[Advaita-l] 'Ishwaro'ham' and 'IshwarabhAvaH'
v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Tue Sep 10 06:56:08 CDT 2013
In the sentence //NONE can have any bhakti rasa for that formless Ishwara '
pl. read the highlighted word as mUrti'.
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 5:19 PM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 4:37 PM, balagopal ramakrishnan <
> rbalpal at yahoo.co.in> wrote:
>> >>>>Madhusudana Saraswati like Sridhara explicitly says Krishna's form is
>> eternal. It is not just his opinion but supported by logic and sabda
>> pramana. If you say Krishna's form is temporary, it is for you to base your
>> statement on the works of an advaita purvacharya and sastras. I agree that
>> we - not only me but we - should go by pramanas.
>> Straying from the main topic...doesn't BGVerse 4 /5 -"bahUni me
>> .. para.ntapa " - indicate Bhagavan's descendances before the present form
>> of 'krishna'. Verse 4/6 - " ajo.api ..AtmamAyayA " - says he comes and goes
>> at his on will. Verses 7 & 8 - "yadA yadA...yuge yuge " - clearly says
>> that he comes with a purpose. Now this is only to differentiate the
>> 'janmashtami Krishna and the eternal Krishna ( as Swami Paramarthananda
>> Ji says in his Gita classes).
> Very well said. Actually MS in that commentary only means: //The
> personality of Ishwara is eternal, till such time 'time' exists.//
> The concept called 'Ishwara' is mAyopAdhika chaitanyam. This entity is
> accorded a certain personality for otherwise the jagat janma sthiti laya
> etc. kAryam cannot be said to be performed/managed by a particular entity.
> The idea of 'personal God' is this. It is this 'person' MS avers in the
> commentary for 4.6 as eternal.
> Such a 'person' has no form; the word 'mUrtiH' used by MS is only
> notional. Such a mUrti can never be seen by anyone. MS substantiates this
> by citing a MB verse
> माया ह्येषा मया सृष्टा यन्मां पश्यसि नारद ।
> सर्वभूतगुणैर्युक्तं नैवं मां ज्ञातुमर्हसि ||
> After showing His vishvarUpa darshana to Narada, the Lord says: Narada,
> what you see Me here is My illusory projection. Do not know Me as endowed
> with all these attributes. [which Shankara too cites in the BSB]
> and adds:
> // sarvabhUtaguNaiH yuktam kAraNopaadhiM maaM carmacakShuShaa draShTum
> nArhasi ityarthaH. //
> This means: The mAyopAdhi Ishwara that I am, that is endowed with all the
> attributes of all the creation is incapable of being beheld by the physical
> This shows that MS is NOT averring any eternality of any formed avatAra
> like Krishna but only referring to the concept called Ishwara who is
> eternal in Vedanta. Krishna tells Arjuna, several births of your's and
> mine have come and gone. This means: several times Ishwara has taken
> avatAra-s, krishna, rama, devi, etc. Innumerable are they. The Ishwara
> who taught the Yoga to vivasvAn, the Sun God, in the yore is the same one
> who is now, in the form of Krishna teaching Arjuna. As Ishwara it is the
> same 'person' who taught Sun in the distant past but NOT as the
> body-krishna born on an aShTamI.
> NONE can have any bhakti rasa for that formless Ishwara 'mRuti' but one
> can have any amount of joy, bliss, etc. for the formed Krishna, Rama,
> Narasimha, bAlAmbikA, vAmana, etc. All these bodies/forms are NOT eternal
> in the same way the Ishwara-concept-mUrti is.
> To sum up, and reiterate, it is ONLY the Ishwara-concept that is eternal
> with a notional form. Such eternality is not accorded to the innumerous
> physical forms such Ishwara has taken and will assume for all time to
> And there is no eternal loka specified for that conceptual Ishwara. All
> jiva-s in their bound state will remain 'IN' that Ishwara who is avyAkRta.
> What comes to people's consciousness is ONLY the effects of the mAyA
> principle that manages the creation. The Ishwara concept is inferred,
> based on shruti, to be the chaitanyam that is behind all the effects that
> we experience.
> The exact sentence that is taken up for the above study from MS's 4.6
> commentary is:
> अनादिमायैव मदुपाधिभूता यावत्कालस्थायित्वेन च नित्या जगत्कारणत्वसंपादिका
> मदिच्छयैव प्रवर्तमाना विशुद्धसत्वमयत्वेन मम मूर्तिः । [My 'Form' is eternal
> as long as Time exists. It is anAdi mAyA that is My upAdhi. This mUrti is
> the source for the creation-causehood. That form is owing to My desire,
> made of pure-sattva. ]
> If the above purport is not taken then we will have the erroneous
> conclusion that 'krishna-form' is the one that is existing from
> beginningless time, causing the creation, etc. Again, there is no specific
> Krishna-form, for within KrishnAvatAra we have innumerous forms like baby
> krishna, yashoda krishna, radha krishna, parthasarathy krishna,
> draupadi-krishna, kamsa slayer krishna, aniruddha-father krishna, etc. We
> will have to hold all these as anAdi, ananta. Such absurdity can be
> avoided ONLY if the above analysis is admitted. MS himself says 'the form
> of Ishwara is not available for the human/physical eye.' All the above
> enumerated forms were available for seeing by those who lived then and by
> those who do upAsanA, even now. But that is not the Ishwara mUrti that MS
> is terming 'eternal'. He also says: 'ato anena nityenaiva dehena
> vivasvantam...' ..therefore, with That Eternal Body did I taught Vivasvan
> and now, you... Surely, the body that we enumerated above had a date of
> birth and a date of dissolution/passing. With that body Krishna did not
> teach Vivasvan.
> I think the above explanation settles the issue once and for all for those
> who make an effort to understand it.
>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> For assistance, contact:
>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list