[Advaita-l] Trimurtis are created of Pancha bhūta-s - Shankara

sreenivasa murthy narayana145 at yahoo.co.in
Fri Nov 24 21:55:55 EST 2017

Dear friends,  "Am I" a SarIri or aSariri? The "I" applies to all readers.What is the answer of Sruti, yukti and anuBava.A simple,direct, immediate, non-technical and verifiable reply is requested.

With warm regards,Sreenivasa Murthy

    On Saturday 25 November 2017, 5:59:26 AM IST, Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:  
 Namaste Chandramouliji
Apologies for addressing Praveen ji when I actually meant Chandramouliji.

We see that
अत्र विप्रतिपद्यन्ते — पर एव हिरण्यगर्भ इत्येके ; संसारीत्यपरे ।
Is Hiranyagarbha a samsArI or is He paraH ?

न, कल्पनान्तरोपपत्तेरविरोधात् । उपाधिविशेषसम्बन्धाद्विशेषकल्पना
न्तरमुपपद्यते ।
Both viewpoints have support from shAstra and are valid based on different
upAdhiviseSha. So there is no contradiction says bhAShya.

 ‘आसीनो दूरं व्रजति शयानो याति सर्वतः । कस्तं मदामदं देवं मदन्यो
ज्ञातुमर्हति’ (क. उ. १ । २ । २१)
उपाधिवशात्संसारित्वम् , न परमार्थतः । स्वतोऽसंसार्येव । एवमेकत्वं नानात्वं
च हिरण्यगर्भस्य ।

In the above acceptance by bhAShyakAra of both the samsArI upAdhi as well
as para upAdhi for hiraNyagarbha, my understanding is that the para upAdhi
is not nirviseSha Brahman since He is spoken of as
हिरण्यगर्भस्तूपाधिशुद्ध्यतिशयापेक्षया प्रायशः पर एवेति श्रुतिस्मृतिवादाः

by the word upAdhi shuddhi, there is no possibility of nirviseSha brahman
in this context.

Now if we look at the other upAdhi the samsArI, there has to be some
ashuddhi which makes saMyoga with अरति etc., possible.

A small digression -
One last question is, Chandramouliji
- when you  say that avyAkRta with mAyopAdhi directly gives hiraNyagarbha,
are you referring to triguNAtmikA mAyA? Can the guNas exist in isolation
without any reference to the 5 elements?  How?

I am not very clear about this because I have not studied sAMkhYA . I have
heard it said that  in sAMkhya, guNas are not merely 'qualities' ( the
counterpart of dravya or substance.)  So when it is said that prakRti in
sAmkhya is triguNAtmika, the word guNa is more substantive than just
qualitative. Such a sAMkhya model which vedanta generally endorses for
adhyAropa, seems to leave open the possibility that mahat arises directly
from prakRti.

I will reread yours and Subbuji posts again and see  ...


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