[Advaita-l] How do you explain this?
H S Chandramouli
hschandramouli at gmail.com
Sat Jan 19 03:21:12 EST 2019
Pranams Sri Sadananda Ji,
Reg << Next, he says: maayopahitaa dRik brahma| maayaavacchinnaatu
How do you interpret the above statements since Brahman is also defined
with maayaa upaadhi and with Iswara as maayaa avacchinna’. >>,
I could not see any difference between the two sets of definitions you have
given. When mAyA is stated as the upAdhi for Brahman, it means mAyA (
through its products) appears to limit Brahman and presents the One and
Only Brahman as different entities. That is the meaning of mAyA as upAdhi.
The One and Only Brahman is the upahita entity with reference to mAyA and
its products. Brahman together with mAyA, as a combination, is the abhinna
nimittOpAdAna kAraNam for Creation and is called Iswara. In this context,
Brahman as veiled/covered (avachinna) by mAyA is Iswara.
On the other hand, the shruti itself uses the same term Brahman for both
Brahman and Iswara that you have mentioned as different terms above. The
correct meaning should be understood contextually. For example in the TU
mantra << yatOvA imAni bhUtAni……tadbrahmEti >>, the Brahman corresponds to
the Iswara (maayaa avacchinna Brahman) you have mentioned above. In the BU
mantra 1-4-7 << taddhedaM tarhyavyAkRRitamAsIt >> << तद्धेदं
तर्ह्यव्याकृतमासीत् >>, the Bhashya elaborates on the meaning of the term
avyAkRRita (अव्याकृत) and states that it should be understood as referring
to Atman (Brahman) alone, or Atman (Brahman) plus anAtma together, or
anAtma alone depending upon the context.
Reverting back to Vedanta Sangraha you have cited, the author is only
defining the contextual meaning of the terms as used in his current work.
Even if they differ from definitions given in some other texts, they should
only be considered as contextual and not as contradictory. This is how I
would understand the position.
On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 8:45 AM kuntimaddi sadananda via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> PraNAms to all.
> I was reading the text - Vedanta Sangraha of Ramaraya Kavi with commentary
> by Prof. R.Balasubramanian and S.Revati, published by Chinmaya
> International Foundation. (Shree Subbuji had given reference to this few
> weeks back). I thought of taking this text in my talk series as I completed
> the panchadasi text.
> In the introduction to the text, Sri Balasubramanian discusses the
> essence of Advaita covering various concepts including Khyaati vaadas.
> After reading his introduction, and coming from a strong science background
> and also was brought up as Vishishtaadvaitin like Ramaraya Kavi, I felt the
> urge to talk first on ‘Why Advaita? A perspective of a Scientist’. We
> completed this series. There are about 17 talks; and the series will soon
> become available on YouTube under Acharya Sadaji, by the courtesy of
> Advaita Academy. I just started the talks on Vedanta Sangraha. Ramaraya
> Kavi starts the chapter on ‘dRisya prapacham’. With the statement that
> there are two entities – dRik and dRisyam or seer-seen or subject-object.
> In his second para, he introduces the driK entity. With the statement that
> there are types – dRik padaarthaH chaturvibhaH| Brahma-Iswara-kuuTastha –
> jeeva bhedaat| Oupaadikoyam bhedaH na taatvikaH| Next, he
> says: maayopahitaa dRik brahma| maayaavacchinnaatu IswaraH|
> How do you interpret the above statements since Brahman is also defined
> with maayaa upaadhi and with Iswara as maayaa avacchinna’.
> Will be happy to know.
> Hari Om!
> 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