[Advaita-l] 'Prana' as Brahman

[Kaushik Chevendra]

Namaste sir

Kaushik,
>
> The quote of Sri Amalananda that you have cited is actually a refutation
> of Bhagavatpada by him.
>

It would be a refutation of  shankaracharya if he would have contended that
the jeevatma has an origination. But that's not what he says.
Shankaracharya's problem with panchatantra is only the origination of
souls. As he himself says "we don't object that the supreme narayana who is
beyond avyakta takes various forms to grace...." . "Neither do we object
that one pointed devotion to him must be established through prostrating
before him, meditating on him etc"
If it was that narayana was a jeeva acharya wouldn't have said the above.

Keeping this in mind amalananda says that the origination of souls have to
be taken as an origination of souls in a secondary sense and not literal.
Hence he does a "samanvaya" and doesn't refute acharya.
In what way will our own acharyas refute shankaracharya?

   Look, while Shankara refuted this school on this point, his own
> descendent differs from him and has said what is supporting us.
>

That's because they miss the point. Amalananda has done a reconciliation
between shankaracharya and pancharatra.
If we start saying that he refuted shankaracharya, what is the difference
between us and them?

>
>
>
>>>>