[Advaita-l] Shiva and Krishna give the same assurance - Mahabharata

[jaldhar at braincells.com]

On Thu, 1 Jun 2023, sreenivasa murthy via Advaita-l wrote:

> Dear Sri Subramanian, You write : "Thus we have both Hari and Hara 
> making the same statement:the attainmentof Hari or Hara is what is known 
> as moksha." It is rather surprising that such erroneous statements are 
> made.Both Hari and Hara are anAtma i.e.non-self.

If you accept the premises of Advaita Vedanta, nothing can be anatma.

Now in the vyavaharika loka we think of things as being anatma (and we 
think of atma as ahamakara) and this could extend up to Hari or Hara.  But 
that is not what the bhakta believes.  His discipline systematically 
leads him to the knowledge that his ishtadeva is Brahman, His own self and 
the self  of all

> Sri Shankara writes in 
> his commentary to mantra 3-5-1 of Bruhadaranyaka Upanishad

3-3-1 you mean.

> thus 
> :           nityatvAt  mOkShasya sAdhakasvarUpAvyatirEkAcca ||
>

I think you are a little confused as to what Shankaracharya is trying to 
get at here.  The one vakya you quoted is only part of a lengthy 
introduction to this Brahmana in the upanishadic text.  Shankaracharya 
discusses the relationship of karma to jnana.  He meets the objections of 
theorists who think that karma can be a source or atleast an accessory to 
jnana.  The Advaita position is the two are completely separate. karma 
cannot dispel avidya.  Only jnana can.  Because (this is your quote) 
moksha is eternal and the sadhakas own svarupa. (i.e. not a caused 
effect.)  Whereas karma by definition requires an actor to purposefully 
cause an action which will have some effect.


> What does it mean?Hari or Hara, are they my svarUpa?If the answer is no, 
> they are anAtma only.

If the answer is no, it means your understanding of your svarupa is 
defective.

> In the light of the above UpadEsa of Sri Shankara,

What you have quoted is not an upadesha but a samjna (definition) a 
different type of thing.

What Shankaracharya thought on this subject is more accurately illustrated 
by an excerpt from the bhashya on chaturvyuhadhikarana of the Brahmasutras 
(2.2.42-45).  This refutes the view of the Pancharatra that Bhagavan 
Narayanas real form is the  four vyuhas, Vasudeva, Sankarshana, Pradyumna 
and Aniruddha.  Shankaracharya takes pains to note that it is only this 
theory that is being refuted, not the idea of Bhakti itself.


यदपि तस्य भगवतोऽभिगमनादिलक्षणमाराधनमजस्रमनन्यचित्ततयाभिप्रेयते, तदपि न प्रतिषिध्यते, 
श्रुतिस्मृत्योरीश्वरप्रणिधानस्य प्रसिद्धत्वात् ।

Read the whole thing.  The key points are that Ishvara pranidhana is 
taught by Shruti and Smrti.  It consists of going to mandirs etc.  And the
results of this sadhana are moksha.


-- 
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>