From sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com Fri Aug 1 06:26:16 2025 From: sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com (Sudhanshu Shekhar) Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2025 15:56:16 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Illusoriness of causation (cause-effect-relationship) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: *Namaste Michael ji.* --It is only such anumana that is supportive of sruti spoken about here. > I'm sure that's clear. Sastrika tarka not lokyia tarka. It is interesting > to reflect on the precise role of tarka versus Sruti. Here's a couple of > pages from SSSS commenting on this issue. Though he agrees on the role of > tarka but based only on sastrika adhyaropa apavada - different from PSA > analysis. > How have you arrived at the conclusion that Shruti is a pramANa? Isn't it through logic? Is your conclusion "Shruti is pramANa" based on emotions, feelings? Please answer. Are you in awe of some charismatic person and merely follow his dictum that "Shruti is pramANa"? Please answer. Shruti is pramANa not because it is Shruti. It is a pramANa because what it says is infallible truth. And that is why only that logic which conforms to Shruti is acceptable. Not because logic is conforming to Shruti, but because logic is conforming to truth. If a logic concludes that "fire is cold", then it is wrong and unacceptable because it is not conforming to truth. Similarly, a logic not conforming to Shruti is not acceptable because it is not conforming to truth. I will repeat - Shruti is a pramANa not because it is Shruti. But because it contains infallible truth. I will request you again to answer - how have you arrived at the conclusion that Shruti is pramANa. Is it through logic, emotion or preponderance of probabilities? --The argument is that a bhavarupa avidya that precedes adhyasa must > survive though adhyasa extinguished. You hold that a bhavarupa maya shakti > is the cause of adhyasa. Destroy the pot, clay remains and your clay is > maya not brahman! > Clay is myAya-vishishTa-Brahman. mAyA cannot be posited without Brahman. However, in the context of adhyAsa, you are right, mAya i.e. avidyA is the cause of adhyAsa. Now, avidyA remains even when there is no kArya-adhyAsa. That is in the case of sushupti and in our everyday experiecnce. --Of course it is the mind that perceives > Sir, who perceives mind? Please answer. Give a clear-cut answer. but Brahman is the ground of both perceiver and perceived. No regress. > Regress is present because you have to answer about the entity which perceives mind. > However, if you think mind and perception are positive mithya entities > caused by maya rather than simply atma/anatma adhyasa, then logical > complications will arise. > No logical complications are present as the cause thereof is not bhAva. It is bhAva-abhAva-vilakshaNa. --How can you say that the jivanmukta with avidya-lesha would not be > affected by conditions in Gaza, for instance or a swift kick to the chin - > will he not shout, ow!? . If there is perception, there is duality. I think > that crystal clear > When you know that a magical illusory shown is thrown up, you don't get affected by the women and children getting killed in that illusory show. > --Then also, "avidya...does not exist'??? you mean snake does not exist? > or that snake kinda exists but not really exists? There is no third > ontological category for Bhasyakara - only two fact/illusion, sat/asat, > atma/anatma. Rope/snake as you describe it is mithya or sadasat vilaksana > anirvacaniya. Other than existence or non-existence and that is a > violation of the law of 'excluded middle' - there is no partial existence. > I think I am short of words in expressing my disappointment. I request you to read what is written. Otherwise, what is the point in a discussion!! Neither snake exists, nor avidyA exists. I agree that there is no third ontological category. asat and mithyA are both non-existent. That has been clarified many a times. Still, you are repeating something which has never been stated by the other party. Additionally, you're endowing a description and function to mithya. > What is wrong in that? > If it cannot be defined, how can we even say what it is? To say something > cannot be categorized yet appears and is experienced is to smuggle in a > functional reality, while denying its ontological basis. It is logically > incoherent and needlessly complex. > It is experientially demonstrated through the example of dream and illusory snake. So, it is neither logically incoherent nor complex. It is rather universally experienced. Dream-elephant was non-existent because it was always only changeless > Brahman. > Changeless Brahman cannot appear as changeable-dream-elephant without changeable ignorance superimposed therein. But you say dream-elephant is neither existing nor non-existing bhavarupa > perception that is not changeless Brahman. > This is incorrect as I have never said this. You need to read again what has been said. Doesn't that seem awkward as nonduality? > Non-duality is safe because mithyA is non-existent. *Namaste Bhaskar prabhu ji.* *//*We must wonder how palatable these statements are to purely dry logicians who prefer mere tarka over bhAshya and shruti??// Prabhu ji. How have you arrived at the conclusion that bhAshya and Shruti are correct and that you should follow them. Is it through fanatic faith, emotional appeal or some other manner? Please elaborate. //shrutyanugraheeta tarka / yukti does not mean anything to them!! And for them shruti is NOT the untya pramANa for the brahma jignAsa but tarka/logic is the pramANa over shruti despite shruti itself saying that naishA tarkeNa matirApaneya (its knowledge cannot be obtained through mere logic.// As explained in response to Michael ji's post. Regarding "???? ?????? ??????????", please refer to "??????? ????????????? ?????????????? , ?????????????????????? ?? ? ?????? ????????? ???????? ; ????????????????????????????? ?". If you insert that tarka must reuire Shruti, then you are contradicting kArikA because it says that advaita is not only through Shruti. So, it needs to be appreciated that truth can be described or found through logic as well as through Shruti. Neither logic per se is important nor Shruti *per se*. They both are important because they both lead to thruth. Shruti is important not because it is Shruti but because it contains truth. MantrAs glorifying Shruti is on account of Shruti containing truth. //But even for these categorical statements also logicians have their own excuses to replace logic over shruti verdict.// Because in the garb of being vaidika, one should not be actually an emotional fanatic. //But being vaidika-s NOT mere dry logicians we have to completely rely on the supremacy of the shruti pramANa and shruti anugraheeta tarka when doing the mananaM.// Again, how have you arrived at the conclusion that Shruti is pramANa? - Because Shruti says so? - then anyOnyAshraya. - Because Shankara says so? - then you are a fanatic. - Because logic says so? - Here is a welcome refreshing glass of lemon-mint-squash in my camp!! ? //I am really surprised statements like : why ONLY shankara bhAshya, why ONLY shruti when logic itself is suffice !! Etc. floating smoothly without being questioned by socalled orthodox followers of shankara?s Advaita ?// Because logic-conforming-to-truth and Shruti go hand in hand. Not all logic is being praised. Only that logic which conforms to truth is advocated. And it happens to match with what Shruti says. //It seems you have done an unpardonable sin by sharing Sri SSS?s take on this!! Because according to some his observations/logic etc. goes against even to the logic of average student of 8th standard student ?// That is quite clear. To speak of some mrit-sAmAnya as nirvikAra is rejected by an eight-grade student.. no, even a seventh class student. Sir, what is mrit-sAmAnya? Explain. Without activity, how does this nirvikAra mrit-sAmAnya transforms to pot. And how many nirvikAra entities do you have in your book? mrit-sAmAnya, swarNa-sAmAnya? Regards. Sudhanshu Shekhar. From michaelchandra108 at gmail.com Fri Aug 1 10:31:51 2025 From: michaelchandra108 at gmail.com (Michael Chandra Cohen) Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2025 10:31:51 -0400 Subject: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Illusoriness of causation (cause-effect-relationship) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Namaste Bhaskarji and Sudhanshuji, Bhaskarji, I don't why but I have not received your last few emails. Perhaps they are embedded within other postings in a thread and I've missed them viewing just subject headings. Nothing personal, please. Sudhanshuji, //How have you arrived at the conclusion that Shruti is a pramANa? Isn't it through logic? Is your conclusion "Shruti is pramANa" based on emotions, feelings? Please answer. Are you in awe of some charismatic person and merely follow his dictum that "Shruti is pramANa"? Please answer.// -- Sir, I am sure you know my answer but rather be rhetorical. We have strayed, The question was as to the place of logic with regard to sruti. Originally you asked: //Can advaita be known/experienced/realized only through VedAs, or can it be known/experienced/realized through tarka (logic) also?// --Sruti is pramana through an inquiry into its words and meaning. "You are the tenth" is not a logical statement. *"S?.Bh?. 1-1-2: ?Knowledge of Brahman arises from the determination of the meaning of the Vedic statements, not from inference or * *other means of knowledge.?* *//*Clay is myAya-vishishTa-Brahman.// -- I'd bet this is a post-Sankara term. It sounds like a kind of vishishTa advaita! I know that is not your intention but it takes logical wrangling to distinguish your bhAva abhAva vilakshaNa from an inhibition upon Brahman even as a vyavaharika explanation. Brahman needs to be understood as not different from what we now experience otherwise the Absolute is compromised. Perception is Brahman misperceived just as dream is just Consciousness misperceived. Nondual Absolute is here and now. It is not after some condition is removed from Brahman or from Jiva. //mAyA cannot be posited without Brahman.// --clearly. //However, in the context of adhyAsa, you are right, mAya i.e. avidyA is the cause of adhyAsa. Now, avidyA remains even when there is no kArya-adhyAsa.// --I never mentioned cause. It is adhyasa itself to assume kArya & kArana adhyAsa. That you demand an actual cause where there is only mistaken identity is the crux of SSSS's determinations //Sir, who perceives mind? Please answer. Give a clear-cut answer. // --we've discussed this before where you make a distinction between mind and its thoughts. I think you argued that thoughts cease in deep sleep but mind is present therefore mind and thoughts are not the same. I ask you to prove mind continues in deep sleep. And please, "I had a good sleep' is not evidence as it is a waking observation which could as easily be phrased as, I had a good absence. What's not refutable is the experience per se of deep sleep free of mind/thoughts I said: "but Brahman is the ground of both perceiver and perceived. No regress." you replied: //Regress is present because you have to answer about the entity which perceives mind. // Wh --Do you propose there is an entity other than Brahman that perceives mind?! Surely not but you will say, it is a "condition" of brahman that perceives mind. This condition needs clarification. If it is a wrong thought, knowledge can be its remedy. But, you say it is something more than a wrong thought, it is the power of illusion. How can right knowledge resolve a powerful cause? //Neither snake exists, nor avidyA exists. I agree that there is no third ontological category. asat and mithyA are both non-existent. // you distinguish between asat and mithya as between hare's horn and rope/snake by virtue of non-perception and perception. That gives a status to perception that is different from hare's horn asat. Thus a third ontological category not found in PTB. Instead, Self and not-Self only. Whether perceived or not-perceived, asat does not exist. The 'third ontological category' accusation becomes decided when this reasoning is extended to the three states. By proclaiming pratibhasika dream to be distinct from vyavaharika satta entitles vyavaharika to possess a relative or temporary reality in comparison to the unreality of pratibhasika. PTB never made this distinction. I said, "And then, you give a description and function to this which you say does not exist and reply," you replied: //What is wrong in that?// --I repeat, "If it cannot be defined, how can we even say what it is? To say something cannot be categorized yet appears and is experienced is to smuggle in a functional reality, while denying its ontological basis. It is logically incoherent and needlessly complex." and you responded, //It is experientially demonstrated through the example of dream and illusory snake. So, it is neither logically incoherent nor complex. It is rather universally experienced.// -- my reply: You make an assumption that dream and snake are effects produced by some mithya ajnana. Bhasyakara tells aviveka is the only cause for naisargarika, anadi adhyasa. //Changeless Brahman cannot appear as changeable-dream-elephant without changeable ignorance superimposed therein.// -- Indeed, yet it does appear. "mithyeti bhavitum yuktam. tatha api..." Avidya is not pramana siddha but anubhava siddha. no one can deny. Regards & ??? On Fri, Aug 1, 2025 at 6:26?AM Sudhanshu Shekhar wrote: > *Namaste Michael ji.* > > --It is only such anumana that is supportive of sruti spoken about here. >> I'm sure that's clear. Sastrika tarka not lokyia tarka. It is interesting >> to reflect on the precise role of tarka versus Sruti. Here's a couple of >> pages from SSSS commenting on this issue. Though he agrees on the role of >> tarka but based only on sastrika adhyaropa apavada - different from PSA >> analysis. >> > > How have you arrived at the conclusion that Shruti is a pramANa? Isn't it > through logic? Is your conclusion "Shruti is pramANa" based on emotions, > feelings? Please answer. Are you in awe of some charismatic person and > merely follow his dictum that "Shruti is pramANa"? Please answer. > > Shruti is pramANa not because it is Shruti. It is a pramANa because what > it says is infallible truth. And that is why only that logic which conforms > to Shruti is acceptable. Not because logic is conforming to Shruti, but > because logic is conforming to truth. > > If a logic concludes that "fire is cold", then it is wrong and > unacceptable because it is not conforming to truth. Similarly, a logic not > conforming to Shruti is not acceptable because it is not conforming to > truth. > > I will repeat - Shruti is a pramANa not because it is Shruti. But because > it contains infallible truth. > > I will request you again to answer - how have you arrived at the > conclusion that Shruti is pramANa. Is it through logic, emotion or > preponderance of probabilities? > > --The argument is that a bhavarupa avidya that precedes adhyasa must >> survive though adhyasa extinguished. You hold that a bhavarupa maya shakti >> is the cause of adhyasa. Destroy the pot, clay remains and your clay is >> maya not brahman! >> > > Clay is myAya-vishishTa-Brahman. mAyA cannot be posited without Brahman. > However, in the context of adhyAsa, you are right, mAya i.e. avidyA is the > cause of adhyAsa. > > Now, avidyA remains even when there is no kArya-adhyAsa. That is in the > case of sushupti and in our everyday experiecnce. > > --Of course it is the mind that perceives >> > > Sir, who perceives mind? Please answer. Give a clear-cut answer. > > but Brahman is the ground of both perceiver and perceived. No regress. >> > > Regress is present because you have to answer about the entity which > perceives mind. > > >> However, if you think mind and perception are positive mithya entities >> caused by maya rather than simply atma/anatma adhyasa, then logical >> complications will arise. >> > > No logical complications are present as the cause thereof is not bhAva. It > is bhAva-abhAva-vilakshaNa. > > --How can you say that the jivanmukta with avidya-lesha would not be >> affected by conditions in Gaza, for instance or a swift kick to the chin - >> will he not shout, ow!? . If there is perception, there is duality. I think >> that crystal clear >> > > When you know that a magical illusory shown is thrown up, you don't get > affected by the women and children getting killed in that illusory show. > > >> --Then also, "avidya...does not exist'??? you mean snake does not exist? >> or that snake kinda exists but not really exists? There is no third >> ontological category for Bhasyakara - only two fact/illusion, sat/asat, >> atma/anatma. Rope/snake as you describe it is mithya or sadasat vilaksana >> anirvacaniya. Other than existence or non-existence and that is a >> violation of the law of 'excluded middle' - there is no partial existence. >> > > I think I am short of words in expressing my disappointment. I request you > to read what is written. Otherwise, what is the point in a discussion!! > > Neither snake exists, nor avidyA exists. I agree that there is no third > ontological category. asat and mithyA are both non-existent. That has been > clarified many a times. Still, you are repeating something which has never > been stated by the other party. > > Additionally, you're endowing a description and function to mithya. >> > > What is wrong in that? > > >> If it cannot be defined, how can we even say what it is? To say something >> cannot be categorized yet appears and is experienced is to smuggle in a >> functional reality, while denying its ontological basis. It is logically >> incoherent and needlessly complex. >> > > It is experientially demonstrated through the example of dream and > illusory snake. So, it is neither logically incoherent nor complex. It is > rather universally experienced. > > Dream-elephant was non-existent because it was always only changeless >> Brahman. >> > > Changeless Brahman cannot appear as changeable-dream-elephant without > changeable ignorance superimposed therein. > > But you say dream-elephant is neither existing nor non-existing >> bhavarupa perception that is not changeless Brahman. >> > > This is incorrect as I have never said this. You need to read again what > has been said. > > Doesn't that seem awkward as nonduality? >> > > Non-duality is safe because mithyA is non-existent. > > *Namaste Bhaskar prabhu ji.* > > *//*We must wonder how palatable these statements are to purely dry > logicians who prefer mere tarka over bhAshya and shruti??// > > Prabhu ji. How have you arrived at the conclusion that bhAshya and Shruti > are correct and that you should follow them. Is it through fanatic faith, > emotional appeal or some other manner? Please elaborate. > > //shrutyanugraheeta tarka / yukti does not mean anything to them!! And > for them shruti is NOT the untya pramANa for the brahma jignAsa but > tarka/logic is the pramANa over shruti despite shruti itself saying that > naishA tarkeNa matirApaneya (its knowledge cannot be obtained through mere > logic.// > > As explained in response to Michael ji's post. Regarding "???? ?????? > ??????????", please refer to "??????? ????????????? ?????????????? , > ?????????????????????? ?? ? ?????? ????????? ???????? ; > ????????????????????????????? ?". If you insert that tarka must reuire > Shruti, then you are contradicting kArikA because it says that advaita is > not only through Shruti. > > So, it needs to be appreciated that truth can be described or found > through logic as well as through Shruti. Neither logic per se is important > nor Shruti *per se*. They both are important because they both lead to > thruth. Shruti is important not because it is Shruti but because it > contains truth. > > MantrAs glorifying Shruti is on account of Shruti containing truth. > > //But even for these categorical statements also logicians have their own > excuses to replace logic over shruti verdict.// > > Because in the garb of being vaidika, one should not be actually an > emotional fanatic. > > //But being vaidika-s NOT mere dry logicians we have to completely rely on > the supremacy of the shruti pramANa and shruti anugraheeta tarka when doing > the mananaM.// > > Again, how have you arrived at the conclusion that Shruti is pramANa? > > > - Because Shruti says so? - then anyOnyAshraya. > - Because Shankara says so? - then you are a fanatic. > - Because logic says so? - Here is a welcome refreshing glass of > lemon-mint-squash in my camp!! ? > > > //I am really surprised statements like : why ONLY shankara bhAshya, why > ONLY shruti when logic itself is suffice !! Etc. floating smoothly without > being questioned by socalled orthodox followers of shankara?s Advaita ?// > > Because logic-conforming-to-truth and Shruti go hand in hand. Not all > logic is being praised. Only that logic which conforms to truth is > advocated. And it happens to match with what Shruti says. > > //It seems you have done an unpardonable sin by sharing Sri SSS?s take on > this!! Because according to some his observations/logic etc. goes against > even to the logic of average student of 8th standard student ?// > > That is quite clear. To speak of some mrit-sAmAnya as nirvikAra is > rejected by an eight-grade student.. no, even a seventh class student. Sir, > what is mrit-sAmAnya? Explain. Without activity, how does this nirvikAra > mrit-sAmAnya transforms to pot. And how many nirvikAra entities do you have > in your book? mrit-sAmAnya, swarNa-sAmAnya? > > Regards. > Sudhanshu Shekhar. > > > > > From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Sat Aug 2 00:47:53 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2025 10:17:53 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] PM Modi Launches Bhagavad Gita in Tamil Message-ID: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPIRXtSsTu0 From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Sat Aug 2 01:42:53 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2025 11:12:53 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Anugraha Bhashanam | Samskritotsava- Central Sanskrit University | Message-ID: Live Now from Sri Guru Nivasa Sringeri Anugraha Bhashanam | Samskritotsava- Central Sanskrit University | Sringeri Jagadguru Shankaracharya Guru Nivasa, Narasimhavana, Sri Matha, Sringeri https://www.youtube.com/live/ok0l8eEkzCY?si=6GdN5bKwSP0bR-Te From sjayana at yahoo.com Sun Aug 3 18:18:40 2025 From: sjayana at yahoo.com (S Jayanarayanan) Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2025 22:18:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Advaita-l] Jagadguru Speaks: Reduce Desires to Attain Peace References: <1636200413.794086.1754259520173.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1636200413.794086.1754259520173@mail.yahoo.com> (Around the beginning of the month, a nugget of Wisdom from the Jagadguru may be posted on the Chaturamnaya list : http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/chaturamnaya ) ? ? Man must conduct his life with due consideration of certain? aspects such as the limitless objects perceived in this illusory? world and the waywardness of his own mind, to run after them.? ? Multifarious desires crop up in man's mind from time to time.? Even a little introspection into such desires will reduce the? intensity of their pull. However, nurturing excessive desires? will only destroy one's peace of mind, as there is no limit to? one's desires. The realisation of one desire will immediately? spawn more desires which will entangle man in an endless? chase and eventually destroy his life. A mind that is not content? will not experience any peace or calm. ? In this context, the story of the hen laying golden eggs must? be familiar to most. This is also what our forefathers have? instructed. ? ? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ?????? ?????? | ???? ? ????????? ??????????? ?? ??????? || ? He with no control over his desires is truly poor and helpless.? An oft-quoted proverb says, ?The mind which considers what it? has as enough will find true wealth.?? Only a person who has a? sense of contentment and sufficiency can be considered truly? prosperous. This is because contentment and peace of mind are? man's greatest treasures. ? The crux of the matter is that desires have no limit and? nurturing them will rob man of all peace.? ? Our blessings for everyone to understand this well and live? contentedly with what comes their way. ? From swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com Mon Aug 4 18:02:53 2025 From: swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com (Swagata Chowdhury) Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2025 04:02:53 +0600 Subject: [Advaita-l] multi universes and powers In-Reply-To: References: <783345105.2297389.1753275521092.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <783345105.2297389.1753275521092@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: You can get some idea from Shiva Puran Vidyeshwar Samhita chapter 17. It talked about Mahavishnu,Karanbrahma,Karan Rudra,Karan Mahesh even beyond. U will get a lot of lokas compared to 14 lokas etc. Under Kaala everything is Anitya. But there are many realms beyond Kaala. On Thu, 24 Jul 2025, 8:31?pm Aravind M via Advaita-l, < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > Swami Dayananda ""There is not ONE GOD...there is ONLY GOD "" > > On Thu, 24 Jul, 2025, 7:26?pm Jyotiranjan via Advaita-l, < > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > Is dhAma's like goloka,vaikuntha are nitya or they destroy at the time of > > mahapralay? > > > > > > > > > > Narayan > > Jyotiranjan Routray > > > > On Thu, Jul 24, 2025, 17:41 Bhaskar YR via Advaita-l < > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > > > praNAms > > > Hare Krishna > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe the answer you are seeking lies in analysing the following. It > > > > is from the Saubhagyabhaskara commentary to the Sri Lalita Sahasra > > Nama: > > > > > > > > ?????????????????????? ???????????? || ??? || This is a nama there > > > > for which the commentary explains: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ????? ??????? ????? ?? ?????????????????? ???? ???????? | > > > > > > > > ????? ????????? ??????????? ????? ?? ??? | > > > > > > > > ???????????????????? ???????? ?????????? | ????? ??????????? ?????? | > > > > > > > > There are many Brahmanda-s, universes, each of which has a Vir?t, > > > > Hranyagarbha, Ishwara, etc. She is the Janani for these so many > Vir?t, > > > etc. > > > > > > > other male Gods too have this title : akkhilaanda kOti brahmAnda > > > nAyaka.... > > > > > > > If we say the Trimurtis are the Virat, etc. then She is the Janani > of > > > > the Trimurtis too. Then we can say that the Trimurtis in one > Brahmanda > > > > will have jurisdiction over that Brahmanda only. > > > > > > > And from this we can also say there are multiple paarvati-s, > > Lakshmi-s, > > > Saraswati-s, Ganesha-s, Subramanya etc. etc. ?? > > > > > > > > > Since Bhagavatpada > > > > says in the Brihadaranyaka bhashya, Hiranyagarbha is both jiva and > > > > Brahman from diff points of view, we can say the Trimurtis are > > > > different jivas in diff brahmandas. > > > > > > >> mahAn Atma and tiny jeeva differentiated here to clarify the > > > difference between avyAkruta and avidyA, I don?t think it is there is > > > declare trimuthy-s are just another set of jeeva-s. If that is the > case > > > who is Ishwara here?? Is he another jeeva?? > > > > > > > Trimurtis being considered jivas may not go down too well with some. > > > Although Brahmaa ji is often given jiva status. > > > > > > > Let us not think about others, do you yourself agree that > trimurthy-s > > > are just another set of three jeeva-s and gained this position through > > > their meritorious karma ....like indra padavi?? > > > > > > The famous Bhagavatam verse is there where brahmas of different > > brahmandas > > > with differing numbers of faces, all come and pay their respects to Sri > > > Krishna Bhagavan - its pic by ISKCON / gaudiya tradition is rather > > > memorable I think. > > > > > > > so who is nArAyaNa here?? Before creation and after mahA pralaya?? > > > > > > > > > One other problem is if Lalita Devi (sagu?a Brahman) is anekakoTi > > > brahmANda jananI what about her consort Lord Shiva? Is he the Lord of > one > > > universe or Lord of the multiverse? > > > > > > > as said above there must be multiple shiva-s, Ganesha-s, nandi-s > etc. > > > to maintain the shiva's family intact in each and every brahmAnda, > > likewise > > > family members of vishNu and chaturmukha brahma ? > > > > > > > > > There may be infinite regress unless we acknowledge the existence of > > > certain forms of Ishvara including Shiva, Parvati , Vishnu etc as > having > > > Aishvaryam of the entire multiverse and these aspects of saguNam brahma > > are > > > not-limited-to-one-universe. > > > > > > > And if the above is true in literal sense, then we have to accept > that > > > sarvajnatva of brahma restricted to the particular brahmaanda where he > is > > > operating ? > > > Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! > > > bhaskar > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > > > For assistance, contact: > > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > For assistance, contact: > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From bhaskar.yr at hitachienergy.com Tue Aug 5 03:39:29 2025 From: bhaskar.yr at hitachienergy.com (Bhaskar YR) Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2025 07:39:29 +0000 Subject: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Illusoriness of causation (cause-effect-relationship) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: praNAms Sri Sudhanshu prabhuji Hare Krishna //We must wonder how palatable these statements are to purely dry logicians who prefer mere tarka over bhAshya and shruti??// Prabhu ji. How have you arrived at the conclusion that bhAshya and Shruti are correct and that you should follow them. Is it through fanatic faith, emotional appeal or some other manner? Please elaborate. ? It is through Aapta vAkya as the pramANa. You know something called Apta vAkya as a valid pramANa, in your childhood you listen to your parents, teachers, elders etc. without logically scrutinizing / doubting their instructions. It is just like that, in the path of jnAna mArga you / we are still kids you should have conviction in the pramANa of the guru-Acharya vAkya without looking at it with your logically conditioned mind. //shrutyanugraheeta tarka / yukti does not mean anything to them!! And for them shruti is NOT the untya pramANa for the brahma jignAsa but tarka/logic is the pramANa over shruti despite shruti itself saying that naishA tarkeNa matirApaneya (its knowledge cannot be obtained through mere logic.// As explained in response to Michael ji's post. Regarding "???? ?????? ??????????", please refer to "??????? ????????????? ?????????????? , ?????????????????????? ?? ? ?????? ????????? ???????? ; ????????????????????????????? ?". If you insert that tarka must reuire Shruti, then you are contradicting kArikA because it says that advaita is not only through Shruti. ? So you are holding this kArika as pramANa and arguing that shruti is NOT the untya pramANa in brahma jignAsa any conditioned mind with ?socalled? logical backdrop can determine what that brahman is without the help of shAstra !! Yes for brahma jignAsa shruti is not only the pramANa but anubhavAdi also bhAshyakAra too says but note that this anubhavAdi (experience etc.) not free from shrutyanugraheeta, pUrNAnubhava and anubhava sammata tarka to erroneously argue OK I can deduce brahma jnAna with mere dry logic I don?t need bhAshya nor shruti. Are you really a saMpradAyavAdi or mere tArkika ?? Please let me know which vyAkhyAnakAra floating these type of asampradAyik statements in his works!! So, it needs to be appreciated that truth can be described or found through logic as well as through Shruti. * Again you are making blunder here. There are no two alternatives here one in conditioned mind?s dry logic and another one is shruti. Tarka mananaM should be endorsed by shruti and pUrNAnubhava and not the other way round i.e. dry logic should put clearance / acceptance label on shruti verdict. There is no end to the logical conclusions which has been originated through the conditioned / qualified mind?where human logic ends and accepts its limitations from there shruti starts. Neither logic per se is important nor Shruti per se. They both are important because they both lead to thruth. Shruti is important not because it is Shruti but because it contains truth. ? How do you know that shruti contains truth!!?? Through your conditioned mind?s logic?? or through Apta vAkya and shraddha in sampradaya Acharya?s words?? If you are holding 1-1-2 sutra bhAshya to say something nonsense like above then please note there also bhAshyakAra not talking about dry logic which has limited boundary as it is restricted to individual mind?s intellect. MantrAs glorifying Shruti is on account of Shruti containing truth. ? And for the shruti and its truth, brahman is the source which cannot be ascertained by any conditioned dry logic to declare shruti per se not important and and ?my? logic also can serve this purpose!! Again I am really surprised asaMpradAyik statements like this sneaking in without being questioned by socalled official flag bearers of shAstra/ sampradaya ? //But even for these categorical statements also logicians have their own excuses to replace logic over shruti verdict.// Because in the garb of being vaidika, one should not be actually an emotional fanatic. ? The other name of this fanaticism is shraddha and bhakti in shAstra, sampradaya, guru and Acharya, and I know in the atheist/tArkika conditioned mind these terms mean nothing. //But being vaidika-s NOT mere dry logicians we have to completely rely on the supremacy of the shruti pramANa and shruti anugraheeta tarka when doing the mananaM.// Again, how have you arrived at the conclusion that Shruti is pramANa? ? I am sorry for asking this question, how do you know that you are the son of your own parents?? Just because they said so or have you used any / some logical device to determine that ?? * Because Shruti says so? - then anyOnyAshraya. * Because Shankara says so? - then you are a fanatic. * Over dose of mere speculations born out of dry logic making you to pass these type of dreadful statements. For those who follow shankara and shruti are doing so as it is for them AptavAkya, only tArkika-s who do not have any respect to shAstra-saMpradAya, guru-Acharya can make some statements like this? * Because logic says so? - Here is a welcome refreshing glass of lemon-mint-squash in my camp!! ? * You can live in your delusional logical world,no issues ? But those who know sampradaya, those who respect their Acharya, Acharya vAkya know that only shruti, shrutyanugraheeta tarka based on pUrNAnubhava permitted in brahma jignAsa. And they know very well kevala tarka, nirAgama tarka, shushka tarka etc. which you are passionately promoting here in this list are simply shruti viruddha, nishpramANakavAdaM and goes against anubhava as well. We the fanatic followers of shankara knows what verdict our Acharya given on kevala tArkika-s..By the way since you are not the fanatic I don?t have to quote what my Acharya says on ?kevala tarka?. That is quite clear. To speak of some mrit-sAmAnya as nirvikAra is rejected by an eight-grade student.. no, even a seventh class student. Sir, what is mrit-sAmAnya? Explain. Without activity, how does this nirvikAra mrit-sAmAnya transforms to pot. And how many nirvikAra entities do you have in your book? mrit-sAmAnya, swarNa-sAmAnya? * I can understand your frustration here resulting in bAlisha (childish) conclusions about these examples in shruti. Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Thu Aug 7 12:50:20 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2025 22:20:20 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Srimad Bhagavatham - Purana Shravana - Advaita - English Message-ID: A wonderful exposition of the Advaita Tattva in the Bhagavata. Gives a very authentic understanding of the Tattva as taught by Veda Vyasa and Shankara. An immensely useful shravana. Vidwan Lalitaditya Gannavaram. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFjN3aHfXL4 warm regards subbu From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Thu Aug 7 13:28:16 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2025 22:58:16 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?b?RndkOiDgpLjgpILgpLjgpY3gpJXgpYPgpKTgpL4=?= =?utf-8?b?4KS34KWN4KSf4KS+4KS14KSn4KS+4KSo4KSu4KWNIFJhaml2IEdhbmRo?= =?utf-8?q?i_Campus=2C_Sringeri?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: V Subrahmanian Date: Thu, Aug 7, 2025 at 10:57?PM Subject: ?????????????????? Rajiv Gandhi Campus, Sringeri To: BHARATIYA VIDVAT https://www.youtube.com/live/QMySU4DOULg?feature=shared From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Thu Aug 7 22:56:43 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2025 08:26:43 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Advaita in capsule form - Chatgpt. Nice one Message-ID: https://chatgpt.com/s/t_6895610531a48191b926b465b4e8bbdf https://chatgpt.com/s/t_6895662111b481919b3eb48e4185fb2f From 530uddeshya at gmail.com Fri Aug 8 02:06:08 2025 From: 530uddeshya at gmail.com (Uddeshya Sharma) Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2025 11:36:08 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Regarding the term akhandakaravritti Message-ID: Shiva Shiva ! Namaskara to Vidvans, Recently I came across this term akhandakaravritti and it's derivatives like akhandakaravrittigyana which had me questioning what this term could be refering to. My doubt is about the term aakara. If the term is about knowing Brahmana and becoming one with it in a state of awakening, why is there the term aakara when Brahmana is Nirkara and Nirguna to start with . This might seem like a silly query but I request your help in understanding this correctly. Hara Hara Mahadeva. From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Fri Aug 8 02:34:05 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2025 12:04:05 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Regarding the term akhandakaravritti In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Namaste The term aakaara is significant in the sense that all other vrittis have some or the other parichchanna, finite, limited, form like ghata vritti, sukhaakaara vritti and so on. When the aspirant by great effort keeps all other objects away, and remains focussed on Atma Brahma as taught in the shaastra, he succeeds in making the vritti of Atma Brahma aakaara. Since Atma Brahma is nirakara but is not khanda, limited, it is termed a-khanda. Hence the term is only to differentiate it from other khanda forms of vritti. We have terms line chidruupam, sadruupam, etc., again in the same sense as above, even though Brahma has no rupam. Regards subbu On Fri, 8 Aug, 2025, 11:36?am Uddeshya Sharma via Advaita-l, < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > Shiva Shiva ! > > Namaskara to Vidvans, > > Recently I came across this term akhandakaravritti and it's derivatives > like akhandakaravrittigyana which had me questioning what this term could > be refering to. My doubt is about the term aakara. If the term is about > knowing Brahmana and becoming one with it in a state of awakening, why is > there the term aakara when Brahmana is Nirkara and Nirguna to start with . > > This might seem like a silly query but I request your help in understanding > this correctly. > > Hara Hara Mahadeva. > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com Fri Aug 8 02:56:02 2025 From: sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com (Sudhanshu Shekhar) Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2025 12:26:02 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Regarding the term akhandakaravritti In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Namaste. Please see GItA bhAshya 18.50: Opponent: ??? ????????? ??????? ? ? ??????????, ???? ???????? ????? ?????? ??????? ?.........??????? ????????? ??????? ??? ?????????? ? Answer: ??? ????? ?????? ??????? ? ????? ?? ???????? ??? ??????? , ??? ??????? ???? ? ?????????? ????? ?????????? ? ?????????????? ????? ??????????? ??? ?????????????? ??? ? ? ; ????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????? ? ????????? ??????? ???????????????????? ????????????????????????????? ? ???????????? ???, ????????? ???????????, ??????????????? ???? ? ??? ??????? ????????? ?? ??????????? ??????? ? Regards. Sudhanshu Shekhar. From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Fri Aug 8 03:30:58 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2025 13:00:58 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Regarding the term akhandakaravritti In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Very apt quote from the Bhashyam. Thanks. Regards On Fri, 8 Aug, 2025, 12:36?pm Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l, < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > Namaste. > > Please see GItA bhAshya 18.50: > > Opponent: ??? ????????? ??????? ? ? ??????????, ???? ???????? ????? ?????? > ??????? ?.........??????? ????????? ??????? ??? ?????????? ? > Answer: > ??? ????? ?????? ??????? ? ????? ?? ???????? ??? ??????? , ??? ??????? > ???? ? ?????????? ????? ?????????? ? ?????????????? ????? ??????????? > ??? ?????????????? ??? ? ? ; > ????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????? ? ????????? > ??????? ???????????????????? ????????????????????????????? ? > ???????????? ???, ????????? ???????????, ??????????????? ???? ? ??? > ??????? ????????? ?? ??????????? ??????? ? > > Regards. > Sudhanshu Shekhar. > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From raghavkumar00 at gmail.com Fri Aug 8 05:51:41 2025 From: raghavkumar00 at gmail.com (Raghav Kumar Dwivedula) Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2025 15:21:41 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Regarding the term akhandakaravritti In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Excellent quotation regarding AtmAkAra vRtti and thank you for sharing, Sudhanshu ji (It will incidentally also help SSS abhAva people appreciate things better on this topic .) Om On Fri, 8 Aug 2025 at 12:36?PM, Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > Namaste. > > Please see GItA bhAshya 18.50: > > Opponent: ??? ????????? ??????? ? ? ??????????, ???? ???????? ????? ?????? > ??????? ?.........??????? ????????? ??????? ??? ?????????? ? > Answer: > ??? ????? ?????? ??????? ? ????? ?? ???????? ??? ??????? , ??? ??????? > ???? ? ?????????? ????? ?????????? ? ?????????????? ????? ??????????? > ??? ?????????????? ??? ? ? ; > ????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????? ? ????????? > ??????? ???????????????????? ????????????????????????????? ? > ???????????? ???, ????????? ???????????, ??????????????? ???? ? ??? > ??????? ????????? ?? ??????????? ??????? ? > > Regards. > Sudhanshu Shekhar. > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From karavind09 at gmail.com Fri Aug 8 07:40:03 2025 From: karavind09 at gmail.com (Aravinda Rao) Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2025 17:10:03 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Advaita in capsule form - Chatgpt. Nice one In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Very nice Subbu ji, It is good for a presentation. Recently, I made a query asking AI to compare Madhu brahmanam of Brihadaranyaka Upanishad and the Buddhist doctrine pratitya samutpada. I did not expect it to give any answer but it gave a very cogent essay. I am realizing that we can use AI, though with caution. Regards, Aravinda Rao On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 8:26?AM V Subrahmanian wrote: > https://chatgpt.com/s/t_6895610531a48191b926b465b4e8bbdf > > https://chatgpt.com/s/t_6895662111b481919b3eb48e4185fb2f > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "advaitin" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te1MPrh3BXQec_vO%3DV9bsQiiVydVbKjmTcvH7iv8JkSyRg%40mail.gmail.com > > . > From sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com Fri Aug 8 07:57:06 2025 From: sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com (Sudhanshu Shekhar) Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2025 17:27:06 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Illusoriness of causation (cause-effect-relationship) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Namaste Michael ji. //How have you arrived at the conclusion that Shruti is a pramANa? Isn't it > through logic? Is your conclusion "Shruti is pramANa" based on emotions, > feelings? Please answer. Are you in awe of some charismatic person and > merely follow his dictum that "Shruti is pramANa"? Please answer.// > > -- Sir, I am sure you know my answer but rather be rhetorical. > I have asked a very precise question for which you have not advanced any answer. > We have strayed, The question was as to the place of logic with regard to > sruti. Originally you asked: > //Can advaita be known/experienced/realized only through VedAs, or can it > be known/experienced/realized through tarka (logic) also?// > > --Sruti is pramana through an inquiry into its words and meaning. "You are > the tenth" is not a logical statement. > Shruti tells me - "there is a heaven". There is no means to verify it. It is neither a logical statement, nor an illogical statement. Question is - "how have you arrived at the conclusion that there is a heaven". You hold Shruti to be pramANa. How have you arrived at this conclusion? Let us be more specific and consider the question of heaven propounded in Shruti. Please note - I am not saying that the prAMANya of Shruti is through logic. I am merely trying to understand your thought process. How have you arrived at this conclusion that Shruti is pramANa. Because Shankara said so, because SSSS ji said so, because you "feel" so? Why Quran is not a pramANa but Shruti is pramANa? > *"S?.Bh?. 1-1-2: ?Knowledge of Brahman arises from the determination of > the meaning of the Vedic statements, not from inference or **other means > of knowledge.?* > We will come to this. First appreciate the question - how have you accepted this statement? What is the modus? Why is Qurana not a pramANa but Shruti a pramANa. Why is jannat not acceptable but swarga is acceptable? *//*Clay is myAya-vishishTa-Brahman.// > -- I'd bet this is a post-Sankara term. It sounds like a kind of vishishTa > advaita! I know that is not your intention but it takes logical wrangling > to distinguish your bhAva abhAva vilakshaNa from an inhibition upon Brahman > even as a vyavaharika explanation. Brahman needs to be understood as not > different from what we now experience otherwise the Absolute is > compromised. Perception is Brahman misperceived just as dream is just > Consciousness misperceived. Nondual Absolute is here and now. It is not > after some condition is removed from Brahman or from Jiva. > Digression, hence not responding. //However, in the context of adhyAsa, you are right, mAya i.e. avidyA is > the cause of adhyAsa. > Now, avidyA remains even when there is no kArya-adhyAsa.// > --I never mentioned cause. It is adhyasa itself to assume kArya & kArana > adhyAsa. That you demand an actual cause where there is only mistaken > identity is the crux of SSSS's determinations. > You use terms without elaborating. What is "mistaken identity", "misperceived"? > //Sir, who perceives mind? Please answer. Give a clear-cut answer. // > --we've discussed this before where you make a distinction between mind > and its thoughts. I think you argued that thoughts cease in deep sleep but > mind is present therefore mind and thoughts are not the same. I ask you to > prove mind continues in deep sleep. And please, "I had a good sleep' is not > evidence as it is a waking observation which could as easily be phrased as, > I had a good absence. What's not refutable is the experience per se of deep > sleep free of mind/thoughts > You have not given a clear-cut answer as to who perceives the mind. Your comment does not state my position. I have never argued that the mind is present in deep sleep. So, the comments are incorrect. Mind merges in ignorance in deep sleep wherein avidyA sustains. --Do you propose there is an entity other than Brahman that perceives > mind?! Surely not but you will say, it is a "condition" of brahman that > perceives mind. This condition needs clarification. If it is a wrong > thought, knowledge can be its remedy. But, you say it is something more > than a wrong thought, it is the power of illusion. How can right knowledge > resolve a powerful cause? > Sir, define thought. What is it? I have not said that "condition of Brahman" perceives mind. > //Neither snake exists, nor avidyA exists. I agree that there is no third > ontological category. asat and mithyA are both non-existent. // > you distinguish between asat and mithya as between hare's horn and > rope/snake by virtue of non-perception and perception. That gives a status > to perception that is different from hare's horn asat. Thus a third > ontological category not found in PTB. Instead, Self and not-Self only. > Whether perceived or not-perceived, asat does not exist. > Distinguishing from hare's horn does not imply ontological status. Distinction is only on the ground of perception and not on the ground of non-existence. Illusory snake is as non-existent as a hare's horn. The distinction is only with respect to perception. That is borne from experience and hence cannot be disputed. The 'third ontological category' accusation becomes decided when this > reasoning is extended to the three states. By proclaiming pratibhasika > dream to be distinct from vyavaharika satta entitles vyavaharika to possess > a relative or temporary reality in comparison to the unreality of > pratibhasika. PTB never made this distinction. > Please understand that vyAvahArika-sattA or prAtibhAsika-sattA spoken in VedAnta does not imply sattA of nAma-rUpa as it is the sattA of supreme Brahman which is superimposed on nAma-rUpa. I am however a lover of eka-sattA-vAda. PTB contains everything. It contains eka-sattA-vAda, sattA-dvaividhya-vAda and also sattA-traividhya-vAda. You choose what you like. Just don't argue that entire bhAshya is hard molded in one prakriyA. It contains SDV, it contains DSV and it also contains ajAtivAda. -- my reply: You make an assumption that dream and snake are effects > produced by some mithya ajnana. Bhasyakara tells aviveka is the only cause > for naisargarika, anadi adhyasa. > That aviveka, ajnAna, ignorance, mAyA are all one and same. > //Changeless Brahman cannot appear as changeable-dream-elephant without > changeable ignorance superimposed therein.// > > -- Indeed, yet it does appear. "mithyeti bhavitum yuktam. tatha api..." > I again request you to discuss your theory with an eighth-class student of a changeless singular inactive entity appearing as the changeable world, without accepting a changeable non-existent illusory ignorance. I would be interested in reading that conversation. If you won't, then I will do that at leisure and post it here. > Avidya is not pramana siddha but anubhava siddha. no one can deny. > > This is true. That is why avidyA is sAkshi-bhAsya and not pramANa-gamya. Regards. Sudhanshu Shekhar. From sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com Fri Aug 8 08:50:29 2025 From: sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com (Sudhanshu Shekhar) Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2025 18:20:29 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Illusoriness of causation (cause-effect-relationship) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hare Krishna Bhaskar prabhu ji. ? It is through Aapta vAkya as the pramANa. You know something called > Apta vAkya as a valid pramANa, in your childhood you listen to your > parents, teachers, elders etc. without logically scrutinizing / doubting > their instructions. It is just like that, in the path of jnAna mArga you / > we are still kids you should have conviction in the pramANa of the > guru-Acharya vAkya without looking at it with your logically conditioned > mind. > How have you arrived at the conclusion that Shruti is Apta-vAkya, SSSS ji's is Apta vAkya but Quran is not Apta-vAkya and Prophet's is not Apta-vAkya? > ? So you are holding this kArika as pramANa and arguing that shruti > is NOT the untya pramANa in brahma jignAsa any conditioned mind with > ?socalled? logical backdrop can determine what that brahman is without the > help of shAstra !! > Sir, I hold that truth can be known through both logic and Shruti. Shruti is antya pramANa, because it is contains truth and not because it is Shruti. A person with sufficient logical capacity can indeed come to the truth revealed by Shruti. Yes for brahma jignAsa shruti is not only the pramANa but anubhavAdi also > bhAshyakAra too says but note that this anubhavAdi (experience etc.) not > free from shrutyanugraheeta, pUrNAnubhava and anubhava sammata tarka to > erroneously argue OK I can deduce brahma jnAna with mere dry logic I don?t > need bhAshya nor shruti. Are you really a saMpradAyavAdi or mere tArkika > ?? Please let me know which vyAkhyAnakAra floating these type of > asampradAyik statements in his works!! > You will have to do research on your own to find out that, if you are interested. I have given statement from BhAshyakAra - ??????? ????????????? ?????????????? , ?????????????????????? ?? ? ?????? ????????? ???????? ; ????????????????????????????? ? If you wish to know how advaita is known through tarka, you can consider reading advaita prakaraNa. Again you are making blunder here. There are no two alternatives here one > in conditioned mind?s dry logic and another one is shruti. Tarka mananaM > should be endorsed by shruti and pUrNAnubhava and not the other way round > i.e. dry logic should put clearance / acceptance label on shruti verdict. > There is no end to the logical conclusions which has been originated > through the conditioned / qualified mind?where human logic ends and accepts > its limitations from there shruti starts. > Sir, why not Quran? The words of Shruti are contradicted by Quran, which is directly the words of Allah. Not only my dry logic, but your wet logic also is superseded by the direct words of Allah. Where logic and Shruti both end, the realm of words of God start. I propose you explore that. You will get to hear direct words. Come on!! ? How do you know that shruti contains truth!!?? Through your > conditioned mind?s logic?? > Sir, all tools at my disposal point to the non-sublatable truth enunciated in Shruti. The logic by which I am convinced concludes the same truth which is enunciated in Shruti. And the anubhava too at my disposal is in harmony with statements of Shruti. The illogical explanation of Shruti by you therefore stands negated. > or through Apta vAkya and shraddha in sampradaya Acharya?s words?? > If Apta vAkya or sampradAya AchArya's vAkya are accepted without a logical enquiry, and blindly believed, it is another name of fanaticism. > If you are holding 1-1-2 sutra bhAshya to say something nonsense like > above then please note there also bhAshyakAra not talking about dry logic > which has limited boundary as it is restricted to individual mind?s > intellect. > Since Shruti contains truth, any logical adventure contradicting Shruti is obviously liable to be rejected. Where is the objection in that? I don't know what is your definition of dry logic and wet logic. I am not interested in knowing that either. To me, "logic not conforming to thruth" is dry logic. That is rejected. Since the logic with which I am convinced leads to the same truth which shines in Upanishads, BSB 1.1.2 or whatever is not contradicted. ? And for the shruti and its truth, brahman is the source which cannot > be ascertained by any conditioned dry logic to declare shruti per se not > important and and ?my? logic also can serve this purpose!! > There is nothing like "my logic" vs Shruti. My statement is that logic which conforms to truth is on equal footing with Shruti. Shruti is important because it contains truth. The logic which leads to truth is hence equally important. > Again I am really surprised asaMpradAyik statements like this sneaking in > without being questioned by socalled official flag bearers of shAstra/ > sampradaya ? > You are incorrect about your understanding of sampradAya. ? The other name of this fanaticism is shraddha and bhakti in shAstra, > sampradaya, guru and Acharya, and I know in the atheist/tArkika conditioned > mind these terms mean nothing. > You are incorrect in equating fanaticism with shraddhA/sampradAya/guru etc. ? I am sorry for asking this question, how do you know that you are > the son of your own parents?? Just because they said so or have you used > any / some logical device to determine that ?? > Blast from the past? ISKCON days? Srila Prabhupada's argument!! Sir, just as I decided in my dream that I am a son of so and so, similarly I have decided here. As much truth value my that "belief" in swapna had, exactly the same truth value my "this belief" has. It means nothing. It is a mere belief. If you insist that it is a pramA that "I am son of so and so", then sir, please know that it is through anumAna or arthApatti. If you say that it is through Apta vAkya, then you are in for a trouble because being a paurusheya-Apta-vAkya, it is fraught with danger. In SDV model, Veda is considered pramANa not because it is Apta-vAkya, not because it is apaurusheya, not because of anything. Veda has swatah-prAmANya. The aprAmANya is absent because of dOsha-abhAva. dOsha-abhAva is because of apaurusheyatva. So, flow is as under: apaurusheyatva => dOsha-abhAva => aprAmANya-abhAva. prAmANya is swatah. And please note that apaurusheyatva is not a blind belief. It comes from anumAna as under: 1. ???????????? ?????????? ????????????????????????????????, ???????????????, ?????????????????????. 2. ????????? ??????????????????????: ???????????????????????????:, ??????-??????-?????????????, ???????????????????. You will have to apply mind to understand what is said above. So, sum and substance is this: 1. I am a man, son of so and so, -- is a belief. A rebuttable belief having as much truth value as my belief of being son of so and so in my dream yesterday. 2. Through tushyatu-durjana-nyAya, if it is accepted to be a pramA - then it is known through anumAna or arthApatti. > - Over dose of mere speculations born out of dry logic making you to > pass these type of dreadful statements. For those who follow shankara and > shruti are doing so as it is for them AptavAkya, only tArkika-s who do not > have any respect to shAstra-saMpradAya, guru-Acharya can make some > statements like this? > > I am afraid that your statements are liable to be rejected on account of absence of application of mind. > - You can live in your delusional logical world,no issues ? But > those who know sampradaya, those who respect their Acharya, Acharya vAkya > know that only shruti, shrutyanugraheeta tarka based on pUrNAnubhava > permitted in brahma jignAsa. And they know very well kevala tarka, > nirAgama tarka, shushka tarka etc. which you are passionately promoting > here in this list are simply shruti viruddha, nishpramANakavAdaM and goes > against anubhava as well. We the fanatic followers of shankara knows what > verdict our Acharya given on kevala tArkika-s..By the way since you are not > the fanatic I don?t have to quote what my Acharya says on ?kevala tarka?. > > Sir, how many AchAryAs are there is your sampradAya after 10th century AD. Let us talk on that!! I want a list of AchAryAs of your sampradAya. Something akin to Brahma-Madhva-Gaudiya sampradAya?? > > - I can understand your frustration here resulting in bAlisha > (childish) conclusions about these examples in shruti. > > Sir, sorry to disappoint you as I have no frustration in understanding Shruti. You have however an uphill task to explain your concept to even an eight-year old boy!! Try it. Post your conversation with an eight year old boy as to how a changeless singular inactive entity appears as changeable world. Good luck. Regards. Sudhanshu Shekhar. From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Fri Aug 8 09:33:27 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2025 19:03:27 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Svarupanirupanam in Hindi by Sri Mani Dravid Sastrigal Message-ID: ?????????????? -Svarupanirupanam of Adi Shankara in Hindi by Vid.MM.Brahmarishi Dr.Manidravid Sastri https://youtu.be/d2DVqOTDnwI From michaelchandra108 at gmail.com Fri Aug 8 15:19:53 2025 From: michaelchandra108 at gmail.com (Michael Chandra Cohen) Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2025 15:19:53 -0400 Subject: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Advaita in capsule form - Chatgpt. Nice one In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Namaste Subbuji & Aravinda ji, Chatgpt has produced a rich study. I find it valuable to forensically discover lurking bhavarupa avidya assumptions. I started to respond to issues, mithya definition etc. and then I thought why not ask Chatgpt 5.0 to refute Subbuji's Chat with strict adherence to Prasthanatraya Bhasya, Upadesha Sahasri, Gaudapada Karikas and Sureswara's writings. . The effort taught me some things - machine learning :) -- Perhaps of interest to others. Nice ? good, careful summary you pasted. I?ll *refute / correct* it strictly from how the *Prasth?natray?* bhasya tradition actually treats these points (?a?kara?s *Prasth?na-tray?-bh??ya*, *Upade?a-s?hasr?*), plus Gaudap?da?s *M????kya-k?rik?* and ?a?kara?s pupil Sure?vara ( *Nai?karmya-siddhi*). I?ll keep this tightly documentary: state the oversimplification or error, then give the corrective (with the classical justification). I?ll mark the *load-bearing claims* and cite the primary sources right after each corrected point. ------------------------------ 0 ? Quick headline of the refutation Your summary reads like a good *introductory* textbook version of Advaita. *But it repeatedly moves from descriptive to ontological claims the traditional texts explicitly avoid or treat with much more caution.* The main errors are (a) turning epistemic/grammatical tools into ontological statements, (b) presenting *m?y?/avidy?* as an identifiable causal power in Brahman, and (c) treating ?vivarta? and ?mithy?? as simple, univocal categories rather than technical, context-sensitive doctrines (anirvacan?ya-khy?ti / adhy?sa / aj?tiv?da). These are precisely the issues Shankara, Gaudap?da and Sure?vara wrestle with. (vedantastudents.com , Shlokam , Tom Das ) ------------------------------ 1 ? ?Mithy? = ?neither sat nor asat?? ? true but incomplete and misleading *What you said (oversimplified):* jagat is mithy? because it is neither absolutely real (sat) nor absolutely non-existent (asat). *What the texts say (correction):* ?a?kara and the early Advaita tradition indeed use a middle category, but they *technicalize* it: the world is called *anirvacan?ya / mithy?* because it *cannot be strictly described ontologically* in the twofold vocabulary *sat*/*asat* ? and because its status must be explained in terms of *levels of truth* and *error theory (khy?ti/adhy?sa)*, not by simply saying ?dependent on ignorance.? Shankara?s introduction (Adhy?sa-bhashya) treats the problem as primarily epistemological: *we* superimpose, and therefore the world?s status is indeterminate from the absolute standpoint. The point is not merely ?neither-nor? as an ontological classification but a *methodological* and epistemic claim about how knowledge and negation work. (vedantastudents.com ) ------------------------------ 2 ? ?The world depends on ignorance (avidy?) for its being? ? illicit ontologizing of avidy? *What you said (oversimplified):* the world ?depends on Brahman and on ignorance (avidy?) for its being? ? i.e., avidy? is a causal projector. *Textual correction:* ?a?kara uses the rope?snake image and *adhy?sa* to explain how the world is *experienced*, but he (and especially Sure?vara) are very careful *not* to make avidy? into a standard ontological cause that exists in Brahman as a property (for that raises the paradox of how ignorance can be in the absolutely luminous Brahman). Instead, *avidy?* is characterized as *anirvacan?ya* (indescribable / neither real nor unreal) and as an epistemic condition ? beginningless in empirical experience and removable by j??na ? not a *real* power that produces the world in the way prak?ti produces effects in S??khya. Sure?vara develops this point: mithy?/avidy? cannot be treated as an ordinary causal entity (that would contradict Brahman?s purity). The correct classical wording is cautious: the world is experientially dependent on Brahman as substratum, and *avidy?* is the *explanans* of misapprehension, not a positive ontic production within Brahman. (vedantastudents.com , Tom Das ) ------------------------------ 3 ? ?Vivarta = apparent modification of Brahman? ? Shankara avoids committing to a metaphysical transformation language *What you said (oversimplified):* Advaita ?posits vivarta (apparent modification) ? Brahman appears as the manifold world.? *Textual correction:* Gaudap?da and later Advaitins develop *vivarta*-language, but *?a?kara?s chief move is methodological*: he explains the appearance by *adhy?sa* (superimposition) and classifies the world as anirvacan?ya. He avoids, in many places, a blunt metaphysical claim that ?Brahman becomes the world? (which would be parin?ma). Gaudap?da?s *M????kya-k?rik?* pushes the doctrine further with the *aj?tiv?da* thesis (non-origination): the world is ultimately not even born ? what appears is never a real production. This is stronger than ?vivarta? understood na?vely. So the proper scriptural posture is: *Gaudap?da: non-origination;* *?a?kara: error theory / adhy?sa / anirvacan?ya* ? do not simply translate this into ?Brahman appears as world? without the technical qualifications. (Shlokam , vedantastudents.com ) ------------------------------ 4 ? Levels of truth: not just a tidy three-box taxonomy *What you said (oversimplified):* ?Param?rthika / Vyavah?rika (and pratibh?sika)? ? mithy? belongs to empirical level. *Textual correction:* Yes, the two/three levels taxonomy is used, but its *function* in ?a?kara is to *explain the pragmatics of soteriology and scriptural statements*, not to give a flat ontology. Shankara treats *mithy?* as *anirvacan?ya* relative to *param?rtha* and meaningful in *vyavah?ra*; Gaudap?da?s and ?a?kara?s usage of *pratibh?sika* (illusory) is technical. In other words: the texts insist you must keep *standpoint* (drishti) in view ? epistemic posture determines which predicates apply. Simply saying ?mithy? belongs to the empirical level? loses the emphasis the texts place on how *negation* operates at the higher level (sublation, not destruction). (vedantastudents.com , Shlokam ) ------------------------------ 5 ? Causality and empirical efficacy: the subtleties Sure?vara exposes *What you said (oversimplified):* The jagat ?appears and causes effects? ? so it can?t be asat. *Textual correction:* Sure?vara (and ?a?kara) concede empirical efficacy, but they *carefully argue* about the status of causal proof from anirvacan?ya appearances. In *Nai?karmya-siddhi* Sure?vara analyses whether a mithy? entity can serve as a pram??a (evidence) or k?ra?a in the ordinary sense; he shows the need to distinguish *levels*: mithy? can have *vyavah?rika* causal efficacy (i.e., it functions within transactional reality), yet it cannot serve as an ontologically primary cause in the param?rthika sense. Suresvara?s treatment is technical: one cannot cavalierly move from ?works empirically? to ?is ontologically real? without destroying the central thesis that Brahman is the sole absolute. So your summary is right about empirical efficacy but omits Suresvara?s careful qualifications. (Tom Das , vedantastudents.com ) ------------------------------ 6 ? The rope?snake and dream analogies ? correct but partial *What you said:* rope?snake, dream, mirage examples show mithy?. *Textual correction:* ?a?kara uses all these analogies, but the *function* of the analogies in his bhasya is to illustrate *the epistemic dynamics of error and the method of negation (adhy?ropa-apav?da)*. Gaudap?da?s argument from dream to jagat is deployed to show *aj?tiv?da* (non-birth) and to defend the claim that the waking world is not ultimately produced. So the analogies are not merely pedagogical ? they anchor technical claims about non-origination and the limits of empirical inference. The summary?s casual analogy-use understates how those analogies feed into formal arguments in the *Prasth?natray?* tradition. (vedantastudents.com , Shlokam ) ------------------------------ 7 ? On moral/ethical consequences and soteriology ? stronger emphasis in the texts *What you said (objection reply):* ?At empirical level karma still operates, so not nihilism.? *Textual correction:* ?a?kara and *Upade?a-s?hasr?* give much stronger, methodical reasons: *ethical life (dharma), karma, and s?dhan? are indispensable* because they purify the mind to make j??na possible. The texts don?t merely patch moral practice onto an ontological theory; they embed ethical practice into the epistemic prerequisites for liberation. Presenting the moral reply as an afterthought (i.e., ?it?s okay because empirical laws still operate?) understates the central textual claim that ethical and ritual disciplines are necessary in the vyavah?ra domain to prepare for param?rthika realization. (Internet Archive ) ------------------------------ 8 ? Two technical pitfalls your summary slides into (and the strict text-based corrections) 1. *Pitfall ? Saying ?avidy? projects the world? (as if avidy? is a causal power):* *Correction:* The bhasyas treat avidy? as *anirvacan?ya* and epistemic ? not an ordinary ontological generator. If you make it a real causal power you create a dualism (Brahman + real ignorance) the texts explicitly try to avoid. (vedantastudents.com , Tom Das ) 2. *Pitfall ? Presenting vivarta/parin?ma as simple alternatives:* *Correction:* Gaudap?da?s *aj?tiv?da*, ?a?kara?s adhy?sa + anirvacan?ya-khy?ti, and Sure?vara?s technical analysis are *not* simple synonyms of ?apparent transformation.? Each carries different argumentative weight: *aj?tiv?da* ? absolute non-birth; *adhy?sa / anirvacan?ya* ? error-theory with staged negation; *vivarta* language appears but is tightly regulated by the other two. You can?t reduce all three to ?Brahman appears as the world.? (Shlokam , vedantastudents.com ) ------------------------------ 9 ? Short, corrective synthesis (how to re-phrase your short answer strictly per the texts) Write it like this to match *?a?kara / Gaudap?da / Sure?vara*: The jagat is *anirvacan?ya / mithy?*: epistemically effective in the vyavah?ra (transactional) standpoint but not sat in the param?rthika sense. Its apparent reality is explained by *adhy?sa* (superimposition) ? the cognitive misattribution that depends on avidy? ? while Gaudap?da?s *aj?tiv?da* insists no true ontological origination occurs. *Avidy?* itself is treated as beginningless and *anirvacan?ya* (not a positive ontic power in Brahman), and Sure?vara shows how these distinctions preserve both empirical efficacy and the sole absoluteness of Brahman. ( vedantastudents.com , Shlokam , Tom Das ) ------------------------------ 10 ? Offer / next step If you want, I?ll do one of these next (pick one and I?ll deliver it immediately): - *A. Line-by-line scriptural corrections:* show the actual short passages from ?a?kara?s *Adhy?sa-bhashya* / *Brahma-s?tra-bh??ya*, Gaudap?da?s *M????kya-k?rik?* (key k?rik?s + gloss), *Upade?a-s?hasr?* extracts, and Sure?vara?s *Nai?karmya-siddhi* passages that justify each correction ? with brief one-line explanations. (I?ll cite the exact passages.) - *B. A tight rewriten ?one-paragraph? version of your whole summary that is strictly faithful to those texts? vocabulary and caveats.* - *C. A point-by-point line-refutation that quotes the relevant sutra/verse and gives the exact place in the bhasya where the text contradicts each sentence in your original summary.* Which of A / B / C would you like? (If you pick A or C I?ll show the passages + precise citations right away.) On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 7:40?AM Aravinda Rao wrote: > Very nice Subbu ji, > It is good for a presentation. Recently, I made a query asking AI to > compare Madhu brahmanam of Brihadaranyaka Upanishad and the Buddhist > doctrine pratitya samutpada. I did not expect it to give any answer but it > gave a very cogent essay. I am realizing that we can use AI, though with > caution. > Regards, > Aravinda Rao > > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 8:26?AM V Subrahmanian > wrote: > >> https://chatgpt.com/s/t_6895610531a48191b926b465b4e8bbdf >> >> https://chatgpt.com/s/t_6895662111b481919b3eb48e4185fb2f >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "advaitin" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te1MPrh3BXQec_vO%3DV9bsQiiVydVbKjmTcvH7iv8JkSyRg%40mail.gmail.com >> >> . >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "advaitin" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAGwUMpT%3DvTW-HAD1iPxhe2nvYY_60uX35%2Bd2uUpkNkkBxi636Q%40mail.gmail.com > > . > From swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com Fri Aug 8 17:34:26 2025 From: swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com (Swagata Chowdhury) Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2025 03:34:26 +0600 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?Inquiry_Regarding_Sringeri_Matha=E2=80=99s?= =?utf-8?q?_Own_Scholars_and_Vakyartha_Sabha?= Message-ID: Dear All, I hope you are doing well. I would like to kindly ask if there is any opportunity to witness the participation of Sringeri Matha?s own scholars in a Vakyartha Sabha. As far as I understand, the Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha generally includes around fifty eminent scholars from outside the Matha, with perhaps one or two representatives from Sringeri itself. I am particularly interested in learning how the rigor and scholarship of Sringeri Matha?s own scholars compare to those participating in the Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha. Any insights or information on this matter would be greatly appreciated.[If its secretive than even some hints would be appreciated] Thank you all for your time and assistance. Best regards, Swagat From rama.balasubramanian at gmail.com Fri Aug 8 18:52:08 2025 From: rama.balasubramanian at gmail.com (Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan) Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2025 15:52:08 -0700 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?Inquiry_Regarding_Sringeri_Matha=E2=80=99s?= =?utf-8?q?_Own_Scholars_and_Vakyartha_Sabha?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I don?t understand what you mean by representatives of Sringeri. Is Sri Naveena Holla a representative since he learned nyAya shAstra from mahAsannishAnam himself, or not since he is a professor in Rajiv Gandhi University? By default there will only be a few scholars in residence at Sringeri. There is a difference between a maTha and a western style university. Typically you will have one or at most 2 scholars teaching a subject. Also can I know your background and motivation for this since to test the knowledge of someone you need to have the relevant background in the first place? The scholars in residence typically provide intensive training to the next AchArya over multiple years before they take up sannyAsa in subjects like nyAya and mImAmsA, so you can imagine their level. The sadas is to promote shAstra at a pan Indian level and not for glorification of Sringeri scholars. Ramakrishnan On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 2:41?PM Swagata Chowdhury via Advaita-l < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > Dear All, > > I hope you are doing well. > > I would like to kindly ask if there is any opportunity to witness the > participation of Sringeri Matha?s own scholars in a Vakyartha Sabha. As far > as I understand, the Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha generally includes > around fifty eminent scholars from outside the Matha, with perhaps one or > two representatives from Sringeri itself. > > I am particularly interested in learning how the rigor and scholarship of > Sringeri Matha?s own scholars compare to those participating in the > Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha. > > Any insights or information on this matter would be greatly appreciated.[If > its secretive than even some hints would be appreciated] > > Thank you all for your time and assistance. > > Best regards, > Swagat > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com Sat Aug 9 00:16:30 2025 From: swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com (Swagata Chowdhury) Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2025 10:16:30 +0600 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?Inquiry_Regarding_Sringeri_Matha=E2=80=99s?= =?utf-8?q?_Own_Scholars_and_Vakyartha_Sabha?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am currently studying Vedanta Paribhasa,Panchadasi and Vibramviveka under Guruji. Question was simply out of Curiosity. ? On Sat, 9 Aug 2025, 4:52?am Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan via Advaita-l, < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > I don?t understand what you mean by representatives of Sringeri. Is Sri > Naveena Holla a representative since he learned nyAya shAstra from > mahAsannishAnam himself, or not since he is a professor in Rajiv Gandhi > University? By default there will only be a few scholars in residence at > Sringeri. There is a difference between a maTha and a western style > university. Typically you will have one or at most 2 scholars teaching a > subject. > > Also can I know your background and motivation for this since to test the > knowledge of someone you need to have the relevant background in the first > place? The scholars in residence typically provide intensive training to > the next AchArya over multiple years before they take up sannyAsa in > subjects like nyAya and mImAmsA, so you can imagine their level. The sadas > is to promote shAstra at a pan Indian level and not for glorification of > Sringeri scholars. > > Ramakrishnan > > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 2:41?PM Swagata Chowdhury via Advaita-l < > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > Dear All, > > > > I hope you are doing well. > > > > I would like to kindly ask if there is any opportunity to witness the > > participation of Sringeri Matha?s own scholars in a Vakyartha Sabha. As > far > > as I understand, the Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha generally > includes > > around fifty eminent scholars from outside the Matha, with perhaps one or > > two representatives from Sringeri itself. > > > > I am particularly interested in learning how the rigor and scholarship of > > Sringeri Matha?s own scholars compare to those participating in the > > Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha. > > > > Any insights or information on this matter would be greatly > appreciated.[If > > its secretive than even some hints would be appreciated] > > > > Thank you all for your time and assistance. > > > > Best regards, > > Swagat > > _______________________________________________ > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > For assistance, contact: > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Sat Aug 9 00:17:47 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2025 09:47:47 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?Inquiry_Regarding_Sringeri_Matha=E2=80=99s?= =?utf-8?q?_Own_Scholars_and_Vakyartha_Sabha?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In the Maha Ganapathy vakyartha vidwat sadas apart from scholars who come from elsewhere, many scholars who are residing in the Mutt as present teachers etc too make presentations in various disciplines like mimansa, nyaya, vyakarana and Vedanta. One can visit Sringeri during this time when the sadas is on and witness the proceedings as viewers. Only that such persons can't intervene or express opinion at that time. If they have anything to say they can interact with the scholars after the sadas is over that day. Regards subbu On Sat, 9 Aug, 2025, 4:22?am Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan via Advaita-l, < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > I don?t understand what you mean by representatives of Sringeri. Is Sri > Naveena Holla a representative since he learned nyAya shAstra from > mahAsannishAnam himself, or not since he is a professor in Rajiv Gandhi > University? By default there will only be a few scholars in residence at > Sringeri. There is a difference between a maTha and a western style > university. Typically you will have one or at most 2 scholars teaching a > subject. > > Also can I know your background and motivation for this since to test the > knowledge of someone you need to have the relevant background in the first > place? The scholars in residence typically provide intensive training to > the next AchArya over multiple years before they take up sannyAsa in > subjects like nyAya and mImAmsA, so you can imagine their level. The sadas > is to promote shAstra at a pan Indian level and not for glorification of > Sringeri scholars. > > Ramakrishnan > > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 2:41?PM Swagata Chowdhury via Advaita-l < > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > Dear All, > > > > I hope you are doing well. > > > > I would like to kindly ask if there is any opportunity to witness the > > participation of Sringeri Matha?s own scholars in a Vakyartha Sabha. As > far > > as I understand, the Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha generally > includes > > around fifty eminent scholars from outside the Matha, with perhaps one or > > two representatives from Sringeri itself. > > > > I am particularly interested in learning how the rigor and scholarship of > > Sringeri Matha?s own scholars compare to those participating in the > > Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha. > > > > Any insights or information on this matter would be greatly > appreciated.[If > > its secretive than even some hints would be appreciated] > > > > Thank you all for your time and assistance. > > > > Best regards, > > Swagat > > _______________________________________________ > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > For assistance, contact: > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com Sat Aug 9 05:06:05 2025 From: swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com (Swagata Chowdhury) Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2025 15:06:05 +0600 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?Inquiry_Regarding_Sringeri_Matha=E2=80=99s?= =?utf-8?q?_Own_Scholars_and_Vakyartha_Sabha?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Veda Brahmarshi Sri Naveen Holla is evidently a representative of the Sringeri Sharada Peetham,because of having received his training in the Shastras from the Sringeri Math. Whoever learned Shastras rigorously from Sringeri math and still has connection that person is obviously representative of Sringeri Sharada peetham. This is purely a matter of curiosity and carries no negative intent. My own Guruji has himself produced many eminent scholars in Varanasi, yet he also imparts the Shastras to me in a very simple manner, mindful of the fact that my academic backgrounds are different and time limitation. On Sat, 9 Aug 2025, 4:52?am Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan via Advaita-l, < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > I don?t understand what you mean by representatives of Sringeri. Is Sri > Naveena Holla a representative since he learned nyAya shAstra from > mahAsannishAnam himself, or not since he is a professor in Rajiv Gandhi > University? By default there will only be a few scholars in residence at > Sringeri. There is a difference between a maTha and a western style > university. Typically you will have one or at most 2 scholars teaching a > subject. > > Also can I know your background and motivation for this since to test the > knowledge of someone you need to have the relevant background in the first > place? The scholars in residence typically provide intensive training to > the next AchArya over multiple years before they take up sannyAsa in > subjects like nyAya and mImAmsA, so you can imagine their level. The sadas > is to promote shAstra at a pan Indian level and not for glorification of > Sringeri scholars. > > Ramakrishnan > > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 2:41?PM Swagata Chowdhury via Advaita-l < > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > Dear All, > > > > I hope you are doing well. > > > > I would like to kindly ask if there is any opportunity to witness the > > participation of Sringeri Matha?s own scholars in a Vakyartha Sabha. As > far > > as I understand, the Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha generally > includes > > around fifty eminent scholars from outside the Matha, with perhaps one or > > two representatives from Sringeri itself. > > > > I am particularly interested in learning how the rigor and scholarship of > > Sringeri Matha?s own scholars compare to those participating in the > > Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha. > > > > Any insights or information on this matter would be greatly > appreciated.[If > > its secretive than even some hints would be appreciated] > > > > Thank you all for your time and assistance. > > > > Best regards, > > Swagat > > _______________________________________________ > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > For assistance, contact: > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com Sat Aug 9 08:41:53 2025 From: swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com (Swagata Chowdhury) Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2025 18:41:53 +0600 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?Inquiry_Regarding_Sringeri_Matha=E2=80=99s?= =?utf-8?q?_Own_Scholars_and_Vakyartha_Sabha?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you. I have always felt that the Sringeri Math is truly blessed, I believed it nurtures both eminent scholars and devoted Sadhaks. I hold the Sringeri Math in the highest respect, and Guruji also holds it in great reverence. Therefore, there is no question of my ever thinking to show any disrespect towards the Sringeri Sharada Peetham. Once again, thank you. On Sat, 9 Aug 2025, 6:36?pm V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l, < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > In the Maha Ganapathy vakyartha vidwat sadas apart from scholars who come > from elsewhere, many scholars who are residing in the Mutt as present > teachers etc too make presentations in various disciplines like mimansa, > nyaya, vyakarana and Vedanta. > > One can visit Sringeri during this time when the sadas is on and witness > the proceedings as viewers. Only that such persons can't intervene or > express opinion at that time. If they have anything to say they can > interact with the scholars after the sadas is over that day. > > Regards > subbu > > On Sat, 9 Aug, 2025, 4:22?am Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan via Advaita-l, < > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > I don?t understand what you mean by representatives of Sringeri. Is Sri > > Naveena Holla a representative since he learned nyAya shAstra from > > mahAsannishAnam himself, or not since he is a professor in Rajiv Gandhi > > University? By default there will only be a few scholars in residence at > > Sringeri. There is a difference between a maTha and a western style > > university. Typically you will have one or at most 2 scholars teaching a > > subject. > > > > Also can I know your background and motivation for this since to test the > > knowledge of someone you need to have the relevant background in the > first > > place? The scholars in residence typically provide intensive training to > > the next AchArya over multiple years before they take up sannyAsa in > > subjects like nyAya and mImAmsA, so you can imagine their level. The > sadas > > is to promote shAstra at a pan Indian level and not for glorification of > > Sringeri scholars. > > > > Ramakrishnan > > > > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 2:41?PM Swagata Chowdhury via Advaita-l < > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > > > Dear All, > > > > > > I hope you are doing well. > > > > > > I would like to kindly ask if there is any opportunity to witness the > > > participation of Sringeri Matha?s own scholars in a Vakyartha Sabha. As > > far > > > as I understand, the Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha generally > > includes > > > around fifty eminent scholars from outside the Matha, with perhaps one > or > > > two representatives from Sringeri itself. > > > > > > I am particularly interested in learning how the rigor and scholarship > of > > > Sringeri Matha?s own scholars compare to those participating in the > > > Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha. > > > > > > Any insights or information on this matter would be greatly > > appreciated.[If > > > its secretive than even some hints would be appreciated] > > > > > > Thank you all for your time and assistance. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Swagat > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > > > For assistance, contact: > > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > For assistance, contact: > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From raghavkumar00 at gmail.com Sat Aug 9 10:18:49 2025 From: raghavkumar00 at gmail.com (raghavkumar00 at gmail.com) Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2025 14:18:49 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?Inquiry_Regarding_Sringeri_Matha=E2=80=99s?= =?utf-8?q?_Own_Scholars_and_Vakyartha_Sabha?= References: <826275743.2375888.1754749129324.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <826275743.2375888.1754749129324@mail.yahoo.com> Namaste Swagata jiI understand that Pranava chaitanya Puri ji and another respected naiShThika brahmachari of Rajarajeshwari Peeth of Kashi are well-known to impart the shastra.? If it?s ok, can you plz share your Guruji?s yoga paTTA or GurusthAn. OmRaghav On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 at 6:12?PM, Swagata Chowdhury via Advaita-l wrote: Thank you. I have always felt that the Sringeri Math is truly blessed, I believed it nurtures both eminent scholars and devoted Sadhaks. I hold the Sringeri Math in the highest respect, and Guruji also holds it in great reverence. Therefore, there is no question of my ever thinking to show any disrespect towards the Sringeri Sharada Peetham. Once again, thank you. On Sat, 9 Aug 2025, 6:36?pm V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l, < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > In the Maha Ganapathy vakyartha vidwat sadas apart from scholars who come > from elsewhere, many scholars who are residing in the Mutt as present > teachers etc too make presentations in various disciplines like mimansa, > nyaya, vyakarana and Vedanta. > > One can visit Sringeri during this time when the sadas is on and witness > the proceedings as viewers. Only that such persons can't intervene or > express opinion at that time. If they have anything to say they can > interact with the scholars after the sadas is over that day. > > Regards > subbu > > On Sat, 9 Aug, 2025, 4:22?am Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan via Advaita-l, < > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > I don?t understand what you mean by representatives of Sringeri. Is Sri > > Naveena Holla a representative since he learned nyAya shAstra from > > mahAsannishAnam himself, or not since he is a professor in Rajiv Gandhi > > University? By default there will only be a few scholars in residence at > > Sringeri. There is a difference between a maTha and a western style > > university. Typically you will have one or at most 2 scholars teaching a > > subject. > > > > Also can I know your background and motivation for this since to test the > > knowledge of someone you need to have the relevant background in the > first > > place? The scholars in residence typically provide intensive training to > > the next AchArya over multiple years before they take up sannyAsa in > > subjects like nyAya and mImAmsA, so you can imagine their level. The > sadas > > is to promote shAstra at a pan Indian level and not for glorification of > > Sringeri scholars. > > > > Ramakrishnan > > > > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 2:41?PM Swagata Chowdhury via Advaita-l < > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > > > Dear All, > > > > > > I hope you are doing well. > > > > > > I would like to kindly ask if there is any opportunity to witness the > > > participation of Sringeri Matha?s own scholars in a Vakyartha Sabha. As > > far > > > as I understand, the Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha generally > > includes > > > around fifty eminent scholars from outside the Matha, with perhaps one > or > > > two representatives from Sringeri itself. > > > > > > I am particularly interested in learning how the rigor and scholarship > of > > > Sringeri Matha?s own scholars compare to those participating in the > > > Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha. > > > > > > Any insights or information on this matter would be greatly > > appreciated.[If > > > its secretive than even some hints would be appreciated] > > > > > > Thank you all for your time and assistance. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Swagat > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > > > For assistance, contact: > > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > For assistance, contact: > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > _______________________________________________ Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ To unsubscribe or change your options: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l For assistance, contact: listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org From swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com Sat Aug 9 12:21:18 2025 From: swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com (Swagata Chowdhury) Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2025 22:21:18 +0600 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?Inquiry_Regarding_Sringeri_Matha=E2=80=99s?= =?utf-8?q?_Own_Scholars_and_Vakyartha_Sabha?= In-Reply-To: <826275743.2375888.1754749129324@mail.yahoo.com> References: <826275743.2375888.1754749129324.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <826275743.2375888.1754749129324@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: My Guruji is Vedantashastrasiromani Ramkishor Tripathi, who holds distinguished titles such as Vedanta Martyanda, Kashi Vidvat Bhusan, Kashi Vidvat Gaurav, Shankar-Vishesh-Visishtva Puraskar, Vidyavacaspati, and Vidvat Bhusan. He is a renowned scholar of Varanasi and has served as the Head of the Department of Vedanta at Sampurnanand Sanskrit University. While I am studying the Shastras under his blessing, my approach is very simple and not as rigorous as that of others. Further details about him can be found on the faculty page of Sampurnanand Sanskrit University. On Sat, 9 Aug 2025, 8:19?pm Rk via Advaita-l, < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > Namaste Swagata jiI understand that Pranava chaitanya Puri ji and another > respected naiShThika brahmachari of Rajarajeshwari Peeth of Kashi are > well-known to impart the shastra. > If it?s ok, can you plz share your Guruji?s yoga paTTA or GurusthAn. > OmRaghav > > > On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 at 6:12?PM, Swagata Chowdhury via Advaita-l < > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > Thank you. > I have always felt that the Sringeri Math is truly blessed, I believed it > nurtures both eminent scholars and devoted Sadhaks. I hold the Sringeri > Math in the highest respect, and Guruji also holds it in great reverence. > Therefore, there is no question of my ever thinking to show any disrespect > towards the Sringeri Sharada Peetham. Once again, thank you. > > On Sat, 9 Aug 2025, 6:36?pm V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l, < > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > In the Maha Ganapathy vakyartha vidwat sadas apart from scholars who come > > from elsewhere, many scholars who are residing in the Mutt as present > > teachers etc too make presentations in various disciplines like mimansa, > > nyaya, vyakarana and Vedanta. > > > > One can visit Sringeri during this time when the sadas is on and witness > > the proceedings as viewers. Only that such persons can't intervene or > > express opinion at that time. If they have anything to say they can > > interact with the scholars after the sadas is over that day. > > > > Regards > > subbu > > > > On Sat, 9 Aug, 2025, 4:22?am Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan via Advaita-l, > < > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > > > I don?t understand what you mean by representatives of Sringeri. Is Sri > > > Naveena Holla a representative since he learned nyAya shAstra from > > > mahAsannishAnam himself, or not since he is a professor in Rajiv Gandhi > > > University? By default there will only be a few scholars in residence > at > > > Sringeri. There is a difference between a maTha and a western style > > > university. Typically you will have one or at most 2 scholars teaching > a > > > subject. > > > > > > Also can I know your background and motivation for this since to test > the > > > knowledge of someone you need to have the relevant background in the > > first > > > place? The scholars in residence typically provide intensive training > to > > > the next AchArya over multiple years before they take up sannyAsa in > > > subjects like nyAya and mImAmsA, so you can imagine their level. The > > sadas > > > is to promote shAstra at a pan Indian level and not for glorification > of > > > Sringeri scholars. > > > > > > Ramakrishnan > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 2:41?PM Swagata Chowdhury via Advaita-l < > > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > > > > > Dear All, > > > > > > > > I hope you are doing well. > > > > > > > > I would like to kindly ask if there is any opportunity to witness the > > > > participation of Sringeri Matha?s own scholars in a Vakyartha Sabha. > As > > > far > > > > as I understand, the Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha generally > > > includes > > > > around fifty eminent scholars from outside the Matha, with perhaps > one > > or > > > > two representatives from Sringeri itself. > > > > > > > > I am particularly interested in learning how the rigor and > scholarship > > of > > > > Sringeri Matha?s own scholars compare to those participating in the > > > > Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha. > > > > > > > > Any insights or information on this matter would be greatly > > > appreciated.[If > > > > its secretive than even some hints would be appreciated] > > > > > > > > Thank you all for your time and assistance. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Swagat > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > > > > > For assistance, contact: > > > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > > > For assistance, contact: > > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > For assistance, contact: > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From raghavkumar00 at gmail.com Sat Aug 9 12:31:48 2025 From: raghavkumar00 at gmail.com (Raghav Kumar Dwivedula) Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2025 22:01:48 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?Inquiry_Regarding_Sringeri_Matha=E2=80=99s?= =?utf-8?q?_Own_Scholars_and_Vakyartha_Sabha?= In-Reply-To: References: <826275743.2375888.1754749129324.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <826275743.2375888.1754749129324@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Thank you for your detailed response Namaste Swagata ji Om On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 at 9:51?PM, Swagata Chowdhury via Advaita-l < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > My Guruji is Vedantashastrasiromani Ramkishor Tripathi, who holds > distinguished titles such as Vedanta Martyanda, Kashi Vidvat Bhusan, Kashi > Vidvat Gaurav, Shankar-Vishesh-Visishtva Puraskar, Vidyavacaspati, and > Vidvat Bhusan. He is a renowned scholar of Varanasi and has served as the > Head of the Department of Vedanta at Sampurnanand Sanskrit University. > While I am studying the Shastras under his blessing, my approach is very > simple and not as rigorous as that of others. Further details about him can > be found on the faculty page of Sampurnanand Sanskrit University. > > On Sat, 9 Aug 2025, 8:19?pm Rk via Advaita-l, < > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > Namaste Swagata jiI understand that Pranava chaitanya Puri ji and another > > respected naiShThika brahmachari of Rajarajeshwari Peeth of Kashi are > > well-known to impart the shastra. > > If it?s ok, can you plz share your Guruji?s yoga paTTA or GurusthAn. > > OmRaghav > > > > > > On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 at 6:12?PM, Swagata Chowdhury via Advaita-l < > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > > Thank you. > > I have always felt that the Sringeri Math is truly blessed, I believed it > > nurtures both eminent scholars and devoted Sadhaks. I hold the Sringeri > > Math in the highest respect, and Guruji also holds it in great reverence. > > Therefore, there is no question of my ever thinking to show any > disrespect > > towards the Sringeri Sharada Peetham. Once again, thank you. > > > > On Sat, 9 Aug 2025, 6:36?pm V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l, < > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > > > In the Maha Ganapathy vakyartha vidwat sadas apart from scholars who > come > > > from elsewhere, many scholars who are residing in the Mutt as present > > > teachers etc too make presentations in various disciplines like > mimansa, > > > nyaya, vyakarana and Vedanta. > > > > > > One can visit Sringeri during this time when the sadas is on and > witness > > > the proceedings as viewers. Only that such persons can't intervene or > > > express opinion at that time. If they have anything to say they can > > > interact with the scholars after the sadas is over that day. > > > > > > Regards > > > subbu > > > > > > On Sat, 9 Aug, 2025, 4:22?am Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan via > Advaita-l, > > < > > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > > > > > I don?t understand what you mean by representatives of Sringeri. Is > Sri > > > > Naveena Holla a representative since he learned nyAya shAstra from > > > > mahAsannishAnam himself, or not since he is a professor in Rajiv > Gandhi > > > > University? By default there will only be a few scholars in residence > > at > > > > Sringeri. There is a difference between a maTha and a western style > > > > university. Typically you will have one or at most 2 scholars > teaching > > a > > > > subject. > > > > > > > > Also can I know your background and motivation for this since to test > > the > > > > knowledge of someone you need to have the relevant background in the > > > first > > > > place? The scholars in residence typically provide intensive training > > to > > > > the next AchArya over multiple years before they take up sannyAsa in > > > > subjects like nyAya and mImAmsA, so you can imagine their level. The > > > sadas > > > > is to promote shAstra at a pan Indian level and not for glorification > > of > > > > Sringeri scholars. > > > > > > > > Ramakrishnan > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 2:41?PM Swagata Chowdhury via Advaita-l < > > > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dear All, > > > > > > > > > > I hope you are doing well. > > > > > > > > > > I would like to kindly ask if there is any opportunity to witness > the > > > > > participation of Sringeri Matha?s own scholars in a Vakyartha > Sabha. > > As > > > > far > > > > > as I understand, the Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha generally > > > > includes > > > > > around fifty eminent scholars from outside the Matha, with perhaps > > one > > > or > > > > > two representatives from Sringeri itself. > > > > > > > > > > I am particularly interested in learning how the rigor and > > scholarship > > > of > > > > > Sringeri Matha?s own scholars compare to those participating in the > > > > > Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha. > > > > > > > > > > Any insights or information on this matter would be greatly > > > > appreciated.[If > > > > > its secretive than even some hints would be appreciated] > > > > > > > > > > Thank you all for your time and assistance. > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > Swagat > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > > > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > > > > > > > For assistance, contact: > > > > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > > > > > For assistance, contact: > > > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > > > For assistance, contact: > > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > For assistance, contact: > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > For assistance, contact: > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Sun Aug 10 05:47:59 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2025 15:17:59 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Prahlada charitam - English Message-ID: https://www.youtube.com/live/3aE1mdZwzu0?si=1rsFFriSxCQAt1Hf From michaelchandra108 at gmail.com Sun Aug 10 06:58:15 2025 From: michaelchandra108 at gmail.com (Michael Chandra Cohen) Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2025 06:58:15 -0400 Subject: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Illusoriness of causation (cause-effect-relationship) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Namaste Sudhanshuji, Further on GKbh3.1 reference to tarka not just sruti 'establishing advaita'. What does this mean? Surely, it does not contradict so many declaration that sruti alone is pramana for Atma/Brahma, ?I ask you of that Being who is to be known only from the Upanishads BrU3.9.26,? ?Of that purusa which is to be comprehended from the Upanishads only?BS1.1.4,? "That Being who is to be known only from the Upanisads' (BrUIII. ix. 26).'(Vedanuvacana). SSSS reflects on Bhasyakara's statement that is intended to logically prove only Nonduality but that no pramana is intended "to establish' svatahsiddha atma. from Essential Gaudapada: THE PLACE OF TARKA Because it is stated that - "Advaita can be signified by , means of Sruti and it can be establislled by Tarka (reasoning, logic)" - it should not be concluded that Tarka also, along with Sruti (Sastra PramaI.1a) , , is an independent PramaIJ.8 (valid means of knowledge). In the Sruti, which is the authoritative source for the Agama PrakaraI.1a, since Advitlyatman is self-establislled tlle special features of A vasthatraya which are superimposed upon Him (i.e. Advitlyatman or non-dual Self) are sublated (falsified, negated, rescinded) and the trutll that - "Atman is of Advaita Swarupa (of the very essence of non-duality, i.e. having nothing second to Himself)" - has been clearly explained. Therefore, to , some extent, the Sruti also has followed Tarka (reasoning) alone and llas, for the sake of the superior class of seekers, instructed the self-established " Tattwa . (Absolute, Transcendental Reality). Tllat very truth was explained fully in tIle Agama Prakarat:la Karikas. Since here in the present Chapter (Advaita Prakara~a) too - having followed or ad, opted that kind of Tarka whicll is adopted with felicity in the Sruti but in consonance with universal Intuitive Experience (Anubhavariga Tarka) so that it does not contradict It, tile impediments like Samshaya (doubt), Viparita GrahaJ)a (misconception, wrong knowledge) are rescinded, ne- , gated and the real purport of the Sruti alone has been signified - it has been affirmed that - "By means of Tarka also Advaita can be established. " That is all. This explanation should be suitably made applicable to the second Vaitathya PrakaraIJ.8 also. Because Atmatattwa is not a PrameY8 (object of perceptual knowledge), It cannot possibly be established by any PramaQa wllatsoever ; because It is Swatahsiddha (self-established), there is no need wllatsoever for establishing It by means of any PramaQa. Even so, for tIle sake or benefit of those seekers WllO are endowed with limited or low-grade intelligence (discriminative faculty) and are having predominantly an extroverted view- , point, tIle Sruti, adopting tile ancient time-tested traditional methodology of 'Adhyaropa Apavada Nyaya' (axiom of Superimposition and Rescission), deliberately superimposes on It certain Advaita Prakaran. a 213 Dharmas (special features or attributes) which do not really exist in It and relatively rescinds certain other Dharmas, showing that they do not exist in It. Those preceptors who are well-versed in this traditional methodology of teaching are utilizing as an aid to this teaching the empirical logical arguments (Loukika Tarka) in consonance with that methodology. Therefore, in the Vaitathya Prakarat:la, in order to clarify the truth that - 'Atman is Advaita', first Dvaitamithyatwa (the truth that duality is false) was indicated and then the Karyarupa (the form or category of effect) was rescinded by means of Tarka ; but here in the present context the Kara~arupa (the category of cause - as a superimposed special feature) is rescinded, refuted. Thus, because Advaita Tattwa is self-established alone, It reveals Itself to the properly qualified seekers without any hindrance or hurdles whatsoever indeed. - - "",- On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 8:50?AM Sudhanshu Shekhar wrote: > Hare Krishna Bhaskar prabhu ji. > > ? It is through Aapta vAkya as the pramANa. You know something >> called Apta vAkya as a valid pramANa, in your childhood you listen to your >> parents, teachers, elders etc. without logically scrutinizing / doubting >> their instructions. It is just like that, in the path of jnAna mArga you / >> we are still kids you should have conviction in the pramANa of the >> guru-Acharya vAkya without looking at it with your logically conditioned >> mind. >> > > How have you arrived at the conclusion that Shruti is Apta-vAkya, SSSS > ji's is Apta vAkya but Quran is not Apta-vAkya and Prophet's is not > Apta-vAkya? > > > >> ? So you are holding this kArika as pramANa and arguing that shruti >> is NOT the untya pramANa in brahma jignAsa any conditioned mind with >> ?socalled? logical backdrop can determine what that brahman is without the >> help of shAstra !! >> > > Sir, I hold that truth can be known through both logic and Shruti. Shruti > is antya pramANa, because it is contains truth and not because it is Shruti. > > A person with sufficient logical capacity can indeed come to the truth > revealed by Shruti. > > Yes for brahma jignAsa shruti is not only the pramANa but anubhavAdi also >> bhAshyakAra too says but note that this anubhavAdi (experience etc.) not >> free from shrutyanugraheeta, pUrNAnubhava and anubhava sammata tarka to >> erroneously argue OK I can deduce brahma jnAna with mere dry logic I don?t >> need bhAshya nor shruti. Are you really a saMpradAyavAdi or mere tArkika >> ?? Please let me know which vyAkhyAnakAra floating these type of >> asampradAyik statements in his works!! >> > > You will have to do research on your own to find out that, if you are > interested. I have given statement from BhAshyakAra - ??????? ????????????? > ?????????????? , ?????????????????????? ?? ? ?????? ????????? ???????? ; > ????????????????????????????? ? If you wish to know how advaita is known > through tarka, you can consider reading advaita prakaraNa. > > Again you are making blunder here. There are no two alternatives here >> one in conditioned mind?s dry logic and another one is shruti. Tarka >> mananaM should be endorsed by shruti and pUrNAnubhava and not the other way >> round i.e. dry logic should put clearance / acceptance label on shruti >> verdict. There is no end to the logical conclusions which has been >> originated through the conditioned / qualified mind?where human logic ends >> and accepts its limitations from there shruti starts. >> > > Sir, why not Quran? The words of Shruti are contradicted by Quran, which > is directly the words of Allah. Not only my dry logic, but your wet logic > also is superseded by the direct words of Allah. Where logic and Shruti > both end, the realm of words of God start. I propose you explore that. You > will get to hear direct words. Come on!! > > ? How do you know that shruti contains truth!!?? Through your >> conditioned mind?s logic?? >> > > Sir, all tools at my disposal point to the non-sublatable truth enunciated > in Shruti. The logic by which I am convinced concludes the same truth which > is enunciated in Shruti. And the anubhava too at my disposal is in harmony > with statements of Shruti. > > The illogical explanation of Shruti by you therefore stands negated. > > >> or through Apta vAkya and shraddha in sampradaya Acharya?s words?? >> > > If Apta vAkya or sampradAya AchArya's vAkya are accepted without a logical > enquiry, and blindly believed, it is another name of fanaticism. > > >> If you are holding 1-1-2 sutra bhAshya to say something nonsense like >> above then please note there also bhAshyakAra not talking about dry logic >> which has limited boundary as it is restricted to individual mind?s >> intellect. >> > > Since Shruti contains truth, any logical adventure contradicting Shruti is > obviously liable to be rejected. Where is the objection in that? > > I don't know what is your definition of dry logic and wet logic. I am not > interested in knowing that either. To me, "logic not conforming to thruth" > is dry logic. That is rejected. Since the logic with which I am convinced > leads to the same truth which shines in Upanishads, BSB 1.1.2 or whatever > is not contradicted. > > ? And for the shruti and its truth, brahman is the source which >> cannot be ascertained by any conditioned dry logic to declare shruti per se >> not important and and ?my? logic also can serve this purpose!! >> > > There is nothing like "my logic" vs Shruti. My statement is that logic > which conforms to truth is on equal footing with Shruti. Shruti is > important because it contains truth. The logic which leads to truth is > hence equally important. > > >> Again I am really surprised asaMpradAyik statements like this sneaking in >> without being questioned by socalled official flag bearers of shAstra/ >> sampradaya ? >> > > You are incorrect about your understanding of sampradAya. > > ? The other name of this fanaticism is shraddha and bhakti in >> shAstra, sampradaya, guru and Acharya, and I know in the atheist/tArkika >> conditioned mind these terms mean nothing. >> > > You are incorrect in equating fanaticism with shraddhA/sampradAya/guru > etc. > > ? I am sorry for asking this question, how do you know that you are >> the son of your own parents?? Just because they said so or have you used >> any / some logical device to determine that ?? >> > > Blast from the past? ISKCON days? Srila Prabhupada's argument!! > > Sir, just as I decided in my dream that I am a son of so and so, similarly > I have decided here. As much truth value my that "belief" in swapna had, > exactly the same truth value my "this belief" has. It means nothing. It is > a mere belief. > > If you insist that it is a pramA that "I am son of so and so", then sir, > please know that it is through anumAna or arthApatti. > > If you say that it is through Apta vAkya, then you are in for a trouble > because being a paurusheya-Apta-vAkya, it is fraught with danger. > > In SDV model, Veda is considered pramANa not because it is Apta-vAkya, not > because it is apaurusheya, not because of anything. Veda has > swatah-prAmANya. > > The aprAmANya is absent because of dOsha-abhAva. dOsha-abhAva is because > of apaurusheyatva. > > So, flow is as under: > > apaurusheyatva => dOsha-abhAva => aprAmANya-abhAva. > > prAmANya is swatah. > > And please note that apaurusheyatva is not a blind belief. It comes from > anumAna as under: > > 1. ???????????? ?????????? ????????????????????????????????, > ???????????????, ?????????????????????. > 2. ????????? ??????????????????????: ???????????????????????????:, > ??????-??????-?????????????, ???????????????????. > > You will have to apply mind to understand what is said above. > > So, sum and substance is this: > > 1. I am a man, son of so and so, -- is a belief. A rebuttable belief > having as much truth value as my belief of being son of so and so in my > dream yesterday. > 2. Through tushyatu-durjana-nyAya, if it is accepted to be a pramA - then > it is known through anumAna or arthApatti. > > > >> - Over dose of mere speculations born out of dry logic making you to >> pass these type of dreadful statements. For those who follow shankara and >> shruti are doing so as it is for them AptavAkya, only tArkika-s who do not >> have any respect to shAstra-saMpradAya, guru-Acharya can make some >> statements like this? >> >> > I am afraid that your statements are liable to be rejected on account of > absence of application of mind. > > >> - You can live in your delusional logical world,no issues ? But >> those who know sampradaya, those who respect their Acharya, Acharya vAkya >> know that only shruti, shrutyanugraheeta tarka based on pUrNAnubhava >> permitted in brahma jignAsa. And they know very well kevala tarka, >> nirAgama tarka, shushka tarka etc. which you are passionately promoting >> here in this list are simply shruti viruddha, nishpramANakavAdaM and goes >> against anubhava as well. We the fanatic followers of shankara knows what >> verdict our Acharya given on kevala tArkika-s..By the way since you are not >> the fanatic I don?t have to quote what my Acharya says on ?kevala tarka?. >> >> > Sir, how many AchAryAs are there is your sampradAya after 10th century AD. > Let us talk on that!! I want a list of AchAryAs of your sampradAya. > Something akin to Brahma-Madhva-Gaudiya sampradAya?? > > >> >> - I can understand your frustration here resulting in bAlisha >> (childish) conclusions about these examples in shruti. >> >> > Sir, sorry to disappoint you as I have no frustration in understanding > Shruti. You have however an uphill task to explain your concept to even an > eight-year old boy!! Try it. Post your conversation with an eight year old > boy as to how a changeless singular inactive entity appears as changeable > world. Good luck. > > Regards. > Sudhanshu Shekhar. > > > > > From sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com Sun Aug 10 07:49:07 2025 From: sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com (Sudhanshu Shekhar) Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2025 17:19:07 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Illusoriness of causation (cause-effect-relationship) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Namaste Michael ji. //Yes, of course through logic but very much also due to apta pramana ... in my case the guru (Sivananda) for native Hindus, Advaita is part and parcel of the culture. This needn't establish logic as a superior pramana. The eyes see a rope until the ears hear the hiss. Logic is supportive only.// You have not answered as to why you hold Veda as a pramANa? Nor you have answered why Quran is not a pramANa for you. If you hold Veda as a pramANa because Swami Sivananda said so, then it is fanaticism. A statement is true because Shankara said so, then it is fanaticism. What Shruti said, is logically incontrovertible. Why? Because Shruti is pramANa. Why? Because the prAmANya of Shruti is swatah. On its own. It does not have non-prAmANya. Why? Because it has dOsha-abhAva. Why? Because it is apaurusheya. How? Through logic it is proved. That should be our approach. If a statement of Shruti is logically contradicted, then it is inferred that Shruti means something else here. Because Shruti cannot be illogical. This is not fanaticism. This is based on logic. A logic conforming to truth and Shruti are both on equal footing Michael ji. They both are depicting truth. In the name of Shruti or Shankara, we should not statement illogical stuff. //Now you digress - what about causation? tattva anyatAgrahana = mistaken identity, misperceived.// Let us keep digressions aside. //perceiver and perception are co-terminus dualities. That there is seeing and seen is dependent upon sAkshi as svarupa. So then is not sAkshi also a thought? Yes but from paramarthika drsti only otherwise sastra formulates sAkshi as a notion to dispel indivdual seer/knower.// SAkshI is not a thought. It is Brahman described from the frame of reference of ignorance. From pAramArthika drishTi, there is no sAkshi-tva. Only pure Brahman remains. //I know DSV ultimately dismisses sAkshi as a product of thought but how does DSV account for the existence of mind and individuality? Are they products of avidya and if so, then when the effect, mind, is negated won't avidya, as the material cause of mind necessarily remain?// DSV does not dismiss sAkshI aa product of thought. SAkshI is Brahman, described from the frame of reference of ignorance. Like sun, which is prakAsha-mAtra, appears as prakAshaka with respect to earth, similarly, Brahman, which is pure light, appears as illuminator sAkshI with respect to ignorance. In DSV, a mind distinct from ignorance as a product thereof is not required. //But you did make a distinction between mind and its thoughts, yes? I forget the context and reasoning// In SDV, a particular modification of mind is called thought. In DSV, ignorance itself is enough to account for thought // your term, avidy?-upahita-caitanya. Perhaps my sanskrit is mistaken but upahita means conditioned by. Is this a term used by Bhasyakara? It implies an actual presence of avidya that is not Caitanya.// Upahita is derived from upAdhi. It is a technical term which needs to be understood. //Theories of perception abound - how can you say perception cannot be disputed? Just ask Chatgpt about science and perception as illusion. Gaudapada argues perception itself does not exist, ajati vada. Perception itself indicates avidya. Why hold perception per se as sacrosanct when all Vedanta is intended to instruct the nondual absence of all distinction?// I did not treat perception as sacrosanct. I just explained the subtlety of hare's horn vis a vis illusory snake. //SDV interprets sattA and hierarchy of states; DSV and PTB distinguish tri-avastha as drsti-s only. What then is the difference between DSV & PTB that SSSS points out? I believe it is that DSV regards drsti as avidya whereas SSSS points out what appears as drsti is Brahman only - avidya itself is a sastrika superimposition.// I am not interested in investigating what SSSS ji says. DrishTi in DSV refers to vritti-upahita-chaitanya and not chaitnya itself. //I don't follow the sequence here but generally, these are not pick and choose methodologies. They apply to categories of adhicaritvam. The hard and fast, sine qua non method however is adhyaropa/apavada. It is pervasive if you know to look for it. Sruti cannot operate as pramana without A/A - what can right knowledge destroy except wrong suppositions and without a thorough apavada of word, sentence and method, nonduality can never be established.// adhyArOpa requires avidya. //PTB does not agree that avidya and maya etc are one and the same. SSSS, Hacker et. al. have all pointed out this distinction between Post-Sankara and PTB. You would have to disprove all these guys to maintain allegiance to strict Sankara Advaita it seems to me.// I have disproved them a number of times. //We have discussed before - a pet objection of yours. Vedanta assumes avidya as experiential in teaching the method to be rid of avidya - thus avidya is anubhava siddha.// avidyA is anubhava siddha because I say - I am ignorant. No need to bring in Advaita Vedanta here. //As such, Sruti's goal is not to account for creation but only to relieve ourselves of creation. It is 8th grade lokya tarka that demands an explanation for the inexplicable Subject appearing as other than the subject. There is no end to the why and how of Creation. Gaudapada bundles all Creation theories together and dismisses them as maya for the average (8th grade like) student but ultimately negates them altogether as ajati vada. // You did not respond to my pet objection. //Further on GKbh3.1 reference to tarka not just sruti 'establishing advaita'. What does this mean? Surely, it does not contradict so many declaration that sruti alone is pramana for Atma/Brahma, ?I ask you of that Being who is to be known only from the Upanishads BrU3.9.26,? ?Of that purusa which is to be comprehended from the Upanishads only?BS1.1.4,? "That Being who is to be known only from the Upanisads' (BrUIII. ix. 26).'(Vedanuvacana).// These elaborate concepts of pramANa are well accepted in SDV. In DSV, however, no difference from dream is admitted. Now, in dream, you dreamt of Shruti. Were they pramANa? Were they apaurusheya? Were they not illusory? Similarly waking Shruti. So, Shruti, logic, pratyaksha, whatever we are employing are all illusory. They are held to be pramANa because they are concluding a non-sublatable truth. That is all. No superiority of one vis-a-vis another. So other statements of BhAshyakara should be read in that context. Regards, Sudhanshu Shekhar. From 530uddeshya at gmail.com Mon Aug 11 01:20:28 2025 From: 530uddeshya at gmail.com (Uddeshya Sharma) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 10:50:28 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Regarding the Guru Parampara of Bhagvatpada Message-ID: Shiva Shiva , Namaskaras to Vidvans , During a discussion with one of my friends,the following Guru Parampara shloka got me thinking. ??????? ???????? ???????, ?????? ? ???????? ?????? ?? ?????? ???? ?????? ???????, ???????????????? ????????????? ? ?????????????? ?????? ???????? ? ?????????? ? ????????? ?? ??????? ?????????????????, ?????? ??????????? ?????????? How does the Sanyasa Parampara of Bhagvatpada starts ? Shukadeva lived in the dwapara Yuga while Gaudapadacharya was in the kaliyuga. As per the well accepted view Bhagvatapada lived in the 7th - 8th CE . Taking even a century of lifetime for both of his previous Aacharyas, we can say that Gaudapadacharya was in 5th CE. That would still be around 2000 years from the start of Kali. Are there some Aacharyas missing in this shloka ? Also who was the first dandi sanyasi in this Parampara because Aacharyas previous to Gaudapadacharya are known to have had a family . Is there any mention of them undergoing Sanyasa in which case who initiated the first sanyasi in the lineage and why isn't he in the parampara? This question might look silly but I'll be glad if some vidvan could quote from any Shankara Vijaya text if any information is available for this topic. Hara Hara Mahadeva Namaskara. From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Mon Aug 11 06:54:11 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 16:24:11 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada Message-ID: Earlier we had seen that in the Mahabharata is a dialogue where Krishna discourses on the various observances/vows that lead one to His loka or Shiva loka and those who go there return to this loka after enjoying bhoga there. Having returned they become Jnanis. Here are two instances from the *s?ttvik* Naradiya Mahapurana where individuals are shown returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada (Tad VishnoH paramam Padam - a Rg vedic passage) and enjoying bhogas in that realm for many kalpas. ???????????- ??????????/??????? ?? https://sa.wikisource.org/s/4v8 - Devanagari version https://cloudup.com/chlxvobAueh Kannada version with translation p.60 https://archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.12945/page/n323/mode/2up English translation of verse 77 ????????? ?????????????? ???????? ??????????? ?? ?? ?????????? ??????????? *???????????? ??? ???? ?? *??-?? ?? ???? ?????????????? ????????? ??????? ?? ???????????????????????? ????????? ???????? ?? ??-?? ?? *????????????????? ??????? ???????? ???? ????????? ??* ??????? ???????? ??????????????? ?? ??-?? ?? ???????? ???????? ?????? ????????? ?? ????????????? ??? ????? ????????? ???????? ?? ??-?? ?? ~ ???????????- ??????????/??????? ?? Below is another chapter from the Narada purana: https://sa.wikisource.org/s/4vb Devanagari version https://cloudup.com/chlxvobAueh Kannada version with translation: p. 94 https://archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.12945/page/n341/mode/2up English translation of verse 87 ??? ???????? ???????????? ?????? ????????? ?? ???????? ???? ??????????? ????????? ?? ??-?? ?? ??? ??????? ??? ???? ?????????????? ?? ????? ???????????? *?????????? ???? ???? ?*? ??-?? ?? ???????????? ???????? *????????????????* ?? ?????? ??? ????????? ?????????? ???????? ?? ??-?? ?? ???????????????? ????????????? ? ?? ???????? ????????? ????????????????????? ?? ??-?? ?? ??????? ???????????? ??????????????? ?? ????????? ???????????? *??? ??????????? *?? ??-?? ?? warm regards subbu ~ From raghavkumar00 at gmail.com Mon Aug 11 09:29:32 2025 From: raghavkumar00 at gmail.com (Raghav Kumar Dwivedula) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 18:59:32 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 11 Aug 2025 at 4:31?PM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > Earlier we had seen that in the Mahabharata is a dialogue where Krishna > discourses on the various observances/vows that lead one to His loka or > Shiva loka and those who go there return to this loka after enjoying bhoga > there. Having returned they become Jnanis. > > Here are two instances from the *s?ttvik* Naradiya Mahapurana where > individuals are shown returning to earth even after attaining the > Vaishnava-Parama pada (Tad VishnoH paramam Padam - a Rg vedic passage) and > enjoying bhogas in that realm for many kalpas. > > > ???????????- ??????????/??????? ?? > > https://sa.wikisource.org/s/4v8 - Devanagari version > > https://cloudup.com/chlxvobAueh Kannada version with translation p.60 > > https://archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.12945/page/n323/mode/2up > English translation of verse 77 > > ????????? ?????????????? ???????? ??????????? ?? ?? > ?????????? ??????????? *???????????? ??? ???? ?? *??-?? ?? > > ???? ?????????????? ????????? ??????? ?? > ???????????????????????? ????????? ???????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > *????????????????? ??????? ???????? ???? ????????? ??* > ??????? ???????? ??????????????? ?? ??-?? ?? Namaste dear Subbu ji Excellent point. Do the vishishTAdvaitins etc assert that *all* those who reach vaikunTha never return and attain permanent sayujya etc or do only the most exalted amongst the vaikunThavAsi-s attain permanent sayujyam while the rest have to come back etc. ? Your verse 77 and that too from a vaiShNava-endorsed purANa checkmates any claims to attainment of sayujyam etc. or even residence being permanent. All gati is followed by ?gamanam unless j??nam arises in brahma-loka or vaikun?ha etc., is the reasonable stand of advaita ved?nta. Om Raghav > > > ???????? ???????? ?????? ????????? ?? > ????????????? ??? ????? ????????? ???????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > ~ ???????????- ??????????/??????? ?? Below is another chapter from the > Narada purana: > > https://sa.wikisource.org/s/4vb Devanagari version > > https://cloudup.com/chlxvobAueh Kannada version with translation: p. 94 > > https://archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.12945/page/n341/mode/2up > English translation of verse 87 > > ??? ???????? ???????????? ?????? ????????? ?? > ???????? ???? ??????????? ????????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > ??? ??????? ??? ???? ?????????????? ?? > ????? ???????????? *?????????? ???? ???? ?*? ??-?? ?? > > ???????????? ???????? *????????????????* ?? > ?????? ??? ????????? ?????????? ???????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > ???????????????? ????????????? ? ?? > ???????? ????????? ????????????????????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > ??????? ???????????? ??????????????? ?? > ????????? ???????????? *??? ??????????? *?? ??-?? ?? > > warm regards > subbu > > ~ > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From 530uddeshya at gmail.com Mon Aug 11 09:35:51 2025 From: 530uddeshya at gmail.com (Uddeshya Sharma) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 19:05:51 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Shiva Shiva , Namaskara sir , This reminds me of reading somewhere that the bhakta having gone to satyaloka ( the realm of his istha )receives Brahma gyana from the devta and then proceeds to the final liberation at the time of pralaya . Is this from the bhasya of Bhagvatpada? On Mon, 11 Aug 2025, 18:59 Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l, < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > On Mon, 11 Aug 2025 at 4:31?PM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l < > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > Earlier we had seen that in the Mahabharata is a dialogue where Krishna > > discourses on the various observances/vows that lead one to His loka or > > Shiva loka and those who go there return to this loka after enjoying > bhoga > > there. Having returned they become Jnanis. > > > > Here are two instances from the *s?ttvik* Naradiya Mahapurana where > > individuals are shown returning to earth even after attaining the > > Vaishnava-Parama pada (Tad VishnoH paramam Padam - a Rg vedic passage) > and > > enjoying bhogas in that realm for many kalpas. > > > > > > ???????????- ??????????/??????? ?? > > > > https://sa.wikisource.org/s/4v8 - Devanagari version > > > > https://cloudup.com/chlxvobAueh Kannada version with translation > p.60 > > > > https://archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.12945/page/n323/mode/2up > > English translation of verse 77 > > > > ????????? ?????????????? ???????? ??????????? ?? ?? > > ?????????? ??????????? *???????????? ??? ???? ?? *??-?? ?? > > > > ???? ?????????????? ????????? ??????? ?? > > ???????????????????????? ????????? ???????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > > > *????????????????? ??????? ???????? ???? ????????? ??* > > ??????? ???????? ??????????????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > > Namaste dear Subbu ji > > Excellent point. > > Do the vishishTAdvaitins etc assert that *all* those who reach vaikunTha > never return and attain permanent sayujya etc or do only the most exalted > amongst the vaikunThavAsi-s attain permanent sayujyam while the rest have > to come back etc. ? > > Your verse 77 and that too from a vaiShNava-endorsed purANa checkmates any > claims to attainment of sayujyam etc. or even residence being permanent. > All gati is followed by ?gamanam unless j??nam arises in brahma-loka or > vaikun?ha etc., is the reasonable stand of advaita ved?nta. > > Om > Raghav > > > > > > > ???????? ???????? ?????? ????????? ?? > > ????????????? ??? ????? ????????? ???????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > > > ~ ???????????- ??????????/??????? ?? Below is another chapter from the > > Narada purana: > > > > https://sa.wikisource.org/s/4vb Devanagari version > > > > https://cloudup.com/chlxvobAueh Kannada version with translation: p. > 94 > > > > https://archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.12945/page/n341/mode/2up > > English translation of verse 87 > > > > ??? ???????? ???????????? ?????? ????????? ?? > > ???????? ???? ??????????? ????????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > > > ??? ??????? ??? ???? ?????????????? ?? > > ????? ???????????? *?????????? ???? ???? ?*? ??-?? ?? > > > > ???????????? ???????? *????????????????* ?? > > ?????? ??? ????????? ?????????? ???????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > > > ???????????????? ????????????? ? ?? > > ???????? ????????? ????????????????????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > > > ??????? ???????????? ??????????????? ?? > > ????????? ???????????? *??? ??????????? *?? ??-?? ?? > > > > warm regards > > subbu > > > > ~ > > _______________________________________________ > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > For assistance, contact: > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From psangeerthgenius at gmail.com Mon Aug 11 11:54:57 2025 From: psangeerthgenius at gmail.com (Sangeerth P) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 21:24:57 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In Vishishtadvaita philosophy, we make a clear distinction between *Vishnu* and *Narayana* in certain contexts. For example, in the *Mahalakshmi Ashtothram*, one of Mahalakshmi?s names is *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai Namaha*. If Narayana is the *Aadhara* (support) of everything, and if Vishnu and Narayana were entirely identical in all aspects, then how could Mahalakshmi be described as the *Atma* (inner self) of Vishnu? Similarly, consider the episode of the Sanakadi Rishis reaching Vaikuntha and cursing Jaya and Vijaya. Even after this, we see Jaya and Vijaya born in the material realm. This raises two important points: 1. If the Sanat Kumaras had truly reached *Nitya Vaikuntha*, they would not be seen anywhere else, such as in Brahmaloka. But we see that at the beginning of Bhagavatham's Mahatmyam only there is Narada and Sanat kumara samvada which is at the beginning of Kali yuga. And the Jaya vijaya incident should have happened very before this meeting. 2. If Vaikuntha were a place of *non-return*, then the curse on Jaya and Vijaya could not have led them back into *samsara*. Thus in Vishishtadvaita, we clearly differentiate between two realms: *Karya Vaikuntha* and *Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntha*. It is the *Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntha* that is the true eternal, non-returnable abode, not the Karya Vaikuntha. For instance, in the *Uttara Kanda* of the Ramayana, when Lord Rama takes all the people of Ayodhya to His *Dham*, this refers to *Karya Vaikuntha*, not Nitya Vaikuntha. As per the siddhanta, the mukti can be obtained either by Bhakthi yogam or Sharanagati. This understanding is supported by *Arthapatti Pramana.* Regards Sangeerth P 8608658009 On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 7:06?PM Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > On Mon, 11 Aug 2025 at 4:31?PM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l < > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > Earlier we had seen that in the Mahabharata is a dialogue where Krishna > > discourses on the various observances/vows that lead one to His loka or > > Shiva loka and those who go there return to this loka after enjoying > bhoga > > there. Having returned they become Jnanis. > > > > Here are two instances from the *s?ttvik* Naradiya Mahapurana where > > individuals are shown returning to earth even after attaining the > > Vaishnava-Parama pada (Tad VishnoH paramam Padam - a Rg vedic passage) > and > > enjoying bhogas in that realm for many kalpas. > > > > > > ???????????- ??????????/??????? ?? > > > > https://sa.wikisource.org/s/4v8 - Devanagari version > > > > https://cloudup.com/chlxvobAueh Kannada version with translation > p.60 > > > > https://archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.12945/page/n323/mode/2up > > English translation of verse 77 > > > > ????????? ?????????????? ???????? ??????????? ?? ?? > > ?????????? ??????????? *???????????? ??? ???? ?? *??-?? ?? > > > > ???? ?????????????? ????????? ??????? ?? > > ???????????????????????? ????????? ???????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > > > *????????????????? ??????? ???????? ???? ????????? ??* > > ??????? ???????? ??????????????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > > Namaste dear Subbu ji > > Excellent point. > > Do the vishishTAdvaitins etc assert that *all* those who reach vaikunTha > never return and attain permanent sayujya etc or do only the most exalted > amongst the vaikunThavAsi-s attain permanent sayujyam while the rest have > to come back etc. ? > > Your verse 77 and that too from a vaiShNava-endorsed purANa checkmates any > claims to attainment of sayujyam etc. or even residence being permanent. > All gati is followed by ?gamanam unless j??nam arises in brahma-loka or > vaikun?ha etc., is the reasonable stand of advaita ved?nta. > > Om > Raghav > > > > > > > ???????? ???????? ?????? ????????? ?? > > ????????????? ??? ????? ????????? ???????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > > > ~ ???????????- ??????????/??????? ?? Below is another chapter from the > > Narada purana: > > > > https://sa.wikisource.org/s/4vb Devanagari version > > > > https://cloudup.com/chlxvobAueh Kannada version with translation: p. > 94 > > > > https://archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.12945/page/n341/mode/2up > > English translation of verse 87 > > > > ??? ???????? ???????????? ?????? ????????? ?? > > ???????? ???? ??????????? ????????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > > > ??? ??????? ??? ???? ?????????????? ?? > > ????? ???????????? *?????????? ???? ???? ?*? ??-?? ?? > > > > ???????????? ???????? *????????????????* ?? > > ?????? ??? ????????? ?????????? ???????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > > > ???????????????? ????????????? ? ?? > > ???????? ????????? ????????????????????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > > > ??????? ???????????? ??????????????? ?? > > ????????? ???????????? *??? ??????????? *?? ??-?? ?? > > > > warm regards > > subbu > > > > ~ > > _______________________________________________ > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > For assistance, contact: > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Mon Aug 11 13:34:44 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 23:04:44 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 9:25?PM Sangeerth P via Advaita-l < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > In Vishishtadvaita philosophy, we make a clear distinction between *Vishnu* > and *Narayana* in certain contexts. For example, in the *Mahalakshmi > Ashtothram*, one of Mahalakshmi?s names is *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai > Namaha*. If Narayana is the *Aadhara* (support) of everything, and if > Vishnu and Narayana were entirely identical in all aspects, then how could > Mahalakshmi be described as the *Atma* (inner self) of Vishnu? > Namaste Is this *Mahalakshmi Ashtothram* acceptable to Srivaishnavas? Also, is the two-type Vaikuntha that Ramanuja system accepts, admitted in any Purana like the Bhagavatam? There we see the Jaya-Vijaya episode happening in 'Vaikuntha' and no adjective like k?rya is added there. In the Rangaramanuja Kathopanishad bhashya we see: 4. ????????? - ?????? ????? - ?? ????????, ?????? ???????? ? ???????? ??? ??????? - ?????????????? ??? ? ???????? - ??????? ????, ????????????? ? *?????????? ???? ????' *(?.?.?-?) ??? ???????? ??????????????? ? ??? - ???????????????? ??????????? - *????????????? *?; '????' ??? ???? ? The above says: tad vishnoH paramam padam = the mukti from where *there is no return.* In the Narada Purana verses cited, we have this alluding to that *?????????? ???? ???? ?*? ??-?? from where the people return after experiencing bhoga for long. regards subbu > > Similarly, consider the episode of the Sanakadi Rishis reaching Vaikuntha > and cursing Jaya and Vijaya. Even after this, we see Jaya and Vijaya born > in the material realm. This raises two important points: > > 1. > > If the Sanat Kumaras had truly reached *Nitya Vaikuntha*, they would not > be seen anywhere else, such as in Brahmaloka. But we see that at the > beginning of Bhagavatham's Mahatmyam only there is Narada and Sanat > kumara > samvada which is at the beginning of Kali yuga. And the Jaya vijaya > incident should have happened very before this meeting. > 2. > > If Vaikuntha were a place of *non-return*, then the curse on Jaya and > Vijaya could not have led them back into *samsara*. > > Thus in Vishishtadvaita, we clearly differentiate between two realms: > *Karya > Vaikuntha* and *Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntha*. It is the *Nitya Vibhuti > Vaikuntha* that is the true eternal, non-returnable abode, not the Karya > Vaikuntha. For instance, in the *Uttara Kanda* of the Ramayana, when Lord > Rama takes all the people of Ayodhya to His *Dham*, this refers to *Karya > Vaikuntha*, not Nitya Vaikuntha. As per the siddhanta, the mukti can be > obtained either by Bhakthi yogam or Sharanagati. > > This understanding is supported by *Arthapatti Pramana.* > > > Regards > Sangeerth P > 8608658009 > > > > From psangeerthgenius at gmail.com Mon Aug 11 14:03:04 2025 From: psangeerthgenius at gmail.com (Sangeerth P) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 23:33:04 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Namaste sir 1. The Mahalakshmi ashtotram acceptability in what sense I am not able to understand sir. Also it was just an example that I wanted to tell. 2. As I have told its an Arthapaththi pramana. You infer at which place Vishnu refers to the one in Karya Vaikunta and at which place Vishnu refers to Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntam. Its purely inferential and will come through the lineage. Because the same place (Vaikunta) cant be told be un-returnable as well as returnable. It would be a contradictory. And hence this has to be taken through Arthapathi pramanam. 3. As told in the above point in Katha Upanishad one refers to the Vishnu in Sri Vaikuntam(Nitya vibhuti). Narada purana would refer to Karya Vaikuntam. Regards Sangeerth P 8608658009 On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 11:04?PM V Subrahmanian wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 9:25?PM Sangeerth P via Advaita-l < > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > >> In Vishishtadvaita philosophy, we make a clear distinction between >> *Vishnu* >> and *Narayana* in certain contexts. For example, in the *Mahalakshmi >> Ashtothram*, one of Mahalakshmi?s names is *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai >> Namaha*. If Narayana is the *Aadhara* (support) of everything, and if >> Vishnu and Narayana were entirely identical in all aspects, then how could >> Mahalakshmi be described as the *Atma* (inner self) of Vishnu? >> > > Namaste > > Is this *Mahalakshmi Ashtothram* acceptable to Srivaishnavas? Also, is the > two-type Vaikuntha that Ramanuja system accepts, admitted in any Purana > like the Bhagavatam? There we see the Jaya-Vijaya episode happening in > 'Vaikuntha' and no adjective like k?rya is added there. > > In the Rangaramanuja Kathopanishad bhashya we see: > > > 4. ????????? - ?????? ????? > - ?? ????????, ?????? ???????? ? ???????? ??? ??????? - ?????????????? ??? > ? ???????? - ??????? ????, ????????????? ? *?????????? ???? ????' *(?.?.?-?) > ??? ???????? ??????????????? ? ??? - ???????????????? ??????????? - *????????????? > *?; '????' ??? ???? ? > > The above says: tad vishnoH paramam padam = the mukti from where *there > is no return.* In the Narada Purana verses cited, we have this alluding > to that *?????????? ???? ???? ?*? ??-?? from where the people return > after experiencing bhoga for long. > > regards > subbu > >> >> Similarly, consider the episode of the Sanakadi Rishis reaching Vaikuntha >> and cursing Jaya and Vijaya. Even after this, we see Jaya and Vijaya born >> in the material realm. This raises two important points: >> >> 1. >> >> If the Sanat Kumaras had truly reached *Nitya Vaikuntha*, they would >> not >> be seen anywhere else, such as in Brahmaloka. But we see that at the >> beginning of Bhagavatham's Mahatmyam only there is Narada and Sanat >> kumara >> samvada which is at the beginning of Kali yuga. And the Jaya vijaya >> incident should have happened very before this meeting. >> 2. >> >> If Vaikuntha were a place of *non-return*, then the curse on Jaya and >> Vijaya could not have led them back into *samsara*. >> >> Thus in Vishishtadvaita, we clearly differentiate between two realms: >> *Karya >> Vaikuntha* and *Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntha*. It is the *Nitya Vibhuti >> Vaikuntha* that is the true eternal, non-returnable abode, not the Karya >> Vaikuntha. For instance, in the *Uttara Kanda* of the Ramayana, when Lord >> Rama takes all the people of Ayodhya to His *Dham*, this refers to *Karya >> Vaikuntha*, not Nitya Vaikuntha. As per the siddhanta, the mukti can be >> obtained either by Bhakthi yogam or Sharanagati. >> >> This understanding is supported by *Arthapatti Pramana.* >> >> >> Regards >> Sangeerth P >> 8608658009 >> >> >> >> From sjayana at yahoo.com Mon Aug 11 20:15:53 2025 From: sjayana at yahoo.com (S Jayanarayanan) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 00:15:53 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?Stories_from_the_Shiva_Purana_-_12_=28Parv?= =?utf-8?b?YXRp4oCZcyBUZXN0KQ==?= References: <1966461018.2379488.1754957753088.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1966461018.2379488.1754957753088@mail.yahoo.com> (Continued from the previous post. Shiva's wife once tested the Divinity of Rama: https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/shiva-purana-english/d/doc226044.html Section 2.2, Chapter 24. The following rendering is Ramana Maharshi's retelling of the incident in ?Talks?, #218 (30th June, 1936): https://english.sreyas.in/parvatis-test/ ) ? ? Parvati?s Test ? ( This part is taken from Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva in ?Spiritual Stories? as Told by Ramana Maharshi ) ? Sri Bhagavan was looking into the Shiva Purana and related, ?Shiva has the Transcendental and Immanent aspects as represented by His invisible, transcendental being and the Linga aspect respectively. The Linga, manifested as Arunachala originally, stands even to this day. ? ?In the sphere of speech, Pranava (the mystic sound AUM) represents the Transcendental (nirguna), and the Panchakshari (the five-syllabled mantra), represents the Immanent aspect (saguna).? To illustrate this Sri Bhagavan recounted the anecdote of Parvati testing Rama. ? Rama and Lakshmana were wandering in the forest in search of Sita. Rama was grief-stricken. Just then, Shiva and Parvati happened to pass close-by. Shiva saluted Rama and passed on. Parvati was surprised and asked Shiva to explain why He, the Lord of the Universe, being worshipped by all, should stoop to salute Rama, an ordinary human who having missed his consort was grief-stricken and moving in anguish in the wilderness looking helpless. Shiva then said, ?Rama is simply acting as a human being would under the circumstances. He is nevertheless the incarnation of Vishnu and deserves to be saluted. You may test him if you choose.? ? Parvati considered the matter, took the shape of Sita and appeared in front of Rama, as he was crying out the name of Sita in great anguish. He looked at Parvati appearing as Sita, smiled and asked, ?Why Parvati, are you here? Where is Sambhu? Why have you taken the shape of Sita?? Parvati felt abashed and explained how she went there to test him and sought an explanation for Shiva saluting him. ? Rama replied, ?We are all only aspects of Shiva, worshipping Him at sight and remembering Him out of sight.? ? ? (To be Continued) From raghavkumar00 at gmail.com Mon Aug 11 21:30:47 2025 From: raghavkumar00 at gmail.com (Raghav Kumar Dwivedula) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 07:00:47 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Namaste Sangeerth ji Thank you for sharing this. For completeness can you share where was the earliest reference to this two fold distinction of karya vaikunTha and Nitya vaikunTha mentioned? Since the Jaya Vijaya earthly excursion and vulnerability to being cursed is so well-known, I surmise the idea of an anitya vaikunTha aspect must have been dealt with in ?r? bh??ya itself? Om Raghav On Mon, 11 Aug 2025 at 11:41?PM, Sangeerth P via Advaita-l < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > Namaste sir > > 1. The Mahalakshmi ashtotram acceptability in what sense I am not able to > understand sir. Also it was just an example that I wanted to tell. > 2. As I have told its an Arthapaththi pramana. You infer at which place > Vishnu refers to the one in Karya Vaikunta and at which place Vishnu refers > to Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntam. Its purely inferential and will come through > the lineage. Because the same place (Vaikunta) cant be told be > un-returnable as well as returnable. It would be a contradictory. And hence > this has to be taken through Arthapathi pramanam. > 3. As told in the above point in Katha Upanishad one refers to the Vishnu > in Sri Vaikuntam(Nitya vibhuti). Narada purana would refer to Karya > Vaikuntam. > Regards > Sangeerth P > 8608658009 > > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 11:04?PM V Subrahmanian > wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 9:25?PM Sangeerth P via Advaita-l < > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > >> In Vishishtadvaita philosophy, we make a clear distinction between > >> *Vishnu* > >> and *Narayana* in certain contexts. For example, in the *Mahalakshmi > >> Ashtothram*, one of Mahalakshmi?s names is > *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai > >> Namaha*. If Narayana is the *Aadhara* (support) of everything, and if > >> Vishnu and Narayana were entirely identical in all aspects, then how > could > >> Mahalakshmi be described as the *Atma* (inner self) of Vishnu? > >> > > > > Namaste > > > > Is this *Mahalakshmi Ashtothram* acceptable to Srivaishnavas? Also, is > the > > two-type Vaikuntha that Ramanuja system accepts, admitted in any Purana > > like the Bhagavatam? There we see the Jaya-Vijaya episode happening in > > 'Vaikuntha' and no adjective like k?rya is added there. > > > > In the Rangaramanuja Kathopanishad bhashya we see: > > > > > > 4. ????????? - ?????? ????? > > - ?? ????????, ?????? ???????? ? ???????? ??? ??????? - ?????????????? > ??? > > ? ???????? - ??????? ????, ????????????? ? *?????????? ???? ????' > *(?.?.?-?) > > ??? ???????? ??????????????? ? ??? - ???????????????? ??????????? - > *????????????? > > *?; '????' ??? ???? ? > > > > The above says: tad vishnoH paramam padam = the mukti from where *there > > is no return.* In the Narada Purana verses cited, we have this alluding > > to that *?????????? ???? ???? ?*? ??-?? from where the people return > > after experiencing bhoga for long. > > > > regards > > subbu > > > >> > >> Similarly, consider the episode of the Sanakadi Rishis reaching > Vaikuntha > >> and cursing Jaya and Vijaya. Even after this, we see Jaya and Vijaya > born > >> in the material realm. This raises two important points: > >> > >> 1. > >> > >> If the Sanat Kumaras had truly reached *Nitya Vaikuntha*, they would > >> not > >> be seen anywhere else, such as in Brahmaloka. But we see that at the > >> beginning of Bhagavatham's Mahatmyam only there is Narada and Sanat > >> kumara > >> samvada which is at the beginning of Kali yuga. And the Jaya vijaya > >> incident should have happened very before this meeting. > >> 2. > >> > >> If Vaikuntha were a place of *non-return*, then the curse on Jaya and > >> Vijaya could not have led them back into *samsara*. > >> > >> Thus in Vishishtadvaita, we clearly differentiate between two realms: > >> *Karya > >> Vaikuntha* and *Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntha*. It is the *Nitya Vibhuti > >> Vaikuntha* that is the true eternal, non-returnable abode, not the Karya > >> Vaikuntha. For instance, in the *Uttara Kanda* of the Ramayana, when > Lord > >> Rama takes all the people of Ayodhya to His *Dham*, this refers to > *Karya > >> Vaikuntha*, not Nitya Vaikuntha. As per the siddhanta, the mukti can be > >> obtained either by Bhakthi yogam or Sharanagati. > >> > >> This understanding is supported by *Arthapatti Pramana.* > >> > >> > >> Regards > >> Sangeerth P > >> 8608658009 > >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Tue Aug 12 01:56:15 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 11:26:15 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 11:33?PM Sangeerth P wrote: > Namaste sir > > 1. The Mahalakshmi ashtotram acceptability in what sense I am not able to > understand sir. Also it was just an example that I wanted to tell. > Since the Ashtottaram says *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai Namaha*, Mahalakshmi will have to be the antaryami of Vishnu too. Is this acceptable to Srivaishnavas? For the Atharvashikha mantra 'Brahma Vishnu Rudra Indra - all are born of Shambhu', Ramanuja in his Vedarthasangraha says: while Brahma, Rudra, etc. are born of their karma, Vishnu here is avatara. Shambhu here is Narayana. So says Ramanuja. Also what is meant by k?rana vaikuntha? Is this vaikuntha the cause - for what? regards subbu > 2. As I have told its an Arthapaththi pramana. You infer at which place > Vishnu refers to the one in Karya Vaikunta and at which place Vishnu refers > to Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntam. Its purely inferential and will come through > the lineage. Because the same place (Vaikunta) cant be told be > un-returnable as well as returnable. It would be a contradictory. And hence > this has to be taken through Arthapathi pramanam. > 3. As told in the above point in Katha Upanishad one refers to the Vishnu > in Sri Vaikuntam(Nitya vibhuti). Narada purana would refer to Karya > Vaikuntam. > Regards > Sangeerth P > 8608658009 > > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 11:04?PM V Subrahmanian > wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 9:25?PM Sangeerth P via Advaita-l < >> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: >> >>> In Vishishtadvaita philosophy, we make a clear distinction between >>> *Vishnu* >>> and *Narayana* in certain contexts. For example, in the *Mahalakshmi >>> Ashtothram*, one of Mahalakshmi?s names is *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai >>> Namaha*. If Narayana is the *Aadhara* (support) of everything, and if >>> Vishnu and Narayana were entirely identical in all aspects, then how >>> could >>> Mahalakshmi be described as the *Atma* (inner self) of Vishnu? >>> >> >> Namaste >> >> Is this *Mahalakshmi Ashtothram* acceptable to Srivaishnavas? Also, is >> the two-type Vaikuntha that Ramanuja system accepts, admitted in any Purana >> like the Bhagavatam? There we see the Jaya-Vijaya episode happening in >> 'Vaikuntha' and no adjective like k?rya is added there. >> >> In the Rangaramanuja Kathopanishad bhashya we see: >> >> >> 4. ????????? - ?????? ????? >> - ?? ????????, ?????? ???????? ? ???????? ??? ??????? - ?????????????? >> ??? ? ???????? - ??????? ????, ????????????? ? *?????????? ???? ????' *(?.?.?-?) >> ??? ???????? ??????????????? ? ??? - ???????????????? ??????????? - *????????????? >> *?; '????' ??? ???? ? >> >> The above says: tad vishnoH paramam padam = the mukti from where *there >> is no return.* In the Narada Purana verses cited, we have this alluding >> to that *?????????? ???? ???? ?*? ??-?? from where the people return >> after experiencing bhoga for long. >> >> regards >> subbu >> >>> >>> Similarly, consider the episode of the Sanakadi Rishis reaching Vaikuntha >>> and cursing Jaya and Vijaya. Even after this, we see Jaya and Vijaya born >>> in the material realm. This raises two important points: >>> >>> 1. >>> >>> If the Sanat Kumaras had truly reached *Nitya Vaikuntha*, they would >>> not >>> be seen anywhere else, such as in Brahmaloka. But we see that at the >>> beginning of Bhagavatham's Mahatmyam only there is Narada and Sanat >>> kumara >>> samvada which is at the beginning of Kali yuga. And the Jaya vijaya >>> incident should have happened very before this meeting. >>> 2. >>> >>> If Vaikuntha were a place of *non-return*, then the curse on Jaya and >>> Vijaya could not have led them back into *samsara*. >>> >>> Thus in Vishishtadvaita, we clearly differentiate between two realms: >>> *Karya >>> Vaikuntha* and *Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntha*. It is the *Nitya Vibhuti >>> Vaikuntha* that is the true eternal, non-returnable abode, not the Karya >>> Vaikuntha. For instance, in the *Uttara Kanda* of the Ramayana, when Lord >>> Rama takes all the people of Ayodhya to His *Dham*, this refers to *Karya >>> Vaikuntha*, not Nitya Vaikuntha. As per the siddhanta, the mukti can be >>> obtained either by Bhakthi yogam or Sharanagati. >>> >>> This understanding is supported by *Arthapatti Pramana.* >>> >>> >>> Regards >>> Sangeerth P >>> 8608658009 >>> >>> >>> >>> From psangeerthgenius at gmail.com Tue Aug 12 01:58:55 2025 From: psangeerthgenius at gmail.com (Sangeerth P) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 11:28:55 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Its karya Vaikuntham not karana sir. Karya(effect of srushti) Regards Sangeerth P 8608658009 On Tue, 12 Aug 2025, 11:26 am V Subrahmanian, wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 11:33?PM Sangeerth P > wrote: > >> Namaste sir >> >> 1. The Mahalakshmi ashtotram acceptability in what sense I am not able to >> understand sir. Also it was just an example that I wanted to tell. >> > > Since the Ashtottaram says *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai Namaha*, > Mahalakshmi will have to be the antaryami of Vishnu too. Is this acceptable > to Srivaishnavas? For the Atharvashikha mantra 'Brahma Vishnu Rudra Indra > - all are born of Shambhu', Ramanuja in his Vedarthasangraha says: while > Brahma, Rudra, etc. are born of their karma, Vishnu here is avatara. > Shambhu here is Narayana. So says Ramanuja. > > Also what is meant by k?rana vaikuntha? Is this vaikuntha the cause - for > what? > > regards > subbu > > > >> 2. As I have told its an Arthapaththi pramana. You infer at which place >> Vishnu refers to the one in Karya Vaikunta and at which place Vishnu refers >> to Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntam. Its purely inferential and will come through >> the lineage. Because the same place (Vaikunta) cant be told be >> un-returnable as well as returnable. It would be a contradictory. And hence >> this has to be taken through Arthapathi pramanam. >> 3. As told in the above point in Katha Upanishad one refers to the Vishnu >> in Sri Vaikuntam(Nitya vibhuti). Narada purana would refer to Karya >> Vaikuntam. >> Regards >> Sangeerth P >> 8608658009 >> >> >> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 11:04?PM V Subrahmanian >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 9:25?PM Sangeerth P via Advaita-l < >>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: >>> >>>> In Vishishtadvaita philosophy, we make a clear distinction between >>>> *Vishnu* >>>> and *Narayana* in certain contexts. For example, in the *Mahalakshmi >>>> Ashtothram*, one of Mahalakshmi?s names is >>>> *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai >>>> Namaha*. If Narayana is the *Aadhara* (support) of everything, and if >>>> Vishnu and Narayana were entirely identical in all aspects, then how >>>> could >>>> Mahalakshmi be described as the *Atma* (inner self) of Vishnu? >>>> >>> >>> Namaste >>> >>> Is this *Mahalakshmi Ashtothram* acceptable to Srivaishnavas? Also, is >>> the two-type Vaikuntha that Ramanuja system accepts, admitted in any Purana >>> like the Bhagavatam? There we see the Jaya-Vijaya episode happening in >>> 'Vaikuntha' and no adjective like k?rya is added there. >>> >>> In the Rangaramanuja Kathopanishad bhashya we see: >>> >>> >>> 4. ????????? - ?????? ????? >>> - ?? ????????, ?????? ???????? ? ???????? ??? ??????? - ?????????????? >>> ??? ? ???????? - ??????? ????, ????????????? ? *?????????? ???? ????' *(?.?.?-?) >>> ??? ???????? ??????????????? ? ??? - ???????????????? ??????????? - *????????????? >>> *?; '????' ??? ???? ? >>> >>> The above says: tad vishnoH paramam padam = the mukti from where *there >>> is no return.* In the Narada Purana verses cited, we have this alluding >>> to that *?????????? ???? ???? ?*? ??-?? from where the people return >>> after experiencing bhoga for long. >>> >>> regards >>> subbu >>> >>>> >>>> Similarly, consider the episode of the Sanakadi Rishis reaching >>>> Vaikuntha >>>> and cursing Jaya and Vijaya. Even after this, we see Jaya and Vijaya >>>> born >>>> in the material realm. This raises two important points: >>>> >>>> 1. >>>> >>>> If the Sanat Kumaras had truly reached *Nitya Vaikuntha*, they would >>>> not >>>> be seen anywhere else, such as in Brahmaloka. But we see that at the >>>> beginning of Bhagavatham's Mahatmyam only there is Narada and Sanat >>>> kumara >>>> samvada which is at the beginning of Kali yuga. And the Jaya vijaya >>>> incident should have happened very before this meeting. >>>> 2. >>>> >>>> If Vaikuntha were a place of *non-return*, then the curse on Jaya and >>>> Vijaya could not have led them back into *samsara*. >>>> >>>> Thus in Vishishtadvaita, we clearly differentiate between two realms: >>>> *Karya >>>> Vaikuntha* and *Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntha*. It is the *Nitya Vibhuti >>>> Vaikuntha* that is the true eternal, non-returnable abode, not the Karya >>>> Vaikuntha. For instance, in the *Uttara Kanda* of the Ramayana, when >>>> Lord >>>> Rama takes all the people of Ayodhya to His *Dham*, this refers to >>>> *Karya >>>> Vaikuntha*, not Nitya Vaikuntha. As per the siddhanta, the mukti can be >>>> obtained either by Bhakthi yogam or Sharanagati. >>>> >>>> This understanding is supported by *Arthapatti Pramana.* >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Sangeerth P >>>> 8608658009 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Tue Aug 12 02:22:41 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 11:52:41 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 11:29?AM Sangeerth P wrote: > Its karya Vaikuntham not karana sir. Karya(effect of srushti) > OK, is this karya vaikuntha on the same level as Brahma loka and Shiva loka? regards subbu > > Regards > Sangeerth P > 8608658009 > > On Tue, 12 Aug 2025, 11:26 am V Subrahmanian, > wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 11:33?PM Sangeerth P >> wrote: >> >>> Namaste sir >>> >>> 1. The Mahalakshmi ashtotram acceptability in what sense I am not able >>> to understand sir. Also it was just an example that I wanted to tell. >>> >> >> Since the Ashtottaram says *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai Namaha*, >> Mahalakshmi will have to be the antaryami of Vishnu too. Is this acceptable >> to Srivaishnavas? For the Atharvashikha mantra 'Brahma Vishnu Rudra Indra >> - all are born of Shambhu', Ramanuja in his Vedarthasangraha says: while >> Brahma, Rudra, etc. are born of their karma, Vishnu here is avatara. >> Shambhu here is Narayana. So says Ramanuja. >> >> Also what is meant by k?rana vaikuntha? Is this vaikuntha the cause - for >> what? >> >> regards >> subbu >> >> >> >>> 2. As I have told its an Arthapaththi pramana. You infer at which place >>> Vishnu refers to the one in Karya Vaikunta and at which place Vishnu refers >>> to Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntam. Its purely inferential and will come through >>> the lineage. Because the same place (Vaikunta) cant be told be >>> un-returnable as well as returnable. It would be a contradictory. And hence >>> this has to be taken through Arthapathi pramanam. >>> 3. As told in the above point in Katha Upanishad one refers to the >>> Vishnu in Sri Vaikuntam(Nitya vibhuti). Narada purana would refer to Karya >>> Vaikuntam. >>> Regards >>> Sangeerth P >>> 8608658009 >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 11:04?PM V Subrahmanian < >>> v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 9:25?PM Sangeerth P via Advaita-l < >>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> In Vishishtadvaita philosophy, we make a clear distinction between >>>>> *Vishnu* >>>>> and *Narayana* in certain contexts. For example, in the *Mahalakshmi >>>>> Ashtothram*, one of Mahalakshmi?s names is >>>>> *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai >>>>> Namaha*. If Narayana is the *Aadhara* (support) of everything, and if >>>>> Vishnu and Narayana were entirely identical in all aspects, then how >>>>> could >>>>> Mahalakshmi be described as the *Atma* (inner self) of Vishnu? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Namaste >>>> >>>> Is this *Mahalakshmi Ashtothram* acceptable to Srivaishnavas? Also, is >>>> the two-type Vaikuntha that Ramanuja system accepts, admitted in any Purana >>>> like the Bhagavatam? There we see the Jaya-Vijaya episode happening in >>>> 'Vaikuntha' and no adjective like k?rya is added there. >>>> >>>> In the Rangaramanuja Kathopanishad bhashya we see: >>>> >>>> >>>> 4. ????????? - ?????? ????? >>>> - ?? ????????, ?????? ???????? ? ???????? ??? ??????? - ?????????????? >>>> ??? ? ???????? - ??????? ????, ????????????? ? *?????????? ???? ????' *(?.?.?-?) >>>> ??? ???????? ??????????????? ? ??? - ???????????????? ??????????? - *????????????? >>>> *?; '????' ??? ???? ? >>>> >>>> The above says: tad vishnoH paramam padam = the mukti from where *there >>>> is no return.* In the Narada Purana verses cited, we have this >>>> alluding to that *?????????? ???? ???? ?*? ??-?? from where the people >>>> return after experiencing bhoga for long. >>>> >>>> regards >>>> subbu >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Similarly, consider the episode of the Sanakadi Rishis reaching >>>>> Vaikuntha >>>>> and cursing Jaya and Vijaya. Even after this, we see Jaya and Vijaya >>>>> born >>>>> in the material realm. This raises two important points: >>>>> >>>>> 1. >>>>> >>>>> If the Sanat Kumaras had truly reached *Nitya Vaikuntha*, they >>>>> would not >>>>> be seen anywhere else, such as in Brahmaloka. But we see that at the >>>>> beginning of Bhagavatham's Mahatmyam only there is Narada and Sanat >>>>> kumara >>>>> samvada which is at the beginning of Kali yuga. And the Jaya vijaya >>>>> incident should have happened very before this meeting. >>>>> 2. >>>>> >>>>> If Vaikuntha were a place of *non-return*, then the curse on Jaya >>>>> and >>>>> Vijaya could not have led them back into *samsara*. >>>>> >>>>> Thus in Vishishtadvaita, we clearly differentiate between two realms: >>>>> *Karya >>>>> Vaikuntha* and *Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntha*. It is the *Nitya Vibhuti >>>>> Vaikuntha* that is the true eternal, non-returnable abode, not the >>>>> Karya >>>>> Vaikuntha. For instance, in the *Uttara Kanda* of the Ramayana, when >>>>> Lord >>>>> Rama takes all the people of Ayodhya to His *Dham*, this refers to >>>>> *Karya >>>>> Vaikuntha*, not Nitya Vaikuntha. As per the siddhanta, the mukti can be >>>>> obtained either by Bhakthi yogam or Sharanagati. >>>>> >>>>> This understanding is supported by *Arthapatti Pramana.* >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> Sangeerth P >>>>> 8608658009 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From psangeerthgenius at gmail.com Tue Aug 12 02:25:59 2025 From: psangeerthgenius at gmail.com (Sangeerth P) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 11:55:59 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Yes sir. We actually say this is a returnable loka only and bakthi yoga or prapatti is the means to reach the non returnable nitya vibhuti Vaikuntam. Regards Sangeerth P 8608658009 On Tue, 12 Aug 2025, 11:52 am V Subrahmanian, wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 11:29?AM Sangeerth P > wrote: > >> Its karya Vaikuntham not karana sir. Karya(effect of srushti) >> > > OK, is this karya vaikuntha on the same level as Brahma loka and Shiva > loka? > > regards > subbu > >> >> Regards >> Sangeerth P >> 8608658009 >> >> On Tue, 12 Aug 2025, 11:26 am V Subrahmanian, >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 11:33?PM Sangeerth P >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Namaste sir >>>> >>>> 1. The Mahalakshmi ashtotram acceptability in what sense I am not able >>>> to understand sir. Also it was just an example that I wanted to tell. >>>> >>> >>> Since the Ashtottaram says *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai Namaha*, >>> Mahalakshmi will have to be the antaryami of Vishnu too. Is this acceptable >>> to Srivaishnavas? For the Atharvashikha mantra 'Brahma Vishnu Rudra Indra >>> - all are born of Shambhu', Ramanuja in his Vedarthasangraha says: while >>> Brahma, Rudra, etc. are born of their karma, Vishnu here is avatara. >>> Shambhu here is Narayana. So says Ramanuja. >>> >>> Also what is meant by k?rana vaikuntha? Is this vaikuntha the cause - >>> for what? >>> >>> regards >>> subbu >>> >>> >>> >>>> 2. As I have told its an Arthapaththi pramana. You infer at which place >>>> Vishnu refers to the one in Karya Vaikunta and at which place Vishnu refers >>>> to Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntam. Its purely inferential and will come through >>>> the lineage. Because the same place (Vaikunta) cant be told be >>>> un-returnable as well as returnable. It would be a contradictory. And hence >>>> this has to be taken through Arthapathi pramanam. >>>> 3. As told in the above point in Katha Upanishad one refers to the >>>> Vishnu in Sri Vaikuntam(Nitya vibhuti). Narada purana would refer to Karya >>>> Vaikuntam. >>>> Regards >>>> Sangeerth P >>>> 8608658009 >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 11:04?PM V Subrahmanian < >>>> v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 9:25?PM Sangeerth P via Advaita-l < >>>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In Vishishtadvaita philosophy, we make a clear distinction between >>>>>> *Vishnu* >>>>>> and *Narayana* in certain contexts. For example, in the *Mahalakshmi >>>>>> Ashtothram*, one of Mahalakshmi?s names is >>>>>> *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai >>>>>> Namaha*. If Narayana is the *Aadhara* (support) of everything, and if >>>>>> Vishnu and Narayana were entirely identical in all aspects, then how >>>>>> could >>>>>> Mahalakshmi be described as the *Atma* (inner self) of Vishnu? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Namaste >>>>> >>>>> Is this *Mahalakshmi Ashtothram* acceptable to Srivaishnavas? Also, is >>>>> the two-type Vaikuntha that Ramanuja system accepts, admitted in any Purana >>>>> like the Bhagavatam? There we see the Jaya-Vijaya episode happening in >>>>> 'Vaikuntha' and no adjective like k?rya is added there. >>>>> >>>>> In the Rangaramanuja Kathopanishad bhashya we see: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 4. ????????? - ?????? ????? >>>>> - ?? ????????, ?????? ???????? ? ???????? ??? ??????? - ?????????????? >>>>> ??? ? ???????? - ??????? ????, ????????????? ? *?????????? ???? ????' >>>>> *(?.?.?-?) ??? ???????? ??????????????? ? ??? - ???????????????? >>>>> ??????????? - *????????????? *?; '????' ??? ???? ? >>>>> >>>>> The above says: tad vishnoH paramam padam = the mukti from where *there >>>>> is no return.* In the Narada Purana verses cited, we have this >>>>> alluding to that *?????????? ???? ???? ?*? ??-?? from where the people >>>>> return after experiencing bhoga for long. >>>>> >>>>> regards >>>>> subbu >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Similarly, consider the episode of the Sanakadi Rishis reaching >>>>>> Vaikuntha >>>>>> and cursing Jaya and Vijaya. Even after this, we see Jaya and Vijaya >>>>>> born >>>>>> in the material realm. This raises two important points: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. >>>>>> >>>>>> If the Sanat Kumaras had truly reached *Nitya Vaikuntha*, they >>>>>> would not >>>>>> be seen anywhere else, such as in Brahmaloka. But we see that at >>>>>> the >>>>>> beginning of Bhagavatham's Mahatmyam only there is Narada and >>>>>> Sanat kumara >>>>>> samvada which is at the beginning of Kali yuga. And the Jaya vijaya >>>>>> incident should have happened very before this meeting. >>>>>> 2. >>>>>> >>>>>> If Vaikuntha were a place of *non-return*, then the curse on Jaya >>>>>> and >>>>>> Vijaya could not have led them back into *samsara*. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thus in Vishishtadvaita, we clearly differentiate between two realms: >>>>>> *Karya >>>>>> Vaikuntha* and *Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntha*. It is the *Nitya Vibhuti >>>>>> Vaikuntha* that is the true eternal, non-returnable abode, not the >>>>>> Karya >>>>>> Vaikuntha. For instance, in the *Uttara Kanda* of the Ramayana, when >>>>>> Lord >>>>>> Rama takes all the people of Ayodhya to His *Dham*, this refers to >>>>>> *Karya >>>>>> Vaikuntha*, not Nitya Vaikuntha. As per the siddhanta, the mukti can >>>>>> be >>>>>> obtained either by Bhakthi yogam or Sharanagati. >>>>>> >>>>>> This understanding is supported by *Arthapatti Pramana.* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> Sangeerth P >>>>>> 8608658009 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> From raghavkumar00 at gmail.com Tue Aug 12 03:14:52 2025 From: raghavkumar00 at gmail.com (Raghav Kumar Dwivedula) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 12:44:52 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Namaste Subbu ji k?rya vaikun?ha ? a grade of svarga nitya vaikun?ha ? satya loka But is this distinction mentioned by Sri Ramanujacharya anywhere? For us, even satya loka is a ?returnable? loka. Om Raghav On Tue, 12 Aug 2025 at 11:53?AM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 11:29?AM Sangeerth P > wrote: > > > Its karya Vaikuntham not karana sir. Karya(effect of srushti) > > > > OK, is this karya vaikuntha on the same level as Brahma loka and Shiva > loka? > > regards > subbu > > > > > Regards > > Sangeerth P > > 8608658009 > > > > On Tue, 12 Aug 2025, 11:26 am V Subrahmanian, > > wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 11:33?PM Sangeerth P < > psangeerthgenius at gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Namaste sir > >>> > >>> 1. The Mahalakshmi ashtotram acceptability in what sense I am not able > >>> to understand sir. Also it was just an example that I wanted to tell. > >>> > >> > >> Since the Ashtottaram says *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai Namaha*, > >> Mahalakshmi will have to be the antaryami of Vishnu too. Is this > acceptable > >> to Srivaishnavas? For the Atharvashikha mantra 'Brahma Vishnu Rudra > Indra > >> - all are born of Shambhu', Ramanuja in his Vedarthasangraha says: while > >> Brahma, Rudra, etc. are born of their karma, Vishnu here is avatara. > >> Shambhu here is Narayana. So says Ramanuja. > >> > >> Also what is meant by k?rana vaikuntha? Is this vaikuntha the cause - > for > >> what? > >> > >> regards > >> subbu > >> > >> > >> > >>> 2. As I have told its an Arthapaththi pramana. You infer at which place > >>> Vishnu refers to the one in Karya Vaikunta and at which place Vishnu > refers > >>> to Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntam. Its purely inferential and will come > through > >>> the lineage. Because the same place (Vaikunta) cant be told be > >>> un-returnable as well as returnable. It would be a contradictory. And > hence > >>> this has to be taken through Arthapathi pramanam. > >>> 3. As told in the above point in Katha Upanishad one refers to the > >>> Vishnu in Sri Vaikuntam(Nitya vibhuti). Narada purana would refer to > Karya > >>> Vaikuntam. > >>> Regards > >>> Sangeerth P > >>> 8608658009 > >>> > >>> > >>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 11:04?PM V Subrahmanian < > >>> v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 9:25?PM Sangeerth P via Advaita-l < > >>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> In Vishishtadvaita philosophy, we make a clear distinction between > >>>>> *Vishnu* > >>>>> and *Narayana* in certain contexts. For example, in the *Mahalakshmi > >>>>> Ashtothram*, one of Mahalakshmi?s names is > >>>>> *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai > >>>>> Namaha*. If Narayana is the *Aadhara* (support) of everything, and if > >>>>> Vishnu and Narayana were entirely identical in all aspects, then how > >>>>> could > >>>>> Mahalakshmi be described as the *Atma* (inner self) of Vishnu? > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Namaste > >>>> > >>>> Is this *Mahalakshmi Ashtothram* acceptable to Srivaishnavas? Also, is > >>>> the two-type Vaikuntha that Ramanuja system accepts, admitted in any > Purana > >>>> like the Bhagavatam? There we see the Jaya-Vijaya episode happening > in > >>>> 'Vaikuntha' and no adjective like k?rya is added there. > >>>> > >>>> In the Rangaramanuja Kathopanishad bhashya we see: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> 4. ????????? - ?????? ????? > >>>> - ?? ????????, ?????? ???????? ? ???????? ??? ??????? - ?????????????? > >>>> ??? ? ???????? - ??????? ????, ????????????? ? *?????????? ???? ????' > *(?.?.?-?) > >>>> ??? ???????? ??????????????? ? ??? - ???????????????? ??????????? - > *????????????? > >>>> *?; '????' ??? ???? ? > >>>> > >>>> The above says: tad vishnoH paramam padam = the mukti from where > *there > >>>> is no return.* In the Narada Purana verses cited, we have this > >>>> alluding to that *?????????? ???? ???? ?*? ??-?? from where the > people > >>>> return after experiencing bhoga for long. > >>>> > >>>> regards > >>>> subbu > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Similarly, consider the episode of the Sanakadi Rishis reaching > >>>>> Vaikuntha > >>>>> and cursing Jaya and Vijaya. Even after this, we see Jaya and Vijaya > >>>>> born > >>>>> in the material realm. This raises two important points: > >>>>> > >>>>> 1. > >>>>> > >>>>> If the Sanat Kumaras had truly reached *Nitya Vaikuntha*, they > >>>>> would not > >>>>> be seen anywhere else, such as in Brahmaloka. But we see that at > the > >>>>> beginning of Bhagavatham's Mahatmyam only there is Narada and > Sanat > >>>>> kumara > >>>>> samvada which is at the beginning of Kali yuga. And the Jaya > vijaya > >>>>> incident should have happened very before this meeting. > >>>>> 2. > >>>>> > >>>>> If Vaikuntha were a place of *non-return*, then the curse on Jaya > >>>>> and > >>>>> Vijaya could not have led them back into *samsara*. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thus in Vishishtadvaita, we clearly differentiate between two realms: > >>>>> *Karya > >>>>> Vaikuntha* and *Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntha*. It is the *Nitya Vibhuti > >>>>> Vaikuntha* that is the true eternal, non-returnable abode, not the > >>>>> Karya > >>>>> Vaikuntha. For instance, in the *Uttara Kanda* of the Ramayana, when > >>>>> Lord > >>>>> Rama takes all the people of Ayodhya to His *Dham*, this refers to > >>>>> *Karya > >>>>> Vaikuntha*, not Nitya Vaikuntha. As per the siddhanta, the mukti can > be > >>>>> obtained either by Bhakthi yogam or Sharanagati. > >>>>> > >>>>> This understanding is supported by *Arthapatti Pramana.* > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards > >>>>> Sangeerth P > >>>>> 8608658009 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Tue Aug 12 04:03:29 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 13:33:29 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 11:56?AM Sangeerth P wrote: > Yes sir. We actually say this is a returnable loka only and bakthi yoga or > prapatti is the means to reach the non returnable nitya vibhuti Vaikuntam. > In any case, the same 'tad vishnoH paramam padam' will have two meanings: 1.nitya vibhuti and 2, returnable bhoga loka. But how can both be '*parama* pada'? The first will have to be parama and the second will be a-parama, like Para Brahman and Apara Brahman. > > Regards > Sangeerth P > 8608658009 > > On Tue, 12 Aug 2025, 11:52 am V Subrahmanian, > wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 11:29?AM Sangeerth P >> wrote: >> >>> Its karya Vaikuntham not karana sir. Karya(effect of srushti) >>> >> >> OK, is this karya vaikuntha on the same level as Brahma loka and Shiva >> loka? >> >> regards >> subbu >> >>> >>> Regards >>> Sangeerth P >>> 8608658009 >>> >>> On Tue, 12 Aug 2025, 11:26 am V Subrahmanian, >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 11:33?PM Sangeerth P < >>>> psangeerthgenius at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Namaste sir >>>>> >>>>> 1. The Mahalakshmi ashtotram acceptability in what sense I am not able >>>>> to understand sir. Also it was just an example that I wanted to tell. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Since the Ashtottaram says *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai Namaha*, >>>> Mahalakshmi will have to be the antaryami of Vishnu too. Is this acceptable >>>> to Srivaishnavas? For the Atharvashikha mantra 'Brahma Vishnu Rudra Indra >>>> - all are born of Shambhu', Ramanuja in his Vedarthasangraha says: while >>>> Brahma, Rudra, etc. are born of their karma, Vishnu here is avatara. >>>> Shambhu here is Narayana. So says Ramanuja. >>>> >>>> Also what is meant by k?rana vaikuntha? Is this vaikuntha the cause - >>>> for what? >>>> >>>> regards >>>> subbu >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> 2. As I have told its an Arthapaththi pramana. You infer at which >>>>> place Vishnu refers to the one in Karya Vaikunta and at which place Vishnu >>>>> refers to Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntam. Its purely inferential and will come >>>>> through the lineage. Because the same place (Vaikunta) cant be told be >>>>> un-returnable as well as returnable. It would be a contradictory. And hence >>>>> this has to be taken through Arthapathi pramanam. >>>>> 3. As told in the above point in Katha Upanishad one refers to the >>>>> Vishnu in Sri Vaikuntam(Nitya vibhuti). Narada purana would refer to Karya >>>>> Vaikuntam. >>>>> Regards >>>>> Sangeerth P >>>>> 8608658009 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 11:04?PM V Subrahmanian < >>>>> v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 9:25?PM Sangeerth P via Advaita-l < >>>>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> In Vishishtadvaita philosophy, we make a clear distinction between >>>>>>> *Vishnu* >>>>>>> and *Narayana* in certain contexts. For example, in the *Mahalakshmi >>>>>>> Ashtothram*, one of Mahalakshmi?s names is >>>>>>> *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai >>>>>>> Namaha*. If Narayana is the *Aadhara* (support) of everything, and if >>>>>>> Vishnu and Narayana were entirely identical in all aspects, then how >>>>>>> could >>>>>>> Mahalakshmi be described as the *Atma* (inner self) of Vishnu? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Namaste >>>>>> >>>>>> Is this *Mahalakshmi Ashtothram* acceptable to Srivaishnavas? Also, >>>>>> is the two-type Vaikuntha that Ramanuja system accepts, admitted in any >>>>>> Purana like the Bhagavatam? There we see the Jaya-Vijaya episode happening >>>>>> in 'Vaikuntha' and no adjective like k?rya is added there. >>>>>> >>>>>> In the Rangaramanuja Kathopanishad bhashya we see: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 4. ????????? - ?????? ????? >>>>>> - ?? ????????, ?????? ???????? ? ???????? ??? ??????? - >>>>>> ?????????????? ??? ? ???????? - ??????? ????, ????????????? ? *?????????? >>>>>> ???? ????' *(?.?.?-?) ??? ???????? ??????????????? ? ??? - >>>>>> ???????????????? ??????????? - *????????????? *?; '????' ??? ???? ? >>>>>> >>>>>> The above says: tad vishnoH paramam padam = the mukti from where *there >>>>>> is no return.* In the Narada Purana verses cited, we have this >>>>>> alluding to that *?????????? ???? ???? ?*? ??-?? from where the people >>>>>> return after experiencing bhoga for long. >>>>>> >>>>>> regards >>>>>> subbu >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Similarly, consider the episode of the Sanakadi Rishis reaching >>>>>>> Vaikuntha >>>>>>> and cursing Jaya and Vijaya. Even after this, we see Jaya and Vijaya >>>>>>> born >>>>>>> in the material realm. This raises two important points: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If the Sanat Kumaras had truly reached *Nitya Vaikuntha*, they >>>>>>> would not >>>>>>> be seen anywhere else, such as in Brahmaloka. But we see that at >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> beginning of Bhagavatham's Mahatmyam only there is Narada and >>>>>>> Sanat kumara >>>>>>> samvada which is at the beginning of Kali yuga. And the Jaya >>>>>>> vijaya >>>>>>> incident should have happened very before this meeting. >>>>>>> 2. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If Vaikuntha were a place of *non-return*, then the curse on Jaya >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> Vijaya could not have led them back into *samsara*. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thus in Vishishtadvaita, we clearly differentiate between two >>>>>>> realms: *Karya >>>>>>> Vaikuntha* and *Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntha*. It is the *Nitya Vibhuti >>>>>>> Vaikuntha* that is the true eternal, non-returnable abode, not the >>>>>>> Karya >>>>>>> Vaikuntha. For instance, in the *Uttara Kanda* of the Ramayana, when >>>>>>> Lord >>>>>>> Rama takes all the people of Ayodhya to His *Dham*, this refers to >>>>>>> *Karya >>>>>>> Vaikuntha*, not Nitya Vaikuntha. As per the siddhanta, the mukti can >>>>>>> be >>>>>>> obtained either by Bhakthi yogam or Sharanagati. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This understanding is supported by *Arthapatti Pramana.* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>> Sangeerth P >>>>>>> 8608658009 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From psangeerthgenius at gmail.com Tue Aug 12 04:22:50 2025 From: psangeerthgenius at gmail.com (Sangeerth P) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 13:52:50 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ????????? ??? ????????? ?????? ?? ??? ????- With this line in the Upanishad one can make this distinction sir. And for the examples of Jaya and Vijaya curse or Narada purana one, you can clearly see a pattern of returning. Hence that Vaikunta has to be Karya Vaikunta. Its from Arthapathi, we come to conclusion. I will check for references from our Purvacharyas where they have mentioned it. Currently I dont recall where exactly this is stated. Regards Sangeerth P 8608658009 On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 1:33?PM V Subrahmanian wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 11:56?AM Sangeerth P > wrote: > >> Yes sir. We actually say this is a returnable loka only and bakthi yoga >> or prapatti is the means to reach the non returnable nitya vibhuti >> Vaikuntam. >> > > In any case, the same 'tad vishnoH paramam padam' will have two meanings: > 1.nitya vibhuti and 2, returnable bhoga loka. But how can both be ' > *parama* pada'? The first will have to be parama and the second will be > a-parama, like Para Brahman and Apara Brahman. > >> >> Regards >> Sangeerth P >> 8608658009 >> >> On Tue, 12 Aug 2025, 11:52 am V Subrahmanian, >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 11:29?AM Sangeerth P >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Its karya Vaikuntham not karana sir. Karya(effect of srushti) >>>> >>> >>> OK, is this karya vaikuntha on the same level as Brahma loka and Shiva >>> loka? >>> >>> regards >>> subbu >>> >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Sangeerth P >>>> 8608658009 >>>> >>>> On Tue, 12 Aug 2025, 11:26 am V Subrahmanian, >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 11:33?PM Sangeerth P < >>>>> psangeerthgenius at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Namaste sir >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. The Mahalakshmi ashtotram acceptability in what sense I am not >>>>>> able to understand sir. Also it was just an example that I wanted to tell. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Since the Ashtottaram says *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai Namaha*, >>>>> Mahalakshmi will have to be the antaryami of Vishnu too. Is this acceptable >>>>> to Srivaishnavas? For the Atharvashikha mantra 'Brahma Vishnu Rudra Indra >>>>> - all are born of Shambhu', Ramanuja in his Vedarthasangraha says: while >>>>> Brahma, Rudra, etc. are born of their karma, Vishnu here is avatara. >>>>> Shambhu here is Narayana. So says Ramanuja. >>>>> >>>>> Also what is meant by k?rana vaikuntha? Is this vaikuntha the cause - >>>>> for what? >>>>> >>>>> regards >>>>> subbu >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> 2. As I have told its an Arthapaththi pramana. You infer at which >>>>>> place Vishnu refers to the one in Karya Vaikunta and at which place Vishnu >>>>>> refers to Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntam. Its purely inferential and will come >>>>>> through the lineage. Because the same place (Vaikunta) cant be told be >>>>>> un-returnable as well as returnable. It would be a contradictory. And hence >>>>>> this has to be taken through Arthapathi pramanam. >>>>>> 3. As told in the above point in Katha Upanishad one refers to the >>>>>> Vishnu in Sri Vaikuntam(Nitya vibhuti). Narada purana would refer to Karya >>>>>> Vaikuntam. >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> Sangeerth P >>>>>> 8608658009 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 11:04?PM V Subrahmanian < >>>>>> v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 9:25?PM Sangeerth P via Advaita-l < >>>>>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In Vishishtadvaita philosophy, we make a clear distinction between >>>>>>>> *Vishnu* >>>>>>>> and *Narayana* in certain contexts. For example, in the *Mahalakshmi >>>>>>>> Ashtothram*, one of Mahalakshmi?s names is >>>>>>>> *Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva-Atmikayai >>>>>>>> Namaha*. If Narayana is the *Aadhara* (support) of everything, and >>>>>>>> if >>>>>>>> Vishnu and Narayana were entirely identical in all aspects, then >>>>>>>> how could >>>>>>>> Mahalakshmi be described as the *Atma* (inner self) of Vishnu? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Namaste >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is this *Mahalakshmi Ashtothram* acceptable to Srivaishnavas? Also, >>>>>>> is the two-type Vaikuntha that Ramanuja system accepts, admitted in any >>>>>>> Purana like the Bhagavatam? There we see the Jaya-Vijaya episode happening >>>>>>> in 'Vaikuntha' and no adjective like k?rya is added there. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In the Rangaramanuja Kathopanishad bhashya we see: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 4. ????????? - ?????? ????? >>>>>>> - ?? ????????, ?????? ???????? ? ???????? ??? ??????? - >>>>>>> ?????????????? ??? ? ???????? - ??????? ????, ????????????? ? *?????????? >>>>>>> ???? ????' *(?.?.?-?) ??? ???????? ??????????????? ? ??? - >>>>>>> ???????????????? ??????????? - *????????????? *?; '????' ??? ???? ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The above says: tad vishnoH paramam padam = the mukti from where *there >>>>>>> is no return.* In the Narada Purana verses cited, we have this >>>>>>> alluding to that *?????????? ???? ???? ?*? ??-?? from where the people >>>>>>> return after experiencing bhoga for long. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> regards >>>>>>> subbu >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Similarly, consider the episode of the Sanakadi Rishis reaching >>>>>>>> Vaikuntha >>>>>>>> and cursing Jaya and Vijaya. Even after this, we see Jaya and >>>>>>>> Vijaya born >>>>>>>> in the material realm. This raises two important points: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If the Sanat Kumaras had truly reached *Nitya Vaikuntha*, they >>>>>>>> would not >>>>>>>> be seen anywhere else, such as in Brahmaloka. But we see that at >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> beginning of Bhagavatham's Mahatmyam only there is Narada and >>>>>>>> Sanat kumara >>>>>>>> samvada which is at the beginning of Kali yuga. And the Jaya >>>>>>>> vijaya >>>>>>>> incident should have happened very before this meeting. >>>>>>>> 2. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If Vaikuntha were a place of *non-return*, then the curse on >>>>>>>> Jaya and >>>>>>>> Vijaya could not have led them back into *samsara*. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thus in Vishishtadvaita, we clearly differentiate between two >>>>>>>> realms: *Karya >>>>>>>> Vaikuntha* and *Nitya Vibhuti Vaikuntha*. It is the *Nitya Vibhuti >>>>>>>> Vaikuntha* that is the true eternal, non-returnable abode, not the >>>>>>>> Karya >>>>>>>> Vaikuntha. For instance, in the *Uttara Kanda* of the Ramayana, >>>>>>>> when Lord >>>>>>>> Rama takes all the people of Ayodhya to His *Dham*, this refers to >>>>>>>> *Karya >>>>>>>> Vaikuntha*, not Nitya Vaikuntha. As per the siddhanta, the mukti >>>>>>>> can be >>>>>>>> obtained either by Bhakthi yogam or Sharanagati. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This understanding is supported by *Arthapatti Pramana.* >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>> Sangeerth P >>>>>>>> 8608658009 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> From badisa66 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 12 10:23:21 2025 From: badisa66 at yahoo.com (ramesh badisa) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 14:23:21 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Advaita-l] Black holes reference in our scriptures References: <133663480.4586067.1755008601939.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <133663480.4586067.1755008601939@mail.yahoo.com> Dear Advaita followers,Namaskaram.Do our scriptures mention about black holes? They are called Krishna Bilam in sanskrit. Can you please share the information with me??thank youramesh? From jai1971 at gmail.com Tue Aug 12 11:37:15 2025 From: jai1971 at gmail.com (Jaishankar Narayanan) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 21:07:15 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] shanta and danta in The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Bhashya 4.4.23 Message-ID: Namaste, In his Bhashya to the famous Brihadranyaka Upanishad vakya ...??????????????????? ????? ??????????????? ??????? ????????????????????? ??????...? ?.?.?? ? ...tasm?deva?vicch?nto d?nta uparatastitik?u? sam?hito bh?tv?tmanyev?tm?na? pa?yati...? 4.4.23 ? Shankaracharya gives the meaning for 'shama' and 'dama' differently as ??????? ??????? ?????? ????????????????????? ????????, ??? ?????? ???????????????? ???????? tasm?t eva?vit ??nta? b?hyendriyavy?p?rata upa??nta?, tath? d?nta? anta?kara?at????to niv?tta? Normally 'shama' is understood as 'mano-nigraha' (Mastery of Mind) and 'dama' as 'b?hyendriya-nigraha' (Mastery over external sense organs and organs of action) from texts like Tattvabodah, Vedanta Saara, Vivekachudamani etc., but here Shankara has interchanged the meanings and is taking '??nta?' as one who has ceased the activities of his external organs (sense organs and organs of action) and 'd?nta?' as one who has averted the longings of his internal organ (mind). According to the Dhatupaata both the roots have the same meaning ??? ????? and ??? ????? i.e. to grow calm; to stop, cease. So Bhashyakara could have taken 'shama' as 'b?hyendriya-nigraha', which leads to 'dama' which is 'mano-nigraha', as '??nta?' appears before 'd?nta?' in the Upanishad Vakya. Kanchi Mahaperiyava Swami Chandrashekarendra Saraswati has also discussed this in the book Deivathin Kural Volume 6. He says that the interchanging of the meanings of 'shama' and 'dama' by Shankaracharya in his Bhashya has caused some controversy. He opines that after becoming a Sanyasi one of the first texts that Shankara authored were the Bhashyas on Upanishads. So in the Brihadranyaka Bhashya he has given the meaning of shama and dama, in keeping with the sequence in which they appear, as 'b?hyendriya-nigraha' and 'mano-nigraha' respectively as both roots have the same meaning in general. But later as he travelled across India he came to know the particular meanings associated with 'shama' and 'dama' and gave the generally accepted meanings in his prakarana granthas like Vivekachudamani. Interestingly Sureshvaracharya in his vArtika has actually said that dama is 'bahi?kara?ace???y? niv?tti' and shama is 'anta?kara?ace???y? niv?tti' and the 'sequence in meaning' (arthakrama) is more powerful (bal?y?n) than 'sequence in reading' (p??hakrama) ?????? ?????? ??? ????????????????? ????? || ????????? ???????????????? ??????????? || ?.?.???? || d?nto bh?tv? tata? ??ntastata?coparato bhavet || arthakramo bal?y?nsy?dyata? p??hakram?diha || 4.4.1203 || ??????????????????? ??????? ??????????? || ????????? ????????? ????????????? ?????? || ?.?.???? || kriy?niv?ttivi?aye prayogo jagat?k?yate || abhidh?nasya ??nt?de? pratyak?e?eha sarvata? || 4.4.1204 || ???????????????? ???????? ????? ?????? || ??????????? ??????? ????? ???????????? ????????? || ?.?.???? || bahi?kara?ace???y? niv?ttau d?nta ucyate || d?nto'?vo gaurgajo v?'pi prayogastatra v?k?yate || 4.4.1205 || ???????????????? ???????? ????? ?????? || ?????? ???????????????? ??????????????????? || ?.?.???? || anta?kara?ace???y? niv?ttau ??nta ucyate || ??nto bhik?ustapasv?ti tatprayogasam?k?a??t || 4.4.1206 || with love and prayers, Jaishankar From kkashyap2011 at gmail.com Tue Aug 12 12:42:42 2025 From: kkashyap2011 at gmail.com (Krishna Kashyap) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 22:12:42 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Puranic Vishnu Loka and the Rigvedic Vaishnava-Parama pada (Tad VishnoH paramam Padam - a Rgvedic passage), are considered different from each other. term vishnu means: vishlr-vyAptau. The term Vishnu can be used for Vishnu as a devata, as well as for Vishnu as Para-Brahman (as in Sarva-Vyapaka). The term vaikunta is also a multi-purpose word. Vaikunta directly can mean parama purusha, as in Vaikuntah purushah piranha.... of sahasranama. Please check Shankara bhashya here. Vaikunta means dhama vachaka sometimes, and Sanskrit term means - vigatha kunta - kunta is limitation, vaikunta means - limitless or infinite (or ananta). Hence, these terms are interpreted based on context and other criteria. For example, the term Atma can be used to refer to self, mind, jivatma, paramatma, Brahman, and so on. Thanks to the flexibility of Sanskrit, or is it mega-confusion? *Best Regards,* *Krishna Kashyap* On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 4:24?PM V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > Earlier we had seen that in the Mahabharata is a dialogue where Krishna > discourses on the various observances/vows that lead one to His loka or > Shiva loka and those who go there return to this loka after enjoying bhoga > there. Having returned they become Jnanis. > > Here are two instances from the *s?ttvik* Naradiya Mahapurana where > individuals are shown returning to earth even after attaining the > Vaishnava-Parama pada (Tad VishnoH paramam Padam - a Rg vedic passage) and > enjoying bhogas in that realm for many kalpas. > > > ???????????- ??????????/??????? ?? > > https://sa.wikisource.org/s/4v8 - Devanagari version > > https://cloudup.com/chlxvobAueh Kannada version with translation p.60 > > https://archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.12945/page/n323/mode/2up > English translation of verse 77 > > ????????? ?????????????? ???????? ??????????? ?? ?? > ?????????? ??????????? *???????????? ??? ???? ?? *??-?? ?? > > ???? ?????????????? ????????? ??????? ?? > ???????????????????????? ????????? ???????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > *????????????????? ??????? ???????? ???? ????????? ??* > ??????? ???????? ??????????????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > ???????? ???????? ?????? ????????? ?? > ????????????? ??? ????? ????????? ???????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > ~ ???????????- ??????????/??????? ?? Below is another chapter from the > Narada purana: > > https://sa.wikisource.org/s/4vb Devanagari version > > https://cloudup.com/chlxvobAueh Kannada version with translation: p. 94 > > https://archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.12945/page/n341/mode/2up > English translation of verse 87 > > ??? ???????? ???????????? ?????? ????????? ?? > ???????? ???? ??????????? ????????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > ??? ??????? ??? ???? ?????????????? ?? > ????? ???????????? *?????????? ???? ???? ?*? ??-?? ?? > > ???????????? ???????? *????????????????* ?? > ?????? ??? ????????? ?????????? ???????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > ???????????????? ????????????? ? ?? > ???????? ????????? ????????????????????? ?? ??-?? ?? > > ??????? ???????????? ??????????????? ?? > ????????? ???????????? *??? ??????????? *?? ??-?? ?? > > warm regards > subbu > > ~ > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Tue Aug 12 13:08:15 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 22:38:15 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] shanta and danta in The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Bhashya 4.4.23 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Namaste Sri Jayashankar ji, Very interesting post. One is reminded of the Mandukya Karika 4.86 and the bhashyam: Here the Bhashyam seems to take both the ?ama and dama to mean the same: upa??nti. ????????? ????? ????? ??? ??????? ?????? ? ??? ???????????????????? ??????????? ??????? ? ?? ? 4.86 ????????? ???????????? ????? ????????? ?????????? ?????????????????????????? ? ?? ????? ????????? ?? ???????? ?????????? ?????? ?????? ? ????????? ?? ?????????????????? ??????? ?? ????????????????????????? ? ??? ??????? ?????????????? ?????? ???????? ???? ????????? ??????????? ?????????????? ??????? ?????????????????????? ???????? ? Here is the Swami Gambhirananda translation: 86. This is the modesty of the Brahmanas, this is called their natural tranquility, and this is their natural self-restraint resulting from spontaneous poise. Having known thus, one gets established in tranquility. This continuance in the state of identity with the Self is the natural vinayah, modesty; vipr?n?m, of the Brahmanas. This is their humility, and this is also ucyate, called; their pr?krtah ?amah, natural mental tranquility. Damah, self-restraint, too, is this only; prakrtidantatvat, because of (their) spontaneous poise, and because Brahman, too, is by nature quiescent. Evam vidv?n, having known thus, having known the aforesaid Brahman as naturally tranquil; vrajet, one should attain; ?amam, tranquility, which is spontaneous and which is the very nature of Brahman--that is to say one remains established in identification with Brahman. warm regards subbu On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 9:07?PM Jaishankar Narayanan wrote: > Namaste, > > In his Bhashya to the famous Brihadranyaka Upanishad vakya > > ...??????????????????? ????? ??????????????? ??????? ????????????????????? > ??????...? ?.?.?? ? > > ...tasm?deva?vicch?nto d?nta uparatastitik?u? sam?hito > bh?tv?tmanyev?tm?na? pa?yati...? 4.4.23 ? > > Shankaracharya gives the meaning for 'shama' and 'dama' differently as > > ??????? ??????? ?????? ????????????????????? ????????, ??? ?????? > ???????????????? ???????? > > tasm?t eva?vit ??nta? b?hyendriyavy?p?rata upa??nta?, tath? d?nta? > anta?kara?at????to niv?tta? > > Normally 'shama' is understood as 'mano-nigraha' (Mastery of Mind) and > 'dama' as 'b?hyendriya-nigraha' (Mastery over external sense organs and > organs of action) from texts like Tattvabodah, Vedanta Saara, > Vivekachudamani etc., but here Shankara has interchanged the meanings and > is taking '??nta?' as one who has ceased the activities of his external > organs (sense organs and organs of action) and 'd?nta?' as one who has > averted the longings of his internal organ (mind). > > According to the Dhatupaata both the roots have the same meaning ??? ????? > and ??? ????? i.e. to grow calm; to stop, cease. So Bhashyakara could have > taken 'shama' as 'b?hyendriya-nigraha', which leads to 'dama' which is > 'mano-nigraha', as '??nta?' appears before 'd?nta?' in the Upanishad Vakya. > > Kanchi Mahaperiyava Swami Chandrashekarendra Saraswati has also discussed > this in the book Deivathin Kural Volume 6. He says that the interchanging > of the meanings of 'shama' and 'dama' by Shankaracharya in his Bhashya has > caused some controversy. He opines that after becoming a Sanyasi one of the > first texts that Shankara authored were the Bhashyas on Upanishads. So in > the Brihadranyaka Bhashya he has given the meaning of shama and dama, in > keeping with the sequence in which they appear, as 'b?hyendriya-nigraha' > and 'mano-nigraha' respectively as both roots have the same meaning in > general. But later as he travelled across India he came to know the > particular meanings associated with 'shama' and 'dama' and gave the > generally accepted meanings in his prakarana granthas like Vivekachudamani. > > Interestingly Sureshvaracharya in his vArtika has actually said that dama > is 'bahi?kara?ace???y? niv?tti' and shama is 'anta?kara?ace???y? niv?tti' > and the 'sequence in meaning' (arthakrama) is more powerful (bal?y?n) than > 'sequence in reading' (p??hakrama) > > ?????? ?????? ??? ????????????????? ????? || > ????????? ???????????????? ??????????? || ?.?.???? || > > d?nto bh?tv? tata? ??ntastata?coparato bhavet || > arthakramo bal?y?nsy?dyata? p??hakram?diha || 4.4.1203 || > > ??????????????????? ??????? ??????????? || > ????????? ????????? ????????????? ?????? || ?.?.???? || > > kriy?niv?ttivi?aye prayogo jagat?k?yate || > abhidh?nasya ??nt?de? pratyak?e?eha sarvata? || 4.4.1204 || > > ???????????????? ???????? ????? ?????? || > ??????????? ??????? ????? ???????????? ????????? || ?.?.???? || > > bahi?kara?ace???y? niv?ttau d?nta ucyate || > d?nto'?vo gaurgajo v?'pi prayogastatra v?k?yate || 4.4.1205 || > > ???????????????? ???????? ????? ?????? || > ?????? ???????????????? ??????????????????? || ?.?.???? || > > anta?kara?ace???y? niv?ttau ??nta ucyate || > ??nto bhik?ustapasv?ti tatprayogasam?k?a??t || 4.4.1206 || > > with love and prayers, > Jaishankar > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "advaitin" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAOkLS-FihqDtpdJRj68Uuv4ZMVO7kKOeY2jJPqujB5oew1EGrg%40mail.gmail.com > > . > From vikkyjagan at gmail.com Tue Aug 12 13:16:55 2025 From: vikkyjagan at gmail.com (Vikram Jagannathan) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 12:16:55 -0500 Subject: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] shanta and danta in The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Bhashya 4.4.23 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Namaskaram acharya ji, Subbu ji, Revered Bhamatikara too brings in a sense of similarity / consequence between sama and dama. "???????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?? ??? ?????????????? ??????????, ???????? ????????????? ???????? ?? ??? ??????????? ??? ????????? ? ?????? ? ????????????????????????????? ?????, ??????? ??????? ??? ?" Translation by Sri Suryanarayana Sastri: "That mind, however, in which the intoxication due to the wine of passion etc., has been put an end to by the perfecting of non-attachment gained by the repetition of the contemplation (mentioned above), is subjugated, i.e., is brought under control by the self. This subjugation of the mind occasioned by non-attachment is called calmness (sama) or 'va??k?ra-samj??'. And the subjugated mind is made fit for application in respect of truth {i.e., to the investigation of truth) ; this its capacity is (dama) equanimity," prostrations, Vikram On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 12:08?PM V Subrahmanian wrote: > Namaste Sri Jayashankar ji, > > Very interesting post. One is reminded of the Mandukya Karika 4.86 and > the bhashyam: Here the Bhashyam seems to take both the ?ama and dama to > mean the same: upa??nti. > > ????????? ????? ????? ??? ??????? ?????? ? > ??? ???????????????????? ??????????? ??????? ? ?? ? 4.86 > ????????? ???????????? ????? ????????? ?????????? > ?????????????????????????? ? ?? ????? ????????? ?? ???????? ?????????? > ?????? ?????? ? ????????? ?? ?????????????????? ??????? ?? > ????????????????????????? ? ??? ??????? ?????????????? ?????? ???????? ???? > ????????? ??????????? ?????????????? ??????? ?????????????????????? > ???????? ? > > Here is the Swami Gambhirananda translation: > > > 86. This is the modesty of the Brahmanas, this is called their natural > tranquility, and this is their natural self-restraint resulting from > spontaneous poise. Having known thus, one gets established in tranquility. > > This continuance in the state of identity with the Self is the natural > vinayah, modesty; vipr?n?m, of the Brahmanas. This is their humility, and > this is also ucyate, called; their pr?krtah ?amah, natural mental > tranquility. Damah, self-restraint, too, is this only; prakrtidantatvat, > because of (their) spontaneous poise, and because Brahman, too, is by > nature quiescent. Evam vidv?n, having known thus, having known the > aforesaid Brahman as naturally tranquil; vrajet, one should attain; ?amam, > tranquility, which is spontaneous and which is the very nature of > Brahman--that is to say one remains established in identification with > Brahman. > > warm regards > subbu > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 9:07?PM Jaishankar Narayanan > wrote: > >> Namaste, >> >> In his Bhashya to the famous Brihadranyaka Upanishad vakya >> >> ...??????????????????? ????? ??????????????? ??????? >> ????????????????????? ??????...? ?.?.?? ? >> >> ...tasm?deva?vicch?nto d?nta uparatastitik?u? sam?hito >> bh?tv?tmanyev?tm?na? pa?yati...? 4.4.23 ? >> >> Shankaracharya gives the meaning for 'shama' and 'dama' differently as >> >> ??????? ??????? ?????? ????????????????????? ????????, ??? ?????? >> ???????????????? ???????? >> >> tasm?t eva?vit ??nta? b?hyendriyavy?p?rata upa??nta?, tath? d?nta? >> anta?kara?at????to niv?tta? >> >> Normally 'shama' is understood as 'mano-nigraha' (Mastery of Mind) and >> 'dama' as 'b?hyendriya-nigraha' (Mastery over external sense organs and >> organs of action) from texts like Tattvabodah, Vedanta Saara, >> Vivekachudamani etc., but here Shankara has interchanged the meanings and >> is taking '??nta?' as one who has ceased the activities of his external >> organs (sense organs and organs of action) and 'd?nta?' as one who has >> averted the longings of his internal organ (mind). >> >> According to the Dhatupaata both the roots have the same meaning ??? >> ????? and ??? ????? i.e. to grow calm; to stop, cease. So Bhashyakara could >> have taken 'shama' as 'b?hyendriya-nigraha', which leads to 'dama' which is >> 'mano-nigraha', as '??nta?' appears before 'd?nta?' in the Upanishad Vakya. >> >> Kanchi Mahaperiyava Swami Chandrashekarendra Saraswati has also discussed >> this in the book Deivathin Kural Volume 6. He says that the interchanging >> of the meanings of 'shama' and 'dama' by Shankaracharya in his Bhashya has >> caused some controversy. He opines that after becoming a Sanyasi one of the >> first texts that Shankara authored were the Bhashyas on Upanishads. So in >> the Brihadranyaka Bhashya he has given the meaning of shama and dama, in >> keeping with the sequence in which they appear, as 'b?hyendriya-nigraha' >> and 'mano-nigraha' respectively as both roots have the same meaning in >> general. But later as he travelled across India he came to know the >> particular meanings associated with 'shama' and 'dama' and gave the >> generally accepted meanings in his prakarana granthas like Vivekachudamani. >> >> Interestingly Sureshvaracharya in his vArtika has actually said that dama >> is 'bahi?kara?ace???y? niv?tti' and shama is 'anta?kara?ace???y? niv?tti' >> and the 'sequence in meaning' (arthakrama) is more powerful (bal?y?n) than >> 'sequence in reading' (p??hakrama) >> >> ?????? ?????? ??? ????????????????? ????? || >> ????????? ???????????????? ??????????? || ?.?.???? || >> >> d?nto bh?tv? tata? ??ntastata?coparato bhavet || >> arthakramo bal?y?nsy?dyata? p??hakram?diha || 4.4.1203 || >> >> ??????????????????? ??????? ??????????? || >> ????????? ????????? ????????????? ?????? || ?.?.???? || >> >> kriy?niv?ttivi?aye prayogo jagat?k?yate || >> abhidh?nasya ??nt?de? pratyak?e?eha sarvata? || 4.4.1204 || >> >> ???????????????? ???????? ????? ?????? || >> ??????????? ??????? ????? ???????????? ????????? || ?.?.???? || >> >> bahi?kara?ace???y? niv?ttau d?nta ucyate || >> d?nto'?vo gaurgajo v?'pi prayogastatra v?k?yate || 4.4.1205 || >> >> ???????????????? ???????? ????? ?????? || >> ?????? ???????????????? ??????????????????? || ?.?.???? || >> >> anta?kara?ace???y? niv?ttau ??nta ucyate || >> ??nto bhik?ustapasv?ti tatprayogasam?k?a??t || 4.4.1206 || >> >> with love and prayers, >> Jaishankar >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "advaitin" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAOkLS-FihqDtpdJRj68Uuv4ZMVO7kKOeY2jJPqujB5oew1EGrg%40mail.gmail.com >> >> . >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "advaitin" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te1FWUrKQAWR4fHBAQqN8ZBr_s%3Dxj0XPiBmvKC3VfsaBzA%40mail.gmail.com > > . > From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Tue Aug 12 14:10:42 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 23:40:42 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 10:12?PM Krishna Kashyap wrote: > Puranic Vishnu Loka and the Rigvedic Vaishnava-Parama pada (Tad VishnoH > paramam Padam - a Rgvedic passage), are considered different from each > other. > Namaste In the Bhagavatam, Jaya-Vijaya episode, there occurs a verse with the term vaikuntha: ?? ?? ????? ???????? ?????????????? ? ???????? ?????????? ???????? ? ??????????? ? ?? ? 3.16.27 After seeing the Lord of Vaiku??ha, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, in the self-illuminated Vaiku??ha planet, the sages left that transcendental abode. Sridhara swamin's commentary: ?????????????? ??????? ???? ????????? ? ??????????? ? ????? ??????? ??????????????????? ? ?????????????????? ?? ?? ?? Vikun?ha = Hari. Vaikun?ha - His residence Vaikun?ha loka. It is Self-luminous, does not require any other illuminating agency, since it is a transformation of sattva (guna). Found this in the Srimat Ahobila m?h?tmyam collected in the Ramanuja resources site: As per this, the Jaya-Vijaya episode is in the *k?rya vaikuntha*; a term found in a book. But the* tad vishnoH paramam padam is not cited here*: 3. ?????????????????????? Part 2 ??????? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ??????? ? ????????????????????? ???????????? ???????????? ? ? ? ??????? ?????????????? ?????? ??????? ? ?????????????????? ??????? ?????????????? ? ? ? ???? ????? ???????? ?????? ?????? ? ? ????? ???????? ?????? ????? ???????????????? ? ? ? ????????? *???????????? ?????????* ????????????? ???? ? ????? ??????????????? ?????????????? ?? ? ? ? ????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ? ?????? ??? ????????: ?????????? ?????? ???????? ? ? ? ???????? ??????????? ??????? ?????????? ? ????????? ????????? ????????????? ? ? ? ?????????????????? ???????? ????????? ? ???????? ???????? ?????????????????? ? ? ? ??? ????????????????? ???????? ????????? ? ??????? ??????? ??????? ????????? ??????????? ? ? ? ????? ?????????? ???????????????? ? ???????? ???????????? ???????? ??????? ??? ? ? ? ??????????? ?? ????? ?????? ??????????? ? ?? ?* ???? ???? ????????? ?? ????? ????????? ? ?? ?? ???????????? ???????????????? ?* regards subbu > > term vishnu means: vishlr-vyAptau. The term Vishnu can be used for Vishnu > as a devata, as well as for Vishnu as Para-Brahman (as in Sarva-Vyapaka). > The term vaikunta is also a multi-purpose word. > > Vaikunta directly can mean parama purusha, as in Vaikuntah purushah > piranha.... of sahasranama. Please check Shankara bhashya here. > > Vaikunta means dhama vachaka sometimes, and Sanskrit term means - vigatha > kunta - kunta is limitation, vaikunta means - limitless or infinite (or > ananta). > Hence, these terms are interpreted based on context and other criteria. > > For example, the term Atma can be used to refer to self, mind, jivatma, > paramatma, Brahman, and so on. > > Thanks to the flexibility of Sanskrit, or is it mega-confusion? > > > > *Best Regards,* > > *Krishna Kashyap* > > > > > >> >> From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Tue Aug 12 14:23:34 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 23:53:34 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] shanta and danta in The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Bhashya 4.4.23 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Vikram ji, for the reference. Really interesting. This is from the very first Brahma sutra bhashya (ath?to brahmajijn?s?) gloss of the Bhamati. regards subbu On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 10:47?PM Vikram Jagannathan wrote: > Namaskaram acharya ji, Subbu ji, > > Revered Bhamatikara too brings in a sense of similarity / consequence > between sama and dama. > > "???????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?? ??? > ?????????????? ??????????, ???????? ????????????? ???????? ?? ??? > ??????????? ??? ????????? ? ?????? ? ????????????????????????????? ?????, > ??????? ??????? ??? ?" > > Translation by Sri Suryanarayana Sastri: > > "That mind, however, in which the intoxication due to the wine of passion > etc., has been put an end to by the perfecting of non-attachment gained by > the repetition of the contemplation (mentioned above), is subjugated, i.e., > is brought under control by the self. This subjugation of the mind > occasioned by non-attachment is called calmness (sama) or > 'va??k?ra-samj??'. And the subjugated mind is made fit for application in > respect of truth {i.e., to the investigation of truth) ; this its capacity > is (dama) equanimity," > > prostrations, > Vikram > > > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 12:08?PM V Subrahmanian > wrote: > >> Namaste Sri Jayashankar ji, >> >> Very interesting post. One is reminded of the Mandukya Karika 4.86 and >> the bhashyam: Here the Bhashyam seems to take both the ?ama and dama to >> mean the same: upa??nti. >> >> ????????? ????? ????? ??? ??????? ?????? ? >> ??? ???????????????????? ??????????? ??????? ? ?? ? 4.86 >> ????????? ???????????? ????? ????????? ?????????? >> ?????????????????????????? ? ?? ????? ????????? ?? ???????? ?????????? >> ?????? ?????? ? ????????? ?? ?????????????????? ??????? ?? >> ????????????????????????? ? ??? ??????? ?????????????? ?????? ???????? ???? >> ????????? ??????????? ?????????????? ??????? ?????????????????????? >> ???????? ? >> >> Here is the Swami Gambhirananda translation: >> >> >> 86. This is the modesty of the Brahmanas, this is called their natural >> tranquility, and this is their natural self-restraint resulting from >> spontaneous poise. Having known thus, one gets established in tranquility. >> >> This continuance in the state of identity with the Self is the natural >> vinayah, modesty; vipr?n?m, of the Brahmanas. This is their humility, and >> this is also ucyate, called; their pr?krtah ?amah, natural mental >> tranquility. Damah, self-restraint, too, is this only; prakrtidantatvat, >> because of (their) spontaneous poise, and because Brahman, too, is by >> nature quiescent. Evam vidv?n, having known thus, having known the >> aforesaid Brahman as naturally tranquil; vrajet, one should attain; ?amam, >> tranquility, which is spontaneous and which is the very nature of >> Brahman--that is to say one remains established in identification with >> Brahman. >> >> warm regards >> subbu >> >> On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 9:07?PM Jaishankar Narayanan >> wrote: >> >>> Namaste, >>> >>> In his Bhashya to the famous Brihadranyaka Upanishad vakya >>> >>> ...??????????????????? ????? ??????????????? ??????? >>> ????????????????????? ??????...? ?.?.?? ? >>> >>> ...tasm?deva?vicch?nto d?nta uparatastitik?u? sam?hito >>> bh?tv?tmanyev?tm?na? pa?yati...? 4.4.23 ? >>> >>> Shankaracharya gives the meaning for 'shama' and 'dama' differently as >>> >>> ??????? ??????? ?????? ????????????????????? ????????, ??? ?????? >>> ???????????????? ???????? >>> >>> tasm?t eva?vit ??nta? b?hyendriyavy?p?rata upa??nta?, tath? d?nta? >>> anta?kara?at????to niv?tta? >>> >>> Normally 'shama' is understood as 'mano-nigraha' (Mastery of Mind) and >>> 'dama' as 'b?hyendriya-nigraha' (Mastery over external sense organs and >>> organs of action) from texts like Tattvabodah, Vedanta Saara, >>> Vivekachudamani etc., but here Shankara has interchanged the meanings and >>> is taking '??nta?' as one who has ceased the activities of his external >>> organs (sense organs and organs of action) and 'd?nta?' as one who has >>> averted the longings of his internal organ (mind). >>> >>> According to the Dhatupaata both the roots have the same meaning ??? >>> ????? and ??? ????? i.e. to grow calm; to stop, cease. So Bhashyakara could >>> have taken 'shama' as 'b?hyendriya-nigraha', which leads to 'dama' which is >>> 'mano-nigraha', as '??nta?' appears before 'd?nta?' in the Upanishad Vakya. >>> >>> Kanchi Mahaperiyava Swami Chandrashekarendra Saraswati has also >>> discussed this in the book Deivathin Kural Volume 6. He says that the >>> interchanging of the meanings of 'shama' and 'dama' by Shankaracharya in >>> his Bhashya has caused some controversy. He opines that after becoming a >>> Sanyasi one of the first texts that Shankara authored were the Bhashyas on >>> Upanishads. So in the Brihadranyaka Bhashya he has given the meaning of >>> shama and dama, in keeping with the sequence in which they appear, as >>> 'b?hyendriya-nigraha' and 'mano-nigraha' respectively as both roots have >>> the same meaning in general. But later as he travelled across India he came >>> to know the particular meanings associated with 'shama' and 'dama' and gave >>> the generally accepted meanings in his prakarana granthas like >>> Vivekachudamani. >>> >>> Interestingly Sureshvaracharya in his vArtika has actually said that >>> dama is 'bahi?kara?ace???y? niv?tti' and shama is 'anta?kara?ace???y? >>> niv?tti' and the 'sequence in meaning' (arthakrama) is more powerful >>> (bal?y?n) than 'sequence in reading' (p??hakrama) >>> >>> ?????? ?????? ??? ????????????????? ????? || >>> ????????? ???????????????? ??????????? || ?.?.???? || >>> >>> d?nto bh?tv? tata? ??ntastata?coparato bhavet || >>> arthakramo bal?y?nsy?dyata? p??hakram?diha || 4.4.1203 || >>> >>> ??????????????????? ??????? ??????????? || >>> ????????? ????????? ????????????? ?????? || ?.?.???? || >>> >>> kriy?niv?ttivi?aye prayogo jagat?k?yate || >>> abhidh?nasya ??nt?de? pratyak?e?eha sarvata? || 4.4.1204 || >>> >>> ???????????????? ???????? ????? ?????? || >>> ??????????? ??????? ????? ???????????? ????????? || ?.?.???? || >>> >>> bahi?kara?ace???y? niv?ttau d?nta ucyate || >>> d?nto'?vo gaurgajo v?'pi prayogastatra v?k?yate || 4.4.1205 || >>> >>> ???????????????? ???????? ????? ?????? || >>> ?????? ???????????????? ??????????????????? || ?.?.???? || >>> >>> anta?kara?ace???y? niv?ttau ??nta ucyate || >>> ??nto bhik?ustapasv?ti tatprayogasam?k?a??t || 4.4.1206 || >>> >>> with love and prayers, >>> Jaishankar >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "advaitin" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. >>> To view this discussion visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAOkLS-FihqDtpdJRj68Uuv4ZMVO7kKOeY2jJPqujB5oew1EGrg%40mail.gmail.com >>> >>> . >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "advaitin" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te1FWUrKQAWR4fHBAQqN8ZBr_s%3Dxj0XPiBmvKC3VfsaBzA%40mail.gmail.com >> >> . >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "advaitin" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAM7AOLceBctXCtMbsfsEvqD7OuKeDRoDe_ReejMr-LGGG_C8qw%40mail.gmail.com > > . > From kkashyap2011 at gmail.com Tue Aug 12 22:28:23 2025 From: kkashyap2011 at gmail.com (Krishna Kashyap) Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2025 07:58:23 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The Karya Vaikunta concept is well-known among Visistadvaita adherents. The main issue there is if Sanaka, Sanandana, and so on were angry at the Jaya-vijayas who stopped them from entering Vaikunta, how can such foremost of Rsis have anger? How can the dwara palakas of Vaikunta be so ignorant as to stop those Rsis, and many such questions arise. A simple solution is that the Vaikunta in question is just the Karya Vaikunta and not the real Vaikunta. The Dvaitins sometimes state that the gatekeepers, such as Jaya Vijay, are not really inside Vaikunta but at the periphery. Hence very small amount of krodha and shaapa, and other such activities are possible. Each system comes up with some kind of justification in this context. Justification of Vaikunta is seriously discussed in other works such as tattva mukta kalapa and so on. *Best Regards,* *Krishna Kashyap* On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 11:40?PM V Subrahmanian wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 10:12?PM Krishna Kashyap > wrote: > >> Puranic Vishnu Loka and the Rigvedic Vaishnava-Parama pada (Tad VishnoH >> paramam Padam - a Rgvedic passage), are considered different from each >> other. >> > > Namaste > > In the Bhagavatam, Jaya-Vijaya episode, there occurs a verse with the term > vaikuntha: > > ?? ?? ????? ???????? ?????????????? ? > ???????? ?????????? ???????? ? ??????????? ? ?? ? 3.16.27 > > After seeing the Lord of Vaiku??ha, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, in > the self-illuminated Vaiku??ha planet, the sages left that transcendental > abode. > > Sridhara swamin's commentary: > > ?????????????? ??????? ???? ????????? ? ??????????? ? ????? ??????? > ??????????????????? ? ?????????????????? ?? ?? ?? > > Vikun?ha = Hari. Vaikun?ha - His residence Vaikun?ha loka. It is > Self-luminous, does not require any other illuminating agency, since it is > a transformation of sattva (guna). > > Found this in the Srimat Ahobila m?h?tmyam collected in the Ramanuja > resources site: As per this, the Jaya-Vijaya episode is in the *k?rya > vaikuntha*; a term found in a book. But the* tad vishnoH paramam padam is > not cited here*: > > > 3. ?????????????????????? Part 2 > ??????? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ??????? ? ????????????????????? > ???????????? ???????????? ? ? ? ??????? ?????????????? ?????? ??????? ? > ?????????????????? ??????? ?????????????? ? ? ? ???? ????? ???????? ?????? > ?????? ? ? ????? ???????? ?????? ????? ???????????????? ? ? ? ????????? > *???????????? ?????????* ????????????? ???? ? ????? ??????????????? > ?????????????? ?? ? ? ? ????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ? ?????? ??? > ????????: ?????????? ?????? ???????? ? > ? ? ???????? ??????????? ??????? ?????????? ? ????????? ????????? > ????????????? ? ? ? ?????????????????? ???????? ????????? ? ???????? > ???????? ?????????????????? ? ? ? ??? ????????????????? ???????? ????????? > ? ??????? ??????? ??????? ????????? ??????????? ? ? ? ????? ?????????? > ???????????????? ? > ???????? ???????????? ???????? ??????? ??? ? ? ? ??????????? ?? ????? > ?????? ??????????? ? ?? ?* ???? ???? ????????? ?? ????? ????????? ? ?? ?? > ???????????? ???????????????? ?* > > regards > subbu > >> >> term vishnu means: vishlr-vyAptau. The term Vishnu can be used for Vishnu >> as a devata, as well as for Vishnu as Para-Brahman (as in Sarva-Vyapaka). >> The term vaikunta is also a multi-purpose word. >> >> Vaikunta directly can mean parama purusha, as in Vaikuntah purushah >> piranha.... of sahasranama. Please check Shankara bhashya here. >> >> Vaikunta means dhama vachaka sometimes, and Sanskrit term means - vigatha >> kunta - kunta is limitation, vaikunta means - limitless or infinite (or >> ananta). >> Hence, these terms are interpreted based on context and other criteria. >> >> For example, the term Atma can be used to refer to self, mind, jivatma, >> paramatma, Brahman, and so on. >> >> Thanks to the flexibility of Sanskrit, or is it mega-confusion? >> >> >> >> *Best Regards,* >> >> *Krishna Kashyap* >> >> >> >> >> >>> >>> From swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com Wed Aug 13 06:40:42 2025 From: swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com (Swagata Chowdhury) Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2025 16:40:42 +0600 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narada Purana - Returning to earth even after attaining the Vaishnava-Parama pada In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Concept of Karya Vaikhunta,Karan Vaikhunta or Karya Rudraloka, Karan Rudraloka etc mentioned in Shiva Puran Vidyeshwar Samhita ch. 17 beautifully. On Wed, 13 Aug 2025, 8:36?am Krishna Kashyap via Advaita-l, < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > The Karya Vaikunta concept is well-known among Visistadvaita adherents. The > main issue there is if Sanaka, Sanandana, and so on were angry at the > Jaya-vijayas who stopped them from entering Vaikunta, how can such foremost > of Rsis have anger? How can the dwara palakas of Vaikunta be so ignorant > as to stop those Rsis, and many such questions arise. A simple solution is > that the Vaikunta in question is just the Karya Vaikunta and not the real > Vaikunta. The Dvaitins sometimes state that the gatekeepers, such as Jaya > Vijay, are not really inside Vaikunta but at the periphery. Hence very > small amount of krodha and shaapa, and other such activities are possible. > Each system comes up with some kind of justification in this context. > > Justification of Vaikunta is seriously discussed in other works such as > tattva mukta kalapa and so on. > > *Best Regards,* > > *Krishna Kashyap* > > > > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 11:40?PM V Subrahmanian > wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 10:12?PM Krishna Kashyap > > > wrote: > > > >> Puranic Vishnu Loka and the Rigvedic Vaishnava-Parama pada (Tad VishnoH > >> paramam Padam - a Rgvedic passage), are considered different from each > >> other. > >> > > > > Namaste > > > > In the Bhagavatam, Jaya-Vijaya episode, there occurs a verse with the > term > > vaikuntha: > > > > ?? ?? ????? ???????? ?????????????? ? > > ???????? ?????????? ???????? ? ??????????? ? ?? ? 3.16.27 > > > > After seeing the Lord of Vaiku??ha, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, > in > > the self-illuminated Vaiku??ha planet, the sages left that transcendental > > abode. > > > > Sridhara swamin's commentary: > > > > ?????????????? ??????? ???? ????????? ? ??????????? ? ????? ??????? > > ??????????????????? ? ?????????????????? ?? ?? ?? > > > > Vikun?ha = Hari. Vaikun?ha - His residence Vaikun?ha loka. It is > > Self-luminous, does not require any other illuminating agency, since it > is > > a transformation of sattva (guna). > > > > Found this in the Srimat Ahobila m?h?tmyam collected in the Ramanuja > > resources site: As per this, the Jaya-Vijaya episode is in the *k?rya > > vaikuntha*; a term found in a book. But the* tad vishnoH paramam padam is > > not cited here*: > > > > > > 3. ?????????????????????? Part 2 > > ??????? ???????? ???????? ??????????? ??????? ? ????????????????????? > > ???????????? ???????????? ? ? ? ??????? ?????????????? ?????? ??????? ? > > ?????????????????? ??????? ?????????????? ? ? ? ???? ????? ???????? > ?????? > > ?????? ? ? ????? ???????? ?????? ????? ???????????????? ? ? ? ????????? > > *???????????? ?????????* ????????????? ???? ? ????? ??????????????? > > ?????????????? ?? ? ? ? ????????? ???????? ??? ?????????? ? ?????? ??? > > ????????: ?????????? ?????? ???????? ? > > ? ? ???????? ??????????? ??????? ?????????? ? ????????? ????????? > > ????????????? ? ? ? ?????????????????? ???????? ????????? ? ???????? > > ???????? ?????????????????? ? ? ? ??? ????????????????? ???????? > ????????? > > ? ??????? ??????? ??????? ????????? ??????????? ? ? ? ????? ?????????? > > ???????????????? ? > > ???????? ???????????? ???????? ??????? ??? ? ? ? ??????????? ?? ????? > > ?????? ??????????? ? ?? ?* ???? ???? ????????? ?? ????? ????????? ? ?? ?? > > ???????????? ???????????????? ?* > > > > regards > > subbu > > > >> > >> term vishnu means: vishlr-vyAptau. The term Vishnu can be used for > Vishnu > >> as a devata, as well as for Vishnu as Para-Brahman (as in > Sarva-Vyapaka). > >> The term vaikunta is also a multi-purpose word. > >> > >> Vaikunta directly can mean parama purusha, as in Vaikuntah purushah > >> piranha.... of sahasranama. Please check Shankara bhashya here. > >> > >> Vaikunta means dhama vachaka sometimes, and Sanskrit term means - > vigatha > >> kunta - kunta is limitation, vaikunta means - limitless or infinite (or > >> ananta). > >> Hence, these terms are interpreted based on context and other criteria. > >> > >> For example, the term Atma can be used to refer to self, mind, jivatma, > >> paramatma, Brahman, and so on. > >> > >> Thanks to the flexibility of Sanskrit, or is it mega-confusion? > >> > >> > >> > >> *Best Regards,* > >> > >> *Krishna Kashyap* > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From jaldhar at braincells.com Wed Aug 13 23:06:10 2025 From: jaldhar at braincells.com (jaldhar at braincells.com) Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2025 23:06:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Advaita-l] [ADMIN] list outage for some gmail users Message-ID: Every couple of years or so it seems gmail takes leave of its senses and starts marking list mail as spam and blocking it. Well it happened again today. I think it is fixed now but I will keep an eye on the situation. If you sent an email to the list and it doesn't seem to have appeared, please check the archives first before resending. You can also use the archives to check up on any messages you may have missed. If you are still having problems sending or receiving, please contact me privately and I will investigate. -- Jaldhar H. Vyas From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Thu Aug 14 06:25:11 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2025 15:55:11 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?=22Sound_and_Sandhya_=3A_Lalit=C4=81_Sahas?= =?utf-8?q?ran=C4=81ma_=285/7=29=22_English?= Message-ID: https://youtu.be/Qe6owc7Y4IQ?si=YUySpmXAkrdASigz Vidwan Laliaditya Gannavaram discourses on the technicality behind speech and Sandhya worship. Many interesting details are expounded. warm regards subbu From jaldhar at braincells.com Thu Aug 14 10:01:06 2025 From: jaldhar at braincells.com (Jaldhar H. Vyas) Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2025 10:01:06 -0400 Subject: [Advaita-l] [ADMIN] list outage for some gmail users In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sorry one more thing. If you got a message from the list server saying you need to resubscribe, please disregard. The issue should be resolved. On August 13, 2025 11:06:10 PM EDT, "Jaldhar H. Vyas via Advaita-l" wrote: >Every couple of years or so it seems gmail takes leave of its senses and starts marking list mail as spam and blocking it. Well it happened again today. I think it is fixed now but I will keep an eye on the situation. > >If you sent an email to the list and it doesn't seem to have appeared, please check the archives first before resending. You can also use the archives to check up on any messages you may have missed. > >If you are still having problems sending or receiving, please contact me privately and I will investigate. > >-- >Jaldhar H. Vyas >_______________________________________________ >Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > >To unsubscribe or change your options: >https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > >For assistance, contact: >listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org Jaldhar H. Vyas From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Thu Aug 14 22:01:07 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 07:31:07 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Krishna Janmastami - 3 online English discourses Message-ID: https://www.facebook.com/share/14Ezgc23nm9/ See details in this link. Regards subbu From raghavkumar00 at gmail.com Fri Aug 15 03:43:30 2025 From: raghavkumar00 at gmail.com (Raghav Kumar Dwivedula) Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 13:13:30 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Krishna Janmastami - 3 online English discourses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Namaste Subbuji Particularly interesting was the proposed lecture titled ?Krishna, the master strategist? by Sri Vishwanath Ji. Sri Krishna?s astounding role in refashioning the whole society of 3000 BCE India, such as how he validated and blessed the Rajasuya Yagya of Yudhishthira, crowing him as the Chakravarty of Bharata (the Indian subcontinent, comprising all areas from Afghanistan to Bangladesh (And possibly control extending up to Bali in South East Asia ) points to his role in working for the political unification of BharataVarsha. And Sri Krishna Bhagavan used optimal but unapologetic force in achieving that unification end - which was clearly enunciated by him as a desirable goal for the protection of Dharma. Om Raghav On Fri, 15 Aug 2025 at 7:51?AM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org > wrote: > https://www.facebook.com/share/14Ezgc23nm9/ > > See details in this link. > > Regards > subbu > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Fri Aug 15 06:11:42 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 15:41:42 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Adhyaropa - apavada nyaya - An English article and my providing passages from Ramanuja system Message-ID: Here is an article in English on the adhyaropa - apavada nyaya (see link in the sequel): I am citing from the English article and am providing passages from Ramanuja, Shankara and Ranga Ramanuja. Also this article says: //adhy?rop?pav?d?bhy?? ni?prapa?ca? prapa?cyate ? (Attributed to Bhagav?n Upavar?a)// I have asked the publisher of the article about the attribution source. In any case, this is quite in tune with what Shankara says: sampradaaya vidaam vachanam while citing the nyaya. https://www.prekshaa.in/jivana-dharma-yoga-episode135 //A child wants to see the moon. Is it possible to search the entire sky for it? No. Therefore, the elder carrying the child points at the branch of a tree and asks it to look in that direction. The orb of the moon will be visible in the direction of the branch. Therefore, something that seemed far now seems to be near. This example is called ??kh?-candra-ny?ya. This is adhy?ropa-apav?da. This nyaya is admitted by the Sribhashyam: 1. ??????????? 01-01-06 ??????????????? ?????? ??? ????? ? ???????????? ??????: (???.?.??.?) ??? ? ??? ????????????????????? ??????? ?????????? ?????????????????? ????????????? ? (???????????? ????????????????????) ??? ?? ?????????? ??????????????????? ?????????? ??????: ?????: ??? ????? ?????? ?????????, ?????????? ???? ????? ?????????????????, ???????????????? ???, ??????????? ? ??????, ???????? (??. ??.?) ?????? (??.??.?) This is exactly admitted by Advaita too: Here is the Shankara bhashyam for the Taittiriya Upanishad, panchakosha viveka, what Ramanuja says above: ? ?? ?????? ?? ??????? ???????? ?????? ?????????????????? ? ???? ? ????????????????????????? ????????????????? ???? ???????????? ??????? ???? ??????????????????????? ?????????? ? ????????????? ??????????????????????????? ??????????????????????? ???????????? - ????????? ???? ? ???? ???? ??????????????????? ????? ???? ?????????? ? The word ??kh?-candra-ny?ya is present in both Sribhashyam and Shankara bhashyam for the same purpose. The sthUla arundhati nyaya is also admitted by Rangaramanuja in the Taittiriya Bhashyam, for the same purpose as the shakha chandra nyaya by Ramanuja: ???? ???????? ????????????-??????????????????? ???????? ?????, ????????? ???????????, ? ????? ??? ??????????????, ??????? ?? ????? ??? ????????? ???????????????????? ??????????????????? ????????? ????????? ??????? ? ???????????????? ????????? ????????? ?????? ?????? ?? ?????????? ??????????? ?????????????? ?????????? ??????????????? ????????????, ????????????? ??? ?????????? ? ?????? ????????????? ??????? ???????? ????????? ??????? ??????????????? ???????????????? ??????????, ????????????? ??? ?????????? ? ????? ?????????????????? ???????? Shankara too accepts this nyaya in the anandamayaadhikharana, for the same purpose as Rangaramanuja, though in the alluding to the purvapaksha: ??????? ??????????????????????????????????? ?????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????? ??????? ??????? ???????????????????????????????? ???????? , ???????????????????????? ?????????? ??????????????????????????????? ??????????? ? ?????????????????? ?????????? ????????????????????????? ?????????, ?? ??????? ??????????? ?? ??????????????? ????; ??????????????????? ?????????????????????????????? ? So, the Advaitin's stand that the adhyaropa apavada nyaya is also called shaakha chandra and sthula arundhati nyaya is well documented in the Ramanuja system too, though only the name adhyaropa apavada nyaya is not popular in the Ramanuja system. Continuing the citation from the article: There is a tradition of showing the star Arundhat? to newlyweds on the evening of their wedding day. Arundhat? is the epitome of pativrat?-dharma (the dharma of loyalty to her husband). But it is a very small star and not easily visible. Therefore there is a tactic to spot it. The purohitas first ask the newlyweds to turn towards the north. This is adhy?ropa. The north is not Arundhat?. Therefore there is an apav?da for that. Then the saptar?i-ma??ala[3] is shown. This is also an adhy?ropa; the saptar?i-ma??ala is not the Arundhat?; then the purohitas show the Vasi??ha star. This is again an adhy?ropa, because Vasi??ha is not Arundhat?; Arundhat? is Vasi??ha?s wife. Therefore another apav?da is required. In the end, the purohitas point towards the tiny star next to Vasi??ha. This is how Arundhat? is spotted. This is also a famous example called the Arundhat?-pradar?ana-ny?ya. This is adhy?ropa-apav?da. From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Fri Aug 15 08:36:59 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 18:06:59 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Govindashtakam - Beautiful rendering Message-ID: Happy Shri Krishna Janmashtami to all.? #Govindashtaka is live on the @Bhoomalabs Youtube channel. Link- https://youtu.be/vQk62gD18A4?si=727J3sZc08Vj2fwL ?Beautiful chanting with lyrics and meaning.. ??Immers yourself in devotion and peace. From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Sat Aug 16 04:21:58 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2025 13:51:58 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?North_X_South_Krishna_Bhajans_=7C_Devotion?= =?utf-8?b?YWwgU29uZ3MgTWFzaHVwIOCkueCkv+CkguCkpuClgCDDlyDgrqTgrq4=?= =?utf-8?b?4K6/4K604K+NIMOXIOCwpOCxhuCwsuCxgeCwl+CxgSDDlyDgspXgsqg=?= =?utf-8?b?4LON4LKo4LKh?= Message-ID: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sF0vQ8mkIo4 From swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com Sat Aug 16 11:17:49 2025 From: swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com (Swagata Chowdhury) Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2025 21:17:49 +0600 Subject: [Advaita-l] Join Tattvapradipika Hindi Classes Message-ID: Dear All, It gives me great pleasure to inform you that Guruji is presently teaching *Chitsukhi* (*Tattvapradipika*), one of the most advanced and profound texts of Advaita Vedanta. Despite the highly complex nature of this work, Guruji is explaining it in a remarkably simple and accessible manner, carefully breaking down every technical term. Those who wish to study *Chitsukhi* are warmly encouraged to follow the link below, where you will find Guruji?s lectures on *Tattvapradipika*. The classes are conducted live on YouTube every evening from 6:30 PM to 7:30 PM (IST), in Hindi. Viewers proficient in Hindi may benefit greatly, You may also address your queries to Guruji in Hindi or Sanskrit during the live sessions through the comments section whenever you seek clarification. *About Guruji:* Dr. Ramkishor Tripathi is a distinguished scholar, honored with numerous titles and awards such as *Vidyavachaspati, Vedanta Shastra Shiromani, Vedanta Martanda, Kashi Vidvat Gaurava, Vidvat Bhushana,* and the prestigious *Shankara-Vishishta-Vishesh Vidwan Puraskar* and *Hariharananda Saraswati Puraskar,* among many others. He has also presided over International Vakyartha Sadas in Varanasi.He has also presided over the N?gak?pa Shastrath Sabha in Varanasi, as well as several other Shastrath Sabhas. At present, Guruji serves as the Vice President of the Shree *Kashi Vidvat Parishad*, and last year he was felicitated by the *Sringeri Sharada Peetham's Jagadguru Swami Vidhusekhar Bharati during Varanasi Shastrath Sabha. * Har Har Mahadev Devotee and disciple of Guruji, Swagata Chowdhury From swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com Sat Aug 16 11:18:57 2025 From: swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com (Swagata Chowdhury) Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2025 21:18:57 +0600 Subject: [Advaita-l] Join Tattvapradipika Hindi Classes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: https://youtube.com/@-4738?si=u3StNI5B1J0OAmdX Link of Guruji's YouTube channel. ? On Sat, 16 Aug 2025, 9:17?pm Swagata Chowdhury, < swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > It gives me great pleasure to inform you that Guruji is presently teaching > *Chitsukhi* (*Tattvapradipika*), one of the most advanced and profound > texts of Advaita Vedanta. Despite the highly complex nature of this work, > Guruji is explaining it in a remarkably simple and accessible manner, > carefully breaking down every technical term. > > Those who wish to study *Chitsukhi* are warmly encouraged to follow the > link below, where you will find Guruji?s lectures on *Tattvapradipika*. > The classes are conducted live on YouTube every evening from 6:30 PM to > 7:30 PM (IST), in Hindi. Viewers proficient in Hindi may benefit > greatly, You may also address your queries to Guruji in Hindi or Sanskrit > during the live sessions through the comments section whenever you seek > clarification. > > *About Guruji:* > Dr. Ramkishor Tripathi is a distinguished scholar, honored with numerous > titles and awards such as *Vidyavachaspati, Vedanta Shastra Shiromani, > Vedanta Martanda, Kashi Vidvat Gaurava, Vidvat Bhushana,* and the > prestigious *Shankara-Vishishta-Vishesh Vidwan Puraskar* and *Hariharananda > Saraswati Puraskar,* among many others. He has also presided over > International Vakyartha Sadas in Varanasi.He has also presided over the > N?gak?pa Shastrath Sabha in Varanasi, as well as several other Shastrath > Sabhas. > > At present, Guruji serves as the Vice President of the Shree *Kashi > Vidvat Parishad*, and last year he was felicitated by the *Sringeri > Sharada Peetham's Jagadguru Swami Vidhusekhar Bharati during Varanasi > Shastrath Sabha. * > > Har Har Mahadev > > Devotee and disciple of Guruji, > Swagata Chowdhury > From sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com Sat Aug 16 11:50:13 2025 From: sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com (Sudhanshu Shekhar) Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2025 21:20:13 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Join Tattvapradipika Hindi Classes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you Swagat ji for sharing the link. Another ongoing sessions on Chitsukhi is at https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLDE70pXeENYfKvm4rlqr0kkMH152DRbYs&si=HlpSkbUkP3TbwxKY Regards. Sudhanshu Shekhar. From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Sun Aug 17 03:51:20 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2025 13:21:20 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?b?VGhlIERpdmluZSA2MyB8IOCuqOCuvuCur+CuqQ==?= =?utf-8?b?4K+N4K6u4K6+4K6w4K+NIOCuqOCuvuCuruCuvuCuteCus+CuvyB8IE9v?= =?utf-8?q?thukadu_Venkatakavi_=7C?= Message-ID: https://youtu.be/dgX2-v3lJPE?si=3ux3S3W50YJwiQMD Ootthukkaadu kavi is portrayed as Krishna Bhakta. Here we are surprised to see that he is an ardent Siva Bhakta too. Such a sublime emotion in a tough composition. Not an easy thing to weave the 63 Nayanmars in a musical canvas. Great Amazing. So well presented by the singer. From swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com Sun Aug 17 09:03:09 2025 From: swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com (Swagata Chowdhury) Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2025 19:03:09 +0600 Subject: [Advaita-l] Join Tattvapradipika Hindi Classes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: https://www.youtube.com/live/JZC-HNc7VKY?si=d9wnLJBus6i5llmE Chitsukhi Class has begun. You all are welcome to join. On Sat, 16 Aug 2025, 9:18?pm Swagata Chowdhury, < swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com> wrote: > https://youtube.com/@-4738?si=u3StNI5B1J0OAmdX > > Link of Guruji's YouTube channel. ? > > On Sat, 16 Aug 2025, 9:17?pm Swagata Chowdhury, < > swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Dear All, >> >> It gives me great pleasure to inform you that Guruji is presently >> teaching *Chitsukhi* (*Tattvapradipika*), one of the most advanced and >> profound texts of Advaita Vedanta. Despite the highly complex nature of >> this work, Guruji is explaining it in a remarkably simple and accessible >> manner, carefully breaking down every technical term. >> >> Those who wish to study *Chitsukhi* are warmly encouraged to follow the >> link below, where you will find Guruji?s lectures on *Tattvapradipika*. >> The classes are conducted live on YouTube every evening from 6:30 PM to >> 7:30 PM (IST), in Hindi. Viewers proficient in Hindi may benefit >> greatly, You may also address your queries to Guruji in Hindi or Sanskrit >> during the live sessions through the comments section whenever you seek >> clarification. >> >> *About Guruji:* >> Dr. Ramkishor Tripathi is a distinguished scholar, honored with numerous >> titles and awards such as *Vidyavachaspati, Vedanta Shastra Shiromani, >> Vedanta Martanda, Kashi Vidvat Gaurava, Vidvat Bhushana,* and the >> prestigious *Shankara-Vishishta-Vishesh Vidwan Puraskar* and *Hariharananda >> Saraswati Puraskar,* among many others. He has also presided over >> International Vakyartha Sadas in Varanasi.He has also presided over the >> N?gak?pa Shastrath Sabha in Varanasi, as well as several other Shastrath >> Sabhas. >> >> At present, Guruji serves as the Vice President of the Shree *Kashi >> Vidvat Parishad*, and last year he was felicitated by the *Sringeri >> Sharada Peetham's Jagadguru Swami Vidhusekhar Bharati during Varanasi >> Shastrath Sabha. * >> >> Har Har Mahadev >> >> Devotee and disciple of Guruji, >> Swagata Chowdhury >> > From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Mon Aug 18 03:07:19 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2025 12:37:19 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Voicing the need for a broader view of sectarian beliefs Message-ID: "?????? ?? ??????????? ??? ?????????? ???? - https://youtu.be/2_455e2asJQ?si=XHs5CP6d1GQkTRaC Dushyant Sridhar From swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com Mon Aug 18 05:43:21 2025 From: swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com (Swagata Chowdhury) Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2025 15:43:21 +0600 Subject: [Advaita-l] Join Tattvapradipika Hindi Classes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you Sudha Sekharji. Guruji is teaching *Chitsukhi* in such a simple manner that even a beginner like me can clearly understand it. On Mon, 18 Aug 2025, 3:41?pm Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l, < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > Thank you Swagat ji for sharing the link. > > Another ongoing sessions on Chitsukhi is at > > > https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLDE70pXeENYfKvm4rlqr0kkMH152DRbYs&si=HlpSkbUkP3TbwxKY > > Regards. > Sudhanshu Shekhar. > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com Mon Aug 18 12:25:46 2025 From: swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com (Swagata Chowdhury) Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2025 22:25:46 +0600 Subject: [Advaita-l] Join Tattvapradipika Hindi Classes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: #IMPORTANT During the live sessions, you may ask questions to Guruji in Hindi or Sanskrit, provided they are written in Devanagari script. Guruji will try to respond whenever he finds the time in Live. On Mon, 18 Aug 2025, 3:43?pm Swagata Chowdhury, < swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you Sudha Sekharji. > > Guruji is teaching *Chitsukhi* in such a simple manner that even a > beginner like me can clearly understand it. > > On Mon, 18 Aug 2025, 3:41?pm Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l, < > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > >> Thank you Swagat ji for sharing the link. >> >> Another ongoing sessions on Chitsukhi is at >> >> >> https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLDE70pXeENYfKvm4rlqr0kkMH152DRbYs&si=HlpSkbUkP3TbwxKY >> >> Regards. >> Sudhanshu Shekhar. >> _______________________________________________ >> Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ >> >> To unsubscribe or change your options: >> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l >> >> For assistance, contact: >> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org >> > From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Tue Aug 19 06:00:02 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2025 15:30:02 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Narayaneeyam Upanyasam | Br. Sri Sundarkumar - A unique Personality Message-ID: Sri Sundar Kumar is a unique multifaceted Rasika. He is a kavya rasika, bhakti rasika, shaastra rasika, sangeetha rasika and so on. His discourses abound in many such facets. He enriches them with countless samples from Tamil, Sanskrit, Telugu, Marathi, at times even English literature. One gets to benefit immensely by listening to him. Here is Part 2 of the Narayaneeyam. The remaining ones can be accessed from YouTube. https://youtu.be/jvenG4T1fn4?si=CF3_YGIXzShCFKQc From jaldhar at braincells.com Tue Aug 19 10:48:30 2025 From: jaldhar at braincells.com (jaldhar at braincells.com) Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2025 10:48:30 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Advaita-l] Chitsukhacharya and the Bhagavata Purana Message-ID: On Sat, 16 Aug 2025, Swagata Chowdhury via Advaita-l wrote: > *Chitsukhi* (*Tattvapradipika*), one of the most advanced and profound > texts of Advaita Vedanta. Chitsukhacharya is indeed one of the most influential post-Shankaracharya Advaitins. But another interesting thing is that he is the earliest known commentator on the Bhagavata Purana. Both Shridharaswami and the Gaudiya philosopher Jiva Goswami attest to this. Sadly, this work is no longer available. (Actually this is just a test to see if Google is still blocking our email.) -- Jaldhar H. Vyas From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Wed Aug 20 03:58:46 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 13:28:46 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?Why_the_idea_of_a_=E2=80=98Mukti-sth=C4=81?= =?utf-8?q?na/abode=E2=80=99_is_not_absolutely_true=3F?= Message-ID: This is a file giving details that the Bh?gavata, in harmony with Ved?nta, teaches that the essence of liberation is nothing other than *brahm?tmaikatva-j??na*?the knowledge of one?s identity with Brahman and not abiding in a mukti loka. English version: https://adbhutam.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/why-the-idea-of-a-mukti-loka-is-not-absolutely-real.pdf Kannada version: https://adbhutam.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/is-mukti-loka-absolute-kannada.pdf warm regards subbu From raghavkumar00 at gmail.com Wed Aug 20 06:35:40 2025 From: raghavkumar00 at gmail.com (Raghav Kumar Dwivedula) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 16:05:40 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?Why_the_idea_of_a_=E2=80=98Mukti-sth=C4=81?= =?utf-8?q?na/abode=E2=80=99_is_not_absolutely_true=3F?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Namaste Subbu ji Thank you for the article. Is there any yukti directly given in any verse that any concept of ?Nitya vaikun?ha loka? with the word loka as a special divine *eternal* place etc., is logically impossible because ?sAvayavatvAt anityatvaM? or ?dRshyatvAt anityatvaM? etc. Anything that is seen of has parts is non-eternal. While yukti stands on its own legs, still sometimes such yuktis are given in Shruti or smRti giving them a certain finality. Om Ra On Wed, 20 Aug 2025 at 1:29?PM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > This is a file giving details that the Bh?gavata, in harmony with Ved?nta, > teaches that the essence of liberation is nothing other than > *brahm?tmaikatva-j??na*?the knowledge of one?s identity with Brahman and > not abiding in a mukti loka. > > English version: > > > https://adbhutam.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/why-the-idea-of-a-mukti-loka-is-not-absolutely-real.pdf > > Kannada version: > > > https://adbhutam.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/is-mukti-loka-absolute-kannada.pdf > > warm regards > subbu > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Wed Aug 20 07:26:58 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 16:56:58 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?Why_the_idea_of_a_=E2=80=98Mukti-sth=C4=81?= =?utf-8?q?na/abode=E2=80=99_is_not_absolutely_true=3F?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 4:05?PM Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > Namaste Subbu ji > Thank you for the article. Is there any yukti directly given in any verse > that any concept of ?Nitya vaikun?ha loka? with the word loka as a special > divine *eternal* place etc., is logically impossible because ?sAvayavatvAt > anityatvaM? or ?dRshyatvAt anityatvaM? etc. Anything that is seen of has > parts is non-eternal. While yukti stands on its own legs, still > sometimes such yuktis are given in Shruti or smRti giving them a certain > finality. > Dear Raghav ji, There is one verse which has this statement, which I have cited in the article, from the Bhagavatam itself: *???* *??????* *???????* *???????????????* *????* ???? This means: just like imagination, dream, all that is perceived is mithya. So, here we have the yukti: dRshyatvAt mithya.' But those who argue for the reality of the Vaikuntha say that that loka is not material, prAkRta, but a-prAkRta and hence will not follow the above yukti. In any case, in the Laghu chandrika commentary to the Advaita siddhi, it is stated that 'there is no pramANa for an uncreated Vaikuntha loka. Advaita Siddhi too denies absolute eternality to such lokas. regards subbu > > Om > Ra > > > > On Wed, 20 Aug 2025 at 1:29?PM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l < > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > This is a file giving details that the Bh?gavata, in harmony with > Ved?nta, > > teaches that the essence of liberation is nothing other than > > *brahm?tmaikatva-j??na*?the knowledge of one?s identity with Brahman and > > not abiding in a mukti loka. > > > > English version: > > > > > > > https://adbhutam.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/why-the-idea-of-a-mukti-loka-is-not-absolutely-real.pdf > > > > Kannada version: > > > > > > > https://adbhutam.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/is-mukti-loka-absolute-kannada.pdf > > > > warm regards > > subbu > > _______________________________________________ > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > For assistance, contact: > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From jai1971 at gmail.com Wed Aug 20 13:36:55 2025 From: jai1971 at gmail.com (Jaishankar Narayanan) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 23:06:55 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] adhyAropa apavAda in Br. Up. Bhashya 4.4.25 Message-ID: Namaste, We all know the famous saying about adhyAropa-apavAda being the methodology of teaching brahman as quoted by Adi Shankara above in BG Bhashya. ??? ?? ?????????????? ????? ? ???????????????????? ???????????? ???????????? ??? ? ?. ??. ?? ??.?? tath? hi samprad?yavid?? vacanam ? ?adhy?rop?pav?d?bhy?? ni?prapa?ca? prapa?cyate' iti ? bha. G?. bh? 13.13 BhashyakAra also explains the adhyAropa-apavAda using two analogies in the Brihadarnayaka Upanishad bhasya to 4.4.25. Here he uses numbers from 1 to paraardha (155.52 trillion!) represented by lines and also alphabets represented by scripts as analogies to explain adhyAropa (deliberate superimposition) aiding in revealing knowledge of numbers and words. It is interesting to note that our ancestors knew the place value system of numbering and were able to count up to 155 trillion, which is the largest number, which had a specific name of paraardha (50 years of Brahma?s life). ?? ???????? ??????? ??????????????? ????? ? ?????????????? ?????????????? ???????????????????????????? ?????????????????????? ? ?????? ???? ; ??????? ? ???? ???????????????????????????????? ???? ??????????????? ? ??? ???????????????????????????????????????? ????????????? ?????? ? ????? ????, ?????? , ?????? , ????????? ? ??? ????????, ??????? ?????????????? ?????? , ? ?? ????????? ????????????? ; ??? ? ????????????????? ?????????????? ????????????????????????????? ???????? ???????????????, ? ??????????????????????????? ???????? ? ??? ??? ??????????????????????????? ??? ????????????????????? , ???? ?????????????????????????????????? ???? ?????? ?????????????? ???? ? ??. ??. ?? ?.?.?? e?a sarvasy? upani?ada? sa?k?ipto'rtha ukta? ? etasyaiv?rthasya samyakprabodh?ya utpattisthitipralay?dikalpan? kriy?k?rakaphal?dhy?ropa?? ca ?tmani k?t? ; tadapohena ca neti net?tyadhy?ropitavi?e??panayadv?re?a puna? tattvam?veditam ? yath? ekaprabh?ty?par?rdhasa?khy?svar?paparij??n?ya rekh?dhy?ropa?a? k?tv? ? ekeya? rekh?, da?eyam , ?ateyam , sahasreyam ? iti gr?hayati, avagamayati sa?khy?svar?pa? kevalam , na tu sa?khy?y? rekh?tmatvameva ; yath? ca ak?r?d?nyak?ar??i vijigr?hayi?u? patrama??rekh?disa?yogop?yam?sth?ya var??n?? satattvam?vedayati, na patrama?y?dy?tmat?mak?ar???? gr?hayati ? tath? ceha utpatty?dyanekop?yam?sth?ya eka? brahmatattvam?veditam , puna? tatkalpitop?yajanitavi?e?apari?odhan?rtha? neti net?ti tattvopasa?h?ra? k?ta? ? b?. upa. bh? 4.4.25 Swami Madhavananda?s Translation This is the purport of the whole Upani?ad put in a nutshell. It is to bring home this purport that the ideas of projection, maintenance, dissolution, etc., as well as those of action, its factors and its results were superimposed on the Self. Again, by their negation?by the elimination of the superimposed attributes through a process of ?Not this, not this??the truth has been made known. Just as, in order to explain the nature of numbers from one up to a hundred thousand billions, a man superimposes them on certain lines (digits), calling one of them one, another ten, another hundred, yet another thousand, and so on, and in so doing he only expounds the nature of numbers but he never says that the numbers are the lines; or just as, in order to teach the alphabet, he has recourse to a combination of leaf, ink, lines, etc., and through them explains the nature of the letters, but he never says that the letters are the leaf, ink, lines, etc., similarly in this exposition the one entity, Brahman, has been inculcated through various means such as the projection (of the universe). Again, to eliminate the differences created by those hypothetical means, the truth has been summed up as ?Not this, not this.? In the end, that knowledge, further clarified so as to be undifferentiated, together with its result, has been concluded in this paragraph. with love and prayers, Jaishankar From sjayana at yahoo.com Wed Aug 20 14:27:32 2025 From: sjayana at yahoo.com (S Jayanarayanan) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 18:27:32 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Advaita-l] Stories from the Shiva Purana - 13 (The Mahakaleshwar Temple in Ujjain) References: <1093004559.1107773.1755714452036.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1093004559.1107773.1755714452036@mail.yahoo.com> (Continued from the previous post. This recounts the history of the Great Shiva Temple of Mahakaleshwar Jyotirlinga in Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh, India: https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/shiva-purana-english/d/doc226517.html Section 4, Chapter 16) ? ? There is a beautiful city, Avanti (Ujjain), yielding liberation to all souls. It is a favourite of Shiva, highly meritorious and sanctifying. An excellent Brahmin engrossed in the performance of auspicious rites lived there. He studied the Vedas and performed the Vedic rites. The Brahmin maintained sacrificial fires. He was a devotee of Shiva. Everyday he worshipped the idol of Shiva. This Brahmin Vedapriya was always interested in acquiring perfect knowledge. After securing the fruits of holy rites he attained the goal of the good. ? He had four sons like him. They were not inferior to their parents and they were ever engaged in the worship of Shiva. There was a great Asura Dushana on the Ratnamala hill. He was very powerful. He was the king of the Daityas incessantly engaged in hating virtue and virtuous rites. ? Thanks to the grant of boons by Brahma, he considered the whole universe insignificant. The gods were defeated by him and ousted from their places and positions. Vedic rites and rites according to Smritis all over the earth were smothered by that wicked fellow like rabbits by a lion. ?There is a beautiful city Avanti?, thinking that, accompanied by a vast army, the Asura Dushana went there desiring to harm the Brahmins staying in the city. ? The Brahmins said, ?Listen, we do not have an army to frighten the wicked Asuras. We do not have weapons to drive them back. The general dishonour and insult reflects on him who supports us. Moreover, what can happen to Shiva who is omnipotent? Let Lord Shiva protect us from the terror of the Asuras. Except Shiva, favourably disposed to His devotees there is no other refuge.? Emboldened thus, they performed the worship of Shiva?s earthern idol. They sat firmly engaged in meditation. ? On seeing them thus the mighty Dushana shouted, ?Let them be killed. Let them be bound.? But the Brahmins, the sons of Vedapriya engrossed in meditation on Shiva did not hear the shouts. When the wicked Daitya desired to kill the Brahmins, the spot near the Parthiva idol caved in with a loud report. From the chasm thus created, Shiva rose up assuming a hideous form. He became famous as Mahakala, the slayer of the wicked and the goal of the good. ? ?I am Mahakala (the great god of death) risen up against the wicked like you. O sinful one, go away, leave the presence of these Brahmins.? After saying this Shiva reduced Dushana and his army to ashes immediately with a mere sound of Hum. Just as darkness is dispelled on seeing the sun, so also that army was destroyed on seeing Shiva. Divine drums were sounded. Shower of flowers fell. Vishnu, Brahma and other gods came there. After bowing to the benefactor of the worlds, the Brahmins joined their palms in reverence and eulogised Him with different hymns. After consoling the Brahmins, the delighted Shiva asked the Brahmins to choose the boon they wished to have. ? The Brahmins said, ?O Lord, the chastiser of the wicked, O Shiva, grant us liberation from the ocean of worldly existence. O Shiva, You shall stay here itself for the protection of the people. O Lord Shiva, save those who see You.? ? Requested thus, Shiva remained in that auspicious chasm for the protection of His devotees after granting them the goal of the good. The Brahmins attained salvation. The supporting base of Shiva in the form of Linga extended to 3 kilometres in each of the four directions. Shiva became famous as Mahakaleshwar. On seeing this image no one will have misery even in dreams. ? ? (To be Continued) From sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com Thu Aug 21 01:40:14 2025 From: sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com (Sudhanshu Shekhar) Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 11:10:14 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] adhyAropa apavAda in Br. Up. Bhashya 4.4.25 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Amazing clarity Jaishankar ji. Especially liked the word kalpanA in ????????????????????????????.......?????? ????. Not only utpatti and pralaya are kalpanA, even the sthiti is also a kalpanA. What a bold statement! Regards. Sudhanshu Shekhar. From jai1971 at gmail.com Thu Aug 21 02:33:26 2025 From: jai1971 at gmail.com (Jaishankar Narayanan) Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:03:26 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Bheda Khandanam in khandana-khanda-khAdya Message-ID: Namaste, I will be delivering a talk on the topic of 'Bheda Khandanam - Refutation of distinctness in khandana-khanda-khAdya' in the online symposium conducted by Indica Moksha on Sunday, 24th Aug 2025 at 10.00 AM IST. You can register for this at https://indica.events/event/sri-harshas-khandanakhandanakhadya/ Om. From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Thu Aug 21 07:05:53 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 16:35:53 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Bhakti leads to Brahman identity - SB 3.29.14 Message-ID: In the Bhagavatam we have this verse: ???????????????????/??????? ?/??????? ?? https://sa.wikisource.org/s/ava ? ?? ???????????? ????????? ??????? ? ???????????? ???????? ???????????????? ? ?? ? *That alone is said to be the supreme (ultimate) path called Bhakti-yoga, by which, transcending the three gu?as (sattva, rajas, tamas), one attains My own state (mad-bh?va, i.e. Brahmanhood).* *Commentary of Sridhara Swamin:* ?????? ????? ????? ???????? ???????????????? ? ????? ? *Why then do they worship (Me)? Because devotion alone is the highest fruit?hence it is said ?that alone.?* ??? ?????????? ?????? ??????????????? ?????? ?????????? ? *But is it not well-known that the supreme fruit is attainment of Brahman after transcending the three gu?as?* ????? ????? ????????????????????? ? *True, but that Brahman-attainment is only secondary, as a concomitant of devotion (bhakti).* ??? ?????????? ???????? ??????????? ?? ?? ?? *By that bhakti-yoga alone, one attains My state, i.e. Brahmanhood.* *See here a post on the same theme of Mukti being Brahman-identity from the Mahabharata, with Shankara's statement:* https://groups.google.com/g/advaitin/c/5P13EdbUKkE *It is significant that the Vivekachudamani defines Bhakti as:*??????????????????? ???????? ?????? ? ??????????????????? ????????????????? ? ?? ? Among all the means that lead to liberation, *bhakti alone is the highest* . Bhakti is defined as the constant contemplation and inquiry into one?s own true nature (sva-svar?pa-anusandh?na). Om Tat Sat From jaldhar at braincells.com Fri Aug 22 11:02:36 2025 From: jaldhar at braincells.com (Jaldhar H. Vyas) Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2025 11:02:36 -0400 Subject: [Advaita-l] Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha to take place Message-ID: <2010E47D-91B8-485F-A750-E40416CC5354@braincells.com> Saw the announcement on YouTube and as it was a recent topic of interest here, I thought I'd share http://youtube.com/post/UgkxgnI61CL8zFYb0SNYH-d4IMsn0QEdEP2N?si=HeluzJoWvOdiJoPN Jaldhar H. Vyas From swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com Fri Aug 22 12:43:53 2025 From: swagatachowdhury024 at gmail.com (Swagata Chowdhury) Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2025 22:43:53 +0600 Subject: [Advaita-l] Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidvat Sabha to take place In-Reply-To: <2010E47D-91B8-485F-A750-E40416CC5354@braincells.com> References: <2010E47D-91B8-485F-A750-E40416CC5354@braincells.com> Message-ID: Thanks. ? It's interesting. -- Swagata On Fri, 22 Aug 2025, 9:02?pm Jaldhar H. Vyas via Advaita-l, < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > Saw the announcement on YouTube and as it was a recent topic of interest > here, I thought I'd share > > > http://youtube.com/post/UgkxgnI61CL8zFYb0SNYH-d4IMsn0QEdEP2N?si=HeluzJoWvOdiJoPN > > Jaldhar H. Vyas > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Fri Aug 22 14:09:05 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2025 23:39:05 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Chaturmasya Sangeeta Seva | Sringeri Jagadguru Shankaracharya | Sri Shankara Stotra | Carnatic Music Message-ID: https://www.youtube.com/live/DjnZVmTaQVI?si=13_fEDuoATyJCoiN The program has come out in a splendid manner. The various compositions of Bhagavatpada Shankara and Mysuru Sri Shivarama Sastry have been presented in the presence of His Holiness. The effort behind this is amazing. The team brings out the greatness of Samskara that comes with it. Both men and women of all ages are involved in this. This is a model that needs to be emulated all over the country and abroad. From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Sat Aug 23 06:27:10 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2025 15:57:10 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] A Viveka Deepti English program at Bangalore - Now live streaming Message-ID: https://www.youtube.com/live/QppCPeKP6KY From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Sat Aug 23 07:14:50 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2025 16:44:50 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?b?4KSW4KWN4KSv4KS+4KSk4KS/4KSDICgg4KSt4KWN?= =?utf-8?b?4KSw4KSu4KS+4KSk4KWN4KSu4KSV4KSCIOCknOCljeCknuCkvuCkqA==?= =?utf-8?b?4KSu4KWNICkgSWxsdXNvcnkga25vd2xlZGdlOiBBIHNob3J0IHZpZGVv?= =?utf-8?q?_in_Sanskrit?= Message-ID: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFXCHfX8l7w From raghavkumar00 at gmail.com Sat Aug 23 09:23:16 2025 From: raghavkumar00 at gmail.com (raghavkumar00 at gmail.com) Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2025 13:23:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?b?4KSW4KWN4KSv4KS+4KSk4KS/4KSDICgg4KSt4KWN?= =?utf-8?b?4KSw4KSu4KS+4KSk4KWN4KSu4KSV4KSCIOCknOCljeCknuCkvuCkqOCkrg==?= =?utf-8?q?=E0=A5=8D_=29_Illusory_knowledge=3A_A_short_video_in_Sanskrit?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1613460607.389664.1755955396646@mail.yahoo.com> Namaste Subbu jiIs there any acharya of the advaita Vedanta tradition?between 820 CE and 1920 CE (1100 years) who has rejected anirvacanIyA khyAtiH? OmRaghav? Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Saturday, August 23, 2025, 4:45 PM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFXCHfX8l7w _______________________________________________ Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ To unsubscribe or change your options: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l For assistance, contact: listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org From sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com Sun Aug 24 03:14:45 2025 From: sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com (Sudhanshu Shekhar) Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2025 12:44:45 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Rejection of kAraNa-tva as per KhaNDa-khanDa-khAdya Message-ID: Hari Om, A note on rejection of kAraNa-tva as per KhanDana-khanDa-khAdya can be accessed at https://sudhanshushekhar.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/rejection-of-karana-tva-as-per-khandana-khanda-khadya-1.pdf . The following definitions of NyAya are refuted: 1. ?????????????? 2. ?????????????? ????????? 3. ?????-??????-?????????? ??????-??????????-??????????? 4. ???-?????????? ???? ????????-??????-????????, ??? ???? ?????? 5. ????-?????????????? ????????? 6. ????????????????? ????????? 7. ???????????????????-?????????? ????????? 8. ???????????????? ????????? Basically kAraNa-tva is postulated as anirvachanIya. The line from VichAra SAgara - ?????????? ?????? ??-??????????? ????? ????? ???-????? ??????? ?????-???????-????? ??????? ?????-?????? ?? - makes eminent sense. Regards. Sudhanshu Shekhar. From raghavkumar00 at gmail.com Mon Aug 25 08:07:36 2025 From: raghavkumar00 at gmail.com (Raghav Kumar Dwivedula) Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2025 17:37:36 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?b?VnLEgXR5YXTEgS3Fm3VkZGhpc2HhuYVncmFoYSBh?= =?utf-8?q?nd_vr=C4=81tya_stoma_-_returning_to_the_san=C4=81tana_dh?= =?utf-8?q?arma?= Message-ID: Namaste The link below is an interesting article about the dynamism of san?tana dharma in adapting to unprecedented historical circumstances. When millions of the practitioners of Dharma had been forcibly and with violence made to repudiate Dharma, it is quite appropriate and understandable that they are allowed to return to their ancestor Dharmik fold. By extension, anyone who seeks to formally embrace Dharma is given the option to do so, according to the Dharma Shastra?s quoted in the following link. I had not earlier known about of the deval?? sm?ti and the vr?tya ?uddhikara?am advanced by Shri Nagoji Bhatta, who was also a great Advaitin And commentator on the p?ta?jala mah?bh??ya of vy?kara?a. Om Raghav https://www.dharmadispatch.in/commentary/vr%C4%81tya-st%C5%8Dma-schopenhauer-emerson-elst-and-frawley From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Mon Aug 25 12:32:55 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2025 22:02:55 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?Watch_=22Manikandan_avl_speech-_=E0=AE=A4?= =?utf-8?b?4K6/4K6w4K+B4K6o4K+A4K6x4K+BLSDgrrXgrr7grrDgrr/grq/grr4=?= =?utf-8?b?4K6w4K+NIOCumuCvgeCuteCuvuCuruCuv+CuleCus+CvjSIgb24gWW91?= =?utf-8?q?Tube?= Message-ID: https://youtube.com/shorts/FPAKBNF5hfQ?si=oZX830iXwvtDYbeO From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Mon Aug 25 14:02:11 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2025 23:32:11 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] 'Chintanam' - a short crisp daily message in Kannada Message-ID: During this Chaturmasya, HH Sri Shankara Bharati Swamiji is delivering a short message in Kannada on a daily basis. These messages have the theme: the profound Vedanta related statements in the Puranas are juxtaposed with similar ones in the vast literary works of Shankaracharya. Here is the playlist of the messages for this year: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01Wl6G_P25c&list=PLEpGJy_cCDU_4oZwiCFCGiRFXyNJc_pKe One can access the Playlists for the earlier years too as this Chintane is a regular feature during the annual Chaturmasya. warm regards subbu From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Tue Aug 26 01:47:26 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2025 11:17:26 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=9CVighneshwara_is_the_Jagat-karana_?= =?utf-8?q?Brahman=E2=80=9D_-_says_Shri_Sarvajnatma_Muni_ji?= Message-ID: Sri Natraj Maneshinde's post: =========================== ?Vighneshwara is the Jagat-karana Brahman? - says Shri Sarvajnatma Muni ji =========================== Shri Sarvajnatma Muni ji is the author of ?Sankshepa-shareerika? - an exposition on the sutra bhashya of Bhagavatpada. From his works, it is evident that Sarvajnatma ji was devoted to Bhagavan Vishnu. But like any true Vedanti, he does not hesitate to behold the same Parabrahman in other Bhagavat-swaroopas as well. This conviction of his is evident in the following Mangalacharana shloka of Sankshepa Shareerika : ??????? ????? ???????????? ????????????????? ?? ??????????????????? ????????????????????????? ? ??????????????? ?????????????????? ??????????? ????? ????????? ??? ?????? ??????????? ????????? ? (If Bhagavan Vighneshvara is pleased, even the efforts of the animals attain fulfillment and if not, even Brahma?s efforts go in vain. Victory to such Vighneshvara, who is the Vishva-karta, whose glory knows no bounds and who is always engaged in benefiting the world) Thus, in the vision of Sarvajnatma Muni ji, Bhagavan Ganapati is the Vishva-karta i.e. the Jagat-karana Brahman. Shri Madhusudhan Saraswati ji and Shri Nrusimhashrama ji make some insightful remarks while commenting on the above shloka. The snaps from their tika-s are attached in the comments. Below are the highlights : 1)Swami Madhusudhan Saraswati ji says that Bhagavan Vighneshvara rules over everyone , right from animals to Brahma himself. Hence, he is ?????????????, the lord of all. Swamiji quotes the shruti vakya : ?????????????? ???? and says that Bhagavan Vighneshwara is verily that tattva which is described in the said Shruti. Let us look into the Bhashya of Bhagavatpada on the cited Shruti: ?????????????? ???? ? ???????? ?????? ? ????????????????????????? ? ????????????? ????? ??? ? (Taittiriya Upanishad, 2.8.1) Bhashya : ???? ???? ??????? ???? ???? ? ???????? ?????? ? ???? ??????? ????????????????? ? ????????????? ????? ??? ? ??????? ?? ???????? ???????????? ????? ?????????????????????????? ?????? ??????????? ; ????????? ?????????? ??? ; ??????? ?????? ????? ?????????? , ?????????? ??????? ????? ????????? ?????? ? ?????? ?????? ?? ?????? ??????? ???????? ???? ??????????? ???? ????????????? ?????? ? (From fear of this, the wind blows. From fear, rises the sun. From fear of this, speed Agni and Indra, and Death, the fifth. "Wind etc.," of great worth, though lords in themselves regularly performed their functions, blowing etc., requiring great effort. This regularity with which they perform their functions can be appropriate only if there is a controller. Therefore, Brahman, their cause of fear and controller, exists; because they set about their duties from fear of this Brahman, as servants from fear of kings. That cause of fear is Bliss, ie., Brahman) Thus, Madhusudhan Saraswati ji clearly establishes that the Vighneshvara praised by Sarvajnatma Muni ji is the Parabrahman fearing whom all devata-s engage in their respective duties. Commenting further, Swamiji says that this Vishvakarta-Vighneshvara, the Jagat-karana Brahmam, himself incarnates in the form of Ganesha! Thus, in the vision of Advaita Acharyas, Ganapati, the son of Shiva-Parvati, is verily the Avatara of Parabrahman ! 2)Shri Nrusimhashrama ji commenting on the last two lines of the shloka, makes an interesting remark. Swamiji says that this Vighneshvara is ?shruti-loka-prasiddha? i.e well known in both Veda and in the world. As he is Vishva-karta, Vishva-palaka ( ????????? ???) and also its samharaka, Vighneshvara is verily the embodiment of Brahma-Vishnu-Rudra! Thus, from the above verse of Shri Sarvajnatma Muni ji, who was a devout Vishnu-bhakta, we understand that Advaitan Acharyas see the one and the same Parabrahman in all Bhagavat-swaroopas. Courtesy : Many thanks to Shri Subrahmanian Vaidyanathan ji for helping in understanding the commentaries. ??? Additionally Bhagavatpada and Anandagiri Acharya also behold Bhagavan Ganapati as ?Vishva-karta?. ???????????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ???? ???? ???? ? ????????????????? ????? ??????? ???????? ???? ????? ?????? ? ? ? ~ ???? ????????? ??????, ????????????? (???? on ?????????? ????? ???????) [I compose the praise of Bhagavan Heramba, who is having the shape of a great tusker, who shines with the red lustre like flowers of badhuka, who eliminates impediments, who is a treasure of Gunas, who is glorious and who is creating the worlds] The conviction of Advaitin Acharyas, that Bhagavan Ganapati is the Jagat Karana Brahman, is rooted in the following verse of Bhagavatpada ????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????? ??????? ????????????????? ??????????? ??????????????????????????????? ?????? ???????????????17.9?? ~ ???? ???? ?????????????, ????????? [Bhagavan Vighneshvara holds a pomegranate, gada, a bow made of sugarcane, a trishula, chakra, lotus, pasha, utpala, dhanya-vallari, tusk in his ten hands. He bears a ratna-kalasha in his trunk. He is embraced by his consort who holds a lotus. Bhagavan Vighneshvara of such a form, who brings about the srushti-sthiti-sahmara of the Jagat, grants all the wishes of his devotees.] From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Tue Aug 26 02:32:21 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2025 12:02:21 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Sedation and counter sedation - A modern day example for Adhyaropa and apavada Message-ID: In Adhyaropa - Apavada, there is a deliberate action to facilitate accomplishing a task and a subsequent 'cancellation' of the earlier action to complete the intended task. The classic example is the Bhagavadgita 13.13 where the Vedantic Brahman is first portrayed as endowed with the body-mind-organs of all the beings in the cosmos: Adhy?ropa. With this, the 'existence' of that inscrutable Brahman is established. Now, with a view to remove the misconception that Brahman is in fact endowed with the body-mind-organs complexes, the next verse 13.14 shows Brahman as devoid of all that was superimposed on it earlier: Apav?da. Shankara cites the ny?ya: 'adhy?ropa apav?d?bhy?m nishprapancham prapanchyate' as enunciated by the traditional masters of Vedanta. We have many examples for this in daily life like the sh?kh? chandra nyaya, the sthula arundhati nyaya, etc. Here is one where in a rescue operation the elephants are sedated to enable their retrieval from where they are trapped. Once they are out of danger they are counter-sedated to enable them to walk free. Please see the short video in this link: https://jmp.sh/GNGG1Drz This happens sometimes in human medical treatments. regards subbu From bhaskar.yr at hitachienergy.com Tue Aug 26 07:08:38 2025 From: bhaskar.yr at hitachienergy.com (Bhaskar YR) Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2025 11:08:38 +0000 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?=5Badvaitin=5D_=E2=80=9CVighneshwara_is_th?= =?utf-8?q?e_Jagat-karana_Brahman=E2=80=9D_-_says_Shri_Sarvajnatma_Muni_ji?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: praNAms Hare Krishna And now the question is, when the jignAsu comes out of delusions like vighneshwara is jagat kAraNa, bhagavati is bhavatAriNi etc. and elevate himself to become jnAni and realizes that these characters are mere phantacy figures in his mind!!?? ? Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Wed Aug 27 08:52:28 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2025 18:22:28 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Watch "Sri Mahaganapati Vakyartha Vidwat Sabha at Narasimha Vana | Sringeri | Shastra Parampara | Jagadguru" on YouTube Message-ID: https://www.youtube.com/live/qh5sDGlJ0zg?si=H1CyKeWH_ZGSZWQt From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Wed Aug 27 14:05:23 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2025 23:35:23 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] 'Who are you?' Message-ID: Deep quest beyond the kiddish prank https://www.facebook.com/share/r/165VY5vaaQ/ From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Thu Aug 28 07:32:30 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2025 17:02:30 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Shankara says 'All deities are Brahman alone' Message-ID: In the Bh.Gita 9th chapter Bhagavan says: ?????????? ??? ?????? ??????? ????????????? ????????? ???????????? ? ?? ???????????? ???????????????????? ???????????? ????????? ? ?? ? 9.20 Those who are versed in the Vedas, who are drinkers of Soma and are purified of sin, *pray for the heavenly goal by worshipping Me through sacrifices.* Having reached the place (world) of the king of gods, which is the result of righteousness, they enjoy in heaven th divine pleasure of gods. Shankara introduces that verse thus: ?? ???? ?????? ???????? ? ??? ???????????????? Those, again, who are ignorant and desirous of pleasures. Shankara says that these people worship Bhagavan, *existing in the forms of gods such as the Vasus and others*; yajnaih, through sacrifices such as the Agnistoma etc. Subsequently Bhagavan says: ?????????????? ????? ?????? ????????????????? ????? ????? ??????? ?????????????????????9.23?? 9.23 Even those who,* being devoted to other deities *and endowed with faith, worship (them), they also, O son of Kunti, worship Me alone (though) following the wrong method. Shankara introduces this verse thus: ??? ????? ??? ?????? ?????? ???? , ??????????? ??????? ?????? ? ????????? ? *'If you Yourself are the other gods as well,* then do not their devotees too worship You alone?' 'Quite so!' Here, drawing from Bhagavan's own words in 9.20 that *those desirous of worldly pleasures propitiate Me alone through sacrifices, yajna-s, *Shankara asks as above*: * *you Yourself are the other gods as well.* Thus, from the words of Bhagavan Himself we understand that those who are worshiping other deities are actually worshiping Him, Brahman. Those deities are not different from Him, Brahman. 'anya devata' = those deities 'other' than one's own Self, Atman. We see from the puranas and the Mahabharata that those worshiping even Vishnu through sacrifices go to Vishnu loka and return. Bhagavan says in the very same chapter of the Gita: ?????? ???????? ?????? ????????????? ??????????? ?????? ?????? ???????? *?????? ???????????? ????*??9.25?? 9.25 Votaries of the gods reach the gods; the votaries of the manes (pitrus) go to the manes; the worshippers of the Beings reach the Beings; and t*hose who worship Me reach Me. Here Bhagavan implies that 'votaries of gods reach gods' the deity Vishnu is also one of those gods. * Since those who worship 'other' deities do not reach Bhagavan and only those who consciously seek Him attain Him, and also from the statements of other Purana and Mahabharata that even Vishnu is worshiped with worldly ends as the goal, *we conclude that the statement made in the Gita is by Brahman and not the deity. * *Also we have in the Aitareya Upanishad: *?? ???????? ?????? ?? ???????????? ????? ???? 3.5 He is Brahma, He is Indra, He is Prajapati, He is all these gods... This pramana is accepted and cited by Shankara while determining the status of Hiranyagarbha. From all this we arrive at the conclusion that: *All deities are actually Brahman alone. * Om Tat Sat subbu From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Fri Aug 29 01:11:56 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2025 10:41:56 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] =?utf-8?q?Watch_=22In_a_wave-y_world=2C_keeping_the_?= =?utf-8?q?mental_ship_steady=2E_=F0=9F=9A=A2_=23sanskrit_=23bhagav?= =?utf-8?q?atgita_=23spiritualwisdom=22_on_YouTube?= Message-ID: https://youtube.com/shorts/6mJVnEeBwoA?si=1WRk7WhQ14dzqYgd From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Fri Aug 29 12:37:43 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2025 22:07:43 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Thyagaraja Vaibhavam - Tamil discourse with plenty of Telugu songs Message-ID: Br,Sri Erode Balaji Bhagavatar discourses on the Life and compositions of Thyagaraja Swami. Deluge of Bhakti... https://www.youtube.com/live/ae-GxnTSVws?si=crctPTknC6E8-F-N From v.subrahmanian at gmail.com Sat Aug 30 04:00:53 2025 From: v.subrahmanian at gmail.com (V Subrahmanian) Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2025 13:30:53 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Thyagaraja Swami, a great Vaishnava as per Veda Vyasa Message-ID: In the composition karuNa jUDavamma on Devi of Thiruv?rur Sri Thyagaraja says in a charanam: https://www.karnatik.com/c2397.shtml purANa puruSaDugu rAmuniki yA purArikini nIku rAjadhari maccarAna vErEnca rAdu He shows unity between Rama, Shiva and Devi, by telling her that there is no envy and rivalry among themselves. The above was stated by Brahma Sri Balaji Bhagavatar in his discourse on Thyagaraja Vaibhavam. It would be interesting to note that the Padma Puranam, in the Bhagavata 12th Canto Mah?tmyam says: ???? ? ?????? ????? ???????????????????? ? ????????????? ?????? ??????? ? ??? ??? ? ?? He is admitted to be a great Vai??ava who does not differentiate between Durg?, Vi??u, ?iva, etc. and looks upon all to be Brahman Itself. These set of verses warm regards subbu From raghavkumar00 at gmail.com Sat Aug 30 22:48:40 2025 From: raghavkumar00 at gmail.com (raghavkumar00 at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2025 02:48:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Advaita-l] Thyagaraja Swami, a great Vaishnava as per Veda Vyasa In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <289091979.422845.1756608520777@mail.yahoo.com> Namaste Subbu jiThank you the post.? The title of your post initially?puzzled me ?Thyagaraja Swami, a great Vaishnava as per Veda Vyasa?. ?I was wondering how Veda Vyasa (c.3000 BCE)??talked about Thyagaraja Swami (19th century CE). :) Om Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Saturday, August 30, 2025, 1:31 PM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l wrote: In the composition? karuNa jUDavamma? on Devi of Thiruv?rur? Sri Thyagaraja says in a charanam: https://www.karnatik.com/c2397.shtml purANa puruSaDugu rAmuniki yA purArikini nIku rAjadhari maccarAna vErEnca rAdu He shows unity between Rama, Shiva and Devi, by telling her that there is no envy and rivalry among themselves. The above was stated by Brahma Sri Balaji Bhagavatar in his discourse on Thyagaraja Vaibhavam. It would be interesting to note that the Padma Puranam, in the Bhagavata 12th Canto Mah?tmyam says: ???? ? ?????? ????? ???????????????????? ? ????????????? ?????? ??????? ? ??? ??? ? ?? He is admitted to be a great Vai??ava who does not differentiate between Durg?, Vi??u, ?iva, etc. and looks upon all to be Brahman Itself. These set of verses warm regards subbu _______________________________________________ Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ To unsubscribe or change your options: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l For assistance, contact: listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org From jeff3069 at gmail.com Sun Aug 31 06:36:40 2025 From: jeff3069 at gmail.com (XTR) Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2025 13:36:40 +0300 Subject: [Advaita-l] Where in Sankaracharya's works the enclosed statement was said? Message-ID: Namaste learned members, Can you please tell where in Sankaracharya's works the following statement was said? n?mar?p?di-an?tma-adhy?ropa?a-niv?tti? eva k?ry? na ?tma-caitanya-vij??nam Thank you. J. From sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com Sun Aug 31 06:58:45 2025 From: sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com (Sudhanshu Shekhar) Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2025 16:28:45 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Where in Sankaracharya's works the enclosed statement was said? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Gita bhAshya 18.50 On Sun, 31 Aug, 2025, 4:07?pm XTR via Advaita-l, < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > Namaste learned members, > > Can you please tell where in Sankaracharya's works the following statement > was said? > > n?mar?p?di-an?tma-adhy?ropa?a-niv?tti? eva k?ry? na > ?tma-caitanya-vij??nam > > Thank you. > J. > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From jeff3069 at gmail.com Sun Aug 31 08:01:12 2025 From: jeff3069 at gmail.com (XTR) Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2025 15:01:12 +0300 Subject: [Advaita-l] Where in Sankaracharya's works the enclosed statement was said? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you Sri. Sudhanshu Ji, The search *was* focused on the Gita Bh??ya (below editions), but it seems unmatched characters caused it to fail. I also tried using the Devanagari text generated by Claude Pro AI, but that too was unsuccessful. ??????????????????????????????????? ?????? ? ??????????????????? Could you please explain the right way to perform such a search? - Swami Gambhirananda - Alladi Mahadeva Sastry With warm regards, J On Sun, Aug 31, 2025 at 1:58?PM Sudhanshu Shekhar wrote: > Gita bhAshya 18.50 > > > > On Sun, 31 Aug, 2025, 4:07?pm XTR via Advaita-l, < > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > >> Namaste learned members, >> >> Can you please tell where in Sankaracharya's works the following statement >> was said? >> >> n?mar?p?di-an?tma-adhy?ropa?a-niv?tti? eva k?ry? na >> ?tma-caitanya-vij??nam >> >> Thank you. >> J. >> _______________________________________________ >> Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ >> >> To unsubscribe or change your options: >> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l >> >> For assistance, contact: >> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org >> > From kkashyap2011 at gmail.com Sun Aug 31 08:03:02 2025 From: kkashyap2011 at gmail.com (Krishna Kashyap) Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2025 17:33:02 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Where in Sankaracharya's works the enclosed statement was said? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: are you searching on advaitasharada.net? *Best Regards,* *Krishna Kashyap* On Sun, Aug 31, 2025 at 5:31?PM XTR via Advaita-l < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > Thank you Sri. Sudhanshu Ji, > > > The search *was* focused on the Gita Bh??ya (below editions), but it seems > unmatched characters caused it to fail. > > > I also tried using the Devanagari text generated by Claude Pro AI, but that > too was unsuccessful. > > ??????????????????????????????????? ?????? ? ??????????????????? > > > Could you please explain the right way to perform such a search? > > > > - Swami Gambhirananda > - Alladi Mahadeva Sastry > > With warm regards, > > J > > On Sun, Aug 31, 2025 at 1:58?PM Sudhanshu Shekhar < > sudhanshu.iitk at gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Gita bhAshya 18.50 > > > > > > > > On Sun, 31 Aug, 2025, 4:07?pm XTR via Advaita-l, < > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > >> Namaste learned members, > >> > >> Can you please tell where in Sankaracharya's works the following > statement > >> was said? > >> > >> n?mar?p?di-an?tma-adhy?ropa?a-niv?tti? eva k?ry? na > >> ?tma-caitanya-vij??nam > >> > >> Thank you. > >> J. > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > >> > >> To unsubscribe or change your options: > >> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > >> > >> For assistance, contact: > >> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From kameswaran2007 at gmail.com Sun Aug 31 08:05:26 2025 From: kameswaran2007 at gmail.com (K Kameswaran) Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2025 17:35:26 +0530 Subject: [Advaita-l] Where in Sankaracharya's works the enclosed statement was said? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Namaste. you can see it in the link below.. https://www.gitasupersite.iitk.ac.in/srimad?htrskd=1&httyn=1&htshg=1&scsh=1&hcchi=1&hcrskd=1&scang=1&language=dv&field_chapter_value=18&field_nsutra_value=50 ????????????????? ?????????? ?????????????? ???? ?????? ????????? ??? ????? ????????????????????? ????? ????????????????? ????? ??????????????????? ?????? ??????? ????????? ?????????????? ????????????? ????????? ??????????? ??????? ??????? ?????????????????? ???????????????? ?????????????????? ???????? ????????? ?????? ? ??????????? ??? ????? ??????????????????????????????????? ??????? ?????????????????? ???????? ???????????????????????????????? ?????????? ?????????????? ???? ?? ?? ?? ????????????? ??????? ????????????????? ???????? ???????? ???????????? ?????????????????????? ? ????????? ??????????????? ??????? ????????????????????????????? ???????? ?????????? ? ?? ?????????????? ?????? ?????????????????????? Thanks and Regards K.Kameswaran On Sun, 31 Aug 2025 at 16:29, Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > Gita bhAshya 18.50 > > > > On Sun, 31 Aug, 2025, 4:07?pm XTR via Advaita-l, < > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > Namaste learned members, > > > > Can you please tell where in Sankaracharya's works the following > statement > > was said? > > > > n?mar?p?di-an?tma-adhy?ropa?a-niv?tti? eva k?ry? na > > ?tma-caitanya-vij??nam > > > > Thank you. > > J. > > _______________________________________________ > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > For assistance, contact: > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > From jeff3069 at gmail.com Sun Aug 31 08:14:07 2025 From: jeff3069 at gmail.com (XTR) Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2025 15:14:07 +0300 Subject: [Advaita-l] Where in Sankaracharya's works the enclosed statement was said? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you. before asking here in the group, I went through each of the 18 chapter verses in the Gitasupersite. and could not see it *Now I see it: n?mar?p?dyan?tm?dhy?r?pa?aniv?ttir?va (spelled a bit different)* Thank you very much. On Sun, Aug 31, 2025 at 3:06?PM K Kameswaran via Advaita-l < advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > Namaste. > > you can see it in the link below.. > > > https://www.gitasupersite.iitk.ac.in/srimad?htrskd=1&httyn=1&htshg=1&scsh=1&hcchi=1&hcrskd=1&scang=1&language=dv&field_chapter_value=18&field_nsutra_value=50 > > ????????????????? ?????????? ?????????????? ???? ?????? ????????? ??? ????? > ????????????????????? ????? ????????????????? ????? ??????????????????? > ?????? ??????? ????????? ?????????????? ????????????? ????????? ??????????? > ??????? ??????? ?????????????????? ???????????????? ?????????????????? > ???????? ????????? ?????? ? ??????????? ??? ????? > ??????????????????????????????????? ??????? ?????????????????? ???????? > ???????????????????????????????? ?????????? ?????????????? ???? ?? ?? ?? > ????????????? ??????? ????????????????? ???????? ???????? ???????????? > ?????????????????????? ? ????????? ??????????????? ??????? > ????????????????????????????? ???????? ?????????? ? ?? ?????????????? > ?????? ?????????????????????? > > Thanks and Regards > K.Kameswaran > > > > > > On Sun, 31 Aug 2025 at 16:29, Sudhanshu Shekhar via Advaita-l < > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > Gita bhAshya 18.50 > > > > > > > > On Sun, 31 Aug, 2025, 4:07?pm XTR via Advaita-l, < > > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote: > > > > > Namaste learned members, > > > > > > Can you please tell where in Sankaracharya's works the following > > statement > > > was said? > > > > > > n?mar?p?di-an?tma-adhy?ropa?a-niv?tti? eva k?ry? na > > > ?tma-caitanya-vij??nam > > > > > > Thank you. > > > J. > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > > > For assistance, contact: > > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > > > For assistance, contact: > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/ > > To unsubscribe or change your options: > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l > > For assistance, contact: > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org >