Advaita and Puranas

[kandhan]

Friends

Some recent posts in the forum prompted me to go through synopsis of some of mahapurnas. i came across a prevalent notion of classification of the mahapuranas as satwik, rajasic and tamasic. the classification is apparently found in the padma purana which is included in the satwik group (correct me, if am wrong). the other puranas belonging to the satwik group are Garuda Purana, Vishnu Purana, Narada Purana, Bhagavata Purana and Varaha Purana.

i quote here the synopsis of creation chapters of the satwik puranas:


NARADA PURANA

Prior to creation, there was the great godhead (mahavishnu) which was everywhere. When the time for creation drew near, the godhead expanded himself into three forms. Brahma was created from the right side of the godhead and Brahma’s appointed task was creation. Shiva was created from the centre of the godhead and his job was destruction. Vishnu was created from the left side of the godhead. Vishnu was assigned the task of preservation.

GARUDA PURANA

In the beginning there was nothing. Only the divine essence (brahman) was everywhere. The brahman is the origin of the universe. It has no beginning and no end. Before creation, there was nothing except the brahman. The universe was immersed in water.
Then in the water a golden egg (anda) appeared. Vishnu was inside the egg. He had adopted a physical form so as to create. From Vishnu was created Brahma, the one with four faces. All that was created Brahma. The one with four faces. All that was created was inside the egg. Brahma is the creator, Visnu the preserver and Shiva the destroyer. But it is the same brahma which adopts these different forms. Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva are not really separate entities.

VISHNU PURANA

In the beginning the universe was full of water. But in that water there emerged a huge egg (anda) that was round like a water-bubble. The egg became bigger and bigger and inside the egg there was Vishnu. This egg was called Brahmanda. And inside Brahmanda there were the mountains and the land, the oceans and the seas, the gods, demons and humans and the stars. On all sides, the egg was surrounded by water, fire, wind, the sky and the elements. Inside the egg, Vishnu adopted the form of Brahma and proceeded to create the universe. When the universe is to be destroyed, it is Vishnu again who adopts the form of Shiva and performs the act of destruction.

BHAGVATA PURANA

Although Brahma is regarded as the creator, Brahma himself owes his creation to Vishnu. Vishnu created the three gunas (qualities) for the purposes of creation.
In the beginning, there was only the great egg (brahmanda). For thousands and thousands of years the egg floated on the waters that were everywhere. Then a being came out of the egg. This was nothing but Vishnu’s great form. It had thousands of thighs, legs, hands, breasts, faces and heads.
This vishvarupa extends throughout the universe. It even extends beyond the universe. Nothing that was created is independent of this great being. Brahma himself emerged from a lotus that sprouted from this great being’s navel. If Brahma became the creator of all living beings, it was only because of the blessings of Vishnu. And Shiva happens to be the destroyers also by Vishnu’s grace. In every cycle (kalpa), Vishnu first creates himself. Then he creates other beings, preserves them and eventually destroys them.

[kandhan]

PADMA PURANA

During the initial phase of his creation, Lord Brahma created the Mahattatva first of all. After that he created the three types of Ego from the Mahattatva—Satva, Rajas and Tamas. These three types of Ego are the origins of all the five sense-organs, organs of action and all the five basic elements–space, water, fire, air & earth.
An enormous egg came into existence with the permutation and combination of these five basic elements. Within this egg exists the whole universe including the mountains, islands, oceans, planets, deities, demons and the human beings. The layers of water, fire, air, space and darkness envelop this enormous egg. These elements are once again covered by the ‘Mahattatva’, which in turn is enveloped by the ‘Prakriti’ (nature). Lord Vishnu himself does creation in the form of Lord Brahma and also takes various incarnations to protect the mankind. At the end of the Kalpa, it is only He, who annihilates in the form of Rudra. After the end of Kalpa, he takes rest on the back of Sheshnag for the full period of deluge.

VARAHA PURANA

The supreme Almighty is eternal.In the biginning of creation,Ego(ahamkar) as well as the five basic elements- space,water,earth,air and fire manifest themselves from the supreme Almighty.Subsequently,the great element-mahattatva,nature and collective conciousness manifest themselves.The collective conciousness then combines with each of the three basic qualities-satva(pure),rajas and tamas(dark) and exits in three different states.It’s combination with the dark quality results into the manifestation of Mahadbrahm which is also called prakriti or nature by the enlightened ones.Kshetragya(soul) is considered to be more superior than the Prakriti.This way the different permutations and combinations of all the three gunas with collective intelligence result into the creation of different “tanmatras”(subtle form of matters).From the tanmatras are created the “Indrias” or sense organs.This is the way how the Universe comes into existence.I then create all the living creatures with the help of five basic elements.”
“In the beginning there was nothing but empty space. Subsequently,various natural elements like “shabda”(sound),”akash”(ether),”vayu”(air),”teja”(light) and jal(water) came into being respectively – each of the latter manifesting from the former.Then,I Created you(earth)to provide base to all the living creatures.The combination of earth and water resulted into an “Egg”(anda).As the egg grew in size,I manifested myself as Narayan within it.During each kalpa a lotus manifests itself from my navel upon which is seated lord Brahma.I then request lord Brahma to commence creation.Inspite of all his efforts, lord Brahma does not succeed in commencing his creation.As a result he becomes furious and from his fury manifests a divine child who starts to wail incessantly.The divine child is none other than Rudra who is requested by lord Brahma to begin creation but the child being incapable of doing that decides to acquire power by doing penance and enters into deep water.

Friends

What I can deduce from this is that there is no unanimity on the process of creation or the origin of the trinity within the satwik puranas. I also find elements of advaita in some of the puranas, for eg. Narada Purana and Garuda Purana which start explaining creation as starting from an entitiy which has very close resemblance to the Brahman of Advaita. What differs is the nomenclature given to the underlying reality.

My understanding of what advaita says is this:” Hey, for a thing to be real it has to have these properties: only that which is everpresent, immutable and independent can rightly claim to be real.”

Some of these puranas seem to have assumed the reality, as defined by advaita, as the foundation on which edifice of creation has been rised.

[Sudarshang]

My understanding of what advaita says is this:” Hey, for a thing to be real it has to have these properties: only that which is everpresent, immutable and independent can rightly claim to be real.”

Some of these puranas seem to have assumed the reality, as defined by advaita, as the foundation on which edifice of creation has been rised.

Kandhan

As far as I know, Advaita says Brahmam is without "any properties". Therefore you cannot call it "real', "everpresent", "immutable", and "independent" - because these are properties. Advaitam only accepts Nirguna brahmam.

On the other hand, it is visishtaadvaitam that says Brahmam has all these and other innumerable properties. Visishtaadvaitam gets its name from "Chetana" "Achetana" "Guna" Visishta Brahmam. Visishtaadvaitam says that, Without the fundamental "gunam" of "satya sankalpatvam", the Brahmam cannot say "bahusyaam prajaayeya" (it comes in the same khanda as the mahavakyam "Tattvamasi") and become many. and If it became many merely by sankalpam, it proves that the Brahmam has the property of satyasankalpatvam. Again, if it became many, how can the many it became, be "Mithya"? Isn't that what Adi Shankara says, "Brahma Satyam Jagat Mitya, Brahmaiva Jeevo na para: Iti vedanta dindimaha"?

Of course, I am not an expert in advaitam - even the little I tried to explore in advaitam left me with many unanswered questions which is when I turned to visishtaadvaitam and found the answers. perhaps other advita experts can comment more.

[kandhan]

Sudarshanji

You are correct. but if one says Brahman is without any properties, then it has the property of "being without properties".

afaik brahman is described sat-chit-ananda. these are not properties that it posses coz if these are considered as properties of Brahman then that will lead to infinite regress.

[Sudarshang]

Kandhan-ji

FYI there are two other schools of advaitam established by Bhaskara and Yadava Prakasa that differed from Adi Shankara on the "Guna" aspect and accepted a "Saguna Brahmam".

Yes, it leads to an infinite regress once you agree to even one "property" of the Brahmam. In order to substantiate its theory of nirguna brahmam, the Adi Sankara school claimed the Brahmam itself to be satya swaroopam, gyana swaroopam, and ananda swaroopam, without agreeing to satyam, gyanam, and anantam to be its properties. However, that stand does not satisfactorily explain the "sodaka" vakyas in the shrutis. The sodaka vakyas are the statements that "describe" the qualities of the Brahman. One of the many attributes of the Brahman in the sodaka vaakyams happens to be "nirgunam" ... that which Adi Shankara's advaita school took as its main key! if you take all the sodaka vakyams together, "nirgunam" happens to be one of the "properties" of the brahman as opposed to claiming that the Brahmam itself is Nirgunam.

[Sudarshang]

Sorry for digressing from the main topic ...however, the role of itihasas and puranas is to "illustrate" the vedanta. Therefore your analysis is right - vedanta forms the basis upon which puranas describe the creation - even though there are differences in the way they have described it (and differences in how we understand it from their respective english translations).

This is further confirmed by Swami Pillai Lokachariar in Sri Vachana Bhooshanam - , "vedartam arrudiyiDuvathu smriti itihaasa puraananglaale."

That said, the primary 'strishti prakaranam" in vedantam is chandogya upanishad, 6.1 wherein Uddalaka tells Shwetaketu about the Brahmam. All three schools - Advaitam, Visishtadvaitam, and Dvaitam use that chapter to discuss about the Brahmam.

[kandhan]

Sudarshan ji

Thanks for your feedback. I do not have the indepth knowledge of the puranas and other religious literature that you possess.

I do agree with u that when analysed as a theory, advaita too has very many loopholes. But i believe its purpose is not to explain, but rather to jolt.

[swamykool]

KD,

For the original theory of creation, refer the Purusha Sukta of Rigveda. The Purans are much later creations, basically compiled between 100 BCE to 500 ACE. Most of them were compiled during the Sunga and Gupta Empires.

Also the different Purans represent the three broad schools of thought during this period, i.e. Shaiva, Shakta and Vaishnav. They contradict each other and call each other tamasik and stuff.

swamykool

[kandhan]

The Purusha Suktam seems to have contributed a lot to Samkhya philosophy of dualism:

A thousand heads has the Universal man, Purusha; as also a thousand eyes and a thousand feet He has. He spreads over the earth on all sides and beyond it as far as ten fingers can count.

Purusha, the Man, is all that has been in the past,all that is coming and all that exists now.

From him the brilliant Viraaj was born, from Viraj came the primal Purusha.
When he was born, he spread beyond the earth, on all the sides to create all beings.

The Purusha, is the creator of all forms and is given all the names.

He who understands this Purusha, whom Brahma called Paramathma,
whom Indira saw in all four directions, attains Moksha [liberation] in this birth.

Now, Advaita draws heavily upon Samkhya to explain Creation.

[kandhan]

Here are some verses from Narayan Suktam:

This universe is the eternal being (Narayana), the imperishable, the supreme, the goal, multi-headed .....

This universe is the supreme being (Purusha) alone; hence it subsists on that, the eternal which transcends it (in every way), the omnipresent absolute ........

He is the limitless, imperishable, omniscient, residing in the ocean of he heart,..........

Below the adams apple, at a distance of a span, and above the navel (i.e., the heart which is the relative seat of the manifestation of pure consciousness in the human being), effulges the great abode of the universe, as if adorned with garlands of flames.

Surrounded on all sides by nerve-currents (or arteries), suspends the lotus-bud of the heart in an inverted position. It is in a subtle space (a narrow aperture, the sushumna-nadi), and therein is to be found the substratum of all things.

In that space within the heart resides the great flaming fire, undecaying, all-knowing, with tongues spread out in all directions, with faces turned everywhere, consuming food presented before it, and assimilating it unto itself.

In the middle of that flame, the supreme self dwells. This (self) is Brahma (the creator), Siva (the destroyer), Hari (the protector), Indra (the ruler), the imperishable, the absolute, the autonomous being.

[Sudarshang]

Sudarshan ji

Thanks for your feedback. I do not have the indepth knowledge of the puranas and other religious literature that you possess.

I do agree with u that when analysed as a theory, advaita too has very many loopholes. But i believe its purpose is not to explain, but rather to jolt.

Kandhan-ji,
If the purpose were to jolt, then after the jolt it must also help the student to acquire the right knowledge. It could state, "I told this to jolt you, now listen to the right thing..."

How can one trust the "knowledge that has loopholes" to show the way to the final destination? the loopholes could potentially lead to wrong conclusions (that all devatas are equal) and subsequently lead the student to the wrong destination (anywhere except Bhagavad-labham)...it goes on to claim that the Brahmam itself is covered in 'avidya" and that moksham happens to the "brahmam" when it finally gets rid of that avidya!

but then there are many that have invested heavily (perhaps several life times) in this "knowledge with loopholes" that they cannot accept that it has loopholes and are continuing to live in the "illusion" that it is complete/wholistic.

According to a translation of Swami Ramanuja's Vedartha Sangraha, which I tend to agree with,

"If the Brahman according to Advaita is knowledge-self only therefore always
knows itself, without any attributes and is without a second real entity, then
how come it becomes to know itself as Jeevaatman (without even knowing itself
as real-Brahman) and suffer in material world by the obstruction/cover of
Avidya which is of opposite nature to knowledge-self? Avidya cannot be
considered as another entity different from Brahman as Advaita says "Chin
Maatram". It cannot be an attribute of Brahman also as Advaita says
"Nirguna/Nirvisesha". It cannot be said by Advaita that the Avidya covers only
the "Swamprakaasatva" of Brahman because they do not consider
"Swamprakaasatva" as a quality of Brahman.
"Swamprakaasatva" is "knowing itself by its own knowledge". Therefore if
Avidya covers the "Swamprakaasa" which is Brahman itself then the entitiy
"Brahman" itself is not established by Advaita as it itself is destroyed when
it is covered by Avidya!

If the Brahman according to Bhaaskara's Bhedabheda by itself because of real
upaadi sambandam becomes to apprear as Jeevaatman and suffer in the material
world, then is not the liberation and adopting means to get liberated are
applicable to Brahman itself?

If the Brahman itself by nature becomes chit and achit, is not the Brahman
impure in Yadavaprakaasa's Bhedabheda?

Thus these schools of thought contradict the Vedas and logic. The purport of the Vedas has to be
ascertained with Visistadvaita Shree Vaishnava Philosphy and Practice. "

[Sudarshang]

Here is Swami Ramanuja's Verse and Translation (from Vedartha Sangraham):
It is the second verse of the grantham, which he has written as if he is paying his respects to his guru "Yamunacharya", while refuting the three schools of advaita:

The second verse of Vedartha Sangraham runs as follows:
Param Brahmaivaagnyam Bhrama Parigatam Samsarti tat
Paropaadyaaleedam Vivasam Asubasyaaspadamiti
Sruthi Nyaayaapetam Jagati Vitatam Mohanamidam
Tamo Yenaapastam Sa Hi Vijayate Yaamuna Muni:

This verse in the form of saluting his preceptor (Yaamunacharya), also refutes
and rejects the Advaita of Adi Sankara, Bheda-bheda Vadas of
Bhaaskaraacharya and Yadavaprakasa.

"Param Brahmaivaagnyam Bhrama Parigatam Samsarti" is Sankara's Advaita. In
Advaita, the Brahman is conceived as only knowledge-self without any
attributes and only this Brahman is real and nothing other than this is real,
everything other than Brahman is just an illusion. The Brahman when
obstructed/covered by Avidya, creates an illusion of universe and itself
suffers in the material world as Jeevaatman.

"Paropaadyaaleedam Vivasam" is Bhaaskara's Bhedaabheda philosophy. Bhaaskara
does not say that Brahman is devoid of attributes like in Sankara's
philosphy-Advaita. But he says that the Brahman becomes Jeevaatman and suffers
in the material world because of real Upaadi Sambhandam (Upaadi is that which
changes the nature of an entity) like
sense organs, body etc.

"Asubasyaaspadam" is Yaadavaprakaasa's Bhedabheda philosophy. His school of
thought is same as that of Bhaskara except that here the Brahman itself is
Chit, Achit and Iswara by nature and suffers in the material world and
therefore is with impurities of the universe.

The "Eva" in the first line of this verse, denotes that these schools of
philosphy are refuted as they are not only contradicting/against the Veda but
also also illogical("Sruthi Nyaayaapetam"). These philosophies are deceiving
people by bewildering them and spreading in the world("Jagati Vitatam
Mohanamidam"). Only Bhagavat Yaamunaacharya who dispelled the ignorance
(personified darkness) of these philosophies always wins (thus I salute him)
("Tamo Yenaapastam Sa Hi Vijayate Yaamuna Muni:")

Note: Translation Credits to Shri M.S. Hari

[kandhan]

If the purpose were to jolt, then after the jolt it must also help the student to acquire the right knowledge. It could state, "I told this to jolt you, now listen to the right thing..."

How can one trust the "knowledge that has loopholes" to show the way to the final destination? the loopholes could potentially lead to wrong conclusions (that all devatas are equal) and subsequently lead the student to the wrong destination (anywhere except Bhagavad-labham)...it goes on to claim that the Brahmam itself is covered in 'avidya" and that moksham happens to the "brahmam" when it finally gets rid of that avidya!

but then there are many that have invested heavily (perhaps several life times) in this "knowledge with loopholes" that they cannot accept that it has loopholes and are continuing to live in the "illusion" that it is complete/wholistic.

Sudarshan ji

You may possibly be right. My intention here was not to claim superiority of Advaita theory, but to explore the possible connection between advaita and puranic literature.

As for attaining moksham, i believe that the trikona lords always being mutual natural friends points to the fact that every being will be saved.

[kandhan]

I know these kinds of discussions can never reach to final Conclusion.

So true. and i dont want to take too much of public space in the forum. Hence i have sent my opinion in pm to you. Hope u didnt mind.

[Sudarshang]

Sudarshan ji

You may possibly be right. My intention here was not to claim superiority of Advaita theory, but to explore the possible connection between advaita and puranic literature.

As for attaining moksham, i believe that the trikona lords always being mutual natural friends points to the fact that every being will be saved.

Kandan-ji

I very-well understand the intention of your "post" being "exploratory"...and that is precisely the reason of my responses as well - niether of our intentions is claiming superiority of one school over the other, but merely exploring what each has to say. That is the reason why I am simply putting across what Swami Ramanuja has to say about Advaita, instead of writing my own words here. Adi Shankara and Ramanuja were great learned scholars themselves and with the limited knowledge we have, we are not even qualified to ask the questions the poorvapakshi's asked in those days or answer like the sidhanti's of those days. However, the poorvapakshi's objections, and sidhanti's samaadaanam have been recorded very well in several granthams that we have to only take advantage of and explore.

[Sudarshang]

advaita too has very many loopholes

Only God or Mahavishnu can tell us who is right and who is wrong so according my view it will be far better to supplicate him to communicate. I hope nobody may think "I am desiring the Moon". That is all I want to express because I know these kinds of discussions can never reach to final Conclusion.

Anupam-ji

with due respects, Mahavishnu did speak and tell us what is right (as oppsed to "who" is right and "who" is wrong)! Here is the story:

Ramanuja used to be student of Yadavaprakasa, an advaiti. After several years of gurukulam, he was not convinced with the advaitic theory and several of his questions to his guru went unanswered. His guru had plotted to kill him during a pilgrimage to the Ganges. Ramanuja came to know of the plans and escaped to Kanchipuram. He became part of the staff at the temple of Varadaraja Perumal.

At that time, there was this saint at that temple by name Thirukkkachi Nambi (TN). TN was born in the village of Poonamallee - about 50 KM from Kanchipuram. He used to walk everyday to Kanchi and was performing the "Alavatta" kangaryam to the Lord. (Fanning the Lord). TN had the unique ability to "talk to the Lord".

Knowing TN's ability, before he commenced his journey towards Srirangam to meet Yamunacharya (Ramanuja wanted to become Yamunacharya's student) Ramanuja submitted his queries to TN and asked him to speak to the Lord requesting answers. TN got back 6 phrases from the Lord in answer. All 6 are not relevant here, so I will only disclose the first two that are relevant:

1. Ahameva paratattvam. (I am para-tattvam or Brahmam)

2. Darshanam Bheda-evacha (Bedham is the only darshanam - bedham here referring to the Jeevatma being different from the paramatma - there is no Jeeva-Para Aikyam even in Moksha).

Now, the second statement conflicts with Chandogya Upanishad's Tattvam Asi, and "Ekameva Advitiyam". By exploring the Chandogyam and the context in which these two phrases have been used, and after exploring the shrutis in entirety, and after understanding the ubaya-vedantam - the Dravida Vedas of the Azhwars, Ramanuja put forth the theory of Sharira-Atma Bhavam and how the Jeevatma is the shariram to the Brahaman, thus establishing how the Lord's words of Darshanam Bheda evacha does not contradict Chandogya Upanishad. As a result, he found Advaita's "maya/mithya-vadam" to be opposed to the true meaning of the shrutis.

Nothing is right or wrong - either one is with the shrutis understanding what they truly intended to communicate or one is against them, living in a world of "illusion". For the one who with the shrutis, there is some hope in this life (of achieving something); For the one who has understood them wrongly, (the one living in illusion), that person perhaps has to wait for another life in which hopefully he/she understands the shrutis more truthfully.

[Sudarshang]

(continuation from previous post)...
Some of the fundamental differences between Advaitam and Visishtaadvaitam:

1. Advitam says Jeevan = Brahamam. i.e Jeeva-Para Aikyam. Visishtadvaitam says Jeevan is shariram to Brahmam or Brahmam is the "antaryami" that owns the Jeevan for its shariram. Each Jeevan is therefore a different part of the Brahmams body. Therefore Tat Tvam Asi, is still true. Ekameva Advityam is also true. Because the jeevan is "visishtam" to the Brahmam, therefore the darshanam is called "Visishta- Advaitam".

2. Advitam says Brahmam is nir-visesham. Visishtadvaitam says Brahmam is at all times "Guna-visishta Brahmam". Even if you call the Brahmam as Nirgunam, it only means the brahmam has the viseshanam of "Nirgunatvam".

3. Chandogyam says "yena ashrutam shrutam bhavati, amatam matam, avignyaatam vignyaatam..." i.e on knowing which "adesham" the unheard becomes heard, unknown known, etc. (6.1.2 onwards) Nowhere does it say on knowing which you understand that other things "do not exist" or "are an illusion". When Adi Shankara claimed "Brahma Satyam Jagat Mithya" it was argued by visishtadvaitis that "Mithya" is unwarranted in understanding/explaining the context of the "Tat Tvam Asi" maha vakyam. The same chandogyam further confirms Visishtadvaitam's Sharira-Atma Bhavam by stating (6.3.2) "Hantaaham ImaastristrO devataa aneena jeevena aatmanaa anupravishya naama roope vyakaravaani". This Pratigyna of the Brahmam is in line with its earlier one (6.2.3) "Tad aikshata bahusyaam prajaayeya" (May I become many...it does not say may I become an illusion). The conclusion therefore is "Tad" (the Brahmam) as as real as "bahusyaam" - the many that it became. When it said "Mrittika it eva satyam" it was merely establishing the Brahmam as the material cause of the universe and does not say that the Karyam (effect) of the kaaranam (cause) is an illusion/mithya.

Therefore by doing "anupravishya" the Brahmam became many with names and forms, and remained in each of them as the "antaryami", as the owner of each Jeevatma that is present in the world that we see today. therefore everything is real, and nothing is an illusion - is the arguent of visishtadvaitis.

Of course, I have only produced a gist here of the potential "loopholes" in advitam as seen by visishtadvaitis. In the present day after reading these granthams I can only say, we are not even qualified enough to ask the right questions that poorvapakshis asked in those days. The analysis is really thorough and one needs to go through proper instruction in vyakaranam, nyaya-shastram, and vedantam in order to understand the different schools more thoroughly before establishing who is right and who is wrong.... and we dont need to do it, because learned scholars of the yesteryears have already established it for us...we only need to read their commentaries and choose the one that we want to apply.

That said, for a layman like me who has insufficient exposure to vyakaranam or nyaya shastram or vedantam, i find the path to moksha is very clearly elucidated in visishtaadvaitam than in advaitam. Not only me, there is a huge audience of people in tamilnadu that I find, who have no vedanta knowledge whatsoever, who can't differentiate advaitam from visishtadvaitam, flocking to the sri-vaishnava mutts for performing prapatti. In its simplicity, is its charm. It is a hands-up and feets down approach to moksha - "sharanagati" - do it once, and you are done! This is what the Lord told TN in the remaining 4 phrases I did not disclose earlier - "Upaayeshu Prapatti:" and "Dehaavasaane Muktisyaat" - i.e Prapatti is the best upaya - (not Karma, Gyana, and Bhakti), and if you do prapatti, "moksha at the end of this life".

This is again confirmed by the Lord Sri Ranganatha of Srirangam to Ramanuja directly (without using TN as the mediator this time) - when Swami Ramanuja dedicated his Sharanagati Gadyam to HIM during the Panguni Uthiram festival there. "Sharira Pata Samaye Tu Kevalam Madiyayaiva dayaya ....maameva avalokayan". Here the Lord says, at the time when your body falls (ie the atma separates from the body), by my grace ONLY (madiya yaiva DAYAya), you will be seeing me only...

[Sudarshang]

Continued from previous post:

When He has already given his ASSURANCE in the BG (Maa Shucha:), and then to TN, and then to Swami Ramanuja in sharanagati gadyam (all these have happened in recent history), How many more times do you want to "according my view it will be far better to supplicate him to communicate"...?? He has spoken, and His words have been recorded...Now if we question its authenticity or remain unaware of them, or refuse to listen to them, who's problem is it? His?

[Sudarshang]

As for attaining moksham, i believe that the trikona lords always being mutual natural friends points to the fact that every being will be saved.

kandhan-ji

Very true - that every being IS BEING Saved, as I write this .... afterall saving (if you have used it in the sense of attaining moksha) every being is the purpose of srishti (creation) - if it were not, we would have remained in pralaya state for ever!

[ChandraLagna]

This reminds me of a lesson we all have studied in primary school. Six blind men and the elephant. What each one touched and described as truth was still the truth, but not the whole truth.

[suniti]

I do agree with u that when analysed as a theory, advaita too has very many loopholes. But i believe its purpose is not to explain, but rather to jolt.

Kandhanji

just my opinion and a much as i've studied both advaita and dvaita have perfect logic..no loopholes in either.
Ive thought a lot on this thing and i dont know anything but i feel that
whether the "final" state is "ONE" or "TWO" i think only the realized soul can knows but cannot explain being limited by words because it maybe neither or both.

maybe if we stay on our path of sadhana we will find out

pranaams
suniti

[kandhan]

tnx for your feedback suniti.

[Sudarshang]

That was why I said only Mahavishnu can tell what is right but it seems even that is not possible as per your post because 'He' talks to selected few according to 'His' choice. And I am sorry to say I cant accept it. For me He can talk or communicate with anybody, if he is honest to the core, in his quest of knowing the truth. And I can declare it with all the confidence in my heart.

This is all I want to say finally since we all know these kinds of discussions can never end.

Anupam-ji - if you have the confidence in your heart, I am sure you will hear from him very soon... when a bhakta calls him, he does not delay! after all He is sitting in your own heart and already knows what you want.

Here is a small story from the life of Swami Ramanuja:

When swami was busy in the thirumadappalli (temple kitchen) in Srirangam temple, he heard a man going on shouting outside. He came out and asked what his problem was. The man said, "I have been doing service to the Lord all these years, the food for my family comes from the thirumadappalli only...now my family size has grown and therefore the quantity of food I receive is insufficient. I want more." Swami asked him, "Who do you have confidence in?" The man said, "my Acharyan." Swami said, "Ok go back, everything will be allright." So saying he forgot about the incident and did not do any follow-up action.

After a few months, Swami was going around the town when he accidentally met the man again. He enquired how he was. The man fell at swami's feet and thanked him for sending more food from thirumadappali every day. He said, a man comes from the temple everyday and we receive sufficient food for everybody in the family. Swami realized it was Thiruvarangan himself delivering food every day for he had not appointed anyone to go and do the delivery!

In the same Srirangam during my last visit this happened! My train from Chennai reached Srirangam at about 10 PM. I was thinking that at least this time I should visit my favorite acharya "Manavala Maamunigal" sannidhi before going to see Thiruvaranganathan. I was reminded of Swami Ramanuja who did not go into the temple when he arrived from Kanchipuram for the first time - when he came to become Yamunacharya's sishya, for that very day Yamunacharya attained His acharyan thiruvadi. Swami had decided that without getting his acharyan's blessings he would not go into the temple.

At about 10:30 PM I went to Maamunigal sannidhi and found it closed. The archakar swami was standing outside the gate (he lives in the same building as the sannidhi). I enquired with him what time they opened the sannidhi in the morning. He said about 9 or 9:30 AM. My family wanted to go the temple for vishwaroopa darshanam in the morning at 6 AM. I was wondering how to make this happen. So I told what was in my mind to the archakar swami. He told me to come back at 11 PM. I did, and he opened the sannidhi for the sake of an acharya purusha who was receiving his "mariyadai" that day...and long with him he let me also into the sannidhi.

If you are honest in your wish, and have confidence, everything will happen for good!

[Sudarshang]

Interesting Outlook on Advaita ...as practiced today!

http://www.shiningworld.com/Satsang%20P ... dvaita.htm

[Sudarshang]

Mahesh-ji,
whoever you worship all of it finally "kesavam patigachati".

The antaryami bhagvaan is inside every atma and guiding it at all times. as long as your realize this fact and remember it at all times and in every action, you actions are bound to be right.