[Advaita-l] A vichAra on Swatantra & Paratantra (Independent & dependent Realities)

[V Subrahmanian]

On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 7:43 PM, Shrisha Rao <shrao at nyx.net> wrote:

>
> Sure, which is precisely the point.  I also do wonder if your theories are
> even accurate as per Advaita, because you have invested Vishnu, the
> qualified Brahman, with पारमार्थिक-सत्यत्व, whilst the classical Advaitic
> authors (e.g., Madhusudana Saraswati that I am aware of) regard only the
> निर्गुण as being so, and the सगुण as also व्यावहारिक like the world.  Thus,
> you have achieved the feat of coming up with a Vedantic theory that is
> unacceptable to Advaitins as well as Dvaitins.
>

[ Shankaracharya comments on the portion: तद्विष्णोः परमं पदम्
(KaThopaniShat 1.3.9) thus:

तद्विष्णोः *व्यापनशीलस्य* ब्रह्मणः परमात्मनो वासुदेवाख्यस्य परमं प्रकृष्टं
पदं स्थानं सतत्त्वमित्येतद्यदसौ आप्नोति विद्वान् -  (That man of knowledge
reaches the end of the road, i.e. the very supreme goal to be reached beyond
samsAra.  He becomes free from all the worldly bondages.  That is the
highest place, i.e. the very nature, of *ViShNu,* of *the all-pervading
Brahman*, of the Supreme Self, who is called Vasudeva.)

For the name 'ViShNu' of the Vishnusahasranaama too, in the Bhashya,
Shankaracharya gives a similar meaning, as one of the many.  Surely, in
Advaita the ultimate goal, as different from saguNa brahma loka, is Moksha
and that is what is meant by the above BhAshya on the term 'ViShNu'.   The
term 'VAsudeva' too has a meaning that is different from saguNa Ishwara.]


> However, I found the following excerpt very much in tune with the Advaitic
> interpretation of the 'वाचारम्भणश्रुतिः’:
>
>
http://www.indiadivine.org/articles/218/1/Philosophy-of-Dvaita-Vedanta/Page1.html
>
> // The dependence of the world of matter and the souls on Brahman is in
the
> sense that both are functioning at His will, which is the essential
> condition and sustaining principle *that invests them with their reality
and
> without which they would be but void names and bare possibilities. //
>
> *Of course, it is easy to dismiss this also as not accurate.

 That's correct, it of course is.  They would not even be names or bare
> possibilities without Brahman's will.  In any case, I don't think that is
> particularly close to the Advaitic interpretation.  A proper excerpt of
> Madhva's view on that Shruti (which should be the sense conveyed by that
> URL) would be:
>
> "वाचारम्भणं विकारो नामधेयं मृत्तिकेत्येव सत्यम्" (छा.उ. ६.१.४) इत्यत्र च
> `वाचा' नाम्नां `आरम्भणम्', `विकारः' अविकृतं नित्यं `नामधेयम् मृत्तिकेत्येव'
> इत्येतद्वचनं `सत्यं', इति श्रुत्यर्थः ।  न च `वाचारम्भण'शब्दोऽपि मिथ्यात्वे
> प्रसिद्धः | *`वाचारम्भणमात्रम्' इति च अश्रुतकल्पनम् *| तस्मिन्पक्षे,
> `नामधेय'शब्दः, `इति'शब्दश्च व्यर्थस्स्यात्? अतो, न कुत्रापि जगतो
> मिथ्यात्वमुच्यते |
>

[ Regarding the underlined portion of the above bhAShya passage, an article
titled 'Shankara and Jayatirtha', which is being posted separately,  may be
read. ]

>
> > Regarding the Madhva interpretation of the Bhagavad Gita II-12 (नत्वेवाहं
> > जातु नासं न त्वं नेमे जनाधिपाः)  there exists an article in the Advaita L
> > website where some comments are available -
> > http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/articles/Mananam.pdf
>
> A decent effort, but it should be improved with a proper study of the
> original sources, rather than taking off from some other summary.
>

[ I thank you for the remarks.]

>
> Regards,
>
>   subrahmanian.v
>
>