[Advaita-l] Ishwara Turiya?

[Rajaram Venkataramani]

Bhagavatam says that true scholars find no dosha in verses that glorify
Ishwara. However, his position is not altered by our conception of that and
we are only interested in understanding Sankara's view correctly. Anyway,
it is a good summary of your / bhamati position. But is it Bhamati position
alone? Is there any school of Advaita that contradicts this position on
Ishwara? Madhusudana is syncretic and holds similar view - hence this
question. Also, is there room for criticism that upgrade to the status of
Ishwara is due to Vaishnava influence?

On Saturday, March 10, 2012, Antharyami <sathvatha at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> atha advaita-mate Ishvara-svarUpa-tattvaM samkSepa-rUpeNa prapa~ncayati:-
>
...
> pratibimbita-caitanyaM Ishvara-caitanyaM ityabhidhIyate. sa sAkSi
caitanyaM
> nAma IshvaraH sarvaj~naH sarvashaktir-anAshanAyAdi saMsAra-dharma varjito
> nitya-suddha-buddha-mukta svabhAvaH ajaro’maro’mrto’bhyo’dvayo vai iti
>
> sAkSitvaM ityAdi svarUpa lakSaNaM tadvirodhAt. anAditvaM ajatve hetuH iti
> nyAyena. Ishvarasya vyAvahArikatve pakSe  tu anIshvaratva-prasangAt ca.
> ayogAdapi. kuyuktaM cApi.
>
>
>
> sarvasyApi IshaH, parameshvaraH, IshAnaH ityAdi padena AcAryaiH guDakA
> nidrA niyantrA jitanidraH ityanena vacanena IshvaraM pAramArthikaM iti
> suspaSTena avagamyante. gItA bhASye tu dashamAdhyAye (10.8) ahaM padokte
> paraM brahma vAsudevAkhyaM sarvasya jagataH prabhavaH ityatra
> sthiti-nAsha-kriyA-phalopabhogalakSaNaM vikriyArUpaM iti kRtya tasya
> tattvaM paramArthatattvAbhiniveshaH iti nirdeshayanti AcAryaiH. prakRte
> viSaye suddha caitanyaM yadi sUcanaM tarhi tat bhAsya virodhaM syAt.
>
>
> vAcaka doSaH kSandavyaH.