[Advaita-l] Ishwara Turiya?

[Rajaram Venkataramani]

Today, we have few posts and hope it is okay exceed the 2 mails per member
per day quota!

I will definitely appreciate the gloss to critically understand your
argument and ensure it is in total alignment with Sankara and Advaita
tradition. The reason I asked if it is unique to Bhamati, though I didn't
think so as stated in my mail, is because Sri Bhaskar said it is Bhamati
position. I also note that dedicated scholars such as Sri Subrahmanian hold
that Ishwara is mithya and His "state" is not Turiya. Even Sri Vidyasankar
(and Sri Ramesh) did not categorically assert that Ishwara is in Turiya.
They seem to hold the view that He is called Brahman when in Turiya and
called Ishwara, Hiranyagarbha etc., when within the three states. No one
asked me why I would think Vishnu's (the one beyond names and forms) state
is any less than the Supreme state (Turiya). It gives me the impression
that there is a valid Advaita position that Ishwara (the saguna brahman
beyond names and forms) is a step below the Parabrahman because of His
association, albeit as a controller, with Maya. If none of the Advaita
acharyas hold this view, what then is he origin of this concept I wonder?
Frankly and hurtful though it may be, are you superimposing, inadvertently,
the impressions from your Vaishnava background or do you hold that this is
the correct official position of Advaita tradition to date?

On Saturday, March 10, 2012, Antharyami <sathvatha at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hari OM~
> Sri Rajaram,
>
> I think you should go over the writing closely to critically understand my
> argument. I would gloss it for you if you want.
>
> Except for the two references - one to Brahma-siddhi paksa and a passing
> reference to Bhamati, the rest of my exposition is purely with reference
> and emphasis only to explain BhagavatpAda's position on Ishvara.
>
> Further with regard to this issue there is no prakriyA bheda at all.
>
> With Narayana Smrti,
> --