[Advaita-l] Comments of an ISCKON follower

[V Subrahmanian]

Here is one explanation of 'sAyujya mukti' from the Madhwa system:

The devatA-s who have originated from the various organs of Hari's body,
remain in those respective parts and experience/enjoy the Ananda destined
for each of them is called sAyujya mukti. They enter Hari's body and
experience various activities as seeing, going, coming, etc. through Hari's
organs.  This is considered a very great boon.  But there is no compulsion
that one has to be in Hari's body alone for this mukti.
[source: the Kannada book 'matra traya sameekShA' by Dr.A.V.Nagasampige, a
noted scholar of the Dvaita school]

I just heard Sri Velukudi Krishnan Swami, a noted scholar of
Vishishtadvaita say: 'parama sAmyApatti' is the sAyujya mukti according to
this school.  This involves the jiva going to Vaikuntha and attaining all
the 'attributes' of Vishnu like satyakAmatva, satyasamkalpatva, and
enjoying the bhoga that Vishnu enjoys, along with Him, in His measure.
They hold the Taittiriya Upanishad passage सोऽश्नुते सर्वान् कामान् सह
ब्रह्मणा विपश्चितेति and the Mundakopanishad passage 3.1.3  तदा विद्वान
पुण्यपापे विधूय निरञ्जनः परमं साम्यमुपैति as the basis for this mukti.
They say: Vishnu 'gives' these jiva-s His own self.'

In any case we can easily see that all this happens with the individuality
of the jiva remaining in tact even in such sAyujya mukti.  Advaita does not
have any such concept.  We have the total giving up as mithyA the jivatvam
and realizing one's Brahmatvam.  There is no 'sAyujyam' in this.  The very
word 'sAyujya' involves a two-entity pre-requisite where one 'joins' the
other, yet the two entities  remaining in tact.  In Advaita there is only
one Reality which is to be realized.  There is no joining something/someone
else.  That forms the core of the sAyujya mukti concept and hence is not in
any way the Advaitic mukti.

subrahmanian.v



On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Shyam Subramanian <shyamsub at gmail.com>wrote:

> Dear Sunilji,
>
> I am sure the scholars in the list will be able to explain the difference
> better. Whatever I understood from the bhAshyA and the
> translations was that the sAlokya,sAmIpya,sArUpya and sAyujya all pertain
> to saguNa brahman - hence sAyujya ("unifying with saguNa brahman" ?) cannot
> be considered to be "brahmAtmanA saMsthitiH".
>
> As regards Sayujya mukti let us consider the statement in the Ramayana,
> > which you must  be aware is considered equal to Veda (as Ramayana itself
> > declares). Lord Ram offered Sayujya Mukti to Hanuman and on Sayujya mukti
> > one does not have any individual body left. How can then sayujya mukti be
> > anything other than complete dissolution of individuality. Othyer types
> of
> > Mukti are not real mukti as it is known that even after attaining sarupya
> > Mukti ravana had to take birth albeit it happened due to acurse. That
> shows
> > that in all  forms of Mukti other than the SayujyaMukti one is vulnerable
> > to taking birth. With all respects to Sri CandraSekhara BhAratI SvAminaH
> > has anybody ever asked him for such clarification?
> >
> >
> Just curious, can you give me the source (kANDa, adhyAya, verse) for the
> above statements/incidents in the vAlmIki rAmAyaNa ? I couldn't find the
> word sAyujya mentioned in the rAmAyaNa at all.
>
> Regards,
> Shyam
>