[Advaita-l] 'Ishwaro'ham' and 'IshwarabhAvaH'

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 2:01 AM, Rajaram Venkataramani <
rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:

> RV: Krishna's form is eternal. Is it not?
> XX: Even my form is.
> RV: How?
> XX: Manushya jAti is eternal and hence the form.
>

​That's wrong. Let the jAti be eternal in terms of AkalpasthAyI. But, how
could it's base, a specific body become eternal.
​


> RV: Yes. Even your particular form is eternal as knowledge of Ishwara but
> it is produced due to karma and cannot come back in to manifestation after
> that karma is exhausted.
>

​I can't understand what do you want to express by 'particular form is
eternal as knowledge of Ishvara'. Do you mean that forms and Ishvara-GYAna
are similar or same !!??? That's untenable.
​


> XX: How do you know Krishna's form is the same? We know the name Krishna as
> Devaki Putra is eternal because it is said so in shruti but it need not be
> that He has the same form.
>

​It is also not very clear.​

​Anyway, if no name is eternal, as it is mithyA according to advaitin-s. If
you mean that A-pralayam, then it may be true. But, your intentions appear
otherwise.

 RV: His form is eternal because it is made of maya, which is eternal. It is
> not made of elements which are products of karma.
>

​mAyA itself is mithyA. Then where is the talk of anything made with it.
Moreover, even our bodies are made of mAyA, ultimately!!??
​


> XX: If shruti and/or smrti say that His form is the same, we can accept it.
>

​What if shruti says something opposed to yukti and other pramANa-s. He
seems to ignore this fact.
​


> RV: I think they do.
> XX: If there is pramana, we have to accept.
>

​Here it appears that he is trying to escape and hence is nodding head to
your insistence.
Anyway, this whole thing was not enough to persuade us.​




*श्रीमल्ललितालालितः
*www.lalitaalaalitah.com