[Advaita-l] An interesting observation by a Vishishtādvaitin

[V Subrahmanian]

Here is a post from the archives of a Ramanuja group:

http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/oct2002/0139.html

The contents of the post is reproduced here:

Respected All,

 Aprops to discussion in the group between God's names
Vishnu Vs Narayana, I wish to add  the views of Swami
Pillai Lokachar(SPL) who explained why the the Term
"Vishnu" is more preferred by Poorvacharyas as against
other Names.


In Vishnu Gayatri, we have three Vyapaka Mantras
namely,(as pointed out by Sri Mani in the earlier
mail)

a.   Narayanan
b.   Vasudevan
c.   Vishnu

Out of the 3 Vyapaka Mantras, the Name 'Narayana'  is
considered supreme.

The reasons attributed by SPL are:


1. Other Two Vyapaka Mantras(viz, vasudevan,Vishnu)
have two drawbacks.

a. Apoorthi-Incompleteness .

The term Vishnu is Incomplete in one sense that it
explains only his Vyapthi(omni presence) but not his Kalyana gunas
Similarly, The term Vasudevan implies that everything
in Him(Sarvam Vasathi). it however, does not describe
his Kalyana Gunas.

b. Achista Parigraham- the other two mantras are
supported by advaitis  who have  not comprehended
God's real nature and hence it anothor  drawback.


As against these, Narayana saptham  brings in God's
Svarupam, Roopam and also His Kalyana Guanas. And
hence this name was supported by  Alwars, Acharyas and
Rishis


Dasan

KM.Narayanan
//

Response by the Advaitin:

While we have nothing to say about the Acharya's reported view as to
whether they are
accepted by the Ramanuja tradition without debate, the opinion he has
expressed about

the names 'Vishnu' and 'Vāsudeva' with regard to Advaita is definitely
admissible and

is quite correct. Just a few examples from Shankara's Bhashya are
presented here:

Kathopanishat 1.3.9:

 तत् विष्णोः व्यापनशीलस्य ब्रह्मणः परमात्मनो वासुदेवाख्यस्य परमं
प्रकृष्टं पदं स्थानम् , सतत्त्वमित्येतत्………

Shankara is commenting on the mantra portion: तद्विष्णोः परमं पदम् .
Shankara gives the

meaning for 'Vishnu' as 'vyāpanaśīla', the all-pervading one. He also
uses in the same

breath the term 'vāsudeva' which means, as per popular etymology: that
which is the abode

of everything in creation. Or that which pervades everything in
creation. In both cases, the

meaning is: the Nirguna Brahman that is the adhishthanam of the
illusory created world.

In Advaita, the idea of Brahman 'pervading' the illusory world means
that it is the substratum of

the superimposed world, just as we hold 'the rope 'pervades' the
āropita snake'. Says Shankara in the BGB 13.15:

अचरं चरमेव च, यत् चराचरं देहाभासमपि तदेव ज्ञेयं यथा रज्जुसर्पाभासः ।
[The moving and unmoving body-appearance

is also Brahman alone, just as the rope-snake appearance.] In another
BGB 4.24 Shankara has

said what it means to say: silver = shell? 'that which was wrongly
seen as silver is

actually the shell.' ब्रह्म अर्पणं येन करणेन ब्रह्मवित् हविः अग्नौ
अर्पयति तत् ब्रह्मैव इति पश्यति, तस्य आत्मव्यतिरेकेण अभावं पश्यति, यथा
शुक्तिकायां रजताभावं
पश्यति ; तदुच्यते ब्रह्मैव अर्पणमिति, यथा यद्रजतं तत् शुक्तिकैवेति ।

Thus, everything in creation 'rests' in Brahman or is pervaded by
Brahman.  In the first case

the term 'Vāsudeva' applies and in the second, the term 'Viṣṇu' suits
the Advaitin.

In the very introduction to the BG, Shankara says on what the BG is aiming at:
परमार्थतत्त्वं च वासुदेवाख्यं परं ब्रह्माभिधेयभूतं विशेषतः
अभिव्यञ्जयत् It especially reveals the Supreme Tattva, Param

Brahma, known by the term 'vāsudeva'.

It should also be noted that in advaita even though Nirguna Brahman
has no name or form, the śāstra uses names

to denote it, to enable vyavahara of bandha-moksha. We have as
authority a verse
from mahopanishat 4.54 / Laghu Yoga vAsiShTha utpatti prakaraNam 1.12:


ऋतमात्मा परं ब्रह्म सत्यमित्यादिका बुधैः ।
कल्पिता व्यवहारार्थं तस्य संज्ञा महात्मनः ॥4.54॥

[In order to facilitate parlance, the wise employ words such as Rtam, AtmA,
Param, Brahma, Satyam, etc., to designate that Supreme Self.]  [names such
as vishnu, vasudeva, shiva, rudra, etc. come under the 'etc.' of the
verse.]

It is quite well known that the Advaita Paramartha Tattva, Brahman, is
Nirgunam. Shankara specifies

that this Tattvam, Brahman, is named 'Vāsudeva'. Thereby Shankara does
not accept Vāsudeva

as representing the abode of 'kalyāṇa guṇa-s'.

BGB 2.61: आसीत मत्परः अहं वासुदेवः सर्वप्रत्यगात्मा परो यस्य सः
मत्परः, ‘न अन्योऽहं तस्मात्’ इति आसीत इत्यर्थः ।

Here again, the term vāsudeva is used to denote the Supreme Brahman,
Nirgunam, with which

alone the aspirant realizes his identity as 'I am no different from
Him'. And Shankara is also

explaining how Bhagavan thinks Himself in relation to the aspirant:
'I, Vasudeva, the innermost

self of all..' This innermost self in advaita is not any saguna entity
as in the case of

non-advaitins, but is nirguna shuddha chaitanyamātram. That is
Vāsudeva in Advaita. As is well known

from the Kenopanishad 1.5 bhashya, the 'vishnu, vasudeva, etc' that
the non-advaitins

understand to be, is anātmā, abrahma, in Advaita, on the basis of this mantra.


Having seen these sample passages on Vishnu and Vasudeva in Advaita,
we add that even the

name 'Narayana' is no different for the Advaitin. One example is the
famous usage of Shankara of this

name in the antaryāmi brahmanam 3,7,3 of the Brhadaranyaka:

 देवताकार्यकरणस्य ईश्वरसाक्षिमात्रसान्निध्येन हि नियमेन
प्रवृत्तिनिवृत्ती स्याताम् ; य ईदृगीश्वरो नारायणाख्यः,

Narayana is shown here by Shankara as the Ishwara-sākṣimātra (shuddha
chaitanyam) in whose

proximity the mind-body-senses-prana complex performs its designated
functions. In Advaita the antaryami

is nirguna brahman who does nothing apart from being merely present.
And this antaryami is taught

by this upanishad as none other than the self of the jiva: एष त आत्मा
अन्तर्याम्यमृतः mahāvākya. Such narayana is

nirguna brahman in advaita. Shankara has used the term antaryami to
define Ishwara and also

to define the nirguna brahman in the Br.Up. bhāsyam itself. Yet, the
usage of narayana

in the context of the mahavakya is decidedly as nirguna brahman.

To conclude, the Vishishtadvaitin Acharya's perception of the names
Vishnu and Vasudeva

in the context of advaita is quite in order and does not call for any dispute.

Here are three famous verses, all from the pen of Shankara:

यस्य प्रसादादहमेव विष्णुर्मय्येव सर्वं परिकल्पितं च ।
इत्थं विजानामि सदात्मरूपं तस्यांघ्रिपद्मं प्रणतोऽस्मि नित्यम् ॥ २॥ [Vākyavṛtti]

अहमेव परं ब्रह्म वासुदेवाख्यमव्ययम् ।

इति स्यान्निश्चितो मुक्तो बद्ध एवान्यथा भवेत् ॥ १ [Brahmanuchintanam]

नारायणोऽहं नरकान्तोऽहं पुरान्तकोऽहं पुरूषोऽमीशः ।
अखण्डबोधोऽहमशेषसाक्षी निरीश्वरोऽहं निरहं च निर्ममः।।494।। [Vivekachudaman]

In all the three verses, the names 'vishnu, vāsudeva and narayana' are
used in the

expression of realization of one's true self, nirguna Brahman.


'Vākyavṛtti' is cited by Swami Vidyaranya in the Panchadashi as that
of Acharya. * Sri V*ishveshvara Sraswati,in the Yatidharma sangraha,
has cited
verses from the Vakyavritti and the Brahmanuchintanam as those of Shankara.*]
*

Thus, we have the opinion from an early Vishishtadvaitin himself that
the names 'vishnu' and 'vasudeva' are

eminently advaita-friendly.  Hence there is absolutely no scope
whatsoever for superimposing non-advaitic

intonations on Advaita Bhashyas over the use of these and such names.
In fact for the advaitin

it is easily perceptible that Shankara sees the Vishnu Sahasra Nama as
a text of names of

Brahman rather than that of any finite deity. That is why he, at the
outset itself, cites verses from

various sources for the Hari-Hara abheda and even within the body of
the nāma-bhāṣya cites

from the Shiva Purana to hold Shiva, Rudra, as parama kāraṇam. He has
cited the Kaivalyopanishad

to establish Hari-Hara abheda and thus holds whether it is Vishnu or
Rudra denoted by various

names from the Shruti/Smriti, etc. as Brahman, they refer to Brahman
alone and not any finite deity.


Om Tat Sat