[Advaita-l] REFERENCES FROM VARIOUS PURANAS, UPANISHADS, SASTRAS WHERE VISHNU, RAMA, KRISHNA DON BHASMA TRIPUNDRA AND VISHNU IS A PARAMA SHIVA BHAKTA

[Srinath Vedagarbha]

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 9:59 PM V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
>>>
>>> ब्रह्मेति विष्णुरिति रुद्र इति प्रतीतिः ॥ ८३ ॥
>>>
>>> [In this verse, Jayantha Bhatta says 'One Beginningless, Infinite,
>>> Purusha,
>>> of great splendor, who is the One complete cause of the creation,
>>> sustenance and destruction, owing to these very cosmic functions, comes
>>> to
>>> be called Brahma, Vishnu and Rudra.]
>>>
>>>
>> That is his opinion, hardly any pramANa I suppose.
>>
>
> He has cited pramanas only, from shruti and smriti.
>

He cited from shruti and smirti which are contradictory in nature. He did
not address the philosophical standpoint from them except concluding
Hari-Hara abeda, that too when he has a glaring bAdaka from Rgvedic asya
devasya mILhuSo vayA  pramANa.



> The above pramana is cited by Ramanuja. If you say Puranas are mutilated,
> you should never rely on puranas and even Mahabharata which Madhva admitted
> is mutilated.
>

I did not say ALL puranas are mutilated. A given puranic verse may or may
not be mutilated, but Shruti takes the precedence when there is a viRodha
in the specific context.


> Also Jayanta Bhatta has cited shruti pramana too, as seen below. So, your
> balAbala argument holds no water.
>

No he did not, he forgot to take asya devasya mILhuSo.. shruti into the
equation.



>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> [Jayantha Bhatta says: In the Veda, repeatedly we hear 'One Rudra alone,
>>> none second to him (Atharvashikha/shira 3). And 'idam vishnurvichakrame'
>>> Tai Samhita 1.2.13, Rg.samhita1.22.7 thus about Rudra and Vishnu. The
>>> method of worshiping these deities is also taught in the Veda itself. In
>>> the Shaiva and Pancharatra Agma-s these methods alone have been taught
>>> in a
>>> different way. This much is no ground to hold the latter to be
>>> contradicting the Veda as methods are always optional. Therefore, since
>>> these Agamas have been composed by 'Apta-s', venerable ones, and also
>>> since
>>> these do not contradict the Veda, the two stated Agama-s are quite
>>> valid.]
>>>
>>>
>> These are all well addressed in Dvaita literatures. I have uploaded a
>> Kannada book by Sri.Raayapalya Raghavendra Acharya here
>> https://drive.google.com/open?id=17SdRD2ULI7G5HgX-8XOJ7GsW9HkxThvb
>>
>
> These are all only a personal opinion and hardly qualifies to be 'well'
> addressed.
>


Please read it, the author quoting shruti/smriti passages in addressing
pUrvapaxa objections. I wonder you didn't even opened that book.



>
>>
>>
>>
>>> The difficulty in this issue for non-advaitins is due to the fact that
>>> for
>>> them Brahman is a vyakti, a person, a some 'body', who is different from
>>> every 'body' else.
>>
>>
>> I am not sure where you got these idea. I am afraid you are not
>> representing your pUrvapaxa correctly.
>>
>
> I get the idea from Madhva's commentary in the BG where he says 'Prakriti
> is Brahman's bhAryA'. Only human-like persons can have bhAryA. A Tattva
> cannot have any relationship with anything/anyone. The Tattvam is asanga.
> Brahman has son (aniruddha, brahmaa), grandson (pradyumna?, shiva), etc. as
> per non-advaitins. Advaitins do not take puranic pictorial descriptions as
> literal.
>
>>
>>
Even your Shankara said in Soundryalahari parabrahman has pattamahiShi, so?

prakriti, bhArya, stree, yOni etc are all vydIka shabda-s. They need to be
understood in that context. Your (ill) understanding of bhArya is only
meant to be a human wife, is quite questionable on your schooling.

When shruti says 'jagat prasUti'  are you going to say because the word
"prasUti" is there, that tatva went to  maternity hospital (prasUti-gruha)
or called midwife? If not why not?

When purusha sUkta calls Brahman as 'purUSha', are you going to say Brahman
is a purusha (and not stree) as in mundane language? If not why not?

Your objections, which are based on silly understanding of pUrva paxa is
not worthy of addressing.

/sv