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

[V Subrahmanian]

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 6:07 AM Srinath Vedagarbha <svedagarbha at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 9:47 PM V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> That may be the position for Shankara, but Hari shabda, by its yogIka
>>> artha denotes only Vishnu (harithi iti hariH).
>>>
>>
>> For both wods Hara and Hari, the dhAtu, hr, is the same. Both words
>> indicate that 'harati paapaani'.  (harati is to remove, destroy, etc.)
>>
>
> nirupapada viShEsha always denote the excellent in that class. So, if you
> interpret harati pApAni, the unqualified 'pApa' indicate the highest one in
> that class, that is this bandhana. Hara does not fit for that qualification
> as the 'remover' because saakshAt Hara Himslef said “ahaM bhogaprado vatsA,
> mokShadastu janArdanaH ', Who are you to dispute that? If you still adment
> and say it is Shiva only the remover of samsAra, you cannot handle Rig vEda
> 7.40.5 I have quoted earlier ( asya devasya mILhuSo vayA viSNoreSasya
> prabhRthe havirbhiH vide hi ***rudro rudriyaM*** mahitvaM yAsiSTaM
> vartirashvinAvirAvat)
>

This is an English translation of the above mantra:

Rig Veda 7.40.5:

Rudra is mentioned along with a litany of other deities in Rig Veda 7.40.5.
Here is the reference to Rudra, whose name appears as one of many gods who
are called upon:

अस्य देवस्य मीळ्हुषो वया विष्णोरेषस्य परभ्र्थे हविर्भिः |
विदे हि रुद्रो रुद्रियं महित्वं यासिष्टं वर्तिरश्विनाविरावत ||

“ This Varuna, the leader of the rite, and the royal Mitra and Aryaman,
uphold my acts, and the divine unopposed Aditi,earnestly invoked: may they
convey us safe beyond evil. I propitiate with oblations the ramifications
(vayāh) of that divine attainable Vishnu, the showerer of benefits. Rudra,
bestow upon us the magnificence of his nature. The Aśvins have come down to
our dwelling abounding with (sacrificial) food. “

The Sayana Bhashya for the above is available here as an image:

http://www.mediafire.com/file/u69j957wdppskxg/asya_devasya.png/file

The bhashya for the sentence/portion of the 'asya devasya...' where occurs
' **rudro rudriyaM***  is: 'रुद्रः देवः रुद्रियं रुद्रसम्बन्धि सुखं महित्वं
महत्त्वं च विदे हि अस्मान् प्रापयति खलु | [Rudra bestows upon us the bliss
of Rudra]  Thus, this mantra does not lend any support whatsoever for
Vishnu sarvottamatva.

//Hara does not fit for that qualification as the 'remover' because
saakshAt Hara Himslef said “ahaM bhogaprado vatsA, mokShadastu janArdanaH
', Who are you to dispute that?//

The Vedas and Veda Vyasa have disputed that immensely. There is the
Atharvashikha upanishad, cited by Ramanuja and also commented upon by
Advaitin Acharyas in 13 century CE which says 'the trimurtis are born from
Shambhu'.  Jayantha Bhatta has cited from this Upanishad. Any amount of
trickery to convert 'shambhu' to Vishnu will not succeed. Also in the
Mahabharatha Veda Vyasa has penned a dialogue where Krishna without mincing
words says 'worship of Vishnu and Rudra lead to the same result':
https://adbhutam.wordpress.com/2017/04/24/worship-of-shiva-or-vishnu-lead-to-the-same-result-mahabharata/
   One can read the dialogue here.

In the Mahabharata, Ashvamedha parvan, there is a dialogue between Krishna
and Yudhishthira on the ‘vaishnava dharma shāstra’:

http://bombay.indology.info/mahabharata/apps/UD/Supp14.txt

All these verses are also found in the Kumbhaghoṇam (Madhva) edition too:

http://sanskritdocuments.org/mirrors/mahabharata/mbhK/unic/mbhK14_sa.html

14_004_1454 निवेशयति मन्मूर्त्या आत्मानं मद्गतः शुचिः

14_004_1455 रुद्रदक्षिणमूर्त्यां वा चतुर्दश्यां विशेषतः 14_004_1456
सिद्धैर्ब्रह्मर्षिभिश्चैव देवलोकैश्च पूजितः 14_004_1457
गन्धर्वैर्भूतसंघैश्च गीयमानो महातपाः 14_004_1458 प्रविशेत्स महातेजा मां वा
शंकरमेव वा

14_004_1459 तस्यापुनर्भवं (sic) राजन्नात्र कार्या विचारणा
Whoever on the Chaturdashī, gives himself up in devotion to My (Vishnu’s)
form or to the form of Rudra-Dakshināmūrti, will be worshiped by the
siddha-s, brahmaṛṣi-s and the devaloka-s and praised by the gandharva-s and
the bhūta-groups, he, such a devotee is Mahātapāḥ. Such a devotee endowed
with great Tejas will be united with Me or Shankara; he will be freed from
rebirth. No doubt need to be had in this, O Yudhishtira!

Thus, we have Veda Vyasa and Krishna's words to contradict or dispute your
claim.

>
>
>>
>>
>>>  Any deity can be assigned to that definition. As per the definition,
>>> Narayana is the adhiShThAnam of the jagat adhyasa.
>>>
>>
>
> adhiSThaAnaM is agreed, but where does Manusmriti says adhistana of
> 'adhyasa' ? It is indeed a quite laborious interpretation. If
> adhyAsa-bhAshya is not laborious, what else is?
>

It is not a result of interpretation of Manu smriti. It is based on
'upAdAna kAraNa - kArya ananyatva' of Brahasutra and the Chandogya 6th
chapter. . Narayana is the source from which the pancha bhutas emerge. The
bhautika prapancha is thus a vivarta of Narayana.

>
> Any deity can be assigned to nArAyaNa shabda? You must be kidding, Appaya
> Dixita a mahA ShaivA himself gave up on interpreting 'nArayaNa' in favor of
> Shaiva due to the presence of Na-kaara and absence of na-kaara.
>

There is no basis for the above story. It has been told too many times so
as to lose all credibility. The 'Na-kAra' aspect is laughable. For
Narayana, Shiva is 'Narayana'. Read an article here:
https://adbhutam.wordpress.com/2018/02/24/shiva-is-narayana-for-narayana/

Here is another instance of the name ‘Narayana’ applied to someone other
than Vishnu.  The Lingapurana has a stuti by Vishnu and other gods and
sages addressed to Shiva:
https://sa.wikisource.org/s/4ij
तपसा प्राप्य सर्वज्ञं तुष्टाव पुरुषोत्तमः।।
श्रीभगवानुवाच।।
महेश्वराय देवाय नमस्ते परमात्मने।। ७१.९६ ।।

नारायणाय शर्वाय ब्रह्मणे ब्रह्मरूपिणे।।
शाश्वताय ह्यनंताय अव्यक्ताय च ते नमः।। ७१.९७ ।।
Lord Vishnu, along with other gods and sages, observing austerities, tapas,
approached Lord Umapati.  Vishnu himself addresses Shiva as: ‘Maheshwara,
Deva, Paramatman, Narayana,

Sharva, Brahman, Brahmarupin, Shaashvata, Ananta, Avyakta, Obeisance to You.

'Narayana' is used for BrahmA too.


>
>> Hence, N is NB.  Likewise Vishnu means that which is vyApaka. Nirguna
>> Brahman is sarvavyApi and hence Vishnu denotes Brahman. So with Vasudeva,
>> etc. names.
>>
>
> If you say so, two issues -- one from gramatical point of view and other
> doctrinal point o view.. On the grammatical issue -- do not forget  your NB
> is never vAchyArtha and always been laxyArtha only. There where is the
> question of application of yOgika-artha of any word, let alone nArAyanAdi
> shabdas?
>

The above is not a correct understanding of Advaita. If that were the case,
no bhashya would have been written for the upanishads, etc.

>
> On the doctrinal issue -- if you interpret in a way that NB is adhistanata
> and vyApaka, then NB is no more nirguNa, as such qualifications adhisttavaM
> and vyapakatvaM will render it as SB.
>

They are not guna-s of Brahman. With reference to the world, Brahman is
adhisthanam. Since world is mithya, the adhishthanatva is also not real. So
with vyapakatva. Only if vyapya jagat is admitted, Brahman is said to be
vyapaka.

>
> Should I remind you again, NB is nEti nEti. So, interpret those shabda-s
> in negative term as 'non-non-supporter' or 'non-localized' etc. Remember
> satyam-jnAnaM-antaM  case? Instead o interpreting straight way, the
> negative way 'not-asatya, not-ajnAna, not-antam' is indeed a laborious
> way.
>

These are non-issues.

vs

>
>
> /sv
>
>