[Advaita-l] Concept of Īśvara according to Sureśvarāchārya

[Kaushik Chevendra]

Here is a small discussion from the recorded works of chandrshekara
bharathi-

HH: Yes. It is correct so far as persons who are not able to conceive of a
higher power are concerned. To those however who can conceive of that
power, He is the real upasya. That power is called Hiranyagarbha. He
enlivens and ensouls not only the Surya, but all devils. He enlivens and
inhabits not only the solar orb but all things. He is the cosmic
personality who is the soul of all things.

D: I suppose just as we have the sense of “I” in our phys-ical bodies, so
does that cosmic personality has the sense of "I" in the entire cosmos.

HH: He has.

D: If so, the difference between Him and me lies not in the presence or the
absence of the sense of “I” but only in the degree, the range or the
magnitude of that sense. Mine is restricted, His is extended.

HH: It is so.

D: if it is the sense of "I" that is responsible for the concept of a jiva,
he must be as much a jiva as myself.

HH: Quite so. In fact He is called the First Born.

D: Then, even if this higher power happens to belong to the category of
Jivas, just like myself, the same objection which I mentioned against the
worship of Surya devata holds good in his case also.

HH: What then would you like to worship?

D: A transcendent power which is not a jiva.

HH: Have it then that it is such a transcendent power that is worshipped in
the sandhya. We give Him the name oflswara, the Lord, or the antaryami, the
inner ruler.


From the above we can see that isvara is not a jeeva unlike hiranyagarbha.
His shishya shri abhinava vidyatritha swamin explains how this isvara takes
forms to grace his devotees in a kannada exposition penned by him which was
translated-

As God is without qualities, how is one to love Him? The Supreme, though
intrinsically devoid of qualities, appears with wonderful qualities that
thoroughly facilitate devotion. The Lord has said: “Though I am without
birth, have, by nature, a power of knowledge that never wanes and am the
Lord of beings, by subjugating My Prakṛti, I take birth by My own Māyā.”1
The Veda teaches, “He that is unborn manifests in many ways.”2 Thus, it
must be accepted that God incarnates. His incarnations are His captivating
sports. Why does the Lord incarnate? He does so for the sake of benefitting
beings. It is said: “Having compared the weights of helpfulness to others
and abidance in absoluteness and concluded that helping others is the
weightier of the two, the Lord incarnated ten times'.

I think this topic has been covered many times before so i will refrain
from discussing further. But for madusudhana saraswati acharya
hiranyagarbha was a jeevatma only. The non-difference between the trimurtis
is just like the non-differnece of isvara and ourselves.

On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 at 10:56, Kaushik Chevendra <chevendrakaushik at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste sir,
> In fact in the gudartha deepika of madusudhana saraswati, acharya brings
> about the difference between brahma and krishna. Numerous times Brahma is
> said to be a jeevatma. It has again been discussed many times on this group
> with detailed explanations given by venkataraghavanji. The settled fact
> remains that the position of brahma is a karmaphala and he is a jeeva. And
> he is seen the same as the parameshwara on a few occasions because he is
> very close to him, as venkatji has clarified before.
>
> On Thu, 16 Mar 2023 at 19:13, Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>> Namaste Subbu ji
>> Perhaps i overlooked this in earlier posts and it may have been dealt with
>> already.
>>
>> My question is related to the fact that many such ideas are presented
>> which
>> do not distinguish between the statuses of brahmA the first jiiva and
>> viShNu/Shiva.
>>
>> Sri Sureshvara and others never seemed to bother about the possible
>> asymmetry between brahmA and the other two aspects of Ishvara.
>>
>> Any reference whether they were mutually distinguished, in vArtika
>> prasthAnam?
>>
>> Om
>> Raghav
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 20 Mar, 2017, 6:33 pm V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l, <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Concept of Īśvara according to Sureśvarāchārya
>> >
>> > In the 'Siddhāntabindu' (a commentary on the Daśaślokī of
>> Shankaracharya)
>> > by Madhusudana Saraswati, for the 8th verse, the concept of Iśvara
>> > according to Sureśvaracharya is stated:
>> >
>> > वार्तिककारमते त्वीश्वर एव साक्षीति द्वैविध्यमेव जीवेश्वरभेदेन दृशः ।
>> > तत्रेश्वरोऽपि त्रिविधः । स्वोपाधिभूताविद्यागुणत्रयभेदेन
>> > विष्णुब्रह्मरुद्रभेदात् । कारणीभूतसत्त्वगुणावच्छिन्नो विष्णुः पालयिता ।
>> > कारणीभूतरजउपहितो ब्रह्मा स्रष्टा । हिरण्यगर्भस्तु महाभूतकारणत्वाभावात् न
>> > ब्रह्म, तथापि स्थूलभूतस्रष्टृत्वात् क्वचिद्ब्रह्मेतुपचर्यते ।
>> > कारणीभूततमउपहितो रुद्रः संहर्ता । एवं चैकस्यैव
>> > चतुर्भुजचतुर्मुखपञ्चमुखाद्याः पुमाकाराः श्रीभरतीभवान्याद्याश्च
>> > स्त्रयाकाराः, अन्ये च मत्स्यकूर्मादयोऽनन्तावतारा लीलयैवाविर्भवन्ति
>> > भक्तानुग्रहार्थमित्यवधेयम् ।
>> >
>> >  चिन्मयस्याद्वितीयस्य निष्कलस्याशरीरिणः ।
>> > उपासकानां कार्यार्थं ब्रह्मणो रूपकल्पना ॥
>> >
>> > In the above text Madhusudana Saraswati brings out the view of
>> > Sureshvaracharya: One Brahman alone takes on the forms of the trimūrtis
>> for
>> > the purposes of creation, sustenance and annihilation. Not just that,
>> it is
>> > this Brahman alone that appears as the shakti-s, consorts of these
>> > trimūrti-s as well. He sums up the discussion with a verse which means:
>> One
>> > Pure Consciousness, without a second, devoid of parts and body, with a
>> view
>> > to bless the devotees, takes on forms. This is in tune with Shankara's
>> > statement in the BSB 1.1.20:
>> >
>> > यत्तूक्तं हिरण्यश्मश्रुत्वादिरूपवत्त्वश्रवणं परमेश्वरे नोपपद्यत इति,
>> अत्र
>> > ब्रूमः — स्यात्परमेश्वरस्यापीच्छावशान्मायामयं रूपं साधकानुग्रहार्थम् ,
>> > ‘माया ह्येषा मया सृष्टा यन्मां पश्यसि नारद । सर्वभूतगुणैर्युक्तं मैवं
>> मां
>> > ज्ञातुमर्हसि’ इति स्मरणात् ।
>> >
>> > Thus, there is no basis at all in the claims of some misguided elements
>> > that 'Sureshvaracharya was a vaishnava'. The above text of Madhusudana
>> > Saraswati can be seen to confirm the Vārtika-based article:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> http://www.mediafire.com/file/gg27uyd2mh869r9/Sureshvaracharya_a_Trimūrti_aikya_vādin_F.pdf
>> >
>> > and another article on the feminine version of trimurti-s:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> https://adbhutam.wordpress.com/2015/03/24/trimurti-aikya-the-feminine-version/
>> >
>> > regards
>> > subrahmanian.v
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>> >
>> > To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> > http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>> >
>> > For assistance, contact:
>> > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>>
>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>
>> For assistance, contact:
>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>
>