[Advaita-l] Madhusudhana Saraswathi and Advaita.

[kuntimaddi sadananda]

--- On Sun, 2/26/12, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:

The Shankarabhashya sentence I showed from the Kenopanishat is sufficient
proof for the teaching that everything 'meditatable' as Ishwara, etc.
(aadi) is idam and anaatmA.
.......
......
In the Anandagiri gloss for 8.9 he quotes a Brahmasutra 3.2.14 which
decides that Brahman is to be known/realized as without any form ONLY.  A
question is taken up:  what is the fate of those shruti passages that give
a form to Brahman? The reply is: these are upAdhi-based forms and do not
constitute the svarUpa of Brahman. 

---------------

PraNAms

For consistency, saguNa is related to form which by definition finite. By definition infinite Brahman can only be nirguna. Yet the existence of all saguNas are due to nirguna brahma only. One cannot do nirguNa brahma upaasana with the divisions of upaasaka- upaasya-upaasana. In Avadhuta Gita Dattaatreya says - aham dhyaata param dhyeyam akhandam khandate katham? - how can you divide I am mediator and this has to be meditated upon that which is indivisible. However any upaasana involves divisions and for convenience one can divide until one understands that divisions are superficial and the underlying truth is indivisible. Until one understands the uppasana helps in the purification of the mind and after understanding it become a vibhuti or play of the self.

Hence knowledge or understanding is that in spite of apparent divisions the truth is indivisible - and that is tat paadaartha vichaara. Without the saguNa nirguna Brahma cannot be thought of - Thinking of nirguNa brahma is just abiding in the knowledge that - I am - pure conscious-existence that pervades this entire universe. That forms the complete understanding of Brahman. Yet without the divisions understanding of the indivisible is not possible. 


Hari Om!
Sadananda