Dvaita and Sophistry - Part 2(Reality and Unreality)
shrao at NYX.NET
Fri Mar 14 22:16:54 CST 2003
On Sat, 15 Mar 2003, kalyan chakravarthy wrote:
> >That's fine. Even so, it suffices to show that difference is a quality,
> >which was the point you questioned.
> How do you accept a definition which seriously falls short of explaining all
Short answer: I don't. You haven't even come close to demonstrating that
>From venkat_advaita at rediffmail.com Sat Mar 15 08:53:54 2003
Message-Id: <SAT.15.MAR.2003.085354.0000.VENKATADVAITA at REDIFFMAIL.COM>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 08:53:54 -0000
Reply-To: venkata subramanian <venkat_advaita at rediffmail.com>
To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
<ADVAITA-L at LISTS.ADVAITA-VEDANTA.ORG>
From: venkata subramanian <venkat_advaita at REDIFFMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: Vishnu and Shiva
Comments: cc: Vidyasankar <vsundaresan at HOTMAIL.COM>
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed
Kindly please note that the Acharya always uses the words Ishwara
and Parameshwara to Bhagavan Narayana only. The words are used
in the Gita Bhashya also throughout... but in places even when
referring to Vasudeva. To Him Vasudava, Krishna, Parameshvara ,
Ishvara are all synonyms.
He NEVER allures anywhere to Rudra / Chandramouleeshwara etc.
ANYWHERE in this Bhashya.
On Sat, 15 Mar 2003 Vidyasankar wrote :
> >Why may i humbly ask
> > -The Great Sri Shankaracharya - entirely in his Prastana
> >uses only the word vishnu / narayana for Brahman.
>That is not quite correct. The words that Sankaracharya uses most
>ISvara and parameSvara, not vishNu, not nArAyaNa, not Siva, not
>It is only in the gItA commentary that he uses the words
>and vAsudeva, but that is understandable, given that the gItA is
Odomos - the only mosquito protection outside 4 walls -
Click here to know more!
S. Venkata Subramanian
Venkat_advaita at rediffmail.com
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list