[Advaita-l] What is 'aprAkRta' ?

[Rajaram Venkataramani]

On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 6:29 PM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>wrote:

>  Sri V Subrahmanian:  I would like to add that there is the other option
> of meaning 'mAyA-shabalitam Brahma' for the word
> the 'Lord'.  This is in perfect synchronization with the Mandukya 6th
> mantra on Ishwara and the bhashya. Since such a Brahman, in association with
> maya, is called Ishwara, his 'body' that we referred to earlier and the
> 'body' as an avatara are definitely inseparable from maya/prakrti.  That is
> what is meant by 'My own maya' which Shankara has explained very well.  That
> explains the statement 'The Lord and His body are non-different' (both being
> maayic). There is no ambiguity here.
>
> RV: Your point is Krishna's body is made of five elements like ours.
> Madhusudana says Krishna's body is not made of five elements and explains
> why. He also says his position is in line with Sankara and Anandagiri. If
> you accept them as acharyas, you have to retract your position accepting
> incorrect analysis or at least quote an acharya like Sureshwara or Padmapada
> to prove that Krishna's body is indeed made of five elements. It will at
> least tell us that there two views in the sampradaya.
>


>  Now you are coming up with another analysis on why the Lord and His form
> are non-different. Madhusudana has clearly given the reasons for his support
> of that secondary view in a one page long commentary. He is not saying the
> Lord is Mayika.
>


>  Krishna does not become aged - nava yauvanam ca (though He can manifest
> > whatever IS part of His infinite glories).
>
> Sri Subrahmanian: It is quite well known through the sources such as the
> Mahabharata that Krishna was over 120 years old at the
> time of the avatara-ending.  Yudhishtira was a little older than
> Him.  Arjuna was younger and so on.  There was certainly a modification in
> His bodily appearance.  He no longer could be carried by Devaki and cuddled
> by Nandagopa.  He had married and given birth to sons and grand sons.  All
> these are pointers to vikara.
>
RV: As Madhusudana pointed out His body is not material and He instructed
Vivasvan long ago with the SAME body. For Devaki, He manifested a child
form, for Gopis the Youth form, for Krishna and Vivasvan a Teacher form etc.
at different times. As Madhusudana pointed Maya makes the impossible
possible.

>
> I think we are not adding anything new to this discussion.  The scriptural
> position has been well stated long ago and needs no reiteration.
>
RV: Yes - the scriptural position has been well stated long ago by
Madhusudana and long long ago by Sridhara, Anandagiri and Sankara. It needs
no re-interpretation in twenty first century especially without supporting
evidence.


> > Jivan Muktas have a body made of material elements created due to
> prarabda karma. Their form is not eternal like the Lord's.
> It would be incorrect to say that.  Just like the Ishwara's avatara has a
> beginning and end on the physical plane and yet the devotee several
> centuries later too can pray and be blessed by that avatara, a jivanmukta
> too can be prayed to and his blessings and guidance got by devotees  long
> after his physical death.
>
RV: You can pray to any form you like even manjal pillayar (turmeric
ganapathi) and para Vasudeva will be the benefactor through that form. The
point will remain that Krishna's form being para mayika is eternal and
exists as long as time exists. A jivan mukta's body is created using
material elements due to prarabda karma. It does not exist after videha
mukti. Having said that in BS 3.3.32, Sankara talks about adhikara purusha
who continues to remain after death and gives the example of Vyasa, Narada
and Sanatkumara.