[Advaita-l] Holenarsipur Swamiji's remarks and why even Avidya is not necessary for Advaita

Venkatesh Murthy vmurthy36 at gmail.com
Tue Jan 31 10:36:47 CST 2012


The point I am trying to make now is also same Sri Kalyan was saying.
Maya has come into Advaita because of Bauddha influence. People are
asking for references but I am giving them and they are neglecting
them. What game is this?  Kindly look at the references. Some more are

O.C.Handa page 58 Buddhist Monasteries of Himachal-
'Even the very concept of Maya may be of Buddhist Origin'.

A History of Early Vedanta Philosophy by Nakamura and Leggett Page 120-
'Maya-vada was vigorously criticized by other sects within the same
Vedanta school on the point that its thought resembles that of
Buddhist theories. Vijnanabhiksu also frequently discussed the problem
of the theory of the modern proponents of Maya Navina Maya Vadin and
commented they are crypto Buddhists and a section of the Buddhists
that superficially they are those who call themselves Vedantists
Vedantibruva but that actually this thought is not Vedanta theory Na
Tu Tad Vedantamatam. Bhaskara says the proponents of Maya are men who
rely on Buddhist theories Bauddhamatavalambin. Vallabha called the
proponents of Maya another incarnation of Madhyamika itself
Madhyamikasay eva aparavataraha. Yamuna too says that Mayavada and the
Vijnanavada are essentially identical and that difference exists only
in the fact that the latter is an open Buddhist Prakata Saugata the
former is a crypto Buddhist Pracchanna Saugata and Ramanuja asserted
that the thought of the crypto Buddhist who makes a pretence of the
Veda vada resembles Vijnanavada.'

My responses below.

2012/1/31 श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <lalitaalaalitah at gmail.com>:
> *श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <http://www.lalitaalaalitah.com/>
> lalitAlAlitaH <http://about.me/lalitaalaalitah/bio>*
>> Holenarsipur Swamiji is saying Sankara Bhashya has used only
>> Adhyaropa Apavada Vada. A false thing is superimposed and removed.
> And what does 'being false' mean? sat or asat or both or 'you can't say' ?
> This was asked in a previous thread. You just bypassed.
Here it means a non Self thing is superimposed on the Self. The Non
Self is false. There are only two type of things. Self and Non Self.
The Self is real. The Non Self is not. This is one theory.

>> But
>> Adi Sankara has used Brahmavada very strongly in arguments in the
>> Bhasya.
> And what is that brahmavAda ?
Brahman is the Only Reality. This is Brahmavada. It does not mean the
world is Mithya or false. It means the world also is Brahman.
> Is it able to stand without mAya ?
Yes because everything is Brahman. Even if you say the word Maya that
word Maya is Brahman only.

> Definitely not as is shown by many advaitain-s here.
This is wrong conception. Maya is introduced following some Bauddha
type reasoning. It is not required for Upanishadic study.
Maya theory has Bauddha influence. It is Asacchastram truly.

>> The Creator of the World is Brahman. It is unnecessary to
>> bring in another thing called Maya to explain Creation.
> So, world is real. Because it is created by brahman. This is not advaita of
> sha~Nkara.
> Are you trying to propagate vishiShTAdvaita in disguise in this forum ?
I am saying Brahman is truly everything in the Universe. Visistadvaita
will not say that. I am also saying all objects in the world are
created in the thought of Brahman.

> But he creates
>> the world with his Sankalpa thought only.
> So, he has a mind. And definitely he is not 'his mind'. So, he is a limited
> brahman. Such is not brahman of veda-s.
For explaining Creation of World we have to explain Saguna Brahman.
With Nirguna Brahman you cannot explain Creation.

>> He does not have to do any
>> work actually. He is doing this creation for having fun.
> So, he feels bored too. What type of brahman is this ?
> It is His
>> Leela. Lokavattu Leelakaivalyam sutra 2-1-33 is clear. Moreover
>> Brahman's Sankalpa cannot be false.
> Your such and such brahman is false, because he is limited. What to say
> about his sa~Nkalpa.
Then you are saying Sruti is also saying false things.
>> He is called as Satya Sankalpa.
>> Whatever He thinks will be real only. It will never be false.
> He thinks about snake-in-rope and our dreams, they born mithyA. So, it
> proves him mithyA-sa~Nkalpa !?
Even the Snake and Mirage Water are in the thought of Brahman. They
are real. His thought is real. Satya Sankalpa.

>> The Bruhadaranyaka Sruti is saying Purnamadaha Purnamidam Purnat
>> Purnamudachyate. Adi Sankara has explained this. This Universe has
>> come from the Infinite Purna Brahman. It is not different from Him.
> If it came from him, then it is clearly different from him ? Child is not
> one with Mother. Isn't it ?
Then you are saying Sruti is telling us lies.

>> But a question can be asked? How is it possible for a Jada Vastu like
>> a stone to be Brahman? In pure Advaita there is no Jada vastu at all
>> like the Visistadvaita says Acit Vastu. Instead of Acit or Jada or
>> Achetana Vastu in pure Advaita the stone is not revealing Brahman to
>> us. But Brahman is there in it.
> Even if stone is accepted as an agent of revelation of brahman, it is
> different from brahman. As a gem is different from light.
How is stone different? For a Jnani a stone and a gem are equal. Both
show Brahman only. He sees Brahman only everywhere all the time.

>> Another question. If the world is Brahman how is there suffering and
>> cruelty in the world? The World is created in Brahman's thought as a
>> Game for fun. In a Game we suffer sometimes defeat sometimes we get
>> victory. We cannot always be winning. We have to smile even in defeat
>> because we can play well in the next game. Better Luck Next Time.
>> Life is a Game played by God. We have to be good sportsmen. Exercise
>> well and play well. We cannot take Life very seriously because it is
>> only a Game.
>> The Sruti is also saying Nirguna Brahman is the only thing existing.
>> We all are That only. By doing Sagunopasana we can realize we are part
>> of Brahman's Sankalpa thought only. This will lead to Nirguna Brahman
>> directly.
> It appears as you have read too many books of different writers, so you are
> uttering unrelated and baseless things. Before revealing your thoughts to
> public, test them atleast.
Mayavada theory must have been tested before they brought into
Advaita. No quality check done. That is why we have to do some changes

One very important advantage arguing with all the people is my faith
in the Brahmavada theory has increased 100 times. I will never look at
Mayavada again in my life. Thank you all.



More information about the Advaita-l mailing list