[Advaita-l] Ishwara Turiya?

[Rajaram Venkataramani]

On Tuesday, March 13, 2012, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 11:52 PM, Rajaram Venkataramani <
> rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Monday, March 12, 2012, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Rajaram Venkataramani <
>> > rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Please read one of your earlier posts where  you argued that Ishwara's
form
>> is panchabautika or material on the grounds that if it is not then it has
>> to be Brahman because there is no third entity apart from matter and
spirit
>> but it cannot be because the latter is beyond all names and forms.
>
>
> That might have been before I spoke to Dr.Sastrigal about this.  Still the
> body of Ishwara is matter alone.  For Ishwara Himself takes it, remains in
> it and leaves it at will.  It is 'this', 'idam' for Him too.  It is only
> because Arjuna identified Krishna, Bhagavan, with His body, did he wail
> inconsolably when Krishna'a avatAra sharIra had disappeared from this
> world.  Surely Brahman can never appear and disappear, being all pervading
> and ever existing.  That is why do we have a date for His janma, a navami
> or ashtami.  That is the stand of Advaita with regard to any body.

If you were the one teaching Sastrigal, then why ask me to talk to him?
Your views are directly opposed to the views of Madhusudana, Sridhara etc.
if you say that Ishwara's body is panchabautika. I have quoted them to say
that it is not. You should quote at least one Advaita acharya before
Madhusudana for your position that Ishwara's body is made of five elements.
Otherwise, your view has nothing to do with Advaita tradition whatever
proximity you may claim.

As I stated, you have confused between Virata, Hiranyagarbha, Avyakta and
Ishwara. You are negating Ishwara whereas Mandukya only asks you to negate
Ishwara.