[Advaita-l] viShNu and caturbhuja viShNu

[Sujal Upadhyay via Advaita-l]

Namaste Subramaniam ji,

Yes. That is what I have understood too. The reason for saying viShNu as a
person in 11th Chapter is because our AcArya has faithfully explained what
arjuna had said.

I went ahead quoting viShNu and bhAgavat purANa for understanding that
viShNu is not caturbhuja viShNu.

Conclusions in brief


   1. Whenever any form of ISvara is described as 'that which is worshipped
   as AtmasvarUpa in heart', it is always nirguNa brahman.
   2. brahman is GYanasvarUpa and is nirguNa only, but is seen by 5 senses
   as having guNa-s due to faulty vision.
   3. viShNu is not always carutbhUja viShNu. viShNu or nArAyana when
   described as substratum of entire universe as the sole creator, preserver
   and destroyer, and as the source of all avatAra-s then not catur-bhUja
   viShNu, the deity of preservation, but brahman.
   4. viShNu is sometimes taken as pradhAna prakruti meaning it is feminine
   form, SAkti of nirguNa brahman.
   5. viShNu or any form of ISvara is saguNa brahman and is the closest
   manifested form of brahman, and hence this all-powerful form 'viShNu' is
   worthy of worship
   6. When is it said, 'I am you *and* you are me', then it confirms
   non-duality. e.g. if viShNu bhagavAn says that I am Siva', but Siva never
   says that 'I am viShNu', then one can understand that Siva is a part of
   viShNu, but when viShNu says, 'I am you and you are me', then it confirms
   non-duality. In the same way, at one instance, viShNu says 'I am Siva,
   brahmA, etc' and at a separate instance, Siva says, 'I am viShNu, brahmA,
   etc', then this too confirms non-duality.
   7. 'I' or 'Me' in gItA can be taken as 'brahman'

Thank you for the link. I was very buy these days and so skipped that
article. I will surely read it.

OM

Sujal


On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 11:24 PM, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Shankara has not referred to 'Viṣṇu' and other names as the one with
> chaturbhuja, etc.  The only reference is in the BG 11th chapter end where
> Arjuna, unable to bear the fearsome viśwarūpa, wants Krishna to resume His
> benign chaturbhuja form and this is specific to the Krishna avatāra.
>
> A detailed analysis of the question as to whether Shankara identified or
> preferred any deity as saguṇa brahman, be it Viṣṇu or Śiva or any other, is
> available in an article I posted a few weeks ago:
>
> http://www.mediafire.com/view/z3kwt9h1kr87fem/Shankara_pref_deity.pdf
>
> regards
> subrahmanian.v
>
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 5:54 PM, Sujal Upadhyay via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>> || Hari OM ||
>>
>> Pranams,
>>
>> Please read article viShNu and caturbhuja viShNu
>> <http://www.advaita-vedanta.in/vishnu>
>>
>> We can understand from the commentaries by Sri Adi SankarAcArya ji that he
>> use to refer to kruShNa, nArAyaNa, viShNu, hari as brahman. Did our AcArya
>> really meant caturbhuja viShNu or is it something different.
>>
>> OM
>>
>> Sujal
>> _______________________________________________
>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>>
>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>
>> For assistance, contact:
>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>
>
>