[Advaita-l] dva suparNA

[Ravi Kiran]

There are 2 aspects

1) what the second bird represents ? - as many substantiated, it is the
saguNabrahman or kUtastha Brahman
2) the realization of the first bird or the knowledge attained (aham
brahmAsmi) is always ekam - ekam evadvitiyam brahma



On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Siva Senani Nori via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> I am sorry for responding so late - I was busy with other things. A number
> of learned members have stated that in the dvA suparNA mantra of Mu. Up.
> the second bird is nirguNabrahman. This is not so, in my view. Here the
> reasons:
> 1. The way the word sakhAyA is explained by Bhagavatpaada: सखाया सखायौ
> समानाख्यानौ समानाभिव्यक्तिकारणौ (They are "sakhas". Sakhas are those who
> are known (AkhyAna) to be equal (samAna), i.e. the reason for their
> manifestation (being known) is the same). NirguNabrahman cannot be known -
> It is beyond words. Only Brahman with the adjunct of maayaa can be known.
> Maayaa is the reason why Brahman is known either as ISvara or as jeeva. The
> same is reinforced by the next sentence: एवंभूतौ सन्तौ समानम्
> अविशेषमुपलब्ध्य अधिष्ठानतया (having so obtained similarity, i.e.
> non-difference, on account of the same substrate or base). The
> abhivyaktikAraNam is now being described as the adhisThAna, base. Therefore
> the second bird is ISvara, i.e. saguNabrahman.
> 2. The vRksha here is the metaphor for SarIra, and the birds cling to this
> vRksha = SaRira (as per the mantra). ISvara clings onto kAraNaSarIra and
> jIva to sUkshmaSarIra (or liñgaSarIra). NirguNabrahman does not cling onto
> anything.
> 3. The way ISvara is described by AcArya: अनश्नन् अन्यः इतरः ईश्वरो
> नित्यशुद्धबुद्धमुक्तस्वभावः सर्वज्ञः सत्त्वोपाधिरीश्वरो नाश्नाति । Here the
> term sattvopAdhiH ISvaraH is important. सर्वसत्त्वोपाधिरीश्वरः is another
> reading. I will give Swami Gambhirananda's translation of this line:
> ""AnaSnan, without tasting; anyaH, the other, God who is by nature eternal,
> pure, wise, and free, who is omniscient and ** has the totality of Maaya as
> His limiting adjunct ** - that God does not taste". NirguNabrahman has no
> upAdhi, whatsoever. Now, here the term "sarvajña" might be what is causing
> confusion. The following from Karl Potter's Encyclopedia of Hinduism, Vol
> III., p 77 might clarify (the context is that after describing Brahman as
> per Advaita, the author, Potter is describing God (ISvara).
> "God (ISvara) is the cause of all this diversity. This basic point is set
> forth in the second BrahmasUtra . . . God is both the efficient and
> material cause of the world. . . . It is His light, His consciousness, that
> is reflected in avidyA as individual selves and the objects they cognize.
> What is difficult to comprehend from the standpoint of ordinary theism is
> that the Advaitin can say all this about God and yet view Him as
> conditioned by ignorance. . . . God's omnipotence, for instance, does not
> mean that he is responsible for the evil and imperfection in the world. God
> is subject to the karmic potentialities of individual selves in creating.
> He provides the opportunities for the jIvas to experience and thus work off
> their karmic residues. . . . Again, His omniscience is hardly a matter of
> knowing everything in the discursive way we think we know some things. His
> omniscience is a feature deriving from the mere fact that He is
> consciousness; it is His awareness - Him - on which we superimpose the
> contents we believe ourselves to be experiencing as we go through the
> world."
> 4. Finally if the second bird were nirguNabrahman, we will end up with
> ViSishTAdvaita!
> RegardsN. Siva Senani
>
>   From: kuntimaddi sadananda via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>  To: Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>; A discussion group for
> Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>  Sent: Sunday, 15 November 2015 8:27 AM
>  Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] dva suparNA
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Sat, 11/14/15, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>  Sada ji,
>  PraNAm. Thanks for the example.
>
>  Just a thought - not sure if the interpretation is correct.
>  The sarvajna:
>  in that example indicates the "possession" of parA vidyA,
>  and therefore I
>  believe would have to be for mAyA vishishta chaitanyam, not
>  for shuddha
>  chaitanyam?
>
>  Regards,
>  Venkatraghavan
>  ----------------------------------------
> Venkatraghavan - PraNAms
>
> As Subbuji answered, the sarvavit will take care of vishiShTa chaitanyam -
> in the sense knowing everything with particulars - that constitute the
> apara vidya - which jiiva need not have to know to become a jnaani.
>
> Since separate word is used by the scriptures, and there is discussion
> before of para and apara vidya, sarvajna must indicate, as Sharkara
> comments, the saamaanya chaitanyam that pervades all the vishishTa
> chaitanyam, which can only be gained by wisdom eye or viveka by jiiva; and
> Paramaatma being the reflection in the pure satva, should be endowed with
> that knowledge. In a sense both refer to Iswaratvam.
>
> Hari Om!
> Sadananda
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>