[Advaita-l] Shankara authenticates Shiva as the son of Brahma

[Srinath Vedagarbha]

Dear Gayatri,



On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 2:11 PM, D Gayatri <dgayatrinov10 at gmail.com> wrote:

> And one more thing Sri Srinath. Despite all my posts supporting Vishnu as
> vedAntic Brahman, I hold that Vishnu's Ishwaratva is ultimately unreal and
> only nirvishesha Brahman (NB) is ultimately real.



If so, why argue for who is superior? Do anyone argue whether snake seen on
rope illusion is Adi Shesha or Taksha ? Both are equally unreal.

Let me ask you, you argued for Vishnu's superiority based on so many
pramANa-s including critical edition of Mbh and that is good. In the same
line, I am curious to see how you can support illusory nature of VishNu
based on the same set of pramANa-s. Could you please do that?



> Vishnu, devoid of His Ishwaratva is NB and I, devoid of my jIvatva am NB.
> Difference is that he knows and I don't know. And his grace is needed to
> obtain jnAna and only this jnAna can destroy avidya.


What is the locus of this knowing/unkowing? Is Vishnu's knowing aspect
belongs to His chid (which is real)? or is it one of many arOpita guNa-s on
Him which are illusory?

If it is former, then you are invoking nAnatvaM in Brahman, for since chid
of vishnu is one & the same as chid of you, and having both knowledge (from
instance of Vishnu appearance) and ignorance (from instance of your
appearance) located in the same chid. Then what happens to nEhA nAnAsti
kiMchana? Also you will contradict Shankara who denys pramaritva of Atman
(na ca agneriva AtmA Atmani viShayaH) if you accept knowledge is
located/equal to Chid of Vishnu.

If it is later, such knowledge of Him is equally mithya and itself does not
exist at all in all three period of times, and what to speak about granting
you that knowledge and destroying your avidya.






> So let me make it clear that even though we both hold Vishnu as vedAntic
> Brahman, our positions are mutually incompatible.



I would rather say Vishnu being Brahman is incompatible with Brahman being
nirviShESha. Either you have to say Vishnu being Brahman (and accept guNa
pUrNattvaM) or say Brahman is nirviShESha and do not argue which Devata is
Vedic Brahman. You cannot have it both ways.

/sv