[Advaita-l] sarvAtma bhAva as explained by Bhagavatpada

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 12:39 PM, Venkata sriram P via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> ///
>
> the word ब्रह्म in the quoted अनुवाक means हिरण्यगर्भ though, since the
> context is उपासन। Moreover, the attainment of सर्वात्मभाव here is after
> death.
>
> ///
>
> Yes. It is sagunOpAsana.  Jivanmukti is just one step ahead.
>

​It appears as if it is being propagated that jIvanmukti is result of
saguNopAsanA.
If it is, let me clearly say that it is unacceptable in advaita-matam. We
accept that GYAna leads to videhamukti and if it is accompanied by
yoga/upAsanA and vAsanA-xaya it leads to jIvanmukti, which is just
unperturbed-ness of mind.
That person who is not emancipated from ignorance, can't be called free
while alive.
Just being upAsaka is not a sign of knowledge of advitIya-brahma.
​

>
> //
> Bhashyakara mentions Sushumna in his commentary under Katha 2.3.16 also.
> //
>
> Yes. I have seen this commentary.  This shows that the presence of
> "kuNDalini vidya"
> is mentioned in shrutis also in contrary to some who argue that it is
> purely tantric and
> doesn't find it's presence in vedas.
>

kuNDalinI-vidyA is present in veda-s. OK.
But, why relate it to the usage of word suShumnA by bhagavatpAda in a
totally unrelated place.. Aren't veda-s enough to prove that devI or
chaitanya is to be worshipped as kuNDalinI for specific result.

Another thing, the word suShumnA is not necessarily related with kuNDalinI
vidyA​. It was used to propound the dream-state too. So, why conclude that
just mention of suShumnA is enough to prove that kuNDalinI-upAsanA is
hinted there and hence is vaidika?





*श्रीमल्ललितालालितः*www.lalitaalaalitah.com