[Advaita-l] Did Vyaasa mean Athaato Vishnu Jijnaasaa or Shiva Jijnaasaa?

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste,
In addition to the references quoted by Sri Subbuji, in Mundaka upanishad,
para brahman is described as guNa and avayava rahita -

यत्तदद्रेश्यमग्राह्यमगोत्रमवर्णमचक्षुःश्रोत्रं तदपाणिपादम् ।
नित्यं विभुं सर्वगतं सुसूक्ष्मं तदव्ययं यद्भूतयोनिं परिपश्यन्ति धीराः ॥

In Shvetashvatara upanishad the word nirguNa is explicitly used to describe
Brahman:
एको देव: सर्वभूतेषु गूढ: सर्वव्यापि सर्वभूतान्तरात्मा |
कर्माध्यक्ष: सर्वभूताधिवास: साक्षी चेता केवलो निर्गुणश्च ||

In Mandukya, after describing PrAjna as Isvara, thus: एष सर्वेश्वर एष
सर्वज्ञ एषोऽन्तर्याम्येष योनिः सर्वस्य प्रभवाप्ययौ हि भूतानाम्, para
brahman, which the Upanishad enjoins us to know (स विज्ञेयः) is described
as guNa rahita: नान्तःप्रज्ञं नबहिःप्रज्ञं नोभयतःप्रज्ञं नप्रज्ञानघनं
नप्रज्ञं नाप्रज्ञम् ।
अदृश्यमव्यवहार्यमग्राह्यमलक्षणमचिन्त्यमव्यपदेश्यमेकात्मप्रत्ययसारं
प्रपञ्चोपशमं शान्तं शिवमद्वैतं चतुर्थं मन्यन्ते स आत्मा स विज्ञेयः ॥

Regards
Venkatraghavan



On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 7:42 AM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 11:21 PM, Srinath Vedagarbha via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > Who/What is Brahman?
> >
> > Shruti itself ask the question 'Why Brahman is called 'Brahman'? ' ataH
> > kasmAt ucchatyE bhahmEti ? The answer comes from the same shruti
> > 'brihantO asmin hi guNAha' . That's how idea of Brahman as ananta-guNa
> > pUrNa.
> >
>
> Guṇas are attributed to Brahman for the purpose of upāsana. That Brahman
> which is to be known, realized, is taught as:
>
> Tat 'eva' Brahma tvam viddhi, nedam yadidam upāsate. Kenopaniṣad.  That
> alone is Brahman that you have to know (which impels the sense organs) and
> is not that which people meditate upon as 'idam', this, as an object.
>
> Finding this detrimental to his siddhānta, Madhva broke that word 'upāsate'
> into three: upa, āsa, te. 'That one who is sitting near you and controlling
> you' is Brahman and not 'this jivarupam'.  Yet the mantra has been rendered
> without the word shown as 'upāsa te':
>
> http://www.dvaita.net/pdf/shruti/kena/kenabt.pdf
>
>
>
>
> > The same idea is echoed in mahA nArayaNa Upanishad's assertion "tad
> > Eva brahma paramaM kavInaam". It says about deity Who is sarvOttama
> resting
> > on the seprpent. At the very end, this Upanishad concludes with assertion
> > 'tad Eva brahma paramam kavInaam'. Kavi-s (jnyAni-s) call this being only
> > (tad Eva) as 'paramaM Brahma'. Please note the prefix 'paramaM' in case
> > anyone were to say such deity is gouNI brahman. Thus, vishNu only is
> > Parabrahma according to this pramANa.
> >
> > Also, when it come to the term 'Atma', we have shruti saying AtatatvAchha
> > mAtrutvAdAtmEti paramO hariH | AtmA bhAsAstadanyE tu na heYtEShAM
> > tatA guNAH ||
> >
> > Krishna's direct words in this sense nails the dispute on who is known
> from
> > all of shAstra-s -- 'vEdEschha sarvErahamEva vEdyaH'
> >
>
> In the Kathopanishad 1.2.15 in reply to Nachiketa's question which itself
> defines Brahman, we have:
>
> सर्वे वेदा यत्पदमामनन्ति तपांसि सर्वाणि च यद्वदन्ति ।
> यदिच्छन्तो ब्रह्मचर्यं चरन्ति तत्ते पदं सङ्ग्रहेण ब्रवीम्योमित्येतत् ॥ १५ ॥
>
> All the vedas teach that state to be reached and all austerities are
> followed for that purpose, I shall say about it in brief: Om is that.
>
> And after that what follows is all about the nature of this Brahman and
> nowhere any guṇas are brought in. Thus, Krishna is meaning this Brahman
> alone by the word 'Me', and not he, the person who was born on a particular
> day and departed on another.
>
> >
> > Not all sUtra-s are about advaitic nirguNa bahman -- for example, second
> > sUtra is about creation and under advaitic reading this sUtra is talking
> > about creator gouNI brahman and not nirguNa brhamn.
> >
>
> Not so. The janmādi sutra and the mantra underlying it is taken by
> Advaitins as meaning both the svarupa and taṭastha lakshana of Brhaman. It
> is the vivartopādāna kāraṇam of the world.  See this explanation by a
> scholar, especially the last line in the image:
>
> http://www.mediafire.com/download/bgdg8b677p43513/janm%C4%81disutra_RKS.pdf
>
> Thus the jijñāsya Brahman is not a gauṇī (saguṇa) but mukhyam, nirguṇam.
>
> Presenting Brahman as a person, with a body, resting on a serpent-couch,
> etc. is symbolic, to help the initial aspirant to think of the abstract
> Tattvam.
>
> vs
>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>