[Advaita-l] Who Is the Ultimate GOD in Vedic dharma ?

[D.V.N.Sarma డి.వి.ఎన్.శర్మ]

Atleast in the beginning Indra was the most iportant of Vedic gods.

regards,
Sarma.

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:33 PM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Dear Shrinivas,
>
> Your post represents the correct Vedantic view of Ultimate God. It is
> endorsed by Sri Sureshwaracharya in his Brihadaranyaka Vartika where he
> says: The One Ishwara alone is variously spoken of as Brahma, Vishnu,
> Shiva, Guru.  Sri Anandagiri in his commentary says that this is the Vedic
> way of looking at it and if the puranas give the impression that the
> Trimurtis are different from each other, such is not the Vedic view.
>
> Taking Surya as the ultimate God is also correct. Some might not accept
> this since in their view Surya is a god who is born, etc. cannot be the
> Supreme. But Vedanta has a different take on this.  Surya is a Jnani as
> clearly stated Bhagavan in the BG: इमं विवस्वते योगं प्रोक्तवानहमव्ययम् |
> विवस्वान् मनवे प्राह मनुरिक्षाकवेऽब्रवीत् || at the 4th Chapter start. Even
> Indra is a Jnani and he is an Acharya for Brahmavidya in the Brahmasutra
> Pratardana adhikarana, from an upanishad. The Mundakopanishat  3.2.1
> teaches that a Jnani, when worshiped by a mumukshu for liberation, will be
> blessed with that Great Purushartha.
>
> स वेदैतत्परमं ब्रह्म धाम यत्र विश्वं निहितं भाति शुभ्रम् ।
> उपासते पुरुषं ये ह्यकामास्ते शुक्रमेतदतिवर्तन्ति धीराः ॥ १ ॥
>  भाष्यम्
> <http://advaitasharada.sringeri.net/display/bhashya/
> Mundaka?page=3&id=MD_C03_S02_V01&hlBhashya=%E0%A4%B8%20%E0%
> A4%B5%E0%A5%87%E0%A4%A6%E0%A5%88%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%8D#
> bhashya-MD_C03_S02_V01>
> यस्मात् स वेद जानाति एतत् यथोक्तलक्षणं ब्रह्म परमं प्रकृष्टं धाम
> सर्वकामानामाश्रयमास्पदम् , यत्र यस्मिन्ब्रह्मणि धाम्नि विश्वं समस्तं जगत्
> निहितम् अर्पितम् , यच्च स्वेन ज्योतिषा भाति शुभ्रं शुद्धम् ,
> तमप्येवंविधमात्मज्ञं पुरुषं ये हि अकामाः विभूतितृष्णावर्जिता मुमुक्षवः
> सन्तः उपासते परमिव देवम् , ते शुक्रं नृबीजं यदेतत्प्रसिद्धं
> शरीरोपादानकारणम् अतिवर्तन्ति अतिगच्छन्ति धीराः बुद्धिमन्तः, न पुनर्योनिं
> प्रसर्पन्ति । ‘न पुनः क्व रतिं करोति’ ( ? ) इति श्रुतेः । अतस्तं
> पूजयेदित्यभिप्रायः ॥
>
> Shankara says above, giving the Brahma lakshanam as 'the abode of all
> desires, where all creation rests...and when a mumukshu worships a knower
> of Brahman as 'the Supreme God', *param iva devam*...will not return to
> samsara.
>
> In fact the very earlier mantra there says: He who longs for worldly
> wealth/position, etc. bhUti, by worshiping a Jnani, will accomplish all
> that. Thus a Jnani is Para Brahman, the Supreme God, that can bestow all
> purusharthas.  In this manner Subrahmanya, Surya, Ganapathi, Devi (Uma
> Haimavati who taught Brahmavidya to Indra in Kenopanishat), Shiva, Vishnu,
> are all fit for the status of Supreme/Ultimate God. The above list covers
> both the Panchayatana Puja and the Shanmatha-s that are believed by many as
> initiated by Shankara.  Nobody can object to this since the basis for
> treating all these deities as Brahman is well established on the authority
> of the Veda.
>
> The vishishtadvaitin author of the Tamil book 'Sankararum Vainavamum', on
> page 11 objects that Surya, who has been depicted as someone who is
> 'afraid' of Brahman, keeps doing his duties of rising and setting without
> break in the Taittiriya Upanishad, cannot be Brahman. Such an objection
> stems from not knowing the purport of that mantra there. Shankara has
> explained that the very statement of creation, cosmic management, etc. is
> taught by the Shruti only with a view to teach the Nirguna Brahman that is
> beyond words and thought. So it is wrong to imagine that the deities such
> as vayu, surya, agni, yama, varuna, etc. are literally under fear of
> Brahman. It only means that the cosmos functions in a certain order. The
> Jnani Surya can always continue in a portfolio as Adhikarika Purusha, just
> as Jnani Yama was in the Nachiketas Brahma vidya.
>
> regards
> subbu
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 12:18 PM, Shrinivas Gadkari via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Namaste,
> >
> > Over the last several months, we have seen many posts
> > on this forum showcasing Shiva as the Ultimate GOD in
> > Vedic dharma. I understand that most of these posts
> > were largely motivated by a desire to counter posts
> > in other forums where Vishnu is showcased at the
> > Ultimate GOD in the Vedic dharma. I would like to
> > present a view point wherein these differences can be
> > easily resolved.
> >
> > To begin with, please do not comment by saying "brahma
> > which is non dual is the only reality and hence the
> > only GOD". We all are well aware of this "para tattva".
> >
> > These type of discussions certainly fall in the realm
> > of dvaita - advaita. That is, that realm of vyavahAra
> > where knowledge and working of para tattva is integrated
> > with the knowledge and workings of other tattva-s.
> >
> > While there is enough evidence in our Puranas that
> > glorify viSNu or shiva or gaNapati or any other deity,
> > as the Ultimate GOD, there is also equally compelling
> > evidence to start thinking that none of these are the
> > Ultimate GOD.
> >
> > Who then in the Vedic dharma is the Ultimate GOD?
> >
> > Here is my understanding:
> > - The "Adi-puruSa" who is glorified in the puruSa sUkta is the
> >   most promising candidate for the Ultimate GOD of Vedic dharma.
> > - Very likely, this is the uttama puruSa of gitA chapter 15.
> > - Even bhAgavatam clarifies in Book 1, Chapter 3, Shloka 1,
> >   (and indirectly at other places) that puruSa is the original
> >   avatAra of bhagavAn (the GOD of bhAgavatam). And all other
> >   avatAra-s of bhagavAn are parts of this puruSa avatAra.
> > - brahmA, viSNu, shiva, gaNapati are major avatAra-s of this
> >   puruSa avatAra.
> >
> > For sake of completeness, upAsanA texts of the any specific deity
> > include a reference to puruSa avatAra as the supreme form of their
> > chosen deity (which is not incorrect), and also the source of
> > "other" deities (this is also not incorrect).
> >
> > For example, a vaiSNava text would use a term like "mahA viSNu"
> > to refer to the puruSa avatAra, and go on to say that brahmA,
> > and shiva are parts of "mahAviSNu". On the other hand a shaiva
> > text would use a term like "sadAshiva" or "paramashiva" to refer
> > to puruSa avatAra, and go on to say that brahmA, and viSNu are parts
> > of "sadAshiva" or "paramashiva". Note that, in principle this is
> > accurate, however for most of the people, these statements can be
> > the primary source of misunderstanding or confusion.
> >
> > With regards,
> > Shrinivas Gadkari
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>