[Advaita-l] SIDDHANTA KAUMADI

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Hari Om Bhaskar ji,

Yes. Indeed such 'confirmation' reduces all mention of Ganesha in diverse
literature as mere fictional symbolism. Nothing wrong with that per se
unless we are ready to accept all related perosnalities (like Vyasa) as
fictional and symbolic also. Here there will arise the problems.

Keeping the symbolism aside, what is your view regarding vyavaharik
satyatva of Ganesha, Shesha-Shayi Vishnu and also Ksheera Sagara. These are
some hard questions in my opinion. Much harder than the logics of advaita.

Regards.
Sudhanshu.

On Thu 2 May, 2019, 17:02 Bhaskar YR, <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:

> praNAms Sri Sudhanshu Shekhar prabhuji
> Hare Krishna
>
> I got stuck on "Ganesha is derived". The question which bothers me is as
> follows - whether Ganesha is a vyavaharik satya like you and me, like this
> table and chair.. or whether He is a derived abstract concept.
>
> >  We the advaitins not ready to accept and attribute even the vyAharArika
> satyatvaM to Lord Ganesha while happily accepting the vyAvahArika satyatva
> of even jada vastu-s like chairs and tables 😊   Ganesha, vishNu, shambhu,
> devi sUrya panchAyatana devata-s are mere derived abstract concepts 😊
> thanks to nireeshwara Advaita vedAnta 😊  Kindly note I am not making this
> statement after seeing your doubt, I am stating this after seeing the
> confirmation that "Ganesha is mere derived abstract concept ".  Now the
> doubt is who wrote mahAbhArata ?? did vyAsa dictate this to mere abstract
> nonexistent entity called ganesha or the ganesha who wrote mahAbhArata is
> some other ganesha who has atleast vyAvahArika reality   😊
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
>
>