[Advaita-l] Narayana Bhatta's 'Narayana' fundamentally different from that of Ramanuja

[kuntimaddi sadananda]

PraNAms
Shreeman S.N. Sastriji had written an elaborate commentary on NaaraayaNeeyam and has been published by Chinmaya Mission. 
Shree Sastriji was also a moderator of the Advaitin group. 
I learned a lot from him, and he was not hesitant to point out if my interpretation was wrong at the same time appreciative of my presentations. 
He left us a couple of years ago.
Hari Om!Sadananda



 

    On Friday, May 31, 2019, 4:48:08 AM PDT, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:  
 
 The 'Naaraayaneeyam' is extremely famous as a devotional discourse authored
by the Advaitin Sri Narayana Bhatta of Kerala. The object of stuti in this
work is Lord Sri Krishna, the presiding deity of the famous temple at
Guruvayoor, Kerala.

To the uninitiated it might appear that this is the very same Vishnu who is
held to be the Brahman by sectarian schools. However, a proper study of the
work with the help of the commentaries would reveal that the Brahman of
this text is fundamentally different and opposed to the god of the
non-advaitins.

While for the Vedantin, Brahman is the one that takes, out of Maya and its
three gunas, the three forms of the Trimurtis, it is also immanent in and
transcends the Trimurtis. Brahman is non-different from the Trimurtis who
are its own essential manifestations. Such an idea is anathema and
reprehensible for the bhakti schools which maintain an absolute difference
across the Trimurtis. Their Brahman, in the view of the Vedantin is a
finite one, being subject to vastu-pariccheda.

In this verse of the 90th dashaka, the author says:
http://www.narayaneeyam-firststep.org/dashaka90.html


वृकभृगुमुनिमोहिन्यम्बरीषादिवृत्ते-
ष्वयि तव हि महत्त्वं सर्वशर्वादिजैत्रम् ।
स्थितमिह परमात्मन् निष्कलार्वागभिन्नं
किमपि यदवभातं तद्धि रूपं तवैव ॥१॥

O Supreme Being! The episodes of Vrikaasura, Sage Bhrigu, Thy Mohini
Avataar and the Ambareesh episode only proves, here, that Thy majesty and
superiority supersedes over all other deities like Shiva and others.Thou
are non-different from Thy Nishkala (partless) form and Thy Sakala (part)
forms like Shiva, Brahamaa, and shine in an indescribable manner as the
essence of all.

The above verse holds that not only Brahman is Nishkalam, Nirgunam, but
also non-different from its sakala, saguna, forms.

What is even more, it is the very same One Brahman that obtains as the
Trimurti-s in their respective regions that are collectively called
Satyaloka. This is being stated in the next verse:

मूर्तित्रयेश्वरसदाशिवपञ्चकं यत्
प्राहु: परात्मवपुरेव सदाशिवोऽस्मिन् ।
तत्रेश्वरस्तु स विकुण्ठपदस्त्वमेव
त्रित्वं पुनर्भजसि सत्यपदे त्रिभागे ॥२॥

The Shaivaas speak of five aspects with Brahmaa Vishnu Shiva Ishwara and
Sadaashiva. Here Sadaashiva is Thy own self the Supreme Being. Thou alone
are Ishwara the Lord of Vaikuntha. The three forms of Trinity, Thou alone
assume in the three parts of Satyaloka.

The above idea of Sadashiva being verily non-different from Vishnu is
unacceptable to non-advaitins. Also, the idea of One Brahman being the
resident of the three aspects of the Satya loka is also not admissible to
them. Only the Vedantin, based on the Turiya of the Mandukya Upanishad will
be able to state the above.

Narayana Bhatta stresses the idea of Murti-traya repeatedly:

तत्रापि सात्त्विकतनुं तव विष्णुमाहु-
र्धाता तु सत्त्वविरलो रजसैव पूर्ण: ।
सत्त्वोत्कटत्वमपि चास्ति तमोविकार-
चेष्टादिकञ्च तव शङ्करनाम्नि मूर्तौ ॥३॥

The form of Vishnu, among the Trimuti, is a manifestation of pure Sattva.
Brahmaa is the manifestation of abundance of Rajas with a trace of Sattva.
Whereas, Thy form known as Shankara has an abundance of Sattva but Tamas
expresses itself in its activities.

The above statement of Vishnu/Brahman manifesting the tamas and rajas as
Shiva and Brahma is rejected by non-advaitins as their concept of Brahman
which is a deity, cannot be depicted as endowed with tamas and rajas. This
also distinguishes at the very root the Vishnu of Narayana Bhatta from the
deity of the vaishnava sects.

The idea of Brahman transcending the Trimurtis is stated here:
तं च त्रिमूर्त्यतिगतं परपूरुषं त्वां
शर्वात्मनापि खलु सर्वमयत्वहेतो: ।
शंसन्त्युपासनविधौ तदपि स्वतस्तु

त्वद्रूपमित्यतिदृढं बहु न: प्रमाणम् ॥४॥

  Thou do transcend the Trinity and are the Supreme Being.  The word
'trimurtyatigatam' says this. Thou are the essence of all and Shaivas
worship Thee alone as Shiva with worshiping norms, as described. That too
is Thy form alone. We have many proofs in support of this truth.

A Vishnu who is above another Vishnu is not admissible in non-advaitic
schools. Shankara in his Vishnu Sahasra Nama bhashya has commented upon the
term ‘Keshava’  with an etymological meaning, alternatively, as ‘He under
whose control exist Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva.’  It is this ‘Turiya
Vishnu/Keshava’ that is taught by Veda Vyasa in the Mahabharatha as "Satyam
Satyam punah Satyam Uddhrtya bhujam uchayate . Vedaat Sastram Param naasti
na daivam Kesavaat param"

Vishnu being under the control of another Vishnu is not admitted by anyone
but Shankara.

Thus, the above sample citations from the Narayaniyam prove beyond doubt
that the concept of 'Vishnu' as Brahman is totally different between
Advaitins and non-Advaitins.

See also:

http://www.mediafire.com/file/qm4ifz4kavff61i/Hari_Hara_abheda..Narayaneeyam_F.pdf/file


http://www.mediafire.com/file/mo3ni2pg3o6e2tr/Vishnu_of_Shankara_and_Ramanuja.pdf/file

warm regards

subrahmanian.v
_______________________________________________
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita

To unsubscribe or change your options:
https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l

For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org