[Advaita-l] Fwd: Looking for the source of a passage

[V Subrahmanian]

On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:16 AM Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Subbu ji and Venkat ji
>
> Based on the rudra prashna, I have heard it said that say such references
> in mantras , to even venal and violent individuals, fraudsters and conmen,
> waylayers, thieves etc in creation as also being that same Brahman - is for
> prAyascitta (atonement).
>
>  The idea being that Shiva alone has manifested as all these unsavory
> characters in our life/world, to give us the necessary karma phalas.
>
> Accordingly, acknowledgement of the same, without dveSha, chanted along
> with mantras like नमः सहमानाय (third anuvAka - I salute the tolerant Lord,
> who accommodates the transgressions of devotees who seek forgiveness
> भक्तापराधक्षममाणाय etc.)  etc., works towards prAyascittam.
>
> ( Of course, in the brahmasutra context,  I understand that the denial of
> multiplicity (nAnAtvaM) in brahman is done by asserting that Brahma is
> manifest even in the gamblers and lower beings. )
>

The view of Advaitins, based on Shankara's bhashyas, is that the Sri
Rudram's statements are to teach us that both the 'ghora' (terrible) and
'aghora' (benign) are manifestations of Brahman.  Instead of saying Brahman
manifests 'in' the terrible, benign, etc. as per Advaita it is correct to
say that 'Brahman manifests 'as' the ghora and aghora in creation. That is
what Shankara asserts with the help of not one but many shruti passages: he
cites the shvetashvatara there (just after the now discovered Paippalada
samhita): you are woman, man, young girl, the old man tottering with a
stick....  Of course the Advaitin would see this as: the name/form of the
ghora and aghora are mithya and the unnegatable vastu there is Brahman.
This part is not admissible to non-advaitins, as can be seen from this
example:  Pl. read this short article that examines the statements made by
noted Dvaita scholar Bannanje Govindacharya exactly in the Srirudram
context:

http://www.mediafire.com/file/2t6t3kws14cfj58/srirudram_Bannanje_reply_English.pdf


> Is vAvana = vA + avana (desire/joy?)
>

I do not know. Maybe vyakarana people can clarify.

regards
subbu

>
>
> Om
> Raghav
>
>
>
> On Mon, 11 May, 2020, 11:46 AM V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l, <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > In the Brahma sutra bhashya 2.3.43, Shankara has cited a passage as from
> > the Atharva veda:
> >
> > तथा ह्येके शाखिनो दाशकितवादिभावं ब्रह्मण आमनन्त्याथर्वणिका ब्रह्मसूक्ते
> — ‘
> > ब्रह्म दाशा ब्रह्म दासा ब्रह्मैवेमे कितवाः’ इत्यादिना ;
> >
> > No editor has cited the source of the passage, as far as I could search.
> >
> > Could anyone help locating the passage?
> >
> > Thanks
> > subbu
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>