[Advaita-l] [advaitin] rAma-krishna-shiva-durga etc. are not same in shAstric vyavahAra!!!

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Venkataraghavan prabhuji
Hare Krishna


  *   It seems upAdhi sahita brahman making more noise here than nirupAdhika brahman 😊

I only meant that they are only jIva-s in vyavahAra, they are not Ishvara.


Ø     And IshvarOpAdhi, his sarvajnatva, sarvashatitva too valid in vyavahAra only due to limited adjuncts is it not??  ( vide reference ArambhaNAdhikaraNa bhAshya) If the upAdhi of Ishwara is his own iccha/saMkalpa/ sAdhakAnugrahArthaM why bhAshyakAra said its due to ignorance valid only in vyavahAra?? And he also clarified elsewhere Ishwara’s / brahman’s sarvajnatvam sarvashaktitvaM etc. is svabhAva of brahman (itareya intro) Just wondering.

Just because we accept there is jIveshvara bheda and jIva-jIva bheda in vyavahAra, why should we accept  bheda between one form of Ishvara and another form of Ishvara in all respects? The bheda between Shiva and Vishnu that we are willing to accept is only in their name, form, pUja vidhi, mantras etc. We do not accept any bheda in their status as Ishvara.


Ø     IMO, it is because we are differentiating based on upAdhi-s.  Ignoring the upAdhi and concentrating and realizing ONLY  Ishwaratva (or paramArtha tattva) does not stop us to see Ishwaravtva ONLY in Ishwara upAdhi.  And when we are saying Ishwaratva being worshipped behind names and forms we knowingly or unknowingly clinging to upAdhi-s only and in that upAdhi pradhAna upAsana prakriya, upAsya devata is different so no need to see the abheda and argue the sameness even though in their kAraNa svarUpa it is Ishwara since Ishwaratva is one and the same behind ‘everything’.



In fact, if we accept bheda between two forms of Ishvara in all respects in vyavahAra then it is as good as saying there are two Ishvara-s, which would be absurd.


  *   Yes this would be absurd and the same rule is applicable to jeeva-jeeva bheda, Jeeva-Ishwara bheda, deva-Ishwara bheda in vyavahAra.  For us, the advaitins, it would be shAtra permit way to think like that.  Now the question is what are the upAdhi-s that are exclusively worn by Ishwara by his own eccha/saMkalpa to bless the sAdhaka-s??  Can we say upAdhi-s ( names and forms) exclusively attributed to ONLY paNchAyatana devata, ok we can include shaNmukha also and nothing else??  I don’t think that would be restrictions that we can impose on IshwarOpAdhi, yO yO yAm yAm tanum bhaktaH ….tAm eva vidadAmyahaM says lord in geeta.  It might be varAha, it might be Narasimha, it might be fish, he might be dwarf (vAmana) or gigantic (trivikrama) what not??  So there is no limitations or exclusiveness to his attire (upAdhi-s) and at the same time the power exhibited by the same Ishwara through different upAdhi-s why not he is different in different names and forms??  The power behind oven and refrigerator one and the same but serve different purpose through different devices.  Hence upAsya devata, upAsana vidhi, upAsaka all are exclusive and different in their own sphere in the kArya brahmOpAsana.  This is what I am trying to say.  Please let me know where I am erring in this understanding.

We instead say both Shiva and Vishnu are Ishvara only, they have just taken different names and forms for our benefit.


Ø     Interestingly when we are trying to prove shiva vishNu abheda we are not so particular to prove along with devi, sUrya, gaNapati abheda.  And bhAshyakAra too interestingly makes the categorization of some devata-s as tAmasi (vinAyaka, mAtru gaNa,sapta mAtruka etc.) and arAdhana of it restricted to only some set of upAsaka-s.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar