[Advaita-l] 'Prana' as Brahman

[V Subrahmanian]

On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 12:13 PM Kaushik Chevendra <
chevendrakaushik at gmail.com> wrote:

> Namaste sir
>
> Kaushik,
>>
>> The quote of Sri Amalananda that you have cited is actually a refutation
>> of Bhagavatpada by him.
>>
>
> It would be a refutation of  shankaracharya if he would have contended
> that the jeevatma has an origination. But that's not what he says.
> Shankaracharya's problem with panchatantra is only the origination of
> souls. As he himself says "we don't object that the supreme narayana who is
> beyond avyakta takes various forms to grace...." . "Neither do we object
> that one pointed devotion to him must be established through prostrating
> before him, meditating on him etc"
> If it was that narayana was a jeeva acharya wouldn't have said the above.
>

The Advaita scholars see this as a clear refutation of Shankara.  It is a
subtle advisory to Shankara that it is to be taken in a secondary sense. He
is expressing what the Vaishnavas say about this: it is in a secondary
sense.  'Don't you even know this?' is the tone of his comment.



>
> Keeping this in mind amalananda says that the origination of souls have to
> be taken as an origination of souls in a secondary sense and not literal.
> Hence he does a "samanvaya" and doesn't refute acharya.
> In what way will our own acharyas refute shankaracharya?
>

There is a definition of a 'vartika': that which is said, not said and
wrongly said is discussed in a vartika.  On these lines a commentator
sometimes disagrees with the muula bhashya.  This is there in other schools
too. Some people have pointed out Sureshwara too disagreeing with
Shankara.  I don't remember the exact instances though.

regards
subbu

>
>    Look, while Shankara refuted this school on this point, his own
>> descendent differs from him and has said what is supporting us.
>>
>
> That's because they miss the point. Amalananda has done a reconciliation
> between shankaracharya and pancharatra.
> If we start saying that he refuted shankaracharya, what is the difference
> between us and them?
>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>