[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Re: Bhagavad Gita - As it actually is | Sanatana Dharma | Sri Shankara Bhagavatpada & Bhakti | Sringeri

[Raghav Kumar Dwivedula]

:

> Namaste Chandramouliji
>
> Noted the key points about BGB 14.27 that mAyA can directly be equated as
> shuddha brahman who is shaktimat (by shakti-shaktimat ananyatvaM)  carrying
> the meaning of jnAnaM (without necessarily having to bringing in Sagunam
> brahma or sopadhikam brahma as the intermediate concept or entity as a
> stepping stone).
>
> Also the phrase Ishvara-Shakti (at least in this context)
> is not Ishvarasya shakti, rather it is
> IshvaraH Eva Shakti who is non-separate from shuddha Brahma (the
> “shaktimat”).
>
> Thank you
> Om
> Raghav
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 at 11:02 AM, H S Chandramouli <
> hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Namaste Raghav Ji,
>>
>> Reg  // The word Brahman used in the above context, brahma pratiShThate
>> pravartate,
>> is saguNam brahma?
>> It might amount to saying IshvaraH shaktyA pravartatE. (as in saya, a
>>
>
>> magician wields his magical power)
>>
> //,
>>
> The statement here in BG14-27 is the Final say of Advaita SiddhAnta.  In
>> my understanding what the Bhashya states is as under.
>>
>> The ONLY Entity  what we understand as Shakti is Shuddha Brahman or
>> NirguNa Brahman. All else are inert. When it is said that mayA is Shakti ,
>> it should be understood  only in a figurative sense. mAyA which is inert
>> derives its capacity to act as a shakti from Shuddha Brahman/Shuddha
>> Chaitanya only. The ONLY Shakti or Shakta is Shuddha Brahman.
>>
>> The same observation applies to the term saguNam brahma also.
>>
>> In this sense, Shakti is equivalent of  Jnanam  as in ** सत्यं
>> ज्ञानमनन्तं ब्रह्म ।** (satyaM j~nAnamanantaM brahma |).
>>
>> Instead of my elaborating  further, it is much more enjoyable to just
>> ponder over this part of BGB 14-27 on these lines in your own way !!
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 7:33 PM Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Namaste Chandramouliji
>>> Thank you for the discussion on BGB 14.27
>>> यया च ईश्वरशक्त्या भक्तानुग्रहादिप्रयोजनाय ब्रह्म प्रतिष्ठते
>>>  प्रवर्तते, सा शक्तिः ब्रह्मैव अहम् , शक्तिशक्तिमतोः अनन्यत्वात्
>>> इत्यभिप्रायः । //
>>>
>>> The word Brahman used in the above context, brahma pratiShThate
>>> pravartate,
>>> is saguNam brahma?
>>>
>>> It might amount to saying IshvaraH shaktyA pravartatE. (as in say, a
>>> magician wields his magical power).
>>>
>>> Can you please clarify?
>>> Thank you
>>>
>>> Om
>>> Raghav
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, 21 Apr 2025 at 5:42 PM, H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l <
>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Namaste Bhaskar Ji,
>>> >
>>> > Reg // And when it has been well established that the jagat which is an
>>> > effect of Brahman is itself non-different from Brahman //,
>>> >
>>> > //  another synonym of this mAya i.e. avyAkruta also clearly said
>>> brahman
>>> > and nothing but brahman before creation and there is no difference
>>> between
>>> > these two!! //.
>>> >
>>> > The term avyAkruta  is understood differently in different contexts in
>>> the
>>> > Bhashya. In some places it addresses Atman itself. In some other
>>> places it
>>> > addresses Iswara (Shuddha Brahman or Atman with mAyA). In yet other
>>> places
>>> > it addresses just mAyA or jagat. This is stated so in the Bhashya
>>> itself.
>>> >
>>> > An effect maybe  nondifferent from cause. But it cannot be said cause
>>> is
>>> > nondifferent from effect. Jagat is neither different nor nondifferent
>>> from
>>> >  Shuddha Brahman. mAyA also is neither different nor nondifferent from
>>> > Shuddha Brahman.
>>> >
>>> > I have given the Bhashya reference BGB 14-27 for your earlier citation
>>> and
>>> > the implications thereof. That Bhashya part does not state mAyA or
>>> jagat as
>>> > nondifferent from Shuddha Brahman. But it does state Shakti to be
>>> > understood as Iswara Shakti (meaning thereby Iswara itself as Shakti
>>> and
>>> > not Iswara’s Shakti) . This is ananya with Shuddha Brahman.
>>> >
>>> > But I do agree that we have addressed  this issue several times earlier
>>> > without agreement.
>>> >
>>> > Regards
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 5:01 PM Bhaskar YR <
>>> bhaskar.yr at hitachienergy.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > It does not posit ananyatvam as between Brahman and mAyA. On the
>>> other
>>> > > hand, it presents Shuddha Brahman and Iswara as ananya.
>>> > >
>>> > > BGB  14-27 // … यया च ईश्वरशक्त्या भक्तानुग्रहादिप्रयोजनाय ब्रह्म
>>> > > प्रतिष्ठते प्रवर्तते, सा शक्तिः ब्रह्मैव अहम् , शक्तिशक्तिमतोः
>>> > अनन्यत्वात्
>>> > >  इत्यभिप्रायः । //
>>> > >
>>> > > // …..yayA cha IshvarashaktyA bhaktAnugrahAdiprayojanAya brahma
>>> > > pratiShThate pravartate, sA shaktiH brahmaiva aham ,
>>> shaktishaktimatoH
>>> > > ananyatvAt ityabhiprAyaH | //
>>> > >
>>> > > praNAms Sri ChandramouLi prabhuji
>>> > >
>>> > > Hare Krishna
>>> > >
>>> > > For the sake of brevity I have deleted rest of your message (Kannada
>>> > > translation as well).  If the Ishwara tattva is clear then I think
>>> > > ananyatvaM between Ishwara and brahman and Ishwara and his shakti
>>> (mAya)
>>> > > can easily be understood.  Here you are saying that brahman and
>>> Ishwara
>>> > as
>>> > > ananya but brahman and mAya are different.  I am not able to
>>> understand
>>> > > this.  Is this  Ishwara without shakti or with shakti??  With shakti
>>> > > (sarvashakta) jnAna (sarvajna) brahman itself called Ishwara is it
>>> not??
>>> > > When it is called Ishwara (brahman) and his shakti NOT different, I
>>> am
>>> > > really not able to understand anyatvaM (difference) between mAya and
>>> > > brahman.  The mAya carries synonym ‘mUlaprakruti’ and it has been
>>> said
>>> > that
>>> > > it is brahman, another synonym ‘akshara’ has again been equated with
>>> > > brahman, and another synonym of this mAya i.e. avyAkruta also clearly
>>> > said
>>> > > brahman and nothing but brahman before creation and there is no
>>> > difference
>>> > > between these two!!  So, I am really unable to understand your
>>> equation
>>> > > i.e. Ishwara=brahman BUT mAya is NOT equal to brahman.  Here what
>>> exactly
>>> > > is the difference between Ishwara (with  mAya) and brahman to say
>>> they
>>> > are
>>> > > different and what strikes the equality between brahman and ishwara
>>> > > (without mAya)!!??
>>> > >
>>> > > And when it has been well established that the jagat which is an
>>> effect
>>> > of
>>> > > Brahman is itself non-different from Brahman, does it not follow
>>> > > automatically that Brahma mAyA too is not different from Brahman? Or
>>> am I
>>> > > missing something here??
>>> > >
>>> > > Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
>>> > >
>>> > > bhaskar
>>> > >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>>> >
>>> > 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: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>>> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>>
>>> For assistance, contact:
>>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>>
>>