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

[H S Chandramouli]

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 2:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Re: Bhagavad Gita - As it actually is |
Sanatana Dharma | Sri Shankara Bhagavatpada & Bhakti | Sringeri
To: Raghav Kumar Dwivedula <raghavkumar00 at gmail.com>


Namaste Raghav Ji,

// mAyA can directly be equated as shuddha brahman who is shaktimat (by
shakti-shaktimat ananyatvaM) //,

No. Not mAyA. Ishwara. As in the second paragraph of your mail.

Incidentally you have not addressed it to the Forums. Accordingly my reply
also is only to you.

Regards



On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 2:30 PM Raghav Kumar Dwivedula <
raghavkumar00 at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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
>>>
>>