[Advaita-l] [advaitin] PanvhadashI 2.35

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms
Hare Krishna

No. It is regarding the usage सतः नामरूपे. And regarding the conclusion of this verse.


  *   Before other members jump in to ‘force’ the interpretation I would like to say :  sataH nAmarUpe is rather proving the satyatvaM that is behind nAma rUpa, the substance or adhishtAnaM behind the perceived nAma rUpa.  For example, when we say the jagat is an existing one, we utter being the part and parcel of the same jagat but assuming that we are vishayi and seeing the jagat as Vishaya.  We are under the impression that we are the cognizer of something which is not our own selves, this is what is called parichinna drushti or restricted / conditioned upAdhi drushti.  Taking the existence of jagat aloof from us and labelling it as the world as if it is something entirely outside of us. This is, nothing but granting of externality to the nAma rUpa jagat which is in reality not external to ourselves. The jagat is not an external object. It is not outside of us, and yet we see it outside.  But the seer, seen the act of seeing everything is within ourselves …karaNaM, kAraNam, karta is THAT only.  In this sense what we see outside of us as nAma rUpa as anAtma is not anAtma but Atma only, that same nirvishesha Atma appearing to us in a vishesha nAma rUpa.  Infact bhAshyakAra himself says this somewhere in some bhAshya.  In the araMbhaNAdhikaraNa sUtra bhAshya somewhere confirms even the nAma/rUpa  effects are indeed of the nature of the cause the brahman, it is just because of the fact that there cannot be an effect coming into existence, if it is not of the nature of the cause.
  *   I know you don’t agree to all this and pushing aside as secondary teaching.  But since you asked member’s understanding I dared to share my thoughts 😊

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar