Guest guest Posted July 23, 2001 Report Share Posted July 23, 2001 Yesteday Shreeman S.M.S. Chari mentioned in his lectures that the word Maya and nirguNa each one occurs only ones in the upanishat - He quoted the Swe. Up. sloka - maayantu prakR^itim vidyaat ... that we are familiar. ARe there any other references to Maya word in other upanishats and also for nirguNa? Vidya are you there? Hari Om! Sadananda -- K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 23, 2001 Report Share Posted July 23, 2001 Dear Sadananda Ji, I disagree with S.M.S. Chari Ji, as I can find many more places where the word has been used in the Upanishads. Just in Shwetashwatara it has been used at two other places than Mr. Chari Ji has mentioned. 1. indro mayabhih pururupa iyate (Brihadaranyaka 2-5-19) 2. vishvamayanivrittih (shwetashwatara 1-10) 3. tasminshchanyo maayayaa sanniruddhah (shwetashwatara 4-9) 4. na yeshu jihmamanritam na maya cheti (prashna upanishad 1-16) Apart from this, I don't remember just now, but most probably there might be some other places where the word has been used. It has been used in the Samhitas also quite frequently. However, the word nirguna occurs only once (at least in the principle Upanishads), sakshi cheta kevalo nirgunashcha (Shwetashwatara 6-11). Loving Regards, Siddhartha Krishna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 24, 2001 Report Share Posted July 24, 2001 My thanks to Shree Sunder, Siddhartha and Vidya - for responding to my post on maaya and nirguNa. In all fairness to Sreemaan Chari - He was referring to in his analysis that in the sense Bhagavaan Shankara used the concept of maaya in the doctrine of advaita there is one place in the upanishat and that is from Swetaashvatara Up. Yesterday he did mention about use of the maaya word in the Br. Up. but said it is not in the context of meaning that Bhagavaan Shankara used in the advaita doctrine. Giving the benefit of doubt, I need to look at the contextual use of the word. Also nirguNa in the description of the nirvishesha Brahman occurs only ones. I am sure Shreeman Chari also recognizes that it is not number game, but given that importance of a given concept will be more if it has been referred to many a times - like the way Uddalaka repeats 'tat tvam asi swetaketu' - I will try to write a summary of his talks when they are over. In discussing the dual nature - nirguNa Brahman from the absolute point and jagat kraaNa Brahman - Iswara- from the tatastalakshaNa or from the point of upaasana- scriptural support to this dual, should we say nature, occurs only once in Prashna Up. in term of para and apara akshara Brahman. I am learning from his lectures, a perspective, I was not fully aware - whether I agree with him or not is a separate question- When I take up the comparative analysis of Shankara Bhaashya with Ramanuja Bhaashya, I hope to address the issues that he has raised. Hari Om! Sadananda >These are some of the references among the 108 >upanishads. There are some others - gopichandana, >chuulikaa, also. > >maayaa: > >bR^ihadaaraNyaka u. II:v:19 >indro maayaabhiH puru-ruupa iiyate . > >shvetaashvatara: >I:10 vishva-maayaa nivR^ittiH . >IV:9 tasmi.nshchaanyo maayayaa sa.nniruddhaH . > asmaanmaayii sR^ijate vishvametat . >IV:10 maayaa.n tu prakriti.n viddhi . > maayina.n tu maheshvaram . > >prashna: >I:16 na maayaa cheti . > >nR^isi.nhapuurvataapinii: >III:1 maayaa vaa eshhaa naaras.nhii > maayaametaa.n shakti.n vidyaat . > ya etaaM maayaa.n shakti.n veda . >V:1 maayayaa vaa etatsarva.n veshhTitam . > naatmaanaM maayaa spR^ishati . > maayayaa bahirveshhTitam . > kshetra.n kshetra.n vaa maayaishhaa sampadyate . >V:9 maayayaa hyanyadiva . > maayaa cha tamoruupaanubhuuteH . > evamevaishhaa maayaa ..kshetraaNi darshayitvaa . > muuDha iva vyavahaarannaste maayayaiva . > maayayaa naasa.nvittiH svaprakaashe . > >nR^isi.nhauttarataapinii : >1. trayamapyatat sushhupta.n svapnaM maayaamaatram . >5. ida.n sarva.n yadayamaatmaa maayaamaatram . >maitrii: >IV:2 indrajaalamiva maayaamayam . > >sarvasaara u: >I. aatmaa maayaa cheti katham . >IV.saa maayetyuchyate . > >kR^ishhNa: >5. maayaa saa trividhaa proktaa . >6. maayaa tredhaa hyudaahR^itaa . >7. ajayyaa vaishhNavii maayaa . >11. hariH saakshaanmaayaavigrahadhaaraNaH . >12. maayayaa mohita.n jagat . >13. tasya maaya jagatkatham . > >raamapuurvataapinii: >III:1 tato raamo maanavo maayayaadhaat . > >kaivalya: >I:12 sa evaM maayaaparimohitaatmaa . >_ > >nirguNa: > >shvetaashvatara: >VI:11 saakshii chetaa kevalo nirguNashcha . > >brahma u.: > saakshii chetaa kevalo nirguNashcha . > >maitrii: >VI:10 asya nirguNo bhoktaa . >VII:1 nirguNaH shuddho bhaasvaraH . > >sunder > -- K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 24, 2001 Report Share Posted July 24, 2001 Namaste, Brahma-sutra III:ii:3: maayaamaatra.n tu kaartsnynaanabhivyaktasvaruupatvaat.h . Shankara does not mince any words, and is quite clear in the sense in which he uses the word maayaa. All his references in the Bhashya are to Brihad. Upan. Regards, s. advaitin, "K. Sadananda" <sada@a...> wrote: > > > In all fairness to Sreemaan Chari - He was referring to in his > analysis that in the sense Bhagavaan Shankara used the concept of > maaya in the doctrine of advaita there is one place in the upanishat > and that is from Swetaashvatara Up. Yesterday he did mention about > use of the maaya word in the Br. Up. but said it is not in the > context of meaning that Bhagavaan Shankara used in the advaita > doctrine. Giving the benefit of doubt, I need to look at the > contextual use of the word. > > > >nR^isi.nhapuurvataapinii: > >III:1 maayaa vaa eshhaa naaras.nhii > > maayaametaa.n shakti.n vidyaat . > > ya etaaM maayaa.n shakti.n veda . > >V:1 maayayaa vaa etatsarva.n veshhTitam . > > naatmaanaM maayaa spR^ishati . > > maayayaa bahirveshhTitam . > > kshetra.n kshetra.n vaa maayaishhaa sampadyate . > >V:9 maayayaa hyanyadiva . > > maayaa cha tamoruupaanubhuuteH . > > evamevaishhaa maayaa ..kshetraaNi darshayitvaa . > > muuDha iva vyavahaarannaste maayayaiva . > > maayayaa naasa.nvittiH svaprakaashe . > > > >nR^isi.nhauttarataapinii : > >1. trayamapyatat sushhupta.n svapnaM maayaamaatram . > >5. ida.n sarva.n yadayamaatmaa maayaamaatram . > >maitrii: > >IV:2 indrajaalamiva maayaamayam . > > > >sarvasaara u: > >I. aatmaa maayaa cheti katham . > >IV.saa maayetyuchyate . > > > >kR^ishhNa: > >5. maayaa saa trividhaa proktaa . > >6. maayaa tredhaa hyudaahR^itaa . > >7. ajayyaa vaishhNavii maayaa . > >11. hariH saakshaanmaayaavigrahadhaaraNaH . > >12. maayayaa mohita.n jagat . > >13. tasya maaya jagatkatham . > > > >raamapuurvataapinii: > >III:1 tato raamo maanavo maayayaadhaat . > > > >kaivalya: > >I:12 sa evaM maayaaparimohitaatmaa . > >_ > > > >nirguNa: > > > >shvetaashvatara: > >VI:11 saakshii chetaa kevalo nirguNashcha . > > > >brahma u.: > > saakshii chetaa kevalo nirguNashcha . > > > >maitrii: > >VI:10 asya nirguNo bhoktaa . > >VII:1 nirguNaH shuddho bhaasvaraH . > > > >sunder > > > -- > K. Sadananda > Code 6323 > Naval Research Laboratory > Washington D.C. 20375 > Voice (202)767-2117 > Fax:(202)767-2623 > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 26, 2001 Report Share Posted July 26, 2001 >On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Vidyasankar wrote: > >(quote from Sadananda) > >> >Yesteday Shreeman S.M.S. Chari mentioned in his lectures that the >> >word Maya and nirguNa each one occurs only ones in the upanishat - > >He's wrong, at least if his own tradition be believed. There is also the >verse: Shrisha Rao Thanks for your input. I think I had clarified in my next post, perhaps in advaitin list, Shreeman Chari's statement pertains to the use of the word Maya in the context of how Bhagavan Shankara used in the advaita doctrine. In the other places where maya occurs he contends that its usage is not in the same sense. In the advaita, maaya equated essentially as prakr^iti, with triguNaatmika and with aavarana and vikshepa shakti and it becomes upaadhi of Iswara for the creation. In that sense it is usage occurs only once that is in the Swetaaswatara Up. and even there also contextually if one examines, it is not exactly the same, says Shreeman Chari. He also mentions, of course, given the adviatic position that Brahman alone is real as sat, one has to bring in Maaya to account for the appearance of jada prakR^iti/ jagat. In that case it becomes shrutit based anupalabdhi pramaaNa, rather than direct shruti pramaaNa. Nothing wrong in the use of anupalabdi and all achaaryas have used in some context or the other to justify their doctrine. I give a benefit of doubt to Shreeman Chari's statement before I accept or reject it. Hari Om! Sadananda -- K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 27, 2001 Report Share Posted July 27, 2001 Shrisha Rao Thanks for your input. > > >> > ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- >> ><ADVAITA-L > >I got such an error previously also; my last posting had to be sent twice. Yes, they are encountering some problems and <avadvaita-l seems to accept the postings. Pl. try that. > >> >He also mentions, of course, given the adviatic position that >> >Brahman alone is real as sat, one has to bring in Maaya to account >> >for the appearance of jada prakR^iti/ jagat. In that case it becomes >> >shrutit based anupalabdhi pramaaNa, rather than direct shruti >> >pramaaNa. > >However, Ramanuja follows Shankara's lead on the question of prakR^iti, >cf. the prakR^ityadhikaraNa (1.4.2x?) of the shrIbhAshhya; he accepts >Shankara's lead in saying that the sUtrakAra has rejected the principle of >prakR^iti. That being so, Chari's point is rather a chimerical one and >one fails to see what its merit is. I think both Bhagavaan Shankara in one sense and Bhagavaan Ramanuja in another sense, in contrast to Bhagavaan Madhva accept Brahman as the upaadana kaarana rejecting prakr^iti it self or alone as the Upadaana cause. If I understand correctly, in that sense only Ramanuja follows Shankara's lead. >If there being just one instance where mAyA and prakR^iti are mentioned >together is an obstruction the way he's putting it, then what can we make >of there being only one instance where bhakti is mentioned as being >similar towards a Guru as towards a Deity (yasya deve parAbhaktiryathA >deve tathA gurau)? It would be that devotion to a Guru is unnecessary, >and that devotion to Deities is also optional at best. Notice in this >regard that Ramanuja can find no support for his doctrine's fundamental >tenets of prapatti and bhakti, in the sUtra-s. > >Regards, > >Shrisha Rao While I do not disagree with your statements, I am sure we all agree in some sense that bhakti or prapatti or sharanaagati in the sense Bhagavaan Ramanuja proposes would help as a sadhana and definitely not an obstruction for liberation. Whether it is direct means or not depends on how we associate the meaning for the sharanaagati and the nature of the goal. There we all know that all the three achaarya-s differ. My interests in raising the above issue is not for finding fault with Bhagavaan Ramanuja's theory at this stage but only learning what extent Shreeman Chari is right in his comments relating to maaya and nirguNa aspect as presented in the adviatic doctrine. I hope to take up Ramajuja's laghu and mayaa siddhaanta-s and reexamine it in the light of the Shankara Bhaashya that I am presenting in the two advaita lists. Hari Om! Sadananda -- K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 27, 2001 Report Share Posted July 27, 2001 As every one ofcourse is aware-- Both Prapatti and Saranaagati are Lord Sri Krishna's own advice in Srimad Bhagawad Gita. --- "K. Sadananda" <sada wrote: > Shrisha Rao > > Thanks for your input. > > > > > > >> > ----- The following addresses had permanent > fatal errors ----- > >> ><ADVAITA-L > > > >I got such an error previously also; my last > posting had to be sent twice. > > Yes, they are encountering some problems and > <avadvaita-l seems to accept the > postings. Pl. try > that. > > > > >> >He also mentions, of course, given the adviatic > position that > >> >Brahman alone is real as sat, one has to bring > in Maaya to account > >> >for the appearance of jada prakR^iti/ jagat. In > that case it becomes > >> >shrutit based anupalabdhi pramaaNa, rather than > direct shruti > >> >pramaaNa. > > > >However, Ramanuja follows Shankara's lead on the > question of prakR^iti, > >cf. the prakR^ityadhikaraNa (1.4.2x?) of the > shrIbhAshhya; he accepts > >Shankara's lead in saying that the sUtrakAra has > rejected the principle of > >prakR^iti. That being so, Chari's point is rather > a chimerical one and > >one fails to see what its merit is. > > I think both Bhagavaan Shankara in one sense and > Bhagavaan Ramanuja > in another sense, in contrast to Bhagavaan Madhva > accept Brahman as > the upaadana kaarana rejecting prakr^iti it self or > alone as the > Upadaana cause. If I understand correctly, in that > sense only > Ramanuja follows Shankara's lead. > > >If there being just one instance where mAyA and > prakR^iti are mentioned > >together is an obstruction the way he's putting it, > then what can we make > >of there being only one instance where bhakti is > mentioned as being > >similar towards a Guru as towards a Deity (yasya > deve parAbhaktiryathA > >deve tathA gurau)? It would be that devotion to a > Guru is unnecessary, > >and that devotion to Deities is also optional at > best. Notice in this > >regard that Ramanuja can find no support for his > doctrine's fundamental > >tenets of prapatti and bhakti, in the sUtra-s. > > > >Regards, > > > >Shrisha Rao > > While I do not disagree with your statements, I am > sure we all agree > in some sense that bhakti or prapatti or > sharanaagati in the sense > Bhagavaan Ramanuja proposes would help as a sadhana > and definitely > not an obstruction for liberation. Whether it is > direct means or not > depends on how we associate the meaning for the > sharanaagati and the > nature of the goal. There we all know that all the > three achaarya-s > differ. > > My interests in raising the above issue is not for > finding fault > with Bhagavaan Ramanuja's theory at this stage but > only learning what > extent Shreeman Chari is right in his comments > relating to maaya and > nirguNa aspect as presented in the adviatic > doctrine. I hope to take > up Ramajuja's laghu and mayaa siddhaanta-s and > reexamine it in the > light of the Shankara Bhaashya that I am presenting > in the two > advaita lists. > > Hari Om! > Sadananda > > > > -- > K. Sadananda > Code 6323 > Naval Research Laboratory > Washington D.C. 20375 > Voice (202)767-2117 > Fax:(202)767-2623 > > Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Messenger http://phonecard./ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.