Originally Posted by
sarabhanga
First you used the Vedanta (Brahma) Sutras, and then the Padma Purana, and then Shankaracarya’s Gita Bhashya, and then the Bhagavadgita itself, and then Shankaracarya’s Brahmasutra Bhashya, and then the Vishnu Purana and the Vishnu Sahasranamavali !
And you have so far avoided the Mandukyopanishad and the Gaudapadakarika, and when I introduced the very first line of the actual Upanishad you deemed it irrelevant !
You started this thread and set the ground rules, and ever since you have completely ignored the very basis of this discussion !
If you cannot follow simple rules, why do you impose them on others ?
Do you think Mandukya sublates all other scriptures? That is what advaitins seem to think so...
Here, I have not brought in anything related to it - I am simply asking why Narayana is held to be Prajna and Shiva as Turiya( you mentioned that in this thread) when Sri Shankara himself never mentions anything. Nirguna Brahma is both ashabda and avachya and cannot be called Shiva(auspicious) - breaks the very definition of NB. So who is Shiva according to advaita, yeah the same Rudra or Umapati?
Mind you, I have great regard for Shankara unlike some of the other Vaishnavites who call him devil or something like that. He is a great Vishnu bhakta though his interpretations are not anybody other than a Mayavadin would accept. Simply because many concepts of advaita have no scriptural basis. Nor any logical basis. Even by advaitin interpretations, the scriptural support is found in less than 1% of the scripture and the rest of the scripture is maya.(false truth)
Guard your Dharma, Burn the Myth, Promote the Truth, Crush the superstition.
Bookmarks