Vishnu talks with her Mother Devhuti [Bhagavata Purana]

[hinduism♥krishna]

Pranam..

This thread includes conversation of Bhagavan Kapila, Avatara of Vishnu with his mother Devhuti. It is mentioned in 26th chapter of 3rd canto of Bhagavata Purana. He teaches the perfect supreme knowledge of Advaita. He also asserted that knowledge alone is the cause of Moksha.

श्रीभगवानुवाच ।
अथ ते सम्प्रवक्ष्यामि तत्त्वानां लक्षणं पृथक् ।
यद्विदित्वा विमुच्येत पुरुषः प्राकृतैर्गुणैः ॥ १ ॥

" Now I'll explain about realities indications, knowing which person gets rid of Prakruti. "

ज्ञानं निःश्रेयसार्थाय पुरुषस्यात्मदर्शनम् ।
यदाहुर्वर्णये तत्ते हृदयग्रन्थिभेदनम् ॥ २ ॥

" Only knowledge about Atma is the cause of Moksha and it is said that that alone is the destroyer of his Ahankara. "

अनादिरात्मा पुरुषो निर्गुणः प्रकृतेः परः ।
प्रत्यग्धामा स्वयंज्योतिः विश्वं येन समन्वितम् ॥ ३ ॥

" By which this world is illuminating is this beginning less Atma. He's Purusha, Nirguna and beyond prakruti, self-illuminating, internally illuminated in the hearts. "

स एष प्रकृतिं सूक्ष्मां दैवीं गुणमयीं विभुः ।
यदृच्छयैवोपगतां अभ्यपद्यत लीलया ॥ ४ ॥

" By his own will, he himself undergone to Prakruti by his own Maya. He came into Prakruti by his own sport. "


गुणैर्विचित्राः सृजतीं सरूपाः प्रकृतिं प्रजाः ।
विलोक्य मुमुहे सद्यः स इह ज्ञानगूहया ॥ ५ ॥

" By seeing Prakruti is making similar lokas ( persons ) , he, by her concealing of knowledge, immediately got deluded. "

एवं पराभिध्यानेन कर्तृत्वं प्रकृतेः पुमान् ।
कर्मसु क्रियमाणेषु गुणैरात्मनि मन्यते ॥ ६ ॥

" Thus by thinking his self as Prakruti, he thought all effects of Prakruti like Karma and acts as his self. "

तदस्य संसृतिर्बन्धः पारतन्त्र्यं च तत्कृतम् ।
भवति अकर्तुरीशस्य साक्षिणो निर्वृतात्मनः ॥ ७ ॥

" This pride created bondage and separatness for him, though he's inactive, Sakshi and Joyfull. "

कार्यकारणकर्तृत्वे कारणं प्रकृतिं विदुः ।
भोक्तृत्वे सुखदुःखानां पुरुषं प्रकृतेः परम् ॥ ८ ॥

" The cause of Karya, Karana and Karta is Prakuti alone. Intelligent persons think that Purusha (Brahman) himself which is beyond prakruti experiences joy and sorrow ( as a Jiva )"

Thus Ends...

[devotee]

Namaste HLK,

Great ! You have become an expert on Bhagwata Purana. I hope your efforts reduces/eliminates uncalled for feeling of animosity that some Vaishnavas carry towards Advaita VedAnta.

OM

[hinduism♥krishna]

Namaste HLK,

Great ! You have become an expert on Bhagwata Purana. I hope your efforts reduces/eliminates uncalled for feeling of animosity that some Vaishnavas carry towards Advaita VedAnta.

OM

Pranam Devotee,

It's a long conversation between Kapila and Devhuti. I've just posted a part. I'll post some more verses which clearly posit advaita or oneness of Atma and Brahman. This is highly advanced Brahma-Vidya where you'll see the verses of Brahman getting deluded. The truth is that shri vishnu himself appears to be deluded due his own maya. He experiences himself as something different from. Ishwara himself is this Jiva. It's out of the scope of our mind to know how Ishwara doesn't even touch maya though he accepts Maya.

Vaishnawas think that Krishna isn't originally formless. But this is completely false as far as shastra Praman is concerned. One of them is from Padma purana / BP.

"अत: सत्सु दयां कृत्वा मा व्रज
भक्तार्थं सगुणो जातो निराकारोऽपि चिन्मय: (भागवत महात्म्य पद्म पुराण तथा उद्धव गीता)

Uddhava to Krishna: Meaning: " Dear shrikrushna, Do mercy on sages and don't leave us. Though you're originally only formless and consciousness, for devotees only you become a saguna Rupa ( Ishwara ).

There's nothing like Dvaitian Vaishnawa. Advaita may or may not be a Vaishnawa. But every real vaishnawa is always Advaitian. Because peak of devotion is none other than Advaita Knowledge. Without knowledge Moksha is not possible. This is supported by Shruti & Smruti. For me, Tulsi das, eknatha, Dyaneshwar, Tukaram, Namdev, Adi Shankara are real Vaishnawa. Shastra insults those who see difference between Atma and Brahman.

One of my favorite quotes from Vishnu Purana:

विभेदजनकेऽज्ञाने नाशमात्यन्तिकं गते
आत्मनो ब्रम्हणो भेदमसन्तं क: करिष्यति ।। विष्णु पुराण 6.7.96 ।।

Meaning: After the complete annihilation of dualistic ignorance, who'll think the difference between Atma and Brahman, which is completely false....



See my Signature which is the Mahavakya of Bhagavata Purana, rather of all Puranas.

[Amrut]

Thank you HLK for sharing these verses. Indeed you are an expert on BP.


Logically advaita sthiti is as far as one can go. It ends in completeness. Attaining this state is the max one can think.

Hari OM

[hinduism♥krishna]

Thank you HLK for sharing these verses. Indeed you are an expert on BP.

Pranam,

No one can become expert in Bhagavata Purana unless he has a supreme devotion to Vishnu and so obviously I am not an expert Day by day I'm learning new things from Bhagavata. The only thing I can say this Bhagavata Purana is my soul, a manifestation of Vishnu. There's no any scripture higher than it. Even Upanishads can't trace the greatness of Bhagavata and importance of Nama-Jiva. In Upanishads there's only knowledge but this purana is a nectar of both knowledge and Bhakti. So this is more supreme. One should not get amazed when I say this bhagavata alone is enough for attaining supreme abode of Vishnu. There's no need to read any purana or Upanishads when one reads this purana. It's complete in itself.

Logically advaita sthiti is as far as one can go. It ends in completeness. Attaining this state is the max one can think.

Hari OM

Advaita goes even beyond Advaita and that state is supreme abode of Vishnu

[markandeya 108 dasa]

Pranams Devotee

Namaste HLK,

Great ! You have become an expert on Bhagwata Purana. I hope your efforts reduces/eliminates uncalled for feeling of animosity that some Vaishnavas carry towards Advaita VedAnta.

OM

Firstly to become an expert one has to know shastra in full, not just take parts to fit into ones own view. Also one has to learn shastra from a bona fide spiritual master, as explained in Gita.

Secondly, as you say some vaishnvasa carry a certain negative attitude towards some advaitists. The key word here being some.

A true vaishnava accepts advaita without any doubt, the absolute truth is non dual, duality meaning an expression of phenomena.

Some vaishnavas explain that impersonalism is anything that denies that the supreme absolute truth can have form, form is in 2 aspects, one form is the form and shape of phenoneman, the material energy. Of course the liberated state of moksha is free from any trace of the dual nature of phenomena.

Some advaitist falsely analyse that because matter has form and is impermanent then surely moksha means to escape form, that's true but only up to a certain point, Brahman can also have form, but its not material, its very simple if we accept that the Brahman is unlimited in ever respect.

Srimad Bhagavatam states Learned transcendentalists who know the Absolute Truth call this non-dual substance Brahman, Paramatma, and Bhagavan.

So we have to accept that transcendnce also has form, but that form has no trace of duality.

To say a devotee has a personal relationship with the supreme Brahman is part of duality is not correct and is not supported anywhere in siddhanta of pure bhakti. For us this is a total misinterpretation of our siddhanta, that is where the disagreement with advaita begins, or to put it in a more exact context the interpretations of some advaitists.

So its no that there is any problem with pure adviata, we have no objection to the siddhanta of brahmavada.

Rather uneducated, or perhaps personal bias based on mitigating material affliction and condition's come out with comments that have no actual factual basis in their interpretation of true vaishnava siddhanta.

They say that we have no identification of self atma with brahman. I do find this rather confusing

"Aham brahmasmi: I am spirit. It is said that one should understand that he is Brahman, spirit soul. This Brahman conception of life is also in devotional service, as described in this verse. The pure devotees are transcendentally situated on the Brahman platform, and they know everything about transcendental activities."
Bg 7.29, Purport by Srila Prabhupada

In fact there are to many to mention that i feel it insults my intelligence to post to many quotes, as the problem lie in the uneducated biased estimation of unfounded propaganda.

A true Vaishnava is one who fully understands and accepts advaita, we have no problem with accepting the fact that Brahman is the supreme absolute truth, its non dual, its also self, also the atma, it has no material form or shape, no trace of phenomena, no birth and death, and is supreme consciousness.

But the good thing about Viashnava siddhanta is that Brahman is more than just self atma, it also includes vishnnu tattva which is param Brahman and has spiritual form, which is the original adi of the unborn transcendent form of Sri Bhagavan.

anadi adi govindam

Until one comes to the state of Brahman realization he cannot apply material logic to shastra, this is described and stated countless times in vedic literature. But sadly in this age of kaili yuga, both advaitist and all other forms of religion have made dogma more important than actual practice of the introspective values of the holy life.

Ys

Md

[Amrut]

Namaste MD ji,

Compliment of 'expert' was said from lighter standpoint, as an encouragement.

Advaita also accepts both saguNa brahman and nirguNa brahman and advaita is not just theory, it is practically applicable.

nirguNa does not mean free from durguNa from advaita POV. It means above 3 guNa-s. Nothing is above 3 guNa-s including vaikunTha and spiritual body of viShNu. Rising beyond mAya means to rise above names and forms and experience oneself as completeness, peace, bliss, but not separately. Here Isvara exists as pure consciousness, Brahman.

We accept ISvara and he is unlimited, but with name and form. In nirvikalp samAdhi, one does not experience anything, but himself, as non-dual atman / brahman.

For any kind of experience, mind is necessary, but for mind does not reach brhaman, hence brahman is indescribable (eyes doe snot see him). Sure all acharyas have interpreted the verses in different way so that they comply their siddhanta. I am just talking about advaita vedanta only.

VA, dvaita, etc do not accept formless aspect of ISvara.

Brahman is not opulence of the lord. Srila Prabhupada has twisted words of Adi Sankara in his purports. We have nothing to say against great saint Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu or his bhakti.

In case of aham brahmasmi, it is I am Brahman. Here Brahman is not soul, it is Brahman

Since this thread is in advaita forum, so I think we can freely discuss shastras from advaita POV.

Understanding other siddhanta specially when we have done some amount of self study in our siddhanta is not that easy

Philosophical disagreements may be there, but we fight with none. Advaitin is at peace with all, fights none.

There can be mata-bheda but not mana-bheda


OM

[hinduism♥krishna]

Advaita also accepts both saguNa brahman and nirguNa brahman and advaita is not just theory, it is practically applicable.

Namaste Amrut,


I think, there's a fine line between believing in Saguna Brahman and accepting Saguna Brahman. Advaita of Adi Shankara believes in Saguna Brahman but doesn't accept Saguna Brahman.

There's no creation whatsoever. The true is that Brahman remains as it is in all three states, before creation, as world and after the creation. There is no any reason to come something out of Changeless Brahman. In Bhagavad Gita 7.24 Bhagavan himself says " Unintelligents think me, who is unmanifested(Nirguna), as having a form ( Saguna ) " Here Bhagavan refused to call himself Saguna. Saguna Brahman is seen only through Maya however knowers of Brahamn always see saguna Brahman as a Nirguna Brahman. This is what I call ' non-acceptance of Saguna Brahman ' and there's no such duality of Saguna and Nirguna in supreme Brahman. The difference between Saguna and Nirguna is like a difference between Moon and its Disc Paramatma who is formless hold a form but its formless nature doesn't get tainted. So how can you say saguna Brahman really exists in real sense? Advaita believes in Saguna but accepts only Nirguna. This is what I've learned from Adi Shankara's Upanishada Bhashya.

[Amrut]

Namaste Amrut,


I think, there's a fine line between believing in Saguna Brahman and accepting Saguna Brahman. Advaita of Adi Shankara believes in Saguna Brahman but doesn't accept Saguna Brahman.

There's no creation whatsoever. The true is that Brahman remains as it is in all three states, before creation, as world and after the creation. There is no any reason to come something out of Changeless Brahman. Saguna Brahman is seen only through Maya however knowers of Brahamn always see saguna Brahman as a Nirguna Brahman. This is what I call ' non-acceptance of Saguna Brahman ' and there's no such duality of Saguna and Nirguna in supreme Brahman. The difference between Saguna and Nirguna is like a difference between Moon and its Disc Paramatma who is formless hold a form but its formless nature doesn't get tainted. So how can you say saguna Brahman really exists in real sense?

Sar ji, I think you are flying high in non-dual plane while I am a poor seeker trapped in duality

vyavahArika satya (Amrut), prAtibhAsika satya, pArmArthika satya (HLK )

[hinduism♥krishna]

Sar ji, I think you are flying high in non-dual plane while I am a poor seeker trapped in duality

vyavahArika satya (Amrut), prAtibhAsika satya, pArmarthika satya (HLK )

Pranam,

Why should advaitian talk with Vyavaharika Satya? Yes, you can talk through it but at the same time you should also mention what's Paramarthika Satya. Because Paramarthata is the soul of Advaitian.