Devotion to any Devata results in moksha: Akrura in Bhagavatam

[V Subrahmanian]

In the Bhagavatam there is a stuti by Akrura.  There he says: those who worship other deities are actually worshiping You alone. They will also ultimately attain You alone just like all rivers attain the ocean. 

श्रीमद्भागवतपुराणम्/स्कन्धः १०/पूर्वार्धः/अध्यायः ४०

https://sa.wikisource.org/s/ukw

त्वामेवान्ये शिवोक्तेन मार्गेण शिवरूपिणम् ।
 बह्वाचार्यविभेदेन भगवन् समुपासते ॥ ८ ॥
 सर्व एव यजन्ति त्वां सर्वदेवमयेश्वरम् ।
 येऽप्यन्यदेवताभक्ता यद्यप्यन्यधियः प्रभो ॥ ९ ॥
 यथाद्रिप्रभवा नद्यः पर्जन्यापूरिताः प्रभो ।
 विशन्ति सर्वतः सिन्धुं तद्वत्त्वां गतयोऽन्ततः ॥ १० ॥

Sridhara swami's commentary is very revealing:

He says 'the other gods have no existence apart from You.'  

The Bhagavata verses also show that the contention that worship of other (tamasa) gods will result in hell is un-scriptural. The verses clearly say that all of them will attain liberation.  

We are reminded of the popular verse of Pushpadanta:

त्रयी साङ्ख्यं योगः पशुपतिमतं वैष्णवमिति

प्रभिन्ने प्रस्थाने परमिदमदः पथ्यमिति च।

रुचीनां वैचित्र्यादृजुकुटिल नानापथजुषां

नृणामेको गम्यस्त्वमसि पयसामर्णव इव॥ ७॥

The different practices based on the three Vedas, SaMkhya, Yoga, Pashupata-mata, VaishhNava-mata etc . are but different paths (to reach to the Greatest Truth) and people on account of their different aptitude choose from them whatever they think best and deserved to be accepted . But as the sea is the final resting place for all types of streams , You are the only reaching place  for all people whichever path,straight or zigzag, they may accept .  (7)

Many others have also expressed the above idea. 'ShaNmata' is mentioned by Thyagaraja:

The famous Pancharatna kriti of Thyagaraja, 'Endaro mahanubhaavulu..', in one of its charaNams, mentions the term 'ShaNmata' with a prefix 'shiva aadi'.  The meaning can be read in this site: http://www.shivkumar.org/music/endaromahanubhavulu-new.htm

Annamacharya too has said that the Lord of Tirupati is the same Lord/deities that a devotee of each deity worships.

[Kalyan]

Dear Sri Subrahmanian garu, Namaste

Is Sridhara Swami an advaitin? Gaudiya Vaishnavas claim that he is a Gaudiya Vaishnava. 

What evidence do we have to show that he is an advaitin?

Best Regards

[V Subrahmanian]

On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 2:39 PM Kalyan <kalyanchakr...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Sri Subrahmanian garu, Namaste

Is Sridhara Swami an advaitin? Gaudiya Vaishnavas claim that he is a Gaudiya Vaishnava. 

What evidence do we have to show that he is an advaitin?

Many.  His opening mangala shloka to the Bhagavatam commentary is on Hari-Hara abheda.  At every opportunity his commentary brings out the unreal nature of the world, jiva brahma aikya, sometimes quoting Gaudapada.  He specifies adhyAsa. He has done all this to the extant that Viraraghava of the Ramanuja school criticizes Sridhara on all such aikya/adhyasa, etc. instances.  

In his Vishnu Puranam commentary he at the beginning itself says: those who could not get the abheda message from the Upanishads can get that here. 

All these are anathema to Gaudiyas.  They try saying: Sirdhara only feigned Advaita in order to bring mayavadins to bhakti. 

regards

subbu

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/f213e71a-283c-4e66-a2d8-9186b990f95en%40googlegroups.com.

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Subbuji, Kalyan ji,

We don't have to travel very far in Sridhara Swamin's commentary - He admits to the mithyAtva of the world in the commentary to the very first verse. 

In commenting on the तेजोवारिमृदां यथा विनिमयो यत्र त्रिसर्गोऽमृषा of the first verse, he says - 

यत्र यस्मिन्ब्रह्मणि त्रयाणां मायागुणानां  तमोरजःसत्त्वानां सर्गो भूतेन्द्रियदेवतारूपोऽमृषा सत्यः। यत्सत्यतया मिथ्यासर्गोऽपि सत्यवत्प्रतीयते । अत्र दृष्टान्तः तेजोवारिमृदां यथा विनिमय इति । विनिमयो व्यत्ययोऽन्यस्मिन्नन्यावभासः । स अधिष्ठानसत्तया  सद्वत्प्रतीयत इत्यर्थः । तत्र तेजसि वारिबुद्धिर्मरीचितोये प्रसिद्धा। मृदिकाचादौ वारिबुद्धिर्वारिणि च काचादिबुद्धिरित्यादि यथायथमूह्यम् । यद्वा  तस्यैव परमार्थसत्यत्वप्रतिपादनाय तदितरस्य मिथ्यात्वमुक्तम् । यत्र मृषैवायं त्रिसर्गः न वस्तुतः सन्निति ।

It is pretty clear from just a cursory look of the above that Sridhara Swamin is a staunch advaitin. 

If he wanted to convey the reality of the world, he had a very easy route when commenting on the word अमृषा of the original. He could have simply said that creation is real, अमृषा.

However, he does not. He goes on to say why that creation is called अमृषा - it is so because  it is the reality of Brahman that confers reality to even a mithyA creation. He then comments on the word  विनिमयः to mean adhyAsa, to explain how the reality of one can appear in the other. Using the examples of the mirage water, the original text explains how one object is falsely imposed on something else, leading to the properties of one appearing in the other - hence the reality of the substratum Brahman appears in the superimposed world. 

He offers an alternate reading of the original verse, without the avagraha, as  यत्र त्रिसर्गोमृषा - He says that it is Brahman alone that is absolutely real, paramArtha sat, and to convey that, the mithyAtva of everything else is being stated (hence also the qualifier "param" satyam in the famous सत्यं परं धीमहि of the verse).

Thus, with both readings of the original -  यत्र त्रिसर्गोऽमृषा and यत्र त्रिसर्गोमृषा - Sridhara Swamin endeavours to convey the brahma satyam jaganmithyA doctrine of advaita. 

Regarding the comment that Sridhara Swamin was feigning advaita to get advaitins to accept bhakti - We don't need anyone to feign advaita for us to come to bhakti. Bhakti is certainly not anathema to us in the least. 

Regards,

Venkatraghavan 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te3w_Pt1gjnA4OCogazBMzS%3Dh65wTp1Q%2Bx_1-SKPkTXx_g%40mail.gmail.com.

[V Subrahmanian]

Many thanks Venkat ji, for the response with the Sridhari commentary for the very first verse of the Bhagavatam.  The Advaitic import is so clearly visible there. 

warm regards

subbu

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAL34aEkxpjCg_KWEWVeT7Tp6c8Dc-pmdRB1y4bqEBaruVxgiKA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Raghav Kumar]

Namaste

I have read somewhere that Sridhara Svamin 's commentaries contain remarks to the effect that the form, attributes, manifestations, and abodes of Bhagavan are eternal, as are the bodies of His attendants, which is why Sridhara Svamin finds acceptance amongst Gaudiyas. 

I am not sure there are any other particular reasons why Gaudiyas accept him apart from the other fact that he chose to write a bhAShya on the Srimad Bhagavatam.

Om

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te3Wha7viq1AfEgRQV7aYT1JzogFG%2BBD8kNddWC1CFUQZw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Kalyan]

Dear Sri Venkatraghavan ji, Namaskaaram

Thank you for your message.

Is there a searchable version or text version of the bhAshya available? Please let me know.

Thank you

Best Regards

[V Subrahmanian]

On Sun, 21 Jan 2024, 7:18 am Raghav Kumar, <raghav...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Namaste

I have read somewhere that Sridhara Svamin 's commentaries contain remarks to the effect that the form, attributes, manifestations, and abodes of Bhagavan are eternal, as are the bodies of His attendants, which is why Sridhara Svamin finds acceptance amongst Gaudiyas. 

As an Advaitin Sridhara Swamin would have only meant that eternality to be relative in the sense of pravaha nityatvam that Advaita accepts for Ishwara, Maya, Veda, etc. The Vaishnavas accept this eternality to be absolute. In Advaita absolute nityatvam is for Nirguna Brahman alone.

Regards

subbu

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Subbuji,

In the passage quoted by me earlier this also is seen.

यत्र यस्मिन्ब्रह्मणि त्रयाणां मायागुणानां  तमोरजःसत्त्वानां सर्गो भूतेन्द्रियदेवतारूपोऽमृषा सत्यः। यत्सत्यतया मिथ्यासर्गोऽपि सत्यवत्प्रतीयते । 

The prima facie view of devatArUpah as real is shown in the first sentence. The second sentence refutes that to show that this is only a vyAvahArika satya, mithyA in reality.

Regards,

Venkatraghavan

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te13Qtcb%2Bt3Mi-Si70OzAPjgsaBHSgaUHF%2B7qDB0wjWBaw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Kalyan ji,

Sorry, I don't know if such a searchable version exists. 

However, a pointer - 

One of the files in this archive.org link (https://archive.org/details/ooFd_bhagavata-sridhari-tika-chaukhamba-sur-bharati) is a .gz file titled "OCR search text".

I don't know if this is indeed searchable or not. Perhaps someone with more technical skills than me can advise.

Regards,

Venkatraghavan 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/06ffe9a2-975b-4087-aa31-cbfdd705078fn%40googlegroups.com.