365bet娱乐

170
known passage from the Chandogya Upanisad, Madhusudana
clearly identifies bhagavat and Brahman: "The Upanisadic
text, `All this, verily, is Brahman, in origin, duration,
and dissolution' [CU 3.14.11], teaches that all things arise
from the Blessed Lord alone, exist in the Blessed Lord
34 alone, and dissolve into the Blessed Lord alone.
Finally, in section XXIII, Madhusudana gives a definition of
bhagavat which explicitly identifies Him with the atman of
the Advaitins: "The Blessed Lord is the non-dual Self, a
mass of perfect being, consciousness, and bliss, the pure
existence which is the substratum of all.
35 Such passages make it obvious that the BR's
understanding of bhagavat is thoroughly Advaitic; it
certainly shows no influence of the Bengal Vai峁ａ箛avas'
elevation of bhagavat above the unqualified brahman. If
anything, there is an opposite movement which would be
totally unacceptable to the Gosv膩mins: the concept of
bhagavat becomes quite depersonalized and closely identified
with the unqualified, supreme Brahman of Advaita.
I pointed out in chapter two that Samkara often
spoke of the personal God and the Absolute as if they were
36 equivalent. Madhusudana's tendency in this direction is
even more marked, and, as the following excerpts from the
GAD will demonstrate, it is by no means confined to the BR:
"To Me [K峁涐梗峁嘺] alone," i.e., the undivided Self whose
nature is being-consciousness-bliss, devoid of all
limiting adjuncts.