Guest guest Posted July 25, 2001 Report Share Posted July 25, 2001 Sadananda ji wrote: Advaita is not against karma or bhakti as a yogo. Bhagavaaan Shankara has composed many sloka-s in prayer to different gods. Karma and upaasana are not for moksha but for purification of the mind - to gain the four fold qualifications required for the inquiry of Brahman. Respected Sadananda ji, Here I would like to point out that you are mixing Upasana and Bhakti. Upasana, which you might have seen in the Upanishads, which are Karmanga Upasanas, are different from Bhakti, which is mentioned in Gita. Upasana is for purification of the mind, but Bhakti is not for that purpose. Madhusudana Saraswati points out very clearly that after a person becomes Jnani, the next thing which happens is that he becomes a great Bhakta automatically. That is why Shri Krishna tells us in the 7th chapter that, Jnani, who has one pointed devotion towards me, is the highest one (among the four type of devotees). What clearly I would like to indicate, Bhakti is a subject, which has neither been by the Vaishnava 5 Sampradayas understood and also not by most of the Advaita Vedantins. The only one who gives the best sample of Bhakti, and who has thoroughly understood it is Madhusudana Saraswati. Please enlighten me with your thoughts. Regards, Siddhartha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 26, 2001 Report Share Posted July 26, 2001 > >Respected Sadananda ji, >Here I would like to point out that you are mixing Upasana and Bhakti. >Upasana, which you might have seen in the Upanishads, which are Karmanga >Upasanas, are different from Bhakti, which is mentioned in Gita. >Upasana is for purification of the mind, but Bhakti is not for that purpose. >Madhusudana Saraswati points out very clearly that after a person becomes >Jnani, the next thing which happens is that he becomes a great Bhakta >automatically. That is why Shri Krishna tells us in the 7th chapter that, >Jnani, who has one pointed devotion towards me, is the highest one (among >the four type of devotees). >What clearly I would like to indicate, Bhakti is a subject, which has >neither been by the Vaishnava 5 Sampradayas understood and also not by most >of the Advaita Vedantins. The only one who gives the best sample of Bhakti, >and who has thoroughly understood it is Madhusudana Saraswati. >Please enlighten me with your thoughts. >Regards, >Siddhartha Siddharthaji , my praNaams. What you say is indeed true. Bhakti in terms of upaasana as emphasized in Personified God forms is What I was referring to. Shankara also defines Bhakti in his VivekachuuDamani. moksha saadhana saamagryaam bhaktiH eva gariiyasi swa swaruupaanu sandhaanam bhaktiH iti abhidiiyate| swaatmaanubhava sandhaanam bhaktiH iti apare jaguH|| Of all the paths for moksha, bhakti is the most supreme. But that bhakti is defined as the contemplation on ones own self - or experience of one own self. There was some discussion of Shree Madhusudana's analysis of bhakti by Shree Anand Hudli. Perhaps you can discuss Madhusudana's analysis for the benefit of us all. 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 26, 2001 Report Share Posted July 26, 2001 Namaste Siddhartha-ji and Sada-ji, There are verses in the Gita which would question some of your statements/assumptions: ___________________ > >Here I would like to point out that you are mixing Upasana and Bhakti. > >Upasana, which you might have seen in the Upanishads, which are Karmanga > >Upasanas, are different from Bhakti, which is mentioned in Gita. > >Upasana is for purification of the mind, but Bhakti is not for that purpose. *********Ch. 12 : v. 1 & 2 - eva.n satatayuktaa ye bhaktaastvaaM paryupaasate .[line 1] mayyaaveshya mano ye maa.n nityayuktaa upaasate . [line 1] Ch 3 : v. 3 loke.asmindvividhaa nishhThaa puraa proktaa mayaanagha . j~naanayogena saa~Nkyaanaa.n karmayogena yoginaam.h .. ___________________ > >Madhusudana Saraswati points out very clearly that after a person becomes > >Jnani, the next thing which happens is that he becomes a great Bhakta > >automatically. That is why Shri Krishna tells us in the 7th chapter that, > >Jnani, who has one pointed devotion towards me, is the highest one (among > >the four type of devotees). *********Gita Ch. 18:v.49, 50, 54, 55 ___________________ > >What clearly I would like to indicate, Bhakti is a subject, which has > >neither been by the Vaishnava 5 Sampradayas understood and also not by most > >of the Advaita Vedantins. The only one who gives the best sample of Bhakti, > >and who has thoroughly understood it is Madhusudana Saraswati. > >Siddhartha ************I don't think even Satchidananda Paramatma would make such a statement!! Those who have understood the Self [eg. Sri Ramakrishna, Sri Ramana] don't argue about it, discourage others from arguing about it or from opining about others who have or have not understood it! ____________________ > Siddharthaji , my praNaams. > > What you say is indeed true. Bhakti in terms of upaasana as > emphasized in Personified God forms is What I was referring to. > > > Of all the paths for moksha, bhakti is the most supreme. But that > bhakti is defined as the contemplation on ones own self - or > experience of one own self. > Sadananda ____________________ Regards, s. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 26, 2001 Report Share Posted July 26, 2001 Respected Sunder JI, You wrote: *********Ch. 12 : v. 1 & 2 - eva.n satatayuktaa ye bhaktaastvaaM paryupaasate .[line 1] mayyaaveshya mano ye maa.n nityayuktaa upaasate . [line 1] Ch 3 : v. 3 loke.asmindvividhaa nishhThaa puraa proktaa mayaanagha . j~naanayogena saa~Nkyaanaa.n karmayogena yoginaam.h .. >>>I'm very well aware that for Sri Krishna Bhakti and Upasana means the same. But Upasana of the Upanishads, is very different from Gita's Bhakti and Upasana. Only once Upanishads uses the word Bhakti in that sense, "yasya deve paraa bhaktih yathaa deve tathaa gurau, tasyaite kathitaa hyarthaah prakaashante mahaatmanah". (Shvetashvatara 6-23). However, in the 10 Upanishads and the Vedas, the equivalent of Gita's Bhakti would be Shraddhaa. *********Gita Ch. 18:v.49, 50, 54, 55 >>>Please consider the difference between Apara Bhakti and Para Bhakti. My statement (and indeed, Madhusudana's) was about Para Bhakti, and Shri Krishna's statement is about Apara Bhakti. ************I don't think even Satchidananda Paramatma would make such a statement!! Those who have understood the Self [eg. Sri Ramakrishna, Sri Ramana] don't argue about it, discourage others from arguing about it or from opining about others who have or have not understood it! >>>Let me clarify my self. I mean it like this. Vaishnava's have emphasized on Bhakti too much and have forgotten Jnana. In the same way the Advaita vedantins have emphasized in Jnana and have forgotten the need of Bhakti. But, both of them forget that both are an integral part of one process of self-realization. This has only been understood by Madhusudana. In fact I have a very poor English and sometimes feel it difficult to express myself, hence my expression starts to mean something which I don't want to mean it. However, I was also not talking about a state of realization, but just a system and I think, we are in here to discuss the system. Loving Regards, Siddhartha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 26, 2001 Report Share Posted July 26, 2001 Respected Sadananda Ji, my praNaams. >>>Of all the paths for moksha, bhakti is the most supreme. But that bhakti is defined as the contemplation on ones own self - or experience of one own self. Indeed, this is Para Bhakti, or Jnanamishra bhakti (in the terms of Madhusudana). In fact, we ought to understand it in this way. The parama-premaspada (the most beloved) in this world is Atman (one's own self). The ignorant think it to be this body, but when a person gets realized, he sees that God and I'm indifferent, "yosaavasau purushah sohamasmi". Hence, all his love is pointed towards God/Self. This is the state of Parabhakti, where there is no difference between the upasya (worshiped) and upasaka (worshipper). But, in the state of Apara Bhakti, or Karma Mishra and Shuddha (in the terms of Madhusudana), the difference between them persists. >>>There was some discussion of Shree Madhusudana's analysis of bhakti by Shree Anand Hudli. Perhaps you can discuss Madhusudana's analysis for the benefit of us all. I would like to pardon myself, as I'm studying Madhusudana's commentary on Gita with the commentary Gudharthatattvaloka (one of the most difficult composition of Navya Nyaya). Bhakti's analysis would be a field related to Madhusudana's "Bhakti-rasayana", which I have not studied yet. But, indeed, I would like to share thoughts about Bhakti which can be seen in the Gita commentary. Loving Regards, Siddhartha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2001 Report Share Posted July 28, 2001 Namaste Siddhartha-ji, Accepting your explanation, how can the following verses be ignored? shraddhaavaa.n labhate j~naana.n tatparaH sa.nyatendriyaH . j~naana.n labdhvaa paraa.n shaantim achireNaadhigachchhati.. 4:39.. yoginaamapi sarveshha.n madgatenaantaraatmanaa . shraddhavaanbhajate yo maa.n sa me yuktatamo mataH .. 6:47.. teshha.n j~naanii nityayukta ekabhaktirvishishhyate . 7:17. brahmabhuutaH prasannaatmaa na shochati na kaa~Nkshati . samaH sarvabhuuteshhu madbhakti.n labhate paraam.h .. 18:54.. As Prof. Ranade has pointed out in the discussion on Maya, it is not the occurrence of the word alone that is significant, but the ideas that point to a central theme. I would appreciate your thoughts on bhakti, upaasanaa, shraddha, as used in the Gita, Upanishads, and the Vedas. Regards, sunder advaitin, "sidha" <sidha@d...> wrote: > >>>I'm very well aware that for Sri Krishna Bhakti and Upasana means the > same. But Upasana of the Upanishads, is very different from Gita's Bhakti > and Upasana. Only once Upanishads uses the word Bhakti in that sense, "yasya > deve paraa bhaktih yathaa deve tathaa gurau, tasyaite kathitaa hyarthaah > prakaashante mahaatmanah". (Shvetashvatara 6-23). However, in the 10 > Upanishads and the Vedas, the equivalent of Gita's Bhakti would be > Shraddhaa. > > > >>>Please consider the difference between Apara Bhakti and Para Bhakti. My > statement (and indeed, Madhusudana's) was about Para Bhakti, and Shri > Krishna's statement is about Apara Bhakti. Vaishnava's have emphasized > on Bhakti too much and have forgotten Jnana. In the same way the Advaita > vedantins have emphasized in Jnana and have forgotten the need of Bhakti. > But, both of them forget that both are an integral part of one process of > self-realization. This has only been understood by Madhusudana. > However, I was also not talking about a state of realization, but just a > system and I think, we are in here to discuss the system. 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.