Advaita - Theory and Practice

[Guest guest]

Hari Om,

 

The Best theory is where the ultimate truth lies.

 

Advaita as a theory and philosophy has been well

documented by Acharya Adi Shankara and has been

elaborated by a number of leading missionaries such as

from RK mission or Chinmaya etc. These are the

traditional versions. Even Adi Shankara concedes that

it is difficult and not “routine” to follow the route

prescribed by him, although it is not physical effort

or rituals- just mental clarifications.

 

This is also our experience as the “demonstrated

examples” are few and far between. Smarthas, (Iyers)

followers of Shankara's traditions, cannot really

claim to be "practicing" Advaita, although they do

honor the vision.

 

In this list, we are also seeing proponents of version

2, where the heart/ self melting and merging into the

totality etc are expounded in a genuine way, by some

members. To a certain extent they also derive support

from the seemingly simple “Who am I” line of internal

questioning methodology of Ramana Maharishi. To my

mind it is the question (Maha prashchana), that

precedes the mahavakya "- Tat Tvam Asi-Thou are that"

 

For ordinary mortals like me and presumably a lot

more, the question is how exactly do we “practice”,

sadhana, assuming we understand and accept Version 1

or 2 or something else. To read books and postings is

one thing, doing daily chores is another. How do we

build congruence?

 

As I understood, Advaita Theory says there are

different Planes of Reality. At the highest plane /

level there is only one consciousness, where the

source and components are the same. At planes / levels

below the highest, there are different (if not exactly

lower) realities.

 

Now depending on which plane one is, may be one can

“realize” the truth of that situation. If that

happens, he/she/it may get elevated to the next/

different level of “reality” where there is something

more. In the Patanjali Yoga system, this kind of

gradual progression is elaborated.

 

To my mind, there is no conflict between the Yoga

system gradually leading to Advaitic truth of “All are

one and there is not even the second” state.

 

Have any scholars formally and critically examined the

two approaches of Adi Shankara and Patanjali and come

to the same or different conclusions? Is there any

literature on this specific subject? I request the

help of the list members on this issue.

 

Other religions have a code of practice. For various

reasons we also have different ones for different

communities. Could there be a 21st century version

integrating them for the Hindu community? If we cannot

agree what are the stumbling blocks?

 

Pranams.

 

P.B.V.Rajan

 

 

 

 

 

 

- Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup

http://fifaworldcup.

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

The BhagavadGita is a 'vade mecum' of theory and practice of

Advaita. It has the quint-essence of the Upanishads.

 

Prof. R.D.Ranade [1887-1957] in his book, 'The BhagavadGita

As a Philosophy of Realisation', [publ. Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan3rd ed.

1982], has done a masterly analysis from Western and Indian angles.

Many excerpts from this book were posted on this list [ref. archives].

 

As a spokesman for the Sanatana Dharma, Sri Krishna has made

this dialogue in universal terms, actions that can be lived and

practised anywhere, anytime.

 

Karma, Dharma, Yoga, Bhakti, Dhyana, Jnana, have been

blended in a syncretism that has inspired and sustained a whole

civilisation, and continues to do so to this day.

 

Here are a few samples of verses :

 

niyata.n kuru karma tvaM karma jyaayo hyakarmaNaH .

shariirayaatraapi cha te na prasiddhyedakarmaNaH .. 3\.8..

 

tasmaach{}chhaastraM pramaaNaM te kaaryaakaaryavyavasthitau .

GYaatvaa shaastravidhaanok{}ta.n karma kartumihaarhasi .. 16\.24..

 

eva.n GYaatvaa kR^itaM karma puurvairapi mumukshubhiH .

kuru karmaiva tasmaattvaM puurvaiH puurvatara.n kR^itam.h .. 4\.15..

 

yaGYaarthaatkarmaNo.anyatra loko.aya.n karmabandhanaH .

tadartha.n karma kaunteya muk{}tasaN^gaH samaachara .. 3\.9..

 

tasmaadasak{}taH satataM kaaryaM karma samaachara .

asak{}to hyaacharankarma paramaap{}noti puurushhaH .. 3\.19..

 

yogasthaH kuru karmaaNi saN^ga.n tyak{}tvaa dhana.njaya .

sid.hdhyasid.hdhyoH samo bhuutvaa samatva.n yoga uchyate .. 2\.48..

 

tapasvibhyo.adhiko yogii GYaanibhyo.api mato.adhikaH .

karmibhyashchaadhiko yogii tasmaadyogii bhavaarjuna .. 6\.46..

 

naite sR^itii paartha jaananyogii muhyati kashchana .

tasmaatsarveshhu kaaleshhu yogayuk{}to bhavaarjuna .. 8\.27..

 

tasmaadaGYaanasaMbhuutaM hR^itstha.n GYaanaasinaatmanaH .

chhittvainaM sa.nshayaM yogamaatishhThottishhTha bhaarata .. 4\.42..

 

traiguNyavishhayaa vedaa nistraiguNyo bhavaarjuna .

nirdvandvo nityasattvastho niryogakshema aatmavaan.h .. 2\.45..

 

tasmaattvamindriyaaNyaadau niyamya bharatarshhabha .

paapmaanaM prajahi hyenaM GYaanaviGYaananaashanam.h .. 3\.41..

 

yatkaroshhi yadashnaasi yaj{}juhoshhi dadaasi yat.h .

yattapasyasi kaunteya tatkurushhva madarpaNam.h .. 9\.27..

 

manmanaa bhava madbhak{}to madyaajii maa.n namaskuru .

maamevaishhyasi yuk{}tvaivamaatmaanaM matparaayaNaH .. 9\.34..

 

mayyeva mana aadhatsva mayi buddhi.n niveshaya .

nivasishhyasi mayyeva ata uurdhva.n na sa.nshayaH .. 12\.8..

 

athachittaM samaadhaatuM na shak{}noshhi mayi sthiram.h .

abhyaasayogena tato maamichchhaap{}tuM dhana.njaya .. 12\.9..

 

abhyaase.apyasamartho.asi matkarmaparamo bhava .

madarthamapi karmaaNi kurvansiddhimavaapsyasi .. 12\.10..

 

athaitadapyashak{}to.asi kartuM madyogamaashritaH .

sarvakarmaphalatyaagaM tataH kuru yataatmavaan.h .. 12\.11..

 

chetasaa sarvakarmaaNi mayi sa.nnyasya matparaH .

buddhiyogamupaashritya mach{}chittaH satataM bhava .. 18\.57..

 

 

[translations and Shankara-bhashya are in the files section].

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

 

advaitin, Rajan PBV <rajanpbv> wrote:

> Hari Om,

>

> The Best theory is where the ultimate truth lies.

> Have any scholars formally and critically examined the

> two approaches of Adi Shankara and Patanjali and come

> to the same or different conclusions? Is there any

> literature on this specific subject? I request the

> help of the list members on this issue.

>

> Other religions have a code of practice. For various

> reasons we also have different ones for different

> communities. Could there be a 21st century version

> integrating them for the Hindu community? If we cannot

> agree what are the stumbling blocks?

[Guest guest]

Shri "sunderh" <sunderh wrote..on

Thu Jun 13, 2002 inmessage no.13684

>The BhagavadGita is a 'vade mecum' of theory and

>practice of Advaita. It has the quint-essence of the

>Upanishads.

 

Hari OM.

 

I went through Shri Sunderji's posting carefully.

However I could not decipher how to practice Advaita

from these Gita slokas. What I mean is "Advaita" is

specific in its conclusion. How does one "practice"

advaita is different from how one"discusses" it online

or otherwise. So continuing with my efforts to find an

authentic document about "practice" I found the

following in a Book On Upanishads by Swami Sivananda.

 

What I understood from it is that to realize, one has

to practice "meditation" in a particular way (not

ritual but mode of thinking) under guidance of a Guru,

who will supervise the process and validate the

intermediate steps and finally you can do it. This is

the shortest and safest route. All other methods will

be longer and not necessarily reach the destination.

 

TAITTRIYA UPANISHAD - Brahmananda Valli

 

This belongs to Krishna Yajurveda. The notion of

Brahamn as the supreme self and as entirely different

from the world is clearly defined. These are outlined

in a section “Brhamananda Valli (Brahman-bliss

section). This has 9 anuvakas (paragraphs).

 

It starts with a peace Chant. Om sahana vavathu…

ending with Ma vidhvishavahai.

“Om. May he protect us (teacher and pupil). May he let

us enjoy the bliss of Mukti. May we together acquire

the capacity for knowledge. May our study be splendid

and fruitful. May we never disagree in an antagonistic

way.”

 

Such an introduction is student friendly and there is

a story behind it, but we will ignore that for the

moment and focus on the first anuvaka which follows:

 

Summary of first anuvaka: The knower of Brahman

attains the supreme. Brahman is Truth, Knowledge and

Infinity. He who realizes “It- the transcendental

space” as already existing in his heart, goes on to

realize further his quest ending with the incomparable

Brahman”.

>From this Atman is Akasha (Ether space) is born; from

Akasha, the vayu (air); from the air fire; from fire,

water and then earth; from earth, the herbs (plants,

vegetables); from herbs, food; from food, man. Thus

man is made of the essence of food. This is his head.

This is the right hand (wing). This is the left hand

(wing). This is body (trunk). This is the tail and

support.

 

Notes: The teachings take place in a forest (not in

modern class rooms) and therefore the analogy to a

bird which is commonly observed in the forest rising

in the sky. It is only a simile to explain a key

point.

 

Commentary:

The sruti begins with the words ”The knower of Brahman

attains the supreme”. This is to induce the aspirant

by mentioning first the fruits of, reflection and

meditation, as it is a long process which needs

training and self control.

 

Self Realization of Brahman is not mere understanding

through study of books on Vedanta or upanishads and

thus mere intellectual grasp of a concept. It is

direct cognition (atma sakshatkara) through constant

and intense meditation. This is the "certified"

practice of Advaita. Atleast it is tested and found

true.

 

The process starts with the hearing (Sravana) of

Srutis, which is then thought over and meditated upon.

Here it is important to note that Brahman being

limitless, is not a state to be attained, a process

associated with duality. It is more of a mental

process, not physical distance to be travelled.

 

The lack of correct perception is due to ignorance

starting with individual soul, jiva identifying itself

with the physical body (Annamaya) to start with. It

may be noted that there are 5 sheaths (kosas) and so

mere clarity about physical state is not enough.

 

 

The para outlines the structural components of Atman

when it has seemingly degraded enough to be perceived

by Humans- in the form of anatomy of bird as an

example, of 5 parts of Annamaya Kosa. The sruti leads

the aspirant within, to one”self” within another, till

the real atman is reached. By meditating upon the

kosas one after the other, he realizes the true nature

of each one. Ultimately he becomes competent to

meditate steadily on the atman.

 

The sruti describes the nature of brahman as Satyam

(truth), Jnanam (Knowledge) , Anantam (Infinity). Each

of these adjuncts is independent of others.

 

As Brahman is your own self, it cannot be an object of

knowledge. As one’s self is not distinct from himself,

he cannot be the knower. If he is Knowable, there can

be no knower. If self can both be knower and knowable,

it cannot be, as it is indivisible, devoid of parts.

To “know” Brahman is to become identical with absolute

consciousness. This is “practice” of Advaita.

 

This is done by hearing the sruti, withdraw mind from

external objects, enter into what dwells within the

cavity (guha- intellect) and realize atman which is

the only reality. In that akasa within the heart is

the intelligence in which Brahman is lodged.

 

What does he who realizes Brahman attain? As per

sruti, he enjoys all desires and pleasures at once,

not sequentially, not dependent on performance of

duty.

 

The realization does not happen after one listens to

the first anuvaka. The student describes his feelings

and the “Guru” verifies, clarifies and guides him to

next steps. There are 9 anuvakas in this section-

Brahmananda Valli. One has to go through all.

 

Pranams.

P.B.V.Rajan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup

http://fifaworldcup.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Rajan-ji,

 

I am happy to note that you found the scriptural statements

conforming to your understanding of 'how to practise advaita.'

 

My understanding of the Gita is based on the intuitive

conviction of the following:

 

1. Yogeshvara Krishna was speaking in 'advaita' mode only, and

authentic to the core.

 

2. The precepts of Sanatana Dharma he was preaching to Arjuna was the

essence from all the Upanishads [sarva-upanishhat-sAra], and he had

practised them himself.

 

3. None of what he said could contradict anything from any of the

Upanishads.

 

4. Shankara's choice of Gita among all the Smritis on which to write

the Bhashya as an advaitic text was deliberate.

 

I hope your careful study of the Gita will continue in light of

the above.

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

 

 

advaitin, Rajan PBV <rajanpbv> wrote:

> Shri "sunderh" <sunderh> wrote..on

> Thu Jun 13, 2002 inmessage no.13684

> >The BhagavadGita is a 'vade mecum' of theory and

> >practice of Advaita. It has the quint-essence of the

> >Upanishads.

>

> Hari OM.

>

> I went through Shri Sunderji's posting carefully.

> However I could not decipher how to practice Advaita

> from these Gita slokas. What I mean is "Advaita" is

> specific in its conclusion. How does one "practice"

> advaita is different from how one"discusses" it online

> or otherwise. So continuing with my efforts to find an

> authentic document about "practice" I found the

> following

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

 

Excellently and so effectively and unambiguously summed up,

SunderHji. Yes. All the upanishads are there in the Bhagwath

Geetha. Sankara was very thoughtful, indeed. One can't find fault

with him.

 

Now to come to more mundane botherations, what is that H doing in

your name? Why don't you make it simple so that we can simply call

you Sunderji? Or, I suspect there is another Sunderji around

claiming that title? These advaitains are indeed a queer lot!

 

Pranams.

 

Madathil Nair

_____________________

 

advaitin, "sunderh" <sunderh> wrote:

> Namaste Rajan-ji,

>

> I am happy to note that you found the scriptural

statements

> conforming to your understanding of 'how to practise advaita.'

>

> My understanding of the Gita is based on the intuitive

> conviction of the following:

>

> 1. Yogeshvara Krishna was speaking in 'advaita' mode only, and

> authentic to the core.

>

> 2. The precepts of Sanatana Dharma he was preaching to Arjuna was

the

> essence from all the Upanishads [sarva-upanishhat-sAra], and he had

> practised them himself.

>

> 3. None of what he said could contradict anything from any of the

> Upanishads.

>

> 4. Shankara's choice of Gita among all the Smritis on which to

write

> the Bhashya as an advaitic text was deliberate.

>

> I hope your careful study of the Gita will continue in light

of

> the above.

>

> Regards,

>

> Sunder

[Guest guest]

Namaste Madathilgaru,

 

Thank you for supporting the points in my message.

 

'sunderh' just happens to be the user-id that the mail

address carries! I never sign my name 'sunderh'!! ['h' is the

initial of my last name!] Yes, there was another 'Sundar' on the list

in the past with whom my name was confused [despite reminders!]

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

 

 

 

advaitin, "madathilnair" <madathilnair> wrote:

> Now to come to more mundane botherations, what is that H doing in

> your name? Why don't you make it simple so that we can simply call

> you Sunderji? Or, I suspect there is another Sunderji around

> claiming that title? These advaitains are indeed a queer lot!

>

> Pranams.

>

> Madathil Nair