Guest guest Posted June 13, 2002 Report Share Posted June 13, 2002 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2002 Report Share Posted June 13, 2002 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? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 24, 2002 Report Share Posted June 24, 2002 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2002 Report Share Posted June 29, 2002 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2002 Report Share Posted June 29, 2002 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2002 Report Share Posted June 29, 2002 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 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.