Why did these people not see the real ?

[Guest guest]

Namaskar to all,

 

Great teachers like Sri Ramanuja ( Visishtadvaita ) ,Sri Madhvacharya ( Dwaita

Philosopher ) and the later follower of his faith Sri Raghavendra had very

powerful Yogic spiritual powers. Yet, with all their superior visions, why did

they not see the final reality ? That ALL IS ONE. Instead , they managed to

convince and win people of Advaita / Visishtadvaita philosophy to accept their

arguments.

 

Is it because they did not have the correct teachers to show them the way to

break the final barrier ? What made them believe these faiths so convincingly ?

One tends to believe their arguments as correct and the truth until one reads

the works of great personalities such as Sri Sankara, Sri Vivekananda etc.

There is no doubt from the history that these people had superior spiritual

insight. Why could they still not see the final reality ?

 

I read somewhere that "he will see the truth... if the paramatman wills" . Now

does this mean that we would continue to live in delusion until God has decided

that its time for us to realise the truth ? Or is it our past deeds/meditative

qualities etc. starting to bear fruit ?

 

Om Tat Sat

 

Guru Venkat

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now

 

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste!

 

Who is sitting in judgement here?

 

This world of variegated beauty is for him to see and learn from!

Ramannuja, Madhava, Sankara, Vivekananda, why even Epicurus and our

own Charvakas, have added to its chequered dazzle.

 

Can anyone say with absolute certainty that Sankara and Vivekananda

said the same thing or two advaitins on this List have understood

these great personages the same way?

 

We need this diversity to imbibe the knowledge of Unity. When the

eye is fixed on that Unity, then the differences melt away, like when

the Moon's beauty is appreciated, the "rabbit" on her lap is not in

sight.

 

Pranams.

 

Madathil Nair

_______________________

 

advaitin@advaitin, Guru Venkat <v_vedanti>

wrote:

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

 

Guru Venkat asks the question: Why did these people not see the

real? Here the reference is to the great masters like Ramanuja,

Madhwa, Raghavendra and other great Vedantic stalwarts who

differed from Sankara in certain essential fundamentals. The

question that is being asked is: How did these stalwarts miss

the Real Truth of advaita?

But let us turn the table. A staunch follower of Ramanuja is

asking the same question in another list. How did Sankara miss

the Great Truth that our Ramanuja has so effectively

established? Sankara was no doubt a great Master. How did he

miss it?

 

Put this way, the problem tantamounts to the following. If the

same scriptures, namely the Upanishads, are being interpreted by

different masters in different ways, how can we rely on the

Upanishads? Does it not make the logic of the Upanishads

suspect? Should not there be one, unique, correct interpretation

of the Upanishads?

 

Before we answer these questions let us go back to square one.

What is the totality that is Hindu Vedanta? The common Hindu

masses who have carried forward the torch of the religion from

age-old times might not be able either to understand fully or to

communicate the principles of Hindu Vedanta, but any

knowledgeable and careful observer will recognize that their

beliefs and attitudes are traceable to one or other of these

great schools of philosophy, initiated by these Masters. It is

as if there were a multidimensional perspective in which the

nature of totality must be viewed, but we individuals are each

one-dimensional and each of us sees only what is projected in

that one dimension. We live in that one-dimensional

projection of the infinite-dimensional totality and the latter

is not revealed to us in our physical experience, because the

latter is always finite-dimensional. To comprehend the Universe

in its infinite-dimensional totality we have to get into

enquiry the Vedanta way. So we have to go to the Upanishads.

But the very nature of the Upanishads does not allow one unique

interpretation. The Upanishads are collections of free, candid

and detailed discussions between teacher and disciple and it is

for the reader to draw his or her own conclusions after

assimilating the analyses thus presented and in the light of

one’s own spiritual experience, if any. It is here that the

Masters help. Even to understand them you will need the physical

presence of a teacher before you – a guru – because he has the

spiritual experience. It is therefore not fair to expect the

Upanishads to tell you categorically whether this is right or

that is wrong. The privilege of making categorical

interpretations of the Upanishads has devolved on the great

Masters.

But any attempt to sort out the differing interpretations of

these Masters at an intellectual level can become an exercise in

futility, unless, perhaps one makes it a life-time occupation.

Those of the past who could have thus sorted it out can be

counted in one’s fingers. Two such men were Appayya Dikshidar

(1520 – 1593 A.D.) and Vedanta Desika (1269 – 1369 A.D.). Both

were masters in the different schools of philosophy, both were

prolific in their writings, and both were great intellects. But

each held his own stand, BECAUSE NEITHER OF THEM RESORTED TO

THEIR INTELLECT ALONE.

Intellect alone, however sharp it might be, cannot bring one to

the consummation of an understanding of Vedanta. The spark of

realization and the onset of spiritual becoming have to come

through faith and intuition, not just through study of books.

Listen to Swami Vivekananda on this:

 

<<The soul can receive impulses from another soul and from

nothing else. We may study books all our lives, we may become

very intellectual, but in the end we find that we have not

developed at all spiritually. It is not true that a high order

of intellectual development always goes hand in hand with a

proportionate development of the spiritual side of man. In

studying books we are sometimes deluded into thinking that

thereby we are being spiritually developed; but if we analyse

the effect of the study of books on ourselves, we shall find

that, at the utmost, it is only our intellect that derives

profit from such studies and not our inner spirit. This

inadequacy of books to quicken spiritual growth is the reason

why, although almost every one of us can speak wonderfully on

spiritual matters, when it comes to action and the living of a

truly spiritual life, we find ourselves woefully deficient. To

quicken the spirit, the impulse must come from another soul. The

person from whom such impulse comes is called the ‘Guru’. >>

 

Without the Guru therefore and without the faith in that Guru,

one falls into the disease of ‘The Crisis of Intellect’. Each

Guru, because of his faith and intuition, comes in a tradition

from one of these great Masters. Each Master emphasizes a

certain aspect of Man’s experience as the most crying need at

the time, as per his intuition through his own spiritual

experience. When the Vedic rituals became, over the passage of

time, only sacrifices for selfish ends in total disregard of

the rest of the living universe, a Buddha rises and establishes

the eight fundamental principles of ethical living and

encourages a disregard for the after-life. When in due time

humanity has a need to go back to the fundamental truth of the

oneness of all that lives, a Sankara arises and holds up the

torch of non-duality. Again when the community needs to be

reminded of the truth that this oneness does not mean that you

can close your eyes to the ‘adhyaksha’ (Gita, Ch.9 Sloka 10) of

the whole universe, a Ramanuja arises to tell them that Man is

an insignificant creature before the Super-director of Infinite

Compassion, Infinite Knowledge, Infinite Power and Infinite

Grace. Each of these Masters had their spiritual experience to

support them. Each was and is right – not ‘in their own way’ but

‘even in an absolute sense’. For all of them are projecting to

you what they consider, by their intuition, to be important, for

your good, in your finite dimensional projection of the

infinite-dimensional totality that is the Truth. Instead of

attempting to adjudicate, by our intellectual acumen, among

these different projections in the different axes, we should

thank ourselves for having the freedom to choose that one which

is appropriate to our taste, evolution, training and tradition.

Taste, evolution and training are O.K.; but why tradition?

Tradition contributes a major factor in our choice, because,

centuries of thinking make history and centuries of history make

tradition.

 

praNAms to all advaitins,

profvk

 

 

 

=====

Prof. V. Krishnamurthy

My website on Science and Spirituality is http://www.geocities.com/profvk/

You can access my book on Gems from the Ocean of Hindu Thought Vision and

Practice, and my father R. Visvanatha Sastri's manuscripts from the site.

 

 

 

HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now

http://hotjobs./