When to renounce : "None come to the Father except thro. me"

[Guest guest]

Namaste. Reid –ji and all,

 

This is in reply to your well-worded legitimate questions raised in

 

http://www.escribe.com/culture/advaitin/m25888.html

 

where you said

".. But my understanding of nonduality seems to run

> counter to your descriptions of what is required for the

householder,

> viz. that what must be done to achieve dispassion is only thru

> devotion to the divine. It seems to me that this flouts the idea

> of "not two" and must therefore be seen as merely an impediment to

> true understanding. This seems also to me to be awfully close to

the

> Christian teaching that "None come to the Father but thru

me".Clearly

> these expressions of exclusivity are familiar to many traditions,

> yet, I am awaiting the message that there are no paths to truth as

> there is no destination at all. .. How can the belief in and

> practice of any religious tradition be any thing more than a

> temporary (although perhaps necessary for many) distraction from

> apperceiving the ultimate reality? > Thank you for your time."

Reid

-------------------------------

 

"None come to the Father but through me."

This quote is from John 14. It is a beautiful quote to illustrate

advaita-bhakti.

Jesus said: "I am the way, the truth, and the life." (Ibid). Krishna

also says the same thing : mattaH paraM nAsti(B.G. VII – 7),

sadasaccAhamarjuna (IX – 19), jIvanaM sarvabhUteshhu (VII – 9),

ahamAdishca madhyam ca (X – 20), etc.

 

"None come to the Father but through me."

This `me' actually has to be capitalised here as `Me', because the

Son of God says it. So it becomes

"None come to the Father but through Me."

 

Krishna's statement also can be taken to read

`None come to Brahman but through Me'.

This means `you cannot reach Brahman-realisation, except by devotion

through Me'.

 

This is not an `expression of exclusivity'. It only means that `God

is not just the end but also the means toward that end.'

 

In fact Jesus also means that `I am the means' when he says

"I am the Father and the Father is in me. The words I say are not my

own but my Father who lives in me does his work through me. Just

beleive that I am in the Father and the Father is in me." (John 14)

 

Beleief in and practice of a religious tradition is not just a

temporary pastime or distraction as you seem to put it, Reid-ji. It

is the only path to perceive and realise the ultimate reality.

 

Here it is necessary to clear some cobwebs of misunderstanding

regarding advaita. Advaita is not an atheistic philosophy. It does

not deny God. It only says there is something more than `God with a

form and a name'. And that is the nameless and formless Ultimate

One. The means for advaitic realisation is not to sit quiet without

doing anything. To worship God for the purification of one's mind,

is quite in tune with advaita; because without purification of

mind, how is one going to realise that `I am not the BMI'? So when

somebody says the worship of God with attributes is the only way to

purify one's mind, that statement need not be contradicted. What

else is there as a method to purify the mind?

 

By simply repeating to oneself `I am not the BMI', one is not going

to reach self-realisation. Nididhyasana on vedic mahavakyas, means

that one churns in one's mind the logic of spirituality embedded in

these mahavakyas. In order that the mind cooperates with this

effort of the sadhaka, it has to be purified. And how do you purify

the mind, except by withdrawing it from all sense objects and sense

attractions? And how do you so withdraw the mind, except

by `attaching' it to something as divine as God with name and form.

Any other `attachment' is going to be only a worldly attachment. If

worldly attachments have to go, the only way is to attach yourself

to God so firmly and so consistently that thereafter no other

attachment arises. Then God takes the responsibility to take you to

that Realisation of the Ultimate.

 

Thus `None come to the Father but through Me' turns out to be a

crisp mahavakya of advaita bhakti. Advaita bhakti means devotion of

the One God, without a second, without a distraction. If that

itself is called `distraction', then there is no other royal road to

purification of mind.

 

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk

[Guest guest]

--- "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk wrote:

 

Prof VK - Beautiful synthesis of Jesus statement with Geeta statements.

My humble praNaams.

Sada

 

What you have is destiny and what you do with what you have is self-effort.

Future destiny is post destiny modified by your present action. You are not only

the prisoner of your past but master of your future. - Swami Chinmayananda

[Guest guest]

List Moderators Note Once Again: Please do not include the previous messages as

a tail of your message while sending your replies. Both the new members and

other members do seem to continue to repeat doing this. The list appreciates

your cooperation in keeping the message crisp and clear by removing all

unnecessary parts of previous messages. (As it is done in this message!)

============================

 

But surely we are turning Advaita on its head here.

So what would Shankara say ?

 

Isnt it possible that this so called "God" may be differently

defined and understood by Christians differ from the advaitin/hindu

understanding of what a "God" is ?

 

It seems to me that one should go deeper and try to understand

what the word "God" or "god" means when a christian uses it.

Just because the word "God" is used - doesnt mean that the

word is being used with the same semantic sense by a christian

and a hindu(especially vedanti)

 

First, It is probably best to go past the superficial usage

of words and understand the semantics.

Second - it would be pretty haughty to assign to ourselves the

right to "correctly" interpret texts such as the bible (in

english or greek) - it seems to me we should listen to

what the church interpretations of the bible are.

If so - then we will find that the Bible and Advaita are

totally contradictory. Let us not delude ourselves into

thinking that somehow the Bible teaches advaita. That is

a kind of avidya as well.

 

just my two paise.

 

Regards,

Subrahmanya

-

 

 

-- In advaitin, "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk>

wrote:

> Namaste. Reid –ji and all,

>

> This is in reply to your well-worded legitimate questions raised

in

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste, Respected Professorji, and all

 

When you say,

 

#8220;Krishna's statement also can be taken to read

 

`None come to Brahman but through Me'.

 

This means `you cannot reach Brahman-realization, except by devotion Through

Me'.#8221;

 

To me, the #8220;ME#8221; is not Lord Krishna but the Knowledge He imparts. Lord

Krishna is worshippable because of that Knowledge he imparts.

 

Am I wrong when I understand this #8220;ME#8221; as the Knowledge that Krishna

imparts and the Devotion is to that Knowledge and not to Lord Krishna as a

deity? Further, when that Devotion is absolute, i.e. Devotion or commitment to

that Knowledge, Devotion to Lord Krishna, Jesus, the Father, Muhammed Nabi, etc.

etc. and all seen and unseen, is naturally included. And that Devotion is the

Culmination of all secular Devotions/love, or Parama Bhakti/PREM.

 

After all everyone loves his own self most and when one appreciates and

recognizes that his self alone is the self of all or rather it is That Self

alone appears to manifest as different equipment, body, mind, intellect of all

known and unknown of all sentients and insentients, he cannot but love all alike

as he loves his own self. If one has hatred for anybody, or anything, it only

means he has hatred for his own self. And it is that hatred for one#8217;s own

self, reflects hatred for others. One is unable to accept/love his own self as

he is ignorant about the real swaroopa of his self, which lacks nothing, i.e.

which is Poornam.

 

With pranams to all

 

Mani

 

 

"V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk wrote:Namaste. Reid #8211;ji and all,

 

This is in reply to your well-worded legitimate questions raised in

 

http://www.escribe.com/culture/advaitin/m25888.html

 

where you said

".. But my understanding of nonduality seems to run

> counter to your descriptions of what is required for the

householder,

> viz. that what must be done to achieve dispassion is only thru

> devotion to the divine. It seems to me that this flouts the

 

 

 

Discover

Stay in touch with email, IM, photo sharing & more. Check it out!

 

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste ProfVK,

 

thank you for the beautiful message...

 

the spirituel path takes some time....to explore the heart(s)....the

home of Krishna, Jesus....

 

reading Vedanta...scriptures....the Bible.....can give the

inspirations to realy undertand the truth.....

a true seeker go behind BMI....to reach the Self....

 

it take some time to go behind BMI....

but without the reach of the Self....the words written in many

scriptures remain "unexperienced".......even if the intellect (mind)

agree with the explanations of truth

 

whatever the practice is.....it's necessary to do it with Love....

this is like the key....to enter "None come to the Father but through

me."

 

recently there were some interesting questions appearing....

some food for the heart....and the intellect were given.....

 

but the right "understanding"...through the own heart is necessary

to "experience" the real Being Consciousness).....that we All are.....

 

it take time to perceive "Consciousness" in more and more

things......and it's a beautiful "experience".......

 

Regards

 

peace and love

 

Marc

[Guest guest]

>And how do you so withdraw the mind, except

>by `attaching' it to something as divine as God with name and form.

 

Honourable Profvkji,

I understand and admit the logic.

 

Does God with name and form include sages like Shankara, Raman Maharshi and

other realised souls including one's Guru?

 

PranAms to all advaitins

Ravi Shivde

[Guest guest]

advaitin, Ravi Shivde <shivde@s...> wrote:

> Does God with name and form include sages like Shankara, Raman

Maharshi and

> other realised souls including one's Guru?

>

 

Mamaste

 

Recall: 'gurus-sAkShAt paraM brahma'. Guru is the Absolute Brahman

Itself !

 

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "subrahmanyas2000"

<subrahmanyas@h...> wrote:

> But surely we are turning Advaita on its head here.

> So what would Shankara say ?

>

> Isnt it possible that this so called "God" may be differently

> defined and understood by Christians differ from the advaitin/hindu

> understanding of what a "God" is ?

 

Namaste

 

I appreciate your reservations. But please read

 

Swami Prabhavananda: The Sermon on the Mount according to Vedanta. New

American Library, New York, 1963.

 

PraNAms to all advaitins

profvk

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "subrahmanyas2000"

<subrahmanyas@h...> wrote:

==============

>

> Second - it would be pretty haughty to assign to ourselves the

> right to "correctly" interpret texts such as the bible (in

> english or greek) - it seems to me we should listen to

> what the church interpretations of the bible are.

> If so - then we will find that the Bible and Advaita are

> totally contradictory. Let us not delude ourselves into

> thinking that somehow the Bible teaches advaita. That is

> a kind of avidya as well.

>

 

Namaste.

 

I completely agree. While the idea that all religions are teaching

the same is attractive on the surface, it is best to leave the

interpretation of each religion to its practitioners. Trying to

provide a synthesis between the different scriptures can be

misconstrued and seen as being arrogant and even intolerant. After

all, even in the interpretation of the Gita, there are different

schools of philosophy. We do not try to find synthesis with advaita

among these.

 

I apologize if I have used strong language.

 

Harih Om!

Neelakantan

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "R.S.MANI" <r_s_mani> wrote:

>

> When you say,

>

> To me, the #8220;ME#8221; is not Lord Krishna but the Knowledge He

imparts. Lord Krishna is worshippable because of that Knowledge he

imparts.

>

> Am I wrong when I understand this #8220;ME#8221; as the Knowledge

that Krishna imparts and the Devotion is to that Knowledge and not

to Lord Krishna as a deity?

 

Namaste

 

Lord Krishna Himself is the Knowledge. cf. Gita statements below:

"adhyAtma-vidyA vidyAnAM" X -32

"mantro'haM" IX -16

"vedyaM pavitram" IX - 17

"jnAnaM jneyaM jnAna-gamyaM" XIII - 17

 

So I don't make the distinction between Krishna and the Gita that

you seem to make.

 

Incidntally, what are the numbers 8220, 8221, etc. in your post?

 

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk

[Guest guest]

I have tried to read the english text of the sermon on the

mount, and also went to a few christian bookstores to read what

christian scholars have to say on jesus.

I have not read Swami Prabhavananda's book, but after having

listened to other swamis on all "religions" all "Gods" being

equal etc, my fear is that Swami Prabhavananda'ji

also falls in the same category. But, I will try to keep an

open mind, will make the effort to get it and read his book.

 

When the "categories of debate" and presuppositions of vedanta

are so totally different from "religions" - trying to create

equivalences seems a bit contrived. Such "equivalency" effort

may be useful and has been propagated for political reasons

in India over the decades but is hardly valid in a scholarly

sense. It may however be useful for "introductory initiation*

into vedanta for christians.

 

Atleast the various astika/nastika darshanas have a similiar

"language" and terms of debate - though their may be differences

in conclusion and interpretation.

The "religions" on the other hand, share very little (if any)

with any of the dharmic traditions.

 

Regards,

S.Subrahmanya

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

I also do not know what are those numbers. I inserted inverted comas before and

after certain words, and they never appeared and instead those numbers appeared.

I am sorry if there is any confusion.

I am grateful for your clarification. I also did not make any distinction

between Lord Krishna and the Gita, and if my post sounded that, I feel sorry for

any ambiguity in my statement.

Respectful regards and Pranams to all

Mani

 

"V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk wrote:

advaitin, "R.S.MANI" <r_s_mani> wrote:

>

> When you say,

>

> To me, the #8220;ME#8221; is not Lord Krishna but the Knowledge He

imparts. Lord Krishna is worshippable because of that Knowledge he

imparts.

>

> Am I wrong when I understand this #8220;ME#8221; as the Knowledge

that Krishna imparts and the Devotion is to that Knowledge and not

to Lord Krishna as a deity?

 

Namaste

 

Lord Krishna Himself is the Knowledge. cf. Gita statements below:

"adhyAtma-vidyA vidyAnAM" X -32

"mantro'haM" IX -16

"vedyaM pavitram" IX - 17

"jnAnaM jneyaM jnAna-gamyaM" XIII - 17

 

So I don't make the distinction between Krishna and the Gita that

you seem to make.

 

Incidntally, what are the numbers 8220, 8221, etc. in your post?

 

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk

 

 

 

 

Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman

and Brahman.

Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/

To Post a message send an email to : advaitin

Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages

 

 

 

 

 

advaitin/

 

advaitin

 

 

 

 

 

Discover

Use to plan a weekend, have fun online & more. Check it out!

 

 

[Guest guest]

>

> I have tried to read the english text of the sermon on the

> mount, and also went to a few christian bookstores to read what

> christian scholars have to say on jesus.

> I have not read Swami Prabhavananda's book, but after having

> listened to other swamis on all "religions" all "Gods" being

> equal etc, my fear is that Swami Prabhavananda'ji

> also falls in the same category.

 

Dear Subrahmanya:

 

What the scholars say is just that, scholarly talk.

While it is useful as a frame of reference for whatever

path one walks, Truth is not bound in a book. Knowledge

is a gift of Grace and knows no religion, but surpasses them

all and emcompasses them all. That is the Mystery of It All!

 

Love,

 

Joyce

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "subrahmanyas2000"

<subrahmanyas@h...> wrote:

>

> I have tried to read the english text of the sermon on the

> mount, and also went to a few christian bookstores to read what

> christian scholars have to say on jesus.

> I have not read Swami Prabhavananda's book, but after having

> listened to other swamis on all "religions" all "Gods" being

> equal etc, my fear is that Swami Prabhavananda'ji

> also falls in the same category. But, I will try to keep an

> open mind, will make the effort to get it and read his book.

 

Namaste S,

 

If you read my treatment of the GMatthew, you will get a connection

to the ideas of Vedanta and Buddhism from the Sermon which is

included in this Gospel.........

 

http://www.geocities.com/aoclery/Jesusbook/GospelofMattew.htm

 

ONS....Tony.

[Guest guest]

Namaste dear Lady Joyce:

 

Thanks for saying it in a profound way and that is one of the best

one liner!

 

Mahatma Gandhiji who had the grace of the Lord had read and

understood all religions. Incidently his observation - "We are all

children of the same God. "Verily I say unto you, not every one that

sayeth unto me Lord, Lord, shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but he

that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven shall enter the

Kingdom," was said, though in different words, by all the great

teachers of the world." coincide with your summary statement (His

complete observations are provided below)

 

regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

 

Gandhiji's Observations:

=======================

" Though I admire much in Christianity, I am unable to identify

myself with orthodox Christianity:.. Hinduism as I know it entirely

satisfies my soul, fills my whole being, and I find a solace in the

Bhagavadgita and Upanishads that I miss even in the Sermon on the

Mount. Not that I do not prize the ideal presented therein, not that

some of the precious teachings in the Sermon on the Mount have not

left a deep impress upon me, but I must confess to you that when

doubts haunt me, when disappointments. stare me in the face, and when

I see not one ray of light on the horizon, I turn to the Bhagavadgita

and find a verse to comfort me; and I immediately begin to smile in

the midst of over-whelming sorrow. My life has been full of external

tragedies and, if they have not left any visible effect on me, I owe

it to the teaching of the Bhagavadgita. (From an address to

Christian Missionaries, Young India, 6-8-1925)

 

The Gita has become for me the key to the scriptures of the world.

It unravels for me the deepest mysteries to be found in them. I

regard them with the same reverence that I pay to the Hindu

scriptures. Hindus, Musalmans, Christians, Parsis, Jews are

convenient labels. But when I tear them down, I do not know which is

which. We are all children of the same God. "Verily I say unto you,

not every one that sayeth unto me Lord, Lord, shall enter the Kingdom

of Heaven, but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven

shall enter the Kingdom," was said, though in different words, by all

the great teachers of the world."

 

Source: The message of Gita by Mahatma Gandhiji.

 

 

advaitin, "Lady Joyce" <shaantih@c...> wrote:

> Knowledge is a gift of Grace and knows no religion, but surpasses

> them all and emcompasses them all. That is the Mystery of It All!

>

> Love,

>

> Joyce

[Guest guest]

> "Ram Chandran" <RamChandran

> 2005/06/02 Thu PM 02:14:12 EDT> advaitin

> Re: When to renounce : "None come to the Father except

thro. me"

 

 

Namaste dear Lady Joyce:

 

Thanks for saying it in a profound way and that is one of the best one liner!

 

*************************************

This is a gift Joyceji has of going straight to heart of the matter.

 

All worldly and even scriptural knowledge no matter how beautiful and sublime

requires the use of mind. And yet the wonderful mystery of the ever present,

ever new, the eternal Self Seeing Being is revealed only when the mind itself is

surrendered to the Lord of the Heart. How utterly paradoxical that the mind

which is the instrument of perception and therefore a vehicle for carrying all

types of spiritual knowledge itself must be given up to the Lord. The Christian

saying, "Not my will Lord but thine" probably means something similar to that.

 

As Prof. VK has pointed out, Sri Krishna is the messenger of the eternal truth

and at the same time the eternal truth himself. "I am in the Heart of all

Gudakesha." Krishna here implies the Self, the Heart It Self. Through the

symbolism of words and concepts Self always points to It Self, the one without a

second.

 

Love to all

Harsha

[Guest guest]

advaitin, wrote:

And yet the wonderful mystery of the ever present, ever new, the

eternal Self Seeing Being is revealed only when the mind itself is

surrendered to the Lord of the Heart. How utterly paradoxical that

the mind which is the instrument of perception and therefore a

vehicle for carrying all types of spiritual knowledge itself must be

given up to the Lord. The Christian saying, "Not my will Lord but

thine" probably means something similar to that.

----

 

Namaste, Harsha-ji and all.

 

As your rightly say, it is humility and surrender to God's Will that

is most important. We are living amidst a crisis of intellect which

expresses itself as an emotional intoxication in the belief that

one's way of doing things is the right way.

 

Rama, the Son of Dasaratha, and Jesus, the Son of God, knew what

they were doing was the right thing but never was there an iota of

arrogance in them. It is easy to say that everything happens

according to God's Will, but it is extremely difficult to live by

this belief. Surrender to God's Will is not a pose but an attitude.

When things happen which are not to one's taste and wishes, in spite

of all the best efforts one has put in and the precautions one has

taken, the weak react by grumbling and apportioning blame, the

strong by throwing their weight around, criticising all and sundry

and protesting noisily. But the truly religious man will take it as

God's Will and submit to the flow of the divine current. While the

self-conceited man will feel that his initiative has been lost, the

truly spiritual man will concede that the initiative had never been

with him; it was always with Him alone.

 

It is not our will, or our mind, or our intelligence that works out

things for us. The agent provocateur is within us. Every action is

His. The only action that should be ours is to surrender our will to

Him. This surrender He never activates for us because it has to come

out of our free will. He creates only the circumstances for us to

surrender to Him. If we don't voluntarily give ourselves to Him, in

thought and deed, He allows us, in His infinite mercy, to be tossed

about by the waves of birth and death in the ocean of samsAra and

take our own time to come to Him. Oh God, take my will and make it

thine!

 

PraNAms to Rama, the Son of Dasaratha and Jesus, the Son of God.

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk