Fwd: Amma on Brahmacharya

June 6, 2005

advaitajnana, "Tony OClery" <aoclery>

wrote:

Namaste,

This should bring out some ideas and questions.........ONS..Tony.

Ôm Amriteswaryai Namah

Satsang Amma's Words Control of the Senses

Young man: "Is celibacy compulsory here to live in the Ashram?"

Amma: "Amma has told Her children who are staying here to practice

celibacy. This will eventually transform their sexual energy into

ojas (subtle spiritual energy); then they will come to know their

real nature, the souce of true happiness. This is the way of life

that they have chosen. Amma doesn't force them. She just tells them

that this is the path. Only those who can do this need stay here.

The others can enter grihastashrama (a spiritually oriented

householder life). Those who feel they will fail have the freedom to

leave at any time.

"The police department has its own rules, so does the military.

Similarly, the brahmacharis and brahmacharinis here at the ashram

have to follow the rules of brahmacharya. Observing celibacy is

essential for those who have chosen to live here, and it applies not

only in the sexual sense. They have to restrain all their senses:

their eyes, nose, tongue, and ears as well.

"Amma generally advises them to get married, but those here won't

listen to it. So Amma has told them that here they have to live a

certain way and follow certain rules, and if they can't do that,

they are free to leave. No one is forced to live in this way. Not

everyone can take up this path. Amma tells them, `Don't suppress

anything. You can try this way of life, and if it doesn't work for

you, get married.'

"If you dress up for a role, you should play it well; otherwise,

don't even begin to play that role. If you want to reach the supreme

goal, brahmacharya is essential. Our mahatmas have said so. Why did

Buddha, Ramatirtha, Tulsidas, and other mahatmas leave their wives

and their homes? Why did Sri Shankaracharya take sannyasa at such an

early age? Do their actions imply that brahmacharya isn't necessary?

Even after getting married, didn't Sri Ramakrishna practice

brahmacharya to set an example for others to follow?

"Brahmacharya isn't just something external, it doesn't just mean

foregoing marriage. Every step has to be taken in accordance with

the highest principle. Not even a thought should violate that

principle. Brahmacharya also includes refraining from harming others

in any way, not listening to or looking at anything unnecessarily,

and to speak only when needed. Only then can you call it true

brahmacharya. Brahmacharya is absolutely essential on the spiritual

path.

"Because it may be difficult to control your thoughts in the

beginning, you can start by practicing brahmacharya outwardly. If

brahmacharya isn't observed, you will lose all the strength you have

gained through your sadhana. Amma doesn't mean that you should

suppress these things by force. For those who have lakshya bodha

(constant intent on the spiritual goal), self-control isn't that

difficult. People going to work in the Persian Gulf countries often

return only after several years. (A large number of people from

India, especially from Kerala, have been going to work in the Gulf

countries.) During that time they live far away from their wives and

children. When it's a question of finding a job ( supporting their

family), you don't let your attachment to your family and home get

in the way. Similarly, if your aim is self-realization, you don't

think about anything else. Other thoughts will fade automatically,

without there being any need to forcibly control them.

"People believe that happiness can be found in external objects, and

so they work hard for those things, wasting all their energy.

Happiness cannot be obtained from external objects. We should

reflect on this and understand the truth. Through our love for God

and by practicing one-pointed tapas we will grow strong. This isn't

difficult for those who understand that they only waste energy by

looking for happiness in the world outside.

"Certain plants won't bear fruit if they have too many leaves. Only

if they are pruned will they flower and bear fruit. In the same way,

if we allow ourselves to be swayed by external pleasures, we won't

be able to find the inner Truth. We have to get rid of our desires

for worldly pleasures if we wish to reap the fruit of self-

realization."

--- End forwarded message ---

June 7, 2005

Respected friends,

Namaste.

> Brahmacharya is absolutely essential on the spiritual path.

How essential or ture is this? What do the shastras say? If the above

statement is true, then grihasthas (householders) have no place in the

spiritual path. Or are they expected to live in brahmacharya?

Both the teacher and the student in the Gita - SriKrishna and Arjuna are

much married. Most of our rishis and gods are married with children.

Shiva as the ardha-narIshwara is the epitome of male and female harmony.

Best regards,

Ramachandra

June 7, 2005

advaitin, "K.B.S. Ramachandra" <ram@m...> wrote:

> Respected friends,

>

> Namaste.

>

> > Brahmacharya is absolutely essential on the spiritual path.

>

> How essential or ture is this? What do the shastras say? If the above

> statement is true, then grihasthas (householders) have no place in the

> spiritual path. Or are they expected to live in brahmacharya?

>

> Both the teacher and the student in the Gita - SriKrishna and Arjuna

are

> much married. Most of our rishis and gods are married with children.

> Shiva as the ardha-narIshwara is the epitome of male and female

harmony.

>

> Best regards,

> Ramachandra

Namaste,

maybe whoever is married to "someone"....is married to Maya....

this can happen to householders...like to even unmarried teachers too

but let's hope that all are married to the same Brahman....

....and unmarried to Maya

only few thoughts.....

excuse me if i'm wrong ....

i'm thankfull for the interesting messages and answers

Regards

love and peace

Marc

June 7, 2005

If the above

statement is true, then grihasthas (householders) have no place in the

spiritual path. Or are they expected to live in brahmacharya?

praNAms

Hare Krishna

Ofcourse, bramacharya (celibacy) is an absolute necessary for

brahmacharya, vAnaprasTha & athyAshrama (saNyAsa)...but it does not anyway

mean that gruhasthA-s have excluded from the path of realization.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

June 7, 2005

advaitin, "K.B.S. Ramachandra" <ram@m...>

wrote:

> Respected friends,

>

> Namaste.

>

> > Brahmacharya is absolutely essential on the spiritual path.

>

> How essential or ture is this? What do the shastras say?

Namaste,

Depends on the context and whether one is realised or not. If one is

realised there would be no binding karma in sex, there would be no

binding karma at all. For one would only be witnessing.

However to achieve realisation imho one has to drop every thought,

desire and attachment. So in fact Brahmacharya is the giving up of

these desires.

It is the non surrender and attachment that causes the trouble not

the act...............ONS...Tony.

June 7, 2005

Namaste:

IMO the word "bR^ihmacarya" in one the least understood word.

bR^ihmaNe vedaartham caryaM aacaraNiiyam

Meaning - One who is engaged the studies of bR^ihma (Veda) is

bR^ihmacaarii.

Thus one who observes such penances is bR^ihmacaarii.

bR^ihma dnyaanaM tapo vaa aacarati.

The word bR^ihmacaarii occurs in R^igveda as well and has a very

important meaning.

brhmacaarii carati veviShadviShH | sa devaanaaM bhavatyekam~Ngam ||

R^igveda 10.10.95 ||

Meaning - One who behaves as bR^ihmacaarii gains the same status a

Gods.

This reflects that saadhaka attains the Godhood and thus the

responsibility for every saadhaka is to practice the austerities to

elevate their own levels from human to God. As advita this means

that God and their place svarga is not separate from him but his

responsibility to achieve that state.

During upaniShataic period householders were not off-limits to

bR^ihmacaarya vrata.

To become knowledgeable of devayaana and pitR^iyaana shvetaketu's

father vowed for bR^ihmacaaryavrata and went to pravaahnaNa king

(bR^ihad. 6.2.4). Similarly, householders viz shaala, satyayaxa,

indradyumna, were discussing aadhyaatma but could not arrive at the

conclusion therefore all of them became bR^ihmacaarii(samitapaaNi)

and went to the king ashvapati. I think this story is narrated in

chhanadogyauapaniShad.

In daxasmR^iti it is said:

yo gR^ihasthaashramamaasyaaya brahmacaarii bhavetpuanaH |

na yatirna vanasthyashca sarvaashramavivarjita:

Meaning - Any one after becoming householder again become

bR^ihmacaarii does not belong to any specific aashrama (yati,

vaanaprastha.

kaNvamini was a naiShThika bR^ihmacaarii and he created an aashrama

on the baks of maalini and remained dedicated to educating many

students.

This concept of naiShThika bR^ihmacaarii later was adopted in

bauddha and jaina aacaarya.

Now finally how the concept of celibacy did became the synonymous

meaning is also interesting. I MO, any thing that becomes a

diversion must be avoided must have become the golden rule and thus

the conventional meaning of celibacy remained associated with the

word bR^ihmacaarii.

As far as vidhiniSheda is concerned is clearly documented in the

manusmR^iti in (2.175-179) and needs to be read in original.

Just few thoughts.

Dr. Yadu

advaitin, bhaskar.yr@i... wrote:

>

> If the above

> statement is true, then grihasthas (householders) have no place in

the

> spiritual path. Or are they expected to live in brahmacharya?

>

> praNAms

> Hare Krishna

>

> Ofcourse, bramacharya (celibacy) is an absolute necessary for

> brahmacharya, vAnaprasTha & athyAshrama (saNyAsa)...but it does

not anyway

> mean that gruhasthA-s have excluded from the path of realization.

>

> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

> bhaskar

June 7, 2005

Namaste

I do agree with Dr Yaduji that Brahmacharyam is the most

misinterpreted word. It should only mean a life led with

self-restraint or rather a disciplined life. The prashna upanishad

mentions that those who have sexual intercourse at night remains a

brahmachari:

Day and night, verily, are Prajapati. Of these, day is the eater,

prana and night, the food, rayi. Those who join in sexual

enjoyment by day verily dissipate life; but to join in sexual

enjoyment by night is, verily, chastity. - Prashna upanishad 1:13

On 6/8/05, ymoharir <ymoharir wrote:

> Namaste:

>

> IMO the word "bR^ihmacarya" in one the least understood word.

>

> bR^ihmaNe vedaartham caryaM aacaraNiiyam

>

> Meaning - One who is engaged the studies of bR^ihma (Veda) is

> bR^ihmacaarii.

>

> Thus one who observes such penances is bR^ihmacaarii.

>

> bR^ihma dnyaanaM tapo vaa aacarati.

>

> The word bR^ihmacaarii occurs in R^igveda as well and has a very

> important meaning.

>

> brhmacaarii carati veviShadviShH | sa devaanaaM bhavatyekam~Ngam ||

> R^igveda 10.10.95 ||

>

> Meaning - One who behaves as bR^ihmacaarii gains the same status a

> Gods.

>

> This reflects that saadhaka attains the Godhood and thus the

> responsibility for every saadhaka is to practice the austerities to

> elevate their own levels from human to God. As advita this means

> that God and their place svarga is not separate from him but his

> responsibility to achieve that state.

>

> During upaniShataic period householders were not off-limits to

> bR^ihmacaarya vrata.

>

> To become knowledgeable of devayaana and pitR^iyaana shvetaketu's

> father vowed for bR^ihmacaaryavrata and went to pravaahnaNa king

> (bR^ihad. 6.2.4). Similarly, householders viz shaala, satyayaxa,

> indradyumna, were discussing aadhyaatma but could not arrive at the

> conclusion therefore all of them became bR^ihmacaarii(samitapaaNi)

> and went to the king ashvapati. I think this story is narrated in

> chhanadogyauapaniShad.

>

> In daxasmR^iti it is said:

>

> yo gR^ihasthaashramamaasyaaya brahmacaarii bhavetpuanaH |

> na yatirna vanasthyashca sarvaashramavivarjita:

>

> Meaning - Any one after becoming householder again become

> bR^ihmacaarii does not belong to any specific aashrama (yati,

> vaanaprastha.

>

> kaNvamini was a naiShThika bR^ihmacaarii and he created an aashrama

> on the baks of maalini and remained dedicated to educating many

> students.

>

> This concept of naiShThika bR^ihmacaarii later was adopted in

> bauddha and jaina aacaarya.

>

> Now finally how the concept of celibacy did became the synonymous

> meaning is also interesting. I MO, any thing that becomes a

> diversion must be avoided must have become the golden rule and thus

> the conventional meaning of celibacy remained associated with the

> word bR^ihmacaarii.

>

> As far as vidhiniSheda is concerned is clearly documented in the

> manusmR^iti in (2.175-179) and needs to be read in original.

>

> Just few thoughts.

>

> Dr. Yadu

>

> advaitin, bhaskar.yr@i... wrote:

> >

> > If the above

> > statement is true, then grihasthas (householders) have no place in

> the

> > spiritual path. Or are they expected to live in brahmacharya?

> >

> > praNAms

> > Hare Krishna

> >

> > Ofcourse, bramacharya (celibacy) is an absolute necessary for

> > brahmacharya, vAnaprasTha & athyAshrama (saNyAsa)...but it does

> not anyway

> > mean that gruhasthA-s have excluded from the path of realization.

> >

> > Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

> > bhaskar

>

> 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

>

> Links

>

June 7, 2005

K Kathirasan wrote:

> Namaste

>

> I do agree with Dr Yaduji that Brahmacharyam is the most

> misinterpreted word. It should only mean a life led with

> self-restraint or rather a disciplined life. The prashna upanishad

> mentions that those who have sexual intercourse at night remains a

> brahmachari:

>

> Day and night, verily, are Prajapati. Of these, day is the eater,

> prana and night, the food, rayi. Those who join in sexual

> enjoyment by day verily dissipate life; but to join in sexual

> enjoyment by night is, verily, chastity. - Prashna upanishad 1:13

What is stated above makes little sense to me. Perhaps the scholars and

more experienced members of the list can explain it in more depth.

Love to all

Harsha

June 7, 2005

Dear Shri Ramchandraji,

>Fwd: Amma on Brahmacharya

Pray, who is Amma?

> > Brahmacharya is absolutely essential on the spiritual path.

What is the source and context of the above statement?

> How essential or true is this? What do the shastras say? If the above

> statement is true, then grihasthas (householders) have no place in the

> spiritual path. Or are they expected to live in brahmacharya?

>

> Both the teacher and the student in the Gita - SriKrishna and Arjuna are

> much married. Most of our rishis and gods are married with children.

To some extent you have answered your own question. A number of

married persons with children reaching the highest state is by itself a

clear indication that Brahmacharya is not absolutely essential for spiritual

progress.

Now, the question is, does Brahmacharya help? Shastras are unanimous that

it helps. Brahmacharya is one of the five Yamas of Ashtanga Yoga of

Patanjali. Bhagwadgita mentions it at several places. Vivekananda said, 'If

the Sun of spirituality is shining one fold in a householder, it is shining

a thousandfold in a Sannyasin'.

It is celebrated and enjoined upon monks in Hinduism,

Buddism, Jainism, Christianity, (But notably, not in Zoroastrianism and

Judaism). Islam does not consider it essential, though a number of Sufi

saints were celibates.

Finally one can conclude that Brahmacharya is one of several things (like

non violence, Sattwik diet) that are conducive to spirituality, but not

absolutely essential as exceptions abound.

Brahmacharya is more of a *choice* rather than a *necessity*. And it seems

to work only when it is accepted as a way of life voluntarily and wilfully.

Pranams to all advaitins

Ravi Shivde

June 8, 2005

Dear Sri Shivde

> Pray, who is Amma?

> What is the source and context of the above statement?

My post was in response to Sri. Tony OClery's posting on this subject.

The message is available at

advaitin/message/26890

I was following the moderator's oft repeated [:-) ] advice to cut out

all the irrelevant text while replying.

Thanks for your comments.

Best regards,

Ramachandra

June 8, 2005

> Pray, who is Amma?

Namaste Ravi Shivde,

I think Ramachandraji has already replied to this question. But just to

mention again.

AMMA is Sadguru Mata Amritanandamayi Devi whose ashram is present world

wide & the main ashram is at Vallickavu in Quilon, Kerala, India. AMMA

once won the Martin-King Award & is popularly known as the "hugging

saint" in the west.

For more about AMMA, you can visit www.amritapuri.org

<http://www.amritapuri.org/> .

AUM NAMAH SHIVAYA

Thanks

Hariram

Let a moment not pass by without remembering God

******************* CAUTION - Disclaimer ****************** This e-mail contains

PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended solely for the use of the

addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by

e-mail and delete the original message. Further, you are not to copy, disclose,

or distribute this e-mail or its contents to any other person and any such

actions are unlawful. This e-mail may contain viruses. Infosys has taken every

reasonable precaution to minimize this risk, but is not liable for any damage

you may sustain as a result of any virus in this e-mail. You should carry out

your own virus checks before opening the e-mail or attachment. Infosys reserves

the right to monitor and review the content of all messages sent to or from this

e-mail address. Messages sent to or from this e-mail address may be stored on

the Infosys e-mail system.

***INFOSYS******** End of Disclaimer ********INFOSYS***

June 8, 2005

Namaste:

During the Vedic time period, the Vedic religion of Sanatanadharma

did not stipulate morality conditions for being spiritual. In modern

times, religion is being institutionalized and consequently spiritual

institutions seem to stipulate rules or injunctions. Those who

respect the head of such institutions and have strong convictions to

what the leader preaches. If Ammachi says that "Brahmacharya is an

essential ingredient for spiritual growth" no questions are being

raised. That is unfortunate and that goes against the Vedic tradition

of establishing one's faith by reasoning. The famous quotation of

Einstein is quite appropriate in this context: "Religion without

science is blind and science without religion is vain!" Without

reasoning, the spiritual institution becomes a "cult – group of

followers with extreme excessive admiration for the leader.

As advaitins we believe in `reasoning' and we naturally look for

answers to the questions from the Vedantic literature. Fortunately,

Bhagawan Sri Krishna provide the answers to the questions that were

raised with respect to the "Brahamacharyam." The following two

verses from chapter 9 of Gita provides the clue on the requirement

for "God-realization."

samoham sarvabhutesu na me dvesyo'sti na priyah

ye bhajanti tu mam bhaktya mayi te tesu capyaham ( 9-29)

samah aham - I am the same; sarvabhutesu - in all beings; na me

dvesyaha asti - there is no one for whom I have dislike; na priyah -

no favourite; ye bhajanti tu mam - but those who seek me; bhaktya-

with devotion; mayi te - they exist in me; tesu ca api aham - and I

exist in them

I am the same in all beings. There is no one for whom I have dislike

nor do I have a favourite. But those who seek me with devotion exist

in me and I in them.

api cet suduracarah bhajate mamananyabhak

sadhureva sa mantavyah samyag vyavasito hi sah (9-30)

api eel - even if; suduracarah - one of higly improper conduct;

bhajate mam -worships/seeks Me; ananyabhak - being one without a

sense of separation; sSdhuh eva sah mantavyah - he is to be

considered a good person; hi - because; samayag-vyavasitah sah - he

is one whose understanding is clear

Even if someone of highly improper conduct seeks Me without a sense

of separation, he is to be considered a good person because he is one

whose understanding is clear.

There are several other verses in Bhagavad Gita that reinforces the

message that "undivided devotion to one's Self" is the only

requirement for liberation.

This story told in Mahabharata further illustrates the subtle but

profound message on the requirements for liberation:

One brahmana was sitting under a tree doing his prayers and

meditation and tapas invoking the Lord. In the process he developed

some powers which he himself did not know about. One day, when he was

sitting under a tree, a crane on top of the tree dropped some

droppings on him. He looked at it with angry eyes and the crane burnt-

to ashes. Then he knew he had this power. He used to go for bhiksa

daily to the same village. Previously he was humble like a sadhu, but

once he got power, he became very proud. He went and asked for bhiksa

and the woman made him wait for one hour before serving him. He was

very angry and asked her how she could make him wait like that. She

said that she was doing her duties which was more important. He

said "Do you know who you are talking to?" She said, "Yes I know, but

I am no crane." He asked her how she knew about the crane. And she

told him to go and ask the butcher. The butcher was busy serving his

old and ailing father so the brahmana had to wait again. He was

furious and asked the butcher why he had made him wait. Then the

butcher said, "Did that lady send you here?" The lesson is do not

judge people by what they do. One is a house-holder and the other a

butcher but they were both doing their jobs and were definitely

better than the Brahmin with all his prayers and meditations etc.

In summary, our scriptures do not stipulate that `Brahmacharyam' is a

requirement for Moksha. What could be the possible explanation for

Ammachi to insists her followers who want to serve in the

institutions to strictly practice Brahmacharyam? The answer is quite

simple. She is running an organization with thousands of followers

and by stipulating strict rules of conduct – Brahmacharyam, she wants

to ensure discipline. For spiritual growth, three virtues are

necessary and sufficient – Shraddha (faith and conviction0, Vairagya

(detachment from worldly attractions) and Viveka (ability to

discriminate between the real and unreal).

warmest regards,

Ram Chandran

advaitin, Harsha wrote:

> What is stated above makes little sense to me. Perhaps the scholars

and

> more experienced members of the list can explain it in more depth.

>

> Love to all

> Harsha

June 8, 2005

Namste Hariram-Ji:

As an advitin, you are always with the God because you are part of

that "brahma", but trying to think separate one makes themselves

separate.

Thus removal of ignorance that HE is separate is the practice

recommended for an advaitin saadhaka.

When we remember GOD it is usually be a name (noun) and our object

as a saadhaka is to convert that noun into verb.

Just my 2 cents.

Hari OM

Dr. Yadu

advaitin, "Hariram_Subramonia"

<Hariram_Subramonia@i...> wrote:

>

> >

> For more about AMMA, you can visit www.amritapuri.org

> <http://www.amritapuri.org/> .

>

> Thanks

>

> Hariram

>

> Let a moment not pass by without remembering God

>

June 8, 2005

Namaste,

Brahmacharya is very essential in both pravrtti and nivrtti margas.

But we have interpreted the word such that it only means celibacy.

This is wrong in my opinion. A casual look at the Dharma shastras will

prove that what is meant by Brahmacharya is not celibacy or

continence. But it only means a life dedicated to the study and

assimilation of the Vedic wisdom with "absolute self-restraint

(brahmacharya)". This self-restraint should be exercised in all

matters such as food, entertainment, pleasures, conversations etc...

However due to the influence of later day ascetic traditions within

Hinduism , we have cornered the value of Brahmacharya to mean just

mere celibacy.

The rishis of the Dharmashastras have advocated a healthy sexual

relationship between married couples based on the value of

Brahmacharya. This should not be interpreted as sexual abstinence.

Moderation should be the keyword for householders. Excessive

indulgence and abstinence are both psychological problems which need

immediate attention. However, this rule only applies to those in the

grahastha ashrama.

One more point to consider would be the different contextual

interpretations of Brahmacharyam in the four ashramas. The practice of

Brahmacharya for grhasthas will definitely vary with the Sannyasis.

Since the Upanishads were primarily meant for Sannyasis, brahmacharya

is often referred to as the absence of pleasures experienced in the

grhastha ashrama. Therefore, we often make the mistake that

Brahmacharya only meant celibacy.

Kathirasan

On 6/7/05, K.B.S. Ramachandra <ram wrote:

> Respected friends,

>

> Namaste.

>

> > Brahmacharya is absolutely essential on the spiritual path.

>

> How essential or ture is this? What do the shastras say? If the above

> statement is true, then grihasthas (householders) have no place in the

> spiritual path. Or are they expected to live in brahmacharya?

>

> Both the teacher and the student in the Gita - SriKrishna and Arjuna are

> much married. Most of our rishis and gods are married with children.

> Shiva as the ardha-narIshwara is the epitome of male and female harmony.

>

> Best regards,

> Ramachandra

>

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

>

> Links

>

June 10, 2005

advaitin, "Ram Chandran" <RamChandran@a...>

wrote:

> Namaste:

>

> During the Vedic time period, the Vedic religion of Sanatanadharma

> did not stipulate morality conditions for being spiritual. In

modern

> times, religion is being institutionalized and consequently

spiritual

> institutions seem to stipulate rules or injunctions. Those who

> respect the head of such institutions and have strong convictions

to

> what the leader preaches. If Ammachi says that "Brahmacharya is an

> essential ingredient for spiritual growth" no questions are being

> raised. That is unfortunate and that goes against the Vedic

tradition

> of establishing one's faith by reasoning. The famous quotation of

> Einstein is quite appropriate in this context: "Religion without

> science is blind and science without religion is vain!" Without

> reasoning, the spiritual institution becomes a "cult – group of

> followers with extreme excessive admiration for the leader.

>

> As advaitins we believe in `reasoning' and we naturally look for

> answers to the questions from the Vedantic literature. Fortunately,

> Bhagawan Sri Krishna provide the answers to the questions that

were

> raised with respect to the "Brahamacharyam." The following two

> verses from chapter 9 of Gita provides the clue on the requirement

> for "God-realization."

>

> samoham sarvabhutesu na me dvesyo'sti na priyah

> ye bhajanti tu mam bhaktya mayi te tesu capyaham ( 9-29)

>

> samah aham - I am the same; sarvabhutesu - in all beings; na me

> dvesyaha asti - there is no one for whom I have dislike; na priyah -

> no favourite; ye bhajanti tu mam - but those who seek me; bhaktya-

> with devotion; mayi te - they exist in me; tesu ca api aham - and I

> exist in them

>

> I am the same in all beings. There is no one for whom I have

dislike

> nor do I have a favourite. But those who seek me with devotion

exist

> in me and I in them.

>

> api cet suduracarah bhajate mamananyabhak

> sadhureva sa mantavyah samyag vyavasito hi sah (9-30)

>

> api eel - even if; suduracarah - one of higly improper conduct;

> bhajate mam -worships/seeks Me; ananyabhak - being one without

a

> sense of separation; sSdhuh eva sah mantavyah - he is to be

> considered a good person; hi - because; samayag-vyavasitah sah - he

> is one whose understanding is clear

>

> Even if someone of highly improper conduct seeks Me without a sense

> of separation, he is to be considered a good person because he is

one

> whose understanding is clear.

>

> There are several other verses in Bhagavad Gita that reinforces the

> message that "undivided devotion to one's Self" is the only

> requirement for liberation.

>

> This story told in Mahabharata further illustrates the subtle but

> profound message on the requirements for liberation:

> One brahmana was sitting under a tree doing his prayers and

> meditation and tapas invoking the Lord. In the process he developed

> some powers which he himself did not know about. One day, when he

was

> sitting under a tree, a crane on top of the tree dropped some

> droppings on him. He looked at it with angry eyes and the crane

burnt-

> to ashes. Then he knew he had this power. He used to go for bhiksa

> daily to the same village. Previously he was humble like a sadhu,

but

> once he got power, he became very proud. He went and asked for

bhiksa

> and the woman made him wait for one hour before serving him. He was

> very angry and asked her how she could make him wait like that. She

> said that she was doing her duties which was more important. He

> said "Do you know who you are talking to?" She said, "Yes I know,

but

> I am no crane." He asked her how she knew about the crane. And she

> told him to go and ask the butcher. The butcher was busy serving

his

> old and ailing father so the brahmana had to wait again. He was

> furious and asked the butcher why he had made him wait. Then the

> butcher said, "Did that lady send you here?" The lesson is do not

> judge people by what they do. One is a house-holder and the other a

> butcher but they were both doing their jobs and were definitely

> better than the Brahmin with all his prayers and meditations etc.

>

> In summary, our scriptures do not stipulate that `Brahmacharyam' is

a

> requirement for Moksha. What could be the possible explanation for

> Ammachi to insists her followers who want to serve in the

> institutions to strictly practice Brahmacharyam? The answer is

quite

> simple. She is running an organization with thousands of followers

> and by stipulating strict rules of conduct – Brahmacharyam, she

wants

> to ensure discipline. For spiritual growth, three virtues are

> necessary and sufficient – Shraddha (faith and conviction0,

Vairagya

> (detachment from worldly attractions) and Viveka (ability to

> discriminate between the real and unreal).

>

> warmest regards,

>

> Ram Chandran

Namaste,

thank you for the interesting and clear message

i agree with your words...

....maybe everyone has a whole "institution" in him/herself....

trying to find good organisation, balance and harmony in this (inner)

institution let people also be "active" working in institutions

around....

as kind of reflection of oneself....

the stronger this attitude is....the stronger is maybe the active

participation in institutions....

let us hope that people find peace and harmony in

this "institutions".....and that the "attitude" get....one

day......the fruit.....as an infinite heart.....and so, (independent)

Being.....

Regards

peace and love

Marc

>

June 15, 2005

Namaste Ram,

>As advaitins we believe in `reasoning' and we naturally look for

>answers to the questions from the Vedantic literature. Fortunately,

>Bhagawan Sri Krishna provide the answers to the questions that were

>raised with respect to the "Brahamacharyam." The following two

>verses from chapter 9 of Gita provides the clue on the requirement

>for "God-realization."

Reasoning is of the intellect alone. Hence can a person completely

believe on reasoning alone and can reason alone give the answers to the

questions from Vedantic literature?

>There are several other verses in Bhagavad Gita that reinforces the

>message that "undivided devotion to one's Self" is the only

>requirement for liberation.

There are many paths which lead to the ultimate non-dual reality that

EVERYTHING IS THE SELF alone. There are and might be more ways which

will lead to liberation (rather this word is misleading as the Self is

ever realized and hence it should ideally be realization rather than

liberation). In such cases, those ways or means will be the only

requirement for liberation (using that path). Gita mentions in many

places that one should see ONENESS everywhere - this is one of the path.

As Ramana Maharshi pointed out, the path of Vichara is yet another which

is called the direct path by Maharshi himself (with sufficient backing

up from Yoga Vasistha and Vivekachoodamani).

>In summary, our scriptures do not stipulate that `Brahmacharyam' is a

>requirement for Moksha. What could be the possible explanation for

>Ammachi to insists her followers who want to serve in the

>institutions to strictly practice Brahmacharyam? The answer is quite

>simple. She is running an organization with thousands of followers

>and by stipulating strict rules of conduct - Brahmacharyam, she wants

>to ensure discipline. For spiritual growth, three virtues are

>necessary and sufficient - Shraddha (faith and conviction0, Vairagya

>(detachment from worldly attractions) and Viveka (ability to

>discriminate between the real and unreal).

Brahmacharyam can also be taken to mean establishing oneself in Brahman

or the Self. If this meaning is taken (don't know whether such a meaning

can be taken from the Sanskrit word of Brahmacharyam), then it becomes

the only requirement for Moksha. And as per your own words "The lesson

is do not

judge people by what they do. One is a house-holder and the other a

butcher but they were both doing their jobs and were definitely

better than the Brahmin with all his prayers and meditations etc.", It

is better not to judge people. And AMMA never even uses the word "I" -

so there never comes a question of her running an organization. In one

of the latest books of AMMA titled "From AMMA's heart" compiled and

written by her senior most disciple Swami Amritaswaroopananda puri, she

speaks from the level of Gaudapada. And words of such Mahatmas are tough

to understand through either logic or reasoning (one can compare the

sloka in Mundaka which says that the Self cannot be known through

hearing, lectures or reasoning etc.).

Rightly you have mentioned the three virtues for spiritual growth - but

still that will all depend on the seeker alone (who is none other than

Brahman!!!!). Thus, I believe, what is more essential is knowing or

contemplating (vritti jnaana) that "I am Brahman". I believe Vidyaranya

tells three things of Jnaana, Vairagya and Uparama in Panchadashi (I

haven't learnt the work hence can't mention the place where this occurs

- believe it is in 6th or 7th chapter) and he goes on to mention that

Jnaana is the most important.

This limited intellect (again one and the same Consciousness alone)

hasn't studied much scriptures, hence whatever has been mentioned above

might/will be faulty both in respect to scriptures as well as with

reasoning. Hope the learned members of the group will forgive this.

PS: If something objectionable has been mentioned above, please do

forgive.

AUM NAMAH SHIVAYA

Hariram

warmest regards,

Ram Chandran

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

<advaitin?subject=Un>

* Terms of

Service <> .