Guest guest Posted March 13, 2006 Report Share Posted March 13, 2006 Om Tat Sat Namaste, I came across this upanishad on another mailing list and for once I did not believe this is the content of an upanishad, especially since I had never heard of this upanishad. Some of the portions of the upanishad seem as if they are written by Acharya Shankar. Here is a sample (Veda Vyasa's upadesh to Suka) "This world is Maya. It seems to appear just like a dream. It is superimposed on the Lord just like a rope on a serpent. This is the eternal Truth. There is no creation in reality. All is absolute. All is Truth. Knowing this, one is liberated at once." ............. "The Paramatman is only the Sakshi. He does not do anything. He only assumes the form of the Jiva through His Maya, just as the Akasa inside a pot seems to be different from the Akasa outside and assumes the form of the pot. In reality all is Siva, Advaita, the One Absolute. There is no difference of whatever kind. " The full text is at : http://www.shastras.com/108upanishads/rudrahridaya/ regards, Om Tat Sat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 14, 2006 Report Share Posted March 14, 2006 advaitin, "mahadevadvaita" <mahadevadvaita wrote: > > Om Tat Sat > Namaste, I came across this upanishad on another mailing list > and for once I did not believe this is the content of an upanishad, > especially since I had never heard of this upanishad. Some of the > portions of the upanishad seem as if they are written by Acharya > Shankar. Here is a sample (Veda Vyasa's upadesh to Suka) > > "This world is Maya. It seems to appear just like a dream. It is > superimposed on the Lord just like a rope on a serpent. This is the > eternal Truth. There is no creation in reality. All is absolute. All > is Truth. Knowing this, one is liberated at once." > > ............ > "The Paramatman is only the Sakshi. He does not do anything. He only > assumes the form of the Jiva through His Maya, just as the Akasa > inside a pot seems to be different from the Akasa outside and > assumes the form of the pot. In reality all is Siva, Advaita, the > One Absolute. There is no difference of whatever kind. " > > The full text is at : > http://www.shastras.com/108upanishads/rudrahridaya/ > > regards, > Om Tat Sat > Namaste, I see nothing wrong in that Upanishad, it is showing the truth of Ajativada. Which was propounded by Gaudapada and others. Even when Sankara is teaching you will notice that he often uses the expression..'Means'. So indicating that some idea or practise isn't the ultimate truth but a means to an end a Sadhana.....ONS..Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 14, 2006 Report Share Posted March 14, 2006 Namaste Sri Mahadevaji, The Tejobindu Upanishad of the Krsna Yajurveda and the Paingala Upanishad of the Sukla Yajurveda are even more reminiscent of Shankara's words than the words you quote here. Why has Shankara commented on 10 Upanishads only? The answer is given in the Muktikopanishad of the Sukla Yajurveda, wherein there are 108 Upansihads mentioned as those that are to be studied for obtaining mukti. Of these, it is said that the Mandukya Upanishad is by itself sufficient for granting the highest knowlegde. But it is said that if one cannot get jnana by studying the Mandukya Upanishad, then 10 Upanishads are to be studied. These are: Isa Kena Katha Prasna Munda Mandukya Tittiri Aiterya Chandogya Brhadaranya It is said that if one cannot get jnana from these 10 Upanishads, 32 Upanishads are to be studied. It is interesting to see that these Upanishads contain details about paths to moksha through Mantra, Yoga, Kundalini Yoga, etc. Then it is said that if one cannot get jnana from these 32 Upanishads, 108 Upanishads are to be studied. All the 108 Upanishads are mentioned in the Muktikopanishad. These 108 Upanishads are accepted as being authentic Upanishads. The Rudra-Hrdaya Upanishads is one of these 108. Warm regards, Chittaranjan advaitin, "mahadevadvaita" <mahadevadvaita wrote: > > Om Tat Sat > Namaste, I came across this upanishad on another mailing list > and for once I did not believe this is the content of an upanishad, > especially since I had never heard of this upanishad. Some of the > portions of the upanishad seem as if they are written by Acharya > Shankar. Here is a sample (Veda Vyasa's upadesh to Suka) > > "This world is Maya. It seems to appear just like a dream. It is > superimposed on the Lord just like a rope on a serpent. This is the > eternal Truth. There is no creation in reality. All is absolute. All > is Truth. Knowing this, one is liberated at once." > > ............ > "The Paramatman is only the Sakshi. He does not do anything. He only > assumes the form of the Jiva through His Maya, just as the Akasa > inside a pot seems to be different from the Akasa outside and > assumes the form of the pot. In reality all is Siva, Advaita, the > One Absolute. There is no difference of whatever kind. " > > The full text is at : > http://www.shastras.com/108upanishads/rudrahridaya/ > > regards, > Om Tat Sat > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 14, 2006 Report Share Posted March 14, 2006 > I see nothing wrong in that Upanishad, it is showing the truth of > Ajativada. Which was propounded by Gaudapada and others. Even when > Sankara is teaching you will notice that he often uses the > expression..'Means'. So indicating that some idea or practise isn't > the ultimate truth but a means to an end a Sadhana.....ONS..Tony. Om Tat Sat Namaste Tony-ji, I don't see anything wrong either. I just felt that Advaita was being validated by Shruti and the words sounded remarkably similar to Acharya Shankar's. regards, Om Tat Sat 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.