taking to the path of j~nana on becomes an atheist

[Guest guest]

Namaste shri ramesh-ji

Thank you for your lucid comments.

 

I am so happy to hear about your good fortune of visiting so many

jyotirlingas and your posts certainly reveal that you have both

immense bhakti as well as a firm grasp on the vedantic subject

matter - that is very heartening to see.

 

The knock that many people have on vedanta is a mistaken notion that

it dismisses the concept of Ishwara - and that was the only point I

was trying to make - that Vedanta in no way rejects the concept of

Ishwara..

 

Bhakti and Jnana are the two wings with which any determined sadhaka

should attempt to take flight.

Based on ones temperament one many have a inclination towards one or

the other.

 

Bhakti or devotion is always in relation to the object of bhakti

which is Ishwara. Whether you call this Ishwara Rudra,Vishnu,Krishna

etc is totally immaterial..You may use different aspects of Him to

focus your attention on - you may worship the Sun for example, you

can create a small mound of chandanam and worship it as Ganesha, you

may visit Mount Kailasha for darshan of Lord Shiva; actually, Guru

is perhaps the best person to worship as Ishwara, because in a true

sense he is the Ultimate remover of your sorrows - it matters

little - aakashat patitam toyam yada gacchati sagaram..your bhakti

will for ever be towards ishwara alone..

 

So Ishwara in the sense of Saguna aspect of Brahman is the ultimate

repository for any bhakti - there is no bhakti without Ishwara. As

Swami Tapovan-ji, who was Swami Chinmayananda-ji's guru writes in

his book Kailasa Yatra "If you reject bhakti you reject the object

of bhakti which is Ishwara"

 

Being established in Para-bhakti and Advaita jnana-nishta are not

different - and in the Narada Bhakti sutras as well the Bhagwad Gita

this point is brought out on numerous occasions. Once the ego is

sublimated its sense of separateness from Ishwara is also gone - the

wave droplet has realized it is the Ocean in both instances.

 

The jnani's bhakti is at the highest level - parabhakti- and is not

an action on his part like walking, talking but an innate

understanding and appreciation of Ishwara and His mahatmyam...thats

what makes every Jnani a devotee whose devotion itself inspires so

many of us - in our own times I would say Kanchi Paramacharya was

extraordinary in this particular regard...

 

 

Perhaps we are talking about the same thing but the terms God,

Ishwara and theism mean different things to different people.

 

Shri Gurubhyoh namah.

 

Shyam

[Guest guest]

advaitin, moses yesupadam

<moses_yesupadam wrote:

> They might have seen the last upadesha as last ray of hope from

fetters of karma and still more attractive Niratisaya sukha promised

by the Aparoksha Atma J~nana or Anubhava. Even in gita at many places

we can see the dreadfulness of karma.

> "Buddhya yukto yaya partha karma bandham prahaasyasi" tatkim

karmani ghore maam niyojayasi kesava"" Iti maam yobhi janati

karmabhir nasa badhyate".

>

> Now a days which are purely individualistic, Karma is no

longer a bandha. Neither nitya karmas nor naimittika need be

followed. Only karmas for Udara poshana and kamya karmas if they like

to do them. We enjoy great freedom without the restrictons of

sanyasa. In a way we are already half sanyasis without the

taboos of pratyavayas for nonprfomance or defective performance.Only

manasika sanyasa is lacking. Physically we are all sanyasis.

> For atma Jnana we have many good translations of Bhashya granthas

which were not accessible even to devout Brahmins in those days and

many learned scholars are available who wont hesitate to share their

knowledge like in our group . Aparoksha Anubhava of Atman is a rare

commodity even among saffron clad sadhus. thats why the last updeshaa

might have lost importance.

>

> anxious to see the valuable criticisms and exposure of defects in

my posting.

> with apologies if I hurt any body's feelings

 

 

Namaste,

 

Kindly note that neither the Gita nor Acharya Shankara denounced

Vaidika Karma. All that is said is for Moksha Purushartha, the

performance of Vaidika Karma without attachment to the fruits

thereof, in the manner of Karma Yoga, is of utmost importance. The

Gita says: yajno daanam tapah karma paavaani

manishinaH. ...kaaryameva tat. As these karmas purify the mind,

they are to be performed without fail. Only a person who has

purified his mind by these karmas can successfully progress in the

path of Knowledge. Both the Gita and Acharya Shankara are emphatic

about this. So, to say that in the modern times we are free from

karma is wrong. Again, 'Iti maam yobhi janati karmabhir nasa

badhyate'only means that 'he who Realizes Me as his Self, will be

freed from the results of his past actions, meaning that he will not

be born again'. This verse is not an indictment of vaidika karma.

 

Regards,

subbu

[Guest guest]

 

Namaste LM-ji,

 

Because you are assuming that the Jivanmukta sees or experiences. If

this were so then it would not constitute moksha. What sees and

hears is the body/mind complex surviving the ego being destroyed. So

the mind is in fact the Sakti then and sees itself.

However this is at the illusory Saguna level, and the Mukta is

Nirguna with no experience at all. In fact with the dropping of the

body there is no connection at all, even though Sakti because it

never did happen at all, not even the illusion or appearance. No

snake no rope.........Ajativada...........ONS...Tony.

 

Namaste Ji,

 

Please do not promote these ideas. This is a kind of dry speculative Advaita devoid of practical utility. Shankaracharya was very clear in having two distinctive views, one theoretical and one practical. By dumping the practical side and preaching the theory Advaita created a number of atheists in the pasts. If they have been practical oriented, nobody would have risen against Advaita like Ramanujacharya and Madhvacharya.

 

Have you been a jivanmukta yourself?

How do you know what he sees and what not?

Did Lord Krishna see Arjuna while preaching to Arjuna?

Was Krishna's level of consciousness in the paramArtika or vyavahArika?

If Krishna was not in absolute plane of reality, why should we believe that he was competent to teach Arjuna?

 

Bhagavad Gita is very clear, the path of Bhakti is indeed the most supreme. The path of Jnana presupposes too high a qualification and can anyone in the modern world say that it is suitable for anyone? (except the very small percent)

 

Bhakti alone stands on its own foot. Bhakti with Jnana is supreme.

Jnana mArga without Bhakti is a dead duck - it is doubtful if anyone will find the shores at all.

 

The snake/rope illusion is not the exact idea of Advaita. The more appropriate is seeing an object, and seeing its reflection in the mirror. Both can be seen, but the second one is optional for the jivanmukta or avatara. He sees the first always, which is something more than seeing and is identifcation of oneself with the reality.