Guest guest Posted October 14, 2008 Report Share Posted October 14, 2008 praNAms Hare Krishna I need clarification from learned prabhuji-s of this forum...Can spiritual practices like meditation, bhajans, nAma saMkeertan, japa be the substitute for our veda vihita nitya & naimittika karma-s like sadhyA vandana, agni kArya, dEvatArchana, vrata, hOma, havana etc.?? I have seen some people, giving utmost importance to do japa, bhajans, nama saMkeertana and while doing the veda vihita sandhya vandana, devatArchana, abhishekaM etc. they do the same only for formalities sake & sometimes due to short of time & to do scheduled bhajans, saMkeertana, they are ready to skip pUja/abhishekam part of their programme!! Is this type of spiritual practice acceptable?? I was talking to one of the devotees of brahma chaitanya maharaj ( popularly known as Gondavali Maharaj), he was saying after all we are observing/following these spiritual practices for the sake of self agrandizement/chitta shuddhi..what is the problem if it is done in one way or the other?? He continued to argue & said, moreover, in sadhana-s like japa, dhyAna, nAma saMkeertana etc. mind is more focussed, still & gets the peace very quickly when compared to routine, monotonous sandhya & devatArchana...However, he does not have any objection to follow periodical pitru tarpaNa, shrAddha etc. in the form of pitru R^Na. This discussion is stopped abruptly in the midway due to some reason..In short, his intention was to say that he has very limited period of time for his spiritual practice, & he would prefer to spend that time in doing meditation, japa etc. instead of sandhya, agnikArya, devatArchana..coz. his contention is that later sadhana-s do require lot of kriya (action), parikara/pAtrAsAdhana/pUjA dravya & preparation time !!?? IMHO, being a vaidika brAhmaNa one should first give preference to observe his nitya & naimittika karma & other adhyAtmik sadhana-s like nAma saMkeertana, bhajans, japa etc. can be done as an additional part if time permits...I dont prefer to do japa/ meditation directly without observing saMdhyAvandana formalities. Kindly share your view points on this issue. Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2008 Report Share Posted October 14, 2008 Dear Bhaskar-ji, I am certainly not really the person to answer your question (I don’t even know what most of the Sanskrit terms that you mention mean!) However, my understanding is that Shankara’s interpretation of the first sutra of BS is that ‘atha’ refers to the prior obtaining of sAdhanA chatuShTaya sampatti and he argues with the pUrvapakSha that the rituals etc laid down in the karma kANDa are *not* a pre-requisite. These are only necessary to the extent that they might be needed in order to gain the s-c-s. Even the s-c-s is (are?) only needed so that the j~nAna may be taken on board, since a relatively still, controlled mind *is* necessary for self-knowledge. So, it seems to me that meditation is directly relevant to s-c-s, whereas rituals of any sort are not. Best wishes, Dennis advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf Of Bhaskar YR Tuesday, October 14, 2008 1:34 PM advaitin ; Advaita-L Meditation Vs nitya karma praNAms Hare Krishna I need clarification from learned prabhuji-s of this forum...Can spiritual practices like meditation, bhajans, nAma saMkeertan, japa be the substitute for our veda vihita nitya & naimittika karma-s like sadhyA vandana, agni kArya, dEvatArchana, vrata, hOma, havana etc.?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 Bhaskarji - PraNAms. Please read again. I have neither resentful or praiseworthy comments on puja vidhi - it is a vidhi - meaning a procedure to be followed by those who feel that is important and necessary. Pujnas are done as per prescriptions. I just described what is done. Personally I am not a ritualist and that is what I said. I do my vandanam in my own way and that is my choice. From my perspective, all prayers and pujas help in terms of chitta suddhi - as all karmas do. what is needed is preparation of the mind. Hence nothing against karmas for those who want to do it. As regards to injunctions, Shankara discusses these eloborately in connection to jnaana karma sumuchhaya vaada - in his introduction to 3rd Chapter of Gita. As regards to vandanam - not only at sandhya but all the time to that glorious presence helps. At least 3 times required but all the time is the best! If one does not understand, it is better to follow. If one understands one adopts. So please do not say that I have made resentful comments to puja. I made the observations that I see. Nothing less and nothing more. You asked for comments and I expressed my opinition as you can see in the introduction to my comments. You do not have to agree with them. Hari Om! Sadananda --- On Wed, 10/15/08, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote: praNAms Sri Sadananda prabhuji Hare Krishna I dont think doing or skipping one's own nitya karma is an individual choice...These are injunctions enshrined in our smruti & shruti texts..Hence there is no *other* choice but to adhere to one's own dharma (svadharmE nidhanaM shrEyaH..are the words of krishna in gIta) I am really surprised to see your somewhat resentful comments on the procedure of poojA vidhAna...Here it is from your below mail : Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 Dear Dennis-ji, You wrote: > I am certainly not really the person to answer your question (I don't even > know what most of the Sanskrit terms that you mention mean!) However, my > understanding is that Shankara's interpretation of the first sutra of BS is > that 'atha' refers to the prior obtaining of sAdhanA chatuShTaya sampatti > and he argues with the pUrvapakSha that the rituals etc laid down in the > karma kANDa are *not* a pre-requisite. These are only necessary to the > extent that they might be needed in order to gain the s-c-s. Even the s-c-s > is (are?) only needed so that the j~nAna may be taken on board, since a > relatively still, controlled mind *is* necessary for self-knowledge. So, it > seems to me that meditation is directly relevant to s-c-s, whereas rituals > of any sort are not. > Not my intention to get into a debate here but I have a small query. What in your opinion is " meditation " and how different is it from a " ritual " ? As far as I can see, the difference is largely a matter of semantics. Ultimately, the idea of chitta-shuddhi is to cultivate mental discipline and build character. Whichever way you look at it, chitta shuddhi is ultimately about a disciplined mind. Performing a " ritual " as a duty creates this mental discipline. I don't mean to pick up on Sadaji (again I reiterate that no offence is meant) but if someone finds something " boring " then it is only a lack of mental discipline. I certainly don't claim to be a mentally disciplined person myself :-) There are of course different paths to chitta shuddhi that suit different temperaments. My 2 paise Ramesh -- santoShaH paramo lAbhaH satsa~NgaH paramA gatiH I vicAraH paramaM j~nAnaM shamo hi paramaM sukham II - yoga vAsiShTha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 advaitin , Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote: > > > > praNAms > Hare Krishna > IMHO, being a vaidika brAhmaNa one should first give preference to observe > his nitya & naimittika karma & other adhyAtmik sadhana-s like nAma > saMkeertana, bhajans, japa etc. can be done as an additional part if time > permits...I dont prefer to do japa/ meditation directly without observing > saMdhyAvandana formalities. > > Kindly share your view points on this issue. > > Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! > bhaskar Dear Shri Bhaskar, What you have stated above is the correct position in my view. The Vedas place an obligation on all Brahmanas to study the Vedas (SvAdhyAyo AdhyetavyaH) and to perform the nitya and naimittika karma. This applies irrespective of whether a person is a spiritual aspirant or not. The Mimamsakas hold the view that failure to perform nitya karma and naimittika karma results in the accrual of a new sin. (akaraNe pratyavAyaH). Shri Shankara holds a different view. He says that non-performance of obligatory duties is something negative (abhAva) and so it cannot produce a positive result such as a new sin, but because of such non-performance the accumulated sins of past lives will continue, while by the performance of the obligatory duties the accumulated sins are destroyed (See Taittiriya Up. bhAshya). So according to him also the performance of obligatory duties is necessary even for a spiritual aspirant, because these sins are obstacles to his spiritual progress and nitya karma removes them. Chapter 6 of the Gita says that karma is the means for the Arurukshu. As long as the person has not become a YogArUDha he has to perform his obligatory karma. Nitya karma means `obligatory duties to be performed every day'. YogArUDha is a person who has attained total detachment towards all worldly objects and has therefore no desire at all to engage in action for getting anything. For a person who has become a YogarUDha the means is `shama', i.e., the path of jnAna alone. He does not deliberately give up karma, but karma drops off because he spends all his time in Sravana, manana, etc. Another way of becoming free from the obligation to perform the karma laid down for the householder is to take VividiShA sannyAsa, but then he has to observe all the disciplines laid down for that Ashrama which are very strict. It may be mentioned here that the nitya and naimittika karmas are obligatory only for the Brahmanas, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas and not for others. The Vedas place a greater responsibility on these three castes. It is another matter that most people are not performing these karmas nowadays. I am merely stating the theoretical position. Shri Shankara's rejection of jnAna karma samuccaya (combination of jnAna and karma) is based on the fact that once jnAna has dawned, the person has no longer any identification with his body and mind. Karma is possible only when there is such an identification. So Shri Shankara says that combining jnAna and karma is not possible at all. The Mimamsakas who adhere to the theory of combination of jnAna and karma do not accept the possibility of a person becoming a jnAni during his lifetime. So what they understand by jnAna is only paroksha jnAna and not aparoksha anubhUti. Shri Shankara also does not say that aparoksha jnAna and karma cannot be combined. According to the Gita any action performed by a jnAni is akarma and not karma. For this reason also there cannot be a combination of jnAna and karma in the sense in which the word `jnAna ` is used by Shri Shankara. Best wishes, S.N.Sastri 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.