Guest guest Posted March 19, 2009 Report Share Posted March 19, 2009 From :- krishnarao (lanka.krishnarao1) Subject :- : What is common in adwaita and SAktaadwaita? " SrIgurussarvakAraNaBhUtA Saktih | SrImahAgaNAdhipatayEnamah || " priya mahASayAh, I submitted a message asking all the members to clarify my doubt about " What is common in adwaita and SAktaadwaita? " . Some of my friends have readily responded with their profound knowledge upon the subject of non-duality, quoting excerpts from authorities like SrIramana maharShi, yOgavAsiShTa and also some adwaitic esoteric meanings for some names from `lalitA sahasranAmam. But my question " Why jagadguru Sri Adi SankarAcArya and his followers are sailing in these seemingly different boats which appear quite antagonistic with each other. They did not in the same spirit adopted the viSiShtaadwaita or dwaita philosophies also along with their `adwaita " At that time it was really a doubt in my mind. But when I prayed it to my gurudEv, he has transmitted some flashes of thought waves into my mind and I myself could solve the problem and wish to share it with you all. In fact, the `Suddha adwaita and the SAkta adwaita are not two different philosophies at all.. They are the two sides of a coin. Just as Sakti is not a different entity from Siva, this SAkta adwaita also is not different from Suddha adwaita. If Siva is invisible of prakR^iti, the Sakti becomes the exhibitor of that Siva in the form of prakR^iti . She is the " Sivaj~nAnapradAyini " . Suddha adwaita is just a theory, which is not at all practicable for any expert adwaitin. That is why almost all the R^iShis, sages and gn~anis have adopted SAkta adwaita for their practice, though they speek Suddha adwaita, because it is gupta vidya. SAkta adwaita is a gradual process to reform every one to become a perfect " adwaitin " . This is " krama vidya " . Really, both the theories appear contradictory with each other. Siva and Sakti also appear to be incompatible. The ornaments and floral decorations differ with each other. The flowers offered for Siva are not acceptable for Sakti. Flowers liked by Sakti are prohibited for Siva. naivEdyAs also differ. If Siva was angry with manmadha, Sakti becomes benevolent upon him. In spite of so many differences they both are one. AdiSankara knows perfectly well that every thing other than him is " middhya " , and he knows well that every thing is his own extension. He knows it well that the concept of external godhood is absolutely fictitious and a creation by the R^iShis and seers only. He perfectly knows that he himself is the real `brahman'. He knows it well that there will be nobody else to give him the `mOkSha', because there is no `bandha' at all. Even then he bowed before every idol of innumerable gods and deities, and composed several stavas and stOtrAs etc., for all of them.. As far as my knowledge goes, in SAkta adwaita, there are two " BhUmiklAs " . One is " aham brahmAsmi " and the other is " SaraNAgati " , Both are essencial. We all know that the government is " of the people, by the people and for the people " . All the government officers are the servants of the people living upon the salary paid from the tax amounts of the people, But when you approach a tahasildar (or any other officer) with a petition, you will have to salute him first and obediently explain him the injustice occurred to you and request him to do the justice. But in spite of all your obedience, if the officer does not hear you (for so many of his reasons like bribe etc.,), certainly you will have to revolt upon him and say that you will exposé him before the higher officials or the court of law and see him punished. SrIrAma has politely prostrated before `sAgara', fasting for three days, explaining about the abduction of his wife by rAvaNa, and requesting his help by giving way to get back his wife. But when the `sAgara' did not give any response, he has raised bow and arrow along with the conscious of " aham brahmAsmi " , saying that he will desiccate the whole waters of the ocean and proceed for lanka. Then only sAgara came up with folded hands and showed him the way.. rAvaNa also knew this kind of " aham brahmAsmi " theory. With this theory he commanded all the dEvatAs to remain servants for him and ultimately met with consequences. In adwaita, there is no scope for Bhakti, where as in Sakta adwaita, both Bhakti and j~nAna are simultaneously prevailing. " twayA hR^itwa vAmam vapor aparitR^iptEna manasA, SarIrArdham SamBhOr aparamapi SankE hR^itam aBhUt | Any wise guru will always warningly instruct his disciple to come down to the heart region from sahasrAra, when ever any problem arises in his japam. So it is evident that both the theories are essential for the successful sAdhana. That is why the AcArya and his followers have adopted SAkta adwaita also along with his adwaita philosophy saying " Sivah SaktyAyuktO yadi Bhavati Saktah praBhavitum, na cEd Evam dEvo na Kalu kuSalah spanditumapi " . It is not SrI Sankara and his followers are the first initiators of this combined path for realization, but it has been observed from ancient times long since the beginning of creation itself. The devotion should always be in three ways as adwaita, dwaita and dwaitaadwaita. " antar bahisca tat sarvam vyApya nArAyaNah sthitah " . Thanking you all who have sent their views for my request for clarification, which all become guidelines for my sAdhana. Yours always in the service of the mother, Krishnarao (SrIparasuKAnandanAtha) ====================================================== , " krishnarao " <sriparasukhanandanadha wrote: > > - Krishnarao (lanka.krishnarao1) > Subject :- what is common in adwaita and SAktaadwaita? > > priya mahASayAh, > > One scholarly pITAdhipati has defined adwaita as " maru marIcikA nyAyam " and SAktAdwaita as " mR^idGaTa nyAyam " . I don't know how far this illustration is appropriate. > But he did not answer my above query > > I still have the doubt how SrI SankarAcArya and his followers have chosen to follow both the sampradAyAs simultaneously, because adwaita says there will be no water at all in the mirage whereas in SAktaadwaita there is the mud and also the pot. > > I request all our members to clarify my doubt giving proper examples to understand easily. > > Thanking you all in advance, > Yours always in the service of the mother > krishnarao (SrIparasuKAnandanAtha) > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 20, 2009 Report Share Posted March 20, 2009 Dear krishna rao garu, Namaste. Acharya Sankara adopts both the schools VivartavAda (Theory of Illusion) and pariNAmavAda (Theory of Transformation) into his fold. Ample evidence is found in his Brahmasutra Bhashya (refer 2nd adhyaya) where Acharya Sankara says: " apratyAkhyAyaina kAryaprapancham, PARINAMAPRAKRRIYAM CHA shrayati SAGUNESHuPASANESHUPAYOKSHYA te iti " . Also, in the 1st adhyaya for the sutra " tad adhInatvA darthavat " , Acharya Sankara explains the principle of Sakti to be the upAdana kAraNa for paramEshwara in the Creation. Acharya Sankara emphatically says that it is the Parinamavada which is to be adopted to achieve the Sagunopasana Siddhi and not for kArya-prapancha (jagat) siddhi. Now, what exactly is this parinamavada is explained through the logic called mrid-ghata nyaya where there are two objects ie., clay and pot. The clay got transformed itself into pot. In vivartavada, there are several logics like maru-marichi (desert-mirage), rajju-sarpa (rope-snake), sukti-rajata (oystershell-silver) nyaya where the appearences of mirage, snake and silver appear to be real but are illusory. Acharya Sankara in his sutra bhashya, exhorts us to adopt the parinamavada (theory of transformaton) for the purpose of saguna upasana which is the upasana of maya-sabala brahman where the substratum is Brahman only. When the upasana is ripe, and upon the dawn of right knowledge, the " reality " which the " ignorant " people perceive WOULD BECOME an " illusion " . So, this is what is the Vivartavada. So, there is absolutely no conflict among vivartavada and parinamavada. The statements of Vivartavada are the statements of the people who have realised the Substratum " Brahman " . For them, the Jagat is Mithya NOT FOR US. FOR US, IT IS THE PARINAMAVADA THAT HAS TO BE ADOPTED WHICH PAVES THE WAY FOR VIVARTAVADA WHICH IS THE ULTIMATE REALISATION " BRAHMA SATYAM JAGAT MITHYA " . Shri Bhaskararaya Makhin in his commentary on Lalitha Sahasranama while commenting on " mithyAjagadadhiShThAna " , refers these two nyayas sukti-rajata and mrid-ghata nyaya draws a common line among the two schools vivartavada & parinamavada. Shri Bhaskara says that there are two concepts called " maya " and " mithya " . Mithya is that which gets nullified upon the dawn of right knowledge and maya is that which is existant as well as non-existant. So, Mithya is the by-product of Maya. Maya and Ishwara are inseparable where ishwara is nimitta karana and maya is the upadana karana. The mixture of both maya and ishwara is what is called as " mithya " which is Jagat. Parinamavada says that it is this Maya which is otherwise called Sakti that got transformed itself into Jagat in the form of 36 principles. Now, Bhaskara explaining this Parinamavada says that one doesn't become a *dvaita* if we adopt the parinamavada, per se, and if we perceive the substratum of this 36 principles of creation to be Sakti which is Maya-sabala-Brahman. In parinamavada Sakti is non-different from Jagat and the upasaka of this school perceive the Jagat to be siva-sakyatmaka. For him, the *concept of jagat* ceases as jagat, per se, but is perceived as " sarvam sakti mayam jagat " . Shri Bhaskara does not stop here. He further says that followers of Vivarta school, perceive the Brahman instead of perceiving the Jagat, per se. For them the *illusion* of Jagat ceases to be Jagat but is perceived as *Brahaman*. Which " sarvam khalvidam brahma " . SO, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO CONFLICT AMONG VIVARTAVADIS AND PARINAMAVADIS. THE CONFLICT IS AMONG HALF-KNOWLEDGE PEOPLE AND HALF-KNOWLEDGE IS VERY DANGEROUS. There is abolutely no-difference in perceiving the Jagat either as " sakti-mayam " or " Brahma-mayam " . Both are 2 sides of the same coin. For further reference, a thorough reading of the Saubhagya Bhaskara is suggested especially the name " mithyAjagadadhiShThAna " and also the " Manasollasa " which is a gloss by Shri Sureshwaracharya on Dakshinamurthy Stotra. shrI medha dakshinamurthy vijayate..... Ever at the feet of Shri Dakshinamurthy With regards, Sriram , " krishnarao " <sriparasukhanandanadha wrote: > > - Krishnarao (lanka.krishnarao1) > Subject :- what is common in adwaita and SAktaadwaita? > > priya mahASayAh, > > One scholarly pITAdhipati has defined adwaita as " maru marIcikA nyAyam " and SAktAdwaita as " mR^idGaTa nyAyam " . I don't know how far this illustration is appropriate. > But he did not answer my above query > > I still have the doubt how SrI SankarAcArya and his followers have chosen to follow both the sampradAyAs simultaneously, because adwaita says there will be no water at all in the mirage whereas in SAktaadwaita there is the mud and also the pot. > > I request all our members to clarify my doubt giving proper examples to understand easily. > > Thanking you all in advance, > Yours always in the service of the mother > krishnarao (SrIparasuKAnandanAtha) > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 22, 2009 Report Share Posted March 22, 2009 Dear sir, The statements made by Vivartavadis is an *experience* and *not a theory*. The *Jagat mithyAvAda* is ONLY FOR BHAGAVAN RAMANA MAHARISHI, ACHARYA SANKARA, SADASIVA BRAHMENDRA SARASWATI, KANCHI MAHASWAMI, CHANDRASEKHARA BHARATI ETC....... BUT NOT FOR YOU & ME. That is why Acharya Sankara in his Sutra Bhashya urges us to adopt Parinamavada or the theory of transformation for Saguna Upasana which is a first step. My gurunatha didn't encourage discussing *advaita siddhanta* on *public forums* which require requisite parameters as the 1st sutra itself emphasizes on *athAto* in *athAto brahma jignAsa*. Let us not bother our heads with these theories whether world is real or unreal. We are only bothered about the *glories of Mother Divine*. Advaita is not for such persons who care for bank balances, five figured salaries in US, yearn for 3 meals a day. Let us ponder over the *aham* tattva in the mahAvAkya *aham brahma asmi*, and decide whether this *aham* denotes shakti tattva or shiva tattva or purna brahma tattva. shrI dakshinamurthy vijayate... sriram , " krishnarao " <sriparasukhanandanadha wrote: > > > > From :- krishnarao (lanka.krishnarao1) > Subject :- : What is common in adwaita and SAktaadwaita? > " SrIgurussarvakAraNaBhUtA Saktih | > SrImahAgaNAdhipatayEnamah || " > > priya mahASayAh, > > I submitted a message asking all the members to clarify my doubt about " What is common in adwaita and SAktaadwaita? " . Some of my friends have readily responded with their profound knowledge upon the subject of non-duality, quoting excerpts from authorities like SrIramana maharShi, yOgavAsiShTa and also some adwaitic esoteric meanings for some names from `lalitA sahasranAmam. But my question " Why jagadguru Sri Adi SankarAcArya and his followers are sailing in these seemingly different boats which appear quite antagonistic with each other. They did not in the same spirit adopted the viSiShtaadwaita or dwaita philosophies also along with their `adwaita " > > At that time it was really a doubt in my mind. But when I prayed it to my gurudEv, he has transmitted some flashes of thought waves into my mind and I myself could solve the problem and wish to share it with you all. > > In fact, the `Suddha adwaita and the SAkta adwaita are not two different philosophies at all.. They are the two sides of a coin. Just as Sakti is not a different entity from Siva, this SAkta adwaita also is not different from Suddha adwaita. If Siva is invisible of prakR^iti, the Sakti becomes the exhibitor of that Siva in the form of prakR^iti . She is the " Sivaj~nAnapradAyini " . > > Suddha adwaita is just a theory, which is not at all practicable for any expert adwaitin. That is why almost all the R^iShis, sages and gn~anis have adopted SAkta adwaita for their practice, though they speek Suddha adwaita, because it is gupta vidya. SAkta adwaita is a gradual process to reform every one to become a perfect " adwaitin " . This is " krama vidya " . > > Really, both the theories appear contradictory with each other. Siva and Sakti also appear to be incompatible. The ornaments and floral decorations differ with each other. The flowers offered for Siva are not acceptable for Sakti. Flowers liked by Sakti are prohibited for Siva. naivEdyAs also differ. If Siva was angry with manmadha, Sakti becomes benevolent upon him. In spite of so many differences they both are one. > > AdiSankara knows perfectly well that every thing other than him is " middhya " , and he knows well that every thing is his own extension. He knows it well that the concept of external godhood is absolutely fictitious and a creation by the R^iShis and seers only. He perfectly knows that he himself is the real `brahman'. He knows it well that there will be nobody else to give him the `mOkSha', because there is no `bandha' at all. Even then he bowed before every idol of innumerable gods and deities, and composed several stavas and stOtrAs etc., for all of them.. > > As far as my knowledge goes, in SAkta adwaita, there are two " BhUmiklAs " . One is " aham brahmAsmi " and the other is " SaraNAgati " , Both are essencial. We all know that the government is " of the people, by the people and for the people " . All the government officers are the servants of the people living upon the salary paid from the tax amounts of the people, But when you approach a tahasildar (or any other officer) with a petition, you will have to salute him first and obediently explain him the injustice occurred to you and request him to do the justice. But in spite of all your obedience, if the officer does not hear you (for so many of his reasons like bribe etc.,), certainly you will have to revolt upon him and say that you will exposé him before the higher officials or the court of law and see him punished. > > SrIrAma has politely prostrated before `sAgara', fasting for three days, explaining about the abduction of his wife by rAvaNa, and requesting his help by giving way to get back his wife. But when the `sAgara' did not give any response, he has raised bow and arrow along with the conscious of " aham brahmAsmi " , saying that he will desiccate the whole waters of the ocean and proceed for lanka. Then only sAgara came up with folded hands and showed him the way.. rAvaNa also knew this kind of " aham brahmAsmi " theory. With this theory he commanded all the dEvatAs to remain servants for him and ultimately met with consequences. > In adwaita, there is no scope for Bhakti, where as in Sakta adwaita, both Bhakti and j~nAna are simultaneously prevailing. > > " twayA hR^itwa vAmam vapor aparitR^iptEna manasA, > SarIrArdham SamBhOr aparamapi SankE hR^itam aBhUt | > Any wise guru will always warningly instruct his disciple to come down to the heart region from sahasrAra, when ever any problem arises in his japam. So it is evident that both the theories are essential for the successful sAdhana. > > That is why the AcArya and his followers have adopted SAkta adwaita also along with his adwaita philosophy saying " Sivah SaktyAyuktO yadi Bhavati Saktah praBhavitum, na cEd Evam dEvo na Kalu kuSalah spanditumapi " . It is not SrI Sankara and his followers are the first initiators of this combined path for realization, but it has been observed from ancient times long since the beginning of creation itself. The devotion should always be in three ways as adwaita, dwaita and dwaitaadwaita. " antar bahisca tat sarvam vyApya nArAyaNah sthitah " . > > Thanking you all who have sent their views for my request for clarification, which all become guidelines for my sAdhana. > > Yours always in the service of the mother, > Krishnarao (SrIparasuKAnandanAtha) > > ====================================================== > > , " krishnarao " <sriparasukhanandanadha@> wrote: > > > > - Krishnarao (lanka.krishnarao1@) > > Subject :- what is common in adwaita and SAktaadwaita? > > > > priya mahASayAh, > > > > One scholarly pITAdhipati has defined adwaita as " maru marIcikA nyAyam " and SAktAdwaita as " mR^idGaTa nyAyam " . I don't know how far this illustration is appropriate. > > But he did not answer my above query > > > > I still have the doubt how SrI SankarAcArya and his followers have chosen to follow both the sampradAyAs simultaneously, because adwaita says there will be no water at all in the mirage whereas in SAktaadwaita there is the mud and also the pot. > > > > I request all our members to clarify my doubt giving proper examples to understand easily. > > > > Thanking you all in advance, > > Yours always in the service of the mother > > krishnarao (SrIparasuKAnandanAtha) > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Priya Devi bhaktas : The Kanchi maha periyavaal himself says " Next to advaita , sri vidya upasana is the best marga " ! please read what Sri Lalita Tripura sundari herself says in Tripura Rahasya, a text very dear to Sri Ramana maharishi. " I am the abstract intelligence wherefrom the cosmos originates, whereon it flourishes, and wherein it resolves, like the images in a mirror. The ignorant know me as the gross universe, whereas the wise feel me as their own pure being eternally glowing as 'I-I' within. This realisation is possible only in the deep stillness of thought-free consciousness similar to that of the deep sea free from waves. The most earnest of devotees worship me spontaneously and with the greatest sincerity which is due to their love of me. Although they know that I am their own non-dual Self, yet the habit of loving devotion which is deep-rooted in them makes them conceive their own Self as ME and worship ME as the life-current pervading their bodies, senses and mind without which nothing could exist and which forms the sole purport of the holy scriptures. Such is my Transcendental State. " My concrete form is the eternal couple - the Supreme Lord and Energy - always in undivided union and abiding as the eternal consciousness pervading the three phenomenal states of waking, dream and sleep, and reclining on the cot whose four legs are Brahma (the Creator), Vishnu (the Protector), Siva (the Destroyer) and Isvara (Disappearance) and whose surface is Sadasiva (Grace) which is contained in the mansion known as 'fulfilment of purpose' enclosed by the garden of 'Kadamba' trees in the jewel island situated in the wide ocean of nectar surrounding the cosmos and extending beyond. 'Brahma, Vishnu, Siva, Isvara, Sadasiva, Ganesa, Skanda, the gods of the eight quarters, their energies of her gods, celestials, serpents and other superhuman beings all manifestations of myself. However, people do not know ME because their intellect is shrouded in ignorance. " I grant boons to those who worship ME. There is no one besides ME worthy of worship or capable of fulfilling all desires. " The fruits of worship are put forth by Me according to the mode of worship and the nature of individual desires. I am indivisible and interminable. . " Being non-dual and abstract intelligence I spontaneously manifest even as the smallest detail in the universe and as the universe. " Though I manifest in diverse ways, I still remain unblemished because absoluteness is My being. This is My chief power, which is somewhat hard fully to understand. " Therefore, O Rishis! consider this with the keenest of intellect. Though I am the abode of all and immanent in all I remain pure. " Although I am not involved in any manner and am always free, I wield My power - called Maya; become covered with ignorance, appear full of desires, seek their fulfilment, grow restless, project favourable and unfavourable environments, am born and reborn as individuals, until growing wiser I seek a teacher and sage, learn the truth from him, put it in practice and finally become absolved. All this goes on in My pure, uncontaminated, ever free absolute intelligence. This manifestation of the ignorant and the free, and of others, is called My creation which is however, without any accessories - My power is too vast to be described. I shall tell you something of it in brief. It is that the cosmos is only the obverse of the many details in them leading up to different results. .. " Knowledge relating to me is complex but it can be dealt with under the two categories; dual and non-dual, of which the former relates to worship and the latter to realisation. On account of their intricacies, there are many details in them leading up to different results. " Dual knowledge is manifold because it depends on the concept of duality and manifests as worship, prayer, incantation, meditation, etc., etc.. all of which are due to nothing more than mental imagery. " Even so, they are efficacious in contradistinction to day-dreams, for, the law of nature provides for it. There are degrees in the efficacy of the methods, of which the most important concerns the aspect mentioned before (see above the concrete form of Devi). The ultimate goal of all is certainly non-dual realisation. Commentary. - Mental imagery cannot put forth tangible results either directly or in successive stages. But the one relating to God differs from ordinary day-dreams in that it purifies and strengthens the mind in order to make it fit to realise the Self. " Worship of Abstract Intelligence in a concrete form is not only useful but essential for non-dual realisation. For how can one be made fit for it, without Her benediction. " http://sss.vn.ua/tripura2.htm#CHAPTER%20XX <http://sss.vn.ua/tripura2.htm#CHAPTER%20XX> that is why Adi shankara bhagvadapada sings raptiuorously bhavAni tvaM dAse vitara dRShTiM sakaruNAM iti stotuM vAcchan kathayati bhavAni tvamiti yaH | tadaiva tvaM tasmai dishasi nijasAyujyapadaviiM mukunda brahmendra sphuTa mukuTa niirAjitapadAm || " Do you, O lady (bhavani), extend to me, your slave, a compassionate glance! " — when one desiring to praise you utters the words " you, O lady " , at that moment you grant him a state of identity with you, with your feet illuminated (as in the evening waving of lights before a god's image) by the crests of Mukunda (Vishnu), Brahma, and Indra. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 > But he did not answer my above query Probably because they have nothing in common.(this is an exaggeration though- they do have some common elements) The word advaita for a shAkta, kaula and such traditions means something different than what it means for a follower of shankara vedAnta. > I still have the doubt how SrI SankarAcArya and his followers >have chosen to follow both the sampradAyAs simultaneously, because >adwaita says there will be no water at all in the mirage whereas in >SAktaadwaita there is the mud and also the pot. This should not surprise us. They adopted shAkta mantra-s and their methods(along with acceptable philosophical elements) just like they adopted shaiva, saura, and other systems. So there is nothing special about the adoption of shAkta procedures by the followers of shankara. Likewise the jaina-s and bauddha-s adopted shaiva, shAkta and other mantras. It is not any different from shankara vedAntin-s adopting acceptable elements from these various systems. I dont think we need to speculate philosophical / metaphysical explanations for this adoption. 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.