Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

some food for thought regarding advaita in tantra......

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

This is a view point of a great scholar in Atharvana Veda and a Srividyopasaka.

Though i have certain difference of opinion regarding the advaita & tantra, hope

these statements may turn out to be a good topic for discussion.

 

********************

Was advaita vedAnta connected to shrIvidyA from its inception? Is the mahApaduka

mantra a “genuine†aspect of shrIvidyA? Are sha~Nkara and gauDapAda really

connected to shrIvidyA? advaita vedAnta has its origins in one set of the

diverse ideas presented by philosophers from the vedic period. Its subsequent

development stood on the great philosophical exegesis of sha~Nkara’s school.

Tradition also connects sha~Nkara’s school with a certain form of shrIvidyA,

which tends to ignore or remove the kula doctrines and this is certainly the

form of shrIvidyA practiced by modern initiates affiliated with sha~Nkara’s

tradition. But there are some issues amongst these initiates:

 

1) Many of the modern initiates while very knowledgeable about their paddhati-s

and mantra prayoga-s have a relatively poor understanding of the root sources:

the diverse kula texts including the root tantra-s of shrIvidyA.

2) Many aspirants as well as lay devotees actively practice texts like

lalitA-sahasranAmaM and saundaryalaharI but do not recognize or in some cases

deny the kula doctrine at their core.

3) They pay tremendous importance to the mahApaduka mantra which incorporates

upaniShadic mahAvAkya-s.

 

There is no evidence that the mahApaduka mantra was central to any kula

teaching.

From early times the brAhmaNa-s migrated out of their smArta baseline to develop

new systems of philosophy or knowledge. In some cases they converted entirely to

these systems, like the nAstIka-matas, or in other cases created versions that

spanned a spectrum from purely smArta to something which might contradict smArta

norms. Likewise, in shrIvidyA’s development from early on there were forms in

line with smArta norms (e.g. prapa~nchasAra and shAradA-tilaka) as well as those

transgressing smArta norms (e.g. parashurAma kalpa sUtra-s; though from the very

adoption of a mImAMsaka style is indicative of the brahminical origins of the

PKS), both systematized by Brahmins of ultimately smArta origin. The

pa~ncha-makara might not necessarily be

adopted by those who remain smArta because their norms are violated by the 5

ma-s, but the principle of kAmakala worship and the ShaT-chakra-s, both of which

are drawn plainly from the original kula doctrine, are retained at the heart of

shrIvidyopAsana by even these smArta-s. But nowhere in any of their early

sources do we find the mahApaduka and upaniShadic statements. Now the smArta-s

appear to have created another set of Agama-s much closer to their own pattern

of worship – the shubhAgama pa~nchaka.

 

But interestingly these hardly have any popularity compared to the root tantra-s

which follow the unadulterated kula doctrine. Now I have only seen fragments of

these and these are clearly later in provenance than the early kula texts.

Advaita of the early kaula-s of matsyendra’s successors does not mean the same

as the vedantic advaita.

 

There a-dvaitam appears (at least to me) to be interpreted as the lack of

duality in worship – thereby allowing the more kaula elements (the pure-impure

distinction breaks down).

So the vedantic advaita does not in anyway appear to be inherent to the kula

doctrine.

 

So, in conclusion:

 

I believe the evidence favors the advaitins of the sha~Nkara tradition have only

secondarily adopted shrIvidyA and are behind the creation of the mahApAduka

mantra.

 

They have even gone to the extent of claiming that one can get the

guru-status or a higher level mantrAdhikAra only with this mahApAduka dIkSha.

My personal opinion is that every one is entitled to their own tradition. So, if

some one is affiliated with a sha~Nkara maTha they may follow their maThAdhipati

and Acharya-s,

but the claims regarding mahApaduka are not binding on all tAntrIka-s.

 

***************************************

 

wth regards,

sriram

 

 

 

 

Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to

http://messenger./invite/

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...