shankaracharya

[jijaji]

People who think that advaitavadins walk around thinking themselves as 'GOD' or wanting to be 'GOD' are very misinformed.

It comes from a lack of understanding of the system of advaita and perhaps taking at face value others statements about advaita who were uninformed themselves.

Equating the atman to brahman is not claiming oneself to be the 'Almighty GOD' but doing away with dualism altogether.

I agree with shvu..most Gaudiyas have a very uninformed/elementary understanding of shankaras advaita.

And I for one do not accept that Sri Chaitanya was all that against advaita, but that the Gaudiya School 'DEVELOPED' its stance towards advaita over time after Sri Chaitanya passed away.

 

jijaji

[shvu]

 

Good post, shvu. You cann't convince the bull (dull) frogs of the 'well' unless and until they themselves leap into the Ocean of Sat-Chit-Ananda Brahman.

Actually, no one has to be convinced about other systems. People have their own System, which they follow with faith and that is enough. They don't need to know anything about others. Within their own circle, they can criticize and condemn other systems without justification.

 

However when we come in contact with people who have other beliefs, such as in a discussion forum, we should be sure about what we quote; especially when talking about other beliefs. Plain criticism which cannot be backed up by proper reasons, will not do.

 

Cheers

 

 

[jijaji]

Sushil Kumar De in his 'Vaishnava Faith and Movement' states that it appears probable that Madhvendra Puri and his disciple Isvara Puri were Sankarite Samnyasins of the same type as Sridhara Svamin.

Sridhara Svamin in his commentary on the Srimad Bhagavatam attempted to COMBINE the Advaita teachings of Sankara with the Devotionalism of the Bhagavatas.

Devotion to Krishna or Narayan has never been considered inconsistent with one's belonging to the Sankara Sampradaya, many taught that Advaita realization could be attained through worship of a particular diety as a person or a symbol.

The tutelary deity of Sankara himself was Krishna, although his chief disciple, (like Sridhar) worshipped Nrsimha.

Around the time of Sridhar Svaimin there seems to have developed a type of 'Tempering' (in S.K.De's words) of the severe monistic idealism of Advaita Vedanta with the 'Devotional Worship' of a personal GOD.

Sridhar Svamin reveals this tendency in his well known commentary on the Vishnu Purana, Bhagavad Gita and Srimad Bhagavatam, in which he acknowledges Samkara's teachings as authoritative AND considers Bhakti as the BEST means of Advaita Mukti.

Sridhara Svamin in his commentary on the Srimad Bhagavatam attempted to COMBINE the Advaita teachings of Sankara with the Devotionalism of the Bhagavatas.

 

[jijaji]

From jijaji some time back...

 

Chaitanya & Sridhar Svami...

Sri Krishna Chaitanya, the famous Saint of Nadia, Bengal, India, accepted only one commentary on Bhagavata Purana as being valid. That commentary was written by the famous Sridhar Svami years before Sri Chaitanya had settled in the great city of Puri on the Western coast of India.

Sridhar Svami had been the 10th Shankaracarya of the Shankara Govardhan Math of Puri. Interestingly enough, despite his background, Sridhar Svami also saw the Bhagavata Purana as the shining sound incarnation of Krishna for Kali Yuga as did Sri Chaitanya.

Sridhar Swami, reached his intellectual peak at a hill top shrine known as Kapilash in Orissa which served as his abode in the 14th Century A.D. The treatises on "Srimad Bhagavat Geeta", "Vishnu Purana" & "Sripadyabali" were written here by Sridhar Swami during his long stay.

That Sri Chaitanya accepted Sridhars Svami’s commentary above all others, including Madhvas, whom Gaudiyas claim lineage from, is a puzzle in itself.

Was it because Sridhar Svamin belonged to Shankaras sampradaya, which Sri Chaitanya took Sannyass Diksha into?

Does it have anything to do with the influence Sridhar Svamis commentary had on the region where Sri Chaitanya had moved immediately after he took Sanyass? Because at the time of Sri Chaitanya’s arrival in Orrisa the whole atmosphere was steeped in the Holy memory of Sridhar Svami.

Sri Chaitanyas acceptance of Sridhar Svamins Bhagavatam (a known advaitin) over and above the then available Vaishnava commentaries is worthy of our investigation.

Sri Chaitanya came to settle in Puri after he had taken sanyass from the Advaitin Keshava Bharati. It is contended by his followers that Sri Chaitanyas reason for taking initiation from Keshava Bharati was because it was the then accepted and most known form of Sannyass at that time. They also say that Sri Chaitanya had devised a plan to save the fallen souls of Kali Yuga by taking this Sannyass, thus giving people the chance to bow to him and be saved by that very act.

But we ask why did Sri Chaitanyas Gurus Isvara Puri and Madhavendra Puri accept Sanyass into the Madhva Sampradaya or did they?

In Sri Chaitanys biographies he is described as having the ability to convert one into a devotee of Krishna, by one having a mere glance of him dancing in Kirtan. In fact whole villages were converted in this way. Why then the need to accept Sanyass from a school of thought that was opposed to his dualistic teachings of Krishna Bhakti?

 

 

¸..· ´¨¨)) -:¦:-

¸.·´ .·´¨¨))

((¸¸.·´ ..·´ -:¦:- jijaji

-:¦:- ((¸¸.·´*

 

[This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 04-04-2002).]

[karthik_v]

Originally posted by Shvu:

With due respect and with no sarcasm intended towards anyone, the knowledge level of Advaita and Shankara, in a typical Gaudiya scholar ranges from below average to nil. This is because they do not study Advaita as a Purva Paksha and hence they have to rely on hearsay which is mostly negative propoganda. Naturally it is not surprising that Gaudiya scholars/authors have many misconceptions about Advaita.

I would agree with this. Even if one wants to critize Advaita, one has to study Advaita very systematically. One has to read all the Bhashyams of Adi Sankara and also Gaudapada and Mandana Mishra. Sweeping generalizations often prove to be wrong.

 

The Bhaja Govindam according to Shankara's biographies were *not* written on his deathbed after he had a "change of heart" as some people state.

I agree. One has to understand Bhaja Govindam in relation to Adi Sankara's gradation of Saguna and Nirguna Brahman worship. If we do that, we will see how seamlessly it is integrated.

 

In brief, if a person describes Advaita as impersonal, lacking in Bhakti, etc, you can be sure this person doesn't know squat about Advaita and is only repeating what he heard somewhere.

I have read some of the writings of Kanchi Paramacharya and nowhere he talks of ourselves becoming God. He praises and advocates worshipping Narayana throughout.

 

Actually, no one has to be convinced about other systems. People have their own System, which they follow with faith and that is enough. They don't need to know anything about others.

True. We follow whatever our acharya gives us.

 

Within their own circle, they can criticize and condemn other systems without justification.

I may disagree on this alone. This can lead to stereotyping as seen among Gaudiya Vaishnavas. I think even to criticize, we should be knowledgeable of other systems. Of course, we can very well choose not to criticize Advaita at all, and just sing the glories of Lord Krishna as Caitanya Mahaprabhu and Srila Prabhupad taught us. Often times I am alarmed that speakers of ISKCON cannot go through one lecture without an attack on Mayavadis or without making a sweeping generalization about Advaita.

[jijaji]

quote:

Often times I am alarmed that speakers of ISKCON cannot go through one lecture without an attack on Mayavadis or without making a sweeping generalization about Advaita

 

jijaji:

It is the norm because all the books are filled with this same mentality!

 

 

[gHari]

Bottom line: what pleases Krsna?

[abhi_the_great]

1. Without indepth study of Advaitha, do not criticise it.

A. I appreciate this statement and second it. Its not proper to openly blast any philosophy expecially the one coined by the greatest Sankara. They also follow the Vedik ways and are much much advanced spiritually than any other non-vedic people.

 

Again I am not against the frank and innocent discussions with an idea of learning more abt Adhvaita.

 

A strict advaitin will also eligible for mukti, this is the simple fact which makes him respectable.

 

It wd be great if we in Gaudiya Sampradaya cd learn more upanishads and the vedas and the vedanta. I am all for learning more.

 

2. Gaudiya Acaryas misquoted Sri Chaithanya Mahaprabhu, who himself was not all that against Advaitha.

A. Without understanding the gaudiya Sidhdhanta, somebody has tried to generalise it. No one can re-write a biography of Lord Chaithanya without the sanction of the existing Vaishnavas. None of the Vaishnavas of that time including Rupa, Sanatana, Jiva (the genius), Lokanatha, Bugharba, Mother Jahnava has questioned even a drop of the biographies written by Krishna Das or Vrindavan Das.

 

Simultaneously, I wd acknowledge that there are people here who are happy to talk only anti-gaudiya and nothing else.

 

3. Why Chaitanya took diksha from a Mayavadin?

A. jijaji, you tell us. And take the life and activities of Chaitanya into account, while giving the answer.

 

Sincerely

abhi

[sha]

Originally posted by gHari:

Bottom line: what pleases Krsna?

In the Padma Purana, it is said:

 

 

aradhananam sarvesam

visnor aradhanam param

tasmat parataram devi

tadiyanam samarcanam

 

Once, Parvati-devi asked Lord Siva, "Of all kinds of worship, whose

worship is best?" Then, Lord Siva told her plainly, "The worship and

devotional service of Lord Narayana, Visnu, is the highest." Then

Parvati became a little mortified and disappointed, thinking, "But I

am serving Siva, so I hold a lower position." Then the next line

came, tasmat parataram devi tadiyanam samarcanam. "But higher than

the worship of Narayana is worship of the devotees of Lord Narayana.

That is even greater than devotion to the Lord Himself." Then,

Parvati smiled, thinking, "Then I am serving the devotee of the Lord.

Siva is a devotee: vaisnavanam yatha sambhuh. So, I am doing the best

thing."

 

This is also confirrned by Krsna, in the Adi Purana :

 

 

ye me bhakta-janah partha

ne me bhaktas ca te janah

mad bhaktanam ca ye bhaktas

te me bhaktatama matah

 

"Those who worship Me directly are not real devotees; real devotees

are those who are devoted to My devotees."

 

 

hari om! om namaha shivaye!

 

[jijaji]

It is interesting to note that Nimai Pandit accepted the name Chaitanya from Keshava Bharati. Now Chaitanya is the name given to bramacharis at the famous Sringiri Math of Adi-Shankara, which Sri Chaitanya headed for shortly after his Sanyass (if he ever took Sanyass at all). It must be noted because of his acceptance of the name Chaitanya from Keshava Bharati, there is controversy in regards to him having received Sannyass at all. Some are of the opinion that he essentially accepted bramachari, thus the name Chaitanya.

The point is he accepted a Shankarite Mahavakya at the time of diksha and it has been construed to be something else. His Gaudiya Biographers have said many things that don't seen to make sense. Certainly The Sringriri Math gives the names of Chaitanya to it's bramacharis AND Bharati/Puri to it's Sannyasins.

Why was Sri Chaitanya so intent to go to Sringriri Math after his diksha? And why did he visit there at all if he was so opposed to the Advaitin doctrine and forbade his followers to not as much LOOK at a Mayavadin Sannyasin.

Some Gaudiya scholars say Keshava Bharati was a Madhva ascetic which is obviously a blunder.

Understood..however it must be noted that each Matha that was established by Adi-Shankara has it's own Mahavakya associated with it..

The Gaudiya's even go as far to say that Sri Chaitanya wispered a mantra that he received in a dream to Keshava Bharati before diksha asking him to initiate with the dream mantra.

But then later we see some of his other Gaudiya biographers saying that he in fact accepted a Shankarite Mahavakya....

 

jijaji

 

 

[This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 04-04-2002).]

[gHari]

Very good point, Sha.

[karthik_v]

Originally posted by gHari:

The last word from SaGkarAcArya as presented in the purport to Srimad Bhagavatam 4.24.18:

 

Even though Lord Siva appeared to preach MAyAvAda philosophy, at the end of his pastime in the form of SaGkarAcArya, he preached the VaiSNava philosophy: bhaja govindaM bhaja govindaM bhaja govindaM mUDha-mate. He stressed worshiping Lord KRSNa, or Govinda, three times in this verse and especially warned his followers that they could not possibly achieve deliverance, or mukti, simply by word jugglery and grammatical puzzles. If one is actually serious to attain mukti, he must worship Lord KRSNa. That is SrIpAda SaGkarAcArya's last instruction.

Very true that Adi Sankara sang the glories of Lord Govinda. But do Advaita acharyas accept that Bhaja Govindam was his final verdict? If I am correct, Advaita acharyas regard Bhaja Govindam as one of the less significant compositions of Adi Sankara. His Bhashyams are the most important. Further Adi Sankara also established Panca upasana worship and even established 4 mutts. If indeed he wanted his philosophy to be temporary, why will he do all this?

[shvu]

 

Very true that Adi Sankara sang the glories of Lord Govinda. But do Advaita acharyas accept that Bhaja Govindam was his final verdict? If I am correct, Advaita acharyas regard Bhaja Govindam as one of the less significant compositions of Adi Sankara. His Bhashyams are the most important. Further Adi Sankara also established Panca upasana worship and even established 4 mutts. If indeed he wanted his philosophy to be temporary, why will he do all this?

Karthik,

 

With due respect and with no sarcasm intended towards anyone, the knowledge level of Advaita and Shankara, in a typical Gaudiya scholar ranges from below average to nil. This is because they do not study Advaita as a Purva Paksha and hence they have to rely on hearsay which is mostly negative propoganda. Naturally it is not surprising that Gaudiya scholars/authors have many misconceptions about Advaita.

 

The Bhaja Govindam according to Shankara's biographies were *not* written on his deathbed after he had a "change of heart" as some people state. It was composed much earlier and the context is totally different. In addition to this, Shankara has composed many works which are highly devotional. The problem here is propoganda. The rival camps tried to project Advaita as an impersonal philosophy lacking in devotion and humility. Their followers have simply been repeating this, without making an attempt to learn by themselves.

 

In brief, if a person describes Advaita as impersonal, lacking in Bhakti, etc, you can be sure this person doesn't know squat about Advaita and is only repeating what he heard somewhere.

 

Cheers

 

[gHari]

Lord Krsna's last or ultimate instruction of 18.66 came near the end of His conversation with Arjuna. Shankara's ultimate instruction may not have come at the end of his writings, but like 18.66 it is clearly similar in nature - forget everything I told you and just do this.

 

Envy of Krsna manifests in infinite ways. For some clever ones, they will want to prove that they are God. No matter what. I think that was Shankara's parish.

 

I waana be God. I wanna be God. I wanna be God. BOOM. I no longer exist. I must be God.

[gHari]

Let me first say that I had not been aware that there were adherents of non-dual Advaita philosophies here. I would likely not have described some of the puzzlements of the Vaisnava sampradayas, most significantly the Madhva tattvavadi school. However, having started I should complete the demonstration. This last and final mega-post seems to hit at the heart of the difference between the two ideals.

 

The essential difference: Differing views of desire in the ideas of Ramana and SrI Aurobindo from "Renunciation Through Wisdom" by A. C. Bhaktivedanta (it should be noted since it may not have become evident in these posts, that this acarya has absolute respect for Lord Siva and Sankaracarya, quoting them often):

Constitutionally, the JIva is an Eternal Servant of KRSNa

 

The profound esoteric conclusions Lord Caitanya revealed in a few aphorisms of instruction to SrI SanAtana GosvAmI are only partially discussed in all the works of SrI Aurobindo. In language full of complex syntax and obscure terms, SrI Aurobindo tries to express the knowledge that is easily available through the practice of vaidhi-bhakti, devotional service rendered according to regulations given by the authorized spiritual master and the scriptures. Because of his high-flown literary style, and for other technical reasons, SrI Aurobindo's writings are not easily understood by the ordinary reading public, and so his literature is, in a sense, ineffectual.

 

Lord Caitanya discusses in detail the jIva's eternal constitutional position as Lord KRSNa's servant, and how the jIva is put into illusion, or mAyA, when he tries to be the supreme enjoyer. Lord Caitanya further explains that when the jIva forgets his eternal position as a servant of Lord KRSNa, he becomes eternally conditioned and illusioned. Thus mAyA inflicts the miseries of material life upon the jIva. If a person artificially tries to be something he is not, then he can expect only misery. In this regard we recall a short story we read as a child in school that tells of a crow who tried to become a peacock. The creator and master of this universe is its rightful owner as well. Thus He is the sole enjoyer of everything. But if one among the creator's many servants tries to usurp His position and play the role of the Lord and enjoyer, how can he expect anything but suffering?

 

In the SrImad-BhAgavatam (10.87.30), one of the four KumAras, Sanandana, recites to an assembly of sages in Janaloka the prayers the personified Vedas previously recited to the Supreme Lord. One of the prayers is as follows:

 

aparimitA dhruvAs tanu-bhRto yadi sarva-gatAs

tarhi na zAsyateti niyamo dhruva netarathA

ajani ca yan-mayaM tad avimucya niyantR bhavet

samam anujAnatAM yad amataM mata-duSTatayA

 

If the countless living entities were all-pervading and possessed forms that never changed, You could not possibly be their absolute ruler, O immutable one. But since they are Your localized expansions and their forms are subject to change, You do control them. Indeed, that which supplies the ingredients for the generation of something is necessarily its controller because a product never exists apart from its ingredient cause. It is simply illusion for someone to think that he knows the Supreme Lord, who is equally present in each of His expansions, since whatever knowledge one gains by material means must be imperfect.

 

The last word in knowledge is certainly not self-realization or Brahman realization. There is more to realize--namely, that the jIva is the eternal servant of Lord KRSNa. This realization is the awakening of supramental consciousness, and the activities a jIva performs in such consciousness are the beginning of his eternal life. When the jIva performs all his activities under the direction of the Lord's internal, spiritual energy, he enjoys eternal transcendental bliss, which is a billion times greater than the happiness of Brahman realization. The difference in transcendental joy between the two is like the difference between the vast ocean and the water collected in a calf's hoofprint. When SrI Aurobindo wrote of "the Divine Mother," he was likely referring to this internal, spiritual energy, the predominating Deity of eternal transcendental bliss. He also pointed out that the activities of the inferior, material energy should not be mistaken for those of this spiritual potency.

 

Once the famous impersonalist and monist sannyAsI Ramana Maharshi of Madras was asked by a foreign disciple, "What is the difference between God and man?" His cryptic reply was "God plus desire equals man, and man minus desire equals God." We say that man can never be free of desire. In his eternal conditioned existence the jIva is full of the desire to enjoy matter, while in his eternal liberated state he is full of the desire to render devotional service to the Lord. Thus the jIva can never become God. It is sheer insanity to equate man with God, or vice versa. The MAyAvAdI's unnatural desire to deny the inherent characteristics of his conscious self is the very same desire that keeps him from attaining liberation. Hence the MAyAvAdIs' false and arrogant claim of liberation is merely mistake.

 

According to the SrImad-BhAgavatam, desire can never be nullified. While conditioned, the jIva is a repository of unlimited material desires, summarized as the catur-varga, the four goals of human life enunciated in the Vedic literature (religiosity, economic development, sense gratification, and liberation). However, in the liberated state produced by acting under the direction of the Lord's internal, spiritual energy, the jIva's true, spiritual desires become manifest. SrI Aurobindo has discussed this subject (though not in detail), and for this we appreciate him more than Ramana Maharshi. Ramana Maharshi has more or less tried to completely choke the life out of desire. This forcible elimination of desire is spiritual suicide. There is no credit in finishing off the patient without curing his disease; the doctor is qualified when he can cure the disease and save the patient. Those who pursue the four Vedic goals mentioned above, even up to impersonal liberation, find themselves imprisoned by their senses and enslaved by their desires. On the other hand, one who can teach people how to engage their daily activities in the service of the Supreme Lord is the real benefactor of humanity.

 

In the Bhagavad-gItA (9.4) Lord KRSNa says:

 

mayA tatam idaM sarvaM

jagad avyakta-mUrtinA

mat-sthAni sarva-bhUtAni

na cAhaM teSv avasthitaH

 

By Me, in My unmanifested form, this entire universe is pervaded. All beings are in Me, but I am not in Them.

 

In His unmanifested impersonal form Lord KRSNa pervades this entire universe, which is a transformation of His external energy. Therefore all living entities in the material creation rest on His energies. Energy cannot exist by itself, without an energetic source. Thus the material energy and the Supreme Energetic, Lord KRSNa, are in principle one, though the Energetic is far removed from the workings of His energy. The jIva, being marginal, is moved by desire to serve either the manifestation of the Lord's external energy--this physical world--or the Lord Himself in spiritual world, which is an expansion of His superior, internal potency. In other words, in every situation the jIva maintains his constitutional position as a servant. Thus he cannot relieve the suffering he undergoes as a servant of this material nature by artificially giving up his desire to serve. Inherently a servant, the jIva can never forsake his desire to serve. But if he so desires, he can quit his bad service for a good one. He should abandon his service of the four Vedic goals, including impersonal liberation--which will altogether throttle the life out of his desire to serve--and carefully try to manifest his original spiritual desire to serve the Lord. SrI Aurobindo has discussed this same point in the passage quoted above:

 

If the supermind could not give us a greater and more complete truth than any of the lower planes, it would not be worthwhile trying to reach it.

 

If a human being tries to exist without ego, desire, feelings, dislikes, and so on, he will be converted into inert matter. This is not spiritual elevation. When a person gradually progresses from materialistic perception to spiritual perception, he can clearly understand how trivial are his mundane desires, feelings, dislikes, and so on which were so long contaminated by ignorance. As this ignorance dissipates, mundane desires become insignificant. Desires remain, but they are no longer mundane. They become transcendental. In that state, one perceives Brahman, the Supersoul, and the Supreme Lord as one. Such higher perceptions are possible only when one's mind and senses are transcendental, a stage impossible to reach in one leap. Those who try the impossible are irrational and overambitious. Everyone has to proceed gradually, placing each step securely before taking the next one. In this way one will ultimately reach the goal.

 

In his essay entitled "Yoga," SrI Aurobindo does not recommend destroying desire but rather changing its character. It is a perennial truth that the jIva is by nature an eternal servant of Lord KRSNa. The jIva has no other identity, whether he is conditioned or liberated. His position is similar to that of a citizen of a country: he is always subject to the government laws, whether he is in or out of jail. When he is inside the jail, all his activities are painful, but as a free citizen he feels content in everything he does. It is merely a matter of changing his character.

 

Similarly, even when the jIva refuses to serve the Supreme Energetic, SrI KRSNa, and instead serves His illusory energy, mAyA, he remains a servant of the Lord. But in that condition he is ignorant of the bliss of devotional service to the Lord. Only when the jIva casts away his mundane characteristics can he experience transcendental joy in devotional service. Still, in no situation does the jIva ever give up his inherent nature as KRSNa's eternal servant, for he emanates from the Lord's marginal potency.

 

 

In my heart it boils down to why Krsna created us. I believe He wanted me to be a separate entity with whom to interact. I'm not sure that is possible after accepting merging mukti. Of course, it could well be that the Advaita school has changed over the past five hundred years after Sri Caitanya spoke with their leaders. His complaint about accepting half a truth may well have evolved a regiment that now facilitates spiritual variety, a spiritual life, participation in the Kingdom of God, and greater intimacy with Sri Krsna.<font color="#f7f7f7">

 

[This message has been edited by gHari (edited 04-05-2002).]

[gHari]

Since we are praising Lord Siva, this portion of a recent lecture by Srila Bhaktivedanta Narayana Maharaja seems appropriate:

<table><td valign=top width="50%"><center>

<img src=http://www.aloha.net/~sadhu/siva07.jpg width=355 height=462></center></td><td width="50%">"Siva means auspicious. Siva deludes those who are averse to Krsna, and He is favorable to and helps those who are His devotees. Sankara-tattva or Siva-tattva is very complex. He is not Visnu, nor is he a jiva. He is not maya-tattva, but he is not beyond maya-tattva. As Sada-Siva he is Visnu-tattva. As Visnu-tattva he is svamsa, a plenary portion of Krsna. Also, when Krsna incarnates in the three modes of nature, Siva is the predominating deity of tama-guna, the mode of ignorance. Brahma Samhita states that Siva is a combination of tama-guna, the quality of minuteness of the marginal potency, and a minute degree of the mixture of Samvit and Hladini."

</td></table>

[jijaji]

gHari:

Of course, it could well be that the Advaita school has changed over the past five hundred years after Sri Caitanya spoke with their leaders.

 

jijaji:

Sri Chaitanya did not have much influence at all on the advaita school. There are a few references to him meeting some advaitavadins by his biographers but those meetings are imbellished to show him defeating them and then converting masses of people into Gaudiya Vaishnavism, which is a total exaggeration.

 

As I have stated I do not think Sri Chaitanya was as oppossed to 'MAYAVAD'as his LATER biographers made him out to be.

 

His Sanyass came from Keshava Bharati...now why would Sri Chaitanya forbid people from reading shankaras brahma sutra bhasya, while he himself takes diksha from an Advaitavadin Sannyassin...doesn't jive at all.

 

Does anyone here have the guts to look at this history objectivly or are they satisfied to just quote what they have heard on the matter and do no other research and not question...

EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE LOTS OF LOOSE-ENDED QUESTIONS...?

 

 

jijaji

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 04-05-2002).]

[shvu]

it could well be that the Advaita school has changed over the past five hundred years after Sri Caitanya spoke with their leaders. His complaint about accepting half a truth may well have evolved a regiment that now facilitates spiritual variety, a spiritual life, participation in the Kingdom of God, and greater intimacy with Sri Krsna.

Actually not. Advaitha today is the same as what was taught by Shankara 1300 years ago. No changes or "improvements" during this time by anyone, especially by people who were *not* advaitins themselves.

 

Just for the record, Advaitins are great devotees too and have plenty of love for Krishna or any other God they choose to worship. The truth is, no group of people can claim exclusive status wrt Devotion.

 

Also, there is no record of Chaitanya meeting with and talking to, much less influencing any prominent Advaitin of his time.

 

(Again, no offense to anyone)

 

Cheers

 

[jijaji]

I mean no offence as well....

 

jijaji

[sha]

Originally posted by gHari:

Since we are praising Lord Siva, this portion of a recent lecture by Srila Bhaktivedanta Narayana Maharaja seems appropriate:

<table><td valign=top width="50%"><center>

<img src=http://www.aloha.net/~sadhu/siva07.jpg width=355 height=462></center></td><td width="50%">"Siva means auspicious. Siva deludes those who are averse to Krsna, and He is favorable to and helps those who are His devotees. Sankara-tattva or Siva-tattva is very complex. He is not Visnu, nor is he a jiva. He is not maya-tattva, but he is not beyond maya-tattva. As Sada-Siva he is Visnu-tattva. As Visnu-tattva he is svamsa, a plenary portion of Krsna. Also, when Krsna incarnates in the three modes of nature, Siva is the predominating deity of tama-guna, the mode of ignorance. Brahma Samhita states that Siva is a combination of tama-guna, the quality of minuteness of the marginal potency, and a minute degree of the mixture of Samvit and Hladini."

</td></table>

I have received this forwarded message in e-mail for Maha Shivaratri greetings. Hope this can add more praise to Lord Shiva.

 

Namaste and happy auspicious celebrations of 'Maha Shiva Ratri' to all devotees!!

 

 

<center>

 

When Lord Krishna and Radharani played the magnificent Divine dance of 'Maha Raasa Lila', Shankar Bhagavan entered the Lila as a Gopi.

 

Thus He became popular with the Name Gopi-Isvara.

 

There is a temple in Vrindavan for Gopisvara, Whom all Vrajavasis worship with love.

 

Lord Siva Himself is the Master of Music. Worshippers of Nada Brahma, the Sound Incarnate of Lord, accept Him as their Guru.

 

Some Rasik Saints say Lord Siva is Lord Krishna's 'Flute'.

 

They are also right in the sense, that because the 'Flute' is Krishna's 'Priya Sakhi' and Sivaji too has transformed Himself to become His Gopi, any way.

 

This verse from 'Brahma-Samhita-56', which is very dear to Gauranga Mahaprabhu confirms - "..vaMzI priya sakhI..."

 

The verse 45 of 'Sri Brahma Samahitam' gives another kind of transformation -

 

<font color="red">"kSIraM yathA dadhi vikAra vizeSa yogAt

 

saJjAyate na hi pRthag asti hetoH

 

yaH zambhu tAm api tathA samupaiti kAryAd

 

govindam AdipuruSaM tam ahaM bhajAmi"</font>

 

Meaning: Just as milk itself is transformed into curd (yogurt), but yet they both are neither SAME nor DIFFERENT from each other, so also I adore my Beloved primeveal Lord Govinda, Who has transformed Himself into Lord Shiva for the performance of divine lilas.

 

Here are some more excerpts, taken from Brahma Vaivarta Purana in relation to Lord Siva.

 

"Lord Siva is said to be a portion of Lord Krishna and arise out of the left side of Krshna's body.

 

<font color="red">"vAmarddhAGgo mahAdevo

 

dakSiNo gopikApatiH"</font>

 

The left half became Siva and the right became the Husband of Gopis.

 

He is dearly loved by Krishna.

 

The BVP says it is sin to slander Siva, Who is dearer to Krishna than His own life.

 

Krishna Himself declares:

 

"Among my favorites Brahma is dear to Me.

 

Lakshmi, ever residing on my chest, is dearer than Brahma.

 

Radha is yet dearer, and my devotees are dearer still.

 

Dearest of all is Shankara (Siva); no one is dearer than He.

 

My heart resides with my devotees, My life with Radha.

 

My Self with Sankara, who is dearer than My life."

 

(Bkh,Pkh, KJkh of BVP)

 

Those who are the Excellant Portions of Krishna are intensely devoted to Him.

 

It is not surprising then that Siva, a Portion of Krishna, is His Devotee.

 

We find frequent references to Siva as the BEST OF VAISNAVAS.

 

Accordingly, Siva seeks to become the Servant of Krishna and confesses His own dependence upon the latter.

 

Siva is often portrayed as in constant MEDITATION ON KRISHNA, WEEPING, DANCING with ECSTASY of devotion.

 

Of all those who know Krishna, it is Siva, the BEST OF VAISNAVAS, who knows Him best.

 

Thus, by Siva's Grace a votary may attain faith in Krishna.

 

Siva in fact states that those who oppress Vaisnavas will be punished by Krishna and that the hearts of non-vaisnavas are impure He further exclaims that Vaisnavas are DEARER to HIM than HIS OWN followers.

 

Krishna, Who is filled with Love for His devotees, has made Siva equal to Himself on account of Siva's DEEP Devotion.

 

Krishna asserts that Siva is fully His EQUAL in splendour, knoweledge and virtue.

 

Further, the Divine Forms or Bodies (Sat-Chit-Ananda vigrahas) of Siva and Krishna alone are Eternal, not those of other beings.

 

It is through Siva's Devotion to Krishna, finally, not MERE EQUALITY, but actual IDENTITY is apparently attained:

 

<font color="red">'svapne jAgaraNe zazvath kRSNa dhyAna rataH

 

zivaH

 

yathA kRSNA stathA zambhur na bhedo mAdhavezayoH"</font>

 

(Brahma Vaivarta Purana-Prakriti khanda II.56.61)

 

"Sleeping or awake, Siva is constantly absorbed in MEDITATION of KRISHNA.

 

AS IS KRISHNA, SO IS SAMBHU; THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE between MADHAVA and ISA"

 

<font color="red">'yo hariH sa zivaH sAkSAd yaH zivaH sa svayaM hariH

 

ye tayor bhedamAti sthan narakAya bhave nnaraH"</font>

 

(Visnu purana.5.33.46)

 

"Whoever is Lord Hari, He Himself is Lord Shiva indeed.

 

Whoever is manifesting as Lord Shiva, He Himself is Lord Hari.

 

Any humanbeing mistakes both the Lords to be different, he/she surely goes to hell.

 

In Vishnu Purana also, VISHNU declares HIS NON DIFFERENCE from SIVA. (V.P.5.33.46-48)

 

Here we find, full justification for the statement in the Narada PancaRatra concerning the BVP as teaching the NON DIFFERENCE between HARI AND HARA.

 

Often we are told that whoever does not worship the Linga of Siva commits a great sin and goes to hell.

 

<center> </center>

 

 

Krishna says to Siva:

 

"Who, having constructed Your linga of clay, joined with Prakriti (yoni), at a place of piligrimage, worships it a thousand times with devotion...

 

He shall rejoice with Me in GOLOKA for crore of Kalpas.

 

And who worships at that place a lakh of lingas, with proper offerings, Shall not fall from GOLOKA; He shall be equal to US.

 

Saivaite devotional practices lead, then, to the ultimate goal of the Vaisnavas.

 

In Brahma-Samhita the relationship of Lord Siva and Lord Govinda are compared to that of milk and yogurt. Milk itself becomes TRANSFORMED into yogurt.

 

Similarly, though They both are possessing the same transcendental attributes, They PERFORM different divine pastimes.

 

<font color="red">"yathA ziva mayo viSNuH

 

zivasya hRdayaM viSNur viSNoz

 

ca hRdayaM zivaH"</font>

 

(Skanda Purana)

 

Just as Lord Vishnu is pervaded by Lord Shiva,

 

similarly, in Siva's heart Vishnu resides and Vishnu's heart is the abode of Shiva.

 

In Caitanya Caritamrita, Mahaprabhu's eternal Associate Sri Advaitacarya is said to be Lord Sadasiva, who always says,

 

"I am the servant of Lord Krishna."

 

Intoxicated by ecstatic Love for Krishna, He becomes overwhelmed and incessantly dances without clothing and sings about Lord Krishna's qualities and pastimes.

 

<center><font color="red">" nimnagAnAM yathA gaMgA devAnAm acyuto yathA

 

vaiSNavAnAM yathA zambhuH purANAnAm idaM tathA

 

kSetrANAM caiva sarveSAM yathA kAzI hyonuttamA

 

tathA purANa vratAnAM zrI mad bhAgavataM dvijAH "</font>

 

(Srimad Bhagavatam 12.13.17)

 

 

Just as the celestial Ganges is the most Holy among all the flowing rivers,

 

just as Lord Krishna is the Supreme among all Divine Personalties,

 

just as Lord Siva is the most Exalted Lover of Vishnu,

 

just as the City of Kasi is the most Sacred among all Holy places,

 

Srimad Bhagavatam is also the most fulfilling vow as well as the most elevated Scripture among all other auspicious Puranas.

 

 

Prayers to Lord Shiva-

 

<font color="red">"jagadguro namastubhyaM

 

zivAya zivadAya ca

 

yogIndrANAm ca yogIndra

 

gurUNAM gurave namaH"</font>

 

"Salutations unto Thee, O Teacher of the universe.

 

Thou art the Lord auspicious and the giver of bliss,

 

the foremost of the perfect Yogis, the Teacher of teachers. Salutations unto Thee."

 

(BVP 4.30.43)

 

>

 

Another prayer for Shivaji says-

 

<font color="red">"haste 'kSa mAlA hRdi kRSNa tattvaM

 

jihvAgra bhAge vara rAma mantraM

 

yan mastake kezava pAda tirthaM

 

zivaM 'mahA bhAgavatAM' namAmi"</font>

 

 

Meaning-

 

I salute to the Supreme Devotee, (Maha Bhagavata)

 

in Whose hand is the a-ksha (A to Z) japamaala,

 

in Whose heart is the reservoir of Divine Essence of Lord Krishna,

 

on Whose tongue is ever residing the Name of His Beloved Rama,

 

on Whose head is ever flowing Sacred water that washes the Lotus feet of Lord Keshava.

 

Jai Hari-Hara, Mahaadeva Shambho!

 

<center>

 

<font color="blue"><big>brahma murAri surArcita lingam

nirmalabhASita zobhita lingam

janmaja duHkha vinAzaka lingam

tat praNamAmi sadAziva lingam</big></font>

 

I bow before that Sada Shiva Linga, which is adored by Brahma, Vishnu and other Gods, which is praised by pure and holy speeches and which destroys the cycle of births and deaths.

 

[This message has been edited by sha (edited 04-05-2002).]

[Guest guest]

The import of everything you have written,is revealed to the devotee through the mercy of Sri Guru.The Guru is God,God is manifesting to us through everything,everywhere.At first we are told to see God through the bodily manifestation of the Pure vaisnava,as we advance, we percieve Guru in everything.The monist's cannot appreciate that a personality is required, to direct the manifestation, of the interactions, of the various types energy, operating as agents of the eternal,changeless,infinite,supreme oneness,or Brahman.Without a personality to direct the energy of the cosmos,all would be formless,this varied material manifestattion would not exist at all.There has to be a controlling aspect of the universal oneness,it is absolutely neccesary, in order for the varied attribute's of it's Self,to manifest as a plurality,otherwise without the personal design and monitoring by the Personality of the infinite,all would truly be one,a singularity,without distinction,without variation.

As we can see this world is full of variation,therfore it's very existence is indicative of a personality of godhead.

[jijaji]

The advaita school accepts both saguna brahman and nirguna Brahman...

 

 

 

[jijaji]

Originally posted by shvu:

 

Also, there is no record of Chaitanya meeting with and talking to, much less influencing any prominent Advaitin of his time.

 

Why does the persistent mis-information continue that Sri Chaitanya converted large masses of people (advaitavins, buddhists, common folk etc.) from other sects in India during the middle ages?

It most certainly seems to be an embellishment of the facts later exaggerated by his biographers.

 

This is not an attack or blasphemy towards Sri Chaitanya, in fact it is more respectful of who he was as far as I am concerned.

 

Exaggerating events to win converts or to out do other sects is a common thing in India. Please don't think for a minute that the Gaudiya school has been completely free from this tendency.

 

This tendency to exaggerate was just part of the way the INDIAN MIND thought at THAT TIME in HISTORY!

 

But alas...we live in different times now don't we?

 

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 04-06-2002).]

[jijaji]

NO ONE CAN LIMIT GOD

 

(From Sri Ramakrishna Kathamrita, conversations of Sri Ramakrishna recorded by Sri M.)

 

March 11, 1883.

 

MASTER: "With sincerity and earnestness one can realize God through all religions. The Vaishnava will realize God, and so will the Saktas, the Vedantists, and the Brahmos. The Mussalmans and Christians will realize Him too. All will certainly realize God if they are earnest and sincere.

 

"Some people indulge in quarrels, saying, 'One cannot attain anything unless one worships our Krishna', or, 'Nothing can be gained without the worship of Kali, our Divine Mother', or, 'One cannot be saved without accepting the Christian religion.' This is pure dogmatism. The dogmatist says, 'My religion alone is true, and the religions of others are false.' This is a bad attitude. God can be reached by different paths.

 

"Further, some say that God has form and is not formless. Thus they start quarrelling. A Vaishnava quarrels with a Vedantist.

 

"One can rightly speak of God only after one has seen Him. He who has seen God knows really and truly that God has form and that He is formless as well. He has many other aspects that cannot be described.

 

"Once some blind men chanced to come near an animal that someone told them was an elephant. They were asked what the elephant was like. The blind men began to feel its body. One of them said the elephant was like a pillar; he had touched only its leg. Another said it was like a winnowing-fan; he had touched only its ear. In this way the others, having touched its tail or belly, gave their different versions of the elephant. Just so, a man who has seen only one aspect of God limits God to that alone. It is his conviction that God cannot be anything else.

 

"How can you say that the only truth about God is that He has form? It is undoubtedly true that God comes down to earth in a human form, as in the case of Krishna. And it is true as well that God reveals Himself to His devotees in various forms. But it is also true that God is formless; He is the Indivisible Existence-Knowledge-Bliss Absolute. He has been described in the Vedas both as formless and as endowed with form. He is also described there both as attributeless and as endowed with attributes.

 

"Do you know what I mean? Satchidananda is like an infinite ocean. Intense cold freezes the water into ice, which floats on the ocean in blocks of various forms. Likewise, through the cooling influence of bhakti, one sees forms of God in the ocean of the Absolute. These forms are meant for the bhaktas, the lovers of God. But when the Sun of Knowledge rises, the ice melts; it becomes the same water it was before. Water above and water below, everywhere nothing but water. Therefore a prayer in the Bhagavata says: 'O Lord, Thou hast form, and Thou art also formless. Thou walkest before us, O Lord, in the shape of a man; again, Thou hast been described in the Vedas as beyond words and thought.'

 

"But you may say that for certain devotees God assumes eternal forms. There are places in the ocean where the ice doesn't melt at all. It assumes the form of quartz."

 

KEDAR: "It is said in the Bhagavata that Vyasa asked God's forgiveness for his three transgressions. He said: 'O Lord, Thou art formless, but I have thought of Thee in my meditation as endowed with form; Thou art beyond speech, but I have sung Thee hymns; Thou art the All-pervading Spirit, but I have made pilgrimages to sacred places. Be gracious, O Lord, and forgive these three transgressions of mine.' "

 

MASTER: "Yes, God has form and He is formless too. Further, He is beyond both form and formlessness. No one can limit Him."

 

[Guest guest]

Why did Caitanya take sanyasa from Kesava?

Prior to that time,devotee's of Radha-Krsna were seen as sentimentalists,not serious about spiritual attainment.The sanyasa of sri Caitanya was laughed at by Nityananda,who knew of the true identity of Caitanya.He knew that Caitanya was performing the pastime of munifecence,the distribution of divine-lila.The taking of sanyasa was funny because Caitanya was in fact the supreme enjoyer,the taster of madhurya-rasa,the pleasure seeking,rasaraja of vrndavana.

His intention as a member of the sankarites, was to display the difference, between the ecstacy of sankirtan and the pleasure one recieves from the study of vedanta,philosophical gymnastics and theoretical musings of the nature of god.

In Benares he would fall on the floor,and display ecstatic emotional angst,in the mood of a lover seperated from her lover.This was seen at first to be a sign of a disturbance within Mahaprabhu,by the Sanyassi's.Then they tried to give him instructions on the absolute truth,all the while not knowing they were talking to the absolute truth.The purpose of his sojourn there was achieved when the top sanyassi's became his close associates,having been given entry into the truth of the true identity of the love intoxicated sanyasi,from Navadvip.

The truth of the identity of Sri Caitanya is revealed in this way,through ecstacy.One can theorize and speculate about the nature of the soul,the absolute truth,and the manifestations of god's energy,or one can gain entrance into the pleasure pastimes of that same absolute truth.

The purpose of life is to enjoy,the supreme enjoyer is the controller of the cosmic manifestation,simply being aware of the existance of the eternal,is not the purpose of life.The Personality of God desires to enjoy his creation,we are the means to that enjoyment.Simply realizing oneness with God,is not an end, in and of itself,it is the beginning.

We have an eternal nature,what are our activities to be? The Personality of Godhead desires our association directly,face to face,in a relationship of loving recipricocity.This reality is distributed by the Personality of godhead,directly, in the form of Sri Caitanya.Everything else is of a lesser quality.His lila of distributing personal love of god,is in fact, an activity taking place in the transcendental realm.

The life of a follower of Sri Caitanya,is under the guidance of the pleasure potency of the Supreme Truth,he does not live in the mortal realm,his existance has been transformed into that of a resident of Vaikuntha,the spiritual world.

God consciousness is not attainable,it is a descending flow of love,coming to us, not from us.The Truth reveals itself,we are recipients of the eternal,infinite,love of God,in this mood,we are enabled to recieve the highest benediction.