Meerabai

[madhav]

It does not matter what the name means here.

What mattrers is that she was a great devotee of Krishna.

Krishna to her was her husbahd.

 

Meera was a princess and queen. Being so, the custom of the time would not allow her to walk and dance in public.

(Even now royal families do not do it.)

 

Meera gave up the kingdom, the rolay family, and the social boundary. She would dance and sing freely in public among the sadhus and praise Krishna.

 

Her songs are full of pain of separation from krishna, love for kirhsna, renounciation, and bhakti and gyana.

 

In India the name Meera invokes this great devotee's pastimes. People of lower guna and karma do not keep Meera name. The meeaning of Meera is her character and bhakti.

 

some of her songs are:

 

govindo pran amaaro re

mane jaga lagyo kharo re

 

Translation: Govind (Krishna) is my life, and the sansara has tasted salty/bitter to me.

 

ranoji kagal mokale re

dejo mirane haath

sadhuni sangat chhodi mira tame vaso amaari saath

 

The king (her hesband) send a letter to meera:

"give up the association of sadhus and live with me."

 

Meerabai kagal mokale re

dejo ranane haath.

raja patha chhdi rana tame vaso amaari shath.

 

Meere sends a reply to the king:

"O rana, you give up the kingdom

and come live with us and glorify Krishna."

 

Every one in Gujarat and Rajasthan sings Meera's bhajans.

 

Jai Sri Krishna!

 

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

It does not matter what the name means here.

What mattrers is that she was a great devotee of Krishna.

Krishna to her was her husbahd.

 

 

A great devotee of Krishna, indeed.

 

However, her line of thought is not acceptable to Gaudiya Vaishnavas, because the conclusion of Meerabai's teachings/bhajans is that it may be desirable to achieve sayujya-mukti. As we all know, GV's do not endorse the concept of sayujya-mukti.

 

That said, I find it the apparent taste for svakiya-rasa rather interesting. I still do not see any congruence in this concept though, for svakiya-rasa and sayujya-mukti seem to be mutually incompatible.

 

I hear that she met Srila Jiva Goswami and appreciated the fact that Chaitanya was an incarnation of Krishna. How true is this?

[madhav]

In response to:

>>A great devotee of Krishna, indeed.

However, her line of thought is not acceptable to Gaudiya Vaishnavas, because the conclusion of Meerabai's teachings/bhajans is that it may be desirable to achieve sayujya-mukti. <<

 

These differences are at very high level or realization, and most of us are at grass level. Also note that Meera did not start a sampradaya, Chaitanya did. She was a pure bhakta, and she did achieve mukti. That counts.

 

Within vedic society there are several sampradayas, and they alwasy compete with each other; but it is a family intrnal quarrel. It is not a war like jeehad that is imposed on the world by Islamists.

 

What I have heard about Meera is that when she went to vrindavan, she knew that Jiva Goswami was there.

So she sent a messagner to him expressing her desire to greet him. Jiva Goswami sent back the message that he does not meet women.

 

So, Meera sent the message to him:

"Oh, I would like to see who is another purusha in vrindaba. All I see is only krishna is purusha here."

 

Getting this message, Jiva Goswami immeditately came and met her with great reverence and love. I believe Jiva Goswami never had any complaint about this. I would be interested to know what the history books say about this meeting.

 

In vedic culure no one falls down by praising other devotees.

 

Jai Sri Krishna!

 

 

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

These differences are at very high level or realization, and most of us are at grass level.

 

 

What has that got to do with anything? Does that mean we should not discuss spiritual topics at all, since we are not "very high" ?

 

 

She was a pure bhakta, and she did achieve mukti. That counts.

 

 

I really do not think so, because Srimad-Bhagavatam specifically states that attainment of sayujya-mukti is an impure state. It is not the business of Vaishnavas to bother with mukti.

[madhav]

 

Mira's story:

http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/saints/mirabai.htm

 

Jai Sri Krishna!

 

[Vaishnava_das108]

Nice, but it is not altogether appropriate to glean information from an Advaitic site.

[madhav]

the scriputer talk of dvaita as well as advaita.

 

there two groups always argues with each otre since the creation. it consider it family quarrel of the vedic people. my sadhan ais of dvaita, but i do not hate advaitis.

 

i understnd that chaitanya has advised to not read advaiti literature. tht is good for a student who is new and can really get confused. or it coudl cause doubt in the mind ot the student about his gu's teaching, and dout cannot help one progress. for me it neer has caused me any problem.

 

when an advaiti insists me his view, i tell him,

 

"when we both reach god, then we will both know how god is.

and the argeuemt will end.

so, let us continue our sadhana till then.

no need to argue now when we both are far away from god ralization."

 

jai sri krishna!

 

[Guest guest]

 

 

It is not the business of Vaishnavas to bother with mukti.

 

 

 

You mean, it is is not the business of Gaudiya Vaishnavas to bother with Mukti. There are plenty of Vaishnava groups who see Mukti as the ultimate goal to achieve.

 

 

 

[paul108]

I studied advaita philosophy (mostly Vasistha's Yoga) for about 3 years before Krishna set me straight, but still if I think about advaita, I get bewildered by it and need hurry to the Bhagavad-gita As It Is for shelter. I think I would have been better off as a heroin junkie than a student of advaita philosophy. Not much difference, really.

 

Hare Krishna

 

[madhav]

>>You mean, it is is not the business of Gaudiya Vaishnavas to bother with Mukti.<<

 

Yes, any bhakta does bhakti without desire for mukti.

that is supermost bhakti. to do bhakti for mukti is not best, but still a lot better than no bhakti.

 

bhakti is the end and the means. a pure bhakta does not care for mukti, but it comes to him as a side product, no doubt. mukti means freedom from birth after births.

 

[madhav]

>>Does that mean we should not discuss spiritual topics at all, since we are not "very high" ?<<

 

no. discussion as well as practice, bith are needed.

 

[madhav]

>>I really do not think so, because Srimad-Bhagavatam specifically states that attainment of sayujya-mukti is an impure state. It is not the business of Vaishnavas to bother with mukti. <<

 

Meera loved krishna as her husband all her life.

the legend is that her body merged with the krishna moorti at dwarka temple. her sari was found at the foot of the moorti, her body is not found.

 

if i remember correctly, she never has asked krishna to give her mukti. so any one can speculate what kind of destination she got after leaving this earth. i would not argue about it. we all will find it out when we reach there.

 

her guru, i believe, was haridas.

not sure from which sampradaya he was.

any krishna / vishnu devotee is a vaishnava.

 

 

 

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

You mean, it is is not the business of Gaudiya Vaishnavas to bother with Mukti. There are plenty of Vaishnava groups who see Mukti as the ultimate goal to achieve.

 

 

True, but the definition of 'mukti' in those Vaishnava groups are not the same as the Advaitic one, viz., sayujya-mukti.

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

the scriputer talk of dvaita as well as advaita.

 

 

With all due respects, I don't see how. The Advaita philosophy is an *interpretation* of the scriptures, and especially of the Vedanta-sutra. Dvaita is also an interpretation. What we must do is to analyse which interpretation fits closely with the import of the scriptures themselves, with necessary backup evidence.

 

 

i understnd that chaitanya has advised to not read advaiti literature. tht is good for a student who is new and can really get confused. or it coudl cause doubt in the mind ot the student about his gu's teaching, and dout cannot help one progress. for me it neer has caused me any problem.

 

 

Well, Chaitanya didn't just advised not to read Advaitic literature with a view to reading it when one gets more "advanced." He said not to read it, period. Specifically, He said that one who reads it, everything will get spoiled and destroyed (mayavadi-bhasya sunile haya sarva-nasa).

 

Of course one may read Advaitic literature for the purpose of analysing their arguments with a view to preaching, but Advaitic literature as a whole serves veritably no purpose for spiritual aspiration.

 

 

when an advaiti insists me his view, i tell him,

 

"when we both reach god, then we will both know how god is.

and the argeuemt will end.

so, let us continue our sadhana till then.

no need to argue now when we both are far away from god ralization."

 

 

Okay, but we don't need to wait until we reach God, for that would itself be wasting valuable time. We simply have to rely on the words of the Acharyas, who have done the necessary research, and follow them.

 

According to the opinion of the realized Acharyas, Advaitins will merge into the Brahman effulgence and ultimately fall from that state, but a devotee of Krishna will reach Goloka Vrindavan and never fall.

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

I studied advaita philosophy (mostly Vasistha's Yoga) for about 3 years before Krishna set me straight, but still if I think about advaita, I get bewildered by it and need hurry to the Bhagavad-gita As It Is for shelter. I think I would have been better off as a heroin junkie than a student of advaita philosophy. Not much difference, really.

 

 

Ha ha ha ha ha! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif I feel exactly the same!

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

Meera loved krishna as her husband all her life.

 

 

Exactly, and the very first sentence on that Advaitic website states that Meera was believed to be the incarnation of Radha.

 

This is impossible, because we all know that the relation between Radha and Krishna was that of parakiya-rasa and not svakiya-rasa.

 

 

if i remember correctly, she never has asked krishna to give her mukti. so any one can speculate what kind of destination she got after leaving this earth. i would not argue about it. we all will find it out when we reach there.

 

 

My source of information regarding Meera's attainment was from Gour Govinda Swami. He mentioned in a talk that Meera met Jiva Goswami and had ultimately attained sayujya-mukti, and that we (as Gaudiya Vaishnavas) do not care for such goals.

 

And where is "there"? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

 

any krishna / vishnu devotee is a vaishnava.

 

 

Does that include Advaitins? I know plenty of Advaitin devotees of Krishna and Vishnu. They are not going to achieve the same goal as a Vaishnava, regardless of which sampradaya they come from.

 

[madhav]

dear Vaishnava_das108 goswami,

 

this dvaita-advaita debate has no priority at this time

when the demons are up and active right under our nose but in disguise.

 

as a vaishanv, when some one starts this debate

(perticularly to divide and conquer)

i tell this:

 

"after the great advaiti sri shakaraharya, there came five great vaishnav (dvaiti) aacharyas who refuted advait argument by debating it fully in public with the highest advaita authorities of their times.

all these arguments and counter arguments are recorded.

so, why you and me, the tiny advitis and dvaitis who are at bottom spiritual level, need to debate it again?

why not take the conclusion of the giants' debates

and live by it?

why not you faithfully do advaita sadhana, and

i do dvaita sadhana and both get our final destination?

 

when we reach there, we would know where you, i, and god are, and our argument will end.

till then i wish you success in your sadhana.

would you not wish me success in my sadhana?"

 

this outlook will help the vedic people a lot

when now the real danger is from the demoiniacs.

sure there is unity at the super-most level,

why not unite at some lower level too?

every one in afamily fights somewhat with other family member more or less, but when an outsider demon comes to fight or finish the family, then the family is united, has to unite. even devas and danavas united for necter and churned the ocean.

 

the demoinacs do not want us to unite.

do we want to help them by remaining divided

and get defeated/killed?

 

[Vaishnava_das108]

These are all very nice sentiments, even though they may need a comment here or there, but may I remind you that this is not a discussion about the rivalry of Dvaita and Advaita?

 

This is about Meera and her status as a Vaishnava saint. I respect her devotion to Krishna, but all I am saying is that it is not of the Gaudiya standard, that's all.

[Guest guest]

there are so many people who throw prabhupada's books in to the garbage can. they think it is better to be a materialist than to follow this form of artificial repression. this does not make prabhupada's works useless. they are just not intelligent enough. if one does not understand sankara's writings, then the fault is not sankara's. i am sure that paul and vaishnava dasa would do well to learn how to respect a great tradition such as that of sankara's. there have been great devotees and acharyas in sankara's line. as you know caitanya mahaprabhu himself took initiation in sankara line and treated the sankartie sannyasins with great respect. this should teach you a lesson or two. even srila prabhupada says that you should be thankful to different acharyas like sanakara for their important teachings. he uses sanakaracharya's authority also to establish the supremacy of lord krishna. i myself was convinced of krishna's supremacy by a quote from sankara given to me by a staunch hare krishna.

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

if one does not understand sankara's writings, then the fault is not sankara's. i am sure that paul and vaishnava dasa would do well to learn how to respect a great tradition such as that of sankara's. there have been great devotees and acharyas in sankara's line.

 

 

I used to be an Advaitin. I now have no respect whatsover for it, because of the institutionalized cheating processes that go on in the name of God and "Advaita."

 

 

as you know caitanya mahaprabhu himself took initiation in sankara line and treated the sankartie sannyasins with great respect. this should teach you a lesson or two.

 

 

Just because Mahaprabhu treated Advaitins with respect does not mean that He approved of their teachings. He taught 'amanina mana dena' - to respect everyone else, and conversely to not expect any respect for himself. And this is evidenced in His conduct towards Advaitins.

 

Of course, we all know that he condemned Mayavada philosophy in many places, as He duly told those very Advaitins.

 

 

even srila prabhupada says that you should be thankful to different acharyas like sanakara for their important teachings.

 

 

Where did he say that?

 

 

he uses sanakaracharya's authority also to establish the supremacy of lord krishna.

 

 

I don't think so. The only thing I have seen is a essay/commentary on one of Sankara's writings, and Srila Prabhupada specifically used Sankara's writings to condemn typical Mayavada concepts. This is containd in the book 'Science of Self-Realisation.'

 

 

i myself was convinced of krishna's supremacy by a quote from sankara given to me by a staunch hare krishna.

 

 

And since I was an Advaitin myself, I was convinced by Srila Prabhupada's forceful preaching of the fallacies of Advaita.

[Guest guest]

Meerabai's Sadguru (spiritual preceptor) was saint-poet Raidas (some call him as Rohidas) who was a great Shri Ram bhakta and a disciple of Ramananda and not Haridas.

Is there any doubt about whether Meerabai attained salvation or not? I am surprised!!!

Meerabai was not the reincarnation Radha as has been mentioned. She was an incarnation of a gopika (cowheard maiden) by name Lalita.

Most of us are Dwaities (believe in duality) as we consider the God as a "separate" entity than ourselves. There is nothing wrong in it. I personally feel that Advaita is a valid philosophy but tough to understand. Just because we do not understand it, it does not become wrong or invalid. If an illeterate farmer does not believe (or know) the Laws of Gravity, that does not mean the Laws don't exist or are wrong! The inner bickerings in Hinduism are the main reasons for its losing its due importance.

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

Is there any doubt about whether Meerabai attained salvation or not? I am surprised!!!

 

 

Nobody is questioning this fact. The point is that according to authorized sources, Meerabai attained sayujya-mukti. Thus this is not of the Gaudiya standard, that's all.

 

 

I personally feel that Advaita is a valid philosophy but tough to understand. Just because we do not understand it, it does not become wrong or invalid. If an illeterate farmer does not believe (or know) the Laws of Gravity, that does not mean the Laws don't exist or are wrong!

 

 

Now this is slightly insulting when we call the great pundits (not to mention Acharyas) who have written many texts about this very subject by comparing them to,... illiterate farmers? The conclusion should be that as followers of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, we follow in His footsteps and reject Advaita philosophy.

 

 

The inner bickerings in Hinduism are the main reasons for its losing its due importance.

 

 

That may be true, but on the other hand, it is essential subject matter that is worthy of being discussed.

 

A sincere student should not neglect the discussion of such conclusions, considering them controversial, for such discussions strengthen the mind. Thus one's mind becomes attached to Krsna." [Cc. Adi-lila 2.117]

[madhav]

>>I personally feel that Advaita is a valid philosophy but tough to understand. Just because we do not understand it, it does not become wrong or invalid.<<

 

Gita 12.1

 

arjuna uvaca

evam satata-yukta ye

bhaktas tvam paryupasate

ye capy aksharam avyaktam

tesham ke yoga-vittamah

 

TRANSLATION

Arjuna inquired: Which are considered to be more perfect, those who are always properly engaged in Your devotional service or those who worship the impersonal Brahman, the unmanifested?

-------------------

so yes, advaita is a valid path.

for some it is hard to understand

and it really could confuse some dvaitis.

 

so , the best way is that one stick with one sadhana.

-----

thanks for giving correct info about meera's guru.

 

current time is such dangerous for all the vedic people (HK's included) that it is really not smart to argue dvaita-advaita or this vs that sampradaya. unity is needed when the non-vedic enemy is at the door.

[Guest guest]

I was a dvaitin converted to an Advaitin. I see lot of misunderstanding about Advaita here in this forum. In Advaita mukti is synonymous with Brahman. As a famous Upanishad saying goes-

 

The Knower of Brahman becomes Brahman.

 

There is no fall for Brahman into the material world. Brahman is the Supreme, and so an Advaitin who achieves mukti does not come back to the world as Gaudiyas seem to think.

 

To say that mukti is possible only for a devotee of Krishna, and that too only if Krishna is worshipped in the Gopi style is incorrect. That is a myth being spread by ISKCON. The hindu dharma is called Sanatana Dharma. There are innumerable ways to attain God in that. The Gaudiyas are after all nothing but a small sect in hinduism. Iskcon people may not call themselves as hindus, but no one really takes that seriously as all their concepts are borrowed from hinduism alone.

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

TRANSLATION

Arjuna inquired: Which are considered to be more perfect, those who are always properly engaged in Your devotional service or those who worship the impersonal Brahman, the unmanifested?

-------------------

so yes, advaita is a valid path.

for some it is hard to understand

and it really could confuse some dvaitis.

 

 

I don't see how you have drawn your conclusion that Advaita is a valid path from the above verse. Just because Arjuna asked about it's veracity does not necessarily mean that it is bona fide. Actually the very fact that Arjuna even brought up this question to Krishna proves that he was in doubt about this issue, and thus brought it up for Krishna's clarification. And Krishna's conclusion is clear:

 

Chapter 12, Verse 2.

The Blessed Lord said: He whose mind is fixed on My personal form, always engaged in worshiping Me with great and transcendental faith, is considered by Me to be most perfect.

 

Chapter 12, Verse 3-4.

But those who fully worship the unmanifested, that which lies beyond the perception of the senses, the all-pervading, inconceivable, fixed and immovable--the impersonal conception of the Absolute Truth--by controlling the various senses and being equally disposed to everyone, such persons, engaged in the welfare of all, at last achieve Me.

 

Chapter 12, Verse 5.

For those whose minds are attached to the unmanifested, impersonal feature of the Supreme, advancement is very troublesome. To make progress in that discipline is always difficult for those who are embodied.

 

Chapter 12, Verse 6-7.

For one who worships Me, giving up all his activities unto Me and being devoted to Me without deviation, engaged in devotional service and always meditating upon Me, who has fixed his mind upon Me, O son of Prtha, for him I am the swift deliverer from the ocean of birth and death.

 

Chapter 12, Verse 8.

Just fix your mind upon Me, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and engage all your intelligence in Me. Thus you will live in Me always, without a doubt.

 

Also, I don't see how dvaitins would find it hard to understand Advaita, because Advaita is not bona fide. Advaita is based on a speculative and exaggerated interpretation of the Vedanta-sutra. It is not at all confusing to those who are knowers of the truth. It is only confusing for those who follow it, perhaps.

 

 

current time is such dangerous for all the vedic people (HK's included) that it is really not smart to argue dvaita-advaita or this vs that sampradaya. unity is needed when the non-vedic enemy is at the door.

 

 

Yes we have seen that you have been repeating this same sentiment time and again with vague references to the "Islamic enemy," but nobody else sees an immediate threat, especially from Islam.

The topic of Dvaita vs. Advaita has been going on from time immemorial and will continue to do so.

 

Also, please remember that this is not a thread about Dvaita or Advaita. This is about Meerabai. If you would like to discuss the rivalry between Dvaita and Advaita, then please open a new thread and we will discuss it there instead of deviating this thread.