Meerabai

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

I was a dvaitin converted to an Advaitin.

 

 

I really don't see how this can be possible...

 

Isn't Dvaita the mere opposite of Advaita?

 

Such misperception is one of the reasons why some reject the use of 'Dvaita' to refer to the doctrine of Tattvavâda. While it is true that Advaita and Tattvavâda have had many debates over hundreds of years, and that the latter denies the jagan-mithyatva (illusory nature of the universe) that is one of the fundamental tenets of Advaita, it is certainly not the case that there is disagreement everywhere, nor is it the case that one can derive Tattvavâda merely by taking the opposite of everything claimed by Advaita. But it can be said with full certainty that on most fundamental issues such as the nature of Îshvara, jîva, attainment of mukti, etc., the two have total and irreconcilable differences.

 

Isn't Dvaita the first step towards learning Advaita?

 

If it is, then it is a quite large, reverse, first step! While adherents of Advaita say that by nature and everyday experience one believes in the reality of the universe, etc., and that such belief must be got rid if one is to attain complete union with the nirguNa-Brahman, no serious scholar of Advaita claims that studying Tattvavâda is a first step towards learning Advaita. For one thing, it is a rule of all learning that things learned first must not contradict things learned later; for another, Tattvavâda specifically examines and denounces many Advaita concepts, and hence, one who has learned Tattvavâda first cannot possibly accept Advaita later. In fact Advaita has not built up a credible system of analysis where the pûrva paksha or the initial proposition of Tattvavâda is examined and rejected thereby establishing Advaita. The exact reverse obtains today. - http://www.dvaita.org/faq.shtml

 

...but each to their own.

 

 

In Advaita mukti is synonymous with Brahman. As a famous Upanishad saying goes- The Knower of Brahman becomes Brahman.

 

 

Well this is exactly my point. Different sampradayas have different definitions of mukti. Mukti does not necessarily mean a merging of individuality into the "Supreme Source."

 

Also, this Upanishadic saying that you have quoted, it's highly interesting how the FAQ on the official Advaita website insists on a metaphorical treatment of this verse. this suggests that even Advaitins do not take their own precepts seriously.

 

 

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.

 

 

You are forgetting that mergence in God is not approved of by God. Besides that, you have quoted no scriptural proof to suggest that an achiever of mukti will not fall, while there are ample references that indicate that they do fall.

 

 

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.

 

 

Well, where did you get this information? Nobody said that mukti is possible only for devotees of Krishna, and especially those in gopi-bhava. I have already stated above that each sampradaya has a different definition of mukti, and further to this we can even say that there are different states of mukti. The "mukti" that is attained by a Gaudiya Vaishnava in madhurya-rasa is indeed the topmost, and there are numerous shastric quotes to this effect.

 

 

The hindu dharma is called Sanatana Dharma.There are innumerable ways to attain God in that.

 

 

With all due respect, you have spoken incorrectly here. There is only Sanatana-dharma, not "Hindu dharma." There is no such thing as Hindu-dharma. Only in the watered-down corrupt form of "Hinduism" that we see all around s today can it be said that there are innumerable ways to attain God, and this is factually incorrect in itself. Bhagavad-gita makes it clear that the Lord is attained by devotion alone.

 

 

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.

 

 

Well, perhaps only you may not take that seriously, but many others do. If many Gaudiya concepts are borrowed from "Hinduism," then how do you explain why no demigods are worshipped? Why are sraddha ceremonies not performed? Why is there no tantrik rituals?

 

I gather you understand my point.

 

Furthermore, allow me to remind you that we are discussing Meerabai here. If it is required, we can open a new discussion thread and discuss the topic of Dvaita or whatever, there.

[Guest guest]

 

 

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

 

 

Vaishnava dasa,

 

Anyone can make such sweeping statements. Please allow me to demonstrate.

 

ISKCON philosophy is not bona fide. It is based on wild and fanciful concoctions by the early goswamis and has been passively accepted by a credulous section of people, who are generally ignorant about the Vedas.

 

There...that was easy !

 

(shvu here...forgot to login)

Cheers

 

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

Anyone can make such sweeping statements. Please allow me to demonstrate.

 

ISKCON philosophy is not bona fide. It is based on wild and fanciful concoctions by the early goswamis and has been passively accepted by a credulous section of people, who are generally ignorant about the Vedas.

 

 

Well, this is only your opinion. You have not produced even one single example of the "wild and fanciful" concoctions of the Goswamis, neither have you explained how such followers are ignorant of the Vedas.

 

Are you knowledgeable about Vedas? If so, please demonstrate.

[Guest guest]

 

 

Well, this is only your opinion.

 

 

And your denigration of Advaita is what? A proven fact? I am playing your game here.

 

You can check out the 'is advaita a geuine tradition?' thread started by Karthik a few months back. It will save us a lot of redundant typing.

 

Cheers

 

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

And your denigration of Advaita is what? A proven fact? I am playing your game here.

 

 

Well, for me it is a proven fact. I used to be an Advaitin and I realised it's inherent fallacies by direct experience. I discovered that belief in Advaita simply confounds confusion, and brings up more questions than answers.

 

 

You can check out the 'is advaita a geuine tradition?' thread started by Karthik a few months back. It will save us a lot of redundant typing.

 

 

I did read it, and found nothing in there that could change my opinion.

[Guest guest]

 

 

Well, for me it is a proven fact. I used to be an Advaitin and I realised it's inherent fallacies by direct experience. I discovered that belief in Advaita simply confounds confusion, and brings up more questions than answers.

 

 

That is your opinion again. There are plenty of Advaitins who are perfectly happy with Advaita with no confusion, whatsoever. Perhaps, you did not get to learn Advaita in a proper way. Anyway, IMO, different people have different predispositions and accordingly, their beliefs vary. So, if some people are confused with Advaita, it is not a problem.

 

Coming to iskcon, the simple point that iskcon claims a reverse order [Vishnu emanates from Krishna], thus directly contradicting the Mahabharatha and the Vishnu Purana is enough for me to reject it's validity. Other spurious claims such as the divinity of Chaitanya, etc only strengthen my case. btw, I am not out to start a fresh argument on these topics, for they have already been discussed here more than once.

 

Cheers

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

There are plenty of Advaitins who are perfectly happy with Advaita with no confusion, whatsoever.

 

 

I was also relatively happy when I was an Advaitin, what does that prove? I grew a brain and used it to think. They may think that they are happy, but one day ... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

 

Perhaps, you did not get to learn Advaita in a proper way.

 

 

I learnt Advaita from the texts of numerous Advaitic leader including Sankara.

 

 

Coming to iskcon, the simple point that iskcon claims a reverse order [Vishnu emanates from Krishna], thus directly contradicting the Mahabharatha and the Vishnu Purana is enough for me to reject it's validity. Other spurious claims such as the divinity of Chaitanya, etc only strengthen my case. btw, I am not out to start a fresh argument on these topics, for they have already been discussed here more than once.

 

 

Right, then don't. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[akila]

it is very much true that meera met sri jiva goswami

she said that she knows only one man and that in krsna

all others are gopis.

he is govindam adi purusam

[Sirona]

Meera gave up all her privileges and her family bonds to live for Krishna. A very cute story and IMHO a brilliant example of intense love for God. Still, some of you guys don't seem to like her. I don't understand that and I'll keep my mouth shut on things I don't understand. Still, I'd be curious to learn what makes her so objectionable in some posters' eyes. I barely got that there are some incompatible philosophical ideas or so but I'm not used to all those complicated Sanskrit terms. Anyone, a plain and simple explanation please: Why do you think something is wrong with her?

[Enlightened]

It takes guts for any one to leave her kingdom and devote everything to selfless action.....

 

besides, she was a woman and women in India at that time didn't have as many rights as they do now.

 

But couldn't she have done more if she stayed at home and glorified krishna across the land by political stimulation among the public?

 

Oh well, anyway, i didn't know meerabai until my arrival to america... Ironic isn't it.. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

However, I did see her picture before because we used to use a champoo named "Meera" and it had her holding a sitar.

/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[livingentity]

 

Mirabai worships Lord Krsna

[livingentity]

[Enlightened]

The pictures are so awesome! they are so incredible/images/graemlins/smile.gif !!!

 

 

I love it!

 

thanks /images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

Oh yeah, I love the one where krishna is hugging Chaitanya, it is so cool !

 

[Guest guest]

why you guessed He is hugging chaitanya?

 

this is the first time i saw such a piacture in relation to mira. usually a picture depicts a psttime.

if a picure does not show pastime, then it is just imagination of the artist.

 

jai sri prabhupada!

 

 

[livingentity]

is it possible for you to stop being so d... negative and not rain on everybody's parade?

[Guest guest]

dear sister,

 

you see the guests's comment negative,

but i see some jealousy in the mind of the aritst

or whoever paid the artist to make the picture

in which 'chaitanya hugs krishna'.

 

let me explain:

 

mira was a devotee. her bhakti was prema lakshana bhakti.

she did not start a sampradaya after her.

chaitanya did.

his followers made an organization.

like islam, they mostly say, "only we are right. only chaitanya is to be worshipped. chaitanya charitamrita is higher than gita., etc."

 

there is a historical event about mira.

 

when she went to vrindavan, jiva goswami was there.

so, she respectfully sent a message to him that she desires to meet him. jiva goswami sent a reply, " i do not meet with women."

 

Mira: "Oh, i thought only krishna is purush in vrindavan. i certainly would like to see another purush."

 

jiva goswami immediately came to meera and bowed down to her. both were in ecstacy.

 

when i told this to a hare krishna leader, he said this is meant to lower jiva goswami's position and he does not believe it.

 

well, if history books say it is wrong, then i would not believe it. but there is no need to be jealous about other exalted devotees of the equal or excel chainya's followers.

krishna is no one's monopoly.

 

this same jealously has motivated some one to make a picture of mira worshipping krishna and chaitanya hugging krishna.

 

or, it is not chaitanya. but then the real pastime history should be revealed about the picture. a free lance artist is just as bad and one who concocts.

 

an artist need to follow instructions from a true goswami when he makes pictures. else it (the mentality) is no diferent than a muslim artist - hassan - in india who painted saraswati devi in nude. (see, he did not choose to paint pedofile mohammed in nude. he chose saraswati. raskal!)

 

the artists have to reveal the truth as reaalized by great devotees/goswamis in their art work.

 

jai sri prabhupada!

 

 

[Guest guest]

the forum software now has revealed my past user name - madhav.

 

i had chosen not to come here once because of disagreements, but continued to come here as 'guest' for satsanga and communiacte.

 

so now, am i tolerated or hated, welcomed or rejected?

 

should i really leave?

 

jai sri prabhupada!

jai sri krishna!

 

[Kishalaya]

That picture of a woman worshipping the lila of "Gauraanga hugging Krishna" seems to be in a Bengali backdrop. Most probably, She is Srimati Vishnupriyaa Devi, the second wife of Sri Gauraanga (an educated guess).

 

As for traditional disdain of Miraa in Gaudiya tradition, as per the recent information I have gathered (much more browsed), there are primarily two reasons. (Please note, I am not speaking here as a Gaudiya vaishnava representative, I am only trying to present things which I opine to be statements of fact).

 

The lesser reason is that some quarters believe that her goal of spirituality was saayujya mukti, which again is sometimes grossly translated as "merging into Brahman" thus "trying to become one with Brahman" etc. As per Gaudiya tenets, aspirations for such mukti lead to total destruction (sarva-naash). Now how far it is true that Miraa wanted to "merge into Krishna", is an apt question. Personally, I have heard some songs attributed to Miraa which are dangerously close to "becoming one". However I do not know if she would sing in Sanskrit etc., so I find it difficult to attribute authorship of such poems to Miraa. Considering from the other side, it is a well known fact that a bhakta will never want to remove the distinction of mastership of His Lord and his position of being servant. As Hanumaana is traditionally assumed to say to Sri Raama, that He does not want such mukti where he is not His Lord's servant. When Sri Hari himself declares "tesaam satata yuktaanaam, bhajataam priti purvakam, dadami buddhi yogam tam yena maam upayanti te" - to an ekaantika devotee, The Lord Himself gives proper intelligence, I find it a bit difficult to accept that Miraa would indeed prefer kaivalya mukti above the sweetness of bhakti.

 

Second, and the primary reason. The most devout followers of Sri Gauraanga are in a mood of the manjaris - The hand maids of Her Lordship, Srimati Gaandharvikaa. The extent of their devotion towards Her Lordship goes to the extremity of even excluding the agenda of Sri Krishna. The only goal of their existence is the pleasure of Her Lordship. I would not be wrong, if I were to say that their devotion to Sri Krishna exists only because He is THE object of love of their Lady. They have no direct relationship with Sri Krishna, and such a thought amounts to blasphemy.

In this light, there are rumors that Miraa identified herself with Her Lordship -- this is sacrilege, maayaavaada -- arrogating the position of Brahman (Her Lordship) to a jiva (Miraa). Again, how far this is true of Miraa's own sentiments, needs to be found out and also if it was true initially (neophite stage), whether it remained true later? (Will Srimati Gaandharvikaa leave Vrindaavana and reside in Dvaarkaa???)

My likely guess is that Miraa's utterings about being Vraja gopi were expressions of emotions which were somewhat similar in nature to those of the gopis (not those of the manjaris i.e. tad-bhaava-icchaa-mayi, but of the sambhog-icchaa-mayi category). It is also noteworthy that after meeting with Srila Jiva Gosvami, she finally decided to reside in Dvaarkaa. Miraa strictly considered Sri Krishna to be her Husband, about which Srila Rupa Gosvaami writes that people with such sentiments, on achieving siddhi, go on to associate with the Mahiishis - the queens of Krishna in Dvaarkaa. However such a goal is considered by Srila Ruupa Gosvaami to be outside the purview of raagaanugaa bhakti and needs vaidhi saadhanaa. It is interesting to speculate that Miraa received the saadhanaa padhati from Srila Jiva Gosvaami and spent the rest of her life in a dhaama conducive to her mood of devotion.

 

Kishalaya

[srivats]

 

I think Krishna is happy to see you here , please stay.

 

Madhava Kesava Madhana Gopala !

 

Srivats

[Guest guest]

thanks srivats,

 

(perhaps you do not know, but srivats means 'my dear son'.

so it is kind of embarassing for me to say you srivats, unlesy ou are a small boy.)

 

i would come as madhav

when jndas and one more bhakta here can sincerely say i could come.

 

jai sri krishna!

 

[srivats]

haribol !

 

good to see you here , pls contiune with postings, you may light up knowledge in many ppl like me .

 

Here you started , i never know my name's meaning is dear son. So i can call myself as dear son to lord , haha .

as far as i know , Srivatsangam is the golden neckless which srinivasa wears.

 

And it also comes in Krishna Ashtakam which i read daily .

 

Madhava Kesava Madhana Gopala !

 

Srivats

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

what ever the bhagwatam might say about mukti for vaishnavas, but we must and have to acknowledge that meerabai was a highly evolved and realised soul. she was one of the greates devotees of krishna. the feelings and pain and devotio in her poem is of such high content and quality that even chaitanya and other devotees of krishna fall weak in front of her. the unfaltering love she had for krishna is an ideal to behold. she had reached a stage beyond bhukti mukti etc. she was in pure knowledge of her infinite form and so merged into the krishna , the infinite when she felt like.

[hare_krishna]

Meera Bai is a great example. She got adwaita mukti. I don't think there is somebody among us dwaitins who can claim to be a greater devotee than Meera Bai.

[theist]

 

what ever the bhagwatam might say about mukti for vaishnavas, but we must and have to acknowledge that meerabai was a highly evolved and realised soul. she wasone of the greates devotees of krishna. the feelings and pain and devotio in her poem is of such high content and quality that even chaitanya and other devotees of krishna fall weak in front of her. the unfaltering love she had for krishna is an ideal to behold. she had reached a stage beyond bhukti mukti etc. she was in pure knowledge of her infinite form and so merged into the krishna , the infinite when she felt like.

 

 

I don't know anything about Mira Bhai. But I have to question the above statement. Would you mind sharing where you learned that?

 

Also I have heard devotees never accept sayuja-mukti. They never desire to merge with Krsna losing awareness of the distiction. Takes two to have a loving relationship.

[hare_krishna]

I agree with guest. Mira Bai was a great devotee. Even a famous sanyasi in the sampradaya where Prabhupada belongs to met Meera Bai. As sanyasi he was not allowed to meet women, but he made an exception for Meera bai.