Mayavadi Philosophy

[LimitlessLight]

I speak not from theroretical knowledge but from actual realization of the infinite, permeating all I shine as self.It is hard for the impure mind to realize this truth it may take many lifetimes of purification for the attainment of clarity,yet once it is reached then the living krisna resides as the only reality that exists.Does anyone in this forum read the upanishads or the ancient texts on vedanta for they are the root of this current version of Krisna theory.If the student lacks clarity the master can do nothing but smile and say ok ok your right.Truly realized beings do not cater to the body identification nor do they dwell on this universe of form for they know all as self and therefore have no need to worship nor any need to serve an aspect of thier own being.

[LimitlessLight]

to say one must reach krisna conciousness is false one is krisnas conciousness there can be no division within krisnas conciousness all beings are filled with krisna conciousness it is by forgetfullness alone that the many suffer you forget you are krisna so you seek krisna its really sad.If you but rest in your eternal nature and enjoy the bliss of pure existence there will be no need for worship there will be no need to focus on what you think krisna is for you will be krisna as you already are it is folly to seek the self it is folly for the self to be immersed in the appearance.This unity cannot be broken this truth cannot be denied all who suffer are krisna all who do not suffer are krisna.This idea of krisna as other and dwelling on his holy planet is ego created and nothing more than the imagination of krisna.

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

does anyone know if guru nanak and the rest of the sikh gurus are mayavadis? coz from what i understand of sikhism, nanak calls his 'one true god' wahe guru formless and he respects krsna but doesnt accept krsna as the 'one true god' wahe guru

 

to me this looks similar to the mayavadi 'saguna brahman' theory where their definition of saguna brahman is basically 'personal god w/ form' who they respect but ultimatley reject as in the sikh case if my understaing of it is correct

 

 

Sikhs do have plenty of their own sastric support enough to regard themselves as a branch of Vaishnavism. However, there are also (I hear) certain prayers that speak of the death of Vishnu. I will have to check this out because the Sikh sasta (Sri Guru Granth Sahib) is a compilation of the hymns of many saints of that time including Kabir, who was known for his temperament.

 

Also, I reckon that the understanding if 'formless' in the Sikh way is more or less the same as is understood in the Gaudiya way, formless really menaing having no material form but accepting the existence of a spiritual form.

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

ou cant seem to understand it is not a matter of realizing some personal form of god this is false doctrine created by egoistic minds that cant concieve of an ultimate that doesnt need and desire worship i would go as far as to say it is ludicrouse and somewhat repugnant for people to sit around serving this illusive krisna.

 

 

On the contrary, it is Krishna Himself who is the founder of this ludicrous and repugnant 'personal philosophy.' I suppose you are now going to argue that Krishna had an egoistic mind?

In strict contrast, it is the impersonal philosophy that is worthy to be decried as we know from Padma Purana that it is a cheating philosophy.

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

it is just that there is so much falsity going on in respect to religion and religios practices it just seems that people just want to feel good and that the end all is with this supreme personality, as a servant it is kinda silly on some levels for the children to serve the parent like a lord it makes absolutely no sense and in the long run cannot be the actual state of the universe.

 

 

Well we already know that the current appearance of falsity in the name of religion is fully embodied in the philosophy of Advaita.

 

Furthermore, as stated earlier, Krishna Himself is the origin of the idea that the jivas are His eternal fragmental parts. The tininess of the jiva is testimony to it's serving duty. This is exemplified in the quote from CC: 'Jivera svarupa haya, krsnera nitya-dasa' - The constitutional position of the jiva is to be an eternal servant of Krishna.

 

Get it? This is your constitutional position. There's no way you can get away from it. You may delay and hang out in the brahmajyoti for a while, but it will never last because your status is that of an ETERNAL servant.

 

As for the actual state of the universe, what exactly do you wish to convery here? Is there a danger of this topic getting astronomical? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

You are obviosly the owner of incomplete knowledge this bramhajyoti you speak of is the living Krisna within all appearance and the realization of the divine within all is the ultimate reality no sage would dispute this but I think you might lol.

 

 

Of course we will dispute it. Isn't that hilarious?

 

Pray tell, which sage are you referring to who might be at odds with personalistic philosophy?

 

As for incomplete knowledge, that Srimad Bhagavatam clearly stated that God is to be realised in three states; Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagavan. It is clear from this that you are talking only of Brahman-realisation, and hinting at Paramatma realisation too, but you evidently have no knowledge of the Bhagavan-realisation and yet you are touting the lower two as all-in-all! Why? And what evidence do you have to support this?

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

I speak not from theroretical knowledge but from actual realization of the infinite, permeating all I shine as self.It is hard for the impure mind to realize this truth it may take many lifetimes of purification for the attainment of clarity,yet once it is reached then the living krisna resides as the only reality that exists.

 

 

Sorry, we do not accept people's personal experiences here. I am not interested in verifying the genuineness of your "experience," because it is by itself extremly biased. Pratyaksha is to be sufficiently accompanied with anumana and sabda. And of course, how do you know if what you perceived is correct? So let us stick to evidence with which everybody can easily consult without resorting to spurious claims of "enlightenment" that is an obvious disadvantage for others.

 

 

Does anyone in this forum read the upanishads or the ancient texts on vedanta for they are the root of this current version of Krisna theory.

 

 

If you noticed, a rather large section of the Isa Upanishad was posted above. The final verses of that Upanishad clearly state that God is a personal being behind His own effulgence. Thus it is foolish to think that the effulgence is all that needs to be realised, or seen, or whatever.

 

Apart from that, Gaudiya Vaishnavas concentrate largely on Srimad Bhagavatam, which is pramanam-amalam; the spotless evidence.

 

 

to say one must reach krisna conciousness is false one is krisnas conciousness there can be no division within krisnas conciousness all beings are filled with krisna conciousness it is by forgetfullness alone that the many suffer you forget you are krisna so you seek krisna its really sad.

 

 

You are only partially correct. It is true that living entities have forgotten their Krishna Consciousness and is almost hopelessly revolving in samsara. By the association and enlightenment gained froma bona-fide guru, the living entity can once again enter the state of Pure Krishna Consciousness in consonance with their eternal identity as a servant of Krishna, not that we are Krishna. This idea is incorrect.

 

Also, you would do well to provide some sastric evidence of your position instead of expecting us to accept whatever you say.

[Guest guest]

"Prabhupada warns us many many times to beware of this Mayavadi philosophy - to avoid this poison".

 

Hmmm is that so !!

 

a) Why then Chaitanya Mahaprabhu accepted sanyasa in the the Advaita sampradaya from Kesava Bharati

 

b) Why Chaitanya accepted the advaita commentary on the Srimad Bhagavatam by Sridhara Swami, who accepted Sankara advaita as ultimate authority.

 

c) Why did Chaitanya preach the advaitic achintya bedhabedha (one and different), this is in conflict with Madhava's dvaita (different). After all the Gaudiyas claim lineage to Madhava ... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

 

[livingentity]

Are you trying to say that Srila Prabhupada did not warn us to avoid the poison of MP? If so, then you need to sit down and read any of His books, letters or listen to His lectures. Srila Prabhupada warns us many many times over.

 

While it is true that Lord Caitanya accepted sannyasa from a mayavadi (which is why He is seen in a short doiti in paintings) - He also defeated the mayavadi sannyasi and they converted. Please refer to the Cc or Teachings of Lord Caitanya.

 

Someone with more time and knowledge will help to fill in the gaps.

[Guest guest]

Are you trying to say that Srila Prabhupada did not warn us to avoid the poison of MP? If so, then you need to sit down and read any of His books, letters or listen to His lectures .Srila Prabhupada warns us many many times over".

 

I have read his books and I am aware that he considers Advaita commentaries to milk touched by a serpent.

 

"While it is true that Lord Caitanya accepted sannyasa from a mayavadi He also defeated the mayavadi sannyasi and they converted. Please refer to the Cc or Teachings of Lord Caitanya"

 

You agree Chaintanya is a mayavada sanyasi, then his so called defeating and converting the mayavadi sanyasis is a contradiction.

 

Or is it that Chaitanya was defeated by Kesava Bharati who then initiated him into the gopal-mantra and the worship of Radha and Krsna.

 

Also tell me how you reconcile Prabhupada's warning on reading Advaita commentaries with Chaitanya's acceptence of Sridhara swami's advaita commentary of the Srimad Bhagavatam ?

 

"(which is why He is seen in a short doiti in paintings)"

Why are the Gaudiya sanyasis followers of Chaitanya not wearing short lungis ....

 

"Someone with more time and knowledge will help to fill in the gaps"

 

Yes, please ......

[LimitlessLight]

I hate to get all serious on you guys but really your knowledge of advaita is pathetic you should refrain from any comment on it till you have done more reading and less talking.As for your view of it being an impersonal belief that is very far from true what could be more personal than realizing the unity of all existence all energy as one living self as it is said, the vedas and the upanishads are the breath of the eternal and were not these written by realized sages.So I ask who was the Eternal The eternal is dwelling within all as self and all realized beings are Light within light.If you see other know other smell other then you cannot know the self for the self lies beyong duplicity.One undifferentiated eternal concioussness. I will even go further to refute your ignorant statements that the vedantic teachings are impersonal. Atman meaning the breath and or life force wich is permeating all is by no means impersonal as it is inhabiting all forms enjoying all things and still never for a moment changing.being attached to the modifications of the mind the many become obsessed with meditation and service all the while forgetting thier trancendental nature.If you cannot see how personal and how compassionate the sages that wrote the upanishads were then i pity what you call wisdom and wonder at any religious teacher that tells his students to avoid the base texts of his own religion.i am thinking it is silly to avoid a philosophy bacause srila said it i mean come on people accept some personal responsability for your liberation i fear you may have been mislead.I know dark thoughts are probably running through your heads and i forgive you your anger and wish you nothing but ultimate truth wich is in every word of the upanishads.If by chance i have offended you it is only due to your ignorance for the wise cannot be offended by words nor blades nor the imaginary gods the wise reside within the self as self this is absolute truth i pity any who cannot at once realize this and break free of the dream you call service.All is atman atman is all three stages to realize god lol.

it is not for the sake of the husband that the husband is loved it is for the sake of the self.

may all know this manifold universe is the essence and existence of one light that light is atman the light by wich you percieve the light.Freedom is ever attained one cannot think i am a finite being serving an infinite god and thus trancend the attachment to this world one must realize that this world is nothing but light and this body is light and this universe is light and it is one I am most serious and most sincere this is reality beyond maya ain soph limitless light infinite conciousness it is everywere this moment you dwelling as self how can you not see all this is self.I am sure none of you will get this far into my post but if you have then you have probably realized im not trying to pass of some false mayavadi . im talking from actual experience and if you dont believe in my eternal nature then ive got bad news for you your destroying your own hope for liberation for we are one.I am infinite light all this time i was duped into thinking i was a body but now awaked from body conciousness i have attained my own nature wich is the unborn formless self effulgent infinite atman residing within all as the heart of the lotus.

 

Alll praises to the atman that even though it maintains the infinite universes it is never discouraged when the jivas deny his existence and call him impersonal.Well i hope and sincerely wish you would think about what ive said and if i was not clear then go back and reread teh upanishads and see for yourself if i am lying or modifying the teachings of the immortals.All praises be to those that have reached atman and still choose to speak to mortals.It is painfull and ardouse to say the least infinite patience infinite atman.I crack myself up cant wait for your replys,if you give any i read them very carfully to try and understand why you reject the advaita sytem that is the most perfect system of thought and trancendence on this planet but dont take my word for it.I cannot win i cannot lose all is self many blessings.goodnight my friends i hope you recieve this with open hearts and smiles on your faces you are the infinite atman like it or not i see it shinning within and without you it is pure bliss just under the suface its there just waiting to be noticed the moment is complete i seek nothing .OOOOOmmmmmmm mani padme hum

[leyh]

Dear Limitless Light:

 

In one of your posts, you wrote the following words:

 

"to say one must reach krisna conciousness is false one is krisnas conciousness there can be no division within krisnas conciousness all beings are filled with krisna conciousness it is by forgetfullness alone that the many suffer you forget you are krisna so you seek krisna its really sad."

 

I respectfully beg to inform that you have simply misunderstood Krsna Consciousness. Krsna is not non-different from the living entities. I write this not on the basis of my own opinion, bit on the authority of Krsna's words:

 

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." (Bhagavad-gita 9.4)

 

If I and all the other living entites are Krsna, then why does Krsna say in the above verse that He is distinct from all beings?

 

You also wrote in your last post: "if you give any i read them very carfully to try and understand why you reject the advaita sytem that is the most perfect system of thought and trancendence on this planet but dont take my word for it."

 

Krsna considers Bhakti Yoga to be most perfect ("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." --- Bhagavad-gita 12.2) and I'd rather take His word for it. Anyway, Advaita sounds boring to me. Who wants to be one with everything when one has the opportunity to dance, sing and play with Radha, Krsna and Their friends in Vrindavana Goloka? You can take Adavita. I'll take Krsna anyday.

[Vaishnava_das108]

Either you are jijaji or satyaraj.

 

In any case, I have no wish to reply to your questions for two reasons:

 

1 - They have been answered elsewhere and are gone-cases.

 

2 - You are just here to cause conflict and not at all interested in a discussion.

[Kishalaya]

Have u seen this limitless light:

 

avajananti mam mudha

manusim tanum asritam

param bhavam ajananto

mama bhuta-mahesvaram

 

Fools consider me to have taken shelter of a human form.

They do not know the superior nature that I am the Lord of everything.

[Kishalaya]

avyaktam vyaktim apannam

manyante mam abuddhayah

param bhavam ajananto

mamavyayam anuttamam

 

Fools think I was unmanifest before and have taken from

now. They do not know that I am inexhaustible and the

finest.

[Kishalaya]

1. om namah

sac-cid-ananda-rupaya

krsnayaklista-karine

namo vedanta-vedyaya

gurave buddhi-saksine

 

Mayavadis are great proponents that Brahman assumes form

with the help of maya and such form is lower than the

unmanifest. There is no difference between Krishna and his

body/form. here it is clearly said, "SAT CIT ANANDA RUPAAYA"

 

112. om yo’sau param brahma gopala om tat sad bhur bhuvah

svas tasmai vai namo namah

 

"PARAM BRAHMA GOPALA".

 

Full Text can be found in

http://www.gosai.com/chaitanya/saranagati/html/vedic-upanisads/gopala-tapani-upanisad.html

 

The following of the PARAM BRAHMA does not look to be too

much of unmanifest?

 

40. namo vinnana-rupaya

paramananda-rupine

krsnaya gopinathaya

govindaya namo namah

 

41. namah kamala-netraya

namah kamala-maline

namah kamala-nabhaya

kamala-pataye namah

 

Gopal Tapani Upanishad has explicit description of This

Param Brahman's form, pastimes and home/planet etc.

[dhaa]

http://kamakoti.org/shlokas/kshlok16.htm

 

pandurangastaka by Jagadguru Sankaracarya

 

parabrahma lingam bhaje pandurangam

[paul108]

You are a pretender. What is this talk you are making of praising atman, advaita, etc.? If you understood advaita, you would find nothing to praise or criticise, nor would you be moved by others praise or criticism of you. As Vasistha said, a jnani feels the same sensation whether contacting a beautiful woman or sharp weapons.

 

I studied advaita philosophy, and pursued it through rajayoga and following the teachings of Ramana Maharshi, Nisargadatta Maharaj, et. al. I read Vasistha's Yoga seven times. Every morning upon awaking, I thought I was seeing another dream. I located the self in my heart, and I became acquainted with samadhi. These experiences mean nothing to me any more.

 

Several years ago I found Bhagavad-gita As It Is in a used bookstore. I took it home and tried to understand it through my advaita glasses, but I could not. Yet I could not abandon it. After a few days, I invited Krishna to help me. I wanted to know whether to stick with Vasistha's Yoga, or to continue to try to understand Bhagavad-gita As It Is. Two days later He appeared out of a painting of Himself, and gave me a class in Bhagavad-gita. The first thing He did was to laugh heartily, and say, "You think you are a yogi?" Then He said, "You want to know samadhi?" Suddenly I was immersed in realization of the impersonal aspect of the Absolute Truth. Then I was back, and He said, "Prema." Immediately I forgot everything else and felt pure, infinite love of Krishna. At that moment I knew Him to be the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but whether He was God or not didn't matter at all. I just loved Him to no limit. He then proceeded to instruct me in a variety of topics of Bhagavad-gita, and when He was finished He left my awareness, with a few instructions to guide me. The next day I did not remember seeing Krishna, but I remembered His instructions, and taking them to heart I am becoming increasingly fond of His lotus feet.

 

I have never cared for advaita philosophy after that. But I do recognize pretenders.

 

Hari bol.

 

 

[Vaishnava_das108]

What a lovely experience, Paul. You were so fortunate to see Krishna and experience all those things, prema etc. I pray one day He might show mercy on this silly sinful soul.

[Vaishnava_das108]

 

I hate to get all serious on you guys but really your knowledge of advaita is pathetic you should refrain from any comment on it till you have done more reading and less talking.

 

 

Well as far as I can see, several people here including myself are either quoting sastra or the commentary of Sri Guru to back up their points. On the contrary, you have been repeatedly asked to back up your points with sastric quotes but you have not done so. Also, you should realise that several people here including myself are ex-Advaitins, so it remains to be seen how 'pathetic' is the knowledge that we have gained and subsequently rejected. Reading more what? Which kind of books are you talking about? You haven't even given a sample title.

 

 

As for your view of it being an impersonal belief that is very far from true what could be more personal than realizing the unity of all existence all energy as one living self as it is said the vedas and the upanishads are the breath of the eternal and were not these written by realized sages.So I ask who was the Eternal The eternal is dwelling within all as self and all realized beings are Light within light.

 

 

So we should think about "light within light"? I thought light was one? How can there be a light within light? /images/graemlins/wink.gif Aside from that, how is a realisation of "light" personal? The very meaning of 'personalism' is to interact with a Person, or some sort of living being. Light is neither embodied nor is it a living thing, so will you kindly explain to me how I can have a personal relationship with light? How will I love it, stroke it, caress it, talk to it, etc? Will it love me in return? It is plainly obvious that a "realisation of light" the Brahman effulgence is an impersonal realisation. We don't even need sastra for this, it is just common sense.

 

 

I will even go further to refute your ignorant statements that the vedantic teachings are impersonal.

 

 

Have you even read the entire Vedanta-sutra text? Do you know how to explain each and every sutra clearly? How can you say it is impersonal or personal? I don't think you have even read the text. Have you, I am asking?

 

 

If you cannot see how personal and how compassionate the sages that wrote the upanishads were then i pity what you call wisdom and wonder at any religious teacher that tells his students to avoid the base texts of his own religion.i am thinking it is silly to avoid a philosophy bacause srila said it i mean come on people accept some personal responsability for your liberation i fear you may have been mislead.

 

 

Well see, this is the thing we feel about followers of Advaitic philosophy, we fear that they are being mislead. It works both ways. /images/graemlins/smile.gif The reason being is that Advaitic philosophy is not in consonance with the sastras. Neither you nor anybody else has proved it. You still have to explain why you regard a 'manifestation of light' as all-in-all when there are clear sastric verses that completely refute this idea and specifically state that the Bhagavan-realisation is the topmost. Can you disprove this?

By the way, it was not 'Srila' who said any of this. Srila Prabhupada did talk a lot about this topic, but you should be interested to note that Krishna Himself discounted Advaita philosophy in Bhagavad-gita.

 

 

I crack myself up cant wait for your replys,if you give any i read them very carfully to try and understand why you reject the advaita sytem that is the most perfect system of thought and trancendence on this planet but dont take my word for it.I cannot win i cannot lose all is self many blessings.goodnight my friends i hope you recieve this with open hearts and smiles on your faces you are the infinite atman like it or not i see it shinning within and without you it is pure bliss just under the suface its there just waiting to be noticed the moment is complete i seek nothing .OOOOOmmmmmmm mani padme hum

 

 

Well, I didn't know what to reply to, because your entire post was full of unsubstantiated garble about 'Atman' and 'Light' or so many vague things that it was almost impossible to clearly understand any point that you were trying to make and yet keep it relevant to the general discussion.

 

We know that we are atman (souls), nobody is denying that. We also know that as tiny atmans, we must serve the whole, jivera-svarupa haya krsnera nitya-dasa, the constitutional position of the soul is to be the eternal servant of Krsna.

 

When we are serving Krsna perfectly, we will be possessed of a joyful heart and our faces will be radiant. But if we aspire to merge in the brahmajyoti effulgence (which is forbidden by Krishna) then we shall remain in that hellish state.