A dialogue between Jnana and Bhakti

[V Subrahmanian]

*Setting: A serene ashram garden where two seekers meet at sunset. Maya, a devotee following the bhakti path, sits in meditation near a small temple. Arun, a scholar of Vedanta focused on jnana, approaches and sits nearby.*

**Arun**: *observing Maya as she completes her devotional prayers* Your devotion has such genuine feeling. The way you relate to the divine... it's as though you're speaking to someone right here.

**Maya**: *smiling warmly* Because I am. The Divine is as present to me as you are, perhaps more so. *looking curiously* But I've seen you here before, always with your texts, contemplating deeply. Your path seems different from mine.

**Arun**: Yes, I follow jnana marga—the path of knowledge. I seek understanding through inquiry and discrimination, peeling away layers of illusion to realize what is eternally true.

**Maya**: And I follow my heart through bhakti. I find the Divine through love and surrender. *pauses* Some say our paths are contradictory.

**Arun**: *thoughtfully* Many do see it that way. The jnani seeks to transcend all forms to realize formless Brahman, while the bhakta embraces divine form and relationship. But I've come to wonder if they're truly separate paths.

**Maya**: I wonder the same. When I'm deepest in my devotion, something strange happens. The "I" that loves and the Divine that is loved... the boundary between them starts to dissolve.

**Arun**: *eyes widening with interest* That's fascinating. In my deepest inquiries, when I follow the thread of "Who am I?" to its source, I don't arrive at cold, abstract knowledge. There's a... fullness there. A completeness that feels like love.

**Maya**: Perhaps because love and knowing aren't truly separate? *picks a flower* When I truly love this flower, I'm paying complete attention to it. I'm knowing it, not intellectually, but with my whole being.

**Arun**: And when I truly know something—not just conceptually but directly—there's a natural appreciation, even reverence, that arises. The boundaries between knower and known thin out.

**Maya**: *nodding eagerly* Yes! When I pray to Krishna, sometimes I feel I'm looking through His eyes back at myself. The devotee and the object of devotion start to feel like two waves in the same ocean.

**Arun**: That's a beautiful way to express it. The Upanishads say "Tat Tvam Asi"—That Thou Art. The self and Brahman are one. But this isn't just an intellectual proposition; it's something to be realized.

**Maya**: *contemplative* In my tradition, there's a concept called prema—divine love in its purest form. When prema fully blossoms, they say the devotee and Krishna experience themselves in and as each other. Isn't that also non-duality?

**Arun**: It sounds very much like it. Perhaps true bhakti naturally leads to jnana, and true jnana blossoms into bhakti.

**Maya**: *looking at the setting sun* Think of the sun and its rays. The sun might represent Brahman or Krishna—the source—and the rays are the ways we approach it. Whether we study the nature of light or bask in its warmth, we're engaging with the same sun.

**Arun**: That's an illuminating metaphor. *smiles* There's another way to look at it. Jnana might be recognizing that you and the Divine are one ocean. Bhakti is delighting in the dance of the waves.

**Maya**: *laughs softly* I like that! The ocean doesn't negate the waves, and the waves don't diminish the ocean. They're expressions of the same reality.

**Arun**: *nodding* And there's something else I've noticed. Jnana alone can become dry and conceptual without the heart engagement of bhakti. The knowledge might be there, but it doesn't transform you completely.

**Maya**: Yes! And bhakti without some element of jnana can sometimes get caught in superstition or attachment to particular forms rather than the essence behind them.

**Arun**: *thoughtfully* Perhaps they're like two wings of a bird. You need both to truly soar.

**Maya**: *picking up a small Krishna murti* When I look at this form of Krishna, I'm not just seeing a deity separate from me. I'm recognizing something of my own essential nature reflected back at me—consciousness, bliss, love.

**Arun**: And when I meditate on the mahavakyas, the great sayings like "Aham Brahmasmi"—I am Brahman—it's not a cold intellectual exercise. There's a profound sense of connection, an overwhelming... *searches for words*

**Maya**: Love?

**Arun**: *smiles* Yes, love. Not separate from knowledge but its very essence.

**Maya**: *looks at the first stars appearing* The gopis in the Bhagavatam reach Krishna through pure love, not philosophical knowledge. Yet they experience the highest truth.

**Arun**: And many jnanis speak of surrender—a quintessential bhakti quality—as essential for final realization. Even Shankaracharya composed beautiful devotional hymns.

**Maya**: *nodding* And Ramana Maharshi, though teaching self-inquiry, embodied tremendous devotion. Perhaps at their heights, jnana and bhakti become indistinguishable.

**Arun**: Like rivers with different sources meeting in the same ocean.

**Maya**: *gesturing to the space between them* Maybe that's why we're having this conversation. To remind each other of what our paths share.

**Arun**: *smiling warmly* Truth expresses itself through both wisdom and love. Whatever path we walk, the destination illuminates both the head and heart.

**Maya**: *places the Krishna murti between them* When I look deeply into the eyes of the Beloved, I see Brahman looking back. When you realize your true nature, do you not find love there?

**Arun**: *with deep sincerity* Always. In that speechless recognition, love and knowing are one movement of consciousness.

*As night falls completely, they sit in comfortable silence, the boundaries between their paths dissolving like stars reflecting in still water—different lights revealing the same vast sky.*

[V Subrahmanian]

On Fri, Apr 4, 2025 at 10:50 PM Harsh Raval <hardyr...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Subrahmanian jii,

Shri Radhe🙏,

My heart is so full after reading this conversation between two aspirants of bhakti and gyaan. 

But sometimes on reading  Advaita shastras the prema for ishwara dimishes and mind gets indulged in confusion.

For eg. PANCHDASI-6.236. Maya is said to be the desire-fulfilling cow. Jiva and Ishvara are its two calves. Drink of its milk of duality as much as you like, but the truth is non-duality. 

Here ishwara is considered to be under maya.

 Panchdasi 1.16 says- Brahman, reflected in Maya, is known as the omniscient Isvara, who controls Maya.

And here maya is considered to be under ishwara.

How to resolve such conflicts?

Dear Harsh ji,

Supposing there is a Commissioner of Prisons, an IAS officer.  For logistical reasons his office is located inside a sprawling Central Prison premises.  When he is in his office, a relative calls up his house and enquires where this officer is.  His wife answers: He is in the prison.

Supposing there is a criminal in the same prison serving a five-year term.  HIs relative, not in contact with this criminal/prisoner's family for a long time, calls up his house and asks where this man is.  His wife answers:  He is in the prison.

Now, both the answers are facts.  Yet they have a world of difference between them.  Similar is the case with Ishwara and the bound jivas coexisting in the realm of Maya.

Thus, there is no question of Ishwara being under the illusion of duality according to Advaita. 

warm regards

subbu

Thanks,

Harsh Raval

_______________________________________________
Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/

To unsubscribe or change your options:
https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l

For assistance, contact:
listm...@advaita-vedanta.org

[putran M]

Namaskaram Raval-ji

I am seeing Subbu-ji's reply to your mail in the "advaitin" list.

This confusion is a common problem for many of us trying to follow advaita. Even if we can intellectually satisfy ourselves otherwise, we may still find the difficulty at the practical level when studying and trying to align to shastras that talk of an ultimate truth beyond duality. Because the jiva-Ishvara dvaita bhava is only real if the bheda between jiva and Ishvara is real; and Advaita says bluntly this bheda is not real: it is mithya, adhyasa, avidya.  

So, that is a problem for us; we find ourselves asking "Isn't bhakti to Ishvara then just fooling ourselves since it is all based on an imagination anyway?" That dissuades us from emphasizing Ishvara in our daily life and we keep trying to bypass Him and orient ourselves to the non-duality of Self. 

The mistake here is that the ajnani who (lets say) over-does this will become inconsistent in his life and also opposed to the guidance of the Vedic tradition. His emphasis on non-duality is always emphatic only when it comes to Ishvara and not to his bank account, wife and children, or his body when it shows the least signs of sickness. At one moment he is Brahman and the next he is pulled by cricket, cinema and politics, only to later explain it all away through advaita! He goes round and round, knowingly and unknowingly.

At the least we have to acknowledge this predicament, come to some conclusion over what the tradition actually teaches (or, as taught by a guru), then decide if we want to strive to be consistent with that tradition, or if we want to simply go "Wild West" on our own. We will get what we deserve either way. Ishvara will give the right phala for our choices and present the choice between sreyas and preyas at every turn - whether we think of Him or not! 

Now, let me present some of my understanding on the traditional approach to Ishvara and bhakti. There is probably room for debate on this within advaita circles (like SDV vs DSV) on some of this. From what I understand, the Leela or kalpita in Consciousness that constitutes our world of experience comes in a package of Three dimensions: the jiva, jagat and Ishvara, all three of which are mutually and correspondingly real as each other. 

So long as there is a jivatvam, there is a corresponding Ishvaratvam that has to be acknowledged by this "jiva", and this acknowledgment is according to the relationship of bhakti. That is the dharma of this Leela abiding by which the jiva will be led by his Ishvara from dvaita-bhakti towards Him to advaita-bhakti where he sees All in/as Him, finally culminating in the advaitic jnana of tattvamasi/aham-brahmaasmi. Till jivatvam is extinguished, Ishvara is correspondingly real and to be acknowledged as such.

So when a jiva says "I am a man. This is my wife and this my mother" but then also says, "The devatas and avataras, the pitrus, etc. are just imaginary props to help us in our spiritual growth. So also all the japa and rituals to deities or worship of Them in temples." - then that is wrong (at least, according to a traditional position). If you identify at a body level, then Ishvara's Leela or manifestation includes all these other things and beings, and there is validity to the karma, bhakti etc. at both the level of this identification and for the sake of going beyond.

See if you are talking about how beautiful the rose in the garden looks (while watching a cartoon movie), then don't say on the same breadth that the light of the sun in that movie is not real but a projection of some projector. The entire thing is projection; or we talk of flowers and sun on an equal footing, with the sun shining light on the flower.

But for a dvaitin who has a deep realization that the body is temporary and that he is really a jivatma, his association with Ishvara and the nature of bhakti towards Him need not be tied to the realities of this present body-manifestation. He will still abide by the corresponding vyavahara-dharma in a natural way - by revering his mother, etc., but that will not conflict with the tattva-jnana where such vyavahara is deemed 'maya" and only the jiva-Ishvara bheda is ultimately real (eternal) and to be realized correctly for attaining moksha. 

Likewise, for an advaitin, the tattva jnana is the nonduality of Self wherein even the jiva-Ishvara bheda is unreal/adhyasa. But unless he is established in jnana, he should also abide naturally with the dharma and realities of his level of vyavahara. If he is thinking of his mother as special, then so is His Ishta-devata special and real for him. As he reveres his mother and thinks of her and her well-being, so does He cherish and devote himself to the worship/service of his Ishta (by following karma-yoga etc.). Eventually he may mature to where he sees all (including mother and Ishta) as the manifestation of the same Ishvara. His true relationship is then only with Ishvara - the antaryami of all. He participates in the leela at the gross level without becoming attached therein.

The nature of bhakti shifts accordingly.  For example, he may begin to see in all his experience, Ishvara  as the Cause and Coordinator. Every experience then, he realizes as karmaphala and Ishvara as the karmaphaladaata. And he is asking himself what is my svadharma now, the path of sreyas? Or he may see whatever appears in cognition as a manifest form of Ishvara. The question then becomes what is the right way to worship Ishvara in this form He has revealed to me? That worship is non-different from one's svadharma as well. Then as we go beyond worshipper-worshipped bheda, our action-oriented response may shift internally to a simple abidance in the knowledge "Ah, It is only He". Thus, in Him, as His svarupa, all our dualistic cognitions and cogitations are surrendered and we leave no room for affirming a self apart from Him - for any such attempt in consciousness results in a cognition that again is absorbed back as Him. 

What is important in this process is that this is not merely a mental gymnastic or sadhana alone. It has to be an affirmation of the understanding of Ishvara that the shastra pramana tells us. Because we are trying to transition from an ajnana of Self/Brahman to Jnana and our knowledge of Brahman as ishvara-jiva-jagat and then as Ishvara is to correspond to our maturation, but ultimately we should not get ourselves stuck in some dvaita-bottleneck. This is not really a great concern for the majority who would do better to focus on getting the right knowledge of Ishvara at the level of their own vyavahara, but the recent discussions in our forum show that such subtle nuances are important in the final stages of knowledge of Brahman.

Ok, I just resaw the second part of your question on Ishvara vs Maya. Instead of writing long, here are 5 perspectives on Ishvara from a past writeup.

1. Ishvara is Consciousness (Brahman) associated with Maya/Shakti. The ishvara-jiva-jagat prapancha is nothing but a vivarta (apparent) projection of this Ishvara. The seen is the seeing of the Seer. All internal causality and individuality between the namarupa "entities" is mithya and reduces to the play of Maya of this Ishvara.

2. Ishvara is Brahman associated with universal Form (vishwarupa) that He manifests, guides, withdraws back within, by recourse to His intrinsic maya-shakti.

3. Ishvara (God) is Brahman associated with the functionality of being Lord of jiva-jagat and karmaphaladaata of jivas. We can deduce that this identification corresponds with a svarupa within the vishwarupa corresponding to this function and role, that distinguishes Him from the jiva-jagat.

4. Ishvara is Brahman associated with a namarupa of a Devata.

5. You are that Ishvara.

The ishvara in standpoint 3. is the one "under maya" of the Ishvara in viewpoint 1. But I think ultimately in Advaita, even the Ishvara in viewpoint 1 understood through a dualistic construction (involving upadhi of Maya and its projection world) is adhyasa on nirguna Brahman. We negate the reality of the duality of Sat-Chit (Existence-Consciousness/Maya) in the adhishtanam. So, all such including Ishvara description of 1. is mithya/maya/anirvachaniya. That seems to be what is implied by 5.

thollmelukaalkizhu

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te2U8Y2J1oOA4RKqXRD%3D%3DWv_zWPC%3DzNM3DN-i_ap%2BT6ygQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[putran M]

Namaskaram,

I am attaching a slightly edited version that I sent to my personal group.

thollmelukaalkizhu

[putran M]

[Vikram Jagannathan]

Namaskaram Putran ji,

Thanks for sharing the wonderful article expressing the relevance of bhakti in common experience. It is true that even some advaitins play double-standard when it comes to reality of personal relations versus relationship to the Great Lord - Ishvara.

In alignment with your overall opinion, however, I will need to reflect deeper on your 5-perspective summary.

Meanwhile, just thought of sharing my notes on my current understanding of bhakti in Advaita system. This is something I noted a little while ago when someone was criticizing that bhakti is downplayed in Advaita, particularly in SankaraBhashya. The intent was to very briefly summarize my understanding of bhakti & jnana before responding to the criticisms.
https://archive.org/details/reflections-on-advaita-bhakti

prostrations,
Vikram

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKqm3-pwuHS4%3DR1C9pAjvpZP0n47sWxQTspr_-pbg9fLiMEpWg%40mail.gmail.com.

[putran M]

Namaskaram Vikram-ji,

Thanks for the comments and the link to your writings on bhakti. Its a good mananam. Questions and criticisms, they are often the best motivators for us to organize our thoughts and understanding.

thollmelukaalkizhu

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAM7AOLfuK5PGjGubmeKLOkD%2BEsaAOnkMaiL%3DC9i5KTop%2BTunHA%40mail.gmail.com.

[putran M]

Namaskaram Subbu-ji,

But for a dvaitin who has a deep realization that the body is temporary and that he is really a jivatma, his association with Ishvara and the nature of bhakti towards Him need not be tied to the realities of this present body-manifestation. He will still abide by the corresponding vyavahara-dharma in a natural way - by revering his mother, etc., but that will not conflict with the tattva-jnana where such vyavahara is deemed 'maya" and only the jiva-Ishvara bheda is ultimately real (eternal) and to be realized correctly for attaining moksha. 

Can you correct the passage highlighted red? I think the word maya is used too loosely. I am not sure how a dvaitin understands notions like "I am a man. This is my mother." 

Would they say that these are based in ajnana (because the truth for them is "I am the jiva-self")? Then the word maya above can be replaced with ajnana.

Would they also say that "I am a man, this my mother" is satyam (real) only, but simply not absolutely real? We also may call that vyavaharika satyam, but I am wondering how it differs from the dvaitin here.

thollmelukaalkizhu

[putran M]

Namaskaram Subbu-ji and others,

Since the reference there is general to the "dvaitin", I decided to simply replace with "someone of dvaitic persuasion" and not get too bogged down with the siddhanta's technicalities. Of course, I would be happy to learn here of their nuances, especially how they treat maya and "real" differently from us.

Changed version:

But for someone of dvaitic persuasion who has a deep realization that the body is temporary and that he is really a jivatma beyond the impermanent body, his association with Ishvara and bhakti towards Him need not be tied to acknowledging the realities of the present body-manifestation. He will still abide by his present vyavahara-dharma in a natural way - by revering his mother, etc., but that will not conflict with the tattva-jnana where such vyavahara is deemed to be based in the ajnana of self, and where the jiva-Ishvara bheda is the reality (true/eternal) that has to known and followed upon correctly for attaining moksha. 

I thought of this above point last week itself. Dvaitins object to our apparent non-emphasis on bhakti to Ishvara when we discuss advaita Brahma-tattva. But a little introspection will show that they also talk freely of their tattvajnana without feeling obligated to pay homage to their human parents at every turn, in fact (imu) stating frankly that "I am a man. This is my mother" is all ajnana! That doesn't mean a disingenuity or hypocrisy or a lack to true respect and devotion to their parents.  

thollmelukaalkizhu

[putran M]

Namaskaram,

Attaching again, should be the final version. I don't like resending multiple times in this forum, but since it is written like an essay-pdf, it is also for the record and some of the wordings I felt should be made clearer.

thollmelukaalkizhu

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Putran prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

But for someone of dvaitic persuasion who has a deep realization that the body is temporary and that he is really a jivatma beyond the impermanent body, his association with Ishvara and bhakti towards Him need not be tied to acknowledging the realities of the present body-manifestation. He will still abide by his present vyavahara-dharma in a natural way - by revering his mother, etc., but that will not conflict with the tattva-jnana where such vyavahara is deemed to be based in the ajnana of self, and where the jiva-Ishvara bheda is the reality (true/eternal) that has to known and followed upon correctly for attaining moksha. 

 

Ø     I think same thing applicable to Advaitin as well with few changes at some places (like in place of jeevAtma, paramAtma etc.) Even after realization (jeeva Ishwara abedha) he will continue to follow the vyavahAra dharma (satya) in a natural way .  Otherwise we have to create some new explanation for shankara’s coming back to do his mother’s last rights.  So as long as jnAni’s body (irrespective of whether he is dvaita jnAni or Advaita paramArtha jnAni) is available for our sight, he will continue to  follow vyavahAra dharma / satya. 

 

I thought of this above point last week itself. Dvaitins object to our apparent non-emphasis on bhakti to Ishvara when we discuss advaita Brahma-tattva. But a little introspection will show that they also talk freely of their tattvajnana without feeling obligated to pay homage to their human parents at every turn, in fact (imu) stating frankly that "I am a man. This is my mother" is all ajnana! That doesn't mean a disingenuity or hypocrisy or a lack to true respect and devotion to their parents.  

 

Ø     BTW, in the module called DSV, the socalled advanced module of Advaita Vedanta, there is no place for Ishwara or if at all Ishwara is there he is just an imagination in your mind factory, a manufactured avidyA product like jagat, a dummy or nothing character after realizing that you are brahman 😊

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

[Sudhanshu Shekhar]

Namaste Bhaskar prabhu ji.

 Ø     BTW, in the module called DSV, the socalled advanced module of Advaita Vedanta, there is no place for Ishwara or if at all Ishwara is there he is just an imagination in your mind factory, a manufactured avidyA product like jagat, a dummy or nothing character after realizing that you are brahman 😊

Shows complete ignorance of drishTi-srishTi-vAda. 🙂 

Please see the correct position:

Regards.

Sudhanshu Shekhar.

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

I am not talking about ‘correct version’of DSV or ajAta vAda, I am talking about the presentation of these theories by some logicians!!  Just go back and see what you had written about Ishwara when you were passionately advocating ‘advanced module of DSV’.  And I am happy in your module if you willing to give some place / respect for Ishwaraastitva apart from ajnAni’s avidyA creation 😊

 

BTW, if I remember correctly, when Sri Anand Hudli prabhuji writing about ajAta vAda, somewhere he said even in that vAda there is provision to accept Ishwara srushti not definitely in an inferior manner or basic module of SDV !!  But now I don’t remember his exact words, it was few decades ago 😊

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

 

Shows complete ignorance of drishTi-srishTi-vAda. 🙂 

[Ryan Armstrong]

नमस्ते Subuji

What a beautiful story.

It immediately brings to mind the bhakti of One of those closest to Śri Ādi Śaṃkara - Śri Toṭakācarya.

He remained silent in the Master's presence.

Always seeing to the needs of the Master.
Never turning his back to the Master.

And while doing Master's laundry, the full knowledge of Vedanta was bestowed in a moment!

Kind Regards
Ryan

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te0qcpJG3tietVe9nvDsKOLBz3offFtv3W_F5J1YoyQFmQ%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Regards

Ryan Armstrong
+27 82 852 7787
rya...@gmail.com