Advaita within the Sikh Tradition : The Inseparable Unity of Brahman and Atman

[Thakur Jan Hari]

It is unfortunate that many Sikhs and Non-Sikhs are unaware of the Advaitin/Non-Dualistic Ideas within the Sikh Tradition such as the unity of Brahman and the Atman and principles such as the Jagat/Manifold as being Mithya/illusionary (Which is a discussion for another day) etc... Talking of Advaita within Sikhi, we also find many analogies given in Vedantic texts such as Ocean and Waves, Pots and Akasha etc.. also in the Writings of the Sikh Tradition.

Gurbani (Compilation of Compositions of the Sikh Gurus), are replete of verses describing the unity of the Atman and Brahman such as the following and many more -

ਯਹਿ ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਆਹਿ ਆਤਮਾ ਰਾਮ ॥

ਜਿਹ ਅਮਿਤ ਤੇਜਿ ਅਬਿਗਤ ਅਕਾਮ ॥

ਜਿਹ ਭੇਦ ਭਰਮ ਨਹੀ ਕਰਮ ਕਾਲ ॥

ਜਿਹ ਸਤ੍ਰ ਮਿਤ੍ਰ ਸਰਬਾ ਦਿਆਲ ॥

ਅਨਭਉ ਸਰੂਪ ਅਨਹਦ ਅਕਾਮ 

Atman is Brahman, And is indestructible, Illuminating, imperceptible and desireless  

It is without separated condition, unaffected by illusion, it does bot act and is not affected by time, It is compassionate to all whether freind or foe, the essential form of Atman is consciousness, it is boundless and desireless -

 (Sri Guru Gobind Singh, Sri Dasam Granth, Gyan Prabodh, Verse 28)

ਗੁਰ ਵੀਚਾਰੀ ਅਗਨਿ ਨਿਵਾਰੀ ॥ ਅਪਿਉ ਪੀਓ ਆਤਮ ਸੁਖੁ ਧਾਰੀ ॥

Contemplating the Guru's teachings quenches the fire; Drinking the undrinkable they obtain the bliss of the self. (Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji, Page/Ang 945 of Sri Guru Granth Sahib)

ਪ੍ਰਾਤਮਾ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਕਾ ਰੂਪ

 … ਨਾ ਇਹੁ ਬਿਨਸੈ ਨਾ ਇਹੁ ਜਾਇ ॥ ਆਦਿ ਜੁਗਾਦੀ ਰਹਿਆ ਸਮਾਇ

That Atman is the form of Parabrahm; It is indestructible, It is unborn; It eternally remains inseparable. (Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji, Rag Gaund, Page/Ang 869 of Sri Guru Granth Sahib) 

ਆਤਮ ਰਾਮੁ ਰਾਮੁ ਹੈ ਆਤਮ ॥
Atman is Rama (Brahman) and Rama (Brahman) is the Atman  - (Guru Nanak Dev Ji, Ang/Page 1030)

From the above Vakyas of the Sikh Gurus it becomes evident that the Sikh Philosophy is Advaitin and believes in the undisputed and Inseparable unity of the Atman and the Supreme Brahman which is identical to the Upanishadic Decelerations such as 

Jeevo Brahma - Shukrahasya Upanishad,

Jeev Eva Sada Brahma -  Tejobindu Upanishad 

Sa Jeevaha Kevalo Mataha - Yogatattva Upanishad 

Jeevaha Shivaha Jeevaha Sa Jeevaha Kevalaha Shivaha - Skandopanishad 

etc...

The above quotations provided from Sikh Scripture and Shruti Vakyas show the  undeniable unity of the Atman and Brahman, There is much to uncover and unfold regarding Sikhi and Advaita. In Traditional Sikh Schools established by the Gurus such as the Damdami Taksal, Sato Gali Wali Taksal  and Nirmala & Udasin Sikh Institutions all hold firm belief of Sikhi/Sikhism being a Advaitin School infact Vedantic Texts are also taught within these Schools such as Vichara Sagara, Vairagya Shataka & Other Prakarana Granthas along with Upanishads etc there are even Sikh Commentaries to texts such as the Adhyatma Ramayana and Brahma Sutra and some Upanishads. The Tenth Master or Guru of the Sikh Tradition, namely, Sri Guru Gobind Singh himself sent five Sikhs to Kashi/Varanasi to do Adhyayan of the Vedic Scriptures, founding the Nirmala Sampardaya of Sikhs also it is one thing to note that the Sikh Sampardayas do not have philosophical conflicts or any sort of conflicts they are only distinct from their clothing/appearance (Bhek). Along with all this, Guru Gobind Singh has even written a commentary upon the Bhagwad Geeta in Braja Bhasha called the Gobind Gita found in old copies of the Sri Dasam Granth which my Vidya Guru has published in both Devanagari Script along with Original Punjabi/Gurmukhi Script. Along with commentating upon the Bhagwad Gita the Tenth Master would make his Court Poets to Translate Vedic and Vedantic Sikh Scripture from Languages such as Sanskrit to languages such as Braja so that the knowledge within these texts can be accessed by the common Sikh as they may not be well versed in languages such as Sanskrit. The Tenth Master would also have the five Nirmala Sikhs to teach and to do discourse of Vedic and Vedantic Scripture to fellow Sikhs such as Mahabartha etc... 

Namaste and Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

Please do forgive for any typos

Thanks 

[putran M]

Namaskaram Thakur-ji,

Is what you are saying commonly accepted in Sikh community? You have written that several "Traditional Sikh Schools" hold belief that Sikh philosophy is advaitic only. Are these major schools, or are the major traditions in Sikhism more dvaita based? 

If a Hindu advaitin was to talk to a normal Sikh (who knows something about the Sikh religion), would the Sikh agree that Sikhism has such well-established 'bonafide' advaitic traditions or will he consider them somewhat on the fringe?

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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/5e8598c0-8a09-49e0-8980-c56e457c4e01n%40googlegroups.com.

[The Sikh Advaitin]

Namaste Ji,

All Major Traditional or Sampardaik Schools which have their lineages connecting to the Sikh Gurus agree that the Sikh Philosophy is Advaitin.

Leave the the knowledge on Sikh Philosophy of Normal Sikhs or Mainstream Sikhs most of them don’t even know basic tenets of Sikhism which can be called a product of the Singh Sabha Movement which occurred in the late 1800’s which distorted the Sikh Philosophy transforming it to a biblical doctrine so I am unsure if a ‘Normal Sikh’ would even know anything in regards to Sikh Philosophy or Basic Tenets. But Yes, There are still many Sikhs who are connected with these Major Sikh Institutions which do understand the Sikh Doctrine to be a Advaitin Doctrine. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKqm3-rOZK5Yn%2B31ScCAHT70eYuSeMQtSqKMv8f0RvKHontpvg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Aravinda Rao]

Namaskars, 

Thank you Putran ji, for the input. I am not aware of the Sikh commentaries on Brahma sutras and other texts. I came to know only recently about these similarities from the talks of Prof. Kapoor on youtube. On further perusal of the Granth sahib I noted the following, which I am including in an essay.

The mula mantra of Sikhs is – 

‘Ik Omkar, sat-naam, karta purakh, nirbhay, nirvair, akala murat, ajuuni, saibhum, guru prasad’.

It means, Om alone exists. It is sat, pure existence. It is the karta, the creator, and purakh, purusha in Sanskrit, the indweller of all. It is beyond fear and hate because it is one and non-dual. The Brahma-sutras describe this aspect in the chapter titled ‘brahman is neither partial nor cruel’ (vaishmya-nairghrinya adhikarana 2-1-34). Further, It is timeless, akala but murat, takes a form circumscribed by time. It is not born (ayoni), ajam, as it is known in Vedanta. Saibhum is the self-luminous, svayam-bhu, the self-evident consciousness principle. It is known by the grace of the guru and hence guru-prasad.

All the terms in the mantra are the Punjabi forms of the Sanskrit words which describe Brahman in the Upanishads. It is advisable to read the Guru Granth Sahib (www.gurugranthdarpan.net) in its Hindi translation because the Indian reader can get the import of the words more accurately than in the English translations. We can also note the common diction between the Granth Sahib and the Upanishads. The very opening words of Granth Sahib are about maaya, the manifesting power of Brahman, because of which the jiva got distanced from the Supreme (paramatma), and the distance will disappear if one works according to the hukm of parmatma. Hukm, probably is equivalent to dharma. This separation from parmatma is ever since the creation. It is precisely the same idea that the Upanishads postulate.

The Gayatri mantra, the sacred mantra of the Hindus, describes the all-pervading Brahman (Om), but focuses on the individual (saadhaka) who, during the Sandhya-upasana, which is a spiritual exercise, reminds himself of the divinity in him and divinity in all the beings. In the mantra of Sikhism, the emphasis is on the description of Brahman. The Supreme Reality is described in the same terms in both religions. The mantra starts with Om, the symbol from the Vedas.

All statements of Sikh gurus are comparable to the statements of the Upanishads. They accept the nirguna (devoid of form and attribute) and saguna (with a form and attribute) as in Vedanta and also accept that all beings are not different from Brahman. The Rigvedic concepts of satyam (absolute reality) and ritam (cosmic order/relative reality) are both accepted.

Gurubani mentions all names such as Gobind, Ram, Hari etc., but they are all used to mean one Brahman. Rigveda is the primary text for the Sikh philosophy. Scholars have discussed how there is on unbroken tradition from Rigveda to Gurubani.   

The mula-mantra was given by Guru Nanak Dev at a time when Islam was making violent inroads into Hinduism on the ground that Hindus were polytheists and idol-worshippers. It was meant to remind the common man that the Hindu thought is based on philosophical reasoning and not merely on a simple assertion about a single god. Those who were willing to save Hinduism became Sikhs. In due course Sikhism evolved into a separate religion and some started saying that Sikhism is close to Islam, which is due to ignorance and due to manipulation by theBritish. 

aravinda rao   

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKqm3-rOZK5Yn%2B31ScCAHT70eYuSeMQtSqKMv8f0RvKHontpvg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Aravinda Rao]

He is professor Kapil Kapoor. His talks are on a site called Sangam talks on youtube.

aravinda rao

[The Sikh Advaitin]

I Absolutely Agree, it is also noteworthy that early Sikh Scholars who have written commentaries upon Gurbani such as Mahakavi Santokh Singh whose works are still studied and there are many discourses on his works such as Suraj Parksh and Nanak Parkash, has also written in his commentary of Japuji Sahib (Which is where the Mul Mantar is) that Guru Granth Sahib is Desh Bhaka of the Vedas or you could say The Sikh Gurus made the knowledge and philosophy of the Vedas more accessible to the people as the commoner wasn’t usually well versed in Sanskrit.

 

If anyone is wondering regarding the reference here is the above from Kavi Santokh Singh’s Garab Ganjani Commentary, Here is a English Transliteration -

Gurū Nānak Jo Sarvagya Hai, Āpni Bāni Mē Sarab Ved Kī Śrutī Kō Hī Arath Rākhyō | Pūrab Jō Ved Hai Sō Bhi Tin Kō Hī Mat Huto | Ab Kalyug Kau Sam Dekh Kar , Mand Budhi Lokan Ki Jān Kar, Tis Ved Kō Hī Ab Deś Bhāśa Mei Banai Likhyan Kō Updesh Dīo | Dharam Kī Sthirtha Ke Hit Jagat Ke Udhārbe Hit Jo Śrutī Ik Omkār Me Rākhī Hai | 

Here The Mahakavi Santokh Singh clearly mentions that Guru Nanak being Sarvagya saw that the people of Kalyuga having Impure intellect may interpret the Ved Vaakyas incorrectly for this reason he has taken the Arath/Meaning of the Vedas/śrutī placed in Gurbani and has made it more easily understandable. 

Gurbani also infact mentions how the Vedas come directly from the Supreme too (Which I will discuss in other posts)

Gurbani also advises Sikhs the Advaitin practise of Aham Brahmasmi/ Soham Jaap in many places -

I could have given more in-depth  translations but decided not to as the above verses show that these Concepts of Advaita are not hidden in Sikhi they are visible from even the worst english translations of Gurbani! 

Talking of Non-Duality and Soham/I am that (Brahman), Gurbani too mentions that the goal is itself to realise ones true self! 

 

Not just this but Gurbani states that the foolish Jiva full of Duality and Ignorance doesn’t realise and understand that in reality it is that and thinks Brahm is far away-

  

The first Master of the Sikh Tradition himself states -

ਸੋਪ੍ਰਭੁਦੂਰਿਨਾਹੀਪ੍ਰਭੁਤੂੰਹੈ॥

so pᵣabhuh doore naahee pᵣabhu tooⁿhai ||

God is not far away - You are God!

Also Aravind Ji the Brahma Sutra commentary was composed in the Tenth Guru’s Kavi Darbar at Anandpur which is now unfortunately lost, Infact nearly all the texts composed in that Darbar have now become lost.

Again as I have previously mentioned there was a Singh Sabha Reformist Movement commissioned by the British to turn the Sikh Abrahmic and give it a separate identity. There were Sikhs who opposed this movement and created their own Singh Sabha in which they wrote texts showing the unity of Upanishadic/Sanatan and Sikh teachings

But was suppressed as the Reformist Lahore Singh Sabha had much support by the British.

Namaste and Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAGwUMpRXqprsPPfRvVg5XJBOBWbJoHgbEkkJRPQSe9%2Bggg4H1A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bhaskar YR]

God is not far away - You are God!

 

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

Is it same if we say “ahaM brahmAsmi” ( I am brahman) and IshwarOhaM (I am Ishwara/God)??  I don’t think so.  Anyway in this context if God is nirvishesha brahman that is mentioned in sikh doctrine then there is no need for any conflicts in perspectives.  Additionally, whether gurbAni says ultimately there is no Ishwara, no srushti, no jeeva etc. just like Advaita paramArtha says in its ultimatum??  What is pAramArika satya in sikh tradition?? Is it jeeva-brahman ikyata or AtmaikatvaM?? 

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

Bhaskar YR

 

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Dear friends,

It appears to me that Ram is the saviour according to the Guru Granth Sahib. The names "Hari" and "Ram" appear in that text for  two  thousand times or so. Incidentally Panini also seems to have equated the word "RAM" with "AUM" grammatically. I am open to correction.

My 2 cents

skb

--

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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6581816F5096FB6A9F967D8A849E9%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[dwa...@advaita.org.uk]

Just a brief note to let everyone know that my new book – ‘Confusions in Advaita Vedanta: Knowledge, Experience and Enlightenment’ – is now available from Indica at Varanasi.

 

This is my most advanced book – almost verging on the academic but, I hope, avoiding that dangerous territory and aiming to be readable (and even occasionally humorous!). It is directly aimed both at beginning seekers, so that they can avoid the pitfalls, and at advanced seekers who might be trapped in some serious misunderstanding. It is the first of a trilogy of books that looks at all the major topics that can cause confusion. It describes the nature and often the sources of confusion and references quotes from prasthAna traya and Shankara to resolve them.

 

See https://www.advaita-vision.org/new-book-announcement/ for the complete announcement, which contains the detailed Contents list. It also gives pointers to lots of material from the book, including a l-o-n-g series of posts on the topic of pratibandha-s.

 

It is available in paperback (at INR 850) or hardback (at INR 995). Unfortunately Indica do not currently intend to produce any electronic version. Westerners can expect Amazon UK and US to stock the book ‘soon’, although it may still be cheaper to order from Indica and pay the postage.

 

 

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

[putran M]

Namaskaram Bhaskar-ji,

I don't know much of Sikh doctrine; but it seems difficult to interpret "You are God" in any way other than "Tattvamasi". Especially, if we take into account all the previous advaitic quotes given of the Sikh gurus. We can understand that they were rooted directly in the Vedic/Advaitic traditions (sanatana dharma) but due to desha, kala, circumstances, etc., the Dharma manifested through them in its unique way. It is unfortunate that there seems to be much effort today to portray Sikhs as separate from the Sanatana Dharma and to behave sometimes like nastikas who are antagonistic towards us. The outer differences are made the center to suggest a fundamental divide rather than the common foundation. Whereas in the Vedic traditions (orthodox or non-orthodox) within Hinduism,  one expects that the sense of common unity at the heart of our religious paths is more strongly present and we will not compromise that fact even among our other quibbles and quarrels. The Mother Religion, the Universal Dharma, has many a child, some of whom act like they came from the moon! Or the politics against Hinduism pushes them further into such mentality.

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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6581816F5096FB6A9F967D8A849E9%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[S Venkatraman]

Namaste Dennisji,

I perused with great interest the information that you have provided on your new book including its Contents list. I do have some confusions on some of the subjects you cover in this book and even ignorance on some others. I plan to buy the book from Amazon India. I just have one clarification to seek before I actually bought the book. 

The contents list provided on your website has the index starting on page 259 and depending on the number of pages covered by the index your book is probably 275 pages long. But Amazon India lists the book as having 451 pages! Can you please explain what could have caused this difference in the number of pages?

Many thanks and regards,

Venkat. 

Sent from my iPhone

On 06-Aug-2022, at 4:59 PM, dwa...@advaita.org.uk wrote:



Just a brief note to let everyone know that my new book – ‘Confusions in Advaita Vedanta: Knowledge, Experience and Enlightenment’ – is now available from Indica at Varanasi.

--

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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/000601d8a987%24b8c50b70%242a4f2250%24%40advaita.org.uk.

[Aravinda Rao]

The "outer differences are made the center to suggest a fundamental divide rather than the common foundation. Whereas in the Vedic traditions (orthodox or non-orthodox) within Hinduism,  one expects that the sense of common unity at the heart of our religious paths is more strongly present and we will not compromise that fact even among our other quibbles and quarrels. The Mother Religion, the Universal Dharma, has many a child, some of whom act like they came from the moon! Or the politics against Hinduism pushes them further into such mentality.'' 

Very nicely said. 

Aravinda Rao 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKqm3-ojNUfZYGO99g2w-bmy6haHW%2ByM5qjyVc1u2Nj7PzaJcg%40mail.gmail.com.

[putran M]

Namaskaram Dennis-ji,

I read Part 1 of Pratibhandaka and the Desire & Enlightenment sections that you linked. I see you had lively discussions with others. Even if some of the topics are or appear controversial, I felt your confident and knowledgeable presentation is very well written and as you said, readable. Just to know in case we recommend to others, do you consider this book as a Part II to any of your other books (which one?) or can it be a stand-alone for someone interested in advaita?

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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/000601d8a987%24b8c50b70%242a4f2250%24%40advaita.org.uk.

[Nithin Sridhar]

Many congratulations Dennis ji. 

--

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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/000601d8a987%24b8c50b70%242a4f2250%24%40advaita.org.uk.

[putran M]

Namaskaram,

For whatever reason, this thread in our public site is occurring inside the Sikh tradition thread and not separately. 

thollmelukaalkizhu

[dwa...@advaita.org.uk]

Hi Putran-ji,

 

This book is the first part of what will be a 3-volume work. Nevertheless, each one is stand-alone. This first book essentially deals with the topics of knowledge, experience and enlightenment. The second volume will deal principally with ignorance, the ‘mechanism’ of teaching and what happens (to the ‘person’ and the world) on enlightenment. Ignorance is an incredibly complex topic (which I suppose is hardly surprising when it is the essence of the entire problem) and its treatment will take up most of the book. I have written most of this now and hopefully will complete it this year. Volume 3 addresses creation, causality and reality. So, all being well, Vol. 2 should appear late 2023 – early 2024 and Vol. 3 late 2024 – early 2025. Should keep me off the streets…

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

From: adva...@googlegroups.com <adva...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of putran M
Sent: 07 August 2022 04:12
To: adva...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [advaitin] Confusions in Advaita

 

Namaskaram Dennis-ji,

 

I read Part 1 of Pratibhandaka and the Desire & Enlightenment sections that you linked. I see you had lively discussions with others. Even if some of the topics are or appear controversial, I felt your confident and knowledgeable presentation is very well written and as you said, readable. Just to know in case we recommend to others, do you consider this book as a Part II to any of your other books (which one?) or can it be a stand-alone for someone interested in advaita?

 

thollmelukaalkizhu

 

.

[S Venkatraman]

Namaste Dennisji,

Very impressive even by way of an outline. I am already salivating at the prospect of reading all the 3 volumes. 

Some of the areas of interest to me in Advaita are as follows:

1. Pratibimba, Avachheda and Aabhasa Vadas and their limitations

2. The different theories of error or Khyativadas

3. Drishti-Shrishti and Shrishti-Drishti Vadas

4. Differences between Bhamati and Vivarana schools

5.  Swami Satichidanendra Saraswathi’s arguments against Post-Shankara Advaitins. (I would like to follow traditional Advaita but would like to be at least aware of Swamiji’s arguments)

Could you please let me know if you have covered or intend covering any of the above areas in one or the other of these 3 volumes? If you are not covering some of them in your volumes, I would very much appreciate receiving from you a book recommendation for the topics not covered by you. 

Thank you and regards,

Venkat

Sent from my iPhone

On 07-Aug-2022, at 4:18 PM, dwa...@advaita.org.uk wrote:



--

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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/001501d8aa4b%24441f4a00%24cc5dde00%24%40advaita.org.uk.

[putran M]

Namaskaram,

On Sat, Aug 6, 2022 at 11:12 PM putran M <putr...@gmail.com> wrote:

Namaskaram Dennis-ji,

I read Part 1 of Pratibhandaka and the Desire & Enlightenment sections that you linked. I see you had lively discussions with others. Even if some of the topics are or appear controversial, I felt your confident and knowledgeable presentation is very well written and as you said, readable. Just to know in case we recommend to others, do you consider this book as a Part II to any of your other books (which one?) or can it be a stand-alone for someone interested in advaita?

It would be good if some of our other scholars (Subbu-ji, Sada-ji, Chitta-ji, Bhaskar-ji, Praveen-ji, Venkataraghavan-ji, etc.) look at the topic of pratibhandakas (and sannyasa) and confirm that Dennis-ji's position is authentic and even further whether or where there is consensus within sampradaya with his position. I don't mind if there are multiple viewpoints on such topics (believe we had tarka before on this) but it is important to know that Dennis-ji's position, which he presents as THE position of Shankara, is at least accepted as A position validated by other advaitins from some accepted sub-school in Advaita. Such a work from an individual scholar gets greater credibility if supported as the right teachings within some sampradaya-based lineage. Dennis-ji may not need this himself (and most of his book may be beyond such controversy and may only weed out confusions agreed upon by all), but it makes sense for others (the pramana principle) who seek to look upon or recommend his work as a reliable source.

https://www.advaita-vision.org/pratibandha-s-part-1-of-6/

https://www.advaita-vision.org/desire-and-enlightenment/

thollmelukaalkizhu

[dwa...@advaita.org.uk]

Dear Venkat-ji,

 

The general differences between bhAmatI and vivaraNa are outlined in Vol. 1. I endeavor to identify the sources of post-Shankara differences in teaching whenever I discuss a particular topic, so references will occur in all 3 volumes.

 

Pratibimba, avachCheda and AbhAsa crop up in Volume 1. In fact you can read the material on AbhAsa vAda at https://www.advaita-vision.org/abhasa-vada/. (Incidentally, the books use IAST convention with diacritical marks and not ITRANS. The website extracts are, however, in ITRANS.)

 

khyAti vAda is dealt with in depth in Volume 2, as are the detailed ‘discussions’ between Swami Satchidanandendra and Martha Doherty and others. I also cover Ramanuja’s ‘Seven Untenables’ in depth.

 

The various ‘creation theories’ are dealt with in Volume 3. Eka-jIva-vAda is addressed in Volume 1 and the SSSS arguments regarding this occur in Volume 2.

 

So I think the answer is that all of your concerns are likely to be covered but, because of the way that I have sorted out the topics, the specific aspects may not all occur in the same place. Not specifically intended to make you buy all 3 volumes! 😉

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

From: adva...@googlegroups.com <adva...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of S Venkatraman
Sent: 07 August 2022 14:42
To: adva...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [advaitin] Confusions in Advaita

 

Namaste Dennisji,

 

Very impressive even by way of an outline. I am already salivating at the prospect of reading all the 3 volumes. 

 

Some of the areas of interest to me in Advaita are as follows:

1. Pratibimba, Avachheda and Aabhasa Vadas and their limitations

2. The different theories of error or Khyativadas

3. Drishti-Shrishti and Shrishti-Drishti Vadas

4. Differences between Bhamati and Vivarana schools

5.  Swami Satichidanendra Saraswathi’s arguments against Post-Shankara Advaitins. (I would like to follow traditional Advaita but would like to be at least aware of Swamiji’s arguments)

 

Could you please let me know if you have covered or intend covering any of the above areas in one or the other of these 3 volumes? If you are not covering some of them in your volumes, I would very much appreciate receiving from you a book recommendation for the topics not covered by you. 

 

Thank you and regards,

Venkat

Sent from my iPhone

On 07-Aug-2022, at 4:18 PM, dwa...@advaita.org.uk wrote:



Hi Putran-ji,

 

This book is the first part of what will be a 3-volume work. Nevertheless, each one is stand-alone. This first book essentially deals with the topics of knowledge, experience and enlightenment. The second volume will deal principally with ignorance, the ‘mechanism’ of teaching and what happens (to the ‘person’ and the world) on enlightenment. Ignorance is an incredibly complex topic (which I suppose is hardly surprising when it is the essence of the entire problem) and its treatment will take up most of the book. I have written most of this now and hopefully will complete it this year. Volume 3 addresses creation, causality and reality. So, all being well, Vol. 2 should appear late 2023 – early 2024 and Vol. 3 late 2024 – early 2025. Should keep me off the streets…

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

.

[dwa...@advaita.org.uk]

Dear Putran-ji,

 

I am very happy for such an undertaking and would be honored to have the ‘validation’ from recognized experts. Can I, however, suggest the following alternative approach?

 

If several people want to participate in such a task formally, and agree to provide reviews of the material for publication afterwards (Amazon etc.), then I am sure I could arrange for the publisher to provide free copies of the book. I can tell you in advance that you will find that my chosen ‘position’ will correspond mostly with the teaching of VivaraNa, in the form of Swamis Dayananda and Paramarthananda. But, as I have already pointed out, my aim throughout is to supply quotations from Shankara to support any explanation that might be contentious. I.e. I never use quotations from Swamis D or P or any other modern teacher to justify a position.

 

I have already arranged to send a copy to Sada-ji, with whom I have a long acquaintance. Could I ask that any ‘acknowledged expert’ who is interested contact you, Putran-ji, who then decides who will participate. If you then provide me with, say a maximum of 5 names and addresses, I will arrange for the publisher to send copies of Volume 1 to that list.

 

I would prefer to do it this way rather than on the sole basis of the pratibandha topic, which I am aware (from the often heated discussions on the site) may be contentious with some!

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

From: adva...@googlegroups.com <adva...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of putran M
Sent: 07 August 2022 14:58
To: adva...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [advaitin] Confusions in Advaita

 

Namaskaram,

 

On Sat, Aug 6, 2022 at 11:12 PM putran M <putr...@gmail.com> wrote:

Namaskaram Dennis-ji,

 

I read Part 1 of Pratibhandaka and the Desire & Enlightenment sections that you linked. I see you had lively discussions with others. Even if some of the topics are or appear controversial, I felt your confident and knowledgeable presentation is very well written and as you said, readable. Just to know in case we recommend to others, do you consider this book as a Part II to any of your other books (which one?) or can it be a stand-alone for someone interested in advaita?

 

It would be good if some of our other scholars (Subbu-ji, Sada-ji, Chitta-ji, Bhaskar-ji, Praveen-ji, Venkataraghavan-ji, etc.) look at the topic of pratibhandakas (and sannyasa) and confirm that Dennis-ji's position is authentic and even further whether or where there is consensus within sampradaya with his position. I don't mind if there are multiple viewpoints on such topics (believe we had tarka before on this) but it is important to know that Dennis-ji's position, which he presents as THE position of Shankara, is at least accepted as A position validated by other advaitins from some accepted sub-school in Advaita. Such a work from an individual scholar gets greater credibility if supported as the right teachings within some sampradaya-based lineage. Dennis-ji may not need this himself (and most of his book may be beyond such controversy and may only weed out confusions agreed upon by all), but it makes sense for others (the pramana principle) who seek to look upon or recommend his work as a reliable source.

 

https://www.advaita-vision.org/pratibandha-s-part-1-of-6/

https://www.advaita-vision.org/desire-and-enlightenment/

 

thollmelukaalkizhu

 

 

.

[S Venkatraman]

Namaste Dennisji,

Thanks a lot for your patient reply. I have already ordered Volume 1 on Amazon India. Please keep us informed on this group about the publication of the other 2 volumes. I have decided to buy them too; having read the excerpts on Pratibandhakas on your website, I need no validation from anyone else on your adherence to sampradAyA. 

Please keep off the streets. Thank you. 

Venkat. 

Sent from my iPhone

On 07-Aug-2022, at 8:06 PM, dwa...@advaita.org.uk wrote:



--

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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/003201d8aa6b%2405edc200%2411c94600%24%40advaita.org.uk.

[putran M]

Namaskaram Dennis-ji,

I am very happy for such an undertaking and would be honored to have the ‘validation’ from recognized experts. Can I, however, suggest the following alternative approach?

 

If several people want to participate in such a task formally, and agree to provide reviews of the material for publication afterwards (Amazon etc.), then I am sure I could arrange for the publisher to provide free copies of the book. I can tell you in advance that you will find that my chosen ‘position’ will correspond mostly with the teaching of VivaraNa, in the form of Swamis Dayananda and Paramarthananda.

I have no issues with your proposition although it might take a longer time than I imagined from an exchange of thoughts in our forum. There is also a possibility that some who may answer in the forum may not be willing to do a full review. But if you would like or find useful formal reviews, then certainly those who are willing to contribute can contact you or me. I would suggest they just contact you since there is no point in me being a middle-man. If not them, they can also inform other advaitin scholars they know who may be willing to review the book formally and have them contact you.

From your comments, I understand that you regard the presentation on pratibhandakas and sannyasa to be consistent with Swamis Dayananda and Paramarthananda's teaching. You use the word "mostly"; don't know if it is just precautionary or if it means you went "off the grid" in some places. The general idea behind my questioning is only this: If there is any particular instance of a scholar's analysis where they cannot match their conclusions on what Shankara meant with any other "acknowledged experts" from within sampradaya but have argued independently based on their convictions and analysis (or siding only with non-sampradaya academics etc.), then ideally they should at least let us know of that - or in general, such a situation if known should be acknowledged in the book itself. That deserves an appendix for these types of books. 

If you yourself feel such is not the case, then that itself is a good settler for my question with your book.

thollmelukaalkizhu

 

But, as I have already pointed out, my aim throughout is to supply quotations from Shankara to support any explanation that might be contentious. I.e. I never use quotations from Swamis D or P or any other modern teacher to justify a position.

 

I have already arranged to send a copy to Sada-ji, with whom I have a long acquaintance. Could I ask that any ‘acknowledged expert’ who is interested contact you, Putran-ji, who then decides who will participate. If you then provide me with, say a maximum of 5 names and addresses, I will arrange for the publisher to send copies of Volume 1 to that list.

 

I would prefer to do it this way rather than on the sole basis of the pratibandha topic, which I am aware (from the often heated discussions on the site) may be contentious with some!

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

From: adva...@googlegroups.com <adva...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of putran M
Sent: 07 August 2022 14:58
To: adva...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [advaitin] Confusions in Advaita

 

Namaskaram,

 

On Sat, Aug 6, 2022 at 11:12 PM putran M <putr...@gmail.com> wrote:

Namaskaram Dennis-ji,

 

I read Part 1 of Pratibhandaka and the Desire & Enlightenment sections that you linked. I see you had lively discussions with others. Even if some of the topics are or appear controversial, I felt your confident and knowledgeable presentation is very well written and as you said, readable. Just to know in case we recommend to others, do you consider this book as a Part II to any of your other books (which one?) or can it be a stand-alone for someone interested in advaita?

 

It would be good if some of our other scholars (Subbu-ji, Sada-ji, Chitta-ji, Bhaskar-ji, Praveen-ji, Venkataraghavan-ji, etc.) look at the topic of pratibhandakas (and sannyasa) and confirm that Dennis-ji's position is authentic and even further whether or where there is consensus within sampradaya with his position. I don't mind if there are multiple viewpoints on such topics (believe we had tarka before on this) but it is important to know that Dennis-ji's position, which he presents as THE position of Shankara, is at least accepted as A position validated by other advaitins from some accepted sub-school in Advaita. Such a work from an individual scholar gets greater credibility if supported as the right teachings within some sampradaya-based lineage. Dennis-ji may not need this himself (and most of his book may be beyond such controversy and may only weed out confusions agreed upon by all), but it makes sense for others (the pramana principle) who seek to look upon or recommend his work as a reliable source.

 

https://www.advaita-vision.org/pratibandha-s-part-1-of-6/

https://www.advaita-vision.org/desire-and-enlightenment/

 

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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/003701d8aa6e%248fa59e70%24aef0db50%24%40advaita.org.uk.

[Sundar Rajan]

Namaskaram Dennis-ji,

I am trying to order from Amazon US site, don't see it yet. Not sure how I order from Amazon India and ship it here.

Anyway, I discovered Swami Paramarthananda's speeches several years ago and played the 'generic' ones at a local SatSang (our attendees are not into Vedanta too much) and even wrote a blog post https://www.indiadivine.org/content/topic/1053409-swami-paramarthanandas-speeches-on-the-web/ 

Later, on one of my trips I purchased Swamiji's speeches on Gita 6th chapter and listened to it, let us say I didn't quite get the 'wow' feeling. So on my next trip to India, I met with Swamiji and expressed my 'concerns'. He smiled and said you probably belong to the Bhamati sampradaya. I mentioned I didn't consciously belong to Bhamati or any sampradaya, having never read  Bhamati or for that matter VivaraNa  Having no knowledge of Sanskrit and no attempt at any 'systematic learning', mine are mostly random readings from commentaries.

So, I will most likely have opposing position to yours , some of it may be in my posts in this forum. Once I get the book I will post some reviews (if time permits).

Best Wishes,

Sundar Rajan

--

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 on the web visit

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/003701d8aa6e%248fa59e70%24aef0db50%24%40advaita.org.uk

.

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Congratulations to Dennisji. Hope it will be available in the western countries soon. 

Sunil KB

Sent from my iPhone

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAK95xdjp6OVQsXkMq47jWSwRYb6jwx4pRmBO03QHOzXWxU6%2BWw%40mail.gmail.com.

[S Venkatraman]

Namaste Dennisji,

In your write-up on Pratibandhakas on your website at several places you mention certain Reference numbers (like for example Ref. 168 for Swami Advayananda’s statement on Samadhi’s role in removing Viparita Bhavanas ). What are these references and where can I find the names of books or articles referred to by them?

Thank you once again and regards,

Venkat

Sent from my iPhone

On 07-Aug-2022, at 9:18 PM, S Venkatraman <sven...@gmail.com> wrote:

Namaste Dennisji,

[Bhaskar YR]

khyAti vAda is dealt with in depth in Volume 2, as are the detailed ‘discussions’ between Swami Satchidanandendra and Martha Doherty and others.

 

praNAmm Sri Dennis Waite prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Briefing us/me more details about this discussion between Sri SSS & Martha Doherty would be highly appreciated.  If I am right this Martha Doherty, from Sri DNS’s AVG, has written the refutation for the work called mUlAvidyA nirAsa by Sri SSS which is relatively more recent based on his works not based on any direct interactions with him.  Swamy Jnanaprasunandendra Saraswati, in turn disproved her claims / observations in her paper based on shankara’s prasthAna traya bhAshya which is the source material for Sri SSS’s MVN. 

If possible, kindly let me know more details about this ‘discussion’. 

[dwa...@advaita.org.uk]

Dear Putran-ji,

 

Again, you make a very valid point. Here is what I meant by ‘mostly’:

 

I always endeavor to prevent the ‘official line’, by which I mean my VivaraNa understanding of Shankara. And I always endeavor to support such views by appropriate quotations from Shankara. Occasionally, I will add my own ‘interpretation’ but it is always clear when I do this, and it may safely be ignored. The sort of situation in which this may occur is in the long, convoluted arguments on the topics relating to ignorance. I do, for example, advise against attempting to read such texts as Brahmasiddhi on grounds of incomprehensibility and questionable purpose! What I try to do is present the essence or conclusions of an issue in a readable and understandable manner and ignore the intricacies. (It is clearly impossible to cover everything on such a topic in part of a single volume, in any case.)

 

I do quote from non-sampradaya academics occasionally, but either as illustration of typical confusion or as a source of reference. E.g. I derived much of my knowledge of the confusions stemming from Vivekananda from the books by Rambachan. I always refer to Shankara/Sureshvara/Padmapada/Gaudapada for resolution.

 

The reason I suggested that you determine the reviewers is that you will be more aware of who are the ‘experts’ than I am and would be better able to choose 5 if there are many more applicants. It would also obviate any danger of partiality on my part.

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

From: adva...@googlegroups.com <adva...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of putran M
Sent: 07 August 2022 17:29
To: adva...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [advaitin] Confusions in Advaita

 

Namaskaram Dennis-ji,

 

 

I am very happy for such an undertaking and would be honored to have the ‘validation’ from recognized experts. Can I, however, suggest the following alternative approach?

 

If several people want to participate in such a task formally, and agree to provide reviews of the material for publication afterwards (Amazon etc.), then I am sure I could arrange for the publisher to provide free copies of the book. I can tell you in advance that you will find that my chosen ‘position’ will correspond mostly with the teaching of VivaraNa, in the form of Swamis Dayananda and Paramarthananda.

 

I have no issues with your proposition although it might take a longer time than I imagined from an exchange of thoughts in our forum. There is also a possibility that some who may answer in the forum may not be willing to do a full review. But if you would like or find useful formal reviews, then certainly those who are willing to contribute can contact you or me. I would suggest they just contact you since there is no point in me being a middle-man. If not them, they can also inform other advaitin scholars they know who may be willing to review the book formally and have them contact you.

 

From your comments, I understand that you regard the presentation on pratibhandakas and sannyasa to be consistent with Swamis Dayananda and Paramarthananda's teaching. You use the word "mostly"; don't know if it is just precautionary or if it means you went "off the grid" in some places. The general idea behind my questioning is only this: If there is any particular instance of a scholar's analysis where they cannot match their conclusions on what Shankara meant with any other "acknowledged experts" from within sampradaya but have argued independently based on their convictions and analysis (or siding only with non-sampradaya academics etc.), then ideally they should at least let us know of that - or in general, such a situation if known should be acknowledged in the book itself. That deserves an appendix for these types of books. 

 

If you yourself feel such is not the case, then that itself is a good settler for my question with your book.

 

thollmelukaalkizhu

 

 

 

 

 

But, as I have already pointed out, my aim throughout is to supply quotations from Shankara to support any explanation that might be contentious. I.e. I never use quotations from Swamis D or P or any other modern teacher to justify a position.

 

I have already arranged to send a copy to Sada-ji, with whom I have a long acquaintance. Could I ask that any ‘acknowledged expert’ who is interested contact you, Putran-ji, who then decides who will participate. If you then provide me with, say a maximum of 5 names and addresses, I will arrange for the publisher to send copies of Volume 1 to that list.

 

I would prefer to do it this way rather than on the sole basis of the pratibandha topic, which I am aware (from the often heated discussions on the site) may be contentious with some!

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

.

[dwa...@advaita.org.uk]

Hi Sundar-ji,

 

I’m afraid it will not immediately be available from Amazon US or UK. Apparently it takes the publisher some time to set this up. Also, I understand that Amazon India will not ship to the West. (Probably because of relatively low cost of books in India – everyone would try to buy from there!) However, you can purchase direct from the publisher (and pay by PayPal) by emailing indicabo...@gmail.com.

 

I don’t think your background will be any problem at all. I only ‘found’ Swami P’s talks after many years and I did not then know the differences between BhAmatI and VivaraNa. In any case, although I have admitted to being principally influenced by him, the book is quite impartial, in the sense that I justify positions by quotations from shruti and Shankara, not by ones from Swamis D or P!

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

From: 'Sundar Rajan' via advaitin <adva...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: 07 August 2022 18:48
To: adva...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [advaitin] Confusions in Advaita

 

Namaskaram Dennis-ji,

 

I am trying to order from Amazon US site, don't see it yet. Not sure how I order from Amazon India and ship it here.

 

Anyway, I discovered Swami Paramarthananda's speeches several years ago and played the 'generic' ones at a local SatSang (our attendees are not into Vedanta too much) and even wrote a blog post https://www.indiadivine.org/content/topic/1053409-swami-paramarthanandas-speeches-on-the-web/ 

 

Later, on one of my trips I purchased Swamiji's speeches on Gita 6th chapter and listened to it, let us say I didn't quite get the 'wow' feeling. So on my next trip to India, I met with Swamiji and expressed my 'concerns'. He smiled and said you probably belong to the Bhamati sampradaya. I mentioned I didn't consciously belong to Bhamati or any sampradaya, having never read  Bhamati or for that matter VivaraNa  Having no knowledge of Sanskrit and no attempt at any 'systematic learning', mine are mostly random readings from commentaries.

 

So, I will most likely have opposing position to yours , some of it may be in my posts in this forum. Once I get the book I will post some reviews (if time permits).

 

Best Wishes,

Sundar Rajan

 

 

 

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/77259269.1070155.1659894471129%40mail.yahoo.com.

[dwa...@advaita.org.uk]

Hi Bhaskar-ji,

 

The SSS-Doherty discussions are dealt with in Vol. 2. So far, I have written nearly 9000 words on the SSS topic but I have not yet finished. The headings are:

 

Introduction; His objections; Existence of ignorance; Cause of avidyA; Beginninglessness; Deep-sleep state; Re-emergence of avidyA in waking and dream; Locus and object of avidyA; Result of ignorance; Removal by knowledge; Problems with his understanding; Final remarks.

 

The original source of material was his book ‘MUlAvidyA NirAsaH athavA ShrI ShaMkara HRRidayam’ and I use Alston’s ‘Heart of Sri Sankara’ for this. But I have most of his other books (and have read them!). I still need to check through ‘The Method of the Vedanta’ for any other points I would like to cover. And I am also aware of the subsequent ‘discussions’ between the two ‘sides’, although I have not read all of these.

 

Just because I confess allegiance to VivaraNa and the Dayananda school does not mean that I agree with all that they say. Whilst (I believe) it is the case that some of the things that SSS says are not so clear-cut, I also believe that he had some misunderstandings probably stemming from Vivekananda, Krishnaswamy Iyer and even Western philosophers. Nevertheless, I will almost certainly agree with his final conclusion, namely that ‘ignorance’ is not an existent thing at all but simply the convenient name that we give to a mind that has not yet gained the related knowledge (which is also a convenient name)!

 

As I said earlier, if I ever make any statement of ‘my own understanding’, I make this clear and the reader is welcome to disagree. I always quote from Shankara et all for the ‘official’ position. So I don’t think you will have any concerns about the material when it finally appears.

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

--

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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB65814DCA41D97DB44A77E70584639%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[putran M]

Namaskaram Dennis-ji,

Thanks for your clarifications. Let me pose 3 purvapakshin arguments against your book (all based on a heavy dose of 'presumption'). 

1. ('Traditionalist'): The Author has his biases against sampradaya validated vyavaharika satya and reading his book will mean that you imbibe such bias. The Author believes in body-mind and pain, so spends reams of pages on showing the jnani experiences such. But when it comes to topics like Ishvara, devatas, punarjanma, bhakti, etc., you will find the Author tactfully jump into "adhyaropa-apavada" mode and de-emphasize their vyavaharika satta. A traditionalist or sampradaya person will not do it in this manner because for him these are as much vyavaharika satya as the body-mind - only he accepts shastra as pramana. For the author, the body is vyavaharika satya and Ishvara, devatas,punarjanma etc. are more like pratibhasika, and he even thinks the shastra does not validate some of them as vyavaharika satya. So how can his book not implicitly project the bias opposing sampradaya teachings?

2. (Dvaitin): What is this business of "Confusions in Advaita"? Advaita has Bhamati, Vivarana, SSS, etc., you are already confused among yourselves; how can you (advaitins) unanimously, with one voice present Advaita and argue with other schools like dvaita or claim someone else is only confused about you?? This is hypocrisy. The Author has decided only Vivarana or his presentation of it is not confused and is making it appear like it is a book for anyone to learn advaita 'correctly'.  Swami Paramarthananda and Dayananda gives their own novel 'modern' interpretations that will be opposed to orthodoxy of others. Anyone and everyone says anything. You are a confused tribe. Instead of acting like you can clear confusions, you should present different viewpoints of advaita as followed in so-called 'advaita' schools and see if you can reconcile them in some 'happy' sense.

3. (Sri Ramakrishna follower): The Author acts like SRK and SV are opposed to Shankara advaita. If they are teaching wrong things, then the assumption must be they are not jnanis. Well then, all those monks of the RK order who are talking Shankara advaita and writing works on Shankara's works must be thinking their own gurus were talking nonsense and were not jnanis!! Are you kidding me?!? Surely, they are able to see that their gurus were highest jnanis is whatever shankara advaitic sense and they do not see a conflict between their gurus' teachings and that of Shankara. The Author is suffering from an inability to have the right insight and is reading these saints in a purely academic sense.

I am sure your response to these charges will be useful.

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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/001c01d8aafa%244566caa0%24d0345fe0%24%40advaita.org.uk.

[dwa...@advaita.org.uk]

Dear Putran-ji,

 

These are all certainly potential objections. However, I don’t think a pUrvapakShin worthy of the name would be allowed to make them before actually reading the book! I suggest that arthApatti is not a valid pramANa here.

 

However, in brief reply to your imagined objections:

 

1. My aim is to resolve confusions over ‘sampradaya validated vyAvahArika satya’ by quoting shruti and Shankara (or close sources). Any ‘personally preferred understanding’ is included to make the material more readable or to resolve topics that contradict reason.  Wherever this happens, it is clear – I certainly never attempt to impose my own non-sampradaya teaching! But you can only confirm this to be so by reading the book yourself! Note that I never claim to be teaching as per a formal sampradaya either. The book is specifically aimed at seekers who do not have access to this. If they do, I always make it clear that they should use that source! In fact, the primary aim of the book is to resolve confusions arising precisely because seekers try to understand Advaita through reading alone. There is a long introduction explaining who the book is for, how and why it is written. Regarding my own qualifications, I state:
   
   “So why should you read this book? Because I am now aware of all these potential misconceptions (and made many of them myself in the past!).Hopefully, I can now alert you to them in advance. The only reliable way to discover the truth on any given topic is to go back to source. See what the scriptures themselves say. Trust only the commentaries of Shankara, his immediate disciples, and those authors that you can verify as adhering closely to the teaching of Shankara. Avoid any teacher or writer who claims authority on their own cognizance – especially anyone who says, ‘This is my experience’ or ‘I am enlightened and I know this’! In this book, I certainly do refer to ‘misleading’ statements made by teachers and I do endeavor to show the ‘correct’ interpretation. But I also quote and reference substantiating material from Shankara and often include relevant Sanskrit if some sources appear to ‘mistranslate’ these or impose their own misunderstanding.”
2. As I said, I do not give Swami D&P interpretations. I present any relevant internal views where these are likely to be encountered by seekers – BhAmatI, VArttika, and numerous post-Shankara influences down to Vivekananda and Ramana  – but I conclude with Shankara’s understanding (as I understand it, supported by quotations). And Shankara has adequately refuted other interpretations of prasthAna traya.
3. I do not simply state that RK and V’s teaching contradicts Shankara. Specific ideas are addressed and many quotations used to justify any such statements I make. Nowhere do I suggest that they were not j~nAnI-s; nor do I suggest that they and many of their subsequent disciples were / are not good teachers. I am simply aiming to resolve confusions that can arise from reading some of the material.

 

Read the book and then make such comments if you still believe they are valid! Please do not raise further comments of this nature until then. What I have written in the introduction should resolve most of any such questions and I do not believe there will be any concerns of this type after reading the whole book.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKqm3-o_r91miPL2DS4nV1O-FQoqc4CohKS1RGui-aTjz5EU0g%40mail.gmail.com.

[putran M]

Namaskaram Dennis-ji,

That's a fair response. I knew I was stretching it a bit but felt justified since 1. it is important for me to have such confirmation before I read or buy (or suggest to anyone) a general learn-advaita book (at a very premium price) 2. you have the opportunity to respond in the best way possible and you did. That you end with "I do not believe there will be any concerns of this type after reading the whole book." is a strong statement. That gives a basic level of confidence for a general reader as well as an advaitin not too confident of his own understanding, that the author himself is fully aware of such concerns and potential objections and is being candid and honest to the extent possible that readers are not misled in an untoward way. For whatever reason, people fear getting influenced incorrectly in religious/philosophical matters and so don't read books simply because it talks advaita. They stick to their niche of gurus and sampradaya. Of course, you have stated that the book is meant for a specified category of seekers. But having read your responses, I am more inclined to read it now than before - so I think the discussion was good for our forum since my questions would likely express concerns of others as well.

thollmelukaalkizhu

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/005401d8ab4b%24d6e83a30%2484b8ae90%24%40advaita.org.uk.

[dwa...@advaita.org.uk]

Dear Putran-ji,

 

I appreciate your concerns and am pleased that they have been allayed at least to some degree.

 

I do feel, however, that getting confirmation of the value of a book before reading it is very uncommon. I have a library of over 1000 Advaita books and I acquired the majority without any prior notification of their worth. I’m also unsure of the degree to which most seekers worry about being ‘misled’. I think many, in the West at least, happily purchase books of transcribed conversations with Ramana or Nisargadatta, for example, (or, much worse, their ‘disciples’) and take what is said therein for gospel. For those who are more ‘traditionally’ inclined, they will purchase books of translated Upanishads with commentary and assume these are authentic to Shankara’s teaching. It is for these that my books are principally written. I assume that those who have access to a qualified sampradaya teacher will not have any need for such books!

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKqm3-pYan4i5yWhq6mBK7WbiK%2BAY5X5cgWxacdziOgzDp4Ehw%40mail.gmail.com.

[putran M]

Namaskaram Dennis-ji,

Of course. It has to do with trust. Books are essentially like shabda pramana. I also get books of the translation kind of shastra/acharyas (not withstanding your complaints on translations) or conversations of saints (i.e. those who are already esteemed to be so). I also might read books or hear lectures written by Sannyasis of an Order with which I am familiar or became initially associated to. Because I might accept their guidance in the spiritual matters and be willing in some cases to sort out their words from theory later. Like, I am not going to be worried reading the Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna thinking it may confuse me about jnana vs Bhakti. In my case, I used to buy every other book from RKMath but have ~0 from Chinmaya mission (that I came across much later). But that is a far cry from saying I would go listen to anyone who speaks or writes Advaita: that may be the case when we are newbies but later as we settle in our understanding and our chosen teaching-lineage, the temptation to go find out everyone else's opinions goes down. (Of course, we get a dose of that in our forum; different matter.)

Relating to one of your topics, a person who initially learns about Advaita from Vivekananda's lectures may later after knowing about Shankara bhashya read the same lectures from a different general angle or not at all when the purpose is to learn about Advaita. The lectures may have immense value in a hundred ways but the question is whether it satisfies the purpose of teaching Advaita. A Shankarite might just not want to go through Vivekananda's thoughts with such a goal of learning Advaita (for example, after learning of the "confusions" you claim); he may be content with Shankara. Now replace Vivekananda with Dennis-ji. Ok. We know each other in the forum, so and only so there is a bit of trust. Otherwise, why in the world would I imagine Dennis-ji is not putting in his own color in the name of Advaita or Shankara? Any more than of a random academic who can appear mightily logical and scientific in textual analysis. But if Dennis-ji learned Advaita from this or that teaching-lineage within the sampradaya, with whom I am familiar, and wrote as its representative, then if he were to say "This is what the (my) sampradaya teaches", then we know "Ok, he is teaching what he learned and any further analysis he does is not going to stray from that foundation of his traditional learning." Then the trust factor comes in and the value we are seeking from his book need not be feared so much as getting compromised by other manipulations. 

In the absence of such a guru-shishya parampara connection in which we are already having trust, as representing Shankara Advaita, we have to be either willing to place trust in Dennis-ji himself as a sincere guru regarding Shankara advaita (based on our readings of his works, as a newbie), or we want to find out before itself reasons why Dennis-ji's exposition is trustworthy for our thinking and we approach his work with the right mindset. Fortunately, the forum setting allows for such an exchange of thoughts.

thollmelukaalkizhu

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/000001d8ab64%245059eea0%24f10dcbe0%24%40advaita.org.uk.

[dwa...@advaita.org.uk]

Dear Putran-ji,

 

If I can briefly summarize my position:

 

I do not belong to a sampradaya and have no guru. My knowledge stems from reading many books, discussions on lists, writing over 10 books (and researching for these) etc. I have been doing this for over 20 years. Prior to that I belonged, on and off since early 1970’s, to an organization that was loosely connected to Jyotirmaṭha. This series of books is aimed at seekers in a similar sort of position, i.e. who do not have access to a qualified teacher (as per Shankara definition) and are obliged to try to gain their understanding from reading books, internet etc. And I suggest that only someone who has themself done this is in a position to be aware of the problems that are encountered!

 

The book does not aim to ‘teach’ in the sense of ‘this is my understanding gained from the above; take it or leave it’. What it does is to consider the main topics in Advaita. It looks at the confusions that seekers have found (based upon my answering emailed questions over the past 20 years – see https://www.advaita-vision.org/questions-and-answers/). And it quotes from many sources, traditional and modern, texts which can give rise to such confusion. I explain the reasons for the confusion and quote from Shankara et al to justify my explanation and clarify the problem. Any other ‘jumping about between vyavahAra and paramArtha’ (of which there is very little) is additional to this and added almost as an aside; as a reminder not to forget the ‘bottom-line’ position of ajAta vAda.

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

From: adva...@googlegroups.com <adva...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of putran M
Sent: 08 August 2022 22:48
To: adva...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [advaitin] Confusions in Advaita

 

Namaskaram Dennis-ji,

 

Of course. It has to do with trust. Books are essentially like shabda pramana. I also get books of the translation kind of shastra/acharyas (not withstanding your complaints on translations) or conversations of saints (i.e. those who are already esteemed to be so). I also might read books or hear lectures written by Sannyasis of an Order with which I am familiar or became initially associated to. Because I might accept their guidance in the spiritual matters and be willing in some cases to sort out their words from theory later. Like, I am not going to be worried reading the Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna thinking it may confuse me about jnana vs Bhakti. In my case, I used to buy every other book from RKMath but have ~0 from Chinmaya mission (that I came across much later). But that is a far cry from saying I would go listen to anyone who speaks or writes Advaita: that may be the case when we are newbies but later as we settle in our understanding and our chosen teaching-lineage, the temptation to go find out everyone else's opinions goes down. (Of course, we get a dose of that in our forum; different matter.)

 

Relating to one of your topics, a person who initially learns about Advaita from Vivekananda's lectures may later after knowing about Shankara bhashya read the same lectures from a different general angle or not at all when the purpose is to learn about Advaita. The lectures may have immense value in a hundred ways but the question is whether it satisfies the purpose of teaching Advaita. A Shankarite might just not want to go through Vivekananda's thoughts with such a goal of learning Advaita (for example, after learning of the "confusions" you claim); he may be content with Shankara. Now replace Vivekananda with Dennis-ji. Ok. We know each other in the forum, so and only so there is a bit of trust. Otherwise, why in the world would I imagine Dennis-ji is not putting in his own color in the name of Advaita or Shankara? Any more than of a random academic who can appear mightily logical and scientific in textual analysis. But if Dennis-ji learned Advaita from this or that teaching-lineage within the sampradaya, with whom I am familiar, and wrote as its representative, then if he were to say "This is what the (my) sampradaya teaches", then we know "Ok, he is teaching what he learned and any further analysis he does is not going to stray from that foundation of his traditional learning." Then the trust factor comes in and the value we are seeking from his book need not be feared so much as getting compromised by other manipulations. 

 

In the absence of such a guru-shishya parampara connection in which we are already having trust, as representing Shankara Advaita, we have to be either willing to place trust in Dennis-ji himself as a sincere guru regarding Shankara advaita (based on our readings of his works, as a newbie), or we want to find out before itself reasons why Dennis-ji's exposition is trustworthy for our thinking and we approach his work with the right mindset. Fortunately, the forum setting allows for such an exchange of thoughts.

 

thollmelukaalkizhu

 

s discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKqm3-qcbn%3D8MxqJmajUiwJTioH1tuaW_SjdM6SVz-9rHPsR5A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bhaskar YR]

I do not belong to a sampradaya and have no guru.

 

It looks at the confusions that seekers have found (based upon my answering emailed questions over the past 20 years – see https://www.advaita-vision.org/questions-and-answers/). And it quotes from many sources, traditional and modern, texts which can give rise to such confusion. I explain the reasons for the confusion and quote from Shankara et al to justify my explanation and clarify the problem

 

praNAms Sri Dennis Waite Prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Very nice to know your dedication and intentions. Kindly accept my praNAms.  I firmly believe there is an ample scope for works like this.  As you know nowadays it is very difficult to get a genuine shroteeya brahmanishTa guru from bonafide saMpradAya due to one or the other reason.  Though shankara bhagavatpAda while upholding the importance of traditional guru says that : asampradAyavit sarvashAstravidapi mUrkhavadeva upekshaNIyaH, we should have the works like this to get more clarity on the doctrine of Advaita.  We have raMaNa followers, they write about Advaita keeping the teaching of their master, we have RK & V followers, they too write about Advaita & interpret it as per teachings of their masters, we have Advaita in bhAmati and vivaraNa as well within tradition and they too claim that what they have written and taught is indeed shankara’s shuddhAdvaita.  And some souls like Sri SSS not satisfied with all these turns and curves asking seekers in Advaita to go-back to mUla (original source) and sureshwara’s vArtika prasthAna.  It is good that you have taken all those things into consideration and trying to reconcile it by quoting and justifying your stand through the source material.  To the extent Sri SSS also did the same thing by amply quoting shankara to consolidate his position.  Under these circumstances, I am curious to know what is so unique in your work.  And lastly, if your intention is exclusively reconciling the confusions in Advaita by bhAshya and ONLY bhAshya, why not the title of the book should be : Confusions in Advaita & It’s reconciliation??  I reckon that title would give more insight to the contents of your work/book.  And those who are look at the cover page would immediately come to know that there is an effort to clear the confusions by the author.  Ofcourse, I agree that no one should judge the book by its cover 😊

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

Bhaskar YR

 

From: adva...@googlegroups.com <adva...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of dwa...@advaita.org.uk
Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2022 2:49 PM
To: adva...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [advaitin] Confusions in Advaita

 

Warning

This email comes from outside of Hitachi Energy. Make sure you verify the sender before clicking any links or downloading/opening attachments. If this email looks suspicious, report it by clicking 'Report Phishing' button in Outlook. See the SecureWay group in Yammer for more security information.

--

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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/001601d8abd1%2411cbe7c0%243563b740%24%40advaita.org.uk.

[dwa...@advaita.org.uk]

Dear Bhaskar-ji,

 

Yes – that would have been a better title! I tried to keep it fairly short, especially since I knew I would have to have a subtitle to describe the particular topics for each volume. I suppose I thought that the ‘reconciliation’ aspect would be obvious, since no one (in their right mind) would write a book just describing all the confused understanding without attempting to resolve it.

 

I should also explain that, when I started to write the books, I was aiming at a Western reader, who almost invariably will have no access to a qualified teacher. There are many Westerners who derive their (assumed) knowledge only from books. A typical seeker may only read transcriptions of Ramana for example, and they inevitably get a very distorted view. It was to try to redirect their awareness so as to obviate this that I wanted to write about the problems. When I got around to informing my then publisher, I discovered that they were not really interested in such a serious work, so I had to look elsewhere and eventually found interest from an Indian publisher – Indica. I changed the ITRANS to IAST, included the Devanagari for major quotations, and assumed a far more ‘Advaita-literate’ audience for the material.

 

You ask why this book is different from, say, SSS in trying to go back to the ‘pristine, pure’ teaching of Shankara. And it is an excellent question! I think that the problem with other attempts, whether or not such an aim was specifically intended, is that authors tended to be from a particular lineage. I.e. I am turning Putran-ji’s argument on its head! If one has been brought up with a very specific interpretation, it is very difficult to see problems with it or to see positive aspects of alternative teaching. You can see this in many classic post-Shankara works, where specific ideas are pushed into abstruse, virtually incomprehensible realms. I think the really committed teachers (committed to a particular teaching concept) will often become quite evangelical when discussing or writing about it. And they may be blind to reasonable objections.

 

In the past, I have been ‘committed’ to Ramana, Nisargadatta, Direct Path as well as Ramakrishna, Chinmayananda, Dayananda and I have had many discussions with teachers and writers on the Internet in addition to my participation on this group. I am no longer ‘committed’ to any teachers other than the likes of Gaudapada, Shankara and Sureshvara (always tempered by reason). I know from personal experience how some of the things I have read from ‘revered’ sources have confused me. Accordingly, I feel more qualified to talk about all of this than any pure sampradaya teacher! Note that I am not suggesting for a minute that I could explain a particular topic better than such a teacher, simply that I am aware of both mistaken and correct understanding and am able to explain the difference. My profession prior to retirement in 2000 involved writing about complex topics in such a way as to make them comprehensible to those not directly involved. And I found that I was good at it! I hope that I continue with such skill since I turned to writing about Advaita!

 

Hope this clarifies my position at last!

 

Bet wishes,

Dennis

 

From: 'Bhaskar YR' via advaitin <adva...@googlegroups.com>

Sent: 09 August 2022 11:19
To: adva...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [advaitin] Confusions in Advaita

 

I do not belong to a sampradaya and have no guru.

 

It looks at the confusions that seekers have found (based upon my answering emailed questions over the past 20 years – see https://www.advaita-vision.org/questions-and-answers/). And it quotes from many sources, traditional and modern, texts which can give rise to such confusion. I explain the reasons for the confusion and quote from Shankara et al to justify my explanation and clarify the problem

 

praNAms Sri Dennis Waite Prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

Very nice to know your dedication and intentions. Kindly accept my praNAms.  I firmly believe there is an ample scope for works like this.  As you know nowadays it is very difficult to get a genuine shroteeya brahmanishTa guru from bonafide saMpradAya due to one or the other reason.  Though shankara bhagavatpAda while upholding the importance of traditional guru says that : asampradAyavit sarvashAstravidapi mUrkhavadeva upekshaNIyaH, we should have the works like this to get more clarity on the doctrine of Advaita.  We have raMaNa followers, they write about Advaita keeping the teaching of their master, we have RK & V followers, they too write about Advaita & interpret it as per teachings of their masters, we have Advaita in bhAmati and vivaraNa as well within tradition and they too claim that what they have written and taught is indeed shankara’s shuddhAdvaita.  And some souls like Sri SSS not satisfied with all these turns and curves asking seekers in Advaita to go-back to mUla (original source) and sureshwara’s vArtika prasthAna.  It is good that you have taken all those things into consideration and trying to reconcile it by quoting and justifying your stand through the source material.  To the extent Sri SSS also did the same thing by amply quoting shankara to consolidate his position.  Under these circumstances, I am curious to know what is so unique in your work.  And lastly, if your intention is exclusively reconciling the confusions in Advaita by bhAshya and ONLY bhAshya, why not the title of the book should be : Confusions in Advaita & It’s reconciliation??  I reckon that title would give more insight to the contents of your work/book.  And those who are look at the cover page would immediately come to know that there is an effort to clear the confusions by the author.  Ofcourse, I agree that no one should judge the book by its cover 😊

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

Bhaskar YR

 

web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6581140A4CF2A9CE4F109F0684629%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[dwa...@advaita.org.uk]

 

Just a brief correction. I am adding the gist of what Putran-ji and I have discussed to the introductory material of Vol. 2 since I believe that a clarification of my own position etc. will be helpful to the reader.

 

In doing so, I discovered a typo that could be misleading. I said in one of my emails to Putran-ji yesterday: “I always endeavor to prevent the ‘official line’, by which I mean my VivaraNa understanding of Shankara.” The word ‘prevent’ should read ‘present’!

 

Lest anyone should be confused… 😉

 

Dennis

.

[putran M]

Namaskaram Dennis-ji,

Other than in some formal sense by way of family, I am pretty much in the same boat. I am not learning Advaita under a guru, but rather from books of those I deem gurus or acharyas, this forum and its scholar members, etc. So I am sure I can gain important knowledge from your book as well, and that is why I prodded you with questions of this type (although I was also impelled by the fact that I recommended the book to some others and then had the ‘oops’ moment with second thoughts and de-recommended; finally decided to ‘confront’ you directly to get some assurance against such fears).

I also did not say you have to be part of a particular Sampradaya (formally by way of guru or informally) but that if in an author’s writing, they are pushing for an independent understanding that they know does not align with any known sampradaya or ‘acknowledged expert/guru’, then that should be acknowledged clearly. On the flip side, it would also be material to inform the reader if a position the author forwards as Shankara's is also accepted by any established matha, sampradaya, guru. You said you were aware of such concerns and that your don't have intention is to prioritize your personal views, so I was able to get more confidence and trust that I will not be misled in any disingenuous way. 

Just as an example, when I read ~“This is how Sureswaracharya asserted requirement of Sannyasa as well as other modern people but that’s a confusion in Advaita due to prevailing views and this is the real way to understand”, the question comes up “Is this Dennis-ji opposing the consensus of many including a direct disciple of the acharya? What credibility does he have? Does he have the requisite chitta-shuddhi, sadhanachatushtasampatti, mumukshatvam - he is not even a sannyasin? Why should I trust him? Sure he quotes bhashya etc., but then there are plenty of ways to skew an argument by quoting out of context or not having a broad comprehension of all shastras needed." The reader with some background in advaita will want some confidence in the author's own adhikara to be a "teacher" of advaita. 

But if you were to say "This is what Shankara says on this issue ... and this position that formal Sannyasa [similar topic: necessity of direct sampradaya guru's upadesa of mahavakya] is not necessary condition for jnana is also accepted by such and such school or 'acknowledged experts' in advaita", then that adds weight to your argument as being 'bonafide'. I may not know enough of shastras to judge your analysis but when many others who are totally devoted to the philosophy (possibly belonging to established sannyasa order - which gives confidence regarding adhikara/sadhana) are also coming to the same conclusions, then it tells me the chances of being misled in a fanciful way are less. That instead, this is a general topic where there are divergent views among people with adhikara and Dennis-ji is siding with one such view as being the "not-confused" one - then I can read and learn that established viewpoint and understand why it makes sense.

Perhaps everyone else is wrong and only Dennis-ji's unique perspective of Shankara is correct - such a claim if made is also fine. Those who accept it after reading Dennis-ji's work have found their guru and a new lineage begins. Hinduism constantly generates such things. My only point is that any such personal assertion should be out in the open and preferably juxtaposed against other positions ("confusions") held by either amateurs or by clearly identified sampradayas. People like myself may not read the book then, but others may and find insight and 'truth'. That is fine. Sampradaya 'membership' is not Veda vidhi as far as I know; it may be a 'sampradaya vidhi' for those already in a sampradaya. Or that is another 'confusion' for which you can offer your clearance! But sampradaya-teaching has a mark of adhikara knowing which a student/reader may be more willing to place trust in the teacher/writer.

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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/001601d8abd1%2411cbe7c0%243563b740%24%40advaita.org.uk.

[dwa...@advaita.org.uk]

Dear Putran-ji,

 

I think we have ‘flogged’ this topic now! I have added a new, long section to the introduction of Vol. 2 which covers all of the very valuable points that you have made.

 

Just to be absolutely clear: My final authority for all that is said is Shankara.

 

I think my comment to Bhaskar-ji best sums up my position. I believe that I am actually more qualified to write about this than would be a sampradaya teacher by virtue of having gone through the process myself whereas a sampradaya teacher would not have done. In fact, you could say that I am speaking from the vantage point of a more-knowledgeable seeker explaining to less-knowledgeable one so that they can avoid potential pitfalls, rather than as a qualified teacher to a disciple.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKqm3-oWdNaYrpdu9NqptSgb21JLweDJ7ggs1P-NNPf0bEy9yA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Sundar Rajan]

Namaskar Putran-ji,

>> Sampradaya 'membership' is not Veda vidhi as far as I know; it may be a 'sampradaya vidhi' for those already in a sampradaya >> 

May not be a veda vidhi but Sankara does consider Sampradaya to be important as in 'asampradayavit murkhavat upekshaniya', is He cautioning against loners not part of a support structure?.

Maybe he was concerned with following the likes of Eckhart Tolle (The Power of Now), who might have gained insight or even some form of enlightenment but what about continuity?.

Given that Sankara himself was part of a Sampradaya, and he has a universal appeal so many generations later indicates Sampradaya is not an hinderance. Sampradaya to me is like a scaffolding during building construction. Once the seeker has accomplished the goal thru a particular sampradaya, their learning/teaching(s) should resonate with all others?

Regards

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKqm3-oWdNaYrpdu9NqptSgb21JLweDJ7ggs1P-NNPf0bEy9yA%40mail.gmail.com.

[S Venkatraman]

Namaste Putranji,

I have been listening to Swami Paramarthananda for the past 37 years. I have also read the first 5 out of the 10 parts on Pratibandhakas from Mr Dennisji website. For the past 1 year I am also reading Shankara’s commentaries in original Sanskrit. I can assure you that I did not come across one sentence by Dennisji which was contrary to either Swami Paramarthananda’s teachings or Shankara’s commentary. When he quoted on his website (actually an extract from the book) a much revered Swamiji who talked about the positive role of Samadhi in achieving Mukti he also hastened to add that other Sampradayavits do not agree with him. 

Just thought I will let you know. 

Regards,

Venkat

Sent from my iPhone

On 09-Aug-2022, at 8:37 PM, putran M <putr...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKqm3-oWdNaYrpdu9NqptSgb21JLweDJ7ggs1P-NNPf0bEy9yA%40mail.gmail.com.

[putran M]

Namaskaram Sundar-ji,

Yes, there are reasons why these are important. Why a guru, why sannyasa, why a way of teaching, why a particular regimen of sadhana/svadharma, why a sampradaya, organization etc. I think of them as part of Ishvara's Order corresponding with the needs/karmaphala of the jivas. The question of necessity vs importance has to be sorted out carefully. As Dennis-ji said, he also knows more of this problem-side of "loners" since he has had to bang heads with "I know it all" non-traditionalists.

thollmelukaalkizhu

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/1250421595.1578997.1660061845424%40mail.yahoo.com.

[putran M]

Namaskaram Venkataraman-ji,

Thanks. That is what I had initially asked other members to confirm as per their knowledge; but then Dennis-ji himself clarified his position.

thollmelukaalkizhu

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/5FAB1571-00C7-426D-9AE6-7280618C6AC0%40gmail.com.