praNAms Sri Vikram prabhuji
Hare Krishna
To provide more context, I am born a SriVaishnava and belong to Visishtadvaita sampradhayam. However philosophically I am aligned with Advaita.
With a deeper understanding of both the perspectives, I believe the teachings of the great acharyas are actually quite aligned (except for the criticisms which are figuratively apples versus oranges).
In a local setting, we just started an initiative to discuss Srimad Bhagavad Gita based on both perspectives - Swami Ramanujacharya's bhashya and Swami Sankaracharya's bhashya.
It is my strong conviction that without a clear understanding of the fundamentals of both sampradayam, a comparative or relative study will end up creating more confusion than illumining clear directions. This is because of root-level differences regarding the nature of bondage, ignorance, knowledge and liberation.
When explained within the right context, there is definite self-consistency and cohesiveness of both philosophies. The attempt of this article is also to provide these minimalistic fundamentals that will enable a clearer understanding of
SBG in different perspectives.
> IMO it is better to get the opinion of traditional acharya-s from both schools of thought before trying to find any similarity between the schools. I reckon Advaita is more flexible and could accommodate different doctrines based on adhikAra bedha and vyAvahArika satya and I really doubt other dualistic school acharya-s would agree to the contention that Advaita vedAnta is the parama siddhAnta of vedAnta.
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
--
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/CAM7AOLeDG%2BZGJ1s0O1eXdXUQo0DXp-V6Mg0n%3DJ3mpToGNGn-Rw%40mail.gmail.com.
- Do you mean to say Sri rAmAnuja’s Sri bhAshya and vedAnta deshikar’s shata dUshAni etc. don’t aware of this alignment, have this clarity and hence taken Advaita as pUrvapaxi for refutation??
- Don’t you think above are the basic tenets of any school of thought to decide the very nature of respective siddhAnta?? If there is difference of opinion with regard to knowledge and liberation what to talk about other things!!??
> IMO it is better to get the opinion of traditional acharya-s from both schools of thought before trying to find any similarity between the schools.
I reckon Advaita is more flexible and could accommodate different doctrines based on adhikAra bedha and vyAvahArika satya and I really doubt other dualistic school acharya-s would agree to the contention that Advaita vedAnta is the parama siddhAnta of vedAnta.
praNAms Sri Vikram prabhuji
Hare Krishna
To clarify, my intent is not to strike a common ground between the two schools. The sampradhayams are quite distinct, with distinct goals and paths. One will not do justice to either sampradhayam by diluting them to arrive at a common ground.
My intent is to appreciate the sampradhayams as what they are, and then more importantly, demonstrate that the other sampradhayam too is valid in their own right.
This is not meant as a research work or for deeper seekers, but just meant to provide enough information to keep the context accurate and clear for discussion amongst common people on the two perspectives.
Ø If it is not for a deeper epistemological analysis of some delicate and complicated doctrinal issues then IMO, instead of finding the alignments between two different schools of thought, it is better to keep it within the boundaries of shishtAchAra, dhyAna, upAsana aspects as these sAdhana-s and AcharaNa-s are quite common in all three-matastha followers.
Indeed. Hence my opinion that prior to any comparative discussion one has to be clear about the fundamentals and context of each school. For instance, Swami Sankaracharya teaches in SBG that jnana alone (without any karma associated) is capable of overcoming ignorance. Swami Ramanujacharya, on the other hand, teaches through SBG that jnana with karma (in the form of upasana or prapatti) is essential for overcoming ignorance. When one reads the SBG shlokas with both bhashyas, it is possible to view that the teachings are at a direct conflict, and consequently conclude with the one explanation that 'seems' more logical and relegate the other. But this is not accurate and appropriate in a comparative study. A brief deeper analysis will point out that the two distinct means (jnana alone or jnana with karma) have been arrived at because of the difference in the fundamental understanding of the nature of ignorance. Once the starting point is understood, the respective directions will be clear. This firm understanding of fundamentals & context is essential for any sampradhayam study, more so for a comparative study. The same is applicable to all scriptures, not just SBG.
Ø I agree but when there is no attempt here to strike the common ground, don’t you think it is better to leave the fundamentals and contexts (as it is) which are essential for the particular traditional study without bringing in the other schools’ perspective and contextual endorsement of some concepts which seem to be similar ??
Bhaskar ji, on a side note, as part of our earlier discussion, the reason I shared fundamentals points on Advaita and the rope-snake analogy is precisely for this - ensuring that we are clear and aligned on the foundations before venturing deeper into the discussion. Otherwise we are talking apples vs oranges.
Ø Yes, perhaps the mOksha concept when talked from the perspective of dualists Vs nondualists its like above. But it is also to be noted Advaita in the form of krama-mukti could accommodate sAlokyAdi mukti but dualists never ever entertain the thoughts like ahaM brahmAsmi or tattvamasi 😊
To re-clarify, the intent is not to strike a common ground or to dilute the sampradhayam standpoints or establish superiority of one over the other. The intent is to clearly state the respective positions, as-is, prior to a comparative study.
Having done that, it is not hard to see that Advaita does not actually stand in conflict (avirodha) against Visishtadvaita.
One doesn't have to switch schools to see that the other school too is valid. One's nishta to their school (IMHO, based on one's temperament) can still be retained.
Ø This broader perspective allowed only in Advaita and I don’t think thoughts like this would be entertained in dualistic schools.
Bhaskar ji, just curious, and not to be mistaken in any other sense, did you read through this article? If so, I would appreciate your feedback on the stated points.
Ø Yes prabhuji, I read it with interest particularly your attempt to explain certain concepts in VA which is also agreeable in Advaita. But lot of things need to be clarified before saying both schools are saying the same thing and accepted in both schools. If possible I would like to highlight some of points tomorrow.
--
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/AM7PR06MB65819B562DD5CABDA90FA919847B2%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.
praNAms Sri Vikram prabhuji
Hare Krishna
Thanks for the clarification. Please go ahead in your endeavor. Yes you are right most of the tri-matastha-s do not have much idea about what their respective acharya said about their siddhAnta and most people would think that visiting the temples, worshipping their acharya-s, praying, serving would enough for the AtmOnnati ( yes it is enough indeed) and hardly they aware of the doctrinal differences which are there and causing ‘antar kalaha’ among these schools. So your attempt of finding the alignment would definitely work when the audience are mere devotees/saadhaka-s from different schools of thought. As we have seen lot of smArta advaitins going rAghavendra mutt, worshipping dvaitaachaarya-s, madhva guru-s etc. without knowing how cruelly dvaitaachaarya-s attack Advaita and Advaita Acharya-s😊 likewise dvaitins having shankara bhagavatpaada photos at home without knowing anything about what their own mataacharya-s said on bhagavatpaada and also Iyengars doing the rudraabhishekam without knowing how vishishtAdvaitins treat rudra in typical sriviashNava saMpradaaya😊 All the best in your efforts prabhuji.
praNAms
Hare Krishna
This is why a samanvaya view is needed. Reconciliation is the key.
It is hard to do. Several attempts have been made in this regard.
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
Bhaskar
pranams Bhaskar Ji,
Reconciliation can never occur at the mass level. They are not driven by
the same principles open-minded and deep thinkers are driven by.
No one can help this situation with the masses unless strong leaders can
make this happen over years or centuries.
*Best Regards,*
*Krishna Kashyap*
praNAms Sri Sada prabhuji
Hare Krishna
Just for the clarification, I have not said anything about using or wearing the Tulasi maala or rudraaksha maala 😊 Just I was talking about prohibition of chanting mantra-s related to rudra / shiva in SrivaishNava sampradaya ( during udaka shaanti paaraayaNa etc.) and how some typicial srivaishNava saMpradAyavAdins take immediate bath and change their yajnopaveeta if even inadvertently having the darshana of ‘smashaaNa vAsi shiva or shiva temple. And one of my Sri VaishNava friend said some hard core Srivaishavite even avoid the shadow of shiva temple or gopuram and they avoid crossing that road itself 😊
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
Just one correction. Most of the Vaishnavates that I know use Tulasi maala and not Rudrasha maala that you mentioned. Trust me, Tulasi maala is simpler to use than Rudrasha maala.
praNAms
Hare Krishna
Even in Vishisthataadvaita, Brahman is infinite. Jeevas and Jagat form the part of Brahman as it was pointed out that Brahman has no sajaati, vijaati bhedas but has swagata bhedas.
Ø Brahman has Swagata bheda ?? Do we advaitins agree to this?? Yes as per Sri Vikram prabhuji and here Sri Sada also seems to agree like in advaita even in vishishtAdvaita there is svagata bheda in brahman !!?? Here is Sri Vikram’s observation in his alignment article :
//quote //
VA: In Brahman there is no sajatiya bheda and there is no vijatiya bheda; however, there is svagata bheda or internal distinctions in the form of distinctions between Brahman, Jiva and Jagat 11 14.
A: Brahman being the one and only efficient & material cause of the manifested universe implies there is no sajatiya or vijatiya bheda in Brahman. But the manifestation of distinct names and forms, by maya, implies the existence of internal differences or svagata bheda in the form of distinct parts.
//unquote//
--
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/AM7PR06MB658148F502422A29CA3B568A847A2%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.
In my book, Journey Beyond in one of the volumes, I have answered Shree Ramanujas seven objections on avidya - just for info.
Ø Brahman has Swagata bheda ?? Do we advaitins agree to this?? Yes as per Sri Vikram prabhuji and here Sri Sada also seems to agree like in advaita even in vishishtAdvaita there is svagata bheda in brahman !!?? Here is Sri Vikram’s observation in his alignment article :
//quote //
VA: In Brahman there is no sajatiya bheda and there is no vijatiya bheda; however, there is svagata bheda or internal distinctions in the form of distinctions between Brahman, Jiva and Jagat 11 14.
A: Brahman being the one and only efficient & material cause of the manifested universe implies there is no sajatiya or vijatiya bheda in Brahman. But the manifestation of distinct names and forms, by maya, implies the existence of internal differences or svagata bheda in the form of distinct parts.
//unquote//
One point that can't be reconciled at all is: The Ramanuja system holds going to Vaikuntha to be the sine qua non for moksha. The member of that system has the sole goal of being in the company of the Lord, serving him, singing his praise, fanning him, etc. of his life. This idea is severely criticised by Shankara in his Mundaka bhashyam:
...
The position of the VA on this matter cannot be compromised. Hence on this crucial issue there can't be a reconciliation between the two systems.
In other words, there are two attitudes of bhakti which are mutually
irreconcilable
1. Bhakti and upAsanA of Srimannarayana as taught by the Advaita acharyas - this is not exclusivist and shows equal empathy towards worship of Shiva or
Devi etc. The idea of ishTa devatA validates and brings under the ambit of the Advaita sAmpradAya *all* devotion to Srimannarayana which is not
exclusivist or theologically sectarian. This type of devotion to Narayana is part of the Advaita tradition.
2. Bhakti and upAsanA of Srimannarayana as explained by Sri Ramanuja which insists on the superiority of devotion to Srimannarayana over devotion to
Shiva or Devi. (As per my understanding).
--
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/CAKk0Te3tw0cyDoOcdz%3Df3O35ss45_wOQinBaRMUnFMXq7786%3DA%40mail.gmail.com.
Namaskaram Shri Subbu ji,Agreeing on the difference. I will defer to Shri Krishna Kashyap ji for sharing more details on SriVaikunta at maha-pralaya. I have heard some conflicting theories and would rather withhold my opinion due to lack of clarity & understanding.
--However, the point I am trying to communicate is that the Advaita concept of krama-mukti is aligned with VA at least until the maha-pralaya state and therefore there should not be any reason for Visishtadvaitins for a conflict or criticism on this point of moksha marga against Advaita. In other words, from VA’s perspective, Advaita does not stand against VA at least until maha-pralaya. Of course Advaita goes a step further in the form of sadyo-mukti, but this should ideally not be a valid topic of criticism either since VA doesn’t believe in this concept or its logic to begin with.with humble prostrations,VikramOn Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 12:12 AM V Subrahmanian <v.subra...@gmail.com> wrote:--Dear Vikram ji,The krama mukti of Advaita involves getting the Advaita aham brahmasmi jnanam in that Brahma loka and remaining there till maha pralaya when that loka also will perish upon which the jivas there who are Jnanis, will become videha muktas as per advaita. The position of VA is that in that ultimate scenario the muktas will be in Vaikuntha, with individual identities. This is because jiva-jiva and jiva-Ishwara bheda is absolutely real in VA.warm regardssubbu
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/CAKk0Te3tw0cyDoOcdz%3Df3O35ss45_wOQinBaRMUnFMXq7786%3DA%40mail.gmail.com.
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/CAM7AOLdSX8qtTHhy9jycwkV03V4sfvPfwyLqJViAzyEG-g6qMg%40mail.gmail.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te08_duqR7KANzuPR8X40-t7Fsu9xUXwBLCUsVWrm3i0rQ%40mail.gmail.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/TY0PR0101MB45163BF0B1092C93E0B48DCEA9782%40TY0PR0101MB4516.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te04ALm_JjSsVrw788Q-QF7JuY_zmB%2BC84VGcuAQW3DyJg%40mail.gmail.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAM7AOLcG%2BQzszeFT23PHxh8qk5303OVHt5_tMT_97s4X5SPfdw%40mail.gmail.com.
Shankara: For that Jnani/devotee: Vasudeva is All, everything. Ramanuja: 'My everything / for me everything is Vasudeva.'
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te0J1iLakv97fW1J67P3wzEhBK-_PdJL7b_aVjLGuMcprQ%40mail.gmail.com.
Namaskaram Subbu-ji,Shankara: For that Jnani/devotee: Vasudeva is All, everything. Ramanuja: 'My everything / for me everything is Vasudeva.'Bit confusing how to distinguish, if we are to see philosophical difference in these two statements. Perhaps it elaborates asShankara: Vasudeva appears as if everything.Ramanuja: everything is a part of and has identity in Vasudeva.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKqm3-p3qkyAhnaLQ2ukEtDfb4cCZtYZkN41ySSxuzL%3DcsY75g%40mail.gmail.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/TY0PR0101MB4516BAF6FA45B55A695483B4A97F2%40TY0PR0101MB4516.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com.
Ravana had the "Salokya Mukti", the highest oamong the three forms of Mukti. Yet he had to take birth, due to his indiscretion at one time. This, in brief, shows the basic difference among the different forms of Mukti.
praNAms
Hare Krishna
sAlOkya is the first type in krama mukti ( the upAsaka would first attain the abode of his upAsya devata) and sAyujya ( in the final stage he would become one with it) is the highest one is it not!!?? ( sAlOkya, sArUpya, sAmeepya and sAyujya)
--
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/AM7PR06MB658103AB9149DF177C843A41847E2%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com.
The Understanding of Bhagavad Gita
It is up to each of us to decide how we want to understand and adopt to the teachings of Bhagavad Gita as per our understanding. Bhagavad Gita can never be understood completely without paying attention to all the verses in all chapters and also in between the verses. One needs reading the linked verses in the entire book to understand the essence of Wisdom contained in Bhagavad Gita. Bhagavad Gita gives the road map to live in peace through the life journey..
Mahatma Gandhi in his book, “Message of Gita” relied on Bhagavad Gita most of the time and states: “I run to my Mother Gita whenever I find myself in difficulties, and up to now she has never failed to comfort me. It is possible that those who are getting comfort from the Gita may get greater help, and see something altogether new, if they come to know the way in which I understand it from day to day.” He further states: “My life has been full of external tragedies and, if they have not left any visible effect on me, I owe it to the teaching of the Bhagavadgita. (From an address to Christian Missionaries, Young India, 6-8-1925)” Aldous Huxley, the English writer found Gita "the most systematic statement of spiritual evolution of endowing value to mankind.", He also felt, Gita is "one of the most clear and comprehensive summaries of perennial philosophy ever revealed; hence its enduring value is subject not only to India but to the entire humanity. Albert Einstein, Oppeheimer (the father of Nuclear Bomb) were also influenced by the teachings of Bhagavad Gita. There are thousands of books on Bhagavad Gita in almost all world languages which showed the entire humanity wanted to understand and they all come with different background and mindset!
It may be true that the understanding of Gita will likely depend on the framework of thought that our mind is tuned to follow. As a consequence, the literal understanding and life path will likely vary between those who follow Shankaracharya’s Advaita and Ramanujacharya’s Visishtadvaitaand. The beauty of Bhagavad Gita is that it does not require for anyone to adopt to a specific philosophical mindset and teachings of Gita are useful for the entire humanity! The academic analysis is useful and the ultimate truth that comes out of this analysis is that “it does not affect the truth of Gita.”
With my warm regards,
Ram Chandran
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/TY0PR0101MB4516E971A831465EE5F692C6A97E2%40TY0PR0101MB4516.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com.