headers
Bhaskar YR | 1 Jul 2011 05:32
Picon

Re: (Advaita) Bhakti vs. Jnana

Pranams. Your title I humbly submit is fallacious. Bhakti without Jnana is 
incomplete. Jnana without Bhakti is impossible. At their culmination the 
two are homologous.

praNAms
Hare Krishna

I was about to tell this :-))  The subject  line drafted in such a way 
that bhkti & jnAna are poles apart :-)) bhakti & jnAna is not mutually 
exclusive paths...Both karma & jnAna (sAnkhya),  which are the two mArga-s 
 as enshrined in the geeta have the blend of bhakti. 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
Permalink | Reply | 34 comments |
headers
Bhaskar YR | 1 Jul 2011 05:44
Picon

Re: Nodern science and Vedanta

How different are those who take the claim of him being a 
ShaNmatasthApanAchArya?

praNAms
Hare Krishna

If shankara bhagavatpAda is indeed shaNmatasthApanAchArya, why he 
advocated worship of ONLY 5 deities in paNchAyatana pooja??  Why he 
omitted shaNmukha, though he has taken three members of the same family 
(devi, shiva, gaNapati) for the paNchAyatana pooja!! Kindly note, I am not 
sarcastic here.  I really donot know the answer for this, would be 
grateful if anyone clarifies this doubt.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Bhaskar YR | 1 Jul 2011 05:56
Picon

Re: Modern science and Vedanta

Does the word go with the horse or with the Lord Himself?

praNAms
Hare Krishna

Do you mean to say shankara saying in geeta bhAshya worshipping of horse 
is tAmasik not vinAyaka as the lord??  what about the mention of sapta 
mAtruka-s ?? is there any symbolic meaning for this also??  Kindly note, I 
am not questioning this having  'my' own answers in mind, just interested 
to know how these bhAshya vAkya-s have been interpreted in the books of 
later vyAkhyAnakAra-s in advaita saMpradAya.  BTW, what gUdArtha deepika 
says here on this verse is something different I believe.  Sri Ananda 
Hudli prabhuji, any help to resolve this??

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Venkata sriram P | 1 Jul 2011 06:07
Picon
Favicon

Modern science and Vedanta

 
Dear Subbuji,
 
/////////////////////////////
 
Who is 'vinAyaka'?

There is a popular composition of Sri Muthuswamy Dikshitar in the rAga
'suraTi' with a commencement as under:

श्रीवेङ्कटगिरीशमालोकये विनायक-तुरगारूढम्...
shrIvenkaTagirIshamAlokaye vinAyaka-turagArUDham...

[I behold the Lord of Venkatagiri who is mounted on a horse...]

What is the meaning of the word 'vinAyaka' here? Does it refer to
someone/something that has no lord (vi-nAyaka)? Does the word go with the
horse or with the Lord Himself?

Regards,
subrahmanian.v

///////
 
Vishnu is also called vinAyaka. viH indicates pakShi (bird) which is garuda. One who
is alighted on garuda pakshi is vinAyaka.  
 
BTW, i am busy with my official pressures.  I will get back shortly what is vinAyaka,
mAtrika gaNa & chaturbhagini svarupa in BG.  
 
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Bhaskar YR | 1 Jul 2011 06:19
Picon

Re: Nodern science and Vedanta

Doesn't Sankara respect pariNAmavAda in BSB as the step to reach upwards.

praNAms Sri ram prabhuji
Hare Krishna

At the outset let me clarify that I am not against any deva-devata 
upAsana.  And almost regularly I do chandi pArAyaNa,have attended more 
than 50 chandi hOma-s as a  Ritvik  and in my devatArchana 'vinAyaka would 
get the 'prathama pooja' always...But while examining the bhAshya vAkya-s 
I think we have to be dispassionate in our approach without any subjective 
attachment to any dogma.  Shankara does talk about the 'Ishwara shakti' 
(the potence of lord) in geeta bhAshya but this does not mean that he 
personifies this shakti and that person would be 'Adi parAshakti' devata 
or brAhmi, mAhEshwari, vaishNavi ityAdi sapta mAtruka-s.  Here shakti is 
nothing but prakruti ( we can remember here svetAsvatara shruti :  mAyAntu 
prakrutiM vidyAm mAyinantu maheshwaraM) But as you know, in advaita 
vedAnta parlance, contextually these terminologies have its own meaning 
which cannot be theologized to fit our bill. 

By the way prabhuji, which is that sUtra you are referring here in brahma 
sUtra, kindly let me know.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Bhaskar YR | 1 Jul 2011 06:26
Picon

Re: Modern science and Vedanta

The upAsana of these are followed with lAja bali, tila, haridrAnna, 
dadhyanna etc.  which is 
tamo maya.  

praNAms Sri Sriram prabhuji
Hare Krishna

I shall await for your detailed reply on this.  But do you mean to say 
upAsana with haridrAnna ( rice with turmeric powder) and dadhyanna (curd 
rice) etc. is tamO maya?? In that case upAsana of lalita tripura sundari 
devi is also tamO maya is it not??  Because in sahasranAma you will find 
the reference of both these anna-s.  (haridrAnnaraika rasika hAkini rUpa 
dhAriNi, dadhyAnna sakta hrudaya...etc.)  Please clarify with more 
elaboration please.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Rajaram Venkataramani | 1 Jul 2011 06:27
Picon

Re: (Advaita) Bhakti vs. Jnana

It  should be bhakti marga (bhajana) vs. jnana marga (manana on aham
brahmasmi etc.)? The Lord clearly says that the best is bhagavat
bhajana. Is it it not?

On 01/07/2011, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr@...> wrote:
> Pranams. Your title I humbly submit is fallacious. Bhakti without Jnana is
> incomplete. Jnana without Bhakti is impossible. At their culmination the
> two are homologous.
>
> praNAms
> Hare Krishna
>
> I was about to tell this :-))  The subject  line drafted in such a way
> that bhkti & jnAna are poles apart :-)) bhakti & jnAna is not mutually
> exclusive paths...Both karma & jnAna (sAnkhya),  which are the two mArga-s
>  as enshrined in the geeta have the blend of bhakti.
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster@...
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 33 comments |
headers
Bhaskar YR | 1 Jul 2011 06:38
Picon

Re: (Advaita) Bhakti vs. Jnana

It  should be bhakti marga (bhajana) vs. jnana marga (manana on aham 
brahmasmi etc.)? The Lord clearly says that the best is bhagavat bhajana. 
Is it it not?

praNAms Sri Rajaram prabhuji
Hare Krishna

bhajana, upAsana, dhyAna are all auxiliary sAdhana-s prepares the mind to 
do 'direct' sAdhana-s like shravaNa, manana & nidhidhyAsana.  As per 
advaita, there is no substitute for vedAnta vAkya shravaNa, manana & 
nidhidhyAsana.  sAkshAdeva cha kAraNatvAt shravaNa manana nidhidhyAsanAnAM 
clarifies shankara in taitireeya bhAshya.  And shruti also says AtmA vA 
are drashtavyaH shrOtavyO maNtavyO nidhidhyAsitavyaH...As far as I know, 
there is no compromise on this stand among advaita vedAntins.  Sri 
chandrashekhara bhArati mahAswaminaH has talked about bhajana & nAma 
smaraNa etc. at the cost of 'svadharmAcharaNa' in the work, 'dialogues 
with jagadguru'. 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
Permalink | Reply | 31 comments |
headers
Satish Arigela | 1 Jul 2011 07:26
Picon
Favicon

Re: Modern science and Vedanta

I sent the following yesterday but it did not appear. So here it is again. Will 
only add the following for now:

>The upAsana of these are followed with lAja bali, tila, haridrAnna, dadhyanna 
>etc.  which is 
>
>tamo maya.   It is the nirAsana of such upAsana.

I have the same question that Bhaskar had. Then upAsana of any devata with these 
items is tamomaya? I know of smArta families who were un-influenced by advaita 
or the shankara maTha-s and there they worship these devata-s regularly and 
trust me there is nothing tAmasic about their worship unless one is performing 
it in a "vAmAchAra framework"

I would only request you this and I hope I am not making you angry: Instead of 
spending the intellectual resources on what cannot be reconciled the 
intellectual labor is better spent at something useful. Why not accept things 
for what they are? Why strain so much to come up with explanations which barely 
fit the context.  Adi shankara's greatness is not lowered just because on closer 
observation it is shown that he probably never did a pa~nchAyatana pUja himself 
or by showing he never authored pure tAntrIka works like prapa~nchasAra and 
saundaryalaharI or that he had anything to do with the Shanmata sthApana.

Dear Sriram garu,

>I remember telling you that it is saguNa murti nirAsana. 

If it is saguna mUrti nirAsana, then why pick tumburu rudra/shiva, mAtR^ika-s 
and vinAyaka in specific?
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Jaldhar H. Vyas | 1 Jul 2011 07:52
Gravatar

Re: Mandukyopanishad for the Sanyasis

On Fri, 27 May 2011, Srikanta Narayanaswami wrote:

> I think the Mundakopanishad is for the sanyashis as the name suggests 
> and sanyashis do the mundana

The munDakas were followers of the atharvaveda who underwent a special 
discipline as part of the study of their shakha called shirovrata.  The 
upanishad itself explains it thus.

kriyAvantaH shrotrIyA brahmaniShTa
svayaM juhvata ekarShiM shraddhayantaH |
teShAmevaitAM brahmavidyAM vadeta
shirovrataM vidhivadyaistu chIrNam ||

"Versed in Shruti, established in Brahman[1] who personally sacrifice to
the Ekarshi[2] with faith, to them alone should this brahmavidya be 
taught after duly performing the shirovrata.[3] (3.2.10)

[1] If they are already established in Brahman why would they need to 
learn brahmavidya?  Shankaracharya explains that they are 
aparasminbrahmaNyabhiyuktAH parabrahma bubhu savaH "devoted to the lower 
[i.e. saguna] Brahman who wish to know the higher [i.e. nirguNa] Brahman."

[2] Ekarshi is a name of Agni and this is a specific kind of agnihotra.

[3] A discussion of this shirovrata takes place in brahmasUtra 3.3.3.  It 
is said that this vrata is described in a vedA~nga of the atharva shAkha 
called samAchAra smR^iti.  I think it is no longer extent.  (The 
atharvavedic tradition is rather weak.)
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane