Vaishnava_das108

I don't see how you have drawn your conclusion that Advaita is a valid path from the above verse. Just because Arjuna asked about it's veracity does not necessarily mean that it is bona fide. Actually the very fact that Arjuna even brought up this question to Krishna proves that he was in doubt about this issue, and thus brought it up for Krishna's clarification. And Krishna's conclusion is clear: Chapter 12, Verse 2. The Blessed Lord said: He whose mind is fixed on My personal form, always engaged in worshiping Me with great and transcendental faith, is considered by Me to be most perfect. Chapter 12, Verse 3-4. But those who fully worship the unmanifested, that which lies beyond the perception of the senses, the all-pervading, inconceivable, fixed and immovable--the impersonal conception of the Absolute Truth--by controlling the various senses and being equally disposed to everyone, such persons, engaged in the welfare of all, at last achieve Me. Chapter 12, Verse 5. For those whose minds are attached to the unmanifested, impersonal feature of the Supreme, advancement is very troublesome. To make progress in that discipline is always difficult for those who are embodied. Chapter 12, Verse 6-7. For one who worships Me, giving up all his activities unto Me and being devoted to Me without deviation, engaged in devotional service and always meditating upon Me, who has fixed his mind upon Me, O son of Prtha, for him I am the swift deliverer from the ocean of birth and death. Chapter 12, Verse 8. Just fix your mind upon Me, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and engage all your intelligence in Me. Thus you will live in Me always, without a doubt. Also, I don't see how dvaitins would find it hard to understand Advaita, because Advaita is not bona fide. Advaita is based on a speculative and exaggerated interpretation of the Vedanta-sutra. It is not at all confusing to those who are knowers of the truth. It is only confusing for those who follow it, perhaps. Yes we have seen that you have been repeating this same sentiment time and again with vague references to the "Islamic enemy," but nobody else sees an immediate threat, especially from Islam.The topic of Dvaita vs. Advaita has been going on from time immemorial and will continue to do so. Also, please remember that this is not a thread about Dvaita or Advaita. This is about Meerabai. If you would like to discuss the rivalry between Dvaita and Advaita, then please open a new thread and we will discuss it there instead of deviating this thread.

Nobody is questioning this fact. The point is that according to authorized sources, Meerabai attained sayujya-mukti. Thus this is not of the Gaudiya standard, that's all. Now this is slightly insulting when we call the great pundits (not to mention Acharyas) who have written many texts about this very subject by comparing them to,... illiterate farmers? The conclusion should be that as followers of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, we follow in His footsteps and reject Advaita philosophy. That may be true, but on the other hand, it is essential subject matter that is worthy of being discussed. A sincere student should not neglect the discussion of such conclusions, considering them controversial, for such discussions strengthen the mind. Thus one's mind becomes attached to Krsna." [Cc. Adi-lila 2.117]

Nobody is questioning this fact. The point is that according to authorized sources, Meerabai attained sayujya-mukti. Thus this is not of the Gaudiya standard, that's all. Now this is slightly insulting when we call the great pundits (not to mention Acharyas) who have written many texts about this very subject by comparing them to,... illiterate farmers? The conclusion should be that as followers of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, we follow in His footsteps and reject Advaita philosophy. That may be true, but on the other hand, it is essential subject matter that is worthy of being discussed. A sincere student should not neglect the discussion of such conclusions, considering them controversial, for such discussions strengthen the mind. Thus one's mind becomes attached to Krsna." [Cc. Adi-lila 2.117]

I used to be an Advaitin. I now have no respect whatsover for it, because of the institutionalized cheating processes that go on in the name of God and "Advaita." Just because Mahaprabhu treated Advaitins with respect does not mean that He approved of their teachings. He taught 'amanina mana dena' - to respect everyone else, and conversely to not expect any respect for himself. And this is evidenced in His conduct towards Advaitins. Of course, we all know that he condemned Mayavada philosophy in many places, as He duly told those very Advaitins. Where did he say that? I don't think so. The only thing I have seen is a essay/commentary on one of Sankara's writings, and Srila Prabhupada specifically used Sankara's writings to condemn typical Mayavada concepts. This is containd in the book 'Science of Self-Realisation.' And since I was an Advaitin myself, I was convinced by Srila Prabhupada's forceful preaching of the fallacies of Advaita.

I used to be an Advaitin. I now have no respect whatsover for it, because of the institutionalized cheating processes that go on in the name of God and "Advaita." Just because Mahaprabhu treated Advaitins with respect does not mean that He approved of their teachings. He taught 'amanina mana dena' - to respect everyone else, and conversely to not expect any respect for himself. And this is evidenced in His conduct towards Advaitins. Of course, we all know that he condemned Mayavada philosophy in many places, as He duly told those very Advaitins. Where did he say that? I don't think so. The only thing I have seen is a essay/commentary on one of Sankara's writings, and Srila Prabhupada specifically used Sankara's writings to condemn typical Mayavada concepts. This is containd in the book 'Science of Self-Realisation.' And since I was an Advaitin myself, I was convinced by Srila Prabhupada's forceful preaching of the fallacies of Advaita.

We have discussed this elsewhere. Shiva is not Vishnu. And Kalki (the future avatar) will not be Vishnu either. He will be qualitatively Vishnu, being a saktyavesa-avatar who will be empowered to destroy. This is related in the Krishna-sandarbha of Srila Jiva Goswami, I believe.

I am so unfortunate that I never received any contact with Jaya Radhe devi-dasi, and that the only piece of art that I have seen of hers is from the attachment given from an above message. The tributes on this thread from many Vaishnavas are saddening to me and it is obvious that she was a very special soul. I pray to Srimati Radharani that She may allow me association with Her beloved devotees.

These are all very nice sentiments, even though they may need a comment here or there, but may I remind you that this is not a discussion about the rivalry of Dvaita and Advaita? This is about Meera and her status as a Vaishnava saint. I respect her devotion to Krishna, but all I am saying is that it is not of the Gaudiya standard, that's all.

These are all very nice sentiments, even though they may need a comment here or there, but may I remind you that this is not a discussion about the rivalry of Dvaita and Advaita? This is about Meera and her status as a Vaishnava saint. I respect her devotion to Krishna, but all I am saying is that it is not of the Gaudiya standard, that's all.

As I have heard it, Mahaprabhu found the manuscript of Brahma-samhita in the Adi-kesava temple in South India. He then told his disciples (whoever was with him) to sit down and make a copy. Thus the original manuscript was copied by the scribes. It was these copies that were taken to Bengal and copied further for everyone.

I happen to have been a member of a in which VedicGer108 was also a member. We used to have many interesting discussions, and I also used to question him about his experiences, some of which are related above. That group then started receiving nasty verbal attacks on Krsna-conscious philosophy by Advaitins, and caused em to leave. I remember that VedicGer then decided to open his own group. This was quite soem time ago. I have been looking for that Gruop and also VG108's group but was unable to find it. Thanks to "Guest" who posted VG's experiences here. I am now one step closer to joining his group and meeting an old friend! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

That would not be surprising, since I am not a disciple of Srila Prabhupada. Thanks for your advice, but I am not questioning the character/integrity of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura. None of my posts have reflected this attitude. I was simply surprised to find out this fact about eating meat. If anyone would have said it, I would not have bothered, but since this information apparently comes from his own hand, I felt that it might be a worthy topic to discuss. In this regard, the topic now seems to have diverted to the authenticity of the Svalikhita-jivani. I am trying to do that very diligently. Thank you.

Dear Jahnava-Nitai prabhu, I suppose that this discussion no longer has any relevance to the "Sanskrit" category. How about moving it to the "Spiritual Discussions" forum, where we might get opinions/ideas from more posters? Just an idea ..

Exactly, and the very first sentence on that Advaitic website states that Meera was believed to be the incarnation of Radha. This is impossible, because we all know that the relation between Radha and Krishna was that of parakiya-rasa and not svakiya-rasa. My source of information regarding Meera's attainment was from Gour Govinda Swami. He mentioned in a talk that Meera met Jiva Goswami and had ultimately attained sayujya-mukti, and that we (as Gaudiya Vaishnavas) do not care for such goals. And where is "there"? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif Does that include Advaitins? I know plenty of Advaitin devotees of Krishna and Vishnu. They are not going to achieve the same goal as a Vaishnava, regardless of which sampradaya they come from.

Exactly, and the very first sentence on that Advaitic website states that Meera was believed to be the incarnation of Radha. This is impossible, because we all know that the relation between Radha and Krishna was that of parakiya-rasa and not svakiya-rasa. My source of information regarding Meera's attainment was from Gour Govinda Swami. He mentioned in a talk that Meera met Jiva Goswami and had ultimately attained sayujya-mukti, and that we (as Gaudiya Vaishnavas) do not care for such goals. And where is "there"? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif Does that include Advaitins? I know plenty of Advaitin devotees of Krishna and Vishnu. They are not going to achieve the same goal as a Vaishnava, regardless of which sampradaya they come from.

Ha ha ha ha ha! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif I feel exactly the same!

Ha ha ha ha ha! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif I feel exactly the same!

With all due respects, I don't see how. The Advaita philosophy is an *interpretation* of the scriptures, and especially of the Vedanta-sutra. Dvaita is also an interpretation. What we must do is to analyse which interpretation fits closely with the import of the scriptures themselves, with necessary backup evidence. Well, Chaitanya didn't just advised not to read Advaitic literature with a view to reading it when one gets more "advanced." He said not to read it, period. Specifically, He said that one who reads it, everything will get spoiled and destroyed (mayavadi-bhasya sunile haya sarva-nasa). Of course one may read Advaitic literature for the purpose of analysing their arguments with a view to preaching, but Advaitic literature as a whole serves veritably no purpose for spiritual aspiration. Okay, but we don't need to wait until we reach God, for that would itself be wasting valuable time. We simply have to rely on the words of the Acharyas, who have done the necessary research, and follow them. According to the opinion of the realized Acharyas, Advaitins will merge into the Brahman effulgence and ultimately fall from that state, but a devotee of Krishna will reach Goloka Vrindavan and never fall.

With all due respects, I don't see how. The Advaita philosophy is an *interpretation* of the scriptures, and especially of the Vedanta-sutra. Dvaita is also an interpretation. What we must do is to analyse which interpretation fits closely with the import of the scriptures themselves, with necessary backup evidence. Well, Chaitanya didn't just advised not to read Advaitic literature with a view to reading it when one gets more "advanced." He said not to read it, period. Specifically, He said that one who reads it, everything will get spoiled and destroyed (mayavadi-bhasya sunile haya sarva-nasa). Of course one may read Advaitic literature for the purpose of analysing their arguments with a view to preaching, but Advaitic literature as a whole serves veritably no purpose for spiritual aspiration. Okay, but we don't need to wait until we reach God, for that would itself be wasting valuable time. We simply have to rely on the words of the Acharyas, who have done the necessary research, and follow them. According to the opinion of the realized Acharyas, Advaitins will merge into the Brahman effulgence and ultimately fall from that state, but a devotee of Krishna will reach Goloka Vrindavan and never fall.

True, but the definition of 'mukti' in those Vaishnava groups are not the same as the Advaitic one, viz., sayujya-mukti.

True, but the definition of 'mukti' in those Vaishnava groups are not the same as the Advaitic one, viz., sayujya-mukti.

Nice, but it is not altogether appropriate to glean information from an Advaitic site.

Nice, but it is not altogether appropriate to glean information from an Advaitic site.

Interesting... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif Does anyone have a copy of "Vaktivinod Charit," or is LPT telling a likely tale?

Happy New Year to all Krishna-bhaktas everywhere! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif