Vishishta - Advaita

[Guest guest]

, "Sankar Viswanathan"

<sankarrukku wrote:

Thanks sankarrukku ji for elaborating it further.

 

will you please throw some light on Vishishta-Advaita and its

relation/difference with Advaita & Dvaita?

 

with love

 

baba

[Guest guest]

Advaita literally means “not twoâ€; thus this is what we refer to as a

“monistic†(or non-dualistic) system, which emphasises oneness.

Ishvara or God is seen as the manifestation of Brahman to human mind

under the influence of an illusionary power called Avidya.

Subsequent Vedantins debated whether the reality of Brahman was saguna

(with attributes) or nirguna (without attributes). Belief in the

concept of Saguna Brahman gave rise to a proliferation of devotional

attitudes. Advaita is strictly grounded in the thought that the

ultimate truth is Nirguna Brahman.

 

The Vishistadvaita and Dvaita schools believed in an ultimately saguna

Brahman.

 

Ramanujacharya was the foremost proponent of Saguna Brahman, the

concept of Brahman or God, the ultimate power, having a definite form,

name, and attributes: he saw Sriman Narayana as the supreme Brahman.

He taught that Ultimate reality had three aspects: Ishvara (Vishnu),

cit (soul), and acit (matter). Vishnu is the only independent reality,

while souls and matter are dependent on God for their existence.

Because of this qualification of Ultimate reality, Ramanuja’s system

is known as qualified non-dualism. (Vishishta-Advaita)

 

Like Ramanuja, Madhvacharya identified God with Vishnu, but his view

of reality was purely dualistic and is therefore called Dvaita

(dualistic).

 

As per the old classification of the Philosophical systems all the

three schools belong to Uttara Mimamsa or Vedanta school. All these

are based on interpretations of Badarayanas’s Brahma Sutra.

 

A well balanced article on the systems of Hindu Philosophy can be

found here.

http://www.iep.utm.edu/h/hindu-ph.htm

 

By the way the systems of Philosophy has nothing to do with Avataras.

Avataras or incarnations in human or other form is a product of the

Purana/Itihasa period of Hinduism. Though now most of the Hindus

believe in this, it is mostly confined to the worship of Maha Vishnu.

Though according to Peria Puranam ( a Tamil text) Lord Siva takes

human form, it is only for alleviating the problems of a particular

Bhaktha. Siva and Sakthi appear in many forms, but no avatars.

 

Unfortunately the concept of avatars has lead to a host of Living gods

and goddesses. According to my last count there are more than 50

living gods/goddesses.

 

Is it not strange that Sankara, Ramanuja, Madhava and other great

Acharyas of the past were not called human reincarnations of God ( I

agree that some followers call them so) whereas every other guru calls

himself an avatar now. Sri Ramakrishna, Ramana Maharishi, Swami

Vivikananda, and Sri Aurobindo were some of the great modern Acharyas.

 

What Hinduism needs today are great Acharyas and not living

gods/goddesses.

 

We need movements and not cults.

 

 

 

, beirutkababa <no_reply wrote:

>

> , "Sankar Viswanathan"

> <sankarrukku@> wrote:

> Thanks sankarrukku ji for elaborating it further.

>

> will you please throw some light on Vishishta-Advaita and its

> relation/difference with Advaita & Dvaita?

>

> with love

>

> baba

>

[Guest guest]

You are wrong. Because Shankara Himself told 'Shivah Kevaloham' to His disciples, which means 'I am Lord Shiva.' (incarnation of Shiva). Lord Krishna also told that He is the human incarnation but to Arjuna only to whom He preached Gita.

First of all I want to know, Why do you mean by Acharya?

It is very sorrow to see that, what a Lord in human form (Satguru) cannot do, will be done by acharyas! I can definitely say from your wording that you are not referring to Satguru as acharya because Satuguru is Lord only and you are saying Lord in human form cannot do, but acharyas can do.

If you refer to acharyas like Drona & Kripa, do you mean that what Lord Krishna cannot do, will be done by these acharyas? You do not want to accept the greatness of Lord in Human form.

AVAJANANTI MAM MUDHA MANUSHIM TANUMASHRITAM |

PARAM BHAVAMAJANANTO MAMA BHUTAMAHESHVARAM || 9-11||

When I enter the human body in becoming the human incarnation, the human beings who are egoistic and jealous do not recognize Me, the Lord of this world. They treat Me as a human being and repel against Me due to their inherent repulsion towards any greatness seen in their co-human beings. Instead of accepting Me as the greatest, they hate and even insult Me.

—Bhagavad Gita

 

What do you mean by movement and cult?

Lord in human also comes and preaches. There may be some followers of Him.. The whole system may look like a movement or cult. There may be similar ones under the guidance of human beings also. You should differentiate amongst them and identify the true one using your intelligence, instead of making a comment like this.

At the lotus feet of Shri Datta Swami

surya

http://www.universal-spirituality.org

 

Sankar Viswanathan <sankarrukku > wrote:

Is it not strange that Sankara, Ramanuja, Madhava and other great

Acharyas of the past were not called human reincarnations of God ( I

agree that some followers call them so) whereas every other guru calls

himself an avatar now. Sri Ramakrishna, Ramana Maharishi, Swami

Vivikananda, and Sri Aurobindo were some of the great modern Acharyas.

 

What Hinduism needs today are great Acharyas and not living

gods/goddesses.

 

We need movements and not cults.

 

 

 

 

 

Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs.Try it free.

[Guest guest]

, "Sankar Viswanathan"

<sankarrukku wrote:

 

Thanks respected sankarrukku ji,

 

so what i understand from you post is that

 

Dvait and Vishishta-advait both accept Brham as Sagun

whereas Advaita points to Brham without attributes ?

 

that is the only difference. did i get it correctly?

 

Then Shakta Path...what it should be called ? vis-ad or dvait?

 

love

 

baba

[Guest guest]

, prakki surya <dattapr2000

wrote:

>

> You are wrong. Because Shankara Himself told 'Shivah Kevaloham' to

 

Dear Surya ji

 

All the shiva bhaktas always chant "Shivoham" but that does not

mean that they are declaring themselves as incarnation of Shiva.

 

Shiva is a state of Being, and anyone who reaches that state,

will say shivoham

 

With all respects to your Sadguru, i would like to tell you that

Sankarrukku is right when he says that now a days there is a flood

of incarnations. I dont deny that your sadguru may be a very high

soul, but merely your writing on internet does not prove anything

about him.

 

I will not name but most of the gurus declare themselves as

incarnations of God, which is not correct.

 

There is only Incarnation mentioned in our scriptures and that

is Kalki Avtar and which will come before the end of Kaliyuga.

[Guest guest]

When the students of Adi Sankara uttered Aham Brahma Asmi (I am Brahman), Sankara tolerated but when Sankara told Sivoham (I am Eswara), the disciples also told Sivoham. Then Sankara swallowed the molten lead and showed His controlling power. The disciples could not do so. Then Sankara told Sivah Kevaloham (Only I am the Siva).

The simple argument of Advaita scholars is that the Lord wished to create this world. The life or simple awareness is essential to have a wish. Therefore, the Lord is awareness. The same awareness is in every human being. Every human being is also wishing just like the Lord created this world by His Wish, which is His imagination only. Similarly the human being is also creating its own imaginary world. But there is lot of difference between a hill present in this real world, which is the imagination of the Lord and the hill present in the imaginary world of the human being. If the same awareness is present in the Lord and the human being, both the hills should not have any difference. Since the hills are totally different, there is total difference between the awareness of the Lord and the awareness in the human being.

Infact the Lord gave the faculty of imagination to the human being so that he will understand the process of imagination of the Lord in creating the world. But this foolish human being extends the concept into the model and thinks that the model itself is the concept. A model or example cannot be the original concept. Therefore you have to withdraw the attraction or the bond not only from the seven external circles, but also from yourself because you are thinking that you are the Lord and you are attracted towards yourself. Thus finally this self-bond which is also an illusion should be broken and the total attraction should be shifted towards the external super soul or the Lord. Are you greater than Hanuman in any angle? Did He not know Aham Brahmasmi? Are you greater scholar than Hanuman, who always told Daasoham, which means that He is the servant of Rama, who is the then Human Incarnation? If you put these questions to yourself, your illusion of self-bond also

disappears.

At the lotus feet of Shri Datta Swami

surya

http://www.universal-spirituality.org

beirutkababa <no_reply> wrote:

[Guest guest]

"There is only Incarnation mentioned in our scriptures and that

is Kalki Avtar and which will come before the end of Kaliyuga."

 

So what about sri chaitannia or ramakrishna are they not incarnations ?

In kathamrita ramakrishna reffers to lord Rama as purna bramha narayana.

In ramayana parasurama is reffered to as partavatara (if i am right in my understanding) whereas Lord Rama is full blown avatara of vishnu.

What is this concept of full and part avatara ?

so is Ramakrishna / sri chaitannia part avatars ...and Kalki who will come at the end of kaliyuga will be the full incarnation(purna bramha narayana)

br

Aditya

 

beirutkababa <no_reply> wrote:

, prakki surya

 

 

 

 

 

 

Get on board. You're invited to try the new Mail Beta.

[Guest guest]

> what about sri chaitannia or ramakrishna are they not incarnations ?

> In kathamrita ramakrishna reffers to lord Rama as purna bramha

>narayana.

Chaitaniya and Ramakrishna were Higher souls, who found enlightenment,

but that doesnt make them "Avataars". Some people who do meditation

for many life times become released from birth cycle- Ramakrishna,

Vivekananda, Yogananda, Sivananda etc. But that doesnt mean they are

Avataars.

 

I dont think either Chaitya or Ramakrishna(or Vivekananda or

Yogananda) ever claimed they were Avtaars. But after their death,

their Chelas did, since if the Guru is an Avtaar, the chela gets extra

respect, and their ego goes up!

 

Thats the point being made- the chelas all claim their Guru is an

Avtaar. But 10,000 Gurus claim to be Avtaars in last 50-60 years- Im

not sure our Scriptures allow that many!

 

Krishna is the only Purna Avtaar.

[Guest guest]

dear friend

What is the basis of Kalki avatar coming at the end of Kaliyuga? When is this end of Kali yuga?

Dear Shan racer

from your reply, i understand you don't know about avatars or its characteristics. but, you have decided who is avatar and who is not. Regarding your comments on chelas, i can atleast say those chelas have sacrificed some of their ego and served thinking that their guru is incarnation. So, they are definitely better than us. They went in to water where as we are commenting sitting on the banks.

At the lotus feet of Shri Datta Swami

surya

http://www.universal-spirituality.org