The Avadhuta Gita of Dattatreya

[xexon 0]

As many of you here are scripture oriented, I've decided to post this for discussion.

 

Maybe you can find a better explanation here than what I've been writing about concerning the nature of the soul when it proclaims itself "God".

 

http://www.starwon.com.au/~soham/avadhuta/chap01.htm

 

 

 

x

[Beggar 0]

That is an impersonal translation.

[Beggar 0]

Bhaktivedanta VedaBase: Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 2.7.4

atrer apatyam abhikāńkṣata āha tuṣṭo

datto mayāham iti yad bhagavān sa dattaḥ

yat-pāda-pańkaja-parāga-pavitra-dehā

yogarddhim āpur ubhayīḿ yadu-haihayādyāḥ

SYNONYMS

atreḥ — of the sage Atri; apatyam — issue; abhikāńkṣataḥ — having prayed for; āha — said it; tuṣṭaḥ — being satisfied; dattaḥ — given over; mayā — by me; aham — myself; iti — thus; yat — because; bhagavān — the Personality of Godhead; saḥ — He; dattaḥ — Dattātreya; yat-pāda — one whose feet; pańkaja — lotus; parāga — dust; pavitra — purified; dehāḥ — body; yoga — mystic; ṛddhim — opulence; āpuḥ — got; ubhayīm — for both the worlds; yadu — the father of the Yadu dynasty; haihaya-ādyāḥ — and others, like King Haihaya.

TRANSLATION

The great sage Atri prayed for offspring, and the Lord, being satisfied with him, promised to incarnate as Atri's son, Dattātreya [Datta, the son of Atri]. And by the grace of the lotus feet of the Lord, many Yadus, Haihayas, etc., became so purified that they obtained both material and spiritual blessings.

PURPORT

Transcendental relations between the Personality of Godhead and the living entities are eternally established in five different affectionate humors, which are known as śānta, dāsya, sakhya, vātsalya and mādhurya. The sage Atri was related with the Lord in the affectionate vātsalya humor, and therefore, as a result of his devotional perfection, he was inclined to have the Personality of Godhead as his son. The Lord accepted his prayer, and He gave Himself as the son of Atri. Such a relation of sonhood between the Lord and His pure devotees can be cited in many instances. And because the Lord is unlimited, He has an unlimited number of father-devotees. Factually the Lord is the father of all living entities, but out of transcendental affection and love between the Lord and His devotees, the Lord takes more pleasure in becoming the son of a devotee than in becoming one's father. The father actually serves the son, whereas the son only demands all sorts of services from the father; therefore a pure devotee who is always inclined to serve the Lord wants Him as the son, and not as the father. The Lord also accepts such service from the devotee, and thus the devotee becomes more than the Lord. The impersonalists desire to become one with the Supreme, but the devotee becomes more than the Lord, surpassing the desire of the greatest monist. Parents and other relatives of the Lord achieve all mystic opulences automatically because of their intimate relationship with the Lord. Such opulences include all details of material enjoyment, salvation and mystic powers. Therefore, the devotee of the Lord does not seek them separately, wasting his valuable time in life. The valuable time of one's life must therefore be fully engaged in the transcendental loving service of the Lord. Then other desirable achievements are automatically gained. But even after obtaining such achievements, one should be on guard against the pitfall of offenses at the feet of the devotees. The vivid example is Haihaya, who achieved all such perfection in devotional service but, because of his offense at the feet of a devotee, was killed by Lord Paraśurāma. The Lord became the son of the great sage Atri and became known as Dattātreya.

[Kulapavana 0]

Vedic writings cater to all kinds of taste. You have something for everyone, just like in real life. Avadhuta Gita is there, so is Srimad Bhagavatam. Your inherent rasa (taste) guides you in your choice. It is childish to argue the superiority of orange flavor versus that of mango. To each their own...

[theist 1]

 

Vedic writings cater to all kinds of taste. You have something for everyone, just like in real life. Avadhuta Gita is there, so is Srimad Bhagavatam. Your inherent rasa (taste) guides you in your choice. It is childish to argue the superiority of orange flavor versus that of mango. To each their own...

 

I disagree. The inherent and highest nature of every living being is to love Krsna.

 

Is it childish to argue in favor of spiritual life vs. material life? No. It is real altruist work.

 

Same with saying personalism is superior to impersonalism. There are higher and lower tastes in life. Relativity finds it's pure expression in relation to devotional service to Krsna. Absolute relativity.

 

Leaving someone with the impression that impersonalism is on par with personalism is a subtle form of violence.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Leaving someone with the impression that impersonalism is on par with personalism is a subtle form of violence.

 

Whatever...there are no monsters under your bed, only the ones you create in your mind. I have not seen the really ugly side of Advaitins, but plenty of religious hatred, fanaticism and violence perpetrated by the so called personalists.

 

There is no doubt that Vedas also promote monism, whether you like it or not. For me personalism is superior, but I respect other tastes as well.

[theist 1]

 

Whatever...there are no monsters under your bed, only the ones you create in your mind. I have not seen the really ugly side of Advaitins, but plenty of religious hatred, fanaticism and violence perpetrated by the so called personalists.

 

There is no doubt that Vedas also promote monism, whether you like it or not. For me personalism is superior, but I respect other tastes as well.

 

Well you totally missed the point of my post and charaterize it as an attack on avaitins.

 

The point was/is there are actually higher and lower tastes in life. That is a fact from the absolute perspective and not just from any jivas perspective.Some attempts at happiness that provide only provide an illusion of happiness are materialism Advaita and voidsim.

 

Do you also advise that materialism is ok "because whatever floats your boat man". How about the guy who thinks happiness is found in his weekly visit to the local domanatrix?

 

Relativity is there in rasa with Krsna. Prabhupada mentions how all rasa's are fulfilling for the soul in that rasa but when looked at neutrally conjugal rasa is best. This is Absolute Relativity. But it MUST be in in connection with Krsna consciousness or it's just another temporary state of illusion.

[xexon 0]

And that is the correct path. Mutual respect. Our only differences are products of a maya drunk mind. It can't be trusted. It is the divider.

 

You want to re-combine, Not divide. You want to see brotherhood instead of sects.

 

Perception of self changes as one goes down any path in life.

 

Those who don't share the new perception with you may have a hard time when you talk about it. Its not going to jive with what they know, but since you know their minds, you can still test your ability with words to at least give them an idea of what its like at that level.

 

If they don't hang you on a cross first of course.

 

The world doesn't like people who look under God's robes.

 

It puts a lot of priests out of work too.

 

 

 

x

[theist 1]

 

There is no doubt that Vedas also promote monism, whether you like it or not. For me personalism is superior, but I respect other tastes as well.

 

Monism is not all the vedas promote. However Krsna consciousness is the great reservoir of water and everything else is only another small pond.

 

So why not unabashedly point to the highest destination?

 

 

Bg. 2.42-43 - Men of small knowledge are very much attached to the flowery words of the Vedas, which recommend various fruitive activities for elevation to heavenly planets, resultant good birth, power, and so forth. Being desirous of sense gratification and opulent life, they say that there is nothing more than this.

Bg. 2.44 - In the minds of those who are too attached to sense enjoyment and material opulence, and who are bewildered by such things, the resolute determination for devotional service to the Supreme Lord does not take place.

Bg. 2.45 - The Vedas deal mainly with the subject of the three modes of material nature. O Arjuna, become transcendental to these three modes. Be free from all dualities and from all anxieties for gain and safety, and be established in the self.

Bg. 2.46 - All purposes served by a small well can at once be served by a great reservoir of water. Similarly, all the purposes of the Vedas can be served to one who knows the purpose behind them.

[xexon 0]

As long as you're there, why not dive in?

 

 

 

x

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Do you also advise that materialism is ok "because whatever floats your boat man". How about the guy who thinks happiness is found in his weekly visit to the local domanatrix?

 

I am not advanced enough to say that I care about that guy. If someone is interested in what I know I am inspired to share. But if one is an advaitin or a materialist and happy about it, I am not concerned. There are enough sincere people for me to talk to about Krsna.

[theist 1]

 

I am not advanced enough to say that I care about that guy. If someone is interested in what I know I am inspired to share. But if one is an advaitin or a materialist and happy about it, I am not concerned. There are enough sincere people for me to talk to about Krsna.

Really? I think you care. I am not talking about being fixed on the eternal plane of pure love. If you see someone about to walk into the street in front of an on-coming truck wouldn't you care enough to warn him?

 

Not an extraordinary thing, just human.

 

And even if the first man won't listen still you say something because it is your duty. Also it is important to say something for the benefit of any others who may be tempted to follow him into the street.

 

This fits best with this individual as he has no intention of listening to anyone but himself however there are others who read these threads beyond the posters. And it is for them that this I AM Godism must be challenged and clarified.

[tackleberry 1]

I don't think it's our place to judge people, because while Lord Krishna says that all asura-s follow advaita, it doesn't necessarily follow that all advaitins are asura-s. Certain good people may also follow advaita, mistaking it to be a valid path.

 

The verse in question, chapter 16.8

 

asatyam apratiṣṭhaḿ te

jagad āhur anīśvaram

aparaspara-sambhūtaḿ

 

kim anyat kāma-haitukam

 

They say that this world is unreal, with no foundation, no God in control. They say it is produced of sex desire and has no cause other than lust.

-------------------------------

 

As one can see, asura-s are clearly advaitins, but the reverse isn't necessarily true. So let's be more compassionate.

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Pranam

 

 

I don't think it's our place to judge people, because while Lord Krishna says that all asura-s follow advaita, it doesn't necessarily follow that all advaitins are asura-s. Certain good people may also follow advaita, mistaking it to be a valid path.

 

 

 

Please where does Shree Krishna say Asura-s follow advaita?

 

You have brought your own defination of advaita and frankly it is way off line.

 

They say that this world is unreal, with no foundation, no God in control. They say it is produced of sex desire and has no cause other than lust.

 

This verse does not describe Advaita as you are trying to imply.

I don’t have to spell out what Asuras are but I can safely say a follower of Advaita philosophy adhere to Yama and niyam as prescribed by Vedas.

 

Shree Krishna clearly says

 

Some worship Me by knowledge sacrifice. Others worship the infinite as the one in all (or non-dual), as the master of all (or dual), and in various other ways. (9.15)

 

Upanishad if you care to read are full off Advaita statements and they are in no way Asuric.

 

 

 

 

As one can see, asura-s are clearly advaitins, but the reverse isn't necessarily true. So let's be more compassionate.

 

 

This clearly is an outrageous statement, regarding followers of advaita philosophy, does nothing but bring disrepute to what ever you are purporting to follow.

 

It behoves vaishnav to be tolerant and compensate but it is sad to note the lack off.

 

To put a wedge between followers of Vedas, simply because one has a different understanding, is wrong and an insult to what Krishna is saying in Gita (9.15)

 

Jai Shree Krishna

[theist 1]

Really the issue is not advaitins it is advaita. Every soul is equally part of Krsna. What is not equal are the philosphies.

[tackleberry 1]

 

Pranam

 

 

 

Please where does Shree Krishna say Asura-s follow advaita?

 

You have brought your own defination of advaita and frankly it is way off line.

 

 

This verse does not describe Advaita as you are trying to imply.

I don’t have to spell out what Asuras are but I can safely say a follower of Advaita philosophy adhere to Yama and niyam as prescribed by Vedas.

 

Shree Krishna clearly says

 

Some worship Me by knowledge sacrifice. Others worship the infinite as the one in all (or non-dual), as the master of all (or dual), and in various other ways. (9.15)

 

Upanishad if you care to read are full off Advaita statements and they are in no way Asuric.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This clearly is an outrageous statement, regarding followers of advaita philosophy, does nothing but bring disrepute to what ever you are purporting to follow.

 

It behoves vaishnav to be tolerant and compensate but it is sad to note the lack off.

 

To put a wedge between followers of Vedas, simply because one has a different understanding, is wrong and an insult to what Krishna is saying in Gita (9.15)

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

Lord Krishna's description of asuras (18.6) applies to advaitins, no one else. The world is unreal, without foundation or Ishwara....all these concepts are held by advaitins. So you just have to put two and two together.

 

Also, tolerance doesn't mean nodding your head at everything. Tolerance of evil isn't tolerance, it's stupidity. Ishavaasya Upanishad encourages people NOT to tolerate but to attack false knowledge.

 

And quite foolishly, you quote Krishna who, btw, didn't ask Arjuna to tolerate the kauravas. So tolerance is just a bogus hindu concept which Indians often follow, because they have neither the knowledge nor the guts to fight back.

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Pranam

 

 

Lord Krishna's description of asuras (18.6) applies to advaitins, no one else. The world is unreal, without foundation or Ishwara....all these concepts are held by advaitins. So you just have to put two and two together.

 

Also, tolerance doesn't mean nodding your head at everything. Tolerance of evil isn't tolerance, it's stupidity. Ishavaasya Upanishad encourages people NOT to tolerate but to attack false knowledge.

 

And quite foolishly, you quote Krishna who, btw, didn't ask Arjuna to tolerate the kauravas. So tolerance is just a bogus hindu concept which Indians often follow, because they have neither the knowledge nor the guts to fight back.

 

You are simply making two and two and coming up with five, You be happy in your knowledge of asuras I am not going to waste my time on you, good bye.

 

Jai Shree Krishna

[kimfelix 0]

Verse 16.8 seems here to be being taken out of context. If one reads the whole description of the asuri sampad it does not seem to apply to one who follows the Advaita Vada. It is about a person who driven only by selfish desire and performs acts of violence that harm others in his pursuit of his goals. The nihilist ideas referred to are those put forward by selfish people who will not accept moral restraints. It isn't really about a philosophical position.

 

Tolerance is certainly a value that is stressed by Bhagavad Gita. It is the essential meaning of 6.9 and is included in the daivi sampad as kshama. We see in 9.15 and 12.3-4 that the Gita accepts both approaches to spiritual realisation though overall it does seem to favour the bhakti marg.

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Pranam

 

Philosophical differences are obvious to anyone, although Yama and Niyam in executing Vedic Dharma are all the same, which are very important.

 

But accentuating differences only serves to reinforce age old perceptions of ‘us’ and ‘them’, stirring up misunderstanding, hatred, and fear, for if my religion is by definition all good, then their religion must be all bad.

 

The Supreme Lord said: Fearlessness, purity of heart, perseverance in the yoga of knowledge, charity, sense restraint, sacrifice, study of the scriptures, austerity, honesty; (16.01)

Nonviolence, truthfulness, absence of anger, renunciation, equanimity, abstaining from malicious talk, compassion for all creatures, freedom from greed, gentleness, modesty, absence of fickleness; (16.02)

Splendor, forgiveness, fortitude, cleanliness, absence of malice, and absence of pride; these are the qualities of those endowed with divine virtues, O Arjuna. (16.03)

 

These virtues are not monopoly of any particular sect but a prerequisite of any one who wants to progress on spiritual ladder.

 

 

Jai Shree Krishna

[Kulapavana 0]

 

The Supreme Lord said: Fearlessness, purity of heart, perseverance in the yoga of knowledge, charity, sense restraint, sacrifice, study of the scriptures, austerity, honesty; (16.01)

Nonviolence, truthfulness, absence of anger, renunciation, equanimity, abstaining from malicious talk, compassion for all creatures, freedom from greed, gentleness, modesty, absence of fickleness; (16.02)

Splendor, forgiveness, fortitude, cleanliness, absence of malice, and absence of pride; these are the qualities of those endowed with divine virtues, O Arjuna. (16.03)

 

These virtues are not monopoly of any particular sect but a prerequisite of any one who wants to progress on spiritual ladder.

 

 

You are 100% correct, and it is a perfect quote in this context. Abstaining from malicious talk is very important. Throwing mud on monists or calling them demons is a clear example of malicious talk, unbecoming any truly godly person.

 

In the name of their religion and their god demonic people even kill innocent human beings. It happens everey day.

[tackleberry 1]

 

You are 100% correct, and it is a perfect quote in this context. Abstaining from malicious talk is very important. Throwing mud on monists or calling them demons is a clear example of malicious talk, unbecoming any truly godly person.

 

In the name of their religion and their god demonic people even kill innocent human beings. It happens everey day.

 

To call a spade a spade isn't malicious talk. As a self-proclaimed Kshatriya, you ought to know that. Recently, there was a muslim on this board, did you and Ganes Prasad pat him on the back? consider him holy? rationalize that islam is also as good as H'ism? Etc. etc.? Didn't you attack him-rightly-for his beliefs? So why a different treatment for advaita and H'ism in general?

[Kulapavana 0]

 

To call a spade a spade isn't malicious talk. As a self-proclaimed Kshatriya, you ought to know that. Recently, there was a muslim on this board, did you and Ganes Prasad pat him on the back? consider him holy? rationalize that islam is also as good as H'ism? Etc. etc.? Didn't you attack him-rightly-for his beliefs? So why a different treatment for advaita and H'ism in general?

 

Monism is part of the Vedic tradition. As long as Monists are respectful to your tradition, why is there need to attack them? Do they come here pretending to be interested in our tradition just to preach that theirs is the only true spirituality and attack our tradition as bogus?

[theist 1]

Tradition. For some of us the important thing is the truth and not what is traditional.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Tradition. For some of us the important thing is the truth and not what is traditional.

 

Monism is part of the Truth.

[theist 1]

 

Monism is part of the Truth.

 

So is the material world. Krsna consciousness is the whole truth.

 

Monism ignores Krsna the Supreme Personality of Godhead therefore monism should be ignored.