Becoming indifferent to the vedas

[sant 0]

 

The principle is very simple and logical - whenever a seemingly dependent entity is invoked and described by attributes that are solely those of Brahman alone, then that reference should be interpreted to be Brahman and not the dependent entity one might superficially consider it to mean.

Well tell that to the shaivite or shakts.

Te devi bhagwat calls durga brahm in one part and then it says that highest is mula prakriti.

The shiv puran states that shiva is the origin of vishnu and rudra.

WHat will you call that.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

I said "But oddly, we don't see Vaishnavas worshipping Vishnu in temples by chanting Rudram or some other prayer apparently glorifying a devata", and you replied:

 

 

This is false. The Vishnu-sahasranama stotra is popularly chanted by Vaishnavas and it contains names that are normally attributed to other devatas.

 

 

I don't see how quoting Vishnu sahasranama is a valid answer to what I said. If you find a Vishnu temple chanting Rudram, please let me know, then I can consider whether my statement is false or not.

 

As is, you highlighting that there are Vishnu temples that chant Vishnu Sahasranama does not make my statement false.

[Amlesh 1]

 

In other words, you are clueless about the fundamental objective of the Vedas as seen by different schools. Not surprising at all, as Hare Krishnas receive absolutely no exposure to the Vedic corpus.

Mimamsa - Vedas prescribe frutiive actions only

Vedanta/Advaita - Vedas are a mix of frutive action injunctions and Jnana/Bhakti which leads to liberation. The Mumukshu ought to focus on the latter.

Vedanta/Tattvavada - The sole purpose of the Vedas is to promulgate Hari supremacy and Bhakti. Nothing else.

HKS - No clear position. Just a motley of varied and confused views, made up as they go along.

 

Hard to take your perspective on logic or anthing else seriously, as by your own admission, you do not know Vedas 101.

 

Cheers

How do you explain the mixture of fruitive activities with jnana... a dark spot remains a dark spot.

All the different interpretation might be taken but none of them can remove the fruitive part of the Vedas logically... but Krishna only knows how to do it...

 

How does the Shankara Bhasya explains the importance of Activities with a detached mood????

Krishna never interprets the direct meaning of the Vedas... He says about the rituals performed to get good this and that.. but continues on with the other side of coins also... and ultimately reconciles both..

[Amlesh 1]

 

How do you explain the mixture of fruitive activities with jnana... a dark spot remains a dark spot.

All the different interpretation might be taken but none of them can remove the fruitive part of the Vedas logically...

 

How does the Shankara Bhasya explains the importance of Activities with a detached mood????

Krishna never interprets the direct meaning of the Vedas... He says about the rituals performed to get good this and that.. but continues on with the other side of coins also... and ultimately reconciles both..

[kaisersose 0]

 

How do you explain the mixture of fruitive activities with jnana... a dark spot remains a dark spot.

 

Fruitive actions apply to most people. The Jnana portions are for the advanced soul or mumukshu, who has lost interest in material life and seeks a higher goal. Such a person should seek Sanyasa and will focus on the Jnana Khanda. This individual, through Jnana, is able to differentiate between what is heard and what is to be heard - that is differentiate between the Karma Khanda (which is no longer relevant to him) and Jnana Khanda which is the knowledge of his true self.

 

This is is the Advaita position and this is how Shankara interprets 2.52.

 

I do not see the dark spot you see.

 

Cheers

[Amlesh 1]

 

Fruitive actions apply to most people. The Jnana portions are for the advanced soul or mumukshu, who has lost interest in material life and seeks a higher goal. Such a person should seek Sanyasa and will focus on the Jnana Khanda. This individual, through Jnana, is able to differentiate between what is heard and what is to be heard - that is differentiate between the Karma Khanda (which is no longer relevant to him) and Jnana Khanda which is the knowledge of his true self.

 

This is is the Advaita position and this is how Shankara interprets 2.52.

 

I do not see the dark spot you see.

 

Cheers

 

And what is the focus of the Jnana Kanda... what is actually teaches.

 

The Dark Spot is in Bold:

 

VEDAS = FRUITIVE ACTIVITIES + JNANA

 

In any case, has Jnana anything to do with the Detachment from activities?

[kaisersose 0]

 

And what is the focus of the Jnana Kanda... what is actually teaches.

 

The Dark Spot is in Bold:

 

VEDAS = FRUITIVE ACTIVITIES + JNANA

 

In any case, has Jnana anything to do with the Detachment from activities?

 

The Jnana Khanda is the Vedanta, which means the final portion of the Veda. All Vedanta schools recognize 10 Upanishads as the essence of Vedanta. You can find them easily enough.

 

Traditionally, Vedanta as for advanced seekers and in most cases, they would become sanyasis, which implies detachment from worldly interests. Technically, this should also include detachment from Peta and promoting veganism as however loftly, they are still worldly matters.

 

Obviously Sanyasa is not for everyone. It is unlikely that a young person can become a sanyasi and completely detach himself from the affairs of the world. He will be inclined to engage himself in religious and philantropic activites.

 

Cheers

[Amlesh 1]

 

The Jnana Khanda is the Vedanta, which means the final portion of the Veda. All Vedanta schools recognize 10 Upanishads as the essence of Vedanta. You can find them easily enough.

 

Traditionally, Vedanta as for advanced seekers and in most cases, they would become sanyasis, which implies detachment from worldly interests. Technically, this should also include detachment from Peta and promoting veganism as however loftly, they are still worldly matters.

 

Obviously Sanyasa is not for everyone. It is unlikely that a young person can become a sanyasi and completely detach himself from the affairs of the world. He will be inclined to engage himself in religious and philantropic activites.

 

Cheers

 

That is what I was thinking...the Upanishad's teaches detachment from activities.

On the other Hand the portion that you outlined concerning Activities leading to good birth, birth place et al...

 

But Krishna does not negate both... He says.. you have your right in activities but not to its fruits.

He also does not negate detachment here... he says.. do, do it selflessly.

 

Sure.. we do have few reserved SAnyassis.... but rarer than them is the Mahatma... who works selflessly for the welfare of the Universe...

[raghu 2]

 

I don't see how quoting Vishnu sahasranama is a valid answer to what I said. If you find a Vishnu temple chanting Rudram, please let me know, then I can consider whether my statement is false or not.

 

As is, you highlighting that there are Vishnu temples that chant Vishnu Sahasranama does not make my statement false.

 

I was making the point that the VSN contains names like Rudra which can refer to other devatas in some contexts. Which in turn means that there are some standard prayers which even Vaishnavas chant in temples that invoke anya-devata names but which in fact are not. I assumed by "Rudram" you were referring to prayers with the name "Rudra" in them. If you were referring to a specific prayer like Sri Rudram Chamakam then that is a different story. I do agree with the general point that orthodox Vaishnavas usually avoid even the appearance of anya-devata worship for propriety's sake.