Essays in prabuddha bharatha

[Guest guest]

Namaskaram,

 

I came across the Jan and Feb 2010 editions of Prabuddha Bharatha (of

Ramakrishna order). See:

 

http://www.advaitaashrama.org/pb_archive.php for downloadable copies.

 

The Jan magazine has some nice articles on Advaita as well.

 

It also has a couple of articles under section " The Ramakrishna Movement "

authored by Swami Atmapriyananda and by Jeffrey Long, that attempt to

distinguish Neo-Vedanta from Advaita Vedanta as per Shankaracharya.

 

While members here may not care or know of Sri Ramakrishna and Swami

Vivekananda, you may be able to tell whether the authors have given a fair

treatment of Advaita. I request that learned members read these two articles

carefully and make comments. Thank you.

 

thollmelukaalkizhu

[Guest guest]

Now the turn to consolidate properly.

 

See the editorial of March 2010 issue " Sri Ramakrishna's religion " ; go to the

same site. I encourage all interested to read and make comments.

 

" The reputed philosopher Saris Chandra Chatterjee summed up this position ...

 

'... It is a philosohpy of Advaita #like# Shankara's, but a new type of Advaita.

While agreeing with the traditional Sankarite Advaita in certain fundamental

points, Ramakrishna's Advaita goes beyond Shankara's in certain important

respects. It is more positive than Shankara's Advaita which is more negative. It

is reconciled with Dvaita, Visishtadvaita, Sakti-Advaita of Tantra and other

types of Advaita, while Shankara's Advaita cannot, from the transcendental

standpoint, be reconciled with these.' "

 

To make a careful attempt at dealing with the organization's very smart attempts

at deifying its Person and establishing #his religion#, one must also analyse

whether any suggestions of his uniqueness or just special qualities are really

#his uniqueness#, or whether these are generic saintly qualities that are being

highlighted. The intent of any personality cult is to glorify its Person; the

philosophy is subsidiary to this purpose and the organization will never stand

on philosophy alone, especially on its marketing front.

 

It is also important for us to analyze assertions of " Shankara's Advaita " , etc.

Is Advaita Shankara's own philosophy, or do we understand him as acharya who

elucidated the Vedas, etc? As a personality-cult, one can suspect that the

Ramakrishna Math uses such variables in a manner suited to standardizing their

Person-centric religion - whereas the general understanding would previously

have had different implications.

 

Anyway, others can give more specific comments suited to this forum. Thanks.

 

thollmelukaalkizhu

 

advaitin , " putranm " <putranm wrote:

>

> Namaskaram,

>

> I came across the Jan and Feb 2010 editions of Prabuddha Bharatha (of

Ramakrishna order). See:

>

> http://www.advaitaashrama.org/pb_archive.php for downloadable copies.

>

> The Jan magazine has some nice articles on Advaita as well.

>

> It also has a couple of articles under section " The Ramakrishna Movement "

authored by Swami Atmapriyananda and by Jeffrey Long, that attempt to

distinguish Neo-Vedanta from Advaita Vedanta as per Shankaracharya.

>

> While members here may not care or know of Sri Ramakrishna and Swami

Vivekananda, you may be able to tell whether the authors have given a fair

treatment of Advaita. I request that learned members read these two articles

carefully and make comments. Thank you.

>

> thollmelukaalkizhu

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

 

Neo-vedanta is nothing but " old wine in new bottle " . Unfortunately, the

neo-vedantis claim the " old wine " to be " new wine " .

 

Sankara Vedanta gives much importance to Varna Ashrama Dharma, Nitya /

Naimittika Karma Anushtana like Sandhya Vandana, Panchyatana, Agni Upasana

(worship of Fire) and then in the due course the disciple has to sit at the holy

feet of the guru in person with humility (pariprashnena sevaya..) and study

vedanta. By Sankara Vedanta i mean the Sringeri, Kanchi, Dakshinamurthy Mutt,

Sivaganga, Kudali, Yogananda, Pushpagiri, Sampekatte, Chitrapur, Karavir etc.

 

Neo-vedantis try to by-pass the karma anushtana (which is a fashion now-a-days)

there by end up with karma bhrashtatva. And start their own " isms " and " cults " .

 

Vedanta without Sampradaya Shuddhi / Shrotriya & Brahmanishta Guru Parampara is

just a lip philosophy. I have personally observed the luxorious life styles of

matajis / swamijis of the order. Frankly speaking, i have lost faith in sanyasis

of the current order.

 

If i have hurt anybody' feelings, i am sorry for that.

 

regs,

sriram

 

regs,

sriram

 

advaitin , " putranm " <putranm wrote:

>

> Now the turn to consolidate properly.

>

> See the editorial of March 2010 issue " Sri Ramakrishna's religion " ; go to the

same site. I encourage all interested to read and make comments.

>

> " The reputed philosopher Saris Chandra Chatterjee summed up this position ...

>

> '... It is a philosohpy of Advaita #like# Shankara's, but a new type of

Advaita. While agreeing with the traditional Sankarite Advaita in certain

fundamental points, Ramakrishna's Advaita goes beyond Shankara's in certain

important respects. It is more positive than Shankara's Advaita which is more

negative. It is reconciled with Dvaita, Visishtadvaita, Sakti-Advaita of Tantra

and other types of Advaita, while Shankara's Advaita cannot, from the

transcendental standpoint, be reconciled with these.' "

>

> To make a careful attempt at dealing with the organization's very smart

attempts at deifying its Person and establishing #his religion#, one must also

analyse whether any suggestions of his uniqueness or just special qualities are

really #his uniqueness#, or whether these are generic saintly qualities that are

being highlighted. The intent of any personality cult is to glorify its Person;

the philosophy is subsidiary to this purpose and the organization will never

stand on philosophy alone, especially on its marketing front.

>

> It is also important for us to analyze assertions of " Shankara's Advaita " ,

etc. Is Advaita Shankara's own philosophy, or do we understand him as acharya

who elucidated the Vedas, etc? As a personality-cult, one can suspect that the

Ramakrishna Math uses such variables in a manner suited to standardizing their

Person-centric religion - whereas the general understanding would previously

have had different implications.

>

> Anyway, others can give more specific comments suited to this forum. Thanks.

>

> thollmelukaalkizhu

>

> advaitin , " putranm " <putranm@> wrote:

> >

> > Namaskaram,

> >

> > I came across the Jan and Feb 2010 editions of Prabuddha Bharatha (of

Ramakrishna order). See:

> >

> > http://www.advaitaashrama.org/pb_archive.php for downloadable copies.

> >

> > The Jan magazine has some nice articles on Advaita as well.

> >

> > It also has a couple of articles under section " The Ramakrishna Movement "

authored by Swami Atmapriyananda and by Jeffrey Long, that attempt to

distinguish Neo-Vedanta from Advaita Vedanta as per Shankaracharya.

> >

> > While members here may not care or know of Sri Ramakrishna and Swami

Vivekananda, you may be able to tell whether the authors have given a fair

treatment of Advaita. I request that learned members read these two articles

carefully and make comments. Thank you.

> >

> > thollmelukaalkizhu

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Neo-vedantis try to by-pass the karma anushtana (which

is a fashion now-a-days) there by end up with karma bhrashtatva. And start

their own " isms " and " cults " .

 

praNAms

Hare Krishna

Yes, you are right prabhuji...those who

teach & practice vedAnta in a neo-vedAnta style would not strictly

stick to their nitya & naimittika karmAnushtAna-s...The excuse they

give is after all these karma-s are there for chitta shuddhi & that

chitta shuddhi can be obtained by observing sAdhana chatushtaya...they

donot think shirking from the vaidika karmAnushtAna as per their varNa

dharma (svadharma) is against smruti injunctions (vidhi-s).

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

I am surprised at this, because the monks of Ramakrishna Mission have given us

excellent translations of the bhAShyas and other works of Shankara.Some years

ago I used to attend lectures in the Mission by the monks. They always spoke

about Shankara with great respect. I wonder whether the prsent articles reflect

the official view of the Mission.

As regards nitya karma, many of the present monks are non-traivarnikas and so

these karmas do not apply to them. I have not heard them belittle the importance

of nitya karma for traivarnikas. Indifference to nitya karma is now a common

feature with most people, even those who do not have even an elementary

acquaintance with vedanta. So it is not due to neo-vedanta.

S.N.Sastri

 

advaitin , " putranm " <putranm wrote:

>

> Now the turn to consolidate properly.

>

> See the editorial of March 2010 issue " Sri Ramakrishna's religion " ; go to the

same site. I encourage all interested to read and make comments.

>

> " The reputed philosopher Saris Chandra Chatterjee summed up this position ...

>

> '... It is a philosohpy of Advaita #like# Shankara's, but a new type of

Advaita. While agreeing with the traditional Sankarite Advaita in certain

fundamental points, Ramakrishna's Advaita goes beyond Shankara's in certain

important respects. It is more positive than Shankara's Advaita which is more

negative. It is reconciled with Dvaita, Visishtadvaita, Sakti-Advaita of Tantra

and other types of Advaita, while Shankara's Advaita cannot, from the

transcendental standpoint, be reconciled with these.' "

>

> To make a careful attempt at dealing with the organization's very smart

attempts at deifying its Person and establishing #his religion#, one must also

analyse whether any suggestions of his uniqueness or just special qualities are

really #his uniqueness#, or whether these are generic saintly qualities that are

being highlighted. The intent of any personality cult is to glorify its Person;

the philosophy is subsidiary to this purpose and the organization will never

stand on philosophy alone, especially on its marketing front.

>

> It is also important for us to analyze assertions of " Shankara's Advaita " ,

etc. Is Advaita Shankara's own philosophy, or do we understand him as acharya

who elucidated the Vedas, etc? As a personality-cult, one can suspect that the

Ramakrishna Math uses such variables in a manner suited to standardizing their

Person-centric religion - whereas the general understanding would previously

have had different implications.

>

> Anyway, others can give more specific comments suited to this forum. Thanks.

>

> thollmelukaalkizhu

>

[Guest guest]

Indifference to nitya karma is now a common feature with

most people, even those who do not have even an elementary acquaintance

with vedanta.

praNAms Respected Sri Sastri prabhuji

Hare Krishna

IMHO, the cult which has acquaintance

with vedAnta & citing all excuses for skipping nitya & naimittika

karma-s is more dangerous than the common people who lead purely

materilistic life...Because, these socalled religious / spiritual people

justifying their apathetic attitude and forcing common people to think

differently out of the boundaries of tradition...

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

There are  mainly three objections to Ramakrishna Mission's style and approach.Neo Vedanta : This is the term which was applied to Swami Vivekananda's exposition of Sanatana Dharma by others. He or even the present body of RK Mission dont uphold the Neo Vedanta as understood by others. I  guess it was first used by Romain Rolland. 

What is wrong in putting old wine in the new bottle, if the bottle is acceptable to all ? After all bottle is not important , the wine is.The content is more important than the container. Isnt it a special feature of our Sanatana Dharma  that the 'new' is always welcome?. For the continuous evolution of the outer, while keeping the core intact, I think the new presentation is essential. Why  do we have several smritis such as Parashar, Yajnavalkya and Manu ? The dynamism of the Sanatana Dharma is maintained by the continuous experimentation  and presentation according to the changing social milieu. IMO the saints like Sant Jnanesvar and Tukaram were rebels and people of their times also must have called their teachings Neo Vedanta. Even Bhagavan Krishna stopped the worship of Indra and replaced it with the worship of Govardhana. This was also a small rebellion. 

Finally whatever is against the teachings of Vedanta will be rejected in the long term, whether it is Neo or not.Nitya Karma etc... Swami Vivekananda gave a new meaning to the Nitya karma in terms of service to the poor and needy. In fact  this is the only way to take Vedanta to the masses , otherwise it remains hidden in the minds of ascetics , in the forests. India has suffered enough through centuries because the religion became a monopoly of a few. IMO, this discovery of Swami Vivekananda was path breaking. Let traditional nitya karmas be the private and individual issue for those who want to preserve them. Let there be a freedom to those who want to alter the meaning of Nitya karmas according to the requirement of times. As Sri Ramakrishna said, the coin of Mughal time is useless in the British regime. 

Lifestyle of RK Mission monks...Personally I have known many  monks who  stick to the simple way of living. There may be exceptions. This doesnt mean that it is the official style of functioning of the monks. 

Lastly, as Sastriji says, In RK Mission,I have observed that Sankara's  teachings and comments  are respected and even considered as standard  interpretation of Vedanta at the core.

RegardsDilip DhopavkarOn Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 12:35 PM, snsastri <sn.sastri wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am surprised at this, because the monks of Ramakrishna Mission have given us excellent translations of the bhAShyas and other works of Shankara.Some years ago I used to attend lectures in the Mission by the monks. They always spoke about Shankara with great respect. I wonder whether the prsent articles reflect the official view of the Mission.

As regards nitya karma, many of the present monks are non-traivarnikas and so these karmas do not apply to them. I have not heard them belittle the importance of nitya karma for traivarnikas. Indifference to nitya karma is now a common feature with most people, even those who do not have even an elementary acquaintance with vedanta. So it is not due to neo-vedanta.

S.N.Sastri

 

advaitin , " putranm " <putranm wrote:

>

> Now the turn to consolidate properly.

>

> See the editorial of March 2010 issue " Sri Ramakrishna's religion " ; go to the same site. I encourage all interested to read and make comments.

>

> " The reputed philosopher Saris Chandra Chatterjee summed up this position ...

>

> '... It is a philosohpy of Advaita #like# Shankara's, but a new type of Advaita. While agreeing with the traditional Sankarite Advaita in certain fundamental points, Ramakrishna's Advaita goes beyond Shankara's in certain important respects. It is more positive than Shankara's Advaita which is more negative. It is reconciled with Dvaita, Visishtadvaita, Sakti-Advaita of Tantra and other types of Advaita, while Shankara's Advaita cannot, from the transcendental standpoint, be reconciled with these.' "

>

> To make a careful attempt at dealing with the organization's very smart attempts at deifying its Person and establishing #his religion#, one must also analyse whether any suggestions of his uniqueness or just special qualities are really #his uniqueness#, or whether these are generic saintly qualities that are being highlighted. The intent of any personality cult is to glorify its Person; the philosophy is subsidiary to this purpose and the organization will never stand on philosophy alone, especially on its marketing front.

>

> It is also important for us to analyze assertions of " Shankara's Advaita " , etc. Is Advaita Shankara's own philosophy, or do we understand him as acharya who elucidated the Vedas, etc? As a personality-cult, one can suspect that the Ramakrishna Math uses such variables in a manner suited to standardizing their Person-centric religion - whereas the general understanding would previously have had different implications.

>

> Anyway, others can give more specific comments suited to this forum. Thanks.

>

> thollmelukaalkizhu

>

[Guest guest]

Shastriji,

 

There is no doubt that the monks have deep regard for Shankara and that many of

them are high-class. All that is admitted up-front.

 

But the organization is not static; it is evolving and part of this evolution

involves the consolidation of distinct identity, independent of established

sampradayas and if you observe carefully, independent of Vedas, Shastras, and

all else except the Personality of Sri Ramakrishna (Holy Mother, Swami

Vivekananda, etc). Also the nature of a group is not represented entirely by the

individual you or I happen to meet. The monk that we meet will necessarily be

universal in spirit and outlook; but when the same monk becomes the editor for a

spiritual-monthly of the Order, he will be practical and know where to make the

concessions for the benefit of the organization.

 

So a crucial question becomes what is the agenda of the organization? For this

will guide the little hidden steps that will cover the secret-distance without

being noticed. And in particular here, to what extent is the organization

Personality-dependent and seeking to propagate its Person before Principle? It

is true that Sri Ramakrishna was universal in outlook (ehh - so Shankara or

Kanchi Paramacharya was not?? Clarity please!); but the " Universal temple of Sri

Ramakrishna " is a temple where the Universe can come and worship Sri

Ramakrishna! That is organization pulling the strings. Due to a lack of proper

sampradayic guideline as to how the organization should approach and represent

the Person, the weaker elements of the group eventually pull it down from

Principle to Person, and once in, it becomes exceedingly difficult to get out.

 

In our sampradaya, it is clear (at least to me) that Shankara is a teacher of

the Vedas whose teachings and intent are precise. In the RK Math, this adherence

to the Vedas itself is belittled as being exclusivist (from Bible, etc) which

" Sri Ramakrishna's religion " allows us to transcend, hence it being superior to

traditional Vedanta, etc. etc. Only thing, the compromise happens at a much

lower level, with an implicit Personality dependence. Personality-dependence or

Person-centricism is therefore not " old wine " , at least not " old Vedantic wine " .

It is a sabotaging adulteration seeking oneness with other such cults, and there

is its sole real claim to " newness " .

 

As to understanding Sri Ramakrishna's thought, the best way to get there is to

just read the Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna, editing notwithstanding. We should not

take the present (or earlier) monks' opinions in the matter as worth a pence.

Dasgupta's words probably are the best in the article which any typical Hindu

would naturally have felt, or gone along with. The rest is misery.

 

thollmelukaalkizhu

 

 

advaitin , " snsastri " <sn.sastri wrote:

>

> I am surprised at this, because the monks of Ramakrishna Mission have given us

excellent translations of the bhAShyas and other works of Shankara.Some years

ago I used to attend lectures in the Mission by the monks. They always spoke

about Shankara with great respect. I wonder whether the prsent articles reflect

the official view of the Mission.

> As regards nitya karma, many of the present monks are non-traivarnikas and so

these karmas do not apply to them. I have not heard them belittle the importance

of nitya karma for traivarnikas. Indifference to nitya karma is now a common

feature with most people, even those who do not have even an elementary

acquaintance with vedanta. So it is not due to neo-vedanta.

> S.N.Sastri

>

> advaitin , " putranm " <putranm@> wrote:

> >

> > Now the turn to consolidate properly.

> >

> > See the editorial of March 2010 issue " Sri Ramakrishna's religion " ; go to

the same site. I encourage all interested to read and make comments.

> >

> > " The reputed philosopher Saris Chandra Chatterjee summed up this position

....

> >

> > '... It is a philosohpy of Advaita #like# Shankara's, but a new type of

Advaita. While agreeing with the traditional Sankarite Advaita in certain

fundamental points, Ramakrishna's Advaita goes beyond Shankara's in certain

important respects. It is more positive than Shankara's Advaita which is more

negative. It is reconciled with Dvaita, Visishtadvaita, Sakti-Advaita of Tantra

and other types of Advaita, while Shankara's Advaita cannot, from the

transcendental standpoint, be reconciled with these.' "

> >

> > To make a careful attempt at dealing with the organization's very smart

attempts at deifying its Person and establishing #his religion#, one must also

analyse whether any suggestions of his uniqueness or just special qualities are

really #his uniqueness#, or whether these are generic saintly qualities that are

being highlighted. The intent of any personality cult is to glorify its Person;

the philosophy is subsidiary to this purpose and the organization will never

stand on philosophy alone, especially on its marketing front.

> >

> > It is also important for us to analyze assertions of " Shankara's Advaita " ,

etc. Is Advaita Shankara's own philosophy, or do we understand him as acharya

who elucidated the Vedas, etc? As a personality-cult, one can suspect that the

Ramakrishna Math uses such variables in a manner suited to standardizing their

Person-centric religion - whereas the general understanding would previously

have had different implications.

> >

> > Anyway, others can give more specific comments suited to this forum. Thanks.

> >

> > thollmelukaalkizhu

> >

>

[Guest guest]

In the RK Math, this adherence to the Vedas itself is belittled

as being exclusivist (from Bible, etc) which " Sri Ramakrishna's religion "

allows us to transcend, hence it being superior to traditional Vedanta,

etc. etc. Only thing, the compromise happens at a much lower level, with

an implicit Personality dependence.

praNAms

Hare Krishna

This is a good observation I think. For

that matter, in one of the books (I dont remember the title, may be 'mahAyOga'

by lakshmana sharma?? not sure ) published from RamanAshrama, here the

author prefers ramaNa, as a realized sage's words to eternal & unchanged

vedAntic words...His arguments at the time of reading appered to me was

quite interesting & logical ...But I dont remember even the title of

that book now :-))

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sastriji,

 

Then why the apashurdrAdhikaraNa is violated if they have so much respect for

the Bhagavatpada?

 

Kindly note that my post is not to demean any section of the society but then

Sastra is Sastra. One cannot twist the injunctions as per one's own

convenience.

 

For that matter, i am a broad-minded smarta who welcome all sections of society

into my fold.

 

regs,

sriram

 

advaitin , " snsastri " <sn.sastri wrote:

>

> I am surprised at this, because the monks of Ramakrishna Mission have given us

excellent translations of the bhAShyas and other works of Shankara.Some years

ago I used to attend lectures in the Mission by the monks. They always spoke

about Shankara with great respect. I wonder whether the prsent articles reflect

the official view of the Mission.

> As regards nitya karma, many of the present monks are non-traivarnikas and so

these karmas do not apply to them. I have not heard them belittle the importance

of nitya karma for traivarnikas. Indifference to nitya karma is now a common

feature with most people, even those who do not have even an elementary

acquaintance with vedanta. So it is not due to neo-vedanta.

> S.N.Sastri

>

> advaitin , " putranm " <putranm@> wrote:

> >

> > Now the turn to consolidate properly.

> >

> > See the editorial of March 2010 issue " Sri Ramakrishna's religion " ; go to

the same site. I encourage all interested to read and make comments.

> >

> > " The reputed philosopher Saris Chandra Chatterjee summed up this position

....

> >

> > '... It is a philosohpy of Advaita #like# Shankara's, but a new type of

Advaita. While agreeing with the traditional Sankarite Advaita in certain

fundamental points, Ramakrishna's Advaita goes beyond Shankara's in certain

important respects. It is more positive than Shankara's Advaita which is more

negative. It is reconciled with Dvaita, Visishtadvaita, Sakti-Advaita of Tantra

and other types of Advaita, while Shankara's Advaita cannot, from the

transcendental standpoint, be reconciled with these.' "

> >

> > To make a careful attempt at dealing with the organization's very smart

attempts at deifying its Person and establishing #his religion#, one must also

analyse whether any suggestions of his uniqueness or just special qualities are

really #his uniqueness#, or whether these are generic saintly qualities that are

being highlighted. The intent of any personality cult is to glorify its Person;

the philosophy is subsidiary to this purpose and the organization will never

stand on philosophy alone, especially on its marketing front.

> >

> > It is also important for us to analyze assertions of " Shankara's Advaita " ,

etc. Is Advaita Shankara's own philosophy, or do we understand him as acharya

who elucidated the Vedas, etc? As a personality-cult, one can suspect that the

Ramakrishna Math uses such variables in a manner suited to standardizing their

Person-centric religion - whereas the general understanding would previously

have had different implications.

> >

> > Anyway, others can give more specific comments suited to this forum. Thanks.

> >

> > thollmelukaalkizhu

> >

>

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Venkata Sriram " <sriram_sapthasathi

wrote:

>

> Namaste Sastriji,

>

> Then why the apashurdrAdhikaraNa is violated if they have so much respect for

the Bhagavatpada?

>

> regs,

> sriram

 

Dear Sriram-ji,

You are treading on sensitive ground.

It is not only the Ramakrishna Mission that is violating the apashUdrAdhikarana.

Swami Paramarthananda and Swami Dayananda are also doing the same by teaching

the upanishads to non-traivarNikas. You and and I and Sada-ji and Subbuji who

are writing on the upanishads in this forum which includes many non-traivarNikas

and non-Hindus as members are guilty of the same violation. The view you have

expressed is incompatible with membership of this List and may hurt the feelings

of some members.

I am not interested in supporting the RK Mission. I just tried to look at the

better side of things. For criticism of Shankara no one can equal VijnAna

Bhikshu, in his commentary on the yoga sutras. He descends to outright abusive

language.

The discussion has gone beyond the scope of this List. It is better that it is

closed.

Best wishes,

S.N.Sastri

[Guest guest]

hare krishna namaskarams

 

excelllantly said.where is varnasrama dharma practised by all.let us be little practical and realise todays situation of every one of us.one should take what is best in everything.

 

with krishna's blessings

 

baskaran

 

The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage.