Guest guest Posted May 14, 2006 Report Share Posted May 14, 2006 Dear Guru and all, LR> The panchaloka paala devata pooja starts with LR> Ganesha (Prithvi), and proceeds to Brahma (Vaayu), Vishnu (Jala), LR> Rudra (Agni), Gauri (Akasha) pooja. This order is not always the same. There are different orders, and there are some people who actually perform shad-lokapAla puja here in the Satyanarayana puja (adding the only missing consort of the trimurti-s, saraswati). LR> Clearly the intention here's to lift the sadhaka's mind to a higher LR> level, before he can proceed with the pooja proper. Actually, I would argue that lifting the sadhaka's mind through the process of neti, neti _is_ anoher aspect of the pooja proper. Take the example of the satyanarayana puja: The lokapalas & navagrahas are either invoked in separate kalashas, or as avarana devatas. Either way, what results is that they are _not_ in the central kalashas. So also with the digpalakas (and think about what exactly dig-bandhana means). Finally, we invoke lakshmi sameta satyanarayana in the central kalasha. But, this form is not what we are worshipping either. Very often, the prathama avarana puja consists of the anga puja of the devata, so the angas (or the form) is not what we are worshipping either. It is an even more subtler concept. This mental process is puja. Or take the example of yantra puja like sri chakra puja. The upwards triangles represent shiva, and the downwards triangles represent shakti. We worship all of them, and leave the more manifold concepts aside as we move closer to the center. Finally, we reach the center where there is simply a tiny circle-dot of indescribable power, which may be considerede the `union of shiva-shakti', but it is neither an upwards triangle nor a downwards triangle. > [s.Rath:] Really? So are you saying that saamba is not an adjective for > describing shiva? That implies that saamba is a *normal* state of Shiva like > the neck is normally white and sometimes blue. Kindly clarify. So far in the discussions, we have seen (a) shiva as one of the trimurthi-s, with his consort parvati, and (b) shiva as purusha with his shakti prakriti. However, at the level of © brahman, brahman alone 'exists' in the final sense since maya is not real in the eternal sense. If by 'shiva' we refer to the consort of parvati, or maheshvari, both 'samba' and 'sada' become adjectives for describing shiva as being ever with his shakti. But, if we refer to 'brahman' alone, then it is brahman alone, and the word 'saamba' can be used as a 'process' to get one from the two petalled shiva-shakti combination of the 2-petalled agya chakra, to the 1000(countless)- petalled sahasrara-chakra. > [s.Rath:] I wonder why Jaimini did not prefer sadaa in between saamba shiva. Once we add sAmba also, prakriti drops away, since maya is not real in the eternal sense. It operaters in the purview of time & space, but time and space are themselves a part of creation. Thus, maya is not beyond creation. So, sAmba and sadA can be considered contradictory. Or, it might be that sAmba qualifies 'sadA shiva' thus explicitly showing that the 'shiva' aspect (when taken as brahman) is eternal, who is to be taken as purusha / maheshvara when he is with ambA. If we are to worship shiva for any sort of material results, including the development of a clean pure mind, or the destruction of impurity of mind etc, it only makes sense to address our prayers to that shiva who is seemingly yoked to shakti also, and sthus, sAmba shiva alone makes sense for all practical purposes, including jyotisha. > [s.Rath:] . . . example . . . The example that came to mind suddenly was that of a ghantha--a bell and its striker. We can understand that the bell is " shiva " and the striker is its " shakti " . The shakti is the one that causes the bell to sing with the creation of its sound (om-kara). Narasimha wrote that shiva and shakti need to merge for the experience of brahman. This would be analogous to the striker hitting the bell to create the om-kara. However, there is an important point to note. If the striker hit the bell and stayed in contact with the bell, no om-kara would be produced. Only when the striker separates from the bell after hitting it does the beautiful resonance occur. This is the experience of advaita: seeing / hearing the omkara (advaita) in the face of duality. The purer the composition of the bell (through samskaras), and the cleaner the surface of the bell is (purified intellect), the longer the reverberation of om-kara occurs after the striker hits the bell. But, ultimately, in the final sense, we want to get to a point where even the striking is not required for the production of this om- kara. We realize that in a perfect intellect, the ghantha is self- reverberating, and is already producing the om-kara harmonic all by itself. All we had to do is open our ears and listen. ajit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 14, 2006 Report Share Posted May 14, 2006 Om Gurave Namah Namaste Ajit, Thanks for the lovely post. Guruji is right, you indeed have the rare gift of invoking a blessed atmosphere through your posts. > This order is not always the same. There are different orders, and > there are some people who actually perform shad-lokapAla puja here > in the Satyanarayana puja (adding the only missing consort of the > trimurti-s, saraswati). Lakshmi: Could you please list the other orders too for my learning (with the source, if possible) because I've come across only pancha loka paala devata scheme and not the others. If saraswati added as the 6th deity, then what about Lakshmi? Actually, I would argue that lifting the sadhaka's mind through the > process of neti, neti _is_ anoher aspect of the pooja proper. Take > the example of the satyanarayana puja: The lokapalas & navagrahas > are either invoked in > separate kalashas, or as avarana devatas. Either way, what results > is that they are _not_ in the central kalashas. So also with the > digpalakas (and think about what exactly dig-bandhana means). > Finally, we invoke lakshmi sameta satyanarayana in the central > kalasha. But, this form is not what we are worshipping either. > Very often, the prathama avarana puja consists of the anga puja of > the devata, so the angas (or the form) is not what we are > worshipping either. It is an even more subtler concept. This mental > process is puja. Lakshmi: If the aavarana/environment is not important in a pooja, why set it up at all? Infact, The Divinity is invited to the mandapa with full retinue, because all the aavarana and parivaara devatas are extensions/expressions of the vrata Devata and the vratam is considered incomplete and ineffective, without their participation. It is like working of a software program:--)) If the environment is not set up prior, or if the installation is faulty, or if all the components are not loaded properly, will the program work, even though I keep clicking on the icon? > Or take the example of yantra puja like sri chakra puja. The upwards > triangles represent shiva, and the downwards triangles represent > shakti. We worship all of them, and leave the more manifold concepts > aside as we move closer to the center. Finally, we reach the center > where there is simply a tiny circle-dot of indescribable power, > which may be considerede the `union of shiva-shakti', but it is > neither an upwards triangle nor a downwards triangle. Lakshmi: Apart from triangles, Sri Chakra also contains circles, of which the following are are considered as Shiva chakras... binduschaashtadalam padmam padmam shodasapatrakam chatursram cha chatvaari shiva chakraanukramaat. Bindu is a shiva chakra and the triangle encircling it is the shakti chakra... trikona mastakonam cha dasakonadvayam tathaa chaturdasaaram chaitaani shakti chakraani panchachaH. In Sri Chakra pooja also the nava-aavarana pooja is extremely important. Can we reach the sanctum sanctorum without stepping through the successive aavaranas? Can i proceed to the next room if the door is locked? The access and the key to the Devi are controlled by the aavarana devatas, who are none other than various aspects of Mother, and when we propitiate them, we are purifying ourselves and making ourselves ready for the ultimate epiphanic experience. If that were not so there wouldn't have been any need for Devi Khadgamaala stotram, celebrating/invoking the aavarana devatas . Most importantly, even when one is passing through the scores of gods, one knows that they are all leaves / branches of the same Tree, the same Core. Isn't that advaita? Neti Neti is one way of approaching God, Iti is the other way. The first is the path of philosophy, the second is the nature of bhakti. But they both and many others all lead to Paramatma...and that's advaita enough for me. Regards, Lakshmi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 14, 2006 Report Share Posted May 14, 2006 Dear Lakshmi, Lakshmi: Could you please list the other orders too The other krama I remember off the top of my head is Ganesha, Devi, Saraswati, Brahma, Vishnu, Rudra. Lakshmi is either implicitly invoked with Satyanarayana, or explictly invoked in front of the main kalasha. This is given in the prayoga texts used by the Havyaka community. Lakshmi: If the aavarana/environment is not important in a pooja, why set it up at all? I never mentioned that it isn't important. Devas always come in a group with their retinue, and hence, the also have the name `vrindakarah'. But, it is enough to invoke the devata `saparivara', especially in the initial stages. " Ineffectiveness " is often a word mentioned to " goad " the sadhaka into doing better outward ritual, but a first step is better than none at all. For example, when performing the shankha puja, you have to invoke all 10 kalas of agni, 12 kalas of surya and 16 kalas of chandra. And, in the prana pratishtha that precedes the avahana of the devata, these kalas plus an additional 40 need to be invoked. In fact, all the samskaras (starting from garbhadana) need to be performed after avahana before the puja proper starts. Otherwise, the puja is considered incomplete and ineffective. All of these details can be found in standard tantra texts. There are two separate paths in advaita: the path of action & renunciation (pravritti & nivritti). The pujas (particularly pujas like panchayatana puja & sri chakra puja) provide a method by which either can be pursued at a mental level. They are a beautiful form of outward puja, and also a beautiful form of inward puja. In the same puja, different aspects are emphasized for those who prefer outward / inward travels. In the panchayatana puja, the avarana devatas can be considered separate deities of their own, or expansion of the central deity. I'm skipping the majority of the discussion on shri-chakra for now. Yes, you `go through' the avarana devatas to open each locked door. I myself had written " We worship all of them, and leave the more manifold concepts aside as we move closer to the center. " . Once the door is open, do you simply stand at the door looking at the avarana devatas, or do you walk through, leaving aside the manifoldness of the current avarana walking into the more subtle pervasive less- variegated avarana? Setting up a formal avarana environment is important not for the sake of the avarana itself. It is important because it provides a systematic method for opening the door of the avarana, and walking through it, thus leaving the avarana behind. In the same way, samskaras are important since they provide a systematic method for cleansing the mind, and then the sadhaka walks through the door of sannyasa, thus leaving all samskaras behind. The avaranas / samskaras / environments are not important for their own sake. > Most importantly, even when one is passing through the > scores of gods, one knows that they are all leaves / branches of the > same Tree, the same Core. Isn't that advaita? Yes and No. Your understanding has its own value, and I have no right to comment upon it. I am in no way claiming that I know shankara's advaita. But, as per his school of teaching, brahman is " svajatiya vijatiya svagata bheda rahitam " and teaches " brahma- atma-aikyam " of that which is " sat-chit-ananda " . That is advaita. ajit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 15, 2006 Report Share Posted May 15, 2006 Namskaar Sri Lakshmi and Sri AjitI hope my intervention is helpful and not seen as an interruption. " Following Advaita " means that you understand intellectually that Brahman and " I " can't be separate. This develops the shraddha (capacity to know the same despite all odds), titiksha (to endure and accept anything that the ego brings while reacting to its possible death). What is this intellectual understanding: " Brahman is the whole. All that you see is Brahman. All that you hear is Brahman. Only it Exists. The mind, then, evaluates this statement and asks many questions- 1. How am I an individual?2. What separates me from Brahman? 3. Why do I see things as different from me if I am Brahman?4. Why do I see this Universe?.........These questions are dissolved (not answered), through usage of Viveka on the statements of the Shruti. Advaita is hard to understand because the mind always believes in two or more. And Advaita is no - dwaita meaning No-two. Why did they not use 1? The existence of " 1 " is with " 2 " . When one says no-two it is onlyness. The reference to numbers is broken. Ego does not let the mind understand this. Therefore, Advaita is not by realizing it but because you understand that " no-two " is possible.Ajitji, I personally as well the scriptural texts do not allow the usage of the words " Path " . " Path " refers to a goal to be achieved. That I am Brahman is an already achieved end. There is no path of action that will take you to Brahman. Brahman is the foundation on which all action, in action takes place. It is with the power of Brahman that action is seen and through of and conducted. Action is of the nature of achivement. That I do not have and I shall achieve it. " That I do not have " negates Brahman in you. This is the problem. This is the mental dwaita. Born of Maya, Action is not capable of giving the knowledge that " I am Brahman " . Hence, there is no path of action. Renouncing this very thought, is the most proper thing to understand. It is natural. So where is the question of path of renunciation. What are you renouncing? - You are renouncing Avidya. That vidya which is of the nature of " two or more " . Sri Lakshmi, that is Advaita for you take all gods as different aspects of one. They only appear to be many. I hope that you strive for a true teacher of Advaita. You both look adhikaris of this divine knowledge. Do not let this fire die down. If the above words are of no relevance, then, kindly forgive me. Thanks and RegardsBharatOn 5/15/06, Ajit Krishnan < ajit.krishnan wrote: Dear Lakshmi, Lakshmi: Could you please list the other orders too The other krama I remember off the top of my head is Ganesha, Devi, Saraswati, Brahma, Vishnu, Rudra. Lakshmi is either implicitly invoked with Satyanarayana, or explictly invoked in front of the main kalasha. This is given in the prayoga texts used by the Havyaka community. Lakshmi: If the aavarana/environment is not important in a pooja, why set it up at all? I never mentioned that it isn't important. Devas always come in a group with their retinue, and hence, the also have the name `vrindakarah'. But, it is enough to invoke the devata `saparivara', especially in the initial stages. " Ineffectiveness " is often a word mentioned to " goad " the sadhaka into doing better outward ritual, but a first step is better than none at all. For example, when performing the shankha puja, you have to invoke all 10 kalas of agni, 12 kalas of surya and 16 kalas of chandra. And, in the prana pratishtha that precedes the avahana of the devata, these kalas plus an additional 40 need to be invoked. In fact, all the samskaras (starting from garbhadana) need to be performed after avahana before the puja proper starts. Otherwise, the puja is considered incomplete and ineffective. All of these details can be found in standard tantra texts. There are two separate paths in advaita: the path of action & renunciation (pravritti & nivritti). The pujas (particularly pujas like panchayatana puja & sri chakra puja) provide a method by which either can be pursued at a mental level. They are a beautiful form of outward puja, and also a beautiful form of inward puja. In the same puja, different aspects are emphasized for those who prefer outward / inward travels. In the panchayatana puja, the avarana devatas can be considered separate deities of their own, or expansion of the central deity. I'm skipping the majority of the discussion on shri-chakra for now. Yes, you `go through' the avarana devatas to open each locked door. I myself had written " We worship all of them, and leave the more manifold concepts aside as we move closer to the center. " . Once the door is open, do you simply stand at the door looking at the avarana devatas, or do you walk through, leaving aside the manifoldness of the current avarana walking into the more subtle pervasive less- variegated avarana? Setting up a formal avarana environment is important not for the sake of the avarana itself. It is important because it provides a systematic method for opening the door of the avarana, and walking through it, thus leaving the avarana behind. In the same way, samskaras are important since they provide a systematic method for cleansing the mind, and then the sadhaka walks through the door of sannyasa, thus leaving all samskaras behind. The avaranas / samskaras / environments are not important for their own sake. > Most importantly, even when one is passing through the > scores of gods, one knows that they are all leaves / branches of the > same Tree, the same Core. Isn't that advaita? Yes and No. Your understanding has its own value, and I have no right to comment upon it. I am in no way claiming that I know shankara's advaita. But, as per his school of teaching, brahman is " svajatiya vijatiya svagata bheda rahitam " and teaches " brahma- atma-aikyam " of that which is " sat-chit-ananda " . That is advaita. ajit *tat savitur varenyam* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 15, 2006 Report Share Posted May 15, 2006 Om Gurave Namah Dear Ajit, Namaste. > The other krama I remember off the top of my head is Ganesha, Devi, > Saraswati, Brahma, Vishnu, Rudra. Lakshmi is either implicitly > invoked with Satyanarayana, or explictly invoked in front of the > main kalasha. This is given in the prayoga texts used by the Havyaka > community. Lakshmi: I shall do some research to find out more about the krama you have quoted. Btw, I was not asking about Lakshmi as the Shakti of Satyanarayana, but as a loka paalika, because Vishnu is also another form/name of Satyanarayana, yet He's named as one of the loka paalakas. What could be the meaning of shad-loka paalas? Let me state my understanding of the pooja vidhi that precedes the aavahana of the main deity. The pancha loka paala devata pooja represents the propitiation of pancha tattva devatas and with their blessings overcoming the constraints of Space or pancha bhootas. The propitiation of navagrahas enables one to understand/overcome Time. Hence the barrier between the pindanda and brahmanda is erased and one is in the presence of the ashta prakritis, that are involved in all creation. The panchabhoutika / kaala factors that we have assimilated in the earlier processes are now aligned with the Cosmic Consciousness and the resultant vibrations are the pranava, the Vedas and the mantras. ( diks rule hearing ). These three poojas also indicate one's the passage through tamas, rajas and sattwa gunas. From this saatwik threshold one gains the view of Virat Purusha. That Transcendental Power is then invited & converted into a pancha bhoutika form, the kalasham ( " kam " for Brahma, " lam " for Vishnu and " sham " for Shankara), and onto oneself too. The beejaksharas & mantras accompanying the praana pratishta indicate this. The whole process is aimed at energizing and aligning oneself with Cosmic Force. Perhaps Aurobindo's concept of integral yoga approximates this. This is how the Rishis had so effortlessly understood the complexities of the Universe. Without moving an inch from their seats They had the darshanam of brahmaanda in pindaanda (like Sri Krishna had shown to Yashoda) through such communion and could expostulate on the most intricate matters. While we may never be capable of fully understanding or appreciating the implications of the vedic riruals instituted by the sages, at the same time we should not assume that the procedures are redundant or carry only fear value. It is fine if one renounces rituals in totality and prays to God only in an abstract manner. But if the religious rituals are undertaken, they need to be performed with full faith and trikarana shuddhi, and as prescribed in the shastras. But, it is enough to invoke the > devata `saparivara', especially in the initial > stages. " Ineffectiveness " is often a word mentioned to " goad " the > sadhaka Lakshmi: " Ineffectiveness " may not be used as a goad but as a reality. If the other components of a program are not loaded, as they are supposed to be, will the exe or xlb (example:--))file alone work? All these aavarana poojas have to be loaded initially because they are necessary to make the praanapratishta and invokation complete. > Yes, you `go through' the avarana devatas to open each locked door. > I myself had written " We worship all of them, and leave the more > manifold concepts aside as we move closer to the center. " . Once the > door is open, do you simply stand at the door looking at the avarana > devatas, or do you walk through, leaving aside the manifoldness of > the current avarana walking into the more subtle pervasive less- Ø variegated avarana? > Setting up a formal avarana environment is important not for the > sake of the avarana itself. It is important because it provides a > systematic method for opening the door of the avarana, and walking > through it, thus leaving the avarana behind. In the same way, > samskaras are important since they provide a systematic method for > cleansing the mind, and then the sadhaka walks through the door of > sannyasa, thus leaving all samskaras behind. The avaranas / > samskaras / environments are not important for their own sake. Lakshmi: My understanding is that when you leave a aavarana, you also soak up or carry with you the power of the aavarana devatas. It is that energy which rids one of the bad samskaras. Do I dump the alphabet and the other basics I learnt whenever I graduate to the next level? Are the poorva janma samskarams and karma phalam dumped when the next birth occurs? On the contrary it's those accumulated energies that always accompany us and shape us. They are important because they make us what we are, and placed at what level. They also largely decide whether we can go to the next level, because going to the next level is certainly not in our hands. We can only try and it's the Divine will that ultimately decides whether we should. Who knows…one might even get demoted! It is to be borne in mind that Adi Shankara, the advaita prayokta, himself never spurned multiplicity or rituals. He prayed to various deities and left us beautiful hymns as his exalted legacy. He founded the Shankarmutts which remain the bastions of vedic philosophy and rituals. He was the one who stipulated rigorous rituals, like the trikaala pooja etc for the Shankaracharyas. Shankaracharyas are liberated souls and follow the nivritti maarga, so do all these rituals matter to them? If not why did Adi Shankara lay down such a process? Because whether it's householders or sannyasins certain discipline is necessary where spiritual matters are concenrned. In fact the term " sannyasa " can be decoded as samyak+nyaasa!! Adi shankara himself had to under go experiences related to duality in order to learn. He had to do parakaaya pravesham into a dead body to learn about certain facts of life and another episode was when he was accosted and interrogated by the Chandala. It is because duality was a necessary parameter in those learning experiences. His knowledge was not complete until he underwent those experiences. Adi Shankara was a Mahaanubhaava and a ripe Soul, who could enjoy all the paths to God. Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa was another. He found Mother both as Mayaa and Satyam. That ability to synthesize, to find " ekatvam " is true advaita. Regards, Lakshmi sohamsa , " Ajit Krishnan " <ajit.krishnan wrote: > > Dear Lakshmi, > > Lakshmi: Could you please list the other orders too > > The other krama I remember off the top of my head is Ganesha, Devi, > Saraswati, Brahma, Vishnu, Rudra. Lakshmi is either implicitly > invoked with Satyanarayana, or explictly invoked in front of the > main kalasha. This is given in the prayoga texts used by the Havyaka > community. > > Lakshmi: If the aavarana/environment is not important in a pooja, > why set it up at all? > > I never mentioned that it isn't important. Devas always come in a > group with their retinue, and hence, the also have the > name `vrindakarah'. But, it is enough to invoke the > devata `saparivara', especially in the initial > stages. " Ineffectiveness " is often a word mentioned to " goad " the > sadhaka into doing better outward ritual, but a first step is better > than none at all. For example, when performing the shankha puja, you > have to invoke all 10 kalas of agni, 12 kalas of surya and 16 kalas > of chandra. And, in the prana pratishtha that precedes the avahana > of the devata, these kalas plus an additional 40 need to be invoked. > In fact, all the samskaras (starting from garbhadana) need to be > performed after avahana before the puja proper starts. Otherwise, > the puja is considered incomplete and ineffective. All of these > details can be found in standard tantra texts. > > There are two separate paths in advaita: the path of action & > renunciation (pravritti & nivritti). The pujas (particularly pujas > like panchayatana puja & sri chakra puja) provide a method by which > either can be pursued at a mental level. They are a beautiful form > of outward puja, and also a beautiful form of inward puja. In the > same puja, different aspects are emphasized for those who prefer > outward / inward travels. In the panchayatana puja, the avarana > devatas can be considered separate deities of their own, or > expansion of the central deity. > > I'm skipping the majority of the discussion on shri-chakra for now. > Yes, you `go through' the avarana devatas to open each locked door. > I myself had written " We worship all of them, and leave the more > manifold concepts aside as we move closer to the center. " . Once the > door is open, do you simply stand at the door looking at the avarana > devatas, or do you walk through, leaving aside the manifoldness of > the current avarana walking into the more subtle pervasive less- > variegated avarana? > > Setting up a formal avarana environment is important not for the > sake of the avarana itself. It is important because it provides a > systematic method for opening the door of the avarana, and walking > through it, thus leaving the avarana behind. In the same way, > samskaras are important since they provide a systematic method for > cleansing the mind, and then the sadhaka walks through the door of > sannyasa, thus leaving all samskaras behind. The avaranas / > samskaras / environments are not important for their own sake. > > > Most importantly, even when one is passing through the > > scores of gods, one knows that they are all leaves / branches of > the > > same Tree, the same Core. Isn't that advaita? > > Yes and No. Your understanding has its own value, and I have no > right to comment upon it. I am in no way claiming that I know > shankara's advaita. But, as per his school of teaching, brahman > is " svajatiya vijatiya svagata bheda rahitam " and teaches " brahma- > atma-aikyam " of that which is " sat-chit-ananda " . That is advaita. > > ajit > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 15, 2006 Report Share Posted May 15, 2006 Om Gurave Namah Dear Bharat, Namaste. Thank you for your views. It's always a pleasure to hear from you. Like Ajit's, your posts are also very erudite and I always read them without fail, because I learn so much from all of you. It's my bad luck that I could not come to Delhi Conference, otherwise, I would have enjoyed meeting you. I also enjoy discussing with all of you, because these discussions help to debug my thinking. It's my personal feeling that Isavasyam idam sarvam, Brahma satyam jagan mithya..., deho devaalayam prokto... etc are more to be adopted as an attitude than to be quoted as philosophy. Advaita needs practical application and needs to be ingrained into our responses to every day situations. If the feeling " oneness " that Advaita envisages between Brahman and Self is extended between Self and Self, perhaps the world will be a much better and more peaceful place to live in. In a lighter vein, I have also seen " aham brahmaasmi " to be occasionally interpreted only as applicable to self and not to others:--)) Regards, Lakshmi sohamsa , " Bharat Hindu Astrology " <hinduastrology wrote: > > Namskaar Sri Lakshmi and Sri Ajit > > I hope my intervention is helpful and not seen as an interruption. > > " Following Advaita " means that you understand intellectually that Brahman > and " I " can't be separate. This develops the shraddha (capacity to know the > same despite all odds), titiksha (to endure and accept anything that the ego > brings while reacting to its possible death). What is this intellectual > understanding: > > " Brahman is the whole. All that you see is Brahman. All that you hear is > Brahman. Only it Exists. The mind, then, evaluates this statement and asks > many questions- > > 1. How am I an individual? > 2. What separates me from Brahman? > 3. Why do I see things as different from me if I am Brahman? > 4. Why do I see this Universe? > ......... > > These questions are dissolved (not answered), through usage of Viveka on the > statements of the Shruti. > > Advaita is hard to understand because the mind always believes in two or > more. And Advaita is no - dwaita meaning No-two. Why did they not use 1? The > existence of " 1 " is with " 2 " . When one says no-two it is onlyness. The > reference to numbers is broken. Ego does not let the mind understand this. > > Therefore, Advaita is not by realizing it but because you understand that > " no-two " is possible. > > Ajitji, I personally as well the scriptural texts do not allow the usage of > the words " Path " . " Path " refers to a goal to be achieved. That I am Brahman > is an already achieved end. There is no path of action that will take you to > Brahman. Brahman is the foundation on which all action, in action takes > place. It is with the power of Brahman that action is seen and through of > and conducted. Action is of the nature of achivement. That I do not have and > I shall achieve it. " That I do not have " negates Brahman in you. This is the > problem. This is the mental dwaita. > Born of Maya, Action is not capable of giving the knowledge that " I am > Brahman " . > > Hence, there is no path of action. Renouncing this very thought, is the most > proper thing to understand. It is natural. So where is the question of path > of renunciation. What are you renouncing? - You are renouncing Avidya. That > vidya which is of the nature of " two or more " . > > Sri Lakshmi, that is Advaita for you take all gods as different aspects of > one. They only appear to be many. > > I hope that you strive for a true teacher of Advaita. You both look > adhikaris of this divine knowledge. Do not let this fire die down. > > If the above words are of no relevance, then, kindly forgive me. > > Thanks and Regards > Bharat > > > > On 5/15/06, Ajit Krishnan <ajit.krishnan wrote: > > > > Dear Lakshmi, > > > > > > Lakshmi: Could you please list the other orders too > > > > The other krama I remember off the top of my head is Ganesha, Devi, > > Saraswati, Brahma, Vishnu, Rudra. Lakshmi is either implicitly > > invoked with Satyanarayana, or explictly invoked in front of the > > main kalasha. This is given in the prayoga texts used by the Havyaka > > community. > > > > > > Lakshmi: If the aavarana/environment is not important in a pooja, > > why set it up at all? > > > > I never mentioned that it isn't important. Devas always come in a > > group with their retinue, and hence, the also have the > > name `vrindakarah'. But, it is enough to invoke the > > devata `saparivara', especially in the initial > > stages. " Ineffectiveness " is often a word mentioned to " goad " the > > sadhaka into doing better outward ritual, but a first step is better > > than none at all. For example, when performing the shankha puja, you > > have to invoke all 10 kalas of agni, 12 kalas of surya and 16 kalas > > of chandra. And, in the prana pratishtha that precedes the avahana > > of the devata, these kalas plus an additional 40 need to be invoked. > > In fact, all the samskaras (starting from garbhadana) need to be > > performed after avahana before the puja proper starts. Otherwise, > > the puja is considered incomplete and ineffective. All of these > > details can be found in standard tantra texts. > > > > There are two separate paths in advaita: the path of action & > > renunciation (pravritti & nivritti). The pujas (particularly pujas > > like panchayatana puja & sri chakra puja) provide a method by which > > either can be pursued at a mental level. They are a beautiful form > > of outward puja, and also a beautiful form of inward puja. In the > > same puja, different aspects are emphasized for those who prefer > > outward / inward travels. In the panchayatana puja, the avarana > > devatas can be considered separate deities of their own, or > > expansion of the central deity. > > > > I'm skipping the majority of the discussion on shri-chakra for now. > > Yes, you `go through' the avarana devatas to open each locked door. > > I myself had written " We worship all of them, and leave the more > > manifold concepts aside as we move closer to the center. " . Once the > > door is open, do you simply stand at the door looking at the avarana > > devatas, or do you walk through, leaving aside the manifoldness of > > the current avarana walking into the more subtle pervasive less- > > variegated avarana? > > > > Setting up a formal avarana environment is important not for the > > sake of the avarana itself. It is important because it provides a > > systematic method for opening the door of the avarana, and walking > > through it, thus leaving the avarana behind. In the same way, > > samskaras are important since they provide a systematic method for > > cleansing the mind, and then the sadhaka walks through the door of > > sannyasa, thus leaving all samskaras behind. The avaranas / > > samskaras / environments are not important for their own sake. > > > > > > > Most importantly, even when one is passing through the > > > scores of gods, one knows that they are all leaves / branches of > > the > > > same Tree, the same Core. Isn't that advaita? > > > > Yes and No. Your understanding has its own value, and I have no > > right to comment upon it. I am in no way claiming that I know > > shankara's advaita. But, as per his school of teaching, brahman > > is " svajatiya vijatiya svagata bheda rahitam " and teaches " brahma- > > atma-aikyam " of that which is " sat-chit-ananda " . That is advaita. > > > > ajit > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *tat savitur varenyam* > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 15, 2006 Report Share Posted May 15, 2006 Namaskaar Sri LakshmiYes some delusions can catch the mahavakyas into such an abyss. The ego exists in 3 forms:1. I am separate2. I am supreme3. Only I existIn " I am separate " form it defines the individuality. As one achieves success and attributes all the successes to one's ego, the ego expands to " I am supreme " . It starts to believe that it knows a lot more than others and that the others should follow his/her commands. " Only I exist " - the person sees only himself to be existing. All others are meant to serve him. If they do not, he reacts and vents out anger and frustration. Creates problems and uses force and power to subdue others. Taliban thinking is a good example. If you apply this to Gunas - This is the most Tamasic - where " Aham Brahmasmi " is interpreted in the eyes of the ego! The most important characteristic of Tamas being- understanding everything topsy turvy. Dharma becomes Adharma and Adharma becomes Dharma when mind is influenced by Tamas. This is also the reason why, Visistha Advaita gives us an excellent clue in our understanding. One tends to see the Lord in all around him but himself before realizing the same within. The attitude defines the practical implementation. Do not take physical action alone as " practical implementation " . The cycle has to stop. If there is darkness in a room, do you push the darkness out or bring in a candle. Bringing in the candle are words of the shruti and pushing the darkness and trying to transform is action. Wishing you the best in this " path " :)BharatOn 5/15/06, B Lakshmi Ramesh < b_lakshmi_ramesh wrote: Om Gurave Namah Dear Bharat, Namaste. Thank you for your views. It's always a pleasure to hear from you. Like Ajit's, your posts are also very erudite and I always read them without fail, because I learn so much from all of you. It's my bad luck that I could not come to Delhi Conference, otherwise, I would have enjoyed meeting you. I also enjoy discussing with all of you, because these discussions help to debug my thinking. It's my personal feeling that Isavasyam idam sarvam, Brahma satyam jagan mithya..., deho devaalayam prokto... etc are more to be adopted as an attitude than to be quoted as philosophy. Advaita needs practical application and needs to be ingrained into our responses to every day situations. If the feeling " oneness " that Advaita envisages between Brahman and Self is extended between Self and Self, perhaps the world will be a much better and more peaceful place to live in. In a lighter vein, I have also seen " aham brahmaasmi " to be occasionally interpreted only as applicable to self and not to others:--)) Regards, Lakshmi sohamsa , " Bharat Hindu Astrology " <hinduastrology wrote: > > Namskaar Sri Lakshmi and Sri Ajit > > I hope my intervention is helpful and not seen as an interruption. > > " Following Advaita " means that you understand intellectually that Brahman > and " I " can't be separate. This develops the shraddha (capacity to know the > same despite all odds), titiksha (to endure and accept anything that the ego > brings while reacting to its possible death). What is this intellectual > understanding: > > " Brahman is the whole. All that you see is Brahman. All that you hear is > Brahman. Only it Exists. The mind, then, evaluates this statement and asks > many questions- > > 1. How am I an individual? > 2. What separates me from Brahman? > 3. Why do I see things as different from me if I am Brahman? > 4. Why do I see this Universe? > ......... > > These questions are dissolved (not answered), through usage of Viveka on the > statements of the Shruti. > > Advaita is hard to understand because the mind always believes in two or > more. And Advaita is no - dwaita meaning No-two. Why did they not use 1? The > existence of " 1 " is with " 2 " . When one says no-two it is onlyness. The > reference to numbers is broken. Ego does not let the mind understand this. > > Therefore, Advaita is not by realizing it but because you understand that > " no-two " is possible. > > Ajitji, I personally as well the scriptural texts do not allow the usage of > the words " Path " . " Path " refers to a goal to be achieved. That I am Brahman > is an already achieved end. There is no path of action that will take you to > Brahman. Brahman is the foundation on which all action, in action takes > place. It is with the power of Brahman that action is seen and through of > and conducted. Action is of the nature of achivement. That I do not have and > I shall achieve it. " That I do not have " negates Brahman in you. This is the > problem. This is the mental dwaita. > Born of Maya, Action is not capable of giving the knowledge that " I am > Brahman " . > > Hence, there is no path of action. Renouncing this very thought, is the most > proper thing to understand. It is natural. So where is the question of path > of renunciation. What are you renouncing? - You are renouncing Avidya. That > vidya which is of the nature of " two or more " . > > Sri Lakshmi, that is Advaita for you take all gods as different aspects of > one. They only appear to be many. > > I hope that you strive for a true teacher of Advaita. You both look > adhikaris of this divine knowledge. Do not let this fire die down. > > If the above words are of no relevance, then, kindly forgive me. > > Thanks and Regards > Bharat > > > > On 5/15/06, Ajit Krishnan <ajit.krishnan wrote: > > > > Dear Lakshmi, > > > > > > Lakshmi: Could you please list the other orders too > > > > The other krama I remember off the top of my head is Ganesha, Devi, > > Saraswati, Brahma, Vishnu, Rudra. Lakshmi is either implicitly > > invoked with Satyanarayana, or explictly invoked in front of the > > main kalasha. This is given in the prayoga texts used by the Havyaka > > community. > > > > > > Lakshmi: If the aavarana/environment is not important in a pooja, > > why set it up at all? > > > > I never mentioned that it isn't important. Devas always come in a > > group with their retinue, and hence, the also have the > > name `vrindakarah'. But, it is enough to invoke the > > devata `saparivara', especially in the initial > > stages. " Ineffectiveness " is often a word mentioned to " goad " the > > sadhaka into doing better outward ritual, but a first step is better > > than none at all. For example, when performing the shankha puja, you > > have to invoke all 10 kalas of agni, 12 kalas of surya and 16 kalas > > of chandra. And, in the prana pratishtha that precedes the avahana > > of the devata, these kalas plus an additional 40 need to be invoked. > > In fact, all the samskaras (starting from garbhadana) need to be > > performed after avahana before the puja proper starts. Otherwise, > > the puja is considered incomplete and ineffective. All of these > > details can be found in standard tantra texts. > > > > There are two separate paths in advaita: the path of action & > > renunciation (pravritti & nivritti). The pujas (particularly pujas > > like panchayatana puja & sri chakra puja) provide a method by which > > either can be pursued at a mental level. They are a beautiful form > > of outward puja, and also a beautiful form of inward puja. In the > > same puja, different aspects are emphasized for those who prefer > > outward / inward travels. In the panchayatana puja, the avarana > > devatas can be considered separate deities of their own, or > > expansion of the central deity. > > > > I'm skipping the majority of the discussion on shri-chakra for now. > > Yes, you `go through' the avarana devatas to open each locked door. > > I myself had written " We worship all of them, and leave the more > > manifold concepts aside as we move closer to the center. " . Once the > > door is open, do you simply stand at the door looking at the avarana > > devatas, or do you walk through, leaving aside the manifoldness of > > the current avarana walking into the more subtle pervasive less- > > variegated avarana? > > > > Setting up a formal avarana environment is important not for the > > sake of the avarana itself. It is important because it provides a > > systematic method for opening the door of the avarana, and walking > > through it, thus leaving the avarana behind. In the same way, > > samskaras are important since they provide a systematic method for > > cleansing the mind, and then the sadhaka walks through the door of > > sannyasa, thus leaving all samskaras behind. The avaranas / > > samskaras / environments are not important for their own sake. > > > > > > > Most importantly, even when one is passing through the > > > scores of gods, one knows that they are all leaves / branches of > > the > > > same Tree, the same Core. Isn't that advaita? > > > > Yes and No. Your understanding has its own value, and I have no > > right to comment upon it. I am in no way claiming that I know > > shankara's advaita. But, as per his school of teaching, brahman > > is " svajatiya vijatiya svagata bheda rahitam " and teaches " brahma- > > atma-aikyam " of that which is " sat-chit-ananda " . That is advaita. > > > > ajit > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *tat savitur varenyam* > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 15, 2006 Report Share Posted May 15, 2006 Om Gurave Namah Namaste Ajit, In fact the term " sannyasa " can be decoded as > samyak+nyaasa!! > There's no + between samyak and nyaasa. I apologise for the error. Regards, Lakshmi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 15, 2006 Report Share Posted May 15, 2006 Bharat> I personally as well the scriptural texts do not allow the usage of the words " Path " . Within the sampradaya, the terms `pravritti-marga' and `nivritti- marga' are used quite often to get the point across. Lakshmi> What could be the meaning of shad-loka paalas? Generally, 5 devatas do not seem to appear as the number of devatas in any given avarana (of yantras etc). Usually, you have 6 (shat- kona), 6 (anga-puja), 8 (ashta-dala-padma), [[ other even numbered petals ]], 8 (dig-palakas), 8 (ayudhas). The numbers are generally even. When the pancha-loka-pala puja & the navagraha puja are done separately before the Satyanarayana puja proper, they have odd numbers (5 & 9 respectively). However, when they are placed in a single mandala, and understood to be the expansion of the same Sri- Satyanarayana, they themselves become avarana devatas of Sri Satyanarayana. The loka-palakas become 6 with the addition of Saraswati, and the Navagrahas become 8 since Rahu & Ketu (head & tail) are placed in the same dala. So, also, in similar styled pujas, you make come across durga-adi-ashtha-loka-palaka-s. > But if the religious rituals are > undertaken, they need to be performed with full faith and trikarana > shuddhi, and as prescribed in the shastras. > " Ineffectiveness " may not be used as a goad but as a reality. Of course, they need to be performed with faith and shuddhi while sticking to the texts as closely as possible. But, " ineffectiveness " is most certainly a goad also. According to texts, sandhyavandanam is completely ineffective unless it is performed at the trikala sandhyas 1008 times per day. Yet, have you ever heard the mathadhipathis say " If you happen to wake up late, skip it for the day since it would be ineffective anyways? " . Never. But they tell you, you must wake up before sandhya-kala. There is a difference. Ineffectiveness has to be understood differently. Mantras are ineffective unless they are heard directly from a guru. Mantras are ineffective unless they are prescribed from a guru with mantra-shakti. Mantras are ineffective unless their purashcharana is done. Yet, many here will have experiences where they got wonderful results where this was not the case. Ineffectiveness has to be understood differently. If you think I am advocating improperly done pujas, you are mistaken. I am saying that " advaita-bhava " can (and should) be developed in puja also, while simultaneously sticking to all the details prescribed in the texts. As time goes on, and I understand the rules better, I perform them while trying to stick to them as best as I can. For example, even to the level of what mudras need to be used while holding the upachara materials, and to which side & anga of the devata should dhupa / dipa / naivedya be offered. However, while time goes on, I perform the same puja (including the loka pala pujas etc) with much better advaita-bhava. While performing the avarana puja, it has to be done with great shraddha etc, but once the avarana puja is done, and you are worshipping sri- satyanarayana, it is him alone that should be in the mind. No other thought should be there. Thus, the puja teaches us to systematically move inward, and develop a one-pointed intellect. All samskaras are, after all, a preparation for the serious path towards sannyasa that we will undertake in some lifetime. > Do I dump the alphabet and the other basics I learnt whenever I graduate to the next level? Do you still use your fingers to determine the results of 2 + 3? Do you spell out each word in your mind before you type it, or does it just happen? You may not " dump it " , but the way you use it has certainly changed, hasn't it? Once a door is opened, you can walk through it at any time. > Shankaracharyas are liberated souls and follow the nivritti maarga, so do all these rituals matter to them? If not why did Adi Shankara lay down such a process? Because whether it's householders or sannyasins certain discipline is necessary where spiritual matters are concenrned. The rituals don't matter to them. Those that do them, do them for the good of mankind _as a result of their purva-karmas_. Or rather, they do nothing, but their bodies continue along the path, impelled by previous karma unless the current body drops off. I undestand your logic, there is much more here, and would require many long discussions of its own. Do some reading into the life of Chandrashekara Bharati, or Sri Vidyasankara. All is not as it appears. > Adi shankara himself had to under go experiences related to duality > in order to learn. He had to do parakaaya pravesham into a dead body > to learn about certain facts of life and another episode was when he > was accosted and interrogated by the Chandala. This story is not universally accepted, particularly in the higher echelons of the parampara. Many learned scholars completely reject this episode. > He found Mother both as Mayaa and Satyam. That which is mAyA cannot be satyam. `yA mA sA mAyA'. That which is not [satyam] is mAyA. > Advaita needs practical application and needs to be ingrained into our > responses to every day situations. And is precisely why it needs to be taught very carefully from a guru as it can be twisted all over the place if not properly understood. > In fact the term " sannyasa " can be decoded as samyak+nyaasa!! nyAsA has two meanings, since there are two sides to every coin. It means `to place' etc, but simultaneously, it also means `to abandon' also. I'll let you ponder over it. ajit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 16, 2006 Report Share Posted May 16, 2006 Om Gurave Namah Namaste Ajit, Thanks for the lovely discussion. I am sure all of us have got some points to ponder about. I feel that trikarana shuddhi and singular focus of iccha (manasaa), gnana (vaachaa), kriya (karmanaa) shaktis is necessary not only in poojas, but is necessary in all matters. Any karma performed with such totality of concentration, without an eye on the result, is indeed worship of the Almighty. If Valmiki's " maraa " or if Ekalavya's idol of Guru delivered such tremendous results, it is because of this. sarvam shiva mayam jagat. Regards, Lakshmi sohamsa , " Ajit Krishnan " <ajit.krishnan wrote: > > Bharat> I personally as well the scriptural texts do not allow the > usage of the words " Path " . > > Within the sampradaya, the terms `pravritti-marga' and `nivritti- > marga' are used quite often to get the point across. > > Lakshmi> What could be the meaning of shad-loka paalas? > > Generally, 5 devatas do not seem to appear as the number of devatas > in any given avarana (of yantras etc). Usually, you have 6 (shat- > kona), 6 (anga-puja), 8 (ashta-dala-padma), [[ other even numbered > petals ]], 8 (dig-palakas), 8 (ayudhas). The numbers are generally > even. When the pancha-loka-pala puja & the navagraha puja are done > separately before the Satyanarayana puja proper, they have odd > numbers (5 & 9 respectively). However, when they are placed in a > single mandala, and understood to be the expansion of the same Sri- > Satyanarayana, they themselves become avarana devatas of Sri > Satyanarayana. The loka-palakas become 6 with the addition of > Saraswati, and the Navagrahas become 8 since Rahu & Ketu (head & > tail) are placed in the same dala. So, also, in similar styled > pujas, you make come across durga-adi-ashtha-loka-palaka-s. > > > But if the religious rituals are > > undertaken, they need to be performed with full faith and > trikarana > > shuddhi, and as prescribed in the shastras. > > " Ineffectiveness " may not be used as a goad but as a reality. > > Of course, they need to be performed with faith and shuddhi while > sticking to the texts as closely as possible. But, " ineffectiveness " > is most certainly a goad also. According to texts, sandhyavandanam > is completely ineffective unless it is performed at the trikala > sandhyas 1008 times per day. Yet, have you ever heard the > mathadhipathis say " If you happen to wake up late, skip it for the > day since it would be ineffective anyways? " . Never. But they tell > you, you must wake up before sandhya-kala. There is a difference. > Ineffectiveness has to be understood differently. > > Mantras are ineffective unless they are heard directly from a guru. > Mantras are ineffective unless they are prescribed from a guru with > mantra-shakti. Mantras are ineffective unless their purashcharana is > done. Yet, many here will have experiences where they got wonderful > results where this was not the case. Ineffectiveness has to be > understood differently. > > If you think I am advocating improperly done pujas, you are > mistaken. I am saying that " advaita-bhava " can (and should) be > developed in puja also, while simultaneously sticking to all the > details prescribed in the texts. As time goes on, and I understand > the rules better, I perform them while trying to stick to them as > best as I can. For example, even to the level of what mudras need to > be used while holding the upachara materials, and to which side & > anga of the devata should dhupa / dipa / naivedya be offered. > However, while time goes on, I perform the same puja (including the > loka pala pujas etc) with much better advaita-bhava. While > performing the avarana puja, it has to be done with great shraddha > etc, but once the avarana puja is done, and you are worshipping sri- > satyanarayana, it is him alone that should be in the mind. No other > thought should be there. Thus, the puja teaches us to systematically > move inward, and develop a one-pointed intellect. All samskaras are, > after all, a preparation for the serious path towards sannyasa that > we will undertake in some lifetime. > > > Do I dump the alphabet and the other basics I learnt whenever I > graduate to the next level? > > Do you still use your fingers to determine the results of 2 + 3? Do > you spell out each word in your mind before you type it, or does it > just happen? You may not " dump it " , but the way you use it has > certainly changed, hasn't it? Once a door is opened, you can walk > through it at any time. > > > Shankaracharyas are liberated souls and follow the nivritti > maarga, > so do all these rituals matter to them? If not why did Adi Shankara > lay down such a process? Because whether it's householders or > sannyasins certain discipline is necessary where spiritual matters > are concenrned. > > The rituals don't matter to them. Those that do them, do them for > the good of mankind _as a result of their purva-karmas_. Or rather, > they do nothing, but their bodies continue along the path, impelled > by previous karma unless the current body drops off. I undestand > your logic, there is much more here, and would require many long > discussions of its own. Do some reading into the life of > Chandrashekara Bharati, or Sri Vidyasankara. All is not as it > appears. > > > Adi shankara himself had to under go experiences related to > duality > > in order to learn. He had to do parakaaya pravesham into a dead > body > > to learn about certain facts of life and another episode was when > he > > was accosted and interrogated by the Chandala. > > This story is not universally accepted, particularly in the higher > echelons of the parampara. Many learned scholars completely reject > this episode. > > > He found Mother both as Mayaa and Satyam. > > That which is mAyA cannot be satyam. `yA mA sA mAyA'. That which is > not [satyam] is mAyA. > > > Advaita needs practical application and needs to be ingrained into > our > > responses to every day situations. > > And is precisely why it needs to be taught very carefully from a > guru as it can be twisted all over the place if not properly > understood. > > > In fact the term " sannyasa " can be decoded as samyak+nyaasa!! > > nyAsA has two meanings, since there are two sides to every coin. It > means `to place' etc, but simultaneously, it also means `to abandon' > also. I'll let you ponder over it. > > ajit > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 16, 2006 Report Share Posted May 16, 2006 Om Gurave Namah Dear Ajit, Namaste. > > He found Mother both as Mayaa and Satyam. > > That which is mAyA cannot be satyam. `yA mA sA mAyA'. That which is > not [satyam] is mAyA. Lakshmi: Mother is descibed as " Vidya avidya swaroopini " in Lalitha sahasranaamam. Sri Devyupanishat also says the same thing. If we say that Maya is not Brahman, and yet Maya exists (for a temporary period), are we not contradicting the statement that Brahman is All? Maya can not exist on its own. It is like a reflection (albeit a distorted one:--)) of Truth. Like, this body is maya, and is perishable, but the soul it contains is Eternal and certainly not maya. Is the soul less Brahman because it is enveloped in maaya? There are some like Sri Ramakrishna, who can cut away and correct the distortion and for them the Maya is a replica of Truth and their essence is the same. > why it needs to be taught very carefully from a Ø guru Lakshmi: I agree. Guru is a very important influence in shaping one's philosophy of life. Learning by reading from shastras is another. But in such abstract subjects, significant insight can be gained by focused introspection (tapasya). I am sure that's why Guruji wanted this discussion to materialize. I have read many books & articles on Kanchi Mahaswami and have had the good fortune of meeting him too. Infact, if you happen to visit Hyderabad, please take some time off to visit a Sri Rama temple near Hi tech city (Madapur). It's a beautiful temple complex and is built by my cousin brother at the express wish of Kanchi Mahaswamy. One thing I still do not understand. You said that the Shankaracharyas undertake rituals to guide people and they themselves do not need it. Is advaita meant only for sannyasis? Why do grihastas invariably have take to pravritti maarga? Why should there be a difference between Shankaracharya and the lay person, unless one is differentiating on the basis of maaya and giving undue weightage to it? If the Brahman who dwells in the sannyasi and the samsaari is the same, then why does one need different approaches? Infact, the very saying " aham brahmaasmi " itself talks of two entities (I and Brahman) and their oneness. It's like an assertion, a declaration. When there's none other than Brahman, to whom is it being declared / asserted? Regards, Lakshmi > > In fact the term " sannyasa " can be decoded as samyak+nyaasa!! > > nyAsA has two meanings, since there are two sides to every coin. It > means `to place' etc, but simultaneously, it also means `to abandon' > also. I'll let you ponder over it. > sohamsa , " Ajit Krishnan " <ajit.krishnan wrote: > > Bharat> I personally as well the scriptural texts do not allow the > usage of the words " Path " . > > Within the sampradaya, the terms `pravritti-marga' and `nivritti- > marga' are used quite often to get the point across. > > Lakshmi> What could be the meaning of shad-loka paalas? > > Generally, 5 devatas do not seem to appear as the number of devatas > in any given avarana (of yantras etc). Usually, you have 6 (shat- > kona), 6 (anga-puja), 8 (ashta-dala-padma), [[ other even numbered > petals ]], 8 (dig-palakas), 8 (ayudhas). The numbers are generally > even. When the pancha-loka-pala puja & the navagraha puja are done > separately before the Satyanarayana puja proper, they have odd > numbers (5 & 9 respectively). However, when they are placed in a > single mandala, and understood to be the expansion of the same Sri- > Satyanarayana, they themselves become avarana devatas of Sri > Satyanarayana. The loka-palakas become 6 with the addition of > Saraswati, and the Navagrahas become 8 since Rahu & Ketu (head & > tail) are placed in the same dala. So, also, in similar styled > pujas, you make come across durga-adi-ashtha-loka-palaka-s. > > > But if the religious rituals are > > undertaken, they need to be performed with full faith and > trikarana > > shuddhi, and as prescribed in the shastras. > > " Ineffectiveness " may not be used as a goad but as a reality. > > Of course, they need to be performed with faith and shuddhi while > sticking to the texts as closely as possible. But, " ineffectiveness " > is most certainly a goad also. According to texts, sandhyavandanam > is completely ineffective unless it is performed at the trikala > sandhyas 1008 times per day. Yet, have you ever heard the > mathadhipathis say " If you happen to wake up late, skip it for the > day since it would be ineffective anyways? " . Never. But they tell > you, you must wake up before sandhya-kala. There is a difference. > Ineffectiveness has to be understood differently. > > Mantras are ineffective unless they are heard directly from a guru. > Mantras are ineffective unless they are prescribed from a guru with > mantra-shakti. Mantras are ineffective unless their purashcharana is > done. Yet, many here will have experiences where they got wonderful > results where this was not the case. Ineffectiveness has to be > understood differently. > > If you think I am advocating improperly done pujas, you are > mistaken. I am saying that " advaita-bhava " can (and should) be > developed in puja also, while simultaneously sticking to all the > details prescribed in the texts. As time goes on, and I understand > the rules better, I perform them while trying to stick to them as > best as I can. For example, even to the level of what mudras need to > be used while holding the upachara materials, and to which side & > anga of the devata should dhupa / dipa / naivedya be offered. > However, while time goes on, I perform the same puja (including the > loka pala pujas etc) with much better advaita-bhava. While > performing the avarana puja, it has to be done with great shraddha > etc, but once the avarana puja is done, and you are worshipping sri- > satyanarayana, it is him alone that should be in the mind. No other > thought should be there. Thus, the puja teaches us to systematically > move inward, and develop a one-pointed intellect. All samskaras are, > after all, a preparation for the serious path towards sannyasa that > we will undertake in some lifetime. > > > Do I dump the alphabet and the other basics I learnt whenever I > graduate to the next level? > > Do you still use your fingers to determine the results of 2 + 3? Do > you spell out each word in your mind before you type it, or does it > just happen? You may not " dump it " , but the way you use it has > certainly changed, hasn't it? Once a door is opened, you can walk > through it at any time. > > > Shankaracharyas are liberated souls and follow the nivritti > maarga, > so do all these rituals matter to them? If not why did Adi Shankara > lay down such a process? Because whether it's householders or > sannyasins certain discipline is necessary where spiritual matters > are concenrned. > > The rituals don't matter to them. Those that do them, do them for > the good of mankind _as a result of their purva-karmas_. Or rather, > they do nothing, but their bodies continue along the path, impelled > by previous karma unless the current body drops off. I undestand > your logic, there is much more here, and would require many long > discussions of its own. Do some reading into the life of > Chandrashekara Bharati, or Sri Vidyasankara. All is not as it > appears. > > > Adi shankara himself had to under go experiences related to > duality > > in order to learn. He had to do parakaaya pravesham into a dead > body > > to learn about certain facts of life and another episode was when > he > > was accosted and interrogated by the Chandala. > > This story is not universally accepted, particularly in the higher > echelons of the parampara. Many learned scholars completely reject > this episode. > > > He found Mother both as Mayaa and Satyam. > > That which is mAyA cannot be satyam. `yA mA sA mAyA'. That which is > not [satyam] is mAyA. > > > Advaita needs practical application and needs to be ingrained into > our > > responses to every day situations. > > And is precisely why it needs to be taught very carefully from a > guru as it can be twisted all over the place if not properly > understood. > > > In fact the term " sannyasa " can be decoded as samyak+nyaasa!! > > nyAsA has two meanings, since there are two sides to every coin. It > means `to place' etc, but simultaneously, it also means `to abandon' > also. I'll let you ponder over it. > > ajit > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 Namaste friends, One very quick remark. According to Vasishtha, the so-called maya is Brahman too. If Brahman is an ocean, the maya is like a surface tension causing ripples in the ocean that start thinking of themselves as ripples and not as ocean. However, the surface tension and the surface ripples are ocean too. Maya and the objects etched out by maya are Brahman too. True Adwaita is not about dismissing a lot of things as "mithya" or "illusion", but to see Brahman in those too. BTW, sannyasa is not samyak + nyasa. Instead it is sat+nyasa. Sat means good. Good giving up. May the light of Brahman shine within, Narasimha ------------------------------- Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org ------------------------------- > Om Gurave Namah> > Dear Ajit,> > Namaste. > > > > He found Mother both as Mayaa and Satyam. > > > > That which is mAyA cannot be satyam. `yA mA sA mAyA'. That which > is > > not [satyam] is mAyA. > > Lakshmi: Mother is descibed as "Vidya avidya swaroopini" in Lalitha > sahasranaamam. Sri Devyupanishat also says the same thing. If we > say that Maya is not Brahman, and yet Maya exists (for a temporary > period), are we not contradicting the statement that Brahman is All? > > Maya can not exist on its own. It is like a reflection (albeit a > distorted one:--)) of Truth. Like, this body is maya, and is > perishable, but the soul it contains is Eternal and certainly not > maya. Is the soul less Brahman because it is enveloped in maaya?> > There are some like Sri Ramakrishna, who can cut away and correct > the distortion and for them the Maya is a replica of Truth and their > essence is the same. > > > > why it needs to be taught very carefully from a > Ø guru > > Lakshmi: I agree. Guru is a very important influence in shaping > one's philosophy of life. Learning by reading from shastras is > another. But in such abstract subjects, significant insight can be > gained by focused introspection (tapasya). I am sure that's why > Guruji wanted this discussion to materialize.> > I have read many books & articles on Kanchi Mahaswami and have had > the good fortune of meeting him too. Infact, if you happen to visit > Hyderabad, please take some time off to visit a Sri Rama temple near > Hi tech city (Madapur). It's a beautiful temple complex and is built > by my cousin brother at the express wish of Kanchi Mahaswamy.> > One thing I still do not understand. You said that the > Shankaracharyas undertake rituals to guide people and they > themselves do not need it. Is advaita meant only for sannyasis? > Why do grihastas invariably have take to pravritti maarga? Why > should there be a difference between Shankaracharya and the lay > person, unless one is differentiating on the basis of maaya and > giving undue weightage to it? If the Brahman who dwells in the > sannyasi and the samsaari is the same, then why does one need > different approaches? > > Infact, the very saying "aham brahmaasmi" itself talks of two > entities (I and Brahman) and their oneness. It's like an assertion, > a declaration. When there's none other than Brahman, to whom is it > being declared / asserted?> > Regards,> Lakshmi > > > > > > > > > > In fact the term "sannyasa " can be decoded as samyak+nyaasa!!> > > > nyAsA has two meanings, since there are two sides to every coin. > It > > means `to place' etc, but simultaneously, it also means `to > abandon' > > also. I'll let you ponder over it. > >> > > > sohamsa , "Ajit Krishnan" <ajit.krishnan@> > wrote:> >> > Bharat> I personally as well the scriptural texts do not allow the > > usage of the words "Path".> > > > Within the sampradaya, the terms `pravritti-marga' and `nivritti-> > marga' are used quite often to get the point across. > > > > Lakshmi> What could be the meaning of shad-loka paalas? > > > > Generally, 5 devatas do not seem to appear as the number of > devatas > > in any given avarana (of yantras etc). Usually, you have 6 (shat-> > kona), 6 (anga-puja), 8 (ashta-dala-padma), [[ other even numbered > > petals ]], 8 (dig-palakas), 8 (ayudhas). The numbers are generally > > even. When the pancha-loka-pala puja & the navagraha puja are done > > separately before the Satyanarayana puja proper, they have odd > > numbers (5 & 9 respectively). However, when they are placed in a > > single mandala, and understood to be the expansion of the same Sri-> > Satyanarayana, they themselves become avarana devatas of Sri > > Satyanarayana. The loka-palakas become 6 with the addition of > > Saraswati, and the Navagrahas become 8 since Rahu & Ketu (head & > > tail) are placed in the same dala. So, also, in similar styled > > pujas, you make come across durga-adi-ashtha-loka-palaka-s.> > > > > But if the religious rituals are > > > undertaken, they need to be performed with full faith and > > trikarana > > > shuddhi, and as prescribed in the shastras. > > > "Ineffectiveness" may not be used as a goad but as a reality. > > > > Of course, they need to be performed with faith and shuddhi while > > sticking to the texts as closely as possible. > But, "ineffectiveness" > > is most certainly a goad also. According to texts, sandhyavandanam > > is completely ineffective unless it is performed at the trikala > > sandhyas 1008 times per day. Yet, have you ever heard the > > mathadhipathis say "If you happen to wake up late, skip it for the > > day since it would be ineffective anyways?". Never. But they tell > > you, you must wake up before sandhya-kala. There is a difference. > > Ineffectiveness has to be understood differently. > > > > Mantras are ineffective unless they are heard directly from a > guru. > > Mantras are ineffective unless they are prescribed from a guru > with > > mantra-shakti. Mantras are ineffective unless their purashcharana > is > > done. Yet, many here will have experiences where they got > wonderful > > results where this was not the case. Ineffectiveness has to be > > understood differently. > > > > If you think I am advocating improperly done pujas, you are > > mistaken. I am saying that "advaita-bhava" can (and should) be > > developed in puja also, while simultaneously sticking to all the > > details prescribed in the texts. As time goes on, and I understand > > the rules better, I perform them while trying to stick to them as > > best as I can. For example, even to the level of what mudras need > to > > be used while holding the upachara materials, and to which side & > > anga of the devata should dhupa / dipa / naivedya be offered. > > However, while time goes on, I perform the same puja (including > the > > loka pala pujas etc) with much better advaita-bhava. While > > performing the avarana puja, it has to be done with great shraddha > > etc, but once the avarana puja is done, and you are worshipping > sri-> > satyanarayana, it is him alone that should be in the mind. No > other > > thought should be there. Thus, the puja teaches us to > systematically > > move inward, and develop a one-pointed intellect. All samskaras > are, > > after all, a preparation for the serious path towards sannyasa > that > > we will undertake in some lifetime. > > > > > Do I dump the alphabet and the other basics I learnt whenever I > > graduate to the next level? > > > > Do you still use your fingers to determine the results of 2 + 3? > Do > > you spell out each word in your mind before you type it, or does > it > > just happen? You may not "dump it", but the way you use it has > > certainly changed, hasn't it? Once a door is opened, you can walk > > through it at any time. > > > > > Shankaracharyas are liberated souls and follow the nivritti > > maarga, > > so do all these rituals matter to them? If not why did Adi > Shankara > > lay down such a process? Because whether it's householders or > > sannyasins certain discipline is necessary where spiritual matters > > are concenrned. > > > > The rituals don't matter to them. Those that do them, do them for > > the good of mankind _as a result of their purva-karmas_. Or > rather, > > they do nothing, but their bodies continue along the path, > impelled > > by previous karma unless the current body drops off. I undestand > > your logic, there is much more here, and would require many long > > discussions of its own. Do some reading into the life of > > Chandrashekara Bharati, or Sri Vidyasankara. All is not as it > > appears. > > > > > Adi shankara himself had to under go experiences related to > > duality > > > in order to learn. He had to do parakaaya pravesham into a dead > > body > > > to learn about certain facts of life and another episode was > when > > he > > > was accosted and interrogated by the Chandala. > > > > This story is not universally accepted, particularly in the higher > > echelons of the parampara. Many learned scholars completely reject > > this episode. > > > > > He found Mother both as Mayaa and Satyam. > > > > That which is mAyA cannot be satyam. `yA mA sA mAyA'. That which > is > > not [satyam] is mAyA. > > > > > Advaita needs practical application and needs to be ingrained > into > > our > > > responses to every day situations. > > > > And is precisely why it needs to be taught very carefully from a > > guru as it can be twisted all over the place if not properly > > understood.> > > > > In fact the term "sannyasa " can be decoded as samyak+nyaasa!!> > > > nyAsA has two meanings, since there are two sides to every coin. > It > > means `to place' etc, but simultaneously, it also means `to > abandon' > > also. I'll let you ponder over it. > > > > ajit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 Dear Lakshmi > If we say that Maya is not Brahman, and yet Maya exists (for a temporary > period), are we not contradicting the statement that Brahman is All? When (and only when) we talk at the level of brahman, existence is permanent. At this level, there is no such thing as existence for a temporary period. Advaita does not deny mAyA or this world around us. It simply denies the status of [absolute] reality to mAyA and the world around us. > Infact, if you happen to visit > Hyderabad, please take some time off to visit a Sri Rama temple near > Hi tech city (Madapur). It's a beautiful temple complex and is built > by my cousin brother at the express wish of Kanchi Mahaswamy. Thanks! I will certainly try to do so if I'm in Hyderabad. > Why should there be a difference between Shankaracharya and the lay > person, unless one is differentiating on the basis of maaya and > giving undue weightage to it? There is vyAvahArika (relative) reality and pAramArthika (absolute) reality, and one has to be very careful not to mix up the two in the course of our logical arguments. We are agyanis who are trying to become gyanis. This is not pAramArthika satyam, but this is how we have conditioned ourselves to think in this vyavaharika world. A dreamer's " dream-thirst " is quenched only by drinking water in the dream world and not otherwise. Similarly, " agyana " and " removing agyana " belong to the same strata of reality, and any " agyana " has to be removed (so to speak) in the same level of reality where agyana (maya) exists (as it were). Sannyasis are special, because among us, they are truly mumukshus dedicated to the pursuit of moksha. A vedic initiate has access to the same veda as a brahmachari, grihastha, vanaprastha and sannyasi. But, he uses it differently. Initially he learns, as a grihastha he applies, as a vanaprastha he starts to contemplate, and as a sannyasi he truly embarks on the path of renunciation. This is varna-ashrama-dharma. This notion of 'dharma' itself is a concept in vyAvahAric reality only. The notion of samskaras, pujas, truthfulness etc are all concepts in the vyavaharika world. We are all " living in this world " , and we must find the solution in this world itself. This is why advaita does not really have any use for svarga, brahma-loka, vishnu-loka etc. This " seeming " vyAvahArika avidya needs to go away here, in the vyAvahArika world, for in a pAramArthika absolute sense, there is no avidya in the first place. The difference between gyanis and myself is that I believe that there is a difference (between them and me), and hence, I am subject to different rules as per dharma. In the case of gyanis, they entertain no such difference. But their body exists in this vhAvahArika world. And impelled with [vyAvahArika] purva-karma, the [vyAvahArika] body continues to [vyAvahArika] act as per [vyAvahArika] dharma. > If the Brahman who dwells in the > sannyasi and the samsaari is the same, then why does one need > different approaches? Because the samsaari has placed samsaaratvam on himself. It is not brahman's doing. Hence, with the constant cleansing of karmas, one tries to remove the dirt with which one has encrusted one's own vyAvahArika mind. > Infact, the very saying " aham brahmaasmi " itself talks of two entities. Of course, since this saying is intended for the vyAvahArika person who sees varied vyAvahArika entities. > When there's none other than Brahman, to whom is it being declared / asserted? Precisely. No more triputhis. But none of us are at that stage. So we continue along the course of outwardly dvaitic worldly life, performing samskaras while trying to develop the qualities which will be useful in the pursuit of self-deliberation in a lifetime far, far down the road. ajit Thanks to all of you for the discussion. In the end though, all schools of thought teach the same practical way out: perform karmas, pujas, samskaras and other sadhana, and dedicate them to the ishta- devata. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 Dear Narasimha, > True Adwaita is not about dismissing a lot of things as " mithya " or " illusion " , but to see Brahman in those too. Dismissing the world around us as 'mithya' neither implies that it is unreal, nor implies that it is not brahman (in the pAramArthika sense). It simply identifies it as being impermanent by relegating it to the vyAvahArika strata of reality which we all live and breathe. ajit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2006 Report Share Posted May 17, 2006 Om Gurave Namah Namaste Narasimha garu and Ajit, Thanks for your enlightening participation in this discussion. I think I am slowly coming round to the view that the three functions of GodHead, viz., srishti, sthithi and samhaara are the roots of dwaita, vishistaadvaita and advaita approaches respectively and need to be understood as such. Narasimha garu, thanks for the correction. samyak+nyaasa is indeed incorrect, and i did correct my mistake in my very next post, and requested all to ignore the " + " between the two words:--)) But sannyasa can be explained as " samyak " ( total, complete) " nyaasa " . Isn't " Sat " by its very nature true & complete? Regards, Lakshmi sohamsa , " Narasimha P.V.R. Rao " <pvr wrote: > > Namaste friends, > > One very quick remark. > > According to Vasishtha, the so-called maya is Brahman too. If Brahman is an ocean, the maya is like a surface tension causing ripples in the ocean that start thinking of themselves as ripples and not as ocean. However, the surface tension and the surface ripples are ocean too. Maya and the objects etched out by maya are Brahman too. > > True Adwaita is not about dismissing a lot of things as " mithya " or " illusion " , but to see Brahman in those too. > > BTW, sannyasa is not samyak + nyasa. Instead it is sat+nyasa. Sat means good. Good giving up. > > May the light of Brahman shine within, > Narasimha > ------------------------------- > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org > ------------------------------- > > > Om Gurave Namah > > > > Dear Ajit, > > > > Namaste. > > > > > > He found Mother both as Mayaa and Satyam. > > > > > > That which is mAyA cannot be satyam. `yA mA sA mAyA'. That which > > is > > > not [satyam] is mAyA. > > > > Lakshmi: Mother is descibed as " Vidya avidya swaroopini " in Lalitha > > sahasranaamam. Sri Devyupanishat also says the same thing. If we > > say that Maya is not Brahman, and yet Maya exists (for a temporary > > period), are we not contradicting the statement that Brahman is All? > > > > Maya can not exist on its own. It is like a reflection (albeit a > > distorted one:--)) of Truth. Like, this body is maya, and is > > perishable, but the soul it contains is Eternal and certainly not > > maya. Is the soul less Brahman because it is enveloped in maaya? > > > > There are some like Sri Ramakrishna, who can cut away and correct > > the distortion and for them the Maya is a replica of Truth and their > > essence is the same. > > > > > > > why it needs to be taught very carefully from a > > Ø guru > > > > Lakshmi: I agree. Guru is a very important influence in shaping > > one's philosophy of life. Learning by reading from shastras is > > another. But in such abstract subjects, significant insight can be > > gained by focused introspection (tapasya). I am sure that's why > > Guruji wanted this discussion to materialize. > > > > I have read many books & articles on Kanchi Mahaswami and have had > > the good fortune of meeting him too. Infact, if you happen to visit > > Hyderabad, please take some time off to visit a Sri Rama temple near > > Hi tech city (Madapur). It's a beautiful temple complex and is built > > by my cousin brother at the express wish of Kanchi Mahaswamy. > > > > One thing I still do not understand. You said that the > > Shankaracharyas undertake rituals to guide people and they > > themselves do not need it. Is advaita meant only for sannyasis? > > Why do grihastas invariably have take to pravritti maarga? Why > > should there be a difference between Shankaracharya and the lay > > person, unless one is differentiating on the basis of maaya and > > giving undue weightage to it? If the Brahman who dwells in the > > sannyasi and the samsaari is the same, then why does one need > > different approaches? > > > > Infact, the very saying " aham brahmaasmi " itself talks of two > > entities (I and Brahman) and their oneness. It's like an assertion, > > a declaration. When there's none other than Brahman, to whom is it > > being declared / asserted? > > > > Regards, > > Lakshmi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In fact the term " sannyasa " can be decoded as samyak+nyaasa!! > > > > > > nyAsA has two meanings, since there are two sides to every coin. > > It > > > means `to place' etc, but simultaneously, it also means `to > > abandon' > > > also. I'll let you ponder over it. > > > > > > > > > > > sohamsa , " Ajit Krishnan " <ajit.krishnan@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Bharat> I personally as well the scriptural texts do not allow the > > > usage of the words " Path " . > > > > > > Within the sampradaya, the terms `pravritti-marga' and `nivritti- > > > marga' are used quite often to get the point across. > > > > > > Lakshmi> What could be the meaning of shad-loka paalas? > > > > > > Generally, 5 devatas do not seem to appear as the number of > > devatas > > > in any given avarana (of yantras etc). Usually, you have 6 (shat- > > > kona), 6 (anga-puja), 8 (ashta-dala-padma), [[ other even numbered > > > petals ]], 8 (dig-palakas), 8 (ayudhas). The numbers are generally > > > even. When the pancha-loka-pala puja & the navagraha puja are done > > > separately before the Satyanarayana puja proper, they have odd > > > numbers (5 & 9 respectively). However, when they are placed in a > > > single mandala, and understood to be the expansion of the same Sri- > > > Satyanarayana, they themselves become avarana devatas of Sri > > > Satyanarayana. The loka-palakas become 6 with the addition of > > > Saraswati, and the Navagrahas become 8 since Rahu & Ketu (head & > > > tail) are placed in the same dala. So, also, in similar styled > > > pujas, you make come across durga-adi-ashtha-loka-palaka-s. > > > > > > > But if the religious rituals are > > > > undertaken, they need to be performed with full faith and > > > trikarana > > > > shuddhi, and as prescribed in the shastras. > > > > " Ineffectiveness " may not be used as a goad but as a reality. > > > > > > Of course, they need to be performed with faith and shuddhi while > > > sticking to the texts as closely as possible. > > But, " ineffectiveness " > > > is most certainly a goad also. According to texts, sandhyavandanam > > > is completely ineffective unless it is performed at the trikala > > > sandhyas 1008 times per day. Yet, have you ever heard the > > > mathadhipathis say " If you happen to wake up late, skip it for the > > > day since it would be ineffective anyways? " . Never. But they tell > > > you, you must wake up before sandhya-kala. There is a difference. > > > Ineffectiveness has to be understood differently. > > > > > > Mantras are ineffective unless they are heard directly from a > > guru. > > > Mantras are ineffective unless they are prescribed from a guru > > with > > > mantra-shakti. Mantras are ineffective unless their purashcharana > > is > > > done. Yet, many here will have experiences where they got > > wonderful > > > results where this was not the case. Ineffectiveness has to be > > > understood differently. > > > > > > If you think I am advocating improperly done pujas, you are > > > mistaken. I am saying that " advaita-bhava " can (and should) be > > > developed in puja also, while simultaneously sticking to all the > > > details prescribed in the texts. As time goes on, and I understand > > > the rules better, I perform them while trying to stick to them as > > > best as I can. For example, even to the level of what mudras need > > to > > > be used while holding the upachara materials, and to which side & > > > anga of the devata should dhupa / dipa / naivedya be offered. > > > However, while time goes on, I perform the same puja (including > > the > > > loka pala pujas etc) with much better advaita-bhava. While > > > performing the avarana puja, it has to be done with great shraddha > > > etc, but once the avarana puja is done, and you are worshipping > > sri- > > > satyanarayana, it is him alone that should be in the mind. No > > other > > > thought should be there. Thus, the puja teaches us to > > systematically > > > move inward, and develop a one-pointed intellect. All samskaras > > are, > > > after all, a preparation for the serious path towards sannyasa > > that > > > we will undertake in some lifetime. > > > > > > > Do I dump the alphabet and the other basics I learnt whenever I > > > graduate to the next level? > > > > > > Do you still use your fingers to determine the results of 2 + 3? > > Do > > > you spell out each word in your mind before you type it, or does > > it > > > just happen? You may not " dump it " , but the way you use it has > > > certainly changed, hasn't it? Once a door is opened, you can walk > > > through it at any time. > > > > > > > Shankaracharyas are liberated souls and follow the nivritti > > > maarga, > > > so do all these rituals matter to them? If not why did Adi > > Shankara > > > lay down such a process? Because whether it's householders or > > > sannyasins certain discipline is necessary where spiritual matters > > > are concenrned. > > > > > > The rituals don't matter to them. Those that do them, do them for > > > the good of mankind _as a result of their purva-karmas_. Or > > rather, > > > they do nothing, but their bodies continue along the path, > > impelled > > > by previous karma unless the current body drops off. I undestand > > > your logic, there is much more here, and would require many long > > > discussions of its own. Do some reading into the life of > > > Chandrashekara Bharati, or Sri Vidyasankara. All is not as it > > > appears. > > > > > > > Adi shankara himself had to under go experiences related to > > > duality > > > > in order to learn. He had to do parakaaya pravesham into a dead > > > body > > > > to learn about certain facts of life and another episode was > > when > > > he > > > > was accosted and interrogated by the Chandala. > > > > > > This story is not universally accepted, particularly in the higher > > > echelons of the parampara. Many learned scholars completely reject > > > this episode. > > > > > > > He found Mother both as Mayaa and Satyam. > > > > > > That which is mAyA cannot be satyam. `yA mA sA mAyA'. That which > > is > > > not [satyam] is mAyA. > > > > > > > Advaita needs practical application and needs to be ingrained > > into > > > our > > > > responses to every day situations. > > > > > > And is precisely why it needs to be taught very carefully from a > > > guru as it can be twisted all over the place if not properly > > > understood. > > > > > > > In fact the term " sannyasa " can be decoded as samyak+nyaasa!! > > > > > > nyAsA has two meanings, since there are two sides to every coin. > > It > > > means `to place' etc, but simultaneously, it also means `to > > abandon' > > > also. I'll let you ponder over it. > > > > > > ajit > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 26, 2006 Report Share Posted May 26, 2006 Dear Narasimha & Jyotisha's Im not so familiar with details of Advaita/Vishishtadvaita paradigm. I saw that the concept of Sunya (like Sanjay Ji lecture of diseases / Sunya Samhita of Sri Achyuta, my Guruji attitude (last conversation) ) or Advaita concept prevail (i mean it is main trend) in SJC. There is also view that Sri Caitanya followers could accept that theory which is against the branch of Gaudiya (at least what Bhaktisiddhanta/Bh.Thakkura/Six Gosvamis(Sri Rupa & Sri Sanatana) preached). Sometimes I wish there could be some Jyotish explanation also for Dvaitans like me - like for example some note in "Creation" article about other also popular view of creation, or explanation that Jagganth has no feet/eyes (nirguna). I accept that other people can have various views but I think it would be nice & proper to give one small note about other concept. For proper understanding I would like to ask some questions: (1) Why the avidya and maya exists ? I heard one answer that Brahmana has lila, but to be fact this must have some saguna attributes. (2) If Jiva realizes Tattwa and get liberation and become One Atma=Brahman this cycle of getting into maya is cycle (Gita says one who is liberated dont come to material world again) (3) If Jiva realizes the true nature being a Brahmana how the other Jivas can be still under realization (not realized). I know its from view of Vyavaharica but still the practice is under the Vyavaharica nature - like Worship / Getting Up / Washing Body etc. (4) If Brahman is one why I must follow some process to go back to origin state? I dont have power to do this immediately so I dont have enough Sakti (power). If there is Brahman with Sakti and without there is Dwaita which is unacceptable. Ok...I can only dream that I have no power, or my state of non-power is imaginery, but I am still into this condition..and I dont want to suffer but I cannot do anything immediately to stop it. I know there can be mistake in my questions pertaining to mixing the two levels : vyavaharica and reality but please anyone interested to comment on this. Regards Rafal Gendarz - Narasimha P.V.R. Rao sohamsa Wednesday, May 17, 2006 6:00 AM Re: samba sada shiva & advaita Namaste friends, One very quick remark. According to Vasishtha, the so-called maya is Brahman too. If Brahman is an ocean, the maya is like a surface tension causing ripples in the ocean that start thinking of themselves as ripples and not as ocean. However, the surface tension and the surface ripples are ocean too. Maya and the objects etched out by maya are Brahman too. True Adwaita is not about dismissing a lot of things as "mithya" or "illusion", but to see Brahman in those too. BTW, sannyasa is not samyak + nyasa. Instead it is sat+nyasa. Sat means good. Good giving up. May the light of Brahman shine within, Narasimha ------------------------------- Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org ------------------------------- > Om Gurave Namah> > Dear Ajit,> > Namaste. > > > > He found Mother both as Mayaa and Satyam. > > > > That which is mAyA cannot be satyam. `yA mA sA mAyA'. That which > is > > not [satyam] is mAyA. > > Lakshmi: Mother is descibed as "Vidya avidya swaroopini" in Lalitha > sahasranaamam. Sri Devyupanishat also says the same thing. If we > say that Maya is not Brahman, and yet Maya exists (for a temporary > period), are we not contradicting the statement that Brahman is All? > > Maya can not exist on its own. It is like a reflection (albeit a > distorted one:--)) of Truth. Like, this body is maya, and is > perishable, but the soul it contains is Eternal and certainly not > maya. Is the soul less Brahman because it is enveloped in maaya?> > There are some like Sri Ramakrishna, who can cut away and correct > the distortion and for them the Maya is a replica of Truth and their > essence is the same. > > > > why it needs to be taught very carefully from a > Ø guru > > Lakshmi: I agree. Guru is a very important influence in shaping > one's philosophy of life. Learning by reading from shastras is > another. But in such abstract subjects, significant insight can be > gained by focused introspection (tapasya). I am sure that's why > Guruji wanted this discussion to materialize.> > I have read many books & articles on Kanchi Mahaswami and have had > the good fortune of meeting him too. Infact, if you happen to visit > Hyderabad, please take some time off to visit a Sri Rama temple near > Hi tech city (Madapur). It's a beautiful temple complex and is built > by my cousin brother at the express wish of Kanchi Mahaswamy.> > One thing I still do not understand. You said that the > Shankaracharyas undertake rituals to guide people and they > themselves do not need it. Is advaita meant only for sannyasis? > Why do grihastas invariably have take to pravritti maarga? Why > should there be a difference between Shankaracharya and the lay > person, unless one is differentiating on the basis of maaya and > giving undue weightage to it? If the Brahman who dwells in the > sannyasi and the samsaari is the same, then why does one need > different approaches? > > Infact, the very saying "aham brahmaasmi" itself talks of two > entities (I and Brahman) and their oneness. It's like an assertion, > a declaration. When there's none other than Brahman, to whom is it > being declared / asserted?> > Regards,> Lakshmi > > > > > > > > > > In fact the term "sannyasa " can be decoded as samyak+nyaasa!!> > > > nyAsA has two meanings, since there are two sides to every coin. > It > > means `to place' etc, but simultaneously, it also means `to > abandon' > > also. I'll let you ponder over it. > >> > > > sohamsa , "Ajit Krishnan" <ajit.krishnan@> > wrote:> >> > Bharat> I personally as well the scriptural texts do not allow the > > usage of the words "Path".> > > > Within the sampradaya, the terms `pravritti-marga' and `nivritti-> > marga' are used quite often to get the point across. > > > > Lakshmi> What could be the meaning of shad-loka paalas? > > > > Generally, 5 devatas do not seem to appear as the number of > devatas > > in any given avarana (of yantras etc). Usually, you have 6 (shat-> > kona), 6 (anga-puja), 8 (ashta-dala-padma), [[ other even numbered > > petals ]], 8 (dig-palakas), 8 (ayudhas). The numbers are generally > > even. When the pancha-loka-pala puja & the navagraha puja are done > > separately before the Satyanarayana puja proper, they have odd > > numbers (5 & 9 respectively). However, when they are placed in a > > single mandala, and understood to be the expansion of the same Sri-> > Satyanarayana, they themselves become avarana devatas of Sri > > Satyanarayana. The loka-palakas become 6 with the addition of > > Saraswati, and the Navagrahas become 8 since Rahu & Ketu (head & > > tail) are placed in the same dala. So, also, in similar styled > > pujas, you make come across durga-adi-ashtha-loka-palaka-s.> > > > > But if the religious rituals are > > > undertaken, they need to be performed with full faith and > > trikarana > > > shuddhi, and as prescribed in the shastras. > > > "Ineffectiveness" may not be used as a goad but as a reality. > > > > Of course, they need to be performed with faith and shuddhi while > > sticking to the texts as closely as possible. > But, "ineffectiveness" > > is most certainly a goad also. According to texts, sandhyavandanam > > is completely ineffective unless it is performed at the trikala > > sandhyas 1008 times per day. Yet, have you ever heard the > > mathadhipathis say "If you happen to wake up late, skip it for the > > day since it would be ineffective anyways?". Never. But they tell > > you, you must wake up before sandhya-kala. There is a difference. > > Ineffectiveness has to be understood differently. > > > > Mantras are ineffective unless they are heard directly from a > guru. > > Mantras are ineffective unless they are prescribed from a guru > with > > mantra-shakti. Mantras are ineffective unless their purashcharana > is > > done. Yet, many here will have experiences where they got > wonderful > > results where this was not the case. Ineffectiveness has to be > > understood differently. > > > > If you think I am advocating improperly done pujas, you are > > mistaken. I am saying that "advaita-bhava" can (and should) be > > developed in puja also, while simultaneously sticking to all the > > details prescribed in the texts. As time goes on, and I understand > > the rules better, I perform them while trying to stick to them as > > best as I can. For example, even to the level of what mudras need > to > > be used while holding the upachara materials, and to which side & > > anga of the devata should dhupa / dipa / naivedya be offered. > > However, while time goes on, I perform the same puja (including > the > > loka pala pujas etc) with much better advaita-bhava. While > > performing the avarana puja, it has to be done with great shraddha > > etc, but once the avarana puja is done, and you are worshipping > sri-> > satyanarayana, it is him alone that should be in the mind. No > other > > thought should be there. Thus, the puja teaches us to > systematically > > move inward, and develop a one-pointed intellect. All samskaras > are, > > after all, a preparation for the serious path towards sannyasa > that > > we will undertake in some lifetime. > > > > > Do I dump the alphabet and the other basics I learnt whenever I > > graduate to the next level? > > > > Do you still use your fingers to determine the results of 2 + 3? > Do > > you spell out each word in your mind before you type it, or does > it > > just happen? You may not "dump it", but the way you use it has > > certainly changed, hasn't it? Once a door is opened, you can walk > > through it at any time. > > > > > Shankaracharyas are liberated souls and follow the nivritti > > maarga, > > so do all these rituals matter to them? If not why did Adi > Shankara > > lay down such a process? Because whether it's householders or > > sannyasins certain discipline is necessary where spiritual matters > > are concenrned. > > > > The rituals don't matter to them. Those that do them, do them for > > the good of mankind _as a result of their purva-karmas_. Or > rather, > > they do nothing, but their bodies continue along the path, > impelled > > by previous karma unless the current body drops off. I undestand > > your logic, there is much more here, and would require many long > > discussions of its own. Do some reading into the life of > > Chandrashekara Bharati, or Sri Vidyasankara. All is not as it > > appears. > > > > > Adi shankara himself had to under go experiences related to > > duality > > > in order to learn. He had to do parakaaya pravesham into a dead > > body > > > to learn about certain facts of life and another episode was > when > > he > > > was accosted and interrogated by the Chandala. > > > > This story is not universally accepted, particularly in the higher > > echelons of the parampara. Many learned scholars completely reject > > this episode. > > > > > He found Mother both as Mayaa and Satyam. > > > > That which is mAyA cannot be satyam. `yA mA sA mAyA'. That which > is > > not [satyam] is mAyA. > > > > > Advaita needs practical application and needs to be ingrained > into > > our > > > responses to every day situations. > > > > And is precisely why it needs to be taught very carefully from a > > guru as it can be twisted all over the place if not properly > > understood.> > > > > In fact the term "sannyasa " can be decoded as samyak+nyaasa!!> > > > nyAsA has two meanings, since there are two sides to every coin. > It > > means `to place' etc, but simultaneously, it also means `to > abandon' > > also. I'll let you ponder over it. > > > > ajit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 27, 2006 Report Share Posted May 27, 2006 | om gurave namah |Dear Rafal To understand one like Caitanya, one has to progress step by step through the Advaita and then the Dwaita and then do the *impossible task* ot bringing these two together. To my knowledge in recent past only Ramakrishna was able to do this (although the lineage of the Ramakrishna Mission founded by Vivekananda is Advaita). Thakur even tuaght his own Guru (and proved to him) the validity of Dvaita. At this stage we are trying to understand advaita for Jyotish. Best wishes and warm regards,Sanjay RathPersonal: WebPages ¡Ü Rath¡¯s Rhapsody SJC WebPages: Sri Jagannath Center ¡Ü SJCERC ¡Ü JIVAPublications: The Jyotish Digest ¡Ü Sagittarius Publications---- sohamsa [sohamsa ] On Behalf Of Rafal GendarzFriday, May 26, 2006 8:38 PMsohamsa Subject: Re: Re: samba sada shiva & advaita Dear Narasimha & Jyotisha's Im not so familiar with details of Advaita/Vishishtadvaita paradigm. I saw that the concept of Sunya (like Sanjay Ji lecture of diseases / Sunya Samhita of Sri Achyuta, my Guruji attitude (last conversation) ) or Advaita concept prevail (i mean it is main trend) in SJC. There is also view that Sri Caitanya followers could accept that theory which is against the branch of Gaudiya (at least what Bhaktisiddhanta/Bh.Thakkura/Six Gosvamis(Sri Rupa & Sri Sanatana) preached). Sometimes I wish there could be some Jyotish explanation also for Dvaitans like me - like for example some note in "Creation" article about other also popular view of creation, or explanation that Jagganth has no feet/eyes (nirguna). I accept that other people can have various views but I think it would be nice & proper to give one small note about other concept. For proper understanding I would like to ask some questions: (1) Why the avidya and maya exists ? I heard one answer that Brahmana has lila, but to be fact this must have some saguna attributes.[s.Rath:] Brahman is the advaita concept when existing independantly, but it is Brahma (not Brahman) (2) If Jiva realizes Tattwa and get liberation and become One Atma=Brahman this cycle of getting into maya is cycle (Gita says one who is liberated dont come to material world again) (3) If Jiva realizes the true nature being a Brahmana how the other Jivas can be still under realization (not realized). I know its from view of Vyavaharica but still the practice is under the Vyavaharica nature - like Worship / Getting Up / Washing Body etc. (4) If Brahman is one why I must follow some process to go back to origin state? I dont have power to do this immediately so I dont have enough Sakti (power). If there is Brahman with Sakti and without there is Dwaita which is unacceptable. Ok...I can only dream that I have no power, or my state of non-power is imaginery, but I am still into this condition..and I dont want to suffer but I cannot do anything immediately to stop it. I know there can be mistake in my questions pertaining to mixing the two levels : vyavaharica and reality but please anyone interested to comment on this. Regards Rafal Gendarz - Narasimha P.V.R. Rao sohamsa Wednesday, May 17, 2006 6:00 AM Re: samba sada shiva & advaita Namaste friends, One very quick remark. According to Vasishtha, the so-called maya is Brahman too. If Brahman is an ocean, the maya is like a surface tension causing ripples in the ocean that start thinking of themselves as ripples and not as ocean. However, the surface tension and the surface ripples are ocean too. Maya and the objects etched out by maya are Brahman too. True Adwaita is not about dismissing a lot of things as "mithya" or "illusion", but to see Brahman in those too. BTW, sannyasa is not samyak + nyasa. Instead it is sat+nyasa. Sat means good. Good giving up. May the light of Brahman shine within, Narasimha ------------------------------- Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org ------------------------------- > Om Gurave Namah> > Dear Ajit,> > Namaste. > > > > He found Mother both as Mayaa and Satyam. > > > > That which is mAyA cannot be satyam. `yA mA sA mAyA'. That which > is > > not [satyam] is mAyA. > > Lakshmi: Mother is descibed as "Vidya avidya swaroopini" in Lalitha > sahasranaamam. Sri Devyupanishat also says the same thing. If we > say that Maya is not Brahman, and yet Maya exists (for a temporary > period), are we not contradicting the statement that Brahman is All? > > Maya can not exist on its own. It is like a reflection (albeit a > distorted one:--)) of Truth. Like, this body is maya, and is > perishable, but the soul it contains is Eternal and certainly not > maya. Is the soul less Brahman because it is enveloped in maaya?> > There are some like Sri Ramakrishna, who can cut away and correct > the distortion and for them the Maya is a replica of Truth and their > essence is the same. > > > > why it needs to be taught very carefully from a > ¨ª guru > > Lakshmi: I agree. Guru is a very important influence in shaping > one's philosophy of life. Learning by reading from shastras is > another. But in such abstract subjects, significant insight can be > gained by focused introspection (tapasya). I am sure that's why > Guruji wanted this discussion to materialize.> > I have read many books & articles on Kanchi Mahaswami and have had > the good fortune of meeting him too. Infact, if you happen to visit > Hyderabad, please take some time off to visit a Sri Rama temple near > Hi tech city (Madapur). It's a beautiful temple complex and is built > by my cousin brother at the express wish of Kanchi Mahaswamy.> > One thing I still do not understand. You said that the > Shankaracharyas undertake rituals to guide people and they > themselves do not need it. Is advaita meant only for sannyasis? > Why do grihastas invariably have take to pravritti maarga? Why > should there be a difference between Shankaracharya and the lay > person, unless one is differentiating on the basis of maaya and > giving undue weightage to it? If the Brahman who dwells in the > sannyasi and the samsaari is the same, then why does one need > different approaches? > > Infact, the very saying "aham brahmaasmi" itself talks of two > entities (I and Brahman) and their oneness. It's like an assertion, > a declaration. When there's none other than Brahman, to whom is it > being declared / asserted?> > Regards,> Lakshmi > > > > > > > > > > In fact the term "sannyasa " can be decoded as samyak+nyaasa!!> > > > nyAsA has two meanings, since there are two sides to every coin. > It > > means `to place' etc, but simultaneously, it also means `to > abandon' > > also. I'll let you ponder over it. > >> > > > sohamsa , "Ajit Krishnan" <ajit.krishnan@> > wrote:> >> > Bharat> I personally as well the scriptural texts do not allow the > > usage of the words "Path".> > > > Within the sampradaya, the terms `pravritti-marga' and `nivritti-> > marga' are used quite often to get the point across. > > > > Lakshmi> What could be the meaning of shad-loka paalas? > > > > Generally, 5 devatas do not seem to appear as the number of > devatas > > in any given avarana (of yantras etc). Usually, you have 6 (shat-> > kona), 6 (anga-puja), 8 (ashta-dala-padma), [[ other even numbered > > petals ]], 8 (dig-palakas), 8 (ayudhas). The numbers are generally > > even. When the pancha-loka-pala puja & the navagraha puja are done > > separately before the Satyanarayana puja proper, they have odd > > numbers (5 & 9 respectively). However, when they are placed in a > > single mandala, and understood to be the expansion of the same Sri-> > Satyanarayana, they themselves become avarana devatas of Sri > > Satyanarayana. The loka-palakas become 6 with the addition of > > Saraswati, and the Navagrahas become 8 since Rahu & Ketu (head & > > tail) are placed in the same dala. So, also, in similar styled > > pujas, you make come across durga-adi-ashtha-loka-palaka-s.> > > > > But if the religious rituals are > > > undertaken, they need to be performed with full faith and > > trikarana > > > shuddhi, and as prescribed in the shastras. > > > "Ineffectiveness" may not be used as a goad but as a reality. > > > > Of course, they need to be performed with faith and shuddhi while > > sticking to the texts as closely as possible. > But, "ineffectiveness" > > is most certainly a goad also. According to texts, sandhyavandanam > > is completely ineffective unless it is performed at the trikala > > sandhyas 1008 times per day. Yet, have you ever heard the > > mathadhipathis say "If you happen to wake up late, skip it for the > > day since it would be ineffective anyways?". Never. But they tell > > you, you must wake up before sandhya-kala. There is a difference. > > Ineffectiveness has to be understood differently. > > > > Mantras are ineffective unless they are heard directly from a > guru. > > Mantras are ineffective unless they are prescribed from a guru > with > > mantra-shakti. Mantras are ineffective unless their purashcharana > is > > done. Yet, many here will have experiences where they got > wonderful > > results where this was not the case. Ineffectiveness has to be > > understood differently. > > > > If you think I am advocating improperly done pujas, you are > > mistaken. I am saying that "advaita-bhava" can (and should) be > > developed in puja also, while simultaneously sticking to all the > > details prescribed in the texts. As time goes on, and I understand > > the rules better, I perform them while trying to stick to them as > > best as I can. For example, even to the level of what mudras need > to > > be used while holding the upachara materials, and to which side & > > anga of the devata should dhupa / dipa / naivedya be offered. > > However, while time goes on, I perform the same puja (including > the > > loka pala pujas etc) with much better advaita-bhava. While > > performing the avarana puja, it has to be done with great shraddha > > etc, but once the avarana puja is done, and you are worshipping > sri-> > satyanarayana, it is him alone that should be in the mind. No > other > > thought should be there. Thus, the puja teaches us to > systematically > > move inward, and develop a one-pointed intellect. All samskaras > are, > > after all, a preparation for the serious path towards sannyasa > that > > we will undertake in some lifetime. > > > > > Do I dump the alphabet and the other basics I learnt whenever I > > graduate to the next level? > > > > Do you still use your fingers to determine the results of 2 + 3? > Do > > you spell out each word in your mind before you type it, or does > it > > just happen? You may not "dump it", but the way you use it has > > certainly changed, hasn't it? Once a door is opened, you can walk > > through it at any time. > > > > > Shankaracharyas are liberated souls and follow the nivritti > > maarga, > > so do all these rituals matter to them? If not why did Adi > Shankara > > lay down such a process? Because whether it's householders or > > sannyasins certain discipline is necessary where spiritual matters > > are concenrned. > > > > The rituals don't matter to them. Those that do them, do them for > > the good of mankind _as a result of their purva-karmas_. Or > rather, > > they do nothing, but their bodies continue along the path, > impelled > > by previous karma unless the current body drops off. I undestand > > your logic, there is much more here, and would require many long > > discussions of its own. Do some reading into the life of > > Chandrashekara Bharati, or Sri Vidyasankara. All is not as it > > appears. > > > > > Adi shankara himself had to under go experiences related to > > duality > > > in order to learn. He had to do parakaaya pravesham into a dead > > body > > > to learn about certain facts of life and another episode was > when > > he > > > was accosted and interrogated by the Chandala. > > > > This story is not universally accepted, particularly in the higher > > echelons of the parampara. Many learned scholars completely reject > > this episode. > > > > > He found Mother both as Mayaa and Satyam. > > > > That which is mAyA cannot be satyam. `yA mA sA mAyA'. That which > is > > not [satyam] is mAyA. > > > > > Advaita needs practical application and needs to be ingrained > into > > our > > > responses to every day situations. > > > > And is precisely why it needs to be taught very carefully from a > > guru as it can be twisted all over the place if not properly > > understood.> > > > > In fact the term "sannyasa " can be decoded as samyak+nyaasa!!> > > > nyAsA has two meanings, since there are two sides to every coin. > It > > means `to place' etc, but simultaneously, it also means `to > abandon' > > also. I'll let you ponder over it. > > > > ajit avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 0621-4, 05/26/2006Tested on: 5/27/2006 11:09:37 PMavast! - copyright © 1988-2006 ALWIL Software. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 28, 2006 Report Share Posted May 28, 2006 vyam vyasadevaya namah Dear Guruji, Thank You for Your answer. I think its topic for longer discussion (maybe in Serbia/June). Anyway essence of my mail was request for braod view with tolerance for others view(presenting other views) mixed with personal/individual approach. I think this is only option for harmony in one community with different views. Regards Rafal Gendarz - Sanjay Rath sohamsa Saturday, May 27, 2006 7:39 PM RE: Re: samba sada shiva & advaita | om gurave namah |Dear Rafal To understand one like Caitanya, one has to progress step by step through the Advaita and then the Dwaita and then do the *impossible task* ot bringing these two together. To my knowledge in recent past only Ramakrishna was able to do this (although the lineage of the Ramakrishna Mission founded by Vivekananda is Advaita). Thakur even tuaght his own Guru (and proved to him) the validity of Dvaita. At this stage we are trying to understand advaita for Jyotish. Best wishes and warm regards,Sanjay RathPersonal: WebPages ¡Ü Rath¡¯s Rhapsody SJC WebPages: Sri Jagannath Center ¡Ü SJCERC ¡Ü JIVAPublications: The Jyotish Digest ¡Ü Sagittarius Publications---- sohamsa [sohamsa ] On Behalf Of Rafal GendarzFriday, May 26, 2006 8:38 PMsohamsa Subject: Re: Re: samba sada shiva & advaita Dear Narasimha & Jyotisha's Im not so familiar with details of Advaita/Vishishtadvaita paradigm. I saw that the concept of Sunya (like Sanjay Ji lecture of diseases / Sunya Samhita of Sri Achyuta, my Guruji attitude (last conversation) ) or Advaita concept prevail (i mean it is main trend) in SJC. There is also view that Sri Caitanya followers could accept that theory which is against the branch of Gaudiya (at least what Bhaktisiddhanta/Bh.Thakkura/Six Gosvamis(Sri Rupa & Sri Sanatana) preached). Sometimes I wish there could be some Jyotish explanation also for Dvaitans like me - like for example some note in "Creation" article about other also popular view of creation, or explanation that Jagganth has no feet/eyes (nirguna). I accept that other people can have various views but I think it would be nice & proper to give one small note about other concept. For proper understanding I would like to ask some questions: (1) Why the avidya and maya exists ? I heard one answer that Brahmana has lila, but to be fact this must have some saguna attributes.[s.Rath:] Brahman is the advaita concept when existing independantly, but it is Brahma (not Brahman) (2) If Jiva realizes Tattwa and get liberation and become One Atma=Brahman this cycle of getting into maya is cycle (Gita says one who is liberated dont come to material world again) (3) If Jiva realizes the true nature being a Brahmana how the other Jivas can be still under realization (not realized). I know its from view of Vyavaharica but still the practice is under the Vyavaharica nature - like Worship / Getting Up / Washing Body etc. (4) If Brahman is one why I must follow some process to go back to origin state? I dont have power to do this immediately so I dont have enough Sakti (power). If there is Brahman with Sakti and without there is Dwaita which is unacceptable. Ok...I can only dream that I have no power, or my state of non-power is imaginery, but I am still into this condition..and I dont want to suffer but I cannot do anything immediately to stop it. I know there can be mistake in my questions pertaining to mixing the two levels : vyavaharica and reality but please anyone interested to comment on this. Regards Rafal Gendarz - Narasimha P.V.R. Rao sohamsa Wednesday, May 17, 2006 6:00 AM Re: samba sada shiva & advaita Namaste friends, One very quick remark. According to Vasishtha, the so-called maya is Brahman too. If Brahman is an ocean, the maya is like a surface tension causing ripples in the ocean that start thinking of themselves as ripples and not as ocean. However, the surface tension and the surface ripples are ocean too. Maya and the objects etched out by maya are Brahman too. True Adwaita is not about dismissing a lot of things as "mithya" or "illusion", but to see Brahman in those too. BTW, sannyasa is not samyak + nyasa. Instead it is sat+nyasa. Sat means good. Good giving up. May the light of Brahman shine within, Narasimha ------------------------------- Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org ------------------------------- > Om Gurave Namah> > Dear Ajit,> > Namaste. > > > > He found Mother both as Mayaa and Satyam. > > > > That which is mAyA cannot be satyam. `yA mA sA mAyA'. That which > is > > not [satyam] is mAyA. > > Lakshmi: Mother is descibed as "Vidya avidya swaroopini" in Lalitha > sahasranaamam. Sri Devyupanishat also says the same thing. If we > say that Maya is not Brahman, and yet Maya exists (for a temporary > period), are we not contradicting the statement that Brahman is All? > > Maya can not exist on its own. It is like a reflection (albeit a > distorted one:--)) of Truth. Like, this body is maya, and is > perishable, but the soul it contains is Eternal and certainly not > maya. Is the soul less Brahman because it is enveloped in maaya?> > There are some like Sri Ramakrishna, who can cut away and correct > the distortion and for them the Maya is a replica of Truth and their > essence is the same. > > > > why it needs to be taught very carefully from a > ¨ª guru > > Lakshmi: I agree. Guru is a very important influence in shaping > one's philosophy of life. Learning by reading from shastras is > another. But in such abstract subjects, significant insight can be > gained by focused introspection (tapasya). I am sure that's why > Guruji wanted this discussion to materialize.> > I have read many books & articles on Kanchi Mahaswami and have had > the good fortune of meeting him too. Infact, if you happen to visit > Hyderabad, please take some time off to visit a Sri Rama temple near > Hi tech city (Madapur). It's a beautiful temple complex and is built > by my cousin brother at the express wish of Kanchi Mahaswamy.> > One thing I still do not understand. You said that the > Shankaracharyas undertake rituals to guide people and they > themselves do not need it. Is advaita meant only for sannyasis? > Why do grihastas invariably have take to pravritti maarga? Why > should there be a difference between Shankaracharya and the lay > person, unless one is differentiating on the basis of maaya and > giving undue weightage to it? If the Brahman who dwells in the > sannyasi and the samsaari is the same, then why does one need > different approaches? > > Infact, the very saying "aham brahmaasmi" itself talks of two > entities (I and Brahman) and their oneness. It's like an assertion, > a declaration. When there's none other than Brahman, to whom is it > being declared / asserted?> > Regards,> Lakshmi > > > > > > > > > > In fact the term "sannyasa " can be decoded as samyak+nyaasa!!> > > > nyAsA has two meanings, since there are two sides to every coin. > It > > means `to place' etc, but simultaneously, it also means `to > abandon' > > also. I'll let you ponder over it. > >> > > > sohamsa , "Ajit Krishnan" <ajit.krishnan@> > wrote:> >> > Bharat> I personally as well the scriptural texts do not allow the > > usage of the words "Path".> > > > Within the sampradaya, the terms `pravritti-marga' and `nivritti-> > marga' are used quite often to get the point across. > > > > Lakshmi> What could be the meaning of shad-loka paalas? > > > > Generally, 5 devatas do not seem to appear as the number of > devatas > > in any given avarana (of yantras etc). Usually, you have 6 (shat-> > kona), 6 (anga-puja), 8 (ashta-dala-padma), [[ other even numbered > > petals ]], 8 (dig-palakas), 8 (ayudhas). The numbers are generally > > even. When the pancha-loka-pala puja & the navagraha puja are done > > separately before the Satyanarayana puja proper, they have odd > > numbers (5 & 9 respectively). However, when they are placed in a > > single mandala, and understood to be the expansion of the same Sri-> > Satyanarayana, they themselves become avarana devatas of Sri > > Satyanarayana. The loka-palakas become 6 with the addition of > > Saraswati, and the Navagrahas become 8 since Rahu & Ketu (head & > > tail) are placed in the same dala. So, also, in similar styled > > pujas, you make come across durga-adi-ashtha-loka-palaka-s.> > > > > But if the religious rituals are > > > undertaken, they need to be performed with full faith and > > trikarana > > > shuddhi, and as prescribed in the shastras. > > > "Ineffectiveness" may not be used as a goad but as a reality. > > > > Of course, they need to be performed with faith and shuddhi while > > sticking to the texts as closely as possible. > But, "ineffectiveness" > > is most certainly a goad also. According to texts, sandhyavandanam > > is completely ineffective unless it is performed at the trikala > > sandhyas 1008 times per day. Yet, have you ever heard the > > mathadhipathis say "If you happen to wake up late, skip it for the > > day since it would be ineffective anyways?". Never. But they tell > > you, you must wake up before sandhya-kala. There is a difference. > > Ineffectiveness has to be understood differently. > > > > Mantras are ineffective unless they are heard directly from a > guru. > > Mantras are ineffective unless they are prescribed from a guru > with > > mantra-shakti. Mantras are ineffective unless their purashcharana > is > > done. Yet, many here will have experiences where they got > wonderful > > results where this was not the case. Ineffectiveness has to be > > understood differently. > > > > If you think I am advocating improperly done pujas, you are > > mistaken. I am saying that "advaita-bhava" can (and should) be > > developed in puja also, while simultaneously sticking to all the > > details prescribed in the texts. As time goes on, and I understand > > the rules better, I perform them while trying to stick to them as > > best as I can. For example, even to the level of what mudras need > to > > be used while holding the upachara materials, and to which side & > > anga of the devata should dhupa / dipa / naivedya be offered. > > However, while time goes on, I perform the same puja (including > the > > loka pala pujas etc) with much better advaita-bhava. While > > performing the avarana puja, it has to be done with great shraddha > > etc, but once the avarana puja is done, and you are worshipping > sri-> > satyanarayana, it is him alone that should be in the mind. No > other > > thought should be there. Thus, the puja teaches us to > systematically > > move inward, and develop a one-pointed intellect. All samskaras > are, > > after all, a preparation for the serious path towards sannyasa > that > > we will undertake in some lifetime. > > > > > Do I dump the alphabet and the other basics I learnt whenever I > > graduate to the next level? > > > > Do you still use your fingers to determine the results of 2 + 3? > Do > > you spell out each word in your mind before you type it, or does > it > > just happen? You may not "dump it", but the way you use it has > > certainly changed, hasn't it? Once a door is opened, you can walk > > through it at any time. > > > > > Shankaracharyas are liberated souls and follow the nivritti > > maarga, > > so do all these rituals matter to them? If not why did Adi > Shankara > > lay down such a process? Because whether it's householders or > > sannyasins certain discipline is necessary where spiritual matters > > are concenrned. > > > > The rituals don't matter to them. Those that do them, do them for > > the good of mankind _as a result of their purva-karmas_. Or > rather, > > they do nothing, but their bodies continue along the path, > impelled > > by previous karma unless the current body drops off. I undestand > > your logic, there is much more here, and would require many long > > discussions of its own. Do some reading into the life of > > Chandrashekara Bharati, or Sri Vidyasankara. All is not as it > > appears. > > > > > Adi shankara himself had to under go experiences related to > > duality > > > in order to learn. He had to do parakaaya pravesham into a dead > > body > > > to learn about certain facts of life and another episode was > when > > he > > > was accosted and interrogated by the Chandala. > > > > This story is not universally accepted, particularly in the higher > > echelons of the parampara. Many learned scholars completely reject > > this episode. > > > > > He found Mother both as Mayaa and Satyam. > > > > That which is mAyA cannot be satyam. `yA mA sA mAyA'. That which > is > > not [satyam] is mAyA. > > > > > Advaita needs practical application and needs to be ingrained > into > > our > > > responses to every day situations. > > > > And is precisely why it needs to be taught very carefully from a > > guru as it can be twisted all over the place if not properly > > understood.> > > > > In fact the term "sannyasa " can be decoded as samyak+nyaasa!!> > > > nyAsA has two meanings, since there are two sides to every coin. > It > > means `to place' etc, but simultaneously, it also means `to > abandon' > > also. I'll let you ponder over it. > > > > ajit avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 0621-4, 05/26/2006Tested on: 5/27/2006 11:09:37 PMavast! - copyright © 1988-2006 ALWIL Software. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 29, 2006 Report Share Posted May 29, 2006 Dear Rafal, > I know there can be mistake in my questions pertaining to mixing the two levels : vyavaharica and reality Precisely. For example: > (1) Why the avidya and maya exists ? (1a) Why the [vyavaharika] avidya and [vyavaharika] maya [vyavaharika] exists ? (1b) Why the [vyavaharika] avidya and [vyavaharika] maya [paramarthika] exists ? If your question is 1a, then it becomes " if something is blue in colour, why is it blue in colour " , and is not very interesting. If it is 1b, then it becomes, " if something is blue in colour, why is it green in colour " , and is obviously self-contradictory. Re-examine your assumptions. Similar questions you can ask might be `Why does Krishna exist?', or `Why do I exist?'. Your questions are good ones, but really require some fundamental grounding in the method of [advaita] vedanta. Once this is in place, you will most probably no longer go looking for answers, but spend more time looking at your questions. The quest ceases being an external one, and instead becomes an internal one. ajit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.