Bhakti as the ultimate goal beyond mukti

[talasiga 0]

TALASIGA RESPONDS TO SHVU'S 25 JUNE 6:06AM POST

 

1. Shvu said, "Finally, an example, I waited circa 100 hours to get one."

 

There was no need for Shvu to faithfully wait so long for my answer.

I am neither his Guru nor his Beloved :>)

(Nor do I consider myself a Vedaantin and neither should ISKCON be insulted by anyone considering me an ISKCONITE - ditto for Vaishnoi-s, Shaiva-s etc)

 

Actually Shvu already had enough information about Ramanuja to show that Shvu cannot tell whether Ramanuja had the Divine Vision and Enlightenment before he approached the Shrootis or after.

 

2. Shvu asks, "Do you mean to say that until one has some kind of experience, he cannot believe in God?"

 

Shvu asks a circuitous question and that is why I suggested another question more appropriate to the inquiry. However Shvu persists with his circuitous question.

 

Accordingly, my answer is "No" and, also, "Yes".

 

3. Shvu proposes that bare "curiosity" drives one to seek God per se or to seek ABOUT God in the Shrootis.

 

This gives rise to a more fundamental question:

"Whence does this "curiosity" arise?"

 

4. Shvu has not been able to cite any Shrooti that expressly supports his claim that Shrooti is the ONLY MEANS to KNOW God.

 

a) He cited commentary by Shankaracharya which is not Shrooti and which was commentary on KNOWING ABOUT God in the context of establishing a discursive or dialectical concept. Shvu now clarifies that he never claimed "shankara's [sic] commentary to be shruti".

 

b) Shvu again refers me to the Kenopanishad, this time to the Pratham Khanda. For the second time I have gone to the Lake and find no Damsel there. Interestingly however I note at I:3 of the Kenopanishad that the Guru says, "We do not therefore know how to instruct you about It" (Sri Swami Sivananda translation - "The Principal Upanishads" , Divine Life Society, Rishikesh India).

 

c) Shvu may also note Shrooti in Bhagavad Gita at II:29. The Supreme Being, Lord Krishna says,

"One looks upon Him as a marvel, another likewise speaks of Him as a marvel, another hears of Him as a marvel; and even after hearing, no one whatsoever has known Him." (S Radhakrishnan translation "The Bhagavadgita" George Allen & Unwin paperback ISBN 0 04 891029 5).

 

5. Shvu agrees that a more appropriate question is, "Do you mean to say that a person having an EXPERIENCE goes to the Shrootis to establish a BELIEF that either the experience is divine or that it is not divine?"

 

Yes, and conversely a person having a BELIEF in God established by Shrooti goes on to experience that subtantiates it or goes on to no experience at all.

 

These statements are not meant to preclude the recognition that a BELIEF itself is an EXPERIENCE.

 

 

[Guest guest]

6. No religious discipline can guarantee the realisation of the Bhagavaan (Personal Being) aspect of God.

 

Dear Talasigaji. Our premise in that case is that there is no absolute guarantee for Hari's realization. Most of sectarian sects use to increase the volume of their pockets by stating that their path is completely guaranteed. A sect would sey; 'If one follows such and such discipline as instructed by our acaryas for certain he will attain Hari."

 

This is also subject to God's Grace which may be bestowed even on one who is practising a religious discipline. The Grace may itself be inherent in the discipline (compare specific Grace with perpetual or inherent Grace) for the Shabda itself asserts that Pranava Aum is non different to the Brahman and the Devotee of the Lord recognises that the Lord is non-different to His Name and Form.

 

It is a nice premise. But it is also conditional, the Grace may be or may be not bestowed to someone who is practicing a religious discipline. The Grace may itself be inherent or may not be inherent in the discipline. Some religious sects may states that sabdha 'causes' the manifestation of Brahman in someone's heart, but

sruti states that Brahman has no cause.

 

Devotee of the Lord recognizes that the Lord is non-different to His Name and Form, but no devotional theology is satisfactory to explain why Harinama doesn't manifest Himself immediately as Bhagavan as soon as He is uttered by someone. The only explanation that one may find is the absolute free will of Bhagavan to manifest Himself as His name, form, associates, pastimes, and so on. No religious discipline will cause any interference in Hari's free will.

 

[kailasa 0]

Sadana conducts to kripa. If the man to study, it(he) receives the diploma. There are people which did not study, but steel by the large scientists. But it does not mean, that for this purpose what to receive the diploma, it is better to not study. It is Example.

 

[amanpeter 0]

From Satyaraj prabhu:

 

Devotee of the Lord recognizes that the Lord is non-different to His Name and Form, but no

devotional theology is satisfactory to explain why Harinama doesn't manifest Himself

immediately as Bhagavan as soon as He is uttered by someone. The only explanation that one may

find is the absolute free will of Bhagavan to manifest Himself as His name, form, associates,

pastimes, and so on. No religious discipline will cause any interference in Hari's free will.

 

 

"The Holy Name is so powerful that it MUST act, but when one utters the Holy Name with offenses, it's action will be delayed, not immediate, although in favorable circumstances the Holy Names of the Lord act very quickly." Cc. Antya 3.60 (Antya: 1, pp. 237-39)

[talasiga 0]

Satyaraja Dasa said,

A sect would sey; 'If one follows such and such discipline as instructed by our acaryas for certain he will attain Hari."

and,

Some religious sects may states that sabdha 'causes' the manifestation of Brahman in someone's heart, but.....

 

Talasiga does not consider what some others say, or do not say, as relevant to an expose' of Satyaraja's understanding if those others are not esteemed, or considered authoritative, by Satyaraja. Talasiga says that it would be more fruitful for Satyaraja to support his expression of his understanding with the sayings of those he esteems, loves or considers authoritative. Talasiga makes this suggestion warmly and in a spirit of fellowship.

 

Satyaraja Dasa also said,

...but no devotional theology is satisfactory to explain why Harinama doesn't manifest Himself immediately as Bhagavan as soon as He is uttered by someone.

 

Talasiga says that Harinama is already Bhagavaan manifested but the sadhaka's path is to realise it (meaning 1) and also to realise it (meaning 2).

Talasiga had hoped that his spontaneous comments to Satyaraja's second postulate may have been helpful to reconcile Satyaraja'a paradox. Talasiga had commented that while God's Grace is independent, from the recipient's position the reception of the Grace

a) is dependent on God

b) is, subject to God's Grace, coloured by the recipient's state of consciousness.

c) may be perceived by the recipient as a specific Grace

d) may be perceived by the recipient as perennial or inherent Grace not previously recognised by the recipient

e) may not be perceived by the recipient at all.

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by talasiga (edited 06-27-2001).]

[Guest guest]

"The Holy Name is so powerful that it MUST act, but when one utters the Holy Name with offenses, it's action will be delayed, not immediate, although in favorable circumstances the Holy Names of the Lord act very quickly." Cc. Antya 3.60 (Antya: 1, pp. 237-39)

 

Sectarian books such as the mentioned in this quote by Amanpeter cannot be accept as universal precepts, as they are clearly against sruti.

 

"The Holy Name is so powerful that it MUST act,' that assertive has a sruti support (Katha Upanisad 1.2.16-17):

 

"Yama said: The goal which all the Vedas declare, which all austerities aim at, and which men desire when

they lead the life of continence, I will tell you briefly: it is Om.

 

"This syllable Om is indeed Brahman. This syllable is the Highest. Whosoever knows this syllable obtains

all that he desires."

 

'But when one utters the Holy Name with offenses...', and now this devotional theology is clearly placing Brahman in a conditional case; Holy Name will manifest Himself as the Brahman if[/f] He is uttered without offenses. So, it is denying the principle that Brahman is absolute and not ruled by any condition.

 

Sruti states that Parabrahman cannot be attained by any religious process:

 

"This Atman cannot be attained by the study of the Vedas, or by intelligence, or by much hearing of sacred

books. It is attained by him alone whom It chooses. To such a one Atman reveals Its own form." (Katha Upanisad 1.2.23)

 

So, the conclusion one should attain following sruti texts is that "no devotional theology is satisfactory to explain why Harinama doesn't manifest Himself immediately as Bhagavan as soon as He is uttered by someone. The only explanation that one may find is the absolute free will of Bhagavan to manifest Himself as His name, form, associates, pastimes, and so on. No religious discipline will cause any interference in Hari's free will."

 

 

[Guest guest]

Talasiga says that Harinama is already Bhagavaan manifested but the sadhaka's path is to realise it (meaning 1) and also to realise it (meaning 2).

 

So, that is a theology by Talasinga trying to explain why Harinama doesn't manifest Himself immediately as Bhagavan as soon as He is uttered by someone. As sruti text (Katha Upanisad 1.2.23) clearly states that " (Atman)It is attained by him alone whom It chooses," Talasinga's theology is also denying sruti by inferring that sadhana is the cause of an EXPERIENCE (such as realization). But without sruti basis, how one may establish that either the experience is divine or that it is not divine?

 

 

Talasiga had commented that while God's Grace is independent, from the recipient's position the reception of the Grace

a) is dependent on God

 

That's a dual position: Bhagavan's grace is independent, but from the recipient perspective it is dependent. This position is not absolute and it is again a mere theology by Talasiga

 

b) is, subject to God's Grace, coloured by the recipient's state of consciousness.

 

Therefore one may say that only brahmanins should attain Bhagavan's grace, as they have a proper state of consciousness for it. If a demon, a beast, or a tree attain Bhagavan's grace it is inferred that they must have been brahmanins in a past lifetime. That's another mere theological viewpoint.

c) may be perceived by the recipient as a specific Grace

 

You are inferring that one may refuse the grace or accept it after its perception. So, jiva's free will surpass Bhagavan's free will. Jiva is powerful than Bhagavan at least in this aspect. This may create another conflicting theological argument.

 

 

d) may be perceived by the recipient as perennial or inherent Grace not previously recognised by the recipient

 

That's to say if jiva is covered by maya he cannot recognize Bhagavan's perennial or inherent grace. One may develop a enormous compendium of theology starting from that premise.

 

e) may not be perceived by the recipient at all.

 

This premise also falls into the category of a dreamlike and talkative mundane theology.

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by Satyaraja dasa (edited 06-27-2001).]

[kailasa 0]

The sacred name not the gear, is all spiritual world. There there is a life and this life has laws. We simplly want as easier - scheme. Has made so - has received it, has made on the contrary - has received that. But Krisna it is the Person and it(he) more cleverly cleverest and that we would become and we are more restrained and more cleverly - His(its) devoted . It(he) also learns(teaches) us to mind - reason. When for me the ground leaves from under legs, I always know - " It Krisna ".

 

In the beginning, that devoted would be approved, more and more less simplly, but if we really aim in the attitudes(relations), on everyone. Accomplished(perfect) devoted it is that, in my judgement, who not having communication(connection), knows that it is necessary to do(make), acts, applying reason and is hard in it. Most important, it to get under the control of internal energy, but it is impossible it to make, pragmatically, at first I shall find out all, and then I go. It is necessary to go, it and is sraddha.

 

Simplly our intellect is very much limited, therefore occasionally we are lost. But so sraddha also gets stronger. Forces whence will undertake if not to do(make) of efforts? Whence will undertake sraddha, if all under the scheme?

 

There is a good advice Bhaktivinoda Thakura - " take mind(wit) in a hand and Impact it(him) while it(he) will not ask mercy ", it works 100 %.

 

Sivu, where you? I have joked, all is brahman.

 

[Maitreya 0]

Originally posted by kailasa:

Sivu, where you? I have joked, all is brahman.

I am also becoming concerned.Has he fallen asleep in the brahmajyoti?

 

 

 

[talasiga 0]

1. Re: Talasiga says that Harinama is already Bhagavaan manifested but the sadhaka's path is to realise it (meaning 1) and also to realise it (meaning 2).

 

a) Satyaraja attempts to dismiss this statement based on his level of understanding of Katha Upanishad I.2.23. Applying this level of understanding mantras 12,13,14,15, & 16 of Katha Upanishad at Chapter 1 valli 3 will be seen to counter Satyaraja's selection.

 

b) Satyaraja also misinterprets this statement to mean sadhana alone causes the state of beatitude but there is nothing in this statement that says this. The Talasiga statement was made, in the line of discussion including precepts about perennial or inherent Grace and specific Grace, a propos and in agreement with Satyaraja's postulation that God's Grace is independent.

 

Therefore, reading it in this context, an appropriate interpretation of the statement may be illustrated as follows:

Harinama is invested with the Lord's trancendental energies and therefore is a manifestation of the Lord's perennial Grace. A Devotee who chants the Harinama is on the path to actualise the Lord's Grace which occurs by the specific Grace of the Lord by which the Devotee realises the inherent Grace in the Harinama and/or any other realisation by the Lord's Will.

 

2. Re: Talasiga saying that from the recipient's position the reception of the Grace is dependent on God.

 

Satyaraja makes no substantial criticism on this, other than to class it as "mere theology" reflecting a "dual position" that is "not absolute".

 

This is all true and does not upset the value of the Talasiga statement: -

 

(i) it is "mere theology" a propos Satyaraja's own mere theology;

 

(ii) it reflects a "dual position" in as much as the concept of God bestowing Grace on a person illustrates a dual position as postulated by Satyaraja himself;

 

(iii) it is "not absolute" because the perspective of the jiva is "not absolute".

 

The plain fact is that the Causeless Mercy of the Lord is perceived by the jiva as Mercy caused by the Lord.

Q.E.D.

 

3. Satyaraja's criticisms of the remainder of Talasiga comments a propos Satyaraja's own theology, are also in the same vein and tend to show that Satyaraja has misunderstood Talasiga. Talasiga had attempted to assist Satyaraja by qualifying Satyaraja's theology in a way that would enable it to comprehend and honour the Shrooti of the Shikshashtaka of Lord Chaitanya.

 

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by talasiga (edited 06-28-2001).]

[Guest guest]

Satyaraja has misunderstood Talasiga. Talasiga had attempted to assist Satyaraja by qualifying Satyaraja's theology in a way that would enable it to comprehend and honour the Shrooti of the Shikshashtaka of Lord Chaitanya.

 

Talasiga is right in his premise, as Satyaraja has misunderstood Talasiga. Talasiga was defending a belief that Lord Caitanya is an avatara and His Siksastakam is a sruti. No one should deal with believers, as their postulate is that faith is the cause of divine experience. Satyaraja was defending the premise that a divine experience may not depend on faith.

 

Shvuji was correct, Talasiga is an Iskconer in disguise.

 

 

[This message has been edited by Satyaraja dasa (edited 06-28-2001).]

[talasiga 0]

Satyaraja Dasa continues to expose his misunderstanding by

(i) incorrect presumption that Talasiga is "defending a belief that Lord Chaitanya is an avatara".

(ii) ironically promoting his (Satyaraja's) BELIEF that "no-one should deal with believers"!

(iii) labelling Talasiga as "an Iskconer in disguise".

 

Talasiga considers these issues are a DISTRACTION from the examination of Satyaraja's theology to which Talasiga has made some thoughtful comments. In the spirit of fellowship the latest substantial comments by Talasiga are now reposted to continue constructive discussion, particularly on points 1 and 2 which Satyaraja has not yet touched on:

 

Originally posted by talasiga:

1. Re: Talasiga says that Harinama is already Bhagavaan manifested but the sadhaka's path is to realise it (meaning 1) and also to realise it (meaning 2).

 

a) Satyaraja attempts to dismiss this statement based on his level of understanding of Katha Upanishad I.2.23. Applying this level of understanding mantras 12,13,14,15, & 16 of Katha Upanishad at Chapter 1 valli 3 will be seen to counter Satyaraja's selection.

 

b) Satyaraja also misinterprets this statement to mean sadhana alone causes the state of beatitude but there is nothing in this statement that says this. The Talasiga statement was made, in the line of discussion including precepts about perennial or inherent Grace and specific Grace, a propos and in agreement with Satyaraja's postulation that God's Grace is independent.

 

Therefore, reading it in this context, an appropriate interpretation of the statement may be illustrated as follows:

Harinama is invested with the Lord's trancendental energies and therefore is a manifestation of the Lord's perennial Grace. A Devotee who chants the Harinama is on the path to actualise the Lord's Grace which occurs by the specific Grace of the Lord by which the Devotee realises the inherent Grace in the Harinama and/or any other realisation by the Lord's Will.

 

2. Re: Talasiga saying that from the recipient's position the reception of the Grace is dependent on God.

 

Satyaraja makes no substantial criticism on this, other than to class it as "mere theology" reflecting a "dual position" that is "not absolute".

 

This is all true and does not upset the value of the Talasiga statement: -

 

(i) it is "mere theology" a propos Satyaraja's own mere theology;

 

(ii) it reflects a "dual position" in as much as the concept of God bestowing Grace on a person illustrates a dual position as postulated by Satyaraja himself;

 

(iii) it is "not absolute" because the perspective of the jiva is "not absolute".

 

The plain fact is that the Causeless Mercy of the Lord is perceived by the jiva as Mercy caused by the Lord.

Q.E.D.

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by talasiga (edited 06-29-2001).]

[jijaji 0]

The beauty of a lute and skill in playing its cords can bring some pleasure to people but can hardly make you a king.

In the same way, speech alone,

even a deluge of words, with scholarship and skill in commenting on the scriptures, may achieve some personal satisfaction but not liberation.

 

from *(Viveka-Chudamani)* by Sri Sankara

 

 

 

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

PEACE OUT NOW

[premananda 0]

Originally posted by jijaji:

The beauty of a lute and skill in playing its cords can bring some pleasure to people but can hardly make you a king.

In the same way, speech alone,

even a deluge of words, with scholarship and skill in commenting on the scriptures, may achieve some personal satisfaction but not liberation.

 

from *(Viveka-Chudamani)* by Sri Sankara

 

 

 

 

"Why don´t I spend more time doing something important, like meditating, instead of spending hours in front of the computer engaged in endless debates?"

 

[talasiga 0]

Originally posted by jijaji:

The beauty of a lute and skill in playing its cords can bring some pleasure to people but can hardly make you a king.

 

Who would be a king

When there is a Movement among the paupers?

 

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

busker

talasiga@hotmail.com

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by talasiga (edited 08-12-2001).]

[talasiga 0]

Originally posted by premananda:

"Why don´t I spend more time doing something important, like meditating, instead of spending hours in front of the computer engaged in endless debates?"

Those who expend all their thoughts

on philosophy

become so Destitute.

Just see - how their hearts

are dignified by Defeat!

 

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

 

talasiga@hotmail.com

 

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by talasiga (edited 08-12-2001).]

[premananda 0]

Originally posted by talasiga:

Those who expend all their thoughts

on philosophy

become so Destitute.

Just see - how their hearts

are dignified by Defeat!

 

 

That´s not what I meant...

 

 

[talasiga 0]

Originally posted by premananda:

That´s not what I meant...

 

 

.....and that's not what I meanT

 

 

[premananda 0]

Originally posted by talasiga:

.....and that's not what I meanT

 

 

I didn´t mean what you think I meant, I THINK ;-)

 

So what did you mean?

 

 

[talasiga 0]

Originally posted by premananda:

I didn´t mean what you think I meant, I THINK ;-)

 

So what did you mean?

 

 

 

My best poems are those

whose meanings exceed my intentions.

 

 

 

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

talasiga@hotmail.com