Smartha Sampradaya....A Few Insights....

Hello! After a lot of thinking and reflection, I've now come to understand something about the Smartha culture. As I said in an earlier post, It is Shaivite. Let me explain.

(1)Shankaracharya is believed to be an avatar of Shiva.

(2)Shiva is a strict God with no mercy, as opposed to the over-flowing mercy of Lord Vishnu. Shankaracharya's teachings are ridiculously rigid and non-adaptive.

(3)Shankara exhorts us to attain Brahman through the Jnana marga. Shiva-Dakshinamurthy is a symbol of Jnana. Bhakti is to be discarded at the earliest....Hari is symbolic of Bhakti (He's the source of all yogas but that's beyond the scope of this post). So one has to discard Lord Vishnu at the earliest.Nama japa is only the means unlike in Bhagavatha dharma where nama is both the means and the end (c.f Srimad Bhagavatham, Rama Rahasya upanishad and the compositions of Sri Thyagaraja/Purandaradasa)....So one attains Brahman through Shiva.

(4)Renunciation is supreme in this samradaya. Shiva/Rudra is the god of renunciation. Thus follow Lord Shiva's example.

(5)There is NO Vishnu Panchayatana puja. Shiva Panchayatana puja alone is performed.(I have yet to come across a Vishnu Panchayatana puja in both books and online resources)

(6)We don't seem to have agamas but it 's Shaiva agamas that is taught to us Smarthas when needed. My grand uncle who's a Sri Vidya upasaka told me so.

Smartas - The Eclectic Hindus - I

In our quest for our roots, most of us have an interest in knowing about the Smarta religion. But there is very little research material on the subject. Another major problem is that though the tenets of the Smarta religion are followed all over India, only in South India we call ourselves Smarta.

The basic tenet of the Smarta religion is non-Sectarianism. It is eclectic in belief. We believe in all Gods/Goddesses. It is this Smarta belief which is Hinduism to most of the Hindus all over the world. Again Smarta are not Vedantins. They believe in all the six Dharshanas or the systems of philosophy.

I would like to start with the evolution of Smarta religion.

Hinduism has been plagued by sectarianism for a long time. This sectarianism made Hinduism weak. We all know about the fight between the Shaivites and the Vaishnavites in Tamil Nadu. That is history. To look at some sectarian beliefs you have to only visit any Hare Krishna web site. Shiva and all other Gods/Goddesses are not even Gods. They are only demi-Gods. Frequent rants against Adi Sankara forgetting the historical fact that but for him, there might not have been any Hinduism at the time of Chaitanya Maha Prabhu.

You can very well imagine how it must have been in the middle ages when sectarianism ruled the roost.

There was another problem also with sectarianism in the middle ages. Saivism and Vaishnavism in those days were both Agamic. The Pancharatra Vaishnavism and Kalamukha and other brands of Saivism. These did not lay emphasis on the Vedas or Vaidic practices.

So it was felt that a non sectarian religion was required to unify Hinduism, and also to revive Vaidic practices. And it was also felt necessary to bring the different warring philosophies together since different sects followed different philosophies.

Now this bringing about the unity has been attributed to Adi Sankaracharya. But scholars have questioned whether Adi Sankaracharya the exponent of pure Advaita could have been the founder of a religion which emphasized on all the six Dharshanas. Whether it was one or many Sankaracharyas does not matter for us. The fact is that it is the Sankaracharyas and the mutts established by him which played a major role in this unification.

Now I expect some of the Smartas to object to my classifying the Smartas as following all the six Dharshanas or systems of philosophy. This may seem contrary to the widespread belief that they are Advaita Vedanta followers.

Smartas - The Eclectic Hindus - II

Now I expect some of the Smartas to object to my classifying the Smartas as following all the six Dharshanas or systems of philosophy. This may seem contrary to the widespread belief that they are Advaita Vedanta followers.

I do not know how many of you are aware of the titles of the Matathipathi of Sankara Matams. These titles are recited by people who consider the Sankaracharya as their personal Guru.

Shad Dharsana sthanapachaya

Sankyathraya prithipadaka

Vaidhika Marga Pravarthaka

A sloka

Sasthram sarira Mimansa devasthu Parameswara
Acharya Sankaracharya santhu me janma janmani

Why did the Smartas do it? Tamil Smartas always talk about Shanmadham, but not about Shad Dharshana.

The basic idea of Smarta religion was to reestablish Vaidic practices. Vedas are non-sectarian unlike the Puranas. There are verses in praise of all Gods. Indra, Varuna, and other Vaidic Gods. Then we have Rudraprasna, Narayana Suktham and Sri Suktham among others. In these verses the god to whom the verses are addressed is considered the Supreme God. Again the Vaidic practices are basically from Karma Kanda and follow Uttara Mimansa. Advaita is Gnana Kanda. Then Yoga has become a part and parcel of Hinduism. Sankhya is the basic philosophy of the Sakthas.

You can not bring about a unity among different sects or revive the Vaidic practices without bring together the six systems of Philosophy.

So Smartaism became Shan Madha and Shad Dharshana. Though it is not stated clearly Smartas also absorbed the concept of Bhakthi. The various slokas attributed to Sankaracharya are evidence of this.

The followers came from all the sects. Initially we did have subclassifications of Smarta-Saiva, Smarta-Vaishnava and Smarta-Sakthas. But this disappeared over a period of time. The best part of Smarta religion is that you could continue your sectarian worship. The Panchayathana Puja was a compromise. But here the central deity could be Shiva, Vishnu, Sakthi, Skanda or the Sun. The Smartas went to the extent of even allowing sectarian marks. That is how we have Nama Iyers for example.

Two important points to be considered now.

1. How do I say that most of the Hindus are Smartas?

Take the case of Bengal. Sri Ramakrishna's family deity was Raghubir (Krishna). His Tantrik Guru was Bhairavi Brahmani a Vaishnavite Tantrika. He worshiped Krishna and Kali. This is Smartaism. Most of the Brahmins in Bengal are like this.

Kerala: The Nambhoodiris claim to be Purva Mimansa followers. But see the worship. Shiva, Devi and Krishna temples are all over Kerala. Everyone goes to all these temples. Swami Chinmayananda spent his lifetime spreading the message of Bhagavd Gita. But in all his Ashrams the central temple is Shiva's temple. This is Smartaism.

2. Some one might say that "But there is proof that Smartas are Saiva, Vaishnava". We have had discussions regarding this. This is exactly what you are supposed to believe. Smartaism is Saivism for Saivas and Vaishnavism for Vaishnavas. All things to all people is the name of the game. We can not claim that Smartas are pure Advaita Vedanta people. Pure Advaitins reject Purva Mimansa. They do not subscribe to Sri Vidya practices which basically believes in Saguna Brahman.

Smartas - The Eclectic Hindus - III

I would also like to point out the all important role of the Sankara matams and thousands of other matams which are loosely affiliated to these matams. These matams have spread the idea of non-sectarian Hinduism all over India. They have also revived the Vaidic practices.

Again India has been known for the millions of wandering renunciates. Smarta religion tries to bring some order here also by creating the Dasanami Sampradhayas of Sannyasis. They created a semblance of an organization. But this affiliation is only nominal. They do not even have a uniform practice of dealing with the dead bodies of Sannyasis.

Finally

If Smarta religion is so good and has strengthened Hinduism how come no one is talking about it?

Here lies the crux of the matter. Smarta called themselves Smartas because they wanted to emphasize the role of the Smiritis/Dharmasasthras. Dharmasasthras are founded on Varnashrama Dharma. So the Smartas have been accused of propagating the Varnashrama Dharma.

But this criticism does not take into account the seminal role played by the Smartas in strengthening Hinduism and preventing it from becoming divided into a number of warring sects.

Hope

The vision shown by Adi Sankarachrya or Sankaracharyas is unparalleled in the history of Hinduism. We can only pray that such a visionary will be born in India again who will unite all the castes together, so that the caste name would signify only a tradition or culture. A Dalit should say proudly of the Brahmins "Here are the people who have kept OUR Vedic traditions alive."

raga.

do you know - BP has wrote an extensive commentry on Bhagavat Geeta and Vishnu Shasra nama?

Bhaja Govindam , Bhaja Govindam - Govindam Bhaja Mooda Mathe... whose composition is it ? My dear raga?

Nacchinarkiniyan said:

Again India has been known for the millions of wandering renunciates. Smarta religion tries to bring some order here also by creating the Dasanami Sampradhayas of Sannyasis. They created a semblance of an organization. But this affiliation is only nominal. They do not even have a uniform practice of dealing with the dead bodies of Sannyasis.

Click to expand...

A small doubt sir:

The dasanamis claim to have been existing as a tradition of renunciates before smarta religion was formed. They say Sri Adi Shankara organized them, not founded the sampradaya. Apparently Sri Adi Shankara organized them to become affiliated with mutts during His time, which did happen but nominally. Prior to that they seem to have followed the ashram system. Meaning a shishya will go to the guru's ashram, seek initiation, learn, then become a wandering monk spreading the message of sanatana, its tenents, yoga, philosophy, etc. They still seem to follow the system of founding / being affiliated with ashrams not mutts.

As regards disposal of dead bodies, usually dasanamis do burial or cremation which i notice that it generally depends on the spiritual state. If a person attained samadhi or any other higher states of consciousness, then it is burial, otherwise then it appears to be cremation. I heard those of the Nath sampradaya, drown the body in the ganges.

smartas are there from time immemorial...

malgova.mango said:

smartas are there from time immemorial...

Click to expand...

It is very difficult to specify the date of the Smarta religion. The Smarta religion with its syncretistic tendencies seem to have been in existence for long. There is evidence for that like the medieval sculptures of Panchayatana Sivalinga and Harihara. But organizing them into a force in Hinduism could be attributed to Adi Sankaracharya.

These are developments which took place over a period of hundreds of years. We do not have a time frame for this development.

palindrome said:

A small doubt sir:

The dasanamis claim to have been existing as a tradition of renunciates before smarta religion was formed. They say Sri Adi Shankara organized them, not founded the sampradaya. Apparently Sri Adi Shankara organized them to become affiliated with mutts during His time, which did happen but nominally. Prior to that they seem to have followed the ashram system. Meaning a shishya will go to the guru's ashram, seek initiation, learn, then become a wandering monk spreading the message of sanatana, its tenents, yoga, philosophy, etc. They still seem to follow the system of founding / being affiliated with ashrams not mutts.

As regards disposal of dead bodies, usually dasanamis do burial or cremation which i notice that it generally depends on the spiritual state. If a person attained samadhi or any other higher states of consciousness, then it is burial, otherwise then it appears to be cremation. I heard those of the Nath sampradaya, drown the body in the ganges.

Click to expand...

Jadathari renunciates were among the Vedic Rishis. Later renunciation was given prime importance in Saivism. The early Sannyasis were all Saivites. There were many sects of sannyasis. Some like the Kalamukhas had extensive organization. Their old monastries have been discovered. These kind of sadhus still continue with the Naga sadhus, Nath Sampradhaya and others.

The Dasanami Sampradhaya was a later phenomenon. I was discussing the details of the Maha Samadhi of my Guru with a friend of mine who is a Dasanami monk in Banares. He was surprised at the rituals though he belonged to the same order as my Guru. Then I found that there are one too many regional and other variations in both the initiation and Maha Samadhi ceremonies.

Are the Tamil Brahmin Smartas uncomfortable with Shad Dharsana?

There was a lot of discussions about Smartas being Saivas/Sakthas earlier. Then someone was trying to prove that Saktas are all Advaita Vedantins.

Now there is hardly anyone who has responded to this thread. Are we the Tamil Brahmin Smartas uncomfortable with the idea that we are eclectic and that we are not only Shan Madha but also Shad Dharsana?

Now about Vishishtaadvaita and Dwaita. Even here the only problem that the Smartas have is the definition of Narayana and Vishnu as the only supreme God. Smartas are not comfortable with that. Otherwise the philosophies of Vishishtaadvaita and Dwaita are perfectly acceptable.

Nacchinarkiniyan said:

Otherwise the philosophies of Vishishtaadvaita and Dwaita are perfectly acceptable.

Click to expand...

Sir,

Could you write something about the evolution of the dwaita, advaita and vishisadvaitha.

I notice that the dasanamis seem to follow a form of what some call as advaitha but that which can be fitted into both advaita and vishishtadvaitha spanning from kevala advaita to all forms of advaita as well.

Is it because their principles or practices are older than the (re)establishing of advaita by Sri Adi Shankara and the (re)establishing of Vishistadvaita by Sri Ramanujacharya, that their philosophies seem ecletic and fitting in everywhere?

Thanks.

The principles of Advaita, Vishishtaadvaita, and Dvaita are much older than the Acharyas. These have been discussed for centuries. Then we had Siva Advaita, Smarta Advaita and Saktha Advaita. Sivadvaita is very much akin to Vishishtaadvaita of Ramanujacharya, except for the role of Vishnu being taken by Shiva. The Saktha Advaita's position is also similar. The Sri Vidya philosophy is similar to Vishishtaadvaita.

Appiah Dikshidar wrote the Chatur-mata-sara to illustrate the philosophical thoughts of the four prominent schools of interpretation of Brahma sutras. The Naya-manjari deals with advaita, the Naya-mani-mala with Srikanta mata, the Naya-mayukha-malika with Ramanuja's philosophy, and the Naya-muktavali with Madhva's philosophy. His remarkable catholicity of outlook, his thoroughness in writing, his impartiality, his unerring sense of values, and his concern for truth are all so evident in these writings that the Vaishnavas have adopted the Naya-Mayukha-Malika as their manual for study, and the Madhvas the Naya-Muktavali.

Frankly even while studying I I did not find these philosophies and their differences an interesting subject.

These are for people with dialectical skills and who enjoy these arguments.

Talking about Advaita a friend of mine from England was very much impressed by Sankaracharya, Bagavan Ramana Maharishi, and Sri Ramakrishna. He came to India and spent some years here wandering from Ashram to Ashram searching for a teacher of true Advaita.

He went back to England frustrated. His conclusion was that pure Advaita as propounded by Adi Sankaracharya does not exist in India now. He and his friends now have the Advaita Vedanta religion which they say is not affiliated to the present day Hinduism.

lucky are those who have the option to go searching high and low like that....some ppl like me take to a path just based on availability of gurus not because of the path itself.. all a learning experience..

they say to everyone climbing up a mountain their route or path seems the most suitable...but finally everyone reaches the same mountain top.

"Thus the rousing of the Kundalini is the one and only way to attaining Divine Wisdom, superconscious perception, realisation of the spirit. The rousing may come in various ways, through love for God, through the mercy of perfected sages, or through the power of the analytic will of the philosopher."

----- Excerpt from "Raja Yoga" by Swami Vivekananda.

I have not fully read all the postings in the thread.My view is that Sankarabhgavatha Padal never advocated Savisim alone.He has alsopropounded Ganapathiyam Saakthametc.His main teaching is one ness with the self.I am putting it very simpy. In short AHAM BRRAMAASME

Smartas and Avataras

Avatara is basically a Vaishnavite concept. The Saivites do not believe in Avataras.

The Smartas believe that all Gods/Goddesses could take Avataras.

Raising kundalini is by sheer Yogic practice.
Knowing takes place by attending proper teaching.

A Knower of SELF need not to be Yogi and an Yogi need not to be a Knower.

Dear MM,

A yogi can just be a seeker right now but will eventually become a knower if the practice continues properly.

A knower of self need not be a yogi right now but might have been in the past (births) or will become one in future due to transitions in life....even bhakthi is yoga right?

Knowledge that comes from being with a teacher can be of two wide categories....learning from the teachers' experiences/teachings or learning to experience by oneself.

re

sridharvasudevan said:

Dear MM,

A yogi can just be a seeker right now but will eventually become a knower if the practice continues properly.

A knower of self need not be a yogi right now but might have been in the past (births) or will become one in future due to transitions in life....even bhakthi is yoga right?

Knowledge that comes from being with a teacher can be of two wide categories....learning from the teachers' experiences/teachings or learning to experience by oneself.

Click to expand...

gosh sv,where did you go?missed your postings.as usual brilliant explanation,forgot about the past birth thingy for a while,but in this birth itself we can experiance out of body experiances=obe ( koodu vittu koodu payirddhu ),if we practice simple pranayama techniques.

sb

Dear Sridhar Ji

Yogi can only become a Gnani by applying himself to teaching there is no other way.
By karma or by practising and doing something you only achieve siddhi in that particular domain.

So a Yogi can never become a Gnani , if he fails to hear the teaching. Like Sage Narada - even after he mastered all the arts and yogic powers.
He missed a vital understanding about HIMSELF and was taught by Sanat Kumaras. So says one Upanishad.


One should not get confused with "experience" . The Knower's delight is Knowing the Self , which HE is seeking for Jenmas since time immemorial.


May be a bit out of context... just came to my mind....

The word "anubhava" has a higher meaning than experience. Everybody experience the pain of injustice and corruption done to them by others but only few understands the importance of justice and fair-play and seek to live clean.

Majority given a chance they will lie, steal etc... though they suffer the same action caused by others.

The people who understood the "Values" are called "Anubhava salees" - cause they learnt from their experiences -

Majorities , not having learned they are mere experiencers . So they will go without tickets, cheat tax paying, etc... and they continue to live and suffer until they learnt from experience

Regards

Dear MM, Thank you for explaining your thoughts and words from earlier postings.

my 2 cent.

smarthas,were originally shiva devotees as were the majority of indians of undivided india.but soon gave birth to son's...etc as per ithihasas,puranas...it has always been easy to create a division and then rule over masses,so within shiva devotees sects within sects came about.but its the tribute of our forefathers/mothers that,not only shiva devotees,but also vishnu devotees and brahma's gyaanam=trinity of gods became the forces of active philosophical leanings,shaping bhakthi.from a monotheistic to pantheistic society evolved over long durations of yugams ,as explain by our vedic standards=mind boggling actually.

while shiva & parvathi were called shaivaites & shakthas just like vaishnavas called themselves vishnu bhakthars avoiding any mingling=stand alone philosophy of vishnu only,but the smartha advaitins embraced all concepts of bhakthi,ishavara=shaktham==vishnu=brahma=ganapathyam=koumaram=souram as one single conscious stream,which is what todays indians (majority) are practicing.

following the vaishnavas policy,we have the abrahamic faiths too adopting similiar ,stand alone 'ishta devata' concept,taken from sanathana dharma originating from bharatham.

sb

sb!

how mleccha religion spreads is detailed in bhavishya purana.

regards