Flaws in Advaita - Real or Perceived?

[suraju06]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Dear Shri KRS one more thing, I had you in my mind because you have said my view or Sangom's view is colored by something or the other, similar to the interviewer dismissing Malcolm X based on his experiences. But I did not have you in mind when I said there are some who take this tactic to the extreme, suraju06 fits that bill perfectly.
Cheers!

Mr. Nara,

Again you are not able to get me out of your mind. May be I have touched a raw nerve some time which wound is still not healed. I have stopped addressing you directly long back because you said you wanted to avoid me assiduously. But when you come to this forum to put down your ideas I do come to record my counter points taking care not to address you directly. Now in this post you have passed a judgment about me. Of course I do not care about what you have to say about me. But then I have a question and a request to you. The question isont you think you are insulting people again and again here when you repeatedly and relentlessly pursue your pet theory of "brahminism" and its "nefarious/funny practices" ?(I have put it in quotes because they are your terms and have no meaning to brahmins other than in a cultural context) The request:Let us call it quits. You go your way with your convictions about the brahmins, their superiority complex, their practice of "brahminism" etc. But please dont bring it into this forum and rub/inflict it on us.If you are unable to resist your temptation, at least do not complain when we give it back in equal measure (the language may vary depending on one's mastery of it). Instead of inventing theories if you can accede to this simple request of me your contribution on other areas may be useful to the members of this forum and personally to me too. Thank you.

 

[happyhindu]

The question isont you think you are insulting people again and again here when you repeatedly and relentlessly pursue your pet theory of "brahminism" and its "nefarious/funny practices" ?(I have put it in quotes because they are your terms and have no meaning to brahmins other than in a cultural context)

No matter what you say, Shri Raju, "brahmanism" that is, casteism and birth-based labour laws are banned by law. Discrimination against anyone based on caste is illegal. Yet this "nefarious" practice of caste-discrimination is continued by 'brahmins' at the highest level (that is, at the mutt-level or institutional-level). Sooner or later they will be answerable for it (please mark these words). Shri Nara, is in fact trying to help his folks, by making them see reason.

The request:Let us call it quits. You go your way with your convictions about the brahmins, their superiority complex, their practice of "brahminism" etc. But please dont bring it into this forum and rub/inflict it on us.

Who are you to tell Shri Nara to go away? Why do you rub/inflcit your casteism on us ?

If you are unable to resist your temptation, at least do not complain when we give it back in equal measure (the language may vary depending on one's mastery of it). Instead of inventing theories if you can accede to this simple request of me your contribution on other areas may be useful to the members of this forum and personally to me too. Thank you.

Shri Raju, your "inventing theories" stands no chance. The public is a lot more aware of the "obfuscation" done in the name of "faith". Irrespective of whether or not Shri Nara speaks about it, public awareness is no less these days.

 

[Nara]

click on this link..here to get a picture how things are debated here.

Philosophy - Hindu Dharma Forums

I was once invited to debate Advaitam in that forum. I know how they debate. They are no better, and if anything more vicious.

 

[saidevo]

Did you not miss something about the HDF you used to say invariably, Nara? Yes, the 'mutual admiration society'!

HDF is not a forum that discusses Advaita or any subject for that matter in depth because it has a sizeable percentage of Western Hindus and another sizeable percentage of native, laukika Hindus, me included in the latter group.

Perhaps we might find an in-depth discussion in this Advaita list:
Advaita-l Info Page

I was once invited to debate Advaitam in that forum. I know how they debate. They are no better, and if anything more vicious.

 

[subbudu1]

Dear Subbudu sir, as you rightly observe, this samskara is an absolute must for all SVs, so much so, in orthodox families, a new DIL will not be allowed to touch anything in the kitchen, why, they may not even be allowed to enter the kitchen, until she is branded .

Boys get branded when the get their second life - upanayanam, though many weekend SVs have no idea about this and don't do it, and the girls get branded when they get their second life - wedding. The one who performs this samskara becomes one's acharya, and therefore girls normally are made to wait until they get married so that the entire family will have the same acharya.

To be fair, this samskara is not only about branding with Shangu and Chakra, but it has five aspects to it -- for this reason this is also called pancha samskara. These five are:

1. tApa samskaram, i.e. the branding part,
2. pundara samskara, the acharya will place the urdva pundaram (namam) in twelve places in the upper torso, and one is supposed to wear this 12 pundaram from that day forward,
3. nAma samskaram - all SVs take the same name, ramanuja dasan,
4. mantra samskaram, the acharya will initiate the aspirant with three esoteric mantras that are of prime importance for all SVs, and they are, (a) thiruvashtaksharam, (b) dvayam, and (c) Srimat BG sharama shlokam; BTW, the first two are so esoteric that they must not be said aloud, and yet, even in the most important temple for all SVs, namely Sri Rangam, these mantras are broadcast on loud speakers -- so much for following tradition , and finally,
5. Ijjai samskaram, this is when you get the right to perform aradhanam to saligrama perumal, and all SVs are supposed to do saligrama aradhanam everyday and consume only what is offered to this perumal, this is the reason for all the exclusivity.

This panca samskara is not restricted only to dwajas, anyone can get it done, even a dalit. If the the stories of SV Acharyas can be believed, then we know that Dalits were indeed part of the SV community once upon a time. Even today, if somebody approaches a SV acharya and requests Panca samskara to be administered, they will do it, they have to do it, for, according to SV, each and every human is entitled to it -- வைகுந்தம் புகுவது மண்ணவர் விதியே, says Nammazhvar. These days, how they get treated afterwards is another story.

Cheers!

That is one thing that has come good from a past legacy. If we observe the practice of lay vaishnavas things are much different. To give you an example, an Iyengar and an Iyer, who is welcome in this orthodox Iyengar's home? The answer is known but the qualities of the individual are never known nor compared. May be all those who dont undergo samskaram cannot become a good person? That is shifting the onus on certain rituals rather than the individual attitude to God, which should rein supreme regardless of samskara.This feeling basically coming back to the age old feeling of birth based superiority. Even though ramanuja tried to correct it situation is like this. If Such a difference exists among brahminical sects, then what about the non brahmins? Different kind of same behaviour exist.

I have not see the current orthodox environment of namboodiris. But I heard in the past they took bath for touching a tamil brahmanan.

 

[Nara]

Did you not miss something about the HDF you used to say invariably, Nara? Yes, the 'mutual admiration society'!

Yes, yes, Saidevo, this is indeed true, I forgot about it, HDF is indeed a mutual admiration society, the limit of their diversity does not extend to anyone who is unwilling accept the undeniable greatness of "Brahminism", or at the very least "Hinduism".

Cheers!

 

[Iyyarooraan]

onion

Tonnes and tonnes of onions have been peeled off but nothing has been found. But people will continue to peel off vennkaayam cryingly. It is all that pungent taste that matters. But vennkaayam everyday, no sir, no sir. It is a (poor) season of mangoes. For a change, let us have some sweet! There has been so many avatars to change the world. Everybody wants to change the others, but not the self. Nevertheless, variety is welcome!!

 

[KRS]

Dear Srimathi Happy Hindu Ji,

My response in 'blue' and 'red' below:

No matter what you say, Shri Raju, "brahmanism" that is, casteism and birth-based labour laws are banned by law. Discrimination against anyone based on caste is illegal. Yet this "nefarious" practice of caste-discrimination is continued by 'brahmins' at the highest level (that is, at the mutt-level or institutional-level). Sooner or later they will be answerable for it (please mark these words).
Dear Srimathi HH Ji,
Can you elaborate how this is so? Like not allowing a NB to be a priest in some temples? Not allowing NBs to touch them? Just so that I can understand fully what you are saying, please elaborate.

Shri Nara, is in fact trying to help his folks, by making them see reason.

Who are you to tell Shri Nara to go away? Why do you rub/inflcit your casteism on us ? Srimathi HH Ji, this is not a very good statement to make. Sri Suraju Ji has every right to ask another member to leave. Why are you coming between what is between him and Professor Nara Ji. Last time I looked, Professor Nara Ji, has all the tools necessary to respond to Sri Suraju Ji. This is how cliques are formed. I am not going to allow such interferences between two members' conversations here anymore. I will let this stand for now as an example of what I will edit out in the future


Shri Raju, your "inventing theories" stands no chance. The public is a lot more aware of the "obfuscation" done in the name of "faith". Irrespective of whether or not Shri Nara speaks about it, public awareness is no less these days.

Regards,
KRS

 

[Nara]

Sri Suraju Ji has every right to ask another member to leave. Why are you coming between what is between him and Professor Nara Ji........ I will let this stand for now as an example of what I will edit out in the future

I am fully aware that what is written in red is beyond reproach, but this involves me. It is a very strange rule indeed that one member has the right to ask another member to leave the forum, but a third member, however outraged he/she may feel, must let the law of the street to prevail and stay out, or else, an example will be made out of him or her.

I really don't know where this is going, in case I am still around posting in this forum, I would like to welcome anybody to jump in in a conversation between me and anyone else, against me or in support of me. This has been the rule all along, but things seem to be changing now.

Cheers!

 

[subbudu1]

As discussed I will explain in a few brief words what I understood of Vallabhacharya's philosophy. This is a philosophy which I believe to be closest to Advaita among the Vaishnavas. Yet it is different. In the south we are used to seeing dvaita, advaita and vishishtadvaita. But Vallabhacharya makes a new turn.
Here is a decent inroduction
http://www.pushtimarg.net/newPushti/pushti_vidhanam/book/english/bramhavaad.pdf

His philosophy is known as Shudda-advaita. The connection between kevaladvaita and shudda-advaita as it is called is the original state of Brahman. Vallabhacharya proclaims that the one becomes many. The many are a transformation of the one. Like curd is different from milk, the Jivas are to be considered different from the Brahman. But the Brahman is only one and the Jivas have come from the Brahman and are a modification to the Brahman.

He makes an interesting assertion
" Atmasrster na vaisamyam
Nairghrnyam capi vidyate"
Because God himself has become universe, and tho. universe is nothing but
God Himself, either partiality or cruelty’’ has no scope whatsoever.

There is again a major difference with Advaita. Vallabhacharya ,According to him one has become many not only in appearance but also in reality. The world thus becomes real.

There is a difference with Vishistadvaita too. This is his doctrine of mutually incompatible attributes coexisting in God. He allows the mutual coexistance of attributes and nonattributes in God. From a practical point there is some similarity with the Vadakalai school of thought with regard to the grace of God. The argument is that where human will ends divine help begins. This is a positive view in my perspective.

Then what is the difference in stature between the jiva and the brahman. The Jiva is verily none other than brahman but the quality of brahman which is ananda is imperceptible. Remember in Vallabhachary's terminology there is a duality in that the jiva has come from the brahman and it is also a brahman but with its inherent ananda being imperceptible. Vallabhacharya uses the statement from Brahadaranyaka Upanishad in support of his claim that one became many.

The highest goal in this philosophy is eternal service to Krishna which causes the jiva to loose knowledge of its senses since the atma itself has been offered to God for enjoyment and the senses are no longer utilized by the Jiva for pleasure. Vallabha believes that there is nothing apart from Bhakti, which can be used to attain God.Vidya and avidya are considered just contradictions of each other, both under the grip of maya. It is here again this philosophy differs from Advaita.

This philosophy continues to have followers in the states of Gujarat and to some extent Rajasthan.

 

[KRS]

Dear Professor Nara Ji,

I have said this type of 'Jalra' support, with the vehement tone will not be allowed in the future.

We have allowed all types of exchanges in the past, but these types of postings, jumping in the middle an exchange that is clearly the job of the moderator create issues.

I have said so many times in the past, but people are not listening. If one can not contain oneself and take the job of a moderator one too many times, and if this practice is prevalent, then perhaps a new rule covering thill be put in place.

Regards,
KRS

 

[subbudu1]

Dear Nara

I am surprised there has to be so much discussion on individual behavior in a forum . There appear to be some who make comments probably valid, but without proof in public. So for all practical reasons unless one sees sense in them they are to be considered invalid. These comments sometimes reflect their support of someone's else's views. Everything would be fine when there is a general agreement. Yet when they themselves are at the receiving end, a sudden outrage is seen from them. If there is no consensus, authority is invoked. This would tend to give the impression of a hierarchy out there somewhere. Thinking aloud, I almost feel this is a case, without any proof of course, that the same perception of the individuals must exist outside the forum. Though such perceptions need not be correct, it is only natural that such a feeling occurs.

The real question is does the forum like to be perceived that way?

Is it not a wiser option to have anybody conversing freely with anyone else, as long as they restrict their comments to ideas but not on the individuals?. There is no harm I feel in anyone criticizing anyone else's views regardless of who originally originated the particular discussion. If nobody else is to participate in any discussion between two members then it is better for the individuals to have a separate chat session. Skype is a better option no?

Your views on the moderator's role is thought provoking even though there is no consensus. Take it as prophecy if you would like, but with so many restrictive rules, you are not likely to see an improvement in the real behavior of individuals. The net effect would be a natural loss of interest in the forum.

I also understand that there are restrictions placed on criticizing holy men the babas and the swamijis. I almost felt tempted to say a few things. But I have forced myself to keep silent. One need not comment on certain actions of a holyman which are just a rumour or which are under review by court. But there are certain well known and publicly acknowledged incidents pertaining to the life of some holymen. In the interest of public, there should be a healthy discussion on this as well. Quite often it is the religion of such individuals which is safe guarded if they dissociate from such men. Enough information should be available for the public to make such decisions.

Let us place restriction on decency and the language which one should use.Let us also not make comments based on rumors and unproven things. Infringing on any other form of freedom of expression reminds us of a Communist rule.

 

[happyhindu]

No matter what you say, Shri Raju, "brahmanism" that is, casteism and birth-based labour laws are banned by law. Discrimination against anyone based on caste is illegal. Yet this "nefarious" practice of caste-discrimination is continued by 'brahmins' at the highest level (that is, at the mutt-level or institutional-level). Sooner or later they will be answerable for it (please mark these words).
Dear Srimathi HH Ji,
Can you elaborate how this is so? Like not allowing a NB to be a priest in some temples? Not allowing NBs to touch them? Just so that I can understand fully what you are saying, please elaborate.

Dear Sri KRS ji,

Everyone knows mutts indulge in caste-discrimination. And everyone also knows caste-discrimination is illegal and banned by law. Its open and clear. So i do not think any kind of elaboration is required here.

Who are you to tell Shri Nara to go away? Why do you rub/inflcit your casteism on us ? Srimathi HH Ji, this is not a very good statement to make. Sri Suraju Ji has every right to ask another member to leave. Why are you coming between what is between him and Professor Nara Ji. Last time I looked, Professor Nara Ji, has all the tools necessary to respond to Sri Suraju Ji. This is how cliques are formed. I am not going to allow such interferences between two members' conversations here anymore. I will let this stand for now as an example of what I will edit out in the future

AFAIK, anyone can intervene with their points. I suppose you want to bring in a new rule suddenly now. You were always welcome to edit out anything you please.

In this case, i wud like to know on what basis can Raju ask Nara sir to leave? I know you and Praveen can ask anyone to leave because you are the SM and Praveen is the owner of this forum. But how Raju? I would like to know this sir.

 

[sangom]

Dear Shri KRS,

It has now become more than clear, even to an aged brain like mine, that this forum most probably wants to compete with the new forum launched by our ex-veteran in safeguarding the view points of religious bigots. (When I started giving the meaning of rigveda verses, in that forum, the immediate response from our ex-veteran was that the duty of brahmins is to learn and transmit the recitation of the vedas without any error in pronunciation and pitches (swaras) and getting the meaning based on western indologists' perspective is not enjoined upon us.) I feel this sort of religious attitude is becoming more and more attractive and that is why even the "read only" membership has risen in arms and have besieged Praveen and yourself with an avalanche of pms directed against the postings of Happy Hindu, Nara, myself and possibly, of Kunjuppu.

During the last two days I have suggested that you put some of these pms open in this forum for all to see. But this has not been done. Yet from your post #183 and 186, it appears to me that you as SM have sympathies lying more with the pm-ers than an impartial view.

In so far as I have already raised some points of disagreements with your style of presenting argument (vide my post no.99), and since it is now apparent that I also come under the group of persona non grata of the pm-ers, I assure you, on my integrity, that I will not be making any post except in this thread, as and when necessary to continue our mutual discussion.

Having said that and assured the pm-ers of one bete noire less to contend with in future, I would like to state with all due respect to you that post #183 questioning HappyHindu for defending Nara, is a new lesson for me. I know for a fact that this "type of 'Jalra' support" originated with another group which defended the orthodox and possibly bigoted pov and was allowed, for whatever reasons may be. But this has suddenly been found fault with and "jalra support" derided. FYKI, we never had any thread outlining how this like/unlike feature is to be worked. I have been using the "like" feature to go on record when I find a particular post to my liking; and since "liking" is a matter of subjectivity, it is beyond logical assessment. If it is to be a rational assessment, it should be a comprehensive rating on a certain scale, 0-10, 0-5 etc.

With these few words I rest my case and also my association with the forum. Let me cite a small poem to give vent to my feelings at this moment:—


Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high
Where knowledge is free
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments
By narrow religious bigotry
Where words come out from the depth of truth
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way
Into the dreary desert sand of dead belief and habit
Where the mind is led forward by thee
Into ever-widening thought and action
Into that heaven of freedom, my God, let this forum awake…from its present stupor!
— indebted to Rabindra Nath Tagore

 

[Raghy]

What a sorry looking thread this turned out!

As a member, I like to voice my protest, please. I protest singling out three members for expressing their views in this thread. Every member has a right to express his/her views as long as the views are not offensive to others. In this thread, personally, I did not see any member offending an other member. It is very unfortunate to see our respectable member Sri.KRS using blue ink and red ink and black ink to bring out colourful messages.

All the three members singled out have not offended anybody in this thread. Their views may be debatable, granted. But their integrity? That was quite a heavy word to use in this circumstance, in my opinion.

Sri.Raju had not asked to Sri.Nara to leave the forum. I request members to read Sri.Raju's message once again, please. Sri.Raju only asks Sri.Nara to keep some of his views away.

Sri.Raju had not promoted casteism in this forum. He had not expressed any message degrading other castes. He likes to defend his forefathers; One may not find fault with that, in my opinion.

Leaders of this forum are involved in this act of misunderstanding. I humbly request all the seniors to sort of their differences, please.

As a person with limited learning, I have to say this here - after following this thread all this time, my understanding about Advaita has not improved much at all. But that is beside the point.

Sri.Sangom sir, I humbly request you to continue to contribute, please.

Thank you.

 

[sravna]

Shri Sangom,

A few statements which you made without substantiation.

"Sankara seemed to have learnt all the lessons from Buddhism and used those to counter Buddhism itself; and this includes part of Buddhistic philosophy (śūnyavāda)."

"Only the Brahman can make any statement about itself and by definition, it can't because it is Nirguna, without any attribute; see how Sankara has taken the entire hindus for a ride"

"I also suspect that when he (sravna) talks about absolute and relative realities, he is borrowing from Relativity Physics; that is perhaps the reason for his confidently asserting what the view/s of the nirguna brahman is/will be, like:

I suspect there are a few more of such statements.

When you make unsubstantiated statements such as "sankara has taken the hindus for a ride" you are not exercising the caution that is needed when you critique any revered person. When ordinary mortals like us feel slighted at innocuous remarks, how can one insult a person whose contribution to Indian philosophy is immense?

I think Shri KRS would have been prompted by such remarks to say what he said.

 

[Raghy]

Shri Sangom,

A few statements which you made without substantiation.

.........When you make unsubstantiated statements such as "sankara has taken the hindus for a ride" you are not exercising the caution that is needed when you critique any revered person. When ordinary mortals like us feel slighted at innocuous remarks, how can one insult a person whose contribution to Indian philosophy is immense?

I think Shri KRS would have been prompted by such remarks to say what he said.

Sri.Sravna Sir, Greetings.

as a Hindu, Sri.Sangom has a right to criticise any and every revered person. 'நெற்றி கண்ணைத் திறப்பினும் குற்றம் குற்றமே!.... Even Sankaran himself was not spared. Same thing goes to all the demigods and sundries by different persons at different situations.

Let us say, Sri.Sangom had never substantiated any of his statements. Let us say, all the things he writes are just his opinions. Still, how can his integrity be questioned? You have been discussing with him in length throughout this thread... you should have been the first person to protest when Sri.Sangom's integrity was questioned.

Cheers!

 

[sravna]

Sri.Sravna Sir, Greetings.

as a Hindu, Sri.Sangom has a right to criticise any and every revered person. 'நெற்றி கண்ணைத் திறப்பினும் குற்றம் குற்றமே!.... Even Sankaran himself was not spared. Same thing goes to all the demigods and sundries by different persons at different situations.

Let us say, Sri.Sangom had never substantiated any of his statements. Let us say, all the things he writes are just his opinions. Still, how can his integrity be questioned? You have been discussing with him in length throughout this thread... you should have been the first person to protest when Sri.Sangom's integrity was questioned.

Cheers!

Shri KRS just said Shri. Sangom is making statements without supporting them. I do not think that means questioning his integrity.

You cannot make such statements in a public forum and think you should get away with it.

 

[Raghy]

Shri KRS just said Shri. Sangom is making statements without supporting them. I do not think that means questioning his integrity.

You cannot make such statements in a public forum and think you should get away with it.

Sri.Sravna Sir,

This is to bruush up your memory, please.

Folks,
In just came across this thread.

I feel sorry for Sri Sravana Ji, who got in to a subject, in my opinion, without adequate preparation and is not ready to defend a Philosophy on Epistomoligal terms. Sorry, Sri Sravana Ji. Belief and Pramana are different. Unfortunately, here you are dealing with three non believers, one approaching the question from SV viewpoint, another drawing all sorts of inferences from his assumptions and the third drawing conclusions without proper grounding.

Let us reset this thread.

So, I request you, Sri Sravana Ji,

to state your first thought on Advaitha. Let us see how these 3 pundits respond to it. Professor Nara Ji makes all sorts of statements based on his knowledge of SV and his current mind set as an agnostic, Sri Sangom Ji makes all sorts of inferences tat are not supported by any recorded history and Sri subuddu1 Ji, makes statements with his fragmented knowledge.

Advaitha Philosophy is as valid as any of the other two major philosophies of our tradition.

What is actually amusing to me is Sri Sangom's assertion that Dwaitha is an allied philosophy of Visishtadwaitha as opposed to Advaitha!

Let the games begin, with these folks! If they have any integrity, they would not mind starting in the beginning. Especially Sri Sangom Ji, who makes all sorts of assertions, without providing any concrete proofs.

Regards,
KRS​

Sir, you may find it here. As a member, Sri.KRS said that. But as a moderator, he did not edit that. He could have done that. Even now, it may not be too late.

Sri.Sravna Sir, now that I have shown you, Sri.Sangom's integrity was questioned, are you going to record your protest now, please? After all, he was discussing with you; Would I do the same thing that I ask you to do? Yes, I would, I have done that in this same forum.

Cheers!

 

[sravna]

Shri Raghy,

Shri.KRS here uses the word explicitly. But in numerous other discussions, it was used in a cloaked way. One should not get unduly affected way because someone says that something is wrong with you. There are a number of people who always say that there is something wrong with you. The trick is in the way you react and if you react in a considered way the problem is not aggravated but is brought under control.

My point is, even if someone is being very offensive to you, it is you who are going to decide whether you will be offended. If you let yourself be offended by every explicit or implied offensive language, there can't be any discussion.

Also, I think the members of this forum are civil in general so that it should not be difficult to gloss over some occasional lapses.

 

[zebra16]

Namaste,

In message no. 1 of this thread, Sri Sravana, set out his preamble (preamble not in typical advaita tradition I would think), in message no. 2 Sri Subbudu pointed out some difficulties in logically accepting maya and avidya, in message no. 3 Sri Sangom (among other things) wanted to know why did VA and D branch out if Advaita was self logical, in message no. 4 Sri Nara indicated that in the absence of external terms of reference there was no scope for meaningful exchange. These were the primary messages which set the tone for further postings.

That the thread could have a life span of its own (194 messages till now and more to come) without any of the basic needs or clarifications stated in msgs. 2-4, is met, is phenomenal for my little mind and can only be attributed to penchant for posting, especially considering almost all the posters in the thread have self-confessed very little knowledge, if any, on advaita.

Such a directionless discussion is sure to disrupt the forum, is the lesson I have learnt from this episode.

Regards,

narayan

 

[anandb]

I had decided long time back that I will only be an active reader of the discussions in this forum but just could not resist the temptation of butting in. Quite apparent that this has become two (warring) camps and great as long as it promotes a healthy debate. I am totally unqualified to contribute anything meaningful to this debate intellectually though I know I am an advaitin by heart. I know concepts like Brahman, God, astral world, maya or atma can never be proved by the faithful to the other camp unless a member from each side enter into a suicide pact and decide to investigate in their after life (if at all they exist). But what I do believe is there exists a god and a devil in each of us. Now, what one decides to awaken is left to each of us. That is where the concept of free will comes in and that is what most of our revered Gurus have been preaching for ages. That we exercise our free will and raise ourselves. I also feel that if the devil like qualities can be raised so also the opposite God like qualities can be raised in oneself (no arguments here with people who would argue that God himself is the devil).

To me, if someone like Sankara or the Acharyas of the Mutts or any of the other revered saints says that God is within oneself and raise yourself to him and experience him, it is something which is so highly noble. As far as I know, none of the Gurus, at least the revered ones have said to their followers that they will show God to them. The instruction is to "experience" him and that is not easy. There are so many paths but then surely some "contemplation" and a great deal of "meditation" is really needed, irrespective of the path one chooses to follow whether it is through bhakti or mantra or service. This is one reason why it is always difficult for the God believing camp to prove the existence of God and his associated concepts to the atheist or agnostic camp. Even if, let's say, God appears in flesh and blood the non-believers can always say that it is black magic or they have been hypnotized. So while these intellectual arguments are great especially from a debating point of view and which I believe occupies almost 99% of our time with no end in sight, IMHO, concepts like Advaita or the Brahman needs to be "experienced" which may not be again "experienced" in one life time given our preoccupation with worldly affairs and the burning of accumulated karmas. Unless a start is made at some point in life, what is the point?

When I enrolled my younger son in a mridangam class, I cannot forget the advice he (also a Vedic scholar) gave my son. He cited a Sanskrit verse, which I cannot recollect, and translated it into English for him. For one to excel in any discipline, whether studies or sports or music, the following has to be there in that order.

1. 25% contribution from the Guru or the teacher.
2. 25% contribution from the pupil through practice, expansion of knowledge from other resources.
3. 25% contribution from discussion with peers.
4. 25% contribution that comes through experience.

I think when it comes to knowing something as complex as Advaita, IMO, we seem to be doing point No.3 and the latter part of Point No.2 all the time with almost or no little time devoted to the first and fourth. So our intellectual prowess by reading various resources on the topic is quite impressive, the intuitive prowess which can only come through a deeksha from a Guru and through "experiencing" it by the self is pretty much low. No complaints as it is a sign of the times we are operating in.

my two cents even if it is not worth that much.

 

[gopaindu]

Advaita- feeling of animosity among members for and gainst the philosopy

Dear Suraju96(Ref: Post No.115-Advaita,
A person practising Advaita i.e. thinks that he is Brahman and for him all souls including inanimate and animate beings, are equal. He does not see any difference among the souls on the basis of their forms. A person seeking to become Brahman also seeks the divine help for the goal practises VIshistadvaita and a person who thinks god is supreme and he is very very small before him is practising Dwaita. The trio philosophy rests on the level of understanding of God and the intensity with which he makes efforts to attain the final objective i.e. Advaita. This being the case, I do not understand why there should be animosity among the members regarding their stand. Each one is at liberty to have his/her views based on certain beliefs and notions held. If a member is not convinced of another member's stand, he/she can simply say that they are on parallel lines which will never meet and go to express their views on another topic. This would be a healthy trend for the forum and the members can a lot from the posts of the forum, contemplate on the issues and they can take either stand or totally yet another stand. There is nothing wrong in it. I feel have learnt a lot from the forum and able to appreciate those whose posts are informative and justifying their stand without hurting the feelings of other members. lastly any philosophy for that matter is not an individual's property. raja48.

 

[gopaindu]

Dear H.H., (Post188- Advaita)
The discrimination is prevalent in this world. citizens of US,UK, etc. discriminate on the basis of colour of skin. They also discriminate on the basis of wealth among themselves. Government discriminates on the basis of castes. Elections are won on the basis of caste discrimination. Even in Jail, the criminals are discriminated on the basis of their political back up. The list is endless. Therefore, Mutt heads discriminating people on the basis of caste/sub sect, etc. need not be found fault with. Mutt heads have certain followers. Naturally, the would like to give preference to their followers to the casual visitors belonging to other caste/sub sect.Even among the followers they discriminate between haves and have nots for the reason that haves will be helpful in attaining their material goals through liberal donations. If a non-follower is willing to give a liberal donation to the Mutt, then he/she will be preferred to followers even. Of course, there are people who do not come under the purview of the above general rule. Mutt heads should normally behave like a sanyasi having absolute faith in God and treating everybody as equal but they behave like a king who wants to expand his territory through collection of material possessions. This is reality and no one can help it.raja48

 

[sravna]

The problem with comprehending a philisophy such as advaita has to do with one's intuition. But intuitive power varies among people. If you are not able to grasp it intuitively, it appears counter intuitive and no amount of any other way of knowledge is going to help. This is generally true for comprehending any concept. In the case of advaita since it requires that the intuitive power be astounding , there are really very few who can understand the philosophy and the rest are baffled by its seemingly contradictory and counter intuitive nature.

When we try to ferret out the deepest truth the rest only facilitate that process. Finally, it is the self which discovers by itself in an intuitive way, the concealed truth and it is only at that point it is free from the uncertainties about the truth of its knowledge