On Vishitadvaita Philosophy...

[happyhindu]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

The Visishtadwaitist also doesn't believe in Jivan mukthi.

Dear Sir,

Thankyou very much for this post.

A request: if possible, could you please explain the jivan mukti part.

Also, could you recommend any online class one can go to, to learn from a guru (am not a brahmin and my tamil language skills are ordinary) (would really appreciate a private message on this).

Thankyou.

 

[tbs]

Dear Sir,

Thankyou very much for this post.

A request: if possible, could you please explain the jivan mukti part.

Also, could you recommend any online class one can go to, to learn from a guru (am not a brahmin and my tamil language skills are ordinary) (would really appreciate a private message on this).

Thankyou.

hi HH,
there are mukthis explained in different philosophies in different
name......may be called nirvana, kaivalya, moksha etc...in advaitha
there are 2 kinds of mukthis.......jivan mukthi and mokha.....
there some sages got moksha while living the body......they are
already liberated but still physical body in earth....... while
visistadvaitha never accepts jivan mukthi.........they called
total saranagathi (total surrender) to sriman narayan is
called moksha........they called sayujya mukthi/ saamipya
mukthi.......means kaingaryam to narayana in vaikundam is
called saamipya mukthi.........like andal mukthi is called
sayujya mukthi........

regards
tbs

 

[malgova.mango]

so is hh andal mukthi, not jeevan mukthi?

is not, kamba nattalvar jeevan mukthar?

anybody can able to get rid of the confusion surrounding his identity and gain knowledge what?

why should one go to vaikundam for that?

moreover....

even after going to vaikundam , there is no guarantee one will get rid of his ignorance. So Srimad Bhagavata Purana says , the dwara phalakas who were in Vaikuntha were born and born again as ashuras and opposed the very LORD whom they are supposed to protect .....

 

[malgova.mango]

The 4 paths are valid, but the end stage or the final step is what ? that is the bone of contention.

when you do a siddhanta - you are telling the world this is the last step and nothing else to understand further.

If you don't do siddantha , then Upasana Marga is valid stage.

But Knowledge didn't end in Upasana Stage, there is one more step to go.

if one tells that's the end, then that should be corrected. simple .... common take it easy..

 

[KRS]

I do not think that there are any bones for contention here. Because 'the final step' as assumed may not be a step at all. One thinks that it is a final step because a philosophy says so, which may not hold true, irrespective of what the Acharyal said. One can not prove it to be so. This is exactly why different Sambradhayams came in to being. An elegant solution may not be the true solution.

These are all mere intellectual gymnastics devised by men. As Ramana Maharishi once put it and I am paraphrasing it here, why religions make something as easy as a human being understanding his/her natural state and make it so complex? Just realize who you are, He said. No need to understand all these philosophical mumbo jumbo. Just destroying one's ego and performing one's duties with Him in thoughts is enough.

Every Sambradhayam in our religion teach us the same. The meta physics of each one may be different, based on how they interpret our Sruthis, but in terms of acheiving the supreme, how do they in any way come in the way? Vaikuntam, if a Bhaktha believes in very sincerely, may be the pathway to Mukthi. No one knows. So the thing to focus on is how one goes about getting one's mind and thoughts purified by any of the four means. At a point of this, He will show the way. This is all that should matter. Not that a person puts on Vibudhi or Namam on his forehead. That is only the starting point.

This is why this comparison of other Sambradhyams based on the philosophy of one's own is not valid.

KRS

 

[ravidesikan]

Please add Sivadwaitam also to this list - source Paramacharya's deivathin Kural

Vedanta is based on two simple propositions:

1. Human nature is divine.

2. The aim of human life is to realize that human nature is divine.

3.Sub-schools of Vedanta

* 3.1 Advaita
* 3.2 Vishishtadvaita
* 3.3 Dvaita
* 3.4 Dvaitādvaita
* 3.5 Shuddhadvaita
* 3.6 Achintya Bhedābheda
* 3.7 Purnadvaita or Integral Advaita
* 3.8 Modern Vedanta

source-wikipedia

sb

Please add Sivadwaitam also to this list.

Shri paramacharya has listed this in Deivathin Kural.

Regards,
Daasan Ravi Desikan

 

[malgova.mango]

KRS !

You give so many TITLES to me ... Now I'll return one...

You are like a mixie... you know where we put many ingredients to churn ... you are similar to that .. in the sense , you read many a thing and mix it all up.

so i give you the title " Mr. Mixie"

Anyway your post is good comic relief..

Regards

 

[s007bala]

>>Please add Sivadwaitam also to this list.

Shri paramacharya has listed this in Deivathin Kural.<<

Shri Daasan Ravi Desikan,

Is it Siva-Advaitham or Siva-Dwaitham?Knowing Shri Mahaswamigal it must be Siva-Advaitham ie you and i are siva,and siva exists,as consciousness.International Society of Siva Consciousness-ISSCON... maybe we ought to start a society like that

sb

 

[happyhindu]

Got it finally!!! Here is a tutorial: http://saranagathi.org/articles/tutorials/visis/main.html

Now anyone posting anything on this thread must first read thru the link and then only speak...enuf of this vagueness and floating about everything, from the self to the consciousness to perception to endless seeking and what not...sorry if am sounding 'off'...switch is getting turned off..

 

[KRS]

Dear Srimathi happyhindu Ji,

To me anything currently viewed as a part of Hinduism (as it is determined by the scholors that the tenets espoused is not in anyway contradictory to what is contained in our Srutis) is valid. I went through the link you have provided, but for my discussions here, that is not necessary. Hope I am not violating your edict.

Dear Sri MM Ji,

A frog in the well always thinks that the Universe is his well. When others bring stories to him about other wells, rivers and oceans with descriptions of other animals, of course it provides 'comic relief' to the well frog.

A 'mixie' does the job. It usually synthesizes and combines several disparate elements in to a single unitary mash. Thank you for thinking that.

Let me ask a simple question: If you happen to be born today in an Iyengar family, what would you think about Advatha? Would you think that VA is somehow inferior?

Please read the following in 'Hindu Dharma' by Maha Periaval, and tell me where He says that Advaitha is the only Truth? In fact he equates the 'God' in every religion as valid and capable of grace. Is this not the point that makes your argument so wrong?:

"All religions have one common ideal, worship of the Lord, and all of them proclaim that there is but one God. This one God accepts your devotion irrespective of the manner of your worship, whether it is according to this or that religion. So there is no need to abandon the religion of your birth and embrace another.
The temple, the church, the mosque, the vihara may be different from one another. The idol or the symbol in them may not also be the same and the rites performed in them may be different. But the Paramatman who wants to grace the worshipper, whatever be his faith, is the same. The different religions have taken shape according to the customs peculiar to the countries in which they originated and according to the differences in the mental outlook of the people inhabiting them. The goal of all religions is to lead people to the same Paramatman according to the different attributes of the devotees concerned. So there is no need for people to change over to another faith. Converts demean not only the religion of their birth but also the one to which they convert. Indeed they do demean God.
"A man leaves the religion of his birth because he thinks there is something wanting in it," so you may think. 'Why does the Svaamigal say then that the convert demeans the new religion that he embraces? " I will tell you why. Is it not because they think that God is not the same in all religions that people embrace a new faith? By doing so, they see God in a reduced form, don't they? They presumably believe that the God of the religion of their birth is useless and jump to another faith. But do they believe that the God of their new religion is a universal God? No. No. If they did there would be no need for any change of faith. Why do people embrace a new faith? Is it not because that the continuance in the religion of their birth would mean a denial of the blessings of the God of the new faith to which they are attracted? This means that they place limitations on their new religion as well as on its God. When they convert to a new religion, apparently out of respect for it, they indeed dishonour it."

Regards,
KRS

 

[happyhindu]

Sir, i put that link there since it might seem to others that Ram is being discusssed in every manner in this thread without the Ramayan being looked into...

also to a third person reading thru this thread, some things put forth by some might be a turn-off, esp if the context tends be fixated towards proving....

the above post was not meant for you sir...btw, not only the link, the entire site is very absorbing, packed with articles and videos, one can spend days and nights with it..so must say...it wud require a great deal of discipline to keep one off from such topics at regular periods to be able to move on with other parts of life...

 

[malgova.mango]

anta - means end

 

[ravidesikan]

Siva Adwaitam

>>Please add Sivadwaitam also to this list.

Shri paramacharya has listed this in Deivathin Kural.<<

Shri Daasan Ravi Desikan,

Is it Siva-Advaitham or Siva-Dwaitham?Knowing Shri Mahaswamigal it must be Siva-Advaitham ie you and i are siva,and siva exists,as consciousness.International Society of Siva Consciousness-ISSCON... maybe we ought to start a society like that

sb

Yes it is Siva Adwaitam. One of the key proponents of thsi being Sri Appaya Dikshitar, who initially a strong votary of Shri swami vedantha Desika. the stalwart-saint-hagiographer-poet-sarvathatntra swantantrar-kavitharkika simham. Shri Appaya Dikshitar also wrote a commentary on Yaadavbyudayam - Swami Desikan's poem on Sri Krishna. Later Sri Appaya Dikshitar became a Siva-Adwaitist.

Daasan Ravi Desikan

 

[malgova.mango]

Vedaanta means the final thing to know

end also means mangalam

mangalam means shivam

 

[malgova.mango]

Our Poorvigam is from a hamlet in Tanjore, near Mudikondan. One Famous Seer lived 100 years before belongs to our hamlet.

His Ishta Deviam is Lord Narashima...

In our hamlet we all had Lord Narayana's namam. But we have no problem in assimilation Advaita, like the seer from our place.

"Aalangudi Swamigal" kelvi pattirukkelo...

 

[malgova.mango]

KRS

I'm not saying everybody should worship in the same way , in the same manner and same rupa.

What I'm saying is Siddhanta should derive at the end of what is said in the sutra, then only it is siddha-anta, orelse it is not that so.

you miss that and went off tangently..

 

[happyhindu]

Forgive me for saying this MM-ji, but sharing some thots:

a) as bhaktas, all are so immersed in their path that they say this is the only way..it is natural...but no advaitin truly following that marga seems to find the need to show one as better over the other with the idea of portraying anything as inferior or proving as less or beneath anything, etc..

b) a true advaitin follows the example of Shiva who Himself showed that a woman is His equal (as ardhanaareshwara). Parvati in many stories is a princess, Shiva never asked her not to inherit property. She followed Shiva on Her own; but Shiva wud not have had any prob if She had inherited any kingdom as well. Have never heard of a true advaitin who says women must be treated differently or she must not inherit property.

Regards.

 

[malgova.mango]

you have not given due consideration, to what is said on property rightd. that's why you got mix-up.

please go to the thread and read back what is said in a calm manner . Give a try.

 

[malgova.mango]

daksha prajapati story you must read

 

[s007bala]

Hari Hara Sudanay Sharanam Ramanappa

Villadi Veeranay Sharanam Ramanappa

Pallikattu Thiru Annamalaikku Kallum Mullum Kallukku Medhai

Swamiye Ramanappa....

sb

 

[KRS]

But Sri MM Ji,

By saying that Siddhanta is the definitive final phase, you are putting qualifications on other modes of worship. This is what I am trying to say, which you consider as deviation.

Every sambradhayam within Hinduism, base the Srutis as the final arbiter. And the founders of these Sambradhayams are much more learned in our scriptures, as erudite as the giants in our religion. So, my point is that how they interpreted the Sutras for their followers is good enough as the final answer to their own 'salvation'.

On the contrary, you and I, coming from Advaitha tradition believe in Siddhanta. To me personally this philosophy appeals.

The question we should be asking is not which theory is correct, but rather which theory is appropriate for the culture and make up of a group of people following a sambradhayam. They then are all equally valid. One can not seperate the identity and the dignity of a people following a particular sambradhayam, because all the cultural artifacts of such a sambradhayam are imbibed and merged in to the group identity. This is why, we need to respect all sambradhayams as True.

I quoted Maha Periaval's view on other religions, because I think that applies equally to the different Hindu sambradhayams.

Hope this clarifies.

Regards,
KRS

KRS

I'm not saying everybody should worship in the same way , in the same manner and same rupa.

What I'm saying is Siddhanta should derive at the end of what is said in the sutra, then only it is siddha-anta, orelse it is not that so.

you miss that and went off tangently..

 

[[email protected]]

How to get ready while death comes.

:d

but sri mm ji,

by saying that siddhanta is the definitive final phase, you are putting qualifications on other modes of worship. This is what i am trying to say, which you consider as deviation.

Every sambradhayam within hinduism, base the srutis as the final arbiter. And the founders of these sambradhayams are much more learned in our scriptures, as erudite as the giants in our religion. So, my point is that how they interpreted the sutras for their followers is good enough as the final answer to their own 'salvation'.

On the contrary, you and i, coming from advaitha tradition believe in siddhanta. To me personally this philosophy appeals.

The question we should be asking is not which theory is correct, but rather which theory is appropriate for the culture and make up of a group of people following a sambradhayam. They then are all equally valid. One can not seperate the identity and the dignity of a people following a particular sambradhayam, because all the cultural artifacts of such a sambradhayam are imbibed and merged in to the group identity. This is why, we need to respect all sambradhayams as true.

I quoted maha periaval's view on other religions, because i think that applies equally to the different hindu sambradhayams.

Hope this clarifies.

Regards,
krs

 

[[email protected]]

To All, We are just discussing about Bakthi, ganha,karma yogas, but forget one thing, what for we get this humanbirth, whatpurpose, and how to go back to the orgional home. The best way is to get a living perfect master. From him we must get the holy varnathmic Name for concentration in Meditation. Today we are doing all thing according to the MIND, the bigest enemy for all humun beings. To win the Mind each one get the True path and a True Master. The back home theory we must search to get knowledge about Surat sabd yoga and the the way daily die to live. Once we get the right path all human being (makedsouls) will return to home. The best way today is to get THEHOLY NAME and do meditation for grt rid of Birth and deaths.

 

[malgova.mango]

see krs!

i 'm not questioning any cult or dis-crediting any mode of worship. if i do that then your concern is valid.

what i'm saying is..

philosophy is not a like a spectacle that one wishes to choose and wear.

philosophy is the ultimate darshanam that all soul have to understand to reach the other shore - there is no alternate route

so we all should derive at the same answer. there is no compromise possible here

 

[malgova.mango]

we all can live without understanding the final say of our scripture , that is very much possible ....

but the talk here is in the context of what brahma sutra and vedanta offers as their final say...

the answer is given in vedanta in the form of mahavakyas, brahma sutra and the bhashyams of BP help us to connect to mahavakyas.

so the quest here is not finding the answer, rather finding a mode of communication to the answer which is already given..

one should not arrive at a new answer , totally contradicting mahavakyas ... and go on to say that this is what vedanta is all about. this what finally said etc... that's misleading ......

ofcourse , without knowing all the above also one can pray to god and seek his welfare in anyother mode, that's perfectly possible.

When we are talking , what is Moksha is all about? there is only one definte answer .. not many but only one which is already revealed in mahavakyas..

One should only strive to connect to what is said.

If we don't talk about Moksha, then all sort of life-style with different ideologies are possible.

see the difference....