PDA

View Full Version : Can Vaishnavism AND advaita philosophy merged?



Elizabeth108
24 June 2010, 05:10 AM
Hi,

I am new to Vaishnavism. I am very much interested in its way and teachings - that of Vaishnavism apart from ISKCON.
I have a specific question:
can advaita philosophy AND Vaisnava exist side by side /merged practiced by the same person? Or is it against the Vaishnava scriptures

What do Vaishnavas think about the advaita philosophy?

Onkara
25 June 2010, 07:30 AM
Hi Elizabeth
Good question. It depends on the final goal. For Sri Ramanuja the goal is not jivanmukta (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jivanmukta), liberation whilst living as it is for Advaita but kaivalya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaivalya). For Sri Ramanuja the outcome is supreme bhakti or prapatti. This however is not as clear for the Advaitin because once the Advaitin realises that the world is a superimposition there is no desirable goal as such in bhakti, as bhakti is for attainment of moksha.

For Sri Ramanuja the purpose after Kaivalya continues to be service of Lord Krishna as one realises that one is a Sesa (or a depended liege of the Lord). So one continues to perform bhakti just as before this realisation.

Both Sri Ramanuja and Sri Adi Shankara are non-dual: The whole manifest comes from Brahman as the Upanishads assert, however for Ramanuja the world is not a superimposition due to Maya and so the physical dependence on the Lord's grace still remains after realisation.

We can approach this from another angle if required :)

In my personal opinion it is possible to worship Krishna/Vishnu whilst trying to understand Advaita. To my knowledge there is no reason to not embrace both, but that too depends on our aptitude to be able to be clear when we practice Bhakti or other yogas.

devotee
25 June 2010, 08:34 AM
Hi,

I am new to Vaishnavism. I am very much interested in its way and teachings - that of Vaishnavism apart from ISKCON.
I have a specific question:
can advaita philosophy AND Vaisnava exist side by side /merged practiced by the same person? Or is it against the Vaishnava scriptures

What do Vaishnavas think about the advaita philosophy?

The brief and correct answer is "Yes" unless you decide to join some hardcore Vaishnava organisation as "ISKCON". In fact, it is quite normal to start with duality i.e. worshipping a particular deity for an Advaitin. Please note that Advaita has no conflicting with worshipping any form of God. A common Hindu by birth, unattached to any sect, can be Vaishnava/Shaiva/Shakta as well as an Advaitin. On the other hand, all Advaitins have their own chosen form of God too that they worship till they come to Self-realisation.

Scriptures for all Hindus are same. The Vedas enjoy the highest authority among all scriptures and among all Hindus.

OM

Elizabeth108
25 June 2010, 01:16 PM
Hi,

Thank You so much for your answers and patient as well! You helped me a lot.

In fact I had also understood these teachings the same way as you described them. Just as 'devotee' referred to it - some organizations such as ISKCON do refiuse the possibilities of "merging" these above mentioned views. (Mainly that's the reason why I excluded that organzation in my question...). Of course, I respect their beliefs though I can't completely identify myself with them.
What's more I have embraced the advaita philosophy and "prefer" Vaishnava way/approach when "choosing" a form of God...I just wish to know if this all is not a "man-made" stuff. :)

I am interested in more opinions / eexperiences in this subject, so they are welcome.

Elizabeth
OM

Onkara
26 June 2010, 01:46 AM
Hi Elizabeth
I am glad the replies were helpful, I found Devotee's reply to be clear and useful too :)

I am curious what you mean by the "Vaishnava way/approach when "choosing" a form of God"? Has someone explained a process to choose a God or do you mean there is more choice?

Advaita is embraced by Smarta (Smartism), who are able to choose from the Shanmata (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanmata). So I don't see less flexibility with Advaita Vedanta, pehaps more as each God is a form of Brahman. This is not so with Gaudiya Vaishanvism (ISKON) as explined by Devotee, Rather Krishna is the Godhead and source and Brahman the impersonal power of Krishna, imho.

My impression is that you may still worship which ever God you wish and follow Advaita. Were you under a different impression?

sambya
26 June 2010, 04:40 AM
Hi Elizabeth
For Sri Ramanuja the goal is not jivanmukta (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jivanmukta), liberation whilst living as it is for Advaita but kaivalya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaivalya).

hi snip . i think there has been a wrong understanding here . jivanmukta(someone who is already liberated despite continuing in his material body) is not the goal of advaita . jivanmukta is an extremely rare state of existence which comes to some rarest of rare individuals . it is not something that an advaitin looks forward to .

then what does an advaitin look forward to ? ans -- freedom from miseries of world and rebirth and realization of the supreme in its non-dual state . this is described in one word as moksha .

jivanmukta is a rare phenomenon . it is not a goal .


For Sri Ramanuja the outcome is supreme bhakti or prapatti. This however is not as clear for the Advaitin because once the Advaitin realises that the world is a superimposition there is no desirable goal........


there are different stages of realization as per advaitist vewipoint . the highest is called nirvikalpa samadhi . when this happens the person realizes the absolute and unity and ceases to exist materially . his gross body withers away within a period of 21 days , after attainment of nirvikalpa samdhi , which in eyes of others might appear as 'death' .

however , in extremely rare cases some persons have come back after nirvikalpa samadhi and all of them were understood to be divine expansions of god -- avatar in other words( remember here that avatar can also be a partiall one)


....once the Advaitin realises that the world is a superimposition there is no desirable goal.....

once an advaitin truly 'realizes' that the world is a superimposition he has already attained perfection ! no further goal can exist at this point . for desires are cause of rebirth !!! and untill he reaches that stage , he has not actualy realized that the world is a superimposition . he has merely read it in books and has based his sadhan on what he has read .



as such in bhakti, as bhakti is for attainment of moksha.

in its purest form bhakti is unconditional . not even for moksha . bhakti alone generates bhakti . and we feel the surge of bhakti because it is our very nature , our instinct , our swadharma as a jiva !

sambya
26 June 2010, 05:35 AM
the philosophy of vaishnavism and advaita might be hard to combine . but loving krishna and believing in advaita at the same time can definitely be acheived !

" the philosophy of shankaracharya and the path of chaitanya" ----- is the rule that you can use to shape your spiritual life . believe in the doctrine of advaita and then resort to bhakti yoga as your path . place tulsi on your lords feet and feel his presence all over the creation .

sri ramakrishna paramahamsa said -- " as long as you are entrapped within maya its not wise to say ' i am brahman '. the waves(jiva) belong to water(god) , not the other way round . as long as you are withint maya its better to pursue dasya(servitor) bhava . if the master loves his servant , he calls the servant asking him to sit close to him and says ' me and you are the same ' . but if the servant forcefully sits beside the master , can it bring about any good ? "

if advaita realizations comes at the end let it be . but follow the path of bhakti .

Onkara
26 June 2010, 05:36 AM
hi snip . i think there has been a wrong understanding here . jivanmukta(someone who is already liberated despite continuing in his material body) is not the goal of advaita . jivanmukta is an extremely rare state of existence which comes to some rarest of rare individuals . it is not something that an advaitin looks forward to .

then what does an advaitin look forward to ? ans -- freedom from miseries of world and rebirth and realization of the supreme in its non-dual state . this is described in one word as moksha .

jivanmukta is a rare phenomenon . it is not a goal .!
Hi Sambya
I enjoyed reading your expansion on this interesting topic, thanks!

Just to be clear on the point above, before we risk a digress from the OP; Ramanuja disagrees that Jivanmukta is possible as this can occur only when the physical body, consisting of the elements, falls. To my understanding, the state of Jivanmukta is not accepted by him which means that bhakti continues (as we agree). For our friend Elizabeth I feel this is a point she may encounter whilst mixing the two philosophies and so the topic I raise.

You are right, until the superimposition is seen then the seeker is still seeking.

What might be interesting for us is if one accepts Sri Ramana Maharshi’s comments on Advaita and Jivanmukta as the purpose to life:

“Thus in this Crown-gem of Discrimination has Sri Sankara described samadhi or spiritual trance which is the limitless Bliss of Liberation, beyond doubt and duality, and at the same time has indicated the means for its attainment. To attain this state of freedom from duality is the real purpose of life, and only he who has done so is a Jivanmukta, liberated while yet alive.

Thus defining a Jivanmukta, Sri Sankara declares him to be free from the bonds of three-fold karma (sanchita, ăgami and prărabdha). The disciple attains this state and then relates his personal experience. He who is liberated is indeed free to act as he pleases, and when he leaves the body, he abides in Liberation and never returns to this birth,which is death.”
Link to open PDF (http://www.tattvaloka.com/Shankara%20Jayanthi/viveka%20chudamani.pdf)

Elizabeth108
27 June 2010, 05:41 AM
Hi All,

I am thankful for each answer here as I could find important messages / clarification related to my question. This is very helpful. Thank You all.


Snip,


but loving krishna and believing in advaita at the same time can definitely be acheived ! by Sambya

This is what I mean by Vaishnava way/approach when "choosing" a form of God, but at the same time knowing that Krishna/Vishnu is only one of the forms of God and not the only one. So I do respect each other form of it as well - as they are all different aspects of ONE.

Elizabeth

Onkara
27 June 2010, 09:29 AM
Snip,

This is what I mean by Vaishnava way/approach when "choosing" a form of God, but at the same time knowing that Krishna/Vishnu is only one of the forms of God and not the only one. So I do respect each other form of it as well - as they are all different aspects of ONE.

Elizabeth

Then may the Gods bless your path! :)

charlebs
30 August 2010, 10:38 AM
Hi All,

I am thankful for each answer here as I could find important messages / clarification related to my question. This is very helpful. Thank You all.


Snip,



This is what I mean by Vaishnava way/approach when "choosing" a form of God, but at the same time knowing that Krishna/Vishnu is only one of the forms of God and not the only one. So I do respect each other form of it as well - as they are all different aspects of ONE.

Elizabeth

krishna isn't an aspect I believe, since he was a perfect incarnation of God. His might, strength and glory was unfathomable. Even in the worst situations He brought solutions.
Just think of when Brahma hid all his cow herding friends for a whole year! Lord Krishna outwitted Brahma by seperating into multiple forms and pretended they were the young cow herders.

Krishna is great, I wish he'd never had left the earth!

Vaishnava
04 September 2010, 11:05 PM
Hi All,

This is my first post in this forum. Discussions make us question our own convictions and tend to strengthen or correct them. Believing this, I have deciding to join. God bless all.

Vaishnavism and Advaita are like fire and water, darkness and light. You asked if this synthesis is man-made and that is true. Because when we talk about “ism” we are talking about a parampara or established tradition. Rest is man-made or speculation. Specifically Padma Puran mentions four different Vaishnava sampradayas. That of Ramanuja, Madhva, Vishnu Swami and Vallabha originating from Vishnu.

The common points in between these are:
1. They have an unbroken disciplic chain connecting to God.
2. Their knowledge originates from Vishnu Himself.
3. For all of them
-----> Vishnu is the highest
-----> World is real
-----> We are souls that have eternal existence excluding merging in God.
4. Finally they have all had many many divine incidents in their life and communion to God.

So, for example, Ramanujacharya passes on the knowledge and path that he received from his guru and also from the alwars, who are themselves connected to God. Also, on top of that his method is derived from the six lines of truth told to him Lord Varada (Vishnu). Hence it is very authorized.

The point I am trying to make is that Vaishnavism has been established by these acharyas who totally rejected advaita point of world being illusory, we being God etc. and so if we follow Vishnu through advaita it is definitely a man invented path, as He never inspired these acharyas to do so.

I have understood by God’s grace that neither perception nor scriptures support advaita. If we are all illusory, then why worship Vishnu or Shiva and not our own God or whatever. How is scripture that follows in realm of maya, an authority to these? Or this or that person for that matter? How does seeking even matter? Hence logic can prove anything but our heart may not agree to that.

Onkara
05 September 2010, 04:19 AM
(cut for space)
The point I am trying to make is that Vaishnavism has been established by these acharyas who totally rejected advaita point of world being illusory, we being God etc. and so if we follow Vishnu through advaita it is definitely a man invented path, as He never inspired these acharyas to do so.

I have understood by God’s grace that neither perception nor scriptures support advaita. If we are all illusory, then why worship Vishnu or Shiva and not our own God or whatever. How is scripture that follows in realm of maya, an authority to these? Or this or that person for that matter? How does seeking even matter? Hence logic can prove anything but our heart may not agree to that.

Namaste Vaishnava and welcome to the forum. :)
The jīva need not take the world as illusionary to arrive at God, be it Vishnu, Shiva or Durga, etc. For the jīva who's natural inclination (svabhāva) leads them to Advaita as a way to God, then the investigation of the world as a superimposition is a helpful tool and one which lies in their path.

Once the universe is known to be verily that Supreme Lord, then there remains no doubt nor need to distinguish whose teaching is right or wrong; such comparison of teaching remains purely academic and conceptual. In fact, once one reaches that vantage point, then one is aware that it was God's grace all along.

Note that Adi Shankara teaches superimpoision (Adhyaropa) as an explanation of māyā and how it functions. "Illusion" is the English translation for māyā - it appears in dictionaries and translations of the Bhagavad Gita. In my opinion the English word "illusion" falls short of the philosophical and spiritual depth used by Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita e.g. 7.14. It is unfortunate that many people will immediate go with their material repulsion that how can this world (māyā) not be 100% true (thus being victim to māyā Herself). Unfortunately this word "illusion" is manipulated by authors in the propaganda to persuade people from looking further into to Advaita (or any other philosophy) and rather following their new masters and feeling superior over others who do not.

Advaita does not mean that bhakti is wrong. This is the concern of the dualist, for if there is no subject-object then the dualist may feel they are denying themselves the bliss of objective worship in taking any other stance or further investigation into non-dualism. Perhaps they fear that Krishna will cease to exist if they become an Advaitin.... nonsense. Krishna must exist for any thing to exist!

At the end of the day, it all does not matter, as all (apparent) differences are His Lila anyway. He chooses who and how they know Him.

Peace

atanu
05 September 2010, 04:53 AM
Deleted

AhamAtma
05 September 2010, 08:57 AM
"For when there is duality, as it were, then one smells another, one sees another, one hears another, one speaks to another, one thinks of another, one knows another. But when everything has become the Self, then what should one smell and through what, what should one see and through what, what should one hear and through what, what should one speak and through what, what should one think and through what, what should one know and through what? Through what should One know That owing to which all this is known—through what, my dear, should one know the Knower?" ( Brihadaranyaka Upanishad II-4-14)

"This self was indeed Brahman in the beginning. It knew itself only as "I am Brahman." Therefore it became all. And whoever among the gods had this enlightenment, also became That Brahman. It is the same with the seers (rishis), the same with men. The seer Vamadeva, having realized this self as That, came to know: "I was Manu and the sun." And to this day, whoever in a like manner knows the self as "I am Brahman," becomes all this universe. Even the gods cannot prevent his becoming this, for he has become their Self. Now, if a man worships deity, thinking: "He is one and I am another," he does not know. He is like an animal to the gods. As many animals serve a man, so does each man serve the gods. Even if one animal is taken away, it causes anguish to the owner; how much more so when many are taken away! Therefore it is not pleasing to the gods that men should know this. " ( Brihadaranyaka Upanishad I-4-10)


'isvaranugrahad-eva pumsam advaita-vasana; mahadbhaya-paritranat vipranam upajayate'
Meaning:
"Through the grace of Ishvara alone, the desire for Advaita arises in wise men to save them from great fear." ---- Lord Dattatreya.




trayī sāṃkhyaṃ yogaḥ paśupatimataṃ vaiṣṇavam iti
prabhinne prasthāne param idam adaḥ pathyam iti ca
rucīnāṃ vaicitryād ṛjukuṭilanānāpathajuṣāṃ
nṛṇām eko gamyas tvam asi payasām arṇava iva

"There are different paths of realization as enjoined by the three Vedas, Sānkhyā, Yoga, Pāśupata and Vaishnava doctrine . Persons following different paths straight or crooked according as they consider that this path is best or that one is proper due to the difference in temperaments, reach Thee alone O Lord Shiva, just as rivers enter the ocean."

Vaishnava
05 September 2010, 11:55 AM
Namaste Vaishnava and welcome to the forum. :)

Thank you! :)



Once the universe is known to be verily that Supreme Lord

I too acknowledge that the universe is not 100% different. But since the Supreme Lord exists everywhere under it and gives it the various shape and power, therefore its has its self in it. But I don't think that the scritpures say that the world is absolutely identical with the Lord.


then one is aware that it was God's grace all along.

This too I agree. But there is a separation.

"This atman(Param) cannot be attained by instruction, nor by intellectual ability nor by much learning. It is to be attained only by the one this one chooses." - Katha Upanishad - 1:2:10

There is no question of choosing if they are the same. So, the knowing/seeking is stressed in the form of devotion alone.



Unfortunately this word "illusion" is manipulated by authors in the propaganda to persuade people from looking further into to Advaita

I know that various gurus deviated much from Shankaracharya. I also understand that Maya doesn't exactly map to illusion. But I believe that all the advaitis and gurus of this age, believe that world and the many different individuals are but false projections from Brahman, kind of dream-like, which we don't agree. And how do we know this anyway? Is it by our own experience or by perception or by scriptures.


Advaita does not mean that bhakti is wrong.

This I beg to defer strongly. Advaita does not "say" that bhakti is wrong. But implies the same. Who is to worship whom? What has Krishna leela for e.g. got to do anything with the truth, when His actions, appearance or auspicious qualities are within the realm of maya? Who is to grace whom?

Advaita makes the whole Gita or Upanishads redundant. There is no need to go into great details of our being trapped and unhappy in a samsara and need to get out, what path we should adopt, inquire into that Brahman which is all perfect, all powerful, inner rule, and then finally discover that everything is a mitya anyway. When scriptures and gods fall into the realm of Maya, what makes them an authority or a proof anyway?

Btw, how do I search for all my posts? When I click on "all posts by Vaishnava", it goes to a page with "invalid search" and with "user control panel" in the drop down.