PDA

View Full Version : Advaita is a separate philosophy from Shaiva path?



adevotee108
15 January 2012, 06:31 PM
So far I have identified Advaita with the Shaiva path. But today, I have just read a "Shaiva criticism of Advaita". This has just raised these questions to me:

Is advaita a separate path/philosophy from the shaiva path? So can I have Vishnu (Instead of Shiva) as my istha devata (so I would be a vaishnava) and still follow the advaita path?
Furtheremore has the Bhagavad-Gita got an advaita commentary or that work is a dvaitic and has nothing to do with advaita views?

Can I as one who follows the advaita path regard Shiva and Vishnu as two facets of the One? So I am neither exclusively shaiva or vaishnava but simply following the advaita path and regard them (Vishnu and Shiva) as One, reading both shaiva and vaishnava literature?

Could you help me make these paths of Shaiva and Vaishnava/Advaita philosophy clear?
What is the relation of Advaita Philosophy to the Shaiva Path and the Vaishnava Path?

I am really confused now.

saidevo
15 January 2012, 08:13 PM
namaste adevotee108.

If you choose the sampradAya--tradition of Shankara-smArta-advaita, you can worship all the six major gods of Hinduism as one and brahman: shiva, viShNu, shaktI, gaNapati, sUrya and shaNmukha (murugan). This is the most flexible path that lets a devotee steer clear of the exclusivities of individual traditions.

You might have a clear view of what is advaita and how it relates to other Hindu sampradAyas in this Website from these and other links therein:
http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/ad_faq.html
http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/ad-today.html

Eastern Mind
15 January 2012, 10:59 PM
I am really confused now.

Vannakkam. Me, too, regarding confusion. I've always regarded advaita as a philosophical goal at the end of a path. Within Saivism and Vaishnavism, advaita may or not be the goad, depending on the path, or sect within Saiva or Vaishnava.

From my sampradaya's viewpoint, advaita is a goal, but we focus more on the path, because realistically, that is where most of us are at.

So advaita is like the light at the end of the tunnel.

Aum Namasivaya

sm78
16 January 2012, 12:05 AM
There are many schools of advaita, the one's within shaiva sampradaya's who follow advaita don't really jell to well with Shankara's philosophy, so yes shaivas are not following kevaladvaita of shankara. Most shaiva siddhanta is dualism (in line with vaishnava qualified monism, not perfect duality) and is not advaitic at all. However, some like shivaya subramanuniya swami ascribe to adviata, but doesn't really make it clear what this advaita is all about. What he teaches is very much like this qualified monism and not advaita in his books.

adevotee108
16 January 2012, 04:06 AM
Namaste,

Thank you all for your helpful answers so far.

I follow the teachings of Ramana Maharishi, which is pure advaita as far as I could understand it. Ramana himself is shaiva but he accepted anyone regardless of cultural and religious background. As for me, I love Shiva and He is really dear to me, but yet I am unable to exclude Vishnu for example. But as for viashnava schools, I don't intend to follow the dvaita path. :)

That's why I am confused especially after reading that specific article mentioned in my original post. :)

Ananda
16 January 2012, 04:22 AM
Hello adevotee108,





Furtheremore has the Bhagavad-Gita got an advaita commentary or that work is a dvaitic and has nothing to do with advaita views?


Yes, there is a commentary written By Shankaracharya; the Gita Bhashya, which identifies Ishwara with Vishnu..

:)

adevotee108
16 January 2012, 04:32 AM
Hello adevotee108,






Yes, there is a commentary written By Shankaracharya; the Gita Bhashya, which identifies Ishwara with Vishnu..

:)

Namaste Ananda,

Is this: http://www.sankaracharya.org/gita_bhashya.php the same writing you are referring to? Because I have been reading the Bhagavad Gita, too, but that version's commentary is dvaita. :)

Ananda
16 January 2012, 07:14 AM
Hello adevotee108,


Yes that's the link for the Shankara (Advaita) commentary on the Gita. It seems there are only the first 10 chapters, though, so you might want to look around elsewhere for a complete copy.




:)

adevotee108
16 January 2012, 07:43 AM
Hello adevotee108,


Yes that's the link for the Shankara (Advaita) commentary on the Gita. It seems there are only the first 10 chapters, though, so you might want to look around elsewhere for a complete copy.




:)

Yeah, you are right. I have just found the full version too. Thanks!
This helps me a lot because this way I can read about Vishnu (Krsna) with an advaita commentary! :)

rku
17 January 2012, 09:29 AM
Dear,

Re:Can I as one who follows the advaita path regard Shiva and Vishnu as two facets of the One? So I am neither exclusively shaiva or vaishnava but simply following the advaita path and regard them (Vishnu and Shiva) as One, reading both shaiva and vaishnava literature?


This is better view.

Shiva and Vishnu help us so long as we are on the paths to liberation. Once we identify ourselves with the Advaita we just need to prescribe Shiva and Vishnu to others depending on their patrata and tradition and you yourself being one with Vishnu and Shiva we become synonymous with the welfare for the rest. This is how I identify relationship between Shiva, Vishnu etc and Advaita. Am I right?

Jainarayan
17 January 2012, 11:23 AM
I myself have been conflicted and confused as to what is the "right" view: Advaita, VishishtAdvaita, Achintya BhedAbheda.

I have always felt we are part of God, i.e. Brahman, and Brahman pervades us. My belief is that Brahman in manifest form is Krishna. I can't help but believe that Vishnu/Krishna and Shiva are dual aspects of the same Brahman in manifest form, not that Shiva is an expansion of Krishna, for example.

Not being Gaudiya, I'm not sure I can subscribe to Achintya BhedAbheda, as seems to be the "requirement" there. I know that Achintya BhedAbheda is "inconceivable one-ness and difference" from Krishna; VishishtAdvaita doesn't sound all that different from Achintya BhedAbheda. In VishishtAdvaita and Achintya BhedAbheda, moksha is not liberation in the sense that we become one with Brahman, but rather that we live in Vaikuntha as semi-separate entities. I'm not so sure about believing this. Maybe for me the problem is it smacks of the Abrahamic belief of being a different spiritual entity from God.

Of course, maybe I'm not understanding the concepts. On the other hand, I do have some odd beliefs and practices for what would be a typical Vaishnava. That is, I include Lord Shiva and His Shaktis, Lord Hanuman, Lord Ganesha, Maa Saraswati on my altar and in my prayers. Yet my devotion is focused on Lord Krishna as my Ishta-devata and Brahman in manifest form.

"I'm sooo confuuuused!" - Vinnie Barbarino.

Sahasranama
17 January 2012, 11:53 AM
There is a long history of bhedabheda philosophy that led towards the formations of Acintya Chintya Bhedabheda. If you are interested in philosophy, all points of view should be considered. I don't like the attitude of many shishya's who simply subscribe to one of these and leave it at that. Even worse, I think is that most guru bhaktas don't even look at the tradition and history of their own philosophy, but simply take their guru's word for everything. The matter of Indian philosophy is so interconnected that one cannot read Shankara and understand Shankara, one has to have an understanding of all the schools that Shankara considers in his argumentations, this goes back and forth. These days nobody really cares about this and is quick to adopt and defend any siddhanta, even without understanding.

Jainarayan
17 January 2012, 12:04 PM
Namaste Sahasranama.

Yes, if I understand correctly, this is a matter of labeling and trying to fit things into nice neat categories. I don't think that is possible, hence the confusion. I'm as guilty of trying to label my beliefs as the next person. Maybe the best thing is to just do one's bhakti, try to achieve God in any way that it comes, and leave the philosophy and debating to the acharyas.

Sahasranama
17 January 2012, 12:13 PM
Namaste Sahasranama.

Maybe the best thing is to just do one's bhakti, try to achieve God in any way that it comes, and leave the philosophy and debating to the acharyas.

Absolutely, this is the best approach.

It is not that we should not have any interest in philosophy whatsoever, but we should undertand the depth of the matter and not triviliase it to whatever guru maharaja has told us.

Jainarayan
17 January 2012, 12:21 PM
Yes, I see what you mean. Thanks. :)

brahman
18 January 2012, 05:20 AM
So far I have identified Advaita with the Shaiva path. But today, I have just read a "Shaiva criticism of Advaita". This has just raised these questions to me:

Is advaita a separate path/philosophy from the shaiva path? So can I have Vishnu (Instead of Shiva) as my istha devata (so I would be a vaishnava) and still follow the advaita path?
Furtheremore has the Bhagavad-Gita got an advaita commentary or that work is a dvaitic and has nothing to do with advaita views?

Can I as one who follows the advaita path regard Shiva and Vishnu as two facets of the One? So I am neither exclusively shaiva or vaishnava but simply following the advaita path and regard them (Vishnu and Shiva) as One, reading both shaiva and vaishnava literature?

Could you help me make these paths of Shaiva and Vaishnava/Advaita philosophy clear?
What is the relation of Advaita Philosophy to the Shaiva Path and the Vaishnava Path?

I am really confused now.







Dear adevotee,

There is a thin superficial veneer of a controversial style adopted by the master mind proponent Sankara, evidently for the purpose of the majority of the common devotees to whom he had necessarily to address himself in those Buddhist-moment days. The limitations of understanding of these devotees to whom these works had to cater, kept him within the limits of a religious scriptural form with characteristics of both veda and Vedanta together, without gaining a fuller status of an open and critical philosophical work, as seen in the west. However the case for Advaita Vedanta could be very well seen showing itself from behind steering the dynamic style of Upanishads themselves where the teachings centre round the absolute value called Brahman, attaining to a full philosophical context of Self –Realization beyond paradox of logic and emotions rather than that of adoration of any deity.

Perhaps the Holiness’ intention was to predicate something that treats philosophy and religion unitively.

(An opinion alone) love:)