What is the use of bhakti in Advaita?

[orlando]

Namaste all.

Since I am afraid that otherwise someone,noting that I am a vaishnava,could mistake my intentions,I do a premise:I don't want to challenge or criticize Advaita.
I am just curious to know

Now my question.

Advaita teaches that everyone and everything is Brahman.So a truly realized Advaitin doesn't see any difference between himself and everything else,including God.

My question is: then why do advaitin practice also bhakti-yoga?
Isn't bhakti(a dualism between God and His devote) an hindrance to Advaita samadhi?

I know for sure that Sri Shankara him-self practiced bhakti as well...

Pranama,
Orlando.

[Jetavan]

Namaste all.


My question is: then why do advaitin practice also bhakti-yoga?

Because even Advaitins need love.

[devotee]

Namaste Orlando,

Since I am afraid that otherwise someone,noting that I am a vaishnava,could mistake my intentions,I do a premise:I don't want to challenge or criticize Advaita.

Thanks for the assurance !

Advaita teaches that everyone and everything is Brahman.So a truly realized Advaitin doesn't see any difference between himself and everything else,including God.

True !

then why do advaitin practice also bhakti-yoga?
Isn't bhakti(a dualism between God and His devote) an hindrance to Advaita samadhi?

No, on the other hand, it helps. First of all, Advaita SAdhanA is to go towards God and not away from it. So, Bhakti is the first step towards Advaita SAdhanA. The seeker initially is with deep samskaars and is bound to body-mind entity. Here, grace of God/Guru helps to come out of it. Let's remember that Self-realised Guru is nothing but God alone.

However, in Advaita SAdhanA, you should not be attached to any form or name or attribute of God which initially helps but becomes a hindrance to attain the Ultimate in the end as happened to Ramkrishna Paramhansa. He was so much attached to form of Mother Kaali that that very form which was more real to him than anything else in this world became a hurdle to realise Nirvikalpa SamAdhi. Here, on the advice of his Advaitic Guru, Swami Totapuri, he destroyed the form in his mind with the sword of his Viveka and merged into the infinite ocean of bliss of Nirvikalpa SamAdhi.

We cannot start with non-duality, unless one is born enlightened ... due to working of the Nature, there is strong tendency to perceive this diverse Universe as diverse ... but as one goes along the path ... the sense of duality decreases and a point comes where there is no duality at all.

The scriptures say, "By worshiping you in form, I have violated Your being beyond all physical limitations. By going to temples, I have violated Your omnipresence. By chanting your name and praising you, I have violated Your being beyond all words. My dear God, please forgive me for these three sins."

OM

[orlando]

Namaste devotee

The scriptures say, "By worshiping you in form, I have violated Your being beyond all physical limitations. By going to temples, I have violated Your omnipresence. By chanting your name and praising you, I have violated Your being beyond all words. My dear God, please forgive me for these three sins."

Would you kindly tell me which scriptures say this?

Pranama,
Orlando.

[devotee]

Namaste Orlando,

Would you kindly tell me which scriptures say this?

I read it long back in one of the scriptures. So, it is not going to be easy for me, but I will give you the reference in due course ... the exact version may be slightly differing.

OM

[Jainarayan]

Namaste.

No need to provide any reference to you now. Please forget whatever I wrote.

OM

I would like to know.

I was once read that to meditate on OM is to meditate on Brahman, which is not for everyone; not for those not of a certain spiritual level. Sri Krishna tells us to think of Him. He says that spiritual advancement is difficult for the embodied to focus on the Unmanifest. I'm curious how this is all reconciled with the above referenced scriptures.

[devotee]

Namaste Jainarayan,

"By worshiping you in form, I have violated Your being beyond all physical limitations. By going to temples, I have violated Your omnipresence. By chanting your name and praising you, I have violated Your being beyond all words. My dear God, please forgive me for these three sins."

I have already stated that I don't remember the scripture ... but what is wrong which is stated there ?

The above is not in conflict with Bhakti Yoga. Please read the above carefully. Let's analyse the above :

a) God is Anantam (Infinite) i.e. beyond limitations. .... We all accept that whether one is an Advaitin or a Saguna-Bhakta. This is not disputed ===> Hari Ananta, Hari katha anantA (Hari is Infinite and ways to describe Him (talking of Him) too are infinite).

Now, if that is so, by worshiping Him in anyone form ... is like not accepting that He alone is everything and everywhere ? Bhagwad Gita says, "VAsudevah Sarvam Iti" ===> Everything is Vasudeva. The term "Vaasudeva" has come from "Vasa" which means "reside" ===> Therefore, He who resides in everyone and everything is VAsudeva i.e. God. But still we worship one form of Lord ... is it not denial of His being Infinite ?

b) Similarly, we all agree that God is everywhere ... He is Omnipresent. However, we don't see Him everywhere and go to temples to worship Him. Isn't it denial of His Omnipresence ?

c) We all agree that God/Hai is beyond words ... AnivarchanIya ... and we still try to give Him names and describe Him with words which is nothing but denail of His being AnivarchanIya.

**************

Now, let's see what the devotee says. He says that "I have worshiped you in form ... though you are beyond all forms. I have gone to a specific place to worship you when you are everywhere. I have tried to describe you ... praise you in words when you are beyond all words." Now, these are not sins per-se. As the devotee has no option but to do it ... because of his own limitation of his body-mind entity to grasp the Reality that God is ... he did so.

.... But when he (devotee) is able to Realise God as He is ... he (devotee) sees his folly and talks to God in the above words lovingly. If you remember this is what happens to Arjuna when he sees the Infinite form (Vishvaroopa) of Lord Krishna (Chapter-11, BG). He pleads with God to forgive him for all small sins done against him as he didn't know Him in true form before that and all along he though that Lord Krishna was merely his one of the friends.

******************

Instead of seeing the quoted passage when you start denying the authenticity of it, there is proven bias against a certain point of view which is being presented. So, there is no sincerity in seeing the others' point of view but a tendency to prove superiority of one's accepted views over the other ... this doesn't appeal me.

If I have to quote scriptures to show superiority of Advaita over form-worship ... I have no dearth of scriptures ... I can quote directly from the VedAs and VedAnta. But that is not my intention. It was Orlando's necessity to understand how Bhakti helps an Advaitin and not mine.

All paths that lead to God are valid and right. It is only our shortsightedness which impels us to indulge into "My path is better than yours" games. My request is that we keep HDF free from such meaningless fights/games playing.

OM

[Amrut]

Even I have read what Devotee has said and even I cannot recall it's source. I have poor memory.

The scriptures say, "By worshiping you in form, I have violated Your being beyond all physical limitations. By going to temples, I have violated Your omnipresence. By chanting your name and praising you, I have violated Your being beyond all words. My dear God, please forgive me for these three sins."

Well, if you think that Shankaracharya was not an advaitin or he did not follow traditional advaita vedanta, then no point in giving reference.

I am not taking his /her side, but what devotee is saying is true.

Even advaita is a bhakta, but the definintion of bhakti changes. Like vaishnav, advaitin does not rigidly stick to only and only krishna or any form of God.

Sri Ramana Maharshi said that, " Total surrender of Ego to the SELF is the Real Bhakti"

Now if you do not believe in Sri Ramana Maharshi, then nothing more can be said.

Even traditional bhakti is needed in the beginning like worshipping Shiva or Rama. Bhakti is the foundation. But just like Gita is not ending with chapter 11, Vishwarupa Darshana Yog, but ends with chapter 18, Moksha Sanyas Yog, so does the spiritual journey ends with Moksha.

Why does Gita start with Karma Kand and ends with Jnana Kand. Why is Bhakti before Jnana Kand?

Why does not Gita end with Chapter 12, Bhakti Yog. Why is the need to explain Atman-Anatman? in later chapters like chapter 13, Kshetra-Kshetragna Yog.

Some statements are rejected (or given lesser importance and so not highlighted) by other schools. Better not to start a debate and there will be arrows of verses fired by both ends.

So if you think that by worshipping Krishna (and not Krishna Tatva), you are worshipping the entire brahman, then so be it. It's not going to harm anyone

You notice that some founders of some schools contradict Shankaracharya's philosophy.

Just peacefully agree to disagree.

Aum

[smaranam]

Namaste IndiaSpirituality

Your posts are good and so is your website. I have nothing against you and not intending to debate.

Just want to comment on this below:

So if you think that by worshipping Krishna (and not Krishna Tatva), you are worshipping the entire brahman, then so be it. It's not going to harm anyone

Aum

The two-handed flute-playing chariot-riding Gita-speaking Shyamsundar Devakinandan YashodAnandan, DwarakAdheesh, Muralidhar, JanArdan, Achyuta, Adhokshaja, Makhan chor, Chit chor
yes that kamalnayan wearing a peacock feather , yellow pitambar,
yes that very One ,

IS INDEED THE ENTIRE BRAHMAN. Worshipping MadhusUdan GiridhAri ShyAm IS INDEED the best way to worship Brahman - take that from a devotee

Those who do not agree do not understand the most transcendental vigraha of Shri KRshNa. No offense meant. Let's leave His Vigraha to His devotees.

Krishna Tattva is inseperable from KRshNa's Person and Vigraha
KRshNa's holy names, bajan, song, painting, teaching, kathA, lIlA, bhAv, fame, IS KRshNa
KRshNa's VrndAvan Gokul IS KRshNa
KRshNa's Universe is KRshNa

Hari bolo

[grames]

The operator of EGO is not EGO, it is the very same Self! This is the missing point...

Who is going to surrender the Ego to Self? Self Surrendering to Self does not sound a possible action or transformation! Giving Prakriti or Maya the power of acting on its own in any form of reality nullifies the "Advaitam". So, Ego cannot surrender to Self by itself and it requires the control/direction from the Self itself.

Good message from Smaranam - Krshna is Brahman and Brahman is Krshna! The devotee point of view is that, since Krshna is everything, worshipping Krshna is worshipping all that He is! It is not putting limits to Krshna but realizing the limits of the individual jiva.

The famous story of Lord Ganesha getting the JnanaPalam from Lord Shiva is one example of it. ( Circumambulating the Shiva Shakthi is same as circumambulating the entire universe). When Jnana is there, there is no doubt that worshipping Krshna is same as worshipping Brahman in His entirety.

Hare Krshna!