What is the use of bhakti in Advaita?

[Amrut]

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:



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

Namaste,

I agree. I did not say anything negatively.

Aum

[Amrut]

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!

Namaste,

in Gita SELF or Atman is sometimes taken as body, mind, ego soul, etc

e.g. In chapter 6, Atmasayyam Yog. In this you have to take Atma as Mind. So it's control of mind. some translate as Dhyan Yog (Yog of Meditation) or Abhyasa Yog.

When you say

I am sick, I = Body i.e. you are refering to 'I' as body. We do not say, my body ot this body is sick.
I am hurt, I = Ego
I am intellegent, I = Intellect (buddhi)
I am bored, I = mind
I will do good karma and enjoy it's fruits in heaven, I = Jiva
I am the substratum of Entire universe, I = I (SELF, Atman)

According to Tatva Bodh, and Sri Ramana Maharshi, Mind is nothing but continuous flow of thoughts.

Aum
Indiaspirituality

Cross posted from Mind

If you talk of strickly advaita, then there is just maun. Nothing else. No updesha, nothing. Just abide in Self. or simply 'Just Be'.

But this does not help.

It is like seeing a snake and saying that I see rope. Have you heard of Snake-rope analogy (rajju-sarpa Anuvada). Entire advait and some concepts from Gita like

I am inside everything abut this world is inside me,
I am inside everything and everything is inside me.
I am not inside anything and with world is not inside me

can be explained from this snake - rope analogy.

@grames and @smaranam

I am highly influenced by Sri Ramakrishna who belied and equally respected all paths and all faiths.

Sri Ramakrishna has said:

An ant saw a pile of sugar. By eating one ant satisfied hunger. Atmost it can take another piece to it's home. Even great souls like Sukhdeva could eat 4-5 sugar cubes (pieces). Who can know the whole brahman.

--

In a big mango garden, there are 100s of mango trees. Why do you worry too much about how many trees are there in this garden, there are how many branches, how many leaves and how many mangos. Eat some mangos and it will satisfy your hunger.

--

Only 12 rishis came to know that Sri Ram was an avatar of Lord Vishnu. But when Sri Ram approached them, they said that we are more interested in the Nirguna aspect of you. they were following advaita.

--

Once there was a sabha (gathering) in kings court. There was an intense debate whether Shiva is supreme or Vishnu is supreme. After the debate got very intensified and on verse of fighting, Kind called a very respected Pandit, whom everyone respected. When asked same question, he replied:

Nor me or my 7 generations of ancestors saw shiva or Vishnu, so I cannot say which one is superior. Shiva Purana declares Shiva is supreme and Vshnu Purana says Vishnu is supreme. Each god is equally beloved to his devotees. For Vishnu devotees, Vishnu is the greatest and for Shiva devotees, shiva is the greatest.

--

There was another occasion when someone was talking about this - why is this world like this, why God created this and this, etc. When asked to a devotee and disciple of Sri Ramakrishna (I forgot his name). He replied, friend, God did not consult me before creating this world

--

who can know the infiinte ways of Brahman. No one can limit God.

--

If you want to know there are how many trees in garden, and there are how many fruits, then better have friendship with the landlord (God), then to count them in hiding. Once you have friendship with landlord, he will himself tell you every details about garden.

So better is to first be one with God then to think of his glories.

--

Refer Post #17 for some quotes on Longing.

--

Not by talking but my meditating and singing glories of God one comes near him. If you give me a prasad from lord Krishna's temple I will gladly accept it with equal honour and respect that I accept it Lord Shiva's prasad and the food cooked by a devout Advaitin.

Only difference is that a bhakta thinks of himself different from God, while an advaitin think he is not different of God (Brahman) - this does not mean Ego.

Eve a bhakta looses his her identity and merges with beloved God. Nothing more needs to be achieved for him. Advaita says there is no moksha without knowledge (jnana). But bhakta does not need moksha. Still t is the duty of God to give what is best for his devotee who has completely surrendered to Him.

So Radha should be Krishna for within. When in Prema bhakti, bhakta does not recoginze whats going around, where they are, what are they wearing. They are not aware of their body.

Enough of theory, as when I argue, I lose my hard earned peace through years of meditation due to just one incident.

Let me meditate on Nirguna Brahman and let you or others meditate on Krishna with Form. We will all progress and come near our goal

P E A C E

Aum
Indiaspirituality

[Amrut]

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 ,

btw is it given in Gita or Bhagawat? I have poor memory, and have not read too many scriptures.

No need to point verse number. Just (innocently) curious to know its source. Nothing more than that.

Aum

[smaranam]

btw is it given in Gita or Bhagawat? I have poor memory, and have not read too many scriptures.

No need to point verse number. Just (innocently) curious to know its source. Nothing more than that.

Aum

That was just a spontaneous 'udgaar' (expression). It is not from scriptures, but I am sure we can find something similar in many places/verses of the Bhagvat. I know that you agree.

Om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya

[Amrut]

That was just a spontaneous 'udgaar' (expression). It is not from scriptures, but I am sure we can find something similar in many places/verses of the Bhagvat. I know that you agree.

Om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya

oohh ok

EDIT: Udgaar comes from heart. who resides in heart ________

__/ \__

Om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya

[smaranam]

EDIT: Udgaar comes from heart. who resides in heart ________

__/ \__

Om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya

Actually I had written in the post: The source is KRshNa-inside-me. But then I erased it.

_/\_

[Jainarayan]

Namaste.

Namaste Jainarayan,



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

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.

I never doubted that you know it, hence asking for a little education as to what it means. I'm not the brightest diya at diwali. Now I understand and can grasp it. Thanks, that explains it perfectly; now I understand.

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

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

I'm sure that was not addressed to me, as I meant nothing along those lines, nor any offense. I too am tired of the "who can lift one's leg higher to piss up the tree" games on HDF. Unfortunately there are but a few, including yourself as evidenced by your detailed explanation, who give meaningful answers that one is hard-pressed to find elsewhere. It's like the corporate "golden handcuffs"... you want to bail, but the benefits make you stay.

[satay]

Admin Note

Namaste,
Please note that you are in Advaita forum thus discussion should be from that point of view. There is no point arguing from non advaitin perspective.

Closing thread since it has degraded into 'you are wrong, I am right.'