Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: Adi Sankaracharya's Abrahamic Tendencies

  1. #21
    Join Date
    December 2007
    Age
    57
    Posts
    3,211
    Rep Power
    4713

    Re: Adi Sankaracharya's Abrahamic Tendencies

    Namaste, Phil,

    I am simply highlighting what you said so that people can understand you in a better way :

    Quote Originally Posted by philosoraptor View Post
    Because it is shankarAchArya's commentary, not Vivekananda's commentary. I don't follow shankarAchArya either, but even I can readily spot the differences between the real advaita philosophy propagated by Adi shankara and the "new-and-improved" version which has caught hold of the imagination of so many modern Hindus.
    Please mark the highlighted portion which shows what you think of yourself and so-called modern Hindus like me. Thanks.

    I'm perfectly happy to concede that there is a mistranslation if someone can actually point it out and show me.
    Oh, it is still not done ? In what way should it be done ? Please elaborate.

    More to the point, many neo-advaitins clearly love Ramakrishna and Vivekananda, so they should not object to a translation of one of their followers on sectarian grounds.
    Please mark the use of words like, "neo-advaitin" (which is not used with a very noble intent which is clear) for me, IndiaSpiritualit etc. Shall we coin a word, "neo-dualists" or something like that, so that we are at the same wavelength to understand each others' language ?

    The fact that you have to hint that Swami Gambhirananda has mistranslated the commentary according to sectarian Vaishnava grounds even after acknowledging him to be an Advaita ashram member just shows your desperation.
    This is a Kutarka. A wrong translation is a wrong translation. It doesn't show anyone's desperation but shows that you didn't read the source.

    As of this writing, this thread has apparently been moved to the "Jalpa If you must pointless argue with others...." forum.
    Rightly done as it doesn't add to anyone's knowledge which is the motto of this site. Your intention was to show so-called "neo-advaitins" as uninformed, and misguided and you wanted to show that "NArAyaNa alone is the Brahman".

    After senior members opined that those great AchAryas who accepted deva-hierarchy are "fit for Abrahamic religions," I felt some education was in order.
    Indeed ! We are so fortunate to have a teacher like you ! Thanks, again !!

    So far, I have shown that Adi shankarAchArya has commented on several key verses in ways that are identical to those "Abrahamic" scholars, but there has been very little outcry against Adi shankarAchArya.
    That is already refuted. You have every right to feel that you alone are right. Who stops you from thinking so ?

    Why this double-standard? It is because of an attitude among uninformed Hindus, based on bad experiences with Christianity and Islam, that theism is somehow by the very fact militant and fundamentalist, while Hinduism is somehow non-theistic and all-accepting.
    Really ? I and also who are so-called neo-Advaitins are uninformed and we all had bad experiences of Christianity and Islam, right ? This statement speaks volumes of your mentality.

    Adi shankara is often hailed as the great leader who taught this great doctrine of all gods being the same and all religions being true. This of course, is nothing more than propaganda.
    I am surprised that you know so much about Shankaracharya. I would have been obliged if you have proved what you said.

    Hindu culture is beautiful as it is, and it does not need to be changed to accommodate those who lack the patience to study the source materials.
    Exactly the same way, you read the source material while creating this thread ???

    As for what path I am on, I've said it before in my intro - I'm a seeker. You don't have to be committed to a path in order to point out the facts and how well certain conclusions fit or don't fit the facts.
    Thanks for this assurance but your hard-selling "NArAyANa alone" theory, by hook or by crook ... makes us believe something else. I hope you are sincere in what you are saying.

    OM
    "Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"

  2. #22
    Join Date
    December 2007
    Age
    57
    Posts
    3,211
    Rep Power
    4713

    Re: Adi Sankaracharya's Abrahamic Tendencies

    Namaste,

    To understand the message of the Vedas, nothing can be worse than to make a hard-line opinion based on one verse/one passage in one of the books etc. One has to see what coherent message the Vedas give. If there is no harmony in what they teach at one plave and they teach at the other places, the whole Vedas would lose its validity as an unchallengeable authority which it enjoys. Kena Upanishad is to highlight the supremacy of Unconditioned Brahman over other devas associated with their limiting adjuncts and their “ignorance” about the reality. However, the same devas when free from their limiting adjuncts and ignorance of the reality are nothing but Brahman Itself and they have been praised at so many places in Veda-samhitAs and the Upanishads as quoted by me in thread http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=9647 . I would not like to create boredom here by quoting the same thing again and again. Anyone interested in knowing what the Vedas say at different places can visit that thread and read the quotes given by me and make their own opinion. Again, I must remind here that Brahman of Kena is not named NArAyana or Vishnu.

    I would like to draw the attention of forum members who may be reading this post that Vishnu who has been praised at many places in the Veda-samhitas/Upanishads as Supreme i.e. Brahman and also been described as the son of Aditi, as one of the twelve AdityAs. Now, if Vishnu is born to Aditi, he cannot be “Unborn” that Brahman is. So, shall we conclude that Vishnu is not Brahman ? That would be a childish way to understand the message. The message of the Vedas is not so simple as the Truth is beyond the understanding of the mental realms. I will like to quote here from the Tattriya Upanishad which praises VAyu as the direct and immediate Brahman :

    ShAnti paath :


    May Mitra be blissful to us. May Varuna be blissful to us. May Aryama be blissful to us. May Indra and Brahaspati be blissful to us. May Vishnu, of long strides, be blissful to us. Salutation to Brahman. Salutation to you, O Vayu. You, indeed, are the immediate and directly perceptible Brahman. You alone I shall call the direct perceptible Brahman. I shall call you righteousness. I shall call you the Truth. May he protect me. May he protect the teacher. May he protect me. May he protect the teacher. Om, peace, peace, peace.

    We can very well see in the shanty-paath above, how VAyu has been extolled as the Only direct and perceptible Brahman. However, the same Vayu is depicted as a deva with liming adjuncts and ignorance in Kena. If we take literal meaning of the two passages, there will be contradictions in the sayings of the Vedas at different places which cannot be accepted. Therefore, we must find out what message the Vedas really give. We cannot read at one place and jump ... Yahoo ! This is the right meaning. It is not done that way. The Vedas must be understood in its entirety.

    I have already stated the correct meaning of the allegorical story stated in the Kena Upanishad above which leaves no scope of contradictions between sayings of the scriptures at different places.

    I will talk about the real meaning of the verse, “Ekam sad vipra bahudhA vadanti” in my next post.

    OM
    "Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"

  3. #23
    Join Date
    December 2007
    Age
    57
    Posts
    3,211
    Rep Power
    4713

    Re: Adi Sankaracharya's Abrahamic Tendencies

    Namaste,

    The complete verse “Ekam Sad Vipra BahudhA vadanti” is this :

    Rig Veda 1.164.46

    He alone is called Indra, Mitra or Varuna. He is the Sun in the sky. He alone is Agni, Yama and MAtarishvA. The vipras describe the same Truth in various ways.


    This verse in its original complete form doesn’t leave any scope to interpret it in a different manner. It is talking about Brahman. It is talking about the equal status of Indra, Mitra, Varuna, the Sun, the Agni, Yama and MAtarishva.

    Instead of telling you my understanding of this verse to bore you further, I would provide an explanatory passage by Swamy Prabhavananda, a monk from Ramkrishna Order. He beautifully explains these complicated issues :

    a. Why is it that now one god, now another, is lifted to the loftiest position and celebrated as the supreme divinity?
    b. Why is it that in the Vedic hymns we find elementary ideas of God as well as the most advanced?

    Let’s see what he offers :

    Quote Originally Posted by Swamy Prabhavananda
    The preceding brief survey of the varying conceptions of God in the Samhitas quite naturally raise two questions. The first is this: Why is it that now one god, now another, is lifted to the loftiest position and celebrated as the supreme divinity? Professor Max Muller has observed this phenomenon, and named it henotheism, but has done little to fathom its mystery. Its true explanation is to be found in the hymns themselves; `and it is a grand explanation,' declares Swami Vivekananda, `one that has given the theme to all subsequent thought in India and one that will be the theme of the whole world of religions: Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti===>"that which exists is One: sages call it by various names".'

    The subject is worth pausing with, for in the quoted words lies the secret not only of an aspect of the Vedic hymns but also—as Swami Vivekananda suggest—of an aspect of the religious life of India throughout her long history. Casual visitors to this ancient land carry away with them the impressions of an elaborate polytheism. True it is that India has always many gods—but in appearance only. In reality she has had but one god, though with prodigal inventiveness she has called him `by various names'. Indra, Varuna, Hiranyagarbha—Rama, Krsna, Siva: What does it matter? Whichever of these or of many others the Hindu chooses for his adoration, that one becomes for him God himself, in whom exists all things, including, for the time being, all other gods. It is because India has been so permeated with the spirit of Ekam sat vipra bahuda vedanti that she has known relatively little of religious fanaticism, of religious persecution, of religious wars. Characteristically she has sought the truth in every faith—even in faiths not her own.

    But there was a second question: Why is it that in the Vedic hymns we find elementary ideas of God as well as the most advanced? To the Western scholar there is no mystery, for he is accustomed to think of all things in terms of evolution, as he conceives evolution, and in the simpler anthropomorphic notions he sees the first stages of growth which slowly ripens to abstraction. But not so the orthodox Hindu. What he sees in the graduated scale of Vedic conceptions is a beneficent correspondence to varied stages of religious attainment. Some men are but barbarians in spiritual things; others are seers and sages. The Vedas (and this, say the orthodox, was a clear purpose of the exalted rsis) minister to all according to their needs. Some they teach to fly; some they must first teach to walk. To those at a low stage they offer polytheism, even at times materialism; to those at a higher stage monotheism; and to those at the top of the scale a notion of God so utterly impersonal, so devoid of anything describable in human terms, as to be suited only to the greatest saints, and to these only in their most strenuous moments.

    For it would appear, in general, that even the greatest of Hindu saints have found the conception of God an abstract reality too rarefied for constant use. Occasionally they rise to it, but not for long. Like more ordinary mortals they too have yearned for a notion of divinity close to their minds and hearts, something they could readily love, and meditate upon, and worship."
    I hope a careful study of the above passage and also the correct meaning of the whole verse clarifies all doubts.

    OM
    "Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"

  4. #24

    Re: Adi Sankaracharya's Abrahamic Tendencies

    Quote Originally Posted by devotee View Post
    Vishnu who has been praised at many places in the Veda-samhitas/Upanishads as Supreme i.e. Brahman and also been described as the son of Aditi, as one of the twelve AdityAs. Now, if Vishnu is born to Aditi, he cannot be “Unborn” that Brahman is. So, shall we conclude that Vishnu is not Brahman ? That would be a childish way to understand the message.
    OM
    Indeed.
    VishNu succumbs to motherly wishes of His devotees. Therefore,
    as the dwarf-brahmin VAman He is son of Aditi (this is how He is son of Aditi)
    as Shri KRshNa He is son of Devaki , devakinandana
    as PRshNi-garbha He is son of PRshNi
    as Shri RAm He is son of KausalyA
    as GopAl dAmodar He is son of YashodA
    as Kapila He is son of Devahuti
    as DattAtreya He is son of AnusUyA

    _/\_ In that devakinandan yashodAnandan kausalyAnandan i live
    || Shri KRshNArpaNamastu ||

  5. #25
    Join Date
    December 2007
    Age
    57
    Posts
    3,211
    Rep Power
    4713

    Re: Adi Sankaracharya's Abrahamic Tendencies

    Namaste Smaranam,

    Quote Originally Posted by smaranam View Post
    Indeed.
    VishNu succumbs to motherly wishes of His devotees. Therefore,
    as the dwarf-brahmin VAman He is son of Aditi (this is how He is son of Aditi)
    as Shri KRshNa He is son of Devaki , devakinandana
    as PRshNi-garbha He is son of PRshNi
    as Shri RAm He is son of KausalyA
    as GopAl dAmodar He is son of YashodA
    as Kapila He is son of Devahuti
    as DattAtreya He is son of AnusUyA
    You are right. For the sake of bhaktAs, God takes birth even though He is always unborn. Though I am not well versed in PaurANic stories, the information available to me is this : Being born to Aditi is slightly different from any other avtAra of Vishnu. Vishnu comes into being as Vishnu as son of Aditi. Aditi is considered as the mother of gods and to her were born 12 Adityas (in some places only 8 Adityas are mentioned). Rig Veda mentions Aditi quite a number of times and Vishnu is also mentioned being born to her.

    Anyway, birth of God is really not a birth in literal sense. This has to be understood.

    OM
    "Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"

  6. #26

    Re: Adi Sankaracharya's Abrahamic Tendencies

    Being born to Aditi is slightly different from any other avtAra of Vishnu.
    It is just like any other avatAr of VishNu.
    SB 8.17,18 : VAman avatAr.
    Purpose: to overthrow the demons who had captured svarga.(SB8.16)
    Svarga belongs to the devas whereas VishNu's abode is Vaikuntha. The devas always approach VishNu when in trouble and out of compassion He takes avatar.

    Vishnu comes into being as Vishnu as son of Aditi.
    VishNu does not come into being. He always IS.
    Aditi, on her husband Kashyap Muni's advice, performed payo-vrat to obtain the Supreme Lord VishNu as her son. Before that she had only a few sons - who were the devas (Indra Agni Vayu etc.) Nothing inconceivable about this.

    SB 8.15: Bali Mahārāja Conquers the Heavenly Planets
    SB 8.16: Executing the Payo-vrata Process of Worship
    SB 8.17: The Supreme Lord Agrees to Become Aditi's Son
    SB 8.18: Lord Vāmanadeva, the Dwarf Incarnation
    SB 8.19: Lord Vāmanadeva Begs Charity from Bali Mahārāja

    SB 8.15.24: Seeing Bali Mahārāja's endeavor and understanding his motive, King Indra, along with the other demigods, approached his spiritual master, Bṛhaspati, and spoke as follows.
    SB 8.15.29: Neither you nor your men can conquer the most powerful Bali. Indeed, no one but the Supreme Personality of Godhead can conquer him, for he is now equipped with the supreme spiritual power [brahma-tejas]. As no one can stand before Yamarāja, no one can now stand before Bali Mahārāja.

    SB 8.16.1: Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: O King, when Aditi's sons, the demigods, had thus disappeared from heaven and the demons had occupied their places, Aditi began lamenting, as if she had no protector.
    SB 8.16.15: Therefore, most gentle lord, kindly favor your maidservant. We have now been deprived of our opulence and residence by our competitors, the demons. Kindly give us protection.
    SB 8.16.16: The demons, our formidably powerful enemies, have taken away our opulence, our beauty, our fame and even our residence. Indeed, we have now been exiled, and we are drowning in an ocean of trouble.
    SB 8.16.17: O best of sages, best of all those who grant auspicious benedictions, please consider our situation and bestow upon my sons the benedictions by which they can regain what they have lost.
    SB 8.17.1: Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: O King, after Aditi was thus advised by her husband, Kaśyapa Muni, she strictly followed his instructions without laziness and in this way performed the payo-vrata ritualistic ceremony.

    SB 8.17.4: My dear King, the original Supreme Personality of Godhead, dressed in yellow garments and bearing a conchshell, disc, club and lotus in His four hands, then appeared before Aditi.
    SB 8.17.8: The goddess Aditi said: O master and enjoyer of all sacrificial ceremonies, O infallible and most famous person, whose name, when chanted, spreads all good fortune! O original Supreme Personality of Godhead, supreme controller, shelter of all holy places, You are the shelter of all poor, suffering living entities, and You have appeared to diminish their suffering. Please be kind to us and spread our good fortune.

    SB 8.17.18: You have prayed to Me and properly worshiped Me by performing the great payo-vrata ceremony for the sake of protecting your sons. Because of Kaśyapa Muni's austerities, I shall agree to become your son and thus protect your other sons.

    SB 8.17.24: When Lord Brahmā understood that the Supreme Personality of Godhead was now within the womb of Aditi, he began to offer prayers to the Lord by reciting transcendental names.

    Aditi is considered as the mother of gods
    ONly for the duration of one manavantar since Kashyap Rshi is one of the SaptaRshis who are prajapatis - they populate the world.
    Aditi-Kashyap --- deva (12)
    Diti-Kashyap --- asura (hiranyaksha hiranyakashyapu)
    Kadru-Kashyap --- nAga (1000)
    VinitA-Kashyap --- Garuda (Vainiteya) , 2 sons

    and to her were born 12 Adityas (in some places only 8 Adityas are mentioned). Rig Veda mentions Aditi quite a number of times and Vishnu is also mentioned being born to her.
    WERE born. In sequence. one after the other.
    Rg Ved has history. BhAgavat has history.

    om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya
    Last edited by smaranam; 27 February 2013 at 05:09 AM.
    || Shri KRshNArpaNamastu ||

  7. #27
    Join Date
    December 2007
    Age
    57
    Posts
    3,211
    Rep Power
    4713

    Re: Adi Sankaracharya's Abrahamic Tendencies

    Namaste Smaranam,

    You have much more information of PurANas than I have. I have been banking on my knowledge of Veda-samhitA alone for this. Thanks for your inputs.

    OM
    "Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"

  8. #28
    Join Date
    November 2010
    Posts
    1,278
    Rep Power
    1636

    Re: Adi Sankaracharya's Abrahamic Tendencies

    What a sheer waste of bandwidth and empty superfluous posturing this thread is!

  9. #29
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    mrityuloka
    Age
    46
    Posts
    3,703
    Rep Power
    293

    Re: Adi Sankaracharya's Abrahamic Tendencies

    Admin Note

    Seems like OP has abandoned this thread.

    My advice to all esteemed knowledgeable members is that they take a break from HDF to avoid making fools of themselves further.

    Thank you
    satay

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Open up Abrahamic Religions Forum
    By wundermonk in forum Feedback
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 16 August 2012, 01:22 PM
  2. Understanding the Abrahamic Mindset
    By TTCUSM in forum Abrahamic Religions (Closed For Posting)
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 22 June 2011, 07:14 PM
  3. The Mahabharata and the Abrahamic Bible
    By Eric11235 in forum Itihasas
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 07 May 2011, 06:29 PM
  4. Abrahamic Religions and God Realization
    By sm78 in forum Abrahamic Religions (Closed For Posting)
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: 24 July 2010, 07:33 AM
  5. Why the Abrahamic Religions are So Violent
    By Yajnavalkya dasa in forum Christianity
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02 October 2007, 10:47 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •