Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 78

Thread: Adi shankarAchArya's views on anya-devata worship

  1. #51
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,210
    Rep Power
    1364

    Re: Adi shankarAchArya's views on anya-devata worship

    Namaste,

    Just logged in and found a lot has been said in this thread.

    If we read BG 9.26, Shankara Bhasya, we can know that bhava is given importance.

    Reading the whole chapter, including intro makes understanding better. Commentary on last verse says that 'Me' can be taken as 'Atman'. Advaita does not consider Stay at Vaikuntha as the last stage. Also advaita do not give importance to any form of God as far as meditation is concerned. When it comes to karma-kand, cleansing mind and attaining purity, so that one could qualify for Jnana, one has to give importance to different deities and worship them.

    Commentary by Madhusudan Saraswati would be of interest. Also studying chapter 17 would help us understand this better. But all has to be done from advaita POV. If only prasthAntrayi has to be counted, then even puranas should not be discussed.

    Though there may be interpolations, I wonder how much it is interpolated and after removing interpolations what would be left out?

    Generally I do not like to say but, no one has seen any of the acharya-s. In this context, chances of interpolations by lesser evolved disciples cannot be ruled out and applies to all sampradAya-s. Even enquiries by scholars cannot be considered as unbiased.

    I think it is better not to discuss this topic any further.

    Viraja di, please do not feel guilty, as the question asked by you was genuine, but we do not have control about what other say and perceive.

    Aum
    Only God Is Truth, Everything Else Is Illusion - Ramakrishna
    Total Surrender of Ego to SELF is Real Bhakti - Ramana Maharshi

    Silence is the study of the scruptures. Meditation is the continuous thinking of Brahman which is to be meditated upon. The complete negation of both by knowledge is the vision of truth – sadAcAra-14 of Adi SankarAcArya

    namah SivAya vishnurUpAya viShNave SivarUpiNe, MBh, vanaparva, 3.39.76

    Sanskrit Dict | MW Dict | Gita Super Site | Hindu Dharma

  2. #52
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,210
    Rep Power
    1364

    Re: Adi shankarAchArya's views on anya-devata worship

    Swami Sivananda's commentary, which closely follows Adi shankara's commentary makes things more clear. Here. Vinayaka is given in plural form

    English commentary by Swami Sivananda

    9.25 यान्ति go, देवव्रताः worshippers of the gods, देवान् to the gods, पितृ़न् to the Pitris or ancestors, यान्ति go, पितृव्रताः worshippers of the Pitris, भूतानि to the Bhutas, यान्ति go, भूतेज्याः the worshippers of the Bhutas, यान्ति go, मद्याजिनः My worshippers, अपि also, माम् to Me.

    Commentary: The worshippers of the manes such as the Agnisvattas who perform Sraaddha and other rites in devotion to their ancestors go to the manes. Those who worship the gods with devotion and vows go to them. Bhutas are 'elemental beings' lower than the gods but higher than human beigns; they are the Vinayakas, the hosts of Matris, the four Bhaginis and the like.Those who devote themselves to the gods attain the form of those gods at death. Similar is the fate of those who worship the manes (their own ancestors) or the Bhutas. The fruit of the worship is in accordance with the knowledge, faith, offering and nature of worship of the devotee.Though the exertion is the same, people do not worship Me on account of their ignorance. Consequently they get very little reward.My devotees obtain endless fruit. They do not come back to this mortal world. It is also easy for them to worship Me. How? (Cf.VII.23)

    this might be also helpful

    http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/archi...ly/027946.html
    Only God Is Truth, Everything Else Is Illusion - Ramakrishna
    Total Surrender of Ego to SELF is Real Bhakti - Ramana Maharshi

    Silence is the study of the scruptures. Meditation is the continuous thinking of Brahman which is to be meditated upon. The complete negation of both by knowledge is the vision of truth – sadAcAra-14 of Adi SankarAcArya

    namah SivAya vishnurUpAya viShNave SivarUpiNe, MBh, vanaparva, 3.39.76

    Sanskrit Dict | MW Dict | Gita Super Site | Hindu Dharma

  3. #53
    Join Date
    June 2013
    Location
    Maharashtra
    Posts
    570
    Rep Power
    1125

    Arrow Re: Adi shankarAchArya's views on anya-devata worship

    Namaste, all of you.

    If Adi shankara really was of the view ' we should worship only vishnu' , then he wouldn't have praised lord Ganesha as a bramhan and a giver of moksh. His Ganesha pancharatnam is praising lord Ganesha beautifully. He was of the view 'all gods are manifestations of same bramh.' Adi shankara was a realised bramh. So he knew who is krishna or Ganesha much better than us. At the final state of mukti, we come to know that self is not different from God or world / god or world is not different from self. So worship of supreme gods as bramhan or worship of ishwara as self is certainly allowed according to shankara.


    The first shlok of Ganesha pancharatnam starts with this :

    1.1: (Salutations to Sri Vinayaka) Who Holds the Divine Joy in His Hand as Modaka (a sweetmeat) and Who Always strives to Accomplish the Liberation of His Devotees towards that Divine Joy,
    1.2: Who Holds the Digit of the Moon as His Ornament and with a Joyful Spirit Protects the World,
    1.3: Who is without any Master but is Himself the only Master for His Devotees, and Protects them by Destroying the (inner) Demons,
    1.4: To those who Surrender to Him, He Destroys the Inauspicious tendencies Quickly; I Salute Sri Vinayaka and surrender to Him.

    2.4: Who is the Great God; To His Refuge, Who is Superior than the Best , I Continually place myself in devotional surrender.

    5.2: Whose essential Form is Inconceivable and without any Limit, and which Cuts through the Obstacles of His Devotees,
    5.3: Who Continually Abides in the Cave of the Heart of the Yogis.


    Jai shri hari govinda narayana


  4. #54
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai, India
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,088
    Rep Power
    1128

    Re: Adi shankarAchArya's views on anya-devata worship

    I had announced that I was not going to post on this thread anymore, but....

    Quote Originally Posted by hinduism♥krishna View Post
    If Adi shankara really was of the view ' we should worship only vishnu' , then he wouldn't have praised lord Ganesha as a bramhan and a giver of moksh.
    And he did not. The stotras he supposedly wrote praising various deities are all of dubious authenticity. In his prasthantrayi bhashyas Shankaracharya refers only to Narayana as Brahman.

    Even though Shiva Purana and Skanda Purana identify the supreme being who humiliated the devas in kena upanishad as Shiva Shankara does not refer to this in his kena upanishad bhashya.

    Quote Originally Posted by hinduism♥krishna View Post
    He was of the view 'all gods are manifestations of same bramh.'
    No.See these quotes from his works-
    1.3.26. Also (beings) above them, (viz. men) (are qualified for the study and practice of the Veda), on account of the possibility (of it), according to Bâdarâyana. It has been said above that the passage about him who is of the size of a thumb has reference to the human heart, because men are entitled to study and act according to the sâstra. This gives us an occasion for the following discussion.--It is true that the sâstra entitles men, but, at the same time, there is no exclusive rule entitling men only to the knowledge of Brahman; the teacher, Bâdarâyana, rather thinks that the sâstra entitles those (classes of beings) also which are above men, viz. gods, and so on.--On what account?--On the account of possibility.--For in their cases also the different causes on which the qualification depends, such as viz. gods, and so on.--On what account?--On the account of possibility.--For in their cases also the different causes on which the qualification depends, such as having certain desires, and so on, may exist. In the first place, the gods also may have the desire of final release, caused by the reflection that all effects, objects, and powers are non-permanent. In the second place, they may be capable of it as their corporeality appears from mantras, arthavâdas, itihâsas, purânas, and ordinary experience. In the third place, there is no prohibition (excluding them like Sûdras). experience. In the third place, there is no prohibition (excluding them like Sûdras). Nor does, in the fourth place, the scriptural rule about the upanayana-ceremony annul their title; for that ceremony merely subserves the study of the Veda, and to the gods the Veda is manifest of itself (without study). That the gods, moreover, for the purpose of acquiring knowledge, undergo discipleship, and the like, appears from such scriptural passages as 'One hundred and one years Indra lived as a disciple with Pragâpati' (Kh. Up. VIII, ii, 3), and 'Bhrigu Vâruni went to his father Varuna, saying, "Sir, teach me Brahman"' (Taitt. Up. III, 1).-- And the reasons which have been given above against gods and rishis being entitled to perform religious works (such as sacrifices), viz. the circumstance of there being no other gods (to whom the gods could offer sacrifices), and of there being no other rishis (who could be invoked during the sacrifice), do not apply to the case of branches of whom the gods could offer sacrifices), and of there being no other rishis (who could be invoked during the sacrifice), do not apply to the case of branches of knowledge. For Indra and the other gods, when applying themselves to knowledge, have no acts to perform with a view to Indra, and so on; nor have Bhrigu and other rishis, in the same case, to do anything with the circumstance of their belonging to the same gotra as Bhrigu, &c. What, then, should stand in the way of the gods' and rishis' right to acquire knowledge?--Moreover, the passage about that which is of the size of a thumb remains equally valid, if the right of the gods, &c. is admitted; it has then only to be explained in each particular case by a reference to the particular size of the thumb (of the class of beings spoken of). admitted; it has then only to be explained in each particular case by a reference to the particular size of the thumb (of the class of beings spoken of)
    Kena Upanishad Bhashya-
    "the subsequent passages clearly show the folly of thinking that that Brahman, who is controller of all in every way even superior to all Devas, Lord over lords, not easily known, the cause of the victory of the Devas and of the defeat of the Asuras does not exist. Or (it is related) for eulogising the knowledge of Brahman. How? By showing that it was, indeed, by the knowledge of the Brahman that Agni, etc. attained pre-eminence among the Devas; and Indra specially more than the rest. Or, it shows how difficult it is to know Brahman, because even Agni, etc with all their great powers, and even Indra, lord of the Devas knew the Brahman only with considerable difficulty. It may be that the whole Upanishad to follow is intended to lay down an injunction (to know the Brahman) or the story may have been intended to show the fallacious nature of the notion of doer, etc., found in all living beings, by contrasting it with the knowledge of the Brahman - fallacious like the notion of the Devas that the victory was theirs. The Brahman already defined won a victory for the benefit of the Devas; i.e. the Brahman in a battle between the Devas and the Asuras defeated the Asuras, the enemies of the world and the violaters of the limitations imposed by the Lord and gave the benefit of the victory to the Devas for the preservation of the world. In this victory of Brahman, the Devas, Agni, etc, attained glory, and not knowing that the victory and glory belonged to the Paramatman, seated in their own Atman, the witness of all perceptions, Lord of the universe, omniscient, the dispenser of the fruits of all Karma, omnipotent, and desirous of securing the safety of the world, looked upon the victgory and the glory, as achieved by themselves - the Atman enclosed with the limitations of their own forms, Agni, etc; that the glory - their being Agni, Vayu, Indra and the like, resulting from the victory - was theirs and that neither the victory nor the glory belonged to the Lord, over all the Atman within them. So they cherished this false notion." them. So they cherished this false notion.
    Quote Originally Posted by hinduism♥krishna View Post
    Adi shankara was a realised bramh.
    According to you. Others may consider Ramanuja to be realized, or Meykandar,etc.
    It is precisely because of this that an apaurusheya shruti exists.
    namastE astu bhagavan vishveshvarAya mahAdevAya tryaMbakAya|
    tripurAntakAya trikAgnikAlAya kAlAgnirudrAya nIlakaNThAya mRtyuJNjayAya sarveshvarAya sadAshivAya shrIman mAhAdevAya ||

    Om shrImAtrE namah

    sarvam shrI umA-mahEshwara parabrahmArpaNamastu


    A Shaivite library
    http://www.scribd.com/HinduismLibrary

  5. #55
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai, India
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,088
    Rep Power
    1128

    Re: Adi shankarAchArya's views on anya-devata worship

    Quote Originally Posted by ShivaFan View Post

    Makes me wonder if even the one writ or commentary is 100% legit as well, I may do some of my own research.
    It is not just one work. There are 10 upanishad bhashyas, a gita bhashya and a bhashya on the brahma sutras that are almost unanimously accepted as authentic. The Vishnu Sahasranama Bhashya and some of the Prakarana Granthas are probably authentic too.

    Quote Originally Posted by ShivaFan View Post
    In one way, it has reawaken a relook, and dynamic in my personal path, of the valid reasons behind Advaita aspects of Saivism as I am a dualist, and searching out an Advaita framework that does not tend to try and divide Hindus.
    There is no such franework within traditional hinduism. Even Smartas only accept Vishnu, Shiva, Devi, Ganesha, Kartikeya and Surya as forms of Brahman. Within Shaivism, the farthest you can go is Appaya Dikshita, Srikanra and Abhinavagupta's position that Vishnu and Uma are the upadana and nimitta Shaktis of Shiva, and are thus have a relatiobship of simultaneous identity-cum-differenxe with Him.
    This is actually the principal probem with Hinduism today. Hindus look for a theology that fits their ore existing beleifs instead of trying to understand what the scriptures say.
    namastE astu bhagavan vishveshvarAya mahAdevAya tryaMbakAya|
    tripurAntakAya trikAgnikAlAya kAlAgnirudrAya nIlakaNThAya mRtyuJNjayAya sarveshvarAya sadAshivAya shrIman mAhAdevAya ||

    Om shrImAtrE namah

    sarvam shrI umA-mahEshwara parabrahmArpaNamastu


    A Shaivite library
    http://www.scribd.com/HinduismLibrary

  6. #56

    Re: Adi shankarAchArya's views on anya-devata worship

    This is actually the principal probem with Hinduism today. Hindus look for a theology that fits their ore existing beleifs instead of trying to understand what the scriptures say.
    +1....
    Philosoraptor

    "Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something." - Plato

  7. #57

    Re: Adi shankarAchArya's views on anya-devata worship

    Quote Originally Posted by Indiaspirituality Amrut View Post
    Commentary by Madhusudan Saraswati would be of interest.
    Amrut,

    I have Madhusudana Saraswati's commentary and he also takes a Vishnu-centric position on those verses, just as Adi shankara did.

    This only makes one wonder that what is described as advaita to most may not in fact be the actual doctrine propagated by these great scholars. Of course, no one should feel forced to change their beliefs. We're just having a discussion, not a war.
    Last edited by philosoraptor; 25 September 2013 at 02:57 PM.
    Philosoraptor

    "Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something." - Plato

  8. #58
    Join Date
    February 2012
    Posts
    1,525
    Rep Power
    2741

    Re: Adi shankarAchArya's views on anya-devata worship

    Namaste Omkara

    ShivaFan: searching out an Advaita framework that does not tend to try and divide Hindus
    Perhaps due to my English construct here, I am being misunderstood. All I am saying is, even though I am a dualist (dvaita), I am seeing that those sects which emphasize duality seem to often engage in these types of threads, pitting one Devata against another over wasteful jalpa instead of just praising their Lord. Fixations such as this on a single quote of some commentator (though renown) really takes the cake, it becomes almost laughable, and so I now wonder if I have made a mistake in sort of ignoring the Advaita aspects of the Saiva Siddhanta tradition in my zeal for devotion (which, devotion is not discounted in Advaita either, I am refering to dualists). Simply said, it seems among Avaitans that they are more kind, more respectful to all the Family within Hinduism, especially within a public forum (while reserving the right to be sectarian in some aspects among themselves), and this being said from someone as me who obviously has dualistic nature. Not all dvaitans are raw on the edges, especially those who love devotees as next to God, it's just some who are makes one reconsider Advaita as a house that has many respectful and tempered Hindus, level headed, not like those who have chips on their shoulders and walk around with "machine gun minds".

    Jai Ganapati.

    I am finished with this thread.

    Om Namah Sivaya

  9. #59

    Re: Adi shankarAchArya's views on anya-devata worship

    My observation is that people who like moral relativism and religious universalism tend to decry those who look for objective truth as having impure, sectarian motives.

    Such people will only be happy if we ban discussion of all potentially controversial topics and simply fawn over each other's so-called realizations all day long.
    Philosoraptor

    "Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something." - Plato

  10. #60
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,210
    Rep Power
    1364

    Re: Adi shankarAchArya's views on anya-devata worship

    Quote Originally Posted by philosoraptor View Post
    Amrut,

    I have Madhusudana Saraswati's commentary and he also takes a Vishnu-centric position on those verses, just as Adi shankara did.

    This only makes one wonder that what is described as advaita to most may not in fact be the actual doctrine propagated by these great scholars. Of course, no one should feel forced to change their beliefs. We're just having a discussion, not a war.
    Namaste,

    I know that you have Madhusudan Saraswati's commentary, probably by Swami Ghambhirananda. Also please check 9.26 and the last verse of chapter 9. Hence, without any prejudice, I just stated that it should be referred. Also sub-commentaries like that of Dhanpati and Neelkanth can be helpful i.e. can give more clarity. Neelkanth's commentary (available on Gita Super Site) does not describe specific names.

    Sure Advaita has undergone some changes. Swami Sacchidanandendra of Shringeri Math agrees too. Change is the nature of time. That it why great men incarnate from time to time to re-establish what is right or wrong. Nothing wrong in having discussion.

    All I was pointing out is that we should have proper reference, as trying to interpret from non-advaita POV would not be fair. It is natural for a vaishnav to instinctively think from his POV.

    I think that too much speculation and R & D would result in losing faith. It may also make one skeptical, as not all reading HDF as members or guests, are scholars and they do not have much information.

    At times, Adi Shankara may not give direct reference to some sort of teaching, but he gives hints or is portrayed by his life, like Shivalanada Lihiri, Saundarya Lahiri, or from Shankara Digvijay, etc. For proper methods of checking authenticity, I may open another thread.

    Please continue the discussion

    Pranams

    ---

    just for info

    The word "vada" itself is nowadays wrongly taken to mean stubbornly maintaining that one's view is right. As a matter of fact it truly means finding out the truth by weighing one's view against one's opponent's. It was in this manner that Sankara held debates with scholars like Mandanamisra and it was only after listening to the other man's point of view that he arrived at non-dualism as the ultimate Truth. Vada means an exchange of thoughts, not a refusal to see the other man's point of view. To maintain that one's view of a subject is the right one without taking into account the opinion of others is "jalpa", not vada. There is a third attitude. It is to have no point of view of one's own and being just contrary: it is called "vitanda".
    http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part13/chap8.htm
    Only God Is Truth, Everything Else Is Illusion - Ramakrishna
    Total Surrender of Ego to SELF is Real Bhakti - Ramana Maharshi

    Silence is the study of the scruptures. Meditation is the continuous thinking of Brahman which is to be meditated upon. The complete negation of both by knowledge is the vision of truth – sadAcAra-14 of Adi SankarAcArya

    namah SivAya vishnurUpAya viShNave SivarUpiNe, MBh, vanaparva, 3.39.76

    Sanskrit Dict | MW Dict | Gita Super Site | Hindu Dharma

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Swami Vivekananda
    By Viraja in forum I am a Hindu
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 03 August 2013, 10:33 PM
  2. Murti Puja is not idol worship
    By rkannan1 in forum Hot Topics
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 01 August 2013, 10:18 AM
  3. do different paths of self realization go towards absolute truth?
    By hinduism♥krishna in forum Hare Krishna (ISKCON)
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 07 July 2013, 12:50 AM
  4. Replies: 104
    Last Post: 29 January 2013, 08:38 AM
  5. What is metaphoric and literal?
    By Spiritualseeker in forum Scriptures
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 13 June 2009, 10:31 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
  •