Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 84

Thread: Adi shankara Posts - Jalpa Thread 2

  1. #41
    Join Date
    June 2013
    Location
    Maharashtra
    Posts
    570
    Rep Power
    1125

    Red Face Re: Adi shankara Posts - Jalpa Thread 2

    Namaste,

    No doubt, adi shankara was a smartian. He was an ideal vedanti. He didn't say only vishnu is bramhan.

    If you had asked him who is bramh, then he would have replied with a silent smile " Ekam Sat Vipra Bahudha Vadanti


    Last edited by hinduism♥krishna; 30 September 2013 at 02:45 AM.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    January 2007
    Location
    duhkhalayam asasvatam
    Posts
    1,450
    Rep Power
    92

    Re: Ganapathi pooja in Vaishnavism

    Pranam

    First I would like to thank Satay for being patience with us, I am sorry to have caused him extra work needlessly, unfortunately I find my self unable to refrain my self when Devas get based about as if we have a right to do it in our own territory, how is that presenting Hinduism in positive light?

    This will also gives me an opportunity to pose a question which I was meaning to do anyway, once I gather my thoughts, that will follow.


    Quote Originally Posted by bhagavatafan;

    Putting this together, Adi Shankara's original matham cannot have taken Rudra for Highest Lord.

    This is highly contrived position to take, adding two and two and coming up with five. I would be interested if he had said so in so many words otherwise it is all speculation.

    Being born in a Shiva tradition it is highly likely he was initiated in shiva dharma. He is for ever seen with tilak of three horizontal lines, one would think, if he was only a Vishnu devotee at least one of his math out of the four established on Vishnu kshetra, his followers would have adopted Vishnu style tilaks but no, to date all four Shankracharya follows the same tradition.
    Besides other work on Shiva one off that is Vedasar shiva stava says it all really.

    For an acharya who established adwaita it is hard to believe he would go against sruti vakya, "ekam sat vipra"he also does not deny Vayu in his commentary on shanti mantra From Taittiriya Upanishad:

    "Om Sham No Mitra Sham Varunah Sham No Bhavatvaryamaa,
    Sham Na Indro Brihaspatih Sham No Vishnururukramah,
    Namo Brahmane Namaste Vaayo Tvameva Pratyaksham,
    Brahmaasi Tvaameva Pratyaksham Brahma Vadishyaami,
    Rtam Vadishyaami Satyam Vadishyaami,
    Tanmaamavatu Tadvaktaaramavatu Avatu Maam Avatu Vaktaaram,
    Om Shantih Shantih Shantih"

    Jai Shree Krishna
    Rig Veda list only 33 devas, they are all propitiated, worthy off our worship, all other names of gods are derivative from this 33 originals,
    Bhagvat Gita; Shree Krishna says Chapter 3.11 devan bhavayatanena te deva bhavayantu vah parasparam bhavayantah sreyah param avapsyatha Chapter 17.4 yajante sattvika devan yaksa-raksamsi rajasah pretan bhuta-ganams canye yajante tamasa janah
    The world disappears in him. He is the peaceful, the good, the one without a second.

  3. #43

    Re: Adi shankara Posts - Jalpa Thread 2

    If Omkara,'s, bhagavtafan's, and Sri Vaishnava's remarks on this thread are considered "off topic" on the subject of Adi-shankara's views, then I guess the jalpa forum is the place for me to be. So far as I can see, they are the only ones who are presenting coherent, evidence-based arguments.
    Philosoraptor

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

  4. Re: Adi shankara Posts - Jalpa Thread 2

    This is highly contrived position to take, adding two and two and coming up with five. I would be interested if he had said so in so many words otherwise it is all speculation.

    Being born in a Shiva tradition it is highly likely he was initiated in shiva dharma. He is for ever seen with tilak of three horizontal lines, one would think, if he was only a Vishnu devotee at least one of his math out of the four established on Vishnu kshetra, his followers would have adopted Vishnu style tilaks but no, to date all four Shankracharya follows the same tradition.



    It is all highly contrived and speculative to quote from authentic works, but what we see in picture frames printed in 20th/21st centuries and google images is authentic. Wonderful.

    Hagiography contained in the later-than-14thC Shankara Vijayam stories and institutions without a critically-examined history before 14thC bear no weight as historical evidence in front of voluminous literary evidence with a clear history based on authentic works that have a tradition of sub-commentaries, sub-sub-commentaries and so on and collected from manuscripts from a wide spectrum of sources.

    There is clear evidence from Padmapada's work Panchapadika that Shankara did not wear Shaivite symbols. This has been pointed out by Vidwan Tiruvisanallur Ramasubba Shastri in his work Anubhashya Gambhirya, as follows:

    In Panchapadika,
    Sri Padmapada salutes his guru by composing the following sloka at the beginning of the work (Mangala sloka):

    namAmy-abhogi-parivArasampadaM nirasta-bhUtiM anumArddha-vigrahaM
    anugraM unmRdita-kAla-lA~ncanaM vinA-vinAyakaM apUrva-sha^nkaraM

    The above sanskrit verse is a double entendre. Each word/sentence can be interpreted in two ways:

    apUrva shaMkaraM = Salutations to the new Shankara who is different from the commonly known Shankara (Shiva)

    namAmy abhogi-parivAra sampadaM = He is surrounded by sages (abogi-s) / he is not surrounded by snakes (bhogi-s)

    nirasta bhUtiM = He has got no material wealth (bhUti) -- (as he is a sannyasi) / he is devoid of ashes (bhUti)

    anumArdha vigrahaM = He has logic (anumA) as his other half / he does not have Uma as his other half

    anugraM = He is not fierce

    unmRdita kAla lA~ncanaM = He has surpassed the mark of time (ie., samsara) / he is devoid of the black-mark (on the throat)

    vinA vinAyakaM = He is not accompanied by vinAyaka

    The commentaries "Ruju Vivarana" (by Vishnu Bhatta) and "Tattva Dipana" (by Akhandananda Muni) conform to this interpretation. Both are 13th century works. The former says "nirasta bhUtiM - bhasma-rahitam, nirasta aishvaryaM vA", and the latter says "sa bhasmAnulipta gAtraH, ayaM tu nirasta aishvaryavAn".

    For an acharya who established adwaita it is hard to believe he would go against sruti vakya, "ekam sat vipra"he also does not deny Vayu in his commentary on shanti mantra From Taittiriya Upanishad:
    Another lazy explanation that ignores Shankara's or other ancient/medieval advaitins' commentaries.

    See Brahma Sutra Bhashyam of Shankara, First Adhyaya, Second Pada, 17th Sutra:

    Selfhood cannot be ascribed to the sun, on account of his externality (parâgrûpatva). Immortality, etc. also cannot be predicated of him, as Scripture speaks of his origin and his dissolution. For the (so-called) deathlessness of the gods only means their (comparatively) long existence. And their lordly power also is based on the highest Lord and does not naturally belong to them; as the mantra declares, 'From terror of it (Brahman) the wind blows, from terror the sun rises; from terror of it Agni and Indra, yea, Death runs as the fifth.''

    See Madhusudana Sarasvati's explanation on "ekam sat viprAH bahudhA vadanti":

    Sri Madhusudana Sarasvati, in hismagnum-opus "gUDhArthadIpika" (a glorious, independent commentary to the Bhagavad Gita) explains here (15.15) that even though the Vedas contain hymns to Indra and other devas, it is still only Bhagavan vAsudeva alone is to be known from the Vedas as He is the in-dwelling supersoul of all: "vedaishca sarvaih-indrAdi-devatA-prakAshaih-api ahameva vedyaH, sarvAtmatvAt". Sri Sarasvati then explains that Vedic passages such as --
    "They call Agni as Indra, Mitra, and Varuna; they also say that He is the divine Garutman of beautiful wings. The sages speak of Him, who is one, in many ways; they call Him Agni, Yama, mAtarishvan."
    (Atharva Veda, 9.10.28)

    and "... for He is all the devas" (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, 1.4.6) are to be understood in that way.

    Anandagiri, who wrote a Tika on Shankara's Gita Bhashyam says one should renounce "devatAntara bhajanaM" and take refuge under Lord Vasudeva alone, who is the Self of all.
    Last edited by bhagavatafan; 01 October 2013 at 07:25 PM.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai, India
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,088
    Rep Power
    1128

    Re: Ganapathi pooja in Vaishnavism

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganeshprasad View Post
    he also does not deny Vayu in his commentary on shanti mantra From Taittiriya Upanishad
    So your position is that Vayu is Brahman despite Kena Upanishad saying he is not?
    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. #46
    Join Date
    January 2007
    Location
    duhkhalayam asasvatam
    Posts
    1,450
    Rep Power
    92

    Re: Adi shankara Posts - Jalpa Thread 2

    Pranam

    Quote Originally Posted by bhagavatafan View Post
    [COLOR=Black][FONT=Arial]

    ---, but what we see in picture frames printed in 20th/21st centuries and google images is authentic. Wonderful.

    ---. This has been pointed out by Vidwan Tiruvisanallur Ramasubba Shastri in his work Anubhashya Gambhirya, as follows:
    On one hand we have an authentic work of a Vaishnava! On the other an age old tradition as set up by Adi Shankra himself not just one but all four, in different corner of Bharat. If all four are in unison I really see no need look at picture frames of 20/21 century as alleged.


    I see Eakam sat vipra for what it is, do not need to contrive any other meaning out of it. All names as well as forms belong to Eko

    Don't need to put 2+2 and coming up with 5.

    Jai Shree Krishna
    Rig Veda list only 33 devas, they are all propitiated, worthy off our worship, all other names of gods are derivative from this 33 originals,
    Bhagvat Gita; Shree Krishna says Chapter 3.11 devan bhavayatanena te deva bhavayantu vah parasparam bhavayantah sreyah param avapsyatha Chapter 17.4 yajante sattvika devan yaksa-raksamsi rajasah pretan bhuta-ganams canye yajante tamasa janah
    The world disappears in him. He is the peaceful, the good, the one without a second.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    January 2007
    Location
    duhkhalayam asasvatam
    Posts
    1,450
    Rep Power
    92

    Re: Ganapathi pooja in Vaishnavism

    Pranam

    Quote Originally Posted by Omkara View Post
    So your position is that Vayu is Brahman despite Kena Upanishad saying he is not?
    No it is not my claim, this is what Shanti mantra is saying.

    Jai Shree Krishna
    Rig Veda list only 33 devas, they are all propitiated, worthy off our worship, all other names of gods are derivative from this 33 originals,
    Bhagvat Gita; Shree Krishna says Chapter 3.11 devan bhavayatanena te deva bhavayantu vah parasparam bhavayantah sreyah param avapsyatha Chapter 17.4 yajante sattvika devan yaksa-raksamsi rajasah pretan bhuta-ganams canye yajante tamasa janah
    The world disappears in him. He is the peaceful, the good, the one without a second.

  8. Re: Ganapathi pooja in Vaishnavism

    GP,

    I did not expect you to agree with me. I would be a fool to expect otherwise.

    The sole purpose of my posts was to inform others who are interested.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai, India
    Age
    29
    Posts
    1,088
    Rep Power
    1128

    Re: Ganapathi pooja in Vaishnavism

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganeshprasad View Post
    Pranam



    No it is not my claim, this is what Shanti mantra is saying.

    Jai Shree Krishna
    So your position is that the Shanti mantra contradicts Kena Upanishad? That shruti contradicts itself?
    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

  10. #50
    Join Date
    January 2007
    Location
    duhkhalayam asasvatam
    Posts
    1,450
    Rep Power
    92

    Re: Ganapathi pooja in Vaishnavism

    Pranam

    Quote Originally Posted by Omkara View Post
    So your position is that the Shanti mantra contradicts Kena Upanishad? That shruti contradicts itself?
    Did say that, did I even mention Kena UP!

    "For an acharya who established adwaita it is hard to believe he would go against sruti vakya, "ekam sat vipra"he also does not deny Vayu in his commentary on shanti mantra From Taittiriya Upanishad:"

    Jai Shree Krishna
    Rig Veda list only 33 devas, they are all propitiated, worthy off our worship, all other names of gods are derivative from this 33 originals,
    Bhagvat Gita; Shree Krishna says Chapter 3.11 devan bhavayatanena te deva bhavayantu vah parasparam bhavayantah sreyah param avapsyatha Chapter 17.4 yajante sattvika devan yaksa-raksamsi rajasah pretan bhuta-ganams canye yajante tamasa janah
    The world disappears in him. He is the peaceful, the good, the one without a second.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 48
    Last Post: 12 October 2011, 11:22 PM
  2. New posts refersh rate
    By Onkara in forum Feedback
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 21 June 2011, 04:44 PM
  3. Recommendation: jalpa
    By yajvan in forum Feedback
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 13 September 2010, 10:06 AM
  4. Tattvas
    By grames in forum Advaita
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 14 October 2009, 07:55 AM
  5. Some questions on HK
    By Yogkriya in forum Hare Krishna (ISKCON)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06 August 2007, 02:03 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
  •