Thanks Yajvan, for a beautiful thread ! You also summarised it well.
I enjoyed the discussion.
Thanks Yajvan, for a beautiful thread ! You also summarised it well.
I enjoyed the discussion.
"Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"
Namaste Yajvan,
It is me who cited a few verses and not Devotee, so, I find it appropriate that a few points be made. Though I cited one verse, the view I offered is harmonised as a whole in me.
The first point, oneness with Ishwara's function is not the goal of Advaita (or of Shiva lovers). But the oneness of the distinction less spirit is the truth and the goal of realisation (for me at least).
The second point, in prevalent Christian consciousness, the Father as the origin is forgotten, and Christ -- the logos, is elevated at the expense of the Father. They insist that Jesus is the only way/Jesus is the only son, as if before New Testament, there was no son of the father and there was no way available to Him. Similar is the case with prevalent Vaishnav consciousness (you may not agree and that will prove my point). Typical Vaishnava says, devotion to Krishna alone is devotion, as if there was no way for devotion and mukti, before Bhagavatam and Gita came into existence.
The first principle is Turya, indescribable -- neither a being nor a non-being. Where as, Lord Krishna, by his own admission, is sat and asat. There is a distinction between father and son, though son says "Me and my father in heaven are one" and Krishna says "-- one knows who knows me as unborn mahesvara--". In absolute terms this is true for all, but from sense perception, when we attribute the primary importance to the form (the logos), we are committing a mistake (which is natural). We are mixing up the form of the logos with the principle.
SRI BRAHMA SAMHITA Book 1 TEXT 8.
niyatih sa rama devi
tat-priya tad-vasam tada
tal-lingam bhagavan sambhur
jyoti-rupah sanatanah
ya yonih sapara saktih
kamo bijam mahad hareh
Devi is the desire, the seed, and the faculty of cognition of Hari – Mahat. And She, the Sakti – the regulator (Niyati) is under the control of joyti rupa eternal Bhagawan Shambhu. She is the potency of Mahat - Hareh.
Though the above is not shruti, in their own literature, typical Vaisnava forgets to see the word sanatana Bhagawan. They fail to see that Harih is Mahat -- the universal mind.
They also forget the sanatana Bhagawan and sanatana Purusha of the Vedas:
Shri Rudram 1.9
namo astu nIlagrIvAya sahasrAxAya mIDhushhe |
atho ye asya sattvAno .ahaM tebhyo .akaraM namaH ||
Shri Rudram 1.10
pramuJNcha dhanvanastvamubhayorArtniyorjyAm.h |
yAshcha te hasta ishhavaH parA tA bhagavo vapa ||
-------------------
In Vedanta, 'the indescribable', the un-nameble is named as shantam, shivam, achyutam, Turyam. Rudra is Ishwara as well as the principle of the first Purusha, in whom Hiranyagarbha (Vishnu) -- the world soul is born. This is so, since at the end of pralaya also, this Rudra will be the last to exist. Vishnu is always the principle of that which enters the world. And the movement that makes all manifestations (including Vishnu), is Soma. It is true that all along the Self, termed as shivoadvaita, is the Sat.
Kesava -- Krishna, is embodied Rudra, Vishnu, and BrahmA together, and is the same as the father in Paramarthika sense, yet He is sat and asat, whereas the father remains unborn, neither sat nor asat.
So logos through all ages have worshipped the root- the Father. In whatever form and for whatever purpose it manifests -- as Krishna, as Rama, as Vamadeva, as Guru, as Parvati, as Jesus, though "The word was with God and The word was God". The problem arises when Krishna is seen as a form and not as the Self.
When Self has to be known, it can be known as Self and not as another. When it has to be worshipped, it has to be worshipped as another.
Vaishnavas, by their own admission do not want to know the Self but they want to worship the Self in loving devotion. That is OK, except that Isha Upanishad teaches to combine the two processes.
What I have shared is not for the sake of argument. What I have have shared is my understanding. YMMV and all views are respected.
Regards.
Om Namah Shivaya
Last edited by atanu; 17 December 2007 at 09:44 AM.
That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious and the non-dual. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.
Hari Om
~~~~~
Namaste atanu,
pardon my mistake...
yes, I comprehend what you say. What is key is distinction-less, and to this I agree and was taught this accordingly.The first point, oneness with Ishwara's function is not the goal of Advaita (or of Shiva lovers). But the oneness of the distinction less spirit is the truth and the goal of realisation (for me at least).
Yes, I understand this POV.....Similar is the case with prevalent Vaishnav consciousness (you may not agree and that will prove my point). Typical Vaishnava says, devotion to Krishna alone is devotion, as if there was no way for devotion and mukti, before Bhagavatam and Gita came into existence.
The first principle is Turya, indescribable -- neither a being nor a non-being. Where as, Lord Krishna, by his own admission, is sat and asat.Yes, this part is interesting. If we look to Krsna as Universal SELF, it is a curious thing indeed not whating to know the SELF.There is a distinction between father and son, though son says "Me and my father in heaven are one" and Krishna says "-- one knows who knows me as unborn mahesvara--". In absolute terms this is true for all, but from sense perception, when we attribute the primary importance to the form (the logos), we are committing a mistake (which is natural). We are mixing up the form of the logos with the principle.
Vaishnavas, by their own admission do not want to know the Self but they want to worship the Self in loving devotion. That is OK, except that Isha Upanishad teaches to combine the two processes.
What I have shared is not for the sake of argument. What I have have shared is my understanding.
Hence, that was my position of one-ness not being accepted - that is, if the Vaishnavas accept this seamless, ubiquitious one-ness , then there is nothing to worship, there is no longer 2, a subject and object - the Lord and devotee.
thank you again for the post..
pranams,
Last edited by yajvan; 19 December 2007 at 11:09 PM.
यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
because you are identical with śiva
_
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks