Questions about Adi Shankara

[Cosinuskurve]

(How) does Advaita Vedanta actually respond to achinta bheda abheda tattva? I think it's a logical fallacy it's saying A=B and A is not B at the same time. You can conclude anything and nothing from it.

I also stumbled across the term "mayavadi", reading statements that Shankara was one. I haven't found the term in any other literature. With the help of a Sanskrit diary I found out it means something like "fraud-thinker". I don't think Advaita Vedanta is a fraud. Do followers of Shankara actually call themselves "mayavadi" or is the term derogatory?

I also read that Shankara was an incarnation of Shiva. Can you believe in Shankara and still chant Hare Krishna, or are you required to believe in Shiva?

[Ananda]

Hello Cosinuskurve,

(How) does Advaita Vedanta actually respond to achinta bheda abheda tattva?

Achintya-Bheda-Abheda really only gained significant prominence after the time of Shankara, during the rise of Vaishnava theology. An early form of Bhedābheda was extant in Shankara's time, propounded by Bhaskara and Bhartrprapanca, which are refuted in his Brahma Sutra Bhasya. I'd recommend having a look in the Bhasya.

I also stumbled across the term "mayavadi", reading statements that Shankara was one. I haven't found the term in any other literature. With the help of a Sanskrit diary I found out it means something like "fraud-thinker". I don't think Advaita Vedanta is a fraud. Do followers of Shankara actually call themselves "mayavadi" or is the term derogatory?

Mayavadi is used as a derogatory term for Advaitins by the ISKCON (hare krishna) cult. They misrepresent the Advaita position by calling them 'voidists' (when, in fact, the doctrine of voidness was refuted by Shankara), and like to fancy Advaitins as atheists, heretics, and buddhists in disguise.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namast�

The notion of māyāvāda
Because this whole māyā notion has gotten too much attention , it is almost thought of as the theme of advaita vedānta. Those critical of advaita vedānta tend to call advaita vedānta āyāvāda. Hence advaitin-s ( those practicing this darśana ) are considered māyā-vādins.

The critic's notion for this name? - explaining (vāda) why one experiences diversity (māyā) is high on the discussion list of advaita vedānta, so they say . This māyā-vādin epithet is not considered complementary as it misses the overall theme of advaita vedānta, ekaṁ sva advitīyam.

praṇām

[Kismet]

I think it's a logical fallacy it's saying A=B and A is not B at the same time. You can conclude anything and nothing from it.

I think, after a certain point, in ascertaining the truths about reality you need a higher logic.

To me this seems patently clear, even if we can't quite "grasp" it intellectually. Our not understanding something does not mean it is wrong. It may even be the case that we know it intuitively.

The Achintya-Bheda-Abheda view makes the greatest amount of sense because of how it manages to pull together and cohere all the most profound observations about life and who exactly we are.

First, we are nothing, we are less than a reed or a straw laying in the road. We are "marginal energy", going whichever way we please according to some invisible dictate of freedom that invariably becomes concretized into its opposite.

On the other hand, we are verily the World, we are fullness, life, joy and power divine. In all the greatest, most affirming moments in our lives, even if only briefly, we get that taste of Self. And that is not the ego.

Humility entails we be like the reed. Love, however, also means we are the Self. For there can only be One to love truly.

[devotee]

(How) does Advaita Vedanta actually respond to achinta bheda abheda tattva? I think it's a logical fallacy it's saying A=B and A is not B at the same time. You can conclude anything and nothing from it.

I also stumbled across the term "mayavadi", reading statements that Shankara was one. I haven't found the term in any other literature. With the help of a Sanskrit diary I found out it means something like "fraud-thinker". I don't think Advaita Vedanta is a fraud. Do followers of Shankara actually call themselves "mayavadi" or is the term derogatory?

I also read that Shankara was an incarnation of Shiva. Can you believe in Shankara and still chant Hare Krishna, or are you required to believe in Shiva?

What is the meaning of "Achintya" ? ==> That which cannot be mentally grasped. That is why you cannot find an analogy which can exactly represent the Truth. So, A = B but still A Not = B ... actually it depends from which state you are looking at. From one state, A = B but seen from the other state, A Not = B.

Advaitins are not just Mayavadis & certainly are not demons. I am an Advaitin and I have no protruding teeth or horns grown on my head ! The Advaitins say that A = B in reality but due to illusion/Maya, A appears to be not equal to B. This is what they (the ISKCON) call Advaita as Mayavad !

OM

[Eastern Mind]

I am an Advaitin and I have no protruding teeth or horns grown on my head !

Vannakkam Devotee:

Only an undoctored accurate verifiable picture would prove this!

Aum Namasivaya

[R Gitananda]

Namaste

I do not chant that mantra but I did have some interest in Shankara's Advaita Vedanta. Therefore I purchased Shankara's Crest-Jewel of Discrimination translated by Swami Prabhavananda and Christopher Isherwood (although there is a different translation available to read online for free). I thought the book was very nice but what is presented seems somewhat different than my reading of the Bhagavad Gita. So I decided that the book is not for me.

My advice is this - if you are going to associate with members of a community then you will have to decide if it is important to you for that association to be harmonious. However if you are going to practice on your own then you need to decide for yourself what to believe. There is no one answer for many of these questions within the 'Hindu' community. Personally I don't accept any negative characterizations of Sri Shankara or Advaitins. However I do consider Advaita Vedanta a different path than my understanding of what was recommended to Arjuna.

My conclusion is that if you just want to follow the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita, it is a lifetime study in and of itself. So then you would do well to focus on that and leave Advaita to the Advaitins. I don't think Advaita Vedanta will help you to have a better understanding of the Bhagavad Gita.

Aum Shanti

(How) does Advaita Vedanta actually respond to achinta bheda abheda tattva? I think it's a logical fallacy it's saying A=B and A is not B at the same time. You can conclude anything and nothing from it.

I also stumbled across the term "mayavadi", reading statements that Shankara was one. I haven't found the term in any other literature. With the help of a Sanskrit diary I found out it means something like "fraud-thinker". I don't think Advaita Vedanta is a fraud. Do followers of Shankara actually call themselves "mayavadi" or is the term derogatory?

I also read that Shankara was an incarnation of Shiva. Can you believe in Shankara and still chant Hare Krishna, or are you required to believe in Shiva?

[wundermonk]

(How) does Advaita Vedanta actually respond to achinta bheda abheda tattva? I think it's a logical fallacy it's saying A=B and A is not B at the same time. You can conclude anything and nothing from it.

Remember that all words, thoughts, actions and even LOGIC are valid only in Vyavaharika and not Paramarthika. Advaita, like all other schools of thought need recourse to scriptures after a certain point.

That being said, the idea of Maya originated via the concept of Adhyasa [superposition]. When you see a snake in the darkness when it is actually a rope, which exactly is true?

Is the rope false because only the snake is cognized? Is the snake false even though it IS cognized?

It is certainly wrong to say A=B and A!=B at the same time within the same level of reality. Advaita doesnt say this. Advaita says that it is neither that A=B nor is it that A!=B. Maya is indeterminate and hence anirvachaniya.