Why Advaita Vedanta first?

[Vinayaka]

I didn't want to derail Orbit's thread any more than it's already been derailed so am starting this new one on the topic of why Advaita Vedanta is often the first Hindu philosophy that non-Hindu curious westerners hit.

I agree with Shiv on it. I think its because its the one that's most readily available, although that's most likely changing. Many western non-dual teachers like Tolle, etc. use it, and disconnect it to Hinduism is so doing. For me, that's sad for several reasons.
1) It largely ignores the path, and how our sages came to those conclusions in the first place. In other words, bhakti and self-improvement. It just starts right out at the top, and has transformed the true advaitic realisations into an intellectual study.
2) It can ignore ethics altogether. Living ethically, according to dharma, is necessary to get there mystically.

I think study of the east is somehow more pallatable to newcomers if it's coming from westerners. Maybe it's language, maybe it's race, I don't know really, but it seems that if it is presented outside of Hinduism , its just more pallatable. There is also the factor of anti-Hindu programming so prevalent. "I want no part of it if it's of the devil."

I truly believe that the final conclusion is Advaita ... pure monism. The difference is all about how we get there.

 

[lovemuffin]

1) It largely ignores the path, and how our sages came to those conclusions in the first place. In other words, bhakti and self-improvement. It just starts right out at the top, and has transformed the true advaitic realisations into an intellectual study.
2) It can ignore ethics altogether. Living ethically, according to dharma, is necessary to get there mystically.

If I can butt in here as a westerner, I think there's some truth in this, and in what StarryNightShade said there. He referenced people being drawn from it away from the dualism of sin and separation from God, but it follows somewhat from there that they are questioning the idea of a need for bhakti, self-improvement, and dharma. As starry put it, "all you need to do is realize that you are, in essence, God". Anecdotally, via facebook groups I've seen a lot of former Christian westerners express this sort of view of advaita, motivated in part by a rejection of evangelical Christian idea of morality.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

This is even more true wrt., Vedanta. Vedanta is practically equated to Advaita ignoring other forms of Vedanta such as Vishishtadvaita and Dvaita.

Historically, Shankara's doctrine found phenomenal success, practically displacing Mimamsa. But more importantly, there were other bright lights in his line (Chitshuka, Harsha, et al.,) who kept the torch burning and therefore Advaita became the dominant Vedanta tradition. Subsequent scholars such as Ramanuja and Madhva found limited success as they were unable to find a strong following beyond their own local regions, unlike their predecessor Shankara who had found a strong following around the country.

Naturally, Advaita always had more literature and was better known. When European scholars entered the field, Advaita was seen as de facto Vedanta. Vivekananda practically presented Advaita as Hinduism to the West and then the Ramakrishna Mutt too, played a significant role in popularizing Advaita Vedanta in the West.

 

[Makaranda]

Perhaps also the influence of Swami Vivekananda..

 

[StarryNightshade]

I truly believe that the final conclusion is Advaita ... pure monism. The difference is all about how we get there.

I 100% agree with this and it was one of the biggest factors as to why I was drawn to Sri Vaishnavism.

Sri Vaishnavism is non-dualistic, but it still has the path of Bhakti (and eventual surrender) towards God as we make our way towards realization.

We all have a spark of God within. Most of us just don't know it yet.

 

[Kirran]

As well as what I said in the other thread, it's a nice straightforward philosophy to come to. It's simple: All is One. Done. Other Vedanta schools aren't quite as simple, like Dvaita and Vishishtadvaita.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

As well as what I said in the other thread, it's a nice straightforward philosophy to come to. It's simple: All is One. Done. Other Vedanta schools aren't quite as simple, like Dvaita and Vishishtadvaita.

Personally, I would say it may be harder to comprehend the Advaita concepts of Maya, Vyavaharika, etc. There was a discussion on this forum earlier about how reincarnation is hard to explain in Advaita. Ajativada (nothing is ever born) will sound crazy to a lot of people.

Other forms of Vedanta are relatively simpler because they support the concept of linear time, which makes things a lot more easier to explain - even if they require more faith.

 

[Aupmanyav]

.. they are questioning the idea of a need for bhakti, self-improvement, and dharma.

No one can question 'dharma' and be a Hindu. Like Kirran said, 'advaita' is a simple straight-forward philosophy. One can remove all mysticism from it, still it is true. It does not contravene science.

 

[Kirran]

Personally, I would say it may be harder to comprehend the Advaita concepts of Maya, Vyavaharika, etc. There was a discussion on this forum earlier about how reincarnation is hard to explain in Advaita. Ajativada (nothing is ever born) will sound crazy to a lot of people.

Other forms of Vedanta are relatively simpler because they support the concept of linear time, which makes things a lot more easier to explain - even if they require more faith.

I think people can come to Advaita without knowing much of that stuff though.

And to be honest, most problems in understanding it can ultimately be solved by the obsessive repetition of 'All is One'

 

[Orbit]

I'll give this a more complete answer than I did in the other thread. I'm an ex-christian who as an atheist practices meditation. In reading the books of Ken Wilber on meditation, I was drawn to the concept of nonduality, and to the stages of consciousness that he evidently drew from Advaita Vedanta.

I think the comment about it being an easy path from atheism to Vedanta because of the lack of a personal god is spot on. I was attracted to the idea of consciousness as God, and to the idea that we are all God (or at least manifestations of God). The reason I came to it from Western sources was simply because that was what was available to me. As soon as I figured out where they were getting their ideas, I wanted to know more about the source.

 

[Vinayaka]

No one can question 'dharma' and be a Hindu. Like Kirran said, 'advaita' is a simple straight-forward philosophy. One can remove all mysticism from it, still it is true. It does not contravene science.

And that's just it. Like yoga, it's totally distanced from Hinduism. You can ask a western non-dual teacher that question straight up ... "This sounds pretty Hindu to me. Is it?"
and more often than not, he'll say, "Absolutely not!" Of course we Hindus know better.

I think there is a subconscious leftover from Christian days ... "Thou shalt not worship false idols" ... Much of that may be repressed, but it comes out in behaviour. Many western Advaitins wouldn't dare enter a Hindu temple ... for this reason and perhaps another, although I hesitate to say it ... subconscious repressed racism.

 

[Kirran]

Many western Advaitins wouldn't dare enter a Hindu temple ... for this reason and perhaps another, although I hesitate to say it ... subconscious repressed racism.

I'll be honest, that feels like quite a jump.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

And that's just it. Like yoga, it's totally distanced from Hinduism. You can ask a western non-dual teacher that question straight up ... "This sounds pretty Hindu to me. Is it?"
and more often than not, he'll say, "Absolutely not!" Of course we Hindus know better.

I think there is a subconscious leftover from Christian days ... "Thou shalt not worship false idols" ... Much of that may be repressed, but it comes out in behaviour. Many western Advaitins wouldn't dare enter a Hindu temple ... for this reason and perhaps another, although I hesitate to say it ... subconscious repressed racism.

I have seen that too. Also, many Western Hindus (and some Indian Hindus too) are caught up in the "idol worship is to be looked down upon" idea. They are most particular about distancing their own Murthi worship from idol worship, inventing a new name for it (icon worship or something similar).

They are only kidding themselves. I have absolutely no trouble with Murthi = idol because I understand that the taboo comes from Christianity/slam and has nothing to do with Hindu beliefs. The last thing one should do is view one's own Hindu beliefs from a Christian perspective - regardless of previous conditioning.

 

[Poeticus]

I'll be honest, that feels like quite a jump.

Not really. He's been a Hindu for over 40 years. He knows what he's talking about. Plus, back-preaching is so annoying.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I think the comment about it being an easy path from atheism to Vedanta because of the lack of a personal god is spot on. I was attracted to the idea of consciousness as God, and to the idea that we are all God (or at least manifestations of God). The reason I came to it from Western sources was simply because that was what was available to me. As soon as I figured out where they were getting their ideas, I wanted to know more about the source.

That is your take on 'advaita'. I am a hard-boiled atheist. I do not need any God, and 'advaita' does not compel me to have one.

But then, I have no quarell with Gods. And Vinayaka has brought a good point in the discussion. The underlying Christian ideas about worship of idols.

 

[Kirran]

Not really. He's been a Hindu for over 40 years. He knows what he's talking about. Plus, back-preaching is so annoying.

I'm not questioning Vinayaka's status as a Hindu, or saying that he's talking about stuff he doesn't know about. I have nothing but respect for Vinayaka, who has been immensely helpful to me.

I just don't really think that newcomers to Advaita with Western origins staying away from temples is necessarily due to racism, and I'd like some expansion on the reasoning behind this conclusion.

I didn't really understand the back-preaching comment.

 

[George-ananda]

Well, for us westerners most of us do not come upon eastern thought until our adult years. Advaita Vedanta is the cream of the Vedas. Without seeing the end result why would we want to start a journey which to us is filled with all kind of things we can not even pronounce.

So once we see the cream we realize there is something to this tradition we need to take seriously. Then we involve ourselves in the yogas and sadhanas because we understand where these things are taking us.

We don't come from a place where we place our faith in the hands of a guru from a young age.

 

[Poeticus]

I'm not questioning Vinayaka's status as a Hindu, or saying that he's talking about stuff he doesn't know about. I have nothing but respect for Vinayaka, who has been immensely helpful to me.

I just don't really think that newcomers to Advaita with Western origins staying away from temples is necessarily due to racism, and I'd like some expansion on the reasoning behind this conclusion.

I didn't really understand the back-preaching comment.

Not necessarily due to racism, yes. He does state "perhaps another", however. V-dada's a White Hindu who converted 40-45 years ago (keep in mind, most of the Hindu posters on RF are non-Indian except a few). Dude's practically ancient. I think he's been alive for over 500 years. He's just saying things as per his experience. Regarding back-preaching, I mean it in the sense "You are doing your religion incorrectly, it should be done this way.". I, personally, have encountered that. And it's rather tiring.

Advaita Vedanta is the cream of the Vedas.

You don't mind if I don't see it that way, right?

 

[shivsomashekhar]

The other thing about widespread Advaita is it has become "loose" enough to accommodate just about any belief. Different people who consider themselves to be following Advaita have different views and many of these views are in contrast with one another.

 

[Orbit]

I personally would love to visit a Hindu temple. I really don't understand the racism comment.