Good sources for learning about Bhedabheda?

[Buddha Dharma]

I've decided to undertake learning about Indian thought more than I already know. Broadening my scope and knowledge beyond Buddhism, and the snippets I know about Jainism.

Bhedabheda seems as good a place to begin as any for learning. What are some of the basic premises of this school of thought, and where is good introductory material about them?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Bhedābheda Vedānta is a subschool of Vedānta, which teaches that the individual self (jīvātman) is both different and not different from the ultimate reality known as Brahman.
Bādarāyaṇa’s Brahma Sūtra (c. 4th century CE) may also have been written from a Bhedābheda Vedāntic viewpoint.
Bhedabheda - Wikipedia

Chaitanya's Acintya Bhedābheda Vedānta (Hare-Krishna) is an extension of the same.
Many attempt to reconcile the differences of Dvaita and Advaita.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

Thanks @Aupmanyav

The wiki article directed me to what seems to be a good work that discusses this and other topics: Unifying Hinduism - Wikipedia

 

[Buddha Dharma]

I find the differences between schools of Bhedabheda, and the debates about how Brahman could be one and many fascinating.

Believe it or not, this is not unlike debates between Buddhists that disagree about rather Buddha-nature is substantive, void, or non-existent. (Theravadans accept no such nature)

The schools like my own that hold to a real Buddha-nature have said things along similar lines. That the seeming sense of self is not entirely false. Tendai says the sense of having a self is both true and false, as is the sense of not having one.

Some of the Tendai teachings say as long as you live, don't fight against the self sense, for it is not entirely false or true.

 

[Shantanu]

I've decided to undertake learning about Indian thought more than I already know. Broadening my scope and knowledge beyond Buddhism, and the snippets I know about Jainism.

Bhedabheda seems as good a place to begin as any for learning. What are some of the basic premises of this school of thought, and where is good introductory material about them?

You do realise that you are asking to be taught the greatest of mysteries in Vedantic thought that can only be fully be realised through experiencing it from devotional practices?

 

[Buddha Dharma]

You do realise that you are asking to be taught the greatest of mysteries in Vedantic thought that can only be fully be realised through experiencing it from devotional practices?

I understand what you're getting at. I hope I didn't seem irreverent.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

Who knows? Maybe my learning more about Vedanta will lead me to embrace and practice it. I won't rule it out. I find some of the premises of Bhedabheda to be fascinating and worthy of consideration at this present time. I'm going to read and learn more about it.

 

[Shantanu]

I understand what you're getting at. I hope I didn't seem irreverent.

You were not irreverent. Polite questioning shows you are serious in your quest. The oneness and separateness of the Parmatman from the Jivatman requires to be tested to know that it is true.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

@Shantanu you will find what I'm about to say either somewhat presumptuous or creative.

The reason I'm interested to learn more about Bhedabheda (which I am now interested in learning more) is I think it provides some interesting points that not only offer one solution to the seeming problem of self and other in Vedanta schools. I find it provides some interesting points worthy of a Buddhist's consideration as well.

I like Buddhism and am very devoted to it's practice, but I admit that it's philosophy is minimalist and can seem lacking in areas. One of the things I find somewhat limiting about Buddhism is it's reluctance to say too much about the relation of the self-sense to Ultimate Reality. Since Mahayana affirms there is an Ultimate Reality in Buddha-nature.

I am finding that I really appreciate what Bhedabheda offers on this subject, because it doesn't attempt to sweep this seeming difference under the rug, as though it shouldn't at least be thought about.

I do not at this point know rather this investigation will lead me to embrace Vedanta, or it will lead to some new insight in my Buddhist practice- but I'm open to either. I am not approaching Vedanta just to draw on it's knowledge with no purpose to practice. That I assure you. I am considering that it may really have something authentic to offer.

I am not sure these considerations will lead me to give up Buddhism for something else- neither am I sure that must be where they inevitably lead.

This is the Hindu DIR though, so I don't want to be disrespectful and go into the aspects of Bhedabedha I see as not being far off from some Buddhist perspectives in Mahayana.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I wouldn't want you to leave your beliefs. I am happy that you know your dharma and are trying to follow it. Krishna said that was enough. There has always being exchange of views between Hinduism and Buddhism. Hindu dharma is not any different from the Noble Eight-fold Path. I agree to all the eight points. And Buddha is one of my two gurus, Sankara being the other.

 

[Jainarayan]

I like Buddhism and am very devoted to it's practice, but I admit that it's philosophy is minimalist and can seem lacking in areas. One of the things I find somewhat limiting about Buddhism is it's reluctance to say too much about the relation of the self-sense to Ultimate Reality. Since Mahayana affirms there is an Ultimate Reality in Buddha-nature.

That may be the very point of Buddhism. What I know of it is that practice is virtually the whole of it. Focusing on things that can't really be known are stumbling blocks to practice.

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was living among the Sakyans. Now there is a Sakyan town named Sakkara. There Ven. Ananda went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to the Blessed One, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, Ven. Ananda said to the Blessed One, “This is half of the holy life, lord: spiritual friendship (kalyāṇamittatā), spiritual companionship (kalyāṇasahāyatā), spiritual camaraderie (kalyāṇasampavaṅkatā).”

“Don’t say that, Ananda. Don’t say that. Spiritual friendship, spiritual companionship, spiritual camaraderie is actually the whole of the holy life. When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, and comrades, he can be expected to develop & pursue the noble eightfold path. [Samyutta Nikaya(adapted)]

 

[von bek]

One of the things I find somewhat limiting about Buddhism is it's reluctance to say too much about the relation of the self-sense to Ultimate Reality. Since Mahayana affirms there is an Ultimate Reality in Buddha-nature.

I want to make a quick response to this and then duck out as this is the Hindu DIR. In Theravada, we are taught that there are four Ultimate Realities by the Abhidhamma, three conditioned and one unconditioned. The unconditioned is Nibbana, while the three conditioned are matter (rupa), consciousness (citta), and mental factors (cetasika.)

The Abhidhamma in Practice

 

[Shantanu]

@Shantanu you will find what I'm about to say either somewhat presumptuous or creative.

The reason I'm interested to learn more about Bhedabheda (which I am now interested in learning more) is I think it provides some interesting points that not only offer one solution to the seeming problem of self and other in Vedanta schools. I find it provides some interesting points worthy of a Buddhist's consideration as well.

I like Buddhism and am very devoted to it's practice, but I admit that it's philosophy is minimalist and can seem lacking in areas. One of the things I find somewhat limiting about Buddhism is it's reluctance to say too much about the relation of the self-sense to Ultimate Reality. Since Mahayana affirms there is an Ultimate Reality in Buddha-nature.

I am finding that I really appreciate what Bhedabheda offers on this subject, because it doesn't attempt to sweep this seeming difference under the rug, as though it shouldn't at least be thought about.

I do not at this point know rather this investigation will lead me to embrace Vedanta, or it will lead to some new insight in my Buddhist practice- but I'm open to either. I am not approaching Vedanta just to draw on it's knowledge with no purpose to practice. That I assure you. I am considering that it may really have something authentic to offer.

I am not sure these considerations will lead me to give up Buddhism for something else- neither am I sure that must be where they inevitably lead.

This is the Hindu DIR though, so I don't want to be disrespectful and go into the aspects of Bhedabedha I see as not being far off from some Buddhist perspectives in Mahayana.

Buddhism is a very honourable philosophy and one can only admire Buddhists for their non-violence and the principles for the ameilioration of dukha. It is good that Buddha found a way of coping with stress and something he could teach the public but it is not all that there is to know. To know means you are in control of everything. If you want knowledge the path to it is through the process of saty-advaita which takes one to realise Bhedaabheda where it shows you God in all His glory. Would you rather you did not know that God exists and just live to ameliorate your dukha? It is up to the individual. So in Hinduism we have jnana yoga, the path to knowledge. It is tough to go through. It is not for the faint hearted who are easily satisfied with their lot. It is for those who are determined that their lives are going to be run according to truth alone as dharma. That is different from Buddha dharma. To live to truth as dharma requires devotion to truth. That devotion to truth takes you all over the place and is a perennial occupation which works simultaneously with swadhyaya or self examination. Shall I go on?

 

[Buddha Dharma]

@Shantanu I already believe 'God' exists, as I've said before in some pantheist threads. I believe Buddha-nature is actually synonymous with Brahman. I don't say that only because I want it to be so, but because like in Advaita- Mahayana Buddhism only sees Ultimate Reality as truly real.

That being said, I am not sure I'm ready to take on Vedantic practice. As @Aupmanyav said, there's always been exchange of ideas and concepts between Indian schools. I don't want to sound disrespectful, but I am not sure I'm ready to leave Buddhism.

That being said- I still think a Buddhist could consider some of Vedanta's philosophical points for insight. As I said- bearing in mind that I think Buddhism teaches Brahman. It's approach just happens to be very minimal. I am not sure it is more or less minimal than Advaita, but probably more.

This is the Hindu DIR. Am I rambling? lol

Nah, I'm just trying to find the best way I can word everything. I'm talking about some heavy ideas here.

I wouldn't want you to leave your beliefs.

I don't see myself as being prepared to do so, but if I did- you can bet I'd never put the Buddha aside. Just supposing hypothetically I became a Hindu of some sort, I'd be like yourself and maintain the Buddha as a teacher. I have cultivated genuine love and devotion for the Buddha through my practice. There's no way of turning one's back to that love and devotion.

The Abhidhamma in Practice

Thanks. Abhidhamma is something I only know a little about because as you probably know: Mahayanists don't fool with atomism very much. We're much more paradoxical than looking for material explanations from the get go. Not that I'm saying Abhidhamma has no merit. Just stating the position of Mahayana about it. I'm sure it does have merit.

Theravada has had a lot of time to develop as a tradition just as Mahayana has. I'm sure thought and inquiry have gone into Buddhism every bit as seriously from the Theravada side. I'm actually glad the two vehicles are drawing together more during this time.

@Shantanu I do have something else to say about my making this thread. I didn't know a lot about Hinduism before I came to this forum, but I've always respected it as Buddhism's sister religion- both traditions born out of India and it's richness.

Since I've learned more about Hinduism, you can say I'm a bit excited. I'm always like that with new knowledge. It's my personality. It's like a kid being given new toys.

 

[von bek]

Thanks. Abhidhamma is something I only know a little about because as you probably know: Mahayanists don't fool with atomism very much. We're much more paradoxical than looking for material explanations from the get go. Not that I'm saying Abhidhamma has no merit. Just stating the position of Mahayana about it. I'm sure it does have merit.

Theravada has had a lot of time to develop as a tradition just as Mahayana has. I'm sure thought and inquiry have gone into Buddhism every bit as seriously from the Theravada side. I'm actually glad the two vehicles are drawing together more during this time.

I began typing out a response to you, but I deleted it since it the Abhidhamma is off-topic to your OP. Perhaps an Abhidhamma thread might be interesting in the Buddhism DIR? My time online is usually not as frequent over the weekend, so if you start a thread please be patient about any response.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I want to make a quick response to this and then duck out as this is the Hindu DIR. In Theravada, we are taught that there are four Ultimate Realities by the Abhidhamma, three conditioned and one unconditioned. The unconditioned is Nibbana, while the three conditioned are matter (rupa), consciousness (citta), and mental factors (cetasika.)

Hey, Von Bek, we have never aimed our guns at you? It is nice when you are with us. Why are you so afraid of us?

 

[von bek]

Hey, Von Bek, we have never aimed our guns at you? It is nice when you are with us. Why are you so afraid of us?

It's not fear, I merely wish to respect y'all as friends.

 

[Aupmanyav]

@von bek , you very well know that our doors are always open for friends.

 

[Shantanu]

@Shantanu I already believe 'God' exists, as I've said before in some pantheist threads. I believe Buddha-nature is actually synonymous with Brahman. I don't say that only because I want it to be so, but because like in Advaita- Mahayana Buddhism only sees Ultimate Reality as truly real.

That being said, I am not sure I'm ready to take on Vedantic practice. As @Aupmanyav said, there's always been exchange of ideas and concepts between Indian schools. I don't want to sound disrespectful, but I am not sure I'm ready to leave Buddhism.

That being said- I still think a Buddhist could consider some of Vedanta's philosophical points for insight. As I said- bearing in mind that I think Buddhism teaches Brahman. It's approach just happens to be very minimal. I am not sure it is more or less minimal than Advaita, but probably more.

This is the Hindu DIR. Am I rambling? lol

Nah, I'm just trying to find the best way I can word everything. I'm talking about some heavy ideas here.



I don't see myself as being prepared to do so, but if I did- you can bet I'd never put the Buddha aside. Just supposing hypothetically I became a Hindu of some sort, I'd be like yourself and maintain the Buddha as a teacher. I have cultivated genuine love and devotion for the Buddha through my practice. There's no way of turning one's back to that love and devotion.



Thanks. Abhidhamma is something I only know a little about because as you probably know: Mahayanists don't fool with atomism very much. We're much more paradoxical than looking for material explanations from the get go. Not that I'm saying Abhidhamma has no merit. Just stating the position of Mahayana about it. I'm sure it does have merit.

Theravada has had a lot of time to develop as a tradition just as Mahayana has. I'm sure thought and inquiry have gone into Buddhism every bit as seriously from the Theravada side. I'm actually glad the two vehicles are drawing together more during this time.

@Shantanu I do have something else to say about my making this thread. I didn't know a lot about Hinduism before I came to this forum, but I've always respected it as Buddhism's sister religion- both traditions born out of India and it's richness.

Since I've learned more about Hinduism, you can say I'm a bit excited. I'm always like that with new knowledge. It's my personality. It's like a kid being given new toys.

I can only reiterate what @Aupmanyav has said: I would not want you to leave your beliefs. Be true to yourself and you will find your path to your destiny. Nothing can be forced. That is our Hinduism.

 

[Shantanu]

It's not fear, I merely wish to respect y'all as friends.

Sure we can remain friends even when we have different outlooks.