I've said a lot in this thread re non-Advaita, including just a few minutes ago, and consider myself a non-Advaitan who follows the path of bhakti yoga.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Non-Advaita approaches
- Thread starter Martin
- Start date
I've said a lot in this thread re non-Advaita, including just a few minutes ago, and consider myself a non-Advaitan who follows the path of bhakti yoga.
shivsomashekhar
Well-Known Member
I assume the interest would be in Hindu systems that have some level of philosophy associated with them. A quick list would be -
Vishishtadvaita - closely tied to Pancharatra Vaishnava theology.
Dvaita - similar to the above, with some key differences. Particularly known to be a closed system.
Achintya bedhabedha - well known in the West through ISKCON.
Shaiva Sidhanta - @Vinayaka is associated with this school and had deep knowledge of the system
Besides the above, there are relatively modern Kriya Yoga, Kundalini Yoga, Tantra systems that have active followers around the world. But besides, what is available on the internet, I have little knowledge of these systems.
Vishishtadvaita - closely tied to Pancharatra Vaishnava theology.
Dvaita - similar to the above, with some key differences. Particularly known to be a closed system.
Achintya bedhabedha - well known in the West through ISKCON.
Shaiva Sidhanta - @Vinayaka is associated with this school and had deep knowledge of the system
Besides the above, there are relatively modern Kriya Yoga, Kundalini Yoga, Tantra systems that have active followers around the world. But besides, what is available on the internet, I have little knowledge of these systems.
Oh no, Meercat. Not 'Vi****advaita' but 'Vishishta Advaita'. See there, no asterii.
Same thing happens with Parik****. So I use the macrons. Parikṣit.
I look it up in Wikipedia and copy. Especially for the two /sh/ sounds. Viśiṣṭādvaita. Who says cheaters never win? 
ajay0
Well-Known Member
My instinct is that Advaita relies on a lot of smoke and mirrors. Maybe it's just me.
It is very unfortunate and tragic that you said this, and I was expecting something of this sort.
Advaita is very simple to learn, and in the right minds can lead even to enlightenment which is very auspicious for the world, especially in these troubled times.
Unfortunately Advaita as a philosophy has been repeatedly put forward in a confusing way by people ignorant of the subject but feigning knowledge and 'enlightenment' to dupe gullibles. And this is one of the main reasons it has become quite confusing and hard to discern.
I have explained about this phenomenon in this post
Hindu website
My instinct is that Advaita relies on a lot of smoke and mirrors. Maybe it's just me.
Maybe. That would depend on how you perceive "me."
They're not off-topic when you express your own personal views by suggesting "Advaita relies on a lot of smoke and mirrors."
But yes, it's best not to continue this like of discourse in this thread. If you wish to debate personal views on Advaita, best to take it to Same Faith Debates.
I picked it up from the Wikipedia article. It has the Devanagari also. विशिष्टाद्वैत My Devanagari is rudimentary at best.
Vishishtadvaita - Wikipedia
I think Alan Watts is largely to blame for this. In one of his books or other writings he used the example that Brahman likes to play hide ‘n seek with itself. He made it sound like Brahman is a lonely child that makes up imaginary friends.
If I remember correctly something from Adi Shankara, he said the nature of Brahman is to create. That is the material world, which we are part of. We can’t see the reality of Brahman, so to us it’s illusion. But it’s no deliberate game of Brahman to fool or trick us. After all, we are Brahman. I‘m probably not explaining it clearly.
Saw a quote today, explains a lot from a bhakta's point of view:
"It is not the arguments of theologians that solve the problems of a questioning heart, but the cry of that heart to Me and the certainty that I have heard."
I think Alan Watts is largely to blame for this. In one of his books or other writings he used the example that Brahman likes to play hide ‘n seek with itself. He made it sound like Brahman is a lonely child that makes up imaginary friends.
If I remember correctly something from Adi Shankara, he said the nature of Brahman is to create. That is the material world, which we are part of. We can’t see the reality of Brahman, so to us it’s illusion. But it’s no deliberate game of Brahman to fool or trick us. After all, we are Brahman. I‘m probably not explaining it clearly.
Namaste, Jainarayan
What some of us are trying to say is not that Brahman is deliberately trying to trick or play a game with us, it's more like Brahman is deliberately playing a game with Itself by masquerading as "us."
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
What you have written in Devanagari is correct. Perhaps I am not correct here. Sorry for that.I picked it up from the Wikipedia article. It has the Devanagari also. विशिष्टाद्वैत My Devanagari is rudimentary at best.
Vishishtadvaita - Wikipedia
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
I have no doubts about Brahman. I do not accept 'Saguna'. With me it is crystal clear. We are Brahman. Nearly all, men or animals, are afflicted by the Corona virus of 'maya'. They think this has happened, this is happening and this will happen. Actually nothing ever happens. They as well as I am changeless. The 'Saguna' side has to explain its views.I‘m probably not explaining it clearly.
Last edited:
Aupji, I had to look up Vyavaharika although I've seen you use it many times and thought I got the gist of it by context. But I wanted to make sure. If I understand what I read correctly, it refers specifically to illusory existence, yes? Illusory being the key word. Saguna Brahman (Ishwara) is not an illusion as I wrote somewhere else, perhaps in this thread. The "vision" of Ishwara is not available to the senses or mind, etc., it is beyond those and therefore not in this realm of vyavaharika you speak of. Can you research what actually Shankara said and get back to us??
ajay0
Well-Known Member
I think Alan Watts is largely to blame for this. In one of his books or other writings he used the example that Brahman likes to play hide ‘n seek with itself. He made it sound like Brahman is a lonely child that makes up imaginary friends.
If I remember correctly something from Adi Shankara, he said the nature of Brahman is to create. That is the material world, which we are part of. We can’t see the reality of Brahman, so to us it’s illusion. But it’s no deliberate game of Brahman to fool or trick us. After all, we are Brahman. I‘m probably not explaining it clearly.
Alan Watts is a good teacher, and more into Zen. He had a correct intellectual understanding of Advaita and eastern philosophy and did not dishonestly distort it to assert any preexisting ideologies or personal theories which would have deluded people further.
I would say his contributions are on the positive side.
shivsomashekhar
Well-Known Member
The problem here is more fundamental.
Each person here has his or her own definition of Advaita - ranging from the traditional doctrine established by Shankara to all kinds of modern mixups. For an example of the latter, we have people here like who claim to be Advaitins and yet all their quotes in support of their position come from Kabir, Maa Anandmayi and unknown European names! Not a single quote from Sureshwara, Anandagiri or Madhusudhana Saraswati. In all probability, they are not even aware of these names. This is the damage caused to Advaita by loose, modern-age interpretations that have consumed this space. In short, Shankara's doctrine has been overlaid by various new age beliefs, hijacking the name Advaita - mostly for claims of legitimacy.
For those who are keen/serious abobut the original Shankara Advaita, please read books by Shankara (Upadesha Sahasri) or his direct disciples (Naishkarmya Sidhi, etc). If you want to discuss Advaita with people who are well versed with the subject, I recommend Advaita Vedanta . org. No Kabir, Brahma kumari or Maa Anandamayi quotes on that forum!
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Swamini, is that truth or another instance of 'maya'? But I will check.However, Shivsomashekhar is quite knowledgeable about it and has written something. Now I will go through his post.
Shiva, where are you from? I mean are you from South India? The normal South Indian spelling of your name will be 'Sivasomasekara' which I like. You do not spell your name like that, and many a times I stop when I am writing your name.
You write it in one way, I like it in some other way.
Well, Shiva outlines the problem admirably, but offers no solution.
Perhaps I should go back to Chapter X of "History of Indian Philosophy, Part I" by Surendranath DasGupta.
Last edited:
ajay0
Well-Known Member
This itself shows again that your knowledge of Advaita is pretty inadequate. Kabir, Anandamayi Ma themselves were enlightened and gave teachings showing Advaitan perception.
Reality is beyond speech and thought. Only that which can be expressed in words is being said. But what cannot be put into language is indeed That which IS. Anandamayi Ma
“The river and its waves are one surf: where is the difference between the river and its waves?
When the wave rises, it is the water; and when it falls, it is the same water again. Tell me, Sir, where is the distinction?
Because it has been named as wave, shall it no longer be considered as water?
Within the Supreme Brahman, the worlds are being told like beads:
Look upon that rosary with the eyes of wisdom.”
― Kabir,
You are claiming 'unknown europeans' know nothing of Advaita or nondualism and have nothing to offer here.
But are you aware that this is mainly a western forum and you are residing in a western country as well, and most who interact here are westerners.
Also to state thus smacks of dualistic thought that europeans cannot know anything of advaita because they are not Indian.
That is as dualistic as it comes.
Europeans and westerners taking advantage of the teachings of Ramana Maharshi , Shankaracharya and other masters had gained correct intellectual understanding and experiential understanding too of Brahman.
Robert Adams, Dr.Jean Klein, Francis Lucille, Jeff Foster, Eckhart Tolle,Franklin Merrell-Wolff , Burt Harding, Gary Weber are examples of the same. This is because of their excellent scholarship and work ethics.
Trust Indians like Virochana and pseudoscholars at the time of Shankaracharya (whom he rebuked) to keep on getting things incorrect inspite of upanishadic guidelines and case studies of frauds.
The same Brahman is there in the European and Indian, and we should seek articulate teachings from enlightened ones from whichever part of the globe to get our intellectual understanding correct at least, if not enlightenment.
Last edited:
Hi, Aupji. Over the years, again and again in my experiences with Ishwara--well, it sounds like so many but mostly the years are many
--I say again and again, for you and everyone, that one of the most profound mercies of the Lord, perhaps for struggling or bewildered souls the most merciful, is that God does not leave any doubt in His wake. Or Hers or Its, you get the idea. If there is the LEAST doubt in you, any doubt whatsoever about your spiritual experience, it wasn't genuine and extreme caution should be used in deciphering the experience. When the experience is Real, another person could come along and say, "Retract your statement or I'll pin you to a cross!" And you will say, "Well, then, fetch your hammer!"