ADVAITA-L Digest - devotion vs. knowledge

[Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian]

Michael Cohen <MC1 at AOL.COM> writes:

Greetings,

> If I may, a general question addressed to the forum:
>
> When seeking to locate authority concerning the precepts of advaita, to whom
> should appeal ultimately be directed? If we seek to understand the
> relationship between jnana and bhakti, it seems scriptural sources are the
> resort of choice. If we seek interpretation of the scriptures relating to
> advaita, is not Samkara the voice accepted as most authoritative by virtue of
> sampradaya or the succession of teaching lineage?

shrii shaMkara's tradition is not the only accepted tradition in advaita. Even
they make this quite clear. Some advanced souls like ramaNa have had their guru
as shiva himself. The shankara maThas recognize and acknowledge the validity of
this. I know that the maTaadhipathis of both the Puri and Sringeri mutts had a
very high regard for ramaNa and recognized him as a self-realized guru. In fact
H.H Shankaracharya of Puri himself once had some of his doubts on vedanta
cleared by ramaNa.

shaMkara is definitely the foremost advaitin and even ramaNa has said so. But
gauDapaada has also pointed out that what is accepted by _both_ scripture and
reasoning are alone correct, since shruti in some places, talks about creation
etc for the novices, whereas by reasoning we can deduce that creation has
neither "reality" nor "un-reality".

> If this line of reasoning is accepted, then surely quoting Ramakrishna or
> Ramana, brilliant as they may be, has to given a subordinate reference behind
> the Upanishads and Samkara otherwise, it seems to me, we run the risk of
> sectarianism and sacrifice of the philosophic integrity of advaita (a charge
> frequently leveled by scholars against "neo-vedantists").

Not really, since the master (gauDapaada) himself says "the jnani alone
interprets the scripture without fear" and as long as the person is
"self-realized" there cannot be any contradiction between their teachings and
that of the upanishads.

In general yes, it's better to stick to reasoning+upanishads+works accepted by
the shaMkara maTas. If one places his faith on a "guru" he had better be sure
that he is competent. Since I am not in a position to judge anyone, I stick to
the reasoning+scripture advised by gauDapaada and also the Srigeri mutt to
which we belong. This ofcourse, does not mean I have dis-regard for the other
mutts or gurus.

As far as the charges go, I am not sure whether they have any validity. After
all advaita serves as a tool for realization and is itself a vyavahaarika
satya. Becoming too attached to it as a "system" would be shaastra vaasana
(attachment to scriptures and analysing them), which is what I am probably
doing right now :-).

Ramakrishnan.
--
Two monks were arguing about a flag. One said, "The flag is moving." The other
said, "The wind is moving." The sixth patriarch happened to be passing by. He
told them, "Not the wind, not the flag; mind is moving." - The Gateless Gate