bhakti yoga

[Stephanie Stean]

Hello Sadananda:

I have some questions.

> In B.G. KrinshNa acutally outlines as only two paths -
>
> lokesmin dwividhaa nishhTaa puraa proktaa maya
> anaghaa|
> jnaana yogena sankhyaanaam karma yogena yoginaam||

Can you tell me where exactly this sloka is?  Which part of the B.G.?


> moksha kaaraNa saamaagryaam bhatireva gariiyasi|
> swaswaaruupaanu sandhaanaam bhatirityabhijiiyate||
>
> Of all the paths for moksha, Bhakti is the supreme.
> That Bhakti is contemplation on ones ownself|

I do not have this text yet (VevekachuuDaamani) but I will soon.  Can you
explain the above idea a little more?  I want to make sure I understand.



> Bhakti with j~naana becomes j~naana yoga - it is the
> devotion towards the goal - hence Shankara defines in
> the said VevekachuuDaamani slokas
>
> this along with the previous sloka in the text -
>
> no yogena na sankhyena karamaNaa no na vidyayaa|
> brahmaatmaikatva bodhena mokshaH siddhyati na
> anyathaa||... essentailly the liberation cannot be
> gained without the understanding of the identity of
> oneself with the totality or limitlessness.

If the 2 paths ultimately lead to jnana or pramA (or 3 paths if some include
bhakti), then pramA is what we aspire to, right?  And if so, all aspire to
Knowledge, but disagreement occurs over marga or path/ method.  Correct?

Help me if I'm mistaken.  I understand it as:
No matter which path is chosen, either karma or jnana (without delusion),
bhakti is an inherent part.
And no matter what path is chosen, jnana is the ultimate aspiration.  It is
what is sought.

> Your teacher is following the Ramanuja doctrine.

My teacher does not follow any path or doctrine.  He seems to follow more
the literal translation of the text.  He is a German Sanskrit Scholar and
Linguist.

He also sees moksha as being like something like the Christian concept of
heaven, a state "out there" or "up there" as he described it.
I understand or see Moksha  (of the Gita) as being as described in part 11,
where Krishna gives Arjuna divine eyes to see his true form.  To me, that
was "a fleeting taste" of the pramA or jnana of moksha.  What are your
comments on this?

 >But even in Ramanuja's doctrine - what is recognized is
> that j~naana which he calls as 'bhakti ruupaka
> j~naana' - in otherwords the jnaana that arises as a
> result of bhakti.  but what is that j~naana, he
> difines it differently from the identity of the brahma
> with atman that advaita emphasizes.
>

Understood.  Thanks for the explanations.  This is very helpful.

Take care,
Stephanie