[Advaita-l] Is Bhakthi necessary?

[srikanta at nie.ac.in]

The term Bhakthi can be interpreted in many ways.One is by Upasana with
the Upasaka(the worshipper) and the Upasya(the object worshipped).In
ancient times man wondered at the creation and the phenomena and started
wondering what was the source of it all.When he started thinking that he
is also part of the creation,that was the starting point of his
enamouring,which we may call Bhakthi.He could see the difference between
him and the rest of the creatures,he came to know that he had another
component to his thinking,which he called emotions.He was many times
overwhelmed by the source which he called the creator, the God,,he forgot
himself,and could discern that in his forgetting of his ego,there is
extreme peace.The modern man can go one step further.while listening to
melodious Thyagaraja keerthanas,the Bhakti pravaha of Annamacharya,the
offering of Meerabhai,Kabir bhajans, he is elevated to unknown dimensions
where there is no ego.This may be called Bhakthi.Shankara defines Bhakti
as "taila dharavath"followed with the same interpretation by 
Ramanuja,that it is like the incessant flowing down of oil.These unusual
moments are worthy to cherish.The tears that flow from the eyes washes
away all sins.In his interpretation of the line"sarvam Vasudevamiti sa
mahatma sudurlabah",and "Ananyascintayanto mam ye janah parypasate!
                 tesam nityabhiyuktanam yogakshemam vahamyam!!"
Shankara has brought the epitome of Bhakthi.The moment one is caught
unawares, that he is doing bhakthi,then the ego intervenes,and misery
envelopes the mind.
In the Mandukyopanishad karikas,Acharya Gaudapada states:
          "sukham avriyate nityam,dukham vivriyate sada!
           yasyakasyaca dharmasya grahena Bhagawanasau"!!(Alatashanti
prakarana)
           "The bliss is always veiled,the misery always unfolds,when this
Lord is grasped by this or that notion".

                                                   N.Srikanta.