[Advaita-l] Fwd: Difference Between Sankya and Advaita!

[Sunil Bhattacharjya]

Dear friends,

Ishvara is the Para-Prakriti and is also the Apara- Brahman ans his vachaka is OM.  Prakriti is the Yoni of Ishvara (remember mama yoni Mahadbrahma) and Prakriti alone creates or pedagogically one can say that Prakriti is the instrument for creation or one  can also say that Prakriti creates to fuilfil the desire of Ishvara to be many. With Ishvara-pranidhana or Bhakti the vibhakta (divided or separated)  beings become avibhakata (undivided or be whole or united) with the Ishvara. Thus I maintain that Yoga mean the same thing as what yoga also means etymologically. So etymological meaning of Yoga is not wrong. Yoga can never mean viyoga, howevermuch some people may try to interpret. It may for that reason the that Nirukta is one of the Vedangas and one must know that first before reading the Vedic literature.


Regards,

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya



________________________________
From: Ravisankar Mayavaram <abhayambika at gmail.com>
To: Siva Senani Nori <sivasenani at yahoo.com>; A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2011 12:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Fwd: Difference Between Sankya and Advaita!

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Siva Senani Nori <sivasenani at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> Next when we say that Yoga is saankhya + ISvara, it needs to be emphasised that
> it does not amount to anything significant. The ISvara of Yoga is a special
> person, 'purusha-viSeshah' [2] (? like the arhat of Jains, whose
> samyakchaaritram is exactly the same as the yamas of Yogasutras), whose main
> drawback is that he is not the creator and that he cannot 'grant' moksha [3]. To
> that extent, this acceptance of Isvara does not have any conflict with Saankhya,
> especially given the context that Isvara is mainly proposed as an aalambana for
> yogaabhyaasana. From a meditation point of view, Isvara is as good as anything
> that one likes [4], like a statue, a book, a teacher or whatever. Thus the
> atheism of Saankhya and the theism of Yoga are not really different. I think
> this is the reason why not too much stress is placed on this difference between
> Saankhya and Yoga on this aspect.
>

You should also consider the sutra
ईश्वरप्रणिधानाद्वा॥ १ - २३॥

which is again repeated
समाधिसिद्धिरीश्वरप्रणिधानात्‌॥ २- ४५॥

In addition His role as Guru
स पूर्वेषाम्‌ अपि गुरुः कालेनानवच्छेदात्‌॥ १ -२६॥

And the fact that praNava is unique and constant symbol
तस्य वाचकः प्रणवः॥ १-  २७॥

You can tie this verses reverential to praNava in shruti such as Om
ityekAxaram brahma.

yoga darshaNa considers that liberation is attained easily by iishvara
praNidhaana.

One cannot take that yataabhimataddhyAnAdvaa by itself to say that hey
meditating on Ishvarya Rai is same as meditating on Ishvara, hence
Ishvara is not important. Even meditating on Ishvarya Rai will help to
integrate the scattered mind - patanjali is OK with a beginner
starting on anything that is easy for him/her to learn the principles
behind eka tattva abhyAsa.

My 2c.

Ravi

(Sunil Bhattacharjya in some other thread a while ago mentioned that
purpose of Yoga is to Unite. Sorry for posting this out of context
without giving the link. Actually the purpose of Yoga as in Yoga
Darshana is to *separate* puruSha from prakrti. It helps to achieve
this by integrating the scattered mind and eventually leading to
mano-nAsha)
_______________________________________________
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita

To unsubscribe or change your options:
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l

For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org