[Advaita-l] Dhar is for a body (was Re: : Sankhya and Yoga can give Moksha?)

S Jayanarayanan sjayana at yahoo.com
Thu Jun 14 13:57:10 CDT 2012

Dharma is moral action for a body.
(Yoga is a "Higher Dharma" for the mind, but that's a different matter).
Then how is it that Dharma, which is moral or ethical action enjoined on the body, actually helps with Self-realization?
H.H. Chandrasekhara Bharati MahaswamigaL says (I think in His biography, am quoting the gist from memory here) that the Shastras enjoin action for which the results cannot be seen. One therefore performs the action with the belief that the result may be achieved in another life (different from the present one). This raises the conviction that the Self is NOT the (present) body!
In other words, by performing the rituals that are enjoined by the Vedas, one automatically obtains the conviction that the Self and the body are different!

 From: sriram <srirudra at vsnl.com>
To: S Jayanarayanan <sjayana at yahoo.com>; A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> 
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 4:32 AM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] : Sankhya and Yoga can give Moksha?
Dear Sri S.Jayanarayanan
If one behaves according to the dharma of their body will it not mean that there is identification of athma as a dhehi ?
I think better it is if said that dharma of their ashram.R.Krishnamoorthy.
----- Original Message ----- From: "S Jayanarayanan" <sjayana at yahoo.com>
To: "advaita" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 10:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] : Sankhya and Yoga can give Moksha?

Bhaskar YR bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com wrote:

>> Just as Rama showed an apparent ignorance of his real nature, so too did Sankara show an apparent ignorance of his real nature.
>> Sankara was playing the role of a king and gave his disciples an opportunity to show their devotion to their Guru,
>> in the same way as Brahma received an opportunity to show his devotion to Vishnu.

> rAmO vigrahavAn dharmaH, I dont think like shankara in DV, rAma too engaged himself in sva-varNAshrama nishiddha activities.

Dharma is specific for a given body. "Sankara" in the body of the king behaved perfectly according to the dharma of a king or ruler.

> IMHO, justification like this can be given on each & every questionable activity of the person whom we believe he is jnAni or our Acharya, is it not??

Not so. Just as Sankara in his original body behaved perfectly according to the rules of dharma of a Sannyasi, so too we would expect all Acharyas (and indeed everyone) according to the dharma of their body.

> Since we are the ardent follower of bhagavatpAda, he is our paramAchArya we some how have to defend his activities as accounted in
> dig-vijaya (DV). But an outsider, an objective reader would not let his readings swayed by the subjective attachment to the personality in question.

I cannot speak for subjective views of arbitrary people.

> For that matter, the author of DV does
not provide this type of justification for shankara-s 'sva-varNAshrama
viruddha activities'. Instead, shankara here defends his stand (with
regard to his parakAya pravesha) on various other grounds. And the
author does not give even a hint for us to believe that shankara here giving
an opportunity to his disciples to prove their guru bhAkti. OTOH,
he emphasizes, shankara in king's body, completely lost himself and was
enjoying 'nirargaLa brahmAnanda' from the sexual relations with antaHpura
stree-s!! He also says, shishya-s of shankara had to sing 8 different songs
to wake him up...And even after realizing his true svarUpa shankara in
DV does not say anything about apparent & temporary forgetfulness of
his real nature for the sake of his shishya-s. If shankara's forgetfulness
is for the noble cause, I wish the author of DV could have said it somewhere.

Again, that is not unlike the Valmiki Ramayana where Brahma had to "remind" Rama of his real nature being Vishnu. Valmiki Ramayana also does not say Rama's ignorance is apparent.

> Anyway, I heard this type of story even
in vishnu's varAha avatAra also. In this case nArada had taken the
trouble to take vishNu out of varAha, which was enjoying happily with wife
& kids in the gutter :-))

>> In fact, Sankara even says in the Dig-Vijayam, "I am equal to Maha-Vishnu".

> Yes, our bhagavatpAda, despite all these
DV exaggerations, is brahma, vishNu, maheshvara svarUpa for us. Hence
the chanting gururbrahma, gururvishNu gurudevO maheshwaraH..

> Kindly pardon me prabhuji, this is my last
post on this subject, whatever reply you give to this is final.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/

To unsubscribe or change your options:

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

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list