[Advaita-l] Namaskar, please .I really need help for some confused

[Ajit Krishnan]

namaste,

> ...  radha tantra  ...
> they don't teach the real meaning of the mantra ...
> in the hare krishna mantra, ha in hare refers to Siva and re to Parvathi :)


Out of curiosity, I searched and found this text in the "gaudiya
grantha mandira". Honestly, the meaning given is forced and unnatural.
This text also reads a visarga in the mantra and glosses it as "paraa
kuNDalinii".

sasneham,

   ajit





On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 5:35 AM, Rajaram Venkataramani
<rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:
> I have spent many years learning gaudiya vaishnavam and can try to help you
> on this. I also spent a lot of time discussing this with Sri Subrahmanian
> Sri Devanathan, Sri lalitha lalitha, Sri Vidyasankar and others to
> understand if this verse can even remotely refer to Sankara. I also did my
> own independent research.
>
> You can confidently say that this verse refers to a particular sect of pasu
> patha matha of nalusha, a Gujarati Brahmana and considered an incarnation
> of Lord Siva. He lived 2500 years ago and adopted the Buddhist tantrik
> practices and so was considered prachanna bauddha. He taught aikyam between
> jiva and Siva by transfer of all qualities,  not acceptable to vaidhikas
> because Siva is a particular manifestation of the Lord and you don't become
> Siva. He taught in the Brahmana form fitting he description Brahmana rupina
> in the verse. He asked the ascetics of his order to violate all regulations
> by doing things such as public ejaculation so that common people are
> shocked out of maya. He argued everything is an illusion and taught common
> people to relax varnashrama rules as did Buddha. Both these fit giving up
> all karma stated in the verse.
>
> Sankara was born in a Brahmana family but was a sannyasi. So he did not
> teach in Brahmana Rupa as said by the verse. The sannyasa that he taught is
> as per Vedic vidhi for paramahamsas. He differed from Buddha very clearly.
> He taught realization of Vishnu, the Inner Self not become one with Vishnu,
> the husband of Lakshmi or Siva, the husband of Parvathi. So, none of he
> descriptions in the verse fit him or Advaita tradition.
>
> How then did this verse come to be associated with Sankara? Sankara had
> demolished the pasupatha madam especially the negative variants such as
> kabalikas. So, this verse stood there without a reference. The followers of
> Ramanuja referred to Sankara's school as prachanna bauddham and mayavadam,
> probably taking cue fom this verse. But they did not use the verse
> explicitly probably because of the technical difficulties of using it to
> refer to Sankara. Madhwas also used the terms but not the verse. Chaitanya
> and the six gosvamis did not refer to Sankara by name. Jiva Gosvami made
> reference to this verse and made an indirect reference to Sankara with he
> words tadiya bhashye. By that time some of the followers of pasupatha had
> merged in to Advaita tradition retaining some of their ill-conceptions. And
> the oft repeated charge by vaishnavas of Advaitam (mayavadam prachanna
> bauddham) had become common place. So, he probably deemed it fit to comment
> as such. Also, Chaitanya's Bhakti movement had attracted Ramanandis, who
> brought in their opposition to Sankara, which influenced them. After almost
> 100 years, the followers of Chaitanya, who was a Sankaracharya initiated by
> Kesava Bharathi, who shaved his head and removed the thread giving up
> rights to karma, who taught Advaitin Sridhara Swami's commentary on
> Bhagavathan, crystallised their opposition to Sankara as you can see from
> Chaitanya Charitamrta. While a contemporary work Chaitanya Bhagavatha talks
> highly of Sarvabhauma, an advaitin scholar and bhakta, Chaitanya
> Charitamrta talks about his conversion from Advaitam to Gaudiya Vaishnavam!
> Even CC maintains reverence towards Sankara as Lord Siva though critical of
> His philosophy and bringing in injunctions to not read them. These
> injunctions were however not taken seriously Visvanath and Baladev, who
> quote Gaudapada, Sankara, Sridhara and Madhusudana though they adopt
> achintya bhedAbheda tattva of Sri Krishna Das Kaviraj. But he was mostly
> influenced by Ramanuja. The gaudiya tradition continued as a normal
> Vaidhika, Tantrika and Bhagavatha tradition until Bhaktisiddhanta gave it a
> Vaishnava colour by adopting the tridandi sannyasa and rejection of worship
> of Lord Siva as a demi-god. It is strange because Sri Krishna Chaitanya
> taught Bhagavatham in Kapilash, a Siva temple where even today great Siva
> bhaktas live in forests amongst wolves etc. performing mantropasana of
> Siva. Anyway, ISKCON, as a result, does not worship Sri Krishna Chitanya in
> his form as a Sankaracharya! There is a contemporary portrait I sent
> yesterday to this group.
>
> ISKCON devotees are very committed to Krishna Bhakti. They have Lord
> Krishna as their sole aim in their life. Influenced by Srila Prabhupada,
> who took the cue fom Christianity and British governance, they are
> extremely well organised. But they violate the rules of radha tantra  by
> teaching hare krishna mantra to everyone although it is perhaps okay
> because they don't teach the real meaning of the mantra but just say that
> these are names of god. Many of them will be shocked if they learnt that,
> in the hare krishna mantra, ha in hare refers to Siva and re to Parvathi :)
>
> On Sunday, March 18, 2012, ktvmb <ktvmb at qq.com> wrote:
>> Namasar
>>
>>  I need help for some confused, it really make me suffering,it is about
> the verse from Padma purana which is usually quoted by Vashnava schloar
> that talking about Advaita is a non-vedic but illusion princple. However,
> Shankarachaya is the sun of the spiritual sky , therefore, I really wants
> to know is this verse be distorted to translated?
>>  I really wants to know. I dont want to be confused on this any more.
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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