[Advaita-l] Eternal Loka

Rajaram Venkataramani rajaramvenk at gmail.com
Thu Nov 1 17:19:22 CDT 2012

 Dear Sri Vidyasankar,

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 11:19 PM, Vidyasankar Sundaresan <
svidyasankar at hotmail.com> wrote:

> I'm not saying that bhakti is an emotion. I'm saying that what I've seen
> of your posts
> indicates that you are looking for emotional, not logical, answers,  in
> when it comes to
> mukti and bhakti.
> Three authorities you cite below, Madhusudana Sarasvati, Sringeri
> Mahasannidhanam
> and Kadalangudi Sastrigal, are stellar advaitins, from whose works and
> life accounts
> we can all learn. You are no doubt reading up on what each of them has had
> to say
> about bhakti and what role it plays in the life of a jnAnI or a mumukshu /
> jijnAsu. Yet,
> your questioning is about the very nature of mukti in advaita vedAnta and
> there is an
> undertone in all your posts, that what advaita says about mukti / nirguNa
> brahman /
> AtmajnAna is lacking in some way about something. That is what I was
> targeting in
> saying that you need to follow your heart and see where it leads.
> As for the bhAgavatam citations, I will let others who are more
> well-verses in that
> purANa to answer. I did guess that one of your probable sources was the
> verse
> 2.3.10. I'll simply say that this verse, as well as 3.29.13, should be
> read not
> separately, but in context, taking into account the verses that precede
> and follow
> each of them.

> RV: I will await explanation from scholars on this forum who are well
> versed in SBh after reading preceding and succeeding them though I am
> reasonably confident Sridhara and Madhusudana would have done a decent job!
> As always, I remain open to be corrected where I have misunderstood but
> only with reference to facts.

> I am really puzzled about what you see in verse 4.9.29. That verse is
> about dhruva
> feeling remorseful that he did NOT seek eternal mukti from the mukti-pati,
> but hadinstead directed his tapas towards perishable ends. The bhAgavatam
> is NOT telling us that dhruva spurned moksha so as to do "loving devotional
> service" to bhagavAn.
> Please read this verse in its full context as well.

RV: Mukti pateh tells us that the Lord is the controller of Mukti (even for
the smart ones who meditate on who am I). Please read the next verse
(4.9.30) Dhruva asserts that he had attained the sat padam in six
months that sanakadhis attained in many life times.  So, the Lord gave him
atma jnanam though he never asked him for it. Dhruva also asserts that his
state is superior to that of the Devas (4.9.32), which is possible only for
a jnani. This is also inferred from what the Lord Himself tells him in the
preceding verses (e.g. 4.9.25) that Dhruva, like sanyasis, will attain the
state of Vishnu after this life. He expresses his advaita jnanam in 4.9.33
where he says that the sadness in his heart with respect to enemy is due to
maya only because there is no second person. Most importantly, Maitreya
tells us in 4.9.36 that people like Dhruva who worship the dust at the feet
of Mukunda (the giver of liberation) are satisfied with what comes from
bhagavanugraham and other his "loving devotional service" dont ask for any
thing else.

Regarding Sri Subrahmanian's point that the jnanam of the jnani is
destroyed when the mind is. Does he then place bhakti, a mano vritti, at
the same level as jnanam? Then I agree. Otherwise, I will ask why bhakti is
given a lower status though both bhakti and jnanam are only products of the
mind? Secondly, if we destroy the mirror that reflected the sun, will we
say the sun is destroyed? If bhakti and jnanam are accepted as reflection
of Brahmananda on the mind, albeit through different processes, then the
destruction of the mind at death will be akin to destruction of only
the mirror.

Regarding Sri Ramesh's response on the impossibility of bhakti in abheda
state, please note that bhakti in abheda state is what Sridhara,
Madhusudana and the author of Sivanandalahari say - not me. So, if you
think bhakti iss not possible in abheda state, please ask them. Gopalaham
as a form of devotion is what Gopala Tapani Upanishad teaches - again not
me. Some Gopis become Gopala when others yearn in separation. You will do
well to study Bhakti Rasayana where Madhusudana explains why Bhakti is the
higest goal. And goes further to say that many of the bhakti rasas are
relished only after jivan mukti. Bhakti is not just a preparatory step not
is it  just a carry forward of previous habits in jivan muktas.

Regarding Sri Sunil's point comparison of the relationship between devotees
and the Lord to that between the kidnapped and the kidnapper in stockholm
syndrome, I can only say that the terms mukti-pati, mukunda etc. do not fit
his ingenious comparison.

Best regards,

> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 22:12:56 +0000
> From: rajaramvenk at gmail.com
> To: advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org

> > Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Eternal Loka
> >
>  > Dear Sri Vidyasankar,
> >
> > In SBh 1.5.12, Kadalangudi Sastrigal translates that atma jnanam does not
> > look well when devoid of devotion to the supreme lord. In SBh 3.29.13, it
> > is clearly said that a pure devotee does not want any kind of liberation
> > including ekatvam. A similar view is expressed in SBh 4.9.29. In SBh
> > 2.3.10, three kinds of devotes are talked about. One who is free from all
> > desires, one who has all desires and one who has desire for liberation.
> So,
> > it is not that there are only devotees with desires in the material world
> > and devotees who want to get out of it.There are akama bhaktas who
> perform
> > devotion only because of attraction to the lord. We may not have that
> kind
> > of devotion but cannot say that it does not exist.
> >
> > I don't think Bhakti needs bheda bhava as you say. Madhusudana says that
> > the highest devotee is one who knows I am He. Even in gaudiya school,
> > Baladeva talks about Gopalaham as a form of devotion. Sridhara, in his
> > introduction to BhavArthadIpikA talks about devotion between Siva and
> > Vishnu, who are one. Please read Prof. lance Nelson's thesis on Bhakti
> > Rasayana. He describes how Madhusudana not only considers Bhakti to be
> > paramapurushartha but also why it is eternal. Of course, he concludes
> that
> > Madhusudana was more a devotee than an advaitin and could not reconcile
> > Bhakti and Advaita. I think a deeper research in to Bhakti and Advaita is
> > required.
> >
> > In Yoga, Enlightenment and Perfection Sringeri Periyava answers his
> > disciple's question whether after realising the falsehood of all forms he
> > looked upon saradambal's form also like that. But he answered that he was
> > moved with tears - emotion there? :) I don't think Bhakti is an emotion
> as
> > you say. I tend to go with SBh which says Bhakti is a Manovrtti or
> > Madhusudana who says it is non-different from Bhagavan.
> >
>  _______________________________________________
> 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

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list