[Advaita-l] Fw: [USBrahmins] Re: Fw: [hc] Reinterpreting Dwaita versus Adwaita by sanjay rao

[Sunil Bhattacharjya]

Namaste,


In fact the criticism of Sankara's Advaita started actively right from the time of Vacaspati Mishra, who strongly differed from the views of 
Sankara in several places. Vacaspati Mishra did it articulately and that is why he is still revered in the Advaita circles. It could also be 
that Vacaspati Mishra had taken to heart the defeat of Mandana Mishra, who 
was from his own place and could even have been from the same house (ie. family / clan) of Mishras, albeit with a big time-interval in between 
them. Vacaspti Mishra most likely wanted to redeem the prestige of 
Mandana Mishra. I understand that people from the place where Mandana 
Mishra and Vacaspati mishra lived, till today believe that Sankara 

never defeated Mandana Mishra in debate. Yet Mandana Mishra's wife advised 
him to take Santasha from Sankara (probably she wanted to return to her 
divine abode. The criticism from the Visistadvaita group and then  from 
the Dvaita group started only later. People forget that Vacaspati was also  primogenitor of the Nyaya school.

Another reason (probably the main reason) for the people criticizing  Advaita 
is due to their not being able to develop the required mental attitude.  Advaita was taught from the times of Adi Sankara only through the guru 
parampara and the disciples learnt all the fine nuances of Advaita 
directly from their respective gurus. The gururs must have told their 
disciples that one has to have the right mental make-up prior to the learning the Advaita philosophy. It is probably 
here that the question of the adhikara comes. One who is attached to the temporal world will not be able to be a true advaitin. The name Ubhaya 
Bharati literally means  very well versed in both types of Vidya, i.e, the 
Temporal and the Spiritual. That is why she could ask Sankara some 
questions, which made Sankara uncomfortable and he had to ask for time 
to have that Vidya and she could also advise Mandana Mishra to get 
initiated to Sanyasha, because no Vidya is higher than the Adhyatma 
Vidya and Advaita is at the highest level of Adhyatma Vidya. Sankara and the earlier advaitins very well understood that the impermanent 
(anitya) world appears to be futile (Mithya) only to those who had 
voluntarily left the temporal world and started living the life of a 
recluse  They very well knew that what is permanent is the immutable 
Brahman. In getting initiated to Adavitic Sanyasha one has to perform the ritual of Atmashraddha, which includes symbolic ritual 
burning of the body through cremation of one's own effigy, wearing the 
fire of cremation  as clothes  (i.e., wearing fire-colored clothes)  as 
well as doing the required Japa for symbolic burning of the  past karma, so that there would be no rebirth. That means that  the Advaitic 
Sanyashi is already a dead person and never to be reborn. Thus a 
non-sanyashi would be able to appreciate Advaita only if he or she can 
develop a mental attitude of an advaitic sanyashi, which of course is 
possible, according to the verse 6.1 of the Bhagavad Gita. 

The
 people who do not understand Advaita is due their looking at the 
Temporal world as permanent. Probably Ramanujacharya did not know that 
he had earlier births where he was bodily (including 
mentally/intellectually) and situationally different from the 
Ramanujacharya. However Madhvacharya could have
 imaginedt that he had no earlier birth and that Lord Vayu created him 
for the first time and gave him an immortal identity as Madhvacharya, 
never to have another birth, even though he had to part with his 
physical body like any other mortals.

Regards,
Sunil KB



________________________________
 From: V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
To: Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com>; A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> 
Sent: Monday, October 1, 2012 12:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Fw: [USBrahmins] Re: Fw: [hc] Reinterpreting Dwaita versus Adwaita by sanjay rao
 




On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 11:45 PM, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com> wrote:

The Davitins and Visistadvaitins cannot realize that till the Videhamukti (ie. till
>the parting with the Vyavaharika existence) the Advaitins appreciate the
>
>following of the Vyavaharika  norms, as set out in the dharma/neeti-shastras
>
>while at the same time aspiring for the realization of the paramarthika Satya.
>
>Regards,
>Sunil KB
>

It is a pity that even very learned scholars of Dvaita have made statements such as 'when everything is same (for Advaitins) there is no difference (for them) between a spouse and a parent. '  One blogger (not Dvaitin) told me: 'you can eat excreta since for you both excreta and food are the same.'  Such is the dismal understanding of Advaita on their part.  There is a Sanskrit saying: 'abaddham paThitvA kuchodyam karoti' - a person grasps a subject erroneously and raises inappropriate questions.  

On another count I have it from the authority of top ranking Advaita scholars that the objections against Advaita from the other schools is solely because of a wrong understanding on their part of the Advaita shAstra.  If only one understands Advaita correctly he will have nothing to object against it.    


regards
subrahmanian.v


>
>