[Advaita-l] Eternal Loka

[Vidyasankar Sundaresan]

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, 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.

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 had
instead 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.
 
Best regards,
Vidyasankar
 

> 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.
>