[Advaita-l] The 'Snake-and-ladder' game - The Spiritual path

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Thu, 9 Aug 2018, Murali k wrote:

> Very unfortunate.

Yes.  However it is sad to say supposedly "Hindu" groups have opened the 
path to this through their own unscrupulous behavior.  E.g. Sai Babas 
followers often replace the names of Devas with Sai in their bhajans.

>  My apologies if my post is off-topic.

Yes it is.   Unfortunately there have been some alarmingly stupid 
arguments in this thread that must be adressed.


On Thu, 9 Aug 2018, D.V.N.Sarma డి.వి.ఎన్.శర్మ via Advaita-l wr

> To ne fair the other side.
> 
https://thewire.in/communalism/in-tamil-nadu-non-hindu-carnatic-musicians-are$
>
> Bismilla Khan is the Asthana Vidwan of Kashi Viswanath Temple.
> Nadaswara vidvan Shiek China Moula was a great devoteeof Lord Ranganatha 
of
> Srirangam.
> Abraham Pandithar wrote a voluminous book on Carnatic music
> K.J.Jesudas is devotee of Guruvayur Appan.

These people turned to bhakti for individual reasons.  It was not the 
policy of any Hindu institution to entice them from their own religions 
so the situations are not comparable.


On Thu, 9 Aug 2018, D.V.N.Sarma డి.వి.ఎన్.శర్మ via Advaita-l wr

> That clearly means that people of that religion find resonance of the
> devotional sentiments expressed in our songs
> to their own mental state. After all the idea of devotion is the same in
> all religions. Only the names of gods differ.
>

Do you even understand the concept of devotion?  The bhakta poets created 
such moving songs because of there intense emotional bond to *specific* 
and in their minds vivid images of divinity.  We recently discussed that 
Shankaracharya had two compositions called shiva padAdikeShAnta stotra and 
shiva keShAdipadAnta stotra.  For a bhakta every minute detail of 
Bhagavans appearance (and mood, and pastimes etc.) is important.  There is 
no generic "devotional sentiment." Bhakti in shastras is expressed in 
terms of Shringara Rasa.  Think of the love of a man for his wife.  Would 
he accept another man having an affair with her shrugging his shoulders 
and saying "Well he is only finding resonance in the marital sentiment."


> let me relate an anecdote. Before Ramanaa Mahrshi a lady started singing 
a
> number of songs addressed to Ramana . Later on it was found that she was
> singing
> the songs of a devotee of Rama, replacing the name of Rama with that of
> Ramana.  When this was made known to Ramana, he said "she connot compose
> something on her own. But when everybody is singing she also wanted to
> sing. So she sang those songs replacing Rama with Ramana. Rama or Ramana,
> how does it matter."

Ideally bhakti will lead to development of the advaita bhava and at that 
point Rama will be Ramana and Ramana will be Rama.  Is that what happened 
here?  The Catholic Archdiocese that wanted to replace e.g. Shiva with 
Jesus; did they also take Christian hymns and replace Jesus with Shiva? 
If not the situations are not comparable.

On Thu, 9 Aug 2018, Kalyan via Advaita-l wrote:

> I often find posts in this list saying that advaita is non-sectarian and
> devata does not matter in advaita


I'm happy because you and D.V.N Sharma were recently pushing the notion 
that tradtion is a burden or  hindrance and the misconceptions you are 
making demonstrate why that idea is wrong thereby saving me the trouble of having 
to write up a refutation.

Nobody said Devata doesn't matter for the individual bhakta.  The Advaita 
teaching is you cannot use this personal preference to claim superiority 
for one Vedokta form of divinity over another because the Vedas themselves 
proclaim their oneness.

> and all devatas can be treated as Ishwara.

All those devatas can be treated as Ishwara in theory but there is also 
the practical question of *how* they are worshipped.  The Gita mentions 
the Sattvic, Rajasic, and Tamasic devatas and devotion. Tamasic bhakti is 
out of fear that the God will punish one who does not worship Him. Rajasic 
bhakti is out of expectation for some material gain.  Sattvic bhakti is 
done purely out of love.


> If devata does not matter, then Jesus and Allah should also be
> acceptable to advaitins, right? What is the harm in replacing the name
> of Rama or Krishna with that of Christ?

And in his bhashya Shankaracharya clearly explains these classes.  For an 
example of tamasic devatas, He gives Vinayakas.  Now Ganesha or Vinayaka 
is worshipped at the beginning of every dharmic vidhi so obviously this 
can't be a blanket condemnation can it?  It turns out it is a reference to 
one specific tantric cult then prevalent but now extinct which 
included a form of Ganesh worship which was done in an avedic way and is 
therefore wrong.

If that critique can be applied to "Hindu" deities, how much more so for 
aliens.  The God of the dualists (We can't just Abrahamic because this 
applies to certain Indian theisms too.) is a sadistic puppetmaster who 
creates some jivas only to torture them with eternal hell.  Such a monster 
is not worthy of upasana.  Furthermore the Abrahamic God has clearly 
expressed to His prophets that his followers are not to come to near Him 
let alone become one with Him.  Not an Ishwara an Advaitin could care for.


On Thu, 9 Aug 2018, Kalyan via Advaita-l wrote:

> Rig veda says - ekam sat viprah bahuda vadanti.

"Many names" does not imply "every name".  In fact why don't you look at 
the next line of the rk?  It tells you exactly who the bahuda are.

This btw is another one-liner the reformer types lift out of context 
because they don't have the help of tradition.


> Narayana sukta says - sa  brahma sa shiva etc.

Does that etc. include Jesus or Allah?  No it doesn't.

> In brahmasUtra bhAshya, Shankara says that Ishwara
> can take any form to bless his devotee.  Also, you can follow this link
> which argues that even a buffalo can be Ishwara -
> http://creative.sulekha.com/even-a-buffalo-can-be-saguna-brahman_626228_blog

Everything is Brahman.  So everything can can potentially be treated as 
Brahman.  I actually agree with you there.  But it does not imply that all 
forms of Ishwara are equally useful.  This buffalo for example, can you 
tell me if he ever said "Thou shall have no other buffalos before me."?


On Thu, 9 Aug 2018, Murali k via Advaita-l wrote:

> Ishwara  is very much unlike Allah and the ancient christian god of the
> old testament

Just one point here.  Don't fall for the apologists trick of claiming 
there is a difference between the God of the old testament and the God of 
the new testament.  Certainly in terms of Christian dogma there isn't. 
And it is anti-semitic.  Judaism, the religion that is actually based on 
the old testament is actually a lot less violent than Christianity.

On Thu, 9 Aug 2018, Kalyan via Advaita-l wrote:

> Indra has done so many bad deeds and yet the Rig veda treats him as 
> Ishwara.


The shastras exalt some of his deeds yes.  (But do they call Him Ishvara? 
I don't think so.)  They also teach that Indra (an office held by those 
who have performed 100 ashvamedhas) is repeatedly born again as a result 
of His deeds.  Can the Bible or the Koran judge their Gods that way?  No. 
Then the two examples are not comparable.


On Thu, 9 Aug 2018, Kalyan via Advaita-l wrote:

> Then, you have probably not read the Manusmriti, which enjoins pouring
> of molten lead into the ears of Shudras who hear vedas, cutting off the
> tongue of Shudras for chanting vedas, cutting shudra's body into pieces
> for mastering the vedas.

Once again an example of why a lack of tradition doesn't free the 
intellect but only makes it dumber.  This canard about the molten lead has 
been recycled by pretend-clever people for over a century now and it does 
not make you look very good to repeat it.

There must surely be some archeological evidence (an ear-shaped lead ingot 
for example) if this ever actually happened.  Surely literature would have 
recorded such a memorable event or atleast the oral traditions of the 
oppressed would have remembered it no?  But those things do not exist 
because regardless of what one line in a book of many lines might say, 
such punishments never actually happened.

>
> //What the scriptures say and what  people follow are two entirely
> different things. //
>
>
> The same twisted (sorry for using this word) defence can be given for
> Islam and Christianity.

Nope the difference is that right now you can go on the Internet and see 
people ranting about destroying mandirs and killing Hindus WITH A COPY OF 
THE KORAN IN THEIR HANDS.  You are trying to equate conceptual violence 
with actual proven incitement to physical violence.  That is 
intellectually dishonest in the extreme.

-- 
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>