[Advaita-l] Comments of an ISCKON follower

[Sunil Bhattacharjya]

Dear Shyamji,

Lord Krishna is the Apara-Brahman and he Himself is the Para-Brahman in the Nrguna state. The Lord Krishna advised that surrendering to Him is the easier way than to contemplate on the Nirguna Brahman. He is Akshara and he is  He all the time. Therefore one should not distinguish between the Apara-Brahman and the Para-Brahman. For him the creation is not different from him. That is why a Jani-bhakta like Sridharaswami or Madhusoodana Saraswati can realize the oneness with the Lord. With Bhakti alone without the Jnana one cannot have that direct Mukti. Of course the option of Krama-Mukti does remain available to the bhakta who has yet to attain the Jnana..

As regards Sayujya mukti let us consider the statement in the Ramayana, which you must  be aware is considered equal to Veda (as Ramayana itself declares). Lord Ram offered Sayujya Mukti to Hanuman and on Sayujya mukti one does not have any individual body left. How can then sayujya mukti be anything other than complete dissolution of individuality. Othyer types of Mukti are not real mukti as it is known that even after attaining sarupya Mukti ravana had to take birth albeit it happened due to acurse. That shows that in all  forms of Mukti other than the SayujyaMukti one is vulnerable to taking birth. With all respects to Sri CandraSekhara BhAratI SvAminaH has anybody ever asked him for such clarification?

Regards,

Sunil KB



________________________________
 From: Shyam Subramanian <shyamsub at gmail.com>
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> 
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 4:37 PM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Comments of an ISCKON follower
 
Dear Rajaram,

On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 11:47 PM, Rajaram Venkataramani <
rajaramvenk at gmail.com> wrote:

> Sridhara Swami was an advaitin but his view of Advaita is different from
> the views of many contemporary  advaitins. For example, his view is Ishwara
> is that He is absolute. He considered advaita siddhi to be different from
> sayujya following Bhagavatam, which says that a devotee does not accept any
> of the five kinds of liberation including sayujyam and attains the very
> state or Vishnu. As you can see from Sri Sadananda's post, contemporary
> advaitins equate sayujyam with advaita siddhi.
>
>
The commentary on the vivekacUDAmaNi (verse 2) by Sri candraSekhara bhAratI
svAminaH mentions that
"sAlokya-sAmIpya-sArUpya-sAyujya" cannot be considered be truly mukti. The
commentary is in
http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/texts/VC_bhashya_chandrasekhara_bharati.pdf.
An english translation
of the same is in
http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/series/viveka/vivekachudamani_top.htm

Regards,
Shyam
_______________________________________________
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