Can Advaita philosophy and Vaishnava views be "merged"? Is there such a school within vaishnavism that accepts/involves the advaita views? Or are they (Vaishnava and advaita views) two completely, separated views/ ways / teachings?
Can Advaita philosophy and Vaishnava views be "merged"? Is there such a school within vaishnavism that accepts/involves the advaita views? Or are they (Vaishnava and advaita views) two completely, separated views/ ways / teachings?
u hav already asked this question right?
on the outset we can say yes,why not,but if we try to study or understand the vedanta more and more they are different.it's very important to stick to any one view,because the goals of these two schools are different.and also there are many sub groups in vaishnavism.just praying lord narayana is not vaishnavism as many advaitins also do that.the views of advaita is very different from vaishnavism.
Sarva DharmAAn Parityajya
Hi,
Thanks for your answer.
Yeah, I asked it earlier - and have got some other useful answers as well.
I tried to delete this thread and leave the other one only, but I am unable to. Maybe one moderatot will remove your answer to the other thread and delete this one...
Thank you for your answer, too.
Elizabeth
The 'merging' or combining of Advaita and Vaishnavism is not only a possibility but was a reality that was seen as the Bhakti movement spread to Northern India during the late medieval period
Last edited by Jogesh; 28 June 2010 at 03:34 PM.
Sridhar Svamin the famous commentator of Bhagawat Purana was the perfect example of an Advaitin who had strong Vaishnava leanings...
I am glad you brought this up because while at least currently I have been called to/attracted to Krishna/Vishnu/Vaishnavism, when I read the differences between Dvaita and Advaita philosophies, Advaita is closer to what I have always believed spiritually. Hmm....
Before the muslim destruction, the kashmir valley was the hot beg of religious evolutions and breakthroughs. Along with the more publisized buddhism and shaivism, vaishnavism was also very popular in kashmir and was strictly a monist philosophy. This I was reading in the introduction to manthanabhairavatantra. I don't know any kashmiri monist vaishnava text or tradition ever survived - you may want to research a bit. However one must be clear that strict monism of tantras is not same as shankara advaita vedanta.
The agamic vaishnavism which forms the backbone of the practice of most of the orthodox vaishnavas generally preaches dvaita-advaita in line with shaiva agamas from which they are influenced. All the agamas following dvaita-advaita and tantras following para-advaita were developed in kashmir ... though both shaiva and vaishnava agamas now survive as living traditions only in the south.
It is not surprizing that agamas which dealt with practicalities of religious practice would preach dvaita-advaita, where the god is both transient and imminent in creation. Jiva is forever connected to the God, but doesn't become identical with God after moksha (i.e we don't become God after moksha, which would be a very difficult concept to base one's worship on for a devotee). Instead we become essentially his nature - yet not him. "Sameness" instead of "Oneness" as somebody put it.
However hindu societies who practiced agamas also found it necessary to prove their vedic-ness and developed all these darshanas based on vedanta. Brahmins could not think of living outside vedic dictum.
But agamic religion including vaishnava do not need to cling to any of the vedantic theories ... agamas are themselves too rich in philosophical depth and understanding, and discusses matters of consciousness in much more depth & clarity than the vague poetic estacy of vedanta.
Yet the brahmans of this land could not bear to be called avaidik - so they took up both. For me all of vedic, vedantic and agamic religions are precious as testiments of spiritual evolution and also a history of faith in this land. Also vedic and agamic religions are complimentary to a large extent with different focus. But I follow a evolutionary view of religion, for those who can't bear the thought of vedas being anything else than the one and only source of all religion, and one and only proof of god (which it is clearly not), need to subverse others to one. In the process we have cooked up many theories which are far less original and profound and which now stand as neither vedic nor vedantic or agamic...but something we would want each of these to be.
The medieval darshana movement (advaita, vishistadvaita,dvaita,shuddhadvaita,achinta-bheda-abheda, blah blah mumbo jumbo), the bhakti movements are all examples of such efforts.
I have discarded them and decieded to understand religion as a human invension and God as an aspect of humanity, and study the human discoveries made about consciousness in vedas, vedanta and tantra ... without the need to cook up one true religion. But I am ok to be called a stupid fool and a radical.
What is Here, is Elsewhere. What is not Here, is Nowhere.
It is not me but the philosophy of dvaitAdvaita.
If it gives you some comfort, many others have come to the same conclusion, mainly in the academic. If you read the agamas and tantras, it is very clear (unless one has a seriously impaired brain or is dogmatically blind) that they have a very distinct & unique theology and practices which have little if nothing to do with the srauta and the smarta religions.
It does not mean that they are independent, developed independently completely uninfluenced by each other. That would be absurd. But the tenants and practices are unique enough to make these separate religions within the hindu cultural complex.
Unlike the buddha, sikhs and to an extent jains who have opted out to be out of the hindu cultural complex...others have stayed in the same religio-cultural complex.
What is Here, is Elsewhere. What is not Here, is Nowhere.
There is one text I have read about, the Paramarthasara of Adishesha. This was written in the introduction of the Paramarthasara of Abhinavagupta translated by Deba Brata SenSharma:
The Paramarthasara, the Essence of the Supreme Truth,
is a work of 105 verses written in the Arya metre. It is an
adaptation of an earlier Vaisnavite text with the same title by
Adisesa, who is also known as Anantanatha or Adhara. This
earlier text of the Paramarthasara by Adisesa contains 85
verses also in Arya metre. It was published by T. Ganapati
Sastri with the commentary called Vivarana by
Raghavananda, as volume 12 in the Anantashayana Sanskrit
Series in 1911.
This earlier Paramarthasara by Adisesa is considered to be
a Vaisnavite text because the first verse is an adoration to
Visnu and the text teaches a single unified reality which it
calls Vasudeva or Visnu. The final verse declares that the main
purpose of the text is to present the essence of
the Vedanta philosophy of the Upanisads, but in spite of
this declaration of its aim it does not follow Sankaracharya's
monistic philosophy. Instead, it expounds ideas from classical
Sankhya, such as the concepts of purusa and prakrti.
Abhinavagupta has completely transformed this earlier
text into a Shaivite text by retaining some verses unchanged,
making alterations to others, and adding additional
verses. He has enlarged the text from 85 to 105 verses.
Yogaraja, commenting on the final verse, observes that:
Abhinavagupta, the great follower of the supreme Lord,
Paramasiva, reproduced the description of the supreme truth,
given in the past by Lord Sesa, by enlarging and
refashioning the text to conform with the monistic
spiritual experiences of the Agamic teachings.
A comparative study of the two texts shows striking and
numerous similarities and exact correspondences, confirming
that the present text of the Paramarthasara of Abhinavagupta is
an adaptation of the older text by Adiéesa.
It is available at this online store with the description:
http://www.wisdom-books.com/ProductDetail.asp?PID=11461
The Paramarthasara, or Epitome of the Highest Truth, is perhaps the earliest work on Advaita Vedanta in existence. Attributed to Adi Sesa, the primeval serpent, or at least to his incarnation Patanjali, it gives in a mere 85 verses, employing ancient Samkhya terminology, a succinct statement of the highest truths taught in non-dual Vedanta. Its teachings have many parallels to those found in Gaudapada's famous Mandukya-karika. This edition includes the original Sanskrit text.
Added to this edition is the later Kashmir Saiva work of the same name, written by Abhinavagupta, which is based on Adi Sesa's earlier work.
Last edited by Sahasranama; 20 February 2012 at 09:36 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks