If there is a strong advaitist think, it cant be a vaishnava (vishishtadvaita & dvaita) scripture . However it can be an advaitist scripture with vaishnava (vishishtadvaita & dvaita) parts. This is just common sense.
Advaita accepts vishishtadvaita & dvaita as steps.
vishishtadvaita accepts...
Namaste incarnations of ananda!
Anandagiri is one of the great commentators on Shankaras comments (i.e. sub-comments). I was looking for these online and also in books to buy, but hardly any success.
Do anyone know where to find them? First of all I would like to get his Bagavad Gita...
Sorry for not participating in the actual discussion, will just give a hint I found useful.
Sathya Sai Baba says that:
"The word Bhakthi might not be used, as such, in the Samhithas, but is not the word "Sraddha" found?
Sraddhayaagnih Samidhyathe Sraddhaahooyathe havih
Sraddhaam bhagasya...
I was curious how the concept of satan would be explained in hinduism. So how to start? Well I dont have to invent the wheel again, so I google searched Krishnananda's site (site:swami-krishnananda.org Satan) to see if he had something to say on he matter and indeed he had. It turned out...
shivsomashekhar... I have again and again put the quotes infront of you, the latest was several quotes by Shankara...
but you simply refuse to see it and run your own new age agenda.
Since this is so I see no further use to discuss this topic with you.
Do we need the intellect to know the Self? Doesnt look like it to me...
Shankara Gita comment 2.18:
…the Self is self-evident…
…what is called the 'self' does not remain unknown to anyone…
By way of merely negating superimposition of qualities that do not belong to the Self, it attains...
This simply means it not an object.
This simply means I am.
But the interesting thing is, why did you ignore my post about Sivananda/Krishnananda? Which guru do you follow? Do you follow your own intellectual analysis of Shankara/Gaudapada? To me it looks like you follow some form of new age...
IMO it boils down to shivsomashekhar not accepting atman as self-evident. Instead it has to be intellectually inferred.
I was looking into the Brahmakara Vritti (the thought I am brahman) and found this:
Sivananda:
The Sadguru will explain rn extenso the nature of Advaita Brahman, the One...
Yes, differences in prarabdha-karma (karma that still has to bear fruit in this life) is the cause of the differences between 4-7. The enlightenment is the same (destruction of avidya) . Thats how I understand it and how Madhusudana also explains it. Although Madhusudana adds that "because of...
sapta-jñāna-bhūmikā-s or seven degrees of knowledge: (from varāha upaniṣad) Adapted with comments by Madhusudana
3 states of the mumukṣu (desiring liberation): [jāgruti: waking state: sees universe as real]
1. śubhecchā (good resolve) = desire for liberation
2. vicāraṇā (consideration) =...
Just adding a litte more to the discussion. Will participate more later.
Madhusudana writes further (same book, same 6.29 comment):
Not that Yoga in particular is a necessity. Hence Vasistha has said:
"O Raghava (Rama), Yoga and enlightenment are the two processes for the elimination of the...
Is nirvikalpa samādhi necessary?
Im an advaita follower and do meditate. In order to understand meditation better I have also studied yoga sutras with comments.
The yoga system aims at nirvikalpa samādhi, but is it the same with advaita?
Is there any good explanation and what is it like?
Since...
Shankara explains in his commentary on the Brahmasutra (2.3.7) how the Self is self-evident:
“Any idea of the possibility of denying the existence of the Self is illogical, just because it is the Self. The Self is not an adventitious effect of any cause, it being Self-established. For the Self...
So by this definition, deep sleep is advaita, since you observe nothing?
Whereas the jnani who sees all as atman is deluded?
Actually your quote goes even further since you even deny the observer.
Erm... hold your horses. I or I am... i.e. atman, is self-evident. It doesnt need a mind.
Take the example of nirvikalpa samadhi. In that state the mind has stopped to function and the Self alone shines.
???
Quote from Shankara comment brihadaranyaka:
He who knows that the vision of the seer is eternal, does not wish to see It in any other way. This wish to see the seer automatically stops because of its very impossibility, for nobody hankers after a thing that does not exist.
It knew only...
I think others have answered this already, but just in case:
We have to remember that there are two selves... (and atman is the basis of both)
Atman can identify with body-mind and believe "thats me" or
Atman can realize body-mind is not me, instead "Im Atman" (aham brahmāsmi - I am Brahman)...