-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Non-Advaita approaches
- Thread starter Martin
- Start date
Saiva Siddhantin here ... monistic. We agree with Advaita from the mountaintop perspective but differ substantially about how to get there. So it's more practice than philosophy. Less debate, less intellect, more bhakti and meditation. If you consider the conclusions of Vedanta as Absolute Reality, we don't deny that, but the out here' part is equally important, (relative reality) where you live 99% of the time.
I tried but could never get my head wrapped around Advaita. Maybe because it is a meditative approach, and I just can’t do that hard as I tried. My preference is Vishishtadvaita, “Advaita with qualifications”. All diversity subsumed to the whole. Brahman, whether It be Shiva, Vishnu, Devi, etc... is the whole. We are the diversity but still part of it. The ocean and waves; sparks, heat, light from fire; heat and light from the sun are examples. The same in quality but not quantity.
Namaste, Meerkat
Vinayakaji's response is helpful in that it distinguishes one approach as being the idea of "the whole" and another approach as being the idea of "parts of the whole." But is there a difference in Reality? No. Both are true. The Whole is the sum of its parts, is it not? But also, the Parts would not exist except for the Whole. In many respects, the ideas are merely stating the distinction between "impersonal God" and "personal God," both valid aspects of OneGod's manifestations.
You might find it "easier" (chuckle, quotes on purpose) to settle on a path by checking in with yourself as to whether you are more intellectually inclined (the jnana yoga path) or more heart oriented, which would direct you more naturally to the paths of bhakti or karma yoga. Any path of yoga, practiced with diligence and sincerity, will result in yoga, i.e., reunion with God-Self. In that moment, all distinctions cease to exist. But that is not the path of advaita, it IS Advaita.
Vinayakaji's response is helpful in that it distinguishes one approach as being the idea of "the whole" and another approach as being the idea of "parts of the whole." But is there a difference in Reality? No. Both are true. The Whole is the sum of its parts, is it not? But also, the Parts would not exist except for the Whole. In many respects, the ideas are merely stating the distinction between "impersonal God" and "personal God," both valid aspects of OneGod's manifestations.
You might find it "easier" (chuckle, quotes on purpose) to settle on a path by checking in with yourself as to whether you are more intellectually inclined (the jnana yoga path) or more heart oriented, which would direct you more naturally to the paths of bhakti or karma yoga. Any path of yoga, practiced with diligence and sincerity, will result in yoga, i.e., reunion with God-Self. In that moment, all distinctions cease to exist. But that is not the path of advaita, it IS Advaita.
Martin
Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
I have a copy of the 'Gita, which chapter are you thinking of?
Martin
Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
Thanks, that's useful. I think I incline to jnana yoga, though I don't think intellect alone is sufficient. Would chanting be an example of bhakti yoga?
Martin
Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
Yes, I like the look of Vishishtadvaita (though I have trouble spelling it!), it reflects my experience more closely than Advaita.
Martin
Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
I hadn't heard of Saiva Siddhanta. Is the Wiki article reasonably accurate?
And is the "out here"/relative reality equivalent to Saguna Brahman?
Last edited:
2 through 9; 12, 14 and 18 discuss different yogic paths.
It would. 
It should be remembered, though, that using the "tools" of soul--ego, intellect, mind (they're not the same), breath, body, etc., by themselves will not result in God-realization. In fact, it's only when all those adjuncts of soul are quiescent that we can enjoy any meaningful appreciation of the divine. The practices, sadhanas, of yoga are all meant to help achieve that quietude. Often the mistake is to think we are humans in possession of a soul. But in truth, we are souls having human experiences (this time around, anyway).
It should be remembered, though, that using the "tools" of soul--ego, intellect, mind (they're not the same), breath, body, etc., by themselves will not result in God-realization. In fact, it's only when all those adjuncts of soul are quiescent that we can enjoy any meaningful appreciation of the divine. The practices, sadhanas, of yoga are all meant to help achieve that quietude. Often the mistake is to think we are humans in possession of a soul. But in truth, we are souls having human experiences (this time around, anyway).
Last edited:
Oops, Meerkat~ I forgot to hit "reply." I was responding to your question about chanting.
Yes the article is reasonably accurate, and yes.
The idea is that in order to see God everywhere, we have to see God somewhere. So it's dualistic until you get inner enough to see god inside and everywhere.
Jnana yoga is not about intellect, which is considered to be particular reflections of pure awareness on each particular name and form and it’s history/memory. The point is to see beneath the reflected intellect.
...
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Respect Vinayaka's and Jay's views. Nice point about 'personal' or impersonal' by Sw Vandana Jyoti.
The spelling is not frightening if you parse it into two words.
'Vishishta' (Special, qualified) Advaita (Non-duality).
It is beautiful. Prapatti (Leave it all to the deity, no worries).
The spelling is not frightening if you parse it into two words.
'Vishishta' (Special, qualified) Advaita (Non-duality).
It is beautiful. Prapatti (Leave it all to the deity, no worries).
Martin
Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
So is jnana yoga the same in all Hindu schools, or are there variations?
In Saiva Siddhanta, there is no such thing as jnana yoga. There is raja yoga, which leads to the state of jnana. A jnani is a soul who has completed the goal of raja yoga, self-realisation.
In Saiva Siddhanta, the 'yogas' are seen as progressive stages, not as separate yogas. There is tremendous overlap though. The stages are service, bhakti, yoga, and then jnana as a result. Service (seva, karma yoga) has the person feeling obliged to do stuff. In kriya yoga (bhakti) he wants t do stuff, in raja yoga, that all gets internalised more (meditation) and then end result is jnana. There is little intellect involved in the entire process, other than to understand the nature of the path.
Last edited:
It's Hinduism, for heaven's sake! There are variations of the variations.
Vinidra
Jai Mata Di!
I am not Saiva Siddhantin, but I like and use this approach myself.
The Vedantic schools that follow prasthanatrayi, have jnana yoga. But as expected, there are differences.
Prasthanatrayi - Wikipedia
But as far as I know, it is agreed in all schools that ‘Jnana’ is not intellect. And that was the point.
Sruti saying ‘The mind and word return from it’, will not be contradicted by any school, as far as I know.
Last edited: