Shaivism vs. Vaishnavism

Shankara stressed over and over in his commentaries on gita and upanishads that there is no separation between devotion and knowledge - one i not possible without the other. How can you love that which you don't know? And how could you not come to love that which you truly know?

 

why serve god when you can be god?

 

Adi Shankara


Adi Shankara with the Four Disciples

Adi Shankara (Śaṅkara, Shri Shankaracharya, Adhi Shankaracharya, Ādi Śaṅkarācārya; ‘the first Shankara’ in his lineage), reverentially called Bhagavatpada Acharya (the teacher at the feet of the Lord) (approximately 8th century, but see below) was the most famous advaita philosopher, who had a profound influence on the growth of Hinduism through his non-dualistic philosophy. He advocated the greatness and importance of the important Hindu scriptures, the Veda (most particularly on the Upanishads), spoke to a spirituality founded on reason and without dogma or ritualism, and gave new life to Hinduism at a time when Buddhism and Jainism were gaining popularity. He is considered the founder of the Dasanami sannyasin.

Life

Shankara was born in Kalady, a small village in Kerala, India, to a Namboothiri brahmin couple, Shivaguru and Aryamba. The traditional source for accounts of his life is the Shankara Vijayams, which are essentially hagiographies. The most important among them are the MadhavIya Shankaravijaya, the AnandagirIya Shankaravijaya, cidvilAsIya Shankaravijaya, and keralIya Shankaravijaya. What follows is the standard story of Shankara’s life; some of it is clearly mythical, but a substantial portion is historical, according to most scholars. In fact some of them are blatantly misleading. For example it is mentioned in Madhaviya Sankaravijaya that Adi Sankara had an encounter with a great tantric Abhinavagupta of Kamarupa. In fact the great scholar Abhinavagupta, who wrote Tantraloka and Tantrasara among his many books, was a contemporary of Abhinava Sankara and was from Kashmir and not Kamarupa.

Birth

Shankara’s parents were childless for many years, and prayed at the Vadakkumnathan (vRashAcala) temple in Thrissur, Kerala, for the birth of a child. Legend has it that Shiva appeared to both husband and wife in their dreams, and offered them a choice: a mediocre son who would live a long life, or an extraordinary son who would not live long. Both Shivaguru and Aryamba chose the latter. The son was named Shankara, in honour of Shiva.

Formal education

Shivaguru died while Shankara was very young. The child showed remarkable scholarship, and is said to have mastered the four Vedas by the age of eight. Following the common practice of that era, Shankara lived and studied at the home of his teacher. It was customary for students and men of learning to receive Bhiksha or alms from the laity; on one occasion, while accepting Bhiksha, Shankara came upon a woman who had nothing to eat in her house except a single dried amlaka fruit. Rather than consume this last bit of food herself, the pious lady gave away the fruit to Sankara as Bhiksha. Moved by her piety, Shankara composed the Kanakadhara Stotram on the spot. Legend has it that on completion of the stotram, golden amlaka fruits were showered upon the woman by the goddess Lakshmi.

Renunciation

From a young age, Shankara was attracted to asceticism and to the life of a renunciate. However, his mother, Aryamba, was entirely against his becoming a sannyasi, and consistently refused him her formal permission, which was required before he could take Sannyasam. Once when Shankara was bathing in the river, a crocodile gripped him by the leg and began to drag him into the water. Only his mother was nearby, and it proved impossible for her to get him away from the grip of the crocodile. Shankara then told his mother that he was on the verge of death; if she would give him her formal permission verbally, he would at this moment renounce the world and die a Sannyasi or ascetic. At the end of her wits, his mother agreed; Shankara immediately recited the words that made a renunciate of him, entered Sannyasa, and awaited death. But inexplicably, the crocodile released him from its very jaws and swam away. Shankara emerged unscathed from the river, now a Sannyasi.

Seeing in this incident the hand of God, Aryamba put no further obstacles in the path of her son. Shankara then left Kerala and travelled thoroughout India. When he reached the banks of the river Narmada, he met Govinda Bhagavatpada, the disciple of the Advaitin Gaudapada. Shankara was initiated as his disciple.

Travels

Shankara travelled extensively, while writing commentaries on the Upanishads, Vishnu sahasranama, Brahma Sutras, and the Bhagavad Gita. He engaged in a series of debates with Buddhist scholars, and with scholars of the Purva Mimamsa school, which helped in cementing his spiritual ascendancy. One of the most famous of these debates was with the famed ritualist Mandana Mishra.

His most famous encounter was however with an untouchable. On his way to the Vishwanath temple in Kashi, he came upon an untouchable and his dog. When asked to move aside by Shankara’s disciples, the untouchable asked: “Do you wish that I move my soul, the Ātman and ever lasting, or this body made of clay?” Seeing the untouchable as none other than the Lord Shiva, Shankara prostrated himself before Ishwara, composing five shlokas (Manisha Panchakam). It was from Benaras (Kashi) that he started his Vishwa Vijaya Yatra (journey to conquor the world).

Once he was saved by Sri Narasimha from being sacrificed to goddess Kali by a Kapalika. He then composed the Laksmi-Nrsimha stotra. Another famous composition of Sri Adi Shankara is his Bhaja Govindam, in praise of Vishnu.

It is a traditional belief that Adi Sankara installed at Srirangam a yantra called janakarshana to attract pilgrims to this sacred temple, just as at Tirupati he installed the dhanakarshana yantra. Indeed, Srirangam is the most visited Hindu temple in the world, and Tirupati is the richest.

Shankara is believed to have visited the Sarvajnapitha (lit., the Throne of Omniscience) in Kanchi, where he attained samadhi. A later day famous Abhinava Sankarachaya is known to have visited the Sarvajnapitha in Kashmir before he withdrew to Kedarnath and attained samadhi. The Kamakshi Amman temple at Kanchipuram also has a vrindavanam where he is believed to have attained siddhi. He died at Kanchi when only thirty-two years of age. (A variant tradition expounded by keraliya Shankaravijaya places his place of death as Vadakkumnathan (vRashAcala) temple in Thrissur, Kerala.)

Shankara’s dates

Modern scholarship is agreed on dates in the 8th century, though it has proved impossible to reach agreement on Shankara’s precise dates of birth or death. Some religious institutions dedicated to Shankara, such as Shankara mathams, however, ascribe much earlier dates to him. If these dates were true, they would require moving back the date of Buddha (which serves as an anchor for modern academic history of India).

Of the major Shankara Mathams active today, the Kanchi, Dwaraka, and Puri ascribe the dates 509–477 BCE to Shankara. The Sringeri Peetham, on the other hand, accepts the 788–820 CE dates. (See also below.)

According to Swami Niranjanananda Saraswati’s biography of Shankara, published in his book Sannyasa Darshan, Shankara was born in Kalady, Kerala, in 686, and attained mahasamadhi at Kedarnath, Uttaranchal, in 718.

Philosophy and religious thought

At the time of Shankara’s life, Hinduism had lost some of its appeal because of the influence of Buddhism and Jainism. Shankara stressed the importance of the Vedas, and his work helped Hinduism regain strength and popularity. Although he did not live long, he had travelled on foot to various parts of India to restore the study of the Vedas. His philosophy is known as Advaita Vedanta.

Shankara’s theology maintains that spiritual ignorance (avidya) is caused by seeing the self (Ātman) where self is not. Discrimination needs to be developed in order to distinguish true from false and knowledge (jnana) from ignorance (avidya). Shankara proposed that, while the phenomenal universe, our consciousness and bodily being are certainly experienced, they are not true reality, but are rather maya. He considered that the ultimate truth was Brahman, the single divine foundation, which is beyond time, space, and causation. Brahman is immanent and transcendent, but not merely a pantheistic concept. Indeed, while Brahman is the efficient and material cause for the cosmos, Brahman itself is not limited by self-projection, and transcends all binary opposites or dualities, especially such individuated aspects as form and being.

We must pierce through a hazy lens to understand our true being and nature, which is not change and mortality, but unmitigated bliss for eternity. If we are to understand the true motive behind our actions and thoughts, we must become aware of the fundamental unity of being. How, he asks, can a limited mind comprehend the limitless Ātman? It cannot, he argues, and therefore we must transcend even the mind and become one with Soul-consciousness.

Shankara denounced caste and meaningless ritual as foolish, and in his own charismatic manner exhorted the true devotee to meditate on god’s love and to apprehend truth. His treatises on the Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita, and Vedanta Sutras are testaments to a keen and intuitive mind that did not want to admit dogma but advocated reason. His greatest lesson was that reason and abstract philosophising alone would not lead to moksha (liberation). It was only through selflessness and love governed by viveka (discrimination) that a devotee would realise his inner self. Charges that his philosophical views were influenced by Buddhism are unfounded, as both Buddha and Sankara’s views were based on the ancient shastras. Buddhas shunyata is misconstrued by many as negation of being. Nagarjuna in Mulamadhyamakakaika clearly states that shunyata of Buddhism is neither nothingness nor no-nothingness. It is like the Nisadiya sutra of the Rig veda telling that the ultimate reality is neither existence nor non-existence. Sankara believed that the unmanifest Brahman manifested itself as Ishwara, the loving, perfect being on high who is seen by many as being Vishnu or Shiva or whatever their hearts dictate. Shankara is said to have travelled throughout India, from the South to Kashmir, preaching to the local populaces and debating philosophy (apparently successfully, though no documentation exists) with other Hindu and Buddhist scholars and monks along the way.

His beliefs form the basis of the Smarta tradition, or Smartism and influenced Sant Matha lineages such as Advait Matha. [1]

Even though he lived for only thirty-two years, his impact on India and on Hinduism cannot be stressed enough, as he countered the increasing sacerdotalism (the belief that priests can mediate between humans and god) of the masses, and reintroduced a purer form of Vedic thought. He presented a face of Hinduism that could reasonably contend with Buddhist ideas and spread it, as well as reformist measures, across the land, travelling from as far up as Kashmir from areas in South India. His Hindu revival movement paved the way for the strict theistic movements of Ramanuja and Madhva. The historians like Vincent Smith suggested that it was due to Adi Sankaracharya there was decline of Buddhism in India. Other argue that it was due to the Muslim invasion (of Bakhtyar) that Nalanda was routed and the library there was burned and thousands of Buddha viharas were destroyed subsequently.

Works

Adi Shankara has authored many works of stotras, and bhashyas, many of these are debated and questioned but below are a list of Books certainly written by Adi Shankara:

The “Crest-Jewel of Discrimination” or Viveka Chudamani, one of his most famous works, which summarises his ideas of non-dual Vedanta
The commentary Bhashya on the Brahma Sutra
The commentary on the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad
The commentary on the Taittiriya Upanishad
The Thousand Teachings or Upadesasahasri
A hymn to Krishna as the Herder of Cows, known as Bhaja Govindam
Benedictory invocation to Shiva and Shakti, namely Shivanandalahari and Saundaryalahari respectively
Commentary on Vishnu Sahasranama
Books he probably wrote are:

The commentary on Gaudapada’s Karika to the Mandukya Upanishad

The commentary on the Bhagavad Gita, though there is no scholarly agreement on this.

Mathas (monasteries)

Shankara is said to have founded four maṭhas (a matha is a monastery or religious order), which are important to this day, to guide the Hindu religion in the future. These are at Sringeri in Karnataka, in the south; Dwaraka in Gujarat in the west; Puri in Orissa in the east; and Jyotirmath (Joshimath) in Uttaranchal in the north. He put in charge of these mathas his four main disciples: Sureshwaracharya, Hastamalaka, Padmapada, and Trotakacharya respectively; the heads of the mathas trace their authority back to them. Each matha was assigned one Veda. The Jyothir Math near Badrinath in northern India is assigned with Atharva Veda; Sharada Math at Shringeri in southern India with Yajur Veda; Govardhan Math at Jagannath Puri in eastern India with Rig Veda and Kalikā Math at Dwarka in western India with Sama Veda. Each of the abbots of these four mathas also have the title of Jagadguru Shankaracharya — and are regarded as Patriarchs of Hinduism by many Hindus. However, some claim that there is no concrete evidence for the existence of these mathas before the 14th century.

The matha at Kanchipuram or Kanchi in Tamil Nadu claims that it was also founded by Shankara. According to this matha, it was where he settled in his last days and attained mahāsamādhi (i.e. left his body), but there are other, accounts which claim that he attained mahāsamādhi at Kedarnath.

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article “Adi_Shankara”.

 

So that one may not end up being an egotistical fool.

 

Sure Spook!, but its not a quote, its a song...

rAgam SANSKRIT VERSE TRANSLATION IN ENGLISH
yamankalyANI

bhaja govindam bhaja govindam
govindam bhaja mUDhamate
samprApte sannihite kAle
nahi nahi rakShati dukrunjkaraNe

Adore the lord, adore the lord,
Adore the lord O fool,
When the appointed time (for departure) comes,
the repetition of grammatical rules will not indeed save you.


brndAvana sAranga mUDha jahihi dhanAgamatrshNAm
kuru sadbuddhim manasi vitrshNam
yallabhase nija karmopAttam
vittam tena vinodaya cittam

O fool, leave off the desire of wealth;
create in the mind thoughts about reality, devoid of passion.
what you get -i.e., what you have achieved through your past deeds
-with that, satisfy your mind.

pantuvarAlI yavadvittopArjana saktah:
tAvannija parivAro raktah:
pashcAt jIvati jarjara dehe
vArtAm kopi na prcchati gehe

As long as you have the ability to earn money,
so long will your dependents be attached to you.
After that, when you live with an infirm body,
no one will even speak to you a word.

bAgEshrI mA kuru dhana jana youvana garvam
harati nimeShAt kala: sarvam
mAyAmayam idam akhilam hitvA
brahma padam tvam pravisha vidhitvA

Do not be proud of wealth, kindred and youth;
Time takes away all these in a moment.
Leaving aside this entire (world) which is of the nature of
an illusion, and knowing the state of brahman, enter into it.

behAg sura mandira taru mUla nivAsa:
shayyA bhUtalam ajinam vAsa:
sarva parigraha bhoga tyAga:
kasya sukham na karoti virAga:

Living in temples or at the foot of the trees,
sleeping on the ground, wearing deer-skin, renouncing all possession
and thier enjoyment - to whom will not dispassion bring happiness?

nAdanAmakriyA bhagavat gIta kincitadhItA
gangAjalalava kaNikApitA
sahrdapi yena murAri samarca
kriyate tasya yamena na carcA

For him, who has studied the Bhagavatgita, even a little,
who has drunk a drop of the Gangawater, and who has performed
the worship of the destroyer of the demon Mura (viz Srikrishna)
at least once, there is no tiff with Yama

kApi punarapi jananam punarapi maraNam
punarapi jananI jaTare shayanam
iha samsAre bahudustAre
krpayA pAre pAhi murAre

Repeated birth, repeated death and repeated lying in
mother's womb - this transmigratory process is extensive and
difficult to cross; save me, O destroyer of Mura, through your grace.

senjurutti artham anartham bhavaya nityam
nAstitata: sukhalesha: satyam
putrAdapi dhana bhArjAm bhItih:
sarvatraiShA vihitA rIti:

Wealth is no good: thus reflect always; there is not the
least happiness there from; this is the truth.
For the wealthy there is fear even from a son;
everywhere this is the regular mode.

mohanam geyam gItA nAma sahasram
dhyeyam shrIpati rUpamajashram
neyam sajjana sange cittam
deyam dInajanAya ca vittam

The Bhagavatgita and the Sahasranama should be sung;
the form of the lord of Lakshmi ( Vishnu) should be always meditated on;
the mind should be led to the company of the good;
and wealth should be distributed among the indigent.

sindubhairavI gurucharaNambuja nirbhara bhakta:
samsAradacIradbhava mukta:
sendriyamAnasa niyAmAdevam
drakShyasi nija hrdayastam devam

Being devoted completely to the lotus-feet of the Master,
become released soon from the transmigratory process.
Thus, through the discipline of sense and mind-control,
you will behold the deity that resides in your heart.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
In my opinion, according to this song , the only reality for Shankaracharya is Sriman Narayana (Sri Krishna), and whether you call it "truth" or reality or God, He is you as He is everything, but the "you" - the limited soul, are not Him, I don't think he even considers you "real".

 

So then, what does non-dualism actually mean? If there is a separate lover and a loved object, that can't be non-dual.

 

the process is one of expanding the ego until its universal

 

Jedi, thanks for posting. Now I can research out more on Vedabase.

Srila Prabhupada expressed much the same opinion regarding this hymn as you have in your last paragraph, and used it to point out that Sri Sankaracharya was not strictly a non-theistic philosopher...bhakti was indeed an important part of his outlook.

If I read this not knowing the author, I would call it very much the song of a Krishna-bhakta.

 

Yes it can be, you are the one who said that the supreme being is beyond the limited human reason and logic, why then can the devotee and the lord not be one and seperate simultaneously. For me, the supreme lord is Lord Govinda, who is in everything that I see and sustains everything around me even myself, in that way i am not seperate from him, because I can't exist as a seperate independent entity, however there is seperation in that he is the Super Soul and exists everywhere, while me- i am just a soul.

 

Ego never helps- whether it is expanded ego or limited ego... being an egotistical fool does no good. Thats why many of the sages, even the saints that teach non dualism- like sivananda try to see their Lord in other people. I read somewhere ( hopefully some one else has done so as well, if its not sivananda then forgive me) that Sivananda used to bow down to any woman he came across because he saw DurgaMa in everyone of them, he never tried to see himself in durga ma. Self realization means one realizes his/her eternal companion, who is God and he is everywhere around you, it does not mean you become God. Thinking that you become God will only lead to one's further downfall into maya.

 

Alright.

God is not The "part", and the reason for that is according to the very definition of his name - Vishnu- he pervades everything, he is not part, he is the whole, without him, nothing really exists.

In both dvaita, advaita & vishistadvaita , God is the ONLY truth, the rest is all his maya - illusion.

 

But you're not an advaitin Jedi, so I'd expect you to say this or something like it. What your expressing here is bhedabheda - 'one and not one simultaneously'.
I actually agree, so far as we can express it or concieve it, that this seems a reasonable proposition - but it isn't Shankara's teaching.

 

In Vyasa's Adhyatma Ramayana, there is a verse in which this matter is settled once and for all (at least in my opinion). Herer Sri Rama and Hanumanji are talking and Hanumanji says to the lord,

From the standpoint of the body, I am your servant.
From the standpoint of the individual soul (jiva), I am a spark of thy flame.
From the standpoint of the self (atman), I am you alone,
this is my firm belief.

 

But wouldn't a strict non-dualist say the body and the individual soul are simply illusions? It seems that logically they'd have to.
There can be no distinction of 'thine' and 'mine' outside of illusion and ignorance.
Further - if there is a distinction between Rama and Hanuman, that too is in the realm of maya - which as I understand it, in advaita implies all manifest existences.

I'm not posing these questions simply to be awkward or provoke argument etc, but because it interests me to see exactly what non-dualism does imply.

One of the main implications seems to me to be the unreal nature of the individual, whether on the level of body, mind or spirit, and this is in contradistinction from dualism and qualified non-dualism which admit the existence of individual souls or selves, rather than advaita which says there is only One Self.

Also the nature of Moksha is different in these philosophies. For the devotees it seems that it means continuation of an individual and separative existence in the direct presence of God.
For the advaitin, it seems to mean a realization of the unreality of all manifest existences and the cessation of individual existence - a merging into Brahman, a realization of the One Self as All.

 

Excellent questions.

The very definition of maya, as provided Goswami Tulsidasji in his Ramcharitmanas is - mai aru mora, tu aru tora - "Me and mine, you and yours."
The example of the wave and water is useful here. A wave exists, there is no doubt of that. But if the water is removed, there can be no wave apart from it. In the same way the world and individuals exist only as an expression of brahman. Now if you look from the standpoint of water, there is no wave, it is all only water. So from the standpoint of brahman there is no individual or world. From the standpoint of individual, or the wave, these things exist. But their existence is dependent on brahman, the existent factor, just as the wave is dependednt on water for it's existence, or the various colors are dependent on light. So the existence or non existence of anything is dependent on the standpoint of the statement. Existence itself (brahman) cannot be included in the above rule, however, because existence must exist, if not we arrive at the paradoxical statement that non-existence exists.

Not only in advaita, but in all schools of philosophy the manifest existence is the result of maya only. Even the avatars are incarnated through the use of yogamaya.

I think I explained this sufficiently above. Advaita never says that from the standpoint of body the body does not exist. It is in the ultimate dimension that these things cannot be said to exist.

I don't believe the two are different. In the puranas you will find that (with one exception), all devotees ask the lord that their ahamkara or ego may be destroyed. Once the ego is destroyed, where is the individual remaining? The self is merged in the paramatma tattva, but the self as expressed through the Body/mind equipment continues to serve and worship the self as expressed as Ishwara. This is because of the delight of lila, of play, of sharing love. These distinctions are not the divisive distinctions of the mind, but rather a case of role-playing. The puranas themselves say that Radha herself was an avatar of Krishna!

 

Thanks for your comments Bhaskar.
Just one thing I'd like to pursue further is the status of Moksha.
It seems that some schools believe that behind the ego is the real Self - but this is not concieved of as one in all respects with Brahman. It is believed that this self is an eternally existing real individual, and the outer garments of body, mind, external ego etc are put on and off by this distinct entity over the course of many lives. The goal is to be always with God, not to loose this separate existence in merging in God.

What you say is that once the ego is dissolved, the One Self is realized. At least that's how I understand what you say. So that means no more duality, no more God and the soul, but just the One - indescribable and inconcieveable. This is basically the same as the Buddhist view -
The Gaudiya Vaishnavas for example don't read the same meaning in the Puranas - the teaching is that the individual exists eternally and the goal is not to merge in Brahman. So I think after all there are definite differences here between different vedantic schools.

 

Thank you , that was really hitting the nail on the head, two thumbs up.

 

in the finer tuner of advaita, even that which is not God, is God... even the illusion is God but for the aspiring sadhaka, differentiation is made and that conclusion is not the beginning but the end

as for the vaisnava conclusion, some vaisnavas are advaitists and some are dvaitists

 

huh? whatever, still you are not God

 

yah but even that which is not God is God... God is everything