[Prev][Next][Index]
Re:Aham Brahmasmi-1of 10
> From: sadananda@anvil.nrl.navy.mil (K. Sadananda)
> ISKCON group provides pages and pages of scanned text (some body must have
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> a lot of free time and free scanner)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Yes, we here at Rice have a free scanner. It's not always needed since many
Hare Krishna materials are already available in electronic form. For more
electronically available texts, please see http://www.webcom.com/~ara
> ISKCON group have been making wrong statements that Sankaracharya had
> become wise in his later years and hence wrote RBhajagovindamS implying
> that, the worship to Govinda is the ultimate path.
Please provide a message from the alt.hindu archives by an ISKCON supporter
contending that Adi-Sankara became wise in his later years and hence wrote
Bhaja Govindam. That would be against the statements of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu,
and thus contrary to the Gaudiyas. Lord Caitanya said that Sankara was not
at fault, and was actually an advanced devotee serving the Lord through
teaching Mayavad, as explained in Siva Purana and Padma Purana, for the purpose
of misleading the atheists. So, Sankara was _always wise_, only his _teachings_
were misleading, and so his followers and teachings are called "mayavadi". Sri
Sankara was an incarnation of Lord Siva, so how could he suddenly become wise?
He was already wise before he became Sankara!
> ISKCON statements about Sankaracharya in his later years had discarded his
> advaita philosophy
The statements of Sri Caitanya imply that Sankara himself _never_ believed
his advaita-vada. There has been no suggestion that he discarded anything that
he never believed in the first place.
> Even in Bhajagovindam he talks about the greatness of
> Satsangh and how it can purify the mind and how one can attain Jevan Mukta
> state, that is liberation while living.
There is nothing inherently advaitic about "jivan mukta". I have already
discussed verses from Srila Rupa Goswami that address the issue of jivan mukta
-- it is defined (from a Gaudiya, acintya-bheda-abheda-tattva point of view) as
full engagement in service to Krishna even in this same body.
Satsang is more important to the Vaisnava than to the advaitist anyway.
> Mukti in the advaitic concept is not a sevakUs status; a status of an
> eternal servant; that to me is going from one prison to the other, from
> that with iron shackles to that with golden shackles.
That, of course, is an advaitic view, as said by someone with no appreciation
of the siddhanta "jivera svarupa haya krsnera nitya-dasa". Furthermore, the
view of mukti that you described was not anywhere implied in the Bhaja-Govindam
verse you quoted.
Yours,
Vijay
