You can submit your article, report, announcement, ad etc. by mailing to editor@dandavats.com

Comments Posted By srinandan

Displaying 1 To 3 Of 3 Comments

Were There Two Buddhas?

**** So I do not mean to seem like I am belittling Sri Shankaracharya, as seemingly implied in the postings above by Sri Gopal dasa. But in this day and age, those who are not philosophically trained, which are most people in this world, practically become like atheists when they accept this mayavada and impersonalistic philosophy. Thus, many people think that all forms of God, or Vishnu-tattva, and all other demigods as well, are all the same, equal representations of the Brahman, or all products of the temporary material nature, or maya, mere representations of something higher, which to them means the formless, inert, without character, Brahman. That is because they are not trained, but also because they are influenced by Sri Shankaracharya’s teachings in this way. Plus, many are those who pose as spiritual authorities, gurus of different sampradayas, who may have great influence, and who perpetuate this philosophy in their teachings. Srila Vyasadeva called this, as I had quoted, a concocted scripture, or a disguised Buddhism. This is further explained by our previous acharyas and elder devotees in our sampradaya, like Srila Bhakti Prajnan Keshava Goswami Maharaja in his book “Beyond Nirvana: The Philosophy of Mayavadism: A Life History,” which I quoted at length in my article, of which there is much more to read to find out for yourself. I’m only repeating their views.

**** So let us be clear on this, that we know philosophically that the Brahman is only one and an important aspect of the Absolute Truth, with the Paramatma and Bhagavan as the other aspects that must be understood to have a complete understanding of the different characteristics of God. And philosophically we know that Adi Shankaracharya was an incarnation of Shiva who was actually a Krishna bhakta but came with a specific purpose. But I meet Hindus on a regular basis who do not know or who do not accept this, and only accept the Brahman as the ultimate truth, all that is eternal, based on the teachings of Adi Shankaracharya. And now we can see there are so many Shankaracharyas who have appeared across India. This philosophy is not going away so quickly.
Therefore, we cannot let our respect for Sri Adi Shankaracharya keep us from explaining the one-sided and mistaken premise of the philosophy of mayavadism, as if we are showing disrespect for Sri Shankaracharya as some may imply. Maybe I should write an article that specifically addresses and elaborates on this point.

» Posted By srinandan On Nov 1, 2012 @ 2:03 am

Furthermore, I have written before about Adi Shankaracharya and that he was an incarnation of Lord Shiva who came to perform a specific purpose, especially to drive Buddhism. I said that much in the article above, and that actually he was a devotee of Lord Krishna, and that he established a temple of Govinda for his mother. We have personally seen this temple in our visit to his birthplace in Kaladi. But in day to day life, we also come in contact with so many Hindus who follow this advaita and Mayavada philosophy and reject the notion that God has a form, and also, thus, reject the idea of bhakti and devotion to Lord Krishna. This makes them lose respect for the Bhagavan or Paramatma aspect of God. This is what Srila Prabhupada also worked to change, and which remains part of our responsibility now. We say this every time we offer our obeisances to Srila Prabhupada when we say his pranam mantra:
namas te sarasvate deve
gaura-vani-pracharine
nirvishesha-shunyavadi-
pashcatya-desha-tarine
Translation: “Our respectful obeisances are unto you, O spiritual master, servant of Sarasvati Gosvami. You are kindly preaching the message of Lord Chaitanyadeva and delivering the Western countries, which are filled with impersonalism (nirishesha) and voidism (shunya).”
Thus, from his preaching, an important part of his mission was to deliver us from the philosophy of impersonalism and voidism.

» Posted By srinandan On Nov 1, 2012 @ 2:01 am

Hare Krishna,
I apologize if I touched a button in anyone’s special feelings of respect for Sri Adi Shankaracharya, but the facts have to be told. Sri Shankaracharya did in fact use some specific verses, from which he made elaborate commentaries, to base his mayavada philosophy, and to establish that the Brahman is all that is real. Thus, he denied or ignored many of the traditional concepts and verses that explain the personal aspect of the Supreme. This is very different than merely preaching about the Brahman-tattva as one aspect of God. It leads to the Mayavada philosophy that assumes all avataras and incarnations of God and His lila are all products of maya. Thus, on this basis, they are all as illusory as the temporary material nature, and at best only represent something higher. Srila Prabhupada spoke very strongly against this notion, especially if you read the Chaitanya-caritamrita you will see in so many purports his strong preaching against this mayavada philosophy which was spread by Sri Shankaracharya. We should not forget this.
After Sri Adi Shankaracharya accomplished mission to stop the spread of Buddhism, there came other Acharyas to begin establishing the higher truth of Vedic spiritual knowledge, such as: Sri Vishnuswami; Ramanujacharya; Nimbarkacharya; Madhvacharya; Sri Chaitanya; with further commentary and arguments against Adi Sankaracharya’s impersonalist, mayavada philosophy by Srila Baladevavidyabhushana and others, such as Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Swami and Srila A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami. And we can see that our work is not yet finished. We are still coming in contact with so many who propound or follow this impersonalist philosophy as the end of all knowledge, the basis of Vedanta.

» Posted By srinandan On Nov 1, 2012 @ 2:01 am

«« Back To Stats Page

TOP