jijaji

Sorry I got off topic, briefly I agree with most you say in regards to Ramana, add to that he did not belong to the orthodox Advaita tradition itself. So as Dr, Frawley said many end their understanding for Advaita with Ramana and dont go further to the actual tradition itself. cheers

sorry for double posting

More wisdom from Dr Frawley, thank you Link for bringing him and Ramana Maharishi up, I know it is a tad off topic, but worthy of your time I assure you. Below is excerpted from the large article - link below Misconceptions About Advaita By David Frawley First published in the Mountain Path of the Sri Ramanashram Neo-Advaita and Ramana Maharshi The teachings of Ramana Maharshi are often the starting point for neo-Advaitic teachers, though other influences also exist in the movement. However, instead of looking into the background and full scope of Ramana’s teachings, there is often only a focus only on those of his teachings that seem to promise quick realization for all. Some neo-Advaitins even refer to Ramana’s teachings as if Ramana was a rebel or outside of any tradition, almost as if he invented Advaita himself. While Ramana based his teaching on his own direct realization, he frequently quoted from and recommended the reading of Advaitic texts, which he found represented the same teachings as those that arose from his own experience. This included not only the works of Shankara, the main traditional Advaitic teacher, but many other texts like Yoga Vasishta, Tripura Rahasya and Advaita Bodha Dipika. Ramana did broaden out the traditional Advaitic path from its medieval monastic Hindu forms. Yet even in this regard he was continuing a reformation since Vivekananda who created a practical Vedanta or practical Advaita and taught it to all sincere seekers, not just to monastics. Many students come to neo-Advaitic teachers because of Ramana’s influence, looking for another Ramana or for instruction into Ramana’s teaching, but apart from Ramana’s image used by the teacher, what they get may be something different. That someone may use the image of Ramana or quote from him, therefore, is no guarantee that their teaching is really the same. Are There Prerequisites for Advaita? One of the main areas of difference of opinion is relative to who can practice Advaita and to what degree? What are the prerequisites for Self-inquiry? Some people believe that Advaita has no prerequisites, but can be taken up by anyone, under any circumstances, regardless of their background or life-style. After all, Advaita is just teaching us to rest in our true nature, which is always there for everyone. Why should that rest on any outer aids or requirements? This is a particularly appealing idea in the age of democracy, when all people are supposed to be equal. In much of neo-Advaita, the idea of prerequisites on the part of the student or the teacher is not discussed. Speaking to general audiences in the West, some neo-Advaitic teachers give the impression that one can practice Advaita along with an affluent life-style and little modification of one’s personal behavior. This is part of the trend of modern yogic teachings in the West that avoid any reference to asceticism or tapas as part of practice, which are not popular ideas in this materialistic age. However, if we read traditional Advaitic texts, we get quite a different impression. The question of the aptitude or adhikara of the student is an important topic dealt with at the beginning of the teaching. The requirements can be quite stringent and daunting, if not downright discouraging. One should first renounce the world, practice brahmacharya, and gain proficiency in other yogas like Karma Yoga, Bhakti Yoga and Raja Yoga and so on (the sadhana-chatushtya). One can examine texts like the Vedanta Sara I.6-26 for a detailed description. While probably no one ever had all of these requirements before starting the practice of Self-inquiry, these at least do encourage humility, not only on the part of the student, but also on the part of the teacher who himself may not have all these requirements! Ramana keeps the requirement for Advaita simple yet clear – a ripe mind, which is the essence of the whole thing, and encourages practice of the teaching without overestimating one’s readiness for it. Yet a ripe mind is not as easy as it sounds either. Ramana defines this ripe mind as profound detachment and deep discrimination, above all a powerful aspiration for liberation from the body and the cycle of rebirth – not a mere mental interest but an unshakeable conviction going to the very root of our thoughts and feelings (note Ramana Gita VII. 8-11). A ripe, pure or sattvic mind implies that rajas and tamas, the qualities of passion and ignorance, have been cleared not only from the mind but also from the body, to which the mind is connected in Vedic thought. Such a pure or ripe mind was rare even in classical India. In the modern world, in which our life-style and culture is dominated by rajas and tamas, it is indeed quite rare and certainly not to be expected. To arrive at it, a dharmic life-style is necessary. This is similar to the Yoga Sutra prescription of the yamas and niyamas as prerequisites for Yoga practice. In this regard, Ramana particularly emphasized a sattvic vegetarian diet as a great aid to practice. The problem is that many people take Ramana’s idea of a ripe mind superficially. It is not a prescription that anyone can approach or practice Advaita in any manner they like. Advaita does require considerable inner purity and self-discipline, developing which is an important aim of practice which should not be lightly set aside. http://www.vedanet.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=38%3Aor-the-non-dual-path&catid=12%3Aadvaita-vedanta-and-ramana-maharshi&showall=1

I do have to point out also, even though I agree with Dr. Frawley's brief explanation here is just that, very general and "BRIEF". But that cool

Link - This being from Dr David Frawley, I wanted to ask you, does this coincide with AYP definition of Bhakti? cheers

This may be of interest to you T.I. for your analysis of TM The Jyotirmath Sankaracharya Lineage in the 20th Century by Vidyasankar Sundaresan of advaita-vedanta.org http://indology.info/papers/sundaresan/shank-jyot-ascii/ Shankaracharya Swami Brahmananda Saraswati

I agree with David Frawley on this, thank you.

Can you possibly expand on that definition...?

Ok if that is a joke to you, no worries. I'll put it like this, Do you mean desire for Moksha or Bhakti as referred to in Bhakti Shastra like Narada Pancaratra, Shiva Purana or how it is elucidated in Adi-Shankaras Advaita Vedanta? cheers

Do you mean real Bhakti or "Desire for Liberation"

Of course Mantras should not be charged for... is is total silliness only westerners would fall for

some chanting of Om stuff, and this is hard core ancient stuff Pāṇini 600-500 BCE who's grammar defines Classical Sanskrit Pāṇini is said to have lived at the end of the Vedic period. From "Pāṇini Sootram" "Nama Sivaya" is the "Moola Mantra", which alone is capable of conferring full benefit to the person reciting this five letter mantra or "Panchakshari" mantra at all times and there are no restrictions as to time, place, caste, creed or sex. Now the greatness of the six-letter mantra "Om Nama Sivaya" is discussed. Both the words "OM" and "Nama Sivaya" are stated in the Vedas and hence both are Vedic mantras unlike other mantras possessing immense power or energy stored in them and recitation of a combination of these two mantras releases immense energy. Hence, one should be wary in reciting this Shadakshari mantra. The author says that the mantra "Siva" as well as the Panchakshari mantra "Namah Sivaya" can be recited by each and everyone irrespective of caste, creed, religion, sex, etc., while those who have taken Gayatri Mantra alone, should recite Shadakshari mantra or "Om Namah Sivaya". The Sanyasis or the persons, who have renounced the world, alone have right to recite "OMKARAM" and not by householders belonging to any caste, creed or religion. The reason is that the mantras "Om" and "Namah Sivaya" are Vedic mantras with high power like the high-tension electricity wires a touch of which by uninitiated persons may result in "Vipareetha Phalams" or shocks. Since, "Namah Sivaya" mantra, which is the "Moola mantra", is itself powerful to confer all boons, uninitiated person should not recite "Shadakshari mantra", says the author, Mudigonda Nagalinga Sastry garu in his work Dharma Sangraha, Aahnikanda, because some Agama Sastras are objecting for their recitation by uninitiated persons. The simple meaning of the Shadakshari mantra "Om Namah Sivaya" is : "Sivaya" means to Siva, "Namah" means salutations to Him, "Om" means, by reciting Whose name only once, He who can take away the Jeevas upwards. The Adharva Siropanishad is replying to the question "Sakrud Uchaaryamaane, Oortham Praanaa Nunnamaya Teetyom?" as "Adha Kasmaad Uchatey Omkaraha". This Adharva Siropanishad mantra is stating, as to why Siva is stated as "Omkaram" and gives the reply that Siva alone can take the Jeevas upwards by reciting His name only once and hence Siva is called as "Omkara Vachya". peace out

this may be useful as well http://www.paulmason.info/gurudev/gurudev.htm

You may enjoy this as well: http://minet.org/Documents/shank-1 http://minet.org/Documents/shank-2 http://minet.org/Documents/shank-3 http://minet.org/Documents/shank-4

I dont have a lot of time this morning, have to run out and do the shopping thing. But briefly...TM has its roots in TM only,it does not go back beyond MMY... It was never practiced in Adi Shankaras line before MMY introduced it or fabricated it...which ever way you want to see it... cheers

Have you disappeared into Samadhi T.I ??

New Member Here.. Greetings To All..!

Thanks

T.I. Your comparing apples to oranges, Brahmananda Sarawasti belonged to the Advaita Sampradaya of Adi Shankara, not the Patanjali School of Yoga. In Adi Shankaras line householders are encouraged to practice Bhakti and Karma before Jnana. Generally Om is not chanted before mantras until one receives diksha and most certainly one was not initiated into Mahayakya until Sannyass Ashram was taken. Of course things change over time and different schools have different approaches. That Oaks site is kinda lacking in what it say about Svami Brahmanandaji...I would dig deeper. cheers