• Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

To the younger generation on this forum: Do you prefer following the Neo-Vedanta version of Hinduism versus the orthodox version?

Back to tradition is a better thing because genetically we are inclined towards one style. Slowly only we are evolving. Anything to get imbibed it needs time, environment and a change in the mind set. It is better to be inside the fence and see the outside world than standing up on the edge of a wall without knowing when will you fall down the other side or will be saved by standing in the middle. I hope every one understand. It is just like our culture is sitting just like a cat on the wall not knowing which side to jump. It is always safe to jump where the damage to our culture is less. In order to preserve our culture, first we have to observe some of the best things, educate our younger more on the rational side explaining some of the things at least rather than just asking them to follow ritually. Even if followed ritually also some of them will give benefits but our inquisitive nature will not allow us to remain peaceful and make us to tread our path and then realize it is always better to follow the proven path rather than going in a way where we are not familiar and no one to accompany us even if we fall down and no one to take responsibility to uplift us.When we lived in a village, it is a safe surrounding. Slowly we moved into town and cities. Still we by nature, we try to live the way we have been brought up till the age of 12 even if we reach the age of 50. Whatever we learnt in the middle ages, we tend to find what is wrong in that way of living and again do our way the ancestors lived.
 
It is better to live the traditional way rather than experimenting and finding out every thing we tried new failed and in the end we want only peace of mind. Therefore it is better to live in the back to tradition mold rather than doing something which is alien to our culture.
 

prasad1

Gold Member
Gold Member
On the contrary, I say break all molds. The molds are straight Jackets somebody else put on us. If you do not beak the shackles you will never be free,

Playing it safe is playing the game not to lose. You need to play the game with an attitude of winning.
I am not saying that you have to be a rebel at everything. But unless you have seen the outer edges how would you know your potential.

WE never tried to climb Everest, then one person tried it, and then many more followed.
Similarly, Adi Sankaracharya reformed Hinduism by breaking away from tradition.
In the financial world, a CD is a sedate, and safe bet, but you accept a lower return and you will never be rich (or stay poor). On the other hand, if you venture out and create a new product, or invest in financial products like Stocks, etc, you can live comfortably.

जिन ढूँढा तिन पाइयाँ, गहिरे पानी पैठ जो बौरा डूबन डरा, रहा किनारे बैठ कबीर #Kabir Dive deep to find what you want Don't be afraid of failure
 
OP
P

prveeraraghavan

New member
On the contrary, I say break all molds. The molds are straight Jackets somebody else put on us. If you do not beak the shackles you will never be free,

Playing it safe is playing the game not to lose. You need to play the game with an attitude of winning.
I am not saying that you have to be a rebel at everything. But unless you have seen the outer edges how would you know your potential.

WE never tried to climb Everest, then one person tried it, and then many more followed.
Similarly, Adi Sankaracharya reformed Hinduism by breaking away from tradition.
In the financial world, a CD is a sedate, and safe bet, but you accept a lower return and you will never be rich (or stay poor). On the other hand, if you venture out and create a new product, or invest in financial products like Stocks, etc, you can live comfortably.

जिन ढूँढा तिन पाइयाँ, गहिरे पानी पैठ जो बौरा डूबन डरा, रहा किनारे बैठ कबीर #Kabir Dive deep to find what you want Don't be afraid of failure
I don't think Adi Sankara broke tradition. While he did introduce us to Advaita, he will still a very strong ritualist. Otherwise, his parampara would be a lot more like Chinmayananda rather than having very traditional views about the Shastras.
 

tbs

Well-known member
I don't think Adi Sankara broke tradition. While he did introduce us to Advaita, he will still a very strong ritualist. Otherwise, his parampara would be a lot more like Chinmayananda rather than having very traditional views about the Shastras.

hi

i agreed...he did advaita philosophy....but in his early years....he was more ritualist.....he established

as NIRGUNA BRAHMAN.....BUT IN REAL....HE WAS MORE SAGUNA BRAHMAN...he composed many

slokams based all SIX systems of worship deities....he was more sakta and devi upasaka....even his

matams follows basically devi based systems....kanchi kamakshi or sringeri sharadamba....
 
This sight is all too common.

And people, these days, going straight to restaurants after a haircut. If you stay in Chennai, you know that in
most restaurants, in addition to the ceiling fans, they have huge/ powerful pedestal fans going at full blast. Any 'clean up dusting' done in the saloon after a haircut is only superficial. Do they consider the high probability of loose hairs from their bodies and clothes mixing with the food items of other diners?
Sadly, for many people (these days) all traditional beliefs/ practices (including hygienic practices) are irrational and they are ready to 'throw the baby out with the bathwater'.

While, not everything 'old is gold' some traditional practices are good even today and possibly will be good even tomorrow!
Our our traditional ways and customs is always good and more scientific. It is not. Our custom to cut the cake on birthday. Unfortunate part is the elder s have no knowledge and how can they pass on to new generation
 

usaiyer

Active member
Aadi Shankara was trying to project the right perspective of our Santana dharma ,and hence gave due importance to
rituals,saguna,nirguna concepts.
and also the essence of advaitha philosophy. He however condemned only ritualism and people who tried to take advantage of society on this count.
Kanchi periyava also was not a ritualist ,but a staunch believer
of traditions ,,social aspects of religion ,His book on Deivathin
Kural is treatise on Hinduism and Hindu Philosophy based on the broad guidelines of AdhiSankara.
 

prasad1

Gold Member
Gold Member
Adi Shankaracharya was an Indian philosopher and theologian who consolidated the doctrine of Advaita Vedanta. He is credited with unifying and establishing the main currents of thought in Hinduism.

His works in Sanskrit discuss the unity of the Ātman and Nirguna Brahman "brahman without attributes". He wrote copious commentaries on the Vedic canon (Brahma Sutras, Principal Upanishads and Bhagavad Gita) in support of his thesis. His works elaborate on ideas found in the Upanishads. Shankara's publications criticised the ritually-oriented Mīmāṃsā school of Hinduism. He also explained the key difference between Hinduism and Buddhism, stating that Hinduism asserts "Ātman (Soul, Self) exists", while Buddhism asserts that there is "no Soul, no Self".

Shankara travelled across the Indian subcontinent to propagate his philosophy through discourses and debates with other thinkers. He established the importance of monastic life as sanctioned in the Upanishads and Brahma Sutra, in a time when the Mīmāṃsā school established strict ritualism and ridiculed monasticism.

 
OP
P

prveeraraghavan

New member
Aadi Shankara was trying to project the right perspective of our Santana dharma ,and hence gave due importance to
rituals,saguna,nirguna concepts.
and also the essence of advaitha philosophy. He however condemned only ritualism and people who tried to take advantage of society on this count.
Kanchi periyava also was not a ritualist ,but a staunch believer
of traditions ,,social aspects of religion ,His book on Deivathin
Kural is treatise on Hinduism and Hindu Philosophy based on the broad guidelines of AdhiSankara.
Everything I've read in Deivathin Kural is basically criticizing Brahmins who don't do Vedic rituals. If that was all based on Adi Sankara's guidelines, then it is proof Adi Sankara was a staunch ritualist, despite his promotion of Advaita philosophy.

I think Adi Sankara's ideology is that the only way to acheive the truths of Advaita is by following rituals first.
 

prasad1

Gold Member
Gold Member
Adi Shankaracharya, the great Philosopher was born in 788 CE, Kaladi, Present in Kerala. He died in 820 CE at the early age of 32 only in Kedarnath, Pala Empire, Present in Uttarakhand. Shankaracharya was a noted Philosopher and theologizer from India. He reformed the rituals and doctrines in Hinduism, which were followed blindly by Hindus in those days. The Famous Philosopher Adi Shankara profoundly believes in the concept of Vedas”. He advocated against the rituals and religious practices.

Adi Sankara traveled far and wide in search of a worthy guru, who can remove the bigotries and make him the learner of Spiritual Knowledge. Finally, he reached the bank of the Narmada river and reached the Asrama of Govinda Bhagavatpada, the renowned guru and the disciple of Gaudapada, who wrote the Mandukyakarikas. Govinda accepts Adi Sankara as his disciple. With the guidance and teachings of Govinda Bhagavatpada, Jagadguru Adi Shankaracharya attained spiritual knowledge, and also gained the concepts of Jana, Raja, and “Hatha Yoga. And then he received the knowledge of Brahma Sutras. After the permission of his Guru, Adiguru Shankara Charya left the Ashram and traveled all over India to spreads the Brahma Sutras.

 

prasad1

Gold Member
Gold Member
Pavan Verma in his writing believes:
What they don't understand is that Hinduism itself teaches you to be secular."

Taking the argument further, he adds, "We have to know that Upanishads were penned down over 4,000 years ago in a dialogic manner in forest academies between gurus and disciples; subsequently, in the Brahma Sutras, the commentaries would first have the views of the opponents, followed by the position of the Vedanta." Hinduism could reconcile the differences, including those with Charvakas and tantriks, he says, through shastra has, debates and dialogues. "One person encompassing all these civilizational values was Shankaracharya," he says explaining the book's raison d'etre.

Calling Shankara a "true rebel", Varma reminds how the monk called a Chandala he met in Kashi his guru. "For me, it was an eye-opener to see Shankara, a Namboodiripad Brahmin, refuting the caste system. He, in fact, went to the extent of not even accepting the authority of the Vedas, the Varnasrama system, and the Char Dham," he says. The monk's relationship with his mother also showed his rebellious streak. For, being a sannyasi didn't stop him from serving his mother at the fag end of her life. "Being the only child, he came back from his renunciation to serve her.

Maybe his attachment with his mother was the reason for his Devi/Shakti worship, though he remained an avowed Vedantist all through his life," he reminds. For all his talk of 'nirgun' (attributeless) and 'nirakar' (abstract) God, and the world being an illusion, it was Shankara who set up 12 jyotirlingas, 18 shakti-peethas, and four Vishnu-dhaams to create all-India pilgrim centers that defined the nation as one civilizational entity.

Varma, however, doesn't see this as a contradiction. "Shankara divided the jnana marga (path of knowledge) into two levels - para vidya (higher knowledge), where the primary concern was the metaphysical comprehension of the absolute; and apara vidya (lower knowledge), where bhakti, yoga, and ritual were given legitimacy. He saw the latter as part of the preparatory steps to move from apara to para vidya."

Shankara, for the author, is also a reminder of how sophisticated the Indian thought system was, though he has nothing but contempt for what he calls "the Dinanath Batra-style of scholarship", which invents flying machines and test-tube babies in ancient times. Terming India the "guiding light" of what he calls 'maulik jnana' (original thinking), Varma reminds us how at a time when scientists are not ruling out the possibility of multiverses, the notion of Brahman being infinite seems so contemporary.

"Shankara's concept of the Vedantic absolute, all-pervasive, beyond boundaries, and cosmic in scale, seems akin to the modern scientific interpretation of the space," he says, adding that Stephen Hawking could well have been the disciple of Shankara, had he been aware of Indian philosophical traditions. Ironically, it was Hawking who pompously claimed a few years ago that "philosophy is dead". And if one reads his book, The Grand Design, he - again paradoxically - appears closer to Shankara than to his counterparts obsessed with Newtonian determinism.

"Hawking might have been surprised to discover how much of what modern science has revealed, particularly in the areas of cosmology, quantum physics, and neurology, was anticipated by Shankara more than a millennium ago," signs off the writer-diplomat, cautioning on the growing culture of unrestrained shrill and 'dialogue lessness' in the otherwise argumentative nation.

 
OP
P

prveeraraghavan

New member
Pavan Verma in his writing believes:
What they don't understand is that Hinduism itself teaches you to be secular."

Taking the argument further, he adds, "We have to know that Upanishads were penned down over 4,000 years ago in a dialogic manner in forest academies between gurus and disciples; subsequently, in the Brahma Sutras, the commentaries would first have the views of the opponents, followed by the position of the Vedanta." Hinduism could reconcile the differences, including those with Charvakas and tantriks, he says, through shastra has, debates and dialogues. "One person encompassing all these civilizational values was Shankaracharya," he says explaining the book's raison d'etre.

Calling Shankara a "true rebel", Varma reminds how the monk called a Chandala he met in Kashi his guru. "For me, it was an eye-opener to see Shankara, a Namboodiripad Brahmin, refuting the caste system. He, in fact, went to the extent of not even accepting the authority of the Vedas, the Varnasrama system, and the Char Dham," he says. The monk's relationship with his mother also showed his rebellious streak. For, being a sannyasi didn't stop him from serving his mother at the fag end of her life. "Being the only child, he came back from his renunciation to serve her.

Maybe his attachment with his mother was the reason for his Devi/Shakti worship, though he remained an avowed Vedantist all through his life," he reminds. For all his talk of 'nirgun' (attributeless) and 'nirakar' (abstract) God, and the world being an illusion, it was Shankara who set up 12 jyotirlingas, 18 shakti-peethas, and four Vishnu-dhaams to create all-India pilgrim centers that defined the nation as one civilizational entity.

Varma, however, doesn't see this as a contradiction. "Shankara divided the jnana marga (path of knowledge) into two levels - para vidya (higher knowledge), where the primary concern was the metaphysical comprehension of the absolute; and apara vidya (lower knowledge), where bhakti, yoga, and ritual were given legitimacy. He saw the latter as part of the preparatory steps to move from apara to para vidya."

Shankara, for the author, is also a reminder of how sophisticated the Indian thought system was, though he has nothing but contempt for what he calls "the Dinanath Batra-style of scholarship", which invents flying machines and test-tube babies in ancient times. Terming India the "guiding light" of what he calls 'maulik jnana' (original thinking), Varma reminds us how at a time when scientists are not ruling out the possibility of multiverses, the notion of Brahman being infinite seems so contemporary.

"Shankara's concept of the Vedantic absolute, all-pervasive, beyond boundaries, and cosmic in scale, seems akin to the modern scientific interpretation of the space," he says, adding that Stephen Hawking could well have been the disciple of Shankara, had he been aware of Indian philosophical traditions. Ironically, it was Hawking who pompously claimed a few years ago that "philosophy is dead". And if one reads his book, The Grand Design, he - again paradoxically - appears closer to Shankara than to his counterparts obsessed with Newtonian determinism.

"Hawking might have been surprised to discover how much of what modern science has revealed, particularly in the areas of cosmology, quantum physics, and neurology, was anticipated by Shankara more than a millennium ago," signs off the writer-diplomat, cautioning on the growing culture of unrestrained shrill and 'dialogue lessness' in the otherwise argumentative nation.

Very interesting read.

I wonder what happened in the parampara that the message/thinking is so different from what Adi Sankara believed.
 

prasad1

Gold Member
Gold Member
Around the time of Shankaracharya, southern India had started a Bhakti movement (centered on prayer and devotion). These were however at the fringes of Hinduism. Until that time, Hinduism had more emphasis on the ritualistic and yogistic elements.

Shankara saw that the masses could not be kept interested in the religion without the power of the prayer. The different yogas and upanishads were way too complex for the common man.

Shankara enabled the integration of the fledgling Bhakti movement with the Vedic part of traditional Hinduism. He talked like they were two sides of the same coin. He had the Vedic authority that the other Bhakti movement propagators didn't have. He had a zeal that the other sanyasis and pundits didn't have. Thus, Hinduism quickly brought back the masses to the fold.

Unlike the other Vedic scholars before him - who mostly stressed on dhyana, mukti, yoga and sanyasa, Shankara had a coup in saying that these were same as worshipping Krishna directly.

 

Follow Tamil Brahmins on Social Media

Latest posts

Top
  Thank you for visiting TamilBrahmins.com

You seem to have an Ad Blocker on.

We depend on advertising to keep our content free for you. Please consider whitelisting us in your ad blocker so that we can continue to provide the content you have come here to enjoy.

Alternatively, consider upgrading your account to enjoy an ad-free experience along with numerous other benefits. To upgrade your account, please visit the account upgrades page

You can also donate financially if you can. Please Click Here on how you can do that.