[Advaita-l] Sivaanandalahari -61
anbesivam2 at gmail.com
Mon Jan 4 15:00:55 CST 2010
I am forwarding 61 (2) again.
On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 4:45 AM, Anbu sivam2 <anbesivam2 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Sivaanandalahari -61 (2)
> *"aathmaa paramaanandhasvaroopa: paramaprEmaaspadhathvaath"
> This anumaanapramaaNa vaakyam does the siddhaantham that aathmaa alone is
> the aaspadha vasthu (abode) of the superior prEma. Placing this superior
> prEma of the aathmaa at all time in the paadhaaravindham of Parameswara is
> called Bhakthi. AathmaprEma should be surrendered to ParamEswara. MOksham
> is nothing but placing one's aathmaprEma with ParamEswara. One cannot place
> his aathmaprEma with ParamEswara as long as he thinks that ParamEswara is a
> different vasthu than oneself. Until this dhruda pragnai is reached the
> bhakthi that a person has is merely a ‘saamaanya’ bhakthi. That bhakthi
> cannot be considered a purushaartha.*
> Because I say that aathmaprEma should be placed on ParamEswara it should
> not be understood that ParamEswara is anya vasthu. Why do I say so?
> Because, everyone has prEma only on his self. That prEma of the self
> (aathmaprEma) is not placed on anya vasthu in which case it will be
> anyaprEma which is caused by the pragnya that such and such is an anya
> vasthu. The idea of considering ParamEswara as anya vasthu should
> completely leave one's mind, then only will he be able to place his
> aathmaprEma on ParamEswara. The main reason for this is only the mind, is
> it not?
> “Mana: paramkaaraNamaamananthi samsaarachakram parivarthayEdhyath” says the
> saasthra. The mind is the stumbling block between oneself and Parameswara.
> That is why the mind has to be parted first to Parameswara. In fact
> Parameswara steals this mind from a ripe bhaktha! (உள்ளம் கவர் கள்வன்!) Why
> not part it willingly?*
> In order that manOnaasam to take place one has to do navavidha bhakthi.
> These different bhakthis are highlighted by BhagavathpaadhaaL by examples.
> Even though AngOla seeds that reach the tree there you see the bhEdham of
> the seed and the tree. In the same way is the magnet and the needle has the
> bhEdhagnyaanam. Even though the Pathivrathaa is conscious of her bhartha
> the bhEdham between them is evident. Even when the creeper is seen together
> with the tree the bhEdham between them is discernible. *This bhEda
> gnaanam is called MAAYAI.*
> All the aanandham that we enjoy with bhEdhagnyaanam should be known as
> nachvara aanandham (perishable happiness). Even though in reality aathmaa is
> aanandhamayam maayai hides this and makes aathmaa appear as devoid of
> aanandha. That is why sakala praaNis consider themselves as
> dhukkaswaroopis. Because they consider themselves as dhukkaswaroopis they
> keep seeking aanandha. And aanandhaa they seek is seen with ParamEswara.
> *Now, let’s tread back a little. We were saying that the root cause of our
> misery is our mind. Why so? Because the mind has no ability to function in a
> world where there is no two. Mind knows only by differentiation for which it
> needs the second one. In fact the more the merrier for it! So its first
> conclusion for its own survival is that Parameswara is different from
> oneself. The train of events that follows is that the one, the jeeva, is
> miserable and Parameswara is blissful. We say that as long as there are two,
> the misery will always have to be with the jeeva, otherwise there won’t be
> any argument because if the jeeva is blissful there won’t be any need for
> Parameswara! So the dwaithins spread their siddhaantha that this Aathma is
> miserable and at no time would it ever be blissful. They say that the Aathma
> is different from Parameswara and that Aananda is obtained only from
> Parameswara etc.*
> (continued in 61 (3) )
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list