[Advaita-l] SrividyA and advaita vedAnta
agnimile at gmail.com
Thu Oct 5 11:38:28 EDT 2017
Namaste Sri Praveen ji,
Thanks a lot for the great email. My understanding is quite similar to what
you have articulated (even though I am not familiar with the details of
srividyA upAsana, I seem to have somehow landed on your conclusions). As
usual, the clarity in your email was very helpful.
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Praveen R. Bhat via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> Namaste Venkatraghavanji,
> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 1:07 AM, Venkatraghavan S via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> > Given that we are discussing the topic of SrividyA, could you (or anyone
> > familiar with the matter) please elaborate a little bit on how SrividyA
> > upAsana fits within advaita vedAnta?
> I will share what I can (although I am not sure how much will be seen as
> *okay to be shared*) with the hope that it will not be confused with
> upAsanA leading to mokSha being refuted by Bhashyakara. Surely, upAsana
> cannot result in mokSha, but it can lead one there. In fact, as I remember,
> Vidyaranyacharya defines an uttamAdhikArI as one who is a kRtopAsti (kRtA
> upAsti =upAsanA yena saH), one who has performed upAsanA, meaning, one who
> has attained the result of upAsanA (iShTadevatAdarshana). Technically,
> upAsanA is that which is prescribed with devatA, dhyAna, etc, and this is
> how nidhidhyAsana is explained as being different. Yet, there is an
> overlap. With this background, I shall delve into the questions below. It
> may kindly be noted that what I state is from the perspective of
> kuNDalinisAdhana which is the main content of all three branches of
> shrIvidyA (SV) (samayAchAra, kaula and mishra) although the latter is much
> wider. I particularly do not think there is a difference in implication
> w.r.t. the questions raised (especially if shaktipAt variety of Kundalini
> practice is not compared with).
> > 1) Is it a sAdhana for chitta shuddhi, ultimately requiring / leading to
> > guru prApti, shravaNa-manana-nidhidhyAsana, jnAna and moksha? i.e., does
> > SrividyA hold that one would need to transition from SrividyA upAsana to
> > jnAna sAdhana for moksha?
> As a Vedantin, especially, as in vivaraNa, it may be said that it causes
> chittashuddhi of such an extent in its culmination that a slight tinge of
> knowledge of oneness from any source can result in mokSha. However, for a
> practitioner of upAsana, that itself is most likely to appear as leading to
> aikyajnAna as to how the parokShajnAna gets converted into
> aparokShAnubhUti/ anubhava will not be clear. This is akin to niddidhyAsana
> appearing to result in mokSha for a follower of bhAmatI. For some, there
> could be be a doubt here as to how would the upAsaka not know as to what
> the source of mokSha is? This is answered by Panchadashikara in the 9th
> chapter with an example of a vedapAThI student who is unable to remember
> the sUkta even after many tries during the day, but *something happens*
> during the sleep that he wakes up chanting it completely! This is an
> experience of many, maybe w.r.t. to different fields of *knowledge*. What
> happens there cannot be pointed as idam ittham, but the example is
> pratyakShanubhava. Ergo, no *specific* transition is mentioned to
> > 2) Or, does SrividyA shAstra hold that jnAna is not a requirement for
> > mokshA and upAsana itself is sufficient? Is the nature of mokshA
> > in SrividyA and advaita?
> ... SV itself is inclusive of the highest vidyA, also known as
> jnAnakunDalinI. The nature of mokSha is not different. It is
> advaitakaivalyam. The Divine Mother Herself can be said to directly
> instruct the upAsaka, when ready beyond ajnA.
> > 3) Or, are these elements incorporated within the ambit of the upAsana
> > itself - i.e. the word upAsana in this context includes both upAsana and
> > jnAna sAdhana? If so, how?
> I think this question also stands answered IMO with above.
> Now, SV upAsanA itself is quite involved, with strict rules to follow with
> siddhis associated at each level/ mantra. The siddhi should be used to
> further in the path. Yet, it poses risks of one getting lost under the
> influence of siddhis. This is what was mentioned as bhoga earlier in this
> thread. I had asked a good satsangi friend of mine about all of the SV
> upAsakAs known to him as to who pursues for mokShaphala and he had said
> that although some starts so, he had seen even those getting lost in
> siddhis, if not forever, for a good while.
> Yet, the results are guaranteed and being dRShTaphala, one is quite certain
> of progress oneself. There is another benefit to even a single siddhi as I
> see, though not encouraged to be used, that it gives a doubtless conviction
> that there is a possibility that I am the creator of this world. I know
> this has been disputed by many SDV followers, but I thought its worth a
> mention that those who have doubts as to how a jIva can be anything but
> limited, any considerable siddhi gives a conviction beyond dispute. Another
> point worth mentioning is about the fact that gunA guNeshu vartante becomes
> clear, especially by witnessing the kriyAs that are quite certainly a
> happening than a performance.
> In the end, the questions that help resolve conflicting opinions for those
> who have shraddhA on the subject matter are:
> - Whether SV helps one towards moksha? Undoubtedly.
> - Is it risky? Quite so, unless one is in constant touch with the Guru.
> - Is it necessary? Definitely not.
> --Praveen R. Bhat
> /* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one know
> That owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list