Bhakti Yoga

Stephanie Stean cerebral_rose at MAC.COM
Fri Jun 14 09:46:19 CDT 2002

> b.. The term Bhakthi in Karma yoga and Jnana yoga means the very
> attitude & the very environment respectively in which the sadhana is done.
> There is no Jnana yoga without bhakthi becoz, without a love for God,
> there wil be no striving to know his real nature & the essential oneness
> between the jiva & Iswara.

I understand Iswara to be a manifestation of Brahman. Is this true?

Also, that bhakti, before Jnanam, is directed towards a personal god, which
Iswara is.

But that jnana yoga, is worship and knowledge of the abstract form

Also, when one knows the real nature of and between Iswara and the jiva, one
Knows Brahman, which is not a personal god or God at all.  Any comments?

When I read about "the concept of" Brahman and what others have said about
Knowing Brahman, I see not a personal god or a God at all.  I see something
different.  Is this not in line with the Advaitin philosophy?  Comments

> e.. We start with love towards God as someone other than us & culminate
> in discovering the oneness & hence god -love transforms into self-love.

Is this according to Advaitin philosophy?  Or is this idea representative of
dvaita or visishtadvaita doctrine?

Take care,

>From ADVAITA-L at LISTS.ADVAITA-VEDANTA.ORG Mon Jun 17 12:08:06 2002
Message-Id: <MON.17.JUN.2002.120806.0530.ADVAITAL at LISTS.ADVAITAVEDANTA.ORG>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 12:08:06 +0530
Reply-To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
From: hbdave <hbd at DDIT.ERNET.IN>
Subject: Re: Bhakti yoga
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

kuntimaddi sadananda wrote:

> --- hbdave <hbd at DDIT.ERNET.IN> wrote:
> > Stephanie Stean wrote:
> >> Can anyone give me some
> > references of where this idea is
> > > covered more thoroughly?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Stephanie
> >
> > I do not think any one can give you a reference to
> > show that Jnana and Bhakti
> > are the same.
> I sugggest that you should check VevekachuuDamani text
> - there are two (1 andhalf) slokas - in  that Shankara
> defines Bhakti as pure JNaana only. I provided the
> slokas two weeks ago.
> Hari OM!
> Sadananda

The shlokas mentioned are :

mokshasaadhana saamagraayam bhaktireva gariiyasi
swaswruupaanu sandhaanam bhaktirityabhidiiyate|

swaaatmaanubhava sandhaanam bhaktirityaparejaguh|
[Vivek. (32)]

This 1.5 shloka says, after discussing the Saadhana-chatushthaya
in the previous shlokas, that
"of all the  accessories required in the search for liberation,
devotion (Bhakti) is more important. Bhakti is constant
meditation on one's own nature. Others opine that Bhakti
is meditation on the reality of one's own self."

Thus Bhakti is a process and not the result that Jnana is.

Shri Shankara has given such "figurative" equivalences
at several places. For example, in Aparokshaanubhuti he
compares various aspects of HathaYoga and RajaYoga
with path of Jnana and says that, e.g. Muulabandha is same
as "the fetters binding all the beings and one that binds
the intellect."
[Aparokshaanubhuti 102 to 129]

Here Acharya is taking the etymology (muula -fundamental
+ bandha - fetters) though in Yoga it is a technical word and
denotes certain state of body.

These can not, in my humble opinion, be taken as valid
refernces for equivalence of, say, Jnana and Bhakti, that
the original questioner was asking about.

Best wishes.

-- Himanshu

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list