07-20-2010, 01:08 AM
[quote name='Husky' date='19 July 2010 - 08:31 PM' timestamp='1279551209' post='107523']
(Shankara variously declared that well-known Hindu Gods X, Y, Z, A etc. were the Ultimate - *one* of whom was Mahavishnu/Govinda.)
"Laughing"? Again, why do you nouveau converts feel you have the right to behave so to Hindus. Let them be. People will believe what they can and want to believe. The problem comes when those-Hindus-who-are-not-traditional-Advaitins (not ancestrally so) go about peddling their modern opinions on the internet, as if they are some grand authority on upaniShaadic "aham brahmaasmi" having "discovered" Shankara. There are some places on the web where ... oh it doesn't matter.
The danger that such modern Hindus simply don't see in their eagerness to Hey Let's Vedanta, is one that is quite insidious.
Anyway, Shankara, like Plato, was not "just" a "monistic philosopher". While Plato - in IIRC Julian's words (<- how handy he is, what would I do without him) - 'worshipped images', Shankara was a... a Poly-Idolator, and praised multiple Gods, with lots of Liebe to boot. I do not suspect Shankara of insincerity.
[/quote]
Shankara believe the the Ultimate was impersonal,whit no attributes,nirvishesha. The gods,just like humans were temporary manifestations of the attributeless Brahman.
Yes some call him confused theist:how is possible to say that the Brahman is SatCitAnanda(truth-conscience-happiness)which are attributes by excelence and then say that Brahman have no attributes at all?
Other see him as a hidden buddhist:yes he talk about Brahman,but he see it as nirvishesa ,which is very similar(if not identical whit the buddhist Void(see Nirvana).
Yes he love gods,he even make a system of 5 or 6 gods most worshiped at his time(Vishnu,Shiva,Devi,Surya,Ganesha and Murugan). But it was not an eternal relationship.The gods and humans will return in the future in the unmanifested Brahman.
Im not an authority and not pretend to be.Im always ready to know the truth about Shankara.
There was special attention given to Shankara because his commentaries could be very well be emulated on a atheistic and non-religious minds.Not Ramanuja,Madhva or Nimbarka and their clear theistic views.
At the beginning of the century the indian intellectuals go ahead whit Shankara and say:"See you westerners,we are not primitive,we do not worship gods,we have abstract philosophy.Yes Shankara talk about gods but you see,he did it symbolically.He did not really mean it".
I rest my case.
(Shankara variously declared that well-known Hindu Gods X, Y, Z, A etc. were the Ultimate - *one* of whom was Mahavishnu/Govinda.)
"Laughing"? Again, why do you nouveau converts feel you have the right to behave so to Hindus. Let them be. People will believe what they can and want to believe. The problem comes when those-Hindus-who-are-not-traditional-Advaitins (not ancestrally so) go about peddling their modern opinions on the internet, as if they are some grand authority on upaniShaadic "aham brahmaasmi" having "discovered" Shankara. There are some places on the web where ... oh it doesn't matter.
The danger that such modern Hindus simply don't see in their eagerness to Hey Let's Vedanta, is one that is quite insidious.
Anyway, Shankara, like Plato, was not "just" a "monistic philosopher". While Plato - in IIRC Julian's words (<- how handy he is, what would I do without him) - 'worshipped images', Shankara was a... a Poly-Idolator, and praised multiple Gods, with lots of Liebe to boot. I do not suspect Shankara of insincerity.
[/quote]
Shankara believe the the Ultimate was impersonal,whit no attributes,nirvishesha. The gods,just like humans were temporary manifestations of the attributeless Brahman.
Yes some call him confused theist:how is possible to say that the Brahman is SatCitAnanda(truth-conscience-happiness)which are attributes by excelence and then say that Brahman have no attributes at all?
Other see him as a hidden buddhist:yes he talk about Brahman,but he see it as nirvishesa ,which is very similar(if not identical whit the buddhist Void(see Nirvana).
Yes he love gods,he even make a system of 5 or 6 gods most worshiped at his time(Vishnu,Shiva,Devi,Surya,Ganesha and Murugan). But it was not an eternal relationship.The gods and humans will return in the future in the unmanifested Brahman.
Im not an authority and not pretend to be.Im always ready to know the truth about Shankara.
There was special attention given to Shankara because his commentaries could be very well be emulated on a atheistic and non-religious minds.Not Ramanuja,Madhva or Nimbarka and their clear theistic views.
At the beginning of the century the indian intellectuals go ahead whit Shankara and say:"See you westerners,we are not primitive,we do not worship gods,we have abstract philosophy.Yes Shankara talk about gods but you see,he did it symbolically.He did not really mean it".
I rest my case.