Sri Deva Sthanam

Where Faith and Scholarship Meet

by

Advaita Vedanta

Sankara Acarya

Page 3–Advaita Vedanta

Introduction

The advaita philosophy is not easy to explain briefly, and it is not my intention to repeat in a www home page what takes whole volumes for accomplished experts. I will content myself with providing a brief synopsis of the various aspects of advaita-vedanta.

A very important assumption in all vedanta is that man suffers from bondage in the course of his life in this world. This is said to be samsara, which involves being caught in an endless cycle of births and deaths. The quest therefore is to seek a way out of this bondage, to break the cycle of rebirths and attain moksha or liberation. The most important issues in vedanta have to be understood with respect to what constitutes bondage and what constitutes liberation. Theadvaita school is of the view that jnana (knowledge) of man’s true nature is liberation. Bondage arises from ignorance (avidya) of man’s true nature, and therefore removal of ignorance roots out this bondage. Liberation is therefore nothing more or nothing less than man knowing his true nature. This true nature is his innermost essence, the atman, which is nothing other thanbrahman. He who knows this, not merely as bookish knowledge, but through his own Experience, is liberated even when living. Such a man is a jivanmukta, and he does not return to the cycle of rebirths.

Brahman

It may be noticed that at first glance, advaita’s solution to the problem of man’s liberation does not seem to involve God as a Creator or a Savior at all. If all that is required is to know one’s own true nature, what role does God have to play in this universe? Advaita’s answer to this issue is buried in the advaitic conception of brahman. One is the view of the Brahma-sutra that brahman is at once both the instrumental and the material cause of the universe. The Brahma-sutra holds such a view because there is nothing that can be said to exist independent of brahman. Is brahman then just a name for a universal set – the superset of all things in this universe? Not so, because brahman has been described as beyond all change, whereas the perceived universe is full of change. Still, this universe is said to have brahman as the only cause. At the same time, to understand brahman truly is to know It to be devoid of parts and diversity, and beyond all causality/action. Such a conception of brahmanderives from the Upanisads, which say sarvam khalvidam brahma – all this is indeed nothing but brahman – on the one hand, and neha nanasti kincana – there is no diversity here – on the other. Thus, the conception of brahman as a Creator in advaita is a unique one, and directly relates to the advaita views on causality.

Causality: Parinama and Vivarta

There are different theories of causality described by advaita vedantins, but they are all agreed that brahman is the sole cause of the universe, i.e both the instrumental and the material cause of the universe. The axiom that the Onebrahman is the cause of the many-fold universe is the foundation on which the entire system of advaita vedanta is based, and numerous efforts have been made over the centuries, to address logical problems arising out of it. This brahman is also held to be eternal and changeless. It is easy to understand brahman as the instrumental cause of the universe. This view is not very different from the traditional perspective shared by almost all religions – some creator is usually credited with having created this universe. This creator is the instrumental cause of the universe. What differentiates the standard vedantaposition from such general theistic views is that brahman is simultaneously also the material cause of the universe. In other words, creation is never ex nihilo, but proceeds out of brahman Itself, although brahman remains unchanged.

Common-sense views of material causality always involve some kind of change. Thus, for example, milk is said to be the material cause of curds. However, in the process of curdling milk, the milk cannot be recovered. All we have at the end is the curds, the milk being irretrievably lost. This kind of causality involving change is called parinama. There is another kind of material causality. For example, gold is the material cause of an ornament made out of gold. In the process of making the ornament, the metal does not change into something else. It is only drawn into another form, from a lump to an ornament; the gold remains gold. This kind of causality is called vivarta , where the material cause itself does not change into something else. The Chandogya Upanisad makes very telling use of this kind of causality in its illustrations of how “Being” alone is the original cause (sadeva saumya idam agra asit, ekameva advitiyam), and how all perceived change is only in the realm of name and form, dependent on language (vacarambhanam vikaro namadheyam). The reality of gold is quite independent of what shape it is in.

Although Sankaracarya makes use of both kinds of causality (parinama andvivarta) in his analogies, he denies that brahman’s role as the material cause of the universe involves any change in the essence that is brahman. In the logical extreme, both parinama and vivarta views of causality are deficient, as they presume a separate reality of the effect, apart from that of the cause. Therefore, the most subtle arguments in advaita vedanta turn upon the ajati vada notion – that there is no real creation. vivarta and parinama are both seen as convenient ways of describing causality, only if some provisional reality is conceded for the notion of creation. Those who follow the drsti-srsti-vada also maintain that brahman is beyond all causality. However, most post-Sankaran authors, who teach in accordance with what is called the srsti-drsti-vada, opt for a vivartanotion of causality, as far as accounting for all creation is concerned. It should be remembered that the conception of brahman as both the material and instrumental cause of the universe implies a very special kind of causality, one that is not similar to any other, and that cannot therefore be captured completely by any analogy. It is as if brahman has acted upon itself in order to produce this universe, that is full of change. Yet, the Upanisads abound with passages denying that any change is possible in brahman, and indeed Sankaracarya denies that brahman really acts. Brahman is also described as devoid of all attributes, along with passages that glorify brahman as isvara, the Lord of this universe, with infinite attributes.

Nirguna and Saguna brahman

To resolve such passages in the Upanisads, advaita vedanta maintains that really brahman is devoid of all attributes, and is therefore known as nirguna. brahman may be described as in the Upanisads, as Truth (satyam), Knowledge (jnanam), Infinite (anantam), or as Being (sat), Consciousness (cit), Bliss (ananda), but none of these terms can be truly interpreted as attributes ofbrahman as a Super-person/God. Rather, it is because brahman exists, that this whole universe is possible. It is because brahman exists that man ascribes attributes to brahman. However, brahman’s true nature cannot be captured in words, for all these attributes are ultimately just words. Hence, it is man’s ignorance of Its true nature that postulates attributes to brahman, thereby describing It in saguna terms (with attributes). This saguna brahman is isvara, the Lord, whose essential reality as brahman is not dependent on anything else, and does not change because of the production of this universe. Therefore,advaita holds that brahman’s own nature (svarupa-laksana) is devoid of any attributes (nirguna), while It is seen for the temporary purposes of explaining creation ( tatastha-laksana) to be isvara, with attributes (saguna).

So much for saguna and nirguna brahman. If brahman cannot be held to have suffered any change because of creation of the universe, then what is the status of this universe? Since the cause does not undergo any change in the process of producing the effect, it is held that the cause alone is Real. The universe only partakes in reality inasmuch as it is to be considered as dependent on brahman. Therefore the Upanishads say, “sarvam khalvidam brahma.” If the universe is considered to be independent of brahman, then it has no real Reality, although the world of human perception can never reveal this truth. This is simply because brahman Itself is never an object of human perception. It is this characteristic of dualistic knowledge, derived from perception alone, that prompts the advaitin to call it mithyajnana (false knowledge).

Avidya and Maya

Why does human perception fail to see brahman directly? Sankaracarya attributes it sometimes to avidya (ignorance) and sometimes to maya (the power to deceive). As the Brhadaranyaka Upanisad puts it, ” vijnataram. are kena vijaniyat? ” – How is the Knower Itself to be known? It also stands to reason, therefore, that any effort at characterizing brahman falls far short of brahman. No words reach brahman; how can mere verbal descriptions claim to describe It? advaita now turns to the ancient technique of adhyaropa-apavada(sublation of superimposition) to explain this. Thus, although brahman is called the instrumental and material cause of the universe, advaita tells us that this is only a preliminary view of brahman, motivated by a need to explain creation of the universe. In order to understand brahman, one has to go beyond this preliminary view, and understand brahman in Itself, not necessarily in relation to the universe. Then it is understood that the whole universe is only superimposed on the underlying Reality that is brahman. To really knowbrahman, one needs to sublate this superimposition, and look at the substratum (adhistana ) that is brahman. As for the exact nature of avidya and maya, later authors seem divided into two major schools of thought, namely the bhamatiand the vivarana schools.

Brahman = Atman

What then of the human self, the jiva? It is here that advaita comes up with the most radical answer, one that is unacceptable to all other schools of vedanta. According to advaita, what is called the universe is in reality not other thanbrahman. Similarly, what is called the jiva is in reality, the atman, which is also nothing other than brahman Itself. The real jiva is the atman, which is unchanging, ever free, and identical with brahman. This is said on the basis of upanishadic passages where the atman is explicitly equated with brahman. This equation of atman with brahman is also explained by means ofadhyaropa-apavada . By sublating the superimposition of human shortcomings and attributes on the atman, the pure atman, the substratum, shines forth as brahman Itself. The mani-fold universe and the individual self, which considers itself bound, are both superimposed upon that Transcendental Reality which isbrahman. Once the superimposition is understood for what it is, the individual is no more an individual, the universe is no more the universe – all is brahman.

This doctrine of advaita should not be misinterpreted to mean that the human self is in and of itself God, without any qualification whatsoever. Sankaracarya most emphatically asserts that such is not his intention. On the other hand, he is at great pains to point out that one who is desirous of moksa needs to overcome his human shortcomings in order to achieve full liberation. Sankara prescribes rigorous prerequisite qualities for the person who is to study vedanta. These form the practical aspect of the effort to rise above and sublate the characteristics of the human jiva, in order to understand the atman /brahman. The non-dual reality of the atman is revealed to the intense seeker, as an experience that defies words. One might call it a mystic experience ofbrahman, in which to know brahman is to be brahman. Thus, rather than being atheistic or non- theistic, advaita-vedanta is meta-theistic: it points to the basic underlying Reality of all, including what humans call God, what humans call the universe, and what humans call human. This Reality is the unchangeable brahman.

Tattvam Asi

At this juncture, it is instructive to look at the advaitin interpretation of theChandogya statement tattvamasi , following Sankaracarya. This is one of the four statements that have become well- known as the Upanishadicmahavakyas, which equate atman with brahman. The four most importantmahavakyas (one from each veda) are:

– ” ayamatma brahma ” (Mundaka)

– ” tattvam asi ” (Chandogya)

– ” aham brahmasmi ” (Brhadaranyaka)

– ” prajnanam brahma ” (Aitareya)

Sankara explains tattvam asi as follows. Tat is a common designation for brahman in the Upanisads, while tvam (thou) addresses the student. The sentence states an equation of two seemingly different entities tat – that, andtvam – thou, by means of the verb asi – are. In general, brahman ( tat ) is commonly understood as isvara (saguna brahman), with an infinity of attributes, including the power of creation. Tvam is the individual who is bound, who is embodied, and who is in need of liberation. The difference between tvam and tat seems to be a matter of common knowledge for all individuals. What is the reason for the Upanishad to teach an identity then? An identity cannot be stipulated, even in infallible sruti, if there is a real difference. Keeping in mind that sruti is infallible, advaita therefore concludes that really there is no ultimate difference between tat and tvam.

The identity expressed in a statement like tattvam asi is therefore held to be Real, and its realization constitutes the height of knowledge (jnana). Direct experience of this jnana is in fact moksha. It also follows that since this identity is not perceived normally, difference arises out of avidya , ignorance of the true nature of Reality. Since sruti is superior to perception, this identity is indeed the supreme truth, all difference being in the realm of relative perception. If non-dualism is the true nature of Reality, why is this difference perceived in the first place? Given advaita’s basis on the non-dualistic scriptures, the perception of difference remains, in the final analysis, inexplicable. This is labeled “anirvacya/anirvacaniya ” in advaita – something that can never be fully understood by the human mind. Since perception of duality presupposes avidya, no amount of logical analysis, itself based on this duality, will satisfactorily explain avidya. Hence, Sankaracarya is not much interested in explicatingavidya, except to acknowledge its presence in all human activity, and in trying to overcome it to understand brahman.

Vyavahara and Paramartha

This exegesis of scripture leads to the well-known advaitic doctrine of two levels of understanding: vyavaharika satya (phenomenal or relative reality or just “reality”, where duality is seen) and paramarthika satya (transcendental reality, or “Reality”, non-duality). One important upanishadic source foradvaita vedanta’s theory of two levels of truth is the analysis of the atman as “neti, neti ” – not this, not this. This is from the Brhadaranyaka Upanisad. ThisUpanisad also describes the highest state of the atman in purely non-dualistic terms – ” yatra tvasya sarvam atmaivabhut, tatra kena kam pasyet? ….. vijnataram are kena vijaniyat? ” – Where the atman alone has become all this, how is one to see another? ….. How is the Knower to be Known? Most advaitins point to the quotation from the Brhadaranyaka that immediately precedes this: ” yatra tu dvaitamiva bhavati, … ” -where there is duality, as it were, … – as the scriptural basis for saying that perception of duality is an appearance only, “as it were” and not the supreme Reality. This rejection of all characterization as partial at best, and ultimately untrue, means that the atman is beyond all duality, and all attempts to describe It fail, because language itself presupposes duality. This via negativa approach is very much favored inadvaita-vedanta. This emphasis on identifying the atman with brahman by means of sublating the commonly understood characteristics of each term, to affirm the real nature of the atman, is central to advaita-vedanta.

Note: The standard vedantic position is that brahman is both the material and the instrumental cause of the universe. This is a notion shared by advaita,visistadvaita and the various bhedabheda schools of vedanta. The dvaitaschool denies that brahman can be the material cause of the universe, and (in my opinion) goes against the brahma-sutras in the process.

References:

There is a large body of literature on advaita vedanta. Check the bibliography page for a list of references.

Last updated on May 5, 1999.

 

 

—-

 

These articles about Sankara Acarya were obtained with permission from:http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp

Sankara

by

IRS Issues Warning to Churches

 

IRS warns charities to stay out of political campaigns. In order to remain exempt from federal income tax a church cannot participate or intervene in any political campaign for or against any candidate for public office at the local, state or federal level. This is an absolute prohibition. A church’s exempt status is jeopardized by a single violation. The IRS recently cautioned charities to remain neutral during political campaigns: “(Charities) cannot endorse any candidates, make donations to their campaigns, engage in fundraising, distribute statements, or become involved in any other activities that may be beneficial or detrimental to any candidate.” IRS News Release IR-96-23

Key point. The IRS noted that “whether an organization is engaged in prohibited political campaign activity depends on all the facts and circumstances in each case. For example, orgnanizations may sponsor debates or forums to educate voters. But if the forum or debate shows a preference for or against a certain candidate, it becomes a prohibited activity.”

Key point. The IRS warned that if a charity engages in prohibited political campaign activity it could lose its exempt status. In addition, contributions to such an organization” are not deductible by donors for federal income tax purposes.”

Taken from Church Treasurer Alert! Monthly Newsletter
Richard Hammar, Editor

The monthly magazine Church Treasurer Alert! has accounting, tax, and financial articles by experts on church issues.

by

The Purakas Rites

Hindu Funeral Rites and Ancestor Worship [1]
Antyesti, Sraddha and Tarpana

3. The Purakas Rites  

As we have noted, the notion of an initial subtle body, known as theativahika-sarira, was introduced during the Puranic period. As soon as the gross corporal body was burned, the soul came to inhabit this subtle body composed of only three elements: heat (tejas), wind (vayu), and space (akasa). This was the ativahika body.[1]

The offering of the puraka rites, which involve the offering of handful size cakes made with boiled rice, sesame, honey, milk, sugar and dried fruits, served the function of step-by-step dissolving the ativahika body and gradually creating a subtle preta body. The puraka rites usually last 10 days. The order in which the ativahika body is dissolved and the preta body is created is as follows: On the first day a cake is offered and the deceased obtains the head of the preta; on the second day a second cake is offered and he obtains his ears, eyes and nose; on the third day a third cake is offered and he obtains his chest and neck; on the fourth day he obtains his stomach and abdomen; on the fifth day he obtains legs and feet; on the sixth day, he obtains his vital organs; on the seventh day he obtains bones, marrow, veins and arteries; on the eighth day he obtains nails and hair; on the ninth day all the remaining limbs and organs along with vitality are developed. On the tenth day, when the final cake is offered, the sensations of hunger and thirst associated with the ativahika body are removed. The ativahika body is finally dissolved and the preta bodied is fully developed.

In an emergency situation if the mourning period could only last one day then all the ten funeral cakes must be offered on that day. In some communities these rites are performed on the odd numbered days, but in all cases a total of ten cakes were to be offered.

The ativahika stage is said to involve great suffering due to heat, cold and wind. It is said that during this time the departed soul remains in the sky as wind without any support (akasa-stho niralambo vayu-bhuto nirvasrayah) The subsequent preta body is said to be less subtle than the ativahika body, but still more subtle than the physical body and therefore invisible to the eyes of this world.

Here is a brief description of how the puraka cakes were offered. After returning from the cremation, the nearest relatives of the deceased prepare the ground for the puraka cakes by creating a small altar and marking it with lines. Then with some stands of sacred grass (kusa) the performer sweeps the ground while naming the deceased along with the family gotra, “May this offering be acceptable to thee.” Making a cake with three handfuls of boiled rice, etc. he next says, “Let this first puraka cake restore your head. May it be acceptable to thee.” He then puts fragrant flowers, betel leaves and similar things on the funeral cake and offers a lamp and a woolen scarf to the deceased while saying, “May this lamp and woolen cloth be acceptable to thee.” He then places an earthen vessel of water and black sesame near the puraka cake and says, “May this vessel of water and sesame be acceptable to thee.”

Afterwards the puraka cakes and other things are thrown into sacred waters. The ceremony is then concluded by wiping the ground and leaving some food for crows and other such animals.

For ten successive days the puraka cakes were to be offered using a varied address each day to restore the different bodily parts.

There are many lengthy rules which prescribe who was allowed to perform these puraka rites and the other sraddhas. In fact, the right to perform thesesraddhas and the rights to inheritance were often inter-related. The general hierarchy, going from eldest to youngest within each group, was as follows: the sons, the grandsons, the great-grandsons, the sons of a daughter, a wife, the brothers, the sons of a brother, the father, the mother, the daughters, the daughter-in-laws, the sisters, the sons of a sister and finally any family relation. If no family members are available then the rites may be performed by anyone of the town or village. In making the decision who will perform the funeral rites the emotional and mental competency of a family member was also an important consideration. At any time one family member could defer his or her rights to the next member.

Sixteen Ekoddista-sraddhas

The period of the ten puraka rites was considered a period of mourning. It was also a time of impurity, which meant that the family members would not travel to temples or other holy places. Nor could any sacred ceremonies take place within the family. Ordinarily this time ended after the tenth day with the final dissolution of the ativahika body and the creation of the preta body.[2] The subsequent preta stage lasted for one year. During this time sixteenekoddista-sraddhas were to be performed to maintain the preta body of the deceased and elevate the departed soul to the status of a pitrs. The last of thesesraddhas was called the sapindi-karana at which time the departed soul finally became a pitr. The timing of these sixteen sraddhas is as follows. The firstsraddha is performed on the eleventh day after death. After that twelvesraddhas are performed in each lunar month on the naksatra anniversary of the death.[3] Two further sraddhas are performed on the six-month anniversary of the death. These are usually performed on the day before the regular sixth month and twelfth month naksatra sraddhas. The final sapindi-karana-sraddhawas performed on the day after the last naksatra sraddha. In this way a total of 16 ekoddista-sraddhas were performed.

A brief description of an ekoddista-sraddha is as follows. A clean area is selected so that the performer can face the southern direction, the realm of Yama. The area is washed with cow dung and a seat made of sacred grass (kusa) is prepared. The performer wears his sacred thread over the right shoulder (pracinavitin) and performs a series of rituals and prayers that offer water, cloth, rice cakes (pinda) and other articles to the deceased. In his left hand the performer holds a vessel containing black sesame seeds and water, and in his right hand a special brush made of sacred grass (kusa). This was called a kurca. He pours water through the kurca and names the deceased person saying (in Sanskrit), “May this ablution be acceptable to thee.” Afterwards he takes a rice cake (pinda) mixed with clarified butter and presents it saying, “May this cake be acceptable to thee.” He serves out the food with the following prayers, “Ancestors, rejoice. Take your respective shares and become strong.” He walks counterclockwise around the consecrated spot and says, “Ancestors be glad, take your respective shares and be strong.” He returns to the same seat and again pours water on the ground over the kurca while reciting, “May this ablution be acceptable to you.” The whole affair concludes with the feeding of invited brahmanas in a feeding ceremony call brahmana-bhojanam.

The process of pouring water and black sesame through kurca is calledtarpana. The food that is mixed into cakes is made of boiled rice mixed with ghee and sesame seeds. These are called pindas and they are similar to thepuraka cakes used in the puraka ceremony.[4]

Sapindi-karana the final Sraddha

The sapindi-karana-sraddha is the last of these sixteen sraddhas that are meant to elevate the departed soul to the rank of a pitr. It is performed in a similar manner to the previous sraddha with the following additions. The performer sets out four vessels with water, sesame and fragrance. Three are for the standard hierarchy of pitrs, the father, the grandfather and the great grandfather, and the fourth is for the recently departed soul. The performer then pours the vessel meant for the recently departed soul into the vessels of the three standardpitrs. Similarly, four cakes of rice (pindas) are prepared and the cake belonging to the recently departed soul is broken up and added to the three cakes belonging to three standard pitrs. After the performance of this rite the pretabeing becomes a pitr and joins the assemblage of fathers in their abode (pitr-loka).

Releasing the bull (Vrsotsarga)

At some point during these sixteen ekoddista-sraddhas a rite involving the release of a bull (vrsotsarga) was also performed. Some commentators suggest that it should be performed on the eleventh day, in other words, during the firstekoddista-sraddhas, and others say that it should be performed on last day during the sapindi-karana-sraddhas. The rite is a remnant of the ancient rite of killing the anustarani animal. If an actual bull was not available then an image made of earth, rice or grass could serve the purpose.

Copyright © Sanskrit Religions Institute 2003.
All rights reserved.

[1] The term ativahika has its origins in the Upanisads where it refers to those who are deployed to carry the dead to the other world (ativahe iha lokat para-loka-prapane niyuktah).

[2] The period of impurity would vary according to caste. Higher castes had generally shorter periods of impurity. Ordinarily the major period of impurity would last until the eleventh day. After that regular temple going would resume, but major auspicious family ceremonies such as weddings may be postponed for a year until the final sapindi-karana had been performed.

[3] There are 27 naksatras in a lunar month. See —— for details.

[4] The word pinda is derived from the Sanskrit root pind which means “to form into a ball, to mass, or to join together.” A pinda is that food which is usually made of rice mashed together with various things such as meat, sesame, ghee, dried fruits, sugar, and other condiments. More often it is just made of plain rice. According to some authorities the size of the rice cake should be as small as can easily enter into the mouth of a child of two years. According to other sources it should be one handful of size. Some sources describe it as the size of a hen’s egg. Usually three pinda are offered, one for the father, one for the grandfather, and one for the great-grandfather.

 

by

Duties of Temple Trustees

1. Determine the organization’s mission and set policies for its operation, ensuring that the provisions of the organization’s charter and law are being followed.

2. Set the organization’s overall program from year to year and engage in longer range planning to establish its general course for the future with short term (the next year),medium term (the next five years), long term (the next decade) goals and objectives.

a. establish goals and objectives in advance of every new year
b. develop a written plan
c. review the operational and financial consequences of these goals and objectives

3. Establish fiscal policy and boundaries.

a. develop and monitor budgets
b. establish fiscal control (who signs checks and approves invoices, will the treasurer be bonded, should the books be audited by an outside examiner, etc.

4. Provide adequate resources for the activities of the organization through direct financial contributions and a commitment to fund raising.

5. Select, evaluate, and if necessary, terminate the appointment of the chief executive.

6. Develop and maintain a communication link to the community to promote the work of the organization (speak to community and business groups, friends and associates about the organization’s activities and importance to the community.

Trustees should not:

Engage in the day-to-day operations of the organization
Hire staff other than the chief executive
Make detailed programmatic decisions without consulting staff

Should trustees be expected to donate to the Temple?

Trustees must support the organization in spirit, encouraging others to be as enthusiastic about its programs and activities as they are. They must support the organization more tangibly with money, demonstrating that those closest to the organization, its trustees, are 100 percent committed to it. No set amount of donation should be asked of the directors; however, the directors are expected to provide adequate resources for the activities of the organization through direct financial contributions and a commitment to fund raising.

Adapted from Managing a Nonprofit Organization by Thomas Wolf.