Adi Shankara -- Value
Meditationtime Forum Post
Date: Posted 3 years before Oct 30, 2016
MiBeloved 3 years ago
Chaitanya on LinkedIn:
In what way Adi shankara Teachings influence you?
Today is Shankara Jayanti. Today over 1000 years ago was born Adi Shankara an undisputed milestone in the world of spirituality. Whatever is known today as Sanatana Dharma or Hinduism is a design of Adi Shankara. For someone who understands only logic, Shankra is the perfect master. For those who want to understand the path of Bhakti again Shankara explains them by just singing Bhaja Govindam. His life is an inspiration for many who think enlightenment is a gift by birth and cannot be achieved. The lineage of masters and sannyasi tradition and the 4 ashramas was re-established in proper form by Shankara. Whatever literature that’s known today is because of AdiShankara.
Shiva has long hair a jata to hold the JnanaGanga on his head while Adishankara has held her with a shaved head. He is a master who gave away his last possession, his name as his very state to the disciples. The cosmos is enriched by Adi Shankara.
It’s said there are only two kinds of groups. One which accepts Shankara, the other which rejects Shankara. You can't deny him. He is a perfect example of a master and a student.
MiBeloved's Response:
There is one very special aspect which I got from Adi Shankara, which is his explanation of the two birds sitting on the tree of life from the Upanishads, where he said that the two birds were the buddhi and the atma, or the intellect and the spirit self.
As an independent interpretation of the analogy of the birds, I appreciate this because when doing kriya yoga, one has to come to terms with the self and its psychic adjuncts of which the buddhi intellect is an equipment which the self has to bring to order.
I do however not appreciate his reluctance to admit that the two birds were originally meant as an analogy of the limited spirit (ksar puruṣaḥ) and the Supreme Spirit (akshara puruṣaḥ), and that this analogy stands for all time even though the spirit still have to get its adjuncts (buddhi included) under its wing as one cohesive psyche which only works in the spiritual interest of the core-self (atma)
His analogy about the buddhi and the atma is useful even to those of us who do not buy into his oneness (advaita) idea, because even with the admission of the Supreme Person (Krishna/Shiva), still that Supreme Person will instruct the limited spirit (atma) to bring that buddhi to order so that the buddhi and the atma can live in harmony in the interest of the atma at the expense of everything else, instead of living in harmony in the interest of material nature (prakriti) at the expense of the atma-self.
Shankara’s adoption of the body of a king for the sake of having carnal knowledge so as to win the debate with Mandana Mishra is something that requires deep insight because technically speaking from the psychic perspective it was a breach of his celibate vow, even though from a moral position, it was no breach because his material body did not participate to get the knowledge. It shows that there are loopholes in social morality or dharma.
It is interesting that he made no attempt to get carnal knowledge in the astral world and instead went to the extent of adopting a dead or near-dead body to sexually gain access to physical women. There are thousands of apsaras and dakinis in the astral world and yet he took physical access.
unlimitedsun 3 years ago
Initially from the original post I was trying to pick one of two culprits; the knowledge of the Self or organized religion. Then I read of the two birds and thought of some higher aspect.
The carnal knowledge bit raised questions of a whole other type. Near necrophilia over willing readily accessible subtle partners, that's deep to say the least.
