Line 102: |
Line 102: |
| | | |
| == Brahman as in Different Sampradayas == | | == Brahman as in Different Sampradayas == |
| + | |
| + | === Unity of Brahman === |
| + | Rig veda |
| + | |
| + | Unlike the abrahmic faith, which creates a no-diversity in the process of sadhana or in the perfection (salvation of the Abrahmic faith), in Sanatana Dharma sadhana and sadhaka are unique as they are in the ultimate perfect state. According to Advaitins, the mokhsa is becoming one with Brahman and the Vaishnavaites experience Brahman in the form of Narayana and achieving the Narayana in the Vaikuntha loka. Within the Vaishnava vedanta there is more diversity of perfection with one achieving Vaikuntha; some call it as Goloka, others as Ayodhya, some others as Krishna, Narasimha depending on the deity that they are worship in their sadhana state. Therefore for a Vaishnava sadhana and sadhya are non-different. |
| + | |
| + | Thus, it appears as there are many deities but the character they experience is of the same essence of Brahman. As to the abrahmic faiths, they cannot comprehend the perfected stage manifesting in this diversity of forms. |
| + | |
| + | One many note that the habits, jivana vidhana, daivatarchara of practitioners of Advaita and Vaishnava vedantins are same, they perform all the samskaras which are essentially the same with minor local flavors. A mature Sanatana dharmi does not "tolerate" but "celebrates" the differences of diversity. |
| + | |
| + | In abrahmic faith, Kingdom of God is a localised place. One cannot invoke God in the visible world, but Brahman in Sanatana Dharma can be invoked and experienced in the visible world. It is a destination, which cannot be attained by a sinner, left with only once choice, in one life which is belief in One God without any diversity. If he cannot attain the Kingdom of God, he is eternally condemned, perpetually tormented for ever. All actions in Abrahmic faiths are seen as mundane, without any divinity involved. For a sanatana dharmi, life's activities are associated with divinity. Life itself is a yajna, for example, cooking involves worship of Agni, farming involves worship of the air, every being is considered divine (snakes, ants). Whatever dravya is available in his vicinity, is considered to be an offering in this yajna, thus there is clear accessibility to divinity, unlike in the abrahmic faiths where sadhya is not clearly defined. Abrahmic faiths are system centric believer and not sadhana centric seeker. |
| + | |
| + | 9.27 BG |
| + | |
| + | For a Sanatana dharmi, in his avidya state, sin is conditional and circumstantial, hence there is no condemnation or eternal hell. The state of perfection may be delayed but never denied. Creation is a linear aspect unlike in Sanatana Dharma where it is cyclical and eternal (karma siddhanta and punarjanma). |
| + | |
| + | === Differences about Brahman === |
| Everyone of the vedantic system-builders - Sri Shankara, Ramanujacharya, Madhavacharya and others-has followed his own standpoint in his commentary of the Upanishads, bringing a mind illumined, directed by his own individual spiritual experience and interpreted all the passages to uphold his position and popularize the system of thought he expounded.<ref>Swami Ghanananda author of The Dawn of Indian Philosophy (1958) ''The Cultural Heritage of India, Volume 1 : The Early Phases (Prehistoric, Vedic and Upanishadic, Jaina and Buddhist).'' Calcutta : The Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture. (Pages 333-344)</ref> The [[relationship of Atman and Brahman]] is the primary basis of defining the various vedanta schools, for example, Advaita school is so named as it posits that Atman and Brahman are one and the same, while Dvaita school maintains that Atman and Brahman are distinctly two entities. | | Everyone of the vedantic system-builders - Sri Shankara, Ramanujacharya, Madhavacharya and others-has followed his own standpoint in his commentary of the Upanishads, bringing a mind illumined, directed by his own individual spiritual experience and interpreted all the passages to uphold his position and popularize the system of thought he expounded.<ref>Swami Ghanananda author of The Dawn of Indian Philosophy (1958) ''The Cultural Heritage of India, Volume 1 : The Early Phases (Prehistoric, Vedic and Upanishadic, Jaina and Buddhist).'' Calcutta : The Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture. (Pages 333-344)</ref> The [[relationship of Atman and Brahman]] is the primary basis of defining the various vedanta schools, for example, Advaita school is so named as it posits that Atman and Brahman are one and the same, while Dvaita school maintains that Atman and Brahman are distinctly two entities. |
| | | |