I’ll read through all of that slowly and carefully, so thank you for posting.
There's numerous teachings in that post. The foundation of Vedanta is there, the karana karyam prakriya (cause/Effect). Ajativada (non-origination of creation). And Adhyaropa apavada. :) .
What I’m then not understanding, is, what was it that Swami Dayananda couldn’t get or accomplish, with Sw Chinmayananda, and why? And what was your reason for telling that story.
Swami Dayananda always kept great Bhakti for his Guru, who was without doubt a great teacher. It's a difference in approach. That's why I also mentioned it in the topics context. Swami Dayananda in fact has three teachers.
I've just been talking to a Swami, and he is saying the opposite of what the other Swami is saying in regard to Swami Dayanandalol. I've just been gave a clarification over it. Not a gentle rebuke, but I don't appreciate myself saying something that isn't accurate, lol.
I guess the best thing then is to take what I said with a pinch of salt earlier. I'm going to speak to the Swami who said this directly. It'll take a little time. The Swami who said it is also a direct disciple. I'm taken aback a little. Anyhow...
Always prasad, i'm going to be taught Swami Dayananda's complete story starting tomorrow after this, in a one-to-one.
I assumed there was something lacking with the teaching of Sw C, that meant that Sw D needed to go and do some inner self-reflection, before the teachings of Vedanta, opened up to him. And I thought you were calling that self-reflection, self-inquiry. I couldn’t understand why Sw C wouldn’t have had a complete teaching, sufficient to complete things for Sw D.
It's difference in approach. The same as Ramakrishna Mission, Swami S was mentioned by Zizliz there. Rick Ross, this forum owner, also rates SWami S. I do personally myself. I'm not saying it's been said that there was something Wrong with what was taught at Chinmaya mission.
I don't want to say anything else now, in regard to the whole thing. I've put my foot in it a little. It's not my fault as such, but still, I dont' want to make it worse, haha.
Thanks for all your explanations, Earthquake! Could you give an example of how to do self-inquiry? Is this done only during meditation or also during daily activities?
Vedanta vicara is sravanam, manananam & nididhyasanam. This reveals the meaning of the teachings, and this counters the existing notions of conditioning.
What happens is the person listens and applies the knowledge (sravananam). This is done through set teachings. These teachings carefully strip away prejudiced and personal ideas about reality. The student receives the teachings from the teacher, and uses that knowledge in class, and after, to challenge existing conditioning. The teacher will take questions at the end, which is personal one to one, and this can happen anytime after also. But the teacher only guides, the person must walk themselves.
A good example is that everyone doesn't like sadness. So they come to Vedanta to sort that out, place it in Vedanta context but, they're maybe not as quick to sort happiness out. This is because first happiness is nice, and second there's spiritual idealism in regard to that. So, the person carries on thinking happiness completes them. That is looked into. If sadness doesnt limit me, does happiness complete me? What does Vedanta say? It says that any happiness is merely vishaya ananda, object happiness. And it only anandamaya kosa, the bliss body. if i'm not the bliss body what am I? So I recall orlearn that Vedanta says I am atma, consciousness. I am ananda. Limitless. And anantam Infinitude. This is reasoning and deducing. Inquiry. And we use the teacher and scripture to confirm it. The mind is taking away personal ideas in conditioning by reinforcing what they actually are.
Why would happiness by inquired into? Because it never lasts. In fact, there is happiness, along with the fear of losing it. There is losing happiness, and there is no-happiness. Life is more non-happiness than happiness. What Vedanta offers is constant contentment.
There is other vicara (inquiry) such am Omkara Vicara. This is inquiry into Om. Which is Brahman. That includes the world also. It's taught in the Mandukya. And is enough for enlightenment itself.
Myself and a Swami were just talking about sadhana. A discriminating mind into the nature of self is what it's all about. If the teachings have been proper, this isn't only that im not the person, that im consciousness, it's also how that relates to the world. This is through the implications.
The Swami says: 'Looking at Vedanta or reading Vedanta on one's own won't show what Vedanta is about. They need a teacher. it's not like a novel to read.'
That's because we only can understand something from our current ignorance. The teacher knows the way, and so is able to lead. :).
What happens in your lineage once you "get it", is the practice of self-inquiry continued, or replaced with another practice, or is practice abandoned altogether?
Pujya Swamiji teaches that enlightenment is only the starting perspective. Sadhana is sanskrit for a means to an end. Sahaja is the goal. Moksha sadhana is sadhana for enlightenment as the goal. Once that is resolved, there's no need for sadhana. No need for Vedanta, but the question is why would one not carry on. Sadhana for enlightenment is freedom from suffering so there is suffering. Once there is no suffering, there's simply Vedanta for the sheer joy.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/15/2020 11:41PM by earthquake.