I was in Kansas City recently and saw a listing posted on a bulletin board in a church there of places that are open to group meditations in the general cross-border Kansas-Missouri region. The list was quite long and incredible including some places you would expect but also denominational protestant churches now offering buddhistic meditation classes and group sittings. Whoa, times are changing. The Buddhists seem to have the language of 'inter-faith' down pat which old church communities are re-contextualizing and welcoming. Is transcendent meditation by association with things Vedic seen now as too religious? Jai Adi Shankara, -Buck
Om egads, Empty.. This is terribly interesting! Does the evident antipathy between Buddhism with its Buddhistic practices like mindfulness and transcendent meditation go back even that far? In roots of divergence it seems that not only does modern science show us now they are different practices but even before that a fundamental difference rooted in the spiritual use of rite is also in the Battle lines between the two which seem more clearly written with this scholarly observation of yours. Adi Shankara Vs. Gautama Buddha. -Buck in the Dome ..he [Shankara] worked extensively to refute the idea that the performance of Vedic rites was necessary or even accessory to the realization of BrahmÂtman. Emptybill writes: What Adi Shankara does not do is declare the Vedic rites to be spiritually useless. That was the claim of Gautama Buddha who considered them founded upon attachment to relative rather than transworldly values. Shankara considered the performance of Vedic rites to be preparatory and purifying but non-essential. He thus opposed his method to that his contemporary Advaitin, Mandana Mishra, who championed the view of jñâna-karma samucchaya – the combined path of jñâna and karmic rites. Shankara also considered yoga to be only accessory because the real nature of the self is already awareness (jñâna) and that awareness is who/what we are. No yogic suspension of mental activity (chitta.vritti.nirodha) is necessary because transcendence (nirvikalpa samâdhi) is already the essential nature of awareness. Thanks Emptybill, Substantial post. But oh-oh: " ..he worked extensively to refute the idea that the performance of Vedic rites was necessary or even accessory to the realization of BrahmÂtman." In Western European history those kind of illuminating spiritual people challenging rites and such formality would have been called 'separatists'. I have found meditating during vedic performances by capable priests to be spiritually useful at times. That is my experience. But, Jai Adi Shankara, -Buck in the Dome emptybill@...> wrote : Neti sez: What did Adi Shankara say was the fastest method to Liberation in this Kali Yuga? Well Neti, you can’t even get a straight answer to a simple question. You might note the comments upon your question. Not one of them quotes Shankara directly because they only know about his tradition. No one here reads him. That even includes Shankara’s Gita commentary – the oldest extant commentary for two millenia. In his various commentaries, Shankara did not talk about yugas. Adi Shankara talked about the reality expounded by the Upanishads, the Brahma Sutras and the Gita. That reality is defined as Brahman (literally "The Vast" or "Vastness"). Shankara emphasized the Upanishadic definition of Brahman - satyam, jñânam, anantam. Since “what is” gets reiterated by Shankara as satyam (reality or "isness"), jñânam (awareness) and anantam (limitlessness), his task was to demonstrate what ignorance (avidya) actually is and how it seems to result in the appearance (mithya) of an independent cosmos of cause and effect. Along with that focus, he worked extensively to refute the idea that the performance of Vedic rites was necessary or even accessory to the realization of BrahmÂtman. One variance to note is that when the Gita does talk about the “ages” of Brahma and the universal manifestation, Shankara does comment – all the while following the verses of the text. As expected, he points to the imperishable (aksharam) as the supreme Brahman beyond time. He then amplifies the Gita instructions for attaining that reality which is also known as the supreme person (param purusham) who reposes in the sun as Hiranyagarbha, sustainer of the sense-powers of all beings in the local universe. He calls that entity adhi-daivatam, the divine being and adhi-yajñah (the being of the sacrifice) and specifically calls him Vishnu, the pervader.
