Offering Merits -

I do not know if this practise is present in Gaudiya Vaisnavism, nevertheless it is a very nice one: after any spiritual sadhana, japa, singing, etc. one can offer the collected merits for the benefit of all living beings. There are different traditional prayers for this purpose, but it is enough just to think something like this after completing our sadhana: "May this practise serve the benefit of all living beings".

At the beginning and end of any act Sri Vaisnavas offer the fruit of the act back to the Lord. The prayer includes an affirmation that it is in fact His will that the act be done, and that He provides everything for the act to be done, even our own selves. This is call Satvika Tyaga. There is a formal way to do it, but the important thing is that one should in fact mentally fell this way.

When you give the fruit of your actions to all living beings this assumes that the fruit is yours to give in the first place. Sri Vaisnavas do not accept this proposition. Everything belongs to God.

Is the chair you are sitting on yours? According to this theory it belongs to God, but still you use it, and sometimes offer it to your guests, as if it was yours. I hope God does not take this as an insult, "How come this Keshava guy offers a seat to a guest when that seat is actually mine?!". Similarly, I hope that God does not take it as an insult or offence when I offer the merits of my sadhana to all beings.

I don't see why He would take offense. Both ideas sound like sattvika tyaga to me, but the offering merits to God is simply the traditional Sri Vaishnava version is all.

Sure.



Yes, we do use things that belong to God (see Isopanisad Verse One IsavAsyam etc.).

Yes, we do offer them to others to also use.

No, when we do this we do not think that they are "ours" but we still understand that they are His. See Bhagavad Gita where the Lord says sarva loka mahezvaram, that He is the Lord of everything.



Why should He, He provides everything for us, even our bodies, etc. Our duty is to simply use these things properly. Actually according to sastra, Atithi devo bhava, the guest is to be treated as God. Therefore to offer something to a guest as representing God is scriptural.



Any merits that arise from your sadhana are also God given. If you want to give them up to others that's fine. However my only point was and is that those merits are not produced by your efforts they are given by the Lord. Your efforts cannot produce anything separate from the Lord because nothing is separate from Him.

The only difference between your approach an that taken by the Sri Vaisnava Acharyas is that with your approach there is the chance of thinking that one's merit is produced directly due to one's efforts and not God given.

This offering of merit is common in Buddhist traditions where the ultimate act of sacrifice and compassion is to forego nirvana and one's release from the cycle of samsara so as one may remain here and guide the conditioned.

On the ownership thing, to think of God as the owner of all is to think of God in materialistic capitalistic terms.

That's why I so admire the Buddhists! What a lovely idea in a world where so often we are most concerned with our own gratification, our own liberation, our own wealth, etc., etc., perhaps especially in America. It's so nice to have the Buddhists come along and remind us, hello, you share the planet with over 6 billion people who have feelings and needs too, what are you going to do about it?

The stories about those who give up their chance to escape suffering and stay here to help others escape too are among the most moving I have ever read. I wish I had even a small fraction of that love for others. Something to shoot for.

Keshava, I don't know what you would think of this, but I think another aspect of offering merits is to show our dependence on the Lord for obtaining Him, and our lack of dependence on our own actions as a means of reaching Him. Thus offering merits to Him would be like "please take these, I don't need them." In dayaasatakam, swamy desika offers his sins to dayaa devi (who is venkatesha Himself) and here we are also offering our punya to Him. Thus both get canceled out, not because of an equal balance (cancelling out) of both, but simply because He has taken both and we just take Him.

As for offering merits to others, I have heard it said that when we touch the feet of gurus/holy people, we are in the process taking some of their punyam for ourselves (since they have so much extra, and don't need it because they depend on the Lord only for everything). Interesting, no?

With all due respest to those following other traditions, and the fact that this topic is posted in the Academic/Controversial/Eclectic forum, I am not really understanding what Buddhist tradition Openmind is referring to.

There are many Buddhist traditions which are "somewhat" personal like Jodo Pure Land. However there are many more that are totally impersonal. This is the case with Vaisnavism (Hinduism) also. However with impersonal Vaisnava/Hinduism the standard understanding is that at least Brahman exists (is real) and that at least in the case of Sankara's Advaita there is a type of "lower" reality (not really real) in which there is a Saguna Brahman (personal God) to whom the "illusory" atman or soul can offer the "illusory" merits of his or her "illusory" sadhana.

In Buddhism in general (and since I don't know exactly what kind of Buddhism we are talking of here) the fundamental idea is that reality is sunya or void which is different from that of the Hindu Advaitin. In a realty that is void there is in fact NO atma/soul, NO sadhana/process, NO Isvara/God, NO punya/merit (or papa/sin for that matter), and NO offering of it (this is even more amazing as some Buddhist traditions somehow accept Karma even though they do not accept a KatR or doer).

So before we get all "warm and fuzzy" about the idea of offering our merits to anyone, we must first acknowledge that at least we and others exist, and that there is a real difference between us. Second we have to acknowledge that punya/merit (and also by inference papa/sin) exist. Thirdly that these punyas and papas can attach themselves to individuals (ie Karma theory). Fourthly we must also understand the cause of these punya/papas and the universal mechanism which allows them to be attached or detached to the individual.

The followers of Purva Mimamsa or Karma Mimamsa keep God out of this equation as do many Buddhists.

If we are to have a more meaningful conversation on this topic then perhaps Openmind could explain a little about the type of Buddhism he is speaking about (and maybe Tapati wants to explain her ideas in relation to pantheism).

Haribol,

I was told to chant extra rounds on behalf of my spiritual master who is very sick. I also think that the disciples of ACBSP holded 24 hr kirtan on his behalf at critical times. Is that not examples of offering merits or @auterities@ on behalf of someone else?

Radhe Radhe

P.S What was the name of Vrinda devi's husband? Didn't he got his huge strength from his chaste, pure and devoted wife also?

I am not actually a pantheist. My view of the Divine retains the "simultaneously one and different" doctrine I learned from ACBVSP. I simply worship a Goddess rather than Krsna. I am sure She would be just fine with transferring merit as a concept and a practice.

I also see from experience that many Buddhists are very personal in their own nature, even if their form of Buddhism is one of the varieties that is more impersonal in belief.

But I don't claim to be an expert in any of the forms; I simply read them from time to time and translate concepts into my own personalist framework. They have insight into a number of things that I am curious about, and I respect the time and thought they have put into their various traditions.

edited to add:

Looking around I found a nice page on Wikipedia about Buddhism and as you scroll down they discuss the different schools. Here is the link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism#The_...hes_of_Buddhism

Or maybe Peter has some good links we can check out as well.

Hmm... I don't think you're actually chanting on his behalf, rather you are praying extra for Radha-Krishna to take care of the welfare of a dear one of theirs. You cannot "give away" the merits of chanting harinama. There is no particular quantity of merit that arises after chanting harinama, of which you may deduct. However, of it you may share, yet your own portion remains of the same size, or perhaps grows due to the kindness of your heart.



Her husband is called Mahipala. However I cannot remember a story along the lines you mention.

This must be the story he had in mind. I found versions at both http://www.salagram.net/Tulasi.htm and
http://www.vrindavan.org/vrindakunja/sukam...INDA-TULASI.htm.

In version two, it says:



So instead of transferring merit it appears to be more of a straightforward prayer for assistance of another.

It was because of Tulsi devi's chastity that Jalandara was able to remain undefeated in battle. Thus it became necessary for Sri Hari to relieve her of said chastity.

My original message is as follows:


Did I mention the word Buddhist? Or Buddhism? Or sunya? Or nirvisesa sunyavadi pascatya desa tarine? Nooo. Nevertheless, just for Keshava's information offering merits is present in every school of Buddhism, at least in the ones I had training in: Vajrayana (Kadampa, Kagyupa, Sakya and Nyingma), Zen (both Soto and Rinzai) and Dzogchen (Maha Ati). All Vajrayana pujas end with a prayer similar to this (meaning that by the accumulated merits we wish to achieve enlightenment so that we can bring all others to that state, too):

"Gewa di yi nyur du da, chag gya chenpo drub nyur ne
Drowa chik tyang malu pa, de yi sa la gon par shog"

After Zen practice (both Soto and Rinzai) people chant the Four Great Vows. The first vow is:

"Sentient beings are numberless, I vow to save them all"

In Dzogchen (Maha Ati) we used the following prayer for dedicating the merit for the benefit of all beings:

"Om dare dare bandare svaha"



Anyway, I did not open this thread to generate any philosophical debate. I put it here, in the eclectical section, because it is not about God or lilas or rasa. I simply presented a method I found useful, if someone likes it, one can use it, otherwise just forget it.

I could have sworn the original starting message had something on Buddhism. I have a very distinct memory of this. Strange. I'll have to check this out from a backup just to assure myself. If there was nothing on Buddhism, why post it in this section? And if not Buddhist, what are those traditional prayers you mention?

Just check, as far as I remember, I did not modify the original post. And why these Buddhist prayers? Because Keshava asked which school of Buddhism I was talking about (even though I was not talking about any Buddhist school). I put it here because it is not a traditional GV method, as far as I know, but it is universal and eclectical, anyone can use it. I learned the method in Buddhism, but I consider it a non-sectarian method so I thought I would share. I intentionally presented it in a way acceptable to anyone, "May this practise serve the benefit of all living beings", making sure I do not mention words like "Buddha" or "enlightenment" that may sound strange to Vaisnavas.

Seems like I don't have backups since a couple of days. Anyhow I read a whole bunch of posts at once, maybe I just assumed yours was about Buddhism too since you have a history with the tradition and someone brought it up later on.

I bet that's what happened. Because I don't remember the orig. post having anything to do w/ Buddhism. Just "this can be done- does Gaudiya Vaishnavism have anything like this?"

First of all I admit that it is I that brought up the subject of Buddhism with regards to Openmind's original post and pantheism with regard to Tapati's. Please don't be upset by this. This was only because of reading your profile Openmind and reading some of your posts Tapati. I just thought that maybe you would be knowegable about these traditions. Yes, probably we do find these ideas of giving merits in all traditions. However what I am interested in is how realistic those claims are philosophically. People find all sorts of things to be helpful, even placebos. My question is what is the philosophical understanding behind such claims.

With regard to the Gaudiya tradition let me say this. Is there not a story of a devotee of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (Vasudeva Ghosa? please correct me if I'm wrong) who desired to take all the sins of the living entities in the universe so that they could all go to moksha?

This is indeed a noble sentiment. However my question remains:

Is this actually possible? Can someone trade karma/punya/papa? What is the philosophical justification for such a thing?

You raise an interesting point. I also believe that in the story of Prahlad he was told that so many generations of his family would be liberated because of his devotion. But can one deliberately transfer the fruits of their devotional service to another? I am not sure, and having given away most of my Vaishnava literature I can't research it from the point of view of your tradition. I am sure most pagans would be open minded about such a possibility, whether they are (poly or mono) theists or pantheists.

However, regardless of whether one can offer up the merits of their spiritual practice, I think it is a valuable thing to offer to give it up for others.

It goes back to Jagat's topic of the person and God, the tension between working for our own spiritual benefit and realization, and caring for all other suffering living entities. I think this practice, when offered sincerely and with the belief that it may be possible, helps us break down our false ego's inherent selfishness. To come to a platform of genuine willingness to abandon the benefit of our spiritual practice for ourselves both helps develop our compassion and helps us detach from the result of our activity, to not be attached to the goal of bhakti but to the process itself. If one comes to believe that the results of sadhana are going to others, and one practices anyway, one will actually be doing so for the love of the activity itself. Isn't that more to the point? What one does now out of duty and faith that it will produce Krsna prema in the future, one will continue to do out of love for the process, and by so doing will be one step closer to the actual goal.

Incidentally, I took no offense at the pantheist reference, but I felt I should clarify my beliefs because pagans (of all different kinds) are all over the map in terms of perception of God or Goddess. I very much appreciate your association, Keshava, because when I was a Vaishnava I so wanted to be a pujari. My life unfortunately didn't take me in that direction but I've enjoyed reading your posts about issues related to that glorious service.

Blessed Be--

Tapati

I think the justification to offer the merits to everyone is to be free of good karma. After all, if the sadhaka is buddhist he didn't want any karma at all. He just want generate bodicita (iluminated mind) to help another beings to deliver from suffer.

The buddhists didn't offer to god, cause Buddha didn't say anything about the existence of God. So, to say that buddhist are atheits are a big error.

Anyway, if you offer to all, you offer to god also, since God is at everyone heart

My main dedication of merits follow:

"May wherever merits generated by this email go to all people in form of Goura-karuna!"