"Although genius is an overused term, in my opinion the word perfectly applies to Aldous Huxley–a man for whom thinking itself was an art. In Knowledge and Understanding, a lecture given at the Hollywood Vedanta Temple, he explores the very nature of mental processes. His spontaneous exchanges in the intimate Question/Answer section serve as further insight to the man."
—Huston Smith, author of The World’s Religions
I thoroughly enjoyed every minute of it. It gets directly at the heart of the revolution that Huxley was trying to instigate - specifically, to challenge the Western mind to consider a truth that transcends mere knowledge, a truth that is experiential and that the Eastern mind knows as enlightenment. And Huxley does a brilliant job of articulating the nature and benefits of that deeper truth.
Dana Sawyer, author of Aldous Huxley: A Biography
In the course of Aldous Huxley’s long association with the Vedanta Society of Southern California, he was an important contributor to the Society’s literary heritage. His Vedanta-related body of work includes articles, essays, and introductions, and he was the editorial advisor of Vedanta and the West for eleven years.
He lectured at both the Hollywood and Santa Barbara temples. Knowledge and Understanding, as well as the informal question/answer session that followed, was recorded on a wire recorder and has been digitally transferred by the Vedanta Archives and mastered by mondayMEDIA. The audio quality of the Question/Answer session is less than studio standard, but the spontaneous exchanges reveal a personable Huxley. Traditionally, the speaker and interested audience members would assemble in the "Green House" living room for discussion.
—Huston Smith, author of The World’s Religions
I thoroughly enjoyed every minute of it. It gets directly at the heart of the revolution that Huxley was trying to instigate - specifically, to challenge the Western mind to consider a truth that transcends mere knowledge, a truth that is experiential and that the Eastern mind knows as enlightenment. And Huxley does a brilliant job of articulating the nature and benefits of that deeper truth.
Dana Sawyer, author of Aldous Huxley: A Biography
In the course of Aldous Huxley’s long association with the Vedanta Society of Southern California, he was an important contributor to the Society’s literary heritage. His Vedanta-related body of work includes articles, essays, and introductions, and he was the editorial advisor of Vedanta and the West for eleven years.
He lectured at both the Hollywood and Santa Barbara temples. Knowledge and Understanding, as well as the informal question/answer session that followed, was recorded on a wire recorder and has been digitally transferred by the Vedanta Archives and mastered by mondayMEDIA. The audio quality of the Question/Answer session is less than studio standard, but the spontaneous exchanges reveal a personable Huxley. Traditionally, the speaker and interested audience members would assemble in the "Green House" living room for discussion.
VEDANTA AND VEDIC RELIGION
Vedanta, literally meaning “the end of the Veda,” is one of the six schools of traditional Hindu philosophy, though it comprises within itself viewpoints of widely differing character. The usual adjective is “Vedantin,” but occasionally one finds “Vedantist” in modern English. Vedanta expounds the later part of the Vedic scriptures, namely the Upanishads, and is in principle based on summary of Upanishadic teaching contained in Brahmasutra. Sometimes “Vedanta” is used more narrowly to refer to 20th century versions of Advaita Vedanta, as found in writings of Vivikananda and exponents of the “perennial philosophy” (for example, Aldous Huxley).
Traditionally Vedanta, as the uttaramimamsa or “later exegesis” of the Veda, is coupled with mimamsa or purvamimamsd, the “earlier exegesis” of the Veda. In fact, however, the two schools have very different assumptions, and Vedanta is, moreover, much more concerned with systematic metaphysical thinking. The main schools within Vedanta are Advaita (Non-Dualism), Visitad-vaita (Qualified Non-Dualism) and Dvaita (Dualism). These differ radically on such issues as relation between self and ultimate reality (Brahman) and nature of God. Thus essentially Vedanta is a group of systematized viewpoints with common subject matter, such as the nature of Brahman as in first instance expounded philosophically and theologically in Upanishads.
The main phases of development of Vedanta have been: first, period leading to distillation of Upanisadic teaching in Brahmasutra second, period up to Guadapada and Sankara (late 8th, early 9th century CE, who created Advaita Vedanta as a system, drawing in part on Mahayana Buddhist ideas, especially the Sunyavdda; third, the post-Sankara period, which saw not only further development of Advaita, but reaction against it expressed by Ramauja, Madhva and others; fourth, late medieval period, up to European colonial incursion (16th cent. CE); finally, the modern period. The fourth period was quite lively, but not as creative as predecessors, since it involved largely variations on earlier-established themes. The final period has seen restatements of Vedanta in light of new cultural situation brought about by the establishment of Western-style higher education in British India and by challenge of Christ, missionary activities. The synthesis between traditional Vedantin (especially Advaitin) ideas and Western philosophy was facilitated by dominance of Absolute Idealism among Western philosophers in latter part of 19th cent. Two influential figures in the expression of a modern Vedanta to the West have been Vivekananda and S. Radhakrishnan. Sri Aurobindo undertook the adaptation of Vedanta to an evolutionary account of history of world.
Vedic Religion. The expressions “Vedic religion” and “Vedism” are sometimes used to refer to the religion of Vedic hymns; sometimes more broadly to the religion of the total corpus of the Veda, down to the Upanishads, and therefore include the Brahmanas, etc. It is convenient here to use broader sense. Vedism represents an evolution out of the religion of Aryan invaders of India into a more syncretistic theology and cultus, affected by a millennium of symbiosis between Aryan tribes and indigenous population whom they conquered, including the Indus Valley Civilization and various village cultures of Northwest India, comprising Munda-speaking, perhaps Dravidian-speaking and other elements. Although invaders had in most respects inferior cultural development compared with that of Indus civilization, which was highly urban and centralized, they were superior in warfare, and already possessed sophisticated sacrificial cultus, together with a pantheon related to that of ancient Iran. The cultus is represented indirectly in hymns of Veda, which were used in connection with rites administered by the priestly (Brahmin) class, whose dominance grew during the millennium of Vedism. Early Western interpreters of Veda, such as Max Muller, diagnosed it as form of nature-worship; certainly many of the gods do have a relationship to natural phenomena (such as Indra, wielding thunderbolts, Agni, god of fire, Surya, the sun god, etc.). However, this is to overlook some other import, motifs. Thus Indra in his battles against demonic forces reflects Aryans' struggle against the original masters of the Panjab (much if obscurely, can be inferred from hymns about conquest of region). But, more importantly, a great deal of mythology and language of hymns needs to be understood against background of the sacrificial ritual. For example, the importance of Agni and features of his mythology have to do with part played by fire in rites. Further, Vedic mythology richly indicates the interplay of the invaders' beliefs and cultus with that of those they conquered, together with earlier strata of conflict. Thus the gods recognized in ancient Iran, and presumably during transition of Vedic Indians into India, the asuras, are treated largely as “anti-gods.” A considerable number of hymns in Rgveda are addressed to the aggressive Indra, who is represented not merely as an atmospheric deity but as warrior assisting Aryans in overthrowing the dasyus and destroying their fortified towns. Also in Vedic hymns there are numerous refers to Brahman, the sacred force implicit in ritual. Hence it is reasonable to conclude that, though natural phenomena interpreted mythologically played some part in evolution of Vedic pantheon, reflection in the divine sphere of human events and rituals was at least as import. This analogy between ritual and action here on earth and events of higher realm ultimately issued in the Brahman-Atman identification in Upanishads, but only after infiltration into the Vedic religion of ideas drawn from non-Aryan sources, primarily belief in rebirth and eternity of the self (atman). Further, increasing elaboration of cultus itself led to necessity of contextual writings to supplement hymns themselves. These Brahmanas and Aranyakas formed bridge to Upanishads. The concentration upon details and meaning of the ritual both enhanced and was symptom of prestige of priestly class; and was supplemented by incorporation of folk-magic and incantatory formulae as expressed in the Atharvaveda into Vedic collection. There was thus some shift from direct interest in the gods to the sacred and magical performances occurring here at earthly level. On other hand, the sacrifice itself could be seen as a cosmic event, as in the Purusasukta (purusa); and later hymns of Rgveda, for example, contain some profound speculations about origin of universe. The emergence of creators such as Prajapati signalized a certain drift towards monotheistic belief; while it was characteristic of many hymns to heap the attributes of other gods upon the god addressed within a hymn, thus elevating a given god to supreme place within the context (kathenotheism). The most elevated of such deities was Varuna, though later he was to lose much of his importance; and associated with him was concept of cosmic, moral and ritual order, rta. The later functional creator gods, such as Prajapati, Vis-vakarman, etc., did not seem to have cultic and mythic power to displace other gods; nor did any of earlier important deities, such as Indra, Varuna, Agni, etc., succeed in establishing a recognized predominance over all others (as did Zeus in the Greek pantheon). To some extent way towards more unified conception of divinity was through process of identification, as in the famous verse (Rgveda, i, 164, 46): “They call it Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni; or again the celestial bird Garutman; the one reality the sages call by various names. They call it Agni, Yama, Mataris-van.” In another respect, identification became increasingly important: the homology between sacrificial ritual and spheres of reality, which it controlled, led to search for true identification of sacred power. Brahman. This was rationale of much Upanishadic speculation. Knowledge of Brahman gave power; and knowledge of its identity gave power over sphere of reality identified with Brahman. The search for such knowledge was ultimately synthesized with yogic gnosis (search for self) in formula tat tvam asi and other identity statements. However, though this came to be an important motif in later Vedic religion, it was not the only one (e.g. there is the theism of Katha and Svetasvatara Upanishads). It was task of later sutra writers and commentators to evolve unified view of Upanisadic thought as summit of Vedic religion. By consequence earlier Vedic hymns and Brahmanas, etc., were interpreted from standpoint of later synthesis, and thus to large extent traditional Hindu views of Veda differ from account given above and of modern scholarly investigations of evolution of Vedic polytheism. Vedic religion differs from classical Hinduism in a number of respects. First, the characteristic and dominant cults of classical Hinduism have been those of Visnu and Siva. Both gods are present in Vedic hymns, but Visnu is relatively unimportant. Moreover, the hymns make hostile refers to phallus-worshippers (evidently cult of lingam associated. with Siva). Second, the cult of images and temple worship do not appear in Veda. Third, there was only a foreshadowing of later bhakti religion. Fourth, the division into varnas or classes was present, but not fully-fledged caste system of later Hinduism. Fifth, only in Upanishads is there the almost all-pervasive belief, of Hinduism, in rebirth. Sixth, the center of religion is the sacrificial cultus, which later played a smaller and smaller actual part in fabric of Hinduism. On other hand, Vedic religion set certain patterns that have maintained themselves. First, the dominance of Brahmin class was well established by mid-Vedic times. Second, upper-class patterns of initiation and domestic ritual have continued with relatively little change, considering the time-span involved. Third, the Upanishads have retained dominant position scripturally and have remained normative for expositions of Vedanta. Fourth, the pattern of identifying one divinity with another, etc., has been followed in later Hinduism in task of synthesizing the variety of cults (for example, in the identification of Brahma, Siva and Visnu). Fifth, many gods of Vedic pantheon have persisted into later Hinduism, even if they have been less important cultically than they once were. Sixth, an import, factor in the unity of Indian culture has been Aryanization and Sanskritization of literary and administrative structures of the subcontinent in classical and medieval times— something which grew out of the culture represented by Vedic writings as mediated by the priesthood’s recognizing Vedic writings as revelation (Sruti). But at same time the incorporation of a supplementary canon (smrti) and the influence in medieval times of vernacular religions poetry (Alvars), Tantras and other texts, have in practice greatly modified the interpretation of the Veda. Thus Vedic religion has a complex relationship to Hinduism; in theory, constituting its origin and norm; in fact, being one of factors entering into wider religion and cultural synthesis.
Vedanta, literally meaning “the end of the Veda,” is one of the six schools of traditional Hindu philosophy, though it comprises within itself viewpoints of widely differing character. The usual adjective is “Vedantin,” but occasionally one finds “Vedantist” in modern English. Vedanta expounds the later part of the Vedic scriptures, namely the Upanishads, and is in principle based on summary of Upanishadic teaching contained in Brahmasutra. Sometimes “Vedanta” is used more narrowly to refer to 20th century versions of Advaita Vedanta, as found in writings of Vivikananda and exponents of the “perennial philosophy” (for example, Aldous Huxley).
Traditionally Vedanta, as the uttaramimamsa or “later exegesis” of the Veda, is coupled with mimamsa or purvamimamsd, the “earlier exegesis” of the Veda. In fact, however, the two schools have very different assumptions, and Vedanta is, moreover, much more concerned with systematic metaphysical thinking. The main schools within Vedanta are Advaita (Non-Dualism), Visitad-vaita (Qualified Non-Dualism) and Dvaita (Dualism). These differ radically on such issues as relation between self and ultimate reality (Brahman) and nature of God. Thus essentially Vedanta is a group of systematized viewpoints with common subject matter, such as the nature of Brahman as in first instance expounded philosophically and theologically in Upanishads.
The main phases of development of Vedanta have been: first, period leading to distillation of Upanisadic teaching in Brahmasutra second, period up to Guadapada and Sankara (late 8th, early 9th century CE, who created Advaita Vedanta as a system, drawing in part on Mahayana Buddhist ideas, especially the Sunyavdda; third, the post-Sankara period, which saw not only further development of Advaita, but reaction against it expressed by Ramauja, Madhva and others; fourth, late medieval period, up to European colonial incursion (16th cent. CE); finally, the modern period. The fourth period was quite lively, but not as creative as predecessors, since it involved largely variations on earlier-established themes. The final period has seen restatements of Vedanta in light of new cultural situation brought about by the establishment of Western-style higher education in British India and by challenge of Christ, missionary activities. The synthesis between traditional Vedantin (especially Advaitin) ideas and Western philosophy was facilitated by dominance of Absolute Idealism among Western philosophers in latter part of 19th cent. Two influential figures in the expression of a modern Vedanta to the West have been Vivekananda and S. Radhakrishnan. Sri Aurobindo undertook the adaptation of Vedanta to an evolutionary account of history of world.
Vedic Religion. The expressions “Vedic religion” and “Vedism” are sometimes used to refer to the religion of Vedic hymns; sometimes more broadly to the religion of the total corpus of the Veda, down to the Upanishads, and therefore include the Brahmanas, etc. It is convenient here to use broader sense. Vedism represents an evolution out of the religion of Aryan invaders of India into a more syncretistic theology and cultus, affected by a millennium of symbiosis between Aryan tribes and indigenous population whom they conquered, including the Indus Valley Civilization and various village cultures of Northwest India, comprising Munda-speaking, perhaps Dravidian-speaking and other elements. Although invaders had in most respects inferior cultural development compared with that of Indus civilization, which was highly urban and centralized, they were superior in warfare, and already possessed sophisticated sacrificial cultus, together with a pantheon related to that of ancient Iran. The cultus is represented indirectly in hymns of Veda, which were used in connection with rites administered by the priestly (Brahmin) class, whose dominance grew during the millennium of Vedism. Early Western interpreters of Veda, such as Max Muller, diagnosed it as form of nature-worship; certainly many of the gods do have a relationship to natural phenomena (such as Indra, wielding thunderbolts, Agni, god of fire, Surya, the sun god, etc.). However, this is to overlook some other import, motifs. Thus Indra in his battles against demonic forces reflects Aryans' struggle against the original masters of the Panjab (much if obscurely, can be inferred from hymns about conquest of region). But, more importantly, a great deal of mythology and language of hymns needs to be understood against background of the sacrificial ritual. For example, the importance of Agni and features of his mythology have to do with part played by fire in rites. Further, Vedic mythology richly indicates the interplay of the invaders' beliefs and cultus with that of those they conquered, together with earlier strata of conflict. Thus the gods recognized in ancient Iran, and presumably during transition of Vedic Indians into India, the asuras, are treated largely as “anti-gods.” A considerable number of hymns in Rgveda are addressed to the aggressive Indra, who is represented not merely as an atmospheric deity but as warrior assisting Aryans in overthrowing the dasyus and destroying their fortified towns. Also in Vedic hymns there are numerous refers to Brahman, the sacred force implicit in ritual. Hence it is reasonable to conclude that, though natural phenomena interpreted mythologically played some part in evolution of Vedic pantheon, reflection in the divine sphere of human events and rituals was at least as import. This analogy between ritual and action here on earth and events of higher realm ultimately issued in the Brahman-Atman identification in Upanishads, but only after infiltration into the Vedic religion of ideas drawn from non-Aryan sources, primarily belief in rebirth and eternity of the self (atman). Further, increasing elaboration of cultus itself led to necessity of contextual writings to supplement hymns themselves. These Brahmanas and Aranyakas formed bridge to Upanishads. The concentration upon details and meaning of the ritual both enhanced and was symptom of prestige of priestly class; and was supplemented by incorporation of folk-magic and incantatory formulae as expressed in the Atharvaveda into Vedic collection. There was thus some shift from direct interest in the gods to the sacred and magical performances occurring here at earthly level. On other hand, the sacrifice itself could be seen as a cosmic event, as in the Purusasukta (purusa); and later hymns of Rgveda, for example, contain some profound speculations about origin of universe. The emergence of creators such as Prajapati signalized a certain drift towards monotheistic belief; while it was characteristic of many hymns to heap the attributes of other gods upon the god addressed within a hymn, thus elevating a given god to supreme place within the context (kathenotheism). The most elevated of such deities was Varuna, though later he was to lose much of his importance; and associated with him was concept of cosmic, moral and ritual order, rta. The later functional creator gods, such as Prajapati, Vis-vakarman, etc., did not seem to have cultic and mythic power to displace other gods; nor did any of earlier important deities, such as Indra, Varuna, Agni, etc., succeed in establishing a recognized predominance over all others (as did Zeus in the Greek pantheon). To some extent way towards more unified conception of divinity was through process of identification, as in the famous verse (Rgveda, i, 164, 46): “They call it Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni; or again the celestial bird Garutman; the one reality the sages call by various names. They call it Agni, Yama, Mataris-van.” In another respect, identification became increasingly important: the homology between sacrificial ritual and spheres of reality, which it controlled, led to search for true identification of sacred power. Brahman. This was rationale of much Upanishadic speculation. Knowledge of Brahman gave power; and knowledge of its identity gave power over sphere of reality identified with Brahman. The search for such knowledge was ultimately synthesized with yogic gnosis (search for self) in formula tat tvam asi and other identity statements. However, though this came to be an important motif in later Vedic religion, it was not the only one (e.g. there is the theism of Katha and Svetasvatara Upanishads). It was task of later sutra writers and commentators to evolve unified view of Upanisadic thought as summit of Vedic religion. By consequence earlier Vedic hymns and Brahmanas, etc., were interpreted from standpoint of later synthesis, and thus to large extent traditional Hindu views of Veda differ from account given above and of modern scholarly investigations of evolution of Vedic polytheism. Vedic religion differs from classical Hinduism in a number of respects. First, the characteristic and dominant cults of classical Hinduism have been those of Visnu and Siva. Both gods are present in Vedic hymns, but Visnu is relatively unimportant. Moreover, the hymns make hostile refers to phallus-worshippers (evidently cult of lingam associated. with Siva). Second, the cult of images and temple worship do not appear in Veda. Third, there was only a foreshadowing of later bhakti religion. Fourth, the division into varnas or classes was present, but not fully-fledged caste system of later Hinduism. Fifth, only in Upanishads is there the almost all-pervasive belief, of Hinduism, in rebirth. Sixth, the center of religion is the sacrificial cultus, which later played a smaller and smaller actual part in fabric of Hinduism. On other hand, Vedic religion set certain patterns that have maintained themselves. First, the dominance of Brahmin class was well established by mid-Vedic times. Second, upper-class patterns of initiation and domestic ritual have continued with relatively little change, considering the time-span involved. Third, the Upanishads have retained dominant position scripturally and have remained normative for expositions of Vedanta. Fourth, the pattern of identifying one divinity with another, etc., has been followed in later Hinduism in task of synthesizing the variety of cults (for example, in the identification of Brahma, Siva and Visnu). Fifth, many gods of Vedic pantheon have persisted into later Hinduism, even if they have been less important cultically than they once were. Sixth, an import, factor in the unity of Indian culture has been Aryanization and Sanskritization of literary and administrative structures of the subcontinent in classical and medieval times— something which grew out of the culture represented by Vedic writings as mediated by the priesthood’s recognizing Vedic writings as revelation (Sruti). But at same time the incorporation of a supplementary canon (smrti) and the influence in medieval times of vernacular religions poetry (Alvars), Tantras and other texts, have in practice greatly modified the interpretation of the Veda. Thus Vedic religion has a complex relationship to Hinduism; in theory, constituting its origin and norm; in fact, being one of factors entering into wider religion and cultural synthesis.
The Vedanta Society of Southern California
was founded in 1930 in Los Angeles, California, USA. The Society is under the spiritual leadership of the Ramakrishna Order of India. The Society’s headquarters are in Hollywood, California and it maintains branch centers in Santa Barbara, San Diego, South Pasadena and Trabuco Canyon in Orange County. Membership is open to those who are seriously interested in the teachings of Vedanta and have attended lectures and classes for some time. In addition, an interview with one of the ministers is required.
Interviews with Swami Sarvadevananda are available by appointment at the local centers. There is no charge for these interviews.
Information and books are obtainable in the Hollywood, Trabuco and Santa Barbara bookshops where a large selection of books on Vedanta and other religions is available. Some books are also available at the San Diego Monastery.
History The historical roots of the Vedanta Society of Southern California can be traced back to Swami Vivekananda’s visit to Los Angeles in the late 1890s when he stayed with the Mead sisters in their South Pasadena home. Thirty years later, one of the sisters, Mrs. Carrie Mead Wyckoff, became acquainted with Swami Prabhavananda, a young monk sent to America by the Ramakrishna Order of India. During that time, Mrs. Wyckoff had a house tucked away in the Hollywood hills which she offered to the swami as a gift.
Soon afterwards, in 1929, Swami Prabhavananda moved to Hollywood from Portland to establish the Vedanta Society of Southern California. In 1934, the Vedanta Society of Southern California was officially established as a non-profit organization “to promote harmony between Eastern and Western thought, and recognition of the truth in all the great religions of the world.”
The Vedanta Society steadily grew, and soon there became a need for a larger hall. In 1938, with money donated by Mrs. Wyckoff, a small, white, 3-domed temple was completed and dedicated. In the early 1940s the Vedanta Society was attracting such noted writers and intellectuals as Gerald Heard, Aldous Huxley and Christopher Isherwood.
The influence of these distinguished writers, and their literature, stimulated more growth for the Society. Sincere men and women interested in monastic life began to come, and soon nearby houses were acquired to house a convent and a monastery.
The headquarters of the Ramakrishna Order gave permission for American monastics to receive their vows in 1946. Swami Prabhavananda, the founder of the Vedanta Society of Southern California, passed away in 1976, and Swami Swahananda became the spiritual head of the center for the next thirty-six years. When he passed away in 2012, Swami Sarvadevananda became the next head of the center.
Over the years, branch centers of the main Hollywood Temple were started in Santa Barbara, Trabuco Canyon, San Diego, and South Pasadena.
was founded in 1930 in Los Angeles, California, USA. The Society is under the spiritual leadership of the Ramakrishna Order of India. The Society’s headquarters are in Hollywood, California and it maintains branch centers in Santa Barbara, San Diego, South Pasadena and Trabuco Canyon in Orange County. Membership is open to those who are seriously interested in the teachings of Vedanta and have attended lectures and classes for some time. In addition, an interview with one of the ministers is required.
Interviews with Swami Sarvadevananda are available by appointment at the local centers. There is no charge for these interviews.
Information and books are obtainable in the Hollywood, Trabuco and Santa Barbara bookshops where a large selection of books on Vedanta and other religions is available. Some books are also available at the San Diego Monastery.
History The historical roots of the Vedanta Society of Southern California can be traced back to Swami Vivekananda’s visit to Los Angeles in the late 1890s when he stayed with the Mead sisters in their South Pasadena home. Thirty years later, one of the sisters, Mrs. Carrie Mead Wyckoff, became acquainted with Swami Prabhavananda, a young monk sent to America by the Ramakrishna Order of India. During that time, Mrs. Wyckoff had a house tucked away in the Hollywood hills which she offered to the swami as a gift.
Soon afterwards, in 1929, Swami Prabhavananda moved to Hollywood from Portland to establish the Vedanta Society of Southern California. In 1934, the Vedanta Society of Southern California was officially established as a non-profit organization “to promote harmony between Eastern and Western thought, and recognition of the truth in all the great religions of the world.”
The Vedanta Society steadily grew, and soon there became a need for a larger hall. In 1938, with money donated by Mrs. Wyckoff, a small, white, 3-domed temple was completed and dedicated. In the early 1940s the Vedanta Society was attracting such noted writers and intellectuals as Gerald Heard, Aldous Huxley and Christopher Isherwood.
The influence of these distinguished writers, and their literature, stimulated more growth for the Society. Sincere men and women interested in monastic life began to come, and soon nearby houses were acquired to house a convent and a monastery.
The headquarters of the Ramakrishna Order gave permission for American monastics to receive their vows in 1946. Swami Prabhavananda, the founder of the Vedanta Society of Southern California, passed away in 1976, and Swami Swahananda became the spiritual head of the center for the next thirty-six years. When he passed away in 2012, Swami Sarvadevananda became the next head of the center.
Over the years, branch centers of the main Hollywood Temple were started in Santa Barbara, Trabuco Canyon, San Diego, and South Pasadena.
Ethical Principles
Vedanta ethics and moral virtues are rooted in the ideal of realizing and manifesting our own innate divinity. Simply put, whatever brings us closer to that goal is ethical and moral; whatever prevents us from attaining it, is not.
Like a diamond buried in mud, the Atman shines within us, yet its presence remains obscured, its shining purity masked by countless layers of ignorance: wrong identification, incorrect knowledge, misguided perceptions. It is important to emphasize that we are not trying to become something other than what we already are. We are not trying to become pure; we are pure. We are not trying to become perfect; we are perfect already. That is our real nature. Acting in accordance with our real nature—acting nobly, truthfully, kindly—tears away the veil of ignorance that hides the truth of reality. Whatever distorts this reality is a perversion of the truth.
The whole of Vedanta ethics, then, is based upon a simple line of reasoning: Does this action or thought bring me closer to realizing the truth, or does it take me further away?
Morality and the Ego What is it that prevents us from realizing the truth? Simply put, the ego: the sense of “I” and “mine.” As the great spiritual teacher Ramakrishna said, “The feeling of ‘I’ and ‘mine’ has covered the Reality so we don’t see the truth.” He further said, “When the ego dies, all troubles cease.”
What does the ego have to do with ethics and morality? Absolutely everything. All moral codes are based upon the ideal of unselfishness: placing others before ourselves, forcing the ego to play second fiddle. Following selfish desires is always a detriment to our spiritual life. Whether the action or thought is great or small, any selfishness will make the veil of ignorance thicker and darker. Conversely, any act of unselfishness, however great or small, will have the opposite effect.
It is for this reason that doing good to others is a universal ethical and moral code, found in all religions and societies. Why is this so universal? Because it reflects the truth that we instinctively intuit: the oneness of life.
Love, sympathy, and empathy are the affirmation of this truth; they are a reflexive response because they mirror the reality of the universe. When we feel love and sympathy we are verifying—albeit unconsciously—the oneness that already exists. When we feel hatred, anger, and jealousy we separate ourselves from others and deny our real nature which is infinite and free from limitations.
What is the root of the problem here? Our wrong identification: thinking of ourselves as minds and bodies rather than infinite Spirit. As Swami Vivekananda, Ramakrishna’s great disciple, said: “As soon as I think that I am a little body, I want to preserve it, to protect it, to keep it nice, at the expense of other bodies; then you and I become separate. As soon as this idea of separation comes, it opens the door to all mischief and leads to all misery.”
The Point of Moral Virtues All the moral virtues taught by Vedanta serve to remind us of our real nature, and no spiritual progress can be made without following them. Any attempt to do so would be like trying to build a house without a foundation. Before we even begin to think about how to realize the ultimate truth, we first need to build the groundwork of a real life, one based on real values.
Spiritual life is not a haphazard affair: it is the most serious task that we shall ever face. And it is absolutely impossible to do so without living an ethical, moral life. It simply does not work.
If Vedanta lays such stress on an ethical life, what, then, are the virtues we emphasize? Patanjali, one of the ancient sages of India and the father of its psychology, formulated standards of moral conduct which have been followed for thousands of years.
These precepts function as spiritual tools, tools that can be used to create spiritually beneficial habits. These tools aren’t goals that can be instantly achieved—they are ideals to strive for, patterns to emulate. Still, it’s good to remember that when we do use these tools, we grow in strength and move closer to our ideal.
Patanjali divided the moral precepts into two categories, yama and niyama, each category consisting of five precepts.
Vedanta ethics and moral virtues are rooted in the ideal of realizing and manifesting our own innate divinity. Simply put, whatever brings us closer to that goal is ethical and moral; whatever prevents us from attaining it, is not.
Like a diamond buried in mud, the Atman shines within us, yet its presence remains obscured, its shining purity masked by countless layers of ignorance: wrong identification, incorrect knowledge, misguided perceptions. It is important to emphasize that we are not trying to become something other than what we already are. We are not trying to become pure; we are pure. We are not trying to become perfect; we are perfect already. That is our real nature. Acting in accordance with our real nature—acting nobly, truthfully, kindly—tears away the veil of ignorance that hides the truth of reality. Whatever distorts this reality is a perversion of the truth.
The whole of Vedanta ethics, then, is based upon a simple line of reasoning: Does this action or thought bring me closer to realizing the truth, or does it take me further away?
Morality and the Ego What is it that prevents us from realizing the truth? Simply put, the ego: the sense of “I” and “mine.” As the great spiritual teacher Ramakrishna said, “The feeling of ‘I’ and ‘mine’ has covered the Reality so we don’t see the truth.” He further said, “When the ego dies, all troubles cease.”
What does the ego have to do with ethics and morality? Absolutely everything. All moral codes are based upon the ideal of unselfishness: placing others before ourselves, forcing the ego to play second fiddle. Following selfish desires is always a detriment to our spiritual life. Whether the action or thought is great or small, any selfishness will make the veil of ignorance thicker and darker. Conversely, any act of unselfishness, however great or small, will have the opposite effect.
It is for this reason that doing good to others is a universal ethical and moral code, found in all religions and societies. Why is this so universal? Because it reflects the truth that we instinctively intuit: the oneness of life.
Love, sympathy, and empathy are the affirmation of this truth; they are a reflexive response because they mirror the reality of the universe. When we feel love and sympathy we are verifying—albeit unconsciously—the oneness that already exists. When we feel hatred, anger, and jealousy we separate ourselves from others and deny our real nature which is infinite and free from limitations.
What is the root of the problem here? Our wrong identification: thinking of ourselves as minds and bodies rather than infinite Spirit. As Swami Vivekananda, Ramakrishna’s great disciple, said: “As soon as I think that I am a little body, I want to preserve it, to protect it, to keep it nice, at the expense of other bodies; then you and I become separate. As soon as this idea of separation comes, it opens the door to all mischief and leads to all misery.”
The Point of Moral Virtues All the moral virtues taught by Vedanta serve to remind us of our real nature, and no spiritual progress can be made without following them. Any attempt to do so would be like trying to build a house without a foundation. Before we even begin to think about how to realize the ultimate truth, we first need to build the groundwork of a real life, one based on real values.
Spiritual life is not a haphazard affair: it is the most serious task that we shall ever face. And it is absolutely impossible to do so without living an ethical, moral life. It simply does not work.
If Vedanta lays such stress on an ethical life, what, then, are the virtues we emphasize? Patanjali, one of the ancient sages of India and the father of its psychology, formulated standards of moral conduct which have been followed for thousands of years.
These precepts function as spiritual tools, tools that can be used to create spiritually beneficial habits. These tools aren’t goals that can be instantly achieved—they are ideals to strive for, patterns to emulate. Still, it’s good to remember that when we do use these tools, we grow in strength and move closer to our ideal.
Patanjali divided the moral precepts into two categories, yama and niyama, each category consisting of five precepts.
Ethical Principles:
Yama Yama consists of nonviolence, truthfulness, nonstealing, chastity or celibacy, and the nonreceiving of gifts. Niyama consists of cleanliness, contentment, austerity, study, and self-surrender to God.
Nonviolence:
While many of these disciplines seem self-evident, some of them need further explanation. Serious spiritual aspirants, Swami Vivekananda said, “must not think of injuring anyone, by thought, word, or deed. Mercy shall not be for human beings alone, but shall go beyond, and embrace the whole world.”
Truthfulness
not only means speaking truthfully but also adhering to the truth in thought, word, and deed. Ramakrishna said that “making the heart and lips one” was the spiritual discipline of our age.
Nonstealing
also means noncovetousness: it means not desiring things that belong to others and not appropriating what belongs to others. Even using someone else’s words or ideas and presenting them as our own without acknowledging their source is a kind of stealing.
Chastity
or celibacy is stressed for two reasons: First, serious spiritual seekers need to conserve the energy generally directed to sex and to redirect it to Self-realization. Second, physical or mental sexual activity reinforces our idea of ourselves as bodies and not as Spirit. If we want to progress in spiritual life, we need to regard other people as human beings—as manifestations of God—and not as male and female bodies.
We should add here that Vedanta is meant for all people—not simply those with monastic inclinations. Vedanta acknowledges that sexual desire is, at its core, longing for union with God. While strict celibacy is stressed for monastics, Vedanta advocates sexual responsibility and self-control for nonmonastics. For nonmonastics, chastity means fidelity to one’s spouse. Further, when approached in the right spirit, marriage is a sacred spiritual path. One’s spouse is also one’s spiritual partner and should be looked upon as a manifestation of divinity.
Non-receiving of gifts:
The ethical virtues listed above may seem fairly reasonable, but what’s the problem with accepting gifts? We can see from this guideline how carefully the ancient Hindu sages watched the workings of the mind. Accepting gifts from others makes us feel obligated: we can become manipulated through them and lose our independence. Sometimes gifts are really bribes in disguise: if we feel even vaguely indebted to the giver, our minds become tainted. Sometimes the effect is obvious, sometimes it is subtle; but it is there nonetheless. For this reason we should accept no gift unless it is given with no motive except pure love. Otherwise we’ll be like puppets who jump whenever the invisible strings are pulled.
Yama Yama consists of nonviolence, truthfulness, nonstealing, chastity or celibacy, and the nonreceiving of gifts. Niyama consists of cleanliness, contentment, austerity, study, and self-surrender to God.
Nonviolence:
While many of these disciplines seem self-evident, some of them need further explanation. Serious spiritual aspirants, Swami Vivekananda said, “must not think of injuring anyone, by thought, word, or deed. Mercy shall not be for human beings alone, but shall go beyond, and embrace the whole world.”
Truthfulness
not only means speaking truthfully but also adhering to the truth in thought, word, and deed. Ramakrishna said that “making the heart and lips one” was the spiritual discipline of our age.
Nonstealing
also means noncovetousness: it means not desiring things that belong to others and not appropriating what belongs to others. Even using someone else’s words or ideas and presenting them as our own without acknowledging their source is a kind of stealing.
Chastity
or celibacy is stressed for two reasons: First, serious spiritual seekers need to conserve the energy generally directed to sex and to redirect it to Self-realization. Second, physical or mental sexual activity reinforces our idea of ourselves as bodies and not as Spirit. If we want to progress in spiritual life, we need to regard other people as human beings—as manifestations of God—and not as male and female bodies.
We should add here that Vedanta is meant for all people—not simply those with monastic inclinations. Vedanta acknowledges that sexual desire is, at its core, longing for union with God. While strict celibacy is stressed for monastics, Vedanta advocates sexual responsibility and self-control for nonmonastics. For nonmonastics, chastity means fidelity to one’s spouse. Further, when approached in the right spirit, marriage is a sacred spiritual path. One’s spouse is also one’s spiritual partner and should be looked upon as a manifestation of divinity.
Non-receiving of gifts:
The ethical virtues listed above may seem fairly reasonable, but what’s the problem with accepting gifts? We can see from this guideline how carefully the ancient Hindu sages watched the workings of the mind. Accepting gifts from others makes us feel obligated: we can become manipulated through them and lose our independence. Sometimes gifts are really bribes in disguise: if we feel even vaguely indebted to the giver, our minds become tainted. Sometimes the effect is obvious, sometimes it is subtle; but it is there nonetheless. For this reason we should accept no gift unless it is given with no motive except pure love. Otherwise we’ll be like puppets who jump whenever the invisible strings are pulled.
Ethical Principles:
Niyama Niyama consists of cleanliness, contentment, austerity, study, and self-surrender to God.
Cleanliness means not only physical cleanliness but also mental and moral cleanliness. When our minds are jealous, suspicious, rancorous or just plain mean, our minds are “dirty.” We can take all the baths in the world but we still are failing in cleanliness if our minds are polluted. Cheerfulness is an essential component of mental cleanliness.
Contentment is tied to mental cleanliness because a dissatisfied mind is a turbulent, unhappy mind. We should be content with our present condition, and move forward. Contentment doesn’t mean laziness: it doesn’t mean that we should be satisfied with our current state of spiritual progress. We should have divine discontent but at the same time be satisfied with the externals that we are presented with.
The word “austerity” generally makes people shudder. They shouldn’t though, because we all practice austerities all the time, we simply don’t use the word. No great endeavor can succeed without austerity: a student must study hard in order to get good grades, a parent must sometimes give up sleep in order to care for a sick child. Our jobs demand hard work and long hours.
Spiritual austerity is much sweeter than all these put together, for the goal to be attained is the highest. Austerity in Vedanta means disciplining the body and mind in order to put them at our disposal for the realization of God. It also means keeping an even keel in the tempests of life.
Life generally presents us with what Vedanta calls “the pairs of opposites”: praise and blame, health and sickness, prosperity and penury, joy and misery. We cannot get one without eventually getting the other; they are two sides of the same coin. Keeping our mental poise in the midst of all of these is true austerity: neither being elated by praise nor depressed by criticism, neither being haughty in prosperity nor dejected in poverty. Evenness of mind under all conditions is genuine austerity, for the ego is given no opportunity to come into play.
Study—which comprises not only the study of sacred literature but also the repetition of a mantra or name of God—is vital for spiritual aspirants. Firm regularity in practice is also included in the discipline of study.
While routine might seem counterproductive to spiritual development, it is, in fact, crucial. The force of a regular habit of spiritual study insures that—like it or not, tired or not, interested or not—we will doggedly pursue our highest ideals. The nature of the mind is fickle: sometimes it’s in a good mood, sometimes it’s not. Sometimes it’s energetic, sometimes it’s lazy. We can’t allow our spiritual life to become subject to the mind’s whims. A regular habit of study creates a favorable mental atmosphere: at the appointed time the mind will naturally become quiet since it has been trained by repeated habit to react that way.
Niyama Niyama consists of cleanliness, contentment, austerity, study, and self-surrender to God.
Cleanliness means not only physical cleanliness but also mental and moral cleanliness. When our minds are jealous, suspicious, rancorous or just plain mean, our minds are “dirty.” We can take all the baths in the world but we still are failing in cleanliness if our minds are polluted. Cheerfulness is an essential component of mental cleanliness.
Contentment is tied to mental cleanliness because a dissatisfied mind is a turbulent, unhappy mind. We should be content with our present condition, and move forward. Contentment doesn’t mean laziness: it doesn’t mean that we should be satisfied with our current state of spiritual progress. We should have divine discontent but at the same time be satisfied with the externals that we are presented with.
The word “austerity” generally makes people shudder. They shouldn’t though, because we all practice austerities all the time, we simply don’t use the word. No great endeavor can succeed without austerity: a student must study hard in order to get good grades, a parent must sometimes give up sleep in order to care for a sick child. Our jobs demand hard work and long hours.
Spiritual austerity is much sweeter than all these put together, for the goal to be attained is the highest. Austerity in Vedanta means disciplining the body and mind in order to put them at our disposal for the realization of God. It also means keeping an even keel in the tempests of life.
Life generally presents us with what Vedanta calls “the pairs of opposites”: praise and blame, health and sickness, prosperity and penury, joy and misery. We cannot get one without eventually getting the other; they are two sides of the same coin. Keeping our mental poise in the midst of all of these is true austerity: neither being elated by praise nor depressed by criticism, neither being haughty in prosperity nor dejected in poverty. Evenness of mind under all conditions is genuine austerity, for the ego is given no opportunity to come into play.
Study—which comprises not only the study of sacred literature but also the repetition of a mantra or name of God—is vital for spiritual aspirants. Firm regularity in practice is also included in the discipline of study.
While routine might seem counterproductive to spiritual development, it is, in fact, crucial. The force of a regular habit of spiritual study insures that—like it or not, tired or not, interested or not—we will doggedly pursue our highest ideals. The nature of the mind is fickle: sometimes it’s in a good mood, sometimes it’s not. Sometimes it’s energetic, sometimes it’s lazy. We can’t allow our spiritual life to become subject to the mind’s whims. A regular habit of study creates a favorable mental atmosphere: at the appointed time the mind will naturally become quiet since it has been trained by repeated habit to react that way.
