PDA

View Full Version : differing views...



silence_speaks
26 October 2014, 10:43 PM
Namaste

I do not generally criticize anyone on their chosen spritual path unless it goes against another persons freedom to express his chosen path.

I do not possess the necessary information to either understand or to criticize the information provided by you. But with what ever the little information gained in my short stint at HDF, fully convinced to say that few posts of yours cross the borders of healthy debate.

As much Advaita is not the only truth other philosophies are also not the ONLY available truth.

I am not criticizing the information that is provided nor the provider, but the tone in which it is been presented and also in certain areas where it is purely unwarranted need to be polished.

Smaranam has the right to walk or dance along with Krishna and you have the right to dissolve or sink with Krishna.

The same way I have the right to live in bondage because what you perceive as danger or pride is my humble way to interact with the one I love.



Dear Anirudh ji,
:) Can you please explain how this comment is related to my previous comment or the comments on this thread ?

What is it about the tone of my message ? Please do point out which few words have prompted you to feel likewise so that I can see if it needs to be corrected and take an appropriate decision.

You have full right over what ever path you choose. Where did i deny that ? Who am i to deny that either ?

Finally, If Advaita is not the only Truth and one could follow what ever one wants to and still find Liberation, Why do you think Shankara went about rejecting non-advaitic ideas ? :)

Love!
Silence

Anirudh
27 October 2014, 03:20 AM
Namaste

shastra vasanas of three
types are dangerous

How and when can the recitation of Veda or study of scriptures or following ritual turn into a mania for the same. My intensity wont be same as yours. So what is the parameter that differentiate the same acts from being considered as mania and normal.

Why do you think Shankara went about rejecting non-advaitic ideas
That's not in my circle of influence. If Ramanuja rejected Advaita there should have been a reason and that shouldn't be in your circle of influence either.

Finally in this discussion what was the need to add up those three vasanas that.may hurt the sentiments of those spritual practitioners who actively recite Vedas and other scriptures?

For eg, people walk over live coal or pierce their body as a method to express their love and respect for their preferred deity.

That act can be seen as a imania for rituals as you haven't defined rituals either. That means you have indirectly hurt the sentiments of those devotees.

I am not interested to argue whether Advaita is the best or not, but I am against the idea of someone expecting directly or indirectly to shun away from other practices. And that's what you were trying to do in a thread where the OP has completely a different need. Where is the need to sully dvaita?


In all probability Madhava must have gained more knowledge than many of us here. And if he thinks, dvaita is the way we must respect his views. Because he read the same scriptures what Sankar read but came up with different conclusion.

If we can't because we follow other tradition we have no right to say it is the cause for all sufferings... After all that post has nothing to do with a debate on Advaita vs Dvaita...

"Dvaita mulam aho dhukkam ", says
ashtavakra gita... duality is the root
cause of intense suffering

www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=121052&postcount=23

silence_speaks
27 October 2014, 04:59 AM
Dear Anirudh ji,
:) Namasthe!

Science has to reject a few million ideas before reaching to what is more accurate. and as they do so they do not feel sentimental about those ideas nor are they worried that it would hurt some people. In what you mentioned, BTW, not one statement is mine own. For example:

1. That shastra vasanas of three types are dangerous is not my statement here. This is what is the advaita explanation. you should be able to find it if you dig deep enough into some advaita texts.

2. I have literally translated "Vyasanam" as "mania", which could have better been translated as addiction. So that was also a literal translation and nothing more.

3. I would like to quote what I have said about these three vasanas :



These do have an indirect role in gaining self knowledge but they become obstructions, the movement they themselves assume the dimention of a goal.
This is the view of Advaita Acharyas.

4. "Dvaita mulam aho dhukkam ", says
ashtavakra gita... duality is the root
cause of intense suffering

That is ashtavakra Gita quote. I added nothing to it. Ashtavakra Gita says it!


So ... to sum it up ... its the language of Advaita Acharyas and Ashtavakra Gita that u find as hurting or troubling!

I am just repeating what the Advaita Acharyas are saying ... it is not my language that is hurting u. Its the language of the Advaita Acharyas. I only present it as it is !!

Advaita is not "All Accepting "... Advaita "Rejects" wrong views. If rejection of wrong views hurts someone ... should one stop presenting Advaita itself ? Acceptance of wrong views also hurts someone , in a more dangerous ways !

How do we decide if it is a wrong view ? By proper investigation. I welcome you to investigate and reject if something is a wrong view ... Viveka involves rejection of certain ideas as wrong! There is no choice in this. one cannot be nice and accepting all ideas. it would be more dangeroous and harmful to accept wrong ideas !

Love!
Silence

Anirudh
27 October 2014, 07:13 AM
Namaate Moderators

Silence Speaks has no right to comment on others belief by quoting some Advatic scriptural data. Such discussion will only call for un wanted debates. If we tolerate this style then every member can quote some text that would offend others.

If this discussion or the other thread I have quoted as breach of rules were in Advaita sub forum I wouldnt have commented.

Here with I am expressing my views so that moderators can regulate the flow of thoughts and information.

I have been clearly stating that my intentions were not to belittle any of our Acharyas but using their wisdom to change the course of discussion shouldn't be allowed.

----------++++++

Namaste Silence Speaks

I thought I am communicating to an individual who will take responsibilities of his own actions, but it is unfortunate to have met someone who hides behind scriptures.

I don't indulge in activities that is as useless as trying to wake up a person who is pretending to be asleep instead feel pity on their shallow integrity.

When you sent me a PM this after noon, thought of deleting my post so as not to spoil Yajvan's thread. If you were true to your intentions either would have sent me this reply as a PM or would have kept quite like your handle name implies.

But the intensity of arrogance expressed in your reply has brought out the real self in you. Truly unfortunate.

Now it is upto moderators and other members to decide the future of this non verbal exchanges.


Dear Anirudh ji,
:) Namasthe!

Science has to reject a few million ideas before reaching to what is more accurate. and as they do so they do not feel sentimental about those ideas nor are they worried that it would hurt some people. In what you mentioned, BTW, not one statement is mine own. For example:

1. That shastra vasanas of three types are dangerous is not my statement here. This is what is the advaita explanation. you should be able to find it if you dig deep enough into some advaita texts.

2. I have literally translated "Vyasanam" as "mania", which could have better been translated as addiction. So that was also a literal translation and nothing more.

3. I would like to quote what I have said about these three vasanas :

This is the view of Advaita Acharyas.

4. "Dvaita mulam aho dhukkam ", says
ashtavakra gita... duality is the root
cause of intense suffering

That is ashtavakra Gita quote. I added nothing to it. Ashtavakra Gita says it!


So ... to sum it up ... its the language of Advaita Acharyas and Ashtavakra Gita that u find as hurting or troubling!

I am just repeating what the Advaita Acharyas are saying ... it is not my language that is hurting u. Its the language of the Advaita Acharyas. I only present it as it is !!

Advaita is not "All Accepting "... Advaita "Rejects" wrong views. If rejection of wrong views hurts someone ... should one stop presenting Advaita itself ? Acceptance of wrong views also hurts someone , in a more dangerous ways !

How do we decide if it is a wrong view ? By proper investigation. I welcome you to investigate and reject if something is a wrong view ... Viveka involves rejection of certain ideas as wrong! There is no choice in this. one cannot be nice and accepting all ideas. it would be more dangeroous and harmful to accept wrong ideas !

Love!
Silence

yajvan
27 October 2014, 08:16 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/e/ezweb_ne_jp.B61 I thought to offer the following as a learning experience to the conversation that is transpiring in the posts above. It is not to find fault or embarrass anyone; it is a learning experience for our HDF members who wish to improve their approach to their offers. Recall that the jalpa folder is a place for differences and contesting, but is does not suggest spanking is allowed ( especially by me).https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/e/ezweb_ne_jp.B61

Our goal on HDF and as contributors is clarity, formulated by good communication skills; this falls on the shoulders of the writer. It is our responsibility to communicate to the reader in a way that brings out the knowledge in a reliable manner.

If we base some or all of our posts on the works of another, or on the knowledge of a particular āgama, śāstra or śloka it is our responsibility to point the reader to that work, verse, or chapter. We should not ask our reader to go look for it ; our position within the post is predicated on that knowledge or quote that is offered. The writer does the 'digging', the reader does the reading.


If we use words that can be interpreted in several ways, then add a footnote of the other interpretations and the one you are focusing on.


iti śivaṁ

silence_speaks
27 October 2014, 10:26 PM
Dear Yajvan ji,
:) Thanks for moving it here. I really appreciate your efforts on this.

A Quote is given if someone asks for it ... particularly because i too have to dig into some books before quoting it. For me to put in that effort, someone's intention should be to know. Some quotes we remember on the top of our mind and quote directly:

"Dvaita Mulam aho dukkam" ...

now ... Anirudh ji is unhappy with this ... i already said its from Ashtavakra Gita. Now, if someone is unhappy with this quote, its not my fault... Ashtavakra needs to be questions ;)


There cannot be 10 truths ... there is 1 Truth ... Only 1... if its "Relative" ... thats unreal, mithya!!

Love!
Silence

silence_speaks
27 October 2014, 10:31 PM
Dear Eastern Mind ji,
:)

Where has "I AM RIGHT" come into picture. Its a "Statements" truth value that we discuss, not person's. :)
A person has no truth value.

A statement may be true or false.

But when i say a statement is false, why should a person be hurt or worried ?

"my statement is right, ur statement isright, his statement is also right !! "

is this how we discuss science ?

Person1: Velocity of light is constant.
Person2: Velocity of light is not a constant.

Person3: Hey both of u r right ... form ur own stand point !!
Person1: No!!
Person2: Hey he is being harsh do you see that ?
Person3: Don't be harsh like that ! Accept both!!
Person1: But he is not right !
Person2: Don't make such harsh statements!!
Person3: Common sense says that we should not say i am right u r wrong ... both should be right !!


LOL!!

Love!
Silence

silence_speaks
27 October 2014, 10:53 PM
Friends,
:) On Second thoughts ... :)
I really contest that this is fit to be in JALPA.

This is important to understand the point here.

To reject an idea ... is it harsh ?
Should we or should we not reject an idea ?


This is very important to appreciate! This is not "pointless argument" because ... its important that in the light of rigor all that is incorrect be rejected without mercy.

Because mercy is on people ... not on ideas !!

Ideas are not people.

Lets set aside our meekness and stand tall !! Lets reject whats wrong and take whats right !!

Love!
Silence

silence_speaks
27 October 2014, 11:43 PM
Friends,
:) Regarding the three types of shastra vasanas: The source if Jivan Mukthi Viveka of Sri Vidhyaranya Swami.


So I have given references to all my statements. :)

Love!
Silence

Anirudh
28 October 2014, 08:01 AM
Namaste Moderators,

I have clearly mentioned in my last post on this discussion, there is no use in extending a civilized communication with a handle that pretends to be asleep and that doesn't take responsibility of its own actions.

When I objected, clearly mentioned those quotes can not be expressed in a "non Advatic" forums. I also mentioned that how insulting would it be for a member who believe in Dvaita philosophy or rituals followed since ages.

The Sheer arrogant reply that I received has been recorded in HDF.

The handle in contention is diverting from the actual issue.

The issue is not the validity of the quote. If the issue is Advaita vs Dvaita, then it should be seen in any one of the respective forum. I myself have discussed in lengths on Advaita and have learnt from Devotee ji and Yajvan ji. So it has nothing to do with Advaita or Advatic quote

The issue is about unwarranted bombardment of quote(s) that would hurt the spritual sentiments of others. The issue is about diverting/hijacking the subject. The issue is about tone. The issue is about the arrogant attitude "I am always Right, so you should be wrong invariably".

If Advaita is the only TRUTH as claimed by this handle, then it better be preaching its ideals in a place which will be accepted without any qualms. And if HDF also think Advaita is the ONLY truth,i would request HDF to remove those sub forums.

And look at the examples given to illustrate. Is the debate between Dvaita and Advaita is simple as debating on Velocity of light? If this is not arrogance especially the tone, then would like to be educated on arrogance.

These debates (between different philosophies) didn't reach any logical conclusion even during the period of Shree Adi Sankar or Shree Raamanuja or Shree Maadhava. Then what is the qualification of this handle to prove. And prove what? And to prove whom? All the three great Saints will be laughing out loud.

I honestly wouldn't have made any post as it is not possible to wakeup someone who is faking (sleep) but this handle sent three PM yesterday and now these posts. Everytime provoking for an argument which I am not interested.

I consider this as a internet troll. I rest my case here.

PS: 1. All of my statements were based on the information recorded (less than or equal) at this time stamp.
2. I haven't tried to provoke anyone knowingly or unknowingly
3. I am addressing this post to the moderators so as to avoid any interaction with that handle

silence_speaks
28 October 2014, 08:11 AM
Dear Friends (A Plea From A "Handle"),
:)

I have become "a handle" ... and the only reason being i presented the advaitic view ... in an open forum. A Philosophy forum is open to all. And so this "handle" thought it can present its view and more interestingly a "handle" has views ... so many would be pleased to see that even inanimate handles have some advaitic views!

1. Advaita claims that it is the only Truth ... ;) thats why shankara countered the other views.

2. one should not try to wake up "handles" ;) . People can be woken up !!


Jokes apart ... I would like to suggest that there is nothing wrong in disagreeing or disagreeing authoritatively.

This handle is authoritative in what ever it presents, because the handle speaks rtam, well validated statements ... since it knows the kind of effort it has put into it .... it is clear on what it presents.

THAT SAID, PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT A SINGLE HARSH WORD AGAINST ANY PERSON ANYWHERE . Only views exchanged.
And a forum should give one the liberty to exchange views without being harsh on anyone.

So i have not deviated from any rule ... and if i have done i would request the forum members to let me know the rule number so that i can make a note !!

Love!
Silence

devotee
29 October 2014, 01:19 AM
Namaste,

People who wants to show supremacy of Dvaita over Advaita and also those who try to show supremacy of Advaita over Dvaita should try to look within instead of fighting for their faith. Both are actually in delusion due to their blinding faith.

Let only those who are Self-realised should say with finality on the issue of Advaita and only those who have realised God should say with finality on the issue of Dvaita. Unless you have realised the Truth yourself, all your arguments actually are nothing but a show of your arrogance and nothing else. And it is not auspicious for your SAdhnA.

OM

silence_speaks
29 October 2014, 01:37 AM
Dear Devotee ji,
:)

When Ashtavakra says "dvaita mulam aho dhukkam" ... he is actually rejecting dualistic views.

Note : rejection of a view is not insulting a person.

One should not disagree is not the right way of looking at things. One disagrees and yet respects the other person. I disagree someone's views ... but I do not nurture anger against the person !
Views vary.

You think differently from me. i think differently from you. And when in a discussion forum, i would out right reject some views as even you would. But then ... if i were to meet you somewhere , we meet with a smile and mutual respect! Because, we know that differences in views need not create anger or enmity.

Advaita scriptures have purva paksha arguments rejected very solidly. without rejecting those arguments, Advaitic view point is not well established ... so if i have to speak advaita, i too have to reject what is against advaita in principle ... and in doing so i do not insult people ... i reject ideas. Even as , if i say earth is moving around the sun, i am not insulting anyone. i am making an observation.

ultimately if everyone says the same thing ... what is discussion. "a ball is round", yes "its round", "yes its so round"... "yes its so round from all sides" :) what is discussion here ?? :D


Love!
Silence

devotee
29 October 2014, 02:40 AM
Namaste SS,



When Ashtavakra says "dvaita mulam aho dhukkam" ... he is actually rejecting dualistic views.

But Ashtavakra is no authority for those who subscribe to Dualist views. How can you say who is right and who is wrong ?


Note : rejection of a view is not insulting a person.

That is what you think. Some people may think otherwise as you are attacking their faith.


Advaita scriptures have purva paksha arguments rejected very solidly. without rejecting those arguments, Advaitic view point is not well established ... so if i have to speak advaita, i too have to reject what is against advaita in principle ... and in doing so i do not insult people ... i reject ideas. Even as , if i say earth is moving around the sun, i am not insulting anyone. i am making an observation.

In fact, it is not so easy as it seems. If that was so simple there would not have been so much acrimony among people of different faiths. You can see threads on this forums itself which are full acrimony and discussions with full fledged war of words where ultimately the moderators have to jump in and close the thread.

I am also an Advaitin practising under a Self-realised Guru. You also are an Advaitin and yet we had discussions wherein we didn't agree with each other. The beauty of the Truth is that the more you get closer to it the more tolerant you become towards other paths/views/faiths and start seeing the point where both may meet eventually as the Reality is the same. Everyone is not at the same spiritual level and everyone doesn't have the same spiritual need --- this has to be understood and respected. I believe that different paths exist because God wants these to exist and we must respect His wish and his design. He is the Controller of the world arising from Him and not I am.

OM

silence_speaks
29 October 2014, 02:53 AM
Dear devotee,
:) Namasthe!





But Ashtavakra is no authority for those who subscribe to Dualist views. How can you say who is right and who is wrong ?
So you disagree with Ashtavakra ? :) Should I feel bad now ?



That is what you think. Some people may think otherwise as you are attacking their faith.
Now u r attacking my faith ? Since you are disagreeing with my views ?

Infact every expression of view automatically rejects a 100 other views!

here is a challenge: Make a religious statement without rejecting any views. :)

and if u cannot do that ! Then views will be rejected, no choice there !!



The beauty of the Truth is that the more you get closer to it the more tolerant you become towards other paths/views/faiths and start seeing the point where both may meet eventually as the Reality is the same.
If you are following shankara's advaita, you are reading shankara's bhasyam ? Then what does Bhagavad Gita Bhasyam start with ? Karma and jnana both can lead to liberation or karma cannot lead to liberation ? :) Please ponder!


Our tolerance is not to views ... our respect is to people... love and respect are for people, not views and ideas !

Science rejected newton's views ! :) it has to ... there is no violence in that. But if netwon was kicked out ... that is bad.

Love!
Silence

silence_speaks
29 October 2014, 03:00 AM
" God is there" ... the atheist feels hurt.
"God is not there" ... the theist feels hurt.
"God is there and not there" ... the conformist feels hurt.

Do you see this ? There is no way one can make a statement without rejecting some views.

That is why rejecting views is perfectly fine ... because one's compassion should not be for views, it should be for people.

Compassion for views is misplaced. Identification with views is also a mistake... and when i say this all people who are identified with their views will hate me ??


Love!
Silence

yajvan
29 October 2014, 09:21 AM
namaste,



People who wants to show supremacy of Dvaita over Advaita and also those who try to show supremacy of Advaita over Dvaita should try to look within instead of fighting for their faith. Both are actually in delusion due to their blinding faith.
OM


What you say has merit, yet I am of the opinion that the rub comes from the following:
People who want to show supremacy - the sentence needn't go further. It is the notion of offering ' this is the right way' when no request has been made.
The greatest teachers look and see where the student is at and take that student from that point and lift them up. They use the knowledge the student has at that time and takes it from there to unfold a higher truth ( as necessary). If you have not experienced this, it is a masterful approach.

This is the great teacher who can be called a master. Others trip on this point and fall into ' no, no, what you thinking is obtuse to the real final truth - this is the way. Even if that person is speaking the truth it is falling on deaf ears.

We know the knowledge offered in college is deeper and more robust then that which is found in 1st, 2nd and 3rd grades of grammar school ( as it is called in the west). Why not just deposit those children into those college levels where the higher knowledge resides ? We all know the answer.
Like that it is the same with one's unfoldment. When one persists on offering the highest knowledge without 'sensing' the absorption rate of the listener, the listener sees the person and the offering as a stone in one's shoe. They see the person coming and can only think of one's mother that wishes to administer a big spoonful of castor oil down one's throat. The child hides or at best pushes back. Like that, of what use will the greatest of teachings be if one is running the other way ? STOP STOP, come back I have the highest amongst the high to teach you .

Teaching is an art... it can be developed. The teacher finds out over time or with the loss of students, that one cannot start a student who is anchored in arithmetic and offer them calculus. The time in between the two is guided and enriched by patience of the teacher and the willingness of the student to succumb to the teacher. It is therefore the responsibility of the teacher to create the environment for this to unfold with time; or by seeing the confidence the student has with the teacher or the teachings. Note that it takes both sides..
Anything less and it is time for castor oil .... yes the oil will be good for you, but the reluctance of the student will at best spit it out.
What good comes from that ?

iti sivam

silence_speaks
29 October 2014, 09:35 AM
Dear Yajvan ji,
:)


The teacher finds out over time or with the loss of students,


How can one teach on an online forum ?
We share ideas !
And every idea someone presents can hurt someone else!

for example what you just presented ... if i complain that it is "a stone in my shoe" ?

or may be i complain that there is this:

"It is the notion of offering ' this is the right way' when no request has been made."

??

The point i am making is ...

1. we are not teaching here.
2. we are discussing ideas, sharing ideas. not every where do we wait in our discussions for people to "ask us", no one does.
3. Any idea we present ... there will be some who differ.

Please see this.

So we should ideally discuss ideas, and not feel hurt about ideas.
all the time remaining compassionate and loving towards the people...

our compassion or love is for people ... never, never for ideas!

i would not arrogate myself as someone who can gauge someone else's spiritual maturity.

Ramana used to tell monkeys : U R ATMA.
Once someone said "what will they understand" and he got angry and said "U R HUMAN, HAVE U UNDERSTOOD"?

Who are we to gauge someone's spiritual maturity. We share ideas, discuss ideas ... and any idea we share has some other ideas rejected ... that's expected.

so we should stop worrying that some ideas are dismissed.
:)

and as regards maturity ... the knowledge takes care of itself ... it reaches when people are matured enough ... we should not worry about it when we discuss... coz we are just sharing ideas, not teaching here.

Love!
Silence

yajvan
29 October 2014, 10:41 AM
namaste

To be openly honest, I do not comprehend your post. Yet , please do not infer from what I am saying that I am asking for any clarification, addition or subtraction to the post you have offered.

Yet that said, you have asked ' how can you teach on line ? '. 'Sharing ideas' your words not mine, are fundamental to teaching. Dialog , ideas back and forth is teaching. Some do this well, others think a bull dozer is needed.

The art of teaching is the construction of ideas and thoughts shared in such a way that is inspirational and uplifting.
Some can do this well, and others, not so much.

iti sivam

Believer
29 October 2014, 10:43 AM
Namaste,

Please continue with this discourse.

What I find amusing here and in some other posts are the lines like, Ramana used to say....or Ranama used to (do this).....

Such expressions have the aura of the writer having lived with Ramana, having been at his spiritual level to be on first name basis with him and at the same time having sat cross legged across from him every day listening to him and observing him do things. Did that really happen? :)

Pranam.

silence_speaks
29 October 2014, 10:56 AM
:bowdown:

HARIH OM!!!

devotee
29 October 2014, 11:08 AM
Please try to understand SS ! I think you are going beyond reasonableness to insist on proving yourself correct and reject everyone else's views. When someone feels bad, we should say "sorry" or quit and it should be over with that.

Now, I know you will come out with, "Now you said this and I felt bad, blah blah blah !".

You are always coming out with "Ramana said this and Ramana said that" without giving a thought that there are others also here who have read Ramana extensively. Ramana may be authority for you and he may not be authority for everyone we discuss with here.

Anyway, it is you who have to take a final decision on this.

I quit here.

OM

yajvan
29 October 2014, 11:10 AM
namaste






How can one teach on an online forum ?
coz we are just sharing ideas, not teaching here.


If this be the case, perhaps you may wish to reflect on some of your posts:
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=11906

iti sivam

silence_speaks
29 October 2014, 11:24 AM
I apologize for presenting my ideas authoritatively friends.

Anirudh ji, I am extremely sorry for all the discomfort i have caused you.
I also apologize to all the forum members for the discomforts I might have caused to them as well through my posts.

Yajvan ji, Extremely sorry for not clarifying that that was not a teaching ... a teaching is supposed to be personalized , as i thought. I request you to excuse my ignorance and also not presenting that properly.


And Special apologies to Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi and Bhagavan Sri Ramakrishna Prabhu ... for addressing them in first person singular !

Love!
Silence

silence_speaks
29 October 2014, 11:49 AM
In Response to Eastern mind ji's
suggestion that prefixing "in my opinion" is a good idea:

-----------------------------
:headscratch::) Some thing like "in my opinion water boils at 99.97 degree centigrade"
in my opinion heart is to the left ?

I believe, in my opinion... that can be done.