PDA

View Full Version : A forum for calssical debate



satay
25 October 2007, 10:59 AM
Namaskar,
I am wondering if we would like to have a forum in which all the discussions will be soley based on vedas, puranas, upanishads and commenteries of the three acaryas as opposed to 'personal' opinions etc.

Should we have such a forum for HDF?

We will try to follow classic debating rules.

saidevo
25 October 2007, 11:18 AM
Namaste Satay.

The classical debates forum is a good idea and will help members know our scriptures in an analytical way from the Shastra-savvy members. Personal opinions, if at all shoud figure minimum in the discussions and the moderator should be strict about trolling and spamming.

Let personal opinions abound as usual in other forums, though, because as our Shastras themselves say, ultimately liberation is personal realization for everyone.

Nuno Matos
25 October 2007, 04:07 PM
Namaste

Quoting Satay; " I am wondering if we would like to have a forum in which all the discussions will be soley based on vedas, puranas, upanishads and commenteries of the three acaryas as opposed to 'personal' opinions etc."

I think it would be a very interesting idea that could add value to HDF. I wonder what could be the name for such a forum?
I think as well that our sage members are already keeping straight in a creative way to the scriptures and traditions they represent. And for that such a forum is useless.

Om namah shivaya

yajvan
25 October 2007, 05:24 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste,


I can see the value here. I can also see a few areas that may cause passions to rise...is it a show stopper? I do not think so if we (you et.al) are able to set the framework properly.

'Personal opinion' is vassilating, and every one has an opinion, yes? But personal spiritual experience trumps this. And the Vedas - I think it is good to discuss.
That said, I would assume we would rely on the Nyaya approach, yet avoiding jalpa ( wrangling) and vitanda or destructive criticism.

If this is done with the debate, a friendly reminder that views and nominclature are different based upon your orientation e.g. Vaishava, Shaiva, Shakta, etc. and points of passion.

I point this out because that suggests one has to define their terms, and what POV is being taken and if that POV is changing e.g. ' Now I am looking at this from a samkaya view point, or mimamasa, or vedanta perspective.'

I see this on our HDF today... we discuss, then a new POV is taken and it is from a 45° POV, a bit different then the last view. This works and I am not inferring this is bad, as people must go with the flow.

Yet in debate, that has to be called out, because the outcome and the 'ahhh-ha' will change and cannot be co-mingled with several views without the audit trail back to the knowledge and shastra's that are being expounded.

That is my opinion... for what it's worth.


pranams,

Omkara
04 April 2013, 03:11 AM
Yes!

It should be called 'Tarka' or 'Vada'

Sahasranama
04 April 2013, 07:19 AM
Namaskar,
I am wondering if we would like to have a forum in which all the discussions will be soley based on vedas, puranas, upanishads and commenteries of the three acaryas as opposed to 'personal' opinions etc.

Should we have such a forum for HDF?

We will try to follow classic debating rules.

This would be a good idea.

Although, commentaries of the three acharyas is very limited and only represents a small portion of traditional Hinduism. (post medieval vedanta). This will only give a platform for those who want to discuss traditional Vedanta. Where does that leave the Shaivas, the grammarians, the yogis etc? Where does it leave traditional Vedic commentaries like that of Sayana and the works of the mimansakas? This is a good idea only if the "three acharyas" are not given any special authority.

A better idea is to have a forum where the discussion is primarily based on shashtra (veda, itihasa, purana) and also on supporting shastras ( upaveda, vedanga, agamas, smritis, tantras) and tertiary uses traditional commentaries as a support to elucidate the shastra, not as a stand alone authority. This would include commentaries by Sayana, Mahidhara on the Vedas,the Mahabhashya of Patanjali, the works of Vijnanabhikshu, commentaries on the Mahabharata and Ramayana and even a late 20th century work like the yogabhashya of Hariharananda Aryanya for example, but exclude the post 18th century neo-Hindu/ universalist commenataries.

One thing that must be avoided in such a discussion that is based on shastra is the argument that the acharya of "my sampradaya" says so, so it must be true. This will be very difficult, because a lot of people are affiliated in some manner with a particular acharya.

ShivaFan
04 April 2013, 07:34 AM
Namaste

I am not so sure if limiting commentaries to Shankaracharya, Ramanujacharya and Madhvacharya is such a good idea.

And where does the experiences and writings and thus perspective on Veda etc. of the Tamil Alvars and Nayanmars (which includes women adepts, some members believe women have no rights to comment or even read Veda for example) come into such a forum?

There will be predictably sheltered use of scriptural quotes in English where the very translation is actually personal opinion, and input based on teachings from Guru and experience of such which will be declared personal opinion as a means to further shelter the meaning or message or truth when in fact it is not personal opinion but authorized.

There is no question that such a forum will be created, but classical "debate" is more than just words, it is the actual demeanor of the physical person or saint in posture, actions of such taken just before the words and after the words that context the entire framework of the "debate" which would be missing here but was well known to those of some of the famous debates or commentaries of the past.

If it were simply to quote text, then why not just cut and paste entire paragraphs after paragraphs directly into the post and then deem all else "personal opinion"?

Like I say, the forum is going to happen no matter, so it is already a ship at sail in the sea. However, the ability to quote scriptural text (which will ultimately be English translation of text that tries to drive the point, and which itself is often the most poetic but abusive means of agenda based misrepresentation and thus personal opinion) is not necessarily a marker of adept or comprehending or savey "Hinduism".

In "my own opinion". But have at it, with spirit. In such a case, perhaps the forum should be classically only in sanskrit text and language?

Not trying to be critical, just thinking it won't be as easy or vanilla as some might think.

Om Namah Sivaya

ShivaFan
04 April 2013, 08:34 AM
Namaste

Another thought also... What would be considered the frame of what is classical debate? The Nyaya Sutras? There may be a section on debate among Nyaya, but why have a debate when the authors considered the advanced frame of the soul itself has no consciousness? To even have a thought?

When Chaitanya debated, was this classical debate? And is the Chaitanya Charitamrita considered debatable scriptural input?

Om Namah Sivaya

philosoraptor
04 April 2013, 08:42 AM
Namaskar,
I am wondering if we would like to have a forum in which all the discussions will be soley based on vedas, puranas, upanishads and commenteries of the three acaryas as opposed to 'personal' opinions etc.

Should we have such a forum for HDF?

We will try to follow classic debating rules.

Is that not what the philosophy forum and the scriptures forums are all about?

Believer
04 April 2013, 10:26 AM
Namaste,

I can see a meaningful conversation (debate) between learned people who have read and understand the scriptures in their original form, and are somewhat devoid of ego. But a debate between people whose knowledge is limited to distorted translations in various languages by various intellectuals (not spiritualists), and the ones who have never consulted a dictionary to read the meaning of the word humility, would be time spent on 'defeating' the opponent, rather than to advance oneself spiritually by gaining a clearer understanding of scriptures. I probably will not be entering this proposed forum, but it may advance the cause of scripturally knowledgeable members who actually practice some of what they know.

Pranam.

satay
04 April 2013, 10:26 AM
Namaste,
You are all replying to six years old thread!

Believer
04 April 2013, 10:36 AM
Namaste,

Namaste,
You are all replying to six years old thread!
A six year old classical thread.. :)

We admire Satay so much that we go back in time to answer his queries.

Pranam.

ShivaFan
04 April 2013, 01:24 PM
You are all replying to six years old thread!

Namaste Satay

I have proven myself to be a one year old member and idiot that I am once again!

Now I know why I don't understand advaita. because I don't even know what time it is or what bath I just jumped into.

Om Namah Sivaya

philosoraptor
04 April 2013, 07:58 PM
Namaste,
You are all replying to six years old thread!

That would make it a classic, would it not?

:)

Sri Vaishnava
07 April 2013, 05:26 AM
Namaskar,
I am wondering if we would like to have a forum in which all the discussions will be soley based on vedas, puranas, upanishads and commenteries of the three acaryas as opposed to 'personal' opinions etc.

Should we have such a forum for HDF?

We will try to follow classic debating rules.

Check if it will work.

philosoraptor
07 April 2013, 07:55 AM
Pranams,

Sri Vaishnava is correct. I have no interest in naming names, but there are users on this and many other Hindu forums who clearly have only superficial knowledge of our scriptures, and yet they repeatedly object to scripturally-based presentations of philosophy whenever they don't like them, often casting knowledgeable members as fanatics, sectarian, etc etc. It is a classic case of evidence and rationalism being discarded in favor of the ideology of the masses. These kinds of people never acknowledge their limited understanding, yet they are always ready to attack those whose views have solid basis in shAstra. It reminds me of the Spanish Inquisition at times.

There is nothing wrong with not knowing the scriptures. But there should be some humility that comes with that. Actually, humility is a very good thing in general. But, the point is, it is meaningless for some people who lack knowledge and lack the ability to argue logically to attack those who are presenting viewpoints which are steeped in thousands of years of scholarly commentary and erudition. It is preferable to see mature disagreements between knowledgeable people that have no resolution, but which give everyone a chance to see the relative strengths and weaknesses of each person's views. It is not desirable to see stubborn arguments from someone whose sole knowledge of Hinduism is what he learned from VHP propaganda or Agniveer.com.

I follow a very simple rule in discussions. I am not interested in "winning" any debate, so much as I am interested in examining the strength and weaknesses of my own understanding of a given body of evidence in contrast to the strengths and weaknesses of other understandings. If someone presents evidence that seems to contradict my view, and which should be accepted by me as genuine, then I make it a point to read up on it. This is more constructive and useful for my sadhana.

Also, SV might take note that our moderator Satay has recently expressed great interest in the writings of S.M.S. Chari and Dr. Shanbhag author of "Vishnu is Brahman." I remain optimistic that being a gentleman and sticking to one's principles in an assertive yet non-dogmatic way ends up winning more friends and respect in the end.

Omkara
07 April 2013, 09:37 AM
This is why I never post here, but remain as an observer.


Why not participate selectively? I would love to see a thread on the Vaishnava concept of vyuhas from you. I have been searching for good reading material on the subject for months, but to no avail.

Also, I have sent you a PM with some doubts I have about Vaishnava Vedanta. I would be grateful if you can take the time out to reply.

philosoraptor
07 April 2013, 12:22 PM
I second the call for more participation by Sri Vaishnava (the user as well as more Sri Vaishnavas). In fact, I would like to see more participation by traditionally-minded Shaivites and Advaitins and all other traditional, pre-colonial-era schools. This would really raise the standards of discussion, and I know (my selfish motivation admittedly) that I would learn so much more.

satay
08 April 2013, 10:27 AM
Admin Note

Flaming posts like these are against the rules of HDF. Please continue your discussions on other forums if you must flame each other.


But unfortunately, there are some *cough* *cough* who have zero knowledge of classical vedanta and try to obstruct followers of true vaidikas (who are all essentially vaishnava, including srI adi shankarA) from expressing their opinions. Let alone obstruct, they don't even bother to read what the other person has to say.

satay
08 April 2013, 10:29 AM
Namaste,

No, I don't recall doing that and even if I did circumstances must have warranted it.


Check if it will work.
If I remember, you forbade most vaishnavas from openly expressing their views. No 'fense.

Ganeshprasad
08 April 2013, 11:42 AM
Pranam Satay



Admin Note

--. Please continue your discussions on other forums if you must flame each other.

Sorry I have no intention of flaming anyone, in fact I agonised weather to respond here to his post at all but the human nature, took over my better judgement.

Jai Shree Krishna

shiv.somashekhar
08 April 2013, 06:46 PM
I do not see representation from Advaita and Dvaita schools on this forum. I do not mean the Ramana\Ramakrishna flavor of new age Advaita, but traditional Shankara Advaita - with enough depth in his bhashyas, prakarana granthas, Vachaspathi Mishra's work, etc.

And without representation from these schools, debates are not possible. I have never seen anyone engage in debates to learn; the attitude is more one of firm conviction in one's own position, coupled with the zeal to prove the opponent wrong. I am not saying the attitude is wrong (it is not), just pointing out that debates of such quality are not likely to happen.

wundermonk
09 April 2013, 10:45 AM
Namaskar,
I am wondering if we would like to have a forum in which all the discussions will be soley based on vedas, puranas, upanishads and commenteries of the three acaryas as opposed to 'personal' opinions etc.

Should we have such a forum for HDF?

We will try to follow classic debating rules.

The three acharyas represented just ONE of the SIX darshanas. Even to understand what exactly was the nature of argumentation between the Acharyas requires an understanding of the metaphysics put in place by earlier darshanas like Samkhya, Nyaya, Vaiseshikha and Mimamsa.

We may want to invite certain contemporary academic analytical philosophers like JN Mohanty, Chakravarthi Ram-Prasad, Jonardan Ganeri, Kisor Kumar Chakrabarthi, Bina Gupta, Arindam Chakrabarthi, etc. onto HDF. But given the current climate on HDF they are likely to be turned off within a post or two.

These academicians (and our acharyas earlier) are philosophers first and theologians next. HDF posters seem more content with theology rather than philosophy. That makes sense because for the average Hindu or poster on HDF, theology is easier than philosophy.

philosoraptor
09 April 2013, 02:02 PM
I for one, would love to see more followers of traditional Dvaita and Advaita represented on these forums, as well as Vishishtadvaitins.

I see that one such VA follower has been banned now. One intemperate comment and now we are deprived of his wisdom and knowledge for a month. *sigh*

Believer
09 April 2013, 04:22 PM
Namaste,

I see that one such VA follower has been banned now. One intemperate comment and now we are...
I guess passing gas in the HDF temple even once is not tolerated by the moderators. ;)
And why would I want to listen to someone who goes off the handle over trivial things and that too at the moderators/site owners?
I am always aware that being able to post here is a privilege, not a right, as this is not a Govt. run public site.

Pranam.

satay
10 April 2013, 10:05 AM
Namaste,
That is correct. During the last six or seven years, I have found that once you allow certain people to do that once they will smear **** all over the temple walls within days. That makes my job as the janitor a lot harder as I must then analyze each and every post and decide if that is actually **** or not. :)


Namaste,

I guess passing gas in the HDF temple even once is not tolerated by the moderators. ;)


Pranam.

satay
10 April 2013, 10:06 AM
namaste,



I see that one such VA follower has been banned now. One intemperate comment and now we are deprived of his wisdom and knowledge for a month. *sigh*

two weeks.

satay
10 April 2013, 10:08 AM
namaste,



We may want to invite certain contemporary academic analytical philosophers

I have tried that before. It doesn't work. Again, my OP was made six years ago. A lot has been tried, tested and changed since I made the OP.