Namaste,
Recent postings on "Supremacy of one form of God over all others and otherwise" ... has drawn not-so-sweet comments/reactions from some of the vigilant members and moderators which could have been very well avoided. I am not going to judge anyone (including myself who was unfortunately a part of the whole not-so-good episode). In fact,perhaps, there is some other higher need than start judging anyone to make this place a centre of fruitful discussions on Dharma.
Hindu Dharma is beautiful conglomerate of varying faiths and still there is hidden strong bond which keeps all of us together. This is because of our Hindu's tradition of accepting even diametrically opposite views with respect. The recent posts are due to our failure to stick to the above traditions. Hindu Dharma accepts Dvaita, Vishishta Advaita, Advaita VedAnta, Bheda-Abheda-Achintya Swaroop, Shaiva SidhdhAnta, SiddhA's traditions, Aghoris, NirguNis, Kashmir Shaivism, ShAktism etc. You go to 100 villages and you will find 100 different local gods being worshiped.
Therefore, it is quite natural that we will have differences of opinions. This is not a problem of Hindu Dharma but a strength as it has refined the Hindu Dharma for the better and the quest for Truth has been in an unbiased manner. However, when we try to impose, "ONLY MY WAY/OPINION IS RIGHT" attitude, the discussion fails and what we are left is a bitter taste in our mouth. As it is a sheer waste of time with destructive results ... there is need to curb these tendencies.
This is the reason I request people not to react to my posts who have confirmed strong views against my views. The idea is ... "We have heard each other. Now, let's agree to disagree without creating any bitterness". Personally , I have not been seeking validation of my views from anyone and I have never been posting for "converting anyone" to my views. We must respect other's points of views even if it doesn't match ours. None participating here can claim having intellect, analysing and debating capabilities of Shankaracharya, MAdhava, Ramanuja etc. When this diversity remained even after these great personalities ... let's agree our limitations that we can't do better than them.
Everyone coming on this forum has a different need of his own. My need is very limited ... it just gives me some time to spend on spiritual discussions with a few people on this forum who have views similar to that of mine. I have nothing to gain or lose by winning or losing an argument. I have taken a posture in recent posts which is quite different my usual; stand when strong differences of opinions arise and my feeling is that I was pushed into it against my willingness due to specific attacks against me again and again by one of the members here in spite of my avoiding any discussion with him. I don't claim that my feeling is right or I took the correct decision to handle this situation. However, this does underline the need to respect differing views of other's. There is absolutely no need that everyone must accept Advaita VedAnta or Dvaita or Vishishta Advaita or Vaishnava's philosophy or a Shavia's philosophy or a Shakta's philosophy. Why should there be any need for this at all ?
Shall I suggest that, in case discussions between two members reaches a point of near-hostility we should honour "Not to react against other's posts" request from other side and respectfully agree to disagree ? If felt necessary, we may think of even accommodating this into our Forum-rules.
OM
Bookmarks