Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25

Thread: differing views...

  1. #1

    Re: purifying knowledge...

    Quote Originally Posted by Anirudh View Post
    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
    Come up, O Lions, and shake off the delusion that you are a sheep

  2. #2
    Join Date
    October 2012
    Location
    Bhaarath
    Age
    45
    Posts
    1,113
    Rep Power
    1490

    Re: purifying knowledge...

    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


    http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/sho...2&postcount=23
    Anirudh...

  3. #3

    Re: purifying knowledge...

    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
    Come up, O Lions, and shake off the delusion that you are a sheep

  4. #4
    Join Date
    October 2012
    Location
    Bhaarath
    Age
    45
    Posts
    1,113
    Rep Power
    1490

    Re: purifying knowledge...

    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by silence_speaks View Post
    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
    Last edited by Anirudh; 27 October 2014 at 06:56 AM. Reason: Added note to Moderators....
    Anirudh...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    65
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: differing views...

    hariḥ oṁ
    ~~~~~~
    namasté

    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).

    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
    Last edited by yajvan; 27 October 2014 at 08:20 PM.
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  6. #6

    Re: differing views...

    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
    Come up, O Lions, and shake off the delusion that you are a sheep

  7. #7

    Re: differing views...

    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
    Come up, O Lions, and shake off the delusion that you are a sheep

  8. #8

    Re: differing views...

    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
    Come up, O Lions, and shake off the delusion that you are a sheep

  9. #9

    Re: differing views...

    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
    Come up, O Lions, and shake off the delusion that you are a sheep

  10. #10
    Join Date
    October 2012
    Location
    Bhaarath
    Age
    45
    Posts
    1,113
    Rep Power
    1490

    Namaste Moderators...

    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
    Anirudh...

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 31
    Last Post: 25 February 2012, 04:21 PM
  2. Views on Lord Ganesha, Lord Murugan and the Devas
    By ScottMalaysia in forum Shaiva
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 24 November 2010, 05:58 PM
  3. Are my views against the Vedas?
    By HumaneVitae in forum God in Hindu Dharma
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05 September 2010, 12:07 AM
  4. Scriptural proof for ISKCON's views on sex
    By ScottMalaysia in forum Scriptures
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12 March 2010, 09:44 PM
  5. Critical Views on Christian Theology and Science
    By saidevo in forum Christianity
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 25 December 2006, 06:51 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •