harish

It is okay for everyone to follow the Guru of their choice, complete 100% trust in the Guru is necessary, but what if the Guru himself is not in the right direction? so it is very important to confirm someone's credentials before accepting the Guru if you are serious about the subject. To learn Physics, would you read a text-book of Physics printed by someone privately, or read a book that refers to original scientific papers and publications? You would beleive E-mc^2 is true only if you could trace to Einstein's original work. One way would be the lineage, one cannot be a Guru by acquiring great power and declaring hiself as God 'unilaterally', fooling gullible people whose only basis is personal faith. Take an example of Prabhu-. and Sai-baba. (I am not a follower of Prabhu-. myself but am interested in Vaishnana philosophies and respect his achievements in spreading Vaishnavism) -Who is the Guru's Guru? PP-allegiance line can be traced to Chaitanya and also MadhvaCharya, both who are well known, I need to say no further word about them. SB-? -What is the basis of Guru's faith? PP-A BrahmaSutra Bhashya in the Gaudiya line, also based on Dvaita which is undefeated since the inception and survived debates across centuries. SB-? not sure of the basis, definitely not related to original work on Vedas/Vedanta -What is the connection with the root of the faith? PP-Based on Vedanta which is the source (understanding of Gita can be traced to Vedanta) SB-Borrowed from someone without proper acknowledgement -Notoriety if any. PP-I have never heard any negative comment on his character, only some criticism on Philosophical basis. SB-I need not say, just search for Sai Baba in Google. In India you will find thousands of Gurus masquerading as Godmen. Anyone can read a book on Gita and preach. Just perform some staged miracles and get powerful contacts (such as political), you will get hundreds of followers who are depressed and you can feed on their hope for years. These Gurus get easy publicity as the real Gurus have no wish to build legions of followers but are occupuied more with practising what they preach and preserving, spreading their learnings rather than have followers who follow blind-faith. These self-procalimed Gurus also keep away from debates on the real subject as they themselves have no basis and vaguely say things based on work of others, adding their own nice words (everyone is good, great, should be happy, this and that). Most of all, I am surprised to find so many followers of Sai Baba among educated caste-brahmins who could have had more faith on their own Gurus who can trace their line to Sankara, ramanuja, Madhva,... I don't understand what people find in him, it is a great mystery to me, maybe he hypnotises. As for the usual words that he build hospitals, schools etc.,, I could have done the same if not better if I had money and followers like him, what's the big deal??????? Philanthrophists have done many times better than him, they do not publicize.

I think it is Siksha because Gaudiya Vaishnavas say Veda-Vyasa as the Guru of Madhvacharya, not Achyuta-Preksha who gave him Sanyasa Diksha(formal anointment). Diksha systems are followed by the more orthodox.

Who was the author?

Since everything is illusory except Brahman, how does Mayavada explain reincarnation? To say that a particular Atma lived several lives would be strange when the existance of the Atma itself is negated by mayavada!!

Since man has the ability to contemplate on Godhead, the human being is superior. A dog will not understand beyond satisfying it's hunger on a daily basis. I am interested how this is answered by various vedantic interpretations? are some souls inferior by nature? if so how will there be equality?

I should agree this as a problem faced by all theistic doctrines. Materialism is the danger today supported by technology, hopefully it is not too late for another shot in the arm. I observe in history that arrogance is always the cause of downfall.

Having a closer look at your original posting, I have no big disagreements... "...maybe for a certain class of men..." however saying the Vedas are the vastly superior (not getting into all the details such as it's describing AUM) does not contradict your original posting.

The problem is faced by all brahmins, not only Madhva brahmins. In South-India nowadays, it is very difficult for brahmins to survive unless you are very well educated and performing. Which leads to a demanding education and job, in a life full of pressures, when is the time to follow and understand philosophy? In this process some get carried away with the tide and go astray. It is after all the effect of Kaliyuga and natural. But why Do are you despondent? as many still understand and follow tattva-vada, it is alive and kicking I have seen philosophical debates and discourses from great scholars. The scholars can lead a respectable life, thanks to support from the still beleiving. At least in Bangalore and around, I see a good growth of tattva-vada activities in recent years. As for those who go astray to great lengths, let them, it is due to the intrinsyc nature of their Jiva and cannot be prevented in today's rat-race.

I respect the act of beleif in one and only supreme God, The Bible preaches devotion to God just like the Gita, so does the Koran.(Maybe that is what Srila Prabhupada meant) I was against comparing Bible to the Vedas in the sense that Vedas contain basic meanings and are the 'sound of creation' (for example AUM) all the talk of Animal sacrifice and so on, are misinterpretations due to inabilty of humans to understand the profound(I can point to Veda Bhasya's that interpret differently). This is the reason why Vyasa Deva had to write the Brahma-Sutras. Even the Gita is teachings based on the Vedas. I think faith in Krishna should be based on a firm foundation like the Vedas: AUM->Vedas->Vedanta->Gita... Otherwise I am afraid modern science can refute Bhagavatha, Bhagavat-Gita just as it can refute the Bible or Koran as compositions by normal well meaning human beings in history who exaggerated their experiences.

I do not agree. What you say is, if I come up with a book out of my whim, publish it and 100 readers read it, and accept it, It becomes Vedas for the 100 readers. We consider Vedas as the "primordial sounds" praising the Brahman with Rik, Yaju, Sama making sense. I would agree if you would say that the Bible is like a Purana by following which, Bhakti-Yoga leads to devotion to a higher god which finally leads to Krishna. A follower of Bhakti Marga need not know about the Vedas.

Theoritically, astro-physics considers multiple universes a possibility. How do you arrive at 311 trillion years?

I am not that knowledgeable, however... The Big Bang describes the universe evolved from a singular state. Vedas describe this as the Hiranya-Garbha (Cosmic Egg). Great if someone could throw light on the relevant verses. The Lotus arising from Vishnu's navel in the Padmanabha form denotes creation of the universe containing Chaturmukha-Brahma. Lotus is a metaphor for the universe.

What is the relation of complete surrender to Krishna (Bhakti) to the Vedas/Vedanta Sutras? What is the role or importance of the Vedas as 'Pramana'?

There have been many Ramayanas and interpretations of vedas by great people in history many with good intentions. However the approach of the secular authors has always been that vedic sages were primitive warriors or priests describing nature. This is not how the theistic commentators like Sankara,Ramanuja,Madhva interpret the Vedas. Acharyas interpreted the Tattva in Vedas by the guiding light of Vedanta, Brahmasutras and other texts. For example, verses related to Ashwamedha Yagna can be interpreted as cutting various parts of the Horse and alternatively as signifying the role of devatas in the relevant places(Madhva Bhashya). I am not an expert in Sanskrit or Vedanta but feel that one should beleive the works of respective Acharyas as these interpretations have been sustained in debate for centuries rather than beleive interpretation of the modern authors who are not subject of scrutiny and neither do they have any responsibility other than translating as they think best. To the modern authors, Vedas are just historic literature. Anyway that is my opinion.