Guest guest Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 Awareness of awareness is likely to be the prison. Being aware of being aware is not being aware. This is the off-beat (out-of-phase) foundation for the ego (in my opinion) as i exposed in "a step forward" a while back. By the way, the advertising bot in the group has just tried to sell me this: "CattleMax Cattle Management Software - Manage your Brahman and other breeds of registered and commercial cattle with CattleMax. ABBA interface to to download ABBA cattle records and print reg applications. Free trial available." .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 Namaste: In Vedantic terms, the feeling that "I am the Doer" reflects the awareness of awareness. Any public declaration of the Doership comes from the Ego! One of the members of our temple always calls me (I used to be the Treasurer) by phone several days after he sends a check with a note that the donation is 'unanoymous.' His question always used to be "Did you receive my check to the temple? He wants me to be 'Aware' that the unanoymous check is from 'him.' This is another classic case of the presence of Ego!! Warmest regards, Ram Chandran advaitin, "fcrema" <fcrema wrote: > > Awareness of awareness is likely to be the prison. Being aware of > being aware is not being aware. This is the off-beat (out-of-phase) > foundation for the ego (in my opinion) as i exposed in "a step > forward" a while back. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 Namaste: I noticed the error in the spelling of 'anonymous' and I spelled it wrongly by 'unanoymous.' Here is the corrected version and sorry for the error. You probably would have noticed that this is not the first time for such errors! In Vedantic terms, the feeling that "I am the Doer" reflects the awareness of awareness. Any public declaration of the Doership comes from the Ego! One of the members of our temple always calls me (I used to be the Treasurer) by phone several days after he sends a check with a note that the donation is 'anonymous.' His question always used to be "Did you receive my check to the temple? He wants me to be 'Aware' that the anonymous check is from 'him.' This is another classic case of the expression of Ego!! Warmest regards, Ram Chandran advaitin, "Ram Chandran" <ramvchandran wrote: > > Namaste: > > In Vedantic terms, the feeling that "I am the Doer" reflects the > awareness of awareness. Any public declaration of the Doership comes > from the Ego! > > One of the members of our temple always calls me (I used to be the > Treasurer) by phone several days after he sends a check with a note > that the donation is 'unanoymous.' His question always used to be "Did > you receive my check to the temple? He wants me to be 'Aware' that the > unanoymous check is from 'him.' This is another classic case of the > presence of Ego!! > > Warmest regards, > > Ram Chandran > > advaitin, "fcrema" <fcrema@> wrote: > > > > Awareness of awareness is likely to be the prison. Being aware of > > being aware is not being aware. This is the off-beat (out-of- phase) > > foundation for the ego (in my opinion) as i exposed in "a step > > forward" a while back. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 Another case would be such as "i exposed a while back in etc" :-)... sorry for exceding the quota, but "i just had to add this"... my warmest regards (and some laughter to go with...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Namaste: On a serious note, your statement needs further clarification with respect to what we really mean by saying, "Being aware of being aware is not being aware." In a philosophical sense, awareness needs to be understood within the context of 'Consciousness.' Since this topic is extensively discussed by many, let me provide here several discussions that will further enhance our understanding of consciousness. On a serious note, "awareness of being aware," A number of Web sites provides detailed discussion on Consciousness from the Advaita Vedanta point of view. I recommend the following two: The fires is an electronic version of the book, "The Development of Religious Consciousness " by Swami Krishnananda in chapter 3 discusses the The history of religious consciousness synthesized by Kant, Hegel, Descartes and Sankarcharya. http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/conscious/consc_3.html The second is an essay on Consciousness by Swami Satswarupananda of Ramakrishna Mission the Vedantic and this essay specifically explains the Upanishadic point of view of Self-Consciousness . http://www.sriramakrishnamath.org/magazine/vk/2001/9-3-1.asp http://www.sriramakrishnamath.org/magazine/vk/2001/10-4-1.asp Consciousness from the Visistadvaita Vedanta point of view is provided by Prof. K. R. Sundararajan : http://www.here-now4u.de/eng/self-consciousness_in_ramanuja.htm The western Philosophical thoughts on Consciousness are provided in the following two sites. The Wikipedia site provides both from the religious and philosophical aspects with greater details. The Stanford University site provides an essay on consciousness in text- book style very clear and concise. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscio: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consciousness/#2usness Harih Om! Ram Chandran advaitin, "fcrema" <fcrema wrote: > > Awareness of awareness is likely to be the prison. Being aware of > being aware is not being aware. This is the off-beat (out-of-phase) > foundation for the ego (in my opinion) as i exposed in "a step > forward" a while back. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Note from the List Moderator: The list has no objection for scholars like you to present your view points on consciousness from the Buddhist's perspective. But please bear in mind that the focus of this list is Sankara's advaita philsophy. Inspite of all our efforts, some postings do appear that do not meet the list guidelines. We believe in the 'honor code' and all members are expected to obey. The list moderates postings from those members who violate this written golden rule more often. The list also moderates the new members for the first few posts and the moderation stops after that time. Please understand that the moderators just do their 'duty' and sometimes they do make mistakes but be assured that nothing intentional. We suggest that you visit the list archives and look the number of posts on Buddhism, Ramana Maharishi, Ramakrishna Paramahimsa, Nisargadatta and others before you make your conclusions. A vast majority of the members of the list have joined to learn and understand Sankara's advaita philosophy and the list is obligated to serve them. We are all spiritual seekers and want to provide positive messages and should seek to avoid hatred feelings. Dear Sir, On this topic of consciousness, you have presented wonderful links on various forms of philosophy, including Vishishtadvaita and western philosophy. I am but surprised that this post of yours has covered several forms of philosophy, but has conveniently left Buddhism. I am sure you must be very well aware that Buddhism, just like the Upanishads has explored the consciousness very deeply. If you are interested only and only in Sankara's position on advaita Vedanta, and if this group is only meant for that alone, then no other philosophy, even other interpretations of the Gita, Advaita schools of the Ramakrishna Mission etc., must not be discussed. It is known that the group takes a very conservative stand when faced with a Buddhist standpoint, no matter how harmless, and is determined to oppose it with words such as 'proselytization' or 'marketing'. Yet the group fancies no problems in discussing any other schools of philosophy, whether Vedic or not, such as 'Reincarnation in the Bible', links to websites discussing western philosophy, Greek philosophy, other orthodox schools of Indian philosophy etc. Why then can't the group moderators use terms such as 'proselytization', or 'use of the group as a marketplace' for articles such as 'Reincarnation in the Bible'? Can't that be viewed as an attempt to convert you to Christianity (although I donot encourage that view). But you won't for a western viewpoint is very glamorously relevant to advaita, but one from Buddhism, that is so similar to Advaita is only 'proselytization'! Yet, such a view is the best an advaitin who claims that 'All is Brahman', can have when reading an article regarding the Buddha's teachings, even if they are posted for only answering a question in the relevant context. They would claim that they have 'immense respect for the Buddha' and 'acknowledge the similarities', but find no better words to describe it other than 'commercail venture' or 'conversion' or 'Buddhist missionary'. Perhaps the group members are afraid of Buddhism - I don't know for what. I am sure that this post of mine will not be published on the group at all, since it voices an opinion and no voice whether vaild or not, can be raised against the infallible moderators of this group (where posting is a privilege - or rather for the 'privileged'!). I am sure the poster of this message below is a moderator himself, or is associated with the moderators. The moderators jump to advise members to post articles that are relevant only to Sankara and his philosophy, then let me see them practice what they preach. No interpretations of the Gita other than the Sankara Bhashya should be allowed. No works other than the universally accepted works of Sankara, must be allowed. No, Ramana Maharishi, no Ramakrishna, no Vivekananda and no Buddha. Only and only Sankara. Let me see how many people can post here. I was about to write about the Buddhist standpoint on consciousness, but was discouraged to do so, due to a historical record of hostility against Buddhism that the moderators have shown, especially when it comes from me. I only wish to voice my opinion on this group, since I post very rarely, only on relevant subjects and that too with enough understanding of Advaita along with Buddhism. Besides, my posts are not meant for conversion, but only for sharing knowledge/understanding. I donot 'offer Buddhism as a replacement for advaita' as people here perceive it. Besides, I am very much willing to learn Advaita if my understanding is incorrect. If the moderators think they can learn to understand the value of my posts without forming a bias, I shall continue to be here. If however, the moderators feel otherwise, and think that they are the best ones to advise me on what to do and teach me how to learn Advaita Vedanta, I donot see myself as relevant to the group. Yet I would still want to see how one could have discussions on only Sankara and nothing else. If members interested in Buddhism would have joined a group on Buddhism, then they could have joined a group on western philosophy or Christianity too, if they were interested in it. Why then do posts on those subjects appear? They appear because they show the member's scholarship in philosophy. It is great to have read about western philosophy, but reading about the Buddha and his philosophy is not! Anyway sir, I enjoyed your links to Swami Krishnanada's works and he does cover other philosophies well, so please don't stop publishing it. I was only wodering what could be the root cause for people's and moderators' deep hatred of Buddhism. Regards, -Bhikku Yogi --- Ram Chandran <ramvchandran wrote: > Namaste: > > On a serious note, your statement needs further > clarification with > respect to what we really mean by saying, "Being > aware of being aware > is not being aware." In a philosophical sense, > awareness needs to be > understood within the context of 'Consciousness.' > Since this topic is > extensively discussed by many, let me provide here > several > discussions that will further enhance our > understanding of > consciousness. > > On a serious note, "awareness of being aware," > > A number of Web sites provides detailed discussion > on Consciousness > from the Advaita Vedanta point of view. I recommend > the following > two: The fires is an electronic version of the book, > "The Development > of Religious Consciousness " by Swami Krishnananda > in chapter 3 > discusses the The history of religious consciousness > synthesized by > Kant, Hegel, Descartes and Sankarcharya. > http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/conscious/consc_3.html > The second is an essay on Consciousness by Swami > Satswarupananda of > Ramakrishna Mission the Vedantic and this essay > specifically explains > the Upanishadic point of view of Self-Consciousness > . > http://www.sriramakrishnamath.org/magazine/vk/2001/9-3-1.asp > http://www.sriramakrishnamath.org/magazine/vk/2001/10-4-1.asp > > Consciousness from the Visistadvaita Vedanta point > of view is > provided by Prof. K. R. Sundararajan : > http://www.here-now4u.de/eng/self-consciousness_in_ramanuja.htm > > The western Philosophical thoughts on Consciousness > are provided in > the following two sites. The Wikipedia site provides > both from the > religious and philosophical aspects with greater > details. The > Stanford University site provides an essay on > consciousness in text- > book style very clear and concise. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscio: > http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consciousness/#2usness > > Harih Om! > > Ram Chandran Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Thank you, you beat me to it! Here is what I was just going to write to Yogendra. --Greg ======================== Namaste Bhikku Yogi, Writing to you as a member and as one of the moderators. Myself, I happen not to share any hostility towards Buddhism. I have in fact taken Buddhist vows and Precepts, and am a member of a Chinese lineage that supports Abhidharma, Theravada, Pure Land and Madhyamika. As a member, I personally would like to see open dialogue between Buddhists and Advaitins on the notion of consciousness. One of the most perplexing questions among the more advanced students of Advaita and Buddhism is, "How and why do the two schools disagree? And which view is more accurate?" The two groups see the notion very differently, as you know. And they don't understand, by and large, how other groups see the concept. There is lots of variation among Buddhists as well. But as a moderator, I can tell you that too deep an involvement in such discussion is off-topic, because of the list's historical focus. It's been touched upon many times in the past, and you can even find some material in the archives on the topic. As for the topics of this group, we have circumscribed these topics in a way to fit the interests of the group's many members. And like every group, we more often allow topics that are closer to the border than topics that are farther from the border. This is the way of all groups. As one of the moderators, I would offer to do the following to support the dicsussion that you would like to have. You can write up an invitation, short or long, for a discussion off-line. Or to a new that you create just for the discussion. And I will post that message to the advaitin list with my recommendation that it is an important topic. I think this would be a good idea, and might get you some participants! --Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 advaitin, Yogendra Bhikku <bhikkuyogi wrote: > > Note from the List Moderator: The list has no objection for scholars like you to present your view points on consciousness from the Buddhist's perspective. But please bear in mind that the focus of this list is Sankara's advaita philsophy. Inspite of all our efforts, some postings do appear that do not meet the list guidelines. We believe in the 'honor code' and all members are expected to obey. The list moderates postings from those members who violate this written golden rule more often. The list also moderates the new members for the first few posts and the moderation stops after that time. Please understand that the moderators just do their 'duty' and sometimes they do make mistakes but be assured that nothing intentional. We suggest that you visit the list archives and look the number of posts on Buddhism, Ramana Maharishi, Ramakrishna Paramahimsa, Nisargadatta and others before you make your conclusions. A vast majority of the members of the list have joined to learn and understand Sankara's advaita philosophy and the list is obligated to serve them. We are all spiritual seekers and want to provide positive messages and should seek to avoid hatred feelings. > > > In this connection, may I butt in to state that no less a person than sri Paramacharya has paid tributes to the unorthodox teachers like the Buddha and J.K, in his magnum opus, 'Deivathin Kural.' While expatiating upon the unique concept of reincarnation taught by the Buddha, Swamigal says that he needs a unique language to convey this thought in view of its subtlety and apparent dissonance with reason. While referring to J.K, Swamigal says that K's method of questioning and dialogues, is unique, and has parallels in the tradition. He further puts in a nutshell the teachings of K by saying that K is of the view that any system attempting to delineate truth through the instruments of thought limits it, which is unlimited, adding further that in spite of K's denial of gurudom, his followers rever him as a great teacher. Further, while referring to the Buddha and Jina, Swamigal says that by virtue of their extraordinary purity and truthfulness, these masters have come upon truth without depending on the authority of the revelations. When we could indulge in intellectual discussions on the teachings of Spinoza and Bishop Berkeley, why not the pristinely pure teachings of these men. deserve consideration. Sankarraman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Dear Sir, Thankyou very much. I donot want to start a new thread or some such thing. Instead, I would be more than satisfied if one were not to take an overly biased view of posts that might partially discuss Buddhist standpoints. I don't think you would need to prove to me any non-hostility to Buddhism, by taking up Buddhist vows. That is not the point. I would just request moderators and members to take a more liberal view of Buddhism than those that provoke comments such as 'proselytization'. If a member does not agree with my viewpoint, he/she is free to disagree. I will not argue/debate with him. That however does not warrant one to criticize all of Buddhism as 'commercial', or 'proselytization'. I donot expect anyone to agree with me wholly. I only donot want that posts that try to only clarify the teachings of Dhamma to be labelled as 'conversion' or 'proselytization'. That would be more than enough for me. I also donot have intentions of posting views on the internet for my own gain, that you would perhaps want to point a link to. I only request members to allow healthy discussions rather than blatant attacks, for simple posts that only mean to clarify the Buddhist position. I reiterate for the umpteenth time that I have no intentions of conversion or of any sort of proselytization. -Bhikku Yogi --- Greg Goode <goode wrote: > Thank you, you beat me to it! Here is what I was > just going to write > to Yogendra. > > --Greg > > ======================== > > Namaste Bhikku Yogi, > > Writing to you as a member and as one of the > moderators. Myself, I > happen not to share any hostility towards Buddhism. > I have in fact > taken Buddhist vows and Precepts, and am a member of > a Chinese > lineage that supports Abhidharma, Theravada, Pure > Land and Madhyamika. > > As a member, I personally would like to see open > dialogue between > Buddhists and Advaitins on the notion of > consciousness. > > One of the most perplexing questions among the more > advanced students > of Advaita and Buddhism is, "How and why do the two > schools > disagree? And which view is more accurate?" > > The two groups see the notion very differently, as > you know. And > they don't understand, by and large, how other > groups see the > concept. There is lots of variation among Buddhists > as well. > > But as a moderator, I can tell you that too deep an > involvement in > such discussion is off-topic, because of the list's > historical > focus. It's been touched upon many times in the > past, and you can > even find some material in the archives on the > topic. > > As for the topics of this group, we have > circumscribed these topics > in a way to fit the interests of the group's many > members. And like > every group, we more often allow topics that are > closer to the border > than topics that are farther from the border. This > is the way of all > groups. > > As one of the moderators, I would offer to do the > following to > support the dicsussion that you would like to have. > You can write up > an invitation, short or long, for a discussion > off-line. Or to a new > that you create just for the discussion. > And I will post > that message to the advaitin list with my > recommendation that it is > an important topic. I think this would be a good > idea, and might get > you some participants! > > --Greg > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 1, 2006 Report Share Posted April 1, 2006 Namaste Fcrema, I had to post... I can´t stop laughing... these automatic topic- related advertisement softwares really need to be updated... advaitin, "fcrema" <fcrema wrote: > > Awareness of awareness is likely to be the prison. Being aware of > being aware is not being aware. This is the off-beat (out-of-phase) > foundation for the ego (in my opinion) as i exposed in "a step > forward" a while back. > > By the way, the advertising bot in the group has just tried to sell me > this: > > "CattleMax Cattle Management Software - Manage your Brahman and other > breeds of registered and commercial cattle with CattleMax. ABBA > interface to to download ABBA cattle records and print reg > applications. Free trial available." > > ... > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 Namaste Sri Yogendra BhikkuJi: Refer to your posting in this list with the message # 30506 Re: Re: The Varna System (replying to Chittaranjanji and Bhaskarji) ---- "Today, Vipassana teaching schools are sprawling around everywhere and Buddhism is the fastest growing religion in the world today, especially owing to it's completely scientific and objective approach." -Bhikku Yogi ---- Please read your entire post with the message # 30506 several times and make your own conclusions regarding whether or not you used this advaitic forum for promoting Buddhism. As one of the moderator of this list, I find your accusations are completely false and misguided. Honestly, we greatly respect Lord Buddha and his teachaings but we don't appreciate messengers like you who do not respect the list policies and guidelines. If the moderators of this list change the list policies to accomodate the 'DESIRES' from every member with different religious philosophy, the list very soon will likely disintegrate and degenrate without a direction and focus. Let me try to explain the list's position using the restaurant analogy. There are plenty of ethnic specific restaurants in the Washington Metropolitan. When the customers arrive at the restaurant, the server provides them with a menu sheet to choose and order what they like. If we go to an Italian restaurant, our choices are limited to Italian specific dishes, such pizza, pasta, etc. I can't demand the restaurant my favorite Indian dishes and any such demand is unreasonable! Please understand that this advaitin list like the restaurant provided you with the list policies (FAQ with answers, etc.,) to explain you with what you can post and discuss. Our chief moderator, Sri Greg has already provided you a detailed reply. Since you question the integrity and credibility of this list, as one of the moderator, I am obligated to provide you with a reply. If you want to further discuss about list policies and/or any clarifications, please correspond directly by sending an email to: advaitins. Harih Om! Ram Chandran advaitin, Yogendra Bhikku <bhikkuyogi wrote: > > > It is known that the group takes a very conservative > stand when faced with a Buddhist standpoint, no matter > how harmless, and is determined to oppose it with > words such as 'proselytization' or 'marketing'. Yet > the group fancies no problems in discussing any other > schools of philosophy, whether Vedic or not, such as > 'Reincarnation in the Bible', links to websites > discussing western philosophy, Greek philosophy, other > orthodox schools of Indian philosophy etc. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 Namaste Sri Sankarraman: As one of the moderators of this list, I am pleased to respond to your comments in your recent message referred below. Thanks for raising some interesting issues with respect to list discussion. I just want you to note that I and other moderators of this list greatly respect philosophies propagated by great sages of saints of the world which do include Bhagawan Buddha, JK and others. But at the same time I am pleased to remind you the fact that the main focus of discussions in this list is Sankara's advaita philosophy. Please read over the scope of the list and the FAQ in the file folder. Please also note that in the past (very likely in future also) the list entertained discussions on Buddhism, JK's point of views such as "Truth is a pathless land", and other western and eastern philosophies. These other philosophies are discussed with the purpose of educating the members to get some understanding of philosophies that are closely or distantly tied with advaita. If you want to share some thoughts about JK, you are welcome to post them as series of several articles. But just before you post them, let the moderators know about their contents and your intentions. But please be aware that this list at present does not have any intention to permit debates on the superiority or inferiority of different philosophies. In the past, we have noticed that debates comparing the merits/demerits of philosophies intentionally and unintentionally kindle the emotions of members. Also such debates at some point of time divert the discussions from 'subject matter' to personality. At the end the peace of mind of the list members get irrevocable damages. The purpose of this list is to conduct spiritual discussions to uplift our spirit and at the minimum to help us to achieve peace and happiness. Consequently, the moderators rightly believe that focusing on the subject matter of Sankara philosophy will help us to narrow our goal. Finally, please note that I have no quarrel with what you are saying. Before you derive any conclusion of your own you are obligated to browse through the 30000 articles posted in the list with plenty of discussions covering Lord Buddha and JK. As spiritual seekers, we don't want to make accusations without understanding all the facts. Harih Om! Ram Chandran. advaitin, "shnkaran" <shnkaran wrote: > > Further, while referring to the Buddha and Jina, > Swamigal says that by virtue of their extraordinary purity and > truthfulness, these masters have come upon truth without depending on > the authority of the revelations. When we could indulge in > intellectual discussions on the teachings of Spinoza and Bishop > Berkeley, why not the pristinely pure teachings of these men. deserve > consideration. > > Sankarraman > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 2, 2006 Report Share Posted April 2, 2006 Ram Chandran <ramvchandran wrote: Namaste Sri Sankarraman: As one of the moderators of this list, I am pleased to respond to your comments in your recent message referred below. Thanks for raising some interesting issues with respect to list discussion. Thank you very much for your sincere response. I respect your views. I shall, to the greatest extent possible, try to post the world views of religious teachers like Nisargdatta, and J.K, who have greatly inspired me, without comparing them with advaita, bringing out the essentials alone. Thank you, Sankarraman How low will we go? Check out Messenger’s low PC-to-Phone call rates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 3, 2006 Report Share Posted April 3, 2006 Sri Yogendra Bhikku-ji wrote: Why then can't the group moderators use terms such as > 'proselytization', or 'use of the group as a > marketplace' for articles such as 'Reincarnation in > the Bible'? Can't that be viewed as an attempt to > convert you to Christianity (although I donot > encourage that view). But you won't for a western > viewpoint is very glamorously relevant to advaita, but > one from Buddhism, that is so similar to Advaita is > only 'proselytization'! > I strongly support Sri Bhikku-ji here, though the point on glamour is not correct. Though I have disagreed with some of Bhikku-ji's posts in the past, the fact is that Buddhism is part and parcel of the Hindu heritage and we have a lot to learn from it. Our schools have developed together over the centuries and learnt from each other. The Madhyamaka and Yogacara schools especially have very very deep similarities with Advaita Vedanta. Instead what we have here are members who say that Christ taught non-dualism or that the Bible mentions reincarnation or that some Greek philosopher held non-dual views, and the moderators dont raise a finger. It may be that some odd sentences in the Bible provide opportunities for such interpretations, but am sure that there are many more that do not. And the fact is that the Christian church for 20 centuries has not interpreted it that way. It is utterly presemptuous for our members to now claim that they know more about Christ than those who were directly associated with him and established the church. That certainly does not sound like tolerance to me. Do we recognize a teacher as great only if s/he taught non-dualism? What about Maharshi Kapila, Maharshi Patanjali or Madhvacharya? Are we not supposed to respect them? If we can respect them even though they didnt teach non-dualism, why all these silly attempts to read non-dualism into all the other traditions of the world? In fact such behaviour is not just intolerant but also suicidal. In this regard I find the attitude of the Buddhists to be exemplary. They are tolerant, peaceful and do not attempt to proselytize all the time, but they are also committed to maintaining their own tradition. This is also true of our traditional advaitin matha-s, but many neo-advaitins are only interested in some kind of global non-dual metaphysical soup. "Nothing to do" and "just let go" are their favorite statements. Commitment, methods, study, tradition - these things just dont matter to them. The saddest thing about this is that a seeker who is genuinely interested in Advaita Vedanta today will find it extremely difficult to find a teacher who really knows the tradition. The tradition is being destroyed by the metaphysical soup. Yogendra-ji, I'm sure many of us are interested in knowing the Theravada perspective on consciousness. Rest assured that you will hardly find a Hindu on the planet who hates Buddhism. My only request to you is to avoid statements that Buddhism is somehow more rational than Vedanta or that Sankara misinterpreted the Buddha. If we can avoid such motherhood statements, I am sure all of us will learn a lot. FYI, I spent a lot of time this weekend reading about Madhyamaka & Yogacara, though my understanding has a long long way to go. I also have a suggestion here for the moderators - maybe we could create a parallel group called "advaitin offtopic" or some other name, and add all our current members to that. People who are interested talking about Greek philosophy or the Bible can post on that group. Any member who is not interested in such talk can use a "no email" setting or even from the parallel group. dhanyosmi Ramesh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.