westerners - a clarification of terms

[Guest guest]

To avoid confusion: The term " westerners " (as in the previous email) refers to

those who to the idea of " instant moksha " by means of some

intellectual understanding, and does not refer to people of a specific ethnicity

or origin. I used the term " westerners " to denote anyone (including indians)

who dismiss the rigour of the classical eastern approach to spiritual practice,

involving the many baby-steps of sadhana: faith, rituals, mantras, etc. There

is a sub-culture of " modern " or " new-age " vedantins that suggest that moksha is

something intellectual (e.g., Deepak Chopra, Osho, etc. - i.e., " westerners " or

those of the " western mindset " ) to be had without " paying one's dues " so to

speak - such modern vedanta is devoid of substance and serves only as

theoretical conjecture. In the use of the term " westerner " it is to this

" Chopra mentality " that I refer, and not to americans/europeans, or whatever.

This 'modern vedanta' arose as a result of

the post-Vivekananda fall-out whereby many advanced ideas were exported from

the " east " to the " west " but the basis for those concepts, i.e., a solid

foundation embedded in rituals, faith, and so on, were over-looked and avoided.

The danger in such " modern " vedanta is the tendency to intellectualize and

over-simplify what is inherently not something to be 'understood'

intellectually, but to be 'experienced' as the reality.

 

I contrast this " westerner " view of vedanta to the " eastern " mindset in which

moksham is never something to be strived for " in this lifetime " so its not worth

bothering about. Typically my emails focus on the latter view that " this is too

complex for me " or " i'll never understand this " sort of fatalistic helpless

mentality that often possesses people. In contrast, the post-Vivekananda Deepak

Chopra types who think that moksha is an intellectual thing to be understood or

that it is just a hop, skip, and a thought away (as if its an " Aha! " moment that

the mind has...). Both are imbalanced and can lead one to a state of delusion.

 

 

That said, I apologize if the term " westerner " is confusing or misleading as

used previously. Again, it does not refer to ethnicity or place of origin of a

person, but to the perspective which one uses to understand/progress on 'the

path'. That means, at times we are all prone to imbalances - leading us to be

sometimes westerners (over-modern) and sometimes easterners (over-orthodoxy).

The best is a middling path consisting of a balanced outlook in which one is

pursuing both simultaneously, with one view supporting the other

synergistically.

 

---

Gurorangripadme ManaScenna Lagnam tata: kim! tata: kim! tata: kim! tata: kim!?

Sarva Kartha, Sarva Dhartha, Sarva Hartha, Mangalam!

Satchidananda, Satchidananda, Satchidananda Mangalam!