[Prev][Next][Index]
Re: superstitions
-
To: alt-hindu@uunet.uu.net
-
Subject: Re: superstitions
-
From: vidya@cco.caltech.edu (Vidyasankar Sundaresan)
-
Date: 25 Oct 1994 05:15:21 GMT
-
Distribution: world
-
Newsgroups: alt.hindu
-
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
-
References: <38ho6m$aes@ucunix.san.uc.edu>
In article <38ho6m$aes@ucunix.san.uc.edu>
susarla@great-gray.owlnet.rice.edu (H. Krishna Susarla) writes:
> Vidyasankar Sundaresan (vidya@cco.caltech.edu) wrote:
> : Srinivasa Ramanujam who withered away while in London, because of his
> : steadfast refusal to eat meat? Before you sit in judgment over
> : Vivekananda, remember that it was because of his path-breaking work
that
> : Prabhupada could even think of coming to the US in the first place.
Also
> : recollect the Rg vedic verse where a poet confesses to cooking the
> : entrails of a dog and eating it, when he was in dire straits. I can
give
> : you the exact reference if you want.
>
>
> Feel free, but it is hardly relevant. Meat-eating for survival is one
thing,
> but meat-eating for the pleasures of the stomach is definitely a sin.
>
> Maybe you can explain to me why it is that Vivekananda had to come to
the
> U.S. before Swami Prabhupada could? I mean, if there had been no
Vivekananda,
> what would have prevented Swami Prabhupada from buying his boat ticket
to
> the U.S. and helping to spread Vedic culture?
Nothing. Except that his motivation for spreading "Vedic culture" in a
totally alien land like the US, is not understandable without taking into
account Vivekananda's success much earlier.
>
> Actually, while you are at it, you could also do a little more with your
> posts if you expect me to write a comprehensive reply. You will notice
that
> i did not respond to each and everyone of your points... You seemed to
have
> offered a lot of not-so-constructive criticism without even indicating
why
If you cannot reply to some of my points, don't blame me. I do not expect
you to write a comprehensive reply, so please don't bother yourself.
> it is I am supposedly ignorant of what I say. If you disagree with my
views,
> feel free. But you have claimed greater knowledge of Buddhism, Advaita,
> and the use of the term "nirguna" without any justification for this. I
have
> tried as much as possible to use scriptural arguments and the teachings
of
> a Swami I consider authentic to justify my views. If you are not going
to
> at least try to do something similar, you can hardly expect me to waste
my
> time responding to a lot of condescending noise.
>
I have claimed nothing regarding my knowledge of Buddhism etc. I have only
pointed out that you do not have the requisite knowledge. But the fact
that you interpret my statement as you do, indicates that you have read my
previous posts here on these topics. Yet, you pretend as if you do not
know of them.
All the condescending noise that I see here, is from your side. In an
earlier discussion on this group before, I have written quite a few
articles on Advaita, the Upanishads, Buddhism, the Vishnu Purana etc. I do
not have the time to repeat myself ad infinitum. If you wish to, please
get hold of those articles and read them. Please also try to explain the
upanishadic passages that I have quoted in those articles according to
your interpretation, and also that the advaitic interpretation is wrong.
S. Vidyasankar
