In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com (Vidyasankar Sundaresan) writes:
|> In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>
|> email@example.com (H. Krishna Susarla) writes:
|> > Vidyasankar Sundaresan (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
|> > : Isn't it strange that you people who seemingly uphold the "reality" of
|> > : world preach an escapist surrender? On the other hand, it is the
|> > : advaitins like Vidyaranya and Vivekananda, (who supposedly say this
|> > : is mithya), who are the ones who have tried to change the political
|> > : scenarios of the times they lived in.
|> > And that too, despite their interesting theories on how the world isn't
|> > real, so what's the point? (sarcasm intended) Am I to assume that we
|> > should consider sadhus who take up material activities in this
|> > unreal world to be more virtuous than those who stick with devotional
|> > service to Lord Krishna???
|> No. People like Vidyaranya have played the part of small instruments in
|> "dharma samsthApanam" that the Lord tells us about in the BG. At times of
|> crisis, it is necessary not just to sing the praises of the Lord, but also
|> do some disinterested action for the betterment of the dharma. That is
|> exactly what Vidyaranya tried to do with the establishment of the
|> Vijaynagar kingdom.
So how did Vivekananda's nationalism provide for the betterment
In contrast, look at the first nonviolent protest movement in India,
lead by Chaitanya Mahaprabhu against the Chand Kazi [Muslim
magistrate of Nadia district]. Not only did Chaitanya convince
the Kazi to allow the Hare Krishna movement to "sing the praises
of the Lord" in public areas, he also brought the Kazi to join
the sankirtan movement.
Later Gaudiya Vaisnava acaryas, such as Srinivasa Acarya, also
converted kings, thus bringing whole kingdoms into the fold.
Actually we see many similar cases among other Vaisnava schools
(the temples at Belur and Halebid were built by a Deccan king
who was converted from Jainism, etc. etc.)
There is nothing wrong with political action for a true spiritual
cause so long as one doesn't lose one's consciousness or make any
compromise along the way. And the Vaisnava acaryas have shown how
to do that quite well.
|> If you are convinced about your faith in Krishna and the BG, why do you
|> care about the non-vegetarians in the world? Surely, you cannot hope to
|> convert them by being so abrasive about your beliefs. Fine, Vivekananada
Some people respond well to abrasion (such as, for example, my good
friend Krishna Susarla). But I wouldn't say that Krishna was being
particularly abrasive in his post, certainly not as much as the angry
"Everything is ok" attitude of the mayavadis on this group.
So why does he care? The Vaisnava cannot stand to see anybody
suffer, and he knows that the meateater will suffer regardless of
what body he may get (as stated in the Mahabharata).
|> reason that you are jealous of the visibility of the Ramakrishna Mission?
Krishna belongs to a group that's far more visible than RK mission,
so why would he care?
|> S. Vidyasankar