[Prev][Next][Index]
Re: Vedanta discussions
-
To: alt-hindu@uunet.uu.net
-
Subject: Re: Vedanta discussions
-
From: vidya@cco.caltech.edu (Vidyasankar Sundaresan)
-
Date: 27 Dec 1994 20:55:29 GMT
-
Distribution: world
-
From news@nntp-server.caltech.edu Tue Dec 27 15: 45:47 1994
-
Newsgroups: alt.hindu
-
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
In article <3da7bd$ks@ucunix.san.uc.edu> vijaypai@kachori.rice.edu (Vijay
Sadananda Pai) writes:
> In article <3d51h3$sqg@ucunix.san.uc.edu>,
> Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vidya@cco.caltech.edu> wrote:
>
> |>Please get your points straight before you begin to argue.
>
> Please get yours straight -- Vyasadeva's spiritual master
> was Narada Muni. That should be evident from texts like Srimad
> Bhagavatam. Also, the succession you've stated leads one
> to believe that the message changed over time in the advaita
> succession, since Sukadeva Gosvami preached Bhagavata philosophy.
>
Please do not quote the Bhagavata Purana for this. You will not convince
the vast majority of people with it. Do you have corroborative evidence
from any other work that Narada is Vyasa's guru? Also, do you have any
other evidence for Suka being a Bhagavata?
Vyasa was Parasara's son, and everybody knows that Parasara was himself a
great rishi. The Mahabharata confirms that Parasara took Vyasa away as
soon as he was born, and that Vyasa learnt from his own father. Narada is
not mentioned in the Mahabharata as the guru of Vyasa himself. If Narada
was Vyasa's guru, don't you think Vyasa would have acknowledged it in his
own work, the Mahabharata?
Suka was Vyasa's son, and he was born Self-realized. He was a jivanmukta.
Your philosophy does not even acknowledge that jivanmukti is possible. On
what basis do you claim Suka as a preacher of Bhagavata philosophy? And
stop calling him a "Goswami". The word does not occur in the Bhagavatam
itself. It is peculiar to some Vaishnava sects. Suka, in many Upanishads
like the Sannyasa Upanishad, and the Suka-Rahasya Upanishad upholds the
ultimate oneness of the Jivatman and the Paramatman - surely this is not
Bhagavata philosophy.
S. Vidyasankar
