[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : Becoming Hindu
-
Subject: Re: ARTICLE : Becoming Hindu
-
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar@braincells.com>
-
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 03:36:28 GMT
-
Apparently-To: soc-religion-hindu@uunet.uu.net
-
Newsgroups: soc.religion.hindu
-
Organization: Consolidated Braincells Inc.
-
References: <ghenDzFo4C.F36@netcom.com>
janahan (j.) skandaraniyam <skandar@nortel.ca> wrote in article
<ghenDzFo4C.F36@netcom.com>...
> One's own realizations are justification enough. You don't
> need to tackle it after a achieving a certain state.
However us poor unfortunates left on the other side need a little help in
seperating realizations from idle noodlings.
> Classically?
It may come as a shock to some people but Vedanta existed before the 19th
century. It has a long literary tradition and a technical vocabulary of
its own. Rather than justify their positions with mysticism they placed
their philosophy on firm logical foundations.
> You have misunderstood him and his writings. Give me the exact quote.
> The concept of dharma IS MEANINGLESS to one who has achieved the Goal.
> Dharma, adharma, and all opposites are MEANINGLESS to the realized
> one. Dharma is the path, Dharma is not the Goal. As long as one has
> not achieved the Goal, one should walk the path of Dharma.
>
Advaita Vedanta says that Karma and Jnana are completely distinct. For a
Jnani there is no longer need to perform acts. However Advaita is also
extremely clear that only a sannyasi can be considered a Jnani. (Because
anyone who had truly realized Brahman would not feel the need to stay in
worldly life a minute longer.) Very few of the followers of Vivekanand are
sannyasis so the rest should be walking the path of Dharma right? However
we see that the level of observence of these people is in general very low.
What's the problem? Either Vivekanand failed to get the message across to
his followers or he only pays lip service to the idea that non-sannyasis
should strictly follow dharma.
> On another note, a few people have e-mailed me and asked how I
> could make such a statement, what proof etc. do I have, and
> so on. I shall say it again, one's own realizations are strenght
> enough. My statement was not based on anything from the physical,
> i.e., V's and RK's works etc., it was purely spiritual.
How convenient. In the Vedantic tradition we have certain authoritative
texts and logical reasoning. If some Acharya makes some claim, this can be
verified by anyone with a modicum of intelligence.
What you are proposing is nothing more than a cult of personality. Some
self-proclaimed "realized" person makes some unfounded claims and we're
just supposed to follow along. Far from being Vedanta this is the very
essence of avidya.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas [jaldhar@braincells.com] o- beable .-_|\
Consolidated Braincells Inc. / \
http://www.braincells.com/jaldhar/ Perth Amboy-> *.--._/
"Witty quote" - Dead Guy finger me for PGP key v McQ!
More than one instance of Sumo is attempting to start on this page. Please check that you are only loading Sumo once per page.