[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : God and the Shastras (was Re: ARTICLE : Advice on...)
-
Subject: Re: ARTICLE : God and the Shastras (was Re: ARTICLE : Advice on...)
-
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar@braincells.com>
-
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 02:39:13 GMT
-
Apparently-To: soc-religion-hindu@uunet.uu.net
-
Newsgroups: soc.religion.hindu
-
Organization: Consolidated Braincells Inc.
-
References: <ghenDyL5AD.Hp@netcom.com>
Sankar Jayanarayanan <kartik@Eng.Auburn.EDU> wrote in article
<ghenDyL5AD.Hp@netcom.com>...
> That would be an extremely foolish thing to do, IMHO! (This is not a
personal
> attack, just a way of showing my surprise at reading such a ridiculous
story!)
>
> In the first place, not to ask for mukti is to miss everything :-)
>
Let's think for a minute about what kind of scenario this conversation
could occur in. Am I to believe after thousands of years of not shaving
on Tuesdays Bhagawan is saying "uh, whoops I made a mistake." If you
believe in the omniescence and omnipotence of God you cannot accept this.
So I would have to conclude it was either some kind of test or I was
hallucinating. In either case my answer would be a pretty good one.
> Secondly, if you KNOW that it is indeed the supreme Self of the
universe,
> then the shastras, which are at best knowledge only (merely) at the
Vyavaharika
> level, are insignificant compared to the Lord (I believe Vedanta Desika
or
> Adi Shankara sings the praises of Lord Narayana by comparing the Vedas
to
> mere dust on the Lord's feet).
>
Sadashiva Bhagawan spoke the four Vedas from His four heads (and the
Tantras from His fifth) They may or may not be dust but they are the
legacy He has given us so that's what we use. An arbitrary or capricious
God would not be worth worshipping.
[stories snipped]
These are all fine but not directly relevant to an enquiry into Dharma as
we don't actually know whether they are true or not. In the first case we
know the story cannot be literally accepted as true. Books don't sing.
We would have to look at the context to see what actions these stories
were enjoining or forbidding.
> As far as I know, the advaita parampara, which has the largest following
among
> the Vedanta schools in India, traces its parampara to Lord Narayana. To
say that
> what Lord Narayana thinks is immaterial is simply absurd!
Lord Narayana has said what He needs to say and passed it on to Brahmadev
and the Sanatkumars, Gaudapadacharya, Shankaracharya, Swami Vidyaranya,
Shri Appayya Dikshita all the way up to Swami Swarupananda Saraswati and
the other teachers of the present day in an unbroken chain. What more
needs to be said?
[...]
> So there are two opinions regarding expiation from this sin: one
considers the
> case hopeless, another offers a remedy.
>
Right, in some cases there are several options, some cases it's entirely
up to you and in some cases there is only one option. It's all spelled
out.
[...]
> Therefore, ancestry is not everything; only Truth is everything.
Once again you've quoted a story. How about looking at our actual
history? You know full well for the past couple of thousand years Dharma
has been practiced as I've described it.
>
> > They are certainly more important than the
> > desires of a single person no matter how sincere they are.
>
> If that were the case, Kunti should have said that to Hidimbaa and asked
her to
> get lost.
>
Actually Bhima already had a wife of his own caste so he had fullfilled
his Dharmik obligation.
--
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!
