[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: New site needs your point of view
vivek@cs.rice.edu (Vivek Sadananda Pai) wrote:
>I haven't seen anyone from ISKCON post here in a while, and
>I doubt that you have either, although you might be convinced
>otherwise. Most of the people who post here in support of Srila
>Prabhupada's philosophy are not from ISKCON. Surprising? Hardly so.
OK, I know this. Vijay (or was it you, sorry) and HKS have told in previous
posts that they do not belong to ISKCON. I merely used it as a generic term for
Prabhupada supporters + Gaudiya Viashnavas. I explained this once before also.
>there's always a (not necessarily) fine line between tasteful and
>pointless, and in my opinion, your attempts at humor have been
>pointless.
Well, it's a matter of opinion. I have received comments both ways (by e-mail).
>I find neo-advaita significantly less appealing, both from an
Pray, what is neo-advaita?
>intellectual standpoint, and from a standpoint of "beauty", than
Advaita is not about beauty. It's about self-realization. You might try the
Van Gogh museum instead of Advaita for beauty. And anyone reading Advaita for
"beauty" is only a mere intellectual. Many of us are rather serious
practitioners. Advaita is about practice and as Sivananda said "An ounce of
practice is better than a ton of theory".
>it's claimed predecessor. I have no problem with disagreement,
>and I have no problem with people stating viewpoints which differ
>from mine, but I find a vast range of quality in the posts which
>these days get lumped under "advaita". Needless to say, these stem
I haven't seen any 'vast range' in posts on Advaita. Can you point out some of
them to me? Most posts seemed OK, except for that rather silly "What is
mayaavaadam?" article which represented the lowest end of the spectrum.
>not only from the authors themselves, but also from the people
>whose viewpoints those authors are representing. To put it nicely,
>a lot of the people who claim to be philosophically linked to
>Sankaracharya just don't seem to be on his level. Granted, these
Did anyone claim to be Shankara here? Most of us are sadhakas (I presume) and
trying to attain self-realization and not prove that we are aacharyaas. And of
course I have to presume that you perfectly know on what level Shankara was.
How about explaining to us? I have nothing but the GREATEST regard for him and
have been unable to see on what level he was.
I also find it quite funny that you expect us to be on the level of Shankara,
so I would expect that you are on the level of Chaitanya in that case. I guess
your "level" of Shankara means that all of us should accept that Shankara was
trying to fool the whole world (I am ofcourse referring to that silly quote
here). In which case we are all true advaitins. Is that it? C'mon man.
>However, this continual ISKCON-bashing is quite funny to me,
Is it?
>I am not in ISKCON proper. I most definitely help ISKCON, and
>I support them, but here's the catch - it's with the approval
>of my family's guru back in India. Surprised? Don't be. We descend
>from the Gaudiyas.
Should I be surprised? Did you think I even cared? Or did you think my aim in
life is to "convert" ISKCONites to advaita? What do I care whether you had your
Guru's approval or not?
>and my family's helped all three of them. Only one of them is
>ISKCON. Likewise, my family still has life membership at a major
>temple in New York (no prizes for guessing which one), in addition
I have no idea, what temple?
>I have a hard time understanding the stereotype of fanaticism you
>try to project upon your opponents. Would it surprise you to find
>that even recently, I encouraged someone to attend a non-ISKCON
>Gita study course? If so, why? It made perfect sense to me - I knew
>that she'd stick around for the course, I knew her parents would go
>for it, and given that she's at an age when some religious exposure
>is better than none, I had no problem suggesting that she join.
>Likewise, would it surprise you that I also support other temples
>besides Vaishnava temples?
Should I be surprised? Do you consider it something extraordinary that I should
be surprised?
>Everyone seems to be talking about "Hindu Unity" these days, but
>they seem very unclear on what that means. At this rate, there won't
>be any Hindus born in the US in about a generation or so. This
???!!!
>nihilistic approach to being a Hindu "either be an all-accepting
>Hindu or do nothing" will yield the latter. Already I see a lot of
>people suggesting that any belief is fanaticism, and that's just
???!!!
>from within the Hindu community. In the end, it'll be "cool" to be
>a "know-nothing". It's already that way to a large extent.
???!!! May I know what you are trying to talk about? Why are you so concerned
about whether there will be Hindus or not? They will exist as long as there are
people who can set an example exist.
>You can brand me a heretic for helping ISKCON (among others), but
heretic??. That word does not exist in my dictionary.
>at least I'm doing something. Likewise, you can sit back and
>comfortably lambaste Srila Prabhupada for not meeting your standards,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>but let's face it - take a look at the newer generation of Hindu
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>You are welcome to rant all you want. All I ask is that you get
>your facts straight. You might, however, want to consider what
>you accomplish.
OK, Now I'll get to the point. Where were you when Vivekananda, Ramakrishna and
Sai Baba were having their characters assassinated when they didn't meet the
standards of X or Y or Z? Or if you weren't around in those days what is your
opinion on those posts? My sole aim in attacking ISKCON was to drive this point
home. If you don't want your pet organizations attacked, stop attacking others.
I hope you have some clue of how others will get irritated when you attack
their 'Gurus'.
Also, I have told before that I respect Prabhupada for spreading the message of
Bhakthi. However if people post articles of his, completely criticizing other
traditions without understanding what they are talking about, what else do you
expect? Also people (more than one and no prizes for guessing who) have been
constantly raving about their traditions and lines using their pet books and
denigrating everything else. I am really curious, don't you see the circular
logic involved in this Paadma puraaNa stuff?
In any case, I sincerely hope you have atleast some idea of what people feel
when you attack their gurus etc. I have made enough effort to drive this point
home and won't try again. If I haven't succeeded after all this time, I never
will.
Also, my opinion on teaching children is simple. Set an example. Most children
will follow. There is no need to pontificate extensively on this subject.
Self-reform first, as THE man himself said "Let he who is not guilty cast the
first stone". Frequently people who claim to be moral authorities never meet
their own standards and children can't be expected to follow. Instead, why not
try to be "moral" and tell children that they are trying their best and that
they too should too and EXPLAIN why. IMHO, that's a good way.
Finally, others are also trying to do small services in their own way. You have
no exclusive right over that.
Ramakrishnan.
--
Salvation is the realisation of one's true self and the resulting bliss.
Shiva Purana I.13.66
http://yake.ecn.purdue.edu/~rbalasub/
