[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : Just say no to "Hinduism" (was Re: ARTICLE : On
-
To: ghen@netcom.com
-
Subject: Re: ARTICLE : Just say no to "Hinduism" (was Re: ARTICLE : On
-
From: Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <rbalasub@ecn.purdue.edu>
-
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 16:17:05 -0500 (EST)
Srila Sri Sri H. Krishna Susarla, the same as Lord Krishna, also miraculously,
at the same time, different from Lord Krishna, tried to think and then
proffered:
> That incarnation of the Supreme Brahman, Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian
> <rbalasub@ecn.purdue.edu> offered in article <ghenDx9t6n.CLD@netcom.com>
> the following gems of wisdom:
>
> > Well, yes, since the so called Gaudiya sampradaya is actually a fanciful
> > concoction, irreverently "borrowing" aachaaryas from the Madhva line.
>
> Oh give me a break. The paramparaa from Madhva is a fact. Would you like me
> to send you proof? I have recently received a transcript of a speech given
> by H.H. Vishveshvara Tiirtha of the Madhva sampradaaya. It was given
> several years ago at Srila Prabhupada's pushpa samaadhi mandir in Mayapur.
> In that speech, Vishvesvara Tiirtha very *explicitly* stated that the
> paramparaa is the same, and that the conclusions presented in both are the
> same. While I'm sure he recognizes the differences between the two
> philosphies (dvaita vs. achintya bedha-abedha tattva), he did not let that
> stop him from stating that he was very proud to belong to the same
> paramparaa as Srila Prabhupada.
Oh, back to COM messages of Shri Vishveshvara Tirtha's speech, are we? Is it
the same Srila HKS who attacked Manish on srv for making the statement that
their was such a message on the COM bulletin board (or whatever? ) a few months
back? For the enlightenment of the srh readers: Manish said that he had
received a COM message by e-mail with H.H's "speech". Upon which Srila HKS
berated Manish for not actually producing the message and claiming that there
had been no such message and also claimed Manish was lying. Now after a hiatus
the COM message has surfaced again. Why don't you post it for the
enlightenment of all of us?
I wouldn't be surprised if such a message is doing the rounds in ISKCON. After
all books have come forth from this great "tradition" which
1. claims verses from the Krishna Upanishad which don't exist. In fact the
second chapter was quoted whereas there is no second chapter at all.
2. quotes XYZ upanishad which is not present even in the Upanishad samgarahaH,
inspite of the fact that even upanishads like Allah Upanishad are to be found
in it.
so on and so forth.
In fact outright lying is part and parcel of the books and literature from
this "sampradaya". I have no use for your COM messages really, even if you do
have one with the supposed "speech".
Note: the above two lies emanated during a debate in srv and HPR exposed them.
Not very surprisingly the source of these lies on srv was Srila HKS himself
(supposedly taken from an "authorized" interpretation of the vedas (sic)).
> > > It's really ironic to see this quote in your .sig ....
> >
> > You meeaaan, you know what logic is?!! No, I am not talking about
> "Gaudiya
> > logic", the classical oxymoron. Funny, you never gave any indication that
> you
> > knew anything other than Gaudiya logic all this while.
>
> Cute. Well, I will put Gaudiya logic up against your so-called logic any
> day of the week. If you are so confident in your abilities as a logician,
> why are you wasting time with slanderous remarks instead of talking
> philosophy? The fact that you have to resort to slander is indeed telling,
> but I will give you the benefit of the doubt and consider any "logical"
> proposals you would like to make.
So that you can engage in your usual modulo N argument technique? People who
don't know what this fine art of argument is: Srila HKS has some ridiculous
objections to advaita based on fifth rate articles about it by non-advaitins.
The objections are numbered 0 to N-1. He'll start with 0 proceed to N-1 and
before you know it he'll be back to the argument labelled 0. Then proceed ad
nauseam till the opponent throws up his hands gives up. Naah, I think I'll pass.
> Let's see if you can put your money where your mouth is...
I don't know where my money is. Atleast my mouth is not where my foot is,
unlike you. In any case, this is my last post on this topic.
Ramakrishnan.
--
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant (May faulty logic
undermine your entire philosophy) -- strong Vulcan curse
http://yake.ecn.purdue.edu/~rbalasub/