 |
||
|
||
| Advertise with us! |
|
|
Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian wrote:
>Well let me give another example. Thiru Anna Subramanian was the
>Principal of RK Mission high school and very prominent in the RK
>circles. He is also quite close to the Sringeri people. His scholarship
>is extremely good. My grandmother wasn't English educated and she didn't
>know anything about Vedanta. So what's the point?
The point is that what is being discussed here is whether Sw. Vivekananda is
still relevant today. Is it because the RK mission provides translation of
Skt texts that it necessarily implies that they are the 'sole representatives'
of Advaita! :-)
>While some English speaking people may not know enough about religion it
>is ridiculous to condemn Vivekananda for that. It is to the credit of
>Vivekananda that he was trying to address such an audience also.
The texts are to be studied in their original language. If at that time he was
politically motivated to address the baabus, fine! However, what does he have
to offer now? Times have changed a lot. What was true at the turn of the
century is not true now. Any form of interpretation, to pander to the
prevailing trend, is doing a great injustice to texts.
>> Yes, one cannot generalize from one example or from one's experience (its
>> statistically invalid anyway!) and its all a matter of opinion after
>> all. :-)
>Then better state it as an opinion instead of presenting it as some
>unalloyed, incontrovertible truth. If that had been the case, I'd have
>hardly even bothered to reply to the initial mail.
The fact is that every statement in language is an opinion. 'unalloyed,
incontrovertible truth' *is* an opinion.
>> Maybe that could be a reason why he was more 'open' to this section. Just
>> speculating.
>More importantly, sha.nkara was trying to defeat other vedanta schools
>and was hence being complete. Swamiji may not have cared too much for
>these passages and he has the right to neglect them if he wants to. To
>expect everyone to be as complete as sha.nkara is extremely ridiculous.
>In the present context there is no need to dwell on those passages.
Good for you if you can read the minds of both shankaraachaarya and the swaami.
:-) Why are swaamijiis always bothered by women? :-)
Bye,
Girish
|
||
|
||
| Advertise with us! |
|
|