[Advaita-l] Re: Pa~nchapAdikAchArya
rkabhi at gmail.com
Mon Oct 16 00:58:28 CDT 2006
I may have misunderstood your message. But I am not sure if logical
fallacies are completely irrelevant.
On 10/16/06, Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <rama.balasubramanian at gmail.com>
> Dear Abhishek,
> Can you point out where I said that SSS is wrong because he "went
> against tradition"?
> Sankara is clear that brahma-j~naana is to be obtained through a
> sapradaayavit only. My observation was that a sampradaayavit is not a
> BOOK written by a putative brahma-j~naani. Question is very simple:
> shankara is clear on the need to personally approach a sampradaayavit.
> Who did SSS approach?
> Can we leave irrelevant details on logical fallacies out of the
> picture here?. As far as I can see only Vidyasankar seems to have
> understood what I have been saying, although I have taken great pains
> to write the same thing over and over and over again.
> tasmAttvamuttiShTha yasho labhasva
> jitvA shatrUn bhu~NkShva rAjyaM samR^iddham|
> mayyaivaite nihatAH pUrvameva
> nimittamAtraM bhava savyasAchin||11.33||
> -bhagavAn shrIkR^iShNa, bhagavadgIta
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list