[Advaita-l] Fwd: SSS, avidyA, shrI Ramakrishnan

Anand Hudli anandhudli at hotmail.com
Fri May 25 22:46:58 CDT 2007

jaldhar at braincells.com wrote:

>Or maybe Bhaskar was just being polite did you consider that?  Quite 
>frankly the peevishness and >lack of vinaya of those who claim to be 
>defending Advaita siddhanta seems more of an "outright >insult" than the 
>use of salutations.

>It's a shame. We moderators shouldn't have to take drastic steps, but 
>posters will be banned >unless they can learn to express their views with 
>civility.  Vigor and resolve are fine.  Personal >attacks are not.

It is best to fix the root of the problem rather the symptoms. Here is my 
analysis of what the root problem is.

It is frankly disappointing to see articles here on this list that 
repeatedly insult AchAryas, such as PadmapAda, claiming that they have 
blatantly distorted their own Guru's teachings. A few members, including 
myself, have responded by providing clarity on PadmapAda's writings, but the 
false propaganda never seems to stop. Simply because PadmapAda does not have 
a Holenarsipur-like following today and he is far removed from us in history 
than the Holenarsipur Svami who lived closer to us in time, does not mean 
that we can insult PadmapAda and other post-Shankara advaitins.

See for example, the dvaita tradition again. Even to this day, post-Madhva 
dvaitins such as JayatIrtha, VyAsatIrtha, Raghavendra Svami (who is 
considered an incarnation of PrahlAda) are held in the highest esteem, and 
no one says they blatantly distorted Madhva's writings, trying to strike 
down or belittling the entire tradition after him. Why resort to this 
divisive tendency among advaitins?

I am not saying no one should inquire into the works of later advaitins and 
argue about the points in them. As long as there is a healthy curiousity to 
know what the later advaitins said and a healthy argument about them, it is 
fine. However, to my dismay, what I have seen here, is that the line between 
such healthy argument and false propaganda has been crossed, more than once. 
At some point, false propaganda has taken over and the same allegations of 
distortion are made.

Shankara's is an extremely rich tradition and we should respect all AchAryas 
in his tradition and their prakriyas. This is not my opinion but that of 
none other than HH Bharati Tirtha, (see Ramakrishnan's paper for a quote 
from HH's foreword to the siddhAnta-lesha saMgraha). There are bound to be 
differences in approach and style among such a galaxy of AchAryas. But they 
all agree unanimously with the central message of Shankara. After all, if 
Shankara wanted his bhAShyas to be merely repeated by his followers, he 
would have employed parrots!! Not humans.

I do agree that harsh words have sometimes been written by those whose argue 
against the Holenarsipur school but this is an unfortunate result of any mud 
slinging match which should not have started in the first place. Let us all 
respect all AchAryas of the past, present, and future too. If the 
Holenarsipur school wants to focus only on Shankara and his works, that is 
fine and commendable, as long as the later AchAryas are not belittled.


Like the way Microsoft Office Outlook works? You’ll love Windows Live 

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list