[Advaita-l] Dr Mani Dravid

Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian rama.balasubramanian at gmail.com
Sun Mar 15 05:57:34 CDT 2009

On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Venkata Subramanian
<venkat_advaita at yahoo.com> wrote:
> You are right, he said the exact word.  He told it is incorrect to say everyone down Sureshwaracharya is wrong.
> But he never said what the Holenarsipur Swamigal said is incorrect, in fact he positively praised the Swamiji for his works and said he is within the tradition.
> Hence i conclude for myself - there are rather 3 sub-schools - Bhamathi, the Vivarana and the Holenarsipur.
> why it matters who said it - am not sure whether the Swamiji was unaware of Mimasa & Tarka; nor did Dr. Dravid say anything on that.  He only mentioned that the persons whom he interacted with - did not have an answer; that is a limitation of that person not the Swamiji or his prakriya.  Hence the issue.


As is well known Sri Dravid is a great scholar and is a master of
Sanskrit. So if a reading of Swamijis works leaves him unconvinced
that is either a problem with Sri Dravid or the prakriyA. The fact
that in addition there was no one able to explain Swamijis works
convincingly is most telling. We still have direct disciples of
Swamiji and they were not able to explain what he said ? On the other
hand we are to understand that padmapAda who lived 1200 years back has
been represented faithfully till this day ?!! Can I say then that
Swamiji not agreeing with the prakriyA or getting Sri Virupaksha
Sastri to explain it convincingly is not a problem of padmapAda then?

No one is denying that the Swamiji came from within the tradition -
the question is whether what he wrote has any intrinsic value and is
free of logical and mImA.msic fallacies. BTW, with this position you
are completely going against what Swamiji himself claimed - according
to him we have a pack of fools following the traditional advaita, and
he claimed to be the ONLY true interpreter of "pristine, pure" vedAnta
- whatever the heck that means.I don't want to intrude on anyone's
*belief* about any guru. But when the majority of the people from that
group make it a practice of going around slandering modern day advaita
masters (I am not talking about you) and taking refuge in "but gee, I
am only talking philosophy here" and trying to make a fool out of
everyone, I unfortunately have to take a stand.


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list