[Advaita-l] Is the concept of maya essential to explain advaita?
Jaldhar H. Vyas
jaldhar at braincells.com
Wed Jan 25 11:16:58 CST 2012
On Wed, 25 Jan 2012, Rajaram Venkataramani wrote:
>> Shri R. Balasubramanian has also stated that the concept of Maya
>> is not required as stated at the start of the thread. He has said that in a
>> book published by Shakatapuram Mutt claiming lineage to Totakacharya. He is
>> the former Chairman of Indian Council of Philosophical Research. He is very
>> closely associated with Kanchi Mutt also as we can see from his public
>> profile. *So, this "gross misunderstanding" on the part of Shri Venkatesh
>> is not unique to him as even some traditional cum academic scholars seem to
>> have that. **I think that Shri R. Balasubramanian got this wrong, with
>> due respects to his age and accomplishments, because Shri Subrahmanian has
>> provided specific evidence from the text to that he is wrong. But the point
>> is someone of the stature of Shri R. Balasubramanian says such a thing as
>> what Shri Venkatesh says. *We may disagree with peer reviewed paper
>> published in the Journal of Indian Philosophy by Srinivasa Rao and give
>> more weight to posts on this list because it is the traditional view.
>> Someone like Shri Venkatesh may give less weight to posts on this list
>> though he may be wrong in doing that.
The problem for me is not that VM holds unpopular views or trusts the
wrong authorities but that he has a penchant for coming to a conclusion
first and then casting about for support for it. This is not acceptable
in any rational discipline Western or Eastern.
Start with the primary sources. The works of Shankaracharya are readily
available for perusal. If there is anything unclear then resort to
secondary sources whether pandit or professor. Then come to a conclusion.
If one lacks the technical skills in Sanskrit etc. to do this then stop
speculating until the skills are acquired.
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list