RE: Challenge

[Guest guest]

I must begin by saying what a pleasure it was for myself and my family to

meet all of you who attended the SDDS conference this past weekend. By His

Grace, we will have many more such opportunities in the near future.

 

Mr. Keshava Prasad's challenge to us is certainly not an easy one. But, I

would agree that we do have some responsibility to take it on, in the spirit

of trying to develop some inclination towards Him in our youth. So, here is

my attempt:

>My basic attitude is that I cant bring myself to believe that there is a "God"

>whom we can look towards for guidance, comfort or to fear. All my

experience has

>been to suggest that there is no influence that can be attributed to this

"God".

>I am using the quotes as I am using God in the context most people

understand as

>- as someone who is in charge of the universe, who takes care of his "devotees"

>and who punishes people who "sin". Let me know if we are on common terms here

>when we refer to God or if you mean God in a more inclusive sense and if so

what

>it is.

>

>I think of God in a more general sense as someone/something we dont know about

>and because our minds need some explanations to the processes that go on around

>us, we *need* somebody to be the cause of this. I cant crystallize the concept

>beyond this.

 

God, in my interpretation of what I have read, is both of these, the

personal Deity and the Indescribable Mystery. He is the all pervading

Principle, the Mystery behind all that is, and yet He is near to us as to be

in our own hearts. And we, whether sinners or saints, are more dear to Him

than children are to their mother. By limiting Him, in one way or the other,

we can never really begin to experience His Wonder.

 

(An scripture to cite for this, which I have always found personally

inspiring, is Thiruvamozhi 1.1. To keep this message short, I won't quote

from this, but, an English translation of this can be found in the Tamil

Veda by John Carman and Vasudha Narayanan)

>But this

>benefit I reckon can be got only by total belief in the presence of God and I

>cant bring myself to believe in this God for the simple reason that as soon

as I

>want to do this my mind asks: how do you know that there is this person?

>

>As for religion, I can only appreciate the social benefits and nothing beyond

>that.........................................................."

 

Although I cannot deny the social role of religion, at least as far as

eastern religion is concerned, I would contend that its function is much

more than that. For, I believe the very aim of a religion like SriVaishnavam

is to answer the question: "how do you know that there is this person?" Not

to make it sound like a catch-22 situation, but to develop the faith that

you need to know Him, you have to have faith in Him enough to follow religion.

 

I hope this helps, Mr. Prasad. Please let us know how it turns out with

your young friend.

 

adiyEn,

 

Mohan

[Guest guest]

Dear Bhagavatas,

 

I shall try, in the limited means available to me, to answer Sri Keshava

Prasad's query. Needless to mention, it is my own opinion which might

well be wrong!

 

(a) Dear Sri Keshava Prasad, one thing i noticed is that some people with a

scientific outlook assume that a non-religious outlook is

somehow more logical. That is the strangest part! They don't

recognize that there is nothing within the collected corpus of human

scientific knowledge to allow us to form an opinion of the transcendental.

Why not bring it to their notice that if science doesn't predict atma nor

converesly can it exclude it. An absence of evidence shd not be

miscontrued as an evidence of absence. It is in keeping with spirit of

science to explore (as one can) the Vedic experience of the seers before

forming an opinion.

 

(b) Except to those who are readily amenable to traditional doctrines,

we must stress only those parts of SriVaishnavism that might be expected

to find a psychological appeal. For ex. one cd stress the value of

meditation to soothe the mind. We must not stress on ritualisms,

rebirths, etc which it may be difficult to justify within the framework of

that person's (limited) perception, and even less stress purely social

issues which might appear quite anachronous these days! We cd stress the

fact that by nature spiritual exprience is subjective, with our own mind

being our secret laboratory. One can no more represent this verbally to

everyone's satisfaction than one can explain the experience of (say)

sleep to a sleepless alien!!!

 

Hari Om,

srikanth