Digest bhakti.v004.n032

[Guest guest]

-------------------------------

V. Srimahavishnu, M.Tech (Structures)

C - 211 , Hall - IV

I.I.T. Kanpur - 208 016

INDIA

Email : vsri

s.vinjamuri

-------------------------------

 

On Fri, 2 Jul 1999 Sri Suarshan Madabushi wrote:

>

> In much the same way, I believe, in the history of the Vedic times of India

> there were many great souls like Sankara and others who fought to establish

> the primacy of the Vedic system of thought over alien anti-Vedic ideology.

> You may not agree with their thesis. Subsequent refinements to Vedic faith

> and Vedantic thought ... like those made by Sri.Ramanuja and the "bhakti"

> traditionalists may be arguably superior or more "true" or "more faithful to

> the Vedic ideal".That's a different matter altogether. But you simply cannot

> doubt or belittle the historical contribution of Sankara and his

> contemporaries to the restoration of Vedic idealism and ethos in India.

 

It is not so. Sankara's preahings were in sharp contrast with what

KrishNa had preached. Also Sankar didn't discover anything on his own.

What rAmANuja preached was no diff from the works of vyAsa, bOdhAyana,

Gospel of KrishNa and also apaurushEya vEdas.

> But from your comments I gather I have crossed the boundary and committed

> the unspeakable sin of praising Sankara personally. But what I think is that

> a harmless remark about an objective fact of history that I made about

> Sankara bhagavathpAdA in my last post has sparked you into starting what I

> think will now be another round of "SriVaishnava-Advaitin" polemics on the

> "list" following yours. We will now hear perhaps more great fulminations on

> how true SriVaishnavas will never praise Sankara (or "his grandpa", as

> somebody else once said) and those who do so commit grave "apachAram" and

> "AchArya-drOham"!

 

It is me only. I have been quoted totally out of context justlike

I was quoted to have said that I had digested Sankara's works,

while I

don't know Sanskrit. to know the meaning of the line

I quoted, understanding eigth standard Telugu textbook fully is enough.

It should be very clear as to

what I said was that a work like saundarya lahari deserved sharpest

possible criticism whoever might be the

author. It was immaterial

to me

whether it was Sankara or his grandpa or somebody else. If any member hass

a doubt, he/she can go thru the archives.

>

> If I hear you right, Sri.Mani, I hear you now laying down a cardinal rule

> for all of us members: "Hear ye all ! Praise to Sankara is the taboo of all

> taboos on the "bhakti-list"!

>

> And if you were running a similar list for discussing Newtonian physics,

> Sri.Mani, I suppose you would say none should utter a single nice word for

> Aristotle! Do I understand you right, Sri.Mani?

 

Sankara's philosophy is like saying the earth is flat in 2100 AD. So the

wquestion of Newtonian vs Einsteinian physics doesnt arise. I never

expected that such conclusions could be drawn from Sri mani's mail which

carried a simple message.

 

adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan

V.Srimahavishnu