List policies regarding the usage of offending languages

[Guest guest]

Greetings Advaitin:

 

In a recent posting, Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar wrote:

> but you have read these works in the original so you _know_

> what Shankaracharya really taught. (And lets make no mistake,

> Advaita Vedanta is what Shankaracharya taught not the modern idiots

==============================================

> who have hijacked the name.) Should you not then be called to task

==========================

> for misinterpretation?

 

I just want to remind Shri Jaladhar that his opinion, "Advaita Vedanta

is what Shankaracharya taught not the modern idiots who have hijacked

the name." is not factual. His language is offensive, derogatory and

provoking. His remark degrades all modern time sages including Ramana

Maharishi, Ramakrishna Paramahamsa and Swami Vivekananda, Swami

Chinmayananda, Swami Dhayananda Saraswati and others. I suggest Shri

Jaladhar to read the FAQ of the list carefully (Factual Statements) and

I request him to refrain from using harsh language. Shri Jaladhar is a

very knowledgeable scholar and he may be able to serve the community

better if he can refrain from using offending tone of language.

 

Note: First, Shankaracharya never claimed "Copyrights or Patent" for

Advaita Vedanta. Second, Advaita is not commodity and noone has the

ability to hijacked. Finally, Advaita Vedanta existed before Shankara

and they are always subject to different interpretations.

 

Members of the list have the right to express their opinion freely and

have full right to voice their disagreements. In nearly two months of

our existence, this is the first time that I have noticed someone

expressing inappropriately.

 

I want to take this opportunity to thank the list members for keeping

this list in high esteem. If we can maintain the list without provoking

anyone, we can focus our discussions to the subject matter rather than

to the personality.

 

I do not wish to write another note about the list policies. I do

believe that the list members have the responsiblity and discipline to

keep this list civil.

 

Thanks again!

 

India Celebrates the festival of Lights (Deepawali) this week.

 

Happy Deepawali to everyone.

 

Ram Chandran

List Maintainer

Burke, VA

[Guest guest]

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998, Ram Chandran wrote:

> "Ram Chandran" <chandranram

>

> Greetings Advaitin:

>

> In a recent posting, Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar wrote:

>

> > but you have read these works in the original so you _know_

> > what Shankaracharya really taught. (And lets make no mistake,

> > Advaita Vedanta is what Shankaracharya taught not the modern idiots

> ==============================================

> > who have hijacked the name.) Should you not then be called to task

> ==========================

> > for misinterpretation?

>

> I just want to remind Shri Jaladhar that his opinion, "Advaita Vedanta

> is what Shankaracharya taught not the modern idiots who have hijacked

> the name." is not factual. His language is offensive, derogatory and

> provoking.

 

Hmmm... I didn't specify who the modern idiots so how do you know I was

being offensive, derogatory, and provoking. (and the worst criticism of

all, non-factual. :-) For all you "Modern idiots" may be a null set.

> His remark degrades all modern time sages including Ramana

> Maharishi, Ramakrishna Paramahamsa and Swami Vivekananda, Swami

> Chinmayananda, Swami Dhayananda Saraswati and others.

 

Now this is an interesting list. Why did they come to mind when the

phrase "modern idiots" came up? As it happens they are not the people I

was thinking of but lets look at them anyway.

 

Ramana considered himself to be in accord with Shankaracharyas teachings

(Ramakrishnan posted the quote once I believe.) The Jagadgurus of the

time considered him to be so too.

 

The connection of Ramakrishna and Vivekanand to Advaita Vedanta is rather

dubious but they or their followers at least *thought* they were following

Shankaracharya. The RK mission publishes many of Shankaracharyas works.

I doubt they would disagree with my assertion that Advaita Vedanta begins

with Shankaracharya.

 

As for Chinmayananda and Dayananda. Insofar as they are Dashanami

sannyasins they trace their guru parampara back to Shankaracharya. So

either they follow his teachings in which case I have no argument or they

are gurudrohis in which case they deserve contempt.

 

In all cases it is Shankaracharyas teaching which sets the standard for

Advaita Vedanta. There have been other non-dual schools of Indian

philosophy but they have not called themselves Vedanta. There have

been schools of Vedanta with different interpretations but they haven't

called themselves Advaita. It is a matter of historical record that

"Advaita Vedanta" has always refered to the thought of Shankaracharya and

his successors.

 

Why is this such a difficult concept for some people to understand?

> I suggest Shri

> Jaladhar to read the FAQ of the list carefully (Factual Statements) and

> I request him to refrain from using harsh language. Shri Jaladhar is a

> very knowledgeable scholar and he may be able to serve the community

> better if he can refrain from using offending tone of language.

>

 

Scholars serve the community by telling truth and correcting falsehoods.

Regardless of whose feelings are hurt.

> Note: First, Shankaracharya never claimed "Copyrights or Patent" for

> Advaita Vedanta.

 

You didn't claim copyright or patent on your post. Am I now justified in

going elsewhere and saying "I talked to this Ram Chandran fellow and he

said we should barbecue babies and eat them." One tries to report

anothers words accurately not out of fear of being told off or sued but

because it is the decent, honest thing to do.

> Second, Advaita is not commodity and noone has the

> ability to hijacked.

 

Advaita is a system of thought and of course thoughts can be hijacked.

Look up the word propaganda in a dictionary.

> Finally, Advaita Vedanta existed before Shankara

 

This is blatantly untrue. Advaitins of course claim Shruti, Brahmasutras,

Gita etc. for their own but so do other kinds of Vedantins. The earliest

historical records of a philosophy called Advaita Vedanta we have are the

works of Shankaracharya and Gaudapadacharya. The term only came into

common use early on and then only to describe the thought of Shankaracharya.

 

Unless you posess some information the rest of the world has missed.

> and they are always subject to different interpretations.

>

 

Interpretations are two a penny. Some Christians would interpret Advaita

as being the work of the Devil. Do you accept that interpretation?

 

There are legitimate differences in Advaita Vedanta. We see some points

of contention between the Bhamatikara and the Vivaranakara for instance.

But on the necessity of sannyasa there is no disagreement whatsoever.

> Members of the list have the right to express their opinion freely and

> have full right to voice their disagreements. In nearly two months of

> our existence, this is the first time that I have noticed someone

> expressing inappropriately.

>

 

So lies, half-truths and just plain ignorance are apppropriate for your

list?

 

Well, ok.

> I want to take this opportunity to thank the list members for keeping

> this list in high esteem. If we can maintain the list without provoking

> anyone, we can focus our discussions to the subject matter rather than

> to the personality.

>

 

I'll repeat this once again. Personalities are not at issue but ideas.

You are quite welcome to believe whatever you like for whatever reason.

You are not entitled to call it Advaita Vedanta unless it actually is.

It is only the people who cannot seem to grasp this simple notion who are

being censured.

 

--

Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar