Guest guest Posted March 24, 2001 Report Share Posted March 24, 2001 Harsha wrote: > > When we are at someone's house for dinner and we have to go to the bathroom, > we do not relieve ourselves in the living room, and then start quoting the > Avadhuta Gita as a justification! dearest harshaji- and why not??!! hahahaha! sheesh...humor like that can be dangerous.. it took a great deal of effort for me to stop laughing! now my mouth and stomach hurts.. :-( mercy, please.. :-) as ever, frank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 24, 2001 Report Share Posted March 24, 2001 Dennis Waite [dwaite] In the end, therefore, we are bound to admit that Sandeep is right in what he says. His arguments are inarguable on our own terms, hoist by our own petard as it were. However, to return to everyday standards - and let's face it, most of us are still ego-bound and only paying intellectual lip-service to the tenets of Advaita - there is no question but that Sandeep's words and manner of expressing them are certain to be offensive to many. Personally, I don't mind too much but then I do not have a Hindu background. It seems to me that it would not make advaitic 'sense' to ban him from the list, especially since much of what he writes is so stimulating (in a good or bad way!) I believe that all we can reasonably do is to say 'look, this sort of behaviour is simply not respectful in such a forum'. Eventually, one assumes, when this has happened enough times, the accumulation of causes in his nature will have an effect and he will cease to correspond in that sort of way. Until that time, just take the grain from what he has to say and ignore the chaff. Dennis Well stated Sri Dennis-Ji (for most part!) Having known Sri Sandeepji for sometime on the Internet, I am not bothered by his way of expression. But the moderator Murthyji has made good and substantive suggestions as to why Sandeepji should moderate his language. Sandeepji perhaps can be trained and counseled to express himself in a more respectful way consistent with the list guidelines. I believe Sri Frankji, a list co-moderator, should be put in charge of that for obvious reasons. The logic behind what Murthyji said earlier about respecting others is simple and easy to understand. Basic courtesy is not inconsistent with either talking or expressing Nonduality or related wisdom whatever that may be. Many of us have been around the new age scene and the trend to use language as a shocking device too long to find it interesting or meaningful. But to each their own. The sages say that the Tao that can be spoken of is not the True Tao. Similarly, nonduality that can be spoken of is not the True Nonduality. Therefore courtesy in speech will not negate in any way anyone's enlightenment or lead us to respect them less (are you listening Sandeep baby! :-). When we are at someone's house for dinner and we have to go to the bathroom, we do not relieve ourselves in the living room, and then start quoting the Avadhuta Gita as a justification! Love you all Thanks as always for the laughs and good times plus wisdom Harsha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 24, 2001 Report Share Posted March 24, 2001 Hi GM, I hope now that is not construed has being disrespectful.<s> - Gummuluru Murthy advaitin Sunday, March 25, 2001 02:15 AM Re: Respectful Posts <SNIP> Personally, I feel the views can be expressed in a more 'civilized' manner, without diluting the firmly-held view, but expressing them in a more palatable way. San: Why? That would be useful if I was seeking acceptance from the recipient of what is being prattled? ----------------- While Dennis (and may be Frank by 95%) may agree fully with the views of Sandeep, I do not. Any meaningful discussion is lost when the civility is not directly visible in the debate. San: May I ask for evidence of lack of it? --------------- I am sure you agree with Robert Burton's saying in the book ANATOMY OF MELANCHOLY " .. A blow with a word strikes deeper than a blow with a sword...". A blow to the sages and teachers whom one holds in high esteem is a more serious one than a blow to an individual's post. San: May I ask for evidence of that? -------------- Ultimately, in the present case, it is to be evaluated whether disrespectful sayings towards the sages and postings liberally sprinkled with slang words of the English language are to be balanced against any grain of Truth that we can glean from the posts. And, in this, I would like to have members' feedback, either by personal e-mail to me or on the List. San: All that I hear is that members may be offended, blah, blah, blah. I have yet to see a message "I am offended because you said so and so, such and such.........." Geetha indicated that she(?) is happy with symbols and that as mere mortals, the entity Sandeep should leave her/others with her/their icons of security. I thanked her for her time and effort to respond. End of matter. GM or anybody else who have been offended, please by all means come forth with full gusto, even if you wish to do so privately and I will walk with you. At the end of the walk, if you still choose to disagree, that is perfectly fine with me. After all, you are uniquely "wired" and Impersonal Consciousness may have other plans for you, not apperception. But don't hide behind the baloney of "other members may have cause to be hurt". On respect, here is bromide You cannot insult me, for I never sought your respect in the first place. As for slang, Jesus H Christ, what will you do GM, when I get warmed up. Come on GM, loosen up. Slang is a slang because you say so. --------------------- Now, specific comments on what shri Dennis wrote: On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, Dennis Waite wrote: > [...] > In the end, therefore, we are bound to admit that Sandeep is right in what > he says. His arguments are inarguable on our own terms, hoist by our own > petard as it were. I must say I cannot agree with that assessment. While there are glimpses of Truth there, there are what I think absurd statements as well. As an example, shri sandeep says: there is no jIvA. San: Maybe there is confusion of terminology used. I prefer the term Impersonal Consciousness. You use the term "Jiva", fine with me. You can use any term, makes no difference. What I was trying to expose was the "individual entity", the individual Jiva, which, if I got you right is deluded and needs to be "mokshed". ------- my comment: If there is no jIvA, who is it that is writing? Who is it that is signing it as Sandeep? There is not even a single mention of Atman/Brahman in any of shri Sandeep's writings. San: Yes, because these are all concepts. As much as Impersonal Consciousness is another concept. When nothing has happened, what Brahman are we talking about? Who is talk about it? What is not-Brahman to whom the term Brahman has a meaning, a relevance? - Does he accept That as the basic substratum of all? San: Absolutely. What else have I been prattling about in the last 3-4 days over these numerous posts. If you get your mind off being interested in the "slang" and the "seemingly disrespect", GM, you could probably see that is all I have been saying. "That", is what acts, whether as "slang", as "sinful acts" or goody-goody respectful salutations, profoundities. You have a problem with "slang" take it up with all pervading substratum for coming up with such a delightful term like "ROFLMAO". What's the issue GM? Afraid to laugh and roll and dance and chase butterflies, turn your face and feel the warmth of the sun and the chill of wind behind your ears . Afraid to Walk in the rain, JUMP in mud puddles, Collect rainbows, Smell flowers, Blow bubbles, ooOOoo, Stop along the way, Build sandcastles, Watch the moon & stars come out, Say Hello to everyone, Go barefoot, Go on adventures, Sing in the shower, Have a Merry Heart, Read children's books, Act silly, Take bubble baths, Get new sneakers, Hold hands & hug & kiss, dance, Fly kites, laugh out loud and cry out loud, wander around, wonder (???) about stuff, Feel SCARED, sad, Mad & Happy, Give up worry, guilt & shame, Stay innocent, Say yes & no and the magic words Ride bicycles, Draw, paint & color, See things differently, Fall down and get up again, Talk with animals, Look at the sky, Trust the Universe, STAY UP LATE, Climb trees, Take naps, Do nothing, Daydream, Play with toys, Play under the covers, Have pillow fights, Learn new stuff, Get excited about EVERYTHING, Be a clown, Listen to music, ---------------------- Does he accept adhyAsa, the fundamental tenet of shri shankara's philosophy? > However, to return to everyday standards - and let's face > it, most of us are still ego-bound and only paying intellectual lip-service > to the tenets of Advaita - Probably so. However, whether our advaitic endeavours are intellectual lip-service or a genuine desire to know the Truth, only the individual can answer for him/herself. > there is no question but that Sandeep's words and > manner of expressing them are certain to be offensive to many. Personally, I > don't mind too much but then I do not have a Hindu background. It seems to > me that it would not make advaitic 'sense' to ban him from the list, > especially since much of what he writes is so stimulating (in a good or bad > way!) This List is built (thanks to shri Ram Chandran) as a model of civility in the jungle of internet discussion groups. We have to think whether we consider profane language is acceptable on this List. Once what shri Sandeep calls ROFLMAO is acceptable, the standard four letters of the English language will not be too far behind. San: So "F..ing" true.(Some deference being showed, otherwise............<g>) Now if Adhyasa fell off from it's conceptual pedestal, because of a word which is only a sound (or in the era of the Web, a sight on your PC screen) to which you the recipient attach a meaning, then Shankar's prattlings are indeed worth nothing. Somehow GM, I don't think Shankar's exposition is so weak based. ------------------------------ > I believe that all we can reasonably do is to say 'look, this sort of > behavior is simply not respectful in such a forum'. Eventually, one > assumes, when this has happened enough times, the accumulation of causes in > his nature will have an effect and he will cease to correspond in that sort > of way. Until that time, just take the grain from what he has to say and > ignore the chaff. > True. But how far can we do that? Once it is acceptable for one, another will step forward next week with his/her own personal brand of philosophy and his/her own unique language. The List has to think whether it is acceptable. San: Everybody's "take" has to be unique, because each body-mind complex is uniquely "wired". What's wrong with that? GM, there is a del-key button mercifully provided by key-board manufacturers. My advise to all those who get offended, or who feel a particular post is not relevant, is to use it regularly. End of the problem, which is occupying you so much GM. Cheers Sandeep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.