Language Used in Postings

[Guest guest]

kvlarsen [ Save Address ]

advaitin Re:

language used in the postings

Sun, 25 Mar 2001 08:16:44 +0000

 

Namaste. Greetings to all.

For quite some time I have remained silent, yet I now can

no longer withhold myself from speaking.

Bhagavad Gita XVIII, 67 keeps coming to mind:

 

Idam te naatapaskaaya naabhktaaya kadaacana

Na cashushruushave vaacyam na ca maam yo'bhyasuuyati.

 

This shall not be spoken of by you to one who is without

austerity,

Nor to one who is without devotion,

Nor to one who does not render service,

Nor to one who does not desire to listen,

Nor to one who speaks evil of Me.

The teaching of the Advaita Tradition is precious.

Brother Gummuluru Murthy is right to insist on respect

for Advaita in speech.

Speech is the light of man.

Brothers Dennis Waite, Steven Fair, et. al. are

reasonable to seek refined, honest discussion of the

Tradition.

 

The Sermon on the Mount (Mathew 7,i-vi) is also most helpful:

"Judge not that ye be not judged./For with what

judgmentye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what

measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again./ And

why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye,

but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?/

Or wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the

moteout of thine eye; and behold, a beam is in thine own

eye?/ Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thy

own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the

mote out of thy brother's eye./ Give not that which is

holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before

swine, lest they trample them under thy feet, and turn

and rend you."

 

All the best,

Kenneth Larsen

> Hiya Gummuluru,

> > -

> Gummuluru Murthy

> advaitin > Friday, March 23,

2001 11:51 PM

> language used in the postings

> > > > > namaste shri Sandeepji,

> > I congratulate you for your enthusiasm and for the

different outlook

> brought in. I echo shri Dennis Waite's comment that,

may be, a slower

> presentation of your thoughts may be digestible.

> > > San:

> Fine.

> Your wish is my command.<s> > > > > Also, I have a

> particular concern with the language.

> > As moderator of this List, I am concerned about the

cavalier usage

> of the language.

> > San:

> > LOL.

> > I liked the phrase "cavalier usage of language".

> My dear friend, the biggest illusion is that there is

something in and about

> the phenomenal world, the Leela to be serious about.

> > Enjoy the leela and your role in it.

> > It was put up for your show, by you.

> > > > I give examples below from your postings of the past

> two days:

> > You described upanishadic sages as singing farmers;

> > > San:

> That was exactly what they were.

> Total householders, following whetever was their talent

was, to make a

living.

> OK all of them were not farmers, but at that time

agriculture was more of

less

> 100% of the national activity (not that there was a

nation at that time).

> > And all bromides were sang and conveyed from mouth to

ear, preserved through

> oral singing.

> All texts, all scriptures today are the edited

"versions" of these pristine

> songs.

> > > > > you say gItA

> as the song of Krishna to keep control;

> > > San:

> > No.

> I said, the song of Krishna to Arjun, was subsquently

recorded and in that

> recording, the intrepretations came into recordings and

this set of pages, has

> been used to establish and perpetuate control by

Organised Religion.

> > Same thing for the Bible, and the Koran.

> > > The symbol is never the thing and yet the symbol

has become the controller.

> > Let's take the Gita.

> What is typically the essence of of it, taken today.

> Usually two tenets

> > Do your karma, don't lust for the fruits of your

karma (paraphased)

> > And yet isn't it somehwere, left unnoticed,

uncorrupted by the subsequent

> translators

> > "Shivo Bhokta, Shivo Bhojya

> Shivo Karta, Shivah Karmah,

> Shivah Karanatmakah"

> > Meaning...

> Shiva is the experiencer ands the heighest object of

experience.

> Shiva is the sadhak and Shiva is the sadhna and teh

goal of sadhna.

> > To know this is to be Shiv.

> > What is the other modern tenet of Gita that power

brokers of Organised

> Religion peddle

> > "Parivartan he Sansar can niyam haya" (Phonetic

translation of the Hindi)

> > Meaning, Change is the essence of Life.

> > Hilarious,

> > There is a show , a dream in which there is an

apparent change".

> > In essence the term change or no-change themselves

are not relevant.

> > Why?

> > In Oneness (a conceptual term), who is changing to what.

> > Further for Oneness to affirm that it also

not-chnaging, to whom can even

this

> be affirmed.

> Thus both terms of change and no-change have to be

transcended.

> > That is why, a concept was offerred

> > The absence of presence and the absence of the

absence of presence."

> > Incidentally, my comments on Gita are in reference to

the Bhagwad Gita.

> > Ashtavakra's Gita or Avadhut Gita, well, they are

just Dobeeeeee Do beeeeee

> Dooooooo.

> Or even Ladeeee daaaaaa deeeeee.

> > They go so much deeper.

> There are no compromises, no corruptions, becuase the

perpetuaters of

> Organised Religion saw these did not have the mass appeal.

> > > you say amr^itAnubhava as

> *prattling* of jnaneshwar, etc.

> > > San:

> > LOL.

> You picked the "word" and missed the splendour of the

prattling.

> No doubt appropriate.

> > Indeed it is a prattling, including what is appearing

through the entity

> "Sandeep" on this List.

> What do I mean to convey through that term?

> > Anything said, or conveyed by whichever means, by

anybody to somebody,

> anywhere, at anytime, ever, is a concept.

> > Such usage of language can cause uneasiness to

members. May be

> that is your style of writing. But you should be aware

of the other

> members who hold the gItA with the highest esteem;

> > > San:

> > Any unease, please direct them towards this end. I

will happy to "unease"

them

> further. <LOL> > > My submission, look for the essence,

not the symbol.

> Look at the moon, not the finger pointing to the moon.

> > > who regard highly

> the upanishadic sages as the seers of Truth.

> > > San:

> > My calling them singing farmers disqualifies them ?

> > In fact they, by being exactly what they were, point

to a bigger truth.

> > That Truth can be found standing in front of the

washing machine, in the

> market place as well, as in the vale of green mountain.

> > > 'prattling' is a word

> used in the english language in a derogatory way as the

expression

> of a deluded.

> > San:

> > Derogation is never in the word, any word.

> It is the mind of the receipient.

> > If I called you a fool, Gummuluru,and you became

angry, all that has

happened,

> is that you have lended a truth to my statement.

> > Otherwise how can an iota of a ripple disturb your

consciousness?

> > If I called Krishna or Jesus or Mohammed the biggest

idiots that walked this

> planet and the Bajrang Dal or VHP want to break my head

or the Christian

> missionaries wished to damn me to eternal Hell or the

Muslim fanatics issue a

> fatwa to behead me for blasphemy on me, really what is

happening?

> > What is happening is that all of them accept that

Krishna, Jesus or Mohhamed

> become idiots by my saying so.

> > LOL.

> > > > Such a cavalier usage of the language is not

acceptable

> on this List.

> > San:

> > See what I have meant to convey by the usage of the

word "prattling".

> > If after that, it is still not acceptable, and being

"your" List, I think

> Dennis will get his desires fullfilled quite soon.

> > I am sorry Gummuluru, you or anybody or for that

matter even Sandeep have no

> say on the manner in which, whatever comes up, comes

up, through this entity.

> > > This is a List for serious seekers of the Truth.

> > San:

> > Seriousness (of any kind, about anything) is a disease.

> > Remember the dude Jesus prattling "It is the child

who will enter my Dad's

> pad".

> > > > I do

> hope you will re-read your messages before posting and

correct/replace

> any unrequired words.

> > > San:

> > No.

> There is no volition to do so, my friend.

> > And you have the full right to disallow these posts,

appearing on this List.

> If that is to happen, that will happen, no matter what

Sandeep or

> Gummuluru,does or does not.

> > Are you getting me Gummuluru?

> > This is in no way to curb your enthusiasm of posting.

> > > San:

> > "My" entusiasm?????

> > > Please treat

> this as a lecture hall on advaita and be considerate of

the listeners

> and of the sages of the ancient times and their teachings.

> > > San:

> Ahaaa Gummuluru,

> > It's too late for this entity to be reverential to

anything in

phenomenality.

> I am too busy enjoying the splendour of the show, both

the profanity and the

> profoundity, which I put on for for myself.

> > Who is the other, that I must revere?

> > As the dude Dattatreya prattled in Avadhut Gita <g> >

> How can I salute the Self, which is indestructible,

which is all Bliss,

which

> in Itself and by Itself pervades everything, and which

is inseparable from

> Itself?

> > I alone am, ever free from all taint. The world

exists like a mirage within

> me. To whom shall I bow?

> > > To whom shall I bow Gummuluru?

> > Cheers