Neo-Vedant

[Guest guest]

Let me briefly state my understanding of neo-vedant.

It's basic premise is that the original Vedantic spiritual insight

poetically expressed in Upnishadas and further elaborated in

classical Vedant by Shankaracharya and his followers till the 19th

centuary according to concepts and theories then prevalent in learned

spiritual traditions in India need to be restated in the idiom and

language of the modern world of 20th and 21st century for wider

acceptance of key vedantic ideas like consciousness-nature of Brahman-

Ataman identity,limitations of object-oriented mode of scientific and

aparaa knowledge to the pragmatic(vyavahaaric) field,the need of

cultivation of subjective mode for spiritual intuitive awareness of

Atman buried inwardlyful under Jiva and outwardly under

multiplicity.Wittginstein's statement that 'whereof nothing can be

spoken meaningful,therof it should be passed over in silence' reminds

of Upnishdic remark ' yato vaachaa nivartante apraapya manasaa saha'.

Needless to say that these are very few topics for consideration.

Any feedback either to the advaitin group or personally to me

vggodbole will be appreciated.

[Guest guest]

Sir - three is not much to talk about neo-advaita. There is no

neo-vedanta since vedanta is apourusheya and it is considered as time

immorial.

Not much talk about neo since you have already mentioned that there is

nothing to talk about.

I advice all neo-vedantins to just follow what they intend to teach - to

be just silent!

 

The oldest neo-vedantin is Dakshanamuurthi - who did exactly that

-tought in silence - but the listeres were able to understand that

language. Neo-Vedantin has to find neo-listeners who can understand

that language of silence. All my best wishes to that teaching.

 

Hari OM!

Sadananda

 

--- "vggodbole <vggodbole" <vggodbole wrote:

Wittginstein's statement that 'whereof nothing can be

> spoken meaningful,therof it should be passed over in silence' reminds

> of Upnishdic remark ' yato vaachaa nivartante apraapya manasaa saha'.

> Needless to say that these are very few topics for consideration.

> Any feedback either to the advaitin group or personally to me

> vggodbole will be appreciated.

 

 

=====

What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift

to Him - Swami Chinmayananda.

 

 

 

Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more

http://taxes./

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "vggodbole <vggodbole>"

<vggodbole> wrote:

> Let me briefly state my understanding of neo-vedant.

 

Namaste,

 

The history of the word 'neo-vedanta' appears to be uncertain,

though Swami Vivekananda's introduction in 1893, and its subsequent

efflorescence in the words of many other missionaries of Vedanta

philosophy subsequently, got lumped together under that umbrella word.

 

What Swamiji had embarked on was nothing less than what

Bhagiratha did to bring the Ganges down from the Himalayas - to

drench the arid land of 'Science' with the ambrosia of Vedanta

philosophy. He had to couch his thoughts in words that made sense to

the peoples, Hindus and from other faiths, who had lost touch with

the 'Source' of a divine life. To interpret Shankara to the West was

an unheard-of feat. We are all indebted to him for his uncompromising

advocacy in relating it to the everyday life of humanity.

 

A fine tribute is paid by an American monk (for over 50

yrs.),of the Ramakrishna Mission, Swami Yogeshananda, in the

following article:

 

http://www.eternalquest.org/articles/vivekananda/vedanta.html

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

Hello All,

Neo means no more than 'new', not in the sense of a device to sell more soap

powder. In the sense used in philosophy (as in neoplatonism) it adknowledges

the grounding of the new development in the established wisdom of the old. I

suppose Vedanta in this case to mean the body of accepted commentary on those

scriptures collectively called Vedanta. What would be the position of any new

commentary on the Gita? Would it be acceptable if it stayed within the problem

field as set out by Sankara? But come to think of it that can't be the case as

Swami Vivekananda made reference to the Idealism of the 19th.C. and at times

the shadowy figures of Hume and Locke seem to swim beneath the surface. Is

neo-vedanta only to be condemned when it is promulgated by people you don't

like? Is its most grievious error the sending of traditional pandits back to

their libraries for more study like recalcitrant schoolboys?

Ciao and Blessings, Michael.

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

 

Well, Shri Godbole was to present us his understanding of

Bhattacharya and Malkani and tell us how their teachings were helpful

to him in contemplative meditation. We would therefore happily await

another post from him on this subject.

 

Dakshinamoorthy to Wittginstein, it has always been Silence. But,

the fact is that we need to talk about Silence which we have been

doing without any let up all these dats and will continue to do more

vigorously even post-Wittginstein. So, there is no question of

shutting up in the immediate future.

 

Michael is right - neo acknowledges the onward thrust of wisdom and

is unstoppable. Sankara was neo in his days as was Sw. Vivekananda.

Bhattacharya, Malkani et al are the present crest. Let the tide

build up and enthrall us all in supreme wisdom.

 

Incidentally, there was a post last year by Shri Turumalla (#12594)

about the dangers of neo - pseudo - advaita. Gregji, Kenji,

Murthyji, Prof. Krishnamurthyji, Ramji et al had then commented on

the subject in great detail. It would be interesting to go back to

that thread. I had also posted my two cents worth at # 12616.

 

At that time, the concern was the danger from neo. Thank God, now

nobody has mentioned the word danger. That is progress. Truly, we

are all neos deep at heart. Otherwise, how can anybody explain the

advaitin's constant plodding and prodding?

 

Be a neo standing erect on the solid ground of already built up logic

and wisdom seems to me to be the best choice at the moment. However,

knowledge of the existing edifice is sadly lacking in most self-

proclaimed neos we come across at fiery groups on the net. They just

bubble up, babble and evanesce.

 

Yes. Shri Godbole is right. We need to restate the old teachings in

the language of the present. I had suggested this in the recently-

held Advaitin survey. I hope Shri Godbole's suggestion will receive

the kindest consideration of our knowledgeable Moderators.

 

PranAms.

 

Madathil Nair

[Guest guest]

Namaste Nairji:

 

The list policies regarding posting messages have been clearly stated

to all members and they are always available at the website:

advaitin/

 

If our understanding of neo-vedanta as "Vedanta in plain english" we

the moderators are all for it and we have been supporting this policy

for nearly five years through this list. But if 'neovedanta' is taken

as an alternate methodology of Vedanta, then it has no place in this

list because that is beyond the scope of this list. Sri Sadanandaji's

comment mainly focused on this aspect because this list will not be a

place for redirecting our minds with a new path for enlightenment!

This may explain why he stressed the point that there is one and only

one vedanta - 'the advaita vedanta philosophy as theolized by Acharya

Sankara.'

 

As you have rightly pointed out, this list has previously discussed

the neo-vedantic thoughts of different schools. Some self appointed

gurus in the name of 'neovedanta' promulgate some new ideas that are

contrary to 'advaita as postulated by Sankara.' In the name of neo-

vedanta, short-cuts for human liberation are also being promoted and

this list has the moral responsibility to expose those ill conceived

ideas.

 

Finally, Shri Godbole is welcome to present the understanding of Sri

Bhattachrya and Malkani and we will have the opportunity to evaluate

that understanding within the frame-work of Advaita philosophy.

 

warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair

<madathilnair>" <madathilnair> wrote:

> Namaste.

>

> Well, Shri Godbole was to present us his understanding of

> Bhattacharya and Malkani and tell us how their teachings were

helpful

> to him in contemplative meditation. We would therefore happily

await

> another post from him on this subject.

>