Vedas and Nothingness (the real issue)

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Ram!

>For some, Vedanta and Buddhism may look alike

>and even smell alike but still they are not

>identical. Whenever we make any such comparisons,

>we need to be careful not to overstay and step

>over our limits.

 

Thanks for that useful information on the Vedas. Concerning the

question of Vedanta and Buddhism, I don't want to 'beat a dead horse'

as we sometimes say, or seem like a fanatic for my pet theory of

uniting the two.

 

But here is the essential question that bothers me:

 

Is there or is there not some one single ultimate experience or state

of consciousness to which the 'advanced' mystical traditions each

aspire?

 

If not, then does nirvana or samadhi come in different flavors, like

lemon and orange? This would seem strange to me. Does one tradition

(presumably Advaita) attain the pure experience of God (or

Consciousness) while others merely attain some imitation which is

never quite the real thing?

 

Now you see why I am obsessed with this question. The wisdom of the

list members would be appreciated. I feel that I am a bit like

Einstein who erected his theory of relativity on a fundamental

pillar: that the laws of nature are the same for all observers. For

me, the equivalent principle is that the pure unadulterated

experience of God or Consciousness is the same for all jnanas.

 

So you see ... it is not my pet whimsical theory, my own personal

inconsequential vanity. It is a fundamentally important question and

one that is directly relevant to this list.

 

Om!

Benjamin

[Guest guest]

advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben>

wrote:

>

> Namaste Sri Ram!

>

> >For some, Vedanta and Buddhism may look alike

> >and even smell alike but still they are not

> >identical. Whenever we make any such comparisons,

> >we need to be careful not to overstay and step

> >over our limits.

>

> Thanks for that useful information on the Vedas. Concerning the

> question of Vedanta and Buddhism, I don't want to 'beat a dead

horse'

> as we sometimes say, or seem like a fanatic for my pet theory of

> uniting the two.

 

Namaste,

 

Forget all the steps and terms for a moment, nirguna and nirvana have

the same meaning ......non attributes and no moving or non blowing no

mind..........ONS....Tony,

[Guest guest]

Namaste Tony!

>Forget all the steps and terms for a moment, nirguna

>and nirvana have the same meaning ......non attributes

>and no moving or non blowing no mind..........ONS....Tony,

 

Yes, I think you might be on to something. If nirvana is

indescribable and ineffable, then it must be beyond the distinctions

implicit in any description. So there should be no talk of 'lemon'

vs. 'orange' flavored realization.

 

Still, if anyone has something else to say about the indescribable,

and its possible different varieties (Advaitin, Buddhist, or what

have you), I cannot help being interested. We have to keep this list

going...

 

Om!

Benjamin

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

If all experiences end in nothing, maybe the experiencer means that

there is not even a single thought that moves. But doesn't the

experiencer still remain to see this ?

How can something come out of nothing ?

I would have thought Nirvana would be more likely compared to

Nirvikalpa Samadhi instead of Nirguna.

 

Regards,

Guruprasad

> >Forget all the steps and terms for a moment, nirguna

> >and nirvana have the same meaning ......non attributes

> >and no moving or non blowing no mind..........ONS....Tony,

>

> Yes, I think you might be on to something. If nirvana is

> indescribable and ineffable, then it must be beyond the

distinctions

> implicit in any description. So there should be no talk

of 'lemon'

> vs. 'orange' flavored realization.

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

As our own Tonyji has already stated, Nirvana, Nirguna, Nirvikalpa, all these

terms imply the same thing.

 

The difficulty in such conversations is that the true understanding is not

intellectual or conceptual but absolutely direct. Clear and direct without the

medium of the mind.

 

Sri Ramana’s comments on Buddha reveal his great regard for him.

 

Reaching the highest peak, the scene is the same for everyone. One’s Own Being

It Self Is the Scene! Call it Fullness or Emptiness. The same sameness

everywhere.

 

The arguments in the name of religion happen at the ground floors, at the

intermediate levels, and not at the highest height.

 

In order to go high, one has to be light, without burden. So whether someone is

a Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, Christian, it does not matter. The conceptual luggage

has to be thrown away. That’s all.

 

My teacher told me of one of his visits to Sri Ramana as a teenager. Ramana

Maharshi was silent. Sometimes Sri Ramana liked to keep silent. My teacher asked

him about the highest reality but Sri Ramana was silent for a while. Then the

Sage smiled and without speaking, pointed with his finger, first to the sky and

then the same finger to his heart.

 

So, it seems to me that the highest height is the same as the deepest depth.

Whatever path one takes, one will only come to where One Already Is. Call it by

any name.

 

Love to all

Harsha

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Benjamin:

 

One of the pitfalls of being a "deadly serious philosopher" is the

tendency to 'beat dead horse,' and look for its survival and revival!

As Sadaji rightly pointed out, we need to pay more attention to

spirituality and force the intellectually stiff mind to get open and

become flexible. (By all means, these comments are not meant to

offend you but they are just a friendly wake up call!)

Since this month's focus is on 'spiritual growth,' the reply is

provided within the spiritual context. Members can always post topics

of their interest but if they take steps to link those topics with

subject matter - 'spiritual growth,' their postings will be more

beneficial to list members and list objectives.

 

The essence of Shankara's advaita philosophy can't be fully

appreciated if we do not take time to understand the distinction

between 'paramarthika - absolute' and 'vyavaharik - relative)

realities. At vyavaharika level of reality, buddhism and advaita are

clearly distinct and they are as distinct as apples and oranges.

Since we all believe in 'One consciouness' we are able to infer

intellectually that the 'Truth' is the same at the paramarthika

level. Actually, the question whether there is unity between advaita

and buddhism also will not arise at paramarthika level.

 

Unfortunately, we have a limited vision at the vyavaharika level and

we just live and enjoy our life in the dream world and believe that

it is real! Also each of us experience different dreams and our

belief and understanding based on those beliefs also vary. This may

partly explain why some believe that 'buddhism is identical to

advaita' and at the same time others express disagreements. At the

vyavaharika level, each of us develop a different framework of

understanding that suits and agrees with our beliefs and dreams. This

may explain why you have shown keen interest to find the unity

between different systems of thoughts. With spiritual maturity, we

will be able to appreciate and understand that any vision of

diversity and plurality confirms that we still need to grow

spiritually.

 

Though it is possible to use the logic to look for unity between

apples and oranges but logic has its own pitfalls. For example, apple

is sweet; orange is sweet; but common factor sweetness can't

establish that an apple is equivalent to an orange. Similarly, we can

establish some common attributes between two philosophies such as

advaita and buddhsim. But such common attributes alone can't make

them equal. We may be better of by taking steps that can help us to

grow spiritually. With spiritual maturity, we can have better

control of our mind and intellect and avoid falling into pitfalls.

Sri Gummuluru has explained in several posts why we need to pay

attention to our spiritual maturity. Bhagavad Gita systematically

provide us lessons and subtle messages for our spiritual growth. At

the vyavaharika level, the indicators of spiritual maturity are quite

useful for us to correct our actions that include what and how we

write, how we behave with our friends, foes and relatives, etc., etc.

 

The quotation from Rabindranath Tagore is quite useful for us to

understand why we shouldn't base our inference purely on the basis of

logic alone: "A mind all logic is like a knife all blade; it makes

the hand bleed that uses it."

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben>

wrote:

>

> I don't want to 'beat a dead horse'

> as we sometimes say, or seem like a fanatic for my pet theory of

> uniting the two.

>

> But here is the essential question that bothers me:

>

> Is there or is there not some one single ultimate experience or

state

> of consciousness to which the 'advanced' mystical traditions each

> aspire?

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sris Harsha and Ram,

 

 

Harshaji said:

>As our own Tonyji has already stated, Nirvana, Nirguna,

>Nirvikalpa, all these terms imply the same thing.

>

>The difficulty in such conversations is that the true

>understanding is not intellectual or conceptual but

>absolutely direct. Clear and direct without the medium

>of the mind.

 

Harshaji, what you (and Tonyji) say is exactly what I believe. I

just wanted to see if other list members agree. Otherwise, the

different spiritual paths seem merely subjective (in the sense of

arbitrary), and people just pick one depending on some personal

factor, such as social background or personal taste. If they are not

all pointing at the same ultimate experience, then they are

meaningless fictions, as far as I am concerned.

 

>My teacher told me of one of his visits to Sri Ramana as

>a teenager. Ramana Maharshi was silent. Sometimes Sri Ramana

>liked to keep silent. My teacher asked him about the highest

>reality but Sri Ramana was silent for a while. Then the Sage

>smiled and without speaking, pointed with his finger, first

>to the sky and then the same finger to his heart.

 

This is very similar to the beautiful story of Buddha and Kashyapa.

Buddha announced he was going to give his ultimate teaching, and then

he simply held up a flower. All the disciples looked puzzled except

Kashyapa, who smiled in recognition. He became the founder of the

Zen lineage, which advocates the direct, silent path of Ramana and

yourself. This is no doubt the best path for those who can grasp it.

I am working on it.

 

 

 

Ramji said:

>Members can always post topics of their interest but if they

>take steps to link those topics with subject matter - 'spiritual

>growth', their postings will be more beneficial to list members

>and list objectives.

 

Fair enough! I will try to respond to your comments within the

context of spiritual growth.

 

>The essence of Shankara's advaita philosophy can't be fully

>appreciated if we do not take time to understand the distinction

>between 'paramarthika - absolute' and 'vyavaharik - relative)

>realities.

 

Buddhism also makes this distinction, and as Harshaji just said, the

disputes between religions are at the vyavaharik level. My only

concern is that one can speak a lot of nonsense and sweep a lot under

the rug with this distinction. It can become a 'cheap lawyer's

trick' to justify almost anything, if one is not sincere and wise

about it. I don't think I need to give examples of how it may be

abused. One need only speak any nonsense and say to the critic, 'Oh

you poor thing! You are still at the vyavaharik level. You cannot

understand my higher paramarthik level.'

 

>Also each of us experience different dreams and our

>belief and understanding based on those beliefs also

>vary. This may partly explain why some believe that

>'buddhism is identical to advaita' and at the same

>time others express disagreements.

 

This is an insightful remark. Perhaps the reason that I tried to

stimulate a discussion of the strange and abstract concept of

'emptiness' is because the word is evocative for me. It evokes a

certain state of consciousness which I have slightly tasted from time

to time, a freedom, lightness, purity, transcendence, loss of my

petty self and concerns. On those rare occasions when I have such a

taste, however faint, subtle, fragile and transitory, I immediately

feel that THAT is spiritual progress. This means so much more than

any discussion or argument.

 

So perhaps different words such as 'Self' or 'emptiness' are just

different hooks, rather vague in themselves, upon which we superpose

those spiritual experiences that are meaningful to us. Over the

course of a long spiritual education, a word such as 'Self' or

'emptiness' becomes pregnant with associations, connotations and

overtones. This also explains why religious discussions can become

heated. We have so much emotional energy invested in our favorite

terms and foolishly fail to realize that other terms serve the same

purpose for others.

 

>Though it is possible to use the logic to look for unity

>between apples and oranges but logic has its own pitfalls.

>For example, apple is sweet; orange is sweet; but common

>factor sweetness can't establish that an apple is equivalent

>to an orange.

 

As the risk of degenerating back into a philosopher, I think I can

say something interesting regarding this that is inspired by

Sadanandaji's recent talk on the Upadesa Saram. As I understood him,

he said that spiritual progress consists in seeing the SAME

Consciousness in all the apparent multiplicity. Likewise, we should

see the different tastes of the apple and orange as mere superficial

modifications of the same underlying consciousness!

 

 

"What is here, the same is there and what is there, the same is here.

He goes from death to death who sees any difference here." Katha

Upanishad, II, 1, 10

 

Om!

Benjamin

[Guest guest]

Dear Ben,

 

I am at Colombo airport right now absolutely enlightened with all the

Buddhist monuments that I visited through the last one week.

(Incidentally, there was Kasyapa king in Sri Lanka too. This guy was

different, a womaniser who committed patricide, constructed a fort on

top of a mountain to protect himself from his enemy-cousin and had

frescoes of beautiful damsels drawn all over the cave walls of the

mountain!)

 

Your statement quoted below baffled me. Have you tried Ramana's path

in order to state so very categorically that Zen which you are

*trying* right now is similar to it? And how can you recommend

something on which you are still working as the best? I am sorry if

my thoughts inconvenience you. Frankly speaking, you seem to be

jumping from one tree to another at break-neck speed that we (at

least me) are not able to keep pace with you. Why not pause for us

so that we can give you company?

 

Secondly, the world we experience is what we have ordered and,

therefore, the path we are placed on too is is custom-made. However,

if we can accept ourselves without qualms wherever we are and can

differentiate between the things we can and cannot change, the game

is over, wherever we are placed.

 

I don't know from where I can access the net next. I leave it to Her

and wait for Her grace to flower like it has now at Colombo airport.

 

Regards.

 

Madathil Nair

 

_________

 

advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben>

wrote:

>

> Harshaji, what you (and Tonyji) say is exactly what I believe. I

> just wanted to see if other list members agree. Otherwise, the

> different spiritual paths seem merely subjective (in the sense of

> arbitrary), and people just pick one depending on some personal

> factor, such as social background or personal taste. If they are

not

> all pointing at the same ultimate experience, then they are

> meaningless fictions, as far as I am concerned.

>

.........> This is very similar to the beautiful story of Buddha and

Kashyapa.

> Buddha announced he was going to give his ultimate teaching, and

then

> he simply held up a flower. All the disciples looked puzzled

except

> Kashyapa, who smiled in recognition. He became the founder of the

> Zen lineage, which advocates the direct, silent path of Ramana and

> yourself. This is no doubt the best path for those who can grasp

it.

> I am working on it.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Benjamin:

 

Your comment below just puzzles me! Both Sankara and also Gita wants

us to use our 'discriminating intellect' to arrive at the right

conclusion to avoid falling into the traps of 'cheap lawyer's trick.'

This may explain why we need to divert our energy toward spiritual

maturity instead of getting trapped by religious beliefs. The subtle

message of both Sankara and also Gita is that we can reach the

Paramarthika level of reality when reach the ultimate spiritual

maturity. Honestly, we can never reach the paramarthika level of

spritual maturity by just discussing and/or diverting our energy on a

comparative analysis of 'buddihsm with advaita.' Just like the pole

vault jumper, we should keep the 'pole' until we jump and at the time

of jumping we should release the 'pole' to accomplish the goal!

Whether it is buddhism or advaita or Gita, at certain point we need

to give up to accomplish the spiritual maturity. Our problem is that

we don't seem to pay enough attention the very contents of buddhism,

advaita and Gita which ask us to wake up.

 

Once someone went to Swami Chinmayananda and boasted to him that he

had gone through the Bhagavad Gita ten times; and Swamiji asked

him: "you have gone through Gita 10 times; did Gita go through you

atleast once!" Most of the time, our understanding of the scriptures

is too little and we try to make quick summaries and broad

generalizations. Gandhiji once made a beautiful remark which is quite

relevant in the context of spiritual maturity:

 

"I am a devotee of the Gita and a firm believer in the

inexorable law of karma. Even the least little

tripping or stumbling is not without its cause and I

have wondered why one who has tried to follow the Gita

in thought, word and deed should have any ailment.

The doctors have assured me that this trouble of high

blood- pressure is entirely the result of mental

strain and worry. If that is true, it is likely that I

have been unnecessarily worrying myself, unnecessarily

fretting and secretly harboring passions like anger,

lust, etc. The fact that any event or incident should

disturb my serious efforts, means not that the Gita

Ideal is defective but that my devotion to its

defective. The Gita Ideal is true for all time, my

understanding of it and observance of it is full of

flaws."

Harijan, 29 February 1936. ("What is Hinduism?"

Mahatma Gandhi, National Book Trust of India.

 

Though we may be at vyavaharika level, if we pay attention, we can

see a degree of progression in the vyavaharika level. When we reach

the level of spiritual maturity equal to that of Sri Ramana, the

distinction between the vyavaharika and paramarthika level will melt

away! My friend, this can only be established by experience and

certainly not empirically.

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben>

wrote:

> Buddhism also makes this distinction, and as Harshaji just said,

the

> disputes between religions are at the vyavaharik level. My only

> concern is that one can speak a lot of nonsense and sweep a lot

under

> the rug with this distinction. It can become a 'cheap lawyer's

> trick' to justify almost anything, if one is not sincere and wise

> about it. I don't think I need to give examples of how it may be

> abused. One need only speak any nonsense and say to the

critic, 'Oh

> you poor thing! You are still at the vyavaharik level. You cannot

> understand my higher paramarthik level.'

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Nair:

 

That is one of the best definition for 'spiritual maturity' and this

statement is impossible without Her grace. Have a safe and pleasant

journey back from Sri Lanka.

 

God bless you!

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair"

<madathilnair> wrote:

> Secondly, the world we experience is what we have ordered and,

> therefore, the path we are placed on too is is custom-made.

However,

> if we can accept ourselves without qualms wherever we are and can

> differentiate between the things we can and cannot change, the game

> is over, wherever we are placed.

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sris M. R. Nair and Ram,

 

OK. That is enough of this discussion comparing Buddhism and

Advaita. I was not proselytizing. I am simply fascinated with

comparing different spiritual traditions (especially the so-called

mystical ones based on direct realization), because I feel that this

is an effective way of discerning the underlying common essence,

which presumably is the One Truth.

 

 

Sri Nair said:

>Your statement quoted below baffled me. Have you tried

>Ramana's path in order to state so very categorically that

>Zen which you are *trying* right now is similar to it?

 

I don't want to give the impression of being some kind of guru. I am

only a seeker who hardly knows more than you (perhaps less). But as

I seek and study various scriptures, I acquire intuitions and

impressions of the truth which I wish to discuss to see if others

agree. I feel this is a harmless enough activity.

 

 

Sri Ram said:

>Your comment below just puzzles me! Both Sankara and also Gita

>wants us to use our 'discriminating intellect' to arrive at the

>right conclusion to avoid falling into the traps of 'cheap lawyer's

>trick.'

 

All I was saying is that the paramarthika/vyavahara distinction is

slippery enough that it *might* be *misused* by some people to

propagate nonsense. I am not denying the distinction; I am only

pointing out the possibility for misuse, since we are not talking

about a precise scientific concept that can be rigorously defined and

measured. Also, to say that the truth is inexpressible does open the

door to nonsense and error, a danger of which we must be aware.

 

You are right that discussions like these are only the poles that

should be released when making the pole-vaulting jump. As I said, I

only raised the subject because I honestly feel that a comparative

study of religions and spiritual paths can reveal the common

underlying truth. And surely the Truth must be One. Indeed, this is

the essence of the Truth, its very definition.

 

>Most of the time, our understanding of the scriptures

>is too little and we try to make quick summaries and

>broad generalizations.

 

A valid point. So the constructive thing to do is present a better

and/or alternative interpretation rather than discouraging

discussion. If some enthusiastic students make broad

generalizations, this may arise from a mixture of ignorance,

enthusiasm and insight. The ratios will vary from student to student

and case to case. But I would not denigrate the insight component.

Insights do in fact lead to broad generalizations, and the purer the

insight the more valid the generalization. All important truths are

broad generalizations (e.g. the mahavakyas), but not all broad

generalizations are truth! Hence the need for wise and sincere

discussion.

 

Om!

Benjamin

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Ram Chandran" <rchandran@c...>

wrote:

> Namaste Sri Nair:

> Ram Chandran

>

> advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair"

> <madathilnair> wrote:

> > Secondly, the world we experience is what we have ordered and,

> > therefore, the path we are placed on too is is custom-made.

> However,

> > if we can accept ourselves without qualms wherever we are and can

> > differentiate between the things we can and cannot change, the

game

> > is over, wherever we are placed.

> >

 

Namaste,

 

Yes just like the AA serentiy prayer about accepting the things we

cannot change and changing those we can etc......ONS...Tony

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri M.R. Nair,

 

One other thing, my friend:

>Your statement quoted below baffled me. Have you tried

>Ramana's path in order to state so very categorically that

>Zen which you are *trying* right now is similar to it?

 

Do you really not see the similarity between Buddha silently holding

up a flower to the smiling Kashyapa and Sri Ramana silently pointing

to the sky and then his heart? And both in response to the question,

'What is the Truth?'

 

I do not care at all if we disagree forever at the level of mere

philosophy. But we poets should be able to see the truth at the

higher level of Beauty! I feel a bit sad... But please do enjoy

your trip in Sri Lanka! ;-)

 

Om!

Benjamin

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Benjamin:

 

First, I want to congratulate you for your insights, enthusiasm and

sincerity. Second,I want to assure you that the list has been and

will always encourage discussions that provide greater insights with

the right focus. We are all searching for the Truth and we have

decided to undertake the long journey together to reach the same

common destination. We have also agreed to make use of the road map

developed by Sri Sankara. The objective of this forum is apply this

media to exchange our expertise to read this complex map of Sankara

as precisely as possible. We also join this forum with the common

belief that we can all benefit by following the established path of

Sankara and through conversations.

 

It is quite conceivable that many other maps can also provide similar

help and guidance like Sankara's map. But all maps are not identical

and they invariably follow different definitions, notations,

instructions and layouts. By joining this list, we have agreed to

read and follow Sankara's map and we are obligated to focus our full

attention durin our long journey. This journey is a group journey and

we need to be considerate and be accomodative to the concerns of our

fellow passengers. Conversations during a group journey are enjoyable

as long as the subject matter of our speech caters to the common

interest.

 

The scope of this list and posting guidelines were developed on the

basis of those common interests. The list has undergone several

revisions to accomodate the diverse needs of the members. The list

has been and will be always receptive to new ideas, constructive

suggestions and insights from members.

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben>

wrote:

.......

> A valid point. So the constructive thing to do is present a better

> and/or alternative interpretation rather than discouraging

> discussion. If some enthusiastic students make broad

> generalizations, this may arise from a mixture of ignorance,

> enthusiasm and insight. The ratios will vary from student to

student

> and case to case. But I would not denigrate the insight component.

> Insights do in fact lead to broad generalizations, and the purer

the

> insight the more valid the generalization. All important truths

are

> broad generalizations (e.g. the mahavakyas), but not all broad

> generalizations are truth! Hence the need for wise and sincere

> discussion.

>

> Om!

> Benjamin

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Ram!

>We have also agreed to make use of the road map

>developed by Sri Sankara. The objective of this

>forum is apply this media to exchange our expertise

>to read this complex map of Sankara as precisely as

>possible.

 

 

This is fine and appropriate, and I understand. But on the Advaitin

List FAQ page at

 

http://www.geocities.com/advaitins/Scope.html

 

I find the words

>The list moderators want to acknowledge the fact that Advaita

>Philosophy can't be studied in isolation and consequently will

>support spiritual discussions related to Vaishnavam, Shivam,

>Buddhism, Jainism and others.

 

 

Please note that at no time have I ever discussed Buddhism in

isolation but always in comparison with Advaita, in order to

illuminate the latter from a different angle. And at no time have I

ever used Buddhism to refute Advaita but rather to support it, in my

perhaps naively overtolerant worldview. You must admit that this is

quite a different spirit than Sri Jay previously in this list and

more recently on the Advaita-L list!

 

I realize it is all a matter of balance and judgement. Perhaps I

have gone on too long making my points, but this was always because

someone raised an objection. I guess there is ego in feeling the

need to answer all objections. Perhaps the best thing for my sadhana

would be to sacrifice the desire to have the last word, regardless of

whether I am right or wrong. But I am not the only one who finds

this difficult. Many members of this list and of the Advaita-L list,

both eminent and not so eminent, are unable to make this sacrifice.

But I will try!

 

Anyhow, the real scandal, in my opinion, is not any conflict, real or

imagined, between Buddhism and Advaita. Rather, it is the sparks

that fly WITHIN the arena of Vedanta, between Advaitins,

Visisthadvaitins and Dvaitins. I have been reading on the Advita-L

list, and I am amazed. In comparison, this list is an oasis of peace

and tranquility.

 

Finally, in my more recent messages, I did slip in a few thoughts

about this month's topic of spiritual progress. I hope they did not

go unnoticed. (The desire expressed above could be taken as an

implicit example, namely, my suggestion to myself to sacrifice having

the last word. That would surely be spiritual progress!)

 

Om!

Benjamin

[Guest guest]

Namaste dear friend:

 

I don't want you to get the impression that you are being questioned

for some inappropriate posts. Also none of your posts have even been

filtered, edited or altered. All I tried to do was to make some

friendly and helpful suggestions to help you focus your discussions

within the scope of this list. Since you raised a number of

questions, as the list moderator, I am obligated to respond. The

purpose of my reply was to help you and I honestly have no intentions

to offend you. If you believe that my postings have hurt your

feelings, let me offer my unconditional apology.

 

If you search through the archives, you will see many postings with

quotations and discussions on major religions of the world. Everyone

is always welcome to express insights from other religions. All that

we need to remember is that our focus and background has to

necessarily Sankara's advaita philosophy. We don't want to drift away

from the list scope indefinitely.

 

As you might have noticed, we have allowed a series of postings of

Sri Jay Neelamangala who was highly critical of advaita in several of

his articles. But list moderators couldn't allow such postings to

continue indefinitely and they were forced to exercise their rights

to curtail such discussions.

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

Note: Please note that the FAQ also contains this important

corallary: The moderators will not hesitate to exercise their right

to curtail discussions when they consider the discussion is drifting

away from the primary focus.

 

advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben>

wrote:

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Ram!

>Since you raised a number of questions, as the list

>moderator, I am obligated to respond. The purpose of

>my reply was to help you and I honestly have no intentions

>to offend you. If you believe that my postings have hurt your

>feelings, let me offer my unconditional apology.

 

 

Nothing of the sort! Absolutely not! I completely understand your

position, and I was only trying to clarify my intentions. I have

thoroughly enjoyed every aspect of this list, and I fully understand

and respect your obligation to rein it in from time to time.

 

There is only one thing that can make me feel bad: if you don't smile

at me when we meet in person for Gita satsangh this Friday! That

will make me feel terrible. I trust it will not happen! :-))

 

(By the way list members, here is a tool to get a grip on me. Send a

private email to Sri Ram, and he will take care of me in person if

necessary! I look forward to that. It's always pleasant to deal

with him, regardless of the issue, on this list or in private.)

 

Om!

Benjamin

[Guest guest]

How about if you Sri Benjaminji and Sri Ramji have your picture taken hugging

each other (with big smiles on both your faces) next time you meet and post it

to the Advaitin file section.

 

That will set a wonderful example for the list members in the future about the

ideal interaction in the context of spiritual satsangh and discussion.

 

Love to all

Harsha

 

Benjamin Root <orion777ben

2003/06/25 Wed PM 08:23:43 EDT

advaitin

Re: Vedas and Nothingness (the real issue)