Comments on religions

[Guest guest]

Namaste Balaji & Ramji,

 

Sri Balaji, I have just come back to the list after an absence and

see that you have been quite busy! I don't know if I'll have time to

catch up, but I did agree with the spirit of your message which

started out:

>There seem to be a major confusion on the issue and

>may lead to a pointless discussion, without all of

>us knowing both standpoints well ...

 

What followed seemed like wise insights to me which agree with my own

views. I do worry that one of the sources you quoted might be

inauthentic, but that is only a scholarly detail.

 

 

Sri Ramji, I will agree with you that there are doctrinal differences

between Advaita and Mahayana at the conceptual (i.e. student) level.

You have to understand that I was trying to be a kind of 'spiritual

scientist' looking for deep similarities at the transcendental or

realized level. Not being realized, I tried to deduce this like

Sherlock Holmes based on clues left in the admittedly imperfect

verbal expression of both traditions. I guess I have played my game

long enough. I will try not to pursue this. (Yet, I do believe in

this fundamental unity at the transcendental level, and indeed I

believe it is necessary for realization to have a true meaning. Just

my opinion.)

 

Where I have more of a problem is with the unity you find between the

dualitic and nondualistic approaches in Vedanta. It seems to me that

there is a major problem trying to reconcile these approaches in a

truly satisfying way. This division mirrors a division in religions

throughout the world, between those based on 'common sense' and those

based on an ineffable realized vision. The first is for the

'masses', and the second for the spiritual elite. (I am of course

merely a spectator of the spiritual elite ... though practicing the

shaksi or witness has already produced clear benefits!)

 

Hari Om!

Benjamin