Guest guest Posted December 23, 2002 Report Share Posted December 23, 2002 On Sat, 21 Dec 2002, Madhava wrote: > As I noted in an earlier message, the gist of all objections boils down to the issue of Bhaktisiddhanta's theology . . .>> I've also commented on this earlier, and still disagree with the above postulation; I would say the gist of the matter, in many or most cases, is rather the dubious character of those who want to talk over their heads about "theology." At least in the West, it's undeniable that most of those who vociferate babaji/gosvami criticisms have rejected the world's preeminent Vaisnava acarya (by whose grace they know anything about Krsna at all)--and that just as importantly, they've also rejected the high standards of sadacara he expected of them. Quoting Srila Prabhupada, I've given reasons to suspect that those in India are impelled by similar anarthas. Theologically, there are many, many logical ways to understand Bhagavad-gita; however, let us recognize that all of them are agreed on its final, practical outcome--Arjuna must simply control his mind and fight. People who flee from their battles, hide on the sidelines with their women, and then criticize as they watch the real maharathis work, can hardly be accepted as serious partners in theological discourse. > There is little benefit from discussing the nitty-gritty objections presented here and there if we neglect the mother of all controversy. >> It's nice to know that there is something we agree on! MDd 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.