Shouting Like Hell is not the way to resolve doubts

[Guest guest]

> Furthermore, Shrii Aananda Tiirtha (aka Madhvaachaarya) is well known to

> have commented on "o.m puurnam adaH puurnam ida.m" mantra of Iishopanishad

> in the way that Shriila Baladeva was alleged to. So what kind of

> conclusion is this to suggest that Shrii Madhvaachaarya had access to an

> understanding which Shriila Bhaktivinoda and Shriila Bhaktivedaanta

> Prabhupaada did not? And if they knew this understanding but simply

> decided not to teach it, then why praytell were Shrii Madhva's disciples

> qualified to hear this understanding but Shriila Bhaktivinoda and Shriila

> Bhaktivedaanta's disciples were not? By what logic is it suggested that

> Shrii Madhva, whose philosophy we have abandoned in favor of Mahaaprabhu's

> achintya-bedha-abedha-tattva, would give a higher understanding than our

> aachaaryas?

 

I have his Isopanisad commentary (sanskrit and translation) and there is no

comment on the Invocation. Perhaps there is some misunderstanding here.

Madhvacarya is famous for commentating on this verse, but as appearing in

the Brihad-aranyaka Upanisad, and in CC Prabhupada more or less follows his

commentary.

 

So we have some consistency among the acaryas in this regard, I think.

 

ys Ard