Guest guest Posted November 10, 1999 Report Share Posted November 10, 1999 While at the Cossipore garden house, Sri Ramakrishna was about to have his meal one day. At that time the elder Gopal and another direct disciple were sitting on the cot. Thakur asked them to get down so he could eat. I think it was Shashi (later Sw. Ramakrishnananda) who felt embarrassed at the Guru's action and questioned it. Sri Ramakrishna explained that he was a Brahmin by birth and there was some basic `achar' (proper behaviour) which one had to follow. I think this has to do with the tendencies one inherits at birth, which comprises various attributes. Modern-day scientists should be able to trace this from the genes. But I have found that following one's dharma is the only way. Once a Vaishnava, always a Vaishnava. There is no need to stray to another sect and grope your way back to the correct one. Only, treat all sects with respect and do not assume a superior posture. All the different paths lead to the same Supreme Being. 1. How important to a person is the knowledge of the philosophies of Advaita, Dvaita and Visishtadvaita? 2. The adherence to the philosophies is herditary in Tamil Nadu (I do not know about other parts of the country). For example, if my father belongs to a particular math or ashram, I have no option but to follow the math/ashram. In my case, I belong to the ashram of Srirangam Srimad Andavan, which follows the Visishtadvaita philosophy. I am expected to follow the ashram's traditions. As I am a Vaishnavaite, I have to wear the `namam' on my forehead, and not the ashes or chandan. Why is it so? Why can't each person have the liberty to follow the philosophy of his choice? R. Dinakaran Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 11, 1999 Report Share Posted November 11, 1999 > > " Guha " <guha > > While at the Cossipore garden house, Sri Ramakrishna was about to have his > meal one day. At that time the elder Gopal and another direct disciple were > sitting on the cot. Thakur asked them to get down so he could eat. > I think it was Shashi (later Sw. Ramakrishnananda) who felt embarrassed at > the Guru's action and questioned it. Sri Ramakrishna explained that he was a > Brahmin by birth and there was some basic `achar' (proper behaviour) which > one had to follow. > I think this has to do with the tendencies one inherits at birth, which > comprises various attributes. Modern-day scientists should be able to trace > this from the genes. But I have found that following one's dharma is the > only way. Once a Vaishnava, always a Vaishnava. There is no need to stray to > another sect and grope your way back to the correct one. Only, treat all > sects with respect and do not assume a superior posture. All the different > paths lead to the same Supreme Being. > prashanth replies I don't think you have to stick to your dharma, All the scholars say that you should fallow your dharma only if you are completely convinced with it, if that was not the case why did Vishishtadvaita and Dvaita came , both Ramanujacharya and Madhvacharya could have fallowe blindly Advaita. Both Ramanuja and Madvacharya were learing under Advaitha teachers first, when they found that Advaitha could not answer all there questions they had, they had to fallow fallow what they felt right , and IMO there is nothing wrong in it, and formed Vishistadvaita and Dvaita . sarvam vasudevamayam jagath Prashanth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 11, 1999 Report Share Posted November 11, 1999 Dear Prashant, The sun exists. Do you dispute that? But how will you make a blind man understand that the sun exists? You have to adopt some suitable method to make him accept the fact. Sri Ramakrishna described the situation well. A mother, according to him, cooks fish in different ways for her different children. People have different beliefs, and they are so engrossed in these (rituals) that they become blind to reality. Similarly, God exists, only the methods adopted by religious teachers are different. Advaita is considered a dry subject and hence sages such as Ramanuja chose ways that could attract the common people to God. Ultimately, all these masters realised that God is one. As Sri Ramakrishna says, you proceed on different paths, but reach the same spot. The soul, according to the Gita, is reborn in the womb most suited to it by virtue of the karma in the previous life. These are evidently stages of evolution. That is why people lead lives in line with the family they belong to. The religious tendencies of family members are also similar. A poor person is accustomed to the coarsest food and a rich man to rich food. Ultimately, it is food that is needed. Thus, paths may be different, the aim is the same: to fill the tummy or to realise God. - Guha Prashant G <gprasha prashanth replies I don't think you have to stick to your dharma, All the scholars say that you should fallow your dharma only if you are completely convinced with it, if that was not the case why did Vishishtadvaita and Dvaita came , both Ramanujacharya and Madhvacharya could have fallowe blindly Advaita. Both Ramanuja and Madvacharya were learing under Advaitha teachers first, when they found that Advaitha could not answer all there questions they had, they had to fallow fallow what they felt right , and IMO there is nothing wrong in it, and formed Vishistadvaita and Dvaita . sarvam vasudevamayam jagath Prashanth > " Guha " <guha > > While at the Cossipore garden house, Sri Ramakrishna was about to have his > meal one day. At that time the elder Gopal and another direct disciple were > sitting on the cot. Thakur asked them to get down so he could eat. > I think it was Shashi (later Sw. Ramakrishnananda) who felt embarrassed at > the Guru's action and questioned it. Sri Ramakrishna explained that he was a > Brahmin by birth and there was some basic `achar' (proper behaviour) which > one had to follow. > I think this has to do with the tendencies one inherits at birth, which > comprises various attributes. Modern-day scientists should be able to trace > this from the genes. But I have found that following one's dharma is the > only way. Once a Vaishnava, always a Vaishnava. There is no need to stray to > another sect and grope your way back to the correct one. Only, treat all > sects with respect and do not assume a superior posture. All the different > paths lead to the same Supreme Being. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 13, 1999 Report Share Posted November 13, 1999 Mr Guha, You are engaging in intellectual discussion again. You are using similies and reasoning to arrive at some inference or other---exactly the way the Mystics did. In fact, this is why you have become a member of Onelist.com. But, you need not worry. Because, the path of Bhakti finally leads to Jnan---the ultimate Knowledge that is God, your oasis. Even Ramakrishna and Vivekananda denounced Bhakti which is devoid of knowledge and love. With love, Tanmoy - Guha <guha <Ramakrishna > Thursday, November 11, 1999 10:08 PM [ramakrishna] Re: Tradition > " Guha " <guha > > Dear Prashant, > The sun exists. Do you dispute that? But how will > you make a blind man understand that the sun exists? You have to adopt some > suitable method to make him accept the fact. Sri Ramakrishna described the > situation well. A mother, according to him, cooks fish in different ways for > her different children. People have different beliefs, and they are so > engrossed in these (rituals) that they become blind to reality. > > Similarly, God exists, only the methods adopted by religious teachers are > different. Advaita is considered a dry subject and hence sages such as > Ramanuja chose ways that could attract the common people to God. Ultimately, > all these masters realised that God is one. As Sri Ramakrishna says, you > proceed on different paths, but reach the same spot. > > The soul, according to the Gita, is reborn in the womb most suited to it by > virtue of the karma in the previous life. These are evidently stages of > evolution. That is why people lead lives in line with the family they belong > to. The religious tendencies of family members are also similar. A poor > person is accustomed to the coarsest food and a rich man to rich food. > Ultimately, it is food that is needed. Thus, paths may be different, the aim > is the same: to fill the tummy or to realise God. - Guha > > > Prashant G <gprasha > prashanth replies > > I don't think you have to stick to your dharma, All the scholars say that > you > should fallow your dharma only if you are completely convinced with it, > if that was not the case why did Vishishtadvaita and Dvaita came , both > Ramanujacharya and Madhvacharya could have fallowe blindly Advaita. > > Both Ramanuja and Madvacharya were learing under Advaitha teachers first, > when they found that Advaitha could not answer all there questions they > had, > they had to fallow fallow what they felt right , and IMO there is nothing > wrong in it, and formed Vishistadvaita and Dvaita . > > > sarvam vasudevamayam jagath > Prashanth > > > > > " Guha " <guha > > > > While at the Cossipore garden house, Sri Ramakrishna was about to have his > > meal one day. At that time the elder Gopal and another direct disciple > were > > sitting on the cot. Thakur asked them to get down so he could eat. > > I think it was Shashi (later Sw. Ramakrishnananda) who felt embarrassed at > > the Guru's action and questioned it. Sri Ramakrishna explained that he was > a > > Brahmin by birth and there was some basic `achar' (proper behaviour) which > > one had to follow. > > I think this has to do with the tendencies one inherits at birth, which > > comprises various attributes. Modern-day scientists should be able to > trace > > this from the genes. But I have found that following one's dharma is the > > only way. Once a Vaishnava, always a Vaishnava. There is no need to stray > to > > another sect and grope your way back to the correct one. Only, treat all > > sects with respect and do not assume a superior posture. All the different > > paths lead to the same Supreme Being. > > > Sri Ramakrishnaye Namah > Vivekananda Centre London > http://www.btinternet.com/~vivekananda/ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 1999 Report Share Posted November 17, 1999 Dear friends, In fact the path to progress towards spirituality is highly individual. One has to become " Utterly Selfish " to get the requisite grasp of the goal which is most wonderfully blissful. It is beyond imagination of relative consciousness what great treasure is hidden for everyone when he or she proceeds towards the realization of the SELF. However, if even to earn a few dollars we must go to school and college, bow down and listen to our professors and teachers; then to presume that one can know spiritual truths without help from the " teachers " or the persons expert in the field of spirituality does not make sense to me. At present scriptural exposition in various books and audio-video literature can also be made use of, to some extent, to lift our consciousness and clarify our concepts about spiritual science. But sooner or later, everyone must approach a realized soul to seek the way for himself or herself for further spiritual growth. May everyone become fit to meet such a soul, that is my sincere prayer. ==================================== E-magazine on science and spirituality. Visit: http://members.xoom.com/drcsshah/neovedanta/index.html ==================================== dr c s shah ----------------------- Tanmoy Chakraborty wrote: > > " Tanmoy Chakraborty " <ctanmoy.ct > > Mr Guha, > You are engaging in intellectual discussion again. You are using similies > and reasoning to arrive at some inference or other---exactly the way the > Mystics did. In fact, this is why you have become a member of Onelist.com. > But, you need not worry. Because, the path of Bhakti finally leads to > Jnan---the ultimate Knowledge that is God, your oasis. Even Ramakrishna and > Vivekananda denounced Bhakti which is devoid of knowledge and love. > With love, > Tanmoy 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.