Guest guest Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 Dear Tony, You make some interesting and somewhat wild claims about Ramana's teaching and also that of Sankara's, if not Advaita in general. While I appreciate your loyalty to your own understanding I think the main difficulty, at least for me, is that you don't offer anything from what they say/write themselves which supports your views. There needs to be more to the discussion about Ramana's and Sankara's views than your simply contradicting what other people express. Otherwise your assertion of what is true and valid is based merely on the premise that you (Tony) say it is so. As you rightly say, the term Para Advaita is a term coined by you alone to refer to your "ramblings" - your words. Really it stands for TonyCleary Advaita which you appear to want to make the focus of this group. That you see yourself as the group's 'confrontation yogi' is a worrying sign and indicator of just how much the level of discussion is degenerating. You mentioned a number of times recently that you were banned from the Advaitin group. I'm not sure why you feel that is relevant to repeat here, however, now that you've mentioned it I would point out that it was largely for the reasons I have just outlined above. I will reply to your claims re Ramana's and Sankara's teaching in another mail when I have a bit more time. Regards, Peter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 , " Peter " <not_2 wrote: > > Dear Tony, > > You make some interesting and somewhat wild claims about Ramana's teaching > and also that of Sankara's, if not Advaita in general. While I appreciate > your loyalty to your own understanding I think the main difficulty, at least > for me, is that you don't offer anything from what they say/write themselves > which supports your views. There needs to be more to the discussion about > Ramana's and Sankara's views than your simply contradicting what other > people express. Otherwise your assertion of what is true and valid is based > merely on the premise that you (Tony) say it is so. As you rightly say, > the term Para Advaita is a term coined by you alone to refer to your > " ramblings " - your words. Really it stands for TonyCleary Advaita which you > appear to want to make the focus of this group. That you see yourself as > the group's 'confrontation yogi' is a worrying sign and indicator of just > how much the level of discussion is degenerating. > > You mentioned a number of times recently that you were banned from the > Advaitin group. I'm not sure why you feel that is relevant to repeat here, > however, now that you've mentioned it I would point out that it was largely > for the reasons I have just outlined above. > > I will reply to your claims re Ramana's and Sankara's teaching in another > mail when I have a bit more time. > > Regards, > > Peter. Namaste, 'Confrontational Yoga' is not between myself and another but between a person and their own thoughts and beliefs. I only quote what I have read Sankara and Ramana said, more important are the little snippets of reality they mention and even more important is what they don't say. For eg many Hindus on here would find it surprising that Ramana didn't consider himelf a Hindu or any religion. The discussion has not degenerated but become extremely challenging and centred, away from supersititions. If you examine what I have said it is actually very little and unconvoluted. Anything to do with the mind and its machinations, ie. philosophy, religions etc is BULLSHIT........There is my total whatever..........Tony. That doesn't mean that my body/mind doesn't like to debate, enjoy bhajans and rituals etc---but I know what they are..T 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.