a_kaul Posted February 12, 2001 Report Share Posted February 12, 2001 Thanks to both of U for posing your thoughts in response to my queries. Although both replies are contradicting each other, yet to be honest I am convinced with both of them (the replies ). Shvu,you have given a nice example and I am aware of that ADV. and thus I can conclude that you do have got some justification for Mayavad being either good or bad ( from your point of view ). if you could clearify further as to what your stand is and why... ( oh ! yes I am an INDIAN and have been in ENGLAND for just over 6 months for my work and will be back sometime during this year or next year) Gauracandra , you have agian given a convincing reply (from my view point ), but don't U think that Srila PrabhuPadas devotee/follower would never ever put up a mayavad literature if he believes in instructions of Swamiji. If one has got the resources that this devotee from ISKCON has then the website is an idle oppertunity to spread the message of ones spritual master. Isn't it offending to that very Master by publishing info. about the philosophy that his Master has/had preached against all his life....? If you were to have these resources, would you do the same ? Personally I wouldn't have , but that is my openion !! and I respect everybody's openion even if I may not agree with some of them .... Once again thanks for devoting time for replying Hare Krishna !! Ajay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animesh Posted February 12, 2001 Report Share Posted February 12, 2001 Hi Ajay, I do not think that talking about mayawaad in this website is at all offending to Sri Prabhupada. Let me give you an analogy. In physics text books, you will find many old theories which have become outdated and also new theories. By describing old theories, the author is not trying to say that he agrees with them. He is just describing what the theory says. As an example, you will find books that describe those points of view of Aristotle which have been disproved by Newton. But the author is not trying to say that we should agree with what Aristotle said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a_kaul Posted February 12, 2001 Author Report Share Posted February 12, 2001 hello animesh !! First of all many thanks to you for posting your thoughts so that I be clear about my queries. Secondly , in reply to your thoughts, although I am not convinced with your example but as I had mentioned earlier , I respect everybody's opinions and thoughts...and although I am giving my reasons for not accepting your logic at the same time please don't think that I am getting into an argument.I dont have any intentions of that sort , so please forgive me if I unknowingly would carry this impression. 1) Only when a professor ( be it physics or maths ) has to help his students reach a conclusion does he present the wrong theory first only to prove that the other one is therefore correct. 2)A professor has no standing if he mearly presents two theories and therefore lets the students decide for themselves.How can the student know which one is right or which one is wrong --even that is to be justified by the professor himself --isn't it ? It is all about realization...Professor has realized by his vast experience (by practice and by studies ) as to what or which is right and that he passes on to his students. In the process a student might question the logic and justification of the right theory and once he is convinced he will automatically follow the right one. 3) This cannot be the case in terms of putting every theory ( right or wrong ) on the web and either not approving or disapproving one of the theories at the same time.Nodoubt if the maker of the web decides to put forward both philosophies ... No problem , but one note from him is must ...the note of approval of right philosophy (from his point )--isn't it? 4) How will a new comer decide which one to follow ?Infact he will be the one who will certainly get confused between the two philosophies put out for him and hence the whole purpose of the info. will be lost ---am i right ? Lastly I Reiterate , that if I have only given an argumental impression , then again I beg for your forgiveness. Hare Krishna !! Ajay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shvu Posted February 12, 2001 Report Share Posted February 12, 2001 Hi Ajay, --- I can conclude that you do have got some justification for Mayavad being either good or bad ( from your point of view ). if you could clearify further as to what your stand is and why... --- Basically I dislike people talking bad about something, without actually knowing why. If I am going to complain about Prabhupada, I must have a proper reason. Likewise if someone complains to me about ISKCON, the I expect the person to justify his position. Similarly the problem with condemning Mayavada. I have come across people doing so without knowing what is bad about it. They do it, simple because they have seen others do it, and think they should be doing it too. It is based on some kind of insecurity within themselves. A learned scholar rejecting Mayavada is not a simple act of calling Mayavadis as fools and rascals. He will clearly give points, references and arguments to support his view. btw, I am not a Mayavada supporter. I personally don't see any differences between the different Vaishnava sects, except a desire for Gurus to become Acharyas and Founder Acharyas. It is like an employee who after sufficient experience breaks away from his company to start off on his own. The desire for authority and power. But then, that is India! We like to form groups and feel that we are better than the others. Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animesh Posted February 12, 2001 Report Share Posted February 12, 2001 __________ Lastly I Reiterate , that if I have only given an argumental impression , then again I beg for your forgiveness. __________ I really do not understand why I should feel bad if somebody does not agree with me. I really do not feel bad about this. If I have right to disagree with others, others have right to disagree with me. Ofcourse, if I disagree, I should give reasons for that. Similarly, if others disagree, they should give reasons for that. And you have given a very proper reason. jndas ji, I think you are the best person to tell why you have described Mayawaad in this site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animesh Posted February 12, 2001 Report Share Posted February 12, 2001 Hi Ajay, Please go through the description of Mayawaad in this site. On reading that, it will be quite clear that the author does not agree with that theory. He has also written why he does not agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shvu Posted February 13, 2001 Report Share Posted February 13, 2001 Hi Animesh and Ajay, As far as I know, this site is about Indian Spirituality. And it does talk about diverse topics which come under under the cloak of Hinduism; Mayavada or Advaita being one of them. The people who write articles here belong to the GV system. The GV system is founded on the idea that Mayavada is poison. So naturally their articles on Shankara and Mayavada will be inclined to have negative shades. It is part and parcel of being a Vaishnava. So it is not suprising. The interesting part is, Vaishnavas acknowledge Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu, yet they think his philosophy is wrong. Again they believe that Shankara is a revered Acharya who was an avatar of Shiva, yet they denounce the philosophy as wrong. But in my opinion irrespective of personal opinions, I think when writing an article on a subject, it should contain information on the subject, written with an unbiased attitude. The author can perhaps add his opinion later. That way the description on Mayavada on this site is inadequate. As also the biography of Shankara. They are more focussed on repeating over and over that it is false. And it never really says anywhere as to what it actually is. WHen I find time, I will put together an article on Advaita, it's essence, it's role in hinduism, it's pitfalls and finally the arguments used by Madhvacharya to refute this system. And a biography on Shankara. Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a_kaul Posted February 13, 2001 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2001 Hello animesh, Again it was heartining to know your reactions. Indeed we should all be atleast respecting each others views even if not accepting the same.But I was conscious only of not to commit any offence by unknowingly hurting the feelings of fellow devotee who had taken the trouble of solving my anxiety. I really am at peace after going through your reply. Yes ! regarding authors views (since I am new to this site I don't know where to find it as of now , but I will certainly read the authors views) Thanks Once again !! Hare Krishna !! Ajay Hello Shvu, Thanks for clearification !! I am impressed that though you are following a particular philosophy , but at the same time you are not against any other sect. All the more the ability to make distinctions based on logical references is certainly a very good quality. Whenever you find time do pen down your views about why Not Mayavad ? i.e what actually is wrong in their theory. And since I don't have many resources therefore I would love to hear,read anything from devotees like you. Hare Krishna !! 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.