Guest guest Posted October 4, 2005 Report Share Posted October 4, 2005 Madhva philosophy is restricted to Brahmanas. A Brahmana should have a proper gotra and pravara by definition which rules out People like David Frawley. It follows therefore that Madhva philosophy is not for the entire world, but is reserved for a subset of the Indian population unlike the HK system where all are welcome. SO you are really comparing apples and oranges. The only area of conflict here is interpretation of scripture. This problem is true between any two schools of thought and there is no reason why it should be covered up in this case. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 4, 2005 Report Share Posted October 4, 2005 Madhva philosophy is restricted to Brahmanas. A Brahmana should have a proper gotra and pravara by definition which rules out People like David Frawley. U have misunderstood!!!! The study of Vedas might be restricted to Brahmanas, Vishyas & Kshatriyas. But the Sara of Madhva philosophy is for everyone who is interested in Tatvavada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harishkumar09 Posted October 4, 2005 Report Share Posted October 4, 2005 ##If you will accept this, you will realize that individual attainment is the most plausible option you have. Not that you do not have to preach, but if you are targetting global harmony, then you are way off. ## Then why did he say that service to society is the tax to be paid to god ? There are social goals or one can formulate them. And I am not saying ISKCON is 100% accurate and tallies with M's philosophy.I am saying have a larger perspective. Do we see a similar harshness in denouncing Islam and Christianity ? The Isha Upanishad quote about criticising false knowledge seems to be utilized only for bashing ISKCON. Is it cowardice at work here ? The reason most westerneres and even indians believe Madhva was influenced by Nestorian Christians in the Goa is because ot total lack of criticism of christianity or islam and the heavy criticism of advaita philosophy and similarities like eternal damnation found in both the religions. Even Islam and Christianity are examples of false knowledge , to refuse to acknowledge it and condemn it is as much a sin , if not more , as not condemning ISKCON. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harishkumar09 Posted October 4, 2005 Report Share Posted October 4, 2005 and the two guests are I guess are different people.No time to register or what ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2005 Report Share Posted October 8, 2005 Do we see a similar harshness in denouncing Islam and Christianity ? The Isha Upanishad quote about criticising false knowledge seems to be utilized only for bashing ISKCON. Is it cowardice at work here ? The reason most westerneres and even indians believe Madhva was influenced by Nestorian Christians in the Goa is because ot total lack of criticism of christianity or islam and the heavy criticism of advaita philosophy and similarities like eternal damnation found in both the religions. BOY!!!! this shows your total lack of acquaintance on Madhva's philosophy. Not that I am boosting of knowing everything /images/graemlins/smirk.gif. I too am a neophyte, not an expert :-). Even Islam and Christianity are examples of false knowledge , to refuse to acknowledge it and condemn it is as much a sin , if not more , as not condemning ISKCON. BTW, Have you read <font color="red"> Srimad Jayatirtha's NyayaSudha </font color> ? The answer for your question lies in there. Jayatirtha in his magnum opus work "Nyayasudha" has refuted <font color="red"> "21 maTA's" </font color> which includes refutation of Islam & Christianity also :-). According to Madhva, Sense enjoyment is "hEya", other matA's like Islam & Chistianity are not correct, but even more worse is calling "onself GOD"/ identifying oneself with Brahman. Hence the refutation on Advaita is severe . and the two guests are I guess are different people.No time to register or what ? Yeh, two different people /images/graemlins/grin.gif Getting too busy these days to register /images/graemlins/wink.gif!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harishkumar09 Posted October 8, 2005 Report Share Posted October 8, 2005 #BOY!!!! this shows your total lack of acquaintance on Madhva's philosophy. Not that I am boosting of knowing everything . I too am a neophyte, not an expert :-). # I am talking about the impression given by maadhvas to westerners.I know Christinaity and Madhva's philosophy are different.I am not talking about NyayaSudhas denunciation of semitic religions , I am talking about modern day madhwas and their near silence in condemning semitic religions and heavy attack on ISKCON. If you are intelligent enough you will realise that the discussion is about present day madhwa attitudes towards ISKCON and semitic religions.It seems to be disproportionate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 9, 2005 Report Share Posted October 9, 2005 ISKCON too has been harsh on Hinduism, while praising blood-thirsty Islam and Christianity as valid paths to Krishna. In what way are they different from Madhvas who, as you claim, go easy on semitic religions but attack their own? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 9, 2005 Report Share Posted October 9, 2005 I am talking about modern day madhwas and their near silence in condemning semitic religions and heavy attack on ISKCON. More ink is required to refute a school who uses the same scriptures, but interprets them differently. One has to get into details and specifics to do a complete job. Such level of detail is not possible and more accurately nor required when dealing with semitic beliefs. This is true of all schools. This is why Madhvas have more material criticizing Advaita & Iskcon. Add to this the other factor unique to this case where iskcon tends to "attach" itself to the Madhva school claiming lineage and also the classic dreams in Navadwipa. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harishkumar09 Posted October 9, 2005 Report Share Posted October 9, 2005 ###ISKCON too has been harsh on Hinduism, while praising blood-thirsty Islam and Christianity as valid paths to Krishna. In what way are they different from Madhvas who, as you claim, go easy on semitic religions but attack their own? ### I agree with this point of yours and have bashed ISCKON many times over this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harishkumar09 Posted October 9, 2005 Report Share Posted October 9, 2005 Iskconites behave like cranks when it comes to semetic religions.Their extreme hatred for advaita means that if anybody says God and Soul are different they will worship him. During the Indo-Pak peace process they invited a pakistani to the iskcon temple in bangalore.He "worshipped" the shrine and when he was leaving told the media , that the place was nice but he stuck with his religious beliefs.It was an insult to all vaishnavas. Krishna says "avajananthi maam mudha"..Fools deride me...this fool derided Krishna and went aways scot free bcos islam is dualistic and therefore good according to iskconites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2005 Report Share Posted October 10, 2005 I am talking about the impression given by maadhvas to westerners.I know Christinaity and Madhva's philosophy are different.I am not talking about NyayaSudhas denunciation of semitic religions , I am talking about modern day madhwas and their near silence in condemning semitic religions and heavy attack on ISKCON. If you are intelligent enough you will realise that the discussion is about present day madhwa attitudes towards ISKCON and semitic religions.It seems to be disproportionate. If you are intelligent enough /images/graemlins/grin.gif, you will realise that Modern day Madhwas hold the same view held by Jayathirtha in his Nyayasudha. Have you ever interacted with Madhwas (the onez who have studied Shastra). Have you heard their opinion? Your post cleary says that you havent had enough Sanga with those Bhagavat Bhaktas :-) Madhwas do heavily critisize the teachings of Iskcon as Iskconites claim Madhwa to be one among thier Gurus and preach things that are different. This misleads the general public to think that Madhwa's teachings are same as Iskcon's teachings. Madhwas strongly feel that ISkCON is using Madhwa's name to spead their teachings. END OF TOPIC. Wont be posting anymore here!!!. I better go back to my favourite tattvavada mailing lists & /images/graemlins/smile.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harishkumar09 Posted October 10, 2005 Report Share Posted October 10, 2005 I also accept its time we ended this discussion Firstly i am not saying iskcon is right in everything.Secondly I am pleased to hear from you that there are madhwas who denounce semitics and in fact you are the first onw I have seen who has used harsh language against semetics. Lest you consider me a greenhorn , let me assure you my grandfather study undera guru and was a great scholar and one of my uncles is studying under a guru and holds a top post in ABMM and knows scholars very well.My grandfather was a close friend of Dr.B.N.K.Sharma and he is a family friend. Yet inspite of mixing with such scholarly people in my life and the many bhakta friends of my uncles , i have never come across anyone who denounced the semeitcs , even at the height of the hindutva movement when passion was running high in the country agaisnt muslims and islam. Whenever I raised the question of semetic religions I would find these Madhva scholars avoiding the topic or saying "Atleast these people believe in God , they don't say I am god".This is the common reply. But the political realities of the society demands that we oppose evil.Krishna says we must oppose evil.I remember madhva saying its the duty of all men esp kshatriyas to defend the weaka dn destroy evil.If you remember well , Bhimasena did the same.He did not simply confine himself to individual attainment. Its like saying "Go ahead and embezzele millions of dollars , coz its not as terrible as committing mass murder" I still am not ready to cheat anybody financially. I am not willing to praise the semetics coz they dont say I am god , coz there is a greater villain in advaitins. I will take sword to defend my fellow countrymen against bloodthirsty semetics , even if the victims be advaitins for they have the right to preach , even if it means i have to go to hell.Rather than cheer the believers killing the advaitins. I feel immensely satisfied for having met a semetic denouncing madhva. Thanks a lot !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harishkumar09 Posted October 10, 2005 Report Share Posted October 10, 2005 I would like to know the and mailing lists which you to and post so i cna also increase my knowledge of M's philosophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts