No subject

[Jonathan Bricklin]

On Monday, May 19th, Jaldhar Vyas wrote:

> As Advaitism seems to be something you just invented, I don't know.  As
> for Advaita Vedanta....

It's as if you have not seen the word advaitism, before?  Is this possible
from such a learned man?

> > Its
> > deepest truths make more sense out of
> > the world of experience not less.
>
> You haven't experienced the authors of the Vedas so why should this
> concept make less or more sense to you?

Language mediates experience.
>
> >  Well, Shankara followed the Mimamsakas like Jesus followed the
Pharisees.

> Another unfounded assertion

If you miss the point you miss its foundation.  Jesus had many allegiences
with the beliefs of the Pharisees, but he brought a conceptual revolution
nonetheless.  Citing commentators that weave Shankara with the Mimamsakas
does not address the issue.  There are Jews for Jesus who keep kosher.


> > But surely I am not the only student of advaitism....

> I don't know any other students of advaitism so I can't answer that.

See, there's that doubt, again.  The term is new to you.  Say it ain't so!

> > Inferring orthodoxy is
> > not too much of a leap (although he was pronounced as a heretic by the
> > Talmudists).  I'm sure Jesus read the whole Haggadah at the last
supper.
> > It's not what he's remembered for.  What he is remembered for, in part,
is
> > the same thing that Bal Shem Tov is remembered for:  an insistence that
> > purity of heart is more pleasing to God than learning.
>
> Remembered by who?  Your memmory hasn't proven to be that reliable so
far.

Now hold on.  Until you come clean on whether or not you've seen the term
advaitism before let's have not be casting stones.  See, I would have to
believe that you have seen it, but forgot it.

> On the other hand, there are approximately 500,000 Hasidim alive today
who
> are followers of the Besht.  Do you think they value purity of the heart
> more than Talmudic learning?
>
The ones in my neck of the woods value Menachem Mendel Schneerson above
all.  But comparisons would not be relevant to them.  It would be like
asking Vivekananda whether he preferred the Ashtavakra Gita to Ramakrishna.
 By the way, does that text fit into your self-constructed Talmud of
Advaita Vedanta?


>>But at any rate, if any mystical or religious tradition penetrates to a
deep, spiritual truth, then its relevance to Advaitism seems to be secure.

> If you say so.  You after all invented it.  Advaita Vedanta has different
> criteria.

Now you've done it.  It's time for a quiz.  What eminent Indian Philosopher
begins his account of Advaita Vedanta with this sentence:  "The Advaitism
of Samkara is a system of great speculative daring and logical subtlety."?

> > An apple is not different from brahman either, but that hardly makes it
> > limitless.

> Because you don't understand its true nature.

I am happy to contemplate the true nature of an apple as it relates to
Brahman.  It sincerely makes me happy to do so.  It will become my Zen Koan
for awhile.  I am not being facetious, I truly thank you.  May I offer a
lesser gift concerning leaves?  Wittgenstein, in a lecture, invited his
audience to consider autumn leaves floating to the ground, saying to
themselves "Now I'll go this way...now I'll go that way."

 > Jiva = Brahman.  It's as simple as that.

Well, not quite as simple as car=automobile, but simple, nonethess.
Intelligible if coupled with a belief in free will is another matter.