retirement from the forum

[Vidyasankar Sundaresan]

On Sat, 1 Aug 1998, f. maiello wrote:

..

> Bhagavadgita.  Whereas unorthodox would represent views
> that contain aspects that conflict with certain areas of
> this tradition.  For example, Jaldhar and Vidyasankar
> are evidently hesitant to endorse the teachings of Ramana
> or Ramakrishna, both of who critically veered from the
> doctrine of the orthodox tradition.  Both taught and

While your remarks are indeed well motivated, speaking for myself,
I think there is nothing for me to endorse or not to endorse. However,
I do recognize that gurus like Ramana or Ramakrishna taught according
to the effectiveness and eligibility of those who approach them. At
least for Ramana, I think where he differed from what might be
considered orthodox tradition was in peripheral details. The case
of Ramakrishna is slightly more complicated.

However, to maintain a tradition, some "conservativism" is needed.
Otherwise, anything and everything will be included under the name
of Advaita Vedanta. A modern guru might teach according to his own
experience and estimate of what is necessary for a disciple, but when
he invokes Sankaracharya's name, that immediately reminds one of a
tradition. I. e. a lineage that transmits the important commentaries
and independent texts, a lineage that conserves and preserves both
the memory of the teacher and the purity of his teaching, in addition
to being an organic, living representative of the teacher. Without
this lineage, nobody would invoke the name of Sankara, the same way
nobody invokes the name of Averroes or Avicenna any more, but
everybody still talks of Aquinas.

Regards,
Vidyasankar