naaraayaNa gaayatrii

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Tue, 24 Feb 1998, Ravi Mayavaram wrote:

> namaskAram shrI Vyas,
>
> I find this response by  you  unnecessarily rude and offensive.
> I request you to refrain from such responses.
>

I apologize for being overly sarcastic.  There was a more substantive part
to my post however which needs no apology and perhaps even a reiteration.

> There is nothing wrong if a svAmiji creates a format for the sake his
> disciples and other for morning and evening pUja. For many who are not
> initiated to practices like sandhya vandanam, it is a good starting
> point if they wish to do something. Besides, if one does not want
> he/she need not use it.

There are certain practices mandated by the shastras which are
_mandatory_.  If we do not see them being done, it is a comment on the sad
state of the Kali yuga not an indication that it doesn't need to be done.
Even for those who are not entitled/not familiar with Vedic sandhya, there
are alternates.  Again if this is not known, it doesn't mean it is any
less valid.  There is some room for choice yes, but one cannot randomly
pick bits and pieces and call that a puja.  Some of the suktas mentioned
are Vedic in nature and those Gayatris are for the purpose of Upasana.
I'll say it nicely this time.  There is no spiritual benefit from their
incorrect use.

>
> You may be knowledgeable in some respects and your knowledge in
> vedanta may be useful. But I certainly do not need that if does not
> come with vinayam.
>

I'll apologize if I go overboard (Dharma is not something I can be neutral
about) because vinay is indeed a virtue one should strive for but it's one
of many virtues, Vivek is one too.  However squeamish it may make one,
there are some things which are to be rejected and rejected they must be.
If it's the rejection that people don't like then I don't see how being
polite is going to help but I'll agree to try.

> Once shrI Chandran remarked that you are one of
> those who defend orthodox vedanta tradition and people should not
> get upset about it. So much for it. I am and many in the list are just
> a phone call away from their home in India to get the right view from
> elders.  I can go one step and say this, when I left India, one of my
> orthodox friends in Madras asked why I wanted become an outcaste. In
> that sense from his point of view someone who is born and raised
> outside India is an outcaste anyway and too much for such a one to
> defend vedanta.

What you say is true.  A person becomes ashuddha  by leaving India
(Though not quite an outcaste.  I'm sure your friend in Madras can tell
you the exact nuances.)  Now what should my reaction to this be?
Obviously it's a little convenient to someone who would like to think of
themselves as orthodox.  But I'm not going to deny the truth just because
I don't like it.  Believe me, I'm 10 times as hard on myself as I am on
anyone there.

> People draw a line which is orthodox and which is not
> based on their own convenience.

There is hypocrisy in the world.  This is not a new observation.  So what
difference does that make to me or you?  If one has been taught the
difference between right and wrong one ought to act on that teaching.  Let
"people" rot in Hell.

>Personally to me sincerity in quest for self-realization and earnestness
>alone matters.

I say this in the nicest possible way.  Good intentions count for
_nothing_.  My Father told me a story that once, when he was President of
India, S. Radhakrishnan came to visit our town.  Rather astonishingly
there was a huge crowd of people from the surrounding villages come to see
him.  It turns out that somehow they had got the impression that
Radha-Krishna had come to town!   What faith those people must had! What
pure hearts!  What ignorance!


>
> Personally I can take any kind of rude remarks and flames, but not in
> this forum. In fact I have lived through such remarks in
> Soc.Culture.Tamil and newsgroups like that. I definitely do not want
> anyone on this list to talk badly about svAmijis and saints of any
> tradition in this forum. To me that is more important than
> anything.
>

As the final arbiter of what goes in this list it is your choice.  But
wrong actions will not become any less wrong if they are not mentioned.

--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>