Thank You

[Parisi & Watson]

-----Original Message-----
From: Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <ramakris at EROLS.COM>
To: ADVAITA-L at LISTS.ADVAITA-VEDANTA.ORG
<ADVAITA-L at LISTS.ADVAITA-VEDANTA.ORG>
Date: Sunday, July 25, 1999 12:43 PM
Subject: Re: Thank You


>If I may offer some suggestions: I'd like to point out that you may
>want to explore the system commonly known as Kashmir Shaivism. The
>great abhinavagupta has written many texts based on the Saivite
>Agama-s. The sunypress has published many volumes including two by a
>direct descendant in that tradition: Swami Laksmanjoo. While the
>Kashmir Saivite system also espouses a form of advaita, it holds the
>world to be real, unlike advaita vedAnta. I gather from your mails
>that you are bent to towards what is called "realism". So the system
>of abhinavagupta may hold more appeal to you. There was a member of
>this list, Ken Stuart who felt the same way as you. This system also
>emphasizes yogic practices like nirvikalpa samAdhi and kuNDalini yoga.
>It may also seem less "dogmatic" than advaita vedAnta. Try
>http://www.kashmirshaivism.org for starters.


Thank you, I will check it out.

>> With the kind permission of the members, I would like to continue to
>hound
>> down a couple of points in the current discussion, and then I will
>withdraw
>> from the list with thanks and fond memories, and pursue other
>avenues.
>
>I hope you didn't get the idea that any of your mails were offensive.
>None of the questions you asked were offensive at all. As I mentioned,
>your questions are all raised by the great writer on mImA.nsA (vedic
>exegesis), kumArila bhaTTa as pUrvapaxa (prima facie arguments). I
>have got offended by some other people on this list before (not you)
>who pretended that they appreciated sha.nkara and fully agreed with
>him. However they were posting mails which were clearly insulting
>sha.nkara if you cared to read between the lines. It's only hypocricy
>of this sort which is sickening. Critical and polite questions in the
>spirit of learning which you posed, even if against the tenets of
>advaita are quite welcome and in fact refreshing.


I hoped that they weren't offensive or presumptuous, and I certainly have
not been offended in the least by any of the replies. As I stated, I don't
believe similar questions would ever receive such a patient and constructive
welcome in, for instance, a Christian setting. I am not going away angry,
but more just because I don't see much point in continuing to bludgeon the
same points over and over when there is clearly a disagreement at such a
fundamental level. Not that it isn't what I expected, of course, but just
wanted to double check my conclusions. All of you have my respect and
regard, if not my agreement.

Robert.