"Jagat satya!"

Jagannath Chatterjee jagchat01 at YAHOO.COM
Wed Jul 24 06:13:02 CDT 2002



Sri Jaldhar Vyas wrote:
>Apologetics is a technical term in theology. My dictionary says:

 >      n : the branch of theology that is concerned with the defense of
 >          religious doctrines

>I meant nothing negative by it.

I stand corrected. It will be interesting to note that Swamiji was forced
to deliver only one lecture titled " In Defence of Hinduism" more to
convince orthodox Hindu's than the Europeans.

>Because of course Christ advocated no such thing.  If you examine
>Christian theology the reasons for celibacy in those churches that
>practice it (not all of them do) is totally different from ours.

Then wherefrom the statements "...sell all you have and follow
me", "...eunuchs for Gods sake." The churches, we Hindus believe, have
distorted Christ.

>This is the kind of thing I meant when I said to Ashish the program of the
>19th century intellectuals was to "advaitize" all of Indian culture.  They
>were creating something altogether novel and needed a fig leaf of
>continuity with the past to give their program respectability.  Again this
>may not have been a bad idea but it bears further scrutiny don't you

Not in Bengal at least. The opposition Swamiji faced from orthodox
vaishnavites (because Sri Ramakrishna claimed to be a reincarnation of Sri
Chaitanya), the brahmins (for Swamiji being a kayastha and daring to be an
authority on Hinduism) and the tantrics (who claimed Swamiji had hijacked
their plank),proves this.

>And common sense ought to tell you that dvaita cannot be a different
>approach to advaita anymore than standing still can be a different
>approach to running or gluttony another approach to fasting.

Cannot agree with you, Sir. Today's message from Kamakoti.org says advaita
opposes the other schools only to the extent those schools oppose advaita!
There is essentially no enmity between the philosophies.

>And yet it is the masses who keep to the traditions (empty stomach or not)
>and have turned their backs to the reform movements.  Why do you think
>that is?

It is true that the masses, both grihasthas and sannyasis (I am neither!),
were opposed to the activities of the R K Mission at first due to various
reasons. The young mass were disillusioned that the Mission did not join
the revolutionary movement against the British. The projection of Girish
Ghosh, notorious for his escapades, as an ardent devotee of Sri Ramakrishna
shocked the grihasthas. The sannyasis mocked the seva attitude of the
Mission and called the monks "bhangi" sadhus. But the Mission has today
gained acceptance among all classes.

>As you can tell I have some definitive views on the subject but my goal is
>not necessarily to make everyone think as I do (though that would be a
>good thing :) but to think more deeply about our philosophy.  The world is
>growing ever more complicated and only by understanding where we came from
>can we know where to go.

Parodharma Bhayavaha! It is always better to stick to ones own spiritual
path. Being an ardent supporter of the advaita philosophy myself I
appreciate your stand and can only stand to gain from your views.


>Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
>It's a girl! See the pictures - http://www.braincells.com/shailaja/

What about some recent photographs of the little lady? She has our


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list