[Advaita-l] pArthiva- A year devoted to bhagavad gItA bhAShya discussion

[Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian]

Why restrict to only the gItA/gItA bhAShya for an entire year? I have
been concentrating on other works like the taittiriiya bhaashya and
the upadeshasaahasrii, and wouldn't be able to contribute anything for
an entire year, guaranteed. I am not sure if I will even be able to
benefit completely from the discussions because it will mean I have to
read the BG bhaaShya, for which I do not have the time right now. I
don't like the idea of leaving my studies of the other texts half way
and jumping on to something else. I think it would reduce the posts
from about 5 people at most.

The BG bhAshya is certainly an important text. But I don't see more
discussion on it by restricting posts on other texts. But, I do like
the idea of sticking to source texts - traditional advaitic texts. A
compromise is to to refer to the book and source text in each post.
Example panchadashii, chapter 10 verse xyz.
Thsi would get rid of much of the riff-raff.

Also I don't like the idea of not being able to ask questions on
things like vedic suuktams, etc. I ahve greatly benefitted from such
discusions.

Rama

On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 17:51:47 -0600, Ravi Mayavaram <ravi at ambaa.org> wrote:
> Let us know your thoughts (and amendments) on the following proposal.
> Discussion on this matter will be closed on March 31st. So please send
> your comments to the list. And restrict yourself only to ONE post on
> this subject. Final decision will be made by the moderators based on
> your input.
> 
> SUMMARY: Coming chandramAna year, pArthiva, will be devoted *only* to
> the discussion of Sankara's bhagavad gItA bhAShya.
> 
> Key Items:
> 
> A) No other subject, except ADMIN posts will be allowed.
> 
> B) All subject lines should refer to a chapter and/or verse from gItA.
> 
> C) Main focus will be on our AchArya's bhAShyam. But notes from other
> associated sub commentaries and other commentaries to explain the text
> are welcome.
> 
> We started Advaita-L in 1996 and till this point, we have not undertaken
> a systematic or a focused discussion on this very important work.  I
> hope we can remedy this in the coming year(s).