[Advaita-l] FW: Kingpin status of anubhava - mistaken or out ofcontext (was re:

[bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com]

praNAms
Hare Krishna

I am just replying to Sri Rama prabhuji's mail...Hope moderators wont mind
it.

RB prabhuji :

Dear Bhaskar,

What is the connection between section 6 and Gangollis book in the
Digital library?

bhaskar :

The connection is not between Sec-6 & Digital library, connection is quoted
word *kingpin* with regard to anubhava and the reference given in Section 6
which was the main concern of Sri Siva Senani Nori prabhuji & asked
followers of Sri SSS to clarify "how swamiji can use the word *kingpin*
*twice* to uphold the supremacy of anubhava" in his book...Smt. Savitri
mAtAji brought to the notice of the list that *the basic tenets* is a
translated version of Kannada book & The word *kingpin* is not swamiji's
own choice of word!!!  Hope the connection is clear now!!

RB prabhuji:

You just can't keep from personal attacks, can you? No problem, I'll just
ignore it and attribute it your basic training by ISKCON :-).

bhaskar :

If you think giving clarifications on doubts is personal attack..so be
it..I cannot help it...Anyway, thanks for reminding me the bygone history
:-)) no need to mention your Sec-6 of the paper is the good cause for
rejuvenation of my past memories :-))

RB prabhuji :

The joke is that I had asked the list-members not to discuss section 6, and
Bhaskar very kindly keeps bringing it up in completely irrelevant contexts
:-).

bhaskar :

I hope context is clear now!!  Sri Siva Senani Nori prabhuji has
misunderstood that *kingpin* was swamiji's own word & thought that anubhava
is superior to shruti in SSS's works...dont you think it is the duty of Sri
SSS's followers to share their thoughts with regard to this??  Since Sri
Siva Senani Nori prabhuji keeps on quoting your paper to get the
clarification on SSS's stand on certain issues, I thought it is the high
time to bring it to the notice of the list members that *all the material*
dumped in Sec-6 is not worth thinking as facts...So that We, the Sri SSS's
followers, in future, can avoid answering doubts of list members based on
Sec-6 of your paper...

RB prabhuji:

BTW, I use the book by Gangolli (not the biography) a single time in
the entire paper regarding anubhava.

bhaskar :

Whether it is single or multiple times it does not matter...you've already
seen how it caused the confusion in the minds of neutral readers of your
paper.  BTW, when Sri Siva Senani Nori prabhuji continuously referring your
paper & saying *kingpin* is swamiji's own assertion , why did you not
clarify him atleast *a single time* that it is only in a translated version
of book you found that terminology??

RB prabhuji:

No problem, I'll find some equivalent quote and push this to the foot-note
section! Apparently we have list-members who know SSS better than the
kaaryalaya authorities.
Absolutely no problem at all, I can accommodate them :-).

bhaskar :

Oh!! thanks for the kind gesture:-))  If you want I myself can provide you
the information where exactly Sri SSS exclusively discussed the role of
anubhava in brahma jignAsa (ofcourse it will be in his own words :-))...But
kindly note when our minds are prejudiced & occupied with some biased
notions, we can find some selective quotes out of context from any of the
texts (even from shruti-s!!) to match our preconceived theory:-))  Anyway,
I shall look forward for your new additions to the reference list:-)) Good
luck to you prabhuji....

Rama

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar