[Advaita-l] Ref request for somnath

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Hari Om, Yadu-ji,

On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 7:05 PM, Dr. Yadu Moharir <ymoharir at yahoo.com>wrote:

> Namaste:
>
> after all, who destroyed kshtriiya's ?  Was it not parashuraam who vowed to
> destroy kshtria for not just once but 21 times !!?


Did Parashuram, about whom and his lineage is said "shApAdapi sharAdapi",
destroy kshatriyAs in a different way the 21st time than the earlier 20
times? I guess not, because there were still Kshatriyas after it. Even then,
he was troubled that he couldn't win over Rama and went to Dattatraya to
learn what has come about as Tripura Rahasya, a wonderful teaching indeed!

When are we going to take the responsibility and call spade a spade and
> admit that our ancestor were napu~saka could not defend their own territory,
>


Is that the fault that lies solely with Brahmins or is it of those
Kshatriyas that survived after the 21st assault of Parashuram? Somehow, from
talking of "lifeless pillars" that Brahmins were quoted to be, you seem to
attack a wider range of ancestors now!


> family

???


> and now Sanskrit language, which is being studied by Western scholars more
> systematically than in India.


If our ancestors were napu~sakas, there wouldn't have been a language for
even Westerners to study...


> When are we going to wake up and accept our inadequacy's & deficiencies.
> Remember we cannot charge what we cannot acknowledge.  However,, if
> one prefer to hide behind smapradaaya that is their individual choice and
> that cannot be beneficial to larger society.


... let alone sampradAya to "hide behind"! Perhaps a better approach for
most of us would be to stop this self-pity of a past no one seems to agree
upon, thankless to the rich Indian culture that is somehow preserved with so
many pains that our ancestors took, and walk on the traditional path
instead, inasmuch as is possible.



> All of our sages, including Acharys left their individual smsaara and
> created a larger smasaara for the benefit of all Indians.


I assume these were other than those ancestors that you indicated.


> That is practicing "advaita" not just discussing it.  Just discussing
> "ghaTa and ghaTaakaaSha and mR^ittaka" or "suvarNa and its jewelery" is just
> from the saadhaka point of view but soon that needs to change in to it's
> utility the real purpose.

  After ghata realizing that it is mR^ittkaa should that ghaTa commit
> suicide and recognize it's utility for a larger purpose of storage for it's
> users ? Can a gold bar be used as a jewelery by a lady to accentuate her
> beauty ?
>
> May be you do not have a desire to think of application of out traditions
> and about its implication to larger mases but that is your choice. Acharys
> gave us the most elegant scientific tool of "neti - neti" for evaluating the
> truth but when are we going to use it ?


I don't think neti-neti helps in "utility the real purpose" or has
"implication to larger masses"? Am I wrong in finding it contradictory here?

gurorArpaNamstu,
--Praveen R. Bhat
/* Through what should one know That owing to which all this is known!
[Br.Up. 4.5.15] */