[Advaita-l] The point of discussions

[Vidyasankar Sundaresan]

> >
> > Yes, I too surprised to see Sri Vidya prabhuji's sudden decision on this
> > issue. But I am sure he always does the right thing at the right time.
> > But oflate, I could see some point in Sri Venkatesh prabhuji's argument.
> > Basically he is asking us, when we say brahman is the abhinnanimittOpadAna
> > kAraNa of this jagat and shruti says there is nothing 'apart' from brahman
> > (sarvaM khalvidaM brahma)why we should say jagat (nAma rUpa) is mithya??
> > Can we answer his queries keeping this point of view in mind??
> >

People have been discussing these topics for thousands of years, so just putting
this particular thread to an end is not going to end all discussion on the points
you make above. Anyone is welcome to open new discussion threads on these
issues.
 
Besides, a number of people did respond along these lines. They also asked for
clarification on what was being understood by the words mithyA, sat and asat,
but no proper response was given. It was time to put this particular thread of
discussion to a stop. I thank you for your trust in my judgement. I too would like
to think that I do the right thing at the right time, at least most of the time, if
not always. 
 
I only saw three or four people responding on this thread, including me. This
list has more than 500 people subscribed to it. Of late, discussion threads on
this list seem to exclude all but a small number of people. I can count at least
15 members of this list, whom I know to be very knowledgeable and articulate,
who could be taking part here as they used to in the past, but they largely
choose to remain silent. Please ask yourselves why the situation is like this,
and also ask if the reason for existence of this list is not compromised thereby.
 
> >
> Rajaram: As you know better than I do, these questions are easily answered.
> They have been answered to some extent - may be not up to his satisfaction.
> It is about allowing him to raise them with the mood of learning (and
> sharing).

Therein lies the crux of the issue, in my opinion. I am all for free discussion, but
I would also prefer it to be focused and conducted with the right tone for learning
and sharing. When someone starts saying things like "gauDapAda says, na jAyate,
he should have said na vinaSyati,' etc. etc. it is obvious that the said person has
to return to the basics and to understand them really well. There is no point in
continuing a discussion that should be at a very high level when there is serious
misunderstanding of concepts at the most basic level.
 
Vidyasankar