[Advaita-l] Why can't it be done by some learned scholars?

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

*श्रीमल्ललितालालितः*www.lalitaalaalitah.com

On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Srivathsa Rao <vathsa108 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Sir,
>
>  I am not telling to kill chatur varnashrama,to tell in better worlds,I
> want to unite brahmins
>

​Then don't talk about destroying sects and making a homogenous one.

​


> ....In brahmins there are three sects...smarthas ,madhvas and sri
> vaishnavas...I want to bring all of them under single platform......
>

​Really, I'm sorry to see that you could see only this difference in only
brAhmaNa-s.
​


>
> Brahmins are the backbone of sanathana dharma ,if we unite them the unity
> among hindus will automatically comes....
>


​What type of brAhmaNa-s you mean? Just born as brAhmaNa-s and not studying
veda-s, etc.?
That's not type of brAhmaNa-s which is base of sanAtana-dharma.

The problem is that you are assuming that all brAhmaNa-s are similar, i.e.
they study veda-s, have faith in Ishvara, shAstra, etc. This is not true.
So, you can't get any benefit by uniting such brahma-bandhU-s.
Those who are following veda-s, dharama, etc. well know that they have
common ground called veda-s. That's enough for them to unite.
How they explain that same veda, doesn't matter- for all are Astika-s.

​


>
> At present there is no unity among brahmins ,to bring unity among brahmins
> there is need to bring them under single platform..
>

​Sure, for that just kill their beloved philosophy and thinking power.
​


> As unity among different sects will be always not as good as unity among
> single sect as homogeneous unity will always better than heterogeneous
> unity...
>

​As, homogenous society is constrained, it will be non-creative, stagnant.
BTW, you can't control other men. Just see how your son doesn't follow your
every word just because he has power to think, i.e. he is sentient.
​


>
> Now when there is any injustice to brahmins there comes heterogeneous
> unity ,but after a while this unity will die soon , as it is
> heterogeneous...but homogeneous  unity is not like that it lasts till end...
>
> Also some brahmins think if there is injustice to other sect or other sect
> brahmin ,it is good let it happen...this type of jealous will die ...if
> there is single dharma among brahmins
>
​
These are not philosophical issues.
​


>
> You have asked by killing dvaita and vishistadvaita weather we are not
> killing creativity of hindu religion...for that my answer is..this newly
> formed religions are not there in shankaracharya's time,,these are the
> product of the new acharya's thinking way and these religion looks so
> childish....
>

​You are talking childish.
These religions(I don't know how they turned to religion from
philosophies), look childish to you!!?? Go read even a single treatise of
their great AchArya-s and learn to appreciate their thinking capability.
I don't think that people like you can even think about objections which
they imagined and refuted.
These childish talks can come from only that person who, due to lack of
study and ability of critical analysis, clings to the first thing which
comes in his hand. This is the case of most neo-vedAntin-s.
​


>
> This athma's concept is not up to some one's thinking capacity that is why
> vedas are considered as apourusheya...
>

​Just talk more and reveal how ignorant are you of shAstra-s and sankR^ita
technical terms!!
​


> that is why vedas and its hidden meanings has to be learnt from good
> lineage of guru paramapara.....
>

​As if rAmAnuja-s, madhva-s were without any lineage.
What about sha~Nkara in similar view.
​


>
> This athman's concept is beyond this bhudhi as said by upanishads only
>

​So, even your advaita, which is just play of buddhi, can't grasp AtmA,
isn't it?
​


> ...so ,we have to learn it from a proper guruparampara only not from some
> intellectual brilliant...
>

​Now, it is revealing that you and likes hate intellect and hence
philosophical arguments and any logic!!
​


> which will be mostly wrong..as we can easily see in dvaita and
> vishistadvaita
>
> Shakara's advaita has a lineage from goudapadacharya who was a advaithi,
>

​What before gauDAchArya?
​


> but dvaita was not there before madhva,his teacher achutha preksha was
> aadvaithi...similarly ramauja's guru was aadvaithi......
>

​His teacher may be advaitI, but they were intellectuals and hence they
came up with new logic. What's problem in it? Why should their be any
paramparA of logic? Why shouldn't new and right thing be accepted ?
Don't think like Islamist.
​


>
> Always old is gold.....
>

​Yes, even if old is rotten!!?? Why not?

​


>
>
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 11:47 AM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 11:44 PM, Santosh Rao via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>
>> > NamaskR,
>> >
>> > What were these 72 sects? it is my understanding that sankaracharyas
>> > philosophical opponents were mainly buddhists, jains, and mimamsikas not
>> > muslims. Is this incorrect?
>> >
>>
>> In this URL containing the Anandagiriya Shankara vijaya, on pdf p.12
>> onwards you can see a list of schools that are refuted. One can count at
>> the most 50 there.
>>
>> >
>> > What is the answer to the assertion that advaita vedanta is a
>> philosophical
>> > "compromise" with buddhism? Does this claim hold water?
>> >
>>
>> You can read a six-part series of articles on the topic: Buddhism, Advaita
>> and Dvaita published in this forum.  For the first part here is the URL:
>>
>> http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2011-May/027302.html
>>
>> You can locate the other parts too by suitably searching.
>>
>> regards
>> subrahmanian.v
>>
>>
>> > This is just myth.
>> > 'Removed 72 sects'?? From where??
>> > All minds?? Even most loyal of those sects?? Even from future minds??
>> >
>> > I don't think that just because there is a philosophy known as Vedanta,
>> > people will not convert. If it were true no one would have converted at
>> any
>> > time.
>> >
>> > It's man who decides what he wants to follow, right or wrong. Who gives
>> > even a single thought to validity of philosophy and arguments? Only a
>> few.
>> > So, only they don't convert because there is a philosophy and they can
>> > understand that. It's not applicable to masses.
>> >
>> > Debates are always going on among sects mentioned by you. But, it is
>> not to
>> > convert essentially.
>> > The argument which you think correct is flawed in other's view. So, it
>> > didn't prove your philosophy correct to him. So, he doesn't leave his
>> sect.
>> > Another thing, most debates are to show that they have studied their
>> > respective works and retain that. Some debates are to win prizes. So,
>> the
>> > result you are expecting can't come from those debates.
>> >
>> > Do you think that mAdhva-s and shrI-vaiShNava-s are avaidika in every
>> > sense?
>> > No, it is not like that. They follow veda-s. They are already in home.
>> And,
>> > what veda-s want to say is debatable.
>> > So, stop being biased and forcing your thoughts on others.
>> > On Mar 29, 2015 7:03 PM, "Srivathsa Rao via Advaita-l" <
>> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Before 1200 years there came shankaracharya  who removed 72 sects in
>> > > ancient sathana dharma and brought them under a single platform of
>> > advaita
>> > > vedanta,that is why ancient sanathana dharma is still present in india
>> > > otherwise we would have been muslim by now.
>> > >
>> > > The present day science even support advaita vedanta.Now my point is
>> why
>> > > can't some learned scholars can bring back madhvas and srivishnavas
>> and
>> > > newly formed mathas under advaita vedanta by proper debate under
>> > upanishad.
>> > >
>> > > This will even support Rss 's Ghar Vapsi Right?
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> > > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>> > >
>> > > To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> > > http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>> > >
>> > > For assistance, contact:
>> > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>> > >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>> >
>> > To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> > http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>> >
>> > For assistance, contact:
>> > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>> >
>> > To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> > http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>> >
>> > For assistance, contact:
>> > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>>
>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>
>> For assistance, contact:
>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>
>
>