[Advaita-l] Chanting Gayatri overseas

[V Subrahmanian]

On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Kalyan <kalyan_kg at yahoo.com> wrote:

> //Also is important to keep in mind what Shankara has said in the BGB:
> even if one is proficient in all shāstra-s, if he has not acquired
> knowledge according to the sampradāya, his views are to be rejected as
> those of a fool.//
>
>
> Subbuji, I think you have a very unhealthy tendency to label everyone as
> an asAmpradAyavit or a fool very easily. I think you should curb this
> tendency. You very easily behave as if you are the only gatekeeper of
> sAmpradAya.
>

Kalyan ji,

I can understand your predicament and why you are piques by this.

And stop selectively quoting Shankara bhAshyas. Sistachara does not replace
> Shruti.


It is not replacement of shruti but the method of application of shruti.


> The bhAshya on Br. Up. 1.3.10 is quite emphatic that one must not travel
> to foreign lands. Similar views are found in other dharmashastras quoted by
> others here. It is these, that the Sringeri Acharya has violated.
>

Yukti is important in understanding and application of such statements.
Supposing a group of ten or twenty families of vedic knowledge settle down
in a 'new' place, how is it going to affect the spirit of the shruti or
dharma shastra statements? It is the spirit of those pronouncements that
has to be kept in mind: what effect will the 'alien' environment have on
the dharm. If this is adequately taken care of, where is the problem? All
the dangers of the alien environment adversely affecting the dharmi are
happily available in this land also. A son or a daughter of a parama
vaidika going astray is not uncommon in our own society, family, etc. It is
this spirit that has to be understood from the shruti and dharma shastra.
We have a verse: Ishwara recognizes the intent, the heart, of the
bhakta/aspirant, and not the outward accessories. Thus, there is absolutely
no violation that you think of by the Sringeri Acharya. When he blessed the
event in the US, there is already a vibrant establishment, a huge
settlement of people versed in the Vedas. There are already temples in the
US for the last several decades, veda teaching going on, vaidika karma-s
happening. Those adhering to that are all not asura-s, a great number of
saattvika-s are also there. Just as everyone in this land is not a
sattvika. It is this spirit that is recognized by the Acharya when he
blessed the event and supports the establishment.

All this exactly happens when southerners go and settle in the northern
part of India. There are many glaring conflicts in the conduct, achara of
the two groups. Yet southerners have built up a community of their own
there over time and happily adhere to their own, native, achara-s. Thus a
foreign land can be there even within this country and all depends on how
one tactfully applies the  shruti/dharma shastra.
regards
subbu


>
> Regards
> Kalyan
>
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Sun, 10/8/17, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Chanting Gayatri overseas
>  To: "कुवँर बिपिन चौहान" <bipinchauhan7 at gmail.com>
>  Cc: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-
> vedanta.org>, "Raghav Kumar Dwivedula" <raghavkumar00 at gmail.com>,
> "Kalyan" <kalyan_kg at yahoo.com>, "Vēdānta Study Group" <
> vedant.study at gmail.com>
>  Date: Sunday, October 8, 2017, 2:36 AM
>
>
>
>  On Sat,
>  Oct 7, 2017 at 8:05 PM, कुवँर बिपिन
>  चौहान <bipinchauhan7 at gmail.com>
>  wrote:
>  Namaste
>  !
>
>  Please desh, kaal, stithi
>  ke pare hai paralukik yeh purntah galat hai ki gayatri
>  jambudwip se bahar uccahran kari jaye.
>
>  Tark sansarik mat hai anytha sab neti neti
>  hai.
>
>  Yeh spasht hai ki
>  gayatri ji gupt hain
>
>  https://www.facebook.com/shrim
>  ahakaleshwar/posts/84314980578 5998
>
>  My guru batuk shastri (Brahmnal, Varanasi)
>  always says it's next to impossible we go against shastr
>  on anyway.
>
>  Simple question: Is the
>  Jagadguru of Sringeri wrong in blessing the SVBF initiative
>  in Pennsylvania?
>
>  Answer: I
>  bipin chauhan on behalf of Eternal Law declared it totally
>  wrong.
>
>
>
>  Which text are you referring to by
>  the above name?
>
>
>  For this
>  my Guru ke Guru Swami Karpatri fight/ shastrath with madan
>  mohan malviya that Widow marriage is not possible the fool
>  vaishya kul empire goenka say as per shastr Swami Karpatri
>  ji right but malviya is also not wrong due to desh kal
>  stithi shloka of gita ji.
>
>  I
>  know Jagadguru Sri Bharati Tirtha Mahaswamiji but ignorance
>  or will of Brahman all this happen because Bharat unable to
>  follow
>
>  https://hi.wikipedia.org/wiki/
>  %E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%B9%E0%A4%BE%E0
>  %A4%A8%E0%A5%81%E0%A4%B6%E0%A4
>  %BE%E0%A4%B8%E0%A4%A8 from long ago.
>
>  In the Taittiriyopaniṣat 1.11.3 we
>  have:
>
>  अथ
>  यदि ते कर्मविचिकित्सा
>  वा वृत्तविचिकित्सा वा
>  स्यात् ॥ ३ ॥ ये तत्र
>  ब्राह्मणाः
>  संमर्शिनः । युक्ता
>  आयुक्ताः । अलूक्षा
>  धर्मकामाः स्युः । यथा
>  ते तत्र वर्तेरन् । तथा
>  तत्र
>  वर्तेथाः । Shankara
>  says:  अथ
>  एवं वर्तमानस्य यदि
>  कदाचित् ते तव श्रौते
>  स्मार्ते वा कर्मणि
>  वृत्ते वा आचारलक्षणे विचिकित्सा
>  संशयः स्यात् भवेत् , ये
>  तत्र तस्मिन्देशे काले
>  वा ब्राह्मणाः तत्र
>  कर्मादौ युक्ता इति
>  व्यवहितेन सम्बन्धः
>  कर्तव्यः ; संमर्शिनः
>  विचारक्षमाः, युक्ताः
>  अभियुक्ताः, कर्मणि
>  वृत्ते वा आयुक्ताः
>  अपरप्रयुक्ताः,
>  अलूक्षाः अरूक्षाः
>  अक्रूरमतयः, धर्मकामाः
>  अदृष्टार्थिनः
>  अकामहता इत्येतत् ;
>  स्युः भवेयुः, ते
>  ब्राह्मणाः यथा येन
>  प्रकारेण तत्र
>  तस्मिन्कर्मणि वृत्ते
>  वा वर्तेरन् , तथा
>  त्वमपि वर्तेथाः ।
>
>  If one
>  gets a doubt as to how to conduct oneself on a particular
>  issue, he must do as those brāhmaṇa-s who live in that
>  place or time who practice dharma and are intent on
>  adṛṣṭa, not given to desire, who are not given to
>  anger....do.
>  Sureshwaracharya too does not say
>  anything different in the Taittiriya Bhāṣya Vārtika for
>  this.
>
>  Sāyaṇāchārya for this mantra
>  says:  vṛtta, conduct, means 'kula-paramparāgataḥ
>  laukikaḥ ācāraḥ. ' That pertaining to his own
>  family, lineage, etc. worldly conduct. There can be doubt as
>  to this too, for one sees conduct like 'marrying
>  one's maternal daughter, eating meat, etc. A person
>  might get a doubt as to these issues too. In that case, he
>  has to be guided by the practices of noble persons who live
>  in that place, at that time, where this person
>  lives.
>  So it is very
>  clear that in the matter of conduct, dharma, there can't
>  be any 'eternal' law; it is essentially decided by
>  desha and kāla.  That is exactly what Shankara has said in
>  the Brahma sutra bhashya. All that the Veda or he himself
>  has said elsewhere has to be understood in the light of this
>  statement of Shankara and the Taittiriyopanishat. Also, one
>  can see the other element that I had highlighted: it is the
>  adherence to yama (akrodha, etc.) that gains supremacy over
>  niyama. The Taittiriya says: those brahmanas who are not
>  given to krodha, kāma, etc. as Shankara has highlighted.
>  Dharma differs from place to place, time to time.
>
>  The
>  maṭhāmānya that you seem to refer to does not say
>  anything about the topic.  So, your own ignorance or
>  whatever, you are trying to superimpose on the Jagadguru.
>  Also is important to keep in mind what Shankara has said in
>  the BGB: even if one is proficient in all shāstra-s, if he
>  has not acquired knowledge according to the sampradāya, his
>  views are to be rejected as those of a fool. The view you
>  have expressed does not bear the kind of sampradāya that
>  Shankara has adhered to as is evident in his
>  bhāṣya.
>
>  regardssubrahmanian.v
>
>  Anyway
>  Ram
>
>
>  On 7
>  October 2017 at 10:23, Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l
>  <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedan
>  ta.org> wrote:
>  That's
>  an excellent bhAShya reference, Subbu ji,  on how dharma
>  can
>
>  definitely be reinterpreted by shiShTa-s in keeping with the
>  present desha
>
>  and kAla. No doubt it's not a licence to say, anything
>  goes. We have to
>
>  cautiously move on.
>
>
>
>  But to say that all NRI brahmins are patita-s as long as
>  they are based
>
>  abroad seems untenable.
>
>
>
>  Om
>
>  Raghav
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>