[Advaita-l] Chanting Gayatri overseas

[Kalyan]

Subbuji,

I appreciate your liberal and practical outlook.

But as far as crossing the ocean is concerned, what applies to any brAhmaNa also applies to the Sringeri Acharya. So if there are "vibrant Hindu communities with Vedic knowledge" in distant lands, what prevents the AchArya from going there physically? Perhaps because he knows that it is prohibited. If it is prohibited for him, same for others.

So, your arguments don't really sound convincing. 

Regards
Kalyan

--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 10/8/17, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Chanting Gayatri overseas
 To: "Kalyan" <kalyan_kg at yahoo.com>
 Cc: "कुवँर बिपिन चौहान" <bipinchauhan7 at gmail.com>, "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>, "Raghav Kumar Dwivedula" <raghavkumar00 at gmail.com>, "Vēdānta Study Group" <vedant.study at gmail.com>
 Date: Sunday, October 8, 2017, 3:25 AM
 
 
 
 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. regardssubbu     
   
 
 
 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