Re: Confusion Once more !!!
From the Bhakti List Archives
• April 23, 2000
Namo Naaraayana, Several of the mails I sent on this subject did not go through. Here is a 2nd try at this one. I feel like there is too much tension being generated on the recently discussed subjects. It is turning into a discussion of the honor of one sampradaaya versus another. In my opinion, discussions are best had by making reference to scriptural evidence and avoiding accusations regarding sentimentality and the like. It has to be frankly admitted that this is a Sri Vaishnava forum, and those of us who are not Sri Vaishnavas should think of ourselves as guests. We should either discuss criticisms in a gentle manner or leave for elsewhere. Taking an aggressive or hostile stance does no justice to any argument, or for the tradition one claims to represent. I have some frank doubts about some interpretations given by Sri Vaishnavas in regards to key Bhaagavatam verses. These are doubts I felt at liberty to discuss given the fact that an attempt was made to refute what I had previously taken to be a very straighforward understanding of those verses. True, my understanding is consistent with Gaudiiya Vaishnava doctrine, but I have attempted to avoid quoting Gaudiiya Vaishnava translations in pursuing my arguments. In fact, all of the translations I provided are third-party translations. There was a reason I did this. I feel that, above and beyond what other sampradaayas have to say about the meaning of a given scripture, there should be room for discussing doubts in friendly spirit. After all, how can one truly have conviction in something if he hasn't considered all the alternative viewpoints? I actually was enjoying this discussion until the tensions started building up over the past few days. I am learning a lot, and hopefully maybe others are as well. I have many other points to add to the "kR^iShNastu bhagavaan svayam" argument, including evidence from shruti and other mainstreatm scriptures. But I am hesitant to continue if others are going to turn this into a matter of sectarian pride. The friendships I have made on this list are far more meaningful to me than winning an argument. Hence, I beseech those who do not have something constructive to add to the discussion to stay on the sidelines. The rest of us can argue our respective viewpoints on the basis of shaastric evidence, and let others have the chance to review both sides of the argument. Only if things calm down, I will continue with my case. I want to learn how others would try to refute my position on the basis of scriptural evidence. In particular, I am eagerly awaiting two things: 1) pramaanas proving that the Lord is different from His form, 2) pramaanas proving that Krishna is avataara of Vishnu. yours, Krishna Susarla p.s. I recently met Sri Vijayaraghavan Srinivasan here in Cleveland, and it occurs to me that there may be other Sri Vaishnavas visiting here from out of town for the Thyagaraja Aradhana. If so, by all means please send me an email - my wife and I will be happy to meet you or even feed you if given the opportunity. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Good friends, school spirit, hair-dos you'd like to forget. Classmates.com has them all. And with 4.4 million alumni already registered, there's a good chance you'll find your friends here: http://click.egroups.com/1/2885/2/_/716111/_/956520890/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------------- - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH - To Post a message, send it to: bhakti-list@eGroups.com Visit http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/ for more information
- Next message: Jayanthi Raghavan: "Anand's efforts"
- Previous message: Jai Simman s/o R. Rangasamy: "Confusion Once more !!!"
- In reply to: Jai Simman s/o R. Rangasamy: "Confusion Once more !!!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]