Sri.Mani's non-sequitor
From the Bhakti List Archives
sudarshan madabushi • Fri Jul 02 1999 - 13:42:40 PDT
Dear Mani,
Aristotle, the philosopher, was a bit of an astronomer and mathematician
too. His view of the universe was uncompromisingly geo-centric. To the
Christian church the geo-centric view of the universe was holy cow and the
suggestion of helio-centric theories was sacrilege right until the time of
Copernicus and Galileo. Galileo's theories of physics and astronomy too were
not perfect although by his time the helio-centric vision of the solar
galaxy was settled scientific fact. Not until the time of Newton were some
of the unsolved questions of astronomy and physics of Galileo's times put to
rest. Newtonian physics had its own limitations until Einstein's General
Theory of Relativity overcame them.
In the history of the evolution of ideas Aristotle does not stand condemned
because he had views utterly opposed to Copernicus.
When we praise Galileo it does not mean that we mean any disrespect to
Einstein.
If the students of Einstein had raised a hue and cry everytime the name of
Newton was uttered in their presence, it is doubtful if E=mc2 would ever
have been formulated.
Newton himself once said that if he saw more truth in the universe than any
other astronomer or physicist before him it was only because he was taller
than they and that was because "he stood on the shoulders of Aristotle,
Kepler,Copernicus and Galileo". Newton was humble enough to acknowledge how
much he owed to his precursors although in many respects Newtonian truth
owed nothing of its validity to their own work.
In much the same way, I believe, in the history of the Vedic times of India
there were many great souls like Sankara and others who fought to establish
the primacy of the Vedic system of thought over alien anti-Vedic ideology.
You may not agree with their thesis. Subsequent refinements to Vedic faith
and Vedantic thought ... like those made by Sri.Ramanuja and the "bhakti"
traditionalists may be arguably superior or more "true" or "more faithful to
the Vedic ideal".That's a different matter altogether. But you simply cannot
doubt or belittle the historical contribution of Sankara and his
contemporaries to the restoration of Vedic idealism and ethos in India.
I am a SriVaishnava both by birth and conviction. I admire the philosophy of
Sri.Ramanuja and the poetry of the Alwars and Swami Desikan. My esteem for
them has never diminished on account of the admiration that I have also felt
for the great "AchAryA-s" of other "sampradAyA-s" like Advaita or Dvaita.
It has always therefore been a wonder of wonders for me to see why otherwise
extremely intelligent SriVaishnavas like Sri.Mani Varadarajan always have
this strange psychology of "us Vs them" and simply cannot tolerate something
even blandly positive being said about Sankara. It is almost like some
student of Einstein getting extremely indignant at the very mention of the
name of Aristotle or Newton!
I have heard of the SriVaishnava ideal of "guru-bhakti" and
"guru-vishvAsam". It is very laudatory indeed. But, tell me, does the ideal
enjoin us all to hold the "AchAryA-s" of other Vedantic persuasions in such
utter contempt that we must hold up our noses when their very names are
mentioned ... as though the very air around us is fouled as a result? What
kind of "guru-bhakti" is this?
Sri.Mani, in my series on the LNKS (if you have noticed!) I have not tried
to discuss so much the philosophy as the poetry of Sankara. I have tried my
very best to strike a non-sectarian and non-denominational approach. If I
have words of praise for Sankara it is for his poetry.
But from your comments I gather I have crossed the boundary and committed
the unspeakable sin of praising Sankara personally. But what I think is that
a harmless remark about an objective fact of history that I made about
Sankara bhagavathpAdA in my last post has sparked you into starting what I
think will now be another round of "SriVaishnava-Advaitin" polemics on the
"list" following yours. We will now hear perhaps more great fulminations on
how true SriVaishnavas will never praise Sankara (or "his grandpa", as
somebody else once said) and those who do so commit grave "apachAram" and
"AchArya-drOham"!
If I hear you right, Sri.Mani, I hear you now laying down a cardinal rule
for all of us members: "Hear ye all ! Praise to Sankara is the taboo of all
taboos on the "bhakti-list"!
And if you were running a similar list for discussing Newtonian physics,
Sri.Mani, I suppose you would say none should utter a single nice word for
Aristotle! Do I understand you right, Sri.Mani?
My posts on the LNKS seem to have irked the sensibilities of revered
SriVaishnavas on the list on more than one occasion now!
I think it is time to call it all off. I had no idea that my random
reflections could arouse so much religious partisan-ism on the list. Well,
you live and learn every day, I guess!
To my other friends on the list who were following my posts these many days,
I am sorry to say this to you, but we must leave it here.
If you remember, we quoted a lot of poetry, both Sanskrit and English,
during the course of my LNKS posts. It was good fun too, isn't it? Here is
one more now to end (or abort!) it all and which you may all like to ponder
in a sober moment some evening:
"Why, all the saints and sages who discuss'd
Of the Two Worlds so learnedly are thrust
Like foolish prophets forth: their Words to scorn
Are scatter'd, and their mouths are stopt with Dust."
(Edward
Fitzerald)
adiyEn dAsAnu-dAsan,
Sudarshan
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
- Next message: Ramanbil_at_aol.com: "Pursuit of wealth"
- Previous message: Ranganathan, Sriram: "RE: Pursuit of wealth"
- Next in thread: Mani Varadarajan: "Re: Sri.Mani's non-sequitor"
- Maybe reply: Mani Varadarajan: "Re: Sri.Mani's non-sequitor"
- Maybe reply: Madhavakkannan, Vasudevan: "RE: Sri.Mani's non-sequitor"
- Maybe reply: A. Bharat: "Re: Sri.Mani's non-sequitor"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
