Re: ISKCON vs. Visistadvaita: souls bondage issue
From the Bhakti List Archives
• November 4, 1999
> other Gaudiyas. Their philosophy is very different on many basic points > from Madhva's and it seems just to be a matter of show that they ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ list their > guruparampara as coming from Madhva. If you see Prameya Ratnavali you will > see that Baladeva is convinced by a Puranic quote that there are only four > bonafide sampradayas. Therefore it is not surprising that he ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ traces his ^^^^^^^^^ > lineage to one of them (Madhva's) to gain authenticity. More ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The idea that Baladeva Vidyabhushana and his descendants incorrectly claimed disciplic descent from Madhva simply as a matter of show and/or to "gain authenticty" is not consistent with the actual facts. Unfortunately, such ideas are currently en vogue among scholars and critics of Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Without getting into an in-depth rebuttal here, I would like to ask that some sort of decision be made as to the appropriateness of these kinds of sectarian remarks to this list. If it is going to be acceptable to post these kinds of unflattering remarks about another sampradaya and its acharyas, then it seems only logical to allow for a response. It does not seem particularly fair to allow these kinds of sectarian remarks on the list while discouraging any responses to them as off topic. Note that I am not questioning the fall/no-fall thread itself, since I think that is appropriate, even though it happens to involve the views of another tradition and some of its devotees. I am only questioning the appropriateness of the implicit claim that a well-respected Gaudiya Vaishnava acharya has falsified the details of his parampara for the sake of spiritual acceptance. Aside from being just plain impolite, this has nothing to do with the thread as entitled above. information on > this can be found in BNK Sharma's History of Dvaita Vedanta and it's > Literature Actually, BNK Sharma gives several arguments as to how the Madhva-Gaudiya connection can be accepted. regards, HKS
- Next message: Sudarsan.Parthasarathy_at_infineon.com: "CONTRIBUTE GENEROUSLY TO THE MILLENIUM PARTY ON 04.03.2000(Maasi Avittam)"
- Previous message: Mani Varadarajan: "Hare Krishna Parampara"
- In reply to: Greg Jay: "Re: ISKCON vs. Visistadvaita: souls bondage issue"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]