Re: challenge
From the Bhakti List Archives
• September 4, 1997
Dear Bhagavatas, I shall try, in the limited means available to me, to answer Sri Keshava Prasad's query. Needless to mention, it is my own opinion which might well be wrong! (a) Dear Sri Keshava Prasad, one thing i noticed is that some people with a scientific outlook assume that a non-religious outlook is somehow more logical. That is the strangest part! They don't recognize that there is nothing within the collected corpus of human scientific knowledge to allow us to form an opinion of the transcendental. Why not bring it to their notice that if science doesn't predict atma nor converesly can it exclude it. An absence of evidence shd not be miscontrued as an evidence of absence. It is in keeping with spirit of science to explore (as one can) the Vedic experience of the seers before forming an opinion. (b) Except to those who are readily amenable to traditional doctrines, we must stress only those parts of SriVaishnavism that might be expected to find a psychological appeal. For ex. one cd stress the value of meditation to soothe the mind. We must not stress on ritualisms, rebirths, etc which it may be difficult to justify within the framework of that person's (limited) perception, and even less stress purely social issues which might appear quite anachronous these days! We cd stress the fact that by nature spiritual exprience is subjective, with our own mind being our secret laboratory. One can no more represent this verbally to everyone's satisfaction than one can explain the experience of (say) sleep to a sleepless alien!!! Hari Om, srikanth
- Next message: R. Skrintha: "Re: Intercaste marriage, A Query"
- Previous message: R. Skrintha: "Re: sarvadharmAn- vs. karmaNyeva-"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]