POLL - To Make HinduDIR BLUE

[Shântoham]

Unfortunately, some Hindu-s (like shAnto'ham) seem to view kevalAdvaita, as taught by sha~Nkara, as the only form of vedAnta.

I don’t. But then again, how would you know – we never spoke to each others.

 

[Shântoham]

Namaste Recent Posters,

Can I kindly interest you to perhaps transfer these recent conversations onto another thread if all of you (Makaranda, Shantoham, and JS) may be kindly willing? I do not mean to intrude; sorry. However, if you would like to talk about the OP, you are all more than welcomed - by all means. Thank you for your consideration and kind regards.

You are right. My apologies.

 

[Makaranda]

Shântoham,

It was just a honest exchange of opinions. You spoke your mind and I did speak mine.

That is enough for me.

I am only here to properly present the Advaita Vedānta Siddhānta

The assumption implicit here is that you have a monopoly on the 'proper' understanding of Advaita (Vedanta), and others don't. That is your opinion. As this forum is anonymous and a melting pot of different viewpoints, it seems to me futile to argue or present anything as the correct or proper understanding, but rather instead it becomes a source of consternation and ill will between posters. IOW, I don't think this is the right place to try to teach anybody anything.

But if I rubbed you the wrong way, I sincerely apologize

You really didn't, my posts are calm, I just wanted to make myself thoroughly clear. Though thank you for the condescension.

Now no more off-topic from me in here.

 

[Jaskaran Singh]

I don’t. But then again, how would you know – we never spoke to each others.

You stated that makaranda made "perplexing statements regarding the very nature of Brahman and enlightenment." I assumed that was in regards to his claim that "there is no other (conscious) entity but Brahman" which you viewed as an oxymoron. Many forms of vedAnta, including madhva's dvaita and rAmAnuja's vishiShTAdvaita view chetanam as a visheSha or lakShaNa of brahma; the only major ones which I know of which view brahma as literally "consciousness" are advaita and shuddhAdvaita. Therefore, it's not perplexing for vedAntI-s in general, it's mainly perplexing only for followers of advaitavedAnta. I personally do not view chetanam as a lakShaNa of brahma because lakShaNAni are meant to distinguish between two separate things. For example, if I were to say rAmachandra of the raghuvaMsha born in ayodhya, those characteristics distinguish him from say, balarAma or parashurAma, yet how can you distinguish something from bhagavAn if he is the Ashraya for all beings? Rather, I believe that chetanam is a shakti of bhagavAn, hence the term chitshakti for jIvAtmA-s. Even from this perspective though, it still wouldn't be an oxymoron to say that brahma is conscious.

 

[Quagmire]

***Mod Post***

OK. It looks like, short of handing out infractions, the only way to get you folks to stop debating in this thread is to close it.

People can still vote in the poll, which is what this thread was intended for.​