what is hinduisms highest priority

[Devotee]

I'm kinda an advaitic eclectic. ^_^ I don't really belong to any particular sect; one hour I'm Shaivite, chanting Om Namah Shivaya, the next I'm Vaishnavite, chanting the name of Rama. I pray at a Shiva temple, but I'm currently reading Srimad Bhagavatam and Adhyatma Ramayana. However, both were translated by Swamis from the Ramakrishna sect (the S. Bhagavatam by Swami Prabhavananda, and A.R. by Swami Tapasyananda.)

Basically, as I said before, I see it like this: Whatever Form the Lord takes, I worship That. As for Brahman, I believe that It is the total aggregate of all existence.

Very interesting!

May I ask where you found your Srimad Bhagavatam? I am looking for one that is without commentary, but I cant seem to find one. Thanks.

 

[Devotee]

The Gaudiya Position is that Shankara was a liar

And you accuse me of lying

 

[Riverwolf]

If some people lose sight of the intent/subject and choose to dwell on my tone, then that is just too bad!

Wouldn't the presentation of a healthy meal go over better if it looked and tasted good, rather than looking like mush and tasting like mud?

 

[Devotee]

If some people lose sight of the intent/subject and choose to dwell on my tone, then that is just too bad!

Also, your tone can express your intent. I must say that based on your posts, neither are good. This means that so far, you are seemingly validating my analysis.

 

[kaisersose]

Wouldn't the presentation of a healthy meal go over better if it looked and tasted good, rather than looking like mush and tasting like mud?

So are you saying, it is OK for Atmaram to call Shankara a liar, so long as he sugarcoats it? Looks like that is what you are saying, though I would be happy to stand corrected.

I did not sugarcoat my words. Their insistence on posting unsubstantiated material on Advaita opens the door for an un-accomodating tone (and rightly so). Trust me, they would have talked the exact same way, if I had started a thread on the puerile nature of Gaudiya Vaishnavism - regardless of how I sugar coated it.

Anyway, I think I have said enough on this.

 

[Devotee]

So are you saying, it is OK for Atmaram to call Shankara a liar, so long as he sugarcoats it?

Show me where Atmarama said Adi Shankara is a liar? Oh, he didnt. This means that its purly a mental concoction, a imposition that you have placed upon His words. Good Job!

 

[Riverwolf]

Very interesting!

May I ask where you found your Srimad Bhagavatam? I am looking for one that is without commentary, but I cant seem to find one. Thanks.

Amazon.com: Srimad Bhagavatam: The Wisdom of God (9788178233154): translated by Swami Prabhavananda: Books: Reviews, Prices & more

It's not a "translation" in the usual sense of the word, but more of a summarization. It's definitely abridged (leaving out the bits that are described as "uninteresting"), but it primarily cuts to the most important parts of the text.

And, while I haven't gotten to that part yet, according to the Preface, the Uddhava Gita is wholly unabridged, translated as literally as possible.

Of course, if you just can't stand abridges, there's these:

Srimad Bhagavata: The Holy Book of God - Volume One (Skandhas I-IV) (Sanskrit Text with English Translation)
(in four volumes, translated by Swami Tapasyananda)

and

Bhagavata Mahapurana (Gita Press edition) at Vedanta Press and Catalog
from Gita-Press.

 

[Riverwolf]

So are you saying, it is OK for Atmaram to call Shankara a liar, so long as he sugarcoats it? Looks like that is what you are saying, though I would be happy to stand corrected.

I'd like to see where I either said or implied that, or, in fact, where Atmarama said that.

 

[kaisersose]

Show me where Atmarama said Adi Shankara is a liar? Oh, he didnt. This means that its purly a mental concoction, a imposition that you have placed upon His words. Good Job!

???

Go back to Atmaram's post.

Sanskrit: Mayavadam asat shastram...
English: Mayavada is a false philosophy. Devi, I teach this false philosophy in Kali-yuga for <reason immaterial>

Nowhere did Shankara in any of his works make such a claim (not even on his death-bed) that he was intentionally handing down a false philosophy (lies in simple terms).

Devotee, please do not tell me you do not get it. It would reflect really bad on you. Btw, you congratulated Atmaram on this post.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Its not the dominant Vedanta doctrine. Only a small percentage of Hindus believe in Advaita. Isn't like 60% of Hindus Vaishnava? Im really asking to, not trying to be smart. I heard that about 10% of Hindus are Advaita Vedantist, please tell me if I am misinformed.

I don't think anybody can tell you exactly what percentage of hindus believe when it comes to this subject.

I have heard many Vaishnava claim that 75% of all Hindu's worship Vishnu. How can they know. Just look at all the villages in India and Nepal are you telling me that people walked from town to town taking polls.

I went to a Vishnu temple in Orissa when I asked them who do they follow Chaintia or Madhava they were insulted and said no Sankara. Also the Vaishnava Pusti Marg sect seems closer to Advaita in many ways they look down on the followers of Chaitanya and won't eat the Prasad from them.

I know a South Indian Family who say they are Vaishnava. Yet when asked in detail about it they say they are Smarta. They call themselves Vaishnava because they worship Vishnu in the Smarta Tradition.

In the Punjab a majority of Hindu's seem to be very influenced by the Sikhs and Arya Samaj. In Bengal Mother worship is very popular, Ramprasad is as well known as the Lord Chaitanya.

I have been to villages that I can't even tell what sect they are. They worship snakes and Trees. One main God in one village is 1/2 Dharma and on the back side of the Image is Yama. How do you define this sect?

An all India poll was taken (apparently only among the middle class and rich who have phones) Asking who was the most Important Hindu religious teacher in modern times. It was Swami Vivekananda that came up on top not a Vaishnava.

I believe that it is impossible to know exactly what the common Hindu believes. Such a study has never been undertaken as far as I know. It is also true that the difference between most sects that worship Mother and Shiva differ very little from Adviata's Monism.

I am willing to say that Vaishnava sects are the most popular in India. It is just that I am not even sure that most Hindu's are even a member of any sect.

 

[kaisersose]

I don't think anybody can tell you exactly what percentage of hindus believe when it comes to this subject.

I agree. It is hard to know unless someone counted.

For example, Karnataka has more Shaivas than anyone else (Veera-Shaivas)and so does Tamilnadu. Maharashtra probably goes the other way (more Vaishnavas), but I do not know. Someone would have to get this information statewise and make a compile.

 

[kaisersose]

I'd like to see where I either said or implied that, or, in fact, where Atmarama said that.

Please check post 169. I clarified for everyone's benefit where/how Shankara is called a liar by Atmaram and was congratulated by Devotee for that post.

I am curious. Now that I pointed it out, what will you do? WIll you prefer to stay quiet or will you challenge him?

 

[Devotee]

WIll you prefer to stay quiet or will you challenge him?

:biglaugh:

Is this what this is to you, a challenge! Its supposed to be a friendly debate, not a challenging contest where we are supposed to sit around and try to prove ourselves right, we are just expressing different beliefs that we have. BUt you have taken this far beyond that. This shows me, not only your tone, but your wrong intention. You really dont know how to conceal yourself do you, you let everyone know your tone (because every little thing affects you) and you are very good at showing off your intentions.

 

[kaisersose]

Is this what this is to you, a challenge! Its supposed to be a friendly debate, not a challenging contest where we are supposed to sit around and try to prove ourselves right, we are just expressing different beliefs that we have. BUt you have taken this far beyond that. This shows me, not only your tone, but your wrong intention. You really dont know how to conceal yourself do you, you let everyone know your tone (because every little thing affects you) and you are very good at showing off your intentions.

Dude,

You yourself declared this a debate. And yet you do not want to be challenged? Please be consistent.

Challenging is not a bad thing. It is simply disagreeing or questioning. But you already know this and yet....

 

[Riverwolf]

Please check post 169. I clarified for everyone's benefit where/how Shankara is called a liar by Atmaram and was congratulated by Devotee for that post.

Tell me this: if Atmarama was calling Shankara a liar, then why does he say that Gaudiya Vaishnavas love him? Why love a liar?

Are you sure it's not just a simple misunderstanding (possibly from a misleading translation)? That's certainly not worthy of the harsh words you've used. After all, it's quite clear that you're more well-studied.

Therefore, I shall use different standards for the two of you.

I am curious. Now that I pointed it out, what will you do? WIll you prefer to stay quiet or will you challenge him?

You pointed out the second half of my question. Now address the first. I've already backed up several of your other arguments.

 

[Devotee]

Dude,

You yourself declared this a debate. And yet you do not want to be challenged? Please be consistent.

Challenging is not a bad thing. It is simply disagreeing or questioning. But you already know this and yet....

Your right, I did say that this was a debate. But you really need to fix on how you word things, your tone always comes out as malicious. You say just read what you type, but no matter what you want, your tone shines threw.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

That is the difference. The Gaudiya Position is that Shankara was a liar

I have also at times heard Sankara at times sound like a devil from the mouths of a few Americans who follow the Gaudiya point of view.

I believe it as a very unhealthy way at looking at the world. Not the philosophy part but the prejudice part. I see it bringing Hinduism 10 steps backwards. I also believe the reason this view is so common is because it is being taught in some Iskon temples in the West. A fish rots from the head down. So on this one I am in agreement with you. It makes me sad due to the fact that I have such great love for the Lord Chaitanya.

With that being said I think Devotee and Atmarama must be accepted at their word. If they say they respect Sankara so be it. They seem like they have a good heart.

 

[kaisersose]

Your right, I did say that this was a debate. But you really need to fix on how you word things, your tone always comes out as malicious. You say just read what you type, but no matter what you want, your tone shines threw.

This may be one of perception. You are conditioned to seeing me as the bad guy, so the slightest change in my tone will appear as an affront.

Just for the record, I do not believe GV is any lower or higher than advaita. I have some credibility issues with BVT, but you never heard me complain about him, did you?

 

[Devotee]

I have also at times heard Sankara at times sound like a devil from the mouths of Americans who follow the Gaudiya point of view.

I believe it as a very unhealthy way at looking at the world. Not the philosophy part but the prejudice part. I see it bringing Hinduism 10 steps backwards. I also believe the reason this view is so common is because it is being taught in some Iskon temples in the West. A fish rots from the head down. So on this one I am in agreement with you. It makes me sad due to the fact that I have such great love for the Lord Chaitanya.

With that being said I think Devotee and Atmarama must be accepted at their word. If they say they respect Sankara so be it. They seem like they have a good heart.

I am not apart of ISKCON, mostly because of the contraversy and things like you have mentioned above. Srila Prabhupada himself respected Shiva and Adi Shankara, he just didnt accept his philosophy. Now many ISKCON members have taken it way out of context, but not all have. I know there are some good ISKCON members out there!

 

[Riverwolf]

This may be one of perception. You are conditioned to seeing me as the bad guy, so the slightest change in my tone will appear as an affront.

Not necessarily the reason for the accusations of hostility.

Remember that I'm in agreement with many of your actual arguments and points; yet when it comes to your choice of words, I'm on their side.

Besides, you don't even need to worry about sugarcoating, as you can just leave any sort of taste-enhancing stuff out, and just keep the cereal bland.