« first day (140 days earlier)      last day (2424 days later) » 

3:49 AM
@KeshavSrinivasan ok;
@KeshavSrinivasan Yes I see...
 
 
1 hour later…
4:52 AM
@Pandya By the way, I find that often the best way to learn about a sect of Hinduism that I'm not familiar with is to read their commentary on the Brahma Sutras. That's one of the reasons why I post so many questions asking for commentaries on the Brahma Sutras.
@Pandya Here are some of the commentaries I'd like to find in English: Bhaskara's commentary advocating Aupadhika Bhedabheda; the Shrikara Bhashya, which is the Lingayat commentary advocating Shakti Visistadvaita; Srinivasa Dikshitar's Vaikhanasa commentary advocating Lakshmi Visistadvaita; Vallabhacharya's Anubhashya advocating Shuddhadvaita; any Swaminarayan sect commentary; and any Ramanandi commentary.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Yes, we discussed earlier about Anubhashya (Suddhadvaita) I think...
@KeshavSrinivasan I've just see your comments. I've edited to expounder/founder; how about it?
And By the way should I include the difference between schools (in that answer) or it is not needed as I've mentioned about it in asnwer:
1
A: Dvaitas vs Advaitas vs Vishist Dvaitas vs Shuddhadvaitas vs any other

Pandya Q.I hear these terms Dvaitas, Advaitas, Vishistdvaitas, Shuddhadvaitas, and may be any other XYZdvaitas, etc in most of the questions but I am not very sure what do they refer to. There are six Darshan (षडदर्शन) i.e philosophy in Hinduism which are Samkhya, Yoga, Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Mimamsa ...

@KeshavSrinivasan I'm looking for better and suitable English word for that like main proponent etc...
 
5:16 AM
@Pandya "Chief exponent" would be a good way to phrase it.
@Pandya In any case yes, you should explain the differences between these philosophies, since that's part of what the OP asked in the question.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan ok; I've used founder or chief exponent that may be better ;Thanks for pointing out.
 
@Pandya OK, that's good.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Hmm.. So, It takes me some time to write difference.
@KeshavSrinivasan I think I can write difference in short or should I do into deep?
 
@Pandya Well, one way to do it would be to make a table where you compare the positions of each philosophy on different issues. Like one column could be "Is the world real or illusory", and then you could put yes or no for each philosophy.
@Pandya But yeah, that could end up being a lot of work. I suppose you could just give a one or two sentence summary of each philosophy.
@Pandya By the way, if you ever need to quickly compare how different commentaries interpret a given Sutra in the Brahma Sutras, there's a really helpful book that can help you. See here:
in Discussion between Keshav Srinivasan and brahma jijnasa, Apr 27 at 15:23, by Keshav Srinivasan
@brahmajijnasa By the way, if like me you ever want to compare what a bunch of different commentaries on the Brahma Sutras say on some topic (which admittedly is a pretty nerdy thing to do), you can use Roma Bose's translation of Nimbarka's Vedanta Parijata Saurabha.
in Discussion between Keshav Srinivasan and brahma jijnasa, Apr 27 at 15:25, by Keshav Srinivasan
@brahmajijnasa It's a translation of Nimbarka's commentary on the Brahma Sutras, but it's more than that; for each Sutra, it describes how Nimbarka's interpretation of the Sutra compares with the interpretations of Adi Shankaracharya, Bhaskara, Ramanujacharya, Srikantha Shivacharya, and Baladeva Vidyabhushana. Here's volume 1: http://gdurl.com/dOYx/download Here's volume 2: http://gdurl.com/o8IR And here's volume 3: http://gdurl.com/ibWG/download
in Discussion between Keshav Srinivasan and brahma jijnasa, Apr 27 at 15:30, by Keshav Srinivasan
@brahmajijnasa The only major commentaries that aren't covered are Madhvacharya's Brahma Sutra Bhashya and Vallabhacharya's Anubhashya.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan I know about Advaita and Vishishtadvaita enough (I think). also know about Suddhadvaita. But bit about Dvaita. (Achintya Bhedabheda and Dvaitadvaita looks me similar!)
@KeshavSrinivasan Finally I've decided to post 3-4 sentence about it in my answer. I'll inform you when I complete.
 
5:34 AM
@Pandya Well, both of them are part of a broad category of philosophies called Bhedabheda. There is Bhaskara's philosophy of Aupadhika Bhedabheda, Yadavaprakasa's philosophy of Svabhavika Bhedabheda, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's philosophy of Achintya Bhedabheda, Nimbarka's philosophy of Dvaitadvaita, etc.
@Pandya Even the Lingayat philosophy of Shakti Visistadvaita has the alternate names "Dvaitadvaitabidhana Viseshadvaita" and "Bhedabhedatmaka Viseshadvaita", which are just horrendously complicated names. So it also falls into the Bhedabheda category.
@Pandya OK, that sounds good.
@Pandya By the way, Yadava Prakasha, the proponent of Svabhavika Bhedabheda, was Ramanujacharya's guru whom Ramanujacharya left over that "monkey's butt" issue we were discussing earlier.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Thanks for information but I think I'll provide information about popular philosophies only i.e Advaita, Vishishtadvaita, Dvaita, Shuddhadvaita, Achintya Bhedabheda and Dvaitadvaita. Explaining further sub-philosophies of Bhedabheda looks broad to me and also I don't know about them!
Is it ok?
 
@Pandya Yeah, I was just telling you about the Bhedabheda category because you mentioned that Achintya Bhedabheda and Dvaitadvaita sound similar.
@Pandya But yeah, it's fine to just give explanations of the major ones.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan oh! yes. Thanks; I appreciate your knowledge about them and your research on them!
 
@KeshavSrinivasan @Pandya Hello....
 
@KrishnShweta Hi
 
5:48 AM
@KrishnShweta ...Hello!
 
Why do we have Advaita and similar to this? (I don't remember the names)
Advaita, Vishishtadvaita, Dvaita, Shuddhadvaita, Achintya Bhedabheda and Dvaitadvaita.
 
@KrishnShweta can you clarify your question bit more?
 
@KrishnShweta The names all have to do with the relationship between Jivatma and Paramatmaa. "Advaita" means "not two", i.e. Jivatma and Paramatma being the same. "Dvaita" means "two", i.e. Jivatma and Paramatma being different.
@KrishnShweta Each of these words refers to a different theory about how Jivatmas and Paramatma are related.
 
@Pandya Exactly what @KeshavSrinivasan is explaining.
 
@KrishnShweta ok; Have you visited hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/14779/277?
 
5:54 AM
Who defined all these? Is it written in our puranas?
@Pandya Oh!! I'll take a look at that.
 
It is the realization of Acharyas and translation of that realization into words! (with reference to Prashthanatrayi)
 
@Pandya That question is exactly what I'm asking. Thanks.
 
@KrishnaShweta No, these names aren't mentioned in the Puranas. The names were invented much later than that. The issue is that there are certain statements in the Upanishads that are difficult to understand, so different philosophers have developed different theories as to what these statements mean.
 
I see.
@KeshavSrinivasan I'll let you if I have any doubts further.
 
@KrishnShweta OK, by the way, your family belongs to the Rudra Sampradayam, so the theory that your sect believes in is Vallabhacharya's philosophy of Shuddhadvaita; see here:
Shuddadvaita (Sanskrit: śuddhādvaita "pure non-dualism") is the "purely non-dual" philosophy propounded by Vallabhacharya (1479-1531 CE), the founding philosopher and guru of the Vallabhā sampradāya ("tradition of Vallabh") or Puśtimārg ("The path of grace"), a Hindu Vaishnava tradition focused on the worship of Krishna. Vallabhacharya's pure form (nondualist) philosophy is different from Advaita. The Shrinathji temple at Nathdwara, and compositions of eight poets (aṣṭachap), including Surdas, are central to the worship by the followers of the sect. == Location == Though the tradition originated...
 
6:08 AM
@KeshavSrinivasan Oh!
OK........
 
@KeshavSrinivasan If Visistaadvaita is Advaita, why it gives name for Brahman?
 
6:21 AM
@TheDestroyer Visistadvaita means "qualified monism." The monism part refers to the fact that there is a larger whole called Brahman, but Brahman is qualified by attributes, specifically Chit (souls) and Achit (matter).
@TheDestroyer We believe that Brahman is Saguna, not Nirguna, so there's no problem with Brahman having a name.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan But why only Brahman has only auspicious qualities? Without Brahman, how can world get inauspicious qualities? In Advaita, Brahman is beyond auspicious and inauspicious and both auspicious and inauspicious are Maya.
 
@TheDestroyer Sriman Narayana naturally has only auspicious qualities, but he is able to transform a part of himself into something that has a mixture of Gunas. That is what we call physical matter.
 
6:38 AM
@KeshavSrinivasan Ok. Auspicious and inauspicious both must be Brahman or something beyond and i think we can't limit Brahman only to Auspicious Qualities. Also, why only few Attributes as names to Brahman? Example, Shivam itself is auspicious and Shakti itself is power both are also Auspicious attributes.
 
@TheDestroyer Well, Vishnu has numerous names. His glories are limitless. That's why there are things like the Vishnu Sahasranamam.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan But why it repeats the names? Only Lalitha Sahasranamam has unique names without repetition.
@KeshavSrinivasan I think Visistadvaita, Shuddaadvaita, or someRandomAdvaita are propagated by die hard Vishnu devotees who didn't like equality.
@KeshavSrinivasan Advaita says Maya itself is Maya and no Acharya of Advaita can really say the reason why maya exists? All they can say is Maya is Maya and no use in knowing the reason as it is simply Maya and doesn't exist. Can Visistaadvaita explain reason for existence of Maya?
 
 
3 hours later…
9:50 AM
@KeshavSrinivasan For learning Suddhadvaita, this may helpful.
 
10:33 AM
@TriyugiNarayanMani How did you find OM in Brahmi script?
 
10:52 AM
I have searched this ॐ ब्राह्मी लिपि
@TheDestroyer
 
11:37 AM
@TriyugiNarayanMani Good.
@TriyugiNarayanMani but still i'm not sure whether that is true or not to accept your answer.
 
@TheDestroyer OK. No problem. Still you can upvote :-)
 
@TriyugiNarayanMani I already upvoted.
 
@TheDestroyer Thanks. BTW I will look into more details tonight.
 
@TriyugiNarayanMani Ok.
 
11:59 AM
Found it on this IIT site.
@KeshavSrinivasan @Pandya @SwiftPushkar @TriyugiNarayanMani @Tezz Vedanta concept Map
 
@TheDestroyer Its great
 
12:43 PM
@TheDestroyer Hi , its great flow chart , much informative , nice find :)
 
1:06 PM
@TheDestroyer please check the above image.
 
1:39 PM
@TriyugiNarayanMani Thank you. Will see it.
 
1:49 PM
@TriyugiNarayanMani Wow. Good book.
 
2:05 PM
@TheDestroyer "But why it repeats the names?" It repeats names because the same name can have multiple meanings. For more information see the commentaries on the Vishnu Sahasranamam by Adi Shankaracharya and Parashara Bhattar.
@TheDestroyer "Advaita says Maya itself is Maya and no Acharya of Advaita can really say the reason why maya exists? All they can say is Maya is Maya and no use in knowing the reason as it is simply Maya and doesn't exist. Can Visistaadvaita explain reason for existence of Maya?" That problem doesn't even arise for us, we simply don't believe in Maya, we believe that the world is real.
@TheDestroyer The only Avidya we believe in is the delusion that you are the body as opposed to the soul.
@TheDestroyer In Advaita the question of Maya is a serious problem, because Advaitins believe that Brahman is the only thing that exists and that Brahman has no Avidya, and yet Advaitins also believe that the physical world is an illusion causes by Avidya. So the question arises, who has Avidya if Brahman has no Avidya and Brahman is the only thing that exists?
@TheDestroyer Adi Shankaracharya addresses this issue in a way that I find totally unsatisfactory: "And should you ask who then is characterised by the absence of true knowledge, we reply: You yourself who ask this question!--And if you retort, 'But I am the Lord as declared by scripture,' we reply, 'Very well, if you have arrived at that knowledge, then there is nobody who does not possess such knowledge.'" sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe38/sbe38264.htm
@TheDestroyer In Visistadvaita, on the other hand, we don't have that issue at all, because we don't think that Brahman is the only thing that exists. We think Jivatmas also exist, and so there is no contradiction in the Jivatmas having Avidya while Brahman has no Avidya, since we don't believe that the Jivatma is the same as Brahman.
@TheDestroyer And again, we don't think the world is an illusion. We do think that the Jiva can suffer Avidya by identifying himself with the physical matter he sees around him, namely the body. But the body is still real, the Jiva just needs to realize that he is different from the body:
 
2:23 PM
@KeshavSrinivasan So, who causes Avidya in Jiva? Brahman?
@KeshavSrinivasan No one can explain that even a Jivanmukta, in Advaiata. Obviously, we know answer when we become Jevanmukta but can't share it.
 
@TheDestroyer No, Jivas have had Avidya for infinitely many births going infinitely far back in tume. Even Adi Shankaracharya believes that from the relative perspective, Jivas have had Avidya for infinitely many births.
@TheDestroyer By the way, in Visistadvaita we don't believe in the concept of Jivanmukta, we think that you can only attain Moksha after you die. The reason for the difference is that Advaitins believe that the world is an illusion, so as soon as you realize that the world is not real you are free from Samsara.
@TheDestroyer But Visistadvaitins believe that the world is real, so even if a person has full Jnana the world around him is still there, so he hasn't actually attained Moksha until he has left the world of Samsara.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan But, how can some thing "real" and that exists from "infinite time" can be removed (during Moksha)? In Advaita, Maya is Maya and there's no question of "infinite time" as it is not a real entity.
@KeshavSrinivasan No. Jeevanmukta in Advaita can see World. Only after leaving his Physical body, Suguna Brahman or World disappears
 
@TheDestroyer Well, the fact that the Jiva has been in Samsara for an infinitely long time doesn't mean it can never leave Samsara. It just needs to turn to Sriman Narayana.
@TheDestroyer Yeah, Advaitins believe that a Jivanmukta sees the world but he's unaffected by it, as he realizes it's not really there. So he's free from the world of Samara. Whereas in Visistadvaita, even if you understand everything the world is still real, so you still need to escape it.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Well, it contradicts. If something is true, it must exist eternally. Dharma changes but Truth is always same.
 
@TheDestroyer Well, Dharma is also eternal, but yes I agree that the truth is eternal. But that doesn't mean that something that exists must always exist.
@TheDestroyer And in any case the world still exists even after the Jiva has left the world.
 
2:38 PM
@KeshavSrinivasan It's so simple. Truth must exist eternally. 1+1 =2 is always true but representation may change. The world we see is changing daily at rapid pace. No real thing can change. It must have same state all the time.
 
@TheDestroyer Of course real things can change. Why do you think real things cannot change?
@TheDestroyer The truth is certainly eternal, but the truth being eternal does not imply that real things can never change. One of the truths which is eternal is "the world keeps changing."
 
@KeshavSrinivasan World still exists for people who didn't get realization (as they are in Maya). But liberated souls Maya don't exist.
 
@TheDestroyer Yes, that's what I'm saying, Advaitins believe that for Jivanmuktas the world doesn't exist, they see it but they realize it's not there.
@TheDestroyer It is an eternal truth that "Keshav Srinivasan was born in 1991 and turned 18 in 2009." That is an eternally true statement, even if my age changes between 1991 and 2009.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan when Truth is eternal without changing any state, only Truth must be REAL. For example, how about a friend of us whom we believed as "true or real". Let assume he back-stabbed us. So, Is he true friend? We say he is not a real friend. Reality exists only when something is unchanging not just because we are experiencing it.
 
@TheDestroyer I agree if a friend betrays us, which means that he is loyal at one time but not at another time, he is not a true friend. But that is only because to be a true friend is to be loyal at all times. But I do not see how that in any way implies that for an object to be real, it must be the same at all times.
@TheDestroyer The only reason why friendship requires loyalty at all times is that that is part of the definition of friendship. But there is nothing in the definition of existence that requires being the same at all times.
@TheDestroyer If an object is red at one time and blue at another time, then it is an eternal truth that the object was red at the first time and blue at the second time. That statement is true at all times. But that does not imply that the object cannot change color between the first time and the second time. On the contrary, it implies that the object must change color.
 
2:56 PM
@KeshavSrinivasan The changes happened are "true" from relative perspective. But a real thing cannot delude you. Your eyes are deciding here but a person with eye disorder never agrees with you. He says what he saw is Real and true. A real thing must appear same to everyone irrespective of who he is or there must be something that stopping us to see truth.
@KeshavSrinivasan If you say something as "Real", it should be from absolute point of view not from relative perspective.
 
@TheDestroyer Yes, I think the physical world is fully real from the absolute perspective. In fact I do not even recognize the distinction between relative perspective and absolute perspective. That's only a concept in Advaita.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Eyes of both persons are real but those "real eyes" are showing the realities differently.
 
@TheDestroyer Just because people have different beliefs or perceptions of reality does not mean that what they are perceiving is not real.
@TheDestroyer If someone has an eye disorder, they may have an incorrect perception of an object, but that does not diminish the reality of the object in any way.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan How do you say that your are seeing correctly? What is absolute basis for that object?
 
@TheDestroyer Well, it's possible that I too have an eye disorder and don't know it, but by default the assumption is that one's perception of an object is accurate unless there is a good reason to doubt that perception.
 
3:04 PM
@KeshavSrinivasan No. You must distinguish absolute and relative perspectives.
@KeshavSrinivasan So, you may become wrong in future.
@KeshavSrinivasan But how can something be real changed tomorrow? Reality can be decided only from relative perspective when we have multiple opinions.
 
@TheDestroyer Yes, it is certainly possible for me to find out later that a perception I had wasn't true. Like I may have thought an object was red but it was actually green, and I just had a problem with my eye that day.
@TheDestroyer I don't distinguish between the relative perspective and the absolute perspective, because I don't believe in Maya. In Advaita relative perspective means the perspective of Maya, but I don't believe in Maya at all.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Yes. You found out that. But how about a person who couldn't find it. He still believes that object is Red.
 
@TheDestroyer I think Jivatmas, Brahman, and physical matter are all real in the absolute perspective.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Forget Advaita. what about Theory of Relativity?
@KeshavSrinivasan How can be something real "Physical matter" be removed?
 
@TheDestroyer Yes, it is certainly possible for someone to maintain the false belief that the object is red.
 
3:09 PM
@KeshavSrinivasan This false belief must not arise in true or real entities.
 
@TheDestroyer Moksha does not involve the physical world disappearing, it involves leaving the physical world.
@TheDestroyer It is certainly possible to have a false belief about a real entity.
@TheDestroyer Beliefs are mental models that humans form about reality. Those mental models are not always accurate. But that does not undermine the reality of what is being modeled.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Real things must be with you fore-ever. How can something Real be removed after sometime. It we go by this logic, we will never know what is actual real or true. We will keep on evolving the model. Even after infinite time, we are not sure what is real as things are getting evolved.
 
@TheDestroyer Yes, regardless of what we perceive, there is always a possibility that we are perceiving things incorrectly. Perception never gives absolute certainty. But that does not mean that what is perceived is not real.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Why are you stopping at stage that Paramatma is Antaryami of Jivatma? Who knows paramatma has super self? Because things getting evolved.
 
@TheDestroyer It is not at all true that real things must be with you forever. It is certainly possible for two real entities to be together at one time and apart at another time.
 
3:17 PM
@KeshavSrinivasan Again, Reality is based on truth. What is basis to decide something as real? Without basis, how can you even say something as real?
@KeshavSrinivasan I think we are coming to same point.
 
@TheDestroyer The reason I know that Paramatma does not have an Antaryami is that I base my conclusions on the nature of Jivatma and Paramatma on the Vedas.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Even Shankara came to these conclusions from Vedas.
 
@TheDestroyer Well, when you perceive something, by default you should assume that what you are perceiving is real, unless you have a good reason to doubt it.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan No. This is how a typical westerner thinks. They do according to their whims.
@KeshavSrinivasan Senses can go wrong.
 
@TheDestroyer Yes, I just disagree with his arguments. His arguments are refuted in Ramanujacharya's Sri Bhashya. I suggest you read both Adi Shankaracharya's Brahma Sutra Bhashya and Ramanujacharya's Sri Bhashya and compare them.
@TheDestroyer This is not just how a Westerner thinks, this is how ancient Hindu philosophers think. I suggest you read Adhyaya 1 Pada 1 Sutra 5 of Jaimini's Mimamsa Sutras.
@TheDestroyer Yes, I certainly agree that the senses can go wrong. All I am saying is that by default you should assume that what the senses are telling you is correct, until you find reason to doubt that particular piece of information.
 
3:24 PM
@KeshavSrinivasan ok. I will read them. But I believe that Reality is one and same and it must not change. This is what even Shankara said.
@KeshavSrinivasan But that is tentative.
 
@TheDestroyer Yes, I certainly agree that the information given by perception is tentative. We have no disagreements about that.
@TheDestroyer I simply disagree with the statement that real things cannot change.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Ok. I think this is another disagreement we have besides Caste System.
 
@TheDestroyer Yeah. In any case, like I said you should read Adi Shankaracharya and Ramanujacharya's commentaries on the Brahma Sutras (and other schools' commentaries if you want). Only then will you be in a position to make an informed decision as to which one is right.
 
3:42 PM
@TheDestroyer By the way, that Vedanta concept map is written from the viewpoint of Advaita.
@TheDestroyer By the way, you may be interested in this Tamil lecture series on the Sri Bhashya:
 
@KeshavSrinivasan I stick to belief that Real things cannot be changed even if read those commentaries, as it very close to daily life experiences. Can Brahman change ?
@KeshavSrinivasan Can Brahman cheat you just like that friend?
 
@TheDestroyer Brahman can certainly transform a part of himself, yes. That is how the world is created.
@TheDestroyer I think Visistadvaita is far closer to what we experience in daily life compared to Advaita. When you sit on a chair, by default you assume that the chair is real unless someone can give you a convincing reason to believe that the chair is a figment of your imagination.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Ok. How do you know you reached the end of evolution of real things? There must be some basis. That end is absolute view. It is also possible that you can keep evolving in cyclic path.
@KeshavSrinivasan Well, this from relative perspective. Even in my dream i felt i was sitting chair but doesn't mean i really sat on chair.
 
@TheDestroyer Yes, I agree, the mere fact that you believe that something is true does not imply that it is true.
@TheDestroyer But the fact that chairs seen in dreams are not real does not imply that chairs in the waking world are not real.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Yes. Exactly. That is true for some time only. I think Visistadvaita further evolves to Advaita. What if tomorrow, Vishnu comes and reforms it to Advaita?
@KeshavSrinivasan Also, simply we are experiencing something doesn't mean that is real. Those things are real only for certain time. Final stage is Advaita.
@KeshavSrinivasan Ok. I will see these videos. Language is simple.
 
3:59 PM
@TheDestroyer Well, the way to determine the final stage is by looking to the Vedas. Adi Shankaracharya and Ramanujacharya both present detailed arguments for why their interpretation must be correct. After examining their commentaries and many others, it's clear to me that Visistadvaita must be correct. I suggest you do the same.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan ok. Will do that.
 
@TheDestroyer By the way, the lectures are carried out through video-conferencing, so if you want you can join into the lectures using Google Hangouts.
 
4:17 PM
@KeshavSrinivasan Ohh. Do you attend them via Hangouts?
@KeshavSrinivasan Who is that Priest in Video?
@TriyugiNarayanMani Thanks for the book. I downloaded it. You can edit that answer with this info.
 
@TheDestroyer No, I've never attended them via Hangouts. The one giving the lecture isn't a priest, he's a Sri Vaishnava scholar. He's a professor at a Sanskrit university.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan What is name of that Acharya?
 
@TheDestroyer His name is M.A. Alwar. "Sri M.A. Alwar is Professor of Prācīna and Navīna Nyāya (Logic) at Karnataka Sanskrit University, Mysore. A native of Tirunarayanapuram (Melkote), he descends from a family noted for its dedication to scholarship in Sanskrit and Philosophy. He studied Nyāya, Vedānta, and darśana from a young age with the acclaimed scholar Sri Kothimangalam S. Varadacharya."
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Ok.
 
@TheDestroyer The "studied Nyāya, Vedānta, and darśana from a young age" part reminds me of myself, haha
 
4:31 PM
@KeshavSrinivasan haha. Yeah. Every Hindu must know these things. Unfortunate that "secular" India can't introduce them in Schools.
 
@TheDestroyer Is Modi introducing Sanskrit into schools?
 
@KeshavSrinivasan No. There was exchange of words between "Seculars" (lol.. They don't know meaning of Secular) and BJP members. He introduced at UG level.
@KeshavSrinivasan But few people are interested.
This rotten media uses the word "Saffronizing".
 
@TheDestroyer Yeah, it's too bad they're not doing compulsory Sanskrit education in grade school.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Haryana Government introduced Gita and Upanishads under moral Education for 6th to 12th standard. Some states made Yoga mandatory but only exercises not Pranayama or useful stuff.
 
@TheDestroyer Oh, Hatha Yoga is pointlesss. But yeah, what Haryana is doing sounds good. Any chance it will go nationwide?
 
4:40 PM
@KeshavSrinivasan Secularists are threat to India. In name of Secularism, they are appeasing Muslims and Media wants money and all opposition parties heavily invested in them. Beef ban is making a lot of fuss.
 
@TheDestroyer Is there any chance of Modi enacting a nationwide beef ban?
 
though laws were framed long ago.
@KeshavSrinivasan Not possible now. Prakash Javadekar was good minister as Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. But now Introducing Sanskrit Gita or Upanishads is RSS ideology according to Secularists and Media. So, he can't make fuss.
@KeshavSrinivasan Prakash Javadekar is current HRD Minister.
@KeshavSrinivasan First he must provide some jobs to Sanskrit Scholars. There are no Jobs. He is helpless. Economy works differently.
@KeshavSrinivasan Beef ban is there from long ago but many states didn't implement properly.
Cattle slaughter in India is a historically taboo subject because of the cow's traditional status as a respected creature of God in Hinduism. Dairy products are extensively used in Hindu culture and are one of the most essential nutritional components of Hindu meals. Article 48 of the Constitution of India mandates the state to prohibit the slaughter of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle. On October 26, 2005, the Supreme Court of India, in a landmark judgement upheld the constitutional validity of anti-cow slaughter laws enacted by different state governments in India. 24 out of...
@KeshavSrinivasan Each state has different law.
@KeshavSrinivasan That wiki article has blunders about Hindusim.
@KeshavSrinivasan The problem came when Sangh people (Hindu Rightwing groups) started attacking illegal cow slaughters, especially Dalits and Muslims.
@KeshavSrinivasan You cannot say " Hatha Yoga is pointless" without experiencing it.
 
4:57 PM
@TheDestroyer Hatha Yoga is a medieval invention, there aren't any authentic references to it in ancient Hindu scripture. And in any case Hatha Yoga is supposed to be an offshoot of Patanjali Yoga, and even Adi Shankaracharya criticizes Patanjali Yoga in his Brahma Sutra Bhashya.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Well, many things happen and we didn't update our History books "Puranas". Anyways, Shiva himself told this and results are amazing. So, this is not wrong.
@KeshavSrinivasan But i don't agree with some ideas of Modern sages. They want to spread Hinduism to West without making BharataVarsha a Hindu Superpower which will automatically make others to adopt this culture and this is what happened in Ancient India.
@KeshavSrinivasan Even in book Autobiography of Yogi, Yukteswara Giri stopped Yogananda from becoming freedom fighter. Those Aghoras and Naga Sadhus only protected Shiva Temples from Mughal invasion.
 
@TheDestroyer Well, to quote Bill Clinton, "People are more impressed by the power of our example rather than the example of our power."
 
@KeshavSrinivasan They could use magic but never did. I think they are destined events or Karma of India which is due to bad actions of our ancestors. Those idiotic Dwaitins (Shaivites and Vaishnavites) were busy fighting among themselves for their Gods.
@KeshavSrinivasan See this.
Ujjain Simhastha is a Hindu religious mela held every 12 years in the Ujjain city of Madhya Pradesh, India. The name is also transliterated as Sinhastha or Singhastha. In Hindi, the fair is also called Simhasth or Sinhasth (due to schwa deletion). The name derives from the fact that it is held when the Jupiter is in Leo (Simha in Hindu astrology). It is one of the four fairs traditionally recognized as Kumbha Melas, and is also known as Ujjain Kumbh Mela. According to Hindu mythology, Vishnu dropped drops of amrita (the drink of immortality) at four places, while transporting it in a kumbha (pot...
@KeshavSrinivasan These idiotic Dvaitins fought many times in History.
@KeshavSrinivasan Puranas brought a lot of damage than benefits.
 
5:12 PM
@TheDestroyer Well, I also think that the invasions of India by the Mughals and British had to do with punishment for the bad actions of Indians, but I don't think the bad actions had to do with Vaishnavism or Shaivism. They had to do with people abandoning their Varna Dharmas.
@TheDestroyer I think the Puranas did far more good than whatever conflicts they may have engendered.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan No. Because of Puranas. Vedas were given lesser priority. Swami Vivekananda says "once Bengal was land of Vedas but now people rarely utter Vedic Chants".
@KeshavSrinivasan Puranas did more damage than any scriptures. India must abandon Smriti (which is interpolated) and should give importance to Vedas.
@KeshavSrinivasan If India becomes Hindu country, again this sectarian issue arise, more like Sunni and Shia. So, i think this is the reason why these sages didn't help.
 
@TheDestroyer The Puranas gave people correct knowledge, orienting them away from things that matter less and towards things that matter more. See my answer here:
13
A: Vishnu - how has his understanding developed and what was his role initially?

Keshav SrinivasanFirst of all, to answer your side question, yes, there is something that is more particular to Vishnu that both Vaishnavite and Shaivites would acknowledge about him, and that is that he is the god of preservation. That is to say, Vaishnavites would say that Vishnu is the preserver but he is als...

 
@KeshavSrinivasan That may be true. But there were extremists on both sides.
 
@TheDestroyer Before the Puranas people had a very incorrect understanding of things.
@TheDestroyer There are two reasons why there are less Vedic Yagnas now, one good reason and one bad reason. To the extent that people are doing temple worship in accordance with Pancharatra Agamas as opposed to Vedic Yagnas, that's an unalloyed good thing; see Yamunacharya's Agama Pramanya for more information.
@TheDestroyer But to the extent that people are abandoning Yagnas because they're abandoning Hindu traditions and becoming more Westernized, that is certainly a bad thing and one of the signs that we're living in the Kali Yuga.
@TheDestroyer By the way, you may be interested in the discussion I had with the user Bharat in the comment section of my answer here on this subject:
8
A: Why are brahmins represented by names of Vedas?

Keshav SrinivasanTL;DR They basically indicate the occupations that Brahmanas used to have back when they were officiating Vedic Yagnas rather than being temple priests and the like. In order to understand what it means for someone to be a Rig Veda Brahmana and so on, you need to understand the nature of the Ved...

 
@KeshavSrinivasan Well, i stopped believing Agamas. I may read Dwaita literature but don't believe them. Or i reconcile them by comparing them, probably by changing names.
 
5:27 PM
@TheDestroyer Well, if you don't believe in Agamas, then I suggest you read Yamunacharya's Agama Pramanya: archive.org/stream/pancaratra-agamas/…
@TheDestroyer Yamunacharya was Ramanujacharya's guru's guru, by the way.
@TheDestroyer You can also read the comedic play I emailed you a while back, Agama Dambara by Jayanta Bhatta.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan There can't be two opposite things which are true at the same time. It doesn't mean either of them is wrong as both of them are working. So, it must be problem with persons who are interpreting.
 
@TheDestroyer I just resent it to you.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan ohh. Thank you.
@KeshavSrinivasan i saw comments. Just like Buddhism was wiped out from Bhaarat, i hope someone will wipe out Islam and Christianity from this land.
 
@TheDestroyer Yeah, there should be more formal debates between Hindus and others, and also formal debates between different sects of Hinduism. That's what used to happen in ancient times.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Yes. Amaravati in AP was Buddhist hotspot but now wiped out.
@KeshavSrinivasan Yeah.
Amaravathi is a village in Guntur district of the Indian state of Andhra Pradesh. It is located in Amaravati mandal of Guntur revenue division, on the banks of Krishna river. Amaravati, the new capital of Andhra Pradesh was named after this historic village and is also a part of Andhra Pradesh Capital Region. Although now it is officially designated as a village administered by a gram panchayat, it is an important historic town, and served as the capital of the Satavahana kingdom in ancient days. Sri Amaralingeswara Swamy temple is located at the Amararama Pancharama Kshetra site in this village...
 
5:37 PM
@TheDestroyer By the way, as to your statement "Or i reconcile them by comparing them, probably by changing names", it's not just a matter of Vishnu vs. Shiva. The Pancharatra Agamas say that Brahman is both the efficient cause and the material cause of the Universe, whereas the Shaiva Agamas say that Brahman is only the efficient cause of the Universe. That's why Adi Shankaracharya criticizes the Shaiva Agamas in his Brahma Sutra Bhashya.
 
BTW, this is new capital of Andhra Pradesh and this was famous for Buddhism. But somehow later Shaivism took over this.
 
@TheDestroyer It's interesting that it's called Amaravati. Amaravati is Indra's capital city in Devaloka.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Yes. Indra established Shiva Linga here. So, Shiva here is called Amaralingeswara and place is called Amaravathi.
 
@TheDestroyer Oh ok
 
@KeshavSrinivasan And Shiva Linga is increasing in length.
@KeshavSrinivasan BTW, there are Pancharama Kshetras.
The Pancharama Kshetras or the Pancharamas) are five ancient Hindu temples of Lord Shiva situated in Andhra Pradesh. The Sivalingas at these temples are made from a single Sivalinga. As per the legend, this Sivalinga was owned by the Rakshasa King Tarakasura. No one could win over him due to the power of this Sivalinga. In the war between deities and Taraka, Kumara Swamy and Taraka were face to face. Kumara Swamy used his Sakthi aayudha to kíll Taraka. By the power of Sakti aayudha the body of Taraka was torn into pieces. But to the astonishment of Lord Kumara Swamy all the pieces reunited to...
Believed to be from Tarakasura,
@KeshavSrinivasan When priests nailed at top of Linga to stop increasing length it started bleeding. Even now you can see stains.
 
5:43 PM
@TheDestroyer By the way, there are multiple temples that claim to have the Shivalinga where Indra worshipped to get rid of the sin of killing Vritrasura. In the Madurai Meenakshi temple they claim that Indra got rid of the sin by worshiping the Sundareshwarar Lingam. The Thirushulam temple near the Chennai airport claims the same thing.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan haha.
@KeshavSrinivasan This is common problem with many South indian temples.
 
@TheDestroyer Similarly there are multiple temples that claim to the place where Kala Bhairava got rid of Brahma's head which was stuck to his hand. The Kashi Vishwanath temple claims it, and the Veeraraghava Perumal temple in Thiruvallore also claims it.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Matysa purana, Skanda Purana say that Kala Bhairava got rid that in Kashi.
@KeshavSrinivasan BTW, how do Sri Vaishnavas solve problem with Navagraha Doshas, especially Kala Sarpa Doshas?
@KeshavSrinivasan because those poojas are done only in Shiva Temples?
 
@TheDestroyer Sri Vaishnavas go to Shiva temples. We worship other gods, we just keep in mind that Sriman Narayana is their Antaryami.
 
5:53 PM
@TheDestroyer "When priests nailed at top of Linga to stop increasing length it started bleeding. Even now you can see stains." Oh, there's a similar story where someone tries putting a nail or something into a statue of the Sri Vaishnava Acharya Vedanta Desikan, and the statue bleeds.
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Do you know there is a sentence in Skanda purana that those who cheat in name of Shiva like Pandas demanding money for pooja in Varanasi, these persons are not going to suffer. But i'm not sure about authencity of this. Same thing happened to me in tirupati. I was about to rebuke him with bad words but he has Venkateswara Namam of his forehead and i didnt scold him.
@KeshavSrinivasan ohh.
 
@TheDestroyer That Vedanta Desikan statue is in Thiruvahindrapuram, in the temple I discuss in my question here:
4
Q: Who did Vishnu appear before in Thiruvahindrapuram, Bhumidevi or Bhumadevi?

Keshav SrinivasanI'm currently visiting India, and I went to the town of Cuddalore in Tamil Nadu. It contains a place called Thiruvahindram, one of the 108 Divya Desams. As I discuss in this question, the Alwars (also spelled Azhwars) are a group of 12 ancient Vaishnava saints who lived in Tamil Nadu and are f...

 
@KeshavSrinivasan They gave me small plate inscription of Venkateswara, asked names of family members and demanded Rs 20.
 
@TheDestroyer You're saying that the Skanda Purana says that those who cheat in the name of Shiva will NOT suffer?
@TheDestroyer Do you know where in the Skanda Purana it says that?
 
@KrishnShweta :-( to whom you said that?
 
5:57 PM
Guys, I'm not well so my mother is not allowing me to touch laptop. It will take 2 or 3 days more...
 
@KeshavSrinivasan Yeah. Actually don't remember now. Read 10 days ago.
@KeshavSrinivasan will give you link if i find.
@KeshavSrinivasan I am not sure to believe it or not.
@KrishnShweta Ok. What happened? how is your brother now?
 
@TheDestroyer my brother is suffering from Kidney stone.
 
@KrishnShweta Ohh. what's his age?
 
@TheDestroyer he is just 13
 
@KrishnShweta This is bad. But just beware that there may be fake doctors whose interest is only money. Even personally i heard some cases like this.
 
6:04 PM
@TheDestroyer Yeah true..
@TheDestroyer see you. I'll join after a couple of days.
Good night.
 
@KrishnShweta good night.
 
 
5 hours later…
11:25 PM
Does Hinduism have the concept of legacy?
Basically carrying on a blood line
 

« first day (140 days earlier)      last day (2424 days later) »