Vedanta - Discussion Forum I (introductory))

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->  At the heart of it is the topology of the evolutionary relationships matter not whether you call it a tree or a bush. Are there not trees with a bush like branching?) <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> But it will be fruitless if Vedanta were to be judged as science. It is a system of philosophy....<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Thanx RR and Ashok for your insightful posts. That does put things in the correct perspective.


<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Anyways I fear we are rambling far away from itihasa-purana <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I apologize if my post went off in a tangential direction. I realize that the primary object of such forums is to discuss the "corpus" (or contents) of the scriptures. (Or at any rate remain within the framework of the texts, not the context-free speculations and personal world-views of individuals).

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->May be it is time to have a full scale debate on Vedanta <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I personally don't have the erudition to contribute, but I think the proposed Vedanta discussion will make fascinating reading. The challenge will be to generate <b>synergy</b> through such debate, for, as you said, there are so many nuances within Vedanta -- Kevala Advaita, Vishista-advaita, Dvaita, bhedabheda, Achintya Bhedabheda and the like. And it follows that there will be, today as in the past, passionate adherents for each of these schools. What then will be the sutra (string) which would hold together the disparate pearls of Shankara, Ramanuja, Vallabha, Nimbarka, Chaitanya and so many others long gone by?

In that context, may we commence remembering the spirit :
<i>"Yadyat pashyasi netrabhyam, tatad brahmeti bhavaya" </i>


(This is not to say that everything that passes off as philosophy is equally meritorious; only to generate synergy)