Bhagwadgita - thinam oru shlokam

[Harish Kumar]

And if all paths are one and the same then you must respect my path and also what the Taliban propounds and also what Narendra Modi propounds. Do you realise what a dangerous ideology tolerance and respect for all is? It makes you feel good, a sense of superiority that I am more broadminded than Harish? Democracy is considered superior because it gives freedom of speech, so to not utilise that freedom and also the God-given faculty of intelligence and relapse into a "all are one and the same" mentality is to sin against both God and democracy.

[Harish Kumar]

As already mentioned, even Swami Vivekananda, an advaitin, has pointed out the errors of Quran. Had he not done so, how many more people would have suffered the ill-effects of Yoga without a Guru? All over the net, we find kundalini support groups, for people seriously affected by Kundalini Yoga. These people are suffering thanks to people like Anbu-Kathir and Badri who won't criticise wrong doers and want to feel good by saying "yes" to all.

[Harish Kumar]

There is absolutely no rational logic behind the fact our belief systems are fact and the other belief systems are all cooked-up stories.

There is a rationale behind it,if you do hard work, you will know why Vedas are right and others are wrong. But it is easier to be tolerance, most people are lazy, and it gives a lot of popularity as well.

By the way now you are saying rationale and logic is better than belief systems, again an air of self-superiority!

[Harish Kumar]

The reason why most hindus are tolerant is because, Shankara and Ramanuja whom 99% of hindus follow are themselves not very clear in their commentaries. There is always an element of self-doubt that persists in the minds of their followers, but they don't want to tell it outside, there are a lot of un-answered questions in their minds, which they dont want to ask publicly as they do not want to offend their elders or appear incomplete before others. So they give the benefit of doubt to muslims and christians. How can we say we alone are right? May be they are right too! And by picking selective verses justify their notions that "all religions are one and the same". Muslims and christians can easily see through this and that is why they are not impressed by the tolerance of the Hindus.

On the contrary Madhva has clarified all doubts and there is never any doubt in the minds of their followers as to the correctness of what he taught. All doubts have been cleared, Madhva himself raises doubts about the authenticity of hindu scriptures that humans cannot raise and proves why all those doubts are ill-founded. He has resolved all contradictions between and within various hindu scriptures. So his followers are able to say with 100% sureity that Madhva is right and others are wrong. Indians are baffled by their sureity,and are convinced they are intolerant and fundamentalists. But they do not find the time to go through his works and know why we are so sure we are right. Also there is much social status to be gained and money to be made by saying "all paths are one and the same" and "all is one" and other such nice-sounding words.

[Harish Kumar]

I am happy that the scientists are fundamentalists and have a sense of superority (rightfully). It was thanks to the hurting language of scientists that made me go through the hindu scriptures deeper and also enabled me to separate and discard many hindu superstitions from the true knowledge of the Veda. I can now appreciate the role of the scientists and the spiritualists better than anybody else and better than before. Had I had friends like anbu-kathir, I would have been smug in my wrong notions, and would have gone down. I would have been superstituous and never come to know the truth of the Veda (or realise the value of science and logic and the important role fearless rationalists play in society).

[anbu_kathir]

Dear Harish,

I do not deny the fact that I am indeed a slave to self-superiority at times. Self-righteousness has always been a issue that I have had to grapple with. By the grace of the Guru who dwells within all, I hope to be able to get rid off it someday in some lifetime.

I never claimed that "all paths are one and the same". I merely meant that they are all based on "beliefs" and not logic, and therefore no one is more truer than the other in a purely logical sense. This does not mean that I meant a comparison in terms of "better" and "worse". I am only interested in what is "functional" (as in what might to lead to Chitta-shuddhi) and what is not. How "functional" a particular belief of a belief system is, this is a complex question - however, a general rule I use is to see how they reduce the sense of an individual self (where the individual may be the person or his group). The weaker the boundaries, the more functional is the belief in bringing Chitta-Shuddhi.

Self-righteousness (the persistence that one particular system of belief is fact and all other beliefs are lies) always leads to "tension", although not in the physical sense. This has nothing to do with the particular system of belief under consideration. It may very well be a small belief as that of a cat crossing the road being a bad omen, or a religion itself. This is very well known, even scientifically proven. I observe that a tense mind is not conducive to Chitta-Shuddhi, therefore I hold it imperative on myself to get rid of Self-righteousness.

The social-political-geographical-historical considerations of why particular religions in particular regions are more inclined to produce fundamentalism are out of my bounds here, as it requires immense amount of knowledge accumulation and aggregation. On the other hand, by the own observation of my own mind, I can well say that holding on to a belief, without a rational back-up always leads to mental tension and therefore mars the process of chitta-shuddhi in the long run, except in the rarest of cases.

Wrt to Shankara, Ramanuja or Madhva and their philosophies, I am not knowledgeable enough to mention anything. Wrt Vivekananda, he is well known to be a revolutionary who challenged many of the social-rules put up by several different religions, let alone Islam.

In any case, I refuse to claim that "ONLY" my belief system is "true" and all others must be "false." This is my nature, I really do not care if it is my virtue or my vice. If it is indeed my vice, so be it. I would rather go to the Hell that I created out for myself out of my volitional action and personal choice of belief, rather than the Heaven that I bring upon me my forcible belief in someone else's ideas, even if it be the greatest spiritual master in the world.

As for science being similar to a religion and scientists being "fundamentalists", I don't understand what that means. Science by its very nature demands an open (yes "logical") mind, unlike a belief system which is built (although in some cases, logically) upon the axiom of faith. A scientific "fundamentalist" is an oxymoron really, although the states of mind of a "religious fundamentalist" and that of the "militant atheist" (who is interested in nothing but that which is demonstrated by science) could be paralleled. In any case, science demands no belief from its "true believer" i.e. the scientist. The only things that are "fundamental" to a person with a true scientific spirit (not necessarily a scientist by profession) is an open mind and a thought process founded on logic.

Love and Light.

[Badri]

The irony is only the followers of Madhva agree he is right! If the rest of them decide the followers of Madhva are "wrong" or "evil" and turn against them thinking they are doing the world a lot of good by ridding them of these so called "rakshasas" in the guise of Madhva devotees, then the very same line of thought you are advocating will prove to be your downfall!

So in effect, faithfully following Madhvacharya's teachings in this regard only turning the direction would result in the wipe-out of Dwaitavada!

And how will the world be if everyone decides they are right? I am not here discussing the question of whether Madhva was right or wrong! But just think for a while if some other group out there decides that Madhva devotees are demons.

What then?