Advaita-Chandran

[nanda chandran]

>Perhaps I'm as guilty in this matter as anyone else, but it may be best
ifthis thread (or at least the purely polemical >part of it) is best
carriedon elsewhere, else it may try the patience of those who value
this listfor mainstream >Indology. "The INDOLOGY forum exists for the
use ofadvanced, university-level scholars of classical >INDOLOGY, that
is to saypeople who regularly read the scholarly journals of the
subject, attendconferences, >perhaps teach in university departments,
and participate inthe subject as an academic discipline," ityukteH. "If
this >descriptiondoes not fit you, you are welcome to lurk, but please
try not tointervene, especially not with forceful >language on a topic
you feelpassionate about," iti cha. Carrying out a
nyAyAmR^ita-advaitasiddhi typedebate here >is not well advised (although
I will be happy to answer youand carry on as long as you wish, if we can
carry this >discussion intoanother, perhaps more appropriate forum).

The topic under discussion would definitely fall under the scope of
Indology. Infact, this thread is an offshoot of one such thread, which
the other scholars were discussing.

It’s true that I’m not a scholar. But I can supplement my position with
material from standard works on the subject. And from your posting I see
that you’re pretty knowledgeable yourself.

Though it’s true that I’m passionate about Advaitam, I would not let my
passion interfere with my commonsense and judgement. And I respect all
traditions of Indian philosophy and the respective AchAryAs. I’m also
very interested in understanding how the theists defend their position.

So if the discussion is held in a spirit of reason, I see no problem in
carrying this discussion further. Ofcourse, if the list moderator has no
objections.

Rgds,
Nanda

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com