You are NOT qualified to critique a Spiritual Tradition if...

[dwai]

Before one criticizes another tradition or tries to posit comparative analyses, the following questions should be taken into consideration.

 

 

1. Why are you interested in the differences? You will know, deep in your heart why. Is it to prove X is better than Y?
2. Do you think having a transactional (mercantile) attitude towards spirituality is going to serve you well in the long run? 
3. Have you actually learnt in their entirety, the systems that you are comparing? 

 

I'll take Advaita Vedanta for instance. Many a sharpshooter has tried to do these type of comparative studies of AV (AV vs This or That). Hold on a second...are you actually qualified to do so? If you want to do justice to your intellect and your spiritual path, you need to first qualify as a student. In Ancient India, there was a healthy tradition of debates between different schools of thought/sprituality. But that required a deep understanding of both positions (that which you are speaking for, and that which you are critiquing). 

 

If AV vs "X, Y or Z" is your topic of choice, you need to qualify as a serious student first, before you get the right to criticize it. 

 

In order to be considered a serious Advaita Vedantin, the following conditions need apply --

 

Sādhanā chatustāya - The Four Means

 

What are they? The four means are --

 

1. Viveka - The ability to discriminate real from unreal (Real here means that which has independent Self-nature - aka the Self). This at least needs to manifest in the ability to discern what doesn't have independent self-nature (aka phenomena). 
2. vairagya - Non-attachment
3. Shadsampat - The six virtues --
   1. Shama - Tranquility of the mind (reducing  the modifications of the mind)
   2. Dama - Control of the senses
   3. uparati - cessation of the need for sensory activities (not craving experiences), implying a sense of contentment
   4. titikshā - Fortitude - The ability to persevere with the inquiry/practice. Come what may, I WILL NOT give up until I have full understanding
   5. shraddhā  - Respect for the tradition, the teachings and it's preceptors. 
   6. samādhāna - Focus that will allow one to pursue the inquiry
4. Mumukshutva - Burning Thirst for Liberation

 

If you don't have these, then you are not a serious student of Advaita Vedanta. These are the qualities that qualify one to be an Advaita Vedantin (adhikāri). If you haven't done your homework, your comparisons are going to be in vain. 

 

Some of the shoddy comparisons I find pertaining to Advaita Vedanta prompted me to write this post. Somethings we should avoid doing is setting up straw man arguments. This is 101 in debates. Otherwise the comparisons/debates become farcical. 

 

What constitute straw man arguments? Attributing cherry-picked/out of context, or incomplete facts towards one party of the comparison/debate, or, worse still,  half-truths (or half-lies).  

For instance - "Advaita Vedanta says World is False/illusory". Yes, but when taken in context of the second part of the statement - The World is none other than Brahman who is Absolute Reality, it doesn't seem as shocking or dramatic anymore.

 

Or take for instance the statement - "Advaita Vedanta says that the limited being cannot experience the Universal Being". No where in any upanishads or commentaries of the various Advaita Vedanta masters is that said. Instead, when we study deeper, we find that Advaita Vedanta says the Universal Being (Brahman) appears to the individual being in different forms depending on the state he/she is in (waking, dreaming, deep-sleep). 

 

The list can go on and on...but I'll stop here. 

 

Hari Om Tat Sat

 

 

[Kar3n]

There are no rules on this forum that dictate who can discuss AV or any other system.

 

I've been following your recent interactions in topics and I have seen nowhere where any person has said that any system is better than another.

 

Broad statements such as those made here about discussing AV are quite contemptuous and not all the spirit of TBD.

 

This topic might be better suited for your PPD.

[3bob]

well, and why not add fully developed mystic vision for all parties, thus not just of the astral but of the divine realms -  which could nip a whole lot of debate in the bud.  (which is what some the advanced folks do anyway) 

Edited September 12, 2018 by 3bob

[3bob]

hey Karen, your following of recent interactions is one thing but I think Dwai may be or is probably feeling several years+ of problematic interactions...A pm would have worked here - imo... (in the Hindu related sub-forum)   

Edited September 12, 2018 by 3bob

[Kar3n]

6 minutes ago, 3bob said:

hey Karen, your following of recent interactions is one thing but I think Dwai may be or is probably feeling several years+ of problematic interactions...A pm would have worked here - imo... (in the Hindu related sub-forum)   

Hey Bob, thanks but no thanks.

 

It needs to be said out loud that this is not in the spirit of the bums.

[doc benway]

I applaud dwai for bringing this up.

Far too many critics here and far too little open-mindedness, caring, and support for each other.

I disagree with you Kar3n - I see contemptuous posts on a regular basis invalidating and denigrating the experiences and paths of others. They are generally people projecting their own negative experience (or inexperience) onto others. Nothing wrong with pointing out when such posts are coming from a place of bitterness or ignorance rather than experience or authority.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Kar3n]

There is not a soul on these forums who is qualified to tell another what they can and can not speak of or about. 

 

This is a discussion forum and not a place for anyone to tell another what they can and can not discuss with regard to practices. It just does not work that way here. Everyone is free to engage in commentary, critique or discussion no matter their level of dedication, experience or knowledge.

[dwai]

19 minutes ago, Kar3n said:

There is not a soul on these forums who is qualified to tell another what they can and can not speak of or about. 

 

This is a discussion forum and not a place for anyone to tell another what they can and can not discuss with regard to practices. It just does not work that way here. Everyone is free to engage in commentary, critique or discussion no matter their level of dedication, experience or knowledge.

Part of having a educated discourse is to learn and articulate the other side’s POV. All I pointed to is that without proper articulation, comparisons are at best farcical. 

I stand by my post. Please feel free to take whatever action you deem correct  

 

[Kar3n]

43 minutes ago, dwai said:

Part of having a educated discourse is to learn and articulate the other side’s POV. All I pointed to is that without proper articulation, comparisons are at best farcical. 

I stand by my post. Please feel free to take whatever action you deem correct  

 

This is not about action, this is my opinion.

 

There is a lot about discussion forums that are farcical and to tell another what they are qualified to do and to not do based on your own perception is just wrong. Seems to me that your stance completely negates your argument for educated discourse and accepting another person's point of view.

 

I guess since this is your stance that we can expect that you will not be partaking in any discussions, comparisons or educational processes that you are not an expert in? Or, does this just apply to folks wanting to discuss AV?

 

Ever consider that folks might learn more through comparisons and that perhaps current and future readers might benefit in some way?

[Stosh]

If one cant fend off or correct the considerations of even the inexpert.. then they have no valid expertness themselves. 

 

To demand expertness from the position of an insider , to challenge the positions of an insider ,presents a self fulfilling situation ,that youre only accepting comment from those who essentially agree.

 But you will still get people digging their heels in for their favorite champion or playing the one upmanship game. 

That plan isnt one of open mindedness its exactly the reverse and obviously so. 

 

Its defensive and exclusive ...destructive to the existing paradigm. 

[dwai]

57 minutes ago, Kar3n said:

This is not about action, this is my opinion.

 

There is a lot about discussion forums that are farcical and to tell another what they are qualified to do and to not do based on your own perception is just wrong. Seems to me that your stance completely negates your argument for educated discourse and accepting another person's point of view.

I accept the view but when you are articulating a position about any system or tradition, at least do the groundwork to be accurate. Not partial information. That is disinformation. 

Quote

 

I guess since this is your stance that we can expect that you will not be partaking in any discussions, comparisons or educational processes that you are not an expert in? Or, does this just apply to folks wanting to discuss AV?

I don’t criticize any tradition or try to find faults. So it’s fine by me to not participate in such activities.  

 

Quote

Ever consider that folks might learn more through comparisons and that perhaps current and future readers might benefit in some way?

Not really when comparisons are done in a half-baked manner. I’m all for it if you do a proper representation of both (or all) Parties involved. Otherwise it comes across as disingenuous to me.

Edited September 13, 2018 by dwai

[dwai]

5 minutes ago, Stosh said:

If one cant fend off or correct the considerations of even the inexpert.. then they have no valid expertness themselves. 

I don’t mind if you find faults. But leave those straw men alone  

 

 

 

 

[liminal_luke]

Of course Karen is right that people are free to discuss whatever they want.  

 

Of course Dwai and Steve are right that much of the discussion of spiritual paths comes from a relatively uninformed -- and often less than kind -- place.

 

I would prefer it if people were less critical of other people`s spiritual paths in general, especially if they don`t have embodied experience following a tradition and are just talking from an intellectual point of view.  Participating in a spiritual tradition is often entirely different than debating about it here.  Take Buddhism for example.  My experience of Buddhism here on the forum and in the "real world" is entirely different.  When I practiced Buddhism (several vipassana retreats) it was so quiet and peaceful: we sat down, we were aware of our breath, we walked, we ate, we swept the meditation hall, we didn`t talk much.  Maybe there was a dharma talk in the evening but it wasn`t such a big thing.  Here on the forum it`s just the reverse -- no breathing, no walking, no sweeping the meditation hall, just a whole lot of talk, talk, talk.  And not very peaceful talk at that.

 

The posts I value are first-person accounts of practices that people have found helpful.  If it was helpful to someone else, maybe it could be helpful to me.  That`s interesting.  All the rest of it -- people talking about why something else they haven`t really done isn`t any good -- I skip right over.

 

 

Edited September 13, 2018 by liminal_luke

[Bud Jetsun]

3 hours ago, dwai said:

 

Sādhanā chatustāya - The Four Means

 

What are they? The four means are --

 

1. Viveka - The ability to discriminate real from unreal (Real here means that which has independent Self-nature - aka the Self). This at least needs to manifest in the ability to discern what doesn't have independent self-nature (aka phenomena). 
2. vairagya - Non-attachment
3. Shadsampat - The six virtues --
   1. Shama - Tranquility of the mind (reducing  the modifications of the mind)
   2. Dama - Control of the senses
   3. uparati - cessation of the need for sensory activities (not craving experiences), implying a sense of contentment
   4. titikshā - Fortitude - The ability to persevere with the inquiry/practice. Come what may, I WILL NOT give up until I have full understanding
   5. shraddhā  - Respect for the tradition, the teachings and it's preceptors. 
   6. samādhāna - Focus that will allow one to pursue the inquiry
4. Mumukshutva - Burning Thirst for Liberation

 

If you don't have these, then you are not a serious student of Advaita Vedanta.

 

 

 

 

 

No one has any of them, they are not possessions. 

 

Wisdom comes from all places.  Examine the aspects of oneself which cares about the critique. 

 

Unlimited Love,

-Bud

[s1va]

1 hour ago, Bud Jetsun said:

 

 

 

No one has any of them, they are not possessions. 

 

Wisdom comes from all places.  Examine the aspects of oneself which cares about the critique. 

 

Unlimited Love,

-Bud

 

Very well said!

[s1va]

I have learned everything that is listed as condition in this thread and more directly from AV masters.  But I find the title and the entire premise of the thread just amusing in ways, and have no plans complying or contributing under such ridiculous presumptions.  This is a public forum after all where people from various backgrounds come and share, discuss and sometimes criticize subjects.

 

Advaita is also a philosophy that is open to everyone, to read, learn or whatever a person wants to do with it.  No one owns or has monopoly over Advaita to enact such rules in discussions as the OP of this thread talks about.

 

It is also contemptuous as Karen points out and totally against the egalitarian spirit of TDB.  I agree with Karen's assessment that this should be under the PPD of the author.

[s1va]

4 hours ago, steve said:

I applaud dwai for bringing this up.

Far too many critics here and far too little open-mindedness, caring, and support for each other.

I disagree with you Kar3n - I see contemptuous posts on a regular basis invalidating and denigrating the experiences and paths of others. They are generally people projecting their own negative experience (or inexperience) onto others. Nothing wrong with pointing out when such posts are coming from a place of bitterness or ignorance rather than experience or authority.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think you are mixing this up with some other different, bigger and general issue for the forum.  It may be better if you understand what is going on here in Hindu forums in past week.  That might give you a better idea on the positions presented and where Karen and my arguments are from.

 

It feels like a certain set of people (may be 1 or 2) think only they are qualified to discuss AV.  Only they have the right knowledge in AV and others are wrong.  Anyone with opposing ideas to are labeled, called names like straw-men, etc., or accused of having malicious intent to waste others time!  Even when quoted directly from Vedanta, Upanishads, Gita against the points they present, they say, all of those texts explain only partially.  Except some here got the highest knowledge somehow from some bonafide masters.   And they say their Higher knowledge is the only true AV.  

 

Now at this point, it looks like attempts are made to create rules and say only these qualified people can discuss Advaita.  

 

This is getting beyond ridiculous at this point.

[3bob]

As far as  I know Dwai has mentioned being part of and a student of certain schools,  and we are fortunate to have someone like him from a school or schools (along with his growing up in Indian Hindu culture) sharing information related to same, regardless if it is not of our school or our wana-be school...

 

Btw, if any of us happen to quote texts that are co-opted from a school or schools that does not mean we are part of or given permission by that school as a devotee to represent them - and that is a big difference as everyone should understand!  Granted some sharing and bouncing around on an introductory level when we have had some introduction to what we are talking about can be given and taken with a grain of salt... 

 

(minor edit)

Edited September 13, 2018 by 3bob

[s1va]

Advaita does not belong to any one school.  I thought Dwai had a Taoist master, may be he went to Vedanta school also. Doesn't matter one way or other to me.   I have been part of 2 traditional schools/systems to learn Vedanta and Advaita for over a decade.   I feel this all  has no bearing and just meaningless when it comes to discussing these topics in open forums such as in TDB.  Anyone with sufficient knowledge can quote from Vedanta, Upanishads, Gita, etc.  These are not held in monopoly by anyone or even any tradition or school.  Most traditional schools prohibit their students in participating in open internet forums.

 

Mostly this is all just ego flare up in my opinion.  Some want to be treated as Masters here and their ideas never to be objected or challenged, all the while they will come and criticize others, their ideas and systems.  If someone objects to their idea even with an authentic quote, it is a big issue. That person has inferior knowledge, he is just a straw-man, he is just cherry picking with quotes.  Finally, come back and say I am such a great authority that no one can oppose my ideas or engage in criticism.

 

Not just simply not to engage in criticism, some seem to think they have the monopoly in AV.  If I write something in my thread comparing the Abhinavagupta's non-dual and Vedantic non-dual, I am criticized for misrepresenting the Advaita.  It's like some selected few own Advaita here and control what can be said about it in any given topic.  I call that 'bs.'

[wstein]

This topic is NOT about what the title suggests. It is not about critiquing. It seems to be about some hurt feelings caused by someone disagreeing with the authors views followed by some promotion presumably about their tradition.

[Bud Jetsun]

A bird calls in the tree.  It doesn't get the call right or wrong, just calls.

 

A human call may be less refined, and often composed of a series of constructed substitutes (words) to replace self-expression in the call. 

 

That which can be expressed, no matter the skills or right view of the poet, is not the Dao, but some equally delusionary combination of symbols, containing the same amount of truth as any other patterns of symbols.

 

The nature of the fool is to laugh at wisdom.  The nature of the wise is to understand the wisdom remains unblemished by the fools laughter. 

 

The nature of reality remains equanimous and equally wonder-filled despite our inherently relative human perception/conception limitations. 

 

The fruits of aligning with the nature of reality (Logos/Dao/etc), is to live in the same unbreakable equanimous liberation.  

 

Be grateful for those who treat you cruelly, they are the instruments which enable you to recognize and appreciate kindness. 

 

Thank you for sharing so much excellent wisdom which helped me evolve Dwai.  Every moment everyone starts over fresh from scratch as a beginner with unlimited potential to appreciate Now. 

 

Unlimited Love,

-Bud

 

[liminal_luke]

1 hour ago, Bud Jetsun said:

 

The nature of the fool is to laugh at wisdom.  The nature of the wise is to understand the wisdom remains unblemished by the fools laughter. 

 

 

You have a brilliant way with ultimate wisdom, Bud.  You come with a shiny sharp sword and slice away with loving, but also merciless, abandon.  Your vision of unlimited love requires uncompromising truth.  It`s a hard, beautiful thing.

 

My approach to life - and perspective about Daobums -- is a softer one.  Perhaps not as true and ultimately not as loving but softer.  I offer it for those who are neither fools nor entirely wise but somewhere in between.  And the crux of what I`d like to say is this: let`s be kind to one another.  Yes, we have the right to say whatever we`d like about whatever here on Daobums.  Or nearly whatever.  But it would be lovely if we keep each other`s tender places in mind as we do so.  

 

Ultimately, everything and everybody is a teacher.  People who heal from great trauma often talk about how thankful they are for their difficult experiences, because without them they would never have grown into their wisdom and loving maturity.  And they are right of course.  But let`s not go around breaking arms and expecting the wounded to send thank you cards.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 13, 2018 by liminal_luke

[rex]

People are free to discuss any topic they like - their posts soon reveal if they're qualified commentators or not and as such can be regarded accordingly.

[Michael Sternbach]

As has been said, this is a forum for free discussion. Yes, unfair and uninformed criticism is annoying, but let's bear in mind that the one commiting the act is at the same time exposing themselves. If this happens in a place like this (as opposed to a book, magazine article, regular website), you are free to demonstrate your superior knowledge and/or understanding and to present the (in your opinion, anyway) correct view.

 

People who turn to a forum like this one to learn about a topic in the first place are thus exposed to different views such as would be the case outside the WWW as well. In other words - in one of its functions - TDB serves as a microcosmic arena for the debates that are going on (in some cases, since millenias) between philosophical and spiritual seekers.

 

Fight the good fight! (If you are so inclined.)

[cosmic4z]

Excuse my ignorance; but if someone is critisizing a thing or making a comparison, surely they're not critisizing the actual thing, but their perception of the thing?

 

In a way, they're not so much talking about the thing, as they are talking about themselves.