I have a very clear-cut policy of public engagement. My endorsement or criticism of anyone, for whatever it's worth, is issue-based and goal-oriented. I am not on SM to teach or improve the world as I am just not qualified.
Unity for me means pursuing a common objective, not an obliteration of ideological & philosophical differences. If I disagree with someone's pov, more often than not I ignore rather than engage.
SJV is not my guru, but for the limited purpose of freeing Hindu temples, I find myself in agreement with his larger goal though with many disagreements about his ideas and vision for temples, which includes opening them up to ppl of other religions.
For one, I am quite disturbed by his views on history as well his apparent disregard for agamic traditions in the context of free temples. I don't follow him otherwise and have no interest in what he says or does outside the context of this movement.
I am also not affiliated with Govardhan matha. I happened to have done a video interview of Shankaracharya Ji. That's about it. His views are not binding on me as I don't belong to his sampradaya. My own affiliations, I don't like to disclose on SM.
Quite inexplicably, people have been tagging me and asking me to comment on SJV, some going to the extent of accusing me of slandering him by keeping silent. Imagine that.
Another devotee of Sri Sri messaged upword in the morning asking if we "deliberately ignore the tremendous work done by AOL" or if we do it out of ignorance. Others have interpreted our indifference to irrelevant controversies as a casteist agenda.
I want a solar flare to disrupt internet services for some time, so people can regain sanity. Meanwhile, here are my sincere thoughts on the recent controversy over modern gurus, traditionalists, temples, and scriptures.
As @TheRajarshi remarked elsewhere, the fight between supporters and opponents of gurus like SJV follows an old template, albeit at a greatly reduced level of complexity - the classical debates between Naiyayikas and Baudhas over the validity of shabdapramana.
The pramana debate is by nature open-ended and there will never be a universal answer to which pramana is valid and which is invalid, which is primary, and which secondary. This is exactly why we have so many darshanas.
But the debate over shabdapramana has been broadly settled in practice by the wheel of time. For the purpose of building a theory, the debate will always lead to a dead-end because a single exception to the rule could falsify it.
There will always be jivanamuktas & vibhutis who attain a high state spontaneously. But in the dharmika context, where the goal is teaching and transmission of knowledge & preservation of rituals, the role of scriptural authority is absolutely irreplaceable.
No matter how great a Guru is, he won't be able to build a parampara if there are no authoritative texts for the followers to turn to even while the master is still around, not to mention when he's gone. Baudhas themselves split into multiple scriptural traditions.
A good analogy would be the great mathematician, Srinivas Ramanujam. While the theorems he discovered were gifts of intuition by the great goddess Mahalakshmi of Namakkal, the work still needed to be formally deduced for it to be of any practical value in academia.
Coming back to main issue, temples will thus be run as per the shastra because they are the house of the deity first and foremost. About questions on what that would imply for modern socio-political concerns, here's a must-read piece by @Ravilochanan86. swatantramag.com/who-will-manag…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Ashish Dhar

Ashish Dhar Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Infinitchy

27 Mar
The party hounds are attacking us in a coordinated manner with their usual slander and libel. Tells you that they're very serious about the Central board for temple management. They're not in a mood to tolerate any criticism as the idea is diabolical but fragile. (1/n)
The usual suspects - maisooru, Alok Bhatt, the Kaushik guy etc. have been spreading rumours on and off twitter about us so as to tarnish our reputation. We are called chindics, Chinese, xiaomis, church agents, khangressis and what not. But... (2/n)
Not once have they truly engaged with us or our criticisms in a dignified manner. That is of course expected of people whose loyalty to the party comes in the way of an honest assessment of any issue. But even then, their visceral reactions are uncalled for. (3/n)
Read 9 tweets
3 Jan
Okay, as my discussion with @rahulroushan, an excerpt of which was tweeted by @digikarma, has triggered yet another debate on beef, I feel I must pitch in with my 2 paisa fwiw. (1/10)
As I clarified in the podcast, not eating beef is a non-negotiable as far as I am concerned, no questions asked. It is absolutely not allowed for Hindus in this yuga. (2/10)
However, I like to take the debate away from the religious to the political for two reasons. One, there is no practical method available to throw out from H society those who do not comply with this requirement. (3/10)
Read 10 tweets
5 Dec 20
When Hindus say that Sikhs are a Hindu panth, they mean it with absolutely no political agenda partly because they have no political agenda in the first place. But more importantly, for Hindus, doctrinal differences are not just tolerable but most expected.
After all, Hindus inherit a tradition of dialectics, describing which as glorious would be an understatement. We have debated over everything even though these days our debates tend to be rather embarrassing.
The glorious debates of the yore were hardly pleasant though. Those we hold as sages and pathfinders today did not have it so easy with their contemporaries and even their own disciples sometimes. They fought bitterly and often called each other names.
Read 16 tweets
24 Sep 20
Okay let me spell it out for the benefit of anyone not mesmerised by whatever this govt does. This is what 2000 posts for KP teachers really means... (short thread follows)
When 2000 KPs go back to the valley with basically no change in the circumstances that led to their eviction, it is a tacit acceptance of the Kashmiriyat narrative. How?
It implies that the Hindu eviction was just a misunderstanding between brothers due to Pakistan, rigged elections etc and now we are eager to coexist peacefully as we always did.
Read 7 tweets
21 May 20
Abhinavagupta, the most exalted Kashmiri in recorded history, was a descendant of Atrigupta, who had come to Kashmir from Madhyadesa (present day UP/MP) 200 years before the great Shaiva Acharya was born. #Justsaying
To be clear, I am not virtue-signalling and appealing for some superficial truce on Twitter. I couldn't care less. But it needs to be said that our contemporary regional identities are colonial vestiges and not worth losing sleep over.
That is not to say that our ancestors were a dull grey monolith with no cultural diversity. But the substratum of Dharma, which is like the circulatory system ensured that no part remained isolated from others. Our civilization is quintessentially holistic.
Read 15 tweets
19 May 20
Promise? What promise? The J&K Domicile Act has left all and sundry in a state of confusion. It is important to clarify the intent and implications of the domicile law. I am afraid this fig leaf notification is doing nothing but playing to the gallery. Thread follows.
After the Article 35A was made inoperative, the concept of "permanent resident" became redundant. But the First Order brought out by the government reintroduced the concept for recruitment of Level 4 govt employees.
As @jsaideepak pointed out in his excellent article, this was against the goals set out in the Parliament on Aug 5, 2019. That the state did not attract best talent for govt jobs was one of the ostensible reasons for removal of Article 370.
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!