🕉️ Śaiva | Siddhānta Āgama | Hindu | Dharmic Philosophy | Hindu and Indian Politics |🛕
2 subscribed
Dec 15, 2021 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
Pulling on this, it is important to note that those who insist on classifying based on guṇa (using sectarian readings) suffer from one of several problems. 1) Their theology is weak and is unable to accommodate a broader reading of the scriptures without falling apart.
2) There are portions they’re unable to reconcile in a logical manner thus brushing it away becomes a convenience. 3) Obvious small mindedness prevents them from seeing similar classifications each with deviations or changes.
Now classical vedantis don’t subscribe to such
Dec 15, 2021 • 4 tweets • 2 min read
Both you and the person you are replying to should be able to easily quote non-vaiṣṇavas. Yet, I see a great struggle. I know exactly which verse of Manu he’s referring to, and sadly for him it doesn’t pass muster. No Advaitin accepts classification of Purāṇas.
CC: @GhorAngirasa
The idiotic claim here is that in 12.95 of the Mānava it says “ya vedabāhyāh smṛtayo..”
Apparently this shows that Bh. Manu classified the smṛtis and somehow the Śaiva purāṇas are tāmasika.
Dec 14, 2021 • 7 tweets • 2 min read
This will be an ongoing thread, because frankly such opinion still continuing seems to be because people choose to rely on non-sampradāyikas and the ones belonging to it seldom take the effort to correct it. I’ll include stuff here which are most relevant. 1) Śaṅkara Digvijaya:
Describing Śaṅkarar thus in the 4th Sarga, verse 58
“त्रिपुण्ड्रं तस्याऽऽहु: सितभसितशोभि त्रिपथगां..” इति 2) Now the question of vaidika donning Tripuṇḍra is quite easily handled. Not only is it Vaidika but the rites to do bhasmadhāraṇa are from the śruti.
Apr 8, 2021 • 20 tweets • 5 min read
Profoundly idiotic piece. Will attempt to dismantle this in a bit. Not many notable points were raised, but these can be sufficiently answered.
1) The author begins by admonishing people for neither understanding Yoga nor Hinduism. Then goes ahead and demonstrates that they themselves in their hurry fall for very basic mistakes. Let me show 2) The author starts with the Bhagavad Gita and quotes the verse 9.17, claiming
Apr 7, 2021 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
“The entire process of sanatana dharma.... naturally get to the source of all this.” 1) Did you naturally gain the above statement? 2) Patañjali says, “समाधि सिद्धिः ईश्वरप्रणिधानात्” since only meditating on Īśvara since: क्लेश कर्म विपाकाशयैःपरामृष्टः पुरुषविशेष ईश्वरः
While the premise that raising profound questions is encouraged in Dharma, it is neither the definition nor the underlying process of it.
Dharma is law, based on Satya. 1) Not all questions are profound 2) Not all answers are correct.
While it is reasonable to expect that
Sep 4, 2020 • 5 tweets • 1 min read
The last few RTs is the point I have been trying to make since yesterday. 1) Atheists cannot claim to be rational when their sole purpose is to simply “ridicule someone for having faith” 2) You cannot claim Hindus are same as Abes when you use different beating sticks.
If the atheist is genuinely interested in engaging the Hindu in a debate, it must be in an honest and intellectual plane. Causing offence till a breaking point is reached without any effort to engage constructively makes you no different from an iconoclastic monotheist.
Aug 19, 2020 • 6 tweets • 2 min read
This is for Hindus who wish to learn. Atheists like this tool, will mock but let’s discuss this.
While the pauranika episode is short, the wealth of meaning it provides is immense.
Thread below.
When Ādya form of Vināyaka was made manifest by Śakti, this was done without the fixed anchor of the Purusha. Such can never be an example of emulation for the Cosmos. This was known by both Mahādeva and His Śaktī. Such Līlās are meant to illustrate deeper level rahasyas.
Jun 4, 2020 • 15 tweets • 5 min read
9) Yeah the history books with 4 chapters for Mughals, one chapter each for the pre-Mughal Islamic dynasties and a subsection for the Cholas, and two sentences for other prominent dynasties.
10) There are more non-UC pilgrims than UC at any given point. Kuch bhi.
1) Ji is a respectful form of address. Everyone calls their elders or someone in a respectful position as Ji. I’m sure you call the Brahmin rickshaw driver, servant, labourer as “ji”. If not then reflects your class bias.
2) Unless you’re living in some weird place in your head, all places provide accommodations based on your ability to consistently pay for it. Number of different caste bachelors live in the cities now, you’re being weird. 3) LOL, all public places are open for the public.
Śrī and Hari are not corporeal beings to be ruled by such modern sensibilities. Any manifestation of Deities is for the benefit of the Jīva, so that it may internalise the vidyā and progress on a spiritual journey. A few brief observations below.
1) Īśvara and Śakti are inseparably linked, two consider them distinct is like considering the sun and heat as distinct entities. Śakti is the manifest action of Brahman. 2) It is absurd to think that an infinite and eternal manifest power is Male or Female.
2 subscribed
