DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**tsaaapla** · 11-13-2007, 05:54 AM

Dear Sri Ramaa, Sri KRS & Sri Ranganathan,

After going through your exchanges I came to the following conclusion:

Sri Ramaa, when he said, "Someone had written in this forum that our Dharma is rooted in the Veda" I think he did not remember who had written it or in which thread he read it. This kind of a memory slip can happen to anyone. I don't believe this was a veiled attack on you, Sri KRS.

Sri KRS, I understand why you responded - you thought this idea might have been from one of your own postings. Perhaps - we don't know. From his postings, Sri Ramaa meant to comment on the view, not on the person.

Also Sri Ramaa said that Dharma was beginingless. The Vedas did not invent it. That's all.

He did not specify or imply that the way it is described in the Vedas is wrong.

You have also asked Sri Ramaa another question - As to Dharma being rooted in the Vedas: if this is a yes, does it mean the person saying yes does not acknowledge the existence of dharma before vedas?

To me the answer was, "yeah...". If you say that A is rooted in B then A stems/springs from B. That is the meaning.

According to Sri Ramaa A and B have a correlation that's all. It doesnt mean one came from the other.

Sri KRS, I thought your response was rather complicated to a comparatively simple statement that Sri Ramaa made.

As to "targeting certain audiences" - dear posters, can we please refrain from being too quick to decipher an agenda in others? Malicious intentions usually have a pattern. But anybody can make a mistake or post an improperly formed statement/opinion. We mustn't be too quick to ascribe an agenda to those individuals.

Sri Ranganathan, as your views are those of an observer I don't have any specific comment for you.

Best Regards,
Chintana

Dear Moderatorji,

It seems 'picking on the opinion' have become the focus and seems to have become an issue and not the content of my posting. I therefore would like the moderator to delete such a reference of mine or even my entire posting for it seems my purpose has not been served.

All I said was just as the existence of Paramaathman as pointed out by our Vedas is not a sanction of the Vedas of Paramaathma's existence but imparting of knowledge by the Vedas of His existence, Dharma exists not as a sanction of the Veda when one would say 'rooted in Veda', but despite the Veda though Veda is in comformity pleasantly to such an existence of Dharma. Also that Dharma is synonymous with Paramaathma.

If the above statement is not understood it is no problem with me. If this posting creates a problem I request this also be removed.

Regards,

11-13-2007, 05:54 AM	#17
tsaaapla Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 401 Senior Member	Dear Sri Ramaa, Sri KRS & Sri Ranganathan, After going through your exchanges I came to the following conclusion: Sri Ramaa, when he said, "Someone had written in this forum that our Dharma is rooted in the Veda" I think he did not remember who had written it or in which thread he read it. This kind of a memory slip can happen to anyone. I don't believe this was a veiled attack on you, Sri KRS. Sri KRS, I understand why you responded - you thought this idea might have been from one of your own postings. Perhaps - we don't know. From his postings, Sri Ramaa meant to comment on the view, not on the person. Also Sri Ramaa said that Dharma was beginingless. The Vedas did not invent it. That's all. He did not specify or imply that the way it is described in the Vedas is wrong. You have also asked Sri Ramaa another question - As to Dharma being rooted in the Vedas: if this is a yes, does it mean the person saying yes does not acknowledge the existence of dharma before vedas? To me the answer was, "yeah...". If you say that A is rooted in B then A stems/springs from B. That is the meaning. According to Sri Ramaa A and B have a correlation that's all. It doesnt mean one came from the other. Sri KRS, I thought your response was rather complicated to a comparatively simple statement that Sri Ramaa made. As to "targeting certain audiences" - dear posters, can we please refrain from being too quick to decipher an agenda in others? Malicious intentions usually have a pattern. But anybody can make a mistake or post an improperly formed statement/opinion. We mustn't be too quick to ascribe an agenda to those individuals. Sri Ranganathan, as your views are those of an observer I don't have any specific comment for you. Best Regards, Chintana Dear Moderatorji, It seems 'picking on the opinion' have become the focus and seems to have become an issue and not the content of my posting. I therefore would like the moderator to delete such a reference of mine or even my entire posting for it seems my purpose has not been served. All I said was just as the existence of Paramaathman as pointed out by our Vedas is not a sanction of the Vedas of Paramaathma's existence but imparting of knowledge by the Vedas of His existence, Dharma exists not as a sanction of the Veda when one would say 'rooted in Veda', but despite the Veda though Veda is in comformity pleasantly to such an existence of Dharma. Also that Dharma is synonymous with Paramaathma. If the above statement is not understood it is no problem with me. If this posting creates a problem I request this also be removed. Regards,
	Quote