Was Sri Rama right in giving up Sita?

Yup.

And I see no contradiction in being a patriot and a universalist as well.

Even a universalist has to love his or her own country in the process , in case you don't know.

 

I've never met or heard a patriot who truely loves other cultures and people equal to his own. If they do then by definition they are not a patriot. It simple isnt possible to be a patriot and a universalist. They are opposites.

I dont agree, a universalist would realise countries are a man made distinction that do not exist. This is the process of becoming a universalist, it's about dispelling ignorance.

To me this is just all wrong, a universalist wouldnt except the notion of countries, let alone love them. What has loving countries got to do about loving. They are an idea, a false idea, something created by man. I will never love a country or a culture. I will love that which resides in myself and others only.

Advising to love something before something else seems a unnecessary long route. This idea will never dispell ignorance. Advising to love all things equally should be the only teaching.

I would go as far to say loving anything first, whatever that may be is the seed of evil.

 

Fully agree.

The concept of nations is a wholly man made thing.
It seems people are stuck in all that - unable to see reality.

Also where this madness of 'love of country' is concerned - it's simply a tool in the hands of dishonest politicians to maintain armies to fight their wars for them.

 

Not so. A universalist doesn't even recognoize that 'countries' exist.

 

Students maybe, but disciples - no. A guru-disciple bond goes beyond an intense influence. Many influence us, many guide us, but the Guru's role is unique.
Vivekananda may have been an upaguru to them, but not a sadguru. The sadguru is one whom the disciple recognizes as the divine and surrenders completely to them. Nowhere do I see such a bhava towards Swami Vivekananda from Gandhiji or Netaji.

Anyway words only.

 

Yes, but come to think of it, everything is man made... the idea of what we call humans or sentient beings with souls , feelings and thoughts or the idea that there are various species ... all of these could be deconstructed (Derrida's deconstruction) and made to show that they are really man made and thinking in these man made terms can make our presuppositions completely not in accordance with reality. Ofcourse, this actually requires that one understand derrida's deconstruction process and analyze Derrida's presuppositions.

 

I am familiar with Derrida's work.

What I'd say is this: if we say everything is a human construct, then we are free to construct something superior to the current fragemented global situation.

Derriida himself has expressed his general support for marxist ideas such as internationalism.

 

Well, Vivekananda had said so that it is possible, and I go with Vivekananda.

And Vivekananda indeed loved other people and cultures very much.

A very touching incident in his life was when he was in Egypt with his disciples. While walking through a street with his disciples, some prostitutes in a certain house, started making signs at him and tried to attract his attention. Even though his disciples tried to steer him away from them, he walked towards them , sat down and started weeping , saying " Poor mothers, they have manifested their divinity in their beauty ".


The prostitutes who till then were in a happy mood, thinking they got a customer, were astonished seeing his tears. Some of them started weeping themselves and covered their faces. One of them came forward and kissed his robe, and called him "Hombr dios" ( don't recollect the exact words) , which meant "Man of God."

So ,are you saying that to love your mother first, is the " seed of evil."

 

if my universe, which i love dearly, is attacked by another universe, i will defend it but i will not attack another universe unprovoked

 

Thats the spirit, chiefie.

 

I would never advise following people blindly. I try my best to evaluate whether a teaching is true before excepting it. All that said Vivekananda seemed a great man - but I always felt any man no matter his spiritual level is capable of saying something false.

The Buddha teaches, 'rely on the teaching not the teacher.'

This is how I try to approach things. Just because Vivekananda said something isn't good enough for me. I do not follow a teacher blindly - his teaching must be correct to my logic.

Yes I am. 'Evil' is perhaps the wrong word ignorance is better. But ignorance is a small seed which can grow to a mighty oak. I know of no spiritual master who loved his own family or mother above anyone else. Jesus even lamblasted his mother when he wanted to be about his fathers work.

Why not love your mother and all mothers equally. Why love one more than the other?

 

Yes but two universes have never existed.

Matthew 5:43-48

​

You have heard that it was said, "You shall love your neighbor, and hate your enemy." But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you in order that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax-gatherers do the same? And if you greet your brothers only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect. ​

 

And thats what I am doing , following Vivekanandas teaching , and not him, though I do love him. Vivekananda himself had stated that one should never accept anything blindly and question everything, and should never imitate a personal ideal, no matter how great he may be.

So you love other moms more than your own mom !

 

Well one time you say you only follow the teaching. The time before you follow it just because Vivekananda has said so.

They are the same thing. Thats the point.

You keep saying 'your' - 'mine' etc, I try not to see things as separated. I prefer to see the oneness in all. But I cannot claim to live upto this, I am ignorant of it at times like most others.

 

Well, you can say my later quote was more specific.

All moms are indeed beautiful, more beautiful than anything on earth. But I think you should love your own mom first before you love other moms.

 

I cannot see a reason why.

It doesn't diminish the love for your own family/mother by loving your neighbour the same.

 

MMm...the way I see it is how can you learn to love other moms if you can't even learn the one that you already have ...who is right there in front of you? How can you learn to love all...if you can't even love those who are right in your immediate life....?

Philuk...I see what you are saying...but its hard for people ...you know? Think about an unpersonal God...people have a hard time with that. So, we have Names and Forms for God....but we should never get caught up in those and forget that they are all one. We have nations and culture and diversity... because a) how boring would it be if we didn't? and b) because it similifies things for us for a starting point... first you learn to love your family, then your friends, then your town, then your state, then your country, then your world. Similarly... you can also learn that while you love this little units...they are all part of the One. One World...

This is why I say there is nothing wrong with countries, per se. Not in the political sense of countries...but in the social sense. "Your" people aren't greater than any other peoples...we were just put in the division to get a taste of love... when we learn divine love....there are no boundaries anymore. But everyone has to start somewhere. ::shrug::

 

And very good students of Vivekananda as well, who had studied carefully all his works.

Well, Netaji indeed said that he would fall at Vivekananda's feet, and that he would have accepted him as his guru, if he had only been alive at that time.

 

I can only see love as boundless and unconditional. I don't belive it can be learnt. It's always there inside yourself, it's a matter of discovering it and then everything else is automatic. There isn't any effort. When you start saying I will only love my mother because she did this for me, or I will only love these people because they live here or believe that. Then is it even love?

But your right we start someplace, I do not live what I say all the time. But I wouldnt teach anything different than what I write. I would never advise others to love only one thing more than another. Because this is the seed of attachment, if you lose this one thing then does this produce hate and fear? You can never lose unconditional love because it relays on nothing.

 

siksha (instruction or teaching) is often held as more important than diksha (initiation)