[Advaita-l] shaDdarhana and other unorthodox schools

[Sylvain]

I will be grateful if you can translate the gist in English.

               *

Because I don't master English, nor translation, i translate only one sentence from the philosopher Hegel.
According to the article you ask me to gist, Hegel (who greatly influenced Western philosophy) wrote 
« For Indians, superstition doesn't exist as opposing to reason; but all their live and thinking are a unique superstition because for them everything is a dream.... »

Philosophy is reserved to the Greek heritage. 

Later, Husserl will go in the same direction. 

I add that Christian missionaries classified all hindouism as « polytheistic » which is simply wrong.  

However, advaita is developing in the Occident because people can emancipate from the « classical philosophers » and « missionaries » interpretations.

Sylvain

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ram Garib" <garib_ram at yahoo.co.in>
To: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta"
<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 9:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] shaDdarhana and other unorthodox schools


>
> Sri S Jayanarayanan wrote:
>
>> I too would like to know Ram Garib's source for
>> stating that there
>> exists such a "dominant" view -- what is the
>> reference for his tall
>> claim? After all, if it is such a widely prevalent
>> view, surely he
>> can cite at least 5 independently published sources!
>
> Sylvain wrote:
>
> "For those who read French, this article is very
> interesting :
> http://philo.pourtous.free.fr/Articles/Julien/les_frontieres_de_la_philosophie.htm"
>
> AND
>
> "Yes.  I personnally studied in philosophy and I think
> this sentence is
> correct. it is probably due to western "ethnocentrism"
> or
> "culturocentrism" (variations of egocentrism).  I
> guess the idea is « How people
> that were colonized could develop a notable
> philosophy, a significant
> spirituality ?"
>
> Thanks Sylvain for coming to my rescue. I will be
> grateful if you can translate the gist in English.
>
> Coming to Sri Jayanarayan's point, the most prominent
> name that comes to my mind is Dr. Albert Sweitzher,
> who was of the opinion that "fits of certainty" can
> hardly be called philosophy. Anyway, you don't have to
> take it on anyone's authority. Just browse through
> graduate curricullum of philosphy of some of the
> universities outside India to appreciate what I am
> saying. You may sometime find a section on "World
> Philosophy" as an appendix to the main philosophy
> curriculum but it is hardly any consolation to see
> buddhism and non-dualism competing for space with
> paganism and wicca. For a decent treatment of Indian
> schools, you will have to go to theology or indology
> department.
>
> Surely, Schopenheur and Neitzshe and a whole host of
> philosophers were deeply impressed by indian thought,
> but in what context? You will invariably find that it
> is the spiritual or religious context that they are
> talking about not the philosophical one. Even today
> after tremendous interest in buddhism and non-dualism,
> you still don't see any philosophers expounding on
> them. If at all, their place is found in their
> personal lives, not academic.
>
> With regards,
> Ram Garib
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________
> Yahoo! India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new
> http://in.answers.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>