[Advaita-l] Is this list's position on bhakti correct?

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011, Rajaram Venkataramani wrote:

>> RV: The forum policy gives a lower status to bhakti than jnana, which I
> argue is not the traditional advaita position. Hence, I call for a revision
> of the policy.

I think you are reading way too much into what the list policies say.  The 
reason for including this is that unfortunately there are people who think 
that Advaita Vedanta is some kind of atheism.  We simply mean to affirm 
that bhakti is part and parcel of Vedanta and its is on-topic here. 
That's it.

> It is like US constitution which hundred years considered
> blacks three-fourth human and luckily re-written.

Incidently.  It merely said that slaves (who were mostly but not 100% 
black, another popular misconception.) were to be counted as three-fourths 
for the purpose of determining the population of the states which in turn 
determined the number of representatives in Congress.  If they had been 
counted as whole, then the pro-slavery states could have overwhelmed the 
less populous free states by sheer numbers and made slavery legal 
everywhere so it was actually a progressive move.   I bring this up as a 
timely warning on the dangers of interpretation without context.  :-)

-- 
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>