> I took a look at your posts but I have the feeling
> that the James you have met, is a different James
> I have met.
It's not. It's also the same JS who posts modern vedanta teachings online.
> Swami Dayananda, Swami Paramarthananda, Swami TV,
> Neema, Radha,... James always pointed out that
> there are more teachers and publicly admitted of
> reading transcripts of Swami Dayananda and Swami
> Paramarthananda. He encouraged me to study with
> Chinmaya Mission, and the above mentioned
That has got nothing to do with SW teaching things that are modern vedanta
> James teaches the bhakti and jnana path, with
> bhakti/karma yoga as the preparation for jnana,
What do you mean by 'bhakti'? There are many verisions of modern vedanta that teach varying depths of the above. You are confused as to the definition of modern vedanta. And this is because of the way the pramana is used. That is, because of the way vedanta is taught.
In that way he is not teaching modern
> vedanta of four paths. He makes it clear that
> jnanam is the way to liberation which requires a
> qualified mind, acquired through karma, values and
In what way is he not teaching modern vedanta? You have not quantified this so far, lol. You picking something out of the blue does not invalidate anything.
In any event, if someone is 'not' teaching modern vedanta in any way, does not mean they are not teaching it in other ways.
> James says that nididhyasanam does not end for the
> Jiva, that is because once nididhyasanam has done
> its job, the small, inadequate,emotional jiva is
> no more because tripti, perfect satisfaction, has
> replaced the small inadequate jiva vritti. This is
> how Swami Paramarthananda explains it too.
As we are seeing from our exchange there is not enough precision. Saying Swami Paramarthananda says something has to be put into context and looked at properly. For already imprecise claims are being made here, that are not established. :).
To be precise you wrote the above shows that nididhyasana does NOT end for jiva. However, the above is the way scripture says, and that is that it DOES end for jiva, which is my point.
However, Isabella has publicly posted that it does not. And incase it gets removed, I have saved copies of it among other things. Who did she learn vedanta from...
> James also makes it clear that the teaching is
> independent of the teacher.
Lol. Yes, this is traditional vedanta teaching. Both him and Isabella teach this. However, for teachers that are so impersonal, they are very personal to students who do not do as they are told in their private lives. Students have been subjective to am immense amount of spiritual and emotional manipulation. Much of it is documented. Either in private, or publicly.
> And he makes it clear that spiritual experience is
> as much a hindrance to jnanam as it can be of
> He makes it very clear that jnanam is not an
> event, and that our true nature is indeed
Yes he does say this. Which does not mean he is not teaching other problematic things.
> In my experience James is extremely generous, he
> gives without asking anything for return. This is
> my experience and I have been very close to James
> for about 5 years, attending at least 15 seminars
> and staying with him closely. He even provided me
> free accomodation at the retreat center and
> invited me for food when I was eating with him at
> restaurants. He never asked for a dime. His
> teaching was always only donation.
> I never have met such a generous person in my life
> before! And this is no exaggeration. You can write
> him anytime and be sure to receive a fair reply
> within days without any demand for something in
> return. He always points out that this is the way
> he learned it from his Guru.
Traditionally this is the way of things, but you are superimposing attributes on him that are not valid. Any teacher would only accept donations. It is not a big deal. It does not make them generous. It is tradition and the way dakshina works is very important. However, since this is the case, it is another sign, of students not understanding the tradition and glorifying a teacher. This is a problem, as it makes the students blind to bad behaviour.
However, trying to claim JS is never asking for money is ridiculous. Students were in his seminars last year in Europe when he specifically asked for money for the property in Spain. And much to students discontent. This is a no-no.
The penny must drop here. Just because you have not had money took and been burned, does not mean others haven't. Just because you have not been subjected to spiritual abuse, does not mean others haven't'. Just because you have not been sexually abused, does not mean others haven't.
You will not even accept this, and that is because you are fully conditioned by the cult. So much, that you actually tried to invalidate a victim of sexual assault. And you talked to us about adharma?
Anyhow, it is no longer voluntary donations when there is an expectation and a lobbying in course, for cash.
I am also going to tread a fine line here. But, him and IS have been getting money of students and then burning them. They will read this, and they know what I am talking about. I would like to see their independent financial records for the last 10 years published on their website. Independent. Cults tend not to do this. Let's drill into their finances.
> These are just my two cents. And if I forgot
> something of your criticism against James, let me
> know! I am happy to look into these things for my
> own benefit of clarity.
You say you have read my posts. Though you have not addressed a single point in the modern vedanta teachings that they teach. The deflection won't work with me, I'm very focused.
You are also not interested in your own clarity. You are interested in debunking things. I feel that you are allowed to interact here with me, so you don't need to pretend. I'm not.