Thread: temple priests

Dear pals,

Let us accept the reality.

Let us not try to do "sappaikkattu" on the issue of women in the religion!

Hinduism has been biased against women!
How many women priests you can show in our temples?
We will sing hymns in praise of Lordess Kamakshi - But we will not permit even our grand mother to go inside the sanctum -sanctorum, even if she belongs to the Gurukkal sub-caste and has learnt agamas!

First of all, women are prohibited from learning and chanting vedas!
It is a fact that the Acharyas were not meeting widows if they were not presenting themseleves as per the stipulated appearance! But rules are different for men!

Sanatana Dharma is very retrogressive as far as women are concerned!
See the latest case of Sabarimala! Big hue and cry about a non-issue!
The behaviour of the puritans do not add to the glory of our religion!

We only give lip service for giving women their rightful place ! Once it comes to the brasstacks every one backtracks!

Shankar

Dear Shankar:
I was about to send you an email asking you to join this thread; I like your views. I am thrilled that you have been keeping up!!

Yes, I have read about the Sabarimalai fiasco where some Kannada actress went into the temple. By these asinine rules, what kind of message are we sending to our own folks? Besides, we are giving more fodder to the christian missionaries.
The reason they give is that since Lord Ayyappa is a bachelor, women will not be allowed. This would be a great joke except it is not. The problem with many of us is that we try to humanize and anthropomorphize God; we attach our mortal values and our own biases to God and say that is the way things ought to be and drag God into this by saying that is what HE wants!!

Dear Mr. KRS:
Thank you for your analysis; it was beautiful. However, since we live in present day world, shouldn't we be adapting and adjusting to the modern world?
Will it make a difference if the Sanyasin cannot know whether a woman is a widow or not?

Sure Silverfox. I am happy to endorse any valid idea. I do think women have been ignored for too long within the Hindu and even Brahminical traditions. The man does all the rituals in front of the fire and the women cook in the kitchen all the time when they are supposed to be praying with the men. That's always been hard for me to understand.

A point about the story where Nakkeran finds fault with Lord Shiva. If you ever get a chance to listen to Pulavar Keeran's interpretation of the story (on audio tape) you will recognize that the movie version did not portray the entire story. The contest was not only for the right answer but also for the ability of the poet to be able to read the King's mind. Actually when the contest is announced the words were, 'There is a doubt in the King's mind. Those who can solve it...' etc. But the announcer never actually says what that doubt is. So when Lord Shiva went upto to Shenbaga Pandiyan and said that his wife's hair had a much better fragrance than any flower what he actually was doing was endorsing Pandiyan's love for his wife. Pandiyan loved everything about his wife and so her hair smelt good. But since it was such a private matter he didn't know how to express it. Hence his actual problem was never advertised.

Lord Shiva's intent was not to fool Pandiyan but to celebrate his conjugal love. When a husband and wife truly love each other, everything about the other person would seem grand and good. To an outsider that might look ordinary. But in such situations it is the subjective opinion that matters. Objectivity is of no use because a third person cannot really comment on how a lover should view his beloved.

This is exactly what Nakeeran did - when he asked how can human hair have more fragrance he was looking at the issue from an objective, scholarly stand point. Lord Shiva got angry because it was not a matter for an objective, scholarly discussion. So in the actual Periya Puranam verse Lord Shiva calls Nakkeran as "Thera(k) Keeran" which means "Aarya theriyathavane" - which means one who has shown an inability to understand the context under which the question was raised.

Lord Shiva burns him because scholarship is useless if it cannot understand the context it has to serve. Ultimately intelligence has to serve people - it cannot exist for its own sake in the human form. (Divine intelligence is different and it always expresses itself through love.) Since Nakkeran became very arrogant about his scholarly prowess he was unable to see that the question needed to be answered from a subjective standpoint, not from an objective one.

According to the movie, Lord shiva gets angry because he feels insulted. That is simply ridiculous. The Lord knows no ego - Anbe Sivam. In fact it is the opposite - the Lord came to destroy Nakkeran's ego. Which is what happened when he burnt him - Nakkeran's ego got destroyed and he was restored in the context of renewed faith and humility so that he could serve the world more efficiently. The actual burning of Nakkeran in the movie is a figurative or a metaphorical expression for the way the Lord destroyed his ego. He was not actually killed and brought back to life.

Sorry if this is too long. But I hope it has been an interesting read.

Dear Chintana:

What a beautiful story and your outstanding analysis and commentary. I greatly enjoyed reading it and have learnt from it. My Tamil reading is halting; nevertheless, I would like to get the book; what it is called? Periya Puranam? I would love to read the 'leelas' of Lord Shiva.

Please keep up the good work. Like I have said before, I am blessed to be part of this group; great scholars like Anbu, Venkatraman, KRS, you .... the list goes on.

Thank you, I am glad you liked it. I've always wanted to write pieces like this one. Time and access to books have been a bit problem. Yes, it is called Periya Puranam and the author is Sekkizahar. But you will need an interpretation though. That Tamil is rather ancient and requires a bit of training to get through.

Dear Chintana:
Please, by all means, continue to write; your commentary of Lord Shiva not getting angry because God is 'Anbe Sivam' and above all human weaknesses, and HE didn't literally burn Nakkeerar but his ego - these are beautiful interpretations of these magnificent stories to show that these are metaphorical.
Please continue to write about other stories with your commentaries. You have an ardent follower!
Can you or someone recommend an easier Tamil book on these?

What a nice interpretation Chintana ! I have heard this story so many times from so many people. But till date none have explained it as you have done. Great job ! As Silverfox said, please write about more stories. Probably you can start with all Thiruvilaiyadals. Probably we can request Pravin to start a new forum for this.

Chintana:
You had mentioned a Tamil movie on the subject; what is the name of this movie? Thanks!

The movie is called "Thiruvilayadal" starring Sivaji Ganesan in the lead. Nagesh has given a sterling performance as the poor poet Dharmi.