Smartas - The Eclectic Hindus

[KRS]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

Dear Sri Suraju06 Ji,

In your post #39 above you have said:
<Edtd. - KRS>

This is a direct attack on Smartha beliefs and this is what Sri Nacchinarkiniyan Ji has reported. And I agree with him.

I also think that your definition of Vaishnavism is restricted to a particular belief based on, correct me if I am wrong, Acharya Ramanuja's philosophy. As such, it seems to me, you are saying, and, I am paraphrasing, that to be worshipping Vishnu/Narayana means that you must fall in to the category of 'Vaishnavism' of your definition.

What Sri Nacchinarkiniyan is saying and I think you have missed the point, is that Smarthas worship many Gods, because to them the Brahman behind all of them is the same. Vishnu to Smarthas is just one such God.

It seems to me, without appreciating this from the Smartha pov, you seem to define the way of Smartha worshipping Vishnu according to your concept of Vishnu worship with the attendant theology and seem to pass value judgement on that worship by your almost mocking words I have highlighted above.

Let me finish by adding one more thought. Vishnu/Narayana that you worship IS NOT the same Vishnu/Narayana that the Smarthas worship, even though the deity, and the object of prayer may be the same but the notion of the prayers differ.

I hope you would correct the situation.

Regards,
KRS

 

[prasad1]

Kisne dekhi theri surat, Kaun banai they murat?
This is a futile discussion.
We are all seekers, none of us has seen God and reporting it.
Then again does God have a form? Even that is debatable.

What Is God's Real Form?
Does God have a form or is He formless? Adi Sankara preferred a formless God while Ramanujacharya believed that He was both with and without form.

Ramana Maharshi realised the Inner Divine Self by enquiring, 'Who am I?' Vivekananda was not for dualism, of seeing God in an image. But when Ramakrishna Paramhansa touched his chest to indicate the divinity within, Vivekananda began to 'see' God in every thing - living or non-living.
​

God reveals Himself in the form which His devotee loves most. Arjuna, Meera, Radha, the Gopis of Vrindavan and Hanuman were devotees of God with form and without. Kabir said: 'The formless Absolute is my Father, and God with form is my Mother.' Tulsidas said: 'God with form is in my eyes, without form He is in my heart and His name is ever on my lips.' Christians too love the form of Jesus while believing in His formless aspect.

​

 

[tks]

Hinduism at its foundation is not monotheistic or polytheistic or pantheistic or any other 'theistic'
At the core Isvara is both immanent and transcendent (as described in Prushasuktham and elsewhere like Ishavasya Upanishad etc). There are no definition for this in English.


As noted by one of the Vedanta teachers 'There is not one God but there is ONLY God' meaning that all we perceive and know are manifestations of the same Isvara.

Hindus do not worship many Gods - rather they worship MANY FORMS of the ONLY GOD! That is the essence of our teaching.

Hindus do not worship a cow, a four legged animal that says 'moo' - rather they worship Isvara in the form of Cow which *symbolizes* a nurturing mother who gives milk to sustain life. It is an expression of gratitude for that life sustaining power delivered by Isvara via a form of cow.

Those that tend to believe there is one God and also believe that 'my God is better than your God' has to recognize that it is sounds much like 'my Dog is better than your Dog' LoL

Our ritualistic practices tend to remind people of this core understanding of Isvara - There are many that say the following up to three times a day and yet act very differently towards other forms of worship

akaashuth patitam toyam yatha gacchati sagaram
sarva deva namaskarah keshavam prati gacchati

"Just as a drop of water falling from the sky ultimately goes to the ocean, in the same way all worship performed for any form ultimately goes only to Lord Keshava (Krishna)."

Swami Vivekananda in his famous Chicago addressed called attention to the above with this statement

' 'I will quote to you, brethren, a few lines from a hymn which I remember to have repeated from my earliest boyhood, which is every day repeated by millions of human beings: “As the different streams having their sources in different paths which men take through different tendencies, various though they appear, crooked or straight, all lead to Thee.”

One does not have to be a theist to appreciate the universal appeal in the above message..

 

[renuka]

The whole of this Universe
Is stationed in the Omnipresent
And the Omnipotent God.
We see Him in various forms.
He brings to light
All these worlds.
Him they call the Kala, Infinite,
Pervading the infinite space.


(Atharva 19.53.3)

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

This thread is about the Smartha religion as the title makes it very clear. About Smartas, their concepts and evolution and related things.

It is not about the concept of God in Hinduism. We have a large number of threads about that.

I request the members to keep their posts in Topic.

Thank You.

 

[renuka]

This thread is about the Smartha religion as the title makes it very clear. About Smartas, their concepts and evolution and related things.

It is not about the concept of God in Hinduism. We have a large number of threads about that.

I request the members to keep their posts in Topic.

Thank You.

Dear Sir,

Don't worry some of our posts are just commercial breaks before the battle starts again!

BTW I did not know that Smartaism is a religion.

I always thought is just a school of thought.

 

[sangom]

Hinduism at its foundation is not monotheistic or polytheistic or pantheistic or any other 'theistic'
At the core Isvara is both immanent and transcendent (as described in Prushasuktham and elsewhere like Ishavasya Upanishad etc). There are no definition for this in English.


As noted by one of the Vedanta teachers 'There is not one God but there is ONLY God' meaning that all we perceive and know are manifestations of the same Isvara.

Hindus do not worship many Gods - rather they worship MANY FORMS of the ONLY GOD! That is the essence of our teaching.

Hindus do not worship a cow, a four legged animal that says 'moo' - rather they worship Isvara in the form of Cow which *symbolizes* a nurturing mother who gives milk to sustain life. It is an expression of gratitude for that life sustaining power delivered by Isvara via a form of cow.

Those that tend to believe there is one God and also believe that 'my God is better than your God' has to recognize that it is sounds much like 'my Dog is better than your Dog' LoL

Our ritualistic practices tend to remind people of this core understanding of Isvara - There are many that say the following up to three times a day and yet act very differently towards other forms of worship

akaashuth patitam toyam yatha gacchati sagaram
sarva deva namaskarah keshavam prati gacchati

"Just as a drop of water falling from the sky ultimately goes to the ocean, in the same way all worship performed for any form ultimately goes only to Lord Keshava (Krishna)."

Swami Vivekananda in his famous Chicago addressed called attention to the above with this statement

' 'I will quote to you, brethren, a few lines from a hymn which I remember to have repeated from my earliest boyhood, which is every day repeated by millions of human beings: “As the different streams having their sources in different paths which men take through different tendencies, various though they appear, crooked or straight, all lead to Thee.”

One does not have to be a theist to appreciate the universal appeal in the above message..

"sarva deva namaskarah keshavam prati gacchati"

So, after all, it is Kesava and none else who is the Isvara. Therefore, vaishnavas seem to have won the fight!!

Or, is it the case that Kesava gets only the namaskArA: and all the rest like flowers, water, rose water, naivedyams etc., go to other gods - just like middle level politicians and officials eating away almost the entire assistance and the poor man Kesava getting only aid in paper!!

 

[KRS]

Okay, Sri Suraju06 Ji,

As a Moderator, I am telling you respectfully that the highlighted portion is offensive - please delete it by yourself or I will delete it.

I am not here to discuss anymore on this point - we can do that after YOU SELF DELETE WHAT I HIGHLIGHTED AS OFFENSIVE.

I will give you 2 more hours from now to do it.

Regards,
KRS

 

[suraju06]

Okay, Sri Suraju06 Ji,

As a Moderator, I am telling you respectfully that the highlighted portion is offensive - please delete it by yourself or I will delete it.

I am not here to discuss anymore on this point - we can do that after YOU SELF DELETE WHAT I HIGHLIGHTED AS OFFENSIVE.

I will give you 2 more hours from now to do it.

Regards,
KRS

Dear Mr. KRS,

Let me make it clear. I will not delete it. Please proceed with whatever you want to do. Even when you came back from your vanvas I expected some such fire works from you.

Thanks every body and bye. I have better things to do.

 

[prasad1]

This thread is about the Smartha religion as the title makes it very clear. About Smartas, their concepts and evolution and related things.

It is not about the concept of God in Hinduism. We have a large number of threads about that.

I request the members to keep their posts in Topic.

Thank You.

Smartha is a sub-sect of Hinduism, of which you may represent a wing. You do not speak for all smarthas. We have every right to express our opinion. <Edtd. - KRS> This is a public forum and please follow the forum rules.

Sri Prasad1 Ji, while as a participant in a thread one has every right to express one's opinions, as OP, one also has the ultimate right to set boundaries on the topic to be discussed. Sri Nacchinarkiniyan Ji, in this context has posted a very valid message.

Regards,
KRS

 

[suraju06]

Dear Mr. KRS.

Sri Prasad1 Ji, while as a participant in a thread one has every right to express one's opinions, as OP, one also has the ultimate right to set boundaries on the topic to be discussed. Sri Nacchinarkiniyan Ji, in this context has posted a very valid message.

This is a matter already settled by sri Praveen some time back. There is no such right devolving on the opener of a thread.The forum is open to all. The person who opens a thread has no such special right over it. When a member in the forum said she owned a particular thread and asked others may go away, this was referred to praveen and he settled the matter by saying clearly that the person opening a thread has just the same right as others. Please refer to praveen. Being the super moderator, more than any one else, you should have been aware of this.

Cheers.

 

[suraju06]

<edited. issue sorted via pm> Praveen

 

[praveen]

<edited. issue sorted via pm> Praveen

 

[praveen]

Dear Mr. KRS.



This is a matter already settled by sri Praveen some time back. There is no such right devolving on the opener of a thread.The forum is open to all. The person who opens a thread has no such special right over it. When a member in the forum said she owned a particular thread and asked others may go away, this was referred to praveen and he settled the matter by saying clearly that the person opening a thread has just the same right as others. Please refer to praveen. Being the super moderator, more than any one else, you should have been aware of this.

Cheers.

It is not KRS's fault. I simply forgot to mention to him as this happened while he was away. So i will take the blame for this.

 

[prasad1]

Smartha is a sub-sect of Hinduism, of which you may represent a wing. You do not speak for all smarthas. We have every right to express our opinion. <Edtd. - KRS> This is a public forum and please follow the forum rules.

Sri Prasad1 Ji, while as a participant in a thread one has every right to express one's opinions, as OP, one also has the ultimate right to set boundaries on the topic to be discussed. Sri Nacchinarkiniyan Ji, in this context has posted a very valid message.

Regards,
KRS

Mr, KRSji you should check the forum rules with Mr. Praveen. Mr. Raju is right when he pointed out that. I am only expressing the precedent set by Mr. Praveen.

 

[prasad1]

It is not KRS's fault. I simply forgot to mention to him as this happened while he was away. So i will take the blame for this.

It is great that you accept the responsibility, but we paid the price of Mr. KRS's ignorance.

 

[praveen]

Mr, KRSji you should check the forum rules with Mr. Praveen. Mr. Raju is right when he pointed out that. I am only expressing the precedent set by Mr. Praveen.

It is great that you accept the responsibility, but we paid the price of Mr. KRS's ignorance..

My apologies once again on two counts.

1. For not informing KRSji.
2. I only asked him to moderate this thread because i am, to put it bluntly, not knowledgeable enough to figure out what / who is right.

Now, can i please ask/request all to continue on the main discussion point and move forward?

 

[KRS]

To all:

I respectfully submit what Sri Praveen Ji has moderated before and what I have said above to Sri Prasad1 Ji do not conflict. As much as the participants have the right to post anything (of course one would hope that it would be on topic), to maintain the flow, the OP has every right to request folks to be on topic. That's all I have said.

In this case, Sri Prasad1 Ji mistook the request from Sri Nacchinarkiniyan Ji as an 'order' and hence his response, which required some minor moderation and an explanation. That's all.

Regards,
KRS

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Prasad1 Ji,

Who has paid what 'price' because of my 'ignorance'?

Regards,
KRS

 

[sangom]

I will say, with my limited knowledge, that it is not only smartas who are eclectic but most hindus are eclectic. Some may be slower than others in identifying, selecting, understanding and adopting the eclectic aspects from various sects and some others may have been faster.

I know vaishnavites (Iyengars) who have left many of their olden taboos and customs and are mingling very well with the smartas, even including inter-marriages (not only with other tabras but also with NBs. But Shri raju here has been advocating a kind of extreme version of vaishnavism right from the beginning. That seems to me to be the crux of the present problem.

Religiosity breeds fanaticism, that is the moral of this story, imho!!

 

[sarang]

Sticking to one's tradition and having strong convictions without affecting others, and allowing others to practice their belief is not fanaticism. Forcing others to follow yours way is fanaticism.

Anyway imho absolves everything!

Religiosity breeds fanaticism, that is the moral of this story, imho!!

 

[sangom]

Sticking to one's tradition and having strong convictions without affecting others, and allowing others to practice their belief is not fanaticism. Forcing others to follow yours way is fanaticism.

Anyway imho absolves everything!

In the case under consideration, the two conditions "without affecting others" and "allowing others to practice their belief", do not seem to have been satisfied. The strong sentiments did give a definite message that only vaishnavism is perfect; the freedom of someone else writing about their belief as to what vaishnavism is, was questioned. If your ideal was to be seen in this case, the writings about vaishnavism, smartas etc., should have been allowed to continue since, after all, one person writing in TBF is not going to affect vaishnavism. But neither was this self-restraint observed, nor was/were the personal opinions put forward in a "sAtveeki" form though the peson concerned boasted himself to be a sAtvik

Of course your post as also a few more in the same vein are to be expected because there is a definite "Jalra" group!!

 

[prasad1]

To all:

I respectfully submit what Sri Praveen Ji has moderated before and what I have said above to Sri Prasad1 Ji do not conflict. As much as the participants have the right to post anything (of course one would hope that it would be on topic), to maintain the flow, the OP has every right to request folks to be on topic. That's all I have said.

In this case, Sri Prasad1 Ji mistook the request from Sri Nacchinarkiniyan Ji as an 'order' and hence his response, which required some minor moderation and an explanation. That's all.

Regards,
KRS

The op or anyone else has a right to ask others to stick to the point, but at the same time the forum members have every right to express their views. Mr. KRSji you jumped in and started moderating without considering the precedent setting rules. I have every right to tell the poster, that he should not try to be the moderator.
You moderated my statement may be slightly. In the process we lost a learned member of the forum.

 

[prasad1]

Smartha is a sub-sect of Hinduism, of which you may represent a wing. You do not speak for all smarthas. We have every right to express our opinion. <Edtd. - KRS> This is a public forum and please follow the forum rules.

Sri Prasad1 Ji, while as a participant in a thread one has every right to express one's opinions, as OP, one also has the ultimate right to set boundaries on the topic to be discussed. Sri Nacchinarkiniyan Ji, in this context has posted a very valid message.

Regards,
KRS

In light of Mr.Praveen's post, please reedit this moderation.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Prasad1 Ji,

I edited out your unnecessary harsh language.

I did not delete your entire post because, l agreed that you can freely express your opinion.

In other words, my edit and explanation were towards your harsh language, and not towards your expression about your right to post. The proof lies in me letting the post remain, sans the harsh language.

There will not be any 're-edits'. And in the future, please measure your words that you post carefully. Otherwise, they will keep on being edited out. Thank you.

Regards,
KRS

In light of Mr.Praveen's post, please reedit this moderation.