You asked me what I would do in a given circumstance. You repeated your question and were insisting on a reply and so I gave it. I did not ask you, for obvious reasons, what you would have done in that circumstance. Any way as you are very keen to tell that, let us take a look at it:
Well Raju, perhaps i made a mistake by writing what i would have done, if i were in EVR's place, in a post addressed to you. I was merely conveying to readers what i would have done in an imaginary situation. It was meant for readers possibly tamil speaking dalits from an other forum who tend to justify the violence during the EVR time and claim there were no other options. Any large scale social movement cannot claim to have no options. This thread is getting an average of 100+ hits per day. And am glad for posts from you. Your interaction /posts are valueble.
1) If you were so sure about it(they being irredeemable casteists for ever) why should you go and ask for food from him? Was your self esteem so low? Did you need his approval/acceptance so badly?
I do not understand this. What is it about self-esteem, approval/acceptance ?
There was no need for EVR "go and ask for food" from a brahmin individual. The only places where free food was served in Kasi in those times were chatrams which exclusively fed brahmins (and possibly still do). And ofcourse these were for brahmins only. There were no free-food places for non-brahmins.
So when EVR tried to enter one such chatram, he was told it is for brahmins only. But he had no money. If he wanted food he would have had to beg. Instead of doing that, he tried to enter the chatram wearing a upanayanam-thread. But he had a moustache and could not pass himself off as a brahmin. So he was thrown out (dragged out and pushed out of the door onto the streets, one version also says he was slapped / beaten up and cursed for attempting to pass himself off as a brahmin). Even after being thrown out, he still wud not beg. Out of hunger, he finally had to battle with dogs and eat the leftovers thrown out from the same chatram.
And this is not some concocted tale merely to allege in the lines of "anti-dalit" and "licentious" as you have done. EVR did not live so long back. So there are people in their 80s still alive who can tell you his life's details.
EVR's father had a shop, and the set-up was typically business type, that is, he lived in a household where (gossipy) people continually kept coming in and going out (not like the present times where people can have their privacy). His life events are and known to his extended relatives, friends and those who had lived in the same neighbourhood.
This is ok with me as this is what I have also preferred though 'attitude stemming from the scriptural basis' needs elaboration. '
I need not elaborate on the dharmashastras. Its already been discussed on many threads on this forum. And its obvious how brahmins considered it their duty to adhere to the dharmashastras. So the attitude of birth-based discrimination is ofcourse an attitude that brahmins had, because the shastras say so. This situation is no different from the muslims, who dub all non-beleivers as 'kafirs' (which btw is an insulting word to a strict arab), because the quran says so.
"Asked every one to go back to their old profession" perhaps obliquely indicates the Rajaji Government's aborted experiment. Are you aware of the full details of that experiment? Are you aware that there was no compulsion to go full time to the family's traditional occupation abandoning modern education altogether? What was envisaged was only that each student will devote a part( up to 50%) of his time every day in learning the traditional skills from his father/preceptor in addition to going through the class-room learning of modern education. Are you aware of this? And if yes what is wrong with that experiment? Please enlighten me.
I was not referring to Rajaji. I was referring to the Shankaracharya. I have had enuf arguments with RVR on it and I do not wish to bring up that issue again.
So spare the snake(naga) and hit the brahmin? I do not get what you are trying to tell in this paragraph. May be the neurons in my grey matter are not firing that fast.Please help me.
I think Nara sir already mentioned that EVR never said the point of spare the snake and hit a brahmin. But well, a section of brahmins have decided to attribute quite a few things to EVR to create a demon out of him. Nara Sir, please clarify if EVR had said so. To me, if EVR had said so, i wud think it is another stupid preaching from him.
As regards the shastras, i don't have to explain the labelling, name-calling, etc which they do (again this has been discussed across quite a few threads of this forum).
As for the historical part, i was having the nagara-khanda people in my mind who used the naga (snake) as their totem identification (though they were not the only ones to use such an identification). These nagas were Shaivas, practiced tantra vidhis, and worshipped their asura ancestors. In effect, the fights between devas and asuras in the puranas, were probably fights between the 'vedic-people' and the asuric-shaivas. Anyways, this does not pertain to the topic of EVR, so shall possibly reserve the rest on this subject for some other thread.
Dont be so sure. Please read the book that I had referred. You will change your views on this.
May i know the name of the book and the page numbers which i should look up? On your part, you do need to provide proof that EVR was anti-dalit and licentious.
My understanding of Saiva sidhdhanta(which MM Adigal followed) with its origin in TN is that it has nothing to do with the advaitic philosophy and the nirguna brahman concept of Advaitam. And to bring in Atheism also into the picture takes away in one breath all logic from my span of understanding. May be my grey matter is to be blamed again. Please help me.
Well Adigal was against the atheism of EVR. As regards, Shaiva Siddhantam i don't know much. From books / talks, i understand Saiva Siddhantam has been mingled (or partly "taken over") or deeply influenced by Vedanta. So what really was saiva-siddhantam originally is perhaps difficult to tell since a good many concepts were never put into the written form. I feel the linga symbol originally belongs to the Saiva-siddhantam cult/group though.
In Shaiva-Siddhanta, Shiva is the supreme reality and is formless, omnipresent, beginningless, etc. These concepts are similar to the nirguna brahman of adviata, and possibly these concepts are even pre-vedic (meaning its an ancient philosophy that existed before the rig samhita war period)). So yes, the saiva siddhantam is technically / conceptually atheism. Except that they beleive in a Shiva who lived on Earth (as in Puranas), so they beleive there is a Shiva (as a personal god) who will look after them. Sometimes i wonder if the shaiva tantrics (like the nagara-khanda people) were worshipping asuras like bali, bana, mura, etc because apart from the shiva-linga concept they had no other "gods" to worship at that point of time (maybe they acquired gods to worship after the shanmata system was created).
1)I have not made any allegations. They are statement of facts as available to any one with an open mind.
2)Please go to internet, use any search engine and give the command to search for Periyar EVR and you will get a number of titles. Glean through them patiently and choose the ones which are not by his jalras and there you are with adequate evidence. Any way I have done that several times to prove a point or two to periyarists and found that it was a futile effort to convince any one. So I stop with this and if you have the time and inclination you can search for yourself.
Sorry Raju, i have done enuf searching on the net. And have searched thru enuf books also.
Since you made the allegations, it is only fair that you produce the proof. So please produce the proof that EVR was anti-dalit and licentious.
Regards.
