Hinduism Vs Rest - Part- Ii

[NARAS]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

sirs- this female poet(?), is in way a true follower of the 'periar' as she has already has 2 husbands- one past divorced & one 'present'! she was also 'very close' to the editor of a 'secular' english newspaper, so much so that, she was also on the editorial board of this newspaper! her father has referred to her not as his daughter, but as the daughter of his wife! this 'poet' is going to enter active politics as a post at national level has been allocated for her,though only a few days back her own father had openly said that she was not interested in politics!

 

[NARAS]

sirs- ignoring warnings from indian govt. the srilankan govt. has signed agreements to procure arms and armaments from china. a slap on the face of the mohansingh- sonia maino combine!

2. this female politician, is known for her arrogance, disrespect to elders, loneliness and inaccessibility. she never trusts anybody except one female friend whom she calls as her 'sister'! she has lost many elections because of ignoring the importance of coalitions and alliances. she has won not even a single election on her own, but always with the support of alliance parties. once she wins, she ignores the alliance partners and insults them. a few years back, she misused her authority to defame a highly respected saivite saint. she is like a bear. it is said , a bear knows how to climb a tree, but not how to come down. like that, this politician, who calls herself as a 'revolutionary' leader, knows how to come to power (obviously with the help of alliances) but not how to sustain power and win the next elections!!!!!

 

[chanakya]

Regarding Subsect and Practise

This is regarding the subsect and gothram and practise.
First regarding gothram.What I was informed is gothram is nothing but who is your teacher. Also as far as I know there is no difference between any gothrams.
The difference may be in subsect.
And I have a strong belief the all brahmins were once non-veggie. I dont know why they became veggies. And my doubt comes because of the practise we are following in our rituals. All our rituals has 'BALI' which is nothing but an act of killing of animal to make the GOD happy. Another ritual which comes to my mind is the Ashgaurd cut into 4 pieces and kumkumum spread to look like a flesh(Red) during our house warming cerimonies. Also during yagam we put all items and in early days it may be also include animals. I`ll try to get some more proof for my theory. And if I am wrong anyone can correct me. As I have this strong doubt i want someone who have good knowledge abt our rituals to correct me.
And what i heard is Fish is considered as a prasad by bengali`s and so they are not considering that as non-veg.
So as of now we can only say TAMBRAMs are veggie and its one their identification.

 

[NARAS]

sirs - brahminism believes in re birth. so it is believed animals were also humans in previous birth and they should have born as animals in this birth . so it is impossible that bramins as a group would have been non veggies at any part of time,although it is possible a sect of saiva bramins, comprising of converts from other varnas could have been non veggies. but due to resurgence of vaishnavism, saivism also underwent a reformation and conversions and non vegeteranism were totally stopped.

 

[NARAS]

sirs- to the best of my knowledge, in orthodox hinduism, even saiva bramins cannot convert to vaishnavism and vice versa. so where is the question of nonbramins converting to brahminism ????

 

[KRS]

sirs- to the best of my knowledge, in orthodox hinduism, even saiva bramins cannot convert to vaishnavism and vice versa. so where is the question of nonbramins converting to brahminism ????

Sirs,

You are absolutely and totally wrong. Vaishnavites originated from Saivites. Please get you facts straight. If I were you, I would go and read about the history of Sri Ramanuja Acharyal and the advent of Vaishnavism from reliable sources, than hearing from a mother of a friend.

Pranams,
KRS

 

[NARAS]

sirs- vaishnavism may well have originated from saivism, but not only from saivism but also AGAINST saivism.

2. it is a well known fact that there is no possibility of conversions to brahminism. once upon a time it had existed, but then the doors were closed even for conversions within brahmnism.

3. i did not blindly believe what an elderly bramin woman told me. based on her credibility, i bestowed some respectability on her views. thats all.

4. BUT THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT SAIVISM AND VAISHNAVISM REPRESENT 2 EYES OF HINDUISM AND INDEED 2 EYES OF INDIA. I HAVE LOT OF RESPECT OF SAIVISM AND LORD SHIVA & PARAMACHARYA ALSO, THOUGH I AM A VAISHNAVITE.

 

[NARAS]

sirs- the karunanidhi says the Ramar bridge in rameswaram should be demolished as it has not been declared as a protected monument. even the dmk headquarters, indian parliament building, the houses of various wives' of the karunanidhi have not been declared as protected monuments. does this mean they all should be demolished on one pretext or the other??????

 

[NARAS]

contempt of court???

sirs - the dmk govt. of t.nadu of the yellow shawlist, the karunanidhi, had guaranteed in the chennai high court that wearing helmets for two wheeler driving would be made compulsory in 6 cities in t.nadu. now suddenly, the yellow shawlist under public pressure has said helmet wearing is compulsory, but police should not enforce the law strictly! what sort of 'rationality ' is this? is it not contempt of court???

the yellow shawlist govt. has also issued a notice to the AIADMK threatening to demolish the AIADMK headquarters. but the yellow shawlist says he is not aware of it! then who is behind this notice? is the yellow shawlist atleast aware that he is the chiefminister of t.nadu?

the yellow shawlist asks for 'proof' that the Ramar bridge was built by Lord Rama! can any body in this world including the yellow shawlist or any other 'rationalist' prove that he or she was born to a particular father? IMHO, belief in god is like believing in one's birth.

 

[NARAS]

The Azhagiri Of North India???!!!

sirs- a person called colonel. kirori singh bhaisala, leader of a community called gujjars has caused damage to private & public property worth crores and has also led to loss of lives & injury to many persons because of an agitation he called for to demand scheduled tribe status for his community. this fellow seems to be the azhagiri of north india. not only because he has openly & publicly caused so much of damage, but also because he has been allowed to go scot free!!!

 

[KRS]

sirs- vaishnavism may well have originated from saivism, but not only from saivism but also AGAINST saivism.

2. it is a well known fact that there is no possibility of conversions to brahminism. once upon a time it had existed, but then the doors were closed even for conversions within brahmnism.

3. i did not blindly believe what an elderly bramin woman told me. based on her credibility, i bestowed some respectability on her views. thats all.

4. BUT THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT SAIVISM AND VAISHNAVISM REPRESENT 2 EYES OF HINDUISM AND INDEED 2 EYES OF INDIA. I HAVE LOT OF RESPECT OF SAIVISM AND LORD SHIVA & PARAMACHARYA ALSO, THOUGH I AM A VAISHNAVITE.

Sirs,

Again, you are mis-informed.

2. Sri Ramanuja Acharya, did base His work on the Alwars and attract many Alwars (who were non-Brahmins) to Vaishnavism and this is why many Vaishnavite scriptures (especially Thenkalai) are in Tamil. These people were non-brahmins and to this day, this is why Sri Vaishnavism originated by Ramanuja Acharyal is viewed as the Sambradhayam with 'heart' as opposed to the Shaivism propegated by Sri Adi Shankaracharya, whose philosophy was more towards the orthodox.

4. Both of these great philosophies fold under the weight of the Vedas. In essence, they both accept Vedas as their final authority (okay, Thenkalai says that the Tamil scriptures are older than Vedas, even though it is now widely accepted that they are part of the Upanishads). So, these are all surface differences only. When Sri Ramanuja Acharyal expounded His philosophy, He did not do it to oppose the Shaivites, He did it because of His revelation of Lord Vishnu and His consort Sri. The vehemence against Shaivism was not His. Nor was it in the expositions of the great Vaishnavite philosopher Sri Vedanta Desika. It is just unfortunate that a Brahmin community that was already split along the lines of Sutras was split more in to different Sambradhayams.

I do not see the great divisions of Hinduism (Shaivism, Vaishnavism and Shakthism) as different 'eyes' of Hinduism. To me they are all one and the same and based on one's inclination (not birth) one should be able to follow all three. They all represent different modalities (or frequencies) of the realities of life.

Pranams,
KRS

 

[NARAS]

sirs - Vaishnavism & saivism cannot be one and the same because the gods for both these divisions are different, the books & agamas are different. but they do belong to same family.

2. there is no doubt at all that conversions were allowed between varnas once, but thereafter conversions were stopped, although we do not know when exactly this happened. what ramanujar did was perhaps adoption- a bramin adopting non bramin as his son, makes the non bramin a bramin. this in many ways is same as conversion, but the difference is, for adoption you NEED A BRAMIN, but you can convert & declare yourselves as a bramin even without the support of another bramin. ramanujar may have adopted many non bramins possibly.

3. brahminsm is basically a very democratic ideology and so differences, sub sects, sambradayams, divisions are all unavoidable.

 

[NARAS]

sirs- most of the women of the family of the 'rationalists' sport vermillon, flowers and pose for photos draped in color sarees. IMHO vermillon or bindi, flowers on back of head and color sarees- all are symbolic of orthodox hinduism. has any 'rationalist' or yellow shawlist got the courage to ask women of his family not to sport vermillon and flowers and not to wear color saree. even black is in fact a color associated with orthodox hinduism, as black is identified with Lord saneeswara, the saturn god.

Plain white is the color associated with atheism. May be this is why some hindu widows wear plain white sarees. I think a woman who lost her husband, must have forfeited faith in god and started wearing plain white sarees as a protest, detesting color sarees which denote orthodox hinduism. . (widows do not take part in orthodox rituals, like atheists.). This is perhaps how the practice of wearing whites sarees by widows must have started. all colors except plain white are in one way or other associated with orthodox hinduism. The white saree worn by Goddess Saraswathi is not plain white, but has colors on border. so, when women of their families are sporting color sarees, vermillon & flowers with what face do 'rationalists' & yellow shawlists lecture about 'rationalism' to the public??? shame on you 'rationalists' & 'yellow shawlists'!!!!!!

 

[NARAS]

sirs - just a clarification. i understand once upon a time a section of saiva bramins (converts from other varnas) had the habit of consuming animal flesh ,but not by killing living animals, but only by slaughtering dead animals. even this restrictive pratice seems to have been abandoned at one stage due to impact of vaishnavism. thus i never intended to suggest that saiva bramins were non veggies once. in any case, there is no doubt about the fact that saiva scriptures do not sanction animal killing in any way.

 

[NARAS]

sirs- 'rationalists' are saying the 'periar' reformed hinduism! actually, who is a reformer? any person, who has respect for a system, but feels there are defects in the system which have to be rectified and strives for this rectification, so that system runs better for the benefit of humanity can be called a reformer. how can a person who hated for his country was so deep that he wanted his country to be ruled by foreigners, who observed his country's independence day as a black day, who wanted his country to be divided on the basis of language be called a reformer? then even phoolan devi, auto shankar & sandalwood smuggler verrappan can call themselves as reformers!!!

'rationalists' are also saying temples are public places, and so, governments can do what ever they like inside temples. but can the national flag be hoister inside temples? certainly not! then how can temples be called public places????
ironically, these very 'rationalists' had been abusing temples and gods for somany years. but suddenly once they came to power these temples became 'public places' which have to be reformed! instead of trying to implement prohibition and uniform civil code which have been mentioned in the indian constitution, these 'rationalists' are trying to 'reform' temples, though this has not at all been mentioned in the indian constitution!

 

[NARAS]

sirs- initially, in 1920s 'rationalists' were not very enthusiastic about supporting the islamic religion. in fact, the 'periar' is even reported to have said that he considered the prophet mohammed founder of islam, as an ordinary man! but once muslim league started clamouring for partitioning of india on religious basis, and succeeded in it in 1947, the 'rationalists' openly started eulogising islam, so much so that, muslims form the main votebank of DMK now,without whose support the party will be finished off totally!

 

[NARAS]

sirs - is it true that in islam it is COMPULSORY for each & every male to have 4 wives????

2. is it true that in orthodox hinduism, though there are many persons with more than 1 wife, these persons e.g. King dasaratha & Lord Krishna had sex only with their first wife? so the children of their other wives were adopted sons and not born out of cohabitation? so it means , whereas orthodox hinduism does not sanction sexual polygamy, abrahamic religions do sanction sexual polygamy???

3. is it true that most of the jain temples & Buddhist temples in india were built by hindus? is it also true that most of the jain & buddhist temples demolished by some hindus were later rebuilt by other hindus???

4. it is true that the presence of nudity in some orthodox hindu temples proves that hinduism was such a old religion which originated at a time when human beings did not even wear clothes???

5. is it true that some orthodox hindus killed some jains & non bramins only as revenge & retaliation and not voluntarily?

6. why is it that religions like jainism & buddhism which were themselves born out of rebellion against orthodx hindusim had to face internal rebellion and split into two factions????

7. is it true that the holy sivalinga represents the phallus of child shiva and not grown up shiva??

8. does not the story of Lord Ayyappan's birth (born out of cohabitation between Lord vishnu in a woman's form & Lord shiva) show that in orthodox hinduism, due to belief of re birth, it is believed woman & man are one and the same and a person born as man in this birth could have been woman in previous birth or next?

9. all humans in world are born naked. suppose if a painter were to paint a woman nude & then say 'this is how we were all born. so there is nothing wrong in that. it is natural.' will it be an acceptable argument???

instead of discussing non issues like the cigarette style of some pseudo super stars why not discuss about these things??

 

[NARAS]

sirs- imagine a situation where everybody in a country wants to become a doctor. what will happen then? nobody will be left to look after other professions and as a result society will suffer. so, based on this experience, it seems varnashrama arrangement was implemented once upon a time in india. each & every person was allocated the work of his forefather. since it is believed there is re birth for all humans and that all hindus will be born in 3 varnas during each & every birth, there is in a way no discrimination also in this arrangement, as each and every person will be allocated different types of jobs in each & every birth.

 

[hariharan1972]

Agreed | Blind Justification | Linking back | Pause

instead of discussing non issues like the cigarette style of some pseudo super stars why not discuss about these things??

Suresh sir,

I understand your veiled criticism for my posts about Rajini. Definitely not my intention to discuss smoking styles.

Being a lesser mortal, i have limited abilities to contribute on high profile dharmic subjects so i do indulge in light hearted banter. I was just trying to create some humour. Ofcourse i agree that it is not worth debating, so you'll not see more posts on this from me.

Regarding the other issues you have raised, i have the following observations.

--- Just because we are hindus & brahmins we cannot, IMHO, blindly justify everything & anything. We cannot take a "ninnalum kutham, nadandhalum kutham" approach to discussing other religions / sects / sections. Infact my view is that we should refrain from discussing other religions because we may not have the complete knowledge.

--- Secondly, linking back to 'vegetarianism' or the 'yellow shawlist' for everything & anything doesn't aid discussions. Criticism should be to the point, relevant & contextual. Else it runs the risk of becoming too stale. If we start attacking MK for everything (including accidental death of a kid for kite flying), how are we different from Veeramani & Co who have spent their entire lives bad mouthing Brahmins ?

---- Also it will aid the discussions if you can pause a bit between raising multitude of unconnected issues. Bombarding too many issues into a post dissipates the discussion into too many directions.

Now to reply to couple of your issues

-- With limited authority & limited reading of Islam, i can say that it is NOT mandatory for every Muslim to have 4 wives. Pls browse thru Zakir Naik's website called "Islamic Research Foundation" (you wd get the website from google search) where he has a section on the questions non-muslims have about Islam.

-- The death of the child is terrible but i can assure you that similar such events happen, guess where, Pakistan. They celebrate "Basant Festival" where kiteflying related deaths are reported. This ofcourse doesn't justify the loss of the kid's life but just to put the issue in perspective that only MK isn't "irresponsible" if you want to put the blame at his door.

 

[NARAS]

One Doubt Still Remains!!!

sirs - Hari - thanks for responding.

I have doubts about islam and so i asked questions about it. But i still think in islam it WAS compulsory at one time for all males to have 4 wives! after that it was diluted as an optional arrangement.

I do agree that we should not abuse any religion. but i do not agree that we should not discuss about any relegion at all.

regarding kite flying, my point is that the yellow shawlist concentrates only on issues which give him political mileage and votes. he is not a person who bothers about people's welfare and the whole world knows this. after all, he is a politician!

not all my postings are very length. only once in a while i post some lengthy debates.

i do not think i have linked anything & everything in the world with vegeteranism or yellow shawlism.

just like you i was also indulging in banter, and not criticising you for mentioning about cigarette style of rajinikanth. you can & i wish you should write about rajinikanth & cigarettes as long as it is 100% funny. if it is glorifying rajinikanth, IMHO it will not be enjoyable.

But neither you nor anybody has clarified one important doubt. i had mentioned that orthodox hinduism does not sanction sexual polygamy. but Lord shiva had physical relationship with his consort parvathi and also with Lord vishnu, when Lord vishnu was in the form of a woman. could it be like this? could it be that when Lord shiva cohabitated with Lord vishnu in woman's form, parvathi was not married to Lord shiva. and the woman form of Lord vishnu was only temporary. so when Lord shiva married parvathi, technically there was no other wife for him, as by that time the woman formof Lord vishnu had totally & permanently disappeared. so in that way can we say for sure thatLord shiva did not commit polygamy??

 

[KRS]

Sirs,

The part where it is said in Quran that a man is allowed to take up to four wives comes from a stanza where Muhammed admonishes his followers that 'even if they have four wives they have to treat them all equal'. This, some take it as a dictat to take four wives, but a large section of Muslims also subscribe to the view that this is optonal.

One has to understand the desert culture which was the backdrop of those times. Clans often killed each other's men and therefore a majority of women were without husbands. So to be kind to them, as marriage afforded status, men married more than one wife. Even in our culture, when a husband dies, it is still a custom in some communities to wed the widow of one's brother.

But these are all customs that are fashioned for a specific time and place. In my opinion, in the world like ours today, such practices are barbaric and anachronistic. This is why the polygamy practiced by the Mormons of Utah in the past, is now abolished by a US law.

Pranams,
KRS

 

[NARAS]

When Exactly Did This Happen???

SIRS- it is a well known fact that not only bramins, but even khsatriyas & vaishyas were considered twice born castes once upon a time. khsatriyas & vaishyas were almost on par with bramins in many matters. but suddenly, at some point of time, it seems kshatriyas & vaishyas were diluted of their vedic equalness with bramins . when and how did this happen?

I surmise, because of threat from many enemey countries, particularly islamic countries, the country needed more security,and so kshatriyas and vaishyas , for former to fight for the country, and the latter to generate the resources neccesary for defence, were relieved of their vedic responsibilities and concentrated fully on defending the security of the country.

 

[NARAS]

sirs - orthodox hinduism believes in re birth. it is also believed if you commit a sin in one birth, you will be punished in your next birth. this is why, perhaps , we perform 'devasams' & 'tharpanams' in memory of our forefathers, to plead to god to forgive the mistakes, if any, our forefathers had committed and spare them for punishment and bestow on them happiness and peace in their present & future births. this is also to ensure that they are not punished for any curse they may have incurred during any of their births. forefathers means females also.

The paramacharya says the main reason why bramins do not mingle with non bramins is because, if they do so, they may have to come in contact with the food habits of non bramins, and they may even be tempted to taste meat - after all, they are mortals! this would mean they may go astray from the path of a bramin.

the paramacharya also says bramin priests used to received liberal grants & gifts from kings once upon a time, for their living. but after moghul & british invasion, these gifts & grants stopped, forcing bramins to abandon priestly employment and look after other jobs.

It is also said 'Bhoomi pujas' & 'Grahapravesams' are conducted to plead pardon for killing many insects whist constructing buildings. similarly, there are some yagnas which are so powerful that even gods would come to earth to see them. after gods go after the yagna finishes, Lord varuna will ensure that it rains, so that the footmarks of gods are washed off, because ordinary humans are not supposed to walk on these footmarks.!
Of course, nowadays there are not people with high standards as in those days, who can ensure these miracles. so it is we people who have let down religion and not the other way round.

And coming to the favourite theory of 'rationalists' the aryan invasion theory, many persons do maintain that bramins raped non bramin women & also non bramin women were forced to be comfort girls for bramins. but surprisingly, 'rationalists' who potray bramins as cruel barbarians, never talk about this woman angle! after all, if bramins were so cruel, would they have spared nonbramin woman? does that mean there is bramin blood in all non bramins too? (its a different thing i neither concur with the invasion theory, nor the woman angle.)

 

[silverfox]

Dear Sri KRS:
Nice posting on why muslim men marry 4 wives.

Now that NARAS has mentioned about our 'divasams', I have a question:

If Hindus believed in reincarnation (physical body dies but the spirit ('aathma') never dies and takes on another physical body), then why are we performing this 'divasam' for our forefathers? Their spirits aren't there anymore; right?
My older brother was telling me that they wait for the 'pindam' during the ceremony, which I find hard to believe.
Your comments please. Thank you.

 

[NARAS]

sirs- hindus believe in reincarnation. so there are 2 main reasons, i think why 'devasams' & 'tharpanams ' are performed in memory of our forefathers.


1. the soul of the dead must rest in peace.

2. if our forefathers are reborn again, in this birth as well as in future births , they must lead a happy and peaceful life, and punishment for them due to any curse or sin , should be abolished or reduced to the barest minimum possible.