Hinduisms days numbered in Tamil nadu?

[sarang]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

A hindu has to forsake his religion to criticize christianity or islam, and become a atheist. A christian has to forsake his when he has to criticize a hindu, he dare not criticize islam lest part with his head. A muslim too must become atheist as the rest are infidels; so one day all will become atheists because of successive forsakes. What a rational idea? What will the atheist forsake to criticize brahmins and hindus?

 

[sarang]

Above post repeated; hence contents deleted.

 

[Nara]

... so one day all will become atheists because of successive forsakes. What a rational idea?

Dear sarang, what a lovely thought indeed , and the world be as one -- imagine that!!!

John Lennon - Imagine Lyrics

What will the atheist forsake to criticize brahmins and hindus?

The answer is quite simple dear sarang, all one has to forsake is superstitions and silly delusions, that is all !!!

best regards and warmest of cheers!!!

 

[sangom]

A hindu has to forsake his religion to criticize christianity or islam, and become a atheist.

According to what?

 

[happyhindu]

QUOTE
In both Christianity and Islam, the inequalities among creation - all that you describe - are just the absolute discretion of God, the creator and man cannot question, complain or even try ti find out the reasons therefor — a position similar to what was laid down for the sudras according to the Dharmasastras. Hence, those religions don't need to explain these inequalities; may be we can take them as sudra religions.
UNQUOTE
I wish to explain Sudra and quote my Internet Guru below :

sudra is not the person. it is varna. a person displaying sudra characteristic may becalled sudra for that time. likewise, brahmana is one who displays characteristic of brahmana varna, which depends on his karma samskara determined gunas. it is not permanent.
Varna applies to all people who are dharmik, conscious of what is correct. Those who identify with physical body and acts with selfish motives are avarna, mleccha,untouchables.
Take the case of Ratnakara. he too was a mleccha, robber in jungle, avarna. Later he developed dharmik consciousness and became Maharshi Valmiki, a brahma jnani, a brahmana.
Varna is not something people are branded with when they are send out from the otherworld. It is the expressed behavior of a person here that determines varna.
Varna is not something mandatory or enforced. It is, expressed behavior of a person, which again, changes with time, that determine varna.
sudra is one who is motivated by the purushartha of kama. when u r motivated by kama, u r sudra too.
when u act motivated by desire to uphold dharma, u r kshatriya.if motivated by materials, their working, production, u r vyshya. when u act motivated by desire to know urself, know the basis of all that is seen, experienced, u r brahmana.
when not motivated by the above/when action motivated by selfishness/negative reasons, the person is avarna. mleccha.
actions form habit, which shapes character, which defines life. people, thru continuous actions motivated by predominant varna in them come to exemplify the varna. However, it is not transmitted to progeny. children develop their own character, though influenced by parent/environment. It is not community that decides varna. Rather, varna is the basis for company, and community.
a person in pursuit of realization of brahma sees through the temporality of external appearances and is not distracted by kama or artha or even dharma. a person passionate about dharmikata or righteousness, likewise sees through the impermanence of external appearances and is not swayed by kama or artha. A person engaged by materials is dealing with more concrete thing than mental imagination. A person swayed by kama is enamoured by appearance. The last mentioned state is not conducive to receiving jnana and so sudra is not given veda jnana. The same sudra or even mleccha, if develops dharmikata, like Ratnakara did, can acquire brahma jnana.
varna changes with behavior. it depends on variation in gunas. which again depends on karma samskara. Pattern of behavior that emerges, through repeated pursuits of a particular kind determine the predominant varna of a person. It can be reinforced or changed. nishkama karma exhaust karma samskara and raise the dominant motivation of the person from kama to artha, then to dharma and finally, moksha.
practices or customs have little to do with varna. a chandala was recognised as brahma jnani by Adi Shankaracharya

Reg the point in bold, Brahmans following dharmashastras identify varna with their physical body (btw Jayendra Saraswati - Shankaracharya is on record in a documentary saying varna applies to body alone and not to aatma). Whatever claims brahmans make for themselves aside, it is rather apparent that the motive of birth-based discrimination is for self-gains (selfish motive indeed).

So according to what you write, all brahmans are avarna, mleccha, untouchables. May i know how many brahmans are willing to come forward and say they are avarna, mleccha, untouchables?

We see examples of rathakara, satyakama jabala, vishvamitra, becoming brahmans (do note there is no evidence vishwamitra was a so-called 'kshatriya'). What this means to historians is that people of various origins became absorbed into what is called the 'brahman' grouping.

However, for all this varna talk, please let me know how many brahmins have been throw out of their varna anytime in history for bad behavior?

Which dharmashastras says a brahman is by behavior or that a brahman can be thrown out of his varna for bad behavior? Do elaborate for what kind of bad behavior can brahmans be thrown out of their varna..

Most brahmans are in pursuit of wealth these days. Going by your write-up, it would mean their pattern of behavior is that of a Vaishya. And this varna has emerged through repeated pursuits of a particular kind to determine the predominant varna of a person. Meaning they have inherited the tendency to seek wealth from their purvajanma karma, and pitrus (vaishyas?) who practiced the same thing. If so, then why do they call themselves brahmans?

[Kindly note: am only trying to make you see the fallacies in your argument. No intension to pick on you or on anyone else, as a person ].

Regards.

 

[aramakrishnan1]

Shri.Nara, The term "ஊழ்" and the chapter by Thiruvalluvar confirms the beliefs of Hinduism that Birth, miseries, pleasure, good, bad and all experiences of a living being is the result of Karma Samskara, that is the remanent account carried forward from earlier births. Shri.Sangom expressed that in Christianity and Islam, the miseries of human living are just said to be at the discretion of God and these cannot be questioned.
In contrast, "தீதும் நன்றும் பிறர்தர வாரா" explains that neither God / nor any other person around you is responsible for the miseries you undergo during lifetime. What you do will return to you in correct measure. Who measures the wrong doings and good deeds being performed by a person all the time during his life in this world and ensures that he gets the perfect return in his later births. It is not humanly act to ensure this kind of merit based justice system and hence our scriptures say this is divine justice of the Supreme Reality. You cannot dismiss it saying that it is nothing to do with god and his divine justice. If it is possible by you, follow one person during his entire lifetime and decide what all punishment you will give him for his good and bad deeds. Then you can claim that it has nothing to do with God.

 

[aramakrishnan1]

I think the reality is much more nuanced. The different denominations of Hinduism, mainly Shiavam and Sri Vaishnavam in Tamil Nadu, were at each others throats all along, and to this day. During the time of Ramanuja, Shaivites came for his life, and today they accuse SVs of narrow mindedness. SVs in return sang about Shaivites thus, தாழ்சடையோன் சொற்கற்ற சோம்பர். This disdain for Sahivites is still quite virulent among SVs -- when one SV sanyasee met Sankarachariyar he was roundly criticized by the orthodoxy for coming face to face with a Brahmin not wearing poonal.

Cheers!

The Shaivites or Vaishnavites are free to have their narrow mindedness saying that theirs is the only way to attain the Ishwar (Paramathma). Whatever be your path, be firm on your path and advance in the same path towards realisation of the Supreme Reality. If you keep on contesting which path is superior and which is inferior, then your real goal is not knowing the eternal truth, but to win a contest. Such contest among the Shaivites and Vaishnavites may be only good for debates, but it is wastage of precious time. The attributes, forms, names of God are uncountable and multiple paths are available to reach the Supreme reality. This is the essence of Vedanta. For example, four photographs of a house from various angles and views describe the house; none of them are wrong; all of them describe the house only. If someone says that this is not the house looking at the photo, then he is wrong.

 

[aramakrishnan1]

@Happy Hindu,

Shankaracharya is on record in a documentary saying varna applies to body alone and not to aatma - Varna applies to person living in a body during life in this world and these varnas / vasanas are not going to affect the perfect Atma, which is only a witness looking at the person’ s deeds.
Whatever claims brahmans make for themselves aside, it is rather apparent that the motive of birth-based discrimination is for self-gains (selfish motive indeed) – This happened when Varna was understood as Jaathi by the society.

So according to what you write, all brahmans are avarna, mleccha, untouchables. May i know how many brahmans are willing to come forward and say they are avarna, mleccha, untouchables? “when u act motivated by the desire to know urself, know the basis of all that is seen, experienced, u r brahmana” – Otherwise not.
In the current Kaliyuga, the understanding of the word Brahmana is only pointing towards a particular Jaathi of people and it is different from the Varna called Brahmana.

We see examples of rathakara, satyakama jabala, vishvamitra, becoming brahmans (do note there is no evidence vishwamitra was a so-called 'kshatriya'). What this means to historians is that people of various origins became absorbed into what is called the 'brahman' grouping. Please read again Guruji’s explanation. He does not say that Brahmans are a particular group of people. It is expression of Guna (predominant in a person). If the varna Brahmana is misunderstood as the Jaathi Brahmana, then only confusion remains.

However, for all this varna talk, please let me know how many brahmins have been throw out of their varna anytime in history for bad behavior? It is only possible within a Jaathi system to throw out / induct someone into the structure. But Varna is expressed behaviour and it is the individual’s motivation towards Kama, Artha, Dharma or the Brahman that decides the Varna.

Which dharmashastras says a brahman is by behavior or that a brahman can be thrown out of his varna for bad behavior? Do elaborate for what kind of bad behavior can brahmans be thrown out of their varna.. It is not question of throwing a person out of a particular varna, but the person in question is not in the path towards realising Brahman, but in the pursuit of Kama or Artha or Dharma only. So, he will take some more births to align himself in the path towards Brahman and become the real Brahmana varna when his motivation changes. The Vaasanas from earlier births also plays their role in deciding the motivating element.

Most brahmans are in pursuit of wealth these days. Going by your write-up, it would mean their pattern of behavior is that of a Vaishya. And this varna has emerged through repeated pursuits of a particular kind to determine the predominant varna of a person. Meaning they have inherited the tendency to seek wealth from their purvajanma karma, and pitrus (vaishyas?) who practiced the same thing. If so, then why do they call themselves brahmans? This is explained only by the difference between a Jaathi called Brahmana and the varna called Brahmana.
Person of any varna (or even avarna/mlecha) can re-orient himself towards attaining Brahman and his varna during the pursuit of Brahman becomes Brahmana.

 

[Nara]

...Such contest among the Shaivites and Vaishnavites may be only good for debates, but it is wastage of precious time..

Yes aramakrishnan1, I agree. This is why I think your assertion that the differences within "Hinduism" is unique, or is its strength, are both completely untenable. It is no better than any other religion when it comes to sub-sects and the internecine fighting among them.

....In contrast, "தீதும் நன்றும் பிறர்தர வாரா" explains that neither God / nor any other person around you is responsible for the miseries you undergo during lifetime.

I think you are missing my point, which is, there is nothing in Poongunranar's poem to see divine action or justice. If you wish to believe in such things, that is obviously your birth right, but, all I am saying is, there is nothing in this poem to justify your belief.

What you do will return to you in correct measure. Who measures the wrong doings and good deeds being performed by a person all the time during his life in this world and ensures that he gets the perfect return in his later births. It is not humanly act to ensure this kind of merit based justice system and hence our scriptures say this is divine justice of the Supreme Reality.

This is simply evidence free belief system. While it is obvious that our actions will have effect and good/bad action will very likely result in good/bad consequences, there is no reason to expect perfect return or to see a divine hand in it.

We all want perfect justice, we can't bear to see an innocent man executed, and since this seems impossible in this life we invented many janmas and divine justice to play out in due course. If this is soothing to our child-like expectation of perfect justice from a divine and all-knowing parent, then it is not surprising that the believer is going to get all upset if this bubble of delusion is going to be burst. This is understandable.

But, the only justice available to us is a secular one, which is imperfect. If any aspect of justice transcends our puny lives, it is whether or not our genes get passed down to the next generation. Behave badly, it is less likely one's genes will see the next gen, even here there is no perfect cause-and-effect at the individual level, only in the aggregate.

Cheers!

 

[Iyyarooraan]

Divine justice is always perfect. Only we have imperfect judging power. So we call it justice which favours us or our mind.