M
malgova.mango
Guest
i love the village elders too - they may be idiots - but they are honest and clean guys
-
This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
Implications of Logic versus Faith in Modern Society
- Thread starter KRS
- Start date
- Status
Absolutely, I second you... Leo Tolstoy had said that the simpletons (or fools) were the most contented persons....!!!
hv heard of how some village elders were in the past...i hear that all of them were not honest and clean...
not sure, but perhaps some ppl have this idea that everything abt the past was ideal or something like that maybe..also, not everyone likes village life...i do but i know of many who do not...they find it boring, etc..also i don't find anyone liking poverty...Maybe not all of them were clean, but all politicians in this democratic setup seem to be corrupted.... :wof:hv heard of how some village elders were in the past...i hear that all of them were not honest and clean...
Relatively then, it would have been better earlier... and yes, poverty is also a relative thing....
M
malgova.mango
Guest
poverty has its positive side, many seers choose to remain in tapas ...
chanakya is one such person - there is a moving narration of his self-non-indulgence..
there are many village elders lived as role-model to the villagers..
but i understand , it is not easy to appreciate simplicity .... it takes a lot of maturity to understand simplicity.
chanakya is one such person - there is a moving narration of his self-non-indulgence..
there are many village elders lived as role-model to the villagers..
but i understand , it is not easy to appreciate simplicity .... it takes a lot of maturity to understand simplicity.
M
malgova.mango
Guest
sesh!
simpletons are not fools - they are matured to understand beauty in simplicity AND futility in the hustle and bustle...
they just need to sit under a shade of tree and enjoy a breathe of fresh air ... to rejuvenate themself....that's all ....what else...
that's a beauty.... needs a lot of punyams and understanding to reach that level..
Summa Iru.....only the blessed understand this state of ....SUMMA IRUPPATHU
simpletons are not fools - they are matured to understand beauty in simplicity AND futility in the hustle and bustle...
they just need to sit under a shade of tree and enjoy a breathe of fresh air ... to rejuvenate themself....that's all ....what else...
that's a beauty.... needs a lot of punyams and understanding to reach that level..
Summa Iru.....only the blessed understand this state of ....SUMMA IRUPPATHU
Last edited by a moderator:
mango, leo tolstoy's idea of a fool was a simpleton... the more clever and twisted, the more complicated life becomes... hence, if you see most of his stories, it would be titled as "X, the fool" etc... here the term "fool" is a relative term used to portray that we lose the bigger idea of peace and happiness while trying to be smart and modernised...
M
malgova.mango
Guest
Finding a wrong or fault with other person doesn't mean one hates the person and also it doesn't mean one loves the person. It is just a "FACT" to acknowledge that's it.
I too have muslim friend. that doesn't mean I should restrict myself against any crit in their wrong doing.
A wrong is a wrong , it applies to one and ALL. SIMPLE...
I too have muslim friend. that doesn't mean I should restrict myself against any crit in their wrong doing.
A wrong is a wrong , it applies to one and ALL. SIMPLE...
if poverty has a positive side, then why do some ppl find the necessity to go overseas to work...
M
malgova.mango
Guest
poverty is not tolerated by the modern society, and also maturity takes time ...
in the mean-while one has to live through his conditions....his prarbdha , sanchita and agami karma takes hold of him.
On further reflection : the correct term is not "poverty", it should be read as "simplicity"
in the mean-while one has to live through his conditions....his prarbdha , sanchita and agami karma takes hold of him.
On further reflection : the correct term is not "poverty", it should be read as "simplicity"
M
malgova.mango
Guest
sesh - thanks for the clarification
M
malgova.mango
Guest
night soil ? .... that happens not in villages... it is in old cities like KUMBAKONAM ...
so in villages it is not a problem...
problem is Lopa buddhi (stinginess) ... if this can be dealt with then, there is nothing like village life.
in olden days yagyas and temple festivals and temple rituals played a key role in wealth distribution... when that's stopped - everything changed....
key for social health is wealth distribution..
so in villages it is not a problem...
problem is Lopa buddhi (stinginess) ... if this can be dealt with then, there is nothing like village life.
in olden days yagyas and temple festivals and temple rituals played a key role in wealth distribution... when that's stopped - everything changed....
key for social health is wealth distribution..
what if a man does not want to toil away in the fields? what if he wants to own the fields? what is a man wants to be doing yagams and does not want to work in the fields? what if a man wants to build bigger and bigger villages so that it becomes a city? what if a man wants to live in such a city? what if a man supposed to be doing yagams chooses to live and earn money in such a city by going to an office? what if there is no wealth for distribution?
The answer is there in your queries... "wants" are the impetus for this setup of society...
Simplicity essentially means contention... accepting life as it takes him through... and one's mind is ever at peace and satisfied...
If the turn of things do really make a farmer a king, one would find that his feelins at heart would still suggest that he is a simpleton... but alas, the whole world is not filled with such simpletons and hence we see digressions...
M
malgova.mango
Guest
see now - the thread started with mutalib's incident.
i posted a view from a thinker of modern times for reader's digest.
a rude remark was posted to throw the thinker out. not stopping with that the poster also ridiculed the village life-style.
I supported the village life-style, then you started crticizing the village life-style.
So it is veering off the course. Let's refrain from this.
I've no qualms about city-living. So too about village life-style. I don't put anything down for some imagined beatitude.
i posted a view from a thinker of modern times for reader's digest.
a rude remark was posted to throw the thinker out. not stopping with that the poster also ridiculed the village life-style.
I supported the village life-style, then you started crticizing the village life-style.
So it is veering off the course. Let's refrain from this.
I've no qualms about city-living. So too about village life-style. I don't put anything down for some imagined beatitude.
Malgova,
You said elsewhere:
krs - cool ...
Malgova, I am always cool, are you?
it's a fact that you emotionalise issues and indulge in verbal fighting.. i've seen from the date i've joined here..... i simply reflected the facts....
If I recall, on the day you started your mission was to attack Sri Nacchi immediately, for which you were reprimanded and moderated by Chintana Ji. Just because you keep on repeating like a parrot that I emotionalize the issue does not make it true. Why don't you come off this useless exercize?
re - philosophy and religion... yourself said you are several thousand feet away ... so you disqualify yourself ... and moreover we have finished with our discussions on that , you even apologised to me for your emotional out-burst... so why re-start again.
Don't take it out of context (but you always do that) what I said. I said to discuss all 3 philosophies in great detail (with all the nuances involved) I could not do it because I know them only at the high level. That did not mean that I agreed that you know Advaitham at any detail level. You seem to thump your own chest on your knowledge, but then you do not even know the rudiments of other philosophies. I know what I do not know, and you think you know everything when you know zilch, that's the difference.
cool...
You said elsewhere:
krs - cool ...
Malgova, I am always cool, are you?
it's a fact that you emotionalise issues and indulge in verbal fighting.. i've seen from the date i've joined here..... i simply reflected the facts....
If I recall, on the day you started your mission was to attack Sri Nacchi immediately, for which you were reprimanded and moderated by Chintana Ji. Just because you keep on repeating like a parrot that I emotionalize the issue does not make it true. Why don't you come off this useless exercize?
re - philosophy and religion... yourself said you are several thousand feet away ... so you disqualify yourself ... and moreover we have finished with our discussions on that , you even apologised to me for your emotional out-burst... so why re-start again.
Don't take it out of context (but you always do that) what I said. I said to discuss all 3 philosophies in great detail (with all the nuances involved) I could not do it because I know them only at the high level. That did not mean that I agreed that you know Advaitham at any detail level. You seem to thump your own chest on your knowledge, but then you do not even know the rudiments of other philosophies. I know what I do not know, and you think you know everything when you know zilch, that's the difference.
cool...
krs take the recent example from your reply on the other thread..
you are rude in dismissing the article by a well-known and respected intellectual of our land. You could differ from his view, and politely put up your arguments against his. But instead you RUDELY threw that away.
You mean to say you are not emotional? 'respected intellectual'? On whose account? I have to be polite because he is your darling? Come on, don't be emotional.
You mean to say you are not emotional? 'respected intellectual'? On whose account? I have to be polite because he is your darling? Come on, don't be emotional.
He uses the Bar incident created by the idiot Mutalik to buttress his argument about scrapping all modern laws in the countery to go back to a system that created one of the biggest social blemish on our society called untouchables. This is akin to sedition. I do not care if he is the greatest 'intellectual' ever lived. He is preaching anti national ideas. So he is an idiot and should be thrown in jail.
You also told very crudely about village-heads and villages, in your hatred with people differing from your views.
I do not hate anyone - both my grandparents hail from villages. I was talking about the village idiots who ran the panchayats that created the social problems we have (don't blame it on the British as you always do, because these existed before that and they exploted what was there) and who still in certain villages are keeping up with these divisions should not be the arbiters of our fate. They in general over time have proved themselves to be sectarian and stupid. Come off your high horse in defending those people. Stop being emotional!
I do not hate anyone - both my grandparents hail from villages. I was talking about the village idiots who ran the panchayats that created the social problems we have (don't blame it on the British as you always do, because these existed before that and they exploted what was there) and who still in certain villages are keeping up with these divisions should not be the arbiters of our fate. They in general over time have proved themselves to be sectarian and stupid. Come off your high horse in defending those people. Stop being emotional!
Now please don't tell me that's what you learnt about civilzation.
I have already said my piece.
I have already said my piece.
KRS
Last edited:
Malgova,
I am very sorry about this. But I have to write what I am writing below to show folks where you are coming from:
1. You have said in one of your posting 'our side'. This shows that there is a cabal in the Forum, 'us versus them'. I thought we are all TB brothers. This shows your intolerance to other schools of thought.
2. I am not against orthdoxy, but you do not give any credence to modern way of life. So, you seem to view the world through your narrow colored glass of your own 'orthodoxy'. In your world, there is no room for even other Hindu philosophies.
3. Time and again, both with me and others who you consider as 'liberals' you attack. This last posting is an example. Out of the blue when I am having conversation with Sri s007bala Ji about an issue we were having (since amicably settled in a civilized way), you took that chance to tell the Forum members that I am not worthy of being a member. This same tactic was applied in a different Forum (I know you are a part of it there too), but failed. It will not work here either. All this, because you want to muzzle any voices except your own pseudo-orthodox kind, while crying foul that you are being muzzled!
4. This is a TB Forum. Not Smartha Forum. Some of you seem to forget this little fact when you post, criticizing other sambradhayams, from your own point of view. Time and again, you especially promote this view, while crying that there is no unity among the Brahmins!
5. Unless we embrace all different sambradhayams and people who are 'liberal' then there is no way we can unite. Unity in diversity should be our motto. I do not think you see it that way.
6. You are ready to attack other Hindu Mahans, because they differed from your own view. This again tells me you are simply a sectarian.
So, there it is. As you say, 'facts are facts' and these are the unvarnished facts.
KRS
I am very sorry about this. But I have to write what I am writing below to show folks where you are coming from:
1. You have said in one of your posting 'our side'. This shows that there is a cabal in the Forum, 'us versus them'. I thought we are all TB brothers. This shows your intolerance to other schools of thought.
2. I am not against orthdoxy, but you do not give any credence to modern way of life. So, you seem to view the world through your narrow colored glass of your own 'orthodoxy'. In your world, there is no room for even other Hindu philosophies.
3. Time and again, both with me and others who you consider as 'liberals' you attack. This last posting is an example. Out of the blue when I am having conversation with Sri s007bala Ji about an issue we were having (since amicably settled in a civilized way), you took that chance to tell the Forum members that I am not worthy of being a member. This same tactic was applied in a different Forum (I know you are a part of it there too), but failed. It will not work here either. All this, because you want to muzzle any voices except your own pseudo-orthodox kind, while crying foul that you are being muzzled!
4. This is a TB Forum. Not Smartha Forum. Some of you seem to forget this little fact when you post, criticizing other sambradhayams, from your own point of view. Time and again, you especially promote this view, while crying that there is no unity among the Brahmins!
5. Unless we embrace all different sambradhayams and people who are 'liberal' then there is no way we can unite. Unity in diversity should be our motto. I do not think you see it that way.
6. You are ready to attack other Hindu Mahans, because they differed from your own view. This again tells me you are simply a sectarian.
So, there it is. As you say, 'facts are facts' and these are the unvarnished facts.
KRS
M
malgova.mango
Guest
krs!
I went thru the thread "go bheenam..." and our conversation with SB just last night.
i noted that you are going to legal actions... that's very cool of you.
see though i write a lot of thing here, i'm a simpleton eking out a living, i don't want to take the slightest risk to complicate my life with legal battles for these issues.
so my request to you, please don't engage me for any converstaion with you.
thanks
I went thru the thread "go bheenam..." and our conversation with SB just last night.
i noted that you are going to legal actions... that's very cool of you.
see though i write a lot of thing here, i'm a simpleton eking out a living, i don't want to take the slightest risk to complicate my life with legal battles for these issues.
so my request to you, please don't engage me for any converstaion with you.
thanks
Malgova,
There you go again, getting emotional. Sri s007bala ji and I had conversations in private, where in we both reconciled our differences.
But on general principle, when a person is threatened with harm, then I would encourage everyone to use the legal means to counter that. We can all call each other names. But one crosses the line if they issue a perceived threat.
Unless you threaten me there is no danger of any law suit, because it is unlawful to threaten anyone. Even then, there is room to discuss what is really meant/said.
If you do not want to respond, that is fine. But I can not give you that promise not to post responses on your future postings.
KRS
There you go again, getting emotional. Sri s007bala ji and I had conversations in private, where in we both reconciled our differences.
But on general principle, when a person is threatened with harm, then I would encourage everyone to use the legal means to counter that. We can all call each other names. But one crosses the line if they issue a perceived threat.
Unless you threaten me there is no danger of any law suit, because it is unlawful to threaten anyone. Even then, there is room to discuss what is really meant/said.
If you do not want to respond, that is fine. But I can not give you that promise not to post responses on your future postings.
KRS
- Status
Share this page
Similar threads
- Locked
