Is the Community digging its own grave

[sravna]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

Dear Shri Sravna,

I simply cannot understand this concept/idea of "spiritual progress" (SP). Even granting that there exists some such thing, for argument's sake, how do we judge or measure this SP in a particular human being? Again, unless we know more about this SP, how can we assume that all the humans under each caste or varna of the chaturvarnya system, will get some particular 'grading' in regard to this SP? What factors determine the growth or decay of this SP grade in a human being? Is it not possible that a brahmin girl may have a very low grade of SP as compared to a NB girl?

Unless you provide logically convincing answers to such enigmatic problems associated with the SP concept, it will be of no use to bring up this SP aspect in this discussion (or, for that matter in any discussion, whatsoever). This notion of SP may find approbation only in groups which still believe in the brahmin superiority without any evidence to support such a view.

I am sure you understand what I mean by spiritusl progress. It is the highest in a person with sattva guna. So if you can identify sattvic characteristics mostly in a person then he can be said to possess predominantly sattva guna. This can be assessed by anyone and the fact it has not be quantified doesn't mean the concept is an enigma.

It is my view all your experiences that can enhance your existing spiritual development adds to the spiritual growth. These experiences typically make you learn the timeless values and thus broad your vision.

 

[biswa]

Such a highly spiritual person with only 100% sattva guna will die of starvation as he/she will not be able to procure their own food. At a minimum that person will depend on others to survive and will be a burden to society.

Desiring to only possess sattva guna is like saying I will create a life-form with only carbon, without hydrogen and oxygen.

 

[Vaagmi]

Dear Mr. Kunjuppu,

That was a candid admission of reality. But you also said:

i, for one, do not look upon caste as a barrier. to me a hindu is more important an identity. i have hopefully inculcated some hindu values in my children. but i am sure, they dont know the meaning of caste. also, living in canada, makes it practical for me to do this. in india, i may have more hurdles. i agree to that.

I do not understand why you inculcated some hindu values (which are obviously different from brahmin values if I have understood you right) to your children. Is it not because a secret, subconcious desire not to lose completely an identity and dissolve oneself in the ocean of an alien culture? Is that desire not an outcome of a fear of a homogenisation that reduces you to just another of a species? My regret is only this that a person with such intelligence and analytical capabilities has to ultimately compromise with that kind of a reality and come to terms with it. I wont advise you to seriously consider passing on all the brahmin cultural values to your offsprings because that may lead them to a helluva lot of stress and strain and make their life miserable. Let them live peacefully and happily with their acquired value system. My suggestion will be different if you intend come back to India for good. Thanks.

 

[sangom]

I did not say anything about IC marriages but about the timeless values implied in our tradition.
I said that such values are being preserved all around the world - so we have a new group of people that are living up the ideals of the meaning of the word Brahmana. Varna classification is but one meaning.

I have no interest in Varna classification or discussion about that . I think words like Mleccha is derogatory - there is no need to use them now.

I am talking about universal principles and values - that is the context of my post. Some of our religious traditions are aligned with those principles but not all. I do not have interest in religious traditions that are not connected to principles and have no interest in edicts that have no applicability today.

I don't think any one of us - you and I included - have the authority to make rules like "words like Mleccha is derogatory - there is no need to use them now.", etc., and thus twist our scriptures to suit our individual fancies.

Talking of "guna brahmana" the term cannot be applied to anyone outside even the Aryaavarta and that is why the panchagouda brahmanas were considered superior to the panchadravida brahmanas. Hence all this talk about universal principles etc., have no relevance in considering whether a person outside our hindu fold will qualify as a braahmana.

So, you are trying to make your own brand of religion and laying down edicts therefor. But you may have to look for followers only from among like minded PIOs.

 

[sangom]

I am sure you understand what I mean by spiritusl progress. It is the highest in a person with sattva guna. So if you can identify sattvic characteristics mostly in a person then he can be said to possess predominantly sattva guna. This can be assessed by anyone and the fact it has not be quantified doesn't mean the concept is an enigma.

It is my view all your experiences that can enhance your existing spiritual development adds to the spiritual growth. These experiences typically make you learn the timeless values and thus broad your vision.

Dear Shri Sravna,

Equating percentage of satva guna in a person with his level of spirituality is foolishness of the first order. Even Patanjali did not obviously subscribe to such a blunder, imo. The mischief has been done by BG, imo.

There should be perfect balance between the three gunas for a person to achieve moksha through the pAtanjali yoga route; but Shankara rules out moksha through samkhya or yoga routes. That is the position.

The word "satva" also means demon, spirit, goblin, ghost, monster, beast, etc., and in Malayalam this is the sense in which the word is used in day to day conversation. So, satva guna can also mean the guna/s of demon, spirit, goblin, ghost, monster, beast, etc. Hence it is better to be more circumspect in going after acquisition of more and more satva guna lest you end up as a wrong example

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Sravna,

Equating percentage of satva guna in a person with his level of spirituality is foolishness of the first order. Even Patanjali did not obviously subscribe to such a blunder, imo. The mischief has been done by BG, imo.

There should be perfect balance between the three gunas for a person to achieve moksha through the pAtanjali yoga route; but Shankara rules out moksha through samkhya or yoga routes. That is the position.

The word "satva" also means demon, spirit, goblin, ghost, monster, beast, etc., and in Malayalam this is the sense in which the word is used in day to day conversation. So, satva guna can also mean the guna/s of demon, spirit, goblin, ghost, monster, beast, etc. Hence it is better to be more circumspect in going after acquisition of more and more satva guna lest you end up as a wrong example

Dear Shri Sangom,

I do not think I can have a serious debate with you. You are making irrational attacks and not considering my arguments on their merits. You are quick to point out any reference that suits you views but consider something like BG as doing mischief when it doesn't go with your views.

I have better things to do than argue with you.

 

[tks]

I don't think any one of us - you and I included - have the authority to make rules like "words like Mleccha is derogatory - there is no need to use them now.", etc., and thus twist our scriptures to suit our individual fancies.

Talking of "guna brahmana" the term cannot be applied to anyone outside even the Aryaavarta and that is why the panchagouda brahmanas were considered superior to the panchadravida brahmanas. Hence all this talk about universal principles etc., have no relevance in considering whether a person outside our hindu fold will qualify as a braahmana.

So, you are trying to make your own brand of religion and laying down edicts therefor. But you may have to look for followers only from among like minded PIOs.

'Scriptures' is a generic word that covers many items. Certain Smritis are not applicable today since they were meant at a certain time when society was organized in one way. They are not timeless in their directives but application of principles at a given time and place. Once they have become inapplicable (because changes have happened in the society) and even derogatory in their interpretation it is not in good taste to use them. That is the point I was making.

You probably did not read my full post in your response. Let me try again - certain religious traditions are aligned with the timeless and placeless teachings in our scriptures. For example saying shanti mantra in our rituals is aligned and it will not become inapplicable in the future for those that embrace the universal principles. Certain edicts such as Manusmriti directives are not applicable even if their original application in a given society was aligned with principles (and I do not care to debate the finer points of such works and how they may have been aligned).

The teachings of the universal principles do *not* depend on any religion.

So dropping items that are not applicable is not about creating new brand of religion.

For those that equate caste with Varna and those obsessed with these classifications at a very deep level it may appear that I am making something up. I do not care for their views. I am expressing an opinion and is not subject to debate.


IC marriages are serious issues if the so called lower caste person is not aspiring to be of good qualities (e.g., Sativic Guna in outlook, knowingly eating non-vegetarian and has no interest in choosing to change diet or even wanting to find out why). It is worse if the vegetarian spouse end up changing and raising kids with traditions that take them away from good qualities and timeless traditions.

Preservation of a religious traditions is in my view the root concern of the OP because our traditions do embed timeless principles and provide practical way to help realize the vision of sages.

If a marriage produces moving away from such traditions (assuming the so called Brahmin family was following them in the first place) the such IC marriages are detrimental. If on the other hand the so called lower caste end up embracing the rich traditions I think there will be no issues.

I think Sri Biswa made this point a while ago probably more succinctly.

In the end it is all about education. In today's world when a person does not know or take time to understand the teachings and meanings of traditions then there is nothing to preserve - the destruction has already happened. It can be stopped and even reversed with more qualified teachers.

The older generation that has been thinking that they 'living a life a Brahmin' mistakenly in my view, by *only* embracing the time dependent ideas like Varna based directives are in for a shock.

Others and most people I know are lot more broad minded which include many posters here in my view.

 

[tks]

.
.
.

The mischief has been done by BG, imo.
.
.

I think this statement is accurate if you just preface with 'BG the way I understand it' .

Knowing the way you understand it from past posts, I can join you and even make stronger arguments as to why it has caused mischief :evil:

 

[Nara]

...I don't think any one of us - you and I included - have the authority to make rules like "words like Mleccha is derogatory - there is no need to use them now.", etc., and thus twist our scriptures to suit our individual fancies.

The term Brahmana is defined in an extremely supremacist way in the scriptures of Brahminical Hinduism, including Bhagavad Geethai. Further, these definitions are interpreted in a supremacist way by the scholars and acharyas who are seen as incontestable authorities on these scriptures. This is a problem for the modern Brahmin who are proud of his/her Brahmin heritage but lives in a secular world that has long rejected such supremacist ideology. They have to reconcile what they see as profound philosophy with the ugly supremacy that is interwoven into that philosophy. They try to solve this problem by coming up neo-vedantic interpretation that there is something called Guna Brahmin and that is described in Bhagavad Geethai. In doing so, they have to eviscerate the commentaries of Adi Shankara, Ramanuja, and Madwachariyar.

When they do this, as you rightly point out, they are in effect starting a new religion. But, even this new religion, having made up something called Guna Brahmin, is laced with supremacist ideology. The term Brahmana has a long and horrid history. To escape this history if one coins a new phrase Guna Brahmin and ascribe to it noble gunas, and then saying anyone who qualifies is a Guna Brahmin, then it is akin to KKK describing qualities such as hard work, discipline, being a Christian, etc. as gunas that make a Guna White person and then assert that any Black or Brown people who exhibit these gunas are Guna White. Put in this way we can see how horrible this idea of Guna Brahmin really is ......

Thanks ...

 

[tks]

The term Brahmana is defined in an extremely supremacist way in the scriptures of Brahminical Hinduism, including Bhagavad Geethai. Further, these definitions are interpreted in a supremacist way by the scholars and acharyas who are seen as incontestable authorities on these scriptures. This is a problem for the modern Brahmin who are proud of his/her Brahmin heritage but lives in a secular world that has long rejected such supremacist ideology. They have to reconcile what they see as profound philosophy with the ugly supremacy that is interwoven into that philosophy. They try to solve this problem by coming up neo-vedantic interpretation that there is something called Guna Brahmin and that is described in Bhagavad Geethai. In doing so, they have to eviscerate the commentaries of Adi Shankara, Ramanuja, and Madwachariyar.

When they do this, as you rightly point out, they are in effect starting a new religion. But, even this new religion, having made up something called Guna Brahmin, is laced with supremacist ideology. The term Brahmana has a long and horrid history. To escape this history if one coins a new phrase Guna Brahmin and ascribe to it noble gunas, and then saying anyone who qualifies is a Guna Brahmin, then it is akin to KKK describing qualities such as hard work, discipline, being a Christian, etc. as gunas that make a Guna White person and then assert that any Black or Brown people who exhibit these gunas are Guna White. Put in this way we can see how horrible this idea of Guna Brahmin really is ......

Thanks ...

There you go again

 

[Vaagmi]

I have been coming across this "supremacist" tag quite often here. Comparison is a natural phenomena in a heterogeneous society. There are bound to be good, bad and ugly in the society. There is bound to be big and small, intelligence and stupidity, strong and weak, poor and rich etc among people in this heterogeneous society. Those who are strong, rich, intelligent, big etc. will naturally be happy about their advantages and would express it also. What is wrong in this as long as the strong does not rob the weak, the intelligent does not trash the stupid, the rich does not insult the poor etc.? The supremacy is not per se bad. But it is used here as if supremacy is a dirty thing and should be equated with chauvinism. If every thing desirable because of its being good, strong, etc is grouped together and called by the name brahmin would all that automatically become a supremacist pig? Then what will be there to achieve in life? Just be stupid because you hate supremacy, be weak because you hate supremacy, be poor because you hate supremacy? Where in BG is brahmin depicted like a supremacist pig? Secular ideology may reject brahmins but it has again appropriated to itself the supremacist tag. People keep flaunting it every now and then to trivialize other ideologies. Ultimate every thing boils down to a POV. You can hate supremacy and yet insist that the worker who lays the road(real hard work-sweated labour) will be paid only Rs. 800 per day whereas you, a well educated well employed young man sweating(if you can really) in your AC cabin will get 100 times that amount. Equality and fraternity coexist with supremacy and that is a fact which can not be denied. There is difference between people in this world and we cannot deny that. This is what was called சமனிலாதன பல பரப்பி in Tamil.Thanks.

 

[tks]

I have been coming across this "supremacist" tag quite often here. Comparison is a natural phenomena in a heterogeneous society. There are bound to be good, bad and ugly in the society. There is bound to be big and small, intelligence and stupidity, strong and weak, poor and rich etc among people in this heterogeneous society. Those who are strong, rich, intelligent, big etc. will naturally be happy about their advantages and would express it also. What is wrong in this as long as the strong does not rob the weak, the intelligent does not trash the stupid, the rich does not insult the poor etc.? The supremacy is not per se bad. But it is used here as if supremacy is a dirty thing and should be equated with chauvinism. If every thing desirable because of its being good, strong, etc is grouped together and called by the name brahmin would all that automatically become a supremacist pig? Then what will be there to achieve in life? Just be stupid because you hate supremacy, be weak because you hate supremacy, be poor because you hate supremacy? Where in BG is brahmin depicted like a supremacist pig? Secular ideology may reject brahmins but it has again appropriated to itself the supremacist tag. People keep flaunting it every now and then to trivialize other ideologies. Ultimate every thing boils down to a POV. You can hate supremacy and yet insist that the worker who lays the road(real hard work-sweated labour) will be paid only Rs. 800 per day whereas you, a well educated well employed young man sweating(if you can really) in your AC cabin will get 100 times that amount. Equality and fraternity coexist with supremacy and that is a fact which can not be denied. There is difference between people in this world and we cannot deny that. This is what was called சமனிலாதன பல பரப்பி in Tamil.Thanks.

Well said indeed!

A saying comes to my mind

கண்ணை மூடிக் கொண்ட பூனை, உலகமே இருட்டாகிவிட்டது என்று சொல்லுமாம்

That is how some people without truly understanding the breadth and vastness of vision taught in B.Geeta and other upanishads start trashing the works. If they preface by saying that is their understanding there is no problem with their interpretation. That is like a cat acknowledging that it is dark to me because I may be closing my eyes.

While I was never around casteist people having grown up in Delhi and being in USA for studies shortly after teen years I learnt after visiting this forum that many times NBs commit violence in the name of caste superiority while simultaneously bashing the so called Brahmins.

We have a few obsessed with caste here as well who turn every discussion into Brahmin Bashing.

The best thing to do is to ignore them

 

[sangom]

The term Brahmana is defined in an extremely supremacist way in the scriptures of Brahminical Hinduism, including Bhagavad Geethai. Further, these definitions are interpreted in a supremacist way by the scholars and acharyas who are seen as incontestable authorities on these scriptures. This is a problem for the modern Brahmin who are proud of his/her Brahmin heritage but lives in a secular world that has long rejected such supremacist ideology. They have to reconcile what they see as profound philosophy with the ugly supremacy that is interwoven into that philosophy. They try to solve this problem by coming up neo-vedantic interpretation that there is something called Guna Brahmin and that is described in Bhagavad Geethai. In doing so, they have to eviscerate the commentaries of Adi Shankara, Ramanuja, and Madwachariyar.

When they do this, as you rightly point out, they are in effect starting a new religion. But, even this new religion, having made up something called Guna Brahmin, is laced with supremacist ideology. The term Brahmana has a long and horrid history. To escape this history if one coins a new phrase Guna Brahmin and ascribe to it noble gunas, and then saying anyone who qualifies is a Guna Brahmin, then it is akin to KKK describing qualities such as hard work, discipline, being a Christian, etc. as gunas that make a Guna White person and then assert that any Black or Brown people who exhibit these gunas are Guna White. Put in this way we can see how horrible this idea of Guna Brahmin really is ......

Thanks ...

Dear Nara,

My doubt is —

On the one hand great reliance is placed on our scriptures to bring out the argument that brahmin is superior to all the three other varnas, whereas, when it comes to raising some Brazilian woman as "guna brahmani", the very same scriptures are thrown to the winds.

It is this hypocrisy that I am surprised at.

 

[Nara]

...That is how some people without truly understanding the breadth and vastness of vision taught in B.Geeta and other upanishads start trashing the works. If they preface by saying that is their understanding there is no problem with their interpretation.

Would you apply the rule for yourself, i.e. will you preface your claims of some great BG vision BG free of Brahmnical supremacy?

But then, I have seen way too many times that you would refuse to get into substance and engage only in dismissive, "here you go again " or inanities like "you can't understand". Instead of generalities and Reagonisque put downs why don't you specifically address the issues I have raised. I am not holding my breath though.

The best thing to do is to ignore them

I have a feeling you just can't resist reading my posts.

 

[Nara]

It is this hypocrisy that I am surprised at.

Dear Sangom, I have a feeling they don't see the hypocrisy a la Paula Deen who was completely oblivious to her racism.

Also, I get a feeling that these people may not have actually read BG or the commentaries by great Acharyas with a critical eye. Even if they have read some of it, they are so sold on the greatness of these texts and commentaries they probably just eat it all up uncritically. The authors of these texts were at the very least honest, they weaved a consistent theory of karma, rebirth, and birth-based varna system and didn't shy away from the birth-based supremacist ideology, they took them as the divine order for the good of the society. These people on the other hand, caught in a secular world in which supremacist ideology will be seen as bigoted, want to whitewash the birth-based varna system and replace it with birth-independent varna arising out of guna only, and when they do that they don't realize, or refuse to realize, the raison d'etre of varna is lost.

I wouldn't have entered the discussion if tks had said the Brazilian woman is a learned and good person and IC/IR with such a person must be welcome. He introduced this notion of Guna Brahmin and cited BG as the basis. I didn't see any difference between this and what LS said in his thread for which LS took a lot of criticism deservedly. The idea of Guna Brahmin is by nature supremacist, and BG does not give support for a varna that is not birth based.

Let me leave it at that unless tks or Vaagme come up with some specific argument instead of generalities and put downs....

 

[sangom]

Dear Sangom, I have a feeling they don't see the hypocrisy a la Paula Deen who was completely oblivious to her racism.

Also, I get a feeling that these people may not have actually read BG or the commentaries by great Acharyas with a critical eye. Even if they have read some of it, they are so sold on the greatness of these texts and commentaries they probably just eat it all up uncritically. The authors of these texts were at the very least honest, they weaved a consistent theory of karma, rebirth, and birth-based varna system and didn't shy away from the birth-based supremacist ideology, they took them as the divine order for the good of the society. These people on the other hand, caught in a secular world in which supremacist ideology will be seen as bigoted, want to whitewash the birth-based varna system and replace it with birth-independent varna arising out of guna only, and when they do that they don't realize, or refuse to realize, the raison d'etre of varna is lost.

I wouldn't have entered the discussion if tks had said the Brazilian woman is a learned and good person and IC/IR with such a person must be welcome. He introduced this notion of Guna Brahmin and cited BG as the basis. I didn't see any difference between this and what LS said in his thread for which LS took a lot of criticism deservedly. The idea of Guna Brahmin is by nature supremacist, and BG does not give support for a varna that is not birth based.

Let me leave it at that unless tks or Vaagme come up with some specific argument instead of generalities and put downs....

Though I am aware of the limitation on my knowledge of hindu scriptures, I am enjoying the "performances" of vaagmi, tks (old actor to whom we are all accustomed) and LS (who has recently jumped in swinging by the chandelier hanging, á la MGR) - may be with a bit of unholy glee!!

 

[tks]

There is a movie called 'Blues Brothers' that came out in 1980. They put band together that had fallen apart.
We have the old Jalra group being put back by TB Forum Brothers, they have just gotten together .. Let us sit back and watch the fun ...LoL

 

[kunjuppu]

Educated caste Hindu youth campaign against inter-caste marriages

... and now this in today's online hindu. wonder whether *******, which has openly opposed inter caste marriages, would send a rep to this meeeting convened by these folks.

..and wouldn't be surprising, if a boy and a girl, meeting at this 'opposing inter caste marriages' fall in love ha ha

btw, i presume, these guys are against their girls marrying from tambrams too, as indicated by their 'forward community'

educated-caste-hindu-youth-campaign-against-intercaste-marriages

periyar's teachings have now come to a full circle, ... right where it started. oh well!!

 

[Nara]

There is a movie called 'Blues Brothers' that came out in 1980. They put band together that had fallen apart.
We have the old Jalra group being put back by TB Forum Brothers, they have just gotten together .. Let us sit back and watch the fun ...LoL

You have no problem finding time to make these inane remarks, but when it comes to substantively address the issues raised all the time just magically disappears, doesn't?

Anyway, I told you, you just can't resist reading my posts, you just can't ignore me .....

 

[tks]

You have no problem finding time to make these inane remarks, but when it comes to substantively address the issues raised all the time just magically disappears, doesn't?

Anyway, I told you, you just can't resist reading my posts, you just can't ignore me .....

I usually ignore your posts when it does not convey anything substantive and communicates a narrow minded perspective. I usually do not follow posts unless I happen to have commented. This being a weekend I have time.

I actually answered you but you cannot recognize that and it is not in the form you are looking for.

Your posts reflect to me that you have some strong preconceived notions. You think that our Upanishads have inane content. In my view you do have a bias towards caste hierarchy of your own brand just like many NB in India do.

Post #162 was in the same spirit as post #161 - just some fun if you are not a 'square' ..

In the past when I have asked very basic questions like what problem do you think the Upanishads address or something similar you were not able to answer basic 'funda' questions. Your belief systems and your bias (not apparent to you obviously) despite your intelligence is preventing one from having any substantive discussions. When I said once that you are caught in the web of binary logic you had no response other than just get annoyed the way you responded. At least that is what I remember.

Every subject requires certain mental traits - Understanding our timeless scriptures (and I do not mean all the Smritis) require tremendous abstraction skills in addition to other habits to prepare to learn. You do need a qualified teacher - it can be proven why without a teacher it is not possible to learn.

I am sure you must be brilliant in what you do since people have addressed you as a Professor.

You may have a storehouse of data and information probably much more than an average Hindu but I do not see a combustion from your posts.

Unless one overcomes their bias first by acknowledging it one cannot really see the world the way it is.


A few points before I close:

1. You have a problem thinking that Sri Sankara in his commentaries teaches narrow mindedness. This is not true.
In Manīshā Pancakam Sri Sankara repeatedly says that the Chandala is his Guru with profound reasons.

2. Having lived outside India for such a long time why do you think that someone from another country could not develop and display predominantly Sativic Guna (someone who is a Brahmin is described in terms of their Gunas in our scriptures, you can do your own research).

3. Hindus and even birth based Brahmins have had no problem accepting someone as a form of Isvara or a teacher even if their background shows they were not born as a Brahmin. You yourself have cited examples. Brahmins today go to Sai Baba temples, and follow people like Amritanandamayi.

4. Any serious Sadhakas if they met this Brazilian woman I mentioned would feel honored to be able to discuss and learn.

Calling out such a person for their Guna they display using the word Brahmani (again to describe the qualities) is not a big deal. If you think that is not in accordance with Manu's teaching so be it. As you know every Sanskrit word has a verbal root and is not arbitrary. The word Brahmana has a meaning and it is not just to refer to someone who was born in such a family only.

I have no hope you will understand any of this ... so let me stop this now

You have to show you understand B.Gita to have a serious discussion.

Do you think the verse below is inane nonsense - why would Sri Krishna start his teaching with this at the battle field in Chapter -2, Verse 16:

nàsato vidyate bhàvo
nàbhàvo vidyate sataâ
ubhayor api dêìîo ubhayor api dêìîo 'ntas
tv anayos tattva-daríibhiâ

Literal translation is

For the non-existent there is no existence
For the existent, there is no non existence
The certainty of both is seen
by those who perceive truth.

I know you will not answer and I am not holding my breath... Though I said I will not engage anymore on this topic with you this time I hope to do that ..

All the best in your quest to bash supremacist brahmins

 

[renuka]

who knows,

our beloved doctor might prefer a fatwa, to being addressed as a 'poor philistine'

Dear Kunjs,

I can't help laughing reading about Fatwa,Philistine etc.

Sometime last month..my son was watching Zee TV some song or dance show and Vidya Balan happened to be the guest judge.

Then suddenly my son asked me"Amma who is this woman? I see her many times in Zee TV?"

I said "she is VB an actress"

My son said "how on earth did she become an actress..she is not beautiful at all and she is so fat"

Ok Kunjs..this is from a 13 year old!

So I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder as Biswa correctly said.

 

[renuka]

A fatwa is way too harsh for poor philistines

Dear Amala,

Nope...you are wrong..I am no philistine...remember?? I always find you beautiful.

 

[renuka]

The inter caste marriages are order of the day.It is not only to tabras.You know the furror created by the marriage of a vanniar girl with a dalit in Darmapuri some months ago.Finally the girl came backto her mother(father commited suicide of the marriage).the boy died recently of suicide or murder. So it happens everywhere.
Alwan

Hi Talwan ji,

Long time no see in Forum.

 

[renuka]

Dear TKS ji,

I read what you wrote about the Brazilian beauty who was well versed in Vedanta etc and the usage of the terminology Guna Brahmana.

I understand the context in which you are using it cos as far as I have known your style of thinking in Forum I feel you classify Varna status of a person according to his/her Guna and not by birth...hence you feel the Brazilian lady is a Guna Brahmana..going by that I am sure you will not hesitate to classify a Janma Brahmana as even a Guna Vaishya for example.

But frankly speaking not everyone accepts this sort of classifications cos Varna has been birth based I think since time immemorial and I have no problems with that too.


Just to add sometimes the usage of the term Guna Brahmana might be not go down well all the while if we really dissect the terminology.

For example by calling the Brazilian lady a Guna Brahmana just denies her Brazilian heritage the honour of having such a wonderful beauty with Vedanta brains and it sort of implies that anything "good" has to have a Brahmana link.

As I mentioned in Forum before that many people from other communities too show wonderful qualities and intelligence par excellence..so I feel let them be known by their own community names and not 'confer' upon anyone any Varna terminology so that the credit also goes to their own community and this might actually encourage people of that community to emulate this person.

For example if we call a Dalit a Guna Brahmana based on his virtues....other Dalits are not going to emulate him..they will feel "Oh he is now known as Guna Brahmana and he is no more one of us".By this thinking this Guna Brahmana is now a total outsider to his own community and neither will he be accepted in the real sense of it by Janma Brahmanas and this Guna Brahmana will be "extinct" and not be able to be a role model for anyone in society.

If we let him remain and give him the due respect without branding him a Guna Brahmana he will remain a role model for his community and others will start looking up to him and emulating him...after all all we want for a society,a nation and the world is peace loving individuals and not Varna knighthood.

Would like your feedback on this.

 

[Nara]

I usually ignore your posts

How can you ignore and also respond, tks, you are one of a kind.

You are still talking in generalities and put downs. Our argument was focused on Guna Brahmana and BG, not Manisha Panmchakam. Also, if Manisha panchakam is Adi Shyankara's last word on birth based Varna, are you saying what Adi Shankara says about birth based Varna in his magnum opus, Shankara Bhashyam, and his BG commentary are false?

The inane statements I was talking about are yours, please do not conflate them with BG or its commentaires. I have great respect for the honesty of the great Acharyas who did not equivocate on birth-based Brahminical superiority. They were not hypocritical. What I consider inane are your argument that there is such a thing called Guna Brahmana independent of birth -- try selling that to any of the Acharyas representing the great Brahmnical traditions such as Shankara Matams, SV matams and Madwa Matams and you will quickly learn what I am talking about.

tks, please stop obfuscating, the only point of argument is your claim that there is something called Guna Brahmana independent of birth and that is consistent with BG. I say that is hogwash. From Chapter 2 to Chapter 9 to Chapter 16 to 18 (I have to look it up exactly which), and the commentaries by orthodox traditions, it is clear that the kind of Varna BG talks about is one that is birth based. The insult over injury is that they then assign all noble qualities to the higher varnas and despicable ones to the lower varnas, especially Shudras.

If you want to define a Guna based Brhmana independent of birth, you are free to do so, but that would be your own invention, one that is equally vile for reasons I have stated repeatedly.

Thank you ..