• Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Religious Conversion and freedom of religion

Gutter "குத்து" creates a gut feeling in people used to ஆயிரத்தில் இப்பத்து ! - குத்து is expression of marginalized ("the toxic others") full of agony This Md Ali குத்து is against people who learn lessons from Austria and not from Rangan & Thulukkanatchiiar in spite of their passion for பத்து.! I will be back in the last week of August after my holiday and if the sparring partner is willing can have the இறுதி சுற்று or knock out then Hope message is simple and clear without Bashyam
 
OK,


1. My understanding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality
The above is well accepted view. I know people who are gay/lesbian. They are no different than any other person we come across except they are attracted to members of their own sex. How they have sex is obvious to most adults in this day and age.

2. Well your brand of LOL communicates something else. So presence or absence is part of the message. Let us see how mature your response is (notice: I did not say how mature you are - separating the post from the person ) .. I was going to add LOL , but resisted it !

Your response, please to item 1

Dear Mr Vaagmi:

Are you going to respond ??
 
Dear Mr Vaagmi:
Are you going to respond ??
Your 'god concept' is a mental thing.
Mental thing has to be able to explain why homosexual consorts are not shown in temples. Homosexuality is in nature and is seen in pairing of animals also.
Is this god concept with a form rejects homosexuals? What does this god concept do when a homosexual surrenders also ?
These cannot be waved away as not issues with an LOL. LOL

Homosexuality is distinguished by the physicals while the "mentals" (using your word) are love, affection and passion which are not gender specific. Similarly consorts are about sAyujyam and about the Atman (soul) and has nothing to do with physicals.
So the answer to your question is: homosexuals also can attain sAyujyam but at that level homosexuality is meaningless. Lepers and poisonous snakes too attain sAyujyam by surrender. Period.

In the NityAradana that I and other vaishnavites perform daily, we chant from the Ramayana "............vaidehi barthaaram parishaswaje......" without the 'sexual feeling' crossing our mind even remotely. What we pray for is just that the Atman be given sAyujyam. But that requires a higher level of thinking and understanding which I do not expect in you.

Now the point 2:

Well your brand of LOL communicates something else. So presence or absence is part of the message. Let us see how mature your response is (notice: I did not say how mature you are - separating the post from the person ) .. I was going to add LOL , but resisted it !

So, my every simple LOL, as it reaches you is first scrutinised for a brand stamped on it. I find it a waste of time to engage such a soul in any conversation. May SrimanNarayana bless you with better stuff to engage in study of such subjects. LOL. It is just Laughing Out Loud. Please do not waste time looking for a suitable pigeon hole with a brand name to put it in. LOL.
 
Prasadji,

What God giveth, Trump taketh away. There are no absolute guarantees. There is a fundamentalist streak in US, Saudi Arabia as well as India.

Note the American "Muslim ban", which has now been upheld by the US Supreme Court.

Generally, when we want to curtails "others" freedom of choice, it means if others are opposed to "my" way of thinking.

When we call others as Anti-India Anti-Hindu, just because they have different POV, is plain wrong.
WHO gives the authority, that we can judge others, by OUR (EGO) standards.

I live in a country where I have the guarantee of my freedom. We have many Hindu temples, and can very much follow anything that is legal.

We do get Church groups coming to the door asking us to change, we have Swadyaya group convince us to visit them.
I have my personal religion, I am not converting at the same time I have no interest in what others do.
Sinhan ke lehde nahi, hansan ke nahi path
Ladan ki nahi boria, Sadhu na chale Jamat.

Tigers do not congregate in groups.
Anna Pakshi do not gather in flocks.
You do not have a sackful of Rubies.
Similarly, Sadhus do not need a crowd.

As far as getting a privilege for being a member of a community, we all join clubs.
Now Lingayats are not Hindus, Ramakrishna Mission does not want to be Hindu.
 
Homosexuality is distinguished by the physicals while the "mentals" (using your word) are love, affection and passion which are not gender specific. Similarly consorts are about sAyujyam and about the Atman (soul) and has nothing to do with physicals.
So the answer to your question is: homosexuals also can attain sAyujyam but at that level homosexuality is meaningless. Lepers and poisonous snakes too attain sAyujyam by surrender. Period.

In the NityAradana that I and other vaishnavites perform daily, we chant from the Ramayana "............vaidehi barthaaram parishaswaje......" without the 'sexual feeling' crossing our mind even remotely. What we pray for is just that the Atman be given sAyujyam. But that requires a higher level of thinking and understanding which I do not expect in you.

LOL.

Let us leave out LOL for now - no one is doing that.

My question was a serious question requiring a logical answer addressing the logical issues. What I read is a religious belief answer and a typical Vaagmi response of ' you cannot understand since it requires higher level of thinking'. Thinking is about logic, and Logic of the contradiction I raised is not addressed. Let us be at the ground level. I will explain again the issue. If you have a logical way to address the issue that will be great

So in your belief anyone can achieve this 'saayujyam' - Your god (remember it is your concept and that of other Vaishnavites as you have stated) will grant that Saayujyam for all serious devotees. Is this God a male?

But this God seem to make a distinction. If it is a female devotee, He grants this Saayujyam and also makes her a Consort though he already has a few. If it is a male devotee, he cannot become a Consort. Let us leave out sexual aspect of hetro and homo for the moment. So the God picks who can be a Consort based on their Gender and takes himself to be a Male ! But Homosexual attraction in nature is created by Him. No Gay person chose that attraction. So this God is biased because there is distinction between how he treats Homos and women both of whom are attracted to him without physical sex aspect. That raises the question of consort status which seem to be an add-on to Saayujyam status. Is there a partiality? If it is not, show why not. Please do not repeat your belief that - it is that way, you need higher level thinking to get it. That is not an answer

Die hard Christians believe gays will go to hell - I said that is unfair to one. He said 'God created Adam and Eve' not 'Adam and Steve' - Is that an answer. He is stating his belief and did not address the unfairness aspect at all. Your answer is at the same level.

If you can respond how there is no unfairness in your belief that will be helpful

There is another point. Long ago (I remember your posts) you made a big thing about how sexual union of male and female is written by poets in describing this union (Saayujyam). Now you can correct me, but you hold belief that sex is sacred (as in Lord Krishna and Radha being a Gopi?? if that rings a bell). Now if sex is sacred why is homo and lesbian sex is not?
 
Prasadji,

What God giveth, Trump taketh away. There are no absolute guarantees. There is a fundamentalist streak in US, Saudi Arabia as well as India.

Note the American "Muslim ban", which has now been upheld by the US Supreme Court.



Yes, that too.
But at least for now (is just a time frame) we can practice our religion, no one can guarantee anything in perpetuity.
 
[h=1]Does loving Hindus mean hating Muslims? Asks Mamata

West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee today said those who accuse her of appeasing Muslims are friends of neither the Hindus nor the Muslims.[/h]
"Some accuse me of (doing) Muslim appeasement. My question to them is whether loving Hindus means you have to hate Muslims. I respect and love all communities and religion. This country belongs to everybody," she said.


"Those who say I appease Muslims are friends of neither the Hindus nor the Muslims," Banerjee, also the Trinamool Congress supremo, said while addressing a special prayer gathering on Red Road here to celebrate Eid-ul-Fitr.



The BJP and some other organisations have been charging Banerjee with appeasement of Muslims for political reasons.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/does-loving-hindus-mean-hating-muslims-mamata/articleshow/64614162.cms
 
I need help here. If someone can help me, welcome. What is said in this post?

To the member:

Kindly enclose a Jambu Bhashyam with such posts in future. Time is precious. I have no time to go through posts repeatedly. So I choose to ignore. Thanks.

Jambu Bhashyam - 2 please.

There were request for.Bhashyam 3 and 4 which have vanished ! The clear message of gutter குத்து & தெரு கூத்து - zero tolerance for intolerance! This message has reached நடுத்தெரு நாராயணண்s of even ஆழ்வார் பேட்டை ! Pristine Philosophy - காேபுரம் ஏறி பரப்பினாலும் has no effect குத்து is powerful like Md Ali's punch - கட்டிக்காே ஓட்டிகாே on Ramzan - never வெட்டிக்காே Bhashyam - Basheer needs no Sribhashyam from Austria!

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/chennai/a-road-straddling-two-religions/article4262890.ece
 
1) So in your belief anyone can achieve this 'saayujyam' - Your god (remember it is your concept and that of other Vaishnavites as you have stated) will grant that Saayujyam for all serious devotees. Is this God a male?

2) But this God seem to make a distinction. If it is a female devotee, He grants this Saayujyam and also makes her a Consort though he already has a few. If it is a male devotee, he cannot become a Consort. Let us leave out sexual aspect of hetro and homo for the moment. So the God picks who can be a Consort based on their Gender and takes himself to be a Male ! But Homosexual attraction in nature is created by Him. No Gay person chose that attraction. So this God is biased because there is distinction between how he treats Homos and women both of whom are attracted to him without physical sex aspect. That raises the question of consort status which seem to be an add-on to Saayujyam status. Is there a partiality? If it is not, show why not.

3) There is another point. Long ago (I remember your posts) you made a big thing about how sexual union of male and female is written by poets in describing this union (Saayujyam). Now you can correct me, but you hold belief that sex is sacred (as in Lord Krishna and Radha being a Gopi?? if that rings a bell). Now if sex is sacred why is homo and lesbian sex is not?



"yadhA vAcha nivartante, apprApya manasA saha" -- Please meditate/ruminate on this from the vedas.

I have not seen God and so I do not know what is his form and whether he is a He or a She or anything else that I know. So I am sorry I can not give you a satisfactory direct answer. But I can narrate my experiences and explain the path I travelled to find an answer. As my mind struggles and grapples with the task (It is in my nature as a human being) to know him and as my anxiety due to repeated failures increases, I find the problem to be intractable and situation becomes hopeless. So I decide on a solution personal to me. Instead of looking for and finding a God with a form and name, I give God a form and a name. I call him Sriman Narayana and imagine him to be a kalyana gunArnavam (a repository of all good attributes/qualities). And considering his greatness and my smallness and after exploring a lot many of other things, I decide to just love and surrender to him. And what more!! I am happy that I have found a practical and correct solution to the problem that was tormenting me for long -- like it is perhaps tormenting you now.

And as I look around, I find there are many others too in the vast humanity, who have followed the same method as I did and have arrived at similar solutions. Thus I find a whole society accepting the God entity, giving it a form and a name including Sriman Narayana to objectify that entity for convenience. I have for company a large number of people in this world-people who are capable of thinking deeply, people who are not fools. Among them I find people who give the form of a woman to their God entity, there are those who give the form of a man, a child, a successful warrior, a good monarch, even a man-lion composit form etc., I have no quarrel with them because I understand their thought processes as they do understand me. I do not ask them why this form and why not that form. I do not ask them why their form is not a transsexual or a homosexual because I understand it is silly to ask such a question. It is they including me who have chosen the form and it is not the form assumed by God entity.

God as a male warrior-king, with queens by the side (yes the plural form of queen is deliberate), as a naughty boy indulging in lovable pranks, as a turtle, a man-lion composite form, a woman parasakthi, a mother who is mercy personified, a fierce looking Kali, a Maadan with mush extremely fierce-looking with sharp weapons in hand, all these forms with number of various consorts-men and women. The whole lot of all this is just the form given by human beings to the formless, nameless indeterminable entity called God. So I do not enter into any argument with anyone about why some one is part of the socalled consort while some one else is not etc., It is all the mental constructs of humans. There can be reasons or no reasons. It is a waste of time arguing over these.

I also understand that this God entity pervades everything in the creation and that includes me too. I understand there are people in this world, who stress this pervading aspect and choose to believe God exists in this kind of consciousness itself. I have no quarrel with them either. There are also those who have struggled grappling with the search in their mind and are unable to cut out the active alternative path of solution that I and many other like minded people have chosen. They wait indefinitely for newer tools and newer capabilities to come to the human beings when they think they will finally get the answer to the nagging question. So they choose to refute God entity and call it just the creation by the society of believers and nothing more. They strictly go by cause and effect and proof physical. I am unable to go with their reasoning and I choose to remain what I am –a believer.

So the answer to your question is “I do not know” qualified by all that has been written in the above paragraphs..

I can write more on this topic. But that would presume a certain familiarity with Epistemology and Ontology. Moreover that would need a lot of self-effacement and genuine burning desire to know on the part of the participant in dialogue. I am not sure about that here. I am not interested in discussing this further here. So I stop with this. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Does loving Hindus mean hating Muslims? Asks Mamata

West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee today said those who accuse her of appeasing Muslims are friends of neither the Hindus nor the Muslims.



"Some accuse me of (doing) Muslim appeasement. My question to them is whether loving Hindus means you have to hate Muslims. I respect and love all communities and religion. This country belongs to everybody," she said.


"Those who say I appease Muslims are friends of neither the Hindus nor the Muslims," Banerjee, also the Trinamool Congress supremo, said while addressing a special prayer gathering on Red Road here to celebrate Eid-ul-Fitr.



The BJP and some other organisations have been charging Banerjee with appeasement of Muslims for political reasons.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/does-loving-hindus-mean-hating-muslims-mamata/articleshow/64614162.cms

Indian Politicians cannot survive without communal politics.

She came to power by projecting Left as anti-minorities. In the recent communal clash, no concrete action was taken, especially where Hindus were affected.

Many believe, by hiding under the cover of a Hindu, she is more a pro-Muslim.

Staying comfortably in Calcutta, saying India belongs to everybody is nothing but exposing her as a pseudo-secular. Can she repeat the word in Kashmir?
 
"yadhA vAcha nivartante, apprApya manasA saha" -- Please meditate/ruminate on this from the vedas.

I have not seen God and so I do not know what is his form and whether he is a He or a She or anything else that I know. So I am sorry I can not give you a satisfactory direct answer. But I can narrate my experiences and explain the path I travelled to find an answer. As my mind struggles and grapples with the task (It is in my nature as a human being) to know him and as my anxiety due to repeated failures increases, I find the problem to be intractable and situation becomes hopeless. So I decide on a solution personal to me. Instead of looking for and finding a God with a form and name, I give God a form and a name. I call him Sriman Narayana and imagine him to be a kalyana gunArnavam (a repository of all good attributes/qualities). And considering his greatness and my smallness and after exploring a lot many of other things, I decide to just love and surrender to him. And what more!! I am happy that I have found a practical and correct solution to the problem that was tormenting me for long -- like it is perhaps tormenting you now.

And as I look around, I find there are many others too in the vast humanity, who have followed the same method as I did and have arrived at similar solutions. Thus I find a whole society accepting the God entity, giving it a form and a name including Sriman Narayana to objectify that entity for convenience. I have for company a large number of people in this world-people who are capable of thinking deeply, people who are not fools. Among them I find people who give the form of a woman to their God entity, there are those who give the form of a man, a child, a successful warrior, a good monarch, even a man-lion composit form etc., I have no quarrel with them because I understand their thought processes as they do understand me. I do not ask them why this form and why not that form. I do not ask them why their form is not a transsexual or a homosexual because I understand it is silly to ask such a question. It is they including me who have chosen the form and it is not the form assumed by God entity.

God as a male warrior-king, with queens by the side (yes the plural form of queen is deliberate), as a naughty boy indulging in lovable pranks, as a turtle, a man-lion composite form, a woman parasakthi, a mother who is mercy personified, a fierce looking Kali, a Maadan with mush extremely fierce-looking with sharp weapons in hand, all these forms with number of various consorts-men and women. The whole lot of all this is just the form given by human beings to the formless, nameless indeterminable entity called God. So I do not enter into any argument with anyone about why some one is part of the socalled consort while some one else is not etc., It is all the mental constructs of humans. There can be reasons or no reasons. It is a waste of time arguing over these.

I also understand that this God entity pervades everything in the creation and that includes me too. I understand there are people in this world, who stress this pervading aspect and choose to believe God exists in this kind of consciousness itself. I have no quarrel with them either. There are also those who have struggled grappling with the search in their mind and are unable to cut out the active alternative path of solution that I and many other like minded people have chosen. They wait indefinitely for newer tools and newer capabilities to come to the human beings when they think they will finally get the answer to the nagging question. So they choose to refute God entity and call it just the creation by the society of believers and nothing more. They strictly go by cause and effect and proof physical. I am unable to go with their reasoning and I choose to remain what I am –a believer.

So the answer to your question is “I do not know” qualified by all that has been written in the above paragraphs..

I can write more on this topic. But that would presume a certain familiarity with Epistemology and Ontology. Moreover that would need a lot of self-effacement and genuine burning desire to know on the part of the participant in dialogue. I am not sure about that here. I am not interested in discussing this further here. So I stop with this. Thanks.

Dear Mr Vaagmi:

Thanks for taking the time to write a long write up.

Here is my response . You can respond back if you want.

The quote you have used (and often in the forum) has many different views based on googling for it. They all do not agree. There are widely divergent views. Hard to meditate on something that does not even have a simple and agreed upon meaning.

No issue with your solution, but you cannot expect it to be coming under a logical framework to debate. It is but a belief and you acknowledge that. But people have found their own solutions like you that clash. You and I can be fine with 'live and let live'. But many fight leading to immense violence (mostly not initiated by true Hindus).

What we believe, though baseless can lead to huge problems. For example, Christianity and Islam says animals have no souls and think that God created all these for men's pleasure. That is their 'solution about God'

So that results in factory farming, consumerism and hurting the environment by grabbing things at any cost.

If you are not careful, your own conviction on your belief can make you fight with others if they say something contradictory or raise questions.

To me a God (and his Godmen) cannot be doing miracles because I think life itself is a miracle. May be you admire a cockroach.. I wonder how a small bird can travel 20000 miles in a year and return to the same spot. Or a mosquito that is able to move about so fast (compared to its size). Those are real miracles.

Hope your God concept does not include miracles breaking laws of nature.

Also I can debate with you about 'surrender' because there is a lot of contradictions in its usage I think.

In Christianity surrender is 'accept Jesus is your savior' and no matter what you will go to heaven. That to me is nonsense.

Wonder what your understanding of surrender is to a God you have given a form to in your mind.
 
"yadhA vAcha nivartante, apprApya manasA saha" -- Please meditate/ruminate on this from the vedas.

I have not seen God and so I do not know what is his form and whether he is a He or a She or anything else that I know. So I am sorry I can not give you a satisfactory direct answer. But I can narrate my experiences and explain the path I travelled to find an answer. As my mind struggles and grapples with the task (It is in my nature as a human being) to know him and as my anxiety due to repeated failures increases, I find the problem to be intractable and situation becomes hopeless. So I decide on a solution personal to me. Instead of looking for and finding a God with a form and name, I give God a form and a name. I call him Sriman Narayana and imagine him to be a kalyana gunArnavam (a repository of all good attributes/qualities). And considering his greatness and my smallness and after exploring a lot many of other things, I decide to just love and surrender to him. And what more!! I am happy that I have found a practical and correct solution to the problem that was tormenting me for long -- like it is perhaps tormenting you now.

And as I look around, I find there are many others too in the vast humanity, who have followed the same method as I did and have arrived at similar solutions. Thus I find a whole society accepting the God entity, giving it a form and a name including Sriman Narayana to objectify that entity for convenience. I have for company a large number of people in this world-people who are capable of thinking deeply, people who are not fools. Among them I find people who give the form of a woman to their God entity, there are those who give the form of a man, a child, a successful warrior, a good monarch, even a man-lion composit form etc., I have no quarrel with them because I understand their thought processes as they do understand me. I do not ask them why this form and why not that form. I do not ask them why their form is not a transsexual or a homosexual because I understand it is silly to ask such a question. It is they including me who have chosen the form and it is not the form assumed by God entity.

God as a male warrior-king, with queens by the side (yes the plural form of queen is deliberate), as a naughty boy indulging in lovable pranks, as a turtle, a man-lion composite form, a woman parasakthi, a mother who is mercy personified, a fierce looking Kali, a Maadan with mush extremely fierce-looking with sharp weapons in hand, all these forms with number of various consorts-men and women. The whole lot of all this is just the form given by human beings to the formless, nameless indeterminable entity called God. So I do not enter into any argument with anyone about why some one is part of the socalled consort while some one else is not etc., It is all the mental constructs of humans. There can be reasons or no reasons. It is a waste of time arguing over these.

I also understand that this God entity pervades everything in the creation and that includes me too. I understand there are people in this world, who stress this pervading aspect and choose to believe God exists in this kind of consciousness itself. I have no quarrel with them either. There are also those who have struggled grappling with the search in their mind and are unable to cut out the active alternative path of solution that I and many other like minded people have chosen. They wait indefinitely for newer tools and newer capabilities to come to the human beings when they think they will finally get the answer to the nagging question. So they choose to refute God entity and call it just the creation by the society of believers and nothing more. They strictly go by cause and effect and proof physical. I am unable to go with their reasoning and I choose to remain what I am –a believer.

So the answer to your question is “I do not know” qualified by all that has been written in the above paragraphs..

I can write more on this topic. But that would presume a certain familiarity with Epistemology and Ontology. Moreover that would need a lot of self-effacement and genuine burning desire to know on the part of the participant in dialogue. I am not sure about that here. I am not interested in discussing this further here. So I stop with this. Thanks.
hi

NAAYAMATMA PRAVACHANA ENA LABYAHA.....NA MEDHAYA.....the upanishad says....
 
hi

NAAYAMATMA PRAVACHANA ENA LABYAHA.....NA MEDHAYA.....the upanishad says....

Dear Mr TBS:

There are many of us who cannot follow what you have written.
Not even sure if English transliteration is correct because Googling produces no result.

Can you please expand this and say what you mean? If it was meant only for Mr Vaagmi and not for others you can use PM to do that.

In a discussion forum, it is best to provide some details so people can follow. Thanks
 
And as I look around, I find there are many others too in the vast humanity, who have followed the same method as I did and have arrived at similar solutions.

[video].https://youtu.be/AOOs8MaR1YM[/video]

Fortunately, we are not lemmings. We have an intellect and we can analyze before we jump off the cliff.
The reasoning of following a leader does not bode well in a Hindu society.




A note of caution:

A video is for the purpose of illustration only.


Because of their association with this odd behavior, lemming "suicide" is a frequently used
metaphor in reference to people who go along unquestioningly with popular opinion, with potentially dangerous or fatal consequences. This metaphor is seen many times in popular culture, such as in the video game Lemmings.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemming
 
Last edited:

Latest ads

Back
Top