• This year perform Avani Avittam from the safety of your home. Click here for details
  • 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.

Significance of Religious symbol on AIADMK leaders

Status
Not open for further replies.

prasad1

Gold Member
Gold Member
rcmaqGjieidja.jpg

Are they Astikas? Are they, Shiva Bhaktas?
 

mraghavan

Member
The word "Astika" literally means one who follows Vedas. In that context, no they are not. But, the AIDMK is not an atheistic movement like the DMK, so the wearing of religious symbols is certainly allowed. Remember that Jayalalitha came from an Iyengar family and performed rituals aligned with that community.
 
Sri M Raghavan writes:-

"The word "Astika" literally means one who follows Vedas."


According to M Monier-Williams' "A Sanskrit English Dictionary", aastika (derived from "aasthi" --there is or exists) refers to one who believes in the existence (of God, of another world, etc). In common parlance, the word is taken to mean a practising Brahmin.

Aasthikartha-da, (granting or granter of Asthka's request) for example, refers to King Janamejaya who, at the request of sage Aasthika Muni, son of Jaradkaaru and Bhagini Jaradkaaru, excepted the Naaga Takshaka from the destruction by fire to which he had doomed the serpent-race.

(We recite certain manthrams regarding the serpents and the Jaratkaaru couple, Janamejaya's mahaa-yagnyam in which sacred fire all serpents perished and turned into ashes, during our daily sandhya-vandanams, just before namaskkaarams.)

From Valmeeki's Raamaayanam, we also learn of the existence of powerful and learned rishi-Naasteekas like Jaabaali who advised Sree Raama to disobey Emperor Dasharatha's decree of 14 years' exile and to return to Ayodhya to claim the imperial throne. Sree Raama countered with arguments as to why his father's decrees should be obeyed faithfully and in accordance with the rules of dharma.

Yet, Sree Raama not only bore no animosity, but invited sage Jaabaali to his coronation in Ayodhya, and gifted him with the same donations as given to other invited sages.

Sri Raghavan also writes:-

"Jayalalitha came from an Iyengar family and performed rituals aligned with that community." She was also reported to have been very, very close to, almost intimate with, a Malayali actor, one Gopala Menon (better known as MGR). When she was Chief Minister of Tamil Naadu, she re-named a district with a Hindu name, Millath-e-(Something), to show how strongly pro-Islam and anti-Hindu she was.

Some say she kept completely aloof from not only the Iyengar community but with the whole Braahmana samooham during her life.

Were her last rites conducted in accordance with "rituals aligned with that community"? Were there Vaishavaite Bhattachaaryas, for example, helping her nearest male relative perform the requisite apara prayogams?

S Narayanaswamy Iyer
 

zebra16

Well-known member
Sri M Raghavan writes:-

"The word "Astika" literally means one who follows Vedas."


According to M Monier-Williams' "A Sanskrit English Dictionary", aastika (derived from "aasthi" --there is or exists) refers to one who believes in the existence (of God, of another world, etc). In common parlance, the word is taken to mean a practising Brahmin.

Have to disagree with Mr. Monier Williams.

Astika is formed from the root word "asthi" meaning that "it is so". Astikas are supposed to believe in just two things :

(a) Supremacy of Vedas
(b) Birth after death.

The concept of Iswara or nireeswara does not enter into the picture at all.

Because the buddhists did not subscribe to the idea of supremacy of vedas (but they did believe in re-births) they were called nAstikAs.
 
Last edited:

Sri Zebra16 writes:-

"Astikas are supposed to believe in just two things :

(a) Supremacy of Vedas
(b) Birth after death.

"The concept of Iswara or nireeswara does not enter into the picture at all."

Am a bit puzzled.

May I please know what is the basis of this supposition? Perhaps some known guru like Vasishta or Vishvaamithra or Bhaaradvaaja said so? Or some Upanishad-type sacred scripture we know? Or even the Vedas themselves in their Samhithas, their Braahmans, their Aaranyakas?

In Vaalmeeki's Raamaayanam, sage Vishvaamithra wakes Sree Raama by reminding him of his religious duties such as contemplation of the deities and performance of daily duties such as sandhyaa-vandanam -- Valmeeki Raamaayanam Baala-kandam, thrayovimsha sargam (Canto XXIII):-

कौसल्या सुप्रजा राम पूर्वा संध्या प्रवर्ततॆ,

उत्तिष्ट नरशार्दूल कर्तव्यम् दैवमाह्निकम्


"Kausalyaa suprajaa Raama poorvaa sandhyaa pravartate

uttishta narasaardula kartavyam daivamaahnikam"

Sree Raama certainly was a faithful and dutiful Kshathriya aastika. In addition to accepting the authority of the Vedas, he certainly accepted the existence of Ishvara as represented by the Vedic deity Savitr.

He also adored Lord Shiva-Rudran by establishing the jyothir-lingam Raamanaatha-svaami at Ramesvaram at the southern tip of the Indian Peninsula and performng expiatory rites for having killed Brahmanaas such as Raavana, Kumbha-karna, and Raavana's sons in battle.

We all know that in Bhagavath-Geetha, Lord Sree Krishna Paramaathma urged everyone to reject utterly all other creeds and to surrender to Him alone. He will thereupon grant dispensation from all sins and reward them with moksham. Do not fear -- Chapter 18, slokam 66.

Aasthikas who accept this exhortation thereby also accept the Paramaathma as their Ishvara, their Ishta Devatha.

Can we therefore modify Sri Zebra16's definition of aasthikas by saying that they adore a personal God, i.e. an Ishta Devatha, or an ancestral deity, i.e. a Kula Devatha, that they accept the paramountcy of the Vedas, and that they also accept the cycle of death-followed by-birth-followed by death?

S Narayanaswamy Iyer
 
OP
prasad1

prasad1

Gold Member
Gold Member
I am sorry my original post asked a simple question.
These Politician claiming to be a Dravidian Party, which originally started by a person BANNED in this forum.
They used to bash Hinduism.
My question was whether they were, believer, agnostic, or atheist.
I translated atheist as Nastik, and Believer to Astik.
My apologies if I mislead others.
 

Raji Ram

Gold Member
Gold Member
Dear Prasad Sir,

Most of these politicians are 'veettula eli; veLiyila puli' type! :D

They are not supposed to pray God but most of them visit some temples regularly. They will advise against superstitions but

a senior leader never forgets to wear one yellow shawl, whenever he goes out! Now a days some are bold enough to wear holy

symbols on their foreheads and this might be some other superstition to win a royal seat! :cool:
 
Sri Prasad1 clarifies:-

They used to bash Hinduism.
My question was whether they were, believer, agnostic, or atheist.
I translated atheist as Nastik, and Believer to Astik.


Really depends on what we mean by "Hinduism".

In UK, USA and elsewhere enormous luxurious edifices in wide and well-maintained gardens are erected to "Swami Narayan".

Nothing to do with Sree Mahaa Vishnu or any of His avathaarams. The central figures worshipped in these magnificently-designed "Hindu temples" is a shudra hunter couple elevated to divinity. Not to be confused with any semblance however remote to Radha/Krishna.

In some parts of South India and in some countries to which Tamil uneducated "indented labourers" were mass-transported by the British during their Empire hey-days, one finds temples erected to sword-wielding Ayyanaar, Muniyaandy, Maari-aathaa, Periyaatchi, Chinna-aatchi, Theraupathi-Amman, Karu-maayee, Madurai Veeran, Karuppan, Chinna Karuppan, Periya Karuppan, a giant-sized severed head fixed to the ground, and other "village gods".

The present-day descendants of these ex-labourers worship these deities by cymbal music, song and dance, often entering into screaming trances, and uttering prophesies. Food and drink offered to these deities (and later consumed by devotees as prasaadam) consist of cooked and raw fish, chicken, goat-meat, plus toddy, beer, brandy, whisky, "chaaraayam", and "beedi", cheroots, cigars, cigarettes which are all lighted. Those entranced also wave machetes, long knives, and swords during their dances. The weapons are deemed to contain the spirit of their gods and goddesses.

When questioned, the worshippers confirm they do not go to "regular" Hindu temples or accept the gods and goddesses there, and that E V Ramasamy is their "thalaivar". They have vowed to wipe off all "aiyyars" from the face of the Earth, or at least from Kashmir to Kanyakumaari, from the Arabian Sea to the Bay of Bengal. Some prosperous worshippers also own successful businesses such as operating lorry transport, recruiting untrained workers for construction jobs, owning sari and veshti shops, provision shops, grocery shops, Tamil bookshops.

To strangers, these are all "Hindus" though they do not wear forehead marks. They do dress in thundu and mel-thundu, and wear leathern chappals.

To answer Sri Prsad1's clarified question, can we perhaps say that these are not Hindus but believers in goddesses and gods of their own creation, i.e. gods not in the Hindu pantheon?

S Narayanaswamy Iyer
 

renuka

Gold Member
Gold Member

Sri Zebra16 writes:-

"Astikas are supposed to believe in just two things :

(a) Supremacy of Vedas
(b) Birth after death.

"The concept of Iswara or nireeswara does not enter into the picture at all."

Am a bit puzzled.

May I please know what is the basis of this supposition? Perhaps some known guru like Vasishta or Vishvaamithra or Bhaaradvaaja said so? Or some Upanishad-type sacred scripture we know? Or even the Vedas themselves in their Samhithas, their Braahmans, their Aaranyakas?

In Vaalmeeki's Raamaayanam, sage Vishvaamithra wakes Sree Raama by reminding him of his religious duties such as contemplation of the deities and performance of daily duties such as sandhyaa-vandanam -- Valmeeki Raamaayanam Baala-kandam, thrayovimsha sargam (Canto XXIII):-

कौसल्या सुप्रजा राम पूर्वा संध्या प्रवर्ततॆ,

उत्तिष्ट नरशार्दूल कर्तव्यम् दैवमाह्निकम्


"Kausalyaa suprajaa Raama poorvaa sandhyaa pravartate

uttishta narasaardula kartavyam daivamaahnikam"

Sree Raama certainly was a faithful and dutiful Kshathriya aastika. In addition to accepting the authority of the Vedas, he certainly accepted the existence of Ishvara as represented by the Vedic deity Savitr.

He also adored Lord Shiva-Rudran by establishing the jyothir-lingam Raamanaatha-svaami at Ramesvaram at the southern tip of the Indian Peninsula and performng expiatory rites for having killed Brahmanaas such as Raavana, Kumbha-karna, and Raavana's sons in battle.

We all know that in Bhagavath-Geetha, Lord Sree Krishna Paramaathma urged everyone to reject utterly all other creeds and to surrender to Him alone. He will thereupon grant dispensation from all sins and reward them with moksham. Do not fear -- Chapter 18, slokam 66.

Aasthikas who accept this exhortation thereby also accept the Paramaathma as their Ishvara, their Ishta Devatha.

Can we therefore modify Sri Zebra16's definition of aasthikas by saying that they adore a personal God, i.e. an Ishta Devatha, or an ancestral deity, i.e. a Kula Devatha, that they accept the paramountcy of the Vedas, and that they also accept the cycle of death-followed by-birth-followed by death?

S Narayanaswamy Iyer

If we go technical..Asti means IS and Nasti means NOT.

I guess we have to co relate what do we mean by IS and what we mean by NOT.

It logically points to some form of perception here.
 

B V RAAGHAVAN

Active member
Namaskarams,
In olden days, only brahmins were educated. Other caste people were not able to get education because of their economic and other situations. In the medieval period E V Ramaswamy Naikkar (E VE RA Periyar) (having Lord Rama's Name) entered the scene and propagated the Dravidian thesis. He said that these brahmins are suppressing the other communities and are not allowing others to come up in the Society. He was supported by C N Annadurai like leaders. Periyar started saying that there is no God's presence in the world. Those who are following the God are fools. Like this he propagated the Dravidian thesis. He classified the Brahmins as Aryas who came from North and Dravidians are the Son of the Soil. So the Aryans should quite Tamil Nadu. That was his main agenda. He asked his followers not to go to Temples and have the asthik symbols like vibhuti, chandan on the forehead. Then the political party DMK was started by C N Annadurai who came out from Periyars group. So they also followed the same pattern to win the minds the gullible tamil people. But later the break-away group by lead by MGR was half asthik and half nasthik. Though they have the name of Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, they followed the Asthik route. They visited temples etc. They never antoganised the Brahmin community. So the followers of MGR DMK are having all the symbols on the forehead.

It was told that the hardcore Periyar also was a God fearing man. He was having a pooja room in his house. A brahmin was assisting him in his daily chores.

After all everybody is fooling the poor gullible tamil illeterate people. Actually these people only suppressed these other community people to derive political benefits out of that and still they are doing the same and the tamil people are succumbing to their tacit activities.

Lord only can save these people.

Anbudan
Adiyen
 

GNANA SUNYAM

Active member
Namaskarams,
In olden days, only brahmins were educated. ...........
After all everybody is fooling the poor gullible tamil illeterate people. Actually these people only suppressed these other community people to derive political benefits out of that and still they are doing the same and the tamil people are succumbing to their tacit activities.

Lord only can save these people.

Anbudan
Adiyen

Im reminded of the film 'muhammad-bin-tuglaq' produced by cho ramaswamy.

he makes a remark in the film, 'janangal muttaalgal. avargal ennaiyae therndhethuvittaargal' (electorate are fools. they elected me as their premiere)'.

cho ramaswamy is the only person who boldly and publicly said that electorate are fools.
 
"The break-away group by lead by MGR was half asthik and half nasthik. Though they have the name of Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, they followed the Asthik route. They visited temples etc. They never antoganised the Brahmin community. So the followers of MGR DMK are having all the symbols on the forehead." -- B V Raghavan.

Have always wondered -- Was DMK ever a full DRAAVIDA munnetra kazhagam? Wasn't it, isn't it just a Thamizhar setup? Are the majority of members Kannadas, Telegus, Malayalis?

S Narayanaswamy Iyer
 

B V RAAGHAVAN

Active member
Namaskarams,

Though the male members of these families were busy in doing politics in the name of Nasthikam, the female members of these families were very much doing all the religious rituals without any fail. So these DMK fellows were just making fund of their followers all through the years. They were making money out of this political business

Anbudan
Adiyen
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Follow Tamil Brahmins on Social Media

Top
  Thank you for visiting TamilBrahmins.com

You seem to have an Ad Blocker on.

We depend on advertising to keep our content free for you. Please consider whitelisting us in your ad blocker so that we can continue to provide the content you have come here to enjoy.

Alternatively, consider upgrading your account to enjoy an ad-free experience along with numerous other benefits. To upgrade your account, please visit the account upgrades page

You can also donate financially if you can. Please Click Here on how you can do that.