To the younger generation on this forum: Do you prefer following the Neo-Vedanta version of Hinduism versus the orthodox version?

[prasad1]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Pavan Verma in his writing believes:
What they don't understand is that Hinduism itself teaches you to be secular."

Taking the argument further, he adds, "We have to know that Upanishads were penned down over 4,000 years ago in a dialogic manner in forest academies between gurus and disciples; subsequently, in the Brahma Sutras, the commentaries would first have the views of the opponents, followed by the position of the Vedanta." Hinduism could reconcile the differences, including those with Charvakas and tantriks, he says, through shastra has, debates and dialogues. "One person encompassing all these civilizational values was Shankaracharya," he says explaining the book's raison d'etre.

Calling Shankara a "true rebel", Varma reminds how the monk called a Chandala he met in Kashi his guru. "For me, it was an eye-opener to see Shankara, a Namboodiripad Brahmin, refuting the caste system. He, in fact, went to the extent of not even accepting the authority of the Vedas, the Varnasrama system, and the Char Dham," he says. The monk's relationship with his mother also showed his rebellious streak. For, being a sannyasi didn't stop him from serving his mother at the fag end of her life. "Being the only child, he came back from his renunciation to serve her.

Maybe his attachment with his mother was the reason for his Devi/Shakti worship, though he remained an avowed Vedantist all through his life," he reminds. For all his talk of 'nirgun' (attributeless) and 'nirakar' (abstract) God, and the world being an illusion, it was Shankara who set up 12 jyotirlingas, 18 shakti-peethas, and four Vishnu-dhaams to create all-India pilgrim centers that defined the nation as one civilizational entity.

Varma, however, doesn't see this as a contradiction. "Shankara divided the jnana marga (path of knowledge) into two levels - para vidya (higher knowledge), where the primary concern was the metaphysical comprehension of the absolute; and apara vidya (lower knowledge), where bhakti, yoga, and ritual were given legitimacy. He saw the latter as part of the preparatory steps to move from apara to para vidya."

Shankara, for the author, is also a reminder of how sophisticated the Indian thought system was, though he has nothing but contempt for what he calls "the Dinanath Batra-style of scholarship", which invents flying machines and test-tube babies in ancient times. Terming India the "guiding light" of what he calls 'maulik jnana' (original thinking), Varma reminds us how at a time when scientists are not ruling out the possibility of multiverses, the notion of Brahman being infinite seems so contemporary.

"Shankara's concept of the Vedantic absolute, all-pervasive, beyond boundaries, and cosmic in scale, seems akin to the modern scientific interpretation of the space," he says, adding that Stephen Hawking could well have been the disciple of Shankara, had he been aware of Indian philosophical traditions. Ironically, it was Hawking who pompously claimed a few years ago that "philosophy is dead". And if one reads his book, The Grand Design, he - again paradoxically - appears closer to Shankara than to his counterparts obsessed with Newtonian determinism.

"Hawking might have been surprised to discover how much of what modern science has revealed, particularly in the areas of cosmology, quantum physics, and neurology, was anticipated by Shankara more than a millennium ago," signs off the writer-diplomat, cautioning on the growing culture of unrestrained shrill and 'dialogue lessness' in the otherwise argumentative nation.

Pavan Varma's latest book is on the life and times of Adi Shankaracharya

www.indiatoday.in

 

[prveeraraghavan]

Pavan Verma in his writing believes:
What they don't understand is that Hinduism itself teaches you to be secular."

Taking the argument further, he adds, "We have to know that Upanishads were penned down over 4,000 years ago in a dialogic manner in forest academies between gurus and disciples; subsequently, in the Brahma Sutras, the commentaries would first have the views of the opponents, followed by the position of the Vedanta." Hinduism could reconcile the differences, including those with Charvakas and tantriks, he says, through shastra has, debates and dialogues. "One person encompassing all these civilizational values was Shankaracharya," he says explaining the book's raison d'etre.

Calling Shankara a "true rebel", Varma reminds how the monk called a Chandala he met in Kashi his guru. "For me, it was an eye-opener to see Shankara, a Namboodiripad Brahmin, refuting the caste system. He, in fact, went to the extent of not even accepting the authority of the Vedas, the Varnasrama system, and the Char Dham," he says. The monk's relationship with his mother also showed his rebellious streak. For, being a sannyasi didn't stop him from serving his mother at the fag end of her life. "Being the only child, he came back from his renunciation to serve her.

Maybe his attachment with his mother was the reason for his Devi/Shakti worship, though he remained an avowed Vedantist all through his life," he reminds. For all his talk of 'nirgun' (attributeless) and 'nirakar' (abstract) God, and the world being an illusion, it was Shankara who set up 12 jyotirlingas, 18 shakti-peethas, and four Vishnu-dhaams to create all-India pilgrim centers that defined the nation as one civilizational entity.

Varma, however, doesn't see this as a contradiction. "Shankara divided the jnana marga (path of knowledge) into two levels - para vidya (higher knowledge), where the primary concern was the metaphysical comprehension of the absolute; and apara vidya (lower knowledge), where bhakti, yoga, and ritual were given legitimacy. He saw the latter as part of the preparatory steps to move from apara to para vidya."

Shankara, for the author, is also a reminder of how sophisticated the Indian thought system was, though he has nothing but contempt for what he calls "the Dinanath Batra-style of scholarship", which invents flying machines and test-tube babies in ancient times. Terming India the "guiding light" of what he calls 'maulik jnana' (original thinking), Varma reminds us how at a time when scientists are not ruling out the possibility of multiverses, the notion of Brahman being infinite seems so contemporary.

"Shankara's concept of the Vedantic absolute, all-pervasive, beyond boundaries, and cosmic in scale, seems akin to the modern scientific interpretation of the space," he says, adding that Stephen Hawking could well have been the disciple of Shankara, had he been aware of Indian philosophical traditions. Ironically, it was Hawking who pompously claimed a few years ago that "philosophy is dead". And if one reads his book, The Grand Design, he - again paradoxically - appears closer to Shankara than to his counterparts obsessed with Newtonian determinism.

"Hawking might have been surprised to discover how much of what modern science has revealed, particularly in the areas of cosmology, quantum physics, and neurology, was anticipated by Shankara more than a millennium ago," signs off the writer-diplomat, cautioning on the growing culture of unrestrained shrill and 'dialogue lessness' in the otherwise argumentative nation.

Pavan Varma's latest book is on the life and times of Adi Shankaracharya

www.indiatoday.in

Very interesting read.

I wonder what happened in the parampara that the message/thinking is so different from what Adi Sankara believed.

 

[prasad1]

Around the time of Shankaracharya, southern India had started a Bhakti movement (centered on prayer and devotion). These were however at the fringes of Hinduism. Until that time, Hinduism had more emphasis on the ritualistic and yogistic elements.

Shankara saw that the masses could not be kept interested in the religion without the power of the prayer. The different yogas and upanishads were way too complex for the common man.

Shankara enabled the integration of the fledgling Bhakti movement with the Vedic part of traditional Hinduism. He talked like they were two sides of the same coin. He had the Vedic authority that the other Bhakti movement propagators didn't have. He had a zeal that the other sanyasis and pundits didn't have. Thus, Hinduism quickly brought back the masses to the fold.

Unlike the other Vedic scholars before him - who mostly stressed on dhyana, mukti, yoga and sanyasa, Shankara had a coup in saying that these were same as worshipping Krishna directly.

How did Adi Shankaracharya revive Hinduism, and what reforms did he bring to it that affect us to this day?

Answer (1 of 17): Organized Hinduism Until the arrival of Adi Shankara in the 8th century, Hinduism was a looser connection of different faiths. Although the Vedas provided the common foundation, Hinduism didn't have religious organizations or spiritual authorities. Buddhism, on the other hand, w...

www.quora.com

 

[Mani_Chennai]

What's the revulsion you're feeling? I didn't follow.

I said aacharams/traditions like echhal make sense. But some don't. I don't know what the day of cutting your hair/nails has anything to do with science, morals, or dharm.

These rituals were created when Brahmans were poor, lived in small villages, did not have advanced higher studies and so on. So, they felt to follow the old ways. But they were clever in that they included Ayurveda (medicine at that time), health, environment protection, economics, personal hygiene, cooperation, societal cohesion and other things. Social cooperation was a norm. But they did not write down every thing. Based on their observation and statistically good results (not always) they merged every thing into one big ritual. Our climate and tropical status also dictated many of our rituals.



Also, there were limited number of family barbers(sorry to use the term – hair artists)), who were also medicine men hence needed for that professional part too, Dhobhis(cloth washing experts) etc., so they were paid in paddy or some other form which were in short supply. Also astrology (whether we like it or not) played a part in deciding procedures. Though poor, they still wanted the children to have sweet and other eatables, thus every month they had one or two special days or festivals or religious functions.

Now every body has money(almost ever body), have higher education(??), better job, live in cities, no joint family, can buy anything at any time and so on, the old ways appear to be nonsense. But behind all of them there were reasoning but not explained to the next generation or next generation did not ask for explanation. Personal hygiene was the reason to tell not to lick and touch things. You can see in the West, they will taste with a spoon and use the same spoon to stir the cooking time! Imagine you mother licks her hand and put it to take a handful of banana curry in you plate! Will you like it? Banana leaves were used water was sprinkled around to prevent ants(in olden days, now we kill them with DDT powder etc), we use to drink three spoon full water to wet our dry throats otherwise we may chock… endless practical reasons.



Now how did I know. I was curious and will ask any one and every one for the reasoning. I was amazed that every one had some answer or knowledge but none had all.

So, when you say nonsense you show your ignorance and not curiosity which is sad and some times you will pay a heavy price for it. Grand parents are part of the growth and welfare of the children (bad ones are not), but now they are thrown out and the children grow unruly and become antisocial.

The choice is yours and no one cares what you feel or what is your opinion since you are not paying the salary of others nor others are paying you. You must travel around India and learn things which West does not have it, excepting our 95 % corruption

 

[Mani_Chennai]

I KNOW MANY OF MY RELATIVE GUYS WHO ARE INTO IT SECTOR AND MOVED TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES AND HAVE FORGOTTEN OUR CULTURE DUE TO EITHER THE LIFE STYLE THERE OR BECAUSE OF SHYNESS AS KEEPING VIBUTHI ON FOREHEAD AND GOING TO OFFICE IS FELT STRANGE BY SOME OF THEM. HOW TO CORRECT THEM IS REALLY A QUESTION MARK

While in Rome be a Roman is the norm. Wearing religious symbols - Vibhudi, Namam, sand dot etc., make you look dangerous to others. We also feel the same way say, if a Kapalika comes with the skull of a dead person toour house. We like homegenity and if some one looks odd, we feel he or she is dangerous. Sardarji's for example, are perceived as decoits or Barbarians in the West and do not distinguish them away from Pakistanis. A Jew with skull cap looks like a mean guy to non Jews. So, keep the religion to yourself at home within the four walls. That does not mean you are not a Hindu, rather you are smart survivalist.

Adi Shankar's time is gone. He wanted to society to be only ritual oriented (Mimamskas) and even he had a shock to realize that without realizing he was practicing untouchability. He did not say don’t marry, have kids etc., but said once you have completely fulfilled your duty as a pro creator (Brahma-Saraswati), protector (Vishnu-Laxmi) and remover of ignorance (Parameswaran-Parvathi), you will be in general(not every one) prepared to search for your purpose of live- who am I etc. That maturity - I was a father, brother, son, husband, employee etc., but which one is me? I was just role playing, but what is my real identity. This is what Vanaprastam and search for truth. Aham Brahmasmi comes to only those who have gone through life and having fully filled all their social obligations.

Now, we live in a time were physical knowledge to survive in the phsical-chemcical-biological-social economical.... life and never get detached from our ego in that without us the world will come to a stand still we don't say this open, rather behave in that way). We do not remove ourselves form the life of our children but give them love when they need. Careful study of Shanka is still applicable with modification for the current time. Those who can see it are happy, travel, do pilgrimage, reduce physical processions and serve others. Others lament and suffer. The main reason is the society in India has 1.28 crore people, when Adi Shankara was there may be a few crores lived in India.

Adi Shankara taught us the Philosophy of Hinduism and rituals were added as the first step and not the ultimate goal. We only now cling to the rituals as our symbol of Hinduism and forget striving to search for the purpose or legacy of our life. We run behind ritual mirage as our identify.

 

[Mani_Chennai]

prveeraraghavan: I took time to read your question here. Do you think youngeneration become member of this forum and read your posting? So, your queestion has to be directed forum where younger generation are members.​

Your views are your personal ones and they do not affect any thing, even your own children(if any). But if you have asked a general question and stated this is my view , can any one throw more light on it, would be an appropriate question. No Shankara is living to answer your question nor no one cares. Shankara himself fought against blind "Yangna" Meemaamsa method. Religion is dynamic and does not dictate what you should do , accept reject etc. It is neutral. What it says is, if you are unhappy find methods to calm down your inner turmoil, accept that there are many invisible forces beyond your control that affect your actions - called side effects; find GOD in every thing and every where. Do you want to eat meat or not is based on your empathy to animals which play a role in our life and so on.

Also without realizing you are showing your arrogance “me, I..” and if you are asking clarification and want to understand the underlying rituals, then you need to be polite. Hindu religion, rather philosophy tells us to see GOD everywhere and in every thing. Some rituals are group binding and to prevent alzheimer, dementia etc. People always remember the past in such cases and ask for recitals when they are dying.

For example whether you chant mantra, old devotional songs or not is not important, but by chanting you exercise your brain and memory and recalling the past peacefully but no one knows if GOD is pleased with you. Since He/She is within you along with your Atman, you feel happy at least for a short time away from your daily mundane activities.

Alright, it may seem that I am attacking you, but be assured I gain nothing by doing it nor happy. But when you are hurt, you will realize that “every action action has an equal and opposite reaction” will be invoked.

We need to realize that life is dynamic and our religion is adaptive in nature with core values always being present- see GOD in every thing and nature, respect elders, learning is life long, control our breath and then concentrate in mindfulness, cleanliness from body moves to the cleanliness of mind and rituals are the first step in it. But once you have wisdom, nothing is important.

You can see that even now in general, we offer something to drink to our guests, because at least some of us believe that “Atiti Devo Bhava”. How do we know that GOD is not coming as our guest to test our devotion? The West now is understanding “hospitality” always starts with simple gestures. Are gestures only found in Hindus? We don’t know.

 

[renuka]

prveeraraghavan: I took time to read your question here. Do you think youngeneration become member of this forum and read your posting? So, your queestion has to be directed forum where younger generation are members.​

Your views are your personal ones and they do not affect any thing, even your own children(if any). But if you have asked a general question and stated this is my view , can any one throw more light on it, would be an appropriate question. No Shankara is living to answer your question nor no one cares. Shankara himself fought against blind "Yangna" Meemaamsa method. Religion is dynamic and does not dictate what you should do , accept reject etc. It is neutral. What it says is, if you are unhappy find methods to calm down your inner turmoil, accept that there are many invisible forces beyond your control that affect your actions - called side effects; find GOD in every thing and every where. Do you want to eat meat or not is based on your empathy to animals which play a role in our life and so on.

Also without realizing you are showing your arrogance “me, I..” and if you are asking clarification and want to understand the underlying rituals, then you need to be polite. Hindu religion, rather philosophy tells us to see GOD everywhere and in every thing. Some rituals are group binding and to prevent alzheimer, dementia etc. People always remember the past in such cases and ask for recitals when they are dying.

For example whether you chant mantra, old devotional songs or not is not important, but by chanting you exercise your brain and memory and recalling the past peacefully but no one knows if GOD is pleased with you. Since He/She is within you along with your Atman, you feel happy at least for a short time away from your daily mundane activities.

Alright, it may seem that I am attacking you, but be assured I gain nothing by doing it nor happy. But when you are hurt, you will realize that “every action action has an equal and opposite reaction” will be invoked.

We need to realize that life is dynamic and our religion is adaptive in nature with core values always being present- see GOD in every thing and nature, respect elders, learning is life long, control our breath and then concentrate in mindfulness, cleanliness from body moves to the cleanliness of mind and rituals are the first step in it. But once you have wisdom, nothing is important.

You can see that even now in general, we offer something to drink to our guests, because at least some of us believe that “Atiti Devo Bhava”. How do we know that GOD is not coming as our guest to test our devotion? The West now is understanding “hospitality” always starts with simple gestures. Are gestures only found in Hindus? We don’t know.

Chanting isnt just an exercise for memory and brain though it does help.

Mantras are cryptograms, where it has the ability to " inner engineer" our whole system.( mananat trayate iti mantra...sustained repetition protects)
Whether we know the meaning of the mantra or not, it makes no difference because meaning is only for the intellect but not the consciousness.
(Consciousness isn't the same as intelligence)

Also mantras will eventually decode itself to the one who recites it with shraddha and bhakti and the adhyatma( esoteric) meaning is revealed to the reciter.

To those who recite it mechanically sans shraddha and bhakti, mostly it wont really have that much effect though many times we see the ahamkara increasing.

Once the cryptogram mantras starts decoding itself to the reciter, he would gain true knowledge in the form of flashes of illuminative esoteric messages which do not traverse the intellect, then the Ocean of Existence "parts" to reveal to us the pathless path of self realization where one walks alone yet complete.

Summary: Mantras are not merely exercises for the brain and memory.

 

[Mani_Chennai]

Chanting isnt just an exercise for memory and brain though it does help.

Mantras are cryptograms, where it has the ability to " inner engineer" our whole system.( mananat trayate iti mantra...sustained repetition protects)
Whether we know the meaning of the mantra or not, it makes no difference because meaning is only for the intellect but not the consciousness.
(Consciousness isn't the same as intelligence)

Also mantras will eventually decode itself to the one who recites it with shraddha and bhakti and the adhyatma( esoteric) meaning is revealed to the reciter.

To those who recite it mechanically sans shraddha and bhakti, mostly it wont really have that much effect though many times we see the ahamkara increasing.

Once the cryptogram mantras starts decoding itself to the reciter, he would gain true knowledge in the form of flashes of illuminative esoteric messages which do not traverse the intellect, then the Ocean of Existence "parts" to reveal to us the pathless path of self realization where one walks alone yet complete.

Summary: Mantras are not merely exercises for the brain and memory.

Thanks for value added comment.

 

[shankarkrupa]

What are the achara and anushtana vidhigal, as you define it?

I am not qualified to eloborate exhaustively, but yet acharam as I see are guidelines advised and practiced by our ancestors that we have observed in a given circumstance/event. Anushtana vidhigal as I see as a pattern are routines practiced.

 

[Mani_Chennai]

In simple language first clean your body and the steps to do it and then follow that in daily life with prayer etc. My grand mother once told me that you should not touch my wet cloth drying in the rod. I asked why. She smiled and said, if I allow in your hurry you will dry your wet hand in it and then every one follow that without thinking and my sari will always be dirty and wet. So, my acharam is - don't others drying cloths.
Logically it makes sense. The same way, don't touch with a hand with food or anything that you just put in mouth, it is dirty. Hygene!
Don't strech your leg before elders - you may trip them and accident may happen.

It seems, all these rules for hygene and proper behviour may look stupid but if you consider historical times, they were necessary. Does any one clean their dirty hand on their towel or dothi? That is acharam.
Routinely fllowing acharam is anushtanam(following). Most of them are very valid even today.
You cannot lick some thing and put your hand on that item and with COVID you will be Govinda.
Unfortunately we practice without explaining things and whether we will argue (as usual, did GOD follow these etc) and due our partial western thinking and bookish schooling , will not follow any rules whether it is following a queue or acharam and and anushtanam.
We are in transition phase in India - Trisangu - neither West nor East.

 

[Mani_Chennai]

This is a fairly common scene in Chennai and possibly in other progressive societies in India.

Three friends A, B and C go to an ice cream bar and order 3 cones - chocolate, butterscotch and strawberry. A licks the chocolate cone a few times and then passes it to B who does the same with the butterscotch before passing it to C who completes the cycle by passing his/ her cone to A. The cycle repeats for as long as there is some ice cream left.

I did not have an orthodox upbringing but I get a deep feeling of revulsion merely seeing this. I feel the (traditional) observance of Echchal makes all the more sense in these modern times.

Historically in our younger days, we will bite a mango or something putting a cloth over it , bite and pass on the rest. This was called Kaakkaai kadi. Do you recall on your marriage day, both of you exchanged food from each others mouth ? You feel feed because the people were not sharing solid things like mango pieces etc. So, if the participant do not fedl bad, outsiders have no right to comment on it. For example, you have the right to say, sorry I am not into it. I said once to a family that I will not the dhal because they put the spoon in it after sucking on it to taste the dhal. They understood and I ate other things. Problem solved. But within their family it was OK. Mother use to feed a bite from her food to her child and we have no right to object to it. Each family has own standards. In an Iyengar's marriage, the house lady told me, De, put a red central namam and eat. She really loved me even though I was not an Iyengar. When the food distributor asked me, are you vadagalai or Thenkalai, I said I am nadukkali and he went away. But he dispersed kootu with his hand (that was not solid banana curry, rather liquid type), so I discarded. I did not make a big deal about it.

My point is all are God's children and your values are in no way above their values as long as it is abusive in nature.

But you have the right to feel the way you fell, but sharing is not your right as it amounts you are expecting affirmation form others about your irrational view.

Do you wash spoons and forks when offered as a guest before using them?

 

[Mani_Chennai]

I was simply answering another person's question about "youngster" and re-iterated why I made this post. I have read through the responses.

Also, why the hostility? I think you and I actually may have a very similar mental wavelength in the context of this forum, so there is no need to create any bad blood.

He had said he is a old timer, thus when he can not give logically correct or alternative possible explanation, he will label others. It seems that this his forum but operated from USA- may be an illusion?

 

[100and9]

I don't believe that there is an 'end to the Vedas' or a summation of all knowledge available to those of us still in the cycle of Karma. There isn't one single orthodox version of Hinduism either to pin as a single path.

Kind of what makes Hinduism special is that the religion is like an avial or a buffet. I can mix Idlis with Achar or pick an Ishtadeva or Mantram. Of course, there are orthodox groups who have a strict way of life, but fortunately my family is of a more flexible background. I can do an hour long journey up [Kalinchowk] and find magic in the Gauri Shankar Himalayan Mountains or find [the sacred scroll] in the music of a foreigner.

I can invoke [Agni] in an elevated thought, and [Apas] in a daily bath. All acts become Ritual with an elevated mindset.

Ancient hermits perhaps sought solace in the wilderness for this very reason. Away from Corona Virus and into True Coronation; and this where True Sruti seeps from the Waters into one's voice of reason.

I can see [Shivama:] in [Om] or [The Ankh]

 

[Mani_Chennai]

I don't believe that there is an 'end to the Vedas' or a summation of all knowledge available to those of us still in the cycle of Karma. There isn't one single orthodox version of Hinduism either to pin as a single path.

Kind of what makes Hinduism special is that the religion is like an avial or a buffet. I can mix Idlis with Achar or pick an Ishtadeva or Mantram. Of course, there are orthodox groups who have a strict way of life, but fortunately my family is of a more flexible background. I can do an hour long journey up [Kalinchowk] and find magic in the Gauri Shankar Himalayan Mountains or find [the sacred scroll] in the music of a foreigner.

I can invoke [Agni] in an elevated thought, and [Apas] in a daily bath. All acts become Ritual with an elevated mindset.

Ancient hermits perhaps sought solace in the wilderness for this very reason. Away from Corona Virus and into True Coronation; and this where True Sruti seeps from the Waters into one's voice of reason.

I can see [Shivama:] in [Om] or [The Ankh]

A nice observation.

Hinduism caters to every group of people and allow them to imagine GOD as per their views - from Baby Krishna to Dancer Mahadeva. This must have evolved over a period centuries and since written documentations were not available, we use the last available sources. But if you remove the layers of rituals, algorithms(methods), medicine (Ayurveda), divinity assigned to every thing in nature like removing the lotus petals, we finally find the lotus seeds(which when ground and taken cures piles - Patti vaidiyam). All these multiplicity might have evolved with isolated communities due to almost impossible travel, these methods thrived and protected nature too. So, the names may change but the basic decency created in Hinduism will survive with new forms and methods.

But, the West is slowly seeing the science behind our systems, which unfortunately we do not indulge in.

Indians in general are rushing towards monetary independence while the West is looking at us for spiritual independence. They try every thing via science which is incomplete at first.

Sarvam shivamayam jagat is a very useful formula to understand the world. But in India we are slowly looking at them at the face value rather than seeking the hidden meaning.

The proverb “ house plant curry leaves (karuvepilai) has no value until we are forced to buy it outside” is true. By seeing GOD in every thing and everywhere, one gains faith and expectation for a better tomorrow. Russians ( a few) had Indian wedding and see marriage as a sacred union of Shiva and Parvathi or Vishnu and Laxmi (that is why the groom is said to be “Mahavishnu swarupasya..).



Let us hope another Vivekananda will appear to rejuvenate Hinduism as generations assumes things and get lost in search of happiness in other places.

 

[kamu]

After going through the item #18 of Shri Prasad, I was seeing
the serial 'Bhagyalakshmi' in Vijay TV where I observed that in
a birthday party after cake cutting ,one big piece from that is exchanged among members ,each one biting out a bit from it and enjoying it. Even in public places like a restaurant I have seen people sharing food item from the same bowl .The
children also follow similar practice. Soucham is important
and best learned at home .Whatever good practices we want to pass on to our youngsters should be followed by parents at home. Charity begins at home.

soucham - is very important - with the "social distancing", washing hands frequently, no handshakes, haven't we all learnt that what we should have been following is more hygiene oriented than anything else - like wise, the aspect of keeping women away during their menstruation : its because, there are magnetic forces, which we have not understood so far, which will clash when a women in her periods comes in contact with another person might affect her as well as the other person [ and it does so too - there are books which tell you why she should keep away from temples during those days - I dont mean the ritualistic ones but written by serious authors like Aravindan Neelakandan ]. Ramakrishna Mission, Chinmaya mission also tell you about these. Less said about the ways of the Christian and Muslim clergy the better.
The Sankaracharya Mataathipathis are all so very concerned about the absolutely strict adherence to the letter of all the rituals , that they have not moved with the times - Yes, Sri Chandrasekarendra Saraswati was definitely a very great sage, extremely knowledgeable in all the Vedas and Sastras, even knew what was going on and sometimes what is going to happen, and is revered by a whole lot of people as their Guru, if not an avataram of Siva or Adi Sankara himself . But again, his refusing to give prasadam to unshorn widows who came to see him out of their bhakti for him, while not refusing audience to Indira Gandhi or the Queen Mother of Greece - though of course they sat on the other side of a well - is somewhat off putting. I will be slammed for saying all this, but people have to make up their minds what they want - that's the greatness of our Sanatana Dharma

 

[kamu]

Yes

They may not be wrong. It is the true translation of the mahavakya.
Aham Brahamsmi.
I am not there yet.

Are you talking about Chandrasekhara Saraswati? At least in the USA, he is worshipped by some orthodox Brahmins as a God with the same zeal that Christians worship Jesus.

yes - he is revered and worshipped in India too - of course, he was extremely well read - had an eidetic memory, many times knew what the other person even faraway thought [ thought/mind reading to put it simplistically], and was able to manifest himself in more than one place at the sametime [ there's proof of this] - but his adherence to some of the rituals like not giving prasadam to unshorn widows [while an audience to Indira Gandhi or the Queen Mother of Greece was possible ] was definitely off putting.

 

[renuka]

Its so weird that acharyas who should be knowing well that the human body is temporary and the atma is eternal..that too its a projection of the Universal Atma yet they feel the presence of a widow is not something which should be seen with hair on their head or considered auspicious enough to receive prasadam.

This itself shows that one is still in the realm of the body.
So how to actually accept their pearls of wisdom otherwise?
How enlightening can it be when its coming from a receptacle that hasnt moved beyond the physical reality?

God knows and only God knows best.

 

[renuka]

Yes



yes - he is revered and worshipped in India too - of course, he was extremely well read - had an eidetic memory, many times knew what the other person even faraway thought [ thought/mind reading to put it simplistically], and was able to manifest himself in more than one place at the sametime [ there's proof of this] - but his adherence to some of the rituals like not giving prasadam to unshorn widows [while an audience to Indira Gandhi or the Queen Mother of Greece was possible ] was definitely off putting.

Yes, being omnipresent is a siddha power that many saints have and also yogis and some mystics of the Middle East.