War cry in holy cities A storm is gathering along the banks of river Ganges.

[sarang]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

It is the duty of the acharya to voice his objection when he sees a threat to his 'matham'; in fact if more gurus had acted during islamic and christian invasions when sanatan dharma was attacked, temples were destroyed and mass conversions were done by threats and murder, history would have taken a different course. They never advised what to do and which course to take. Except in some rare instances, like Shivaji, the kings acted on their own with inconsistent and indifferent results. On the gnana side, our gurus have kept the tradition live and vibrant, but one the spread of non indic religions they have done pretty little. They failed to see and prevent the predatory spread of islam and christianity.

 

[tks]

So now you want to prescribe the role of Sankaracharya and what comments he should or should not make.That makes you his Guru and our "Parama Guru".I wonder whether at all you have a Guru (other than your father who gave you Brahmopadesam).If you did have a Guru you would have known what a sin it is to denigrate a Guru.

It is never too late.surrender to a guru of your choice and experience the difference in your outlook.

This post reflects an immature understanding of why the role of Guru is held in high esteem in Hinduism.

I can give you a hint as to what following a Guru is not - it is not about following someone blindly.

This person you hold in such blind respect is your guru, not mine. His approach to defending the six mode of worship defined by Adi Shankara is beginning to corrupt the institution he is associated with.

There are other stories about this person (note I am not using the term Guru or Sankaracharya on purpose) and it describes his indulgence in Politics.

It is demeaning to centuries old institution that one of its head is being reported to incite violence using some people called Naga Sadhus.

Our teaching does not advocate blind hero / Guru worship - only then any "surrender" is real. You may want to experience the difference in outlook when you wake up from ignorance.

 

[vgane]

It is the duty of the acharya to voice his objection when he sees a threat to his 'matham'; in fact if more gurus had acted during islamic and christian invasions when sanatan dharma was attacked, temples were destroyed and mass conversions were done by threats and murder, history would have taken a different course. They never advised what to do and which course to take. Except in some rare instances, like Shivaji, the kings acted on their own with inconsistent and indifferent results. On the gnana side, our gurus have kept the tradition live and vibrant, but one the spread of non indic religions they have done pretty little. They failed to see and prevent the predatory spread of islam and christianity.

How true...May be the Gurus did not see the intensity of the abrahamic attacks on our foundation..They were immersed in Bhakthi that they forgot the Viveka & VijJnana required to discern the tsunami that was shaking their own foundation!

 

[tks]

post #44:



Nothing can be farther from truth. Which Hinduism is spoken about here? The Hinduism that is practised by performing umpteen rituals in which sanskrit mantras are recited or the Hinduism that is practised in the numerous fashionable Kalyana utsavams, teppa utsavams etc that are celebrated in the numerous temples? It is not the only Hinduism that exists there. My village has a big temple for a God by name Pattaraayan (no one here would have come across this name I am sure) who is the God for the majority of the people in my village-majority because there are converted christians too living there. In the temple of that God every year a Kodai (a kind of annual utsavam) is held in which freshly brewed arrack and special Dindigul cigar are offered with a lot of love and devotion by the numerous bhaktas. And what more, in the night of that Kodai day many goats and sheeps and cocks are killed and offered to the deity. If any one was unable to identify himself with the goings on there it was a brahmin boy (me) whose value system was totally different. So who was unwelcome in the worship here? Caste, varna, jAti are terms used flippantly by people here without any understanding of the underlying realities. Everyone wants to be a politician here and if you get a chance you can not resist the temptation to give a kick to the unmentionable Brahmin here as you pass him. Vicarious pleasure perhaps. LOL.

Actually Dr Renu's posts like #44 routinely mixes Varna and caste which is incorrect to say the least.

Our non-posting member Sri Nara had a single minded focus about turning any and all discussion about Brahminism and Jati/ Caste and how it is all the feature of Hinduism, thanks to the despicable Brahmins -- Dr Renu may have read far too many of his views. That is the only way I can understand why there is this swipe at Hinduism - perhaps she meant to say Brahminism like Nara may have though I never understood what that term meant. It must mean everything that is wrong in Hindu societies.

In certain parts of South India among almost all Brahmin/Iyer communities there is this notion about Kula Daivam that invariably happens to be a dravidian goddess. In fact for generation all my ancestors had their first hair offering at this temple which was done for me as well (and my kids at the insistence of my father in law to follow tradition). People had given this temple their first pay check to this temple .

Our Kula Daivam I was told is Madurai Kali amman where Pujari used to do Archana in Tamil and until mid 1980s used to have sacrifice of goats and hens. The temple is now staffed with Sanskrit chanting priests and animal sacrifices are not held .

 

[prasad1]

How true...May be the Gurus did not see the intensity of the abrahamic attacks on our foundation..They were immersed in Bhakthi that they forgot the Viveka & VijJnana required to discern the tsunami that was shaking their own foundation!

When a wise one truly surrenders their discriminating thinking to a fool, they also start looking like the fool. No guru, belonging to any religion has stopped a charging elephant (except in some mythology). A mogul army, Mongol, Greek, Roman, or Crusaders overran all other oppositions. Most of the time the people subjugated were more advanced than the marauding army.

So please do not compare religion with military might.
Let us get back to Swaroopanadaji, and his comments.

Mr. Kaushinkji:

There is difference between a True Guru and his teaching, and a pretender, also your guru might be revered by you, but it does not matter to others. You can not dictate reverence, it has to be earned. I do not go with titles but with the knowledge that person has. Even a PHD holder may make absolutely foolish remark, so for a moment let us forget the exalted titles and look the comments, on its own merit.
Why would you make idiotic comments when you supposed to be the knower of true self?

 

[renuka]

post #44:



Nothing can be farther from truth. Which Hinduism is spoken about here? The Hinduism that is practised by performing umpteen rituals in which sanskrit mantras are recited or the Hinduism that is practised in the numerous fashionable Kalyana utsavams, teppa utsavams etc that are celebrated in the numerous temples? It is not the only Hinduism that exists there. My village has a big temple for a God by name Pattaraayan (no one here would have come across this name I am sure) who is the God for the majority of the people in my village-majority because there are converted christians too living there. In the temple of that God every year a Kodai (a kind of annual utsavam) is held in which freshly brewed arrack and special Dindigul cigar are offered with a lot of love and devotion by the numerous bhaktas. And what more, in the night of that Kodai day many goats and sheeps and cocks are killed and offered to the deity. If any one was unable to identify himself with the goings on there it was a brahmin boy (me) whose value system was totally different. So who was unwelcome in the worship here? Caste, varna, jAti are terms used flippantly by people here without any understanding of the underlying realities. Everyone wants to be a politician here and if you get a chance you can not resist the temptation to give a kick to the unmentionable Brahmin here as you pass him. Vicarious pleasure perhaps. LOL.

Not everyone can identify with rituals that involve animal slaughter as you mentioned that happened in your village..and also not many people also can accept the animal sacrifice in Vedic days..the famous dialogue between Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and a Muslim Kazi makes a nice read where Chaitanya Mahaprabhu explains about animal sacrifice in Vedic times.

So it looks like it killing animals has been both Vedic and Non Vedic lifestyle when it comes to prayer..so whether is a sheep,a horse(Ashwamedha), a cock or a bull being sacrificed..killing is still killing.But the best part is Chaitanya Mahaprabhu mentions that in the past animals that were sacrificed were brought back to life!

Seriously?? What about the pain endured? Were the Vedic Surgeons using General Anesthesia before slaughtering an animal? Did God sanction sacrifice or its man who wanted to eat meat and made excuses? Why is God portrayed as a Blood Thirsty entity? Doesnt make sense that one needs to spill blood in Vedic rites?

Comparatively Shiridi Baba never advocated any rituals that involved loss of lives and everyone can join in for a peaceful sans ritualistic Eco Friendly Vegetarian Mode of prayer where everyone regardless of community can feel welcomed.

BTW my post was not to kick anyone of any community as you mentioned..I wrote a fairly neutral post about restrictions for some people based on their birth..I wonder why you chose to see it that I was targeting the Brahmin..I am Miss Point Blank..If I want to target anyone in specific I would say it.

Here is the dialogue of Chaitanya MP and the Kazi.

http://vaniquotes.org/wiki/Discussion_between_Sri_Caitanya_Mahaprabhu_and_Chand_Kazi

CC Adi 17.158, Translation: As a learned scholar, the Kazi challenged Caitanya Mahāprabhu, "In Your Vedic scriptures there is an injunction for killing a cow. On the strength of this injunction, great sages performed sacrifices involving cow-killing."


CC Adi 17.159, Translation and Purport: Refuting the Kazi's statement, the Lord immediately replied, “The Vedas clearly enjoin that cows should not be killed. Therefore every Hindu, whoever he may be, avoids indulging in cow-killing.

In the Vedic scriptures there are concessions for meat-eaters. It is said that if one wants to eat meat, he should kill a goat before the goddess Kālī and then eat its meat. Meat-eaters are not allowed to purchase meat or flesh from a market or slaughterhouse. There are no sanctions for maintaining regular slaughterhouses to satisfy the tongues of meat-eaters. As far as cow-killing is concerned, it is completely forbidden. Since the cow is considered a mother, how could the Vedas allow cow-killing? Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu pointed out that the Kazi's statement was faulty. In the Bhagavad-gītā (18.44) there is a clear injunction that cows should be protected: kṛṣi-gorakṣya-vāṇijyaṁ vaiśya-karma svabhāva-jam. "The duty of vaiśyas is to produce agricultural products, trade and give protection to cows." Therefore it is a false statement that the Vedic scriptures contain injunctions permitting cow-killing.


CC Adi 17.160, Translation: “In the Vedas and Purāṇas there are injunctions declaring that if one can revive a living being, one can kill it for experimental purposes.


CC Adi 17.161, Translation: “Therefore the great sages sometimes killed old cows, and by chanting Vedic hymns they brought them back to life for perfection.


CC Adi 17.162, Translation: “The killing and rejuvenation of such old and invalid cows was not truly killing but an act of great benefit.


CC Adi 17.163, Translation: “Formerly there were powerful brāhmaṇas who could make such experiments using Vedic hymns, but now, because of the Kali-yuga, brāhmaṇas are not so powerful. Therefore the killing of cows and bulls for rejuvenation is forbidden.

 

[renuka]

Actually Dr Renu's posts like #44 routinely mixes Varna and caste which is incorrect to say the least.

Our non-posting member Sri Nara had a single minded focus about turning any and all discussion about Brahminism and Jati/ Caste and how it is all the feature of Hinduism, thanks to the despicable Brahmins -- Dr Renu may have read far too many of his views. That is the only way I can understand why there is this swipe at Hinduism - perhaps she meant to say Brahminism like Nara may have though I never understood what that term meant. It must mean everything that is wrong in Hindu societies.

In certain parts of South India among almost all Brahmin/Iyer communities there is this notion about Kula Daivam that invariably happens to be a dravidian goddess. In fact for generation all my ancestors had their first hair offering at this temple which was done for me as well (and my kids at the insistence of my father in law to follow tradition). People had given this temple their first pay check to this temple .

Our Kula Daivam I was told is Madurai Kali amman where Pujari used to do Archana in Tamil and until mid 1980s used to have sacrifice of goats and hens. The temple is now staffed with Sanskrit chanting priests and animal sacrifices are not held .

Dear TKS ji,

Its rather unbecoming of you to drag in Nara's name here when he is not actively present in Forum now to defend himself.

Your post seems to be in poor taste and it only reflects that you are running out of points.I dont take swipes at any one religion..cos each religions has it positive and negative points..no one religion is perfect.

BTW I think for myself..no one influences my mind besides my own self and once I have made up my mind I am like Vijay's Punch Dialogue:oru vaati mudivu pannitan en pecha naanae kaeka maatan..

 

[prasad1]

Intolerance has no boundaries.
I do not think any body has to defend their statement because they are NB, muslim, pink, yellow or anything.
This is open forum for intelligent people to share their views.
Animal sacrifice on religious grounds was carried out as the devotees wanted to eat meat. It has nothing to do with what "GOD" wanted.
Enlightenment is an individuals lonely journey, it is not a collective endeavor.
I am not much for organized religion.
I am also against this mob mentality of the majority. Majority of the members here are fairly balanced but individualist. We make our own mind and live by our own principles. That is why we can continue to function in this site.

 

[tks]

Dear TKS ji,

Its rather unbecoming of you to drag in Nara's name here when he is not actively present in Forum now to defend himself.

Your post seems to be in poor taste and it only reflects that you are running out of points.I dont take swipes at any one religion..cos each religions has it positive and negative points..no one religion is perfect.

BTW I think for myself..no one influences my mind besides my own self and once I have made up my mind I am like Vijay's Punch Dialogue:oru vaati mudivu pannitan en pecha naanae kaeka maatan..

Well my post was not an attack of Sri Nara but referencing what I wrote to him when he was active in the forum.

The issue I find from your post is that periodically there is this swipe against Hinduism and bringing discussion to caste and making connections which are not supported by facts. Who is denied what in terms of worship and is that sanctioned by Hinduism?

Anyone can discriminate against other people who are in a less powerful position. But those acts cannot be generalized to be categorized as part of a religion.

Religious traditions may have plus and minus. The parallel I was drawing to Nara's posts is this focus on getting discussions to caste.

It is not about Hinduism vs Sai Baba devotion because Sai Baba devotees are also Hindus.

Some people go and burn effigy of a person in the name of devotion to Sai Baba. It does not make the Sai Baba followers to be all termed as followers of a violent cult.


My point was against the generalization often without facts.

 

[sarang]

Even with facts one cannot generalize as applicable to all. Our dharma has given us a wide base in which conflicting philosophical, spiritual and physical facts coexist. I do not subscribe to advaitham, but I have no problem with staunch advaitins. Bringing issues of varna, caste, untouchability in every issue is the habit with some. Each one must be proud of his genealogy, ancestry and jathi if he values them; he is free to unfollow and join the melee, but has no right to criticize ardent and dedicated followers. If a member of a family falls out against the wishes of the family members, it is upto the family to decide what to do.

My point was against the generalization often without facts.

 

[tks]

Even with facts one cannot generalize as applicable to all. Our dharma has given us a wide base in which conflicting philosophical, spiritual and physical facts coexist. I do not subscribe to advaitham, but I have no problem with staunch advaitins. Bringing issues of varna, caste, untouchability in every issue is the habit with some. Each one must be proud of his genealogy, ancestry and jathi if he values them; he is free to unfollow and join the melee, but has no right to criticize ardent and dedicated followers. If a member of a family falls out against the wishes of the family members, it is upto the family to decide what to do.

When there are facts, generalizations will usually cease.
Also no specialized Dharma can violate Samanya Dharma - the conflicts that you mention recognizes differences in people and how they relate to the world.

When it comes to discrimination and power asserion (based on a factor X) of some human beings over others, every society has had issues in the past, has issues today and will have issues in the future. The factor X may change but discrimination will continue since it is rooted in human weakness.

These weaknesses that have nothing to do with doctrinal aspects of a religion unless its theology demands exclusivity ("you will go to eternal hell if you do not follow my religion").

Our ancestors were people and like all people have had pluses and negatives. I am not sure if everyone has to be 'proud' but one should not put anyone down if they feel 'proud' of their heritage provided their pride is not used to pull anyone down today.

 

[prasad1]

The problem with being proud is you have to put down other who you think are better than you.
Pride vs Self-esteem


Pride is very different from self-esteem. Pride is simply defined as one’s feelings of excessive self worth whereas self-esteem can be synonymous to self-worth, but not necessarily that high. Hence, self-esteem is a stable level of self-worth. It is rather the aggregate sum of one’s feelings of worthiness.


Experts also say that self-esteem is a form of personal trait. It is greater than any single belief and is in fact bigger than anyone’s single feelings or emotions. On the contrary, pride is more of an attitude and because it is in excess, it is also accepted as a vice.

There are a lot vain proud people, who keep tying to impose their will on people with self esteem.
People who have self esteem will accept others with self esteem. A proud person can never understand that.

We have every right to criticize ardent and dedicated followers, particularly when they are jumping off a cliff with their eyes closed and hands tied behind their backs along with their followers. If people had criticized Mr. Jim James of Jonestown Massacre (http://history1900s.about.com/od/1970s/p/jonestown.htm) so many life's could have been saved.

 

[Vaagmi]

BTW one more thing the Shankaracharya needs to remember that in Hinduism the Varna/Caste/Jati stigma still prevails and simple folks might never really feel totally 'welcomed" in worship cos by virtue of birth they could be denied certain aspects of the Hindu religion

Renukaji,

Please define/elaborate "simple folks" and "never really feel totally welcomed in worship" and "by virtue of birth they could be denied certain aspects of the Hindu religion". I might have understood wrongly.

Not everyone can identify with rituals that involve animal slaughter as you mentioned that happened in your village..and also not many people also can accept the animal sacrifice in Vedic days..the famous dialogue between Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and a Muslim Kazi makes a nice read where Chaitanya Mahaprabhu explains about animal sacrifice in Vedic times.
So it looks like it killing animals has been both Vedic and Non Vedic lifestyle when it comes to prayer..so whether is a sheep,a horse(Ashwamedha), a cock or a bull being sacrificed..killing is still killing.But the best part is Chaitanya Mahaprabhu mentions that in the past animals that were sacrificed were brought back to life!
Seriously?? What about the pain endured? Were the Vedic Surgeons using General Anesthesia before slaughtering an animal? Did God sanction sacrifice or its man who wanted to eat meat and made excuses? Why is God portrayed as a Blood Thirsty entity? Doesnt make sense that one needs to spill blood in Vedic rites?
Comparatively Shiridi Baba never advocated any rituals that involved loss of lives and everyone can join in for a peaceful sans ritualistic Eco Friendly Vegetarian Mode of prayer where everyone regardless of community can feel welcomed.
BTW my post was not to kick anyone of any community as you mentioned..I wrote a fairly neutral post about restrictions for some people based on their birth..I wonder why you chose to see it that I was targeting the Brahmin..I am Miss Point Blank..If I want to target anyone in specific I would say it.
Here is the dialogue of Chaitanya MP and the Kazi.

I generally discount the anecdotes part of religious literature because they are mostly out put from a fertile imagination. To me the Hindu religion shows a lot of concern and prohibits any himsa to any life form on earth. My religion does not accept the Abrahamic religious principle that God created everything in the universe for the enjoyment of Man.I can quote any number of vedic verses to support this. And when someone points out a ritual in which a cow or a horse is said to be killed as an offering, and when there are evidences to show that it was not really the cow or the horse but a pratima made from wheat flour of the particular animal, I prefer to accept the argument on its face value and I do not go deep into that matter. May be a Kazi may be very interested only in doing that for obvious reasons. My religion is a very old one and it is older than papers, languages, history and chronicles. I take such arguments about animal sacrifices with a pinch of salt. Even if it were true we all have grown beyond that over a long period of time. We need keep only the philosophy part of it and move ahead. There is no need to harp on animal sacrifice just to score a point or two.

By speaking about the animal sacrifice in the vedic times you have effectively diluted the focus which I brought in by complaining that exclusivism is not restricted to a certain castes alone and that it is there in every caste. I presumed that you were talking about the exclusivism practised by keeping the deities in the temple beyond the physical reach of devotees. I just wanted to point out that if one exclusivism keeps the deities far from the devotees the other exclusivism keeps devotees away from the deities by horrendous, inhuman practices of worship.

 

[tks]

The problem with being proud is you have to put down other who you think are better than you.
Pride vs Self-esteem


Pride is very different from self-esteem. Pride is simply defined as one’s feelings of excessive self worth whereas self-esteem can be synonymous to self-worth, but not necessarily that high. Hence, self-esteem is a stable level of self-worth. It is rather the aggregate sum of one’s feelings of worthiness.


Experts also say that self-esteem is a form of personal trait. It is greater than any single belief and is in fact bigger than anyone’s single feelings or emotions. On the contrary, pride is more of an attitude and because it is in excess, it is also accepted as a vice.

There are a lot vain proud people, who keep tying to impose their will on people with self esteem.
People who have self esteem will accept others with self esteem. A proud person can never understand that.

We have every right to criticize ardent and dedicated followers, particularly when they are jumping off a cliff with their eyes closed and hands tied behind their backs along with their followers. If people had criticized Mr. Jim James of Jonestown Massacre (The Story of the Jonestown Massacre) so many life's could have been saved.

Sri Prasad

Good clarification regarding use of the term pride vs self-esteem.

Having said that if someone were to feel proud and do not cause damage to others I am personally fine with that because their pride does not affect me or others. To overcome pride one has to become more mature. However why should we correct anyone if they say something like "Jews are the chosen people".

 

[tks]

Renukaji,

Please define/elaborate "simple folks" and "never really feel totally welcomed in worship" and "by virtue of birth they could be denied certain aspects of the Hindu religion". I might have understood wrongly.



I generally discount the anecdotes part of religious literature because they are mostly out put from a fertile imagination. To me the Hindu religion shows a lot of concern and prohibits any himsa to any life form on earth. My religion does not accept the Abrahamic religious principle that God created everything in the universe for the enjoyment of Man.I can quote any number of vedic verses to support this. And when someone points out a ritual in which a cow or a horse is said to be killed as an offering, and when there are evidences to show that it was not really the cow or the horse but a pratima made from wheat flour of the particular animal, I prefer to accept the argument on its face value and I do not go deep into that matter. May be a Kazi may be very interested only in doing that for obvious reasons. My religion is a very old one and it is older than papers, languages, history and chronicles. I take such arguments about animal sacrifices with a pinch of salt. Even if it were true we all have grown beyond that over a long period of time. We need keep only the philosophy part of it and move ahead. There is no need to harp on animal sacrifice just to score a point or two.

By speaking about the animal sacrifice in the vedic times you have effectively diluted the focus which I brought in by complaining that exclusivism is not restricted to a certain castes alone and that it is there in every caste. I presumed that you were talking about the exclusivism practised by keeping the deities in the temple beyond the physical reach of devotees. I just wanted to point out that if one exclusivism keeps the deities far from the devotees the other exclusivism keeps devotees away from the deities by horrendous, inhuman practices of worship.

Hope Dr Renu will answer your questions! I do want to take the focus away from that

Having said that where is it written in what is called Hindu mode of worship that one has to be absolutely inches from the deity.

North Indians love to touch the Murthis and there are temples that cater to them. Even in Sai Baba temples people can touch and feel the deity form.

In South India we were taught to do formal Namaskaram outside the Dwajashambam . It is not as if the physical distance is going to dilute the intended effect of the prostration.

Being a priest is not such a big deal and there are priests of all kinds in India in temples visited by all groups of people including the so called birth based brahmins. I gave an example of what I was told as our Kula Daivam!

I know my posts are not tasteful on this topic to Dr Renu but it seems there are some unresolved issues based on personal experience that tends to come up and now. It would be far easier to have discussions on what those issues are. I am not sure if this medium can help have such a discussion

 

[prasad1]

Sri Prasad

Good clarification regarding use of the term pride vs self-esteem.

Having said that if someone were to feel proud and do not cause damage to others I am personally fine with that because their pride does not affect me or others. To overcome pride one has to become more mature. However why should we correct anyone if they say something like "Jews are the chosen people".

When they say what they say does it mean it is the only truth, and contrary is wrong. I do not believe in that. When I say what I say is because of my limited experience, and knowledge at that time (being a honest opinion). It does not apply to others, and should not imply so.
If my child came 1st, and I am proud of it is understandable, but if I go the parent of the child who came 100th in the class and prance around with the medal, it is in poor taste.

So to boast about oneself in front of others in a business world may be ok, but in social setting it is grating and jarring to others and will evoke bitterness about that person.

 

[renuka]

Vaagmi ji..my answers in blue:

Renukaji,

Please define/elaborate "simple folks" and "never really feel totally welcomed in worship" and "by virtue of birth they could be denied certain aspects of the Hindu religion". I might have understood wrongly.

I am sure you are aware how certain Middle Castes oppose Dalits in some temples in Tamil Nadu.I think Vanniyars are notorious for ill treating Dalits and no one opposes that...I was always hoping that the learned Brahmanas could at least teach the Middles castes that ill treatment of Dalits and not allowing Dalits in the temple is not what Hinduism has prescribed but sadly even the Brahmanas remain silent..may be out of fear?? I dont know..may be you can explain to me the village scenario in India.If the Brahamana who is supposed to be Jnana Bodhaka fears the middle castes..then where does a Dalit stand?

So in the temples of Shiridi Sai..no middle caste can wag his/her tail and treat the Dalits badly.

Castes that are higher up in the food chain might not really feel how a Dalit feels in a temple that opposes his very existence..so that is why I feel that temples that advocate unity and does not have discrimination should be allowed to thrive regardless if the patron saint was a Muslim or a Hindu or an Atheist.

I generally discount the anecdotes part of religious literature because they are mostly out put from a fertile imagination.

Exactly!


.

 

[renuka]

Hope Dr Renu will answer your questions! I do want to take the focus away from that

Having said that where is it written in what is called Hindu mode of worship that one has to be absolutely inches from the deity.

North Indians love to touch the Murthis and there are temples that cater to them. Even in Sai Baba temples people can touch and feel the deity form.

In South India we were taught to do formal Namaskaram outside the Dwajashambam . It is not as if the physical distance is going to dilute the intended effect of the prostration.

Being a priest is not such a big deal and there are priests of all kinds in India in temples visited by all groups of people including the so called birth based brahmins. I gave an example of what I was told as our Kula Daivam!

I know my posts are not tasteful on this topic to Dr Renu but it seems there are some unresolved issues based on personal experience that tends to come up and now. It would be far easier to have discussions on what those issues are. I am not sure if this medium can help have such a discussion

I have answered Vaagmi ji's question..take a look please.

 

[renuka]

The issue I find from your post is that periodically there is this swipe against Hinduism and bringing discussion to caste and making connections which are not supported by facts. .

Dear TKS ji,

One a personal note..I dont subscribe to any organized religion..so what I write is my opinion and there is no intention to target only one religion and be anti Hinduism or drag in caste system.

Whatever I find not conducive in any religion I voice my opinion..so I think you fail to see that I am a fairly neutral person.

I personally admire Lord Buddha a lot and love His teachings but some part of me still always wonders why He did not tell His wife that He was leaving her and His son..that is the only drawback of Him where I feel He should have sat down..discussed with her and may be found another alternative for her like remarriage for her.

Same with Swami Raghavendra..I only wished He had cared for His wife and child and not let them to suffer that lead to His wife's suicide.

So both these Noble Souls..Lord Buddha and Swami Raghavendra cared for the whole world and I do admire Them both but still the nagging feeling that "doesnt charity start from home? what about the absence of a husband for their wives?"

So I hope you get it that I dont want to degrade any religion but I might want to bring up and discuss certain salient points..but it seems to be its not really possible cos you seem to become defensive these days..unlike what you were before..before you used to be an open minded person who could discuss any subject under the sun but these days "defensiveness" has become your middle name and with every post I write I seem to be actually giving a detail explanation again and again becos you choose to see me as being Anti Hindu..hinting that I am being influenced by Nara and I target the caste sytem.

So it seems that its not me who is having a problem of unresolved personal issues...but rather you.

 

[tks]

Dear TKS ji,

One a personal note..I dont subscribe to any organized religion..so what I write is my opinion and there is no intention to target only one religion and be anti Hinduism or drag in caste system.

Whatever I find not conducive in any religion I voice my opinion..so I think you fail to see that I am a fairly neutral person.

I personally admire Lord Buddha a lot and love His teachings but some part of me still always wonders why He did not tell His wife that He was leaving her and His son..that is the only drawback of Him where I feel He should have sat down..discussed with her and may be found another alternative for her like remarriage for her.

Same with Swami Raghavendra..I only wished He had cared for His wife and child and not let them to suffer that lead to His wife's suicide.

So both these Noble Souls..Lord Buddha and Swami Raghavendra cared for the whole world and I do admire Them both but still the nagging feeling that "doesnt charity start from home? what about the absence of a husband for their wives?"

So I hope you get it that I dont want to degrade any religion but I might want to bring up and discuss certain salient points..but it seems to be its not really possible cos you seem to become defensive these days..unlike what you were before..before you used to be an open minded person who could discuss any subject under the sun but these days "defensiveness" has become your middle name and with every post I write I seem to be actually giving a detail explanation again and again becos you choose to see me as being Anti Hindu..hinting that I am being influenced by Nara and I target the caste sytem.

So it seems that its not me who is having a problem of unresolved personal issues...but rather you.

Dr Renu

I have not changed as far as I know. Everyone is welcome to voice their opinions.

However when there are generalizations done about any religion and that too without facts I will express my points calling attention to that.

I think there is far too much focus on caste in my view in your posts and there are seemingly veiled put-downs. You are welcome to disagree and ignore which is what you will do.

I am not defending anything except object to what seems like put downs . If that is coming across as closed minded so be it. I do not see you as Anti anything or for anything . I only comment on your posts (not about you) as to how they come across. I have no problem with you . I have no problem with your posts because if I come across as objectionable I will express that point calling attention to the issues.

Many times the questions asked were answered by me or someone but they keep coming up with the same focus and with same sweeping generalizations.

 

[renuka]

I think there is far too much focus on caste in my view in your posts and there are seemingly veiled put-downs. You are welcome to disagree and ignore which is what you will do.

.

Dear TKS ji,

I only discuss about caste when I feel its relevant..in other sections of Forum I never talk about caste cos there is no relevance to the topic.

I spoke about caste when the Shankaracharya objected to the worship of Shiridi Sai Baba cos I felt that may be he did not realize that caste and discrimination does not exists in Shiridi Sai set up.

Long back a prominent member did mention that Godmen/Babaji are popular becos they address every section of society and the simple downtrodden folks feel welcomed too.

Now coming to the alleged "veiled put down"..If I have something to say I can be very explicit..what is there to hide?

I dont believe in sugar coating and veiling any statement..surely as members here we need to maintain some amount of decorum so my posts might seem like veiled out down to you.Well partly becos I am Libran and Librans are known for their diplomacy and their style of speaking that at times comes across as being technically correct sans loops holes with the message got across.

So what to do..that's my style of saying things..En Vazhi Thani Vazhi!LOL

 

[tks]

In post #66

Renukaji,

Please define/elaborate "simple folks" and "never really feel totally welcomed in worship" and "by virtue of birth they could be denied certain aspects of the Hindu religion". I might have understood wrongly.

I am sure you are aware how certain Middle Castes oppose Dalits in some temples in Tamil Nadu.I think Vanniyars are notorious for ill treating Dalits and no one opposes that...I was always hoping that the learned Brahmanas could at least teach the Middles castes that ill treatment of Dalits and not allowing Dalits in the temple is not what Hinduism has prescribed but sadly even the Brahmanas remain silent..may be out of fear?? I dont know..may be you can explain to me the village scenario in India.If the Brahamana who is supposed to be Jnana Bodhaka fears the middle castes..then where does a Dalit stand?

So in the temples of Shiridi Sai..no middle caste can wag his/her tail and treat the Dalits badly.

Castes that are higher up in the food chain might not really feel how a Dalit feels in a temple that opposes his very existence..so that is why I feel that temples that advocate unity and does not have discrimination should be allowed to thrive regardless if the patron saint was a Muslim or a Hindu or an Atheist.

I generally discount the anecdotes part of religious literature because they are mostly out put from a fertile imagination.

Exactly!

Dr Renu

I am sure Sri Vaagmi will have his response.

From my point of view, I have seen such comments from you and have actually answered with examples in the past perhaps a year ago or more.

I do not have time to search past threads to locate the reference.

No one group in modern India is responsible for creating or resolving the caste issues.

There is no need to make comments like "learned Brahmanas could at least teach the Middles castes that ill treatment of Dalits because it puts the ownership on "learned Brahmanas" by birth for the issues. In the modern era there is no special status given to any Brahmanas ( and there is no need for anyone to do so) except possibly that some recite some Mantras in a religious function or in a temple as part of their prefesssion.

Secondly, I myself have given references to educated people who happened to be Brhamanas who risked their life for temple entry of discriminated people. Here are references to two example. So they have not been silent as you claim so sweepingly.

A. Vaidyanatha Iyer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

C. P. Ramaswami Iyer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I gave another example from my own ancestors about having Dravidian temple as our Kula Daivam where first offerings of hair are made for generations. My family is no exception. They worship side by side with people from all walks of life where I have seen Purjari who is not a Brahmin perform Archana in Tamil.

The caste problem is immense and cannot be resolved by blame game that some educated Brahmanas have to solve. No one is going to listen to anyone because there is no exalted status given to Brhamanas by anyone nor is it expected by most people I know.

 

[renuka]

Blue are my answers.

.

Secondly, I myself have given references to educated people who happened to be Brhamanas who risked their life for temple entry of discriminated people. Here are references to two example. So they have not been silent as you claim so sweepingly.

A. Vaidyanatha Iyer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

C. P. Ramaswami Iyer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


yes there have been people who risked everything for dalits and temple entry and such souls are indeed worthy of praise.

I gave another example from my own ancestors about having Dravidian temple as our Kula Daivam where first offerings of hair are made for generations. My family is no exception. They worship side by side with people from all walks of life where I have seen Purjari who is not a Brahmin perform Archana in Tamil.

TKS ji..this shaving hair is no real big deal cos I know most people are scared of neglecting Kula Deivam cos many are scared of curses..starting from Pitrs to Kula Deivam..so fear might actually motivate anyone to prevent curses.To prevent curses most people will put aside personal differences at least for some occasions.

My family does not believe in any such rituals where the hair should be offered to Kula Deivam..and for me and my brothers and my son..all hair shaving was done by my father right at home under sterile and aseptic conditions with no prayer offered to any one deity.

Shaving of the head of a baby is believed to be done to promote hair growth(even though medically it is debatable)..We Indians like celebration of any kind..so all rituals have been made into get together festivals cos that was a form of entertainment those days and it kept the economy going...if we see things from the practical point of view..basically everything is to keep the mind busy and for economic purposes..thats all.

The caste problem is immense and cannot be resolved by blame game that some educated Brahmanas have to solve. No one is going to listen to anyone because there is no exalted status given to Brhamanas by anyone nor is it expected by most people I know.


May be you have a point cos these days no one really cares for another..may be we can ask some white man to solve it !LOL

 

[tks]

Blue are my answers.

A. Vaidyanatha Iyer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

C. P. Ramaswami Iyer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


yes there have been people who risked everything for dalits and temple entry and such souls are indeed worthy of praise.

I gave another example from my own ancestors about having Dravidian temple as our Kula Daivam where first offerings of hair are made for generations. My family is no exception. They worship side by side with people from all walks of life where I have seen Purjari who is not a Brahmin perform Archana in Tamil.

TKS ji..this shaving hair is no real big deal cos I know most people are scared of neglecting Kula Deivam cos many are scared of curses..starting from Pitrs to Kula Deivam..so fear might actually motivate anyone to prevent curses.To prevent curses most people will put aside personal differences at least for some occasions.

My family does not believe in any such rituals where the hair should be offered to Kula Deivam..and for me and my brothers and my son..all hair shaving was done by my father right at home under sterile and aseptic conditions with no prayer offered to any one deity.

Shaving of the head of a baby is believed to be done to promote hair growth(even though medically it is debatable)..We Indians like celebration of any kind..so all rituals have been made into get together festivals cos that was a form of entertainment those days and it kept the economy going...if we see things from the practical point of view..basically everything is to keep the mind busy and for economic purposes..thats all.

The caste problem is immense and cannot be resolved by blame game that some educated Brahmanas have to solve. No one is going to listen to anyone because there is no exalted status given to Brhamanas by anyone nor is it expected by most people I know.


May be you have a point cos these days no one really cares for another..may be we can ask some white man to solve it !LOL


========================

There you go again.

No one needs your praise or my praise. My point is to give you counter example of your sweeping generalizations where you directly imply or directly state that somehow 'learned Brahmanas' have not risked their life to help make progress.

The focus is not on shaving the head which is just a practice. I also mentioned people giving their first salary to the temple earlier. You can say it is because of fear. All religions exist to deal with human fear and greed.

Again that is a distraction. I was giving another example about people of all walks of life praying in the same temple that is not controlled by Brahmins.

If you care - why dont you do something about the caste issues in India rather than blame this group or that group ...

 

[renuka]

========================

There you go again.

No one needs your praise or my praise. My point is to give you counter example of your sweeping generalizations where you directly imply or directly state that somehow 'learned Brahmanas' have not risked their life to help make progress.

The focus is not on shaving the head which is just a practice. I also mentioned people giving their first salary to the temple earlier. You can say it is because of fear. All religions exist to deal with human fear and greed.

Again that is a distraction. I was giving another example about people of all walks of life praying in the same temple that is not controlled by Brahmins.

If you care - why dont you do something about the caste issues in India rather than blame this group or that group ...

Well there you go again too..again and again you choose to describe my opinions as sweeping statements when the truth is I might not be aware of some incidents where a Brahmana had stood up for a Dalit..so the onus is on you to "enlighten" me about such incidences which I might not be aware of and using words like "sweeping statements" is actually a sort of accusing tone.

You see if someone is saying something that is not correct..usually I try to guide the person to the right answer without making assumptions that the person is making a sweeping statement.

Elsewhere in Forum..someone was explaining a Mantra which was not correct according to Sanskrit rules of Grammar..I explained politely the correct answer without making the other person feel small in anyway..this is what is called Tact in dealing with others.

So its not really fair that you keep using the word Sweeping Statements on what I write.

Let me give you an example ..if it was me I would have worded my post like this:

Dear So and So..I would like to kindly bring your attention that in the pasts there have been many Brahmanas who have stood up for Dalits..etc..I have provided the links for you to click on to read..may be you are under the impression that no one stood up for Dalits..so kindly read and share your opinion with me for further discussion.


You see that?? But you choose to keep saying Sweeping Statements non stop in a defensive manner as if I am moving around with a broom!LOL