11-29-2004, 12:19 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-Kaushal+Nov 27 2004, 08:35 PM-->QUOTE(Kaushal @ Nov 27 2004, 08:35 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> I am curious to know the reason for your prejudice against smarthas.
There are evil and there are good people, and from your remarks i gather you have condemned large sections of the priestly class as fundamentally evil. It is a sad commentary on our times when we pronounce large classes of people as evil and then select the Iconic leader of a revered monastic order as a symbol of retribution for perceived wrongs done by the Brahmana.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
We could have a good discussion about the ramifications of the smartha sampradaya, Kaushal. We would need experts like Ashok Kumar for input on its origins. Surely they did not appear from nothing in the 8th century. What was their lineage before the 8th century, their philosophy then? Why is this forgotten? Did we have priests before the advent of Adi Shankara?
I have no prejudices against smarthas or anyone; I simply feel that they are standing in the way of a caste free society, which I will explain over time. And again I mean the smartha monasteries and priesthood, not the regular smartha people, 80% of whom are not in the priesthood (and technically not really smarthas). And probably its the smallest of all the priesthood sects and monasteries.
Yes I did say that the smarthas, the smirthis and the caste system is the triple exis of evil plagueing Hinduism. I will explain this, but I am sure you can already see where the 'hate' in Hindu society originated.
But it is incredulous Kaushal that you are oblivious to the resentment the Hindus generally have to the priesthood and caste. If you are in Vizag, just stroll thru the streets and villages and you wont see a ripple, everybody just going thru their lives. This is how Hindus speak.
They also show their resentment by turning to the athiests, secularists and commies. This same resentment translates into discrimination and violence against dalits and primals. We have to ask, who taught them discrimination, and violence against the 'lower classes'? The smirthis did. There is violence and discrimination in them, and so much hate and capital punishment that no Hindu king ever implemented it. The itihasas are books on war and vengence. Who taught the smirthis?
And we must ask, where is the love our saints taught?
Except for Adi Shankara, the lineages contributed nothing to Hinduism for 1300 years, no saints of repute, no reform till the 20th century vedantins, but endless bashya after bashya. I wish to be corrected on this.
Nobody did anything to the kanchi sankaracharya. He did it all himself(presumably, wait for the court to decide). He let down the smarthas. The smarthas have only him to blame, not the people.
But I go further; he was born to face this prarabda karma. He was born to bring an end to the kanchi lineage. He was chosen for it. Therefore I absolve him immediately. I knew it back then in 1987, that he is destined to leave the monastery once again, which he already has. Adi Shankara himself brought several sects to an end during his times. Karma now turning full circle.
Every monastery has different rules, but the usual is, after so many days away and alone in Vellore, JS cannot go back. Dont you see, he is no longer shankaracharya. VS is. He cannot even remove VS. It is VS who must invite him back, as a sadhaka.
Its just my forthrightness.
aum shanti.
Pathma
There are evil and there are good people, and from your remarks i gather you have condemned large sections of the priestly class as fundamentally evil. It is a sad commentary on our times when we pronounce large classes of people as evil and then select the Iconic leader of a revered monastic order as a symbol of retribution for perceived wrongs done by the Brahmana.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
We could have a good discussion about the ramifications of the smartha sampradaya, Kaushal. We would need experts like Ashok Kumar for input on its origins. Surely they did not appear from nothing in the 8th century. What was their lineage before the 8th century, their philosophy then? Why is this forgotten? Did we have priests before the advent of Adi Shankara?
I have no prejudices against smarthas or anyone; I simply feel that they are standing in the way of a caste free society, which I will explain over time. And again I mean the smartha monasteries and priesthood, not the regular smartha people, 80% of whom are not in the priesthood (and technically not really smarthas). And probably its the smallest of all the priesthood sects and monasteries.
Yes I did say that the smarthas, the smirthis and the caste system is the triple exis of evil plagueing Hinduism. I will explain this, but I am sure you can already see where the 'hate' in Hindu society originated.
But it is incredulous Kaushal that you are oblivious to the resentment the Hindus generally have to the priesthood and caste. If you are in Vizag, just stroll thru the streets and villages and you wont see a ripple, everybody just going thru their lives. This is how Hindus speak.
They also show their resentment by turning to the athiests, secularists and commies. This same resentment translates into discrimination and violence against dalits and primals. We have to ask, who taught them discrimination, and violence against the 'lower classes'? The smirthis did. There is violence and discrimination in them, and so much hate and capital punishment that no Hindu king ever implemented it. The itihasas are books on war and vengence. Who taught the smirthis?
And we must ask, where is the love our saints taught?
Except for Adi Shankara, the lineages contributed nothing to Hinduism for 1300 years, no saints of repute, no reform till the 20th century vedantins, but endless bashya after bashya. I wish to be corrected on this.
Nobody did anything to the kanchi sankaracharya. He did it all himself(presumably, wait for the court to decide). He let down the smarthas. The smarthas have only him to blame, not the people.
But I go further; he was born to face this prarabda karma. He was born to bring an end to the kanchi lineage. He was chosen for it. Therefore I absolve him immediately. I knew it back then in 1987, that he is destined to leave the monastery once again, which he already has. Adi Shankara himself brought several sects to an end during his times. Karma now turning full circle.
Every monastery has different rules, but the usual is, after so many days away and alone in Vellore, JS cannot go back. Dont you see, he is no longer shankaracharya. VS is. He cannot even remove VS. It is VS who must invite him back, as a sadhaka.
Its just my forthrightness.
aum shanti.
Pathma