Not at all Rajesh.
Happy days are here again because the wrongs are being righted. I couldn't care less who wins because happy days are here already as a casteist tradition has been broken and must now <b>reform or die</b>.
Take a wild guess what they would do! My guess is, thats right, they will not die! <!--emo&  --><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Pathma
Ohoo ...
What about "Confidence tricksters, jokers and <b>criminals</b>" bit boss ??
I know how you are going to spin it. I just want to see you spin.
<!--QuoteBegin-rajesh_g+Jan 14 2005, 09:41 AM-->QUOTE(rajesh_g @ Jan 14 2005, 09:41 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> What about "Confidence tricksters, jokers and <b>criminals</b>" bit boss ??
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now which one of the three would fit VS to a T? Right! The first one.
The judge will rule whether JS fits the third one.
Take a guess again who are the jokers! <!--emo& --><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> I'm having a laff, son. Spin good enough?
Pathma
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Spin good enough?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nah ! nowhere near your usual standards.
Pathma,
I guess we have told each other whatever we have had to say. So there is no point in beating the same track again and again. So this will be my last post.
1. You see no big harm in destruction of kAnchi Matha and sampradAya
2. You see shrI Adi-shankara as a mere grain of sand
3. You are happy to imagine that advaita-vedanta is on its way to doom, or at least think very low of it
4. You said something like 'we are tired of hearing shri bhagavan uvacha'
5. You think vaishnavism is a different religion than shaivism
6. You believe that brahmins deserve some sort of 'karmic' retribution, and any abuse of justice or power is OK and understandable if Brahmins are punished, even after they have become ascetics.
So let me say it as mildly as I can: You are anti-hindu and a caste-bigot.
As far as I am concerned, I am not even a millionths of a grain of sand in front of ShrI Adi Shankara. So there is no point in me trying to reach upto the head of yours which according to you is placed so high that even shri Adi shankara appears to you like a grain of sand.
But your version of the future is NOT going to pass. Because I think the universe is not run according to the wishes of the people who were described thus in the Kathopanishad:
avidyAyAm antare vidyamAnAH svayaM-dhIrAH paNDitammanymAnAH
dandramyamAnAH pariyanti mUDhAH andhena nIyamAnAH yathAndhAH
By the way I read a comment by you on your forum which was something like 'I don't understand why Indians respect Budhha so much'
The same Gautam Buddha when advising Ajatashatru's prime minister VassakAra had said that as long as the people of vaishAlI keep on respecting the arhats (monks, sAdhus etc of any religion, not just Budhhists), they cannot be defeated.
My mother said anyone who gives pain to a sAdhu reaps suffering for himself and his family. She didnt say a brahmin sAdhu, she meant any sAdhu.
That is what India thinks of its holy people. You are so far removed from the soul of India that you can't comprehend this yet. And I hope this little tidbit about Gautama Buddha tells you how Indians think about arhats, bhikhus, monks, sanyasis in general. And why Indians have so much respect for Buddha too.
Ashok,
I have to address your last post point by point.
Quote:1. You see no big harm in destruction of kAnchi Matha and sampradAya.
I am saying , let the law take its course. I am saying Hinduism is not dependent on any matha or sampradaya. Thousands of sampradayas have existed and over time many ceased to exist and new ones sprouted. This process will be repeated in future too. This is the strenght of Hinduism, it has many roots, it continually remoulds itself. In this sense there is no harm if Kanchi exists or not.
But I am concerned about the monks there and their future. It is for this reason that I suggested that kanchi be handed over to Sringeri, or the monks be transferred there. Simple common sense. No one seems to care about the monks who have dedicated their lives in pursuit of moksha, rather attention to pride, the traditions, the name(fame) seems to be the guiding principles in defending the matha and arguments for it, and emotions and attachments, and equating the kanchi matha with Hinduism.
I have not heard one word form the matha accepting these events as their karma and that they will deal with it. Just pointing fingers. Hindus dont do that.
I also think that kanchi will serve as a reminder to all other mathas, temples and institutions to reexamine themselves and make changes, and know for certain that we are not in the medieval ages where name and fame will protect them. I also think that the 5 shankara mathas and most other Hindu monasteries, are medieval Hindu institutions, still living in a medieval caste culture, dependent on the name of its founder for its hallowedness, and peoples patronage and have outlived the age, living on borrowed time.
How can any human being support, a 'spiritual monastery' mind you, that has segregated dining, segregated hostels and temples. Have we all lost our minds to accept this, or so droned that we can somehow eke out an explanation and try see some merit in this?
Quote:2. You see shrI Adi-shankara as a mere grain of sand
Not one person in the world is any more or less important than the other. There is no great or small. This is the vedic view. When we begin to see as one greater or lesser, therein begins the hierarchy and discrimination, and we all know what the end result is, and what this sampradaya unflinchingly stood for. They stood for an unvedic view, and so did their patrons.
In the galaxy of Hindu saints and sages, I dont see how one is more elevated than the other. This thinking of importance is egoistic thinking, and only egoists promote such views.
Quote:3. You are happy to imagine that advaita-vedanta is on its way to doom, or at least think very low of it
I said it will be challenged, not doomed. I do not think low of it, instead as one of the pinnacles of Hindu philosophy, and every one of them supplement the others.
Just because it carries the name of Shankara does not give it invincibility or unquestioning authority. Because I say this, know for certain I am no drone. Today, everthing in Hinduism will be challenged and no more blind acceptance and awed fascination.
Quote:4. You said something like 'we are tired of hearing shri bhagavan uvacha'
We are tired of endless repetition by rote, which any parrot can do, and most priests in India too do by rote without knowing its meanings. And all this book quoting is just drone culture, and drones do that. They have no mind, or its closed to other parts of the sastras. Why dont they quote from the vedas? Thats because they will be ashamed of themselves.
Quote:5. You think vaishnavism is a different religion than shaivism
Did you read my post where I said Hinduism is a family of religions or sects, a family of hundreds of sampradayas? Do you understand what a family means - siblings from the same father - the vedas? Or do you read just to try and find fault?
Quote:6. You believe that brahmins deserve some sort of 'karmic' retribution, and any abuse of justice or power is OK and understandable if Brahmins are punished, even after they have become ascetics.
Abuse of power cannot be justified. I still dont see an abuse of power by the TN govt and police. Again I am not following the mass drone culture of shouting foul at the police, the govt, the b1tch and just about everthing. I think they have followed the law and what is required of investigations. There has been no abuse of justice as the trial has not begun. There has been no abuse of justice as the SC has allowed bail.
Karmic retribution is certain for everyone, including brahmins. You belive it, no? Or are there exceptions for some like ascestics?
Again, discriminate, and you will be discriminated upon.
Quote:So let me say it as mildly as I can: You are anti-hindu and a caste-bigot.
You too Ashok? This will pain you for a long time. Everyone can be judged by their work and mine work speaks clearly.
The way Hindus villify other Hindus and cast aspersions is shameful. I have criticised kanchi and the smarthas, but this is a topic of discussion and I have stated my reasons. I have not been abusive of any member in this forum, but I have not received the same cordiality.
Quote:As far as I am concerned, I am not even a millionths of a grain of sand in front of ShrI Adi Shankara. So there is no point in me trying to reach upto the head of yours which according to you is placed so high that even shri Adi shankara appears to you like a grain of sand.
Yes as a sage-scholar his accomplishments must be lauded. But the point is, as evolving souls no one is higher or lesser. If you dont hold the view that all souls are no more important than any animal, dog or tree, then its telling of egoism and its tendency to differentiate and discriminate, and its telling that the walk on the spiritual path has not yet begun. Its still the book quoting routine which carries the burden of egoism.
Quote:But your version of the future is NOT going to pass. Because I think the universe is not run according to the wishes of the people who were described thus in the Kathopanishad:
avidyAyAm antare vidyamAnAH svayaM-dhIrAH paNDitammanymAnAH
dandramyamAnAH pariyanti mUDhAH andhena nIyamAnAH yathAndhAH
I work with no expectation of the results. Let us see to whom this verse applies.
Quote:By the way I read a comment by you on your forum which was something like 'I don't understand why Indians respect Budhha so much'
The same Gautam Buddha when advising Ajatashatru's prime minister VassakAra had said that as long as the people of vaishAlI keep on respecting the arhats (monks, sAdhus etc of any religion, not just Budhhists), they cannot be defeated.
The late Bhavisya tried to integrate Buddha as an incarnation, therefore the general acceptance.
Buddha is not a Hindu and has been condemned by our saints, and the religion chased away from the subcontinent. Or do you want to take counsel from Buddha? Your choice.
The buddhist nations of the world today is telling on their religion. Sri Lanka, Myanmar, promiscuous Thailand, fallen Angkor and genocidal Cambodia, and communist Vietnam.
Quote:My mother said anyone who gives pain to a sAdhu reaps suffering for himself and his family. She didnt say a brahmin sAdhu, she meant any sAdhu.
That is what India thinks of its holy people. You are so far removed from the soul of India that you can't comprehend this yet. And I hope this little tidbit about Gautama Buddha tells you how Indians think about arhats, bhikhus, monks, sanyasis in general. And why Indians have so much respect for Buddha too.
She is wise. Throw away your books Ashok and listen to her. Be free of the constrictions and limiting framework that it impels. And I may add that, 'anyone giving pain to ANYBODY will invite suffering for himself and his family.
Regarding the respect to sadhus, you telling this to an ex-monk?
Pathma
<!--QuoteBegin-Pathmarajah+Jan 17 2005, 01:47 PM-->QUOTE(Pathmarajah @ Jan 17 2005, 01:47 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->
In the galaxy of Hindu saints and sages, I dont see how one is more elevated than the other. This thinking of importance is egoistic thinking, and only egoists promote such views.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--emo&:omg--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/omg.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='omg.gif' /><!--endemo--> The last time I checked none of the saints proclaimed themselves as greatest bubba around, it is "us" the lowly people who see them in relative importance, as per our understanding. How is the egoistic view of the saints? Now are we thinking for the saints? <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Pathmarajah+Jan 17 2005, 01:47 PM-->QUOTE(Pathmarajah @ Jan 17 2005, 01:47 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> In the galaxy of Hindu saints and sages, I dont see how one is more elevated than the other. This thinking of importance is egoistic thinking, and only egoists promote such views.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No one is great or small by birth. Nor are they great or small by profession. But each one is great or small by Knowledge and learning. It is said that the wiser one shall be respected by the less wiser one based on learning and not on age. Hence the old sages under the Vatatharu were listening to Dhakshinamurthi.
I do not know where you got this idea that all are equal in EVERY aspect. A Chidabhasa dwelling in ignorance and under the control of maya is not the same as one that has realized this (maya) and is free from it is DEFINITELY higher than the wrorms that still wiggle in the gutters of samsara.
Confusing egoless AHAM-kaara for the ego (ahamkara) speaks volumes about the understanding of the whole concept. Back to the drawingboard.
You do not have to answer this, but curiosity drives me to ask if you are categorizing Rama and Krishna too in the same 'sand grain' pile.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The last time I checked none of the saints proclaimed themselves as greatest bubba around, it is "us" the lowly people who see them in relative importance, as per our understanding. How is the egoistic view of the saints? Now are we thinking for the saints?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I did not say the saints Ram, it is us who grade them as less or more important, and it is our own ego, pride and attachment that impels this. My point was once we start thinking this way, sooner or later we will start grading ourselves in relative importance, we start differentiating based on OUR values, and finally we get to discrimination.
To resolve this we have to simply see all souls as equal, no one more or less important. That our saints were once in our stage of karmic evolution, and that we all too will reach the same stage of their attainments. In other words, we are only different in time. Once we change to this attitude, we respect every man, women, child and dalit as equal to saints, but we do not necessarily take counsel from them. If Shankara can apologise to a dalit with palms together after realising the truth, that all are equal, so can we. I am asking we adopt this attitude.
Once we take this attitude, perhaps we can realise that JS is undergoing a similar karma, possibly his last one before attaining realisation. Therefore we rejoice. You can see the parallels with Shankara and so many other saints.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->You do not have to answer this, but curiosity drives me to ask if you are categorizing Rama and Krishna too in the same 'sand grain' pile.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Referring only to karma bound evolving souls who HAVE take birth on earth to resolve those karmas.
Regards.
Pathma
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->JS is undergoing a similar karma, possibly his last one before attaining realisation.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And I thought this was a "shameless lineage right from the start". <!--emo&  --><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='rolleyes.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Just because it carries the name of Shankara does not give it invincibility <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Pathma, you are right and wrong at the same time. It is not the associatgion with Sankara that gives Advaita its invincibility. It is the other way around. It is in the exposition of Advaita and bringing it within reach of ordinary mortals that adds luster to the memory of this extraordinary individual.
I also agree with you (if that is what you assert) that teh deification ofindividuals is foreign to the tenets of the dharma. But at the same time we the modern Sanatani will not take it lying down while his name is vilified and dragged in the mud as if he was a common murderer and a thief (and believe me we have more than our fair share of such charlatans in high public life in India)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->And I thought this was a "shameless lineage right from the start".<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Shankara was taught a lesson in truths, humility and non discrimination by a dalit. This was his point of realisation. The dalit was apparently more 'realised' than Shankara. The dalit was Shankara's true teacher (guru). What was Shankara before this meeting with the dalit? Was he a realised soul? I dont think so.
But almost immediately after this eventful moment, the established smartha sampradaya forgot this lesson by the dalit and became casteist till this day. The sampradaya ignored Shankara's experience and teaching, and even went directly against it. Hence, shameless. To this day they have been living off his name, fending off attacks on castiesm and contributing nothing more to Hinduism, not even another saint of repute. 1300 years of existence and nothing to show for it except the founder and his advaita mayavadam. Meanwhile during this same period thousands of bakti saints and reformers rose to fend off the jains and buddhists and inspire the people and lead the masses back to faith. The shankaracharyas were in obscurity all this time till the 20th century when they suddenly arose again to prominence, simply because most of the smarthas were english educated and filled the higher echelons of professional society. But this prominence has nothing to do with spiritualness.
Of course, in the 20th century the smarthas did give rise to some reformers and leaders but these came from the dasanami orders and not from the 5 shankaracharyas.
There is a parallel with buddhism. He too taught against idol worshipping but today almost all buddhists are idol worshippers.
But why should we be surprised with this parallelism, when buddhism and advaita vedanta are almost parallel. Because those theories cannot hold, to survive, the buddhists soon absorbed icon/temple worshipping rituals and puranas, and the smarthas absorbed castiesm, emphasis on itihasa-puranas and temple worship though the agamas are not part of their philosophy. Hinduism in practise today is almost all agamic and very little vedic. Agamas are theistic - directly contradicting advaita. Because its scruti the smarthas are silent on it while the followers are almost wholly agamic.
By adopting casteism, they locked themselves in. By their own rules they cannot spread the religion to others and overseas. Something had to be broken to free them, face the karmas and obtain moksha. Hence, JS's experiences. Here karma is the teacher.
Pathma
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->By adopting casteism<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think we are back to square one. I do not understand what this phrase means. One must realize that the prime promoter of caste in India is the Government of India. The GOvernment asks personal questions regarding ones caste and insists on pain of penalties that you answer such question regarding caste. I would much rather the government get out of the caste business and not even use caste as a criterion for help.
A preponderance of doctors in the US (of Indian origin) are Kammas from Andhra Pradesh. Does it mean that the Kamma community is casteist. In fact i refuse to accept your basic premise that the Sankaracharya order is casteist
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->QUOTE
Just because it carries the name of Shankara does not give it invincibility
Pathma, you are right and wrong at the same time. It is not the associatgion with Sankara that gives Advaita its invincibility. It is the other way around. It is in the exposition of Advaita and bringing it within reach of ordinary mortals that adds luster to the memory of this extraordinary individual.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thanks Kaushal. I think we are both right. Just mentioning Shankara or advaita vedanta no longer subdues Hindus too.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But at the same time we the modern Sanatani will not take it lying down while his name is vilified and dragged in the mud as if he was a common murderer and a thief (and believe me we have more than our fair share of such charlatans in high public life in India) <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I know very, very well about the character of Indian politicians and their machinations. This we can handle. Regarding JS, we simply have to go thru the trying times, fight the legal battle, and at the same time be prepared to lose. In this, it is heartening to know there is a suggestion for a third acharya. I think we have a breakthrough. In my mind, no matter what, VS must not succeed.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->QUOTE
By adopting casteism
I think we are back to square one. I do not understand what this phrase means.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I meant that the 4 original shankara mutts maintained their brahminical order during, and right after Shankara. They did not allow non brahmins into vedapadasalas and graduating as priests, into the mutts as monks, nor upanayana for all. They have maintained this tradition till today. Until recently non brahmins could not even enter their temples. Their segregation policies reminds us of Rhodesia and South Africa. Untonsured widows cannot approach JS. Non brahmins and dvijas, being 80% of society were shut out of the religion and its sacraments. All of this is reminiscent of the dark ages. This is the sore point.
But you are right, as of now its the GOI with its reservation policies, and most monasteries and padasalas that perpetuates the caste system. These orders must reform or go. And laws must be changed. I do not see the latter happening without international intervention.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In fact i refuse to accept your basic premise that the Sankaracharya order is casteist <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This I got to hear Kaushal. The way I know it most orders of every sect are casteist. I am willing to admit error.
Regards.
Pathma
Quote #1
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In the galaxy of Hindu saints and sages, I dont see how one is more elevated than the other. This thinking of importance is egoistic thinking, and only egoists promote such views.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Quote #2
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The dalit was apparently more 'realised' than Shankara. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But then what do I know ? I am not an ex-monk..
We have heard following excuses so far to justify an abuse of the police-politician-justice system in TN
1. Karma - It is all bad karma of Shankaracharya that he has to face false police cases
2. Nothing that happens is evil - Supporters of the acharya should try to see the ultimate good in the abuse
3. Everything is God's will. - so don't protest against the abuse
Let me just mention what justifications a brahmin caste supremacist could have used regarding the discriminated castes:
1. Karma - It is all their bad karma, which is making them suffer like this in this birth
2. Nothing that happens is evil - so try to see the ultimate good in any abuse
3. Everything is God's will- so don't protest against the abuse
I venture to claim that there is no difference in the mentality that celebrates the abuses of political power against the Shamkaracharya JS, and what a brahmin supremacist may have used against other castes.
Both justifications show a mentality which is based on bigotry.
All well meaning people would naturally be against any kind of bigotry. But what kind of support a well meaning person could offer to someone who protests against a type of crime while simultaneously being guilty of it.
If someone wants to reform the Hindu society, then he must himself be reformed first. There is no point in supplanting one type of bigotry by another.
I have visted Kanchi only once as a 14 year old boy. No one enquired about our caste. I am not sure about the rules for the veda-pathashalas. I don't support any restrictions based on birth for being eligible for any school or job. Personally, I think veda-pathshalas should not be restricted by one's birth. And I think sooner such retrictions, if present, are removed, the better.
But we again drop into a moral morass if people support the state that 'reserves' upto 70% of public funded opportunities against brahmins, while blasting brahmins for 'reserving' private funded veda-pathshalas for themselves.
We also have people who would castigate the Shankaracharya if he ever slightly deviated from the 'tradition'. Shankararaman was one such gadfly. Even a member in this forum kept on harping about the fact that Shankracharya was somehow 'disqualified' because he left his 'danda' behind once, when he had left the Matha for fe days.
Then there are opportunists. Who would demand that Shankaracharya reform the Matha and practices, but would be too delighted to criticize him in the next breath for breaking the 'traditions' and claiming that due to broken traditions, sampradaya is now dead.
What I know of Shri Shankaracharya Jayendra Sarasvati is that he has tried hard to reform the system while facing stiff oppositions from the 'traditionalists', Shankararaman included.
Then there are others who would say "forget reforms, just close the whole place down and be done with it. Hinduism has a whole sea-beach with saints and sampradayas scattered like sands. Why should one care about one grain of sand."
The problem with this approach is that, on closer scrutiny even their pet sampradays appear in need of reform. They of course would deny it, but the key word here is 'impartial'. If one were to apply this 'close down and be done with' approach impartially, the sea beach will be cleaned out of all the sand.
This is a destructive approach. As Hindus, who wish good for Hinduism, we must find a constructive way.
Another thing which has been mentioned repeatedly is the 'karma of the brahmins'. Apparently brahmins deserve a karmic retributions for past caste discriminations by other brahmins.
There is a fallacy in this line of thinking.
If we follow the doctrine of Karma, a jIva can take birth in any yoni and caste. It is not necessary that a present day 'brahmin' was a brahmin in his previous birth or even an Indian. How is that person supposed to be carrying the brahmin community's karma?
karma is carried individually by each jIva. It is interesting to extend this idea to communities too. But unless a jIva is forced to take rebirth in his/her community again and again, this tying up of a jIva's karma with the communities karma doesn't make sense.
So if you see a brahmin suffering today, it may have nothing to do with 'brahmin community's karma', it may just be his individual karma. Since there is no way to know which is which, claiming that a person's present suffering is due to the sins of his community is an exercize in bigotry. Hitler justified his persecution of Jews because of Jews community' role in crucifixion of Christ. One can if needed, justify any persecution by going sufficiently back in history and digging up that community's karma. And where do you stop? Is there a karma of Brahmins, of Indians, of men, of humans..... Does it even stand to reason that I should support a person x's persecution because x is a human, and humans obviously have a huge load of karma to carry?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But then what do I know ? I am not an ex-monk.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, I know what you mean Rajesh. But dont be too hard on yourself. Most dont know anything either.
Like yourself, nobody can make a difference between 'being realised' and 'claiming importance'. See son, nobody remembers the dalit today, but everyone remembers Shankara. See?
Well Ashok,
Abuse of power or discrimination should not be accepted. Accepting our karma means blaming no one for our misfortunes or circumstance but bravely dealing with it. This means to fight injustice, if any, and fighting discrimination.
As to whether there has been injustice and abuse of power against JS, VS and Kanchi matha, well that to be taken up in the other thread, not here. Personally I dont see any abuse of justice yet, therefore I keep away from that thread. The only thing I can admit is that the various govts of India have been guilty of selective prosecution, preferring not to investigate and prosecute certain political cronies.
The way I see it, with another murder in the next door matha, and the govt plans to take over the kanchi matha, things are just getting worse.
Quote:1. Karma - It is all bad karma of Shankaracharya that he has to face false police cases
2. Nothing that happens is evil - Supporters of the acharya should try to see the ultimate good in the abuse
3. Everything is God's will. - so don't protest against the abuse[QUOTE]
What is that you want to protest against, and to whom? Aren't you filing your defence? What else do you want to do? Tell me?
When people remain Hindu and fight the caste discrimination, means they accept the circumstance they are in, but are fighting the social injustice. This does not mean accepting the abuse. Like the people fought the caste discrimination, now we fight the case against the seer.
I don't support any restrictions based on birth for being eligible for any school or job. Personally, I think veda-pathshalas should not be restricted by one's birth. And I think sooner such retrictions, if present, are removed, the better. Quote:I think we are beginning to understand each other better.
[QUOTE]But we again drop into a moral morass if people support the state that 'reserves' upto 70% of public funded opportunities against brahmins, while blasting brahmins for 'reserving' private funded veda-pathshalas for themselves.
And we want to bring international pressure on India to drop all these caste based reservations. Now why are YOU against this? I simply dont understand. Do you think that India will ever drop reservations without the thread of sanctions and embargo on its economy?
Quote:What I know of Shri Shankaracharya Jayendra Sarasvati is that he has tried hard to reform the system while facing stiff oppositions from the 'traditionalists', Shankararaman included.
I am sorry. No, he has not, except for sops to dalits. This year we are going to introduce free namakarana samskara and upanayana for those willing and wanting, to severel hundred dalit children in India. This is real reformation. Watch and see. And pleasingly humiliate yourself knowing that it didn't take a seer to do this.
Quote:Then there are others who would say "forget reforms, just close the whole place down and be done with it. Hinduism has a whole sea-beach with saints and sampradayas scattered like sands. Why should one care about one grain of sand."
Like I said before, we could not care less even if all our beloved monasteries and temples are closed in India, if thats what it takes to reform Hinduism of these caste discrimination. But we are hoping this is not what it takes.
Quote:The problem with this approach is that, on closer scrutiny even their pet sampradays appear in need of reform. They of course would deny it, but the key word here is 'impartial'. If one were to apply this 'close down and be done with' approach impartially, the sea beach will be cleaned out of all the sand.
Go ahead. Call for the closure of any one matha that discriminates against you as a Hindu. I will back you.
Pathma
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Another thing which has been mentioned repeatedly is the 'karma of the brahmins'. Apparently brahmins deserve a karmic retributions for past caste discriminations by other brahmins.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This thing of the brahmins' group karma due to past discrimination, is something between the Lord and the brahmins. It has nothing to do with the rest of the Hindus. The rest of the Hindus as you can see is, while resentful, are not reacting. Therefore, please take it up with the Lord.
As an example, see the kanchi episode. It is not a reaction of the Hindu people. The Hindu people had nothing to do with it. We only feel sorry. It is the Lord's reply. Thats why I keep saying, its an act of god, therefore accept this karma as your dues and deal with it. Dealing with it means not lashing out here and there, but accepting the events as possible crimes, fighting it in court, then accepting the verdict, and finally making amends to the people.
Regards.
Pathma
|
