Know more about Hinduism

Don't worry I won't lose anything.

Dear Vijisesh!
You are forcing me to reply.
When Nachinarkinayar Ji questioned the caste system with a mis-preceived conception, and assaulted the very spirit of "Veda" where are your "learned pundits" ? In Nirvikalpa Samadhi? When the same lectured about Bhakti , I obviously, because of the conflicts in the articles posted wanted to know is it the same person as there can be 2 person under one name.. (No soul has even the small courtesy to acknowledge my clarifications. )
You as if waiting for an "oppourtunity" started lecturing on the poster and the postings.
With all the modesty I didn't want to put up an argument. As it dawned to me that you all have a emotional bonding and any clarification by OUTSIDERS not going to be welcomed.
But Let me tell you this :-
It was a shock for me that you want to learn "VEDANTA" in your style. This is a total mockery for the respect given to that knowledge.
It is even more shocking that the elders of this e-society are willing to be e-guru even after you clearly mentioned that other pursuits left with no time to study.

Please don't think that I have nothing to do but to give FREE ADVISE.

I don't think I'll lose anything by stopping to see your "contributions".

Thanks

Regards
malgova.mango

malgova.mango said:

Dear Vijisesh!

I know what you are trying to convey. Hereafter I won't be interrupting you all. Anyway It dawned to I'm a wrong person in wrong place.

My intention is not offend but to clarify but if I offended my apologies.

Regards

malgova.mango

Click to expand...

definitely so

all tamil brahmins

Dear All,
Greetings!
It gives me immense pleasure to join this forum. I'm a junior member to this forum, alright, but just to introduce mself, I'm a considerably seasoned person when it comes to the Brahminical practices, Spiritual and Philosophical thinking and above all, achanchala bhakthi.
It is indeed true that I was a little perturbed at the outset to find some "hardlines" exchanged between some members, but that's inevitable sometimes! As a junior member (as far as this forum is concerned), with all due respect to the seniority of other members, I would request, with all humility, to keep hardlines at a minimum and concentrate on spreading awareness of our religion and practices.
I do not hesitate to tender my sincere and earnest apologies if this message has even slightly pricked somebody.
Many thanks.

Immense pleasure and a slight discomfort

Dear All,
Greetings!
It gives me immense pleasure to join this forum. I'm a junior member to this forum, alright, but just to introduce mself, I'm a considerably seasoned person when it comes to the Brahminical practices, Spiritual and Philosophical thinking and above all, achanchala bhakthi.
It is indeed true that I was a little perturbed at the outset to find some "hardlines" exchanged between some members, but that's inevitable sometimes! As a junior member (as far as this forum is concerned), with all due respect to the seniority of other members, I would request, with all humility, to keep hardlines at a minimum and concentrate on spreading awareness of our religion and practices.
I do not hesitate to tender my sincere and earnest apologies if this message has even slightly pricked somebody.
Many thanks.

Welcome.

Dear Mr.Smaarth Balaji,

Welcome to the Forum of Tamil Brahmins. Nice to have seasoned persons like you who have knowledge of Brahminical Practices, spiritual and philosophical thinking. I hope your contribution to the discussions will certainly add value to the Forum.

Regards,
Brahmanyan.

Madhur Bhava

All of us know of this great Bhava.

This is known as relationship of a Bhakta with the attitude where the Lord is 'sweetheart'. It is the supersensual love between milkmaids (Gopis) of Vrindavan and Sri Krishna. However, it must be remembered that child Krishna was just about ten years of age at that time. All this love for Gopis in general and Radha in particular should be seen as divine love between atman and paramatman, without any physical or carnal element.

This is considered the highest Bhava by many Vaishnavites. Chitanya Mahaprabhu was the standing example of this kind of Bhakti. Sri Ramakrishna also went through this Bhava. Vallabhacharya and Surdas are other great people who enunciated this path.

Some of the most beautiful devotional songs/poems of Hinduism has been produced by this Bhava.

This is the end of the formal article on Bhakti. The traditional classification is:

Shanta bhava

Dasya bhava

Sakhya bhava

Vatsalya bhava

Madhura bhava

Dear Mr.Smaarth Balaji,
Thanks for the nice sentiments. It is just an argument, and in the olden
days scholars used to exchange views , sometimes quite contrary to
each other's, limiting the arguments to the issues and desisting from
trading charges. We are trying to follow the noble example set by them.
Your inputs will be appreciated.

Hi! Smart Balaji , sorry Smaarth Balaji,


Welcome ! Join the party ! Actually without some mirch masala , Life becomes monotonous and mundane ! and
looking at the positive side of rumbles , many passive observer's like yourself are getting into the forum , with active contributions which is a good sign !
and as mentioned by sri ranganathan ji, all consider themselves to be scholar's here !
raising there collar's -
and you don't need to have any apprehensions about the designated senior members.
One becomes a senior when he completes his 100'th message !
So you are welcome !, once again !

Mr Indirect!

Dear Mr Indirect!




One doesn't need to be a black belt “Master” to be a mosquito “Buster”


One doesn't need to be a “scholar” to correct the views of some “Posters”.



More direct duet with substance, if you have any, could be much more appreciated.


But please don't go to ***** level . I don't want to trigger another of that kind. Unless the Moderators are prepared to do “Punya Vachanam “ to the whole portal.


Regards
Malgova.mango

Excellent ! comments malgova!

Now , please let us continue with the more important issues,

Thanks for your kind understanding !

malgova.mango said:

Dear Mr Indirect!




One doesn't need to be a black belt “Master” to be a mosquito “Buster”


One doesn't need to be a “scholar” to correct the views of some “Posters”.



More direct duet with substance, if you have any, could be much more appreciated.


But please don't go to ***** level . I don't want to trigger another of that kind. Unless the Moderators are prepared to do “Punya Vachanam “ to the whole portal.


Regards
Malgova.mango

Click to expand...

Please be direct

Dear Vijisesh!


Thanks for your compliments. Please don't worry. The world will not stop. The important issues will go on. Nothing is going to standstill.


If you have slight courtesy, reply me directly to the issues raised, without trying to skirt away. People will appreciate your courage believe me.


Come on! people jolly well knows that you are trying to carpet-cover the issues raised with big words.


On your comments on “Sad Bhavana” I fully agree with you, I 'll change it as suggested by you. See how easy is to deal directly with the issues raised. But with a puffed up “EGO” even this is difficult what do you say?


Regards
malgova.mango

Dear sweet malgova ,

Thanks for your kind words . I really appreciate your view points and next time whenever i address any msg to you , I shall try and improvise myself , the way you want me to ,straight as an arrow i.e not skirting away from the issue .

And So .. let us wind up this episode here and pave the way for Mr.Nacchi to continue with his good work in this thread where our interactions aren't worth a penny!

My total surrender to you Oh ! Holy one !

Thanks , once again for the kind understanding !

Dear Sri malgova.mango Ji,

I just read this, and I can not believe what you accuse Sri Nacchinarkiniyan Ji of saying. I know you have posted your question to him in the Varna thread he has authored, but his non reply should not be taken as a snub.

I also believe that the Rishis have only imparted what is there, they did not 'discover' anything new. But on the intellectual level, this is a faith. There is nothing in the Srutis that attest to this in black and white (if there is, please enlighten). And because we hold Srutis as the final authority over Smritis, it only implies that what is written in the Smritis may be fallible.

So, why get worked up over an intellectual issue where it comes to a matter of belief? You may want to agree to disagree but, then we should move forward.

In my humble opinion, Sri Nacchinarkiniyan Ji, has written much very valuable in a short time to enlighten us all, even if we do not agree with a few points here and there.

There is no group in this Forum that is 'bonded'. We all know about the scarlet words of Sowbhagyavathi Chintan Ji, admonishing any one of us who dare to step out of line!

Peace.

Pranams,
KRS

malgova.mango said:

Dear Vijisesh!
You are forcing me to reply.
When Nachinarkinayar Ji questioned the caste system with a mis-preceived conception, and assaulted the very spirit of "Veda" where are your "learned pundits" ? In Nirvikalpa Samadhi? When the same lectured about Bhakti , I obviously, because of the conflicts in the articles posted wanted to know is it the same person as there can be 2 person under one name.. (No soul has even the small courtesy to acknowledge my clarifications. )
You as if waiting for an "oppourtunity" started lecturing on the poster and the postings.
With all the modesty I didn't want to put up an argument. As it dawned to me that you all have a emotional bonding and any clarification by OUTSIDERS not going to be welcomed.
But Let me tell you this :-
It was a shock for me that you want to learn "VEDANTA" in your style. This is a total mockery for the respect given to that knowledge.
It is even more shocking that the elders of this e-society are willing to be e-guru even after you clearly mentioned that other pursuits left with no time to study.

Please don't think that I have nothing to do but to give FREE ADVISE.

I don't think I'll lose anything by stopping to see your "contributions".

Thanks

Regards
malgova.mango

Click to expand...

Order and dis-order

Dear Sri KRSji!


Greetings. Thanks for your queries.


For Nachinarkinyar Ji, now you are the second person to defend. I welcome your directness. All this shows my conclusion on “Bonding” is not completely unfounded.


Before preceeding further. Let me get it clear what is fact and what is belief.


A “belief” is something that one doesn't ascertain (pramana) yet and assumed it to be.


For the sake of explanation , Let's presume this dialogue:
I'm a naive village man in Tanjore and your are from the holy city “Kashi” and I invite you to be a guest for that day. After attending to your needs , I start a converstaion :-


I – who are you sir?


You – Well I'm a so and so and I come from Kashi.


I – What is “Kashi”?


Y – Kashi is a holy city , where Lord “Vishwanathar with Mother Visalakshi” resides
with the Holy Ganges flowing and they have built Ghats on the sides of river . It's pictursque and so on.


I – Where is it?


Y- It is in the north, there are train facilities availabe and from chennai you got to take allahabad express so and so.


To me the whole city of Kashi and its existence is a matter of beilef.


To you the whole things are nothing but fact.


Now If , I don't believe what you said , then you can't do anything . You may simply say, you believe it or not it is up to you. I can't help it.


But if I twist the facts and said Kashi is there, but there are neither Lord nor Ganges flows there it is only a jungle and some grouds for cremation. This I tell to some naive public not to you, What you will say? You may ignore me, but to the naive public you will definetly tell hey! this man is twisting the facts. Would you tell or not.? Now, If I tell you it is a matter of belief , how do you feel ?


“Fact” on the other hand is – If I say “that you have fingers in your hands” which is ascertainable is called Fact. Even if a devata came before you and said you don't have fingers or contradicatry what is ascertainable, you will not accept it, even if the devata is your Ishta Devata. There could be no possible arguments about facts.


As you agreed the “Rishis” imparted us “what is their “– clearly means – they taught us fact. That's why “Sruti's” are called “pramana's”


To say smirithis are irrelevant and can be challenged or doubted is another absurd logic.


Smirthis are rooted in Shrutis only. Truth revealed to “Seers” called “Sruti” the further explanation by the seers are called “smrithi's”.


As for the “varna dharma” - “Purusha Shuktam” is the shruti pramana. In various scriptures notably in the famous pala shruti of Vishnu sahasranama the order of vana is hinted.


Summing up...


The caste system existed from time immemorial and no body created it. “Rishis” only endorsed and advised to preserve it for the benefit of the society. The caste system is “anadhi” same like “vedas” . The caste sytem is “ ever present order” . The very order is Ishvara.


Then why is so much hardship and confusion in the name of caste, is it necessary?


Well.......


As the saying goes “Dharmathin vahvuthannai suddhu kavvum , iruthiyil arame vellum” .


To get dis-order is also within the order. If we have a stomach dis-order, in the agony of pain,we may think why there is a thing called stomach there?. But after taking the essential remedies like medicine etc.., we are back to order and we will forget about the whole episode.


Finally....


To talk peace, at the same time stepping in the toes of others, is like christians actively promoting conversion with the pope showing olive branch. Muslims with the prayer may peace be unto you. Hypocrisy.


Vanakkathudan
Malgova.mango

Nirguna Brahman

According to the Advaita philosophy, Nirguna Brahman is the Ultimate Reality. GOD. Nirguna Brahman could be called pure consciousness.

Advaita Vedanta philosophy says that for human eyes Nirguna Brahman is viewed as Saguna Brahman, or Brahman with personal attributes, and is commonly worshipped as Devi, Siva, Vishnu and other Deities. While this is a beginners' stage, the Nirguna aspect of the Absolute is realized by Yogis or Jnanis, when they transcend the personal consciousness, which gives the false idea of individuality.

It could be called the equivalent of Purusha in In Sankhya.

This is one concept in which the Hindu thought is totally different from all other religions. How do we define Nirguna Brahman? Since there are no attributes we can define only by negative statements. Not this , Not this.

Though there are many ways of reaching or realizing the state of pure consciousness, the way of Atma Vichara or self enquiry enunciated by Bagavan Ramana Maharishi is one of the best.

I have friend who is from England. He spent a number of years in India seeking. He was very much attracted to Suddha Adavita. Once when we were discussing the concept of Nirguna Brahman, he remarked that since Nirguna Brahman is pure consciousness without any attributes, it can not have a religious connotation also. Though the concept and development of the idea of Nirguna Brahman is purely Hindu, Nirguna Brahman by itself cannot be Hindu.

I am sure many of the members would like to develop on the thought of Nirguna Brahman.

Respected Sri Malgovaji,
I saw the exchange of messages between you and Mr.Vijiseshji and sri KRSji.

If you differ from the views expressed by anyone, you are free to post your
counters, politely drawing the attention of the member concerned . No one
prevents you from doing this.

We are talking of uniting all Tamil brahmins and at the same time nursing
some grievance. I appeal to you, sir, not to get offended by this note.
Let us share our knowledge. Life is a mighty University.

Dear Sri malgova.mango Ji,

My response is in color below:

malgova.mango said:

Dear Sri KRSji!

For Nachinarkinyar Ji, now you are the second person to defend. I welcome your directness. All this shows my conclusion on “Bonding” is not completely unfounded.

I do not know how you can jump to this 'bonding' conclusion just because I said that your response to sri Nacchinarkiniyan's posting was not justified. Again, I have already said what you said about bonding is not true. But you still continue to press the issue. This shows that you think what I said was untrue. Why would you think that I would lie about this? It would have been easy for me to say that yes, there is bonding and then what would you have done?

Before preceeding further. Let me get it clear what is fact and what is belief.
A “belief” is something that one doesn't ascertain (pramana) yet and assumed it to be.
I have deleted your story below for brevity.
To me the whole city of Kashi and its existence is a matter of beilef.
To you the whole things are nothing but fact.
Now If , I don't believe what you said , then you can't do anything . You may simply say, you believe it or not it is up to you. I can't help it.

But if I twist the facts and said Kashi is there, but there are neither Lord nor Ganges flows there it is only a jungle and some grouds for cremation. This I tell to some naive public not to you, What you will say? You may ignore me, but to the naive public you will definetly tell hey! this man is twisting the facts. Would you tell or not.? Now, If I tell you it is a matter of belief , how do you feel ?
“Fact” on the other hand is – If I say “that you have fingers in your hands” which is ascertainable is called Fact. Even if a devata came before you and said you don't have fingers or contradicatry what is ascertainable, you will not accept it, even if the devata is your Ishta Devata. There could be no possible arguments about facts.
As you agreed the “Rishis” imparted us “what is their “– clearly means – they taught us fact. That's why “Sruti's” are called “pramana's”
Sir, from the above I gather that you are from 'Kashi' and so you know it for a fact that what the Srutis say are true! This is not just a belief on your part, but you know it for a FACT! If so my namaskarams to you as you have truly attained the Seer status.

If by chance, you have not attained this divyadrishti, as I asked you before, can you cite any slokas from our Srutis that say that the Rishis 'saw' what was the natural order of things? If you can not, is this not a matter of faith? What is wrong in admitting that it is?

Every religion starts with faith and ours is no exception.
To say smirithis are irrelevant and can be challenged or doubted is another absurd logic.
Please reread what I said - I did not say that Smritis are 'irrelevant'. I said when it comes to a matter of reconciling the differences between the Srutis and Smritis, what is said in the Srutis take precedence. Every respected Guru of our religion has said this.
Smirthis are rooted in Shrutis only. Truth revealed to “Seers” called “Sruti” the further explanation by the seers are called “smrithi's”.
I agree in part, as explained above.
As for the “varna dharma” - “Purusha Shuktam” is the shruti pramana. In various scriptures notably in the famous pala shruti of Vishnu sahasranama the order of vana is hinted.
Purusha Shuktham does talk about Varnas and Dharma. Does not say that it is heredity as the caste system has come to be. Is it Vishnu sahasranama or Vishnu Purana that talks about the creation and the Varnas? I read it in Vishnu Purana. Again 'there is no order' established. It is open to interpretation as Vishnu Purana is clearly a Smriti. But again a careful study of it will not give you the justification for the castes but rather only the four fold Varna aspect.
Summing up...

The caste system existed from time immemorial and no body created it. “Rishis” only endorsed and advised to preserve it for the benefit of the society. The caste system is “anadhi” same like “vedas” . The caste sytem is “ ever present order” . The very order is Ishvara.
Again a belief, not provable as 'fact'. Yes, as a Hindu I believe it, but does not mean that I go bonkers if others do not.
Then why is so much hardship and confusion in the name of caste, is it necessary?
Yes, it is absolutely necessary, because you are making unfounded statements.
Well.......
As the saying goes “Dharmathin vahvuthannai suddhu kavvum , iruthiyil arame vellum” .
To get dis-order is also within the order. If we have a stomach dis-order, in the agony of pain,we may think why there is a thing called stomach there?. But after taking the essential remedies like medicine etc.., we are back to order and we will forget about the whole episode.
How do you know this? Again did you have a vision?
Finally....
To talk peace, at the same time stepping in the toes of others, is like christians actively promoting conversion with the pope showing olive branch. Muslims with the prayer may peace be unto you. Hypocrisy.
I said 'Peace' only to ask you to calm down. Comparing my simple gesture to Islam and Christianity shows your status of mind. You easily use a word like 'Hypocrisy'. So, let me be more of a hypocrite:

'Peace be with you, brother' 'Om Shanti'
Pranams,
KRS.
Vanakkathudan
Malgova.mango

Click to expand...

Foou! There are lot of hair splitters in this forum!! Where do you guys get all the time!!

Posted in jest! No offense please!!

Dear folks,

Why don't we ask Sankaracharya if a man is born into a caste such as Brahmin? He is an authority of Hindu scriptures. Has any body ever asked him or has he ever said something on this?

Regards,

Know more about hinduism

Dear Mr.Desi,
I refer to your post. The views of Sri Kanchi MahaPeriyaval is already posted
in another thread. For your reading, I give the link herein :
http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part20/chap1.htm

He has analysed Lord Krishna's slokas appearing in Srimath Bhagavat Gita
on varna classification. Full text of Gita slokas appears elsewhere in this
forum.

Mahathma Gandhi's views on varna dharma is contained in " My Varnashrama
Dharma ", a passage from it is shown in the following link :
http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part3/referp3.htm

Thanks Mr. Ranganathan for the links.

So, a man is born into a caste, I should say varna.

I wonder why anyone should try to recruit a non-Brahmin as a Brahmin. Hey! Wake up! No one is lining up to become a Brahmin!

I see again people try to be Brahmin to which they are entitled and this 'trying' is needless.

At the same time they say that they don't like what they regard as Brahminism and what to redefine it. Also there are people who want to change the basic rule that a person is born into a caste and laboriously try to say that such a system of birth into a caste is outdated. That means what? You want to keep a caste option. You can be Brahmin by day and sudhra by night, What a free choice!

I am not specifically naming anyone in this forum for there are people having, perhaps, a genuine and/or perhaps an ingenious confusion. Also there are lots of people outside the forum whose influence is very much seen here.

As far as I am concerned I am a Brahmin by birth and I need to have no re-evaluation. I think close to a 100% of the members of this forum would share my view. If they are not I wonder why they are here! To advocate to us the views of non-Brahmins or to find out if we as a whole can become non-Brahmin or we be non-Brahmin yet can call ourselves as Brahmin??

Why should anybody trying to have the sanction of another to be what he is or what he wants to be? Suicide is an individual decision and not a collective one.

I tell to these fine people, you have a label and realize it! You are denied equal rights because they think that you have an advantage being a Brahmin or more correctly and simply that if they deny it to you then they can have your share for themselves. This is daylight robbery! We should say to them: "If you are a secularists then give us equal rights, otherwise declare yourself as a son of a ........."

What pains me is to read from our own people who say that we have an advantage as a Brahmin and that those non-Brahmins have a point. What are you trying to say? That we should be denied equal rights? That we should be hounded and discriminated against? If you don't mean that then don't say they have a point. They are telling this bull shit so you would find it in your heart to accept their denial and robbery.

Some people say that we Brahmins mistreated non-Brahmins in the past. Blah! What is that supposed to mean? Do you agree that we should be discriminated against and that we should be exiled from our own native land? Some people say we still have a mindset to put down others. Really? Actually I see a vast majority of us are scared of our existence as a community, to practice our Dharma and to hand them down, even if we talk among ourselves about the fallen nature of the beasts who persecute us.

Just because we are a minority it cannot be taken advantage of by banding together to deny us what is legitimately ours. Such robbery is not secularism. Or perhaps that is secularism! We should unite and speak with one voice that it is irrational and racist tactics to speak of a past to deny a new born brahmin.

I loathe at the lack of veracity of people who keep harping that birth is not the criterion to be a Brahmin and a Brahmin should be a begger and chanting veda in a corner. What kind of sadistic pleasure is this? I will be told that it is what veda says that that I should say good buy to it if I don't like it. That is yet another sadist taunt.

Secondly, all other castes believe they are so by birth and reap quite a harvest by means of reservations etc.

So, people! Can we stop talking about who is a Brahmin and try to chalk out some fine programs in defense of us all? In doing so remember that we are all Hindus and we Hindus from ancient times have lived in harmony with our various castes and this division was inflicted on us by the colonial masters. Even though the white christians have left us they have bequeathed to us their rotten 'vaarisus' who continue this divide and rule. They have to be overthrown to regain our glory as a community. So the non-Brahmins are not our enemy but the secularist gang out there haunting and taunting us.

Dear Desi Ji,

Thank you for your impassioned posting. Actually, if you have been following this Forum for long, (I have been contributing here for a year or more and a lot of our friends here also have been around far more than that), you would have perhaps realized that the issue we are discusiing about is not whether someone is born a 'Brahmin' or not.

I made the exact statement some time ago, like you make above, that there are no non-brahmins waiting in line to become a brahmin and that this discussion about Brahmin by birth or not is not really important.

The issue is this. As much as Maha Periaval Sri Shankaracharya in his book on Hindu Dharma cites Gita as a reference to a Brahmin by birth, He also cites the reason for saying so. He says that it is easier to train a Brhamin for the 26 years or so it will take to train one, if we start the kid off early. His main concern is that the mechanics of selecting a non-brahmin suitable for the Brahminical way of life.

If one looks at all different Gurus' sayings on this issue, there is a camp which says that Brahminism is by birth and another equally authoritative camp (including Sri Paramahamsa Yogananda, Sri Vivekananda etc.) says that Brahmin is made by activity and Guna only. This split, from what I can see has been going on for a long time between those who want to 'modernize' Hinduism, and those who want to preserve the older order of our religion.

For our job at hand here in this Forum, either of these positions rarely matter. We are here to advance the interests of the present day TBs. The point is however, how we as a group talk to each other, having dissimilar views.

It seems to me, whenever someone makes a statement that a Brahmin is not by birth, some of our folks are intent on heaping harsh words against that person (in this case, please go back and read what Sri malgova.mango Ji wrote about Sri Nacchinarkiniyan). He also made a statement that the caste system is as true as Ishwara Himself (I am paraphrasing) and that Sri Nacchinarkiniyan by saying that the Brahmin is not by birth was 'standing on his toes'.

For a subject that has been discussed endlessly within Hinduism, it is wrong to be harsh with each other here, just because one person identifies with one different view point. As I said, just because someone says that the castes should be abolished tomorrow, does not definitely mean that they will be. Unless we come to a point where we don't have kniption every time someone says the 'boo' word, then as a community, how we will unite? This is the point.

So, every time someone argues on polemics, without giving proper authority within our scriptures, I think it is necessary to draw their attention to the equal validity of a opposing view. I think, for myself, it is important to preserve this kind of freedom of speech in this Forum (a tradition followed by the able Administrators), I will defend this right, to the extent of spending a lot of my time (which frankly I don't have) to contribute here (now you have the answer to your question in jest).

For this, I have been accused of being a 'secularist', a 'Brahmin hater' etc. It does not matter.

Hope, now you somewhat understand.

Regards,
KRS

Dear KRS,

"I made the exact statement some time ago, like you make above, that there are no non-brahmins waiting in line to become a brahmin and that this discussion about Brahmin by birth or not is not really important."

Click to expand...

You have made two statements:
a) there are no non-brahmins waiting in line to become a brahmin;
b) this discussion about Brahmin by birth or not is not really important.

You are posting as if (a) and (b) are interconnected. As you know I agree with you on (a) but pray tell me why is it that Brahmin by birth is not really important. You seem to gloss over whatever I have said on this in my last posting.

"As much as Maha Periaval Sri Shankaracharya in his book on Hindu Dharma cites Gita as a reference to a Brahmin by birth, He also cites the reason for saying so. He says that it is easier to train a Brhamin for the 26 years or so it will take to train one, if we start the kid off early."

Click to expand...

You are making an argument that Sri Paramacharyal is making a conditional argument about the Brahmin by birth. Sometimes Periava gives out explanations to convince someone but what is explained is not necessarily dependent on how it is explained. In other words, if the reasons as you say for a Brahmin to have his devolution by birth is supplanted then it it would be convenient for you to argue that Brahmin by birth is not really important which I see that you clearly and cleverly did! As far as I can see it since he quoted Bhagavat Geetha and the Sruti he is emphatic that the Brahmin is born and that is not changeable no matter that he did explain or not.

I have already made my point about the so called training of some 26 years or so that you contend for one to be a Brahmin with the implication that otherwise it he would not be a Brahmin. I see that would be a contradiction to the very assertion that a Brahmin is born. I say a Brahmin is a Brahmin the moment he is born and no one is going to take away that right from him on any condition.

"another equally authoritative camp (including Sri Paramahamsa Yogananda, Sri Vivekananda etc.) says that Brahmin is made by activity and Guna only."

Click to expand...

On all exegetical questions we do refer to Sankaracharya and no one else. People like Vivekananda and Mahathma Gandhi with due respect to them don't have historical authority on matters of the Vedic ritualism and philosophy. Today, Mahathma Gandhi's congress party is the most regressive and oppressive party against the Hindus with their vote bank politics that they keep playing to the tunes of Muslims and Christians. Mahathma himself supported the Maapla movement of the Muslims in Kerala that has resulted in the genocide of the Hindus by the Muslims. Could such person be an authority even though in the weblink provided by Sri Ranganathan Gandhi was supportive of the Brahmins. And Vivekananda's RamaKrishna Mission has given a go by to vedic rituals and Murthy Poojas in the name of their new found universalism. They have even declared themselves as a non-Hindu organization perhaps to keep the govt. away from them. So I would not like to follow these people in the matter of Hindu beliefs. No one should be advocating the Brahmins to move away from the Sankara Mutt to which they are attached for centuries.

Secondly pray tell me who would arbitrate on the Guna if we were to accept that a person the be judged on the Guna? A person like Karunanidhi could make a claim to be the judge. I think he already did!

Your criticism that some people like Mr.MM is vehement on his belief that a Brahmin is as true as Easwara is, is not to be overlooked for in my understanding according to our Veda Easwara is a Brahmin who projected other varnas. His criticism of others who ignore this should not be a cause to reject a Vedic contention. I agree the delivery should be pleasant and not irksome. Some people unfortunately are not good at it. Anyway, I always say to people who wants to endlessly differ on our basic Hindu stances, "Go join something you are comfortable with instead of being a pain in the butt. But if you attack our religion we would attack you too!"

"As I said, just because someone says that the castes should be abolished tomorrow, does not definitely mean that they will be."

Click to expand...

This is precisely my point. Use this forum to advance the interest of Tamil Brahmins. Start another forum named 'abolish castes' or something to go on a different objective. For, I see endless threads on which people keep piling insults on the Brahmins per se or on each other, thus defeating our objective and frittering our energy. May be they don't have anything constructive to say!

"So, every time someone argues on polemics, without giving proper authority within our scriptures, I think it is necessary to draw their attention to the equal validity of a opposing view."

Click to expand...

This is again caused by unnecessary polemics that I have despised. You yourself have repeated time and again that you are not an authority on Veda and I don't think any one in the forum is. Then why harp on authority? That is why the last time I talked about it, I suggested that we refer this to what Sankaracharya would say and thanks to Sri Ranganathan we came to know his view on the aspect of who is a Brahmin.

"For this, I have been accused of being a 'secularist', a 'Brahmin hater' etc. It does not matter."

Click to expand...

Please sir, no personal problems because it is sickening. If you are uncomfortable anywhere, find a comfortable company. People usually do. That would be good for you and for everybody. let us not complain against each others and get complained by each other. Let bygones be bygones. Please talk of what we as a community can do to advance our interests while preserving our beloved Hinduism and protecting it from being attacked and eroded by alien religions. Ms. Ramaa has put forward a posting as to what she would want and that is a good start.

I have seen some very good Tamil websites that have understood the problem and advancing our interests. I give below a few. We can learn from them how to advance our interests rather than carrying endless in-fighting.

http://nesamudan.blogspot.com/
http://nesakumar.blogspot.com/
http://islaamicinfo.blogspot.com/
http://puduvaisaravanan.blogspot.com/

Regards,
Desi

Dear Sri Desi Ji,

A very interesting reply, but replete with 'non-scientific' unsound logical arguments. My response is in color.

Desi said:

Dear KRS,

You have made two statements:
a) there are no non-brahmins waiting in line to become a brahmin;
b) this discussion about Brahmin by birth or not is not really important.

You are posting as if (a) and (b) are interconnected. As you know I agree with you on (a) but pray tell me why is it that Brahmin by birth is not really important. You seem to gloss over whatever I have said on this in my last posting

No, I did not gloss over - I did not say that statement a) is interconnected to b). That is your inference, because you are analyzing it from your firm belief that Brahmins are born. If you agree that not all of us (TBs) hold that view, then my statement will be clear to you. This means, you need to look at it from a different point of view than your own.

You are making an argument that Sri Paramacharyal is making a conditional argument about the Brahmin by birth. Sometimes Periava gives out explanations to convince someone but what is explained is not necessarily dependent on how it is explained. In other words, if the reasons as you say for a Brahmin to have his devolution by birth is supplanted then it it would be convenient for you to argue that Brahmin by birth is not really important which I see that you clearly and cleverly did! As far as I can see it since he quoted Bhagavat Geetha and the Sruti he is emphatic that the Brahmin is born and that is not changeable no matter that he did explain or not.

Again, an unfounded inference. No cleverness on my part involved. I agree and accept what Maha Periaval said regards to Brahmin by birth. I only explained his further logic on it. He also said, which I did not cite, the fact that unless a person goes through all the training that is designed to wring out all the ahamkara in him and to purify him, he does not attain Brahminhood. Bhagavat Gita is not Sruti.

I have already made my point about the so called training of some 26 years or so that you contend for one to be a Brahmin with the implication that otherwise it he would not be a Brahmin. I see that would be a contradiction to the very assertion that a Brahmin is born. I say a Brahmin is a Brahmin the moment he is born and no one is going to take away that right from him on any condition.
Again, this is your belief. One can not logically argue this point because being a 'Brahmin' meant a whole different thing than what we do today generally as Brahmins. To me, if one asserts that one is a born Brahmin, then one should do all the things that Maha Periaval lays out for a Brahmin to do. Otherwise it has no meeaning. We are just Jathi Brahmana and not even Karma Brahmana or Guna Brahmana.

On all exegetical questions we do refer to Sankaracharya and no one else. People like Vivekananda and Mahathma Gandhi with due respect to them don't have historical authority on matters of the Vedic ritualism and philosophy. Today, Mahathma Gandhi's congress party is the most regressive and oppressive party against the Hindus with their vote bank politics that they keep playing to the tunes of Muslims and Christians. Mahathma himself supported the Maapla movement of the Muslims in Kerala that has resulted in the genocide of the Hindus by the Muslims. Could such person be an authority even though in the weblink provided by Sri Ranganathan Gandhi was supportive of the Brahmins. And Vivekananda's RamaKrishna Mission has given a go by to vedic rituals and Murthy Poojas in the name of their new found universalism. They have even declared themselves as a non-Hindu organization perhaps to keep the govt. away from them. So I would not like to follow these people in the matter of Hindu beliefs. No one should be advocating the Brahmins to move away from the Sankara Mutt to which they are attached for centuries.
Sir, to me Maha Periaval was Guru. But please go and ask a person who follows Visishtadwaitha or Dwaitha about following Maha Periaval. Why even within the different Shankara Maths, there are differences in outlook. Just because I follow Maha Periaval's words does not mean that I should shout down any other valid outlook.

By the way, I am shocked that you consider Sri Vivekananda as a non-authority on Hinduism. I also see you have conveniently discarded my citing of Sri Paramahamsa Yogananda.

I did not cite the Mahatma Gandhi as a source, precisely because I do not consider him to be an authority on our scriptures. Again, this is completely 'unscientific' on your part, bringing in Gandhi Ji, when I did not.
Secondly pray tell me who would arbitrate on the Guna if we were to accept that a person the be judged on the Guna? A person like Karunanidhi could make a claim to be the judge. I think he already did!
Just because I have said that two different thoughts exist on the topic of Brahmin by birth, does not mean that either I support one theory nor does it mean I know how to implement either theory. Please do not confuse with what I said with what other's use for their own purposes.

Your criticism that some people like Mr.MM is vehement on his belief that a Brahmin is as true as Easwara is, is not to be overlooked for in my understanding according to our Veda Easwara is a Brahmin who projected other varnas. His criticism of others who ignore this should not be a cause to reject a Vedic contention. I agree the delivery should be pleasant and not irksome. Some people unfortunately are not good at it. Anyway, I always say to people who wants to endlessly differ on our basic Hindu stances, "Go join something you are comfortable with instead of being a pain in the butt. But if you attack our religion we would attack you too!"
You can attack me all day. But please understand the issue properly with your scientific mind before you attack. I did not say that what the Veda said was wrong. I said that it is one interpretation, based on belief. Moreover, to confuse a belief with certainity of fact and arguing from that perspective, to put it mildly is unscientific.

By the way, who died and made you the administrator, telling other folks to go elsewhere? Seems to me, people who are uncomfortable with all different ideas and want to define who a Brahmin is should go elsewhere where they are comfortable. Write to me in private, and I will give you some places to go.

This is precisely my point. Use this forum to advance the interest of Tamil Brahmins. Start another forum named 'abolish castes' or something to go on a different objective. For, I see endless threads on which people keep piling insults on the Brahmins per se or on each other, thus defeating our objective and frittering our energy. May be they don't have anything constructive to say!
So, you know everything and you don't insult anyone! Vow!
This is again caused by unnecessary polemics that I have despised. You yourself have repeated time and again that you are not an authority on Veda and I don't think any one in the forum is. Then why harp on authority? That is why the last time I talked about it, I suggested that we refer this to what Sankaracharya would say and thanks to Sri Ranganathan we came to know his view on the aspect of who is a Brahmin.
While I am not an authority, Sri MM Ji, came across as he was one. This is why I asked about authority. Please do not turn this away from the original statements made. If Sri N.R. Ranganathan had not posted, I would have posted Maha Periaval's words on this, as I have posted the same citations several times before.

Please sir, no personal problems because it is sickening. If you are uncomfortable anywhere, find a comfortable company. People usually do. That would be good for you and for everybody. let us not complain against each others and get complained by each other. Let bygones be bygones. Please talk of what we as a community can do to advance our interests while preserving our beloved Hinduism and protecting it from being attacked and eroded by alien religions. Ms. Ramaa has put forward a posting as to what she would want and that is a good start.
The person issue was discussed mainly because of veiled accusations on your part in the last posting about 'outside' influences and 'secular' influences. I did not label anyone. Seems like this is a standard practice. I have commented extensively on Sri Ram Ji's posting. Please accept other's views as valid within Hinduism and then let us work together. This habit of throwing up on other's beliefs and being rigid with only one view when our religion has so many views is a BIG PROBLEM.

I have seen some very good Tamil websites that have understood the problem and advancing our interests. I give below a few. We can learn from them how to advance our interests rather than carrying endless in-fighting.

http://nesamudan.blogspot.com/
http://nesakumar.blogspot.com/
http://islaamicinfo.blogspot.com/
http://puduvaisaravanan.blogspot.com/

Regards,
Desi

Click to expand...

Dear KRS,

"To me, if one asserts that one is a born Brahmin, then one should do all the things that Maha Periaval lays out for a Brahmin to do. Otherwise it has no meeaning. We are just Jathi Brahmana and not even Karma Brahmana or Guna Brahmana."

Click to expand...

Did our revered Sankaracharya not know that the vast majority of the Brahmanas have not undergone your so called 26 years of training? Did he reject them from Being a Brahmana? What are these nomenclatures such as Jaathi Brahmana, Karma Brahmana and Guna Brahmana. I never heard of them. Who made them up?

I am shocked that you consider Sri Vivekananda as a non-authority on Hinduism.

Click to expand...

Keep shocked I have no problem! I have already given my reason for that. Swamy Vivekananda was a great Hindu. He chose to be missionary. All missions have to peddle their wares to suit the tastes of the largest consumer population. That is what happened with Ramakrishna Mission with its universalism. Hindus from time immemorial have looked up to the Sankaraachaarya as an authority. Sankaracharyas continue to be there and I have no reason to overlook them. Just because I omitted about the other two Acharyas it does not mean that I do not recognize them. They too would support the fact that a Brahmin is by birth.

"You can attack me all day."

Click to expand...

Mr. KRS, Please don't wear the victim's mask. I did not attack you. Please don't use those words.

I said that it is one interpretation, based on belief. Moreover, to confuse a belief with certainity of fact and arguing from that perspective, to put it mildly is unscientific.

Click to expand...

Could you explain this more. Did I not tell you the vedic stance that the Brahmana projected all other varnas. What is the belief involved in it?

"By the way, who died and made you the administrator, telling other folks to go elsewhere?"

Click to expand...

First of all what I said was not about being member of the forum. It is about people being critical of Hinduism. I tell them that they have the option to leave Hinduism if they don't like it. Anything wrong with it?

"Seems to me, people who are uncomfortable with all different ideas and want to define who a Brahmin is should go elsewhere where they are comfortable."

Click to expand...

I didn't define the Brahmin. Who a Brahmin is by birth has already been defined by Sankaracharya and you are the one seeming to have difficulty with it. If you don't have difficulty you would not have referred to Vivekananda and so on.

"The personal issue was discussed mainly because of veiled accusations on your part in the last posting about 'outside' influences and 'secular' influences."

Click to expand...

Why would you think that you have been accused. If I had wanted to accuse you I would have done so, no problem. As long as I didn't do, you need not own it.

Now can we do something fruitful?

Regards,