Smt. HH,
We are not sure how many of these people have become Christians. Irrespective of that, they do not show any involvement in the religious part. It is a very small temple and all people have to simply throng before the small sanctum sanctorum. In other day-to-day activities they have dealings with the residents of the agrahaaram also. So, feeling unwelcome etc., is out of question IMO. It appears to be that they are simply not attracted by the high-caste god.
But sir i thot Murugan is a popular deity across all castes...
It should be remembered that the people there are all politically very conscious and any question of this sort, that too in the temple, is sure to be taken as offensive and aimed at segregating the non-hindu etc. The result will be chaos and pandemonium. As I said, the people are otherwise in contact but it is very difficult to identify whether they have joined Xianity. They don't come out with answers readily.
This is a difficult situation. But once when we had visited the Dakshinamurthy temple in Alangudi, we saw 2 church fathers in their full white robes with a cross sign necklace coming and doing archanai to Guru bhagavan.
I agree, even if we do not delve, others will. But we merely delve; do we have anything to counter the propaganda by the Missionaries that hindu religion is full of so many obscenities?
Sir why should we consider them obscenities. So what if some folks then were hedonistic, experimentalistic, kinky, crazy, bohemian and so on. It was their way of experiencing life. And unless we experience things we do not outgrow them, do we...we might even feel like coming back in an other life to experience them...
I feel we should not mix up what our previous generations did, with what some may be feeling today. It is not the same individuals IMO.
This may be true for some, while others may not give it much importance. But we need not be ashamed or proud or anything, about what the ancients did. We just have to accept it that they lived a full life (perhaps better than the lives we live within our cocoons). And certainly they were experimentalists.
I heard that wandering sages were even cutting up dead bodies and studying them. And that is how Sushruta learnt his surgical techniques. These sages were like aghoras who tried to steal dead bodies from burial places. Me thinks the rest of the people might have originally even shunned such sages out of fear.
The blog does not tell the whole story. If you read the full details, perhaps you will agree that such sort of fixation for the imaginary aspects of sex does not add any glory to our sages or rishis or the puranas which contain such fanciful accounts. I also don't subscribe to the view that "even if the rishis procreate out of lust, it is for a purpose" as though they knew it beforehand; they are as good or as bad as any ordinary mortal when they find an outlet for their lust. But we may attribute all that and the results to God; it is the same with all other mortals also, is it not?
Sir, i feel no man is born without a reason, without a purpose. It is the man himself who has not realised the purpose of his birth. Once he does, he longer takes pride in temporal things. The body is not brahman.
So what if people are born from kama. Don't we treat kama as agni and maithuna as a havan. The hindus even deified the 'sense of Kama' into a god, Kamadeva. This too is treated as a divinity. The ancients did not seperate sexuality from sprituality.
If one has to approach spirituality truly, it cannot happen by 'suppressing' one aspect of life. Which is why the sages did not condone sex. Am still not able to understand why do we need to be ashamed of sex and sexuality.
You are a very senior and old member of this forum. Still, as an elderly person, I would like to suggest that we should give less importance to the person/s and more to the content of what they write. Even if we know for sure that there is dichotomy between what they say here and what they actually do in their personal lives, I feel we should desist,AFAP, from using that to win an argument, because what we are doing here is merely a clearing house for various view points, not a debate like those between our Acharyas and their opponents. Once we present our views by means of one or two posts, I think we should not persist on putting down the critic and may even allow others to trash our views, according to their methodology; it is for the general readers to judge whose ideas were cogent and convincing.
Thankyou sir. I shall keep this in mind. It is true that i forgot the diff b/w the posts and the poster. I was sort of irked that the poster brought the word 'missionary' in between somehow or the other indirectly more than a handful of times. Though it was not used a direct reference the allusion was more than obvious. I can only state that i am not a missionary. Am not a politician. Am a hindu. And i acknowledge that hindu history has not been as accomodative as it is portrayed. I acknowledge that sanatana does contain things which are considered anti-social today. It is just a matter of fact that such things exist. Am neither ashamed nor proud about it.
I believe in karma. Am fascinated with how god-constructs are conceived of. It also does not matter to me whether a god exists in the vedas or not. If i worship a god, say Lakshmi, with all my heart, i know that sincereity does not go unanswered. Even if my prayers are unanswered, it does not matter. I cannot give up on Lakshmi. She is my way of life. Just like my mother is mine. And am willing to welcome everyone who wishes to join in, to celebrate her love and presence, irrespective of creed, occupation, ethnicity or whatever.
Here we are told that we must not talk, some talks are useless, we must act or involve in charity and so on...Well what is good for the goose need not be the same for the gander....Each one is free to choose their topics, either to chat up or to act on them. And i promise i shall take utmost care while writing out my posts from now on.
Regards.
