<B>Hinduism is on the Decline!!! (Pls vote this Poll)

[KRS]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

sapr333,

As I said before, your poll question assumption is wrong. How then do you expect me to vote?

When I said enough whipping of this horse, I meant the assumption behind your poll question.

Again, you have this habit of making statements (Sri Adi shankara was akin to the Catholic Spanish inquisitors, for example) and not answering my responses. Even after I posted an article clarifying Adi Shankara 'exterminating' Buddhism, you have not stated your current position.

I am spending time responding to you because you asked me to be engaged. But sir, your not responding to my questions only tells me that you want to come in here with an agenda. If you claim to be 'searching for the truth' as you say, please have the courtesey to respond to the posers made to you. Because, I do take pains to address your queries.

Thank you.

KRS

Yes, we have whipped the horse enough.. Deep in our hearts, we all know what the truth and ground reality is.

Its time, we should stick the objective of the post .... POLL..OPINION..

 

[sapr333]

sapr333,


Even after I posted an article clarifying Adi Shankara 'exterminating' Buddhism, you have not stated your current position. S

Yes, response for that is yet pending from my end.

I thought I would respond to that, once I get little more info on this. .. Even downloaded a book 'Buddhist India', and was bit skimming through..In the midst bit of travel and tight schedule.. I need sometime to respond to that..Till such time, kindly bear with me.Thanks

 

[KRS]

sapr333,

Okay, fair enough. I am also late in giving you my critique of 'Why I am not a brahmin?'

I am expecting responses from you both on 'Adi Shankara exterminating Buddhism' and 'Adi Shankara was comparable to the Catholic Spanish Inquisitors' whenever you have time. Thanks.

Regards,
KRS

Yes, response for that is yet pending from my end.

I thought I would respond to that, once I get little more info on this. .. Even downloaded a book 'Buddhist India', and was bit skimming through..In the midst bit of travel and tight schedule.. I need sometime to respond to that..Till such time, kindly bear with me.Thanks

 

[sapr333]

KRS, am yet to complete my study on Swami Adi Shankarar & Buddhist's fall. (Had a long holiday break...)

In the mean time, I came across a clipping of what Swami Vivekananda said about Shri.Adi Shankara swami... Taken from an article by Dr.K.Jamanadas (Possibly an Ambedkarite and I admit his articles lack balanced view).


Swami Vivekananda has described how Aacharya Adi Shankara used to enjoy the burning of Buddhist monks after defeating them in shastrartha. This is what he says : "And such was the heart of Shankara that he burned to death lots of Buddhist monks by defeating them in arguments. What can you call such an action on Shankara's part except fanaticism." [Vivekananda: Complete Works vol. VII, p. 117 ff.]

Im not sure if Swami Vivekananda had said this!!

 

[happyhindu]

KRS, am yet to complete my study on Swami Adi Shankarar & Buddhist's fall. (Had a long holiday break...)

In the mean time, I came across a clipping of what Swami Vivekananda said about Shri.Adi Shankara swami... Taken from an article by Dr.K.Jamanadas (Possibly an Ambedkarite and I admit his articles lack balanced view).


Swami Vivekananda has described how Aacharya Adi Shankara used to enjoy the burning of Buddhist monks after defeating them in shastrartha. This is what he says : "And such was the heart of Shankara that he burned to death lots of Buddhist monks by defeating them in arguments. What can you call such an action on Shankara's part except fanaticism." [Vivekananda: Complete Works vol. VII, p. 117 ff.]

Im not sure if Swami Vivekananda had said this!!

ada rama :doh: god knows whatzzup with these ambedkarites...why do they produce such pure undiluted trash.....not surprisingly a major chunk of ambedkarwala publications are funded by well you-know-who....looks like they never tire of meddling with indian scriptures even though we got independent in 1947...

adi shankara just burnt ignorance...people who were left speechless after an argument with him felt burnt i guess..and that's what swami vivekanada meant....but guess some ppl uderstand it differently though :der:

its certainly not fanatism...lets say you and i argued and after a while i had nothing to counter-argue with you, then can i say you are fanatical? shankara bp was not known to have lost his temper at all...

 

[KRS]

Dear sapr333,

I believe in citing quotes and giving the full context. I have copied below the full exchange between the Swami and a fanatical devotee of Sri Shankaracharyal. Please pay particular attention to the sentences I have highlighted. Then ask yourself the following two questions:

1. Did Sri Shankara himself burned to death the defeated Buddhist monks?
2. What brought about the decline of Buddhism in India?

While I look up at the Swami as a Rishi, I take his words on the historical things as generally true. In this context, it is curious that the people who quote his words on Sri Shankaracharyal to show how Sri Shankara 'killed' the Buddhists and Buddhism do a selective job of quoting him! Especially by omitting a sentence (that I highlighted in red) how their selective quotes completely alter the meaning of what the Swami has said! And see also, by omitting the '-' in front of 'by defeating them in argument' how the meaning changes!

Thus the talk went on, and gradually drifted to the topic of Shankarâchârya. The disciple was a great adherent of Shankara, almost to the point of fanaticism. He used to look upon Shankara's Advaita philosophy as the crest of all philosophies and could not bear any criticism of him. Swamiji was aware of this, and, as was his wont, wanted to break this one-sidedness of the disciple.
Swamiji: Shankara's intellect was sharp like the razor. He was a good arguer and a scholar, no doubt of that, but he had no great liberality; his heart too seems to have been like that. Besides, he used to take great pride in his Brahmanism — much like a southern Brahmin of the priest class, you may say. How he has defended in his commentary on the Vedanta-Sutras that the non-Brahmin castes will not attain to a supreme knowledge of Brahman! And what specious arguments! Referring to Vidura* he has said that he became a knower of Brahman by reason of his Brahmin body in the previous incarnation. Well, if nowadays any Shudra attains to a knowledge of Brahman, shall we have to side with your Shankara and maintain that because he had been a Brahmin in his previous birth, therefore he has attained to this knowledge? Goodness! What is the use of dragging in Brahminism with so much ado? The Vedas have entitled any one belonging to the three upper castes to study the Vedas and the realisation of Brahman, haven't they? So Shankara had no need whatsoever of displaying this curious bit of pedantry on this subject, contrary to the Vedas. And such was his heart that he burnt to death lots of Buddhist monks — by defeating them in argument! And the Buddhists, too, were foolish enough to burn themselves to death, simply because they were worsted in argument! What can you call such an action on Shankara's part except fanaticism? But look at Buddha's heart! — Ever ready to give his own life to save the life of even a kid — what to speak of "— For the welfare of the many, for the happiness of the many"! See, what a large-heartedness — what a compassion!
Disciple: Can't we call that attitude of the Buddha, too, another kind of fanaticism, sir? He went to the length of sacrificing his own body for the sake of a beast!
Swamiji: But consider how much good to the world and its beings came out of that 'fanaticism' of his — how many monasteries and schools and colleges, how many public hospitals and veterinary refuges were established, how developed architecture became — think of that. What was there in this country before Buddha's advent? Only a number of religious principles recorded on bundles of palm leaves — and those too known only to a few. It was Lord Buddha who brought them down to the practical field and showed how to apply them in the everyday life of the people. In a sense, he was the living embodiment of true Vedanta.
Disciple: But, sir, it was he who by breaking down the Varnâshrama Dharma (duty according to caste and order of life) brought about a revolution within the fold of Hinduism in India, and there seems to be some truth also in the remark that the religion he preached was for this reason banished in course of time from the soil of India.
Swamiji: It was not through his teachings that Buddhism came to such degradation, it was the fault of his followers. By becoming too philosophic they lost much of their breadth of heart. Then gradually the corruption known as Vâmâchâra (unrestrained mixing with women in the name of religion) crept in and ruined Buddhism. Such diabolical rites are not to be met with in any modern Tantra! One of the principal centres of Buddhism was Jagannâtha or Puri, and you have simply to go there and look at the abominable figures carved on the temple walls to be convinced of this. Puri has come under the sway of the Vaishnavas since the time of Râmânuja and Shri Chaitanya. Through the influence of great personages like these the place now wears an altogether different aspect.

KRS, am yet to complete my study on Swami Adi Shankarar & Buddhist's fall. (Had a long holiday break...)

In the mean time, I came across a clipping of what Swami Vivekananda said about Shri.Adi Shankara swami... Taken from an article by Dr.K.Jamanadas (Possibly an Ambedkarite and I admit his articles lack balanced view).


Swami Vivekananda has described how Aacharya Adi Shankara used to enjoy the burning of Buddhist monks after defeating them in shastrartha. This is what he says : "And such was the heart of Shankara that he burned to death lots of Buddhist monks by defeating them in arguments. What can you call such an action on Shankara's part except fanaticism." [Vivekananda: Complete Works vol. VII, p. 117 ff.]

Im not sure if Swami Vivekananda had said this!!

Regards,
KRS

 

[sapr333]

KRS,

Keeping in mind the decorum of this forum,I would be humble enough, to say,that, I take back my statement on Shri. Adi Shankar's buddhist killing.

I did a few readings, and I found most of them seems to be from propaganda hindu casteist fanatic sites.. At the moment, I think, that could have been an issue, where the kings took advantage of Shri.Adi Shankars's debate-winning and utilised the situation to expand their kingdoms by exterminating buddhists.

I dont wish to futher debate on that, cos, pointing figers at someone is not what Im looking at, in my quest towards ULTIMATE TRUTH ABOUT GOD.

Apologize, had I hurt your sentiments.

 

[KRS]

sapr333,
Thank you for this posting.

The problem with most of the idealogues today is that if they cannot argue on points, then they tend to demonize the person(s) whose logic they can not defeat. Misquoting someone out of context is a favourite way for them to try to diminish the 'enemy'.

This is happening to all religions/philosophies today. Folks pass off shoddy hateful messages as though they are scholorly works.

Does this mean that you won't answer my inquiries in to your statement where you compared Sri Adi Shankara's actions to those of Spanish Catholics of the Inquisition?

Again, thank you for your forthrightness.

Regards,
KRS

KRS,

Keeping in mind the decorum of this forum,I would be humble enough, to say,that, I take back my statement on Shri. Adi Shankar's buddhist killing.

I did a few readings, and I found most of them seems to be from propaganda hindu casteist fanatic sites.. At the moment, I think, that could have been an issue, where the kings took advantage of Shri.Adi Shankars's debate-winning and utilised the situation to expand their kingdoms by exterminating buddhists.

I dont wish to futher debate on that, cos, pointing figers at someone is not what Im looking at, in my quest towards ULTIMATE TRUTH ABOUT GOD.

Apologize, had I hurt your sentiments.

 

[sapr333]

sapr333,

Does this mean that you won't answer my inquiries in to your statement where you compared Sri Adi Shankara's actions to those of Spanish Catholics of the Inquisition?

Again, thank you for your forthrightness.

Regards,
KRS

Shri.K.R.S,

Logically/philosophically, Im convinced about existence of Absolute morals but not 'relative moralism'.. In that context, according to my ideology, Inquisition is definitely wrong, and it breaks the divine law by "Killing others'. Its wrong, even if we it under kings dharma, political set up or even under the social context of that timeline..Its definitely wrong.

According to your idea of 'relative moralism' and natural instinct, inquisition could be 'right', I guess!!

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri sapr333,

If there was absolute morality about Inquisition then, how come those Christians who did that did not flinch? How could the crusaded happen, in the name of God?

Today, these will not happen. Why? Please ponder.

Regards,
KRS

Shri.K.R.S,

Logically/philosophically, Im convinced about existence of Absolute morals but not 'relative moralism'.. In that context, according to my ideology, Inquisition is definitely wrong, and it breaks the divine law by "Killing others'. Its wrong, even if we it under kings dharma, political set up or even under the social context of that timeline..Its definitely wrong.

According to your idea of 'relative moralism' and natural instinct, inquisition could be 'right', I guess!!

 

[sapr333]

Dear Sri sapr333,

If there was absolute morality about Inquisition then, how come those Christians who did that did not flinch? How could the crusaded happen, in the name of God?

Today, these will not happen. Why? Please ponder.

Regards,
KRS

There are many a arguments and counter arguments in regard to relative moralism and the church seems to oppose always relative moralism. The question posed by you really a good evidence 'realtive moralism', ie,it cannot happen in the 'current social context', where as taking judgement in line with Absolute moralism, even the past inquisition could be condemend.
Rather, with relative moralism,slavery,witch burning,Hitler could be justified.The free sex/abortion/child pregrancy of Europe/US is mainly because of the 'Relative Moralism' , developed the name of Democracy/secularism.

Amidst all these confusions, if we take a 'worldview', its more convicing to me, that the should be an 'Absolute Moral' which we can derive from God delivered through scriptures.

 

[KRS]

Dear sapr333,

Whether you call something 'absolute' or 'relative', morals exist in a society. And with the development of time and civilization, new definitions of morals do come in to being, for each society. As the world has shrunk in terms of communications and modern technology, you will see more and more clarifications/definitions of morality based on individualism.

The problems with 'absolute' morality is that they are fixed and black and white. And it is applied to yester years with today's moralism. As I said before, if 'killing' is immoral, how come so many were killed in the name of religion/God? This goes back to the norms of those times. Yes, we can see those activities with today's lenses to learn from, but again those socities which committed those acts did not see anything wrong with them. This is my point.

From homosexuality to not allowing child marriages, various laws have been passed. All these have come about because of the 'atomization' of the society, where individual rights need to be protected, hence the constant change from what the religions prescribe as 'absolute morality'. This is where the confusion about 'secularism' lies.

Just my two cents.

Regards,
KRS

There are many a arguments and counter arguments in regard to relative moralism and the church seems to oppose always relative moralism. The question posed by you really a good evidence 'realtive moralism', ie,it cannot happen in the 'current social context', where as taking judgement in line with Absolute moralism, even the past inquisition could be condemend.
Rather, with relative moralism,slavery,witch burning,Hitler could be justified.The free sex/abortion/child pregrancy of Europe/US is mainly because of the 'Relative Moralism' , developed the name of Democracy/secularism.

Amidst all these confusions, if we take a 'worldview', its more convicing to me, that the should be an 'Absolute Moral' which we can derive from God delivered through scriptures.

 

[sapr333]

Post of Shri.Vsrangarajan' from the blog section is pasted here, for relevance..Author is informed about this.



Its a well known fact that a Hindu is born and not made as they do in other religions. Its a way of living. Thats the reason that people from other religions can not become a Hindu in one single stroke. They have to live as Hindu to have the feel of it.
At the same time, that acts as a deterrant also . Many Hindus dont know the relevance of being Hindu as he is not taught about it.(particularly after the economic suppression of Brahmin community) Brahmins were the people who used to remind other people about the importance of being Hindu, its glorious traditions and practices . Pitiably, the present day Brahmins themselves dont know the meaning of being born as a Hindu , leave alone being born as Brahmin.This is mainly because of the systematic assassination of the importance of Brahmins as social reformers, teachers and as a pious community. As they diversified their interest to other greener pastures, their youth are misguided into chaging their living style, unhealthy marriage into other communities diluting the biological superiority they enjoyed through years of chaste habits and corrupt mind which is the result of modern gadgets like visual media(Though it could have had a positive impact on the society).


Unless we revive our social status back to olden days (Atleast partially) , we can not change the morale of the society. Brahmins are the only community who can do that and bring about that change. But to achieve this, they have to reform themselves first. Do lot of sacrifice . Economic influence is must as we all agree. But after certain stage in life, they must devote lot of their time for serving the community and hence humanity without selfish motive. See the Sikhs and learn how to do eligious service . I feel that this is one way we can redeem ourselves.

 

[Mohan Parasuram]

My gut feeling is no and on the contrary it is slowly emerging from its
long slumber and gradually asserting itself. There are sprouts allaround but it will take a generation time to fully assert itself.
What is happening presently is, I mean the concerted efforts
by the political and interested parties to make us believe that
it is on decline. I feel do not believe on all this campain. In this
the brahmins have a great rol to play that they first believe in themself and take our traditions seriously and strongly. We have to do our Sandhyas regularly and also involve ourselves in nama japas in every brahmin household. This will go a longway.

Rgds

 

[nandbala]

Instead of blaming everything and everybody around us, let everyone of us try to be on the path of being a true brahmin...i.e., read the scriptures, try and follow the permanent truth stated in those scriptures by FOLLOWING it in every little way we can.. let us first of all, genuinely get rid of this ego that we are more educated and thus superior to everyone.... we are not... education of the objective world does not count THERE... subjective education of looking inwardly will reduce ego, bring about realisation and calmness to one's approach.
rgds Bala

 

[ssaidass]

We have very strong religion Hinduism.... It is not like any other new religion (chirstianity 2k old and Muslim (1500 years).
We are invaded and ruled by Mughals and Christians (british) they are not able to eradicate hinduism from india.
there were many other religions formed like jainism,buddhism.... nothing did any much damage to hinduism.
No possibility to happen any such thing like Philiphines or south korea.
Where our population was only < 30 crores before independence
now were 3 or 4 times more than that ... If not happened with less volume and surly not going to happen with larger volume.

Hinduism is way of living followed by Indians and until india is there it will be there and followed by huge majority of hindus.

 

[renuka]

Hinduism is basically a man given name to Sanathana Dharma. As implied by the name(Sanathana) it is Eternal.Hence it really cannot decline or increase its like a Status Quo.
It is the Dharma on the individual basis or Dharma practised by society per se which might be on the decline.
Overall those who practise Sanathana Dharma are given the most freedom to think and explore GOD, Religion and its practical application in day to day life.
The beauty of Sanathana Dharma is there is no compulsion( which many take for granted and do not uphold the individual Dharma subscribed to them. ).
Sanathana Dharma allows scope for Question and Answer (always remember Bhagavad Geeta, Q & A between Krishna and Arjuna) which would aid an aspirant in the journey of self realization.
the best way to promote Dharma and to prevent its decline is to instill love for GOD and dedicating all our actions to GOD.
Study of scriptures should start from young in the language best suited for a particular community and promoting the study of Sanskrit among Hindus,so that the message of the scriptures can be assimilated directly without any misinterpratation.
Promotion of charity for the needy, maybe setting aside a certain amount of money on monthly basis for the needy humans, feeding of animals and for donation to temples and to a true practising brahmana.
The amount need not be big but a little goes a long way.
The most important to prevent decline in Dharma is to practice the following:
Kanthasya Booshanam Sathyam
Shrotansca Booshanam Shastram
Hastasya Booshanam Dhaanam.
We can never go wrong with this time tested formula.

 

[Meghnad]

Viewing of religions in proper perspective

Hi everybody,

I have viewed lot of discussions on religion but all of them are engrossed in technicals. Basically, what is religion ?. In my view, a religion is a globalised team and like every team it has a purpose to serve with an agenda. One must realise that religions are basically concerned about human body, its survival, longevity and well being.
Rest are all technicals meant for professionals to profess. How many average person has gone through his religious text ?.

In my view two major religions in this world are Christianity and Islam today. In order to qualify for a Religious Team, the team should have a `core' with a fanatical following.

Hinduism is an `ism' like Capitalism, Communism (which is one the wane now) etc. Of late Hinduism is trying to acquire a religious vigour. It is trying to form a `core' in the form of Ram Temple in Ayodhya. There is nothing wrong if it acquires a fanatical following in the process. Unless Hinduism acquires fanatical following it cannot further its agenda.

Christianity is all about human organ HEART. Christians wear a ring in the left hand ring finger. Why ?. Upon cutting open the human body it has been found that only through that particular finger, a nerve connects human heart. To honour that finger a ring is worn as a mark of love. Forget and forgiveness is the hallmark of Christianity which unloads a lot of tension from the Heart. One can go on.

Islam is about `creation' of humankind. Its agenda is to increase the human population. For them a new born child is a gift of Allah. One should not view an Arab having a lot of female mates meant for breeding children as abnormal or inappropriate. It is his Dharma. Therefore, Islam concerns about vitality of human reproductive organs and stamina to human body. That's why vegetarianism is prohibited for islamic followers. Celibacy is abhored. Their daily `namaz' are a form of exercise which keeps them fit. In Islam, Brain is of less importance to its followers.

Now, coming to Hinduism it is all about our organ Brain. Our exercise like Surya Namaskaram, Madhyayanam and Sandhyavandhanam,
if done in gramatical manner, gives lot of oxgen to brain since a Brahmins main duty is to think and give ideas, solutions to the problems of this world. Therefore, if we see a Brahmin sitting idle engrossed in thinking should not be viewed otherwise unless he gives ideas or solutions to others. Therefore, our Rishis and Acharyas abstain from sex and eat minimal food so that their heart is free to pump more blood to the brain so that its capacity utilisation is expanded. Perpetual Ananda or Bliss is the hallmark of true Brahminism. A true brahmin's face exhudes a lot of `Thejus" as a result of his Gyanam and Abyasam.

Representatives of all religions meet at the Religious Parliament and set agenda for leaders of countries to follow.

Ananthanarayanan iyer

 

[Meghnad]

Viewing of religions in proper perspective

Hi everybody,

I have viewed lot of discussions on religion but all of them are engrossed in technicals. Basically, what is religion ?. In my view, a religion is a globalised team and like every team it has a purpose to serve with an agenda. One must realise that religions are basically concerned about human body, its survival, longevity and well being.
Rest are all technicals meant for professionals to profess. How many average person has gone through his religious text ?.

In my view two major religions in this world are Christianity and Islam today. In order to qualify for a Religious Team, the team should have a `core' with a fanatical following.

Hinduism is an `ism' like Capitalism, Communism (which is one the wane now) etc. Of late Hinduism is trying to acquire a religious vigour. It is trying to form a `core' in the form of Ram Temple in Ayodhya. There is nothing wrong if it acquires a fanatical following in the process. Unless Hinduism acquires fanatical following it cannot further its agenda.

Christianity is all about human organ HEART. Christians wear a ring in the left hand ring finger. Why ?. Upon cutting open the human body it has been found that only through that particular finger, a nerve connects human heart. To honour that finger a ring is worn as a mark of love. Forget and forgiveness is the hallmark of Christianity which unloads a lot of tension from the Heart. One can go on.

Islam is about `creation' of humankind. Its agenda is to increase the human population. For them a new born child is a gift of Allah. One should not view an Arab having a lot of female mates meant for breeding children as abnormal or inappropriate. It is his Dharma. Therefore, Islam concerns about vitality of human reproductive organs and stamina to human body. That's why vegetarianism is prohibited for islamic followers. Celibacy is abhored. Their daily `namaz' are a form of exercise which keeps them fit. In Islam, Brain is of less importance to its followers.

Now, coming to Hinduism it is all about our organ Brain. Our exercise like Surya Namaskaram, Madhyayanam and Sandhyavandhanam,
if done in gramatical manner, gives lot of oxgen to brain since a Brahmins main duty is to think and give ideas, solutions to the problems of this world. Therefore, if we see a Brahmin sitting idle engrossed in thinking should not be viewed otherwise unless he gives ideas or solutions to others. Therefore, our Rishis and Acharyas abstain from sex and eat minimal food so that their heart is free to pump more blood to the brain so that its capacity utilisation is expanded. Perpetual Ananda or Bliss is the hallmark of true Brahminism. A true brahmin's face exhudes a lot of `Thejus" as a result of his Gyanam and Abyasam.

Representatives of all religions meet at the Religious Parliament and set agenda for leaders of countries to follow.

Ananthanarayanan iyer

 

[happyhindu]

Now, coming to Hinduism it is all about our organ Brain. Our exercise like Surya Namaskaram, Madhyayanam and Sandhyavandhanam,
if done in gramatical manner, gives lot of oxgen to brain since a Brahmins main duty is to think and give ideas, solutions to the problems of this world. Therefore, if we see a Brahmin sitting idle engrossed in thinking should not be viewed otherwise unless he gives ideas or solutions to others. Therefore, our Rishis and Acharyas abstain from sex and eat minimal food so that their heart is free to pump more blood to the brain so that its capacity utilisation is expanded. Perpetual Ananda or Bliss is the hallmark of true Brahminism. A true brahmin's face exhudes a lot of `Thejus" as a result of his Gyanam and Abyasam.

Representatives of all religions meet at the Religious Parliament and set agenda for leaders of countries to follow.

Ananthanarayanan iyer

Today, the main duty of 'brahmins' does not appear to be "thinking, giving ideas and solutions to the problems of this world". Instead, it seems to be about just one thing -- how to safeguard their self interests.

And, please note that your description of a 'brahmin' is that of a monk, not a priest.

The Atri Smrithi (which can be downloaded here: http://is1.mum.edu/vedicreserve/smriti/11Atri_Smriti.pdf ) says:

ज़न्मना जायते शूद्र: सन्स्कारद द्विजा उच्यते|
वेद्पाठी भवेद विप्र: ब्रह्म जनाति ब्रह्मनाह:||

Janmana jaayate shudrah Sanskarad dvija uchyate||
Vedpaatih bhaved vipra Brahma janaati brahmanah||

Meaning (source: Kamat's Potpourri: Brahmins - Who is a Brahmin? ) :

"By birth, every man is a Shudra (an ignorant person). Through various types of disciplines (samskaras), he becomes a dwija (twice born). Through the studies of scriptures, he becomes a vipra (or a scholar). Through realization of supreme spirit (brahmajnana), he becomes a brahmin."

But now current-day brahmins claim that they are brahmins by birth -- wonder how many people are born with the realization of the supreme spirit, esp on this forum...

But ofcourse, sections have produced literature to support such a claim. Therefore, they purport to be superior by birth, because they have inherited wisdom.

Moreover, to them, wisdom becomes associated with occupations. They lay a spurious claim on all discoveries of the ancient world as those produced by 'only' their ancestors.

They claim to be arya (a noble one) by birth. And even try to pass off inheritance of occupations as 'genetics'

And ofcourse, to maintain the status quo of it all, they would like to ensure their main POV, which is the "jaati-by-birth" dharma.

God alone knows if "dharma" in kaliyuga is actually dharma, or is it adharma being mistaken for dharma.

And what have you today --
with all the interpolations,
the arguments,
the inability to accept that admixtures of tribal societies gave rise to castes, cultures, and their transformations over the millenia,
the crazy notions of pure undiluted direct descent from brahma, the hatered for secularism and other religions possibly from xenophobia of sorts (or, dislike for one that is not one's own),
the ownership of vedas attitude...

And what can one say about the other side as well --
people making varna claims from kayasthas in bengal to mudaliyars in tamilnadu, all claiming to be so-called kshatriyas but considred shudras by 'brahmins' (self-appointed ones, that is), people producing literature of all sorts, people with vested interests (from missionaries, politicians to anti-state sections) making hay out of the degraded caste model...

What can one say, but wonder at the ways of the world...

All the best to everyone. Am taking the much needed break from this forum.

And special best wishes to the ones that keep coming back under various names (sesh, bala, saab, spectator, saptha, jamadagni..), i mean the ramble rousers, the 'sufferes' of victimhood, the ones with megalomaniac egos claiming to be brahmins...hope the likes of nara ji and kunjuppu ji can handle you guys...

Good luck to the forum.

God bless.

 

[sapthajihva]

happyhindu,

It really seems that some of your recent posts are spillouts of your inner frustrations. Picking on names, and calling them bluff, as if your POV is unquestionable.

I had refrained from commenting on your much recent posts which directly or indirectly, sought to belittle some member here - past or present. This just shows your immaturity. If you have a point, substantiate it with logic, not rhetoric.

Just as you have your POV, everyone is entitled to theirs. And if that deserves the laurels you have so generously credited me with... I dont care!

Actually, I think you suffer from a sort of superiority complex, which is the core of your problem. As a result you are unable to either stand or understand parallel thought processes.

There are ample evidences in our scriptures to show that a brahmin is by birth. If I say this, it does not mean that I discriminate, unless you have innately assumed that acceptance of the caste factor, ipso facto, discriminates (which is illogical, btw).

Shri Nara and Shri kunjuppu have their space in this forum just as I have, and just so the others. I wonder what you meant that they would 'handle' me...

I welcome NaraJI and kunjuppuJI to take care of me... layball:

And my wishes for a nice long break...

Thank you,

 

[RVR]

Happy Hindu said `Today, the main duty of 'brahmins' does not appear to be "thinking, giving ideas and solutions to the problems of this world". Instead, it seems to be about just one thing -- how to safeguard their self interests'


Today Brahmins are forced to become selfish because of Brahmin bashing in Tamilnadu.

Brahmins have been forced out of villages by enforcing agricultural land ceiling etc. Brahmins were not very rich traditionally but were managing with small land holdings.

Brahmins were deprived of Government and Public sector jobs.

Brahmins are being denied in admissions to educational institutions just because of their birth.

After doing all the above, brahmin bashing has not stopped.

During independence struggle, brahmins were in the forefront and made lot of sacrifices for the entire country.

Even after independent struggle, they were in public service through Congress, communist, BJP etc and served the nation. Rajaji propagated prohibition not to help brahmins but daliths & other backward classes. Rajaji fought against nuclear proliferation for the entire mankind of the world. But most of the brahmins were sidelined in politics and now very few brahmins are in political parties.

When others are driving Brahmins to the wall, there is no other option except to become selfish.

It is the other communities who are responsible for Brahmins to turn selfish and by nature brahmins are not at all selfish.

Like jews crucified by Hitler, today brahmins are being crucified by the Dravidian parties.

Brahmins are not taking violent path and are peacefully vocating the space to other communities and are forced to look after their own interest by moving to greener pastures.

Please don't blame the brahmin community for everything

All the best

 

[happyhindu]

Saptha,

happyhindu,

It really seems that some of your recent posts are spillouts of your inner frustrations.

The recent posts are spillouts of having had greater exposure and having spoken to non-political 'dalit' writers over emails.

Like many here, i was foolish to think that brahmins had nothing to do with the state that dalits are in, and that politics was to be blamed.

Obviously the scriptural stuff and interpolations 'brahmins' created is for anybody to understand..

Picking on names, and calling them bluff, as if your POV is unquestionable.

I had refrained from commenting on your much recent posts which directly or indirectly, sought to belittle some member here - past or present. This just shows your immaturity. If you have a point, substantiate it with logic, not rhetoric.

Your logic wud be super illogical to a non-shanka ekadandi. Whatever i have said so far is not my POV, its what the non-shankara matts say - go figure from them, no use picking on me..

Just as you have your POV, everyone is entitled to theirs. And if that deserves the laurels you have so generously credited me with... I dont care!

Actually, I think you suffer from a sort of superiority complex, which is the core of your problem. As a result you are unable to either stand or understand parallel thought processes.

I have no comments on what you are and what are able to understand. Its obvious.

There are ample evidences in our scriptures to show that a brahmin is by birth. If I say this, it does not mean that I discriminate, unless you have innately assumed that acceptance of the caste factor, ipso facto, discriminates (which is illogical, btw).

That's your POV. You are entitled to it.

Shri Nara and Shri kunjuppu have their space in this forum just as I have, and just so the others. I wonder what you meant that they would 'handle' me...

I welcome NaraJI and kunjuppuJI to take care of me... layball:

And my wishes for a nice long break...

Thank You.

Thank you,

 

[happyhindu]

Shri RVR ji,

Today Brahmins are forced to become selfish because of Brahmin bashing in Tamilnadu.

Hope you wud also look at the non-political side of things..

Brahmins have been forced out of villages by enforcing agricultural land ceiling etc. Brahmins were not very rich traditionally but were managing with small land holdings.

Brahmins were not the only ones forced out of land holdings..

Brahmins were deprived of Government and Public sector jobs.

Brahmins are being denied in admissions to educational institutions just because of their birth.

And so are other so-called forward castes, not just brahmins alone..

After doing all the above, brahmin bashing has not stopped.

If casteism stops, this too will stop. The solutions are there, but they are ofcourse unacceptable to brahmins due to self-interests.

During independence struggle, brahmins were in the forefront and made lot of sacrifices for the entire country.

So did other communities.

Even after independent struggle, they were in public service through Congress, communist, BJP etc and served the nation. Rajaji propagated prohibition not to help brahmins but daliths & other backward classes. Rajaji fought against nuclear proliferation for the entire mankind of the world. But most of the brahmins were sidelined in politics and now very few brahmins are in political parties.

Why keep blaming politics and ppl with vested interests who want to make hay out of cracks in the wall. Why not look at the causes for the cracks in the wall.

When others are driving Brahmins to the wall, there is no other option except to become selfish.

It is the other communities who are responsible for Brahmins to turn selfish and by nature brahmins are not at all selfish.

I think we indians are experts at the blame game. We like to blame everything else. But will not look within ourselves for solutions.

Ofcourse not all people of one caste are selfish. But some are.

Like jews crucified by Hitler, today brahmins are being crucified by the Dravidian parties.

Brahmins have not suffered like jews. Such a comparison is extreme.

Brahmins are not taking violent path and are peacefully vocating the space to other communities and are forced to look after their own interest by moving to greener pastures.

Please do not apply this to brahmin in places like Bihar. Physical violence by brahmins is reported there. And also violence by brahmins was present in the colonial period in andhra. Today, there are right wing activists treading the path of violence.

Please don't blame the brahmin community for everything.

No i am not. Please do not reach such a conclusion. There is not a single egoistical person among those absorbed in the service of god in temples or yagams. The prob is with those who quit that path and claim a lot of hubris.

All the best.

Thank You.

 

[renuka]

Sometimes i cant help wonder where all this arguments about caste is leading to ?
Why cant we Hindus just concentrate on the inner meanings of Sanathana Dharma?
If we still want to maintain our unique diversity so be it.
Each caste or division has their role to play but at least let us foster Unity in Diversity.