Brahmana (Brahmin) Status

[sapthajihva]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Right from the days of the vedas Brahmins are not Brahmins bybirth alone.e/g Visvamitra.

There is a reason for Visvamithra to be born as a kshatriya. Please read about how he was born to understand the circumstances in which he became a brahma rishi.

The persons conduct is the one to decide and that was the intention of the original Hindu(sic Vedic?) people.

A person's conduct/behaviour is not something that can be taken as a norm for classification, as it is of a floating nature. It can be good for a theoritical purpose and for idle chat in discussion forums, but too complex and confusing to be applied in practice.

A person is a Brahmin by conduct and not by birth alone.I dont mean just byy doing Sandyavandanam etc.

Do you mean that a person is a brahmin if he is a brahmin by birth AND he is also a person of good conduct? The word 'alone' in your sentence gives the meaning as suggested above. Which means that to be a brahmana, both birth and conduct are essentials.

But being intelectual and living out of his brains and not by wealth

Ah, but that description befits a vysya. A brahmana does not make a living out of his intellect; rather, he chooses to enlighten himself/others.

Regards,

 

[pbkhema]

A brahmin isnot born always.He is also made by reason of his conduct srudies etc
In one om earlier postings either in this thread or a similar one I had extracted portions from a Brahmmana and a Upanishad on this topic
By intellect I meant by using his brains,In fact in one of the smritis I think Manu it says in a time of distress a Brahmin can perform the functions of a Shudra and do farming,Bu that is much better than giving money for interest

 

[anandb]

Dear HH

I don't know much about Ekadandi monks so will not comment on it. But I do know a little on the Adi Shankara tradition so did a bit of a refresher reading.

ii) Vedas do not preach any jati system. But dharmashastras that surfaced later practice segregation. And predominantly based on dharmashastras and a few other texts (plus interpretations considered flawed by other Ekadandis), the 4 (+1) mutts of Adi Shankara created an exclusive "by-birth"system.

It is true that there was only one Varna during the Satya Yuga just as there was only one Veda. Just like the Vedas being classified by Vyasa as he foresaw the decline of dharma through the ages, the Varna system believed to have started to accommodate the various types of activities prevalent in society. Adi Shankara did not believe in the varna system based on some random thoughts in the Dharmashastras. In the Bhagavatam, Shri Krishna talks extensively about this system. He says he is the originator of the system. The varna system worked beautifully down the ages. The abuse of the system probably started more in the last 100 years by us.

You speak of Shringeri mutt sending you a pic of Shri Adi Shankara. But please be warned that the same mutt is most likely not to accept you as a brahmin...

The tradition of Adi Shankara believed there is no necessity to change one's varna or jati. They never called the brahmin jati as superior. In fact in Bhagavatam. Shri. Krishna says the four social orders make a complete system. So the Shudras are required as much as the Brahmins or any other order to make the system complete. In fact it was recognized that if there were no shudras the brahmins could never have done the duties allotted to them. God realization was possible by doing the duties that were alloted to each varna. It was based on this principle that the Shankara mutts did not allow conversion of jatis.

b) Varna by birth is practiced only by the mutts of Adi Shankara and a section of the tridandi monks. They are mainly purvamimansaka ritualists. If acceptance into the brahmin fold is what you seek, you might not receive it from them.

Categorizing Shankara mutts as purvamimamsaka ritaulists is wholly false. In fact, the Maha Periavaal, categorises themselves as Uttaramimamsakas or Vedantins. He says that Adi Shankara wholly subscribed to Vyasa's Brahmasutra which declares "Karta sastrarthavattvat" (ie) Isvara is the creator of the cosmos which is not what the Purvamimamsakas say. The reason why these mutts are wrongly considered purvamimasakas is because of their emphasis on rituals and sacrifices laid out in the karmakanda of the Vedas. We need to understand here that these Sanyasins don't really need to perform them as they are already god-realized. They still did them to convince the people especially the brahmins who followed them about the importance of such rituals. So Adi Shankara agrees with the Purvamimamsakas upto a certain stage on the importance of doing one's karma (rituals and practices) but later on gnana or knowledge dealt with by the Uttaramimamsa of the Vedas lead to true realization.

c) If its advaitha you seek, please note that many of the ekadandis do not undergo upanayanam; and tend to remove the thread upon sanyasam. The Ekadandi advaita monastic traditions are far more older than Adi Shankara (AS).

Here the antiquity or contemporary does not matter because in a way it is recognized by all gurus that there is a single universal consciousness that connects everyone at all times. The differences or variances in the system are more to suite the gunas of the followers rather than differences among gurus themselves. There is an example. Vyasa was Jaimini's guru and composed the Brahmasutra which was a Uttaramimamsa work while the Purvamimasa sutra was composed by Jaimini. There was no enmity between them. In fact during the debate between Adi Shankara and Mandanamisra during a shraddha performed by Mandana, Vyasa and Jaimini were the two brahmins who took part in the ceremony.

AS sought to organize the ekadandi monks into 4 mutts. He suceeded only partially. The success was only nominal bcoz the ekadandis do not consider varna and jaati as the same. But the people who joined Shankara mutts (possibly the purvamimansa ritualists) sought to consider them the same and ended up creating (the right word is actually 'enforcing') a rigid system.

Actually there was no confusion among the Shankara mutts regarding caste system as they never felt the caste system to be discriminatory which was true in those times. The Acharyas themselves never practiced any discrimination between castes. The Paramacharyal in one of his discourses quotes Vyasa saying "Kalih Saduh, Sudrah Sadhu". This means "The age of Kali is no way inferior to other ages nor the Sudras inferior to other castes. Kali is indeed elevated and Sudras exalted". The Periavaal says the Shudra by the very nature of the duties he perform remains humble and thereby is always residing by the side of god.

Whatever you have mentioned on this thread abt varna and jati, shruti and smrithi are the views of the other Ekadandi Advaitins, but not those of the Ekadandi advaitins of the Shankara mutts (that is mutts established by Adi Shankara).

The monks of the Shankara mutts are not into amending smrithis or acknowleding interpolations in them, instead they possibly seek to enforce things as it is (its confusing which smrithi they actually want everyone to follow, since smrithis themselves are both self-contradictory plus various smrithis contradict one another). The other Ekadandis tend to recognize the probs with the smrithis, and consider the shruti superior to smrithis.

Again your view gives the impression that the Acharyas considered smiritis superior to the shrutis which is nothing farther from truth. Mandanamishra, originally a purvamimamsakin on losing his debate with Adi Shankara became Suresvacharya and wrote a commentary on Adi Shankara's Bhasya on the Taittriya and Brhadaranyaka Upanishad. It is worthwhile to note that the Upanishads are part of the Srutis and deal with the Ghnankanda of the Uttaramimamsa.

Ekadandi advaitins consider varna, guna, proclivities, etc as inherent by birth but not based on jaati (occupation). They recognize varnas as semi-stratified units with freedom of movement from one varna to another. They do not recognize the term called 'jati brahmin' ("brahmin" is a varna, but dunno who invented the term 'brahmin caste').

If you read the discourses given by the Paramacharyal you can see he is constantly chiding the brahmins for forsaking their dharma. He keeps saying that this jati which once set an example is no longer doing so. The traditions of the matham might have prevented them from wantonly teaching veda to a non-brahmin but I can never imagine that if a NB had taken to Veda chanting and tried to recite in front of a Acharya they would have turned him away. In short, not admitting other jatis to the brahmin fold does not mean that discrimination was practiced.

The mutts of Adi Shankara are Smarthas, who came to exist after Adi Shankara in 800 AD. They are therefore a recent creed and am not sure why you wud like to seek acceptance into the brahmin fold from them.

The Guru Parampara tradition in our religion is an on going one which still goes on to this day. To me the time period should not matter as long as it is a time tested one.

Am also not sure why you started this thread. Each one of us knows what we are. And each one of us has our chosen path or is searching for a path. Why not go about it quietly? i mean you cud speak abt your views, but am not sure abt the acceptance part.

Dear HH, I do agree with you here. While the meaning of a true brahmana itself can be a subject of a huge debate, I personally don't attach any value to these outward symbols of conversion.

This is an open forum and on this forum, you can also find individuals with some amount of identity crisis. Am not sure you want replies and acceptance from individuals who may be having an identity crisis themselves.

Hope I am not one of these individuals you mention here. :suspicious:

Thanks

 

[happyhindu]

Dear Anand,

I don't know much about Ekadandi monks so will not comment on it. But I do know a little on the Adi Shankara tradition so did a bit of a refresher reading.

It is true that there was only one Varna during the Satya Yuga just as there was only one Veda. Just like the Vedas being classified by Vyasa as he foresaw the decline of dharma through the ages, the Varna system believed to have started to accommodate the various types of activities prevalent in society. Adi Shankara did not believe in the varna system based on some random thoughts in the Dharmashastras. In the Bhagavatam, Shri Krishna talks extensively about this system. He says he is the originator of the system. The varna system worked beautifully down the ages. The abuse of the system probably started more in the last 100 years by us.

When was satya yuga? Are you telling me that Sanskrit language existed say abt 15,000 years ago? How do you know that the Bhagvad Gita was not interpolated?

Am not inclined to comment on how beautiful a system was in the past. Am only able to speculate that the varna system might have served its purpose at the time when it was designed. I do not think the varna system started being abused just 100 years ago.

Sorry Anand, i do have a wee bit of something called a scientific temperment. Am unable to accept things that do not tally with science or evidence, including historical evidence.

The tradition of Adi Shankara believed there is no necessity to change one's varna or jati. They never called the brahmin jati as superior. In fact in Bhagavatam. Shri. Krishna says the four social orders make a complete system. So the Shudras are required as much as the Brahmins or any other order to make the system complete. In fact it was recognized that if there were no shudras the brahmins could never have done the duties allotted to them. God realization was possible by doing the duties that were alloted to each varna. It was based on this principle that the Shankara mutts did not allow conversion of jatis.

Its clear that the Shankara matts expects to people to follow the dharmashastras. It is also clear that the dharma shastras designate the brahmin as superior. Please do not expect me to accept justification of a system that perpetuates discrimination.

Categorizing Shankara mutts as purvamimamsaka ritaulists is wholly false. In fact, the Maha Periavaal, categorises themselves as Uttaramimamsakas or Vedantins. He says that Adi Shankara wholly subscribed to Vyasa's Brahmasutra which declares "Karta sastrarthavattvat" (ie) Isvara is the creator of the cosmos which is not what the Purvamimamsakas say. The reason why these mutts are wrongly considered purvamimasakas is because of their emphasis on rituals and sacrifices laid out in the karmakanda of the Vedas. We need to understand here that these Sanyasins don't really need to perform them as they are already god-realized. They still did them to convince the people especially the brahmins who followed them about the importance of such rituals. So Adi Shankara agrees with the Purvamimamsakas upto a certain stage on the importance of doing one's karma (rituals and practices) but later on gnana or knowledge dealt with by the Uttaramimamsa of the Vedas lead to true realization.

I request you to read up a bit of history and meet monks of various matts. Shankara matts are considered to be predominantly purva mimansa followers. Ofcourse they accept vedanta. Request you to read the posts on 'caste system weakness of hindusim' thread.

Here the antiquity or contemporary does not matter because in a way it is recognized by all gurus that there is a single universal consciousness that connects everyone at all times. The differences or variances in the system are more to suite the gunas of the followers rather than differences among gurus themselves. There is an example. Vyasa was Jaimini's guru and composed the Brahmasutra which was a Uttaramimamsa work while the Purvamimasa sutra was composed by Jaimini. There was no enmity between them. In fact during the debate between Adi Shankara and Mandanamisra during a shraddha performed by Mandana, Vyasa and Jaimini were the two brahmins who took part in the ceremony.

A teacher and a student need not have enemity while debating on the same subject. Badrayan clearly rejected Jaimini's premises. I have already posted on this subject before. Please look up old threads.

Actually there was no confusion among the Shankara mutts regarding caste system as they never felt the caste system to be discriminatory which was true in those times. The Acharyas themselves never practiced any discrimination between castes. The Paramacharyal in one of his discourses quotes Vyasa saying "Kalih Saduh, Sudrah Sadhu". This means "The age of Kali is no way inferior to other ages nor the Sudras inferior to other castes. Kali is indeed elevated and Sudras exalted". The Periavaal says the Shudra by the very nature of the duties he perform remains humble and thereby is always residing by the side of god.

Paramacharya lived by example. I have the highest regard and reverance for Him. It does not matter to me that i may not be in agreement with a few things that Paramacharya said, esp wrt to things in the social context. I cannot say the same about everyone who quotes him.

Again your view gives the impression that the Acharyas considered smiritis superior to the shrutis which is nothing farther from truth. Mandanamishra, originally a purvamimamsakin on losing his debate with Adi Shankara became Suresvacharya and wrote a commentary on Adi Shankara's Bhasya on the Taittriya and Brhadaranyaka Upanishad. It is worthwhile to note that the Upanishads are part of the Srutis and deal with the Ghnankanda of the Uttaramimamsa.

Am expressing views after speaking to various sects of Ekadandis. Please see my posts in the thread "caste system weakness of hindusim".

If you read the discourses given by the Paramacharyal you can see he is constantly chiding the brahmins for forsaking their dharma. He keeps saying that this jati which once set an example is no longer doing so. The traditions of the matham might have prevented them from wantonly teaching veda to a non-brahmin but I can never imagine that if a NB had taken to Veda chanting and tried to recite in front of a Acharya they would have turned him away. In short, not admitting other jatis to the brahmin fold does not mean that discrimination was practiced.

The last sentence is a view not accepted by Ekadandis of Non-Shankara matts - in the sense that they view jaati as different from varna. Regarding discrimination, lets not try to pull wool over our own eyes with our own hands.

Thanks & Regards.

 

[Raghy]

Sri Anand said:-

"It is true that there was only one Varna during the Satya Yuga just as there was only one Veda. Just like the Vedas being classified by Vyasa as he foresaw the decline of dharma through the ages, the Varna system believed to have started to accommodate the various types of activities prevalent in society."

Sri anand,

If you have reference that says that there was only one Veda in satya Yuga, can you kindly provide it, please? As far as I have heard, Vyasa put the existing Vedas in order; he did the compilation work. Four varnas are clearly stated in Rg Veda.

 

[happyhindu]

As far as I have heard, Vyasa put the existing Vedas in order; he did the compilation work. Four varnas are clearly stated in Rg Veda.

i suppose you mean the purushasuktham of rig veda (which mentions the 4 varnas).

i have not yet asked for that thread on purusha suktham to be re-opened.

anyways, please have a look at the conversation here:
Purusha Suktam - Audarya Fellowship

a small excerpt:
"Nandita Krishna, Director of C P Ramaswami Iyer Foundation, Chennai in her article titled 'Images of Religion' which appeared in Sunday Express, 27 Oct 2000 says that Purusha Sukta is a let interpolation in Rig Veda..

..arguments by Harvard's Witzel and others that the 10th Mandala of the Rg Veda, which contains the Purusha Sukta among other hymns, is a late addition because of linguistic and organizational dissimilarity with the rest of the text".

Reg satya yuga, please let us not delude ourselves with ideas of millions of years. Esp when the current human population world-wide is not that old. And ofcourse language itself was 'designed' by humans and is not as old as some ppl make it out to be. Some links:

Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Language and Social Organization

The recent origin of human speech

The evolution of human speech: Its anatomical and neural bases.

 

[Raghy]

Sow. Sri. Happy Hindu,

Thanks for the information about Purusa Suktham. Personally I am not deluding about million years for Satya Yuga; at the same time, I do not think it was only 1500 years ago (as some biblical scholars claim). I know 'rudhram' does not say about Varnas; but, Chamakham does. Is Rudhram and Chamakam belong to the same time period?

 

[anandb]

When was satya yuga? Are you telling me that Sanskrit language existed say abt 15,000 years ago? How do you know that the Bhagvad Gita was not interpolated?

Am not inclined to comment on how beautiful a system was in the past. Am only able to speculate that the varna system might have served its purpose at the time when it was designed. I do not think the varna system started being abused just 100 years ago.

Sorry Anand, i do have a wee bit of something called a scientific temperment. Am unable to accept things that do not tally with science or evidence, including historical evidence.

If the Vedas are in Sanskrit and supposed to be timeless then for me Sanskrit can be much older than 15k years. Bhagavad Gita could have been interpolated and for that matter anything could have been interpolated. What we say now and scientific discoveries could be said to have been interpolated say 10000 years from now. It is a fact that so many things change in the course of history including landscape, rivers, civilizations. languages and so on so nothing is permanent except faith. You are talking about evidence but what if a nuclear bomb or a earthquake flattens a major portion of the planet and all the evidence disappears and humanity goes back to the stone ages. Do the human beings at that point of time would believe that civilization started just then because there is lack of evidence. And that is why there is a growing body of scientists believing that humanity was probably much more advanced ages back that what is normally believed.

Its clear that the Shankara matts expects to people to follow the dharmashastras. It is also clear that the dharma shastras designate the brahmin as superior. Please do not expect me to accept justification of a system that perpetuates discrimination.

When you say the Gita could have been interpolated why should I not say that the Dharmashastras could also have been interpolated to reflect the views of the people who wanted to perpetuate discrimination. No where I have come across teachings of both Sringeri or Kanchi Acharyas telling that brahmins are superior. I have seen available footage of the Acharyas visiting places all over India and being visited by people from all castes and communities. If the Shankara tradition is known to be discriminatory, you will find only brahmins thronging to them which is not the case.

I request you to read up a bit of history and meet monks of various matts. Shankara matts are considered to be predominantly purva mimansa followers. Ofcourse they accept vedanta. Request you to read the posts on 'caste system weakness of hindusim' thread.

I have read history. As I said before just because Shankara mutts emphasise on rituals and sacrifices at a particular stage in life they don't become Purvamimamsa followers. The Uttaramimamsa essentially says two things - that Isvara is the creator of the cosmos and he is the one who dispenses the fruits of our actions. According to the Acharya, the Purvamimamsa does not say anything about Isvara or who created the world. On the question of fruits of our action, the Vedic works we perform determine the fruits. Even reading the discourses of the Acharyas the emphasis is more on Veda and Vedanta than the dharmashastras.

Am expressing views after speaking to various sects of Ekadandis. Please see my posts in the thread "caste system weakness of hindusim".

I understand that. I am also quoting from what the Acharya said in this regard.

The last sentence is a view not accepted by Ekadandis of Non-Shankara matts.

I am nobody to challenge the ekadandis. I will give my personal opinion on this. Unless the mentality changes a NB becoming a B or a Vaisya becoming a Kshatriya has no meaning. A NB may be more of a brahmana by qualities than a brahmana himself. This does not need to be validated by him becoming a brahmana. These outward symbols have no meaning if the inner mind is not controlled.

 

[anandb]

Dear Raghy,

Sri Anand said:-

"It is true that there was only one Varna during the Satya Yuga just as there was only one Veda. Just like the Vedas being classified by Vyasa as he foresaw the decline of dharma through the ages, the Varna system believed to have started to accommodate the various types of activities prevalent in society."

Sri anand,

If you have reference that says that there was only one Veda in satya Yuga, can you kindly provide it, please? As far as I have heard, Vyasa put the existing Vedas in order; he did the compilation work. Four varnas are clearly stated in Rg Veda.

I am referring to the verse below and its translation. I don't know sanskrit so if the translation is wrong pardon me.

adau krta-yuge varno nrnam hamsa iti smrtah
krta-krtyah praja jatya tasmat krta-yugam viduh

In the beginning, Satya-yuga, there was only one social class, called "hamsa". In that age everyone was perfect (in devotional service) from birth. That age is therefore known as Knta-yuga, or the age in which all religious duties are fulfilled. (Bhag. 11.17.10)

 

[anandb]

i suppose you mean the purushasuktham of rig veda (which mentions the 4 varnas).

i have not yet asked for that thread on purusha suktham to be re-opened.

anyways, please have a look at the conversation here:
Purusha Suktam - Audarya Fellowship

a small excerpt:
"Nandita Krishna, Director of C P Ramaswami Iyer Foundation, Chennai in her article titled 'Images of Religion' which appeared in Sunday Express, 27 Oct 2000 says that Purusha Sukta is a let interpolation in Rig Veda..

..arguments by Harvard's Witzel and others that the 10th Mandala of the Rg Veda, which contains the Purusha Sukta among other hymns, is a late addition because of linguistic and organizational dissimilarity with the rest of the text".

Reg satya yuga, please let us not delude ourselves with ideas of millions of years. Esp when the current human population world-wide is not that old. And ofcourse language itself was 'designed' by humans and is not as old as some ppl make it out to be. Some links:

Proto-Indo-European language - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Language and Social Organization

The recent origin of human speech

The evolution of human speech: Its anatomical and neural bases.

Regarding Harvard's Witzel, please read the following link on the credibility of this maestro??

Vijayvaani.com

 

[Raghy]

Sri. Anand,

Thanks for providing the information. I do not know Sanskrit either. I am sure, some of the learned members would explain this to us.

 

[anandb]

Dear Shri. Raghi

Sow. Sri. Happy Hindu,

Thanks for the information about Purusa Suktham. Personally I am not deluding about million years for Satya Yuga; at the same time, I do not think it was only 1500 years ago (as some biblical scholars claim). I know 'rudhram' does not say about Varnas; but, Chamakham does. Is Rudhram and Chamakam belong to the same time period?

I went through the meaning of Chamakam and could not find reference to varnas. The 1st anuvakam does talk about high and noble births but does not specify further. I would think they belong to the same period as they are always chanted one after the other in that order.

 

[Nara]

adau krta-yuge varno nrnam hamsa iti smrtah
krta-krtyah praja jatya tasmat krta-yugam viduh
(Bhag. 11.17.10)

Dear Anand, there is almost universal consensus among scholars, both Indian and Western, that Bhagavatham is no earlier than 500 CE and could be as late as 1000 CE. There is also internal textual evidence within Bhagavatham that indicates a date after the Azhvars between 7th and 9th century CE.

Cheers!

 

[happyhindu]

Dear Anand,

If the Vedas are in Sanskrit and supposed to be timeless then for me Sanskrit can be much older than 15k years. Bhagavad Gita could have been interpolated and for that matter anything could have been interpolated. What we say now and scientific discoveries could be said to have been interpolated say 10000 years from now. It is a fact that so many things change in the course of history including landscape, rivers, civilizations. languages and so on so nothing is permanent except faith. You are talking about evidence but what if a nuclear bomb or a earthquake flattens a major portion of the planet and all the evidence disappears and humanity goes back to the stone ages. Do the human beings at that point of time would believe that civilization started just then because there is lack of evidence. And that is why there is a growing body of scientists believing that humanity was probably much more advanced ages back that what is normally believed.

Sorry sir, no language in the world is that old. Every language come from its prototype. And even the prototype of indo-european languages is not as old as 15k years.

What you wish to believe in is your prerogative. Some might say Kerala came from the sea in 8K bc - but sir satellites images of the earth, its tectonic plate movements, has helped us study the earth's past, etc...so even if an earthquake flattened the earth of all evidence, still our biological molecular clocks, info abt the earth, etc are available and real..

advancements are many, its your choice if you want to go by 'shastras' blindly (and not consider it blind) or you want to accept evidence as found on hand...

When you say the Gita could have been interpolated why should I not say that the Dharmashastras could also have been interpolated to reflect the views of the people who wanted to perpetuate discrimination. No where I have come across teachings of both Sringeri or Kanchi Acharyas telling that brahmins are superior. I have seen available footage of the Acharyas visiting places all over India and being visited by people from all castes and communities. If the Shankara tradition is known to be discriminatory, you will find only brahmins thronging to them which is not the case.

yes ofcourse, the common view is that the dharmashastras were also interpolated - by people who knew to write sanskrit.

i have not come across the acharyas saying brahmins are superior either, but some texts have ranked brahmins as most superior, with kshatriyas 2nd in rank and vaishyas placed 3rd in rank - and this ranking was sought to be fixed by birth. If someone says one must follow the dharmashastras, which ones are they supposed to follow and how?

I have read history. As I said before just because Shankara mutts emphasise on rituals and sacrifices at a particular stage in life they don't become Purvamimamsa followers. The Uttaramimamsa essentially says two things - that Isvara is the creator of the cosmos and he is the one who dispenses the fruits of our actions. According to the Acharya, the Purvamimamsa does not say anything about Isvara or who created the world. On the question of fruits of our action, the Vedic works we perform determine the fruits. Even reading the discourses of the Acharyas the emphasis is more on Veda and Vedanta than the dharmashastras.

No comments. Everyone is entitled to their POVs.

I am nobody to challenge the ekadandis. I will give my personal opinion on this. Unless the mentality changes a NB becoming a B or a Vaisya becoming a Kshatriya has no meaning. A NB may be more of a brahmana by qualities than a brahmana himself. This does not need to be validated by him becoming a brahmana. These outward symbols have no meaning if the inner mind is not controlled.

Reg your last sentence, i do not think some 'brahmins' have their inner mind controlled either..so i suppose there is no point talking abt such lofty things when it comes to the base case social scenario..

Reg the rest, only some dalits seem interested in spiritual studies - possibly to come out of their scriptural condemnation. Nobody else seems interested in such things.

And my pov is that, if there are such people, please welcome them, instead of chasing them away to christianity or islam where they can even get brainwashed to work against your religion or the state. No point raising a cry against missionaries, conversions, politicians, etc.

i remember having read abt vedic school admitting children irrespective of caste and gender in other states, i had also posted something on it here, now i have forgotten which thread was it..

Regards.

 

[happyhindu]

Regarding Harvard's Witzel, please read the following link on the credibility of this maestro??

Vijayvaani.com

Each time a westerner brings out evidence that we do not like to see, we label him with so many names...

Each time a westerner brings out evidence that we like to see, we praise him...

But sir, research is research -- its not about what we like to see or do not like to see...

To reject someone's findings, one does not need attack the researcher personally - one only needs to prove things otherwise...not with blind faith, but with equally substantive evidence..

bhagvan singh did a fine job...one never knows which way the scales will tip in future though...

wish there was a scenario of the inter-disciplinary sort with archeologists, genetists, historians, etc all putting their knowledge pool and evidences as found, together...

regards.

 

[anandb]

Dear Shri. Nara,

Dear Anand, there is almost universal consensus among scholars, both Indian and Western, that Bhagavatham is no earlier than 500 CE and could be as late as 1000 CE. There is also internal textual evidence within Bhagavatham that indicates a date after the Azhvars between 7th and 9th century CE.

Cheers!

This is news to me. You mean to say all these characters of the Mahabharata lived after Jesus Christ was born (if it was 500 CE) or lived about 2 centuries before the Mughals invaded India (if it was 1000 CE). I don't know what to say?

 

[happyhindu]

This is news to me. You mean to say all these characters of the Mahabharata lived after Jesus Christ was born (if it was 500 CE) or lived about 2 centuries before the Mughals invaded India (if it was 1000 CE). I don't know what to say?

While Shri Nara replies to it, here is my input:

Itihaasas were written in the itihaasa period (dating is controversial, but the book "The Encyclopaedia Of Indian Literature, Volume 2" by Amaresh Datta confirms it to be pre-puranic period).

The BG is supposed to have been written at a later period and added to the story.

There was a discussion b/w Arun Shankar and me on the Bhagvad Gita. He had provided the parts that were the original BG.

It is possible that the other parts were added to the BG later.

One prob with the itihaasas are that different authors can present different versions of the same story.

Each time the olai or palm leaves got old, these stories were copied down on new palm leaves.

If you have a fertile imagination, you too can write a story and name the characters as Arjuna, Krishna, Parashurama....And perhaps add it to the Mahabharat.

Have you wondered why so many versions of the Ramayan are available? Some were written just so that the author can prove his literary abilities..

Regards.

 

[happyhindu]

Accorind to the wiki article on indian epics, Mahabharat supposedly describes the Mahajanapadas of the late vedic period. If it does, then it does not go prior to 2000 BC.

Mahabharat is supposed to have been written starting from around 800 BC reaching its final form in 400 AD. If interested, look into the sources in the article: Mahabharata - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[anandb]

Dear HH

Sorry sir, no language in the world is that old. Every language come from its prototype. And even the prototype of indo-european languages is not as old as 15k years.

What you wish to believe in is your prerogative. Some might say Kerala came from the sea in 8K bc - but sir satellites images of the earth, its tectonic plate movements, has helped us study the earth's past, etc...so even if an earthquake flattened the earth of all evidence, still our biological molecular clocks, info abt the earth, etc are available and real..

advancements are many, its your choice if you want to go by 'shastras' blindly (and not consider it blind) or you want to accept evidence as found on hand...

You can call me blind or stubborn, I don't mind but honestly I don't attach much importance to scientific evidence because as new evidence surfaces the goal post in science shifts as well. There is one point where our shastras and science do concur to some extent which is the age of the earth considered to be 4.5 billion years. Lot of times I just look for logic than evidence. I just cannot believe that mankind can only be 15k or 50k years (as they recently seemed to have unearthed evidence) in a planet 4.5 billion years old. If there was mankind older than that there should have been a language as well. The river Saraswati is mentioned more number of times in the Rig Veda than even Ganga but it was pooh-poohed by everyone till satellite images threw up the presence of a dried up river bed. Same with Ram Setu. Ramayana has been existing for ages with Ravana's Pushpaka vimana which supposedly flew in those times much before Wright Bros. found the airplane. Even if we assume that Ramayana was a figment of someone's imagination that someone to imagine a vimana defying gravity speaks something. For me, a simple reason to believe the Shastras is no body stood to gain anything (in those days) by saying these.

yes ofcourse, the common view is that the dharmashastras were also interpolated - by people who knew to write sanskrit.

i have not come across the acharyas saying brahmins are superior either, but some texts have ranked brahmins as most superior, with kshatriyas 2nd in rank and vaishyas placed 3rd in rank - and this ranking was sought to be fixed by birth. If someone says one must follow the dharmashastras, which ones are they supposed to follow and how?

I don't know about these texts but even as a layman if I look at the traditional definition of the four varnas one can see that you need all the four to complete the society. Even now any modern society needs bhakti, maintenance of traditions, rituals or samskaras (brahmin), valour and protection of country (kshatriya), agriculture and trade (Vaishiyas) and other services (Shudras). As per modern thought, one probably could even live without bhakti, rituals but not without an army, trade, agriculture and other services. So where is the importance of a brahmin here when his traditional duties have taken a backseat. Probably misguided brahmins at some stage tried to exercise their authority but the original purpose of the caste system was not that. I repeatedly find the Acharya saying that you reach god by doing the allocated duties. There is a chapter which details the samskaras to be followed by a traditional unchavritti brahmin. It is so mind-boggling that the brahmin or his wife has no time to pursue activities of a material nature. If he follows it strictly he would be able to have his lunch only by 3 pm everyday. Plus the guy is not supposed to amass wealth, has to go begging for food and harbor good thoughts and do sanskaras for the good of the world. In those ages, even if I were a shudra I would actually pity the poor brahmin's plight. In spite of the differences in the duties performed by the varnas all of them accumulate good karma by doing their duties. So a shudra doing the work of a janitor was considered as good as a brahmana begging for food and doing his sanskaras. As the Acharya says there was no differences in the minds of people following different varnas as there was a place, time and space for all activities. Each took pride in the work they did. I think down the ages this system has become so badly abused and screwed up that people are now putting the blame on the caste system. On the question of what dharmashastra to follow, I don't think people are even aware of these texts to follow them. I believe the text that is followed in Tamil-Nadu is Vaidyanatha Dikshitam supposed to have been written about 300 years back after reconciling the various dharmashastras. If someone has read this they can comment on it. Similar texts by other authors are followed all over India.

Reg your last sentence, i do not think some 'brahmins' have their inner mind controlled either..so i suppose there is no point talking abt such lofty things when it comes to the base case social scenario..

I agree.

Reg the rest, only some dalits seem interested in spiritual studies - possibly to come out of their scriptural condemnation. Nobody else seems interested in such things.

And my pov is that, if there are such people, please welcome them, instead of chasing them away to christianity or islam where they can even get brainwashed to work against your religion or the state. No point raising a cry against missionaries, conversions, politicians, etc.

I am all for teaching Vedas or sanskaras to everyone, whom so ever is interested. The tools should be made available to everyone. I am trying to say is there really a point in trying to convert a NB to a B or vice-versa when everyone is doing everything and the original definition of varna has got blurred. Without these outward symbols of conversion one can still do what one wants really.

thanks

 

[happyhindu]

Dear Anand,

You can call me blind or stubborn, I don't mind but honestly I don't attach much importance to scientific evidence because as new evidence surfaces the goal post in science shifts as well. There is one point where our shastras and science do concur to some extent which is the age of the earth considered to be 4.5 billion years. Lot of times I just look for logic than evidence. I just cannot believe that mankind can only be 15k or 50k years (as they recently seemed to have unearthed evidence) in a planet 4.5 billion years old. If there was mankind older than that there should have been a language as well. The river Saraswati is mentioned more number of times in the Rig Veda than even Ganga but it was pooh-poohed by everyone till satellite images threw up the presence of a dried up river bed. Same with Ram Setu. Ramayana has been existing for ages with Ravana's Pushpaka vimana which supposedly flew in those times much before Wright Bros. found the airplane. Even if we assume that Ramayana was a figment of someone's imagination that someone to imagine a vimana defying gravity speaks something. For me, a simple reason to believe the Shastras is no body stood to gain anything (in those days) by saying these.

Yes ofcourse, each time a new discovery is made, science has to change. It is not like 'shastras' that are considered "unchangable". (or rather considered 'unchangable' now since it suits the convenience of some people).

I do not see any difference b/w muslims who consider the quran unchangable bcoz it is the word of God and hindus who consider the shastras the same way.

Human life is old really, heard of Ardipithecus? Earth has been inhabited by all kinds of hominids. Just that we anatomically modern humans are not so old. And its proven.

Ppl like Da Vinci and other drew airplanes, imagined airplanes, etc until someone managed to invent a flying machine later. That does not mean that their drawing represented "ancient aircrafts". Anyone can imagine airplanes and create a story out of it, why not...

As a bhakta i beleive in God. It wud not matter to me if Mahabharat and Ramayan were just tribal stories, created into epic itihaasas (like mega serials) later, with a lot of added imagination..

I don't know about these texts but even as a layman if I look at the traditional definition of the four varnas one can see that you need all the four to complete the society. Even now any modern society needs bhakti, maintenance of traditions, rituals or samskaras (brahmin), valour and protection of country (kshatriya), agriculture and trade (Vaishiyas) and other services (Shudras). As per modern thought, one probably could even live without bhakti, rituals but not without an army, trade, agriculture and other services. So where is the importance of a brahmin here when his traditional duties have taken a backseat. Probably misguided brahmins at some stage tried to exercise their authority but the original purpose of the caste system was not that. I repeatedly find the Acharya saying that you reach god by doing the allocated duties. There is a chapter which details the samskaras to be followed by a traditional unchavritti brahmin. It is so mind-boggling that the brahmin or his wife has no time to pursue activities of a material nature. If he follows it strictly he would be able to have his lunch only by 3 pm everyday. Plus the guy is not supposed to amass wealth, has to go begging for food and harbor good thoughts and do sanskaras for the good of the world. In those ages, even if I were a shudra I would actually pity the poor brahmin's plight. In spite of the differences in the duties performed by the varnas all of them accumulate good karma by doing their duties. So a shudra doing the work of a janitor was considered as good as a brahmana begging for food and doing his sanskaras. As the Acharya says there was no differences in the minds of people following different varnas as there was a place, time and space for all activities. Each took pride in the work they did. I think down the ages this system has become so badly abused and screwed up that people are now putting the blame on the caste system. On the question of what dharmashastra to follow, I don't think people are even aware of these texts to follow them. I believe the text that is followed in Tamil-Nadu is Vaidyanatha Dikshitam supposed to have been written about 300 years back after reconciling the various dharmashastras. If someone has read this they can comment on it. Similar texts by other authors are followed all over India.

True. But some bad eggs of the past are probably the cause of the troubles in the present.

Wud be glad if you cud post what are the solutions you can think of, to assuage the feelings of so-called dalits in the 'caste system weakness of hinduism' thread.

I am all for teaching Vedas or sanskaras to everyone, whom so ever is interested. The tools should be made available to everyone. I am trying to say is there really a point in trying to convert a NB to a B or vice-versa when everyone is doing everything and the original definition of varna has got blurred. Without these outward symbols of conversion one can still do what one wants really.

The tools became available to all because of the publishing industry that printed books and bcoz of modern day education that made people capable of reading them.

The traditions stayed alive because of monks of the non-shankara mutts for their non-discriminative nature in disseminating knowledge to whosoever sought it, without taking caste, gender, etc into the pic.

Ofcourse one can always pursue a path without outward symbols. If that be the case, why are 'brahmins' called 'brahmins' or wish to practice exclusivism even if they have no outward symbols ...Its not that easy Anand. ..i feel all this is just sheer obfuscation. If there was openness by the shankara matts, it wud have come with willing arms ages ago, in pre-independent india, long before there was anything called politics.


thanks

 

[anandb]

Dear HH

While Shri Nara replies to it, here is my input:

Itihaasas were written in the itihaasa period (dating is controversial, but the book "The Encyclopaedia Of Indian Literature, Volume 2" by Amaresh Datta confirms it to be pre-puranic period).

The BG is supposed to have been written at a later period and added to the story.

There was a discussion b/w Arun Shankar and me on the Bhagvad Gita. He had provided the parts that were the original BG.

It is possible that the other parts were added to the BG later.

One prob with the itihaasas are that different authors can present different versions of the same story.

Each time the olai or palm leaves got old, these stories were copied down on new palm leaves.

If you have a fertile imagination, you too can write a story and name the characters as Arjuna, Krishna, Parashurama....And perhaps add it to the Mahabharat.

Have you wondered why so many versions of the Ramayan are available? Some were written just so that the author can prove his literary abilities..

Regards.

Just because something happened thousands of years back when we were not present does not mean it becomes a figment of someone's imagination. This way we can dismiss anything in antiquity including our Vedas, shastras, puranas, itihasas, kings, wars etc because we have not seen them. It means all studies into the past becomes totally useless while we can just live in the present. Makes things more easier, isn't it?

While there are many versions of the Ramayana, the Valmiki Ramayana is considered to be the most original and authentic. Let us take modern day concepts. Can you find doctors or lawyers or scientists or even decision makers in the same company agreeing on one thing? The human mind is such that there are always going to be multiple versions, theories, stories. It does not take away the fact that the Ramayana or Mahabharata were itihasas believed to have actually happened by not only people in India but also in the surrounding regions of Sri Lanka, Thailand, Nepal and Burma. There was an email circulating some time back. The original planetary conjunction as mentioned in Valmiki Ramayana when Shri. Rama was born was fed into a software called Planatarium developed by NASA. This gave the exact date when the same conjunction took place last time about 7000 years back. The interesting thing is the date coincides with the date of the Rama Navami festival in North India. May be astrologers can verify this but I have read that planetary conjunctions repeat themselves many times through ages. If that is the case, Rama could be dated earlier than 7000 years. Now our intellect may refuse to accept this but nevertheless the intuitive mind will say the possibility does exist.

Then there is the story of one Mr. Ram Avtar who was determined to find the places associated with Ram as mentioned in the Valmiki Ramayana. He listed 195 such places where some sort of memorial is still found for Rama and Sita. The places he listed include include Tamsa Tal (Mandah), Shringverpur (Singraur), Bhardwaj Ashram (situated near Allahabad), Atri Ashram, Markandaya Ashram (Markundi), Chitrakoot, Pamakuti (on banks of Godavari), Panchvati, Sita Sarovar, Ram Kund in Triambakeshwar near Nasik, Shabari Ashram, Kishkindha (village Annagorai), Dhanushkoti and Rameshwar temple.

If you study the sthala puranas of 3 Shiva temples in TN supposedly visited by Rama (this is not mentioned in Valmiki Ramayana) you can find an interconnection. When Rama killed Ravana he committed 3 types of sins. One is "Brahmahatya" (ie) killing of a brahmin. To atone for this Rama installed the linga at Ramesvaram. The second sin was killing a great warrior which was "Virahatya". To atone for this he installed the linga at Vedaranyam. Ravana was also a great patronizer of arts apart from playing the veena himself. Such excellence is known as Chaya and by killing someone who possessed it Rama committed Chayahatya. To atone for this Rama installed the lingam at Pattisvaram. The Acharya himself says that though this is not mentioned in Valmiki Ramayana the sthala puranas cannot be termed as untrue either because the incidents mentioned match with the nobility of Rama.

You go further down to Sri Lanka where Rama is revered. There are places which the Sri Lankans believe to be Asoka Vana, a Ravana Falls, place where Sita was put to fire.

Now read this for yourself which came in Zee News. There is a Part 2 and 3 as well on the link.

Mil Gaye Ram! ? Part I

The existence of Dwaraka was contested till S.R. Rao from the National Institute of Oceanography uncovered its ruins. You can read a detailed account here

Hindu Wisdom - Dwaraka

What I want to say is we just need to be careful before dismissing everything as someone's fertile imagination.

 

[anandb]

Dear HH

I do understand where you come from but I do hold opposite views. I will explain myself further though it may not have any impact.

Yes ofcourse, each time a new discovery is made, science has to change. It is not like 'shastras' that are considered "unchangable". (or rather considered 'unchangable' now since it suits the convenience of some people).

You are right. Shastras are unchangeable because they are considered sacrosanct. Now if you start tampering with them there is no end to it. One section of the population wants it one way and the other section wants it the other way and then there are accusations and counter accusations. Just like everything has become a tamasha this will be one more addition.

I do not see any difference b/w muslims who consider the quran unchangable bcoz it is the word of God and hindus who consider the shastras the same way.

There is a huge difference. You cannot compare the two. The Quran allegedly contains passages non-palatable to kafirs but the shastras have no such thing. By shastras I mean the entire body of Hindu work including Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas, Itihasas and Dharmashastras.

Human life is old really, heard of Ardipithecus? Earth has been inhabited by all kinds of hominids. Just that we anatomically modern humans are not so old. And its proven.

Sorry, for me logic rules. The anatomically modern man is already racing towards destruction by creating a living hell on earth through wars, poverty, environmental pollution just to name a few. To me such a superior specie who can transform himself to god realization cannot be racing on this path of destruction within a short span of time (say 15k to 50k years) while inferior species and hominids roamed the earth for the better part of 4.5 billion years. Now if I were the Creator and created the earth why would I create dull and inferior species like the animals and hominids for something like 4.5 billion less 50k years?

I can only accept a logical/intuitive explanation and not a scientific one. A lot of times logic is not supported scientifically and intuition is not accepted by science at all. Which is modern man has existed for a longer period than believed to be. Why there is no scientific evidence? Probably because they have been destroyed by the naturally violent cycles that the earth has undergone something like the avantara pralaya (partial deluge) mentioned in our scriptures. Or there is evidence waiting to be discovered. Who knows what?

Ppl like Da Vinci and other drew airplanes, imagined airplanes, etc until someone managed to invent a flying machine later. That does not mean that their drawing represented "ancient aircrafts". Anyone can imagine airplanes and create a story out of it, why not...

There is a lot more than imagination. You should read this chapter on Vimanas in this site Hindu Wisdom - Vimanas. There is a huge amount of material which can make your head spin as it happened to me but it is worthwhile spending time on it.

As a bhakta i beleive in God. It wud not matter to me if Mahabharat and Ramayan were just tribal stories, created into epic itihaasas (like mega serials) later, with a lot of added imagination..

No problem. To each his own belief.

True. But some bad eggs of the past are probably the cause of the troubles in the present.

Wud be glad if you cud post what are the solutions you can think of, to assuage the feelings of so-called dalits in the 'caste system weakness of hinduism' thread.

.

I am all for abolishing the caste system in totality if that is going to address the dalits problem and bring equality and an era of prosperity to them.

The tools became available to all because of the publishing industry that printed books and bcoz of modern day education that made people capable of reading them.

The traditions stayed alive because of monks of the non-shankara mutts for their non-discriminative nature in disseminating knowledge to whosoever sought it, without taking caste, gender, etc into the pic.

M'am, I think you are unfairly targeting the Shankara mutts because of the perception that they supported the brahmins and brahminism. Nothing can be farther from truth. I can say this about the Kanchi mutt during Maha Pariavaal's time. He was constantly chiding the brahmins for forsaking their dharma. Now you can ask why he was not bothered about others. By dharma he meant the brahmins had forsaken their simple lifestyle, forgotton to do the sandhya and rituals, not chanting the Vedas, got into evil practices like dowry etc. He said once that why he targeted the brahmins was because they considered him to be their guru. So many times he had said in his speeches that the sanskaras the brahmins perform are for the good of the world though in a intangible form. The traditions of the Shankara mutts especially in South India was more addressed towards the brahmin community at least in this and the last century because this community in their eyes was not following their kula dharma. So while giving credit to non-Shankara mutts which I have no problem with, the Shankara mutts were also fulfilling an imporatnt task in their own way. Otherwise these mutts would not have survived so long.

Ofcourse one can always pursue a path without outward symbols. If that be the case, why are 'brahmins' called 'brahmins' or wish to practice exclusivism even if they have no outward symbols ...Its not that easy Anand. ..i feel all this is just sheer obfuscation. If there was openness by the shankara matts, it wud have come with willing arms ages ago, in pre-independent india, long before there was anything called politics.

I think it is we followers who perceive all these differences in our mind. You read about Paramahansa Yogananda talking highly about Adi Shankara and the Paramacharyal himself commenting that Paramahansa is a one of a kind yogi.

 

[happyhindu]

Dear Anand,

Just because something happened thousands of years back when we were not present does not mean it becomes a figment of someone's imagination. This way we can dismiss anything in antiquity including our Vedas, shastras, puranas, itihasas, kings, wars etc because we have not seen them. It means all studies into the past becomes totally useless while we can just live in the present. Makes things more easier, isn't it?

i did not say the itihaasas were figments of imagination.

its precisely because of the antiquity factor that things are so circumspect.

no one knows who added what to the story.

While there are many versions of the Ramayana, the Valmiki Ramayana is considered to be the most original and authentic. Let us take modern day concepts. Can you find doctors or lawyers or scientists or even decision makers in the same company agreeing on one thing? The human mind is such that there are always going to be multiple versions, theories, stories. It does not take away the fact that the Ramayana or Mahabharata were itihasas believed to have actually happened by not only people in India but also in the surrounding regions of Sri Lanka, Thailand, Nepal and Burma. There was an email circulating some time back. The original planetary conjunction as mentioned in Valmiki Ramayana when Shri. Rama was born was fed into a software called Planatarium developed by NASA. This gave the exact date when the same conjunction took place last time about 7000 years back. The interesting thing is the date coincides with the date of the Rama Navami festival in North India. May be astrologers can verify this but I have read that planetary conjunctions repeat themselves many times through ages. If that is the case, Rama could be dated earlier than 7000 years. Now our intellect may refuse to accept this but nevertheless the intuitive mind will say the possibility does exist.

A lot of things were considered to have been added and deleted to the Valmiki Ramayana. The ones who researched it and wrote on such things were indian hindus 'brahmins'. Since you are averse to western ones, you can google and read on them. Am running short of time, or wud have posted links / names of books.

Then there is the story of one Mr. Ram Avtar who was determined to find the places associated with Ram as mentioned in the Valmiki Ramayana. He listed 195 such places where some sort of memorial is still found for Rama and Sita. The places he listed include include Tamsa Tal (Mandah), Shringverpur (Singraur), Bhardwaj Ashram (situated near Allahabad), Atri Ashram, Markandaya Ashram (Markundi), Chitrakoot, Pamakuti (on banks of Godavari), Panchvati, Sita Sarovar, Ram Kund in Triambakeshwar near Nasik, Shabari Ashram, Kishkindha (village Annagorai), Dhanushkoti and Rameshwar temple......

A lot of temples were built based on various stories. Who knows if the temples are that old or were built based on the story in later times like post-mughal times..

What I want to say is we just need to be careful before dismissing everything as someone's fertile imagination.

nope am not dismissing everything as someone's fertile imagination. But ancient stories tend to have lots of loopholes. We cud talk abt this on a seperate thread, like contradiction in itihasas, like say abt the character Parashurama in the Ramayan and supposedly the same Parashurama in Mahabharat.

Will be logging in afer a few days. Ciao later.

 

[happyhindu]

Dear anand,

I do understand where you come from but I do hold opposite views. I will explain myself further though it may not have any impact.

You are right. Shastras are unchangeable because they are considered sacrosanct. Now if you start tampering with them there is no end to it. One section of the population wants it one way and the other section wants it the other way and then there are accusations and counter accusations. Just like everything has become a tamasha this will be one more addition.

Shastras were already tampered with. Diff smrithis have opposing views on whats allowed or not. Already it has lead to confusion - as to what shd each follow. And i think we have enuf tamasha already...

There is a huge difference. You cannot compare the two. The Quran allegedly contains passages non-palatable to kafirs but the shastras have no such thing. By shastras I mean the entire body of Hindu work including Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas, Itihasas and Dharmashastras.

Sorry anand. Like you are entitled to you POV so am i. And i think there is no diff b/w muslims and hindus in this shastra-amending matter.

Sorry, for me logic rules. The anatomically modern man is already racing towards destruction by creating a living hell on earth through wars, poverty, environmental pollution just to name a few. To me such a superior specie who can transform himself to god realization cannot be racing on this path of destruction within a short span of time (say 15k to 50k years) while inferior species and hominids roamed the earth for the better part of 4.5 billion years. Now if I were the Creator and created the earth why would I create dull and inferior species like the animals and hominids for something like 4.5 billion less 50k years?

That's purely your pov..coming from lack of info on evolution and mixing up evolution with others things...am no teacher, i can only request you read up before you decide to base your views on something....but if just in case you already have a fixed idea that scriptures are the end-all of everything, then i suppose no point reading up..

I can only accept a logical/intuitive explanation and not a scientific one. A lot of times logic is not supported scientifically and intuition is not accepted by science at all. Which is modern man has existed for a longer period than believed to be. Why there is no scientific evidence? Probably because they have been destroyed by the naturally violent cycles that the earth has undergone something like the avantara pralaya (partial deluge) mentioned in our scriptures. Or there is evidence waiting to be discovered. Who knows what?

Science is based on logic. Not faith. Partial deluges have happened in the past. I dunno what you r trying to convey exactly.

There is a lot more than imagination. You should read this chapter on Vimanas in this site Hindu Wisdom - Vimanas. There is a huge amount of material which can make your head spin as it happened to me but it is worthwhile spending time on it.

yes i have read that link. let them construct all those vimanas. to test if each can fly or not. some of da vinci's machines were so detailed so technical but all the crafts did not lift off ground. some only propelled a bit. am not saying all those vimanas are fake. it wud be great to have some proof instead on sheer talk only.



No problem. To each his own belief.

.

I am all for abolishing the caste system in totality if that is going to address the dalits problem and bring equality and an era of prosperity to them.

Yes it will bring peace and prosperity for all.

M'am, I think you are unfairly targeting the Shankara mutts because of the perception that they supported the brahmins and brahminism. Nothing can be farther from truth. I can say this about the Kanchi mutt during Maha Pariavaal's time. He was constantly chiding the brahmins for forsaking their dharma. Now you can ask why he was not bothered about others. By dharma he meant the brahmins had forsaken their simple lifestyle, forgotton to do the sandhya and rituals, not chanting the Vedas, got into evil practices like dowry etc. He said once that why he targeted the brahmins was because they considered him to be their guru. So many times he had said in his speeches that the sanskaras the brahmins perform are for the good of the world though in a intangible form. The traditions of the Shankara mutts especially in South India was more addressed towards the brahmin community at least in this and the last century because this community in their eyes was not following their kula dharma. So while giving credit to non-Shankara mutts which I have no problem with, the Shankara mutts were also fulfilling an imporatnt task in their own way. Otherwise these mutts would not have survived so long.

Am not targetting any mutt. Am pointing out discrepencies and differences in teachings. I only wish Paramacharya were alive so i cud get a chance to speak to Him.


I think it is we followers who perceive all these differences in our mind. You read about Paramahansa Yogananda talking highly about Adi Shankara and the Paramacharyal himself commenting that Paramahansa is a one of a kind yogi.

see ya. bye.

 

[Nara]

This is news to me. You mean to say all these characters of the Mahabharata lived after Jesus Christ was born (if it was 500 CE) or lived about 2 centuries before the Mughals invaded India (if it was 1000 CE). I don't know what to say?

Dear Anand, no I don't mean the characters of MB are that, only that Bhagavatham was written around this time frame. Much like Kamba Ramayanam is dated to the 12th century. The difference of course is the authorship of Bhagavatham is obscure and the orthodox view is that it was written by Vyasa.

Cheers!