"Complicatedism"

[palindrome]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Palindrome,

Excuse me for this frank post.

I am a smarta by birth. I do not think being a smarta is so degrading, though I am not clear how smartas have become such anathema in your view. Also what are the violences represented in brahmanical literature? Do you think such kind of violence goes on among brahmins in general or among the smartas at least, even today? Don't you think the vaishnavas also were smartas before they embraced vaishnavism?

I agree that the term "shudra" was pejorative before Independence and brahmins in TN used to denote NBs by this term for the sake of convenience, perhaps (I don't know.) Possibly the lower castes were serf-like also then. But Independence has changed all those social equations and today any person belonging to any caste can become the President of India even.

But Brahmins as a caste, is separate. Just as a brahmin cannot become a paraiah today and get an SC certficate legally, because Paraiah is also a caste name. The law of the land does not recognise the Shudra varna any more. What is relevant today are castes; and nobody with a modicum of worldly knowledge and right mind will be interested in becoming a brahmin, legally. But this does not mean that all such people are motivated in such refusal by the violence in brahmanical literature, etc. It is just that brahmins are the least preferred caste today in the eys of law and the constitution, if it may be said so.

Still, I think no brahmin/smarta will lament his birth as such brahmin/smarta just as no pariah/pallan will today lament his birth in that caste. The latter have much to gain from the political dispensation today whereas the brahmins have the satisfaction of having made significant contributions to the fields of knowledge and preservation of the vedas through millennia by oral transmission which was the main task of brahmins.

Thus, there is today no reason for bad blood between a B and an NB. All are equal not only in the eyes of law but also before the divine dispensation; if any NB learns the Vedas and mantras and is willing to take up the job of temple priest, he should be allowed to do so. But, ironically, attempts in Kerala by Nambudiris to train the lower castes (including SC) and make them priests has miserably failed because of opposition from the NB people themselves. So, these trained NB priests have been absorbed against white collar jobs in the Devaswom Boards.!!

This is food for thought; what makes the NBs insist on a priest of brahmin lineage?

Sir,

The intention was not to convey being a smartha is degrading. But to convey to Sarang, that no one wud like to be one, to the best of my knowledge, in known circles. Kindly read in context to the questions asked by Sarang. This of course is based on current sensibilities where people, in general, prefer sensitivity, instead of the old world sense of authority.

The post was also to convey, in today's world, no youngster is interested in wanting to represent the corpus texts of fights between devas and asuras, as they have better things to do. At best, some may be interested in agamic type of pujas or reading about philosophy. Am pretty sure sir, even among brahmin families, this is the case. We live in a post-modernist world. Young adults have many interesting things to do today.

As regards violence, I have already presented verses in several previous posts. It is not necessary to repeat here.

In Thirumala, there has been no opposition like the one you cite at Kerala. So things depend on the people, and the kind of attitude they have, which is of course changing with time. My parents won't accept a NB trained as a priest. But me and all my cousins will. The difference between a single generation is such.

 

[palindrome]

This is the sort of prejudice that I had talked about before here.



It is convenient and highly prejudical to talk about "brahmin lineage" when it suits one's argument but oppose them when it does not suit one's argument. Then why all the hue and cry when JK talked about brahmin lineage of buddhist monks and jains.

Nobody spoke about buddhist and jain monks. It was about the origin of Buddha and Mahavira. The hue and cry is coming more from those who want to tag those great leaders vedic. With established historical facts and supremacy of trojans/brahmins/greeks

When there is considerable doubt even today about even when exactly Buddha lived, how can one be exactly sure of what, in buddhism, represented exactly buddha's words and what represented that of the monks. Within the monks, how can one be sure that varna related arguments are put forth only by erstwhile "brahmin" monks. These are all arguments of a biased mind.

The suttas from which Yuvraj Krishna quotes are buddhist scriptures only. They have been buddhist scriptures for the past several centuries. To understand whether buddhism supports varna/caste system, one cannot selectively pick and choose what one wants from these scriptures.

You should compare against literature and sources. Perhaps you depend on one paper or one author or selective verses. Yes of course, any follower, whether brahmin or non-brahmin, could have produced buddhist literature inclusive of brahmanical prejudices of those times.

No sir, you cannot say, all buddhist scriptures should be viewed as one. Its like saying all literature pertaining to tantras should be viewed as one. Moreover, the Anguttaranikaya for example, is a set of discourses ascribed to Buddha. Not necessary Buddha said it. Just like how Bhagavad Gita was authored by Ishvara-Krishna (of Sankhya school) but got ascribed to Vasudeva-Krishna (son of Yashoda) of Mahabharat (it is like putting words into the mouth of god, a feature pretty common in puranas and agamas). So, it is necessary to compare across accounts presented, in the Buddhist texts, to pronounce anything on Buddha.

 

[palindrome]

It has been claimed here repeatedly that every other social system other than the varnas whether the jatis or castes were not rigid, but mobile and there were no superior/ inferior notions etc etc. It has been repeatedly claimed that buddhist society or jain social organizations did not have rigid birth based system.

Yuvraj's paper dispels these myths. His argument is persuasive because he not only quotes from buddhist scriptures which provide evidence for justifcation of varna/caste system in buddhism but also has analyzed organization of buddhist societies in various regions. If those societies were flexbile, why we find outcastes in buddhist soceities. Clearly they would not have wanted to remain as outcastes. To come around now and say that "brahmin" varna model was juxtaposed on those flexible buddhist societies is not an acceptable argument, IMO.

Kindly present your points from Yuvraj Krishan's paper. If not me, I can always send an email to Buddhists and ask for clarifications. Again and again you repeat the same thing. So again and again I repeat the same thing, Varna and Jati are not the same. If outcastes, violence, killing, non-vegetarian diet, etc exist in Srilanka, Nepal, how can Buddha be held responsible for it? Buddha did what He could do best -- allow everyone to shed their former identity and join the sangha.

 

[renuka]

This is food for thought; what makes the NBs insist on a priest of brahmin lineage?

Dear Sangom ji,


There is a belief among NBs that a Brahmin will know his Priest job better than anyone else since it is his family trade.

Out here there is a dish called Hainan Chicken Rice and those Chinese from Hainan province of China make it the best.
So if Non Chinese tries to make and sell this dish..hardly anyone will eat it cos they wont have the confidence that the Non Chinese will make it as well.


I too used to feel that Brahmins will surely know their stuff better but after learning some amount of Sanskrit I have realized that not all priest know the meaning of what they are reciting and some even mispronounce the mantras by going high speed.

So right now if you ask me who I would prefer as a priest..I would say it does not really matter anymore whether the priest is a Brahmin or Non Brahmin or an Indian or a Non Indian as long he is dedicated..whether he understands Sanskrit or not too wont really make a difference cos as long he has dedication, Bhakti will over ride Vibhakti.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

Nobody spoke about buddhist and jain monks.

But you did. This is what you wrote.

Two, good many brahmins entered Buddhism. In view of this it becomes necessary to differentiate the actions of Buddhist monks (and their writings) and what the Buddha himself did / represented.

My response in post # 372 was apt.

No sir, you cannot say, all buddhist scriptures should be viewed as one.... So, it is necessary to compare across accounts presented, in the Buddhist texts, to pronounce anything on Buddha.

My point is twisted here. If it is your opinion that only confirmed sayings of buddha should encompass buddhist religion, then this appeal should be made to the buddhists.

One cannot claim that buddhist scriptures should not be included in a discussion about buddhism and organization of buddhist society!

If outcastes, violence, killing, non-vegetarian diet, etc exist in Srilanka, Nepal, how can Buddha be held responsible for it? Buddha did what He could do best -- allow everyone to shed their former identity and join the sangha.

Once again, there is constant shifting of goal posts here. If you want to hold buddha in a high pedestal, please hold so. The discussion is about buddhism and buddhist society.

If buddhism, the religion, is the anti-thesis of "oppressive" varna system as you boast and there was no birth-based rigidity in buddhist societies' caste and jati system , why did/do the buddhist soceities from sri-lanka to nepal to ladhak to burma had outcastes and untouchables? That is the question. The outcasts were/are prohibited from joining the sangha. The untouchables were/are considered unclean etc. (More details are included in the paper). The reason is that this social system was not repudiated in buddhism at all. According to buddhism, being born in a caste is not accidental but the result of poorva jenma karma. That is all. It did not reject the caste/varna system. It accepted it and tried to provide a justification based on karma. Should buddha, who provided this intellectual justification, be held responsible? That is not a point of interest to me. But the lay buddhists and monks alike use karma as a justification for their caste system and treatment of outcastes/ untouchables.

 

[Jaykay767]

Dear ShivKC,

I am not associating with Jews just because they are powerful today. I always go by history first & last, unlike many who twist history to suit their opinions.

I assume you have seen my earlier post – Brahmins – our true origins.

In short, Valmiki Ramayana & Homer Illiad Troy are the same war. Winners write Ramayana, Losers write Troy. So we brahmins are the descendants of the Alexander soldiers who stay behind in India after the conquest & the war with Porus.

Alexander soldiers comprised of Macedonian Greeks, small group of Saxon Whites (Blonde hair, blue eyed, white people) & persians. These persians joined the Alexander army after the persian conquest. Since Greek & Aramaic inscriptions are found In India, & Aramaic is the language of the state of Israel, these persians were actually Jews.

Alexander army splits after they settle below the Ganges (Cauvery), & establish great kingdoms. Trojans are led by the Saxon whites but have both Greek & Jews as part of their kingdom. Trojans are the Lankans are the Brahmin race that created all the religious texts & they are the priestly class across all races. The clash of Germanic language (Saxon whites) + Greek + Dravidian = resultant sanskrit !! if you hear a latvian folk song, it will sound very close to Sanskrit Vedic chants. Latvian has a lot of similarity with German language.

After the fall of Troy, these Trojans go back to the land of Greece/Rome (ancient Greece encompassed a large portion of Europe). The Trojans are betrayed in the war (Vibishanan !!) , leading to their fall. Jews follow the religion of Vibishanan – Vaishnavites where 1 God is surpreme unlike Shaivites where many/all Gods are supreme.

The Trojans land in Rome as the Sea god does not allow them to land in Greece – read Homer’s Odessey, and they take the Shaivite religion with them (& a minority take the Vaishnavite religion) – which tolerates all Gods. Jews take the Vaishnavite religion with them to middle east, where only 1 God is surpreme. Minority of Romans + Jews who follow the Vaishnavite religion, are persecuted.

Roman empire issues a decree that any celebration in the honor of dionysus (Vishnu) is unacceptable. (Before people can jump/react – Megasthenes (Greek Philosopher) comes to the Pandian Kingdom and calls Madurai is Mathura & says it the Land of Krishna/Vishnu/Dionsysus. ) The religion of the Christians and Jews was monotheistic in contrast to the polytheism of the Romans.

Thats why Romans were persecuting the Jews in the middle east, this was the Shaivite vs Vaishnavite war and the betrayal of the Trojan King – Priam/Ravana They believed the Roman view (Ravana/Priam) of many Gods was surpreme. Thats why Jesus Christ persecution by Romans in middle east become a potent symbol for the minority of Romans who are incensed by the persecution & they are the first Christians.

During Gallienus (Roman Emperor) regime, he issued an edict of toleration for all religious creeds including Christianity, a re-affirmation of the policy of Alexander Severus. Christianity then gains ground & spread across europe. Once Christianity establishes, they put a decree that all paganism (Shaivite) must be destroyed due the intense persecution before. So this war continues in history. Shaivite religion is only preserved in the Greek mythology of many Gods but there are NOT many followers in Europe.

Havent you wondered why Chritianity is founded in Vatican & Not in middle east since Christ was born there ? Also why the Whites are following Jesus Christ who is a Jew !!.

So all religions – Vedic Religion, Christianity, Jewish, Islam, Buddhism, Jainism etc.. originate from the Trojans – Christian priests are like Brahmins, they are dedicated to God, most dont marry & continue a vow of celibacy. Simiarly Nuns are – Virgin Girls or Girls with a vow of celibacy married to God similar to our Devadasi system in the past where Virgin girls are married to God. Of course, I can go on with the similarity of all the texts - Testament with Bhagavad Gita...

So the current brahmins & Jews are a mix of the Saxon whites, Greeks, Jews & the local Dravidians. By the way, if you are not aware, all the Royal families in Europe claim they are the descendants of the famed Trojans because the original Trojans/Brahmins were White (Blonde hair, blue eyed, white skin)!!.

 

[renuka]

original Trojans/Brahmins were White (Blonde hair, blue eyed, white skin)!!.

Dear Jaykay,

Not possible...cos have you read dumb blonde jokes??

Blonde and blue eyed are supposed to be the least intelligent....I dont know about Trojans but Brahmins are supposed to be the intellectual community so not possible that original Brahmins would have been Blonde and Blue eyed.

You might wonder why I am using Dumb Blonde jokes as an example to come to a conclusion that Brahmin could never have been Blonde and Blue eyed in their original state..but if one is supposed to believe what you write then there is a possibility that I too could be right!LOL

 

[renuka]

In short, Valmiki Ramayana & Homer Illiad Troy are the same war. Winners write Ramayana, Losers write Troy. So we brahmins are the descendants of the Alexander soldiers who stay behind in India after the conquest & the war with Porus.

Dear Jaykay,

Since you say Brahmins are descendant of Alexander's soldiers...So what about all the Brahmins who were present in India before Treta Yuga(since Ramayana took place in Treta Yuga)....where did they come from?

BTW why this sudden shift in profession from invading less civilized war mongers to Vedic Priests??

Does not make sense right???

 

[Jaykay767]

Dear Jaykay,

Since you say Brahmins are descendant of Alexander's soldiers...So what about all the Brahmins who were present in India before Treta Yuga(since Ramayana took place in Treta Yuga)....where did they come from?

BTW why this sudden shift in profession from invading less civilized war mongers to Vedic Priests??

Does not make sense right???

Hi Renuka,

See there is no proof for any of the timelines of Treta Yuga etc.. My view is a Yuga relates to the timeline of a King or Dynasty’s rule - so it was at best 20 yrs to 100 or max 200 yrs.

I dont think there was a clear community called Brahmins before Alexander Invasion, there was a social construct, but Brahmins/Aryans first appear in the Vedas !!

No doubt, Alexander Soldiers borrowed from the local dravidians, but Sanskrit originates from them & thats the start of our religion. They codified every thing into these Sanskrit slokas / Greek mythology/ Jewish Aramaic scripts & preserved through history.
No sudden shift in profession, I have been a follower of History & Philosophy. Philosophy was always first since it runs in my family.

Cheers,

 

[palindrome]

But you did. This is what you wrote.

Two, good many brahmins entered Buddhism. In view of this it becomes necessary to differentiate the actions of Buddhist monks (and their writings) and what the Buddha himself did / represented.

So?

My response in post # 372 was apt.

You are free to hold your opinion

My point is twisted here. If it is your opinion that only confirmed sayings of buddha should encompass buddhist religion, then this appeal should be made to the buddhists.

What point is twisted here? What and why should I appeal to Buddhists? I am not a Buddhist.

One cannot claim that buddhist scriptures should not be included in a discussion about buddhism and organization of buddhist society!

Of course all scriptures should be included. But one needs to check across all accounts, in buddhist literature, to pronounce anything on Buddha.

If casteists entered buddhist ranks and produced literature with brahmanical prejudices, how can Buddha be held responsible for that? Its like a Pashupata entering Pancharatra literature, putting Shiva's praises into Krishna's mouth, and getting Shiva established as supreme.

The only thing Buddhists can do now is to reject such stuff and stand up for the teachings of Buddha. It is upto them. Let them take care of their religion.

Once again, there is constant shifting of goal posts here. If you want to hold buddha in a high pedestal, please hold so. The discussion is about buddhism and buddhist society.

When did I say no?

If buddhism, the religion, is the anti-thesis of "oppressive" varna system as you boast and there was no birth-based rigidity in buddhist societies' caste and jati system , why did/do the buddhist soceities from sri-lanka to nepal to ladhak to burma had outcastes and untouchables? That is the question. The outcasts were/are prohibited from joining the sangha. The untouchables were/are considered unclean etc. (More details are included in the paper). The reason is that this social system was not repudiated in buddhism at all. According to buddhism, being born in a caste is not accidental but the result of poorva jenma karma. That is all. It did not reject the caste/varna system. It accepted it and tried to provide a justification based on karma. Should buddha, who provided this intellectual justification, be held responsible? That is not a point of interest to me. But the lay buddhists and monks alike use karma as a justification for their caste system and treatment of outcastes/ untouchables.

The society then functioned ruthlessly, violently, in a typical feudal setup with slavery. Hindu dharmashastra laws were designed to help such a feudal set up (already discussed this in Aarakshan thread). The only thing Buddha could do is to help the condition of the under-privileged. By educating people that no one is different by birth or descent, all are manushya jati, by giving the downtrodden a chance to shed their former identity, enter the buddhist sangha, get an education, and improve their condition in general. True followers were those who established universities, centers of learning, where anyone of any caste could join. But if a follower is untrue to his master, what can Buddha do?

Lets put it this way, if a brahmin has a poonul, claims to do trikala sandhi, yet is totally corrupt, receives large bribes, has no sympathy for others, should Brahma be held responsible for it? Lets say one such brahmin produces a few words in sanskrit saying it is others' karma to get bribed and he should not be held responsible as the karta (doer), and ascribes his knowledge to Brahma, should Brahma be responsible for such a composition?

 

[Jaykay767]

Dear Jaykay,

Not possible...cos have you read dumb blonde jokes??

Blonde and blue eyed are supposed to be the least intelligent....I dont know about Trojans but Brahmins are supposed to be the intellectual community so not possible that original Brahmins would have been Blonde and Blue eyed.

You might wonder why I am using Dumb Blonde jokes as an example to come to a conclusion that Brahmin could never have been Blonde and Blue eyed in their original state..but if one is supposed to believe what you write then there is a possibility that I too could be right!LOL

LOL !! I know, but thats the reality !!
Original Brahmins were Blondes, - Ravana is described as Blonde man – Tripura Sundara (Most handsome man in 3 worlds) – by Valmiki – Hanuman explains that Ravana, a Gigantic figure with the strength of 10 men, has hairs like the Golden rays of Sun, Eyes like the Deep Blue Sea & Skin as white as the Clouds.

Infact thats why Hitler claims Aryan supremacy & takes the Swastika Symbol & then starts this genetic experiment of mating the blondes !!

 

[renuka]

I dont think there was a clear community called Brahmins before Alexander Invasion, there was a social construct, but Brahmins/Aryans first appear in the Vedas !!
I dont think there was a clear community called Brahmins before Alexander Invasion, there was a social construct, but Brahmins/Aryans first appear in the Vedas !!

Dear Jaykay,

So that means you do not really believe in the Yuga theory that is even expressed and supported by Paramhansas for example Paramhansa Yogananda but you don't mind believing that a Brahmin is a descendant of a Greek invading soldier??

I have a feeling we Indians somehow still have a White men hangover (Greeks are not really Scandinavian white/blue eyed/blonde hair types if you carefully observe).

We Indians do not want to contribute greatness of India to India..I don't know why everyone wants to be a so called white men descendant.

 

[KRS]

palindrome,

My response in 'blue':

Thanks very much sir. Just some specific observations below.

So then it would mean nirguna is something unknown, unknowable (beyond our senses). This conflicts with the premise that one could attain nirguna brahman. If our senses are designed within the relative real, if we live in the relative real, how cud one perceive the absolute real (nirguna); when it is 'unknown' and 'unknowable'.
'Unknown' and 'unknowable' are by the senses/mind. And since in the empirical world, the senses/mind perceive everything as the other, and distinguish itself as 'I', one can 'know' the atman (nirguna) by eradicating the 'I' identification, per the teaching.

Sir, so far was thinking there is no One View on the locus of avidya in advaita. Read in another forum about Bhamati and Vivarana schools of advaita. Bhamati view is jeeva is locus of avidya. Vivarana view is brahman is locus of avidya. Which of these is correct is debated in places over the internet. Despite following all that you mention (by aspirants), there is contention on locus of avidya. The difference, imo, is either experiential or epistemological. Am not sure if samadhi means attaining nirguna brahman. Being completely self-absorbed such that all sense organs cease means a state of nothingness, becoming null. Whether this means a state of nirguna in terms of relative-real or absolute-real is unresolvable, i feel. Esp when nirguna is beyond everything.
About the locus of Maya, yes, the two schools post Guru Shankara confused the situation, in my opinion and this question is used by all other philosophical schools that oppose Advaitha in the hope that any answer to theses questions will bring down the whole structure.

In my opinion, the correct way to explain is this: Maya is as ancient as Brahman but subordinate to Brahman and is instrumental in the creation of the empirical world, envelops the empirical world and the gunas. It is neither real nor unreal.

For a complete disposition of the locus question, please read Professor John Grimes book that I have referred.

Regarding Samadhi, it is not a 'nothingness' state. It is a state where thoughts to your mind are killed, your senses stilled, so you can experience the pure consciousness. Sat Chit Ananda.

Regards,
KRS

 

[palindrome]

Since you say Brahmins are descendant of Alexander's soldiers..

Oh no, not a good idea to bring in Alexander's soldiers. The coorg community is the only one which seems to have basis for their claim (that Alexander's soldiers married their women and settled there). No other community in India either makes such a claim nor has any historical basis. As such, not a good idea to bring in soldiers who fight with their life on the line and reward themselves with women...well, these are men who travel long distances, battle hostile living conditions, live in tents, are sexually starved, looking for riches to loot..

 

[renuka]

LOL !! I know, but thats the reality !!
Original Brahmins were Blondes, - Ravana is described as Blonde man – Tripura Sundara (Most handsome man in 3 worlds) – by Valmiki – Hanuman explains that Ravana, a Gigantic figure with the strength of 10 men, has hairs like the Golden rays of Sun, Eyes like the Deep Blue Sea & Skin as white as the Clouds.

Infact thats why Hitler claims Aryan supremacy & takes the Swastika Symbol & then starts this genetic experiment of mating the blondes !!

Then what about Sage Vyasa??

He was described to be dark skinned and certainly not blue eyed.

BTW have you seen a pic of Hitler?? what so superior about him.

He lacked everything from looks to a heart!

 

[renuka]

Oh no, not a good idea to bring in Alexander's soldiers. The coorg community is the only one which seems to have basis for their claim (that Alexander's soldiers married their women and settled there). No other community in India either makes such a claim nor has any historical basis. As such, not a good idea to bring in soldiers who fight with their life on the line and reward themselves with women...well, these are men who travel long distances, battle hostile living conditions, live in tents, are sexually starved, looking for riches to loot..

Dear Palindrome,

I am just amazed wondering about this theory.

I saw this similar theory is some blog too..So I guess many actually believe this theory!LOL

 

[palindrome]

Dear Palindrome,

I am just amazed wondering about this theory.

I saw this similar theory is some blog too..So I guess many actually believe this theory!LOL

Effect of Maya !!

Well Renu, this thread has done full justice to the topic -- complicatedism...

 

[renuka]

Effect of Maya !!

Well Renu, this thread has done full justice to the topic -- complicatedism...

LOL!

Since I started this thread...I must take full credit to that! Ha Ha Ha

 

[Jaykay767]

Dear Jaykay,

So that means you do not really believe in the Yuga theory that is even expressed and supported by Paramhansas for example Paramhansa Yogananda but you don't mind believing that a Brahmin is a descendant of a Greek invading soldier??

I have a feeling we Indians somehow still have a White men hangover (Greeks are not really Scandinavian white/blue eyed/blonde hair types if you carefully observe).

We Indians do not want to contribute greatness of India to India..I don't know why everyone wants to be a so called white men descendant.

Hi Renuka,

I believe the Yuga theory, but not the interpretation of the timelines. Ie 1 Yuga is 12000 yrs + etc.. they are incorrect. There is no proof to correlate what our ancients said to the current year timeline we follow. You saw what happened to the Mayan World Apocalypse, again a wrong interpretation of the timelines.

No, this has nothing to do with White Man Hangover. I go with what Valmiki says in Ramayana, this is the historical evidence, we can go with. I have not “interpreted his statements in Ramayana” to suit my ideology.

Cheers,

 

[Jaykay767]

Then what about Sage Vyasa??

He was described to be dark skinned and certainly not blue eyed.

BTW have you seen a pic of Hitler?? what so superior about him.

He lacked everything from looks to a heart!

Brahmins subsequently in India got intermixed with the locals, thats why find many fair skinned, dark skinned etc..

Agree, Hitler was no where close to being a Blonde. Infact many believe he was himself a half jew. I think that Idiot was waging the unfinished war of Shaivite vs Vaishnavite religion. Unfortunately different religion fought against each other in History & continues to this day & in this forum

 

[renuka]

Agree, Hitler was no where close to being a Blonde. Infact many believe he was himself a half jew. I think that Idiot was waging the unfinished war of Shaivite vs Vaishnavite religion.

Dear JK,

What?? So you better tell me now...was Hitler an Iyer or an Iyengar?

 

[கால பைரவன்]

If casteists entered buddhist ranks and produced literature with brahmanical prejudices, how can Buddha be held responsible for that?

This is ridiculous argument. For every caste prejudice that the casteists exhibit whether it be buddhist followers or jaina followers or any of the non-brahminical followers, the brahmins cannot be blamed!

So calling their prejudices "brahminical" only shows your prejudice against brahmins.

 

[palindrome]

'Unknown' and 'unknowable' are by the senses/mind. And since in the empirical world, the senses/mind perceive everything as the other, and distinguish itself as 'I', one can 'know' the atman (nirguna) by eradicating the 'I' identification, per the teaching.

The suggestion to eradicate the "I " to know the atman is suggested by various siddha sampradayas also. But in terms of relative-real and absolute-real, things are not clear. I feel, there is something more to it which advaita is not explaining probably. Maybe i have not been reading enough. I will get the books you suggested soon.

About the locus of Maya, yes, the two schools post Guru Shankara confused the situation, in my opinion and this question is used by all other philosophical schools that oppose Advaitha in the hope that any answer to theses questions will bring down the whole structure.

Frankly, i don't think other philosophical schools provide any answer either. At least afaik.

In my opinion, the correct way to explain is this: Maya is as ancient as Brahman but subordinate to Brahman and is instrumental in the creation of the empirical world, envelops the empirical world and the gunas. It is neither real nor unreal.

For a complete disposition of the locus question, please read Professor John Grimes book that I have referred.

Thanks sir, i shall get the books.

Regarding Samadhi, it is not a 'nothingness' state. It is a state where thoughts to your mind are killed, your senses stilled, so you can experience the pure consciousness. Sat Chit Ananda.

Ah, yes, this is what i suspected. Samadhi does not mean attaining nirguna.

Thanks sir, the discussion with you was very helpful.

 

[Jaykay767]

Dear JK,

What?? So you better tell me now...was Hitler an Iyer or an Iyengar?

LOL !!. I think he was a half-Iyengar & half-iyer. The Iyer part over took him to take revenge on the Iyengars - pun intended.
By the before people react to this, I am an Iyer myself !!

 

[renuka]

LOL !!. I think he was a half-Iyengar & half-iyer. The Iyer part over took him to take revenge on the Iyengars - pun intended.
By the before people react to this, I am an Iyer myself !!

Dear JK,

I was having my lunch and typing in Forum(I take a very early lunch) and when I read your reply..I almost choked!

I wonder what the others in Forum have to say about this?? LOL