Do you agree with Mr Narayanmurthy on Brahminical Thinking being the problem???

[KRS]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Dear sapr333,

I was talking about 'historical' wrongs. Not events happening today that are governed by today's laws. You are comparing apples and oranges.

There is no 'atonement' in the examples I have given. One can not judge distant past actions of a group of people based on today's mores and culture. That was my point.

Regards,
KRS

If so, then you should tell me, whats wrong with our hindu law, by which the sons are asked to repay his fathers debts?

Lets try to find a solution to this issue,with this reverse approach..

Btw,there is a process of forgiving or pardoning a transgression, which is very well found in both the wester/eastern religions. Doctrine of Karma stands tall in this. What is that all about generic curse?

Lets not forget to figure out this word 'Atonement" in line with Karma..!!!

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

You can not apply this theory only to Brahmins. What about the traitors who sold India to the British. Their descendants are still ruling India. How about the Muslims? Do they have to repay for the misrule and atrocities committed by all the Muslim rulers of India?

Are the present day Muslims responsible for the destruction of thousands of Hindu temples and Buddhist monasteries by the Muslim rulers?

In India even the ICS officers who tortured the freedom fighters and ordered firing at them were later rewarded by the Indian government whereas the people who fought the British like the Indian National Army of Subash Chandra Bose were ignored.

Applying it internationally what have the Christians done to repay thousands of years of anti-semitism carried on by them with the blessings and active help of the Church?

They have taken the land from the Palestinians and given to Israel. I wonder whether they would have been this generous if the Promised Land was in the middle of Germany or France.

Talking about Curse, Christianity is the most cursed religion. It was responsible for Colonialism, Slavery, Anti-Semitism and countless atrocities.

This is typical anti-Brahmin propaganda. Talking about Karma is nothing but hogwash.

 

[sapr333]

You can not apply this theory only to Brahmins. What about the traitors who sold India to the British. Their descendants are still ruling India. How about the Muslims? Do they have to repay for the misrule and atrocities committed by all the Muslim rulers of India?.

Where did I blame brahmins alone???.. (Unless one wish to create an imaginary EVR out of me)

There are instances in the hilly tribal areas, the tribals were discriminated by Dalits.In this situation, dalits should work for the upliftment of tribals. Its not caste alone, for generations, men oppressed women, and all men should voluantarily work for the upliftment of women, and give them a life on par with women.

So, all Im saying is, any attoricities committed by our ancestors, should be taken care of by us, with a 'Guilt' in heart. And if that atrocities still carry an impact on any society, we should take onus, to bring them up to a level playing platform in par with the rest of the society.

Commonwealth is one such 'smaller' move to erase the attrocities done by British.The Pope tendering apology for the attrocities done by spaniards is yet another move..Yes, one may ask, can they all bring back the lives of the victims!! But , to a victim, the first soothing word is, 'Accepting the mistake open heartedly".. Thats the first step..Then follows the compensation for attrocities.

 

[hariharan1972]

If so, then you should tell me, whats wrong with our hindu law, by which the sons are asked to repay his fathers debts?

Lets try to find a solution to this issue,with this reverse approach..

Btw,there is a process of forgiving or pardoning a transgression, which is very well found in both the wester/eastern religions. Doctrine of Karma stands tall in this. What is that all about generic curse?

Lets not forget to figure out this word 'Atonement" in line with Karma..!!!

Why should i tell you what's wrong with the Hindu law ? I didnt write them.

I am only contesting the extension of a 'commercial problem' to a 'sociological issue'.

Listen mate, what the ancestors did was what they believed to be their karma. Even if i concede that Krishna was being egregious in declaring that all the Varnas are his creation and even he cant change them or Manu and other authors were egregious for codifying laws which sanctioned oppression, the guy who merely followed the system in the belief that it was his karma cannot be hauled over coals.

Brahmins indulged in conscientious oppression of other communities in the religious sphere because they believe that they were the chosen ones. Brahmins were incapable of oppression in the social sphere.

In the past, all knowledge began and ended with the Srutis and Smritis. So in denying the access to the sacred religious texts, i agree that Brahmins kept masses outside the purview of knowledge.

But to "claim" this to be the "causative factor" for today's issues is obviously a far fetched claim and does not stand the test of scrutiny by all except those owing allegiance to the Dravidian parties.

I outrightly reject the idea of making Brahmins seek for atonement because the oppression that is seen today is a degeneration of the system. If the broth has seen too many cooks, you dont end up blaming only the first cook.

I dont know or couldnt care less about Karma and other stuff. I only go by what is rational and what is logical.

The facts are :

a) It is true that Brahmins followed the varna system and denied access to knowledge to other communities

b) It is true that Brahmins believe that they were the chosen ones and kept others outside the religious sphere

c) It is an irrefutable fact that there is no correlation between what was denied earlier and what is required today.

So if your agenda is to only fault the Brahmins, do it by all means. But you should also know that this is not going to provide any succour to the masses who are still oppressed by those who claim to have removed brahmin hegemony to only replace it with their own.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Nacchinarkiniyan Ji and Sri Hari,

Spot on!

sapr333,

How about this - instead of any group trying to figure out 'atonement' for any actual and alleged actions of their forefathers in the past, we all as individuals, according to each of our capacity work for the upliftment of the unfortunate amongst us? Irrsepective of caste, creed, religion etc.?

Regards,
KRS

 

[malgova.mango]

my humble opinions....

knowledge is given freely to people when asked, like on joshiyam, sagunam, how to do rituals etc... regardless of castes.

Only learning of the vedas are denied , reasons could be given to that, one as followers we followed the instructions, so if the elders advised who should be taught what , then we followed that.

the second reason is it is not easy to learn vedas without proper discipline and at the same time without hindering one's own duties.

third -
Knowledge is Power , which can be used or abused.

When used it brings immense benefit to one and all , when abused the harm is equally intense. So far knowledge - discipline and conduct is a pre-requiste.

4th - Learning VEDAS is the only rice Bowl given for brahmins, obvioulsy
if he shares that to other jaathis, with each one having there one rice bowl, will only make his community redundant within no time.


As far reaching "HIS LOTUS FEET" people of all castes, including dalits and all varnas reached and is all recorded in many Puranams. For recent history , Periya Puranam throws light on many of the people belonging to various creed attained liberation.

To say anygroup of people denied spiritual progess of other people is of no sub-stance. if GOD blessed his bhakta to reach him , could anygroup or any person stand in-between.


To tell a group to feel guilty for following a righteous path is an indication of THAMO GUNA at work. and to seek atonement is a complete joke.

imho.

 

[happyhindu]

mm-ji,

i am left speechless...

very nice sir..

thank you.

 

[KRS]

sapr333,

Again, let me ask what these 'atrocities' are?

There was a time when invading another country was the norm. Was this an atrocity?

White man conquered North Anerica, driving the local 'Indians' in to oblivion. Was it an atrocity?

We need to be careful when we term an action as an 'atrocity'. Many an action by our forefathers happened around the world because at those times those actions were not considered 'atrocities'. With the benefit of the society's onward progress with new ideas of egalitarianism and 'freedom' for the masses, which are modern ideas, we have 20/20 vision to evaluate the past. I think this position is untenable and punishes people who have nothing to do with the past except being born in those communities, which they can not control. The misery in this world is mainly due to this fact of the 'victims' not willing to move on forward (I am talking about historical pasts not current events).

If one accepts the concept of personal freedom and choice in our brave new modern world, then this concept of 'atonement' is not only morally repugnant, but will create 'victims' everywhere.

Regards,
KRS

So, all Im saying is, any attoricities committed by our ancestors, should be taken care of by us, with a 'Guilt' in heart. And if that atrocities still carry an impact on any society, we should take onus, to bring them up to a level playing platform in par with the rest of the society.

Commonwealth is one such 'smaller' move to erase the attrocities done by British.The Pope tendering apology for the attrocities done by spaniards is yet another move..Yes, one may ask, can they all bring back the lives of the victims!! But , to a victim, the first soothing word is, 'Accepting the mistake open heartedly".. Thats the first step..Then follows the compensation for attrocities.

 

[hariharan1972]

So, all Im saying is, any attoricities committed by our ancestors, should be taken care of by us, with a 'Guilt' in heart. And if that atrocities still carry an impact on any society, we should take onus, to bring them up to a level playing platform in par with the rest of the society.

Please help me in understanding who is this "us". Do you mean the common people like you and me ?

Ok, let me put this challenge to you.

Can those who have ancestors who have purportedly committed atrocities take it upon themselves to educate a child from the oppressed class ?

Looks great ! But Looks great on paper ?

How many common folks can manage this for either want of resources or time ?

And by the way, did someone say India is a democracy with an elected govt with "people representatives" ?

What are they for ? Surely not only to eat samosa and sip tea in Parliament ???

No individual can ever successfully take over the role of Governance. While i dont disagree that those who can, should contribute their mite in whatever they can, but it is certain that a society cannot be pulled out the depths of poverty/ignorance/oppression (make your pick) merely by the collective efforts of individual, however numerically big they may be.

What is supposed to the function of a state can never be effectively replaced by individual enterprise.

What each individual however must do, is to banish all thoughts of caste discrimination. Caste is not something that can be wished away especially since the continuation is "ensured" by a faulty social justice program.

Today in urban india, caste is irrelevant. No one has the time nor the inclination. Life in India is too harsh to be spent worrying on someone's caste.

It may take a decade more for the fault lines to get blurred in terms of caste (that is if Mu ka would permit) but the upward mobility of 800 million indians cannot be merely ensured by eradication of caste.

If you continue to think that it is incumbent upon Upper castes (since you have declared that you are not a clone of EVR) to socially uplift the downtrodden, please read this :

http://www.tehelka.com/story_main41.asp?filename=Ne090509lalu_mulayam.asp

The leader of dalits has only this to say :

What have you done for the dailts?
Many things. My partners like Ramdas Athavale in Maharashtra have championed the dalit cause. We have raised our voice against every atrocity on dalits.

Unquote

Can someone ask him what those "many things" are. And also notice how he projects "raising voice against atrocity" as a "contribution".

Will there be enough food in the kitchens of all dalit homes merely because someone "raises voice" against atrocities ?

Unfortunately the "raised voice" against atrocity is not legal tender that can be exchanged for rice, wheat and pulses.

 

[sapr333]

Talking about Curse, Christianity is the most cursed religion. It was responsible for Colonialism, Slavery, Anti-Semitism and countless atrocities.
.

Possibly right!! You failed to add Inquisition/Iraq war too. Inspite of all,these Christian majority nations are still flourishing, inspite..

1) May be the law of karma is not working on them.

2) OR, they all have accepted their mistakes of past, with an open heart, compensated the bad-past,and thereby got relieved from their group Karmic effect.

3) May be, God doesnt even exist!!

 

[sapr333]

How about this - instead of any group trying to figure out 'atonement' for any actual and alleged actions of their forefathers in the past, we all as individuals, according to each of our capacity work for the upliftment of the unfortunate amongst us? Irrsepective of caste, creed, religion etc.?

Regards,
KRS

KRS,

Perfect !!. I wish to tread this way too!! Every one should carry the guilt/onus and worktowards the upliftment of unfortunate victims of past & present,primarily in his individual capacity.

We are indeed heading for an interesting debate..

Now, my basic question is, on what moral/vedic/scriptural basis, you and I could condemn these acts.

1) I close my eyes and pass-by a car accident victim on the road..."Oh my! Its his bad karma".

2) My forefathers illegally/forcibly grabbed all the lands from the nearby villagers, and they subsequently ended up in being beggers for generation. Should I compensate them with my ancestoral-guilt, or just brush aside, claiming, I didnt do that, so let me enjoy the life!!

3) According to your view, what Hitler/Mussolini/Stalin/Komeni did is Right or Wrong? And on what basis?

 

[KRS]

My response is in 'blue':

KRS,

Perfect !!. I wish to tread this way too!! Every one should carry the guilt/onus and worktowards the upliftment of unfortunate victims of past & present,primarily in his individual capacity.
Again, I help someone not because of any 'guilt' on my part from the past. I help the unfortunate because I say to myself 'but for the grace of God, I am that person'. We are all connected and we are all brothers and sisters and this is what drives me. I do not carry any burden or 'guilt' from the past. 'Guilt' is a feeling from the Abrahamic faiths exclusively from the cocept of 'original sin'. No such concept in the Eastern religions.

We are indeed heading for an interesting debate..

Now, my basic question is, on what moral/vedic/scriptural basis, you and I could condemn these acts.

1) I close my eyes and pass-by a car accident victim on the road..."Oh my! Its his bad karma".
Obviously this is against morality and codified in the laws of many nations - called 'good samaritan' law. Every religion recognizes not helping a fellow man in need as either 'sinful' (Abrahamic Religions) or 'bad karma' (eastern religions).

2) My forefathers illegally/forcibly grabbed all the lands from the nearby villagers, and they subsequently ended up in being beggers for generation. Should I compensate them with my ancestoral-guilt, or just brush aside, claiming, I didnt do that, so let me enjoy the life!!
If the land has been legitimatized in the eye of the current law, I don't need to do anything. I may CHOOSE to help because I want to assist. Again, timing is everything. If this happened in the recent past, I may be more inclined to help them. But again, this is a hypothetical argument.

3) According to your view, what Hitler/Mussolini/Stalin/Komeni did is Right or Wrong? And on what basis?
All of them did wrong. And so what? It is all recent and in some cases (like Hitler/Mussolini), some retributions have been made.

But the current day Germans/Italians/Russians/Iranians should not have any guilt. They may feel ashamed to have produced such monsters out of their culture and reflect on it to prevent future happening of the same kind. But other than that, they are moving on, and should do so.

I am talking about the likes of Gengis Khan who are in the past history. So, do we punish the current day Mongolians for all the sins of the Khan?

KRS

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Possibly right!! You failed to add Inquisition/Iraq war too. Inspite of all,these Christian majority nations are still flourishing, inspite..

2) OR, they all have accepted their mistakes of past, with an open heart, compensated the bad-past,and thereby got relieved from their group Karmic effect.

Do you include the Christian nations of Africa like Congo in your list of flourishing nations?

A couple of interesting articles about Christianity and the Blacks in U.S.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/.../a_christian_nation_wouldnt_act_this_way.html

Whatever Blacks did in the past that are glorious or not so glorious, the facts remain that in today's world, the blacks, no matter their geography, are looked upon as the first step to step-on when anyone wants to make a move and the last one to remember when they make their final move. When we are remembered and treated, we are treated with scorn and distaste. If one is consumed with the pursuit of religion but ends up not being able to feed one's self or family, what good is the religion?

http://www.africanexecutive.com/modules/magazine/articles.php?article=4312

Unfortunately you are like most of the Christian Dalit leaders who cloak their Christian Evangelism in the guise of Dalit activism.

We know what Christianity/Christians can do to a nation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Republic_of_the_Congo

And also the role of Christianity in the Genocide in Rwanda.

The Roman Catholic Church, the primary educators in the country, subscribed to and reinforced the differences between Hutu and Tutsi. They developed separate educational systems for each.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwanda

The role of the organized Christian religion in perpetuating the caste divide among the Hindus in India is significant. The thinking was that they could convert all the Dalits. But they could not succeed. They are still trying.

What Colonialism could not do is sought to be done under International Trade.

BTW the Christian organizations keep away from talking about the caste system in Japan. Why?

An excellent article about the caste systems in India and other countries.

http://www.hindu.com/2001/09/25/stories/13250541.htm

During the Meiji era of transformation in the mid-Nineteenth century the caste system was officially abolished in Japan. The ground reality, however, was that only the first four dissolved their individual identities and merged. The Etas were kept where they were till the end of the Second World War. Some half-hearted attempts have since been made to eradicate discrimination but local prejudice has been high. Unlike India, Japan has not introduced any affirmative action but depends upon educating majority public opinion.

The mainstream Japanese and the Etas are both migrants to the Japanese islands from the Asian mainland through Korea and belong to the Mongol race. There is no ethnic difference worth the name. Yet there has been hierarchic stratification and discrimination belying the assumption of race being the cause of caste. The probable cause is attributed to the influence of Buddhist missionaries from India and their prejudice against animal slaughter, in other words to religious beliefs about cleanliness. This is contrary to the general feeling that Buddhism eschews caste. Buddha might have done so but not all his followers, if we go by the Japanese example.

The story of Japan does not end here. The island's original inhabitants were tribals called Ainus, a hirsute group of people, probably of Caucasian origin and racially different from the Mongolian stock of the mainstream. How they waded to this area through a sea of Mongol people is not known yet. Some have been absorbed and the rest have been pushed to the northern islands. There has been and still is discrimination against them and their numbers are dwindling. If there is discrimination on account of race, pure and simple, here it is.

The caste system in Bali island is worth noting as there are NO DALITS in this Hindu caste system.

In far-off Bali island, where the population is 95 per cent Hindu, a caste system has been in existence for centuries based on the Indian one. There are four castes -- Brahmana, Sattriya, Vaisya and Sudra. There are no sub-castes. There is no dalit caste either. There are no vegetarian castes. Beef is not taboo. Pork is a favoured dish. Intercaste marriages, though not common, do take place, the children being absorbed in the caste of the father. The people are of uniform ethnicity. Balinese Hinduism indicates that race and caste are not interconnected and that untouchability is not a necessary concomitant of a castiest society.

 

[sapr333]

sapr333,

Again, let me ask what these 'atrocities' are?

11>>>>There was a time when invading another country was the norm. Was this an atrocity?

22>>White man conquered North Anerica, driving the local 'Indians' in to oblivion. Was it an atrocity?


KRS

11]] Before responding to that, I need a small clarification. Do you believe in the existence of 'Absolute Moral' or 'Relative Moral' (in the eyes of Brahma).If moral/karma/Sin are relative, then your may be right, but it subsequently leads to the proof for non-existence of Brahma.


22]] In line with 'Abosolute moral standards', what the White Man did to Native American was definitely 'Wrong/atrocity".. No second thoughts about that. The new gen Amercians, neither washed their hands 'saying it as ancestoral mistake' nor 'disowned the responsiblity/Guilt'. Rather, they took the onus and lend a helping hand through A.A..


A clip:-
Affirmative action allows colleges and universities to reach out to Native Americans, an historically neglected community. Due to national recruiting and outreach efforts between 1980-2001 , American Indian enrollment in institutions of higher education increased by 80 percent

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

I am surprised that the Doctrine of Karma is being invoked so often. That too in the name of the Dalit community.

Earlier in my life when I was a Dalit activist of sorts, this is one doctrine which myself and my Dalit friends hated.

The reason is very simple. The other castes have justified the treatment meted out to Dalits by quoting this doctrine. Statements like " You are born a Dalit because of your bad karma." "Dalits are suffering now because of the sins committed by them in the past." and so on. The same statement was made whenever the poor and the downtrodden members of the society wanted equal opportunities.

Sounds familiar. The Christians justified anti-semitism because the Jews were cursed by GOD. The dominant communities always justified their deeds by invoking some past curse of God.

Let us not go that way again.

 

[KRS]

sapr333,
My response in 'red':

11]] Before responding to that, I need a small clarification. Do you believe in the existence of 'Absolute Moral' or 'Relative Moral' (in the eyes of Brahma).If moral/karma/Sin are relative, then your may be right, but it subsequently leads to the proof for non-existence of Brahma.
Dear sapr333. there you go again! You are using Hindu words like 'Brahma', but then you are seeing through the monotheistic glasses to define Him. In Hinduism, 'Brahma' or the 'Nirguna God' is beyond good and evil. Your God is limited as a 'moral' God.

Morality is both absolute and relative. In the Abrahamic religion, 'non morality' or more aptly 'un morality' is looked upon as a sin. And since the Abrahamic God does not like the sinners (because of free will), He condemns the sinners to Hell. But in Hinduism, we have the concept of 'Dharma'. So your proof of 'non existence of Brahma' because of the lack of 'absolute morality' is no proof at all.

Absolute morality stems in Hinduism from the actions of a person that derives from his/her inherent nature. If one follows one's inherent nature then Karma (by the way, karma is not just 'sin') will have no effect on that person. Because human beings are complex and so a majority of them do not 'know' their inherent nature, (mind versus the soul), one way to not let the Karma stick is to act with detachment (Karma can be both good and bad).

There is also a relative morality. This happens when a society decides collectively that certain things are okay. For example, some societies impose death penalty for certain crimes while other societies do not. Who is correct in terms of morality? Both societies are, because every society has the right (dharma) to self guard their interests in a way they collectively see fit. Cannibalism falls in to this relativist area.

Again, Hinduism accommodates both the absolute and the relative morality.

So from your perspective, what are the absolute and what are the relative moralities?

22]] In line with 'Abosolute moral standards', what the White Man did to Native American was definitely 'Wrong/atrocity".. No second thoughts about that. The new gen Amercians, neither washed their hands 'saying it as ancestoral mistake' nor 'disowned the responsiblity/Guilt'. Rather, they took the onus and lend a helping hand through A.A..
Americans are the most generous people I know. But I do not agree with your thesis that what the white settlers did to the natives was definitely 'wrong/atrocity'. Let us not confuse between what the present day Americans are doing out of their goodwill, with what was the morality in the past. Again, no 'ancestral mistake' is involved. But the feeling that no American should be disadvantaged is the impetus for the AA.

A clip:-
Affirmative action allows colleges and universities to reach out to Native Americans, an historically neglected community. Due to national recruiting and outreach efforts between 1980-2001 , American Indian enrollment in institutions of higher education increased by 80 percent

 

[krisanantha]

I am in agreement with many thing you have said & your correct conclusion that Brahmins cannot be faulted. Would like to draw our attention to points a & b which need correction. Nammazvar who is the preceptor of Vaishnavas is from a caste that we today call Dalits. He is the number one acharya & occupies an unparalelled status compared to any other acharyas of the vasihnava lineage. There are many other Azvars like Thiruppanazvar from so called " low castes" . So when they have been given such reverence there is no question of keeping them outside the purview of learning. Obviously they "got" the revered status because they had the knowledge, but most importantly the "god head realization". Ofcourse in matter of faith, logic will only take you to a certain point. In this regard Sanathana dharma is the only one that goes the farthest & stands the test of logic & rationality.
In today's modern life there are many many thing we do routinely that WILL NOT stand the test of logic & rationality. But we do it as a matter of routine practice unquestioningly !

Beynd that

Why should i tell you what's wrong with the Hindu law ? I didnt write them.

I am only contesting the extension of a 'commercial problem' to a 'sociological issue'.

Listen mate, what the ancestors did was what they believed to be their karma. Even if i concede that Krishna was being egregious in declaring that all the Varnas are his creation and even he cant change them or Manu and other authors were egregious for codifying laws which sanctioned oppression, the guy who merely followed the system in the belief that it was his karma cannot be hauled over coals.

Brahmins indulged in conscientious oppression of other communities in the religious sphere because they believe that they were the chosen ones. Brahmins were incapable of oppression in the social sphere.

In the past, all knowledge began and ended with the Srutis and Smritis. So in denying the access to the sacred religious texts, i agree that Brahmins kept masses outside the purview of knowledge.

But to "claim" this to be the "causative factor" for today's issues is obviously a far fetched claim and does not stand the test of scrutiny by all except those owing allegiance to the Dravidian parties.

I outrightly reject the idea of making Brahmins seek for atonement because the oppression that is seen today is a degeneration of the system. If the broth has seen too many cooks, you dont end up blaming only the first cook.

I dont know or couldnt care less about Karma and other stuff. I only go by what is rational and what is logical.

The facts are :

a) It is true that Brahmins followed the varna system and denied access to knowledge to other communities

b) It is true that Brahmins believe that they were the chosen ones and kept others outside the religious sphere

c) It is an irrefutable fact that there is no correlation between what was denied earlier and what is required today.

So if your agenda is to only fault the Brahmins, do it by all means. But you should also know that this is not going to provide any succour to the masses who are still oppressed by those who claim to have removed brahmin hegemony to only replace it with their own.

 

[sapr333]

Do you include the Christian nations of Africa like Congo in your list of flourishing nations?

Saying goes 'Exemptions are not rules'. Lets attack the issue with a broad spectrum, than pricking pins, for the argument sake.

All Im askin' is, " Why the Christian majority nations were still flourishing, inspite of all their cruel-past against humanity'(as cited by you)??.My basic question was/is, Why there is no bad karmic effect on them? Is it because, they did good karma for all their past/ancestoral mis-deeds (like A.A) and saved themselves with the Good Samaritan frame of mind?

(OR)

If A.A is outcome of their American Patriotism, to ensure that, none of their citizens are pushed aside from main stream(as KRS says), then, my question is, what has inspired them to do so? Why are we not seeing such positive motives amongst our fellow citizens in India, except for witnessing self immolations and shutting hospital doors for the dying,when a social concern is raised?

btw, throwing the ball back on the court, with deviating topics or fine prick points like Rwanda/Catholic divide-rule educational system/plight of African christians etc etc, may add some interest to the debate, but doesnt add any value to the dialogue.

 

[sapr333]

KRS:

>>> You are using Hindu words like 'Brahma', but then you are seeing through the monotheistic glasses to define Him.>>

God is ONE...And all the religions agree, that he is the 'SUPREME'..Do you have any problem in using my choice of name?


>>>In Hinduism, 'Brahma' or the 'Nirguna God' is beyond good and evil. Your God is limited as a 'moral' God. >>

A small tip.. Please google 'Euthyphros Dilemma" by Plato, and try to prove him wrong..In the mean time, my question is,(an important point though for future discussions), If God is beyond Good and Bad, then on what basis, human beings would distinguish Good n Bad?


>>>But in Hinduism, we have the concept of 'Dharma'. So your proof of 'non existence of Brahma' because of the lack of 'absolute morality' is no proof at all. >>

If God doesnt have any role in deciding good n bad or delivering Absolute Justice,then why we need God?. Whats the purpose of God's governance and authority upon us, if every thing is left to themselves and mytic. This is the argument most of the aetheists ask..


>>Absolute morality stems in Hinduism from the actions of a person that derives
from his/her inherent nature. If one follows one's inherent nature then Karma (by the way, karma is not just 'sin') will have no effect on that person.>>

I think you need to have a relook in to Vedas about your view on Karma.. Anyways, if Absolute Morality is inherent, then say suppose, tomorrow, an alien/even a remote island tribal, comes to the town and rapes all the girls around and says " Hey, raping is acceptable in our society".. then what would you say? He may even escape the law of the land by trick, but then, whoom he is accountable for all his evil actions? If morality is inherent/relative, then God has no role over their to decide upon his karma/last judgment/re-birth.

>>>There is also a relative morality. This happens when a society decides collectively that certain things are okay. >>For example, some societies impose death penalty for certain>

Rather, I call this as ETHICS..If I show a thankful smily guesture at a person who shows me the way to the lift, its ethics..Even if he doesnt,he is not doing any thing wrong or immoral. For eg, Euthnesia/fight against death penalty/Just war are all set on ethics.


>>>>So from your perspective, what are the absolute and what are the relative moralities?

In my view, "Moral is rooted in God' not on man or society...

BTW, KRS, thanks for the long post.. Its indeed an impressive response, I enjoyed it too. I have only given crispy single liner response, but for sure we will discuss in detail each one of those, in forthcoming days. Thanks again for your patience and time

 

[KRS]

My response is in 'blue':

>>> You are using Hindu words like 'Brahma', but then you are seeing through the monotheistic glasses to define Him.>>

God is ONE...And all the religions agree, that he is the 'SUPREME'..Do you have any problem in using my choice of name?
While God is ONE, we humans have differences in how we describe Him. So, in that sense a Christian God is totally different from the Hindu God. In this context I think you are using the wrong word, which describes a Hindu(monistic) God, to describe a Christian(montheistic) God.


>>>In Hinduism, 'Brahma' or the 'Nirguna God' is beyond good and evil. Your God is limited as a 'moral' God. >>

A small tip.. Please google 'Euthyphros Dilemma" by Plato, and try to prove him wrong..In the mean time, my question is,(an important point though for future discussions), If God is beyond Good and Bad, then on what basis, human beings would distinguish Good n Bad?
Again, 'Euthphros Dilemma' is about a montheistic God, with the attribute of goodness. A Hindu God does not have any attributes. In our definition God is beyond our sensory grasp and hence can not be described in human terms.

You do not need a God to distinguish 'good' or 'bad'. In the Hindu concept He creates everything and in time withdraws that creation. During the time of the Universe's existence it progresses according to the natural laws. Every particle in the Universe has it's own nature (we call it Svadharma). This is why birds fly, lions hunt, fish swim. Every human being then has his/her own dharma. If one breaches it, it is called adharma and the law of Karma will take care of the justice. A Hindu God is not a father figure ready to discipline His children based on their behaviour. He does not make any relative moral laws - they are made by humans based on the status of 'vidya' (knowledge) of the society at any time. Today's laws will probably change tomorrw, based on the advancement of our concepts of culture and civilization.

>>>But in Hinduism, we have the concept of 'Dharma'. So your proof of 'non existence of Brahma' because of the lack of 'absolute morality' is no proof at all. >>

If God doesnt have any role in deciding good n bad or delivering Absolute Justice,then why we need God?. Whats the purpose of God's governance and authority upon us, if every thing is left to themselves and mytic. This is the argument most of the aetheists ask..
Well, does the SUN expect anything from the creatures who enjoy it's benevolence. But then, sometimes the Sun can be malevolent too. Is the Sun intending to be so? It appears to be so for the humans based on certain conditions. The same way, Hinduism states, the God is out there shining but without any inherent attributes. If we all know what God 'wants' then by definition He is no God at all. With that view, one can not explain why a lot of times bad things happen to good people. All the monotheistic religions who connect the morality to God can not explain this.


>>Absolute morality stems in Hinduism from the actions of a person that derives
from his/her inherent nature. If one follows one's inherent nature then Karma (by the way, karma is not just 'sin') will have no effect on that person.>>

I think you need to have a relook in to Vedas about your view on Karma..
Okay, pray tell what I have said is contrary to anything contained in the Vedas. Please defend this sentence of yours with examples.
Anyways, if Absolute Morality is inherent, then say suppose, tomorrow, an alien/even a remote island tribal, comes to the town and rapes all the girls around and says " Hey, raping is acceptable in our society".. then what would you say? He may even escape the law of the land by trick, but then, whoom he is accountable for all his evil actions? If morality is inherent/relative, then God has no role over their to decide upon his karma/last judgment/re-birth.
Your hypothetical theory is not really hypothetical. Aliens did for example came to India and did the same thing you describe. Were they punished for those crimes? No. It is because, culture in those days evolved only to that extent. As I said, God and your 'moral' laws existed and were followed in those alien lands. But did they treat all the people with the same laws? No. So your argument that God is the final authority on morality does not hold water. Morality applied only towards their own folks. Not to the outsiders. This tells you that the societal morality is relative.

Who says God has no role over your Karma? Please read our scriptures to understand Eashwara's role in deciding one's rebirth (Sri Shankara argued this most eloquently).

>>>There is also a relative morality. This happens when a society decides collectively that certain things are okay. >>For example, some societies impose death penalty for certain>

Rather, I call this as ETHICS..If I show a thankful smily guesture at a person who shows me the way to the lift, its ethics..Even if he doesnt,he is not doing any thing wrong or immoral. For eg, Euthnesia/fight against death penalty/Just war are all set on ethics.
Definition of Ethics:"The study of the general nature of morals and of the specific moral choices to be made by a person; moral philosophy"

Every society has them. Ethics are none other than behaviours expected out of moral choices. So, I don't understand your fine line between morality and ethics.

>>>>So from your perspective, what are the absolute and what are the relative moralities?

In my view, "Moral is rooted in God' not on man or society...
A good view based on your monotheistic religious concept. Only monotheism supports this view. But then this is your view.......

Morality in my opinion is invented by men to safeguard their group's survival. Nothing more. If these morals are 'absolute' and God given, then all wars would be unjust. Because the Commandment is 'Thou shall not Kill'. It did not say,"Thou shall not kill, except your enemies'. Because the people who claim to have received the commandments from God are the ones responsible for invading, killing, looting and eradicating other cultures all over the world proves my point that the societal morality is relative. One law for my kind, one different one for the 'heathen' and the 'infidel'. Is this not so?

BTW, KRS, thanks for the long post.. Its indeed an impressive response, I enjoyed it too. I have only given crispy single liner response, but for sure we will discuss in detail each one of those, in forthcoming days. Thanks again for your patience and time

 

[hariharan1972]

Saying goes 'Exemptions are not rules'. Lets attack the issue with a broad spectrum, than pricking pins, for the argument sake.

All Im askin' is, " Why the Christian majority nations were still flourishing, inspite of all their cruel-past against humanity'(as cited by you)??.My basic question was/is, Why there is no bad karmic effect on them? Is it because, they did good karma for all their past/ancestoral mis-deeds (like A.A) and saved themselves with the Good Samaritan frame of mind?

(OR)

If A.A is outcome of their American Patriotism, to ensure that, none of their citizens are pushed aside from main stream(as KRS says), then, my question is, what has inspired them to do so? Why are we not seeing such positive motives amongst our fellow citizens in India, except for witnessing self immolations and shutting hospital doors for the dying,when a social concern is raised?

btw, throwing the ball back on the court, with deviating topics or fine prick points like Rwanda/Catholic divide-rule educational system/plight of African christians etc etc, may add some interest to the debate, but doesnt add any value to the dialogue.

Exemptions are always rules, Exceptions are not.

That apart, i am surprised that you believe that economic development of a nation is linked to karmic effects.

Do you seriously believe that the lack of development in India is because we have 'lower reserve' of 'Karmic credits' ?

Christian majority nations are NOT flourishing because they have karmic credits but because they were industrialized a lot before Third world nations. They have higher level of literarcy and dont have geo political issues. (Though there have been exceptions such as Bosnia, USSR etc..)

Though i cant be certain, I dont think God links Stock Markets, GDP etc.. with karmic deeds.

There is one difference though between christian dominant nations and India.

There is no concept of 'redemption' in Hinduism to the best of my understanding. Hinduism believes in 'karma' as a 'going concern'. So everyone is accountable to his deeds till the end and even beyond.

Christianity offers 'redemption' from all sins if one surrenders himself to Jesus Christ.

So there may be an explanation that what happens to a person in case of a Hindu could linked to his 'karmic running account'

 

[raghuram04]

Mr Narayana Murthy has built Infosys and taken it to the top. Yet if he says, Brahmins are responsible for execution problems, then what is he?

 

[happyhindu]

I am going to do a bit of wondering aloud here. You may call it an unrestrained ramble.

1) Why does a man, after founding a biz empire, talk about caste as a stumbling block towards development? or rather why does he need to talk about caste at all ?

2) How and why have each of one of us allowed caste to influence our lives so much (if we have) that each one of us can actually either blame, defend or analyze the words of a founder of a biz empire, that talks about caste?

3) What makes us involved in caste? External-need for identity? Possibly sense of belonging "only for those who are like me"? Feeling of persecution?

4) What is caste? Is it not only an occupation group that promised (by birth, without necessarily having the ability or inclination for) realisation of God, ownership or administration of vast lands and people, realisation of ownership of a business or realisation of a position of service to the society?

Today, in this present time, where does such a situation present itself? And why does Mr.NRN talk about this in this present time?

As far as i can see, caste is held on to only by two groups of people -- certain politicians and certain mutts. Both hold on to their position like two banks of a river, never moving from that position. The rest flow like the river in between, with the tide of time, sometimes clashing against the static rocks on the banks, yet moving on.

And that river is the largest majority of people, millions of people. Truthfully speaking, the river has never needed man-made banks...probably it was desiged for a course decided by nature...

So what exactly is Mr.NRN trying to convey? That the masses have a thinking problem? And is it because of a section of people called brahmins?

It seems (to me) that this whole idea about caste is sheer propaganda. The two man-made banks of the river proclaim things that are quite untrue.

Neither had one section ever been supressed or restricted by force to follow a particular occupation group (not in the past nor present), nor have the peoples of this country now or old kingdoms then, been directed by, or have heeded to the advise of only one section of people.

However, both sections (dalits and brahmins) believe it to be so. And how should the rest react? No matter how they react, in the end, finally, they will flow with the tide of time anyways...so whatever Mr.NRN says probably makes no difference to them (?). When a river is made up of millions, it is possibly strong enough to make its own course of path anyways...

 

[sapr333]

Christian majority nations are NOT flourishing because they have karmic credits but because they were industrialized a lot before Third world nations. They have higher level of literarcy and dont have geo political issues. (Though there have been exceptions such as Bosnia, USSR etc..)

'

Let me put it this way...

Inspite of all the atrocities done by Christian west, still they are flourishing. And they continued to flourish through Industrial revolution, and it looks like 'karmic debts' or repayment of bad deeds seems to have no effect on them.Germany is still flourishing inspite of draining the blood of 6Mn Jews.Both the Spaniards and Spanish seems to enjoy the best of life, inspite of Spanish Inquisition..

So my question is.. Whats the role of God and Karma here?

PS: I believe even Industrial revolution could be an act of God!!

 

[sapr333]

My response in RED HH, first of all, I should thank you for brining back the discussion in line with the objective of this thread..

I am going to do a bit of wondering aloud here. You may call it an unrestrained ramble.

>>>>1) Why does a man, after founding a biz empire, talk about caste as a stumbling block towards development? or rather why does he need to talk about caste at all ?>>

Lets find out what inspired Abraham Lincoln , to voice for the plights of blacks


>>>2) How and why have each of one of us allowed caste to influence our lives so much (if we have) >>

A valid point.. Needs a lot of debate. Lets figure out the root cause of caste and discrimination


>>>3) What makes us involved in caste? External-need for identity? Possibly sense of belonging "only for those who are like me"? Feeling of persecution?

Identity crisis and freely available inheritant- privileges... For eg, once upon a time, being a brahmin was a privilge... And by this date, being an untouchable is a privilege(in certain areas in G.O.I)...

4)>>> What is caste?>>

For good souls like handle Nacchinarkinian, caste is truly nothing but a culture (Like Chettinad cusine)..For some, its an inheritant pride and privilege...And for many, its is a social stigma with bad tone. And for a politician, its a vote bank. And for few out-castes, they are victimized ones.We are a bit confused lot with complex doctrines.

>>And that river is the largest majority of people, millions of people. Truthfully speaking, the river has never needed man-made banks...probably it was desiged for a course decided by nature...>>>

Matter of fact, thats river is a droplet... Majority dont feel that way.. Cos,the voices in Parliament, doest support your point of view..

>>>So what exactly is Mr.NRN trying to convey? That the masses have a thinking problem? And is it because of a section of people called brahmins?>>

Frankly, I dont buy NRN's view.. Cos, I know he is a confused lot and a kind of wanna be politician..All I know is, he is a man of double standards and an opportunist and land grabber.


>>>It seems (to me) that this whole idea about caste is sheer propaganda.

I can buy your point, provided, if you are open to accept the point, that, there is definitely a social imbalance, and, a community called Untouchables are still not finding fairer representation in terms of their populace.. Lets not ridicule about talents here, as KRN said in an earlier post.... With the patriotism,Americans worked towards brining up Native Indians through AA... But, we are not yet bothered about our own men who were on the abject side/weaker sex women, but still we talk a lot about Patriotism(only if Pakistan comes in the middle)... Hmm! Patriotism is not about the piece of 2500 mile long real-estate called India....rather, its all about fellow human beings on the next door.

saop