First Of All, Let Us Unite!

[Viswanath]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

My namaskarams to everyone here. I am new to this forum.
I have been browsing this forum (and related forums) for some time now. Sometimes posting my thoughts but most of the times a spectator. This is perhaps my 2 nd post in this forum.

This may be at a slight tangent to the topic being discussed here.

This promises to be a rather long post and if I seem to pontificate, please bear with me. The subject is one of deep importance and I tend to get carried away a bit.

If I may share a few thoughts on this profound subject, the subject of Guru, Mantras and Self Realisation.

For the sake of analysis let us look at the 3 aspects separately: Guru, Mantras and Self Realisation.

Guru:
There are 2 kinds, basically.
1. The Mantra (Diksha) Guru
2. The SadGuru

Brief explanation of the two.

1. Mantra (Diksha) Guru, is one who has attained Mantra Siddhi- complete mastery of the Mantra. It is this mastery that gives him the power to initiate his disciples into the Mantra. This type of Guru is usually the family priest, parent, friend etc
These mantras, when chanted according to the Gurus instructions with faith, lead the disciple to ChittaShuddhi - purification of the innner vehicles - of the mind/intellect. This in turn matures the disciple and he becomes fit enough to pursue Self-Knowledge.
It is at this stage that the Supreme Guru, the SadGuru, manifests. The deep yearning of the disciple for Self-Knowledge draws the Guru as it were.

2. The SadGuru is one who has 'attained' Self Realisation, a Jnani, a Sage. One who remains in and as ParaBrahmam. in other words in Sahaja Sthithi - the Natural State. This is extremely rare. Very few reach this pinnacle of Advaitic experience. This is the state of JivanMukti (Jnanam, liberation, Moksha, Nirvana) This is again a very deep subject and one could go on and on.

Sometimes the Mantra (Diksha) Guru may himself be a Self Realised Jnani. Very rare again.

The difference between the two types of Gurus is that while the Mantra(Diksha) Guru is still under the influence of MAYA, he has not yet transcended it, the SadGuru is completely beyond MAYA. He is not under its spell.

Each one has a different role to play, each important for a particular stage of development of the disciple. One leads seamlessly to the other.

There is no need to search for a Guru. The Guru is all the time within you, guiding your steps. When the mind is purified of all the dross, and the time is ripe, the Guru manifests himself. It may be in a physical form or as a presense within the depths of the Heart.

When the disciple is ready, the Guru appears.

Let us now look at Mantras and Self Realisation.

A concrete example might illustrate it better.
Ganapathi Sastry was a very great and powerful Rishi who lived in the earlier parts of the last century. As a lad he was initiated into Siva Panchakshari mantra by his father. After years of rigorous penance he attained Mantra Siddhi - visions of various Gods and Goddess’s. He also attained various siddhis (powers). The Kundalini reached his sahasrara chakra - the ultimate in Raja Yoga and Mantra Yoga. He attained ChittaShuddhi - complete purity of mind. He came to be called Muni, meaning a great Tapasvi.
Inspite of all these attainments his mind was not in complete repose. He felt there was still something left to do. He continued his tapas. After sometime he was led to the presence of a Sage.
This Sage,though younger to Ganapathi Muni in years, was a complete Jnani. Because Ganapathi Muni was a ripe soul he recognised the greatness of the young Sage. When Ganapathi Muni implored the great Sage to tell him the secret of Tapas, the Sage looked at him for sometime and spoke just a few words. He said 'while chanting the Mantra, if you look at the source from where the Mantra is emanating, that is the Supreme'. Ganapathi Muni was wonder struck at the originality of the Upadesham. Though Ganapathi Muni was a great Sanskrit scholar and deeply learned in the Vedic lore he had never come across anything like this. He felt completely satisfied. He had 'met' the SadGuru.
The young Sage was none other Ramana Maharishi. In fact it was Ganapathi Muni who conferred the name Ramana Maharishi on the young Sage. He was known as 'Brahmana Swami' prior to this.

One can also see the depth of understanding, the same Mantra that was chanted for obtaining ChittaShuddhi, purity of mind, is now 'charged' & transformed into a powerful vehicle for Self Realisation.

This shows how Mantras, when chanted with deep faith, lead one to the SadGuru and his Upadesham.
As a corollary, when one is not ripe one will not be able to recognise the SadGuru even if the SadGuru were to be in front of one. It is all a matter of 'ripeness', ChittaShuddhi.

Chanting of Veda Mantras - their deep significance and their power to bring peace and prosperity to the entire world (animate and inanimate) is a subject to be dealt with separately.

Please feel free to critique this post.
Thank you for your patience in reading through this post.

-- rvishu

 

[Anbu]

For Manthra Siddhi the object of which is attainment of power, one had to go in search of a Guru. For attainment of Gnana the Guru calls you when you are ready because you do not know that you are ready. When Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi was ready he was called and Bhagavan could not resist!

 

[grajendran]

Thanks for the clarifiactions Praveen and others. I did not mean to personalize when i made those comments. I do understand that words are extremely powerful. In my first post I had commented that people tend to get emotional, but guess i got too. Anyway I'm sorry again, here i am.

As far as the above discussion goes, I tend to agree with silverfox/srk as we tend to discuss things are are very esoteric and am afraid getting lost in the numerous schools of thoughts. An interesting sideline item to note: A study recently pointed out, to the dismay of many that prayers have been found to have no effect on the patients with long term illness / surgeries.

Regards

 

[Viswanath]

For Manthra Siddhi the object of which is attainment of power, one had to go in search of a Guru. For attainment of Gnana the Guru calls you when you are ready because you do not know that you are ready. When Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi was ready he was called and Bhagavan could not resist!

Anbuji,
Very true.

--rvishu

 

[anandr91]

yo dude, whats ur bloody problem? maybe ur's and people like u and their mentality is the reason for why tamilnadu has gotten to the state that it is in today. grow up and get away from such stupid thinkings. show some maturity. u preach unity and all u do is trash everyone. and please mind ur language. show some self respect and dignity.

 

[Chintana]

Dear Sri Metroparpanan and Anand,

If you find offensive postings please notify the admin team immediately. Do not dignify such postings with your response.

Best,
Chintana

 

[Mr.Iyengar]

there are lotsa good looking iyengar gals. sure we should unite.

I too looking for Iyer girls. We sure want to unite as I am seeing good looking girls from Iyer. Don't want to miss them...:noidea:

Regards,
Mr.Iyengar

 

[prpsarathy]

In fact, out of 12 alwars many are not even brahmins. I think the site has deprecated to a bunch of sycophants without having any idea of hinduism.

 

[rxrajamo]

Shri.Prpsarathy, as Chintana said please do not dignify such offensive postings with your reply.

Folks, it is against forum rules to post messages that discriminate anyone based on caste, community or religion. Repeat offenders will be summarily suspended without any notice.

Please be responsible in your postings.

Thanks
rxrajamo

 

[prpsarathy]

Admin,

I was upset when i say the mail having the comments. I have not used any abusive language as the statement of the participant itself indicates that the person has no idea of what hinduism is. Offcourse, i will desist from making strong remarks in my email

 

[Saab]

I was going to pose a question "Can Tamil Brahmins unite?", but I realize that it has an obvious answer

Each Tamil Brahmin is an island who thinks he is surrounded by enemies. For example you Dhikshitar bring me bad name. Get out of the temples and get out of the agraharams and don't call yourself a Brahmin with all those dirty sir names, grow mushtache and smoke beedi. Don't chant Veda but sing dappankuthu. This way more we 'educate' ourselves faster we should disappear! This is our 'nirvana' into nothingness! Make haste!!

We all know we have 'ups' and 'downs'. Some of these 'ups' and 'downs' can be for a few days or can last centuries. But we the educated ones think that we are on one way street. For those of us our glory is past never to return. So let's hurry and get out of town!

For some of us 'Brahmin' is just another caste and spells disadvantage. To such of us, our ancestors are to blame. Our bad luck that we are not born into a rich scheduled caste! May be it is our parents' fault. Thank God our children won't Brahmins!!

Long live the Tamil but not the Brahmin for it has no pride!

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Unity can come only when people become tolerant of the views of others and not force a narrow sectarian view on others.

I do not expect pesudo Brahmins to either understand the necessity or work towards the Unity of Brahmins.

Fortunately the pseudo Brahmins though very vocal and articulate are in a very small minority.

The silent majority to whom this thread is addressed will try to contribute their mite towards this Unity.

 

[malgova.mango]

I'm amused , the topic is unity among "Brahmins".

For persons who "rile" at Seers, who wants to dump the Jati system, for whom even the great acharayas are not to their likes etc...etc..,

To them question of Brahmin identity itself is not settled issue yet. So they need not be unduly worried about bringing unity among Brahmins.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri malgova.mango Ji,

You have written:
"For persons who "rile" at Seers, who wants to dump the Jati system, for whom even the great acharayas are not to their likes etc...etc..,"

Please pray tell who have 'riled' at which Seers and when in this Forum. I have never read even a single word of any 'riling' at any Seers here (apart from a few abusive postings from some cranks which have been removed).

If you can cite any such passage, I will be happy to make sure that such a view is repudiated.

Pranams,
KRS

 

[malgova.mango]

Dear Sri KRS

Simply key the word and search it please.

Your
MM

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri malgova.mango ji,

Yes, I did do the search and found the reference. The comment obviously meant as a joke.

With all due respect, to use it as a reference to someone, without naming names is at best disingenous and at worst intellectually dishonest. The person who made the comment has a 'handle' in this Forum. You could have addressed him directly.

Intent is important as you cite elsewhere in the Forum. How can you then take a word that was said in jest and turn it around as a serious comment?

Pranams,
KRS

Dear Sri KRS

Simply key the word and search it please.

Your
MM

 

[Saab]

Dear KRSji,

I agree that MMji should not be afraid of saying to Sri Nachinarkiniyan (N) that he said so and let him defend it if riling at the seers was meant as a 'joke'. I thought it was N's frustration that he had to chant one thousand names and could have easily got away saying Rama, Rama, Rama. Being on this topic the conversation between Siva and Parvathi in phalasruthi indicate that that the sahasranamam is for pandithas and Ramanama is for the unpads. It is my perception (to use one of MM's favourite words!) that Sri N was revealing the intellectual choice he could have made.

Regards,
Saab

 

[KRS]

Dear Saab Ji and Sri malgova.mango Ji,

I very well understand that both of you hold views that may be different from the views that are held by the likes of me and others in this Forum.

But my thesis is that as a community we can agree to disagree and move on. This means that we respect each other's view points where they can not be reconciled by dialog and logic. It seems to me that if someone says that the concept of Jathis is outdated or not needed, that provokes some unpleasant reaction within yourselves. Same thing happens if someone says that true secularism is the way to govern India.

I think our religion permits anyone to question any basic tenets of our religion, using logic. Otherwise Sri Shankara would not have defeated the Mimamsakaras in debates. Sri Shankara did not shrink away from such debates, nor did he dismiss out of hand the positions held by his opponents as something trivial.

So, it then feels funny to me that by the comments above by Sri malgova.mango ji, Sri Nacchinarkiniyan's position on Jathi etc., are taken as trivial and are being mocked at. Why this is so?

As Sri Nacchinarkiniyan said elsewhere in the Forum, and I agree with him, it seems to me that both of you have not addressed various counter arguments against your postions by myself as well as others in detail. You both seem to conveniently ignore the citations of Upanishads and other modern spiritual luminaries we cite, but instead cite some Smrithis that are clearly not looked upon as speaking for the essence of Hinduism.

In the spirit of dialog, I would very much like to understand this issue.

Pranams,
KRS

 

[Saab]

Dear Sri KRSji,

I speak for myself and if you have noticed I have asked Sri MMji to speak for himself. I do not gang up with anyone nor am I least bit interested in that sort of thing. The fact is we do not know each other in this forum and I come into this forum precisely because I have the pride of being a Tamil Brahmin and feel the sense of comradary in fellow Tamil Brahmins. I neither insist others to conform to or accept my views nor I feel obliged to or feel threatened by others. Precisely this was the message to Sri MMji in my last post addressed to you.

Wherever I felt necessary, in the limited time at my disposal I have taken care to reply. In the other topic that was under discussion you and the moderator had discussed about my views with the strictest warning that none should interfere. I did post where I felt I was misunderstood but my posting was removed. I accept the moderator's judgement and as far as I am concerned I clearly sense that there is a lack of interest in the matter among forum members and I don't think that I could tread any further on matters where I have already said that one has to learn from a Guru.

So I would request you to apply your own judgment in the matter and let people have their own views of the world and as you say let's MOVE ON.

Regards,
Saab

 

[malgova.mango]

Dear Sri KSR!

There is a proverb in Tamil- "thennai marathil thell kottichunna ,Pannai marathi nerri kattikuchan" your replies remind me this.

Regarding the intention of the post, the best one to answer is the poster himself . I precieve it as a serious comment .

Are you a spokesman for Sri N?

On you remarks on good and best, I can cite many guys in this forum do this, I mean they just put their inputs without addressing or naming anybody.

I've not mentioned Sri N name simply because it is too obvious for the forumites following this forum for sometime and also the expression of bitterness came from my heart spontaneously.

On other notes....

Just to note both Smritis and Upanishads both came from "Seers".

If Brahmin is not based on jati.. on what basis you are talking about unity?
From Guna.?..Guna brahmins means they exercise supreme virtues like mutual tolerance and there won't be any any need to unite them.

Whatever arguments you put-forth are clearly answered. Infact you clearly admitted that your intention is to support someone. That exposed you are not for open dialogue. Which is called Jalpa vadam in sanskrit. And this is clearly not favoured by any body leave alone acharyas.

For DEBATE there are three types
1 - Vadam - Mutual discussion with open mindedness
2- Jalpa vadam - where the opponents repeats the same thing again and again without heeding to what the proponent say.
3- Vithanda Vatham - where the opponent just say the opposite of what the proponent said.

BTW - Do you believe in Papa , Punyams...

Regards
MM

 

[KRS]

Dear Saab Ji,

Thank you for your considered response. I respect the right for anyone to hold any views as long as that person is not abusive and try to impose their views on others. Imposing would include after a certain level of discussion, instead of agreeing to disagreeing, continuing to harague.

I am glad that you agree with this. I only addressed you and Sri MM Ji, jointly, not because I thought you were 'ganging up'. Instead, it was because at one time or other both of you have interacted with me seperately with more or less with the same style. So to save time, instead of writing to each of you with the same question, I addressed you both in the same posting for brevity of space and time.

Thank you once again. I understand where you stand.

Pranams,
KRS

Dear Sri KRSji,

I speak for myself and if you have noticed I have asked Sri MMji to speak for himself. I do not gang up with anyone nor am I least bit interested in that sort of thing. The fact is we do not know each other in this forum and I come into this forum precisely because I have the pride of being a Tamil Brahmin and feel the sense of comradary in fellow Tamil Brahmins. I neither insist others to conform to or accept my views nor I feel obliged to or feel threatened by others. Precisely this was the message to Sri MMji in my last post addressed to you.

Wherever I felt necessary, in the limited time at my disposal I have taken care to reply. In the other topic that was under discussion you and the moderator had discussed about my views with the strictest warning that none should interfere. I did post where I felt I was misunderstood but my posting was removed. I accept the moderator's judgement and as far as I am concerned I clearly sense that there is a lack of interest in the matter among forum members and I don't think that I could tread any further on matters where I have already said that one has to learn from a Guru.

So I would request you to apply your own judgment in the matter and let people have their own views of the world and as you say let's MOVE ON.

Regards,
Saab

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri magova.mango Ji,

Thank you for your response above. I appreciate the time you took to respond.

No, I am not a spokeperson for Sri N. As you can see he can very ably defend his views. He does not need any 'support' in this area. My only concern, which I have expressed a couple of times before in this Forum, is that when one comments on someone else's posting(s), one should at least give the other person the chance to respond. I sincerely did not pick up the fact that you were commenting on Sri N.'s postings. I thought they were generic comments. When I read Sri N's posting which you pointed out, I read it totally different from what you read in to it. But then, if this was bothering you all this time, then if I were you, I would have asked a direct question for Sri N. to respond. Again, this would me my style, and you may not be comfortable with such a style. But at least, I think you should intimate that you are talikng about Sri N.'s postings. This would clarify things a bit. I remember Sowbhagyavathi Chintana Ji, making similar comments.

Now, yes, I am a Tamil Brahmin because of Jathi. We as a community has a tough time getting Government Jobs in TN, because we are born in to a particular Jathi. So, when someone says that Jathis must go, (I am not citing Sri N.'s views on this, he can speak for himself), it means two things: 1) He/she believes that Jathis as constituted today do not make sense and so we will be better off today if they vanished and 2)Such an advocacy does not mean that Jathis will disappear tomorrow, just because one says so.
Again, just because people express certain views about macro principles does not mean that they will come true. We are where we are today is because the majority of our Hindu society have been choosing a way of life that they deem to be of value. Societies evolve on a constant basis and it is no secret that we paerhaps have lost the 'golden age' of our lives in a perfect Hindu society long time ago. India today is much different from India of several hundred years ago. If you scratched me at my birth, you would have found in my 'cultural blood', not only Tamil Brahimin, but also an amalgamation of Muslim and English culture. We adopted several things from other cultures throughout our national life. Just saying that they are foreign is to deny their integration within ourselves.

Hopefully, I am not close minded and presenting closed loop arguments. But isf you think so, next time, please stop me and point this out to me. Then I can understand where I am doing such an argument.

I believe in Paapam and Punyam. But your concept of what constitutes each may be different than mine. I suspect what constitutes 'dharma' may be different from your perspective from mine.

Again, I am answering this in detail, because of the topic of the thread. Again, unity can only be built on healthy respect for other's views.

By the way, I can not understand the Tamil proverb you started your response with. Can you translate?

Pranams,
KRS

 

[Saab]

Dear KRSji,

I am not interfereing in the discussion between you two. I am strictly picking on the problems facing Brahmins.

We as a community has a tough time getting Government Jobs in TN, because we are born in to a particular Jathi. So, when someone says that Jathis must go, (I am not citing Sri N.'s views on this, he can speak for himself), it means two things: 1) He/she believes that Jathis as constituted today do not make sense and so we will be better off today if they vanished and 2)Such an advocacy does not mean that Jathis will disappear tomorrow, just because one says so.

The arguments seem to flow as follows:

a) That the Brahmins do not get jobs because they are placed in the apex of castes;
b) If Castes are abolished then Brahmins will not be placed in the apex and thus discriminated.

This is accepting psuedo-secularist arguments that the Brahmins have to be placed at the apex and then finding a solution.

My 'secularist' argument would be: never mind what caste a person belongs to and it is none of anyone's business (after all everybody is professing to belong to a caste and as Adiyenji has said in another thread that everybody except the Brahmins swear to belong to either BC or OBC or SC!); let him get the job on his merit and that 'he' could be of any caste not necessarily a Brahmin.

I hope I made sense.

Regards,

 

[KRS]

Dear Saab Ji,

My mentioning the job situation is strictly to infer that even the Government, which technically abolished the caste system in India, is still recognizing the same (this to answer Sri malgova.mango Ji's question to me as to whether I believe that jathis by birth exist).

I agree with your 'secular' argument. Instead of putting the money where it should have, in the elementary and secondary schools, bringing along the disadvantaged communities till high school, the governments ventured in to the dangerous precedence setting quotas. I think it would have been even better to have paid each disadvantaged family some money to compensate for a child to be in school. But the governments have taken the easy way out.

Again, I did not intend the logic as posted by you, illustrated by the two points.

Pranams,
KRS

Dear KRSji,

I am not interfereing in the discussion between you two. I am strictly picking on the problems facing Brahmins.



The arguments seem to flow as follows:

a) That the Brahmins do not get jobs because they are placed in the apex of castes;
b) If Castes are abolished then Brahmins will not be placed in the apex and thus discriminated.

This is accepting psuedo-secularist arguments that the Brahmins have to be placed at the apex and then finding a solution.

My 'secularist' argument would be: never mind what caste a person belongs to and it is none of anyone's business (after all everybody is professing to belong to a caste and as Adiyenji has said in another thread that everybody except the Brahmins swear to belong to either BC or OBC or SC!); let him get the job on his merit and that 'he' could be of any caste not necessarily a Brahmin.

I hope I made sense.

Regards,

 

[anandr91]

hello everyone,
I would like to remind all of u, once again, the title of this thread is "First of all,let us unite".
All that is been happening in the last few postings are finger pointing and accusing and trying to defend each other. I dont think that is the right way to go about unity. is it? put aside ur differences and try to see what and how we can all unite.
enough of this trying to one up on each other.