God is great!! really great!!_a sequel

[sangom]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

This is a sequel to the original thread by Shri V. Balasubramani, titled "God is great!! really great!!" which was got closed rather hurriedly, imo.

Originally Posted by V. Balasubramani "

Sir, Thanx for the information and cautioning me. If you feel that I am crossing the limits, I am sorry Sir. My posting is aimed at to learn something and not to hurt anyone’s sentiments/feelings. In the interest of maintaining better relationship among Veterans and Super Moderator, etc I am closing this thread. Not a good day for me.

Dear Shri Balasubramani,

I am really sorry that you have asked Shri Praveen to close your thread titled "God is Great!!, really great!!". What I wanted to point out is that the same "Sanatana Dharma" about which most people talk and praise, in and out of context, has many aspects or facets which will be unacceptable to many of the very same set of people today. This may be seen in post # 12 of that closed thread, made by Shri Biswa.

My only point is that we hindus are twisting and turning the highly hailed "Sanatana Dharma" to the point where it has completely gone out of shape and may become a monster very soon. It is at such points of time that fate or our collective Karmas interferes and changes happen as they did when Mahmud of Ghazni, Muhammad Ghori, etc., attacked and looted & plundered our country and thus paved the way for Muslim rule of India for more than 600 years.

So, let us not say that we are "followin" sanatana dharma and cite vedas, upanishads, puranas etc.; what we have in hinduism today is a very warped version of whatever is told in those ancient texts. Similarly, those who take great pride and ego about their "brahmin" heritage also have squandered all that was brahminic and only a sort of phantasm of the original brAhmaNa is available today.

That is why I say that we should not try to have our feet on two boats at the same time.

Hope you have understood my point. I have absolutely no problem with whatever you wrote, nor am I hurt or anything like that; I am only trying to point out the "doublespeak" people resort to in trying to be very religious. Hence, in future, please do not get discouraged by the kind of posts and don't get thread closed/locked in a hurry.

 

[tks]

Sri Balasubramani

While I do not keep up with all the posts this sequel thread caught my attention.

Sometimes we may have long standing beliefs based on our upbringing and edicts imposed resulting from some interpretation of a religious practice. One may be that women or certain people are not allowed to learn. Such notions may get challenged here which in the end may lead to our maturity.

In my understanding the knowledge embodied in Upanishads is actually universal. Puranic stories, great epics and other scriptures have been embellished over thousands of years. For large part they tend to be containers to convey wisdom that can lead to our maturity. But one has to be careful not to take those stories literally. My unproven and biased guess is that most of the stories did have a great teaching expressed in a metaphorical manner via description of set of events. Over the years some may have lost that essence (pure conjecture on my part) and all that may remain is a fascinating story with no real value. So one has to use our ability to think as a guide while drawing generalizations of how we should conduct our life

Even Vedas may have many instances of seemingly inane verses and may have no relevance to a sincere student. However they also contain certain truth that cannot be found anywhere else.

The word Dharma is also least understood in my view. The phrase Sanathana Dharma is used liberally by many leading to confusion for anyone trying to make sense out of all this.

So a serious study of this is not possible in any forum set up.

When I first discovered this forum I was sort of impressed at the quotations and at so called veterans. I soon discovered statistically they are no more endowed with knowledge than the average population. So I would not be intimidated by any titles anyone may have. They are as knowledgeable or as confused as anyone else you are likely to find in your real life. By this statement I am neither putting down or glorifying anyone.

However there are diversity of thoughts that makes this forum an interesting place. You do not have to give any special credence to any titles like Veterans etc - they are like you. You do have to live by the rules and hence have to respect the ruling of a moderator.

So I hope you will continue to post , get challenged and get engaged

Regards

 

[sangom]

Dear Shri Biswa,

This has reference to your post#12 here, in the old, closed thread.

I think Islam keeps its religion as something sacred and so it does not make changes according to convenience as the hindus have been doing with their religious beliefs, systems and practices. Therefore, Islam is a more stable religion. That is why the white people converting to Islam say that it is a religion having clear "direction and discipline"(Spiritual Life).

While gender equality and many similar issues may be relevant today, it is better not to twist the tenets of any old established religion to suit our needs arising from time to time. That will lead only to a situation where the religion will be like a stock-market, with no idea as to what will happen tomorrow. And, I don't think a religion perishes just because its tenets are not constantly changed according to requirements; Islam itself has been there for not less than 1200 years, and is not showing any sign of its "death" in the near future. On the contrary there seems to be lot of westerners converting to Islam because it offers them a disciplined and simple, direct religion, devoid of all the cobwebs of many things in Hinduism.

 

[palindrome]

While gender equality and many similar issues may be relevant today, it is better not to twist the tenets of any old established religion to suit our needs arising from time to time.

I completely disagree sir. A religion has to adapt to changing times. Since Islam is not able to do so, hence numerous fights between various factions (within Islam). This particular article may interest you: Women?s Rights in Saudi Arabia: Wahhabism vs. Islam | Morocco World News

That will lead only to a situation where the religion will be like a stock-market, with no idea as to what will happen tomorrow. And, I don't think a religion perishes just because its tenets are not constantly changed according to requirements; Islam itself has been there for not less than 1200 years, and is not showing any sign of its "death" in the near future. On the contrary there seems to be lot of westerners converting to Islam because it offers them a disciplined and simple, direct religion, devoid of all the cobwebs of many things in Hinduism.

Just because some people convert today does not mean their progeny won't (re)convert (to yet another religion) or become apostate (or religionless) tomorrow.

Contrary to what you observe, any society based on religion has to become a hypocrite. One thing in scriptures, another thing in practice. Women have long ceased to observe laws of religion. Women study and work, which by itself is testimony that women do not follow sharia and the dharmashastras.

Strangely, enough, in all religions, rules are made by men. Maybe nature got fed up, so now we have natures' game plan of excessive males and fewer females. Or females who do not accept male authority in various societies across the world anymore. Lets see how social pressures will cause religion to bend down further in future.

 

[prasad1]

If you have a static position in life including religion, you have to deal with iron hand to maintain it. Eventually people will revolt against it too, look at Catholics . It is better to be supple and adapt to changes. So I would rather have our Hindu religion where diversity is accepted.
I do not follow any organized religion.
Blaze your own path after synthesizing all paths in Hinduism.

Singsn a lehede nahi, Hansan ke nahi Paths.
Lalahan ki nahi boriyan, Sadhu na chale Jamat.

But at the same time accord the same right to others.

 

[palindrome]

V.Balasubramani Sir,

Please do not worry about forum markings such as 'veterans '. No one here is learned. We are all learning. One person may present an alternative view, having read about it a bit more, and shares it. Since you read it, now you also know it. So now, in effect, there is no difference between you and a veteran.

Additionally, there are always more sides to any point. Which a so-called veteran may not be aware of. So, in effect she/he is not a veteran at all. Hence, please do not give importance of any sort to forum markings.

Also, sir you must be knowing about the phrase "tejasvi nAvadhItamastu mA vidviShAvahai". Even gurus and shishyas argued vehemently with a prayer there would be no enmity. To argue out, reason out aloud, is part of eastern religions. It is part of the learning process.

Request you to please cast aside any doubts and freely express your views.

 

[biswa]

Sangomji,

I think I also respectfully disagree. What you call twisted I call adapted In my opinion, adaptation is a supremely desirable quality for anything to survive. That which does not adapt will die. For example Sanskrit. It has died for all practical purposes. However adapted offshoots like Hindi, Bengali, Punjabi, Gujrati etc survive. Even Tamil and Greek have adapted and survived.

The adaptation of Hinduism to the modern era is what will allow it to survive. I agree with you that the classic Sanatana Dharma has pluses and minuses, meaning some things which are acceptable and not acceptable in modern times. That understanding and then appropriate tailoring is possible within the framework of Hinduism. We are not bound by the last words written down in a centuries old book unlike Christianity and Islam.

 

[C RAVI]

Dear Shri Biswa,

........That is why the white people converting to Islam say that it is a religion having clear "direction and discipline"(Spiritual Life).

Shri Sangom,

Then why you kept on finding fault in my post in the thread - "Complicatedism" where I stated that - "Spirituality is the foundation of any religion with any name of their GOD/Belief system of the Spiritual Path. That, Spirituality is the very purpose of Religion and Religion is the very purpose of Spirituality"?

You were opposing it and ridiculing it stating, all I said is - blah blah blah blah but interestingly as the Only and Only Truth that is for sure nothing but blah blah blah.

 

[prasad1]

Sangomji,

I think I also respectfully disagree. What you call twisted I call adapted In my opinion, adaptation is a supremely desirable quality for anything to survive. That which does not adapt will die. For example Sanskrit. It has died for all practical purposes. However adapted offshoots like Hindi, Bengali, Punjabi, Gujrati etc survive. Even Tamil and Greek have adapted and survived.

The adaptation of Hinduism to the modern era is what will allow it to survive. I agree with you that the classic Sanatana Dharma has pluses and minuses, meaning some things which are acceptable and not acceptable in modern times. That understanding and then appropriate tailoring is possible within the framework of Hinduism. We are not bound by the last words written down in a centuries old book unlike Christianity and Islam.

I like your post.
This aping of Anrahamic religion by some hindus for mass appeal is degrading Hinduism. If you ape and degrade yourself there will be a lot of people cheering you on, that does not mean that you have help them achieve greater knowledge. A rishi sitting in some cave in Himalaya may have more success in leading a lonely student to greater knowledge is far more accomplished , than a guru with 1000 followers.

 

[palindrome]

We are not bound by the last words written down in a centuries old book unlike Christianity and Islam.

unfortunately sir, it seems to me, islam is actively adapting to changing times than 'hinduism'. some articles worth reading to the end -- The Women of Islam - TIME (please do not miss all 3 pages) and Women and Islam - Oxford Islamic Studies Online

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri V. Balasubramani Ji,

While Sri Praveen Ji complied with your request of closing the previous thread, I am disturbed by the reason you gave in asking so.

Seems to me that you took some postings as saying that your ideas are not valid.

You put forward your thesis and opening remarks very well. If a 'veteran' like Sri Sangom Ji posts his opinions, and they are his opinions, please don't get intimidated. Stand your ground and logically argue your position for the benefit of the members. If you think that you can not logically defend your position (if it is faith based), just state that also and agree to disagree.

I have two jobs in this Forum: One as a Moderator and other as a member. The first role is there to enforce the rules of the Forum. The latter role allows me to voice my opinions like any other member here. If I violate any rules in that capacity, there is Sri Praveen Ji to make sure that I get the same treatment like any other member.

So, just because I am a Moderator, my opinions posted here as a member should not be viewed as something not to be challenged.

For example, let us say, Sri Sangom Ji and I have read a same article on a subject, it is more likely than not, our opinions would greatly differ on the matter. This is not because one of us is right and the other is wrong, it is because of our unique backgrounds and world experiences we may draw different conclusions from the same facts.

You have your own such uniqueness. So, you have a unique voice. Please don't be afraid to bring it to the Forum. It will benefit us all.

Regards,
KRS

 

[V.Balasubramani]

This is a sequel to the original thread by Shri V. Balasubramani, titled "God is great!! really great!!" which was got closed rather hurriedly, imo.



Dear Shri Balasubramani,

I am really sorry that you have asked Shri Praveen to close your thread titled "God is Great!!, really great!!". What I wanted to point out is that the same "Sanatana Dharma" about which most people talk and praise, in and out of context, has many aspects or facets which will be unacceptable to many of the very same set of people today. This may be seen in post # 12 of that closed thread, made by Shri Biswa.

My only point is that we hindus are twisting and turning the highly hailed "Sanatana Dharma" to the point where it has completely gone out of shape and may become a monster very soon. It is at such points of time that fate or our collective Karmas interferes and changes happen as they did when Mahmud of Ghazni, Muhammad Ghori, etc., attacked and looted & plundered our country and thus paved the way for Muslim rule of India for more than 600 years.

So, let us not say that we are "followin" sanatana dharma and cite vedas, upanishads, puranas etc.; what we have in hinduism today is a very warped version of whatever is told in those ancient texts. Similarly, those who take great pride and ego about their "brahmin" heritage also have squandered all that was brahminic and only a sort of phantasm of the original brAhmaNa is available today.

That is why I say that we should not try to have our feet on two boats at the same time.

Hope you have understood my point. I have absolutely no problem with whatever you wrote, nor am I hurt or anything like that; I am only trying to point out the "doublespeak" people resort to in trying to be very religious. Hence, in future, please do not get discouraged by the kind of posts and don't get thread closed/locked in a hurry.

Sri Sangom Ji,

I have great reverence for one and all associated with this Forum specially going by their postings. I joined the Forum to learn repeat learn. It is variety here which is the spice of life.


Thanx Sir,

With regards

 

[V.Balasubramani]

Dear Sri V. Balasubramani Ji,

While Sri Praveen Ji complied with your request of closing the previous thread, I am disturbed by the reason you gave in asking so.

Seems to me that you took some postings as saying that your ideas are not valid.

You put forward your thesis and opening remarks very well. If a 'veteran' like Sri Sangom Ji posts his opinions, and they are his opinions, please don't get intimidated. Stand your ground and logically argue your position for the benefit of the members. If you think that you can not logically defend your position (if it is faith based), just state that also and agree to disagree.

I have two jobs in this Forum: One as a Moderator and other as a member. The first role is there to enforce the rules of the Forum. The latter role allows me to voice my opinions like any other member here. If I violate any rules in that capacity, there is Sri Praveen Ji to make sure that I get the same treatment like any other member.

So, just because I am a Moderator, my opinions posted here as a member should not be viewed as something not to be challenged.

For example, let us say, Sri Sangom Ji and I have read a same article on a subject, it is more likely than not, our opinions would greatly differ on the matter. This is not because one of us is right and the other is wrong, it is because of our unique backgrounds and world experiences we may draw different conclusions from the same facts.

You have your own such uniqueness. So, you have a unique voice. Please don't be afraid to bring it to the Forum. It will benefit us all.

Regards,
KRS

Sri KRS Sir,

Pranams. I think I am bit disturbed Sir, after going thro unexpected response. I have absolutely no problem in 'agreeing to disagree'. Being a beginner I believe I need to learn more. It will take some time for me to retrieve. Thanx for the encouragement Sir.

With regards

 

[V.Balasubramani]

V.Balasubramani Sir,

Please do not worry about forum markings such as 'veterans '. No one here is learned. We are all learning. One person may present an alternative view, having read about it a bit more, and shares it. Since you read it, now you also know it. So now, in effect, there is no difference between you and a veteran.



Additionally, there are always more sides to any point. Which a so-called veteran may not be aware of. So, in effect she/he is not a veteran at all. Hence, please do not give importance of any sort to forum markings.

Also, sir you must be knowing about the phrase "tejasvi nAvadhItamastu mA vidviShAvahai". Even gurus and shishyas argued vehemently with a prayer there would be no enmity. To argue out, reason out aloud, is part of eastern religions. It is part of the learning process.

Request you to please cast aside any doubts and freely express your views.

Sir Palindrom Sir,
Pranams.

What is bothering is the tendency of the few to prevail upon me and the sort of cursing at the end is more disturbing. I strieve to get the best from all and thus enrich my knowledge. In the process I stumble. I tend to stick to my burning desire to learn more on spirituality where I am very poor.

Thanxs Sir

With regards.

 

[Sastri]

Sir Palindrom Sir,
Pranams.

What is bothering is the tendency of the few to prevail upon me and the sort of cursing at the end is more disturbing. I strieve to get the best from all and thus enrich my knowledge. In the process I stumble. I tend to stick to my burning desire to learn more on spirituality where I am very poor.

Thanxs Sir

With regards.

The tree which bears fruit is the one on which stones are thrown.

 

[sangom]

I completely disagree sir. A religion has to adapt to changing times. Since Islam is not able to do so, hence numerous fights between various factions (within Islam). This particular article may interest you: Women?s Rights in Saudi Arabia: Wahhabism vs. Islam | Morocco World News

Just because some people convert today does not mean their progeny won't (re)convert (to yet another religion) or become apostate (or religionless) tomorrow.

Contrary to what you observe, any society based on religion has to become a hypocrite. One thing in scriptures, another thing in practice. Women have long ceased to observe laws of religion. Women study and work, which by itself is testimony that women do not follow sharia and the dharmashastras.

Strangely, enough, in all religions, rules are made by men. Maybe nature got fed up, so now we have natures' game plan of excessive males and fewer females. Or females who do not accept male authority in various societies across the world anymore. Lets see how social pressures will cause religion to bend down further in future.

S/Shri Palindrome, Biswa and others,

The article you have quoted is, I think, from western society which is bent upon changing Islam to suit its own requirements. The article by one Hajar Laalaj picks and chooses the islamic scriptures on which it will depend, etc. Thus, to me it appears to be a skewed report. Whatever that may be, I find that the Muslim society in Kerala and also elsewhere in India are not as "modernist" as this article seeks to present.

My post was simply to point out that hindus boast about something called "Sanatana Dharma" whereas they swear by "Today's hinduism" which may even be post-modernist. The word 'sanAtana' comes from sanAt = from ancient times, eternally, etc. Since, as some of the members laud it, hinduism has been changing and there is nothing sanAt in it now. I was trying to point out this contradiction in the matter. It will be appropriate I think if people boast about contemporary hinduism instead of sanAtana dharma, therefore.

 

[sangom]

Shri Sangom,

Then why you kept on finding fault in my post in the thread - "Complicatedism" where I stated that - "Spirituality is the foundation of any religion with any name of their GOD/Belief system of the Spiritual Path. That, Spirituality is the very purpose of Religion and Religion is the very purpose of Spirituality"?

You were opposing it and ridiculing it stating, all I said is - blah blah blah blah but interestingly as the Only and Only Truth that is for sure nothing but blah blah blah.

Dear Shri Ravi,

Let me first point out that the words (Spiritual Life) appearing for the url, are not mine. I still hold that the word "spirituality" does not convey any clear meaning or idea (at least to me). Religions spread religion that is a certain set of beliefs about a creator or supreme god, usually anthropomorphic and male, that too, and controls the behaviours of those who come under that religion (voluntarily, by enticements or by outright cruel subjugation and compulsion to fall in line) in ever so many ways. Religion can go into even the most intricate and personal aspects of a follower. Those who follow the tenets of the religion most faithfully and are able to convince the priesthood in particular and the population in general, are considered to be highly religious and each religion promises a very great reward for them after death. These are empty promises because none - neither the priestly class nor the laity - knows anything for sure as to what happens after death.

Spirituality is not the purpose of any religion, unless you hold them both as meaning one and the same thing. In that case, I have nothing more to say.

 

[palindrome]

Sir Palindrom Sir,
Pranams.

What is bothering is the tendency of the few to prevail upon me and the sort of cursing at the end is more disturbing. I strieve to get the best from all and thus enrich my knowledge. In the process I stumble. I tend to stick to my burning desire to learn more on spirituality where I am very poor.

Thanxs Sir

With regards.

Dear Sir,

Given the circumstances of the forum, in the heat of the moment, people may say so many things which they do not mean. Sometimes, arguments can be such. But please do not bother about others. Please do not bother what anyone says. Everyone has their own path, their own karma. What we desire is the path meant for us, hence the desire. Also, sir, please do not consider yourself spiritually poor. Nobody is rich or poor when attempting to understand the self, the spirit.

With many best wishes.

 

[palindrome]

The article you have quoted is, I think, from western society which is bent upon changing Islam to suit its own requirements. The article by one Hajar Laalaj picks and chooses the islamic scriptures on which it will depend, etc. Thus, to me it appears to be a skewed report. Whatever that may be, I find that the Muslim society in Kerala and also elsewhere in India are not as "modernist" as this article seeks to present.

I agree Hajar Laalaj picks selectively from the quran, puts the blame of suppressing women (in wahhabism) on tribal concepts whilst acquitting quran from the same. During its time, islam may have given some leeway to women (in terms of banning female foeticide and giving women the right to inherit wealth). However, it was still primitive then. Now in the post-modernist world Islam is all the more primitive. Whatever is modernist is actually secular. This article present the view better, esp wrt Turkey, which remains the most secular of islamic countries to date: The Women of Islam - TIME

My post was simply to point out that hindus boast about something called "Sanatana Dharma" whereas they swear by "Today's hinduism" which may even be post-modernist. The word 'sanAtana' comes from sanAt = from ancient times, eternally, etc. Since, as some of the members laud it, hinduism has been changing and there is nothing sanAt in it now. I was trying to point out this contradiction in the matter. It will be appropriate I think if people boast about contemporary hinduism instead of sanAtana dharma, therefore.

I agree. I also think hindus (esp women and various sections of the society) are better off today because secularism helped extricate ourselves from senseless dharma laws.

 

[Anand Manohar]

Salutations to the Zen Master

"Takbir" ----- " Allah Hu Akbar "

Yay Yem

 

[sangom]

. . .Turkey, which remains the most secular of islamic countries to date: The Women of Islam - TIME

Palindrome,

How can a country be "most secular" and also "Islamic" at the same time? Confusing!!

 

[PV JAYARAMAN]

It is just like telling "Best amongst the worsts".

 

[palindrome]

Palindrome,

How can a country be "most secular" and also "Islamic" at the same time? Confusing!!

Ah yes, i see your point.

In case of Turkey, though population follows islam, somehow Attaturk managed to modernize the constitution and create laws not based on sharia. More on Ataturk here: Atatürk's Reforms - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Egypt too had followed the same route but islamic hardliners took over recently, so can expect the country to revert to sharia-based laws.