Hinduism and Brahmins

[prasad1]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

In this forum many members repeatedly wonder why the Sankara Mutts do not initiate social reforms. They expect that the Mutts should do it. Many non-Brahmin groups have also expressed such an opinion.

This assumption is basically wrong. Sankara Mutts are religious organizations. Religious organizations are not for carrying our social reforms. There are many Brahmin Gurus who personally do not believe in the caste system. But they do not speak up against it. They are religious Gurus and not social reformers.

Two of the popular religious Gurus who tried social reform were Sri Narayana Guru and Ramalinga Adigalar. Ramalinga Adigalar is almost forgotten and Sri Narayana Guru has been reduced to a caste leader.

We are all aware of what happened in the Kanchi Mutt in 1987. How the social activities of Jayendra Saraswathi Swamigal led to a crisis. Even now not all the Tamil Brahmins approve of the social activities of the Mutt.

If the Sankara Mutts preach social reforms a number of Tamil Brahmins will leave the Mutts.

Mr. Sharmah,
In my post#2 I expressed same opinion, but should that be the only consideration of these religious leaders? Do they not have the social responsibilities?

A political leader may loose vote if he is against corruption, may be that is why he should not honest.

 

[sankara_sharmah]

Mr. Sharmah,
In my post#2 I expressed same opinion, but should that be the only consideration of these religious leaders? Do they not have the social responsibilities?

A political leader may loose vote if he is against corruption, may be that is why he should not honest.

A religious leader's primary or the only duty is to show the way to spirituality. There are others who undertake social reform and improve the lot of the society materially. The religious leader improves the lot of the people spiritually. This is the role of the religious leader.

Paramacharya was a spiritual giant. He has led countless number of people on the spiritual path. In this he was like Ramana Maharishi and Sri Ramakrishna. You could raise the same objection to Ramana Maharishi and Sri Ramakrishna also.

Talking about roles, the question which is asked is why did the Nandas (who were shudras) and Chandra Gupta Maurya ( who was not a Kshatriya) abolish the caste system? But then it is not the King's role to reform society. May be they would have lost their kingdom if they attempted any social reform. Or may be they attempted social reforms and failed. We do not know.

This is true of the present day rulers also. We elect them to rule the country. Not to carry out social reforms. That is why any attempt by the ruling political class to carry out social reforms is bound to fail.

Babashaeb Ambedkar initiated social reform. But his successors were more interested in getting power than improving the lot of the society.

The Hindu religion should share the blame for this state of affairs. Our temples have a lot of money. Did they start hospitals and schools with that money? No. The Christian missionaries started more hospitals and schools than the Hindus who had more money. May be this was one of the ways of conversion. But the fact remains that they did it. Our organized religion did not. The situation has not improved even now.

Sri Ramakrishna was personally opposed to any kind of social activities. It is Swami Vivekananda who initiated it. In this he was influenced by his contact with Christianity. Even today few Hindu missions/Gurus start a hospital. ISCKON who had a large presence in U.S never started a hospital. None of the other Gurus in the U.S did it. Starting a super specialty hospital for the rich is not a social activity. It is purely commercial.

Even today you will get a lot of contributions for a new temple. But very few for a hospital project.