Hinduism Vs Rest

[NARAS]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

priests are public servants.Temples are public property and employees in public proerty are public servants.Indian constitution has declared temples as public property and you or me cannot wish it away.



If in cricket there is a rule that "If dalits hit sixers,it is considered as zero runs" should the govt interfere or not?

In temples currently we have rules like "If dalits do poojas it is not valid.If brahmins do pooja only it is valid"

In this situation it is certainly legal,ethical,moral and necesary for a government to intervene and interfere.




No.



This law was approved by supreme court.So as you said courts only have intervened in specific matters to enforce equality of law.:thumb:



We talk about equality of people, not equality of states,countries,petrol resources etc.



Equality means equal before god,law and opportunities.we tax the rich and give concessions to poor to bring in equality.we give free treatment to handicapped to fit artifical body parts to bring equality.We try everything possible to enforce equality.

equality is an end,not means.We are fighting to bring in equality.Nobody says equality exists now.

If it exists we dont have need for any law.



If hindus had agreed voluntarily to allow all as priests,we dont need law.If they had earlier agreed to allow dalits inside temples,we dont need laws to enforce it.As you said these changed should have happened voluntarily.But they did not happen.without laws they will never happen.

sir - the main reason why some people are demanding 'rationalism' inside even orthodox temples is because, these temples are controlled by the govts. so under the pretext that priests are 'gvt. servants' & temples are 'public places' 'rationalists' & their apologists are trying to tamper with sacred and holy agamas. in a secular country what business does a govt. have controlling places of worship.?? moreover govts. are controlling only hindu places of worship and not mosques & churches. what sort of a 'rationalism' is this to control place of worship of one community only , and allow other communities scot free? surprisingly even the courts of india are dead silent on this issue. govts. controlling temples is a blatant, blatant violation of secular fabric & basic character of indian constitution which guarantees freedom of religion.
govts. should immediately transfer ownership of orthodox temples to private hindu monasteries.if they are not doing that, courts should order them to do so. until then 'social justice' , 'equality' & 'rationalism' will contine to hang as damocles swords above head of orthodox devotees!!!!!!

 

[NARAS]

'Pagutharivu' is a wonderful term which underlines the importance of understanding, analyzing & then deploying each & every information.

The seeds of "Pagutharivu" i would like to believe are sown in "Thirukkural" itself where Saint Thiruvalluvar says

"yepporul yaar yaar vai ketpinum,
apporul mei-p-porul kanbadarivu"

The Dravida clan has only used the "pagutharivu" to fuel hatred, discrimination and has contributed a lot to the creation of a divisive society. So their brand of "Pagutharivu" should be renamed as "Vagutharivu" - knowledge to divide (& rule)

sir - in t.nadu if you do not have 'padipparivu' that is education ,to earn you a job, then there are 3 alternatives for prospering -(you can select only 1 or 2 or if possible even all 3 !

1. pagutharivu i.e. 'rationalism'
2. politics &
3. porn films!

people like karunanidhi, kamalahaasa, satyarajan, vivekan, vairamutha etc., are examples! here is the latest 'pagutharivu' baffonery from the muthuvelar.

The muthuvelar govt. has issued an order saying that irrespective of the quality & merit of a film if the film has a 'tamil' title , it will be exempted from entertainment tax! so if you make a film with titles like 'saavu' , 'ezhavu', 'paadai', 'mayiru' or even 'vibachaari' it will be 100% exempt from entertainment tax, even if it is a porn film! but if you make a film on the holy paramacharya with the title 'paramacharya' the film will be taxed!!! what great 'pagutharivu'!!!!!

 

[hariharan1972]

Simply loved this one

The muthuvelar govt. has issued an order saying that irrespective of the quality & merit of a film if the film has a 'tamil' title , it will be exempted from entertainment tax! so if you make a film with titles like 'saavu' , 'ezhavu', 'paadai', 'mayiru' or even 'vibachaari' it will be 100% exempt from entertainment tax, even if it is a porn film!

Suresh,

I simply loved this comment. I collapsed on my bed LOL.

Anyways :

I am sure for even such movies our great lyricists v & v will be ready to pen lyrics...My guesses

a) For film 'mayiru' - Heroine singing in praise of Hero's hair

"Mayiru Mayirudhan, idhu sooper mayiru dhan, indha mayirukketha thairu yendudhan" (heroine selling curds)

b) For film 'ezhavu' - Hero is a doctor "celebrating" his 1000th operation failure

"Yenna ezhavu, yethanai ezhavu, kodi thodum yennoda ezhavu, indru yendhan mortuary serndhadhe"

c) Punch dialogue for 'Paadai'....Hero opposing a cunning, evil brahmin

"Dei Dei Dei, Periyar dhan da pagutharivu oodai, avaru vazhila vanda naan unakku kattuvenda paadai"

idhu yeppadi irukku !!!!!:llama:

 

[goundamani]

sir - the main reason why some people are demanding 'rationalism' inside even orthodox temples is because, these temples are controlled by the govts. so under the pretext that priests are 'gvt. servants' & temples are 'public places' 'rationalists' & their apologists are trying to tamper with sacred and holy agamas. in a secular country what business does a govt. have controlling places of worship.?? moreover govts. are controlling only hindu places of worship and not mosques & churches. what sort of a 'rationalism' is this to control place of worship of one community only , and allow other communities scot free? surprisingly even the courts of india are dead silent on this issue. govts. controlling temples is a blatant, blatant violation of secular fabric & basic character of indian constitution which guarantees freedom of religion.
govts. should immediately transfer ownership of orthodox temples to private hindu monasteries.if they are not doing that, courts should order them to do so. until then 'social justice' , 'equality' & 'rationalism' will contine to hang as damocles swords above head of orthodox devotees!!!!!!

Govt controlling hindu temples is a shame on our religion.It only shows hindus are incapable of governing their temples, which sadly is true.

The moments hindus stop casteism and bring in secularism and reforms inside temples, they should be handed over to a board which includes devotees from all castes.

Irrespective of who manages it,the ownership of temples should always remain with public.employees of temples shall always remain public servants. Whoever runs temples should always be answerable to public. Temples should not be beyond law and equality. Temples played a major role in creating untouchability and casteism. Now they should play an important role in eradicating untouchability and casteism.

 

[aditya]

Govt controlling hindu temples is a shame on our religion.It only shows hindus are incapable of governing their temples, which sadly is true.

How exactly are hindus managing their places of worship any differentlyfrom christians and muslims? Stop your foolish propaganda and baseless tirade. The fact that hindu temples are controlled by governments, whereas churches and mosques are not, is nothing to do with 'mis-management' and more to do with politics, power and money.

The moments hindus stop casteism and bring in secularism and reforms inside temples, they should be handed over to a board which includes devotees from all castes.

Doesn't this also imply that christian churches that ban dalit christians from entering their church should be taken to task by the government? Kindly remember - discrimination against dalits is also rampant and acute in christianity and islam. Yet, no government dares to interfere with the churches' and mosques' dicta, but will not hesitate to poke its nose into hindu affairs in the pretext of safeguarding the rights of the downtrodden.

What does 'secularism inside a temple' mean? While I agree that ALL should be allowed to worship inside a temple, I do not agree that anyone should be allowed to become a priest, without the necessary and arduous training that brahmin priests typically undergo. Since much of this long and arduous training for priesthood was typically undertaken by brahmins from a very early age, because it was their family profession passed on from generation to generation, any replacement of brahmins in large temples by other castes cannot be done ovenight.


Neither should the quality of priests be compromised in a rush to thrust lower castes/dalits to the position. As a matter of fact, there are already many small temples throughout TN that have priests from lower castes. Unfortunately, many of the priests in these temples do not have the training to go beyond the very basic; some can't recite slokas properly, or lack proper diction; they don't know much about the various rituals and traditions, and are unable to explain these rituals at length to average visitor or the common man.


In one temple I visited, the 'priest' waved the arti plate around the deity like he was waving a cigarette around, mumbled something (which might or might not have been a sloka), threw kumkum liberally on the diety, and then stuck the arti plate out to me with one hand, while scratching his hair luxuriously with the other. I'm sure though for that small temple, that's all pretty much what he needs to know, or do. However, there are large and historically very important temples that need priests who definitely need to know and do much more than that.

No one would dispute the fact that a doctor should undergo the necessary training (5-7 years, or whatever the number of years required), pass all his exams, and succesfully complete his internship, before he is allowed to practice. The more specialized he wants to be, the more stringent his training is supposed to be. No one would also suggest, especially in the US, that a person can be a professor without a PhD training, even if a smart aleck undergraduate and graduate student argues that he/she is equally qualified to do the job.


Yet, we all somehow seem to believe that the job of a priest doesn't entail much training or dedication- it's just waving the arti around, throwing kumkum or vibhudi on the deity, and breaking a coconut on the ground (or on anybody's feet). Well, the priest's job entails far more than that: he is supposed to be an authority on the various rituals and the specific tradition, scriptures, and slokas, and be able to guide the average visitor on various spiritual matters. As an example, when a childless female relative and her husband recently visited the kamakshi amman temple in Kancheepuram, the priest did a special archana for them for begetting a child, and recommeded certain rituals/homams for them. He also suggested a sloka that she could recite everyday at home for her own mental peace and for evoking blessings.


The extensive knowledge of temple priests on the various issues requires years of training and practice, which cannot be obtained from a 6-month diploma course. Perhaps, after a generation or two of training, non-brahmins will achieve proficiency in such matters and be able to take over as priests in large temples without compromising the quality of priestly tasks and responsibilities, but they do need to go through the same extensive training the way that brahmin priests have traditionally undergone.

Temples played a major role in creating untouchability and casteism. Now they should play an important role in eradicating untouchability and casteism.[/

Oh boy, another large sweeping statement! You can't blame temples for hsitorically appointing brahmins as temple priests, because that was what they, the brahmins, were trained for - just as courts appoint qualified lawyers and hospitals qualified doctors, nurses, and para-medics, and so forth. To suggest that brahmin priests should be replaced by non-brahmins simply as an expression of egalitarianism is like saying that nurses should be appointed as doctors, and para-medics should do the job of nurses as a way to bring about an egalitarian society.

 

[goundamani]

How exactly are hindus managing their places of worship any differentlyfrom christians and muslims? Stop your foolish propaganda and baseless tirade. The fact that hindu temples are controlled by governments, whereas churches and mosques are not, is nothing to do with 'mis-management' and more to do with politics, power and money. Doesn't this also imply that christian churches that ban dalit christians from entering their church should be taken to task by the government? Kindly remember - discrimination against dalits is also rampant and acute in christianity and islam. Yet, no government dares to interfere with the churches' and mosques' dicta, but will not hesitate to poke its nose into hindu affairs in the pretext of safeguarding the rights of the downtrodden.

Untouchability prevails in hinduism,islam and christianity.I agree with this.

But there are some major differences here.In Hindu temples at present by law and religious doctrines, 97% hindus cannot become priests. Whereas in islamic and christian places of worship by law and by religious policies people from any caste can become priests.

If a dalit is disallowed from becoming a priest in churches or mosques, he has legal remedies.He even has religious remedies.He can approach jamath or court and can get his problem fixed.But in Hinduism this opportunity is legally and religiously disallowed to dalits and OBC's.

If equal employment opportunities are refused in churches or mosques,it is against law and religion.But in hindu temples, it is completely legal and religiously acceptable.

I am not saying temples arent mismanaged .They are mismanaged and I feel sad about it. But I am afraid that if temples go out of government's hands even these opportunities to reform will be negated. I feel that mosques should also be bought under government control because currently they disallow entry to women, which I feel is totally outrageous.But i wouldnt say hindu reforms should be stalled until muslims reform(which I dont believe will ever happen)

That's why i say to change the system first and make our religion discrimination free.Then we all can discuss about who should run the temple.

And next, using harsh words will not make an argument succesful. We are here to debate an issue which plagues our religion and society. Harsh words will do no good to anybody.

What does 'secularism inside a temple' mean? While I agree that ALL should be allowed to worship inside a temple, I do not agree that anyone should be allowed to become a priest, without the necessary and arduous training that brahmin priests typically undergo. Since much of this long and arduous training for priesthood was typically undertaken by brahmins from a very early age, because it was their family profession passed on from generation to generation, any replacement of brahmins in large temples by other castes cannot be done ovenight.

In principle, do you agree that birth and caste are no bar for a person to become a priest?Him getting the necessary training and qualities is a different issue.But is birth and caste an issue here?

When a person satisfies all reasonable criteria to become a priest,would you care which caste he belongs to?Will that matter at all?

If your answer is "Birth and caste matters" then say so.I will answer that.

If your answer is "birth and caste doesnt matter.Only training and attitude matters" then I would say that it is very easy to train people for this job.when dalits become scientists and presidents, they can easily attain the necessary qualifications for this job.If not by a 6 month diploma, then by a 3 year degree.

Neither should the quality of priests be compromised in a rush to thrust lower castes/dalits to the position. As a matter of fact, there are already many small temples throughout TN that have priests from lower castes. Unfortunately, many of the priests in these temples do not have the training to go beyond the very basic; some can't recite slokas properly, or lack proper diction; they don't know much about the various rituals and traditions, and are unable to explain these rituals at length to average visitor or the common man.

Dont you think that this is a shame on our religion?

Bhramin priests are fluent in slokas and dalit preists are laggards.Doesnt this indicate that as a religion and as a society we have failed to train and educate one third of our brothers about the basic tenets of our religion?

In forums and websites we boast about the greatness of our religion.We lecture about the greatness of vedas in foreign countries.But why did we fail to take vedas and slokas to dalits?why did not they know anything about the greatest philosophical tradition that underlies hinduism?

If dalits lag behind in religious education,it is our duty to educate them.Them laggging behind should not be a reason for us to perpetually keep them in the dark.Train him .Give him job.Otherwise how will he learn? If he mispronounces a vedic slogan in temple, so what? God is full of mercy. He will understand why this happened. A child will learn to walk only if we help him. He cannot learn walking without falling down.

In one temple I visited, the 'priest' waved the arti plate around the deity like he was waving a cigarette around, mumbled something (which might or might not have been a sloka), threw kumkum liberally on the diety, and then stuck the arti plate out to me with one hand, while scratching his hair luxuriously with the other. I'm sure though for that small temple, that's all pretty much what he needs to know, or do. However, there are large and historically very important temples that need priests who definitely need to know and do much more than that.

For generations they were refused entry into big temples.Nobody taught them anything about vedas and agamas.How will they learn?How can you compare their pooja with that of a trained priest in big temples?

Given all the insults which were heaped on him in name of our religion,it is still surprising that he remains a hindu and even becomes a priest in a temple.So even if he does that pooja without any knowledge of agamas and shastras, it will be more pleasing to god than the poojas done in big temples.

In fact, god lives only in dalit temples. He doesnt live in temples which discriminate. What is there is just a stone idol, not god.Any pooja done in such a temple is wasted.

No one would dispute the fact that a doctor should undergo the necessary training (5-7 years, or whatever the number of years required), pass all his exams, and succesfully complete his internship, before he is allowed to practice. The more specialized he wants to be, the more stringent his training is supposed to be. No one would also suggest, especially in the US, that a person can be a professor without a PhD training, even if a smart aleck undergraduate and graduate student argues that he/she is equally qualified to do the job.

dalits satisfy all these criteria and become succesful doctors.So there is no reason why they cannot qualify for a poojari's job.

Yet, we all somehow seem to believe that the job of a priest doesn't entail much training or dedication- it's just waving the arti around, throwing kumkum or vibhudi on the deity, and breaking a coconut on the ground (or on anybody's feet). Well, the priest's job entails far more than that: he is supposed to be an authority on the various rituals and the specific tradition, scriptures, and slokas, and be able to guide the average visitor on various spiritual matters. As an example, when a childless female relative and her husband recently visited the kamakshi amman temple in Kancheepuram, the priest did a special archana for them for begetting a child, and recommeded certain rituals/homams for them. He also suggested a sloka that she could recite everyday at home for her own mental peace and for evoking blessings.

Dalits can do all this and even more than this.

They are in no way lesser human beings.

The extensive knowledge of temple priests on the various issues requires years of training and practice, which cannot be obtained from a 6-month diploma course. Perhaps, after a generation or two of training, non-brahmins will achieve proficiency in such matters and be able to take over as priests in large temples without compromising the quality of priestly tasks and responsibilities, but they do need to go through the same extensive training the way that brahmin priests have traditionally undergone.

They will do a better job if an opportunity is given.Without giving a chance, we cannot argue that "they cannot do this, they are unqualified etc etc"

 

[goundamani]

Oh boy, another large sweeping statement! You can't blame temples for hsitorically appointing brahmins as temple priests, because that was what they, the brahmins, were trained for - just as courts appoint qualified lawyers and hospitals qualified doctors, nurses, and para-medics, and so forth. To suggest that brahmin priests should be replaced by non-brahmins simply as an expression of egalitarianism is like saying that nurses should be appointed as doctors, and para-medics should do the job of nurses as a way to bring about an egalitarian society.

That was not a sweeping statement at all.Till the beginning of 20th century prostitution in name of devadasi system prevailed in temples.Till 1950, Dalits were denied entry into temples.I dont think god ever lived in such temples.The preists prayed to a stone in these temples and chanted manthras to a stone,not to god. God must have migrated to dalit temples before thousands of years itself. All the qualification you talk about means nothing to god.

If you compare big temples with dalit temples, from time immeorial dalits never allowed devadasis in temples. Dalits always have allowed people from all castes to enter their temple(nobody were willing to go is a different issue).But whereas in big temples , even though they were run by trained pundits,they allowed devadasis and stopped dalits from entering into them.

Which temple do you think was well managed? In which temple do you think god lived? Who do you think is more qualified to run a temple? Who do you think has more devotion?

Kannappa nayanar spat on god and offered him pork. God accepted that because of his devotion.God doesnt need these rituals. He needs kind hearts. He needs love, compassion and devotion. If a person doesnt have it,then whatever shastras he learnt,whatever vedas he memorized means nothing to god.

If a devoted dalit from a toilet cleaning family becomes a priest in tirupathi temple, god wouldnt care about his qualifications and knolwedge. God will be willing to forgive the mistakes he commits while performing poojas. God is much,much more merciful, forgiving and affectionate than you think him to be. These rituals mean much,much less than you make them out to be.

 

[murali]

goundamani sir,
your voice is the impassioned voice of a liberal.I respect it.But taking liberalism to its logical conclusion,why do we need temples with idols etc.

These sampradayas have been in vogue for a long time.They cater to the needs of the majority.Untouchability is not found in the vedas.Temple worship is not found either.

Yet temple worship has been around for ages.It is primarily meant for non-brahmins.I am not denigrating temple worship.It has an important part in srivaishnava religion,but not so much among smartas.Smarthas do not undervalue it.But it is for the masses of hindus.

I am sorry to say this.temples were patronised by kings,vellalas and naidus.They wanted brahmana priests and it is they who excluded dalits.We had little say in running temples,except agraharam temples.here too,social opinion was respected.

You rightly pointed out,a great agitation was launched by gandhiji for admitting harijans.Ambedkar did not think much of this,as he wanted dalits to go to school.

Even then,many temples in many parts of india (including thanjavur)did not allow dalits inside temples.It was a law only in paper.Things changed after independence because of changing social AND ECONOMIC mores.It was impossible to differentiate a dalit and a non dalit in the new milieu.

The temple priests have been in their professions for ages.Their devotion and knowledge cannot be replicated easily.

non-temple priests like us cannot touch the idol,nor can we do abhishekha or alankara.It requires deeksha.This a father gives to his son.In chidambaram,only a married dikshitar(who wife is still alive) can do puja.There are so many restrictions.we have no right to interfere in the traditional rights of archakas.

Respecting you for your liberal thoughts, i have a question.Will an orthodox brahmana countenance teaching vedas to a dalit in a veda patashala?

 

[NARAS]

Suresh,

I simply loved this comment. I collapsed on my bed LOL.

Anyways :

I am sure for even such movies our great lyricists v & v will be ready to pen lyrics...My guesses

a) For film 'mayiru' - Heroine singing in praise of Hero's hair

"Mayiru Mayirudhan, idhu sooper mayiru dhan, indha mayirukketha thairu yendudhan" (heroine selling curds)

b) For film 'ezhavu' - Hero is a doctor "celebrating" his 1000th operation failure

"Yenna ezhavu, yethanai ezhavu, kodi thodum yennoda ezhavu, indru yendhan mortuary serndhadhe"

c) Punch dialogue for 'Paadai'....Hero opposing a cunning, evil brahmin

"Dei Dei Dei, Periyar dhan da pagutharivu oodai, avaru vazhila vanda naan unakku kattuvenda paadai"

idhu yeppadi irukku !!!!!:llama:

sir - i am sure the above lyrics & dialogues will be copied by our 'great' lyricists V & V or some other lyric writer or dialogue writer soon!! we can expect a tamil film with above lyrics & dialogues i am sure - in a matter of few months!!!!!:amen: (particularly the 'mayiru' song!!!)

 

[NARAS]

Govt controlling hindu temples is a shame on our religion.It only shows hindus are incapable of governing their temples, which sadly is true.

The moments hindus stop casteism and bring in secularism and reforms inside temples, they should be handed over to a board which includes devotees from all castes.

Irrespective of who manages it,the ownership of temples should always remain with public.employees of temples shall always remain public servants. Whoever runs temples should always be answerable to public. Temples should not be beyond law and equality. Temples played a major role in creating untouchability and casteism. Now they should play an important role in eradicating untouchability and casteism.

sir - before arriving at a final conclusion as to whether orthodox temples not allowing non brahmins as priests is constitutionally discriminatory or not, we should first understand that it is the spirit of a particular law or constitutional provision which is more important than the letters. if iam saying about somebody that 'he is a tiger' that does not mean that the particular fellow is an animal without any rational thinking! it only means that the fellow is a courageous person! similarly the important question in this matter is - did the founders of temples have any ULTERIOR MOTIVE in not allowing non brahmins as priest in orthodox temples? my answer is a BIG NO!!! pls. consider the following-

1. even brahmin gods of rival sects cannot enter sanctumsanctorum of orthodox temples!!

2. even brahmin priests of rival sects cannot enter sanctum sanctorum!!

3. even brahmins born outside priestly families of same sect cannot become priests or enter santum sanctorum of orthodox temples!!

the above facts clearly proves that our forefathers & ancestors did not have any ulterior motive in disallowing non brahmins as priests in orthodox temples. had they allowed all brahmins & disallowed all non brahmins then the charges of 'discrimination' & 'untouchability' would have had some meaning. but the fact that they have imposed restrictions even on brahmin gods, brahmin devotees and brahmin priests also clearly proves that there is no proof of any ulterior motive. so the charge of 'discrimination' & 'untouchability' is absurd and i am dismissing this charge with the contempt they deserve!!

in fact, it is the 'rationalists' who have ulterior motives. they have always abused & ridiculed brahmins. so they want to impose non bramins in brahmin temples out of sheer jealousy and stomach burning, to reduce the relatively higher levels of popularity which orthodox temples are currently enjoying inspite of the fact that 'rationalists' have dabbled in orthodox temples for so many years!!!! the motive of the 'rationalists ' is highly suspect and so they cannot be believed at all! they are anti nationalists who opposed our freedom struggle & supported british barbarism. the founders of 'rationalism' are well known illiterates. they do not have any sort of credibility at all!!!!!

 

[aditya]

QUOTE]

If a dalit is disallowed from becoming a priest in churches or mosques, he has legal remedies.He even has religious remedies...If equal employment opportunities are refused in churches or mosques,it is against law and religion.But in hindu temples, it is completely legal and religiously acceptable.

"The problem in christianity can be fixed quickly, especially through religious remedies" - the statement erroneously conveys a rosy, optimistic image of Christianity - far different from how christianity is actually practiced everywhere. The reality is that christianity is one of the most stubborn religionsa among all religions, with exception of islam. The result of that stubbornness is borne out by the numerous factions that exist within christianity.


Each time there is dissent within the church over some social issue, it ends with the faction group breaking away from the mainstream church and setting up a new church. We have seen this timelessly, with the separation of protestant factions from the catholic church in the past, and in the more recent times, factions breaking away to set up their own church over the appointment of female priests, gay priests, black priests, etc. So, Christianity is very bad example of how social and religious issues should be resolved.

As for islam, there is nothing much to talk about, as you have already pointed out. The scenario is just as bleak as in christianity.

If your answer is "birth and caste doesnt matter.Only training and attitude matters" then I would say that it is very easy to train people for this job.when dalits become scientists and presidents, they can easily attain the necessary qualifications for this job.If not by a 6 month diploma, then by a 3 year degree.

The two (caste and birth) were not exclusive because professional training in priesthood have been passed on from generation to generation and thus has been birth-based. Now what you are basically getting at is, whether I would care whether someone born of another caste can take on priestly duties. I have already clearly stated that training is critical for this profession – the intense training that Brahmins have had from childhood, from generation to generation, from time immemorial. And here you are talking about a 3 month-3 year diploma?

Temple priesthood is a way of life. It is not about chanting a few slokas and learning the steps of basic worship. The average worshipper can do that. Besides bein extremely proficient in the vedas, agamas and other scriptures, the families of priests have tradionally maintained a specific lifestyle for generations – vegetarianism, hygiene principles, ban on certain food types, regular conduct of rituals at home after priestly duties at temples, etc. It is not an easy life! They are basically the guardians of the scriptures, and responsible for ensuring its survival and transmission to the next generation of hindus. Not all Brahmins today stand upto the rigorous lifestyle of priesthood and are eagerly lining up to opt for the job, as one can see by the number of Brahmins unable to practice even some of the more basic requirements of brahminism.

Being a doctor, scientist, or president on the other hand doesn’t entail adopting a certain way of life, whereas for a priest, the responsibilities go above and beyond the call of temple hours and duties. The question is, can the entire family of the dalit or from any other caste adopt the strict lifestyle based on restrictions and rigorous religious practices and discipline? If the aspiring candidates are able to adopt the lifestyle, and adhere to all the recommended sastras and practices, they become the ‘brahmins’ and there is no reason why they shouldn't be entitled to become priests.

If he mispronounces a vedic slogan in temple, so what? God is full of mercy. He will understand why this happened. A child will learn to walk only if we help him. He cannot learn walking without falling down.

The argument on whether or not god minds our mistakes when performing puja is not the issue. It is expected that the average worshipper, basically you and I, will make mistakes when he conducts rituals - that's why the professional priests were appointed -to take up the responsibility, and to guide and instruct all those who are not adept in the sastras.

For that matter, god never asked or insisted anyone to be a temple priest for attaining salvation and realizing him. It is YOU who insists on wanting that responsibility, and nowhere does it say in the Vedas, or the Gita, that a dalit (or a ‘brahmin’ who no longer follows a brahminical way of life, or person of any other caste) with pure devotion in his heart will not attain the gates of heaven or the kingdom of god (to use Christian phrases).

For generations they were refused entry into big temples.Nobody taught them anything about vedas and agamas.How will they learn?How can you compare their pooja with that of a trained priest in big temples?

The solution is not to install him there as priest simply as a political statement. Politics and religion don’t mix. The Christians mixed it; the muslims mixed it, and look where both the religions are in the world today – hated, feared, and seen as lacking entirely in spiritual depth. Again, temple priesthood training begins from early childhood and entails adherence to a certain lifestyle.

Given all the insults which were heaped on him in name of our religion,it is still surprising that he remains a hindu and even becomes a priest in a temple.

The faith and devotion of dalits to Hinduism is indeed admirable - I wish others, including the DMK stalwarts who insist that Hinduism, and the vedas, is all rubbish, while remaining mysteriously mum over the more fanatical religions of Christianity and islam, would emulate and learn from them. Their devotion is in no way undermined, anymore than yours or mine, because they are not temple priests.

So even if he does that pooja without any knowledge of agamas and shastras, it will be more pleasing to god than the poojas done in big temples.

The Divine is no doubt pleased with ANY effort we make to reach out him and serve him in our own humble way - so why the debate over whether dalits should occupy the priest position in large temples - a position that calls for the adoption of a drastic change in lifestyle, enormous spiritual responsibilities, and extensive scholarship on Vedas, agamas, and other scriptures?

In fact, god lives only in dalit temples. He doesnt live in temples which discriminate. What is there is just a stone idol, not god.Any pooja done in such a temple is wasted.

If that isn't harsh, I wonder what is. The statement sounds disturbingly like a DMK slogan. The same observation can be made for those wanting to pursue reverse discrimination and keen on punishing a generation, that is not involved in oppression or subjugation of another community, for things that happened in the past.

Dalits can do all this and even more than this.

They are in no way lesser human beings.

No one has said they are lesser beings. Neither the Vedas nor the Gita, nor the Brahmins or upper-castes of today. Lets stop being dramatic. The emotional drama has nothing to do with the reality. The reality is: first, brahmins are NOT the ones subjugating and oppressing the dalits today. Second, the issue of who should best serve as priests in large temples is more to do with what is the best way of ensuring the preservation of the knowedge of scriptures and transmitting it to the common worshipper in need of advice and guidance, than about delibrate discrimination.

The goal should be greater unity among hindus and the upliftment of a needy community, without resorting to bringing down, or crushing, another community. But, if the intent is simply to punish one group for the alleged deeds of their forefathers, then the issue is more about revenge and vengeance than social justice and upliftment of hindus society as whole, the conversation should stop here once for all.

 

[goundamani]

"The problem in christianity can be fixed quickly, especially through religious remedies" - the statement erroneously conveys a rosy, optimistic image of Christianity - far different from how christianity is actually practiced everywhere. The reality is that christianity is one of the most stubborn religionsa among all religions, with exception of islam. The result of that stubbornness is borne out by the numerous factions that exist within christianity. Each time there is dissent within the church over some social issue, it ends with the faction group breaking away from the mainstream church and setting up a new church. We have seen this timelessly, with the separation of protestant factions from the catholic church in the past, and in the more recent times, factions breaking away to set up their own church over the appointment of female priests, gay priests, black priests, etc. So, Christianity is very bad example of how social and religious issues should be resolved. As for islam, there is nothing much to talk about, as you have already pointed out. The scenario is just as bleak as in christianity.

Orthodox hinduism, orthodox christianity and orthodox islam all are equally bad, anti-human and foolish religions.Hinduism as preached by orthodox people reminds me of osama-bin-ladens version of Islam, Ignatius loyola's version of christianity, stalin's version of communism and Hitler's version of Nazism.

But hinduism practiced by the average, secular hindu in the country fills my heart with happiness and pleasure.An average hindu is secular, peace loving, respectful to all religions and gods and innocent.When I see such people, I am truely proud to be a hindu.I am proud of my religion.

Apart from hinduism,I see such secularism and broad mindedness only among christians. Like the Hindu society, christian society tries to reform. It shuns off orthodoxy and tries to make it a reformed religion.Like Hinduism, it has its own problems.Like Hinduism, it has its own mechanism to address these problems. In this aspect I find these religions to be similiar.

Now I strongly believe that a true hindu is one who has denounced vedas.A true christian is one who has denounced bible.A true muslim is one who has denounced quran.One becomes a human being only if he comes away from these books. People who follow these books word by word become raving maniacs, talibanistic and inhuman.

Parts of these books are great,inspirational and divine.Parts of these books are foolish.Parts of these books are barbaric.

The two (caste and birth) were not exclusive because professional training in priesthood have been passed on from generation to generation and thus has been birth-based. Now what you are basically getting at is, whether I would care whether someone born of another caste can take on priestly duties. I have already clearly stated that training is critical for this profession – the intense training that Brahmins have had from childhood, from generation to generation, from time immemorial. And here you are talking about a 3 month-3 year diploma?

Priest job needs training from generation to generation?ha..ha.

That is why I said a dalit priest will satisfy any reasonable criteria for a priest's job. Not the criteria which you have in mind. You expect that a dalit priest should become a brahmin and live like a brahmin. No..he wont. He can't. I dont think it is necessary at all.

He will satisfy any reasonable criteria. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Temple priesthood is a way of life. It is not about chanting a few slokas and learning the steps of basic worship. The average worshipper can do that. Besides bein extremely proficient in the vedas, agamas and other scriptures, the families of priests have tradionally maintained a specific lifestyle for generations – vegetarianism, hygiene principles, ban on certain food types, regular conduct of rituals at home after priestly duties at temples, etc. It is not an easy life!

They are basically the guardians of the scriptures, and responsible for ensuring its survival and transmission to the next generation of hindus. Not all Brahmins today stand upto the rigorous lifestyle of priesthood and are eagerly lining up to opt for the job, as one can see by the number of Brahmins unable to practice even some of the more basic requirements of brahminism.

I understand what you are saying. I think you are describing the process of how a dalit can become a brahmin, but I am talking about how a dalit can become a priest. Both are not one and same. Further these rules apply to brahmanism and not to hinduism. (Mr.suresh might describe the differences between brahmanism and hinduism). Dalits dont have any necessity to memorize vedas and spread it from generation to generation. This need not prevent them from becoming priests. To become a priest, one doesnt necessarily need to become a brahmin.

TN government has appointed a comittee headed by different saints to decide the criteria needed for a priest's job. I am waiting to hear the qualification and job descriptions defined by the comittee.

Being a doctor, scientist, or president on the other hand doesn’t entail adopting a certain way of life, whereas for a priest, the responsibilities go above and beyond the call of temple hours and duties. The question is, can the entire family of the dalit or from any other caste adopt the strict lifestyle based on restrictions and rigorous religious practices and discipline? If the aspiring candidates are able to adopt the lifestyle, and adhere to all the recommended sastras and practices, they become the ‘brahmins’ and there is no reason why they shouldn't be entitled to become priests.

Dalits need not become brahmins to become priests. There is no reason as to why his family should change their life style for him.

The argument on whether or not god minds our mistakes when performing puja is not the issue. It is expected that the average worshipper, basically you and I, will make mistakes when he conducts rituals - that's why the professional priests were appointed -to take up the responsibility, and to guide and instruct all those who are not adept in the sastras.

For that matter, god never asked or insisted anyone to be a temple priest for attaining salvation and realizing him. It is YOU who insists on wanting that responsibility, and nowhere does it say in the Vedas, or the Gita, that a dalit (or a ‘brahmin’ who no longer follows a brahminical way of life, or person of any other caste) with pure devotion in his heart will not attain the gates of heaven or the kingdom of god (to use Christian phrases).

God never asked anything.See...thats what i always say.Gods vedas and gita did not levy any conditions for a person to become a priest.Its humans who levy such conditions.

what is imposed by humans can be changed by humans.Simple.

The solution is not to install him there as priest simply as a political statement. Politics and religion don’t mix. The Christians mixed it; the muslims mixed it, and look where both the religions are in the world today – hated, feared, and seen as lacking entirely in spiritual depth.

It is not a political statement.It is his fundamental human right guaranteed in the constitution.Nobody can take it away from him.It is his temple, his religion, his god, his government.(Also ours)

Again, temple priesthood training begins from early childhood and entails adherence to a certain lifestyle.

Priesthood begins from childhood..?No

Priesthood needs a reasonable code of conduct..yes.

The Divine is no doubt pleased with ANY effort we make to reach out him and serve him in our own humble way - so why the debate over whether dalits should occupy the priest position in large temples - a position that calls for the adoption of a drastic change in lifestyle, enormous spiritual responsibilities, and extensive scholarship on Vedas, agamas, and other scriptures?

Let me ask this question just out of curiosity.I am not saying this will happen , but just out of curiosity.I ask this only because you said "The Divine is no doubt pleased with ANY effort we make to reach out him and serve him in our own humble way"

If a devotional dalit, who eats meat (at his house), who knows tamil devotional verses only, does pooja in traditional temples, would God mind?

As per your previous statement, god wouldnt mind.

So why should we also mind?

What needs to change is our mindset and not he.

 

[goundamani]

No one has said they are lesser beings. Neither the Vedas nor the Gita, nor the Brahmins or upper-castes of today. Lets stop being dramatic. The emotional drama has nothing to do with the reality. The reality is: first, brahmins are NOT the ones subjugating and oppressing the dalits today. Second, the issue of who should best serve as priests in large temples is more to do with what is the best way of ensuring the preservation of the knowedge of scriptures and transmitting it to the common worshipper in need of advice and guidance, than about delibrate discrimination.

I never said only brahmins oppress dalits.It is done by all.

The goal should be greater unity among hindus and the upliftment of a needy community, without resorting to bringing down, or crushing, another community. But, if the intent is simply to punish one group for the alleged deeds of their forefathers, then the issue is more about revenge and vengeance than social justice and upliftment of hindus society as whole, the conversation should stop here once for all.

I perfectly agree with this.

 

[goundamani]

goundamani sir,
your voice is the impassioned voice of a liberal.I respect it.But taking liberalism to its logical conclusion,why do we need temples with idols etc.

Dear Mr.pappan,
Thanks for the appreciative words. But that's a wrong interpretation of liberalism.Liberals are what their name implies,liberals.

Liberalism means freedom.It means equity,liberty and fraternity.You can be an atheist and be a liberal.You can be a theist and be a liberal.

These sampradayas have been in vogue for a long time.They cater to the needs of the majority.Untouchability is not found in the vedas.Temple worship is not found either.

So the job is simple,right.They werent said in vedas and geetha.They are just a practice which are there for a long time.Thats all.

Yet temple worship has been around for ages.It is primarily meant for non-brahmins.I am not denigrating temple worship.It has an important part in srivaishnava religion,but not so much among smartas.Smarthas do not undervalue it.But it is for the masses of hindus.

Let us drop the word smarthas which denotes a caste.Let us take the word advaitha which is global.

Advaithis argue that everything is one.But they see humans as four.They say advaitha is mercy and compassion. But they argue for child marriage, prevention of widow remarriage and upholding varna dharma.(I can give quotes of great advaithin saints who say so,if you want)

So, I am totally disillusioned with them.They dont practice what they preach (I understand that they say "By seeing varnas as 4 we can attain a mindset where we see all as one".But that sounds totally illogical to me.According to me ,Advaithis will never become advaithis as long as they practice advaitha vaishnavism practiced by iskcon is much more liberal.Even blacks,women,whites and russians become priests in vaishnavism.That is why I love vaishnavism.It is much,much more liberal and secular than advaitha)

I am sorry to say this.temples were patronised by kings,vellalas and naidus. They wanted brahmana priests and it is they who excluded dalits.We had little say in running temples,except agraharam temples.here too,social opinion was respected.

Its all history.Let us correct the mistakes of the past,mistakes of our ancestors and create a new world.

The temple priests have been in their professions for ages.Their devotion and knowledge cannot be replicated easily.

You are wrong.

Their knolwedge in vedas cannot be replicated. But their devotion can (and is) be replicated by many.

non-temple priests like us cannot touch the idol,nor can we do abhishekha or alankara.It requires deeksha.This a father gives to his son.In chidambaram,only a married dikshitar(who wife is still alive) can do puja.There are so many restrictions.we have no right to interfere in the traditional rights of archakas.

To touch an idol one doesnt need deeksha. One needs only to remove the restriction that one needs deeksha to touch an idol.

All such restrictions are man made.What was made by one man can be removed by another man.

Respecting you for your liberal thoughts, i have a question. Will an orthodox brahmana countenance teaching vedas to a dalit in a veda patashala?

It's like asking, will a mullah approve a woman's right to wear bikini.

The one who needs to change is the mullah and not the woman.

 

[hariharan1972]

Good Discussion / Stereotypes - Breaking few; Creating few

M/s Goundamani, Aditya, Pappan, Suresh

Wonderful discussion. I really enjoyed going thru all your posts. Some very good points on both sides.

The long & short of the discussion as i understand seems to be :

Whether the historical/hierarchical/traditional system of appointment of priests should be respected / followed ; Is priesthood something that can be acquired ; If yes, should that person making a substantial change to his lifestyle

Since i am not as well versed as you guys are in arguing from fundamental standpoints, let me put forward my thoughts with a layman approach.

In my personal view, i care 2 hoots about the priest (no offence meant). I personally don't need anyone between me & god. Infact i consciously try avoiding visiting temples on 'auspicious days' because of the unnecessary restrictions imposed on that day etc... I am of the firm belief that there is no good or bad day to reach out to HIM.

Hence personally i am not too worried on the credentials of the priest.

Having said that i do believe that a general decorum is required & expect it to be maintained in temples. What is that & who will define that, i am not sure.

In this whole set of discussions, there are a few stereotypes which have been shattered & a few created or reiterated.

I am extremely glad that Mr Aditya made the point regarding not persecuting the current generation of Brahmins for past issues. This is the plank of the Dravida clan which has been consistently whipping up the passions of the non-brahmin community for evils that happened several decades ago. It is their steadfastedness that is not allowing the other communities to put the past behind & look forward.

I am also agreeing to Mr Goundamani's views on removing artificial glass cielings that inhibit growth of any community. However i disagree with his views (which i find stereotypical) that the one who denounces Veda is a true hindu etc... I am not an expert on Veda (infact i know nothing) but i believe vedas bear testimony to the rich legacy & heritage of Hinduism & it cannot be consigned to the dustbins for certain views which are contemporarily objectionable.

Anyways good discussion & let's keep peeling the onion further.:thumb:

 

[murali]

goundamani sir,
1.agree about liberal theists and atheists.did not phrase my thoughts well.

2.Today dalits revere ambedkar more than gandhiji.It might seem irrelevant,but K.R.Narayanan,Meera kumar,Ram Vilas Paswan,Parithi Ilamvazhuthi generaly take an anti-brahmin.The dalit neo-elites also act as brahmins.I am also a liberal and i also believe the way forward is only the way of equality of opportunities.what i am saying is that though gandhiji did great things,the real inspiration has to come from within.Let the demand come.

3.Do we have the right to interfere in something,i repeat, smarthas have only an oblique involvement.The temple priests have been charge of the traditions for so long.some guidance might have come from smarthas.But essentially agamas have a life of their own.

4.ISKCON,I believe is rootless.It is a harbinger for the future.I have the greatest respect for chaitanya mahaprabhu.The truth is religion cannot be divorced from the milieu.That is why we are smarthas.And Ramana and others like him are Jnanis.
The gaudiya tradition does not acknowledge murugan or mariamman.Nor does it allows atheism.One can be a smartha and an atheist,at the beginning level.The smrithis are not sacrosanct.We are not like our forefathers.

5.sir,you have not answered my question on veda patashalas.it will create a storm.we have to be mindful of the feeling of majority.The idea of "SHOUCHA"( purity) is deep rooted in our religion.Only a paramahamsa sanyasi,who has attained sama dhrishti,is beyond it.In secular matters,the only way is forward.

 

[hariharan1972]

Great point !!!!

2.Today dalits revere ambedkar more than gandhiji.It might seem irrelevant,but K.R.Narayanan,Meera kumar,Ram Vilas Paswan,Parithi Ilamvazhuthi generaly take an anti-brahmin.The dalit neo-elites also act as brahmins.I am also a liberal and i also believe the way forward is only the way of equality of opportunities.what i am saying is that though gandhiji did great things,the real inspiration has to come from within.Let the demand come.

pappan sir,

fabulous, fabulous point.....I will slightly modify though

I think the DEMAND IS THERE.....but know what, the Dravida powers are "FILTERING" THE DEMAND. The problem is that the guys who are really inspired & want to break all the shackles don't have DIRECT ACCESS. The Dravida clan is acting as the "middlemen". They have successfully brainwashed the "real inspired guys" into believing that they need only ONLY their caste as the ticket & passport to success. So they have diverted the DEMAND from "real, tangible requirements" to a cacaphony on caste. By supressing the voice of the inspired, aspiring group within the Dalit community, the Dravida clan is ensuring that their domination on them is complete.

 

[lotus_quartz]

Bravo! Hear ! Hear !

Wonderful standpoint!
Majority of youngsters (me included) and majority of well educated, intelligent, rational human beings (again, allow me the modesty of including myself in this category) care two hoots about who stands between me and my God. I have already expressed my opinion else where on this site that I prefer saying my prayers in silence and in solitude and that interpreters and middlemen of God do not figure any where in the list of people I resepct or admire. , And finally, ok, let us admit it - when we come out of any temple visit, how many of us bothered to remember the name and face of the priest?

And while we are on the issue of Temples, there is another aspect which I have always found questionable: Hindu Temples are so grand in their size, architecture, deisgn, grandeur and glory but why the sanctum-sanctorum (Garbha Griha) is so narrow, congested , dark, dank and smoke filled ? Why do the devotees have to jostle in hot sultry tropical climate for darshan? Can't anything be done to make things better? Fortunately, the Birla Temples in various cities have started to rectify the inherent flaw in design. There, the sanctum-sanctorum is quite spacious, well lit and clean.

In my personal view, i care 2 hoots about the priest (no offence meant). I personally don't need anyone between me & god. Infact i consciously try avoiding visiting temples on 'auspicious days' because of the unnecessary restrictions imposed on that day etc... I am of the firm belief that there is no good or bad day to reach out to HIM.

 

[lotus_quartz]

Bravo! Hear ! Hear !

Wonderful standpoint!
Majority of youngsters (me included) and majority of well educated, intelligent, rational human beings (again, allow me the modesty of including myself in this category) care two hoots about who stands between me and my God. I have already expressed my opinion else where on this site that I prefer saying my prayers in silence and in solitude and that interpreters and middlemen of God do not figure any where in the list of people I resepct or admire. , And finally, ok, let us admit it - when we come out of any temple visit, how many of us bothered to remember the name and face of the priest?

And while we are on the issue of Temples, there is another aspect which I have always found questionable: Hindu Temples are so grand in their size, architecture, deisgn, grandeur and glory but why the sanctum-sanctorum (Garbha Griha) is so narrow, congested , dark, dank and smoke filled ? Why do the devotees have to jostle in hot sultry tropical climate for darshan? Can't anything be done to make things better? Fortunately, the Birla Temples in various cities have started to rectify the flaw in design. There, the sanctum-sanctorum is quite spacious, well lit and clean.

In my personal view, i care 2 hoots about the priest (no offence meant). I personally don't need anyone between me & god. Infact i consciously try avoiding visiting temples on 'auspicious days' because of the unnecessary restrictions imposed on that day etc... I am of the firm belief that there is no good or bad day to reach out to HIM.

 

[NARAS]

QUOTE]

"The problem in christianity can be fixed quickly, especially through religious remedies" - the statement erroneously conveys a rosy, optimistic image of Christianity - far different from how christianity is actually practiced everywhere. The reality is that christianity is one of the most stubborn religionsa among all religions, with exception of islam. The result of that stubbornness is borne out by the numerous factions that exist within christianity.


Each time there is dissent within the church over some social issue, it ends with the faction group breaking away from the mainstream church and setting up a new church. We have seen this timelessly, with the separation of protestant factions from the catholic church in the past, and in the more recent times, factions breaking away to set up their own church over the appointment of female priests, gay priests, black priests, etc. So, Christianity is very bad example of how social and religious issues should be resolved.

As for islam, there is nothing much to talk about, as you have already pointed out. The scenario is just as bleak as in christianity.


The two (caste and birth) were not exclusive because professional training in priesthood have been passed on from generation to generation and thus has been birth-based. Now what you are basically getting at is, whether I would care whether someone born of another caste can take on priestly duties. I have already clearly stated that training is critical for this profession – the intense training that Brahmins have had from childhood, from generation to generation, from time immemorial. And here you are talking about a 3 month-3 year diploma?

Temple priesthood is a way of life. It is not about chanting a few slokas and learning the steps of basic worship. The average worshipper can do that. Besides bein extremely proficient in the vedas, agamas and other scriptures, the families of priests have tradionally maintained a specific lifestyle for generations – vegetarianism, hygiene principles, ban on certain food types, regular conduct of rituals at home after priestly duties at temples, etc. It is not an easy life! They are basically the guardians of the scriptures, and responsible for ensuring its survival and transmission to the next generation of hindus. Not all Brahmins today stand upto the rigorous lifestyle of priesthood and are eagerly lining up to opt for the job, as one can see by the number of Brahmins unable to practice even some of the more basic requirements of brahminism.

Being a doctor, scientist, or president on the other hand doesn’t entail adopting a certain way of life, whereas for a priest, the responsibilities go above and beyond the call of temple hours and duties. The question is, can the entire family of the dalit or from any other caste adopt the strict lifestyle based on restrictions and rigorous religious practices and discipline? If the aspiring candidates are able to adopt the lifestyle, and adhere to all the recommended sastras and practices, they become the ‘brahmins’ and there is no reason why they shouldn't be entitled to become priests.

The argument on whether or not god minds our mistakes when performing puja is not the issue. It is expected that the average worshipper, basically you and I, will make mistakes when he conducts rituals - that's why the professional priests were appointed -to take up the responsibility, and to guide and instruct all those who are not adept in the sastras.

For that matter, god never asked or insisted anyone to be a temple priest for attaining salvation and realizing him. It is YOU who insists on wanting that responsibility, and nowhere does it say in the Vedas, or the Gita, that a dalit (or a ‘brahmin’ who no longer follows a brahminical way of life, or person of any other caste) with pure devotion in his heart will not attain the gates of heaven or the kingdom of god (to use Christian phrases).

The solution is not to install him there as priest simply as a political statement. Politics and religion don’t mix. The Christians mixed it; the muslims mixed it, and look where both the religions are in the world today – hated, feared, and seen as lacking entirely in spiritual depth. Again, temple priesthood training begins from early childhood and entails adherence to a certain lifestyle.

The faith and devotion of dalits to Hinduism is indeed admirable - I wish others, including the DMK stalwarts who insist that Hinduism, and the vedas, is all rubbish, while remaining mysteriously mum over the more fanatical religions of Christianity and islam, would emulate and learn from them. Their devotion is in no way undermined, anymore than yours or mine, because they are not temple priests.

The Divine is no doubt pleased with ANY effort we make to reach out him and serve him in our own humble way - so why the debate over whether dalits should occupy the priest position in large temples - a position that calls for the adoption of a drastic change in lifestyle, enormous spiritual responsibilities, and extensive scholarship on Vedas, agamas, and other scriptures?

If that isn't harsh, I wonder what is. The statement sounds disturbingly like a DMK slogan. The same observation can be made for those wanting to pursue reverse discrimination and keen on punishing a generation, that is not involved in oppression or subjugation of another community, for things that happened in the past.

No one has said they are lesser beings. Neither the Vedas nor the Gita, nor the Brahmins or upper-castes of today. Lets stop being dramatic. The emotional drama has nothing to do with the reality. The reality is: first, brahmins are NOT the ones subjugating and oppressing the dalits today. Second, the issue of who should best serve as priests in large temples is more to do with what is the best way of ensuring the preservation of the knowedge of scriptures and transmitting it to the common worshipper in need of advice and guidance, than about delibrate discrimination.

The goal should be greater unity among hindus and the upliftment of a needy community, without resorting to bringing down, or crushing, another community. But, if the intent is simply to punish one group for the alleged deeds of their forefathers, then the issue is more about revenge and vengeance than social justice and upliftment of hindus society as whole, the conversation should stop here once for all.

sir - i fully agree with aditya. priethood is not an employment like chiefminister of t.nadu, which any tom, dick &harry can become. priest is expected to be an expert in slokas & strictures, adhere to pure vegeteranism, teetotallerism etc. priests are not only guardians of temples, they are the axis around whom temples revolve. without priests temples are nothing! moreover a priest is also expected to prepare some one from his family, preferabbly his son for priesthood in future, after his retirement. it was & is easy for present priest to prepare their offsprings for priesthood, since the entire family right from birth is devoted to priesthood! it is in their, blood, genes & all over their body & life! will it be easy even for brahmins outside priestly families to prepare even 1 successor in their whole life time for priesthood? when brahmins outside priestly families cannot do that , how can non brahmins do that?

priests are not middlemen or brokers. they are specialists in shastras, slokas & scriptures who have devoted their entire life to service of god. to abuse such holy persons as middlemen , only shows the ignorance of the abuser!! temples were built by devotees as a mark of respect to god. so the builders wanted high standards to be maintained in these places of worship. so we need specialists to take care of them. priests are to temples, what mother is to child!!!

if a true hindu is one who has denounced the vedas, then is a true husband one who denounces his wife? is a true son, one who denounces his parents? is a true wife one who denounces her own husband? is a true parent onewho denounces his or her own child?????

though rules, regulations & laws are made by humans only, they can be changed only if it is proved that the motive of the founders of the rule or law is offensive. in the absence of any proof to establish that there was an ulterior motive in bringing these rules or regulations or laws, there should not be any change at all. change just for the sake of change is absurd!!!!

BTW, CHRISTIANITY IS AN EXTREMELY INTOLERANT RELIGION. CHRISTIANS INVADED VARIOUS PARTS OF THE WORLD, SPREAD THEIR RELIGION THROUGH MONEY POWER & CHANGED THE DEMOGRAPHIC PATTERN OF MANY COUNTRIES! IN INDIA THEY SPREAD MANY LIES ABOUT HINDUISM FOR E.G. ARYAN INVASION ETC., & CREATED A BIG DIVIDE & BITTERNESS BETWEEN BRAHMINS & NON BRAHMINS. ABUSING OTHER RELIGIONS IS LIKE EATING HALWA FOR ORTHODOX CHRISTIANS! HOW CAN THIS RELIGION BE CALLED 'LIBERAL'?????

 

[NARAS]

Wonderful standpoint!
Majority of youngsters (me included) and majority of well educated, intelligent, rational human beings (again, allow me the modesty of including myself in this category) care two hoots about who stands between me and my God. I have already expressed my opinion else where on this site that I prefer saying my prayers in silence and in solitude and that interpreters and middlemen of God do not figure any where in the list of people I resepct or admire. , And finally, ok, let us admit it - when we come out of any temple visit, how many of us bothered to remember the name and face of the priest?

And while we are on the issue of Temples, there is another aspect which I have always found questionable: Hindu Temples are so grand in their size, architecture, deisgn, grandeur and glory but why the sanctum-sanctorum (Garbha Griha) is so narrow, congested , dark, dank and smoke filled ? Why do the devotees have to jostle in hot sultry tropical climate for darshan? Can't anything be done to make things better? Fortunately, the Birla Temples in various cities have started to rectify the flaw in design. There, the sanctum-sanctorum is quite spacious, well lit and clean.

sir - sanctum sanctorm is place where gods & priests reside. since god & priests do not like grandeur, this place is always small, dark & very simple. the reason why devotees are jostling in hot climate is because of large population in india! due to this large population, most of the days there are huge crowds, leading to jostling!!!

 

[NARAS]

In my personal view, i care 2 hoots about the priest (no offence meant). I personally don't need anyone between me & god. Infact i consciously try avoiding visiting temples on 'auspicious days' because of the unnecessary restrictions imposed on that day etc... I am of the firm belief that there is no good or bad day to reach out to HIM.

[/quote]

sir - a very important, basic & fundamental principle of orthodox hinduism is 'ATHIHI DEVO BHAVA'!! This means , if a person comes to your place as a guest, he or she is equivalent to god. 'ATHITHI DEVO BHAVA' lays emphasis on hospitality. the founders and builders of temples, based on this principle, to serve the devotees who come to the temples, appointed the priests. priests are not a hindrance between god and devotee. temples were built as a mark of respect to god. so on certain days, people flock to temples in more numbers than other days to record their respect as these are auspicious days for devotees. the motive is only to register their respect. do not people celebrate the birthdays of their beloved ones ??? then what is wrong in celebrating auspicious occassions connected with god???
SINCE INDIA'S POPULATION IS LARGE, NUMBER OF DEVOTEES IS ALSO NATURALLY HIGH, AND THEREFORE CROWDS PILE UP DURING AUSPICIOUS DAYS, IN TEMPLES, LEADING TO SOME PERSONS GETTING FRUSTRATED AS THEY HAVE TO STAND IN QUEUES FOR LONG HOURS. THESE FRUSTRATED PERSONS NATURALLY BRING FORTH NEW THEORIES LIKE ' I DO NOT NEED MIDDLEMEN BETWEEN ME & GOD!' & ' THERE IS NO NEED FOR A SPECIAL DAY TO WORSHIP GOD! ALL DAYS ARE EQUAL' ETC., ETC.,,...!!!!!

 

[NARAS]

sir - sanctum sanctorm is place where gods & priests reside. since god & priests do not like grandeur, this place is always small, dark & very simple. the reason why devotees are jostling in hot climate is because of large population in india! due to this large population, most of the days there are huge crowds, leading to jostling!!!

sir - its true that gods wear jewels. but this is not to exhibit grandeur. these jewels are to help the temples generate income which is required to run the orthodox temples!!!

 

[NARAS]

sir - the word HINDU or even the word ARYAN is not at all found in any of the orthodox scruiptures . it is the word 'brahmin' which is found in many orthodox scriptures.
. a person can be a brahmin only by birth. no person born in any other faith can get converted as a brahmin. but any person born in any other faith can get himself converted as 'hindu'. thus the word 'brahmin' has more exclusivity & speciality than the word 'hindu'. of course a non brahmin women, if she marries a brahmin man, become a brahmin herself! (e.g. the great late M.S.Subbulakshmi). similarly, a child born to a brahmin father, even if the mother is a non brahmin, is also considered to be a brahmin. instead of declaring as just a hindu, i have more pride in declaring myself as a 'brahmin' or at the most an 'orthodox hindu'

 

[aditya]

Orthodox Hinduism, orthodox christianity and orthodox islam all are equally bad, anti-human and foolish religions. Hinduism as preached by orthodox people reminds me of osama-bin-ladens version of Islam, Ignatius loyola's version of christianity, stalin's version of communism and Hitler's version of Nazism.

Hinduism is not the same as Christianity and islam. Christianity, irrespective of its sect, and Islam are conceptually orthodox. The two, by their very tenet and doctrine, are religions of exclusivity and autocratic. That means, the view of god is one and only one way; any other interpretation is condemned and unacceptable. There is no room for flexibility or negotiations. Tolerance in these two religions means putting up with but not accepting. Hinduism is the only religion that accepts and embraces diversity in spiritual paths. The only liberal Christian is one who has left Christianity or no longer practices it, if one could still call him a Christian. A devout Christian therefore is a fanatic with a closed mind who forbids any variations in the spiritual path. Only communism and Islam, which both declare ‘my way or no way’, come close to Christianity in principle.

But Hinduism practiced by the average, secular hindu in the country fills my heart with happiness and pleasure.An average hindu is secular, peace loving, respectful to all religions and gods and innocent.When I see such people, I am truely proud to be a hindu.I am proud of my religion.

You are not acquainted with the Upanishads/Vedanta, or the Gita, I see. If the only reason for being proud or not being proud, of being part of a religion is the behavior of few people, then there can’t be much depth in your identification with the religion, can there.

An appreciation of religion comes from understanding the tenets of its scriptures, and not how x or y acts. Otherwise, a person drifts from one religion to another, based on the hearsay of another. If the DMK declares Hinduism and Vedas are humbug and christianity very rationale, 3/4th of the illiterate and semi-literate population in TN jump to Christianity, and from Christianity to Islam (because someone else says so), and so forth. Understand the scriptures, and you have understood the religion. There is no need then for affirmation to come from anyone else.

Apart from hinduism,I see such secularism and broad mindedness only among christians. Like the Hindu society, christian society tries to reform. It shuns off orthodoxy and tries to make it a reformed religion.Like Hinduism, it has its own problems.Like Hinduism, it has its own mechanism to address these problems. In this aspect I find these religions to be similiar.

The christianity you claim to see is in your fantasies, and nothing more. Some Indian Christians have imbibed the hindu perception of God and hindu philosophy and spiritual outlook. This Indian version of christianity is more accommodating and sees God as perceived in hinduism, as loving, compassionate, and friend -figure, as opposed to christianity’s conceptualizing of God – a jealous god who punishes and demands utmost singular loyalty, and loves only those that serve him and only him. Numerous foreign evangelists, time and time again, have remarked in deep frustration and despair that converting Indians is most frustrating, because the Indian converted Christian just won’t let go the hindu way of conceptualizing God and religion.

Now I strongly believe that a true hindu is one who has denounced vedas.

Strange declaration. Again, stems from your ignorance on the Vedas. The entire wisdom contained in the Vedas, and which is the heart of Hindu philosophy, are found in these few simple, but profoundly rich statements: Tat Twamasi (Thou art That), Aham Brahmaasmi (I am that Supreme Being/Totality), Ayam Aatmaa Brahma (This Self is Brahma), Aham Vishvam (My universe is my Self), and the well-known Vasudaiva kutumbakam (The world is my family).

To say (proudly) that you reject Vedas implies your inclination to reject all of the above wisdom, or you have no idea what is contained in the Vedas, or know only what DMK propagandists and christian evangelists have taught the masses to deliberately mislead them. Whatever the reason, its a pity. Its like declaring ‘I think maths/Physics/ chemistry is totally stupid or irrelevant’ when one has never studied maths/physics/chemistry.

Every Indian guru, irrespective of his/her own social background, including the contemporary Satya Sai Baba, Mata Amritananda (Amma), Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Swami Veda barathi, Swami Dayananda Saraswati, and other countless gurus and swamis throughout the world, including those of foreign origins have nothing but praises for the Vedas and its relevance in today’s world. Even the Dalai Lama has expressed great appreciation for the wisdom contained in the Vedas.

Unless your intention here is to spread your anti-hindu, pro-christian propaganda, I suggest that you start acquainting yourself with the Upanishads/ Vedanta, Shankara’s philosophy, the Gita, to start with.

Priest job needs training from generation to generation?ha..ha.

I already said, it starts from early age –it is about developing the moral character, conduct, and knowledge, and cultivating the right temperament. Thhus it was easier to impart this training from generatiomn o generation. Just like the child of classical musician learns from his own musician parent from very early age. Nothing funny or strange in that.
[