N
Nara
Guest
Venkat K, to state the obvious, those who have no interest are not going to be bothered, but I don't understand why people with no faith should keep away and not write about it in this forum? What is your objection?
-
This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
-
Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
My Shirdi trip- some thoughts and questions
- Thread starter ashwin_ash
- Start date
- Status
Raji Ram
Active member
Dear Sir,
'anaikatti' is near Coimbatore and 'Ananimalai' is near Pollachi.
My dad was a general practitioner for nearly thirty five years in Anaimalai.
renuka
Well-known member
Dear Venkat Ji,
I feel this is quite an unfair statement.
We have no right to curb anyone's freedom of movement.
After all most people visits religious sites for some personal gain in a transaction manner and they call it faith..their faith lasts as long they get what they want.
A person who presumably lacks "faith" according to the standards of all "Old Faithful" brigade might actually have a few doubts of his own which could be cleared when he visits religious sites.
In fact it is actually a so called "faithless " person who is going there for no personal gain of any kind..he is just an observer unlike the many so called faithful who throng for favors from God.
All doors are open everywhere....so we cannot play Gate Keeper to keep anyone out..the last time when Gate Keepers played too hard they ended up taking 3 births as Asuras.
Last edited:
prasad1
Active member
No it is not curbing anyone's movement, it is free country so you can visit it.
If we have an open house, and people come to visit it, they are welcome, but if they criticize my style or the food I serve I have every right to show them the door.
Similarly if you do not have faith in Satya Sai Baba or any one similar, there is no compulsion to visit. But if you still visit you should respect the wishes and rules of the host (host community). You have no business to go to such places and then criticize them. It is common curtsy to your host.
Last edited:
renuka
Well-known member
Dear Prasad ji,
I have seen many people who have faith and when things go wrong blame God and also people who are skeptical who later on become totally devoted..so you see it is very hard to judge anyone.
As far as I know being a follower of teachings of both Shiridi Sai and Sathya Sai Baba..from their teachings they do not seem to have a problem with a believer or a non believer..I am pasting todays Sathya Sai Baba's quote here where Baba gives the option to even not believe in the concept of God as long we show love to others...so when Sathya Sai Baba has no problems with a Non Believer..so what is our problem yaar??
This is the quote:
sangom
0
Shri venkat K,
This forum in this General Discussions (GD) section, allows discussion on many topics and, if you see the home page, you will see this note "Topics unrelated to other forums. Please note many of the topics can be sensitive in nature".
I respect Shirdi Sai Baba as one of the (if not the only) so-called holy man. However I was unable to visit Shirdi any time during my active years and now I am unable to do the traveling and bear the strain. But I have come to know from those who visit Shirdi, that it has become a money-making enterprise just as the Siddhivinayak Temple of Prabhadevi, Mumbai has become yet another. Some people suspect also the role of illicit money (from arms, drugs, smuggling and even underworld) underlying such apparently religious activities around the country, so that these huge funds will never be questioned nor their ultimate use.
This GD section is allowed to highlight all such points. Eventhough I hold Saibaba of Shirdi in high respect in my mind, I will not advise anyone to visit the present day Shirdi if it has lost touch with the simple and saintly atmosphere.
In this context one cannot insist that all those who visit Shirdi must keep their mouths shut and should not write anything negative about it. You, Ashwin, myself - all are allowed by the owner of this forum to come here and participate, subject to the conditions laid down by him. He alone (and not you) can abrogate the right to stipulate what can be written and what should not be.
renuka
Well-known member
Dear Renu,
So whenever Sai Baba is attacked, you don't report post!!
Nope..you can ask Praveen..as far as I remember I have received PMs and Emails from fellow devotees to ask me to report such post but as far as I remember I have not reported any Anti Sai post to Praveen.
In fact there is a member here who can tell you that I replied his email saying why I do not want to report such post.I think you know who I mean...you can ask him yourself too.
The only time I made an open complain in Forum was when a member was writing some stuff in the Sai thread when it was in the GD section.
So I requested the thread to be shifted to Philosophy and Tradition thread and he was free to continue his attack in GD..on technical grounds I removed the thread from GD...so no acute attack can be launched there.
Many a times even in Sai Thread..some have asked 'attacking' questions to which I advise them to open a separate thread for discussion so that the Sai Thread Sanctity is maintained.
You can check the archives in Philosophy/Tradiotion section see me requesting members to open a separate thread for discussion.I made such a request last year in 2012.
So I hope its clear now dear RR ji.
Last edited:
tbs
0
hi sir,
i visited shirdi 2 yrs back.....my whole family members are devotee of shirdi sai baba.....i hold respect ONLY BABA in my life.....
i dont have any problem....its depend own conscious.....but i dont want criticize others....
Naina_Marbus
Active member
An interesting article in the reputed magazine Scientific American that may have some relevance here:
Excerpts:
Atheists are one of the most disliked groups in America. ……and atheists are rated as the least desirable group for a potential son-in-law or daughter-in-law to belong to.
Will Gervais at the University of British Columbia, Canada has published a set of studies looking at why atheists are so disliked.
Gervais and his colleagues presented participants in the study with a story about a person who accidentally hits a parked car and then fails to leave behind valid insurance information for the other driver.
Participants were asked to choose the probability that the person in question was a Christian, a Muslim, a rapist, or an atheist. They thought it equally probable the culprit was an atheist or a rapist, and unlikely the person was a Muslim or Christian.
In a different study, Gervais looked at how atheism influences people’s hiring decisions. People were asked to choose between an atheist or a religious candidate for a job requiring either a high or low degree of trust. For the high-trust job of daycare worker, people were more likely to prefer the religious candidate. For the job of waitress, which requires less trust, the atheists fared much better.
It wasn’t just the highly religious participants who expressed a distrust of atheists. People identifying themselves as having no religious affiliation held similar opinions.
Gervais and his colleagues discovered that people distrust atheists because of the belief that people behave better when they think that God is watching over them. This belief may have some truth to it. They found that reminding people about God’s presence has the same effect as telling people they are being watched by others: it increases their feelings of self-consciousness and leads them to behave in more socially acceptable ways.
renuka
Well-known member
So when the so called Wild Wild West does some research and study about something that interest us then it seems that the Western finding carries some weight..other wise blame the Western Culture for everything bad that happens in the East ! LOL
Post #36 for reference.
In the case of atheists, I think that there is no "God" agent to instill a fear or reverence, or to coerce the mind to adhere to certain principles. The fear of hell, or the desire of heaven, has been the most successful technique to bring about an order in society; to adhere to societal norms which the majority decides. The perception that an atheist is likely to be immoral stems from the fact that he is answerable to no higher agent.
An atheist by his very principles is a "free man", so to say. No "religious code of conduct" guides him, but can we extrapolate this to say that here is a person who is to be detested and distrusted? No.
I think it takes a lot of courage and conviction to take the stand of an atheist; not to be swayed by the vicious whirls of life to ascribe to a higher power but to face the consequences head on. One would have had to reflect deeply on the usefulness (or uselessness) of religion and its impact on day to day life before brushing away theological thoughts. Hence I see an atheist as a thinking person, a rational one, who is bound by the strength of relationships built around him.
It is not as if only irreligious ones are prone to criminal tendencies and religious ones are the purest souls out there. Hence we cannot generalize.
However, on the same note, I tend to think that the innate inability of humans, given the whimsical nature, to adhere to common good principles that would enable us to co-exist, compels the need for religion(s).
In the case of atheists, I think that there is no "God" agent to instill a fear or reverence, or to coerce the mind to adhere to certain principles. The fear of hell, or the desire of heaven, has been the most successful technique to bring about an order in society; to adhere to societal norms which the majority decides. The perception that an atheist is likely to be immoral stems from the fact that he is answerable to no higher agent.
An atheist by his very principles is a "free man", so to say. No "religious code of conduct" guides him, but can we extrapolate this to say that here is a person who is to be detested and distrusted? No.
I think it takes a lot of courage and conviction to take the stand of an atheist; not to be swayed by the vicious whirls of life to ascribe to a higher power but to face the consequences head on. One would have had to reflect deeply on the usefulness (or uselessness) of religion and its impact on day to day life before brushing away theological thoughts. Hence I see an atheist as a thinking person, a rational one, who is bound by the strength of relationships built around him.
It is not as if only irreligious ones are prone to criminal tendencies and religious ones are the purest souls out there. Hence we cannot generalize.
However, on the same note, I tend to think that the innate inability of humans, given the whimsical nature, to adhere to common good principles that would enable us to co-exist, compels the need for religion(s).
Dear Sir,
Have you seen 'God'? Are there any genuine testimonies for miracles? Have you, or anyone you know, experienced miracles by worshipping 'Saints'? Isn't it enough to keep the faith rather than spending money on something which nobody has really experienced or seen? Why did Marx say 'Religion is the opium of the masses', and why do even atheists live long and fulfilling lives?
I am not an atheist by any means, but I've seen that the more you explore Hinduism, the more you realize that it's an atheistic religion.
sangom
0
Even in regard to this study, I feel what iis said as the "finding/s" should be seen with reference to each society separately. What applies to Canada need not apply to the whole world.
Secondly, for the westerners, a god who constantly keeps watch over them is essential for their good conduct - just as the whites kept constant watch over their black-skinned slaves. India has not subscribed to such a god concept, I think. For us god is always within us and all that we do or not do, is continuously witnessed by Him. The concept and the approach are different. But our hindu religion has come today to look upon god as a bribable official of the heavens whose authority and abilities are infinite; in effect a gigantic nG-scam is possible for god! Hence, I feel if a similar so-called "study" is made in India today, atheists will rank equal to believers.
sangom
0
I feel that religions were "imposed" from outside on individuals and the society ensured, by constant watch, that nobody strayed off the flock in matters of religion. But even when religions ruled the roost in the olden days, crimes continued to exist and crimes thrived, by re-inventing themselves. So, the effectiveness of religions in enabling us to co-exist, adhere to common good principles, etc., are very suspect. More wars have been fought on religious grounds than others.
sangom
0
Re: the portion highlighted by me, I feel it will be more apt to say that "the deeper you go into hinduism, the more you realize that it leads you away to atheism".
N
Nara
Guest
I don't think this was me, at least I don't remember any such exchange.
This is definitely me, I didn't say anything negative, but I did mention that I would like to ask some challenging questions as the thread was in GD, and it was promptly moved, so I never got to ask any of those questions.
It is in a way quite puzzling that even in GD, where even Sankarachariyars are quite freely questioned and criticized, anything that could remotely shine some light on Sai prompts thread closure or warning to refrain from ruffling the tender feathers of Sai devotees.
N
Nara
Guest
நைனா, I don't see any relevance. This seems to be an attempt to malign atheists. Be that as it may, I feel what is reported in the study is an indictment of the society at large, not of the atheists. The theistic majority seems to think people will act in a moral way only if there is a threat of divine retribution hangs over their heads. Atheists reject this notion.
People have a natural moral core. This is the result of natural selection, because this moral core gives us a distinct survival and reproductive advantage. We see this in our daily lives all the time. Yes, there are exceptions. Not all the mangos in a tree are well formed and juicy, there are a few that are ill formed and dry. Likewise, there are a few who are depraved and immoral. Perhaps at the dawn of human civilization, when nomadic life style gave way to sedentary one, god and religion were invented to tame these few. Over the millennia these have grown into multiplicity of religions and gods. What was invented to keep few bad apples in check has so thoroughly consumed the entire society that the very idea of rational questioning of god and religion is seen as deviant and immoral.
We atheists realize we have only one life to live and therefore it is precious and must be lived in full enjoyment. True and lasting pleasure can be achieved only by being kind and compassionate with one another. We atheists are motivated by these considerations to be moral, not the threat of retribution by an imagined god whose existence is just as plausible as an invisible pink unicorn watching over our acts and thoughts every second of our lives.
As Sangom said, "the deeper you go into hinduism, the more you realize that it leads you away to atheism" While I am not an atheist, I find myself becoming rational day by day. The more I study hinduism, the more I am forced to question the various rituals etc, all of which were invented by man. Faith indeed works miracles, but why do we cloak the powers of our subconscious mind under the garb of 'religion'?
Nara, you are absolutely right. One can question anyone and get away with it, but certain Human-Gods are sacrosanct. A magician named PC Sorcar defeated a very well known godman by matching him trick for trick.
When I was in Shirdi, I met a tambram couple who claimed to have visited the house where the brahmin human god was raised by muslim 'foster-parents'. They went on and on about how they had tears in their eyes bla bla. Mass hysteria, in my opinion. That human god was never brahmin, he was always a muslim, all he used to do was stare into emptiness and utter 'allah malik'. How he was made a hindu god, and why so many dubious miracles were ascribed to him (nobody knows what he did for 60 years, only the last 10 years of his life are documented) is beyond understanding.
Sikhism seems to be the only faith which rejects rituals or pilgrimages of any kind. The golden temple is the only spiritual sanctuary open to all without preconditions. One can introspect or simply relax there for as long as one wishes to.
N
Nara
Guest
ashwin, it is not just Hinduism, all religions are alike in this respect. Some people here have tried to argue Vedantam is a special case and it is not a religion. It should be revealing that only those who subscribe to Vedantam make this claim, like only the Muslims claim Islam is scientific. The funny thing is, the prerequisite they insist for even a discussion of it, is absolute faith (well they don't want to call it faith, but some other word, messaging is apparently very important for their message) that Vedantam is the absolute truth. To question it, we must first swear our absolute loyalty to it. If the answers given are unsatisfactory, we must attribute that to our own intellectual limitations and still maintain unshakable faith in the profundity of the doctrine. The fact is, each and every one of these prerequisites only reinforces that Vedantam is a religion just as Islam is or any other, worthy of our suspicion, not steadfast devotion.
When the origins of these godmen are unknown it is invariably associated with Brahmin birth, there are lots of such stories like this. It is either an abandoned Brahmin child or a miraculous appearance of some heavenly entity without the aid of sperm, egg, and uterus.
Many Hindu temples have signs that say only Hindus allowed. Not long ago there was a great kerfuffle about a Christian entering Guruvayurappan temple. But, I feel there are many places, music, art, text that give us profound experiences and some opt to call them "spiritual". Perhaps the Golden Temple offers such an experience.
Thanks ....
sangom
0
Shri Ashwin,
I have not heard, nor read about Shirdi Sai Baba being abrogated by "brahmins". If that sort of thing has happened, then it is the age-old "trick" in hinduism. Just as the Lifebuoy soap ad says "where there is Lifebuoy, health is there!", or its equivalent in regional languages, there is in hinduism, a cliched practice of first trying to reject any NB greatness, but when facts compel, that greatness is invariably and with satellite precision, attributed to brahmin parentage (at least brahmin seed) and divine, miraculous transfer to NB surroundings. This theme is ever-recurring, from Krishna of the divine seed origin. You kindly search for Kabirdas' birth and enjoy the fun!
Shirdi Sai Baba never said anything to anybody about his caste, birth, growth or what religion he professed. He was content to be himself, in a dilapidated mandapam, smoking chilka and eating whatever food he could get by way of alms or gift or offerings. Till the very end he lived like that and that is why I hold him in high respect and view most other samiyars as fraud. As you rightly say nobody knows what he did - but during the first half of his life, roughly (not 60 years) but subsequent to that he became a source of solace for many poor and indigent people. So, naturally, his life remained essentially unchanged and unruffled. It was only during the final phase of Baba's life that he was "found out" by the rich and greedy. Yet, he did not fall for any enticements and unlike Ramana, satyasai, chinmayananda and many many more swamijis and gurujis, remained in his original mandapam only. I feel therefore that he was a person very different from all the other godmen/godwomen whom our believers eulogize today. These people were after money and comforts and were, fortuitously, successful in fooling people, and built for themselves considerable estates and riches. Thus they best exemplified the "udara nimittam bahukrita veshaH" description.
Don't judge any religion or ism from outside just on the basis of one temple and your very short acquaintance with it. All isms have their ills, just as all human bodies have very many serious diseases lurking inside each of them, but will manifest only on some occasions. In the golden temple also, if you are a sikh convert from the dalit castes, you are looked down upon. That was why even a politician was asked to clean shoes of the devotees as tankhwah, I had read somewhere. In some European country a sikh sant was shot and killed because of similar reasons. No ism is the best ism.
renuka
Well-known member
Dear Sir,
I have a feeling you might be in for a (not so) pleasant surprise when you visit Shirdi now. The auto drivers first fleece you (Rs 100-odd for 3 kms) and then try to dump you in a hotel of their choice (they tried convincing me the trust no longer manages accommodation, but I didn't fall for it). I booked a "VVIP" room in a building belonging to the Shirdi trust (I don't know why they give such bombastic names to rooms) and the room was very large and had two mosquito repellent mats. There was an LED TV with n no. of channels. The room also had a helpful map to the Shirdi water and amusement park (apparently it draws more crowds than the temple) so you can have 'fun' after 'darshan'.
Darshan is much like Tirumala, normal, special, super super special et al. Gates 1 and 2 are for 'people', and Gate 3 is for 'paying people'. Needless, Gate 3 is extremely clean and orderly. Just before the night arati, they cage you in a room for like 30-60 mins. They suddenly remove the barriers, and all hell breaks loose. People jostle, push, and trample each other to stand closest to the 'samadhi'. All rituals in the Samadhi are performed by brahmins according to Vedic traditions. The priests work in two shifts, and are from the Tryambakeshwar veda patasala. A huge rudraksha is placed on top of the samadhi (where the godman was buried per islamic traditions), and it is flanked by a huge marble statue of the godman (which also has a rudraksha).
Per Hinduism, a samadhi has divine powers only if the saint consciously opted for "jeeva samadhi". The Shirdi godman passed away from kidney failure. It truly baffles me as to how an itinerant person who survived on alms is now a revered "God". The mosque in Shirdi is now called "dwarakamayi", the godman simply used to call it 'masjid'. There is even a neem tree which is now the 'temple tree'. It was like a spiritual overload for me and I could see an amalgam of Hinduism+commerce+vested interests+corruption evolving.
Somehow, I feel people can have real time 'darshan' of Shirdi on their 3D LED TVs, some TVs now have a technology which allows you to touch and 'feel' what you see on the TV.
I am not anti-religion, but the path taken by Hinduism is not really the best one.
- Status
Share this page
Share this page
Latest posts
-
-
-
Good news for senior citizens visiting Tirupati Balaji,
- Latest: Padmanabhan Janakiraman
-
-
Latest ads
-
Wanted Fulltime care person neededLooking for a fulltime lady who can look after 80 yr old person who has dementia. She can manage...
- vashok (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
- Expires
-
Free [Bride Wanted] Bride WantedLooking for Bride - Family Oriented and brought up from Cultured Family
- SRIKANT S -(Bride Wanted) (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
- Expires
-
-
Free [Bride Wanted] TAMIL BRAHMIN VADAMA BRIDE WANTEDMust to be willing to relocate to Bengaluru Must be willing to accommodate joint family
- self today (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
- Expires
-
Wanted [Cook Wanted] Wanted cook for Home at Gandhipuram Coimbatore. Decent Salary offeredHi, we need a female Brahmin cook for home ( 5 members family) at Coimbatore. Morning and...
- gchitra (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated: