My Shirdi trip- some thoughts and questions

[mkrishna100]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

After my retirement I started spending much of my time in reading our original scriptures and their commentaries in Tamil, Malayalam, Hindi by indian scholars. This opened up a hitherto unseen world and I slowly started doubting the pramaanams themselves, though the prameyam did exist in my mind, unaffected. But the more I read (by that time I had acquired a PC and internet connection and could get access to several websites discussing our religion, scriptures, etc., and providing links to original commentaries by indian acharyas and scholars. The more I delved into the religion the more I got doubtful about the truth in the pramaanams and that led me finally to question whether the prameyam itself is faulty which was why all the pramanams have also become what they are. After still further reading and much effort at deeply thinking about these and other problems relating to religion itself per se, I have come to the conclusion that there is no anthropomorphic god at all.

May be, there are other people also, who hold a similar view.

Sangom Sir

Whatever may be your conclusions about the scriptures etc ,one thing to be admired is that you have spent your retirement life in a very useful manner .Few years back there was a program on DD about people getting fooled by False Gurus /Godmen and people from all religious background were part of that discussion .One Hindu Swami who was a guest for that program asked the audience as to ir-respective of whatever religious background they may belong ,how many of them have studied at least one of the major religious books ( i.e Gita ,Bible,Quaran etc )completely and not a single person raised their hands . Then he asked how many have at least attempted to study the same , again the response was poor and he said as long as such people exist ( i.e people unaware of their own religious scriptures and people lazy to read their own scriptures ) they will get fooled by these false Gurus and Godmen .
He also added that even Atheists study all the religious scriptures though their attempt is to find loopholes in them but at least they make an effort to study the same and so for believers the responsibility is more when it comes to study and understand one's scripture and having a lazy or superficial approach is not good and will only lead them to false Gurus /Godmen who will exploit them .
Now with the availability of Internet we have no excuse of not finding material to study our own scriptures in depth and also be aware of the counter opinion of those who do not believe in them .With both these views available one can make an informed choice about whether to believe in God,Vedas etc .

 

[vgane]

Dear All,

We started the debate with Aswin in the OP questioning the worship by orthodox Hindus of Baba who was a Muslim by birth

I would like to turn the history a few thousand years to the 7th century AD when the Shiva Ling in Mecca (Originally Makha or sacrificial fire which was part of the Vikaramaaditya Empre ) was converted to Kaaba or Black stone...Kaaba itself is corrupted from the Sanskrit word Garb Griha..It is called as Hajre Aswad in Arabic which is corrupted from Sange Aswad(Non white stone) in Sanskrit.....Muslims perambulate that stone 7 times, this is the only place where Muslims do that worship

If Muslims worship a Hindu idol, nothing wrong with Hindus worshipping a so called Fakir..Baba is attributed to miracles..He led a pious life too

 

[sangom]

Sangom Sir

Whatever may be your conclusions about the scriptures etc ,one thing to be admired is that you have spent your retirement life in a very useful manner .Few years back there was a program on DD about people getting fooled by False Gurus /Godmen and people from all religious background were part of that discussion .One Hindu Swami who was a guest for that program asked the audience as to ir-respective of whatever religious background one may belong ,how many hear have studied at least one of the major religious books ( i.e Gita ,Bible,Quaran etc )completely and not a single person raised their hands . Then he asked how many at least attempt to study the same , again the response was poor and he said as long as such people exist ( i.e people unware of their own religious scriptures and people lazy to read their own scriptures ) they will get fooled by these false Gurus and Godmen .
He also added that even Atheists study all the religious scriptures though their attempt is to find loopholes in them but at least they make an effort to study the same and so for believers the responsibility is more when it comes to study and understand one's scripture and having a lazy or superficial approach is not good and will only lead them to false Gurus /Godmen who will exploit them .
Now with the availability of Internet we have no excuse of not finding material to study our own scriptures in depth and also be aware of the counter opinion of those who do not believe in them .With both these views available one can make an informed choice about whether to believe in God,Vedas etc .

Dear Shri Krishnaji,

In retrospect, I think I have done exactly what you have said, viz., "... have spent (my) retirement life in a very useful manner." But, at the same time, I have to thank my long lost great grandfather (father of my maternal grandmother) who was a very orthodox tabra, somewhat erudite in our scriptures, familiar with sanskrit, old Malayalam (he was a malayalam teacher in primary school in those days of royal rule of Travancore state), etc., but used to hold the firm view that no grihastha should allow a sanyaasi inside even the "tiNNai" and that the maximum (as well as mandatory) duty of a brahmin grihastha was to give freshly prepared rice and/or curries to any sanyaasi coming and standing before the house for "bhikshai". He often forbade his people from going to visit swamijis and when his cousin took a fancy to one swamiyar and allowed that swamiyar to stay in a room in his house for chaturmasyam, my GGF stopped entering that cousin's house in protest! This advice and example set my GGF are still strong in my memory and so I don't also go visit any swamiji whosoever. Anyway, today we don't find any saffron-clad people coming for "bhikshai".

I am fully in agreement with you that we brahmins do not take the pains to study our scriptures; of course, it has become a raging fashion nowadays to study (which means learn by rote so that one will be able to recite without book) bhaagavatham, naaraayaneeyam which are currently, the list toppers, as I see here! But how many go into these books deeply and find out the nuances and other supporting scriptures like brahmavaivarta purana, etc., is a difficult question to answer.

The success of "pOli" swamiyars, godmen etc., seems to be more among TN/AP population as compared to the Keralites, may be because we have a strong communist movement here. (The one star exception is Amritananda mayee but it has its own reasons for fame.)

In the ultimate analysis, I feel it is a question of one's ability to call a spade a spade, with the childlike innocence which said "the emperor has no clothes on!"

 

[Vaagmi]

You see Vaagmi, you are the one who wanted me to ask these questions, let me remind you and others, here is what you said:


Now you are saying it is futile to argue with me. This is like waking up a sleeping person and telling him to go to sleep, what a crock!!!

Nara,

Yes. I wanted you to ask me the questions. No denying that. I wanted to reply them too. That is why I prepared a detailed reply. But then the reality sank in. So I gave up. If you were sleeping I am sorry I woke you up.

 

[mkrishna100]

Sangom Sir
Dear Shri Krishnaji,

In retrospect, I think I have done exactly what you have said, viz., "... have spent (my) retirement life in a very useful manner." But, at the same time, I have to thank my long lost great grandfather (father of my maternal grandmother) who was a very orthodox tabra, somewhat erudite in our scriptures, familiar with sanskrit, old Malayalam (he was a malayalam teacher in primary school in those days of royal rule of Travancore state), etc., but used to hold the firm view that no grihastha should allow a sanyaasi inside even the "tiNNai" and that the maximum (as well as mandatory) duty of a brahmin grihastha was to give freshly prepared rice and/or curries to any sanyaasi coming and standing before the house for "bhikshai". He often forbade his people from going to visit swamijis and when his cousin took a fancy to one swamiyar and allowed that swamiyar to stay in a room in his house for chaturmasyam, my GGF stopped entering that cousin's house in protest! This advice and example set my GGF are still strong in my memory and so I don't also go visit any swamiji whosoever. Anyway, today we don't find any saffron-clad people coming for "bhikshai".

The aversion your GGF had towards Sannayasis in Kerala has is roots right from the day of Adi Shankara where he had a lot of clash with the Orthodox Brahmins there during his mother's cremation . This trend continues even today in subtle form in most of Orthodox Brahmins .One reason can be Sannyasis and Swamis encourage study of Upanishads and taking the path of Sannyasa and avoid completely the Karma Kanda portion and this hits the Orthodox Brahmins a lot whose lively hood is based on people following only Karma Kanda portion of the Vedas .

Today we are blessed to have internet to access information from wide areas with regard to our scriptures as well as lot of counter views from Atheists /Rationalists on the same and we must make the best use of the same to educate ourselves and develop clarity in what we believe .

 

[Vaagmi]

Dear Sri Sangom,

I feel all people cannot be classified in the two categories you refer to above. For example, I will like to say about myself. I was born in an orthodox family but there was no compulsion (possibly because both my grandfathers died by the time I was 7 years old, and my father, though ordinarily orthodox and a conformist did not know much beyond the superficialities and did not compel us kids into anything religious. But I grew up as an ordinary, run-of-the-mill tabra, got married, brought up my children with much financial difficulty, and now, my wife & I are comfortably leading retired life-end. Till about the time of retirement I continued to be the ordinary, run-of-the-mill tabra with all the "looking for , understanding, following, praying to, celebrating, loving, showing bhakti, holding in reverence etc, of the prameyam called God."

As you are aware, values in life are acquired by several means. From what elders teach, by just observing and picking up from elders, by looking at the peers and picking up from them etc., It is acquired in a natural way without being aware of even the process. It appears, you had picked up the same values voluntarily while in some cases these are at times thrust upon someone by demanding a strict regimen. The methods are different but the result is the same. Thus you were an “ordinary, run-of-the-mill” TB looking for…. etc of the prameyam while a friend of you may be one who was strictly told by elders to accept the God and pray to Him(nyasyAmyakinchana: srImannanukUlOnyavarjitha: viswAsa prArthanApUrvam AtmarakshAbaramtwayI etc….) without fail, to do all the things which will please Him ( anukUlOnyavarjitha. He too may be a “run-of-the-mill ordinary TB only. So you too fall in the category I have mentioned in my post #148 para 2 though you had acquired the prameyam by a slightly different route. You were “looking for, understanding, following, praying to, celebrating, loving, showing bhakti, holding in reverence etc, of the prameyam without the help of a knowledge of the pramanam (as you have yourself admitted) just because you thought that was the right thing to do as your value system had acquired those values in a quiet unobtrusive way.
After that it is all copy book style as explained in para 2 of my post. These, your words, confirm that:

After my retirement I started spending much of my time in reading our original scriptures and their commentaries in Tamil, Malayalam, Hindi by indian scholars. This opened up a hitherto unseen world and I slowly started doubting the pramaanams themselves, though the prameyam did exist in my mind, unaffected. But the more I read (by that time I had acquired a PC and internet connection and could get access to several websites discussing our religion, scriptures, etc., and providing links to original commentaries by indian acharyas and scholars. The more I delved into the religion the more I got doubtful about the truth in the pramaanams and that led me finally to question whether the prameyam itself is faulty which was why all the pramanams have also become what they are. After still further reading and much effort at deeply thinking about these and other problems relating to religion itself per se, I have come to the conclusion that there is no anthropomorphic god at all.

You have made an interesting observation “, I have come to the conclusion that there is no anthropomorphic god at all.” Here I have to state that the anthropomorphous form of Godhead is only a convenience. The pramanam itself does not support the anthropomorphous form as the only form of Godhead for worship. So what you have said is an obvious truth. It is a given situation. Thanks.

 

[Nara]

....Yes. I wanted you to ask me the questions. No denying that. I wanted to reply them too. That is why I prepared a detailed reply. But then the reality sank in. So I gave up. If you were sleeping I am sorry I woke you up.

Before I accept your backhanded apology let us get some things straight, especially since you started with " it is futile to argue with you" and then made up your own irrelevant narrative about pramanam and prameyam as though it offers some cover, fig leaf, save face, or whatever for your inability to meet the challenge you made yourself.

Let me clarify something for you and others, I observed (paraphrasing myself) that truly difficult questions will not be answered under some pretext or other, which is exactly what has happened now. Instead of admitting to it you say it is futile, that is a pity.

I agree with your comment that for you "the reality sank in", i.e. the reality that you have no rational answer to the questions finally sank in. Instead of accepting this reality you want to say "it is futile to argue with you." I am not one to gloat if you concede, but I am not one to simply acquiesce to this unnecessary swipe either.

Before I close, let me repeat the two questions I asked for which you have no rational answer:
[1] What is the rational basis for the Vedas to be taken as a font of true knowledge.
[2] If God can exist as swyambu, why not jagat?

 

[sravna]

Before I close, let me repeat the two questions I asked for which you have no rational answer:
[1] What is the rational basis for the Vedas to be taken as a font of true knowledge.
[2] If God can exist as swyambu, why not jagat?

Dear Shri Nara,

If you allow me to state my views:

1) The only rational basis on which something normally is accepted as true knowledge is the evidence in support of the knowledge. In the case of science once you see the evidence in accordance with the theory proposed, you accept the theory as correct. But Science is full of cases when a theory that was accepted based on evidence was significantly modified or totally abandoned. So if something that can be erroneous can be accepted as correct, then why not accept a theory based on its logical appeal alone instead of rejecting that approach because it is not guaranteed to be correct? ? It is like seeing through the mind.

My point is something which is a reality if presented cogently will reveal itself to others readily just as you can see something physically in front of you through your eyes. Reality is understood by all if presented cogently unless one is adamant in not accepting it. this should be the basis for accepting vedas as true knowledge. Others who do not accept it are either obstinate or because there is still not an attempt that tries to present vedas in a way that the truths are readily discernible.

2) God is swayambu because he is beyond time. But a physical thing like jagat is tied to the notion of time and space and that is the reason why it cannot be swayambu.

 

[sangom]

< snipped >

2) God is swayambu because he is beyond time. But a physical thing like jagat is tied to the notion of time and space and that is the reason why it cannot be swayambu.

< snipped >

Before I close, let me repeat the two questions I asked for which you have no rational answer:
[1] What is the rational basis for the Vedas to be taken as a font of true knowledge.
[2] If God can exist as swyambu, why not jagat?

Dear Shri Sravna,

Which of our gods is beyond time? Definitely not any of the avataaras, since Rama, Krishna et al., are supposed to have died and gone. Same must therefore be the case with varaaha, narasimha, vaamana, balarama, etc. Hence the two currently most popular gods are bound by time. All the rest of the vast pantheon of 33 crores (330 millions) are also vouched by scriptures to be time-bound since after every kalpa not even the gods remain and everything is destroyed. Hence all our gods including the trinities are mortals, in a certain sense. (Pl. correct me if I am wrong.) Hence if such gods can be swayambu why not this jagat which lasts for a shorter period of time?

Dear Shri Nara,

As we were saying in this thread itself (Post # 151) most people do not bother to read and understand and analyze the scriptures even to the extent of 10% of what they usually do to read, understand and analyze the terms and conditions of their job, and more importantly, the perquisites made available . That is the true level of attachment to matters religious, I will say. Hence, it becomes easy for every one to parrot old brahminist axioms like "vedas are not man-made, they are inerrant and furnish all the ultimate possible "wisdom" that will ever be available in this jagat, etc."
There is no rational ground to suppose that vedas reflect even the level of scientific knowledge that humankind has acquired till date.

Regarding swayambu jagat, kindly read my post to shri sravna, above.

My personal view is that this jagat is a mirage projected by our own consciousness and we are amde to feel as though it is for real because this projected mirage, just like an electronic game looks the same to every viewer and follows certain uniform rules which do not vary from person to person.

 

[Nara]

..... .... Reality is understood by all if presented cogently unless one is adamant in not accepting it. this should be the basis for accepting vedas as true knowledge. Others who do not accept it are either obstinate or because there is still not an attempt that tries to present vedas in a way that the truths are readily discernible.

sravna, your view of what science is, is erroneous. Let me break down the rest of your argument (i) you are presenting something and you think it is cogent (note, that does not necessarily mean it is cogent), (ii) just because you think it is cogent it must be true, and therefore (iii) anyone who does not accept it as truth is being adamant and obstinate. To put it extremely mildly, this line of reasoning is comical.

2) God is swayambu because he is beyond time. But a physical thing like jagat is tied to the notion of time and space and that is the reason why it cannot be swayambu.

This space and time is a convenient retrofit. There are several problems with this:

• that there is something called beyond time is merely your conjecture, it is not an established fact, and,
• if there is such a thing as beyond time where this God exists, it does not necessarily mean this God MUST be swayambu
• if a cause for this God existing in this beyond time can be done away with in "beyond time", then by the same token, a cause for jagat can be done away at the instance time began.

sravna, I don't want to go in circles with you again, if you have anything that is rational and evidence based let us talk about it, if all you have are the old arguments that have been debunked many times, let us save all of us some time and stop right here.

 

[sravna]

sravna, your view of what science is, is erroneous. Let me break down the rest of your argument (i) you are presenting something and you think it is cogent (note, that does not necessarily mean it is cogent), (ii) just because you think it is cogent it must be true, and therefore (iii) anyone who does not accept it as truth is being adamant and obstinate. To put it extremely mildly, this line of reasoning is comical.

This space and time is a convenient retrofit. There are several problems with this:

• that there is something called beyond time is merely your conjecture, it is not an established fact, and,
• if there is such a thing as beyond time where this God exists, it does not necessarily mean this God MUST be swayambu
• if a cause for this God existing in this beyond time can be done away with in "beyond time", then by the same token, a cause for jagat can be done away at the instance time began.

sravna, I don't want to go in circles with you again, if you have anything that is rational and evidence based let us talk about it, if all you have are the old arguments that have been debunked many times, let us save all of us some time and stop right here.

Dear Shri Nara,

No I am not saying that because something is cogent it must be true. What I am saying is that if the truth is presented in a cogent manner, the reality will be immediately evident just as the physical reality in front of one is evident.

I think you have a great problem in understanding if something is beyond time it has to be swayambu. You are not doing away with cause if something is beyond time. There simply cannot be a cause as cause and effects happen in time.

 

[Nara]

No I am not saying that because something is cogent it must be true. What I am saying is that if the truth is presented in a cogent manner, the reality will be immediately evident just as the physical reality in front of one is evident.

If this is what you are saying, then it is a meaningless tautology. Saying truth, aka reality, if presented in a cogent manner, the reality will be immediately evident, is like saying 2 is equal to 2!!!

I think you have a great problem in understanding if something is beyond time it has to be swayambu. You are not doing away with cause if something is beyond time. There simply cannot be a cause as cause and effects happen in time.

You are just ignoring my objections. Simply stating I have a great problem understanding your baseless assertion does not add any value. Take a look at my objections and give your answers to them if you can. If all you have are assertions then we are done.

 

[sravna]

If this is what you are saying, then it is a meaningless tautology. Saying truth, aka reality, is presented in a cogent manner, the reality will be immediately evident, like like saying 2 is equal to 2!!!

You are just ignoring my objections. Simply stating I have a great problem understanding your baseless assertion does not add any value. Take a look at my objections and give your answer to them if you can. If all you have are assertions then we are done.

Alright Shri Nara, if instead of saying "it would be evident" if I say that "it would have great appeal" will that make sense to you? My point is confirming with physical evidence does not make a theory infallible. So if that is ok why not something that has great appeal to the mind. I was saying of the extreme case when a theory would be immediately seen as true.

You accept the physical reality because everybody sees it the same way. But does that make it ultimately real? What I am saying is it is possible to see truths farther than what the physical world can show. In such cases why not rely on the appeal of the theory?

 

[tks]

Nara,

Yes. I wanted you to ask me the questions. No denying that. I wanted to reply them too. That is why I prepared a detailed reply. But then the reality sank in. So I gave up. If you were sleeping I am sorry I woke you up.

Just curious Sri Vaagmi

What kind of epiphany did you experience perhaps recently for what you term as 'reality sank in' ...

You dont have to answer if you dont want to of course.

In a discussion forum of this sort there is going to be lots of ideas and many collective monologues going on.

Without getting in the middle of this particular comment let me say that forums such as this is not suited for serious discussion.

For one people wanting to debate must have utmost integrity to find the truth and place that ahead of own need to be viewed right.
There is no assurance for that to happen. Second for any serious discussions of any subject a certain pre-requisite have to be met.

There is a lot of misinformation online including this forum.

So not getting engaged is a good move ...

Regards

 

[sarang]

At least stones thrown can be returned, abuses reflected. Especially when the don hates everything connected with brahmins - lifestyle, scriptures, beliefs, ancestors, traditions, social behaviour - and expressly wish and work for the destruction of above.

So not getting engaged is a good move ...

Regards

 

[Vaagmi]

Just curious Sri Vaagmi

What kind of epiphany did you experience perhaps recently for what you term as 'reality sank in' ...

You dont have to answer if you dont want to of course.

In a discussion forum of this sort there is going to be lots of ideas and many collective monologues going on.

Without getting in the middle of this particular comment let me say that forums such as this is not suited for serious discussion.

For one people wanting to debate must have utmost integrity to find the truth and place that ahead of own need to be viewed right.
There is no assurance for that to happen. Second for any serious discussions of any subject a certain pre-requisite have to be met.

There is a lot of misinformation online including this forum.

So not getting engaged is a good move ...

Regards

Dear Sri tks,

It is just a search. Sometimes a painful one.

 

[Nara]

....After knowing each other I expect to maintain a beneficial conversational relationship with you here. I would certainly expect you to be at a certain level before taking up that.

So now you are breaking the promise you made as well. Take a look at what you said originally:

.... Please ask me your difficult questions. I promise I will not ask you show your commitment and determination. Please.

What happened to this promise, now you want me to tell you what my qualifications are, oh well, that is different from commitment and determination I suppose.

Vaagmi, your credentials are impressive, mine are very meager in comparison. I am just a working stiff in the local university. All I bring to this conversation is an open and rational mind, willingness to seriously consider arguments presented, and a complete and total lack of awe or reverence to religious authority of any kind. That is it, that is all I bring.

 

[ashwin_ash]

Dear Sri tks,

It is just a search. Sometimes a painful one.

Vaagmi,

Many of the atheists in this forum are armchair atheists who delight in others' misery by presenting abhorrent views. All they need to do is to preach Big River's form of atheism to which they subscribe to, in the Bible Belt of the US.

Atheists such as Mr Nara earn their dollars in the United States where each Dollar bill proudly proclaims "In God we Trust". Should they request their salary to be doled in North Korean currency, which is avowedly atheistic?? They should burn all dollars in their possession, since it has God written all over it.

 

[sangom]

Vaagmi,

Many of the atheists in this forum are armchair atheists who delight in others' misery by presenting abhorrent views. All they need to do is to preach Big River's form of atheism to which they subscribe to, in the Bible Belt of the US.

Atheists such as Mr Nara earn their dollars in the United States where each Dollar bill proudly proclaims "In God we Trust". Should they request their salary to be doled in North Korean currency, which is avowedly atheistic?? They should burn all dollars in their possession, since it has God written all over it.

Dear Shri Ashwin,

I know I am intruding but Shri Praveen has allowed this.

I am not an atheist but an agnostic who does not believe in religion or the various gods presented by religions. So, I may be considered to be like an atheist as far as orthodox people like vaagmi and yourself are considered. I agree I am an arm-chair agnostic, but that is because I have neither the health to go about 'preaching'my brand of agnosticism nor do I think our society is evolved adequately so as to come out of the delusion created by religion in their minds and consciousness.

It is however a solemn fact that my views are not presented in this forum with the intention of creating misery for others and taking delight in such misery; on the contrary, I write my views on god, religion, etc., so that if anyone has started thinking about the authenticity/usefulness of religion, gods, etc., such person/s may find that there are/were others who passed through the same path and could live happily after denouncing religion/s and the godheads.

I do not think that the currency has monetary value only for those who 'trust in god'; it has its same exchange value even for the North Koreans.

 

[ashwin_ash]

Dear Shri Ashwin,

I know I am intruding but Shri Praveen has allowed this.

I am not an atheist but an agnostic who does not believe in religion or the various gods presented by religions. So, I may be considered to be like an atheist as far as orthodox people like vaagmi and yourself are considered. I agree I am an arm-chair agnostic, but that is because I have neither the health to go about 'preaching'my brand of agnosticism nor do I think our society is evolved adequately so as to come out of the delusion created by religion in their minds and consciousness.

It is however a solemn fact that my views are not presented in this forum with the intention of creating misery for others and taking delight in such misery; on the contrary, I write my views on god, religion, etc., so that if anyone has started thinking about the authenticity/usefulness of religion, gods, etc., such person/s may find that there are/were others who passed through the same path and could live happily after denouncing religion/s and the godheads.

I do not think that the currency has monetary value only for those who 'trust in god'; it has its same exchange value even for the North Koreans.

Dear Sir,

Civil debates on the usefulness (or otherwise) of religion are always welcome and must be encouraged. I am anything but orthodox. If anything, I am irreligious. I tell myself I'll believe in religion after meeting just one person who's seen God.

In this regard, I find debates by Marx, Lenin, and Abraham Kovoor on religion enlightening. Big River used atheism to further selfish motive, and that is what is unacceptable. Kannadasan's magnum opus, Arthamulla Indhumadham is also enlightening, as it relates the reverse journey. One must try and evolve enough in order to digest multiple viewpoints without fear or favor.

As far as dollar bills are concerned, I only wanted to highlight the hypocrisy of an avowedly Big River follower who thinks it's a sin even to utter "god". Big River used to wash his mouth if he uttered "god" even on oversight. And hypocrites accept their salary in a currency which swears by god?

 

[Vaagmi]

I have deleted a post I made about my area of specialisation and interest as it did not bring out an appropriate response from Mr. Nara. He has left me wondering still about his area of interest and specialisation other than his awe for and reverence in which he holds Bigriver. As he has nothing else to bring to the table here, I conclude that it is not worth engaging him on any serious discussion about God,religion,belief or science. I take the advice of tks. Thanks, Mr. Nara, for responding. God bless you.

 

[tks]

At least stones thrown can be returned, abuses reflected. Especially when the don hates everything connected with brahmins - lifestyle, scriptures, beliefs, ancestors, traditions, social behaviour - and expressly wish and work for the destruction of above.

Casteism, Racism, sexism and other such birth based bias arises out of flaw in character and ignorance. Attacking those that call themselves by a Caste name like Brahmin as an identity is Casteism . Period.

I admire your tenacity to respond to expose misinformation and narrow mindedness so that new readers can get a balanced perspective. I am not sure how many new readers really read these posts on a given month.

In an internet based cultural medium like this forum the only way extreme and repeated behavior of intolerance and abuse is dealt with is by the readers at large who form their opinion of some people that lose credibility over time.

I do not know for sure who all the 'Dons' here are!

Regards

 

[sangom]

Dear Sir,

Civil debates on the usefulness (or otherwise) of religion are always welcome and must be encouraged. I am anything but orthodox. If anything, I am irreligious. I tell myself I'll believe in religion after meeting just one person who's seen God.

Dear Shri Ashwin,

Re: the highlighted portion, I am of the view that no human being will ever be able to "see" god. This is so because the god is what makes you a live entity and also makes you see, hear, smell, feel and taste. Hence god is the seer, hearer, smeller, feeler and taster and there is even upanishadic proclamation that the seer can't be seen, the hearer can't be heard, and so on. But this crucial observation (and similar such advices found scattered in our scriptures) are submerged by all kinds of nonsensical blah, blah about external gods and bhakti etc. All these are pure bunkum produced from time to time by the people who stood to benefit from the working of religion as is commonly known.

Then we have another set of advice saying, "control your indriyas (senses) and look inwards to find god within yourself, etc." This is also another false advice because no person will be able to control all the senses simultaneously as that would be controlling the god power animating you; may be one or two of the senses can be controlled with the assistance of the other senses and intellect, and that is what we practice as part of growing up and attaining maturity. Even so you will find umpteen instances - in our scriptures - of sages, rishis, devas or even the trinities themselves losing self control, impreganting one woman or another, semen escaping and what not. Coming to earthy level, we have ever so many scandals involving sex and godmen, sanyasis, etc. (Shirdi Saibaba and nautch girls which you cited is one of such examples, probably.)

Hence, your ambition of finding one person who has (truly) seen god is very difficult to be achieved, imo.

In this regard, I find debates by Marx, Lenin, and Abraham Kovoor on religion enlightening. Big River used atheism to further selfish motive, and that is what is unacceptable. Kannadasan's magnum opus, Arthamulla Indhumadham is also enlightening, as it relates the reverse journey. One must try and evolve enough in order to digest multiple viewpoints without fear or favor.

I agree we should be able to "digest" differing view points. At the same time one has to achieve one's own definite view and cannot postpone this indefinitely.

As far as dollar bills are concerned, I only wanted to highlight the hypocrisy of an avowedly Big River follower who thinks it's a sin even to utter "god". Big River used to wash his mouth if he uttered "god" even on oversight. And hypocrites accept their salary in a currency which swears by god?

There is absolutely no hypocrisy in giving the bigriver devil his due credit for establishing a different ruling party in TN for the first time in history, in your personally believing in/doubting/rejecting god and working with any currency. I personally believe that the "In god we trust" appearing on US$ notes only announces that you can't believe the Americans to pay you "for value received" and so, when you get a dollar note only god can help you in realizing its value in exchange The red and blue won currency notes do not have any such claims.

 

[sarang]

Modi has mentioned this in many of his speeches. As majority of hindus believe in and make it an important event in their lives to visit temples, rivers and holy places in all corners of india, steps should be taken to make the journey, stay and the experience more comfortable and spiritual. Let us hope, all yatra spots get the necessary facelift and infrastructure.

 

[Nara]

I have deleted a post I made about my area of specialisation and interest as it did not bring out an appropriate response from Mr. Nara. He has left me wondering still about his area of interest and specialisation other than his awe for and reverence in which he holds Bigriver. As he has nothing else to bring to the table here, I conclude that it is not worth engaging him on any serious discussion about God,religion,belief or science. I take the advice of tks. Thanks, Mr. Nara, for responding. God bless you.

Vaagmi, you are again being dismissive by saying it is not worth engaging me in a serious discussion. The truth is you have no argument that will stand up to rational scrutiny and you don't want to admit to it, so you are coming up with these silly statements about EVR.

As I stated in my last post, I am not one to gloat if you had conceded, we all find ourselves in such a situation one time or another, but you are kicking up a dust storm. Why is my educational qualification and work experience relevant? I am not applying for a job. I have established my credentials through the posts I have made in this forum, and for the kind of "intellectual" discussions we have here that is more than enough.

My first question to Vaagmi was what is the rational basis for the Vedas to be taken as a font of true knowledge. The answer of course is none. By this I don't mean it is full of nonsense in its entirety. The ritualistic poorva mimamsa is of course full of nonsense, this is why people like tks never talk about it, they always focus on upanishads, and by this they have already conceded that there is no rational basis for the Vedas to be taken as a font of true knowledge.

Even if we narrow the scope to uttara mimamsa, we see that among the 108 upanishads several are filled with utter nonsense. If we further restrict the scope to the major ones, we find they are a mix of some profound thoughts and totally ridiculous ideas about reality, creation, etc. My opinion is, there is some value in studying these upanishads, but in a critical manner carefully rejecting the inane stuff and focusing only on the profound ones. Further, profound ideas are not unique to upanishads, contrary but equally profound ideas can be found in other non-vedic texts from ancient India, and other places like ancient Greece.

Vaagmi, I wish you had acted honorably by admitting to your inability to argue in a rational manner, but by bringing in EVR, and saying stuff like it is futile, and not worth it, and saying "God Bless" to someone you know is an atheist, you have shown you are not an honorable opponent.