Teaching Morals Of Ramayana To Kids

[prasad1]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Sangom sir,

na brūyāt satyaṃ apriyam

I agree with you, but it was direct question, the teacher came back to us for advice, and we researched and gave an honest answer.

satyaṃ brūyāt priyaṃ brūyāt

.

The inconvenient truth.

 

[tks]

Dear Shri Prasad,

If you will like to follow the adage "satyaṃ brūyāt priyaṃ brūyāt | na brūyāt satyaṃ apriyam ||", there is a way out, I feel. Rama before taking leave of Kausalyaa, tells her "from tomorrow we will be eating fruits and roots, and wearing barks; thus we will lead the lives of hermits for 14 years, tries to create enough pathos but starts eating meat soon after crossing Ganga. So you could hereafter say this portion, instead of the truth.

With children or anyone I would tell the truth.
As human beings we have a choice to eat - either real food 'cooked' by plants using inedible things like sunlight, soil, Carbon-di-oxide etc Or eat an animal that has eaten the real food. In the later case there is killing and harm involved.

But if one is in a forest and we are likely to cause harm to what we call is our body if real food is not available then there is a decision to be made. Harm this body (which is not me anyway) or cause harm to another body. In the end it is about attitude behind the killing. If it is for self survival then there are no conflicts assuming the choice of real food is not available.

The kid who insists on eating meat is obviously confused and so are the parents. The kid has a choice to not cause harm and also eat the only real food that nature prepares.

There is no reason to hide anything. Our scriptures while passed on via oral traditions was not modified by our ancestors. Unlike Sri Sangom I am do not have the kind of details and information. But even if many of his translations are true (and I do not mean his interpretations always ) there are really no conflicts.

Only when someone has minimal understanding and is given to a tradition of beliefs that one is conflicted when confronted with reality !

 

[Raghy]

Dear Shri Raghy,

I am not at all trying to vilify VR, nor am I accepting it as a scripture which cannot be questioned. In case you have not followed the entire course of this thread, may I say that I wrote my views about VR in this post. The one point I did not write therein was that, as Smt. Renuka had said in post # 2, it will be difficult to find convincing and rational answers to many doubts which today's kids may raise.

Shri suraju06 entered the scene in post # 49 with his reservations on/objections to the type of analysis which I am subjecting the VR to. From then on many new and extraneous points came in and the discussions have taken the course as it now is.

I consider that VR as a text has many deficiencies in supporting the avataara image of Rama which the public mind now firmly has. Unfortunately, however, VR is the text/scripture considered as par excellence at least in south indian brahmin circles and many people firmly believe that all their notions about Rama are supported by the contents of VR, which is not true. Adhyatma Ramayana, Ananda Ramayana, Mantra Ramayana, etc., are the more suitable texts which project Rama's divine avataara status though these texts differ from VR in many places. I want to point out this disjuncture or confusion in the public mind.

For example Ramcharitmanas which is recited by many brahmins also in the north, adhyatma Ramayana of ezhuthachan which is now very popularly recited daily throughout the month of ADi in Kerala in many households, etc., are different from VR.

So, I feel it is time to keep VR as an example of the earliest sanskrit poetry and follow adhyatma ramayana or even Kamba Ramayana for daily reading etc. Otherwise it is like sowing a cucumber seed and expecting a pumpkin from it, imho. VR when compared with the other versions of Ramayana will bring out how much Vaalmeeki's hero has been morphed to get the popular Rama of today. To that extent I do not agree with the scriptural status given to VR.

Dear Sri. Sangom, Greetings.

I have a nagging feeling, we are going to debate with each other.

I am a mental health nurse. My job is to infuse confidence and self esteem to persons who feel dejected and low self self esteem. I usually pick up a very small positive attribute of a person, however small it may be, I blow t out of proportion to boost up the morale and confidence of my clients. It is perfectly accepted as an ethical approach since I do it for the benefit of an individual.

I see your point. You like to see the readers to see the reality. In other words it is known as "reality check". While it is fantastic to perform reality check, are the recepients ready for it?

For example, from my childhood, from the time I could recall I was told and I believed Rama is a God. Seriously, I was in a hopeless situation... I recited Sundara Kanda with all the faith.. presto! all my suuferings went away like magic. No, this is not sarcastic..... I am sincere.

I heard about Adhyatma Ramayana. But Kamba Ramayana is not recited in Tamil Nadu. I enjoyed Kamba Ramayana as a poetry, but recited VR.

When Ramayana was telecast in India in the late 80s, it was Thulasi Das Ramayana, not VR.

I am really sorry to say this to you.... people still would believe VR portrays Rama as a divine figure. I don't know. When we meet in person, we may talk a bit about this. But in my opinion, sometimes it is better to back off. Some times, it is better to make up stories to boost up morale.

Would that be dishonest? If it is going to benifit some one, if it is going to lift someone's morale and if it is not going to harm anyone, I wouldn't mind being dishonest.

I know, I have distrupted the flow of the discussion. Kindly pardon me.

Cheers!

 

[sankara_sharmah]

I did not know that Rama ate Meat till I came to this forum. I always thought he ate only fruits and roots available in the forest. May be he ate Meat at home because he was a Kshatriya. Never thought about it .

I do not find any reason why we should advise the children about what is written in the original Valmiki Ramayana.

I was told that Ravana caught Sita by her hair and dragged her away as per Valmiki Ramayana. But I have read that Ravana never touched her.

I know that Valmiki considered Rama to be an ideal King. Since I am a Krishna Bhaktha never bothered to read Valmiki Ramayana.

My exposure to Ramayana was through Kamba Ramayana.

அண்ணலும் நோக்கினான்

அவளும் நோக்கினாள்

and

தோள் கண்டார். தோளே கண்டார்

I know that all that is poetic fancy. But I loved it.

What is the idea of telling the children something to disillusion them? Does it serve any purpose? Especially to people/children who believe that eating Vegetarian food is one of pre-requisites of Hinduism.

 

[Jaykay767]

Let me add my views on this.

1. for kids the best scripture to teach them for morals is - Bhagawad Geetha !! Not easy to understand but it is the crown jewel of our Vedic Civilization. And the best text to root them on Dharma, Karmic Cycle, morality, how to decide when faced with life dilemnas etc..

2. Apart from this, they can anway go through all the panchatantra, jataka tales etc..

3. Coming to Ramayana & Mahabharat stories, these are based on historical wars & all the actors were caught in a particular historical time & context. if people have seen my earlier posts (a few months back), these are all wars based on small kingdoms/kings & their fights, the winner wrote these texts - Ramayana/ Mahabharata - glorifying their roles to the status of Gods.

But like Renuka pointed out, this is NOT something you can use to teach morals to Kids by going through the full story. fighting & killing 100s of 1000s of people due to one man's problem (that too she runsaway ) is NEVER right !! However you can pick & choose from VR where he defines the ideal man as Rama & what are his responsibities etc.. Sita, her grace & calmness under pressure, her responsibilities & teach only that to the Kids.

Also Mahabaratha can teach a lot of things, partcularly Karna & his life is a great example of righteous path & exemplary sacrifice !!

And faith of a billion+ people in Rama makes him a God & that faith moves mountains & creates miracles in all our lives !!

 

[tks]

I did not know that Rama ate Meat till I came to this forum. I always thought he ate only fruits and roots available in the forest. May be he ate Meat at home because he was a Kshatriya. Never thought about it .

I do not find any reason why we should advise the children about what is written in the original Valmiki Ramayana.

I was told that Ravana caught Sita by her hair and dragged her away as per Valmiki Ramayana. But I have read that Ravana never touched her.

I know that Valmiki considered Rama to be an ideal King. Since I am a Krishna Bhaktha never bothered to read Valmiki Ramayana.

My exposure to Ramayana was through Kamba Ramayana.

அண்ணலும் நோக்கினான்

அவளும் நோக்கினாள்

and

தோள் கண்டார். தோளே கண்டார்

I know that all that is poetic fancy. But I loved it.

What is the idea of telling the children something to disillusion them? Does it serve any purpose? Especially to people/children who believe that eating Vegetarian food is one of pre-requisites of Hinduism.

Though I am using the above post as a reference this is really addressed to all:

First of all there is not a categorical conclusion that Sri Rama ate flesh from the descriptions of Valmiki Ramayana.
There are many more interpretations of the verses that Sri Sangom had quoted. I am not sufficiently well versed in Sanskrit to enter into a debate.

VR has over 20000 verses and there are several orders of magnitude of more references to vegetatian food than references to meat.
It will be strange for a main Character of a story who is portrayed as Dharma personified to make a promise to his mother and then cross the Ganga River and then start killing animals for food like Sri Sangom has suggested.

Sri Rama being portrayed to be from a Kshatriya, it is possible that he ate meat. But if someone makes a promise to his mother about not eating flesh then meat eating must be considered in a negative light. If someone never ate meat it is not easy for them to become a meat eating person quickly though if it was done to survive it is not against Dharma.

Regarding Sita wanting that deer, she also talks later about taking it back to Ayodhya etc. Only when reminded that it could be a demon does she say that if it is killed that its skin be used as a seat. Using skin of an already dead deer as a seat was a old practice.

I have read in a number of places that word like Mamsa do not mean flesh of an animal. It is also used to refer to pulp of a fruit.

My point is not to prove or disprove if the character of Rama as described in VR ate flesh of an animal. All I want to say is that there are many interpretations to the same well known and controversial stanzas.

I think Children ought to be treated with respect which means to tell them exactly as it is. If one is confused then they should not undertake the role of teaching.

 

[sankara_sharmah]

Some years back my wife had conducted a quiz on Ramayana for Children for the local Sankara Matam. The quiz was conducted to encourage children to learn Ramayana. After some discussion we decided to circulate a copy of Samshepa Ramayana. This is the first chapter of Ramayana. In this chapter Valmiki who is in search of a suitable hero, whose exploits he wants to write as an epic, asks Sage Narada for suggestions. Narada suggests that Valmiki should write about Rama and also tells him in brief the story of Rama. My wife did the translation. I helped her in formulating the questions for the quiz.

What I am putting forward is that by choosing the version of the Ramayana you avoid many questions.

The discussions in this forum are purely of academic interest.

 

[tks]

Some years back my wife had conducted a quiz on Ramayana for Children for the local Sankara Matam. The quiz was conducted to encourage children to learn Ramayana. After some discussion we decided to circulate a copy of Samshepa Ramayana. This is the first chapter of Ramayana. In this chapter Valmiki who is in search of a suitable hero, whose exploits he wants to write as an epic, asks Sage Narada for suggestions. Narada suggests that Valmiki should write about Rama and also tells him in brief the story of Rama. My wife did the translation. I helped her in formulating the questions for the quiz.

What I am putting forward is that by choosing the version of the Ramayana you avoid many questions.

The discussions in this forum are purely of academic interest.

In my view one becomes more mature from questioning & discussions, understanding & resolving dilemmas with the support of competent teachers who do not avoid answering seemingly tough questions.

 

[sarang]

There are interpretations by the ignorant and uninformed; then there are interpretations by the non believers, destroyers of traditions, pseudo secularists, communists, those against sanatana dharma and pure foul mouths. If someone wants an alternate belief or system to be adopted, he should sing the glories of the new belief instead of foul mouthing an existing, well respected tradition. Sangomji will be doing a service if he says loudly what good things he has learnt and follows, a positive approach. I hope he writes more about what he respects instead what he hates. evr and anna and their ilk did this and have not gone anywhere. There are more Rama katha upanyasams, more Rama temples, and more Rama bhaktas who will uphold the tradition. When Ramanand sagar's tv serial on ramayana was first broadcast, many places came to a virtual standstill with everyone glued to the tv.

1. Rama lived in treta yuga, and not just 3000 years ago.
2. Rama is worshipped ad an avatara of God by millions and this is not going to change.
3. There may be hundreds of interpretations, region wise, faithwise and mentality wise. That is not going to affect the value and position of the adi kavya - valmiki ramayanam. But those interpretations which are against the spirit of VR or want to vilify Ramayanam will not survive despite support and padding by ideology centric seculars. One has to look hard to buy a copy of keemayanam.
4. There are people who learn samskrit just to pick misunderstood holes; western indologists have done this in the past; since samskrit/indolology departments are winding up in the western universities, this breed may soon dwindle to nothing.
5. Laws geometry of euclidian linear space are not valid in spherical space. Today there is a report that einstein's famous law may also fail (probable) - inertial mass and gravitational mass may not be the same. It appears in treta yuga all were powerful and supernatural.

If someone considers valmiki ranmayana as low grade scripture or Rama is not a maryada purusha, he may better serve the ignorant population by locating a superior scripture and propagating it.

 

[C RAVI]

There are interpretations by the ignorant and uninformed; then there are interpretations by the non believers, destroyers of traditions, pseudo secularists, communists, those against sanatana dharma and pure foul mouths. If someone wants an alternate belief or system to be adopted, he should sing the glories of the new belief instead of foul mouthing an existing, well respected tradition. Sangomji will be doing a service if he says loudly what good things he has learnt and follows, a positive approach. I hope he writes more about what he respects instead what he hates. evr and anna and their ilk did this and have not gone anywhere. There are more Rama katha upanyasams, more Rama temples, and more Rama bhaktas who will uphold the tradition. When Ramanand sagar's tv serial on ramayana was first broadcast, many places came to a virtual standstill with everyone glued to the tv.

1. Rama lived in treta yuga, and not just 3000 years ago.
2. Rama is worshipped ad an avatara of God by millions and this is not going to change.
3. There may be hundreds of interpretations, region wise, faithwise and mentality wise. That is not going to affect the value and position of the adi kavya - valmiki ramayanam. But those interpretations which are against the spirit of VR or want to vilify Ramayanam will not survive despite support and padding by ideology centric seculars. One has to look hard to buy a copy of keemayanam.
4. There are people who learn samskrit just to pick misunderstood holes; western indologists have done this in the past; since samskrit/indolology departments are winding up in the western universities, this breed may soon dwindle to nothing.
5. Laws geometry of euclidian linear space are not valid in spherical space. Today there is a report that einstein's famous law may also fail (probable) - inertial mass and gravitational mass may not be the same. It appears in treta yuga all were powerful and supernatural.

If someone considers valmiki ranmayana as low grade scripture or Rama is not a maryada purusha, he may better serve the ignorant population by locating a superior scripture and propagating it.

:thumb:

 

[suraju06]

I think Children ought to be treated with respect which means to tell them exactly as it is. If one is confused then they should not undertake the role of teaching.

I think this is the most cryptic and yet most eloquent reply to the question raised in the op of this thread.

 

[sangom]

Dear Sri. Sangom, Greetings.

I have a nagging feeling, we are going to debate with each other.

I am a mental health nurse. My job is to infuse confidence and self esteem to persons who feel dejected and low self self esteem. I usually pick up a very small positive attribute of a person, however small it may be, I blow t out of proportion to boost up the morale and confidence of my clients. It is perfectly accepted as an ethical approach since I do it for the benefit of an individual.

I see your point. You like to see the readers to see the reality. In other words it is known as "reality check". While it is fantastic to perform reality check, are the recepients ready for it?

For example, from my childhood, from the time I could recall I was told and I believed Rama is a God. Seriously, I was in a hopeless situation... I recited Sundara Kanda with all the faith.. presto! all my suuferings went away like magic. No, this is not sarcastic..... I am sincere.

I heard about Adhyatma Ramayana. But Kamba Ramayana is not recited in Tamil Nadu. I enjoyed Kamba Ramayana as a poetry, but recited VR.

When Ramayana was telecast in India in the late 80s, it was Thulasi Das Ramayana, not VR.

I am really sorry to say this to you.... people still would believe VR portrays Rama as a divine figure. I don't know. When we meet in person, we may talk a bit about this. But in my opinion, sometimes it is better to back off. Some times, it is better to make up stories to boost up morale.

Would that be dishonest? If it is going to benifit some one, if it is going to lift someone's morale and if it is not going to harm anyone, I wouldn't mind being dishonest.

I know, I have distrupted the flow of the discussion. Kindly pardon me.

Cheers!

Dear Shri Raghy,

I have absolutely no problem in backing off, in the sense, stop writing my views. But will that not also mean that we are equating the people who "still would believe VR portrays Rama as a divine figure" (which probably includes yourself also, because your reading sundara kanda coincided, somehow, with all your sufferings going away; BTW, then you have not had any suffering thereafter, or, is it a continuing treatment with sufferings and paaraayanam going on interminously?) are all similar to persons who feel dejected and have low self-esteem (i.e., mental patients of some sort)? If this is agreed, I have absolutely no problem. It would then prove that religion is an opiate.

 

[Raghy]

Dear Shri Raghy,

I have absolutely no problem in backing off, in the sense, stop writing my views. But will that not also mean that we are equating the people who "still would believe VR portrays Rama as a divine figure" (which probably includes yourself also, because your reading sundara kanda coincided, somehow, with all your sufferings going away; BTW, then you have not had any suffering thereafter, or, is it a continuing treatment with sufferings and paaraayanam going on interminously?) are all similar to persons who feel dejected and have low self-esteem (i.e., mental patients of some sort)? If this is agreed, I have absolutely no problem. It would then prove that religion is an opiate.

Dear Sri. Sangom, Greetings.

That was very nice reply. I really like it.

Personally, yes, I believed reciting Sundara Kandam somehow coincided, all my sufferings going away in instalments over a period of about 6 to 7 years. Leave alone my belief, at one instance in India my boss hailed me for my continous recital of Sundara Kandam... the story goes like this.. Every day in the morning I use to recite two to 3 sargams before I left to work. At times my boss used to pick me up. He ( everyone for that matter) knew I would be reciting Sudara Kandam in the morning. So, when he left his home from Villivakkam, he thought I would be reciting Sundara Kandam... an overtaking lorry swiped his Maruti car out of the road ( Poondhamalli Highway).. the car was total ( rolled few times).. he walked out with a slight scrtach in his forearm.. just required band aids. He believed Sundara Kandam saved him.

Yes, there was a time I had such beilefs. In fact, paaaraayanam was going continously for quite a few years. I was reciting VR but also I learned and knew the meaning. I was not looking at Rama as an avatar even while I was reciting. But I had an attachment though.

Later on I developed a mentality which started looking at life events as just life events. I stopped looking at events as 'good events' or 'not so good events'. Slowly any anxiety feeling in my mind started going away. Now I come to a stage I don't regret anything. If I did something, I developed a mindset to face it squarely. Also, I don't have to do anything which I have to regret later on.

I strongly believe, religion is a kind of extra balancing wheels to be used in the early part of our life until we can think more coherently, think equitably, think rationally and think logically. Once we gotto that stage, religion is not really required.

I agree religion is an opiate. There is no doubt about that.

Even in this forum, after my requesting you to 'back off', there are so many messages written which are not quite accepting the evidences you have shown from VR.

VR is the original adi Kavya; Rama was the character created by Valmiki. So, I would go by VR only. Rama lived like a human being. Period. He had his moments of errorr in judgement; he made mistakes. I was comfortable to agree with that even while I was reciting Sundara Kandam in the past. It doesn't look like the case with many members in this forum anyway.

When I look back at my life events, the events took place in the past were not any different to events taking place right now; but, in those days I did not know how to tackle them well and sought diving grace to tackle them. But now I am not concerned at all. What ever happens, if it is not in my control, then there is no point in getting anxious about that... in other words, I don't seek devine intervention now.

Main reason for asking you to hold off a bit is to provide time for your messages to sink in. If I am not wrong, many members are getting these exposure about VR for the first time.

Cheers!

 

[prasad1]

Mr. TKS amd Mr. Raju,

I do not know whether you understand your words. I suppose both of you are brahmacharies living in Himalayas and never come in contact with ordinary householder trying to raise kids.

We parents try our best to teach our children, we all may not the medhavis like you, who know it all. We also do not have the luxury of waiting for Dakshinamoorty.

We have a life to live like ordinary mortals, In course of living our life we have to answer moral questions every day. We come up with the best answer, we can find.

So please do not insult us, with your constant insinuation that we are not fit to teach our children.

If you know the answer, please provide it with proof that we may use.
Thanks

 

[sangom]

Dear Sri. Sangom, Greetings.

That was very nice reply. I really like it.

Personally, yes, I believed reciting Sundara Kandam somehow coincided, all my sufferings going away in instalments over a period of about 6 to 7 years. Leave alone my belief, at one instance in India my boss hailed me for my continous recital of Sundara Kandam... the story goes like this.. Every day in the morning I use to recite two to 3 sargams before I left to work. At times my boss used to pick me up. He ( everyone for that matter) knew I would be reciting Sudara Kandam in the morning. So, when he left his home from Villivakkam, he thought I would be reciting Sundara Kandam... an overtaking lorry swiped his Maruti car out of the road ( Poondhamalli Highway).. the car was total ( rolled few times).. he walked out with a slight scrtach in his forearm.. just required band aids. He believed Sundara Kandam saved him.

Yes, there was a time I had such beilefs. In fact, paaaraayanam was going continously for quite a few years. I was reciting VR but also I learned and knew the meaning. I was not looking at Rama as an avatar even while I was reciting. But I had an attachment though.

Later on I developed a mentality which started looking at life events as just life events. I stopped looking at events as 'good events' or 'not so good events'. Slowly any anxiety feeling in my mind started going away. Now I come to a stage I don't regret anything. If I did something, I developed a mindset to face it squarely. Also, I don't have to do anything which I have to regret later on.

I strongly believe, religion is a kind of extra balancing wheels to be used in the early part of our life until we can think more coherently, think equitably, think rationally and think logically. Once we gotto that stage, religion is not really required.

I agree religion is an opiate. There is no doubt about that.

Even in this forum, after my requesting you to 'back off', there are so many messages written which are not quite accepting the evidences you have shown from VR.

VR is the original adi Kavya; Rama was the character created by Valmiki. So, I would go by VR only. Rama lived like a human being. Period. He had his moments of errorr in judgement; he made mistakes. I was comfortable to agree with that even while I was reciting Sundara Kandam in the past. It doesn't look like the case with many members in this forum anyway.

When I look back at my life events, the events took place in the past were not any different to events taking place right now; but, in those days I did not know how to tackle them well and sought diving grace to tackle them. But now I am not concerned at all. What ever happens, if it is not in my control, then there is no point in getting anxious about that... in other words, I don't seek devine intervention now.

Main reason for asking you to hold off a bit is to provide time for your messages to sink in. If I am not wrong, many members are getting these exposure about VR for the first time.

Cheers!

Dear Shri Raghy,

I knew a tabra, who is no more now, a close relative of my wife, who, in his own words told to me, had commenced reading VR and also sundarakandam paaraayanam right from his young age. I don't know exactly when and for achieving what wish he started it. But he was not even a matriculate. Because of the position brahmins enjoyed under the Travancore king, he, like many many other tabras got the job of a middle school teacher. He had 8 daughters and his wife was very much uncomfortable with that fact which she used to blurt out sometimes, at least. Hence I think that gentleman must also have desired a son which was the root cause of his Robert Bruce-like trials and more daughters! His life was uneventful and his sons-in-law, at least one, took care of him till the end. I personally don't think the VR/SK paaraayanam did any great benefit for him.

Nearer home, my mother was a great believer in SK paaraayanam and her chithappa had formally initiated her as Guru and also given the various detailed instructions regarding the daily stop points and how to conclude each complete recital of SK etc. She used to do this regularly and meticulously for a number of years but there was hardly any effect in her financial sufferings until I passed out of the college with a degree and a bit of communist thinking, found out that unless I strive and do hard work to earn some money and spend it wisely, the household was not going to improve. Ultimately that was what proved to be the right medicine and the years' long SK paaraayanam did not help. Even in those days I used to wonder how by just reading the story poem, God was going to bless anyone. Therefore, I feel that even in your case extraneous factors must have worked to make all your sufferings vanish and it was purely a coincidence that you happened to read VR during that very same period. Something like காக்காய் உட்கார பனம்பழம் விழுந்த மாதிரி, I will say.

I am fully aware that you, or any other member here is completely within his/her rights to hold any views on any topic. I feel, on the same note, that my views are also allowed to be expressed here. If that is so, the members who swear by VR and a VR-created divine Rama could have simply ignored my post #6, 12, 29 and Shri suraju could have also done so without coming in with his post # 49, and thus paving the start for a discussion. Strangely, however, you also seem to be overlooking this point and are advising me alone to back-off at this stage when the overwhelming evidence to show that the Rama of VR is just a human prince and no more, has been presented. Thus, there seems to be immunity for the opposite view, even in your scheme of things. I was surprised to see that you are also joining the crowd and insisting on the "tyranny of the majority" prevailing: my immediate feeling was like "you too, Brutus!".

Anyway, I don't have the inclination to continue any further nor the numbers backing my views, to break this tyranny of the majority. The best course for me now, therefore, will be to back-off completely, since, this sort of situation can happen in any topic. Thank you!

 

[Raghy]

Dear sri. sangom,

I feel, I may not have made myself very clear in my message in post #288.

I did not ask others to 'back off' because I did not quite agree with most of the views expressed by such members. Where as I agreed with your views, I too expressed the very same views and I also read the same in VR. Often times, it is essential to let the point of views to sink in; more so in the case of controversial point of views.

Just like any youngster, I was told about the divinity of Lord Rama as I grew up. I believed in certain things. I wrote about what I believed when I was young. I did not say just by reading Sundara Kandam my situation improved dramatically.. it never was the case. I worked hard all my life for anything to happen. But I also had belief. That's what I mentioned.

I did not ask you 'back off' because of my belief. I asked you to take it easy inspite of the fact I agreed with your point of view for the simple purpose of such views to sink in.

Seriously, now that we have this conversation, more people are going to be interested to know what is your point of view and why I am asking you to 'go easy'.

Every individual has a journey in improving their logical and rational thinking. Nobody came to teach me about rational thinking or logical thinking. I did that on my own accord as I read more and more of the scriptures ( not very much though) with their meanings.

While reciting SK, I did not sit around in India with my trade position waiting for a miracle... when I had half an opportunity, I went to Australia with nothing in my pocket. I took my chances. I worked very hard. There were times I worked as labourer too. I never waited for miracles to happen.... because I knew miracles don't happen.

I don't believe one would shed his/her belief overnight. It takes time. I openly said in this forum I am an athiest. Where as you called yourself as 'agnostic'. There is a journey for everyone to take. I know where I am at in my journey.

Kindly don't think I was trying to silence your views. On the contrary, I am really looking forward to read your personal views. You have been giving evidences from VR to show Lord Rama was either a fictional character or just a human being. But, From your life experience, one may seek to read your personal point of views; such point of views may not need backing from verses from VR or from any other scriptures. Such information may be more effective, in my opinion.

I humbly request you to read my message in post #288 once again, please. I am not asking you not to express your views but asking you to express more of your personal views from your life experiences, please. Thank you.

P.S - Kindly pardon me if I offended you in anyway. My apologies. I requested you to back off only for your views to sink in.

Cheers!

 

[Amirtha]

Anyway, I don't have the inclination to continue any further nor the numbers backing my views, to break this tyranny of the majority. The best course for me now, therefore, will be to back-off completely, since, this sort of situation can happen in any topic. Thank you!

Shri Sangom

I have been reading the conversation regularly between the members in this thread. I immensely appreciate and thankful to the knowledge and opinion of the members in this thread. I highly regard your opinions since I also have similar views, particularly in religion. It would be loss to the community if you decided to not to continue. I really hope and wish that you will continue to voice your opinion which is nothing but the truth. Thank you

Kind Regards

 

[C RAVI]

Dear Shri Raghy,

........my mother was a great believer in SK paaraayanam and her chithappa had formally initiated her as Guru and also given the various detailed instructions regarding the daily stop points and how to conclude each complete recital of SK etc. She used to do this regularly and meticulously for a number of years but there was hardly any effect in her financial sufferings until I passed out of the college with a degree and a bit of communist thinking, found out that unless I strive and do hard work to earn some money and spend it wisely, the household was not going to improve. Ultimately that was what proved to be the right medicine and the years' long SK paaraayanam did not help. Even in those days I used to wonder how by just reading the story poem, God was going to bless anyone.........

Shri Sangom,


So, your rational brain and hard work clearly figures out to you that -

The bakthi/devotion/Shradha with which your mother continued with SK Parayanam, regularly and meticulously for a number of years with deep rooted belief in it has not fetched her a good results through "You"? Getting her a responsible, intelligent and hard working Son who uplifted the financial status of the family and could comfort her at least in the later part of her life?


Do you also believe that that an individual's spiritual practices with true shraddah "should" fetch an individual his/her desired results to him/her immediately and only directly through him/her, Otherwise of which, spiritual concepts are just hogwash?

Just want to know your opinion.

 

[sangom]

Dear sri. sangom,

I feel, I may not have made myself very clear in my message in post #288.

I did not ask others to 'back off' because I did not quite agree with most of the views expressed by such members. Where as I agreed with your views, I too expressed the very same views and I also read the same in VR. Often times, it is essential to let the point of views to sink in; more so in the case of controversial point of views.

Just like any youngster, I was told about the divinity of Lord Rama as I grew up. I believed in certain things. I wrote about what I believed when I was young. I did not say just by reading Sundara Kandam my situation improved dramatically.. it never was the case. I worked hard all my life for anything to happen. But I also had belief. That's what I mentioned.

I did not ask you 'back off' because of my belief. I asked you to take it easy inspite of the fact I agreed with your point of view for the simple purpose of such views to sink in.

Seriously, now that we have this conversation, more people are going to be interested to know what is your point of view and why I am asking you to 'go easy'.

Every individual has a journey in improving their logical and rational thinking. Nobody came to teach me about rational thinking or logical thinking. I did that on my own accord as I read more and more of the scriptures ( not very much though) with their meanings.

While reciting SK, I did not sit around in India with my trade position waiting for a miracle... when I had half an opportunity, I went to Australia with nothing in my pocket. I took my chances. I worked very hard. There were times I worked as labourer too. I never waited for miracles to happen.... because I knew miracles don't happen.

I don't believe one would shed his/her belief overnight. It takes time. I openly said in this forum I am an athiest. Where as you called yourself as 'agnostic'. There is a journey for everyone to take. I know where I am at in my journey.

Kindly don't think I was trying to silence your views. On the contrary, I am really looking forward to read your personal views. You have been giving evidences from VR to show Lord Rama was either a fictional character or just a human being. But, From your life experience, one may seek to read your personal point of views; such point of views may not need backing from verses from VR or from any other scriptures. Such information may be more effective, in my opinion.

I humbly request you to read my message in post #288 once again, please. I am not asking you not to express your views but asking you to express more of your personal views from your life experiences, please. Thank you.

P.S - Kindly pardon me if I offended you in anyway. My apologies. I requested you to back off only for your views to sink in.

Cheers!

Dear Shri Raghy,

Your candid post #291 as also (at least) one lone expression of support from Smt. Amirtha in post # 292 have given me enough motivation. I thank you both immensely.

Coming to my personal views, there (still) is a small temple on the east side of the north road to the (now) famously rich Sri Padmanabhaswamy temple here in Thiruvananthapuram. During my school days for about two or three years our family was staying in a rented house in the street (Brahmin agrahaaram then, a mostly commercial road now) and this temple was just 5 minutes' walk from my house. It was a Rama temple, with the idols of Rama, Lakshmana and Sita of about one foot height and Hanuman kneeling, of appropriate size to suit the rest. It was one of the several 'subsistence' temples then (I see that when looking back now) and one old priest (a Thulu "Potti") used to come in the mornings and evenings, do the usual removal of nirmaalyam (yesterday's flowers and clothes, etc.), abhishekam with water only, a garland made of Tulsi leaves (because there was always good growth of Tulsi plants in the compound of the temple), a little bit of sandal, actually made by grinding sandal wood piece on the special stone, and offer a small amount (must be just rice made from about 3 or 4 tablespoonfuld of raw rice, perform an aarati (deepaaraadhanai) and then, taking the rice from the temple vessel, he would lock the temple and go. The same routine was there mostly in the evenings but I am not sure about the naivedyam.

I was in classes 6 & 7 then and I used to go to that temple whenever I could. The ambience was such that I used to feel very calm and happy inside the temple.

We moved to another part of TVM after those two years and this temple was some distance away. Later when I joined college and could take long walks in the evenings, I used to visit this temple. But during the intervening period, that temple had somehow become busier, more devotees coming, many types of poojas, archanais, offerings, etc., and to crown them all, the devoted people, mostly tabras of the street in which this temple was situate, started a grand Ramanavami celebrations - collecting funds, carnatic music performances, katha pravachanams (one Sukabrahmam Ramaswamy Sastrigal was regular, I think), etc., etc. The temple had now become a centre for retail trade in bhakti, aanmeekam etc., and almost everyone knew that some people were benefitting in some ways because of all these. My affinity to the temple vanished. Still, I used to attend the pravachanams. But I could sense, though slowly, that many things are either too exaggerated or completely passed over because I had some smattering of sanskrit and the SK book was there at home, and I used to go through this book just for reality check, as you might put it.

Rama ceased to be of interest to me thereafter. During the last about 8 years I have been trying to learn what exactly our scriptures say, literally and what does religion in the general sense mean? As I had many books on Ramayana, M Bh, etc. available on-line as also hard copies purchased, I came to the conclusion that Rama of Vaalmeeki is not the Rama of hindu worship today. I just wanted to bring this point to be on record here in the archives of this Forum, that was all.

May be, hereafter, I should not respond to challenging posts. I shall try to do that.

What I am really pained to see is that the more the religiosity of a person, the more zealot he/she becomes. My FIL himself was an example. He was a "progressive" during his younger days, associating with Theosophy, criticising some practices and aspects of our religion; but after retirement he became a devotee of one Paramahamsa Yogananda somewhere in Ranchi, studied Bhagavatha inside out, purchasing so many voluminous copies of it, attending any saptaaham within his ability to reach and so on. He even grew a few strands of hair and used to make a tiny pigtail. Stranger than all these was his irascibility when someone doubted the need for such saptaahams. the historicity of Krishna, or any other aspect of religion. His grandson (my brother-in-law's son) used to caution us saying "Thaatha is highly inflammable in such matters; take care" whenever he knew that somebody is likely to broach some such topic.

If religion in essence is something which engenders and promotes only such intolerance and zealotry, will it lead a person towards a better state? That was why in my post #260 I drew the parallel between Rama, on the basis of his own hypothesis that the Ikshvaaku lineage is empowered to establish their version of Dharma upon the whole world (see the conversation between dying vaali and Rama), and the Taliban-like outfits thinking in a very similar manner and trying to enforce their version of "Dharma" on the whole world, which we object to.

I am reminded of Cho's drama Mohd. Bin Tuglak wherein, Emperor Tuglak signs off saying "As long as our people are like this, they will not deserve a better government than mine" (from memory, please). In the same way, "as long as religiosity increases intolerance, it is better to keep off religion."

 

[sankara_sharmah]

Sangom,

Religion does not promote intolerance and zealotry. The real religious person is tolerant. Unfortunately the people who are very vocal are the zealots who claim to be religious. Since they voice their intolerance very vocally, one is inclined to blame religion for that.

Ignorance breeds intolerance. Real Knowledge of religion makes one tolerant. If you check the background of religious zealots many a time you find that their exposure is very limited. Lack of exposure and ignorance makes them intolerant.

You can not blame religion for the ignorance of these people who are intolerant.

I remember some one in U.S once saying "You can not argue with that Hindu. He agrees with whatever you say." Hinduism is a religion which accepts all the religions of the world as valid paths to GOD. Compare this with many Hindus we know who would not even accept other sects.

 

[tks]

Mr. TKS amd Mr. Raju,

I do not know whether you understand your words. I suppose both of you are brahmacharies living in Himalayas and never come in contact with ordinary householder trying to raise kids.

We parents try our best to teach our children, we all may not the medhavis like you, who know it all. We also do not have the luxury of waiting for Dakshinamoorty.

We have a life to live like ordinary mortals, In course of living our life we have to answer moral questions every day. We come up with the best answer, we can find.

So please do not insult us, with your constant insinuation that we are not fit to teach our children.

If you know the answer, please provide it with proof that we may use.
Thanks

Sri Prasad -

My statement that Sri Raju highlighted applies to any field.

If your child wants to learn Chemistry for Advanced Placement but not offered in his or her school you would not think twice about finding a teacher who teaches high school chemistry.

My children are born and raised in USA and are in graduate school now. When they were at an age to learn how to drive I had to find a qualified instructor since I did not feel qualified to teach them.

If this idea of finding a properly qualified teacher applies to common learning topics I would assume this goes for teaching principle centered leadership using our scriptures as well.

If this was about preaching but not teaching I would say there is no need for any qualifications for a teacher.

I know creating the right environment for children to learn such topics such as our epics is not easy but almost everyone I know who are determined were able to find an arrangement. We were fortunate to find proper teachers.

 

[sangom]

Shri Sangom,


So, your rational brain and hard work clearly figures out to you that -

The bakthi/devotion/Shradha with which your mother continued with SK Parayanam, regularly and meticulously for a number of years with deep rooted belief in it has not fetched her a good results through "You"? Getting her a responsible, intelligent and hard working Son who uplifted the financial status of the family and could comfort her at least in the later part of her life?


Do you also believe that that an individual's spiritual practices with true shraddah "should" fetch an individual his/her desired results to him/her immediately and only directly through him/her, Otherwise of which, spiritual concepts are just hogwash?

Just want to know your opinion.

Dear Shri Ravi,

What you have written above, especially the bold font matter, was what people used to say in the past when 'congratulating' my mother for having successfully raised all her children and that sort of things, especially when I or my (younger) brother happened to be within hearing distance. But you may know that these are nothing more than formal words and are empty. The people got their moneys back (with usurious interest, in some cases) and they might have very well thought to themselves something entirely different from whatever was uttered loudly, for all that I know of this world!

Secondly, the type of troubles in our household were mostly the creations of my parents only. Though I used to have some vague suspicions I could not be sure because all the facts of the past could not be known by me. After the demise of my parents my uncles have told me much of the Mahabharata. I will therefore not give any credit to my parents for bringing tragedy upon themselves by their own irresponsibility, and also upon the children, and then reciting SK as though Rama is bound to come and help as a result of this. AFAI am concerned, it is one way of not owning up one's own mistakes and blaming some imaginary "third-party god" for that, and praying to the same or some other god to come and help!!

I could have jolly well gone my own way, (and I had considered running away even when I was in the college) but I did not want my brother and younger sister to suffer even more than I did. Thus, you may say that it was more because of my sense of duty and responsibility rather than the blessings of Rama. If however you will insist that even my sense of duty and responsibility arose due to the good effects of the SK paaraayanam, then it follows that you have to agree that my attitude of questioning religion and finally becoming an agnostic are also traceable to the same cause.

 

[sangom]

Sangom,

Religion does not promote intolerance and zealotry. The real religious person is tolerant. Unfortunately the people who are very vocal are the zealots who claim to be religious. Since they voice their intolerance very vocally, one is inclined to blame religion for that.

Ignorance breeds intolerance. Real Knowledge of religion makes one tolerant. If you check the background of religious zealots many a time you find that their exposure is very limited. Lack of exposure and ignorance makes them intolerant.

You can not blame religion for the ignorance of these people who are intolerant.

I remember some one in U.S once saying "You can not argue with that Hindu. He agrees with whatever you say." Hinduism is a religion which accepts all the religions of the world as valid paths to GOD. Compare this with many Hindus we know who would not even accept other sects.

Dear Shri Sharmah,

well said, sir. I also feel that even among we tabras, the knowledge about our religion as revealed in the various scriptures, is very minimal. However, having been told that "we are brahmins" and carrying a feeling that their kind of belief system is completely flawless many of the people live in religious bubbles of their own making and when even a small straw in the wind happens to break/tries to break this bubble, they are aghast with anger!

Even direct evidence from the scriptures which goes against the held beliefs is "wished away", so to say, on flimsy grounds like westerners' misinterpretation, the word "maamsa" in sanskrit means not only flesh but also the pulp of fruit, etc. But then why should someone kill an animal to get fruit-pulp?

What I feel is that hinduism has become a vast agglomeration of individualistic belief systems each holding his/her beliefs as unassailable. It is the vast interstices within such a molecular agglomeration that provides the fertile ground for various swamijis, gurus, babas, aanandas, etc., to grow in double quick time and make tons of money, I feel.

 

[tbs]

hi
every individual makes man stronger in belief in religion or disbelief in religion...i read some story abt swami chinmayananda abt his

poorvarma stories...i may be wrong...he was jounalist/communist too...he went to rishikesh ....to take inerview abt swami

sivanananda....he had a lot of questions abt god/religion etc....finally he met swamiji at tapovanam and later he became sanyasi....

so he was atheist/agonist too...sometimes somewhere something happens....a great devotee can become an atheist /agonist...

an atheist can become a devotee too...IT DEPENDS ON INDIVIDUAL EXPERIENCES.....MORE PERSONAL INCIDENTS TOO...

like lord rama is avatar for somebody....same rama is hero of kalidasa's raghuvamsa.......kaidasa was a great poet....

so he need a great hero/heroine for his poem......raghuvamsa became a great poetic work...

 

[sankara_sharmah]

Sangom,

I remember the first Veda sabha that I attended long back. The principal organizer and the person behind the sabha was telling us about the necessity of these sabhas. I remember one statement he made "The Tamil Brahmins call themselves Vaidhika Brahmins and swear by Vedas. But most of them know next to nothing about the Vedas." He is a Tamil Brahmin. Later on I realized how right he was. Hardly any one knows to which Sakha they belong. The term sakha is unknown. The Yajurveda followers of Tamil Nadu do not even know that there are two Yajur Vedas. Krishna and Shukla. I can go on. Unfortunately all these people would argue about the supremacy of the Vedas at the drop of a hat.