Unpacking Paramacharya's Words

[hariharan1972]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Lets get our perspectives right

Is anyone free to take up the missed opportunities of HH Shankaracharya , during their freetime ????? and complete them to the satisfaction of the next few generations ??

Mr Vijisesh,

I dunno whether you said this in jest, but i thought i will use this as an opportunity to get some facts across.

Personally speaking, do you feel that i was trying to throw my hat in the ring for the next pontiff ? Surely not, you'll agree i hope

Let us all agree on one thing. Ours is a 'talk-shop'. Let us be conscious of our 'limitations' in terms of what we can achieve and what we cant. Kindly note the use of 'we'.

Individually some of us may have the charisma and personna to make an impact in our 'circle of influence'. Collectively here in the forum, we can exchange our ideas, discuss/debate and perhaps in the process collectively learn.

And on the back of such learning, we can go back to our circle of influence with some fresh perspectives / ideas.

So, i wouldnt like to make this charge of 'Can you do it' or 'Why dont you do it' against anyone in the forum. Because i am too well aware of my own limitations.

I know Bharathi derided 'vai chollil veerars' but i consider myself a little bit (ever so little) 'more conscious' than others who have shut themselves from whatever happens around them.

Tell you what, when my office colleagues or friends discuss about real estate prices, interest rates, rupee-dollar crisis, stock prices etc... i am increasingly becoming a mute listener with a detached attachment. Sometimes, not too often, i wonder whether all of this is meaningless. There is surely a certain point of time, especially while driving to work, that my mind wanders on the various social issues etc... I am fully aware that i am uncapable of solving it on my own, but atleast i have become conscious enough to realise there is a problem.

Put in this context, i dont think anyone of us is trying to become the next Acharya. Nor anyone of us have the 'free time' since we have our 'yadartha vazhkai' to pursue. So, i hope you dont think that anyone here is trying to play holy.

You have been a prolofic contributor, perhaps we dont agree on many issues, but i hope you will agree that discussion isnt such a bad thing after all.

I only wish, if you want to disagree you will place your viewpoints so that i benefit from them rather than being mordant.

 

[Chintana]

Dear Sri KRS,

Dear Sowbhagyavathi Chintana Ji,

To add to your reply to Sri Brahmayan above, I will add that a person's Dharma is always expressed as 'Varnashrama Dharma'.

I respectfully disagree. Dharma by itself is a dynamic concept. It stems from the Sanskrit word "Dhri" - to hold together. To do that thing which lies ahead of us which can "hold us together" as individuals and as a community at any given time in history, is dharma.

Dharma can thus be a societal prescription or an internal conviction that can arise out of a deepening sense of understanding and wisdom. It includes ideas like "Swa-Dharma" - or duty toward onself. Dharma is laid out as part of the big four - Dharma, Artha, Kama, and Moksha.

Dharma has more to do with a sense of an ever-refining sense of right and wrong - the ultimate result hopefully will be the achievement of supreme discrimination or the ability to choose God over all other things always.

Varnashrama Dharma refers to the prescriptions of "duty" expected out of individuals in every stage of life (there are 4 stages as we all know). E.g., a householder is expected to marry, have children, be a gracious host to guests and a generous donor for spiritual/religious causes.

These may be different for different varnas - a Vaishya may have been expected to donate more than the Brahmin and a Brahmin may have been expected to spend more time at the temple than the Vaishya. A student is expected to maintain celibacy, reside in his guru's ashram until the period of training is over, follow the instructions of the guru in spirit and letter, etc. Again a Brahmin was expected to train longer under his guru than his Kshatriya and Vaishya class mates.

These are more broad-based and in my opinion should be considered as "general rules". Meaning we always will have to recognize exceptions. Adi Shankara, for example went from Brahmacharya, straight to Sannyasa. There may have been less luminous examples that we don't know about.

Throughout the various stages of varnashrama one's sense of dharma is supposed to deepen the evolution of one's consciousness - this quality is solely ascribed to the discriminatory potential of the individual and that person is expected to exercise his/her judgment. Here we see how the flexibility of the religion plays a part.

Varnashrama Dharma is rigid compared to dharma per se. Varnashrama Dharma did not include women and Shudras in within its jurisdiction. Women and Shudras were supposed to achieve salvation by serving the men of the other three Varnas (of course Shudra women were expected to serve Shudra men).

In other words, the Varna System or even the Ashrama Dharma System did not have a good way of recognizing evolution of consciousness of a person if that person did not belong to the big three Varnas. Hence we have a Nandanar who was not allowed to see Lord Shiva at the Temple. This is Varnashrama Dharma's biggest failing - the refusal to recognize evolved souls wherever they may have been born. That is almost like being anti-God.

In my opinion the Varnashrama Dharma did only partial justice to the concept of Dharma itself.

That it not to say that the system did not have its merits but if we are to follow it we need a real serious change in perspective. We need to carve out a more inclusionary approach within the system that recognizes outstanding individuals, i.e., individuals of evolved consciousness.


The Varna classification is part and parcel of our religion. It goes to the foundational aspect of who we are as Hindus. Because Sanatana Dharma is rather a way of life, as a 'Hindu', one should not look at this classification as 'bad'. It was instituted for a purpose. The current struggle is how to keep it's modern aspects, while discarding the anachronistic aspects that are not and can not be in practice anymore.

Sure. Also we must bear in mind that our religion has several starlwarts who have demonstrated that one need not go through Varnashrama to get to God. In fact one of the requirements of any person entering Sannyasa is to relinquish any earthly bond or identification. If that person belongs to any of the three big castes he has to cut off his poonool (shave head, don ochre etc) as part of his Sannyas vows. Meaning relinquishing of identity is necessary to get to God.

Varnashrama Dharma on the other hand, promotes identity. And that is not bad. But in my opinion it was instituted to provide for operationalization of religion, to help build a conducive atmosphere for soul evolution. Of course if one follows all of the prescriptions one will find that there are all the necessary yamas and niyamas necessary to get to God. But our god-realized gurus have consistently call upon us to rise above distinctions. In other words, following Varnasharama Dharma in itself will not bring Moksha - one needs to work through other means for transcendence.


A society grows by many ways. Knowledge generated within the society as well as knowledge imported from other societies (I am talking about knowledge with a small 'k'). For better or worse, India has imported several different types of knowledge, thanks to both invasions and commerce.

Being open to other cultures has its merits. But external influence is not a necessary condition for attaining God-realization. Secular pursuits are about external expansion; religious pursuits are about internal expansion, which can be achieved only by going within (our yogic practices are aimed at this).


In the recent history, we know of the ideas and knowledge coming from the Greeks, Persians, Arabs, Mongols, Chinese, Japanese, English, American and other cultures.

In my opinion they are useful as long as they build a sense of respect for the world, a sense of tolerance and a willingness to listen and work peacefully with them.

These influences in and of themselves don't directly help spiritual goals.

I get what you are saying - i.e., the exposure to these influences have given us new ideas and we need to use them.

I am saying those ideas may help us in material interactions. Not necessarily in spiritual goals.



For better or worse we were impacted and changed as people from the long rules of both Moguls and the English. To discard these influences as 'foreign' is to deny who we are as people today.

In terms of fashioning our occupational identities these are useful.

But technically these influences should not matter to any serious, religious/spiritual quest. Let us not forget that Ramana Maharishi did not step out of Tamil Nadu to find oneness with God. In fact it was the other way around - the world found him.


So, the question is how do we apply the principles of our ageless religion to who we are today?

We could begin by recognizing that we are essentially dealing with two spheres - material and spiritual. I think the material realm has changed a lot. But the spiritual hasn't. Any change in the material realm, in principle, should not alter the path to God.

In this sense Hindu teachings are timeless. I think we need to recognize its external trappings from internal truths. Once we begin to understand the internal truths we can figure out how much of the trappings we need.


Pranams,
KRS[/quote]

 

[vijisesh]

Salamuvalaikum Hari ji,

Kaiffa halluk ?
Thanks for getting in me into this thread !
i still prefer to wait and watch for some more time !

Not because ......i am scared that due to the discussions , the Acharyas may be stripped off their values or their works will turn untrue !

Not because ... I cannot digest some of the bitter truths about hinduism , that can come out as a result of the discussion which can be 180 degress against the practices that we have been following !

But simply because I need to have a better knowledge of the works done by these great people , prior to raising the flag of protest or showing my discontentment on certain issues !

All the Best for this discussion , if it's going to be fruitful and going to help the unity of Brahmins !

Ma'salama !

Mr Vijisesh,

I dunno whether you said this in jest, but i thought i will use this as an opportunity to get some facts across.

Personally speaking, do you feel that i was trying to throw my hat in the ring for the next pontiff ? Surely not, you'll agree i hope

Let us all agree on one thing. Ours is a 'talk-shop'. Let us be conscious of our 'limitations' in terms of what we can achieve and what we cant. Kindly note the use of 'we'.

Individually some of us may have the charisma and personna to make an impact in our 'circle of influence'. Collectively here in the forum, we can exchange our ideas, discuss/debate and perhaps in the process collectively learn.

And on the back of such learning, we can go back to our circle of influence with some fresh perspectives / ideas.

So, i wouldnt like to make this charge of 'Can you do it' or 'Why dont you do it' against anyone in the forum. Because i am too well aware of my own limitations.

I know Bharathi derided 'vai chollil veerars' but i consider myself a little bit (ever so little) 'more conscious' than others who have shut themselves from whatever happens around them.

Tell you what, when my office colleagues or friends discuss about real estate prices, interest rates, rupee-dollar crisis, stock prices etc... i am increasingly becoming a mute listener with a detached attachment. Sometimes, not too often, i wonder whether all of this is meaningless. There is surely a certain point of time, especially while driving to work, that my mind wanders on the various social issues etc... I am fully aware that i am uncapable of solving it on my own, but atleast i have become conscious enough to realise there is a problem.

Put in this context, i dont think anyone of us is trying to become the next Acharya. Nor anyone of us have the 'free time' since we have our 'yadartha vazhkai' to pursue. So, i hope you dont think that anyone here is trying to play holy.

You have been a prolofic contributor, perhaps we dont agree on many issues, but i hope you will agree that discussion isnt such a bad thing after all.

I only wish, if you want to disagree you will place your viewpoints so that i benefit from them rather than being mordant.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sowbhagyavathi Chintana Ji,

My response to your posting above will be general to your response:

1. I am not saying that Varnashrama Dharma is the direct path to God. What I am saying is that in it's original concept (I did not say that it was ideal) it's aim is to classify the class dharma. Swadharma is for each, Ashrama Dharma is for each according to the station/phase in life and Varna Dharma is the Societal contrbution of one's class. All three are considered important to live a worldly life. I don't know what you are disagreeing with.

2. I was discussing more in terms of what Sri Hari was saying about the castes. Nothing to do with personal salvation. I was pointing out the confusion we all have in terms of deciding how to live with the concept of Varna/Jathi in today's world.

3. I agree with the division of material and spiritual. But I contend that the 'foreign' influence was not just limited to 'material' alone. I remember visiting a Sufi saint's samadhi when I was young. God is multifaceted as there are religions and while there are 'exoteric' and 'esoteric' aspects of any religion, both are valid paths, depending on one's make up. 'Exoteric' would be ideal for Bhakthi and 'esoteric' will be ideal for looking inward.

Pranams,
KRS

 

[Chintana]

Dear Sri KRS,

A detailed response might have to wait.

Regarding the Sufi saints part - yes, there are saints from other religions and we need to recognize and respect them.

But we have specific methods of expounding upon the esoteric aspects which I believe are quite unparalleled.

In terms of following the tenets of any path it is advisable to stick to ONE way. It is perfectly alright to read the works of other saints and religious leaders when one is still "shopping" for a guru. But once one find resonance with a particular guru that person should employ express speed in assimilating and practicing those teachings and should not waste time.

So if one does get advanced within Hindu thoughts and is serious about self-realization then looking at other paths are only a distraction.

Regards,
Chintana

 

[KRS]

Dear Sowbhagyavathi Chintana Ji,
I quite agree with you. For esoteric practice, there is no parallel to what our religion has developed and offer.

But there are some souls in this world, because of certain happenings in their lives grab at other traditions, which are all part of our history/culture. Sri A.R. Rehman comes to mind.

I also agree that for esoteric practice, a single Guru who can guide, before one finds one's own internal Guru is the best. No arguments.

Pranams,
KRS

Dear Sri KRS,

A detailed response might have to wait.

Regarding the Sufi saints part - yes, there are saints from other religions and we need to recognize and respect them.

But we have specific methods of expounding upon the esoteric aspects which I believe are quite unparalleled.

In terms of following the tenets of any path it is advisable to stick to ONE way. It is perfectly alright to read the works of other saints and religious leaders when one is still "shopping" for a guru. But once one find resonance with a particular guru that person should employ express speed in assimilating and practicing those teachings and should not waste time.

So if one does get advanced within Hindu thoughts and is serious about self-realization then looking at other paths are only a distraction.

Regards,
Chintana

 

[Chintana]

Dear Sri KRS,

Dear Sowbhagyavathi Chintana Ji,

My response to your posting above will be general to your response:

1. I am not saying that Varnashrama Dharma is the direct path to God. What I am saying is that in it's original concept (I did not say that it was ideal) it's aim is to classify the class dharma. Swadharma is for each, Ashrama Dharma is for each according to the station/phase in life and Varna Dharma is the Societal contrbution of one's class. All three are considered important to live a worldly life. I don't know what you are disagreeing with.

Your opening statement sounded as if you were saying all dharma is varna dharma. Hence my explanation.

2. I was discussing more in terms of what Sri Hari was saying about the castes. Nothing to do with personal salvation. I was pointing out the confusion we all have in terms of deciding how to live with the concept of Varna/Jathi in today's world.

Ok. Since you had addressed me in that posting I misunderstood that you were conveying something to me.

3. I agree with the division of material and spiritual. But I contend that the 'foreign' influence was not just limited to 'material' alone. I remember visiting a Sufi saint's samadhi when I was young. God is multifaceted as there are religions and while there are 'exoteric' and 'esoteric' aspects of any religion, both are valid paths, depending on one's make up. 'Exoteric' would be ideal for Bhakthi and 'esoteric' will be ideal for looking inward.

We discussed this I think.

Pranams,
KRS

Regards,
Chintana

 

[Chintana]

Dear Sri KRS,

Dear Sowbhagyavathi Chintana Ji,
I quite agree with you. For esoteric practice, there is no parallel to what our religion has developed and offer.

But there are some souls in this world, because of certain happenings in their lives grab at other traditions, which are all part of our history/culture. Sri A.R. Rehman comes to mind.

See...this is the part where I get confused in my discussions with you. While we are talking about esoteric things why this sudden throwing of a material thing?

I already conceded that external influences may be important for occupational reasons. But I don't understand why A R Rehman should be discussed when we were discussing esoteric things and Sufi saints.

I get that the spiritual should co-exist with the material. But must that mean that when we are discussing the nature of spiritual things our focus should be diluted by an immediate material attention-grabber? Can't material things be discussed as the next step in understanding?

This is similar to the confusion I had in the Who are we - II? thread. We were discussing internal things - Bhakti, Karma and Gnana Yoga and suddenly we were discussing Varnashrama Dharma.

Why can't each concept be flushed out in fulness before we try to juxtapose them?


I also agree that for esoteric practice, a single Guru who can guide, before one finds one's own internal Guru is the best. No arguments.

Pranams,
KRS

Regards,
Chintana

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

The Varna Dharma which considered a sizable number of people as outcastes was a reprehensible system. It classified people according to the birth.

It is shocking that many Tamil Brahmins defend this horrible and condemned Varna Dharma which is the root cause of many of their problems.

 

[Chintana]

Sir :

HH Sri Chandrashekarendra Saraswathi Swamigal himself has dealt with
this subject once. He said :

" Many people have approached me with the question 'why not you change
the sastras to suit the needs of the fast changing times ?. After all, even
the Governments change the Laws . You are like the Rishis who have
compiled the Dharma sastras. Therefore, if you wish, you also can change
the sastras to fall in line with the current day practices. In other words,
they have diplomatically asked me to change the sastras to suit their
needs and desires.

Their is nothing wrong in their request if only the smritis are the personal
opinions of the smritikartas !

But, many people do not know that the smritis do not reflect the personal views of their authors. They have just compiled what is said in the Vedas and offered it to us for our benefit. Vedas can't and must not be changed under any circumstances. And therefore, the smritis also cant be changed.

I may not have the ability or qualification to compel you to follow the
sastras. I am sitting here as the Pontiff to see that you people practise the dharmas as enshrined in the Vedas and this is also Sri Acharyaal's directive.
I do not have any right to change the sastras to suit the present day
philosophy and way of life with all its attendant comforts.............. "

( vide Pages 772 and 773 of Deivathin kural .vol 2 )

Dear Sri Ranganathan,

Thanks for this useful posting.

My personal opinion on this subject is this - I'd feel comfortable if I actually read those scriptures and decipher some of those things on my own. It will be great if we can have translators that can publish books on this.

All that we hear about Smrithi and other scriptural texts - I don't what comes after what - what was said in the context of what else - who was the author, i.e., what was his/her nature, how was s/he regarded by the society at that time - I'd want to know at least some of this information before I feel like I can participate in this.

I think you posted a few links to Kanchi Acharya's works. That is great. Because we can read the text ourselves and compare our interpretations. That would be very useful.

But it is really hard for me to have an opinion on someone's opinion about something. I want to know what that something is if I am to evaluate that someone's opinion.

Hope that was not too confusing.

Regards,
Chintana

 

[Chintana]

The Varna Dharma which considered a sizable number of people as outcastes was a reprehensible system. It classified people according to the birth.

It is shocking that many Tamil Brahmins defend this horrible and condemned Varna Dharma which is the root cause of many of their problems.

Right.

And we'd like to figure out alternatives. One can bring down a system only when one has viable, acceptable alternatives.

Regards,
Chintana

 

[Chintana]

Dear sir :

Here is His Holiness Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswathi Swamigal's logic :

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part4/chap1.htm

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part4/chap1.htm

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part4/chap4.htm

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part20/chap16.htm

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part20/chap17.htm

This is an excellent starting point.

Would someone like to start us off on the 1st Chapter?

Regards,
Chintana

 

[Ramaa]

Dear Sri KRS,

I am sure I am not as learned as you are so please ignore me if I am wrong.

First of all, you are 'class'ifying the Brahmins into some three categories. I suppose that such classification is your own and not Vedic.

Secondly, my understanding of the philosophical category called 'unity' is that it is ephemeral and transitory. So your classification is not as strong as the varnas ordained in the Veda. Greater the number in a set, lesser would it remain united. This is more easily seen in nature and in society. Therefore 'vikruthic' branding is as illusory as the set branded as you would see that any 'unity' has an origin and would therefore have an end. In between it is remains a mithya.

Since I have contended that varnas are stable, all we are seeing is the increase and decrease in the potency of the varna due to circumstances as they keep evolving. Any classification of the varna as you do therefore is merely a different way of introducing casteism that we decry. (you have only attempted to do it for the Brahmins which is a bias that militates against objectivity. Also the reservation practiced by the govt. has also loosened the potency of other varnas and set of caste proliferation. In historical times these are abberations and would vanish when the reservations are done away with.)

Hindus are under siege in India and therefore Hindusim is suffering from 'sickness' and lack of potency. Our ancestors have left behind enough intellectual 'aasthi' for us to use and assert our greatness. Hindus would certainly reclaim their glory I am quite sure. However we should fight for it as nothing is given on a silver platter.

Talking of what our ancestors have left behind, I have recently read a report that in spite of so many of the literatures having been destroyed by the Muslims and Christians, there is a vast wealth of knowledge still available and it would take a person some 500 years just to have a cursory glance of them!

Regards,
Ram

 

[hariharan1972]

Alternative

Right.

And we'd like to figure out alternatives. One can bring down a system only when one has viable, acceptable alternatives.

Regards,
Chintana

Chintana,

I see it like this.

All of us, i am sure, would first see ourselves as a human. So none of us would want to injure another either physically or physiologically.

At the same time, we have differences in the sense of - our abilities, interests, behaviours, traits, practices etc...

So what we need is to be able to 'appreciate our differences' without 'affecting anyone's sensibilities'.

'Differentiation without Discrimination' is the way forward ; Not judging someones worth by his birth is what we need.

For this whether we need a 'codified system' i am not certain, so i dunno the alternatives.

I will go back to my pet theory of Public vs Private domain. In the private domain, we can be what we want to be, but moment we step out, we should leave our personal cloak behind.

On this, i infact agree with the K Brigade. It is when they want rude intervention in the private domain, i oppose.

 

[Ramaa]

Dear Sri Hari Sir,

If you and Sow. Chintana would excuse me for interjecting, I would like to make the following comment.

"All of us, i am sure, would first see ourselves as a human."

On the face of it, it is a harmless, generic, and even exalted statement. Yet people never take this stand but something more specific than that from man/woman to scientist/athiest/DMK/Hindu/Muslim/Christian etc etc etc. People are never conscious of this lowest common denominator and would refuse to descend to that and we can't force anyone to do so. "LOkO binna ruchihi" is the axiom. It is always in this way of difference that people including you and me would see the world. If we can see everyone in a common denominator we would all be sages seeing our own self in all!

With best regards,
Ram

 

[Ramaa]

Dear Nacchi Sir,

If you would permit me let me say the following:

"The Varna Dharma which considered a sizable number of people as outcastes was a reprehensible system. It classified people according to the birth.

It is shocking that many Tamil Brahmins defend this horrible and condemned Varna Dharma which is the root cause of many of their problems."

Every society keeps changing in composition and is never static. But when we look at it at any specific moment we forget the flux and see it as constant and then evaluate the relationship within the society and then attribute the cause of ill to something like varna system, Manu Dharma Saasthram etc.

It is a Marxist concept which says that quantitative change would bring about the qualitative change. On the face of it, it seems right but Marx's historical materialism teaches that the qualitative change is an unheard of new change. This is his short sightedness. It is perhaps new for that generation or series of generations but if you would expand it as our ancestors have done, it is nothing new but a mere repetition.

When the Kshathriyas were disproportionately large upsetting the balance of the society the result was that they were running amuck driven by their Guna. Our system envisages this eventuality in the Vedic statement "kshathrasya kshathram dharmam" i.e. greater than kshathriya (the kshathriya of the kshathriya!) is Dharma. And Dharma took the form of Parasurama and started quelling them. Kshathriyas started dying in great numbers and in order to replenish themselves each one married large number of women (as also the women were outnumbering the men). Yet Parasurama was fierce in cutting them down. The result was that devoid of the force of Kshathriyas upon them the Vaisyas and Sudhras proliferated unmolested with their cheating and robbery and stealing of women becoming the order of the day. The Brahmins went unprotected without the kshathriyas and they were continuously dishonoured (Does it remind you of the Dravidian rule?!) Again there is an upset in the balance of the society and so Dharma has to resurrect in the person of Rama to quell the source and he did by vanquishing Parasurama. Rama's father didn't have to marry any further in order to remain alive. However Rama encouraged people to give up polygamy and set himself as an example of monogamy. He later killed the demon Ravana who was Brahmin by birth but adopted the life of a thaamasic glutton. This is how Sri Rama brough back the balance in society which is extolled as 'Dharma Raajyam'.

Regards,
Ram

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Sri. Ram,

I am not able to understand your post. I do not find Marxism to my taste. Of course no Marxist would touch me even with a barge pole. Among Western philosophers I am more influenced by Thoreau and Emerson.

BTW I had mentioned about many Gurus in one of my earlier posts. This is a concept of Lord Dattareya, the Guru of Gurus whom we follow. He was also the Guru of Parasurama.

http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/fest/fest_19.html

 

[hariharan1972]

Dear Sri Hari Sir,

If you and Sow. Chintana would excuse me for interjecting, I would like to make the following comment.

On the face of it, it is a harmless, generic, and even exalted statement. Yet people never take this stand but something more specific than that from man/woman to scientist/athiest/DMK/Hindu/Muslim/Christian etc etc etc. People are never conscious of this lowest common denominator and would refuse to descend to that and we can't force anyone to do so. "LOkO binna ruchihi" is the axiom. It is always in this way of difference that people including you and me would see the world. If we can see everyone in a common denominator we would all be sages seeing our own self in all!

With best regards,
Ram

Quite true Sri Ram.

In hindsight it is a wishful statement. Rather i should have said that 'we should see ourselves as humans first'.

Even as i say this, i realise the enormity of the statement and as you rightly say, it is not very easy to reduce ourselves to this LCD.

It is a pity that we let our 'attributes' (man/woman/hindu/muslim/christian) rule our conscience, but as you say, if we are capable of doing it, the per sq feet rate at Himalayas would be such an astronomical number.

 

[Ramaa]

Dear Nacchi Sir,

Namaskaram. The reference to Marx did not mean that you attributed to Marx. Far from it. I was only trying to rip the Marxists as they walk around as great philosophers. Once again my namaskarams to you and your Guru parampara.

The legend is that after his defeat at the hands of Sri Rama, Parasurama surrendered to Lord Dattatreya and and the Lord gave him the secret of AmbaaL that has now come down to us as "Thripura Rahasya". It is available online (originally published by Sri Ramanasramam). http://sss.vn.ua/tripura1.htm

Regards,
Ram

 

[Ramaa]

Dear Hariji,

Talking of the LCD one of the moot questions our ancients have raised was "What is it knowing of which all else be known?" And they have answered it far more precisely - in one word! It is the "Aathma" or the Self!

Our ancestors have found that all generalization are fleeting in their concept and hence are Maya. The only Reality is one's own Self! How contrasting is this our upbringing in 'secular' schooling! Personally speaking I found that our vedantic view has brought me much better understanding of all objects including the society as the 'alien' view tend to fuse one's self into the object thus creating the bias i.e. we tend to take sides easily. This creates us to be one-sided and wanting in objectivity. I hope I made myself clear.

Regards,
Ram

 

[Chintana]

The Varna Dharma which considered a sizable number of people as outcastes was a reprehensible system. It classified people according to the birth.

It is shocking that many Tamil Brahmins defend this horrible and condemned Varna Dharma which is the root cause of many of their problems.

I think they defend it out of ignorance.

I think they don't have alternatives.

Providing information could be the first step toward rectifying this.

Regards,
Chintana

 

[Chintana]

Dear Sri KRS,

I am sure I am not as learned as you are so please ignore me if I am wrong.

First of all, you are 'class'ifying the Brahmins into some three categories. I suppose that such classification is your own and not Vedic.

Secondly, my understanding of the philosophical category called 'unity' is that it is ephemeral and transitory. So your classification is not as strong as the varnas ordained in the Veda. Greater the number in a set, lesser would it remain united. This is more easily seen in nature and in society. Therefore 'vikruthic' branding is as illusory as the set branded as you would see that any 'unity' has an origin and would therefore have an end. In between it is remains a mithya.

Since I have contended that varnas are stable, all we are seeing is the increase and decrease in the potency of the varna due to circumstances as they keep evolving. Any classification of the varna as you do therefore is merely a different way of introducing casteism that we decry. (you have only attempted to do it for the Brahmins which is a bias that militates against objectivity. Also the reservation practiced by the govt. has also loosened the potency of other varnas and set of caste proliferation. In historical times these are abberations and would vanish when the reservations are done away with.)

Hindus are under siege in India and therefore Hindusim is suffering from 'sickness' and lack of potency. Our ancestors have left behind enough intellectual 'aasthi' for us to use and assert our greatness. Hindus would certainly reclaim their glory I am quite sure. However we should fight for it as nothing is given on a silver platter.

Talking of what our ancestors have left behind, I have recently read a report that in spite of so many of the literatures having been destroyed by the Muslims and Christians, there is a vast wealth of knowledge still available and it would take a person some 500 years just to have a cursory glance of them!

Regards,
Ram

Dear Sri Ram,

KRS probably will of course respond to your posting.

My understanding of what KRS meant was that - he was not trying to "redo" the Varna system. He was merely trying to classify the Brahmin mindset today, as it exists. This is done more from a sociology point of view, not spiritual point of view.

In other words his classification was for purposes of our convenient understanding - so that we can learn how to relate to members of our community.

We have no understanding amongst ourselves because we don't understand how we have changed.

Only when we recognize our current day differences can we get an idea about who needs what kind of information and how best it can be given to them.

I recognize that Hindus are needlessly targeted in today's India - one of the reasons we are here is to find out how we can do our part by uniting Brahmins together. And we are starting with Tamil Brahmins.

So what KRS laid out was actually out of his experience dealing with modern day Brahmins. That is something that can help us understand how we can bring everybody under one umbrella.

In short, this forum's answer to today's problems of Hindus is to unite people. For that we as a community must unite.

Regards,
Chintana

 

[KRS]

Dear Sowbhagyavathi Chinatana Ji,

I only bring up both the esoteric and the exoteric within the context of all the paths available to a peron in the current Indian society. Both of these aspects are a very much part of our religion. For example, Advaitha is a philosophy that has the esoteric aspect well developed, while the Dvaitha of the Madhvas has a well developed exoteric aspect of our religion (Ramanuja's philosophy falls somewhere in between). But they all are part of our religion today.

So, when one talks about our religion, one has to talk about one's life objective of not only attaining salvation for oneself, but also about one's relationship to one's family and then to the society and the world. One does not live as an island to oneself. Our religion understands this and hence the term 'Varnashrama Dharma'.

Now, one can seperate Swadharma from this and discuss it along the four paths. But then, whether you are a bachelor, a householder, a sanyasin, your dharma also includes to your relationship to the world. For example, not everyone can become a sanyasi. In fact becoming a sanyasi just to run away from the responsibilities of a grahastha for example is not acceptable in our religion (Please read Swami Vivekanada's teachings on this topic).

When we talk about influences of other cultures in India, my point is that the options available to a person are quite varied and as such we have to recognize that as a society we do not live in the Vedic times anymore. So when we talk about our religion and community these influences should be noted, albeit in the material realm.

So, in my mind, the Varna system is something we can not escape from or ignore when we talk about our society. The solution to our current problems as the Tamil Brahmin society, lies in not ignoring or saying that the esoteric and the exoteric are slimly connected in our religion, but rather to find a way to harmonize the two.

Our religion started exoterically with the need to do sacrifices and rites, performed by the Brahmins. We can not and should not throw this away. The solution for any tackling of the modern life issue would therefore include both the esoteric and the exoteric.

Hope, I am explaining myself adequately, because I do not have the power of language to help me to present such a complex issue.

Now I am switching topics.

By the way, while I subscribe to what Sri Naachinarkiniyan Ji has written about Varna elsewhere here, I differ from him on one thing. It is that a sizeable portion of our brethren believe that the Varna system was created by God and is part of the Sruti (even though no Sruti from my knowledge has developed this syatem, except to say how the four Varnas were created- but for the story of Jabala in the Upanishad). Unfortunately Srimad Bhagavad Gita has certain passages that reinforce the then operating system of Varna by birth. So, the question is, what is the acceptable alternative?

Pranams,
KRS

Dear Sri KRS,

Dear Sowbhagyavathi Chintana Ji,
I quite agree with you. For esoteric practice, there is no parallel to what our religion has developed and offer.

But there are some souls in this world, because of certain happenings in their lives grab at other traditions, which are all part of our history/culture. Sri A.R. Rehman comes to mind.

See...this is the part where I get confused in my discussions with you. While we are talking about esoteric things why this sudden throwing of a material thing?

I already conceded that external influences may be important for occupational reasons. But I don't understand why A R Rehman should be discussed when we were discussing esoteric things and Sufi saints.

I get that the spiritual should co-exist with the material. But must that mean that when we are discussing the nature of spiritual things our focus should be diluted by an immediate material attention-grabber? Can't material things be discussed as the next step in understanding?

This is similar to the confusion I had in the Who are we - II? thread. We were discussing internal things - Bhakti, Karma and Gnana Yoga and suddenly we were discussing Varnashrama Dharma.

Why can't each concept be flushed out in fulness before we try to juxtapose them?


I also agree that for esoteric practice, a single Guru who can guide, before one finds one's own internal Guru is the best. No arguments.

Pranams,
KRS

Regards,
Chintana

 

[Chintana]

Chintana,

I see it like this.

All of us, i am sure, would first see ourselves as a human. So none of us would want to injure another either physically or physiologically.

At the same time, we have differences in the sense of - our abilities, interests, behaviours, traits, practices etc...

So what we need is to be able to 'appreciate our differences' without 'affecting anyone's sensibilities'.

'Differentiation without Discrimination' is the way forward ; Not judging someones worth by his birth is what we need.

For this whether we need a 'codified system' i am not certain, so i dunno the alternatives.

I will go back to my pet theory of Public vs Private domain. In the private domain, we can be what we want to be, but moment we step out, we should leave our personal cloak behind.

On this, i infact agree with the K Brigade. It is when they want rude intervention in the private domain, i oppose.

Hari,

Valid questions.

We recognize the bad points of Varna System yet we know we need to evolve into more of a "meritorious" system which recognizes abilities, not just birth.

This cannot be a drastic change. Needs to be a step-by-step process.

The one thing that comes to mind is to gather people who are recognized and respected for their worth within each varna. (We can of course afford to focus only on ours given our limited resources. But hopefully the example will catch on). Such people should not only be considered knowledgeable by the orthodox sections of the community they should also have participated enough in modern ways of living to be able to relate to the left end of the community. Such people should form panel, meet on a regular basis and begin to evaluate persons on a list of criteria that includes ancient and modern ways.

Eventually this system can grow to include others.

Sometimes I think if each Varna/Jathi does this to its own kind we will be much happier.

There was a time when I believed that caste system was not good. But nowadays I am not so sure. 60 years of post independence has not managed to eradicate it. People fight because of it. Obviously people dont want to give it up.

We need to bear this in mind when we think of alternatives.

Regards,
Chintana

 

[KRS]

Dear Sowbhagyavathi Chintana Ji,

You have captured my thoughts in to the response to Sri Ram's posting! Much better that I could have done!

Pranams,
KRS

Dear Sri Ram,

KRS probably will of course respond to your posting.

My understanding of what KRS meant was that - he was not trying to "redo" the Varna system. He was merely trying to classify the Brahmin mindset today, as it exists. This is done more from a sociology point of view, not spiritual point of view.

In other words his classification was for purposes of our convenient understanding - so that we can learn how to relate to members of our community.

We have no understanding amongst ourselves because we don't understand how we have changed.

Only when we recognize our current day differences can we get an idea about who needs what kind of information and how best it can be given to them.

I recognize that Hindus are needlessly targeted in today's India - one of the reasons we are here is to find out how we can do our part by uniting Brahmins together. And we are starting with Tamil Brahmins.

So what KRS laid out was actually out of his experience dealing with modern day Brahmins. That is something that can help us understand how we can bring everybody under one umbrella.

In short, this forum's answer to today's problems of Hindus is to unite people. For that we as a community must unite.

Regards,
Chintana