Vedic learning restricted to brahmins only - true or false?

[prasad1]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

prasad1 in post #41:



I feel frustrated when I read the above post. I am not in denial of anything. Rather my case is that there is nothing to deny. On the contrary there are many people in our community who are permanently mired in a ‘mia culpa’ guilt groove unable to come out of it and grow. So every thing for them has to be viewed from this position. And it has to be binary logic always in which the cardinal principle is stated in those oft quoted words “either you are with us or with them. We will bomb you to stone ages”. I have answered with proof a hundred times and I reiterate for one last time now that Vedas never prohibited any one from knowing them. It is rather the smritis which have a hunded ways of descriminating man from man and man from woman. And I have also given enough evidences that learned people take vedas as the ultimate authority and reject what is said in smritis if it is not logical or reasonable. My second objection is about the purpose. Why do we have to keep harping on the smritis and say vedas is not accessible to so and so that too in an age when everything is open to every one? If a mlecha is interested in vedas today he can master it without any one helping him. So what do we achieve by harping on the smritis? – that is, unless you are deply disturbed by the mia culpa complex. Dynamic societies move past aberrations quickly accepting and owning them as aberrations and looking forward to the future. If vedas are vedas or knowledge, smritis are chronicles of how these vedas were acquired by different segments of the society and how the society handled the issues of teaching, learning and using the knowledge. Chronicles are always notorious for the lies and half truths added to the original text over a period of time. And in the case of vedas and smritis we are talking here about the period in thousands of years. So why all this chest beating about the interpolations and the victimhood grievances? And when people try to put the entire blame at the doors of that sitting duck of a target called brahmins it becomes a free for all. In this forum it ends up in a Greek tragedy with every one dying in the end. I do not intend to write any more about this non-sense in this forum. Enough is enough. Before closing I would reiterate this:

1. Vedas are knowledge. They had always been accessible to every one interested irrespective of caste or creed. Sudras and pancamans had accessed it freely without any hindrance. For proof read vedas first (not smrities) and then come and ask for clarifications if you want.

2. All those passages where brahmins are glorified are passages which were added to the smrities by the majority of the society at that time and not by brahmins. By the same logic all those passages where Sudras are spoken of in derogatory terms were also added to the smrities by the majority of the population.

3. Many of the smrities were authored by non-brahmins and as such brahmins can not be held accountable for what is written in them.

4. 2% of a population could not have held the rest of 98% in darkness because the logic defies the simplest of credibility tests.

5. All the talk about a conspiracy to keep the Sudras down is politics of the stinking variety. That talk is the glittering cellophane cover in which communal hatred is packed and sold in the bazars of Indian political make-believe world.
Learned and aware Hindus know what is in vedas and how to access it if one is serious about it. The rest is all nonsense just to be forgiven and forgotten.

6. There is no pumpkin - not even a shred of it to hide from scrutiny. It is there only in the fertile imagination of some in our community suffering from an incurable “mia culpa” syndrome.

I do not intend to join issue with any one on this matter any more.

Cheers.

Rajuji,
you wrote:
Vedic learning restricted to brahmins only - true or false?- is the question.


The answer is:

1. There is enough evidence to prove that vedic learning was open to every one in the society-this included brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vyshyas, Sudras, Panchamans and even those who did not know their caste/gothra.

2. There is enough evidence to prove that Vedic learning was open to ladies.

All that we hear contrary to these two well proved facts are hyperbole, politics and hypocritical manipulation.

Cheers.

It is like saying that money is available to all, so there are no poor people in this world. Money has not been denied, there is ample proof that even ladies have it, so there is no discrimination. So poverty has been eradicated.
cheers.

 

[mahakavi]

...... But then, if we approach a
Purohit to perform any hindu rituals, there will be a query at once. What
is the Community and Custom and further what is the Gothram.

Balasubramanian
Ambattur

Well, the purohit has to go by the ritual's specifications which call for all the details regarding the client's gothram, forefathers and a host of other details. There may be a few liberal purohits who will substitute all the details appropriately but they may be ostracized by the more orthodox priests. In essence it is self-destruction for the profession. Back in the early 1900's Subramanya Bharathi did an upanayanam ceremony for dalits. The brahmin community was up in arms and pretty much drove him out of their neighborhood. What we need is a secular religion (an oxymoron--isn't it?)

 

[prasad1]

Well, the purohit has to go by the ritual's specifications which call for all the details regarding the client's gothram, forefathers and a host of other details. There may be a few liberal purohits who will substitute all the details appropriately but they may be ostracized by the more orthodox priests. In essence it is self-destruction for the profession. Back in the early 1900's Subramanya Bharathi did an upanayanam ceremony for dalits. The brahmin community was up in arms and pretty much drove him out of their neighborhood. What we need is a secular religion (an oxymoron--isn't it?)

The most secular religion is Hinduism in its pure form. But unfortunately it has been distorted, by human beings for their own purpose. In spite of Mr. Raju's protest the practiced Hinduism has various regional bias, and has practiced various discrimination. The information age has opened up various avenues for learning, and the society has enforced some modifications to the practice.

 

[mahakavi]

The broader question though is whether the excluded community is interested in joining this show. Even for those who are included they are all just rituals to execute for their own satisfaction and for fear of offending the departed souls (in the case of obsequies) and a combination of piety and request for favors (pUjAs). Temple worship is still just faith which anybody can do without adhering to the rituals. How many of us really understand the meanings of all those recitations? So the issue here is: does the broader community have any interest in following all these. The paguttaRivu folks may adopt the defiant attitude for public consumption while privately worshiping at home. Do the rest of them (who have faith and go to temples) really want to recite the vEdAs and mantrams? I guess not. I see the status quo to continue, whatever the encouragement that is given to those who might want to venture into this game.

It is the same with carnatic music. Only those who are into devotion and classical music attend the concerts. By making it appeal to the entire population you are not going to get more people into the fold. When the pop and film music appeal is overwhelming that is where the action will be.

 

[prasad1]

There is very provocative article in The Times Of India.
Role of 'Vedas' in Degradation of Status of Women in India

Role of 'Vedas' in Degradation of Status of Women in India | Faith And Rituals Blog on Speakingtree.in

I was little disappointed by this article.

 

[mahakavi]

There were lot of things in the past which were considered normal at that time but out of sync now. This is true all over the world. Henry VIII had six wives and he got two of them summarily executed and divorced two of them to suit his whim. He even created his own church when the Catholic church would not accept his divorce of Catherine, his first queen. In the US women did not get to vote until 1920. In India during the Vedic times getting girl babies was not desired (that was because male babies will grow up to muscular men required for hard agriculture labor and for war). Circumstances dictate customs and laws of a country. Society does have a say in certain issues which are all too evident nowadays. It is futile to drag the past and beat it to death. There is a lot that is wrong with religion: The Roman Catholic church's inquisition of Galileo for saying the earth revolves around the Sun, the declaration of people of other faiths as infidels, proselytization of people of one faith into another, and the list goes on. Religion has to transform from within ---like Protestantism evolved from Catholicism. Religion is such a strong force governed by a cliquish group not amenable to social or political transformation. So instead of pointing fingers it is better to look forward and try for fairness and justice for all. If something is wrong with certain codes of conduct which does not jibe with the current times it has to be changed. Old order changes constantly yielding to new one.

 

[prasad1]

There were lot of things in the past which were considered normal at that time but out of sync now. This is true all over the world. Henry VIII had six wives and he got two of them summarily executed and divorced two of them to suit his whim. He even created his own church when the Catholic church would not accept his divorce of Catherine, his first queen. In the US women did not get to vote until 1920. In India during the Vedic times getting girl babies was not desired (that was because male babies will grow up to muscular men required for hard agriculture labor and for war). Circumstances dictate customs and laws of a country. Society does have a say in certain issues which are all too evident nowadays. It is futile to drag the past and beat it to death. There is a lot that is wrong with religion: The Roman Catholic church's inquisition of Galileo for saying the earth revolves around the Sun, the declaration of people of other faiths as infidels, proselytization of people of one faith into another, and the list goes on. Religion has to transform from within ---like Protestantism evolved from Catholicism. Religion is such a strong force governed by a cliquish group not amenable to social or political transformation. So instead of pointing fingers it is better to look forward and try for fairness and justice for all. If something is wrong with certain codes of conduct which does not jibe with the current times it has to be changed. Old order changes constantly yielding to new one.

I like your post.

The first action is to recognize the problem. Accept that there is a problem, then find a solution to the problem.
If you do not recognize and accept then you can not find a solution.
There was no finger pointing, it was simply identifying the problem, so a solution could be found.

 

[mahakavi]

I like your post.

The first action is to recognize the problem. Accept that there is a problem, then find a solution to the problem.
If you do not recognize and accept then you can not find a solution.
There was no finger pointing, it was simply identifying the problem, so a solution could be found.

Sorry if I did not make my point clear. I was saying there is no point in doing research on which veda and which canto was responsible for some of the injustice done to women in the past. I am not defending the vedic age practices. Every age has a dark side to it. What we consider normal now may be ridiculed 50 years from now.

As for problems they are obvious. It is only the willingness to address them by all that is the issue. Some people live in the past and others don't. Most of the solutions have to EVOLVE. Overnight rectification is not possible unless it is a violent one. One example is the current struggle of 99% versus 1% on the economic situation. This will be with us for the foreseeable future and beyond.

 

[prasad1]

Sorry if I did not make my point clear. I was saying there is no point in doing research on which veda and which canto was responsible for some of the injustice done to women in the past. I am not defending the vedic age practices. Every age has a dark side to it. What we consider normal now may be ridiculed 50 years from now.

As for problems they are obvious. It is only the willingness to address them by all that is the issue. Some people live in the past and others don't. Most of the solutions have to EVOLVE. Overnight rectification is not possible unless it is a violent one. One example is the current struggle of 99% versus 1% on the economic situation. This will be with us for the foreseeable future and beyond.

The modern age has made Veda's available to all, there might still be holdouts in some circles, but that should not matter. The matts and other religious body functioning in general public should change their stand. If it is a private organization they have the right to keep their policy.

 

[Somayaji.S]

AN ernative to National Anthem

I was away for a few days—a lot of water has flown under the bridge, it seems—I just noticed.

Sanskrit=> Taathum= father(Biological or Religiously adopted)
Dhaatum=Giver (“Anna Dhaatha )—also one who is cause of creation.=BRAHMANN—

(“Vishesathaha Dhaatha Vidhathaata)
Brahma—Vishnu—Rudra are all NAMES of BRAHMANN
Rig Vedham says “Vipraahaa Bahudhaa Vadhanthi”—the word is “Vadhanthi”---Learned Scholars call Brahmann by many Names (Poly Nomism –Not Poly Theism)

BAHMANN is Vidhaathaa

So Brahma—Vishnu—Rudra or the Chief of all the 3 Lord Siva all are Dhaatha and Vidhaatha only. The Bhashyakar writes the Bhaashyam to separately interpret the words, according to the context..

I have also said the same thing—I said Vidhaatha is God.--Bhashyakar says Vidhaatha is Vishnu=God- So Vidhaatha is G-O-D=God—Not Emperor of England.

Again Taathum/Dhathum => sri.Vedha Vyasa aspired for a very long period to have a son, to escape the “Hell” of “Puth”,by hectic penance. While churning two “Arani Kattais”(wood) for the ‘Yaagam” a “Fire-ball” came towards sri.Vedha Vyasa ,which turned to sri.Sukha Brahma Rishi. So sri.Vedha Vyaasa was neither biological nor adopted father (Taathum) of sri.Sukha.He was the cause of creation (Dhaathum)

Sri.vasishta was Taathum of Sri.Sakthi.
Sri.Sakthi was Taathum of sri.Parachara.
Sri.Parachara was Taathum of sri.Vyasa.
But sri.Vyasa was Dhaatum of sri.Sukha

There was an interesting question in Yahoo Answers (Y.A.-R.S )-USA

“Who was the mother of sri.Sukha-?
sri.Sukha had NO mother.

Sukhaha means Parrot—Pikhaha means Pea cock.

On-Line Sanskrit-English dictionary

[TABLE="width: 800, align: center"]
[TR]
[TD]सुक
[/TD]
[TD]suka
[/TD]
[TD]
[/TD]
[TD]parrot
[/TD]
[TD]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]
[/TD]
[TD]
[/TD]
[TD]
[/TD]
[TD]
[/TD]
[TD]
[/TD]
[TD]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]
[/TD]
[TD]शुक
[/TD]
[TD]zuka
[/TD]
[TD].
[/TD]
[TD]parrot
[/TD]
[TD]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

sri.Sukha Brahma Rishi was moving from place to place in the form of a parrot only. At “Will” he could take human form also--There is an interesting story.

 

[Somayaji.S]

Vedic learning restricted to brahmins only

Sorry.The above is my reply to a post in the thread "An Alternative to National Anthem."--But in advertently this is posted here.---Somayaji.S.

 

[mahakavi]

Are you saying Suka was swayambu? Was he celestial and not human but equal to God? As we all know mythology takes wings of fancy and we better take it with lots and lots of grains of salt. Mythology is just religious fiction when it comes to Hinduism. The writers blended them together and wove a very tight fabric and hence it is difficult to say which is fact and which is fiction.

The Vishnu sahasranamam states only "Suka tAtam taponidhim" ( not dhAtam). Pl see the devanagari verse I quoted in the Anthem thread . The first "tA" and "ta" in dEvanAgari alphabet. I wonder if Vishnu sahasranamam errs in such a specific relationship. I would stand corrected if the version "Suka dhAtam taponidhim" was the original phrase and evidence is shown for that.

VidhAtA means producer, creator (generic meaning). Since the other words were tell-tale I mentioned Bharatha Bhaguya vidhAta refers to George V. He was in charge of India's destiny (more of a manipulator/director). If you imply the meaning of God for vidhAtA I cannot question it. But the context matters more than anything else in interpretation. To claim that God will guide the destiny of India only to the exclusion of other regions is preposterous. One can pray "please God, save our country". The same thing was done to George V (in the anthem) who was the emperor at that time and he was controlling India's destiny (like it or not) beyond doubt.

Moderator: Will you please move these two posts to the "An alternative National anthem for India"?
Thanks.

 

[neeluiyer]

I am 36, and have no exposure to Vedas. I have 9 year old son, whom i would like to teach vedas. My Can any one plese let me know the procedure of starting the same.
I also want to learn. Is Vedas Gotram Specific..

Best Regards,

Neelakantan Iyer (Bangalore, 782991874; [email protected])

 

[sarang]

Like modi, manu too increases the pulse and blood pressure of many.

1. Only vedas are eternal and cannot be modified.
2. Smritis, like manu's and a host of others are man made laws, and can be edited, modified and kept in the shelf. The smrutis themselves carry this 'to whomsoever it may concern'.
3. Our forefathers (all varnas) were very clever, knew what to follow and what to neglect. Even pro and anti brahmin zealots (some in this forum too) have shouted vociferously that brahmins are not brahmins because they do not follow manu 100%.
4. Our culture was and is different; we don't ban or boycott or burn books we don't like or approve. We just ignore them.
5. There is no evidence to show that sudras were barred from learning vedas or lead was poured into their ears when they happened to hear vedas. The kings involved all the citizens in the yagams.
6. Quoting 10 passages out of 1000 which are negative just does not make the whole book negative. Verses eulogising women (lakshmi comes only when the women folk are honoured or those who ill treat women incur irredeemable sin) are conveniently ignored. It is like finding an unnatural or erotic statues in a temple tower, and then blaming the entire temple going community as debased.
7. We, sanatana dharmists, are wise enough to differentiate what is good and what is acceptable and move on, despite detractors who quote only select passages.
8. In a tv discussion on god and commonalities in religions with sri sri ravishankar, zakir nayak, a vocal anti hindu, was only listing negative passages from hindu scriptures. No amount of talk by srisri to steer the discussion to the topic was successful (the bashers are always high decibel vocal). He later explained to his devotees that if I argue with a murka and win I will only become a maha murka.
8. Our ancestors were wise and knew what to follow and what to skip. We, too, are no different.
9. Those who have a fascination for manusmriti can blacken the offending passages or tear off those pages, if that is going to help to quieten their mind.
10. Following sushma swaraj, we can say to the manu-apriya-vadis - manusmriti is an encashed cheque. It is not going to create a guilt complex in brahmins. Nor will it win votes.

srisri ravishankar's talk on vidanda vadis.

Ravi Shankerji Powerfull slap to Zakir Naik Face - YouTube

 

[sarang]

There is no need to despair. Even in films one can hear the dialogue when the king wants to settle a dispute - manu dharmam enna solkirathu!

Perhaps cho's writing on manusmrithi in hindu maha samuddiram will help in getting balanced perception for those with neutral mind.

I have not found any evidence in any religious or secular samskrit and tamil literature that manu's harsh injunctions were followed or implemented by any king.

You are right, no need to get into unnecessary discussion. My only wish is they find references to events which support the verses.

prasad1 in post #41:



I feel frustrated when I read the above post. I am not in denial of anything. Rather my case is that there is nothing to deny. On the contrary there are many people in our community who are permanently mired in a ‘mia culpa’ guilt groove unable to come out of it and grow. So every thing for them has to be viewed from this position. And it has to be binary logic always in which the cardinal principle is stated in those oft quoted words “either you are with us or with them. We will bomb you to stone ages”. I have answered with proof a hundred times and I reiterate for one last time now that Vedas never prohibited any one from knowing them. It is rather the smritis which have a hunded ways of descriminating man from man and man from woman. And I have also given enough evidences that learned people take vedas as the ultimate authority and reject what is said in smritis if it is not logical or reasonable. My second objection is about the purpose. Why do we have to keep harping on the smritis and say vedas is not accessible to so and so that too in an age when everything is open to every one? If a mlecha is interested in vedas today he can master it without any one helping him. So what do we achieve by harping on the smritis? – that is, unless you are deply disturbed by the mia culpa complex. Dynamic societies move past aberrations quickly accepting and owning them as aberrations and looking forward to the future. If vedas are vedas or knowledge, smritis are chronicles of how these vedas were acquired by different segments of the society and how the society handled the issues of teaching, learning and using the knowledge. Chronicles are always notorious for the lies and half truths added to the original text over a period of time. And in the case of vedas and smritis we are talking here about the period in thousands of years. So why all this chest beating about the interpolations and the victimhood grievances? And when people try to put the entire blame at the doors of that sitting duck of a target called brahmins it becomes a free for all. In this forum it ends up in a Greek tragedy with every one dying in the end. I do not intend to write any more about this non-sense in this forum. Enough is enough. Before closing I would reiterate this:

1. Vedas are knowledge. They had always been accessible to every one interested irrespective of caste or creed. Sudras and pancamans had accessed it freely without any hindrance. For proof read vedas first (not smrities) and then come and ask for clarifications if you want.

2. All those passages where brahmins are glorified are passages which were added to the smrities by the majority of the society at that time and not by brahmins. By the same logic all those passages where Sudras are spoken of in derogatory terms were also added to the smrities by the majority of the population.

3. Many of the smrities were authored by non-brahmins and as such brahmins can not be held accountable for what is written in them.

4. 2% of a population could not have held the rest of 98% in darkness because the logic defies the simplest of credibility tests.

5. All the talk about a conspiracy to keep the Sudras down is politics of the stinking variety. That talk is the glittering cellophane cover in which communal hatred is packed and sold in the bazars of Indian political make-believe world.
Learned and aware Hindus know what is in vedas and how to access it if one is serious about it. The rest is all nonsense just to be forgiven and forgotten.

6. There is no pumpkin - not even a shred of it to hide from scrutiny. It is there only in the fertile imagination of some in our community suffering from an incurable “mia culpa” syndrome.

I do not intend to join issue with any one on this matter any more.

Cheers.

 

[sarang]

After this post I too will follow suraju's advice:

Some excerpts from jeyamohan's blog; he advises us to approach the issue with an open mind, free from colonial hangover.

"அதற்கு மிகச்சிறந்த உதாரணம் மனுநீதிக்கும் வர்ணாசிரமதர்மத்துக்குமெல்லாம் ஐரோப்பியர்களால் கொடுக்கப்பட்ட முக்கியத்துவம். இந்தியாவையே மனுநீதி என்னும் நெறிநூல்தான் ஆட்சி செய்கிறது என்றும், இந்தியாவின் ஒட்டுமொத்த சமூக அமைப்பும் மனுநீதியால் வகுக்கப்பட்ட வர்ணாசிரம அமைப்புக்கு கட்டுப்பட்டு உருவானது என்றும் அவர்கள் வகுத்துக்கொண்டார்கள்.இன்றுவரை இந்தியாவின் பொதுவான கருத்தியல்விவாதத்தளத்தில் மையக்குரலாக ஒலிப்பது இந்தக்குரலே. இதை திட்டவட்டமாக நிலைநிறுத்த ஐரோப்பிய ஆய்வாளர்கள் இன்றுகூட அவர்கள் நூல்களில் படும்பாடு ஆச்சரியமூட்டுவது. மேற்கோள்காட்டுவதையே சிந்தனை என்று கற்றுக்கொண்ட நம்மூர் அசடுகள் அதற்கு உரிய பின்பாட்டும் பாடிவருகிறார்கள்.
"ஸ்மிருதிகள் ஓர் அதிகாரச்சூழலில் அச்சூழலின் தேவைக்கேற்ப உருவாக்கப்பட்டவை. பல ஸ்மிருதிகள் நான்குவருணத்தவரும் அவரவருக்கான வேதமந்திரங்களை கற்று அவரவருக்குரிய வேள்விச்சடங்குகளை செய்யவேண்டுமென அறிவுறுத்துகின்றன. நாரதஸ்மிருதி சூத்திரர்கள் உட்பட அனைவருக்கும் வேதஞானத்தை கட்டாயப்படுத்துவதோடு வருணம் விட்டு வருணத்துக்கு மாறுவதையும்கூட அங்கீகரிக்கிறது.
"அப்போதுகூட மனுஸ்மிருதி உட்பட எந்த ஸ்மிருதியும் இந்தியாவின் கோடானுகோடி சாமானிய மக்களின் சமூக அமைப்பை வடிவமைத்தது , அவர்களை நேரடியாக கட்டுப்படுத்தியது என்று சொல்லிவிடமுடியாது. பத்தொன்பதாம்நூற்றாண்டின் தொடக்கத்தில் கூட இந்தியாவின் பெரும்பாலான மக்கள் தங்கள் குலநீதிகளின்படியே ஆளப்பட்டனர். குல ஆசாரங்களிலேயே வாழ்ந்தனர். அவை அம்மக்களின் வாழ்க்கையின் போக்கில் தொல்பழங்காலம் முதலே உருவாகி வந்தவை.மனுநீதி உட்பட்ட ஸ்மிருதிகள் எல்லாமே பெரும்பாலும் உயர்மட்டத்தில்தான் இருந்தன. சொல்லப்போனால் அவை செல்வாக்குடனிருந்த இடங்களில்கூட ஒருவகையில் கொள்கையடிப்படையில் ஏற்றுக்கொள்ளப்பட்டவையாக மட்டுமே இருந்தன, திட்டவட்டமான நடைமுறைகளாக அல்ல.
"தேவகிரியின் யாதவர்கள் முதல் கடைசியாக விஜயநகர நாயக்கர்கள் வரை பெரும்பாலானவர்கள் மேய்ச்சல்தொழில் செய்துவந்தவர்கள். அவர்கள் பெரும்திரளாக ஆகி நிலத்தைக் கைப்பற்றி அரசை உருவாக்கும்போது இயல்பாகவே ஷத்ரியர்கள் ஆகிவிடுகிறார்கள். தக்கலை அருகே உள்ள தலக்குளம் என்ற கிராமத்தைச்சேர்ந்த நாயர்குடும்பம் ஒன்று திருவிதாங்கூர் அரசர்களாக ஆனபோது அவர்கள் ஷத்ரியர்களாக ஆனார்கள். நம்பூதிரிகள் அவர்களை ஷத்ரியர்களாக அங்கீகரித்து தங்கள் வேள்விகளுக்கு காவலர்களாக ஆக்கினார்கள்.
இந்தியாவிலிருந்த ஸ்மிருதிகள் பல அனைவரும் வேதங்கள் கற்பதை அனுமதித்திருந்தன. ஆகவே வைத்தியம் , சிற்பவியல், ஆயுதவித்தை போன்ற தொழில்கற்பவர்களும் வேதம் கற்றிருக்கிறார்கள். ஆனால் பழங்காலம் முதலே வேதங்கள் ஒரு தொன்மையின் தொடர்ச்சியை நிலைநிறுத்தும் மந்திரங்களாகவே ஓதப்பட்டிருக்கின்றன. சிற்சில குருமரபுகள் தவிர்த்து வெளியே அவை கற்று ஆராயப்படவில்லை.
"மனுஸ்மிருதி பிற வர்ணத்தவர் வேதம் கற்பதை விலக்கினாலும் பற்பல இனக்குழுவினர் மனுஸ்மிருதியின் கட்டுப்பாட்டுக்குள் வரவில்லை. குறிப்பாக இந்தியாவில் மருத்துவம், ஆயுதவித்தை, சிற்பவியல் போன்ற கலைகளை குலமரபாக கற்பவர்கள் பொதுச்சமூகத்தின் கட்டுப்பாடில்லாத தனித்த துணைச்சமூகங்களாகவே இயங்கிவந்தனர். அரசனால் கூட கட்டுப்படுத்தமுடியாதவர்களாக அக்குழுக்கள் இருந்தன.

"ஆதிக்கவாதிகள் அளித்த எளிய அரசியல் வரைபடங்களைச் சுமந்தலையாமல் நம்முடைய பண்பாட்டையும் அணுகும் புதிய தலைமுறை உருவாகி வரக்கூடும். அவர்கள் நமக்கு புதிய வெளிச்சங்களை அளிக்கலாம்
http://www.jeyamohan.in/?p=27469

 

[nannilam_balasubramanian]

#66
There is an article who ruled India written by Swami BG Narasingha.
Could you kindly go through and offer your views please in the light of the above.

Who Ruled India? | Sri Narasingha Chaitanya Ashram

Balasubramanian
Ambattur

 

[prasad1]

It is A historical - story, I do not have time to independently verify the dates and events given in the story.

He has conveniently left out the social reform movements in India during the earlier times. Hinduism, and India have been evolving, as it should be, through out the ages.

The last line is pure pov of the writer.

MTV and Bollywood have managed in only 62 years of independence — the massive moral, social and cultural degradation of India.

 

[prasad1]

Mr. Sarangji,
Again I am not against the premise that Veda is knowledge and it is open for all to learn.
I am not blaming Brahmins for the state we are in. I am happy that the "so Called Rationalist" are not here blaming Brahmins for all of society's ills, at the same time I am not going to be defensive about every thing that is done in the name of Hinduism.

Denial is the first stage in the loss process.
STAGES OF THE LOSS PROCESS
By Jake Lawson


What are the stages of the loss process?
Stage 1: Denial
Stage 2: Bargaining
Stage 3: Anger
Stage 4: Despair
Stage 5: Acceptance


What are the stages of the loss process?


A loss experience involves the following five stages of emotional response: denial, bargaining, anger, despair and acceptance.




Read more: Stages Of The Loss Process | LIVESTRONG.COM

 

[renuka]

Mr. Sarangji,
Again I am not against the premise that Veda is knowledge and it is open for all to learn.
I am not blaming Brahmins for the state we are in. I am happy that the "so Called Rationalist" are not here blaming Brahmins for all of society's ills, at the same time I am not going to be defensive about every thing that is done in the name of Hinduism.

Denial is the first stage in the loss process.
STAGES OF THE LOSS PROCESS
By Jake Lawson


What are the stages of the loss process?
Stage 1: Denial
Stage 2: Bargaining
Stage 3: Anger
Stage 4: Despair
Stage 5: Acceptance


What are the stages of the loss process?


A loss experience involves the following five stages of emotional response: denial, bargaining, anger, despair and acceptance.




Read more: Stages Of The Loss Process | LIVESTRONG.COM

Dear Prasad ji,

These days Manu Smirti or any other religious law is not in vogue.For any offence itself we have civil and criminal law which is basically Western Law.
Western law has been accepted almost all around the world.

Even Muslim countries with the exception of a few do not practice Hudud Law.
Times have changed and we have moved well along with the flow sometimes for the good or for the bad.

Same way with vedic studies..it's open to anyone now.So many organizations teach vedic chantings/vedanta etc to any student who shows interest.

Out here in M'sia we have Non Brahmin priest who also conduct rituals and homas and people do engage them too.

You know I have had experience with both priests here Brahmin and NB..as far as I know I didn't see much difference.
Both have same rates of charging and most important most of them just knew the recital but were not really aware of the words they were chanting.

I remember one Brahmin priest from India he did a pooja where he recited a mantra which had the word "Til" denoting Sesame oil and when after the pooja was over I asked him what do I do with the extra Til oil..to my surprise he asked me "madam what is Til?
Then I used to Tamil word for it and he knew what I was talking about.

So that goes to show that he was not aware of the word he was reciting as he was pouring the Til oil.

Another NB priest I knew was reciting lots of things a little mixed up here and there.

So finally the outcome is the same.
Both Brahmin and NB priests here do recital without understanding the meaning of what they are saying.

So I guess it does not make a difference who we engage cos as long they have Bhakti in their work that should suffice.

 

[nannilam_balasubramanian]

Dear Prasad ji,

These days Manu Smirti or any other religious law is not in vogue.For any offence itself we have civil and criminal law which is basically Western Law.
Western law has been accepted almost all around the world.

Even Muslim countries with the exception of a few do not practice Hudud Law.
Times have changed and we have moved well along with the flow sometimes for the good or for the bad.

Same way with vedic studies..it's open to anyone now.So many organizations teach vedic chantings/vedanta etc to any student who shows interest.

Out here in M'sia we have Non Brahmin priest who also conduct rituals and homas and people do engage them too.

You know I have had experience with both priests here Brahmin and NB..as far as I know I didn't see much difference.
Both have same rates of charging and most important most of them just knew the recital but were not really aware of the words they were chanting.

I remember one Brahmin priest from India he did a pooja where he recited a mantra which had the word "Til" denoting Sesame oil and when after the pooja was over I asked him what do I do with the extra Til oil..to my surprise he asked me "madam what is Til?
Then I used to Tamil word for it and he knew what I was talking about.

So that goes to show that he was not aware of the word he was reciting as he was pouring the Til oil.

Another NB priest I knew was reciting lots of things a little mixed up here and there.

So finally the outcome is the same.
Both Brahmin and NB priests here do recital without understanding the meaning of what they are saying.

So I guess it does not make a difference who we engage cos as long they have Bhakti in their work that should suffice.

Really superb. That mean he just like that chants Mantra without knowing the
meaning of it. I don't blame him. It all depends on his Guru who taught him
without explaining the meaning of it.

Balasubramanian
Ambattur

 

[Dr.S.Ramanathan]

Manu Smruti has been battered for too long for all wrong things. We have had many other Smrutis also and Sutras. What is relevant today is what I often call as Ambedkar Smruti,ie the Constitution of India and the Hindu Code bill and Act. Officially, they have replaced all other Smrutis.
I am aware in Pune, there are only women priests in certain areas, who perform marriages and other rites and what they follow are very much the same as what a male Brahmin priest chants and performs. There are temples where only nonbrahmin priests have the right tp perform pooja etc. Brahmins, who have this God as their kuladeivam, perform poojas through him and accept prasad from him without any murmur. The disputes are really created by those who want to keep the casteism alive for reasons other than religion.
Regards, Ramanathan.

 

[crbsram]

Hello Ramanathan sir,
You are right. The woman pandits in some paqrts maharastras follow the matrayani recension of krishna yajur veda which is said to be given by maitrayani wife of great sage yajnavalkya rishi. Even the woman pandits used to do yajnas and poojas and prayogas even if they are in their asaucha period. In which woman are not advised to do any pooja during these period.

om namah shivayah
Thanks
c.r.bala

 

[ozone]

There are more purohits in the world who understand the meaning of rituals, than there are nurses who understand the purpose and reasons for a medicine or injection dosage.

 

[prasad1]

There are more purohits in the world who understand the meaning of rituals, than there are nurses who understand the purpose and reasons for a medicine or injection dosage.

Are we really talking about registered Nurses? Are nurses supposed to know the purpose of prescription? Nurses generally are supposed to follow the medicine and dosage prescribed by the doctor with MD or MBBS(a real one not the compounder officiating as one).

In US the nurse RN can not prescribe any medicine or adjust the dosage. Only the doctor can do that.

We hire priest for our Temple, we have to go through applications and interviews for priests. Mr. O3 you will be surprised that so many of them do not know the purpose of the pujas. These all are ordained, and have qualification granted by different veda patshalas.

We have a set of questions designed by our consultant in TN, after selection we hire them. We hired a priest from Kanchi Veda patshala. Then my cousin came to visit us, and we went to the prodosham puja at the Temple. My cousin was appalled at the priest for missing so many important steps. He pointed out the deficiencies at the way the puja was conducted and confronted the priest. The priest admitted to his errors, and claimed that due to time consideration he had to do short cuts.

We have had our share of bad priests.