Questions - All people can become priests

May 21, 2006

Hi,

I do not post on this board much but I want to hear on this board.

I am an Iyengar myself but

1. why can't a person not a brahmin become a priest?

2. Why can't the Brahmins who are well versed in our

sampradayas start Vedic schools for all so that our

sampradaya is not lost?

3. If a person who is not a Brahmin is deeply interested in the subject, is willing to learn, and excels in the sampradayas and

rituals, why can he not conduct poojas in the temple?

With seperatist and castist attitudes like this still existing in the 21st century, it is not surprising that the christian

missionaries are gaining ground in getting converts.

This attitude will only lead to loss of our

sampradayas altogether. For whom will the Brahmin be a

priest if all the so-called "non-Brahmins" are

converted to Christianity?

Geetha

May 22, 2006

sri:

Dear Smt Geetha Raghavan and other devoees:

All the answers are only for Vaikhanasa and Pancharatra temples.

as that is all i know a little bit about.

First i am stating where i stand.

ONLY BRAHMINS ARE ALLOWED to be Archakas as per

agama and tradition in Vaikahansa and Pancharatra temples.

[we can discuss in another thread as to who are the brahmins]

Now i will address your questions one by one:

>I am an Iyengar myself but

I think you mean you are a Sri Viahsnava.

(If you do not know the difference please send me personal mail separately

for this)

>Q1. why can't a person not a brahmin become a priest?

Ans: Because to be a priest, you have to learn Vedas and get Dhiksha.

To learn the Vedas you have to have Upanayanam as a Bachelor.

(Only Brahmna, Vaishya and Kshatriya boys are allowed upanayana as per

shastras)

and because the material is vast, one has to start the learning process

while your mind is young and fresh.

PS: Only Brahmins can teach, but Khastiyas and Vaishyas can learn.

There are other services one can perform, like Arulicheyal chanting,

why not focus on them?

Many Sri Vaishnava non-brahmins have been doing this and doing it very well.

>2. Why can't the Brahmins who are well versed in our

>sampradayas start Vedic schools for all so that our

>sampradaya is not lost?

Because if they follow the Shastras which say they can only teach to those

who have

had upanayana and are performing tri-kala sandhya.

Our sampradaya is being lost and degenerated by the "NON Believer"

administration

and our people just do not see it.

We have been divided and conquered again and again and we fall prey to it

over and over.

All the Dhivya Desams were very well kept with enough lands and families

assigned

to the temples for their maintenance forever.

In come the politicians with the story that the assigned families are

not managing the temple wealth properly and take over the temple,

and designated families which had rights to serve in the temple were

stripped of their service and other rights

[We should have stopped them at this point, but we were falling prey to

their propaganda,

and the divide and conquer game.]

Once the temple was taken over, they stripped the temple of its Lands and

properties.

Then the funds that come into the temple (in hundi and other donations)

Then they strip any valuables ordained for the Archa Vigrahas.

They assign an E.O. who has no faith in the LORD and the temple.

THIS can not be done to any other community but the soft and gentle Sri

Vaishnava community.

>3. If a person who is not a Brahmin is deeply interested in the subject,

>is willing to learn, and excels in the sampradayas and

>rituals, why can he not conduct poojas in the temple?

Even if the rules can be compromised (hypothetically), can you get even one

person willing to learn

for 10 years, and then work for free (expecting NO returns)

You are falling for the media story, the main people behind this have an

agenda to

wipe out the Vedic (hindu) religion and have been doing this very successfully

for the past 40 years and it pains to see our own people join hands and

clap for them

not realizing the truth.

What is the truth: These temples have been preserved for the past 1000+ years

by the devotees (and brahmin archakas), weather they are paid or not. They

have protected the religion and

culture, many times with their lives.

In just 100 years the foreign rule broke us down using divide and

rule, still the culture survived, by HIS grace.

In the past 40 years the NON believers have continued on this path, still

we manage to survive, by HIS grace.

Not all the brahmins are allowed to serve as Archakas, one a small portion

of the designated

families are allowed. Others just serve in the Parayana Goshti.

In the Arulicheyal Goshtii, i have witnessed this many non-brahmins serving

the lord in many many

temples.

What is the goal here:

==================

If service to HIM is the goal, for everyone regardless of caste, sex or

race, there are avenues to serve the lord.

But if the goal is to break down this soft and gentle religion, then i am

sure the LORD will show signs,

and make us all act.

Dear devotees: It is paining to see people mis-quote our Bhagawath Ramanuja,

he opened the services for all, but he never appointed non-brahmin archakas

(he never broke the rule of shastras).

I have many many non-brahmin friends, and i serve in temples with them

(some in parayana goshti) but NO one ever wanted to break the rules and

become the Archaka (priest)

because they are believers who are in temple service.

Please wake up and realize

=======================

* What is the motive of the NON-Believers.

* Can this happen to any other religion but us.

* It is a fundamental right to practice my own religion (in a democracy),

then why is it being tampered with.

Why were the temples taken over by the government and then made fully

dependent on them?

What has happened to all the funds, lands and families allocated for each

of these temples?

40 years ago, all the assigned families were kicked out saying no special

chanting privileges for you,

now after 40 years these temples are empty devoid of funds, lands and the

large goshti

and the dedicated families assigned to the temple.

History repeats itself again and again; Some mis-informed Sri vaishnavas

supported this move and

and are now repenting after 40 years.

So this time please learn all the facts and see why is this change being

pushed on us,

what is the reason behind it?

We should all join hands together and take the facts to the administration,

if we do not join and act now, we might be sorry 40 years from now, when it

will be too late.

==================================================================

Azhvar Emperumanar Jeeyar Thiruvadigale Saranam

Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan,

Mukundan Vangipuram Pattangi

May 22, 2006

Dear members, praNAmams

Thank you for the clarification, Sri Rajagopal Kannan swAmin,

as to what the definition of archakar is and what the distinction

between the different roles are. What I was referring to is that

there were clearly adult males *without* yagnyopaveetam serving

close to Thaayaar, offering manjakkaappu to the devotees, and if I

mistakenly called these people 'archakars' then I am sorry for the

mistake. Part of this arises from the confusion with my using the

English word 'priest' to describe a number of different distinct

temple roles.

The reaction I was a little saddened by is the assumption that

other castes are not pure enough to serve close to the deities as

per Varnashramam. These people, whether they are called 'kainkarya

parALs' or 'archakars' or whatever, were close to Thaayaar's

vigraham and distributing the prasaadam, that is the main thing that

I meant to convey. I thank yourself and Sri K.P. Sarathy swAmin for

clarifying what their roles are. But I would have thought that in

traditional varNaashramam, non-dvijas would not be allowed so close

to the idol because they would be deemed impure? Please clarify.

Dear Sri Mukundan Pattangi swAmin, I am guessing that the

specific "mis-quote" of Bhagavad Ramanuja that pained you was mine,

in which case I am very sorry if that caused you pain, but I would

like you to clarify what was incorrect with my quoting of Ramanuja

Gita Bhashya 18:47. "Doing one's duty...", as per the commentary

there, does not seem to mention anything about the jobs for

different varnas or jatis, it seems to talk only about Jnaana Yoga

and Karma Yoga, as per my reading. If my quoting of that passage

has caused you hurt then I am truly sorry, as it is not my wish to

hurt anyone's feelings.

I completely understand the concern that those hereditary

archakar families who are being displaced in the current climate are

facing tremendous problems and facing losing a livelihood. I think

even those of us who have supported the possibility of non-Brahmins

becoming priests would not doubt that this is a terrible situation

for those poor Brahmin families - no-one with any humanity would

wish the loss of livelihood on anyone, brahmin or otherwise. My own

great grandfather on my mother's side served as the archakar in a

temple in Tippur, Karnataka and my grandfather himself was also

trained in this role before becoming an architect. So I have no

desire to be "politically correct" when people's livelihoods are at

stake, and I am sure those who are favourable to the possibility of

non-brahmins becoming priests also would not wish such misfortune on

those poor brahmin families. I think your charge that we are

falling prey to the arguments of "non-believers" is a little harsh,

though. We are merely expressing a legitimate doubt of ours.

I would like to illustrate the flip side of the coin with a

family anecdote. My father's family hail from one of the Divya

Desams (which will remain unnamed for now) and knew many of those

involved in temple affairs (whether they were archakars or doing

veda parayanam I don't know; suffice it to say they were brahmins in

close proximity to the Deity on a daily basis). My father's family

were close enough to them to know that some of them were regularly

drinking ***alcohol, consuming forbidden foods and having all sorts

of extra-marital relations***. Now *please* before anyone jumps on

this I am not suggesting *for one moment* that this is the state of

all brahmins in all temples, which would be a gross bhAgavata

apAchAram. I am just telling you the facts in one particular case

that I know of. Here is one instance where heredity has not worked

at preserving the high standards of sampradaayam and shaastram.

I am no expert on dharmashaastra or aagama to know what

the "dos-and-donts" are with regard to which jaatis can serve in

temples. But when so many "don'ts" are already being commited,

especially by those who we look up to, I think it is legitimate to

ask the question "are we losing focus"? I have no qualification to

say "we must have non-Brahmin archakas in temples" but when faced

with the possibility of a sincere, devoted non-Brahmin who is

willing himself to put in the hours of training, learning and live

according to the high standards required, we should at least be

allowed to ask the question, "why not?". I would suggest that

accusing us of falling for media propaganda if we ask such questions

is a little extreme perhaps, and does suggest that we can't think

for ourselves.

Lastly as I said, it is my hope that we express compassion

first and foremost in all our opinions, whichever side we fall on.

Let us wish the brahmin archakar community well, let us also wish

well to those of other communities who want to offer sincere service

in the temple, let us also cultivate a humble attitude of devotion

within ourselves and our families - perhaps this is really the key

to how we will preserve our tradition, rather than wasting our

energy getting upset at the government, the Empire and any other

past rulers.

sarvAparAdhAn kShamasva

namO nArAyaNAya

Ranjan

May 23, 2006

Pattangi swamin,

pranams and a koti of that.

Yes we are never united and are divided always right through history. That is the reason politicians have gifted temple land (badrachalam issue) to build Church (school).

I think a special leave petition has to be considered in the SUPREME COURT chalenging the validity of all these temple take overs and maintanence.

This has to be raised on seperate grounds like compensation for the lands to the temples, the use of temple money (hundi) for non-religious purposes, the interference in the religious activities of a particular community etc.,

Dasan/raghavan

May 23, 2006

namaste smt.raghavan,

1. To be a priest is to follow a certain code of conduct that is slightly more than that for brahmins even. That is a 24x7 job no mayday, no labour laws and no paid holidays.

The attitude of servitude should be there. If a learned non-brahmin can have all these he can be considered.

2. Pl donot mention Christian missonaries without understanding the cause for all this.

Can you do this with pontifical office. That is considered only a job, but a sc/st have not been ordained till date in church.

3. Why think that we have a castiest mentality. Are we so washed out of ideas. Was it not we who thought the democratic way of living.

4. Can you tell me which religion is more free than hindus. The term itself if you think clearly is a group of systems in sync. We have practices from offer of meat and wine to the most eveolved concepts of AATMA SAMARPANAM PRAPATTI ETC.,

5. Christians still offer only wine and meat to him making him animalistic.

7. If the arguments are proper they dont stand chance, all we have to do is put pawns in media, paper and stage to propagate our views. The way they manage and attack we will take them.

Regards/raghavan