Guest guest Posted June 11, 2007 Report Share Posted June 11, 2007 Dhyanasaraswati wrote;-Rupa-ji, you took Gandhiji's name while discussing 'Ahimsa'? Did you know that it was Gandhiji who said 'True ahimsa should mean a complete freedom from ill-will and anger and hate and an overflowing love for all. " Love is the best Religion. A loving person is kind , understanding , compassionate and is truly spiritual. May i share this verse from IBNJ ARABI , THE SUFI POET PHILOSOPHER ? " My heart has become capable of every form: it is a pasture for gazelles and a convent for Christian monks, And a temple for idols, and the pilgrim's Ka'ba, and the tables of the Tora and the book of the Koran. I follow the religion of Love, whichever way his camels take. My religion and my faith is the true religion. " Sadaji is right ! Everything is a gift from God - our very own existence on this planet - we have to thank the higer power for the very 'air' we breathe! thank you ! Namaste,D, As Ramana says, God doesn't do anything! Ramana never even claimed to be Hindu. A lot of Sufis ate meat, some didn't. They were Bhaktis progressing to ParaBhakti. For many, love for the meat on their plate exceeds the love for their brother animals. God forbid that anybody upset brothers and sisters about eating meat and the suffering and death of millions of innocent animals. My original question brought into the scene, the fact that Hinduism except for Vedanta is really base superstition. Somebody on here recently was even saying that Sankara was an incarnation of Siva for godsake. Religion is about manipulation and being on the inner exploitive groups. Why do you think Sankara incarnated? And even he in the face of base superstition had to pay lipservice to it. There isn't much point in talking/arguing about not eating meat to people who are not on an eco or spiritual path, they are not aware enough to grasp the message. I agree with Sadaji on that but I disagree that ignoring the situation is Ahimsa. However a polite comment is not a violation of Ahimsa. This is the logical conclusion of superstition. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6729927.stm Hu. Never miss an email again! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. Check it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 dearest Rishiji : i was shocked (rather traumatized) when i read these words in your post ! ( Shankara, for instance, says that Shudras do not have adhikara to study the Upanishads because upanayanam mantras for Shudras are lacking in the Vedas (and the Vedas explicitly bar Shudras from performing yajnas) and because smriti (ie: manu smriti) prohibits it very clearly. Is this superstition or is it something else? ) Then you go on to say (Either we have to accept that Shudras are not entitled to study the Upanishads (meaning they should not) or we have to reject Shankaracharya's position (and also the manu-smriti).) Rishiji, I HOLD YOU IN VERY HIGH ESTEEM SO THESE WORDS DID NOT RING TRUE , COMING AS IT DOES FROM YOU ! Some of the best translations of Upanishads come from Westerners who do not wear the Sacred thread nor the tuft ! I think , this is not superstition but thinking of Bigots - not spiritually enlightened persons ... we are living in different times and in different era - Globalization has narrowed down many walls including the Caste Barrier! please , please .... the scriptures are not the monoploy of any one --- for the sake of the self , rishi is loved and for the sake of self , saraswati is loved ! Rishi-ji , bhakt kabir says How is it that you are a Brahmin, and I am of a low social status? How is it that I am formed of blood, and you are made of milk? | Says Kabeer, one who contemplates God, is said to be a Brahmin among us. || SO , ALL ARE QUALIFIED TO STUDY UPANISHADS ( this includes women and shudras and malechas) if they have a love for Truth! sorry , i had to speak up ! LOVE AND REGARDS ' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 My (admittedly relatively ignorant Western) view of this topic is that the 'enlightened' view of the emotive caste distinction is that it has been completely misunderstood and that it actually relates to the guNa-balance in the nature of the particular individual. Thus the brahmin is the one who happens to have the most sattvic nature and is thus intrinsically best suited for self-inquiry. Conversely, the shudra happens to have a predominantly tamasic nature and is thus unable fruitfully to follow sAdhanA. My understanding is that there was never any question of forbidding anyone from studying the upanishads. As Dhyanasarawati-ji points out, they are available for all. But if the mind is unprepared, it would not be very worthwhile. I suggest that it is in this sense that Shankara spoke of the subject. I'm sure that this subject has been discussed in depth before and that anyone interested may find these in the archives. Best wishes, Dennis advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf Of dhyanasaraswati 13 June 2007 16:14 advaitin Re: Hinduism, Veges etc. [i was shocked (rather traumatized) when i read these words in your post ! ( Shankara, for instance, says that Shudras do not have adhikara to study the Upanishads because upanayanam mantras for Shudras are lacking in the Vedas (and the Vedas explicitly bar Shudras from performing yajnas) and because smriti (ie: manu smriti) prohibits it very clearly. Is this superstition or is it something else? )] .. <http://geo./serv?s=97359714/grpId=15939/grpspId=1705075991/msgId=3 6277/stime=1181747839/nc1=4507179/nc2=3848546/nc3=3848584> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 Namaskarams to all, I am a new entrant to this group today. Please accept my heartiest namaskarams. Regarding the matter under discussion in my humble opinion: The varnas were made simply to entrust some work/job to particular group. Now let us take so called shudras. They were entrusted the work of working in the fields, protecting the country's boundaries i.e. army etc. Another sect was Vaishyas. They were entrusted the work of commerce and economic. Under this circumstance, if you ask a vaishya to study the upanishad, then the work of commerce i.e. commercial activities of the country will be affected and consequently the economy of the country. That is why allow the person to do the work were he can thrive well. Brahmans work was to worship for the welfare of the whole country and the people. Loka samastha sukhino bhavanthu. So he studied the Upanishads to guide him in his work. So there is nothing wrong in those principles. What shankara Bhagavathpada did was correct for the all the centuries to come. Thanks and regards Raaghavan advaitin , " dhyanasaraswati " <dhyanasaraswati wrote: > > dearest Rishiji : > > i was shocked (rather traumatized) when i read these words in your > post ! Note from the Moderator: Members are advised once again not to include the entire the message of the previous poster while sending your reply. Only keep the minimum that is relevant for your reply. We once again remind members to strictly follow the list policies and guidelines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2007 Report Share Posted June 13, 2007 advaitin , " Dennis Waite " <dwaite wrote: > > My (admittedly relatively ignorant Western) view of this topic is that the > 'enlightened' view of the emotive caste distinction is that it has been > completely misunderstood and that it actually relates to the guNa-balance in > the nature of the particular individual. Thus the brahmin is the one who > happens to have the most sattvic nature and is thus intrinsically best > suited for self-inquiry. Conversely, the shudra happens to have a > predominantly tamasic nature and is thus unable fruitfully to follow > sAdhanA. My understanding is that there was never any question of forbidding > anyone from studying the upanishads. As Dhyanasarawati-ji points out, they > are available for all. But if the mind is unprepared, it would not be very > worthwhile. I suggest that it is in this sense that Shankara spoke of the > subject. Namaste, When one is downtrodden and exploited it is hard to buy a book even...Hu http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,21902967-5012763,00.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.