A true Brahmin

[Guest guest]

Pranam to all,

 

I have not contributed to this list but have read posts. I am familiar with

some members as they are on other lists. I have been involved at times on the

following lists: Advaita Vedanta, USBrahmins, and viprasamhitha to name a few.

 

It is a different (and unfortunate) matter that many brahmins do not live up to

the 100% ideal or perhaps even 10% of the ideal. But a definition of a brahmin

per shastras is rather clear, by birth. Former Kanchi Acharya has written

extensively in his book Hindu Dharma. Bheesma had many virtues but major flaws

were siding with Kauravas, not defending Draupadi's honr, etc; but still he is a

Kshatriya as were Shisupala and Jarasandha.

 

I have copied a respone by Raj Pandit sharma on this topic, he is a member of

Hindu Council of UK.

 

Dhanyavaad,

Ravi Chandrasekhara

member, World Brahman Federation (www.brahmanworld.org)

 

 

Maanya Priya Vipragana

 

Saadar Pranaam

 

Brahmins were always respected for their absolute commitment to speaking the

truth and for remaining aloof when considering all matters related to Dharma.

They could not be swayed even by the establishment and were fearless

adjudicators and advisers of integrity so much so that even Emperor Akbarfs (a

Muslim) confidante Birbal was an esteemed Brahmin. In this spirit let us detach

ourselves from political and social implications and debate this topic under the

aegis of Shruti and Smriti.

 

Firstly in response to the write up on the caste system given by J G Arora with

whom I am well acquainted, it should be noted that he is a staunch Arya

Samajist. The quotes given by him from Veda are based on the interpretation by

Swami Dayanand (Arya Samaj) which is not accepted by any other Vedacharya of the

Hindu Faith. Other than Arya Samajists, no one endorses or gives credence to

these translations of Veda by their founder Dayanand. Furthermore, the

quotations of Veda given by Arora ji are unrelated to varnashrama dharma and

taken out of context.

 

The crux of the argument is based on the interpretation of a verse from Bhagavad

Gita (4.13) which is highly surprising given that it is part of Mahabharatam

which unequivocally endorses varna by birth. Let us examine this verse in

detail:

 

Chaaturvarnyam mayasrshtam guna karma vibhaagashaha..

 

This has been interpreted as: eThe four fold varna was created by me based on

guna and karma.'

 

Referring to the commentary by Adishankaracharya we establish the authentic

interpretation of this verse:

 

Chaaturvaryam=chatvaar eva varnaaH chaaturvarnya

Maya= eeshvarena

sRShTam=utpaaditam (braahmanofsya mukhamaaseet-ityaadi shruteH)

guna-karma vibhaagashaH=sattva-rajas-tamaansi

 

What Bhagavan Krishna ji says is that the fourfold varna system as described in

Shruti (Brahmana was the mouth of Purush etc.) is designed by me and a person

takes birth according to the prevalence of the three guna (sattva-rajas-tamas)

coupled with the effect of their karma (according to the actions of previous

existences etc.). There is no inference here that a personfs caste is

determined by their actions and attributes in their current existence. Hindu

Dharma upholds that the prani attains a birth according to the fruits of their

previous lives and that action done in life will determine the outcome of any

subsequent birth.

 

This also applies to the quote given from Gita (18.41) which actually means that

all varnas are allocated duties according to the guna (sattva-rajas-tama) that

has determined their birth. There is no implication that these attributes

develop through the current existence and in fact refer to the guna which a

person possesses at birth.

 

Genetics has proven that we inherit various traits, idiosyncrasies and medical

disorders from our parents, so would we now refute this science also?

 

Another anomaly J G Arorafs reflections pose is that we should consider the

Vedic definition of 'Arya' as meaning 'noble', which is one of the dozen or so

connotations of the word in Sanskrit. For the benefit of all, I would like to

dilate on this matter in order to demonstrate the etymology of the word and more

importantly, its meaning in the Vedic sense. We must look at the word in the

context of Veda itself, cross-referencing with Nirukta/Nighantu/Amarkosha etc.

 

Arya= A+ãRta (respectable. honourable, noble).

 

According to the above Vedic lexica Arya is clearly defined as,

 

" mahAkula kulinArya sabhya sajjana sAdhavah " -

 

MahA= great, impressive, superlative, highest

Kula= stock, parentage, lineage

KulinArya=of high or eminent descent, well-born

Sabhya=having gentle or refined behaviour and demeanour

Sajjan= being wellborn and respectable

SAdhavah=of virtue, honour, or righteousness

 

The Arya is therefore one of eminent, good stock and lineage, possessing

refinement, respectability endowed with honour and following Dharma.

 

Arya directly contrasts with dasa, dasyu, shudra in the Rig-Veda, for example:

 

vi jAnIhy AryAn ye cha dAsyava & #7717; 'Distinguish thou well Aryas and

Dasyus'(Riga-Veda 1.51.8)

 

It is evident therefore that in order to be classified an Arya it is determined

by birth into a family fulfilling the abovementioned criteria and be endowed

with the qualities listed.

 

The question now arises, how is an 'Arya' to be determined if he or she lacks

knowledge of family origin given that birth is a determining factor according to

Vedas.

 

This now moves on to the existence of gotra, pravara and jati. Although some

assert that surnames were not used in Ramayan and Mahabharata etc., this does

not infer that they did not exist. In certain States of India today, individuals

are known by their first names and surnames do not exist, in the conventional

nomenclature prevalent in other parts of the subcontinent. As every Purohit who

conducts Vedic rituals is aware the invocation or sankalp recited before the

ceremony ensues records the exact kalpa, manvantara, yuga, year (samvat), aayan,

season, lunar month, day, nakshatra (asterism) place etc.

 

The name and gotra of the host (yajman) is also recited. The name of the yajman

is suffixed with the following words depending on their family origin:

Shudra-'Das'

Vaishya-'Gupta'

Kshatriya'-Varman'

Brahman- 'Sharman'

Manu ji describes and classifies the offspring of all mixed caste permutations

in great detail inferring that caste was determined by birth even at the time

Manu Smriti was compiled.

 

Though Shri Jaldhar Vyas jifs comments may have been unpalatable to some, they

were based on sound scriptural substantiation and I would encourage others to

either agree or refute such assertions through bona fide Vedic injunctions.

 

For your kind consideration let us first define the term edvijaf ascribed to

all Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas.

 

Dvija means twice born; Dvi means two, and Ja means birth. Hence, it means, with

two births - one human, the other religious or spiritual. These are Brahmins,

Kshatriyas and Vaishyas:

 

Braahmanah kshatriyo vaishyas-tryo varnaa dvijaatayah/ Shankh 1:6

Braahmanah kshatriyo vaishyah tryo varnaah dvijaatayah/Anusha. 47:7

Braahman-kshatriya- vaishyas- tasmaad-ete dvijaah smrutaah/Yag. 1:2:17

 

How they become Dvijas, has also been specified by Smriti. But they say it is by

Maunji Bandhanam (Upanayanam); not by attributes, profession, education etc. as

some would assert.

 

Now, whose word is to be accepted? That of speculators or that of the Scriptures

which are unequivocal? Here are its Scriptural evidences:

 

Teshaam janma dviteeyam tu vigyeya maunji-bandhanam/ / Yag. 1:2:17

Maatur-agre adhijananam dviteeyam Maunji-bandhane/ Manu 2:169

Matur-yadagre jaayante-dviteeyam Maunji-bandhanaat/ Yag. Aach. 39

 

The onus to prove the point that Dvija-hood is by guna, karma,education,

profession etc. lies on others to prove it through scriptural evidence.

 

Some scholars quote eFrom birth everyone is Shudra, it is through the

sacraments that one becomes a dvijaf; it is regrettable that no Vedic scholar

has been able to source the origin of this verse and even so this verifies that

edvijahoodf is through Upanayanam Sanskaar alone.

 

Hindus would reject even the words of Saakshaat Bhagavan if they are found to

diverge from the Scriptures, much less if they are against them. This is why

Hindus rejected those of Bhagawan Buddha and deemed them as enaastikaf i.e.

rejecting the authority of Veda.

 

There is another snag too; Yajur Veda says:

 

Aa Brahman-braahmano brahm-varchasi jaayataam, aa raashtre raa-janyah shoora

ikhavyo- ativyaadhee maharatho jaayataam. (22:22)

 

Pada jaayataam in the above, means: may be born. We implore Ishvar that in our

nation may illustrious Brahmins be born endowed with 'Brahmatej' may son's of

Kings (rAjanyaH-kshatriya) be born full of valour. Now, does it not refute the

contention that Brahmins, Kshatriyas are by attribute and not by birth? Also,

that all are Shudras by birth?

 

Some protagonists of non-birth based varna classify Shudras as those who are

unable to gain the education.

 

This is another self-concocted untruth. Had it been the case, all the

uneducated, unlettered in the Hindu Society would have been Shudras; and

educated and lettered ones Brahmins, Kshatriyas or Vaishyas. But we do not find

it so.

 

Then there is one more catch. If everyone was Shudra at birth, how would anyone

receive yajnopaveetam then, which is a pre-requisite for becoming Dvija and

taking education in the Vedas? It is by virtue of this sacred Sanskaara that one

attains dvija-hood or second birth, where Gayatri is the mother and Guru the

father:

 

Aachaaryastu pita proktah saavitri janani tathaa/

 

Brahm kshatra vishaam-chaiva maunjibandhan janmani// Shankh 1:7

 

Tatra yad brahm-janma- asya maunji-bandhan- chihnitam/

 

Tatraasya maataa saavitri pita tu-aacharya uchyate// Manu 2:170

 

In light of the above, we would have to consider: How would you send a Shudra to

Acharya-kulam for the study of the Vedas when he has had no Upanayanam? Even

the reformist Swami Dayanand of the Arya Samaj asserts in his magnum opus

Satyarth Prakash:

 

Shoodra parhhe parantu uskaa upanayanam na kare. (Samulla.4.p.46.)

 

That a Shudra can study however should not undergo the Upanayanam.

 

Smriti confirms the ages for Upanayam according to varna:

 

Ashtame varshe braahmanam-upnayet (1), ekaadashe varshe-kshatriyam (3),

dvaadashe varshe vaishyam (4).

 

The age of the Upanayanam is not stated for a Shudra child in Shruti or Smriti;

for without this crucial Sanskar a Shudra cannot undertake Vedic erudition to

become a Dvija (Brahmin, Kshatriya or Vaishya).

 

If the above ages do not relate to the caste of the child from birth, then how

precisely in the tender age of 8th, 11th and 12th years does one determine the

varna of the child (according to attributes or propensity) in order to perform

the Upanayanam at the correct age as stated in the scriptures? Moreover, at

such a tender age how exactly do we ascertain (simply by attributes) which child

is to undertake study to become a Brahmin, Kshatriya or Vaishya?

 

In light of the above findings it has been clearly demonstrated that jAti/varNa

is intrinsically linked to birth and we now await sound and unequivocal Vedic

scriptural references to prove otherwise.

 

Best wishes

 

Dr Raj Pandit

[Guest guest]

in lighter vein bhaskar ji,would it be possible for you to ignore such

one-liners.Maybe you ought to mull over this ,suggestion...hmm.om na ma si va

ya.

 

suresh.

[Guest guest]

The following shloka from bhAgavatam states how a Brahmin should conduct his

life in this world.

 

brAhmaNasya hi deho'yam kShudrakAmAya neShyate |

kRicchrAya tapase ceha pretyAnantasukhAya ca ||

(srImad bhAgavatam, 11.17.42)

 

" The body of a Brahmana is not meant for trifling enjoyments. It is meant for

severe austerities in this world and for infinite bliss after this life " .

 

Best wishes

S.N.Sastri

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " vadhula " <vadhula wrote:

>

> But a definition of a brahmin per shastras is rather clear, by

> birth.

 

Hari OM!

What " birth " is shastras clear on is the question. Certainly not body!

Brahmin is called " dvija " by the same shastras, meaning twice-born.

Body is born only once, not twice. Moreover, body can be made to be

born using latest shastra-jnana by a test tube too. Even Shankara

uses the only the term " dvija " - " caaMDaalOstu satu dvijOstu Eshaa ma

neeshaa mama " in his inspired Maneesha Panchakam prostrating to

so called Chandala.

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

Hari OM!

-Srinivas

[Guest guest]

From : H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy

Pranams to all.

 

Dear Moderaters and Members Of this group,

 

It is most unfortunate that such irrelevant and silly matters

like the subject matter " A true Brahmin " etc are being discussed

and dragged on for ever is truly sickening. When the goal is to transcend name

and form such present postings take one deeper and deeper into the mire of

ignorance.

Is it possible to put an end to this?

LET THIS FORUM BE USED FOR RIGHT AND FRUITFUL PURPOSES.

 

From one who is pained and disgusted,

Sreenivasa Murthy.

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " narayana145 " <narayana145 wrote:

>

> It is most unfortunate that such irrelevant and silly matters

> like the subject matter " A true Brahmin " etc are being discussed

> and dragged on for ever is truly sickening. When the goal is to

> transcend name and form such present postings take one deeper and

> deeper into the mire of ignorance.

> Is it possible to put an end to this?

> LET THIS FORUM BE USED FOR RIGHT AND FRUITFUL PURPOSES.

>

> From one who is pained and disgusted,

 

Hari OM!

I share some angst, but more grateful for some posts by Sri Sastriji

and others that shed light and insight on this topic. We would not

have those few nice posts if the topic was simply shut. If this

dispels even a single wrong notion within us, then forum IS being

used for right and fruitful purposes.

 

Even with much advancement in Science and education, still prevailing

by-birth-classification notions show how lofty the goal is to get rid

of them- let alone transcend name and form. Spirituality is compared

to walking on razor's edge. Far easy to buy razor- read, write, talk

or post about it, but walking on it is entirely different matter.

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

Hari OM!

-Srinivas

[Guest guest]

advaitin , Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

>

> Hare Krishna

>

>

> these verdicts of dhama shAstra is always puzzling is it not?? why

> descendants should suffer due to one's own " svayaMkrutAparAdha " ?? does it

> mean to say even though his descendants do study the Veda-s with all

> sincerity they will not be granted the status of brAhmaNa due to one

> person's dodging in the dynasty??!!

>

> Likewise, I have read somewhere in mUndaka (?? not sure) if one gets the

> self realization, all of his 7 generation would get the Atma jnAna !! How

> can it be??

>

> I think these are all some sort of threatening / eulogical statements just

> force one to follow his svadharma.

> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

>

> bhaskar

>

>

[Guest guest]

sreenivasa murthy ji:

 

Hope lord siva heals your pain,as every topic is his topic,whether

brahmin,kshatriya,vaishya or shudra...all are shivas...sarvam shiva mayam

 

suresh

[Guest guest]

sudesh ji :

 

Your inference seems very logical,and seemingly true.Thanks very much.

 

suresh.

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " narayana145 " <narayana145 wrote:

>

> From : H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy

> Pranams to all.

>

> Dear Moderaters and Members Of this group,

>

> It is most unfortunate that such irrelevant and silly matters

> like the subject matter " A true Brahmin " etc are being discussed

> and dragged on for ever is truly sickening. When the goal is to transcend name

and form such present postings take one deeper and deeper into the mire of

ignorance.

> Is it possible to put an end to this?

> LET THIS FORUM BE USED FOR RIGHT AND FRUITFUL PURPOSES.

>

> From one who is pained and disgusted,

> Sreenivasa Murthy.

 

Dear Murthy-ji,

Discussion of the question. " Who is a true Brahmin " is not outside the scope of

advaita vedAnta, but is quite relevant. I shall explain how.

 

muNDaka up. I.ii.12 says, " A brAhmaNa should resort to renunciation after

examining the worlds, acquired trough karma, -----.

 

In his bhAShya on this mantra Shri Shankara explains why `brAhmNa' has been

specifically mentioned here. He says, " The brAhmaNa is mentioned because he

alone is specially qualified for the acquisition of knowledge by renouncing

everything " .

 

So it is worth knowing what are the qualities which make a brAhmanA specially

qualified. This will help all spiritual aspirants, both brAhmanas and others, to

know what qualities they should cultivate.

 

The scriptures give the highest place to brAhmaNas, but at the same time enjoin

severe austerities and the regular performance of the obligatory duties laid

down for them. It is true that the brAhmaNas of the present day do not all

practise these ideals. It is therefore worth knowing what they are, so that we

can put in efforts to follow them to the extent possible. Most of the posts on

this subject have given quotations from well known works. They are therefore

quite valuable. Some posts may have strayed into irrelevant regions, but the

subject itself cannot be considered irrelevant.

 

However, the subject has been discussed sufficiently. I would suggest that some

one start a new topic.

Best wishes,

S.N.Sastri

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " sureshbalaraman " <sureshbalaraman wrote:

>

> sreenivasa murthy ji:

>

> Hope lord siva heals your pain,as every topic is his topic,whether

brahmin,kshatriya,vaishya or shudra...all are shivas...sarvam shiva mayam

>

> suresh

>

 

Namaste Suresh-Ji:

 

For a true practitioner of advaita Lord shiva cannot be separate for himself.

He/she themselves have to become (at least emulate) " him " in true sense.

 

This thread (Messages #45892, #45893) also referenced to " Re-Birth " and

displeasure from some members that this is a futile discussion. IMO – It is sad

that we do not wish to practice but just discuss. Some thoughts that came to me

are noted below:

 

Just some thoughts, ignore them if someone thinks that they do not make sense.

 

All the four classes are essential for maintaining a productive society. Even

if one of the class is not there then that defeats the productive portion of the

society. Our ancestor never really believed the cast by birth. All the four

broad sections of the society need to be operating at the highest possible

potential.

 

IMO - rebirth is a good comforting concept. Actually we are born and re-born

constantly.

 

When a scientist realizes his mistakes then the direction of his project takes

the re-birth at the time of reckoning.

 

Even an alcoholic when he goes to the alcoholic anonymous, he first acknowledges

that he is alcoholic. It is only then his progress can occur. Is this not a

re-birth?

 

Scientifically speaking, all our cells are constantly re-born. Is this not a

re-birth?

 

" baalaaavasthaa " needs to die before " yauvaa " could manifest, is this not the

re-birth of ourselves that can be experienced.

 

Is it not the primary goal of every saadhaka to do his own " chitta shuddhi " ?

Just by having had a thread ceremony or academic recitation of gaayatrii one

does not becomes " dvijaa " .

 

Kind regards,

 

Dr. Yadu

[Guest guest]

hare krishna,namasakarams.

 

living in the 21st century where everything,values and culture, has been diluted

and compromised with the western influence even though we dont like it,who is

really qualified for anything according to scriptures.leave alone the question

of who is a brahmin, who is really qualified to even read the vedas and

upanishads when you find yourself as one of them in a class of students in all

kinds dresses and many still smoking and drinking for the sake of society.

 

writing this from seattle from my son's place as one of the many middle class

families that had to depend on sons and daughters studying and living in us and

have even accepted inter caste marriages,where is the question of that

qualification.

 

we have to understand where are we now and what is the best solution under such

circumstances with the available resources and  possibilities. in today's

context i fell that  all those having a desire to know the truth that liberates

us, such persons are  all brahmins in a way.

 

let us look in to what we can today and seek that knowledge that is available

through scriptures,institutions and masters like swami dayananda saraswathy and

still try for that liberation from samsara.

 

may lord krishna bless us all.

 

baskaran    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Love Cricket? Check out live scores, photos, video highlights and more.

Click here http://cricket.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Namaskaram Yadu ji :

 

>>For a true practitioner of advaita Lord shiva cannot be separate for himself.

He/she themselves have to become (at least emulate) " him " in true sense.<<

 

Only becoz of shiva,you and i exist.When we realise shiva is the cause and

effect,only shiva exists.Which is what we are told alternately as

brahman=god.Only becoz of god everything exists.Temperorily,we enjoy sense

perceptions,untill we merge into whole brahman.At least,i am understanding this

way.

 

>>This thread (Messages #45892, #45893) also referenced to " Re-Birth " and

displeasure from some members that this is a futile discussion. IMO – It is sad

that we do not wish to practice but just discuss. Some thoughts that came to me

are noted below:

 

Just some thoughts, ignore them if someone thinks that they do not make sense.

 

All the four classes are essential for maintaining a productive society. Even

if one of the class is not there then that defeats the productive portion of the

society. Our ancestor never really believed the cast by birth. All the four

broad sections of the society need to be operating at the highest possible

potential.<<

 

Genes play an important role,as per modern science.Therefore its possible,that

by birth the personality traits became a practice.Therefore jathi brahmana by

birth.

 

>>IMO - rebirth is a good comforting concept. Actually we are born and re-born

constantly.

 

When a scientist realizes his mistakes then the direction of his project takes

the re-birth at the time of reckoning.

 

Even an alcoholic when he goes to the alcoholic anonymous, he first acknowledges

that he is alcoholic. It is only then his progress can occur. Is this not a

re-birth?

 

Scientifically speaking, all our cells are constantly re-born. Is this not a

re-birth?<<

 

Re-birth or re-incarnation,in a new body is a reality,imho,not a concept..The

very first introduction Lord Krishna tell Shri Arjuna,is,i remember all my

previous births and i have explained bhagavath gita to Ikshvaku,Surya Vamshis

and so on....and now to you.

 

There are instances of children remembering their past lives and taking their

parents to their previous lifestyle household and explaining relationships,much

to amazement of people.

 

So,the body dies not the atma.as the atma is never born nor it ever dies.

 

>> " baalaaavasthaa " needs to die before " yauvaa " could manifest, is this not the

re-birth of ourselves that can be experienced.

 

Is it not the primary goal of every saadhaka to do his own " chitta shuddhi " ?

Just by having had a thread ceremony or academic recitation of gaayatrii one

does not becomes " dvijaa " .

 

Kind regards,

 

Dr. Yadu<<

 

I agree with you.Ritualistic process enables one to attain,the ultimate

self-realisation.But rituals are not the ONLY way to realise your 'self'.

 

suresh.

[Guest guest]

advaitin , Shyam <shyam_md wrote:

>

> For the Tamil speaking members in thie forum, there is a wonderful Tamil

serial - Enge Brahmanan? - that talks about the true spiritual heritage, and

its lack thereof today. Nice discussions on the Bhagawad Gita and other

spiritual topics is interwoven into the storyline in a very interesting manner -

a treat to watch.

>

 

The show has come to an unexpected end!

 

I cannot quite agree with Sri Cho's simplistic reduction of the Brahmana as

varna-based vs jati-based. He makes the 'valid' observation that there are

(probably) no ideal varna-Brahmanas nowadays. But it is a bit flawed that he

suggests that it is due to the past social-respect accorded to the Brahmana

ideal that had allowed their existence. Society-allowance is a practical and

calculative matter whether it takes the form of " respect " (i.e. social support

for survival) or " money " - the ideal is either lost in both cases, or we must

admit that it can exist in both times if the dharma-concept is understood

properly.

 

Moreover, his grouping of Sambu Shastri with Neelakantan/Nathan in the same

jati-based category, is a bit atrocious. Fine, he wants to emphasize the

pristineness of the ideal, but the unwillingness to distinguish between the

Brahmanas (yes Birth-based) who actually strive for the ideal (though not there

yet), as their svadharma, and the majority who don't, is not doing much good.

 

As for Sambu Shastri, his flaw was not that he earned money through Vaidika

karmas. The flaw was that he did not clearly surrender that process to Dharma,

Shastras or to Ishvara. Along with this, there was also the 'ego' that he was a

'true Brahmana' - but reducing the issue to his earning or saving (a little)

money through acceptable Vaidika means, is far too simplistic. (Also

frustrating; a show centered entirely on birth-based Brahmana community

concluding essentially that they should not exist in the first place -

Brahmin-bashing. Many important aspects were shown, but the central theme

sidelined them in a hasty manner and ran to a hasty finish.)

 

thollmelukaalkizhu

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " putranm " <putranm wrote:

>

> As for Sambu Shastri, his flaw was not that he earned money through Vaidika

karmas. The flaw was that he did not clearly surrender that process to Dharma,

Shastras or to Ishvara. Along with this, there was also the 'ego' that he was a

'true Brahmana' - but reducing the issue to his earning or saving (a little)

money through acceptable Vaidika means, is far too simplistic. (

 

 

 

There is also the decisive flaw that he did not train his children in the

Brahmana-dharmas. I think that fundamentally disqualifies him, if nothing else.

Guess, the social-support aspect weighs into the equation.

 

thollmelukaalkizhu

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " putranm " <putranm wrote:

>

> advaitin , " putranm " <putranm@> wrote:

> >

> > As for Sambu Shastri, his flaw was not that he earned money through Vaidika

karmas. The flaw was that he did not clearly surrender that process to Dharma,

Shastras or to Ishvara. Along with this, there was also the 'ego' that he was a

'true Brahmana' - but reducing the issue to his earning or saving (a little)

money through acceptable Vaidika means, is far too simplistic. (

>

> There is also the decisive flaw that he did not train his children in the

Brahmana-dharmas. I think that fundamentally disqualifies him, if nothing else.

Guess, the social-support aspect weighs into the equation.

>

 

 

A couple of relevant sites from Kanchi Mahaswamigal's discourses:

 

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part17/chap11.htm

http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part5/chap39.htm