Message from 'Vivek'

[Guest guest]

The following message came from 'Vivek'

 

We had to edit out the 'digest message' of previous day.

 

May we remind the members that when responding to a

'digest message' please ensure that the tail end of the

message is deleted before posting it to the list............jay

 

~~~~~~~~~~edited message from 'Vivek'~~~~~~~~~

 

" vivekananda " <vivek_sw

<Ramakrishna >

Wednesday, May 15, 2002 08:00

Re: [sri Ramakrishna] Digest Number 1129

 

 

I would like to share my little knowledge about the notion which

Mr.Srivrindavan had expressed. My friend has a feeling that temples have

not contributed much when compared to the contributions made by the modern

institutions towards spirituality. I was also under the same wrong

impression. But on a brief study of Sociology, we find that temples which

are in ruins today were the places where great debates were conducted, great

masters had addressed the common devotees, guided them. Temples were places

of gatherings and Panchayats were held in temples. Even Adi Shankaracharya

had addressed the devotees in many temples. Temples were the centres were

great researches were done. On a visit to the great temples we can see the

huge Sabhanganas. Unfortunately, with the advent of the Britishers this

phase of Hinduism changed. The Britishers were successful in doing this by

systematically bringing in laws for breaking the Joint Hindu family. Of

course, this was done mainly to make their task of conversion easier. I am

only telling this to show that we owe a lot to our temples and surely

efforts must be taken to repair the temples and maintain them.

regards,

Vivekananda

 

~~~~~~~second message also came with full digest of previous day~~~~

 

Sub:- regarding the bad maintenance of temples.

Most of the temples which get huge revenue are maintained by

the respective state govts. The funds from a particular temple is

used only for the maintenance of that particular temple and the

remaining funds are siphoned off by the govt. for various other

purposes which are called the welfare measures of the State.

Example can be given ofthe richest temple.i.e., Tirumala Tirupathi

in Andhra Pradesh, Palani in TN,etc., The temples which have

little revenue are not maintained. Whereas the govt. dares not

touch the fund or revenue of a church or mosque and they have

institutions such as wakfs, etc., to look aftermaintain the

revenues. If someone questions this or tries to bring about a

change, he would be branded as anti-secular. ------No wonder a

majority of the temples, both in North and South India still

continue to be in a dilapidated condition. It is high time that

we awake and do something about this.

 

regards,

Vivekananda

[Guest guest]

Ramakrishna, " Vivekananda Centre " <vivekananda@b...>

wrote:

> I would like to share my little knowledge about the

> notion which Mr.Srivrindavan had expressed. My friend has

> a feeling that temples have not contributed much when

> compared to the contributions made by the modern

> institutions towards spirituality.

 

The way I read your email, I see it as a different

interpretation of what I meant. In my email, what

I said was what I gained from " my " experience. I am neither

a great saint nor a great scholar. I am just an ignorant

man who stated his experiences from his ignorant point of

view. I neither claim it's universal application nor it's

widespread use. It was just a statement of facts as I saw

it: a comparison of visit to the temples " around me in

Bombay " compared to " some modern institutions in Bombay. "

It was an expression of my practical experience.

 

What stirred me was generally sweeping statements made on

people in general and Hindus in particular, of the

like: " If people can indulge in sacrifice of human lives

in the course of building yet another temple for which

funds are available, what sort of help do they need? "

My statement was meant only to say that India is too

diverse to generalize any one view or viewpoint. And as

a case in point, I expressed mine. If that did not come

out well, I apologize for not being precise enough.

 

Secondly, I never denigrated temples. If that was my

intention, then I would never visit temples. Yet I used

to visit temples regularly and even now, whenever I get

an opportunity, I do visit them around me. I go and bow

down my head to the God, offer my pranams, take the thirtha

and do the same things that I stated. And these with

feeling. So I do love and respect temples. If a different

sense came out of my email, I sincerely apologize.

 

Thirdly, I don't think that temples will be what they are

if what you say are done today. ( " We find that temples

which are in ruins today were the places where great debates

were conducted, great masters had addressed the common

devotees, guided them. " ) And that was also my point of

view - these temples did not come all of a sudden, but

were built by people of that time. Nothing prevents us

from building newer and greater temples, and nothing

prevents us from building them at other places, if the

Govt. won't let us build/maintain them exactly within

those few square meters of land ? As far as I see, modern

institutions are doing that to some degree. Actually,

probably I am wrong in stating " modern " , because why

should I limit anything to the word " modern " . It should

be any institution where spiritual learning is imparted.

My email says that " we can build even great centers of

learning " . What was done in the past was something better

than that done compared to people before them. What

prevents us from doing things even better than what

existed ? I surely welcome your most beautiful and deep

sense of gratitude: " to show that we owe a lot to our

temples " . But if that work is hindered a lot by various

circumstances, what prevents you from redirecting that

energy in building even greater and greater temples and

centers of learning so that people in future would hold

their head high and say that we even outdid our forefathers

with even greater works ? Because, more than bricks and

mortar, it is what goes on in that temple, the saints who

live and breathe in that temple that make it greater.

As far as I see, these " modern " institutions are doing that

to some degree.

 

And a most significant point of view that I wanted to

raise was that I felt the decline in spiritual attitudes

as requiring more urgent attention than the continuing

decline of old temples. For, if people with spiritual

values do not remain, who will have attitudes like you ?

 

As always, these are my personal views. These are not

meant to state that your views are wrong and my views are

right. I fully respect your deep sense of respect and

gratitude for the work done in the past. And your email

was very positive. My request to list members is to

please do send out such positive emails, but never

generally condemning ones. Please send out constructive

emails, but not denigrating ones. In part, I take the

blame, because the language of my previous email was

somewhat negative. I apologize if I have hurt anyone

with my emails. But my request is to never generalize

and make sweeping statements about others - especially

Hindus in general. It hurts me !

[Guest guest]

Dear Srivirndavan,

 

Ramakrishna, " srivrindavan " <srivrindavan> wrote:

> What stirred me was generally sweeping statements made on

> people in general and Hindus in particular, of the

> like: " If people can indulge in sacrifice of human lives

> in the course of building yet another temple for which

> funds are available, what sort of help do they need? "

> My statement was meant only to say that India is too

> diverse to generalize any one view or viewpoint. And as

> a case in point, I expressed mine. If that did not come

> out well, I apologize for not being precise enough.

 

I was the one who made that comment. For good reasons too. I was hoping

that someone would see the bigger picture. Perhaps some people living in a

particular locality in India (for that matter any country) may only see the

problem in front of them in their locality resulting in skewdness and not

see the issue in a national and international context and how it impacts

worldview. If some people cannot control their emotions, they have only

themselves to blame.

 

Regards,

Sathia.