Misunderstandings - VAD Threads

[Avyaydya]

Pranam,
I have many neighbours who are Vaishnavas. Some young people are not even aware to what sampradaya they belong (Sri, Kumar, etc). Only one has read Upanishads.

Of all Vaishnava-s I have interacted, they have a copy of Srimad Bhagavat (full or Brief). I have not found even one among 10 who have read Vishnu Purana, forget other Vaishnava purana-s like Kurma purana.

I feel that they get what they want it from SB. One neighbour has sunder kand by-heart.

Very few read Gita either in full or in part. Same is true for Brahmins. Very few read upanishads.

In this context, for laymen, who do not read Shruti, it is difficult for them to know the truth. Though we agree of interpolation in purana-s no one knows which part is corrupt or interpolated. Laymen is certainly not in position to judge and come to a valid conclusion.

It is true that everyone must be given knowledge of smriti-s.

Jai Shri Krishna

Exaxtly! Hinduism is not a protestant tradition in which people come together to read the holy book. In my country we have hundreds of protestant denominations because of that. They often started arguing over the interpretation of one line of text, and tensions can get so high they split off. And then it is hate ever after.

Hindu Brahmins are not busy seeking Moksha the way Iskonites are seeking salvation, that is a Christian thing westerner bring from their own tradition. Many Brahmins hardly read the Upanishads and Vedas. As this English professor can confirm.

As I wrote before Hinduism centres around Dharm not Moksha, it is a Dharmic Tradition, not a Vedic ideology. Dharm is central to Moksha too. You can not attain Moksha without it, because one should not concentrate on the result and Moksha is a result. That is why Dharm is part of the path of all Hindus.

Krishna did not talk to Arjuna to release humanity from suffering. No, he tells Arjuna to do his Dharm. He also says that Arjuna is very special, one in thousands in thousands, and he should keep secret what he is teaching him. This is the reverse of what western Hindus (Iskonites) spread. They are basically spreading protestant "saved-by-grace" ideas. Believe in Krishna (aka Jesus) and you will be saved.

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam Avyaydya et al:

I've never really realised quite so dramatically this until now but indeed in the East the focus is on dharma, and westerners (especially ones coming from a certain mindset) like to think a lot about moksha, as it has a companion (heaven) they can relate it to.

It's the proverbial cart before the horse problem, and only patient education will help sincere seekers see this misplace of focus.

Aum Namasivaya

[Sudas Paijavana]

Many Brahmins hardly read the Upanishads and Vedas. As this English professor can confirm.

Highest Pranam-s,

I don't mean to divert the topic of the OP any further than it already has, but I agree with you.

[philosoraptor]

Hindu Brahmins are not busy seeking Moksha the way Iskonites are seeking salvation, that is a Christian thing westerner bring from their own tradition. Many Brahmins hardly read the Upanishads and Vedas. As this English professor can confirm.

The solution to this problem is for Hindu Brahmins to start recognizing and acknowledging that they are indeed, Brahmins, and to take up the disciplines (including study of the Upanishads) which have been prescribed for them.

The inability to do this is largely due in part to the "caste by quality not by birth" philosophy, which allows Hindu Brahmins to rationalize their abandonment of brahminical dharmas on the grounds that they don't act like Brahmins, are therefore not Brahmins, and are thus released from any Brahmin responsibilities as a result. If they could get past this misconception, I think we would see a lot more seriousness on the part of immigrant Brahmins in secular professions to at least cultivate brahminical culture by rising early in the morning, doing prAtaH sandhya-vandanam at least, and studying shAstra according to the directions of a guru... at least in the few hours before they go to office and follow worldly pursuits.

[Avyaydya]

The solution to this problem is for Hindu Brahmins to start recognizing and acknowledging that they are indeed, Brahmins, and to take up the disciplines (including study of the Upanishads) which have been prescribed for them.

The inability to do this is largely due in part to the "caste by quality not by birth" philosophy, which allows Hindu Brahmins to rationalize their abandonment of brahminical dharmas on the grounds that they don't act like Brahmins, are therefore not Brahmins, and are thus released from any Brahmin responsibilities as a result. If they could get past this misconception, I think we would see a lot more seriousness on the part of immigrant Brahmins in secular professions to at least cultivate brahminical culture by rising early in the morning, doing prAtaH sandhya-vandanam at least, and studying shAstra according to the directions of a guru... at least in the few hours before they go to office and follow worldly pursuits.

Why read these particular texts? They have little practical contribution to Dharm. To reach Moksha? That is not a duty. Or so they can bring others to enlightenment? Then I do not agree. Enough Brahmins already take care of worthy pupils. Only few are needed for that. Most Brahmins have more simple duties like doing rituals in temples and at home than assisting people in reaching Moksha. I think the shastras are more important to their Dharm.

As Shri Nisargadatta Maharaj once said: it is harder to find a worthy pupil than it is the find a good master. They are so extremely rare and such people are so near to breakthrough that they will often enlighten themselves before they find a master.

As we read in one of the Upanishads a Pupil went to a Brahmin to learn and all he made him do was maintain the fires. For years he did nothing else, until the fires began to speak to him and he thus got enlightened. Only then did the Brahmin start his teaching.

It is not by teaching that people get enlightened but by walking the path of Dharm over the course of many lives. It can not be hastened by teachings, and teaching to people unworthy has disastrous consequences.

Krishna himself gives the example how this knowledge should be passed on. Firstly he says that Arjuna is worthy and that only one in many millions is worthy. Than he transfers the knowledge from the mouth of the master to the ear of the disciple. That is what Shruti really means, it must not be read, it must be heard from the mouth of a true Master. After that he impresses on him to keep this knowledge secret to anyone not worthy (Only one in many millions).

Now take Ramakrishna, who had enormous patience with Vivekananda that even made a fool of him, because he recognized his greatness. A man came to him and wanted to be educated by him, because he longed to know God. Ramakrishna did not think this person was developed enough and said so. But the man was very stubborn and kept on coming back to ask for education. Ramakrishna kept on rejecting him, but he was so zealous he kept on coming back. At some point Ramakrishna said to him: Okay, meet me tomorrow morning where the river bends and I will give you your first lesson.

The next morning the man came to the river and saw Ramakrishna in the river begging him to come nearer. When the man came close, Ramakrishna suddenly grabbed his head and pushed it under, and kept it under until he lost consciousness. Then he brought him to the shore and brought him back to consciousness. He then asked: What was the last thing you were thinking off before you lost consciousness? The totally shaken man said: "Air, air, I want air". Than Ramakrishna said: Remember this feeling, when you long for God with the same fever as you longed for air, than come back to me and I will train you.

Westerners are used to the situation in which salvation is handed out to them. On the corner of the streets are teachers wanting to share God with them. They even come to their houses to push it through their throats. They can not understand that traditions like Judaism and Hinduism are not that way. They think, I am willing, where is my teacher? Why this discrimination?

Well there are enough gurus that will accommodate you and they are happy to take your money, and many do a good job and give lots of good advise and teach useful techniques.

But Brahmins are not like that. Their responsibility is not to educate people that are interested in the highest knowledge. They rather guard that this knowledge does not fall in the wrong hands. Because higher knowledge in the hands of people with insufficient character and consciousness is seriously dangerous. Such people not only form a danger to society, they ultimately destroy themselves. Ravan is an example of that, a Brahmana and master of the Veda's, but so lacking in character he still remains ignorant, and so powerful he becomes the biggest threat to Dharm. The RCC is another example of that. Their Monks do similar tapas as in Hinduism to create enormous strength and they killed tens of millions with it. And many Iskcon leaders are tragic examples too.

So do not say that the Brahmanas do not take their responsibility seriously, they do. Or do you claim to know that they do not enlighten the one in many millions that is worthy? Westerners simply have the wrong expectations. They look at everything from the perspective of this one life, in stead of thousands of lives. They know of samsara without fully accepting it. They want to grow fast through learning, not slowly through walking the path of Dharm through many, many lives. They care about the result, not the actions. They do not fully understand Dharm.

Not the Vedas but Dharm is the highest. Dharm is what connects us directly with God. Dharm is the Divine Laws instated by God. They bind God as much as Man and the rest of Nature. Dharm binds everything together.

The Vedas only enlighten Dharm. The Vedas are heard by the Sages from the Devas. Vedas is knowledge from the Devas and about the Devas. The Vedas is not the word from God directly as westerners think. The words "Vedas" and "Devas" are directly related. I quote Satya Sarada Kandula:

Deva – A divine being, luminary, worthy of worship derived from the root Div meaning – to illuminate, light etc. Diva means day. Divya means divine and so on.

Veda – means knowledge, that which is to be known, derived from the root Vid to know. Vidya – knowledge, Vidwan – knowledgeable person. Brahma-Vid – One who knows Brahman and so on

One of Yaska’s rules of etymyology is about reversal – eg pasyaka (seer) becomes kasyapa, himsa – violence, becomes simha – lion, arasu (king) becomes asura (mighty). Soham =Sah+Aham => hamsa (swan) and Deva becomes Veda and vice versa. Given that all the Vedas are about Devas.

Knowledge is about the luminaries and to illuminate, or throw light on something is to increase our knowledge about it.

Dharm is directly connected to God, that is why God comes to teach and uphold it. The Vedas are connected to the Devas. They are about the Devas and the Sages heard this knowledge from the Devas. But God is higher than the Devas that is why Dharm is more important and central in Hinduism than the Vedas. Both Devas and Vedas support Dharm. Dharm is highest.

It is Westerners that want to see the word of God in the Vedas similar to the Bible. They think the Vedas bring the salvation of God to those who study them. They demand to be enlightened. For people with a western mindset Hinduism can become a frustration, because the path of Dharm, though rewarding, is a slow one trying to improve character life after life. Compare that with the instant satisfaction that Christianity promises you. Pray to Jesus and you are saved. Pay extra and you will enjoy treasures in heaven.

Hinduism like Judaism is a tradition and it goes with a mindset that is totally different from the western mindset. You either have that or not, but it can not be taught. That is like changing someone's character. That is why in Iskcon they meditate, do Puja and study their balls off, but still fail when it comes to simple humane loving behaviour. And when they repress their sexual feelings it often leads to uncontrollable violent sexual abuse. Hinduism is for people that accept the slow progress of Dharm, not for people want to be initiated in the secrets and mystic of higher knowledge by sheer force of will. That is the path of aDharm, Demons follow that path.

[ShivaFan]

Namaste Avyaydya

It doesn't work, this endless "you" this or that about bible this or jesus that. Doesn't apply to me, I am a Hindu, never was anything else.

Twice born.. You cannot be twice born in a single birth - physically that is. At least not you corruptable humans unless the Devas or Devi help you. Because Twice born is a spiritual passage, a tranformation given to you by the Acharya your teacher. Whatever twice born you think you are, brahmin or otherwise, you are not that coming out of your mother's womb, you are not that until that transformation.

Your quote:

That level of corruption we will not easily see that among Brahmanas as most of these people really do represent higher consciousness and carry the blood of the Deva's.

Now you are almost getting bizarre. The blood of the Devas? Are you so sure Devas and Devi have such corruptable blood? This almost sounds like something the racists would say.

If you seriously think you are a brahmin and thus have the "blood of the Devas", what is your point, that others blood is different and does not?

Give me the quote from the Vedas regarding this ridiculous notion.

You're straight on the fact that an actual Brahmana is very rare in the world today, to be able to live the true character of such and demonstrate the qualities of such is very, very rare indeed. It certainly isn't by birth for if it were, there would be enough well fed brahmins with elite status to have plenty of offspring. Or maybe not.

I just finished reading some DNA analysis, since you want to focus on material things such as flesh, puss and blood instead of quality of character, which shows without question DNA markers that show DNA of European and Turkish and Iranian and Asian and African markers inl most all from India, without question, and a divide between North Indians and South Indians, and things like Goan Brahmins who actually have Portuguese markers, on and on, Tamil brahmins with African markers, a history of cross societal and racial blending after eons of invasions, there is a good arguement that if brahmin is "by birth only" there isn't a single brahmin left in India with a dedicated birth line back to Vedic times existing today, the odds of an Iranian "brahmin" (albeit today a practicing muslim but in lineage of birth of Vedic "rank") is higher than one in India.

Why this fixation on blood? Dharma is not blood.

By the way, I am not ISKCON but your inaccurate depiction of their adherents as street bums is so wrong, they include every walk of life including millionaires.

You are also wrong about "birth based" brahmins being all the example of the rare qualities of a Knower of the Brahman. ISKCON corruption (as if it is due to not being "born a brahmin") - ah, do I really have to give example after example of the those Indian "brahmins" who in just recent news events are arrested for sexual abuse of minors among such whom you claim, of examples even where my wife lived of the sons of such so-called "brahmins" molesting gils, especially those of so-called "low caste"? I don't even want to go there, it is typical of those who have acquired power without earning it to abuse and not appreciate the true application of it.

Yes, 6000 jati are man made. And it went from 300 before the British to 6000 under there hegemony as part of the British divide and rule to pit Hindu against Hindu. There were "brahmins" who assisted with this, and fact that
names of none of Rigvedic rishis carry any present day caste titles like
Pandit, Sharma, Tripathi, Chaturvedi, Trivedi, Singh, Gupta and Namboodari.

Blood? What a joke.

Om Namah Sivaya

[Avyaydya]

Now you are almost getting bizarre. The blood of the Devas? Are you so sure Devas and Devi have such corruptable blood? This almost sounds like something the racists would say.

If you seriously think you are a brahmin and thus have the "blood of the Devas", what is your point, that others blood is different and does not?

Give me the quote from the Vedas regarding this ridiculous notion.

You're straight on the fact that an actual Brahmana is very rare in the world today, to be able to live the true character of such and demonstrate the qualities of such is very, very rare indeed. It certainly isn't by birth for if it were, there would be enough well fed brahmins with elite status to have plenty of offspring. Or maybe not.

I just finished reading some DNA analysis, since you want to focus on material things such as flesh, puss and blood instead of quality of character, which shows without question DNA markers that show DNA of European and Turkish and Iranian and Asian and African markers inl most all from India, without question, and a divide between North Indians and South Indians, and things like Goan Brahmins who actually have Portuguese markers, on and on, Tamil brahmins with African markers, a history of cross societal and racial blending after eons of invasions, there is a good arguement that if brahmin is "by birth only" there isn't a single brahmin left in India with a dedicated birth line back to Vedic times existing today, the odds of an Iranian "brahmin" (albeit today a practicing muslim but in lineage of birth of Vedic "rank") is higher than one in India.

Why this fixation on blood? Dharma is not blood.

Give me a quote from the Vedas. That is similar to how Christians typically seek truth. give me a quote from the bible. As if the Vedas are the Hindu encyclopaedia that gives Gods final answer on everything. You wonder why Hindus even wrote all those other books. For you information, the Vedas are not another Gods written last word. Nor should they be used as if they were a bible. In discussion you like to use fallacies like "otherwise God would not have made it this way", "It is not in the Vedas", etc. Typically the kind of fallacies Christians use.

For westerners the whole concept of Devas is a difficult one as in Christian culture all other Gods are:
a) evil
b) do not exist.
They rime those two by saying all other gods are really manifestations of Satan, and have no separate existence. These ideas have been enforced and indoctrinated for more then thousand years until they seemed obvious. Today westerners laugh at worshipping anything other than their one God if any. That is why many western "Hindus" rather try to think of Devas in abstract terms, as forces of nature or archetypes, or aspects of the Divine.

But reality is that in all the Pagan religions many Gods are not abstract entities and many Gods are not only worshipped as persons, they are also considered to be Ancestors, often the founders of the peoples/tribe. These Ancestor Gods were unique for a people, and gave them their identity as people.

In all Pagan traditions we read stories of Gods creating off-spring among people. In the Mahabharata and Ramayana we read about Gods incarnated in excellent people and them also creating off-spring. This is one of the ways Devas serve mankind. And unless cursed Gods logically incarnate the best of families. The great Sages also are not ordinary people like we see today.

As so many Pagan religions have these beliefs that they originate from Gods, is this all primitive superstition? For evolution theory only suggest our ancestors are more primitive and ape-like than us. As it happens we found skulls from people far superior to us with much larger brains. The boskop people.

Funny thing is that first reaction of Western scientists confronted with ancient records of great and highly worshipped figures is to declare them mythological figures, not having really existed. Again and again they are proven wrong.

The Greek too believed that many great people came from Godly descent and that these great forefathers still were reborn as Hero's to help humanity, but that they also helped people as a spirit they called Daemons. For instance Socrates says that he got all his ideas from his Daemon. And Socrates was not an irrational, superstitious dimwit. It only became irrational through thousands of years of bloody suppression and indoctrination by monotheism.

To me the Mahabharata and Ramayana are not fairytales in which fantasy people are mere actors in an allegorical story. I do not believe our ancestors were stupid. And what is the point in taking the Vedas or Hinduism seriously when they are so full of Devas you do not believe in? If you are a hardcore monotheist stick to abramist beliefs.

Now Westerners enter or rather invade Hinduism, traditional Hindus become the laughing stock, because westerners find their ideas laughable, and their traditions not palatable (your words). They say: seriously, you do not really believe the Devas created off-spring among humans? There is only one universal God Krishna aka Shiva aka Jesus and the Devas are only aspects (make it vague) of him.

Well we are all manifestations of the Divine, so those are meaningless statements. Hinduism is not the meaningless glorification of a far removed Universal entity. That is abramism. Hinduism is an accurate description of all aspects of reality and Devas are very real beings indeed. And Hinduism says they can manifest as people too and create off-spring. And this off-spring is special. It does not however imply that all their descendants are holy Sages. Hinduism tells very clearly that the off-spring of Sages and Devas can be Demons and very corrupt people too. But most benefit humankind. Devas serve and protect Dharm, Bramanas too. it is only logical that they are related, and that has nothing to do with DNA.

Or to use your crummy logic: Where in the Vedas does it say Devas have another DNA when they incarnate in humans?

Blood? What a joke

Maybe the Joke is on you. Hinduism comprises of many traditions with surprising rituals, ideas and philosophies. And if one calls oneself a "Hindu", though one need not subscribe to all the ideas, one should treat them with the same respect. I think where I personally draw the line between Hindu and not-Hindu is Dharm. If people belong to western traditions that structurally do adharmic respectless things like conversion and child abuse, I do not regard them Hindus, whatever they call themselves. So on the admiration of Prabhupada and Iskcon we stand divided. And your condescending behaviour I see the same light.

[Viraja]

Sorry, I have not been reading posts here, everyone's is a bit too lengthy for me. But, Avyaydya, did you really say Brahmanas carry some 'superior blood'?! I cannot believe this sentence coming from you, an educated Westerner! On this holy day when I just watched the story of 'Thirupaanazhwar' from the mouth of Srimad Ramanuja, I cannot believe I am hearing someone claiming in 2013 that Brahmana's blood is superior!

[Avyaydya]

Sorry, I have not been reading posts here, everyone's is a bit too lengthy for me. But, Avyaydya, did you really say Brahmanas carry some 'superior blood'?! I cannot believe this sentence coming from you, an educated Westerner! On this holy day when I just watched the story of 'Thirupaanazhwar' from the mouth of Srimad Ramanuja, I cannot believe I am hearing someone claiming in 2013 that Brahmana's blood is superior!

Maybe if you do not read my post, you should not comment on them?

Yes, I believe Bhahmanas are generally (not individually) born more spiritually advanced people. I think they are further on the path and nearer to Moksha. I think that is the whole point of the Varna system and the Brahmana Varna.

I know this is diametrical to Protestant egalitarian thinking in which everyone is the "same". I think equality in people only means deserving the same respect. The whole idea that all people are equally talented and that this is randomly evenly distributed among all layers and groups in society is not true.

Take the Jews for instance, 4% of the people are good for more then 90% of Nobel-price winners. Is that a racist statement? No that is a scientific fact. It may not fit your ideas of equality but that does not change it.

Does that mean that all individual Jews are very intelligent? No it does not. Does it mean the life of a Jew is worth more than that of a non-Jew? No, it does not (That idea would be racist).

Reality is that some people have been longer on this world, having been reborn more often in the process Samsara. They are literally "leading" us. No reason to get jealous. Rather we should profit from their more subtle minds to guide us.

Westerners have difficulty with accepting the consequences of samsara. They want to believe everyone is the same and everyone can achieve Moksha if he puts his heart to it. But that is modern Protestantism not Hinduism. Many old Christian Church fathers said that maybe one in hundred thousand would be saved. And that is what many hardline protestants in my country still believe. How cruel would this be if we had only one life. That is why American protestants created a commercially more attractive idea. Anyone can reach salvation by merely accepting Jesus (saved by Grace). (The fine print is you will be paying a lot of church contribution and be proselyting for them later, and you have to accept a dictatorial authority like Iskcon).

If this idea is a problem, maybe Hinduism is the real problem. Maybe westerners think too much that the to western taste adapted export version of Hinduism is "the real Hinduism".

[Viraja]

The whole idea that all people are equally talented and that this is randomly evenly distributed among all layers and groups in society is not true.

Take the Jews for instance, 4% of the people are good for more then 90% of Nobel-price winners. Is that a racist statement? No that is a scientific fact. It may not fit your ideas of equality but that does not change it.

Does that mean that all individual Jews are very intelligent? No it does not. Does it mean the life of a Jew is worth more than that of a non-Jew? No, it does not (That idea would be racist).

Reality is that some people have been longer on this world, having been reborn more often in the process Samsara. They are literally "leading" us. No reason to get jealous. Rather we should profit from their more subtle minds to guide us.

I see no proof or evidence to believe in your statements here i) there are so many IIT and brilliant medical students enrolled in Universities all over India, (and elsewhere), I am sure many of them would be a perfect fit for procuring vedic studies too. There is simply no proof to your personal belief that " The whole idea that all people are equally talented and that this is randomly evenly distributed among all layers and groups in society is not true. ". Stating something that has to do with some Jewish groups proves nothing w.r.t this statement of yours, actually.

ii) "Reality is that some people have been longer on this world, having been reborn more often in the process Samsara. They are literally "leading" us. No reason to get jealous. Rather we should profit from their more subtle minds to guide us."

Yes, it is true, but this does not correspond with 'Brahmana Varna' exquisitely. Modern day brahmanas might be against untouchability, but it needed one Dr. Ambedkar, of 'non-dwija varna' to bring about great social revolution of abolishing this evil. Needless for me to say, we all need to learn from personalities like him and not paint a picture that 'Brahmanas are born closer to god'.