After watching a youtube video - a TV interview of "Prof" K.S Bhagavan titled "Mukta samvada Nera maathu" - the following seems to be some of his objections against Vedas, Bhagavad Gita and other Hindu scriptures:
Objection 1.
In the Madhvacharya's dvaita philosophy, there are three types of jivas - "nityamuktas", "tamoyogyas" and "nityanArakis". Nityamuktas or Brahmins are eligible for moksha even if they engage in sinful activities. Tamoyogyas or Shudras are destined to go to eternal darkness and nityanArakis or Dalits will go eternal naraka or hell.
Answer:
This is a total misunderstanding and misinformation. The three types of jivas according to Sri MadhvaAcharya are sattvikas, rAjasikas and tAmasikas and this division is based on the nature of the embodied jiva and has nothing to do with the birth based varna or jati at all. There can be a Tamasic jiva even among the brahmanas and a sattvic jiva among the Sudras also. In Simple words he says "Sattviko brahmanaha". meaning "A sattvic or dharmic or good person in (any varna) is a brahmana".
It cannot be denied that in any society there are sattvic-good , tamasic-bad and rajasic-in-between people. Infact this division is true in the entire objective world of jiva and jada. Sri MadhvAcharya has boldly stated this plain truth which of course will always be bitter!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Objection 2. Sri Shankaracharya is even worse. He writes in his Brahmasutra bhAshya that if a Shudra chants Veda his tongue should be cut, and his ears should be filled with lead. If they have already read Veda then their bodies should be cut into pieces.
Objection 1.
In the Madhvacharya's dvaita philosophy, there are three types of jivas - "nityamuktas", "tamoyogyas" and "nityanArakis". Nityamuktas or Brahmins are eligible for moksha even if they engage in sinful activities. Tamoyogyas or Shudras are destined to go to eternal darkness and nityanArakis or Dalits will go eternal naraka or hell.
Answer:
This is a total misunderstanding and misinformation. The three types of jivas according to Sri MadhvaAcharya are sattvikas, rAjasikas and tAmasikas and this division is based on the nature of the embodied jiva and has nothing to do with the birth based varna or jati at all. There can be a Tamasic jiva even among the brahmanas and a sattvic jiva among the Sudras also. In Simple words he says "Sattviko brahmanaha". meaning "A sattvic or dharmic or good person in (any varna) is a brahmana".
It cannot be denied that in any society there are sattvic-good , tamasic-bad and rajasic-in-between people. Infact this division is true in the entire objective world of jiva and jada. Sri MadhvAcharya has boldly stated this plain truth which of course will always be bitter!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Objection 2. Sri Shankaracharya is even worse. He writes in his Brahmasutra bhAshya that if a Shudra chants Veda his tongue should be cut, and his ears should be filled with lead. If they have already read Veda then their bodies should be cut into pieces.
Answer: Those are not Sri ShankarAcharya's words but he has only quoted Manusmruthi in his Brahma sutra bhashya. Infact most of the major Acharyas who have commented on Brahma sutras have made reference to that verse in the Manusmruthi. This is definitely incorrect and present day Hindus and saints will happily reject or reinterpret that part of Manusmruthi.
The problem can be solved if the word Sudra in the Apashudradhikarana of Brahmasutra is interpreted as an adhArmic person who has no sense control / tapasya, devotion / bhakti and who has not served a learned Guru / Acharya. This is explicitly stated in the BhagavadGita 18:67 and all achAryas including Sri Shankara have essentially interpreted that way only in their respective bhashyas.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Objection 3. Dr. Kuvempu once told Prof Bhagavan that he has a doubt that the Shanakra mutt brahmins must have somehow added the section about the shudras in Sri Shankara's brahmasutra bhashya. Prof Bhagavan then started reading all related literature and then he started reading Sri Vivekananda's complete works which are in ten volumes. He was surprised to find that fact in the fifth volume. When that was shown to Kuvempu, he simply stamped on Sri Shankara's book.
Answer: There is no need to have any suspicion against Shankara mutt brahmins. It has been already acknowledged that Sri Shankara and other Acharyas have given reference to Manusmruthi verse which can be re-interpreted as appropriate. It has to do with proper adhikAra and it need not pertain to birth based varna at all. The problem can be resolved if the word Sudra is re-interpreted per Bhagavad Gita 18:67 as explained earlier.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Objection 4. In Manusmruthi it is said that sudras are supposed to serve brahmanas. Those who hesitate should be forced to slavery.
Answer: Mr. Bhagavan must realize that Manusmruthi prescribes varna dharma based on guna or merit. It clearly says a Brahmana with no knowledge and conduct is the lowest of all. It also says a Sudra can teach if he is knowledgeable and endowed with devotion and conduct. Also Manusmruthi is one among the many smruthi literature and they can be changed as per times. So Hindus have no problem to re-interpret or reject portions that goes against the essential teaching of vedAnta.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. There will always be clash between old and new ideas. Before Indian constitution there was Manusmruthi. So there is a conflict between Brahminic and modern thoughts. But Indian constitution which is based on equality and brotherhood prevails over Manusmruthi based on inequality.
Answer: The idea of equality is rooted in the Vedas only where it is clearly stated that "Truth is one and the learned adore him through many name/forms". All other scriptures like Bhagavad Gita and Manusmruthi also acknowledges that. But as already stated there are portions in Manusmruthi that are not relevant anymore and Hindus are happy to reject or re-interpret those.
Indian constitution keeps on changing and there are always loopholes in the human law and so perfect justice is not possible. On the other hand the unwritten constitution of the law of karma and dharma that accepts an impartial, all pervading God who indwells in all and remains as a witness and dispenser of justice in the form of punya-papa karma phala, can never go wrong and prevail for ever.
It is a fact that there is diversity and inequality in the world which is due to one's own karma and these differences can be transcended only through the ideal of dharma or performance of duty according to one's nature. If Varnashrama is viewed only as a "division of labor" based on one's own nature there will be not be any issue and probably will work for all times to come.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Ramayana and Mahabharata and the respective Heroes / Gods, Rama and Krishna both supported Chaturvarana which is based on inequality. This should be opposed. Even though Buddha is considered as an avatara of Vishnu he was sent out of India. Why? it is because he opposed chaturvarna.
Answer: Whether you accept or not it is a blatant truth that not everybody is created equal. If the society is taken to be an organic entity (body of God), similar to a human body, there will always be this four class of people standing for the head, arms, thighs and feet. So any civilized society is naturally organized in this way. The roles played by all the body parts are equally important and complement each other and there will be peace and harmony only when they engage in their respective functions / duties without fear or favor. Problem arises only when there is mutual hatred based on external differences, with no co-operation and that needs to be avoided. Hindu Gods perform avatara to maintain this dharmic harmony and they are equally available to all selfless beings engaged in true love/bhakti, irrespective of their material position, varna or other differences.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Objection 3. Dr. Kuvempu once told Prof Bhagavan that he has a doubt that the Shanakra mutt brahmins must have somehow added the section about the shudras in Sri Shankara's brahmasutra bhashya. Prof Bhagavan then started reading all related literature and then he started reading Sri Vivekananda's complete works which are in ten volumes. He was surprised to find that fact in the fifth volume. When that was shown to Kuvempu, he simply stamped on Sri Shankara's book.
Answer: There is no need to have any suspicion against Shankara mutt brahmins. It has been already acknowledged that Sri Shankara and other Acharyas have given reference to Manusmruthi verse which can be re-interpreted as appropriate. It has to do with proper adhikAra and it need not pertain to birth based varna at all. The problem can be resolved if the word Sudra is re-interpreted per Bhagavad Gita 18:67 as explained earlier.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Objection 4. In Manusmruthi it is said that sudras are supposed to serve brahmanas. Those who hesitate should be forced to slavery.
Answer: Mr. Bhagavan must realize that Manusmruthi prescribes varna dharma based on guna or merit. It clearly says a Brahmana with no knowledge and conduct is the lowest of all. It also says a Sudra can teach if he is knowledgeable and endowed with devotion and conduct. Also Manusmruthi is one among the many smruthi literature and they can be changed as per times. So Hindus have no problem to re-interpret or reject portions that goes against the essential teaching of vedAnta.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. There will always be clash between old and new ideas. Before Indian constitution there was Manusmruthi. So there is a conflict between Brahminic and modern thoughts. But Indian constitution which is based on equality and brotherhood prevails over Manusmruthi based on inequality.
Answer: The idea of equality is rooted in the Vedas only where it is clearly stated that "Truth is one and the learned adore him through many name/forms". All other scriptures like Bhagavad Gita and Manusmruthi also acknowledges that. But as already stated there are portions in Manusmruthi that are not relevant anymore and Hindus are happy to reject or re-interpret those.
Indian constitution keeps on changing and there are always loopholes in the human law and so perfect justice is not possible. On the other hand the unwritten constitution of the law of karma and dharma that accepts an impartial, all pervading God who indwells in all and remains as a witness and dispenser of justice in the form of punya-papa karma phala, can never go wrong and prevail for ever.
It is a fact that there is diversity and inequality in the world which is due to one's own karma and these differences can be transcended only through the ideal of dharma or performance of duty according to one's nature. If Varnashrama is viewed only as a "division of labor" based on one's own nature there will be not be any issue and probably will work for all times to come.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Ramayana and Mahabharata and the respective Heroes / Gods, Rama and Krishna both supported Chaturvarana which is based on inequality. This should be opposed. Even though Buddha is considered as an avatara of Vishnu he was sent out of India. Why? it is because he opposed chaturvarna.
Answer: Whether you accept or not it is a blatant truth that not everybody is created equal. If the society is taken to be an organic entity (body of God), similar to a human body, there will always be this four class of people standing for the head, arms, thighs and feet. So any civilized society is naturally organized in this way. The roles played by all the body parts are equally important and complement each other and there will be peace and harmony only when they engage in their respective functions / duties without fear or favor. Problem arises only when there is mutual hatred based on external differences, with no co-operation and that needs to be avoided. Hindu Gods perform avatara to maintain this dharmic harmony and they are equally available to all selfless beings engaged in true love/bhakti, irrespective of their material position, varna or other differences.
Buddha neither opposed not supported chaturvarna. Infact he was defeated and still accepted because, what he taught was Vedic dharma only in an indirect way without Veda! That is why Hindus adore Buddha as an avatara of Vishnu. But they do not follow Buddha because he is not directly teaching Vedic dharma. The denier of everything cannot deny himself. God who is residing as the Self in all is the inner ruler supporter, sustainer of all beings. There is no perfect equality in Buddhism also as women are seldom given sanyasa deeksha. In addition majority of Buddhist monks including their leader Dalai lama are meat eaters, which goes against their teaching of non-violence. As there is no kshatriya varna they cannot protect themselves. No wonder, many Buddhists including their leader Dalai lama are taking shelter in Bharat, the land of dharmic kshatriyas.
So Vedic Hindu dharma alone can be considered complete and self-sufficient as it accepts ahimsa (brahma) as well as dharma-himsa (kshatra) tattvas,
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. After his pattabhisheka, Rama actually did not give anything to Sudras. But he gave lots of gifts and money to only Brahmins. So they made him a God. Also it is said that he ruled for 11000 years which is humanly not possible. So we will take it as 11 years. So in this 11 years he did only two things. He abandoned his wife Sita thereby he mistreated entire women folk. Then he cutoff the head of a sudra called Shambuka, just because he practiced spirituality or tapas. Thereby he mistreated entire shudra population. So Ramarajya means to send women to forest and cutoff the heads of shudras. So why should we not oppose Rama and Ramayana? Instead of Ramarajya we need Bhimarajya (Ambedkar's rajya) in the form of Indian constitution.
Answer: The above is a bunch of lies. Mr. Bhagavan has totally ignored that Sri Rama was unanimously liked by all the people including Sudras in His Kingdom. Sri Valmiki describes at great length the glory of Rama rajya. Sri Rama did not abandon Sita but asked Lakshmana to safely drop her very near to Sage Valmiki's Ashram. This he did to show that as a King he is impartial and loved his people more than his own family. At the same time he made sure that Sita is safe with Sri Valmiki (who is like her brother as both are born from mother earth). This is called Sukra neeti which is adopted at times of need when the enemy is not dharmic.
Sri Rama never discriminated people based on their varna. He received the hospitality of Guha who was a hunter and ate the berries offered by Sabari, who was a tribal. It is also interesting that Srimati Sabari who was a tribal women was a disciple of Matanga rishi who was a brahmin! That also proves that varna and gender is not an obstacle for learning under a Guru and attaining moksha.
If Shambuka was doing tapasya for his own sadhana Sri Rama would have left him alone. But Shambuka's purpose was to conquer the devaloka. Sri Rama warns him first not to pursue the same as it is demonic to oppose devatas who are on the path of dharma. But he never listens. So as a protector of devatas and dharma, he had no choice but to cutoff the head of Shambuka.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. Valmiki was a hunter. Vyasa was a fisherman and Kalidasa was a shepherd. These personalities were so great that brahmin community has never produced anyone equal to them - with due respects to brahmin community I have to say that brahmins always have the audacity to claim great personalities as belonging to their own community.
Answer: That is fine. But one important point to be noted is those famous "non-brahmin" personalities have never said anything bad about vedas, puranas and brahmins. Infact they all have high regards for brahmins who are the custodian of vedas and performers of sacrifices for the devatas keeping the wheel of dharma moving. Brahmanas also adore and worship all such "non-brahmin" sages/poets. If Mr. Bhagavan has high regards for Valmiki, Vyasa and Kalidasa then he has no choice but to accept Vedas and varnashrama dharma as taught by those great personalities through their compositions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. It should be noted that if democracy goes then we will get back into the age of manusmruthi.
Answers: Brahmins have never opposed democracy. Equality in democracy does not mean everybody is given the same compensation whatever may be the work one is engaged in. That would be communism and not democracy. In true democracy and dharma, evil people are always punished and good people are honored according to their contributions.
Even democracy is not perfect. Evil people can walk free making use of the loopholes in the law and good and innocent people may get punished also...But that will not happen when the sense of papa and punya is ingrained in one's consciousness. This is how true Brahmins are and that is the root of all morality and wealth. Britishers and Muslims invaded India because of its wealth and prosperity. When India was the richest nation in the world there was no "Indian constitution". Instead there was only Veda and dharma which remained and always remains as the unwritten constitution of the universe for ever.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Objections from Mr. Bhagavan's supporters:
Generally it is believed that spiritual texts should confer shanti or peace. But Bhagavad Gita cannot be considered as a spiritual text as it was given on a battlefield. Arjuna did not want to fight and kill his own relatives who were on the other side. But Sri Krishna instigated him to engage in violence and is responsible for the mahabharatha war that brought so much of destruction of life. So Krishna cannot be considered as God and his gita cannot be considered as a spiritual text.
Answers: Bhagavad Gita is a spiritual text for all humans and the background of war is actually a perfect setting as every human has to confront the war between spirit and matter. It teaches all humans how not to retreat from one's duty of fighting against adharma rooted in selfishness and immorality.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Objection: Allmost all of Hindu gods hold weapons. Thus they are violent themselves and so should not be worshiped by peace loving people.
Answer: Hindu Gods wield their weapons against evil beings. The weapons of Hindu Gods assure protection for the good and generate fear among the evil. Weapons are needed to safegaurd peace and to deter evil.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. After his pattabhisheka, Rama actually did not give anything to Sudras. But he gave lots of gifts and money to only Brahmins. So they made him a God. Also it is said that he ruled for 11000 years which is humanly not possible. So we will take it as 11 years. So in this 11 years he did only two things. He abandoned his wife Sita thereby he mistreated entire women folk. Then he cutoff the head of a sudra called Shambuka, just because he practiced spirituality or tapas. Thereby he mistreated entire shudra population. So Ramarajya means to send women to forest and cutoff the heads of shudras. So why should we not oppose Rama and Ramayana? Instead of Ramarajya we need Bhimarajya (Ambedkar's rajya) in the form of Indian constitution.
Answer: The above is a bunch of lies. Mr. Bhagavan has totally ignored that Sri Rama was unanimously liked by all the people including Sudras in His Kingdom. Sri Valmiki describes at great length the glory of Rama rajya. Sri Rama did not abandon Sita but asked Lakshmana to safely drop her very near to Sage Valmiki's Ashram. This he did to show that as a King he is impartial and loved his people more than his own family. At the same time he made sure that Sita is safe with Sri Valmiki (who is like her brother as both are born from mother earth). This is called Sukra neeti which is adopted at times of need when the enemy is not dharmic.
Sri Rama never discriminated people based on their varna. He received the hospitality of Guha who was a hunter and ate the berries offered by Sabari, who was a tribal. It is also interesting that Srimati Sabari who was a tribal women was a disciple of Matanga rishi who was a brahmin! That also proves that varna and gender is not an obstacle for learning under a Guru and attaining moksha.
If Shambuka was doing tapasya for his own sadhana Sri Rama would have left him alone. But Shambuka's purpose was to conquer the devaloka. Sri Rama warns him first not to pursue the same as it is demonic to oppose devatas who are on the path of dharma. But he never listens. So as a protector of devatas and dharma, he had no choice but to cutoff the head of Shambuka.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. Valmiki was a hunter. Vyasa was a fisherman and Kalidasa was a shepherd. These personalities were so great that brahmin community has never produced anyone equal to them - with due respects to brahmin community I have to say that brahmins always have the audacity to claim great personalities as belonging to their own community.
Answer: That is fine. But one important point to be noted is those famous "non-brahmin" personalities have never said anything bad about vedas, puranas and brahmins. Infact they all have high regards for brahmins who are the custodian of vedas and performers of sacrifices for the devatas keeping the wheel of dharma moving. Brahmanas also adore and worship all such "non-brahmin" sages/poets. If Mr. Bhagavan has high regards for Valmiki, Vyasa and Kalidasa then he has no choice but to accept Vedas and varnashrama dharma as taught by those great personalities through their compositions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. It should be noted that if democracy goes then we will get back into the age of manusmruthi.
Answers: Brahmins have never opposed democracy. Equality in democracy does not mean everybody is given the same compensation whatever may be the work one is engaged in. That would be communism and not democracy. In true democracy and dharma, evil people are always punished and good people are honored according to their contributions.
Even democracy is not perfect. Evil people can walk free making use of the loopholes in the law and good and innocent people may get punished also...But that will not happen when the sense of papa and punya is ingrained in one's consciousness. This is how true Brahmins are and that is the root of all morality and wealth. Britishers and Muslims invaded India because of its wealth and prosperity. When India was the richest nation in the world there was no "Indian constitution". Instead there was only Veda and dharma which remained and always remains as the unwritten constitution of the universe for ever.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Objections from Mr. Bhagavan's supporters:
Generally it is believed that spiritual texts should confer shanti or peace. But Bhagavad Gita cannot be considered as a spiritual text as it was given on a battlefield. Arjuna did not want to fight and kill his own relatives who were on the other side. But Sri Krishna instigated him to engage in violence and is responsible for the mahabharatha war that brought so much of destruction of life. So Krishna cannot be considered as God and his gita cannot be considered as a spiritual text.
Answers: Bhagavad Gita is a spiritual text for all humans and the background of war is actually a perfect setting as every human has to confront the war between spirit and matter. It teaches all humans how not to retreat from one's duty of fighting against adharma rooted in selfishness and immorality.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Objection: Allmost all of Hindu gods hold weapons. Thus they are violent themselves and so should not be worshiped by peace loving people.
Answer: Hindu Gods wield their weapons against evil beings. The weapons of Hindu Gods assure protection for the good and generate fear among the evil. Weapons are needed to safegaurd peace and to deter evil.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is funny that Mr. Bhagavan is putting down Hindu God's but his own name is that of the Supreme Hindu God !
Namaste
Suresh
No comments:
Post a Comment