US presidential elections
started by MaxEntropy_Man 11 mnths agoReplies
An exception may be Obama who seems to have passion and some idealism based on his book "The audacity of hope" - maybe I need to listen to him more closely.
Of course, there is always the possibility of not voting at all.
About as much as you becoming Uppili's running mate :-)
In my village, the rest of the Brahmins would always talk derisively about Dikshitar Brahmins eating Yagam meat.
--> Dikshitar brahmins are tamil brahmins who eat meat, right? Are they Saivas or Vaisnavas?
>>> meat eating is proscribed in the iyer and iyengar tradition. the vast majority of tamil brahmins never give up the proscription. there are some who have made exceptions like myself. i am very fond of sea food cooked in the many different delightful american regional cuisines- new england, cajun and so forth. however, i don't eat chicken or any red meat.
Anytime, Fukir Razmun talks about anything South Indian it is only to use against them in the future and abuse them. There is no seriousness and/or eagerness to learn anything honestly in that human package of cells.
There can be no doubt that communal madcaps like Mullah Uppili Bounder Gounder (also known as Jehadi Uppili Aurangzeb) are enemies of India.
In my village, the rest of the Brahmins would always talk derisively about Dikshitar Brahmins eating Yagam meat.
--> Dikshitar brahmins are tamil brahmins who eat meat, right? Are they Saivas or Vaisnavas?
HAHAHAHA........ROFLMAO... HAHAHA......
I am waiting to see how this "expert exchange" turns out......
of course....Akbar great, Moguls great, all the Mogulities are great....
Since logic is an unknown quantity for you, I can see the reason for your great confusion. And Akbar is about as relevant to this discussion as your pal who asks whether the show was to the irght or the left of the umbrella.
Akbar is as relevant to Dikshitars as Dikshitars to US presidential elections.
Please continue your highly logical, eloquent, elegant discussion on Dikshitars to your great e-pal - THE Tamil Expert and enighten us all about Tamil, TN, and Kumudam, of course.
If you read the Kumudam link, you will see Brahmins defending yagams -- in fact one person says that not killing animals is not one of our traditions. VP also defends animal sacrifice claiming that this is done for a worthy cause supported in the vedas and thus is better than killing animals for scientific research.
I have had of Brahmins in some parts of India -- Goa/Konkan/Kashmir (?)-- eating meat.
However not all Brahmins are vegetarians. A classic example would be the Kashmiri Brahmins who continue to pride themselves on their mutton dishes. There are also the Brahmins of Bengal who eat fish.
http://www.kamat.com/indica/alamkara/9.htm
I think konkani brahmins probably must be also eating meat. Both kashmiri and konkani brahmins are saraswat brahmins. To the best of my knowledge, only kashmiri and konkani brahmins are saraswat brahmins. It is speculated that kashmiri and konkani brahmins must have existed together for some time in north-west india when one branch migrated to the konkan region and the other branch to kashmir.
on another note, i have heard of rituals involving buffalo slaughter in bengal and bihar/jharkhand in which the buffalo meat is distributed amongst everyone attending and is supposed to be consumed as prasad.
There still exist very few temples in U.P. where animal slaughter takes place to propitiate the deities. (I personally know of only one such temple--Vindhyavasini temple.) The most famous hindu temple where animal slaughter takes place is of course the kamakhya temple in assam.
> the Bengal region and a surplus of fish due to the presence of many swamps.
I heard from Bengali friends that Bengali brahmins started eating fish because of a relatively recent famine, after the Battle of Palashi.
It could be in the Brahacharanam group. One of the resons, we Asta Sahasrams, do not accept the Brahacharanams, as equal to us in social status. Not that I care. But that is the social hierarchy. So too with the Vadamals. I am Haritha Gotram and an Asta Sahasram.
Regards.
Rajaputhran.
What I have heard from disparate groups all jell on this topic. VP started out questioning the Kumudam article as lacking in hard facts but soon switched to saying
"I personally do not think that it will make any great difference to the animals if they are sacrificed for the betterment of humanity, as evidenced in the Vedas"
"the Homa ( yagam) .... strengthen your spiritual values."
My village only has two streets in the Agraharam. My relatives should know what they were talking about.
There are a couple of fringe practices that I know about -- Panchangakkaran (Brahmins who perform rituals for Non-Brahmins) and the rituals for obtaining Sannyasam. These were also talked about derisively.
In the Kumudam article, someone associated with the Kanchi Madam says:
"Animal sacrifice has always been a part of Vaideegam according to Vedic laws. It is only VaLLalar whose followers believe in Jeevakarunyam (non-violence ?). Vedas definitely involve animal sacrifice. The only debate has been whether it is OK to eat the sacrificed animal or not. Kanchi Periyavar defended animal sacrifice in Kolkatha Kali temple"
Since you know Tamil, you can check the accuracy of my translations. The Kumudam reporter R Vivek Anandan calls these "rare details that he got from the Madam folks".
VC:
You commit the same mistake as the unpads. You jump to conclusions and quote out of context. Have the patience to read the full discourse of the Maha Periyaval, and come to some conclusions. Analyse his arguments, and post your cogent reply. Vetrivel and Sakthivels are penpushers whose bread and butter it is to write titillating stuff, I don't blame them. A parathai has to show her wares before her victim will part with his money.
I am reproducing some paragraphs, from what I have posted earlier, and I would request to visit the site for a more elaborate discussion on Hindu Dharma.
Madvacharya was against the killing of any pasu for a sacrifice. In his compassion he said that a substitute for the vapa must be made with flour and offered in the fire. ("Pasu" does not necessarily mean a cow. In Sanskrit any animal is called a "pasu". )
In his Brahmasutra, Vyasa has expounded the nature of the Atman as found expressed in the Upanishads which constitute the jnanakanda of the Vedas. The actual conduct of sacrifices is dealt with in the Purvamimamsa which is the karmakanda of the Vedas. The true purpose of sacrifices is explained in the Uttaramimamsa, that is the jnanakanda. What is this purposse or goal? It is the cleansing of the consciousness and such cleansing is essential to lead a man to the path of jnana.
The Brahmasutra says: "Asuddhamiti cen na sabdat". The performance of sacrifices is based on scriptural authority and it is part of the quest for Self realisation. So how can it be called an impure act? How do we determine whether or not an object or an act is impure or whether it is good or bad? We do so by judging it according to the authority of of the sastras. Vyasa goes on to state in his Brahmasutra that animal sacrifice is not sinful since the act is permeated by the sound of the Vedas. What is pure or impure is to be known by the authority provided by the Vedas or rather their sound called Sabdapramana. If sacrifices were impure acts according to the Vedas, they would not have accepted them as part of the Atmic quest. Even if the sacrificial animal is made of flour (the substitute according to Madhvacharya) it is imbued with life by the chanting of the Vedic mantras. Would it not then be like a living animal and would not offering it in a sacrifice be taken as an act of violence?
"It is totally false to state that Brahmins performed sacrifices only to satisfy their appetite for meat and that the talk of pleasing the deities was only a pretext. There are rules regarding the meat to be carved out from a sacrificial animal, the part of the body from which it is to be taken and the quantity each rtvik can partake of as prasada (idavatarana). This is not more than the size of a pigeon-pea and it is to be swallowed without anything added to taste. There may be various reasons for you to attack the system of sacrifices but it would be preposterous to do so on the score that Brahmins practised deception by making them a pretext to eat meat." -
The principle on which the physiology of deities is based is superior to that of humans. That apart, to say that the priests drank bottle after bottle of somarasa or pot after pot is to betray gross ignorance of the Vedic dharma. The soma plant is pounded and crushed in a small mortar called "graha". There are rules with regard to the quantity of essence to be offered to the gods. The small portion that remains after the oblation has been made, "huta-sesa", which is drunk drop by drop, does not add up to more than an ounce. No one has been knocked out by such drinking. They say that somarasa is not very palatable.
An argument runs thus: In the eons gone by mankind possessed high ideals and noble character. Men could sacrifice animals for the well-being of the world because they had great affection in their hearts and were selfless. They offered even cows and horses in sacrifice and had meat for sraddha. As householders, in their middle years, they followed the karmamarga (the path of works) and performed rites to please the deities for the good of the world. But, in doing so, they desired no rewards. Later, they renounced all works, all puja, all observances, to become sannyasins delighting themselves in their Atman. They were men of such refinement and noble character that, if their brother, a king, died heirless they begot a son by his wife without any passion in their hearts and without a bit detracting from their brahmacharya. Their only motive was that the kingdom should not be plunged in anarchy for want of an heir to the throne.
In our own Kali age we do not have such men who are desireless in their actions, who can subdue their minds and give up all works to become ascetics and who will remain chaste at heart even in the company of women. So it is contended that the following are to be eschewed in the Kali age: horse and cow sacrifices, meat in the sraddha ceremony, sannyasa, begetting a son by the husband's brother. As authority we have the following verse:
Asvalambham gavalambham sanyasam palapatrikam
Devarena sutotpattim kalau panca vivarjayet
VP.
On the GOP side, my preference is Senator who used to be a prisoner of war (I just gorgot his name). He is committed to human rights.