From: gopals@astro.umd.edu (N. Gopalswamy)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: Seetham's Blasphemy or Cheap Tickets To VaikunTam
Date: 28 Dec 92 19:40:40 GMT
Organization: U. of Maryland @ College Park, Astronomy

In article <1992Dec28.160800.351@oracorp.com> narayana@oracorp.com (K. T. Narayana) writes:
>In article <9212220022.AA11205@ece7.NIS.ece7> seetam@hub.eng.wayne.edu (Seetamraju Uday Bhaskar Sarma) writes:
>
>
>The center piece of Hindu thought is intellectualism; in the prehistoric
>period, it offered one of the finest intellectual freedoms that societies
>could offer to thinking individuals. No stone was left untouched in the
>pursuit of the intellect. The variety of sects, within and outside the
>pale of Hindu thought, and their philosophies, are a testement to this 
                                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^
Some of them like chaarvaak's were destroyed by the supporters
of your intellectualism!

>freedom. In all this period, thought played the fundamental role
>to Brahmanical hold on the society (rather the Kshatriya rebellion)
>is debatable. This is because the concept of the Self and the Identity
>of the Self and the Brahman is Kshatriya in origin; actually Kshatriyas
>held this knowledge as a secret. Brahmanas became disciples of Kshatriyas,
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

In TN, the name for vedas is maRai (=the concealed)! 

>learnt the Brahma-vidya from them, and then systematized the same in
                                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You mean keeping knowledge as secret?

>
>This view of intellectual diversity supported by the ritualistic component
>of Hinduism was current even in the times of Adi Sankara. This in spite
>of the rampant Krishna Bhaagavatism, particularly in the south (means TN)
>of the Alvar variety. It is not true that the Vedantic society of that day 
>accepted Bhaagavatism as main stream religion. In deed Bhaagavatism offered
>the worst form of worship; brahmanas who used to pursue Bhaagavatism were
>consisdered lower (not socially but intellectually). Indeed Adi Sankara
>dismisses Bhaagavatism as outside the pale of Vedanta. 

The first and last lines of this paragraph are contradictory. You
sound really strange. What kind of intellectual was adi sankara
who said that if a sudra listens to veda, molten lead should
be poured into his years? Not only Alwars, but also Naayanmaars
(many of them were intellectually lower brahmanas according to
your definition) were in bakthi movement. Bakti movement directly
related an individual to god without middle men. Your dogmatic
views of society and intellectualism does not let you
accepts the positive step the society in dealing with god and religion.
 
>
>
>Ramanuja's cheif social contribution was to bring into the fold the idol
            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
IMO, raamaanujaa's contribution was the realization that
everyone is equal in front of god. While the intellectual
prehistoric brains of the sankaraachaarys can not tolerate
a harijan going into a hindu temple, ramaanuja converted harijans
to bramanas. He accepted a sudra as his guru. I am sure
treating humans as equals is not in your realm of intellectualism.

>of total prapatthi of AndaaL (admirable that AndaaL is), there is a
>total absense of any intellectualism. In other words, the religion
       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
When you can not come out of yajur vedic age, you can not
appreciate a sudra Alwar lady like andal.

>of the south immensely damaged the intellectualism and the secularism
>of the Hinduism.

Ha! are you refering to the peaceful south during the 
babri masjit madness?
> 
>Thus the decline of Hinduism in the north, and the recent revival
>of the brahminical vedantic tradition, along with the yagnas and
>the yagas, is perhaps the best that we should hope for.
>If it takes of, we will have more thinking Hindus than chest-beating
>Hindus chanting "Ayappo-Swamyne-Ayappo" variety. Intellectualism
>is the fulcrum of Hindu thought. It offered diversity, freedom thought,
>and liberation of mind. More importantly, it offered individuality
>of thought and action without the abiding structure.
>
When a cat closesd its eyes, it thinks the world is dark. You simply
do not have the yard stick to measure the development of human
intellectualism when you can not come out of your prehistoric
notions of human thought.  

This is one other master piece in your south-bashing epics. But
many on the net know that these throw-ups are due to your
total ignorance about the thought process of the south. 
Do you know about sidhdhars? They are not idol worshippers.
These sudra thinkers asked people to search inside them for
god and not out side or in idols. Read some lingaayat kannada
poetry. 
>...kt


N. Gopalswamy
Xref: sparky soc.culture.indian:42641 soc.culture.pakistan:19092