Discussion:
Brahmanism Exposed
(too old to reply)
Great Parayan
2004-04-21 09:13:42 UTC
Permalink
===================Taken from the thread "CHRISTIANS DESTROYED HINDU
TEMPLES "
From: Great Parayan (***@blackplanet.com)
Subject: Re: CHRISTIANS DESTROYED HINDU TEMPLES
View: Complete Thread (87 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian, alt.bonehead.jai-maharaj,
alt.religion.hindu, misc.writing.screenplays,
soc.culture.indian.marathi
Date: 2004-04-19 03:00:19 PST
==============================================================================

In this thread and other threads, I have asked several times to
produce a brahmin
who fulfills the hindus' criteria of brahminhood.

It is presumed that no such brahmin exists!!!

Now some more questions.
1. Any fake brahmins who claim brahminhood and recievr service from
hindus in the name
of their brahminhood?

2. Is it sin as per hinduism to serve a fake brahmin?

3. Is it sin as per hinduism to serve a non-brahmin?
You have obviously never studied Valmiki and write profusely about him.
You have profusely studied Valmiki, so that you can only utter that
Valmiki support your racist ideas. But You failed to give any quotes
from Valmiki
to support your points.
I haven't written about Valmiki at all.
Please check message 59. Your answers ( apart ) are given below. Tell
[Valmiki – author of first hindu epic 'Ramayanna']

You claimed Valmiki substantiate your points. Now it becomes others
burden to learn and find
out how Valmiki substantiate your points. You demand google-readers
should
learn Valmiki and answers your questions. Oh, I see, you cannot work
and others should serve your purpose.

==========================================================
All this is in Valmiki, if you care to study. No secrets.
Surely Valmiki didn't say it was inside himself that Ravana found
Rama!
Now this is so clearly explained in Valmiki. I am shocked no one cares
to read that and just spews his own thoughts.
Valmiki is very very clear.
Clear as mud. He doesn't give one any idea of where one may find God
in order that one may attempt to conquer him.
==========================================================
In message 42, when you find that a bhangi can meet your previously
stated requirements for being a brahmana, you come up with a new set
of requirements.
I clearly said bhangis cannot be brahmanas! You did not get it!
[Bhangies are the people forcefully absorbed to hindu social system,
known
as Varnna Darma(VD). They are given job of cleaning cleaning as
duty of their varnna. Hindus regard Bhangies that theyare destined so
by hindu gods.]

As a brahmin, one thing is clear to you. A bhamgi and other Dalits
cannot be
caompassinate and selfless.
Please
read again message 42. I explained it. If I say a doctor is one who
knows how to diagnose illness etc and has to be qualified for such,
you seem to say why not
consider a carpenter as a doctor! The two are different. Very simple.
[Indian culture give more freedom to Doctors than to Carpenters.
It settle suits in favor Doctors to Carpenters. If you work and do not
harm others,
you will be insulted, abused and denied justice]

We understood. Carpenters and Doctors cannot be compassionate,
selfless, wise and supremely
devoted to God, as per hindu-wisdom.

Being a brahmin is engaging a profession
(like a doctor/carpenter engaging into theirs)
or an attitude/outlook toward the world???

A doctor can be carpenter and a carpenter can be a Doctor also.
A brahmin cannot visualize doctor/carpenter being compassionate and
selfless.
A brahmin cannot respect, care, love and support a non-brahmin.
A brahmin teaches loving, caring, serving and supporting a non-brahmin
is like empowering a Devil.
Every body knows all brahmins boast they are the only people
of capable being compassionate and selfless.

Everyone heard of brahmins receiving services/presents from hindus,
but nobody has heard of a brahmin being compassionate and selfless.
Everybody has heard of brahmins cursing others without understanding
why poor hindus are unable to fulfill the mental perception of
brahmins.

No brahmin is known to be compassionate and selfless, then why
are you insisting that people should accept compassion and
selflessness as attributes of brahmins???
Instead, if you say boasting,
self-praising, envies,
crookedness, laziness, racist and arrogance as attributes of
brahmins,
it will be more apt and appropriate and people could easily understand
from the examples they see around.

----From hindu epics-------------------------------------------------
When Viswamtran asked a cow from Vasiastan. Being a brahmin, Vasistan
was so selfish
and he immediately denied it
and in addition, he killed forces of Viswamitran.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
If Radhakrishnan said that in all societies, all important actions
have to be decided by brahmanas, he was an ulluu; few societies let
"picchakaar" direct any important actions, leave alone all important
actions. If he said "wise men", he might have been onto something but
God alone knows how you deduced that wise men meant brahmanas; wise
men are just that - wise men, not brahmanas.
You wanted, a definition of brahmanas. I gave one. They are supremely
devoted to God, selfless, compassionate. They advise others on their
duties and teach them- see message 42. Hence they are wise. Simple.
They are brahmanas in shastras. Very simple. Problem? See message 42.
In a social system, several millions of people are insulted, tortured
and
denied justice, and few million brahmins with their agents(upper
varnnas)
and their coolies(BC/OBC)
live shamelessly on the tears, sweat and blood of others. Meantime,
the most 'compassionate' and
'selfless' people engage in spreading the age-old criteria of
brahminhood
to help blood-sucking-brahmins, who block progress of the nation.
The most compassionate and selfless people cannot just understand
grief of millions of people, and they cannot devise a solution for it.
I am sorry to say you will lose miserably if you pursue
this debate as I may tell you things you never knew about Indian
civilisation
In Indian civilization, do imbeciles become wise merely because they
are compassionate, selfless, don't work for money, etc?
Are they fully devoted to God and perform the six categories of tasks
as I said before in message 42? Then they cannot be imbeciles! Simple.
The wise are
wise because they are wise, not because they are compassionate,
selfless, etc. The compassionate and selfless need not necessarily be
Wisdom is reflected in behaviour. Read Kural- Arivinaal aaguvadhundo
piridhin noy thannoy pol potraakadai. Read at least Kural if not
Valmiki to know about Hindu culture and the duties of brahmanas and
their nature. Andhanar enbor aravor matrevvuyirkkum senthanmai
poondozhugalaan etc etc. Also know aravaazhi andhanar thaaL etc.
That is why I said submitting to a brahmana is a previlege.
Firstly I am glad you are not using abusive language.
Secondly, you responded. Thirdly, you read message 42.
I cannot do more,unless you start thinking and shed your rage.
You need not be angry, as you are sucking blood of poor Dalit victims
hunted and trapped
by your agents known as hindus(esp. ksatriya, vysya, baniaya, kayastha
etc.).

[ksatriya, vysya, baniaya, kayastha are various varnnas in VD]
For
some reason you seem very angry. It baffles me. I used no abusive
language ever. The definition of brahmana from shastra is not what
*you* (or your absconding friend) think!
That is the problem
For arguments sake, we agree a Bhangi cannot be compassionate and
selfless,
but it is now your turn to produce a brahmin as per your criteria for
google-reades
to verify and identify the species.


In the name of this non-existing species, in last thousands years,
millions
of people butchered, robbed, abused, insulted, ridiculed. Nobody was
there
to listen cries of this unfortunate people. Nobody was there to tell
their stories.
Nobody was there to care these unfortunate people. Nobody was there
to shelter them,
protect them. But so many 'sastrass' (science), 'neethy' (justice and
justifications)
are written to explain how to shun them, how to insult them, how to
torture them and how to justify hindus' torturing them.

And the most 'compassionate' and 'selfless' people take pride in this
social system. The most 'compassionate' and 'selfless' people squeal
that they are people of merit and ask the government to all assistance
to poor people.

Every body knows one cannot be a brahmin without being arrogant,
scornful,
holier-than-thou attitude, incapable of empathetic and highly
prejudiced,
demanding, always-finding-fault-with-others,
incapable-of-understanding-others-views&feelings,
highly-opinionated-about-actions-of-others and
abusing-ideas-of-others.

You can verify this simple fact by reading posts of hindus/brahmins to
Google
or observing hindus/brahmins in India/outside-India. Hindu is the one
who buys
bullshits of brahmins. They are comparatively less arrogant, with
pleasing personality,
with inferiority-complex, with no creative talent and with no thinking
skills. They simply cannot think
other than doing the drudgery assigned to them by brahmins.

Brahmins show creative talents in how to insult a non-brahmin.
If a brahmin neglects you, it means he is afraid of you in your
attracting
power over his slaves (known as hindus). They divide people and make
people
enemies each other by praising one(usually most powerful and
influential)
and ditching the other (usually poor and weak). Brahmins are always
keen on promoting and empowering his people. They are afraid (perhaps
envious)
of ordinary human values(like empathy, cooperation, compassion) with
human beings,
and some times one may wonder whether brahmins are human beings.

[Hindus claim there are only four varnnas. Brahmins use these kind of
ideas to bluff
hindus. They quote from hindu-scriptures to support their claim. But
nobody
(even brahmins&hindus) cares and follows hindu scriptures. They use
hindu scriptures
to exploit people. Varnna System revolves around the idea that people
should be
divided and there should be a graded hierarchy of contempt.
Presently there are around 6000 varnnas in hindu society.]
Great Parayan
2004-04-22 12:16:08 UTC
Permalink
Brahmanas are defined as below,

"They are supremely
devoted to God, selfless, compassionate. They advise others on their
duties and teach them- see message 42. Hence they are wise. Simple.
They are brahmanas in shastras. Very simple."
--***@yahoo.com (Madhu Sudhan)

This is the definition hindus give for brahmins.

These are brahmins in sastras!!!

I have repeatedly asked to produce a brahmin in real life as per hindus' definition.
In hindus infested SCI, nobody responded.

Is there any fake-brahmins (who calims brahmin but in reality not so)?
Can you give a list of such fake brahmins?

Is there any organisation spotting and warning against fake-brahmins?

Is there any organisation who publish a directory of true brahmins?
Sachin
2004-04-24 15:14:36 UTC
Permalink
Times have changed a lot, baby. Can you produce a directory of TRUE
christians, jainas, buddhas, mohmmedans? Stop uttering nonsense about
brahmins alone.

- Sachin
Post by Great Parayan
Brahmanas are defined as below,
"They are supremely
devoted to God, selfless, compassionate. They advise others on their
duties and teach them- see message 42. Hence they are wise. Simple.
They are brahmanas in shastras. Very simple."
This is the definition hindus give for brahmins.
These are brahmins in sastras!!!
I have repeatedly asked to produce a brahmin in real life as per hindus' definition.
In hindus infested SCI, nobody responded.
Is there any fake-brahmins (who calims brahmin but in reality not so)?
Can you give a list of such fake brahmins?
Is there any organisation spotting and warning against fake-brahmins?
Is there any organisation who publish a directory of true brahmins?
M. Ranjit Mathews
2004-04-25 00:58:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sachin
Times have changed a lot, baby. Can you produce a directory of TRUE
christians, jainas, buddhas, mohmmedans? Stop uttering nonsense about
brahmins alone.
No one is saying it is a sacred privilege to find, serve and submit to
a Christian, Jain, Buddhist or Muslims.

Since the claim was that it is a sacred privilege to find, serve and
submit to Brahmins alone, then the question of the essence is how to
find a Brahmana, not how to find one of these others.

Madhu Sudan is still at a loss as to explain the procedure by which
one would find a Brahmin in a Bhangi basti. He claims that those
working as bhangis can't be Brahmana, but he passes over the little
detail that their children can be Brahmana if they haven't yet started
working. So, Madhu, would you kindly outline the procedure for finding
Brahmana children of bhangis, for serving them and submitting to them?

Alternatively, ask your relatives to find Brahmana children of bhangis
and start serving these children and submitting to them. Once your
relatives have shown others how to find Brahmins, how to serve them
and how to submit to them, then perhaps the masses will better
understand how to find, serve and submit to Brahmanas.
Post by Sachin
- Sachin
Post by Great Parayan
Brahmanas are defined as below,
"They are supremely
devoted to God, selfless, compassionate. They advise others on their
duties and teach them- see message 42. Hence they are wise. Simple.
They are brahmanas in shastras. Very simple."
This is the definition hindus give for brahmins.
These are brahmins in sastras!!!
I have repeatedly asked to produce a brahmin in real life as per hindus'
definition. In hindus infested SCI, nobody responded.
Is there any fake-brahmins (who calims brahmin but in reality not so)?
Can you give a list of such fake brahmins?
Is there any organisation spotting and warning against fake-brahmins?
Is there any organisation who publish a directory of true brahmins?
Madhu Sudhan
2004-04-25 14:55:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
No one is saying it is a sacred privilege to find, serve and submit to
a Christian, Jain, Buddhist or Muslims.
Wrong again. It is considered a previlege to serve the pope amongst
others, munis in Janism amongst others, monks including the Dalai
Lama. Muslims consider it a previlege to serve, Atatollah Khomeni,
Kameni, Osama bin Ladin, Abdul Sattar Edhi etc etc. Shows how your
logic is going worng when you think of this problem. For some reason
your rage is obstructing your reason.
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Madhu Sudan is still at a loss as to explain the procedure by which
one would find a Brahmin in a Bhangi basti.
Wrong again. You left the thread "Christians destroyed Hindu temples"
and your friend Shri Parayan started this and other thread. Instead of
following that as well, you seem to side swipe me in this thread! I am
not at a loss!


He claims that those
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
working as bhangis can't be Brahmana, but he passes over the little
detail that their children can be Brahmana if they haven't yet started
working.
You *never* asked me that so far!



So, Madhu, would you kindly outline the procedure for finding
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Brahmana children of bhangis, for serving them and submitting to them?
Does not matter where they are born. If they are selfless, devoted to
God and compassionate, they are brahmanas.

I am submitting to Nandhanaar, thiruppaanazhvar, kannapaar, kanakadasa
etc. They are all worshipped in temples.

Modern day brahmana would be Gandhi or any true Gandhian for example.

If you think the pope is devoted to God, selfless and compassionate,
then he is your brahmana. Not mine though.
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Alternatively, ask your relatives to find Brahmana children of bhangis
Their parents will never allow them. Face it. They need the kids to
make money.
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
and start serving these children and submitting to them. Once your
relatives have shown others how to find Brahmins, how to serve them
and how to submit to them, then perhaps the masses will better
understand how to find, serve and submit to Brahmanas.
See above regarding nandhanar, azhvaars, etc etc

Please note that I defined who a brahmana is. He cannot do dirty tasks
etc.

I simply cannot understand your rage, sarcasm and emotional
outbursts.

If you have any real questions, please ask. Many questions you ask,
you can answer them yourself, they seem to be so basic.
M. Ranjit Mathews
2004-04-25 17:31:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
So, Madhu, would you kindly outline the procedure for finding
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Brahmana children of bhangis, for serving them and submitting to them?
Does not matter where they are born.
Very good. Then, suggest a procedure for FINDING Brahmanas in a bhangi
basti. "FIND, SERVE and SUBMIT", you said. How do you find, in the
first place?
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
If they are selfless, devoted to
God and compassionate, they are brahmanas.
Then, a selfless, devoted and compassionate child of a bhangi is a
brahamana and it is a a sacred privilege for her/his parents (and for
you) to serve and submit to her/him:->

When she/he reaches adulthood and starts work as a bhanghi, does
she/he cease to be selfless? Or devoted? Or compassionate? If not,
then according to the above definition, she/he is still a brahmana.
Madhu Sudhan
2004-04-25 21:43:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Madhu Sudhan
If they are selfless, devoted to
God and compassionate, they are brahmanas.
Then, a selfless, devoted and compassionate child of a bhangi is a
brahamana and it is a a sacred privilege for her/his parents (and for
you) to serve and submit to her/him:->
There is something very seriously wrong with your comprehension. I
wrote so many times, so clearly, in the previous thread and you keep
repeating the same questions.

Let me tell you again. Please read this many times till you
understand this.
It does not matter where the child came from. If the child displays
these qualities, then the child is a brahmana. Such a child will never
perform the task of a bhangi. Bhangis do these jobs for monay and not
for selfless service at all. These jobs are unncessary, banned,
unwanted and done only for money. Brahmanas cannot and should not work
for money but may serve. Understood?
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
When she/he reaches adulthood and starts work as a bhanghi, does
she/he cease to be selfless? Or devoted? Or compassionate? If not,
then according to the above definition, she/he is still a brahmana.
Again, understand this. Read the previous thread again and this one. A
brahmana cannot work as a bhangi. That is dirty and done for money!
It is a shame you left the previous thread in spite of many reminders
and ask the same question. This seems to be intellectually totally
dishonest.

I can only pray for you.

Brahmanas cannot work for money and may serve without expecting money.
They subsist by donation given by *proper* people for *proper* tasks
that are satvic.
Clear? Please do not ask the same qustions when they have been
answered. You try to pretend I am not answering.
Snoopy
2004-04-25 23:33:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Let me tell you again. Please read this many times till you
understand this.
It does not matter where the child came from. If the child displays
these qualities, then the child is a brahmana. Such a child will never
perform the task of a bhangi. Bhangis do these jobs for monay and not
for selfless service at all. These jobs are unncessary, banned,
unwanted and done only for money.
Yes, cleaning latrines must be the fastest way to becoming a
millionaire. And such an unnecessary, banned and unwanted job at that.
Latrines were designed to be overflowing cesspools of human waste that
provide an ideal environment for meditation and other such selfless tasks.

Goddamn bhangis! Always cornering the market on lucrative jobs! They
should be cleaning latrines for free!
Romanise
2004-04-26 08:32:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Snoopy
Yes, cleaning latrines must be the fastest way to becoming a
millionaire.
My freedom to relieve myself out in open was taken away from me at the
age of 11. Had to go to a smelly Dabbaa tin latrine. Bhangis were
relevant then. At 16 I moved to where it was drainage connected
latrine and that was 50 years back.

Dont know if anywhere in India there are Dabba latrines left.

As for cleanlyness or lack of it in public latrines things are not
much better in the West.
Post by Snoopy
And such an unnecessary, banned and unwanted job at that.
Latrines were designed to be overflowing cesspools of human waste that
provide an ideal environment for meditation and other such selfless tasks.
Goddamn bhangis! Always cornering the market on lucrative jobs! They
should be cleaning latrines for free!
Snoopy
2004-04-26 18:18:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Romanise
As for cleanlyness or lack of it in public latrines things are not
much better in the West.
You've got to be joking! Aside from the "portapotty" type public
latrines, toilets in the west are generally clean, and at the very least
*much, much cleaner* than those in India. As a matter of fact, ask any
Indian in the US how they rate toilets in Indian(American) restaurants
versus even those found at McDonald's. Honestly, the Indian restaurant
toilets are an embarassment, especially when you are trying to introduce
Indian cuisine to westerners.

Acknowledging a problem is the first step to remedying it, and Indians
are notorious for refusing to acknowledge their shortcomings. The Indian
position that toilet-cleaning is a "bhangi" job most certainly seems to
affect how toilets are maintained. "Cleanliness is next to godliness: is
a popular Indian saying. Apparently, the gods are not much revered in
India if one goes by the cleanliness.
Romanise
2004-04-27 19:44:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Snoopy
Post by Romanise
As for cleanlyness or lack of it in public latrines things are not
much better in the West.
You've got to be joking!
I had to write twice to London Mayor Livingston about Baker Street
Toilet facility for men being shut. Baker Street is no small public
place.
In late fifties and early sixties living in Ahmedabad I felt more at
ease moving about and accessing a public urinal than I have ever felt
in West immediately afterwards.
Post by Snoopy
Aside from the "portapotty" type public
latrines, toilets in the west are generally clean, and at the very least
*much, much cleaner* than those in India. As a matter of fact, ask any
Indian in the US how they rate toilets in Indian(American) restaurants
versus even those found at McDonald's. Honestly, the Indian restaurant
toilets are an embarassment, especially when you are trying to introduce
Indian cuisine to westerners.
Acknowledging a problem is the first step to remedying it, and Indians
are notorious for refusing to acknowledge their shortcomings. The Indian
position that toilet-cleaning is a "bhangi" job most certainly seems to
affect how toilets are maintained. "Cleanliness is next to godliness: is
a popular Indian saying. Apparently, the gods are not much revered in
India if one goes by the cleanliness.
Westerners are trying to hide certain smells. Indians on the whole let
certain smell to be around.
Ae for 'bhangi' the fellow is no more to be found in India anywhere.
Today even where open spaces are available to ease oneself people have
latrines connected to Gobar-Gas plant. First such plant I encountered
in Kathlal on a small dairy farm 20 or so kilometers outside Ahmedabad
in 1963.

Would following reduce your prejudice
http://www.sulabhtoiletmuseum.org/pg02.htm
Snoopy
2004-04-29 05:43:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Romanise
Post by Snoopy
Post by Romanise
As for cleanlyness or lack of it in public latrines things are not
much better in the West.
You've got to be joking!
I had to write twice to London Mayor Livingston about Baker Street
Toilet facility for men being shut. Baker Street is no small public
place.
When I say public toilet, I mean toilets in public places such as
restaurants, office buildings, museums and such. Perhaps the Baker
Street facility was deemed unnecessary in view of the fact that only a
lone Indian made use of it. In any event, I was referring to
_cleanliness_, not street accessibility.
Post by Romanise
In late fifties and early sixties living in Ahmedabad I felt more at
ease moving about and accessing a public urinal than I have ever felt
in West immediately afterwards.
Quite. Perhaps that was because most public urinals in Ahmedabad, and
elsewhere in India, are located along convenient walls, rather than
inside a proper building.

Btw, here's a story on how accessible public urinals are in Ahmedabad:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/217499.cms
Post by Romanise
Post by Snoopy
Aside from the "portapotty" type public
latrines, toilets in the west are generally clean, and at the very least
*much, much cleaner* than those in India. As a matter of fact, ask any
Indian in the US how they rate toilets in Indian(American) restaurants
versus even those found at McDonald's. Honestly, the Indian restaurant
toilets are an embarassment, especially when you are trying to introduce
Indian cuisine to westerners.
Acknowledging a problem is the first step to remedying it, and Indians
are notorious for refusing to acknowledge their shortcomings. The Indian
position that toilet-cleaning is a "bhangi" job most certainly seems to
affect how toilets are maintained. "Cleanliness is next to godliness: is
a popular Indian saying. Apparently, the gods are not much revered in
India if one goes by the cleanliness.
Westerners are trying to hide certain smells. Indians on the whole let
certain smell to be around.
And I'm sure you take great pride in the notion that Indians "let
certain smells" hang around. You must derive no end of therapeutic
benefit from inhaling those wondrous smells.

"The official odor of India is urine. What else can I say? Wherever you
go, whatever you're doing, you are usually overwhelmed by the acrid and
overpowering stench of urine."
http://www.tarantism.com/mefloquine/12india.html
Post by Romanise
Ae for 'bhangi' the fellow is no more to be found in India anywhere.
A few years ago, Christianne Ammanpour of CNN aired a fairly lengthy
feature on bhangis or "nightsoil carriers" in India. So sorry to
disappoint you, but that practice, like dowry, continues unabated
regardless of the fact that it is now illegal.
Post by Romanise
Today even where open spaces are available to ease oneself people have
latrines connected to Gobar-Gas plant. First such plant I encountered
in Kathlal on a small dairy farm 20 or so kilometers outside Ahmedabad
in 1963.
One thing I have noted about India and Indians is the typically
insufficient response to overwhelming and urgent problems.

By the way, have you seen how a gobar-gas plant works? I have. More
importantly, I have seen how the septic tanks are emptied. Hang around
for one of these eye-opening(and nostril-closing) events, and you will
find your missing bhangis.
Post by Romanise
Would following reduce your prejudice
http://www.sulabhtoiletmuseum.org/pg02.htm
That has nothing to do with my "prejudice". I'm sorry that you find my
focus on cleanliness to be a "prejudice".

-------------------------------------------------
In 1995 an international symposium in Hong Kong discussed the subject of
public toilets, following the recent awakening of awareness of
ecological issues. Dr. Bindeswar Pathak, speaking of his native India,
made an interesting point: "How can the country ignore the subject of
public toilets when the average daily amount of human wastes is 900
million liters of urine and 135 thousand tons of solid excretion? How
can we explain the fact that 600 million out of a total 900 million are
still relieving themselves in the public realm? Sewage systems are
available to only 30% of the urban population, and to only 3% of the
rural population, who must, from lack of choice, rely on nature as their
sewage disposal system."

Ironically, New Delhi boasts a museum of the history of
toilets.
http://www.aiq.co.il/pages/EnglishArticle.asp?id=122

----------------------------------------------------
soft-eng
2004-04-26 18:41:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Madhu Sudhan
If they are selfless, devoted to
God and compassionate, they are brahmanas.
Then, a selfless, devoted and compassionate child of a bhangi is a
brahamana and it is a a sacred privilege for her/his parents (and for
you) to serve and submit to her/him:->
There is something very seriously wrong with your comprehension. I
wrote so many times, so clearly, in the previous thread and you keep
repeating the same questions.
Let me tell you again. Please read this many times till you
understand this.
It does not matter where the child came from. If the child displays
these qualities, then the child is a brahmana. Such a child will never
perform the task of a bhangi. Bhangis do these jobs for monay and not
for selfless service at all. These jobs are unncessary, banned,
unwanted and done only for money. Brahmanas cannot and should not work
for money but may serve. Understood?
I think there are a lot of people going around calling
themselves brahmins, by virtue of birth. Are you
calling them all imposters? Yourselves included, presumably?
[I think it's a fair assumption you work for money,
and therefore should not even accidentally call or imply
yourself a brahmin, correct?]

What is an appropriate ("shastra"-approved) punishment
for such imposters? (Does anyone know the punishment
that brahmins of a few centuries ago desired
for much milder presumptions, e.g. accidental listening
to "holy" words? Molten lead, to be poured
down the ears!)

Or did you have two classifications in mind: those
who are born that way, and those you will condescend to
"grant" the hot fat reward of being called brahmins?
Presumably without involving any molten lead?
Madhu Sudhan
2004-04-26 21:47:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by soft-eng
I think there are a lot of people going around calling
themselves brahmins, by virtue of birth.
This discussion is about definining who a brahmana is.

There are only two possibilities: 1) as per guna and karma as per all
shastras except Manu 2) as per Manu and other smritis: karma and janma
both together. Not just janma ever

There is *no* definition any where just by birth at all. That is a
hoax perpetrated.

Tell me which one are you applying as definition when you say "there
are alot of people" etc etc.

If you definition is from the masses and popular newspapers, dont
bother replying.

I am talking about scriptures, real facts.

Tghere are differences between people whoc all themselves doctors and
are duly qualified. There are quacks too.

Choose which one you are referring to.

I hope you understand.
soft-eng
2004-04-27 14:39:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Tell me which one are you applying as definition when you say "there
are alot of people" etc etc.
What part of the concept "there are a lot of people who claim/think
they are brahmins" did you find hard to understand? What
definitions do you want? "People", "claim", "lot"?
You can find all of these at www.dictionary.com

You appear to want to provide a particular definition
for "brahmin", and that's fine -- but then you need
to be able to say how does your favorite
definition answer the question posed.

Let me explain that again: *you* are being asked
to use *your* favorite definition to answer the question.

(Hopefully it will clarify the ego-battle that's
in your mind, and that's leading you to, unfortunately,
try to vainly defend untruths and evils by using
twisted philosophy. Using words to cover up
actual gound reality is twisted.)
M. Ranjit Mathews
2004-04-27 20:35:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Post by soft-eng
I think there are a lot of people going around calling
themselves brahmins, by virtue of birth.
This discussion is about definining who a brahmana is.
There are only two possibilities: 1) as per guna and karma as per all
shastras except Manu 2) as per Manu and other smritis: karma and janma
both together. Not just janma ever
There is *no* definition any where just by birth at all. That is a
hoax perpetrated.
If it is a hoax, surely there are likely to be Brahmanas in a bhangi
basti. In order to demonstrate that it is a hoax, why don't you tell
us how you would find a Brahmana in a bhangi basti?
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Tell me which one are you applying as definition when you say "there
are alot of people" etc etc.
If you definition is from the masses and popular newspapers, dont
bother replying.
I am talking about scriptures,
If you took a time machine and asked Drona in which scripture may one
find a definition of a brahmana, what reference would he be able to
produce? If none, how did he know who a brahmana was? A scriptural
reference, not an itihasa or shastra, please!
Post by Madhu Sudhan
real facts.
What sense may one make of the story that Janaka became a brahmana?
How did Yajnavalkya become a brahmana?
http://www.nalanda.demon.co.uk/verbal.htm
Star_Gazer
2004-04-28 02:29:39 UTC
Permalink
Although you think that you are answering the question, there appears
to be an impression that you are beating about the bush.

If the son of a bhangiji and the son of a brahmanji are born today how
can the son of the bhangiji grow up to be a brahmin?
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Post by soft-eng
I think there are a lot of people going around calling
themselves brahmins, by virtue of birth.
This discussion is about definining who a brahmana is.
There are only two possibilities: 1) as per guna and karma as per all
shastras except Manu 2) as per Manu and other smritis: karma and janma
both together. Not just janma ever
There is *no* definition any where just by birth at all. That is a
hoax perpetrated.
Tell me which one are you applying as definition when you say "there
are alot of people" etc etc.
If you definition is from the masses and popular newspapers, dont
bother replying.
I am talking about scriptures, real facts.
Tghere are differences between people whoc all themselves doctors and
are duly qualified. There are quacks too.
Choose which one you are referring to.
I hope you understand.
I.S.I walla
2004-05-09 20:47:54 UTC
Permalink
WHO WERE THE ORIGINAL INDIANS AND WHO IS BRAHMIN
HINDU INVADER CRAP....

The Sudras were the makers of the advanced Indus Valley civilisation,
the likes of which Hindu Brahmins have failed to come up with in
thousands of years after their plunder of the Indus valley
civilisation. The Sudras practiced Shaivism, whatever it was, it was
NOT the degrading criminal brahmin invention of Hinduism.See degrading
Hindubullaworship Loading Image... The Sudra
holocaust was one of the most devastating events in world history.
Indigenous sudras were exterminated in all of the Indus and Ganges
valley.The Sudroid (Dravido-Kolarian)Indus Valley civilisation was
completely annihilated.Thousands of Shiva temples were destroyed.For
example,The Jagannath temple in Puri Orissa is built on top of a Shiva
temple, remnants of which can be seen in the lower levels of the
temple compound!

The linguistic evidence for the Indo-European origin of Sanskrit
outside India is overwhelming. And it should be clear that languages
do not migrate by themselves: people migrate.

Whereas all Indo-European peoples possessed three castes, the
Indo-Aryans possess four. The fourth caste thus necessarily represents
the enslaved and subjugated indigenous Sudras. The Latins possessed
the Flavians (priests), Milites (warriors) and Plebins (commoners),
which ocrrespond to the Aryan Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas.

Shaivism is confined to the Dalits and Adivasis, who form 25 % of the
population. There are also very few Shiva temples, and Brahmanism
(Vedism and Vaishnavism) are the predominant religions of North India.
Shaivism, meanwhile, continues to flourish in south India, with Tamil
Nadu as its prime locus.The survival of Brahuis and other Dravidian
isolates in remote regions of the North indicates that they were
pushed aside by invading Aryans. Northern drift of the Brahuis into
already existing Aryan populatin is refuted by the Brahuis' habitation
of isolated mountains - a feature which can only be explained by their
being driven from the plains.
________________________________________________________________________________

PROOF THAT HINDUISM WAS CREATED TO PROMOTE OPPRESSION
LOCAL INDIANS BY BRAHMIN INVADERS......

NOTE THAT ANYONE PROMOTING SUCH MATERIAL IN CIVILISED
COUNTRIES WILL BE TRIED FOR RASCISM.....YET THIS VERY
VERSES ARE STANDARD HOLY HINDU LITERATURE......

"If the Sudra recites (Vedic texts), his tongue shall be cut out"
[Gautama Dharamsutra 12.5]

"If he remembers them, his body shall be split in twain"
[Gautama Dharamsutra 12.6]

"If a Sudra arrogantly teaches Brahmins their duty, the king shall
cause hot oil to be poured into his mouth and into his ears."
[Manu Smrti VIII.272]

" A once-born man (a Sudra), who insults a twice-born man with gross
invective, shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin. "
[Manu Smrti VIII.270]

"Now if the Sudra listens intentionally ( to a recitation of) the
Veda, his ears shall be filled with (molten) tin or lac.
[Gautama Dharamsutra 12.4]

If a Sudra has criminal intercourse with an Aryan woman, his organ
shall be cut off and his property confiscated.
[Gautama Dharamsutra 12.2]

" If he mentions the names and castes (Jati) of the (twice-born) with
contumely, an iron nail, 10 fingers long, shall be thrust red-hot into
his mouth ."
[Manu VIII.271]

" If a low-caste man who tries to place himself on the same seat with
a man of a high caste, shall be branded on his hip and is banished, or
(the king) shall cause his buttock to be gashed."
[ Manu VIII.281 ]

" Having killed a cat, an ichneumon, a blue jay, a frog, a dog, an
iguana, an owl, or a crow, he shall perform the penance for the murder
of a Sudra."
[Manu Smrti XI.132]
_______________________________________________________________________________

PROOF THAT BRAHMIN HINDOOS PRACTICED WHAT THEY PREACHED

" The Vaisya and the Sudra are not allowed to hear it [ the Veda ],
much less to pronounce and recite it. If such a thing can be proved
against one of them, the Brahmans drag him before the magistrate, and
he is punished by having his tongue cut off. "
`Al-Beruni's India,' transl. E.C.Sachau, Vol.I, Ch.XII, p.125 ]

The traveller John Fryer, who visited India in the 1670s and hence an
eye-witness to Brahminist oppression, described the dehumanising
effects of Brahmin rule in Maharashtra : " The cruel exactions of
Mahratta rule were patent on all sides. The great fish preyed upon the
little ones, until the poorer classes wer brought into eternal
bondage. The Brahman officials tortured the revenue farmer and the
farmers tortured the cultivators." [ Wheeler and Macmillan, p.62 ].
This was during the tyrannical rule of the Peshwa Brahmins and
confirms the cumulative effects of their oppression of Marathas and
Dalits.
_______________________________________________________________________________

PROOF THAT BRAHMINS STILL CONTINUE THEIR RULE AS HOLY
HOODLUMS.........

About three million Dalit women have been raped and around one million
Dalits killed from the time of Independence. This is 25 times more
than number of soldiers killed during the wars fought after
independence!

" More than 60 per cent of Dalits are landless. Over 40 million of
them are bonded labourers. Dalits are the worst victims of labour
coercion." !

"The 1991 Government survey of India states that on an average day,
two Dalits are killed, three Dalit women are raped, two Dalits' houses
are burned and fifty Dalits are assaulted by people of a higher
caste."

" [H]igh-caste Brahmins formed a private army, the Ranvir Sena, to
stop communists from encouraging Dalit field workers to demand higher
wages "

SOME BRAHMIN SCIENCE AT WORK........

After having `proven' to their own satisfaction that there was never
any Aryan Invasion, and consequently no Sudra Holocaust, Negationists
and believers in the Vedic Sindhu Theory have now moved on to make
further astounding discoveries. Wherever they go, the `indigenists'
are turning established history and science on its head. The latest in
this trail of new discoveries is that Newton did not discover gravity.
The credit belongs to - who else ? - two Brahmin researchers Arya
Bhatt (Bhatt is a common Brahmin title even today) and Bhaskar Acharya
(Acharya is a universal Brahmin title).

`Nuclear Growth in Vedas', at a function of the Rajasthani Graduates
Association, Sharma sneered at the Big Bang theory. `Contrary to the
belief that the Universe was formed after the great explosion, space
and planets came from the Brahman,'

I.S.I Walla: What dead end? When Mr. sharma hasnt yet discovered
anything.
_______________________________________________________________________________

AMBEDKAR ON THE ARYAN INVASION........

"To proceed with subject. According to well known ethnologists, the
population of India is a mixture of Aryans, Dravidians, Mongolians and
Scythians. All these stocks of people came into India from various
directions and with various cultures centuries ago, when they were in
a tribal state. They all in turn elbowed their entry into the country
by fighting with their predecessors, and after a stomachful of it
settled down as peaceful neighbors."
[`Writings and Speeches,' Education Department, Government of
Maharashtra, 1979 Vol. 1; Hardbound pp 496.]
________________________________________________________________________________
(All of the above material so far is condensed from
http://www.dalitstan.org
________________________________________________________________________________
I.S.I walla
2004-05-16 03:21:03 UTC
Permalink
________________________________________________________________________________

PROOF THAT HINDUISM WAS CREATED TO PROMOTE OPPRESSION
LOCAL INDIANS BY BRAHMIN INVADERS......

NOTE THAT ANYONE PROMOTING SUCH MATERIAL IN CIVILISED
COUNTRIES WILL BE TRIED FOR RASCISM.....YET THIS VERY
VERSES ARE STANDARD HOLY HINDU LITERATURE......

"If the Sudra recites (Vedic texts), his tongue shall be cut out"
[Gautama Dharamsutra 12.5]

"If he remembers them, his body shall be split in twain"
[Gautama Dharamsutra 12.6]

"If a Sudra arrogantly teaches Brahmins their duty, the king shall
cause hot oil to be poured into his mouth and into his ears."
[Manu Smrti VIII.272]

" A once-born man (a Sudra), who insults a twice-born man with gross
invective, shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin. "
[Manu Smrti VIII.270]

"Now if the Sudra listens intentionally ( to a recitation of) the
Veda, his ears shall be filled with (molten) tin or lac.
[Gautama Dharamsutra 12.4]

If a Sudra has criminal intercourse with an Aryan woman, his organ
shall be cut off and his property confiscated.
[Gautama Dharamsutra 12.2]

" If he mentions the names and castes (Jati) of the (twice-born) with
contumely, an iron nail, 10 fingers long, shall be thrust red-hot into
his mouth ."
[Manu VIII.271]

" If a low-caste man who tries to place himself on the same seat with
a man of a high caste, shall be branded on his hip and is banished, or
(the king) shall cause his buttock to be gashed."
[ Manu VIII.281 ]

" Having killed a cat, an ichneumon, a blue jay, a frog, a dog, an
iguana, an owl, or a crow, he shall perform the penance for the murder
of a Sudra."
[Manu Smrti XI.132]
_______________________________________________________________________________

PROOF THAT BRAHMIN HINDOOS PRACTICED WHAT THEY PREACHED

" The Vaisya and the Sudra are not allowed to hear it [ the Veda ],
much less to pronounce and recite it. If such a thing can be proved
against one of them, the Brahmans drag him before the magistrate, and
he is punished by having his tongue cut off. "
`Al-Beruni's India,' transl. E.C.Sachau, Vol.I, Ch.XII, p.125 ]

The traveller John Fryer, who visited India in the 1670s and hence an
eye-witness to Brahminist oppression, described the dehumanising
effects of Brahmin rule in Maharashtra : " The cruel exactions of
Mahratta rule were patent on all sides. The great fish preyed upon the
little ones, until the poorer classes wer brought into eternal
bondage. The Brahman officials tortured the revenue farmer and the
farmers tortured the cultivators." [ Wheeler and Macmillan, p.62 ].
This was during the tyrannical rule of the Peshwa Brahmins and
confirms the cumulative effects of their oppression of Marathas and
Dalits.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Madhu Sudhan
2004-05-16 13:12:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by I.S.I walla
________________________________________________________________________________
PROOF THAT HINDUISM WAS CREATED TO PROMOTE OPPRESSION
LOCAL INDIANS BY BRAHMIN INVADERS......
NOTE THAT ANYONE PROMOTING SUCH MATERIAL IN CIVILISED
COUNTRIES WILL BE TRIED FOR RASCISM.....YET THIS VERY
VERSES ARE STANDARD HOLY HINDU LITERATURE......
"If the Sudra recites (Vedic texts), his tongue shall be cut out"
[Gautama Dharamsutra 12.5]
In all your studies of shastras, please help us understand what the
definition of sudra, kshatriya, vaisya, brahmana is.

That will help us understand what you mean by all this. I think the
shastras must have defined who the varnas are, would you not agree

Please tell us what your understanding is so we can discuss properly
instead of wasting time abusing people

For example who is a sudra, brahmana etc?
M. Ranjit Mathews
2004-04-25 18:05:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Modern day brahmana would be Gandhi or any true Gandhian for example.
...
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Please note that I defined who a brahmana is. He cannot do dirty tasks, etc.
On the one hand, you say that Gandhi, who clearly COULD perform dirty
tasks like cleaning latrines, was he a brahmana and on the other hand,
you say that a brahmana is one who CANNOT to perform dirty tasks? You
seem to have tied yourself up in contradictary knots. Need any help
getting untied?
Madhu Sudhan
2004-04-25 21:52:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Modern day brahmana would be Gandhi or any true Gandhian for example.
...
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Please note that I defined who a brahmana is. He cannot do dirty tasks, etc.
On the one hand, you say that Gandhi, who clearly COULD perform dirty
tasks like cleaning latrines, was he a brahmana and on the other hand,
you say that a brahmana is one who CANNOT to perform dirty tasks? You
seem to have tied yourself up in contradictary knots. Need any help
getting untied?
Now again. Please read the previous answer. Are you asking for
clarifications or for wasting time? You should know the history of
Gandhiji.

Did you undertstand that a brahmana, as per shastra, cannot perform a
task for money?

He never ever did anything for money. Dont you know that much about
him and India?

You wanted adefiniton for a brahmana and I gave one.

Now you seem to be running from thread to thread and pretend I did
not answer.

How come you know nothing? Nothing about kural, never even heard of
Dr. Radhakrishnan's works even and cannot even understand any thing
even when explained?

Are you trying to waste time?
M. Ranjit Mathews
2004-04-26 11:14:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Modern day brahmana would be Gandhi or any true Gandhian for example.
...
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Please note that I defined who a brahmana is.
He cannot do dirty tasks, etc.
On the one hand, you say that Gandhi, who clearly COULD perform dirty
tasks like cleaning latrines, was a brahmana and on the other hand,
you say that a brahmana CANNOT to perform dirty tasks. You
seem to have tied yourself up in contradictary knots.
You should know the history of Gandhiji.
Did you undertstand that a brahmana, as per shastra, cannot
perform a task for money? He never ever did anything for money.
Dont you know that much about him and India?
The point (of yours) that I addressed here is whether a brahmana CAN
perform dirty tasks, not whether a brahmana can perform tasks for
money. So, money is irrelevant to the point I addressed; these are the
assertions of yours that I did address:

1) A brahmana CANNOT perform dirty tasks.
2) Gandhiji was a brahmana.

Gandhiji COULD perform dirty tasks, so your assertion #2 contradicts
your assertion #1.
Madhu Sudhan
2004-04-29 00:27:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
1) A brahmana CANNOT perform dirty tasks.
2) Gandhiji was a brahmana.
Gandhiji COULD perform dirty tasks, so your assertion #2 contradicts
your assertion #1.
Please see anwers to these questions in the next reply to questions
posted by you in the same thread
M. Ranjit Mathews
2004-04-26 19:08:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Modern day brahmana would be Gandhi or any true Gandhian for example.
...
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Please note that I defined who a brahmana is. He cannot do dirty tasks, etc.
On the one hand, you say that Gandhi, who clearly COULD perform dirty
tasks like cleaning latrines, was a brahmana and on the other hand,
you say that a brahmana is one who CANNOT to perform dirty tasks? You
seem to have tied yourself up in contradictary knots. Need any help
getting untied?
Now again. Please read the previous answer. Are you asking for
clarifications or for wasting time? You should know the history of
Gandhiji. Did you undertstand that a brahmana, as per shastra,
cannot perform a task for money? He never ever did anything for
money. Dont you know that much about him and India?
You wanted a definiton for a brahmana and I gave one.
If it's because a bhangi works for money that she/he can't be a
brahmana, you'd have said so rather than that it's because such dirty
work is degrading that a bhangi can't be a brahmana. See the thread
below.

Now, we're on to the search for your 3rd definition of a brahmana. If
a devoted, selfless and compassionate bhangi wins enough in a lottery
to gain the economic freedom to decide to continue to do bhangi work
for free, is she then a brahmana and if so, how would you serve her
and submit to her?

---- thread -----
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
If you are asking how it is possible to know who a brahmana is,
I answered already. One devoted to the Supreme, selfless and is
compassionate.
Consider a bhangi whom you employ to clean your latrines. After how long
would you (ordinarily) get to know whether she's a brahmana?
Madhu's 2nd definition (caveat added to 1st definition):
She is not a brahnmana. Simple. This kind of "work" is not necessary
for society and is done to earn a wage. This dirty "work" is
degrading. A brahmana cannot do unclean, unnecessary, harmful "work"
such as this to "earn a livelihood".
Madhu Sudhan
2004-04-29 00:52:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
If it's because a bhangi works for money that she/he can't be a
brahmana, you'd have said so rather than that it's because such dirty
work is degrading that a bhangi can't be a brahmana. See the thread
below.
Now, we're on to the search for your 3rd definition of a brahmana. If
a devoted, selfless and compassionate bhangi wins enough in a lottery
to gain the economic freedom to decide to continue to do bhangi work
for free, is she then a brahmana and if so, how would you serve her
and submit to her?
I am baffled. I am beginning to suspect you did not even read
carefully what I wrote so far, so many times..

I said a brahmana has to be selfless, compassionate and fully devoted
to God.

Now, a bhangi does unclean, unnecessary tasks for money. His kids are
comdemned by him in the same task all for money. You should realise
that this work is unnecessary. I am going to leave it at that for now.
Please ask a bhangi who knows what they did with the collections of
excreta in villages. I dont want to say it. They ate carcasses too.

Such tasks and life cannot be lived by a brahmana devoted to God. He
cannot do any thing for money.

However if a child born in such a family is removed from there and
raised in a satvic environment with samskaras, he/she will be a
brahmana. If satvic qualities are found, they will be worshipped,
whoever they may be. That is why Nandanaar, Thiruppannazhvar etc were
w/are worshipped.

But the parents of bhangis will not allow the kids to be separated.
It seems cruel to separate the kids from parents. The parents should
therefore change if the kids have any chance. Even if a bhangi wins
lottery and does this task, he is still unclean and doing unnecessary
things.

Gandhiji did do some toilet cleaning etc. Not for money. Dirt is not
in the work (physical aspect) itself. Even parents clean up their kids
after excretion but this is necessary. Dirty is in doing for selfish
reasons and doing unnecessary things as well. It is in the attitude.
Bhangis prevented people from doing this themselves and also prevented
earlier development of sewage system by supplying such cheap labour.
Even now in cities people dont adopt modern sewage systems( because of
capital costs in installation) because manual cleaning is available.

Do you know the governments banned manual toilet cleaning in India
and bhangis still do it? Do you know why? They want to make cheap
money.

Regarding Drona, the vedhas such as brihadaaranyaka upani have
mentioned the varnas. Also vajrasucika etc etc. Varna is not just in
Gita or ithihasa.
Yajnavalkya was a brahmana beacuse he was satvic. So was satyakama
jabala. Gautama said he was a brahmana even though satyakama did not
know his father. It is satvic character and conduct that matters.
Vyasa's mother was a fisherwoman.
Hope this answers all your questions.
Great Parayan
2004-04-30 08:51:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Modern day brahmana would be Gandhi or any true Gandhian for example.
...
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Please note that I defined who a brahmana is. He cannot do dirty tasks, etc.
On the one hand, you say that Gandhi, who clearly COULD perform dirty
tasks like cleaning latrines, was he a brahmana and on the other hand,
you say that a brahmana is one who CANNOT to perform dirty tasks? You
seem to have tied yourself up in contradictary knots. Need any help
getting untied?
Now again. Please read the previous answer. Are you asking for
clarifications or for wasting time? You should know the history of
Gandhiji.
Please read you own previous answers. Let me remind you that your definitions(s)
does not eschew feamales from being brahmins. You imply females can be brahmins.

Otherwise as discussion progress, you may need to post several times as shown below.

"There is something very seriously wrong with your comprehension. I
wrote so many times, so clearly, in the previous thread and you keep
repeating the same questions.

Let me tell you again. Please read this many times till you
understand this.
">
<snipped>
Great Parayan
2004-04-28 11:14:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Madhu Sudan is still at a loss as to explain the procedure by which
one would find a Brahmin in a Bhangi basti.
Wrong again. You left the thread "Christians destroyed Hindu temples"
and your friend Shri Parayan started this and other thread. Instead of
following that as well, you seem to side swipe me in this thread! I am
not at a loss!
In this thread I am searching for any hindus who can offer details
of a brahmin as per hindu-definition. I have asked this question
several times
in the thread "Christians destroyed Hindu temples".

Please read first two posts of this thread for knwing why
I started this thread.


But no hindu/brahmin braved to pollute himself/herself answering me.

My parants have not amassed ill-gotten money by employing slaves,
they worked 'for a living' and so unfit for gods' blessing (as per
hindus' invention)
so I am not getting enough time to answer all posts of
stinking-hindus.
Madhu Sudhan
2004-04-29 10:08:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Great Parayan
they worked 'for a living' and so unfit for gods' blessing (as per
hindus' invention)
so I am not getting enough time to answer all posts of
stinking-hindus.
I thought you went away to pray to Lord Vishnu. Now you are back. You
claim I did not answer?

I answered so many times. Please dont say I did not answer.

Please see above and also in the other thread " christians destroyed
temples"

If there is any thing you can disprove please do so.

Real Hindus cannot treat any one badly because of birth etc. Vyasa
was son of a fisherwoman. He is the greatest Hindu that ever lived.
Adhi Sankara fell at the feet of a so called chandala, his wife and
his four dogs(!)- see Manisha panchakam
Star_Gazer
2004-04-29 14:59:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Post by Great Parayan
they worked 'for a living' and so unfit for gods' blessing (as per
hindus' invention)
so I am not getting enough time to answer all posts of
stinking-hindus.
I thought you went away to pray to Lord Vishnu. Now you are back. You
claim I did not answer?
I answered so many times. Please dont say I did not answer.
Please see above and also in the other thread " christians destroyed
temples"
Why would a mother destroy her children?
Please see http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/2104/hinduism.html
Hinduism is the child of Indian christianity.
Post by Madhu Sudhan
If there is any thing you can disprove please do so.
Real Hindus cannot treat any one badly because of birth etc. Vyasa
was son of a fisherwoman. He is the greatest Hindu that ever lived.
Adhi Sankara fell at the feet of a so called chandala, his wife and
his four dogs(!)- see Manisha panchakam
If there can be Sharmajis, Iyerjis and Sardarjis why can't you bring
yourself to address this guy as Parayanji?

:)
M. Ranjit Mathews
2004-04-29 20:54:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Star_Gazer
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Post by Great Parayan
My parants have not amassed ill-gotten money by employing slaves,
they worked 'for a living' and so unfit for gods' blessing (as per
hindus' invention) so I am not getting enough time to answer all
posts of stinking-hindus.
I thought you went away to pray to Lord Vishnu. Now you are back. You
claim I did not answer?
I answered so many times. Please dont say I did not answer.
Please see above and also in the other thread " christians destroyed
temples"
Why would a mother destroy her children?
Please see http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/2104/hinduism.html
It says, "Before Christ, only two religion existed in India, and they
were Buddhism and Jainism." Then, what religion did Buddha's and
Mahavira's parents have?
Post by Star_Gazer
Hinduism is the child of Indian christianity.
Excellent! In that case, vigrahams of Maria Chedatti and Yeshu Chetan
can be installed in Hindu temples and the Pope and Billy Graham can
advise Christians to freely worship in these temples.
Post by Star_Gazer
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Real Hindus cannot treat any one badly because of birth etc. Vyasa
was son of a fisherwoman. He is the greatest Hindu that ever lived.
Adhi Sankara fell at the feet of a so called chandala, his wife and
his four dogs(!)- see Manisha panchakam
If there can be Sharmajis, Iyerjis and Sardarjis why can't you bring
yourself to address this guy as Parayanji?
... or why not fall at the feet of a so-called bhangi, his wife and
his four pigs?
Madhu Sudhan
2004-04-30 02:03:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
... or why not fall at the feet of a so-called bhangi, his wife and
his four pigs?
Hey! You know some thing man! I did not know you knew about pigs and
who owned them etc. Do you know what they did with them too? I did not
ever want to say it. But will see if you know. If you dont want to say
I will understand
Star_Gazer
2004-04-30 12:36:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Post by Great Parayan
My parants have not amassed ill-gotten money by employing slaves,
they worked 'for a living' and so unfit for gods' blessing (as per
hindus' invention) so I am not getting enough time to answer all
posts of stinking-hindus.
I thought you went away to pray to Lord Vishnu. Now you are back. You
claim I did not answer?
I answered so many times. Please dont say I did not answer.
Please see above and also in the other thread " christians destroyed
temples"
Why would a mother destroy her children?
Please see http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/2104/hinduism.html
It says, "Before Christ, only two religion existed in India, and they
were Buddhism and Jainism." Then, what religion did Buddha's and
Mahavira's parents have?
Definitely not Hinduism. Why does it have to have a name and be neatly
classified. e.g., ancestor worship in Tamil and Japan sound like its
the same but is it?
The old way of life (that of Mahavira and Buddha parents) might have
been replaced by something new. What were are left with is Adi
Shankaracharya's and
Ramanuja'a legacy. That's the official line. The reality is that there
is no system.
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
Hinduism is the child of Indian christianity.
Excellent! In that case, vigrahams of Maria Chedatti and Yeshu Chetan
can be installed in Hindu temples and the Pope and Billy Graham can
advise Christians to freely worship in these temples.
The Catholic Church did make local dieties into saints and people do
worship those saints. Sabarimala devotees pay obesience to a muslim
friend of
Ayyappan. There's the Nagore andavar, and the latest Captain Baba.
The Indian landscape is replete with temples to men and women who have
become gods. Yeshu is quite deserving of a temple. Regarding Maria (
I hope you mean mother of Christ), even all the christians do not
accept her divinity. Yet lots of Hindus to pray to her as Our Lady of
Health at Vellankanni. I did see a show on TV where a priest was doing
an aarthi for the "idol" of St. Mary inside the church.
It's been done.
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Real Hindus cannot treat any one badly because of birth etc. Vyasa
was son of a fisherwoman. He is the greatest Hindu that ever lived.
Adhi Sankara fell at the feet of a so called chandala, his wife and
his four dogs(!)- see Manisha panchakam
If there can be Sharmajis, Iyerjis and Sardarjis why can't you bring
yourself to address this guy as Parayanji?
... or why not fall at the feet of a so-called bhangi, his wife and
his four pigs?
With reference to Adi Shankaracharya and adding re-birth of souls to
the mix:
Bhangiji has a soul, his wifeji has a soul and his four pigjees have
souls. In fact Maha Vishnu was once a pigji. Considering all this, the
scriptures should have nothing against this. Lets line up and
prostrate ourselves.
Madhu Sudhan
2004-05-01 11:15:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Star_Gazer
Definitely not Hinduism. Why does it have to have a name and be neatly
classified. e.g., ancestor worship in Tamil and Japan sound like its
the same but is it?
The old way of life (that of Mahavira and Buddha parents) might have
been replaced by something new. What were are left with is Adi
Shankaracharya's and
Ramanuja'a legacy. That's the official line. The reality is that there
is no system.
Post by Star_Gazer
Hinduism is the child of Indian christianity.
Nonsense. This is rubbish typical of christian myths.

Buddha talked of vedas abd debated brahmanas many times.

See suttas: http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/dob/index.htm

There is alot of astronomical data as weel to date rig veda. Even
European Indologista agree it is at leats 1500 years old.

This missionary nonsense is typical of christian crooks. Typical of
people who celebrate the killing of a man and make it the centre of
their cult

If you know any Tamil as these Tamil converts boast of, converts
should know Valluvar spoke of Hinduism, Vishnu, Lakshmi etc.

Thirumular is an ancient text.

Some saivite texts are at least 1700 yrd old, Arunagiri's
Thiruppugazh. Kamba Ramayanam is 1000 yrs old

Practice your brainless heartless cult but dont tell us lies
Star_Gazer
2004-05-02 04:17:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Post by Star_Gazer
Definitely not Hinduism. Why does it have to have a name and be neatly
classified. e.g., ancestor worship in Tamil and Japan sound like its
the same but is it?
The old way of life (that of Mahavira and Buddha parents) might have
been replaced by something new. What were are left with is Adi
Shankaracharya's and
Ramanuja'a legacy. That's the official line. The reality is that there
is no system.
Post by Star_Gazer
Hinduism is the child of Indian christianity.
Nonsense. This is rubbish typical of christian myths.
Is that all you've got?
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Buddha talked of vedas abd debated brahmanas many times.
See suttas: http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/dob/index.htm
There is alot of astronomical data as weel to date rig veda. Even
European Indologista agree it is at leats 1500 years old.
What are you saying? It's older than that.
Post by Madhu Sudhan
This missionary nonsense is typical of christian crooks. Typical of
people who celebrate the killing of a man and make it the centre of
their cult
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha. (note there is no exclamation)
Post by Madhu Sudhan
If you know any Tamil as these Tamil converts boast of, converts
should know Valluvar spoke of Hinduism, Vishnu, Lakshmi etc.
Valluvar is generally considered Jain.
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Thirumular is an ancient text.
I have not heard of this text please educate me.
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Some saivite texts are at least 1700 yrd old, Arunagiri's
Thiruppugazh. Kamba Ramayanam is 1000 yrs old
More Saivaite texts are older than that.
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Practice your brainless heartless cult but dont tell us lies
Would you care to elaborate.
Madhu Sudhan
2004-05-05 21:59:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Star_Gazer
What are you saying? It's older than that.
Sorry. I meant 1500 BC

\> Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha. (note there is no exclamation)
Post by Star_Gazer
Post by Madhu Sudhan
If you know any Tamil as these Tamil converts boast of, converts
should know Valluvar spoke of Hinduism, Vishnu, Lakshmi etc.
Valluvar is generally considered Jain.
Ha! Ha! Ha! There is exclamation! Valluvar speaks of Vishnu etc and
was a Jain. This lie was told by DMK to dehinduise Kural. You buy
that? If you study Kural carefully , you will know it has to be Hindu!
The only problem is crooks wont tell you the meanings. Read Pope's
translation if you want! Or you have to use your own brain.
Post by Star_Gazer
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Thirumular is an ancient text.
I have not heard of this text please educate me.
Would you care to elaborate.
Thirumandiram is the oldest Saivite text! This was when Tamil had 57
letters like sanskrit! Hence before Tholkappiyanar!

For your info Tholkappiyam talks of vedha, taitthriya( a part of
vedha), talavakara( part of vedha etc).

You lose man. Admit it.
Star_Gazer
2004-05-06 02:23:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Post by Star_Gazer
What are you saying? It's older than that.
Sorry. I meant 1500 BC
\> Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha. (note there is no exclamation)
Post by Star_Gazer
Post by Madhu Sudhan
If you know any Tamil as these Tamil converts boast of, converts
should know Valluvar spoke of Hinduism, Vishnu, Lakshmi etc.
Valluvar is generally considered Jain.
Ha! Ha! Ha! There is exclamation! Valluvar speaks of Vishnu etc and
was a Jain. This lie was told by DMK to dehinduise Kural. You buy
that? If you study Kural carefully , you will know it has to be Hindu!
Can you give any reference as to the DMK being the ones who
"dehinduised" Thirukkural?
Post by Madhu Sudhan
The only problem is crooks wont tell you the meanings. Read Pope's
translation if you want! Or you have to use your own brain.
Post by Star_Gazer
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Thirumular is an ancient text.
I have not heard of this text please educate me.
Would you care to elaborate.
Thirumandiram is the oldest Saivite text! This was when Tamil had 57
letters like sanskrit! Hence before Tholkappiyanar!
You mentioned that Thirumular is an ancient text.
where can I find it?
Or is this another mistake of yours?
Did you actually mean Thirumandiram?
Post by Madhu Sudhan
For your info Tholkappiyam talks of vedha, taitthriya( a part of
vedha), talavakara( part of vedha etc).
You lose man. Admit it.
You aren't playing with a full deck, are you?
M. Ranjit Mathews
2004-05-01 20:08:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Star_Gazer
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
Why would a mother destroy her children?
Please see http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/2104/hinduism.html
It says, "Before Christ, only two religion existed in India, and they
were Buddhism and Jainism." Then, what religion did Buddha's and
Mahavira's parents have?
Definitely not Hinduism.
How is it definite?
Post by Star_Gazer
Why does it have to have a name and be neatly classified.
Hinduism is not neatly classified; it's a general term meaning
"religion of India" just like the "Made in China" sign on wares you
see in stores these days is a general term meaning it was made
somewhere in China.
Post by Star_Gazer
e.g., ancestor worship in Tamil and Japan sound like its
the same but is it?
The old way of life (that Mahavira and Buddha parents) might have
been replaced by something new.
The term for the something "new" is Sramana ...
http://www.mergingcurrents.com/book.php?BookSKU=1282
Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira: Life and Doctrine

... but it wasn't radically new; Sramana schools of Hindu philosophy
had a presence for centuries:
http://www.wisdomworld.org/additional/AncientAndModernPhilosophy/Transition-Part2.html
The Sramanas and their schools dominated Indian Philosophy for
centuries. Of the five major sramana schools, only two have endured to
the present day. The Buddha may be considered the most significant of
all Sramanas.
Post by Star_Gazer
What were are left with is Adi Shankaracharya's and Ramanuja'a legacy.
That's the line. The reality is that there is no system.
If there's no system, that's ample reason to use a general term like
Hinduism rather than more specialized terms, wouldn't you say?
Post by Star_Gazer
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
Hinduism is the child of Indian christianity.
Excellent! In that case, vigrahams of Maria Chedatti and Yeshu Chetan
can be installed in Hindu temples and the Pope and Billy Graham can
advise Christians to freely worship in these temples.
The Catholic Church did make local dieties into saints and people do
worship those saints.
... but the Pope didn't worship Balaji in Tirupati or Ayyappa in
Sabarimalai. If Hinduism is the child of Indian Christianity, why
doesn't he worship in a temple of the child of Christianity?:->
Post by Star_Gazer
Sabarimala devotees pay obesience to a muslim friend of Ayyappan.
... and how many of these devotees are Christians?
Post by Star_Gazer
There's the Nagore andavar, and the latest Captain Baba.
The Indian landscape is replete with temples to men and women who have
become gods. Yeshu is quite deserving of a temple.
... or at least deserving of a vigraham in a temple. Rumor has it that
some Hindus were kind enough to offer to make such a vigraham but the
Portugese rudely declined and demolished the temple to build a church
solely for Yeshu. Pompous insufferable brats, wouldn't you say?
Post by Star_Gazer
Regarding Maria (
I hope you mean mother of Christ), even all the christians do not
accept her divinity. Yet lots of Hindus to pray to her as Our Lady of
Health at Vellankanni.
Ah, then Indian Christianity must be a child of Hinduism:-)
Post by Star_Gazer
I did see a show on TV where a priest was doing
an aarthi for the "idol" of St. Mary inside the church.
It's been done.
If Hinduism is the child of Indian Christianity, is there a temple
with a Maria vigraham to which Christian pilgrims pay their respects?
That's not been done, has it?
Post by Star_Gazer
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Real Hindus cannot treat any one badly because of birth etc. Vyasa
was son of a fisherwoman. He is the greatest Hindu that ever lived.
Adhi Sankara fell at the feet of a so called chandala, his wife and
his four dogs(!)- see Manisha panchakam
If there can be Sharmajis, Iyerjis and Sardarjis why can't you bring
yourself to address this guy as Parayanji?
... or why not fall at the feet of a so-called bhangi, his wife and
his four pigs?
With reference to Adi Shankaracharya and adding re-birth of souls to
Bhangiji has a soul, his wifeji has a soul and his four pigjees have
souls. In fact Maha Vishnu was once a pigji. Considering all this, the
scriptures should have nothing against this. Lets line up and
prostrate ourselves.
Varaaha bhangi tere naam!
Star_Gazer
2004-05-02 03:59:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
Why would a mother destroy her children?
Please see http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/2104/hinduism.html
It says, "Before Christ, only two religion existed in India, and they
were Buddhism and Jainism." Then, what religion did Buddha's and
Mahavira's parents have?
Definitely not Hinduism.
How is it definite?
During this period of time great changes were taking place. The old
order was changing. The old gods were dying. New trends and ideas like
karma and transmigration of souls was gaining ground. From which arise
the mainstream religions that we see today.
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
Why does it have to have a name and be neatly classified.
Hinduism is not neatly classified; it's a general term meaning
"religion of India" just like the "Made in China" sign on wares you
see in stores these days is a general term meaning it was made
somewhere in China.
You are right in the sense that the current beliefs appears similar.
Consider the Vedic gods, I would very easliy relate them to the Norse
or Greek gods rather than anything I see around me. Perhaps you could
say Hinduism I , II and III. Clubbing Mitraism, Zoaratrainism and
Christianity under one name ( no I don't want to start a thread on
this!) would make me feel the same.
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
e.g., ancestor worship in Tamil and Japan sound like its
the same but is it?
The old way of life (that Mahavira and Buddha parents) might have
been replaced by something new.
The term for the something "new" is Sramana ...
http://www.mergingcurrents.com/book.php?BookSKU=1282
Sramana Bhagavan Mahavira: Life and Doctrine
... but it wasn't radically new; Sramana schools of Hindu philosophy
http://www.wisdomworld.org/additional/AncientAndModernPhilosophy/Transition-Part2.html
The Sramanas and their schools dominated Indian Philosophy for
centuries. Of the five major sramana schools, only two have endured to
the present day. The Buddha may be considered the most significant of
all Sramanas.
Thank you.
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
What were are left with is Adi Shankaracharya's and Ramanuja'a legacy.
That's the line. The reality is that there is no system.
If there's no system, that's ample reason to use a general term like
Hinduism rather than more specialized terms, wouldn't you say?
Chritianity from derived Judaism is not named Judaism.
In quite similar form old beliefs and faith in the subcontinent should
not have the same as the latest form. Esoecially if there are a
significant number of differences.
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
Hinduism is the child of Indian christianity.
Excellent! In that case, vigrahams of Maria Chedatti and Yeshu Chetan
can be installed in Hindu temples and the Pope and Billy Graham can
advise Christians to freely worship in these temples.
The Catholic Church did make local dieties into saints and people do
worship those saints.
... but the Pope didn't worship Balaji in Tirupati or Ayyappa in
Sabarimalai. If Hinduism is the child of Indian Christianity, why
doesn't he worship in a temple of the child of Christianity?:->
Beats me. Perhaps because he is a Catholic. :)
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
Sabarimala devotees pay obesience to a muslim friend of Ayyappan.
... and how many of these devotees are Christians?
K.J. Jesudas for one and a Catholic to boot.
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
There's the Nagore andavar, and the latest Captain Baba.
The Indian landscape is replete with temples to men and women who have
become gods. Yeshu is quite deserving of a temple.
... or at least deserving of a vigraham in a temple. Rumor has it that
some Hindus were kind enough to offer to make such a vigraham but the
Portugese rudely declined and demolished the temple to build a church
solely for Yeshu. Pompous insufferable brats, wouldn't you say?
They also say that the vision was of maari and not of Maria.
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
Regarding Maria (
I hope you mean mother of Christ), even all the christians do not
accept her divinity. Yet lots of Hindus to pray to her as Our Lady of
Health at Vellankanni.
Ah, then Indian Christianity must be a child of Hinduism:-)
Thats Catholic. Not Indian Christian.
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
I did see a show on TV where a priest was doing
an aarthi for the "idol" of St. Mary inside the church.
It's been done.
If Hinduism is the child of Indian Christianity, is there a temple
with a Maria vigraham to which Christian pilgrims pay their respects?
That's not been done, has it?
Indian Christianity is of the eastern variety where St. Mary does not
have much of a significance.
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Star_Gazer
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Real Hindus cannot treat any one badly because of birth etc. Vyasa
was son of a fisherwoman. He is the greatest Hindu that ever lived.
Adhi Sankara fell at the feet of a so called chandala, his wife and
his four dogs(!)- see Manisha panchakam
If there can be Sharmajis, Iyerjis and Sardarjis why can't you bring
yourself to address this guy as Parayanji?
... or why not fall at the feet of a so-called bhangi, his wife and
his four pigs?
With reference to Adi Shankaracharya and adding re-birth of souls to
Bhangiji has a soul, his wifeji has a soul and his four pigjees have
souls. In fact Maha Vishnu was once a pigji. Considering all this, the
scriptures should have nothing against this. Lets line up and
prostrate ourselves.
Varaaha bhangi tere naam!
Did say pranaam? :)
Great Parayan
2004-04-30 08:36:23 UTC
Permalink
---Restoring the portions ***@yahoo.com (Madhu Sudhan) cut
away deliberately
---to mislead google readers. (See the post to which madu-sudan
replied to)

-----start
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Madhu Sudan is still at a loss as to explain the procedure by which
one would find a Brahmin in a Bhangi basti.
Wrong again. You left the thread "Christians destroyed Hindu temples"
and your friend Shri Parayan started this and other thread. Instead of
following that as well, you seem to side swipe me in this thread! I am
not at a loss!
In this thread I am searching for any hindus who can offer details
of a brahmin as per hindu-definition. I have asked this question
several times
in the thread "Christians destroyed Hindu temples".
Please read first two posts of this thread for knwing why
I started this thread.
----End
Post by Madhu Sudhan
My parants have not amassed ill-gotten money by employing slaves,
they worked 'for a living' and so unfit for gods' blessing (as per
hindus' invention)
so I am not getting enough time to answer all posts of
stinking-hindus.
But no hindu/brahmin braved to pollute himself/herself answering me.
Post by Madhu Sudhan
I thought you went away to pray to Lord Vishnu. Now you are back. You
claim I did not answer?
vishnu had done something naughty, I was reprimanding him.
Post by Madhu Sudhan
I answered so many times. Please dont say I did not answer.
I asked to produce a person (live or dead) who meets hindu criteria.
Nobody had responded in the thread 'christians destroyed temples'.
So I started this thread, see first two posts of this thread.
In this thread also, I did not hide I am participating the thread
'christians destroyed temples', so that respondants can refer the
thred ('christians destroyed temples') you worry about.

If any readers participate in this thread, read thier post and
the post the respond, as you are 'compassionate', it would not
be difficult for you to understand.
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Please see above and also in the other thread " christians destroyed
temples"
If there is any thing you can disprove please do so.
Happy to discuss.
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Real Hindus cannot treat any one badly because of birth etc. Vyasa
was son of a fisherwoman. He is the greatest Hindu that ever lived.
Adhi Sankara fell at the feet of a so called chandala, his wife and
his four dogs(!)- see Manisha panchakam
Yah. When he listened that Chanadala instead of claiming compassionate
and shunning away that Chanadala,
and so that Chanadala was able to teach hims some lessons.
Great Parayan
2004-04-30 13:49:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Great Parayan
away deliberately
---to mislead google readers. (See the post to which madu-sudan
replied to)
-----start
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Madhu Sudan is still at a loss as to explain the procedure by which
one would find a Brahmin in a Bhangi basti.
Wrong again. You left the thread "Christians destroyed Hindu temples"
and your friend Shri Parayan started this and other thread. Instead of
following that as well, you seem to side swipe me in this thread! I am
not at a loss!
In this thread I am searching for any hindus who can offer details
of a brahmin as per hindu-definition. I have asked this question
several times
in the thread "Christians destroyed Hindu temples".
Please read first two posts of this thread for knwing why
I started this thread.
----End
Post by Madhu Sudhan
My parants have not amassed ill-gotten money by employing slaves,
they worked 'for a living' and so unfit for gods' blessing (as per
hindus' invention)
so I am not getting enough time to answer all posts of
stinking-hindus.
But no hindu/brahmin braved to pollute himself/herself answering me.
Post by Madhu Sudhan
I thought you went away to pray to Lord Vishnu. Now you are back. You
claim I did not answer?
vishnu had done something naughty, I was reprimanding him.
Post by Madhu Sudhan
I answered so many times. Please dont say I did not answer.
I asked to produce a person (live or dead) who meets hindu criteria.
(a correction, otherwise madu-sudan make a fuss of it,
normal people will guess properly. Madu-sudan is a bit 'compassionate')
I asked to produce a person (live or dead) who meets hindu criteria of brahminhood.
Post by Great Parayan
Nobody had responded in the thread 'christians destroyed temples'.
So I started this thread, see first two posts of this thread.
In this thread also, I did not hide I am participating the thread
'christians destroyed temples', so that respondants can refer the
thred ('christians destroyed temples') you worry about.
If any readers participate in this thread, read thier post and
the post the respond, as you are 'compassionate', it would not
be difficult for you to understand.
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Please see above and also in the other thread " christians destroyed
temples"
If there is any thing you can disprove please do so.
Happy to discuss.
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Real Hindus cannot treat any one badly because of birth etc. Vyasa
was son of a fisherwoman. He is the greatest Hindu that ever lived.
Adhi Sankara fell at the feet of a so called chandala, his wife and
his four dogs(!)- see Manisha panchakam
Yah. When he listened that Chanadala instead of claiming compassionate
and shunning away that Chanadala,
and so that Chanadala was able to teach hims some lessons.
Madhu Sudhan
2004-05-01 01:36:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Great Parayan
Post by Great Parayan
vishnu had done something naughty, I was reprimanding him.
Lord Krishna is always mischievous. I am glad you witnessed the play
of the Lord. You are now equal to Nanda and Yashoda?
Post by Great Parayan
Post by Great Parayan
I asked to produce a person (live or dead) who meets hindu criteria.
(a correction, otherwise madu-sudan make a fuss of it,
normal people will guess properly. Madu-sudan is a bit 'compassionate')
I asked to produce a person (live or dead) who meets hindu criteria of brahminhood.
That is why I said that. I did reply to that question. But you went
away to see Lord Vishnu. I know that is better than answering my
question.

I mentioned Gandhiji and true Gandhians as examples.


Have you heard of Nandanaar(so called untouchable), Kannappa Nayanar(
a hunter), Thiruppannazhvar( so called untouchable), Thirumazhisai
Azhvar( so called Harijan), Nammazhvar ( so called sudra) etc etc etc.
All these are worshipped by all Hindus!
Great Parayan
2004-05-20 07:00:15 UTC
Permalink
<snipped>
Post by Madhu Sudhan
I mentioned Gandhiji and true Gandhians as examples.
Here Dalits and Hindus have same opinion on brahminhood of MK Gandhi.

"If a man with God's name on his tongue and sword under his armpit
deserved the appellation of a Mahatma, then Mohandas Karamchand
Gandhi was a Mahatma." --Dr. B.R. Ambedkar

See http://www.cwo.com/~lucumi/gandhi.html

MK Gandhi (wrongly lablled as 'Mahatma' by some) falls
in the definition of brahmins.

Brahmins are the people with the attributes boasting, self-praising,
enviness, croockedness, laziness, racist
and arrogance.

Almost all religions(except hindusim and brahmanism) see a man as a
potential person for being compassionate , selfless and capable
of contributing to the welfare of universe .
So these religions exhort to help that man, cooperate with that man,
love him, respect him and forgive him, talk him to understand his
grief.
These religions enable him to develop his talents and pursue happiness
and
attain salvation. These religions make a change in most cruel,
uncompassinate,
brahmanic, selfish person and help him to be merciful, compassionate
and selfless,
paraya person. These religions find a possible palce of divinity in
each and every person.

Hinduism/brahmanism regard a person incapable of being compassionate
and selfless
and befitted to be a slave of brahmins. Hinduism does not allow a
person
to select
his profession. It questions and insults judgments and discretion of a
non-brahmin. It castrates a person off his
spirituality('aathmieyataha') by repeated propaganda that (s)he is
incapable of
having good virtues. All mantras('hindu ritual himns') declare a
non-brahmins impotency
in the field of divinity and exhort him to serve the ambassadors of
most "selfless" and "compassionate", viz. brahmins. Hinduism finds
evilness in non-brahmin people.

Hinduism effectively stops non-brahmin hindus recording of their
history, so that
the hindus feel they have always been in the shit-hole hindusim and
ever be so and the feeling that they
cannot escape from that.

Hinduism kills creativity and curiosity of the people by finding
fault with them and label it as their congenital faults. Hindusim says
faults of hindus are incurable and suggest
serving-brahmins-without-questioning as the only solution available.
Naturally non-brahmin hindus lost
their ability to question phenomena, and to be curious why the world
is so.
Brahmins pay full attention to keep hindus in ignorance and intolerant
to non-brahmanic
ideas, so they also do not get time to do research in the filed of
science and technology.
Brahmins always engage in interpreting and explaining things for their
advantage.
Hinduism neglects grief of non-brahmins and give utmost care to blood
sucking nature
of brahmins. Hindusim abuses dignity of human beings and convert them
to slaves of brahmins
(known as hindus). Hinduism advocates for stopping thinking of
non-brahmins
so that brahmins can exploit people. Brahmins do not want their
slaves (hindus)
get exposed to the outside world and new ideas. Hindus are not
supposed to develop new ideas.
Their fundamental duty is to open mouth and devour, when brahmins feel
like s*itting.
Hinduism is not compassionate enough to understand plight and grief
of non-brahmins.

Brahmins excel in memorising large chunk of irrelevant literature
and indulging in meaningless arguments neglecting plight, pain and
grief
of people.

One can easily see the down-fall and poverty of India is due to
brahminism/hinduism.

So curse of India is hinduism/brahmanism.

Hinduism with its abustive stance agianst humankind is thrusting India
into doom.

A whole nation is required for making a few brahmins(as per hindus'
definition of brahminhood)
selfless and compassionate.
Millions of people are regularly insulted, their food habits and
dressing styles
are insulted and abused, for feeding some lazy brahmins. Hard wroking
people
are abused and no dignity is given to labour, to just boost morale of
few
brahmins. Millions of people are taken for granted to boast fabricated
stories of brahmins.
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Have you heard of Nandanaar(so called untouchable), Kannappa Nayanar(
a hunter), Thiruppannazhvar( so called untouchable), Thirumazhisai
Azhvar( so called Harijan), Nammazhvar ( so called sudra) etc etc etc.
All these are worshipped by all Hindus!
Madhu Sudhan
2004-05-20 11:38:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Great Parayan
"If a man with God's name on his tongue and sword under his armpit
deserved the appellation of a Mahatma, then Mohandas Karamchand
Gandhi was a Mahatma." --Dr. B.R. Ambedkar
See http://www.cwo.com/~lucumi/gandhi.html
MK Gandhi (wrongly lablled as 'Mahatma' by some) falls
in the definition of brahmins.
Ambedkar was a power hungry man just like Jinnah. Jinnah created a
pakiland just to be the leader of some country as he could not be an
Indian leader. Nehru, Patel, Gandhi were too much to compete with. he
played the muslim cared late in his life as he got more desperate to
be the leader of some thing. That is why Gandhiji advised even Nehru
and co to make him the PM of India. Cngress refused to do that just
for his power centred nature. The country divided

Ambedkar was the same as Jinnah. He thought he could be the leader of
all of India. Nehru, Gandhi, Patel etc were too much. He did not want
to be a muslim convert as he could not compete with Jinnah's
selfishness and origins. He did not want to be a christo convert
either as the leadership in the church was well established.
Christianity was unpopular as the religion of slaves and colonialists.
He thought of this Buddhist thing and tried to be a leader. No one
became a Buddhist though! He had talents as alawyer and was given a
seat in the assembly. But he sulked.

This man condemns th Mahatma who is hailed as the man of the century!
Shows how crooked his mind was. He wanted to use the scheduled caste
card for his own power needs. Simple. Try to undertand that
politicians use caste for this purpose. they are selfish. Gandhi never
was in power. He died with the name of Shri Rama on his lips and
wanted the man who shot him to be pardoned just before he died. A true
saint. You are comparing him to Ambedkar, a cheap, power hungry caste
expoliting pseudo scholar?



It questions and insults judgments and discretion of a
Post by Great Parayan
non-brahmin. >
You question is answered below! Many times answered. You simply do not
get it. You are too filled with hatred unfortunately. I have already
answered all this and many more.
Post by Great Parayan
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Have you heard of Nandanaar(so called untouchable), Kannappa Nayanar(
a hunter), Thiruppannazhvar( so called untouchable), Thirumazhisai
Azhvar( so called Harijan), Nammazhvar ( so called sudra) etc etc etc.
All these are worshipped by all Hindus!
Add Chokamela, Ravi Das, Kabir, Tukaram, Vyasa, Vidura, Shabari, Guha,
Sugriva,Vibheeshana, Prahalada, Parasara, Agasthya

Shri Krishna Himself was born in a kshatriya family and raised in
yadava( cowherd) clan!

So much for your knowledge!
Snoopy
2004-05-20 17:02:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madhu Sudhan
This man condemns th Mahatma who is hailed as the man of the century!
Shows how crooked his mind was. He wanted to use the scheduled caste
card for his own power needs. Simple. Try to undertand that
politicians use caste for this purpose. they are selfish. Gandhi never
was in power. He died with the name of Shri Rama on his lips and
wanted the man who shot him to be pardoned just before he died. A true
saint. You are comparing him to Ambedkar, a cheap, power hungry caste
expoliting pseudo scholar?
Considering that it was one of your precious RSS wackos that killed
Gandhi, and that the saffron sangh indirectly applauds that action, I'd
say it is you fellows who are crooked and sly.
Madhu Sudhan
2004-05-20 21:36:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Snoopy
Post by Madhu Sudhan
This man condemns th Mahatma who is hailed as the man of the century!
Shows how crooked his mind was. He wanted to use the scheduled caste
card for his own power needs. Simple. Try to undertand that
politicians use caste for this purpose. they are selfish. Gandhi never
was in power. He died with the name of Shri Rama on his lips and
wanted the man who shot him to be pardoned just before he died. A true
saint. You are comparing him to Ambedkar, a cheap, power hungry caste
expoliting pseudo scholar?
Considering that it was one of your precious RSS wackos that killed
Gandhi, and that the saffron sangh indirectly applauds that action, I'd
say it is you fellows who are crooked and sly.
I have nothing to do with RSS BJP etc. For your info any way RSS had
nothing to do with it

I am glad you agree Mahathmaji was the greatest man, not the caste
racist hatred purveyor Ambedkar or Jinnah
1Shiva
2004-04-25 18:43:00 UTC
Permalink
I think there is something deeper here that people are missing.
Firstly, it should not considered that any caste or varna is superior
or inferior to any other. All though this is the social concept which
seems to have been accepted in the past, I have always advocated that
all caste should be abolished (And I recollect you argued for caste, a
while back). I pointed out how caste has destroyed Hindu society, and
also pointed out that it is irrelevant in today's Hindu society -
Hence it has to be castigated and destroyed. I also advocate that even
historical records of caste and castism has to wiped out of religious
and history books; i.e. Re-writing Hindu history by eliminating the
existence of caste.

Varna or duty, should exist only in terms of how one choses to live
one's life. Just as an engineer building a bridge, should not be
considered superior or inferior to a lawyer practising law or a
businessman selling widgets. They are all practising some trade and
leading some form of life, each neither better nor worse than the
other.

Taken in this sense, regardless of people's prejudices, I think
Indians are moving more and more toward this thinking, when the very
mention of caste is now becoming taboo. I saw this trend in the 80's,
and inter-caste marriages and distaste for mentioning caste, is now
common in not only the metropolitan areas in both the South and the
North, but also the other towns in rural areas.

I also read with increasing frequency, about the number of
non-Brahmins becoming preists in temples. So, caste per say is
dying... And we must encourage it to die quickly, by leading it to its
grave...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by Sachin
Times have changed a lot, baby. Can you produce a directory of TRUE
christians, jainas, buddhas, mohmmedans? Stop uttering nonsense about
brahmins alone.
No one is saying it is a sacred privilege to find, serve and submit to
a Christian, Jain, Buddhist or Muslims.
Since the claim was that it is a sacred privilege to find, serve and
submit to Brahmins alone, then the question of the essence is how to
find a Brahmana, not how to find one of these others.
Madhu Sudan is still at a loss as to explain the procedure by which
one would find a Brahmin in a Bhangi basti. He claims that those
working as bhangis can't be Brahmana, but he passes over the little
detail that their children can be Brahmana if they haven't yet started
working. So, Madhu, would you kindly outline the procedure for finding
Brahmana children of bhangis, for serving them and submitting to them?
Alternatively, ask your relatives to find Brahmana children of bhangis
and start serving these children and submitting to them. Once your
relatives have shown others how to find Brahmins, how to serve them
and how to submit to them, then perhaps the masses will better
understand how to find, serve and submit to Brahmanas.
Post by Sachin
- Sachin
Post by Great Parayan
Brahmanas are defined as below,
"They are supremely
devoted to God, selfless, compassionate. They advise others on their
duties and teach them- see message 42. Hence they are wise. Simple.
They are brahmanas in shastras. Very simple."
This is the definition hindus give for brahmins.
These are brahmins in sastras!!!
I have repeatedly asked to produce a brahmin in real life as per hindus'
definition. In hindus infested SCI, nobody responded.
Is there any fake-brahmins (who calims brahmin but in reality not so)?
Can you give a list of such fake brahmins?
Is there any organisation spotting and warning against fake-brahmins?
Is there any organisation who publish a directory of true brahmins?
M. Ranjit Mathews
2004-04-25 22:45:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by 1Shiva
I think there is something deeper here that people are missing.
Firstly, it should not considered that any caste or varna is superior
or inferior to any other.
To claim that it is a sacred privilege to serve and submit to a person
is to claim the person superior. To claim that some people are
degraded is to claim them inferior.
Post by 1Shiva
All though this is the social concept which
seems to have been accepted in the past, I have always advocated that
all caste should be abolished (And I recollect you argued for caste, a
while back).
That was not the same kind of caste.
1Shiva
2004-04-27 00:13:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by 1Shiva
I think there is something deeper here that people are missing.
Firstly, it should not considered that any caste or varna is superior
or inferior to any other.
To claim that it is a sacred privilege to serve and submit to a person
is to claim the person superior. To claim that some people are
degraded is to claim them inferior.
True. When one is superior, by logical reasoning, the other *must* be
inferior...There can't be another option... :-))
Post by M. Ranjit Mathews
Post by 1Shiva
All though this is the social concept which
seems to have been accepted in the past, I have always advocated that
all caste should be abolished (And I recollect you argued for caste, a
while back).
That was not the same kind of caste.
How many types of caste are there? :-)
soft-eng
2004-04-28 15:43:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by 1Shiva
I think there is something deeper here that people are missing.
Firstly, it should not considered that any caste or varna is superior
or inferior to any other. All though this is the social concept which
seems to have been accepted in the past, I have always advocated that
all caste should be abolished (And I recollect you argued for caste, a
while back). I pointed out how caste has destroyed Hindu society, and
also pointed out that it is irrelevant in today's Hindu society -
Hence it has to be castigated and destroyed. I also advocate that even
historical records of caste and castism has to wiped out of religious
and history books; i.e. Re-writing Hindu history by eliminating the
existence of caste.
This sort of lying has always caused a lot of grief.
It assumes that the person or group of people doing
the lying is extremely superior, and can figure out
the perfect lies for the next generation. But in
fact, people are more or less the same, with only
_slight_ difference that only appear exaggerated
because people live amongst people and are very
sensitive to differences.

So the person doing the lying ends up causing more
problems than solved.

Dealing with facts and assuming next generations can
think too, is much simpler.

Re caste, it hasn't always been the evil it is today.
At one time, it was rather sensible for people to
learn a trade from one's father and grandfather.

As schools of learning and organized methods of training
emerged, caste became less sensible, just like an old building
that once provided shelter but now only provides
falling pieces of stone and rock that hit people on the head.

Fixing the building or destroying it for a better
one is a good idea, but it is not necessary to
start saying the building was never there.
Snoopy
2004-04-29 05:43:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by soft-eng
Post by 1Shiva
I think there is something deeper here that people are missing.
Firstly, it should not considered that any caste or varna is superior
or inferior to any other. All though this is the social concept which
seems to have been accepted in the past, I have always advocated that
all caste should be abolished (And I recollect you argued for caste, a
while back). I pointed out how caste has destroyed Hindu society, and
also pointed out that it is irrelevant in today's Hindu society -
Hence it has to be castigated and destroyed. I also advocate that even
historical records of caste and castism has to wiped out of religious
and history books; i.e. Re-writing Hindu history by eliminating the
existence of caste.
This sort of lying has always caused a lot of grief.
It assumes that the person or group of people doing
the lying is extremely superior, and can figure out
the perfect lies for the next generation. But in
fact, people are more or less the same, with only
_slight_ difference that only appear exaggerated
because people live amongst people and are very
sensitive to differences.
So the person doing the lying ends up causing more
problems than solved.
Dealing with facts and assuming next generations can
think too, is much simpler.
Re caste, it hasn't always been the evil it is today.
At one time, it was rather sensible for people to
learn a trade from one's father and grandfather.
As schools of learning and organized methods of training
emerged, caste became less sensible, just like an old building
that once provided shelter but now only provides
falling pieces of stone and rock that hit people on the head.
Fixing the building or destroying it for a better
one is a good idea, but it is not necessary to
start saying the building was never there.
Very well written! Thank you!
Sachin
2004-05-01 15:16:13 UTC
Permalink
Brahminism has become a keyword. All crybabies have started using it.
I'm not a brahmin, but i do not hate them. Hating them is useless. You
can learn a few things from them. They have a few bad treats in them.
Same about all communities.

Stop crying, crybabies. Work hard, gain success.

- Sachin
Post by Great Parayan
===================Taken from the thread "CHRISTIANS DESTROYED HINDU
TEMPLES "
Subject: Re: CHRISTIANS DESTROYED HINDU TEMPLES
View: Complete Thread (87 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian, alt.bonehead.jai-maharaj,
alt.religion.hindu, misc.writing.screenplays,
soc.culture.indian.marathi
Date: 2004-04-19 03:00:19 PST
==============================================================================
In this thread and other threads, I have asked several times to
produce a brahmin
who fulfills the hindus' criteria of brahminhood.
It is presumed that no such brahmin exists!!!
Now some more questions.
1. Any fake brahmins who claim brahminhood and recievr service from
hindus in the name
of their brahminhood?
2. Is it sin as per hinduism to serve a fake brahmin?
3. Is it sin as per hinduism to serve a non-brahmin?
You have obviously never studied Valmiki and write profusely about him.
You have profusely studied Valmiki, so that you can only utter that
Valmiki support your racist ideas. But You failed to give any quotes
from Valmiki
to support your points.
I haven't written about Valmiki at all.
Please check message 59. Your answers ( apart ) are given below. Tell
[Valmiki &#8211; author of first hindu epic 'Ramayanna']
You claimed Valmiki substantiate your points. Now it becomes others
burden to learn and find
out how Valmiki substantiate your points. You demand google-readers
should
learn Valmiki and answers your questions. Oh, I see, you cannot work
and others should serve your purpose.
==========================================================
All this is in Valmiki, if you care to study. No secrets.
Surely Valmiki didn't say it was inside himself that Ravana found
Rama!
Now this is so clearly explained in Valmiki. I am shocked no one cares
to read that and just spews his own thoughts.
Valmiki is very very clear.
Clear as mud. He doesn't give one any idea of where one may find God
in order that one may attempt to conquer him.
==========================================================
In message 42, when you find that a bhangi can meet your previously
stated requirements for being a brahmana, you come up with a new set
of requirements.
I clearly said bhangis cannot be brahmanas! You did not get it!
[Bhangies are the people forcefully absorbed to hindu social system,
known
as Varnna Darma(VD). They are given job of cleaning cleaning as
duty of their varnna. Hindus regard Bhangies that theyare destined so
by hindu gods.]
As a brahmin, one thing is clear to you. A bhamgi and other Dalits
cannot be
caompassinate and selfless.
Please
read again message 42. I explained it. If I say a doctor is one who
knows how to diagnose illness etc and has to be qualified for such,
you seem to say why not
consider a carpenter as a doctor! The two are different. Very simple.
[Indian culture give more freedom to Doctors than to Carpenters.
It settle suits in favor Doctors to Carpenters. If you work and do not
harm others,
you will be insulted, abused and denied justice]
We understood. Carpenters and Doctors cannot be compassionate,
selfless, wise and supremely
devoted to God, as per hindu-wisdom.
Being a brahmin is engaging a profession
(like a doctor/carpenter engaging into theirs)
or an attitude/outlook toward the world???
A doctor can be carpenter and a carpenter can be a Doctor also.
A brahmin cannot visualize doctor/carpenter being compassionate and
selfless.
A brahmin cannot respect, care, love and support a non-brahmin.
A brahmin teaches loving, caring, serving and supporting a non-brahmin
is like empowering a Devil.
Every body knows all brahmins boast they are the only people
of capable being compassionate and selfless.
Everyone heard of brahmins receiving services/presents from hindus,
but nobody has heard of a brahmin being compassionate and selfless.
Everybody has heard of brahmins cursing others without understanding
why poor hindus are unable to fulfill the mental perception of
brahmins.
No brahmin is known to be compassionate and selfless, then why
are you insisting that people should accept compassion and
selflessness as attributes of brahmins???
Instead, if you say boasting,
self-praising, envies,
crookedness, laziness, racist and arrogance as attributes of
brahmins,
it will be more apt and appropriate and people could easily understand
from the examples they see around.
----From hindu epics-------------------------------------------------
When Viswamtran asked a cow from Vasiastan. Being a brahmin, Vasistan
was so selfish
and he immediately denied it
and in addition, he killed forces of Viswamitran.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
If Radhakrishnan said that in all societies, all important actions
have to be decided by brahmanas, he was an ulluu; few societies let
"picchakaar" direct any important actions, leave alone all important
actions. If he said "wise men", he might have been onto something but
God alone knows how you deduced that wise men meant brahmanas; wise
men are just that - wise men, not brahmanas.
You wanted, a definition of brahmanas. I gave one. They are supremely
devoted to God, selfless, compassionate. They advise others on their
duties and teach them- see message 42. Hence they are wise. Simple.
They are brahmanas in shastras. Very simple. Problem? See message 42.
In a social system, several millions of people are insulted, tortured
and
denied justice, and few million brahmins with their agents(upper
varnnas)
and their coolies(BC/OBC)
live shamelessly on the tears, sweat and blood of others. Meantime,
the most 'compassionate' and
'selfless' people engage in spreading the age-old criteria of
brahminhood
to help blood-sucking-brahmins, who block progress of the nation.
The most compassionate and selfless people cannot just understand
grief of millions of people, and they cannot devise a solution for it.
I am sorry to say you will lose miserably if you pursue
this debate as I may tell you things you never knew about Indian
civilisation
In Indian civilization, do imbeciles become wise merely because they
are compassionate, selfless, don't work for money, etc?
Are they fully devoted to God and perform the six categories of tasks
as I said before in message 42? Then they cannot be imbeciles! Simple.
The wise are
wise because they are wise, not because they are compassionate,
selfless, etc. The compassionate and selfless need not necessarily be
Wisdom is reflected in behaviour. Read Kural- Arivinaal aaguvadhundo
piridhin noy thannoy pol potraakadai. Read at least Kural if not
Valmiki to know about Hindu culture and the duties of brahmanas and
their nature. Andhanar enbor aravor matrevvuyirkkum senthanmai
poondozhugalaan etc etc. Also know aravaazhi andhanar thaaL etc.
That is why I said submitting to a brahmana is a previlege.
Firstly I am glad you are not using abusive language.
Secondly, you responded. Thirdly, you read message 42.
I cannot do more,unless you start thinking and shed your rage.
You need not be angry, as you are sucking blood of poor Dalit victims
hunted and trapped
by your agents known as hindus(esp. ksatriya, vysya, baniaya, kayastha
etc.).
[ksatriya, vysya, baniaya, kayastha are various varnnas in VD]
For
some reason you seem very angry. It baffles me. I used no abusive
language ever. The definition of brahmana from shastra is not what
*you* (or your absconding friend) think!
That is the problem
For arguments sake, we agree a Bhangi cannot be compassionate and
selfless,
but it is now your turn to produce a brahmin as per your criteria for
google-reades
to verify and identify the species.
In the name of this non-existing species, in last thousands years,
millions
of people butchered, robbed, abused, insulted, ridiculed. Nobody was
there
to listen cries of this unfortunate people. Nobody was there to tell
their stories.
Nobody was there to care these unfortunate people. Nobody was there
to shelter them,
protect them. But so many 'sastrass' (science), 'neethy' (justice and
justifications)
are written to explain how to shun them, how to insult them, how to
torture them and how to justify hindus' torturing them.
And the most 'compassionate' and 'selfless' people take pride in this
social system. The most 'compassionate' and 'selfless' people squeal
that they are people of merit and ask the government to all assistance
to poor people.
Every body knows one cannot be a brahmin without being arrogant,
scornful,
holier-than-thou attitude, incapable of empathetic and highly
prejudiced,
demanding, always-finding-fault-with-others,
incapable-of-understanding-others-views&feelings,
highly-opinionated-about-actions-of-others and
abusing-ideas-of-others.
You can verify this simple fact by reading posts of hindus/brahmins to
Google
or observing hindus/brahmins in India/outside-India. Hindu is the one
who buys
bullshits of brahmins. They are comparatively less arrogant, with
pleasing personality,
with inferiority-complex, with no creative talent and with no thinking
skills. They simply cannot think
other than doing the drudgery assigned to them by brahmins.
Brahmins show creative talents in how to insult a non-brahmin.
If a brahmin neglects you, it means he is afraid of you in your
attracting
power over his slaves (known as hindus). They divide people and make
people
enemies each other by praising one(usually most powerful and
influential)
and ditching the other (usually poor and weak). Brahmins are always
keen on promoting and empowering his people. They are afraid (perhaps
envious)
of ordinary human values(like empathy, cooperation, compassion) with
human beings,
and some times one may wonder whether brahmins are human beings.
[Hindus claim there are only four varnnas. Brahmins use these kind of
ideas to bluff
hindus. They quote from hindu-scriptures to support their claim. But
nobody
(even brahmins&hindus) cares and follows hindu scriptures. They use
hindu scriptures
to exploit people. Varnna System revolves around the idea that people
should be
divided and there should be a graded hierarchy of contempt.
Presently there are around 6000 varnnas in hindu society.]
Great Parayan
2004-05-02 04:18:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sachin
Brahminism has become a keyword. All crybabies have started using it.
I'm not a brahmin, but i do not hate them. Hating them is useless. You
can learn a few things from them. They have a few bad treats in them.
Same about all communities.
Stop crying, crybabies. Work hard, gain success.
Who is hating?
Dalits are exposing brahmins and saving hindus from brahmins.
We are exposing brahmins' propganada.
Kshatriya
2004-05-21 00:29:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Great Parayan
Post by Sachin
Brahminism has become a keyword. All crybabies have started using it.
I'm not a brahmin, but i do not hate them. Hating them is useless. You
can learn a few things from them. They have a few bad treats in them.
Same about all communities.
Stop crying, crybabies. Work hard, gain success.
Who is hating?
Dalits are exposing brahmins and saving hindus from brahmins.
We are exposing brahmins' propganada.
Why do you call yourself a Dalit ?

Your fraud Christian religion allegedly does not have any castes. So
the day you became Xtian you should be casteless. But still your own
Xtians discriminate against you .

So the problem lies not in Hinduism , but is a problem of race. Racism
against negroes cuts accross all religions , less so in Hinduism
compared to others.

And since you are an Xtian stop calling yourself a Dalit you idiot. If
you have a problem with Hinduism then i suggest you go to Africa and
live there amongst the natives. They are mostly Xtians in Africa but
still the Europeans racially discriminate against thier own
co-religionists.

Goto UK,US and most of the Western countries , and the discrimination
against the Dalts will be 100 times more than in India. So stop this
bullshit of accusing Hindiusm for everything. Your fraud Xtian faith
is even worse on this regard.
I.S.I walla
2004-05-21 11:17:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kshatriya
Goto UK,US and most of the Western countries , and the discrimination
against the Dalts will be 100 times more than in India. So stop this
bullshit of accusing Hindiusm for everything. Your fraud Xtian faith
is even worse on this regard.
Dalits in Western countries are'nt discriminated because they belong
to Dalit caste, but simply because they are foreigners of different
ethnicity. Brahmin wogs also face the exact level of discrimination.

But again, Westerners are simply discriminating against foreign people
of different color whereas Brahmin Hindu wogs discriminate against
people of same color belonging to the same country.

The very fact that Indian wogs are fleeing abroad for good is an
indication of something seriously fucked up with India. Why do you
think a Dalit would even consider going to other people's country any
way? But again the wog logic of destroying one's own country and then
moving in to destroy others is all that matters. As of now, hindoos
settled in California are already bringing change in the cultural
landscape......real estate prices are getting jacked up, women are
being leered and sneered at and non brahmins and Muslims are being
discriminated.

A wog who managed to escape India is lucky by all counts.
Madhu Sudhan
2004-05-22 12:19:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by I.S.I walla
A wog who managed to escape India is lucky by all counts.
You are full of hatred and lack common sense. Muslims kill nonmuslims.
They kill muslims they do not like by classifying them as nonmuslims-
shiite sunni problem. The sectarianism and tribalism in islam is far
more violent than this caste problem. They are so violent amongst
themselves and violent to others, they are a major threat to
civilisation.

The brahmin- dalit problem is missionary-politician engineered.

Dalits are never persecuted ever. In fact the missionary-politicians
are using them for votes and conversion.

Dalits saints are worshipped in Hinduism day in and day out.

Throw the koran in the toilet
Great Parayan
2004-06-11 07:49:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kshatriya
Post by Great Parayan
Post by Sachin
Brahminism has become a keyword. All crybabies have started using it.
I'm not a brahmin, but i do not hate them. Hating them is useless. You
can learn a few things from them. They have a few bad treats in them.
Same about all communities.
Stop crying, crybabies. Work hard, gain success.
Who is hating?
Dalits are exposing brahmins and saving hindus from brahmins.
We are exposing brahmins' propganada.
Why do you call yourself a Dalit ?
Beacuse I am Dalit. I do not believe in vedas. I am not superstitious
like hindus. I am not racist.
Post by Kshatriya
Your fraud Christian religion allegedly does not have any castes. So
the day you became Xtian you should be casteless. But still your own
Xtians discriminate against you .
Castes are pre-vedic religions. Caste is my ethnicity. I need not renounce
my Caste to convert to non-vedic religion. Only thing is I have
to stop being a Casteist (hating lower varnnas and respecting upper varnnas)
or racist. After aryan invasion, Castes were absorbed. The Caste fisrt submitted
to aryans elevated to top vacant slot in ksudra varnna. Still hindus
estimate their dignity by how ancient they absorbed varnna system.

Christians discriminate Dalits for getting some scraps from you hindus.
Post by Kshatriya
So the problem lies not in Hinduism , but is a problem of race. Racism
against negroes cuts accross all religions , less so in Hinduism
compared to others.
It is your hindu knowledge you get from your hindu scriptures and bloody
brahmins' training. You are taught you are least racist and you are proud
of being a racist and you think you can be more and more racist. Because
your brahmin master taught you are least racist. Bloody hindusim is the one
and only one racist religion. This is the only religion which defends
and takes pride in their beliefs and customs of torturing other races
and other nationalties and denying justice to other races
and other nationalties.
Post by Kshatriya
And since you are an Xtian stop calling yourself a Dalit you idiot. If
you have a problem with Hinduism then i suggest you go to Africa and
live there amongst the natives. They are mostly Xtians in Africa but
still the Europeans racially discriminate against thier own
co-religionists.
I have no problem with hinduism if hindus do not bother us. I have
no complaint if you daily feed on shit of brahmins. But if you become
violent when we eat beef or if we eat on an eclipse day or if we do
not believe in your ass-trol-gers, we are foced to tackle you.
Post by Kshatriya
Goto UK,US and most of the Western countries , and the discrimination
against the Dalts will be 100 times more than in India. So stop this
bullshit of accusing Hindiusm for everything. Your fraud Xtian faith
is even worse on this regard.
Utter baloney. Dr. B.R Ambedkar and many other Dalits educated in Western
countries. We get same descrimination you get there.
Madhu Sudhan
2004-06-12 12:34:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Great Parayan
Post by Kshatriya
Why do you call yourself a Dalit ?
You are not a *dalit*. You told me you are not a Hindu at all. Please
dont lie.
I know you are a Malayalee Xtian denigrating Hinduism and Hindus using
the web for false info. You seem to know nothing about Hinduism and
give onlyu false info
Post by Great Parayan
Beacuse I am Dalit. I do not believe in vedas. I am not superstitious
like hindus. I am not racist.
You are not a hindu. There is question of vedas etc . Be content with
the babble as a xtian
Post by Great Parayan
Castes are pre-vedic religions. Caste is my ethnicity. I need not renounce
my Caste to convert to non-vedic religion.
Day in and day out you say Hindus are castesit and now you say you are
full of caste mind set! As a xtian!

. After aryan invasion, Castes were absorbed. The Caste fisrt
submitted
Post by Great Parayan
to aryans elevated to top vacant slot in ksudra varnna. Still hindus
estimate their dignity by how ancient they absorbed varnna system.
Nonsense. You dont know athing about varns or caste.

It is your hindu knowledge you get from your hindu scriptures and
bloody
Post by Great Parayan
brahmins' training. You are taught you are least racist and you are proud
of being a racist and you think you can be more and more racist. Because
your brahmin master taught you are least racist. Bloody hindusim is the one
and only one racist religion. This is the only religion which defends
and takes pride in their beliefs and customs of torturing other races
and other nationalties and denying justice to other races
and other nationalties.
You are playing the same trick of all monster missionaries: 1)
denigrate brahmins first to destroy Hindus and Hinduism 2) Denigrate
vedas and puranas 3) Tell lies that Hindus oppress dalits when
actually they dont. Make dalits get angry and make them paranoid.
Inflame them and make them try to forcefully enter temples after
eating beef and pigs 4) Play the varous castes against each other.
Post by Great Parayan
Utter baloney. Dr. B.R Ambedkar and many other Dalits educated in Western
countries. We get same descrimination you get there.
Ambedkar was spreading false info about Hinduism to become PM and fr
politics sake. He lost. Jinnah at least got a moth eaten Pakiland.
Hindus were kind to make him a constituent assembly member. This man
was hibnobbing witht he British and fought *against* freedom saying
Hindus will oppress sc/sts! Like Jinnah said!


Remember you worship B.J. Christ
Snoopy
2004-06-21 17:06:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madhu Sudhan
Remember you worship B.J. Christ
You must be a proud Hindu, indeed!

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...