God in trouble in God's own country... Sabarimala

This is a place where you can enter any non-sports general topics
User avatar
jayakris
Moderators
Moderators
Posts: 24212
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2002 7:24 am
Please enter the middle number: 1
Location: Irvine, CA, USA
Contact:

God in trouble in God's own country... Sabarimala

Post by jayakris » Tue Jan 08, 2019 8:25 am

Sin Hombre wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:30 pm
In India at the moment, and all the news is dominated by two stories today, the Modi government wanting to increase reservation to 60% by introducing an additional 10% for economic weaker section and the riots in Kerala because of the Sabarimala decision. .... Both are obviously politically orchestrated.
I forgot to respond to the second part of your original post. On the Kerala riots being politically orchestrated. Yes, but it wasn't by Modi or BJP.

This was started for political reasons by the Pinarayi Vijayan, the Communist party CM in Kerala. He wanted to pull Hindus out of the Congress party and put them in BJP, so that the Hindu votes will be further split (already a good chunk goes to CPM, and the remaining big chunk goes to Congress) and thus he can nearly eliminate the Congress challenge to CPM in Kerala. Well, there is also vested interest in making money from an airport near Sabarimala, creating a year round tourist industry around the sacred temple (family trekking and partying up in the western ghats, I suppose).

But the CM was playing with fire. Kerala Hindus will NOT let him go scot-free for what he has done with Swami Ayyappa (the deity at Sabarimala) and Hindus' beliefs.

Nationally, the news coverage has been absolutely appalling, as everybody seems to think that this is a gender-equality thing for women to enter a temple. My foot. My posterior! It is nothing short of attacking a temple and murdering the deity, that the state government has done - by deliberately not defending the temple that the government runs and has a duty to defend, and thus orchestrating/forcing a Supreme Court judgment that would allow the destruction of a temple's deity and its fundamental definitions. Kerala BJP and RSS will not let this go. Make no mistakes about it.

There is one "God" who runs "God's own country" and that is Ayyappa. If Ayyappa has said that he does not want to see child-bearing age women because he is a celibate on a dhyanam at that spot, and we humans set up an idol for him with those definitions there, no Supreme Court or Chief Minister can stop people from taking the wishes of the deity as more important. Easily over 95% of Kerala hindu women believers of Ayyappa know it clearly too, and that is why they will not go there. We can hurt the beliefs of such a huge majority for the sake of feminist activism, and social engineering by the CM? That too, in a place where there is no need for any such social engineering, and has the most literate and gender-equal population in India? Sorry, this won't go unanswered by Hindus in Kerala.

If the rest of the country does not understand the basic Hindu principles of vigraha-sankalpa or prathishta-sankalpa (definitions of rights/characteristics of a deity, done during idol installation), and see this as just a simple "women's entry" issue, they can all go take a hike as well - literally. Kerala Hindus will take care of standing up and saying that we won't let our deity (that we humans created; a deity who possesses strength from our own collective beliefs) to be murdered. Because violating a fundamental tenet of the definition we gave to that deity, the Sabarimala Ayyappa, is murdering the deity.

I know I am sounding like some Hindu terrorist or something, but this is the feelings of a real Hindu. Remember that we are talking about a part of India, one of the very few places, that has never ever been under the rule of a non-Hindu king. South Kerala. Kerala Hindus won't show it, but Hindu roots are deep in the land of Adi Sankara.

Modi, very uncharacteristically, and possibly for political reasons, stayed totally away from even saying a word on the issue for 3 months till this week. There are a lot of Kerala Hindus who are quite upset at him for not offering support when the communists are coming after their religion with a vengeance. Naturally the Christian and Muslim communities stand by and laugh, like they always do, at the suffering of their Hindu brethren who have respected them through centuries in the state.

User avatar
prasen9
Member
Member
Posts: 12751
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 8:49 pm
Please enter the middle number: 1
Location: State College, PA
Contact:

Re: New bill for more Reservations, but on Economic criteria

Post by prasen9 » Wed Jan 09, 2019 8:20 pm

Yep. Satidaha was a Hindu tradition too I suppose. As was untouchability ... Modi, Trump, very rich people, etc. are too smart. They do not do the dirty work. They let their surrogates do it. It is nice to know that now implementing a Supreme Court order (which establishes a fundamental human right of non-discrimination) by a CM is seen as politicking.

User avatar
jayakris
Moderators
Moderators
Posts: 24212
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2002 7:24 am
Please enter the middle number: 1
Location: Irvine, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: New bill for more Reservations, but on Economic criteria

Post by jayakris » Thu Jan 10, 2019 1:36 am

First of all, prasen, you should read this article that came out just yesterday from Shashi Tharoor - Forgive me liberal friends, but I can’t completely overlook faith of Sabarimala devotees. I am no big fan of Shashi Tharoor the Congress politician, but he really wrote something from his conscience here. And he is taking a lot of flak for it today.
prasen9 wrote:
Wed Jan 09, 2019 8:20 pm
Yep. Satidaha was a Hindu tradition too I suppose. As was untouchability ...
Nope. None of that was in the definition of a deity that we worshipped. Sati was not a temple worship thing. Just a cultural practice that had to go. The deities in temples were not installed with the concept that they were deities for everybody "higher than untouchables". So untouchability also had to go.

The people affected by those practices wanted them to go too. But 99% of Hindu women in Kerala do NOT want a change in the status quo at Sabarimala, because they cannot think of an Ayyappa who wishes to see them. They are all ayyappa devotees. You will not find even 5 percent of Kerala Hindu women who thinks that Ayyappa is discriminating them when he requests to be left alone in his meditation. It is a deity in meditation. Not at all like the untouchables' case. The untouchables, easily over 90% of them, wanted to pray in the temples. The deities had never said they shouldn't either, which is why they wanted to pray to the deities.

But here we are talking about a temple, where the concept of the deity is that he will not see a child-bearing age woman. The legend behind the deity is that Ayyappa, born as the son of Shiva and Vishnu in Mohini form (thus hari-hara-putra) had given a vow to an asura woman (Mahishi) he had given moksha to, who became a beautiful woman and wanted to marry him. That lady is the deity (Devi Malikappuram) in a temple right next to the ayyappa temple at Sabarimala. He did not marry her, but promised her that he would not see another woman of marrying age, as he would be sitting in meditation there until the time when no new devotees would come to pray with him for a whole year. He is still in meditation. Check the unique ayyappa idol form, and you will see that he is praying himself, unlike the deities in other temples, who are there for others to pray to.

The "pray with him" part is important - we are talking about a very unique temple in India. The temple writes only one word in front of the sanctum sanctorum - "tat tvam asi" (that thou art -- you are that), clearly stating that the devotees are Gods with him. That is why the devotees who go there call each other ayyappa or malikappuram (if you are a woman), regardless of caste or status. How many deities in India pray with the devotees? He is not a deity sitting there to offer you boons like people think of deities in other temples. How many temple deities sit in yogapattasana form (an authentic yoga asana, the best for tapas, that needs a tie -patta- around the knees)? I believe only a Dakshinamurthi temple somewhere and an old Hampi temple of Yoganarasimha have that tapas form. So this is all at the core of the definitions of a deity.

The point is -- the concept of the deity includes that he cannot see a young woman. It comes from bhoothanatha-upakhyanam, which is an age-old text. It is the concept of the deity that was ritually set up when the prathishta (idol) was set up there. It is not some random tradition that people started followinng at some time because of "menstruation" and all that bullshit the Leftist writers in India started.

How can you ever call anybody who does not believe in the nature of the deity and goes up to do something that the deity does not want the person to do, a devotee? They are just misinformed activists, who want to go after the concept of the deity itself. Where is a gender-discrimination case here. Is that gender discrimination if a deity (or any person) decides to be celibate and not see young women? Can you send women to disturb a maharshi doing tapas in a cave in Himalayas, and ask for gender equality in what he is trying to do?

If Jesus said that he is against pagan worship, can a person who claims to be a christian, worships a frog (because he/she wants equality in the frogs' rights to be worshiped like elephants, monkeys, and snakes in India) go into a church praying with a frog-idol saying he/she wants to pray to Jesus also? Will the supreme court rule that a pagan worshiper can go to church, saying they want to pray to Jesus also? That person cannot be a Christian. The supreme court will not do that, and the communist government won't dare touch the church. But then the communist government won't get a chance to give false and contradicting testimony on church beliefs like happened in this case. The church will give testimony instead. Here, a Devaswom board with non-believing communists in it, organized the testimonies, which did not defend the deity's concept correctly. The SC themselves saw later that they may have been misled. It was an extremely rare act by a constitution bench to entertain a reconsideration of their ruling. It almost never happens. The government may again offer no defense for the temple and it may again not pass the SC as the judges may have no choice if the defender doesn't defend. Who knows. If so, the agitation will continue, as it must.
Modi, Trump, very rich people, etc. are too smart. They do not do the dirty work. They let their surrogates do it. It is nice to know that now implementing a Supreme Court order (which establishes a fundamental human right of non-discrimination) by a CM is seen as politicking.
Oh yeah? The same CM who some reports seem to say was the #1 accused in the charge sheet of the very first political murder in Kerala history in 1969, who was apparently let go only because witnesses were scared to come forward (EMS Namboothirippad the Marxist CM got him out of it, they say - I don't know; I was too young in 69). The CM who reportedly has 11 criminal cases on his record, the 2nd most among Indian CMs right now (behind Fadnavis with 22!!)? You want to know the number of court rulings that are NOT enforced in religious matters involving church and mosque disputes, in Kerala? I can send you authentic links for all these - not just from RSS mouthpieces that I don't give much weight to.

Even if he wanted to enforce a court ruling, finding Maoist women from Tamil Nadu and escorting them to the temple to spite the devotees was the way to do it? When the supreme court itself said they will reconsider, what is the hurry in enforcing it by sneaking in women at 3 am in the dead of night through the kitchen entry with police camouflage and a video man taking video to send out (not even climbing the sacred 18 steps which is what a devotee is supposed to do)?

Religious persecution is religious persecution, even if it is committed on Hindus. Kerala Hindus are under extreme persecution right now. No two ways of stating it. And this in a country where there is 80% Hindu majority and a Hindu party ruling at the center. But the country does not even know, thanks to the liberal and leftist media/press. Why is Kerala even in this country, is what Kerala Hindus are wondering now. They just want their favorite concept of a God, in Ayyappa form at that temple, be preserved. That is not for activism. Not in the state with the lowest level of gender discrimination in India, on any measure.

Can't you all see, what is going on? This is frustrating, prasen, when intelligent people like you refuse to see it. The way I am writing these pieces should tell you how much it has affected me. A nightmare of the kind nobody could've ever expected to happen to people in India.

User avatar
prasen9
Member
Member
Posts: 12751
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 8:49 pm
Please enter the middle number: 1
Location: State College, PA
Contact:

Re: New bill for more Reservations, but on Economic criteria

Post by prasen9 » Thu Jan 10, 2019 3:16 am

The only logic that I find appealing is whether the enforcement of fundamental human rights is worth the cost of the live that it took. I am not sure at what cost should I say that we should appease the chauvinistic, religious fundamentalists and give up on basic human rights. If we hope for a progressive India, we have to fight the hard fights at some point. But, I do not know what is the right cost and what is the right way to minimize that cost.

It does not matter if the chief minister has murdered 1000 people. We are not talking about that. Should he be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for his crimes? Yes. Do it. But, when the Indian populace has rewarded a person who allegedly engaged in the bloodshed in Godhra and rewarded convicted murderers with cabinet posts, then that is unfortunately the level of politicians in India. The Kerala CM is doing what others are doing. I am not condoning his sins. But just because he did awful things does not mean that it is not his constitutional duty to uphold a Supreme Court decision. It is.

Religion is delusional bullshit. I find it to be no higher than any cultural practice. Whatever the reason, I do not support discrimination. There is no difference between religious bullshit and cultural bullshit to me.

And, btw, this bullshit is much smaller than the carnage we have seen in several riots in the past in India. Mostly in the name of religion. Although each and every riot possibly has an deeper underlying economic or political reason for it.

User avatar
prasen9
Member
Member
Posts: 12751
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 8:49 pm
Please enter the middle number: 1
Location: State College, PA
Contact:

Re: New bill for more Reservations, but on Economic criteria

Post by prasen9 » Thu Jan 10, 2019 3:24 am

jayakris wrote:
Thu Jan 10, 2019 1:36 am
The people affected by those practices wanted them to go too. But 99% of Hindu women in Kerala do NOT want a change in the status quo at Sabarimala, because they cannot think of an Ayyappa who wishes to see them.
You got this wrong. The people affected by those practices are those women who want to go to the temple but are not being allowed to go in. 100% them want it to go as 100% of the people who were put on the pyre wanted to live. For those who do not want to visit the temple by their own choice, obviously, they are not "affected by those practices".
You will not find even 5 percent of Kerala Hindu women who thinks that Ayyappa is discriminating them when he requests to be left alone in his meditation.
"his meditation". We are talking about a myth! Sorry, I do not have any intention to debate about what a mythical creature thinks. When we go into the realm of delusion, you can have your final word.
It is a deity in meditation.
It is some garbage story that people made up to discriminate against other people and brainwashed them. There are also many conservative women who think it is okay for a man to strike a woman who has done something wrong. Who cares?
The deities had never said they shouldn't either, which is why they wanted to pray to the deities.
I do not know whether to laugh or to cry over this. The deities saying something is a figment of man's creative imagination. To the best of my knowledge, no sane man or woman has seen or heard a deity ever say anything.

I usually try to argue point by point. But when things go to such a realm of delusional garbage, I don't think any argument matters anymore.

User avatar
prasen9
Member
Member
Posts: 12751
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 8:49 pm
Please enter the middle number: 1
Location: State College, PA
Contact:

Re: New bill for more Reservations, but on Economic criteria

Post by prasen9 » Thu Jan 10, 2019 3:29 am

jayakris wrote:
Thu Jan 10, 2019 1:36 am
Religious persecution is religious persecution, even if it is committed on Hindus.
By this logic, fighting for human rights against satidaha and untouchability is also religious persecution. Reductio ad absurdum, if a religion requires human sacrifice, stopping it is also religious persecution. There are certain basic unalienable human rights which are uncompromisable truths that we should not give up just because some nefarious religion cloaks it under the pretext of religion and tries to protect it. If I start a religion that requires hitting women three times a day, stopping that is not religious persecution.

User avatar
jayakris
Moderators
Moderators
Posts: 24212
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2002 7:24 am
Please enter the middle number: 1
Location: Irvine, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: New bill for more Reservations, but on Economic criteria

Post by jayakris » Thu Jan 10, 2019 7:26 am

prasen9 wrote:
Thu Jan 10, 2019 3:24 am
You will not find even 5 percent of Kerala Hindu women who thinks that Ayyappa is discriminating them when he requests to be left alone in his meditation.
"his meditation". We are talking about a myth! Sorry, I do not have any intention to debate about what a mythical creature thinks. When we go into the realm of delusion, you can have your final word.
Yes, religious belief is delusion based on myths. At least for me as a Hindu, there is no objection on that. It is explained as such too. It is just delusion that people have found to make themselves feel good, concentrate, get focused on getting things done etc. Some misuse the delusion too, and most don't understand any of it.
It is a deity in meditation.
It is some garbage story that people made up to discriminate against other people and brainwashed them. There are also many conservative women who think it is okay for a man to strike a woman who has done something wrong. Who cares?
Huh? Garbage? What is garbage about it, sir? What did they discriminate against by assuming a deity to be in meditation. You mean it was set up to discriminate against women? Oh, come on. Then why didn't they do that in the other thousands of temples in Kerala and the rest of India? You are making up things (or have read Leftist atheist writers who made this bullshit up). This is about Kerala. We had a matriarchal system even for family succession (till the British abolished it in the 20th century). Women were not the downtrodden lot, and there is enough historical evidence of much more gender equality in Kerala compared to anywhere else in India. No evidence to say that anybody wanted to discriminate against women with just one temple in the hills/forest. If so, they would've done this at so many other temples too.

Is it something inconceivable that a man called Ayyappa said a few centuries ago that he was going to meditate there? What is wrong if people believed that some impressive man (who influenced people and caught their imagination at one time) said that and had sat there in meditation? They wanted to set up an idol for him later, and to go there every year to pray "with him", as they thought. For you and me, they would be deluding themselves into believing that his "essence" was still there. But explain to me what is "garbagy" about it? What is making you angry about it? If they didn't "feel something" they wouldn't do it. If they could delude themselves and feel something, why must you or I be angry about it?

The theory of creating and controlling what you call delusions, that people developed from practice and experience, is what Hinduism is. More below on it.

And why are you rambling to unnecessary directions? What is the connection with women believing that man can hit them? The above matter of meditation is nothing socially unacceptable, or demeaning, or unfair. But delusions around hitting women, are different! No Hindu talks about praying to a God that asks you to hit a woman, for the same reason. Strange analogy from you. In fact several temple practices went away because others told people (sometimes forcefully) to stop bad beliefs. In fact, before Adi Sankara codified the practices (around the 8th century), a lot of temples involved ritual sacrifices etc. Society changed, and most of those went out. There are ways in which the belief system around a temple can be collectively changed by the devotees. Very much allowed. But non-believers claiming to be defending Hindus and misleading courts, and then sending police into temples to do crazy things that not even 1% of the Hindu society want, is not the way that changes should happen.
The deities had never said they shouldn't either, which is why they wanted to pray to the deities.
I do not know whether to laugh or to cry over this. The deities saying something is a figment of man's creative imagination. To the best of my knowledge, no sane man or woman has seen or heard a deity ever say anything.
Again, you are not using your intellect (that I know you have plenty of) here. You are the one thinking that what you said is some revelation that bothers Hindu believers. It may bother those of other religions (and probably some less informed Hindus too) when you say that a deity is a figment of imagination. But a real Hindu knows that it indeed is in their imagination. The clearest reason why I would have to say that you have no clear clue on Hinduism and are just attacking (perhaps) the only religion that actually agrees with your logical intellect!

A deity is what PEOPLE make. At least in Hinduism, it is explicitly so. Gods are all man-made. When I say "a deity said", it is referring to only what people assume about that deity. Other temples do not get into it, but Sabarimala clearly does when it writes boldly in front of the idol to tell the devotees "you are that". People create Godliness. They are the Gods. The people made that God concept. There is no video recording of a man called Ayyappa saying anythinh. But if a deity is made in a temple for what people believe Ayyappa said, that is their belief, and their pilgrimage and prayers are of use only when the core items of what THEY set up as a deity remains intact. Meditating as a celibate is the concept the people set up for Ayyappa, the deity they wanted to worship. The women devotees believe in that concept too. Check with Kerala Hindu women. I have. Everybody knows what the ayyappa concept at Sabarimala is. They know the assumed back story of his promise to remain celibate etc. All part of their beliefs. They all made it up, if you want to say that. But so? Are their beliefs any less important than the beliefs the Govt or SC won't touch that are part of other religions' practices (no women pastors, not being in the mosque dargah, etc).
I usually try to argue point by point. But when things go to such a realm of delusional garbage, I don't think any argument matters anymore.
Because you are out of arguments to make, quite uncharacteristically. And you are resorting to name calling (on concepts, not me) out of frustration! Unnecessary frustration, because none of that really conflicts with what you logically think. You just assume that they do.

Delusions are a reality in life. The problem is your refusal to see that delusions also can have systematic characteristics, and that it can be controlled, individually and collectively. Why do you think it can't be? Focus your mind properly, and you can delude yourself the right way; i.e., in a positive way. That is the concept of God (well, there is more; but I will skip all that now).

Meditation helps you in the delusion. Well, if you have a full set of thoughts in your mind that you think are not delusions but are perceptions of real things/events, but then you remove some of those thoughts during meditation --> then you have lost the full-set of real feelings, which makes the partial-set a delusion, right? ... Then the question comes up - what all is included in the full-set of real things that you will consider as "not delusion"? ... (trying my computer science explanation)

Actually a lot of what you think is real are actually delusions too (even if you don't agree that everything is a delusion). As an atheist or agnostic or whatever you are, you need to examine delusions properly to understand what religion is. Note that other religions will not let you call it delusion. But my religion does. Collective delusion is an extension of it too. Done correctly, that can be beneficial too.

So, when a concept is put in place as a deity and everybody collectively have decided to delude themselves into believing it, it is as real as anything else, and their minds can benefit from it. The experience is uplifting for them. That is the belief in God and temples. There is no God sitting in heaven (at least for me). It is all in our own minds. But there are some concepts like Ayyappa, with its defined characteristics, that lead to great feelings of "delusions" followed by clearer minds and thinking, and even better family/social life (as most Ayyappas that go to Sabarimala and their wives will attest to). That is all quite a different delusion than drunken delusions or drug-induced delusions. Because it is delusions that we ourselves take our minds into voluntarily - without chemicals doing it on our nerves. You need to re-examine your view of what I said in the earlier posts on that basis. Hopefully you will.

User avatar
jayakris
Moderators
Moderators
Posts: 24212
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2002 7:24 am
Please enter the middle number: 1
Location: Irvine, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: God in trouble in God's own country... Sabarimala

Post by jayakris » Thu Jan 10, 2019 8:21 am

In a lighter and different vein, ours is an argument between somebody from Vivekananda's land, and somebody from AdiSankara's land... Both places over-run by communists and progressive thinkers who refuse to see that their minds are closed, mostly because their intellect cannot stay within the constraints in the concepts of the religions from the west. But they take it out on the religion that doesn't really place such restrictions on their logic/intellect (if you get deep into it; otherwise, it looks just the same as every religion). Not yet sure that you are firmly in that group though, Prasen. But I know a few friends in Kerala whom I have converted to accepting their Hinduism for what it is, after being very unconvinced about it at first. They almost feel liberated that their thinking was all fine all along!

But, Vivekananda, who was a staunch atheist at first, would be the best one for you to take a look at.

A story on Adisankara by the way, of relevance to the "delusion" discussion. He was requested by the king to go and help at the great Madurai Meenakshi temple where the pujaris were refusing to do puja. Their problem was that the Devi had so much "shakti" that they couldn't stand it, to even do puja. They would walk in and faint, looking at the idol. Of course, it was all in their minds, nothing else! So Sankarachrya went in, and came out later to tell them that he had just taken some power off the Devi. He claimed that he twisted the idol by a small angle. Not sure if he ever did that, but saying it was enough to make the Devi manageable for the pujaris, and the devotees who could go up and pray after that. The point is, sometimes something like that is enough to twist the domain of delusion. It is all perfectly fine by the theories. It is all mAya. It is all in our minds. But everything we think God does, happen because of what our own minds do. It is not at all blasphemy for a Hindu to say it. That is "aham brahmasmi" (we are the universal/ultimate energy state) in Hinduism. That is "tat tvam asi" (you are that) that Sabarimala tells the devotees.

User avatar
kujo
Authors
Authors
Posts: 3000
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: God in trouble in God's own country... Sabarimala

Post by kujo » Thu Jan 10, 2019 4:51 pm

If anything, this is just age discrimination for women. not specifically gender discrimination!! :D

User avatar
prasen9
Member
Member
Posts: 12751
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 8:49 pm
Please enter the middle number: 1
Location: State College, PA
Contact:

Re: God in trouble in God's own country... Sabarimala

Post by prasen9 » Thu Jan 10, 2019 10:21 pm

Jay, I think our belief systems are different and I think we cannot argue in any real sense. I have a core set of beliefs that trumps everything else and you have a different one. We can keep arguing but the result will not be any different. This is why hardly any political views are changed by arguments.

Yes, you are right. I have been frustrated by religion and its role in tons of human misery over millenia. I understand it has done some good too but imho, the good can be achieved by other means without resorting to fundamentalist religion. That is why I called it delusional garbage.

If I want, I can argue rationally to construct an argument. But, to what point? Our axioms are different. Hence, any proofs will diverge to different conclusions.

Sin Hombre
Member
Member
Posts: 3622
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 6:59 pm
Antispam: No
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: Chicago

Re: God in trouble in God's own country... Sabarimala

Post by Sin Hombre » Tue Jan 15, 2019 12:36 pm

I think one of the core reasons why these flare up is that India refuses to be a truly secular state.

Get a uniform civil code and it would be hard for Hindus to argue for special treatment for their deities.

User avatar
jayakris
Moderators
Moderators
Posts: 24212
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2002 7:24 am
Please enter the middle number: 1
Location: Irvine, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: God in trouble in God's own country... Sabarimala

Post by jayakris » Wed Jan 16, 2019 1:38 am

Sin Hombre wrote:
Tue Jan 15, 2019 12:36 pm
I think one of the core reasons why these flare up is that India refuses to be a truly secular state. Get a uniform civil code and it would be hard for Hindus to argue for special treatment for their deities.
What special treatment did anybody ask for Ayyappa? Actually what special treatment did Hindus ask for ANY deity? (I may be simply overlooking something, as a Hindu, so this is again not an argumentative question).

As far as Hindus are concerned, they constantly feel that they don't get equal treatment on respecting their belief systems compared to other religions. Step-motherly treatment compared to other religions. The state executive and judiciary seem to feel very comfortable in frequently stepping in and interfering with Hindu beliefs, in a way they cannot do for other religions like Christianity and Islam which have administrative structures, authoritative voices and unquestioned scriptures. Hinduism is not based on unquestioned scriptures, so the state and judiciary think that they can be the final word on belief systems.

If you say that Hindus ask for a "different treatment" of the deities due to this fact, you are correct. If "special treatment" means something over and above what other religions' belief systems get, then I disagree. All the Ayyappa devotees are asking only for their deity to be left alone, and for the supposed (presumed) characteristics of that deity to not be altered for activism purposes - especially when the "oppressed group" of women themselves say by over 99% majority that it is a wrong thing to do.

Interesting that you bring up the uniform civil code. The funny thing is that there is a small group of people, such as Mr. Rahul Easwar in Kerala, who believe that this Supreme court mess with Sabarimala was a deliberate creation of an extreme right wing agenda pushed by the previous Supreme Court justice, Deepak Misra, who set up a bench to make sure that they can encroach harshly into a Hindu temple's beliefs and set up a precedence to later be used for encroaching into other religion's beliefs and thus bring in a uniform civil code (and Ayyappa's not being a "nationally known" deity like Rama or Krishna or Hanuman, and Keralites being a very egalitarian and progressive bunch, he assumed that this would not yield the kind of reaction from Hindus like it has). I do not subscribe to this view of what Deepak Misra did, but there are some few folks who strongly suspect it.

User avatar
prasen9
Member
Member
Posts: 12751
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 8:49 pm
Please enter the middle number: 1
Location: State College, PA
Contact:

Re: God in trouble in God's own country... Sabarimala

Post by prasen9 » Thu Jan 17, 2019 4:48 am

I see we are still debating treatment afforded to fake entities :-) We were hearing about fake news. Now, we have rights of fake entities to deal with :-) lol.

I guess I am still stuck at a basic axiom. Should we as a people have a set of human rights that the state must uphold? Or does religious rights come first? Depending upon whether you think religion should trump human rights or vice-versa, you will derive different conclusions. And, if you do agree with the latter, can I start my religion that requires me to steal Rs. 100 from one person everyday even if it means killing that person? And, the court will uphold this because religion comes before human rights?

:-) This is a sad state of affairs. But, the contortions people go through to argue makes it interesting and even funny in a perverse way :-)

Separation of church and state is not there in India. We are hardly a secular state despite the proclamations. We are, if anything, a multi-religious state.

User avatar
Varma
Member
Member
Posts: 2404
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 2:49 am
Please enter the middle number: 1
Location: Irvine, CA, USA

Re: God in trouble in God's own country... Sabarimala

Post by Varma » Thu Jan 17, 2019 8:25 am

Human rights? Really? I did not want to debate on this topic, but couldn't resist when this "human rights" crap is thrown over and over again (no personal dig at you, Prasen. I am referring to the media in general). I always wanted to visit Sabarimala but didn't ever make it because I wasn't patient enough to take the "Deeksha", which (as far as I know) is mandatory even for men to enter the main temple. You are supposed to embark on a 40 day ritual where you follow strict diet (vegetarian, of course), wear only black clothes, remain completely bare foot for that entire period, sleep on the floor, maintain celibacy, and many more. So, the temple expects its devotees to follow a certain regimen. Even a man cannot just wake up one day and barge in. Forget about "women's rights", I think they should generalize this movement and cut the crap of this 40-day regimen and allow everyone to go there. After all, it's that very restriction which denied my basic human right of wanting to go visit Sabarimala :D. I heard the lady who visited the temple is gate crashing Jama Masjid tomorrow. She is itching very bad to exercise her other birth/human right! :p

- Varma

User avatar
jayakris
Moderators
Moderators
Posts: 24212
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2002 7:24 am
Please enter the middle number: 1
Location: Irvine, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: God in trouble in God's own country... Sabarimala

Post by jayakris » Thu Jan 17, 2019 7:12 pm

prasen9 wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 4:48 am
I see we are still debating treatment afforded to fake entities :-) We were hearing about fake news. Now, we have rights of fake entities to deal with :-) lol.
If you are trying to see if you will upset a real Hindu with your smartaleckiness, and downright childish word play -- well, you won't. Because you are trying to say something that is well-understood in a very systematic way, though your attempt at stating it as some sort of a joke only shows that you do not understood it. Which is why I call it childish, because I know you are refusing to use your sharp brain which can indeed understand it if you realize that you are brainwashed by what you think is logic, while that logic is based on limited premises. Open your mind and think, please.

"Treatment afforded to fake deities" -- How low have your intellect sunk, prasen? Did you even read what I said that deities are the creation of the devotees, in the minds? Did that not translate to "treatment of a deity" as the treatment of the devotees?

Drop this line of talk, prasen. Those who understand the real Hindu principles have intellectually, and in a logically consistent way, determined that there is real value to one's own personal mental health, and collective community well-being, from "imagined" concepts like God -- which you call "fake". As though imagination is not something that exists! The fake thing you mention is indeed what God is -- in every religion -- though only the Indians (Hindus, Buddhists, etc) seem to really know it.
I guess I am still stuck at a basic axiom. Should we as a people have a set of human rights that the state must uphold? Or does religious rights come first?
In my view, the set of human rights comes first, in general... but it depends on what is "human rights". Certainly "fake" human rights should not come first, above the majority opinions of the "population of concern" (a loaded phrase). Just because 1% of the population perceives that they have some human right, it doesn't mean that such human rights exist. To want to be a nudist can really be argued as a human right of the very basic kind (and India even allows it in some tribal islands, for instance) -- but it is absolutely not allowed almost everywhere. If you want a gender-unequal case of it, just because I am a woman who thinks I have a right to show my nipples in public like a man may be allowed to (in most places), I don't get that "human right". Depending on the country, just because I feel that I have a basic human right to kill and eat a dog, just like I may be allowed to kill and eat a goat or a cow, I don't get that right.

Then comes the issue that "human rights" is not anything absolute. They change over time too. In most societies, people had a right to beat and discipline their young children, but that right isn't there now. Because deeply hurting the feelings of a vast majority of people will usually establish that "human right" as one that is only in your mind, and not in the public's. Smoking was a human right once, and it is not one now. Because it affects a majority of others. The effect in the case of a woman showing nipples, is mental. The effect in the case of smoking can be physical. The effect of any law when it comes to religious beliefs is generally on the mental side. So giving the human right you perceive vis-a-vis religious practices, has an effect no different than human rights perceived in public/social behavior as a nudist. We are again back to the issue of what the majority feels within the "population of concern".
Depending upon whether you think religion should trump human rights or vice-versa, you will derive different conclusions. And, if you do agree with the latter, can I start my religion that requires me to steal Rs. 100 from one person everyday even if it means killing that person? And, the court will uphold this because religion comes before human rights?
No, you have to first show that there are enough people buying that as a religion and show that the public accepts that as not having socially deleterious effects. Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, etc can all show that the beliefs and practices are generally socially beneficial. That is a big reason they became religion. People don't believe in things that aren't good, collectively. The religions have all evolved over time to the point where socially unacceptable and non-beneficial practices slowly went away. Your "stealing religion" does not qualify, on any yardstick a constitution of a country may use. Cannibalism will not be a religion anywhere. You don't have a right to call any bullshit as "religion". Just like you don't have a right to call any bullshit "human right"...

In fact, the religion that you described, exists. Not as a religion but as a political philosophy. It is called communism. Steal money, even if you have to kill, with the reasoning that it makes everybody equal and happy. If anything is against human rights, it is communism, and this whole argument started only because of the dictatorial actions by a communist CM (who by definition is a non-believer in God or temples) to selectively enforce a court order at a temple, without first consulting the people who believe in that temple (who may even have agreed to not oppose the SC verdict but simply ask for it to be fully implemented as it said - "allow DEVOTEE women of any age". A check on whether they were devotees as prescribed by Hindu religious figures was all that was needed. He would've hardly found even 15 devotee women going there, when 15 million men go)
:-) This is a sad state of affairs. But, the contortions people go through to argue makes it interesting and even funny in a perverse way :-)
Only you are going through contortions, because you cannot find logically consistent thoughts within you about beliefs, creating Gods, imagination, its individual and collective power, how it becomes religion, etc. For me, as a Hindu, there are no contortions. I don't need contortions to justify and argue for the beliefs that are in Christianity, Islam, and other religions either. Logic and philosophy on this, that developed over millennia in India, have been quite strong and satisfying for me, who is a mathematically and analytically inclined guy with western science training.
Separation of church and state is not there in India. We are hardly a secular state despite the proclamations. We are, if anything, a multi-religious state.
Like you believe that! You are deceiving yourself if you think you want church and state to be separate. Then why aren't you asking why the SC should legislate what characteristic of a God are allowable? Because that is what they just did in Sabarimala. SC basically said that we cannot have a God made by the devotees under the premise (based on legends) that he didn't want to see young women on the basis of his presumed promise to a Goddess that he would not see young women if he was not willing to marry that Goddess. No, you need to have a God who *will* see young women, said the SC. The devotees are asked to imagine and believe only that kind of a God. What next? Legislate that in India Jesus should be shown to have a female version also in every church, because praying to just a man is discriminating Christian women who want to pray to a woman.

What you really wanted was for the state to get involved in the Hindu temple's beliefs (that do not cause ANY social harm!) and use it for political reasons. You found it fine for the state executive to encourage (with orchestrated false testimonies) judicial activism during the trial, against the wishes of 99% of devotees, in a place where the reason for that activism, gender-inequality, is the least pronounced in India. You found nothing wrong in it, and started singing paeans on the SC and about the state "enforcing" the activism.

It really needs a lot of intellectual dishonesty to yourself for you to say that you want separation of church and state. Unfortunately, you are not aware of how much you are deceiving your own logical thinking because of the leftist (or at least the so-called "progressive") brainwashing you have undergone.

Note that I stayed away from the usual Sangh Parivar retort - "why aren't you asking the state to interfere in the churches and mosques also, then?". Because I feel that such a retort is dishonest too, and is trying to side-step the issue. Plus, I actually think that you want the state to interfere and change Christian and Muslim practices too, not just the Hindus' practices.

What you want is for church and state to be separated, but via the elimination of church, and not by true separation. Yours is a communist view, nothing else. You are just parroting the nonsense the leftists have been saying for a long time.

Post Reply