You are here: SriPedia - Oppiliappan - Archives - Oct 2004

Oppiliappan List Archive: Message 00197 Oct 2004

 
Oct 2004 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


SRIMATHE RAMANUJAY NAMAH..
 
I have been reading an interesting subject "Women & chanting Vedas.." Various logical arguments have been put up, but I humbly believe that Gita has a reply while interpreting teachings of great gurus, Ramanujachary, Raman etc. It says: "Tasmaat shastram pramaanam.."   I think, we should avoid applying our measurement of today's surroundings. See, our shaastras have not banned women from "MUKTI", they have presented 18 puraans for all of us. Every one is entitled to have a deep in the Ganges. But if I want to be a doctor and practice medicine professionally, I have got to get MBBS or other degree first and then I can go for specialization course. Any road goer can not stand up on the road crossing and start regularizing traffic by giving side, he must be necessarily a traffic constable or inspector appointed by the authority. Only qualified and licenced engineers or architects can prepare and submit building plans and thereby practise as architects and engineers and nobody else can either get licence to practise or do the profeession. So there are numbers of such examples of man made rules, regulations and laws in our society to regulate it. If we formulate our constitutions, rules, regulations, laws; should we not 'permit' Him to have His constitution, regulations, rules and laws ? He created man & woman. See, there is no discremination between the two as there is the same "aatma" in man what the woman has. But the 'shukshma' difference is in respect of their bodies.
 
One has got to accept that there is fundamental physical difference between the two. A woman concieves, can a man do ? Both have vocal coard, but still there is a difference between their voice. Can there be a similar quality of voice of Ms Subhalaxmi and Pandit Jasraj ? Why don't we object to this descriminations ? You are sitting in a large auditorium and suddenly light goes off and some one speaks on a loud speaker, you will immediately know as to the speaker is a woman or a man. So we have got to accept that there is a difference between man and woman. Communist theory or political consideration of equality would not work there. I cannot expect rice to grow on Punjab land and wheat to grow on West Bengal land. There are perfact rules of nature. The groom sits on an elephant and not on donkey or monkey, though all have the same aatma inside them. We forget our arguments of eqality there..!
 
Then why do we fight for breaking the rules of God who does not permit chanting of Vedas ?! And over and above, as I said earlier, 'Shaashtras' do not prohibit women to attain "mukti", "aatma-kalyaan" or climbing the highest peak in spiritual upliftment. But He has worked out the routes for man and woman to reach their targets. Two trains depart from Hawra (Calcutta) everyday for Mumbai- one via Nagpur and another via Pune. You have a reservation in a train via Nagpur train:  Coach No. 4, Berth No.10. Now if you go to a train via Pune, with a ticket for the Coach No. 4, Berth No.10; will the TT permit you to travel by that train despite your arguments with him, "See, I have a reservation for Mumbai,
coach no.4, Berth No. 10.. I have paid for that and why don't you allow ?" He would simply say, "Sir, it is true that you have a reservation ticket for the same coach, but it is for the train which goes to Mumbai via NAGPUR, and not via PUNE... see, that train is on the another platform, you can go there and can travel by that train though both are going to Mumbai only.
 
Shaashtras do not stop us from going and reaching to Mumbai, but both trains are different like our physical bodies. Man can chant Vedas because his reservation is in the train via Nagpur, women can chant and study 18 "puraanas" and reach Mumbai by the train via Pune. Both trains reach and bring to Mumbai, however subject to your reservation, of course ! 
 
I am, therefore, of the humble opinion that women should restraign themselves from chanting Vedas. At least I am practising this and both my daughters do not chant Vedas following aagya of our Guruji while taking mantra-diksha..
 
Let me humbly clarify that I am not at all expert on the subject. However, your beautiful article on the subject attracted my attention and I have attempted  to participate in the discussion. I shall be very happy to see if the discussion continues by experts..
 
Regards.
 
-Bharat Sukhparia
Advocate,
Jamnagar-361001 (Gujarat)
bsukhparia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 
 
 
 
 
 


jasn sn <jayasartn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:


SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA.

The analysis of the verse 10-34 of Gita is continued
to probe into whether there exists some other meaning
to this verse.
The Lord as being the origin of Birth in this context
is easy to understand. But why does He tell about
Himself as being Death in the context of telling who
He is among women?

Thinking about the two great epics, we seem to get
closer to the core idea. Is it because the Lord swung
into action as Lord of Death when the women were
wronged?

When Sita was abducted, Valmiki merely goes about
narrating how the incidents had happened and how Sita
was distressed. Then Jatayu enters the scene and is
badly wounded. She goes near him, holds him and does
?rodhanam? (crying) saying so many words. Ravana then
lifts her up by her hair? At this juncture Valmiki
says that when Ravana did this act (of holding her
aloft by her hair), Brahma devan remarked happily,
?kaaryam mudindhadu? (the job is over), implying that
Ravana?s fate is now sealed. The other other-worldly
beings such as kinnara etc also rejoiced that Ravana?s
end had come. They didn?t seem to comment like this
when Sita was abducted. At that time everyone was
watching in stunned silence. The act of touching
Sita?s hair and lifting her by holding it seems to be
an act of grave offence to signify that there would be
no going back in Rama?s resolve to kill him. It is
note-worthy that Rama let go kakasura who harmed her
mortally in her private part, but he didn?t do that to
Ravana whose committing of an affront on Sita?s
dignity was a shade physically lesser than what
kakasura had done. The sookshumam seems to lie in
hair!

Why I am led to think like this is because similar
dreadful end was foretold by Draupadi when she made a
vow of not tying up her hair till the kauravas were
vanquished and Dhuryodhana?s blood smeared on her
hair. Probably elders who are more conversant with
practices of olden days may be able to shed more light
on the sookshumam of woman?s ?aLaga-bhAram?.

The purpose of the above narration is to stress the
point that the Lord does not take kindly on acts that
affect woman?s dignity, safety and probably the 7
qualities that have found mention in His own song.
Whenever such qualities (mEdha, vAk, speech etc) are
exhibited, there has been no hindrance to their
seeking of lofty Principles. To substantiate this, let
me quote what sage Yajnavalkya said to his wife.

Yajnavalkya was too happy to hear Maitreyi ask him
what leads to deathlessness. He says, ?you have always
been very dear to me and what you say now makes you
dearer still?, and continues to unravel the Eternal
Knowledge to her. If it had been mandatory for anyone
to learn swadhyaya as antecedent to inquiry into
Eternal knowledge, how could Yajnavalkya had given it
to his wife? Of the different pramanas that Bhagavad
Ramanuja had quoted, why did he not consider this one?
In practice, this antecedent clause bars not only
women, but also men from taking up direct inquiry ?
something what we all do today.

With advancement of kali yuga, the first notable
casualty is vedadhyayana. One can count the number of
persons learning the karma khandam as Ramanuja thinks
is required for further abhyasa. If he has meant it to
be a strict rule, then not many men, leave alone
women, are entitled to do the meditation on Brahman.

On arriving at this thought, I felt I need to know
Ramanuja?s mind better. Elsewhere - in 3 places in
brahma sutra-bhashya to be precise - Ramanuja had said
something, but practised something else in his own
life. (I request the readers not to consider my
language as an affront on him. This is an intellectual
exercise which I took to Ramanuja in Melkote when I
was not convinced why he chose to give an explanation
like this, while he could have as well spoken like
Shankara in his interpretation of the sutra.)

One area is the interpretation on who a shudra is.
Though Ramanuja defines a shudra as one ?who is
grief-stricken?, he preferred to fall in line (in sri
bhashyam) with the sutrakara who said that shudrahood
comes by caste.(?shudras by caste are not entitled to
Brahma vidhya? - 1-3-33) But in practice, Ramanuja
never barred anyone from learning / knowing
thirumanthram or sat vishayam.

Another area where he wrote something and preached
another is in determining whether the jiva has any
freewill. In his commentary to Brahma sutra, he does
speak about jiva?s own ?volition? at the initial stage
? only as a logical consequence in the context without
producing any pramana to substantiate this. For,
theoretically, vedopanishads do not support the idea
of freewill to the jiva. There is no case built for
the conditions that can determine what this initial
stage that he has in mind. He does not explain what
defines the initial stage and what factors contribute
to spontaneity of will of the jiva. This ideological
dilemma is tempered down in Vedartha sangraha (124)
where he talks about god conferring on the jiva
?spontaneously a holy disposition of will and
intellect?. Further later, the granthas like
Srivachana bhooshanam and Mumukshuppadi which reflect
his grooming and thought harp on the virtues of
shedding ?swa-shakthi?, that is shedding of freewill
and glorification of absolute subservience to god.

Yet another area where the transformation in thought
is found, is in his composition of Vaikuntha gadhyam
glorifying the Lord in Form. But all along his sri
bhashya, he had heavily relied on pramanas on formless
god (Brahman). There was a heavy accent on the
metaphysical aspects of the inquiry, than on a god of
form. It strikes the attention of the reader of
Vedartha sangraha, that wherever he speaks about a god
with form, he relies on quotes by telling that the
sutrakara says like this. But later he seems to have
been so convinced about propagating the idea of god
with form, for the sake of common man to worship.

So that leaves only with this chanting of vedas. Did
Ramanuja foresee that a time would come when the
ashrama dharma would collapse at least with reference
to learning at a gurukul? Probably not, considering
the fact that it was only with the advent of Macaulay,
the education system changed in this country. But he,
with far-sight must have made some amends somewhere ?
to suit the changing conditions.

Thus my concern about the bar on women to chant to
vedas transformed into a larger concern, as his
notions seem to affect all and sundry who do not take
up vedic learning. Then what is his prescription for
people of our times and of future? With this thought
in mind, I was standing in front of him in Melkote
with my eyes closed.

?Is it right to say that women should not recite
vedas?
Is it right to de-bar countless people like me who
are willing to learn about the nature of Brahman,
mainly because we have not had formal ashrama-type
training? Sollum. Neer sollum.?

(to be continued)






_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/XUWolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->


Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Oppiliappan/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Oppiliappan-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
 
Will you help a needy child?
· It only costs .60¢ a day · It's easier than you think.
· Click here to meet a waiting child you can sponsor now.


Yahoo! Groups Links


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index ] [Thread Index ] [Author Index ]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia
oppiliappan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list