Chanting of ॐकार by Women

[Sanhita Joshi]

Saadaram Namonamah, 

Some people believe that the chanting of ॐकार is prohibited for women. The popular rationale given for this is 'the huge amount of heat in ॐकार induces her internal heat and it may prove to be harmful for her health.' Many Yoga Practitioners (at least those who are in my acquaintance) have varied opinions  in this regard. Such prohibition also exist in the cases of practice of गायत्री मन्त्र and अथर्वशीर्ष स्तोत्र by women.  

My questions are- 

1) Did such prohibition exist?  

2) If so, what were the reasons behind the popularization of such notion? 

3) Is there any scientific study conducted in present times which throws light on the repercussions of the chanting of these Mantras especially ॐकार on the human body. especially on women's?    

I sincerely request all eminent scholars of this group to guide on this topic.

Thank you all!

अनुगृहीतास्मि 

Sanhita Joshi.

सर्वे भद्राणि पश्यन्तु मा कश्चित् दुःखमाप्नुयात्||

   (May all see what is auspicious, May no one suffer.)

[Krishna Kashyap]

namaskar,

I also want to know the answers to these questions. Interesting questions!

if someone has done deep scientific experiments to find any effects of chanting Pranava by women, it will help a lot.

Best Regards,

Krishna Kashyap

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAH8RULM169TYHfAXfgDMB9mubdxefLDSg6eSD_aOMLD4RzasTQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Sivasenani Nori]

Sanhita ji, namaste.

I write in the belief (based on your signature etc.) that you are a seeker interested in furthering your saadhanaa, and that your intention is not like that of Dr. Ananya Vajapeyi (https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/the-story-of-my-sanskrit/article6321759.ece) who studied Dharmasastra to only criticize it and those who taught her for three years, an act of kritaghnatA. 

श्रद्धावाल्लँभते ज्ञानम् - भगवद्गीता, 4.13 ।

The one with SraddhA obtains knowledge.

The word SraddhA needs elaboration, especially since it is often used in the sense of  'diligence' in Indian languages. In SAstra, it is better translated as faith. Here are a few references to support the same:

मन्तव्यविषये आदरः आस्तिक्यबुद्धिः श्रद्धा। Sankaracharya's bhashya on Chandogyopanishat 7.19.1 ॥ 

(Sraddha is respect for, and belief in, the topic of discussion)

श्रद्धा अदृष्टार्थेषु कर्मसु आस्तिक्यबुद्धिः देवतादिषु च, अश्रद्धा तद्विपरीता बुद्धिः। Sankaracharya's bhashya on Br. Up. 1.5.3 ॥ 

(Sraddha is belief in karma which has adrishTa (= paapa, puNya) as its result and in gods; Asraddha is the reverse of that).

श्रद्धा ... आस्तिक्यबुद्धिः। Sankaracharya's bhashya on Mu. Up. 2.1.7 ॥

(Sraddha is belief)

सर्वत्रास्तिकता श्रद्धा । bhAshyaratnaprabhA while explaining the sAdhanasampat ॥ 

(Everywhere, Sraddha is belief)

गुरुवेदान्तवाक्येषु विश्वासः श्रद्धा।  vedAntaparibhAshA, under prayojanam while explaining SamadamAdishaTkam॥ (

Sraddha is faith in the Guru and Vedantic sentences)

शास्त्रस्य गुरुवाक्यस्य सत्यबुद्धयावधारणा। सा श्रद्धा कथिता सद्भिर्यया वस्तूपलभ्यते॥ 26, Vivekachudamani ॥ 

(Determining SAstra and the teaching of Guru as true is called Sraddha, that which is a necessary condition for attaining the desired goal)

गुरूपदिष्टवेदान्तवाक्येषु विश्वासः श्रद्धा। vedAntasAra ॥ 

(Faith in the Vedantic sentences taught by Guru is Sraddha)

One has to approach Sastra with Sraddha, with faith that what is said in Sastra and what the teacher of Sastra is saying is true. One might say that this is strange, especially if one is skeptical. Since modern education in India cultivates skepticism, this is worth a brief examination. Let us keep religion aside and examine certain values, which hold true for most human beings, including the irreligious, areligious, non-religious, athiestic and skeptic ones (whichever label they prefer). Let us examine only one value - bhUtadayA - helping other creatures. Why is this good? From evolutionary biology we know that each creature tries to survive and procreate itself; then what explains this very uncharacteristic approval of acting against one's self-interest? If one says what when we help others, dopamine etc. are produced in our body which make us happy, we must be smart enough to know that such a reaction in body is there to encourage certain social behaviour and that one cannot always follow that. If one were to only rely on the harmones produced by body, all of us should eat whenever food is available, becoming super obese; yet, we know better and limit our food intake. I am yet to come across a satisfactory explanation of why widely-held human values are rational, or 'scientific' if you will. We simply believe that some things are valid and cannot prove them right by logic or reasoning.

In fact, you dig deeper, all Science is based on axioms.  Similar in religion, we need to have a minimal set of axioms. We call that faith in religious terms. Or Sraddha. For Buddhists, faith is imposed in the word of Buddha; for followers of Sanatanadharma, Vedas are right; and so on.

To view the same from a different point of view, the doctrine of Sraddha says that somethings can be understood only when you make a sincere effort to do so and such sincerity is not possible, if inside your mind, you harbour doubts. Personally, I was caught in this dichotomy between skepticism borne out of a modern education and sanskaara ingrained from early upbrining, for about sixteen years. Then, while studying Vedanta, it dawned upon me - after much pain, let me add -  that I am an adhamaadhikaari or madhyamaadhikaari, and simply cannot 'get it', as long as I harbour doubts and as long as I do not do adequate saadhanaa. In sum, one needs Sraddha to understand Sastra.

And before directly answering your questions, let me briefly touch upon adhikAra. In Bhoja's champUrAmAyaNa, just before going to vanavAsa Rama meets Kaikeyi and says  मयि पतति गरीयानम्ब ते पक्षपातः - "Mother, you are being partial towards me, compared to Bharata":

वनभुवि तनुमात्रत्राणमाज्ञापितं मे, सकलभुवनभारः स्थापितो वत्समूर्ध्न।

तदिह सुकरतायामावयोस्तर्कितायां मयि पतति गरीयानम्ब ते पक्षपातः ॥ 25, अयोध्याकाण्डम् ॥

(O mother! you have given me the meagre responsibility of protecting myself from wild beasts, and have asked the young Bharata to bear this huge burden of protecting the kingdom from all kinds of dangers; if we compare the ease of tasks, between the two of us, you are partial to me.)

The maryAdapurusha understands kshAtra dharma clearly and sees ruling a kingdom as a responsibility, not a right, or a luxury. Similarly, the adhikAra for VedAdhyana should be seen as a responsibility.

Now, to answer your questions.

1. There is a probhibition against women reciting mantras, because one needs to be initiated (upavIta) and no rite of initiation has been specified for women. So it is not a direct prohibition, but is a deduced position based on the absence of certain enabling procedures. This is better viewed as women not having the responsibility of learning Veda, reciting all of what was learnt at once a month for forty years (svAdhyAya) etc. It does not mean exclusion from worship etc. Instead of a mantras, Slokas are to be used while worshipping etc. The teaching of Veda is also made available through Ramayana, Mahabharata, Puranas etc.

praNavopAsana is ordained only for Sannyasins; grihastas - both male and female - are not supposed to upAsana of kevalapraNava, but it can be used at the beginning of mantras etc. I am not aware of any prohibition of women reciting 'om' at all, especially from the standpoint of haThayoga, but the doctrine of Sraddha shows us that we need to take this from a Guru in that Sastra.

2. To the extent, prohibitions are there, reasons are explained above. An additional remark is not out of place here. If there is a drishTArtha (visible result), then adrishTArtha (invisible result, accrual of puNya) is not used to explain any injunction; but that does not mean that adrishTArtha is not a valid reason. If Veda says, 'pound the grain' (व्रीहीनवहन्ति), one pounds the grain and does not ask questions like 'can I not use my nails to remove the chaff'. If Sastra lays down something, it is like Raajaajnaa (in Alankarasastra, this is called prabhusammitaa) and has to be done; no questions are permitted. The attempts to explain the various injunctions are either attempts at understanding Sastra better (agreeable) or rationalization (not agreeable - by definition, we have faith in Sastra, and do not do something because it is rational).

3. No, to my knowledge there are no studies about heat being produced by reciting omkAra,. For many centuries, people had this urge to verify what has been said in Sastra. The results are called adrishTArtha for a reason. Let me narrate a small episode - from Mimamsa, but Nyaya also has a version of it. There is a Vedic injunction - चित्रया यजेत पशुकामः (Taittiirya Samhita, 2.4.6) - one desirous of animals may do the Chitrayaga. Now a skeptic questions this by first showing a person, who has performed Chitrayaga, but did not get any pashus; then, he also points to another one, who got pashus, but did not perform the Chitrayaaga. The answer of the Sastrin is: "Veda says one will get animals, but it was not said whether one would get them in this janma only or later janmas; also the very fact that the other fellow obtained animals shows that he has performed Chitrayaaga in earlier janmas". Hence I quoted this Vedic sentence श्रद्धा अदृष्टार्थेषु कर्मसु आस्तिक्यबुद्धिः  above. Where there is Sraddha, one does not seek proof, definiely not where adrishTa is involved.

Finally, let it be known that there are myriad paths to what we seek. One reaches much farther when one approaches a goal with humility, rather than with angst.

Regards

N. Siva Senani

[Kumar C.R]

N. Siva Senani Ji --- Beautiful clarification. Many of my doubts, though not on this topic, got clarified. Namastey.

[srivalli anand]

Many Namaskarams Sri Sivasenani Mahodaya.

The answer to this question that was placed is so universally applicable to our Dharma.  We, youngsters who wish to convincingly answer queries that arise every now and then, have had an eye opener in your answer.  It reminds me of how our Guru used to insist - "दुस्तर्कात् सुविरम्यतां श्रुतिमतस्तर्कोऽनुसन्धीयताम्" .  The axioms that we so gladly assume and accept in all sciences somehow are questioned when it comes to Sanatanadharma.  That is not to say that questioning is discouraged. On the contrary, it is the basis of our Sastras to question.  However your explanation on the basic axiom of श्रद्धा being the essential prerequisite was such a revelation.  

Thank you Sir.

Namaskrams, 

Srivalli Anand

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAs%2BaZMmyku5kmYytqx7BaUGSc8tyGo%3D7rqGQOCHjH1ewmiqxw%40mail.gmail.com.

[G S S Murthy]

Thank you very much, Sir, for your brilliant exposition.

Regards,
Murthy

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAOa%2BRtLs%2BxhBpx84cRTUF%3DzbWBK7n%3DE_9jghdkQVM-Ruki0xyQ%40mail.gmail.com.

--

My web site : http://murthygss.tripod.com/index.htm
and also my Sanskrit blog :

http://simplesanskrit.blogspot.com/

http://gssmurthy.blogspot.com

[Savita Sajjan]

       Namaste to all Respected  teachers, 

   1) पञ्चात्मकतेजसेद्धरसश्च सम्यग्ज्ञानात् ध्यानात्

अक्षरमोङ्कारं चिन्तयति । तदेतदेकाक्षरं ज्ञात्वाऽष्टौ

प्रकृतयः षोडश विकाराः शरीरे तस्यैवे देहिनाम् ।   (गर्भोपनिषत् १७)

  2) Astanga Hrudaya    Shareerasthana  1st chapter  Garbhaavakranti  Adhyaya   33 shloka,  to get  good progeny  they have  to chant this mantra which starts with  Om kar itself.

 3) Charaka Samhita Shareerasthana of 8th chapter,    during delivery     physician  should chant some mantras in the ear of  mother,  for safe  delivery.

4) In Yoni Vyapat chikitsa of charaka samhita chikitsa sthana 30th chapter  also there is no such  causative  factor  for 20 types yoni vyapat  diseases. ( Ahita Ahara-vihara,  daiva  factor  is mentioned-Purvajanma kruta karma.)

                   As per my understanding, with above said references , there is no restriction  to chant Om kar  for women.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CADi6ZRjU_o_V3myVnJw5SG%3DDJmJoVSsca42x0z_de8-ESC-TBg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Gudsoorkar A G]

Thank you very much Senaniji for this nice elaboration and illumination on this very important aspect of ‘Shraddha’ required for Sadhana.

My Respects to you.

-Ashok Gudsoorkar 

Sent from my iPhone

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAs%2BaZMmyku5kmYytqx7BaUGSc8tyGo%3D7rqGQOCHjH1ewmiqxw%40mail.gmail.com.

[venkat veeraraghavan]

Shri Sivasenani has given a brilliant and complete answer to your question.

Let me like a squirrel add a little more (yatha-shakti):

"Some people believe that the chanting of ॐकार is prohibited for women."

--> My suggestion please stop asking "people" what to do. Ask experts. By experts I refer to people who have studied shastra at the expense of artha and kAma. Nothing is attained in this world without sacrifice and see if the people you ask are shraddhaalus and not limited to mere verbiage.

Ask people who are adhikaaris. This will exclude certain "indologists" and their local lapdogs like Devdutt Pattnaik.

If you wish to board a flight you want to know that it was designed by people who competently passed out of an accredited aeronautics course and were not mere hobbyists, however gifted.

Hollywood may think otherwise but they sell dreams.

Regarding praNava and gAyatri:

--> Have you considered the plausible reason that a psychology of "desire for the forbidden fruit " is acting in both cases?

The reason the vedas are considered sacrosanct is that they are apaurusheya, timeless beyond conception of past present and future (athato brahmajijnasa....NOW is the only timeframe suggested) and come through the instrument of  uttamaadhikaaris namely the rshis.

-->I am not aware of the atharvashirsha having any constraints..please correct me if I am wrong.

We came into this world through our mother and she introduced us to the father. None of us asked for a DNA certificate or other "scientific" proof of paternity. So also the shastra is like a loving mother who cares equally for all Her children. The advice is meant for each person's evolution and not to marginalise or belittle.

It is possible that in the long hoary past women also were given upavita --I believe there is a separate thread about that on BVP...I am given to understand Harita has written much in that regard.

--> There are plenty of mantras in tantra and shlokas of wonderful efficacy given in the Mahabharata the most popular of which is the Vishnu Sahasranama.

Tukaram one of the greatest saints the world has seen was initiated in a dream and his mantra was nothing fancy.

Eye witnesses recorded that Vimanas with Vishnudutas came to take him away.

Such is the power of shraddha.

 

1) Did such prohibition exist?

   ----> Unless you have access to a sampradaya that initiates the ladies (as given by Harita etc.), it is best to accept the default setting and persevere within the rules. Experimentation is very very dangerous for some one committed. Chanting once or twice will not give any bad effects since most people even the adhikaaris for this japa rarely have the spiritual development necessary to see the results.

I'll give a real story:- A disciple of a tantric Guru took vArAhi sadhana and started his japa at a lonely spot. After sometime a pig started visiting him and the pig liked sitting next to him. The austere sadhaka was offended and had a feeling of revulsion/disgust in the mind. Shortly thereafter he started vomitting blood. When he consulted the Guru he told the disciple that his devata had visited him in the form of a pig and his disgust had resulted in his sadhana giving contrary and rather frightening results.

This was due to lack of shraddha.

The above example is an extreme one and does not apply to Vedic mantras which are more forgiving, but still that would not be an excuse for experimentation.

Most Gurus these days even the ones with fancy siddhis are not uttamaadhikaaris.

The rshis belong to a different level even among uttamaadhikaaris and it is best to follow their advice rather than pit our limited intellect and drishti with theirs. "yatha drishti tatha srishti"

 

“A man goes to knowledge as he goes to war: wide-awake, with fear, with respect, and with absolute assurance. Going to knowledge or going to war in any other manner is a mistake, and whoever makes it might never live to regret it”

--Carlos Cataneda

Approaching anything especially vidya without complete awareness and surrender is dangerous. 

Yes Gayatri does create a lot of heat in the body especially if your japa count goes consistently into the thousands per day. Men have reasonably simple plumbing and they have problems. I assume the more complicated plumbing of ladies makes them susceptible to health issues. 

Gayatri is after all the power of the Sun. /Savita.

2) If so, what were the reasons behind the popularization of such notion? 

--> I am speculating here and if any of the vidvans have source please provide the same (for /against)-->

I am addressing here the reason for the advice of the rshis and not addressing "vox populi"

     1. The different physiology of women and their greater material responsibilities

     2. If a lady gets abstracted in Brahman who is going to look after the mundane activities of the household?

           The woman is the creatrix and perpetuator of the Vedic system and she automatically gets 50% of the result of all the japa and homa of her pati.             Elsewhere the definition of patni is one who assists at the 5 sacrifices.

     3. The time investment required for sandhyavandana, japa, samitadhana/agnihotra, brahmayajna etc. is rather significant. Gotras would have vanished due to starvation if women were to have their own nityakarma.

4. The Vedic system is one of division of responsibility whether it is varnaashrama dharma or grihastaashrama dharma. The lady of the house had her own responsibilities adjacent to the man's that assisted in the Vedic process. Each did his/her part and they shared in the results. Isn't that a beautiful partnership? 

3) Is there any scientific study conducted in present times which throws light on the repercussions of the chanting of these Mantras especially ॐकार on the human body. especially on women's?    

--> While Science as defined as the observation and codification of nature as observed in experimentation is sacrosanct scientists are not.

 Some Scientists have made science into a quasi religion with the same levels of bigotry and preachiness that the medieval church exhibited.

The common people dutifully follow this "scientific temper" as sacrosanct ignoring the fact that much of modern science is funded by vested interests with access to purse strings. The scientists themselves are not above cultural bias and bigotry.

As in all things ignorance is bliss.

Lastly if anyone needs the validation of Science or a Scientist for the Gayatri or Pranava, it is better to take the scientist as a Guru and forget all these mantras...just saying ;-)

As Shri Sivasenani pointed out there are hidden effects at work everywhere and the limited materialist vision of men cannot penetrate into the marma behind the drishti of rshis.

Why do I say this? I know because when I started I questioned everything "traditional", followed my own drum beat and regretted everything.

Atleast I am thankful that I was given a chance to rectify and course correct within this lifetime.

As in all things to each his/her own. 

All the best,

Regards,

Venkat

 

On Sun, 10 May 2020 at 20:49, Sanhita Joshi <sanht...@gmail.com> wrote:

Saadaram Namonamah, 

Some people believe that the chanting of ॐकार is prohibited for women. The popular rationale given for this is 'the huge amount of heat in ॐकार induces her internal heat and it may prove to be harmful for her health.' Many Yoga Practitioners (at least those who are in my acquaintance) have varied opinions  in this regard. Such prohibition also exist in the cases of practice of गायत्री मन्त्र and अथर्वशीर्ष स्तोत्र by women.  

My questions are- 

1) Did such prohibition exist?  

2) If so, what were the reasons behind the popularization of such notion? 

3) Is there any scientific study conducted in present times which throws light on the repercussions of the chanting of these Mantras especially ॐकार on the human body. especially on women's?    

I sincerely request all eminent scholars of this group to guide on this topic.

Thank you all!

अनुगृहीतास्मि 

Sanhita Joshi.

सर्वे भद्राणि पश्यन्तु मा कश्चित् दुःखमाप्नुयात्||

   (May all see what is auspicious, May no one suffer.)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.

[G S S Murthy]

Here is the view of a ज्ञानलवदुर्विदग्ध :

पुराणमित्येव न साधु सर्वम् । 

In matters of rights and duties of women, it is women who we have to hear from. श्रद्धा could be invoked even to defend the caste system, which has been rejected in the modern world. If there is a discussion in dharmashastras about when श्रद्धा turns into अन्धश्रद्धा, scholars could throw light on it despite ब्रह्मापि मां न रञ्जयति ।

Thanks and regards,

Murthy

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/be106881-024b-4f5f-a4a0-615a884f5742%40googlegroups.com.

[venkat veeraraghavan]

Dear Shri Murthy Garu-->

Very very interesting take.

" In matters of rights and duties of women, it is women who we have to hear from. "

Really? Do men get to do the same? I guess many men would argue that they have to wake up in Brahma muhurta do sandhyavandana, agnikarya Brahma yajna in addition to having to make  a living.

Trust me it is not fun...not even for those who strictly adhere to the standards out of a sense of shraddha or duty.

" श्रद्धा could be invoked even to defend the caste system, which has been rejected in the modern world. "

Are you suggesting that the modern world and its zeitgeist are an authority on dharma shastras and how it is to be interpreted? 

If you reject the dharmshastras based on modern viewpoint you are welcome to do so. But in seeking to redefine dharmashastra you also betray a need to modify the vehicle to suit the current mindset. 

If Krishna said in the BG that He created the 4 varnas do you seriously think there have been greater figures of authority in recent times to second guess and improve the hierarchy? 

I understand the difference between varna and jaati so lets not go there.

Even in the modern world there are shudras (almost everyone who works for some one else without intellectual independence), Vaishyas (Businessmen), Kshatriyas (army/police) and Brahmanas (PhDs, researchers, professors etc...

The only difference is that they dont use that moniker....and all their work is directed at OUTER things and not INNER values  

If you suggest that modern humans have the capacity to second guess the rshis, then why even bother redefining the dharmashastras? Why not throw them out altogether and follow sveccha since that is what you are suggesting?

Asking the people what they want amounts to that alone.

I can think of many obnoxious things that the modern society approves of:

1. Slaughterhouses /Go-hatya

2. Doctors say masturbation is essential for "male health"

3. Meat is good for you and a great source of protein

4. GM crops will solve world hunger

5. Babies deciding what sex they want to be (YAY!!!)..boys can legally now wrestle girls claiming that they identify as women....

6. Human fetuses canned as food ( in certain parts of the world)

7. Eating bats, snakes, roaches everything that crawls/flies 

8. Gain of function in Virology that has resulted in the pretty big covid19 dump that the world is now looking at 

I can go on with this list, but I will not.

Please understand that this is a choice for those who believe in the dharmashastras.

The rest do not have to bother with it at all.

Kind Regards,

Venkat

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bvparishat/eVU28G2DBNc/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CADi6ZRjBactTcEitpfL%3D1nOypWdorqH%2BSmHR3%3DqwMMadvxXo2w%40mail.gmail.com.

[G S S Murthy]

Thank you, Sir.

1. It is incorrect to equate the varnashrama system with modern professions. The bane of the Varnashrama system is the aspect of its inheritance.

2. I am not a meat-eater. Yet I consider it wrong to call meat-eating obnoxious. After all. even in India vegetarians are a minority. There would certainly be meat eaters in BVP too. The points you have listed are your personal opinion and are debatable.

I seek to be educated on whether our dharmashastras deal with andhashraddhaa.

Warm regards,

Murthy

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAOWN-CZe3vUr_DztLXUv65Ah6Fw9aB%3DciBD0vHW0TYdALBWhdw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Statement "  श्रद्धा could be invoked even to defend the caste system, which has been rejected in the modern world.  "  by Sri G S S Murthy-ji  without qualifying the word caste system with expressions such as social discrimination based on caste system or something like that  and   enlisting certain life-style aspects as obnoxious without qualifying the word with something like from the point of view of say, Dharma Shastras / traditionalists or something like that -by Sri Venkat Veeraraghavan are not suited for public debate. 

Moderating team may be constrained to put the members under moderation if discussions go into such directions.   

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CADi6ZRg8Ovsv9-Vk%3DoXUh6KX8w0SRihwnx_D8VZU4QZ14GY6Yg%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

Director,  Inter-Gurukula-University Centre , Indic Academy

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

BoS Veda Vijnana Gurukula, Bengaluru.

Member, Advisory Council, Veda Vijnana Shodha Samsthanam, Bengaluru

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies, 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education, 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

 

 

 

[venkat veeraraghavan]

Dear Shri Paturi Garu

Shri Murthy Garu: "I am not a meat-eater. Yet I consider it wrong to call meat-eating obnoxious."

Where have I called meat-eating obnoxious? Please re-read.

I admire many meat eaters including and not limited to Rama, Krishna and in modern times Vivekananda, but this would not be place to quote "yad yad aacharati sreshtaH.."..since the subjective context is totally absent in the present mileu.

I called the meat industry and the industry driven FDA recommendations obnoxious from the pov of dharma. Where is the life-style aspect here for anyone to take umbrage?

Even when animals were sacrificed, something was given back and they were ensured higher rebirths.

Taking without compensation is considered stheya/stealing in dharma.

I am not making any value judgements on  meat eaters either here on BVP or elsewhere. As in everything, to each his/her own. Dharma can be indicated but never forced as in BG where Krishna ended the dialogue with "yatha icchasi tatha kuru..".  

My point in illustrating what I considered obnoxious in modern society is that:

1. Shri Murthy Garu was intent on drawing conclusions based on the prejudices of the present zeitgeist. I merely illustrated the above points to note that these were not the actions of a balanced / wise society. Afterall for  a person's opinion to count even within this forum there has to be a basic level of understanding of cause-effect and grounding in traditional disciplines. 

Many are willing to laugh at Kalidasa cutting off the branch from the root while sitting on the unsafe side, while many of our own actions are no better.  WIth such a context do the prejudices of this "modern society" deserve the oxygen in public discourse?

2. A society that pursues never ending profits at the cost of nature is neither wise nor capable of reflection. 

3. You cannot use a system with completely different paradigms (the present society and its prejudices) to decide whether there is value or not in dharmashastras which have an entirely different non-predatory paradigm.

Shri Murthy garu: "The bane of the Varnashrama system is the aspect of its inheritance."

Kindly watch "the last samurai". 

The script writers of that movie had a better idea of the advantages of varna when compared to many Indians it would seem.

Colonel Bagley: "The rebels don't have any rifles.They're savages with bows and arrows."

Nathan Algren : "Whose sole occupation for the last one thousand years has been war."  

If done properly, there is nothing like it. Done badly nothing worse.

So, there is a context to everything. :)

Regards,

Venkat

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9eb2CPeAVWh7gxAqA89p8c50mUh%2BdYuhAn6mb1s_yFU9jw%40mail.gmail.com.

[G S S Murthy]

Dear Sri. Venkat Veeraraghavan,

My knowledge of English too may be deficient. So be it. Sorry, if that helps.

It is clear to me that let alone our being on the same page we are not even perusing the same book. 

Warm regards,

Murthy

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAOWN-Cb%3DZyOKV4Td0aEtXVKm9K6pV9z%2B4M14jZd84koK%3DAxgwQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Hari Parshad Das]

I would like to highlight an important point which has not been highlighted previously.

In various places in Vedic literature, women have been categorized into — (1) brahmavādinī and (2) sadyovadhū.

The former had access to learning the Vedas (some say even teaching it). The latter did not. Here is a quote from the Vīramitrodayaḥ:

dvividhāḥ striyaḥ. brahma-vādinyaḥ sadyo-vadhvaś ca. tatra brahma-vādinīnām upanayanam agnīndhanaṁ vedādhyayanaṁ sva-gṛhe-ca bhikṣācaryā iti. sadyo-vadhūnāṁ tūpasthite vivāhe kathañcid-upanayana-mātraṁ kṛtvā vivāhaḥ kāryaḥ 

Translation: There are two types of ladies — the brahmavādinī, who doesn‘t desire to marry, and the sadyo-vadhū. For the brahmavādinī there is provision for receiving the sacred thread, conducting the fire sacrifice, studying the Vedas, and begging alms at her own home. The sadyovadhū at the time of marriage should only be invested with the sacred thread and then married. (Hārīta-sṃrti 21.23, Also quoted in the Vīramitrodaya, Samskāra-prakāśa (pp 402,403,404,405) of Mahāmahopādhyāya Paṇḍita Mitra Miśra, Edited by P.N. Sharma, Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series, Printed by Jai Krishna Das Gupta, Vidya Vilas Press, Benares. 1919.)

Sri Madhvacharya also quotes the Vyoma-saṃhitā in the beginning of his brahma-sūtra-bhāṣyam:

āhur apy uttama-strīṇām adhikāraṃ tu vaidike

yathorvaśī yamī caiva śacy ādyāś ca tathāparāḥ

Translation: It is said that for uttama-strī, there is adhikāra in Vedic literature, and the examples are Urvasi, Yami, Saci and other women sages.

Now there are vidvans who argue and say that uttama-strī only means "heavenly" lady. To this, the sub-commentary "candrikā" specifies that the term "ādyāḥ" includes ladies born in human families.

Still there are vidvāns who argue that no strī is uttama in today's age. This argument could go on forever.

sādhu-caraṇa-rajo'bhilāṣī,

hari parshad das.

---------------------------------------------------

[Nagaraj Paturi]

there is an older thread on Women and Sandhya Vandanam:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/bvparishat/women$20and$20%E0%A4%B8%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A7%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%B5%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A6%E0%A4%A8%E0%A4%AE%E0%A5%8D%7Csort:date/bvparishat/0n41vcuW9E0/kTSlMlYJAAAJ  

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CADi6ZRgV6TxX9QS1dz5Khvo0Ec6f8jg7Yd6Twy-ga%3D1n1xriwQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Sivasenani Nori]

Thank you, Hari Parshad Das ji for the references from Viramitrodaya and the quotation by Madhvacharya.

Regards

N. Siva Senani

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/0f16607a-b5c0-4b25-8cb6-fa545fd3a759%40googlegroups.com.

[K S Kannan]

purAkalpe tu nArINAM

maun"jI-bandhanam iShyate

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAs%2BaZNrUuxJqbm4FLcUhpKHKqCNXbs-YrBO2c5Js39BKgjD_Q%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Dr. K.S.Kannan  D.Litt.

​Sant Rajinder Singh Ji Maharaj Chair Professor, IIT-Madras.

Senior Fellow, ICSSR, New Delhi.

Academic Director, Swadeshi Indology.

Member, Academic Council, Veda Vijnana Shodha Samsthana.

Nominated Member, IIAS, Shimla.

Former Professor, CAHC, Jain University, Bangalore.

Former Director, Karnataka Samskrit University, Bangalore.

Former Head, Dept. of Sanskrit, The National Colleges, Bangalore.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Smt Savita Sajjan-ji,

Your quote from Garbhopanishad has अक्षरमोङ्कारं चिन्तयति 

Does chintayati here mean chanting ? 

The other references too do not mention chanting. 

Am I missing something ? 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CACanwnza3VrVdWA8%3Dw7q7tR4W62MrMdMx%3D5M_%3Di81QvNYk2u6A%40mail.gmail.com.

[V Subrahmanian]

On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 10:24 AM Hari Parshad Das <hpd...@gmail.com> wrote:

I would like to highlight an important point which has not been highlighted previously.

In various places in Vedic literature, women have been categorized into — (1) brahmavādinī and (2) sadyovadhū.

The former had access to learning the Vedas (some say even teaching it). The latter did not. Here is a quote from the Vīramitrodayaḥ:

dvividhāḥ striyaḥ. brahma-vādinyaḥ sadyo-vadhvaś ca. tatra brahma-vādinīnām upanayanam agnīndhanaṁ vedādhyayanaṁ sva-gṛhe-ca bhikṣācaryā iti. sadyo-vadhūnāṁ tūpasthite vivāhe kathañcid-upanayana-mātraṁ kṛtvā vivāhaḥ kāryaḥ 

Translation: There are two types of ladies — the brahmavādinī, who doesn‘t desire to marry, and the sadyo-vadhū. For the brahmavādinī there is provision for receiving the sacred thread, conducting the fire sacrifice, studying the Vedas, and begging alms at her own home. The sadyovadhū at the time of marriage should only be invested with the sacred thread and then married. (Hārīta-sṃrti 21.23, Also quoted in the Vīramitrodaya, Samskāra-prakāśa (pp 402,403,404,405) of Mahāmahopādhyāya Paṇḍita Mitra Miśra, Edited by P.N. Sharma, Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series, Printed by Jai Krishna Das Gupta, Vidya Vilas Press, Benares. 1919.)

Sri Madhvacharya also quotes the Vyoma-saṃhitā in the beginning of his brahma-sūtra-bhāṣyam:

āhur apy uttama-strīṇām adhikāraṃ tu vaidike

yathorvaśī yamī caiva śacy ādyāś ca tathāparāḥ

Translation: It is said that for uttama-strī, there is adhikāra in Vedic literature, and the examples are Urvasi, Yami, Saci and other women sages.

Now there are vidvans who argue and say that uttama-strī only means "heavenly" lady. To this, the sub-commentary "candrikā" specifies that the term "ādyāḥ" includes ladies born in human families.

Just trying to understand the implementation part of the above statement since there is this mention of 'upanayana is for vedadhyayana and the devataa-s are naturally endowed with Veda-jnana (without the need for upanayanam and vedadhyayanam) in the Brahma sutra bhashya of Shankara:  devataadhikaraNam 1.3.26:

उपनयनस्य वेदाध्ययनार्थत्वात् , तेषां च स्वयंप्रतिभातवेदत्वात् ; अपि चैषां विद्याग्रहणार्थं ब्रह्मचर्यादि दर्शयति 

This is because there is no varna ashrama dharma for Devataa-s.  They are not born into any caste so as to segregate some as having veda adhikara and some not having it. 

Whether 'vaidike' means/implies vedadhyayanam or adhikara for Veda pratipaadita Atma vidya. The above passage of Shankara goes on to give instances where Indra, etc. observed brahmacharya  for hundreds of years to obtain Atma vidya.  

When it comes to Deva stri-s having adhikara for veda, it has to be seen how this is implemented in Deva loka.  Whether there were veda pathashala-s, etc.  The statement of Shankara gives the impression that such is not the case as the reasoning: no varna ashrama vidhis for devataa-s.  

Any clarification is welcome.

warm regards

subrahmanian.v

[Savita Sajjan]

 Namaste sir.

                    Thank  you, sir, for  clarifying the difference between  chinta and Chanting 

   चिन्ता f. (-न्ता) Reflexion, consideration, recollection., 

चिन्त्य mfn. (-न्त्यः-न्त्या-न्त्यं)

1 To be considered.

2 To be appreciated or conceived.

3 To be thought of or meditated upon,  

           As per  Garbhopanishad,  (अक्षरमोङ्कारं चिन्तयति---_)   this context is explained in the 8th month of pregnancy,  where progeny itself recollects or  Jiva gets the capacity to know its past karma (of past births),  by meditating on Atman as Om, through perfect knowledge and meditation. Having known Om, progeny sees in the body the eight Prakritis derived from it the five elements, mind, intellect and ego, and the sixteen vikaras.

   Thank you, sir.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9ebLZu2qbX7E7Roe5XfHdq-hsmupN1Pf-UWp0HcjsvKdQg%40mail.gmail.com.

[K S Kannan]

Two opportunities, it is said, present themselves before the jIva,

when it can recollect its pristine purity  viz. pre-arrival & post-departure:

in the womb as alluded to above, and at the moment of death

- verily, the two "turning points" of life.

In the former, the jIva "resolves" to resort to sAn'khya and yoga, and never get trapped again;

and in the latter, getting a glimpse of the summum bonum.

But alas, as to the former : the resolution gets "muted" by vaiShNavI-mAyA,

and the pUrva-vAsanA-s overwhelm the jIva

who is ushered - back into the pavilion of saMsAra,

to work his karman-s out.

And in the latter, the helpless jIva, poor perdu, unable to hold on to the grand vision,

is swept off the feet by the tsunami of the saMskAra-s earned all through life.

That is why:

pūrve vayasi tat kuryād yena vṛddhaḥ sukhaṁ vaset | 

yāvaj jīvena tat kuryād yena pretya sukhaṁ vaset ||

All life is to be a planning, thus : as a preparation for death !

The art of living is indeed the art of dying.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CACanwnzPys%2B%2BSQrajdduOkyYvuLQ03prTmbqXWrymWSXOk7OCw%40mail.gmail.com.

[venkat veeraraghavan]

Dear Shri Murthy Garu:

I am not here to comment about your understanding of English, but I can only clarify what I have written in case it has been misunderstood.

It is not important that two people follow/peruse the same book or "sampradaya" ...as long as two hearts are open and there is place for satya and vichara, communication will happen at some level.

Regards,

Venkat

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CADi6ZRgV6TxX9QS1dz5Khvo0Ec6f8jg7Yd6Twy-ga%3D1n1xriwQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear friends,

I have not read the whole thread fully, but it seems to me that some church psychology

might be in play.  I would think we have to be more liberal and more experiential than

accepting written word or instruction anywhere.  Empiricism does work, but the sun

does not arise in the east!  Our scriptures are larger than the "views".

Best regards,

BM

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CADi6ZRgV6TxX9QS1dz5Khvo0Ec6f8jg7Yd6Twy-ga%3D1n1xriwQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[venkat veeraraghavan]

Dear Shri Bijoy Mishra ji:-

If you have not read the thread fully, why do you bother to give a verdict--"church pyschology" etc?

Would that not be prejudice on your part to do so?

If you have issues with specific parts of the narrative in this thread, feel free to share why and how some view is wrong. And do give a counter narrative so that the rest of us can benefit from your wisdom.

"Empiricism does work, but the sun

does not arise in the east!"

I am confused by this statement, can you please clarify?

"Our scriptures are larger than the "views". " 

These "views" as you call them come from people who know and practise "sishtaachara".

It is the person(s) who practise sishtachara who deserves to answer a question on dharma and not otherwise. 

Shri Sivasenani, Shri Korada and many others are such people.

The original questioner put their query to people within the fold of sishtachara and wished for an explication.

When a questioner with angst approaches any assembly for resolution, it is dharma to solve the person's doubt yathashakti. Which is what most people here have done.

Shri Sivasenani has given his views.

If you have any counterviews from your own realm of theory and practise, do share.

Instead posting such generalised comments tarring everyone who doesnt agree with a liberal "view" of dharmashastra as  a bigot. This is a rather old and well worn tactic and unworthy of BVP.

Please understand that the questioner has asked about what happens in sampradayas (which is the subtext of the question).

So the answer also has to come from people who belong and practise in such lineages.  

Again, please keep your replies specific and kindly avoid needless generalisations, we all wait for your wisdom.

Kind Regards,

Venkat

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CALw-kjVC4ouDJ%2BfNLmMUYtR8HhnTdZrQa_hggeSa9BM3t0As4g%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear Sri Veeraraghavan,

I am not arguing with you.

I expressed my impression which I have seen argued elsewhere.

To me, the arguments didn't have any analytic value.

You can continue.

Thank you.

BM

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAOWN-CYM04keM1-aBp09a9r%2B%3DccVKLrbgPsOhzo7PkOoGCPkPA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Atul Tiwari]

Smt Savita Sajjan,

In my opinion, there can be different thought process towards explaining अक्षरमोङ्कारं चिन्तयति :

If we break it into two parts: 

1) The first part which gives Aksharam + Omkar, ie, the word om-kar

2) The second part which is Chintayati, ie, discussion on various aspects, it can have scopes from being a simple structure of how the pronunciation happens, how to control over a partial sound of it via getting self-control over inner glands (kanthaya and osthya), ie, giving a sense of control on desire

When you start feeling the control over your own desires, the calm takes you into an ecstasy zone which then transforms into more control to stretch the meditation. Over a period of one hour, you can chant Om 100-150 times or when you start getting control over your glands (indriya) - a single Om chant can go on and on...

The smallest learning step can be the first step towards the vast universe of knowledge. 

Regards,

Atul Tiwari

Curious Scholar of Universe

Individual Researcher

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAH8RULM169TYHfAXfgDMB9mubdxefLDSg6eSD_aOMLD4RzasTQ%40mail.gmail.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAs%2BaZMmyku5kmYytqx7BaUGSc8tyGo%3D7rqGQOCHjH1ewmiqxw%40mail.gmail.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAOa%2BRtLs%2BxhBpx84cRTUF%3DzbWBK7n%3DE_9jghdkQVM-Ruki0xyQ%40mail.gmail.com.

--

My web site : http://murthygss.tripod.com/index.htm
and also my Sanskrit blog :

http://simplesanskrit.blogspot.com/

http://gssmurthy.blogspot.com

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CADi6ZRjU_o_V3myVnJw5SG%3DDJmJoVSsca42x0z_de8-ESC-TBg%40mail.gmail.com.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CACanwnza3VrVdWA8%3Dw7q7tR4W62MrMdMx%3D5M_%3Di81QvNYk2u6A%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

Director,  Inter-Gurukula-University Centre , Indic Academy

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

BoS Veda Vijnana Gurukula, Bengaluru.

Member, Advisory Council, Veda Vijnana Shodha Samsthanam, Bengaluru

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies, 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education, 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

 

 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.

[Manish Gupta]

Chanting "Om" while exhaling air using our navel, kanth and lips is one thing. It definitely gives a good feeling. No wonder! However, we are producing a sound deliberately because we want to feel good or DIVINE.

Having said that, there is a "unique point" in our head (also called Brahmand in Vedic terminology) when our mind is focus onto that point then one gets to hear  "OM" sound. This OM sound is constantly  happening in everyone's head whether male or female. It is only a matter of reversing the flow of mind from outward to inward (to that point).  

When I say unique point means I really mean it.

People focus too much on theory and not on practical (sadhan abhyaas). Just as in science there is theory and practical. One cannot learn too much about science just by grammar and discussion, instead if she/he wants to experience it they have do some practical in the laboratory. 

Similarly in Vedic science philosophy, scholarly discussion on Mantra is one thing and knowing how to execute or  see through that mantra (practical) is another thing.

Kind regards,

Manish Gupta, PhD.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/309641a9-8ea6-43e9-88c2-58db1d9d5666%40googlegroups.com.

[venkat veeraraghavan]

Dear Shri Manish ji,

Thank you for your post about theory vs practice.

I think you meant "brahmarandhra"?

While everything that you say is true, there is some context to be considered here:-

1. The original questioner has asked for precedence and what is adhikara for women in terms of pranava / gayatri. --> with such a question, theory based on shastra and precedence is what can be discussed.

2. While the journey of chanting is varied and changes from person to person based on the vagaries of personal karma, the end effects are described in many books.

What the books do not describe is the personal hell(the journey) that unprepared people (men and women) go through when they start on this "quest" and travel with persistence and determination. 

There is a saying in Tamil "Sivan sotthu kula naasam" -- it literally translates to "Shiva's property brings about ruination of the kula". Many take this to mean that if one appropriates the property of a Siva temple one's lineage is destroyed.

While this may be true of any temple and not just Siva's, the real meaning is  a little more deeper.

Siva's only true wealth are those who seek Him, for he owns nothing (material that is). Siva yogis are the ones who are called urdhvaretas (ones with vital seed drawn up). Such people cannot have a kula.

Now kula vriddhi is not the only aspect affected. 

Money flow stops, relatives and friends desert you. Health problems appear.

 Now all this does not apply to the journeyman/woman who shops around the spiritual "market" but to one who really commits to the path.

This is the reason Dhruva, Vishvamitra and almost all rshis had to leave everything and stay in lonely places like forests to limit the damage.

There were some exceptional women among these too, but they were fewer than the men because women have more responsibilities to deal with.

The rshis  therefore in their wisdom gave directions on safe evolution for both men and women.

None of the people in  the present marketplace who call themselves yogis come anywhere close even to the strata of rshis in terms of depth of vision and understanding.

3. Theory and precedence is what can be given. Any person even if they have personal experience will not bring themselves forward to discuss such things in public or private.

There is a tradition you may have observed in Ramayana and the Mahabharata where when a rshi is asked for guidance, they source from the lives of other rshis and avoid bringing themselves forward.

This is a very crucial aspect of shishtachara and a basic protocol that most follow.

4. Pravrtti and Nivrtti are two different directions on the same path. Each requires a different set of gunas to successfully accomplish. If both are to be maintained simultaneously a very high level of detachment and control over the senses  is required--something that only yogabhrashtas of a very high caliber are likely to possess. The rest will have trouble in both spheres.

Therefore in such a case shastra is the only reliable eye with which one can see farther than our senses show us. This is where shraddha and vishvaasa comes in.

Kind Regards,

Venkat

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bvparishat/eVU28G2DBNc/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKHBshbgs2G3Lz8E%3Df3pXydqjcyg%2B%3Df_eidcBWKWSxn_nH%2BbFA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dhirendra Kumar]

In the context of a recently published video entitled "RSD-20 - Meaning Behind Restrictions On Vedic Chanting (Sanatana Dharma Series)" [link: https://youtu.be/gMaciau_IVs ] on the YouTue channel "World of Samskrtam - Usha Rani Sanka" I searched the previous threads in the group, so I read this relevant discourse.

The Sanskrit teacher Ms. Usha Rani Sanka in the video, has explained that the Vedas/Vedic mantras cannot be chanted/recited by some set of people including all womenhood, all women, and sudras, and mleksas, that is what the dharma says... Her example to justify such birth-based blanket ban is that, if there is some high-level chemical/medical science laboratory, will a learned mathematician be allowed to enter into it? He may break equipments or harm himself. Veda is also such a place.

To my understanding, a birth-based attribution+training of brahmana is a different categorisation from a training based achievement of a chemical scientist. There may be birth-based medical handicap, but no such social disability injunction for the proper training and practice of chemistry. So, this example is not applicable here.

I found some counterpoints on later social corruptions in a Hindi booklet in the context of sudras (link - एकलव्य का अँगूठा https://www.yatharthgeeta.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/EklavyaHindi.pdf ).

I request the scholars here to clarify my this understanding. I would also like to know if there exists a distinct Vedic injunction which prohibits all sudras/women from the proper Vedic training itself, not from any paravarti source/ later sampradayas. I also noticed that Murthy sir's question "If there is a discussion in dharmashastras about when श्रद्धा turns into अन्धश्रद्धा, scholars could throw light on it..." remains unanswered here. I'm also interested to know this, because that may enable a comparison with the Buddhist tradition as to why there, the sabda pramana is ranked below pratyaksa and anumana; maybe the Buddha noticed a blind-spot or leap of faith with a misuse potential; any pointers in this context too welcome.

With warm regards
Dhirendra Kumar
New Delhi

[Jagannatha S]

Woman Purohit

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/f678f393-0df7-4ab2-b6a5-bc489198ed0en%40googlegroups.com.

[Siddharth Wakankar]

It may be noted that Ghaisas Guruji from Pune and now others too have been training ladies to perform Paurohitya and the famous Jnana Prabodhini from Pune has a long tradition of training ladies to carry out these activities and making them self.sufficient by the regular performance of the Shodasha Samskaras,even now,on line too.

Owing to the shortage of the male  Purohitas,these women Purohitas are encouraged by the society also and some opine that lady Purohitas are more sincere in carrying out their duties to the full satisfaction of the Yajamana.

Prof.Dr.Siddharth Y Wakankar

Vadodara.9427339942.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAE7E-BtFdvfbcJcczTC5n-41zHWsHXnx9464zM0GzKogHesHzw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Damodara Dasa]

|| Hare Krishna ||

I only read the whole thread today and am glad to see the answers of
Sivasenani ji and Venkat ji.

I would like to add a point to an excellent idea of sraddha as an
axiom. That is absolutely correct -- to even begin to understand any
knowledge we must start with some axioms and even modern empirical
science is not an exception to it. First of all, you have to
axiomatically believe that there actually exists something called
knowledge that we are seeking for.

If you take modern science, they have axiomatically accepted that
their procedure of observation, hypothesization, experimentation, and
conclusion is the process (sometimes the only process) that can lead
to perfect knowledge of something.
They have axiomatically believed that the complete understanding of
all the laws of the Universe is possible with their available
faculties (senses, mind, and intelligence including previous
experience with these).
They have full faith in their faculties (including their instruments)
that they can never be wrong.

For instance, we see that modern science have experimented in a
limited space on gravitational force and come up with the value of G
(6.67x10-11) as a Universal Gravitational constant. However, to
declare it as Universal they never bothered to experiment it at many
places in the Universe but axiomatically accepted that it could just
be extrapolated to the whole Universe based on their current
understanding of it, which is also based on many other axioms.

So, in that way, modern science is also based on faith--they have
faith in pratyaksa and anumana. Vedic science has faith in the Vedas.

Thank you,
Hari Guru Vaisnava Das,
Damodara Das
+91 9737475085

On 5/11/20, Sivasenani Nori <sivas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sanhita ji, namaste.
>
> I write in the belief (based on your signature etc.) that you are a seeker
> interested in furthering your saadhanaa, and that your intention is not
> like that of Dr. Ananya Vajapeyi (
> https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/the-story-of-my-sanskrit/article6321759.ece)
> who studied Dharmasastra to only criticize it and those who taught her for
> three years, an act of kritaghnatA.
>
> श्रद्धावाल्लँभते ज्ञानम् - भगवद्गीता, 4.13 ।

> *The one with SraddhA obtains knowledge.*

>> email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit

>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAH8RULM169TYHfAXfgDMB9mubdxefLDSg6eSD_aOMLD4RzasTQ%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAH8RULM169TYHfAXfgDMB9mubdxefLDSg6eSD_aOMLD4RzasTQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .

>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit

> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAAs%2BaZMmyku5kmYytqx7BaUGSc8tyGo%3D7rqGQOCHjH1ewmiqxw%40mail.gmail.com.
>

[Damodara Dasa]

|| Hare Krishna ||

--------------------------------

My questions are-
1) Did such prohibition exist?

--------------------------------
Srimad Bhagavatam 1.4.25,
stri-śudra-dvijabandhunam
trayi na śruti-gocara
karma-śreyasi muḍhanam
śreya evam bhaved iha
iti bharatam akhyanam
krpaya munina krtam

Vamsidhara quotes from Nrsimha-tapani:
"सावित्रीं लक्ष्मीं यजुः प्रणवं यदि जानीयात्स्त्री शूद्रः स मृतोऽधो
गच्छति । तस्मात्सर्वदा नाचष्टे । यद्याचष्टे स आचार्यस्तेनैव मृतोऽधो
गच्छति " इति नृसिंहतापनीयोक्तेश्च ॥

This was just one example. There are many such quotations. Besides
this, there are long-standing traditions in this regard--from North to
South, East to West, among all the four vaisnava sampradayas, among
all sankara sampradayas, among smarta--stretching from time immemorial
(at least for last 1500 years). Its geographic extent as well as its
being widespread among people subscribing to varied darshanas shows
that it is not possible to later introduce these norms (which
otherwise were not previously existing).

The idea that all the sentences/injunctions like these were later
interpolated into the Vedic texts is not at all strong to stand the
test of historical verification; there are too many of them in all
levels--from original sanskrit texts, to its sanskrit commentaries,
and to its practical application in the society--all of these match
single understanding.

If someone would have purposefully interpolated even a few of these
texts then he would not have been spared scrutiny of others and would
have been called for a sastrartha (for which ancient India is well
known) and the proceeding would have been noted in the history as a
major event. But we do not find any ancient evidence of such acts of
major interpolations in any of the sanskrit texts save and except in
the writings of the British employed Indologists who introduced
Indians to the idea of their sastras having full of interpolations.

Especially the texts which have long-standing commentaries are very
hard to interpolate.

Thank you,
Hari Guru Vaisnava das,
damodara das