[Advaita-l] Knowledge, renunciation and varNASrama rules
vmurthy36 at gmail.com
Sat Aug 14 10:45:50 CDT 2010
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 1:39 AM, Vidyasankar Sundaresan
<svidyasankar at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Rules of proper behavior and doing the action that is appropriate to one's birth and status
> in life all apply prior to brahma-jijnAsA. A different set of rules govern those who take
> up saMnyAsa wishing to gain brahmajnAna (vividishA saMnyAsa). In the case of vidvat
> saMnyAsa, the renunciation of everything by the brahmajnAnI, no rules really apply. The
> man of society who thinks with respect to vidvat saMnyAsin-s, "this saMnyAsin was born
> a SUdra, that one is a woman," etc. is merely being a fool and exhibiting his ignorance of
> the true tradition of saMnyAsa.
Our Dharma Sastras tell non dvija cannot be sanyasi not even vidvat
sanyasi. The non dvija vidvat sanyasi is a Vandhya Putra surely.
>The most orthodox SankarAcArya institutions in India have
> historically recognized those who are born non-dvija males, but are eligible for saMnyAsa.
This is bad political pressure. I said this before. Not connected to
tradition but political games. How many non Brahmin Sanyasis became
Acharya of Sringeri Matha? Zero. Kanchi? Puri? Dwaraka? Badari? How
The Mathas must play politics to survive. They do that. Don't
misunderstand politics as Dharma and Tradition. If Sringeri says no
Antyaja will be allowed in Sarada temple what will happen? It is not
wise thing. If you say Sarada temple tradition allows all it is wrong.
> They have also endorsed the taking up of saMnyAsa by such people. On the other hand,
> they have also been known to NOT endorse formal saMnyAsa for even a brAhmaNa born
> man who is not ready for saMnyAsa. One can list more than one name and date in this
> respect, if one wants to do a census of such cases. Rather than a "break from orthodoxy"
> or an "innovation", this is, in fact, the true face of the vedAnta tradition. That is where the
> matter ends, at least for me.
How much this tradition is forcibly done / with political motive / to
follow the Constitution written by enemy of Vaidika religion?
Important question. If a Matha follows secular state laws for
surviving can it be tradition? No in my opinion. The secular state is
an evil state because it says all castes are equal.
In Puranas we read Hiranyakasipu stopped Vedic practices. Will it be
tradition? What a person/organisation will do forcibly/for surviving
is NOT tradition. Tradition is in Dharma Sastras / other practice in
Parampara. Tradition against Dharma Sastra is not Tradition but some
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list