Egotistical Brahmins

In one of our earlier blogs I had promised to write about the egotistical Brahmins, and what better time to choose, than now, just fresh from the visit to Sringeri J

Though being a Brahmin myself, I chose to write on this topic, to show the mindset of majority of them, who are shallow and hollow (incidentally I was one of them J or should it be L). This may open a can of worms.

I call them egotistical because, many of them don’t even know what the system they follow is called. What is sanatana dharma, or for that matter, why do they wear the angavastram (the upper cloth) leaving the right shoulder open (called yoga vastram J, and this many, I am sure, don’t know), when we meet the Acharya, enter the temple or while performing a karma. It is not the ignorance that I am driving at, though a point is made here with reference to it; it is the ego in spite of it (ignorance) which we are talking about here.

How many of them perform the sandhya vandana that is supposed to be a nitya (daily) karma, and not performing it over a period of time, actually disqualifies one from Brahmin-hood. and this is the minimal karma which gives the eligibility for one to perform the other karmas, or even to chant other mantras.

What one is supposed to do as a Brahmin, what is his life style supposed to be, what is that he is gifted with.

When asked about the religious text of Christian, Muslim or the other not very well known religions, they have the right answers. How many of us even know that the primary religious text of Hindus is not Bhagavad Gita, which is shown in the movies for the Hindus to swear upon, but the Vedas.

How many of them know what a Veda is. How many of them know how many Vedas are there, how many of them know what constitutes a Veda.  How many of them know what an Upanishad is, and why are they different from the other section of the Vedas.

How many of us, talking about the one who is eligible, perform the karmas for the pitrus (ancestors), or do we at the least know, there are karmas to be performed for them.

How many of us know how many samskaras (and this is not a greek or latin word) are there, that one has to undergo, or has undergone in a life time.

It is very pathetic, to call one a Brahmin, and not even know the meaning of it (what or who is a Brahmin).

The list of ignorance is not limited to this. And by writing this I am not sponsoring or supporting a Brahminical vision. As Bhagavan Bhashyakara says “brahmanatvasya hi rakshane rakshita syat vaidiko dharma, tadadhinatvat varna-ashrama-bhedanam“ (only when the Brahmin-hood is well preserved, the Vaidic dharma is also nicely maintained, because the different castes and lifestyles are dependent on that).

Smart Mauni says “The one with the said knowledge will have no Ego, and the one who has Ego, definitely does not possess the knowledge”.

EkaVakyata - Two to Sync

EkaVakyata

We earlier said about Ekavakyata, and its two types Padaikyavakyata amd Vakyaikyavakyata. People often mistake, even without knowing about ekavakyata, during decoding the Vedic statements. So, understanding this is of great importance.

Pada-eka-vakyata – when the whole statement is boiled down to a word, and if that word to fulfill the expectation of another statement is brought in sync with it, it is called padaikyavakyata. In the statements of Arthavada in the form of praising, the derivation is for praise. In the case of “he cried” in the form of condemning, the derivation is for condemning. Since the words in the Arthavada statements are accepted to be implying the praise etc, when through that one word itself there is a possibility of knowledge, the other words will be useless. Similarly, the knowledge of form of praise as expected by the injunction, the whole of the Arthavada statement is condensed in a single word, there is a synchronization of the word (of the form of praise or condemn) with the injunction. Thus, the Arthavada statements are in synchronization of the word (Padaikavakyata).

Arthavada-vakya - The statements in the scriptures, which have no use directly in the sacrifice, but helps in praising the act or denouncing the act, is called Arthavada.

The statement “the prajapati tore open his own stomach” has no eligibility (yogyata) therefore was understood to be a statement in praising of the sacrificial animal.

The statement “he cried”, is a statement which says the story of Rudra, he cried therefore he is called rudra. Now this has no relation to the sacrifice. Therefore, the statement is connected with the injunction “barhishi rajatam na deyam” (should not give silver in the sacrifice of barhi). This is because, the teardrops of rudra became silver, and therefore, the silver is negated as the gift in the barhi sacrifice.

Vakya-eka-vakyata – If two statements reciprocally fulfill the expectation and come in sync it is called Vakyaikyavakyata. Wherever, with the two statements which have different connection to different meanings due to the expectancy, gives sensible meaning as a unified statement. For example, in the statements “let one who desires heaven perform darsha-purnamasa sacrifice” etc and “he performs sacrifice with samid (twigs)” etc, each have an expectancy of the part and the whole (the subsidiary and the main), fulfill by being a unified statement. This is said by the Bhataapada, “The statements which give a complete meaning by itself, when come together to fulfill the expectancy of the part and whole is called vakyaikavakya”. Thus, the two types of word meanings (literal (expressed) and derived (implied)) are explained.

Mahavakya – normally translated as ultimate sentence (some translate it as great sentence). Here in this place is translated as unified statement, because, with respect to Vedanta, Mahavakya means “akhandartha bodhaka vakhyam” (the statement which gives the non-dual identity between the individual self (jiva) and the Self (Brahman)). Here, they come together because of some expectancy of the part or of the whole.

Avantaravakhyam – the statement which deals with a single aspect of the discussion. In Vedanta, the statements which discuss only about the jiva, jagat or the Brahman is called avantaravakhyam

Anga and Angi – The statement which is the primary injunction gives the knowledge of the sacrifice to be performed. This statement is construed as a Bhavana by the purva-mimamsa. A Bhavana is a desire which takes place for the eligible (bhavitu bhavana-anukula bhavayitu vyapara). And this bhavana is of three parts 1. Kim Bhavayet (what should be desired), 2. Kena Bhavayet (through what should it be desired) and 3. Katham Bhavayet (how should it be desired). The first bhavana is taken care of by the statement by saying, “desire heaven”. The same statement gives the knowledge of the second also, by saying “through the darsha-purnamasa sacrifice” and the third is taken care by the auxiliary statement “through the twigs”.

“samidho yajati” is one of the five subsidiary sacrifices the others are “ido yajati”, “barhir yajati”, tanunapatam yajati” and “svahakaram yajati”.

Smart Mauni Says “I failed in math because the Teacher was ‘jealous’ of my knowledge that I knew more than him. Sample this: in one book the formulae was (x + y)² = x² + y² + 2xy and in the other it was (a + b)² = a² + b² + 2ab. When asked the value of (x + y)², I wrote, because I know ekavakyata, x² + y² + 2ab.”

Lord Ayyappa

Swamiye Sharanam Ayyappa.

There is this question often asked about the Lord of Shabarimala (mountain Shabari), what is the story related to his birth all about.

The story of Ayyappa is, the king of Pantala in south of India, now Kerala (erstwhile Chera kingdom), had no progeny. When he visited the nearby forest for hunting, found a small baby boy, who was left in the wild forest. Finding no one (parents) around, brought the kid home and accepted him as his own adopted son. Soon after this, the queen also became pregnant and gave birth to a baby boy.

As would any mother, she wanted all the attention and love of her husband for her son and not the adopted son. Though she had a lot of love for the adopted boy, she and the people around her became the nimitta (instrumental cause) for bringing out the greatness of the adopted boy.

As it is the normal conditioning of the Indian mind, therefore it always wants to see the exalted sage as an Avatar (incarnation) of some or other deity. We find the Lord Ayyappa being associated with both Shiva and Vishnu, and thus was named Harihara-putra.

If it be asked, why as the son of Vishnu and Siva, the only logical answer can be, why not. We have people who are seen as the Avatar of Kartikeya (son of Shiva) etc, and maybe there during the time (and sure it was) due to the constant fight between the Shiva and Vishnu worshippers, it seems logical to have a common god, which is of the form of both.

But still, why as a son, and not as an Amsa (part) of the two Greats, if be asked, it is always easy to accept it in this form than as an Amsa d both, which many will feel as farfetched.

His whole life is full of riddles, like 1. Being the son of harihara 2. Having a friend in Babar, a Muslim 3. Having an attire that suits Siddha (and some feel the buddhistic touch) and preaching “tat tvam asi”, based on the scriptures 4. Slaying the demon Mahishi as it is generally felt to be unworthy of a warrior to kill a woman, 5. Being called Ayyappa, for both Ayya and Appa are synonyms for father etc.

Smart Mauni says, “let us pray the Lord, whose life is full of confusion (riddle) to remove the confusion in our life”.