Sangeetha (your post): “A time will come when all bhaktas can chant their mantras and express at free will! Swami Saranam!”
Reply/Anwwer:
True.
But, here, we have to be very clear and straight forward as to where do we stand.
With the nation and its constitutional supremacy?
or
With the partisan sentiments that goes against the constitutional supremacy and integrity of the nation?
With the effort of strengthening the nation and its constitution
or
With the wrecking effort of the partisan sentiments driven by the ulterior political motives and vested interest with a view to abolish and weaken the constitution and thereby the nation as a whole. Only to get power and wealth.
******
Dear Sangeetha, we can agree on one point (which you did not put forward in your above post).
Supreme Court could have avoided this situation by not giving such a verdict.
Supreme Court could have read real situation in Kerala that the women in here do not want to go to Shabarimala or there is or there was no such a direct and apparent gender discrimination at shabarimala (as we argue from our side). That is now an hypothetical say.
But, just because, we (women of Kerala) don't want to go Shabarimala temple, can the constitution and constitutional bench of Supreme Court forget or avoid the aspect of gender equality and prevalence of constitutional morality?
Is the Constitution meant only to address the present, the present generation of Kerala, and only those who do think going to Shabarimala temple is improper, hence it is not in their right?
Is not the constitution meant for the future, future generation of all India, and for those who want to go to Shabarimala temple and think it is proper and hence, it is in their right.
But, just because, we (women of Kerala) don't want to go Shabarimala temple, can the constitution and constitutional bench of Supreme Court forget or avoid the aspect of gender equality and prevalence of constitutional morality?
Is the Constitution meant only to address the present, the present generation of Kerala, and only those who do think going to Shabarimala temple is improper, hence it is not in their right?
Is not the constitution meant for the future, future generation of all India, and for those who want to go to Shabarimala temple and think it is proper and hence, it is in their right.
So, once the verdict has come out, that too from Supreme Court's constitutional bench, what should be our role and duty, as the political parties working under the same constitution or its leaders and workers, and above all good and loving Indian citizens?
Don’t we need to look into the verdict to see what the soul and spirit of the Verdict is?
Supreme Court did not (and cannot) make by-chance verdict. Especially constitutional benches do not (and cannot) make a by-chance verdict. By-chance created by not submitting and revealing the relevant facts (as we allege in this case and verdict). For the constitutional bench, the only measuring scale, criterion and bench mark is the Constitution.
Supreme Court did not (and cannot) make by-chance verdict. Especially constitutional benches do not (and cannot) make a by-chance verdict. By-chance created by not submitting and revealing the relevant facts (as we allege in this case and verdict). For the constitutional bench, the only measuring scale, criterion and bench mark is the Constitution.
*********
Your beautiful question if I have visited Sabarimala Temple is not relevant. Such a question is intended to defeat the one with different opinion on Sabarimala issue. But very childish.
Such a question, I hope, you and your group will not moot towards the Judges that formed the Constitutional Bench too.
Dear Sangeetha, it is not a must at all, in any case and every case, that one who comment upon should be the one doing too. If so, can any one have or make any opinion about the taste of the food he eats? Should he be a good cook as well in order to qualify him to make any opinion on the food he eats?
At least people working in judiciary will know and admit to this. And here, in this case, one who has visited will not have any superiority or more points, especialy since the main question raised and solved by the Supreme Court in this case is question of Constitutional morality and its supremacy.
********
The core and soul of the SC verdict was “Constitution should come first. Constitutional values and morality will prevail on and over all other values and moralities”.
Such a question, I hope, you and your group will not moot towards the Judges that formed the Constitutional Bench too.
Dear Sangeetha, it is not a must at all, in any case and every case, that one who comment upon should be the one doing too. If so, can any one have or make any opinion about the taste of the food he eats? Should he be a good cook as well in order to qualify him to make any opinion on the food he eats?
At least people working in judiciary will know and admit to this. And here, in this case, one who has visited will not have any superiority or more points, especialy since the main question raised and solved by the Supreme Court in this case is question of Constitutional morality and its supremacy.
********
The core and soul of the SC verdict was “Constitution should come first. Constitutional values and morality will prevail on and over all other values and moralities”.
Supreme court wanted to get the Constitution the prevalence and supremacy.
The simple reason is, a nation becomes a nation because of its constitution.
Then what should be our reaction and effort, in the wake of this clear SC verdict, as the proud citizens of the same nation?
That should be our question to ourselves. Especially in and from a democratic perspective.
The simple reason is, a nation becomes a nation because of its constitution.
Then what should be our reaction and effort, in the wake of this clear SC verdict, as the proud citizens of the same nation?
That should be our question to ourselves. Especially in and from a democratic perspective.
It should be:
To teach the people and make them aware of the Constitution and its values and moralities.
To teach and enlighten the people with a simple fact: that India is becoming India just because of its Constitution. Without its constitution, India will be in shatters and fragments.
And our duty should also be, at least:
Not to provoke the people by misinforming them and/or by misusing their ignorance and sentimentalities. Sentiment cannot be a substitute for constitution.
Not to use the ignorance and sentimentalities for our vested political interest and ulterior motives.
All the above, if we are really truthful and honest to our own conscience and are sincere to the core interest of our nation.
All the above, if we are really truthful and honest to our own conscience and are sincere to the core interest of our nation.
*******
Dear Sangeetha, we cannot take and use the sword of tears and sentiments to break the wall of Constitution.
We cannot make the protest of ignorant people, just because they are provoked by the vested interest group to do so, as the pretext to weaken and wreck the constitution and to sow and sprout the seeds of pessimism and anti-national elements thereby.
Tears, mostly are due to misunderstanding or misinformation or ignorance.
Such tears are there at many other places or centres too.
There are thousands of meditation camps producing such heavy tears all over India and the world.
Real and right knowledge only can cure and dry out such tears and bring in the harmony, peace and solution in the place of such tears.
Solution should not be by creating many other wounds and worsening of such wounds and increasing the tears thereby.
Such tears are there at many other places or centres too.
There are thousands of meditation camps producing such heavy tears all over India and the world.
Real and right knowledge only can cure and dry out such tears and bring in the harmony, peace and solution in the place of such tears.
Solution should not be by creating many other wounds and worsening of such wounds and increasing the tears thereby.
********
Dear Sangeetha, what is more astonishing and embarrassing, in this particular scenario is:
Even those who are part of judiciary do not sleep with the Judiciary.
Living on account of Judiciary, their conscience sleep with agendas of vested political interest outside.
They do not belong to or at least do not pretend as if they stand for and with cause of justice and Judiciary impartially and independently.
They do not respect the Judiciary and its verdict.
That too without any specific ground that will serve any in better way.
That too without any specific ground that will serve any in better way.
They too don’t agree and understand the fact that Judiciary is one of the three main pillars of democracy and the nation.
They don’t recognise the fact that: by going against the SC verdict they are going against the mere foundation of the nation. They are wrecking the ship, by trying to make a hole in it.
They don’t value the nation’s integrity and constitutional supremacy as their first preference and priority.
Priorities and preferences are here for them decided by the preoccupations.
Pre-occupied minds are troubled mind.
For the preoccupied minds, their preoccupations become their priority and preference. Hence troubled.
Troubled mind cannot reflect in and with clarity.
Hence, they find everywhere only the troubles.
And they want to create everywhere the troubles.
Troubled minds see and create only the troubles, at any cost and for any reason.
Pre-occupied minds are troubled mind.
For the preoccupied minds, their preoccupations become their priority and preference. Hence troubled.
Troubled mind cannot reflect in and with clarity.
Hence, they find everywhere only the troubles.
And they want to create everywhere the troubles.
Troubled minds see and create only the troubles, at any cost and for any reason.
So are they more interested (like any third rate politicians with secret agendas) in riding on the ignorance and falsely driven sentimentalities of common public.
They do not want to lead the people to the heights and sanctity of the Constitution. that do not become the leaders.
Rather, they want to be lead by those ignorant people to the lowest standard and level or third rate politics of ignorance and superstitions, without minding the cost of constitution and its cherished values.
To the extend that: those people living on account of judiciary would talk against the same judiciary and its historical path breaking verdict for the supremacy of constitution.
Don’t know why?
May be for them Judiciary is only a work place to earn the power, respect and wealth for them.
For them their job is only a job in the job market, not Dharma.
My be, they do look only at their own personal growth, in terms of their salary, allowances and promotion.
Could be judiciary is only ladder for them to go up. They don't want the judiciary and justice to go up ad they don't want to change and transform themselves to the ladders for judiciary and justice.
For them their job is only a job in the job market, not Dharma.
My be, they do look only at their own personal growth, in terms of their salary, allowances and promotion.
Could be judiciary is only ladder for them to go up. They don't want the judiciary and justice to go up ad they don't want to change and transform themselves to the ladders for judiciary and justice.
Hence, could be for them, more important agenda is the ulterior political interest of certain third rate parties than the supremacy of constitution, democratic values and national integrity.
But in the meantime we should not forget the very few people in judiciary born deservingly for judiciary, with their inherent strict blindness and impartiality towards and against any vested interest.
But in the meantime we should not forget the very few people in judiciary born deservingly for judiciary, with their inherent strict blindness and impartiality towards and against any vested interest.
*********
Coming to the point you raised in the above your post.
Dear Sangeetha S Kumar, Well said.
I know you can say and you will say only these good things. Good. Please continue to do so without cultivating in us the values and elements of hatred, hypocrisy and partisanship. By nurturing in us the qualities of love, truthfulness, transparency, loyalty and sincerity.
I know you can say and you will say only these good things. Good. Please continue to do so without cultivating in us the values and elements of hatred, hypocrisy and partisanship. By nurturing in us the qualities of love, truthfulness, transparency, loyalty and sincerity.
No doubt, as you rightly said, all Bhaktas (pious worshippers), hope you mean including young women as directed by Supreme Court, should be allowed and would able to chant mantras at Shabarimala. It has been happening there from the time immemorable. With no discrimination on the basis of gender or race or caste or birth.
Your tone in the post has the meaning that the Bhaktas are not able to chant mantras freely now. I don't know, whether you were mislead by those vested interest group. Or do you really believe that this your version is true to the core, except for the propaganda made by the certain group for serving they limited agendas?
Dear Sangeetha, The same govt of Kerala was there even before this verdict of SC. Last year in 2017, this same govt. ruled this same Kerala and Shabarimala. Nothing wrong happened then and we could not see any such element till today.
********
Then, dear Sangeetha, what will be the real reason for anything wrong happening at Shabarimala now?
We can look at the disease.
But we also need to look at, and need to talk about, the reason for (infection that causes) the disease too.
But we also need to look at, and need to talk about, the reason for (infection that causes) the disease too.
In periphery and outwardly only the fever. But deep inside the core is the reason and solution for the disease.
The reason for the disease or fever is not even the Verdict of Supreme Court allowing the woman of all ages to visit Sabairmala.
Verdict was a real medicine. Applying it wrongly, or not applying it, we made it to be dangerous a poison or disease.
Mishandling make anything to be dangerous. Our political leaders are irresponsibly mishandling.
Verdict was a real medicine. Applying it wrongly, or not applying it, we made it to be dangerous a poison or disease.
Mishandling make anything to be dangerous. Our political leaders are irresponsibly mishandling.
The reason for the disease is and was the agitation and protest against verdict of Supreme Court, without looking at its merit nationally.
Was not the agitation and protest against the Verdict of constitutional bench of Supreme Court really amounting to treason and anti national activity?
Can you really say, what wrong did the present govt of Kerala do after the issuance of verdict by Supreme Court?
Nothing.
Can any other govt. do any other thing in any other better way than the thing and the way govt of Kerala does it in present scenario.
Opinions can be there in thousands. But, we have to be realistic and truthful to the core and our conscience.
If so, come forward with a workable way and solution.
Creating chaos and poisoning is easy. To settle the chaos and treat the poison is very tough.
Opinions can be there in thousands. But, we have to be realistic and truthful to the core and our conscience.
If so, come forward with a workable way and solution.
Creating chaos and poisoning is easy. To settle the chaos and treat the poison is very tough.
********
Sangeetha who is implementing and who is liable to implement this SC verdict on Sabarimala?
At least it is not the government.
To implement this verdict, is there any need of a government at all?
This is not a verdict putting liability on any one, including Govt., but is of giving only the right.
Right to whom?
To all the women in India.
********
All the discussions on SC verdict on Sabarimala are diverted into the direction as if the govt. of Kerala is eagerly implementing the verdict, which is very wrong.
There is no direction from Supreme Court to any govt or any one to specifically implement this verdict.
Only thing is that no one should stand in the way of any woman if she is exercising her right availed from this Verdict, as an obstacle. Even the State Govt.
The maximum liability on any Govt, in the light of this verdict, is and will be to clear the ways for those who want to exercise their right as per this SC verdict.
This verdict is the verdict of giving right only. To all Indian women. It is not a directional verdict to any State Govt to implement. There is nothing to implement for any govt. in this verdict.
Any woman citizen of India can implement this verdict. The Indian women are the implementers of this verdict when they happen to go to Sabarimal.
And that is what is creating problems and chaos here. Not the implementation by any govt.
Just because Indian women are still weak and are in slavery the chaos are created and chaos can be created. They still have no stand of their own. They still prefer slavery to freedom. They are still in the shadows of the past and its influences. Easily misguided.
Hence, the protesters' march against such Verdict. Against the visiting attempts by any woman as per the right given in SC verdict.
Then why do you think it is the govt of Kerala implementing the SC verdict?
No, it is not Govt. of Kerala implementing the SC verdict.
If you think it is govt of Kerala implementing the verdict, you are worng and your are in a wrong boat.
Supreme Court gave the right and power to implement this verdict to each and every woman citizen of India, including you, Sangeetha.
Govt. of Kerala has nothing to do to implement this verdict.
Only thing govt. of Kerala is compelled to do is to give the protection to those women visiting Shabarimala.
That too why and when?
If and when there is any difficulty created by those so-called protesting miscreants against their entry into the temple.
Why the Govt. of Kerala is and has to be then in picture?
Just because agitators are there.
They are stopping and attacking those women.
Or at least they may at any point of time attack such women, if given a free walk.
With that wrong attitude of agitators and protesters does lay the reason and burden of what all wrong things and restrictions happening extra ordinarily at Shabarimala.
The unwanted and unwarranted protest against SC verdict is to blame. Diverting the protest in disguise against the incumbent government in Kerala.
********
Dear Sangeetha, even now, there is freedom at Shabarimal to chant the mantras through out and Harivarasanam at the end, at night.
Everyone is equally allowed there.
The problem makers only felt as having problems and not allowed.
Bacterias and viruses feel suffocated in a healthy body.
The problem is with the agitators’ attitude and eyes.
We have to admit this, if we are really open and receptive.
I do say this openly, just because I do not belong to any belief system of any religion or party or partisan vested interest or ulterior motives. You can check anywhere about my allegiance. But can you be that confident and clear about your stand?
If the answer is big "no", then you need to rethink.
If the answer is big "no", then you need to rethink.
******
Dear Sangeetha S Kumar, even otherwise it is only common sense to understand that the Govt. of Kerala did not want and did not do anything to create chaos in Shabaribmala or unsettle the whole affair there.
If it was the govt’s plan to create chaos in Shabaribmala and unsettle the whole affair there, they could have done it very simply and easily. They could get thousands and thousands (men and women) to go to Sabarimala. They could send thousands to make Sannidhaanam a place of blood bath.
As you may know they are and they have been the ruling party and the biggest party in Kerala through out. They have (if I am right) more than thirty thousand branches in Kerala only. One person from each branch will (can) do the spoiler in Shabarimal, if they really wanted and meant (as we accuse them) doing. But they did not do that. Because they did not want to do that.
What is the fact instead?
Who went there, instead, as spoilers to unsettle and create chaos?
Who wanted there to make the Sannidaahanam a place for blood bath?
The answer will be clear to you.
Who went there, instead, as spoilers to unsettle and create chaos?
Who wanted there to make the Sannidaahanam a place for blood bath?
The answer will be clear to you.
As you may rightly know, govt. of Kerala tried all its best to stop their attempts to worsen the situation.
**********
And , Dear Sangeetha, that is the speciality about Shabarimala now.
No one is restricting or stopping or preventing anyone from chanting the mantras throughout or Harivaraasanam at night.
But such chanting should not be to conduct a protest in disguise against the verdict of Supreme Court. It should not be to create Chaos and frightening scenes to keep the women of all ages away from there.
But such chanting should not be to conduct a protest in disguise against the verdict of Supreme Court. It should not be to create Chaos and frightening scenes to keep the women of all ages away from there.
It should not be to prevent women entering there as per the verdict Supreme Court.
Govt. and Supreme Court together are trying all their best to ensure this happen freely for every interested Indian.
******
But, dear Sangeetha, certain vested interest group has a different agenda (against their own original stand on the entry of woman in Shabarimala) with their ulterior political motives. I don't think you may have such. But you may have got trapped and become their prey or victim.
That their agenda makes it very tough and difficult for both the govt and supreme Court to see the women India implementing the verdict.
What do we really need in this scenario:
We need to get rid of such politics of ulterior motives and vested interest that needs to work even at the cost of Ayyappan and Sannidhaanam.
We need to get rid of such politics of ulterior motives and vested interest that needs to work even at the cost of Ayyappan and Sannidhaanam.
The group of such ulterior motives even will find and make the nation and its core interest as the cost for their power mongering.
Such politics do not stand for the nation and its welfare or wellbeing.
They need only the power and wealth of the nation, not the nation and its people.
They will even sell the breast of their mother to get the price of half kilo gram flesh/meat.
They will even sell the breast of their mother to get the price of half kilo gram flesh/meat.
For them nationalism and patriotism has a different meaning.
They mean they can do anything against the nation and national interest in the name of nationalism. And all others coming against them will be termed as anti national and unpatriotic.
They mean they can do anything against the nation and national interest in the name of nationalism. And all others coming against them will be termed as anti national and unpatriotic.
*******
Dear Sangeetha, the speciality of hinduism, as I humbly understand, is its freedom.
No compulsions or strict definition and its confinements in any form.
Hinduism is the practice and culture in India that accommodates and embraces all differences equally.
It, hence, gives freedom to its followers to imagine and approach the truth and God the way they can from within their limitations.
It considers the aspects of faith as subjective and personal.
No one can interfere in it. Hence freedom.
No model and no role model with any final say in it, as it is in semitic religions.
Hinduism never claims exclusivity and finality to any of its sayings and belief system the way, you may aware, Semitic religions do claim exclusivity and finality to its sayings and belief system, which in result makes such semitic religion to be ideologies of intolerance and extremism.
No compulsions or strict definition and its confinements in any form.
Hinduism is the practice and culture in India that accommodates and embraces all differences equally.
It, hence, gives freedom to its followers to imagine and approach the truth and God the way they can from within their limitations.
It considers the aspects of faith as subjective and personal.
No one can interfere in it. Hence freedom.
No model and no role model with any final say in it, as it is in semitic religions.
Hinduism never claims exclusivity and finality to any of its sayings and belief system the way, you may aware, Semitic religions do claim exclusivity and finality to its sayings and belief system, which in result makes such semitic religion to be ideologies of intolerance and extremism.
*******
Dear Sangeetha, it is true.
With regard to entry of young women at Shabarimala, as you rightly opined, if a woman doesn't want to go, let her not go.
Nobody is there to compel her to go. Nobody will ever compel them too.
With regard to entry of young women at Shabarimala, as you rightly opined, if a woman doesn't want to go, let her not go.
Nobody is there to compel her to go. Nobody will ever compel them too.
But, at the same time, those people who do want to go should be allowed in the same manner.
They should not be compelled or threatened by those who do not want to go there.
They should not be compelled or threatened by those who do not want to go there.
**********
Dear Sangeetha, the ground for going and for not going to Shabarimala should be subjective and personal.
Depending only on one’s subjective feeling.
Not on the menstruation or any external compulsions or impositions in general.
Depending only on one’s subjective feeling.
Not on the menstruation or any external compulsions or impositions in general.
Dear Sangeetha, menstruation should not be a ground for disallowing the entry, legally or constitutionally.
That was also the reason for Supreme Court for its verdict.
That was also the reason for Supreme Court for its verdict.
Menstruation should not be considered as such as a very bad thing.
In one's subjectivity the aspect of mensuration can be a reason for her for not going to Shabarimala.
It is, but, her personal choice and belief.
Personally one can see it as a ground for her not to go.
It is upto her only.
In one's subjectivity the aspect of mensuration can be a reason for her for not going to Shabarimala.
It is, but, her personal choice and belief.
Personally one can see it as a ground for her not to go.
It is upto her only.
But it cannot be the ground for denying and stopping others legally and constitutionally.
That is what Supreme Court meant to say.
As part of applying gender equality and constitutional morality.
That is what Supreme Court meant to say.
As part of applying gender equality and constitutional morality.
Those who do not want to go to Shabarimala should not impose their view on others.
After all you have to know that the Menstruation makes a woman to be a woman and mother.
If no mensturation, a woman is not considered as a woman.
No one would marry such a woman.
We call her as barren.
Isn’t it?
To menstruate and to be a woman or a mother is not a blame or a shame. But a big blessing and quality.
If no mensturation, a woman is not considered as a woman.
No one would marry such a woman.
We call her as barren.
Isn’t it?
To menstruate and to be a woman or a mother is not a blame or a shame. But a big blessing and quality.
Below 10, one doesn’t turn to be a woman, but is only a child with a potential of turning to be a woman in future.
And above 50, a woman stop to be functioning as a perfect woman.
Hence, allowing them to go before 10 and after 50 is not equal to allowing woman. It is equal to denying the womanhood and motherhood in woman.
Mother in woman is divine even as per Hindu vedas.
Denying on the ground of menstruation, (once womanhood and motherhood) is equal to denying womanhood and motherhood from going to Shabarimala.
Constitution of India cannot ratify this. That is what Supreme Court wanted to point out through its verdict. Isn’t it very clear?
And above 50, a woman stop to be functioning as a perfect woman.
Hence, allowing them to go before 10 and after 50 is not equal to allowing woman. It is equal to denying the womanhood and motherhood in woman.
Mother in woman is divine even as per Hindu vedas.
Denying on the ground of menstruation, (once womanhood and motherhood) is equal to denying womanhood and motherhood from going to Shabarimala.
Constitution of India cannot ratify this. That is what Supreme Court wanted to point out through its verdict. Isn’t it very clear?
Then, what is the problem with you with regard to the Verdict of SC?
Sangeetha, don’t you want to respect you as a woman?
Why should you underestimate you as a woman?
Why should a slave feel that in slavery is his freedom?
*****
Here the issue of entry of women at Sabarimala is not created by any one in particular, but the Supreme Court only.
The nutshell of SC verdict dated 28 September 2018? is “constitution is above all. Constitutional values and morality is above all values and moralities”.
To put it like that (that the Constitution is above all) is a good say and declaration for strengthening India as a nation, sovereignty and entity.
This verdict even can be seen as the basis and foundation stone for introduction of the uniform civil code in future.
Hence, our political parties (especially a national party like BJP) should be very much happy and proud of and about this verdict and they should really celebrate this verdict.
This very verdict from Supreme Court, basically, will give more space for political parties, especially national political parties.
*********
Let me come to the point raised by you in your above post.
Sentiments cannot substitute the constitution.
Sentiments cannot be used as excuse to forget and destroy our constitution.
Sentiments cannot be used as excuse to forget and destroy our constitution.
Protest cannot be made as a pretext to defy the constitution.
Can you advise me as to what other thing Govt of Kerala could do with regard to Verdict of Supreme Court, even if they have not declared they are not against the entry of Women in Sabarimala?
Could you even imagine any other govt anywhere in India would do or say otherwise, even if such state was ruled by any other party (including BJP) than the incumbent CPM in Kerala?
******
We know it as in the daylight that BJP or RSS has no other stand originally on the entry of woman of all ages in Shabarimala.
Central Govt too had no different stand on this for this very reason. They cannot too.
They are all in favour of women's entry.
Then why the hullabaloos in Kerala?
Is it only because they are not in power in Kerala?
Is it only because they want to come in power in Kerala using this as a trump card?
Hence they tend to be against it.
This is really wrong and opportunistic.
This is really wrong and opportunistic.
*********
This is not a verdict the state is implementing...
Any citizen in India can implement it. You know it.
Only thing the state can do is not to oppose such implementation by any citizen of India.
The state is not even supposed to give protection unless there is such a situation needing to give protection.
If there is any imminent threat to such citizens of India (when they go to Shabarimala as their right as per the SC overdid and constitution), the question of giving protection arises.
State govt. can do nothing else, be it is of BJP or CPM or Congress…
We have to be realistic when we talk on this issue.
We have to be realistic when we talk on this issue.
Opposition's duty and work necessary in democracy.
But should not blindly oppose, to the extend of amounting to denial of constitution.
But should not blindly oppose, to the extend of amounting to denial of constitution.
BJP is against it now.
But, we have to know “now and here in Kerala" only.
As a political stand only…
*******
Sangeetha.. it is very clear that the police is making such control because of certain groups' malicious moves.
Otherwise there is and there was no such hindrance or control in chanting at all.
That is what we could hear from the people around, except the very particular TV channel.
That is what we could hear from the people around, except the very particular TV channel.
You have to understand this.
Was there any control in 2017?
Not at all.
The same govt. was there in 2017 and before too.
Was there any control in 2017?
Not at all.
The same govt. was there in 2017 and before too.
*******
So, who brought in the difference?
SC verdict made the difference.
Then who?
Unwarranted and unwanted and irresponsible opposition from the party that is ruling the country.
You have to take note here:
Central govt has not made any single word against the SC verdict.
Then why its party doing the contrary in Kerala?
Central govt has not made any single word against the SC verdict.
Then why its party doing the contrary in Kerala?
What does that mean Sangeetha?
Any govt cannot do anything else than what the incumbent govt, in Kerala is doing.
And any govt. can do only what Kerala or central governments are now doing.
Just helping to implement the verdict.
Just create the favourable condition and atmosphere to implement the verdict by any woman citizen of India.
And any govt. can do only what Kerala or central governments are now doing.
Just helping to implement the verdict.
Just create the favourable condition and atmosphere to implement the verdict by any woman citizen of India.
*******
Who is a brahmachaari? Brahmachaari is the one who travels to Brahma.
He is not brhama or God himself.
He is only the one who is trying with the charya to brahma.
Meaning he is only a student or a seeker.
He is a traveller to brahma.
Even the Ayyappan at Shabarimala is a traveller or a seeker.
That is the speciality of Ayyappa at Shabarimala.
Not god himself, but a seeker.
The basic Prathishta at ShabariMala was not of Ayyappa.
But of Dharmashaasthaav.
Ayyapan entered into Dharmashaasthaavu to be one with it,
But only as a brahmachaachari, naishtika brahmachaari.
He is not brhama or God himself.
He is only the one who is trying with the charya to brahma.
Meaning he is only a student or a seeker.
He is a traveller to brahma.
Even the Ayyappan at Shabarimala is a traveller or a seeker.
That is the speciality of Ayyappa at Shabarimala.
Not god himself, but a seeker.
The basic Prathishta at ShabariMala was not of Ayyappa.
But of Dharmashaasthaav.
Ayyapan entered into Dharmashaasthaavu to be one with it,
But only as a brahmachaachari, naishtika brahmachaari.
Why is a brahmachaari a brahmachaari?
Because he opts to be so by himself.
Not because others wants or compels him or abstains from him.
He will opt to be so even if there is freedom to be otherwise.
He has that power to resist all the temptations.
Not because people have to abstain from him
To keep him protected as celibate of brahmachari.
Because he opts to be so by himself.
Not because others wants or compels him or abstains from him.
He will opt to be so even if there is freedom to be otherwise.
He has that power to resist all the temptations.
Not because people have to abstain from him
To keep him protected as celibate of brahmachari.
Who is liable to protect the brahmacharya of a brahmachaari? The people around him or brahmachaari himself?No. It has to be the brahmachaari himself. He is a brahmachaari because he has such power to control himself and resist the tempations. So only he becomes a deserving brahmachaari.
If it is duty of the people to keep and protect him brahmachaari, then it will be very big liability for the people (ignorant people) and it will be very tough for him to be a brahmachari?
Because people cannot to be that disciplined and focussed.
Brahmachari has to be discipline ad focussed.
Brahmachari should not become like a foolish king to ask his minister and people to lay carpet all around the earth to save his feet from the stones and thorns.
That would mean to say Ayyappa as a brahmachari is so week and he is not ready wear the footwear of brahmacharya..
If a brahmcachaari is becoming a brahmachaari because all the people around him abstain from him, it is equal to becoming the same king who did not wear the chapel himself and made it big liability fro the people around him to lay the carpet..
Brahmachari, rather, has to abstain himself from anything and everything. His mind should be so strong that newness of any temptation will not shake him off.
********
Dear Sangeetha,
Thathwamasi is the word inscribed there in front of the temple at Sabarimala.
It was not there as such before.
It is/was a later development.
It was inscribed and put there later, recently.
No temples in India had the practice of putting the word "Thathwamasi" in its front.
Why?
Because the temple is for the ones who did not or could not reach the stage of Thathwamasi.
Because, Thatwamasi or aham brahmaasmi is a stage and phase where one wouldn’t need a temple or Prathishta for himself and where one wouldn’t need to visit any temple.
Because, Thatwamasi or aham brahmaasmi is a stage and phase where one wouldn’t need a temple or Prathishta for himself and where one wouldn’t need to visit any temple.
A brahmachaari is not and cannot be the one who has reached the level and stage of Thathwamasi or Ahambrahmaasmi.
Once one reaches the stage of thathwamasi or ahambrahmaasmi, the question of brahmacharyam will vanish.
The question of having a temple or visiting a temple will not arise.
Because "he/she is that", and "that is he/she". "You are that" and "that is you". "I am that" and "it is me".
*******
And thathwamasi and Ahambrahmaasmi are are equally applicable for woman of all ages too.
Once one reaches the stage of thathwamasi or ahambrahmaasmi, the question of brahmacharyam will vanish.
The question of having a temple or visiting a temple will not arise.
Because "he/she is that", and "that is he/she". "You are that" and "that is you". "I am that" and "it is me".
*******
And thathwamasi and Ahambrahmaasmi are are equally applicable for woman of all ages too.
For the one who reached the stage and level of thathwamasi or ahambrahmaasmi,
No difference will be there between good and evil, God and devil.
All the same.
He won’t have any aversion towards menstruation or any other bodily aspects. No liking and no disliking.
He would neither need attachment nor detachment.
Neither nearness nor abstinence.
This is the phase where all the barriers and boundaries will vanish and become non-existing.
No difference will be there between good and evil, God and devil.
All the same.
He won’t have any aversion towards menstruation or any other bodily aspects. No liking and no disliking.
He would neither need attachment nor detachment.
Neither nearness nor abstinence.
This is the phase where all the barriers and boundaries will vanish and become non-existing.
The pathishta of Ayyappan there in Shabarimala is not of the one who reached the level and phase of thathwamasi or ahambrahmasmi. But is only of a disciplined and ritualistic seeker or traveller, naishtika brahmachari, who is just seeking and travelling to reach the stage and phase of thathwamasi. The one who has reached the thathwamasi or ahambrahmaasmi will not have to further seek, travel and resort to brahmcharya.
Thathamasi and ahambrhamasmi will deny the need of temple and prathishtas. It will also not need brahmacharya and poojas.
This is for your further information.
********
Dear Sangeetha, we can be genuine, even when we have to make opposition.
Our opposition should be logical and reasonable...
It should not be to oppose pinarayi or communism only.
It should have roots and base in our own values.
It should have the support of our own real conscience.
It should be to hug and say the truth.
Right is right, from whoever it be.
Wrong too the same way.
In order to oppose for opposing sake,
We should not kill or suffocate the truth and God.
We should not kill or suffocate the truth and God.
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment