ramanan50

Posts Tagged ‘India’

Brahmins Organized Indian Marriage System Tholkappiyar

In Hinduism, Tamils on December 16, 2014 at 19:27

I have often wondered who organized the Marriage System (Monogamy) in India.

 

Though marriage is considered to be sacred in Hinduism and has elaborate Rituals to solemnize and conduct marriages, I have not been able to find any definite information on who organized this system of marriage.

 

Marriage ceremony.jpeg.

Hindu Marriage ceremony.

 

I could not find the origin of marriage details from the Puranas, Vedas or Ithihasas.

 

All these texts glorify and explain the rituals connected with Marriage.

 

The first written record  on who organized marriage as a System is found in the ancient Tamil Grammar Book, Tholkappiyam, written by Tholkappiar (between 3rd century BCE and the 3rd century CE), a disciple of Sage Agasthya.

 

He states that the society was being ruined by indiscriminate copulation ,involving Lies, frauds.

 

Hence  Brahmins organized the system of marriage.

 

“மேலோர் மூவர்க்கும் புணர்த்த கரணம்
கீழோர்க்காகிய காலமும் உண்டே (1090)
பொய்யும் வழுவும் தோன்றிய பின்னர்
ஐயர் யாத்தனர் கரணம் என்ப (1091) Tholkappiyam.

 

Here there is a rider.

 

Marriage as a system which was in existence for the three Varnas(மேலோர் மூவர்க்கும்) is now being set for the Fourth Varna by the Brahmins.

 

Meaning of the text.

 

Marriage as a System, which was in existence for three varnas, is now set for the fourth varna by Brahmins

 

Information to enrich the article welcome.

2870 Clinical Trial Deaths 12 000 Adverse Events India

In Health on December 15, 2014 at 11:07

India, along with the African and some impoverished Latin American and Central American Countries leads the list of clinical deaths due to the drug trials.

 

These are the official figures.

Clinical Trial Deaths India.jpg

Clinical Trial Deaths India .

 

I doubt whether this constitutes even 10 % of the actual deaths.

 

One has to take into account that many drug trials are conducted in India on the sly., with the active connivance of doctors and Pharmacists.

 

More than 2,500 Indians have died in the course of clinical trials in recent years, government figures reveal.

According to an affidavit filed by the health ministry in the Supreme Court in response to a petition by health NGOs, there were 80 deaths due to clinical trials between January 2005 and June 2012. Between July 2012-August 2013 nine more such reported deaths occurred, making this total 89, according to the petitioner Swasthya Adhikar Manch (SAM), a health rights forum. Compensation was paid in 82 cases.

The ministry also admitted that 2,644 people died during clinical trials of 475 new drugs from 2005 to 2012.

SAM challenges this number of 80 deaths said to have been caused by clinical trials – among the rest who are said only to have died during the course of the trials and not as a result of the trials.

“No standard protocol was followed, there were no post-mortems; so how can they arrive at this figure?” Amulya Nidhi of SAM told IPS. Compensation is paid only if a death was said to have been caused by the clinical trial.

 

Government documents also say that around 11,972 “serious adverse events” (excluding death) were reported from Jan. 1, 2005 to Jun. 30, 2012, of which 506 were said to have been caused by clinical trials.

These figures have raised new opposition to the prevailing practices for conducting clinical trials.

India has become a hub of clinical trials for drugs over the last few years, mostly by pharmaceutical companies from abroad. Allegations of short-changing participants and of unethical practices have been rampant.

Responding to growing concerns by health activists, the ministry of health and family welfare set up a six-member expert panel under the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CIDSCO) in February this year. The panel has recommended that these trials should only be carried out in accredited centres.

Despite clinical trials coming under scrutiny in various courts, little has changed on the ground. At least 370 deaths have been reported during clinical trials in India since February 2013, but compensation has been paid in only 21 cases, according to government data. The amount ranged from Rs 4 lakh to Rs 40 lakh, a senior official told TOI. “

 

Citation.

http://www.ipsnews.net/2013/11/over-2500-deaths-during-indian-clinical-trials/

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/370-die-in-clinical-trials-in-2-years-kin-of-only-21-get-compensation/articleshow/45516891.cms

Image credit.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2097386/Supreme-Court-clamps-illegal-unethical-clinical-trials-exploit-children-mentally-ill.html

No Abusive Word in Sanskrit?

In Hindusim on December 15, 2014 at 06:32

Hinduism states that Sanskrit is Deva Bhasha,Language of the Gods and Sanskrit is considered to be the most compatible for computer Language.

 

I have posted some articles on Sanskrit.

 

Sanskrit Numerals flipped over 786

786 Sanskrit Numerals

 

I have come across information that cultured,pure Sanskrit does not contain an abusive word.

 

Nor does it have a word for Lock.

 

I have read, quoting Kanchi Periyavar that Sanskrit does not have a word for ‘Mouth’ nor Tamil for’ Face’

 

Corrections welcome.

 

“We fall short of words while describing the well-culturedness of Divine Sanskrut language! In spite of having thousands of words, this language has not included a single word with the meaning of ‘kulup‘ (lock). What could be the reason behind this? In order to enable Koutsa to pay his Gurudakshina (offering to Guru), Kuber (God of wealth) had showered gold coins all over the state of Raghuraja. However, not even a single gold coin was picked up by any of the citizens! There was no case of robbery in the state and therefore there was no tradition of putting a ‘lock’. There is no inclusion of abusive words in the Sanskrut language. There is only one word ‘Mudh‘ (mad), which can be remotely considered as a bad word! The well-culturedness of the language gets absorbed in the citizens who use it; therefore one wishes to say that, ‘Learn Sanskrut and be well-cultured (susanskrut)!’..

 

Not even a single inclusion of
abusiveword in well-cultured Sanskrut language !

Citation.

http://www.hindujagruti.org/articles/21.html##5

Indian National Anthem For King George Facts

In India on December 15, 2014 at 05:20

India During Ramayana Period,.jpg

India During Ramayana Period, with Tamil Kingdoms.

The national Anthem of India ,Jana Gana Mana, was composed by Rabindra Nath Tagore, to felicitate King George V and it was sung in Honor of the Emperor.

 

Vande Mataharam was accepted by the Indian Public as the National Anthem of India and as Muslims objected to it, Gandhi and Nehru changed it to Jana Gana Mana.

 

Facts.

The poem was composed in December 1911, coinciding with the visit of King George V at the time of the Coronation Durbar of George V, and “Bharat Bhagya vidhata” and “Adhinayaka” was believed to be in praise of King George V as per the British newspapers. The composition was first sung during a convention of the then loyalist Indian National Congress in Calcutta on 26 Dec 1911.[2] It was sung on the second day of the convention, and the agenda of that day devoted itself to a loyal welcome of George V on his visit to India. The event was reported thus in the British Indian press:

“The Bengali poet Rabindranath Tagore sang a song composed by him specially to welcome the Emperor.” (Statesman, Dec. 28, 1911)
“The proceedings began with the singing by Rabindranath Tagore of a song specially composed by him in honour of the Emperor.” (Englishman, Dec. 28, 1911)
“When the proceedings of the Indian National Congress began on Wednesday 27th December 1911, a Bengali song in welcome of the Emperor was sung. A resolution welcoming the Emperor and Empress was also adopted unanimously.” (Indian, Dec. 29, 1911)

Counter arguments

Many historians aver that the newspaper reports cited above were misguided. The confusion arose in British Indian press since a different song, “Badshah Humara” written in Hindi by Rambhuj Chaudhary,[3] was sung on the same occasion in praise of the monarch. The nationalist Indian press stated this difference of events clearly:-

“The proceedings of the Congress party session started with a prayer in Bengali to praise God (song of benediction). This was followed by a resolution expressing loyalty to King George V. Then another song was sung welcoming King George V.” (Amrita Bazar Patrika, Dec.28,1911)

“The annual session of Congress began by singing a song composed by the great Bengali poet Ravindranath Tagore. Then a resolution expressing loyalty to King George V was passed. A song paying a heartfelt homage to King George V was then sung by a group of boys and girls.” (The Bengalee, Dec. 28, 1911)

Even the report of the annual session of the Indian National Congress of December 1911 stated this difference:

“On the first day of 28th annual session of the Congress, proceedings started after singing Vande Mataram. On the second day the work began after singing a patriotic song by Babu Ravindranath Tagore. Messages from well wishers were then read and a resolution was passed expressing loyalty to King George V. Afterwards the song composed for welcoming King George V and Queen Mary was sung.”

On 10 November 1937 Tagore wrote a letter to Mr Pulin Bihari Sen about the controversy. That letter in Bengali can be found in Tagore’s biography Ravindrajivani, volume II page 339 by Prabhatkumar Mukherjee.

“A certain high official in His Majesty’s service, who was also my friend, had requested that I write a song of felicitation towards the Emperor. The request simply amazed me. It caused a great stir in my heart. In response to that great mental turmoil, I pronounced the victory in Jana Gana Mana of that Bhagya Vidhata [ed. God of Destiny] of India who has from age after age held steadfast the reins of India’s chariot through rise and fall, through the straight path and the curved. That Lord of Destiny, that Reader of the Collective Mind of India, that Perennial Guide, could never be George V, George VI, or any other George. Even my official friend understood this about the song. After all, even if his admiration for the crown was excessive, he was not lacking in simple common sense.”

Again in his letter of 19 March 1939 Tagore writes,

“I should only insult myself if I cared to answer those who consider me capable of such unbounded stupidity as to sing in praise of George the Fourth or George the Fifth as the Eternal Charioteer leading the pilgrims on their journey through countless ages of the timeless history of mankind.” (Purvasa, Phalgun, 1354, p738.)….

 

 

Notwithstanding Tagore’s protests ,consider  the following.

 

2)      It is the acclamation of the ‘Adhinayaka’. ‘Jaya ho’ means Victory is wished for the Adhinayaka. Adhinayaka means the best hero. During 1911 there was no the best hero in India. Therefore only the king, who ruled India, then, was Adhinayaka. That king was the king of British Empire.

3)      Bharata Bhagya Vidhata is a Sanskrit word, which means the Maker, who was to decide the fate of India. India was, then, governed by that British King. Naturally the fate of India was in his hands. Therefore Bharata Bhagya Vidhata was no one else but the British Emperor. There was no Indian leader powerful enough to decide the fate of India. Therefore he must not have been applauded and victory wished for any Indian leader.

4)      Some people say that Bharata Bhagya Vidhata, Adhinayaka means the president of the Indian Congress. But this idea is baseless. The statement in stanzas 2nd and 3rd go against that concept. In the second stanza Ravindra states, ‘ Pooraba Paschima Ase Tava Simhasana Pase’. It means that the east and the west are situated at your throne. No leader of India possessed throne, then. President of Indian Congress had no throne. No throne in the world had the east and the west near it, except the British throne, which ruled all over the world, from the east to the west. It was rightly said ‘the sun does not set on the British Empire’. Therefore this line specifically points to the British king.

5)      Ravindra writes ‘ Tava Charane Nata Matha — Oh, Rajeshwara’. It means that ‘my head bows before your feet, Oh king of kings.’ Ravindra salutes humbly before the king of kings or the emperor. There was no real king in India, then. Naturally there was no Rajeshwara, king of kings, in India to bow before him. There were many states and princes ruling over, but they were in pitiable condition, they were slaves. Thus there was no real king in India. The only king was the King of England, who ruled over India. Therefore it is clear that Ravindra prostrates before the British king.

6)      ‘Gahe Tava Jaya Gatha’ says Ravindra. It means that he was singing a song of his victory. Who in India had conquered anything then? Whose victory drums Ravindra was beating? For whom victory song was sung by Ravindra? To sing victory song, there was only one king, and he was British emperor. Ravindra added his voice in the victory songs sung all over the world for the British emperor.

7)      During 1911 there was tremendous effect of British supremacy over India and Indian people. Ravindra was definitely under the spell of that British effect. Its evidence I put that Ravindra had his Sir-name ‘Thakura’, but due to influence of English, he anglicised his Sir name and began writing ‘Tagore’. It was certainly the mental prostration before English style. In that mental state Ravindra must have composed the song in praise of British emperor.

8)      Congress Government selected the song as national anthem in 1947, but it was against Truth. Hindusthana was divided in 1947 and Pakistan was born out of it. The remaining country was named as India or Bharat. That India did not contain Sindh, more than half of Punjab and Bengal. Then why the states Sindh, Punjaba and Bengal are inserted in the national anthem? If I were the President or the Prime Minister of Pakistan, I would have objected to inclusion of Sindh in the national anthem. Nobody has realised this Truth, so far.

9)      In fact ‘Vande Mataram’ was accepted as the national anthem by all public, then. However, because some Muslims did not like to honour Indian state as their mother, they opposed Vande Mataram. Immediately Gandhi and Nehru succumbed to their pressure and changed the anthem.

10)   Veer Sawarkar had already predicted in 1938 that Gandhi would insult and remove the national anthem Vande Mataram. The same happened nine years later.’

 

Citation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jana_Gana_Mana_%28hymn%29#Controversies

 

https://sites.google.com/site/vvmpune/essay-of-dr-p-v-vartak/truth-behind-the-national-anthem

Types Of Vaishnava Sampradayas

In Hinduism on December 11, 2014 at 09:48

Sampradaya may be translated loosely as Tradition.

 

Practices that were followed are continued by successive generations at the Family level.

 

Thus in Hinduism we have some practices that are common to all the Hindus and some that are group specific.

 

Some Common practices  are,

 

Waking up early in the morning,

 

Taking bath and drawing Rangoli in  front of the House,

 

Doing Pooja,

 

Performing Sandhyavandan, in the case of Brahmins,

 

Performing pooja and offering Naivedya to God,

 

Cook only after taking bath,

 

Perform basic samskaras like Namakarana, Karna Bhooshana, Upanayana, Marriage, Garbhadhana, Seemantha,Anthima Samaskaras.

 

But the way of performing them and some practices distinguish one group from another, though in essence all are Hindus.

 

The two sects in Hinduism, Shaiva and Vaishnava, the former worships Shiva, the later Vishnu,the Samapradayas differ.

 

What is Vaishava Sampradaya?

 

Basically Vaishnavas worship Vishnu to the exclusion of all other Deities, though Puranas insist that this is not correct.

 

Even among the Vaishnavas, there are different Sampradayas.

 

They are four in number traditionally.

 

Sri Sampradaya which is the Sampradaya of Lakshmi
Philosophy: Vishishtadvaita (“Qualified Monism/Non dualism”), espoused by Chidachida Visishtam Ramanujacharya
See Sri Vaishnavism, Vaikhanasa, Ramanandi Sect, Swaminarayan.
Brahma sampradaya
Philosophies: Dvaita (“dualism”), espoused by Madhvacharya, and Achintya Bheda Abheda (literally “inconceivable difference and non-difference”).
Rudra sampradaya
Philosophy: Shuddhadvaita (“pure nondualism”), espoused by Vishnuswami and Vallabhacharya.
Kumara-sampradaya
Philosophy: Dvaitadvaita (“duality in unity”), espoused by Nimbarka.

In South India.

 

  1. The Iyengars, who follow the Sri Vaishnava Vishistadvaita philosophy of Asuri Ramanujacharya. The Iyengars are further divided into the Vadakalai-i.e. the northern school, and Thenkalai or southern school. Both these sects adhere to the Pañcaratra agama, in temples.

These two sects evolved about 200 years after Ramanuja and differ on 18 points of doctrine. The founder of the Vadagalai sect is Swami Vedanta Desika, and the Tengalai sect is Manavala Mamuni.[26] But both schools have a common Guru Parampara prior to the division. The Sri Vaishnavas use both the Sanskrit veda as well as the Tamil divyaprabandham in temple worship.

  1. The Madhvas, who follow the Sadvaishnava Dvaita philosophy of Madhvacharya.
  2. The Vaikhanasas, who are primarily an ancient community of temple priests, who use the Vaikhanasa Agama in temple worship. They use Sanskrit exclusively in temple worship.

But as I indicated in my post Vadakalai, Thenkalai has no sanction of the Vedas, there is no sanction for these divisions in the Vedas.

 

The Reality is One but people practice different methods to realize it , period.

 

Squabbles are not allowed, if one is a Hindu.

Citation.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaishnavism#Vaishnava_sampradayas

 

 

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,074 other followers

%d bloggers like this: