Why I am a Hindu as explained by Perimpilavil Ramadasan and forwarded by C.P.Valsala

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Valsala Gopi wrote:

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: mohan chandran
To: valsala.gopi@yahoo.com; V RAGHUNATHAN ; VINOD UNNIKRISHNAN ; SANUP BHASKARAN ; BALAKRISHNAN ERADY ; NARAYANAN KVG ; JAYA UNNI ; haridasan46@gmail.com; GOURI ERADY ; GOPI KRISHNAN ; gokulachandran@gmail.com; SMRUTHI MANOJ ; ANUP BHASKARAN ; ramakrishnan_tm@yahoo.co.in; CHITHRA K.KUTTY  
Sent: Thursday, 24 May 2012 10:29 AM
Subject: Fw: : WHY I AM A HINDU.
Hidus must read fully so that we can explain what is Hinduism

--- On Mon, 21/5/12, Perimpilavil Ramadasan wrote:

From: Perimpilavil Ramadasan
Subject: Fw: : WHY I AM A HINDU.
To: "Arun Menon" , "Vijayan Perumpilavil" , "Rohini jayakumar" , "baby shree" , "cd gautam" , "Gen. Ashok Kumar " , "Vinod Menon" , "Sabarinathan" , "rajkamal shrivastav" , "MOHANACHANDRAN" , "Ashish" , "Chandrika Ramadasan"
Date: Monday, 21 May, 2012, 6:56 PM

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Ramachandra Subramanyam
To: shobha  
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2012 8:38 AM
Subject: FW: : WHY I AM A HINDU.


WHY  I AM    HINDU

MUST READ  Four years ago, I was flying from JFK NY Airport to SFO to attend a meeting at Monterey , CA. An American girl was sitting on the right side, near the window seat. It indeed was a long journey - it would take nearly seven hours. I was surprised to see the young girl reading a Bible ...unusual for a  young American. After some time. she smiled and we had few getting-acquainted words.  I told her that I am from India
Then suddenly the girl asked: 'What's your faith?' 'What?' I didn't understand the question..
'I mean, what's your religion? Are you a Christian? Or a Muslim?'
'No!' I replied, 'I am neither Christian nor Muslim'. Apparently she appeared shocked to listen to that. 'Then who are you?'

'I am a Hindu', I said. She looked at me as if she was seeing a caged animal. She could not understand what I was talking about.
A common man in Europe or US knows about Christianity and Islam, as they are the leading religions of the world today. But a Hindu, what?
I explained to her - I am born to a Hindu father and Hindu mother. Therefore, I am a Hindu by birth.
'Who is your prophet?' she asked.
'We don't have a prophet,' I replied.
'What's your Holy Book?'
'We don't have a single Holy Book, but we have hundreds and thousands of philosophical and sacred scriptures,' I replied.
'Oh, come on at least tell me who is your God?'
'What do you mean by that?'
'Like we have Jesus and Muslims have Allah - don't you have a God?'
I thought for a moment. Muslims and Christians believe one God (Male God) who created the world and takes an interest in the humans who inhabit it. Her mind is conditioned with that kind of belief.
According to her (or anybody who doesn't know about Hinduism), a religion needs to have one Prophet, one Holy book and one God. The mind is so conditioned and rigidly narrowed down to such a notion that anything else is not acceptable. I understood her perception and concept about faith.. You can't compare Hinduism with any of the present leading religions where you have to believe in one concept of god.
I tried to explain to her: 'You can believe in one god and he can be a Hindu.. You may believe in multiple deities and still you can be a Hindu. What's more - you may not believe in god at all, still you can be a Hindu. An atheist can also be a Hindu.'
This sounded very crazy to her. She couldn't imagine a religion so unorganized, still surviving for thousands of years, even after onslaught from foreign forces.
'I don't understand but it seems very interesting. Are you religious?'
What can I tell to this American girl?
I said: 'I do not go to temple regularly. I do not make any regular rituals. I have learned some of the rituals in my younger days. I still enjoy doing it sometimes..'
'Enjoy? Are you not afraid of God?'
'God is a friend. No- I am not afraid of God. Nobody has made any compulsions on me to perform these rituals regularly.'
She thought for a while and then asked: 'Have you ever thought of converting to any other religion?'
'Why should I? Even if I challenge some of the rituals and faith in Hinduism, nobody can convert me from Hinduism. Because, being a Hindu allows me to think independently and objectively, without conditioning. I remain as a Hindu never by force, but choice.' I told her that Hinduism is not a religion, but a set of beliefs and practices. It is not a religion like Christianity or Islam because it is not founded by any one person or does not have an organized controlling body like the Church or the Order, I added. There is no institution or authority..
'So, you don't believe in God?' she wanted everything in black and white.
'I didn't say that. I do not discard the divine reality. Our scripture, or Sruthis or Smrithis - Vedas and Upanishads or the Gita - say God might be there or he might not be there. But we pray to that supreme abstract authority (Para Brahma) that is the creator of this universe.'
'Why can't you believe in one personal God?'
'We have a concept - abstract - not a personal god. The concept or notion of a personal God, hiding behind the clouds of secrecy, telling us irrational stories through few men whom he sends as messengers, demanding us to worship him or punish us, does not make sense. I don't think that God is as silly as an autocratic emperor who wants others to respect him or fear him.' I told her that such notions are just fancies of less educated human imagination and fallacies, adding that generally ethnic religious practitioners in Hinduism believe in personal gods. The entry level Hinduism has over-whelming superstitions too. The philosophical side of Hinduism negates all superstitions..
'Good that you agree God might exist. You told that you pray. What is your prayer then?'
'Loka Samastha Sukino Bhavantu. Om Shanti, Shanti, Shanti,'
'Funny,' she laughed, 'What does it mean?'
'May all the beings in all the worlds be happy. Om Peace, Peace, Peace.'
'Hmm ..very interesting.. I want to learn more about this religion. It is so democratic, broad-minded and free' she exclaimed. 'The fact is Hinduism is a religion of the individual, for the individual and by the individual with its roots in the Vedas and the Bhagavad-Gita.. It is all about an individual approaching a personal God in an individual way according to his temperament and inner evolution - it is as simple as that.'
'How does anybody convert to Hinduism?'
'Nobody can convert you to Hinduism, because it is not a religion, but a set of beliefs and practices. Everything is acceptable in Hinduism because there is no single authority or organization either to accept it or to reject it or to oppose it on behalf of Hinduism.'
I told her - if you look for meaning in life, don't look for it in religions; don't go from one cult to another or from one guru to the next..
For a real seeker, I told her, the Bible itself gives guidelines when it says ' Kingdom of God is within you.' I reminded her of Christ's teaching about the love that we have for each other. That is where you can find the meaning of life.
Loving each and every creation of the God is absolute and real. 'Isavasyam idam sarvam' Isam (the God) is present (inhabits) here everywhere - nothing exists separate from the God, because God is present everywhere. Respect every living being and non-living things as God. That's what Hinduism teaches you.
Hinduism is referred to as Sanathana Dharma, the eternal faith. It is based on the practice of Dharma, the code of life. The most important aspect of Hinduism is being truthful to oneself. Hinduism has no monopoly on ideas.- It is open to all. Hindus believe in one God (not a personal one) expressed in different forms. For them, God is timeless and formless entity.
Ancestors of today's Hindus believe in eternal truths and cosmic laws and these truths are opened to anyone who seeks them. But there is a section of Hindus who are either superstitious or turned fanatic to make this an organized religion like others. The British coin the word 'Hindu' and considered it as a religion.
I said: 'Religions have become an MLM (multi-level- marketing) industry that has been trying to expand the market share by conversion. The biggest business in today's world is Spirituality. Hinduism is no exception'
I am a Hindu primarily because it professes Non-violence - 'Ahimsa Paramo Dharma' - Non violence is the highest duty. I am a Hindu because it doesn't condition my mind with any faith system.
A man/ woman who changes his/her birth religion to another religion is a fake and does not value his/her morals, culture and values in life. Hinduism was the first religion originated. Be proud of your religion and be proud of who you are.
Om Namo shiva……………
Send it to all Hindus who you think will find it interesting!

I add:
This is representative of the group thinking among a good number of educated Hindus who are sincere and serious about understanding their beliefs but are unable to comprehend what they think or want to communicate. They mouth quotes from some ancient Brahmanical works, like "Loka samastha sukhino bhavantu", "Isavasyam idam sarvam", "Ahimsa paramo dharmam", and perhaps, "Vasudhaiva kutumbakam"!
Ms. Valsala is a retired Professor of Chemistry and a former colleague of mine, now associated with humanitarian work at Prashanti of Ramakrishnan Palat..

I sent her the following note as a tentative reply:


Valsala,

I wish I could share your faith in what Sarvasree Perimpilavil Ramadasan explains as Hinduism with the same amount of enthusiasm.

What he has posted is full of contradictions, like, "Hinduism is a religion of the individual, for the individual and by the individual", "it is not a religion, but a set of beliefs and practices", "Hinduism was the first religion originated", and "The British coin[sic] the word 'Hindu' and considered it as a religion".

At one place he says, he is "a Hindu by birth", at another that Hindus are Hindus by choice, and at still another that "Nobody can convert you to Hinduism, because it is not a religion". If one is a Hindu by birth, how does it become his religion by choice?

I think he ought to have asked himself first what he understood by 'Hinduism' and then only posted his confused thoughts on the net based on the quizzing of a girl, real or imaginary but certainly ignorant, he met on a flight.

I am happy I was born a Hindu for the sheer latitude of thoughts and life styles it used to permit. But, of late, things have changed a great deal and are changing very fast.

My best wishes to you and Gopi.

Sudhakaran

  

How to save the PDF copy of Gundert's Malayalam English Dictionary

After downloading the PDF version, look for the options offered. One of the options is 'save a copy'. Click it, type a title and cick 'save'.

Gundert's A Malayalam English Dictionary

Free download of Gundert's A Malayalam English Dictionary in PDF from Columbia University is available at http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/digital/collections/cul/texts/ldpd_8661431_000/index.html

Pulappedi - Honor Killing in Disguise

Pulappedi ‘Pulappedi’ literally means ‘scare of the Pulayas’. It refers to a popular belief prevalent in some parts of Kerala roughly till the middle of the 20th cent. that men of the lowliest of the polluting castes such as Pulayas, Parayas and Mannans could appropriate young women of the higher Nair caste after defiling them. Depending upon the caste and the region involved, it was also called Parappedi or Mannappedi. The earliest known mention of this scare, though not by the name, was made by Duarte Barbosa, a Portuguese national stationed in Kerala at the beginning of the 16th century, in the context of describing the social plight of the Pulaya caste. [The Book, Vol. II, Hakluyt Society, London, 1921, pp.68-69]. In current popular belief, Pulappedi was a customary ritual observed every year with the permission of the local community in the month of ‘Karkitakam’ (July middle to August middle). During that period, men of the Pulaya, Paraya and Mannan castes, the so called ‘slave castes’, would roam around to defile Nair women who strayed alone outside their houses or were left unprotected inside their homes or wished to be defiled and possessed. Defiling could be by touching the woman or hitting her with a twig or a pebble, or by just sighting her and hollering ‘kande, kande’ (I saw, I saw). When defiled, the woman would lose her caste. She should declare it publicly and run away from her home and subject herself to be appropriated by the defiler, or become a beggar or a mendicant, or allow to be converted to another religion. If not, she could be killed with impunity by her own people, or killed or sold to any willing bidder by the local chief. The defiler and his kith and kin, on their part, could also be killed or tortured as the Nairs or the local chiefs pleased. The apparent definitiveness of this belief and its details owe largely to the fanciful descriptions of Elamkulam Kunjan Pillai [''Mannappediyum Pulappediyum'', Mathrubhumi Weekly, November 1957] who mixed local folk lore with a liberal misreading of Barbosa. He assumed that Pulappedi was actually practised in many parts of Kerala until ‘recent times’. Following him uncritically, other historians and text book writers only popularized his views. The fact is that there is no historical record of any instance of a Nair woman ever coming under Pulappedi. There is also absolutely no way of ascertaining whether it was ever practised as was popularly believed. Even Barbosa was not a witness to any actual instance of Pulappedi. He had most probably only reported what his local contacts had told him. The scare was, however, palpable as is indicated by a proclamation issued by a local chief in C.E.1696 prohibiting it in his domain and threatening its perpetrators and their families with summary execution. But, the historians had generally assumed that Pulappedi was actually practised in extreme secrecy, which was why records were not kept. Therefore, they tried only to explain its origin, significance and other related issues. Elamkulam, for instance, explained it as a community licence given to the slave castes to procreate in Nair women a mixed caste of agricultural slaves. According to him, the practice began sometime in 12th century C.E. after the size of the original slave castes in Kerala began to dwindle. [Elamkulam, 1957]. Another historian saw in it the instance of the ubiquitous class conflict between the Nair oppressors and the oppressed slave castes [K.N.Ganesh, Keralathinte Innalekal (in Malayalam), 1990]. Considering all the available facts, it is extremely doubtful that Pulappedi, including its other two variants, was ever practised as a custom in its popularly depicted form. Rather, it was only a scare consciously perpetrated by Nairs themselves to control their own women from straying outside the family and caste diktats, and to punish those who actually broke or were feared would break those diktats. The role of the polluter, a bonded slave of the Nairs, in this plot would have been to obey the commands of the master and defile or claim to have defiled the woman chosen by the master, or acquiesce to the charge of defiling the woman without actually defiling. Whichever way, the Nairs could punish the polluter also. Interestingly, the polluter castes connected with Pulappedi were known as practitioners of voodoo and magic, which gave those who scripted the story of defiling and abduction a credible excuse for failing. This view was first put forward in 1994 in an article, ‘Pulappedi – Puthiya Oranveshanam’ [in Malayalam], by P.P.Sudhakaran [Kerala Padanangal 4, January – March, 1994, Ed. K.T.Ram Mohan, Chithira Printers & Publishers, Ernakulam]. These are the reasons advanced in support of the view: 1. The social distancing between the polluting castes and the Nairs was so pernicious, the habitats of the polluting castes were located in such isolated areas, and the physical marks of the polluting castes were so distinct and loud that it would have been impossible for a polluter man to go anywhere near a Nair habitat even in ordinary times except perhaps with the overt or covert permission of the Nairs. 2. The polluter could not have defiled any Nair woman by surprise either as the Pulappedi season was known to all in advance, and it needed only some extra vigilance by the Nair men during that period to prevent it if they wanted to. 3. The life environment of the polluting castes compared to that of the Nairs being so depressing, and the other options available to a defiled woman being so devastating, no Nair woman in her senses would ever have risked coming under Pulappedi. 4. The punishment for the polluter, whether caught before the act or after, was known in advance to be so cruel and certain that none but a maniac would have dared to provoke the Nair fury

Brides are not cattle

Marriage is not just acquiring or keeping an object for lust release. It is the foundation for building a family. Thinking of importing brides duty free or at subsidized rates is typically male centered. Think beyond. A wife is not cattle that can be bought or sold according to man's means and pleasure. Studies have shown that femicide is not confined to the urban 'middle class' alone. Among the rural poor also it is practised, perhaps under the pressure of more urgent economic constraints, but almost always after the delivery. February 9 at 12:44pm Sreejith, I sensed sarcasm in Parthapratim's, but preferred to ignore whatever little was in yours, because, sarcasm cannot usually expect a serious response. Barring the one about getting fairer ones duty free, your remarks to Parthapratim's, I thought, was meant to be taken seriously. Your end-question especially, 'will that in any way end the discrimination and violence against the girl child...?', did not seem to dismiss the idea of import as a non option. The sarcasm, if at all there was any, was obviously lost on me. Overall, I feel, importing of women even as a flippant idea would occur only where it is thought of as an option, however distant it could be. Or, should we have just taken to the question as a light-hearted tease? Finally, happy to note that you are not an MCP even remotely. February 10 at 6:58am Parthapratim responds: logging on to fb after a while - i see that my comment was sarcastic, quite dark at that. i am truly sorry, if it sounded offensive. the comment was kind of triggered by the last of the tag lines: 'bike ke picche ---'. i realize that while trying to add a darker tone to the dark comic signpost, i have only managed to lighten the seriousness of the issue. really sorry for that. now i am not a feminist, but i am not against women or their rights. i believe, as sincerely as all you do, that female foeticide is a crime. i believe so because i guess that a female foetus is as good a foetus as a male one; not because some of these would make good mothers and wives and solid foundations of innumerable indian families. some believe, and i find some of their points quite noteworthy, that the family is the root of many social evils. having a family makes one selfish, family-centric. having a family leads to the idea of lineage and legacy, the patriarchy, irrespective of if the society is patriarchal or matriarchal or whatever. women's rights are to be supported not because they are more virtuous, but because they are a lot of people just as the lot of men. i really am rather shaky to post this long monologue in fb which is frequented by people wiser than those who are not in touch with the virtual reality. finally, dramatically or melodramatically i am not sure, but seriously, i would prefer a woman on my bike infinitely better than a tiger in a thousand years, or at least until i die or the tigers go extinct. have a good time folks, and blasted be the ones who cannot take a serious matter seriously, but seriously. February 16 at 1:29pm · My response: Parthapratim, after reading your latest post, I am convinced that your earlier response was not intended to hurt anyone, least of all me. Even before reading it, I did not feel any offence. What I usually do is, after taking note of what might help me introspect and improve my attitude to life and life itself, I move on. What is not worth it, I ignore. You have however touched upon a weighty issue as to what is the real worth of the family as a social institution. About that, another time, hopefully. About the worth of the female gender etc; everyone with a view should have a rationale for it. This is my reasoning: Gender equality is not a physical fact, whatever the women’s libbers might claim. I don't also carry any baggage of religious mumbo jumbo, like, all are equal in the eyes of god. Unlike the female cannibals among some species like spiders, praying mantis and fire flies, human females, overall, are physically weak. According to one estimate, 1 out of 3 women world-wide are being physically abused every day; that is more than one billion women a day, every day. See, for example, [http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/273-40/9999-one-billion-rising] Those abusers are a depraved lot, and there is nothing brave in joining them. They are bullies, and there are enough studies to believe that bullies are, beneath their skin, really miserable cowards. I don’t want to be counted among them. Instead of raping and beating and passing snide remarks in the guise of sarcasm (I don’t mean you), the last of which I believe is bullying on the sly, what is needed is concern for fellow lives, compassion for the weak. But, what I don’t know is this: While some are seen to even empathise with the weak, what makes some others tormenters and sadists? May be, some are born with compassion. Studies about the psychology of compassion are not definitive yet, as far as I know. Oxytocin, the enzyme the pituitary gland normally secretes, and lactating mothers are known to secrete in larger quantities, has been suggested as the one that makes the difference. Whatever that be, I believe compassion can be consciously cultivated. At least, men can learn to let the women live their lives; better still, though, will be learning to love them as fellow human beings, to protect them and be their friends, not possessors. There are, of course, black widows among human species also. But, that is a different problem, and gender imbalance in India’s demography is not related to it. February 17 at 7:25am