[Advaita-l] Re: Women and Vedas

[hemang Chamakuzhi Subramanian]

Dear fellow-seekers,

Om Namah Pranavarthaya,
Shuddha gnanaika murthaye, 
Nirmalaya Prashanthaya,
Dakshina murthaye namaha

Quote "
Shruti is a seperate pramana precisely because its injunctions and
prohibitions are _not_ amenable to outside perception or inference.  The claim is being made that women should not recite not because they are frail or mentally deficient but simply because they can't.  No further explanation is needed because shruti is its own authority.
"

Would be greatful if anyone clarifies these doubts regarding "Shruthi is a separate Pramana ". The usage of the word _not_ conveys the meaning that "This is someone's personal belief system" and "not universal". 
If anyone is objective about a fact(in terms of a "yes" or "No", there should be atleast a few counter-arguments to the same, which according to me would convince all "doubting thomases", the validity of the _not_. Preferably,
1) The actual injunction in the scripture
2) The actual words of a living - enlightened master (not somebody who'se words are quoted,(since quotes are subject to the problem of misinterpretation)
3) Direct experience of the individual.

In this mail, would try to implore 1) and 3) here, since my master has already given an answer to this query...ie. 2) is already done.

In mathematics, A Pramana could be equated to a Theory(or a corollary) and it defenitely needs proof, comprehensible by the human mind-intellect.

Would be good to hear from anyone in this group, who has through direct experience learnt that the Vedas shouldn't be recited because of one's gender in fact if there is a woman who says, she has had problems  after chanting the vedas, it would be great concurrence to this view. 
Are there modern/ancient medical researchers who have concurred to this view. Like I mentioned earlier, today's enlightened masters(Mata Amritanandamayi) has women priests in their temples, who chant and do all the rituals necessary for prayer. 
Will they have problems in future?

Does this cause any problems in the female body-mind-intellect, if not does this bring out bad-luck to the person who chanted it????? What happens........... What happens..........

In fact, would be grateful to anyone who could help me out here. Is there an online version of the Shruthi, or if you could give me a pointer to any of the publications, that have the verse that quotes "Women should not recite the Vedas", it would greatly add to my knowledge...
 
With my limited knowledge and time, have managed to read a few of the works of ancient literature(except the shruthi's, smrithis, puranas or the Vedas).

Everything stated in most of the other scriptures, be it the Yoga Sutras, or Gita, or Ashtavakra, Narada's Bhakti sutras, Yoga Vasishta, Tripura Rahasya, are mostly experiential knowledge, where the ancient scientists(rishis) have experimented over ages and brought this knowledge over to mankind.The modern epics notably "The gospel of Sri Ramakrishna", "The Divine Play of Sri Ramakrishna", "On the path to Freedom- Swami Paramatmananda" dont talk about such limitations. 

In fact, any person willing to experience them could infact use these works of literature, as a guide(ofcourse under the right circumstances, which could include, the presence of a master).

JAI GURUDEV
-hemang



On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 advaita-l-request at lists.advaita-vedanta.org wrote :
>Send Advaita-l mailing list submissions to
> 	advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	advaita-l-request at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	advaita-l-owner at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of Advaita-l digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Women and Vedas (hemang Chamakuzhi Subramanian)
>    2. Re: Women and Vedas (Ger Koekkoek)
>    3. Re: Women and Vedas (m w)
>    4. Re: Women and Vedas (Viswanathan N)
>    5. Re: Women and Vedas (Jaldhar H. Vyas)
>    6. Re: Women and Vedas (Viswanathan N)
>    7. Re: Women and Vedas (Aditya Varun Chadha)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: 5 Apr 2006 18:20:15 -0000
> From: "hemang Chamakuzhi Subramanian" <hemangcs at rediffmail.com>
>Subject: [Advaita-l] Women and Vedas
>To: advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
>Message-ID: <20060405182015.16903.qmail at webmail57.rediffmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=iso-8859-1
>
>Sanjay, That was an Awesome Story..Really enjoyed the part where you said " That is the way its always done"...Heard that many times earlier.
>
>What about those portions of the smArta literature
> >which directly or indirectly hint women performing
> >shrauta karma-s? I am not not talking about the wife
> >participating in yAgA-s along with husband.
> >
> >I am sure people have come across enough references on
> >the above.
>
>If any of us remember high school history textbooks, when the great western scholars purported Aryans to be living on swiss lakes  Recently BBC came out with a report saying that swamiji's (prediction) was true and still our high school history text books claim that the Indian race descended from Swiss Alps.
>
>http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/aryan/aryan_vivekananda.html Š>
>A similar analogy can be put forward to all modern literature regarding most of the Puranas, Smritis, etc, that are translated unscruplously.
>
>In fact during the course of research, several manuscripts of the puranas, and smritis contained passages that were inserted, that enforced certain rituals, which we follow blindly to date. In fact in one of the versions of ManuSmriti, I came across a verse that mentioned "pouring  molten lead into a shudra's ear if he listens to the Vedas"..
>
>Could Manu have written this? and still expected "Dharma" to continue. How could a dharma that proclaims ahimsa to suddenly become ruthless that too for something so trivial.
>
>Anyway, who knows the intentions for these insertions, and their antecedents. To me it looks like some incompetent folks wanted to maintain control over society, so went and inserted this and claimed it to have come from Manu.
>
>Now to some serious-talk,
>
>To indeed really know what is truth, what is not truth as far as the scriptures go, realize it from an Enlightened master(guru). Even your parents, grandparents, etc. can teach you traditions, but not the truth..
>
>Note, if the goal is to reach the highest, the stature of the master should be that one has reached the ultimate. Else, if a person is satisfied by just learning,understanding or chanting, anyone could be considered a teacher(acharya). A subtle difference is that the Guru gives the Diksha -> Or the ability to percieve beyond the Dhi(intellect) whereas the acharya gives you the Shiksha(Knowledge with discipline). In India, there are really so many of these enlightened beings...
>
>How do you know when you see your guru? Your heart swells with gratitude and opens out like the sky, and you just sit in wonder at the expanse of it.
>
>Anyways, the choice is not your own...it is that of the Guru's...
>
>JAI GURUDEV.
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 01:19:52 +0200
> From: "Ger Koekkoek" <gerkoekkoek at wanadoo.nl>
>Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Women and Vedas
>To: "hemang Chamakuzhi Subramanian" <hemangcs at rediffmail.com>,	"A
> 	discussion group for Advaita Vedanta"
> 	<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>Message-ID: <002b01c65907$7196a8e0$5220ea3e at gerk>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=original
>
>A few days ago I wrote that in the ideas around Maya (and the Supreme Truth
>or Brahman) there is a pearl in your tradition. It would be a good thing
>when somewhere in future this ideas will become the centre of science in the
>way the number 0 became the worldwide centre of all mathematics. (This
>number was an Indian idea also.) Here you have an important thing to do that
>even could save the world from a too early selfdistruction!
>(Without a philosophy that is at one hand strong and firm and at the other
>hand is open, free and completely transcendental, and above all, is also
>true, the world goes down in all kinds of different ideas and all kinds of
>wildgroing sorts of agression. Science until now was very succesfull in many
>ways, but for this problem it has no answer at all!)
>But when I read in this mailbox about women and tradition, well, there you
>can learn something from the west. Many of the best talks I had about
>adwaita was with a woman with a very sharp intelligence and a very awake
>alertness, and a very good heart.  And that are the qualities that are
>needed, it has nothing to do with gender. And if your tradition sais
>something different in this matter, well, this time your tradition is wrong!
>With greetings,
>Ger
>----- Original Message -----
> From: "hemang Chamakuzhi Subramanian" <hemangcs at rediffmail.com>
>To: <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 8:20 PM
>Subject: [Advaita-l] Women and Vedas
>
>
>Sanjay, That was an Awesome Story..Really enjoyed the part where you said "
>That is the way its always done"...Heard that many times earlier.
>
>What about those portions of the smArta literature
> >which directly or indirectly hint women performing
> >shrauta karma-s? I am not not talking about the wife
> >participating in yAgA-s along with husband.
> >
> >I am sure people have come across enough references on
> >the above.
>
>If any of us remember high school history textbooks, when the great western
>scholars purported Aryans to be living on swiss lakes  Recently BBC came out
>with a report saying that swamiji's (prediction) was true and still our high
>school history text books claim that the Indian race descended from Swiss
>Alps.
>
>http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/aryan/aryan_vivekananda.html Š>
>A similar analogy can be put forward to all modern literature regarding most
>of the Puranas, Smritis, etc, that are translated unscruplously.
>
>In fact during the course of research, several manuscripts of the puranas,
>and smritis contained passages that were inserted, that enforced certain
>rituals, which we follow blindly to date. In fact in one of the versions of
>ManuSmriti, I came across a verse that mentioned "pouring  molten lead into
>a shudra's ear if he listens to the Vedas"..
>
>Could Manu have written this? and still expected "Dharma" to continue. How
>could a dharma that proclaims ahimsa to suddenly become ruthless that too
>for something so trivial.
>
>Anyway, who knows the intentions for these insertions, and their
>antecedents. To me it looks like some incompetent folks wanted to maintain
>control over society, so went and inserted this and claimed it to have come
> from Manu.
>
>Now to some serious-talk,
>
>To indeed really know what is truth, what is not truth as far as the
>scriptures go, realize it from an Enlightened master(guru). Even your
>parents, grandparents, etc. can teach you traditions, but not the truth..
>
>Note, if the goal is to reach the highest, the stature of the master should
>be that one has reached the ultimate. Else, if a person is satisfied by just
>learning,understanding or chanting, anyone could be considered a
>teacher(acharya). A subtle difference is that the Guru gives the Diksha ->
>Or the ability to percieve beyond the Dhi(intellect) whereas the acharya
>gives you the Shiksha(Knowledge with discipline). In India, there are really
>so many of these enlightened beings...
>
>How do you know when you see your guru? Your heart swells with gratitude and
>opens out like the sky, and you just sit in wonder at the expanse of it.
>
>Anyways, the choice is not your own...it is that of the Guru's...
>
>JAI GURUDEV.
>
>_______________________________________________
>Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>
>To unsubscribe or change your options:
>http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
>For assistance, contact:
>listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 20:56:58 -0700 (PDT)
> From: m w <all_discussions at yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Women and Vedas
>To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
> 	<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>Message-ID: <20060406035658.14927.qmail at web37513.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>Ger I appreciated your understanding few days back on your talk on Maya and I again do the same. Vedas (literally wisdom) are not about reading any books and scriptures and the only greatest thing that this tradition holds till now after all these debates on unnecessary issues (might be imporant for many but not for those who have no concern with such ticklings from such debates) and that is Vedas are inside (external is only a dull reflection, very pale and often thwarted and distorted at times...). The goal is to reach the ocean inside, and it only comes after transcending all these phases and establishing in an understanding that is unmoved, which doesn't need any other authority to approve or disapprove it. Mind needs that, its dissolution doesn't. There is such an abyss inside and where things go and from where they emerge, it is undescribable....what need of such debates....
>
>            I definitely appreciate the power that west has shown to the world, in terms of women freedom and liberty (and also many other things). Well needless to say everything has its pros and cons but a whole lot of mental transformation occurs after seeing both east and west. East has a whole lot to learn from west as do west from east.. (east and west in their conventional usage...)
>
>   There is nothing like this (--women) in this tradition (where wisdom is the goal)... males for satisfying their own interests, ego or maybe to keep them away for their own weaknesses or maybe something else have created many things that are unacceptable in the realms of wisdom (Veda - Vid - Wisdom)...infact this wisdom word is supposed to have its origin from Veda (Vid)
>
>
>   Regards,
>   Manish
>
>
>
>Ger Koekkoek <gerkoekkoek at wanadoo.nl> wrote:
>   A few days ago I wrote that in the ideas around Maya (and the Supreme Truth
>or Brahman) there is a pearl in your tradition. It would be a good thing
>when somewhere in future this ideas will become the centre of science in the
>way the number 0 became the worldwide centre of all mathematics. (This
>number was an Indian idea also.) Here you have an important thing to do that
>even could save the world from a too early selfdistruction!
>(Without a philosophy that is at one hand strong and firm and at the other
>hand is open, free and completely transcendental, and above all, is also
>true, the world goes down in all kinds of different ideas and all kinds of
>wildgroing sorts of agression. Science until now was very succesfull in many
>ways, but for this problem it has no answer at all!)
>But when I read in this mailbox about women and tradition, well, there you
>can learn something from the west. Many of the best talks I had about
>adwaita was with a woman with a very sharp intelligence and a very awake
>alertness, and a very good heart. And that are the qualities that are
>needed, it has nothing to do with gender. And if your tradition sais
>something different in this matter, well, this time your tradition is wrong!
>With greetings,
>Ger
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Blab-away for as little as 1?/min. Make  PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 06:02:59 +0100 (BST)
> From: Viswanathan N <vishy1962 at yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Women and Vedas
>To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
> 	<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>Message-ID: <20060406050259.56055.qmail at web33815.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>Manishji & Ger
>
>   what you said is abosolutely correct and there cant be any second opinion.  you need not go anywhere, neednt read/ or even hear anything form outside....everything is there within you. Just start looking inwards and start your journey verymuch in that direction. Thats what the meditaion is all about.
>
>   Only thing, these things could be used as ignition to start your search engine and even Guru could be just the guide or signpost to direct you to the right path.
>   But once you have started you dont need any of these again. Possibly Guru can be the good travel companion in this lengthy route.
>   Such being the case, why to talk about Man/ woman, Bharaman/sudhra kind of differntiations, when the the very basis of adwaitha is non duality.
>
>   Wish everyone gets over with this kind of surfacelevel / superficial discussions and go deeper.
>
>   Viswanath
>
>m w <all_discussions at yahoo.com> wrote:
>   Ger I appreciated your understanding few days back on your talk on Maya and I again do the same. Vedas (literally wisdom) are not about reading any books and scriptures and the only greatest thing that this tradition holds till now after all these debates on unnecessary issues (might be imporant for many but not for those who have no concern with such ticklings from such debates) and that is Vedas are inside (external is only a dull reflection, very pale and often thwarted and distorted at times...). The goal is to reach the ocean inside, and it only comes after transcending all these phases and establishing in an understanding that is unmoved, which doesn't need any other authority to approve or disapprove it. Mind needs that, its dissolution doesn't. There is such an abyss inside and where things go and from where they emerge, it is undescribable....what need of such debates....
>
>I definitely appreciate the power that west has shown to the world, in terms of women freedom and liberty (and also many other things). Well needless to say everything has its pros and cons but a whole lot of mental transformation occurs after seeing both east and west. East has a whole lot to learn from west as do west from east.. (east and west in their conventional usage...)
>
>There is nothing like this (--women) in this tradition (where wisdom is the goal)... males for satisfying their own interests, ego or maybe to keep them away for their own weaknesses or maybe something else have created many things that are unacceptable in the realms of wisdom (Veda - Vid - Wisdom)...infact this wisdom word is supposed to have its origin from Veda (Vid)
>
>
>Regards,
>Manish
>
>
>
>Ger Koekkoek wrote:
>A few days ago I wrote that in the ideas around Maya (and the Supreme Truth
>or Brahman) there is a pearl in your tradition. It would be a good thing
>when somewhere in future this ideas will become the centre of science in the
>way the number 0 became the worldwide centre of all mathematics. (This
>number was an Indian idea also.) Here you have an important thing to do that
>even could save the world from a too early selfdistruction!
>(Without a philosophy that is at one hand strong and firm and at the other
>hand is open, free and completely transcendental, and above all, is also
>true, the world goes down in all kinds of different ideas and all kinds of
>wildgroing sorts of agression. Science until now was very succesfull in many
>ways, but for this problem it has no answer at all!)
>But when I read in this mailbox about women and tradition, well, there you
>can learn something from the west. Many of the best talks I had about
>adwaita was with a woman with a very sharp intelligence and a very awake
>alertness, and a very good heart. And that are the qualities that are
>needed, it has nothing to do with gender. And if your tradition sais
>something different in this matter, well, this time your tradition is wrong!
>With greetings,
>Ger
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Blab-away for as little as 1?/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
>_______________________________________________
>Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>
>To unsubscribe or change your options:
>http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
>For assistance, contact:
>listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>  Jiyo cricket on Yahoo! India cricket
>Yahoo! Messenger Mobile Stay in touch with your buddies all the time.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 5
>Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 00:09:51 -0400 (EDT)
> From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar at braincells.com>
>Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Women and Vedas
>To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
> 	<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0604031651070.29083 at jaldhar.brainfood.com>
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
>Here are some short responses to a couple of posts.
>
>
>On Sun, 2 Apr 2006, Viswanathan N wrote:
>
> > Sure that quoate is picked out of some other context and doesnt have any
> > meaning.
>
>I'm afraid wishing thaat something was true doesn't make it so.
>
> > Basically you are a man/ woman or child / grownup or brahman/sudhra,
> > based on condition of your mind
>
>Good.  Tomorrow I won't go to work. I'll send my daughter instead.  And if
>she complains that she is only 4 I'll tell that its just a state of mind.
>
>On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, Aditya Varun Chadha wrote:
>
> > I don't think any consciencious modern thinker will try to prove that
> > women are unfit to gain knowledge directly from the Vedas.
>
>Well I consider myself to be modern (and a thinker even :-) and that's
>precisely what I'm saying.  But is what I mean by "fit" the same as what
>you mean?
>
>...
>
> > All I am saying is that, we do not need scriptural sanction ultimately
> > to rule over our daily Acharan. The path of j~nAna yoga requires us to
> > question even the scriptures if they clash with the pratyakSa.
>
>pratyaksha is no foundation for a system of ethics.  If while I'm walking
>I perceive that someones wallet is sticking out of his pocket and I can
>steal it without him or the police or anyone else noticing does it now
>become an acceptable thing to do?
>
>Shruti is a seperate pramana precisely because its injunctions and
>prohibitions are _not_ amenable to outside perception or inference.  The
>claim is being made that women should not recite not because they are
>frail or mentally deficient but simply because they can't.  No further
>explanation is needed because shruti is its own authority.
>
>On Sun, 2 Apr 2006, Siva Senani Nori wrote:
>
> > Should loyalty to one's tradition be blind? No, I think. Should honesty
> > count more than confirmity / orthodoxy? Yes, IMO.
> >
>
>No argument from me there.  But the same also applies to would-be
>reformers too.  Unfortunately too many of them are less than honest in
>their interpretations.  As an aside, a big reason I am so orthodox today
>is because of my perception that "modern" Hindus are largely fools and
>knaves.
>
> > Some of the mantra drashTAs are actually
> > women - gArgi being an example;
>
>Um I'm not sure Gargi was a Rshi however it is true that of the 400+ Rshis
>of the Rgveda, there are about 20 or so with arguably feminine names.
>Even if taken at face value (and it need not be.  Read on.) that's a
>whopping 4%.  Hardly an endorsement of equality.
>
> > then we have maitreyI, the wife of
> > yAj~nvalkya learning brahmavidyA from the great rishi himself, and that
> > episode is itself a part of the vedas.
>
>But does that mean she was taught the Vedas or taught Brahmavidya?  Those
>are not the same thing especially from the Advaita point of view.
>
>Also what evidence do we have that Maitreyi or Yajnavalkya actually
>existed?  Yes we believe they did but from the Mimamsaka perspective it is
>also quite possible they are just literary characters.  The Mimamsakas
>went to great length to deny personality to the Rshis precisely to avoid
>this kind of second-guessing.
>
> > But another way to look at it is
> > from the point of view of a woman or a Sudra: "Oh! wonderful, we have
> > this great knowledge that would lead to everlasting bliss. Could I
> > please be initiated?" Such a person would be initiated only if she
> > already Knows, in which case initiation is perfectly unnecessary;
>
>If it is unecessary why would she even want it and why would anyone bother
>to give it in that case?  Initiation is a means to an end not an end in
>itself.  If the result has been acheived, it is no longer relevant.  This
>is the precise reason why Sannyasis in the Advaita traditions give up the
>yajnopavita (the symbol of Vedic initiation) etc.  It is not that they are
>against it, but if they are no longer in the sphere were Vedic commands
>hold true, what is the point?
>
> > and if
> > she doesn't already Know, well, touch luck, do good, accumulate merit,
> > and be born in next life as a caste man. This doesn't sound fair. And I
> > don't want to believe that my faith is such an unfair one.
> >
>
>So to be fair, their are puranas, itihasa, Gita, Yogavasishtha etc. by
>which one can know.  Which in fact are more well known than the Vedas.
>There are also innumerable people who will tell you.  So where is the
>unfairness.
>
> > In the case of women, children and vedas - my wife picked up some part
> > of purusha sUktam as I offer my daily ablutions; I reminded her that she
> > is not supposed to recite that without due care and respect. By this she
> > understood that she needs to get into a regular routine and not be as
> > liberal as she is with other stotras like Adityahridayam or the
> > sahasranAmams and desists from reciting the part she knows (at least in
> > my presence); my interpretation is that she needs brahmajij~nAsA before
> > she gets into it. The day I know she is keen, I shall not hesitate in
> > teaching her what I know, or introducing her to a teacher (more likely,
> > given her estimate of me!), but till I am not convinced,
>
>You have inadvertently revealed the hidden sexism that underlies a lot of
>the "women should learn the vedas" talk.  Why is reciting adityahrdaya or
>sahasranamas not evidence of keenness or seriousness?  What about women
>who don't know Sanskrit at all but recite e.g. sundara kanda?  Are they
>too to be deemed not serious.  Why should a woman have to copy a man for
>brahmajijnasa?  Especially when we Advaitins believe karma and jnana are
>as seperate as the north and south pole?
>
> > My son (2) and daughter (four and a half) regularly fool around
> > imitating Achamanam, mArjanam etc., and the daughter even knows gaNapati
> > stuti, sarasvatIvandanam, and a couple of SAnti matras. In this case, I
> > indulge them, and didn't prohibit her yet as she is too young to
> > understand and by the time she is 5 (the age after which her
> > karma-account is supposed to start), I hope to wean her away from this -
> > by example of her mother, or take care to complete my ablutions before
> > she wakes up in the morning.
> >
>
>My wife who is an educated woman is also probably quite capable of
>reciting having heard me or others countless times.  My children also like
>to play puja and in the process they repeat what they hear.  This is
>inevitable unless you lock yourself into an airtight soundproof box when
>you pray.  But as children grow in understanding and mature into adults
>they should be taught what is right and wrong.  My 16 month old son
>doesn't mind taking off all his clothes and running around the house
>screaming.  I don't  condemn him for it.  But if he is still doing that at
>35, you bet I will!
>
>...
>
> > So, each one in his limited capacity should be the judge of sAmAnyatA,
> > and any teacher who is convinced of a viSeshatA of a seeker, should
> > teach without hesitation, as in the case of satyakAma jAbAli.
> >
>
>Incidently, the story of Satyakama does not prove what people think it
>proves.
>
>On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, hemang Chamakuzhi Subramanian wrote:
>
> >
> > All quotes/unquotes mentioned by acharyas and attributed to great
> > teacher's are really matters avoidable by debate. Many of these words
> > and sentences may be circumstantial(bound by time) and also
> > contextual(place).
> >
>
>You know that bit about murder being bad?  Well based on debate I have
>decided it no longer fits in with the times so as of...um...April 15,
>readers may feel free to kill anyone they like without burdening their
>conscience.
>
> > We could go on debating about these aspects...and still not come to a
> > conclusion. There are normally 3 ways by which you could confirm the
> > truth yourself. a) Written in the scriptures
>
>Remember, the source of authority in Advaita Vedanta is not only texts (a
>superset of "books") but also shistachara.  A proper analysis includes
>history and anthropology as well.
>
> > b) Listen to the words of
> > someone with authority(if you are blessed indeed, this person would be
> > your Guru).
>
>This shades into a)  A person has authority only if he is familiar with
>texts and tradition.  Texts and traditions get chosen because of their use
>by authoritative
>
> > c) Personal Experience. (if in your experience you have
> > confirmed (a) and (b) then it could be safe to connote that this is the
> > truth). There is no fourth way...here
>
>
>--
>Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 6
>Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 06:40:56 +0100 (BST)
> From: Viswanathan N <vishy1962 at yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Women and Vedas
>To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
> 	<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>Message-ID: <20060406054056.82103.qmail at web33809.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>Vyasji
>
>
>    ( Basically you are a man/ woman or child / grownup or brahman/sudhra, based on condition of your mind
>
>Good.  Tomorrow I won't go to work. I'll send my daughter instead.  And if she complains that she is only 4 I'll tell that its just a state of mind.)
>
>   I really wonder how  come you  understand " the state of mind " in this way. Sure your daughter's state of mind is not matured enough as yours to do your job.(what is point your trying to make here!!).
>    yes, in cases that too happens... for instance Balamuralikrishna (famous carnatic vocalist) could render hudred of ragas at the age of six as well mandolin master U . srinivas could perform at the age of eight. people used to listen to them spell bound regardless their age.That is the state/maturity of mind,
>   not just physical aging
>
>
>
>"Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar at braincells.com> wrote:
>   Here are some short responses to a couple of posts.
>
>
>On Sun, 2 Apr 2006, Viswanathan N wrote:
>
> > Sure that quoate is picked out of some other context and doesnt have any
> > meaning.
>
>I'm afraid wishing thaat something was true doesn't make it so.
>
> > Basically you are a man/ woman or child / grownup or brahman/sudhra,
> > based on condition of your mind
>
>Good. Tomorrow I won't go to work. I'll send my daughter instead. And if
>she complains that she is only 4 I'll tell that its just a state of mind.
>
>On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, Aditya Varun Chadha wrote:
>
> > I don't think any consciencious modern thinker will try to prove that
> > women are unfit to gain knowledge directly from the Vedas.
>
>Well I consider myself to be modern (and a thinker even :-) and that's
>precisely what I'm saying. But is what I mean by "fit" the same as what
>you mean?
>
>...
>
> > All I am saying is that, we do not need scriptural sanction ultimately
> > to rule over our daily Acharan. The path of j~nAna yoga requires us to
> > question even the scriptures if they clash with the pratyakSa.
>
>pratyaksha is no foundation for a system of ethics. If while I'm walking
>I perceive that someones wallet is sticking out of his pocket and I can
>steal it without him or the police or anyone else noticing does it now
>become an acceptable thing to do?
>
>Shruti is a seperate pramana precisely because its injunctions and
>prohibitions are _not_ amenable to outside perception or inference. The
>claim is being made that women should not recite not because they are
>frail or mentally deficient but simply because they can't. No further
>explanation is needed because shruti is its own authority.
>
>On Sun, 2 Apr 2006, Siva Senani Nori wrote:
>
> > Should loyalty to one's tradition be blind? No, I think. Should honesty
> > count more than confirmity / orthodoxy? Yes, IMO.
> >
>
>No argument from me there. But the same also applies to would-be
>reformers too. Unfortunately too many of them are less than honest in
>their interpretations. As an aside, a big reason I am so orthodox today
>is because of my perception that "modern" Hindus are largely fools and
>knaves.
>
> > Some of the mantra drashTAs are actually
> > women - gArgi being an example;
>
>Um I'm not sure Gargi was a Rshi however it is true that of the 400+ Rshis
>of the Rgveda, there are about 20 or so with arguably feminine names.
>Even if taken at face value (and it need not be. Read on.) that's a
>whopping 4%. Hardly an endorsement of equality.
>
> > then we have maitreyI, the wife of
> > yAj~nvalkya learning brahmavidyA from the great rishi himself, and that
> > episode is itself a part of the vedas.
>
>But does that mean she was taught the Vedas or taught Brahmavidya? Those
>are not the same thing especially from the Advaita point of view.
>
>Also what evidence do we have that Maitreyi or Yajnavalkya actually
>existed? Yes we believe they did but from the Mimamsaka perspective it is
>also quite possible they are just literary characters. The Mimamsakas
>went to great length to deny personality to the Rshis precisely to avoid
>this kind of second-guessing.
>
> > But another way to look at it is
> > from the point of view of a woman or a Sudra: "Oh! wonderful, we have
> > this great knowledge that would lead to everlasting bliss. Could I
> > please be initiated?" Such a person would be initiated only if she
> > already Knows, in which case initiation is perfectly unnecessary;
>
>If it is unecessary why would she even want it and why would anyone bother
>to give it in that case? Initiation is a means to an end not an end in
>itself. If the result has been acheived, it is no longer relevant. This
>is the precise reason why Sannyasis in the Advaita traditions give up the
>yajnopavita (the symbol of Vedic initiation) etc. It is not that they are
>against it, but if they are no longer in the sphere were Vedic commands
>hold true, what is the point?
>
> > and if
> > she doesn't already Know, well, touch luck, do good, accumulate merit,
> > and be born in next life as a caste man. This doesn't sound fair. And I
> > don't want to believe that my faith is such an unfair one.
> >
>
>So to be fair, their are puranas, itihasa, Gita, Yogavasishtha etc. by
>which one can know. Which in fact are more well known than the Vedas.
>There are also innumerable people who will tell you. So where is the
>unfairness.
>
> > In the case of women, children and vedas - my wife picked up some part
> > of purusha sUktam as I offer my daily ablutions; I reminded her that she
> > is not supposed to recite that without due care and respect. By this she
> > understood that she needs to get into a regular routine and not be as
> > liberal as she is with other stotras like Adityahridayam or the
> > sahasranAmams and desists from reciting the part she knows (at least in
> > my presence); my interpretation is that she needs brahmajij~nAsA before
> > she gets into it. The day I know she is keen, I shall not hesitate in
> > teaching her what I know, or introducing her to a teacher (more likely,
> > given her estimate of me!), but till I am not convinced,
>
>You have inadvertently revealed the hidden sexism that underlies a lot of
>the "women should learn the vedas" talk. Why is reciting adityahrdaya or
>sahasranamas not evidence of keenness or seriousness? What about women
>who don't know Sanskrit at all but recite e.g. sundara kanda? Are they
>too to be deemed not serious. Why should a woman have to copy a man for
>brahmajijnasa? Especially when we Advaitins believe karma and jnana are
>as seperate as the north and south pole?
>
> > My son (2) and daughter (four and a half) regularly fool around
> > imitating Achamanam, mArjanam etc., and the daughter even knows gaNapati
> > stuti, sarasvatIvandanam, and a couple of SAnti matras. In this case, I
> > indulge them, and didn't prohibit her yet as she is too young to
> > understand and by the time she is 5 (the age after which her
> > karma-account is supposed to start), I hope to wean her away from this -
> > by example of her mother, or take care to complete my ablutions before
> > she wakes up in the morning.
> >
>
>My wife who is an educated woman is also probably quite capable of
>reciting having heard me or others countless times. My children also like
>to play puja and in the process they repeat what they hear. This is
>inevitable unless you lock yourself into an airtight soundproof box when
>you pray. But as children grow in understanding and mature into adults
>they should be taught what is right and wrong. My 16 month old son
>doesn't mind taking off all his clothes and running around the house
>screaming. I don't condemn him for it. But if he is still doing that at
>35, you bet I will!
>
>...
>
> > So, each one in his limited capacity should be the judge of sAmAnyatA,
> > and any teacher who is convinced of a viSeshatA of a seeker, should
> > teach without hesitation, as in the case of satyakAma jAbAli.
> >
>
>Incidently, the story of Satyakama does not prove what people think it
>proves.
>
>On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, hemang Chamakuzhi Subramanian wrote:
>
> >
> > All quotes/unquotes mentioned by acharyas and attributed to great
> > teacher's are really matters avoidable by debate. Many of these words
> > and sentences may be circumstantial(bound by time) and also
> > contextual(place).
> >
>
>You know that bit about murder being bad? Well based on debate I have
>decided it no longer fits in with the times so as of...um...April 15,
>readers may feel free to kill anyone they like without burdening their
>conscience.
>
> > We could go on debating about these aspects...and still not come to a
> > conclusion. There are normally 3 ways by which you could confirm the
> > truth yourself. a) Written in the scriptures
>
>Remember, the source of authority in Advaita Vedanta is not only texts (a
>superset of "books") but also shistachara. A proper analysis includes
>history and anthropology as well.
>
> > b) Listen to the words of
> > someone with authority(if you are blessed indeed, this person would be
> > your Guru).
>
>This shades into a) A person has authority only if he is familiar with
>texts and tradition. Texts and traditions get chosen because of their use
>by authoritative
>
> > c) Personal Experience. (if in your experience you have
> > confirmed (a) and (b) then it could be safe to connote that this is the
> > truth). There is no fourth way...here
>
>
>--
>Jaldhar H. Vyas
>_______________________________________________
>Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>
>To unsubscribe or change your options:
>http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
>For assistance, contact:
>listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>  Jiyo cricket on Yahoo! India cricket
>Yahoo! Messenger Mobile Stay in touch with your buddies all the time.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 7
>Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 12:11:47 +0530
> From: "Aditya Varun Chadha" <adichad at gmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Women and Vedas
>To: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta"
> 	<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>Message-ID:
> 	<9332255f0604052341n2c1b30efu59515ec39ecf6ff0 at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>Jaldhar ji,
>
>On 4/6/06, Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com> wrote:
> > I'm afraid wishing thaat something was true doesn't make it so.
>
>agreed.
>
> > Well I consider myself to be modern (and a thinker even :-) and that's
> > precisely what I'm saying.  But is what I mean by "fit" the same as what
> > you mean?
>
>I don't know, you tell me what you mean by "fit". When I say "unfit" I
>mean that their brains with all the neurons and the structure is
>incapable of comprehending the Vedas like males can comprehend.
>
> > pratyaksha is no foundation for a system of ethics.  If while I'm walking
> > I perceive that someones wallet is sticking out of his pocket and I can
> > steal it without him or the police or anyone else noticing does it now
> > become an acceptable thing to do?
>
>You are restricting the circumference of pratyaksha too much. Ever
>heard of the brain being able to derive subtler concepts from simple
>concepts? The danD nIti of nature is enough to infuse ethics into the
>mind. When you refrain from a "bad" action in a particular case where
>your action would be undetectable, it is a result of pattern matching
>in the brain, not because you remember some verse from some Veda. Do
>you imply that irreligious people are more often inethical than
>religious people? if so, unfortunate misconception. if not, please
>clarify.
>
> > Shruti is a seperate pramana precisely because its injunctions and
> > prohibitions are _not_ amenable to outside perception or inference.  The
> > claim is being made that women should not recite not because they are
> > frail or mentally deficient but simply because they can't.  No further
> > explanation is needed because shruti is its own authority.
>
>Calling a spade a spade by showing that Shruti says something specific
>is one thing. But stopping there and not asking why is quite
>unacceptable, atleast when there is a pratyaksha doubt. But you HAVE
>addressed that question later in your mail to some extent.
>
> > As an aside, a big reason I am so orthodox today
> > is because of my perception that "modern" Hindus are largely fools and
> > knaves.
>
>My turn to ask you how you define "fool" and "knave" in this context.
>Just curious.
>
> > Also what evidence do we have that Maitreyi or Yajnavalkya actually
> > existed?  Yes we believe they did but from the Mimamsaka perspective it is
> > also quite possible they are just literary characters.  The Mimamsakas
> > went to great length to deny personality to the Rshis precisely to avoid
> > this kind of second-guessing.
>
>Aren't the Upanishads Shruti? What does it matter whether the
>characters existed or not?
>
> > If it is unecessary why would she even want it and why would anyone bother
> > to give it in that case?  Initiation is a means to an end not an end in
> > itself.  If the result has been acheived, it is no longer relevant.  This
> > is the precise reason why Sannyasis in the Advaita traditions give up the
> > yajnopavita (the symbol of Vedic initiation) etc.  It is not that they are
> > against it, but if they are no longer in the sphere were Vedic commands
> > hold true, what is the point?
>
>perfectly fine.
>
> > So to be fair, their are puranas, itihasa, Gita, Yogavasishtha etc. by
> > which one can know.  Which in fact are more well known than the Vedas.
> > There are also innumerable people who will tell you.  So where is the
> > unfairness.
>
>are there any scriptures as general as the Vedas that are prohibited
>for men to recite? If yes, fine. If not, then again, asking the
>question WHY is can bear some fruit.
>
> > You have inadvertently revealed the hidden sexism that underlies a lot of
> > the "women should learn the vedas" talk.  Why is reciting adityahrdaya or
> > sahasranamas not evidence of keenness or seriousness?  What about women
> > who don't know Sanskrit at all but recite e.g. sundara kanda?  Are they
> > too to be deemed not serious.  Why should a woman have to copy a man for
> > brahmajijnasa?  Especially when we Advaitins believe karma and jnana are
> > as seperate as the north and south pole?
>
>I think you have missed the point. Ofcourse reciting these scriptures
>is not anything "lesser". The question boils back to whether men have
>such restrictions in the tradition. Ofcourse here I am refering to the
>hypothetical you that you have concocted in the above argument.
>
> > Incidently, the story of Satyakama does not prove what people think it
> > proves.
>
>Incidentally, your stating that you think you know what people think
>it proves does not show that you really know what people think it
>proves. maybe you can elaborate at your convenience.
>
> > You know that bit about murder being bad?  Well based on debate I have
> > decided it no longer fits in with the times so as of...um...April 15,
> > readers may feel free to kill anyone they like without burdening their
> > conscience.
>
>I challenge you to show me the proceedings of such a debate. I claim
>that I will be able to show that your "decision" is either based on
>incorrect premises, or your idea of "murder" is different from the
>idea that a majority of humanity has.
>
> > Remember, the source of authority in Advaita Vedanta is not only texts (a
> > superset of "books") but also shistachara. A proper analysis includes
> > history and anthropology as well.
>
>These sources of authority overlap in their jurisdiction. The history
>and anthropology you allude to are forms of pratyaksha pramANa.
>
>--
>Aditya Varun Chadha
>adichad AT gmail.com
>http://www.adichad.com
>________________________________
>Mobile: +91 98 400 76411
>________________________________
>Room #1024, Cauvery Hostel
>Indian Institute of Technology, Madras
>Chennai - 600 036
>India
>________________________________
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>
>To unsubscribe or change your options:
>http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
>For assistance, contact:
>listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>
>
>End of Advaita-l Digest, Vol 36, Issue 6
>****************************************