DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**PNCarl** · 01-17-2007, 06:50 AM

Religious intolerance itself is a result of trying to "reform" the person belonging to another religion or has a different point of view.

So anything with the view that "my view is right-all others are wrong" leads to conflict. Hinduism has taught tolerance towards other religions. Hinduism is one of the religions that talks about the equality of women.

Ofcourse reforms lead to conflict.If dalits remain in slums and dont come to schools,colleges or temples there wonnt be any conflicts.If they still salute the devar and vanniyar castes,take their chappels in hands while they walk in streets and stop demanding that their corpses should be burnt in the public burial ground, there wont be any caste based conflicts or fights.

So I do agree that if the above said reforms did not happen,there wouldnt have been any conflicts at all.total peace would have prevailed in the country.Reforms do lead to intolerance towards casteism and oppression.Upper castes do have a "different view" about allowing dalits on streets, temples and schools and reformers do argue "I am right, you are wrong".I agree with this.

Reforms are not meant to be peaceful.They arent supposed to use "goody-goody" words like 'All are right,you are right,I am right,he is right" etc.Reformers are not supposed to preach tolerance.They are supposed to create conflicts and struggles.

I dont understand your quote about the violence uleashed by varnashrama followers. The very fact that you sit in a cozy comfortable place, and throw mud on hinduism alone indicates how much of freedom it allows the so called followers to throw mud on itself.
Do you have any historic facts on the violence unleashed by varnashrama followers? If so please quote. Otherwise dont make unwanted statements.

Let me tell you one example.

In 19th century, Sanar women(nadar community women) were not permitted to wear any dress on their upper body.Their men remained illiterate and uneducated and climbed palm trees to survive.Then one day nadar women started fighting for the right to wear saree.They organized a movement which was called as "thol seelai poorattam(தோள்சீலை போரட்டம்).This movement just asked for the rights to wear saree on their shoulders.

Uppercastes in kerala and tamilnadu violently opposed this right.Then king of kerala (swathi thirunal's brother) oppressed this movement with an iron fist.Many sanars were killed, burnt and hacked into pieces.Then finally british government intervened and ordered the king to grant that right.So finally the king passed an order permitting that these women can cover their upperbody with a saree,but that dress should be 'different from higher caste women'.

You asked an incident,so I gave one.If you want 1000 incidents,I can give them.Should I quote pappapatti,keeripatti or thinniyam were a dalit was forced to eat shit by devar community people?

In fact if one just sees that 15% of indian population are reduced to poverty and have been made to live in slums, eating dead cows and animals,without education and healthcare and doing menial jobs like toilet cleaning, even washing mensus clothes of caste hindu women and cleaning streets for generations together-one wouldnt ask what violence was perpetuated in name of varnashrama.

It is an ongoing violence which is continuing even after thousands of years

It requires a Shankara, or a Ramanuja, or a Madhwa to formulate a philosphy and reform a religion. Not the politically motivated power hungry, casteist, corrupt politicians, or the people who sit in A/C rooms and type these.

Afterall, thalapa katti, meesa vachavan ellam bharathi aayida mudiyathu.

Take the example of the sanar women's struggle which I mentioned earlier.What should have they done?should they have waited for a shankara or ramanuja?

They waited for centuries.None came.

The only people who came to reform the atrocities were british.British werent knolwedgable in vedas and shastras.They did not wear a thalappa and moustache like bharathi.

What should have the sanar women done?Sit and gaze at the sky waiting for a devathootha to reform their religion or accept the help of British?

To reform a religion,one needs only a thinking brain and a merciful heart.Nothing more is needed.

01-17-2007, 06:50 AM	#17
PNCarl Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 406 Senior Member	Religious intolerance itself is a result of trying to "reform" the person belonging to another religion or has a different point of view. So anything with the view that "my view is right-all others are wrong" leads to conflict. Hinduism has taught tolerance towards other religions. Hinduism is one of the religions that talks about the equality of women. Ofcourse reforms lead to conflict.If dalits remain in slums and dont come to schools,colleges or temples there wonnt be any conflicts.If they still salute the devar and vanniyar castes,take their chappels in hands while they walk in streets and stop demanding that their corpses should be burnt in the public burial ground, there wont be any caste based conflicts or fights. So I do agree that if the above said reforms did not happen,there wouldnt have been any conflicts at all.total peace would have prevailed in the country.Reforms do lead to intolerance towards casteism and oppression.Upper castes do have a "different view" about allowing dalits on streets, temples and schools and reformers do argue "I am right, you are wrong".I agree with this. Reforms are not meant to be peaceful.They arent supposed to use "goody-goody" words like 'All are right,you are right,I am right,he is right" etc.Reformers are not supposed to preach tolerance.They are supposed to create conflicts and struggles. I dont understand your quote about the violence uleashed by varnashrama followers. The very fact that you sit in a cozy comfortable place, and throw mud on hinduism alone indicates how much of freedom it allows the so called followers to throw mud on itself. Do you have any historic facts on the violence unleashed by varnashrama followers? If so please quote. Otherwise dont make unwanted statements. Let me tell you one example. In 19th century, Sanar women(nadar community women) were not permitted to wear any dress on their upper body.Their men remained illiterate and uneducated and climbed palm trees to survive.Then one day nadar women started fighting for the right to wear saree.They organized a movement which was called as "thol seelai poorattam(தோள்சீலை போரட்டம்).This movement just asked for the rights to wear saree on their shoulders. Uppercastes in kerala and tamilnadu violently opposed this right.Then king of kerala (swathi thirunal's brother) oppressed this movement with an iron fist.Many sanars were killed, burnt and hacked into pieces.Then finally british government intervened and ordered the king to grant that right.So finally the king passed an order permitting that these women can cover their upperbody with a saree,but that dress should be 'different from higher caste women'. You asked an incident,so I gave one.If you want 1000 incidents,I can give them.Should I quote pappapatti,keeripatti or thinniyam were a dalit was forced to eat shit by devar community people? In fact if one just sees that 15% of indian population are reduced to poverty and have been made to live in slums, eating dead cows and animals,without education and healthcare and doing menial jobs like toilet cleaning, even washing mensus clothes of caste hindu women and cleaning streets for generations together-one wouldnt ask what violence was perpetuated in name of varnashrama. It is an ongoing violence which is continuing even after thousands of years It requires a Shankara, or a Ramanuja, or a Madhwa to formulate a philosphy and reform a religion. Not the politically motivated power hungry, casteist, corrupt politicians, or the people who sit in A/C rooms and type these. Afterall, thalapa katti, meesa vachavan ellam bharathi aayida mudiyathu. Take the example of the sanar women's struggle which I mentioned earlier.What should have they done?should they have waited for a shankara or ramanuja? They waited for centuries.None came. The only people who came to reform the atrocities were british.British werent knolwedgable in vedas and shastras.They did not wear a thalappa and moustache like bharathi. What should have the sanar women done?Sit and gaze at the sky waiting for a devathootha to reform their religion or accept the help of British? To reform a religion,one needs only a thinking brain and a merciful heart.Nothing more is needed.
	Quote