[Advaita-l] Mlecchas not eligible to take Hinduism?

Srikanta Narayanaswami srikanta.narayanaswami at yahoo.com
Thu Jul 12 08:52:33 CDT 2012

"A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>

It is one thing to take the position that vaidhika karmAdhikara rests with dwijas. It is another to talk about any hint of suspiction (sic ... ) about Sita consorting with another. Rama did not.  Even the dhobhi did not charge Her with that. Please offer evidence from smrti or withdraw this comment with unreservedly. 

Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

-----Original Message-----
From: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar at braincells.com>
Sender: advaita-l-bounces at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 16:56:39 
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Reply-To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
    <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] mleccha-s not eligible to take Hinduism??

On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, Kathirasan K wrote:

> I am not sure if the Victorian prudes did it. But I am sure the Bhagavatam
> extols Rama for being a ekapatnivrata and that he had set a role model for
> all common folk. (please see Bhagavatam 9.10)

Specifically you are referring to 9.10.54 and surprise, surprise, it is 
not talking about a rule for monogamy.

ekapatnIvratadharo rajarShicharitaH  ShuchiH |
svadharmaM gR^ihamedhIaM shikShayan svayamAcharat || 54 ||
The "Vaidhika Dharma sastra"has held certain norms and rules,above all placed the "Dharma"to be superior to all castes,Brahmana,Kshatriya,Vaishya and shudra,and declared unequivocally that,on any accout,"Dharma"should be protected by all."Dharmo Raksati Rakshitah".The Dharma also has to be followed by Sanyasis.The Sanyasis are not an exception to "Dharma".
There were Kings like Dasaratha,Ashwapathi,who married many wives.This was allowed as Ksatriya Dharma.But,there were no polygamy among women.The Sanyasis were degraded and also killed if they failed in their morality.Note,Ravana who abducted Sita was degraded by the 
whole kingdom,both in Ayodhya and Lanka.It had cast a darkshadow on the Sanatana Dharma,and Rama who was an Ekapatni vratasta,which probably was not a rule or Dharma among the Kshatriya kings,created a record by not following poligamy.It was also the intention of the Rakshasa Ravana to defeat Rama in his purpose of being "Ekapatni Vratasta",and thereby humiliating him if he married another wife.Not knowing the Superiority of Power and the Divine Avatar of Rama,Ravana attempted this futile effort of abducting the Divine mother Sita.The comment of the Washerman(dhobhi) to slight Rama by commenting aspersion on him,saying that the does the Dhobhi's wife think that does she think that he is Rama to take her back(hinting also that she is Sita for him to take her back?)There are many hidden insulting hints in this comment.Firstly,that the Dhobhi must have thought that Ravana is a new hero like that of the cinema villains,who now a days are the new heroes!Now a
 day's in Indian cinema we see heroes who look like Ravanas.Secondly,in modern times we are attempting to interpret "Dharma Sastra"without knowing what Dharma is!

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list