SitaRamachandraarpanam

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
Kana Kana Ruchira Kanaka Vasana Ninnu


Powered by Castpost






powered by SignMyGuestbook.com

SriKrishnaarpanam

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us

Sundara Manmatha Koti Prakaasha,Hare Sri Krishna
When i am about to die, the only forms that should appear b4 me should be that of the Lord (Krishna) with the beautiful flute kept on his lips , with the peacock plumes slantingly placed on his head and with the body as blue as bluestone
Swami Desikan in GopAla Vimshathi

Missed some quote??? Check it out here


Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us

Sunday, October 02, 2005

136th Birth Anniversary Remembrance of the Mahatma

Dear Friends

I am pleased to have the following song rendered for your listening pleasure ;) on the eve of our Mahatma Gandhiji's 136th Birth Anniversary. The song kindles the spirit of love thru Sri Rama and is one of Gandhijis favorite bhajans





Hear a better rendition of the same song by checking this out.

Update 0:

Another rendition of the same song as rendered by Ashit Desai can be gotten by clicking here
Also , check out "Vaishnavajan to " here


"He Ram, He Ram" or "Rama, Rama".- Gandhijis last words

UPDATE 1:

Hinduism & Gandhi

-
By Jagmohan, Former Governor of J & K and former Union
Minister (From the Statesman, Calcutta, 2/10/05)


On Gandhi’s birthday, instead of going round the samadhis and attending
prayer meeting ritualistically, the ruling elite will do well to think
how strong and healthy India could be built on it spiritual traditions
and how Hinduism as viewed by Gandhiji could be used to refertilize and
revitalize that tradition. Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, in connection with his
study of religion posed three questions to Mahatma Gandhi. What is your
religion? How are you led to it? What is its bearing on social life?

Gandhi answered the first question thus: “My religion is Hinduism
which, for me, is the religion of humanity and includes the best of all
religions known to me.â€ï¿½ In response to the second question, Gandhi
said: “I take it that the present tense in this question has been purposely
used, instead of the past. I am led to my religion through truth and
non-violence. I often describe my religion as religion of truth. Of late,
instead of saying God is Truth, I have been saying Truth is God. We are
all sparks of Truth. The sum total of these sparks is indescribable, as
yet unknown Truth, which is God. I am daily led nearer to it by
constant prayerâ€ï¿½.

To the third question, Gandhi replied: “the bearing of this
religion on social life is, or has to be seen in one’s daily social contact.
To be true to such religion, one has to lose oneself in continuous and
continuing service of all in life. Realization of Truth is impossible
without a complete merging of oneself in and identification with this
limitless ocean of life. Hence for me, there is no escape from social
service; there is no happiness on earth beyond or apart from it. In this
scheme, there is nothing low, nothing high. For all is one, though we
seem to be manyâ€ï¿½.

Gandhi elaborated: “The deeper I study Hinduism, the stronger
becomes the belief in me that Hinduism is as broad as the universe.
Something within me tells me that for all the deep veneration I show to
several religions, I am all the more a Hindu, nonetheless for itâ€ï¿½.

On the Mahatma’s birthday it seems necessary to bring home these
fundamentals, particularly to those who go on condemning Hinduism without
even studying it and also to those members of the ruling elite whose
attachment to fake and fraudulent “godsâ€ï¿½ have made the country a den of
corruption, callousness, confusion and criminality.

Gandhi’s elucidation makes it clear that true Hinduism is nothing
but spiritual secularism. To relegate such a religion and to follow a
shallow and superficial secularism is one of the worst sins that the
false problems of contemporary India are committing. They call Gandhi the
Father of the Nation. Yet in practice they do everything to negate all
his beliefs.

Throughout human history, religion has remained a potent force despite
all the pounding it has received from thinkers like Marx who called it
“opiate of the massesâ€ï¿½, and Freud who termed it as “a collective
neurosis of the massesâ€ï¿½. It may be relevant to recall a talk between Cardinal
Gonsalvic and Napoleon. The Cardinal was pleading the case for the
church. Napoleon got annoyed on some point and shouted at the Cardinal
“Your Eminence, are you not aware that I have the power to destroy the
Catholic Church?â€ï¿½ The Cardinal smiled and replied, “Your Majesty, we the
Catholic Clergy for the last 1800 have done our level best to destroy
the Catholic Church. We did not succeed. You will not succeed either.â€ï¿½
This conversation brings out in a telling manner the staying power of
religion, notwithstanding its internal and external destroyers.

While religion has its influence in every country, it is more so
in India. Swami Vivekananda, with his characteristic clarity and
insight, has observed: “Each nation, like each individual, has one theme in
life, which is its centre, the principal note around which every other
note comes to form the harmony. If anyone attempts to throw off this
central note, that is, its national vitality, the direction which has
become its own through the transmission of centuries, that nation dies. In
India, religious life forms the centre, the key-note of the whole music
of national life. Take away region from India nothing would be left.â€ï¿½

Power in present-day India has become an end in itself. Justice is
being buried deeper and deeper. Means however unscrupulous are resorted to
and then rationalized. Corruption in public life has attained alarming
proportions. Most of our institutions have lost their underlying
motivation of service and become effete and venal.

Why has this happened? Why have our state and society become soulless
entities? Why have criminals enlarged their hold on politics? And why
have power and pelf become everything and justice and truth nothing?

The answer to these questions is that the ethical foundation of
Hinduism, as seen by Gandhi, which could provide “an awakened conscienceâ€ï¿½ to
an individual and make him an honest, just and compassionate component
of society has been destroyed partly by the stink and slush of our past
degeneration and partly by the type of spurious secularism which has
been exploited in post-independence India.

Hinduism, as made clear by Gandhi, sees all human beings as
“sparks of truth/divinityâ€ï¿½. As such, it neither goes against any other
religion nor is it incompatible with the constitutional goals of equality,
fraternity, liberty and justice. If the same divinity constitutes the
core of all individuals, they cannot but be equal. Further, divinity in
one person cannot in any way be unjust to the same divinity in another
person. As the Gita puts it, “Seeing the same God equally present in
everything, one does not injure the self by self; and goes to the highest
goalâ€ï¿½.

In Hinduism, Gandhi saw a unique quality: “In it there is room for
the worship of all the prophets of the world. It is not a missionary
religion in the ordinary sense of the worldâ€ï¿½. Gandhi underlined: “God is
not encased in a safe to be approached only through a little hole in
it, but He is open to be approached through billions of openings by those
who are humble and pure of heartâ€ï¿½.

Courtesy : Advaitin Forums on Yahoo

"Generations to come will scarcely believe that such a man in flesh and blood once trod upon this earth"." -Albert Einstein

SRI SITARAMACHANDRAARPANAMASTHU

Comments on "136th Birth Anniversary Remembrance of the Mahatma"

 

Blogger Anandkumar_V said ... (3:47 AM) : 

NATIONAL SHAME – HE NEVER UTTERED "hey ram"

Gopal Godse, co-conspirator in Gandhi's assassination and brother of the assassin, looks back in anger--and without regret

Fifty-seven years ago, on Jan. 30, 1948, Mohandas Gandhi was shot dead by Nathuram Godse, a Hindu extremist. Godse believed that the Mahatma, or great soul, was responsible for the 1947 partition of India and the creation of Pakistan. Godse and his friend Narayan Apte were hanged. His brother Gopal and two others were sentenced to life imprisonment for their part in the conspiracy. Gopal Godse remained in jail for 18 years and now, at 80, lives with his wife in a small apartment in Pune. He is still proud of his role in the murder. Although Godse is largely ignored in India and rarely talks to journalists, he agreed to speak with Meenakshi Ganguly.

TIME: What happened in January 1948?
Godse: On Jan. 20, Madanlal Pahwa exploded a bomb at Gandhi's prayer meeting in Delhi. It was 50 m away from Gandhi. [The other conspirators] all ran away from the place. Madanlal was caught there. Then there was a tension in our minds that we had to finish the task before the police caught us. Then Nathuram [Gopal's brother] took it on himself to do the thing. We only wanted destiny to help us -- meaning we should not be caught on the spot before he acted.

TIME: Why did you want to kill Gandhi?
Godse: Gandhi was a hypocrite. Even after the massacre of the Hindus by the Muslims, he was happy. The more the massacres of the Hindus, the taller his flag of secularism.

TIME: Did you ever see Gandhi?
Godse: Yes.

TIME: Did you attend his meetings?
Godse: Yes.

TIME: Can you explain how he created his mass following?
Godse: The credit goes to him for maneuvering the media. He captured the press. That was essential. How Gandhi walked, when he smiled, how he waved -- all these minor details that the people did not require were imposed upon them to create an atmosphere around Gandhi. And the more ignorant the masses, the more popular was Gandhi. So they always tried to keep the masses ignorant.

TIME: But surely it takes more than good publicity to create a Gandhi?
Godse: There is another thing. Generally in the Indian masses, people are attracted toward saintism. Gandhi was shrewd to use his saintdom for politics. After his death the government used him. The government knew that he was an enemy of Hindus, but they wanted to show that he was a staunch Hindu. So the first act they did was to put "Hey Ram" into Gandhi's dead mouth.

TIME: You mean that he did not say "Hey Ram" as he died?
Godse: No, he did not say it. You see, it was an automatic pistol. It had a magazine for nine bullets but there were actually seven at that time. And once you pull the trigger, within a second, all the seven bullets had passed. When these bullets pass through crucial points like the heart, consciousness is finished. You have no strength.

When Nathuram saw Gandhi was coming, he took out the pistol and folded his hands with the pistol inside it. There was one girl very close to Gandhi. He feared that he would hurt the girl. So he went forward and with his left hand pushed her aside and shot. It happened within one second. You see, there was a film and some Kingsley fellow had acted as Gandhi. Someone asked me whether Gandhi said, "Hey Ram." I said Kingsley did say it. But Gandhi did not. Because that was not a drama.

TIME: Many people think Gandhi deserved to be nominated TIME's Person of the Century. [He was one of two runners-up, after Albert Einstein.]
Godse: I name him the most cruel person for Hindus in India. The most cruel person! That is how I term him.

TIME: Is that why Gandhi had to die?
Godse: Yes. For months he was advising Hindus that they must never be angry with the Muslims. What sort of ahimsa (non-violence) is this? His principle of peace was bogus. In any free country, a person like him would be shot dead officially because he was encouraging the Muslims to kill Hindus.

TIME: But his philosophy was of turning the other cheek. He felt one person had to stop the cycle of violence...
Godse: The world does not work that way.

TIME: Is there anything that you admire about Gandhi?
Godse: Firstly, the mass awakening that Gandhi did. In our school days Gandhi was our idol. Secondly, he removed the fear of prison. He said it is different to go into prison for a theft and different to go in for satyagraha (civil disobedience). As youngsters, we had our enthusiasm, but we needed some channel. We took Gandhi to be our channel. We don't repent for that.

TIME: Did you not admire his principles of non-violence?
Godse: Non-violence is not a principle at all. He did not follow it. In politics you cannot follow non-violence. You cannot follow honesty. Every moment, you have to give a lie. Every moment you have to take a bullet in hand and kill someone. Why was he proved to be a hypocrite? Because he was in politics with his so-called principles. Is his non-violence followed anywhere? Not in the least. Nowhere.

TIME: What was the most difficult thing about killing Gandhi?
Godse: The greatest hurdle before us was not that of giving up our lives or going to the gallows. It was that we would be condemned both by the government and by the public. Because the public had been kept in the dark about what harm Gandhi had done to the nation. How he had fooled them!

TIME: Did the people condemn you?
Godse: Yes. People in general did. Because they had been kept ignorant.

The snapshot of this interview has been taken from the TIME Magazine's Website

 

Blogger Anandkumar_V said ... (3:58 AM) : 

The Rediff Interview/ Gopal Godse

'Gandhi used to systematically fool people. So we killed him'

The lights go off as you reach the dilapidated building in Santa Cruz, in Bombay's western suburbs. With great difficulty you navigate the stairs and knock on a first-floor door.

"What do you want," asks the lady who opened the door.

You tell her you have come to meet Gopal Godse.

"Yes, I'm here," a voice comes from a corner of the dark room. The lady brings a lighted candle and you see the 76-year-old man who underwent 18 years imprisonment for conspiring in Mahatma Gandhi's assassination.

"I'm sorry the lights are off," Nathuram Godse's brother says, "You know, this is India and even after 50 years of Independence we have not improved.

"Since Independence our people are accustomed to forget history. Today no one is bothered about the Partition. And no one wants to reunite India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

"Gandhi systematically fooled the people by saying, 'I'll accept the Partition of the country over my dead body.' But still he partitioned India. So we killed him..."

Godse, in an exclusive interview with Firdaus Syed Ashraf:

Do you ever regret Mahatma Gandhi's killing?
No, never. Gandhi used to claim the Partition would be over his dead body. So after Partition when he didn't die, we killed him. Usually an assassination of a leader is either for personal benefit or to acquire power. We killed Gandhi because he was harmful to India. And it was a selfless act. No one paid us a single penny for it. Our love for the motherland made us do it. We are not ashamed of it. Gandhi should have been honest to admit that his life was a failure.

You see, right from Pakistan and Bangladesh every Muslim is a converted Hindu. Gandhi's appeasement attitude (towards the Muslims) went far too much. That was why we killed him. Two hundred and fifty thousand Hindus were killed in Noakhali in October 1946. Hindu women were forced to remove their sindhoor and do Muslim rituals. And Gandhi said, 'Hindus must bow their heads if Muslims want to kill them. We should follow the principle of ahimsa (non-violence).' How can any sensible person tolerate this? Our action was not for a handful of people -- it was for all the refugees who came from Pakistan.

So, till this day, I have never regreted being one of the conspirators in Gandhi's assassination. In fact, many of Nathuram's friends told me after my release, 'Nathuram ni gadhav pana kela, tyani majha chance ghalavla' (Nathuram did you an injustice. He made you miss your chance to kill Gandhi).

Did your family undergo any social pressure after the assassination?

Yes, very much. No one used to be ready to marry girls from my family. So we decided that the first thing we should put across to the bridegroom was that we are related to Nathuram Godse. It is only now that people appreciate our honesty. Now they are ready for marriage (into my family).

If the Muslim League could influence the Muslims in 1947, why was it that the Hindu Mahasabha could not influence Hindus?

(That was) because I don't have any leadership quality. My talent is to write. And I have convinced my readers with my writing.

Unfortunately, the so-called secular Hindu leaders from the Congress have been ruling the masses since 1885. And they have ruled the country for another 50 years. It is only now that Hindus have become conscious (about the Congress). They have thrown the party out from Maharashtra and all over India.

You cannot gauge a nation in merely five decades. It took 500 years for the Christians to drive away Muslims from Europe. Muslims ruled right up to Spain and Portugal. I don't know how many years it will take for Hindus to rule the entire Bharat. It may be a decade, or it may be a century.

Did you ever contest elections?

Yes, I contested from Ranchi in Bihar. People asked me why I was contesting there. I said my slogan is 'Ab ke bar Ranchi se agli bar Karachi se'. (This election I will contest from Ranchi and the next from Karachi). I was able to secure only 7,000 votes because I did not have any mass support.

Can Muslims and Hindus ever live together in peace?

Yes, if the Muslims give up their blind faith. It is written in the Koran that idol worship is not permitted. If Muslims don't want Hindus to pray to their gods, how can they live together with them (the Hindus)? They want to convert Hindus to Islam not realising that their ancestors were Hindus. They must give up this attitude. Then only the two can live together.

And who created Pakistan? It wasn't the Arabs but the Muslims of Bharat. Who was Jinnah? His grandfather was a Hindu. Benazir Bhutto is also a Hindu Rajput.

Every Muslim nation keeps away from modern science. And when they do that they are left far behind the rest of the world. When the telephone was invented, Muslim countries were not using it. They said it is not mentioned in the Koran, that it was un-Islamic!

Of the 140 million Muslims in India, how many would you say want to convert Hindus to Islam?

The number is not important. What's important is that it is written in their religion. They have already shown that by creating Pakistan. No secular Hindu can go for Haj. Why is it so that only Muslims are allowed there? Is it because only Muslims are secular?

Who wants to expand Islam in India? Can you name them?

No. You have to understand one thing. Individually a Muslim may be good to the Hindus. But when in a group, he will be out of the national mainstream.

On the 136th Birth Anniversary of Mohandas, I offer my humble salutations to the true Mahatma – Nathuram Godse. My Hats off to him

Regards,
Anandkumar V

 

Blogger Arjuna_Speaks said ... (6:52 AM) : 

Wow - for a moment I thought Gandhi has come when I listened to ur voice :)..

Sangeetha Bhooshan Krishna Valga :)

 

Blogger bjenkins said ... (1:03 PM) : 

Interesting posts. Did you know that in the Bible it says that Jesus was fully God and fully man? The Bible says that "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God." A few verses later it says that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.

It seems that although Christianity didn't physically date back as far as Hindu. Eternally, it did exist. From the beginning...Ben

 

Blogger Anand Ramamoorthy said ... (9:50 PM) : 

DEAR KRISHNA,

I HAVE A FEW WORDS TO SAY HERE TO MR.ANANDKUMAR.V, WITH YOUR PERMISSION;

IT IS QUITE LIKELY THAT GANDHIJI COULD NOT HAVE UTTERED "HEY RAM!" WHEN HE WAS SHOT. I AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT POINT. AS FOR THE REST... I HAVE A SIMPLE SUGGESTION
PLEASE GO TO THE OPPOSITE OF HEAVEN!
IT IS VERY EASY TO CRITICISE THE MAHATHMA BUT TO EVEN LEAD A DAY'S LIFE LIKE HE DID- TRY IT AND THEN SEE WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH HIM OR NOT.
AGAIN MR. ANANDKUMAR, YOU HAVE QUITE DISTASTEFULLY TITLED YOUR BLOG HINDU CRUSADE-
1. THE TERM HINDU DESCRIBES A POLITICO-RELIGIOUS MYTH AND NOT A REAL RELIGION.
2.THE TERM CRUSADE IS REPUGNANT TO ANY RATOINAL INDIVIDUAL.

KINDLY , FOR SRI RAMA'S SAKE, RECONSIDER YOUR VIEWS AND UNDERSTAND THE TRUE SPIRIT OF SANATHANA DHARMA - OR ELSE, - PLEASE REFER TO ,MY SUGGESTION ABOVE.

AS FOR MR.BEN
WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO INSINUATE?
HOW DOES IT HAVE ANY FREAKIN RELEVANCE TO THIS POST?
KINDLY STOP MAKING SUCH ASSERTIONS ABOUT A DENOMINATORY RELIGION SO AS TO CLAIM THAT IN SPIRIT IT IS ETERNAL AND SO ON.
NO HUMAN RELIGION IS ETERNAL, ALL ARE SYSTEMATISED WAYS OF WORSHIPPING THE ABSOLUTE ACCORDING TO THE INDIVIDUAL PREFERENCES OF EACH PERSON- THEREOFORE MUCH SENSE WILL GO INTO SHAPING THE FUTURE OF THE WORLD IF PEOPLE FOLLOWED THEIR OWN RELIGION AND NOT SPENT TIME THINKING ABOUT THE OTHER MAN'S FAITH.
I HAV HEARD THIS STATEMENT ABOUT THE WORD BEING GOD AND LATER TAKING FORM ETC-
THE SAM ARGUMENT CAN BE ADVANCED USING THE GITA VAAKYA WHICH STATES
OM ITI EKAAKSHARAM BRAHMA- OM IS THE SINGLE SYLLABLE THAT IS VERILY THE ABSOLUTE.

KRISHNA,

I AM REALLY SORRY BUT THIS POST HAS BROUGHT ON COMMENTS THAT ARE NOT REQUIRED SO I HAD TO MAKE A FEW THINGS CLEAR.

SARVAM SRIKRISHNAARPANAMASTHU!

 

Blogger Anand Ramamoorthy said ... (10:08 PM) : 

AGAIN KRISHNA,

THIS IS FOR MR.BEN,

SIR, I HAVE NOTHING AGAISNT YOU , YOUR WORDS OR YOUR RELIGION,
I MERELY PUT FORTH THE OPINION THAT WE CAN DISCUSS SO MANY GENERAL THINGS ABOUT THE UNIVERSE WITHOUT HAVING TO DISCUSS DIFFERENT RELIGIONS AS THIS DISCUSSION ALMOST ALWAYS BREEDS CONFLICT.
AS LONG AS YOU FOLLOW WHATEVER YOUR FAITH IS AND LEAD A PRINCIPLED LIFE ALL PEOPLE REACH THE SAME ABSOLUTE.
I DIDN'T MEAN TO COMMENT STRONGLY BEFORE BUT I GUESS MY COMMENT IS STILL VALID ONLY IF YOU UNDERSTAND IT PROPERLY.

SARVAM SRIKRISHNAARPANAMASTHU!

 

Blogger krishna said ... (12:06 AM) : 

anandkumar....

Watever be the counter argument, I concur with Einstein's Words for Gandhiji

"Generations to come will scarcely believe that such a man in flesh and blood once trod upon this earth"."

and btw, as Anand had pointed out the way to God is only thru love and there should be nothing like "holy war". Ur blog title and ur primal attitude seems to be inclined towards ur interests in propagating a "holy war" .This is not different from the christian missionaries who claim their religions superiority.

"Brahmam is One" ..One might prefer to take a small or large tributary of the stream depending upon the his/her position in the rivers course.Eventually all the streams lead to the Ocean of Love. It would be only a foolish act to deride the
person who is taking a smaller tributary. Moreover such an act breeds contempt , which is definitely not the path to God. So, kindly refrain from such ideas. If u were born in texas or somewhere , wat would be ur stance??

dear arjuna,

Gandhi's simple and self-less life should always be in our minds. No wonder Einstein said that

"Generations to come will scarcely believe that such a man in flesh and blood once trod upon this earth"."

@ ben,

I don't appreciate crusadic opinions. I left a comment in ur post coz I liked the idea of love that u had conveyed from the Bible.

btw, just to clarify ur opinions, in the beginning , there existed NO religion. There was only one God, the supreme soul. Christ, Krishna, Allah,watever u name ,all are our ways to identify the God. Hence ,it doesnt make much of a sense to keep arguing about who is that God , who came first blab blab blab. Those might perhaps interest a young kid fascinated in theology.
So,kindly refrain from these kind of digressive and futile thoughts.


@anand.

Thanks buddy..

I was very impressed by seeing ur response. Actually, I didn't feel like commeting back coz I felt so bad about having to do that .but ur comments gave me some courage.:)

 

Blogger Anandkumar_V said ... (4:00 AM) : 

I m sorry for my comments.

Regards,
Anandkumar V

 

Blogger krishna said ... (6:08 PM) : 

Will be more glad if I see some positive change in u:)

 

Blogger Kasthuri Srinivasan said ... (12:14 PM) : 

Krishna,
I read your post somedays back but felt lazy in commenting. Very nice. Gandhi is a person whom I also admire. Its not easy to earn the name of "mahatma" unless one sincerely strives for perfection. This can be seen in his autobiography. Often I have seen Gandhi bashing which prompted me to post this :
http://kasthurisrinivasan.blogspot.com/2005/08/on-bashing-gandhi.html
It is easy to criticize but very difficult to understand things.

 

Blogger krishna said ... (10:08 PM) : 

Dear Kasthuri,

Thanks . I understand that at some point of time we are bound to get lazy and we can't comment back even if we want to.:)

On top of this there is also word verification that makes a commenters life even merrier;)

Truly, gandhiji has earned the title "Mahathma"

 

Blogger Venky Krishnamoorthy said ... (9:30 AM) : 

Great post.

 

Blogger krishna said ... (10:39 PM) : 

Thnks Venky

and welcome to aham brahmasmi:)

 

Blogger Saravana Kumar said ... (7:18 AM) : 

Hi Krish anandkumar and anand,

Just wanted to give my personal opinions on Gandhi. I have great regard for Gandhiji, its reflected by a pic of gandhi on my blog, I certainly think he is one of the greatest being who walked on earth in the recent ages.

But true there are certain things from his personality point of view which are not perfect from the viewpoint of Dharma.

Krishna Bhagavan himself says that action should not be avoided, and it so happens at times we need to fight for our freedom, non-violence as a concept works fine, but fighting doesn't always means violence. There are stages in his movement where he shouldn't have urged people to follow ahimsa, as a national leader he should have guided the people in explaining the meaning of Himsa and Ahimsa, Action and Inaction. because he had very good understanding of what gita is ...

and that is the reason I feel that the Godse s are equally great compared to Gandhi ...

Your views on this argument are welcome.

 

Blogger krishna said ... (12:08 AM) : 

Dear Saravana ,

Godse , a brahmin , is not supposed to do the task of a Kshatriya. Gandhi, even though a member of a third caste can be considered to be a member of an upper caste coz of his policy of ahimsa. Though one can debate on this policy of Gandhi on the path to freedom, I believe that it is pretty clear that Gandhi as an individual is far more superior to that of Godse , a Brahmin that did not maintain his brahminism by opting to go aggresive.

Also,I think a war or rebellion should be started only as a last resolute. Mahabharatha was started only as a last resolute. Only if adharma is so much uncontrollable.

Please bear if some of my words were aggresive or haughty. If so, I would like to invoke the grace of God to make my words HIS. If he talks for me, it can never be offensive.. :)

 

Blogger bhattathiri said ... (5:52 PM) : 

India was having a good cultural system I mean Sindhu - Ganga Civilization
and Nalanada-Taxila World first Universities based on equality and social justice with
all modern innovations which the modern scientists may wonder. But we all
lost due to the foriegn invasion. Am I right Sir. Let us hope that Sri.
Sankaracharya or Swami Vivakanada has to born again to bring back the glory.

 

post a comment
f