Comments on: Entry of Non-Hindus in Guruvayoor http://varnam.org/blog/2006/01/entry_of_non_hindus_in_guruvay/ History, Current Affairs & Books Sat, 19 Sep 2009 20:39:01 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: kannan http://varnam.org/blog/2006/01/entry_of_non_hindus_in_guruvay/comment-page-1/#comment-5490 kannan Mon, 05 Jan 2009 09:28:10 +0000 http://varnam.org/blog/?p=1009#comment-5490 i dont no how to check the religion of a person....they can only check the dress code and all. if any of my friends' who s very interested to see the temple, surly i will guide him. what these idiots can do then, they can ban only famous people. all human who love guruvayoorappan can be able to enter the temple...we need a law like that. luckily they did not ban the voice of yesudas inside the temple. i dont no how to check the religion of a person….they can only check the dress code and all. if any of my friends’ who s very interested to see the temple, surly i will guide him. what these idiots can do then, they can ban only famous people. all human who love guruvayoorappan can be able to enter the temple…we need a law like that. luckily they did not ban the voice of yesudas inside the temple.

]]> By: sreekumar http://varnam.org/blog/2006/01/entry_of_non_hindus_in_guruvay/comment-page-1/#comment-2038 sreekumar Wed, 18 Apr 2007 12:03:49 +0000 http://varnam.org/blog/?p=1009#comment-2038 It is true that all temples to be opened for all the people, because none of them belong to hiindus alone, it is ruled and managed by govt, in Kerala, tamil nadu as well in karnataka and AP. Therefore not only the temples but also the sanctum sanctorium to be opened to all the people, who want see, enter, do pooja, take photos or have fun there. Further it is a racial and cast based discrimination not allowing people inside sanctum sanctorium. I also suggest another secular suggestion is that the prasadams where desigend by bramins as thier food, the lower cast foods are not served as prasadam, why this discrimination. Those Belong to Paraya cast eats beef from age unkown, why not include it in the prasadam. This is again a racial discrimination . It is true that all temples to be opened for all the people, because none of them belong to hiindus alone, it is ruled and managed by govt, in Kerala, tamil nadu as well in karnataka and AP. Therefore not only the temples but also the sanctum sanctorium to be opened to all the people, who want see, enter, do pooja, take photos or have fun there. Further it is a racial and cast based discrimination not allowing people inside sanctum sanctorium. I also suggest another secular suggestion is that the prasadams where desigend by bramins as thier food, the lower cast foods are not served as prasadam, why this discrimination. Those Belong to Paraya cast eats beef from age unkown, why not include it in the prasadam. This is again a racial discrimination .

]]> By: shiva http://varnam.org/blog/2006/01/entry_of_non_hindus_in_guruvay/comment-page-1/#comment-2037 shiva Fri, 27 Jan 2006 03:42:09 +0000 http://varnam.org/blog/?p=1009#comment-2037 Indian Xian, Are you using a common standard of pilgrimage applicable across systems of belief? I don't use the term religion for Hinduism since it is not one. Could the question whether a shrine is a pilgrimage destination be left to Hindus themselves? For my motehr-in-law visiting the small Pillayar Kovil at the corner of my street in Madras was a pilgrimage. Being from Bengal she had never been to a mandir like that. For me visiting Siddhi Vinayak in Bombay for the first time was a pilgrimage. Indian Xian,

Are you using a common standard of pilgrimage applicable across systems of belief? I don’t use the term religion for Hinduism since it is not one. Could the question whether a shrine is a pilgrimage destination be left to Hindus themselves? For my motehr-in-law visiting the small Pillayar Kovil at the corner of my street in Madras was a pilgrimage. Being from Bengal she had never been to a mandir like that. For me visiting Siddhi Vinayak in Bombay for the first time was a pilgrimage.

]]> By: IndianXian http://varnam.org/blog/2006/01/entry_of_non_hindus_in_guruvay/comment-page-1/#comment-2036 IndianXian Wed, 25 Jan 2006 03:53:44 +0000 http://varnam.org/blog/?p=1009#comment-2036 My point of contention is merely the inappropriate comparison in Rajeev's post. Mecca and Medina are pilgrimage centers - I haven't seen any of my Hindu friends describe their going to Guruvayoor, a "pilgrimage", unlike going to Sabarimala. I don't see the difference between Guruvayoor, and say Tirupati, for instance, (apart from the deities worshipped and yummy laddoos) and I was merely curious. <p> Reform is always better when it comes from within rather than by diktat. It is upto the temple authorities to decide on criterion of admission and in my opinion, they are well within their rights to do whatever they please. </p> <p> Congratulations on a great and informative blog.</p> My point of contention is merely the inappropriate comparison in Rajeev’s post. Mecca and Medina are pilgrimage centers – I haven’t seen any of my Hindu friends describe their going to Guruvayoor, a “pilgrimage”, unlike going to Sabarimala. I don’t see the difference between Guruvayoor, and say Tirupati, for instance, (apart from the deities worshipped and yummy laddoos) and I was merely curious.

Reform is always better when it comes from within rather than by diktat. It is upto the temple authorities to decide on criterion of admission and in my opinion, they are well within their rights to do whatever they please.

Congratulations on a great and informative blog.

]]> By: JK http://varnam.org/blog/2006/01/entry_of_non_hindus_in_guruvay/comment-page-1/#comment-2035 JK Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:03:29 +0000 http://varnam.org/blog/?p=1009#comment-2035 IndianXian, Guruvayoor temple is a holy place for Hindus and actually there is no need to permit anyone else to enter, just like in Mecca. But then there is some reformists who want anyone who believe to be allowed to enter and already it is happening in temples like Sabarimala. IndianXian, Guruvayoor temple is a holy place for Hindus and actually there is no need to permit anyone else to enter, just like in Mecca. But then there is some reformists who want anyone who believe to be allowed to enter and already it is happening in temples like Sabarimala.

]]> By: IndianXian http://varnam.org/blog/2006/01/entry_of_non_hindus_in_guruvay/comment-page-1/#comment-2034 IndianXian Mon, 23 Jan 2006 04:48:18 +0000 http://varnam.org/blog/?p=1009#comment-2034 Rajeev's analogy to the Pope's "private" chapel and Mecca are laughable at best. The Pope's "private" chapel is meant for the Pope and the people that serve in his "household". Mecca on the other hand is the holiest place for the muslims that go on a pilgrimage and therefore non-Muslims are not allowed in the city. Guruvayoor should be compared with St. Peters Cathedral; unless, of course, Rajeev is implying that Guruvayoor is also a "private" temple of its priests ;). <p> Usually the parents and priests meet before the "baptism" to talk about the responsibilities of the parents. During "baptism", the parents are asked if they will bring their child up in a Christian home. It is very rare for a priest to refuse "baptism" - often, it is "come back when you are ready".</p> Rajeev’s analogy to the Pope’s “private” chapel and Mecca are laughable at best. The Pope’s “private” chapel is meant for the Pope and the people that serve in his “household”. Mecca on the other hand is the holiest place for the muslims that go on a pilgrimage and therefore non-Muslims are not allowed in the city. Guruvayoor should be compared with St. Peters Cathedral; unless, of course, Rajeev is implying that Guruvayoor is also a “private” temple of its priests ;) .

Usually the parents and priests meet before the “baptism” to talk about the responsibilities of the parents. During “baptism”, the parents are asked if they will bring their child up in a Christian home. It is very rare for a priest to refuse “baptism” – often, it is “come back when you are ready”.

]]> By: JK http://varnam.org/blog/2006/01/entry_of_non_hindus_in_guruvay/comment-page-1/#comment-2033 JK Thu, 19 Jan 2006 16:25:51 +0000 http://varnam.org/blog/?p=1009#comment-2033 root, I have add a link to his post also. root,

I have add a link to his post also.

]]> By: root http://varnam.org/blog/2006/01/entry_of_non_hindus_in_guruvay/comment-page-1/#comment-2032 root Thu, 19 Jan 2006 05:52:08 +0000 http://varnam.org/blog/?p=1009#comment-2032 Rajeev Srinivasan thinks the other way JK. <a href="http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2006/01/guruvayur-temple-and-counseling-in.html" rel="nofollow"><a href="http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2006/01/guruvayur-temple-and-counseling-in.html" rel="nofollow">http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2006/01/guruvayur-temple-and-counseling-in.html</a></a> Rajeev Srinivasan thinks the other way JK.

http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2006/01/guruvayur-temple-and-counseling-in.html

]]> By: Anand http://varnam.org/blog/2006/01/entry_of_non_hindus_in_guruvay/comment-page-1/#comment-2031 Anand Wed, 18 Jan 2006 03:22:53 +0000 http://varnam.org/blog/?p=1009#comment-2031 jk -- I agree with what you say. If atheists like me can enter a temple, I think it makes sense to allow true devotees entry irrespective of their religion. Incidentally, Rediff (& hence Bhavane) is wrong. That minister is not a Marxist. He belongs to the Janata Dal. jk — I agree with what you say. If atheists like me can enter a temple, I think it makes sense to allow true devotees entry irrespective of their religion.

Incidentally, Rediff (& hence Bhavane) is wrong. That minister is not a Marxist. He belongs to the Janata Dal.

]]>