Posted:
Most of our members have rightly and collectively pointed out that, in this matter, asking women to vacate their positions merely to accommodate a religious group is not only discriminatory but also an insult to their dignity and equality.
The Eiffel Tower management should never have agreed to such a request in the first place. Asking female staff to vacate their positions to accommodate a religious group was inappropriate and discriminatory.
Hinduism is revered as a unity of diverse beliefs, traditions, and practices, beautifully represented by the timeless ideal of "Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam".... the world is one family.
No Rishi or saint, to my knowledge, ever kept women away from their ashrams or imposed restrictions simply because of their presence. If the rules of a particular sect require women to be kept away from its premises, that should certainly be respected.... yes, as long as the members of that sect themselves remain within the boundaries of their hermitages, ashrams, or akhadas. The issue arises when such sect-specific practices are expected to be imposed upon public spaces or upon others who do not follow those traditions.
Please note that I am not comparing one sect with another, nor am I judging the practices of any particular sect. I am only referring to the diversity that exists within Hindu traditions and trying to understand how different sects follow their own customs and disciplines.
For example, the Naga Sadhus have their own distinctive rules and traditions. They have renounced material possessions, including clothing, and they roam in their natural state (Nude) and traditionally carry weapons such as tridents and swords, particularly during religious occasions such as the sacred baths at the Kumbh. These practices are part of their spiritual tradition and are respected within the appropriate religious context. However, if they were to travel to a foreign country, move freely through public streets in the same manner, and justify it simply by saying, "This is our custom," it would not necessarily be accepted by the society or authorities of that country. Being a religious or cultural practice does not automatically place it above the laws and social norms of the land.
Yet, the Naga tradition is also a part of the broad Hindu religious landscape. Most Naga Sadhus belong to Shaiva traditions, and they generally live and practise within their akhadas and designated religious spaces.
Hinduism encompasses countless traditions, customs, philosophies, and cultures. They may differ greatly in their external practices, but the ultimate spiritual goal remains the same, to seek and realise God, the almighty....not to harass, humiliate, demean, or infringe upon the dignity or rights of another human being.
Our Vedic tradition also contains a rich history of recognising the intellectual and spiritual capabilities of women. Women were not inherently regarded as sinful or culpable merely because they were women, nor were they treated as obstacles in a man's spiritual life. Women such as Gargi and Maitreyi are remembered as learned seekers and participants in philosophical discourses/ discussions.
Therefore, diversity within Hinduism should be understood with respect and sensitivity. One's religious freedom deserves respect, but so does the freedom, dignity, and lawful rights of others. When we step outside our own religious spaces and enter a public place or another country, we must respect the laws, customs, and social norms of that land.
Here the main event in question needs to be judged by checking both the sides in order to understand how & why things have happened. Reaction posted here is just by reading about one side. See what other side is saying. Then reach a conclusion. It's a trend to bash a faith. Though Sanatan dharm is huge. Baps is just one sect. Many sects are part of Sanatan including very large no of people not belonging any of these popular sects. They have their own way of connecting with God & most of them are happy.
Keeping woman out of site of Sadhus is an outdated concept. Is such an incident seen in past few years? At least I haven't seen or read about it. Hence it's difficult for me to even believe that such demand was made. Having limited interaction & keeping woman out of site are 2 different things. Even Sadhvis of any sect can demand to keep men at distance or out of site. Out of respect men agree & keep women associates with them. It's considered normal. Till now no man has raised voice on renounced women & made an issue out of it.
Well coming back to keeping woman away, the real scenario is known to the ET authorities & BAPS who communicated with each other. Till an honest investigation results are out.
As far as I am concerned, am not part of any sect. But I do respect their Pramukh Swami, whom even past President Abdul Kalam used to meet & had high regards for his Spiritual achievements.
Hindu culture has never propagated the degradation or humiliation of women; on the contrary, it has traditionally upheld their dignity, knowledge, and rightful place in society.
Our Vedas gave equal rights to women and gave them the right to learn Vedas and Upanishads, they never treated women as sin or culprits in a male's life.
Yajurveda (26.2):
The Yajurveda mandates that the beneficial words of the Vedas are meant for everyone, including women without distinction.
This Sanskrit Sloka was famously cited/ quoted by scholars like Swami Dayananda Saraswati to prove that women and all social classes have an absolute right to know the spiritual and scriptural wisdom.
यथेमां वाचं कल्याणीमावदानि जनेभ्यः ।
ब्रह्मराजन्याभ्यां शूद्राय चार्याय च स्वाय चारणाय च ॥
तन्मयोऽयं कामः समृध्यतामुप मादो नमतु ॥
This mantra is one of the most widely cited verses proving the universality of the Vedas. It emphasises that spiritual knowledge and truth belong to all humanity without any discrimination based on caste, class, gender, or origin.
Atharvaveda (11.5.18)
ब्रह्मचर्येण कन्या युवानं विन्दते पतिम् ।
अनड्वान् ब्रह्मचर्येणाश्वो घासं जिगीषति ॥
In Vedic philosophy, Brahmacharya does not imply sexual abstinence; it primarily represents the period of life dedicated to rigorous learning, acquiring wisdom, and developing self-mastery for both, men and women.
This specific mantra is frequently cited by scholars to illustrate the importance placed on female education in Vedic society. It suggests that, just as young men were expected to complete their education, young women were encouraged to pursue and complete their education, cultivating knowledge, wisdom, and spiritual understanding, much like those who chose the path of renunciation.
Vedic learning was not founded on a rigid separation of male and female students. The Vedic tradition includes learned women and female seers, demonstrating that women were not inherently excluded from the pursuit of knowledge. The Rishis did not follow a blanket rule that divided Vedic learning into separate spheres for men and women.
https://sreenivasaraos.com/2012/09/04/rig-veda-position-of-women-22/
Here the main event in question needs to be judged by checking both the sides in order to understand how & why things have happened. Reaction posted here is just by reading about one side. See what other side is saying. Then reach a conclusion. It's a trend to bash a faith. Though Sanatan dharm is huge. Baps is just one sect. Many sects are part of Sanatan including very large no of people not belonging any of these popular sects. They have their own way of connecting with God & most of them are happy.
Keeping woman out of site of Sadhus is an outdated concept. Is such an incident seen in past few years? At least I haven't seen or read about it. Hence it's difficult for me to even believe that such demand was made. Having limited interaction & keeping woman out of site are 2 different things. Even Sadhvis of any sect can demand to keep men at distance or out of site. Out of respect men agree & keep women associates with them. It's considered normal. Till now no man has raised voice on renounced women & made an issue out of it.
Well coming back to keeping woman away, the real scenario is known to the ET authorities & BAPS who communicated with each other. Till an honest investigation results are out.
As far as I am concerned, am not part of any sect. But I do respect their Pramukh Swami, whom even Abdul Kalam Aazad used to meet & had high regards of.
Nobody is bashing faith though ? If anything people are worried that faith or people who follow it would be targetted because of this scandal. That these monks belong to one particular sect doesn't make any difference because their organisation very much operates under the umbrella of generic Hinduism with their numerous temples around the world where Vedic rituals are performed. So when something like this happens ,most people ,let alone the average westerner,aren't going to sit down and dissect the differences between this sect and the various other sectors. The organisation explicitly identifies with the Hindu faith and in the Prime Minister's address where he endorsed it and its temple he did not refer to them as a fringe organisation with extreme beliefs ( like his party did when they dropped Nupur Sharma like a hot potato after the Saudis got mad over her comments on Mo ) . He explicitly referred to BAPS as " distinguished representatives of the Sanathan tradition ". Which is why it's very important that he issues an apology making it clear that India does not endorse sexism ,at home or abroad.
As for hearing both sides , to begin with one has to be naive to think the female staff that protested came up with a huge conspiracy to tarnish Hinduism and claimed they were made to stay away. Because , by doing so they'd be jeopardising their equation with their employer , they stand the risk of getting fired. Secondly BAPS does a history of casteism and extreme sex based segregation so it's not fair to say anyone who suspected this was true was doing it in bad faith , no pun intended. These monks literally avoid the presence of women , one of the vows drafted by their founder requires them to never directly look at women. Do you still want to give them the benefit of the doubt just because they've issued an ' apology ' with caveats ?
Look at what liberiangirl shared. The baps temple in her city has seperate seating arrangements for men and women. Which is fine. Men sit on the left side ,women in the right and everybody thinks of God. Right ? Nope. The women have to sit at the back. This again points to men not having to see women. Theres no way these monks went to the Eiffel with their pelvic girdles thinking they'd have minimal interactions with the waitresses there when they ..ermm ordered their super sattvic food ? right in the middle of a city notorious for adultery of all things lol.
To be frank, I never felt like visiting baps temple. They have many followers with enough funds. They do genuine social work during calamities. People like it specially house holders due to their keep away from vices, bad habits like drinking, smoking policies. So money is not wasted & the family is happy.
Regarding renunciation, why is it required? One can be a house holder & persue his/ her spiritual aspirations. After renunciation s0meone has to take responsibility of your stay, food, clothes etc. For that they depend on their sanstha- baps & there is one more sect. To support them once again an institution is required, money, land etc are involved. It's like going in another version of sansaar only. They follow outdated rules.
Here the main event in question needs to be judged by checking both the sides in order to understand how & why things have happened. Reaction posted here is just by reading about one side. See what other side is saying. Then reach a conclusion. ...
That's what I find the most important thing: the right and truthful informations before making a judgement about both parties involved.
The only sure thing one got to know (because of the strike) is the questionable conduct of the management.
However, even though those from the Monks' side scheduling the Eiffel Tour visit may have asked for/demanded/requested to accommodate a restricted view of women stuff, the decision makers had been on SETE's side alone. In this exact case, I won't criticise the monks 'ad hoc' as I don't think that - asking or not - they would have had the 'power' to go against a strict "no" from the French side... they just tried (in whichever way).
I read about that the management accepted having done a mistake but I think, the real answer for the why is Money...
The decision was made at the management level as if it would be a purely organizational measure. Unfortunately, in such hierarchies, it is not customary to discuss operational directives with employees beforehand. The management rightly assumed that the women-stuff would protest which would entail a financial loss. So, the operational leadership decided to present the women-stuff with a 'fait accompli' and push through the instructions at the very last minute on Saturday morning via an official directive expecting that an internal reallocation of workstations (e.g., moving women to offices or side rooms and men to the elevators) could be implemented smoothly as a purely logistical procedure.
As I think that this VIP-private visit of a 100 people group (in Paris for the temple) got well paid and the management knew that - according to the French understanding - the public sphere (which the Eiffel Tour belongs to) must never adapt to the rules of a religious group - especially not when those rules violate fundamental rights, the fact remains that the proceeding was done in an autocratic way - without respect for the concerned women-stuff and not in accordance to the French employment laws and constitutional values.
Originally posted by: WormikaGrubby
Nobody is bashing faith though ? If anything people are worried that faith or people who follow it would be targetted because of this scandal. That these monks belong to one particular sect doesn't make any difference because their organisation very much operates under the umbrella of generic Hinduism with their numerous temples around the world where Vedic rituals are performed.
They won't be targeted. Only their followers takes them seriously not orhers as they believe in different sects or no sect. Even westerners know about this as they have seen different sects of Sanatan in their countries. Some westerners follow Sanatan too. They follow the life style as it is satwik. They follow it better then us at times.
They won't be targeted. Only their followers takes them seriously not orhers as they believe in different sects or no sect. Even westerners know about this as they have seen different sects of Sanatan in their countries. Some westerners follow Sanatan too. They follow the life style as it is satwik. They follow it better then us at times.
I agree ,they do follow it better than us at times.
Regarding sects, no , the average French person is highly unlikely to know or care about the differences and similarities. The ones who follow or are familiar with Hinduism are a minority. So the rest are just gonna see this as an outrageous act of disrespect by Hindus from India. It would be promptly used by the anti immigration/far right crowd to whip up prejudice. And when the PM himself has introduced this cult to the French as ambassadors of Hinduism , the sect thing doesn't matter. An unconditional apology from the Indian govt is very much needed . But what do we expect from a govt that excluded the president of the country ,who happens to be both female and Dalit ,from the inaugural ceremony at the new Parliament .
And the company should apologise to the female employees for entertaining this wretched request.
There are serious questions surrounding BAPS's record of labour practices and its treatment of workers. The recent France 24 report on a former BAPS temple worker in the United States....who regained his freedom from this BAPS group's illtreatment but continues to seek justice, adds another important dimension to the discussion.
How a former BAPS temple worker in the US got his freedom, but still seeks justice--
Every viral video represents a glimpse of someone's personal life, reminding us that there are real stories behind the screens; those are...
Cricket
Anupamaa
15