In the Hindu culture we take "sanyaasis" in a high regard. That trends does not end in just
respecting brahamachari religious leaders - jogis and babas, but it goes far beyond than that. We often elect them as our political leaders to assume the high posts. We don't have to go to far to see it, if you
just look at the current prime minister of India Narendra Modi. You get the picture. Technically,
PM Modi was married, but he denounced it without his wife's consent (maybe he didn't think it was
necessary to bother because it is clear that he is the man in the marriage) and led a brahamachari
life. Again it was a different time and the people of India, 1.3 billion people, cut him a slack, so who
am I to judge. The last Nepali prime minister Sushil Koirala was also a brahamachari. The list
does not end here - Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Krishna Prasad Bhattarai etc.

I wonder that why we are so fond of these brahamachari leaders. I understand that brahamachari is a choice and a tough choice. You have to give up material life. You can't marry. Hence, you are denouncing everything that a family has to provide company, love and comfort. Obviously for these people their purpose is/was bigger than anything in this world. Therefore, they decided to embark the spiritual life of brahamachari. I have a lot of respect for their sacrifices and simplicity of life.

However, I wonder that if they have an experience to be the top leaders. They don't have
a family. They have no experience dealing with wife and kids. As most of the married people know
that how hard it is to keep all of your family members happy. It requires a lot of patience, love
and most importantly compromise. And, these brahamachari people are used to doing things
their way. Leading the diverse people with different needs requires ability to compromise.
I wonder if a brahamachari has a tendency to be a little hard headed. This passion can definitely
be useful during a revolution, but can it also make them one sided. Hitler was unmarried until the day that he committed suicide.

Why do "you" like brahamachari people?

There are four "Purusarthas" (पुरुसार्थ) in Vedic Sanatan dharma.
1) Dharma
2) Artha
3) Kama
4) Moksha

Dharma is the righteousness (duty), Artha is earning wealth without violating dharma, Kama means the fulfillment of genuine desires without violating dharma, and Moksha is the final liberation.
The four stages of life in Vedic Sanatan Dharma are called "आश्रम." They are:
1) Brahmacharya
2) Grahasta
3) Vanaprastha
4) Sannyasi

All these four stages of life are necessary to understand life. Brahmacharya is the stage of student life where a student goes to his guru's place and studies Vedas for 12 years. It is a period of strict self-discipline, sense-control, strict celibacy, study of the self, study of the meaning of existence, etc. Then after this, the student life is over and a person enters a Grahasta life where he/she marries and starts living a family life. Family life is not an easy life. All the complexities of life can be experienced in this stage of life. Without this stage, a person's mind won't understand what life is. Therefore, in Vedic Sanatan Dharma this stage of life is prescribed if one wants to experience what life is. Then comes Vanaprastha. This stage starts when you reach 50 years of life. In this stage you are supposed to start living a life of seclusion and slowly move away from worldly affairs. And the final stage of life is "Sannyasi" which is a total renunciation for the final aim of life: self-realization and attainment of Moksha. The final stage can be confusing because what is it that we need to renounce? Are the modern so called sannyasi like Modi, Sushil Koirala really a true sannayasi? Not at all. They are still attached with worldly affairs and cannot be considered a sannyasi according to Vedic codes of conduct. A true Sannyasi is free from all attachments. What is the use of going to jungle and meditating for 20 years and still worrying about your country, wife, wealth, and children? Therefore, sannyasi means mental detachment from the world itself.

Nice insights @ujl. So is it because Bramachari has less motivation to be less corrupt? They don't have the family to accumulate the wealth for once they assume the post.

There is a very wrong understanding of the word 'Brahmachari' in our present day society. Who is a Brahmachari? Brahmachari is not just one who is a celibate. I can restrain myself from sex and marriage and still not be a Brahmachari.

Brahmachari is that person who has chosen the path of Brahmacharya. What is Brahmacharya? Brahmacharya is composed of two words, "Brahma" + "Char". Brahma means the 'Absolute Reality' and Char means 'to move.' So, a Brahmachari is that person who is moving towards the Absolute Reality day and night. Celibacy is just one part of Brahmachari, not the whole. In fact, celibacy is a byproduct of the process of Brahmachari. Celibacy is an automatic effortless byproduct of the path of Brahmacharya. In modern society when people think of Brahmachari, they only think about a person who doesn't do sex and who is an unmarried person. This is not the whole truth. The main important thing behind Brahmachari is that the person is engaged very intensely on knowing Brahma (The Absolute Reality). And this includes a total renunciation from worldly affairs.

In Patanjali Yoga Sutra, Maharsi Patanjali doesn't describe what Brahmachari means but he describes that by becoming Brahmachari one attains great vigor and strength. In yogic culture, the yogis have discovered that there is an intimate relation between Mind, Semen, and Prana (Energy). When you control one, the other two are automatically controlled. For example, if you control the mind, the other two, semen and prana are automatically controlled. If you control semen, the other two, mind and energy are automatically controlled. So, to move towards Brahma (the Absolute), one needs a great deal of spiritual energy and this energy is called "Ojas" in Sanskrit. When semen is controlled, this energy is converted into spiritual energy called Ojas through the process of sex sublimation. So, yogis and sannyasins who are seeking God become Brahmachari because through brahmacharya, they gain ojas. Brahmacharya also includes refraining oneself from sexual thoughts. It also means daily study of Vedic scriptures. It also means daily study of the field. Now, what is this field? In Bhagavad Gita, lord Krishna talks immensely about this field. This field is the human body in individual level, and the entire cosmos in cosmic level. The closest field for you to study is this human body. So, Brahmacharya starts with knowing the sensations of your own body. And then moving gradually towards cosmic body (know as Virat Purusha) and then finally knowing that there is no such thing as individual body and cosmic body independent of each other. Then, a complete silence is experienced. Brahmacharya is this process of moving towards the absolute silence.

Please, don't connect Modi, Sushil, and modern day politicians with the pure idea of Brahmacharya. True knowledge only comes from direct experience. Just wearing a yellow and an orange rob around your body doesn't make you a Brahmachari, and also just becoming a celibate doesn't make one a Brahmachari.

@uji where did u get all these information? good insights.
any thing u relate? practise!

@ thanks for sharing the knowledge! We really appreciate the knowledge here in Sajha. For me that is the scary thing that Bramachari's goal is to move towards the absolute truth. Now the question is what is the absolute truth? According to Bhagvad gita the absolute truth is self realization and liberation from the material thoughts. If PM Modi thinks that he is moving towards "the absolute truth" by voicing for equality in Nepal, what is stopping him from lifting the blockade until he finds his "absolute truth". India, alike Nepal, is a very diverse country. He could be thinking for the harmony and peace in the region this stand is important. And PM Modi has a high regard for the Bhagvad Gita. He gave a copy of the Bhagvad Gita as a gift to the Japanese PM. My point is that we human beings have tendency to dictate what is right and what is wrong. We have created laws to define some of them, but when it is a matter of a greater good how do you determine that.