|
|  |
| |
|
| | The Chennai Network Network is not currently active and cannot accept new posts | | Sanathana Dharma - Part II | Views: 12584 | | May 31, 2006 6:13 am | | Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # | 
Gyro | | Bharat,
The purpose of foods is to get energy to carry out our day to day activities. The energy should not be overdosed or under dosed. ie. The body should not strain too much to take the energy from food (Tamasic foods) and at the same time should not be over stimulated to convert the energy (Rajasic)from food. The process should be slow & steady which the body can do it naturally & normally to convert the food into energy (Satvic).
All meat food ( Non-vegetarian) and alcoholic drinks are considered as Tamasic food. One will feel lethargic after finish tamasic food. Even to have very good sex our body should be lightweight with clear energy. We show our strength only to soft animals that do not have the energy to fight with human beings. Hence we catch them and cook the meat. Any one is courageous enough to catch forest animals like tigers & lion and cook them to eat? Is it not injustice that we do it for soft animals? Besides this we consider our stomach as graveyard of animals by keep on accumulating meats. (Non-veg eaters kindly excuse me)
Rajasic food such as coffee, tea, spicy foods etc that stimulates our body immediately beyond the normal capacity of our body. Like for an example if a horse has a capacity to run 60 km per hour healthily, we suddenly make it run fast (100 km per hour) in the middle so the continuity is lost. On the long run it will tire very soon and finally even the normal course of duration is not completed.
All fresh fruits, vegetables and vegetarian foods (except onion and garlic) are satvic foods. Even satvic food should not be eaten to the full stomach. We can’t consider our stomach as godown to keep storing foods. Half of the stomach should be filled with food, balance quarter is with water and rest quarter is left free for air.
V.K.L. Raamanathan Private Reply to Gyro | | May 31, 2006 6:20 am | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Human beings make the manifested gods. So, some might have portrayed as they want. King Sibi need not have to be a non-vegetarian to fight in the war. All the great warriars such as Arjuna, Bema, Karna, Doronachariyar, Beeshmar etc are vegetarians. Elephant that eats only vegetarian food has much more strength than the tiger, which always eat non-veg food. A tiger can fight only 3 hours whereas an elephant can fight 3 days continuously.
The Pandavas are five parts of Indhiran. The fame, strength, energy and beauty of Indiran born as Dharmar, Beema, Arjuna, Sahadevan & Mahadevan respectively. (The beauty is divided into two parts and took birth as Sahadevan & Mahadevan). The wife of Indhiran born as Drowpathi. That is the reason why Drowpathi has five husbands (numerically). To defeat and kill Virudhrasuran, Indiran lied and hence due to that sin he had to born as five parts in earth.
Eventhough Pandavas were humiliated in front of all they were not trying to gamble with Duriyodhana and abuse Duriyodhana's wife. If Drowpathy had laughed at Duriyodhana and he was humiliated then he could have asked her to apology failing which declared war. This is what makes the different between Padavas and Duriyodhanas. But Dharma was invited for Gambling. As per the king rule if someone calls for gambling they should not refuse. So Dharmar had to accept. But Pandavas always went by chathriya dharma. After 13 years of vanavasam Pandavas asked their share that is half of the kingdom. When refused they asked atleast five towns or five villages or five grounds (each one for five pandavas) that also was not given. When all the doors were closed Lord Krishna planned for Gurchethra war.
As a token of love to the god (the idol) is decorated with flowers, sandal, Vibhodhi or gold ornaments. As it is a man made one, this kind of practice would vary place to place. What important here is, by looking at the god (idol) in such fashion, the spiritual energy of people hidden inside is accelerated. So, to move from body to soul (or from Material life to spiritual) these kind of materialistic approach (alangarithal) came as tradition I suppose.
V.K.L. RaamanathanPrivate Reply to Gyro | | May 31, 2006 6:47 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Also Part I of this topic is available in the following link:
http://www.ryze.com/posttopic.php?topicid=598540&confid=660
V.K.L. RaamanathanPrivate Reply to Gyro | | May 31, 2006 8:10 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | |
Ganesh on the below 2 statements you have said that someone who is self realized will not TALK.
But now you state that the ones who talked also walked their talk. How come you have changed your stance here? Pls clarify.
“May 01, 2006 7:51 am
Raam, How can one ever say that someone is "self realized" if that someone still have an urge to make people follow his /her/its philosophy?
May 25, 2006 9:48 am
Bharat, my whole point is if you have realized you will not talk ;)
May 30, 2006 1:41 pm
W3,
The ones you listed did not stop with talk.
They walked their talk or talked their walk.
Private Reply to Bharath Cola | | May 31, 2006 10:43 am | | Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # | 
Bharat P | | Ram,
Ok, I sort of understood that. But aparently there is no real list, is there?
Is mushroom a Sattvic, Rajasic or Tamasic food? (considering that it is a plant). What about seafoods like sea-cucumber, sea-urchin etc. And algae? Seaweeds?
Also, whats wrong with Garlic and Onion? Why are they Tamasic? I thought they were extremely good for health as per modern medicine.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | May 31, 2006 10:51 am | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | | I am once told that Garlic and Onion stimulates Sexual Harmones, is that why Raam? Private Reply to Bharath Cola | | May 31, 2006 11:09 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Is this a scientific fact or the overactive imagination of someone 3000 years back?
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | May 31, 2006 11:58 am | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # | 
Ganesh Ram | | W3,Thus is the state of confusion, But did I ever say that any of those you mentioned had "realized"? All I said was those talked about IT walked to achieve IT. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | May 31, 2006 12:15 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat,
Mushroom is sattvic food as it is vegetarian food. If it is cooked with spicy items it becomes Rajasic food. If you boil Mushroom into hot water and drink its soup it is sattvic.
The plants in the sea are different from plants on land. They are able to live under water. So, I would say that the sea foods mentioned by you would come under Tamasic.
Garlic & Onion are not tamasic. It would be Rajasic food as it adds spicy to the food. As WWW mentioned Garlic & Onion stimulates Sexual Harmones. But this can't be compared with Edegra, Caverta or Penegra to prove the effect scientifically. As Sattvic food are considered as yoga foods, desired bachelors who wants to completely avoid sexual thoughts or simulation (by way of food) should avoid Garlic & Onion. When science does research it does not take yogis into account. So, they certify garlic & onion as antibiotic & good for health which I don't deny, as we all live as ordinary human beings.
V.K.L. RaamanathanPrivate Reply to Gyro | | May 31, 2006 12:49 pm | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | | Ganesh - Its not about what you said, its about what is being discussed and what you say in that reference to context.
So what exactly did you mean by "walking their talk"? Was it with reference to this subject or was it like an arrow shot in the blind...
the thread was about Bharat Pat, making a dig about "empty vessels make more noise" w.r.t of realised folks do not talk and my reply to that wherein globally accepted ppl (some of them strongly followed for their enlightened words and some for their path breaking leadership) who TALKed.
you butt into that and say something as a reply and now proclaim something else.
I hope we are having a healthy discussion and not a ego dig... Private Reply to Bharath Cola | | May 31, 2006 1:54 pm | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | W3-> IJ,
hmm.. so this is going to war of words. Well , then let it begin.
you said:
making a dig about "empty vessels make more noise" w.r.t of realised folks do not talk and my reply to that wherein globally accepted ppl (some of them strongly followed for their enlightened words and some for their path breaking leadership) who TALKed.
My take is exactly what I have said. Just because some people are globally recognized for their ideology DOES NOT mean that they have "realized".
Like I had said, they either were TALKING(aloud) about the path they are taking( The Walk)OR HAD TO WALK what they are TALKING about.
While Buddha's 8 fold path is an example of the former, The incidence in Adi Sankara's is a classic example for the latter. He had to live the life of a married man before continuing his argument.
And to your choice of words, you are at liberty to choose. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | May 31, 2006 4:27 pm | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Excellent Raam. But here are my counters.
Human beings make the manifested gods
and so did they about the path to realization. Therefore there cannot be a single way.
Elephant that eats only vegetarian food has much more strength than the tiger, which always eat non-veg food
That depends on the point of attack. If a tiger climbs from behind and hits the elephant on the head, then the tables are turned.
The Pandavas are five parts of Indhiran. The fame, strength, energy and beauty of Indiran born as Dharmar, Beema, Arjuna, Sahadevan & Mahadevan respectively
IMHO,Indiran is a position and not a single person. I remember reading this in one of Swami Vivekananda's lectures.
Assuming all what you have said as an explanation is true, it was not known in the period of Mahabaratha. All of these people were mortals. Also how did kunti knew about this? Reasons like what you have stated were all "cooked up" ( not in a bad sense) by the society with the passage of time to accept the godliness in these epics.
But Pandavas always went by chathriya dharma. After 13 years of vanavasam Pandavas asked their share that is half of the kingdom. When refused they asked atleast five towns or five villages or five grounds (each one for five pandavas) that also was not given. When all the doors were closed Lord Krishna planned for Gurchethra war.
But the war had been planned at the gambling time itself when draupadi said she will wash her hair with durchAdhanAs blood. Bheema was totally against putting draupadi as a pawn at the gambling.BharathiyAr renders, bheema's anger, this scene so well in his poem.
And for why the duruyOdhanAs did not ask for apology.what can I say, it was a man's world then as it is now I guess.(Not in a bad sense ). Also there would not have been an epic if there are NO twists and turns. Will there be?
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 01, 2006 8:39 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh,
Yes there is no single way. There are three ways viz Bakthi Yoga, Karma Yoga and Gyana yoga.
Tiger climbs from behind and hits elephant coz it is afraid of elephant strength. Otherwise it will fight face to face. This proves the fact that elephant is more powerful than Tiger. More than this I was talking of consistent of energy of elephant being a vegetarian animal.
If we assume that Indiran is a position and not a single person, it basically talks the quality of person to qualify for that post. That quality is divided into five and born as pandavas.
When Kunthidevi wanted to test the Manthra that is offered by muni Durvasa as varam and prayed the god Sun, as a fulfillment of that varam Karna was born. To identify Karna in the later stage Kunti sent Karna with specially made cloth that can be touched only by her. If other touches they will have feel of flame in their body. With this they both get identified.
As I had mentioned earlier once Mahabharath initially had 10,000 slogas only but now it is 1,20,000 slogas. So, as you said 1,10,000 slogas are cooked up ones. But the mention of Pandavas (from Indran) is from a Purana.
Beema challenged that he will beat Duriyodhana’s thigh and Drowpathi challenged that she sill reorganize her hair only after it is washed with Duchadhan’s blood. So their aim is only Duriyodhana & Duchadana. I said Lord Krishna is cause for war because, a king is not supposed to go as ambassador to another king. Whereas Krishna go as an ambassador on behalf of Padavas. Krishna’s aim is to provoke Duriyodhana to initiate the war. So, he talks in the saba in such a way that Duriyodhana should refuse all the demands. If Krishna had allowed someone to go as an ambassador he would have asked in the pleased manner & the demand (atleast five ground) would have fulfilled and thereby no war. But Krishna did not give room for that. (That is the reason why as per Jains philosophy Krishna will be in Hell as initiator of war).
Twists and turns are there in our life too. So it was in epic also as it is a real incident.
V.K.L. Raamanathan
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 01, 2006 12:58 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | | Ganesh
"The ones you listed did not stop with talk.
They walked their talk or talked their walk"
the above statement having the below explanation…
My take is exactly what I have said. Just because some people are globally recognized for their ideology DOES NOT mean that they have "realized".
Like I had said, they either were TALKING(aloud) about the path they are taking( The Walk)OR HAD TO WALK what they are TALKING about.
While Buddha's 8 fold path is an example of the former, The incidence in Adi Sankara's is a classic example for the latter. He had to live the life of a married man before continuing his argument.
************************************************************
To me the above mentioned 2 liner in lieu with Bharat Pat’s mordant statement EMPTY VESSELS MAKE MORE NOISE had a sarcastic reference, hence the choice of words.
Would appreciate if we keep the discussion to the subject and not the object who is discussing the subject.
Private Reply to Bharath Cola | | Jun 01, 2006 7:02 pm | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | IJ, hmmm... I understand. But reply was not sarcastic at all. Infact if you do see my reply was on subject with my latter post.
Of course, I do agree my attempt to become a valluvar look alike should stop with a long beard and not extend to writing couplets ;-).
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 01, 2006 7:20 pm | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Raam,
when I said there is no single way, I meant one cannot numerically quantify the number of ways.
The cod fish travels upstream , against the waterflow to lay eggs and dies. That is its nature. Not all fishes do but the cod does. This does not mean the COD is bolder than other fishes. Does it? Similarly the way tiger attacks cannot be compared to how an elephant manages itself.
In the case of drowpathy, it is indeed surprising a lady of that time will accept to such a life. Kunti might not really feel bad about sharing, for she had shared herself. But Drowpathy? It is also surprizing how a woman lived sans guilt having let her own child off.
Back to sanathana dharma. I am reading a book by on Dr.Wayne. he does public speaking and conducts courses. His take is, we need to shun our ego and get inspired to reach within our self. For we are no different from others and all of us are in a single super form of energy he calls the Spirit. He quotes Krishna,patanjali,Ramana maharishi, and a lot of other Indian philosophers/ super souls.
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 02, 2006 7:54 am | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh,
Draupathi was granted a boon (varam) by lord Brahma when she demanded for it and hence five husbands. Even Draupathi's father had to be convinced lot with the intricacies of it for marrying her daughter with five men.
The dialogues between Draupathi & Lord Brahma in this context are as follows:
Draupathi... a holy-birth .. since born from Fire... performed an arduous penance towards Brahma...
Brahma appeared before her... and asked on the Boon sought.
Draupathi replied "I being an unusual Human-Lady who have not undergone the Womb's Residence at all...
... but an offspring of the Holy- Fire. unlike any other creature on Earth ....
... I want to have my Husband to be of UNIQUE-MATCH for me."
.
"What do you mean by unique match of Husband?... Clarify."
He should be the Ideal Husband with FIVE GREAT MIGHTS ... to be Qualified as a King. as per our Sasthras.
" Can you elaborate on those Royal-mights you mean?"
My Husband must be...
(1) Well-knowledged Dharma-Sasthra expert... capable of rendering Royal- justice to the People.
(2) Must be of INVINCIBLE PHYSICAL-MIGHT to defeat any Earthly- Enemy
(3) Must be an UNCONQUERABLE WARRIOR in the Art of Bow & Arrow - Warfare and also possessing the Highest degree of Masculine Vitality
(4) With all such mights he must not DOMINATE over me,.... I being a weaker-sex as a Woman ...
.. and further he must be a SUPREME HANDSOME (of Masculine- Beauty)...
....so deeply AFFECTIONATE with me that he will sincerely SERVE for me.... on my commands.
(5)So Highly Spiritualistic that he can foresee the Future- events and possibilities in Life by means of his Divine- powers... such that he can be my Life-Guide.
Brahma said... " OK Granted... You are bestowed accordingly."
Draupathi was very happy that her Boon had been granted without any Hitch.
And she believed... she would get only such a Husband having all these in One,
... through her Fathers plan for selection of her Match
And when Arjuna won over the Competition.. She believed Arjunaa must be the EXPECTED FIVE IN ONE.... since he was Handsome with proven valour too.
But when the Trend of Marriage... developed towards Five-Husbands...
She got bewildered and prayed to Brahma with Tears...
"Oh God Brahma Should I conclude that you have cheated me?"
Brahma replied.. You have got now as you asked for... which I granted....
.. All those Five characters in the respective order.. You can find in these Pancha- Pandavas in the same oder.
" Oh God!....Is it a Mockery to have FIVE HUSBANDS for a Single Lady? I did not ask for Five... but only ONE having all the Complex- characters.
" Fist of all tell me... other than your unusual qualification by Non-birth Via Womb...are You Qualified enough to duly reciprocate as the FIT-WIFE.... matching... for at least anyone of these 5 characters?
Are you of so much Feminine- beauty like RATHI..to match Nakula...the most Handsome Manmatha on Earth.?
Are you the apt Dharma-conscious as much as Yudhishtra... or at least nearer to his?
Are you capable as a helping wife knowing Dhanur-sasthra due for Arjuna?
Are you Physically so mighty to Feminie-match the Mighty Bheema?.
Are you so spiritual enough to join with Sahadeva in his Yoga- knowledge?
Are you fit enough as the matching wife... to reciprocate a Loving- Husband volunteering to obey on your commonds as your servant
... which indirectly means that you dont find it wrong to command your husband... rather you want to COMMAND
...instead of RECIPROCATING the same to him with the TRUE WIFE'S LOVE... ..
So You do not deserve to be a matching-wife even to anyone of these ideal characters of Five Great Men. ...
However I granted your prayer... out of Kindness ...
... trusting that you will develop the due RECIPROCAL-QUALIFICATIONS. later ... by means of your subsequent efforts...
... to match YOURSELF for the UNUSUAL sort of Husband you sought for.
If you had duly developed yourselves so ... during this interim period..
... I would have CREATED such a TOP- FIVE- CHARACTERED Husband .. exclusively for you .as FIVE IN ONE.,
But I am disappointed to see... your lack of Endeavour... exhibiting your SELFISHNESS and GREED..
However these Five Husbands are destined for you... which you must not reject.... being my Graceful Sanction ...
(Even after marriage all the five did not live with Draupathi together. First year it is with Darmar, then Beema, Arjun, Sahadevan & Mahadevan respectively every year. There was an agreement that when Draupathi lives with one other four should not enter into that palace, unless it is very emergency).
V.K.L. Raamanathan
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 02, 2006 3:47 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Raam,
thanks for the post on drowpathy.
These stories(or the substories) highlight how our lifestyle had incidents were acceptable in the society though some are not today.
And therefore If we assume SD, by itself is all encompassing and timeless, the incidents in our epics seem to be a part of IT and therefore there is no good or bad, ethical, unethical eventhough some may seem contradictory.
And therefore to realize SD one has to be completely unaffected by the good and bad, the entity and non entity, the attributes and the lack of. This IMO,can happen only after death.
But INSPIRATION can happen at anytime in life. I would go with Dr.Dyer definition for Inspiration, which goes something like, "to be with the Spirit".Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 03, 2006 8:34 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh,
The realization of SD can happen to one even when they are alive like it happened to Budha, Ramakrishna Paramahamsar, Ramana Maharishi, Pattinathar, Ramalinga Adigalar etc. who were unaffected by the good and bad.
Actually there are two kinds of approach to analyse the facts of our scriptures.
Approach I: All the points discussed in SD or in our scriptures are imaginations followed by stories. This is a common approach because we come across lots of unbelievable incidents (like Draupathi was born out of fire) in it and hence our brain does not accept certain things that are uncommon and or not taught or not felt by us or not seen by us (magical powers). So, it gives us room to mockery the incidents that is narrated in our scriptures and strongly pushes us to believe that those all are cooked up stories.
Approach II: There is a possibility that things that is told in our scriptures or SD could be true, besides some stories that is added to simplify the messages. It is a difficult and uncommon approach.
I approached SD in both the ways. When I moved towards the first approach, always a question crops in my mind as why all great souls like Appar, Sundarar, Manickavachagar, Sambandar, Chandesvara Nayanar, Arivattaya Nayanar, Murkha Nayanar, Aryabatta, Swami Ramakrishna Paramahamsar, Swami Vivekanada, Adhi sankarar, Mathvachariyar, Ramanujar, Sri Ragavendrar and many more volunteered their whole life to SD if these all are meaningless cooked up stories. What were they trying to achieve through this? A comfortable life or huge wealth that comes generation after generation? None. Coz the rules are very stringent to lead life according to SD. I could not think that they would have simply wasted their life for unwanted things. (Even today we come across Mahesh Maharishi yogi, Sri Sri Ravisankar, Sri Dayanandha saraswathi swamigal etc. who live their life as per SD)
One will be amazed to know the facts of SD who has belief in it (approach II). Even simple dialogues will convey much more meaning than the actual one. Like ‘Edukavo, Korakavo’ by Duriyodhana when his wife was playing with Karna. When there are so many servants in the palace why should a king (duriyodhana) pick the spilled out pearls and thread it. Is it a king job? Actually one can pick up and thread the pearls through small hole only when there is no agitation in the mind. So, he symbolically conveys that he is not at all disturbed by the behavior of Karna, pulling his wife when she stood up after seeing the arrival of Duriyodhana.
When Pandavas live their life without deviating from the path of Dharma, why should they loose in the game of dice during gambling? Actually as per the nature or ethic of gambling only a clever should win. Duriyodhna was clever enough to start the game by saying that Saguni will dice in the game instead of him. Yudhistrar should have also told cleverly that if Saguni dice than on behalf of us Krishna would play the game. But he did not tell so and hence as per the ethic of gambling Pandavas lost in the game. (If they had won by employing Krishna in the game, the seed of war would have sowed in some other occasion). What I am trying to say is that even minute details like this are dealt in Mahabaratha. And same as the case with SD with much more details in micro and macro levels.
V.K.L. Raamanathan
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 05, 2006 1:30 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Raam,
I understand a faith based system will lead to realization. But my take is those are not the only ways. And I stick my take on realization happens only in death.
There is this story about Ramakrishna Pramahamsa( Cannot remember the context or the source from where I read this). It goes like someone placed a coin under the seat where RP sits to test him, and he got affected by it. This clearly shows that he was physically aware of the something that was under the seat. How then can I accept him to be realized?
Also, identifying people as "The Realized" quantifies and qualifies something that can neither be quantified nor be qualified. Don't you think so?
Beautiful explanation of "yedukavo kOrkavO". And that's what beats me when the person who was unaffected by that incident was the main character in the disrobing act. Or did he always treat women with such low dignity that it did not matter when karna did that to duriyodhanA's wife as he did(would do) for drowpathy?
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 06, 2006 6:54 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | GAnesh,
I agree your point on salvation. When you say it is 'death' I call it as ' no rebirth' status and that is their last birth on earth, whoever I claimed as self realised. I have no problem in accepting your theory if the meaning of yours and mine are same.
Good question on RP's status of mind when Swami Vivekanada, put a coin under the mat without anybody's knowledge, to test the guru. RP got a kind of electric shock when he tried to sleep on that mat. Swami Ramakrishna Paramahasa believed that money in any form is an obstacle in the process of spiritual growth. So to get away from materialistic possessions he used to keep coin in one hand & clumps of earth in the other hand and throw both in the river telling both were useless to realise the god. This idea was so deep rooted in the mind of Sri Ramakrishna that he could not even touch a coin without getting pain or reflex withdrawal of the hand. Later in his life he was unable even to touch any metal (knowingly or unknowingly). This is how his materialistic possession vanished completely. When I say he was unaffected by good and bad I am talking of his (spiritual) status of mind and not the physique. When I use a hard word to someone, his/her mind would get wound though there is no physical injury. In the similar way when someone's physique gets affected his mind still can experience calmness.
When you claim that identifying people as "The Realized" quantifies and qualifies something that can neither be quantified nor be qualified then how do you say that realization happens only in death. What is the yardstick to measure the self realisation of a death person?
That particular incident in Mahabharatha shows the true friendship of two friends. Nothing else.
V.K.L. Raamanathan
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 06, 2006 3:57 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | The idea of "Rebirth" is man made. If we think we are in the IT, then each one of us are reborn(physically) at some point of time. To put this in other words, we are in a "soup". We take different forms and that is all.
Coming back to "death". My reasoning is, only after I die, would I not be physically involved with materialistic things. Even if someone consciously think about me,it does not affect me after my death. And that is when, whatever and however I talk of it is realized. The knowledge or the lack thereof of "realization" itself is something I don't know.
And the very reason he was pained by coin,shows his materialistic nature. Even aversion to materials is materialistic, IMO.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 07, 2006 4:24 am | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Ganesh,
I guess at some point deep inside, everyone agrees that:
1. Life is eternal
2. The physical body dies.
So putting these two together, I guess they conclude that the only way both of the above work together is "re-birth". As you said, randomnly taking shapes based on "karma" - another shady concept.
So I guess "all" concepts, ideas, religions are man-made and so is the deity they worship.
Bharat
Private Reply to Bharat P | | Jun 07, 2006 7:26 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh,
All the sciences are also man made. However, there is reference to life after death in the Vedas. It is mentioned in:
a. Rigved Book no. 10, Hymn no. 16 verse no. 4
The unborn portion, burn that, AGNI, with thy heat; let thy flame, thy splendour, consume it; with those glorious members which thou hast given him, JATAVEDAS, bear him to the world (of the virtuous)”
(Rigved 10:16:4)
The Sanskrit word ‘Sukritam u Lokam’ means ‘the word of the virtuous or region of the pious, referring to the hereafter. The next verse i.e.
b. Rigveda Book 10 hymn 16 verse 5 says:
Putting on (Celestial) life, let the remains (of bodily like) depart: let him, JATAVEDAS be associated with a body.”
(Rigveda 10:16:5)
This verse too refers to a second life i.e. life after death.
II. It is mentioned in the Bhagvad Gita
As a person puts on new garments, giving up old ones, the soul similarly accepts new material bodies, giving up the old and useless.
(Bhagvad Gita 2:22)
III. The Doctrine of Re-birth is also described in Brihadaranyaka Upanishad:
As a Caterpillar which has wriggled to the top of a blade of grass draws itself over to a new blade, so does the soul, after it has put aside its body draws itself over to a new existence. (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4:4:3)
(The above is extracted from a website)
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 07, 2006 4:53 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Raam,
no denying on the origin of Science. In fact that is how we started this discussion. didn't we?
on a lighter note, this what you said,
a. Rigved Book no. 10, Hymn no. 16 verse no. 4
The unborn portion, burn that, AGNI, with thy heat; let thy flame, thy splendour, consume it; with those glorious members which thou hast given him, JATAVEDAS, bear him to the world (of the virtuous)”
implies that our vedic gurus were egg eaters.:)
back to the discussion
These verses show more of a want to get back the departed in some form. Which is somewhat of a consoling action in the departed's household. Also when I am IT and IT prevails, then where is the question of rebirth? And how could we be sure or not sure, that , the so called departed "soul" did not enter\transform into another?
as for the quote from Brihadaranyaka Upanishad
The verse does not say to what? If it was clearly talking about human can become only human then that shows the sowing of inquistiveness about life in the early days. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 08, 2006 5:10 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh,
Since you told me that the concept of rebirth is man made I had to quote example from vedas that is learned naturally through sky and not man made. And all the great souls who lived their life as per SD have emphasised it. Otherwise how it is possible for Ramanujam or Sakunthaladevi to become a great master in Maths when they did not have any interest in schooling and curriculams. How it is possible for a small child to memorize all the 1330 Thirukurals and repeat it without any mistakes, which is not possible at that age (around 7 years old). How was the murder of Rajiv Gandhi predicted well in advance by an astrologer? Even today we come across eight year old boy (in Thane) telling the incidents of his previous birth and still remembering the place, wife and his childrens in his previous birth. When it got chekced, the old lady (the wife of earlier birth of that boy) accepted whatever the boy said was correct and even the son remembered some instances his boy father told him what had happened in the past. (She was around 70s and her son was around 45. The boy claimed that she was his wife and also gave several instances to prove it).
Just for fun, when I approached a nadi jodhidar in Vaitheeswaran temple he precisely told the name of my father & my mother, my education, my father business etc though he know nothing about it me. (My visit to them was all of a sudden when I was travelling that side). Though I don't belive their concept of all our life is pre -written in the form of palm thousands of years ago, I think they use some other method to find out it. when I understand their technique to find out the prediction of a person,
it is still strange to me how do they tell the name of parents & people who visit them. Because as per jyothisha sasthra one can predict the fortune of a person but the names. And it is done in a small room and not with mind reading with sophisticated science equipments.
V.K.L. Raamanthan
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 08, 2006 5:11 am | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Ganesh, only about 1-5% of our religion has true value.
All the rest is just way of life, culture etc masqurading as religion.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Jun 08, 2006 4:34 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Raam,There are so many things that we do not know and that is why science expands and is not static.
How and why something can be done by some and not by others is interesting. For example my yet to be two year old, started saying "awesome" repeatedly two days back. We do not know from where she got it. But there were conicident instances when the phrase looked apt. Similarly when the mind concentrates on a certain kind the connections happen. After all ( not that simple) these are all chemical reactions.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 09, 2006 6:42 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh,
The Bhavishya Purana ( Bhavishya means future) deals with the subject that would happen in future. It discussed about ruling of Queen victoria, Kings of Rajabhudana, Thymoore, Babar, Humayun, Akbar, Aurangaship, Sivaji well in advance before the events took place. Invasion of Greeks and The order of future kings also discussed. Sarting from Abimanyu (Son of Arjun), Parichith (The son of Abimanu), Janameyan (Son of Parichith), Sadhanigan (Son of Janameyan), Achavamethathan (Son of Sadhanigan), Adishimakrishnan (Son of Achavamethathan)....it gives the name of 25 kings in this series. Then it talks of Kowdilyan (Sanakyan), Kingdom of Chandragupthan, Bindhusaran, Ashokan and so many things. Jesus was mentioned in the Vedic literature Bhavishya Purana more than 3000+ years before he appeared. In Bhavishya Purana He is referred to specifically as Isha Putra - "the Son of God." In the Prati Sarag Parv III Khand 3 Adhay 3 Shloka 5 to 8 of Bhavishya Purana it says that "A malecha (belonging to a foreign country and speaking a foreign language) spiritual teacher will appear with his companions and his name will be Mohammad. All these are written five thousand years ago by the great sage Srila Krishna Dvarpayana Veda Vyasa.
Are we going to consider all these just as 'Chemical reactions'?
V.K.L. Raamanathan Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 09, 2006 7:34 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Raam, the bavvishya purana looks more like a isckon thingy
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 11, 2006 5:46 am | | Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Ram,
Do you have an english translation (with original sanskrit verses) of the Bhavishya puranam?
I would like to read it and confirm that it talks about the people you have said it talks about.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Jun 11, 2006 6:55 am | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # | 
Harshal Vaidya | | Ramanathan
Which new mystic are you following ;)
Thanks and Regards
Harshal Vaidya.
http://www.lakhpatipage.comPrivate Reply to Harshal Vaidya | | Jun 12, 2006 4:51 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh,
All our vedas and Puranas are common to all our hindu institutions and ISCKON is one of them. My main point was that Bhavishya purana dealth with so many factors or incidents well in advance happening in future.
V.K.L. Raamanthan Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 12, 2006 5:00 am | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat,
You will have to buy the information. Pl check the following link http://bhavishya-purana.puranas.org/ . It is available in CD and the price is $9.95 USD.
However, Pl. read the following that contain sanskrit verses with english translation:
From SRI BHAVISHYA PURANA. Pratisarga parva, Chaturyuga Khanda Dvitiyadhyayah, 19th Chapter. (text 20 onwards).
Ruling over the Aryans was a king called Salivahana, the grandson of Vikramaditya, who occupied the throne of his father. He defeated the Sakas who were very difficult to subdue, the Cinas, the people from Tittiri and Bahikaus who could assume any form at will. He also defeated the people from Rome and the descendants of Khuru, who were deceitful and wicked. He punished them severely and took their wealth. Salivahana thus established the boundaries dividing the separate countries of the Mlecchas and the Aryans. In this way Sindusthan came to to be known as the greatest country. That personality appointed the abode of the Mlecchas beyond the Sindhu river and to the west.
ekadaa tu shakadhisho
himatungari samaayayau
hunadeshasya madhye vai
giristhan purusam shubhano
dadarsha balaram raajaa
Once upon a time the subduer of the Sakas went towards Himatunga and in the middle of the Huna country (Hunadesh - the area near Manasa Sarovara or Kailash mountain in Western Tibet), the powerful king saw an auspicious man who was living on a mountain. The man's complexion was golden and his clothes were white. (Bhavishya Purana 19:22.)
ko bharam iti tam praaha
su hovacha mudanvitah
iishaa purtagm maam viddhi
kumaarigarbha sambhavam
"The king asked, 'Who are you sir?' 'You should know that I am Isha Putra, the Son of God'. he replied blissfully, and 'am born of a virgin.' "(Bhavishya Purana 19:23.)
mleccha dharmasya vaktaram
satyavata paraayanam
iti srutva nrpa praaha
dharmah ko bhavato matah
" 'I am the expounder of the religion of the Mlecchas and I strictly adhere to the Absolute Truth.' Hearing this the king enquired, 'What are religious principles according to you opinion?' "(Bhavishya Purana 19:24.)
shruto vaaca maharaja
prapte satyasya amkshaye
nirmaaryaade mlechadesh
mahiso 'ham samaagatah
"Hearing this questions of Salivahara, Isha putra said, 'O king, when the destruction of the truth occurred, I, Masiha the prophet, came to this country of degraded people where there are no rules and regulations. Finding that fearful irreligious condition of the barbarians spreading from Mleccha-Desha, I have taken to prophethood'." (Bhavishya Purana 19:25-26.)
mlecchasa sthaapito dharmo
mayaa tacchrnu bhuupate
maanasam nirmalam krtva
malam dehe subhaasbham
naiganam apamasthaya
japeta nirmalam param
nyayena satyavacasaa
manasyai kena manavah
dhyayena pujayedisham
suurya-mandala-samsthitam
acaloyam prabhuh sakshat-
athaa suuryacalah sada
"Please hear Oh king which religious principles I have established among the mlecchas. The living entity is subject to good and bad contaminations. The mind should be purified by taking recourse of proper conduct and performance of japa. By chanting the holy names one attains the highest purity. Just as the immovable sun attracts, from all directions, the elements of all living beings, the Lord of the solar region, who is fixed and all-attractive, attracts the hearts of all living creatures. Thus by following rules, speaking truthful words, by mental harmony and by meditation, Oh descendant of Manu, one should worship that immovable Lord'." (Bhavishya Purana 19:27-30.)
isha muurtirt-dradi praptaa
nityashuddha sivamkari
ishamasihah iti ca
mama nama pratishthitam
"Having placed the eternally pure and auspicious form of the Supreme Lord in my heart, O protector of the earth planet, I preached these principles through the Mlecchas' own faith and thus my name became 'isha-masiha' (Jesus the Messiah)." (Bhavishya Purana 19:31.)
iti shrutra sa bhuupale
natraa tam mlecchapujaam
sthaapayaamaasa tam tutra
mlecchasthaane hi daarune
"After hearing these words and paying obeisances to that person who is worshipped by the wicked, the king humbly requested him to stay there in the dreadful land of Mlecchas." (Bhavishya Purana 19:32.)
svaraajyam praaptavaan raajaa
hayamedhan cikirat
rajyam krtva sa sasthyabdam
svarga lokamu paayayau
"King Salivahara, after leaving his kingdom performed an asvamedha yajna and after ruling for sixty years, went to heaven. Now please hear what happened when the king went to svargaloka." (Bhavishya Purana 19:33.)
Thus ends the second chapter entitled, "the age of Salivahara" of the story of Kali Yuga of the Caturyuga Khanda also called pratisarga-parva of the wonderful Bhavishya Maha Purana.
The following Sanskrit verses are taken directly from the Srimad Bhagavatam of Srila Vyasadeva, the original spiritual master, to support that what we are saying is coming from authorised the word of God that Bhavishya Purana is an authorised book written by Srila Vyasadeva.
brahmam padmam vaisnavam ca
saivam laingam sa-garudam
naradiyam bhagavatam
agneyam skanda-samhnitam
bhavisyam brahma-vaivartam
markandeyam sa-vamanam
varaham matsyam kaurmam ca
brahmandakhyam iti tri-sat
(This is extracted from http://www.salagram.net/Jesus-Went-To-India.htm)
Also please read the contents from the following link about Muhammad.
http://www.islam101.com/religions/hinduism/Mhs.htm
V.K.L. Raamanathan Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 12, 2006 5:02 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Harshal Vaidhya,
Welcome aboard.
V.K.L. Raamanathan Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 12, 2006 5:25 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Harshal Vaidya | | Folks
I had read an article which clearly investigated that the idea of Jesus living in India was a total conspiracy hatched by the erstwhile imperial British Govt.
The fact was that, the Hindus would never convert to Christianity unless there was some incentive given to them that Jesus had a relation somehow to the Hindu scriptures and sages or to India.
Hence tampered versions of Puranas and other scriptures which connected Jesus to Hinduism were released throughout India.
I remember that on some network over Ryze itsef there was a link posted to this article but I dont have it anymore.
Some people got befooled with this conspiracy and converted to Christianity. Others converted coz' of the rigid caste system. Both ways converting has never benefitted them.
Thanks and Regards,
Harshal Vaidya
http://www.lakhpatipage.com
Cheapest way to advertise on the internet!
Private Reply to Harshal Vaidya | | Jun 12, 2006 10:29 am | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Maybe Dr. Zakir Naik also would have gone by the tampered versions of Puranas and other scriptures to write his article "Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in Hindu Scriptures" and published in the web :)
V.K.L. Raamanthan Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 12, 2006 12:36 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Let me read and figure that out Ram.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Jun 12, 2006 1:34 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | If there is some text in the Net about ancient hindu culture and the origin of(the text) being from outside India, I would assume it is more for propaganda than otherwise. For example this Bavishya Purana sounds more of attracting westerners into Hinduism. The only one source that I know of doing this ISKCON. If we they have to include, Jesus then they have to do include Islam also into this to make it genuine. If this purAnA is so exact why is that we never read this in our history classes? Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 12, 2006 2:43 pm | | Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Ganesh,
This purana as far as I can see can only predict events 2000 years back (Jesus etc)....
I have not heard of any reliable copies existing in the present....
Let me check out Ram's link.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Jun 13, 2006 6:01 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh,
Like we find informations about all countries, leaders, cultures, religions etc in the net we find details of SD too. Secondly, one will go and search the information about a specific subject in the internet only when they know of it. Very very few people in the world or in India knows about the details of our puranas. How many people do you think they will know that there are 18 important purans and 108 upanishads in Hinduism or Sanatana Dharma. IMHO, not many knows about Bhavishya purana and its contents until some one tells or discuss. It reveals the truth that no propagandas are being done on it.
I had already written that not only in ISKCON but also in many hindu instutitions (Sri Krishnamoorthy foundation, Sri Saibaba Ashram, Sri Sri Ravisankarji ashrams to quote few) we see westners come any join by leaving their wealth, country, relatives and friends. This is not by showing some carrots. You can imagine the degree of dedication to join in an institution by leaving all their belongings, emotional attachments and native place.
As we follow McCauley's British system of education in India, Bhavishya Purana is not part of curriculum in History. However, when ancient India followed Gurukul all these concepts were taught during education.
V.K.L. Raamanathan
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 13, 2006 10:59 am | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Ram,
Perhaps you should have a seperate SD Network.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Jun 13, 2006 4:24 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Assuming that we did read about bhavishya purAnA in pre Macaulay era, there should be some culvert, edifice or for that matter some written manuscript (Olai chuvadi) that confirms this.
IMO, anything written in a language less in practice would be ancient. With all the reverence we attach to sanskrit, anything written using sanskrit becomes a poetry or a sloka. If you have listened to the sanskrit news , you will know what I mean. Also for example,
the famous,
"Vasantha kAlae samprApthae ,
kAkah kAkaha pikah pikaha"
which xlates to when the spring arrives, the difference between the Crow and the Cuckoo will be seen becomes very much poetical.
Westerners flocking to these Ashrams are because we indulge in "showing carrots". We have been propagating the idea of many gods to those who were made to think there is only one. We are bringing to a materialistic, monothiestic lifestyle bearers , a less materialistic, polytheistic lifestyle. I am not here to argue the right and wrong. All I am saying is our hindu "charismatic" leaders do bring in folks by "showing carrots" Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 14, 2006 4:41 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat,
Thanks for the suggestion. But I am not qualified to enough to open a separate SD network. Besides tons of information about SD/Hinduism is available in the net itself when we browse.
V.K.L. Raamanathan
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 14, 2006 4:42 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh,
I agree with you. The carrot shown by the leaders of SD is 'Wisdom'.
V.K.L. Raamanthan Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 15, 2006 1:08 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Ram,
Tons of info is available on everything on internet..
This doesnt stop people from opening a new network or setting up a new site..
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Jun 16, 2006 8:03 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Yes Bharat, you are right. But I don't intend to become a gold member for the time being to start a new network. Second thing I am still a learner like everyone of us. Anyway, I am happy with your acknowledgement. Thanks.
V.K.L. Raamanthan Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 18, 2006 12:40 pm | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Ram,
There is no saying when the learner becomes the master.
Reminds me of story from the Ramayana...
Hanuman doesnt remember his strength and has to be reminded that he can jump across the sea, but having done that, he finds Sita and gives her a discourse on realisation and reality.
Just one leap in faith (across the sea) transforms him into a master.
I assume the same is possible for you.
Have a great weekend.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Jun 19, 2006 4:43 am | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat,
Good Morning.
That's a wonderful example. I will surely try to adhere your suggestion in due course of time.
V.K.L. Raamanathan
PS: There is a program going on in Kamaraj Memorial Hall by Jeyendra Saraswathi Swamigal about Psychology & Psychotherapy. It started yesterday and will be continued up to 24th June 2006. Timing between 6.30 PM to 8.00 PM. Entry free.
From July 01 to July 05 - Gita (Vedanta treatise) by Shri Shri Jayashree. The discourse of Shri Jayashree would be really admirable. Timing between 6.30 PM to 8.00 PM. Entry free.
Whoever interested can attend the program.
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 19, 2006 3:49 pm | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | But isn't Hanuman forgets his strength more than once in Ramayana?
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 19, 2006 3:51 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Raam,
The day when our charismatic leaders bring in folks from other religion into the realm of SD yet practice their own religion is the day, our spiritual leaders have seen SD IMO.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 20, 2006 6:01 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh,
The hanuman is not very proud of his strength and hence do not remember the strength. Because Hanuman thinks that whatever he accomplishes is only due to Lord Rama. It is because of his 100% bakthi towards lord Rama. There is a saying that once Hanuman will cross the sea, walking on seawater by chanting the name of Rama. By looking at this Rama will think that if my name is such powerful how myself if I walk on the water and try to do but will slip in the water and not be able to walk on sea. It is the absolute Bakthi that makes Hanuman to get done the task. Like a born child completely surrenders to the mother.
The purpose of religion is to understand and realize the completeness (Paripoornathvam). Like the lotus does not try to bring vandu, the leaders of SD do not try to bring peoples from other religions. Their major objective is to make the people to realize the truth of independentness (Patratru iruthal – detachment of materialistic things) to have peaceful mind. That is why whenever our spiritual leaders make discourse in the open forum it is mainly on Gita that discuss the subject, which is common to all people in the world. When we see Lord Krishna as god, foreign researchers see him as Philosopher. If a foreigner from other religion gets attracted to the knowledge or wisdom of SD (like vandu) he/she can very well remain in his religion itself. But if they want to submit themselves completely to Hinduism, the leaders of SD cannot reject and say that you stick to your religion only. If they do so it will appear as if Hinduism has got place only for Hindu, which will deviate from the main goal of SD. Coz, SD sees the people as soul and not as a particular person from any religion.
V.K.L. Raamanathan
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 20, 2006 8:42 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Raam you said,
....
Because Hanuman thinks that whatever he accomplishes is only due to Lord Rama.....
rightly said.
In the case of Hanuman. he had great strength even when he was a kid. Also, in Ramayana, there is no mention of Hanuman's strength until sugreeva and others accept rama's strength. In fact the faith in Rama comes only after
Rama proves himself. is it not?
Also in a latter period, hanuman seems to have lifted a whole mountain. Kicking, vali out would not have been difficult, if see ramayana events from backwards. But it does not seem to happen.
I do not accept the Lotus example. Here is why?
Lotus, expresses itself by vibrant color. And that's what attracts the bee.
For that matter , every plant that needs to be propageted will show off either by their color, smell of its flowers. That is NATURE
And how can Gita be common to all people in the world? IMO it is a result of blind acceptance of Gita whithout questioning it.
Also, if we start looking at Krishna from his rasa leela and other pranks, probably he being a philosopher to the foreign eye or a god to the hindu will be taken with a pinch of salt.
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 21, 2006 5:07 am | | Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Harshal Vaidya | | For all you fans of Sanatana Dharma, I'd suggest you read some litreature from Osho Rajneesh.
http://www.lakhpatipage.comPrivate Reply to Harshal Vaidya | | Jun 21, 2006 7:22 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh,
Ramayana will talk more of Rama than anybody else. Hanumayana will talk of Hanuman strength from his childhood. The strength & weakness of Rama is discussed in Ramayana. Even before Lord Rama wins Ravana, Sukreeva, Hanuman, Gugan admired his capability and had faith on him.
When the frog which is always near the lotus does not get attracted with the vibrant color of lotus how was it possible for bee is my question.
Gita deals more of phsychology aspects. This you will appeciate if you attend gita class. ( The Gita program one referred by me at Kamarraj Memorial Hall will be by Sunandaji and not by Nithya shree).
By just reading the topic of book or simply by going the wrapper of a book one can't know the contents of it thoroughly. By seeing the rasaleela and otherevents of lord Krishna one can't mesaure the wisdom of Lord Krishna. In the ocean you find the mixer of many elements. The oceanness does not depends on any thing. The river, ponds, dams depends on ocean by the process of vaporising and rain and so on. Krishna is like ocean. And I don't have a capacity to understand him. Therefore I can't analyse Lord Krishna.
V.K.L. Raamanthan Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 21, 2006 7:23 am | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Harshal,
I am interest to learn Osho's theory from you. If you have already read some of his litratures pl. share that contents with us.
V.K.L. Raamanathan Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 21, 2006 12:18 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | There might have been umpteen reason for gugan to accept Rama, but the first is "Business". To port a large entourage from one shore to the other makes his livelihood. That too if that is the King to-be it adds on to the advertisement.
The frog does not get attracted to the Lotus. But it knows how to make use of the flower, just like the flower knows how to make use of the bees. It does not show itself up on the flower but waits for its food, the bee, from underneath the flower or on the leaf.
Each of us have different objectives and priorities.
This is how I guess Nature has set the food chain.
The Flowers, to propgate, are in vibrant color which attracts the bees.The bees did not come to the flower for propagation but for the nectar(its food).The frog waits on leaf(that by itself floats even with a frog's weight, and is always dry on the top)to have its food. And so on...
More to come.. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 22, 2006 6:16 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh,
My example got diluted entirely in a different prospective!
You said that our charismatic leaders should refrain from accepting people from other religion when come to join in full devotion with Ashram that follows the concepts SD. I said that the gateway of SD is open to all the people from any religions whoever want to practice it and therefore the example of lotus, frog and vandu. (What is English of Vandu? Bee is Theni which sucks and saves honey. But vandu drinks honey. Ie. Vandu is consumer and bee is saver). The point is that one may not have interest in SD just because born as Hindu whereas a person from other religion can appreciate the value of it. Similar to vandu (or bee) consumes the essence of flower which frog does not being very close to lotus most of the times in the pond. Like you said it is natural for bee to consume honey, it is natural that the people from other religion can find the suitable way to quench their spiritual knowledge that convinces them totally. Gita does that. That is the reason it is analyzed by westerns and researched all over the world by spiritual scholars. Otherwise it won’t be appealing for them to join with some institution just for the sake of it. Unlike Sivapuranam, Kanda puranam, Vishnu puranam etc. Gita talks of conscious, subconscious and unconscious status of mind and psychotherapy that is common to all, when Arjuna depressed to fight against their own people who are respected lot by him.
V.K.L. Raamanathan
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 22, 2006 2:14 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | What did I learn from Ramayana?
1. Dont covet another's wife... imagine having two mothers-in-law!!
2. Dont mess with monkeys dude, they will beat the crap out of you.
3. With a little persuasion, rocks will float on water.
4. Snakes are scared of eagles (unless you are talking anaconda)
5. If you can train an army or monkeys, bears and what not to do what you want, you must be one genius of a trainer...Infosys Mysore needs you! (software programmers are easier to train than monkeys)
6. Step-moms are evil only in Ramayana, Fairy tales and Hindi films.
7. It is possible to get pregnant by eating a mango... Sounds like reverse logic --> pregnant women eat mangoes,therefore, mango eating women are pregnant.
8. If you break someone's bow, better be careful, he is gonna be awfully pissed.Private Reply to Bharat P | | Jun 22, 2006 2:46 pm | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | BP,
But Ravana was smart, if at all he did for having Sita as another wife, he did see to that there was no Mrs.Janak(a).
But what do you call Kausalya relation to Ravana? hmmmm...
On Number 5 , I take exception. Au contraire, it is easier to train the animals than the software guys ;)
On number 7, that is a nice finding.
On Number 8, are you referring to "Shiv Danush"?Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 23, 2006 1:28 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Well dude, I atleast learnt some nice morals from Ramayana. I am wondering what I learnt from gita....
1. It is ok to kill your cousins, uncles and other relatives for money.
2. If you cant beat someone fair and square, it is ok to cheat...
3. If you are god, the rules dont apply... so go ahead and lie all you want and play tricks on everybody - and then claim you are god and doing this to uphold truth...
4. Sex change existed and exists even today.
will add to this list later when I have time..
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Jun 23, 2006 2:16 am | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Harshal Vaidya | | Bharat
One fundamental flaw in your analysis is that , you are expecting that Ramayan or Mahabharat is written by Godly creatures who are deemed to do everything nice and nothing bad.
This is totally wrong.
All things related to religion and religious stories as Ramayan and Mahabharat were written by Humans only. Humans who were as normal as you and me and suffered from same vices of ego, greed, jealousy like you and me and everybody else.
Hence you are wrong to find the meaning of life and morals in those books. This is true for Gita, Quran, Bible or whatever.
trust me, if you and me have a 1 month holiday we can write a holy book which will be as thorough as the above.Private Reply to Harshal Vaidya | | Jun 23, 2006 7:54 am | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Harshal,
When you say that there is no meaning understanding of our scriptures as human beings wrote it, how did you recommend reading Osho’s literature? After all he is also a human being. So, what made you to have faith on whatever he wrote?
V.K.L. Raamanathan
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 23, 2006 10:59 am | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat,
Pandavas did not fight for money. It was for their ‘right’, when Duroyodhana refused to offer atleast five grounds when they had right for half of the kingdom. Duriyodhana agreed in the assembly of kingdom that if Pandavas completes 12 years of Vanavasam and 1 years of Angyadhavasam successfully he will give half of the kingdom. He failed to honor his commitment. So, to establish Dharma, Lord Krishna had to play a strategic role. As per yudha dharma if some one fight with Gadha, the opponent should also fight with the same weapon. Here the indirect weapon used by Duriyodhana with the help of his uncle Saguni is ‘Cheating’. Hence, lord Krishna also have to play like that as per yudha dharma.
Kaikeyi, the stepmother of lord Ram, is not the direct cause for sending him forest. After hearing about the news of Patabhishegam of Rama as next king, Kaikeyi delighted and offered her jewels to her hunch-backed mother Manthara. Lord Rama had great respect for his stepmother and Kaikeyi had true love with her son Rama. It is Manthara who is the backbone for the foundation of problem. After several arguments between Manthara and Kaikeyi, where Kaikeyi gives all supporting points of Rama’s right as king, finally Manthara uses the Bramasthra to Kaikeyi by saying that the king Dasarathar do not like you, he only offers sweet words to you but all benefits only to his first wife. If Rama becomes king, only his sons will rule this kingdom generation after generation and you and Bhrath will have no place at all. So, it is not true that step-mom in Ramayana is evil.
Why eating mango to become pregnant? Even just with eye contact a women can become pregnant. That is how Pandu, Dhridhrarastran and Vidhran born (!) in Mahabharatha.
V.K.L. Raamanathan Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 23, 2006 3:12 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Harshal,
I am not assuming some divine decent of any of the indian mythologies. They were obviously written by humans for humans.
Ram, Those books were written to have a hidden meaning, not taken literally.
Let me also add comments on some other points:
1. It is very difficult to establish whether or not the Pandavas had any right.
2. You are comparing Krishna to Shakuni, which is probably right. If Krishna wasnt around to instigate things, the war probably wouldnt have happened.
3. Kaikeyi cant be absolved of responsibility just because someone else convinced her.
4. As regards mangoes and eyes, my take on this whole thing is that Kunti (initially with Karna), and then later Pandu's wives (Kunti and Madri) and Dhritarashtra's wife (gandhari) all had sex with someone else to have kids because their husbands were impotent. The same is true for Satyavati's daughters-in-law, whose husband died early, and therefore they had to have sex with Vyasa.
It is all very well with Surya coming down to Kunti and all that kind of stuff, but I suspect that in those days Kings and queens had a "fun lifestyle" and when someone got pregnant, they always blamed Indra, Vayu, Surya etc for this.
Hope this doesnt hurt someone's sensibility and beliefs. This is just my opinion.
Regards
Bharat
Private Reply to Bharat P | | Jun 23, 2006 4:06 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Like I had said earlier in the part 1, The concept of marriage and one to one relationship are all very young.
I do not know even in other caste and communities(other than kshatriyas) whether these were strictly observed as we have it today.
Since we are fixing a godly sense into these epics, there would have been reasons to make it more moral (to today's standard) than what they really are.
For example, until (I think it is)Rajaji boldly said, rama did commit a mistake when he killed vaali, to show rama as a sinner was indeed a big NONO. Even today, there are side stories to make that act an acceptable one and "desinning" Rama and blaming it on vAli.
Harshal, I do not know if you have gone through this thread and its earlier part, the Part 1. Jumping to conclusion is something that all can do regarding post, like I am doing now. But clearly the discussion is beyond just godliness.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 23, 2006 8:29 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | I do not think Kaikeyi was against Rama, but she for sure was against Kausalaya getting "the mother of the king" status. After all, kaikeyi is only an another wife to Dasaratha.
what has mantara got against Rama? Nothing except for the story he broke her back. But she came with Kaikeyi to Ayodhya after marriage. All the more she will side Bharata's coronation rather than Rama's.
There is also a story that manthara was in ravana's side and was very much favoring the takeover of Ayodhya by Ravana.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 26, 2006 6:16 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat,
I had already explained in Part I that due to manthra power certain creations were happened and not simply for human pleasure to enjoy the act of physical intercourse. Even if we assume so, would that be written so openly in important Ithihas which is read by all Hindus who consider all the important players are respectable or divine in the Ithihas. But still we find these informations in our scriptures. Most of the divine characters be it Yudhistrar, Lord Krishna, Karna, Lord Rama etc would commit mistakes. So, it reveals the simple truth that Muni Vyasa and Valmiki, Kambar & Tusidas have just reproduced whatever happened without hiding anything. If it is simply a written story would they spoil the image of divine characters?
Kaikeyi episode reveals the truth that people should think several times before offering a boon to women. With the boon not only they will put themselves into problem but also create problems to others also. Due to the boon offered by Dasarathar to Kaikeyi, Rama had to be sent to forest. But the ultimate result is the beloved husband Dhasasarthar died due to Puthra sogam (due to love and affection to his son and the injustice that is done to Lord Rama) and therefore Kaikeyi also were sad until the end of life and the objective of making Bharathan as king was not fulfilled as he ruled the kingdom unwillingly with Rama’s Padhugai imagining Rama as king all the time and so on. Same as the case with Kunti. With the boon offered by Durvasar she tested the varam and all the problems.
V.K.L. Raamanathan
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 26, 2006 6:24 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh,
If Kaikeyi was against Kausalaya getting "the mother of the king" status, then she herself would have tried to become queen by sidelining Kausalya soon after she marrys king Dasaradhar. She had great respect for Kausalya & Lord Rama. Manthari attacked her subconcious mind to preserve her comfort life in the kingdom.
V.K.L. RaamanthanPrivate Reply to Gyro | | Jun 26, 2006 11:32 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Well Kaikeyi never bothered much about the "mother of the king" status for kausalya, because dasaratha was issueless for a umber of years even with hordes of concubines. She was not worried after the kids were born because, IMO, she had already chosen a lifestyle that would have lessened her anxiety. But Manthara had something in mind. Had manthara been a ravana's sidey then the birth of the four sons would have kindled the fire within. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 26, 2006 4:33 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Ram,
I think you should think many times before giving a boon to just about anyone, male or female.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Jun 27, 2006 4:49 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Yeah, that is true Bharat. 'Varam' given to one is 'Saabam' to others :)
V.K.L. Raamanathan
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 27, 2006 3:13 pm | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | But isn't that always true? IMO,There never is a solution that is good for/benefits all.
But in the case of basmAsuran's story, Shiva escaped. With dasaratha it was his end.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 28, 2006 7:39 am | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Hmmmmm....to an extent you are right Ganesh. But there are some god creations where there is no harm in certain things. Like tree. It gives us fruit, shadow, consumes carbon dioxide and gives us oxyzen, helps to bring rain and so on. But there are right things and wrong things. Actually if you ask me frankly, there is no positive thinking or negative thinking. There is only 'Thinking'. But there are right thinking and wrong thinking. The negative thinking what we call is just other possibilities of an event. If half of the glass is filled with water, one will say that half of the glass is water and another fellow will say that half of the glass is empty. But both are right. When both are right how can we say that one is positive and another person is negative. Because, what is considered as negative thinking in this example is not wrong thing. It is truth. The person who knows probability (maths) thoroughly will not say that one is positive and another one is negative. I think I am talking something irrelevant :)
Badmasuran was male asuran. With the boon offered to him, he created problem only to others but not himself. At the end of it god have to play a strategic role to destroy him (by making him to keep his own hand on his head) when his attahasam was too much. Whereas in case of Kaysalya she put problem to herself by loosing her beloved husband and making his beloved son Bharath very sad and ultimately she is sad.
V.K.L. Raamanathan
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 28, 2006 8:16 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Raam,
IMO,good and bad , correct and incorrect that you talk about are from your perspective. Your tree example was good, but for the god and creation thingy. But what you missed is, the tree which was as a species existed even before human kind is been enslaved, by the so called humans. It did not bear the flower and fruit for humans. For that matter we as humans have made use of trees in many cases creating more harm than otherwise ( deforestation).Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 29, 2006 7:01 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh,
If we say that the seed of very first tree came out to the world out of nothing, then we are breaking the law of fundamental of physics. Because, out of nothing only nothing will come out. Hence my point is that only from paramporul (Brammam - not lord Brahma) all energies (seeds) came out. So, I said that tree is god creation. Now imagine how big that energy would be which is cause of all energy. Do we have the power to understand the capacity of that energy? Take a handful of sugar. Mix it with a pot of water. Stir it. Now can one say in which part of the water is sweetie. The whole water is sweet. The sugar is mingled with each & every part of water and hence invisible. Likewise, the paramporul, supreme of all energies is spread everywhere. Now imagine the size of it. It is as big as the size of all universes, galaxies, Milky Way or name it, as we like. With the practice one can visualize its viswaroopam. It is possible with Gnathristy and not with our human eye alone.
V.K.L. Raamanathan
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 29, 2006 11:06 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | My point there was to establish, the good and bad or for that matter any kind of segregation is primarily done by human beings for their own convenience.
If we go with the primordial creation nature and yet say the only nothing can come out of Nothing, then we also have to accept that the "Creation" itself is part of "Desctruction". Unless something gets "destructed", "Creation" cannot happen.
And every destruction ends in Creation as every creation ends in destruction.
So what and how can we say as good \bad,correct or incorrect,wrong or right?Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jun 29, 2006 8:22 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Ram,
Read some of the latest theories in physics. Something can come out of nothing.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Jun 30, 2006 8:55 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh, IMHO growth happens due to destruction. Vidhai (seed) sediyagi, sediyil poo poothu, poo kai agi, kai kanindhu Pazamagi, Pazam vedithu meendum vidhaiyagi.........This similar kind of destruction you can see in human being also. Right from first cell to his/her whole life cycle and further continuation. For the completion and repetation of this cycle for anything in the world, initilly ie in the very beginning there should be some sort of creation to have destruction and then growth. That creation is the seed of very first tree of world in my previous example and the creator is Paramporul.
V.K.L. Raamanathan Private Reply to Gyro | | Jun 30, 2006 8:59 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat, if some of the latest theories in Physics is now admitting that something can come out of nothing, then they are talking of SaNaTaNa Dharma. However, may I know which latest theory you are referring to?
V.K.L. Raamanathan Private Reply to Gyro | | Jul 06, 2006 5:48 pm | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | I guess BP is talking about an episode in another of Dan Brown's books. But I guess CERN website has something about this. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jul 06, 2006 6:15 pm | | Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Nope. Particles have always been created in accelerators, but they never last more than nano-seconds...
Just run a google search on particles at the quark level and generally look around. You will understand what I am talking about.
Bharat
(yeah Dan Brown is a good read, isnt he? But not sure how true all that is)Private Reply to Bharat P | | Jul 07, 2006 6:00 am | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | We all know that the Sun attracts the planets, and they by their movement stay at particular orbital lengths away from it. But the influence of the SUN as magnetism and attraction (as the astronomers say) goes way out into space and affects, or determines, its relation to other Suns.
Our Earth has its own magnetism and attraction (we call it gravity), it pervades us and all the rest of the area around the Earth, and serves in part to hold the Moon in its orbit, and us, and other objects, from flying off the surface.
The influence of electricity and of magnetism is everywhere. Its like a vital SPACE and, it comes as "the Great Breath" idea, ABSOLUTE -- everywhere -- and is, of course, a part of us too.
Thought from our minds is like a radiation and sometimes we catch each other's ideas when we are able to "tune in on them." But our thoughts and desires move out and away from us constantly. Some H P B say coalesce with an "elemental" on the Astral Plane.
In any case they are living their own lives, and carry our imprint.
The ABSOLUTE is also like the Sun's radiant magnetism. It works near and far, and perhaps our Sun's influence like this, extends to the limits of "known space." But the ABSOLUTE goes way beyond that and no mental or even physical limits can be envisaged.
Our Earth provides an influence and one could say: it is like the magnetism of the earth's area we live in, and it is common for all.
Our thoughts are like the Karmic links that we place on our desires, wants or aversions. They are a part of the "little lives" (atoms and molecules) in space around us. And they come and go, and some, when many of them come together (condense or solidify) make up our bodies.
Our mutual magnetism makes living patterns (under the action of our Karma in our Astral and Pranic "principles") and serves to draw us all together regardless of the physical distance between us. It is like a "carrier wave" in radio work, the carrier wave also carries the patterns to the place where they are needed or
can be perceived. Their influence continues and goes out to the end of space....
Smaller vibrations travel along it and modify it -- so we get a distinct and individual "Hi-Fi." Every living atom has these peculiar to itself. These are also related to our Karma, as if they are distorted or disturbed, they have to return to us for settlement and adjustment -- thus ewe get "accidents" of "good: or "bad luck."
It is a huge idea, many details and diversifications, and the managing of it all sounds impossibly stupendous. Yet that's the easiest way to think of the vast harmony that is our universe and our living with each other. One way to look at it is that the ABSOLUTE in manifestation has many "assistants." In fact the whole of Nature, visible and invisible make up these sensitive assistants, and they all work under regular and common laws. We
are also a part of that continuity. The "Astral Light" and the "Akasa" are the areas in which this takes place.
Maybe this could help get the perspective of graded relationships that have a continuity and a rationale. It links the "invisible" to the "visible." And the word, or title LAW, or KARMA, covers it.
Karma (as the law of inter-action) is an aspect of the ABSOLUTE in the sense that its universal and always acting. It provides for harmony and regulation when MANIFESTATION' begins operation again. Rest is the opposite of activity, but the two fall under the law of rotation -- Karma again. And we are an indispensable part of that WHOLE. Every part of the ONE WHOLE ( ABSOLUTE) is essential to it.
Look at any computer and at the millions of computers now in common use around the world -- they have to be made to exact specifications or their billions and trillions of components cannot interact in harmony, each with the other as needed, and no
INTERNET could work. The laws of physical and electrical and magnetic matter are at work here.
Why should they not work with equal accuracy with human thoughts, feelings and desires? Why should not reincarnation take care of our Egoic "return" when our individual period of "rest" between lives is over ? Why do we return to these our
bodies after a night's sleep? Why don't we (the EGO) go to some other body?
How else to account for us (EGOS) and for the phenomena we (as individuals) can sense, feel and see of the Earth and the Universe, and of each-other ?
(The above contents from a website)
V.K.L. Raamanathan
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jul 07, 2006 11:07 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Raam, and the point is ? :-[S Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jul 07, 2006 11:41 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | GAnesh, the scientific approach towards SD was putdown as discussion came between Physics & SD.
V.K.L. Raamanathan Private Reply to Gyro | | Jul 07, 2006 7:25 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Statutory Physics warning:
Magnetism and Gravity arent the same thing. There are four forces found in the universe -->
1. Magnetism
2. Gravity
3. Strong nuclear force
4. Weak Nuclear force.
FYI, Magnetism can both attract and repel. Gravity only attracts.
Regards
Bharat Private Reply to Bharat P | | Jul 10, 2006 4:37 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat,
That's a good explanation. Magnet, Megnetic field, Magetism are different things (like Intelligence and Intellect are not the same ). Let me explain:
Magnet : A piece of iron which has the power to draw other pieces of iron towards it or repel.
Magnetic field : A piece of iron may be made to act as a magnet by passing electricity through a wire round it.
Magnetism : In nature, magnetic fields are produced in the rarefied gas of space, in the glowing heat of sunspots and in the molten core of the Earth. Otherwise the transmission of electromagnetic waves would be impossible.
Like magnetism is availabe in the world, the paramporul spreads everywhere. This is what refered in my previous post and not magnet as object.
V.K.L. Raamanathan
Private Reply to Gyro | | Jul 18, 2006 6:11 pm | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Ram,
Some forces dont need a medium to travel. They are their own medium.
Like light is both a wave and a particle...
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Jul 18, 2006 7:26 pm | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Ram said:
Like magnetism is availabe in the world, the paramporul spreads everywhere. This is what refered in my previous post and not magnet as object.
========================================================
won't paramporul spreads everywhere mean that in an ever expanding universe,paramporuL is stretched. Or is it the stretchiness of paramporuL that expands the universe? In either case what happens when a universe collapses?
To say that something, that is prevelant "here, there
and the space in between"( I liked this description by the author of Conversations with god),as an entity that spreads quantifies it. But didn't sanathana dharma talk about such a thing that can neither be qualified nor be quantified?
Magnetism,presence or any other qualities(and therefore the quantity) are only attributes. How can one equate an attribute as an entity? The paramporuaL we talk about is the sum total of all attributes and the devoid of those, isn't it?
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Jul 21, 2006 6:45 pm | | Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Touching touching macchaan... Paramaporul and all that.
Isnt the idea of SD to go within rather than go without? ;-)
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Jul 22, 2006 2:32 pm | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat,
you are right. I think what I tried to convey was communicated though the example does not corelate 100%. 'Thiruvilayadal' baniyil sollanumna 'Porulil kutramillai anal sollil kutramundu'
V.K.L. Raamanathan
<
Some forces dont need a medium to travel. They are their own medium.
Like light is both a wave and a particle...
Bharat
> Private Reply to Gyro | | Jul 22, 2006 2:32 pm | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh Ram,
Expansion or Shrinking are relative terms. When there is no 'boundry line' for the universe, how can we say that it is expanding. I think you are referring to galaxies. There are 200 billion galaxies in the observable universe. Those may be expanding or the size & shape may be changing due to various circumstances. But all are happening in the unmeasurable size of universe. For example, our body is made up of cells. These cells are in turn made up of molecules, which are made up of atoms, which are in turn made up of sub-atomic particles such as electrons. Our body, a tree, thoughts, a vehicle, a planet,light and everything else are 'Concentrations' of energy. I define that energy as paramporul which spreads everywhere. Now, can this energy be quantified or qualified. If it is measurable maths will not have term as infinity.
V.K.L. Raamanathan Private Reply to Gyro | | Aug 11, 2006 2:38 pm | | Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | I read a Dilbert theory on the secret behind gravity.
It seems every instant every object in the universe doubles in size, and therefore, those touching each other push against each other and simulate gravity. Of course since everything doubles in size, nobody notices
;-)
Dilbert rocks.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Aug 12, 2006 10:00 am | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Was just reading a very interesting post by Sumanth on the "Priests" thread.
Was wondering what it was that makes religions grow, stop, wither, die out, mix with others and similar issues...
Can religions really "improve" or is suggesting they can improve itself an act of religious sacrilege. Obviously, if all religions were already "perfect" there would hardly be scope to improve them, would there?
What is the borderline between religions, spirituatlity, philosophy and science?
Just shooting.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Aug 14, 2006 4:25 pm | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Ram,
I suspect that the universe is really infinite, and by definition,anything infinite doesnt have any limitations... therefore it can expand...
so cant say there are 200 billion galaxies... they are infinite too. And planets with life? That is infinite too.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Aug 15, 2006 12:51 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Infinite is a very relative term. When we cannot count we tend to call a thing as infinite. For example a handful of water, if we consider there are infinite molecules of water then there are infinite atoms of oxygen and twice the infinite of hydrogen. Now since, there cannot be a twice for infinite, the number of oxygen atom compared to hydrogen becomes finite.
So how can we then call anything as infinite?
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Aug 15, 2006 1:32 am | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Ganesh,
Interesting post. But I still think that twice infinity is infinity and half infinity is infinity.
So there are infinite hydrogen atoms and infinite oxygen atoms and infinite water molecules. ;-)
Infinity has no limitations.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Aug 15, 2006 7:01 am | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # | 
Sumanth Cidambi | | pUrnam adaH pUrnam idam pUrnAt pUrnam udacyate
pUrnasya pUrnam adaya pUrnam evAvaSiSyatePrivate Reply to Sumanth Cidambi | | Aug 16, 2006 2:34 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Sumanth,
couldnt have explained that better in English.
Sometimes, Sanskrit rocks.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Aug 17, 2006 7:14 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat,
The meaning of that particular sloga from Upanishad quoted by Mr. Sumanth is about 'Paripoornathvam' (completeness) - Brammam.
Paripoornam - To understand a human being, Physiologists and biologists will take one cell of the body and that will tell us what the person is biologically. So, that one cell is paripoornam for the biology of a person.
The exact translation taken from a website may be helpful to understand the sloga better that says as follows:
The Personality of Godhead is perfect and complete. And because He is completely perfect, all emanations from Him, such as this phenomenal world, are perfectly equipped as a complete whole. Whatever is produced of the complete whole is also complete by itself. And because He is the Complete Whole, even though so many complete units emanate from Him, He remains the complete balance.
V.K.L. Raamanathan
Private Reply to Gyro | | Aug 17, 2006 7:59 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Sumanth Cidambi | | the verse simply means...
"this is full, that is full
when you remove fullness from fullness, fullness remains"
which is essentially the nature of the infinite...
cheers
s
Private Reply to Sumanth Cidambi | | Aug 20, 2006 2:39 pm | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | When it is full where is the "this" and the "that"?
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Aug 22, 2006 5:15 am | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh Ram,
For Brammam (ultimate god) there is no 'this' and 'that'. For better understanding of human beings it is explained with many jorgons.
V.K.L. Raamanathan Private Reply to Gyro | | Aug 22, 2006 4:57 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Reminds me of a good old story once narrated by Ramana Maharshi about a disciple and guru - A PURANIC STORY of Sage Ribhu and his disciple Nidagha:
Although Ribhu taught his disciple the Supreme Truth of
the One Brahman without a second, Nidagha, in spite of his
erudition and understanding, did not get sufficient conviction to adopt and follow the path of jnana, but settled down in his native town to lead a life devoted to the observance of ceremonial religion.
But the sage loved his disciple as deeply as the latter
venerated his Master. In spite of his age, Ribhu would himself go to his disciple in the town, just to see how far the latter had outgrown his ritualism. At times the sage went in disguise, so that he might observe how Nidagha would act when he did not know that he was being observed by his master.
On one such occasion Ribhu, who had put on the disguise
of a rustic, found Nidagha intently watching a royal procession.
Unrecognised by the town-dweller Nidagha, the village rustic enquired what the bustle was all about, and was told that the king was going in procession.
“Oh! It is the king. He goes in procession! But where is
he?” asked the rustic.
“There, on the elephant,” said Nidagha.
“You say the king is on the elephant. Yes, I see the two,”
said the rustic, “But which is the king and which is the elephant?”
“What!” exclaimed Nidagha. “You see the two, but do not
know that the man above is the king and the animal below is
the elephant? What is the use of talking to a man like you?”
“Pray, be not impatient with an ignorant man like me,”
begged the rustic. “But you said ‘above’ and ‘below’ – what do they mean?”
Nidagha could stand it no more. “You see the king and the
elephant, the one above and the other below. Yet you want to know what is meant by ‘above’ and ‘below’?” burst out Nidagha. “If things seen and words spoken can convey so little to you, action alone can teach you. Bend forward, and you will know it all too well”.
The rustic did as he was told. Nidagha got on his shoulders
and said, “Know it now. I am above as the king, you are below as the elephant. Is that clear enough?”
“No, not yet,” was the rustic’s quiet reply. “You say you are above like the king, and I am below like the elephant. The ‘king’, the ‘elephant’, ‘above’ and ‘below’ – so far it is clear. But pray, tell me what you mean by ‘I’ and ‘you’?”
When Nidagha was thus confronted all of a sudden with
the mighty problem of defining the ‘you’ apart from the ‘I’, light dawned on his mind.
Chill
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Aug 22, 2006 5:18 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Sumanth Cidambi | | and thus we enter the realm of the mu-koan
;-)Private Reply to Sumanth Cidambi | | Aug 24, 2006 1:42 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Raam (Gyro for clarity),
IMO,and thus is the stories and epics in hinduism.To explain a concept or a thought process stories and epics were\are made.
It was\is convinient to talk to the rest of the humans about a lot of what is now\will be defined as technology and scientific process in a story form in those days\present. To maintain the story running there was always a good and a bad. The stories and epics took the side stories based on the region they were propogated and that is why,"aNalum nOkinAn avaLum nOkinAL" is popular in TNadu while not in the North.
I guess, we are trying to define a process from within.It is highly difficult, for there is a fixed length, breadth and height to it from our won POVs and time.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Aug 24, 2006 11:28 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh,
We can't simply jump to conclusion that whatever told in our scriptures in Hinduism are only stories and unbelievable things. Let me just give you one example:
Everybody knows the speed of light is 186,000 miles which is actually discovered in 1675 by ROMAR. But the hymn 1.50 of the Rigveda on the Sun, says
you who traverse 2,202 yojanas in half a nimesa.The usual meaning of yojana is about 9 miles as in the Artha´saastra and for nimisha.
The measures of time are thus defined in the Puranas:
15 nimesa = 1 kastha
30kastha= 1 kala
30 kala = 1 muhurta
30 muhurta = 1 day-and-night
A nimesa is therefore equal to 16/75 seconds. It does come very close to the correct figure of 186,000 miles per second.
Where is the 'story' here?
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Aug 24, 2006 2:46 pm | | Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | I like stories dude. They are a fun way of explaining complex things in simple ways...
Hmm, Ram, havent heard about that 2202 yojanas in 1 nimesha thing. Where did you get that from?
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Aug 25, 2006 9:28 am | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat,
Pl. follow the link to get more detailed information about the speed of light in Rigveda.
http://www.sriramakrishnamath.org/magazine/vk/2001/7-5-1.asp
Regards.
GyroPrivate Reply to Gyro | | Aug 25, 2006 9:51 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Sumanth Cidambi | | Bharat
Attached is a translation of Hymn 1.50 in praise of Surya by Ralph Griffith, which I personally found to be quite near the original text... As far as I can tell, my reading today of both the sanskrit and the trasliterated or translated text of the Rg Veda did not reveal "the 2200 yojananas in 1/2 nimisa" reference ascribed above...
The reference that Mr. Ramanathan alludes to is probably contained in the commentary on the Rg Veda by a person called Sayana. This is referred to in the website link that Mr. Ramanathan has attached.
Hope this helps.
Cheers
S
______________________________________________
Surya.
1 HIS bright rays bear him up aloft, the God who knoweth all that lives,
Surya, that all may look on him.
2 The constellations pass away, like thieves, together with their beams,
Before the all-beholding Sun.
3 His herald rays are seen afar refulgent o'er the world of men,
Like flames of fire that burn and blaze.
4 Swift and all beautiful art thou, O Surya, maker of the light,
Illuming all the radiant realm.
5 Thou goest to the hosts of Gods, thou comest hither to mankind,
Hither all light to be beheld.
6 With that same eye of thine wherewith thou lookest brilliant Varuna,
Upon the busy race of men,
7 Traversing sky and wide mid-air, thou metest with thy beams our days,
Sun, seeing all things that have birth.
8 Seven Bay Steeds harnessed to thy car bear thee, O thou farseeing One,
God, Surya, with the radiant hair.
9 Surya hath yoked the pure bright Seven, the daughters of the car; with these,
His own dear team, he goeth forth.
10 Looking upon the loftier light above the darkness we have come
To Surya, God among the Gods, the light that is most excellent.
11 Rising this day, O rich in friends, ascending to the loftier heaven,
Surya remove my heart's disease, take from me this my yellow hue.
12 To parrots and to starlings let us give away my yellowness,
Or this my yellowness let us transfer to Haritala trees.
13 With all his conquering vigour this Aditya hath gone up on high,
Giving my foe into mine hand: let me not be my foeman's prey.Private Reply to Sumanth Cidambi | | Aug 26, 2006 3:13 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Gyro,
the idea of personifying surya itself is what I would term as a story. It is the story tat explains and provides knowledge to the layman.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Aug 26, 2006 4:08 am | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Aditya must have smiled, this moment.
Thanks Sumanth...
Bharat Private Reply to Bharat P | | Aug 28, 2006 11:30 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Hi Sumanth,
Thanks for your patronage to the discussion of SD. Actually Vedas were not written in script format by rishis. As told by me many times under this thread, it was communicated through verbal communication right from beginning. Even a small difference in Chanting the verses of vedas would make huge difference. Though it was written in palm in the sanskrit language later, without the help of guru it is difficult to understand or follow those scripts. So, the knowledge was transferred from guru to Shisya. After invention of printing machinery these verses were printed by british people with lots of mistake without knowing that as mistake. Then to mislead and spoil the value of it, some editing were done by them and included certain thing that is originally not their in vedas. The translation of Mr. Ralph Griffith may be right. But did he learn these hymns (original verses) through some sankrit pandits or munis by way of verbal communication or simply translated based on the version(text) available to him is questionable.
On the bottom line, are you trying to say that there is no evidence from our scripture regarding Speed of sound?
GyroPrivate Reply to Gyro | | Aug 28, 2006 11:45 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Hi Ganesh Ram,
Your stand is very simple. Taht is whatever conveyed in our scriptures are all stories. Well, I have now left with no other option other than repeating this whole episode (Sanathana Dharma - Part I & II) which was discussed right from the beginning :)
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Aug 28, 2006 11:45 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Hi Bharat,
Who is Aditya ?
Gyro Private Reply to Gyro | | Aug 29, 2006 1:38 am | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Sumanth Cidambi | | Since some of us like stories to illustrate a point –
King Janaka of Videha once performed a sacrifice at which many presents were offered to the priests. Priests from the Kurus and the Pāńcālas were gathered there. In this Janaka, there arose a desire to know which of these priests was the most learned in scripture. He enclosed in a pen, a 1000 cows. To the horns of each cow were fastened 10 coins of gold.
The king then said, “Venerable priests, let him of you who is the wisest Brahmin among you take away these cows.” Those Brahmins did not dare to do so. Then Yāgńavalkya said to his disciple, “Sāmaśravas, drive them away.” He drove them away. The assembled Brahmins were enraged and said, “How can he declare himself to be the wisest Brahmin among us?” Now, there was Aśvala, the hotr priest of Janaka. He asked him, “Yāgńavalkya, are you, indeed, the wisest Brahmin among us?” Yāgńavalkya replied, “We bow to the wisest Brahmin here but we just wish to have these cows.”
Gyro, forget who's patroninsing what for a moment. In response to what you have written, I believe that while verbal communication was the principal medium in ancient times, once the (devanagari) script evolved, the hymns or possibly whatever of them that could be remembered from smriti/sruti were written in sanskrit and their arrangement itself within the literature presumably depended on some sage's memory(?). Take the Rig Veda itself, why is the hymn dealing with the creation of the world in Book 10 (10.129) and not in Book One itself. I confess not having answers to such questions myself.
Whatever we have with us today is what we have with us, either in their entirety or in remnants. I sometimes question whether the published versions that we have today in Sanskrit of the Vedas or Upanishads are complete in themselves or if we have any lost sections. This is because I sometimes have found certain sections of the Upanishads suddenly closing and concluding abruptly.
Anyways, to the discussion at hand, how does it matter whether Griffith actually learnt to recite the Vedas or not. As you have rightly pointed out, it is questionable if he had access to a right and proper source of instruction. Let us also for argument's sake, set aside Griffith's translation, if you believe the British were biased in their interpretation and there is the possibility that a westerner may not know our language well enough to translate it for the benefit of the masses.
Any contemporary (Indian) scholar of Sanskrit will tell you that the verse in question does not contain such a reference to measuring the speed of light. Bottomline, all I am therefore saying is that Rig Veda I.50 does not contain the reference you speak of. That reference to the speed of light is contained in a commentary on stanza 4 of Verse 50 of Mandala 1 of the Rig Veda written by Sayana. It is not a part of the Rig Veda itself. Where Sayana obtains or bases his conclusion from, I do not know and cannot therefore comment.
The only Veda that deals with science and the occult is the Atharvana Veda, as I was taught. I will enquire with my teachers if the Atharvana Veda contains any reference to scientific fact (speed of light etc) that we are now discussing and let you know. Could I have your contacts please on PM? Many thanks...
Peace
S
PS: A good proportion of the verses in the Sama Veda are just the hymns of the Rig Veda that were transposed and rearranged and following a different metre of chanting. So, you could chant them either in the metres prescribed by the Rig Veda or in the metre prescribed by the Sama Veda... Whilst they make a huge difference in how the verses are themselves chanted, a person who recited them following the prescribed conventions under each of the Vedas would still be right. But, I am sure you know this already...
Private Reply to Sumanth Cidambi | | Aug 29, 2006 8:31 am | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Hi Sumanth,
I would absolutely have no problem to accept that the info about speed of sound is not in Rig Veda as long as it confirms that subject matters has been dealt in our other Vedas (Atharva Veda). So, I would wait for your reply if you find some information from your teachers regarding this that would be helpful to me for my future reference.
As Rig Veda is oldest of the Vedas and Atharva Veda contains many hymns from the Rig Veda, it was more logical for me to believe that the info regarding speed of sound must have been from Rig Veda that is considered as heart of all vedas. Though Bagavad Gita teaches Vedanta Treatise, it primarily applies to Rig Veda technically. Like Aryabhatta informed the world that earth is not flat and spherical in shape and he found how longer the day is, Sayana must have mentioned about the speed of light in his commentary on Rig Veda. However, you are welcome to point out that the info about speed of light is discussed in some other Veda (or not at all dealt in our Vedas).
Regards.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Aug 29, 2006 3:52 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Technically Aditya can be synonymous with Surya, though if I am right, all the sons of Aditi are Adityas... and there are aparently 12 of them... You will have to dig out more details on that.
Similarly the sons of Diti are the Daityas...
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Aug 30, 2006 9:43 am | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # | 
Zain Alvi | |
- How do u qualify which of the puranas are tampered and which is not.
- Who will qualify the authencity of the purana.
Zain
Private Reply to Zain Alvi | | Aug 30, 2006 3:07 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | hmm.. So, in all its reality we are not sure if the vedas we know are "The" vedas that were existing before "Writing" came into existence. And therefore to quantify the vedas as 4 itself is a very recent activity(Only from the advent of writing).
Zain, I would not say our puranas are "tampered" with. PuranAs,as they are/were are stories that were primarily narrated to show the illness and the righteousness of a particular society at a particular period of time. And since they are stories based on a period in Indian history and the place it was narrated,there need not be any degree of authenticity attached to them at all, IMO. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Aug 31, 2006 5:45 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Hi Zain,
Welcome to this thread Sanathana Dharma.
Puranas are based on Upanishads and Upanishads are based on Vedas. As the basic root is Vedas and taught primarily only through verbal communication, it was possible to tamper it knowingly or unknowingly after printed in text format. But puranas are not tampered one but stretched one by adding some stories without diluting core aspect of it. Like for an example Mahabhratha originally had only 10,000 slogas written by Muni Veda Vyas and now it is 1,20,000 slogas that is additional 1,10,000 slogas were added to make the message more understandable. (It is something like basic number is from 0 to 9 but the combination goes upto infinity).
Mathvachariayar, Adi Sankaracharyar & Ramanujar have done great research on Vedas and they have qualified the authenticity of Vedas.
Regards
GyroPrivate Reply to Gyro | | Aug 31, 2006 11:29 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | But gyro,
how can a mere 3 humans ascertain the authenticity of a text that was written before their existence and was present as verbal communication even before?
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Aug 31, 2006 4:53 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Ganesh,
For that matter, any text or book written before large scale publishing happened (also know as printing technology as introduced by Gutenbert), cannot be validated for authenticity.
Once mass production started, large numbers could be distributed, which resulted in making sure people couldnt really add to existing texts without other people knowing.
So are the Vedas really "the" vedas?
Nobody knows... but plenty of people believe they are, and faith is something that can move mountains.
Bharat Private Reply to Bharat P | | Sep 01, 2006 12:19 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh,
All the 3 are the great leaders of SD (and vedas) otherwise the world would not have recognised and acknowledged them as avtars.
Regards.
Gyro Private Reply to Gyro | | Sep 01, 2006 3:12 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Gyro,
but their approach to attain the ultimate were different. They had difference of opinion within their own religion as well as with other religions.
While one fought(argued) , lost and then won his arguments. The other tried to use magical powers against the muslim ruler.
How could we call them great when they could not accept other religions or tried to convert others to hinduism, even while knowing their paths were/are but one among the many to "Realize"?Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Sep 02, 2006 5:36 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | GR,
HINDUISM is not a religion it is way of Life - By Swami Vivekananda (Please read Hinduism as Sanathana Dharma here). The very word HINDUISM has been coined by the Europeans & westerners and has been forced on to us and accepted. (This was elaborately discussed between Cola and me under the same thread). If you want me to put Sanathana Dharma under the name 'religion' I would say our religion is the ' RELIGION OF THE VEDAS'. 'VEDAS' means complete Knowledge. Vedas mainly deal with supreme nature that is common to all the people living in the world. Space as Sutta Veli Akasam, Air as Vayu, Water as Neer, earth as Bhoomi or Prithvi and Fire as Agni. It describes the body as a combination of Pancha-bhuta, or the five elements.
From Science we see that from space came the gases like Hydrogen and Helium (Vayu) and when the various gases are compressed under pressure it shows liquid state (Neer). And from liquid when heavier elements are formed they formed the Earth (Bhoomi).. and finally when the Nuclear reaction starts it is the fire (Agni).
Even in a human body the space that it occupies and the entrapped space within is considered as Akasha. The air we breath is the Vayu. The blood and the fluid aspects are the Neer. The bones, flesh are earth and the warmth is the Agni. When a person dies it is the breath that stops first, then Agni comes out the body becomes cold. Then as it disintegrates water and earth merge with the earth and finally space is merged with the space. So finally, while the body (sarira) disintegrates into the Pancha-bhootas, the spirit (Atma) travels to another body.
Apart from these basic factors Vedas deals in detail about Vedic Science and Vedic maths which was also discussed by us in detail under the same thread and how it correlates to the modern science. The science and Maths also common to all the people in the world. We all know that the concept of 0 was given to the world by the Vedic scriptures. Here is what the Upanishads say about the Infinity.
"Om poornamadhaha poornamidham poornath poornamudachyathe poornasya poornamadhaya poornameva vavadishayate "
Poornam (Ultimate or infinity) If you take away Poornam out of Poornam what remains is still Poornam. (Poornam referred to here is the Supreme Lord). That supreme Lord is known as the Brahman. (not to be confused with the Lord Brahma the creator, Brahman and Lord Brahma are different). Brahman is also known as Virat Purushan. Brahma Sutram gives a complete description about this supreme Lord. It is explained that the whole Universe is his form. Knowing the Supreme lord is beyond our wildest imaginations. That is the reason why it was left to the people, to select their own form and worship (Dvitham and Advitham). It is only the form that is different, but the ultimate lord is the same. Unity in diversity.
If 'other' tried to use magical powers against the muslim ruler, the Shiva temple would have remained as 'Shiva' temple and not as 'Taj Mahal'.
According to Swami Vivekananda, From the lowest form of Fetishism to the Highest flights of Spiritual Philosophy, it is all there in our Upanishads (and therefore in Vedas).
VKLRPrivate Reply to Gyro | | Sep 03, 2006 8:42 am | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Well, yeah, the Upanishads sure pack some punch... And some of them were really written after much mind wrenching activity... but I am not sure that makes them "more" correct (or) divine.
As they say, an ounce of practice is better than tons of theory... So I guess even a glimse of the divinity the vedas talk about, is better than being a master of the tons of theory in the Vedas.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Sep 03, 2006 1:29 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Gyro,
so from all you have said about the human body, we can deduce that the energy is neither created nor destroyed but only transformed. Extending further, the human physical body can be seen as a chunk of energy.
My take on many of our epic is, like I have said before,is that to explain certain concepts and ideas, the stories were written. It could also be a part of start of verbal communication. Vedas, when rendered have words repeated in them. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Sep 05, 2006 10:23 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | " an ounce of practice is better than tons of theory" - Bharat, that is the reason why our munis spent most of their time doing penance in Himalayas or dense forest. Totally practical.
GyroPrivate Reply to Gyro | | Sep 05, 2006 10:27 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | GR,
You can find no stories in Vedas and Upanishads. The ideas and concepts was given as knowledge itself. Only in Epics & Puranas you can find added stories to put the concept in easiest form.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Sep 05, 2006 3:12 pm | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Exactly Ram,
before writing their tons of theory, the Sages indulged in tons of practice.
I doubt they meant for us to just stick to their tons of theory, and not put in our ounces of practice.
Frankly, If someone could perceive 5000 years back, we can do the same today...
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Sep 07, 2006 4:06 am | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Bharat, that kind of extrpolation, that when someone had done it 5000 years back , it can be done today, seldom works. If not we would have had means of knowing how to build temples with such great architecture. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Sep 09, 2006 7:11 am | | Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | And what was true 5000 years back need not be true now, right? ;-)
Private Reply to Bharat P | | Sep 11, 2006 7:36 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Zain Alvi | | I want to know if Puranas and vedas and upnashads are scared why dont all follow it...
Why do people worsship Demigods and mythological characters...
Why does every god only have powers and amazingly they fight above too
There is narad muni ...who plots and creates problems...are the gods unaware of his intentions and still fall in the trap.
There are dances in heaven....before gods ....the same dances which caused our emporers and kings to put their weapons in front of the british.
All these above facts and many more such mythological characters are accpeted by people without verifying facts whether these same god exists or not.
Importantly inspite of the sriptures of the religion going against everthing that is being preached and followed in hinduism (label of Santan Dharma at the moment) .
Why dont u help people understand the true santana dharma.
Are people following the right way
religion cannot be innovated but it is been done on a fast scale.
See the Details below :
UPANISHADS:
The Upanishads are considered sacred scriptures by the Hindus.
The following verses from the Upanishads refer to the Concept of God:
"Ekam evadvitiyam"
"He is One only without a second."
[Chandogya Upanishad 6:2:1]1
"Na casya kascij janita na cadhipah."
"Of Him there are neither parents nor lord."
[Svetasvatara Upanishad 6:9]2
"Na tasya pratima asti"
"There is no likeness of Him."
[Svetasvatara Upanishad 4:19]3
The following verses from the Upanishad allude to the inability of man to imagine God in a particular form:
"Na samdrse tisthati rupam asya, na caksusa pasyati kas canainam."
"His form is not to be seen; no one sees Him with the eye."
[Svetasvatara Upanishad 4:20]4
THE VEDAS
Vedas are considered the most sacred of all the Hindu scriptures. There are four principal Vedas: Rigveda, Yajurveda, Samveda and Atharvaveda.
Yajurveda
The following verses from the Yajurveda echo a similar concept of God:
"na tasya pratima asti
"There is no image of Him."
[Yajurveda 32:3]5
"shudhama poapvidham"
"He is bodyless and pure."
[Yajurveda 40:8]6
"Andhatama pravishanti ye asambhuti mupaste"
"They enter darkness, those who worship the natural elements" (Air, Water, Fire, etc.). "They sink deeper in darkness, those who worship sambhuti."
[Yajurveda 40:9]7
Sambhuti means created things, for example table, chair, idol, etc.
The Yajurveda contains the following prayer:
"Lead us to the good path and remove the sin that makes us stray and wander."
[Yajurveda 40:16]8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5[Yajurveda by Devi Chand M.A. page 377]
6[Yajurveda Samhita by Ralph T. H. Giffith page 538]
7[Yajurveda Samhita by Ralph T. H. Giffith page 538]
8[Yajurveda Samhita by Ralph T. H. Griffith page 541]
Atharvaveda
The Atharvaveda praises God in Book 20, hymn 58 and verse 3:
"Dev maha osi"
"God is verily great"
[Atharvaveda 20:58:3]9
Rigveda
The oldest of all the vedas is Rigveda. It is also the one considered most sacred by the Hindus. The Rigveda states in Book 1, hymn 164 and verse 46:
"Sages (learned Priests) call one God by many names."
[Rigveda 1:164:46]
The Rigveda gives several different attributes to Almighty God. Many of these are mentioned in Rigveda Book 2 hymn 1.
Among the various attributes of God, one of the beautiful attributes mentioned in the Rigveda Book II hymn 1 verse 3, is Brahma. Brahma means ‘The Creator’. Translated into Arabic it means Khaaliq. Muslims can have no objection if Almighty God is referred to as Khaaliq or ‘Creator’ or Brahma. However if it is said that Brahma is Almighty God who has four heads with each head having a crown, Muslims take strong exception to it.
Describing Almighty God in anthropomorphic terms also goes against the following verse of Yajurveda:
"Na tasya Pratima asti"
"There is no image of Him."
[Yajurveda 32:3]
Another beautiful attribute of God mentioned in the Rigveda Book II hymn 1 verse 3 is Vishnu. Vishnu means ‘The Sustainer’. Translated into Arabic it means Rabb. Again, Muslims can have no objection if Almighty God is referred to as Rabb or 'Sustainer' or Vishnu. But the popular image of
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9[Atharveda Samhita vol 2 William Dwight Whitney page 910]
Svetasvatara Upanishad Chapter 4 verse 19.
"Na tasya pratima asti"
"There is no likeness of Him"
The following verse from the Rigveda Book 8, hymn 1, verse 1 refer to the Unity and Glory of the Supreme Being:
"Ma cid anyad vi sansata sakhayo ma rishanyata"
"O friends, do not worship anybody but Him, the Divine One. Praise Him alone."
[Rigveda 8:1:1]10
"Devasya samituk parishtutih"
"Verily, great is the glory of the Divine Creator."
[Rigveda 5:1:81]11
Private Reply to Zain Alvi | | Sep 11, 2006 8:35 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Sumanth Cidambi | | Zain
Your questions are quite novel and interesting. Unfortunately, they are neither unique [to the understanding of any religion] nor are they being asked for the first time nor are the answers you seek so simple.
Can I humbly request that instead of relying on websites or other online material that carve out sections from scriptures that Hindus would probably consider sacred, in a manner that they seem out of context and appear to be apparently in conflict with one another, you read the entire unabridged texts of the Hindu scriptures themselves so you understand the background that lead to the specific verses that you have quoted.
A good starting point that I personally recommend is "Sanatana Dharma - An Elementary Textbook of Hindu Religion and Ethics" by Dr. Annie Besant.
This would probably lead to a more wholesome and balanced understanding of Sanatana Dharma.
Cheers
S
Private Reply to Sumanth Cidambi | | Sep 11, 2006 11:38 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Zain,
and that is the beauty of Hindu religion. Please do not think I am talking against other religion.
Hinduism or for that matter any other religion, I guess would not make a big fuss about how you follow the religion.
To reach to that standard of "there is no structure" and to take a position of " there is several structures" is something that is possible in Hinduism. Probably due to the fact that, the religion in its earlier form(sanathana dharma) was acceptible by many with varied culture and language.
And the other thing about SD, is to question the very existence. I guess the newer religions( including various cults and facets in what is now called Hinduism) does not allow the kind of questioning one does in SD. If you read the first part of this discussion you would know what I mean.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Sep 13, 2006 9:04 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | |
Hi Zain,
Thanks for posting verses from Upanishads and Vedas.
As I had written earlier and discussed in detail under this thread there are three ways to attain the supreme (formless god) viz Bakthi marg, Karma and Gnana marg. In each concept the approaches are entirely different. If we mix all the three and then try to find logic, it will lead us to confuse. The status of 'Swarga' (heavenliness) is a reward for the good life that is lived by us depends on the way we choose. Bakthi yoga is simple which everyone can follow. But Ganana yoga is difficult approach.
Secondly, teaching or learning of hymns of Vedas through net is not recommendable. It is to be learned in institute by reciting the verses in front of a teacher and learn the exact meaning of slogas from him.
Regards.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Sep 14, 2006 2:26 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | For every religion, interpretation by its followers can be various things....
Potentially, even though there is "probably" one reality ;-), I suspect, there are 6 billion ways of believing and reaching that one reality.For the 1 billion odd "Hindus", SD probably means different things.
Apart from this, I would like to comment on what Zain had posted. Sure, most religions believe in "one" great lord god... but if this lord god were to have one main failing - inability to take forms, shapes, characterestics etc, then this in itself would constitute a limitation for this god, which in itself would mean not being the one great lord god.
After all nothing should be impossible for God, right? I mean, how can someone as powerful as to be responsible for this huge universe not be able to take form, shape, size etc. Private Reply to Bharat P | | Sep 15, 2006 12:01 pm | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | BP, IMO, it is not the "inability to take forms", it is "sum total of all the forms". And therefore in some religion it is termed as formless and in some it is all of the forms. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Sep 15, 2006 8:02 pm | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Frankly, yeah, that which can be perceived PLUS that which cannot PLUS stuff that is both PLUS stuff that is nether perceived nor 'not perceived'(or beyond all this).
Now let this be equal to "X"
The truth is this PLUS not this PLUS both PLUS all that which is beyond.
Let us call this "Y"
The truth is this PLUS not this PLUS both PLUS all that which is beyond.
Let us call this "Z"
The truth is this PLUS not this PLUS both PLUS all that which is beyond.
and so on... And we were just talking perception here... pointless isnt it?
Just for the record, I was responding to Zain's posting. It seemed to hint that in the Vedas, the so called atributeless god was supreme. Actually this should have been the attributeless god, the god with attributes, both, neither and all else....If this be "Z" ....etc.. ;-)
Whatever dude. Enjoy!
Honestly, I wonder why we have such desperate need for a "god" to exist. A lot of work from the vedas (esp vedanta) rarely talks about "God".
Private Reply to Bharat P | | Sep 15, 2006 9:24 pm | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Gyro, read BP's last line.
Narada narada
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Sep 16, 2006 5:47 am | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | " A lot of work from the vedas (esp vedanta) rarely talks about "God". "
- It is true and that's the reason I always tell that the wisdom offered through vedas is common to people all over the world. Only Purunas like Skanda purnam, Shiva Puranam, Vishnu puranam etcetra talks or praise specific god. If we talk very high funda suddenly that would be difficult to accpect or follow. So, it starts from going to temple with simple bakthi, then to Parayanam, then to understanding puranas and its concepts, then to Upanishads (Gita) and then to Vedas. LIke PHD is done learning from basics. IMHO, it would be more than enough to the present world if we study and imbibe Bhagavath Gita. However Vedas praise 'Virat Purushan' - ultimate supremo, a formless god.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Sep 18, 2006 3:54 am | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Gyro,
that's brings to my first point in Part 1.
That the vedas seldom talked about gods and all the puranas were\are stories \folklore that were created by human beings.
Therefore, the god(s) in each of the puranas are also man-made. That is why we have so many out-of -the norm and yet justified acts of these gods.
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Sep 18, 2006 11:21 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Hi GR,
In the part one, I had proved with supporting points that our epics are not simply stories but added with some incidents (in story form) which gives us the feel that the entire epic is story.
To be on the otherside, let it be story. If the 'concept' is conveyed (such as soul, karma theory, rebirth etc.) the purpose is solved.
Even an atheist can be an ideal person to practice the contents of upanishad if he lives his life without cheating himself and outside world and fully loyal to the family & society. No need to belive in the concept of god. The basic idea is to practice 'Detachment' of materialistic joys and world.
(Maya maya maya ellam maya chaya chaya chaya ellam chaya - Lyrics of lovely song from film Baba)
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Sep 18, 2006 6:14 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Maya maya ellam maya
Chhaya Chhaya ellam Chhaya...
Then where is there living life without cheating yourself and outside world Where does being fully loyal to the family & society arise? Where is there a practice of 'Detachment' from materialistic joys and world?
Isnt that also maya maya ellam maya, chhaya chhaya ellam chhaya?
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Sep 18, 2006 8:59 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | I had the same question as BP. I tried posting it but failed to post the message after the Preview. Hmmm....
the gist of what I wanted to write,
1. To live a "dtached life" itself is an attachement.
2. One cannot be faithful to oneself and still be faithful to theworld. or the vice versa.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Sep 19, 2006 7:03 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat and GR,
When we dream while sleeping we feel as if that is very real. That is Maya and Chaya. Now assume that dream as trailer and our life is main picture. Like we consider that dream as real, we consider our whole life as ‘real’ which is not so. That’s the reason Krishna tells to Arjuna in Gita that whatever action performed by you is not ‘actually’ done by you. You are going to kill only their present physique based on their previous karma. Only the ultimate ‘real’ is merging of soul with paramathma after attaining salvation.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Sep 19, 2006 11:00 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | and probably that is why krishna killed Karna more than once. And also cheated to protect the physique of Arjuna eventhough Karna could have killed Arjuna.
What was Krishna thinking at that time? That in order to win, one can take whatever stance?
OorAnkku ubadhEsam dhAnae Geethai.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Sep 20, 2006 7:23 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh,
I answered when similar question was asked by Bharat regarding Lord Krishna (Jun 23, 2006 6:59 am), which I am reproducing here once again:
"Duriyodhana agreed in the assembly of kingdom that if Pandavas completes 12 years of Vanavasam and 1 years of Angyadhavasam successfully he will give half of the kingdom. He failed to honor his commitment. So, to establish Dharma, Lord Krishna had to play a strategic role. As per yudha dharma if some one fight with Gadha, the opponent should also fight with the same weapon. Here the indirect weapon used by Duriyodhana with the help of his uncle Saguni is ‘Cheating’. Hence, lord Krishna also have to play like that as per yudha dharma....."
Now coming to your point, If 'Anbe Sivam' Why Lord Shiva should carry a weapon (Thirusul)? Ooruku dhan upadesama? No. This is where we will have to appreciate the realistic approach of Hinduism. Is it practically possible to love each and everyone in the world? Can we love terrorists who are responsible for killing of many innocents by hitting twin towers and so many other incidents like this? They have to be killed mercilessly with the weapon like Thirusul if they are totally corrupt ( Ratchasa gunam). To the maximum possible extent we should try to practice peace. If the opponent is very adamant and provoke us to fight all the times, like Duriyodhana, after Sama, Dhana, Bedha and Dhanda approaches failed we should completely prepare ourself to fight with them like lord Krishna prepares Pandavas to fight with Gauravas.
What I was trying to highlight in my previous post is that the concept of many gods is essential for the devotees who wish to follow 'Bakthi Yoga' and One god concept for 'Gnana Yoga' and 'No god' approach is also OK if Karma yoga is followed consciously and meticulously.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Sep 20, 2006 4:51 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Ellam brammai...
Cheers
Bharat Private Reply to Bharat P | | Sep 20, 2006 6:41 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Gyro,
Krishna knew, it was Duruyodhana and Sakuni, the masterminds. Then why bring a war. He could have shown his wit and tactics on each of them. But he did not. When he could magically help draupadi, he need not have left the pandavas to struggle for 12 odd years. But he did. And he did not oppose the gambling either. And even at the battle when Arjuna asks Krishna "How can I kill my own brothers" Krishna seemed to have answered,"It is I who brings the birth and death, You are doing nothing".
As for anbe sivam, I think it comes from the fact the of showing that if Shakti is fierce then Shivam is anbu. And also, it can be taken as overly affection/deveotion will be as fierce as Shiva. I am talking about the intensity here.
Also there is a lot of difference between Shiva the person and Shivam the matter.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Sep 21, 2006 8:47 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | If you read Mahabhratha you will come to know that lord Krishna plays as the mediator and that's the reason both Duriyodhana and Arjuna comes to him for his blessings & support after the war is declared. Lord Krishna gives two choices to Duriyodhana whether he wants him alone or his entire army. Duriyodhana askes for army and therefore Lord krishna joins with Pandava side. So, he can't simply destroy someone eventhough he knows the masterminds behind injustice. During dice game Yudhistrar (Dharmabuthirar) thinks that Lord Krishna should not know that he is playing gambling with duriyodhana and therefore lord Krishna could not enter there. He was dynamically locked by the pandavas. Even in the assembly of kingdom Drowpathy argues and do not seek the help from Lord Krishna. Only when all the hopes become hopeless then Drowpathi surrenders completely to Lord Krishna and seek for his help and therefore the magical help, which was not something unique during those days. The point here is 'Surrendering' to lord 100%.
Lord Shiva is also known as Vishvanath, Nataraj, Maheswar, Nilakanda, Shankar, Pasupathi, Mahadevan, Gangadhar etc. Shivam is the inherent capability or quality of lord Shiva and he also knows as destroyer in Hinduism.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Sep 21, 2006 7:40 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | When krishna tells Arjuna that it is I in all things and nothings,it would mean then that the dharma and adharma are part of him as a quality. Does that mean that by killing Duruyodhana or for that matter Kamsa or for that matter anyone, he was cleansing himself of adharmA?
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Sep 22, 2006 8:20 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Killing of Ratchasa is Dharma and not Adharma. As said by me earlier, this is a very practical approach and that's the reason most of our god and goddess are symbolized with weapon.
Eventhough Krishna would like to bring the end of Dvapara yuga he did not simply fire the sudarsan chakra to destroy every one in the world. It was with reasoning and therefore Guruchethra war. Killing not for the sake of destruction, but for the sake of regeneration; transformation, transmutation, for recreating, cleansing out and eliminating the debris, the dross and the gross, transforming into strength, power, force etc. . We have been taught good and bad and offered mind & brain to choose the course of actions and thereby face the consequences as result.
GyroPrivate Reply to Gyro | | Sep 22, 2006 2:43 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | But the Ratchasa is not anyone but a part of Krishna himself (Thus spake Krishna in Geethai). And therefore the good and the evil are part of him then.
RAMA did not say thus. But Krishna DID.
Arjuna, the good,and Dhuruyodhana, the bad, are to fight and Arjuna should win,and since both of them are not different from what krishna is, Geethai is more of an infighting of the self of vyasa ( or any of the authors who contributed).Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Sep 25, 2006 7:26 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Eventhough sunrays comes from Sun we can't consider a part of sunray as a full sun. Lord Krishna is like Sun and all other qualities (that includes ratchasa too) are sunrays. Hence he says that I am there in all. When Lord Krishna kills Kamsan he does not kill himself.
GyroPrivate Reply to Gyro | | Sep 26, 2006 5:23 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Zain Alvi | | Dear Bharat,
I dont agree with your point ....of god being so great and not been able to take forms...
God is the creator of all.
Suppose you created a VCD player.....now u manufacture it .
To understand its problems or rectify the same will you become a VCD itself or you would create a manual for people to understand its problems.
Same is with the creator , he doenst need to come down as human to understand the problems because he is all knowing ...it will be foolish to think god doesnt know whats happening.
I dont understand why do we make gods out of human biengs who have certain special powers given by god. Just because somebody has certain powers doesnt mean he is god.
Till today and also in future we will keep on making people gods who either have some powers or assume to have one.
Reality is just a common sense away.
ZainPrivate Reply to Zain Alvi | | Sep 26, 2006 11:56 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Zain, if God is the creator of all, won't that mean He/She/It ( for I do not know what gender to address with),should have created the good and the bad, the animates and the inanimates the dark and the light.
And my thought proecesses ( or for that matter anybody's) is part of that creation.
Then why is that there are differences?
And if there are differences why am I contradicting Gyro, for example?
After all aren't we all are created to be what we are?
In our daily life for sustinance( need a spell checker in Ryze)we consume food. And where do we have the right to kill anything that is not ours?
And about the VCD player example. Like how the people who make the VCD player(at the assembly line) seldom create a user manual, so is how the our religious texts are. They all are written by us humans.
If, for example software guys write user manual, no user would like to read it. This my opinion.
And since the very idea of a user manual is to talk about the operation of the VCD player, so are the religious texts that talk about "living a life" in a society which is governed by certain rules. That is why, while Jainism and Buddhism teaches non-violence and vegetarianism, other religions stress on things that seemed/seems important to a society at a time period. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Sep 26, 2006 1:33 pm | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
N K nayak | | http://www.hindu.com/mag/2006/09/24/stories/2006092400170300.htm
Read this -"Openness is the essence" (Sept 24th)
(By Shashi Tharoor- a UN SecGen aspirant)
An approach that is worth emulating in any religion ,no doubt
He says
"I cherish the diversity, the lack of compulsion, and the richness of the various ways in which Hinduism is practised eclectically."
""Hinduism is, in many ways, predicated on the idea that the eternal wisdom of the ages about divinity cannot be confined to a single sacred book""
"So Hinduism is a faith so unusual that it is the only major religion in the world that does not claim to be the only true religion. I find that most congenial. For me, as a believing Hindu, it is wonderful to be able to meet people from other faiths without being burdened by the conviction that I have embarked upon a "right path" that they have somehow missed" !!!
Private Reply to N K nayak | | Sep 26, 2006 2:30 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | N K N,
Interestingly, Chirstianity accepts Judaism as a valid religion, and Islam accepts "people of the book" - Judaism and Christianity as valid religions.
So Hinduism isnt really unique on that one count.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Sep 26, 2006 3:06 pm | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Zain.
I appreciate your views, but dont subscribe to them.
1. I was not asking you to agree on my point of "god not being able to take forms". But that is a serious limitation you seem to shadow over by the next example of VCD players.
2. Your example of VCD players is good, but not appropriate. You seem to "know" that the creator who is so great "he doesn't need to come down as human to understand the problems because he is all knowing". On what basis do you decide on god's behalf that this is how god would do things? Why "cant" he come down or why "wont" he come down? Has he ever said he will never come down?
3. Your quote - "it will be foolish to think god doesnt know whats happening". I guess we would expect him to know all if he was as great as is claimed. But as above, his being great and his great "aversion" of being amongst us is something which puzzles me.
All this also makes me think that we are somehow detaching god from his creations.
There was god, and then he created something which wasnt really part of him, but something "other" than him. My take is that everything that is, was, will be, was not, is not or wont be is all within what we call the supreme. This means the so called Universe and all parts of it, including humans. So the question of "making" people gods doesnt arise. Everyone is already god - the only difference is that some know they are and most others dont.
So the question why must god come down is redundant... he is already down here, up there and everywhere where u can or cannot perceive.
having said this, this is my point of view, and you of course, are entitled to your own point of view. As I first mentioned, there are as many religions as there are people on this planet - it is all down to interpretation.
And my interpretation doesnt say that once god has created a VCD, he only leaves us a user manual. He also provides after sales service, and repairs the VCD if it is broken, and yeah, does check if the VCD is running properly and of course is the VCD too.
Bharat
p.s.: I refer to god as "he" and "him". This is just commonly used jargon, but could easily be a "she" or "her".
>Dear Bharat,
>I dont agree with your point ....of god being so great
>and not been able to take forms...
>
>God is the creator of all.
>
>Suppose you created a VCD player.....now u manufacture
>it .
>
>To understand its problems or rectify the same will you
>become a VCD itself or you would create a manual for
>people to understand its problems.
>
>Same is with the creator , he doenst need to come down as
>human to understand the problems because he is all
>knowing ...it will be foolish to think god doesnt know
>whats happening.
>
>I dont understand why do we make gods out of human biengs
>who have certain special powers given by god. Just
>because somebody has certain powers doesnt mean he is
>god.
>
>Till today and also in future we will keep on making
>people gods who either have some powers or assume to have
>one.
>
>Reality is just a common sense away.
>
>Zain
Private Reply to Bharat P | | Sep 28, 2006 7:03 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
N K nayak | | Bharath- True that some religions accept certain select religions as valid ---but in some cases gruudgingly or also as earlier versions of their religion because of shared messengers/ angels/traditions /or sameregions(Middle East/Egypt/Israel) from which they all originated
Private Reply to N K nayak | | Sep 28, 2006 9:32 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Zain you asked "I dont understand why do we make gods out of human biengs who have certain special powers given by god. Just because somebody has certain powers doesnt mean he is god".
-------------------------------
As citizens of the world are with varied nature and with different state of mind there was a need of god in different shapes of human beings. Like for a professional people it is lord Krishna, for formers it is Veerakarupan swamy, for students it is Saraswathi, for business people it is Lakshmi and so on. The ultimate aim is to develop concentration on a particular point strongly thereby able to control the mind from oscillation. This is a very scientific and practical approach. Besides this there is deep concept behind each and every god. A text book of ‘The Symbolism of Hindu Gods & Rituals’ written by Guruji A. Parthasathy would explain the reason behind gods in Hinduism in much more detail.
Peolple of any religion always want some object to concentrate. That object could be anything…..an idol, Omkar, Star & crescent or Calligraphic symbol of Allah, Cross, Messianic Seal, Jain hand, Buddha’s feet etc.
From the atomic station the energy is being sent to power stations, then to sub-stations and then the power distributed through transformers to our houses and sub-distributed to power points. Likewise from ultimate supreme (energy source) the communication sent through various gods ( temples as Power station) and transmitted through messangers like Ramanujar, Adi Sankarar, Mathvacharyar (Substations) and finally devered through acharyas ( transformers) to public (power point). As each and everyone is interrelated they have been as part of god.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Sep 28, 2006 9:39 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat,
The unique count of Hinduism (among many).......
if people from other religion question the basics of Hinduism or debate the concept of Sanatana Dharma they will not be seen as anti Hindu or atheist. They would be respected as knowledge seeker and responded in an appropriate manner. Anybody can question on Vedas, Upanishads, Gita or Purana. Just think other way round. Suppose I question bible or ask how can Islam says that they pray formless god when the name Allah itself is of male sex (means there god has a shape of male) I will be immediately glared as anti Christ or anti Islam which is not so in SD. Hinduism is really unique on this count.
Gyro Private Reply to Gyro | | Sep 28, 2006 9:40 am | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | N K N,
Thanks for posting the wonderful link.
GyroPrivate Reply to Gyro | | Sep 28, 2006 12:06 pm | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | In SD , I guess we(the humans) purposely introduced the human touch to the "Supreme" for an easier understanding by all. And I guess we knew about the Einstiennian theory of Mass can be converted to Energy or the vice versa. And that is why,
"yA devi sarva budhaeshu..."
we also identified that energy is prevalant everywher and it is a female since creation is a feminine thingy and it needs energy.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Sep 30, 2006 2:51 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
N K nayak | | Gyro-youre welcome -( i doubt though if the writer will win the race for the Un Sec-general !) Private Reply to N K nayak | | Oct 02, 2006 2:48 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Just for the record, I dont really think religion has anything to do with the truth or reality.
It so happens, that religions also talk of a point of view of what the truth might be. But then, so does physics. Neither has a perfect answer, so I guess it is up to us to figure out or die trying.
I would also like to point out that as per SD, all ways are ways to the truth - whatever the way might be.
That atleast, is the belief I subscribe to. If you are a great archer or musician, you can achieve your truth in archery or music.
Bharat
Private Reply to Bharat P | | Oct 05, 2006 4:22 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | |
"Just for the record, I dont really think religion has anything to do with the truth or reality" - by Bharat.
--------------
Truth is a tool to attain Salvation. Whoever speaks truth all the time under any circumstance is well qualified to reach the destination of Mukthi.
GyroPrivate Reply to Gyro | | Oct 05, 2006 2:38 pm | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | And is that why vishnu had to do it at least 9 times assuming he has done the 10 th time to be born again and again and again.
Either the mythological Vishnu does not speak the truth or it does not matter if you speak the truth or not.
more to come...Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Oct 05, 2006 4:43 pm | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Well, the Dasaavatara looks like evolution to me.. though a simplistic version...
Roughly, a fish, evolved with amphibian tendencies (turtle), morphed into a pig(Varaha), then into half man (Half Lion), little man(Vamana), warrior man (parasurama), perfect man (aparently Rama) and god (Krishna). I guess somewhere in there we missed the apes and stuff, but that is just details.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Oct 06, 2006 10:05 am | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Ganesh, Lord krishna was clever enough to manage situation without any lie like 'Ashwathama dead'during guruchethra when the Elephant Ashwathama died. If other imagine that that Son of Duronocharya is dead he is not responsible for that. However, if quoted with any example that proves 'Vishnu does not speak the truth' I will be in a better position to clarify.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Oct 06, 2006 10:08 am | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat, Thanks for posting the detail of Dasavadharam. In Ramayana 'Monkey army' plays vital role and Hanuman (apes) is regarded as great disciple. As the transition period for Ape to Human was not large as compare to other evoluation no seperate avthar was required but that form is given importance in Ramayana.
Gyro Private Reply to Gyro | | Oct 06, 2006 11:59 am | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | gyro,
my question was based on what you said, that the truth leans towards salvation / mukthi. Where would we categorize a person/god reborn/reincarnated again and again,
1) as a person with no salvation?
2) as a person who does not say truth?
Also, where does cheating and trickery position themselves in the road to salvation?Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Oct 06, 2006 4:29 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Does cheating and tickery prevent someone from achieving salvation? I dont think so...
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Oct 07, 2006 7:20 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | GR,
I understand your question as follows:
God tells lie therefore coming to earth as reincarnation like people take rebirth as not attained salvation.
Rebirth should not be compared with God’s reincarnation. Because we can’t choose the form of shape in rebirth whereas god have the ability to come to earth in desired form and take vishwaroopa too. During first avtar (Machavadaram) like fish how would it be possible to differentiate good and bad in that shape and thereby committing sin or gaining virtue? It is basically to describe the evolving of the human being right from beginning like present science starts from Ameba.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Oct 07, 2006 7:21 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat,
Only a person who has interest in other’s land, gold and princess will be doing cheating and playing trick. Unless we are least interest in these things (even if it is our own) it would be impossible to attain mukthi. So, Cheating and things like that would be definitely preventing from attaining salvation.
Gyro Private Reply to Gyro | | Oct 07, 2006 8:50 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Prema | | hi,
it was quite interesting to read all of your topics. i too have been thinking of the dashavathara and the evolution of mankind. i am no great reader of scriptures and puranas but i do find it interesting ot compare the modern world with our certain ideologies. for example, in my point of view god is the CEO of a company. as he was not able to concentrate his whole attention on the earth he designated vishnu(prosperity), shiva(death) and brahma(birth) as his managers. they too then shared their powers with lakshmi(wealth), parvathi(sakthi), and saraswathi(knowledge). then parvathi gave the management of vigna(obstacles) to ganapathi and disease management to murugan. of course there is hanuman,ayyappa,etc which i have not been able to connect. so comparing these to the present world we still see people worshipping their bosses by presenting them with gifts to get favours done. these are just my views so you may be able to guide me on these.Private Reply to Prema | | Oct 07, 2006 3:09 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | well, considering most companies or countries are run this way, I have no reason to think it couldnt be possible with this universe...
Delegation of work?
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Oct 09, 2006 9:59 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Thanks Prema Bhaskaran.
I presume that you have read my first posting in the first part of SD wherein I have discussed about the concept of god briefly. In Hinduism the ultimate god is known as Virat Purushan. Brahma Sutram gives a complete description about this supreme Lord. It is explained that the whole Universe is his form. As understanding of this Supreme lord is uncommon due to varied nature of people the concept was taught through various gods and it was left to the people, to select their own form and worship.
All the gods were with reasoning. Like Hanuman represent great will power so that whoever need strong physical and mental stamina can pray him. Lord Ganesha is considered the bodily incarnation of the entire Cosmos being known as Aumkara, because his body mirrors the shape of the Aum. (There is logical explanation for Each and every part of Vinayagar).
The wife of Lord Bramha is Saraswathi ( knowledge) because a creator of world requires knowledge about it. The wife of Lord shiva is Sakthi (Power), because power is required to destroy the devil force in the world. The wife of Vishnu is Lakshmi (Wealth) because to take care wealth is essential.
As there are so many gods in Hinduism it would be difficult to fit them into our ideology.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Oct 09, 2006 10:41 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Sumanth Cidambi | | My two bits - Indians in ancient times never worshipped a GOD as such. Their worship was directed to a specific aspect of nature or a natural phenomenon - Thunder, Sky, Earth, Water, Wind, Fire, Sun, etc.
I personally would conclude that the principal upanishads also do not speak about any GOD. They speak about an absolute, i.e. Brahman and its manifestation in each of us - Atman.
The BU also refers to a famous dialogue between the sage Yajnavalkya and several other sages. In that Yajnavalkya demonstrates manifold gods, one brahman, through a series of discussions... Most instructive reading if you are interested...
Fitting anything into ideology just depends on how elastic the mind is and how much you are willing to fantasise...
Cheers
S
Private Reply to Sumanth Cidambi | | Oct 09, 2006 7:04 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | I will agree with Sumanth. All the gods we have are for a reason socially. Religion gave the cohesiveness from a nomadic life our forefatehrs had. And the stories were/are good binding agent(s).
We have so many varied stories for each god. The villians are shown in good as well as in bad light.
SD never had a god(s) in its concept is my opinion.It purely was creating a settled form of life, trying to explain the Nature and rules governing settled life.
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Oct 10, 2006 5:13 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Somewhere on the way I wrote:
Like a single person is known as Father, Son, Uncle, Brother, Father-in-law, Son-in-law, Co-brother, Grandfather, Grandson, Friend, Enemy, Husband etc., the ultimate one god is known in various forms/names.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Oct 10, 2006 11:47 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | and Gyro, that's what is the society. had we been nomadic and food gatherers the reltationship(s) would have lesser meaning. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Oct 10, 2006 5:23 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Well, the vedas stopped with Brahman..... and the rest was left to the people I guess.... and yeah, we did create plenty of "Gods".. not necessarily related to the elements or weather phenomenon... creativity was all that was necessary.
In fact there is that old story of Vishwamitra "creating" a new deity. There is also teh old story of the "gods" creating Durga...
So I guess, we can take our turns now and create some more...
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Oct 11, 2006 9:51 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | GR, even our relationship with god would have lesser meaning if we simply run behind food, shelter, apparels and pleasures always.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Oct 11, 2006 10:01 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharath, The vedas talks about lord shiva too to an extent.
The hymn in Rudram and Chamakam of vedas are devoted to lord Shiva. Even in Ramayana, lord Rama worship lord Shiva after bring the end of life of Ravana.
Among the plenty of powerful deities already created we can choose one that most matches to our vibrations. Like I myself can very easily associate with lord Krishna.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Oct 11, 2006 10:22 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | gyro, there would not have been time to sit and think of anything other than food and shelter and apparel. It is when we started settling down, we had more time to think(idle). You know what Idling brain does. And since the early settlers had to communicate and express, the languages came into existence. Just like we do at "Rayil payaNangaL" Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Oct 11, 2006 10:28 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | But rudram and chamakam are latter extensions of vedas.Are they not?
The RamayaNa only gives the idea the there were established shivites in the south (Ravana being one of them )one as there were vaishnavites in Central India (on the River banks).
And it is that resonance( similar line of thought), that gives the liking (preferntials) towards one diety and less about the others. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Oct 11, 2006 11:39 am | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | When we aim to build a house we start saving small penny from earlier stage itself. Likewise we can train ourselves in a simpler way to prepare our bed in future like going to temple whenever possible and meditate for few seconds with closed eyes standing in front of idol, doing jabam for 10 minutes in our house early in the morning etc.
I don’t know whether rudram and chamakam are latter extensions of Vedas. But it is discussed in Yajurveda. Muni Veda Vyasa, who is considered as avtar of lord Vishnu, divided the veda into four. However, mention about Lingam is not found in Vedas.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Oct 11, 2006 12:09 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | If you wanna see my other side of view (short discussion)pl. visit the following link
http://www.ryze.com/posttopic.php?topicid=756570&confid=1857
GyroPrivate Reply to Gyro | | Oct 11, 2006 1:53 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Lingam and Yoni mudras are very much phallic worship that got incorporated into what is now hinduism. I guess every society had it. Some had it as menhirs.
When Shiva is not mentioned in veda and yet we take him as a god, then he has to be a latter god. Someone came /recognized/discovered/invented after the vedas were written/renedered.
If veda vyasa is an incarnation of Vishnu, then we do not have a temple for him which leads to the fact that not all gods creation/ incarnation/ reincarnation are god(s). This would mean that the villains of the the epics were also god(s) creation/incarnation/reincarnation, which the hindus do not accept. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Oct 12, 2006 5:55 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Not only for Vyasa, except for Rama and Krishna there is hardly any temples for other avtars like Balaramar, Parasuramar, Vamana etc. Even for that matter there is no Krishna temple, we have only perumal (Maha Vishnu) temples. And in shiva temples we worship only lingam and not Shiva in original shape (except for few temples where Natarajar - dancing shiva is worshipped).
Otherthan Brahman, every other gods are latter gods to put it in modern language. (Even this latter is much much more earlier). Alwars and Nayanmars worshiped this later gods. For later society like us latter gods are the solution. Just because we consider this as later it does not mean it has less power. Like later IC chips helps the computer to perform faster. For that matter agriculture is also later. Every other science is latter invention. Ramakrishna Paramahamsar worshiped this latter god Durga (Kali). What we have to understand is the core concept behind each and every god. Then we will see Brahman in gods. Computer coding behind all programs and operating systems are not simply get revealed. Again in the codings binary codes (Bits) are not seen. Ultimately that 1 and 0 is the root cause. And here the root cause for all gods is Brahman.
However, the following link mention details of rudram (Lord Shiva) in Yajur Veda.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shri_Rudram
Gyro Private Reply to Gyro | | Oct 12, 2006 6:29 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | I guess all deities were created by humans for humans.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Oct 12, 2006 6:58 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | and the 1's and 0's are only representation of a charge's level.
I do not agree with gyro that noone programmed with 1's and 0's. The circuit designers in early days did it.
My POV like what BP has written is that the god(s) is\were\are created\being created by humans.
Is it for humans? I would disagree.
Why? for example we would not have elephants doing pooja to the idols then.
Gyro, those who you have quoted are great personalities. No doubt. Their contribution to the society is probably immeasurable and has withstood all ups and downs over the years. But could it be that they tried to penetrate the ideology of the SUPREME into the common man's thinking by having god as a means?
and about the temples, surprising is'nt it? Proves my point of cultism in SD that became vaishnavites and shivites.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Oct 13, 2006 7:05 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat, I partially agree with you. Yes, god has been created for humans BUT NOT CREATED BY HUMAN. Otherwise we would have the list of people who created which god.
Gyro Private Reply to Gyro | | Oct 13, 2006 7:32 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | as I was discussing this later issue these 1 & 0. Otherwise I would have mentioned as 'energy' (which we have already discussed).
We used to get blessing from elephant while visitng temples. Now you made me to think saying that elephants doing pooja to the idols :-).
Like the first cell of human being splits into two (in the process of pregnenency) and grows further, the brahman was seen in Vaishnavam and Sivam and latter to many other forms.
Gyro Private Reply to Gyro | | Oct 13, 2006 11:44 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | and just like to start the splitting two cells had to fuse, the cults should have realized that they all started from ONE or NOTHING. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Oct 13, 2006 6:55 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Well, Gayathri and Durga, two of the top deities were created... either by human or by other deities..
So looks like this was common knowledge...
Murugan was created too by deities. So was Ayyappa...
I suspect, all deities were created by humans, only we have lost knowledge of this... but just one example of Vishwamitra creating Gayathri is good enough for me..
Of course, you are entitled to disagree
Bharat
Private Reply to Bharat P | | Oct 18, 2006 7:49 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat,
Gayathri is acronym of GAYAntam TRIyate Iti. It is not a goddess. Gayathri Manthra is considered as mother of all vedic mantras as considered as elaboraion of OM.
Gyro
PS : I won't be available until 24th Oct 06.
Private Reply to Gyro | | Oct 18, 2006 11:06 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Sumanth Cidambi | | You could also call Gayatri as a metre or chandas for 3 verses of 8 syllables each... the mantra that we know by the same name...
tat-sa-vi-tur-va-re-ni-yam
Bar-go-de-vas-ya-Di-ma-hi
di-yo-yo-nah-pra-cho-da-yAt
The mantra itself is supposedly addressed to Savitr, a pan-vedic deity among others and goes by several descrptive phrases including "mother of the vedas", "holiest mantra" et al...
Cheers
S
PS: I think it was madhavacayra who once said, "why debate on the face of god before we even qualify to wash his feet"
Private Reply to Sumanth Cidambi | | Oct 18, 2006 4:47 pm | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Thanks Sumanth,
you always seem to provide the vedic gyan at the appropriate moments.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Oct 19, 2006 5:37 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | But the thing still remains that deities were probably created by man for man...
So were the geometric designs or yantras...
The mantras, especially the Beeja mantras are derived directly from the script of sanskrit... which was probably invented by one or a group of whacked out dudes who specialsed in contorting their mouth and making funny sounds.
And the Tantra - or methodology of indulging in the ritualistic worship was also probably man made...
Cheers and Happy Deepavali.
Bharat
Private Reply to Bharat P | | Oct 25, 2006 10:19 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat,
Most of gods we know today are from various puranas and Ramayana & Mahabharatha. The gods are also subdived based on varied nature. Like for an examaple SAKTHI is known as Parvathi, Durga, Kali, Uma etc.
For the academic interest I provide the following link that talks of (vedic)gods.
http://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/vedicgods.asp
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Oct 25, 2006 10:40 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Gyro, the link clearly shows how the ancient East Asians, tried to understand Nature and its element. By humanizing and raising the status of each to an authority, it made two things easy. One to add attributes and to make certain new practices in that society legal(esp the soma drink)
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Oct 25, 2006 10:47 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Ganesh,
I guess that means that man did create god. Right? ;-)
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Oct 26, 2006 7:00 pm | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | I rest my case. The verdict is in beyond reasonable doubts. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Oct 27, 2006 10:08 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | There are different views in Hinduisam regarding the evoluation of gods. One such theory would say that without energy no creation is possible. So, Adisakthi (primal energy) created three major gods of Hinduism. Then a question will arise how Adisakthi have born? It replies that from the cosmic illusion first the sound OM was born and then light. From the light was born the Goddess Adishakti. From her the gods were born who then created the universe.
There is another view that cosmic illusion gave birth to Lord Vishnu, Who created Lord Brahma in the lotus flower which grows from the navel of Vishnu at the beginning of the universe. Later Brahma created ten Prajapatis and seven rishis (Saptharishi). Various texts give different versions of Lord Shiva's creation.
As Vedas are not man made and the root cause of all important gods must be from vedas (not so directly, like Shiva is identified with Rudra in the Rig Veda), The attributes of gods must have been taken from Vedas and appropriate shape given by risihis who were created by Brahma out of his thoughts.
So, on the bottom line the gods of Hinduism are not man made.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Oct 27, 2006 11:59 am | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Sumanth Cidambi | | No doubts in my mind which of the ancient civilisations smoked the finest weed before their creative juices flowed ;-)
Private Reply to Sumanth Cidambi | | Oct 27, 2006 12:34 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | | What is the Significance of OM or AUM or AMEN or AMIN? Why is AUM prominent and Useful?
How is gayathri mantra - an expansion of AUM so powerful?
Pls enlighten me...
Bharath Private Reply to Bharath Cola | | Oct 27, 2006 2:09 pm | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Sumanth Cidambi | | Bharat
Please excuse the length of this post.
The Mandukya upanishad, a part of the Atharva Veda, is all of 12 verses. This upanishad explains the meaning of the the word AUM as well as its individual components.
Summarily put:
The self is seen as Brahman and as having four quarters
A, the first element represents VaisvAnara, the first quarter, or the waking sphere of activity in which one is cognitive of external elements. This is derived from the Datu (root) 'ap' meaning to obtain or to be the first
U, the second element represents Taijasa, the second quarter, or the sleeping (dreaming) state in which one is cognitive of internal elements. This is essentially a state of intermediateness
M, the third element, represents Prajna, the third quarter, or the sleeping (dreamless) state, where one is not cognitive, or what you may call transcendental consciousness, for want of a better word. Its root is 'mi', to measure or to merge.
The fourth quarter is one which has no elements, which cannot be spoken of, ungraspable, subtle, not cognitive, not not-cognitive and so on but more importantly, benign and non dual in nature, what is referred to as "Sivo'dvaita evam" a k a the self.
Ayam Atma Brahma, Tat Tvam Asi - meaning "my soul is Brahman, that you are".
As regards the gayatri mantra, I mentioned above that it is a prayer to Savitr, a pan vedic god sung in a particular chandas or metre. You will find this mantra in several sections of the three primary vedas. [PS: If you are academically inclined, this mantra makes its universal debut in the Rg Veda in Book 3, Hymn 62, Section 10.]
The invocation itself means "O thou existence Absolute, Creator of the three dimensions, we contemplate upon thy divine light. May He stimulate our intellect and bestow upon us true knowledge"
If you were to read the Manusmriti, legend has it that the original mantra was woefully long to recite, even for the gods, so they went to that forgotten god, Prajapati, who shortened the mantra by some verses. The [lazy] gods still found that shortened version too long, presumably, it cut into the time they spent fighting each other or wrecking havoc on "evil" people or simply enjoying themselves. They appealed to Prajapati again, who shortened it yet some more and that is the pithy version we have with us today. I wish I had taken precis lessons from Prajapati ;-)
End of day, it what you want to believe and the faith with which you approach your daily ablutions. Peace and enlightenment...
Cheers
S
PS: Dr S Radhakrishnan, our beloved former president has written a wonderful book called the Principal Upanishads, if you are interested in understanding vedic thought. I find it to be most instructive when I am studying our scriptures.
Private Reply to Sumanth Cidambi | | Oct 27, 2006 7:33 pm | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Hmm. so the gayatri is a shortened version of the shortened version of the long version.
That's what I wanted to do with mantras in the other thread.
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Oct 27, 2006 8:46 pm | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Sumanth,
I agree, Mandukya upanishad rocks.
And the simple description of "experience" as waking, dream and deep sleep are definitely impressive, considering it was written eons before modern science again re-recognized these states of mind.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Oct 27, 2006 9:05 pm | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Just in case anyone wonders how this thread started, you can go and read up the original thread which got too big and fat and threw up slow response times....
http://www.ryze.com/posttopic.php?topicid=598540&confid=660
Cheers
Bharat Private Reply to Bharat P | | Oct 28, 2006 3:11 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | | Thanks for the elaborate explaination.. but why does a quantitative repetition of gayathri supposed to give greater benifits to the one who chants?
is there a significance beyound earnest praying from gayathri or AUM?
cheers
bharath cola Private Reply to Bharath Cola | | Oct 29, 2006 5:07 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Sumanth Cidambi | | You may have been told that a mantram is effective only if repeated in a particular way, with the right pronounciation and intonation or for a set number of times.
When you chant something holy, anyway you say it works, whether for 5 minutes or for 500 hours or for one time or 1 million times. All mantras ultimately point to a self that is waiting to be discovered in your consciousness.
Anything which takes attention from the mantram, including counting or worrying about getting an "oh-so-perfect" intonation too much or connecting the mantra with your breathing process etc only serve to retain the mantra at a superficial effect...
Just understand the meaning of the mantram you choose for yourself and chant it with sincerity and enthusiasm, each repetition will carry you nearer to your own self.
Cheers
SPrivate Reply to Sumanth Cidambi | | Oct 29, 2006 4:05 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Food for thought Sumanth.
That can also mean any mantra can be used (or no mantra at all)... as nothing else matters except keeping the mind on the mantra (or non-mantra)... any sound(or soundlessness) should do, right?
As duration, style of chanting and all else doesnt matter... I guess neither does the mantra...
so I guess keeping the mind on no mantra or "nothing" as can be said, would also be a neat idea... wouldnt it?
Cheers
Bharat
Private Reply to Bharat P | | Oct 30, 2006 3:24 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Sumanth Cidambi | | whatevere works for you man ;-) Private Reply to Sumanth Cidambi | | Oct 30, 2006 3:54 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | IMO
the idea our ancestors had is that, if you want to think or if you want to kindle your thought process before action then you have to concentrate. To concentrate you have to set your mind to no distraction. Repeating anything for a set amount of time would lead to concentration. And therefore the mantras were/are asked to be repeated.
This is where I got the 10 second 8 second thingy or the 80-20 percent. that is, in a whole of 10 second, a normal human being can train to concentrate at best to 8 seconds. And that is why the Gayatri mantra when said would (IMO) finish in 8 seconds a two second gap and then a 8 second repeat again.
Not only this before gayatri mantra, those who do sandhyavandana regulate their breathing for a set number of times. And before that they do the achamanam to have their mouth wet as in salivated.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Oct 30, 2006 6:58 am | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | When a mantra is repeated for several times (usually 108 times) it is called japam. Why 108? You may find very interesting informations from the following link:
http://www.salagram.net/108meaning.html
In one minute, we breathe in approximately 15 times, in 1 hour 900 times, and in 12 hours 10800 times, and in a day 10800 * 2 times. A day consists of 24 hours, and if we set aside half the day for our day to day routines, then one can spend 12 hours for recitation of one's idol. Therefore, the maximmum number of times that one can recite "mantra", or perform "Japam" are 10800. If one wants to obtain 100% benefit of its japam, then performing japam 108 times will give the benefit of 100%.
Eighteen is also considered as the code number to break into the soul of the Nature.The first Veda, believed to be protected by Lord Brahma himself, had 18 chapters. Later, Veda Vyasa divided it to create the four vedas: Rigveda, Yajur Veda, Sama Veda and Atharava Veda. Each of these vedas had 18 chapters.Veda Vyasa also wrote 18 puranas and 18 upa-puranas. The Bhagavad Gita has 18 chapters and the Kurukshetra war lasted 18 days. Sabarainala has 18 stepts (represents 18 mountains) and so on. Private Reply to Gyro | | Oct 30, 2006 12:30 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | | Yes - any mantra or chanting of a word repeatedly would yield to the discipline of the mind from multiple random thoughts to A single though and then the ultimate state of thoughtlessness - wherein one experiences the SELF (interesting debate is - who is this ONE who experiences the SELF? If this "one" still exists, how can the SELF surface? :-) ) anyway - having bought that one ... my question was WHY GAYATHRI or AUM? and why not anything else?
I have heard this stuff from a trusted source, wanted to share the same with you folks on WHY GAYATHRI / AUM...
AUM knocks all the 7 chakras of the human system, these are bases of sound which is the most effective to unlock the Psychic energy clots that are in our system which we hardly use...
Aaaa - this sound originates from our base addressing Muladara , swadhistana, manipura
Oooo - when one moves to this, it addresses manipura,anahata and vishudha
Mmmm - and finally this sound knocks Vishudha, Agya and Shahasara
these constant knocking unlocks the energy clots in each of the chakra and provides physic energy to man, apart from physical intake of food which provides basic energy...
thats why i beleive AUM is significant and powerful.. its the simplest and easiest form...
GAYATHRI - is supposed to have even stupendous means to address the 7 chakras in a holistic manner and activate the 7 energy clots rather sooner.
in addition to that - the mind gets disciplined by the chanting and to reach thoughtlessness.. and ultimately connecting to the cosmic force which is far superior to physical energy by food and Psychic energy by the 7 chakras.
its in that state of thoughtlessness - when sahasara opens its energy clots and receives the cosmic energy from existence.. the true state of Brahmin... aham brahmasmi...
Interesting..
Private Reply to Bharath Cola | | Oct 30, 2006 9:22 pm | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Could any of the repetitive model be related to the waning and waxing of the moon?
I did a calculation 108 times 8 seconds comes to 14.4 minutes approximately the waning or the waxing phase(in days) in a month. Also adding 14.4 twice , gives to 28.8, another approximation for a lunar month.
Hmmmm........ Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Oct 31, 2006 4:53 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | | very interesting ganesh! Private Reply to Bharath Cola | | Oct 31, 2006 9:02 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | BC - that was good explanation for AUM.
Ganesh - Why 8 seconds? Is it to arrive 108 by calculating backwardly from 14.4 minutes?
Gyro Private Reply to Gyro | | Oct 31, 2006 12:31 pm | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Why 8 seconds? My theory is,
This is the 80-20 concept. What does 80-20 mean? It means that anything that has to be accomplished gets done only 80% if we try for 100%.
A teacher imparts only 80% of his knowledge to his disciple.
In a span of 10 seconds, the mind most probably can be trained to have a single thought only for the maximum of 8 seconds. And how do we get the mind to have a single thought for 8 seconds? This is where you create a phrase, stanza, poem,couplet that can be said in 8 seconds. After a pause of two seconds you start all over again.
The 14.4 minutes is something I ended up while computing with the above theory.
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Oct 31, 2006 5:15 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | "Nothing" works for me Sumanth.
Guys, looks like Numerology 101 all over again... ;-) so now 108 is the cool number...
Go right on..
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Oct 31, 2006 6:44 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # | 
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Talking of Mantras...
I tried this and it WORKED!
I recited Sloka # 33 from "Soundarya Lahari" 108 times a day for 21 days and landed on a small fortune from an unexpected source.
Swami Amrita Mayaananda Puri who is now with Sri Sri Ravishankar at Bangalore has told me that Mantras RULE the world and they bring about mental, spiritual, environmental and aura cleansing.
Cheers,
Hari Private Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Oct 31, 2006 11:09 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Hari,
is this a cause and effect thingy? Like you recited and that is why you got the wealth.
Or even if you hadn't, the wealth would have reached you anyways.
Did the sloka alone help? Or you did put some effort in attaining this source of wealth?
hmmmm.... 21 days. what is this #33 sloka? how many seconds that it takes to recite it? did you render it as sloka or with a raga attached to it?Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 01, 2006 9:31 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Hi hari,
Thanks for sharing your practical experience regarding mantra.
GR – If the wealth would have reached anyway, the fortune can’t be from UNEXPECTED source. When apply mantra it connects to the NETWORK so even through unknown source one can expect affluence in an astonishing way. The result can be seen in any number of days that need not be standard for all. Why don’t you try once to see it yourself?
Private Reply to Gyro | | Nov 01, 2006 9:46 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Bharat Pat,
I do not know how many times you have tried with mantra to come to finale that 'nothing' works for you.
When the medicine does not work that could be due to following reasons.
1. Wrong diagnosing by the doctor
2. The medicine is not manufactured with proper
combination of drugs
3. The patient have not taken medicine as advised
4. Taken the medicine as advised but did not follow
the habit (food or other) as recommended.
5. The Virus is more stronger then usual.
6. The patient do not have faith on medicine or doctor
When everything is proper the patient get cured based on immune system of one's physique.
In the similar way the mantra also will work for anyone when practised rightly with faith I guess.
Private Reply to Gyro | | Nov 01, 2006 9:58 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Hi Ganesh/ Gyro,
In this 21 days I did NOTHING. Lets just say it was a Gift for a past favour. Since it came from a totally UNEXPECTED quarter, I was blown. Because I did recite this mantra religiously and devotedly everyday.
Though I train people on cause & effect, power of positive thinking and affirmation therapy, I was amazed by this sudden FORTUNE.
The scientific explanation for this is "Mantras create a positive vibration around us and bring about a RE-ARRANGEMENT OF ATOMS conducive to us".
This Mantra is just 4 lines and takes about 12 seconds to recite it once. So it will take about 20 minutes to recite it 108 times. Tamil version is available in most book stalls, including RK Math, Mylapore & LIFCO Books in Ranganthan Street.
There is another Lakshmi Mantra which is believed to have made Khubera rich:
"OM SHREEM HREEM KLEEM IYM KAMALA VAASHINYAI SVAAHA".
I'm yet to start reciting it everyday! :)
Cheers,
HariPrivate Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 01, 2006 12:27 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Gyro,
why should the forutune be attained UNEXPECTED eventhough it would have come ANYWAYS. It is just that one does not know what lies in the future. Did the sloka help that is the question.
I understand all this positive vibration. The very reason you feel positive is because you are NOT idling for a set period of time and are focussed. Therefore you have taken away that said amount of time from having "Notorious"(I did not get a better word) thoughts.
Remember the saying "As you sow,so you reap"? I go with that as my way of life.
Like auvaiyar had said,
"Nandri oruvarukku seidhakAl annandri
yendru tharungkol yena vaenda
Nindru thaLarA vaLar thengu
thAn unda neerai thalayAlae thAn tharudhalAl"
the meaning of which in a gist is,
Like the coconut tree that gives the sweet water from its head after a long period of growth, so will all good deeds one does to others.
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 01, 2006 12:57 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Hari,
my question was just that, wouldn't the fortune anyway had come had you not recited the mantra? There might not be an answer for this at all. My conclusion is what I have written in my reply to Gyro.
The very idea it is positive is Relative.
Positive for whom? you might have felt positive but did bring the positiveness to the people around you? Also, the realm of positiveness should have prevailed around you is it not? so did anyone near you feel the effect of what you experienced?
If vibrations can rearrange atoms then a huge wind blowing would do the same too?
For example over here in the Northeast US the mid of Fall season we get two huge winds. The Fall leaves fall out of the tree and the trees are barren. Is this good or bad? hmm. It is pretty bad for the humans to go office at wind gust of 30-60 mph and chillness bringing the temp to 30F. But for the trees, Nature creates a point of survival. The leaves are shed , so that the huge snowfall does not bring the tree down. Isn't this positive for the trees?
Like they say "Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder" so are the "anythings", "somethings" and the "Nothings"
You felt positive is a good thing to know. You feel prayers help is good thing to know. But to observe this is the way for "materialistic gain" is something that I cannot accept.
This my own personal observation/attitude.
Also Cause and Effect are cyclic and are relative too. the effect is the cause for the next effect which is a cause again.
Also, when you recite, if you use Sanskrit sounds that will be a different vibration than using sounds from other languages. Even in sanskrit, if you mispronounce it is going to be meant differently and therefore a different vibration. Remember the story of KumbakarnA.
So how do we know that the prayer caused the positive effect? we do not and will never know.
But on a personal level it made you feel good at the end and "That" is life all about.
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 02, 2006 4:48 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | GR,
From your reply to me and Hari and examples given I understand that YOU TALK OF KARMA THEORY. That is whatever was sowed in the previous birth would be reaped in the present life whether we recite mantra or not. Is it your stand GR? I can move on further if you clarify me.
Gyro Private Reply to Gyro | | Nov 02, 2006 5:53 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | A part of it is correct gyro. That it is our action that results in the reaction which again becomes the action for the next reaction. The other part where it is my previous birth, I do not accept that. For I do not know How I was , What I am, When i will be Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 02, 2006 6:59 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Dear Ganesh,
I'm NOT an authority yet on Cause n Effect.
I believe in Mantras.
I believe in the Power of Positive thinking.
If a combination of both works wonders for me, then I'm happy.
I don't bother myself analysing what works, what doesn't.
"Ennavum seiyalaam nanmai thaan mukkiyam" or "the end always justify the means" is my philosophy HERE, since it doesn't concern others.
But in other areas of life, I try and enjoy the JOURNEY as much as reaching the DESTINATION.
I have only one life to live! I wd like to achieve lots of things sitting on the shoulders of my ancestral giants, treading the already travelled path, rather than wasting time TRYING to re-invent the wheel.
Loka samastha sukino bhavanthu!
Cheers,
HariPrivate Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 02, 2006 7:09 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Ganesh,
Hope you will agree that listening to some songs make you happy, whereas some songs touch a cord deep insie your heart amd makes you feel sad.
When someone wakes you up with a phone call and says "Hi Ganesh, just called to tell you that you are a great person; Have a nice day!", you obviously feel happy.
Words have a powerful impact on our well-being. Especially positive & powerful words. And that is the funda behind Affirmation Therapy.
The impact of Decibels or "Naadham" on our psyche is phenomenal.
And SANSKRIT words are the most RESONANT in triggering positive vibrations.
I would rather start chanting Mantras, even if the pronounciation is NOT 100% right, and get it perfected over a period of time, than NOT try it all due to FEAR of pronouncing it wrong, BECAUSE I BELIEVE FIRMLY that God will not punish me for that.
Moreover there are audio-tapes available for most Mantras these days. You just need to recite it along for a week to get the right pronounciation.
Cheers,
Hari
Private Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 02, 2006 1:01 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | GR,
With the power of mantra Adi sankarar could separate his soul and enter into some other body to gain sexual knowledge. Now can we say that even otherwise it would have happened. Asking whether mantra has power and how it has power is something like questioning how & why sugar has sweetness. You may sometime say that the success may be fluke or accidental coincident. In your practical life you might have come across many sincere workers who do not come up in life to that level of sweat. By explaining the power of mantra through others experiment may not be convincing for one who do not have belief. So, you can try yourself to recognize the power of it.
When you agree that hard work (sowing seeds) and dedication will bring success, chanting mantra sincerely for several days for a certain number of times (108) with faith also a kind of hard work and dedication in a different route. So, we don't deviate here I think.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Nov 02, 2006 4:05 pm | | : re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | hari, that was my point. That the feeling is very personal. For example I listen to a same song sung by two different people, the words are the same, the rendition might be different or the voice might be different. I tend to go with what suits me well. or where I find my happiness. If I go with that line of thought, then obviously it is not the mere song or the mantra but the way it is rendered is more important.
I agree , the god does not punish(I for one have been arguing god is man made and still I agree), but if I go with that line of thought, then there is no right or wrong. The qualifying attribute of any action as right and wrong are all human made and very much has a period of time when it is punishable and another period of time when it is acceptible.
And this is my take in the whole of part I and part II of this thread.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 02, 2006 7:36 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Ram,
That "nothing" comment was intended to be a pun...
No sound is also a sound. Similarly, no mantra is also a mantra...
cheers
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Nov 02, 2006 7:39 pm | | re: : re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Interesting thing to say Ganesh..
But true - "nothing is good or bad, thinking makes it so."
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Nov 02, 2006 8:34 pm | | re: re: : re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | and therefore in IMO,it does not matter when,what,where,why,which or how(the 5 wives and 1 husband). All that matters is did I feel good at that instance. And that is LIFE and that is what SD is all about.
a person invoking KY(for Kundalini Yoga) and a person doing nothing enjoy what they are doing. It is the society which praises and pedestal one while bring the other down.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 03, 2006 7:45 am | | re: re: re: : re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Every living human being in this earth DOES what makes him/ her HAPPY.
So lets follow the course of our hearts and minds and DO whatever makes us happy.
Wishing everyone Aanandam & Paramaanandam!
Cheers,
Hari Private Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 03, 2006 8:54 am | | re: re: re: re: : re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | | Hi Ganesh,
Read thru the whole tread after a break... I wish to respond to your statement....."If vibrations can rearrange atoms then a huge wind blowing would do the same too? "
I understand that it was your question on Hari's statement that Mantras rearrage atoms around us when recited for one's betterment.
I dont have any proof to validate scientifically what Hari states, but I beleive its possible for my own reasons...
One example to confirm why VIBRATIONS and RELATIVE ATOMS WHICH DETERMINE OUR COURSE are above even Huge WINDS is...
You may have heard..elephants use infrasound (sound below the range of human hearing) in long-distance communication. WINDS, STROAMS, TORNADDOs, EARTH QUAKES -- dont affect this communication between the elephants in long-distance. If that is the case .. how would these winds affect a VIBRATION OF A GREATER FREQUENCE which defines our connectivity to the cosmic force thro these atoms around us?
Just a thought...
Cheers
Bharath Cola
Private Reply to Bharath Cola | | Nov 03, 2006 12:35 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: : re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | BC ,
I agree with you. so does the dolphins communicate in water. My point there was to state that one may not be finitely attribute the goodness or badness of any action to a gain. A gain itself is personal. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 03, 2006 12:44 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: : re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Ganesh,
Certain things in Life are beyond all ANALYSES.
Experience will teach you that in some areas of life you have to go just on blind faith.
Let me ask you something PERSONAL:
a) What will you do if your only child develops a fever of 100 degrees?
b) What will you do if your child's temperature shoots upto 105 degrees?
Answer honestly...
Private Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 03, 2006 1:10 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: : re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Hari, that I will agree. Blind faith is what makes the society social because, it is a yardstick to measure you compatibility with neighbors.
And to answer your question, I rush to the doctor. My faith is more on the doctor than anyone\anybody\anything else.
But when that happened in real to me ,my grandma was with a slogam book sitting right beside me. More than me it gave her comfort.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 03, 2006 2:35 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: : re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Ganesh,
You didn't answer my questions separately.
Please think about the situations, visualise them and answer a) and b) separately. (This was asked to me by my Swamiji in a Q n A session).
If presented with situation a), you rush to the doctor. While the doctor is examining and treating the child, if b) occurs what will YOU DO???
When the "Push becomes a Shove, things take an entirely different turn". You cannot keep arguing about "Cause n Effect" or Logical Reasoning then.
And, thats the GREATNESS of our religion.
There are so many doctrines available. With proven results. Everything is available in black n white. But, there's NO Compulsion that you adopt them. Use your free-will and do what you deem best. Thats the point.
Have a great week-end. Cheers,
Hari Private Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 03, 2006 10:15 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: : re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Hari, I expected that. I should be more articulate in what I say. I am learning. But i stand by what i have said, I can have faith only on the doctor.
The dependance on the all-known or the unknown is not particular to our religion alone.
Not that you do not know, but History tells us,Babur prayed to god when Humayun was bedridden. Likewise many Christians pray to god those living outside India as well. The religions quoted here are samples. probably other religions does too.
IMHO,It is because, like in any other religion, we are inculcated with the fear of the unknown and the power of this "unknown" almighty. ( I have purposely put the word unknown within quotes because I think the almighty that we know of is unknown but others may differ)
And I think, to say, everything is available in black and white, trivializes, the Nature, to be having two definite state. From where I stand there is a wide band of grey between the black and white that is being missed.
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 04, 2006 4:35 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: : re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | GR,
I think you remember I have explained (rather proved) many times that SD in not only a faith based system but also VERY PRACTICAL. That's the reason I gave the link of Bhavishya Purana (Bhavishya means future)and Achivement of our ancients before birth of today's science. Without any scientific equipments our ancient rishis were able to research astronomy that proven right by today's modern science also. It was told much in advance that the earth is 'Andam' and not flat. The diameter of earth was precisely measured by our rishis without using any scientific formula or equipments. May be you can once again go through the complete thread to know where we discussed in the similar line.
The point is not wheather the patient gets cured or not by doing prayer. But in the innerself one has belief in god and surrender to god (if not openly) when the situation goes adverse. Like our TN CM changed to 'yellow' from 'black'. Yellow is a colour of Guru (Datchina moorthy). The original name of Karunanidhi is also Datchina moorthy. So to make his graha strength he was changed to yellow as advised by astrologers. The prayer can stregthen one's mind to overcome the hurdle. But the result is not in anyone's hand. That is the reason the term 'miracle' associate with medical too.Private Reply to Gyro | | Nov 04, 2006 12:28 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: : re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Gyro, the claim that SD is not only faith based but practical is not argued upon at all. In fact, if you have seen some of my previous post, I have claimed that it is the practical nature of SD that is explained by Faith in all occassion(did I spell that right?).
Why do we need Faith? IMO, it is one of the least common multiple that can be put into masses to support a theory about Nature.
Science as I have said earlier is a form of explanation of what that part of Nature is about and how a person perceives it. Nowhere in the SD thread there has been a denial of the fact that we had a lot of info about Nature written by early"Indians" in sanskrit.
This is how I see it. As we started settling from our early nomadic life we had lot of free time and questions about the Nature arose.There were some that could be answered and there were some that could not be at that time and were attributed to be done by a superior entity. This superior entity if it has a human attribute will be understood by many. Thereby havAing a cohesive society.
I have always wondered, we say "venkateshwara suprabatham" but the first two stanza are about Rama waking up. And also, one seldom hears this recited in a Rama temple. The point I am making is, we put up with things inculcated into us when we are young. We are taught not to question certain things and as a human we do not question things that do not bother us much and go with the society.
There were/are those who questioned certain aspects and were able to explain their stance in a way that was acceptible to a group of people. They became the leaders of that mass. Some of them are the great thinkers like Sankara, Ramanuja in the earlier days and Guru Nanak,Sai Baba,prabupAdha of the not so past and the present.
And again, Modern science is one way of explaining the Nature as our epics and mantras and slokams do/did. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 05, 2006 2:21 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | | Hi All - Just to state.....
I dont have blind faith. I realise life thur reasoning. Have gone as far as reasoning has taken me and have realised that there is a SYSTEM of the way the cosmic energy fields work favourably to the man aligned to it. so the man gets the best, since he has a higher magnetic force... thats it.
I dont know how it works.. thats my UNKNOWABLE.
Just because its unknowable to me... i dont call it GOD. GOD is meant for the ignorant. Its a creation to surrender and maintain fear for a better social order. God is used so much that the minute I utter it - its associated with FAITH and FEARING GOD.
I prefer to call the unknowable as Godliness.. its a feeling of all pervading cosmic force.
I accept that GODLINESS EXIST.. in the form of a BIG ENERGY force.
No faith for me and sorry for answering this question, though not posted to me...
at the temp being 100 I will go to the doctor and also ensure that my thoughts are positive about my child.
at the temp being 105 (hypothetically) I will still go to the docutor, ensure my thoguths are postive about my child and will slip into silence to enable transference of cosmic energy from the source to me and from me to my child.
no prayers!!!
OM DAT SAT!
BharathPrivate Reply to Bharath Cola | | Nov 06, 2006 6:01 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | | Pls note - my post could have left one to beleive that I demean prayers... thats not the intent. Prayers also work wonders.. just that the System works favourably for anyone in absolute faith.
Just that my faith is in the SYSTEM and it does not need a conduit called GOD.
Bharath Cola. Private Reply to Bharath Cola | | Nov 06, 2006 8:53 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: : re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | GR - I am bit confused about your stand. When you agree that there is no denial of early predicitions of SD that is relevant in present and future, HOW could they do it if mantra has no power according to you. Is it due to BLIND FAITH?
BC - Maha Chandrasekara swamigal used to say that when we are ill we should consider that has reconcilation of sin done in the previous birth and should experience the pain or discomfort and not try to use any medicine to get rid of it. (Swami Vivekananda did same when he had severe stomach pain). I do understand that ordinary people like us can't stick to sprituality to that maximum extent. Even I will take my child to doctor when 105 degree as a duty of parent like everyone. But in that adverse situation I will not simply rely on doctors & medicine like in case of 101 degree. Apart from taking guidance of doctors and medicine for documentary evidence and to convince the conscience, most will seek the help of god based on their faith system.
Gyro Private Reply to Gyro | | Nov 06, 2006 6:04 pm | | : re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Gyro,
If you have seen my tone throughout the thread, the acceptance and denials will come to light. The acceptance is that SD primarily tries to explain Nature and Societial cohesiveness. THe Denial is it is given to the humans by some unknown with super mighty powers. The acceptance is the way the Nature was described primarily was by attributing human actions like phenom, to make it understandable and follow by the "known and the unknown folks". The denial is, this method of propgating knowledge is only within this "everlasting" Indian sub continent.
Also IMHO, it is trivializing the effort of the composer, to render portions of a sloka or mantra and expect\ attribute the result to that part. one has to know what is said before and what is said after and as a whole. This is in no way digging Hari's in particular, but rather a very generic observation.
I remember, when we (as in fellow humans) did so much of "varuna japam", standing in neck deep water ( in a newly constructed Tank) in Ayodhya mandapam(Ram samaj) in the 80's we never got the rain we wanted. But now, I doubt they are doing it but rain is in plenty. (BTW on a side note, heard Chennai is flooded. Hope you guys are all safe.)
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 06, 2006 7:26 pm | | re: : re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Interesting way to put it Ganesh.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Nov 07, 2006 7:56 am | | re: re: : re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Ganesh,
I think you need to read the book "Arthamulla Hindu Madham" by Kannadasan. Its also available as an audio-tape.
You can keep arguing forever about rational thinking and every possible concept that your mind can comprehend, but when it comes to a stage where the knowledge, the knower and the knowe-able are rendered "null n void", then YOU WILL start accepting the existence of God and the Wisdom of our ancestors.
Thats the higher level of "100 degree fever; 105 degree fever situation..
Have you read the books by AYN RAND? Founatin Head, Atlas Shrugged, Night of Jan16th etc..?
Her entire life and all her world famous works were based on "OBJECTIVISM". She died at the age of 83 turning MAD, because she realised that her FUNDAMENTAL FAITH in life is wrong.
Gyro/ Guys: comments please..
Cheers,
Hari Private Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 07, 2006 11:00 am | | re: : re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | GR,
Thanks for thinking of us when we suffer due to heavy rain in Chennai. Now the situation is OK but still there is an indication from sky most of the time that it is going to rain at any time.
Coming to subject, incase the rain had come due to varuna japam, you might have said that even otherwise there would have been rain without any japam:-)
When I have no information about the varuna japam incident mentioned by you in Ayodhya, I assume that your information is right and the rain did not come after japam. As I have replied to Mr. B' Pat earlier there could be various possible combinations of reasons why a Japan can fail. For instance, most of Hindu family marriages are done with Vedic mantras. Even the marriage of Rama & Sita was done with vedic mantras chanted by great rishis. Nevertheless, they faced so much of difficulties in their life and lived in forest couple of years. In between both got separated and Sita devi lived in Ravana's place for some time. And also Rama asked Sita to set fire afer coming back (whatever may be the reason). After that also Sita was sent to forest when she was pregnant, lived alone in a hut (in a rishi's place) and delivered Lava & Kusa. It is a bare minimum wish of any wife that the husband should be always caring and supportive to her during pregnancy and delivery. But Sita did not get all these. Does it indicate that the lagna, muhurtha, day, date of their marriage chosen by Muni Vashistar and Vedic mantras chanted by rishis on that day proves wrong? NO. This is where we have to understand the intricacies of it and see the end result. Even after thousands of year still we quote Rama & Sita as good example for husband & wife and we will continue to quote them as well. It may be because of the auspicious day selected by rishi and Vedic mantras chanted during their suyamvaram.
There is an incident from Mahabharatha. Duriyodhana will seek help of Sahadevan - a great astrologer and request him to suggest an auspicious date to do yagam for great victory in Guruchethra war. Sahadevan will suggest that if that particular yagam starts in a no moon day he will definitely win in Guruchethra war. Lord Krishna will come to know about this and tell pandavas that if he does that yagam on that day Duriyodhana would surely win in war. So, in order to make that yagam ineffective Lord Krishna will do Tharpanam (done on no moon day by andhanars) one day before Amavashya (no moon day). By looking at this the other people around him also would start doing tharpanam in similar to Lord Krishna. The gods surya and chandra will get confused and come together and ask Krishna “why are you doing rituals (tharpanam) today when tomorrow is actually no moon day?”. Then krishna will say that the day when suryan and chandran meets is amavashya and you both have come together today. So, the no moon day is preponed to one day. By which he makes the yagam inactive done by duriyodhna on actual amavashya day. So, even the mantra was told rightly and done by right people in the yagam, due to preponement of amavashya day the result was changed. Coz the lord decided so. Just because the yagam did not bring result as desired by Duriyodhana, it does not mean that mantra did not have power. The sutchamam (intercasis) sometimes are beyond our understanding capacity.
Studying nature is one aspect of SD. Apart from this SD demonstrated many other capabilities that I have described in detail in this thread. Measuring the size of earth, doing astronomical study and predicting possible event of future by transporting the mind can't be simply done without Vedic mantras. This is what I have written as power of mantra. If you deny this part may I humbly request you to tell me how was that possible by our rishis to do so?
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Nov 07, 2006 11:03 am | | re: re: re: : re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Hari,
I have read none of the books mentioned by you but would love to read in due course of time. It is nice to know so many information from you in this regard.
Gyro Private Reply to Gyro | | Nov 07, 2006 1:04 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | | I wish to take this discussion with my limited knowledge of Science, apply rational and logic to it to explore possibilities of this subject.
Seek your respective inputs on the same.
This entire solar system is holding on to each other through an invisible connectivity to the SUN… due to the centre of gravity of the SUN. The Sun is holding on its position by an invisible connectivity with other stars in our galaxy - milkyway due to an even more powerful centre of gravity of our Galaxy. Our galaxy milkyway is connected to other galaxies through the same connectivity due to an even more powerful centre of gravity of the universe. Likewise we are connected to planet earth with earth’s center of gravity. NETT NETT - All connected to each other due to a powerful force called this MASS of Energy, partially stationed on each planet and star of this universe which defines its respective power of gravity.
My logic is – We all are from the same MASS of energy in different forms.. Man, Stone, plants, animals, oxygen, water, Planets, Stars, Comets ..etc is a derivative of the same MASS energy. So if there exist a centre of gravity in each of the planets/stars/galaxies – which is all a different form of the MASS energy, then a similar Centre of Gravity exist in us humans also, after all we all are also an expression of the same MASS of energy. Our centre of gravity is not as powerful as probably the earth/sun and the rest. But man being an intelligent expression of the same MASS could have possibly identified means to connect to a larger source of center of gravity from the overall MASS and indentified ways and means to empower himself with a higher degree of energy reserve than what he normally has thereby enhancing his centre of gravity. In layman terms – a small magnet attracts a pin and holds it. Let’s say 10 such small magnets clubbed together then those 10 clubbed magnets can hold a stapler, which that one small magnet couldn’t. what happens here? A larger force attracts a bigger piece of iron, right? The same logic is what applies to man… when he gets connected to the overall mass energy and empowers himself with more that what he had earlier… he tends to hold more than what he did before. … More here could be name, fame, fortune, power, etc… maybe this is what the Vedas said about least effort – maximum results. In fact - name, fame, fortune, power etc is also another form of the same mass energy… so it gets attracted to the man with a more powerful gravity than others if he desires for it, because desire is also an expression of the same MASS ďŠ.
Why cannot there be defined practices which some learned lot had deciphered how to do these and get more results? What if the proofs where lost in time? Just because today our limited knowledge does not allow us to comprehend them so we are not able to accept them.
Ramanujam the famous mathematician had arrived at tons of derivatives and even today only some of them are proven and understood and scores of mathematicians are trying hard to understand the remaining. If he was alive – he would have explained to us instead of these mathematicians having to rack their brains endlessly.
If someone had told us – dinosaurs and its variants existed, we would have laughed probably. But today since we have proof of fossils and bones.. we have accepted its existence.
The ways of mantras could be like ramanujam’s derivatives – no one to explain because they have all died eons ago. To seek naked eye’s proof like the dinosaurs could potentially be a fallacy. Instead the closest we can go is to try and experience it in earnestness by our ownselves, maybe in that we will have our own answers!
Private Reply to Bharath Cola | | Nov 07, 2006 1:15 pm | | re: re: re: : re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Hari, Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't you taking it personal?
Now for your books , I have not read kannadAsan's. I should have got that this time when I was in India, but I missed. But I have read and heard "yengae bhramnan" by Cho Ramaswamy.
I have read Fountain Head but without any impact on my way of thinking. But that was while in college, eons ago.
I have not heard /read the life story of Ayn Rand. But from what you said, if she lived a life till 83 with her way of thought, that is pretty good life she had. Some of our great thinkers did not live past 60 years. Not complaining/arguing but just stating the fact.
And about getting MAD (as you put it), it can happen in either case, that is, people like Ayn Rand and those who have blind faith in the "unknown" super power as a single entity. It becomes more complex when the super unknown is itself a multiple entity like we have in present hinduism.
If you have read some of our prev post in this thread, we did establish the fact the some of the gods that we pray now were never present at the begining of society.
In fact, we start as saying the first god that we know of had an illicit relation(by our present day norms) with I think the celestial star Rohini and thus was born the other gods. But this is never explained to us in our daily hinduism.
Our epics have umpteen substories based on the culture in which it is told. Ramanyana, and Mahabaratha are not talked about in India alone, they travelled north and east even before many of us knew about north and east. And those stories seem somewhat different from what we hear. This would reply gyro's too.
And gyro, whatever Krishna did( this story is something that I have heard only today) makes it more firm that he was cheating. It was a war between two clans. Krishna was to do only charioteering. But seems he was doing all kinds things to make pandavas win.
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 07, 2006 4:14 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Hari,
with reference to what you had said --> "You can keep arguing forever about rational thinking and every possible concept that your mind can comprehend, but when it comes to a stage where the knowledge, the knower and the knowe-able are rendered "null n void", then YOU WILL start accepting the existence of God and the Wisdom of our ancestors."
Ok. We dont have all the answers. And we dont have them now. That still doesnt prove the existence of a "god". Just that we still havent figured out everything in science. And I dont believe we wont figure everything out...
At present science has limitations - limitations which we need to grow out of... doesnt mean we need to abandon science altogether...
The same is the case with religion, philosophy and SD if you might want to call it that...
I dont believe evolution gave us the capacity of "rational thinking" without cause. An ounce of figuring something by ourselves is better than tons and tons of theory lying around for thousands of years...
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Nov 07, 2006 4:51 pm | | re: re: re: re: : re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Ganesh,
I'm NOT taking this personal.
I'm at logger-heads with a brit guy by name Steve, trying to defend Hinduism & Indians aginst his racial and religious bias in a ryze-network called "500 Citizens of the World". This is my home-network and love chatting here. :)
When a glass is half-filled with water, some say its half-full; some say its half-empty. I belong to the former category.
Krishna was NOT a CHEAT. As a re-incarnation in human-form, he PLAYED his Karmic role fully well tit-for-tat HUMAN style. Thats it. Pandavas were cheated. Kauravas had military might and were bullies, like present day USA. So, he used everything in his prowess to help the Pandavas.
Similarly Rama defeated Bali/ Vaali stealthily. There is NO justification for that either in "your terms".
What we have to learn is the "essence" or the Moral of the story.
One accident/ event gets reported by different TV channels in different ways. People's perspective varies.
We believe most of the things shown on BBC and CNN. But do we really know how MUCH of that is doctored? We DONT.
5 years ago, when I was chatting with an american white, we enetered into a heated debate. I was telling that Bush never had any right interferring with Iraq. He retorted that Americans have ALWAYS SAVED the earth from Dictators. I asked him how? He said even in the 2nd World War, the whole world was saved from the Japanese!!!
That is the extent of a post-graduate history student in USA. They are fed only what the MEDIA arm-twisted by the Statesmen wan to.
Do we really know whats really happening in Israel/ Palestine? There's a running joke in the Gulf that Elections and Presidents of the USA are decided in Tel Aviv. I can go on like this with REAL LIFE examples.
Our Rishis could really see the astral bodies with their naked eyes!
Puttabarthi Sai Baba is wearing a Bangle that is supposed to be the ring of Lord Rama.
The sword of Tippu Sultan weighs about 45 Kgs, which is difficult for us- present day guys to lift and swirl around with 1 hand. So, obviously Tippu should have been taller (7 ft +), stronger and mightier. This is just in the recent past in History.
The phrase "Lokha samastha Sukino Bhavanthu" is about 5000 years old. Even those days our ancestors had knowledge about a world outside the boundaries of India. And we all know when Vasco Da Gama landed in Calicut.
There is a very thin line between Science and our Religion. We today have only 15% of the Original Sanskrit scripts originally recorded.
During the Aryan invasion of India, the Germans stole lots of books from us. This is a recorded fact. The root language of German is Gothic. Its highly similar to Sanskrit. Even today, the Germans excel in Technology. I think and BELIEVE its because of our books.
In 2001 a Nuclear War-head was discovered by archaelogists in Russia. They found out by carbon dating that its more than 2000 years old. They send it to USA to fix the origin. They declined. Then it was sent across to UK, Germany, France, Japan etc.. Everyone denied any knowledge of origin. Then finally they decided to send it to India "because we guys talked about brahma asthrams & nagaasthrams in our folklore". I honestly don't know what happened after that.
Have you seen the movie "Close encounters of the 3rd Kind" by Steven Spielberg? It released in 1980 I think. Do see it please. Now Spielberg is NOT a guy who will bluff.
The point is, OUR Rishis were NOT DUMB fools. They have analysed with better, sharper intellect & reasoning and laid down certain things for their progeny. Lets NOT waste those precious resources; or waste our lives trying to validate them.
The point is, OUR Rishis were NOT DUMB fools. They have analysed with better, sharper intellect & reasoning and laid down certain things for their progeny. Lets NOT waste those precious resources; or waste our lives trying to validate them.
Cheers,
Hari
Private Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 07, 2006 7:25 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: : re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Hari,
the very instance one understands the glass is half full ends the arguement. For it tells us that the glass has more room to be filled.
If the role of Krishna is a reincarnated human form then where do we get Bagavad gita from. A human cannot say "I am" , you and everything is within me.
Kauravas wanted what is just for them after all Dridhrastra was senior than Pandu and it is therfore duruyodhana who should rule is it not? And it is the (innocent) play that was played on duryodhana in the arrack palace that sow the seeds of the war.
Hari, IMHO,the amount of knowledge one gets in the country that too in history is alway biased to that country and its supporters. we do the same in India as well. In fact one of the thread in this chennai network or it is this thread, had a lengthy discussion on whether India has invaded any country or not. We do not even know the real reason for Jinnah's role on Partition at independence. All we hear is only the Indian part of the story.
And about vaali, it is not I who alone has this view, if I am correct Rajaji did and that too way before me.
The issue is not wasting precious resources or our time as you claim. In fact it is analyzing what they have said to what is present.
The other reason could be the validity of the source, for example we know that dinosaurs lived around the world. And yet we do not have any info about these in our epics. With so much of science and technology, nowhere we have a mention of a dinosaur. One reason could be that dinosaur existed after these epics were written. or it could be that our thinkers avoided the existence totally. Except for the large animals we hear in dasavatharam we seldom see creatures of Jurassic period mentioned.
I guess you do not get Jon stewart and colbert report in the place you stay. If possible see their episodes on Comedy central website. Things are changing.
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 08, 2006 6:07 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | | tsk! tsk!
Guess my post was not worth getting a responce from any of your elite personal inspite of requesting for the same.
:-(
Bharath Cola Private Reply to Bharath Cola | | Nov 08, 2006 6:20 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: : re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Ganesh,
You have a penchant for defending your stance. Good!
If it is determination its a great quality. If its stubborness, then its bad/debatable.
Hope you are aware that a few years ago MICROSOFT declared SANSKRIT language as highly compatible with certain high-end Software languages. Hope the researchers in MS were not bluffing!?
"Those who beieve in God have to prove ONLY HIS existence. Those who don't, have to prove EVERYTHING ELSE". I'm really grateful that I'm a BELIEVER! :D
My ideologies and notions are NOT based on some comedy-shows.
Since I have a spiritual inclination, I'm in regular touch with three Swamiji's presently.
The variety of disciples they have has made me wonder as to "WHY" these highly successful, powerful, super-rich guys NEED the association of these Spiritual Leaders, has been quite a revealing experience. Now these are not mere assumptions. They are FACTS.
In the higher echelons of power, one NEEDS a CONSTANT ELEMENT in a highly volatile, dynamic environment. You need a RESOURCE to re-fuel your armoury.
I don't think the likes of Kumara Mangalam Birla, Anil Ambani, Dig Vijay Singh, Tulsi Tunti, Sunil Mittal, LK Advani, AB Vajpayee will associate with Spiritual gurus just for the heck of it.
Everyone needs MENTORING to become World-Class.
This is also the opinion of World-Class business philosopher VIC JOHNSON. I had posted a thread titled "Secrets of World Class Achievers". Do take a look at that.
Rajni Kanth made a wonderful attempt in trying to reach the message of Spirituality in the movie - BABA. But he got the symbol or Mudra WRONG. If he can fail in his attempt, so can I -a simple, common human being.
Even the great EVR Periyar, who was an atheist all his life IS BELIEVED to have acknowledged the existence of God in his death-bed!
Follow the course of your heart Ganesh. Do whatever makes you HAPPY. Someday in life, YOU WILL LEARN. :)
Cheers,
Hari
Private Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 08, 2006 7:01 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: : re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Ganesh, you wrote: "If the role of Krishna is a reincarnated human form then where do we get Bagavad gita from. A human cannot say "I am" , you and everything is within me."
If we can ACCEPT without any debate about Newton's Laws of Motion and Energy, all mathematical formulae, we can damn well accept the teachings of Krishna in human form.
If it is Krishna, you will question 1 act of his with your highly developed "rational thinking". If it is some foreigner/ teacher, whom YOU look upon, you will accept it blindly isn't it? Great Logic.
Bharat Cola: "We all are from the same MASS of energy in different forms.. Man, Stone, plants, animals, oxygen, water, Planets, Stars, Comets ..etc is a derivative of the same MASS energy. So if there exist a centre of gravity in each of the planets/stars/galaxies – which is all a different form of the MASS energy, then a similar Centre of Gravity exist in us humans also, after all we all are also an expression of the same MASS of energy".
WHO or WHAT controls all these planets' ORBIT? Where is this ENERGY from? Who gives US the energy or power to lift our hands? to move our tongue? Why did Science FAIL to predict the occurence and consequences of TSUNAMI? What if galaxies collided? What if some Meteor hit our earth? How high is the sky? How deep is the Ocean?
OK, ask any Doctor this - "Where is LIFE exactly? Is it in the BLOOD, BREATH or BRAIN?" I would love to hear a CLEAR scientific answer.
Bharath Pat: "I dont believe evolution gave us the capacity of "rational thinking" without cause. An ounce of figuring something by ourselves is better than tons and tons of theory lying around for thousands of years."
Rational Thinking is to live a better life. For staying within the bounds of Law, Introspection, Self-improvement, Understanding the Wisdom of Ancestors, Negotiation, Communication and peaceful co-existence. Not to question your own ROOTS and try something which amounts to re-inventing the wheel.
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" - Fred Forsyth.
Cheers,
HariPrivate Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 08, 2006 9:00 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | BC - Thanks for posting very inspiring article that throw some light how our rishis in ancient times would have gained so much of power through solar energy and also by chanting mantras.
GR – Once a question was asked to Swami Tripurarai about the mention of dinosaurs in Vedic text. I just reproduce his answer:
The legends and lore of most pre-modern cultures contain descriptions of very large animals and it seems that there is irrefutable evidence that very large animals did inhabit the earth in the distant past. Vedic scriptures mention this as well. For example, Srimad-Bhagavatam 8.7.18 speaks of large water elephants and whale-swallowing fish, timi-dvipa-graha-timingilakulat. The Bhagavatam also speaks of large birds compared to clouds, yatha meghah syenadayo vayu-vasah.
(let me also try to find out whether there is any mention about pizza in our vedic literature :-) )
The rig Veda talks of following modes of transportation, that is recent invent by modern science.
Jalayan - a vehicle designed to operate in air and water.
Kaara- Kaara- Kaara- a vehicle that operates on ground and in water.
Tritala- Tritala- Tritala- a vehicle consisting of three stories.
Trichakra Ratha - Trichakra Ratha - Trichakra Ratha - a three-wheeled vehicle designed to operate in the air.
Vaayu Ratha- Vaayu Ratha- Vaayu Ratha- a gas or wind-powered chariot.
Vidyut Ratha- Vidyut Ratha- Vidyut Ratha- a vehicle that operates on power...
GR, once you read the dark period after Mahabharata war you will find the reason why and how our puranas got twisted and told differently in other countries. You can find in every ethnic culture in the world, without fail, there is discussion of a Great War. How does that come about? It may not go by the name Mahabharata, but the great war is there, everywhere. Be it Sumerian, Mayan or in old Chinese tradition. Greek mythologies have a very close similarity to stories from the Kurushetra war.
Duriyodhana had right to become a king of Hastinapura. No doubt. But at the same time Yudhistrar also had equal right for the same position, as his father Pandu ruled Hastinapuram. There was a great confuse as to who is supposed to be king of Hastinapuram, whether Duriyodhana or Yudhistrar? So, it was decided to test the capabilities of both. Duriyodhana failed and Yudhistrar succeeded. And when the public opinion sought through spies they wanted only Yudhistrar to rule them. In spite of all, Duriyodhana committed in the assembly that he would give half of kingdom if they successfully complete 12 years of vanavasam and 1 year of anghyadha vasam. But he did not honour his commitment. Nevertheless Pandavas tried in so many ways to have gentlemen agreement with duriyodhana. They were ready to accept even 5 acres of land. Duriyodhana refused. When all the doors of harmony got closed Guruchethra war was planned.
About lord Krishna………I have written so many times in this thread about the reason for his actions (which you are calling as cheating).
Private Reply to Gyro | | Nov 08, 2006 12:16 pm | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | | Hari – to your questions?
WHO or WHAT controls all these planets' ORBIT? Where is this ENERGY from?
May be the BIG BANG THEORY can explain the same to you .. it begins to state – The universe began with the "explosion" of a "primeval atom.
Who gives US the energy or power to lift our hands? to move our tongue? Why did Science FAIL to predict the occurence and consequences of TSUNAMI? What if galaxies collided? What if some Meteor hit our earth? How high is the sky? How deep is the Ocean? OK, ask any Doctor this - "Where is LIFE exactly? Is it in the BLOOD, BREATH or BRAIN?" I would love to hear a CLEAR scientific answer.
For every question of the unknowable – there is no entity called GOD.
Likewise – if GOD did exist why he restricted life forms only on planet earth in our Solar System and that too why did he choose only human beings to be so intelligent and dominate this planet. What is so great about human beings that he can walk away demolishing this planet and other life forms are going into extinction just because man wants to ensure and secure his clan. Why does god keep quiet when man domesticates cattle, limit the milk supply to the calf so that man can drink the rightful milk of the calf… like this I can ask as many if not more questions for which you will not have answers than what you have posted about SCIENCE’s failure.
2ndly you have assumed that I am supportive of Scientific proofs and have posted quesitonss about TSUNAMI and DOCTORS…. Iam afraid you need to read my earlier post more extensively to understand my FAITH. Its in the all pervading FORCE called ENERGY. You call it GOD and say GOD Does it… I say ENERGY simply manifests itself in its own way and in many forms and we are incidentally manifested as humans…
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" - Fred Forsyth…. For every quote that you have there are enough counter quotes Hari. Lets not waste time posting our borrowed knowledge. Can we have some original talk?
Private Reply to Bharath Cola | | Nov 08, 2006 12:19 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: : re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Hari,
before I even start, thanks for letting me follow my course. I am not even reading the line that follows. After all not all punchlines are capitalized( I mean the caps lock).
The comedy shows thingy is not about idealogies, it is to tell those who think that there is only one side that there is the other. Those shows show the freedom of expression that prevails in this country( be it for good or for bad).
The so called constant element becomes physical humanic(if there is such a word) form of entity for many, and for people like me it is prevelant everywhere and cannot be attached with a single attribute.
IMO, Mentoring alone does not make one world class,it is the usage of what is mentored that makes one world class.
And people like EVR did follow some idealogy for a reason. Primarily Political and also anti-brahminism.
More to come....Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 08, 2006 12:36 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | BC - Scientist themselves proved Bigbang theory wrong. (This was discussed in first part of SD I think)
And regarding 'energy' you may read my post Jun 29, 2006 3:01 am
Private Reply to Gyro | | Nov 08, 2006 12:39 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: : re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Hari,
in the first place, you need to read the part one and some of the part two replies in this thread. something tells me you are jumping to conclusions.
I will try explaining my stance to most of what you have asked. Yours are in Italics followed by mine in normal.
If we can ACCEPT without any debate about Newton's Laws of Motion and Energy, all mathematical formulae, we can damn well accept the teachings of Krishna in human form.
incorrect. All of science and math are pounded upon from the very announcement. While in school,We had question in physics about newton's third law that tries to disprove it(I guess it is from Resnick and Halliday).So are our epics. And at differnt periods of time.
If it is Krishna, you will question 1 act of his with your highly developed "rational thinking". If it is some foreigner/ teacher, whom YOU look upon, you will accept it blindly isn't it? Great Logic
again incorrect. if it is addressed personally to me, I was the one, who have tried disproving the Pythagoraus and other geometry thingy as well.
OK, ask any Doctor this - "Where is LIFE exactly? Is it in the BLOOD, BREATH or BRAIN?" I would love to hear a CLEAR scientific answer
this is where the disconnect is. The idea of science is not to give a perfect answer. It is to explore,experience and understand the Nature. It so happens that some explanations and theories seem apt at one point of time and therefore are assumed to be the answer. But as time passes on those theories are questioned too.
Also, to answer you on a thing you wrote two replies back, Some people admire the food that is served. Some like me are inquisitive in knowing what makes the food so palatable. Neither are incorrect.
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 08, 2006 12:50 pm | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Gyro,
thanks for letting me know about the transports that we had in those days. We have already gone through once how "great" the art and science of warfare, transport were in ancient period.
None of our main stories of mahabartha talks about these creatures, those are the substories.
Pandu ruled hastinapuram because it was thought Dhridarashtra could not. But the legal heir to the throne was Dhridarashtra in the first place and therefore duruyodhana.
First of all if what duriyodhana did in the assembly is atrocious so would be what was done by Krishna in scenes leading to the war and the in the war. Duriyodhana Challenged yudishtra for the game. It was yudishtir who accepted the challenge without knowing what the consequence would be. And that part of the epic clearly tells us what one should or should not do even if he is from higher ranks in a society.
Gyro, till I am convinced with Krishna's action how can I accept that he did the right thing?
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 08, 2006 1:07 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | GR/ BC,
I rest my case by re-iterating my stance...
"Those who beieve in God have to prove ONLY HIS existence. Those who don't, have to prove EVERYTHING ELSE".
I'm REALLY grateful that I'm a BELIEVER! :)
This is based on my personal experiences in life.
There's a saying that you CANNOT find a guru as and when you want to. The guru finds you when the disciple is ready.
Cheers,
Hari
Cheers,
Hari
Private Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 08, 2006 1:51 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | | Hari - YOur stance - "Those who beieve in God have to prove ONLY HIS existence. Those who don't, have to prove EVERYTHING ELSE" is good for a beginner.
I dont beleive in god and i dont strive to prove everything else.
with respect to your saying... "you CANNOT find a guru as and when you want to. The guru finds you when the disciple is ready".... I have heard of another one... "when you are ready, the teacher appears".
For both of them to happen, the seeker in me has to be ready. The seeker in me has found his teacher/guru long back... but after a stage you drop the teacher/guru because the last journey is YOU and YOU ALONE... I am in that stage.
you may find a more lesser exposed student to teach :-)
Cheers
Bharath ColaPrivate Reply to Bharath Cola | | Nov 08, 2006 5:40 pm | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | I will go with what BC has said and add to that, I DO NOT have to prove anything. why would I have to?
For, those who keep proving the existence, think everything has to be proven. Not necessarily. That which exist or not exist need not be proven at all. Proof is for those who have doubts.
Also, I do not why I should not judge Rama or Krishna or for that matter any god in human form. After all we do judge fellow humans don't we not?
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 08, 2006 5:41 pm | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Hari,
going by definitions, god is "everything".. which includes "everything else" ;-)
So you are exactly where non-believers are.
Cheers
Bharat
p.s.: all this still doesnt mean a god has to exist to answer all those questions science cant yet answer.Private Reply to Bharat P | | Nov 09, 2006 8:10 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | BC: 1) If you are in the last stage, you wouldn't be reacting so vehemently. I interact with spiritual gurus who have gone thro’ rigorous stages in “Sannyaasa”.
2) I didn't say “I” am a teacher at any point of time. I'm just a student, sharing my views with others.
3) I’m sorry that I’m incapable of “Original Thinking” in this thread. I’m NOT as enlightened as you are.
Ganesh: “If you keep doing what you have been doing so far, you will keep getting what you have been getting so far” – Jim Rohn.
If you are happy the way you are, then no issues. Your life. Your funeral.
Bharat Pat: You sure know how to piss-me off, juggling words brother. Is T. Rajendar your relative? ;)
P.S.: What started as an info sharing by me, is now tending towards a debate. Sorry, I lack the necessary skills.
Let me tell you a small story. Please do read it:
Once there lived about a 100 frogs in a pond. They had a leader who was very strong, disciplined and athletic. He could cover the length of the pond in 10 laps; the breadth of the pond in 7 laps and the depth of the pond in
5 laps.
One day a bigger, rough n tough looking frog came to this pond. Immediately many small frogs surrounded and took him to meet their leader. The leader was a bit intimidated on seeing this tough-looking frog but since all his chums were present, he put on an air of authority and said "you very much look like us; so, where r u from?". The bigger frog replied "I'm from the sea".
The leader-frog asked "what does sea mean?". The bigger frog said "SEA is also a mass of water, but salty in nature and much bigger".
The leader-frog asked "how big is ur SEA? I cover the length of this pond in 10 laps; breadth in 7 laps'; depth in 5 laps. explain the size of the SEA to me in these terms".
...
...
...
The sea-frog said "my dear fellow; all you know in life is this 10x7x5 laps dimensions of your pond. I cannot explain the SEA in your terms. If you wanna know about the SEA, you have to come there n experience for yourself"...
Private Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 09, 2006 9:09 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | The quotes from rational thinkers that praise the capabilities of our ancient Indians :
If I were asked under what sky the human mind has most fully developed some of its choicest gifts, has most deeply pondered on the greatest problems of life, and has found solutions, I should point to India" - Max Mueller
"India was the mother of our race and Sanskrit the mother of Europe's languages. She was the mother of our philosophy, mother through the Arabs, of much of our mathematics, mother through Buddha, of the ideals embodied in Christianity, mother through village communities of self-government and democracy. Mother India is in many ways the mother of us all." - Will Durant
"In India, I found a race of mortals living upon the Earth, but not adhering to it, inhabiting cities, but not being fixed to them, possessing everything, but possessed by nothing" -Apollonius Tyanaeus (Neo-Pythagorean)
"We owe a lot to the Indians, who taught us how to count, without which no worthwhile scientific discovery could have been made!" - Albert Einstein
"If there is one place on the face of earth where all the dreams of living men have found a home from the very earliest days when man began the dream of existence, it is India!" - French scholar Romaine Rolland
"India is the cradle of the human race, the birthplace of human speech, the mother of history, the grandmother of legend, and the great grand mother of tradition. Our most valuable and most astrictive materials in the history of man are treasured up in India only!" - Mark Twain
"So far as I am able to judge, nothing has been left undone, either by man or nature, to make India the most extraordinary country that the sun visits on his rounds. Nothing seems to have been forgotten, nothing overlooked." - Mark Twain
"She (India) has left indelible imprints on one fourth of the human race in the course of a long succession of centuries. She has the right to reclaim ... her place amongst the great nations summarizing and symbolizing the spirit of humanity. From Persia to the Chinese sea, from the icy regions of Siberia to Islands of Java and Borneo, India has propagated her beliefs, her tales, and her civilization!" - Sylvia Levi
Private Reply to Gyro | | Nov 09, 2006 10:18 am | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | | Hari,
Though you had posted your last statement earlier :-)
Anyway - your statements to me and my replies on the same.
1) If you are in the last stage, you wouldn't be reacting so vehemently. I interact with spiritual gurus who have gone thro’ rigorous stages in “Sannyaasa”.
2) I didn't say “I” am a teacher at any point of time. I'm just a student, sharing my views with others.
3) I’m sorry that I’m incapable of “Original Thinking” in this thread. I’m NOT as enlightened as you are.
My Answer : My responce was not vehement, it was treated by you as vehement because its effected your "ego". With such appreciable relationships with your Gurus, I am sure you will understand the need to receive responces as consequence to your own action :-))
Because the saying you posted about teacher appearing when student being ready and you retiring from this thread - gave atleast me a feeling that you are retiring because u felt WE are not yet ready for your teaching ;-))))
"Sharing views" is differnt from pointing fingers... your statement about "... those who dont beleive in god has to prove everything else" is a conclusive finger pointer at non-beleivers. hope you see the difference.
Citing quotes is OK, but citing them to call this forum as Chaos.. compelled me to let you know its not appropriate to do so ;-)))
We all learn and evolve... at a nacent level its evolving intelligence and at a next level its about evolving conciousness.
Cheers
Bharath Cola
Private Reply to Bharath Cola | | Nov 09, 2006 10:49 am | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | "For both of them to happen, the seeker in me has to be ready. The seeker in me has found his teacher/guru long back... but after a stage you drop the teacher/guru because the last journey is YOU and YOU ALONE... I am in that stage.
you may find a more lesser exposed student to teach :-)"
BC: Sorry I wrote vehemence. It should have been ARROGANCE! :)
And I would seriously like to learn from you what exactly this "original thinking" means..
Cheers,
Hari
Private Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 09, 2006 11:05 am | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | | Hari - Appreciate your immediate acknowledgement.
w.r.t what original thinking vis-a-vis borrowed knowledge...
"knowledge" is what we have gained from other's realisations, thats why its "borrowed"
"Wisdom" on the contrary is when "Knowledge" from the outside world is received, contemplated, comphrehended and/or acted upon gives one's own realisation. That's a new realisation - whcih is what I call "original" in sharing one's thougths.
wonder why u posted my earlier statements again...
Cheers
Bharath Cola
P.s : GR/Gyro/BP pls feel free to inform if this deviation from SD is going too far. We can probably stop it becasue this thread's main dwellers are you folks and wouldnt want to stop your core flow.
Private Reply to Bharath Cola | | Nov 09, 2006 11:23 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | BC: What I have learnt is this -
KNOWLEDGE means the confident understanding of a subject, potentially with the ability to use it for a specific purpose. Knowledge acquisition involves complex cognitive processes: perception, learning, communication, association, and reasoning.
WISDOM is the ability, developed through experience, insight and reflection, to discern truth and exercise good judgment. Wisdom is sometimes conceptualized as an especially well developed form of common sense.
THINKING involves manipulation of information, as when we form concepts, engage in problem solving, reason and make decisions.
Your explanation varies a wee bit off the path of my knowledge..
Anyway, guess its irrelevant to this thread.
Cheers,
Hari
Private Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 09, 2006 12:00 pm | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharath Cola | | yea - we may dwell on this subject in another thread if need be.
cheers
bharath colaPrivate Reply to Bharath Cola | | Nov 09, 2006 12:12 pm | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Gyro, an often repeated statments in several UGs and threads is these words by others about India. But it fails to say when they said it? For India was not India before independence. And years before that the land extended right upto china.
So this would have to be known.
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 09, 2006 12:33 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Guess the compass is set now for true course.
GR - From when 'India' was named as India? Any documentary evidence please. What was our country name before independence if it is not India. Private Reply to Gyro | | Nov 09, 2006 12:40 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | The pre independence had the now pakistan and the now bangladesh as part of a huge subcontinent. The country as India , I mean a single country, came about only few hundred years before that. Until then we were bits and pieces of land mass ruled by different kind of rulers. Have you ever seen any of them addressing the whole subcontinent as a single entity? Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 09, 2006 1:12 pm | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Hari,
nice story , the frog one. But I did not understand the relevance. I kind of figured it, but will let you explain if you may be willing to.
The part of Jim Rohan is suited for those who have a "succuumbed"(should have a thesaraus with me for getting the correct words) to a humanic form of an entity. For those of us on the "Everything else" side, there is No such thing as end at all and no such thing as doing the same. Why because one facet of Action is time. As time progresses the same thing one does changes.
Every action that you do today, if you repeat the same tomorrow will be different and had you done it yesterday would have been different.
Another way of showing that Jim Rohan's might not have meant that line alone, is to see what we do for a living,
for example,A car salesman sells cars. Jim Rohan's line stops there. But to sell the second car, the car salesman uses his experience and exposure in selling his first car. The action/process is the same, But the inner workings while selling the second had refinement and experiments from what he did with the first sale. And it will continue the same way when he sells the third or fourth.
On the teacher thingy. It is that arrogance(I want words please) of "I am a student" that does not put the checks and balances in ones life. If each of us thought ourselves as a teacher then we would put those checks and balances. For a teacher to teach, has to follow his teachings first. Otherwise the teacher is more of a preacher.
This thread is for debate and sharing knowledge. To understand the tone of this thread one has to read the SD thread from the begining, as in part one and part two.
Gyro,BP,BC and Sumanth had provided immense amount of info on our epics and texts that you have to spend a lot of time to research and learn otherwise. You should look at those responses to Gyro where if you do not follow the thread would seem as personal attacks to his belief. And yet we have been doing this thread for nearly over 7 months now and are comfortable in debating.
You are welcome too. But this thread is a debate, And again when you have spare time, browse through from where it all started.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 09, 2006 4:02 pm | | re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Ok Ganesh, Hari, Ram, Bharath,
Let us call a time-out.
Could one of you summarise the two or three or four points of view in bullet points?
Then we can move on to discussing, sharing, arguing or just plain move on to newer pastures... there is plenty to discuss when you are talking SD...
Just a note, I am not of the belief that the grand whole unified idea - a.k.a god - is "inconceivable" or beyond explanation. Just that we are so strongly rooted in language and using language.... and language has limitations... as does the mind in its present state
As Ganesh pointed out, we might sound like we are arguing, but we arent really. We just like yaning each other's chains now and then ;-)
Cheers
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | Nov 10, 2006 2:45 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Sumanth Cidambi | | Ka - 10.121
"kasmai devāya havişa vidhema"
. . . And as these words continually echo within my conscious, an endless litany that almost stupefies, I ask myself, "When did we forget? How did we forget? Why did we forget?" The voices within slowly cadence into silence, mocking me.
. . . and then I take solace in the thought that if all our earthly labours only take us towards something better than our present, then that supreme being is a part of our future, not a shadow from our past.
Peace
S
Private Reply to Sumanth Cidambi | | Nov 10, 2006 5:32 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | GR, I see there is a basic flaw in your analyse. You would be right if you say that Pakistan/Bangaladesh known as country after independance of India. BUT HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT INDIA AS COUNTRY NAMED OR KNOWN TO THE WORLD ONLY AFTER INDEPENDANCE???
When the people like Mark Twain, Romaine Rolland, Max Mueller, Albert Einstein wanted to praise our scholars they knew our country only as India. Secondly the world does not deny the achievements of ancient Indians (please read as followers of Sanatana Dharma). So, it is more logical to believe that the quotes delivered by them about India must be true and not fabricated one by present Indians.
Private Reply to Gyro | | Nov 10, 2006 5:37 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Sumanth, The essence of your message could not be understood by me. Can you pl. put it in a simpler form so that a poor man like me would understand correctly. Private Reply to Gyro | | Nov 10, 2006 6:17 am | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Ganesh,
1)It is JIM ROHN pronounced as JIM RON.
He is America's most celebrated business philosopher and mentor/ success-coach to lots of other world famous mentors like Brian Tracy, Bob Proctor etc..
2) The combined geographic territory of India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka is called "Sub-continent". Never in history was it called INDIA.
Those guys whom Gyro quoted, wrote about India say in the last 150 to 100 years.
But we all know that Heun Tsang visited India from China even before that. Private Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 10, 2006 6:25 am | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Hari - it was known as " Indian Sub-continent " Private Reply to Gyro | | Nov 10, 2006 9:28 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Ganesh,
There is a difference between Vaadham and Vidhandaa Vaadham.
I agree that your mind is capable of multi-dimensional thinking and parallel processing, but what I wanted to CAUTION was, that finally after having exhausted all your thinking, one day when it dawns on you that "Shit, all these things were ALREADY TOLD", you might not feel so upbeat, as you feel today.
Our life, our health, our being, becomes what we THINK. YES, our cells are always eavesdropping on our thoughts. Thoughts are real things that cause actions that develop into habits that make us happy or sad, relaxed or tense, healthy or sick, rich or poor. Life is for living not just for enduring, not for just tolerating, but to be lived, savored and enjoyed.
Many TOOLS are available already for us, provided by the Wisdom of our ancient Rishis. Isn't it enough to enjoy the fruits? Is it necessary to analyse everything and anything?
To Quote a story from my friend and fellow-ryzer Sowmya's ryze-page:
The Ultimate Truth!
A group of alumni, highly established in their careers, got together to visit their old university professor. Conversation soon turned into complaints about stress in work and life. Offering his guests coffee, the professor went to the kitchen and returned with a large pot of coffee and an assortment of cups - porcelain, plastic, glass, crystal, some plain looking, some expensive, some exquisite - telling them to help themselves to hot coffee.
When all the students had a cup of coffee in hand, the professor said: "If you noticed, all the nice looking expensive cups were taken up, leaving behind the plain and cheap ones. While it is normal for each of you to want only the best for yourselves, that is the source of your problems and stress. What all of you really wanted was coffee, not the cup, but you consciously went for the best cups and were eyeing each other's cups. Now if life is coffee, then the jobs, money and position in society are the cups. They are just tools to hold and contain Life, but the quality of Life doesn't change. Some times, by concentrating only on the cup, we fail to enjoy the coffee in it."
So, don't let only the cups drive you... enjoy the coffee instead....
Make today a good day (change yourself if necessary) and you'll have enjoyed a GOOOD LIFE, today.
Repeat the process, DAILY. It becomes a Habit!
Today is the best day, now is the best moment. Close your eyes, tune into heart and listen to the current dialogue between your mind and body. If it is not in celebration of your life, ask what changes you can implement now to move you in the direction of greater joy, love and well being. I just ask you to stop, smell the roses, and live now!
After all, LIVING EVERY MOMENT IN THE PRESENT -CONSCIOUSLY is what spirituality is all about.
Love n Luck,
Hari
Private Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 10, 2006 12:19 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Sumanth Cidambi | | Thermo-dynamic miracles... events with odds against so astronomical they are effectively impossible like oxygen turning spontaneously into gold...
And yet in each human coupling, a billion sperm vie for a single egg... multiply those odds by countless generations, against the odds of your ancestors being alive, meeting and then siring THIS precise son or that EXACT daughter...
Of that union, of the billion "children" competing for fertilisation, it was you, only you that emerged...
To distil so specific a form from that chaos of improbability is like turning air into gold... a crowning unlikelhood, a thermo dynamic miracle...
And if my birth is a thermodynamic miracle, you could probably say that your birth or about the birth of anybody in the world...
But the world is so full of people, you me, he, she, them and so on... So crowded with thse miracles that they become common place and we forget...
We gaze continually at the world and it grows dull in our perceptions. Yet seen from another's vantage point, as if something new, it may still take the breath away...
Cheers
S
PS: Gyro, I meant if all our effort is to evolve into a superior person, mentally, spritually, physically, whaever, then a supreme being is our goal, not a starting point.
Private Reply to Sumanth Cidambi | | Nov 10, 2006 12:29 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Hari,
There is a difference between Vaadham and Vidhandaa Vaadham
these words are very relative.
I agree that your mind is capable of multi-dimensional thinking and parallel processing, but what I wanted to CAUTION was, that finally after having exhausted all your thinking, one day when it dawns on you that "Shit, all these things were ALREADY TOLD", you might not feel so upbeat, as you feel today.
No, incorrect. In fact some of my responses in this thread is that we have been told all of these.But I question the abosortive(is this a word at all) nature of us humans about all of these. IMO, While I see that we have absorbed the stories , we left the excellent depiction of life in those period.
Our life, our health, our being, becomes what we THINK. YES, our cells are always eavesdropping on our thoughts. Thoughts are real things that cause actions that develop into habits that make us happy or sad, relaxed or tense, healthy or sick, rich or poor. Life is for living not just for enduring, not for just tolerating, but to be lived, savored and enjoyed.
and that my dear sir,is different for each one of us. For example you would find piece of mind in music of one form while the person next to you with totally a different one which you might find offensive. Who could say each of you are not enjoying at all?
Many TOOLS are available already for us, provided by the Wisdom of our ancient Rishis. Isn't it enough to enjoy the fruits? Is it necessary to analyse everything and anything?
Had our Rishis enjoyed the fruits alone, they wouldn't have sown the seed for generations to come. My point,It is not enough if one enjoys the fruit, rather it is joy only when it is propogated to the following generations. like what auvaiyAr had said,
thAn unda neerai, thalaiyAlae
thAn tharudhalAl.
on the story about the coffee
I think there is a thread that ran on this story sometime back in CN
And there I had said, it is the nayar kadai coffee and tea that tastes better than a five star restaraunts'.Which would mean I have already decided to taste my coffee than to admire the cup ;)
Today is the best day, now is the best moment. Close your eyes, tune into heart and listen to the current dialogue between your mind and body. If it is not in celebration of your life, ask what changes you can implement now to move you in the direction of greater joy, love and well being. I just ask you to stop, smell the roses, and live now!
If I may add, if possible bring out a smile in whomever you meet that day And do not forget, where there is roses there will be thorns too.
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 10, 2006 12:43 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Hari,
Ganesh,
1)It is JIM ROHN pronounced as JIM RON.
He is America's most celebrated business philosopher and mentor/ success-coach to lots of other world famous mentors like Brian Tracy, Bob Proctor etc..
<\i>
I stand corrected about the name. Thanks
But what I said is not untrue. One has to read what is before the line and what is after to understand what he meant by that.
for example, you would have heard Kurai Ondrum Illai song written by Rajaji. In that there is this line,
Thiraiyin pin nirkindrai Kanna,
unnai marai odhum nyAniyar mattumae kANbAr
This would portray Rajaji as a racist, until, you hear/read the next line which goes as,
yendrAlum kurai ondrum yenakkilai kannA
my point,punchlines are good when only if they are in context otherwise the meaning is upto who hears them
And on the sub-continent thingy, I agree with you. If they had said that in 150-100 years, we are already looking at a vast space than what India is now. We cannot simply attribute these words to the present day India.
Again Heun Tsang visited the sub-continent, Not India ;)
Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 10, 2006 12:44 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Gyro | | Thanks Sumanth, somehow I find it difficult to follow your style of writting.
Hi mates, have a great weekend.
I will continue on Monday, the 13th.
Gyro
Private Reply to Gyro | | Nov 10, 2006 12:49 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Gyro, the idea of India as country came about with british starting to rule us. Till then we were separate states with no single government. From the time of our epics to about 300years or so back. After that, India was what is now Pak,Bangaladesh and India. I do not know if SEAsia and SriLanka was also considered part of this.
I guess you took that as achievements are denied. No. My take is we as Indians (now) are not the only person to take the credit for it. Those statements also include the other countries in this subcontinent.Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 10, 2006 12:53 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | Sumanth, beaeutifully said. And that experience can be had today with a $20Mil package. Just go to the Space Station and look at our minute earth. One would see, IMO, all the calmness in a chaotic world. If we move further up say outside the solar system, then we would see all the chaos that holds the calmness within and the vice versa. Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 10, 2006 1:20 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Hi Sumanth,
That "billion sperm" was a wonderful quote. But my memory fails on who wrote it originally.
Was it Shakespeare? Pls let me know.
Cheers,
Hari
Private Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 10, 2006 2:15 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Sumanth Cidambi | | Hari
Originally ascribed to Dr. Manhattan, a fictional character
Subsequently, bastardised by all and sundry...
Cheers
S
Private Reply to Sumanth Cidambi | | Nov 10, 2006 2:54 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Ganesh Ram | | can we get the discussion moving at SD Part III Private Reply to Ganesh Ram | | Nov 11, 2006 12:40 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Sumanth:
Some DO. Some DON'T.
Some WILL. Some WON'T.
You MIGHT! :)
I have a friend Bala Pillai, also a ryzer, who uses cryptic lingo like you do, tending towards "Johnsonian English".
Cheers,
Hari Private Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 12, 2006 7:33 am | | re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | BC: Thanks for being blunt buddy. Point driven home. :)
Cheers,
Hari Private Reply to Hari Krishnan Prabhakar | | Nov 12, 2006 9:08 am | | re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # | 
Salil Ahmed | | Hi, i'm new to ryze and hope i'm allowed to participate here.
"Yadha yadha yi dharmasya, glanir bhavathi bharatha;
Abhyudhanam adharmasya, thadhaathmaanam srujyaamyaham"
I was brought-up in Chinmaya Vidyalaya, hence know a little bit of sanskrit, yoga and ragas.
Having worked in the gulf countries more than a decade, i wish to say this..
..when you are wronged, in deep despair, when all logic n reasoning fails, only faith in god, courage and perseverance can take you through adamantive walls of difficulties. Sanathana Dharma does help you there like a candle-light in utter darkness.
Salil
Private Reply to Salil Ahmed | | Nov 12, 2006 2:35 pm | | re: re: re: re: Sanathana Dharma - Part II | # |
Bharat P | | Salil,
Everybody and all beliefs are welcome on here... you can agree, disagree or just throw a new spin onto things..
Just go on and post on Sanathana Dharma Part 3. This thread is getting too big.
BharatPrivate Reply to Bharat P | | |
| |
| |
