narayanadasa

Jai Sriman Narayana: I found the below in some article in hinduismtoday digital magazine.: Hinduism Today Magazine I am not a regular reader but just happened to come across this when browsing. When a helpless animal is killed by deliberate act of violence, it dies in great dreed. Its body is flush with harmones produced by fear. These toxic substances enter the body of the person who eats the flesh and adversely affects his or her body and mind. I have always wondered, how can the carcass of an animal that died in moral fear give good health and refined spiritual inclinations to its consumer.

Jai Sriman Narayan: The flask does keep hot things hot and cold things cold . What would you expect the temperature of a mixture of tea and icecream? If kept separate the flask would stil keep hot things hot and cold things cold.

Jai Sriman Narayana! Dear Mr. Venkatesan, You said... -When Kings go to forest for hunting, they will not give a sword to the animal and fight with them. They will hide behind a tree or upon a tree and will kill that animal. Vaali is actually an animal ie., rude monkey. There is no reason for Rama to fight with Vaali. (Eg. Ravana is a "Man" and a real good devotee of Shiva and good to all the people in his country. Hence, Rama gave him a chance to fight) So, killing an Animal - hiding behind a tree is not a mistake. -Dharma says, it is a great sin , even to think bad about Brother's wife. But Vaali has chucked Sugriva out of the country and he was not even ready to listen to Sugriva. Ok. He should have sent Sugriva's wife also along with Sugriva, but he did not follow dharma. Rama would have solved the problem with ease if Vaali had just sent Sugriva and his wife out. But taking Sugriva's wife...... how could you give any chance for vaali to live. So, when Rama killed Vali from behind a tree it is justified as killing an animal, so nothing wrong. But, applying the same logic why cant it be pardonable if one animal taking another animals (may be a brother) wife. May be because the degree of the sin of taking another's wife doesnt reduce just because it is an animal. Any thoughts?

How do you prove something (or rather anything) that happened in the past is true? You cant go back in time and see right? Even seeing can be deceiving.. right? So, if archieology, local practises/customs, local literature and scripture all point to something common we usually take it to be true. Believers dont call it mythology but call it an historical fact. Some dont accept it, but in my opinion they dont believe in anything else except for what they believe in (if at all they do).

Jai Sriman Naranana: where is the proof, I dont belive without seeing or feeling that there is life outside earth, which sastra says that there is life outside earth. Where is proof that God created life on earth, did you see, did you feel? you first said there was nothing and then god created everything, what do you mean by everything. I didnt say this, sorry! I said completely opposite of this, please read completely not just between words.

Jai Sriman Narayana: Who said God did not create life on other galaxies and on what basis did they say that? FYI, the word "created" is wrong as it seems to indicate that at some point of time there was nothing and then God created everything. This is not what the Sastras say. The right word to use is "manifested".

Jai Sriman Narayana: Good question! This was the response given by one of the Azhvars. Vishnu on seeing his devotees doing this so devotedly while remembering him wanted to see how it is like to do the same. Thats when he tried and it remained there for ever. I recently heard from from Sri. Velukkudi Krishnan's lecture on Bhagavad Gita. This is also see when baby Krishna lies on the ocean putting his toe in his mouth. He was overwhelmed with people falling at his feet and saying it is so sweet that he tried to so what it feels like. This is wonderful!

Jai Sriman Narayan: I am sure Gandhi was a great man but not greater than Krishna or God! We cant compare fake swamis to Gandhi and then say whether he should be followed or not. I would rather check on the guidelines from the Gita and true swamis and then see where he fits in. In my opinion Gandhi comes nowehere above Bose, Veer Sawarkar, Sardar Vallabhabhai Patel, Gopal Krishna Gokhale etc. I would consider Gandhi a very good political statesman but would not make him a saint or even a philosopher. Arjuna wanted non-violence. Krishna advised him against that towards adharmic people. Yet Gandhi stuck to non-violence against Adharmis! I am not sure if this really helped the society at large. Was Krishna wrong if Gandhi is right? All the other names I stated above were atleast aware of Krishna and his teachings and to a great extent Gandhi suppressed any similar thoughts. Krishna advised Karma yoga, Gnana yoga and Bhakti yoga. The amount of information on these was exhaustive enough to help one actually follow in day-to-day life and in the end reach Krishna. Which yoga did Gandhi advise and what evidence does Gandhi provide that his path (only non-violence and some strange methods of celibacy) works for all beings? Somewhere in the chain of threads on the topic it was stated that Gandhi slept with young girls to test his celibacy. Where is it stated that one must do this to test his celibacy? (in Gita? in Vedas? in Puranas?). If only Gandhi stated this, with what authority but for mental speculation? was it a revelation that he received from God? If not, then Gandhi experienced something that he thought was truth and propagated it. All fine so far, but unless it is authentic how can everyone follow it? You see, Gita, Vedas have always been true for all types of people. There is no need to follow anything else but God's teachings and the teachings of those who base their thoughts on the same lines.

Jai Sriman Narayan: I found it... How stupid ... I forgot to search on the web before posting this thread. http://www.valmikiramayan.net/

Jai Sriman Narayan: Are any soft copies of Ramayan (by Valmiki, Tulsi etc) available on the web?

Jai Sriman Narayana: http://www.prapatti.com/slokas/english/DivyaDeshams.pdf A very good description of divya desams in pdf format.... dont forget to follow the links in the pdf.

Jai Sriman Narayana: Vedas say.... Pragnam Brahma - Consciousness is Brahman - Aitareya upanishad - Rig Veda Tat twam asi - That thou art - Chandogya upanishad - Sama Veda Ayam Atma Brahma - This self is Brahman - Mandukya upanishad - Atharvana Veda Aham Brahma asmi - I am Brahman - Brihadaranyaka upanishad - Yajur veda

Jai Sriman Narayana: Sure, I am checking anyway. Will let you know as soon as I find out.

Jai Sriman Narayana: Thanks for responding and offering to share the Paasuram, I certainly dont remember it.

Jai Sriman Narayana: Someone also described this scene beautifully (told to me by my friend) . He said "The Lord was himself was not sure why devotees worship his lotus feet, is it so sweet? that he tried to put his own feet into this mouth just to taste and see for himself his own-self!" How wonderful!