RE:

[Guest guest]

> ----Original Message-----

> Sumita Bidaye <Sumita_Bidaye

> hindu <hindu

> 27 September 1999 15:22

> information request

>

>

> >Greetings!

> >

> >First of all, I just wanted to congratulate you on the work you are

> doing!

> > The web site is so helpful.

> >My name is Sumita, I live in Toronto and teach in schools. One of my

> >coworkers requested a brief summary of the hindu creation story. Do you

> >have any such resource at easy access? If so, can you please forward it

> >to me.

> >

> >I would greatly appreciate it! Thanks,

> >Sumita

> >

> >

[Madhava Replies:]

 

Dear Ms. Sumita:

 

Hari Om!

 

Since your friend seem to be more interested in the "brief" summary,

I would like to present a Hymn (Sukta) called "nAsadiya", that I have with

me, which is from our Rig-Veda. It is a very cryptic message on the

Creation Theory. Please let me know if your friend need any further

clarifications.

 

By the way, there are other creation theories in our mythology

(puranas) and of course they sound more like Genesis. I choose this hymn

because it is the most ancient thought on creation. All the best to you.

 

Best Regards,

Madhava

 

 

From the Rig-Veda

 

10.129 Creation Hymn (Nasadiya)

 

This short hymn, though linguistically simple (with the exception

of one or two troublesome nouns), is conceptually extremely

provocative

and has, indeed, provoked hundreds of complex commentaries among

Indian

theologians and Western scholars. In many ways, it is meant to

puzzle

and challenge, to raise unanswerable questions, to pile up

paradoxes.

 

****

 

There was neither non-existence nor existence then; there was

neither

the realm of space nor the sky which is beyond. What stirred? Where?

 

In whose protection? Was there water, bottomlessly deep?

 

There was neither death nor immortality then. There was no

distinguishing

sign of night nor of day. That one breathed, windless, by its own

impulse.

Other than that there was nothing beyond.

 

Darkness was hidden by darkness in the beginning; with no

distinguishing

sign, all this was water. The life force that was covered with

emptiness,

that one arose through the power of heat.

 

Desire came upon that one in the beginning; that was the first seed

of mind.

Poets seeking in their heart with wisdom found the bond of existence

 

in non-existence.

 

Their cord was extended across. Was there below? Was there above?

There

were seed-placers; there were powers. There was impulse beneath;

there

was giving-forth above.

 

Who really knows? Who will here proclaim it? Whence was it produced?

Whence

is this creation? The gods came afterwards, with the creation of

this

universe. Who then knows whence it has arisen?

 

Whence this creation has arisen perhaps it formed itself, or perhaps

it

did not the one who looks down on it, in the highest heaven, only he

knows

or perhaps he does not know.

[Guest guest]

very interesting Madhava.

 

Can you provide the original sloka too since I was not familier with the

verse. Thanks. when it starts with there was neither existence and

non-existenece - there is an apprent contradition unless one interprets what

existence and non-existence means - since there "was" something by the

statement - that 'was' implies that there exists and and hence existence was

there - May be this requries close examination.

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

> ****

>

> There was neither non-existence nor existence then; there was

>neither

> the realm of space nor the sky which is beyond. What stirred? Where?

>

> In whose protection? Was there water, bottomlessly deep?

>

> There was neither death nor immortality then. There was no

>distinguishing

> sign of night nor of day. That one breathed, windless, by its own

>impulse.

> Other than that there was nothing beyond.

>

> Darkness was hidden by darkness in the beginning; with no

>distinguishing

> sign, all this was water. The life force that was covered with

>emptiness,

> that one arose through the power of heat.

>

> Desire came upon that one in the beginning; that was the first seed

>of mind.

> Poets seeking in their heart with wisdom found the bond of existence

>

> in non-existence.

>

> Their cord was extended across. Was there below? Was there above?

>There

> were seed-placers; there were powers. There was impulse beneath;

>there

> was giving-forth above.

>

> Who really knows? Who will here proclaim it? Whence was it produced?

>Whence

> is this creation? The gods came afterwards, with the creation of

>this

> universe. Who then knows whence it has arisen?

>

> Whence this creation has arisen perhaps it formed itself, or perhaps

>it

> did not the one who looks down on it, in the highest heaven, only he

>knows

> or perhaps he does not know.

>

[Guest guest]

Hari Om Sadanandaji:

 

Last Sunday, during Gita Satsang in Virginia ( we do miss you), we discussed

verses 4, 5 and 6 of Chapter 9 and these verses are quite similar.

 

Maya tatam idam sarvam jagad avyaktamurtina (4)

matshtani sarvabhutani na ca 'ham tesv avasthitah

 

All this world is pervaded by me in My unmanifested form (aspect); all beings

exist in Me, bu I do not dwell in them.

 

na ca matsthani bhutani pasya me yogam aisvaram (5)

bhutabhrn na ca bhutastho mama 'tma bhutabhavanah

 

Nor do beings exist (in reality) in Me -behold My Divine Yoga supporting all

beings, but not dwelling in them, is (Me) My Self, the efficient cause of all

beings.

 

yatha 'kkasthito nityam vayuh savatrago mahan (6)

thata sarvani bhutani matsthani 'ty upadharaya

 

As the mighty wind, moving everywhere, rests always in space (the Akasa), even

so, know you all beings rest in Me.

 

Verses (4) and (5) appears too much of a riddle and verse (6) the Lord provides

an example to clarify!

 

Sadaji, may I request you to provide your commentory?

 

Ram Chandran

 

 

 

Kuntimaddi Sadananda wrote:

> "Kuntimaddi Sadananda" <k_sadananda

>

> very interesting Madhava.

>

> Can you provide the original sloka too since I was not familier with the

> verse. Thanks. when it starts with there was neither existence and

> non-existenece - there is an apprent contradition unless one interprets what

> existence and non-existence means - since there "was" something by the

> statement - that 'was' implies that there exists and and hence existence was

> there - May be this requries close examination.

> Hari Om!

> Sadananda

>

[Guest guest]

namaste,

 

Here is one article Patrick may want to study:

 

The Riddle of Fate and Free-Will Solved:

(A dialogue between His Holiness Shri Chandrashekhara Bharati

Mahaswami and a Disciple): [His Holiness was the Sringeri Mathadhipati

1912-1954.]

 

H.H. : I hope you are pursuing your studies in the Vedanta as usual?

D. : Though not regularly, I do make some occasional study.

H.H. : In the course of your studies, you may have come across many doubts.

D. : Yes, one doubt repeatedly comes up to my mind.

H.H. : What is it?

D. : It is the problem of the eternal conflict between fate and free-will.

What are their respective provinces and how can the conflict be

avoided?

H.H. : If presented in the way you have done it, the problem would baffle

even the highest of thinkers.

D. : What is wrong with my presentation? I only stated the problem and

did not even explain how I find it to be a difficult one.

H.H. : Your difficulty arises in the very statement of the problem.

D. : How?

H.H. : A conflict arises only if there are two things. There can be no

conflict if there is only one thing.

D. : But here there are two things, fate and free-will.

H.H. : Exacly. It is this assumption of yours that is responsible for your

problem.

D. : It is not my assumption at all. How can I ignore the fact that the

two things exist as independent factors, whether I grant their

existence or not?

H.H. : That is where you are wrong again.

D. : How?

H.H. : As a follower of our Sanatana Dharma, you must know that fate is

nothing extraneous to yourself, but only the sum total of the

results of your past actions.

As God is but the dispenser of the fruits of actions, fate,

representing those fruits, is not his creation but only yours.

Fre-will is what you exercise when you act now.

D. : Still I do not see how they are not two distinct things.

H.H. : Have it this way. Fate is past karma; free-will is present karma.

Both are really one, that is, karma, though they may differ in the

matter of time. There can be no conflict when they are really one.

D. : But the difference in time is a vital difference which we cannot

possibly overlook.

H.H. : I do not want you to overlook it, but only to study it more deeply.

The present is before you and, by the exercise of free-will, you can

attempt to shape it.

The past is past and is therefore beyond your vision and is

rightly called adrishta, the unseen. You cannot reasonably attempt

to find out the relative strength of two things unless both of them

are before you. But, by our very definition, free-will, the present

karma, alone is before you and fate, the past karma, is invisible.

Even if you see two wrestlers right in front of you, you cannot

decide about their relative strength. For, one may have weight, the

other agility; one muscles and the other tenacity; one the benefit of

practice and the other coolness of judgment and so on. We can go on

building arguments on arguments to conclude that a particular

wrestler will be the winner.

But experience shows that each of these qualifications may fail

at any time or may prove to be a disqualification. The only practical

method of determining their relative strength will be to make them

wrestle.

While this is so, how do you expect to find by means of

arguments a solution to the problem of the relative value of fate

and free-will when the former by its very nature is unseen!

D. : Is there no way then of solving this problem?

H.H. : There is this way. The wrestlers must fight with each other and prove

which of them is the stronger.

D. : In other words, the problem of conflict will get solved only at the

end of the conflict. But at that time the problem will have ceased to

have any practical significance.

H.H. : Not only so, it will cease to exist.

D. : That is, before the conflict begins, the problem is incapable of

solution; and, after the conflict ends, it is no longer necessary to

find a solution.

H.H. : Just so. In either case, it is profitless to embark on the enquiry

as to the relative stregth of fate and free-will.

 

A Guide

 

D. : Does Yor Holiness then mean to say that we must resign ourselves to

fate?

H.H. : Certainly not. On the other hand, you must devote yourself to free-

will.

D. : How can that be?

H.H. : Fate, as I told you, is the resultant of the past exercise of your

free-will. By exercising your free-will in the past, you brought on

the resultant fate.

By exercising your free-will in the present, I want you to wipe

out your past record if it hurts you, or to add to it if you find it

enjoyable.

I any case. whether for acquiring more happiness or for reducing

misery. you have to exercise your free-will in the present.

D. : But the exercise of free-will however well-directed, very often

fails to secure the desired result, as fate steps in and nullifies

the action of free-will.

H.H. : You are again ignoring our definition of fate. It is not an

extraneous and a new thing which steps in to nullify your free-will.

On the other hand, it is already in yourself.

D. : It may be so, but its existence is felt only when it comes into

conflict with free-will. How can we possibly wipe out the past

record when we do not know nor have the means of knowing what it is?

H.H. : Except to a very few highly advanced souls, the past certainly

remains unknown. But even our ignorance of it is very often an

advantage to us.

For, if we happen to know all the results we have accumulated

by our actions in this and our past lives, we will be so much

shocked as to give up in despair any attempt to overcome or mitigate

them. Even in this life, forgetfulnes is a boon which the merciful

God has been pleased to bestow on us, so that we may not be burdened

at any moment with a recollection of all that has happened in the

past.

Similarly, the divine spark in us is ever bright with hope and

makes it possible for us to confidently exercise our free-will. It

is not for us to belittle the significance of these two boons--

forgetfulness of the past and hope for the future.

D. : Our ignorance of the past may be useful in not deterring the exercise

of the free-will, and hope may stimulate that exercise. All the

same, it cannot be denied that fate very often does present a

formidable obstacle in the way of such exercise.

H.H. : It is not quite correct to say that fate places obstacles in the way

of free-will. On the other hand, by seeming to oppose our efforts,

it tells us what is the extent of free-will that is necessary now to

bear fruit.

Ordinarily for the purpose of securing a single benefit, a

particular activity is prescribed; but we do not know how

intensively or how repeatedly that activity has to be pursued or

pesisted in.

If we do not succed at the very first attempt, we can easily

deduce that in the past we have exercised our free-will just in the

opposite direction, that the resultant of that past activity has

first to be eliminated and that our present effort must be

proportionate to that past activity.

Thus, the obstacle which fate seems to offer is just the gauge

by which we have to guide our present activities.

H.H. : The obstacle is seen only after the exercise of our free-will; how

can that help us to guide our activities at the start?

H.H. : It need not guide us at the start. At the start, you must not be

obsessed at all with the idea that there will be any obstacle in

your way.

Start with boundless hope and with the rpesumption that there

is nothing in the way of your exercising the free-will.

If you do not succeed, tell yourself then that there has been

in the past a counter-influence brought on by yourself by exercising

your free-will in the other direction and, therefore, you must now

exercise your free-will with re-doubled vogor and persistence to

achieve your object.

Tell yourself that, inasmuch as the seeming obstacle is of your

own making, it is certainly within your competence to overcome it.

If you do not succeed even after this renewed effort, there can

be absolutely no justification for despair, for fate being but a

creature of your free-will can never be stronger than your free-will.

Your failure only means that your present exercise of free-will

is not sufficient to counteract the result of the past exercise of

it.

In other words, there is no question of a relative proportion

between fate and free-will as distinct factors in life. The relative

proportion is only as between the intensity of our past action and

the intensity of our present action.

D. : But even so, the relative intensity can be realised only at the end

of our present effort in a particular direction.

H.H. : It is always so in the case of everything which is adrishta or

unseen. Take, for example, a nail driven into a wooden pillar. When

you see it for the first time, you actually see, say, an inch of it

projecting out of the pillar. The rest of it has gone into the wood

and you cannot now see what exact length of the nail is imbedded in

the wood. That length, therefore, is unseen or adrishta, so far as

you are concerned. Beautifully varnished as the pillar is, you do

not know what is the composition of the wood in which the nail is

driven. That also is unseen or adrishta.

Now, suppose you want to pull that nail out, can you tell me

how many pulls will be necessary and how powerful each pull has to

be?

D. : How can I? The number and the intensity of the pulls will depend

upon the length which has gone into the wood.

H.H. : Certainly so. And the length which has gone into the wood is not

arbitrary, but depended upon the number of strokes which drove it in

and the intensity of each of such strokes and the resistance which

the wood offered to them.

D. : It is so.

H.H. : The number and intensity of the pulls needed to take out the nail

depend therefore upon the number and intensity of the strokes which

drove it in.

D. : Yes.

H.H. : But the strokes that drove in the nail are now unseen and unseeable.

They relate to the past and are adrishta.

D. : Yes.

H.H. : Do we stop from pulling out the nail simply because we happen to be

ignorant of the length of the nail in the wood or of the number and

intensity of the strokes which drove it in? Or, do we persist in

pulling it out by increasing our effort?

D. : Certainly, as practical men we adopt the latter course.

H.H. : Adopt the same course in every effort of yours. Exert yourself as

much as you can. Your will must succeed in the end.

 

Function of Shastras:

 

D. : But there certainly are many things which are impossible to attain

even after the utmost exertion.

H.H. : There you are mistaken. There is nothing which is really

unattainable. A thing, however, may be unattainable to us at the

particular stage at which we are, or with the qualifications that we

possess.

The attainability or otherwise of a particular thing is thus

not an absolute characteristic of that thing but is relative and

proportionate to our capacity to attain it.

D. : The success or failure of an effort can be known definitely only at

the end. How are we then to know beforehand whether with our

present capacity we may or may not exert ourselves to attain a

particular object, and whether it is the right kind of exertion for

the attainment of that object?

H.H. : Your question is certainly a pertinent one. The whole aim of our

Dharma Shastras is to give a detailed answer to your question.

Religion does not fetter man's free-will. It leaves him quite

free to act, but tells him at the same time what is good for him and

what is not.

The resposibility is entirely and solely his. He cannot escape it by

blaming fate, for fate is of his own making, nor by blaming God, for

he is but the dispenser of fruits in accordance with the merits of

actions. You are the master of your own destiny. It is for you to

make it, to better it or to mar it. This is your privilege. This is

your responsibility.

D. : I quite realise this. But often it so happens that I am not really

master of myself. I know, for instance, quite well that a particular

act is wrong; at the same time, I feel impelled to do it. Similarly,

I know that another act is right; at the same time, however, I feel

powerless to do it. It seems that there is some power which is able

to control or defy my free-will. So long as that power is potent,

how can I be called the master of my own destiny? Whatis that power

but fate?

H.H. : You are evidently confusing together two distinct things. Fate is a

thing quite different from the other one which you call a power.

Suppose you handle an instrument for the first time. You will do it

very clumsily and with great effort.

The next time, however, you use it, you will do so less

clumsily and with less effort. With repeated uses, you will have

learnt to use it easily and without any effort. That is, the facility

and ease with which you use a particular thing increase with the

number of times you use it.

The first time a man steals, he does so with great effort and

much fear; the next time both his effort and fear are much less. As

opportunities increase, stealing will become a normal habit with him

and will require no effort at all. This habit will generate in him a

tendency to steal even when there is no necessity to steal. It is

this tendency which goes by the name vasana. The power which makes

you act as if against your will is only the vasana which itself is of

your own making. This is not fate.

The punishment or reward, in the shape of pain or pleasure,

which is the inevitable consequence of an act, good or bad, is alone

the province of fate or destiny.

The vasana which the doing of an act leaves behind in the mind

in the shape of a taste, a greater facility or a greater tendency for

doing the same act once again, is quite a different thing. It may be

that the punishment or the reward of the past act is, in ordinary

circumstances, unavoidable, if there is no counter-effort; but the

vasana can be easily handled if only we exercise our free-will

correctly.

D. : But the number of vasanas or tendencies that rule our hearts are

endless. How can we possibly control them?

H.H. : The essential nature of a vasana is to seek expression in outward

acts. This characteristic is common to all vasanas, good and bad.

The stream of vasanas, the vasana sarit, as it is called, has two

currents, the good and the bad.

If you try to dam up the entire stream, there mey be danger.

The Shastras, therefore, do not ask you to attempt that. On the

other hand, they ask you to submit yourself to be led by the good

vasana current and to resist being led away by the bad vasana

current.

When you know that a particular vasana is rising up in your

mind, you cannot possibly say that you are at its mercy. You have

your wits about you and the responsibility of deciding whether you

will encourage it or not is entirely yours.

The Shastras ennciate in detail what vasanas are good and

have to be encouraged and what vasanas are bad and have to be

overcome.

When, by dint of practice, you have made all your vasanas

good and practically eliminated the charge of any bad vasanas

leading you astray, the Shastras take upon themselves the function

of teaching you how to free your free-will even from the need of

being led by good vasanas.

You will gradually be led on to a stage when your free-will

be entirely free from any sort of coloring due to any vasanas.

At that stage, your mind will be pure as crystal and all

motive for particular action will cease to be. Freedom from the

results of particular actions is an inevitable consequence. Both

fate and vasana disappear. There is freedom for ever more and that

freedom is called Moksha.

__________________________

 

.. shrii shaN^karaarpaNamastu ..

__________________________

>From the book, Dialogues with the Guru", compiled by R. Krishnaswamy Aiyar,

published by Shankara Vidya Kendra, Pashchim Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi

110 057 (pages 140. Price Rs.40).

 

Reproduced in Tattvaloka (June/July 1997, pp. 4-10)[The Splendor of Truth]

Abhinav Circle,

19- Co-perative Colony, Chamiers Road,

Chennai, India, 600 018

Tel. 498-5202 / 466-0023

Fax: 91-44-466-0065

 

 

----Original Message Follows----

"Ram Chandran" <chandran

advaitin

advaitin

Re:

Wed, 5 Jan 100 13:35:47 -0500

 

Greetings Patrick:

 

On behalf of fellow list moderators and members, it is my pleasure to

welcome you again. I just want to assure you that the list policy does

allow every member to disagree with what others say. However, the list does

expect the member to express his/her disagreements politely focusing only on

the subject matter rather than on the personality. The main purpose of this

spiritual forum is facilate the members to shred their ignorance through

friendly exchange of thoughts. Peace is the ultimate goal for all spiritual

seekers and the list will take all necessary efforts to preserve peace.

 

Please search through the archives using the key words "free-will" or

"destiny" and you should be able to retrieve the previously posted article.

We are looking forward to your thoughtful comments and questions.

 

regards,

 

Ram Chandran

On behalf of Madhava Turumella and

other Moderators of Advaitin.

 

____

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

[Guest guest]

>"Anand Natarajan" <anandn

>

>

>One interesting aspect of free will (if you can call it) is that both

>Arjuna and Vidura told Krishna that they do not wish to fight this war as

>its result was mass destruction.

>Krishna immediately excused Vidura who then proceeded on a piligrimage.

>However Sri Krishna bids Arjuna to fight. Why ?

> Vidura was a Jnani. He was dominated by Sattva Guna.To him

>therefore is the duty of teaching and not fighting. Therefore he was

>excused from the war.

 

Vidura was a Shudra who did not have the duty of fighting the war. Arjuna

was and hence could not be excused. We also know that Bhishma Pitamah too

was great scholar, a Jnani but he too had to fight. Ofcourse, the rules

pertaining to varnaashrama dharma change during war, famine etc. But I don't

think Vidura was excused becuase of his being a Jnani.

 

ashish

____

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

[Guest guest]

Greetings Patrick:

 

On behalf of fellow list moderators and members, it is my pleasure to welcome

you again. I just want to assure you that the list policy does allow every

member to disagree with what others say. However, the list does expect the

member to express his/her disagreements politely focusing only on the subject

matter rather than on the personality. The main purpose of this spiritual forum

is facilate the members to shred their ignorance through friendly exchange of

thoughts. Peace is the ultimate goal for all spiritual seekers and the list will

take all necessary efforts to preserve peace.

 

Please search through the archives using the key words "free-will" or "destiny"

and you should be able to retrieve the previously posted article. We are

looking forward to your thoughtful comments and questions.

 

regards,

 

Ram Chandran

On behalf of Madhava Turumella and

other Moderators of Advaitin.

[Guest guest]

Namaste, Patrick.

> If memory serves the question in the third paragraph below

> ("Impelled by what Krishna does man commit sin involuntarily,

> as though driven by force?") is asked in Chapter 3 and the answer

> is

> that man is so impelled by the guna of rajas. It is made quite

> clear in

> Chapter 3 that *all* of man's actions are determined by the

> interplay of

> the gunas and that only those deluded by ahamkara believe that "I

> am the doer"

> whereas the enlightened person sees that the gunas alone act.

> Likewise Arjuna

> will be impelled to fight by prakriti whether he likes it or not

> (Chapter 18)

> and the slaughter of his enemies is predetermined (Chapter 11).

> Whatever the ethical teachings of the Gita are, they are *not*

> based on

> free-will.

 

This is a good question, Patrick, but why would Krishna urge Arjuna

one way or the other unless Krishna had some choice in the matter?

(perhaps limited existential choice). Your question and my

question may raise another question: Should we expect the Gita to

be logically self-consistent? Or are there rational grounds for

not being surprised if a certain inescapable inconsistency

permeates the text?

 

Namaste,

-- Max

 

 

Talk to your friends online with Messenger.

http://im.

[Guest guest]

Sunder Hattangadi shared:

> The Riddle of Fate and Free-Will Solved:

> (A dialogue between His Holiness Shri Chandrashekhara Bharati

> Mahaswami and a Disciple): [His Holiness was the Sringeri

> Mathadhipati 1912-1954.]

 

a delightful text which included the following passage:

> H.H. : As a follower of our Sanatana Dharma, you must know that

> fate is nothing extraneous to yourself, but only the sum total of

> the results of your past actions. As God is but the dispenser of

> the fruits of actions, fate, representing those fruits, is not

> his creation but only yours. Free-will is what you exercise when

> you act now.

 

I would only add that it seems that the actual scope of "free will"

in any moment seems to be constrained by any "fate" and by the

extent to which the actor is "dis-identified" from determinants.

This "constrained scope" is what I mean by "limited existential

freedom" and expands with dis-identification with determining

factors. I suppose this is another way of saying that with the

practice of virtue freedom becomes our fate.

 

Namste,

-- Max

 

 

Talk to your friends online with Messenger.

http://im.

[Guest guest]

Greetings Max, Sunder, Ram

 

thank you for your messages and the

references to the vexing question of

free will, destiny etc. Clearly this has

generated fruitful exchanges in the past

but my reason for joining the list is

that I look forward to discussing that

Gita

with you and I would prefer to see how

this discussion evolves before grinding

any particular axes. In answer to Max, I

must admit that the Gita does not seem

to me

to be altogether self-consistent which

means that there is a lot more room for

differences

of interpretation than most

commenatators seem to be willing to

allow. (Perhaps this

also accounts for how new the Gita often

seems to us on re-reading it.) I wonder

if

any of you know a book on the variety of

interpretations that have been made in

the past 200 years

called _The Universal Gita_ by Eric

Sharpe?

 

regards,

 

Patrick

 

 

 

Max Harris wrote:

>

> Namaste, Patrick.

>

> > If memory serves the question in the

> third paragraph below

> > ("Impelled by what Krishna does man

> commit sin involuntarily,

> > as though driven by force?") is

> asked in Chapter 3 and the answer

> > is

> > that man is so impelled by the guna

> of rajas. It is made quite

> > clear in

> > Chapter 3 that *all* of man's

> actions are determined by the

> > interplay of

> > the gunas and that only those

> deluded by ahamkara believe that "I

> > am the doer"

> > whereas the enlightened person sees

> that the gunas alone act.

> > Likewise Arjuna

> > will be impelled to fight by

> prakriti whether he likes it or not

> > (Chapter 18)

> > and the slaughter of his enemies is

> predetermined (Chapter 11).

> > Whatever the ethical teachings of

> the Gita are, they are *not*

> > based on

> > free-will.

>

> This is a good question, Patrick, but

> why would Krishna urge Arjuna

> one way or the other unless Krishna

> had some choice in the matter?

> (perhaps limited existential choice).

> Your question and my

> question may raise another question:

> Should we expect the Gita to

> be logically self-consistent? Or are

> there rational grounds for

> not being surprised if a certain

> inescapable inconsistency

> permeates the text?

>

> Namaste,

> -- Max

>

>

> Talk to your friends online with

> Messenger.

> http://im.

> -----

> [ONElist Sponsor]

> Please click above to support our

> sponsor

> -----

> Discussion of the True Meaning of

> Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy

> focusing on non-duality between mind

> and matter. Searchable List Archives

> are available at:

> http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/

> Contact Email Address:

> advaitins

>

>

> ========================================================================

> To UNSUBSCRIBE from this community,

> send an email to:

> advaitin-

> and reply to the confirmation email we

> send you.

> ========================================================================

[Guest guest]

One interesting aspect of free will (if you can call it) is that both Arjuna and

Vidura told Krishna that they do not wish to fight this war as its result was

mass destruction.

Krishna immediately excused Vidura who then proceeded on a piligrimage. However

Sri Krishna bids Arjuna to fight. Why ?

Vidura was a Jnani. He was dominated by Sattva Guna.To him therefore is

the duty of teaching and not fighting. Therefore he was excused from the war.

Arjuna was a kshatriya . He was dominated by Rajas and Sattva. His duty was

therefore to fight, failing which he would incur sin. However you should keep

in mind that after telling the whole of the Gita , one of the last sentences Sri

Krishna tells Arjuna is " I have told you what I have to say. Now you reflect

upon it and do as you choose ". Is'nt he talking of free will ?

 

Sri Ramana Maharshi defined free-will in this context, you have the free-will to

choose whether you wish to be attached to the body and suffer your actions or be

detached and enjoy the bilss of the Self.

 

Om

 

 

 

 

---

 

 

 

A FREE web-based e-mail service brought to you by the PC World Technology

Network.

Get your FREE account today at http://www.myworldmail.com

[Guest guest]

Greetings Sunder,

 

clearly the doctrine of karma

presupposes free will

so I have to make it clear that I don't

find

the idea of karma useful. (Of course I

realize that most members of the list

attach importance to it and my reading

of the Gita is unorthodox

on this point. My view is that the

doctrine of karma forms part of Vyasa's

cultural

baggage like sacrifice to the Vedic gods

but modern readers do not have to

 

to it in order to profit from the

teaching of karmayoga.

Similarly although Chapter 2 makes some

reference to the idea of reincarnation

it's not necessary to believe in this in

order to read the Gita.)

 

regards,

 

Patrick

 

Sunder Hattangadi wrote:

>

> namaste,

>

> Here is one article Patrick may

> want to study:

>

> The Riddle of Fate and Free-Will

> Solved:

> (A dialogue between His Holiness Shri

> Chandrashekhara Bharati

> Mahaswami and a Disciple): [His

> Holiness was the Sringeri Mathadhipati

> 1912-1954.]

>

> H.H. : I hope you are pursuing your

> studies in the Vedanta as usual?

> D. : Though not regularly, I do make

> some occasional study.

> H.H. : In the course of your studies,

> you may have come across many doubts.

> D. : Yes, one doubt repeatedly comes

> up to my mind.

> H.H. : What is it?

> D. : It is the problem of the

> eternal conflict between fate and

> free-will.

> What are their respective

> provinces and how can the conflict be

> avoided?

> H.H. : If presented in the way you

> have done it, the problem would baffle

> even the highest of thinkers.

> D. : What is wrong with my

> presentation? I only stated the

> problem and

> did not even explain how I find

> it to be a difficult one.

> H.H. : Your difficulty arises in the

> very statement of the problem.

> D. : How?

> H.H. : A conflict arises only if there

> are two things. There can be no

> conflict if there is only one

> thing.

> D. : But here there are two things,

> fate and free-will.

> H.H. : Exacly. It is this assumption

> of yours that is responsible for your

> problem.

> D. : It is not my assumption at all.

> How can I ignore the fact that the

> two things exist as independent

> factors, whether I grant their

> existence or not?

> H.H. : That is where you are wrong

> again.

> D. : How?

> H.H. : As a follower of our Sanatana

> Dharma, you must know that fate is

> nothing extraneous to yourself,

> but only the sum total of the

> results of your past actions.

> As God is but the dispenser

> of the fruits of actions, fate,

> representing those fruits, is

> not his creation but only yours.

> Fre-will is what you exercise

> when you act now.

> D. : Still I do not see how they are

> not two distinct things.

> H.H. : Have it this way. Fate is past

> karma; free-will is present karma.

> Both are really one, that is,

> karma, though they may differ in the

> matter of time. There can be no

> conflict when they are really one.

> D. : But the difference in time is a

> vital difference which we cannot

> possibly overlook.

> H.H. : I do not want you to overlook

> it, but only to study it more deeply.

> The present is before you and,

> by the exercise of free-will, you can

> attempt to shape it.

> The past is past and is

> therefore beyond your vision and is

> rightly called adrishta, the

> unseen. You cannot reasonably attempt

> to find out the relative

> strength of two things unless both of

> them

> are before you. But, by our

> very definition, free-will, the

> present

> karma, alone is before you and

> fate, the past karma, is invisible.

> Even if you see two

> wrestlers right in front of you, you

> cannot

> decide about their relative

> strength. For, one may have weight,

> the

> other agility; one muscles and

> the other tenacity; one the benefit of

> practice and the other coolness

> of judgment and so on. We can go on

> building arguments on arguments

> to conclude that a particular

> wrestler will be the winner.

> But experience shows that

> each of these qualifications may fail

> at any time or may prove to be

> a disqualification. The only practical

> method of determining their

> relative strength will be to make them

> wrestle.

> While this is so, how do

> you expect to find by means of

> arguments a solution to the

> problem of the relative value of fate

> and free-will when the former

> by its very nature is unseen!

> D. : Is there no way then of solving

> this problem?

> H.H. : There is this way. The

> wrestlers must fight with each other

> and prove

> which of them is the stronger.

> D. : In other words, the problem of

> conflict will get solved only at the

> end of the conflict. But at

> that time the problem will have ceased

> to

> have any practical

> significance.

> H.H. : Not only so, it will cease to

> exist.

> D. : That is, before the conflict

> begins, the problem is incapable of

> solution; and, after the

> conflict ends, it is no longer

> necessary to

> find a solution.

> H.H. : Just so. In either case, it is

> profitless to embark on the enquiry

> as to the relative stregth of

> fate and free-will.

>

> A Guide

>

> D. : Does Yor Holiness then mean to

> say that we must resign ourselves to

> fate?

> H.H. : Certainly not. On the other

> hand, you must devote yourself to

> free-

> will.

> D. : How can that be?

> H.H. : Fate, as I told you, is the

> resultant of the past exercise of your

> free-will. By exercising your

> free-will in the past, you brought on

> the resultant fate.

> By exercising your

> free-will in the present, I want you

> to wipe

> out your past record if it

> hurts you, or to add to it if you find

> it

> enjoyable.

> I any case. whether for

> acquiring more happiness or for

> reducing

> misery. you have to exercise

> your free-will in the present.

> D. : But the exercise of free-will

> however well-directed, very often

> fails to secure the desired

> result, as fate steps in and nullifies

> the action of free-will.

> H.H. : You are again ignoring our

> definition of fate. It is not an

> extraneous and a new thing

> which steps in to nullify your

> free-will.

> On the other hand, it is

> already in yourself.

> D. : It may be so, but its existence

> is felt only when it comes into

> conflict with free-will. How

> can we possibly wipe out the past

> record when we do not know nor

> have the means of knowing what it is?

> H.H. : Except to a very few highly

> advanced souls, the past certainly

> remains unknown. But even our

> ignorance of it is very often an

> advantage to us.

> For, if we happen to know

> all the results we have accumulated

> by our actions in this and our

> past lives, we will be so much

> shocked as to give up in

> despair any attempt to overcome or

> mitigate

> them. Even in this life,

> forgetfulnes is a boon which the

> merciful

> God has been pleased to bestow

> on us, so that we may not be burdened

> at any moment with a

> recollection of all that has happened

> in the

> past.

> Similarly, the divine

> spark in us is ever bright with hope

> and

> makes it possible for us to

> confidently exercise our free-will. It

> is not for us to belittle the

> significance of these two boons--

> forgetfulness of the past and

> hope for the future.

> D. : Our ignorance of the past may

> be useful in not deterring the

> exercise

> of the free-will, and hope may

> stimulate that exercise. All the

> same, it cannot be denied that

> fate very often does present a

> formidable obstacle in the way

> of such exercise.

> H.H. : It is not quite correct to say

> that fate places obstacles in the way

> of free-will. On the other

> hand, by seeming to oppose our

> efforts,

> it tells us what is the extent

> of free-will that is necessary now to

> bear fruit.

> Ordinarily for the purpose

> of securing a single benefit, a

> particular activity is

> prescribed; but we do not know how

> intensively or how repeatedly

> that activity has to be pursued or

> pesisted in.

> If we do not succed at the

> very first attempt, we can easily

> deduce that in the past we have

> exercised our free-will just in the

> opposite direction, that the

> resultant of that past activity has

> first to be eliminated and that

> our present effort must be

> proportionate to that past

> activity.

> Thus, the obstacle which

> fate seems to offer is just the gauge

> by which we have to guide our

> present activities.

> H.H. : The obstacle is seen only after

> the exercise of our free-will; how

> can that help us to guide our

> activities at the start?

> H.H. : It need not guide us at the

> start. At the start, you must not be

> obsessed at all with the idea

> that there will be any obstacle in

> your way.

> Start with boundless hope

> and with the rpesumption that there

> is nothing in the way of your

> exercising the free-will.

> If you do not succeed,

> tell yourself then that there has been

> in the past a counter-influence

> brought on by yourself by exercising

> your free-will in the other

> direction and, therefore, you must now

> exercise your free-will with

> re-doubled vogor and persistence to

> achieve your object.

> Tell yourself that,

> inasmuch as the seeming obstacle is of

> your

> own making, it is certainly

> within your competence to overcome it.

> If you do not succeed even

> after this renewed effort, there can

> be absolutely no justification

> for despair, for fate being but a

> creature of your free-will can

> never be stronger than your free-will.

> Your failure only means

> that your present exercise of

> free-will

> is not sufficient to counteract

> the result of the past exercise of

> it.

> In other words, there is

> no question of a relative proportion

> between fate and free-will as

> distinct factors in life. The relative

> proportion is only as between

> the intensity of our past action and

> the intensity of our present

> action.

> D. : But even so, the relative

> intensity can be realised only at the

> end

> of our present effort in a

> particular direction.

> H.H. : It is always so in the case of

> everything which is adrishta or

> unseen. Take, for example, a

> nail driven into a wooden pillar. When

> you see it for the first time,

> you actually see, say, an inch of it

> projecting out of the pillar.

> The rest of it has gone into the wood

> and you cannot now see what

> exact length of the nail is imbedded

> in

> the wood. That length,

> therefore, is unseen or adrishta, so

> far as

> you are concerned. Beautifully

> varnished as the pillar is, you do

> not know what is the

> composition of the wood in which the

> nail is

> driven. That also is unseen or

> adrishta.

> Now, suppose you want to

> pull that nail out, can you tell me

> how many pulls will be

> necessary and how powerful each pull

> has to

> be?

> D. : How can I? The number and the

> intensity of the pulls will depend

> upon the length which has gone

> into the wood.

> H.H. : Certainly so. And the length

> which has gone into the wood is not

> arbitrary, but depended upon

> the number of strokes which drove it

> in

> and the intensity of each of

> such strokes and the resistance which

> the wood offered to them.

> D. : It is so.

> H.H. : The number and intensity of the

> pulls needed to take out the nail

> depend therefore upon the

> number and intensity of the strokes

> which

> drove it in.

> D. : Yes.

> H.H. : But the strokes that drove in

> the nail are now unseen and unseeable.

> They relate to the past and are

> adrishta.

> D. : Yes.

> H.H. : Do we stop from pulling out the

> nail simply because we happen to be

> ignorant of the length of the

> nail in the wood or of the number and

> intensity of the strokes which

> drove it in? Or, do we persist in

> pulling it out by increasing

> our effort?

> D. : Certainly, as practical men we

> adopt the latter course.

> H.H. : Adopt the same course in every

> effort of yours. Exert yourself as

> much as you can. Your will must

> succeed in the end.

>

> Function of Shastras:

>

> D. : But there certainly are many

> things which are impossible to attain

> even after the utmost exertion.

> H.H. : There you are mistaken. There

> is nothing which is really

> unattainable. A thing, however,

> may be unattainable to us at the

> particular stage at which we

> are, or with the qualifications that

> we

> possess.

> The attainability or

> otherwise of a particular thing is

> thus

> not an absolute characteristic

> of that thing but is relative and

> proportionate to our capacity

> to attain it.

> D. : The success or failure of an

> effort can be known definitely only at

> the end. How are we then to

> know beforehand whether with our

> present capacity we may or may

> not exert ourselves to attain a

> particular object, and whether

> it is the right kind of exertion for

> the attainment of that object?

> H.H. : Your question is certainly a

> pertinent one. The whole aim of our

> Dharma Shastras is to give a

> detailed answer to your question.

> Religion does not fetter

> man's free-will. It leaves him quite

> free to act, but tells him at

> the same time what is good for him and

> what is not.

> The resposibility is entirely

> and solely his. He cannot escape it by

> blaming fate, for fate is of

> his own making, nor by blaming God,

> for

> he is but the dispenser of

> fruits in accordance with the merits

> of

> actions. You are the master of

> your own destiny. It is for you to

> make it, to better it or to mar

> it. This is your privilege. This is

> your responsibility.

> D. : I quite realise this. But often

> it so happens that I am not really

> master of myself. I know, for

> instance, quite well that a particular

> act is wrong; at the same time,

> I feel impelled to do it. Similarly,

> I know that another act is

> right; at the same time, however, I

> feel

> powerless to do it. It seems

> that there is some power which is able

> to control or defy my

> free-will. So long as that power is

> potent,

> how can I be called the master

> of my own destiny? Whatis that power

> but fate?

> H.H. : You are evidently confusing

> together two distinct things. Fate is

> a

> thing quite different from the

> other one which you call a power.

> Suppose you handle an

> instrument for the first time. You

> will do it

> very clumsily and with great

> effort.

> The next time, however,

> you use it, you will do so less

> clumsily and with less effort.

> With repeated uses, you will have

> learnt to use it easily and

> without any effort. That is, the

> facility

> and ease with which you use a

> particular thing increase with the

> number of times you use it.

> The first time a man

> steals, he does so with great effort

> and

> much fear; the next time both

> his effort and fear are much less. As

> opportunities increase, stealing

> will become a normal habit with him

> and will require no effort at

> all. This habit will generate in him a

> tendency to steal even when

> there is no necessity to steal. It is

> this tendency which goes by the

> name vasana. The power which makes

> you act as if against your will

> is only the vasana which itself is of

> your own making. This is not

> fate.

> The punishment or reward,

> in the shape of pain or pleasure,

> which is the inevitable

> consequence of an act, good or bad, is

> alone

> the province of fate or destiny.

> The vasana which the

> doing of an act leaves behind in the

> mind

> in the shape of a taste, a

> greater facility or a greater tendency

> for

> doing the same act once again,

> is quite a different thing. It may be

> that the punishment or the

> reward of the past act is, in ordinary

> circumstances, unavoidable, if

> there is no counter-effort; but the

> vasana can be easily handled if

> only we exercise our free-will

> correctly.

> D. : But the number of vasanas or

> tendencies that rule our hearts are

> endless. How can we possibly

> control them?

> H.H. : The essential nature of a

> vasana is to seek expression in

> outward

> acts. This characteristic is

> common to all vasanas, good and bad.

> The stream of vasanas, the

> vasana sarit, as it is called, has two

> currents, the good and the bad.

> If you try to dam up the

> entire stream, there mey be danger.

> The Shastras, therefore, do not

> ask you to attempt that. On the

> other hand, they ask you to

> submit yourself to be led by the good

> vasana current and to resist

> being led away by the bad vasana

> current.

> When you know that a

> particular vasana is rising up in your

> mind, you cannot possibly say

> that you are at its mercy. You have

> your wits about you and the

> responsibility of deciding whether you

> will encourage it or not is

> entirely yours.

> The Shastras ennciate in

> detail what vasanas are good and

> have to be encouraged and what

> vasanas are bad and have to be

> overcome.

> When, by dint of

> practice, you have made all your

> vasanas

> good and practically eliminated

> the charge of any bad vasanas

> leading you astray, the

> Shastras take upon themselves the

> function

> of teaching you how to free

> your free-will even from the need of

> being led by good vasanas.

> You will gradually be

> led on to a stage when your free-will

> be entirely free from any sort

> of coloring due to any vasanas.

> At that stage, your mind

> will be pure as crystal and all

> motive for particular action

> will cease to be. Freedom from the

> results of particular actions

> is an inevitable consequence. Both

> fate and vasana disappear.

> There is freedom for ever more and

> that

> freedom is called Moksha.

> __________________________

>

> .. shrii

> shaN^karaarpaNamastu ..

> __________________________

>

> >From the book, Dialogues with the

> Guru", compiled by R. Krishnaswamy

> Aiyar,

> published by Shankara Vidya Kendra,

> Pashchim Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi

> 110 057 (pages 140. Price

> Rs.40).

>

> Reproduced in Tattvaloka (June/July

> 1997, pp. 4-10)[The Splendor of Truth]

> Abhinav Circle,

> 19- Co-perative

> Colony, Chamiers Road,

> Chennai, India,

> 600 018

> Tel. 498-5202 /

> 466-0023

> Fax:

> 91-44-466-0065

>

> ----Original Message Follows----

> "Ram Chandran"

> <chandran

> advaitin

> advaitin

> Re:

> Wed, 5 Jan 100 13:35:47 -0500

>

> Greetings Patrick:

>

> On behalf of fellow list moderators

> and members, it is my pleasure to

> welcome you again. I just want to

> assure you that the list policy does

> allow every member to disagree with

> what others say. However, the list

> does

> expect the member to express his/her

> disagreements politely focusing only

> on

> the subject matter rather than on the

> personality. The main purpose of this

>

> spiritual forum is facilate the

> members to shred their ignorance

> through

> friendly exchange of thoughts. Peace

> is the ultimate goal for all spiritual

>

> seekers and the list will take all

> necessary efforts to preserve peace.

>

> Please search through the archives

> using the key words "free-will" or

> "destiny" and you should be able to

> retrieve the previously posted

> article.

> We are looking forward to your

> thoughtful comments and questions.

>

> regards,

>

> Ram Chandran

> On behalf of Madhava Turumella and

> other Moderators of Advaitin.

>

> ____

> Get Your Private, Free Email at

> http://www.hotmail.com

>

> -----

> [ONElist Sponsor]

> Please click above to support our

> sponsor

> -----

> Discussion of the True Meaning of

> Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy

> focusing on non-duality between mind

> and matter. Searchable List Archives

> are available at:

> http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/

> Contact Email Address:

> advaitins

>

>

> ========================================================================

> To UNSUBSCRIBE from this community,

> send an email to:

> advaitin-

> and reply to the confirmation email we

> send you.

> ========================================================================

[Guest guest]

Namaste Greg-ji and Anand-ji,

 

Thank you for the references. I was interested more in the

approaches of recognised philosophers than in the evidence for

paranormal experiences.

 

Mystical experiences seem to have a general underlying

unanimity--Socrates, Plotinus, Eckhart, Teresa of Avila, Spinoza, etc., but

they seem to have bypassed the questions on the other issues. If that is so,

what would be the reason?

 

Fred Alan Wolf's "The Spiritual Universe", is also a worthy

successor to Capra's book.

 

Regards,

 

S.

 

 

----Original Message Follows----

"Anand Natarajan" <anandn

advaitin

advaitin

Re:

Mon, 17 Jan 2000 12:15:55 -0800

 

 

Sunderji,

 

Here are a list . You may (or may not) find it interesting.

 

web site : http://www.inetport.com/~one/bcrkpl.html.

 

General discussions on meeting point of oriental and western viewpoints are

found in most of Fritjof Capra 's books like "Uncommon Wisdom".

 

Life after Death :- Swami Abhedananda.

 

There is also a lot of interest in the west about Near Death experiences.

Refer "http://www.nderf.org/".

 

You can also refer "Essays on Analytical Psychology" By Carl Gustav Jung.

 

Paul Brunton in his book "Hermit in the Himalayas" refers to the book , the

"The Tibetan book of the dead ". He also mentions a buddhist (spelling

wrong?) technique in which an individual is asked to remember step by step

each year (or month) of his life backwards from the present age. After a

long process, one reached the point of one's birth and it is said , by this

technique one can trace the life before birth. (Seems like a waste of time).

 

 

Regards,

Anand

 

On Mon, 17 Jan 2000 13:35:28 Sunder Hattangadi wrote:

>Would anyone famliar with Western philosophical traditions point to

>sources where there is discussion of dream-states, deep sleep state, and

>after-life, and their coherent ralationship to the waking state?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A FREE web-based e-mail service brought to you by the PC World Technology

Network.

Get your FREE account today at http://www.myworldmail.com

 

____

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

[Guest guest]

Sunderji,

 

Here are a list . You may (or may not) find it interesting.

 

web site : http://www.inetport.com/~one/bcrkpl.html.

 

General discussions on meeting point of oriental and western viewpoints are

found in most of Fritjof Capra 's books like "Uncommon Wisdom".

 

Life after Death :- Swami Abhedananda.

 

There is also a lot of interest in the west about Near Death experiences.

Refer "http://www.nderf.org/".

 

You can also refer "Essays on Analytical Psychology" By Carl Gustav Jung.

 

Paul Brunton in his book "Hermit in the Himalayas" refers to the book , the "The

Tibetan book of the dead ". He also mentions a buddhist (spelling wrong?)

technique in which an individual is asked to remember step by step each year (or

month) of his life backwards from the present age. After a long process, one

reached the point of one's birth and it is said , by this technique one can

trace the life before birth. (Seems like a waste of time).

 

 

Regards,

Anand

 

On Mon, 17 Jan 2000 13:35:28 Sunder Hattangadi wrote:

>Would anyone famliar with Western philosophical traditions point to

>sources where there is discussion of dream-states, deep sleep state, and

>after-life, and their coherent ralationship to the waking state?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A FREE web-based e-mail service brought to you by the PC World Technology

Network.

Get your FREE account today at http://www.myworldmail.com

[Guest guest]

Hi! We need to about mind, Sukshma Shareer to know about wat happens when

one is in dream states, deep sleep state and after-life.

 

I remember having read that kriya yoga explains the relationship btw

waking states and the other conscious states.

 

> On Mon, 17 Jan 2000 13:35:28 Sunder Hattangadi wrote:

>

> >Would anyone famliar with Western philosophical traditions point to

> >sources where there is discussion of dream-states, deep sleep state, and

> >after-life, and their coherent ralationship to the waking state?

>

[Guest guest]

namaste,

 

For some reason this link did not work for me.

 

I found another , at:

 

http://www.upnaway.com/~sulea/

 

 

http://www.upnaway.com/~sulea/essays/mind.txt

 

 

The lower one is a very nice poem on Mind; poet's name is not mentioned.

 

 

Regards,

 

s.

 

>"Ram Chandran" <chandran

>advaitin

><advaitin >

>Re:

>Mon, 14 Feb 2000 15:49:27 -0500

>

>Greetings Jay:

>

>Several Gita links such as Ishwara Gita, Chitanya Gita, Avadhuta Gita etc.,

>can be found at /culture/advaitin/links

>

>The link page has many useful links to advaita related sites.,

>

>I request members to go to the site and add the links that they are

>familiar with. Every link that we add can help many to save search time

>for the rest of the members. This is a great opportunity to show your

>public spirit!

>

>regards,

>

>Ram Chandran

>

> >"Vivekananda Centre" <vivekananda

> >

> >Have this message from a youngster who is very keen on spiritual matters

> >Maybe the list members will be able to send me the urls for some of these

> >gitas.

> >Kindly email these details to me at vivekananda

> >I would also like to add links to these sites from our site.

>

 

____

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

[Guest guest]

Greetings Jay:

 

Several Gita links such as Ishwara Gita, Chitanya Gita, Avadhuta Gita etc., can

be found at /culture/advaitin/links

 

The link page has many useful links to advaita related sites.,

 

I request members to go to the site and add the links that they are familiar

with. Every link that we add can help many to save search time for the rest of

the members. This is a great opportunity to show your public spirit!

 

regards,

 

Ram Chandran

>"Vivekananda Centre" <vivekananda

>

>Have this message from a youngster who is very keen on spiritual matters

>Maybe the list members will be able to send me the urls for some of these

>gitas.

>Kindly email these details to me at vivekananda

>I would also like to add links to these sites from our site.

[Guest guest]

Nitin Trasi wrote:

> "Nitin Trasi" <ntrasi

>

> Dear friends,

>

> Here's an interesting news flash:

> Dr.Nitin Trasi's book on science and advaita spirituality, "The Science of

Enlightenment" has been selected by the Department of Education, Government of

India as a scholarly reference book for university libraries. The CIEFL (Central

Institute of English and Foreign Languages, an institute of higher education and

a deemed university) will be presenting a copy each to 100 university libraries

all over India (including Bombay University) on behalf of the Government.

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Nitin Trasi

 

Good news Nitin-Ji. Congratulations!

 

Love

Harsha

[Guest guest]

HOW CAN I GET THIS BOOK? THANKS BILL

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Madhava,

 

Could you kindly post Pottu Mami's address in Chennai? In both the sites shown

by you, her address is not there. May Pottu Mami continue to inspire devotees as

she has been doing so far.

 

Hari Om!

 

Swaminarayan.

 

 

"Madhava K. Turumella" <madhava wrote:

Hari Om!

 

Dear All,

 

During my recent visit to India I went to see one of the saints Pottu Mami

at Chennai.

 

 

 

 

Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.

 

 

[Guest guest]

--- A Kumar <ites30 wrote:

> If the belief that Brahm and Jiv are the same,

> advaita, then why are the poor Jivatmas sent to this

> world

------------------

 

When the belief that Brahman and Jiva are the same

developes into a very strong conviction in the Jiva,

Self Realisation Occurs in the Jiva .It realises that

the Jiva ,in fact, is nothing but Brahman Itself :

Advaita

 

Once the Jiva comes into its own REAL EXISTANCE as

BRAHMAN, the Jivatma and the world vanish!

 

----------------

What is the need for Brahm to send part of

> himself

 

----------------

 

There is, in fact, no need for Brahman to send a part

of himself and He, in reality does not do so at all!

 

Brahman is PARTLESS

Brahman is ACTIONLESS

Brahman is KEVALA and so,

Brahman is ADVAITA

 

-------------------------

 

Hari Om!

 

Swaminarayan

 

------------------------

>

>

 

 

 

 

Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Messenger.

http://im.

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

> There is, in fact, no need for Brahman to send a

> part

> of himself and He, in reality does not do so at all!

>

 

There is a famous richa in upnishadas which says

"purnasya purnam aadaya purnamevavashishyate" Does is

not mean that there is a notion of subtraction from

brahman (even though that subtraction leaves brahman

unchanged)

 

Hemant.

 

 

 

 

 

Listen to your Mail messages from any phone.

http://phone.

[Guest guest]

Dear Friends,

Nmaste. Is any body knows KENOUPANISHAD. I want to study it deeply. Can

anybody could help me out.

Kumaraguru

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sign-up for Video Highlights of 2002 FIFA World Cup

 

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

Some translations [of varying quality!] are available. For

commentaries, one will have to buy the book; for deep study, a

teacher is essential.

 

http://www.depts.drew.edu/rel/kenaupa.html

 

http://www.depts.drew.edu/rel/kenaupa.htmlhttp://rvjtrust.tripod.com/k

ena.html

 

http://www.san.beck.org/Upan1-Kena.html

 

http://www.realization.org/page/namedoc0/kena/k_0.htm

 

http://www.erowid.org/spirit/traditions/hinduism/hindu_upani_kena.shtm

l

 

http://www.realization.org/page/namedoc0/kena/k_i.htm

 

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/upan/up02.htm

 

http://sanatan.intnet.mu/upanishads/kena.htm

 

http://www.geocities.com/radhakutir/upnishds/upnshd02.html

 

http://www.ttoshi.net/meditation/Upanishads.html

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

 

advaitin, Kumaraguru Iyer <kumaranvijaya> wrote:

>

> Dear Friends,

> Nmaste. Is any body knows KENOUPANISHAD. I want to study it

deeply. Can anybody could help me out.

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

 

Sri Aurobindo's translation is at:

 

http://wolf.mind.net/library/ancient/upanishads/kena.htm

 

 

Regards,

 

S.

 

 

advaitin, "sunderh" <sunderh> wrote:

> Namaste,

>

> Some translations [of varying quality!] are available. For

> commentaries, one will have to buy the book; for deep study, a

> teacher is essential.

>

> advaitin, Kumaraguru Iyer <kumaranvijaya> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Friends,

> > Nmaste. Is any body knows KENOUPANISHAD. I want to study it

> deeply. Can anybody could help me out.

[Guest guest]

--- Kumaraguru Iyer <kumaranvijaya wrote:

>

> Dear Friends,

> Nmaste. Is any body knows KENOUPANISHAD. I want to

> study it deeply. Can anybody could help me out.

> Kumaraguru

 

Namaste,

 

At the present time I am concentrating upon the Keno

Upanishad by studying the Sanskrit daily and following

Shankara's commentary. I have been going verse by

verse and will be having a few study days with friends

later in the year.

If you would like to share some study, verse by verse,

I would be happy to join you. Recently I had

considered posting a message just the same as yours

but neglected to do so, therefore it may be that your

request is there for all of us to pick up.

 

I have typed out the Kena Upanishad in English and

ITRANS...generally I found that the translations on

the Internet were not very good. Unfortunately I am

not at home for the next few days and will have to

find some university computer assistant here to copy

my files onto this system. Then I will post

these....hopefully later today.

I look forward to sharing some study but may this be

kicked off with the essential question:

'By whose volition have you asked this question?'

It is brahman.

 

happy studies

 

ken knight

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Sign-up for Video Highlights of 2002 FIFA World Cup

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been

> removed]

>

>

>

 

 

 

 

- Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup

http://fifaworldcup.