An angry person scars everyone and injects permanent scars!

[Guest guest]

I used to wonder why the same why the elders repeat the story of Ramayana to the

youngsters again and again. The reason is quite obvious. The leading character,

Rama is the embodiment of True Human Nature and he has shown how "TRUTH" and

"Dharma" can always be maintained in spite of personal hardships. Rama actually

did not express any personal hardships because he was totally detached.

Repetition of such stories can implant goodness in the hearts of those hearing

them.

 

Let me take this opportunity to repeat a story that contains a powerful message

for controlling anger. Many times during discussions, we fail to control our

temper and express our anger through inappropriate words in frustrations. After

sometime, our inner voice forces us to apologize and feel sorry for our hasty

action. The story below points out that every expression of inappropriate words

on others injects permanent scars that will never disappear. Let us read the

story one more time so that the moral of this story is remain permanent in our

memory!

 

An angry person scars everyone and injects permanent scars!

 

This story is from an unknown source: There was a little boy with a bad temper.

His father gave him a bag of nails and told him that every time he lost his

temper, to hammer a nail in the back fence. The first day the boy had driven

37 nails into the fence. Then it gradually dwindled down. The boy discovered

it was easier to hold his temper than to drive those nails into the fence.

Finally the day came when the boy didn't lose his temper at all.

 

He told his father about it and the father suggested that the boy now pull out

one nail for each day that he was able to hold his temper. The days passed and

the young boy was finally able to tell his father that all the nails were gone.

The father took his son by the hand and led him to the fence. He said, "You

have done well, my son, but look at the holes in the fence. The fence will

never be the same. When you say things in anger, they leave a scar just like

this one. It won't matter how many times you say I'm sorry, the wound is

still there.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Ramji,

 

A beautiful story indeed. It appears that along with the Gita, Ramayana is also

one of your passions. In this connection I remember an amusing advise which my

grandfather used to give me on Dharma - Do what Rama DID and what Krishna SAID.

 

Regards, Venkat.

 

Ram Chandran <rchandran wrote:

Namaste:

 

I used to wonder why the elders repeat the story of Ramayana to the

again and again.

 

 

 

 

 

Plus - For a better Internet experience

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste:

 

Yes Indeed! The characterization of Rama in Ramayana was a portrayal

of 'Human Dharma' where as the dramatization of Krishna in Mahabharat

was Divine Intervention to destroy 'Adharma'!

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

advaitin, S Venkatraman <svenkat52> wrote:

>

> Do what Rama DID and what Krishna SAID.

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Ram!

>I used to wonder why the elders repeat the story of

>Ramayana to the again and again. The reason is quite

>obvious. The leading character, Rama embodies True

>Human Nature and Rama has shown that how "TRUTH" and

>"Dharma" can always be maintained even when one faces

>adverse situation. Rama actually did not express

>unpleasantness or anger even at the worst circmstances.

 

I might point out that Jesus did sometimes lose his anger, e.g. at

the 'moneychangers' in the temple. You can draw your own

conclusions; I am merely stating a fact from the gospel. It seems

Buddha never lost his temper. Is it something in the Asian diet? (A

lack of meat?)

 

Here is a personal feeling I have regarding equanimity under all

circumstances. If wars were always fought honorably, as I presume

they are in the Mahabharata, then warriors would meet on a

battlefield, 'politely' shoot arrows at each other, leave unarmed

civilians and property alone, and then go home. Not exactly a picnic

but so much better than the inhuman degradation and devastation of

most modern wars. They say India used to fight its battles like this

before the Muslims and Christians invaded, with their supposedly

superior religions.

 

This is what is called 'chivalry', and I wish we still had it. But

what do you say to women and even children who get raped by invading

soldiers, sometimes in front of their family? Or kidnappings where

the family must surrender everything to get a loved one back? Or

terrorism that maims innocents? I cannot imagine preserving my

equanimity in the face of such inhuman, obscene and degrading

horrors. Even in combat there must be some decency, but go tell that

to the hordes of barbarians who have arisen in all continents,

sometimes even wearing suits and neckties.

 

It is for this reason that I can tolerate no pseudo-Gandhian nonsense

regarding the suppression of terrorism and barbarity in all forms.

Yes, I realize that many situations are morally ambiguous, everyone

always has some legitimate grievance, and the fight against terrorism

can also present moral quandaries such as 'collateral damage'. But

the sheer ugliness of some evil severely tests my Advaitin

principles, and I demand that such evil be suppressed.

 

Nor can I blame those who feel fury in the face of indecency. If

only we settled our differences by calmly shooting arrows into

'professional' kshatryas, leaving others unmolested. That would be

enormous progress!

 

Regarding the rest of your post, if I ever seemed to express anger at

anyone on the list, I am truly sorry! Nowadays, the discussion is

thoroughly enjoyable for me, no matter what anyone says. I don't

take it seriously anymore, which is another way of saying that I take

it much more seriously. (Some Advaitin/Buddhist paradoxical

non-Aristotelian logic for you ... you've seen it before.)

 

And I have to say one more thing, as usual. I believe that serious

trouble in marriage arises when an instance of dishonesty or

disrespect is not immediately healed. It festers, perhaps at a

subconscious level, until the infection spreads, perhaps

irretrievably. Even minor instances of dishonesty and disrespect

must be immediately recognized and taken care of, regardless of such

petty concerns as a 'loss of face'.

 

Om!

Benjamin

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Ram Chandran" <rchandran@c...>

wrote:

> Namaste:

>

> Yes Indeed! The characterization of Rama in Ramayana was a

portrayal

> of 'Human Dharma' where as the dramatization of Krishna in

Mahabharat

> was Divine Intervention to destroy 'Adharma'!

>

> Warmest regards,

>

> Ram Chandran

> advaitin, S Venkatraman <svenkat52>

wrote:

> >

> > Do what Rama DID and what Krishna SAID.

> >

Namaste,

 

The only other place I have heard of Ram is in Edgar Cayce, where he

says 90,000 years before Ram entered India, there was an Amilius on

Atlantis, who presumably was an Avatar and an incarnation of

Jesus......ONS....Tony.

[Guest guest]

Namaste benjamin,

When jesus lost his temper, was it a real one or faked for the

worldsake.

How can an apostle of love can lose his temper, as this quality(love)

has to be nurtured across many lives?

Rgds

--Ranga

 

 

 

Benjamin Root [orion777ben]

 

I might point out that Jesus did sometimes lose his anger, e.g. at

the 'moneychangers' in the temple. You can draw your own

conclusions; I am merely stating a fact from the gospel. It seems

Buddha never lost his temper. Is it something in the Asian diet? (A

lack of meat?)

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben>

wrote:

>

> >

>. They say India used to fight its battles like this

> before the Muslims and Christians invaded, with their supposedly

> superior religions.

>

>Hello Benjamin,

Sorry to be tiresome about this but has any war ever been fought on

purely religious

 

grounds. From what you say the inference could be drawn that war was

joined on

 

behalf of Christian or Muslim values. Wars are fought for political

reasons, for

 

control, pillage, plunder, empire building. Rationalisations may be

offered which

 

have a religious tinge but really that is high minded guff. They

happen to be

 

Muslims or Hindus or Christians or Protestants or Catholics but in

fact it's tribal

 

dominance that is the issue. No scripture whatever sanctions

rapine. Jihad is inner

 

moral struggle. Latterly we have an invading army remaining on to

promote truth,

 

justice and the American way (like Superman). Do you believe that or

is it globalisation - empire building by another means?

 

The point I'm making is that the declared reasons for invasion and

expansion though high minded in the extreme are never the only

reasons or the real reasons. There we have the Congo where 2 million

or is it 4 have died where neigbhouring countries are in there

plundering their mineral wealth? It's a pity they don't have

something that everyone wants to control. Poli-tics said a certain

sage of Bharath is a species of infestation.

Best Wishes, Michael.

 

P.S. That site you mentioned about the vision of Ganesha to an

American Professor is

http://www.msu.edu/user/grimesj/ganesha.html

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

 

Since Rama and Jesus have been spoken of in the postings on this

thread, I venture to place the following. ( Some of these are

adaptations from my book on `Essentials of Hinduism' 1989).

 

Rama and Jesus were both model examples of Dharma in action. Action,

words and thought which are completely free of any selfishness are

dharmic. There are two types of selfishness. One kind ultimately

aims at a personal benefit or mundane return or at least a

psychological satisfaction. The other kind emanates from sense

gratification. Neither of these kinds was ever present in either

Jesus or Rama. There is a third kind of selfishness which is a

modern one – which proceeds on the assumption `I am the upholder of

Dharma'. Any time the thought comes to us that we are the upholders

of dharma and without us this dharma will decline, we may rest

assured that egoism has set in and we have strayed far from dharma.

 

Rama who had every right to flaunt the observance of dharma never

did so. He did not have the slightest egoistic pride that could lead

him to proclaim that he was making the greatest sacrifice for the

sake of dharma. His humility even prevented him from going beyond

the simple statement, even in intense debates about the dilemma of

right and wrong, that `Having been told by my mother and father to

do what I am doing, how can I do otherwise?' (mAtA-ptRbhyAm uktoham

katham anyat samAcare – Valmiki Ramayana, Ayodhya Kanda, 104 – 22).

 

Take that colossus of humility, Jesus Christ. Never did so perfect a

man walk on earth who gave love so naturally that no one could

resist loving him intensely or feeling the force of his love. Never

was there such a carpenter who carved (cf. `janana-marana-dukhaS-

cheda-daccham' -- from the popular vcerse on dakshinA-mUrti) the

lives of millions of men for centuries after his day. And yet, never

was there a person whose concern was not that people should know

what he was but that people should know the Father and His love for

His children. Never was there such a colossus and yet the most

humble of mankind!

 

It is humility and surrender to God's Will that is most important in

any crisis of intellect, which usually expresses itself as an

emotional intoxication in the belief that one's way of doing things

is the right way. Rama and Jesus both knew what they were doing was

the right thing but there was not an iota of arrogance in either of

them. It is easy to say that everything happens according to God's

will, but extremely difficult to live by this belief. When things

happen which are not to one's taste and wishes, in spite of all the

best efforts one has put in and the precautions one has taken, the

weak react by grumbling and apportioning blame, the strong by

throwing their weight around, criticizing all and sundry and

protesting noisily. The truly religious man, however, takes it as

God's Will and submits to the flow of the current. While the self-

conceited man feels that his initiative has been lost, the truly

spiritual man concedes that the initiative had never been with him;

it was always with Him alone. The stronger one's conviction is in

this spiritual truism, the easier it is to withhold any anger and

the higher one is on the ladder of Spirituality.

 

praNAms to all advaitins

profvk