GeethaJii : gItAsatsang: Atha Shrimad Bhagwad Gita

[Guest guest]

06032001

Namaste GeetaJi

 

>>BEING YOUNG IN THIS FIELD MAYBE THERE HAS NOT BEEN SUFFICIENT TIME DEVOTED

>BY YOUR MIND INTO SOME OF THE QUESTIONS- THAT THESE ARE ALSO THE THOUGHTS

OF

>MANY OTHERS WHO BEGIN THEIR STUDY AND REALIZE DIFFERENTLY LATER?

 

 

That is really true. I have many things to learn in the field of

philosophy.I hope using this forum and in the company of some great souls I

would not require another birth.

I hope to be with this new thought process and enjoy.Lets see how far I

reach!!!.

 

>IN UNDERSTANDING AND APPRECIATING RELIGION (O SOME

>EXTENT THAT IS WHAT WE ARE DOING) WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME AMOUNT OF BHAVNA OR

>SENTIMENT.

 

I suppose it is difficult to decide how much amount is exactly needed and

hence we tend to belive that goes beyond our reasoning with out much

reasoning. That is why I perfer to have no sentiments in analysis(?). People

say Be expressive enough to see the Satya. Because the Ultimate truth(Satya)

should always be same. If we try to give some thing new or reaveling then it

is not Satya. We go by sentiments and then we try to figure out something

new that has not been said or told. But if we go without Bhavana then every

one should come up with the same understanding and that is Satya.

>BELIEF, FAITH AND TRADITIONS ARE MOVING TARGETS AND VERY INDIVIDUAL AND

>PERSONAL. MANY A TIMES THE BELIEF, TRADITION AND FAITH HAVE EVOLVED FROM A

>SOUND LOGIC AND REASON BUT GET DISTORTED IN PASSAGE - AND THAT IS WHAT WE

>MUST GUARD AGAINST AS WE UNDERTAKE THIS PATH OF INQUIRY.

 

This requires some more time to understand. I shall try to understand what

exactly you wanted to convey. Basically I have to understand your mapping of

Belief, Faith and Traditins with lost Logic.

>RESPECT IS GAINED BY ONE'S ACTIONS AND NOT BY BEING YOUGER OR OLDE ALONE.

A

>PERSON CAN BE RESPECTED FOR SOME QUALITIES AND NOT FOR ANOTHER, SO IT IS

>OKAY FOR YOU TO BE RESPECTED BY AN ELDER, AND YOU ARE ALLOWED TO ACCEPT IT.

>JUST BE WORTHY OF THAT RESPECT.

 

The last line is is punch line. When you are less matuare then your are

prone to all sorts of self elevators. You get satisfied by the every

possible corner and then you have problems. To guard against thses

situations our ancient tradition says that dont unnecessarily be polite with

young ones since usually they create more noise. So just to remind myself I

requested like that. Any way I do not want to go ahead with this trap.

>IF VED VYAS AND VALMIKI WROTE THESE EPICS IN THE SAME MANNER AS THE STORY

OF

>MR. DESHMUKH WILL, WE WILL NOT KNOW IF THEY WERE ACTUAL OCURRENCES OR NOT.

>UNFORTUNATELY THE METHODS THAT ARCHAELOGISTS AND HISTORIANS USE ARE BASED

ON

>DEDUCTION FROM EVIDENCES BEFORE THEM. THERE IS NO OTHER WAY.

 

My basic point is that why do we belive that it is History?. Let the History

and Archaelogy reveal the Society and Social Structure of that time. Why do

we want to mearge History and Philosophy and hence Religion?

As I said earlier Ved Vyas did mearge History and religion to counter Buddha

influence. That way Vedik sanskriti survived. Now there is no immediate

threat to any of the religion so we should not mearge History and Religion.

>ONE CAN

>CHOOSE TO NOT TORMENT ONESELF BY TAKING THE TEACHINGS THAT ARE PRESENT AND

>PUT IT TO USE FOR THE BETTERMENT OF ONESELF.

 

Here your are!! I just wanted to say that but could not express it. Do not

torment you said. I just wanted to say that. When we take them as Historical

account we loose wealth of information available in them. That way we

torment ourselves. I just remind myself not to do that.

>ONE CAN ALSO CHOOSE TO HAVE

>FAITH, BELIEF AND TRADITION AND PRACTISE IT WISELY.

 

Here again your confidence of Faith and Belief maps to Logic because only

Logic can be practised. I will have to think more about it.

>IF YOU CAN BELIEVE THAT

>VED VYAS EXISTED AND WROTE SUCH A COMPLICATED STORY, THEN CAN YOUR MIND

ALSO

>STRETCH ITSELF TO THINK THAT MAYBE IT WAS HISTORY ? CAN ONE NEGATE ALL THE

>HOLY PLACES AND PLACES OF INTEREST RELATING TO KISHNA'S CHILDHOOD OR RAMA'S

>TRAVELS AS BEING FIGMENT OF ONE'S IMAGINATION?

 

Basically it is to be done other way round. We are born and brought up in an

enviornment that makes us to think of these Epics as to be Historical

account only. We dont have to think Non-History to History. It is other way

round. They are History is what the idea we are born with so we have to

stretch our mind to think it to be Non-History. I do not want to negate the

importance associated with the places that are considered as Holy. Why

should I do that? I just wanted to say that using these places clair

intelligence of our great sages resulted in these Epics. Holy place if it is

Holy will always remain Holy.

>TAKE THE LESSONS FROM THOSE STORIES AND TRY TO BENEFIT FROM THEM

 

I have just started lets see how far i am allowed to go!!!

 

 

In any case I belive that we have no problems appriciating each others

logic.

 

Thanks a Lot for your Time and Space.

 

Prabodh