Guest guest Posted January 15, 2002 Report Share Posted January 15, 2002 My Thoughts: Can there be selfless love? We often hear people talk about the love of the mother and son. Is that selfless love? We hear about the love between Meera and Krishna. Is that selfless love? What is love? How can we achieve love? Can it be defined? Each person experiences some kind of a love or the other some time or the other in his/her life. It need not be love as in between a male and a female (includes relationships between mother son etc), it can be love for money, love for self, love for status, love for power, love to kill… anything can be defined as love from the lovers perspective. Krishna is said to have enticed a lot of gopikas – around 16000 of them. What kind of love is that? In how many ways can people interpret love? My love for my work can be treated as an obsession from my wife. Can we call love as an obsession? Is there any difference in them? Are they just some play of words? Where did these words come from? Who started love? Is it the same person who started hate? Why do we have these diverse feelings? Why should one have love or hate? Why do some people love to hate while others hate to love? It is said that we can attain the ultimate spiritual uplift if we love others selflessly. But are we not being selfish in trying to attain this spiritual uplift? What is meant by being selfish? Is it the desire of a person to achieve self satisfaction, affecting a lot of people in the process? Then will the thought of doing deeds to attain spiritual uplift helping others be considered as a selfless act? What is it that we are gaining from this “selfless” act? Are we gaining some good will from the person whom we help? Is it the happiness of the thought, under the belief that a good deed will take us closer to our spiritual self? Is it a psychological orientation towards the belief that each time we help others; it will in turn do a good deed for us? Are we not expecting something in return for that? What is this “something”? What do we attain my performing a pooja/prayers? Is it another psychological orientation of the belief imbibed in us that doing pooja/prayers, we will be pleasing god? What exactly happens here? What kind of transference takes place that we feel good about so much? Is this a mental makeup or some kind of involuntary self hypnosis, which makes us feel good about it? What is it in us who makes us think in this direction? Is it our mind? Is it our soul? Is it the soul which makes us feel things and make our complex body function in a nice and proper manner till it is spoiled by our habits and old age? What is our true age? Are we the age of the body we are currently in or are we the age of the soul which is occupying this body? Does the soul grow old? It is said that the eyes are the window to the soul. Don’t blind people have soul? So, even if we loose a limb or all limbs, we still are alive. We are termed alive till we are considered clinically dead. So where does the soul go after that? Is this not a constant question which everyone asks – about after life? Or does our life start after death? Is our life here in our bodies some kind of a transition state like that of a caterpillar that does nothing but eat, eat and eat; to become still and captivated in a cocoon, to ultimately discard the shell and emerge as a beautiful butterfly? Is our body the cocoon and our soul the butterfly? Can we actually “feel” this knowledge of this butterfly within us and be sure that it is the butterfly of our soul? There are a lot of thoughts in my mind about the body and the soul. I have experienced this lightlessness of the body and this feeling of floating in the air and flying like the bird in the sky. I am often confused about what I feel as it becomes difficult to take this in a stride that I have experienced these things before. My mind is clouded by various thoughts about my feelings about these things as I often tend to relate this with some kind of psychological feeling. There is no one here who has been able to answer or talk in a proper manner about the true nature of the term “spirituality”. What I have noticed is that there is no one who is confidant about what is said. All depend on the guru without telling or even explaining why this guru is needed. Everyone wants to realize what they truly are, but why do they want to realize this? What will they get out of this? Is this a selfless realization? Is this entire soul search another major deviation to keep our mind free from these mental tensions? To give us our presumed peace while our body suffers the brunt of the world and nature – working among people, growing old etc? Why? Why? Why? Why are gods so human in nature – at least they way they are depicted? If I consider Lord Shiva, he is the only god who, with his family been publicized in so many ways and forms. Kamasutra was written based on Shiva and Parvati’s union in the form of Shiva Linga. So most gods have been given a human attribute. Or have humans been given gods attributes? So who is the first human or who is the first god? If we are to evolve on a continuous basis, and each phase of evolution has brought in its own phase of changes, then why do we still follow such old scriptures? Is it because we don’t have any values? Or is it because we are very lazy/scared to make better ones? Do the scriptures actually have such great values or is it that it simply appeals to us that we feel it is good and valuable? Is it some kind of an accepted cult/club which specializes in holding these old values and traditions to continue the growth and consistency of the cult/club? Or is it that we humans have not evolved out of present form of homosapeians and thus still follow the old scriptures? Can we get all these answers from selfless love? Is selfless love defined? Can it be defined? I know that there will be answers for these questions in some form or the other, in some context or the other, some reason or the other, based on beliefs, personal experiences etc. But can I believe that-that is the truth? Will my acceptance of the answers based on my belief be the actual satisfaction? Is my belief actually the actual belief? Or is it again a belief which is born out of a social acceptance? What is the ultimate true belief or true truth? Vijay Bhaskar _______ Get your free @ address at Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 15, 2002 Report Share Posted January 15, 2002 Namaste Sri Vijay Bhasker! You hold an altogether literal intrepretation of many of our so called scriptures- they are not literal but allegorical. I put a post called The Divine Lover- and suggested that most of them are versed in a veil that you can understand only if you have the insightful intelligence. Talking and thinking of soul, one must have the soul faculties for it. You are no doubt a mature soul compared to most people for otherwise you would not have such cogitations. But apparently the road to full soul maturity is very long, and tedious and full of precipices on either side. You make a wrong turn and there is a steep fall. That is why you need a teacher for that. The journey to Rome starts with a single step; can you tell me if you can concentrate for a single minute on a single object without any obtruding thoughts. If so this is a great achievement and now you should try for 10 minutes. If you cannot, brother you have a long way to go for how can one read Shakespeare without learning the alphabet?? I will reply in detail later as I too am preoccupied with work. Aum Namasivaya, Vijay --- Vijay <thesoulstealer wrote: > My Thoughts: > > Can there be selfless love? > We often hear people talk about the love of the > mother and son. Is that > selfless love? > We hear about the love between Meera and Krishna. Is > that selfless love? > > What is love? How can we achieve love? Can it be > defined? > > Each person experiences some kind of a love or the > other some time or > the other in his/her life. It need not be love as in > between a male and > a female (includes relationships between mother son > etc), it can be love > for money, love for self, love for status, love for > power, love to kill… > anything can be defined as love from the lovers > perspective. > > Krishna is said to have enticed a lot of gopikas – > around 16000 of them. > What kind of love is that? > In how many ways can people interpret love? > My love for my work can be treated as an obsession > from my wife. Can we > call love as an obsession? Is there any difference > in them? Are they > just some play of words? Where did these words come > from? Who started > love? Is it the same person who started hate? Why do > we have these > diverse feelings? Why should one have love or hate? > Why do some people > love to hate while others hate to love? > > It is said that we can attain the ultimate spiritual > uplift if we love > others selflessly. But are we not being selfish in > trying to attain this > spiritual uplift? What is meant by being selfish? Is > it the desire of a > person to achieve self satisfaction, affecting a lot > of people in the > process? Then will the thought of doing deeds to > attain spiritual uplift > helping others be considered as a selfless act? > What is it that we are gaining from this “selfless” > act? Are we gaining > some good will from the person whom we help? Is it > the happiness of the > thought, under the belief that a good deed will take > us closer to our > spiritual self? Is it a psychological orientation > towards the belief > that each time we help others; it will in turn do a > good deed for us? > Are we not expecting something in return for that? > What is this > “something”? > What do we attain my performing a pooja/prayers? Is > it another > psychological orientation of the belief imbibed in > us that doing > pooja/prayers, we will be pleasing god? What exactly > happens here? What > kind of transference takes place that we feel good > about so much? Is > this a mental makeup or some kind of involuntary > self hypnosis, which > makes us feel good about it? What is it in us who > makes us think in this > direction? Is it our mind? Is it our soul? Is it the > soul which makes us > feel things and make our complex body function in a > nice and proper > manner till it is spoiled by our habits and old age? > > What is our true age? Are we the age of the body we > are currently in or > are we the age of the soul which is occupying this > body? Does the soul > grow old? > It is said that the eyes are the window to the soul. > Don’t blind people > have soul? So, even if we loose a limb or all limbs, > we still are alive. > We are termed alive till we are considered > clinically dead. So where > does the soul go after that? Is this not a constant > question which > everyone asks – about after life? Or does our life > start after death? Is > our life here in our bodies some kind of a > transition state like that of > a caterpillar that does nothing but eat, eat and > eat; to become still > and captivated in a cocoon, to ultimately discard > the shell and emerge > as a beautiful butterfly? > Is our body the cocoon and our soul the butterfly? > Can we actually “feel” this knowledge of this > butterfly within us and be > sure that it is the butterfly of our soul? > > There are a lot of thoughts in my mind about the > body and the soul. I > have experienced this lightlessness of the body and > this feeling of > floating in the air and flying like the bird in the > sky. I am often > confused about what I feel as it becomes difficult > to take this in a > stride that I have experienced these things before. > My mind is clouded > by various thoughts about my feelings about these > things as I often tend > to relate this with some kind of psychological > feeling. There is no one > here who has been able to answer or talk in a proper > manner about the > true nature of the term “spirituality”. > What I have noticed is that there is no one who is > confidant about what > is said. All depend on the guru without telling or > even explaining why > this guru is needed. Everyone wants to realize what > they truly are, but > why do they want to realize this? What will they get > out of this? Is > this a selfless realization? Is this entire soul > search another major > deviation to keep our mind free from these mental > tensions? To give us > our presumed peace while our body suffers the brunt > of the world and > nature – working among people, growing old etc? Why? > Why? Why? > > Why are gods so human in nature – at least they way > they are depicted? > If I consider Lord Shiva, he is the only god who, > with his family been > publicized in so many ways and forms. Kamasutra was > written based on > Shiva and Parvati’s union in the form of Shiva > Linga. So most gods have > been given a human attribute. Or have humans been > given gods attributes? > So who is the first human or who is the first god? > > If we are to evolve on a continuous basis, and each > phase of evolution > has brought in its own phase of changes, then why do > we still follow > such old scriptures? Is it because we don’t have any > values? Or is it > because we are very lazy/scared to make better ones? > Do the scriptures > actually have such great values or is it that it > simply appeals to us > that we feel it is good and valuable? Is it some > kind of an accepted > cult/club which specializes in holding these old > values and traditions > to continue the growth and consistency of the > cult/club? Or is it that > we humans have not evolved out of present form of > homosapeians and thus > still follow the old scriptures? > > Can we get all these answers from selfless love? Is > selfless love > defined? Can it be defined? > > I know that there will be answers for these > questions in some form or > the other, in some context or the other, some reason > or the other, based > on beliefs, personal experiences etc. But can I > believe that-that is the > truth? Will my acceptance of the answers based on my > belief be the > actual satisfaction? Is my belief actually the > actual belief? Or is it > again a belief which is born out of a social > acceptance? What is the > ultimate true belief or true truth? > > Vijay Bhaskar > > > _______ > > Get your free @ address at > > > === message truncated === Send FREE video emails in Mail! http://promo./videomail/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 15, 2002 Report Share Posted January 15, 2002 Dear vijay, Thanks for the inputs. I am actually looking for answers for a lot of things. What i have mailed is just a small portion of it. I have tried my level best not to interpret the scriptures literally. For example, in your mail, the "divine lover" what you have mentioned is worthy. There is also another intrepretation of the same concept of the gopikas: Our bodies contain a lot of feelings and nerve centres. Scientifically, there are around 16000 odd such nerve points, which control our emotions and our behaviour. Krishna is supposed to have mastered all these nerve centres to the perfection. But to make the layman understand, it is said that they are gopikas and etc etc. Arjuna was his best deciple. He too followed krishan my marrying so many. Can he not be considered as a worht desiple, as he to tried to understand the control of nerves? I do agree with you that it is difficult to concentrate on one object for a long time. But all of us do concentrate like that without our knowledge. For example, Kamasutra is the science of making love. OSHO preaches this as one of the ways to attain tatva. Why is this so? This is the only act where all our nerve points and feelings are concentrated on one bodily function. Is that not a concentration? What is shivalinga? is that not the symbol of concentration? Concentration is not the main problem. The problem is to understand why we have to concnetrate and on what! It sure is nice to interact an issue like spirituality. I am constantly searching for the truth. All the feedback i get leads me one step closer to more questions for which i seek more answers. I persume maybe wrongly or rightly, that the more I have the persistance towards the quest of soul, I more I shall get closer to the self. After all are we not interacting with eachother in a similar manner? We breath the same air, share the same form of bodies, but are considered as individuals. is that what life has to offer us? My quest is to communicate - through our thoughts through our souls and less and less by these physical means. Do mail me. Vijay Bhaskar > > Namaste Sri Vijay Bhasker! > > You hold an altogether literal intrepretation of many > of our so called scriptures- they are not literal but > allegorical. I put a post called The Divine Lover- and > suggested that most of them are versed in a veil that > you can understand only if you have the insightful > intelligence. > > Talking and thinking of soul, one must have the soul > faculties for it. You are no doubt a mature soul > compared to most people for otherwise you would not > have such cogitations. But apparently the road to full > soul maturity is very long, and tedious and full of > precipices on either side. You make a wrong turn and > there is a steep fall. That is why you need a teacher > for that. > > The journey to Rome starts with a single step; can you > tell me if you can concentrate for a single minute on > a single object without any obtruding thoughts. If so > this is a great achievement and now you should try for > 10 minutes. If you cannot, brother you have a long way > to go for how can one read Shakespeare without > learning the alphabet?? > > I will reply in detail later as I too am preoccupied > with work. > > Aum Namasivaya, > Vijay > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 18, 2002 Report Share Posted January 18, 2002 --- thesoulstealer <thesoulstealer wrote: > Dear vijay, > Scientifically, there are around 16000 odd such > nerve points, which > control our emotions and our behaviour. Krishna is > supposed to have > mastered all these nerve centres to the perfection. > But to make the > layman understand, it is said that they are gopikas > and etc etc. > Arjuna was his best deciple. He too followed krishan > my marrying so > many. Can he not be considered as a worht desiple, > as he to tried to > understand the control of nerves? Namaste! I do not know where you got the number 16000. According to the philosophy of Yoga, there are 72000 nadis in the body. I would suggest a good book called ?"" - the book is by Anna Wise(I forget the name) and it gives a useful information on why believing something totally ludicrous would be beneficial to you- something about brain waves and all. > > I do agree with you that it is difficult to > concentrate on one object > for a long time. But all of us do concentrate like > that without our > knowledge. For example, > > Kamasutra is the science of making love. OSHO > preaches this as one of > the ways to attain tatva. Why is this so? > This is the only act where all our nerve points and > feelings are > concentrated on one bodily function. Is that not a > concentration? > What is shivalinga? is that not the symbol of > concentration? I beg to disagree. Osho is a Vamachari and so looks at everything from the point of view of sex and looks at everything in a sexual light. I will not comment further on this but in my definition, concentration means being able to put your mind where you want to put it, not where it wants to go; just the act of being concentrated in particular situation is no different from an animal brain(eg a cow is likely not to think of anything else while it is eating grass just its brain is so underdeveloped). > > Concentration is not the main problem. The problem > is to understand > why we have to concnetrate and on what! Concentration is indeed the main problem because if you have good concentration, answers get revealed to you. So once you have good concentration, you can then concentrate on what to concentrate:-). As I mentioned before, one has to learn the alphabet before studying literature. I would suggest that you read a good translation of Yogasutras by Patanjali( like Swami Venkesananda, this is availabe on the web). He explains why you have to concentrate and on what... > > It sure is nice to interact an issue like > spirituality. I am > constantly searching for the truth. All the feedback > i get leads me > one step closer to more questions for which i seek > more answers. I > persume maybe wrongly or rightly, that the more I > have the > persistance towards the quest of soul, I more I > shall get closer to > the self. After all are we not interacting with > eachother in a > similar manner? We breath the same air, share the > same form of > bodies, but are considered as individuals. is that > what life has to > offer us? Same here. Noone is absolutely right or wrong. Everyone learns from everybody else. Some teach you what to do, others teach you what not to do. > My quest is to communicate - through our thoughts > through our souls > and less and less by these physical means. This is one of the byproducts of yoga(read Patanjali). When you are sufficiently developed, mental telepathy will convey all you want convey. Aum Namasivyaa, Vijay > > Do mail me. > > Vijay Bhaskar > > > > > > > Namaste Sri Vijay Bhasker! > > > > You hold an altogether literal intrepretation of > many > > of our so called scriptures- they are not literal > but > > allegorical. I put a post called The Divine Lover- > and > > suggested that most of them are versed in a veil > that > > you can understand only if you have the insightful > > intelligence. > > > > Talking and thinking of soul, one must have the > soul > > faculties for it. You are no doubt a mature soul > > compared to most people for otherwise you would > not > > have such cogitations. But apparently the road to > full > > soul maturity is very long, and tedious and full > of > > precipices on either side. You make a wrong turn > and > > there is a steep fall. That is why you need a > teacher > > for that. > > > > The journey to Rome starts with a single step; can > you > > tell me if you can concentrate for a single minute > on > > a single object without any obtruding thoughts. If > so > > this is a great achievement and now you should try > for > > 10 minutes. If you cannot, brother you have a long > way > > to go for how can one read Shakespeare without > > learning the alphabet?? > > > > I will reply in detail later as I too am > preoccupied > > with work. > > > > Aum Namasivaya, > > Vijay > > > > > Send FREE video emails in Mail! http://promo./videomail/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 18, 2002 Report Share Posted January 18, 2002 to Vijay from Vijay, Interesting set of information. I find it very strange but the facts are huge. All I can understand here is how much one has to learn to achieve a good amount of knowledge. We in this quest of spirituality at least have to learn a lot. It is not easy to convince others with little or limited knowledge. This group with people like you sure make it a very interesting place to learn new things about life and spirituality - not to mention our vedic history and its interpretations. I really am enjoying these little escapades with life. I have to thank one and all in this group for the kind of knowledge sharing which goes on. Vijay bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 19, 2002 Report Share Posted January 19, 2002 dear vijay, > > > > I do agree with you that it is difficult to > > concentrate on one object > > for a long time. But all of us do concentrate like > > that without our > > knowledge. For example, > > > > Kamasutra is the science of making love. OSHO > > preaches this as one of > > the ways to attain tatva. Why is this so? > > This is the only act where all our nerve points and > > feelings are > > concentrated on one bodily function. Is that not a > > concentration? > > What is shivalinga? is that not the symbol of > > concentration? > > I beg to disagree. Osho is a Vamachari and so looks at > everything from the point of view of sex and looks at > everything in a sexual light. I will not comment > further on this but in my definition, concentration > means being able to put your mind where you want to > put it, not where it wants to go; >just the act of > being concentrated in particular situation is no > different from an animal brain(eg a cow is likely not > to think of anything else while it is eating grass > just its brain is so underdeveloped). the cow example is the perfect,way of descibing osho's philosophy i was looking for such a powerful exmple,nice that u gave the point, at one place sivananda tells that animals are skilled then ordinary mortals like us,take cat/fox /some animal see their hunting skills which we in normal mode cant match until we develop our faculties, the answer he gives is that animals do their act with full concentration becos they dont have the ego factor(only human beings have) due to lack of this ego factor causes the animals not to subject to law of karma that is the reason tiger can hunt whenever it pleases and wherever it pleases without accruing bad karma for killing other animals but animals lack the faculty for mediating and merging into the Lord we should not forget that beyond concentration one has to mediatate too to become the divine, that is the reason u may see raksahas/bad tantriks who get boons by power of concentration/sadhana are not divine why did u leave ur Guru subaramiam(www.Gurudeva.org)( forgive me if i got the name of the Guru wrong) and searching for a new one affectionately aum namasivaya jai Gurudev Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.