Guest guest Posted April 8, 2002 Report Share Posted April 8, 2002 One has to follow one's dharma, thus said shri Krishna too. But what exactly should be taken as dharma ? Today the terrorists are also spreading terror in the name of their dharma, does it make their approach correct ? If we are allowed to spell our own dharma, then certainly it will be a faulty picture with our egoist approach. Who will then confirm what is right Dharma for us ?? Till this point is clear in our mind, we would continue opressing others/being oppressed in the name of Dharma. If our actions are according to our Dharama and they harm other's belief what should we do ? Should we allow others to terrorize us or try to convert us or should we let our future generations suffer because others are following their Dharma ? Questions are many ??? Answers ..... Hari Aum --- --- , dduttaroy <no_reply> wrote: > In my childhood, I read that dharma comes from the concept > of 'dharan' means holding. And what should we hold ? we should hold > the culture, the way of spiritual life, the hindu life. But what is > hindu ? Is it a certain community following scriptures in Vedas or > upanishadas ? Or is it a way of defined life ? If we follow 2nd > thought then we must accept the basic theme of hindu - tolerance for > ambiguity. Shankaracharya observed ambiguity in definition of hindu > and discovered certain path to reduce ambiguity. Shri Gouranga > observed discrepancy between different communities in hindu and > suggested a new path. Ramakrishna Paramahanshadeb taught us how to > tolerate ambiguity. He realized the more the opinions the more the > paths, but all paths are going to the same power. Have we forgot such > tolerance ? Why do we impose philosophy of one religion onto others ? > Have we forgot the torture of Aurangzeb on Hindu ? Are we not > repeating the same in the current situation ? We are sadhakas. Why > do other people term us as fanatism ? > > > Swami Vivekananda observed the same and suggested a new path. > > > , "tatwamasi" <tatwamasi> wrote: > > Dear all > > > > I am speaking again and again of individuals, sadhaks in general > and > > if and what responsibility they have. I am NOT talking about Gvts, > or > > political parties; it is certainly outside the framework of our > > club's mission, and more importantly, sadhna is about how we lead > our > > own lives, not someone else's. > > > > My question repeatedly is what is the role of sadhaks in > particular, > > towards applying religious principles to their thoughts, feeling > and > > actions/interactions in their daily lives. > > > > > There is no clamour from the general public to take any action. >> > > > > What stops sadhaks from clamouring? Is it or is it not part of > > Dharma? > > > > This question is an important one and as long as there is a > > community small or large, will remain an open one. My question is > to > > trigger a dialogue and help bring some clarity as to the roles of > > sadhaks beyond sitting in our meditation rooms, chanting mantras > and > > performing rituals. We may not have answers, but we may open a > > dialogue if we wish to bring increased understanding in this field. > > > > So I repeat - > > > > 1.Do we as individuals have a responsibility towards our fellow > > human beings? > > > > 2.Does our Dharma include any such responsibility? > > > > 3.We live our lives on the basis of our spiritual understanding and > > how much we imbibe the truths in our daily activities. Is this > issue > > an expression of one's sadhna? > > > > Thank you for all your patience for addressing this important > issue. > > I request more and more members to come forward and address this > > issue. We do not impose views on others, our founders do not > > represent a single path or viewpoint, and we do not offer solutions > > or claim to have all answers. We only offer a forum to dialogue > with > > sincerity and mutual respect - which we do take a stand on and take > > seriously. We sincerely feel that satsangh is an important tool for > > learning and pooling knowledge for sadhkas as they journey on. > Please > > be assured that all views, including divergent ones, are welcomed > > here, as long as they are expressed with respect for each other. > > > > Thank you again > > > > _/\_ Tat twam asi > > > > Uma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 9, 2002 Report Share Posted April 9, 2002 You are right. It is a time to redefine the term Dharma just to classify dharma of terrorist. , silentsoul_55 <no_reply> wrote: > One has to follow one's dharma, thus said shri Krishna too. But what > exactly should be taken as dharma ? > > Today the terrorists are also spreading terror in the name of > their dharma, does it make their approach correct ? > > If we are allowed to spell our own dharma, then certainly it will > be a faulty picture with our egoist approach. Who will then confirm > what is right Dharma for us ?? > > Till this point is clear in our mind, we would continue opressing > others/being oppressed in the name of Dharma. > > If our actions are according to our Dharama and they harm > other's belief what should we do ? > > Should we allow others to terrorize us or try to convert us or > should we let our future generations suffer because others are > following their Dharma ? > > Questions are many ??? Answers ..... > > Hari Aum > > -- - > -- - > , dduttaroy <no_reply> wrote: > > In my childhood, I read that dharma comes from the concept > > of 'dharan' means holding. And what should we hold ? we should hold > > the culture, the way of spiritual life, the hindu life. But what is > > hindu ? Is it a certain community following scriptures in Vedas or > > upanishadas ? Or is it a way of defined life ? If we follow 2nd > > thought then we must accept the basic theme of hindu - tolerance > for > > ambiguity. Shankaracharya observed ambiguity in definition of hindu > > and discovered certain path to reduce ambiguity. Shri Gouranga > > observed discrepancy between different communities in hindu and > > suggested a new path. Ramakrishna Paramahanshadeb taught us how to > > tolerate ambiguity. He realized the more the opinions the more the > > paths, but all paths are going to the same power. Have we forgot > such > > tolerance ? Why do we impose philosophy of one religion onto > others ? > > Have we forgot the torture of Aurangzeb on Hindu ? Are we not > > repeating the same in the current situation ? We are sadhakas. Why > > do other people term us as fanatism ? > > > > > > Swami Vivekananda observed the same and suggested a new path. > > > > > > , "tatwamasi" <tatwamasi> wrote: > > > Dear all > > > > > > I am speaking again and again of individuals, sadhaks in general > > and > > > if and what responsibility they have. I am NOT talking about > Gvts, > > or > > > political parties; it is certainly outside the framework of our > > > club's mission, and more importantly, sadhna is about how we lead > > our > > > own lives, not someone else's. > > > > > > My question repeatedly is what is the role of sadhaks in > > particular, > > > towards applying religious principles to their thoughts, feeling > > and > > > actions/interactions in their daily lives. > > > > > > > There is no clamour from the general public to take any action. > >> > > > > > > What stops sadhaks from clamouring? Is it or is it not part of > > > Dharma? > > > > > > This question is an important one and as long as there is a > > > community small or large, will remain an open one. My question is > > to > > > trigger a dialogue and help bring some clarity as to the roles of > > > sadhaks beyond sitting in our meditation rooms, chanting mantras > > and > > > performing rituals. We may not have answers, but we may open a > > > dialogue if we wish to bring increased understanding in this > field. > > > > > > So I repeat - > > > > > > 1.Do we as individuals have a responsibility towards our fellow > > > human beings? > > > > > > 2.Does our Dharma include any such responsibility? > > > > > > 3.We live our lives on the basis of our spiritual understanding > and > > > how much we imbibe the truths in our daily activities. Is this > > issue > > > an expression of one's sadhna? > > > > > > Thank you for all your patience for addressing this important > > issue. > > > I request more and more members to come forward and address this > > > issue. We do not impose views on others, our founders do not > > > represent a single path or viewpoint, and we do not offer > solutions > > > or claim to have all answers. We only offer a forum to dialogue > > with > > > sincerity and mutual respect - which we do take a stand on and > take > > > seriously. We sincerely feel that satsangh is an important tool > for > > > learning and pooling knowledge for sadhkas as they journey on. > > Please > > > be assured that all views, including divergent ones, are welcomed > > > here, as long as they are expressed with respect for each other. > > > > > > Thank you again > > > > > > _/\_ Tat twam asi > > > > > > Uma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 9, 2002 Report Share Posted April 9, 2002 Tks duttaroy ji, we have to redefine Dharma. Now if we go into this philosophically, there are no Two Truths. There are no Two Gods and it is as per the ego of the human mind that Truth is divided into Your God and My god or Your religion and My religion. As Shri Aurobindo beautifully said ," There is no Untruth in the world...it is either truth in the making or truth in the breaking". I feel as a natural law, thus, when two truths contradict each other, this struggle corrects the truths in right perspective, and the truth which is seen as deformed is removed from the scene, or made silent for some time, to give it a time to re-define its dogmas. This is what happens in case of fight/war between religions. But there is always One religion which supercedes all religions, the religion of the Truth...or the religion of the humanity. This silent, and latent Truth prevailed always. Be it the War of Mahabharata or sacrifice of Jesus or rise of Islam, or rising of Budhism sikhism etc. This silent religion always decided the correct path keeping the truth alive at that juncture of time. This silent force is working continuously for the well being of our infant souls and taking it towards the Greatest Truth, called God. and whenever this force sees anything hindering in this progress, it takes a violent shape and destroys the obstacle. We thus can not say applying violence is against religion, as Shri Krishna and shri Rama, the incarnations of God advocated violence against evil. We also can not say that love and affection towards all beings is Dharma, as many great souls showed more cruelty towards the wicked and satanic forces, than a normal person. Can we say that any obstacles, any hinderance which stops the progess of the individual soul and blocks its way towards the greatest Truth is Sin....and destroying this force by any means is Dharma ? Or can we derive any other universal idea of Dharma which clearly defines the terrorists from holy warriors ? which can define Love behind cruelty ? Hari Aum , dduttaroy <no_reply> wrote: > You are right. It is a time to redefine the term Dharma just to > classify dharma of terrorist. > > , silentsoul_55 <no_reply> wrote: > > One has to follow one's dharma, thus said shri Krishna too. But > what > > exactly should be taken as dharma ? > > > > Today the terrorists are also spreading terror in the name of > > their dharma, does it make their approach correct ? > > > > If we are allowed to spell our own dharma, then certainly it will > > be a faulty picture with our egoist approach. Who will then > confirm > > what is right Dharma for us ?? > > > > Till this point is clear in our mind, we would continue > opressing > > others/being oppressed in the name of Dharma. > > > > If our actions are according to our Dharama and they harm > > other's belief what should we do ? > > > > Should we allow others to terrorize us or try to convert us or > > should we let our future generations suffer because others are > > following their Dharma ? > > > > Questions are many ??? Answers ..... > > > > Hari Aum > > > > -- > - > > -- > - > > , dduttaroy <no_reply> wrote: > > > In my childhood, I read that dharma comes from the concept > > > of 'dharan' means holding. And what should we hold ? we should > hold > > > the culture, the way of spiritual life, the hindu life. But what > is > > > hindu ? Is it a certain community following scriptures in Vedas > or > > > upanishadas ? Or is it a way of defined life ? If we follow 2nd > > > thought then we must accept the basic theme of hindu - tolerance > > for > > > ambiguity. Shankaracharya observed ambiguity in definition of > hindu > > > and discovered certain path to reduce ambiguity. Shri Gouranga > > > observed discrepancy between different communities in hindu and > > > suggested a new path. Ramakrishna Paramahanshadeb taught us how > to > > > tolerate ambiguity. He realized the more the opinions the more > the > > > paths, but all paths are going to the same power. Have we forgot > > such > > > tolerance ? Why do we impose philosophy of one religion onto > > others ? > > > Have we forgot the torture of Aurangzeb on Hindu ? Are we not > > > repeating the same in the current situation ? We are sadhakas. > Why > > > do other people term us as fanatism ? > > > > > > > > > Swami Vivekananda observed the same and suggested a new path. > > > > > > > > > , "tatwamasi" <tatwamasi> wrote: > > > > Dear all > > > > > > > > I am speaking again and again of individuals, sadhaks in > general > > > and > > > > if and what responsibility they have. I am NOT talking about > > Gvts, > > > or > > > > political parties; it is certainly outside the framework of our > > > > club's mission, and more importantly, sadhna is about how we > lead > > > our > > > > own lives, not someone else's. > > > > > > > > My question repeatedly is what is the role of sadhaks in > > > particular, > > > > towards applying religious principles to their thoughts, > feeling > > > and > > > > actions/interactions in their daily lives. > > > > > > > > > There is no clamour from the general public to take any > action. > > >> > > > > > > > > What stops sadhaks from clamouring? Is it or is it not part of > > > > Dharma? > > > > > > > > This question is an important one and as long as there is a > > > > community small or large, will remain an open one. My question > is > > > to > > > > trigger a dialogue and help bring some clarity as to the roles > of > > > > sadhaks beyond sitting in our meditation rooms, chanting > mantras > > > and > > > > performing rituals. We may not have answers, but we may open a > > > > dialogue if we wish to bring increased understanding in this > > field. > > > > > > > > So I repeat - > > > > > > > > 1.Do we as individuals have a responsibility towards our > fellow > > > > human beings? > > > > > > > > 2.Does our Dharma include any such responsibility? > > > > > > > > 3.We live our lives on the basis of our spiritual understanding > > and > > > > how much we imbibe the truths in our daily activities. Is this > > > issue > > > > an expression of one's sadhna? > > > > > > > > Thank you for all your patience for addressing this important > > > issue. > > > > I request more and more members to come forward and address > this > > > > issue. We do not impose views on others, our founders do not > > > > represent a single path or viewpoint, and we do not offer > > solutions > > > > or claim to have all answers. We only offer a forum to dialogue > > > with > > > > sincerity and mutual respect - which we do take a stand on and > > take > > > > seriously. We sincerely feel that satsangh is an important tool > > for > > > > learning and pooling knowledge for sadhkas as they journey on. > > > Please > > > > be assured that all views, including divergent ones, are > welcomed > > > > here, as long as they are expressed with respect for each > other. > > > > > > > > Thank you again > > > > > > > > _/\_ Tat twam asi > > > > > > > > Uma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 9, 2002 Report Share Posted April 9, 2002 People live dharma or do not live dharma, there is no dharma of terrorists. Dharma is the path, the way, it is the opening of the surrendered life it is the acceptance of being part of the Buddha pure land, shambala, siddhaashram, or being close to breast of MA. It is being charitable and kind. This is living dharma. Killing is not dharma. Ever. - dduttaroy Tuesday, April 09, 2002 1:00 AM Re: Dharma ?? You are right. It is a time to redefine the term Dharma just to classify dharma of terrorist. , silentsoul_55 <no_reply> wrote: > One has to follow one's dharma, thus said shri Krishna too. But what > exactly should be taken as dharma ? > > Today the terrorists are also spreading terror in the name of > their dharma, does it make their approach correct ? > > If we are allowed to spell our own dharma, then certainly it will > be a faulty picture with our egoist approach. Who will then confirm > what is right Dharma for us ?? > > Till this point is clear in our mind, we would continue opressing > others/being oppressed in the name of Dharma. > > If our actions are according to our Dharama and they harm > other's belief what should we do ? > > Should we allow others to terrorize us or try to convert us or > should we let our future generations suffer because others are > following their Dharma ? > > Questions are many ??? Answers ..... > > Hari Aum > > -- - > -- - > , dduttaroy <no_reply> wrote: > > In my childhood, I read that dharma comes from the concept > > of 'dharan' means holding. And what should we hold ? we should hold > > the culture, the way of spiritual life, the hindu life. But what is > > hindu ? Is it a certain community following scriptures in Vedas or > > upanishadas ? Or is it a way of defined life ? If we follow 2nd > > thought then we must accept the basic theme of hindu - tolerance > for > > ambiguity. Shankaracharya observed ambiguity in definition of hindu > > and discovered certain path to reduce ambiguity. Shri Gouranga > > observed discrepancy between different communities in hindu and > > suggested a new path. Ramakrishna Paramahanshadeb taught us how to > > tolerate ambiguity. He realized the more the opinions the more the > > paths, but all paths are going to the same power. Have we forgot > such > > tolerance ? Why do we impose philosophy of one religion onto > others ? > > Have we forgot the torture of Aurangzeb on Hindu ? Are we not > > repeating the same in the current situation ? We are sadhakas. Why > > do other people term us as fanatism ? > > > > > > Swami Vivekananda observed the same and suggested a new path. > > > > > > , "tatwamasi" <tatwamasi> wrote: > > > Dear all > > > > > > I am speaking again and again of individuals, sadhaks in general > > and > > > if and what responsibility they have. I am NOT talking about > Gvts, > > or > > > political parties; it is certainly outside the framework of our > > > club's mission, and more importantly, sadhna is about how we lead > > our > > > own lives, not someone else's. > > > > > > My question repeatedly is what is the role of sadhaks in > > particular, > > > towards applying religious principles to their thoughts, feeling > > and > > > actions/interactions in their daily lives. > > > > > > > There is no clamour from the general public to take any action. > >> > > > > > > What stops sadhaks from clamouring? Is it or is it not part of > > > Dharma? > > > > > > This question is an important one and as long as there is a > > > community small or large, will remain an open one. My question is > > to > > > trigger a dialogue and help bring some clarity as to the roles of > > > sadhaks beyond sitting in our meditation rooms, chanting mantras > > and > > > performing rituals. We may not have answers, but we may open a > > > dialogue if we wish to bring increased understanding in this > field. > > > > > > So I repeat - > > > > > > 1.Do we as individuals have a responsibility towards our fellow > > > human beings? > > > > > > 2.Does our Dharma include any such responsibility? > > > > > > 3.We live our lives on the basis of our spiritual understanding > and > > > how much we imbibe the truths in our daily activities. Is this > > issue > > > an expression of one's sadhna? > > > > > > Thank you for all your patience for addressing this important > > issue. > > > I request more and more members to come forward and address this > > > issue. We do not impose views on others, our founders do not > > > represent a single path or viewpoint, and we do not offer > solutions > > > or claim to have all answers. We only offer a forum to dialogue > > with > > > sincerity and mutual respect - which we do take a stand on and > take > > > seriously. We sincerely feel that satsangh is an important tool > for > > > learning and pooling knowledge for sadhkas as they journey on. > > Please > > > be assured that all views, including divergent ones, are welcomed > > > here, as long as they are expressed with respect for each other. > > > > > > Thank you again > > > > > > _/\_ Tat twam asi > > > > > > Uma 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.