Guest guest Posted November 27, 2002 Report Share Posted November 27, 2002 Jai Guru Datta, The following answers came to mind. I welcome any thoughts. 1) Do you consider every story as real events? (btw I really want to, and acyually believe the stories)For example Parsurama (page 168, 4th sentence from beneath) went around the world 21 times & killed all kshatriyas. It is not a question of whether the events were real or not, but whether you understand the underlying principle. In truth such stories are to impart wisdom concerning the nature of the three gunas -- sattva, rajas, and tamas. By reading and listening to such stories we may become more adept at identifying these gunas within ourselves as we walk, talk, act, and live. Without a firm grasp of the nature of the three gunas, it is impossible to know when we are under the influence of any particular quality. By being more self-aware of our mental states, it makes us more amenable to becoming witnesses to those states, rather than being pulled here and there by our blindness to the presence of any of these states. By reading such stories, we subconsciously begin to question ourselves as "what would / should I do if I were in so-and-so's place" -- thereby beginning the path towards jnanam. Only by such self-enquiry can you reach the truth. While it is true that all paths lead to liberation, it must be understood that liberation implies that one has awakened, rather than learned something new. This process of awakening begins with self-analysis and heart-to-heart feeling for another person's woes. This is why bhakthi, karma, and jnana yoga all lead to the same conclusion. All paths lead to the awakening of our consciousness to itself, allowing it to cognize its own existence and to understand that it is indeed separate from all these things. Krishna has said "whatever you see, hear, touch, taste, or smell -- know that you cannot know it for what it truly is." By mental introspection one becomes aware of the consciousness residing and presiding over our being. By realizing the inner self, the identity with illusions created by reaction of the sensory organs lessens and ultimately merges into complete self contemplation, i.e., moksham. jai guru datta. 2) Is there mention of dinosaurs in the scriptures? Because for example The persons like KartaviyaArjuna became thousands of years old. First of all, it is our ignorance / limited perception to assume that the puranas and upanishads refer to people who necessarily lived on planet earth. While it is true that many sages and maharishis can live indeterminately, it is not a given that they necessarily live here on earth as such. The very idea of saying 'I live for so many years' is false -- what is time first of all? What reference frame are you using? And who is the "you" that lives? The true "you" is immortal, while the ego-"you" has a finite lifespan that is a function of the material causes (genetics, environment, mental conditioning, as well as the inherent perception of 'time' itself depending on what part of the space-time continuum you live in). It is well known law of physics (for our space-time continuum) called relativity, which shows that as you approach massive objects (by massive it is meant objects which significantly 'bend' the curvature of the spatial continuum) that time itself slows down; time is a function of both gravitational curvature as well as the mental perception of its passage. Of course, there still remains an all-unifying theory that will linki mental perception to gravitation. Nevertheless, I recall that there was a mention somewhere that the day of vishnu is equivalent to the lifespan of brahma, and that a lifespan of vishnu is equivalent to the day of ishwara (kala bhairava). When lifespans themselves are relative, what meaning is there in saying "I live for 100 years"? Modern theories of physics (see David Bohm) even point out the that the nature of the world is nothing but pure 'mind-stuff'. The underlying quantum reality indicates that the physical matter in front of you is only 'real' because you observed it (the infamous 'collapse of the wave function'). When the observer is removed, i.e., when consciousness is liberated, the very fabric or substance of the physical reality ceases to be. 3) The correct order is Matha Pita Guru Daivam ..now on page 162, 2nd sentence from beneath father Jamadagni commanded his 4 sons to cut off the mother's head, because she commited sin of dirty thougths...the four sons hesitated...which i because of the above order understand. Killing mother is not inline with Daivam so if father who is higher in order than mother says to kill mother then i would not do it because Daivam is higher in order and does not support killing... in this situation, However Parsuram killed his mother without second thought and it was blissfull...?! He did however immediately say to his father to ressurect his mother. ..PLEASE COMMENT....how could Parsurama did a good thing here? One should realize that the story is meant to illustrate the idea of one's "state of mind". The other three sons of Jamadagni (parasurama's father i think?) were bound to the material existence. They believed in its reality, therefore their mental conditioning is controlled by the three gunas. Parasurama, do not forget, was the avatar of the almighty himself -- he exists without any such mental conditioning, he is pure and unattached as well as unaffected. He kills no one nor causes anyone to be killed. The falseness of the very killing is evident in the fact that she was revived once killed. How can that which is killed be revived? Forget that matter, how can that which never existed in the first place, die? This is why avadhuta's are free to act, because they understand the truth behind the false perceptions. They have experienced, not just talked about (like i'm babbling right now), this underlying reality. What do they lose or gain by action? Action is the dynamic element of this universe (prakriti) while the witness is the static unchanging immortal element (ishwara). The dynamic cannot exist if the witness does not observe its dynamism. However, the witness (un-labeled as the 'witness') exists in spite of whether there is action or non-action. The witness is no longer identified with witness-ship, but the inherent intelligence remains aware of itself, cognizing itself, and engaging itself in the mystical play of the universe in an entirely spontaneous manner (i.e., no 'desire'). The ego may be likened to the concept of statistical bias. God not only plays dice with the universe, but he imposes bias (maya) on himself to give the illusion that he has no absolute knowledge of the underlying distribution. He then proceeds to play out a monte carlo simulation that leads to various scenarios in multiple parallel universes. From this illusion, he alone resurrects himself, and he alone bears witness to this process. What a grand design indeed! jai guru datta. 4) Now in the Saptodaharini which starts on page 86 it is reiterated that non-injury is very extermely important....but if one reads the story of KartaviriyaArjuna and Parsurama one more or less only sees injury and they both attain ultimate salvation. How should i interpret the non-injury part, and the (blissful) injury part...? The question of injury and non-injury arise on account of our false notions of duality. The underlying is only one -- the existence of the injurer and the injured would require that there is a changing or dynamic aspect to god -- yet god for all time remains god, he neither does anything, nor causes anything to be done. Injury and non-injury only exist in the mental space illusion created by the sensory organs. The objects in front of you are only in your mind, their physicality is in your mind, their smell is in your mind, they touch is in your mind, their very existence is mind alone. Where is the injurer and the injured in this? This does not imply that you should all go around injuring people needlessly. So long as you are under the influence of the gunas, you should stick to the prescribed path for sattvic behavior. If you are doing something to "prove your point" you are still bound to your ego, whether you accept it or not. Only the truly egoless can carry out actions and not be affected by their outcome. It is dangerous for you to assume that you have conquered your ego; the very belief that you have 'conquered' ego, leads you to bondage. Ego is tricky, don't mess with it. 5) How relevant is reading about other yugas/kalpas in this KaliYuga? I find it very beautiful, but i'm sure that when i talk to a college or something about a person who killed worriors and went around the earth 21 times to do it...he will laugh in my face ..probably. How should we interpret this ...sure, "how we want to" ...but did Sri Swamiji give hints about this..? Learning about history can help you to learn something about where 'you' came from, so that you can see the progression of life, to know that everything in the domain of the senses and what we believe to be 'physical reality' is constantly undergoing change. There is no history book anywhere that has recorded any event that is constant, if it were, we wouldn't have to write books about them, because those conditions would still exist today. Whether they are real or not, the point of the stories is illustrative. What we value in life is what we get "out" of something -- similarly, what is important is what do you get from understanding a story. Germans call these "gedanken experiments" in modern times, but the idea of setting up hypothetical scenarios to play with and to gain a more solid grasp of concepts is not new. If a story gives us good tendencies and lessons, then why get rid of it, when it only serves to hasten the process of awakening? When the world-illusion itself is unreal, what then can be said of "history" or "stories"? The stories and history are no more real than all the perceptions and feelings you had 1 minute before. They do not exist in the present. That which does not exist now, did not exist before, and will not exist in the future. Only that which is permanent is regarded as real (Bhagavad Gita says this). I hope my answers are useful or at the least thought-provoking. Jai guru datta. ______________________________ The centipede was happy quite until a bird said, in fun, "Which foot goes after which?" This raised his mind to such a pitch he lay distracted in a ditch considering how to run. Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 27, 2002 Report Share Posted November 27, 2002 1) as for the three gunas: in case someone is angry, impatient. he/she is being rajasic? in case someone is hesitating for too long, he/she is being tamasic? in general, people hesitate out of fear. so is fear tamasic? then tamas also creates rajas, as later on they might get angry about themselves, about their previously hesitating too long, or they might accuse others of their own faults as well, which is again rajasic? one of two persons might tend to always be tamasic, hesitating, and might cause the other one thus to become impatient, i.e. rajasic? so these two are very much interwoven/linked to each other in my opinion, as if one were only the consequence of the other and vice versa. as for sattvic quality: a self-realized one is said to have overcome even sattva. He/she has realized even sattva to be unreal, i.e. his/her good deeds, in a way, are as unreal as someone else´s bad deeds, as the Divine Self alone exists? in any case, without self-analysis and heart-to-heart feeling for another person's woes one will not even learn from one´s own "bad karma". in my opinion, even pain is only useful for people in case they are able to realize why they are suffering and how they can avoid the same in the future. unfortunately, it seems to happen quite often that people are suffering and don´t realize why. so one seems to need Guru´s Grace and (silent and written, spoken etc) teachings in order to realize why one is suffering, and to learn from it. 2) as for modern theories of (quantum) physics, don´t they only confirm what the old rishis have said, that names and forms are unreal and only the Divine Self is real? "Only that which is permanent is regarded as real (Bhagavad Gita says this)." as for the life spans of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva, how about Ganapathi? i am now quoting from the Ganesha Kavacham ..."He is the one who creates, protects and annihilates the universe. ..." 3) O.k. avadhuta's are free to act, because they understand the truth behind the false perceptions. How about ordinary people? i have a Swamiji postcard with a saying: " To attribute cause to others is fallacious" as far as i remember. so one could also, in my opinion say, to attribute cause to oneself is fallacious. so in the end not only an avatar doesn´t suffer or cause to suffer, but also we ordinary people, but we don´t realize the truth, and thus it appears to us as if we were suffering or causing to suffer? as long as there is an ego there is the illusion of suffering and of cause? Thanks, Pradyumna, your thoughts are thought-provoking. Jai Guru Datta > Jai Guru Datta, > > The following answers came to mind. I welcome any thoughts. > > 1) > > Do you consider every story as real events? (btw I really want to, and > acyually believe the stories)For example Parsurama (page 168, 4th sentence > from beneath) went around the world 21 times & killed all kshatriyas. > > > It is not a question of whether the events were real or not, but whether > you understand the underlying principle. In truth such stories are to > impart wisdom concerning the nature of the three gunas -- sattva, rajas, > and tamas. By reading and listening to such stories we may become more > adept at identifying these gunas within ourselves as we walk, talk, act, > and live. Without a firm grasp of the nature of the three gunas, it is > impossible to know when we are under the influence of any particular > quality. By being more self-aware of our mental states, it makes us more > amenable to becoming witnesses to those states, rather than being pulled > here and there by our blindness to the presence of any of these states. By > reading such stories, we subconsciously begin to question ourselves as > "what would / should I do if I were in so-and-so's place" -- thereby > beginning the path towards jnanam. Only by such self-enquiry can you reach > the truth. While it is true that all paths lead to liberation, it must be > understood that liberation implies that one has awakened, rather than > learned something new. This process of awakening begins with self-analysis > and heart-to-heart feeling for another person's woes. This is why bhakthi, > karma, and jnana yoga all lead to the same conclusion. All paths lead to > the awakening of our consciousness to itself, allowing it to cognize its > own existence and to understand that it is indeed separate from all these > things. Krishna has said "whatever you see, hear, touch, taste, or smell -- > know that you cannot know it for what it truly is." By mental introspection > one becomes aware of the consciousness residing and presiding over our > being. By realizing the inner self, the identity with illusions created by > reaction of the sensory organs lessens and ultimately merges into complete > self contemplation, i.e., moksham. jai guru datta. > > > > > 2) > > Is there mention of dinosaurs in the scriptures? Because for example The > persons like KartaviyaArjuna became thousands of years old. > > First of all, it is our ignorance / limited perception to assume that the > puranas and upanishads refer to people who necessarily lived on planet > earth. While it is true that many sages and maharishis can live > indeterminately, it is not a given that they necessarily live here on earth > as such. The very idea of saying 'I live for so many years' is false -- > what is time first of all? What reference frame are you using? And who is > the "you" that lives? The true "you" is immortal, while the ego-"you" has a > finite lifespan that is a function of the material causes (genetics, > environment, mental conditioning, as well as the inherent perception of > 'time' itself depending on what part of the space-time continuum you live > in). It is well known law of physics (for our space-time continuum) called > relativity, which shows that as you approach massive objects (by massive it > is meant objects which significantly 'bend' the curvature of the spatial > continuum) that time itself slows down; time is a function of both > gravitational curvature as well as the mental perception of its passage. Of > course, there still remains an all-unifying theory that will linki mental > perception to gravitation. Nevertheless, I recall that there was a mention > somewhere that the day of vishnu is equivalent to the lifespan of brahma, > and that a lifespan of vishnu is equivalent to the day of ishwara (kala > bhairava). When lifespans themselves are relative, what meaning is there in > saying "I live for 100 years"? Modern theories of physics (see David Bohm) > even point out the that the nature of the world is nothing but pure > 'mind-stuff'. The underlying quantum reality indicates that the physical > matter in front of you is only 'real' because you observed it (the infamous > 'collapse of the wave function'). When the observer is removed, i.e., when > consciousness is liberated, the very fabric or substance of the physical > reality ceases to be. > > > > 3) > > The correct order is Matha Pita Guru Daivam ..now on page 162, 2nd sentence > from beneath father Jamadagni commanded his 4 sons to cut off the mother's > head, because she commited sin of dirty thougths...the four sons > hesitated...which i because of the above order understand. Killing mother > is not inline with Daivam so if father who is higher in order than mother > says to kill mother then i would not do it because Daivam is higher in > order and does not support killing... in this situation, However Parsuram > killed his mother without second thought and it was blissfull...?! He did > however immediately say to his father to ressurect his mother. ..PLEASE > COMMENT....how could Parsurama did a good thing here? > > > One should realize that the story is meant to illustrate the idea of one's > "state of mind". The other three sons of Jamadagni (parasurama's father i > think?) were bound to the material existence. They believed in its reality, > therefore their mental conditioning is controlled by the three gunas. > Parasurama, do not forget, was the avatar of the almighty himself -- he > exists without any such mental conditioning, he is pure and unattached as > well as unaffected. He kills no one nor causes anyone to be killed. The > falseness of the very killing is evident in the fact that she was revived > once killed. How can that which is killed be revived? Forget that matter, > how can that which never existed in the first place, die? This is why > avadhuta's are free to act, because they understand the truth behind the > false perceptions. They have experienced, not just talked about (like i'm > babbling right now), this underlying reality. What do they lose or gain by > action? Action is the dynamic element of this universe (prakriti) while the > witness is the static unchanging immortal element (ishwara). The dynamic > cannot exist if the witness does not observe its dynamism. However, the > witness (un-labeled as the 'witness') exists in spite of whether there is > action or non-action. The witness is no longer identified with > witness-ship, but the inherent intelligence remains aware of itself, > cognizing itself, and engaging itself in the mystical play of the universe > in an entirely spontaneous manner (i.e., no 'desire'). The ego may be > likened to the concept of statistical bias. God not only plays dice with > the universe, but he imposes bias (maya) on himself to give the illusion > that he has no absolute knowledge of the underlying distribution. He then > proceeds to play out a monte carlo simulation that leads to various > scenarios in multiple parallel universes. From this illusion, he alone > resurrects himself, and he alone bears witness to this process. What a > grand design indeed! jai guru datta. > > > 4) > > Now in the Saptodaharini which starts on page 86 it is reiterated that > non-injury is very extermely important....but if one reads the story of > KartaviriyaArjuna and Parsurama one more or less only sees injury and they > both attain ultimate salvation. How should i interpret the non-injury part, > and the (blissful) injury part...? > > > The question of injury and non-injury arise on account of our false notions > of duality. The underlying is only one -- the existence of the injurer and > the injured would require that there is a changing or dynamic aspect to god > -- yet god for all time remains god, he neither does anything, nor causes > anything to be done. Injury and non-injury only exist in the mental space > illusion created by the sensory organs. The objects in front of you are > only in your mind, their physicality is in your mind, their smell is in > your mind, they touch is in your mind, their very existence is mind alone. > Where is the injurer and the injured in this? This does not imply that you > should all go around injuring people needlessly. So long as you are under > the influence of the gunas, you should stick to the prescribed path for > sattvic behavior. If you are doing something to "prove your point" you are > still bound to your ego, whether you accept it or not. Only the truly > egoless can carry out actions and not be affected by their outcome. It is > dangerous for you to assume that you have conquered your ego; the very > belief that you have 'conquered' ego, leads you to bondage. Ego is tricky, > don't mess with it. > > > 5) > > How relevant is reading about other yugas/kalpas in this KaliYuga? I find > it very beautiful, but i'm sure that when i talk to a college or something > about a person who killed worriors and went around the earth 21 times to do > it...he will laugh in my face ..probably. How should we interpret this > ...sure, "how we want to" ...but did Sri Swamiji give hints about this..? > > Learning about history can help you to learn something about where 'you' > came from, so that you can see the progression of life, to know that > everything in the domain of the senses and what we believe to be 'physical > reality' is constantly undergoing change. There is no history book anywhere > that has recorded any event that is constant, if it were, we wouldn't have > to write books about them, because those conditions would still exist > today. Whether they are real or not, the point of the stories is > illustrative. What we value in life is what we get "out" of something -- > similarly, what is important is what do you get from understanding a story. > Germans call these "gedanken experiments" in modern times, but the idea of > setting up hypothetical scenarios to play with and to gain a more solid > grasp of concepts is not new. If a story gives us good tendencies and > lessons, then why get rid of it, when it only serves to hasten the process > of awakening? When the world-illusion itself is unreal, what then can be > said of "history" or "stories"? The stories and history are no more real > than all the perceptions and feelings you had 1 minute before. They do not > exist in the present. That which does not exist now, did not exist before, > and will not exist in the future. Only that which is permanent is regarded > as real (Bhagavad Gita says this). > > > > I hope my answers are useful or at the least thought-provoking. Jai guru > datta. > > > > ______________________________ > The centipede was happy quite > until a bird said, in fun, > "Which foot goes after which?" > This raised his mind to such a pitch > he lay distracted in a ditch > considering how to run. > > > 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.