sumedh Posted February 3, 2007 Report Share Posted February 3, 2007 What does the knowledge of yoga comes from? It is the same as to what u refered above. If the agenda is only to discuss and debate, umm yes shastra, but not only that. Yoga has a more practical aspect to it. Again, the friction in this debate is because you come from a strictly Vedanta school that does not emphasize the importance of practical experience based gyan over scriptural knowledge. You have no idea about the "practical experience" of myself or other devotees to talk about it in any capacity. This is what the pandas in Mathura, Vrindavan, Haridwar have done since the past few hundred of years. And you are not able to either grasp or accept the importance of sadhna over scriptural debate. Get over this. This shooting of general statements with respect to "pandas" and others is unacceptable (not to mention besides the point). Everything moves with Brahmn's will in the universe. That's a generalizing concept. But in the world sadhnas one has to earn the mercy. And not wait for it to fall in your lap as the HK believe. I have explained Bhagwad Gita's devotion before. The pramanas I gave are not acceptable for you. The acceptable pramanas are: a) The four Vedas (samhitas, brahmanas, arayankas), the dashopanishads, and some other upanishads b) Brahma sutra c) Bhagavad-Gita d) Mahabharata, mula-ramayana e) Puranas (particularly sattvic ones) when they follow the above pramanas There are other smriti shastras which are acceptable, but many are controvertial so we can leave them. I ask you to learn the way of sadhna. Do what Krishna instructs Arjuna in BG. Sit errect and meditate on your Agya chakra on Krishna. How about that? Would you learn? It's easy to instruct others though, and that's what HKs do. I have done this for many years. The problem is that you find it hard to accept that there are other more experienced devotees that have been through this before but have different conclusions than yourself. According to that you should altogether reject Bhagwad Gita which is considered a God given scripture. That is another duality. That is why it was my sincere suggestion to read about pramanas. The Bhagavad-Gita is part of Mahabharata which is mentioned in sruti (thus breaking the cirularity) and in other sadagamas given in sruti. the link to downloading ur pramana does not work. There is no file on that link. Sorry about that, somehow the link does not work from this site. Please go here, and then select the third paper in the list. WOW! I didn't expect you to stoop so low in order to just push your point. Well, if that is the attitude, that you need to put down great worshippable sages like Vishwamitra, Vashishtha, Pulastya, Agastya Gorakhnath, simply to prove your point right, Learn to read carefully. My response was to other personalities mentioned before that (babaji, lahiri mahashaya etc.) and not to the vedic sages. then I would like you to provide evidence that Prabhupada or BhaktiSiddhanta were liberated!!! What's the evidence for that Sumedh??? Can you show me an evidence for that? There is no evidence for this. Of course, internally we believe this to be the case but this should never be claimed in a discussion with others. And really I don't care if their writings are in conflict with your scriptures. If Lord Rama decided to sit in Shri Vishwamitra's and Vashishtha's and Agastya's feet and receive blessings, initiations, mantras and sadhnas, then these personalities are worth worshipping!!! Their accomplishments, sadhnatmak levels are unparalled by today's pigmy like devotees. Again, read my post carefully. What is Vedic evidence? The Vedic word has been thoroughly exploited by HKs everywhere. Its a support gaining tool for one. How do you know Agastya and Vishwamitra were not adept in the science of Kundalini? See above for the primary vedic evidences. By your argument one can imagine any method and then ask "how do you know that ... were not adept in xyz?". I asked you about the sabar mantra sadhnas practiced by Guru Gorakhnath. They are not Vedic. But they work. You never asked me. Please do ask, but be ready to provide evidence for: a) that Gorakhnath indeed practised the said sadhana b) that Gorakhnath achieved liberation as a result of that sadhana Please do not waste words in the absence of these. Besides the HKs do not read the Vedas. Only in a some parts. Do they read Rigveda? What about SamVeda? Few devotees read the vedas due to time and other constraints we all have. The Bhagavad-Gita is considered the cream of all upanishads (as Lord Shiva says in Gita-mahatmya), and so is Brahma Sutra whose natural commentry is Srimad-Bhagavatam by Vyasadeva Himself. My friend, This question explains the lack of understanding of the science of mantras. Reciting a mantra in one way or the right way makes it work, otherwise the effect is wasted. The energy is wasted. You will understand if you do A laghu anushthan of 1.25,000 mantras in 11 days. Actually every word of the veda has an associated meter should be recited in a proper manner. With regards to the hare-krsna mahamantra it is specifically stated that there are no rules and regulations in chanting it. If you do not agree, please let us know what you believe would be the correct way to recite it with relevant references. There is evidence that the hare-krsna mantra is the way as practised by gaudiya vaishnavas. Some of the older editions of Kali-santarana upanishad still exist which have the mantra in that order -- this is also confirmed by Brahmanda purana and some other smriti shastras which give the mantra in that order. Okay. if all the VEDIC sadhna methods do involve DHYANA, knowledge (gained through perception), and devotion and if only sankirtana works for this age, then how come you advertise yourselves as "VEDIC"? This is the catch! If you don't follow the Vedic sadhna methods and most scriptures you read are based on and colored by a 500 year tradition, then how are you Vedic?? Gaudiya vaishnavas practise japa which is dhyana; sankirtana, worship of Deities etc. which is devotion and sambandha jnana which is essential. Sankirtana and all these activities are vedic and are specifically recommended. I fail to see your point. But where is it written that it is the ONLY method and that you cannot practice anything else or that Vedic sadhnas and mantras have become futile? What vedic sadhanas are you talking about? This Padma Purana quoting has always been double standard thing by HKs. How come you accept Padma Purana but do not accept Shiv Gita within the same Padma Purana? One is that it is not in some of the versions of Padma purana. Other is that the quotes are corroborated by many other evidences some of which were quoted before. Yes. Everything is ruled out. Just like in Islam all other religions are ruled out. Just like Catholics believe no one comes to God except through Jesus! And the same is the HK position! That's it. Lower the melodrama. The quote in question repeats "no other way" three times. When giving an interpretation to such vedic statements one needs to show that the repetitions refer to different things/attributes/... Keeping the context of the quote in mind, the proper interpretation is that the three "no other way"s refer to the methods recommended in other yugas. Also refer to the quotes given by gHariji from Srimad Bhagavatam which corroborate this. Can I come to the Lord Chanting Om Namah Shivaya and meditating on the image of Lord Shiva? Krishna says smth like - in whichever form you worship me I come to you in that form!! Actually He says something quite different. Bhagavad-Gita 7.20-23: kamaih--by desires; taih--by those; taih--by those; hrta--distorted; jnanah--knowledge; prapadyante--surrender; anya--other; devatah--devatas; tam--that; tam--that; niyamam--rules; asthaya--following; prakrtya--by nature; niyatah--controlled; svaya--by their own. yah--that; yah--that; yam--which; yam--which; tanum--form of the devatas; bhaktah--devotee; sraddhaya--with faith; arcitum--to worship; icchati--desires; tasya--of that; tasya--of that; acalam--steady; sraddham--faith; tam--him; eva--surely; vidadhami--give; aham--I. sah--he; taya--with that; sraddhaya--with faith; yuktah--endowed; tasya--his; aradhanam--worship; ihate--seeks; labhate--obtains; ca--and; tatah--from which; kaman--desires; maya--by Me; eva--alone; vihitan--regulated; hi--for; tan--those. anta-vat tu--limited and temporary; phalam--fruits; tesam--their; tat--that; bhavati--becomes; alpa-medhasam--of those of small intelligence; devan--to devatas; deva-yajah--worshipers of devatas; yanti--achieve; mat--My; bhaktah--devotees; yanti--attain; mam--to Me; api--surely. which says the faith of those who worship other devatas is steadied by Him in the respective devatas and that they attain temporary fruits as a result of that, while only His devotees attain liberation. Bhagavad-Gita 9.23 ye--those; api--also; anya--other; devata--devatas; bhaktah--devotees; yajante--worship; sraddhaya anvitah--with faith; te--they; api--also; mam--Me; eva--even; kaunteya--O son of Kunti; yajanti--sacrifice; avidhi-purvakam--in a wrong way. which specifically says that the worship of other devatas also reaches Him though it is in an incorrect manner. No none of these are "ACCEPTED" by the HKs. They are not accepted by any of the vedanta schools including advaita. Compound this with the fact that you have not provided the relevant quotes as of yet. You really think yoga's giving understanding of body, energy and using it properly for God communion is wild claim? How silly can you get? What can I do if you are blind to the evidence I refered to? The wild claims that you made were: a) yoga refers to kundalini/kriya/... methods b) these methods lead to an understanding of the body c) they elevate the consciousness of jiva and lead it to liberation d) it is hard to achieve the same without these (implicitly and explicitly you have said elsewhere that the gaudiya vaishnava practices cannot lead to liberation) Many more such claims have been made elsewhere. They are wild since: a) they lack any evidence b) there is explicit contrary evidence to many of these claims The person who spoke on this was never an authority on branches like Dhyan, kundalini, kriya yoga. All he did was claim that the ultimate aim of yoga is to go into service of krishna. Actually Srila Prabhupada describes ashtanga yoga in some detail in some of his commentaries, and explains that these are useful to some extent but also says that they do not lead to the ultimate goal. So why did Krishna give Arjuna yoga and devotion? Arjuna was right there with Krishna already!! In his service. His best friend! No penance required! Right. There are evidences that the state of Arjuna was a temporary manifestation by the will of Hari to enable dissemination of Bhagavad-Gita to the jivas. But if you really want to understand yoga, I suggest you at least buy two books -Autobiography of a Yoga by Paramhansa Yogananda and Kundalini Yoga by Sivananda Swami. You will get some more insight. And you will find the verses by Krishna in BG too Read those long time back. I referred to the verse in Dhyana yoga chapter. Find them! I fail to make out any connection of those verses with kundalini etc. You have half the picture. Is there another method he gave in BG? Did he say book distribution? Did he say Namahata? Did he say the word sankirtana ONLY? Did he ask Arjuna to grab a mridanga and kharatala? I find that HK devotees follow most of what Krishna tells Arjuna in Bhagavad-Gita (japa, remembering Him always, worshipping Him, book distribution etc.), while most of the others hardly do so. Arjuna's final convincing adn acceptance came AFTER Krishna's yogic Kriya of activating his Agya chakra and showing his universal form. And it was NOT one form. There is no mention of agnya chakra, only about divine vision. This discussion has digressed too far. Please expect further replies from my side only when you have some evidence for your claims like "HK chanting is unvedic/unscientific", "Bhakti is the first step while kundalini/kriya methods are higher steps" etc. The meaning of an evidence has been given before. haribol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ganeshprasad Posted February 3, 2007 Report Share Posted February 3, 2007 Jai Ganesh Pranam Sumedh ji Knowledge of right path automatically means knowledge of incorrect paths also. This is what means by "tamaso maa jyotir gamaya". Really I thought this is a prayer where we acknowledge our helpless position of ignorance and ask the almighty to lead us out of it. The paths are many as acknowledge by Krishna and I quote again Some worship Me by knowledge sacrifice. Others worship the infinite as the one in all (or non-dual), as the master of all (or dual), and in various other ways. (9.15) I may choose to go to a particular place, so the choices could be many how to get there, e.g. flight, by train, by road or rely on the most trusted the walk, depending on where one is, path is chosen. There are pitfalls on whatever one chooses but the choice is our to make, what is the need to ridicule any? blah, blah... The problem of discord is primarily that of abrahamic religions who have no culture of civil, rational discussion nor any frameworks for such. Please don't try to bring in these kind of arguments here. Well thank you even with blah blah, I welcome your observation on the shortcomings of the said religion, which is precisely the point, I am trying to make, when hk says ours is the only way. Yes, people are free to give their own interpretations and vedanta provides the framework to show correct and incorrect interpretations which many acharyas have done. Agreeing with any interpretation, however incorrect/absurd, for fear of an imagined "discord" is stupid and not vedantic way (and not even appropriate in modern scientific way). Given those interpretations who is to say one is more right then the other and yearning for peace is no new phenomena nor stupid or unVedic. Many Upanishad start with this invocation I wonder why? Aum Saha Naavavathu Sahanau Bhunaktu Saha Veeryam Kara Vaavahai Tejasvi Naavadheetamastu Maa Vidwishaavahai Aum Shantih Shantih Shantihi Meaning: May the Lord protect us both, may He nourish us both, may we work together with great vigor (divine strength). May we both acquire brilliance of our intellect through our studies, may we not hate each other. Let there be peace, peace, peace. You are welcome to start by presenting quotes about kundalini yoga from sruti which is the topic of this thread. Topic of this thread was and I quote [quote (What are some practices that can actually awaken the Fire Snake and if you had any experiences of this awakening how was it?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumedh Posted February 4, 2007 Report Share Posted February 4, 2007 Some worship Me by knowledge sacrifice. Others worship the infinite as the one in all (or non-dual), as the master of all (or dual), and in various other ways. (9.15) We obviously have a different take on this verse. For one, the verse never mentions infinite, rather says "mam". A more acceptable translation would be: Yet others sacrifice with the yagna of Knowledge and worship Me in various ways as the One, as the distinct and as the all-faced (or universal Form). In any case the context is that this refers to persons other than the great souls mentioned in 9.13-14 who are always chanting and devotion to Krishna while this verse gives the endevours done by others. I may choose to go to a particular place, so the choices could be many how to get there, e.g. flight, by train, by road or rely on the most trusted the walk, depending on where one is, path is chosen. There are pitfalls on whatever one chooses but the choice is our to make, what is the need to ridicule any? Which is fine and worship of Krishna can be done in various ways (as 9.15 says), though of course there are also an infinite number of other paths (which are infinitely more than the correct paths) which do not lead to the destination. Thus this distinction of right and wrong paths is always there as is also given in numerous places in Bhagavad-Gita (e.g. 2.41, 9.11-12, Chapter 16). Well thank you even with blah blah, I welcome your observation on the shortcomings of the said religion, which is precisely the point, I am trying to make, when hk says ours is the only way. This needs to corrected: "the HKs say that there are correct paths and incorrect paths" and what those have already been given before. Besides, the point being made was that accepting anyone's philosophy for fear of discord is not an acceptable position. Given those interpretations who is to say one is more right then the other and yearning for peace is no new phenomena nor stupid or unVedic. You seem to confuse peace with (intellectual) disagreement. No one has asked for sruti pramana. YKji engaged in criticism of all the HK devotees (some of whom gave their sincere experience) and gaudiya vaishnava practise. Naturally if one criticise others' practise he/she would be asked for evidence particularly when his/her own practise is not found in scriptures, while the ones being criticised derive from accepted scriptures. The context of sruti was your invitation for a discussion of the same. If you desire some other topic please start a new thread for the same, while discussion of sruti in this thread should be related to the topic of this thread. and at times rude. Which should be criticised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ganeshprasad Posted February 6, 2007 Report Share Posted February 6, 2007 Jai Ganesh Pranam Sumedh ji We obviously have a different take on this verse. For one, the verse never mentions infinite, rather says "mam". A more acceptable translation would be: Yet others sacrifice with the yagna of Knowledge and worship Me in various ways as the One, as the distinct and as the all-faced (or universal Form). In any case the context is that this refers to persons other than the great souls mentioned in 9.13-14 who are always chanting and devotion to Krishna while this verse gives the endevours done by others. I accept your version, although infinite was interchanged for "mam" to indicate, nature of the supreme in that worship. Anyway the verse was quoted to state that there truly are various other way of worship as confirmed by Lord Krishna. Which is fine and worship of Krishna can be done in various ways (as 9.15 says), though of course there are also an infinite number of other paths (which are infinitely more than the correct paths) which do not lead to the destination. Thus this distinction of right and wrong paths is always there as is also given in numerous places in Bhagavad-Gita (e.g. 2.41, 9.11-12, Chapter 16). That said then hks assertion of this is the only path can be ignored, and I don’t mean the path itself but the mentality that this is the only way. I am sorry I do not accept, that there are infinite number of wrong paths which leads to wrong destination, on the contrary it is the path that we choose that leads us to our destination. I can appreciate verses you quoted but I fail to see value in the context of this discussion, no one is suggesting to adopt all the various path described, to reach the supreme goal and certainly no one is suggesting to adopt raksasi and asuri vriti. Surely we are not discussing Divine and Demonic Qualities of chapter 16, which are very important for self-analysis of ones, own quality. You can check what I posted earlier to this regard and I quote again "Just as the sun dispel the darkness, Dharma based on truthfulness, purity, nonviolence and austerity lead us to the love of god. Inquiry is to seek the truth." There are many that do follow various other paths, yet there those who try and ridicule that. it helps no one. To further prove the point check verse in BG. Nourish the Devas with Yajna, and the Devas will nourish you. Thus nourishing one another you shall attain the Supreme goal. (3.11) Note, the word supreme goal. Men in the mode of goodness worship the devas; those in the mode of passion worship the demons; and those in the mode of ignorance worship ghosts and spirits. (17.4) naite srti partha janan yogi muhyati kascana tasmat sarvesu kalesu yoga-yukto bhavarjuna Knowing these two paths, O Arjuna, a yogi is not bewildered at all. Therefore, O Arjuna, be steadfast in yoga (of meditation) at all times. (8.27) </PRE>vedesu yajnesu tapahsu caiva danesu yat punya-phalam pradistam atyeti tat sarvam idam viditva yogi param sthanam upaiti cadyam The yogi who knows all this goes beyond getting the benefits of the study of the Vedas, performance of sacrifices, austerities, and charities, and attains the Supreme eternal abode. (8.28) This needs to corrected: "the HKs say that there are correct paths and incorrect paths" and what those have already been given before. Besides, the point being made was that accepting anyone's philosophy for fear of discord is not an acceptable position. If HKs sticks to the correct path that they follow no one would have any difficulty but when you try and shove that in someone’s face you will find a reaction. I don’t think I am suggesting for one minute to accept for your self someone else position, this is the beauty of Hindu Dharma it does not impose, people follow different paths, straight or crooked, according to their temperament, depending on which they consider best, or most appropriate Respect not out of fear but respect that someone has a right to follow and choose the path that he/she sees fit. You seem to confuse peace with (intellectual) disagreement. I don’t think so; I have absolute no problem to agree to disagree, problem will only manifest if we go on a crusade, mine is the only way. Jai Shree Krishna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumedh Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 We are just rehashing same things. That said then hks assertion of this is the only path can be ignored, and I don’t mean the path itself but the mentality that this is the only way. Which is incorrect as has been stated before. Nowhere does the literature that HKs follow say so. Since you are intent on repeating an incorrect thing over and over, there is no point continuing this unless you produce evidence of the same. There are many that do follow various other paths, yet there those who try and ridicule that. it helps no one. You call asking for evidence of validity of one's position in context of liberation as ridiculing. Well then we have completely different notions in this regard. Men in the mode of goodness worship the devas; those in the mode of passion worship the demons; and those in the mode of ignorance worship ghosts and spirits. (17.4) Of course, also see 7.20-23, 9.23-24, 9.25 etc. which clearly say that only His devotees attain liberation. Not all in the mode of goodness acheive liberation. Knowing these two paths, O Arjuna, a yogi is not bewildered at all. Therefore, O Arjuna, be steadfast in yoga (of meditation) at all times. (8.27) Oh, the two paths mentioned are those of light and darkness not two paths to acheive liberation. Please see the previous verse 8.26 which makes it clear that only passing from this world through the path of light leads to liberation. The yogi who knows all this goes beyond getting the benefits of the study of the Vedas, performance of sacrifices, austerities, and charities, and attains the Supreme eternal abode. (8.28) Please see the context in 8.22 where the Lord is referring to devotees, or in other words yogi here actually means a devotee. If HKs sticks to the correct path that they follow no one would have any difficulty but when you try and shove that in someone’s face you will find a reaction. I don’t think so; I have absolute no problem to agree to disagree, problem will only manifest if we go on a crusade, mine is the only way. Even if someone claimed that his/her is the only path to liberation, it is very much justified if there is evidence for the same and not a problem as long as he/she does not force it on others. Nowhere do i see the anyone shoving or forcing. Calling something lacking evidence as such is not shoving. Except for claims in this regard you have not given any instance of this (in any case if such exist then they should be condemned). If there are any specifics please bring them to light. haribol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ganeshprasad Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 Jai Ganesh Pranam, sumedh ji We are just rehashing same things Which is incorrect as has been stated before. Nowhere does the literature that HKs follow say so. Since you are intent on repeating an incorrect thing over and over, there is no point continuing this unless you produce evidence of the same. You are right we are going round in circle getting no where. The literature is vast full of opinion, which can be contentious issue to some, nothing there, which can not be debated in a civil way. But the mentality is not something one can legislate or prove it is something that some do perceive which obviously you do not see or want to acknowledge. Hindus can be abused, called names, simply non existence, hotch potch or they are on material platform and yes easy target for our next project so let us be nice to them for the time being. The holier then thou attitude can not be proven but the undercurrent are felt right down the spine. You call asking for evidence of validity of one's position in context of liberation as ridiculing. Well then we have completely different notions in this regard. Asking for evidence is no problem, ridiculing that path from on set (and that is what happened regarding this thread) is. <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width=624 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=center bgColor=#ffffff>Originally Posted by Ganeshprasad Men in the mode of goodness worship the devas; those in the mode of passion worship the demons; and those in the mode of ignorance worship ghosts and spirits. (17.4) </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE> Of course, also see 7.20-23, 9.23-24, 9.25 etc. which clearly say that only His devotees attain liberation. Not all in the mode of goodness acheive liberation. I see verse 7.20-23 which is widely quoted to ridicule the worship of Devas, it is funny how we ignore the fact that Krishna clearly states that and I quote kamais tais tair hrta-jnanah prapadyante 'nya-devatah tam tam niyamam asthaya prakrtya niyatah svaya They, whose wisdom has been carried away by various desires impelled by their own Sanskaara, resort to other devas and practice various religious rites. This applies to those who worship them for material desires. Otherwise why would he recommend the worship of Devas in chapter three, which you conveniently omitted. Nourish the Devas with Yajna, and the Devas will nourish you. Thus nourishing one another you shall attain the Supreme goal. (3.11) As to 9.23-25 Of course if I worship a particular deity I expect to go their stands to reason, what is wrong in that. <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width=624 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=center bgColor=#ffffff>Originally Posted by Ganeshprasad Knowing these two paths, O Arjuna, a yogi is not bewildered at all. Therefore, O Arjuna, be steadfast in yoga (of meditation) at all times. (8.27) </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE> Oh, the two paths mentioned are those of light and darkness not two paths to acheive liberation. Please see the previous verse 8.26 which makes it clear that only passing from this world through the path of light leads to liberation. Yes my friend I do understand the utrayan and dakshin marg and its implications, these are not for ordinary being, the yogis know of these paths and achieve it, that was my point. At the time of death with steadfast mind and devotion; making the flow of Pranic impulse rise up (to the middle of two eye brows) by the power of yoga and holding there; attains the Supreme divine spirit. (See also 4.29, 5.27, and 6.13) (8.10) I shall briefly explain to you (the process to attain) that goal which the knowers of the Vedas call the imperishable; into which the ascetics, freed from attachment, enter; and desiring which people lead a life of celibacy. (8.11) Controlling all the (nine) doors of the body, the abode of consciousness; focusing the mind on the heart and Prana in the cerebrum, and engaged in yogic practice; (8.12) One who leaves the body while meditating on Brahman and uttering OM, the sacred monosyllable sound of Brahman, attains the Supreme goal. (8.13) Even if someone claimed that his/her is the only path to liberation, it is very much justified if there is evidence for the same and not a problem as long as he/she does not force it on others. It would be justified if that was true but we know there are other valid paths and I am going to leave at that for I have no ax to grind I am not going to bring any specific because it would be futile on my part, we will always find a valid excuse to justify our position that is the nature of this world. Nice to have talked to you, all the best. haribol Jai Shree Krishna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumedh Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 Namaskar But the mentality is not something one can legislate or prove it is something that some do perceive which obviously you do not see or want to acknowledge. Hindus can be abused, called names, simply non existence, hotch potch or they are on material platform and yes easy target for our next project so let us be nice to them for the time being. The holier then thou attitude can not be proven but the undercurrent are felt right down the spine. Not done. You have made a lot of noise about HKs shoving and forcing their way particularly on Hindus or abusing them but not provided a single instance of the same, which is a completely unacceptable methodology in a discussion. As for mentality and undercurrent, such accusations are easy to make since apparently no evidence is required for the same and the other person is guilty as charged, is that not so. They, whose wisdom has been carried away by various desires impelled by their own Sanskaara, resort to other devas and practice various religious rites. This applies to those who worship them for material desires. On the contrary even in your translation it says that those who worship other devatas are those who are carried away by material desires (which is borne from one's own nature as 3.33, 17.2-4 etc. say) and they think that the fruits are given by the respective devataas when they are given by Vishnu alone as 7.22 says). Otherwise why would he recommend the worship of Devas in chapter three, which you conveniently omitted. Nourish the Devas with Yajna, and the Devas will nourish you. Thus nourishing one another you shall attain the Supreme goal. (3.11) I have not omitted them, just that these do not seem to be so direct ways of worshipping Krishna though actually they are. The worship of devas is recommended in sruti as well, but that is to be done as a sacrifice to Vishnu. There are many sruti/smriti references that yajna refers to Vishnu (e.g. shatpatha brahmana) as well as stated in Bhagavad-Gita e.g. 9.16, and as 9.24 says that those who do not recognize this fact fall down. Thus the verses 3.9-13 refer to offering the yajna refer to knowing Vishnu to be the actual receiver and deliverer of fruits of these. As to 9.23-25 Of course if I worship a particular deity I expect to go their stands to reason, what is wrong in that. which are temporary places of birth and death and not liberated platforms (8.16) while only attaining to Vishnu's abode means liberation (8.20-21). At the time of death with steadfast mind and devotion; making the flow of Pranic impulse rise up (to the middle of two eye brows) by the power of yoga and holding there; attains the Supreme divine spirit. (See also 4.29, 5.27, and 6.13) (8.10) I shall briefly explain to you (the process to attain) that goal which the knowers of the Vedas call the imperishable; into which the ascetics, freed from attachment, enter; and desiring which people lead a life of celibacy. (8.11) Controlling all the (nine) doors of the body, the abode of consciousness; focusing the mind on the heart and Prana in the cerebrum, and engaged in yogic practice; (8.12) One who leaves the body while meditating on Brahman and uttering OM, the sacred monosyllable sound of Brahman, attains the Supreme goal. (8.13) Quite true, yogi refers to a devotee of Lord as mentioned in various places. This is the procedure by which the pure devotees leave their bodies. Please see the context of these verses from 8.5-8.9. I think that you go by the currently circulating meaning of yogi thinking that the scriptures' meaning is the same which is actually quite different. anta-kale--at the end of life; ca--also; mam--unto Me; eva--certainly; smaran--remembering; muktva--quitting; kalevaram--the body; yah--he who; prayati--goes; sah--he; mat-bhavam--My nature; yati--achieves; na--not; asti--there is; atra--here; samsayah--doubt. yam yam--whatever; va--either; api--also; smaran--remembering; bhavam--nature; tyajati--give up; ante--at the end; kalevaram--this body; tam tam--similar; eva--certainly; eti--gets; kaunteya--O son of Kunti; sada--always; tat--that; bhava--state of being; bhavitah--remembering. tasmat--therefore; sarvesu--always; kalesu--time; mam--unto Me; anusmara--go on remembering; yudhya--fight; ca--also; mayi--unto Me; arpita--surrender; manah--mind; buddhih--intellect; mam--unto Me; eva--surely; esyasi--will attain; asamsayah--beyond a doubt. abhyasa--practice; yoga-yuktena--being engaged in meditation; cetasa--by the mind and intelligence; na anya-gamina--without their being deviated; paramam--the Supreme; purusam--Personality of Godhead; divyam--transcendental; yati--achieves; partha--O son of Prtha; anucintayan--constantly thinking of. It would be justified if that was true but we know there are other valid paths and I am going to leave at that for I have no ax to grind I am not going to bring any specific because it would be futile on my part, we will always find a valid excuse to justify our position that is the nature of this world. Nope. It is clearly stated in Bhagavad-Gita (verses 9.24, 8.15-21, 9.3, 7.15, 7.29-30, 14.26, 12.6-7) as well as sruti that only devotion to Vishnu knowing Him to be the Supreme can lead to liberation. The worship of Vishnu Himself can be done in various ways (the nine ways given in Srimad-Bhagavatam or Bhagavad-Gita 9.15 as you pointed out etc.). haribol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ganeshprasad Posted February 11, 2007 Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 Namaskar Not done. You have made a lot of noise about HKs shoving and forcing their way particularly on Hindus or abusing them but not provided a single instance of the same, which is a completely unacceptable methodology in a discussion. As for mentality and undercurrent, such accusations are easy to make since apparently no evidence is required for the same and the other person is guilty as charged, is that not so. Well I take everything back and I am even sorry to have brought it up without any evidence. But I will relate one particular game or play, the payers of Bhaktivedanta players regularly enacted, for the pleasure of us Hindus on MAHA SHIVRATRI DAY (which I believe is next Friday) the drama of lord Shiva running in fright from a demon, Is this how we honur Lord Shiva on the maha Sivratri day? And you call him greatest of Vishnu Bhakta. On the contrary even in your translation it says that those who worship other devatas are those who are carried away by material desires (which is borne from one's own nature as 3.33, 17.2-4 etc. say) and they think that the fruits are given by the respective devataas when they are given by Vishnu alone as 7.22 says). You are missing the point I am trying to make here. Devas worship is not condemned at all nor the Devas are at fault for being worship, even Lord Krishna is worshiped to enter in to heavenly planet it is this effort that is being condemned. Check 9.20/21 I have not omitted them, just that these do not seem to be so direct ways of worshipping Krishna though actually they are. The worship of devas is recommended in sruti as well, but that is to be done as a sacrifice to Vishnu. There are many sruti/smriti references that yajna refers to Vishnu (e.g. shatpatha brahmana) as well as stated in Bhagavad-Gita e.g. 9.16, and as 9.24 says that those who do not recognize this fact fall down. Thus the verses 3.9-13 refer to offering the yajna refer to knowing Vishnu to be the actual receiver and deliverer of fruits of these. Well thanks, you see my point is not what the result of Deva worship brings, the fact that it is a legitimate Vedic practice and not to be laughed at or dismissed just because you have no use of it. which are temporary places of birth and death and not liberated platforms (8.16) while only attaining to Vishnu's abode means liberation (8.20-21) This is your sweet opinion only which a brahman worshiper would not accept. saknotihaiva yah sodhum prak sarira-vimoksanat kama-krodhodbhavam vegam sa yuktah sa sukhi narah yo 'ntah-sukho 'ntar-aramas tathantar-jyotir eva yah sa yogi brahma-nirvanam brahma-bhuto 'dhigacchati labhante brahma-nirvanam rsayah ksina-kalmasah chinna-dvaidha yatatmanah sarva-bhuta-hite ratah kama-krodha-vimuktanam yatinam yata-cetasam abhito brahma-nirvanam vartate viditatmanam Before giving up this present body, if one is able to tolerate the urges of the material senses and check the force of desire and anger, he is a yogi and is happy in this world. (5.23) One who finds happiness with the Self, who rejoices the Self within, and who is illuminated by the Self-knowledge; such a yogi becomes one with Brahman and attains supreme nirvana. (5.24) Seers whose sins (or imperfections) are destroyed, whose doubts have been dispelled by knowledge, whose disciplined minds are attached with the Self, and who are engaged in the welfare of all beings attain Supreme Brahman. (5.25) A Self-realized person who is free from lust and anger, and who has subdued the mind and senses easily attains nirvana. (5.26) <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width=624 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=center bgColor=#ffffff>Originally Posted by Ganeshprasad At the time of death with steadfast mind and devotion; making the flow of Pranic impulse rise up (to the middle of two eye brows) by the power of yoga and holding there; attains the Supreme divine spirit. (See also 4.29, 5.27, and 6.13) (8.10) I shall briefly explain to you (the process to attain) that goal which the knowers of the Vedas call the imperishable; into which the ascetics, freed from attachment, enter; and desiring which people lead a life of celibacy. (8.11) Controlling all the (nine) doors of the body, the abode of consciousness; focusing the mind on the heart and Prana in the cerebrum, and engaged in yogic practice; (8.12) One who leaves the body while meditating on Brahman and uttering OM, the sacred monosyllable sound of Brahman, attains the Supreme goal. (8.13) </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>Quite true, yogi refers to a devotee of Lord as mentioned in various places. This is the procedure by which the pure devotees leave their bodies. Please see the context of these verses from 8.5-8.9. I think that you go by the currently circulating meaning of yogi thinking that the scriptures' meaning is the same which is actually quite different. Well I beg to differ not because yogi can not be referred us Bhakta just as devotion is not a property of a Bhakta, because no path can be chosen without devotion to it. Having said this, I accept the verse 8.5-8.9 refers to Bhakti but you fail to see verse 8.10-8.13 refers to yogic practice unless you think controlling prana, raising it in between the eye brows or studying Vedas, remaining celibate, to attain imperishable Brahman are practices common to followers of Bhakti. Nope. It is clearly stated in Bhagavad-Gita (verses 9.24, 8.15-21, 9.3, 7.15, 7.29-30, 14.26, 12.6-7) as well as sruti that only devotion to Vishnu knowing Him to be the Supreme can lead to liberation. The worship of Vishnu Himself can be done in various ways (the nine ways given in Srimad-Bhagavatam or Bhagavad-Gita 9.15 as you pointed out etc.). Not so fast these are your opinions only, Bhakti is one way and perhaps easy means to liberation where else Krishna does not discount other paths, all be it they may be more trouble some. Other then that he also in no uncertain terms answers Arjuns question in what other way can I worship you? Amongst many other thing he says he is Shankra amongst Rudra, I have no problem accepting that as in face value and if that was not enough this is what Bhagvat puran says 23. O lord, you are self-effulgent and supreme. You create this material world by your personal energy, and you assume the names Brahma, Visnu and Mahesvara when you act in creation, maintenance and annihilation. SB 4.6/45 O most auspicious lord, you have ordained the heavenly planets, the spiritual Vaikuntha planets and the impersonal Brahman sphere as the respective destinations of the performers of auspicious activities. Similarly, for others, who are miscreants, you have destined different kinds of hells which are horrible and ghastly. Yet sometimes it is found that their destinations are just the opposite. It is very difficult to ascertain the cause of this. 4.7/50-54 The lord said: The supreme cause of the universe, I am also Brahma (the creator) and Lord Shiva (the destroyer of the universe). I am the self, the lord and the witness, self effulgent and unqualified. Embracing my own Maya, consisting of the three gunas, it is I who create, protect and destroy the universe have assumed names appropriate to my functions, O Brahmana! It is in such a Brahman, the supreme sprit, who is one without a second, that the ignorant fool views Brahma, Rudra and other beings as distinct entities. SB 4.6.42: Lord Brahma said: My dear Lord Shiva, I know that you are the controller of the entire material manifestation, the combination father and mother of the cosmic manifestation, and the Supreme Brahman beyond the cosmic manifestation as well. I know you in that way. SB 8.7.20: The devas observed Lord Śiva sitting on the summit of Kailāsa Hill with his wife, Bhavānī, for the auspicious development of the three worlds. He was being worshiped by great saintly persons desiring liberation. The devas offered him their obeisances and prayers with great respect. Therefore when a devotee of Lord Shiva worship him as supreme and thus gain libretion in Mahesh dham Markand rishi became immortal worshiping Lord shiva. The famous Mrityunjaya-mantra of Shiva occurs both in Rigveda ( VII.59.12) and Yajurveda. The great mantra of Shiva, Panchakshari, appears already in Yajurveda, in the Rudradhyaya section of Taittiriya-samhita (IV.5.7) and Satarudriya of Vajasaneyi-samhita (Ch. 16,18). this is my last say on this thread, i know you have your opinion which would be different and i respect that. Haribol Jay Shiv Shankar har har maha dev hara Jai Shree Krishna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 11, 2007 Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 Amongst many other thing he says he is Shankra amongst Rudra, I have no problem accepting that as in face value and if that was not enough this is what Bhagvat puran says 23. O lord, you are self-effulgent and supreme. You create this material world by your personal energy, and you assume the names Brahma, Visnu and Mahesvara when you act in creation, maintenance and annihilation. SB 4.6/45 O most auspicious lord, you have ordained the heavenly planets, the spiritual Vaikuntha planets and the impersonal Brahman sphere as the respective destinations of the performers of auspicious activities. Similarly, for others, who are miscreants, you have destined different kinds of hells which are horrible and ghastly. Yet sometimes it is found that their destinations are just the opposite. It is very difficult to ascertain the cause of this. 4.7/50-54 The lord said: The supreme cause of the universe, I am also Brahma (the creator) and Lord Shiva (the destroyer of the universe). I am the self, the lord and the witness, self effulgent and unqualified. Embracing my own Maya, consisting of the three gunas, it is I who create, protect and destroy the universe have assumed names appropriate to my functions, O Brahmana! It is in such a Brahman, the supreme sprit, who is one without a second, that the ignorant fool views Brahma, Rudra and other beings as distinct entities. SB 4.6.42: Lord Brahma said: My dear Lord Shiva, I know that you are the controller of the entire material manifestation, the combination father and mother of the cosmic manifestation, and the Supreme Brahman beyond the cosmic manifestation as well. I know you in that way. Exactly. Krishna (Vishnu) himself says he is Shiva. I wonder why Vaishnavas ignore this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumedh Posted February 11, 2007 Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 Pranams But I will relate one particular game or play, the payers of Bhaktivedanta players regularly enacted, for the pleasure of us Hindus on MAHA SHIVRATRI DAY (which I believe is next Friday) the drama of lord Shiva running in fright from a demon, Is this how we honur Lord Shiva on the maha Sivratri day? And you call him greatest of Vishnu Bhakta. I shall not comment on this for the time being, since i am not conversant with the details of this. You are missing the point I am trying to make here. Devas worship is not condemned at all nor the Devas are at fault for being worship, even Lord Krishna is worshiped to enter in to heavenly planet it is this effort that is being condemned. Check 9.20/21 ... Well thanks, you see my point is not what the result of Deva worship brings, the fact that it is a legitimate Vedic practice and not to be laughed at or dismissed just because you have no use of it. I see your point, but think you have missed what was said before. It has already been stated that worship of other devataas is accepted knowing that it is actually meant for Krishna. See post #80 (quoting it partially here): In comparison, in the vaishnava philosophy worship of Deities is considered essential and worship of deities other than Vishnu is also accepted but not considering them as Supreme, and that worship of other deities considering them as Supreme would not lead to the ultimate goal. This is the point being made, that there is a proper method of worshipping devas and improper method as verse 9.23 clearly says. This is your sweet opinion only which a brahman worshiper would not accept. No opinion from my side, only quotes from Bhagavad-Gita. Objections to translations, or alternative translations which bring better samanvaya are welcome. Before giving up this present body, if one is able to tolerate the urges of the material senses and check the force of desire and anger, he is a yogi and is happy in this world. (5.23) One who finds happiness with the Self, who rejoices the Self within, and who is illuminated by the Self-knowledge; such a yogi becomes one with Brahman and attains supreme nirvana. (5.24) Seers whose sins (or imperfections) are destroyed, whose doubts have been dispelled by knowledge, whose disciplined minds are attached with the Self, and who are engaged in the welfare of all beings attain Supreme Brahman. (5.25) A Self-realized person who is free from lust and anger, and who has subdued the mind and senses easily attains nirvana. (5.26) Firstly Brahman refers to Krishna as known from many verses in Bhagavad-Gita like 14.26-27 as also from numerous other sruti/smriti statements, which is also confirmed by Arjuna in 10.12-15 also expressing the affirmation of Vyasadeva, Narada etc. Hence 5.10, 5.17 etc. are talking about attaining devotion unto Him. Indeed in 18.54 the Lord says that those who reach the brahma-bhutam stage attain pure transcendental devotion unto Him and that should be understood as the goal of various endevours of yogis given in 18.51-53. In other words the jnana, yoga and others given should be understood as different limbs of bhakti or means to achieve pure devotion. The main difference is that you consider the different activities recommended as different paths, while my opinion is that these different activities are aimed at fixing the mind on the Supreme Lord and thus attain devotion (this is also the opinion of acharyas like Madhvacharya, Sripad Ramanuja ...) and hence constitute the one path (as the Lord says in 5.4-6). Well I beg to differ not because yogi can not be referred us Bhakta just as devotion is not a property of a Bhakta, because no path can be chosen without devotion to it. Having said this, I accept the verse 8.5-8.9 refers to Bhakti but you fail to see verse 8.10-8.13 refers to yogic practice unless you think controlling prana, raising it in between the eye brows or studying Vedas, remaining celibate, to attain imperishable Brahman are practices common to followers of Bhakti. The point of this is to fix the mind on Supreme Lord (which i guess is devotion for Krishna), since a jiva will attain the state of being as in the mind at death without fail as 8.6 says. Not so fast these are your opinions only, Bhakti is one way and perhaps easy means to liberation where else Krishna does not discount other paths, all be it they may be more trouble some. Well, references for the same have been given. Bhakti is definitely not easy for it means constant uninterrupted and complete fixation on Krishna (as given in chapter 9 and others); gaining knowledge of Him, meditating on Him etc. are all meant to bring us to that state and conversely in that state one has pure knowledge of Him and devotion unto Him. In other words the various chapters of Gita should be seen as one continuum culminating in chapter 18 and not as describing different things in a discrete manner. Other then that he also in no uncertain terms answers Arjuns question in what other way can I worship you? Amongst many other thing he says he is Shankra amongst Rudra, That is about the opulences of the Lord where Arjuna wants to know of His various opulences so that he may be able to fix the mind on the Lord constantly. The various vibhutis then described should be taken to mean what they are (i.e. all as opulences of the Lord) else one may draw many other conclusions like ashvatthah tree is Krishna or gambling of cheats or winning vak in an argument etc. are Krishna. It only means that the basis of all that exists is Krishna as given in 10.39 and is clarified in 10.41-42 as also given before in 7.7 I have no problem accepting that as in face value and if that was not enough this is what Bhagvat puran says 23. O lord, you are self-effulgent and supreme. You create this material world by your personal energy, and you assume the names Brahma, Visnu and Mahesvara when you act in creation, maintenance and annihilation. SB 4.6/45 O most auspicious lord, you have ordained the heavenly planets, the spiritual Vaikuntha planets and the impersonal Brahman sphere as the respective destinations of the performers of auspicious activities. Similarly, for others, who are miscreants, you have destined different kinds of hells which are horrible and ghastly. Yet sometimes it is found that their destinations are just the opposite. It is very difficult to ascertain the cause of this. 4.7/50-54 The lord said: The supreme cause of the universe, I am also Brahma (the creator) and Lord Shiva (the destroyer of the universe). I am the self, the lord and the witness, self effulgent and unqualified. Embracing my own Maya, consisting of the three gunas, it is I who create, protect and destroy the universe have assumed names appropriate to my functions, O Brahmana! It is in such a Brahman, the supreme sprit, who is one without a second, that the ignorant fool views Brahma, Rudra and other beings as distinct entities. SB 4.6.42: Lord Brahma said: My dear Lord Shiva, I know that you are the controller of the entire material manifestation, the combination father and mother of the cosmic manifestation, and the Supreme Brahman beyond the cosmic manifestation as well. I know you in that way. SB 8.7.20: The devas observed Lord Śiva sitting on the summit of Kailāsa Hill with his wife, Bhavānī, for the auspicious development of the three worlds. He was being worshiped by great saintly persons desiring liberation. The devas offered him their obeisances and prayers with great respect. Therefore when a devotee of Lord Shiva worship him as supreme and thus gain libretion in Mahesh dham Let us not turn this into another Vishnu, Shiva discussion which was not really the point here. There are many other threads for that -- please add to those if required or in a new thread. With respect to samudra manthan episode, suffice to say that Rg Veda's version of the same is in different terms. haribol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 Something that at first sight might seem irrelevant, but on a closer look things might change... The Hollow Men T. S. Eliot (1925) I We are the hollow men We are the stuffed men Leaning together Headpiece filled with straw. Alas! Our dried voices, when We whisper together Are quiet and meaningless As wind in dry grass Or rats' feet over broken glass In our dry cellar Shape without form, shade without colour, Paralysed force, gesture without motion; Those who have crossed With direct eyes, to death's other Kingdom Remember us -- if at all -- not as lost Violent souls, but only As the hollow men The stuffed men. II Eyes I dare not meet in dreams In death's dream kingdom These do not appear: There, the eyes are Sunlight on a broken column There, is a tree swinging And voices are In the wind's singing More distant and more solemn Than a fading star. Let me be no nearer In death's dream kingdom Let me also wear Such deliberate disguises Rat's coat, crowskin, crossed staves In a field Behaving as the wind behaves No nearer -- Not that final meeting In the twilight kingdom III This is the dead land This is cactus land Here the stone images Are raised, here they receive The supplication of a dead man's hand Under the twinkle of a fading star. Is it like this In death's other kingdom Waking alone At the hour when we are Trembling with tenderness Lips that would kiss Form prayers to broken stone. IV The eyes are not here There are no eyes here In this valley of dying stars In this hollow valley This broken jaw of our lost kingdoms In this last of meeting places We grope together And avoid speech Gathered on this beach of the tumid river Sightless, unless The eyes reappear As the perpetual star Multifoliate rose Of death's twilight kingdom The hope only Of empty men. V Here we go round the prickly pear Prickly pear prickly pear Here we go round the prickly pear At five o'clock in the morning. Between the idea And the reality Between the motion And the act Falls the Shadow For Thine is the Kingdom Between the conception And the creation Between the emotion And the response Falls the Shadow Life is very long Between the desire And the spasm Between the potency And the existence Between the essence And the descent Falls the Shadow For Thine is the Kingdom For Thine is Life is For Thine is the This is the way the world ends This is the way the world ends This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper. 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.