Rudrakshas; this response does not talk about Rudrakshas!

January 1, 2007

I think there is perhaps a subtle, psychic energy which is taken into

consideration as well. We are not merely this gross physical body. So

even if you follow what sree ven has mentioned, I don't think you can

protect yourself from whatever pollution is done to your psychic body

by coming in contact with a woman having undergone menstration within

the Sastrik-ly mentioned three day period.

The words of SAstra are immortal and as applicable as they were when

they were first written. Our Vaidik culture comes directly from svayam

bhagavAn Himself, therefore how could he compose something that is

obsolete if He is eternal. This can NEVER be possible.

vedic astrology, sree ven <jyothishishya

wrote:

>

> Hello, here is my penny worth of input (known for many of us already):

> The 'untouchability' and 'pollution' aspects are purely based on

hygeinc viewpoint. During those days (and now as well), the best

defense against infections is a simple, easy, "others keep off or

maintain appreciable distance" from people who are either

infected/susceptible to infection or too weak / new to withstand

infection (such as newborns and their mothers).

>

> All the untouchability aspects of past including the pathetic part

of caste sytem is based on this. While it was well known among the

knowledgeable/ wise/observant folks universally that the best bet to

avoid diseases and infections is to avoid physical contact with people

working with corpses (animal/human), excrements (toilet cleaners) etc,

one culture chose to improve the overall hygeinic aspects by improving

the working/living conditions for one and all, like proper (perhaps

underground) sewage system, eventually all the way up to more

effective sanitary napkins (recently) etc, other one just stopped at

dedicating certain people to do 'menial jobs' and keeping the

'polluted people' away in segregated tenements, more often not

explaining (deliberately?) why this is/was done. So the thumb rule

became, maintain a big physical distance from very holy and menial-job

people; people at the top of the caste system and people at the lowest

end of the system. If some one has a

> different/ opposing take on this, I would request him/her to

explain why for example, Manu shastra even tells the exact distances

to be maintained among people of different castes ...

>

> This also explains why in Hinduism there is too much insisting on

washing oneself (ablutions) and and especially hands as many times

in a day as possible, especially when one gets back home from

'outside' and before any holy practice so that the prasad one gives,

for example, does not inadvertantly carry germs from the giver's hand.

>

> A (not 'THE' perhaps) main purpose of mala is to help count of

mantra recitation such as ashtothara-108 (the LCM - least common

multiple) between 12 houses and 27 Nakshatras. Since we handle the

mala with fingers, and wear it on person all the time, it makes a lot

of sense to keep them away from germs.

>

> Although it took a Louis Pasteur to officially announce the impact

of germs, and how absurdly doctors in those days were spreading

diseases by virtue of unwashed, bloodstained coats (a proud possession

that showed a patient how many surgeries they have performed and how

many bleeding patients they have taken care of, so far!) people knew

it based on observation, all along, at least in India, to my knowledge.

>

> Regards.

>

> Raj Bhardwaj <rajbhardwaj1949

> vedic astrology

> Monday, January 1, 2007 12:18:05 PM

> [vedic astrology] Re: Rudrakshas

>

> Dear Ila,

>

> This rule of not allowing people to visit the new born and keeping

> the new born and the mother confined in one place for about 40 days

> is a very old practice,when it was believed that the mother and the

> child should be saved from bad drishti of outsiders(not the close

> family members). Also it was considered that like the time of

> monthly periods, at the time of delivery also, the female is like an

> untouchable (in some parts of our country). Perhaps keeping this in

> view, in many books it is given that one who is wearing Rudraksh,

> should not go near a new born.But in the modern times, this system

> has almost vanished. In many forums of Astrologers it has been

> argued that how a mother ,who is medium of God to bring the human

> beings on this eartch can be untouchable. Can Earth ever be

> untouchable ?

>

> 2. However, as I have experimented, I recommend wearing of a 4 Mukhi

> Rudraksh,(especiall y for the ladies who had been facing

> miscarriages) , in their waist region ,and insist that doctors should

> not remove it at the time of delivery. I take back the Rudrakh after

> the couple is able to revisit me. I purify the Rudrakhs and give it

> to the next needy couple. Even the doctors at few hospitals in

> Chandigarh are amazed , as they found that Rudraksh has helped in

> having normal deliveries, even when they were expecting some

> complications.

>

> 3. Yes, as a general rule, I advise people that in case they have to

> visit a hospital or cemetry,crematory, they should recharge their

> Rudrakshas and Stones, after they come back home.

>

> 4. For maintaining the magnetic field of the Rudrakshas, I sugget

> dipping them in Mustard Oil for 10-15 minutes, then clean with a

> soft brush to remove dirt,residuals of soap,talcom powder etc ,and

> wash again with Ganga Jal or fresh and unboiled milk, once a month

> and again wear it. This has been working well with me , as I carry

> out the check of magnetic power of Rudraksh,every month, and also

> the magnetic power of the wearer. This is a very iteresting process

> indeed.

>

> R K BHARDWAJ

> SH Aditya Jyotish Kendra

> 31/GH-9,Mansa Devi Complex

> PANCHKULA

> Phone:-4646175 , 4636175

>

> vedic astrology, Ila devi dasi MVS

> <ila_dd_mvs@ ...> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Vikrant Prabhu

> >

> > I have heard many of these rules before, and some are common

> sense, like keeping beads clean and sacred. But please tell me the

> reason why a rudraksha should not be worn when visiting a newborn

> baby? And what about a mother who has just delivered - should she

> not wear any rudraksha? Many women wear rudrakshas for protection

> of the child in the womb...so should these be removed during

> childbirth and after? Until what age must the child be before

> mother can wear rudraksha? Please explain more on this.

> >

> > Thanks

> > Ila

> >

>

January 1, 2007

B-}

vedic astrology, sree ven <jyothishishya

wrote:

>

> Hello, here is my penny worth of input (known for many of us

already):

> The 'untouchability' and 'pollution' aspects are purely based on

hygeinc viewpoint. During those days (and now as well), the best

defense against infections is a simple, easy, "others keep off or

maintain appreciable distance" from people who are either

infected/susceptible to infection or too weak / new to withstand

infection (such as newborns and their mothers).

>

> All the untouchability aspects of past including the pathetic part

of caste sytem is based on this. While it was well known among the

knowledgeable/ wise/observant folks universally that the best bet to

avoid diseases and infections is to avoid physical contact with

people working with corpses (animal/human), excrements (toilet

cleaners) etc, one culture chose to improve the overall hygeinic

aspects by improving the working/living conditions for one and all,

like proper (perhaps underground) sewage system, eventually all the

way up to more effective sanitary napkins (recently) etc, other one

just stopped at dedicating certain people to do 'menial jobs' and

keeping the 'polluted people' away in segregated tenements, more

often not explaining (deliberately?) why this is/was done. So the

thumb rule became, maintain a big physical distance from very holy

and menial-job people; people at the top of the caste system and

people at the lowest end of the system. If some one has a

> different/ opposing take on this, I would request him/her to

explain why for example, Manu shastra even tells the exact distances

to be maintained among people of different castes ...

>

> This also explains why in Hinduism there is too much insisting on

washing oneself (ablutions) and and especially hands as many times

in a day as possible, especially when one gets back home

from 'outside' and before any holy practice so that the prasad one

gives, for example, does not inadvertantly carry germs from the

giver's hand.

>

> A (not 'THE' perhaps) main purpose of mala is to help count of

mantra recitation such as ashtothara-108 (the LCM - least common

multiple) between 12 houses and 27 Nakshatras. Since we handle the

mala with fingers, and wear it on person all the time, it makes a lot

of sense to keep them away from germs.

>

> Although it took a Louis Pasteur to officially announce the impact

of germs, and how absurdly doctors in those days were spreading

diseases by virtue of unwashed, bloodstained coats (a proud

possession that showed a patient how many surgeries they have

performed and how many bleeding patients they have taken care of, so

far!) people knew it based on observation, all along, at least in

India, to my knowledge.

>

> Regards.

>

> Raj Bhardwaj <rajbhardwaj1949

> vedic astrology

> Monday, January 1, 2007 12:18:05 PM

> [vedic astrology] Re: Rudrakshas

>

> Dear Ila,

>

> This rule of not allowing people to visit the new born and keeping

> the new born and the mother confined in one place for about 40 days

> is a very old practice,when it was believed that the mother and the

> child should be saved from bad drishti of outsiders(not the close

> family members). Also it was considered that like the time of

> monthly periods, at the time of delivery also, the female is like

an

> untouchable (in some parts of our country). Perhaps keeping this in

> view, in many books it is given that one who is wearing Rudraksh,

> should not go near a new born.But in the modern times, this system

> has almost vanished. In many forums of Astrologers it has been

> argued that how a mother ,who is medium of God to bring the human

> beings on this eartch can be untouchable. Can Earth ever be

> untouchable ?

>

> 2. However, as I have experimented, I recommend wearing of a 4

Mukhi

> Rudraksh,(especiall y for the ladies who had been facing

> miscarriages) , in their waist region ,and insist that doctors

should

> not remove it at the time of delivery. I take back the Rudrakh

after

> the couple is able to revisit me. I purify the Rudrakhs and give it

> to the next needy couple. Even the doctors at few hospitals in

> Chandigarh are amazed , as they found that Rudraksh has helped in

> having normal deliveries, even when they were expecting some

> complications.

>

> 3. Yes, as a general rule, I advise people that in case they have

to

> visit a hospital or cemetry,crematory, they should recharge their

> Rudrakshas and Stones, after they come back home.

>

> 4. For maintaining the magnetic field of the Rudrakshas, I sugget

> dipping them in Mustard Oil for 10-15 minutes, then clean with a

> soft brush to remove dirt,residuals of soap,talcom powder etc ,and

> wash again with Ganga Jal or fresh and unboiled milk, once a month

> and again wear it. This has been working well with me , as I carry

> out the check of magnetic power of Rudraksh,every month, and also

> the magnetic power of the wearer. This is a very iteresting process

> indeed.

>

> R K BHARDWAJ

> SH Aditya Jyotish Kendra

> 31/GH-9,Mansa Devi Complex

> PANCHKULA

> Phone:-4646175 , 4636175

>

> vedic astrology, Ila devi dasi MVS

> <ila_dd_mvs@ ...> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Vikrant Prabhu

> >

> > I have heard many of these rules before, and some are common

> sense, like keeping beads clean and sacred. But please tell me the

> reason why a rudraksha should not be worn when visiting a newborn

> baby? And what about a mother who has just delivered - should she

> not wear any rudraksha? Many women wear rudrakshas for protection

> of the child in the womb...so should these be removed during

> childbirth and after? Until what age must the child be before

> mother can wear rudraksha? Please explain more on this.

> >

> > Thanks

> > Ila

> >

>

January 2, 2007

Acyutanandadasa, you say that, "Our Vaidik culture comes directly from svayam

bhagavAn Himself, therefore how could he compose something that is

obsolete if He is eternal. This can NEVER be possible."

If you say ALL the words of sastra that we have today are composed by God himself, naturally there is nothing to discuss!! Who are we to question God himself? But the question is about the validity of the assumption that all we have today in the name of Sastras (incl. Manu Dharma sastra) is authenticated by none less than God himself.

If I talk about abominable practices such as untouchability, Sati, social inequality etc (which were conveniently claimed by those who took advantage of such claims to be a part of God-given-sastras) -pl. let us not pretend such things did not happen- now you might back out conveniently by disowning them as not part of legit sastra; or do you still maintain?!

Honestly speaking, all cultures, not just Vaidik culture, comes directly from God (for whatever the terms 'directly', 'come' and 'God' mean. Tell me, which culture comes from devil? Or without God's hands in it?

God is perfect; by definition. Are you maintaining that 'Vaidic culture' with all the shebang aspects is perfect?

Ironically, Sastra means science; I regret to say that I can not not to 'God said it- so I wont analyze it' as a scientific approach. If you say something is a religious commandment, there are no arguments; but if you call it science, then it should make sense. But then, it is me! Looks like, each one perhaps can have his/her own definition of science, let alone "God's words'!!

Again, my idea was to bring out the goodness and wisdom of my ancestors (regarding hygiene) etc, with a level headed approach to the society's implementation of it.

acyutanandadasa <acyutanandadasa >

vedic astrology

Monday, January 1, 2007 1:59:06 PM

[vedic astrology] Re: Rudrakshas; this response does not talk about Rudrakshas!

I think there is perhaps a subtle, psychic energy which is taken into

consideration as well. We are not merely this gross physical body. So

even if you follow what sree ven has mentioned, I don't think you can

protect yourself from whatever pollution is done to your psychic body

by coming in contact with a woman having undergone menstration within

the Sastrik-ly mentioned three day period.

The words of SAstra are immortal and as applicable as they were when

they were first written. Our Vaidik culture comes directly from svayam

bhagavAn Himself, therefore how could he compose something that is

obsolete if He is eternal. This can NEVER be possible.

vedic astrology, sree ven <jyothishishya@ ...>

wrote:

>

> Hello, here is my penny worth of input (known for many of us already):

> The 'untouchability' and 'pollution' aspects are purely based on

hygeinc viewpoint. During those days (and now as well), the best

defense against infections is a simple, easy, "others keep off or

maintain appreciable distance" from people who are either

infected/susceptibl e to infection or too weak / new to withstand

infection (such as newborns and their mothers).

>

> All the untouchability aspects of past including the pathetic part

of caste sytem is based on this. While it was well known among the

knowledgeable/ wise/observant folks universally that the best bet to

avoid diseases and infections is to avoid physical contact with people

working with corpses (animal/human) , excrements (toilet cleaners) etc,

one culture chose to improve the overall hygeinic aspects by improving

the working/living conditions for one and all, like proper (perhaps

underground) sewage system, eventually all the way up to more

effective sanitary napkins (recently) etc, other one just stopped at

dedicating certain people to do 'menial jobs' and keeping the

'polluted people' away in segregated tenements, more often not

explaining (deliberately? ) why this is/was done. So the thumb rule

became, maintain a big physical distance from very holy and menial-job

people; people at the top of the caste system and people at the lowest

end of the system. If some one has a

> different/ opposing take on this, I would request him/her to

explain why for example, Manu shastra even tells the exact distances

to be maintained among people of different castes ...

>

> This also explains why in Hinduism there is too much insisting on

washing oneself (ablutions) and and especially hands as many times

in a day as possible, especially when one gets back home from

'outside' and before any holy practice so that the prasad one gives,

for example, does not inadvertantly carry germs from the giver's hand.

>

> A (not 'THE' perhaps) main purpose of mala is to help count of

mantra recitation such as ashtothara-108 (the LCM - least common

multiple) between 12 houses and 27 Nakshatras. Since we handle the

mala with fingers, and wear it on person all the time, it makes a lot

of sense to keep them away from germs.

>

> Although it took a Louis Pasteur to officially announce the impact

of germs, and how absurdly doctors in those days were spreading

diseases by virtue of unwashed, bloodstained coats (a proud possession

that showed a patient how many surgeries they have performed and how

many bleeding patients they have taken care of, so far!) people knew

it based on observation, all along, at least in India, to my knowledge.

>

> Regards.

>

> Raj Bhardwaj <rajbhardwaj1949@ ...>