Guest guest Posted July 10, 2008 Report Share Posted July 10, 2008 Respected Shri Shantanu ji, I never said that keeping fasts or trying to control one's hunger or any self-control techniques is a mandatory step towards Enlightenment. The main goal is Moksha, other things are just various ways of reaching the same goal. GOD would welcome every Soul in the same way whether that Soul reached HIM by Tapas, by meditation, by devotion, or by any technique. The technique is a free-will of that individual Soul. Also, I don't know, but atleast I don't agree that by self-control we mean control over one's body, because that's not your real Self. With Regards, Prabhat --- On Thu, 10/7/08, shanracer <no_reply > wrote: shanracer <no_reply > Re: THE VIRTUE CALLED SUFFERING. So we should be aware of our weakness, but awareness is not the same as obsession. If I cannot control my hunger its a weakness I should Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2008 Report Share Posted July 10, 2008 , Prabhat Gupta <suprabhat_1999 wrote: > > Respected Shri Aum ji, > > God never tells us to start finding faults in others even one reaches higher states. Dear Prabhat we are not finding faults here with anyone. This is an open forum where we can share each others' views. If my experiences does not match with yours, that does not mean i am on the wrong path. I presented my views.. if you attune with them take them.. or leave them. Nobody is forcing you to accept anything. Aum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2008 Report Share Posted July 10, 2008 Respected Shri Aum ji, Actually my reply was not aimed at you but that was my view in itself. Anyway, I would beg your pardon if you felt bad. With Regards, Prabhat --- On Thu, 10/7/08, aumji <no_reply > wrote: aumji <no_reply > If my experiences does not match with yours, that does not mean i am on the wrong path. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2008 Report Share Posted July 10, 2008 , " spbyoga9 " <spbyoga9 wrote: > > I am certainly against these so called tortures in the name of > Sadhnaa. > If they really want to show Matha your love i personally think > devote more time to Meditation which will be fruitful. But mind > never allows you to sit for long in meditation so in order to > escape that they feel torturing physical body is better. Even > Lord Buddha fasted and tortured his body and then gave all up > stating these tortures are a waste and not needed at all. Dear Sudhakar ji, this is very true. Buddha got enlightenment when he broke his fast and accepted " Kheer " from lady called Sujata. In gita Krishna says only those with moderate living are fit to be yogis. We all have to revolt against the hypocricy in the name of religion. Hinduism has degenerated during last centuries due to useless rituals and hypocricy. In YA i was shocked to see more than 70% hindus told Shiva linga means Penis of shiva !!! Of course all are progressing on the path towards truth, but a sadhaka has to see what is straight path towards truth and what is zig-zag. Best exmaple is Tantra philosophy. This philosophy is so great that even reading it one gets out of most of the doubts. But people with useless, sexual rituals and cheap siddhis, degenerated it so low that today Tantra is known as a sex technique by most of the people. We have to bring back the glorious teachings of our religion and remove all the hypocricy from it...be it Sati pratha, casteism, or religious hypocricy, self tortures, cheap miracles etc. Aum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2008 Report Share Posted July 10, 2008 >> HARE KRISHAN , HARE RAM > Please explain the shloka of gita where shri Krishna tells that > those who torture me, sitting in their soul, in the name of Tapas > are not fit to be Yogis.....before we discuss this subject further Sir ji main kuch na jaaanoooooo bas itna jaanoo ki yedi koi bhi mere Bhagwan Sri Krishan KO , PREM BHAV se CHAHE JAISE BHI poooje ( chahe o ulta khara ho , ya chahe Jokari hi kyon na kare par is bhav se ki Bhagwan Sri Krishan ko khus kar raha hai ...............)to mere Bhagwan Swayam Usko jnan de dete hain aur uski mukti bhi kar dete hain . yeh hi to unki vishesta hai . and the if you are referring the sloka 5-6 of chepter 17 Sir Ji than i think that is for Asuras ..............Hence you are right Sir Ji , ki saadhu roop main bhi rakshas ho sakte hain Hence Sir Ji than please through some light in the case of Ravana what kind of tapasvi he was .............................. Same as Lord Sri Krishan described in sloka 5-6 og chepter 17 or something else i request it to all the Sadhakas to share your views for the case of Ravana . HARE KRISHAN ,HARE KRISHAN ,KRISHAN KRISHAN ,HARE HARE,HARE RAM ,HARE RAM,.RAM RAM,HARE HARE Thanks HARE KRISHAN ,HARE KRISHAN ,KRISHAN KRISHAN ,HARE HARE ,HARE RAM ,HARE RAM ,RAM RAM ,HARE HARE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2008 Report Share Posted July 11, 2008 , " jitendra kumar " <jtin_ja wrote: >> > Hence Sir Ji than please through some light in the case of Ravana Dear Jitinderji, Ravan was a mahagyani and his Tapasya for Shiva is unparalleled. such Tapasvi when can not dissolve their ego and use their siddhis to further inflate their ego, God takes pity on them and by killing them, relieve them of their inflated ego...and they get Moksha. It is better to be an Asura than becoming a religious hypocrite. Surprisingly God always incarnated for Asura to kill them and to give them Moksha.. Why no Bhakta or gyani could force god to incarnate and give them Moksha ?? Aum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2008 Report Share Posted July 11, 2008 , Prabhat Gupta <suprabhat_1999 wrote: > Actually my reply was not aimed at you but that was my view in itself. Anyway, I would beg your pardon if you felt bad. > Dear Suprabhat, there is no question of feeling bad or getting hurt. We are sharing our views. You have understood the truth in one way, which i do not deny. Others are interpreting the truth in another way. Please continue the Satsang Love always Aum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2008 Report Share Posted July 11, 2008 Respected Shri Aum ji, GOD sometimes does incarnate to give Moksha to HIS bhaktas. The example can be quoted from the epic Ramayana in which Lord Ram freed Maa Ahilya (wife of The Sage Gautam Rishi) who was turned to stone by the Rishi's curse. But, GOD most of the time knows that a dedicated Sadhak/Bhakt will be able to transcend Maya by His devotion and will naturally come to HIM. Hence HE most of the time doesn't incarnate for freeing such devoted Souls. With Regards, Prabhat --- On Fri, 11/7/08, aumji <no_reply > wrote: aumji <no_reply > Explore your hobbies and interests. Go to http://in.promos./groups/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2008 Report Share Posted July 11, 2008 HARE KRISHAN ,HARE RAM > > It is better to be an Asura than becoming a religious hypocrite. > Thanks Sir Ji HARE KRISHAN ,HARE KRISHAN ,KRISHAN KRISHAN .HARE HARE ,HARE RAM ,HARE RAM ,RAM RAM,HARE HARE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2008 Report Share Posted July 11, 2008 Respected Shri Aum ji, I would like to say that an Asura can be termed as a non-religious hypocrite always showing his negative powers, making others afraid...so I don't know how is it better to be that. I think that everyone is growing and people who trying to show their magical powers and influence people (by attaining some Siddhis) are also growing. It's just that they are a bit immature (and need to work more). Siddhis are a tool given by GOD as and when required (in the way towards Realization). HE gives them because HE knows that a Sadhak might require them for further growth. Now it's the sole responsibility of the Sadhak whether to use them to grow or thrown back by misusing (under the influence of Maya). GOD just gives it and it's the Soul's free will to utilize it. If the Sadhak misuses them for material growth, he is deteorating. If he uses them properly for Spiritual Advancement, he is sure to advance further towards Moksha. In the end, it is he and only he who is the sufferer (positively or negatively). I don't know how can this bother or affect other Souls. With Regards, Prabhat --- On Fri, 11/7/08, aumji <no_reply > wrote: aumji <no_reply > Re: THE VIRTUE CALLED SUFFERING. Friday, 11 July, 2008, 10:06 AM @ s.com, " jitendra kumar " <jtin_ja > wrote: Ravan was a mahagyani and his Tapasya for Shiva is unparalleled. such Tapasvi when can not dissolve their ego and use their siddhis to further inflate their ego, God takes pity on them and by killing them, relieve them of their inflated ego...and they get Moksha. It is better to be an Asura than becoming a religious hypocrite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2008 Report Share Posted July 12, 2008 NAMO OM NARAYANAYA ! Aumji and other Sadhaks -- Pranams ; Why Bhaktas or Gjnanis could not force God to incarnate ? This is an interesting question . To the extent I can understand SRIMADBHAGAVADGITA incarnations of God occurring in every yuga must serve three objectives in the order 1)Parithranaya sadhuna 2)Vinashayacha dushkrutan and 3)Dharma samsthapanaya The first priority is protecting the righteous only - but every time a good man suffers if the Lord has to incarnate HE has to incarnate continuously without a break .But as is seen in Purana s and Epics even great Gjnani s do not lose their ego normally . Maa Draupadi did not lose her ego even while she was being undressed in open court. She was holding her saree tight against her chest in an attempt to protect her modesty. As long as she held her saree tight ,help did not arrive. But when when she left her hands up pleading total helplessness and surrendered in toto help arrived " AKSHAYAM " (endless). When Gajendra was fighting crocodile for ten thousand years help did not arrive. But once Gajendra in utter helplessness and totally tired pleaded " only YOU can save me " help arrived instantaneously. Mata Sita under the Ashoka tree suffered a lot ,shed tears,gave up food ,water or any other comfort. But only when she attempted the extreme step of hanging herself using her long hair as noose , Lord Hanuman spoke to Her and assured Her safety. Great Sages,Bhaktas, Gjnanis must lose their ego in toto before help arrives.The first person singular word in nominative or any other case displeases The Lord. My sadhana,my opinion,my money my prayer or I write,I speak etc remove God`s role. So He does not incarnate for me. " Did I not help others ? " is a question God never answers. The second priority is the destruction of the unrighteous.If every time someone comits a sin or mistake God has to incarnate , again He should incarnate indefinitely and continuously . That being the case Almighty gives a very long rope to the unrighteous. Only when things reach a pass does God incarnate. And the third one is establishing Dharma . This includes changing every one to the Dharmic path.Every one includes trees animals, mountains,oceans and all others. Establishing Dharma includes destroying the wicked if necessary. Ravan`s death and Vibhishan`s coronation is a way and karmically correct way of establishing the Dharma May I seek the feed back of all sadhaks? Thank you all ijswamy ~SWAMY http://gjnanaswarup.spaces.live.com/blog/ --- On Fri, 7/11/08, aumji <no_reply > wrote: aumji <no_reply > Re: THE VIRTUE CALLED SUFFERING. Friday, July 11, 2008, 12:36 AM @ s.com, " jitendra kumar " <jtin_ja > wrote: >> > Hence Sir Ji than please through some light in the case of Ravana Dear Jitinderji, Ravan was a mahagyani and his Tapasya for Shiva is unparalleled. such Tapasvi when can not dissolve their ego and use their siddhis to further inflate their ego, God takes pity on them and by killing them, relieve them of their inflated ego...and they get Moksha. It is better to be an Asura than becoming a religious hypocrite. Surprisingly God always incarnated for Asura to kill them and to give them Moksha.. Why no Bhakta or gyani could force god to incarnate and give them Moksha ?? Aum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2008 Report Share Posted July 12, 2008 Hari Om! God has universal love for all, the good and the bad. It is only out of pity for the Asuras to free them from the wretched life of ego, that God kills the Asuras and liberate their souls. For the good, there is no need for resorting to such drastic method. Hari Om Tat Sat! ulaganathan p aumji <no_reply > Friday, 11 July, 2008 10:06:02 AM Re: THE VIRTUE CALLED SUFFERING. @ s.com, " jitendra kumar " <jtin_ja > wrote: >> > Hence Sir Ji than please through some light in the case of Ravana Dear Jitinderji, Ravan was a mahagyani and his Tapasya for Shiva is unparalleled. such Tapasvi when can not dissolve their ego and use their siddhis to further inflate their ego, God takes pity on them and by killing them, relieve them of their inflated ego...and they get Moksha. It is better to be an Asura than becoming a religious hypocrite. Surprisingly God always incarnated for Asura to kill them and to give them Moksha.. Why no Bhakta or gyani could force god to incarnate and give them Moksha ?? Aum Meet people who discuss and share your passions. Go to http://in.promos./groups/bestof/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 17, 2008 Report Share Posted July 17, 2008 I've been away for a while and am just catching up with the old emails, so you must forgive me for replying to an old email. As a silent learner, I've also benefitted more than I can say from this forum. I couldn't agree with you more that adding to your suffering is not much use in itself as a saadhana. However, wouldn't you say that if the goal is to reduce 'body consciousness' then suffering has a role to play. If through suffering you are able to realize that our material pleasures are as nothing then you've made progress. Renunciates/Saadhus give up material wealth and take on a lot of hardships just to enable them to get to the point where their only focus in on God. The point to understand when we look at someone thats standing on one foot for 10 years is not that he needs a place in some record book, but that our perspective on what the human body and mind can do is limited. We shouldn't be marvelling at these achievements, but rather understand that we limit ourselves by our belief systems (here I mean our beliefs about ourselves - not God). Someone earlier said that once a Saadhak is able to achieve a certain level of meditation - sleep, rest etc becomes unneccesary. The mind/God controls the body of a Yogi. All these demonstrations are a sign of a person's mastery over his/her body. If you relish suffering (like some of the 'penitants' of the medieval Spanish Inquisition) then you're hurting your spirit as well as your body. If you lose sight of God and constantly focus on the suffering (ie you are not able to raise yourself above your body focus) then you've achieved nothing. Most people fall into the first or second category. Hence for most of us, taking on intense tapas is not productive. Suffering should be differentiated from discipline, we've different pain thresholds, and initially we need to push our body in order to achieve discipline. For instance if you want to be able to meditate for 2-3 hours. We must be disciplined and try to improve a little every day. My 2C. Rgds , shanracer <no_reply wrote: > > And this is the key point Sudhakarji- life of Sadhak is already Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2008 Report Share Posted July 18, 2008 , satishvijayan <no_reply wrote: > > If you relish suffering (like some of the 'penitants' of the medieval > Spanish Inquisition) then you're hurting your spirit as well as your > body. If you lose sight of God and constantly focus on the suffering > (ie you are not able to raise yourself above your body focus) then > you've achieved nothing. Most people fall into the first or second > category. Hence for most of us, taking on intense tapas is not > productive. > > Thanks Satish, this is exactly what i wished to say. Sufferings for siddhis or to show to people or to satisfy the ego are not required in Sadhna Whatever is our share of pains, we are surely going to get it... yet we should not yearn for it. Welcome back to our satsang and we hope to hear from you more often love Aum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2008 Report Share Posted July 18, 2008 Well said Satish, thanks a lot... Regards, Prabhat --- On Thu, 17/7/08, satishvijayan <no_reply > wrote: satishvijayan <no_reply > Re: THE VIRTUE CALLED SUFFERING. Thursday, 17 July, 2008, 7:32 PM 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.