Guest guest Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 Dear Arjunji this is a good post except that it doesnt fit our age anymore as men and women need each other to push their careers, opportunities on the fast track and all is fair in love and war is what shakesphere said now u can add in business, politics or just in life as such when its a rats race we have to live like rats but surely for those who want to choose the path of liberation, service and can afford to live all by himself on natures offerings of good food, shelter it is ok for anyone living in the mundane world options r becoming less to live a orderly, honest, chaste life so it is live and let live and when we blame women we must also put the men in same basket as they r the ones giving it just like a match stick and fire relationship has many ends- a cooking or heating source or a destroying source when uncontrolled best wishes panditarjun2004 <panditarjun2004 wrote: dear friends following is taken from the 29th chapter titled " women's nature " from uma samhita in shivapurana. this particular story is available in volume 3 of the english shivapurana pages 1551 to 1554 published by motilalbanarsidas. ============quote============ vyasa says: o sage sanatkumara, please narrate succinctly what was mentioned by pancachuda that women are despicable. sanatkumara says: i shall explain the nature of women as it is, listen to it, merely hearing which results in detachment. women are lightminded. they are at the root of all troubles. attachment towards them shall not be pursued by wakeful persons who desire liberation. in this respect they quote an ancient tradition, the conversation of narada with the unchaste woman pancacuda (an apsara). formerly while the intelligent celestial sage narada was wandering in the worlds he saw the beautiful celestial damsel pancacuda. naradas askes her to narrate the nature of women for the benefit of the world. pancacuda (the woman apsara) says: this is the defect in women. even women of noble families, women with husbands and women endowed with beauty do not stand within the limits of decency. there is none more sinning and more sinful than women. women are at the root of all sins. they might have husbands of good knoweldge, of ample wealth, of great comeliness and pleasing to them. but when they get opportunities for erring, they do not wait. this is the evil practice of all of us women, that we resort to sinful men casting off all shame and shyness. women love only those persons who solicit their company, who approach them intimately and who render them a little bit of service. women usually do not observe the limitations of conventional decency. if at all they stand by them with their husbands, it is because no man makes advances to them or because they are afraid of their husbands. even women of noble families aspire for the life of lascivious women who in their prime of youth adorned with lovable ornaments and beautiful wearing garments move about frivolously. even the women who are honoured well, loved intimately and looked after with care become attached to hunchbacks, blind men, imbeciles and dwarfs. they become attached to lame and even despicable persons. there is none in the world who cannot be approached by women with solicitations of lust. if women do not get men of their dalliance they begin to indulge in abnormal sexual activity with one another. they do not stnad by their husbands. women become desperate when they do not get men, when they are afraid of servants, when they are frightened of being killed or imprisoned. because they indulge in sexual intercourse as they please they are fickleminded, of evil deeds and emotionally incomprehensible even to an intelligent man. fire is not satiated with the logs of wood it consumes, the ocean is not satiated with the rivers that flow into it. the god of death is not satiated with the living beings he kills and women are not satiated with the number of men they cohabit with. there is another secret of all women that immediately on seeing a man their vaginal passage begins to exude slimy secretions. on seeing a man fresh and clean from his bath with his body perfumed with sweet scents, the vaginal passage of women begins to exude like water dripping from a leather bag. women do not brook their husbands who may give all that they love, who may honour and console them and who may look after them well. women do not remain satisfied and contented so much with simple loves and pleasures and with ornaments and money as with illicit love purused by them with other men. women can be kept equally balanced against all these put together viz. god of death, yama, antaka, patala, the submarine fire, the sharp edge of razor, poison, serpent and fire. ever since the five elements, the world, the men and women were created by brahma, the defect lies in women always. sanatkumara says: o vyasa, thus the nature of women as mentioned by a woman pancacuda has been narrated to you. what other cause of detachment do you wish to hear. =============unquote========= the above story also appears in mahabharata where bhishma narrates this for the reason of detachment from women. sage narada narrating this story as a cause of detachment is also found in other puranas. many sages and saints narrate this story to their disciples who are interested in liberation and detachment from women. members may remember a couple of mails earlier by me where pativratas brinda and tulasi gave curses to lord vishnu which highlight that a pativrata is so rare and so powerful that even gods are afraid of a pativrata. with best wishes and blessings pandit arjun www.rudraksharemedy.com Never miss a thing. Make your homepage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 Dear Friends, These are the weaknesses enumerated by a woman herself. It is good that we are kept reminded of them now and then. I would love to hear some one enumerate similar weaknesses of men. Such excerpts help us keep straight on the noble path so valued in India over centuries. Sure we should get modern and accommodate modern views and we may not be able to live by the values held so pious by our forefathers, but we should not lose sight of them. Sincerely, Roopak , Prashant Kumar G B <gbp_kumar wrote: > > Dear Arjunji > > this is a good post except that it doesnt fit our age anymore as men and women need each other to push their careers, opportunities on the fast track and all is fair in love and war is what shakesphere said now u can add in business, politics or just in life as such > > when its a rats race we have to live like rats > > but surely for those who want to choose the path of liberation, service and can afford to live all by himself on natures offerings of good food, shelter it is ok > for anyone living in the mundane world options r becoming less to live a orderly, honest, chaste life so it is live and let live > > and when we blame women we must also put the men in same basket as they r the ones giving it > > just like a match stick and fire relationship has many ends- a cooking or heating source or a destroying source when uncontrolled > > best wishes > > panditarjun2004 <panditarjun2004 wrote: dear friends > > following is taken from the 29th chapter titled " women's nature " from > uma samhita in shivapurana. this particular story is available in > volume 3 of the english shivapurana pages 1551 to 1554 published by > motilalbanarsidas. > > ============quote============ > vyasa says: o sage sanatkumara, please narrate succinctly what was > mentioned by pancachuda that women are despicable. > > sanatkumara says: i shall explain the nature of women as it is, listen > to it, merely hearing which results in detachment. women are > lightminded. they are at the root of all troubles. attachment towards > them shall not be pursued by wakeful persons who desire liberation. in > this respect they quote an ancient tradition, the conversation of > narada with the unchaste woman pancacuda (an apsara). formerly while > the intelligent celestial sage narada was wandering in the worlds he > saw the beautiful celestial damsel pancacuda. naradas askes her to > narrate the nature of women for the benefit of the world. > > pancacuda (the woman apsara) says: > > this is the defect in women. even women of noble families, women with > husbands and women endowed with beauty do not stand within the limits > of decency. > there is none more sinning and more sinful than women. > women are at the root of all sins. > they might have husbands of good knoweldge, of ample wealth, of great > comeliness and pleasing to them. but when they get opportunities for > erring, they do not wait. > this is the evil practice of all of us women, that we resort to sinful > men casting off all shame and shyness. > women love only those persons who solicit their company, who approach > them intimately and who render them a little bit of service. > women usually do not observe the limitations of conventional decency. > if at all they stand by them with their husbands, it is because no man > makes advances to them or because they are afraid of their husbands. > even women of noble families aspire for the life of lascivious women > who in their prime of youth adorned with lovable ornaments and > beautiful wearing garments move about frivolously. > even the women who are honoured well, loved intimately and looked after > with care become attached to hunchbacks, blind men, imbeciles and > dwarfs. > they become attached to lame and even despicable persons. > there is none in the world who cannot be approached by women with > solicitations of lust. > if women do not get men of their dalliance they begin to indulge in > abnormal sexual activity with one another. they do not stnad by their > husbands. > women become desperate when they do not get men, when they are afraid > of servants, when they are frightened of being killed or imprisoned. > because they indulge in sexual intercourse as they please they are > fickleminded, of evil deeds and emotionally incomprehensible even to an > intelligent man. > fire is not satiated with the logs of wood it consumes, the ocean is > not satiated with the rivers that flow into it. the god of death is > not satiated with the living beings he kills and women are not satiated > with the number of men they cohabit with. > there is another secret of all women that immediately on seeing a man > their vaginal passage begins to exude slimy secretions. > on seeing a man fresh and clean from his bath with his body perfumed > with sweet scents, the vaginal passage of women begins to exude like > water dripping from a leather bag. > women do not brook their husbands who may give all that they love, who > may honour and console them and who may look after them well. > women do not remain satisfied and contented so much with simple loves > and pleasures and with ornaments and money as with illicit love purused > by them with other men. > women can be kept equally balanced against all these put together viz. > god of death, yama, antaka, patala, the submarine fire, the sharp edge > of razor, poison, serpent and fire. > ever since the five elements, the world, the men and women were created > by brahma, the defect lies in women always. > > sanatkumara says: o vyasa, thus the nature of women as mentioned by a > woman pancacuda has been narrated to you. what other cause of > detachment do you wish to hear. > =============unquote========= > > the above story also appears in mahabharata where bhishma narrates this > for the reason of detachment from women. sage narada narrating this > story as a cause of detachment is also found in other puranas. many > sages and saints narrate this story to their disciples who are > interested in liberation and detachment from women. > > members may remember a couple of mails earlier by me where pativratas > brinda and tulasi gave curses to lord vishnu which highlight that a > pativrata is so rare and so powerful that even gods are afraid of a > pativrata. > > with best wishes and blessings > pandit arjun > www.rudraksharemedy.com > > > Never miss a thing. Make your homepage. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 dear roopakji thanks for your feedback since you read the story from shivapurana properly and understood its essence positively. with best wishes and blessings pandit arjun www.rudraksharemedy.com , " roopak.rastogi " <roopak.rastogi wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > These are the weaknesses enumerated by a woman herself. It is good > that we are kept reminded of them now and then. I would love to hear > some one enumerate similar weaknesses of men. > > Such excerpts help us keep straight on the noble path so valued in > India over centuries. > > Sure we should get modern and accommodate modern views and we may not > be able to live by the values held so pious by our forefathers, but > we should not lose sight of them. > > Sincerely, > > Roopak > > > > , Prashant Kumar G B > <gbp_kumar@> wrote: > > > > Dear Arjunji > > > > this is a good post except that it doesnt fit our age anymore as > men and women need each other to push their careers, opportunities on > the fast track and all is fair in love and war is what shakesphere > said now u can add in business, politics or just in life as such > > > > when its a rats race we have to live like rats > > > > but surely for those who want to choose the path of liberation, > service and can afford to live all by himself on natures offerings of > good food, shelter it is ok > > for anyone living in the mundane world options r becoming less to > live a orderly, honest, chaste life so it is live and let live > > > > and when we blame women we must also put the men in same basket as > they r the ones giving it > > > > just like a match stick and fire relationship has many ends- a > cooking or heating source or a destroying source when uncontrolled > > > > best wishes > > > > panditarjun2004 <panditarjun2004@> > wrote: dear friends > > > > following is taken from the 29th chapter titled " women's nature " > from > > uma samhita in shivapurana. this particular story is available in > > volume 3 of the english shivapurana pages 1551 to 1554 published > by > > motilalbanarsidas. > > > > ============quote============ > > vyasa says: o sage sanatkumara, please narrate succinctly what was > > mentioned by pancachuda that women are despicable. > > > > sanatkumara says: i shall explain the nature of women as it is, > listen > > to it, merely hearing which results in detachment. women are > > lightminded. they are at the root of all troubles. attachment > towards > > them shall not be pursued by wakeful persons who desire > liberation. in > > this respect they quote an ancient tradition, the conversation of > > narada with the unchaste woman pancacuda (an apsara). formerly > while > > the intelligent celestial sage narada was wandering in the worlds > he > > saw the beautiful celestial damsel pancacuda. naradas askes her > to > > narrate the nature of women for the benefit of the world. > > > > pancacuda (the woman apsara) says: > > > > this is the defect in women. even women of noble families, women > with > > husbands and women endowed with beauty do not stand within the > limits > > of decency. > > there is none more sinning and more sinful than women. > > women are at the root of all sins. > > they might have husbands of good knoweldge, of ample wealth, of > great > > comeliness and pleasing to them. but when they get opportunities > for > > erring, they do not wait. > > this is the evil practice of all of us women, that we resort to > sinful > > men casting off all shame and shyness. > > women love only those persons who solicit their company, who > approach > > them intimately and who render them a little bit of service. > > women usually do not observe the limitations of conventional > decency. > > if at all they stand by them with their husbands, it is because no > man > > makes advances to them or because they are afraid of their > husbands. > > even women of noble families aspire for the life of lascivious > women > > who in their prime of youth adorned with lovable ornaments and > > beautiful wearing garments move about frivolously. > > even the women who are honoured well, loved intimately and looked > after > > with care become attached to hunchbacks, blind men, imbeciles and > > dwarfs. > > they become attached to lame and even despicable persons. > > there is none in the world who cannot be approached by women with > > solicitations of lust. > > if women do not get men of their dalliance they begin to indulge > in > > abnormal sexual activity with one another. they do not stnad by > their > > husbands. > > women become desperate when they do not get men, when they are > afraid > > of servants, when they are frightened of being killed or > imprisoned. > > because they indulge in sexual intercourse as they please they are > > fickleminded, of evil deeds and emotionally incomprehensible even > to an > > intelligent man. > > fire is not satiated with the logs of wood it consumes, the ocean > is > > not satiated with the rivers that flow into it. the god of death > is > > not satiated with the living beings he kills and women are not > satiated > > with the number of men they cohabit with. > > there is another secret of all women that immediately on seeing a > man > > their vaginal passage begins to exude slimy secretions. > > on seeing a man fresh and clean from his bath with his body > perfumed > > with sweet scents, the vaginal passage of women begins to exude > like > > water dripping from a leather bag. > > women do not brook their husbands who may give all that they love, > who > > may honour and console them and who may look after them well. > > women do not remain satisfied and contented so much with simple > loves > > and pleasures and with ornaments and money as with illicit love > purused > > by them with other men. > > women can be kept equally balanced against all these put together > viz. > > god of death, yama, antaka, patala, the submarine fire, the sharp > edge > > of razor, poison, serpent and fire. > > ever since the five elements, the world, the men and women were > created > > by brahma, the defect lies in women always. > > > > sanatkumara says: o vyasa, thus the nature of women as mentioned > by a > > woman pancacuda has been narrated to you. what other cause of > > detachment do you wish to hear. > > =============unquote========= > > > > the above story also appears in mahabharata where bhishma narrates > this > > for the reason of detachment from women. sage narada narrating > this > > story as a cause of detachment is also found in other puranas. > many > > sages and saints narrate this story to their disciples who are > > interested in liberation and detachment from women. > > > > members may remember a couple of mails earlier by me where > pativratas > > brinda and tulasi gave curses to lord vishnu which highlight that > a > > pativrata is so rare and so powerful that even gods are afraid of > a > > pativrata. > > > > with best wishes and blessings > > pandit arjun > > www.rudraksharemedy.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Never miss a thing. Make your homepage. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 dear prashantji thanks for your positive feedback. your observation is correct that this is what was written by the sages thousands of years ago and may look primitive to modern women. but it is what is there in the puranas and even in mahabharata. similar and more strict orthodox things were mentioned in the old testament of the bible. just because generations or living habits have changed, neither hindus have deleted these chapters from puranas nor christians deleted these rules from old testament. puranas are treated with same holiness even today as they were earlier. similarly the holy bible remains the same holy both for old as well as new testaments even today. my mail was written in simple english language and emphasised several times both before the story and after the story and even in the story also the sages were CLEARLY NARRATING THIS TO THEIR TARGET AUDIENCE WHO ARE THOSE MEN WHO SEEK LIBERATION AND DETACHMENT FROM WOMEN. from this one must understand that if a person wants attachment with women and dont want liberation, he shall simply ignore this story which was narrated by the sages only to those sages who seek liberation and detachment from women. to all those members who are living in grihastha and wish to have attachment with woman, they may just ignore this story which is not meant for them. with best wishes and blessings pandit arjun www.rudraksharemedy.com , Prashant Kumar G B <gbp_kumar wrote: > > Dear Arjunji > > this is a good post except that it doesnt fit our age anymore as men and women need each other to push their careers, opportunities on the fast track and all is fair in love and war is what shakesphere said now u can add in business, politics or just in life as such > > when its a rats race we have to live like rats > > but surely for those who want to choose the path of liberation, service and can afford to live all by himself on natures offerings of good food, shelter it is ok > for anyone living in the mundane world options r becoming less to live a orderly, honest, chaste life so it is live and let live > > and when we blame women we must also put the men in same basket as they r the ones giving it > > just like a match stick and fire relationship has many ends- a cooking or heating source or a destroying source when uncontrolled > > best wishes > > panditarjun2004 <panditarjun2004 wrote: dear friends > > following is taken from the 29th chapter titled " women's nature " from > uma samhita in shivapurana. this particular story is available in > volume 3 of the english shivapurana pages 1551 to 1554 published by > motilalbanarsidas. > > ============quote============ > vyasa says: o sage sanatkumara, please narrate succinctly what was > mentioned by pancachuda that women are despicable. > > sanatkumara says: i shall explain the nature of women as it is, listen > to it, merely hearing which results in detachment. women are > lightminded. they are at the root of all troubles. attachment towards > them shall not be pursued by wakeful persons who desire liberation. in > this respect they quote an ancient tradition, the conversation of > narada with the unchaste woman pancacuda (an apsara). formerly while > the intelligent celestial sage narada was wandering in the worlds he > saw the beautiful celestial damsel pancacuda. naradas askes her to > narrate the nature of women for the benefit of the world. > > pancacuda (the woman apsara) says: > > this is the defect in women. even women of noble families, women with > husbands and women endowed with beauty do not stand within the limits > of decency. > there is none more sinning and more sinful than women. > women are at the root of all sins. > they might have husbands of good knoweldge, of ample wealth, of great > comeliness and pleasing to them. but when they get opportunities for > erring, they do not wait. > this is the evil practice of all of us women, that we resort to sinful > men casting off all shame and shyness. > women love only those persons who solicit their company, who approach > them intimately and who render them a little bit of service. > women usually do not observe the limitations of conventional decency. > if at all they stand by them with their husbands, it is because no man > makes advances to them or because they are afraid of their husbands. > even women of noble families aspire for the life of lascivious women > who in their prime of youth adorned with lovable ornaments and > beautiful wearing garments move about frivolously. > even the women who are honoured well, loved intimately and looked after > with care become attached to hunchbacks, blind men, imbeciles and > dwarfs. > they become attached to lame and even despicable persons. > there is none in the world who cannot be approached by women with > solicitations of lust. > if women do not get men of their dalliance they begin to indulge in > abnormal sexual activity with one another. they do not stnad by their > husbands. > women become desperate when they do not get men, when they are afraid > of servants, when they are frightened of being killed or imprisoned. > because they indulge in sexual intercourse as they please they are > fickleminded, of evil deeds and emotionally incomprehensible even to an > intelligent man. > fire is not satiated with the logs of wood it consumes, the ocean is > not satiated with the rivers that flow into it. the god of death is > not satiated with the living beings he kills and women are not satiated > with the number of men they cohabit with. > there is another secret of all women that immediately on seeing a man > their vaginal passage begins to exude slimy secretions. > on seeing a man fresh and clean from his bath with his body perfumed > with sweet scents, the vaginal passage of women begins to exude like > water dripping from a leather bag. > women do not brook their husbands who may give all that they love, who > may honour and console them and who may look after them well. > women do not remain satisfied and contented so much with simple loves > and pleasures and with ornaments and money as with illicit love purused > by them with other men. > women can be kept equally balanced against all these put together viz. > god of death, yama, antaka, patala, the submarine fire, the sharp edge > of razor, poison, serpent and fire. > ever since the five elements, the world, the men and women were created > by brahma, the defect lies in women always. > > sanatkumara says: o vyasa, thus the nature of women as mentioned by a > woman pancacuda has been narrated to you. what other cause of > detachment do you wish to hear. > =============unquote========= > > the above story also appears in mahabharata where bhishma narrates this > for the reason of detachment from women. sage narada narrating this > story as a cause of detachment is also found in other puranas. many > sages and saints narrate this story to their disciples who are > interested in liberation and detachment from women. > > members may remember a couple of mails earlier by me where pativratas > brinda and tulasi gave curses to lord vishnu which highlight that a > pativrata is so rare and so powerful that even gods are afraid of a > pativrata. > > with best wishes and blessings > pandit arjun > www.rudraksharemedy.com > > > Never miss a thing. Make your homepage. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Simple question that has been intriguing me, Arjunji! Please do not treat this as an expression of distrust or challenge! How come the SAGES, celibate and for eons presumably knew so much about grihasta women and kept returning to the topic as to what they should do or not! On that note, what is your understanding of SAGE PARASHARA's chapter 83: Atha angalakshanaphalaadhyaya which pretty much deals with very intimate details about the female body! Interestingly, Santhanam's version completely ignores this chapter. Why would a sage of Parashara's calibre include this chapter and how does it help the jyotishi or jaataka or in this case Jaatikaa? I have stated earlier too, several times that I do not believe that Jyotish was created for the sages and saints and those with one-way- ticket to Himalaya or whatever spiritual destination of their choice etc! Jyotish was created for the grihasta and despite the few pravrajjyaa yogas thrown in here or there for completion, the BODY of Jyotish deals with and is for the grihasta! And if they are serious about it, any intelligent grihasta or worldly individual can learn jyotish it and practice it, beneficially for themselves and for others! If they are sincere and serious about it! And they do not need any mumbo jumbo or black magic to go along with that, truth be told! Rohiniranjan , " panditarjun2004 " <panditarjun2004 wrote: > > dear prashantji > > thanks for your positive feedback. your observation is correct that > this is what was written by the sages thousands of years ago and may > look primitive to modern women. > > but it is what is there in the puranas and even in mahabharata. > similar and more strict orthodox things were mentioned in the old > testament of the bible. just because generations or living habits > have changed, neither hindus have deleted these chapters from puranas > nor christians deleted these rules from old testament. puranas are > treated with same holiness even today as they were earlier. > similarly the holy bible remains the same holy both for old as well > as new testaments even today. > > my mail was written in simple english language and emphasised several > times both before the story and after the story and even in the story > also the sages were CLEARLY NARRATING THIS TO THEIR TARGET AUDIENCE > WHO ARE THOSE MEN WHO SEEK LIBERATION AND DETACHMENT FROM WOMEN. > > from this one must understand that if a person wants attachment with > women and dont want liberation, he shall simply ignore this story > which was narrated by the sages only to those sages who seek > liberation and detachment from women. > > to all those members who are living in grihastha and wish to have > attachment with woman, they may just ignore this story which is not > meant for them. > > with best wishes and blessings > pandit arjun > www.rudraksharemedy.com > > > , Prashant Kumar G B > <gbp_kumar@> wrote: > > > > Dear Arjunji > > > > this is a good post except that it doesnt fit our age anymore as > men and women need each other to push their careers, opportunities on > the fast track and all is fair in love and war is what shakesphere > said now u can add in business, politics or just in life as such > > > > when its a rats race we have to live like rats > > > > but surely for those who want to choose the path of liberation, > service and can afford to live all by himself on natures offerings of > good food, shelter it is ok > > for anyone living in the mundane world options r becoming less to > live a orderly, honest, chaste life so it is live and let live > > > > and when we blame women we must also put the men in same basket as > they r the ones giving it > > > > just like a match stick and fire relationship has many ends- a > cooking or heating source or a destroying source when uncontrolled > > > > best wishes > > > > panditarjun2004 <panditarjun2004@> > wrote: dear friends > > > > following is taken from the 29th chapter titled " women's nature " > from > > uma samhita in shivapurana. this particular story is available in > > volume 3 of the english shivapurana pages 1551 to 1554 published > by > > motilalbanarsidas. > > > > ============quote============ > > vyasa says: o sage sanatkumara, please narrate succinctly what was > > mentioned by pancachuda that women are despicable. > > > > sanatkumara says: i shall explain the nature of women as it is, > listen > > to it, merely hearing which results in detachment. women are > > lightminded. they are at the root of all troubles. attachment > towards > > them shall not be pursued by wakeful persons who desire > liberation. in > > this respect they quote an ancient tradition, the conversation of > > narada with the unchaste woman pancacuda (an apsara). formerly > while > > the intelligent celestial sage narada was wandering in the worlds > he > > saw the beautiful celestial damsel pancacuda. naradas askes her > to > > narrate the nature of women for the benefit of the world. > > > > pancacuda (the woman apsara) says: > > > > this is the defect in women. even women of noble families, women > with > > husbands and women endowed with beauty do not stand within the > limits > > of decency. > > there is none more sinning and more sinful than women. > > women are at the root of all sins. > > they might have husbands of good knoweldge, of ample wealth, of > great > > comeliness and pleasing to them. but when they get opportunities > for > > erring, they do not wait. > > this is the evil practice of all of us women, that we resort to > sinful > > men casting off all shame and shyness. > > women love only those persons who solicit their company, who > approach > > them intimately and who render them a little bit of service. > > women usually do not observe the limitations of conventional > decency. > > if at all they stand by them with their husbands, it is because no > man > > makes advances to them or because they are afraid of their > husbands. > > even women of noble families aspire for the life of lascivious > women > > who in their prime of youth adorned with lovable ornaments and > > beautiful wearing garments move about frivolously. > > even the women who are honoured well, loved intimately and looked > after > > with care become attached to hunchbacks, blind men, imbeciles and > > dwarfs. > > they become attached to lame and even despicable persons. > > there is none in the world who cannot be approached by women with > > solicitations of lust. > > if women do not get men of their dalliance they begin to indulge > in > > abnormal sexual activity with one another. they do not stnad by > their > > husbands. > > women become desperate when they do not get men, when they are > afraid > > of servants, when they are frightened of being killed or > imprisoned. > > because they indulge in sexual intercourse as they please they are > > fickleminded, of evil deeds and emotionally incomprehensible even > to an > > intelligent man. > > fire is not satiated with the logs of wood it consumes, the ocean > is > > not satiated with the rivers that flow into it. the god of death > is > > not satiated with the living beings he kills and women are not > satiated > > with the number of men they cohabit with. > > there is another secret of all women that immediately on seeing a > man > > their vaginal passage begins to exude slimy secretions. > > on seeing a man fresh and clean from his bath with his body > perfumed > > with sweet scents, the vaginal passage of women begins to exude > like > > water dripping from a leather bag. > > women do not brook their husbands who may give all that they love, > who > > may honour and console them and who may look after them well. > > women do not remain satisfied and contented so much with simple > loves > > and pleasures and with ornaments and money as with illicit love > purused > > by them with other men. > > women can be kept equally balanced against all these put together > viz. > > god of death, yama, antaka, patala, the submarine fire, the sharp > edge > > of razor, poison, serpent and fire. > > ever since the five elements, the world, the men and women were > created > > by brahma, the defect lies in women always. > > > > sanatkumara says: o vyasa, thus the nature of women as mentioned > by a > > woman pancacuda has been narrated to you. what other cause of > > detachment do you wish to hear. > > =============unquote========= > > > > the above story also appears in mahabharata where bhishma narrates > this > > for the reason of detachment from women. sage narada narrating > this > > story as a cause of detachment is also found in other puranas. > many > > sages and saints narrate this story to their disciples who are > > interested in liberation and detachment from women. > > > > members may remember a couple of mails earlier by me where > pativratas > > brinda and tulasi gave curses to lord vishnu which highlight that > a > > pativrata is so rare and so powerful that even gods are afraid of > a > > pativrata. > > > > with best wishes and blessings > > pandit arjun > > www.rudraksharemedy.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Never miss a thing. Make your homepage. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 dear RRji and others firstly one must appreciate that truth remains truth whether it is told by me or others. truth is that this entire chapter in toto does appear in shivapurana of all versions and also finds mention in mahabharata and some other puranas as well. truth is that this is a narration told by a sage to another sage on knowing the casues of detachmentment from women and all these sermons were told to MEN who were interested in liberation. this particular narration is referred by the sages since it is revealed by a woman itself that too an apsara. if some members feel negative about this story and feel that this is outdated they may comment on the purana and not me. members can freelly object to this story and its contents but not me. these days it has become vogue to cherry pick favourable verses from the scriptures to the liking of the native and discard or brand as rubbish other verses from the same holy book. members must learn a lesson as to how christians treat their holy book even when its old testament has similar outdated codes. of course members can elicit personal views and opinions on what is written in a book and each has his or her own freedom of speech. the same sages have written the shastras and samhits including our jyotish sources and hundred percent astrologers take refuge in these scriptural references to support any astro logic. as RRji has pointed out even in these samhitas and shastras there are certain rules and paras which are objectionable and rubbish and illogical for the so called modern thinking men and women. as regards the minutest micro level description of women by sage parashara, these are the details searched by some kings in whose court astrologers were guided and hence even subjects like these were given to cater to the requirements of the kings. otherwise also i do not find any wrong in such narration. it is up to us whether to take it or leave it. members who are treating a reference of a story negatively must object to that text and they are at liberty even to demand a ban on those books going by the way they are gunning against this narration. once salman rushdie wrote a book satanic verses in which he produced certain verses and described them as satanic. these verses remain same in all qurans published in any language anywhere in the world. instead of checking whether these verses first exist or not in the holy quran, some fundamentalists demanded a ban on this book in some underdeveloped and developing countries. but in all developed countries, the developed minds of the natives there first checked and found the verses referred by rushdie existing in the holy quran and have no problems. hope members start thinking rationally and with sanity to realise simple truth that this is a story which appears in all puranas and if they have objection they may write 1001 mails against these scriptures and not me. with best wishes and blessings pandit arjun www.rudraskahremedy.com , " Rohiniranjan " <rohini_ranjan wrote: > > Simple question that has been intriguing me, Arjunji! Please do not > treat this as an expression of distrust or challenge! > > How come the SAGES, celibate and for eons presumably knew so much > about grihasta women and kept returning to the topic as to what they > should do or not! > > On that note, what is your understanding of SAGE PARASHARA's chapter > 83: Atha angalakshanaphalaadhyaya which pretty much deals with very > intimate details about the female body! Interestingly, Santhanam's > version completely ignores this chapter. > > Why would a sage of Parashara's calibre include this chapter and how > does it help the jyotishi or jaataka or in this case Jaatikaa? > > > I have stated earlier too, several times that I do not believe that > Jyotish was created for the sages and saints and those with one-way- > ticket to Himalaya or whatever spiritual destination of their choice > etc! Jyotish was created for the grihasta and despite the few > pravrajjyaa yogas thrown in here or there for completion, the BODY of > Jyotish deals with and is for the grihasta! > > And if they are serious about it, any intelligent grihasta or worldly > individual can learn jyotish it and practice it, beneficially for > themselves and for others! If they are sincere and serious about it! > > And they do not need any mumbo jumbo or black magic to go along with > that, truth be told! > > Rohiniranjan > > > , " panditarjun2004 " > <panditarjun2004@> wrote: > > > > dear prashantji > > > > thanks for your positive feedback. your observation is correct > that > > this is what was written by the sages thousands of years ago and > may > > look primitive to modern women. > > > > but it is what is there in the puranas and even in mahabharata. > > similar and more strict orthodox things were mentioned in the old > > testament of the bible. just because generations or living habits > > have changed, neither hindus have deleted these chapters from > puranas > > nor christians deleted these rules from old testament. puranas are > > treated with same holiness even today as they were earlier. > > similarly the holy bible remains the same holy both for old as well > > as new testaments even today. > > > > my mail was written in simple english language and emphasised > several > > times both before the story and after the story and even in the > story > > also the sages were CLEARLY NARRATING THIS TO THEIR TARGET AUDIENCE > > WHO ARE THOSE MEN WHO SEEK LIBERATION AND DETACHMENT FROM WOMEN. > > > > from this one must understand that if a person wants attachment > with > > women and dont want liberation, he shall simply ignore this story > > which was narrated by the sages only to those sages who seek > > liberation and detachment from women. > > > > to all those members who are living in grihastha and wish to have > > attachment with woman, they may just ignore this story which is not > > meant for them. > > > > with best wishes and blessings > > pandit arjun > > www.rudraksharemedy.com > > > > > > , Prashant Kumar G B > > <gbp_kumar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Arjunji > > > > > > this is a good post except that it doesnt fit our age anymore as > > men and women need each other to push their careers, opportunities > on > > the fast track and all is fair in love and war is what shakesphere > > said now u can add in business, politics or just in life as such > > > > > > when its a rats race we have to live like rats > > > > > > but surely for those who want to choose the path of liberation, > > service and can afford to live all by himself on natures offerings > of > > good food, shelter it is ok > > > for anyone living in the mundane world options r becoming less to > > live a orderly, honest, chaste life so it is live and let live > > > > > > and when we blame women we must also put the men in same basket > as > > they r the ones giving it > > > > > > just like a match stick and fire relationship has many ends- a > > cooking or heating source or a destroying source when uncontrolled > > > > > > best wishes > > > > > > panditarjun2004 <panditarjun2004@> > > wrote: dear friends > > > > > > following is taken from the 29th chapter titled " women's nature " > > from > > > uma samhita in shivapurana. this particular story is available > in > > > volume 3 of the english shivapurana pages 1551 to 1554 published > > by > > > motilalbanarsidas. > > > > > > ============quote============ > > > vyasa says: o sage sanatkumara, please narrate succinctly what > was > > > mentioned by pancachuda that women are despicable. > > > > > > sanatkumara says: i shall explain the nature of women as it is, > > listen > > > to it, merely hearing which results in detachment. women are > > > lightminded. they are at the root of all troubles. attachment > > towards > > > them shall not be pursued by wakeful persons who desire > > liberation. in > > > this respect they quote an ancient tradition, the conversation > of > > > narada with the unchaste woman pancacuda (an apsara). formerly > > while > > > the intelligent celestial sage narada was wandering in the > worlds > > he > > > saw the beautiful celestial damsel pancacuda. naradas askes her > > to > > > narrate the nature of women for the benefit of the world. > > > > > > pancacuda (the woman apsara) says: > > > > > > this is the defect in women. even women of noble families, > women > > with > > > husbands and women endowed with beauty do not stand within the > > limits > > > of decency. > > > there is none more sinning and more sinful than women. > > > women are at the root of all sins. > > > they might have husbands of good knoweldge, of ample wealth, of > > great > > > comeliness and pleasing to them. but when they get > opportunities > > for > > > erring, they do not wait. > > > this is the evil practice of all of us women, that we resort to > > sinful > > > men casting off all shame and shyness. > > > women love only those persons who solicit their company, who > > approach > > > them intimately and who render them a little bit of service. > > > women usually do not observe the limitations of conventional > > decency. > > > if at all they stand by them with their husbands, it is because > no > > man > > > makes advances to them or because they are afraid of their > > husbands. > > > even women of noble families aspire for the life of lascivious > > women > > > who in their prime of youth adorned with lovable ornaments and > > > beautiful wearing garments move about frivolously. > > > even the women who are honoured well, loved intimately and > looked > > after > > > with care become attached to hunchbacks, blind men, imbeciles > and > > > dwarfs. > > > they become attached to lame and even despicable persons. > > > there is none in the world who cannot be approached by women > with > > > solicitations of lust. > > > if women do not get men of their dalliance they begin to indulge > > in > > > abnormal sexual activity with one another. they do not stnad by > > their > > > husbands. > > > women become desperate when they do not get men, when they are > > afraid > > > of servants, when they are frightened of being killed or > > imprisoned. > > > because they indulge in sexual intercourse as they please they > are > > > fickleminded, of evil deeds and emotionally incomprehensible > even > > to an > > > intelligent man. > > > fire is not satiated with the logs of wood it consumes, the > ocean > > is > > > not satiated with the rivers that flow into it. the god of > death > > is > > > not satiated with the living beings he kills and women are not > > satiated > > > with the number of men they cohabit with. > > > there is another secret of all women that immediately on seeing > a > > man > > > their vaginal passage begins to exude slimy secretions. > > > on seeing a man fresh and clean from his bath with his body > > perfumed > > > with sweet scents, the vaginal passage of women begins to exude > > like > > > water dripping from a leather bag. > > > women do not brook their husbands who may give all that they > love, > > who > > > may honour and console them and who may look after them well. > > > women do not remain satisfied and contented so much with simple > > loves > > > and pleasures and with ornaments and money as with illicit love > > purused > > > by them with other men. > > > women can be kept equally balanced against all these put > together > > viz. > > > god of death, yama, antaka, patala, the submarine fire, the > sharp > > edge > > > of razor, poison, serpent and fire. > > > ever since the five elements, the world, the men and women were > > created > > > by brahma, the defect lies in women always. > > > > > > sanatkumara says: o vyasa, thus the nature of women as > mentioned > > by a > > > woman pancacuda has been narrated to you. what other cause of > > > detachment do you wish to hear. > > > =============unquote========= > > > > > > the above story also appears in mahabharata where bhishma > narrates > > this > > > for the reason of detachment from women. sage narada narrating > > this > > > story as a cause of detachment is also found in other puranas. > > many > > > sages and saints narrate this story to their disciples who are > > > interested in liberation and detachment from women. > > > > > > members may remember a couple of mails earlier by me where > > pativratas > > > brinda and tulasi gave curses to lord vishnu which highlight > that > > a > > > pativrata is so rare and so powerful that even gods are afraid > of > > a > > > pativrata. > > > > > > with best wishes and blessings > > > pandit arjun > > > www.rudraksharemedy.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Never miss a thing. Make your homepage. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Hi guys, I am slightly appalled over the following story. My following observation is merely an attempt to give a different perspective on the story, and is definitely not to cast any aspersion on the erudition of any scholar on this list. I just thought that people understand that if we approach the religious text sacramentally, we are admitting to the limitation of our own interpretation. I will be brutally honest here; I am actually shell-shocked over this story, and more importantly, over the paradoxically seemingly popular interpretation of this story that vilifies the women no end. I respect women, admire them and I have no qualms in admitting that I am very fond of them. And I am sure most of the readers would feel the same as regards the women folk. Coming back to the point, ‘interpretation” is the key word here. If we try to interpret every word in religious scriptures (Puranas) literally, then we would be forced to lament over own situation. Only God knows what the actual import of the Puranas were meant to be. The scriptures are meant to emphasize virtues in somewhat amusing manner. As is the case of any literary form, scriptures were also written to educate/inform with lots of elements thrown in for amusement purposes. Many times, the scriptures were written in certain context. You change the context, and the meaning of words could turn out to be sickening. One reader has already pointed out that the ‘apsara’ wanted Narad Muni to not to squander his ‘brahamcharya’ and that is why she came out with all the purported vices of woman folk. I reiterate here: Interpretation and Context are the key words. The scriptures say that many times the Lord reincarnates himself in forms lower than humans. At other times, the scriptures say, Lord chooses to manifest Himself in forms such as half man, half lion that are incomprehensible from the standpoint of ordinary rationality. But the scholars would interpret this story as the suggestion that the enterprise of being human is always fraught with the most hazardous consequences, and that those forms of life, which we habitually consider below us, might have in them the intimations of divinity. On the other hand, one may choose to interpret this story literally, and actually believe that a half man, half lion that is incarnation of Lord did kill the ‘rakshasa’. Nothing wrong in it, but the actual import will be lost. I am again requesting not to jump in front of me with guns drawn. People, who are incapable of entertaining other positions with respect to their religious beliefs, are correctly called heretical extremist. And if one talks about Puranas and scriptures in a Hindu setup, he can not be a heretical extremist. By the way, after a long time, I felt such a strong urge to write on this list. The content of the thread literally anguished me...just stirred my humanistic sensibilities...no offence to anyone though! Best Regards Manoj Sharma --- Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan wrote: > Simple question that has been intriguing me, > Arjunji! Please do not > treat this as an expression of distrust or > challenge! > > How come the SAGES, celibate and for eons presumably > knew so much > about grihasta women and kept returning to the topic > as to what they > should do or not! > > On that note, what is your understanding of SAGE > PARASHARA's chapter > 83: Atha angalakshanaphalaadhyaya which pretty much > deals with very > intimate details about the female body! > Interestingly, Santhanam's > version completely ignores this chapter. > > Why would a sage of Parashara's calibre include this > chapter and how > does it help the jyotishi or jaataka or in this case > Jaatikaa? > > > I have stated earlier too, several times that I do > not believe that > Jyotish was created for the sages and saints and > those with one-way- > ticket to Himalaya or whatever spiritual destination > of their choice > etc! Jyotish was created for the grihasta and > despite the few > pravrajjyaa yogas thrown in here or there for > completion, the BODY of > Jyotish deals with and is for the grihasta! > > And if they are serious about it, any intelligent > grihasta or worldly > individual can learn jyotish it and practice it, > beneficially for > themselves and for others! If they are sincere and > serious about it! > > And they do not need any mumbo jumbo or black magic > to go along with > that, truth be told! > > Rohiniranjan > > > , > " panditarjun2004 " > <panditarjun2004 wrote: > > > > dear prashantji > > > > thanks for your positive feedback. your > observation is correct > that > > this is what was written by the sages thousands of > years ago and > may > > look primitive to modern women. > > > > but it is what is there in the puranas and even in > mahabharata. > > similar and more strict orthodox things were > mentioned in the old > > testament of the bible. just because generations > or living habits > > have changed, neither hindus have deleted these > chapters from > puranas > > nor christians deleted these rules from old > testament. puranas are > > treated with same holiness even today as they were > earlier. > > similarly the holy bible remains the same holy > both for old as well > > as new testaments even today. > > > > my mail was written in simple english language and > emphasised > several > > times both before the story and after the story > and even in the > story > > also the sages were CLEARLY NARRATING THIS TO > THEIR TARGET AUDIENCE > > WHO ARE THOSE MEN WHO SEEK LIBERATION AND > DETACHMENT FROM WOMEN. > > > > from this one must understand that if a person > wants attachment > with > > women and dont want liberation, he shall simply > ignore this story > > which was narrated by the sages only to those > sages who seek > > liberation and detachment from women. > > > > to all those members who are living in grihastha > and wish to have > > attachment with woman, they may just ignore this > story which is not > > meant for them. > > > > with best wishes and blessings > > pandit arjun > > www.rudraksharemedy.com > > > > > > , Prashant > Kumar G B > > <gbp_kumar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Arjunji > > > > > > this is a good post except that it doesnt fit > our age anymore as > > men and women need each other to push their > careers, opportunities > on > > the fast track and all is fair in love and war is > what shakesphere > > said now u can add in business, politics or just > in life as such > > > > > > when its a rats race we have to live like rats > > > > > > but surely for those who want to choose the path > of liberation, > > service and can afford to live all by himself on > natures offerings > of > > good food, shelter it is ok > > > for anyone living in the mundane world options r > becoming less to > > live a orderly, honest, chaste life so it is live > and let live > > > > > > and when we blame women we must also put the men > in same basket > as > > they r the ones giving it > > > > > > just like a match stick and fire relationship > has many ends- a > > cooking or heating source or a destroying source > when uncontrolled > > > > > > best wishes > > > > > > panditarjun2004 <panditarjun2004@> > > wrote: dear friends > > > > > > following is taken from the 29th chapter titled > " women's nature " > > from > > > uma samhita in shivapurana. this particular > story is available > in > > > volume 3 of the english shivapurana pages 1551 > to 1554 published > > by > > > motilalbanarsidas. > > > > > > ============quote============ > > > vyasa says: o sage sanatkumara, please narrate > succinctly what > was > > > mentioned by pancachuda that women are > despicable. > > > > > > sanatkumara says: i shall explain the nature of > women as it is, > > listen > > > to it, merely hearing which results in > detachment. women are > > > lightminded. they are at the root of all > troubles. attachment > > towards > > > them shall not be pursued by wakeful persons > who desire > > liberation. in > > > this respect they quote an ancient tradition, > the conversation > of > > > narada with the unchaste woman pancacuda (an > apsara). formerly > > while > > > the intelligent celestial sage narada was > wandering in the > worlds > > he > > > saw the beautiful celestial damsel pancacuda. > naradas askes her > > to > > > narrate the nature of women for the benefit of > the world. > === message truncated === Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 Namaste' May I humbly respond to this discussion with a verse from the Durga Saptasati (specifically ch. 11 v. 6) which says: vidyaah samastaastava devi bhedaah striyah samamstaah sakalaa jagatsu tvayaikaya puritamambayaitat kaa te stutih stavyaparaa paroktih translated as : Oh Goddess, all that is knowable are your various distinctions, and all women in the world reflect your capacity entirely. By you, Oh Mother, this world is filled. For you who are beyond praise, how can we sing of your glory? Since God/Divine Mother is present always and everywhere (She is omnipresent after all...) how can any part of creation be less than any other part? JAI MAA OM Shanti Morningsong , " Rohiniranjan " <rohini_ranjan wrote: > > Simple question that has been intriguing me, Arjunji! Please do not > treat this as an expression of distrust or challenge! > > How come the SAGES, celibate and for eons presumably knew so much > about grihasta women and kept returning to the topic as to what they > should do or not! > > On that note, what is your understanding of SAGE PARASHARA's chapter > 83: Atha angalakshanaphalaadhyaya which pretty much deals with very > intimate details about the female body! Interestingly, Santhanam's > version completely ignores this chapter. > > Why would a sage of Parashara's calibre include this chapter and how > does it help the jyotishi or jaataka or in this case Jaatikaa? > > > I have stated earlier too, several times that I do not believe that > Jyotish was created for the sages and saints and those with one-way- > ticket to Himalaya or whatever spiritual destination of their choice > etc! Jyotish was created for the grihasta and despite the few > pravrajjyaa yogas thrown in here or there for completion, the BODY of > Jyotish deals with and is for the grihasta! > > And if they are serious about it, any intelligent grihasta or worldly > individual can learn jyotish it and practice it, beneficially for > themselves and for others! If they are sincere and serious about it! > > And they do not need any mumbo jumbo or black magic to go along with > that, truth be told! > > Rohiniranjan > > > , " panditarjun2004 " > <panditarjun2004@> wrote: > > > > dear prashantji > > > > thanks for your positive feedback. your observation is correct > that > > this is what was written by the sages thousands of years ago and > may > > look primitive to modern women. > > > > but it is what is there in the puranas and even in mahabharata. > > similar and more strict orthodox things were mentioned in the old > > testament of the bible. just because generations or living habits > > have changed, neither hindus have deleted these chapters from > puranas > > nor christians deleted these rules from old testament. puranas are > > treated with same holiness even today as they were earlier. > > similarly the holy bible remains the same holy both for old as well > > as new testaments even today. > > > > my mail was written in simple english language and emphasised > several > > times both before the story and after the story and even in the > story > > also the sages were CLEARLY NARRATING THIS TO THEIR TARGET AUDIENCE > > WHO ARE THOSE MEN WHO SEEK LIBERATION AND DETACHMENT FROM WOMEN. > > > > from this one must understand that if a person wants attachment > with > > women and dont want liberation, he shall simply ignore this story > > which was narrated by the sages only to those sages who seek > > liberation and detachment from women. > > > > to all those members who are living in grihastha and wish to have > > attachment with woman, they may just ignore this story which is not > > meant for them. > > > > with best wishes and blessings > > pandit arjun > > www.rudraksharemedy.com > > > > > > , Prashant Kumar G B > > <gbp_kumar@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Arjunji > > > > > > this is a good post except that it doesnt fit our age anymore as > > men and women need each other to push their careers, opportunities > on > > the fast track and all is fair in love and war is what shakesphere > > said now u can add in business, politics or just in life as such > > > > > > when its a rats race we have to live like rats > > > > > > but surely for those who want to choose the path of liberation, > > service and can afford to live all by himself on natures offerings > of > > good food, shelter it is ok > > > for anyone living in the mundane world options r becoming less to > > live a orderly, honest, chaste life so it is live and let live > > > > > > and when we blame women we must also put the men in same basket > as > > they r the ones giving it > > > > > > just like a match stick and fire relationship has many ends- a > > cooking or heating source or a destroying source when uncontrolled > > > > > > best wishes > > > > > > panditarjun2004 <panditarjun2004@> > > wrote: dear friends > > > > > > following is taken from the 29th chapter titled " women's nature " > > from > > > uma samhita in shivapurana. this particular story is available > in > > > volume 3 of the english shivapurana pages 1551 to 1554 published > > by > > > motilalbanarsidas. > > > > > > ============quote============ > > > vyasa says: o sage sanatkumara, please narrate succinctly what > was > > > mentioned by pancachuda that women are despicable. > > > > > > sanatkumara says: i shall explain the nature of women as it is, > > listen > > > to it, merely hearing which results in detachment. women are > > > lightminded. they are at the root of all troubles. attachment > > towards > > > them shall not be pursued by wakeful persons who desire > > liberation. in > > > this respect they quote an ancient tradition, the conversation > of > > > narada with the unchaste woman pancacuda (an apsara). formerly > > while > > > the intelligent celestial sage narada was wandering in the > worlds > > he > > > saw the beautiful celestial damsel pancacuda. naradas askes her > > to > > > narrate the nature of women for the benefit of the world. > > > > > > pancacuda (the woman apsara) says: > > > > > > this is the defect in women. even women of noble families, > women > > with > > > husbands and women endowed with beauty do not stand within the > > limits > > > of decency. > > > there is none more sinning and more sinful than women. > > > women are at the root of all sins. > > > they might have husbands of good knoweldge, of ample wealth, of > > great > > > comeliness and pleasing to them. but when they get > opportunities > > for > > > erring, they do not wait. > > > this is the evil practice of all of us women, that we resort to > > sinful > > > men casting off all shame and shyness. > > > women love only those persons who solicit their company, who > > approach > > > them intimately and who render them a little bit of service. > > > women usually do not observe the limitations of conventional > > decency. > > > if at all they stand by them with their husbands, it is because > no > > man > > > makes advances to them or because they are afraid of their > > husbands. > > > even women of noble families aspire for the life of lascivious > > women > > > who in their prime of youth adorned with lovable ornaments and > > > beautiful wearing garments move about frivolously. > > > even the women who are honoured well, loved intimately and > looked > > after > > > with care become attached to hunchbacks, blind men, imbeciles > and > > > dwarfs. > > > they become attached to lame and even despicable persons. > > > there is none in the world who cannot be approached by women > with > > > solicitations of lust. > > > if women do not get men of their dalliance they begin to indulge > > in > > > abnormal sexual activity with one another. they do not stnad by > > their > > > husbands. > > > women become desperate when they do not get men, when they are > > afraid > > > of servants, when they are frightened of being killed or > > imprisoned. > > > because they indulge in sexual intercourse as they please they > are > > > fickleminded, of evil deeds and emotionally incomprehensible > even > > to an > > > intelligent man. > > > fire is not satiated with the logs of wood it consumes, the > ocean > > is > > > not satiated with the rivers that flow into it. the god of > death > > is > > > not satiated with the living beings he kills and women are not > > satiated > > > with the number of men they cohabit with. > > > there is another secret of all women that immediately on seeing > a > > man > > > their vaginal passage begins to exude slimy secretions. > > > on seeing a man fresh and clean from his bath with his body > > perfumed > > > with sweet scents, the vaginal passage of women begins to exude > > like > > > water dripping from a leather bag. > > > women do not brook their husbands who may give all that they > love, > > who > > > may honour and console them and who may look after them well. > > > women do not remain satisfied and contented so much with simple > > loves > > > and pleasures and with ornaments and money as with illicit love > > purused > > > by them with other men. > > > women can be kept equally balanced against all these put > together > > viz. > > > god of death, yama, antaka, patala, the submarine fire, the > sharp > > edge > > > of razor, poison, serpent and fire. > > > ever since the five elements, the world, the men and women were > > created > > > by brahma, the defect lies in women always. > > > > > > sanatkumara says: o vyasa, thus the nature of women as > mentioned > > by a > > > woman pancacuda has been narrated to you. what other cause of > > > detachment do you wish to hear. > > > =============unquote========= > > > > > > the above story also appears in mahabharata where bhishma > narrates > > this > > > for the reason of detachment from women. sage narada narrating > > this > > > story as a cause of detachment is also found in other puranas. > > many > > > sages and saints narrate this story to their disciples who are > > > interested in liberation and detachment from women. > > > > > > members may remember a couple of mails earlier by me where > > pativratas > > > brinda and tulasi gave curses to lord vishnu which highlight > that > > a > > > pativrata is so rare and so powerful that even gods are afraid > of > > a > > > pativrata. > > > > > > with best wishes and blessings > > > pandit arjun > > > www.rudraksharemedy.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Never miss a thing. Make your homepage. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 dear manojji all members are equally welcome to express their views and freedom of speech must be respected of all individuals alike. however, the surmise that the unchaste apsara telling lies to help sage narada about women is untrue. the exact sanskrit verses of the entire chapter have also been read by me before concluding that there is no translation error by motilalbanarsidas published shivapurana. have also read the original sanskrit verses of the comprehensive sanskrit shivapurana published by chaukhamba sanskrut pratisthan who are reputed for ancient sanskrit classics and this story appears in the same 24th chapter of umasamhita in pages 1256 to 1257. both sanskrit original verses and their hindi translation is available in these pages. here is how the story starts: sage narad asks pancacuda to explain the nature of women. pancacuda says " o sage, you already know what women are and what their nature is. being a woman i cannot censure women " . narada says " it may be wrong to make a false statement. there is no wrong in speaking the truth. hence you can speak the truth " . sage sanatkumara narrating this at this juncture says that thus prompted, the apsara panacuda resolved and immediately began to explain truthfully the permanent defects of women. from the above verses, members can conclude that panacuda was not lying to help narada. anyway the above lines were written by me only to reconfirm that the translation is not wrong and the ENTIRE CHAPTER IN TOTO has been pasted without any one word or one line cherrypicking. this entire chapter is devoted only to one subject and that subject is pasted in full in detail without quoting only one line which gives misunderstanding as some members think. if still members feel that one entire full chapter can give an incomplete information, they are at liberty to read the full version of any shivapurana published by any source of their choice in any language. as regards the angst and appall caused to manoji, i can surely tell that if he reads the manusmriti exact sanskrit version published by any source, he would find many chapters in that as utter nonsense as it is against civilised human life witnessed by the present generation. combing to the subject of hindu mythology, all those pursuing astrology must remind themselves that the vedic astrology is inexplicably intertwined with hindu mythology where the most oft referred brihat parashara hora shastra and all other jyotish shastras and samhitas invariably link the mythological lords and mythological ways of mollifying the planets. if any member says that jyotish is pure astronomy which is an established recognised science, he cannot grant mahadasas for rahu and ketu and preach predictive astrology, for as per science rahu and ketu are non existing. if a member believes in mythology, he has to believe a thousand faced serpant adiseshu, a ten faced demon ravana, so on and so forth. with best wishes and blessings pandit arjun www.rudraksharemedy.com , Manoj Sharma <manojsharma662000 wrote: > > Hi guys, > > I am slightly appalled over the following story. My > following observation is merely an attempt to give a > different perspective on the story, and is definitely > not to cast any aspersion on the erudition of any > scholar on this list. I just thought that people > understand that if we approach the religious text > sacramentally, we are admitting to the limitation of > our own interpretation. > > I will be brutally honest here; I am actually > shell-shocked over this story, and more importantly, > over the paradoxically seemingly popular > interpretation of this story that vilifies the women > no end. I respect women, admire them and I have no > qualms in admitting that I am very fond of them. And I > am sure most of the readers would feel the same as > regards the women folk. > Coming back to the point, `interpretation " is the key > word here. If we try to interpret every word in > religious scriptures (Puranas) literally, then we > would be forced to lament over own situation. Only God > knows what the actual import of the Puranas were meant > to be. The scriptures are meant to emphasize virtues > in somewhat amusing manner. As is the case of any > literary form, scriptures were also written to > educate/inform with lots of elements thrown in for > amusement purposes. Many times, the scriptures were > written in certain context. You change the context, > and the meaning of words could turn out to be > sickening. One reader has already pointed out that the > `apsara' wanted Narad Muni to not to squander his > `brahamcharya' and that is why she came out with all > the purported vices of woman folk. I reiterate here: > Interpretation and Context are the key words. > > The scriptures say that many times the Lord > reincarnates himself in forms lower than humans. At > other times, the scriptures say, Lord chooses to > manifest Himself in forms such as half man, half lion > that are incomprehensible from the standpoint of > ordinary rationality. But the scholars would interpret > this story as the suggestion that the enterprise of > being human is always fraught with the most hazardous > consequences, and that those forms of life, which we > habitually consider below us, might have in them the > intimations of divinity. On the other hand, one may > choose to interpret this story literally, and actually > believe that a half man, half lion that is incarnation > of Lord did kill the `rakshasa'. Nothing wrong in it, > but the actual import will be lost. > > I am again requesting not to jump in front of me with > guns drawn. People, who are incapable of entertaining > other positions with respect to their religious > beliefs, are correctly called heretical extremist. And > if one talks about Puranas and scriptures in a Hindu > setup, he can not be a heretical extremist. > > By the way, after a long time, I felt such a strong > urge to write on this list. The content of the thread > literally anguished me...just stirred my humanistic > sensibilities...no offence to anyone though! > > Best Regards > > Manoj Sharma > > --- Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan wrote: > > > Simple question that has been intriguing me, > > Arjunji! Please do not > > treat this as an expression of distrust or > > challenge! > > > > How come the SAGES, celibate and for eons presumably > > knew so much > > about grihasta women and kept returning to the topic > > as to what they > > should do or not! > > > > On that note, what is your understanding of SAGE > > PARASHARA's chapter > > 83: Atha angalakshanaphalaadhyaya which pretty much > > deals with very > > intimate details about the female body! > > Interestingly, Santhanam's > > version completely ignores this chapter. > > > > Why would a sage of Parashara's calibre include this > > chapter and how > > does it help the jyotishi or jaataka or in this case > > Jaatikaa? > > > > > > I have stated earlier too, several times that I do > > not believe that > > Jyotish was created for the sages and saints and > > those with one-way- > > ticket to Himalaya or whatever spiritual destination > > of their choice > > etc! Jyotish was created for the grihasta and > > despite the few > > pravrajjyaa yogas thrown in here or there for > > completion, the BODY of > > Jyotish deals with and is for the grihasta! > > > > And if they are serious about it, any intelligent > > grihasta or worldly > > individual can learn jyotish it and practice it, > > beneficially for > > themselves and for others! If they are sincere and > > serious about it! > > > > And they do not need any mumbo jumbo or black magic > > to go along with > > that, truth be told! > > > > Rohiniranjan > > > > > > , > > " panditarjun2004 " > > <panditarjun2004@> wrote: > > > > > > dear prashantji > > > > > > thanks for your positive feedback. your > > observation is correct > > that > > > this is what was written by the sages thousands of > > years ago and > > may > > > look primitive to modern women. > > > > > > but it is what is there in the puranas and even in > > mahabharata. > > > similar and more strict orthodox things were > > mentioned in the old > > > testament of the bible. just because generations > > or living habits > > > have changed, neither hindus have deleted these > > chapters from > > puranas > > > nor christians deleted these rules from old > > testament. puranas are > > > treated with same holiness even today as they were > > earlier. > > > similarly the holy bible remains the same holy > > both for old as well > > > as new testaments even today. > > > > > > my mail was written in simple english language and > > emphasised > > several > > > times both before the story and after the story > > and even in the > > story > > > also the sages were CLEARLY NARRATING THIS TO > > THEIR TARGET AUDIENCE > > > WHO ARE THOSE MEN WHO SEEK LIBERATION AND > > DETACHMENT FROM WOMEN. > > > > > > from this one must understand that if a person > > wants attachment > > with > > > women and dont want liberation, he shall simply > > ignore this story > > > which was narrated by the sages only to those > > sages who seek > > > liberation and detachment from women. > > > > > > to all those members who are living in grihastha > > and wish to have > > > attachment with woman, they may just ignore this > > story which is not > > > meant for them. > > > > > > with best wishes and blessings > > > pandit arjun > > > www.rudraksharemedy.com > > > > > > > > > , Prashant > > Kumar G B > > > <gbp_kumar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Arjunji > > > > > > > > this is a good post except that it doesnt fit > > our age anymore as > > > men and women need each other to push their > > careers, opportunities > > on > > > the fast track and all is fair in love and war is > > what shakesphere > > > said now u can add in business, politics or just > > in life as such > > > > > > > > when its a rats race we have to live like rats > > > > > > > > but surely for those who want to choose the path > > of liberation, > > > service and can afford to live all by himself on > > natures offerings > > of > > > good food, shelter it is ok > > > > for anyone living in the mundane world options r > > becoming less to > > > live a orderly, honest, chaste life so it is live > > and let live > > > > > > > > and when we blame women we must also put the men > > in same basket > > as > > > they r the ones giving it > > > > > > > > just like a match stick and fire relationship > > has many ends- a > > > cooking or heating source or a destroying source > > when uncontrolled > > > > > > > > best wishes > > > > > > > > panditarjun2004 <panditarjun2004@> > > > wrote: dear friends > > > > > > > > following is taken from the 29th chapter titled > > " women's nature " > > > from > > > > uma samhita in shivapurana. this particular > > story is available > > in > > > > volume 3 of the english shivapurana pages 1551 > > to 1554 published > > > by > > > > motilalbanarsidas. > > > > > > > > ============quote============ > > > > vyasa says: o sage sanatkumara, please narrate > > succinctly what > > was > > > > mentioned by pancachuda that women are > > despicable. > > > > > > > > sanatkumara says: i shall explain the nature of > > women as it is, > > > listen > > > > to it, merely hearing which results in > > detachment. women are > > > > lightminded. they are at the root of all > > troubles. attachment > > > towards > > > > them shall not be pursued by wakeful persons > > who desire > > > liberation. in > > > > this respect they quote an ancient tradition, > > the conversation > > of > > > > narada with the unchaste woman pancacuda (an > > apsara). formerly > > > while > > > > the intelligent celestial sage narada was > > wandering in the > > worlds > > > he > > > > saw the beautiful celestial damsel pancacuda. > > naradas askes her > > > to > > > > narrate the nature of women for the benefit of > > the world. > > > === message truncated === > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 Just to focus on one point in your post: I did not call that information objectionable or rubbish, just irrelevant and not of practical importance. However if BPHS (as opposed to more recent 16th century texts written for Rajas and Maharajas by jyotishis in their employment or protection etc) were written for Kings and Emperors then definitely makes sense. Speaking of rational approach, given the many versions of BPHS and similar " classics " some individuals wonder if some of the material is not original but insertions by later day custodians of these books. Is this also not possible for other ancient texts, scriptures and stories therein? RR , " panditarjun2004 " <panditarjun2004 wrote: > > dear RRji and others > ... > as RRji has > pointed out even in these samhitas and shastras there are certain > rules and paras which are objectionable and rubbish and illogical for > the so called modern thinking men and women. > > as regards the minutest micro level description of women by sage > parashara, these are the details searched by some kings in whose > court astrologers were guided and hence even subjects like these were > given to cater to the requirements of the kings. otherwise also i do > not find any wrong in such narration. it is up to us whether to take > it or leave it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 dear RRji your observation of distortion is logically and realistically possible for all ancient classics. but we have now these things available in print and hence it is taken as an authority. the gita is the holy book of our country and is recognised by the government of india. gita too has many verses which contradict one another. this also is mythology. some may say that it is history. but the vishvaroopa of great size and enormous proportions is all mythology and the government beleives in it. in south india especially kerala and andhra pradesh, there are many internationally reputed athiests who were mostly erudite brahmins who were wellread of all classics and some are even great poets etc. they used to say that puranas were taught by word of mouth and hence it is subject to change from mouth to mouth until the last time it appeared in print. going by this logical theory of twisting and changing when changed from mouth to mouth, the original might get changed but since all these are matters of faith and belief, readers does not bother much if they have to believe in a mythology. in shivapurana itself in the rudraksha chapter, one verse says that smallest size rudraksha is rare and more powerful, whereas in other verses the bigger the size the more powerful the rudraksha is. hence if some contradictions or illogical or irrational and unacceptable things are written in these published classics, one may ignore and leave them as no one is forcing other to believe these. after all, astrology or mythology is a subject matter of solicitation. devotees throng to a temple on their own as they believe in the diety installed in that temple. similarly natives visit an astrologer thinking that they can hear something from that astrologer. all these solicited matters are based on faith and belief. in old testament of the bible, some scientists disproved the noah ark theory and the great watery marooning of the globe that preceded. but there are again several christian researchers who supposedly discovered the remnants or traces of the lost ark and are striving to prove it true. recently some christian missionaries have identified and fixed a small cave near rishikesh as the place where jesus christ meditated earlier so that this hindu pilgrimage would also become famous as a christian pilgrimage attracting lot of christian believers to visit rishikesh. all these are matters of faith and belief. if someone visits that cave and imagine that jesus was there earlier, there is no wrong in him doing so, for it is his faith. hence my submission is that for x number of believers, we will have y number of disbelievers as well and each has his own way to see things and both live in mutual coexistence peacefully. with best wishes and blessings pandit arjun www.rudraksharemedy.com , " Rohiniranjan " <rohini_ranjan wrote: > > Just to focus on one point in your post: I did not call that > information objectionable or rubbish, just irrelevant and not of > practical importance. However if BPHS (as opposed to more recent 16th > century texts written for Rajas and Maharajas by jyotishis in their > employment or protection etc) were written for Kings and Emperors then > definitely makes sense. > > Speaking of rational approach, given the many versions of BPHS and > similar " classics " some individuals wonder if some of the material is > not original but insertions by later day custodians of these books. Is > this also not possible for other ancient texts, scriptures and stories > therein? > > RR > > , " panditarjun2004 " > <panditarjun2004@> wrote: > > > > dear RRji and others > > ... > > as RRji has > > pointed out even in these samhitas and shastras there are certain > > rules and paras which are objectionable and rubbish and illogical for > > the so called modern thinking men and women. > > > > as regards the minutest micro level description of women by sage > > parashara, these are the details searched by some kings in whose > > court astrologers were guided and hence even subjects like these were > > given to cater to the requirements of the kings. otherwise also i do > > not find any wrong in such narration. it is up to us whether to take > > it or leave it. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 Arjunji, I will try to upload a photo which was taken by me at a site of an important Christian Church in USA which is associated with healing and built near red rocks that show the shape of Mother Mary carrying Baby Jesus and two Nuns guarding them... My eyes fell very naturally at the other end of the rocky range and I was amazed to see not one but two symbols: One Divine and one as we see on this earth! I will let the forum take it from there! Now on to the more difficult process of figuring out this upload download thing! RR , " panditarjun2004 " <panditarjun2004 wrote: > > dear RRji > > your observation of distortion is logically and realistically > possible for all ancient classics. but we have now these things > available in print and hence it is taken as an authority. the gita > is the holy book of our country and is recognised by the government > of india. gita too has many verses which contradict one another. > this also is mythology. some may say that it is history. but the > vishvaroopa of great size and enormous proportions is all mythology > and the government beleives in it. > > in south india especially kerala and andhra pradesh, there are many > internationally reputed athiests who were mostly erudite brahmins who > were wellread of all classics and some are even great poets etc. > they used to say that puranas were taught by word of mouth and hence > it is subject to change from mouth to mouth until the last time it > appeared in print. going by this logical theory of twisting and > changing when changed from mouth to mouth, the original might get > changed but since all these are matters of faith and belief, readers > does not bother much if they have to believe in a mythology. > > in shivapurana itself in the rudraksha chapter, one verse says that > smallest size rudraksha is rare and more powerful, whereas in other > verses the bigger the size the more powerful the rudraksha is. > > hence if some contradictions or illogical or irrational and > unacceptable things are written in these published classics, one may > ignore and leave them as no one is forcing other to believe these. > after all, astrology or mythology is a subject matter of > solicitation. devotees throng to a temple on their own as they > believe in the diety installed in that temple. similarly natives > visit an astrologer thinking that they can hear something from that > astrologer. all these solicited matters are based on faith and > belief. > > in old testament of the bible, some scientists disproved the noah ark > theory and the great watery marooning of the globe that preceded. > but there are again several christian researchers who supposedly > discovered the remnants or traces of the lost ark and are striving to > prove it true. > > recently some christian missionaries have identified and fixed a > small cave near rishikesh as the place where jesus christ meditated > earlier so that this hindu pilgrimage would also become famous as a > christian pilgrimage attracting lot of christian believers to visit > rishikesh. all these are matters of faith and belief. if someone > visits that cave and imagine that jesus was there earlier, there is > no wrong in him doing so, for it is his faith. > > hence my submission is that for x number of believers, we will have y > number of disbelievers as well and each has his own way to see things > and both live in mutual coexistence peacefully. > > with best wishes and blessings > pandit arjun > www.rudraksharemedy.com > > , " Rohiniranjan " > <rohini_ranjan@> wrote: > > > > Just to focus on one point in your post: I did not call that > > information objectionable or rubbish, just irrelevant and not of > > practical importance. However if BPHS (as opposed to more recent > 16th > > century texts written for Rajas and Maharajas by jyotishis in their > > employment or protection etc) were written for Kings and Emperors > then > > definitely makes sense. > > > > Speaking of rational approach, given the many versions of BPHS and > > similar " classics " some individuals wonder if some of the material > is > > not original but insertions by later day custodians of these books. > Is > > this also not possible for other ancient texts, scriptures and > stories > > therein? > > > > RR > > > > , " panditarjun2004 " > > <panditarjun2004@> wrote: > > > > > > dear RRji and others > > > ... > > > as RRji has > > > pointed out even in these samhitas and shastras there are certain > > > rules and paras which are objectionable and rubbish and illogical > for > > > the so called modern thinking men and women. > > > > > > as regards the minutest micro level description of women by sage > > > parashara, these are the details searched by some kings in whose > > > court astrologers were guided and hence even subjects like these > were > > > given to cater to the requirements of the kings. otherwise also > i do > > > not find any wrong in such narration. it is up to us whether to > take > > > it or leave it. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 http://ph./photos/browse/8395? b=33 & m=t & o=0 , " Rohiniranjan " <rohini_ranjan wrote: > > Arjunji, > > I will try to upload a photo which was taken by me at a site of an > important Christian Church in USA which is associated with healing > and built near red rocks that show the shape of Mother Mary carrying > Baby Jesus and two Nuns guarding them... > > My eyes fell very naturally at the other end of the rocky range and I > was amazed to see not one but two symbols: One Divine and one as we > see on this earth! I will let the forum take it from there! > > Now on to the more difficult process of figuring out this upload > download thing! > > RR > > , " panditarjun2004 " > <panditarjun2004@> wrote: > > > > dear RRji > > > > your observation of distortion is logically and realistically > > possible for all ancient classics. but we have now these things > > available in print and hence it is taken as an authority. the gita > > is the holy book of our country and is recognised by the government > > of india. gita too has many verses which contradict one another. > > this also is mythology. some may say that it is history. but the > > vishvaroopa of great size and enormous proportions is all mythology > > and the government beleives in it. > > > > in south india especially kerala and andhra pradesh, there are many > > internationally reputed athiests who were mostly erudite brahmins > who > > were wellread of all classics and some are even great poets etc. > > they used to say that puranas were taught by word of mouth and > hence > > it is subject to change from mouth to mouth until the last time it > > appeared in print. going by this logical theory of twisting and > > changing when changed from mouth to mouth, the original might get > > changed but since all these are matters of faith and belief, > readers > > does not bother much if they have to believe in a mythology. > > > > in shivapurana itself in the rudraksha chapter, one verse says that > > smallest size rudraksha is rare and more powerful, whereas in other > > verses the bigger the size the more powerful the rudraksha is. > > > > hence if some contradictions or illogical or irrational and > > unacceptable things are written in these published classics, one > may > > ignore and leave them as no one is forcing other to believe these. > > after all, astrology or mythology is a subject matter of > > solicitation. devotees throng to a temple on their own as they > > believe in the diety installed in that temple. similarly natives > > visit an astrologer thinking that they can hear something from that > > astrologer. all these solicited matters are based on faith and > > belief. > > > > in old testament of the bible, some scientists disproved the noah > ark > > theory and the great watery marooning of the globe that preceded. > > but there are again several christian researchers who supposedly > > discovered the remnants or traces of the lost ark and are striving > to > > prove it true. > > > > recently some christian missionaries have identified and fixed a > > small cave near rishikesh as the place where jesus christ meditated > > earlier so that this hindu pilgrimage would also become famous as a > > christian pilgrimage attracting lot of christian believers to visit > > rishikesh. all these are matters of faith and belief. if someone > > visits that cave and imagine that jesus was there earlier, there is > > no wrong in him doing so, for it is his faith. > > > > hence my submission is that for x number of believers, we will have > y > > number of disbelievers as well and each has his own way to see > things > > and both live in mutual coexistence peacefully. > > > > with best wishes and blessings > > pandit arjun > > www.rudraksharemedy.com > > > > , " Rohiniranjan " > > <rohini_ranjan@> wrote: > > > > > > Just to focus on one point in your post: I did not call that > > > information objectionable or rubbish, just irrelevant and not of > > > practical importance. However if BPHS (as opposed to more recent > > 16th > > > century texts written for Rajas and Maharajas by jyotishis in > their > > > employment or protection etc) were written for Kings and Emperors > > then > > > definitely makes sense. > > > > > > Speaking of rational approach, given the many versions of BPHS > and > > > similar " classics " some individuals wonder if some of the > material > > is > > > not original but insertions by later day custodians of these > books. > > Is > > > this also not possible for other ancient texts, scriptures and > > stories > > > therein? > > > > > > RR > > > > > > , " panditarjun2004 " > > > <panditarjun2004@> wrote: > > > > > > > > dear RRji and others > > > > ... > > > > as RRji has > > > > pointed out even in these samhitas and shastras there are > certain > > > > rules and paras which are objectionable and rubbish and > illogical > > for > > > > the so called modern thinking men and women. > > > > > > > > as regards the minutest micro level description of women by > sage > > > > parashara, these are the details searched by some kings in > whose > > > > court astrologers were guided and hence even subjects like > these > > were > > > > given to cater to the requirements of the kings. otherwise > also > > i do > > > > not find any wrong in such narration. it is up to us whether > to > > take > > > > it or leave it. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 It is going good. On Feb 2, 2008 7:41 AM, Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan wrote: > http://ph./photos/browse/8395? > b=33 & m=t & o=0 > > > <%40>, > " Rohiniranjan " > <rohini_ranjan wrote: > > > > Arjunji, > > > > I will try to upload a photo which was taken by me at a site of an > > important Christian Church in USA which is associated with healing > > and built near red rocks that show the shape of Mother Mary > carrying > > Baby Jesus and two Nuns guarding them... > > > > My eyes fell very naturally at the other end of the rocky range and > I > > was amazed to see not one but two symbols: One Divine and one as we > > see on this earth! I will let the forum take it from there! > > > > Now on to the more difficult process of figuring out this upload > > download thing! > > > > RR > > > > <%40>, > " panditarjun2004 " > > <panditarjun2004@> wrote: > > > > > > dear RRji > > > > > > your observation of distortion is logically and realistically > > > possible for all ancient classics. but we have now these things > > > available in print and hence it is taken as an authority. the > gita > > > is the holy book of our country and is recognised by the > government > > > of india. gita too has many verses which contradict one > another. > > > this also is mythology. some may say that it is history. but > the > > > vishvaroopa of great size and enormous proportions is all > mythology > > > and the government beleives in it. > > > > > > in south india especially kerala and andhra pradesh, there are > many > > > internationally reputed athiests who were mostly erudite brahmins > > who > > > were wellread of all classics and some are even great poets etc. > > > they used to say that puranas were taught by word of mouth and > > hence > > > it is subject to change from mouth to mouth until the last time > it > > > appeared in print. going by this logical theory of twisting and > > > changing when changed from mouth to mouth, the original might get > > > changed but since all these are matters of faith and belief, > > readers > > > does not bother much if they have to believe in a mythology. > > > > > > in shivapurana itself in the rudraksha chapter, one verse says > that > > > smallest size rudraksha is rare and more powerful, whereas in > other > > > verses the bigger the size the more powerful the rudraksha is. > > > > > > hence if some contradictions or illogical or irrational and > > > unacceptable things are written in these published classics, one > > may > > > ignore and leave them as no one is forcing other to believe > these. > > > after all, astrology or mythology is a subject matter of > > > solicitation. devotees throng to a temple on their own as they > > > believe in the diety installed in that temple. similarly natives > > > visit an astrologer thinking that they can hear something from > that > > > astrologer. all these solicited matters are based on faith and > > > belief. > > > > > > in old testament of the bible, some scientists disproved the noah > > ark > > > theory and the great watery marooning of the globe that > preceded. > > > but there are again several christian researchers who supposedly > > > discovered the remnants or traces of the lost ark and are > striving > > to > > > prove it true. > > > > > > recently some christian missionaries have identified and fixed a > > > small cave near rishikesh as the place where jesus christ > meditated > > > earlier so that this hindu pilgrimage would also become famous as > a > > > christian pilgrimage attracting lot of christian believers to > visit > > > rishikesh. all these are matters of faith and belief. if > someone > > > visits that cave and imagine that jesus was there earlier, there > is > > > no wrong in him doing so, for it is his faith. > > > > > > hence my submission is that for x number of believers, we will > have > > y > > > number of disbelievers as well and each has his own way to see > > things > > > and both live in mutual coexistence peacefully. > > > > > > with best wishes and blessings > > > pandit arjun > > > www.rudraksharemedy.com > > > > > > --- In <%40>, > " Rohiniranjan " > > > <rohini_ranjan@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Just to focus on one point in your post: I did not call that > > > > information objectionable or rubbish, just irrelevant and not > of > > > > practical importance. However if BPHS (as opposed to more > recent > > > 16th > > > > century texts written for Rajas and Maharajas by jyotishis in > > their > > > > employment or protection etc) were written for Kings and > Emperors > > > then > > > > definitely makes sense. > > > > > > > > Speaking of rational approach, given the many versions of BPHS > > and > > > > similar " classics " some individuals wonder if some of the > > material > > > is > > > > not original but insertions by later day custodians of these > > books. > > > Is > > > > this also not possible for other ancient texts, scriptures and > > > stories > > > > therein? > > > > > > > > RR > > > > > > > > --- In <%40>, > " panditarjun2004 " > > > > <panditarjun2004@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > dear RRji and others > > > > > ... > > > > > as RRji has > > > > > pointed out even in these samhitas and shastras there are > > certain > > > > > rules and paras which are objectionable and rubbish and > > illogical > > > for > > > > > the so called modern thinking men and women. > > > > > > > > > > as regards the minutest micro level description of women by > > sage > > > > > parashara, these are the details searched by some kings in > > whose > > > > > court astrologers were guided and hence even subjects like > > these > > > were > > > > > given to cater to the requirements of the kings. otherwise > > also > > > i do > > > > > not find any wrong in such narration. it is up to us whether > > to > > > take > > > > > it or leave it. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Love is a Beauty of Soul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 I had a good chuckle over your one liner:) ms --- Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan wrote: > Gee Manoj! > > For a second I thought you were rebutting my post! > ;-) > > <<crestfallen due to inattention!>> > > RR > > , Manoj > Sharma > <manojsharma662000 wrote: > > > > Hi guys, > > > > I am slightly appalled over the following story. > My > > following observation is merely an attempt to give > a > > different perspective on the story, and is > definitely > > not to cast any aspersion on the erudition of any > > scholar on this list. I just thought that people > > understand that if we approach the religious text > > sacramentally, we are admitting to the limitation > of > > our own interpretation. > > > > I will be brutally honest here; I am actually > > shell-shocked over this story, and more > importantly, > > over the paradoxically seemingly popular > > interpretation of this story that vilifies the > women > > no end. I respect women, admire them and I have no > > qualms in admitting that I am very fond of them. > And I > > am sure most of the readers would feel the same as > > regards the women folk. > > Coming back to the point, `interpretation " is the > key > > word here. If we try to interpret every word in > > religious scriptures (Puranas) literally, then we > > would be forced to lament over own situation. Only > God > > knows what the actual import of the Puranas were > meant > > to be. The scriptures are meant to emphasize > virtues > > in somewhat amusing manner. As is the case of any > > literary form, scriptures were also written to > > educate/inform with lots of elements thrown in for > > amusement purposes. Many times, the scriptures > were > > written in certain context. You change the > context, > > and the meaning of words could turn out to be > > sickening. One reader has already pointed out that > the > > `apsara' wanted Narad Muni to not to squander his > > `brahamcharya' and that is why she came out with > all > > the purported vices of woman folk. I reiterate > here: > > Interpretation and Context are the key words. > > > > The scriptures say that many times the Lord > > reincarnates himself in forms lower than humans. > At > > other times, the scriptures say, Lord chooses to > > manifest Himself in forms such as half man, half > lion > > that are incomprehensible from the standpoint of > > ordinary rationality. But the scholars would > interpret > > this story as the suggestion that the enterprise > of > > being human is always fraught with the most > hazardous > > consequences, and that those forms of life, which > we > > habitually consider below us, might have in them > the > > intimations of divinity. On the other hand, one > may > > choose to interpret this story literally, and > actually > > believe that a half man, half lion that is > incarnation > > of Lord did kill the `rakshasa'. Nothing wrong in > it, > > but the actual import will be lost. > > > > I am again requesting not to jump in front of me > with > > guns drawn. People, who are incapable of > entertaining > > other positions with respect to their religious > > beliefs, are correctly called heretical extremist. > And > > if one talks about Puranas and scriptures in a > Hindu > > setup, he can not be a heretical extremist. > > > > By the way, after a long time, I felt such a > strong > > urge to write on this list. The content of the > thread > > literally anguished me...just stirred my > humanistic > > sensibilities...no offence to anyone though! > > > > Best Regards > > > > Manoj Sharma > > > > --- Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan wrote: > > > > > Simple question that has been intriguing me, > > > Arjunji! Please do not > > > treat this as an expression of distrust or > > > challenge! > > > > > > How come the SAGES, celibate and for eons > presumably > > > knew so much > > > about grihasta women and kept returning to the > topic > > > as to what they > > > should do or not! > > > > > > On that note, what is your understanding of SAGE > > > PARASHARA's chapter > > > 83: Atha angalakshanaphalaadhyaya which pretty > much > > > deals with very > > > intimate details about the female body! > > > Interestingly, Santhanam's > > > version completely ignores this chapter. > > > > > > Why would a sage of Parashara's calibre include > this > > > chapter and how > > > does it help the jyotishi or jaataka or in this > case > > > Jaatikaa? > > > > > > > > > I have stated earlier too, several times that I > do > > > not believe that > > > Jyotish was created for the sages and saints and > > > those with one-way- > > > ticket to Himalaya or whatever spiritual > destination > > > of their choice > > > etc! Jyotish was created for the grihasta and > > > despite the few > > > pravrajjyaa yogas thrown in here or there for > > > completion, the BODY of > > > Jyotish deals with and is for the grihasta! > > > > > > And if they are serious about it, any > intelligent > > > grihasta or worldly > > > individual can learn jyotish it and practice it, > > > beneficially for > > > themselves and for others! If they are sincere > and > > > serious about it! > > > > > > And they do not need any mumbo jumbo or black > magic > > > to go along with > > > that, truth be told! > > > > > > Rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > > , > > > " panditarjun2004 " > > > <panditarjun2004@> wrote: > > > > > > > > dear prashantji > > > > > > > > thanks for your positive feedback. your > > > observation is correct > > > that > > > > this is what was written by the sages > thousands of > > > years ago and > > > may > > > > look primitive to modern women. > > > > > > > > but it is what is there in the puranas and > even in > > > mahabharata. > > > > similar and more strict orthodox things were > > > mentioned in the old > > > > testament of the bible. just because > generations > === message truncated === Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 Dear Manojji, Hearing from you after a long time. //Interpretation and Context are the key words // I had written exactly the same thing, but in different words, much before your message, but it seems that my mail has missed appearing on this Forum, due to hundreds of possible reasons. People interpret wrongly , and also do not mention the full context , where what appeared in midst of what. They thus run away after their base realisations met,without understanding the impilications of such half truths displayed and exposed to innocent minds. I second to all what You have mentioned. rgrds/Bhaskar. , Manoj Sharma <manojsharma662000 wrote: > > Hi guys, > > I am slightly appalled over the following story. My > following observation is merely an attempt to give a > different perspective on the story, and is definitely > not to cast any aspersion on the erudition of any > scholar on this list. I just thought that people > understand that if we approach the religious text > sacramentally, we are admitting to the limitation of > our own interpretation. > > I will be brutally honest here; I am actually > shell-shocked over this story, and more importantly, > over the paradoxically seemingly popular > interpretation of this story that vilifies the women > no end. I respect women, admire them and I have no > qualms in admitting that I am very fond of them. And I > am sure most of the readers would feel the same as > regards the women folk. > Coming back to the point, `interpretation " is the key > word here. If we try to interpret every word in > religious scriptures (Puranas) literally, then we > would be forced to lament over own situation. Only God > knows what the actual import of the Puranas were meant > to be. The scriptures are meant to emphasize virtues > in somewhat amusing manner. As is the case of any > literary form, scriptures were also written to > educate/inform with lots of elements thrown in for > amusement purposes. Many times, the scriptures were > written in certain context. You change the context, > and the meaning of words could turn out to be > sickening. One reader has already pointed out that the > `apsara' wanted Narad Muni to not to squander his > `brahamcharya' and that is why she came out with all > the purported vices of woman folk. I reiterate here: > Interpretation and Context are the key words. > > The scriptures say that many times the Lord > reincarnates himself in forms lower than humans. At > other times, the scriptures say, Lord chooses to > manifest Himself in forms such as half man, half lion > that are incomprehensible from the standpoint of > ordinary rationality. But the scholars would interpret > this story as the suggestion that the enterprise of > being human is always fraught with the most hazardous > consequences, and that those forms of life, which we > habitually consider below us, might have in them the > intimations of divinity. On the other hand, one may > choose to interpret this story literally, and actually > believe that a half man, half lion that is incarnation > of Lord did kill the `rakshasa'. Nothing wrong in it, > but the actual import will be lost. > > I am again requesting not to jump in front of me with > guns drawn. People, who are incapable of entertaining > other positions with respect to their religious > beliefs, are correctly called heretical extremist. And > if one talks about Puranas and scriptures in a Hindu > setup, he can not be a heretical extremist. > > By the way, after a long time, I felt such a strong > urge to write on this list. The content of the thread > literally anguished me...just stirred my humanistic > sensibilities...no offence to anyone though! > > Best Regards > > Manoj Sharma > > --- Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan wrote: > > > Simple question that has been intriguing me, > > Arjunji! Please do not > > treat this as an expression of distrust or > > challenge! > > > > How come the SAGES, celibate and for eons presumably > > knew so much > > about grihasta women and kept returning to the topic > > as to what they > > should do or not! > > > > On that note, what is your understanding of SAGE > > PARASHARA's chapter > > 83: Atha angalakshanaphalaadhyaya which pretty much > > deals with very > > intimate details about the female body! > > Interestingly, Santhanam's > > version completely ignores this chapter. > > > > Why would a sage of Parashara's calibre include this > > chapter and how > > does it help the jyotishi or jaataka or in this case > > Jaatikaa? > > > > > > I have stated earlier too, several times that I do > > not believe that > > Jyotish was created for the sages and saints and > > those with one-way- > > ticket to Himalaya or whatever spiritual destination > > of their choice > > etc! Jyotish was created for the grihasta and > > despite the few > > pravrajjyaa yogas thrown in here or there for > > completion, the BODY of > > Jyotish deals with and is for the grihasta! > > > > And if they are serious about it, any intelligent > > grihasta or worldly > > individual can learn jyotish it and practice it, > > beneficially for > > themselves and for others! If they are sincere and > > serious about it! > > > > And they do not need any mumbo jumbo or black magic > > to go along with > > that, truth be told! > > > > Rohiniranjan > > > > > > , > > " panditarjun2004 " > > <panditarjun2004@> wrote: > > > > > > dear prashantji > > > > > > thanks for your positive feedback. your > > observation is correct > > that > > > this is what was written by the sages thousands of > > years ago and > > may > > > look primitive to modern women. > > > > > > but it is what is there in the puranas and even in > > mahabharata. > > > similar and more strict orthodox things were > > mentioned in the old > > > testament of the bible. just because generations > > or living habits > > > have changed, neither hindus have deleted these > > chapters from > > puranas > > > nor christians deleted these rules from old > > testament. puranas are > > > treated with same holiness even today as they were > > earlier. > > > similarly the holy bible remains the same holy > > both for old as well > > > as new testaments even today. > > > > > > my mail was written in simple english language and > > emphasised > > several > > > times both before the story and after the story > > and even in the > > story > > > also the sages were CLEARLY NARRATING THIS TO > > THEIR TARGET AUDIENCE > > > WHO ARE THOSE MEN WHO SEEK LIBERATION AND > > DETACHMENT FROM WOMEN. > > > > > > from this one must understand that if a person > > wants attachment > > with > > > women and dont want liberation, he shall simply > > ignore this story > > > which was narrated by the sages only to those > > sages who seek > > > liberation and detachment from women. > > > > > > to all those members who are living in grihastha > > and wish to have > > > attachment with woman, they may just ignore this > > story which is not > > > meant for them. > > > > > > with best wishes and blessings > > > pandit arjun > > > www.rudraksharemedy.com > > > > > > > > > , Prashant > > Kumar G B > > > <gbp_kumar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Arjunji > > > > > > > > this is a good post except that it doesnt fit > > our age anymore as > > > men and women need each other to push their > > careers, opportunities > > on > > > the fast track and all is fair in love and war is > > what shakesphere > > > said now u can add in business, politics or just > > in life as such > > > > > > > > when its a rats race we have to live like rats > > > > > > > > but surely for those who want to choose the path > > of liberation, > > > service and can afford to live all by himself on > > natures offerings > > of > > > good food, shelter it is ok > > > > for anyone living in the mundane world options r > > becoming less to > > > live a orderly, honest, chaste life so it is live > > and let live > > > > > > > > and when we blame women we must also put the men > > in same basket > > as > > > they r the ones giving it > > > > > > > > just like a match stick and fire relationship > > has many ends- a > > > cooking or heating source or a destroying source > > when uncontrolled > > > > > > > > best wishes > > > > > > > > panditarjun2004 <panditarjun2004@> > > > wrote: dear friends > > > > > > > > following is taken from the 29th chapter titled > > " women's nature " > > > from > > > > uma samhita in shivapurana. this particular > > story is available > > in > > > > volume 3 of the english shivapurana pages 1551 > > to 1554 published > > > by > > > > motilalbanarsidas. > > > > > > > > ============quote============ > > > > vyasa says: o sage sanatkumara, please narrate > > succinctly what > > was > > > > mentioned by pancachuda that women are > > despicable. > > > > > > > > sanatkumara says: i shall explain the nature of > > women as it is, > > > listen > > > > to it, merely hearing which results in > > detachment. women are > > > > lightminded. they are at the root of all > > troubles. attachment > > > towards > > > > them shall not be pursued by wakeful persons > > who desire > > > liberation. in > > > > this respect they quote an ancient tradition, > > the conversation > > of > > > > narada with the unchaste woman pancacuda (an > > apsara). formerly > > > while > > > > the intelligent celestial sage narada was > > wandering in the > > worlds > > > he > > > > saw the beautiful celestial damsel pancacuda. > > naradas askes her > > > to > > > > narrate the nature of women for the benefit of > > the world. > > > === message truncated === > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 Dear Panditji, Pranams, In no classics, Shastras, Jyotish, or otherwise, including religious Bhagavad Gita or the Bible, are any verses mentioned which contradict each another. It is our perception and intelligence which varies from individual to individual, which makes us feel and see these verses as distortions or contradictions, which is actually not. One needs a Yogic insight and intuition power to gauge and understand the subtle truths mentioned therein,which are not apparently mentioned clearly lest these be used wantonly by the commoners to achieve mean ends. Period. regards, Bhaskar. , " panditarjun2004 " <panditarjun2004 wrote: > > dear RRji > > your observation of distortion is logically and realistically > possible for all ancient classics. but we have now these things > available in print and hence it is taken as an authority. the gita > is the holy book of our country and is recognised by the government > of india. gita too has many verses which contradict one another. > this also is mythology. some may say that it is history. but the > vishvaroopa of great size and enormous proportions is all mythology > and the government beleives in it. > > in south india especially kerala and andhra pradesh, there are many > internationally reputed athiests who were mostly erudite brahmins who > were wellread of all classics and some are even great poets etc. > they used to say that puranas were taught by word of mouth and hence > it is subject to change from mouth to mouth until the last time it > appeared in print. going by this logical theory of twisting and > changing when changed from mouth to mouth, the original might get > changed but since all these are matters of faith and belief, readers > does not bother much if they have to believe in a mythology. > > in shivapurana itself in the rudraksha chapter, one verse says that > smallest size rudraksha is rare and more powerful, whereas in other > verses the bigger the size the more powerful the rudraksha is. > > hence if some contradictions or illogical or irrational and > unacceptable things are written in these published classics, one may > ignore and leave them as no one is forcing other to believe these. > after all, astrology or mythology is a subject matter of > solicitation. devotees throng to a temple on their own as they > believe in the diety installed in that temple. similarly natives > visit an astrologer thinking that they can hear something from that > astrologer. all these solicited matters are based on faith and > belief. > > in old testament of the bible, some scientists disproved the noah ark > theory and the great watery marooning of the globe that preceded. > but there are again several christian researchers who supposedly > discovered the remnants or traces of the lost ark and are striving to > prove it true. > > recently some christian missionaries have identified and fixed a > small cave near rishikesh as the place where jesus christ meditated > earlier so that this hindu pilgrimage would also become famous as a > christian pilgrimage attracting lot of christian believers to visit > rishikesh. all these are matters of faith and belief. if someone > visits that cave and imagine that jesus was there earlier, there is > no wrong in him doing so, for it is his faith. > > hence my submission is that for x number of believers, we will have y > number of disbelievers as well and each has his own way to see things > and both live in mutual coexistence peacefully. > > with best wishes and blessings > pandit arjun > www.rudraksharemedy.com > > , " Rohiniranjan " > <rohini_ranjan@> wrote: > > > > Just to focus on one point in your post: I did not call that > > information objectionable or rubbish, just irrelevant and not of > > practical importance. However if BPHS (as opposed to more recent > 16th > > century texts written for Rajas and Maharajas by jyotishis in their > > employment or protection etc) were written for Kings and Emperors > then > > definitely makes sense. > > > > Speaking of rational approach, given the many versions of BPHS and > > similar " classics " some individuals wonder if some of the material > is > > not original but insertions by later day custodians of these books. > Is > > this also not possible for other ancient texts, scriptures and > stories > > therein? > > > > RR > > > > , " panditarjun2004 " > > <panditarjun2004@> wrote: > > > > > > dear RRji and others > > > ... > > > as RRji has > > > pointed out even in these samhitas and shastras there are certain > > > rules and paras which are objectionable and rubbish and illogical > for > > > the so called modern thinking men and women. > > > > > > as regards the minutest micro level description of women by sage > > > parashara, these are the details searched by some kings in whose > > > court astrologers were guided and hence even subjects like these > were > > > given to cater to the requirements of the kings. otherwise also > i do > > > not find any wrong in such narration. it is up to us whether to > take > > > it or leave it. > > > 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.