Guest guest Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 The problem as I see it -- dear Kumarji -- as others who have experienced a few cultures and human experiences in a few countries etc is simply this: Why does PATI always come before the " vrata " ? WHERE in this codicil that pious people had been talking about for seemingly " ever " do the obligations of the PATI come or get discussed? I realize that it is difficult to let go of the status quo particularly in a fundamentalistic milieu, but is that right? Morally?? I pose that to ordinary grihasthas and not the 2% or less that represent the Spiritually Mensa elites that I am sure exist in our reality! Even the worldly reality where energy exchange keeps bodies alive -- as Reiki lingo goes! Rohiniranjan , Prashant Kumar G B <gbp_kumar wrote: > > Dear Shevani, RRji and other members, > > When we see the combined picture of what has been said by all of us here we will get what Arjunji said > > his points were simple > > that women in revered list of pativratas were rare and they could change, curse even the Gods when they were betrayed or hurt > and how easy it is for them or even men to loose their moral fiber > and RRjis views that this is part of a karmic cycle of birth, re- birth where we r not sure of what we see as torture, harassment or enjoyment whatever is part of some of the older lives accounts > > in Mahabharatha we see such a reference in SWARGA PARVA when Yudhistra see his brothers in Hell and Duryodhana and his brothers in heaven as he enters Heaven [for a few minutes] > > this was to cleanse his sin of lying to his Guru Dronacharya on ashwathama's [an elephants death] but it wa to weaken his resolve when he did not hear that it wa a eleplant that was said in low voice > > so ydhistra seeing his brothers suffer for a few minutes itself found it hard similarly some good done by Duryodhana and company gave them the few minutes of heavenly accommodation but rest of their karma took them back to hell > > > we must see things holistically and and emotionally as RRji said and understand arjunjis post in right way > sure for the failings on morality both men and women are equal and if this makes things better > but for RAMA no other man is caled a Marayada purushottama so most Avatars of gods itself were suspect to bring some good result > > but to do good things also using bad means were not recommended is the essence but when it had to be done its price had to be paid > > this is given by the earlier post of arjunji on Brinda's curse to Sri Vishnu > > this also shows that we have 5 WOMEN ATEAST whom we quote and revere and there IS JUST ONE SRI RAM we can quote SO THE GUILT blame is too obvious > > > > Best wishes > Best wishes > > Rohiniranjan <rohini_ranjan wrote: Dear Sheevani and other readers, > > Another factor to be seriously considered (if we believe in karma and > rebirth) is simply this: > > Who is to say that women born today may not be the fragments of the > same soul that at one point many births ago experienced oppression? > Or the converse is true too: Those who oppressed or abused etc will > have to be born as the oppressed to realize things such as: > > Do they dish out what they received earlier, out of vengeance? > Do they have a better understanding of why one human turns against > another? > Do they now have the full story and greater understanding of this > complex phenomenon called Human Experience? > > I see a lot of see-sawing that goes in minds about what is fated and > what is the product of free will and rational choice and thus > personal responsibility. > > Not that it is easy to figure out or even consistently understand > what indeed is the final Truth in all this. Many of these are emotion > driven conclusions (regardless of the moral aspect). > > When we hear of a child being harmed, we immediately accuse the > perpetrator and deem it to be a sin and punishable act (and it would > be my first reaction too -- like the news story in Saskatchewan, > Canada where an individual was picked up with severe hypothermia and > nearly dead. After 8 hours he 'thawed' enough to enquire about his > daughters who were with him, 3 and 1 year old, a search for whom > began and both were found frozen and dead! This is an example where > our first reaction would be: What kind of a father this is who would > take his daughters out on a day like this (they are experiencing > extreme cold weather with -50 degrees celsius temperatures!) and risk > three lives? A no brainer, but who really knows what the Leela behind > all this was or about? > > But we feel differently when we hear of an aged dictator dying. > > Who was the bigger sinner? The distraught, stoned, dumb-witted father > whose *poor choices* led to his daughters' death? And who would > probably get life sentence for what he did? > > Or the dictator who killed hundreds of thousands and tortured many > more for decades and then was kept alive for few more decades > until " multiple organ failures " caused a natural death and he pretty > much continued to live like a king, albeit exiled while his history > and acts shall keep thumbing their collective noses for eons to come! > > There are hundreds and thousands of similar examples worldwide and > you would not even need to go back more than 100-200 years in history > to find those! > > I see there a double standard in terms of morality, globally! Am I > the only one? > > We always reach out for convenient targets as we skirt around REAL > issues! > > Namastey! > > RR > > , " sheevani147 " > <sheevani147@> wrote: > > > > Namaste.. > > > > Bhaskar ji good observations and well said.. > > > > Panditji, though I understand your intentions are noble trying to > > present the powerfulness of pativarta woman, but generalising > womens > > nature in such poor light is not helpful, be it that it was in the > > purans of thousands of years ago.. Vulnerable individuals can use > it > > to justify greater astroscities towards women.. Woman were taken as > > throphies in battles etc.. Not many will appreciate that those > times > > very different, women were helpless victims, whose rights and views > > were not even entertained or sought.. they lives had been one of > > bondage and servitude, no more than domesticated animals.. > > > > The 5 digits on the same hand are all different in shape, size or > > length and placement, yet each digit is valuable and if any is > hurt, > > the pain is the same and real. Generalising about any gender or > race > > or colour etc is not fair nor helpful > > > > Men need guidance for obtaining detachment from women?? What does > it > > say about men?? > > > > As I understand, the detachment should be from lust.. not women.. > > > > > > A liberated individual see the whole world as God's creation, every > > living and non living thing is loved,respected, appreciated and > s/he > > is impartial.. S/He has divine love for all, men, women, child, > > elderly, animals and enviroment, except there isnt the attachment > to > > anyone or anything. His love is totally unconditional and for > > everyone. > > > > > > Regards > > Sheevani > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " > > <bhaskar_jyotish@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Shri Panditji, > > > > > > Few Observations- > > > > > > 1) there are many pativrata stris (Women) > > > in todays societies too, in normal middle > > > class households,more than we may know, > > > who mantain their dignity amongst assaults > > > of poverty,materialstic wants unfulfilled, > > > and weight of too many responsibilities > > > on their nimble delicate shoulders. > > > > > > 2) It is a mistake if one may think that > > > Grihastas are supposed to persue > > > detachment from women to gain > > > liberation. It is not only from > > > women but from all desires and > > > attractions, that one grihasta or any > > > one who has taken sanyaas, both can think > > > of gaining liberation. In fact unless the > > > requisite of male-female bonding is not made > > > one cannot even think of Liberation- > > > Why ? because he would not have been born > > > in the first place. One cannot produce > > > detachment from his mother and hope to gain > > > liberation . Can he ? Cause his mother > > > too is a women. The norms of detachment have > > > to be the same for oth Sanyasi and Grihasta, > > > except that the Grihasta would be bound > > > by his duties to deliver,which on the contrary > > > would accelerate the liberation, if done > > > selflessly and with detachment to the results. > > > > > > 3) If this article was meant for the target > > > audience for Sahes and Mahatmas who in yore > > > had to gain lberation through detachment from the > > > women, then what is this article doing here on this > > > Forum ? Who is a sage or Mahatma over here ? > > > > > > 4) Sreenadh was certainly wrong, and so were you > > > by siding with his wrong translation, > > > and not reproducing of the Sanskrit shlokas, > > > which was rectfied beautfully, by Shri Narsimha > > > Rao, whose post was copied pasted here by someone, > > > and which originally appeared in the " Jyotish Group " . > > > Every word,phrase and meaning, of the wriong > > > translation by Sreenadh was set right by Shri > > > Narsimha ji.,which post you seem to have missed > > > or forgotten. > > > > > > 5) Women are great. We men spoil them. We wish > > > them to love us fiercely in our selfish > > > possession, which love when does not > > > come forth, dissappoints and causes great wars. > > > Without women man would nowhere be. > > > See them together and you seethe dualities > > > merging into one another and forming a whole > > > Wo+men = Women > > > Women can contain a man, but man cannot contain > > > a women. > > > We have to Love them, respect them, for thousands > > > of their qualities which are nought - in us. > > > > > > I personally cannot Live without a women. > > > Let her be in Form of Shakti Maa, Durga, > > > Parvati or Lakshmi or Saraswati, whichever form, > > > but I need a women in my Life to talk with, > > > to share my pains, to look upto, to seek blessings, > > > for comfort. > > > > > > What is Life without the female essence ? Zero. > > > > > > Anyway....... > > > > > > kind regards, > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " panditarjun2004 " > > > <panditarjun2004@> wrote: > > > > > > > > dear bhaskarji > > > > > > > > thanks for your feedback. > > > > > > > > for the sake of clarity, the objective of my mail is to > > positively > > > > praise the power of a pativrata like brinda and tulasi whose > > > stories > > > > i wrote earlier. the concluding line of my mail says that > since > > i > > > > wrote a couple of mails earlier on the power of a pativrata and > > > how > > > > rare a pativrata is and how powerful a pativrata is so much so > > > that > > > > even gods are afraid of her and such great pativratas have the > > > power > > > > even to curse the gods. some members may wonder how a > pativrata > > > is > > > > more powerful to curse even the lords. those members shall > > > realise > > > > that a pativrata is rarest of rare in which context the nature > of > > > > women is narrated by the sages to those who approached these > > sages > > > > seeking liberation and detachment from women. > > > > > > > > hope now there is some clarity on why the sages have narrated > > this > > > > story and who are their target audience viz. those sages or > > saints > > > > who seek liberation and detachment from women. for those > living > > > in > > > > grihastha and not pursuing detachment from women or liberation, > > > they > > > > may simply ignore this. > > > > > > > > as regards rama issue earlier, if you remember you were opining > > > that > > > > it was sreenadh's mistake of saying negatively on rama whereas > i > > > was > > > > saying that there is no fault of sreenadh since he merely > > > reproduced > > > > what is written in the valmiki ramayana. > > > > > > > > with best wishes and blessings > > > > pandit arjun > > > > www.rudraksharemedy.com > > > > > > > > , " Bhaskar " > > > > <bhaskar_jyotish@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shri Panditji, > > > > > > > > > > Pranam, > > > > > > > > > > Your post was a good one. I do not mean to > > > > > interfere in your postings, but this was again > > > > > a negative reflection on women. I think > > > > > as a good wellwisher, you would allow me > > > > > to say this. You have always guided me well > > > > > with your advises, including advise to give > > > > > free service and readings for requests > > > > > coming on the Forums, > > > > > due to which I have received lots of > > > > > accolades, gifts from God, and the > > > > > admiration and respect of the natives who > > > > > have been answered, and last but not the > > > > > least, contenetment and peace at heart, > > > > > due to this helping people. > > > > > > > > > > In the same manner it is my duty to reciprocate > > > > > these well meant advises. What text has > > > > > been quoted by you from the 'Uma Samhita' > > > > > I have read worser artciles on women from > > > > > venerated men of the past. But what is the > > > > > actual purport of displaying this negativity, in > > > > > Your mail, I quite did not understand. > > > > > I suppose, most of us who have associated > > > > > with women at close quarters, know about these > > > > > qualities of the women, which > > > > > is generalised and not categorised. I did > > > > > not understand why we have to display these > > > > > factors and show them in negative light. > > > > > Instead if you had spoken of the good > > > > > qualities of the Panch Kanyas- > > > > > Ahalya, Draupadi, Tara, Kunti, and > > > > > Mandodari, it would have been much better > > > > > reading. > > > > > > > > > > I respect you a lot, and such negative highlighted > > > > > mails as this one and the last one by you, on > > > > > Janma of Shri Rama, make me wonder > > > > > whats up. > > > > > > > > > > I am keeping myself away from free Horoscope > > > > > readings, uptil March , but otherwise aware > > > > > of all the happennings and keeping update > > > > > because Net access has to be kept on, > > > > > due to my other diversified business interests, > > > > > which you are well aware of, so automatically > > > > > I get the mails from the Forums where I have > > > > > done Individual subscription, and then cannot > > > > > force myself, not to read them. Hence I read > > > > > the mails appearing on this and few other > > > > > Forums. > > > > > > > > > > kind regards, > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , " 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Search. > > 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.