Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

ChandraS

Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby ChandraS » 23 Mar 2009 00:25

There is a famous Tamil proverb 'KanDhadu kaddugu allavvu. KaanaaDhadu kadal allavvu' - The known is but a mustard seed while the unknown is an ocean. The recent discussion on the Ramayana and Mahabharata in the Nukkad thread, until it was prematurely cut off by the discussion on ragging, was such a revelation to me. My primary source of knowledge on these two epics and others have been the bedtime stories from my parents and some books I was able to read in addition to the TV series. The range and depth of the posts indicated the presence of jingos well versed with our ancient epics and texts with their various nuances and meanings. I am sure there are many others who feel the same and would like to know more about our own culture like I do. Thus it will be a worthwhile effort to discuss our questions and thoughts on these texts and treatises helping us to be educate and inform ourselves about our own cultural masterpieces and enrich ourselves with this knowledge. Some examples for discussion - Ramayan, Mahabharata, Tulsi Ramayan, Kambar Ramayanam, Bhagavad Gita, Vedas & Upanishads, Puranas, Arthashastra, Thirukkural, Panchatantra, Jataka Tales among many other literature and philosophical sources.

To this end, this thread will be the repository for all our discussions and shall be archived for future reference. Given that a lot of Indian tests and treatises are linked with Sanatana Dharma and Hinduism, it will be a tough task to not cross the rubicon - Religion is verboten in BRF. Thus this thread comes with a few riders which are needed to ensure a civil discussion among the members.

Rules of Engagement:

While discussion on topics involving religion is allowed (in a very limited space), they will have to be discussed on their own merit with no comparison to other faith. Eg. 'X is good and Y is bad', A is better than B because...' will not be allowed. Philosophical discussion involving the Vedas, Upanishads and Puranas are definitely allowed and in fact solicited so long as they do not spiral into flame baiting amd name calling among members.
Discussion on people, personalities, characters and their action in the form of commentary and critiques are very much appreciated but character assassination will not be tolerated.
Discussion and analysis of particular events and actions stated in the texts are welcome but shall refrain from questioning or passing judgements. It is acceptable to explore the scenario 'what if..' - Eg. What if X had chosen 1 instead of 2? - but it is not acceptable to claim 'X was an idiot to chose 2 ahead of 1'.
Understand that there will be different versions and interpretations of the texts in different parts of the country and it shall be reflected in the posts. Use this as an opportunity to learn and understand more about these differences and nuances. In short, agree to disagree.

The above rules will change or be modified (made stricter or more lenient) as the thread progresses depending on the quality of discussion and the discipline of the members at the discretion of the BRF moderator team. They have been willing to give this a try on the express condition of not straying the boundaries. I have been witness to the past discussion on BRF involving religion getting heated and emotionally charged resulting in some good, knowledgeable members getting banned and the thread being closed down. This can be wholly avoided by following the RoE and realising that we are here to share knowledge and educate ourselves than to compare the size of one's manhood with the other.

In tune with the above rules, there will be a double warning rule for this thread. Any infraction resulting in a warning will include an additional warning too. Thus each instance will result in two warnings. Draconian as it may sound, it is intended to deter potential trolling, flame baiting and verbal diarrhea saving us all the trouble of having to sift through the chaff for the grain. I will be monitoring this thread on a constant basis and shall report any post not in line with the rules. I am not a moderator but I have a laser designator to cue in the drone-acharyas. So think twice, maybe even thrice before you want to post something incendiary for I will only think once and maybe not even that before I report your post. Hopefully, none of the members are suckers for hellfires in the musharraf! :lol:

PS: All the IB4TL hunters and approval stampers, this thread comes with the blessings from the mod team. Keep this in mind when the itch strikes! :D

ChandraS

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby ChandraS » 23 Mar 2009 00:29

shaardula wrote:this is what it has to be:

sdre varaha 1 (must see)
sdre varaha 2
Image

mudra


Arya Sumantra wrote:
shaardula wrote:this is what it has to be:

sdre varaha 1 (must see)

mudra


my roommate once came up with interesting viewpoint. The 10 avatars of Lord Vishnu themselves represent Evolution. The first avatar is a Fish pointing to the evolution that began with life forms in water. This was followed by amphibious avatars then land based animal forms then later ones are completely human forms.


Nayak wrote:One of my favorite story during bedtime was about Lord Ugra Narasimha. Now he is uber-cool man.

From wiki -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narasimha

like some wild beast, dread, prowling, mountain-roaming

ChandraS

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby ChandraS » 23 Mar 2009 00:32

Singha wrote:Gorshy=Vetaal of Vikramaditya and Vetaal fame. everytime you catch hold of it, it spins a yarn and flies back to its tree!

Narasimha and Varaha are my favourite avatars...love these man-beast concepts.


Nayak wrote:I see that stories of non-violence and peaceful behavior is woven around hinduism, but these goras would be surprised at some of the most violent and bloody saga found in our ancient verses. Creation evolution and destruction does not happen by exchanging flowers and singing kumbaya by holding hands.

Ramayana may be PG friendly but Mahabharat is violence and gore, heck if it is remade in a full blown 21st century style it will get a 'A' certificate.


shaardula wrote:nayak,
i too love UN. one night i wrote about LN here at nukkad. narasimha is awesome. that which could not be vanquished from within or without (what ever that symbolized), UN vanquished. btw there is a death metal band in blr that uses UN imagery. with lyrics like runda seeLidanu...

ramana you from hampe?

btw the wodeyars also used varaha extensively. wodeyars basically saw themselves as preservers of the raaya legacy. navarathri was supposed to be very big in hampe. they duly carried it out in mysore. they preserved sayana's bhashya and so on.


Nayak wrote:Shaardula-gurugaley, pranaam to meet a fellow bhakth of Ugra Narasimha.

I like MB more than Ramayana, somehow I feel MB has never been out of style. The stories are woven around basic human nature and are timeless to boot.

BTW, I hate Pandavas, I never liked Arjun, my favorites were Karna, Duryodhana, Abhimanyu and Ekalavya. Admired Pitamah Bhisma for his unwavering loyalty. Loved the friendship between Karna and Duryodhana.

I would give my left testicle to watch a uber cool manga storyline on MB.


Dilbu wrote:I like Abhimanyu. The one who cannot be vanquished as long as he has a weapon in his hand. The young warrior who broke the Padmavyuha. He was killed by adharmic battle tactics and it changes the course of war.

ChandraS

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby ChandraS » 23 Mar 2009 00:34

Dilbu wrote:
Arya Sumantra wrote:my roommate once came up with interesting viewpoint. The 10 avatars of Lord Vishnu themselves represent Evolution. The first avatar is a Fish pointing to the evolution that began with life forms in water. This was followed by amphibious avatars then land based animal forms then later ones are completely human forms.

Even the later human avatars follow a pattern of human evolution. Iron age (Parasurama), agriculture and farming (Balarama and Srikrishna), political systems like kingdom (Sri Rama) etc. Quite interesting if you observe.


Nayak wrote:
Dilbu wrote:I like Abhimanyu. The one who cannot be vanquished as long as he has a weapon in his hand. The young warrior who broke the Padmavyuha. He was killed by adharmic battle tactics and it changes the course of war.


Amar Chitra Katha had this hair raising cover of Abhimanyu battling the kauravas with the broken chariot wheel. Surrounded by dead warriors with a last ditch attempt to break out of Chakravyuha. IMHO the artist should be commended for that cover.

Added later:

Image


Singha wrote:for the nostalgic , Amar chitra katha is fully available now and still the exact same as in our childhood. some stores offer deals like the entire set for rs 2400/- or all the roughly dozen books around MB, Ramayana and so on. NRIs might consider buying the entire lot on a trip to india.
jataka tales, tenali rama, birbal and panchatantra are good too.

our schoolbooks did a terrible job in history, I learnt of rani of kittur, jhansi rani, rana sanga, ranas of mewar, prithviraj chauhan , shivaji , chandrasekhar azad, bhagat singh, kautilya, chandraguta maurya and many other patriots all through ACK.

of the MB characters I most respect Dronacharya (obviously!) and Bheesma. statesmen and teachers who were dealt unlucky hands by life but who did not forget their debt to their country.
its like the jawan who knows the caliber of our politicians and 'leaders' but still goes out there to
risk his life.

Drona was murdered by unfair means by the so-called dharmaraja :evil:


jamwal wrote:What was his original name.. Duryodhan? or was it Suyodhan?
There was one chapter in a hindi textbook I remember in which the author explained (in a play?) how Kauravs were on the right side not Pandavas and how Mahabharat is nothing more than a book written by victors to glorify themselves.


Singha wrote:duryodhana was more like fall guy who was led astray by brotherly love and mama shakuni stoking his fears and greeds. dushashana was a more uncouth chap but yet he had a reason to hate draupadi for she had mocked and made fun of them. Karna again pulled in by friendship with duryodhana.

draupadi and arjun strike me as being very arrogant. and it was love of arjun that made drona mete out such injustice to Ekalavya.

perhaps the true warrior-saint must leave aside all bonds of love, greed, fear to reach the next level.....only the elite of Rishis (Agastya, Kashyap, Dadichi, Bhrigu et al.....), Siddhartha Buddha, Mahavira, Tirthankars, Guru Nanak and a few others seem to have reached that level...they no
longer needed to use physical force for anything....a few milisecs of mental focus and the adversary
would think of himself as a toad and wander away happily or start screaming in pain :lol: remember
"Angulimaal" trying to hack Buddha and never even able to get within range of the slowly walking Saint :twisted:


SaiK wrote:similar to drona's kill is vali's story in ramayana. though vali's vengeance against sugriva could have been softer, but rama's action on him still is painful to me.


Singha wrote:indeed....tricking him into wearing a garland and then shooting him from a hidden position doesnt sit well. but perhaps the message is its fair to use unfair means to punish the wrongdoer. Vali had chased out Sugreev and taken his wives as booty...albeit Sugreev had given him up for dead, blocked the cave and become king to safeguard the kingdom.

these complex moral dilemas are a bit unique in indian stories -vs- the absolutist posture in
western stories.

ChandraS

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby ChandraS » 23 Mar 2009 00:37

Raju wrote:I have never been able to understand what really Ravana did wrong ? He first wanted to avenge humiliation of his sister Shoorpanakha and then eve when he kidnapped Sita, not a hair on her was touched.

So what was the big issue ? Ravana seemed a perfect gentleman then and even now. Contract this with how Sita was ditched by the Mahapurush just on whim.


Raju wrote:....tricking him into wearing a garland and then shooting him from a hidden position doesnt sit well. but perhaps the message is its fair to use unfair means to punish the wrongdoer.

If facing a stronger enemy perhaps .. would like India to shoot Amirkhan or Pakistan in same manner.


Singha wrote:Surpanakha had attacked Sita when Rama rejected her proposal. chain reaction starts. then her two brothers attack but get routed with heavy losses. thats when Surpanakha runs off to big bro in Lanka. perhaps big bro should have exercised better judgement and just come and asked for reparations....that could be the lesson. western historians and subaltern study indians have been
imputing sexual relations between the captured Sita and Ravana and even Hanuman! I think that
escaped convict MF hussain also painted something on those lines?

aye Raju - jayadratha was also killed using a "strategem"


Nayak wrote:
Singha wrote:
Drona was murdered by unfair means by the so-called dharmaraja :evil:


Actually Pandavas never followed any fair means to win against Kauravas. Arjuna was the supposedly best archer and yet had to resort to Krishna's help to kill Karna. Dharma-raja used a rumor to kill Drona. Arjuna hid like a coward behind a eunuch to take Bheeshma Pitamah out of the war. And yet they are revered as followers of Dharma and won the Kurukshetra justly.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Doesn't it remind you of certain pale skinned species who talk about human rights when they had earlier indulged in genocide on a civilizational scale. :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:


Dilbu wrote:
Singha wrote:indeed....tricking him into wearing a garland and then shooting him from a hidden position doesnt sit well. but perhaps the message is its fair to use unfair means to punish the wrongdoer. Vali had chased out Sugreev and taken his wives as booty...albeit Sugreev had given him up for dead, blocked the cave and become king to safeguard the kingdom.

these complex moral dilemas are a bit unique in indian stories -vs- the absolutist posture in
western stories.

The message is it is okay to use a bit of adharma in smaller dose to conquer adharma of a higher magnitude. But then also there is moral dilemma. Like asking if it is okay to bomb innocents in TSP even if it is for uprooting TSPA?

ChandraS

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby ChandraS » 23 Mar 2009 00:41

SaiK wrote:think about your wife getting stolen, and you ask what wrong did he do? supanakha was tailgating both rama and lakshman, and when she wasn't able to get either of 'em, she was jealous of sita and attacked her. so goes!.. she is one of the conditions along with kaikeyi to ramayan's important turning points.


Singha wrote:yep by fair means - Karna, Drona and Bheesma would have brought the war into a stalemate. each
was said to be capable of holding arjuna at bay for indefinite long periods.


Dilbu wrote:Lord Krishna also got involved in the war once which was against his vow. IIRC it was when Jaydradha was killed. All things said Mahabharta does look like victor's justice in the end.


SaiK wrote:Actually arjuna is the weakest link in the mahabrat story.. with out his cowardice there would have been no bhagwat gita!


Nayak wrote:
Singha wrote:yep by fair means - Karna, Drona and Bheesma would have brought the war into a stalemate. each
was said to be capable of holding arjuna at bay for indefinite long periods.


Karna fought all the four Pandavas, defeated them, yet let them survive albeit in humiliation as a promise to Kunti that she will still have 5 sons after war. I never like Arjuna btw, Krishna infact praised Karna for his superior archery skills.


VikasRaina wrote:Way back I had written a short story on Pandava and their not so fair means to win the Mahabhart war.
Whether it was getting Bhishma to commit on not killing any of the five brother or making Karan to promise not to touch any of the five brother but Arjun and of course Guru Dron was always biased towards Arjun.
Karan lost his armor thanx to Sri Krishna and then eventually got killed when unarmed and so was Guru Drona and Duryodhna.
But hey then that is the story of corruption of rulers.


VikasRaina wrote:In the end Pandav won because God himself was with them and they were fighting for the righteous cause. We can sit here and judge them on our current moral standards but then one needs a real Guru to understand meaning of Ramayana and Mahabharata.


Nayak wrote:Karna gave his armor to Indra who came disguised as a Brahmin asking for Alms. Karna never refused alms to Brahmin when he did a pooja. Indra asked for his armor and his ear-rings, Karna gave it away by slicing the armor as it was fused to his body. This despite Surya had appeared in Karna's dream warning him of Indra's treachery.


SaiK wrote:vikasraina, actually the treachery of killings when unarmed or corned into a situation to succumb is an important aspect that we should learn, and still many chalta hai hardcore honest desis don't understand.. these are the very same techniques people of the 21st century use to displace people in normal work environment. these epics teaches how to live and anticipate future problems that may come by.

Dilbu wrote:
Nayak wrote:Karna gave his armor to Indra who came disguised as a Brahmin asking for Alms. Karna never refused alms to Brahmin when he did a pooja. Indra asked for his armor and his ear-rings, Karna gave it away by slicing the armor as it was fused to his body. This despite Surya had appeared in Karna's dream warning him of Indra's treachery.

He is the true hero of Mahbharat. I love the Kathakali 'Karna sapadham' which portrays his devotion and valour well.


ChandraS wrote:
Singha wrote:indeed....tricking him into wearing a garland and then shooting him from a hidden position doesnt sit well. but perhaps the message is its fair to use unfair means to punish the wrongdoer. Vali had chased out Sugreev and taken his wives as booty...albeit Sugreev had given him up for dead, blocked the cave and become king to safeguard the kingdom.

these complex moral dilemas are a bit unique in indian stories -vs- the absolutist posture in
western stories.


If I remember my bedtime stories by my grandmas and mom, then there was a reason for Rama to hide behind a tree and shoot at Vaali. Vaali had a unique gift/power of acquiring/depleting his opponents strengths and abilities - something like kryptonite is to superman. Thus Sugreeva was never able to defeat him in combat. This was the reason for Rama to hide behind a tree and shoot at Vaali so as to not lose his strengths/abilities. Regarding the garland, I think it was Sugreeva who wore it and not Vaali. This was due to Rama's inability to distinguish between the two in an earlier fight. Of course, both the above points are from hearing bedtime stories, so I am open to correction.

Regarding the Indian stories having a more complex stroyline with nothing black and white, I can only vaguely recall a discussion between my father and maternal grandpa nearly 12 years ago. Grandpa said that this was a reflection of the fact that there was only one absolute truth and the rest was all maya, which we create and delude ourselves into craving and yearning for it. Again, I was more interested in the Ind-SA cricket going on that time than this conversation and have been kicking myself every time I recall it :cry:


Raja Bose wrote:That Abhimanyu cover art is actually from the newer versions of Amar Chitra Katha (the ones which had the glossy cover). I still have the old non-glossy version with a slightly different cover art of Abhimanyu (also looks more sketched and less slickly touched up). Amar Chitra Katha were my main source of history, not the junk written by Romila Thapar (which anyhow I only used for noting down how many times my history teacher said "I mean..." - her record was 150 in 30 mins! :mrgreen: ) I think the main guy behind the Amar Chitra Katha concept was Anant Pai (?) - he deserves nothing less than a Bharat Ratna.


Raja Bose wrote:Unlike the western epics which puts certain people on a pedestal, Indian epics always show that even the greatest have their failings, indecisive moments and human weaknesses. Much to be learned from our epics and to marvel at how Indians were able to get such deep insights so many centuries before western 'study of psychology' became fashionable.


Singha wrote:sugreev wore the garland on the second day fight. in first day Rama was unable to distinguish the
two brothers and thus did not shoot.

Anant Pai and his entire team I agree deserves a bharat ratna mki - but given the current discourse
of the day and "Pai" being a dakshina kannada surname will probably be targeted for being a yindu 'fundie'. didnt you know - dakshina kannada is the new Gujarat?


SaiK wrote:well ram-baan was kryptonite to many.. and killing vaali from behind the trees just makes the case that ram (valmiki) felt that is more injurious to ramayan story and ram's character than vali's death. the action is not as important as the motivation behind such an act.

btw, speaking of dharma and vali's act on sugreev's wife, sugreev did take vali's wife post killings. why?

i think (forgotten) rama feels about vali's killings..

and, why did'nt the thought of using hanuman to kill vali came? (no motivation perhaps, he is not a king).

it could also be to define forces in nature.. how they have to be done with.

ChandraS

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby ChandraS » 23 Mar 2009 00:45

Singha wrote:While Mahabharat and Ramayan time lines are lakhs of years old

thats where you are wrong. most of the places id'ed in the two are traceable to places in current
yindia and gandhara. dwaraka was a thriving port and its submerged ruins are also found.
these events are probably less than 4000 yrs old. mahabharata later than ramayana.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e ... ToRama.JPG

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... cIndia.jpg

keep the faith bro. did you know the Thai kings take the name of Rama I,II,....? did you know one
of them had the Ramayana translated into Tai language Ramakien and beautiful scenes from
this illustrate the walls of the holiest of buddhist temples in bangkok? Ramakien is the national
epic of thailand and their version of buddhism (Theravada) came mainly from Sri lanka.

its only the western conspirators and their subalterns who spit on asiatic traditions - east asia
is appreciative of the good things buddhism & hinduism brought.


ChandraS wrote:^Anant Pai- fondly referred to as Uncle Pai - was the man behind Amar Chitra Katha. He was also the one behind Tinkle. I was fortunate enough to hear him speak at our Class X farewell, where he was the chief guest. His words extolling us to pursue our dreams unrestrained and unshackled by any doubts or fear are still fresh in my mind.

Our classics are written for humans, by humans, based on humans. The western world 'discovered' mainstream psychology as we know it today only in late 1800's. Our ancestors knew its importance and wove into the various stories and fables to present us with this invaluable knowledge along with case studies and all.


Prasant wrote:Now that's a badass picture of Maryada Purushottam Shir Ram!

Image


Singha wrote:there is a glossy coffee table manga style Ramayana by Devi publishers (collab with shekar kapoor) available here. luminous japanese style artwork.


jamwal wrote:Singha jee

yes, I'm aware of Hindu culture in SE Asian countries. AFAIK, most of credit goes to South Indian kings like Raja Raja.
Don't get me wrong here. I have no illusions about "fairness" of Westerners, neither do I need anybody's approval about my culture.
But that still doesn't answer my questions about time lines.
Ruins at Gandhar cannot be more than 3000 years old at max. How does concept of Yug fit in here ?


FYI, here is a Discovery show on ancient Hindu temples on Youtube.
7 videos
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jw5lz0_T ... annel_page


VikasRaina wrote:
Dilbu wrote:He is the true hero of Mahbharat. I love the Kathakali 'Karna sapadham' which portrays his devotion and valour well.

Sorry my bad! you are right. What I confused it with was that Kunti revealed the secret of Karna's birth and got the promise of not killing Pandava's in return. She got no such promise from Parth her youngest son.


VikasRaina wrote:
SaiK wrote:vikasraina, actually the treachery of killings when unarmed or corned into a situation to succumb is an important aspect that we should learn, and still many chalta hai hardcore honest desis don't understand.. these are the very same techniques people of the 21st century use to displace people in normal work environment. these epics teaches how to live and anticipate future problems that may come by.

Agreed Saik. Infact in some places we see Lord Krishna extolling Parth to kill his foes whether armed or unarmed.

ChandraS

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby ChandraS » 23 Mar 2009 00:47

Arya Sumantra wrote:
Nayak wrote:Karna fought all the four Pandavas, defeated them, yet let them survive albeit in humiliation as a promise to Kunti that she will still have 5 sons after war. I never like Arjuna btw, Krishna infact praised Karna for his superior archery skills.


For all the talk about bravery of Karna even he violates rules when Abhimanyu reaches the center of chakravyuh. The rule was one warrior would fight with one warrior only at a time. They all engage in many to one simultaneous fight with one sole. So why should he cry foul when rules are broken for his killing.
As Raja bose says MB just shows a less than perfect side of every maharathi but people notice the faults of pandavas much more keenly because psychologically speaking everyone tries to balance the picture. Criticise those who are most eulogized and praise those who are most criticized.

jamwal wrote:If the science at that time was so advanced that could produce 100 kids from a single embryo, man-portable WMDs with ultra-high precision, space travel, flying machines etc., where are any remnants of that highly advanced technology?

The basis for all that "technology" is not material progress of science. Have you not seen any character shown wielding those special weapons always starts with retiring to a forest and starting with meditation.

Newton's laws of motion are applicable to sub-conscious "half-sleepy" human beings. A lot of things are possible in spiritual domain which deemed from a common sense or logic point of view are beyond comprehension. Words & language can only describe what is felt by EVERYone. For the rest of the things, Experience is everything. Unfortunate side effect of this belief is that it generates blind believers, superstitions, quacks etc leaving science as the only safe bet.

To a logical person a lot of all the spiritual miracles is "spiritual fiction" but consider this that his "logic" or common sense does not even extend to sub-atomic world. How logical it is for a sub-atomic particle to be a particle and wave BOTH at the same time? Things are either a particle or a wave by conventional common-sense. If Science has come to accept things this far someday it will progress further. For people living in Newton's time, the things supported by quantum mechanics today would have been unscientific/superstition. Isn't it?

jamwal wrote:My doubts are about time lines. Mohammed and Christ stories are less than 2000 years old. While Mahabharat and Ramayan time lines are lakhs of years old. What about concepts of Yug? How old is human civilization? 5000 -10000 years old? Where do these epics fit in then ?

It does not matter whether you believe them to stories/reality or god in one form or another. At the end of the day the only thing that matters is the intensity of devotion. Prahlad's intensity of devotion could bring out Lord Narsimha out of a stone pillar !


Bolasani wrote:All this talk of the MB reminds me of two things that bother me. I hope one of the gurus here have an answer.

1) When Pandu was made king instead of Dhritrashtra and when Dhritrashtra was made king after Pandu left the kingdom to retire to forest,
was that a permanent transfer of power or more like a regent, a temporary arrangement?

2) When Pandavas were given then own kingdom at khandavaprastha, why didnt any of the court members like drona, vidura follow them there. Would Bhishma have broken his vow if he had moved?

Regards
Bharat


AjayKK wrote:Chandamama published Ramayan. Recommended.




Image

Written over 2000 years ago, Ramayana is an ancient epic that describes the victory of good over evil. According to Hindu tradition, Rama is considered an avatar of Lord Vishnu and embodies human virtue. This story resonates with relevance even today. Chandamama’s ‘Ramayana-The Epic Journey’ is based on the Kamba Ramayana written by the Tamil poet, Kamban in the nineteenth century. Published for the first time in comic format, this version is a visual treat and will appeal to readers of all ages. Specifications Pages : 432 pages + 4 cover Format: Illustrated Style


Language : English
Price : INR 449.00
Discount : INR 90.00
Discounted Price : INR 359.00


http://www.chandamamashop.com/index.php ... ductId=105


Nayak wrote:
Arya Sumantra wrote:For all the talk about bravery of Karna even he violates rules when Abhimanyu reaches the center of chakravyuh. The rule was one warrior would fight with one warrior only at a time. They all engage in many to one simultaneous fight with one sole. So why should he cry foul when rules are broken for his killing.
As Raja bose says MB just shows a less than perfect side of every maharathi but people notice the faults of pandavas much more keenly because psychologically speaking everyone tries to balance the picture. Criticise those who are most eulogized and praise those who are most criticized.



Karna never complained about his fate. Despite all the odds stacked against him, he stood and fought. The beauty of MB characters are not all black and white a'la Ramayan, there are shades of gray.

From wiki

Karna,a true hero

Karna remains a tragic figure for millions of Hindus and Indians to this day. He remains a brave hero, a courageous spirit who braved impossible odds in his life, and died with terrific courage, valor and honor, to rise to immortality. He is especially famous for his generosity. He is also an example of how misjudgement renders all the fine qualities of an individual futile. Many of Hindus consider Karna as a man who fought against his misfortunes throughout his life without a single pause. He never got his due, but never gave up his efforts. Many of his contemporaries including Bheeshma and Lord Krishna conceded Karna was a noble spirit who rarely appears in the human race. He is idealized as an inspiration for the struggling humanity to not lose heart.


I remember in school, there was a huge following of Karna, everybody remembers the actor (Pankaj Dhir) who played the role of Karna.


Tanaji wrote:
Raju wrote:I have never been able to understand what really Ravana did wrong ? He first wanted to avenge humiliation of his sister Shoorpanakha and then eve when he kidnapped Sita, not a hair on her was touched.

So what was the big issue ? Ravana seemed a perfect gentleman then and even now. Contract this with how Sita was ditched by the Mahapurush just on whim.


I think the Sita kidnapping was just the final straw. Ravan and his hordes were guilty of other things as well such as terrorizing the humans, killing sadhus performing penances etc. They must be doing that to eat, never heard of a rakshash who was involved in farming or rearing animals, so they must be stealing from somewhere...

Ravan himself was no gentleman. Remember he tried to seduce / rape the wife of a rishi, and there were other cases of his falling for other women as well. Not to mention the whole affair of his taking over Lanka from Kuber.

But he was an accomplished warrior, in fact Ram had to do some yagya or something after killing Ravan to get over the sin of killing a brahmin.

As pointed out earlier, Indian epics have characters in various shades of gray.

ChandraS

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby ChandraS » 23 Mar 2009 00:53

Raju wrote:
think the Sita kidnapping was just the final straw. Ravan and his hordes were guilty of other things as well such as terrorizing the humans, killing sadhus performing penances etc. They must be doing that to eat, never heard of a rakshash who was involved in farming or rearing animals, so they must be stealing from somewhere...


How could a brahmin Sadhu like Ravan's father then have married into Mandodari's family who were killing Sadhus and terrorizing humans.

Imho there is something much deeper into all this.

Consider the Ram and Ravana as part of greater camps that existed then in the universe. Ram belonging to Arya camp and Ravana belonging to Danava camp. Though both lived on Earth, they had base camps elsewhere on perhaps some other planet. Ravan's father-in-law is King of Planetary system called "talatala".

And they continued this fight to earth. These two groups were inimical to each other throughout. But that need not mean that one group was entirely good and the other group entirely bad. this forms my take on affairs kinda.


Tanaji wrote:
Raju wrote:How could a brahmin Sadhu like Ravan's father then have married into Mandodari's family who were killing Sadhus and terrorizing humans.

Imho there is something much deeper into all this.

Consider the Ram and Ravana as part of greater camps that existed then in the universe. Ram belonging to Arya camp and Ravana belonging to Danava camp. Though both lived on Earth, they had base camps elsewhere on perhaps some other planet. Ravan's father-in-law is King of Planetary system called "talatala".

And they continued this fight to earth. These two groups were inimical to each other throughout. But that need not mean that one group was entirely good and the other group entirely bad. this forms my take on affairs kinda.


Could be...

To be honest we never have had an Indian counterpart of the kooks and nutjobs in the West that pore over each line in the Bible and other tomes looking for hidden meanings and clues and prophecies and codes that predict the future. It makes for entertaining reading if you know what you are looking at.

Imagine the kind of theories one could come up with if someone like those took a look at Mahabharat and Ramayan.


Tanaji wrote:Does anyone recall the Virgin comics series related to Ram? It was an impressive story line: someone finds the DNA of Ram and starts to build an offspring based on that DNA... never knew what happened next , there were no updates.


vsudhir wrote:
If I remember my bedtime stories by my grandmas and mom, then there was a reason for Rama to hide behind a tree and shoot at Vaali. Vaali had a unique gift/power of acquiring/depleting his opponents strengths and abilities - something like kryptonite is to superman. Thus Sugreeva was never able to defeat him in combat. This was the reason for Rama to hide behind a tree and shoot at Vaali so as to not lose his strengths/abilities. Regarding the garland, I think it was Sugreeva who wore it and not Vaali. This was due to Rama's inability to distinguish between the two in an earlier fight. Of course, both the above points are from hearing bedtime stories, so I am open to correction.


Very true.

IIRC, Vali's gift was that he would automatically acquire half the strength (say, x) of any opponent facing him in battle. Coupled with the strength native to him (say, b), he would always have 0.5x+b > 0.5x. Which is one good reason why Shri Hanuman (AaradhyaDev! Morally, the purest character in the Ramayana and easily my all time fav onlee) never fought him though Sugriva was nominally the leader of the exiled vaanars.

In any case, my pet theory is that if Hanuman (as an avataar of Sri Shiva) or Raama (as an avatar of Vishnu) were to go face to face with Vali, they would have equalled him (0.5 of infinity is still inifinity) or even better Vali's physical body would have disintegrated unable to bear the uploading of infinite strength onlee..... :mrgreen: :mrgreen:


vsudhir wrote:
Our classics are written for humans, by humans, based on humans. The western world 'discovered' mainstream psychology as we know it today only in late 1800's. Our ancestors knew its importance and wove into the various stories and fables to present us with this invaluable knowledge along with case studies and all.


Oh, and thats not even the main difference.

Western psy-co-logy is essentially abnormal psychology - the study of deviants to implicitly define what normal is not.
Indic psychology is premised on normality and implicitly defines what super-normality is like (moksh, nirvaan... aha).

Just my $0.02.


achit wrote:
Nayak wrote:Amar Chitra Katha had this hair raising cover of Abhimanyu battling the kauravas with the broken chariot wheel. Surrounded by dead warriors with a last ditch attempt to break out of Chakravyuha. IMHO the artist should be commended for that cover.

Added later:

Image


Bheel Mahabharata presents a different POV.
A Demon Called Abhimanyu, Son of Subhadra
boloji-Satya Chaitanya-articles
Author profile Satya Chaitanya is a management consultant specializing in Leadership Training, Stress Management, Relationship Management, Achievement Motivation, Professional Excellence, Personal Growth, Spiritual, Social and Emotional Intelligence and so on. He is a guest faculty at XLRI School of Business, Jamshedpur, one of India’s top business schools, as well as a visiting faculty at Tata Management Development Centre. Before moving into management consultancy, he taught in a professional college for several years. His interests include Indology, spirituality, literature, theatre, education, mythology, etc.


Singha wrote:can anyone remind the name of the Rishi who was very short tempered ? a real terror with his
ready shaaps.

my favourite among those I read of was the genial Agastya rishi...

infact we should discuss details of the leading Rishis and the gotras they founded...these were
people before whom even powerful kings cowered and scampered with tails between legs.

the only other personages arousing similar levels of raw fear were Durga Ma (created through a
fusion of powers from The Trinity) and Rudra (Shiva) himself :twisted: their extended battles
with vast armies of demons are legendary like the one against Raktabeeja.

Vishnu's only fearsome appearance was Narasimha, but Shiva was generally in a attacking mood
all the time...!


krishnan wrote:That is because he is the destroyer


Nayak wrote:
Singha wrote:can anyone remind the name of the Rishi who was very short tempered ? a real terror with his
ready shaaps.


Durvasa muni..... Parashurama....

Dudes flew off the handle at the drop of holy lota....


Singha wrote:Narada seemed to be the only silver tongued diplomat who could poke fun at the Gods and
get away with his life intact....Narayan Narayan!

old Rishi Dadichi sacrificed himself so this bones could be shaped by Vishwakarma into a special
weapon. it escapes me who it was meant to kill....must have been one powerful bad mojo guy


Sriman wrote:
Singha wrote:old Rishi Dadichi sacrificed himself so this bones could be shaped by Vishwakarma into a special
weapon. it escapes me who it was meant to kill....must have been one powerful bad mojo guy

It was Vritra


ramana wrote:
Sriman wrote:It was Vritra

And the weapon was called "Vajra". IAF chose that name for the Mirage. Gives you an idea of what it carries. 8)


Singha wrote:Indra was one guy who was repeatedly defeated and chased out of the heavens by powerful Asuras, mostly he would then roam around between The Trinity begging for help and advice.

Vishnu and Shiva bailed him out more times than one can remember.

while Vishnu did take life forms in ten avatars very rarely did I read of Shiva taking a direct
part in any battle even with the most vile demons. I guess his presence would immediately
lead to people falling all over themselves to sign the surrender docs and decamp for the hills.


Nayak wrote:Bhasmasura, he almost defeated Shiva. Dude had to take the help of Vishnu to defeat the asura by hoodwinking him.


Arya Sumantra wrote:
Singha wrote:old Rishi Dadichi sacrificed himself so this bones could be shaped by Vishwakarma into a special
weapon. it escapes me who it was meant to kill....must have been one powerful bad mojo guy


Rishi Dadhichi had an ashram on banks of river Sabarmati. A chapter in school textbook compared baapu gandhiji with rishi dadhichi for having 1)an ashram on banks of Sabarmati and 2)making sacrifices for general good


Raju wrote:On Youtube and GoogleVideo there are a few clips of a Zulu Shaman called Credo Mutwa and the way he recounts african history as passed down from one generation to next is very remarkable and sounds much like it belongs to some part of Indic mythology.

According to Credo Mutwa, reptile like beings created what is the present African race and they had a God with one eye in his forehead called Chitauri. What he implied was that these Chitauri beings created African race.

Are their any other Gods in Indian narrative apart from Shiva who has an eye on the forehead.

ChandraS

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby ChandraS » 23 Mar 2009 00:59

achit wrote:
Singha wrote:can anyone remind the name of the Rishi who was very short tempered ? a real terror with his
ready shaaps.

my favourite among those I read of was the genial Agastya rishi...

infact we should discuss details of the leading Rishis and the gotras they founded...these were
people before whom even powerful kings cowered and scampered with tails between legs.

the only other personages arousing similar levels of raw fear were Durga Ma (created through a
fusion of powers from The Trinity) and Rudra (Shiva) himself :twisted: their extended battles
with vast armies of demons are legendary like the one against Raktabeeja.

Vishnu's only fearsome appearance was Narasimha, but Shiva was generally in a attacking mood
all the time...!


Rishi Durvasa.
I'm not sure of Gotra but 'Dublish' in North India claim to be the descendent of Rishi Durvasa.
Dublish are known for having no 'anger management' skills. This is first hand experience as my paternal grand mother is a Dublish!!!
One of her uncles (chacha) was Shri Vishnu Sharan Dublish , participent in Kakori kaand, worked with Shri Azad, Bismil and others. Got 10 year RI for Kakori(some time in 'Kaala Pani'). 2 Times MP. He was also famous for his tempor. Family legend is that he slapped a Jail warden/worker for insulting him at 'Kala pani' and got 'special' treatment but he did it again few days later.


Singha wrote:rishi Vasistha had a ashram on the small Vasistha river near what is today guwahati but in those days pragjyotishpura. ofcourse other sources claim he lived elsewhere. there is still a ancient temple there.

afaik Agastya is the leading rishi of the Tamils?

my community is from the Kashyap gotra I was told.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashyap


ramana wrote:
Singha wrote:Indra was one guy who was repeatedly defeated and chased out of the heavens by powerful Asuras, mostly he would then roam around between The Trinity begging for help and advice.

Vishnu and Shiva bailed him out more times than one can remember.

while Vishnu did take life forms in ten avatars very rarely did I read of Shiva taking a direct
part in any battle even with the most vile demons.
I guess his presence would immediately
lead to people falling all over themselves to sign the surrender docs and decamp for the hills.



Shiva Bhagvan took to the battle field against the Tripurasuras. He gets the name Tripurantaka from that episode. It was a joint enterprise. The bow was the Meru parvat, Vasuki was the bow string and the arrow was Vishnu.


Raju wrote:Also according to Credo Mutwa, the Chitauri have a third eye on their foreheads that seem to open only when they get angry and fight between each other.

Isn't this very similar to Shiva's behaviour ?

Hindu Jats believe that they were created from Shiv's Jatta (matted hair) and thus their name. How come people so far apart can have similar narratives ?


Anujan wrote:
Raju wrote:....tricking him into wearing a garland and then shooting him from a hidden position doesnt sit well. but perhaps the message is its fair to use unfair means to punish the wrongdoer.

If facing a stronger enemy perhaps .. would like India to shoot Amirkhan or Pakistan in same manner.


NO !!!! :shock:

It represents the tension, found throughout hindu scriptures, between ethical absolutism and ethical consequentialism and the dilemma that these pose when one has to follow dharma under the tenets of Karma.

Basically it goes as follows. Everyone knows that one should follow one's dharma. It is because the universe is intricately interconnected and actions could have far reaching consequences. But what are dharmic actions ? Is killing dharmic ? Here we have a problem. Absolutism, where you declare that killing is adharma, under *any* circumstance (Gandhi is a famous adherent to this philosophy).

But then, what about killing Hitler *before* the holocaust. Surely that killing is not bad, because the *consequence* of that action would mean that so many people are spared. That viewpoint is ethical consequentialism. In that context, killing is dharmic. But how to fathom consequence ? World is so intricately interconnected, that well meaning actions can have negative results. That is why, the definition of dharma is "Dharmam Mathibhyo Uthgraha" (dharmic actions are those actions, which originate in the intellect)* Hence it is a mixture of ethical absolutism and consequentialism.

You find this tension, being explored in the form of fascinating mythological stories. Rama, the paragon of dharma, kills Vali in an apparently adharmic way the explanation being that the *consequence* of his action justified his actions - ethical consequentialism. On the other hand, Karma catches up to him, when he, as Krishna gets killed by a hunter's arrow - ethical absolutism.

Krishna exhorts Arjuna to fight against his own cousins, uncles, teachers, relatives and friends, telling him that ethically that is the right path (dharmic consequentialism), but Krishna is cursed by gandhari at the end of mahabharatha that his entire generation will perish due to his actions (and it does eventually) thereby bringing the negative effects of his actions into focus (ethical absolutism).


*As an aside. How can we rely on our judgment to decide which is dharmic and which is not ? The recipe is simple, meditate, learn history and scriptures, maintain a healthy body, follow your responsibilities and duties and have devotion to a higher power. Then you will know the right path. Thereby giving the four different paths enunciated by lord Krishna - Karma yoga, Raja Yoga, Gnana yoga and Bhakhti yoga. This need to know which action is dharmic, is the religio-cultural roots of eastern obsession with meditation.


SaiK wrote:St. Agasthya (Agathiar) came down south to avoid the tilt when all went to visit shiva's marriage with parvathi to the himalayas. :wink: . He is the panini for Tamil. Its called Agathiyam... old Tamil full of grammatical. The scripts were never available though... Sope, a new age tholkapiyam took to be Tamil's first grammar book that has three sections/topics (write, speak and meanings).

BTW, siva and parvathi are concepts of Forms and matter & Energy and power., to bring life. You need both siva (matter) and parvathi (energy) to sprout a living being., be it plant, microbes, animal or human.

Siva does not do avatar, but changes into many forms (he is matter).. all he needs to do is change his atomic structure, and he becomes various person, animal or thing. he asks parvathi to provide him the necessary power based on what role or shape he takes.. he can cloak as well.

Siva is creator(fundamental, not day to day creation that is delegated to brahma), destroyer.. none or nobody has ever seen him taking birth or has any data when he was born... he has only taken shape, and was ever existent. Vishnu tries to see his foot, and brahma his head on a challenge.. both fail.. one tells the truth, and gets blessed to take avatars, and help the world. Brahma lies having seen his head, and gets cursed to have no worshipers to follow him. Brahma hides in a lotus home sprang from Vishnu's naval.. and every time the lotus dies, brahma dies, and is reborn. This happens in 24 brahma hours.i.,e one brahma day is 4.8 human billion years. about 8.x billion years, there is a big bang., and brahma springs up again for giving rise to stars, heavens, and life like planets. Everything comes out of nothing.. anti matter.. or that dark energy during the big bang.. all fits in m theory and string theory as well.


ramana wrote:
jamwal wrote:Mahabharat and Ramayan really happened?



jamwal, In the Distorted history thread I posted a link to the book by Sri HemaChandra RayChaudhri (HRC) on "India a political history from Parkishit to the Guptas". Please download and read it. All the dynasties and king lists are recounted with timelines etc from the coronation of Parikshit.


Singha wrote:I do believe there is a 1000yr old temple in allahabad or varanasi where a celestial fire burns and is about the only temple surviving dedicated to Brahma? his female offshoot was called Brahmini and aided Durga and Kali to kill demons by sprinkling magical water on the enemy to make them weak and sleepy.

I think Kartikeya also migrated south in some anger after Ganesha pulled a fast one by walking
around his parents and claiming he had circled the earth! ..while poor Kartikeya spent lot of time
doing the actual thing on his peacock.

Kiskindha is probably located near today's Hampi. the "vanars" were probably local tribes from that area including Hanumanji.


Dilbu wrote:And is it Muni Agasthya who came into South India crossing Vindhya mountains? Vindhyas were growing continously posing a threat and Agasthya asked it to stop growing until he goes back through the mountains. The story is that the sage never went back and the height of the mountain was fixed. I remember hearing the story in childhood. I guess it must be Agasthya because of the name 'Agasthyakoodam'.

Added later: Ok found it in wiki. Agastyakoodam is far away from Vindhyas so must be unrelated.


SaiK wrote:oh yeah dedicated brahma temple is there at tirunavaya, kerala too. its quite colorful there during navarathri. without brahma there are no 4 vedas, that he represents with his 4 heads.


Arya Sumantra wrote:
Singha wrote:I do believe there is a 1000yr old temple in allahabad or varanasi where a celestial fire burns and is about the only temple surviving dedicated to Brahma? his female offshoot was called Brahmini and aided Durga and Kali to kill demons by sprinkling magical water on the enemy to make them weak and sleepy.


There is one in Pushkar too.

Heard about a temple in Rajasthan of Sahastra bahu (1000 hands) dedicated to lord vishnu. The inability of locals to pronounce judwa-akshar have resulted in the name corruption to Saas-bahu ka mandir.


ramana wrote:
Bolasani wrote:All this talk of the MB reminds me of two things that bother me. I hope one of the gurus here have an answer.

1) When Pandu was made king instead of Dhritrashtra and when Dhritrashtra was made king after Pandu left the kingdom to retire to forest,
was that a permanent transfer of power or more like a regent, a temporary arrangement?

2) When Pandavas were given then own kingdom at khandavaprastha, why didnt any of the court members like drona, vidura follow them there. Would Bhishma have broken his vow if he had moved?

Regards
Bharat


1) When Pandu retires to the forest he doenst know abbout Kunti's vardan and thus transfers power permanently to Dhritharastra, who is blind and was set aside earlier due to Vidura's objection. The idea was since Bhisma is there its OK. In the forest Yudhistir is born to Kunti earlier than Duryodhana. Its is on this that the claim of the Pandavas is based. In those days adopted/different fathered children had same rights as natural born children. If Karna had been revealed to Pandu then, by custom, he would have adpoted him and he would be the natural successor. Thats the tragedy of Karna.

2) The Hastinapura court was sworn to support Dhritharastra and the Kauravas. So no question of them leaving them to go over to Indraprastha. Bhisma's oath to King Santanu is to support the simhasan of Hastinapur. So his moving to Indraprastha would have broken his vow. In fact he gives up his life on the bed of arrows after Yuddhistir is the winner of the war and thus the Hastinapur throne is protected.

Tananji, late Iravati Karve in her small book "Yuganta" has done a critical study of the Mahabharat. I strongly urge all to read it. Boloji.com has a number of critical studies of the Mahabharata and a few on Ramayana written as small essays.


SaiK wrote:kalari payat, the martial arts that predates karate and other eastern kung fu styles, was taken to mongo land along with bhodidharma. there are two types of kalari payat, northern and southern. the northern type was introduced by lord parashuram, and southern introduction came from st. agasthya.

just amazing!


VikasRaina wrote:
Singha wrote:
my favourite among those I read of was the genial Agastya rishi...

infact we should discuss details of the leading Rishis and the gotras they founded...these were
people before whom even powerful kings cowered and scampered with tails between legs.

This is an interesting thought. We Indians always have tried to trace our ancestry back to some Rishi-Muni while Western people try to link themselves up with some King/Queen/Noble or Lord. Shows the difference of thought and POV towards life between us and them.
Wonder how many of us won't care about the Gotra while going for Marriage.


VikasRaina wrote:
ramana wrote: All this talk of the MB reminds me of two things that bother me. I hope one of the gurus here have an answer.

1) When Pandu was made king instead of Dhritrashtra and when Dhritrashtra was made king after Pandu left the kingdom to retire to forest,
was that a permanent transfer of power or more like a regent, a temporary arrangement?

2) When Pandavas were given then own kingdom at khandavaprastha, why didnt any of the court members like drona, vidura follow them there. Would Bhishma have broken his vow if he had moved?

Regards

1) When Pandu retires to the forest he doenst know abbout Kunti's vardan and thus transfers power permanently to Dhritharastra, who is blind and was set aside earlier due to Vidura's objection. The idea was since Bhisma is there its OK. In the forest Yudhistir is born to Kunti earlier than Duryodhana. Its is on this that the claim of the Pandavas is based. In those days adopted/different fathered children had same rights as natural born children. If Karna had been revealed to Pandu then, by custom, he would have adpoted him and he would be the natural successor. Thats the tragedy of Karna.
Tananji, late Iravati Karve in her small book "Yuganta" has done a critical study of the Mahabharat. I strongly urge all to read it. Boloji.com has a number of critical studies of the Mahabharata and a few on Ramayana written as small essays.

Infact Karna requested Kunti not to reveal the secret of his birth to Yudhishtar because Yudhishter in that case would have made Karna the King of Kuru Empire and Karna in return would have handed over the Kingdom to Duryodhna. That was the strong sense of duty those people had.


RaviBg wrote:Yudhishitira , after he comes to know that Karna was his elder brother, says to Kunti that he would have happily given the kingdom to him or stayed in forest if he knew that Karna was his brother.

Duryodhana was greedy. He wasn't willing to make peace with Pandavas even though they asked for just 5 villages. Dhritarashtra gave Indraprastha to Pandavas, which was empty land. With help of asura, they built a magnificient city, and performed rajasuya yagna and conquered kingdoms based on their own strength. When they lost the kingdom in the game of dice, they tried to retain it after the agreed 13 years, to which duryodhana refused. The point here is, they weren't asking Duryodhana for hastinapura, they were asking for their kingdom which they had won by their strength.

Duryodhana recognized Karna as an archer equal to Arjuna and made him king of Anga. Karna was silent during Draupadi's humiliation. He was also an active participant in Duryodana's misdeeds, even going to the forest to humiliate pandavas. But fate intervened and they were all defeated by gandharvas and taken hostage. Bheema and Arjuna had to go and rescue them after defeating the gandharvas. Same is the case with Bhishma and Drona, they refused to intervene when Draupadi was humiliated, when she begged Drona/Bhishma/Kripa to save her honor when she was being disrobed.

Similarly, Bhima defeats Karna first in battle but allows him to live as Arjuna had vowed to kill Karna. Similarly, later Karna defeats Bhima but lets him live. Same is the case between Bhima and Drona. On the day when Arjuna kills Jayadratha, Arjuna and Satyaki enter the vyuha by saluting Drona as their teacher and he lets them enter. However, Bhima treats him as an enemy combatant :) and defeats him 16 times.

Most of the the maharathis were equal in valor. However, Drona/Bhisma/Karna had to be killed based on their association. And the reason Mahabharatha appeals more than ramayan is because of the complexities involved, and the characters having to make hard choices. This mimics real life when we face hard choices over our lifetime too.

The end message which is important is that if you have God on your end, no one can defeat you. And the Bhagvad Gita is one beautiful message which is timeless in nature!!


SaiK wrote:go-tra is the place where cattle shed existed normally controlled by a main sage or ashram. the number of people lived in those days weren't counted in billions or millions, but in thousands at most. population was less. i guess, about 7/8 rishis were largely accounted for lineage system of gotras.

well, it has no meaning w.r.t blood types and relationships. since, river system breakdown due to natural calamities (see drying of sraswathi river), these nomadic groups split, but still maintained their lineage to know which ashram they came from.

people in the same gotra are considered to be brothers and sisters.. 'cause that was the only way to know which ashram they originated from. of course, dna reasoning is more scientific now.. but we as a culture have to accept that.


achit wrote:
ramana wrote:
1) When Pandu retires to the forest he doenst know abbout Kunti's vardan and thus transfers power permanently to Dhritharastra, who is blind and was set aside earlier due to Vidura's objection. The idea was since Bhisma is there its OK. In the forest Yudhistir is born to Kunti earlier than Duryodhana. Its is on this that the claim of the Pandavas is based. In those days adopted/different fathered children had same rights as natural born children. If Karna had been revealed to Pandu then, by custom, he would have adpoted him and he would be the natural successor. Thats the tragedy of Karna.


Karna was 'kanina' son of Pandu. Pandavs were considered 'Kshetraja' sons.

Hindu Law recognized thirteen kinds of sons. (1) Aurasa, (2) Kshetraja, (3) Pautrikaputra, (4) Kanina, (5) Gudhaja, (6) Punarbhava, (7) Sahodhaja, (8) Dattaka, (9) Kritrima, (10) Kritaka, (II) Apaviddha, (12) Svayamdatta and (13) Nishada.
.
.
.
If an unmarried daughter living in the house of her father has through illicit intercourse given birth to a son and if she subsequently was married the son before marriage was claimed by her husband as his son. Such a son was called Kanina.


Riddle -19 Riddle in Hinduism


achit wrote:
RaviBg wrote: Karna was silent during Draupadi's humiliation.

Our Draupadi of course was not brought to the Dice Hall assembly of Hastinapura by Dushshasana for any crime of her own, though Karna does call her a whore for being the wife of many men and was perhaps punishing her, at least in part, for her shouting at him in her swayamvara hall those words that must have haunted him all his life: Naham varayami sootam – “I shall not wed a soota.” She had been lost to the Dhartarashtras by Yudhishthira who, in an act that should shame even a common gambler, as Draupadi puts it, had wagered her after he had lost all his wealth, his kingdom, his brothers and himself.


Was Draupadi Disrobed in the Dice Hall of Hastinapura?

IMHO Karna was the rightful king of Hatinapur. He was the eldest, he was wise and he was a great Warrior. Except the above episode and killing of Abhimanyu; His story is clean.


Arya Sumantra wrote:
Raja Bose wrote:
I have no clue what is gotra, so gurus please define clearly...what is all this talk of cattle and cow sheds? :mrgreen: If in future during marriage, priest asks I will say my gotra is LMU onlee.


This is where we have some similarity with christianity. They have great deluge and Noah's ark and we have pralay too when god put Ctrl+Alt+Del to life on earth barring a few virtuous ppl. During this pralay the seven rishis perhaps with other species get on board a boat. During the pralay or flood the boat is connected by a rope to a horn on giant fish Matsyavatar of lord vishnu who clears it out of harm's way. At the end of pralay, the seven rishis reboot the life on earth. We all are descendants of one or the other of these 7 rishis with our forefathers being from their respective hermitage (or ranch :wink: ). So your gotra is name of rishi whose hermitage you are descendant of and your tracking ID connecting to that event of Life reboot.
The same 7 rishis have a star named after each of them in Saptarishi (Great Bear) constellation.
Just my bit of understanding. Learned gurus may correct.


SaiK wrote:the dating don't match.. pralay happens at every yuga.. dwaraka is consumed by arabian sea now and as visible by coastal radar and ASI's work on the artifacts. the matsya avatar is way ahead of noah's ark story, that may fall on the lines of ice age melts..along with dwaraka and the submerge of mahabalipuram as well, guesstimates are between 10K-13K years back.. end of the ice age melt that started about 20-30K years back.

wasn't the ark story written by moses later.. where did he hear it? every religion, culture has stories there were passed down, and finally some on wrote it.

ChandraS

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby ChandraS » 23 Mar 2009 01:07

Dilbu wrote:OM Namah Shivaya led by Bernie Heideman CANYONLANDS DANCE CAMP UTAH

ticky wrote:@Arya. Most cultures, religion around the world do have stories of a great flood. I read about it in a book long time back

Also I wikied and found this


RamaY wrote:
Raju wrote:....tricking him into wearing a garland and then shooting him from a hidden position doesnt sit well. but perhaps the message is its fair to use unfair means to punish the wrongdoer.


FWIW

Vali has a boon that anyone comes in front of him will lose half his strength to Vali. Evan Ravana tried to beat Vali from behind when Vali was offering tarpanas, and that was a different story.

Vali himself asked Rama the same question. Is it Dharma to kill him from hiding?

Rama gave his answer and Vali was satisfied. One can read this Rama-Vali argument in Ramayana. In fact Vali was so convinced with Rama’s Dharma that he advises Sugriva (his brother) and Angada (his son) to revere Rama and do whatever he says.

Rama’s Dharma-sukshma was:
1. Vali did not forgive his brother even after Sugriva explained and agreed his confusion/mistake.
2. He kicked Sugriva unlawfully out of his kingdom
3. Vali took Sugriva’s wife (even though it was an acceptable custom, in case of the brother’s death)
4. And Rama reminds Vali of his boon.
5. And finally Rama is Kshatriya and he can kill a ravage (as proven above) animal (in this case a Vanara).


SaiK wrote:nice ramay.. that cleared a few questions. so, what did rama say to vali about killing him from behind the trees. i understand, he has the right kill vanar etc.. but there are mixed messages in the logics. like having to take over brothers' wife etc, sounds so human logic.. rather vanar. we have to ensure, that both vanar and human has similar logic when rama delivers his answer.

what did rama say to vali on this? any detailed text exactly to this point>?


VikasRaina wrote:
Arya Sumantra wrote:This is where we have some similarity with christianity. They have great deluge and Noah's ark and we have pralay too when god put Ctrl+Alt+Del to life on earth barring a few virtuous ppl. During this pralay the seven rishis perhaps with other species get on board a boat. During the pralay or flood the boat is connected by a rope to a horn on giant fish Matsyavatar of lord vishnu who clears it out of harm's way. At the end of pralay, the seven rishis reboot the life on earth. We all are descendants of one or the other of these 7 rishis with our forefathers being from their respective hermitage (or ranch :wink: ). So your gotra is name of rishi whose hermitage you are descendant of and your tracking ID connecting to that event of Life reboot.
The same 7 rishis have a star named after each of them in Saptarishi (Great Bear) constellation.
Just my bit of understanding. Learned gurus may correct.


Arya, During Matsya-Avatar, Bhagwan Vishnu took the form of a Fish to save Vaivastya Manu form the great flood. There were no 7 Rishis on his boat. Manu is supposed to be the forefather of all the human life on this earth and also is commonly known as the Indian Law giver.
As far Gotra, initially there were 7 Gotra's but with passage of time and inter-Gotra marriages, the number of Gotras have shot up and their definately are more that 7 Gotra.
A question for the learned: Is Gotra only for Brahmins ? If no then every Hindu should be brahmin since most of the Rishis who formed Gotra were Brahmins and if not then How do Non-Brahmin's trace their lineage.
Also How is Gotra different from Kul like Sri Ram is also known as Raghu-Kul nandan. I get it that Kul is akin to modern Khandaan but how is it different from Gotra ?


John Snow wrote:Gotara is just lineage of having learnt the vedas from a particulr school of Thought by a Rishi or combination of Rishis, just like dean of school and then Prof under whom you did your Thesis or desertation.

Brahmins and so called non brahmins also have gotras.

The delineation between brahmins and non brahmins was not hard coded.

Those who realised Bhraman through study and rigour of living the sacrifices and rituals were accorded the title of Brahmin.
Hence surnames like Chaturvedi, Dwivedi trivedi, Ghanapati, etc.

But later on just by descedency (of bilogical) became the sign or recognition of Brahmin. Its like if your parents are from Ivy League then your admission is assured .....


Near analogous to Gharanas in Hindustani music, Bhopal Gharana may have Misra and Mehmood graduate during the tenure of Vilyat Khan :mrgreen: (all made up cases do not resemble actual named named persons, for illustrative reasons only).

Pandit Bhimsen joshi and Pandit Khan are of equal caliber :wink:


RamaY wrote:Vali's killing is a puzzle from the viewpoint of imperial politics and dharma. Hence Vali questions logically about it, even at his dying stage. The questions are as below:

1] By killing one who is facing away, what worth is achieved by you?; 2] You have not punished the wrongdoer; 3] Killed one who is combating with another and an unvigilant one; 4] In your country or city I did no misdeed; 5] Non-guilty being is hurt; 6] Fruits, tuber eating being is killed; 7] No dispute of land, gold or silver; 8] You primary aspiration is to kill without probing into good or bad; 9] How do you face criticism by scholars?; 10] Unnecessary killers are hell-goers; 11] Un-wearable is my skin uneatable is my flesh; 12] Five kinds of five-nailed animals are usable by humans; 13] I would have brought back Maithili in one day.

For all these questions Rama answers in next chapter and speaks as to how justified is this elimination, to Vali and to all of us.

Source: http://www.valmikiramayan.net/kishkindh ... _frame.htm

The Answer


1."Realise this reason by which I have eliminated you… you misbehaved with your brother's wife, forsaking the perpetual tradition. [4-18-18]

With this one and only reason Rama suffices all the thirteen questions of Vali, as summarised in endnote of last chapter. Beyond this Rama also answers other paltry questions, later.

2."While the great-souled Sugreeva is still alive, you with your habit of sinful acts have lustily misbehaved with Sugreeva's wife Ruma, who should be counted as your daughter-in-law. [4-18-19]

Vali being a king, he committed incest transgressing tradition. v˜lŸ t˜vat sva r˜jye sthitv˜ dharm˜ti kramam k®tav˜n | dharma d¨ÿaka× ca r˜j˜ avaþyam daõýanŸya× | dharm˜k¨tam This is the very fault found by Rama when expressing 'vaalii caaritra duuSakaH 'abuser of history/tradition...' in Kishkindha, 4-10-33.

3."Thereby, oh, vanara, this punishment is imposed on you, for your dissolute sinning in abusing your brother's wife, thereby for your transgression of tradition and virtue. [4-18-20]

Vali's question 10, 'inveterate killers are hell-goers...' is replied, 'killing a sinner is no sin and no hell is ensuing thereby...' is the reply, establishing Vali's sin.

4."I foresee no other kind of control other than punishment to him who conducts himself contrary to the society and who is deviant of conventions. [4-18-21]

Vali's question: 2] 'you are not punishing the wrongdoer...' is answered. saama daanam kSamaa dharmaH satyam dhR^iti 'influencing, largesse, forbearance, probity, candour' etc., will work with kings of equal status and worthiness in political strategies. But you are an inferior with an immodest conduct. Then, why should I waste that much of political manoeuvre in your regard? Thus you are eliminated straightaway...' Vali may counter Rama in asking for a lesser punishment than killing, like exiling etc., which he has given to Sugreeva. For this Rama is ready to say that no other punishment is evident than the one said by Manu: sapiõý˜patya d˜reÿu (reta× siktv˜) pr˜õa ty˜go vidhŸyate - - manu sm®ti .

5."My association with Sugreeva is as good as that with Lakshmana, nevertheless it betided with an understanding to regain Sugreeva's wife and kingdom, and he will give succour to me. [4-18-26]

Vali's question 13] 'I would have brought back Maithili in one day...' is given an answer. Bringing Maithili from the captivity of Ravana would have averted Vali's death - so Vali thought. But who will bring Ruma, wife of Sugreeva, and give her back to Sugreeva? Vali does not consider this, and in this alone Vali's transgression is said to have been proved. Thus any truce between Vali and Rama is an impossible and improbable proposition.

What all Rama wanted is the 'search for Seetha...' not bring her to his fore. Elimination of Ravana is to be done by Rama alone, for which Seetha is to be located first. If a truce is struck between Vali and Rama, Vali straightway goes to Ravana and asks for Seetha. If Ravana yields Seetha there is no cause left for his elimination. Ravana for sure refuses to yield her. Then a combat ensues between Ravana and Vali. But Vali can combat one-to-one in a duel and he may not encounter a magical war of Indrajit or Kumbhakarna. Then all the demons will combine to eliminate Vali, thus the epic concludes there haphazardly. Other way round, if Vali seeks help of Ravana and his military to combat Rama, Vali's forces and Ravana's forces will come down on a handful warriors like Rama, Sugreeva Hanuma, and Jambavanta et al. Then the whole of monkey force will be with Vali, and these few warriors will be routed down mercilessly. Above all, Rama has promised Sugreeva to eliminate Vali, the abuser of tradition, and Rama becomes blameworthy if he fails in his word. Hence the simplest formula 'enemy's friend is my enemy too...' works well and Rama followed that only.


6."I gave a promise to Sugreeva at the time of befriending him in the presence of vanara-s, and how is it possible for my kind to dishonour a given promise? [4-18-27]

In Aranya Kanda he tells Seetha, that he even leaves his life than to feign his promise. api aham jiivitam jahyaam tvaam vaa siite sa lakSmaNaam || 4-10-18. Hence there is no question of his going back on the word given to them that crave for his mercy.

7."When a renouncer has committed sin like that of the one committed by you, my venerable ancestor Maandhaata has given punishment which he desired. [4-18-33]

This is according to the meaning derived by ancient commentators which doe not go well with the import of earlier verse 'the king derives the blot if he does not punish properly' or with the next one. Rama's ancestor Maandhaata should have got that blot for not punishing a renouncer in proper way. Other mms has this verse like this: puurveNa mama maandhaataa sampraaptam vyasanam mahat | shramaNena kR^ite paape yathaa paapam kR^itam tvayaa || And which verse is to be kept, it is up to the pundits.

Rama is quoting a precedent from his own dynasty. Maandhaata has to impose capital punishment to a sage, for that sage committed some immoral act. Here also the shramaNa is used for a wandering sage, called yati. Because he is religious person is he to let off; a religious person's sinning is doubly punishable; are the problems of Maandhaata. This word shramaNa yati, need not be equated with a Buddhist monk, for they also have same titles, and Maandhaata is said to have existed long before Buddha's era.


8.Such sin is acquired even by other kings who are unobservant in imposing proper punishment, and those kings had to make amends for it at appropriate time, by that propitiation they used to mitigate that filth of that sin. [4-18-34]

The kings who are otherwise busy may not hanker after thieves and sinners always, thus they become unobservant of each and every individual's behaviour. So the kings used to make amends at appropriate time. It is up to the individual to comport properly or improperly. An offender may escape hundred offences, but if caught once, he has to pay for all his wrongdoings.

9."Thereby, enough with your annoyance, oh, tigerly vanara, as your elimination is devised righteously, and we too are not independent. [4-18-35]

They are bound by duty. They are not at their free will to act on their own whims and fancies. Vali's question: 9] 'How do you face criticism by scholars?' is answered. ' None can criticise because I have not acted on my own, but bound by scriptures and precedents...' y˜ v˜ na vadhasya vadhe t˜v˜n vadhasya mokÿõe | adharmo n®pate× d®ÿ÷o dharmastu viniyacchata× - manu sm®ti 9-249 'How much sin is acquired by executing a murderer, that much sin is acquired by executing a non-murderer...' which again is somewhat similar to the present day saying, 'let hundred criminals go unpunished, but let no innocent be punished.'

10."I have neither angst nor ire in this matter of my eliminating you, or, your reviling me, oh, best monkey, but listen to the other point I wish to make clear. People will be capturing several animals, either covertly or overtly, with snares, springes and even with numerous contrivances. [4-18-37, 38a]

So far Rama replied Vali with a view that Vanara-s are a species of Vedic-beings who hold fast to Vedic duties like sandhyaa vandana, suuryopasthaana performed by Vali, and swasthyana performed by Tara, and the other their daily routines of Veda-s. But Vali takes a U-turn declaring himself an animal and asks: 6] Why fruits, tubers eating being is killed; 11] Un-wearable is my skin uneatable is my flesh; 12] Five kinds of five-nailed animals are usable by humans...' Rama started to tell how humans deal with animals, should Vali declare himself an animal, if not a specific Vedic-being.

11."In this world even the kingly sages well-versed in virtue will go on hunting, and hunting is no face to face game, as such, oh, vanara, therefore I felled you in combat with my arrow because you are a tree-branch animal, whether you are not combating with me or combating against me. [4-18-40]

'Whether you face this way or that you are an animal, as you alone said, besides being an enemy of my friend...' For this Griffith says - I cannot understand how Valmiki could put such an excuse as this into Rama's mouth. Rama with all solemn ceremony, has made a league of alliance with Vali's younger brother whom he regards as a dear friend and almost as an equal, and now he winds up his reasons for killing Vali by coolly saying: 'Besides you are only a monkey, you know, after all, and as such I have every right to kill you how, when, and where I like.'

12."I am abiding by the ethicalness practised by my father and forefathers, but you revile me without the knowledge of rightness, just by clinging to your rancour." Thus said Rama to dying Vali. [4-18-43]

There is none to say that Vali is 'unkillable...' or 'not to be killed...' But to every one a doubt occurs as to why Rama did not come face to face with and killed him? Why hit him from a remote place? For these doubts, the above said arguments may not suffice or satisfactory, either to Vali or to us, the readers. Dharmaakuutam, the only commentary on Ramayana insofar as dharma is concerned explains that for us.

When it is said by Rama that 'today only I will kill Vali...' then it may be countered by saying, 'then why killing him from distance, why not confront him?' If Rama comes to fore, fear may grip Vali, then he may take Ruma, Sugreeva's wife, and to insult, Sugreeva further, Vali may go to a distant place with her. Or, he may seek shelter with Ravana. Or, he may even take refuge in Rama like Sugreeva. Or, on seeing Sugreeva with enough support, he may summon all his Vanara army to fight with Sugreeva and his supporters. Then it will prolong for a time. Then the promise of Rama made to Sugreeva to accord his wife and his kingdom by killing Vali, also prolongs. Justice delayed is denied. Otherwise, if Vali surrenders to Rama, as the killing of a refugee is not a merited act, Rama has to pardon Vali. Whether Vali takes refuse or not, killing Vali on that day itself, and establishing Sugreeva in Kishkindha are the promises made by Rama, at the time of befriending Sugreeva. The word given is to be kept up. So Rama did it and there is no unrighteous deed done by Rama. And Vali also accepts this in the coming stanzas.


After Rama’s Reply

That lord of vanara-s then replied Rama with adjoined palms, "oh, best one among men, what all you have said is that way proper, undoubtedly. [4-18-45]

Indeed an ignoble cannot disprove a nobleman, Raghava, and with regards to the undesirable and improper words I have unwittingly spoken earlier, in that mater too it will be truly unapt of you to make me blameworthy, as I spoke them in anguish and ignorance. [4-18-46, 47a]

Oh, Rama, the knower of probity, I am the one who digressed from the rightness and a forerunner among such transgressors, such as I am, give absolution even to me with words abounded with rightness." Vali is thus saying to Rama. [4-18-48]

He is boyish, juvenile, and the only dear son of mine, oh, Rama, as such that great-mighty son of Tara needs your protection. [4-18-52]

Oh, lord of men, it will be apt of you to show the same kind of outlook towards Sugreeva, oh, king, even towards Angada, which you have for Bharata and Lakshmana. [4-18-54]

The fault occurring from my fault of maltreating Sugreeva may not light upon that self-reproachful Tara, and it will be apt of you to see that Sugreeva will not look down on her treating her as the wife his rival. [4-18-55]

Oh, lord, oh, tremendously braving one, oh, Rama, the lord of people, I blamed you when your arrow sweltered and rendered me imbecile, thus I blamed you unthinkingly for which I may please be pardoned, I appease you for the same. [4-18-66]


Arya Sumantra wrote:
VikasRaina wrote:Arya, During Matsya-Avatar, Bhagwan Vishnu took the form of a Fish to save Vaivastya Manu form the great flood. There were no 7 Rishis on his boat.

That's not true. There were 7 rishis on the boat along with Satyavrat Manu. Off hand I can give this reference
http://www.poetryinstone.in/tag/incarnation but I have read this elsewhere too.
As had been predicted by the Divine Fish, an all-annihilating flood occurred. Meanwhile, a boat appeared where Satyavrata was waiting with the seeds, plants and animals, and the Sapta Rishi, to take refuge in the boat amidst death`s clutches.


From wikipedia
A Gotra relates directly to the original seven or eight Rishis of the Vedas.


ADDED LATER. But I stand corrected that Gotra is more like a gharana/alumni as JS says and not direct ancestral descendence or Kula.

VikasRaina wrote:As far Gotra, initially there were 7 Gotra's but with passage of time and inter-Gotra marriages, the number of Gotras have shot up and their definately are more that 7 Gotra.

quite likely. like how the four castes have numerous sub-divisions.


shaardula wrote:
John Snow wrote:
Those who realised Bhraman through study and rigour of living the sacrifices and rituals were accorded the title of Brahmin.
Hence surnames like Chaturvedi, Dwivedi trivedi, Ghanapati, etc.



ghanapaaThi(ಘನಪಾಠಿ/ఘనపాఠి/घनपाठि) thats an earned title - no? like Dr.
i may be wrong.
i have never come across anybody with that family name, even though certain families were tasked with certain styles of veda-paaTha. my marraige was solemnized by a certain sastri-gaaru who was a ghana-paaThi. other ghanapaaThis i have seen in action also had different family names bhaTTa, rao etc..


shaardula wrote:couldn't find ghanapatha on youtube. but found this life affirming rendition of mantrapuspha.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yS-Jky997Y

i swear i had a dejavu. as kids we knew naivedya was right around the corner. :rotfl:


ramana wrote:RamaY, Also look up the word "Atataayi". Vali's actions made him that.


Arya Sumantra wrote:Vishnu Cambodia, Khmer period, 7th century

The crown looks almost like Egyptian pharoahs. If not for discus and four hands it would be difficult to guess it's him.


SaiK wrote:i think question is not that vali needs punishment, but why ram has to hide and do it. he could have openly come out and shot him. he has solid reasons to kill vali, but why hide was the question. this is where the answer is not emphatic.

is it that ram might lose half his strength by not hiding?


RamaY wrote:
SaiK wrote:i think question is not that vali needs punishment, but why ram has to hide and do it. he could have openly come out and shot him. he has solid reasons to kill vali, but why hide was the question. this is where the answer is not emphatic.

is it that ram might lose half his strength by not hiding?


I cannot give a convincing answer to you. You must ask some learned person. I will let you know if I find the answer.


Singha wrote:perhaps the the true meanings of indic religions are such that it takes a lifetime of experience
and learning before in old age one finally learns what it is all about before leaving for heaven.
there are no readymade clearcut answers, there are many answers and interpretations and deliberate puzzles in the path.

for people who like it simple, totalitarian and unambiguous PBUH seems to be the best.


negi wrote:While discussing Ramayana we need to keep in mind the fact that 'Rama' was manavatar of lord Vishnu (a mortal); the entire moral of the story is how to live as a mortal .

Bali was blessed by the Gods (dont remember exactly iirc was Surya dev's manas putra) and as everyone knows anyone who confronted him would loose his half powers ,Shri Ram being a mortal was no exception to the rule hence he had to take a shot at the former from behind.


negi wrote:Speaking of Rishi munis; there was this tele serial on DD-National 'Vishwamitra' where Vishwamitra's role was played by Mukesh Khanna (Pitamah Bheeshm from Mahabharat).Another nicely made serial on Hindu mythology and very natural and spontaneous dialogue delivery from the star cast.

I wish Govermund could ban the crap being made these days in the name of Mythological serials where unnecessary song ,dance and Saas bahu BS has been crammed in. The whole serial looks a bi-product of shoddy research; incompetent crew and clueless actors.


negi wrote:Btw speaking of temper Maharishi Bhrigu is right up there with Maha muni Durvasa and Parushuram. No one prays to Lord Brahma in majority of the Hindu rituals and Lord Shiva exists in form of a Shiv ling in most of his temples courtesy Maharishi Bhrigu . :)

Iirc people who know about Lord Venkateswara (Tirupati) would also know about Maharishi Bhrigu .


Raju wrote:No one prays to Lord Brahma in majority of the Hindu rituals

Did the decline of Indian civilzation start with the negation of Brahma ?


Arya Sumantra wrote:
negi wrote:Btw speaking of temper Maharishi Bhrigu is right up there with Maha muni Durvasa and Parushuram. No one prays to Lord Brahma in majority of the Hindu rituals and Lord Shiva exists in form of a Shiv ling in most of his temples courtesy Maharishi Bhrigu . :)


The city of Bharuch, is named after him Bhrigukachh because he did his meditation there. It was called Bhrigukachh in ancient times. The same city(pronounced Broach by angrez) was a major port in ancient India. Today the seashore is far away the city. The railway station there has big image of him there.

negi wrote:Iirc people who know about Lord Venkateswara (Tirupati) would also know about Maharishi Bhrigu .


He kicked Lord Vishnu in chest to test him whether he was worthy of receiving the sacrifice.


negi wrote:
Raju wrote:No one prays to Lord Brahma in majority of the Hindu rituals

Did the decline of Indian civilzation start with the negation of Brahma ?

Infact Hindu Mythology gives a clear indication of onset of anarchy and chaos in Kalyuga when people would deviate from righteousness and indulge in materialistic pleasures and commit sins.


Singha wrote:Jamadagni was another rishi with a fiery temper.

Purush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2445
Joined: 26 Oct 2001 11:31
Location: Loc Muinne

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby Purush » 23 Mar 2009 01:29

Wow, awesome thread. I shall mostly lurk because I have forgotten ( :evil: ) much of the finer details, names of the 2nd tier characters etc of the two epics....it's been such a long time since I read them fully. About 10 years ago, I read Dr. C. Rajagopalachari's (abridged) version of the Mahabharata, and also managed to fully read the huge and unabridged Ramayana translated from the Valmiki original by another scholar (whose name I forget).

What I took away from the Ramayana was that the true Hero of the story is Laxmana 8) . He always had clarity of vision, and a firm sense of what to do and when to do it throughout the story. Rama often falters, and is filled with self-doubt/pity/loathing, and it is always Laxmana who picks him up and guides him in the right direction. The next in line would be Hanuman...also always with a firm sense of purpose and duty.

I think I shall head over to the library this week and borrow the Ramayana once again if I can find a decent version..

PS: Please avoid Ashok Banker's 'version' of the Ramayana written in the holly/bollywood ishtyle..I had the misfortune of trying to read the first book...pure, unadultered, drivel meant only to satisfy the western audience. :evil:

ChandraS

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby ChandraS » 23 Mar 2009 01:34

Sachin wrote:
Raju wrote:No one prays to Lord Brahma in majority of the Hindu rituals
Did the decline of Indian civilzation start with the negation of Brahma ?

I think there is a mythological story behind this too. Shiva had organised some sort of a competition (IIRC to find the depth of earth, and the height of the sky). Brahma gave false evidence that one party actually measured the height of the sky. In Anger Shiva, said that since Brahma has turned out to be a liar, he will not be worshipped any more.


ArmenT wrote:
negi wrote:Btw speaking of temper Maharishi Bhrigu is right up there with Maha muni Durvasa and Parushuram. No one prays to Lord Brahma in majority of the Hindu rituals and Lord Shiva exists in form of a Shiv ling in most of his temples courtesy Maharishi Bhrigu . :)

Most of my college mates didn't believe me when I explained what a shiva lingam represented :D. And they thought I'd made the whole Bhrigu Muni story by myself. Had to pull out some Moderately Enlightening books before they believed me.


ajay pratap wrote:
Sachin wrote:I think there is a mythological story behind this too. Shiva had organised some sort of a competition (IIRC to find the depth of earth, and the height of the sky). Brahma gave false evidence that one party actually measured the height of the sky. In Anger Shiva, said that since Brahma has turned out to be a liar, he will not be worshipped any more.


The story goes as

Once upon a time Lord Vishnu & Lord Brahma had a debate bout who is greater among the two, a Shiv Ling suddenly
appeared, Lord Brahma took the form of a Swan and flew to find the upper end, Lord Vishnu took the form of a wild
Boar and began digging to find the other end, Lord Brahma took the help of a flower" Ketaki" as His witness, and declared He had found the other end, while Lord Vishnu had failed, Lord Shiv, therefore prohibited Ketaki to used
as a puja item, and cursed Lord Brahma that he will find very few people offering him a Puja.

Lord Ram never shot his arrow from behind, He was under cover, his arrow had pierced "Vali's" heart, from front,
in Valmiki Ramayan(the one I subscribe) Valmiki explained it as , it was the Lord's wish that Sugriv be known as the
one who killed Vali, albeit with the Lord's help, not the other way round. Vali was manas putra of Lord Indra, Sugriv
was manas putra of Lord Surya.


negi wrote:
ajay pratap wrote:Vali was manas putra of Lord Indra, Sugriv
was manas putra of Lord Surya.
Iirc it was the other way round.


jamwal wrote:Ramana sir,
Thanks.
Will do.

Image
A picture from Mahabharat . Krishna attacking Bhishm after he defeated Arjun.
That anime style picture of Ramayan was really good. We need more stuff like that in mass media.



SaiK wrote:
ArmenT wrote:Most of my college mates didn't believe me when I explained what a shiva lingam represented :D. And they thought I'd made the whole Bhrigu Muni story by myself. Had to pull out some Moderately Enlightening books before they believed me.

.. is an attempt to give form to the indefinable "brahman". you and me wouldn't be here without these lingas :wink: . prove me wrong. :) . bhrigu rishi made it easier for the normal mind.


shaardula wrote:i dunno how many people here read anujan's post. he made some very important points.

dharma is nuanced. dharma is not righteousness. dharma is that which is right. and what is right is a matter of balance, co-relation and context. father's dharma vs your dharma at work place.

afaik, under dharma no dos and donts have been identified. what has been id-ed are characteristics of different types of people. samsaari - artha, kama moksha etc. sanyasi some others, guru some others, raja some-others and so on. note these are not classification of dos and donts, but enumeration of natural and thus contextually appropriate impulses. living like a sanyasi within a marraige(samsaari) is adharma. it is dharmic for a wife to expect some things from her husband. by dharma a husband cannot play cute and ignore his duties under the pretext that he has sight set hill-wards. that is BS according to dharma. this is also known as maryada. the honour of playing the role you have assumed.

and what is right can rarely be judged in situ in time. some people use texts as templates to figure out the nearest approximation to their problems. they then have the previlige of history to judge the consequences of action taken by our elders.

rama hid and assaulted vaali. we know the context we know the consequences, we know the conundrums. if i have a vaali in my life, against the knowledge in ramayana that i have, should i or not hide and shoot, is a question that only i can answer, and live with. ramayana does not say you have to hide and shoot. ramayana just says rama hid and shot.

indian texts are not to be read literally and definitely not as user manuals for how to lead life. what would jesus do, is a question that even those in mathas would laff at. they were not written for that. they are almost always written for saara/essence. some are compendiums. some as matter of fact examples. this is what anujan said, afaiu.

i will tell you my favourite story. once a young basava and the already accomplished sarvagna met. after dinner basava asked sarvagna for his story and how he came about being what he was. S told B everything. i mean everything in gory detail - the good and the bad and the ugly. matter of factly. raw. once he was done. S slept like a baby. basava was shaken at all the ugliness and gore. he had these preconceived notions about piety and notions about divine purushas. everything thing he knew and assumed had just been demolished. it disturbed him so much he could not sleep. long after this it occured to him what S had done. he had just given a lecture on indic wisdom 101.

as UG used to say, Buddha didnot become Buddha by doing what he preached. all buddha spoke about is post fact. and when he spoke of himself as Buddha he was not a buddha. the uber-advaitin upanishadic ashtavakra prescribed killing, nay slaughtering such charlatans.

in yindoo epistemology this is a known problem. earliest formulation being the nasadiya. then there are many other formulations. the more empirical madhvas where fighting pitched battles with the more criptic advaitins on this for the longest time.

untill they all ingnored the politics of spirituality and people who believe in the book came and whooped their collective asses. eventually one advaitin found some balls and grabbed the book-walas by their balls. what maya!!


shaardula wrote:as an example. dharma says as a samsaari seeking all the flavours of societal living including sex is kosher. hence the kamasutra. which is a studied and scholarly compendium. most impactful thesis of it being that the female has impulses and crescendos of her own.

when it comes to sex, there is only one dharma = samabhoga (co-joint experience). it makes no prescription of which class of woman is kosher for conquest nor the right protocol to retrieve. all it says is if you have found a partner in whatever context, the right way to copulate is a samabhogi with the express understanding that the experience is bhog-ed(experienced) by both.

these guys were serious. folks like panini were slitting open throats of cadavers to study the vocal chords all to study phonetics and context free grammars.

i dunno if you see it. but our ancestors were in a different class altogether as far as intellectual pursuits were concerned. they had the balls to define their subject and write their own thesis. folks like vedavyasa wrote their own mythology. how ****** free and confident should they have been?


RamaY wrote:shaardula-ji,

Good commentary, Thank you!

Found Anujan's original post. Thanks :)


Anujan wrote:
shaardula wrote: eventually one advaitin found some balls and grabbed the book-walas by their balls. what maya!!


shaardula-saar
Namaskaram. Are you referring to Vivekananda here ?


Raja Bose wrote:I remember watching this documentary eons back about the Aghoris. Please dont watch in your office or in front of minors. Perhaps not even in front of GHQ/SHQ unless you want to sleep alone on the couch!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0bGrvKVxac

After watching it my sister refused to sleep alone in her room :mrgreen: which is interesting coz as a kid her best friend was an Aghori baba who used to live in my grandfather's home in Calcutta. His name was also incidentally Ramnath and he was living proof that science still has a lot more to discover and there are a lot of things which humans are capable of which cannot be explained by present science.


Satya_anveshi wrote:
Raja Bose wrote:he was living proof that science still has a lot more to discover and there are a lot of things which humans are capable of which cannot be explained by present science.


Jaise ki? I think I saw that video but didn't find anything that interesting in terms of human capabilities (or lack thereof)? Can you mention a couple things that amazed/amused you?


Raja Bose wrote:
Satya_anveshi wrote:Jaise ki? I think I saw that video but didn't find anything that interesting in terms of human capabilities (or lack thereof)? Can you mention a couple things that amazed/amused you?


The video I linked to is about a different Aghori named Ramnath. I was referring to an Aghori Sadhu with the same name who lived as a tenant in a room in my maternal grandfather's house in Calcutta. He was also the guru of the Nepalese royal family (incld. the deceased Birendra). His powers were not making objects magically appear and such showman stuff but more subtle.

Since you ask, let me tell you some stories.

The first one is an incident which sorta 'involved' me ( :mrgreen: ). When I was born in Darjeeling, my mother had already been admitted into a nursing home previously for other reasons but did not have any family member with 100s of miles of her. My father at that time was away on urgent business in Delhi when late at night he got a call from the Aghori (telephone call, not telepathic mumbo-jumbo!) admonishing him as to why he(my father) did not let him(the Aghori) know that he had just had a son! My father ofcourse was a bit surprised since I wasnt supposed to pop out for another week and also wondering how the Sadhu got to know in the first place. He immediately called the nursing home where he was notified by the duty nurse of my birth (who was surprised how he got to know about it!) and who also told him that the physician attending to my mother was supposed to call him the next morning. Ofcourse what makes it all interesting is there was nobody in the nursing home who had called anybody (family/friends/St.Paul's school personnel) to notify them of my grand entry into this world. On top of that clearly nobody could have contacted the Aghori since his only phone access was through my grandfather's phone (which he used to call my father after waking up my grandfather) and that phone did not ring that night. Plus there were no visitors to the house either (two servants always slept behind the door, so would know immediately). Plus nobody had cellphones back then (Motor Oil Co. having not invented the wonderful gadget yet). Amongst all the family members and friends, my grandfather was the first to know, that too only after the Aghori rushed up to his room to call my father in Delhi.

Ramnath Aghori (affectionately called Bulbulia dadu by my sister when she was a kid) died one day (I forget the exact year but it was during the IPKF ops) in a slightly dramatic fashion. He walked up to my grandfather from his ground floor room, announced to him that he had decided to die and all his belongings should be donated, took a taxi to Bellevue Nursing Home (a pretty posh nursing home in Calcutta, I hope I got the name right) and within the next 2 hours he breathed his last.

However, it is not as if such powers are only for people who live the life of an mendicant and wanderer. During the late 60s-70s when my grandfather (this time, I am referring to my paternal one) was still in-charge of Eastern Zone for CPWD (he did his part for RAW during '71 which I briefly mentioned somewhere else in B-R). At that time he had a friend named Daschaudhuri who was a pretty rich civil contractor in Calcutta (guess who his buddy was...none other than Jagmohan Dalmiya of BCCI fame!..even today we get Christmas cards from that rogue).
This Daschaudhuri was also a longtime disciple of Ramnath Aghori and regularly practiced his meditation every Sunday morning. For a certain amount of time after he came out of his meditation, he was able to tell people things which they normally would not be aware of. For example, for a long time we used to have a servant (actually he was more of a family member than anything else) named Ghanashyam. Ghanashyam had been living with my grandfather since he was a little boy and continued living with us till he retired in 1996 (he worked as a peon in a Central Govt. office) and now lives in his village in pauri Garwhal. At the time this incident occured, Ghahashyam was in Calcutta whereas his wife was in his village where she tended the fields and looked after their livestock. One Sunday morning, my grandfather got a phone call from Daschaudhuri asking to speak to Ghanashyam. On coming to the phone Ghanashyam was told to immediately leave for his home village without delay. Daschaudhuri however refused to tell him what was the matter. Due to the remoteness of the village, it typically takes (even now) a week or so by train, bus and cart to get to it. After Ghanashyam reached, to his horror he found that on the day just before Daschaudhuri called him up, his daughter who was a toddler has accidentaly fallen into a vat of boiling milk and had been killed. In fact, when he reached, the villagers were surprised to see him because there was no telephone or electricity in the village and the nearest post office was a few days walk so they had only been able to send a telegram few days back (much after he had already left for his village!!). The reason I mentioned this example is that Daschaudhuri was a very unlikely practioner of tantra since he was more famous for throwing lavish parties for kids whenever he visited Delhi and was a multi-millionaire who lived in the lap of luxury...he was no ash clad charas smoking sadhu. His brother is still alive and is a millionaire in his own right and lives in UK with his British wife.

Hence, my statement that science has a lot more to learn re.human capabilities. :) People always claims everything about the so-called supernatural is rubbish and unscientific. My view is that most of it is rubbish but there is a very small part which is true and that part science has yet to discover. When science does discover it, it won't be supernatural or 'unscientific' anymore!

Sorry for the long post! Take it FWIW.


Satya_anveshi wrote:Fascinating! Thanks for taking the trouble of explaining.


Singha wrote:my father visited kolkata almost every month for bank work during his career. he used with hang out with the
local bank emploees ofcourse. in early 90s he was taken to meet a person who could
read people's faces and tell them stuff about themselves and the future. after returning, father was saying he had even gone back said things about my grandparents which nobody could have clued him into. he also predicted certain aspect of my career and marriage long before the events. afaik he just said it and didnt take
any money.


Raja Bose wrote:To Western minds, all such talk is considered superstitions of gullible Eastern minds...little do they realize that fundamental science as we know it today was also given to them by these same Eastern minds...many ages back.


vsudhir wrote:Anyone heard of the Nadi Jyotish society based in Mylapore, Chennai? I went once to their Hyd office yrs back.


shaardula wrote:i just got a feeling i was reading the autobiography of a yogi all over again. :twisted:

i personally think it is not necessary for any of the paranormal stuff to be true. from what i understand the whole idea of a yogi is to break down conventional conditioning. they replace conventional conditioning with alternate conditioning through yogic rigours.

with that it may be possible to have different perception of the same experience. within the civilian world, for example the difference between the genius types and jugad types. ramanujan saw algebra differently than others for example. while a genius 'stumbles' upon his condition, the yogis of the past reduced reconditioning to a 'science'. but even here, there is a sense of latent potential. just like any other field. i cannot walk out and become an accomplished aghora tommorrow. i dont know what is there to learn. unless i know what it is that i want to learn, i cant learn.


shaardula wrote:talking of paranormals. by maternal grandfather was a curious case. for as long as i have known him he never went to a temple and never bowed to anything. hardly religious, but as a youngster i had often seen him discuss spirituality with his friends. he also read astrological charts and generally kept up with the calendar.

one evening in summer of '87, he called my aunt and said, listen dont panic, but if i am around after 8:00 pm tommorrow, anuradha nakshatra, i will be there for a while. but if not, it is ok. everything will be fine. i will be peaceful. take care of your mother. she will be around for a while.

next day 8:00 pm he was gone. on the clock.

the thing that freaks me out is i was there, when he told my aunt. i always tagged along my aunt, especially in the evenings, because she was my amar chitra katha. i was there next day too along with with my aunt. i still dont know how my aunt held her composure. she was nurse. once she determined he was dead, she asked me to go and call his best friend. i ran across the village in the dark to inform him.

but his cremation was a huge problem. there were no male heirs to cremate him. my dad was enroute to Delhi and it would be atleast three - four days before my dad could be contacted and he could come back. my mom, who herself arrived early next morning, immediately got to fixing the logistics and had argued with the local brahmins that if nobody turned up by the second day, she would cremate him. as if by miracle, a relative came on the first bus the second day.

another thing i remember from that incident is awesome altruism in villages. for some days after a death, a family cant cook. a hebbar iyengar family had recently moved into the village, they cooked for us for the entire period.


amdavadi wrote:I remember back in early 90's this guy who was from haridwar would come to my father's hospital. He would never take money or would never discuss about his family or his where about. He wouldnt give his contact information or anything else. All we knew about him was his name & pictures he carried with him with whose who of India.

Whenever he would come to ahmedabad, he would also stop by to speak to my father. So one day he told my dad that he want to come to our house, and want to see 2 kids & wife. My dad brought him to see us, as soon as he enter the room. He ask me to goto another room, and write my favorite animal's name.Also told me to leave that piece of paper in the room. I being too lazy wanted to write monkey, but decided to write tiger instead. When i came out, he said it's good that you didnt choose monkey, tiger is a better choice. About the same time i was trying to decide between pharmacy & medical school, but this man said i wouldnt be choosing either one of the filed, as i will be going to america to study computer. I swear a god, com-sci was the last thing on my mind...

Long story short,when i was in India last time,same person showed up at our house,and asked "how is my work with silicon valley company, including the name of the company".There is no way this person would know about that because right before i went to india, i did change employment. He said few things during our conversation, related to career,marriage,my father's death.They all have came true.


Nayak wrote:Anyone knows Nityanand Nayak from Hebri ? He told me quite some spectacular and shocking details about my history which even my parents didn't know and stuff which only I knew. :shock: :shock: :shock:

I was blown away with the details he provided about me just by looking at my face.


ramana wrote:I once showed the birth details of my s-i-l who was ill to someone I know. he called me up and said is this person still alive! I told him she was seriously ill. He said maximum one month. Thats all there was to it. I didn't tell him about her cancer.


KarthikSan wrote:Has anyone watched BBC's "The Story of India"? I happened to watch the first part today. Talks a lot about the Aryan "migration" due to climate change and stuff. Found a lot of gaping holes the size of open sewers. They decide that since the Rig Veda talks about horses and soma the drink, the Aryans migrated from Central Asia since today's Afghanistan has a drink called som and horses were tamed first in Central Asia. There was a Russian archaeologist who says that the populations moved "West" due to the shifting of a river and our man Michael Wood immediately decides that Aryans moved to India. Complete Lahori logic onlee! :rotfl:


Mort Walker wrote:Karthik,

Overall Michael Woods does try to understand India and has been doing so. This is about his 3rd series that covers India that started back in 1990/1991. He makes the conclusion that because of som and horses the Aryans came from outside India, but its only one piece of evidence. The Bhimbetka cave frescos near Sanchi, MP has drawings of men on horses hunting. These frescos and others like it date well back before 10,000 years ago. Michael Woods didn't utilize this evidence which contradicts his evidence.

I think you can ask questions from his website regarding the "The Story of India".


SaiK wrote:Why wouldn't the men on horses been migrated from India to CAS?

If you ask Tamil, they would say they are older than Sanskrit.. and vice versa is valid as well!

Siddha is older than Ayurveda! yes/no!?

Kalari payatu is older than Karatee..


gandharva wrote:
just like any other field. i cannot walk out and become an accomplished aghora tommorrow


Robert E. Svoboda "AGHORA, At the Left Hand of God"
Brotherhood of Life | 1986 | ISBN: 978 0914732211 | 327 pages | PDF | 18,9 Mb

http://depositfiles.com/files/xi3gwm1ib

Mulla Nayakuddin read pages 290-293.


Satya_anveshi wrote:Talking of clairvoyance, I am sure there are members on this forum who know of a place in Tamilnadu where if you tell your name, they will read a leaf (pick a leaf out of thousands of them) and tell you lots of stuff about you.

They were also shown on TV serial called Surabhi (once upon a time). When I was in B'uru, I asked some of my tamil colleagues about this and they all certainly nodded their heads in approval. They were amazed.


negi wrote:From my personal experience I would give some of the astrologers benefit of doubt ; some of these folks are erudite and knowledgeable people and they do have capabilities which are more than 'sensing/reading' one's mind.

Our's is a land of Varahamihiras and Bhaskaras so you never know .


Sachin wrote:
Satya_anveshi wrote:Talking of clairvoyance, I am sure there are members on this forum who know of a place in Tamilnadu where if you tell your name, they will read a leaf (pick a leaf out of thousands of them) and tell you lots of stuff about you.

That is known as Naadi Jyothisham and was supposed to be developed by Sage Agasthya. Mom being a great fan of any form of astrology had consulted the local Jyothishi as well. To put it honestly, many of his observations have come true in my case. These chaps even predict the possible names of your spouse and her parents. And some times when the details are given, the chap says he does not have the "leaf" with him now. And he says it is not time for the person to consult him.


shaardula wrote:hmm.. i know much of astrology and this guru business is all hokey pokey.

but, astrologers really play a psychologists part. and the 'science' is atleast as valid as in psychology, even if rationalizations are much better in psychology. mainly because astrology lacks the systematization that psychology enjoys. again as i said earlier i am not sure there is no psychology to how a psychologist intervenes. psychology is not science. it is not objective. its not like watching sodium mixing with chlorine and taking notes, even if your fields note read 'subject did this, subject did that'. bull shit the whole methodology is.

ditto business of social and economic predictions. yogindra yadav has about the same hit rate a random astrologer. just because he uses 'statistics' does not mean his methodology is any more sound. statistics is science. use of it in social contexts is not.

typical cases of astrological interventions are benign. mostly positive reinforcements. i see some use in attempting to tackle problems by taking out subjective variables. many problems arise because of lack of confidence and commitment and loss of cycle. if going through the rigors of some harmless penance like shani pooja or chanting some syllables for months on end can re-establish your 'cycle', why not? they take the focus off the personal and the subjective and instead focus on the external and 'objective'- you get back your cycle without over-analyzing your own self, especially in a diseased state.

but there are weird cases too. like that tantrik from mumbai who asked his client to violate his daughters. nonsense only it is. need to find some balance to weed these types out.

so what if they can intuit your mind/expectations and tailor answers accordingly. that itself is an art. and much useful in many cases. need to figure out if there is a science to it.


Karkala Joishy wrote:
Arya Sumantra wrote:Talking of astrologers, it can be scary sometimes how much they get to know about you. Suddenly nothing about you remains private. They may not say things that may embarass you but they get to know.


Yeah, my sister in law once visited a friend who had an astrologer visiting. So she asked about her family. He said her sister had santhan yog or something and would have a girl and a boy. The bugger was right, my wife was expecting our second child, a girl, and we had just found out 2 days earlier no one else knew yet. :eek:


merlin wrote:
gandharva wrote:
Robert E. Svoboda "AGHORA, At the Left Hand of God"
Brotherhood of Life | 1986 | ISBN: 978 0914732211 | 327 pages | PDF | 18,9 Mb

http://depositfiles.com/files/xi3gwm1ib

Mulla Nayakuddin read pages 290-293.


His books are very interesting to say the least. I have and have read all three of his books from the Aghora series. Eagerly waiting for a fourth one if he every gets to writing it. He has also written a book on Shani. That's very nice to read as well.

Arya Sumantra
BRFite
Posts: 558
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 11:47
Location: Deep Freezer

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby Arya Sumantra » 23 Mar 2009 01:40

Purush wrote:About 10 years ago, I read Dr. C. Rajagopalachari's (abridged) version of the Mahabharata


I read it as kid too. C. Rajagopalachari's version of MB is most lucid and detailed among the child-friendly versions of MB. There is another book by him named "Stories for the innocent". Really nice one.

ChandraS

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby ChandraS » 23 Mar 2009 01:48

Ok folks, I have managed to finally copy-paste the relevant posts form the Nukkad thread. So let the discussions being.

Purush, thanks for the kind words. My background and exposure is similar to yours. Of late, I have been feeling a renewed interest in our classics and epics. The attempt to explore, understand and make sense of the grey areas in them is indeed a very compelling and fulfilling experience. I have been listening to my favourite devotional song - 'Bhaja Govindam' by MS Subbalakshmi with an intro talk by Rajaji. The following words of his commentary are what sort of inspired me to start this thread in addition to the discussion in Nukkad
Rajaji's introduction talk to Bhaja Govindam
"When intelligence matures and lodges securely in the heart, it becomes wisdom. When that wisdom is integrated with life and issues out in action, it becomes devotion. Knowledge which has become mature is spoken of as devotion. If it does not get transformed into devotion, such knowledge is useless tinsel."

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby brihaspati » 23 Mar 2009 02:42

Most interesting collection of posts. The paranormal and epics/kathas combination is most tempting for me to ask some questions I have so far never been able to get any clear answer to. Just a clarification, I am not asking for the following dream to be interpreted - I am too much of a sceptic for that. :) But I am describing the dream as a narrative that has raised some speculative historical/cultural questions in me.

A close female relative had a certain dream repeatedly when she was pregnant with her only son. In this she dreams of first the moon melting and taking the shape of a baby white elephant that cuddles her. Then a shaven headed tall figure with upabeetam, upper body naked, and lower garment of off-white cotton (as if a faint layer of red dust) elderly male tells her, "I will come to your place from Varanasi, but after 12 years give worship at Puri to Shiva". The lady was brought up without knowledge or participation of ritualistic worship. She had never visited Puri, but only knew that the Puri temple was dedicated to Vishnu/Jagannath. So she asked in her dream, how could she worship Shiva at Vishnu's temple. Apparently the reply came that "he who is Jaggannath is also Vishwanath - what is the difference in meaning?"

She later dreamed that she stood on a log that moved through a dark sea and washed ashore near a temple made of wood. Inside the log she had stood on split into three parts and took the form of what she described as "African totemic images" in anthropologic textbooks. But she somehow was told that this was the Puri temple, and the the wooden images were that of the divinities. She was taken to a garden near a cave where the idols "slept", and she picked up a fallen branch with 5 green mangoes. Then she was escorted back to the idols and she saw the mangoes in the "mouth" of the idols.

The lady remains a "sceptic" of her own dreams. She is not the "religious" type. But I found her dream narrative fascinating.


Aspects of this narrative appears to be consistent in what I have found so far. New idols are supposedly made out of logs that are washed ashore. There also appears to be a myth of original deities being placed in a cave and under the protection of a forest dwelling tribe from whom a certian king "retrieved" the idols. But then there are other elements which might be completely meaningless or could have some basis I don't know of - so I have included all that I heard.

Since the Orissa coastal area appears to be a place of medical research/sun worship from the days of Krishna and Mahabharatm, (Shamba's treatment), the Puri Jagannath temple could have been successor to earlier belief systems. It is also possible that the first temples or structures were in caves or of wood. The description of the wood idols could indeed be compared with African or tribal wooden totem designs by someone who has not seen and identified the idols beforehand. I have heard that a Shiva idol exists in the current temple. But was there Shaiva presence before or in parallel with Vaishnavite dominance? In particular any anecdotal or narrative connection with Kashi Viswanath and Puri Jagannath?
Last edited by brihaspati on 23 Mar 2009 04:26, edited 1 time in total.

Arya Sumantra
BRFite
Posts: 558
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 11:47
Location: Deep Freezer

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby Arya Sumantra » 23 Mar 2009 02:49

Just a suggestion ChandraS, keep the astrology out of the scope of this thread for it is a big area by itself. Besides it runs counter to indian theory of karma. If you are to act without greed for consequences then why should you consult astrologer to know whether you will get consequences of today's actions. Accept it as our weakness as individuals that we have to peep into future this way and avoid being true karmayogis

ChandraS

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby ChandraS » 23 Mar 2009 03:26

My intent in copying all the relevant posts from Nukkad was to get them in one place. Some of the posts discussing the paranormal and astrology aren't really intended to be explored fully. I humbly request members to not divert the attention away from the main topics - epics & texts.

While I agree with Arya Sumantra on astrology running counter to the theory of karma, I believe it will be insightful to know more about those psychics and clairvoyants, who aren't really astrologers or soothsayers, but are in that rare 1% who are more gifted/capable/self actualized than the rest of us. Of course, it would be pretty much off topic for this thread so no more on that from me!

Brihaspatiji, it is interesting to know about your relative being psychic but interpretation of dreams would again be out of the scope of this thread. But the following will definitely be worth exploring if we get enough evidence not just some hearsay stuff pulled out of thin air. It may probably help you form your own interpretation of your relative's dreams without leading the thread astray. :)

Since the Orissa coastal area appears to be a place of medical research/sun worship from the days of Krishna and Mahabharatm, (Shamba's treatment), the Puri Jagannath temple could have been successor to earlier belief systems. It is also possible that the first temples or structures were in caves or of wood. The description of the wood idols could indeed be compared with African or tribal wooden totem designs by someone who has not seen and identified the idols beforehand. I have heard that a Shiva idol exists in the current temple. But was there Shaiva presence before or in parallel with Vaishnavite dominance? In particular any anecdotal or narrative connection with Kashi Viswanath and Puri Jagannath?

Raghav K
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 05:15

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby Raghav K » 23 Mar 2009 03:30

Arya. Astrology in itself is very scientific. Infact Astrology was studied as science up until Newton came up. Thank you for starting this thread.I can also share information with folks that I receive from my Guru. I am blessed to come across this person.This financial crisis is just a smaller problem and we are about to be facing much bigger catastrophes till the year 2015. During these years the Asuras will be very powerful. Infact Asuras are also the children of the Divine Mother Parashakti.

Also are you guys aware of these

Image

Saligrama Shilas

Saligram Shilas are considered a manifestation of Maha Vishnu by ancient Hindus, just as Shiva Lingas are considered a manifestation of Lord Shiva.

These black colored stones are found in the sacred river Gandaki in Nepal. Saligrama stones are worshiped as spiritual, boon-giving objects. They were formed when a portion of the African continent split due to tectonic plate movement, which occurred over 80 million years ago, and when this piece of the continent moved towards Eurasia and crashed against it. The cataclysmic impact of the crash, and the extremely high temperature that melted all material objects, resulted in the formation of these stones. As a result, sea animals from the bottom of the ocean were deposited at the top of the world, or the highest point on the earth - the Himalayan Mountains. Some of the sea animals were caught in the stones, and a species called ammonites were deposited and became a part of the fossil.

The power attributed to these stones is very mystical. The great cataclysmic impact that trapped life forms within the stones created certain cosmic vibratory effects, that in turn attracted some cosmic forces or Devatas, who are impregnated in these stones. In certain stones, signs of various objects held by Maha Vishnu, such as the mace, conch, lotus and disk marks may be present. The most auspicious shape etched in them is a disk-shaped form, created by the impregnation of the ammonite species of sea animals. A small insect known as vatra-keeta lived in this fossil and created these tracks or marks. Ammonites first appeared approximately 400 million years ago, and became extinct at the close of the cretaceous period, which took place approximately 65 million years ago. This was the time of great calamity, when almost 90% of all living species of the earth perished. This period saw the end of dinosaurs, along with all the other species of living beings on earth.

The fact that these stones have mystical powers has been well known for many thousands of years. During the destruction of Pompeii in the first century AD, Pliny the Elder, a great Roman Historian and General, wrote about these fossils. He called them Amonous Cornua, which means horns of Ammon. The Egyptians knew about the mystical effects of these stones - their God Ammon Rha (Sun God) wore a crown with these stones. In the early part of the first millennium, British, Scottish and Irish people of mystical faith assigned mystical effects to the Saligram, which they probably obtained from the Caucasin Mountain range that extended all the way from Hindukush to Europe. 'Druids', who were European mystics, also worshipped them and got power from them.

Many Saligramas have chakras that are considered very auspicious and known to have many mystical effects on people who concentrate on them. They are supposed to have the microcosmic effect of the Sudarshana Chakra, which is the discus of Lord Vishnu. People have obtained higher levels of consciousness by intense meditation on them. Various Puranas, including the Vaivarta Nrsimha, Skanda and the Manada Puranas all describe the significance, and the beneficial, mystical & spiritual effect of Saligramas. Many Puranas have assigned various benefits of Saligrama worship. These include granting of wealth, success, long life, intellect and both spiritual and material benefits. The Skanda-Purana tells us that meditation with a Saligrama makes it 100 fold effective.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby negi » 23 Mar 2009 06:01

Ok Chandras Superb initiative.

I believe most of us BRFites know in general about Mahabharata and Ramayana; however I believe we need to dig deeper into the following and list the 'time lines'.

1. The four vedas and their significance and yes some time lines would help.
2. Puranas (I have read/heard references to these whenever an epic or mythology is discussed).Who wrote these and when ? again time lines would help.
3. When discussing a Mythological event we should post the purana which has a reference to the same this way we would be able to co-relate events in a chronological order.

Case in point:

I remember in one of the chapters in Mahabharat when Draupadi asks Bhim to get a special flower (I forgot the name) which was blown by wind near their hut ,iirc it was some sort of water lilly or lotus . Bhim on his way to find this flower has a rendezvous with an old Monkey who was blocking his path and has a verbal argument with the latter only to find out that it was none other than his elder brother lord Hanuman (on Bhim's request Hanuman agrees to be on the side of Pandavas and graces Arjun's chariot in form of the flag 'Kapidhawaja').

It is from the above incident I realized that Mahabharat was set quite some time after the 'Ramayana' ; there are many such instances in Hindu Mythology where different characters cross paths.I wish to have a more clearer understanding of such events.

Vikas
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6828
Joined: 03 Dec 2005 02:40
Location: Where DST doesn't bother me
Contact:

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby Vikas » 23 Mar 2009 07:14

If I am right, Lord Krishna married daughter of Jambawant, a famous bear General in Sugriv's army while Sri Balaram killed a Monkey who claimed to have fought against Ravana's army.

Vikas
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6828
Joined: 03 Dec 2005 02:40
Location: Where DST doesn't bother me
Contact:

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby Vikas » 23 Mar 2009 07:21

I remember reading a different narration of Sri Krishana Avatar in a serialized form in Punjab Kesri (Newspaper). I think it was by Sri K.M.Munshi.
Basically it gives more human narrative of the events rather than Gods Miracles. E.g. As per the author, Garuda was not a bird but a human being who was more like a chauffer of Sri Hari. Will try to search if I can find it on the net.

Vikas
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6828
Joined: 03 Dec 2005 02:40
Location: Where DST doesn't bother me
Contact:

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby Vikas » 23 Mar 2009 07:32

A question for those who know..
I was talking to a friend of mine and She said that they don't celebrate Krishna-Janamashtmi as they are Shaivites.
In Bhagwath Puran, there is a story where Sri Krishna's grandson Anirudh falls in love with the daughter of King Banasur and spends nights with her.
That results in a war between Banasur and Yadav clan and Banasur being devotee of Lord Shiva is helped by Lord Siva himself but somehow the story potrays that Sri Krishna won the day against Shiva Whereas in Ramayana, Sri Ram prays to Lord Shiva for help and blessings.

At what point did Shaivites and Vashainvites became anti to each other ? What was the point of discord besides "My God bigger than Yours". Were they actually hostile to each other or is it one of those myths propagated through time.

Arya Sumantra
BRFite
Posts: 558
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 11:47
Location: Deep Freezer

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby Arya Sumantra » 23 Mar 2009 07:57

VikasRaina wrote:If I am right, Lord Krishna married daughter of Jambawant, a famous bear General in Sugriv's army while Sri Balaram killed a Monkey who claimed to have fought against Ravana's army.


Lord Krishna by mistake looked at moon on Ganesh Chaturthi day and so as per the curse got accused of stealing a gem Syamantak mani. It is when he goes in its search he finds it in house of Jamavant the bear who fought on Lord Rama's side. They fight for 28 days. At the end Jambavant realizes that Lord Krishna himself is avatar of Lord Rama and gives him his daughter Jambavati in marriage. Later the accuser Satrajit feels guilty and gives his daughter Satyabhama in marriage to Lord Krishna.

Arya Sumantra
BRFite
Posts: 558
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 11:47
Location: Deep Freezer

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby Arya Sumantra » 23 Mar 2009 08:21

VikasRaina wrote:I was talking to a friend of mine and She said that they don't celebrate Krishna-Janamashtmi as they are Shaivites.

Even staunch vaishnavites sometimes do not accept prasad from a temple of a god other than krishna. While they are being stringent and finicky it does not originate from intolerance. There is this philosophy that you may pray all gods but there is only one Ishtadevta(principal god) whose form and image the devout must thoroughly imprint in their heart and mind. When they think of god, he alone and only that image should be reinforced by repeated focus on his form.

The logic is similar to following:
Just as for a question many answers may be correct but if you have cramed answers from one digest/guide better stick to that one and reinforce that answer to memory by repeatedly cramming only that answer from that guide book. That's the way to crack exams. Read from multiple books and you will be scrambling to put the words together to form answer to a question in exam.

Thus it is not intolerance but sticking to one form of god to reinforce the devotion along a particular way. Even for the same god(Krishna) there are people who pray either swaroop Pandurang only or Shrinathji only or usual form of Lord Krishna.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby negi » 23 Mar 2009 08:38

I believe the kind of divide between Shaivites and Vaishnavaites we are talking about has nothing to do with the mythology or the Hindu 'scriptures' .It is solely handywork of feudal lords and ofcourse the 'Priests' of either sects who have used a particular incident to engineer such a divide.

The Puranas and Epics are full of incidents depicting coordination and mutual respect amongst the 'Trinity' and even the incidents involving mutual conflict have been portrayed as something which had been pre-planned by the supreme power.

Raghav K
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 05:15

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby Raghav K » 23 Mar 2009 08:48

negi wrote:I believe the kind of divide between Shaivites and Vaishnavaites we are talking about has nothing to do with the mythology or the Hindu 'scriptures' .It is solely handywork of feudal lords and ofcourse the 'Priests' of either sects who have used a particular incident to engineer such a divide.

The Puranas and Epics are full of incidents depicting coordination and mutual respect amongst the 'Trinity' and even the incidents involving mutual conflict have been portrayed as something which had been pre-planned by the supreme power.


I agree. The ultimate Source is just ONE and only ONE. The trinity is the manifestation of that source. This source was at trillion degrees C and like the Big bang, the Source manifested into different forms. She created the trinity.

Brahma comes out from Lord Vishnu's naval and asks him how to create the universe. Vishnu tells him to sacrifice his body to create us. That is why Vishnu is called Yagnapurush. Yagna=sacrifice. After we go through samsara our soul will merge with Vishnu.

I will tell you the meaning of OM Namasivaya.


OM=Lord Ganesha.
Na=Generator=Brahma
Ma=Organiser=Vishnu.
Si=Dissolver=Shiva
vaya=the illusion we have been living created by the DIVINE MOTHER.

So we have Vishnu in Shiva and vice versa

Keshav
BRFite
Posts: 633
Joined: 20 Sep 2007 08:53
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby Keshav » 23 Mar 2009 10:01

Growing up second-generation, you don't get to hear all of these great stories, especially since the 'rents have opposite affinities for religion and what not.

If not for ACK, though... I probably wouldn't know anything.

All my extensive knowledge of the Mahabharat and Ramayana comes from ACK and Rajagopalachari's renditions.

And just to stir the pot a little:

Krishna has an amazing number of wives depending on which source you use. The Mahabharat has him pinned at about 7 or 8 while the Bhagavat has it at around 16,800 based on the number of women Narakasura stole ("raped"). When he defeated Narakasura, the women, having been captured were considered to be impure or "raped" in the olden days ,since they were not carried off by a proper Kshatriya.

Krishna then "marries" them all and takes them to Dwarka. Sage Narada goes to visit and is a little confused as to how he will take care of all his wives since according to the Bhagavat, a "Hindu" is only allowed to have as many wives as he is able to properly take care of. Krishna then does his little multiplication trick he did during Ras Lila in Vrindavana and each woman has her own individual Krishna.

Saga Narada then walks through Dwaraka and finds a Krishna for every woman - some romancing together, reading poetry, studying the Vedas, having sex, singing, dancing, playing, etc.

___

I looked into the Bhagavat and found practically no mention of Radha whatsoever. She is only mentioned once in a obscure reference to one of the girls that Krishna dances with in Ras Lila in Vrindavana.

It turns out that the romantic dualism of Radha-Krishna was first started by Jayadeva with the Gita Govinda at the beginning of the Bhakti movement in the Medieval Era. It was only then that Radha becomes immortalized.

In the original Bhagavat, she's an absolute nobody! Satyabhama and Rukmini become the main women in Krishna's life.

sudarshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2377
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby sudarshan » 23 Mar 2009 10:34

Many moons ago, I started this thread on BR, trying to answer the following questions. What were the times in which the Ramayana and Mahabharata really occurred? I was confused by the Mahabharata, because the world of the Mahabharata seemed very similar to the India of 500 to 300 B.C., with a strong central power (Magadha) in the Gangetic plains, and surrounding kingdoms. The Mahabharata has been dated to 3200 B.C., based on estimates of when the astronomical conjunction mentioned by Veda Vyasa in the epic could actually have happened. There was another scholar(?) whom I came across (Vartak) who dated the Mahabharata even earlier- around 4500 B.C., and he had his own estimates of the time in which the said astronomical conjunction occurred.

My question at that time was this: the Vedas are similarly dated (now that the Aryan Invasion theory has been shown to be an artificial colonial construct) to around 3500 B.C., based largely on the fact that the Vedas shower praise on the Saraswati river, and not so much on the river Ganga; whereas the Saraswati river started drying up around 3200 B.C., and was *completely dry* by 1900 B.C. (a scientific fact that drove a very large nail in the coffin of Max Mueller's dating of the Vedas to 1500 B.C.). So my question again- why is it that the Mahabharata describes a Ganges-centric India, rather than a Saraswati-centric India?

To this, a poster pointed out that after Bhima's climactic mace battle with Duryodhana (which ended with a broken thigh, and subsequent death for Duryodhana), Balarama took offense and set off to make a pilgrimage of the holy sites by the river Saraswati. This somewhat settled the issue- maybe the Vedic civilization came to an end around the time of the Mahabharata; maybe the axis of the civilization shifted to the Gangetic plain, though the earlier Saraswati-centric civilization was still a living memory; maybe the Saraswati went on its declining spiral after this.

My point is, that it is through subtle clues such as this, that we can piece together what happened thousands of years ago, given that the memory of those times has greatly eroded owing to Muslim and European invasions. Above all, do not ever trust anything the Europeans say/said about India, unless backed up by substantial proof- Swami Vivekananda emphasized this himself, many many times.

Ok, now that that is over, let me put forth my views about a question I noticed in the posts above. I haven't fully read everything in this thread yet, so pardon me if I'm repeating something that's been already said.

Why did Bhishma/Drona/Karna/Vali have to be neutralized by seemingly adharmic means?

Remember, Krishna had just explained to Arjuna, through the Bhagavad Gita, that if Arjuna went into this war thinking he was killing his relatives to regain his kingdom, then he would definitely incur terrible sin. Whereas, if Arjuna went into the war thinking of himself as the agent of divine retribution against sinners, and if he did his duty without worrying about consequences, then sin could not touch him. Now, what qualified Arjuna as this agent of divine retribution?

The social structure at the time was like this: that once guilt had been established, and once the guilty party refused to make amends for his/her guilt, then the dispensation of justice would be in the hands of the Kshatriyas. Who was the guilty party? Duryodhana, and the Kauravas, not to mention their supporters in the war. Their guilt had been amply established- Duryodhana's attempt to burn the Pandavas to death in a lac house; his forcing a partition of the kingdom, though lawfully he had no right to the throne; his grabbing their share of the kingdom by using his uncle's subterfuge in a game of dice; his humiliating the Pandavas, and especially their wife; all of which the Pandavas, to their credit, patiently put up with, because the time had not yet come to extract retribution. Besides, the Pandavas themselves were to some extent at fault, for not calling out the deceit with which their kingdom was taken from them. So, they underwent trials without protest. Now when they came back to get their kingdom, as part of the bargain, Duryodhana refused to oblige. Even when Krishna bargained with him to give them just five villages to rule- well, we all know Duryodhana's answer to that one.

Therefore, both conditions had been fulfilled: guilt had been established, and the guilty party refused to make amends. The last recourse for justice was to appeal to the Kshatriyas. Now it so happens that the Kshatriyas who can set right this injustice are the same as the guilty party (the Pandavas). The Pandavas have two choices now: give up their rights, or fight for justice. This is the choice Dhritharashtra cleverly put to Yudhishtra, by sending Shakuni's son (Ulooka) as emissary. Yudhishtra rightly declared that the choice put to him was to either take the Brahmana's path (forgive and forget), or the Kshatriya's path (fight for justice). Having lived all his life by Kshatriya tenets, would it be right to abandon these and take another path, just because the tenets he'd lived by now required him to something he did not wish to do? What kind of precedent would this set, if professionals in whatever field chose to abandon the field and take up another, everytime the going got rough? This was the gist of Yudhishtra's response to Dhritharashtra. So it came to war.

Now this is part of what Krishna explained to Arjuna in the Bhagavad Gita (IMHO, at least): if Arjuna went to war thinking he was going to kill his relatives to regain his kingdom, then he would definitely incur terrible sin. If Arjuna, on the other hand, kept in mind the true situation- that the aggrieved party just happens to be the party that dispenses justice; and if he fought disinterestedly as the justice-dispensing party, without bothering about his rights as the aggrieved party, then he would not incur sin.

As an example, consider an executioner, whose wife gets murdered. Due legal process identifies that the killer is the executioner's own son, and the law of the land is that this son get the death penalty. It so happens that the executioner has to carry out this sentence. Is he to pardon his son, or is he to carry out the sentence, as per his duty? If he pardons his son, that would be favoritism, given that he's already dispensed justice to a hundred other murderers, without considering the feelings of *their* parents and relatives. If he carries out the sentence, isn't he killing his own son as revenge for his dead wife, when he could very well overlook his dead wife and pardon his son? This is the conundrum that Arjuna faced, and that Krishna cleared up for him.

So now Arjuna has decided to fight disinterestedly, as the agent of divine retribution. That brings us back to the original question: why kill Bhishma/Drona/Karna by seemingly adharmic means?

Law of cause and consequence (karma): the consequences of your actions will be of similar nature to the action (my spin on the law of karma, mainly to address the question).

So Bhishma: when he came into the war, it wasn't as an ordinary soldier. He was hiding behind an unusual boon- that of Ichcha Maranam. Is it fair to come into war with this kind of protection? Thus, the consequence of the action too would come at him, from behind some kind of protection. The consequence of his action has to be executed by Arjuna. Therefore, Arjuna, as the divine agent, was constrained to hide behind Shikandi. It was the contradiction in Bhishma's stance, that came back to kill him in this way; Arjuna was only the agent.

Drona: when Drona takes to using celestial weapons against foot-soldiers, Krishna declares that Drona will find that nobody can escape the laws of cause and consequence. Drona was a Brahmin, fighting a war; there were other deceits he was guilty of. Therefore, his end would come about through deceit. Yudhishtra, as the agent of bringing about this end, would have to resort to deceit, but the sin would not cling to him, Krishna assured him, so long as he told his lie disinterestedly. Yudhishtra, however, could not overcome his doubts in this regard, so he said "Ashwatthama (the elephant) is dead." Why add this "the elephant," except for the fact that he is not thinking of himself as the agent of retribution, but is rather trying to protect himself from the consequences of uttering a lie? Therefore, part of the sin clung to him, and his chariot touched the ground, and he later was tricked into seeing hell and had to take a dip in the Ganga.

Karna: he was fighting with a number of curses dangling over his head. One from his guru (Parashurama), one from a Brahmin, etc. Arjuna again was the agent of retribution; therefore, Arjuna had to kill Karna when he was helpless and unarmed.

Vali: not quite sure what his sin was, but I think the same principle was at work there.

Hope that all makes sense. Sorry for a long post, but I felt the background was necessary.

Sudarshan

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1524
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby Sumeet » 23 Mar 2009 10:58

Regarding Vali vadh one shouldn't forget that Vishnu in Krishna gave Vali who was a hunter an opportunity to seek revenge and kill him from hiding having mistaken Krishna's foot to be a deer.

In Vaman avatar when he went to Bali's sacrificial arena, seeing the cute child Bali's daughter got a motherly feeling towards him and wanted to breast feed him. However, upon realizing how he snatched all land from his father she turned against him and desired that she should poison him while breast feeding.

Both these desires were expressed earnestly. So when Vishnu came as Krishna he fulfilled them both.

Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby Virupaksha » 23 Mar 2009 11:03

Sumeet wrote:Regarding Vali vadh one shouldn't forget that Vishnu in Krishna gave Vali who was a hunter an opportunity to seek revenge and kill him from hiding having mistaken Krishna's foot to be a deer.

In Vaman avatar when he went to Bali's sacrificial arena, seeing the cute child Bali's daughter got a motherly feeling towards him and wanted to breast feed him. However, upon realizing how he snatched all land from his father she turned against him and desired that she should poison him while breast feeding.

Both these desires were expressed earnestly. So when Vishnu came as Krishna he fulfilled them both.

The Vaali and Bali you talk about in Vamana avatar are different. The second bali chakravarthy is immortal iirc

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1524
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby Sumeet » 23 Mar 2009 11:22

Yeah I know that. But I am making a point about how Vishnu satisfies desires of ordinary mortals. I gave two examples. One was Vaali and other was Bali's daughter who was putana during Krishna avatar.

you misunderstood my post i think.

ChandraS

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby ChandraS » 23 Mar 2009 11:46

Good work folks. Keep it up!

Keshav - Regarding Krishna having 16,000 wives, I have also heard that story. Although Krishna did not clone himself 16,000 times to be with each one of them. What he did was some kind of spell that makes each woman think Krishna is with them all the time. But infact he wasn't with any of them! I remember this because a long time ago, I watched a Sun TV (an Indian Tamil channel) show where there was a reference to this point and the reply given was the same. At that time, My mom gave me more info on the text and the scholar's commentary where this explanation was given. I will ask her for it again when I talk to her this week.

Sudarshan - Excellent post giving more background on the seemingly adharmic way of dealing with Bhisma, Drona & Karna in Kurukshetra. Regarding Vali, RamaY had made an excellent post on it. See here - http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4817

Negi - If by timelines you mean placing the cross referencing different events in chronological order, it can be done to a large extent without us having to become some experts. But if you want timelines with dates, it maybe a difficult task, it is only now that contemporary historians have set about to place the events on a time scale. I am open to being corrected on this though. Another pointer to Ramayan happening Mahabharata is the fact that Ramayana took place in Treta Yuga whereas MB took place in Dwapara Yuga.

Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby Virupaksha » 23 Mar 2009 12:01

ChandraS wrote:Good work folks. Keep it up!

Keshav - Regarding Krishna having 16,000 wives, I have also heard that story. Although Krishna did not clone himself 16,000 times to be with each one of them. What he did was some kind of spell that makes each woman think Krishna is with them all the time. But infact he wasn't with any of them! I remember this because a long time ago, I watched a Sun TV (an Indian Tamil channel) show where there was a reference to this point and the reply given was the same. At that time, My mom gave me more info on the text and the scholar's commentary where this explanation was given. I will ask her for it again when I talk to her this week.


Chandra,

The 16000 were given the status of wife, not actual wife. He had eight "actual" wives. Those 16000 were abducted by narakasura. When he was killed and these women were released, to give them a status in the society, he made them his wives.

Keshav
BRFite
Posts: 633
Joined: 20 Sep 2007 08:53
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby Keshav » 23 Mar 2009 19:55

ChandraS wrote:At that time, My mom gave me more info on the text and the scholar's commentary where this explanation was given. I will ask her for it again when I talk to her this week.


The Bhagavatam is available online.
http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org

Part 4, Canto 10

He does not multiply himself per se but it is yogamaya.

The 16000 were given the status of wife, not actual wife. He had eight "actual" wives. Those 16000 were abducted by narakasura. When he was killed and these women were released, to give them a status in the society, he made them his wives


Yep. That's correct.

____

A question about the Kurukshetra War:

Considering the number of times that Krishna helped the Pandavas during the war, wouldn't they have lost without him?

This contradicts Krishna's oath not to involve himself in the war because as he said "the Kauravas and Pandavas were like sons to him".

After Duryodhana is beaten by Bheema after the war, Duryodhana berates Krishna for exactly that. It's interesting that within the epic itself the inconcistencies of a person who is supposed to be an avatar are considered.

It really shows the critical thinking agencies of Indians with respect religion. You just don't see that with the Abrahamic faiths.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby SaiK » 23 Mar 2009 20:15

off thoughts.. krishna tells arjun (bhagwat gita), there are bad, good and there are pure thoughts. bad and good happens but we need pure thoughts, and such pragya is what that leads to "free from depressions" or stable mind.

the practice is more important.. and actions by a daily basis is the learning. by actions, the thoughts are executed. day to day activities at home could be considered pure as well, depending on one's thoughts.

bhagwat gita is so applicable for the future..

JwalaMukhi
BRFite
Posts: 1635
Joined: 28 Mar 2007 18:27

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby JwalaMukhi » 23 Mar 2009 22:17

Keshav wrote:
____

A question about the Kurukshetra War:

Considering the number of times that Krishna helped the Pandavas during the war, wouldn't they have lost without him?

This contradicts Krishna's oath not to involve himself in the war because as he said "the Kauravas and Pandavas were like sons to him".

After Duryodhana is beaten by Bheema after the war, Duryodhana berates Krishna for exactly that. It's interesting that within the epic itself the inconcistencies of a person who is supposed to be an avatar are considered.


Krishna is avatara purusha, who manifests in human form (semi divine). Once human form(roopa) is assumed the travails, testings and failings of humans are to be endured. But as purshotamma, (pinnacle of purusharatha) he is prinicipal embodiment of sanatana Dharma (eternal), albiet manava dharma is exemplified by DharmaRaja. So, his oath is about not to bear arms and not about indulgence in the war, that oath goes to Balarama.
He is also the ParthaSarathy, the guiding principle, for the pandavas in kurukshetra, and essentially deeply involved in war.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54535
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby ramana » 23 Mar 2009 22:56

Vikas Raina, K.M. Munshiji wrote five books on the Krishna Avatar and died before completing them. They are published by Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan people. Should get them from most popular book sellers in India.

Negi, If you watched the BR Chopra version, that episode is one of the most tender moments in the MB.

shaardula
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2591
Joined: 17 Apr 2006 20:02

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby shaardula » 24 Mar 2009 13:43

we should perhaps also do a study on Zoroastrianism.

am listening to bbc episode on it. this is the image that comes to my mind when i think of the relation between indian ideas and ancient persian ones.
dipoles (wiki)
same stuff. but manifest as polar opposites. only the 'space' in iran was more constrained and its western borders more porous that it got flooded out. its a pity that it cannot thrive demographically atleast in india.

some references to understand it better?

Airavat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2326
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31
Location: dishum-bishum
Contact:

Re: Dicussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

Postby Airavat » 24 Mar 2009 14:49

For the dating of the Mahabharata War, the astronomical data given in the various texts have been used, but with varying results.

The Aihole inscription of Pulakesin Chalukya II states that the war took place in 3102 BCE. This date is taken to be the starting point of the Kaliyuga by the mathematician/astronomer Aryabhata.

But another school of astronomers, led by Varahamihira, place the Mahabharata War in 2449 BCE, 653 years into the Kaliyuga era.

Taking the aid of dynastic tables in the Puranas, which give the lineages of the clans that fought in the war and those of a later era, which latter are confirmed by other historical evidence, the date is calculated to 1397 BCE. This is on the basis of the Puranic statement that 1015 years elapsed between the birth of Arjun's son Parikshit, whose own son Janmejaya inherited the Kingdom of the Pandavas, and the coronation of the historic king Mahapadma Nanda, ruler of Magadha.

The Puranas also state that Manu Vaivaswat, founder of the human race, existed 95 generations before the Mahabharata War. This takes his period to 3110 BCE (giving 18 years as the average period for each king's rule), which is very close to the epochal date of 3102 BCE.

All historians agree that this 3102 BCE date is very significant in Indian History and some believe that it may have stood for the period of the "Great Flood".


Return to “History & Current Affairs Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests