Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 08 Jul 2012 02:08

Has anyone read books written by Alf Hiltebeitel?

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 12 Jul 2012 02:06

kshatriya · Post by **kshatriya** » 15 Jul 2012 03:24

Guys, Check this ...Truly mind blowing... Awesome job by Google..

Its an interactive Indonesian version of Ramayana.

http://ramayana.sites.f-i.com

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 15 Jul 2012 22:24

RamaY in Indian Interests thread wrote:Abishek_Sharma garu,

The first point itself becomes illogical in SD context. Everything came from Param. From Param came chaturmukha-Brahma or Creation/Viswam. Daityas and Aaditeyas are children of same Prajapati Kasyapa.

Often times realized asuras became part of Shiva ganas - Gajasura, Mushikasura etc.,

There are good Daityas like Prahlada, Bali etc., and bad Aditeyas (often Indra himself is cursed). By the time we enter Dwapara, Banasura's (Bali's great-grandson?) daughter is married to Krishna's grandson. That is the story of Usha Paraniyam.

People who were committed to remedy their mistakes and abandon their Asuric traits were also given a second chance. Case in point is an exiled Chaturmukha Brahma after his fifth head was severed.

Yayavar · Post by **Yayavar** » 15 Jul 2012 22:41

Probably should mention this in psy-ops but want to understand more. During an innocuous discussion on an unrelated topic a friend commented that 'molten lead was poured into the ears' by Brahmins/upper caste of any unpriviliged caste (unpspecified in scope) who happened to hear the Vedic mantras. I found this very surprising and asked if there is any known incident. It turns out it is 'well known'. Well, not to me. On my search on Google, I find references to the Talmud, and Koran mentioning this as a form of death penalty but none from any original Indic sources, though there are articles on the net claiming it happened. So, question - is there any source or incident on this? or, is it more modern propaganda that has somehow been propagated without any real analysis, search or proof. I want to discuss with my friends again and correct the impression if possible. This is not to say wrongs have not been done in other form but the above 'molten lead int ears' (essentially kill the person in a horrific way) seems so bizarre and I've never heard of it before other than as medieval European torture perhaps.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 15 Jul 2012 22:56

Off-Topic

Klaus wrote:People who were committed to remedy their mistakes and abandon their Asuric traits were also given a second chance. Case in point is an exiled Chaturmukha Brahma after his fifth head was severed.

In this thread we use a different lens to see things - the Itihaasist lens. In Out-of-India Theory we use the Historicist lens, and there Asuras are simply another word for the Iranians, who in a certain phase of history were looked down with contempt by the Vedic Aryans (Purus) due to political and ideological reasons.

Just a comment!

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 15 Jul 2012 22:57

This shloka is mentioned in the Manu Smriti.

However, there are no records of it ever having been practised.

No other Shastra mentions this. I do not know if it is a later addition or was part of the original.

Yayavar · Post by **Yayavar** » 15 Jul 2012 23:09

^^thanks..looks like I need to read more

.

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 16 Jul 2012 07:29

RajeshA wrote: In this thread we use a different lens to see things - the Itihaasist lens. In Out-of-India Theory we use the Historicist lens, and there Asuras are simply another word for the Iranians, who in a certain phase of history were looked down with contempt by the Vedic Aryans (Purus) due to political and ideological reasons.

Just a comment!

One leads to the other. AFAIK, the question of A-Brahma (as an ideology) having received sanction during Brahma's asuric phase cannot be ruled out.

There is the story of Yayati's sons having migrated West after having lost the throne to Puru.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 17 Jul 2012 16:58

Klaus ji,

I made that comment because I am very much in favor of having dual track scholarship - the Itihaasist and the Historicist. The two underlying ways of thinking in both are different, and the benefits of the two viewpoints are also different. If Historicists (Indic nationalist) want to make progress they will have to offer hypothesis and theories, which may go against the traditional thinking among the Itihaasists, and so Historicists need the freedom to do so without being afraid of stepping on the toes of the Itihaasists. It also gives the Itihaasists the freedom not to have to change their traditional thinking just so as to go along with the view of the Historicists.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 20 Jul 2012 23:48

From FaceBook

जितने भी लोग महाभारत को काल्पनिक बताते हैं.... उनके मुंह पर पर एक जोरदार तमाचा है आज का यह पोस्ट...!

महाभारत के बाद से आधुनिक काल तक के सभी राजाओं का विवरण क्रमवार तरीके से नीचे प्रस्तुत किया जा रहा है...!

आपको यह जानकर एक बहुत ही आश्चर्य मिश्रित ख़ुशी होगी कि महाभारत युद्ध के पश्चात् राजा युधिष्ठिर की 30 पीढ़ियों ने 1770 वर्ष 11 माह 10 दिन तक राज्य किया था..... जिसका पूरा विवरण इस प्रकार है :
क्र................... शासक का नाम.......... वर्ष....माह.. दिन

1. राजा युधिष्ठिर (Raja Yudhisthir)..... 36.... 08.... 25
2 राजा परीक्षित (Raja Parikshit)........ 60.... 00..... 00
3 राजा जनमेजय (Raja Janmejay).... 84.... 07...... 23
4 अश्वमेध (Ashwamedh )................. 82.....08..... 22
5 द्वैतीयरम (Dwateeyram )............... 88.... 02......08
6 क्षत्रमाल (Kshatramal)................... 81.... 11..... 27
7 चित्ररथ (Chitrarath)...................... 75......03.....18
8 दुष्टशैल्य (Dushtashailya)............... 75.....10.......24
9 राजा उग्रसेन (Raja Ugrasain)......... 78.....07.......21
10 राजा शूरसेन (Raja Shoorsain).......78....07........21
11 भुवनपति (Bhuwanpati)................69....05.......05
12 रणजीत (Ranjeet).........................65....10......04
13 श्रक्षक (Shrakshak).......................64.....07......04
14 सुखदेव (Sukhdev)........................62....00.......24
15 नरहरिदेव (Narharidev).................51.....10.......02
16 शुचिरथ (Suchirath).....................42......11.......02
17 शूरसेन द्वितीय (Shoorsain II)........58.....10.......08
18 पर्वतसेन (Parvatsain )..................55.....08.......10
19 मेधावी (Medhawi)........................52.....10......10
20 सोनचीर (Soncheer).....................50.....08.......21
21 भीमदेव (Bheemdev)....................47......09.......20
22 नरहिरदेव द्वितीय (Nraharidev II)...45.....11.......23
23 पूरनमाल (Pooranmal)..................44.....08.......07
24 कर्दवी (Kardavi)...........................44.....10........08
25 अलामामिक (Alamamik)...............50....11........08
26 उदयपाल (Udaipal).......................38....09........00
27 दुवानमल (Duwanmal)..................40....10.......26
28 दामात (Damaat)..........................32....00.......00
29 भीमपाल (Bheempal)...................58....05........08
30 क्षेमक (Kshemak)........................48....11........21

इसके बाद ....क्षेमक के प्रधानमन्त्री विश्व ने क्षेमक का वध करके राज्य को अपने अधिकार में कर लिया और उसकी 14 पीढ़ियों ने 500 वर्ष 3 माह 17 दिन तक राज्य किया जिसका विरवरण नीचे दिया जा रहा है।

क्र. शासक का नाम वर्ष माह दिन

1 विश्व (Vishwa)......................... 17 3 29
2 पुरसेनी (Purseni)..................... 42 8 21
3 वीरसेनी (Veerseni).................. 52 10 07
4 अंगशायी (Anangshayi)........... 47 08 23
5 हरिजित (Harijit).................... 35 09 17
6 परमसेनी (Paramseni)............. 44 02 23
7 सुखपाताल (Sukhpatal)......... 30 02 21
8 काद्रुत (Kadrut)................... 42 09 24
9 सज्ज (Sajj)........................ 32 02 14
10 आम्रचूड़ (Amarchud)......... 27 03 16
11 अमिपाल (Amipal) .............22 11 25
12 दशरथ (Dashrath)............... 25 04 12
13 वीरसाल (Veersaal)...............31 08 11
14 वीरसालसेन (Veersaalsen).......47 0 14

इसके उपरांत...राजा वीरसालसेन के प्रधानमन्त्री वीरमाह ने वीरसालसेन का वध करके राज्य को अपने अधिकार में कर लिया और उसकी 16 पीढ़ियों ने 445 वर्ष 5 माह 3 दिन तक राज्य किया जिसका विरवरण नीचे दिया जा रहा है।

क्र. शासक का नाम वर्ष माह दिन

1 राजा वीरमाह (Raja Veermaha)......... 35 10 8
2 अजितसिंह (Ajitsingh)...................... 27 7 19
3 सर्वदत्त (Sarvadatta)..........................28 3 10
4 भुवनपति (Bhuwanpati)...................15 4 10
5 वीरसेन (Veersen)............................21 2 13
6 महिपाल (Mahipal)............................40 8 7
7 शत्रुशाल (Shatrushaal).....................26 4 3
8 संघराज (Sanghraj)........................17 2 10
9 तेजपाल (Tejpal).........................28 11 10
10 मानिकचंद (Manikchand)............37 7 21
11 कामसेनी (Kamseni)..................42 5 10
12 शत्रुमर्दन (Shatrumardan)..........8 11 13
13 जीवनलोक (Jeevanlok).............28 9 17
14 हरिराव (Harirao)......................26 10 29
15 वीरसेन द्वितीय (Veersen II)........35 2 20
16 आदित्यकेतु (Adityaketu)..........23 11 13

ततपश्चात् प्रयाग के राजा धनधर ने आदित्यकेतु का वध करके उसके राज्य को अपने अधिकार में कर लिया और उसकी 9 पीढ़ी ने 374 वर्ष 11 माह 26 दिन तक राज्य किया जिसका विवरण इस प्रकार है ..

क्र. शासक का नाम वर्ष माह दिन

1 राजा धनधर (Raja Dhandhar)...........23 11 13
2 महर्षि (Maharshi)...............................41 2 29
3 संरछि (Sanrachhi)............................50 10 19
4 महायुध (Mahayudha).........................30 3 8
5 दुर्नाथ (Durnath)...............................28 5 25
6 जीवनराज (Jeevanraj).......................45 2 5
7 रुद्रसेन (Rudrasen)..........................47 4 28
8 आरिलक (Aarilak)..........................52 10 8
9 राजपाल (Rajpal)..............................36 0 0

उसके बाद ...सामन्त महानपाल ने राजपाल का वध करके 14 वर्ष तक राज्य किया। अवन्तिका (वर्तमान उज्जैन) के विक्रमादित्य ने महानपाल का वध करके 93 वर्ष तक राज्य किया। विक्रमादित्य का वध समुद्रपाल ने किया और उसकी 16 पीढ़ियों ने 372 वर्ष 4 माह 27 दिन तक राज्य किया !
जिसका विवरण नीचे दिया जा रहा है।

क्र. शासक का नाम वर्ष माह दिन

1 समुद्रपाल (Samudrapal).............54 2 20
2 चन्द्रपाल (Chandrapal)................36 5 4
3 सहपाल (Sahaypal)...................11 4 11
4 देवपाल (Devpal).....................27 1 28
5 नरसिंहपाल (Narsighpal).........18 0 20
6 सामपाल (Sampal)...............27 1 17
7 रघुपाल (Raghupal)...........22 3 25
8 गोविन्दपाल (Govindpal)........27 1 17
9 अमृतपाल (Amratpal).........36 10 13
10 बालिपाल (Balipal).........12 5 27
11 महिपाल (Mahipal)...........13 8 4
12 हरिपाल (Haripal)..........14 8 4
13 सीसपाल (Seespal).......11 10 13
14 मदनपाल (Madanpal)......17 10 19
15 कर्मपाल (Karmpal)........16 2 2
16 विक्रमपाल (Vikrampal).....24 11 13

टिप : कुछ ग्रंथों में सीसपाल के स्थान पर भीमपाल का उल्लेख मिलता है, सम्भव है कि उसके दो नाम रहे हों।

इसके उपरांत .....विक्रमपाल ने पश्चिम में स्थित राजा मालकचन्द बोहरा के राज्य पर आक्रमण कर दिया जिसमे मालकचन्द बोहरा की विजय हुई और विक्रमपाल मारा गया। मालकचन्द बोहरा की 10 पीढ़ियों ने 191 वर्ष 1 माह 16 दिन तक राज्य किया जिसका विवरण नीचे दिया जा रहा है।

क्र. शासक का नाम वर्ष माह दिन

1 मालकचन्द (Malukhchand) 54 2 10
2 विक्रमचन्द (Vikramchand) 12 7 12
3 मानकचन्द (Manakchand) 10 0 5
4 रामचन्द (Ramchand) 13 11 8
5 हरिचंद (Harichand) 14 9 24
6 कल्याणचन्द (Kalyanchand) 10 5 4
7 भीमचन्द (Bhimchand) 16 2 9
8 लोवचन्द (Lovchand) 26 3 22
9 गोविन्दचन्द (Govindchand) 31 7 12
10 रानी पद्मावती (Rani Padmavati) 1 0 0

रानी पद्मावती गोविन्दचन्द की पत्नी थीं। कोई सन्तान न होने के कारण पद्मावती ने हरिप्रेम वैरागी को सिंहासनारूढ़ किया जिसकी पीढ़ियों ने 50 वर्ष 0 माह 12 दिन तक राज्य किया !
जिसका विवरण नीचे दिया जा रहा है।

क्र. शासक का नाम वर्ष माह दिन

1 हरिप्रेम (Hariprem) 7 5 16
2 गोविन्दप्रेम (Govindprem) 20 2 8
3 गोपालप्रेम (Gopalprem) 15 7 28
4 महाबाहु (Mahabahu) 6 8 29

इसके बाद.......राजा महाबाहु ने सन्यास ले लिया । इस पर बंगाल के अधिसेन ने उसके राज्य पर आक्रमण कर अधिकार जमा लिया। अधिसेन की 12 पीढ़ियों ने 152 वर्ष 11 माह 2 दिन तक राज्य किया जिसका विवरण नीचे दिया जा रहा है।

क्र. शासक का नाम वर्ष माह दिन

1 अधिसेन (Adhisen) 18 5 21
2 विल्वसेन (Vilavalsen) 12 4 2
3 केशवसेन (Keshavsen) 15 7 12
4 माधवसेन (Madhavsen) 12 4 2
5 मयूरसेन (Mayursen) 20 11 27
6 भीमसेन (Bhimsen) 5 10 9
7 कल्याणसेन (Kalyansen) 4 8 21
8 हरिसेन (Harisen) 12 0 25
9 क्षेमसेन (Kshemsen) 8 11 15
10 नारायणसेन (Narayansen) 2 2 29
11 लक्ष्मीसेन (Lakshmisen) 26 10 0
12 दामोदरसेन (Damodarsen) 11 5 19

लेकिन जब ....दामोदरसेन ने उमराव दीपसिंह को प्रताड़ित किया तो दीपसिंह ने सेना की सहायता से दामोदरसेन का वध करके राज्य पर अधिकार कर लिया तथा उसकी 6 पीढ़ियों ने 107 वर्ष 6 माह 22 दिन तक राज्य किया जिसका विवरण नीचे दिया जा रहा है।

क्र. शासक का नाम वर्ष माह दिन

1 दीपसिंह (Deepsingh) 17 1 26
2 राजसिंह (Rajsingh) 14 5 0
3 रणसिंह (Ransingh) 9 8 11
4 नरसिंह (Narsingh) 45 0 15
5 हरिसिंह (Harisingh) 13 2 29
6 जीवनसिंह (Jeevansingh) 8 0 1

पृथ्वीराज चौहान ने जीवनसिंह पर आक्रमण करके तथा उसका वध करके राज्य पर अधिकार प्राप्त कर लिया। पृथ्वीराज चौहान की 5 पीढ़ियों ने 86 वर्ष 0 माह 20 दिन तक राज्य किया जिसका विवरण नीचे दिया जा रहा है।
क्र. शासक का नाम वर्ष माह दिन

1 पृथ्वीराज (Prathviraj) 12 2 19
2 अभयपाल (Abhayapal) 14 5 17
3 दुर्जनपाल (Durjanpal) 11 4 14
4 उदयपाल (Udayapal) 11 7 3
5 यशपाल (Yashpal) 36 4 27

विक्रम संवत 1249 (1193 AD) में मोहम्मद गोरी ने यशपाल पर आक्रमण कर उसे प्रयाग के कारागार में डाल दिया और उसके राज्य को अधिकार में ले लिया।

उपरोक्त जानकारी http://www.hindunet.org/ से साभार ली गई है जहाँ पर इस जानकारी का स्रोत स्वामी दयानन्द सरस्वती के सत्यार्थ प्रकाश ग्रंथ, चित्तौड़गढ़ राजस्थान से प्रकाशित पत्रिका हरिशचन्द्रिका और मोहनचन्द्रिका के विक्रम संवत1939 के अंक और कुछ अन्य संस्कृत ग्रंथों को बताया गया है।
साभार ....जी.के. अवधिया |

जय महाकाल....!!!

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 23 Jul 2012 17:14

RajeshA wrote:Klaus ji,

I made that comment because I am very much in favor of having dual track scholarship - the Itihaasist and the Historicist. The two underlying ways of thinking in both are different, and the benefits of the two viewpoints are also different. If Historicists (Indic nationalist) want to make progress they will have to offer hypothesis and theories, which may go against the traditional thinking among the Itihaasists, and so Historicists need the freedom to do so without being afraid of stepping on the toes of the Itihaasists. It also gives the Itihaasists the freedom not to have to change their traditional thinking just so as to go along with the view of the Historicists.

Rajesh ji, I realize where you're coming from and that approach needs more eyes. Dichotomies such as cyclic vs linear nature of time and Itihaasa vs Absolute truth history needs to be made popular, perhaps even institutionalized. Perhaps its one way by which successive generations can get the confusion of Gautama Buddha vs Buddha as avatara, among other knots that tie up many Dharmic and cross-cultural scholars.

PS: Something happened which forced me off the grid, hence couldnt respond earlier.

BajKhedawal · Post by **BajKhedawal** » 01 Aug 2012 08:05

Out of India thread got me wondering more about something which I always wondered about:

Since childhood I have been hearing elders say that there are several brahamands (universe's ??) like ours, with their own set of Brahma, Shiv, Vishnu, devi, devtas, rishis, danavs, etc...

But the history like saptrishi, ramayan, mahabharat, etc is uniform to all such universes.

However, these universes may be at different level of evolution. So than since these universes are not in tandem in terms of time-frame and events unfolding, then it is possible that our history is as old as vedas (unobtainium number of years) which our atma carries within its memory (while universe hopping with each birth), yet the history is as young as civilization on earth.

What?

sudarshan · Post by **sudarshan** » 01 Aug 2012 09:16

This is going to be a long post on a topic which has been of interest to me for some time. Please give it a patient read. It’s relevance to the Indian ethos may not be immediately evident, but it should be by the end of the post.

Albert Einstein said – “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” What is the simplest that things can get in the scientific approach? The axiom. What is an axiom? It is an assumption that we make, so that we can begin building our scientific theories. An axiom cannot be proved. Its validity can be inferred by making observations of the universe, and comparing them with the implications of the axiom. One conflicting observation is enough to negate the axiom. Likewise, predictions can be made based on the theory that is derived from the axiom. If the predictions do not correspond to experimental observations of the system in question (the universe, for instance), the axiom is again negated.

Einstein rejected the Newtonian axioms of absolute space and time, conservation of matter and energy. Einstein’s starting point was the Maxwellian axiom, that the speed of light is absolute. When Einstein pursued a theory based on this axiom, he inferred that space and time were relative, that mass was also relative, and that matter and energy could be inter-converted. This is special relativity. When Einstein generalized this theory to accelerating frames of reference, he came up with a new axiom – accelerating motion is indistinguishable from gravity. This is the basis of general relativity. The revolutionary change that Einstein’s world-view instituted was simply this: the rejection of one set of axioms, and the adoption of another.

When you want to learn about relativity, you could get hold of a book on tensor algebra or manifold mathematics, and go mathematically. In my opinion, this is not the smart way of going about it. A person who is unable to explain a concept in a sentence or two, without resorting to equations and hand-waving, cannot be considered to understand the concept. Understanding a concept starts with the basics – the axioms. A physics lecturer who regales his students with tensor math and equations on Lorentz contraction and time dilation, without explaining the basic concepts – the negation of the Newtonian axioms, and the adoption of the Maxwellian one – is doing his students a great disservice.

Now for the interesting part. If you ask a hundred Hindus to define Sanatana Dharma, you will get a hundred conflicting, confused answers. If you ask a thousand Hindus, you will get a thousand answers. This, to me, indicates that Hindus have LOST TOUCH WITH THE AXIOMS OF THEIR FAITH. They are unable to agree on a consistent definition of Hinduism (or more accurately, SD). The fact that they cannot explain their faith in one sentence, indicates that they do not understand SD at all.

Now get a hundred Muslims – Shias/Sunnis/whatever, and ask them to boil their faith down to one sentence. You will get a consistent, confident answer. La Ilaha il Allah, Mohammed ur rasul-ul-lah. Ask a hundred Christians (of whatever denomination) to define their faith in one sentence, and you will likewise get a consistent answer (or at least, answers with much less variation than the confused Hindu responses).

How then, do Hindus propose to retain, much less increase interest in and awareness of SD?

This is the basis of my book. Or actually, it’s the ideological basis, around which the story of my novel is built.

I believe that it IS possible for Hindus the world over, be they Shaivites or Vaishnavites, Advaitavadins or Bhaktas or whatever, to agree on one consistent, simple definition of SD. More: I believe that it is possible for all adherents of all four Dharmic faiths – Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, and Sikhism, in that chronological order – to agree on a simple, one-sentence definition of the basis of the Dharmic ethos. I further believe that this one-sentence definition directly leads to many of the tenets of quantum mechanics.

This one-sentence definition is based on three simple, intuitive axioms. If you start with these three axioms, and build a logical theory based on them, the resulting structure (I believe) is entirely consistent with the Vedas and the Gita, with Advaita and Dvaita and Vishishtadvaita, with the stories of men and Devas and Asuras performing tapas for thousands of years for attaining their chosen boons, with idol worship or Vedic abstract monism. More – the structure is also consistent with the teachings of the Buddha, with his agnosticism and insistence on quelling your inner desire. Even more – the structure is consistent with many (from my limited thought so far) of the tenets of quantum mechanics. If you pursue the axioms logically, you will find that evolution is a foregone conclusion. I submit that the extensive fossil records and the observations that led to the theory of quantum mechanics, are basically evidence in favor of the axioms of SD.

I realize these are rather tall claims, but I believe that SD is in one sense a scientific inquiry into the nature of the world around us, and more importantly, into the nature of our own consciousness. Like any scientific inquiry, SD is based on simple axioms. Christianity, as it exists today, is also built around an assumption – an assumption that is so basic to Christianity, that no Christian even thinks of questioning it. This is the assumption of absolute good and evil. It is only in the context of this assumption, that it makes sense to have a “good” God and an “evil” devil, who are constantly in competition over man’s soul; to have an “original sin,” which caused the downfall of mankind; to have a “son of God” “take on” your sins for you.

SD, I believe, is based on a different set of assumptions. This is why, despite the seeming similarities between religions, it is so hard to reconcile one with the other – their axioms are different. Classical mechanics and relativity agree (within a few parts per million) in their predictions of how objects behave at low speeds. Fundamentally, though, there is a world of difference between their axioms. Christianity and Hinduism may agree on the triumph of good over evil, and all that kind of feel-good stuff, but at a fundamental level, their axioms are different. Their world-view is different, because of the differences in the cultures of the lands where they evolved. I’m not interested in showing the superiority of either world-view over the other – just in establishing a consistent definition of the SD world-view. A consistent definition of SD is the precursor to taking on politically motivated religious orders (such as the EJs), and to increase awareness in SD the world around. I submit that it is the lack of a consistent definition, which has thus far hampered more extensive acceptance of SD, at least in the modern world.

I think most Hindus would immediately recognize the axioms I’m talking about – just that they haven’t been conditioned to systematically classify them as “axioms,” and to think of the rest of SD as “a logical structure that follows from these axioms.” I think the hundred or thousand different, conflicting answers that Hindus give to the question of “what is SD?” come from their confounding of axiom with theory, mantras and ritual worship with the true basis of the Vedas.

The logical structure resulting from the axioms of SD yields intuitive answers to seemingly vexing questions. I’m not claiming that the SD world-view has THE answers to all these questions, I’m just saying that the SD world-view has intuitive answers, which can be verified by observations of the universe around us. This is the standard to which science is held, is it not? Here are some of the questions which I think SD (through these three axioms) answers in an elegant and intuitive manner, simply by referring back to the axioms, or their corollaries.

* What is the purpose of this life? Why are we here?

* What is God’s master-plan? Why did He put us here?

* Is there a God? If so, why have I never seen Him?

* Where do the concepts of good and evil come from?

* How come there is so much evil in this world, if there is a just, merciful God? Specifically, why doesn’t this God intervene in favor of the good?

* Why does SD keep talking about reincarnation?

* What is “Nirvana?”

* What is evolution? Is it consistent with SD?

* Where do the concepts of Advaita and Dvaita come from?

* Is this world really an illusion? Then why do we even bother giving respect to anybody, to not hurt anybody, to remember God?

Many of the tenets of quantum mechanics (so far as I can observe) can also be shown to be *directly derivable* from these three axioms. Such as:

* The principle of quantum decoherence.

* The principle that events depend upon the observer. (Is this the same as decoherence? Could be.)

* What happens to Schroedinger’s cat?

* Are there really multiple universes?

I want to put up my idea here (that there are a set of few, simple, intuitive axioms of SD, from which the entire logical structure may be derived) for critical review. I also want to emphasize that I’m not claiming to have come up with anything new – I’m only claiming to have identified three tenets of SD, from which the rest may be derived. These tenets have been around from the beginning of SD – just that Hindus, over the centuries, have stopped thinking of them as the basics of SD. If there are gaps or fallacies in my logic, I’d like to be able to correct them for my book.

Is there interest for this idea here? If so, is this thread a good place for this, or should I post elsewhere?

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 01 Aug 2012 10:48

In my limited understanding, the primary axioms of Sanathana Dharma(Hinduism) is:
a) 'Veda(s) are the eternal truth.'

b) 'Veda(s) are divine. They are not man-made.'

c) 'Veda(s) are the authority on all things.'

d) 'All the experiences, words, customs and ideologies of the people that are in consonance with the Vedic teachings are acceptable. And all the experiences, words, customs and ideologies of the people contradictory to Vedic teachings are rejected.'

The word Veda refers to all the four Vedas along with Vedanta(Upanishads).
-------
Based on the above fundamental axioms, Indic philosophies have been categorised as Astika and Nastika.

Astika Philosophies are 6(Shat Darshanas). They accept the Vedic authority. They are:
a) Nyāyá, the school of logic (by Gautama)
b) Vaiśeṣika, the school that proposes atoms (by Kanada)
c) Sāṃkhya, the enumeration school (by Kapila)
d) Yoga, which assumes the metaphysics of Sāṃkhya (by Patanjali)
e) Mimāṃsā or Purva Mimāṃsā, the tradition of Vedic exegesis that stresses on the importance of Vedic rituals. (restored by Kumarilla Bhatta - who is disciple of Jaimini - who is disciple of Vyasa)
f) Vedanta or Uttara Mimāṃsā, the Upaniṣadic tradition.(restored by Adi Shankaracharya - who is disciple of Govinda Bhagavatpada - Gauda Bhagavatpada - Shuka - Vyasa)

Nastika philosophies. They reject the Vedic authority. They are:
a) Buddhism (supposedly by Siddhartha Gautama)
b) Jainism (supposedly by Rishabha, the first Tirthankara. Mahavira is the last of the 24 Tirthankaras.)
c) Cārvāka - Materialistic and hedonistic school of thought.

-----
Then, there are Tantras or Agamas. The Tantras like Darshanas(Philosophies) can also be Vedic or Non-Vedic. All the Tantras/Agamas (or the aspects of Tantras) that are in consonance with Vedas are acceptable. Rest are rejected.

The Tantras also claim their origin from divine beings. Even so, if the teachings are contradictory to Vedas, they are rejected.
-----

Then, there are Smritis or Dharma Shaastras. Smritis are authored by the Rishis. They deal with the rules of conduct. There are several Smritis.

The general rule is that the whole (or part) of a Smriti which is conflicting with Vedas is rejected.

-----

Then, there are Itihasaas(Ramayana & Mahabharatha) along with the 18 Puranas and 18 Upa-Puranas. Generally, they can be treated similar to Dharma Shaastras.

-----

Finally, there are traditions of family. Each family follow certain traditions and customs which it has inherited from its ancestors. These traditions are also acceptable and encouraged as long as they are not in conflict with the above mentioned scriptural teachings.

------

IMHO, the above is the outline of Hinduism or Sanatana Dharma.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 01 Aug 2012 14:41

sudarshan ji,

I think you're on one of the right paths! Please do carry on, and formulate your axioms. I would however suggest another thread. This thread seems to be more for the purpose of discussing what is already in the scriptures, and not for constructing theories on Indic Cultural Renewal!

So I have opened a thread for the purpose - Indic Cultural Renewal. Please feel free to post your previous post there and to elaborate on it, as you wished to do!

sudarshan · Post by **sudarshan** » 01 Aug 2012 19:11

RajeshA wrote:sudarshan ji,

I think you're on one of the right paths! Please do carry on, and formulate your axioms. I would however suggest another thread. This thread seems to be more for the purpose of discussing what is already in the scriptures, and not for constructing theories on Indic Cultural Renewal!

So I have opened a thread for the purpose - Indic Cultural Renewal. Please feel free to post your previous post there and to elaborate on it, as you wished to do!

Thank you, RajeshA ji

. Will post on this in the new thread once the pressures of samsaara (work) are over. Looking forward to a creative discussion.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 01 Aug 2012 20:56

viv wrote:Probably should mention this in psy-ops but want to understand more. During an innocuous discussion on an unrelated topic a friend commented that 'molten lead was poured into the ears' by Brahmins/upper caste of any unpriviliged caste (unpspecified in scope) who happened to hear the Vedic mantras. I found this very surprising and asked if there is any known incident. It turns out it is 'well known'. Well, not to me. On my search on Google, I find references to the Talmud, and Koran mentioning this as a form of death penalty but none from any original Indic sources, though there are articles on the net claiming it happened. So, question - is there any source or incident on this? or, is it more modern propaganda that has somehow been propagated without any real analysis, search or proof. I want to discuss with my friends again and correct the impression if possible. This is not to say wrongs have not been done in other form but the above 'molten lead int ears' (essentially kill the person in a horrific way) seems so bizarre and I've never heard of it before other than as medieval European torture perhaps.

If every mention of evry atrocity in some text indicates it was actually carried out - all of the Islamic chronicles, the Quaran or the ahadith, the Talmud and even the Torah - all are true. Historians deny such atrocities as boastings, fantasies, etc. Same should be done with Manu Smriti.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 02 Aug 2012 19:50

If you read the life Manu presribed for Bramins it is also quite hard on them also. In any even following Manu like follow quaran is not obligated for Hindus. It is not some gods commnand. It is all some stupid idea of brits that hindus must have some law giver and they found Manu that is all.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 02 Aug 2012 22:56

the primarily followed "laws", at least in the South, are by Apastamba. Apastamba sutras were the most widely followed "practices" until recently.

I personally didn't hear or know of a "Manu Smriti" until my teenage when I started getting interested in general affairs. that's when I came across the term, and had to go to my grandfather to know what this "manu smriti" was. but of course, if you read the prescribed history, then Manu has to be the most famous, most widely known, and most accepted "guru"/"teacher" of Hindus. reality is vastly different. if you're not an "internet Hindu", it's likely that you won't even encounter the term. my 28-year old cousin didn't know what I was talking about when I said Manu Smriti.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 02 Aug 2012 23:10

viv,

Some informational links here:
1. Manu Smrti and Shudras -- मनुस्मृति और शूद्र

The sidebar has other related articles:
2. Manu Smriti and Punishment
3. Understanding Manu Smriti
4. Manu Smriti and Women

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Aug 2012 23:32

devesh wrote:the primarily followed "laws", at least in the South, are by Apastamba. Apastamba sutras were the most widely followed "practices" until recently.

I personally didn't hear or know of a "Manu Smriti" until my teenage when I started getting interested in general affairs. that's when I came across the term, and had to go to my grandfather to know what this "manu smriti" was. but of course, if you read the prescribed history, then Manu has to be the most famous, most widely known, and most accepted "guru"/"teacher" of Hindus. reality is vastly different. if you're not an "internet Hindu", it's likely that you won't even encounter the term. my 28-year old cousin didn't know what I was talking about when I said Manu Smriti.

To add the only time I heard about Manusmriti was about Alasani Peddana's "Manu Charitra" which had the story about Varudini and Pravakya which was in a drama in a NTR movie!

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 03 Aug 2012 10:42

Alan Watts - Journey From India
[youtube]nyh5X29ag1U&feature=related[/youtube]

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 03 Aug 2012 10:46

Alan Watts - (MAYA) The Arts - Reality Art & Illusion - 4of4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTxHWuVB ... ure=relmfu

alan watts transcending duality
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2I0vWoF ... ure=relmfu

Alan Watts - still the mind
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdk1O0_7 ... ure=relmfu

For EJs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... Tk#t=2178s
(watch 36-38 Minutes)

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Aug 2012 22:10

Mahabharata resources:

http://www.mahabharata-resources.org/

BORI on Draupadi:
http://mahabharata-resources.org/draupa ... -bori.html

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Aug 2012 02:27

http://mahabharata-resources.org/inspired_english.html

Gian Guiseppe Filippi, Bruno Marcolongo
Kampilya: Quest for a Mahabharata City
D.K. Printworld, New Delhi (1999).
Contents: Preface. 1. Geoarchaeological observations in Doab plain through advanced remote sensing methodology/Bruno Marcolongo. 2. Kampilya: one site on more sites?/Annamaria Dallaporta and Lucio Marcato. 3. Mahabharata reminiscences in some villages near Kampil/L. Arnoldo and G. Fuggetta.

"Kampil (Farrukhabad District, U.P.) is a typical Indian village in the fertile terrain of the Ganga Yamuna Doab. Known for its long, glorious past, the village has, since A. Cunningham's visit here in 1878, compelled increasing attention of the archaeologists seeking to explore its possible identity with Kampilya,the city, described in the Mahabharata story, as the fabulous capital of Drupad's south Pancala Kingdom."
"The question of Kampil-Kampilya identity was examined afresh by a multidisciplinary research team, on the basis of IRS Satellite multispectral images of the mid-Ganga plain, a predictive geo-archaeological model, and field surveys. Which, in turn, led researchers to the discovery of a complex of ruins: the remains of a fortified structure, locally called Drupad Kila?about five kilometers upstream of the Kampil village."
"Set out here are the preliminary findings of this multidisciplinary research, including (a) a study of the late Holocene Palaeohydographic evolution of Doab region around Drupad Kila site and the influence of geomorphology/environmental resources on the human historical settlements; (b) an archaeological report, based on the surface survey of the discovered site; and (c) a socio-ethnological study of the villages around the Kila complex. Carried out during 1996-98, these studies: each contributed by the area specialist (s) of the research team, addressed specifically the question whether the Drupad-Kila complex answers to the description of Mahabharata city of Kampilya."
"Visualizing the manifold importance of Kampilya?beyond just the archaeological event, the editors have created a holistic "Kampilya Project" to retrieve the cultural and environmental potentialities of the Drupad-Kila complex and its peripheral areas" (jacket)

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Aug 2012 02:55

A new author for me atleast:Maggi Lidchi-Grassi

Review of Maggi Lidchi[Grassi's Legs of the tortoise by Dr Pradip Bhattacharya:

Mythic Resurgence

Awesome review

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Aug 2012 11:24

One aspect of the fascination of the modern Westerners in studying the Mahabharata is the WWII in Europe. WWII is a modern Mahabharata war with all sorts of breaches in Christian-Western dharma.

Bji, Any insights?

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 10 Aug 2012 13:57

devesh wrote:the primarily followed "laws", at least in the South, are by Apastamba. Apastamba sutras were the most widely followed "practices" until recently.

I personally didn't hear or know of a "Manu Smriti" until my teenage when I started getting interested in general affairs. that's when I came across the term, and had to go to my grandfather to know what this "manu smriti" was. but of course, if you read the prescribed history, then Manu has to be the most famous, most widely known, and most accepted "guru"/"teacher" of Hindus. reality is vastly different. if you're not an "internet Hindu", it's likely that you won't even encounter the term. my 28-year old cousin didn't know what I was talking about when I said Manu Smriti.

I only became aware of Manu when Kerala Congress Christian Politican and his opinion of Hinduism based on it mentioned it on a NDTV debate post the Murder of Graham Steines.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 10 Aug 2012 22:03

Adda of all Deracinated Guys

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Aug 2012 00:42

One of the Telugu commentators on the epics said that "gau and asva" are the two favored/important animals of the ancient Hindus.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 11 Aug 2012 01:41

RajeshA wrote:Adda of all Deracinated Guys

I followed a few threads and the biggest motivation seems to be aping the "reformation" in Europe. they think that the way the Biblical claims have been rubbished (by genuine scientific research) also should be applied to Indic itihasas. it is a fierce craving in the heart to be associated with the "western". to act and behave like "west" to prove that "we are not different"; "we too hate religion"; "we too question our 'books'"; "we are also like you"......it is a very deep seated craving to act, feel, behave, and think like "west".

of course they don't realize the Ramayana and Mahabharata were never intended as "one true book". the Bible and Quran were/are intended as such, which is why there is a necessity to debunk them, lest the populace become totally ignorant and naive to reality. for Ramayana and Mahabharata, there is no such necessity, b/c at no place, by no author, have they been prescribed as "word of God" or "ONE TRUE SOURCE", etc etc. so there is no compunction to freeze them as they are and perennially apply them to all situations. when there is no such compunction, there is no fundamental need to treat them as purely historical or purely fictional accounts. but of course, they ignore all this, and simply jump to "discredit" and "debunk". they are forcefully doing something which doesn't need doing.

essentially channeling their energies in a fruitless pursuit, b/c ultimately they won't gain anything out of it. instead, they will probably always have the feeling of guilt b/c of inner "knowing" which indicates they are on a futile path.

long-term and long-lasting guilt, especially if for the same reason and widespread among society, can cause destructive forces to take rise.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 11 Aug 2012 06:59

ramana wrote:One aspect of the fascination of the modern Westerners in studying the Mahabharata is the WWII in Europe. WWII is a modern Mahabharata war with all sorts of breaches in Christian-Western dharma.

Bji, Any insights?

ramanaji,
apologies - did not visist this thread for some time. My impression was that
(1) wetserners looked at the moral fallouts of war and how to deal with it through MB - and the search started from wwI.
(2) the moral war inside the decision-makers, the initiators of war - this was what was singularly missing in the Greek tragedies, which were almost all god-planned from up in the heavens and ran to a script. But Krishna's role is on the ground, hands on, even if it ha sbeen given a "avataric" feel in the later redactions of MB - and significantly different from Greeks or Romans - even the supreme godhead is shown not be beyond the penalties of his own laws.

There is a kind of subconscious penitential resonance in the post-Christian post-wwii European psyche - that even those on the "right" side of the conflict should suffer some inner retribution or undergo penalties/sufferance for initiating bloodshed, even if itwas for a higher cause and therefore just.

(3) MB is much more concerned about the psychological aspects of war, and establishes principles of bloodshed that are not based on mundane material thinsg only [like in Greek epics] even though they constitute formal excuses for war [Draupadi and land], but justify war based on principles not merely about land and women or wealth.

Look at Lidchi-grassi for example [I think based in Puducherry ashram?].

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Aug 2012 07:10

Where does Augustine's Just war compare to BG?

There appears to be a gap and hence the quest for MB by Anglo Saxon West,

Lidchi Grassi am ordering.
She is a disciple of Puducherry ashram.

BTW please do blog this issue.

Amazom sampler

Sushupti · Post by **Sushupti** » 13 Aug 2012 21:42

I posted a reply to the following question on a forum and i am sharing that here.

After senseless shootings in Wisconsin, talkshow hosts, journalists,
media figures, etc have started describing about Sikhism: a
monotheistic religion, monotheistic because it is founded on One God
(obviously, not many gods). The meaning of 'ik' seems to be one,
Onkar has many cognates in many Indian languages (both south and north
Indian languages). Can anyone describe Onkar without obfuscating
further? I hate it when people try to obscure one obscure concept with
more obscure concepts.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheHeathe ... ssage/6167

From Jiva/Vyashti (Individual) perspective it is Aatma (not same as soul of Bible) and from "Samashti" (Cosmic) perspective it is Brahamn of Upanishads/Vedanta.

Mandukyopanishad describes it from "Vyashti" perspective. Refer to shlokas 8-11 below.

http://www.psychology4all.com/Mandukya.htm

Also, you can refer to the English translation of Adi Shankara Bhasya here

https://ia600302.us.archive.org/7/items ... 0agoog.pdf

Refer to the page no 30.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 19 Aug 2012 14:38

Ashok Gottipati wrote:
abhishek_sharma wrote:^^ That is fine. Take your time and post the evidence when you are using your desktop/laptop.

Note that I am objecting to your use of "*most* brahmins". I am expecting that you will provide data which will be enough to make sound inference about *most* brahmins. Don't underestimate the difficulty of this task.
Most is anecdotal and you can see one on this very thread johneeg and Malladi Krishna shastri.If you want a modicum of statistical analysis with a pew survey you simply are not getting it from me

Firstly: I am not a 'brahmin'(atleast, not by birth), so my views cannot be extrapolated on to 'brahmins'. In fact, my views run contradictory to your anecdotal experience. I am a non-brahmin (specifically, SC), yet I do not accept your claims about Vyasa's and Valmiki's caste. So, anecdotally, there are some people (brahmins and non-brahmins) who do not accept your claim about Vyasa and Valmiki's caste. So, it debunks your conclusion that only brahmins oppose your claim(based on prejudice).

Secondly: A certain claim is made about Vyasa or Valmiki(specifically about their caste). Others have rejected the claim citing the contradictory proof in scriptures. How can it be the proof of bias on there part? The proof of bias is if people willfully ignore or subvert the proof in support of your claim and fabricate proof in support of their rejection of your claim. Do you think that is happening? If so, please point out the basis on which your claims are based...

Thirdly: There are several personalities in Puranas, Ramayana, Mahabharatha and Hindu folklores that belong to the so-called downtrodden castes. These personalities are celebrated and revered.

Even a hunter in the forest will rise to the level of being respected by all. How? By his devotion. All of us have heard of Kannappa Nayanar. Was he educated or was he orthodox? Was he affluent? No. He had no such qualifications. But his devotion towards the Lord had no parallel.

मार्गवर्तितपादुका पशुपतेरङ्गस्य कूर्चायते
गण्डूषाम्बुनिषेचनं पुररिपोर्दिव्याभिषेकायते ।
किञ्चिद्भक्षितमांसशेषकबलं नव्योपहारायते …

Kannappa Nayanar once beheld a Sivalinga in the forest. He could see that the Sivalinga had not been worshipped for long by anyone. He decided to do the worship himself. But he did not have any materials for worship. Seeing that the Sivalinga was fully covered by dust, Kannappa wanted to clean it. Lacking anything else to wipe it, he used his sandals for removing the dust from the Linga. There was a river which flowed nearby. Kannappa had no vessel to fetch water from the river for the sacred ablution. His mouth became the vessel to carry the water. He spat the water on the Linga and the Abhishekam was over. He thought for a moment as to what he should offer to the Lord as Naivedya. He decided to offer the meat of the animal which he had hunted just a little earlier. Ishwara happily accepted all these acts of His sincere devotee. Why? Because, Kannappa was extremely devoted. Though the story is not over, at this juncture, I wish to warn some people who might think that they can also do Puja in an unorthodox way as did Kannappa. They may also do so, provided they are capable of performing the most astonishing act that Kannappa subsequently indulged in. In that case, Ishwara may accept the worship of such people notwithstanding their heterodoxy.

After the worship was over, Kannappa noticed that tears of blood were flowing copiously from one eye of the Lord’s image. Kannappa was shocked. Thinking that there was something wrong with one of His eyes, Kannappa forcefully plucked his own eye and fixed it on the defective eye of the Lord. Then he noticed that Bhagavan’s other eye started bleeding. Kannappa immediately cut out his second eye and placed it on the second defective eye of Ishwara. Ishwara became immensely pleased with His devotee and appeared before him. Kannappa was instantaneously blessed with Moksha. This was the result of Kannappa’s sincere devotion.

Devotion is something which is vital for everyone.

The above in an excerpt. You can find the full text at the following link:
English translation of an Anugraha Bhashanam delivered by Sringeri Jagadguru Shankaracharya Sri Bharati Tirtha Mahaswamiji expounding the greatness of Devotion, at Coimbatore during his Vijaya Yatra to Tamil Nadu in 1988

So, is this Shankaracharya prejudiced against tribals and hunters? or is He presenting Kannappa as an ideal for one and all?

There was also a brahmin priest in the above story. He performed orthodox worship. Lord Shiva accepted the worship of both the priest and tribal because both had true devotion. The backgrounds of the people are irrelevant if they are devoted to the Lord(Bhagawan). Similarly, the backgrounds of the people are irrelevant if they are not devoted to the Lord(Bhagawan). It is precisely why one is amused when one hears of terms like 'Christian Brahmin'.

Lets go to Mahabharatha now:
We have a famous Dharma Vyadha episode in Mahabharatha.
The episode features humbling of a brahmin(who has learnt Vedas) at the hands of a pious lady. Then, the brahmin goes and seeks the teachings of Vyadha. Vyadha is a meat vendor. Dharma Vyadha expounds Vyadha Gita. The word Gita is used for loftiest teachings in Hindu scriptures.
Mahabharat - Aranya parva - Fifth Chapter first part

Lord Krishna mentions him in the Shrimad Bhagavatam, as someone who has attained perfection by satsang.

Vyadha makes it clear that 'no work is to be looked down upon'. Brahmin, who is earlier prejudiced against certain occupations, is enlightened. This episode runs contrary to charges against the Hindu scriptures that 'it glorifies brahmins only'.

Lets go to Ramayana:
We have Guha, the King of Nishadhas(Tribals). Valmiki Ramayana depicts Rama and Guha as not only acquaintances but even friends. Rama touches Guha also, so no question of any form of untouchability being practiced.

Some people like to say that Shabri is also a tribal. But, I am not sure.

Anyway, there are 3 examples, one from Ramayana, one from Mahabharatha and one from the famous folklores(and acknowledged by Sringeri Shankaracharya Himself). All the three highlight and celebrate the tribals/hunters/meat-vendors.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 19 Aug 2012 16:50

^^^ about 'Kannappa Nayanar'

We used to have calender art for this episode that could be found in homes here up north in early 80s.

It was understood as such. But I did not know of the authenticity of the episode in terms of its Katha value. Name I certainly did not know for the Byaal (which is what we used to call the devotee)

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Aug 2012 22:54

johneeG, Thanks for bringing back the focus. Am in debt to you.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 20 Aug 2012 01:13

ramana wrote:johneeG, Thanks for bringing back the focus. Am in debt to you.

Ramana garu, why such big words!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 Aug 2012 00:52

Anybody watching the ZeeTv's Ramayan based on Ram Charit Manas?
Costumes are gaudy, actors speak vyvaharik speech, still creditable rendering of the epic.
Dasharatha is played by Rishab Shukla, who played Shantanu in BR Chopra's Mahabharat.
Opening sequence is with Vishnu Sahasranamam in song form, unlike M.S. Subblakshmi's version which invokes bhakti.

The actors are familiar people from other Hindi serials.