Discussion on Indian Epics, Texts, Treatises & Kathas

negi · Post by **negi** » 26 Mar 2009 23:31

^

Hindi transliteration

The one from Shaardula sir is played after the end of episode.

Here is the actual track from youtube.

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

Keshav · Post by **Keshav** » 26 Mar 2009 23:46

All this discussion about the Mahabharata just goes to show how much more important the epics are to Indian culture than the Vedas. They don't really mean anything to the average person.

achit · Post by **achit** » 26 Mar 2009 23:54

negi wrote:^

Hindi transliteration

The one from Shaardula sir is played after the end of episode.

Here is the actual track from youtube.

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

Thanks Negi.
Bharat Ek Khoj was one of the best programs ever on DD.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 27 Mar 2009 00:22

Keshav wrote:All this discussion about the Mahabharata just goes to show how much more important the epics are to Indian culture than the Vedas. They don't really mean anything to the average person.

Nope. The epics describe the veda in layman terms. The vedas are supreme, and the epics are the interpreters. The mahabharatha with its hundreds of smaller stories buried in it shows how the vedas and upanishads need to be interpreted to lead our lives.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 27 Mar 2009 01:53

^^the link titles and centers around atheism. imho, its wrong.. atheism is just another way of thinking not knowing the unknown unknowns. skepticism and agnostic thoughts does not qualify even,.. in the atheistic realm.

here is the other link:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv10129.htm

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 27 Mar 2009 03:31

For all Telugu people on this forum:

I found this commentary on Ramayana http://surasa.net/music/samavedam/

and this commentary on Kathopanishad http://surasa.net/music/sundara/

very insightful.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 27 Mar 2009 03:34

ramaY, please visit the book sthread in this forum.

thanks, ramana

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 27 Mar 2009 03:47

ramana wrote:ramaY, please visit the book sthread in this forum.

thanks, ramana

Ramanaji,

Very interesting references. That's lot of home work to do

thanks

ShivHari · Post by **ShivHari** » 27 Mar 2009 07:04

Thank you Raghav K and Sachin.
My curiosity still remains the same that OK if I agree that Duryodhna and Dushasan etc were probably spiritual souls in their previous lives and during Mahabharat, by having a 'darshan' of Supreme Lord Shri krishna, they achieved Moksha. But how about miliions of other souls (Warriors) who participated in Mahabharat war and had the opportunity to see Shri Krishna from their eyes. By seeing Lord Krishna, didn't these millions of souls also achieve Moksha which is the ultimate goal of human life?

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 27 Mar 2009 08:33

ChandraS wrote:Shaardula, Advaita or Dvaita does not make any difference to me. I will lap up all there is to know about them. Your posts have really whetted my appetite. Please continue to post such nuggets of what you know about what they said. Also, any book/text recommendations for a beginner/kora kagaaz type to get into Vedic philosophy?

there is a lot of material. the choice is between what you want it for/what you are seeking.

if purely as an intellectual exercise, radhakrishnan's works are useful. he is really famous for his 'a source book on indian philosphy', note he is really biased in favour of advaita. a good read along with radhakrishnan is BNK Sharma. imho reading radha krishna without reading sharma is really incomplete. see further reading section of this wiki article. additionally the forum on davita.org used to be very good. donno what its current state is. but radhakrishnan was more proligic than sharma. radhakrishan has written what could be called bhashyas on the prasthana trayi.

there are many lively juicy ancient/medieval texts but mostly inaccessible.

if you are interested for personal reasons, then chinmayananda(C) is a very good guru. he was also prolific. good to start with shankara's vivekachoodamani - C has an awesome book on it. then he has commented on several upanishads. again an adavtic take on things, but very rewarding.

apart from these sringeri matha's sankaracharya's have really done some wonderful writing. especially chandrashekara bharati, vidyatheerta and bharathi theerta. translations in almost all indian languages exist.

in either case once you are done, you should read ashtavakra or atleast listen to UG krishnamurthy, who was perhaps ashtavakra's greatest shishya.

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 27 Mar 2009 08:35

rama, chinmayanada has very good and accessible material on all the significant upanishads. i heartily suggest those.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 27 Mar 2009 08:46

ShivHari wrote:Thank you Raghav K and Sachin.
My curiosity still remains the same that OK if I agree that Duryodhna and Dushasan etc were probably spiritual souls in their previous lives and during Mahabharat, by having a 'darshan' of Supreme Lord Shri krishna, they achieved Moksha. But how about miliions of other souls (Warriors) who participated in Mahabharat war and had the opportunity to see Shri Krishna from their eyes. By seeing Lord Krishna, didn't these millions of souls also achieve Moksha which is the ultimate goal of human life?

And they did. The last parva has the scene where all those who fought in the war and died are shown to have attained swarga or mokhsa. No more Earthly life.

Sridhar K · Post by **Sridhar K** » 27 Mar 2009 08:50

ShivHari

Moksha (Permanent abode with the Gods) is different from Swarga (Heaven - a 7* Holiday resort of sort). Duryodhan et all attained swarga and not moksha. The ones that are KIA by the Lord himself are generally divine souls who attain Moksha. Duryodhan etc. were not.

Regarding your original question, a mere dharshan of the lord alone does not ensures moksha. As per the BG, if one has the darshan of the lord with mind completely engrossed in him (when every sense in your body is in union with him) at the time of death, he will attain moksha. All those souls who died in Kurushetra are unlikley to be thinking about Krishna at the time of their death. Generally you get such a union only after you have experienced all the fruits of your karma ( good or bad) and been through one of the three different means prescribed in BG. The *mere name will cure all sins* is kind of an hyberbole to stress the importance of the lord's name. What it ensures is that by chanting you get more Satvic and do not sin generally. Lord does not take away your karma, you have to go through your fruits of Karma God just provides you the strength to withstand the pain while experiencing the fruits of bad karma.

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 27 Mar 2009 08:56

Do you have the compllete translation in hindi for nasadiya?
I was only able to find the english translation

Non-being then existed not being:
There was no air, nor sky that is beyond it.
What was concealed? Where in? In whose protection?
And was there deep unfathomable water?
Death then existed not nor life immortal;
Of neither night nor day was any token.
By its inherent force the one breathed windless:
No other thing than that beyond existed.

Darkness there was at first by darkness hidden;
Without distinctive marks, this all was water.
That which, becoming, 'by the void was covered,
That one by force of heat came into being.

Desire entered the one in the beginning:
It was the earliest seed, of thought the product.
The sages searching in their hearts with wisdom.
Found out the bond of being in non-being.

Their way extended light across the darkness:
But was the one above or was it under?
Creative force was there, and fertile power:
Below was energy, above was. impulse:

Who knows for certain? Who shall here declare it?
Whence was it born, and whence came this creation?
The gods were born after this world's creation:
Then who can know from whence it has arisen?

None knoweth whence creation has arisen:
And whether he has or has not produced it:
He who surveys it in the highest heaven,
He only knows, or haply he may know not.

(Rg Ved 10:129 :1-7)
Radhakrishnan and Moore's Indian
Philosophy, PP. 23-24)

link[/quote]

achit negi sir has posted the relevant link. i have read and re-read radhakrishnan and moore's(UoH) translation. doesnot come close to vasanth deo's translation. perhaps because english is not a natural language for me, but the deo's version is brilliant. i look up sanskrit version(from a Univ of Mysore text i have) and deo's version and it is right up there.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 27 Mar 2009 10:02

shaardula wrote:Do you have the compllete translation in hindi for nasadiya?
I was only able to find the english translation

I have found some very nice rendition of the Vedic Creation hymns in Utube. If you make a search you can find them. For example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaGleromH4Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyrXdEi8 ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAxdLHK9 ... re=related

Enjoy,
Gautam
PS As far as I can remember, Swami Vivekananda also translated the Nasadiya sutras they are very good, but not literal word for word. Try his complete works.

ChandraS · Post by **ChandraS** » 27 Mar 2009 12:04

Shaardula saar, many thanks for the references. My curiosity is mainly from an intellectual point of view. Dr. Radhakrishnan's book seems to be a good start and it isn't very expensive either, will get it this weekend.

Keshav · Post by **Keshav** » 28 Mar 2009 09:44

shaardula wrote:rama, chinmayanada has very good and accessible material on all the significant upanishads. i heartily suggest those.

I second that. Technically, Chinmayananda belongs to the Advaita sampradhya but having attended Chinmaya Mission Balavihar for 8 years, I found his Bhagavad Gita to be most practical - as far as the Bhagavad Gita can be practical, he certainly brings it out.

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 28 Mar 2009 09:51

any one here read ramana? not the admin but the seer.

in recent times one of the few people who grasped the true essence of calamity. and one of the few true to salt traditional gurus.

but IMHO, UG is the best amongst our contemporaries. but the irony is, to appreciate UG, you have to be traditionally trained. once you are primed on tradition, UG peels it all for you. UG is also one of the few people, who actually speaks of how he came about it. he knew the traditions and followed, nay, stalked his guru, JK, for the longest time. until he hit upon it. and then he spent the the rest of his life dissing his gurus and his learning. he was not an ingrate. he was actually the greatest fan of JK, ramana and our tradition. in case any one here disagrees, you can check the sum total of all his talks he just borrowed heavily from ashtavakra - who is perhaps the only one he does not dis - nobody can.

Keshav · Post by **Keshav** » 30 Mar 2009 04:13

shaardula wrote:but IMHO, UG is the best amongst our contemporaries. but the irony is, to appreciate UG, you have to be traditionally trained. once you are primed on tradition, UG peels it all for you. UG is also one of the few people, who actually speaks of how he came about it. he knew the traditions and followed, nay, stalked his guru, JK, for the longest time. until he hit upon it. and then he spent the the rest of his life dissing his gurus and his learning. he was not an ingrate. he was actually the greatest fan of JK, ramana and our tradition. in case any one here disagrees, you can check the sum total of all his talks he just borrowed heavily from ashtavakra - who is perhaps the only one he does not dis - nobody can.

That's the problem with UG. Unless you understand Advaita first, you won't understand him at all. It'll be interesting to see what his followers make of him now that he's dead. How will they interpret his ideas?

gandharva · Post by **gandharva** » 30 Mar 2009 10:53

Someone with understanding of Hindi should surely listen to Swami Akahndanad Ji. Visit http://www.maharajshri.net. Request the login password and download mp3s.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Apr 2009 21:51

Can we please post on-line links to Indian epics, texts, treatises and kathas in this thread & E-Books thread? It willmake the thread mor comprehensive.

Thanks, ramana

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Apr 2009 03:36

In light of Sri Rama navami today Hindu has this article

SriRama Rama Rameti Rame Rame Manorame

BajKhedawal · Post by **BajKhedawal** » 05 Apr 2009 09:26

ramana wrote:Can we please post on-line links to Indian epics, texts, treatises and kathas in this thread & E-Books thread? It willmake the thread mor comprehensive.

Thanks, ramana

Complete translations in English yand Telugu, Individual stories, Characters, articles, etc...

http://www.mahabharataonline.com/

Keshav · Post by **Keshav** » 06 Apr 2009 02:26

I posted this in the E-Book thread:

http://www.geocities.com/advaitavedant/

Its a compilation of all the Upanishads (Major and Minor) plus all the Gitas, works by Shankara and many others treatises.

Keshav · Post by **Keshav** » 07 Apr 2009 02:18

Ramana -

What's that book you're always recommending to people?

The Political History of India? Or something like that?

Who's the author of it?

Thanks in advance.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Apr 2009 03:20

Keshav wrote:Ramana -

What's that book you're always recommending to people?

The Political History of India? Or something like that?

Who's the author of it?

Thanks in advance.

ramana wrote:I was asked to post a ref to this work.

1) Bio of Hemachandra RayChaudhari

2) His Magnum Opus:
Political History of ancient India from Accession of Parikshit to extinction of Guptas

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 07 Apr 2009 15:44

Am not a movie buff but saw this move "The legend of Bagger Vance". The conversation between Will Smith and the confused golfer is pretty much based on Krishna and Arjun's samvaad in Srimad Bhagvad Gita. I strongly believe the storywriter for the movie must have read the Gita.

bhavani · Post by **bhavani** » 07 Apr 2009 20:34

Guys,

i am an avid reader of puranas. I read mahabharata from C Rajagopalachari. but one really interesting facet i find in our religion is the worship of the Mother. Everypart of India there is some sort of Worship of divine Shakti. INfact some believe that the trimurti came from the Mother Shakti. The Various facets of Durga we worship, like Kali, Durga, Parvathi so and thousands of more forms, i think symbolises our respect for the divine feminine.

One question that i always got from the abrahamic religions is god is always male from them. Whereas for us shakti may be superior to all. i have read Devi purana some time back when i was young, did not understand it completely. anybody knows of any other epics and texts on Durga, kali , parashakti. Kali Is one godess who finally symbolises the end of everything and beginning of new. this time when i go back home i am planning to visit andhra university library. This library is known to have lot of books relating to durga and kali and other local dieties like poleramma, nukalamma, etc

One final Question have anybody ever seen a picture or statue in which kali is in her Most angry from with Skull garland and everything and shiva under her feet. ANybody knows what is the meaning and what context it happens?

Infact i want to read and know more about the shakti worship.

Raghav K · Post by **Raghav K** » 07 Apr 2009 21:52

bhavani wrote:Guys,

i am an avid reader of puranas. I read mahabharata from C Rajagopalachari. but one really interesting facet i find in our religion is the worship of the Mother. Everypart of India there is some sort of Worship of divine Shakti. INfact some believe that the trimurti came from the Mother Shakti. The Various facets of Durga we worship, like Kali, Durga, Parvathi so and thousands of more forms, i think symbolises our respect for the divine feminine.

bhavani, infact up until 3000 years ago i.e before Moses entered God was worshipped as Shakti or Divine Feminine. Another proof for this is the book "When GOD Was A Woman by Merlin Stone" The author is an archeologist and not even religious.

During this period the world was very peaceful without any conflicts.Only after Moses entered and the start of Abrahamic religions,man started killing man and this has continued for 3000 years.

To explain the Pre-creation

Supreme Divine Consciousness vibrates with a desire to Create and Manifest.

1.Primary Creation
Dasa Mahavidyas & Various Shakthis, Maha Maya, Purusha ,Prakrithi

2.Para Brahman,
Secondary Creation, Cosmic Egg, Para Bindhu, Nada Bindhu, MoolaThirukona, Shiva Shakthi

2a. Shiva Shakti -- Trimurthi-Brahma,Vishnu,Maheshwara

To predict the future, we are going in for a climax during this period from 2000-2016 and we will again recognize the Divine Mother as she will Manifest herself to save us from the catastrophes we will encounter.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 07 Apr 2009 23:36

The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, online.

http://www.ramakrishnavivekananda.info/ ... _works.htm

The master on vedanta.
http://www.ramakrishnavivekananda.info/ ... ntents.htm

I request those who are interested in vedanta, to read the katha-upanishad at least once in their lives.
the english translation with explanation by Swami Lokeswarananda published by RK mission is quite good.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 08 Apr 2009 00:41

Prologue

Light dissipates darkness. Knowledge ends ignorance. The darkness that rules the entire universe during night disappears with the arrival of light. The ignorance that is haunting us through these many births can only end with the dawn of knowledge.

How does this ignorance exist, truth or false? If it exists as truth, there is no point trying to remove it because if it is truth, it cannot be eliminated. If it exists as , there is no need to remove it. But I know ignorance exists because I am trying to remove it. So ignorance is not truth but it is there. It is not only absence of knowledge but also opponent of knowledge.

Is chasing out the darkness the objective of Light? Light is not trying to do anything to darkness. It just illuminates. Illuminating is its nature. There is no intention or action. When there is Light, the Darkness is disappearing. Inability to stand in the presence of light is the limitation of darkness. Till the dawn of knowledge ignorance stays. As the darkness disappearing in the presence of light, ignorance dies in the presence of knowledge.

Now, what is ignorance? Is absence of knowledge ignorance? Ignorance is the root cause of all our sorrows, troubles, problems. Ignorance results in Samsara. What is Samsara?

Anything that causes sorrow is Samsara. Anything that is finite is Samsara. Anything that comes to go is Samsara. Anything that I am calling as means and goals is also Samsara, because I am trying to gain something that I did not have before. Thus trying to gain joy is also Samsara, because I am not sure of the permanence of that joy. What I call as I (this body) is also Samsara, because this body has hunger and thirst and is full of sorrows. Everything that lives must die. But still no one wants to die. Even though I know that everyone must die, I do want my loved ones to live forever. This is nothing but ignorance, nothing but Samsara. Since my mind perceives my world-view my sense-mind is the root of this Samsara.

So, I need knowledge now. I can get rid of ignorance by attaining knowledge, because ignorance disappears when knowledge arrives.

What kind of knowledge I want?

The concept of knowledge in this world is interesting. As I gain knowledge of a certain aspect, only the ignorance related to it is disappearing. But the ignorance pertained to the other aspects remains. For example, I don’t have knowledge about Mathematics. By learning the knowledge about Mathematics, I am able to get rid of ignorance on Mathematics. But ignorance about Chemistry remains. When I learn Chemistry also, ignorance of Physics still remains. So it goes.

Even when I learn a subject the body of knowledge is not complete. When I gain knowledge of Chemistry, my knowledge (the knowledge available) of Chemistry is not complete. There is lot of new research going on is much more to do. No “Body of Knowledge” is complete and certain. Thus any field of knowledge is limited.

Somehow I am not able to live in this world of limited knowledge. Since I do not want to remain ignorant, I want to attain knowledge. But when I become knowledgeable about one field, there are many more unknown. As I continue my search I realize that there are infinite fields to learn. That means infinite exists. And there must exist, knowledge about that infinite.

I am looking for that knowledge that gives me infinite and absolute knowledge. Is it possible? Can there be a knowledge that allows me to learn everything and infinite?

Yes. There is infinite knowledge. The “Brahmavidya” (Vidya=knowledge, Brahma=Satyam, Jnanam, and Anantam Brahman =Truth, knowledge and Infinite) must be it. Such absolute knowledge encompasses all the fields of finite knowledge.

Any religion that teaches about different worlds such as this world, heaven and hell cannot give me Brahma Vidya. The moment I seek a certain world (say heaven); it means that this world is not that (heaven) and whatever knowledge exists in the heavens doesn’t exist on the earth. Whatever exists here doesn’t exist there. That other world itself is finite, because this world where I am currently living in also exists.

Thus I stand here seeking the knowledge that encompasses everything there is, the infinite.

What is the purpose of Brahmavidya? The gift of Brahmavidya is removal of ignorance. Same as light decimates darkness, Brahmavidya decimates Samsara.

The Samsara must be destroyed absolutely. Destroying it piecemeal would not help. Samsara must be destroyed completely. If this entire world is full of sorrows but I still seek happiness, where can I find it? Since the world outside of me is filled with sorrows but I want bliss, that bliss must exist within me. That should mean I am bliss.

If there is bliss and I am that bliss, then why do I feel sorrow and cannot feel bliss? Even though I am that bliss, I am ignorant of it. Because I am ignorant of my blissfulness, someone must tell me that I am bliss.

All the scripts and teachings promise me a world outside of me and promise me the land of God. They preach about a God, different from me. They promise something in the future if I do (pray, believe, preach) something today. If something is not there today (before) and comes tomorrow it cannot be permanent.

I need the knowledge that uncovers my true self. That shows my true being, that is bliss consciousness. That should teach me “Tatvamasi” (Tat – that bliss you are seeking Tvam – you Asi – are). Not “you will become something in future”. If I will become something in future, that means it is not there today. If something comes in future it will go away after some time.

If there is an Infinite, there cannot be something outside of that Infinite. Since I am manifestation of that bliss-infinite, this I (Atman) must be self-effulgent. It is not dependent upon anything else. Atman is independent, infinite, and it is that (Tat Tvam Eva).

Am I the Atman, the infinite? They why am I not able to know it? That is the problem. Not knowing my true self is the problem. That is why I need scripts/teacher. These scripts can show me that something I am not aware of. They are not there to give me something that is not there. Giving me something that is not there and “that” exists outside of me. If something exists outside me that is finite (because it didn’t include me). If something is finite, it will be temporary. Then “it” must be me. But I do not know about “it”. Not knowing me is ignorance.

Now the question is how should I learn about it? I should learn it as it is. Not a perception of it. Not able to know the rope on the floor” for itself” is ignorance. Lack of true knowledge about the rope should not cause sorrow. Here the ignorance is not causing the sorrow. But the incorrect knowledge (perception) of that rope, perceiving it to be a snake, is causing the fear or sorrow. So the absolute ignorance is not causing the sorrow, the illusionary knowledge of snake is. For example I am happy in sleep, because there is no incorrect perception. But when my mind is working and sensing the world in incorrect way, then I am having sorrows. The thoughts of having this, not having thought, friends, and foes is the issue. Here the imposition of snake on the rope is causing the problem. So ignorance is not the issue, the imposition is. But who is imposing that false knowledge? Ignorance of the rope is causing that imposition.

Awareness on the existence of rope is “knowledge”. Not able to see the rope is “Ignorance”, there is no rope at all. Existence of Knowledge is bliss. Existence of Ignorance is lack of bliss. But the problem is the ignorance about rope is creating the imposition. It is this imposition that is causing sorrows.

If someone (a book or teacher) removes that incorrect knowledge of snake, I will not fear about that snake any more. However I may impose something else on that rope, say a crack on the floor or something else. So as long as I try to remove the imposition I continue to impose something else. The real solution to this problem is to know the existence of the rope. The true knowledge of the rope. Once I have that, I am free of all problems associated with imposition. The teaching must bring the light (of knowledge) and help me see the rope (Truth). Once I know the true knowledge about that rope, I do not have any issues with imposition.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 08 Apr 2009 00:55

X-Posted...

RamaY wrote:
nsa_tanay wrote:'Does God Exists ?'
This is what I have understood so far.... Hope this helps you

1. I know I exist because I know/aware.

How do I exist?
• I am not the limbs of this body – because I can exist even when I lose a hand or leg. And they ‘die’ when separated from my body.
• I am not the senses -–because I can hear when I close my eyes. I can touch even when I can’t hear. I can smell even when I can’t touch. I can taste even if I can’t smell… so on. Moreover even though I am blind, I can see things when I dream.
• I am not the mind – what I think when I am awake doesn’t exist in my dreams. What I think/perceive in my dreams doesn’t exist when I am awake.
• I am not the intellect – Because I know I am alive even when I am in unconscious state.

I exist as a Jeeva/Atman. This atman is cause for the body, senses, mind and intellect. It is the one that see thru eyes. It is the one that hears thru ears… it exists when eyes exist… it exists even when the eye doesn’t exist. This Atman exists as Satyam, Anantam, Jnaanam.

2. Is there God/Param (Brahman = Satyam, Anantam, Jnanam. This is different from Chaturmukha Brahma in trinity) or God-consciousness?

If we take this creation and keep searching for its root cause (KaaraNa), it goes to the birth of universe. The universe is material manifestation of this Param. This is what we call the creation (Chaturmukha Brahma). Before that, maaya is the cause of the creation. The creation existed in maaya, like how a tree exists in a seed. We do not see tree when we see the seed but the entire tree with its roots, trunk, branches, stems, leaves, flowers, fruits comes out of the seed. The Kaarana for this maaya is Param (brahmaan)

This Brahman (God-Consciousness) is Satyam, Anantam, Jnaanam. There cannot be a second God-Consciousness because it breaks the Satyam and Anantam (infinite) charectaristics of Brahman.

We now know that I exist as Atman, and Param exists as God-consciousness.

3. Since there cannot be two Satyam/Anantam/Jnanam it has to be only one. This is "Aham Brahmasmi" (I am Brahman) or "Tatvamasi" (That is You).

Does it mean my Atmaan is same as your Atmaan. YES if we both realize God-consciousness. Until then, we both exist as reflections of this god consciousness. Think you have 10 pots with water in out open under the sun. You can see Sun’s image in all these 10 pots as 10 different Suns. This is how we exist as Jeevas in separate entities. But once we realize our Aatma swaroopa, we become one with God-consiousness.

This Aatma swaroopa can be perceived only by the intellect as Jnaana swaroopa…

Knowing this knowledge is easy. But how do we perceive the Aatma swaroopa. For that one needs Antahkarana Sudhi. One should be able withdraw the senses (which are designed to look outward) from the external world. This will enable the intellect to focus on experiencing Aatma swaroopa. Yoga prepares the physical body, Dhyana prepares Sukshma/astral body, and Jnana prepares the Causal body.

Once a jeeva experiences aatma swaroopa, they (this aatman) becomes immortal. They do not care about what happens this body or material world because thay know they are not this.

How do we know we are on the right path. This is where the Guru comes into picture. Only a Sat-Guru (who follows the standards/pramaana of Veda maata, knows the sampradaya/traditions to understand it) can lead one towards this self realization. That is why Guru comes after Maata, Pitaa in Sanatana Dharma.

Keshav · Post by **Keshav** » 08 Apr 2009 01:07

Thank you, Ramana.

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 09 Apr 2009 15:24

Lord Ganesh in overseas stamps
http://theemerald.wordpress.com/2009/03 ... d-ganesha/

Laos

Thailand

Czech Republic

Rare Bronze Ganesh idol from Cambodia

A Thai artist Veerachan Usahunun's painting of different types of Ganesha.

World class fantasy artist , Veerachan Usahanun , born in 1960 in Thailand paints and sculpts incredibly detailed Fantasy Portrait that capture his subject ‘s surrounding them of surrealism . As a fantasy artist Veerachan’s latest project is the Miracles of Ganesha Collection.

Nritya Ganesha (More on this link http://theemerald.wordpress.com/2009/04 ... paintings/

ADDED LATER: reduced the size of final image

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 09 Apr 2009 17:23

2 excellent versions of the Bhagavad Gita by foreign authors are Christopher Isherwood and Edwin Arnold. Both are almost a century old, i feel they are amongst the best i have read. Epics cannot replace the content of the Shruti in Indian philosophy. The Shruti is the progenitor. Ved itself means wisdom, and if you look at the English part of it a little, you'll realize it literally or entymologically really does originate from it..

gandharva · Post by **gandharva** » 10 Apr 2009 14:56

Click on a branch of Vedic Literature
to access the pdf files.

http://is1.mum.edu/vedicreserve/

gandharva · Post by **gandharva** » 10 Apr 2009 15:13

Very relevant to the God discussion from Nukkad.

Modern Western Thought

72. Sanatana dharma and modern European thought disagree in many things, in their method, approach as well as conclusions. But they agree in one most important thing: they are not dogmatic and they do not punish dissent and both allow reason freedom to question and inquire. [In India where this freedom was never under question, we do not even see the importance of the problem. But in the West, this right was won the hard way. There the Church claimed that it had all the knowledge, spiritual as well as secular; it knew who is God and whom He has begotten; it knew when the world began and when it was to end; it knew that the earth was flat and the sun and the moon were set in the firmament to give light upon the earth. These were dogmas and to question them was dangerous and invited burning at the stake.]

73. But here the agreement ends and both have followed their own characteristic methods of inquiry. One has looked inside, the other outside; one has wanted to know that by knowing which all this is known; it thought that by knowing oneself, one would know all. The other studied the outside world and thought that in this way man would also know himself. There was also another difference in their method: one method was discursive and analytical, the other concentrative and intuitive.

74. The two also disagree in their conclusions and approach and temper. One derives the higher from the lower while the other sees even in the lower the play of the higher. As a result, one derives man from animals, the other derives him from Gods and says that man's roots are above (ûrdhva-mûla), and that he is a soul that has come down into an earthly body and has lost the memory of his true home. Similarly, one school is reductionist in approach while the other allows different levels and multiple dimensions. Sanatana dharma has found out a transcendental dimension; modern secular thought denies it altogether; the former takes into account man's spiritual nature and gives it a high place, the latter treats him mainly as a body, though sometimes grudgingly as a mind too regarding it as the body's appendage.

75. In conformity with its basic approach, modern thought explains the world mainly in physical terms. This view is not new and as a school of thought is quite old and found in all cultures wherever any philosophical thinking was done. What is new is the intellectual prestige the view has acquired in scientific circles as a result of certain marvellous achievements in the field of technology by following its quantitative approach. The view has also the support of our senses and empirical mind and therefore has a universality of its own. In India too this school of thought has existed from very ancient days though it did not belong to the mainstream.

76. The physical view of the universe went along with a physiological and biological view of man, and also supported a particular ethical theory of man's conduct. It said that the highest aim of man is to fulfil his desires and those desires are mainly of his body. This view holds, to put it in the language of the Gita, that the world is without moral basis, without spiritual governance, without Gods, and that its motive force is lust and greed. Modern philosophical thought works on these premises and accepts these views of the world, of man and his ethics.

77. Sanatana dharma rejects these views. It rejects the view which identifies man with his body alone or even with his mind. It accepts man's physical and physiological being but it regards it as only the first definition of man. Beyond this man, annamaya purusha, the sages found other dimensions which constitute man's deeper being.

http://voiceofdharma.org/books/ohrr/ch01.htm

Raghav K · Post by **Raghav K** » 10 Apr 2009 21:50

Kodungalloor Bhadrakali Bhagawathy

Kodungalloor Bhadrakali Bhagawathy is an incarnation of Adi Parashakthi. She appeared in Daruka vanam in Kerala now known as Kodungalloor (formerly known as Cranganore and in Roman times as Musiris) and hence her name is simply referred to as Kodungalloor Bhagawathy. Her incarnation had the purpose of destroying an evil Asura known as Daruka Asura . According to legends, Daruka Asura is the same as Mahisha Asura and so Kodungalloor Bhagawathy can be identified as Mahishasura Mardhini. Daaruka Asuran had worshipped Lord Brahma and attained several boons as a result of which he was nearly invincible. The goddesses Brahmani, Vaishnavi, Maheshwari, Kaumari, Varahi and indrani who respectively derived their powers from Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, Kumara (Subramania), Yama and Indra were unable to independently vanquish the demon. However, armed with the combined power of all these goddess aspects Mother Parashakthi vanquished the demon. The original temple at Kodungalloor was consecrated by Lord Parasurama as instructed by Lord Shiva and yanthra Prathishta was performed by Adi Shankara. The Kodungallor Bhagawathy is the embodiment of all attributes of Bhadrakali and essentially the significance of this aspect of Parashakthi is to emphasize that worshipping Her enables you to overcome obstacles in your path to Moksha.

Chottanikkara Rajarajeswari Bhagawathy

Chottanikkara Rajarajeswari Bhagawathy Amman embodies Goddess Saraswathy, Mahalakshmi and Bhadrakali wherein the first two are Shantha swaroopi's (peaceful) and the third is the ugra roopi (fearful). In addition, Lord Mahavishnu is also present with Her. This simply illustrates that Mother Parashakthi as Rajarajeswari in Chottanikkara town in Kerala combines knowledge/ wisdom (Saraswathy), material and spiritual wealth ( Mahalakshmi) and mental andphysical strength (Bhadra Kali). Thus, when you pray and invoke this deity it is the practice to chant Amme Narayana, Devi narayana, Lakshmi Larayana and Bhadre Narayana. According to legends, the original temple was built in a cowshed by a murderous robber by name Kannappan who had a vision of Mother who wanted to reform him . Subsequently, priests of the Nambudiri class discovered that the deity worshipped by the robber was indeed Mother RajaRajeswari and a proper temple was built for her. According to another legend, Adi Shankara on his way back to Kerala from Kailasa had prayed to Mother Parwathy to accompany him. Mother told him that she would follow him but if he turned back to verify if she was following him, she would stop at the point at which he turned back. So, on his way back to Kerala , Adi Shankara could hear her foot steps and so he knew for sure that Mother was following him. But when he crossed a river near sringeri/ Mookambika, he could not hear the footsteps and so he turned back. Mother Parashakthi stopped at that point now known as Mookambika. Adi Shankara consecrated a temple there but begged mother to forgive him for turning back and wanted her darshan during his sojourn in Kerala. Mother told him to go to Chottanikkara and that She woild give him Darshan at the Chottanikkara Temple. Mother manifested there and Adi Shankara then carried out a Yanthra Pratheeshta there. The Temple morning puja at Chottanikkara is started only after the Puja in Mookambika is started. The Chottanikkara Temple is the site where people who may have been possessed by many evil spirits are relieved of these spirits due to the blessings of Mother Chottanikkara Bhagawathy. Devotees flock to this temple for relief from their ailments.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 10 Apr 2009 22:23

Oh I missed this lovely thread. Growing up Kauravas were my favorite. I never took a liking for the Pandavas. Karna remains my favorite. And though I like BG, I am not a big fan of Arjuna or Krishna. I need to catch up on all the posts.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 10 Apr 2009 22:39

ramana wrote:shaardula, I was thinking and extrapolating the idea of Duryodhana's protection due to Gandahri's gaze and wondered about similar instances in non-Hindu lore. There is Achilles being dipped into the River Styx by his mother and his vulnerable ankle that paris shoots at in the Torjan War. Then there is the dragon in Nordic lore with the weak spot in his scales and Sigfried who bathed in the dragon's blood after killing him and except for a leaf on his back is also invulnerable. So there is this running meme in Indo-Greco- Nordic lore of invulnerablity of the heroic figure with a weak spot.

Doesn't Nala of the Nala-Damayanti fame have a weak spot too. IIRC, he answers a nature's call and washes his feet. But he misses the back of the ankle. And that is what does him finally. I am recollecting from memory, it has been decades since I went into these subjects.