Wednesday, September 28, 2005

My comments

These are my comments for the blog entitled "Brahman and Maya - my doubts".

Kasthuri: Thanks for your great comment. I advice all readers to read Kasthuri's comment. It was an eye opener. From your comment I conclude - that this world is real from the relativistic point of view and once the sense of "EGO" goes, the world becomes an illusion, since there is only Brahman or GOD! Beautiful explanation.

Regarding your comment in Question 2, again a beautiful explanation. The term "manifestation" is very important as you said. I shall correct the error I made, when I said "creation" rather it should be termed as "manifestation". This term of "manifestation" reminds me of the Bhagwad Gita verse I read recently:

Gita, Chapter 2, Verse 28:

avyaktadini bhutani
vyakta-madhyani bharata
avyakta-nidhanany eva
tatra ka paridevana

Translation: All created beings are unmanifest in their beginning, manifest in their interim state, and unmanifest again when annihilated. So what need is there for lamentation?


Beautiful explanations Kasthuri and I salute your Jnana! Thanks a lot for removing my ignorance.
Jacky - Ok, I guess I have an answer to your question, but I guess Kasthuri can clarify this.
In the beginning GOD created the universe and the micro-organisms. These micro-organisms then evolved into plants, animals and then humans. Ok now if you see - when the humans evolved from being animals, they have the animal tendencies. These animal tendencies from their previous birth are the cause of their barbaric life. Then these barbarians after many births due to their experiences gradually reduced their barbaric qualities to become proper human beings! But unfortunately still there are many of us with animal qualities and we need millions of birth to come out of it! So this is my explanation to your question and lets see what Kasthuri is trying to say.

Agni - thanks for your thoughts. I guess Tagore's thoughts are similar to what Kasthuri has pointed.

Anand,Adi, Aatma,TJ, Jeevan,Viji - Thanks for your comments :).

Sriram - What do u mean by Purusha? Is Purusha not the Self? Please clear this doubt.

Phoneix - those were useful thoughts - thanks a lot :)


Once again I would like to thank you all for spending your valuable time in clarifying my doubts :).

9 Comments:

At September 29, 2005 12:47 AM, Blogger krishna said...

arjuna..no doubt..kasthuri's jnana is above par..:)

also pls do check out kasthuris blog on vedanta regularly..

 
At September 29, 2005 2:00 AM, Blogger Kasthuri Srinivasan said...

Arjuna, Krishna : I'll pass the things you have said to Him and maintain that I am ignorant. Perhaps you should ask my advisor about it :-)

Jacky :

"If GOD had created universe, Dharma, Brahman and good principles why did he let the Barbarians to life a no-moral-Animal life for so many thousands of years? Now the whole concept of God as ultimate-impartial-moral police takes a beating. "

As mentioned earlier no creation theories please. He never created nor lets us to have a barbarian life. Any life is divine's play. And He never polices. He lets us have whatever life we want. Upholding the Law of Karma is His only job. As Arjuna rightly pointed out, the animal tendencies are the products of evolution. But, we have some higher qualites as well having evolved to the Vijyanamaya kosha state. Realizing that and acting in the way of Dharma will ensure us to the eternal bliss. Rest of them are details and will be taken care of by Him - in the form of wiping out our past Karma.

 
At September 29, 2005 7:52 AM, Anonymous Jacky said...

Arjuna and Kasthuri,
Thanks very much for replying to my comment.

Kasthuri,
If he never polices then why does he come to rescue Kid Prahlad? Even KalKi Avatar which is yet to happen carries only significance of Moral Policing. Same can be said about Mahabali who was crushed to death. If he really wants to sit back and watch the game of Karma evolve, he needn't intervene it with Avatars!

 
At September 29, 2005 11:41 AM, Blogger Jeevan said...

Arjuna - Kasthuri' comment is good.

 
At September 29, 2005 12:10 PM, Anonymous Anand Ramamoorthy said...

Dear Arjuna,
let me reply to Jacky here,

Jacky,

He did not come to rescue kid Prahlad- was Prahlada not rescued from all the other dangers.
he came to establish the truth of Prahlada's words that Narayana is there in everything- pillar or blade of grass.
as for Bali, you are again mistaken as he was not crushed but sent to the netherworld and also became one of the seven immortals of the world according to the puranas.

as for your more direct questions to Kasthuri,
the concept of avatar has absolutely nothing to do with the sort of moral policing you have in mind,
much like the director who lets the actors play out their parts but corrects them when they deviate from the expected display of histrionics, the Jagan Nataka Sutradhari merely appears to correct humanity.
if you ask of the Kalki avatar, he is said to merely arrive as the one who ends this kalpa and ushers in the next. however this may appear to you
the sportive descents of Narayana cannot be measured by your standards or mine.

he never interferes with the "game of karma" but intervenes only to restore Dharma (which is a term you better not translate as righteousness as understood according to western notions of morality)

when the karmas of humans lead to a denigration of dharma he merely sets the balance right, , in this he is not doing any policing but acting to set the cosmic ballgame right.

you will find "N" number of things to disagree with but..

please do remember, the moon does not develop crakcs if your telescope lens is cracked.

SARVAM SRIKRISHNAARPANAMASTHU!

 
At September 29, 2005 4:21 PM, Anonymous JAcky said...

"please do remember, the moon does not develop crakcs if your telescope lens is cracked."

Different people have different yardsticks. You might actually believe in Moon (Pun) by taking your parents words, reading through various religious texts, listening to speeches and other things. For others like me asking a bit of real spiritual experience (I don't mean he/she should come right in front of me to convince - it could be in any form) as a motivating factor to the journey of spirituality can be seen as too much.
Well you can say my negative karma is too much for all such things to happen but mythology has shown things have happened to cutthroat criminals (Valmiki, Thirumangai Alwar) overnight! If you've seen the moon – have any interesting direct spiritual experience to tell – if you don't mind the pain please share here. Or if you belong to the category of trust (My parents can't be wrong, Vedas and Upanishads can't be wrong etc) we are looking for different paths – let me continue my journey of inquisitiveness.
Thanks for replying btw.

 
At September 30, 2005 1:35 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Etho irundoma ponoma nu illama en pa ippidiellam kozhappikireenga...
ithukku than "over" a padikka koodathu..

konjama thalai girr nnu suthuchu unga "maya / brahman " post paathu .. athan summa thamasukku sonenn.. feel avatheenga.. doctor ayya


;))

 
At September 30, 2005 5:14 AM, Anonymous Anand said...

Jacky,

I take nothing on trust, and was once a rationalist to beat all rationalists. I can discuss my experiences but they will mean nothing to you unless you go through them yourself. as for that, it is bound to happen only when the time comes. this may sound like mystic mumbo-jumbo but it is a fact.... take it or leave it.
as for the texts you have mentioned, I read them and evaluate them rationally and as for the Jnana kanda or the upanishads - they are far more rational in character than one would expect and as for the Karma kanda or the ritualistic portion, well that's not required for vedantins- even aspirants after the truth.

again the story of Valmiki is widely misunderstood,
as for Tirumangai aazhvaar,his story is not myhtology, Hagiography would be a more appropriate term to describe the acount of his life.

I have so to speak, glimpsed the moon and the clouds which shroud it from immediate perception but the experience is not communicable using language.

SARVAM SRIKRISHNAARPANAMASTHU!

 
At September 30, 2005 9:21 AM, Anonymous Jacky said...

Anand, I quite disagree with you that such an experience can't be communicated through language. Infact I'm on the look out for Vivekananda's biography where I can be able to read How Shri.Ramakrishna Paramahamsa transpired him, if there's any first hard narration of his experiences. Unfortunately, I got other pressing things to do, so have been keeping it off for a while.
Cheers
Srikanth.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home