premananda

"Like this, it almost impossible to space out, since you are only allowed to continue the walk, when you have reached the end of the Maha Mantra. Otherwise you simply stay in your corner, but very soon you will figure out that your mind has gone somewhere else. You can further intensify this method, by posting a Maha Mantra on the end of each walking direction. Or you can do it just on two corners and, in order to brake the circle of your mind, you try it on the two other corners without the postings. So if you have problems chanting the Holy Name, just try this simple method, and very easily you will dive into the Nectar Ocean of the Holy Name." I am sure the author means well, but it seems very rigid to me. He speaks about not spacing out, but I would space out for sure after a while, walking around like that.

From this page:http://www.hindunet.org/alt_hindu/1995_Apr_1/msg00052.html: While everybody accepts that SrIdharasvAmin was a great bhakta, some scholars take him to be an Advaitin and others a Vaisnava SannyAsin. In his book "The History and Literature of the Gaudiya Vaishnavas and their relation to other Medieval Vaisnava Schools" , the author Dr. Sambidananda Das, Bhaktisastri says: "It is difficult to say with certainty to which Vaisnava sect he belonged. He says of himself at the end of the commentary Suvodhini on the Gita that he was a Sanyasi (Yati) and disciple of Paramananda. He further pays his homage to his Guru at the end of his Guru Bhavarthadipika on the Bhagavata, in which he supremely eulogises Tridanda Sanyas evidently in preference to Ekadanda. He may have been a Tridandi Sanyasi instead of an Ekadandin. As Tridanda Sanyas has been adopted in the Vishnuswami, Ramanujiya and Nimbarkiya sects and Ekadandin in the Madhva Sect (and also in the Sankarite sect), he must have belonged to one of the first named sects. In the very beginning of his commentary Bhavarthadipika on the Bhagavata, he salutes Nrsimha. Next he says that according to the rule of his Sampradaya or sect and custom of his predecessors, he should make obeisance to Madhva and Umadhava (Rudra) who are almost identical with and dear to each other. ("ParasparatmaParasparanatipriya"). [Note: Nrsimha and Rudra are not accepted in any way in which SrIdharasvAmin did, in any Vaishnava sect except that of Vishnuswami.] We know that the Vishnuswamins accept Rudra as the first Acarya of the sect, the official deity of which is Nrsimha. He therefore may have belonged to the Vishnuswami sect. SrIdhara SvAmin also wrote a poem called Vraja Viraha dealing with love of Krishna and the Gopis.....We know that from before the time of Vilvamangala, the Krishna Gopi cult was introduced into the Vishnuswami sect. (...) The second objection to identifying him with the Vishnusvami sect is that M.M.H.P Sastri has drawn our attention to SrIdhara SvAmi's "Dvaita Nirnaya"- "The commentator of the Bhagavata and others (SrIdhara) is known to have been a follower of Sankara's non-dual theory but his Dvaita Nirnaya deposited at Mimapada in the district of Puri (Orissa) shows that in his advanced state, he gave up non-dual theory and adopted the dual theory". The general belief that he was a Sankarite non-dualist which the great Pandit has referred to has no justification. The Suddhadvaita system of the VishnusvAmi sect has been misunderstood as the Kevaladvaita of Sankara. We do not find any clue to justify in calling Sridhara a Sankarite Mayavadi. Sridhara criticises Sankara's Mayavadism throughout his writings which are the Bhavarthadipika, the commentary of the Bhagavata, the Suvodhini, the commentary of the Gita, and the Atmaprakasa, that on the vishnupurana. He accepted Pancharatra (Bhavarthadipika. i.3.8) while Sankara was hostile to it. His Dvaita Nirnaya is a treatise on the Dvaita system of philosophy of which Madhva is the official founder. It may be that Sridhara svAmin was influened by Madhva's system...." > Caitanya MahAprabhu regarded him with great respect. Many of > the commentators of other schools, in many instances, are content to > endorse him either expressly or by simply reproducing his comments > word for word! This is absolutely correct. It is said that Vallabha Acharya submitted to Sri Caitanya MahAprabhu, his own commentary on the Bhagavata for his approval, in which he criticised SridharasvAmin's commentary and found inconsistencies in it to show his scholarship as superior to Sridhara svAmin's. But MahAprabhu said, " Those who do not obey Svami (meaning husband) are counted among the prostitutes". (Caitanya Caritamritha Antya, VII.III). He also says that he could not bear that anybody should find fault with SridharasvAmi. He adds " It is only through the grace of Sridhara, the world teacher, that we know the meaning of the Bhagavata." (C.C Antya VIII, qoted by Dr. Sambidananda) Kesavan

Thanks for bringing this up. I have been thinking about it too. But, Sri Chaitanya was given by diksha by Sri Isvara Puri, who is said to come from the Madhva Sampradaya. Madhva himself was a Sankarite in the beginning. I guess the difference between Sankarites and Ramanujites for example, is that the latter accept the saguna and nirguna brahman, while the former only accepts the nirguna brahman ultimately. P D

Kalki will not appear for a very long time, according to the Puranas that is...

R Srisan, Please tell us something about the inconceivable nature of the Absolute. Is It/He formless or does it have (transcendental) form? Do you know any good site where I can find complete translations of the Upanishads?

Place: Sri Rangam [ A low caste man called villidhaasan and a beautiful lady called ponnaacchi are prominently exhibiting their affection in public. Ramanujar notices that and talks to him.] Ramanujar: Who are you? villidasan: I am a wrestler. The lady is not my wife. But I have flawless full affection for her and nobody else. Her beauty is all that I enjoy. Ramanujar: If I show you something more beautiful, what would you say? villidasan: I do not think anything is more beautiful than Ponnaacchi. Even in the temple, I see many people alternately looking at the God and at other women. I do not take my eyes off Ponnaacchi. I am not undecided like them. Ramanujar: I am impressed by your frankness. Let me show you Ranganathar and describe the beauty of the Lord. [He takes him to the temple and villidasan is impressed.] Villidasan: (bows) I am at your service. Ponnaachchi: (bows) I am also at your service. Ramanujar: You both can also join the maTam, as a married couple. Some Students: (whispers) This is getting awful, Now he is taking the lowest class of people into our maTam. [ Ramanujar notices their apprehension.] Scene-041 Place: Sri Rangam Ramanujar maTam [ The disciples talk ill of Ramanujar's unconventional methods and are upset by villidasan and ponnaacchi's presence. Ramanujar calls villidasan privately. ] Ramanujar: Do you see those safron clothes in the drying rope? villidasan: Do you want me to wash them again, sir? Ramanujar: No, No. I want you to cut a small corner of each one of those. Including mine of coarse. That is all. villidasan: I do not understand why, sir. Ramanujar: Just do it now. Otherwise I will do it myself. You will know later. [Next morning the Sanyasi disciples are all upset. They all curse the villidasan for being a cheap thief.] Scene-042 Place: Sri Rangam Ramanujar maTam [Ramanujar calls all the Sanyasi disciples] Ramanujar: I have a secret to share with you. I need your help. You know the maTam is running low on finances. We are getting more and more pauper disciples like you. We need some money. This is my plan. Ponnaacchi is wearing a lot of jewels. I want you to steal them while she is sleeping and bring them to me. The disciples: We are shocked Swami. You are telling us to steal. But we will do whatever you say. Ramanujar: Now you know why I allowed Villidasan and Ponnacchi to join the maTam. Scene-043 Place: Ponnacchi's bedroom. [Ramanujar's disciples slowly remove her earring, bangles, etc. from one side. Then she seemed to move. They run away. Meanwhile Villidasan wakes up and talks to Ponnacchi.] Villidasan: You are still so possessive of your jewels. You should have offered it to Ramanujar the first day itself. I can earn more and get you more. Ponnaacchi: Yes, dear, I wanted to do it. I only moved to make it easier for them to remove them. I am sorry. Villidasan: Anyway, we will give Ramanujar the rest of the jewels right away. [He takes the rest of jewels to Ramanujar immediately.] Scene-044 Place: Sri Rangam Ramanujar maTam Students: (to Ramanujar) We did it. But could get only half, then she woke up. [Ponnacchi and Villidasan enter] Ponnaacchi: Here are the rest of the jewels, swami. Villidasan: We apologize for not giving them earlier. Ramanujar: (smiles) Now disciples, do you understand. When you lost a portion of your safron robe, you were so upset. You are so possessive, calling yourself a Sanyasi. Here is this young couple, who are prepared to give up everything they have. I wanted to test all of you. Now go back to sleep. (whole story found here: http://wuarchive.wustl.edu/doc/misc/tamil/ramanuja.play

It would be very inspiring to worship Salagrama-shila.

Sabrina, Hindu religion is not only about serving one´s husband or wife. The higher goal is to realize one´s eternal nature and identity. This can be known and realized through meditation and by study of the scriptures. In this life time you are a woman, but in the previous you may have been a man. Our identification as male or female in this world is temporary, whereas the true self is eternal. P D

- sampath kumar @ Monday, August 13, 2001 9:06 PM Fw: Emperumanar Darsanam --- Old Age problems Monday, August 13, 2001 8:48 PM Emperumanar Darsanam --- Old Age problems Yesterday I had sent a mail on old age problem and I was wondering whether it was in impulsive action by me.I glance a few News papers before the start of the work, and on top of the bunch, was todays Indian Express[dt 13th Aug)ON the front page ,an article had appeared on Widows of Vrindavan.I have heard of Lord Krishna doing His Narthanam all over Brindavan but the title of the article disturbed me a little and I read the article keeping my office work aside for few minutes. The reporting goes like this.The ideal place to live at the fag end of the life is Brindavan ,as people,especially ladies believe from Brindavan you reach Moksha.So the practice of old aged ladies comming to Brindavan started.The ladies used to spend their time singing in praise of the Lord thro the day continued .Then came the day when it became the "dumping ground" for widows and destitute ladies.With so many of them around it became difficult to maintain feeding all these ladies .Now they have to sing for atleast for four hrs in praise of the Lord when they will be given Rs2 per day for their maintenance.There are a number of Dharmashalas in Brindavan. The reporter who filed the news wanted to to do an investigative report.So he enters few of the Darmasalas and interviews the inmates.A number of them are from Bengal, the place which gave to this Universe Chaithanya Maha Prabhu.A number of them have been driven away from their houses and in a number of cases sons have physically assaulted thier own mothers.The sons and daughters "realised"their old parents are "expenses".The article further narrates the pathetic condition in which these followers of Lord Krishna live and so on. While in North India Janmashtami of Lord Krishna was being celebrated with pomp and gaiety the story appered in the paper. Can we safely presume the followers of Lord Krishna also Vaishnavites. Let me repeat the same question which I raised yesterday.What has got Emperumanar Darsanam to do with this problem.Our Jagathacharian Ramanuja ,has he said anything to help another Srivaishnavite? Jaya Sriman Narayana Sri Mudaliyandan Swami shishya Sampath

I didn´t mean what you think I meant, I THINK ;-) So what did you mean?

I didn´t mean what you think I meant, I THINK ;-) So what did you mean?

Jijaji, So Saguna Brahman can have a number of different divine forms. I think that Sri Krishna in Goloka Vrindavan is the most attractive form of the Saguna Brahman, that I have heard of at least.

That was very good Jijaji. On what newsgroup did you find this?

A person who has faith in the Vedic Scriptures and who has converted to one of the various branches included in HInduism can be called a Hindu. Hinduism has little to do with ethnic groups. The proof is that practically speaking all the branches of Hinduism accept non-Indian persons as disciples. P d

That´s not what I meant...

That´s not what I meant...

You don´t have to be in an Indian body to call yourself Hindu...I am also a type of Hindu, even though I was born in Sweden.

You see, Hindu is a very general term. I prefer calling myself a Vaishnava, because it is more specific. A Hindu can be a Shaiva, Shakta, Tantric, Sankarite, etc. P D

Dear Sabrina, "Hinduism" can be basically any religion originating from India. And there are many. Most of the people on these forums belong to a Vaishnava lineage called the Gaudiya Vaishnava Sampradaya. In this religion all persons, independent of caste, sex, age, location or wealth, are welcome. The only thing required is faith in the scriptures and the teachings of the Vaishnava lineage. This is because Vaishnavism is universal in character. We teach that all living beings are equal on the spiritual plane. All are but eternal souls, and the function of the soul is to be engaged eternally in God´s service. Regards, Premananda das

"Why don´t I spend more time doing something important, like meditating, instead of spending hours in front of the computer engaged in endless debates?"

"Why don´t I spend more time doing something important, like meditating, instead of spending hours in front of the computer engaged in endless debates?"

"In this silence, Krishnamurti says that something new and creative happens, something that cannot be conveyed in words, but that is of extraordinary significance for the whole of life. So he does not attempt to communicate this verbally, but rather, he asks those who are interested that they explore the question of meditation directly for themselves, through actual attention to the nature of thought." My suggestion is that the "new and creative" which happens and that cannot be conveyed in words is a state of spiritual consciousness. Although J Krishnamurti doesn´t use the traditional religious terminology, from the description it seems to be a state of consciousness in which one experiences that which is higher than the material coverings, the soul. Krishnamurti spoke a lot about a meditative state of mind. In this state the thoughts and chatter of the mind are completely still, and one is aware of a higher aspect of one´s being. He didn´t go into any details about what one experiences in the meditative state though, perhaps because he felt that it could not be explained. Sri Krishna is also described as acintya - inconceivable to the material mind. But even though He is beyond all descriptions, He can still reveal Himself to the devoted soul. P d

At least I found this interesting. Any comments on Krishnamurti´s words from a Vaishnava perspective? ---------- A Brief Introduction to the Work of Krishnamurti by David Bohm My first acquaintance with Krishnamurti's work was in 1959 when I read his book, First and Last Freedom. What particularly aroused my interest was his deep insight into the question of the observer and the observed. This question has long been close to the centre of my own work, as a theoretical physicist, who was primarily interested in the meaning of the quantum theory. In this theory, for the first time in the development of physics, the notion that these two cannot be separated has been put forth as necessary for the understanding of the fundamental laws of matter in general. Because of this, as well as because the book contained many other deep insights, I felt that it was urgent for me to talk with Krishnamurti directly and personally as soon as possible. And when I first met him on one of his visits to London, I was struck by the great ease of communication with him, which was made possible by the intense energy with which he listened and by the freedom from self-protective reservations and barriers with which he responded to what I had to say. As a person who works in science I felt completely at home with this sort of response, because it was in essence of the same quality as that which I had met in these contacts with other scientists with whom there had been a very close meeting of minds. And here, I think especially of Einstein who showed a similar intensity and absence of barrier in a number of discussions that took place between him and me. After this, I began to meet Krishnamurti regularly and to discuss with him whenever he came to London. We began an association which has since then become closer as I became interested in the schools, which were set up through his initiative. In these discussions, we went quite deeply into the many questions which concerned me in my scientific work. We probed into the nature of space and time, and of the universal, both with regard to external nature and with regard to the mind. But then, we went on to consider the general disorder and confusion that pervades the consciousness of mankind. It is here that I encountered what I feel to be Krishnamurti's major discovery. What he was seriously proposing is that all this disorder, which is the root cause of such widespread sorrow and misery, and which prevents human beings from properly working together, has its root in the fact that we are ignorant of the general nature of our own processes of thought. Or to put it differently it may be said that we do not see what is actually happening, when we are engaged in the activity of thinking. Through close attention to and observation of this activity of thought, Krishnamurti feels that he directly perceives that thought is a material process, which is going on inside of the human being in the brain and nervous system as a whole. Ordinarily, we tend to be aware mainly of the content of this thought rather than how it actually takes place. One can illustrate this point by considering what happens when one is reading a book. Usually, one is attentive almost entirely to the meaning of what is being read. However, one can also be aware of the book itself, of its constitution as made up out of pages that can be turned, of the printed words and of the ink, of the fabric of the paper, etc. Similarly, we may be aware of the actual structure and function of the process of thought, and not merely its content. How can such an awareness come about? Krishnamurti proposes that this requires what he calls meditation. Now the word meditation has been given a wide range of different and even contradictory meanings, many of them involving rather superficial kinds of mysticism. Krishnamurti has in mind a definite and clear notion when he uses this word. One can obtain a valuable indication of this meaning by considering the derivation of the word. (The roots of words, in conjunction with their present generally accepted meanings often yield surprising insight into their deeper meanings.) The English word meditation is base on the Latin root "med" which is, "to measure." The present meaning of the word is "to reflect,to ponder" (i.e. to weigh or measure), and "to give close attention." Similarly the Sanskrit word for meditation, which is dhyana, is closely related to "dhyati," meaning "to reflect." So, at this rate, to meditate would be, "to ponder, to reflect, while giving close attention to what is actually going on as one does so." This is perhaps what Krishnamurti means by the beginning of meditation. That is to say, one gives close attention to all that is happening in conjunction with the actual activity of thought, which is the underlying source of the general disorder. One does this without choice, without criticism, without acceptance or rejection of what is going on. And all of this takes place along with reflections on the meaning of what one is learning about the activity of thought. (It is perhaps rather like reading a book in which the pages have been scrambled up, and being intensely aware of this disorder, rather than just "trying to make sense" of the confused content that arises when on just accepts the pages as they happen to come.) Krishnamurti has observed that the very act of meditation will, in itself, bring order to the activity of thought without the intervention of will, choice, decision, or any other action of the "thinker." As such order comes, the noise and chaos which are the usual background of our consciousness die out, and the mind becomes generally silent. (Thought arises only when needed for some genuinely valid purpose, and then stops, until needed again.) In this silence, Krishnamurti says that something new and creative happens, something that cannot be conveyed in words, but that is of extraordinary significance for the whole of life. So he does not attempt to communicate this verbally, but rather, he asks those who are interested that they explore the question of meditation directly for themselves, through actual attention to the nature of thought. Without attempting to probe into this deeper meaning of meditation, one can however say that meditation, in Krishnamurti's sense of the word, can bring order to our overall mental activity, and this may be a key factor in bringing about an end to the sorrow, the misery, the chaos and confusion, that have, over the ages, been the lot of mankind, and that are still generally continuing without visible prospect of fundamental change, for the foreseeable future. Krishnamurti's work is permeated by what may be called the essence of this scientific approach, when this is considered in its very highest and purest form. Thus, he begins from a fact, this fact about the nature of our thought processes. This fact is established through close attention, involving careful listening to the process of consciousness, and observing it assiduously. In this, one is constantly learning, and out of this learning comes insight, into the overall or general nature of the process of thought. This insight is then tested. First, one sees whether it holds together in a rational order. And then one sees whether it leads to order and coherence, on what flows out of it in life as a whole. Krishnamurti constantly emphasizes that he is in no sense an authority. He has made certain discoveries, and he is simply doing his best to make these discoveries accessible to all those who are able to listen. His work does not contain a body of doctrine, nor does he offer techniques or methods, for obtaining a silent mind. He is not aiming to set up any new system of religious belief. Rather, it is up to each human being to see if he can discover for himself that to which Krishnamurti is calling attention, and to go on from there to make new discoveries on his own. It is clear then that an introduction, such as this, can at best show how Krishnamurti's work has been seen by a particular person, a scientist, such as myself. To see in full what Krishnamurti means, it is necessary, of course, to go on and to read what he actually says, with that quality of attention to the totality of one's responses, inward and outward, which we have been discussing here. BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES ON DAVID BOHM David Bohm was for over twenty years Professor of Theoretical Physics at Birkbeck College, University of London. Since receiving his doctorate at the University of Berkeley, he taught and did research at U.C., Princeton University, University de Sao Paulo, Haifa and Bristol University.

100 000 Names equals 58 rounds of japa on a mala with 108 beads.

That was very cool. Please post more if you´re able to. P d