sant

aha good way to run away raghu tell me once again where is samadhi in your dvait.

I was talking about other 4 jagad gurus who have said advait as wrong. but does it mean it is completely wrong? Maybe because it is mentioned in the padm puraan. I dont know about the article thanks for telling me.

Samadhi i thought it was a reality.It is mentioned in all holy books and i think even dvait wont deny it. So why shouldnt i talk about it.I would surely want to know what raghu means by samadhi since he talks about dvait. When did i say,i just beleive what mahaprabhu and what the other jagadgurus say.are you denying them.Im not hare krishna.

No havent you heard of samadhi.In samadhi there is no difference between the atman and the brahman.it is that state where you become one with brahman so what does dvait do there? You cant say that there at two because samadhi actually is a state where there is no difference.

Can you tell me hindustani where you get all these rules from.I was reading somewhere that shudras should wear different color rudraksh and kshatriyas should wera different rudraksh etc.

I thought renunciation and detachment go hand in hand.

What do you mean do you think you know too much about dvait and by the way advait and what do you beleive in neodvait or neoadvait.

I dont think so mr behal saibaba was also not married. Upanishads say that there are mountains and mountains of your past karamas so in that way you dont know in how many lives you will have to be united with how many people will have to become your wife.You seem to be unhappy with your non married life so certainly you go and get married if you want but dont tell others that brahmacharya is wrong and is an obstacle to spriritual advancement.If somebody doesnt want to marry then let him be dont forcefully become his mother.

Certainly. It makes your mouth stink.......

Even i wanted to know that,

Wait a minute the word is sadhana panchakam but it is pronounced as 'sadhana' and not 'sadhanaa' as in 'maataa'. please correct me.

Ok then you must be write Thank you I APOLIOISE TO THE MEMBERS But tell me is there any vedik place or puranic place the word is used.

I think ive got it. The word is sadhan that should be the sanskrit word. sadhan means -'means to do something'. The sanskrit word can be sadhan and as sanskrit words change sadhana can become sadhanam,sadhanah,sadhanaa. Please correct if i am wrong.

edit

Thank you i apolgise But why does the wikipedia say it is a hindi word. And does vedik scripture mentions it ? Maybe it is used in modern sanskrit but not in ancient sanskrit.

Q.1) Plants are also having life and killing plants is also sin. So in what sense vegetarian food is better than non-vegetarian food, in terms of killing or 'sin'? SWAMIJI: This is a very good question. It is true that plants also have "life" and killing plants is also sin. So the best way to observe total non-violence is to follow "Shiloncha Vraththi". That is to take only those fruit fallen from the trees, plants. In this way we are doing harm to none. But everyone can not follow that. We have to take food to survive and sustain this body and it the question of survival. So we need to take that path which is less sinful and less harm to other "jivi". Now there are two reasons to say that vegetarian food is having insignificant sin. Many of the plants like rice, wheat etc. are having life only for one crop time. Once their yield is over, they die, even if we don't cut them. So by cutting those plants we are doing we less sin or no sin at all. In many other plants, like mango, coconut etc, by plucking the fruit, we are not killing the plants and so we are doing very minimal sin or no sin at all. So vegetarian food is less sinful. More over it is inevitable for our survival, but non-vegetarian food is a luxury to us and we can afford to avoid that. It is more sinful since we are killing animals all the time. Next we need to know why certain acts are sinful. Each and every life (plants, animals etc) has come to this world, to do "sadhana"(efforts), to get better life and finally get "moksha". Whenever such "sadhana" opportunity is cut short, it becomes sin. For plants there is no much "sadhana". They can not do any kind of physical or mental activities, in terms of "sadhana". So by cutting them, we are not doing many harms to their "sadhana" or reducing their opportunity for "sadhana". So it is not sinful. But animals can do a good amount of "sadhana" by means of physical and / or mental activities. By killing them, we are cutting short their opportunities to do "sadhana" towards moksha. So it is more sinful. To support this aspect further, "suicide" is considered as biggest sin, even though no one else is troubled other than the self, because God has given us this wonderful body and mind to do "sadhana" towards moksha and by rejecting this offer or by cutting short this "sadhana", we are insulting God and betraying him. So it is highly sinful. There is another example in "Sasthra". Suppose there is a very very old man, incapable of doing any physical and mental activities. Then he can enter to fire to end his life. That is not sin because he can not do any more "sadhana" by himself or through others. So in general any act which is cutting short others or self "sadhana", it is considered as sin. and vegetarians are doing less sin. Q.2) We were thinking that only human beings, having 'thinking power' can only do "sadhana" and other animals can not. Is it not true? How animals can do "sadhana"? SWAMIJI: It is not true. All animals can also do "sadhana". Otherwise there is a fundamental problem in the system. If animals can not do "sadhana", they can not get better life, namely human life. If they can not get human life, then they can not get "moksha" at all at any time. This is not true and so it is proved that animals also do "sadhana" and get better life. They do 'sadhana' by their mental activities. We can see lot of difference in the behavior of animals. In the same category say cat, dog or cow, we can see lot of difference like some are soft, some are sensitive, some are more active etc. This is due to their mental "sadhana". Also in kids who are not having any thinking power, we are seeing lot of differences. We have seen a kid, in Bombay, around 2 years old. It loves Krishna like anything. While sleeping, it tightly hugs Krishna idol; does not drink milk without offering to Krishna; always want to listen to Krishna's story; always wants to witness Krishna Pooja. It is really surprising. It is all due to previous "samskara". Like that animals also will have previous samskara and "sadhana". Q. 3) Is it true that in olden days, sages used to eat meat? There is an incident of 'Agasthya' eating meat in " Vathapi - Ilvala" story. SWAMIJI: Yes, we can see some mention about such things in very old stories. We need to understand clearly why and under what circumstances they used to consume meat. Firstly they used to take meat, not as their regular food. The animal would be offered to 'yajna', the sacred fire and then the sages, having high yogic power would consume the meat as prasad of the yajna. Due to this auspicious activity, the animal would go to heaven. In the story of 'Augusthya', when he said ' Vathapi jirno bhava', he got digested immediately. Such was the power in those days. But now meat is not approved to Brahmins. First we need to understand why we consume food. It is to have good health. Health means not only the physical health. The mental health plays a very important role. That's why in Sanskrit it is known as "swasthya" means mental peace, purity and health. Meat or non-vegetarian food improves body and but not the mind. So for those people, who need to have physical strength, like solders, meat is not prohibited. Solders need not have any thinking power. They have to fight like machines. But for Brahmins, mental power is more important. We need to have peace and purity of mind, stability and concentration of mind. So for us meat is prohibited. Since ages our ancestors were having vegetarian food and so Brahmins are generally considered as soft, kind hearted, stable and intelligent people. If we start consuming meat, slowly we will loose all these good qualities. We will not see the changes overnight. It takes time and we will see the changes in the later generations. Q. 4) There are many noble laureates who are meat eaters. What we can say for that? SWAMIJI: Getting a noble prize is not at all a yardstick to measure the peace and purity, stability and concentration of mind. It is known that suicide rate is high in scientists too. Actually scientists are more disturbed in their mind. Due to this, they get activated and get involved deeply in something and come out with some new things. For their success, the basic reason is not the peaceful mind, but disturbed mind. Generally Brahmins who is suppose to have the mental capacity to understand ' Brahma', need to have very good concentration power for 'japa' and 'tapa'. and they are supposed to be mentally not disturbed people. In olden days even if they consume meat, they used to keep up their mental stability and peace of mind, due to their yogic power or 'thapas'. But now in 'Kaliyuga', as such our mental powers and concentration powers are getting reduced. We are loosing our purity and peace of mind due to various reasons. As such the 'satvic' atmosphere and 'satvic' qualities are reducing because we are not doing enough 'japa', 'tapa' etc. So if we start consuming meat we will loose all our good mental qualities soon. So in 'kaliyuga', meat is strictly prohibited for Brahmins. It is also sinful as said in previous answers. Q. 5) Is it not sin to kill silkworms for silk and deer's for 'krishnaa-jina'? SWAMIJI : Short answer is it is sin if we do for trading purpose. For detailed answer, first we need to understand what sin is. It is not a substance associated with a particular activity. The same activity can be resulted in sin or not depending upon the purpose, intention and circumstance. For e.g. killing in general is sin, but killing a demon or man hunter is not sin. Similarly in olden days kings used to go for hunting. It was not sin because they used to kill only those wild animals, which are troublesome to the sages and the nearby villagers. Similarly if we kill animal to avoid being killed, it is not sin. As said earlier, every creature in this world is for doing "sadhana". Here the priority is for those doing greater "sadhana". To accomplish that, if others have to sacrifice their "sadhana", there is no harm in that. For e.g.: Assume that there are two students in a house, One if preparing for second grade and other one preparing for Medical exam. Though both are preparing for their exams, we consider that medical exam is more important and give preference to him. If needed, we may ask the other to sacrifice his preparation, because he doesn't lose much. Similarly in this world, "jivi" doing higher order of "sadhana", gets preference. So for the benefit of that, others with little "sadhana" may be sacrificed without any sin. So if we are preparing silk for God's pooja, then it is not sin. But if we are preparing silk for decorating ourselves, it is sin. So we need to understand what is the purpose of the act and what we are going achieve finally. http://www.salagram.net/PSM-veg.htm

im also sorry for any confusion. Quote: Sir I thought the scriptures are for everybody. I said it in a lighthearted way.

No but the word sadhana is new to me and i dont think youl find it in the scriptures even a translation of any sanskrit word. The word sadhana is a new word whose defintion is not the same and is not a translation of any word in the scriptures.

Sir I thought the scriptures are for everybody. I meant the word sadhana is not mentioned in any scripture. From 'It' includes starts the wiki information. I said the paths are not mentioned as its become a trend to use this word instead of bhakti marg ,or gyana marg or karam marg. surely the definiton can vary from person to person.Some will say that sadhana is a part of bhakti yoga and some might consider it non different.

JAI SHRI RADHE What does the word sadhana mean? I dont remember coming across this 'sadhana' word in any of the scriptures. So where does this word come from? Ans.From hindi. Sadhana is not a sanskrit word it is a hindi word. There is no path such as sadhana path mentioned in the scriptures. It includes a variety of disciplines from Hindu and Buddhsit traditions that are followed in order to achieve various spiritual or ritual objectives. The historian N. Bhattacharyya provides a working definition of the benefits of sadhana as follows: "... religious sādhanā, which both prevents an excess of worldliness and moulds the mind and disposition (bhāva) into a form which develops the knowledge of dispassion and non-attachment. Sādhanā is a means whereby bondage becomes liberation. Kinds of Sadhana Sakaam Sadhana Sakaam (Devnagari = सकाम, Sa = yes / with, Kaam = desire) Sadhana is spiritual practice done for worldly pleasures. This is the lowest form of sadhana. There is no spiritual progress with sakaam sadhana. Examples of sakaam sadhana is praying for any worldly goals like getting money, job, marriage or any other aim which is temporary and will not last beyond death. In Ramayana it was mentioned that though Ravana and kumbhkarana were great devotees of Shiva and performed various tapas, they were performing sakaam sadhana as their main aim was to become powerful and rule the world. Nishkaam Sadhana Nishkaam (Devnagari= निश्काम, Ni = no / without, Kaam= desire) sadhana is spiritual practice done for higher aims. It is done to achieve the aim of enlightenmentor moksha . It is done for the spiritual upliftment of the individual so that he is taken out of the cycle of life and death (samsara). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadhana

Is the happinesss talked here same as spritual bliss.

dlete

thanks mr kali upasak

ronin mind your language i know you have a dirty mind. who youre trying to refer. krishna is the supreme is accepted by mostly all jagadgurus. so dear please stop.

sir may i ask why. generally why do people stop others from doing tantra or tantric mantras