Gauracandra

Kailasa wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>If there is a material form, why there can not be a spiritual form?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Kailasa, just so you know Plato agrees with you. I posted the following under the heading about Atlantis and Vedic Civilization, showing the similarity between Greek philosophy and Vedantic Philosophy. But I figured it would be appropriate to create a separate posting for Kailasa's question. While not Vedantic philosophy, this is Plato's view of the eternal forms, of which this world is simply a reflection or a shadow. It is interesting to note that Plato views love or 'eros' as being the motivating factor that spurs the soul onwards towards the true reality - reality the beautiful. <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>An Immortal Soul As I explained, Plato believed that reality is divided into two regions. One region is the world of the senses, about which we can only have approximate or incomplete knowledge by using our five (approximate or incomplete senses). In this sensory world, “everything flows” and nothing is permanent. Nothing in the sensory world is, there are only things that come to be and pass away. The other region is the world of ideas, about which we can have true knowledge by using our reason. This world of ideas cannot be perceived by the senses, but the ideas (or forms) are eternal and immutable. According to Plato, man is a dual creature. We have a body that “flows” is inseparably bound to the world of the senses, and is subject to the same fate as everything else in this world – a soap bubble, for example. All our senses are based in the body and are consequently unreliable. But we also have an immortal soul – and this soul is the realm of reason. And not being physical, the soul can survey the world of ideas. Plato also believed that the soul existed before it inhabited the body. But as soon as the soul wakes up in a human body, it has forgotten all the perfect ideas. Then something starts to happen. In fact, a wondrous process begins. As the human being discovers the various forms in the natural world, a vague recollection stirs his soul. He sees a horse – but an imperfect horse. The sight of it is sufficient to awaken in the soul a faint recollection of the perfect “horse”, which the soul once saw in the world of ideas, and this stirs the soul with a yearning to return to its true realm. Plato calls this yearning eros – which means love. The soul, then, experiences a “longing to return to its true origin”. From now on, the body and the whole sensory world is experienced as imperfect and insignificant. The soul yearns to fly home on the wings of love to the world of ideas. It longs to be freed from the chains of the body. Let me quickly emphasize that Plato is describing an ideal course of life, since by no means all humans set the soul free to begin its journey back to the world of ideas. Most people cling to the sensory world’s “reflections” of ideas. They see a horse – and another horse. But they never see that of which every horse is only a feeble imitation. What Plato describes is the philosopher’s way. His philosophy can be read as a description of philosophic practice. When you see a shadow, you will assume that there must be something casting the shadow. You see the shadow of an animal. You think it may be a horse, but you are not quite sure. So you turn around and see the horse itself – which of course is infinitely more beautiful and sharper in outline than the blurred “horse-shadow”. Plato believed similarly that all natural phenomena are merely shadows of the eternal forms or ideas. But most people are content with a life among shadows. They give no thought to what is casting the shadows. They think shadows are all there are, never realizing even that they are, in fact, shadows. And thus they pay no heed to the immortality of their own soul. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Gauracandra

The following is from a novel called “Sophie’s World” by Jostein Gaarder. The passage I am quoting from was brought to my attention by a female devotee, who read the book, and also saw some of my postings on these forums regarding the similarities between Greek philosophy and Vedantic philosophy. <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>An Immortal Soul As I explained, Plato believed that reality is divided into two regions. One region is the world of the senses, about which we can only have approximate or incomplete knowledge by using our five (approximate or incomplete senses). In this sensory world, “everything flows” and nothing is permanent. Nothing in the sensory world is, there are only things that come to be and pass away. The other region is the world of ideas, about which we can have true knowledge by using our reason. This world of ideas cannot be perceived by the senses, but the ideas (or forms) are eternal and immutable. According to Plato, man is a dual creature. We have a body that “flows” is inseparably bound to the world of the senses, and is subject to the same fate as everything else in this world – a soap bubble, for example. All our senses are based in the body and are consequently unreliable. But we also have an immortal soul – and this soul is the realm of reason. And not being physical, the soul can survey the world of ideas. Plato also believed that the soul existed before it inhabited the body. But as soon as the soul wakes up in a human body, it has forgotten all the perfect ideas. Then something starts to happen. In fact, a wondrous process begins. As the human being discovers the various forms in the natural world, a vague recollection stirs his soul. He sees a horse – but an imperfect horse. The sight of it is sufficient to awaken in the soul a faint recollection of the perfect “horse”, which the soul once saw in the world of ideas, and this stirs the soul with a yearning to return to its true realm. Plato calls this yearning eros – which means love. The soul, then, experiences a “longing to return to its true origin”. From now on, the body and the whole sensory world is experienced as imperfect and insignificant. The soul yearns to fly home on the wings of love to the world of ideas. It longs to be freed from the chains of the body. Let me quickly emphasize that Plato is describing an ideal course of life, since by no means all humans set the soul free to begin its journey back to the world of ideas. Most people cling to the sensory world’s “reflections” of ideas. They see a horse – and another horse. But they never see that of which every horse is only a feeble imitation. What Plato describes is the philosopher’s way. His philosophy can be read as a description of philosophic practice. When you see a shadow, you will assume that there must be something casting the shadow. You see the shadow of an animal. You think it may be a horse, but you are not quite sure. So you turn around and see the horse itself – which of course is infinitely more beautiful and sharper in outline than the blurred “horse-shadow”. Plato believed similarly that all natural phenomena are merely shadows of the eternal forms or ideas. But most people are content with a life among shadows. They give no thought to what is casting the shadows. They think shadows are all there are, never realizing even that they are, in fact, shadows. And thus they pay no heed to the immortality of their own soul. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Gauracandra

Very cool. Several months back I was trying to get a discussion going on the role of religion on economic development. But the discussion just went nowhere. Personally I am fascinated by economics (I have both an undergraduate degree and a masters degree in finance but I have always thought that if I should go back for a Ph.D. it would definitely be in developmental economics). Just so you know where I am coming from, I would say I am a believer in neoclassical economics. While I acknowledge that capitalism does have its excesses, I believe that fundamentally as society grows more and more complex, the decision making authority must be pushed down lower and lower to the individual. The beauty of capitalism is that it is in a constant process of destroying itself and recreating itself, thus allowing for the old processes to die, and new processes to take shape and take us forward. <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Then there is the larger question when one considers a fair distribution of wealth among the populace - at what point does the earth's population of human beings begin to tax the available land and other resources?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This may be a problem. One statistic I read stated that by 2050 Nigeria will have more people than all of Africa does today. This statistic is a bit old, but the point is clear. The rule of 72 is an old math trick. Basically if you want to see how quickly something will double, then take its current growth rate and divide 72 by it. This will give you an approximate estimate of how many periods it will take to double. Lets say world population is growing at 2% per year. Then, since we are currently at 6 billion people, in 36 years we will have 12 billion people. While I don’t think the Malthusian economic scenario will play out in developed countries, it definitely has the possibility of ravaging many parts of the world. This is going to sound harsh, but I’m not saying it in a mean way simply my honest opinion, but I truly believe that AIDS will flourish around the world, decimating many populations, so I don’t think we will get to that point. Right now Africa is being wiped out by AIDS, with in some countries one out of four people being infected. As for the question of poverty and the equitable distribution of wealth, I think we must remember that was is now called poverty in countries like the U.S. would have been called luxury only 100 years ago. There is a difference between absolute poverty and relative poverty. 100 years from now the standard of living may be such, that I today will be considered impoverished. <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Do we want the powers that be to make decisions along those lines for us, or do we want some say in the matter?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Personally I don’t want some bureaucrat to be in charge. This is why I don’t like the idea of Alan Greenspan being able to manipulate the economy. If one person can control such matters, and even assuming he has good intentions, if he makes bad policy then we all suffer collectively. By keeping the decision making at its lowest levels, we at least can adjust our individual decisions to compensate for changes in society. <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Religious doctrine supplies an ethical infrastructure upon which a fair and just government can be built. We seem to be evolving as a race towards that ideal, but there are many issues that still hold us back. Whether a varnashrama system, a democratic republic, a monarchy, or some other form of organizing principle is the optimum remains to be seen.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Now this is where it gets fascinating. To what degree does religion play in economic development? Let me give one example. In the U.S. today there is great emphasis that ‘diversity’ is a strength. And I think to some degree this is true. But it can also be a great weakness in that it is harder to reach consensus for various key decisions. I have often believed that one of the reasons (one, because certainly there are many that can be discussed) that European civilization became so wealthy was due to the expansion of Christianity across Europe. This created a common platform on which trade, relationships, economic transactions could take place, as opposed to various distinct factions with their various distinct interests. In addition, the philosophy of Christianity tends to be very much about trying to recapture the utopia that was lost. It has a large degree of “lets build heaven on earth again” to its philosophy. The manipulation of the material environment was practically a commandment by God. Compare this to many eastern philosophies which emphasize detachment from worldly affairs. To bring this to India, while I am not an expert on India, I do think that India has been severely harmed by bad economic policy. The best thing in my opinion that India could do would be to privatize various state run monopolies, from energy, transportation, and telecommunications. The whole information technology industry can be a major boon to India. There is always this discussion that China is the future for technology etc…. Let me put this straight, and excuse the jargon, but China “doesn’t stand a snowballs chance in hell” of taking away the information technology sector away from India, if India plays its cards right. The first, and most important thing is to deregulate and free up the hands of Indian entrepreneurs. A few months ago I was watching a program where an Indian computer programmer tried to build a company in India, but there was so much regulation and red tape that he eventually went under. Then he came to the U.S. set up the same company and became a millionaire. He wanted to stay in India but there was just too much bureaucracy. In fact, Indians in the U.S. are the wealthiest minority group in America, believe it or not. Wealthier than Japanese Americans, Chinese Americans etc…. There are more Indian American doctors, engineers, and software programmers per capita, than for any other minority group in the U.S. So it is definitely not Indians, it’s the economic policies of India. The second most important thing is to create proper infrastructure in India, especially a constant supply of electricity in order to feed the information technology boom. With shrinking borders, due to the internet, India has a great opportunity to really capitalize on its strengths which are a highly skilled, and trained workforce (computer programmers, engineers, mathematicians) and the fact that English is spoken by almost everyone (and since English is the language of international business, China will find it very difficult to ever capture that edge). Just so you know, the company I work for is one of the largest financial companies in the U.S. (over 30,000 employees) and they recently signed a contract to have ALL of their computer programming done in India, rather than at home. And this is only 1 company. I guarantee you that every financial institution will follow suit just to remain competitive. Gauracandra

Hi Ananga, Very good review. Its interesting to note that virtually every civilization on earth, from the 'new world' americas, to africa, europe, india, china etc.... all cultures have valued gold for some reason. Most people I think would be shocked to learn how little gold there actually is in the world. I did a report once in college, and while I don't recall the exact dimensions, if you were to melt all the gold in existence today and make a single block, it would be like 150ft by 150ft by 50ft or so. Maybe even less. Personally I support going back to the gold standard. If every dollar of money had to be backed by a certain amount of gold (or any other commodity for that matter), it would greatly reduce the power of the Fed to monkey around with the economy. The Federal reserve only adds instability in the market, as we all wait with baited breath trying to guess what Alan "I am God, worship me" Greenspan is going to do next. In fact, Milton Friedman did a great analysis once and showed that the Great Depression was caused by the Fed, which reduced the money supply by about 1/3 in a span of a few months. It is also worth noting that India is the largest consumer of gold in the world. And they don't take the cheap, watered down gold as in the U.S. I'd be curious if anyone had any scriptural references to the value of Gold (be it Vedic, or other traditions as well). Gauracandra

Dasha, This was a very moving story. In the past there used to be a website which focused on devotees who had passed away. Friends and well wishers could write their praises and include photos etc.... I remember stumbling across it one day, and browsing through, only to find that some friends and children of friends who I had known had passed away. I'll see if I can find the site again. If I do I'll email you the address and then if you want you can submit this story to the site for inclusion. It is meant as a way of permanently praising the krsna-bhaktas. From Sadhu-sanga, the Birthplace of Bhakti <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR> Greatest Sorrow In Caitanya-caritamrta (Madhya 8.248) it is mentioned how once Mahaprabhu asked Raya Ramananda, 'duhkha-madhye kona duhkha haya gurutara? "What is the most intense sorrow?" Raya Ramananda answered, 'krsna-bhakta viraha-vina duhkha nahi dekhi para: "Being separated from a krsna-bhakta, a dear devotee of Krsna is the most grievous sorrow and unhappiness."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I personally don't. Though I know someone who told me his own experiences. He was having severe kidney malfunction due to some kind of disease (don't recall what it was) and he was instructed by an Ayurvedic doctor to capture the urine of a new born calf and drink it. It sounds very gross. But he was on a farm and was able to get some. He drank it down, which he said was very difficult. He described it as like making your teeth very course, or grainy. He said for the rest of the day his teeth felt very grainy. But he swears that overnight, just like that, all of his kidney problems went away, and he has never had them since. Personally I don't think I could do it, but he swears by it. Gauracandra

In the first posting I made from 'The Strength of Madhvaism' Madhva points out that Advaita provides no basis on which one can prove or disprove anything. If everything is unreal, then there is no basis on which one can stand to make any intelligible argument. Here is a passage that shows that based on this argument, the very Vedas are considered simply part of this grand illusion, and do not exist eternally, contradicting the very statements of the Vedas themselves. <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Though Sankara adored the Vedas sincerely and wrote Bhashyas for ten Upanishads, strictly speaking, according to his philosophy, their status is only similar to the song of an ignorant musician. In the first place they are products of Avidya, and so not ‘Anadi’ or unoriginated. According to the poorva-meemamsakas the Vedas are beginningless and eternal. Though Sankara followed them in his epistemological analysis, he could not regard the Vedas as ‘Anadi’ like Brahman. So they are ‘Pourusheya’ according to Advaita. Secondly being products of nescience or Avidya they are Mithya and Badhya. They do not exist in the past, present, or future. They will be sublated and they disappear like rope-serpent at the time of the cognition of Brahman. So the Vedas are unreal and not satya or nitya. Why they should be called Srutis, Why their voice should be regarded as final and valid beyond question, why should they be regarded as superior to even Sakshipratyaksha and sense-observation, how should they be proved to be defectless in comparison with the scriptures composed by Anadi Isvara Himself who is said to be sarvagnya (all knowing) and sastra karta (Author of Sastra) are inexplicable and are not explained either, exhaustively, in the works of Sankara and his school.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Gauracandra

I was going through some of my cabinets and found an old, beat up book I had called "The Strength Madhvaism". I figured I'd post some of its passages as relates to Madhva's critique of Advaita philosophy. <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>At the beginning of his Anuvyakhyanam Madhva shows that Shakara's unreality doctrine, Mayavada, kills the Vedas also. Mithyatvamapi Bandhasya Tadvakyasya Agrato Bhavet (If all is unreal, that sentence which says so first becomes unreal.) An unreal sentence not related to three times cannot teach anything like the speech of a barren woman's son. The story of the King's evidence before the Magistrate comes to the mind. The Magistrate asked the King to swear as usual before the court and give his evidence in the criminal case. The King was angry. He said 'I am dead; my father has no children; all men are liars'. Such is Advaita. The Vedas are unreal having no time-connection. They were not created or manifested. They do not touch reality or teach the truth. Owing to this conspicuous blunder, the Mayavada fails utterly and runs to the absurd excesses of making all pratyaksha, all reasoning, and all sacred scriptures unreal; and before all making itself unreal and therefore powerless to posit or prove or disprove anything.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Gauracandra

Upon reading this posting further, I realized I did not answer the question on the table by Ananga. I was answering the question "Did Jesus ever go to India?" where as the real question is "Did Jesus survive the cruxifiction and then go to India?". This I don't know. It is true that the Muslims hold the view that Christ did not die, but survived the cruxifiction. On what basis they make this claim I don't know. And there are also those that claim that Jesus died in Kashmir. But just a quick note on this. There are similar claims that he went to Japan and died (and there is a 'tomb of jesus' in Japan), and if you are Mormon then you believe he died (I believe) and then came to the Americas to preach to Native Americans. My point being, that I don't think anyone really knows what happened afterwards. I have read articles in the past that have made pretty good arguments that he did go to India, and also Tibet (based on testimony in Tibetan books) but regarding if he survived the cruxifiction I don't know. Gauracandra

In the first posting I made from 'The Strength of Madhvaism' Madhva points out that Advaita provides no basis on which one can prove or disprove anything. If everything is unreal, then there is no basis on which one can stand to make any intelligible argument. Here is a passage that shows that based on this argument, the very Vedas are considered simply part of this grand illusion, and do not exist eternally, contradicting the very statements of the Vedas themselves. <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Though Sankara adored the Vedas sincerely and wrote Bhashyas for ten Upanishads, strictly speaking, according to his philosophy, their status is only similar to the song of an ignorant musician. In the first place they are products of Avidya, and so not ‘Anadi’ or unoriginated. According to the poorva-meemamsakas the Vedas are beginningless and eternal. Though Sankara followed them in his epistemological analysis, he could not regard the Vedas as ‘Anadi’ like Brahman. So they are ‘Pourusheya’ according to Advaita. Secondly being products of nescience or Avidya they are Mithya and Badhya. They do not exist in the past, present, or future. They will be sublated and they disappear like rope-serpent at the time of the cognition of Brahman. So the Vedas are unreal and not satya or nitya. Why they should be called Srutis, Why their voice should be regarded as final and valid beyond question, why should they be regarded as superior to even Sakshipratyaksha and sense-observation, how should they be proved to be defectless in comparison with the scriptures composed by Anadi Isvara Himself who is said to be sarvagnya (all knowing) and sastra karta (Author of Sastra) are inexplicable and are not explained either, exhaustively, in the works of Sankara and his school.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Gauracandra

I don't know that Jesus went to India, but certainly it is not out of the question. Here are some reasons: 1. Jerusalem is relatively not far from India. Certainly in those days it would have taken alot of time to travel, but was not impossible, as trading routes can easily prove. 2. The Bible discusses the life of Jesus from birth until around age 12. Then Jesus just disappears, only to appear again at age 30. There is a missing 18 years. Three years later at the age of 33 Christ is cruxified. So his entire preaching mission lasted only 3 years. That makes what ever happened in the prior 18 years extremely important in understanding who he was. Could he have travelled across land to India? It certainly isn't out of the question. 3. It is a proven fact that after Christ died one of his Apostles (I think St. John) went to South India to preach. He was eventually killed by Brahmin priests there. The Catholic church accepts this, and his burial place is located in South India to this day. If one of Christ's disciples could make it, couldn't Christ have made it as well. These are just a few thoughts on this issue. Gauracandra

I was going through some of my cabinets and found an old, beat up book I had called "The Strength Madhvaism". I figured I'd post some of its passages as relates to Madhva's critique of Advaita philosophy. <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR> At the beginning of his Anuvyakhyanam Madhva shows that Shakara's unreality doctrine, Mayavada, kills the Vedas also. Mithyatvamapi Bandhasya Tadvakyasya Agrato Bhavet (If all is unreal, that sentence which says so first becomes unreal.) An unreal sentence not related to three times cannot teach anything like the speech of a barren woman's son. The story of the King's evidence before the Magistrate comes to the mind. The Magistrate asked the King to swear as usual before the court and give his evidence in the criminal case. The King was angry. He said 'I am dead; my father has no children; all men are liars'. Such is Advaita. The Vedas are unreal having no time-connection. They were not created or manifested. They do not touch reality or teach the truth. Owing to this conspicuous blunder, the Mayavada fails utterly and runs to the absurd excesses of making all pratyaksha, all reasoning, and all sacred scriptures unreal; and before all making itself unreal and therefore powerless to posit or prove or disprove anything.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Gauracandra

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR> jijaji wrote: I don't buy it either...but keep in mind this massive world-domination campain of Christianity was the result of the original church teachings being highjacked by the ROMANS. The Church became the outlet for the Romans conquer and destroy tendency...while they repressed the original teachings. The Essenes and other mystical groups hold that Jesus(Yoshua)traveled to India. Muslims make that same claim. He also had contact with the Tibetian Buddhists.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I wanted to follow up on this and figured it might be a good idea to start a new thread. First, I don't want to be misjudged because I have a lot of respect for Christianity and the teachings laid forth by Jesus Christ. But I find this very interesting what you have written jijaji. Perhaps you could share what you know of the philosophy of the Essenes. The current Christian church is today almost totally devoid of mysticism. But this wasn't always so. After Christ died two camps emerged vying for leadership of the fledgling religion. On the one hand was a group led by Jesus's brother Joseph who felt that what was important was the message of Jesus. Another group emerged (and eventually won control) that felt it was the body of Jesus that mattered. Actually one of the things I most appreciate about the teachings of Jesus, is that even today if you read them they can still be controversial ("The meek shall inherit the earth" Whats up with that? ) Anyways, back to the mystical roots of Christianity. I don't know much about the Essenes, but there was a rapid movement that was sweeping Europe at one point called the Cathars. They were so popular that many in the Catholic church were concerned and eventually plotted to have every one of them killed off. I saw a program about them on the Discovery channel a few years ago. I may be a bit fuzzy on the details but here is some of their philosophy. First, I'm almost 90% positive they were vegetarian. They also don't believe Jesus physically died. They felt that Jesus was all along spirit, and when they nailed him to the cross it was kind of like Ravana stealing chaya sita (the shadow of sita, not the real sita). They believe that he never physically touched the ground, and that each of us could "become" as enlightened and mystical as Jesus. I have also always been curious about some of the other gospels that were excluded from the Bible (such as the Gospel of Mary Magdalene). Anyways, if you have any information of the Essenes please share it. I'd be interested. Gauracandra

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>According to the traditional biographies, Shankara appeared over 2,000 years ago. Of course this isn't accepted by the modern indologists. They prefer to keep everything as having occured after Christ.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I wanted to quickly make a point about this observation. In the past I have quoted from many of the original Indologists for their reasons for starting various Departments of Indology throughout Europe. The most common reason I have found was not to honestly study the culture of India, but rather to use their academic positions to actively undermine Indian Society so as to help Christianize the Indian subcontinent. It is very difficult to conquer a group of people who have a strong sense of identity. Thus first you must make them realize that they have no or very little identity. Then they become very easily manipulated. "Hey, the Vedas were written by White European men". The traditional Judaic view of the world is that it is only 5000 years old. With this in mind the indologists needed to find a way to squish the histories of other cultures within this time frame. I have always found it very interesting that for some unknown reason it appears that civilization sprung up from nowhere just around 3000 B.C. all over the world. Very odd. That just so happens to be when we start to get tool making, architecture, metal work, scriptures and religious organization. That must have been some sort of critical mass of knowledge that spurred civilization forward. Yet this happens all over the world, in various cultures. Yes very odd. It would almost seem as though there were some sort of 5000 year boundary. Well personally I don't buy it. Many traditions speak of their civilizations that have spanned far greater time frames than the Judaic 5000 year boundary. But we live in a Western dominated world. These Christians were the bringers of civilization not the recipients of it. Gauracandra

Somewhat related (ie. religious statistics) here is an interesting web site I found several months ago: www.adherents.com Basically it is a site that tries to break out various statistics on religions in the world. Check it out and let me know what you think. Gauracandra

Somewhat related (ie. religious statistics) here is an interesting web site I found several months ago: www.adherents.com Basically it is a site that tries to break out various statistics on religions in the world. Check it out and let me know what you think. Gauracandra

I'm curious if anyone in these forums has seen this program on the Sci-fi channel. I realize not everyone here will have access to U.S. television stations, but wanted to bring up the subject matter of contacting departed relatives. The program features a psychic medium who 'contacts' relatives who have crossed over. I can't honestly say I fully buy it, but there are times when John Edwards is extremely accurate, almost to the point that you have to think something is going on. For those who haven't seen the program, basically John Edwards focuses in on certain members of the audience who he feels he is being pulled to and then starts to ask a bunch of rapid fire questions. The program specifically says that he has not met these audience members before, nor asked them any questions ahead of time. The questions tend to be pretty straightforward. From these questions he narrows down to the individual he is meant to communicate with. I have seen some criticism of him stating that he is simply using a method called "cold reading". Basically this is where some people are really good at sizing people up quickly, and then slowly pulling out just enough information (hence the questions) to relay back some more information, which leads to getting more information in return. Something like that. But to be honest, I have had that in mind as I watched his program, and there are many times when the audience will give him no information, and he will pin point how the family member died, what was placed in the coffen, events that have happened since to the family etc.... And the audience members reactions are very honest. There is no way it could be staged, especially considering the program has been on the air quite a while and there have been many investigative reporters around trying to prove him to be a fraud. So I don't quite know what to make of it. So relating this back to Vedantic philosophy, I'm curious as to the idea of contacting departed relatives. In the Bhagavad Gita Krsna says that those who worship the ancestors will go to the abode of the ancestors. What is the nature of this abode? Any information on the nature of this higher reality would be of interest to me. Gauracandra

So, yesterday I decided to do a big clean up at home. Like most men, rather than cleaning up little by little every day, I tend to let it go to complete squalor and then do one massive clean up Anyways, as I was cleaning up I came across two yellow sheets containing Sri Vallabhacharya’s Madhurashtakam. Several months ago I returned home from work and found an envelope sitting at the base of my door. The envelope was addressed by Rev. Daniel Maziarz, from the Essene School of Life. I have no idea who this guy is or why he left this at my door, or what the Essene School of Life is. But upon opening the envelope I found only two yellow sheets of paper with the Madhurashtakam by Sri Vallabhacharya. Here are the verses, translation, and a brief explanation of the source of this translation. <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR> Adharam Madhuram Vadanam Madhuram Madhurashtakam By Sri Vallabhacharya Adharam madhuram vadanam madhuram Nayanam madhuram hasitam madhuram Hrdayam madhuram gamanam madhuram Madhuradhi-pater akhilam madhuram Vacanam madhuram caritam madhuram Vasanam madhuram valitam madhuram Calitam madhuram bhramitam madhuram Madhuradhi-pater akhilam madhuram Venur madhuro renur madhurah Panir madhurah padau madhurau Nrtyam madhuram sakhyam madhuram Madhuradhi-pater akhilam madhuram Gitam madhuram pitam madhuram Bhuktam madhuram suptam madhuram Rupam madhuram tilakam madhuram Madhuradhi-pater akhilam madhuram Karanam madhuram taranam madhuram Haranam madhuram ramanam madhuram Vamitam madhuram samitam madhuram Madhuradhi-pater akhilam madhuram Gunja madhura mala madhura Yamuna madhura vici madhura Salilam madhuram kamalam madhuram Madhuradhi-pater akhilam madhuram Gopi madhura lila madhura Yuktam madhuram bhuktam madhuram Hrstam madhuram sistam madhuram Madhuradhi-pater akhilam madhuram Gopa madhura gavo madhura Yastir madhura srstir madhura Dalitam madhuram phalitam madhuram Madhuradhi-pater akhilam madhuram Translation Sweet are the lips, sweet the face, Sweet the eyes, sweet the smile, Sweet the heart and sweet the motion – Complete is the sweetness of the Lord of Sweetness! Sweet the words, sweet the deeds, Sweet the clothes, sweet the pose, Sweet the gait and sweet the roaming – Complete is the sweetness of the Lord of Sweetness! Sweet the flute, sweet the foot-dust, Sweet the hands, sweet the feet, Sweet the dancing, sweet the friendship – Complete is the sweetness of the Lord of Sweetness! Sweet the singing, sweet the yellow cloth, Sweet the eating, sweet the sleeping, Sweet the beauty, sweet the tilak – Complete is the sweetness of the Lord of Sweetness! Sweet the deeds, sweet the liberation, Sweet the stealing, sweet the water-sports, Sweet the oblations, sweet the tranquility – Complete is the sweetness of the Lord of Sweetness! Sweet the gunja-berry necklace, sweet the flower garland, Sweet the Yamuna River, sweet the ripples, Sweet the water, sweet the lotuses, Complete is the sweetness of the Lord of Sweetness! Sweet the gopis, sweet the pastimes, Sweet the union, sweet the food, Sweet the delight, sweet the courtesy – Complete is the sweetness of the Lord of Sweetness! Sweet the gopas, sweet the cows, Sweet the staff, sweet the creation, Sweet the trampling, sweet the fruitfulness – Complete is the sweetness of the Lord of Sweetness! The above translation is found in the book, ‘The Miracle Plays of Mathura’, by Norvin Hein, New Haven and London, Yale University Press, 1972. The book is highly complimentary to Vaisnavism. Right before quoting the Madhurashtakam, Hein writes, “The Vaishnavas of Braj are unashamedly and enthusiastically theistic. They resent the doubt cast by the school of Sankara on the reality of the characteristics of Krishna just as he is painted in their scriptures. They do not merely tolerate the human qualities of their deity: They rejoice in them. The very foibles and naughtiness of the child Krishna are to them a revelation, not an obscuration, of the divine nature, and to celebrate them and delight in them is the very way to salvation. Since the human traits of Krishna are accepted positively, it follows that the dramas can often emphasize aspects of the divine personality which are seldom stressed in more transcendentalistic theisms. The awesome power and ‘otherness’ of Krishna is only a minor theme. In the theology of the Balkrishna cult and in these plays the stress falls upon one aspect or another of the deity’s beauty and charm. The Madhurashtakam Hymn of Vallabhacarya has given famous expression to this concentration upon the perfect beauty, handsome appearance, and winsome ways of the God….”<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I hope you all enjoyed this. Take care. Gauracandra

Just to clarify, the original verse to this posting was concluded to be a bad translation. The analysis of this can be found on these forums under the heading "Ancient Kings - Real or Imaginary?". Gauracandra

As I stated in a previous posting, the eternal religion is love of God. But how should we love God? Is love of God simply based on ritual? My answer is no. Jews can attain God. Muslims can attain God. Christians can attain God. It is simply a question of developing love for the Supreme. In this regard, I wish to answer this question I posed with a quotation from the Bible: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Matthew 22:36-40 Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> So the principal commandment by Jesus is to love God fully. And the second is to love all others. If a Christian follows this advice, then certainly he will attain God. Gauracandra

There is only one true religion, that religion is called love of God. The main difference in various forms of worship is the mood that this expression of love takes. So while we may approach the Divine from many different moods (some of awe & reverence, some as friendship, or as lover etc....) we can still have an individual relationship with Him. Gauracandra

Thus far I have shown some philosophical connections between ancient Greek civilization and Vedic civilization. I also would like to note that many of the Vedic gods had been worshipped at times throughout the Greek and Roman empire, and throughout much of Europe. Principle amoung these gods were Varuna, Mitra, and Indra (to a lesser extent). In fact, the Roman emperor Commodus (who can be seen in the recent 'Gladiator' movie starring Russell Crowe) was an initiate into Mithraism. Here is what the Columbia Encyclopedia has to say about Mitra: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Mithra (mth´r) (KEY) , ancient god of Persia and India (where he was called Mitra). Until the 6th cent. B.C., Mithra was apparently a minor figure in the Zoroastrian system. Under the Achaemenids, Mithra became increasingly important, until he appeared in the 5th cent. B.C. as the principal Persian deity, the god of light and wisdom, closely associated with the sun. His cult expanded through the Middle East into Europe and became a worldwide religion, called Mithraism. This was one of the great religions of the Roman Empire, and in the 2d cent. A.D. it was more general than Christianity. Mithraism found widest favor among the Roman legions, for whom Mithra (or Mithras in Latin and Greek) was the ideal divine comrade and fighter. The fundamental aspect of the Mithraic system was the dualistic struggle between the forces of good and evil. Mithra, who gave to his devotees hope of blessed immortality, represented the fearless antagonist of the powers of darkness. The story of Mithra’s capture and sacrifice of a sacred bull, from whose body sprang all the beneficent things of the earth, was a central cultic myth. The ethics of Mithraism were rigorous; fasting and continence were strongly prescribed. The rituals, highly secret and restricted to men only, included many of the sacramental forms common to the mystery religions (e.g., baptism and the sacred banquet). Mithraism, which bore many similarities to Christianity, declined rapidly in the late 3d cent. A.D.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Also, here are a few quotes on both Mitra and Varuna from a report I found on the internet: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Another divinity mentioned in the Mitani treaty and praised by the Vedic poets, is Varuna. He appeared to the Vedic Indians as & most powerful god approaching, if not rivalling in might, the national god Indra himself. The opinions of scholars differ widely as to the origin of this divinity. Some of them assert that the word "Varuna" is related to the Greek word "ouranos" which means "heaven " and that we are confronted with an old personification of the firmament. [Edited for brevity] The cult of Mithra (which is the Persian form of the name) or Mitra was much more popular in Persia than it had ever been in India. Certain communities worshipped that god almost to the exclusion of all other divinities and formed a sect which spread from Persia to the adjoining territories subject to the Roman Empire and thence to Rome itself. The Roman legionaries, who had been partly recruited in Asia Minor, carried Mitraism to the farthest borders of the Empire. By the middle of the first century A.D. the cult had reached the Danube frontier; and Mitraic monuments dating from subsequent periods are found on the Rhine, in France, Spain, Africa, Greece and Great B.itain, principally along the northern border of the Roman dominions. The monuments left behind by the Roman soldiers are our main source of information concerning Western Mitraism, and the ancient Latin texts do not help us much. [Edited for brevity] The cult of Mitra, who was supposed to be represented on earth by the Roman Emperor and who was worshipped throughout the Empire as "Dens Sol invictus Mithras," achieved its widest dissemination during the third century A.D. and bade fair at that time to become a world religion. Mitraism still had some adherents in Central Europe at the end of the fifth century, but must be considered extinct in the West ever since the sixth century. In Persia it lasted longer; and even present-day Zoroastrians still recognize Mitra as one of their gods without, however, as far as I know, performing any special rities in his honour. He is particularly respected as the god of contracts and oaths.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR> This is a test. This is only a test.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Edited. Here is described the Greek conception of the soul. Based on lay analysis, it appears to me that the indivisible is the soul, the divisible is the material body, and the “third and intermediate kind of essense” which was placed between matter and spirit is the subtle body] Now God did not make the soul after the body, although we are speaking of them in this order; for having brought them together he would never have allowed that the elder should be ruled by the younger; but this is a random manner of speaking which we have, because somehow we ourselves too are very much under the dominion of chance. Whereas he made the soul in origin and excellence prior to and older than the body, to be the ruler and mistress, of whom the body was to be the subject. And he made her out of the following elements and on this wise: Out of the indivisible and unchangeable, and also out of that which is divisible and has to do with material bodies, he compounded a third and intermediate kind of essence, partaking of the nature of the same and of the other, and this compound he placed accordingly in a mean between the indivisible, and the divisible and material. [Edited] And we should consider that God gave the sovereign part of the human soul to be the divinity of each one, being that part which, as we say, dwells at the top of the body, inasmuch as we are a plant not of an earthly but of a heavenly growth, raises us from earth to our kindred who are in heaven. And in this we say truly; for the divine power suspended the head and root of us from that place where the generation of the soul first began, and thus made the whole body upright. When a man is always occupied with the cravings of desire and ambition, and is eagerly striving to satisfy them, all his thoughts must be mortal, and, as far as it is possible altogether to become such, he must be mortal every whit, because he has cherished his mortal part. But he who has been earnest in the love of knowledge and of true wisdom, and has exercised his intellect more than any other part of him, must have thoughts immortal and divine, if he attain truth, and in so far as human nature is capable of sharing in immortality, he must altogether be immortal; and since he is ever cherishing the divine power, and has the divinity within him in perfect order, he will be perfectly happy.

??????