karthik_v

Dear Shvu, There is certainly a direct mention of Lord Rama's name in Rk veda. Of course, assuming that the Rama mentioned here is the same as Valmiki's Rama. Many commentators, including Neelakanta have thought so: pra tad Duhsheeme Prithavaane Vene pra Rame vochamasure maghavatsu ye yuktvaaya pancha shataasmayu pathaa vishraavyeshhaam: [RV 10:93:14] [Translation: In the yajnas of great kings such as Dusheema, Prithavaana, Vena, and Rama, I utter these hymns to the Gods who traverse the spiritual world and who protect us.] Also read this verse from Rk veda. This doesn't refer to Lord Rama by name, but the inference looks okay if taken with the above verse: sa hi dyutaa vidyutaa veti saamaprithum yonimasuratvaa sasaada sa saneelebhih: prasahaano asya bhraaturna rite saptathasya maayaaH [RV 10:99:2] [Translation: By His brilliance and prowess, [Rama] with His forces, withstanding the prolonged onslaught of [Ravana] illusion tactics, destroyed the same along with all his maya.] And also this verse from moola Ramayana [i am assuming that all sampradayas consider it to be authentic] tells that Valmiki's rendition is from the Rk veda: Ramayanadrumam naumi Rama rakshaana vaankuram: Gayatri beejamaam naaya moolam moksha mahaa phalam: [Translation: I bow to the sacred tree of Ramayana that has a bud called the Rama-raksha-stotra, that which has the the Gayatri (mantra) as its seed, that which has its roots in the Vedas, and that which yields the great fruit of deliverance.] All the above based on the link I posted to advaita-vedanta.org and a few other related articles. I didn't know that moola Ramayana is considered different from Valmiki's by the Dvaitins. Thanks for pointing that out. I knew that Sri Madhvacarya interpreted Ramayana differently - atleast in nuances. Then that is the case with many other acaryas including Kambar and Tulsidass. Curiously, the oldest extant Ramayana in Tamil is not by Kambar. Atleast 3 versions predated that, of which one survives in part. It is called Pazhaya Ramayanam. Dating that is difficult, but the venpaa style suggests that it belonged to Sangam age. Of course, most western scholars and our own Dravidian scholars would date that post-Sangam as seeing something blatantly religious during Sangam days upsets their secular model. I am wondering if this Pazhaya Ramayanam is based on moola Ramayana. That is purely a guess. Interestingly, both Akanaanuru and Puranaanuru make mention of Ramayana in the passing. That is for tidbits!

Jijaji posted sometime back a lot P V Vartak's writings. I don't recall the exact contents and haven't read his books. May be Jijaji can comment further. PVV bases his dates on astronomical observations. As Shvu often reminds, astronomical dates are cyclical. So, while they give the latest possible date, they don't necessarily give the exact date.

Yes, Prabhuji, I will entirely agree with you on that. In fact, that is the line taken by many, including Sri Aurobindo. Also, Valmiki Ramayana itself is an expansion on the root theme from Rk veda. Please go to this link and click on Rig vedic Ramayana at the bottom. It is in 5 parts and you will enjoy reading it. http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/articles/ Also, we cannot insist that smritis and puranas are perfect verbatim. There are many versions so which one is bonafide? I believe that they all have basis in truth but have gone through many accretions over time. For example, Uttara Kanda was never written by Valmiki, yet we find it today. Basically puranas were written to explain esoteric truth to less intelligent people.

Thanks.

Dear Jagat Prabhuji, But intolerance arises out of reasons other than religious. There are economic reasons in a developing country like India with increasing numbers of upper caste young males in the ranks of the educated unemployed and underemployed to look for trouble and easy scapegoats like Muslims and Dalits. You are partly right that economic reasons are what lead to manifestations of trouble. But please don't equate the Dalits with Muslims. One is the oppressed, the latter the oppressor. Seocnd crimes against the Dalits are not committed by urban upper caste youth, who are affected by unemployment, but by the rural upper caste who own land and who are least affected by unemployment. The account of RSS militants causing trouble for Muslim vendors in the train station as being at the beginning of the whole trouble strikes me as likely to be the truth. Too much CNN?!! Just to set the facts right, Godhra has a population of about 50,000 Muslims out of which 2500 gathered with gasoline in cans for the train to arrive. After the carnage, at the site alone, over 2000 gasoline cans were recovered. Each can will carry app. 5 gallons of gasoline. That means we are talking of over 10,000 gallons of gasoline alone. In India, getting gasoline in cans is illegal and to get such large quantities from a small town needs a very high level of planning and organization. So, let us not make simplistic statenents that add insult to the injury the kar sevaks suffered. But in India, the Muslims are in the minority and they know the kinds of things that can happen to them. I don't think they go looking for trouble unless they believe they have been treated unjustly. Just like Hindus living in Bangla Desh. They don't go making trouble because they know what will happen to them if they do. Again for facts, whereever Muslims live in Mohallas, they are the majority. Virtually every riot has been started by them for 2 reasons. One, they have the numbers where they live. Two, the leftist governments of India and the media invariably support the Muslims as the constitute a vote bank. Again a comparison with Bangladeshi Hindus is an insult to their plight. In case you thought that the Indian Muslims are sweet folks, please check out on Coimbatore and Mumbai blasts. Dear Ram Prabhu, Good one. Also, our Vaishnavas [of course, the ones unaffected by Islamic violence!!] often quote Lord Caitanya's example wherein he made the Kazi a little sober and advice everyone to emulate Him. What they don't remember is that no less a personality than Rupa and Sanatana Goswami had to convert to Islam and literally flee to Benaras to practice KC. Could the great Vaishnavas kindly educate me as to why those 2 great Goswamis couldn't emulate Lord Caitanya's example and make the Muslims a little sober? Or is it a case of exceptions not being the example? How about the great saints who were murdered by the Muslims? Or is it that they were following the goddamn Advaita that they had to pay the due price? And the Vaishnava saints who were killed by the Musilms must have been enacting some lila.

Shvu, I don't think that you have read forbidden archeology. There is not one line in FA about SB or any Hidu book for that matter. If at all there is any reference to Hinduism or religion, it is in the first page where the authors dedicate the book to Srila Prabhupad. Beyond that the book is very academic and systematic. It discusses the whole issue from a highly technical perspective covering such areas as archeology, anthropological biology, geology etc.. It doesn't invent any evidence on its own. It only cites the evidences presented by mainstream scientists and analyses them threadbare. Not one scientist has been able to show one fault in that book. I have attended a couple of those lectures in the universities in WA and most young scientists accept them. It doesn't present any creationist viewpoint, as you seem to think. In the extreme its detractors just abused the authors on personal lines calling them "Hindoo". I would suggest that you read that work before forming an opinion. The authors are Michael Cremo a specialist writer in the history of archeology and Richard Thompson, a Ph.D. in Mathematics from Cornell who worked for NASA and Cambridge university specializing in Mathematical biology. They are no novices. RT's book Vedic cosmography relies heavily on SB. You are right. But, what relevance does it have on FA?

Shvu, it is possible that vegetarians may be biased too at times. So, what we need to do is to go by the scriptures themselves and not speculate. I feel that most eurocentric authors speculate, often in an untenable way. Also, what the traditional commentaries say carries weight. I think that I missed out on the debate on Maamsa and madhu. Can you please point me to that thread. I read through the Gita press version of Valmiki Ramayana and a couple of English translations as well. I didn't come across even one verse that suggested that Rama ever ate meat or missed eating that while in the forest. If you have any specific verse, I would like to hear.

I thought that Shabari offered a dry nut, but I need to check that. Madhu certainly means "a sweet drink [made from fruits]", but where have you come across "a sweet intoxicating drink"? Also where does madhu mean "soma"? I am going over Sri Aurobindo's commentary on Rk veda and Soma is not even a drink. I have gone over Thirumanthiram 3 times, and it also refers to Soma as the thrid eye. I will try going over Sayanacarya's commentary when I get time and confirm if it refers to soma as a drink. If it doesn't then, it is a recent innovation.

Shvu: You are right that neither RT nor MC are archeologists, but archeologists alone cannot determine the age of homo sapiens are pass judgement on the theory of evolution. It is an interdisciplinary function that depends heavily on Mathematical biology and RT is an expert in that area, having worked for NASA and having taught at Cambridge. Let me assure you that FA doesn't speak one line about ISKCON/Hinduism/SB etc.. None of the things that are written in FA are ever taught in ISKCON. I am yet to come across one criticism of FA that refutes any observation there. Virtually all criticisms are directed at the religious leanings of the authors. Whether you want to read it or not is your choice. To criticize something as bogus without reading it is unscholarly and I wouldn't expect you to do that. Do you consider Scientific American, US Journal of Geological Survey etc., also to be ISKCON publications? FA references a lot of papers from these sources too. I had the oppurtunity of cross checking 2 of them from SA and found them to be accurate.

Thanks Shvu. Even I find that Laksri's interpretation is correct. Here are my reasons. In Valmiki Ramayana, there are verses that tell that meat-eating is abominable. I can't recall the verses off-hand and can search the book. Also, when Guha meets Rama, the conversation [don't recall who speaks] is about what one can eat during vanavasa. The list includes roots, herbs and milk. It doesn't include fruits, meat and liquor. Also, when Sita wants the golden deer, she tells Rama that if He can't catch it alive, he should kill it, so that the skin can be used for meditation. Again there is no mention of eating its meat. Also I am wondering as to where you came across the use of the word "madhu" to mean liquor. As far as I am aware, it is used to signify sweets and honey. Perhaps, you are thinking of the Tamil usage.

Not really. A soul need not reincarnate right away. they can be an interregnum. Whether or not there is an interregnum depends on our karmic actions. So, if somebody remains a ghost for a while, a medium can still contact that. After all, a ghost has sukshuma sarira. But, if it reincarnates, then it can't be contacted.

Chances are that you are referring to Sankara's Bhasyam as translated by Ramakrishna Mutt. Please correct me if I am wrong. RKM folks eat meat and also liberally use Max Mueller's translation, even in Sankara's commentary. Atleast I wouldn't consider their work as bonafide. I remember havning read Kanchi Paramacarya staing that there is no mention of meat-eating in BU. There was also a discussion [i will try to get the url], where a vedic scholar from Greece and another from BHU literally tore Witzel to pieces when he made the same claim. They quoted from the same BU where it says that Surya consumes forests and asked Witzel if it means that Surya devoured trees. They gave atleast 12 examples and clearly drove home the point that the language was metaphorical and not literal. They also gave a verse from BU that condemns meat-eating, explicitly. Witzel had no answer except resorting to his usual stance that for 120 years Germans have translated that way.

I think that a good place for raising questions about the intricacies of Advaita will be www.advaita-vedanta.org There are some very knowledgeable participants there, who can give a scriptural perspective. Also, you may search the Hindunet for old discussions between Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian (Advaita) of UIUC and Hari Krishna Susarla (ISKCON) of Rice univ. At times their discussions became acrimonious, but for most part very informative. I don't have the urls.

You are just parroting eurocentric notions on nomadic Aryans. There is no mention of meat-eating in the vedas - not in Rk veda atleast.

Can some one kindly point me to the verse number in Mahabharat that talks of Pandu's death and his wife Madri getting into the funeral pyre? Also, I would appreciate if anyone can kindly point me to the verse where, earlier, Pandu was cursed by a rshi that if he indulged in conjugal relationshp with his wife, he will die? Thank you.

Can some one kindly point me to the verse number in Mahabharat that talks of Pandu's death and his wife Madri getting into the funeral pyre? Also, I would appreciate if anyone can kindly point me to the verse where, earlier, Pandu was cursed by a rshi that if he indulged in conjugal relationshp with his wife, he will die? Thank you.

Can some one kindly point me to the verse number in Mahabharat that talks of Pandu's death and his wife Madri getting into the funeral pyre? Also, I would appreciate if anyone can kindly point me to the verse where, earlier, Pandu was cursed by a rshi that if he indulged in conjugal relationshp with his wife, he will die? Thank you.

Thanks for the information Shvu.

I think Jijaji had posted a few excerpts from various research works, sometime back. Why don't you post a new thread addressing him so that he can help you?

One model to consider may be that of Aurobindo ashram. I have heard that SP was also very appreciative of that. AA folks basically maintain an excellent network and start businesses. They run many types of businesses, such as manufacturing computers, selling incense etc., so long as it doesn't clash with their ideals. They use Aurobindo ashram's logo and brand and a part of their profit goes back to the ashram. The results are amazing. The ashramites are affluent. They have built some of India's best schools. And, they keep funding the ashram. In comparison, ISKCON depends on donations for most part. That is fraught with dangers, as you are entirely dependent on someone's willingness to donate.

Dear Leyh Prabhuji, AGTSP! PAMHO! Self defence is naturally justified when we face danger from offensive parties, but isn’t it possible to engage in self-defence and at the same time not be attached to material designations? One could defend his country or his family against aggression with such a mentality: “I am not a Hindu, a Moslem or an Indian. I am spirit soul and I belong to Krsna and I shall fight against aggression for Krsna.” Very nice argument and I agree with that. We should look at self-defense as a duty and not be attached to it emotionally. Otherwise it will degenerate into violence. Thanks for pointing out.

Hari Bol Audarya Lila Prabhuji, AGTSP! PAMHO! I admit I went overboard in making that statement. Sorry for that. But there are many who are offensive towards Vaishnavism. There was a colleague who once asked me, sarcastically, why Indians wouldn't eat beef. I countered him asking as to why Americans don't eat their pet dogs. He was offended and went on a defensive saying that dogs are their pets. I answered that likewise in India cows are treated as members of the family and protected. SO, no question of eating them. He never indulged in sarcasm ever after. I could have as well explained him in detail, but this was more effective and less time consuming. If someone is genuine, we should answer sincerely, but how else do we deal with those who are insensitive themselves? True, a more mature individual will see all as equal, but I am not mature. I don't intend to mature in another 50 years. That doesn't mean my method is correct. Just that it works at times.

You have a valid point there. An American may it a lot tougher, due to peer pressure, to sport a tilak. Also, an organization like Microsoft is more liberal as it is in hi-tech. A traditional organization like a bank could be more rigid.

Hare Krishna Bhaktajoy Prabhuji, We have SB book at home in India. But here in the US, I don't have it. I am also very hesitant of collecting too many books here as it becomes impossible to carry them back, so would prefer digital format.

Hare Krishna Shiva Prabhuji, AGTSP! PAMHO! First about what Prabhupada said,In India,The Sufi type of Islam was and is predominant there.They differ from other Islamic sects, in that they do have human representation's. True, but Sufis are not the mainstream. They are a minority. Anyway, they don't have mosques - only dargas. So, mosques and images never go hand in hand. About the Quran,all translations of Arabic into other languages can be interpreted in different ways,just like sanskrit,there is no definitive translation. Possible, but has any Muslim theologian ever claimed so? Does Quran itself allow for any interpretation? Is it written in a metaphorical language, like the vedas? I quoted from the Rk veda to show that they explicitly state that the truth of the vedas is not the words convey. Is there anything like that in Quran? Aren't we assuming things that Muslims themselves don't? As for as Hindus are concerned, we have always opposed tooth and nail all the western interpretations. Here, I wasn't quoting from any western translation of Quran. I was quoting from the translations of Muslim theologians. the material laws and rules for society are fluid,and subject to change. True. That is why practices like sati were banned and rightly so. But, Quran doesn't allow for changes. That makes it dogmatic and dangerous. At the time Arabia was lawless and violent,rape was common,therefore a strong admonition against certain types of behavior was necessary. I am not sure that pre-Mohammad Arabia was lawless. My limited reading of their history doesn't say so, but I would be obliged to anyone who can correct me. If any, as per my understanding, lawlessness started with Mohammad. In any case, you had stated that cutting off the hands and stoning weren't Islamic and hence I quoted those references. In fact many Muslims expect the arrival of a savior,"the Madhi",he is prophicized to end the rule of sharia,and Islamic strictness in general,and bring about a new, freer, heavenly society. I would like to hear more about this. Can you please write more? I thought that Quran and Hadith consider Mohammad as the final prophet.