Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Gaea

Members
  • Content Count

    303
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Gaea


  1. Sorry for a mundane question :) Re. the 1980s serial:

     

    Basically theres a 5 disk, 12 disk etc versions. Seen the 5 disk version but the translations were TERRIBLE. They were out of sync, and I know at least a little bit of Hindi and could make out that some of the translations were quite inaccurate. Anyone seen the 12+ disk versions? Translations any better?

     

    Thanks.


  2. I have only read 1 version of Prabhuapada's translation of the Gita. I compare to other translations and the words - indeed the entire meaning of the verses - vary... expected, as the translator may knowingly or unknowingly put his/her own thoughts into it.

     

    I just wanted to analyse this deeper; let's take Prabhupada's translations first - have these changed significantly over the years? (question prompted by someone's post in another thread, pointing to 1972 Gita - why that one in particular?)


  3.  

    If we descended from Apes, then why are there still apes around?

    If apes evolved into humans then there shouldn't be any apes left.

     

    If evolution is a law of nature, then there would be no apes left on the planet because as a species that would have evolved into humans.

     

    Science can't have it both ways.

    They can't say that apes evolved into humans while the ape species still exists in many types.

     

    If evolution were real, then there would be no apes left on Earth.

     

    They would have all evolved into NASA scientists, brain surgeons, computer engineers and Rock musicians.

     

    yay! at last... a subject on this forum i can actually talk about with some confidence.

     

    The problem with people from anti/pro-evolution theory camps is that often they just don't understand it. For example, many equate evo theory to just that of humans - but it is a natural phenomenon that applies across the board... to all living things.

     

    Look, evo theory is a fact - a microbiologist can prove it to you in a day. Put one bacterium in a petri dish and let it multiply. Add antibiotics. Some survive, some don't. That is evolution :) Some managed to survive - that is what Darwin meant by "a struggle for survival" and "natural selection". In fact, in this way, I think Darwin was closer to realising God's hand in nature than many of you really care to see.

     

    Where is the threat to religion in this? Where is the threat to spirituality? So what if humans evolved from apes? Is that to say there is no God? Perhaps the term "human" in Vedic literature pertains to a level of consciousness, rather than the physical non-hairy, 2 arm, 2 leg, 1-nose, 2-eye definition.

     

    I must say that personally i think the scientific picture of human evolution isn't complete yet, but we probably shouldn't blurt out rubbish about a subject any more than a non-educated atheist should pass comment on the intricacies of the Bhagavad Gita.


  4. As soon as you started this thread it was inevitable which way the conversation was gonna go.

     

    What's the point? What do you expect people to post here that hasnt already been posted a thousand times on this forum?

     

    Yes, we get it - Dualists hate the idea of Oneness, etc., etc.

     

    Honestly, get over it, dude. Get on with Bhakti if it makes you so happy (it should!) - don't worry about what "Mayavadis" think or believe.


  5.  

    so nobody has the answer?

     

    well no, no one can say for certain. You can't say for certain what you were doing at precisely 10:17 365 days ago, what to speak of the world 65 millions years ago ;)

     

    But what does it matter?

     

    This is the crunch question for the "modern" devotee:

    Will you still have any faith in God if you were given incontrovertible proof that the current scientific view of history is correct, and the Puranic view isn't?


  6.  

    The above post is a piece of trash culled from ignorant and uninformed sources.

     

    If the people of India have to shed ignorance, the first step would to be avoid falling prey for such jingoistic trash articles and the nonsense dished out by Thackereys and such.

     

    Btw, your article has left out some of the more entertaining "facts" whch are comonly found on the internet and enthusiastically passed around by many. Here are some of them.

     

    1) Indian religion is the oldest because the Purana authors said so. All archaeologicial evidence, philological evidence and common sense in general should be ignored because they are British propoganda.

     

    2) The British doctored Manu Smriti to include caste divisions. Otherwise Indians were very mature and caste dfferences were zero. What? You saw discrimination in other scriptures as well? Then the answer is, they were doctored by the British too.

     

    3) Max Mueller had a propoganda to downplay the greatness of Indian history and so he wrote up false translations. Apparently, this was a tactic to divide and rule Indians. Otherwise, Indians were very united and were known for never letting foreign invaders inside the country. Hence, it was very important for the British to employ such alternative tactics to defeat them.

     

    4) The British wanted to show all good stuff came from Europe; so they said Aryans came from Europe (Clearly, they were sleeping on the day when scientists wrote man originated in Africa, else they would have changed it to man originated in London).

     

    There were some more gems, but I am not able to recollect them now.

     

    Cheers

     

    As a scientist, I've found the works of Cremo and Frawley quite interesting - IMHO I don't think we can rubbish all of what the original poster has posted... tho some of the stuff flying around on the net is pretty dire.


  7.  

    Paarsurrey submits:

    14- The next from- Message of Peace- by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the Promised Messiah/Krishna in Second Coming.

    Krishna in Second Coming 1835-1908 says:

    If today the same Hindus embrace the Muslims while pronouncing the kalimah Tayyibah: (i.e There is none worthy of worship except Allah; Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. ) then Muslims would cease to oppose them forthwith. Conversely, if Muslims renounce Islam and embrace Hinduism and start worshipping fire, air, etc., in accordance with the Vedic injunctions (The reference is to today’s distorted Vedic injunctions that have been modified over time by the followers.), then those differences which are labelled as political will suddenly vanish as if they had never existed.

    It is thus evident that the underlying factors in all enmities and grudges are the religious differences. It is such religious differences which, since times immemorial, reach a climax and then invariably give way to extensive bloodshed. O Muslims, I say: If Hindus treat you as a different nation merely because of religious differences and you respond to them in the same manner, the matter will not end here. How can you achieve a sound, healthy relationship unless you take appropriate remedial measures against this root cause? It is possible that you may temporarily enjoy a friendship, but only superficially.

    The ultimate sincerity of heart, worthy of being called sincerity, can only be achieved if you genuinely change your attitude towards the Vedas and the Vedic Rishis by accepting them to be from God. Likewise, the Hindus should also change their niggardly attitude by testifying to the truth of our beloved Holy Prophet (may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). Remember, and remember it well, that this is the only principle which can establish a genuine truce

    between you and the Hindus and this is the only water which can wash away all malice embittering your relationship.

    If the hour has finally come when these two nations, who have for so long fallen apart, are destined to be reunited, then God will open up their hearts to this purpose as He has already opened up our hearts to the same. It is essential however that you treat Hindus with sincerity and kindness and let decent behaviour be your second nature.

     

    Thanks

     

    well said.


  8. I read the comic - i thought it was great.

     

    I can see how you might get offended though. Hey, maybe putting it on the big screen might encourage people to look up the original. Even if one person does this, isn't that a good thing. To be honest I have time and money better spent elsewhere than boycotting a movie. Who knows, you might even enjoy watching it.


  9. oh dear... i started something that wasn't intended. Let's stick to the original post shall we? Do gods (demigods, angels, etc) marry? I can't think of any, unless you count the consorts of Brahma, Visnu and Siva. Do they engage in incest? I think not. I'll look for the reference, but certainly in Mahabharata it was not considered proper for one to marry another who had a common ancestor less than 7 generations apart. (My source might be mixed up here - i'll look for it).


  10.  

    God is one- the Creator of heaven and earth.

     

     

    Correct. I see that you may not be of Hindu/Hindu-like descent so it might make things clearer if there is some explanation about "gods". "Gods" as Hindus call them is actually a misnomer. The way I understand it, so-called "gods" or "demigods" perform the same function as Christian/Islamic "Angels". In this case the original poster is (probably) not referring to GOD as you are talking about, but the denizens of heaven (entities that have great power and have had a birth of some shape and form and have been created by the One True God)


  11.  

    Some people even tend to mistake love for lust.

     

    haha, some people? I would say most people ;)

     

    I'm very guilty of this myself.

     

    Re. abstinence - I agree with one of the other posters - as you progress the more critical it becomes. However I don't think that is the end.

     

     

    Yet, I have read that suppressing sexual urges can be unhealthy and bad for the system. Is this true?

     

    IMHO I don't think resistance unhealthy for your physical body, but might be unhealthy for your mind. And an unhealthy mind = unhealthy body. If you want to resist the urge a change in mind is required. Tirisilex put forward a nice method.


  12. Vipassana requires that you put to rest all other practices so that you give it a fair chance (words of Goenka in his video) - well, at least when you're in camp anyway.

     

    I found it incredibly useful for peace of mind though. There is no doubt that my temper, lust, lack of awareness and love all contribute to a mental block that hinder progress. Vipassana definitely helped me with this. I think there's no harm, but it depends on your personal goal.


  13.  

    [question:] Some people say one has to be free from anarthas for this type of greed to come.

    [srila Narayana Maharaja:] This is apa-siddhanta. This is not written anywhere in Sri Caitanya-caritamrta or in the books of Srila Rupa Gosvami and Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura. A person may be more wretched than Bilvamangala, Jagai and Madhai and others. First bhakti will come, and then all offences will disappear. These are the rules and regulations of bhakti. It is not correct to think that we have to give up these anarthas before bhakti manifests. Bhakti can come at any stage. Srimad Bhagavatam has explained this. Those who are animals, those who are ladies, those who are males, those who have sraddha, those who don’t, and those who have nistha, ruci and asakti. Wherever they are, they should begin bhakti.

    Bhakti is not an impersonal thing. She is a person. As Sri Krsna has a personal form and a personality, bhakti has also. The root personality of bhakti is Srimati Radhika – hladini sakti. So we bow down to Bhakti devi and pray that she may enter our hearts. When she comes she will clean our hearts and arrange a place for Radha and Krsna. First let bhakti come into our hearts, and then all evil and bad things will disappear. This is the process.

     

    Srila Narayana Maharaja is amazing at explaining things like this! So much depth


  14.  

    It is not so much an ancient culture I am criticising as the status of the Manu Smriti as an authoritative text. I would agree that it is interesting as a reflection of an earlier society but that is not the same as accepting it as scripture or as authoritative in any way.

     

    The prohibition on widow remarriage can be unjust particularly when it exists alongside the custom of child marriage. In 1921 there were 329,000 widows in India under the age of 15 who were not allowed to remarry; when Gandhi and other reformers campaigned against this prohibition the Manu Smriti was cited by their opponents to support traditional practice. To force girls to live their whole lives as widows, in many cases prevented from ever having children, is certainly unjust. According to the Mahabharata not harming any being with thought, word or deed is the highest dharma. On this basis I would argue that the prohibition on widows' remarrying is contrary to dharma.

     

    In Chapter 10 of the Manu Smriti, verses 47 to 55 insist that persons of the lowest castes be excluded from living in the village (v51) and that they must be identified by wearing marks on their clothing that show their low status. Up until the 1930s those born in the lowest castes were forbidden from entering many Hindu temples or even walking on the roads leading to temples.

     

    I don't think there are many who would want to see a return to this type of 'Vedic society' and the issue of arranged marriages is one that might be considered in the same category. There is a grey area between arranged and forced marriage with varying degrees of pressure being applied.

     

    The question on the Manu Smriti is whether it is to be regarded as a historical document that reveals to us the nature of ancient social customs or whether it is to be regarded as an authoritative text that dictates how society today should be structured.

     

    Again, I would agree with that keeping young widows from leading happy lives is wrong - presently. In other yugas, we cannot say because outlook and attitude in life was completely different. Might seem distasteful now but attitudes can change vastly.

     

    I agree with you that this can no longer be considered a law-making text in today's society. Maybe in the next Sathya Yuga ;)


  15.  

    Raghu, I wasn't referring to arranged marriages as unjust and immoral. But Manu does advocate child marriage, does not allow remarriage for widows and he advocates forbidding the lowest castes from mixing with the rest of society. For these reasons it is hard to regard the Manu Smriti as a scripture or an authority on social issues.

     

    Depends on time and circumstance. Child marriage is not acceptable now because society has changed - simple.

     

    Not so many years ago in Britain very young girls married much older men, and was not considered paedophilia, because it was socially acceptable.

     

    One cannot read the Manu Samhita with the spectacles of the 21st century because times have radically changed.

     

    At the time of law making there may have been very, very good reasons for those rules, who is to say they were wrong for the time? You can only say they're wrong because of modern conditioning. Certainly you don't complain about some modern laws (although there are of course some that are very questionable right now) but in 1000 years they may change radically.


  16.  

    Hoola Hoola! (must be lack of sleep setting in)

     

    That's a good description... did you get the feeling that the more you write the more insufficient the description will be? by gaea

    Yeah:)

    I went to see this saint last week called Amma. The hugging saint. Oh man...she's knows what love is. She hugged me and kissed me on the forehead....calling in my ear 'my child my child my child'.

     

    Next morning I got up for mangala arati (I was in the city on short stay)...and gee wiz...what ever that saint did to me I dont know...I have never had jaap like that at mangala arati before.

     

    And walls about philosophy and advaita and vaisnavism have all been blown to bits. I have never encountered love so deep before. And a strong desire and vision for Krsna consciousness since meeting Amma.

     

    Love is everything...I hope I can somehow become a selfless man now and learn to love.

     

    y.s.

     

    Lots of people have told me about Amma's Love - sounds amazing... your experience of having that contagious Love spread to you and your spiritual awareness is EXACTLY the goal (in my non-educated opinion) that ALL, or at least MOST, religions strive for. That is spirituality... That obliteration of all modes of philosophy that you speak of is really a great experience. I can only hope I get to that stage.

    Thanks!!

×
×
  • Create New...