Avinash

The arguments given in the claim are so much stretched that, by such kind of arguments, not only Prophet Mohammad but many others can be made to fit the description of Kalki incarnation. I have read articles that say that Baha'ullah (the founder of Bahai religion) was Kalki incarnation. How is not considering the Prophet as Kalki an insult to Islam? Where is it written in Quran that Prophet Mohammad is Kalki? According to Anonymous, if we do not consider Prophet Mohammad as Kalki incarnation, then we are deriding Islam. Can't we say, by applying the same logic, that not considering Baha'ullah as Kalki is an insult to Bahai religion. But defintely both Prophet Mohammad and Baha'ullah can not be Kalki.

Why can't it be something that a crow can eat?

Anonymous, Shvu is right. When you ask questions, you should be willing to read the answers attentively. It is not necessary for you to agree with the answers but if you do not agree with the answers, you should write as to why you do not like the answers. There are some people who feel that the questions raised by them are so difficult that nobody will be able to answer them. So, if somebody answers, then their ego is hurt and so they say that nobody answered.

So, not one has come forward with any credible evidence to disprove the claim. I really do not know what you are trying to say. Are you really reading the postings on this thread? It is clearly mentioned in Hindu scriptures that there are still about 400,000 years to go before Kalki incarnation will appear. How is it not a credible evidence?

For those who disagree what is your evidence for disclaiming the article written by a well known Hindu scholar. First of all, let me point out that not considering Prophet Muhammad as Kalki avatar is not at all any disrespect to him. Kalki avatar is not mentioned in Vedas; it is mentioned in Puranas. So, let us check if the kalki avatar mentioned in Puranas is Prophet Muhammed. According to Puranas, Kalki incarnation will appear near the end of Kali Yuga. There are still about 400,000 years to go for that. This proves that the claim in the article is wrong.

"OM NA TASYA PRATIMA ASTI YASYA NAM MAHIDYASHAA HIRANYA GARB ITIYESHA MA MA HIMSE DITIYESHA YASMAN JAAT ITIYESHA" Is this verse available in any of scriptures? If yes, could somebody tell me the source?

Dear Vinay, The post you have made is copied from some website (is it http://www.whereisgod.com/2.htm ?) Copying and pasting from somewhere else is not bad in itself. If somebody gets some relevant article somewhere, then it is quite OK to paste it here. But before pasting, please make sure that the post has meaning in this forum. Sometimes you may need to do some editing in order for it to have the intended meaning. In your post, you have written "Incidently, I also visited the venue and heard him." Some posters here may think that the word "I" in the previous sentence refers to you. But, in reality, it refers to D.D. Sharma.

What??????????? Nobody understood it?

I would request everyone to please stick to the topic. We are discussing if there is any reference of Rama eating meat in Valmiki Ramayana. The discussion is not on whether there is reference to anybody eating meet in any of scriptures of Sanatana dharma. I am not saying that this topic is bad. But it is better to start a separate thread on it. Some members are complaining that this topic is stupid because Rama eating or not eating meat is irrelevant. They say that He can eat the whole world if He wants. I agree that He can eat the whole world. In fact, He does eat the whole world as pointed out by j.n. das ji in the thread whose offshoot the present thread is. But I do not agree that this topic is stupid. To know if a topic is stupid we have to know as to how the topic started.

Talasiga ji, Are you reading this? I have been promoted to Member from Junior Member. All members of this forum, eat some sweets from my side.

I agree with jn das ji here. I have read Ramayana and did not see any verse that says that Sita was drying hare meat. In Sundar Kand it is written that Rama was eating fruits, bulbs, roots. But it does not mean that earier He used to eat meat.

Hey Gauracandra ji, Why did you start a thread on "Temptation Island"?

Dear Jijaji, When some historians do studies (archaeological and others) to conclude that most of stories written in Ramayana, Mahabharata and Puranas are either completely wrong or grossly exaggerated, then they are blamed to be having some ulterior motive. It is said that we should give more importance to what is written in these scriptures over what is told by these ‘western historians’. Don’t you think that, by applying the same logic, if we want to know about Jesus, then we should give more importance to what is written in Bible over what is told by the Islamic scholars? As you have pointed out, some of Islamic historians consider Jesus as a mortal prophet. They believe that he was never underwent crucifixion. So what? If you tell them that Krishna was God, they will immediately call you a liar. According to them, God does not come on Earth. Most of them consider stories related to Krishna as complete lies. There is very little probability that you will find some Muslim who can consider Krishna as a prophet. But they do not agree that He was God. Will you agree with them?

Material movement and the soul are incompatable, for the soul does not occupy any material space. My soul is inside my body. When I move, then doesn't soul move with me?

Material movement and the soul are incompatable, for the soul does not occupy any material space. My soul is inside my body. When I move, then doesn't soul move with me?

For your hypothesis to be correct, soul must be continuously moving with the speed of light in vacuum. (In the other thread, you wrote that it must be moving faster than light. That is not needed. Equal to light is good enough). But, is soul really moving? Time depends not only on speed but also on gravity. If somebody is living at a place where gravity is higher than where I am living, then I will age faster than him. Do we conclude that there is infinite gravity in Goloka? [This message has been edited by Avinash (edited 12-27-2001).]

For your hypothesis to be correct, soul must be continuously moving with the speed of light in vacuum. (In the other thread, you wrote that it must be moving faster than light. That is not needed. Equal to light is good enough). But, is soul really moving? Time depends not only on speed but also on gravity. If somebody is living at a place where gravity is higher than where I am living, then I will age faster than him. Do we conclude that there is infinite gravity in Goloka? [This message has been edited by Avinash (edited 12-27-2001).]

Right now in some universe, Lord Caitanya is inaugurating His sankirtana movement; in other universe Lord Krsna is performing His rasa dance; in another universe Dhanvantari is emerging with a giant jug of nectar; like that. Nice example of multi-universe theory (a theory accepted by some of Quantum Physicists).

Vedas are said to be eternal. Is it true for the contents of the four vedas as they are found in the present time. The vedas mention the names of rsis reciting verses. But there must have been some time when they first recited those verses. In upanishads also, some dialogs have been mentioned. There must have been some time when those dialogs took place. So what is eternal? The contents of Vedas and Upanishads as they are found now or the teachings therein?

Didn't Vedas emanate from the mouths of Brahma?

But there must have been somebody who told this first to us mortals.

Gita has been mentioned in Padma-Purana. Does it mean that these verses had been named as "Gita" before Padma-Purana or at least the part of this purana that glorifies Gita was written?

I could guess that. But I felt that accepting my own mistake will help me get the answer fast.

I am sorry; I was not clear. I want to know who was the first person to call the collection of these 700 verses as "Gita".

Bhagwad Gita is a part of Mahabharata. But it is also published and read as a separate book. Who was the first person to realize the importance of these 700 verses of Mahabharata?