aqua3

Why should Bhooma devi go to the Lord for help? To know this, we must first see what kind of relationship god has with bhooma devi. At an ordinary level we say she is His consort. But on deeper analysis we find that it is more than that. The Lord Himself is all this world and is responsible for all that is happening. In Purusha Suktam, it is said Sahasra sirsha…….(verse 1) A thousand heads had Purusha, a thousand eyes, a thousand feet; He covered earth on every side and covered ten fingers breadth beyond In Narayana Suktam it is said, (Verse 5). yacca kincign-jagat sarvam drshyate shrooyate api vaa | antar bahish-ca tatsarvam vyaapya naaraayaNa: sTHitha: || yacca kincid (All that) jagat sarvam (all over the world) drshyate (is seen) api vaa (or is) shrooyate (heard), naaraayaNa: (Sriman Narayana) sThitha: (stands) vyaapya (manifesting) tat sarvam (all that) anta: (inside) bahish-ca (and out). This verse again reinforces that all that is seen , that is heard and that is in this world are all Narayana. Read this along with the Purusha suktam, "sa: bhoomim vishvato vrtva" – As this earth He manifests Himself. This also echoes the Uttarataapani Upanishad " sa vaa eSHa bhootaneendriyaaNi viraajam devata: koshaamsca srSHTvaa praviSHyamooDHo mooDha iva vyavaharan-naaste maayayaiva". -- manifesting the world "inside and out", we may again go back to the Purusha Suktam : "tasmaad viraatajaayata; viraajo adhi puruSHa:" - From him was nature (the female principle viraat) born. The Sahasranaamam again echoes this, praising Sriman Narayana as “bhu- garbha:"-"Who contains the world (bhoo) in his womb (garbha:)"- "He guards his wife Bhoomi Devi as a mother guards her womb". From all this it is made out , that He will be always there for the protection of bhoo whether bhoodevi requests Him or not.

The reply for your query is given by Bhagavan Himself in verses 70 & 71 of the last chapter in BG. Please contemplate on the purport of these verses to know the reply.

Thank you. I think the following is about the aurora seen at the poles.I want to know whether any particular colour is dominant in the auroras. This will give me new insights about what I want to express in my mail in reply to your query. ----------------- There are lights observed in the north and south poles , these lights were intially considered only due to sun's rays splitting the high altitude atoms (called ionosphere) . However recently it is found that the primary cause for this lighting is earth itself, earth has a fluctating complex magentic field (called magentosphere) this causes ion balance change and the main reason for lighting. --------------------------

Recitation is the first step in learning. Reciting and recalling of mantras and slokas are done in the initial years of learning in Veda patashala. It is only after remembering the passages, an inquiry into the meaning is being done. But most of us are not initiated into learning in this way. That is why we begin from learning the meanings. But if you have the time and inclination to do the recitation, don't give it up. By reciting, the original text gets into your mind. As you learn the meaning, you will be able to recall the texts easily and relate them to other passages you have learnt and you will also know for sure that the passages do convey the meaning. You will also find yourself asking more questions and looking for answers which are not usually covered. For instance in the 1st chapter in BG, every apprehension expressed by Arjuna starting from 'kulakshya krutham dosham' to what is that dharmE nashtE to the nashtam to sthree dharma to pithru dosham to the 'mahat paapam' wont leave your mind / attention if you remember them by habit of reading. Because every apprehension expressed by Arjuna is a loaded topic in Sanatana dharma. One may miss them if one goes through only the translations and commentaries. Another advantage is when you come across the same expression at different places (like madbhavam in BG), which you will be aware only if you know the text. The context, the connection, the comparison and analysis that your mind will be automatically doing is an important step in learning. More than all these, the sheer pleasure of reciting them in particular chandas is something to be exprienced. The recitation does have its effect on your body. For instance, Adhi shankara's Govindhashtakam, is composed in such a way that when you recite it, you wont be taking any stop for breathing. The build of words is such that your breathing is taken care of by the recital itself.

Dear Subhamji, I will come back soon on the query on Bhu devi. Meantime, I would like to know more on what you said like this. ------------------------------ Have any idea what is the meaning of earth's mantle and Core what is the signifinance of the discontinuity between them , what is the "Auras" of earth as witnessed in north and south poles , etc., ------------------------------ Can you elaborate?

-------------------- Exactly. Please point out the exact word in the verse (13.31 or 13.32) which means "subordinate to me" (as translated in Gita as it is or by older vishistadvaita translations). The word is "Anadimatparam". ---------------- Subordinateness can become an explanation (not translation for anadhi matparam)by interpreting this as mat + param. Since mat is the ablative case (5th vibhakthi), it is not interpreted as 'he becomes param' which indicates abheda of advaitic school. Since mat indicates 'from me' or 'than me', it is interpreted as 'he having me as param'. This is originally what Ramanuja has interpreted for this verse. Since the difference between 'him' and 'him having Him as param' is made out by 'mat' case, the concept of Him as Seshi and him as sesha must have been brought in here by the commentator. This is how the commentator can arrive at the meaning as 'subordinate to Him'. This is an interpretation only, and not what exactly the term stands for. Sri Namashivaaya ji, there is a problem if you accept this explanation, since this goes against your earlier claim that Brahman's nirgunathwam is indicated in verse 13-31, (anaadhithwaat nirgunathwaat) - it will be beaten. Because this 'subordianteness' continues as a portrayal of the individual soul and it is this individual soul which becomes nirgunathwaan and attains the qualifications of Brahman (once again demonstrating its subordinateness), you can not then claim that the nirgunam spoken by 13-31 is about Brahman.

Subham ji, I am impressed by the way you have interpreted sama, dhana, bheda and danda. But there is one more thing added to this, something you will understand if you are a regular listener of karnatic music. In his composition, 'sarasa sama dhana bheda danada chathura..', saint Thygaraja, one among the sangeetha thri-moorthy, says in the very next line, "saakshi daivamE", meaning the Lord is the Witness of all this. As such I concur with the conclusion you have given --- >>>>>So Hindus should realise first what a great blessing that they got a Birth as Hindu and second use that blessing to achieve Liberation ( and nothing less than that)<<<<<<< is the ideal stance sanatana dharma expects you to take. He is the saakshi, He is the witness -- the deterioration is what is ingrained in His scheme itself, in such a way that successive generations have become the cause by forgetting what their duty is as snatanists. This dharma addresses the individuals, not the masses. Every individual must know the way, follow it and transfer it to the next generation. The only other way prescribed is that the one who has known the import of this dharma, must offer it to the willing and ready ears as 'vidya-dhaanam'. If even one such soul exists, then the entire comminity will be flourished. It rains everywhere for this one enlightened soul. So have no worry about what will happen. The world is still peopled with souls who either know and practice or practice well without knowing. As long as that one person exists saying 'samastha lokA: sukhinO bhavanthu', this world will be continue to be in good stead.

The verse is 13.31 as per some or 13.32 by few others. It does not matter since the preceeding and proceeding verses are same always. It is not interpolation but some translators have numbered a "Arjuna Uvacha ---" as a verse separately, which has been left un-numbered by others. ---------------------- Extremely sorry to interrupt. This chapter on Kshethra kshethragja vibhaga has 34 verses in all, starting from "idam shariram" by Bhagavan. Even in editions which start with Arjuna's query 'prakruthim purusham.." it is mandatorily mentioned that this verse is not counted as it is not found in olden texts. As per Idam shariram vachan of Bhagavan, this verse on 'anadhi mat param' comes in 'GyEyam yat tat..' which is 12th verse (13 -12) Every time I sit to write or talk on Gita, I go through 5 different editions, and commenatries by Shankara, Ramanuja, Madhwa and Sridhara. Their versions have this as 13-12 only. Inspite of getting to know what they say, I also rely on the exact words in the verses, the way they are split up and the meaning derived. This gives a holistic idea of the verse. --------------------------- Exactly. Please point out the exact word in the verse (13.31 or 13.32) which means "subordinate to me" (as translated in Gita as it is or by older vishistadvaita translations). The word is "Anadimatparam". ----------- This vesre anadhimatparam coming in verse 13-12, is not explianed by Ramanujacharya himself in his 'Gita Bhshya'as meaning subordinateness (seshatwam)- pl note Ramanuja is the one who introduced seshatwam in the context of Brahman-jiva realtionship. If the commentry that you follow has this 'subordinate to me'expression in it, know that this has been written by one with vishishtadvaitic leanings, but CERTAINLY not based on Ramanuja's commentry for this verse. For Ramanuja himself does not use this comment (on seshatwa) not only for this verse or anywhere else in the BG. He gave shape to the idea of sheshatwam (subordinateness of the jiva)in his book "Vedartha sangraha" where you will find the exact meaning of 'subordinateness' in the context of defining shesha and seshi. A patient reading of this book will reveal how 'subordinateness' is a casual translation of seshatwa, not exactly revealing what this word in sanskrit reveals. Coming to anadhi mat param, I request you consult a sanskrit scholar, if not, a sanskrit dictionary to know the meaning of this term.

---------------------- 2.Kaakasura - is this a crow? perhaps a "demonic" crow, one that was bothering people that Rama came across or actually bothering Rama himself. Therefore, an unprecedentded attack by a crow could be seen as a crow-demon (kaakasura). but i dont know. i was asking for a lteral translation of the word kaakasura. please elaborate. for if so, i do believe (im not sure however) that certain birds can die from ingesting certain types of grass. thereby, a blade of grass could be "transformed" into a weapon of unprecedented effectiveness that it was hailed as a heavenlyweapon. --------- Please read the chapter 38 of Sudhara khanda in valmiki Ramayana to know the details of this episode. This is available on net.

-------------------------- 1. I think mantras are only as important as the mind that is repeating them. mantras mean nothing unless the person saying them has a genuinly inquisitive mind and remains open minded. If one just thoughlessly repeats a mantra, it does nothing for the person. so in this sense, it is not the power of the mantra or the words of the mantra, but acutally the psychological power the mantra holds for those that truly repeat it with a right state of mind. --------------------- This plus the acoustics plus the mental evolution of the person who recites the mantras to conduct the Homas, have made animal sacrifices render potent results in the yester- yugas. That is pure science. But since no one exists in Kaliyuga with such exalted mental disposition who can invoke the desired results in the sacrifice as well as to transfer the sacrificed animal to ethereal realms as ordained by the mantras recited, this has been prohibited in Kali yuga. Pramana for this does exist. This is to just draw attention to the potency of mantras by just their power of sound, and not rake up any controversy. This is different from what one gains by means of meditation on certain mantras. The quoted information on agni hotra and the one here above are about the power of Vedic mantras which are science- unknown to mankind.

The following is taken out from ‘Indian Express’ news item published on 31st December, 1981(or82). This writer had an opportunity to personally see the report of the research mentioned in this report. "This is about the HR and CE stall at the Tourist Trade Fair held at Chennaithen. ‘Teachers and students of Parasakthi College, Courtallam, through a set ofexperiments using laboratory gadgets, make a scientific interpretation of the chanting of slokas, abhisheka of the idol and offering of fruits and leaves."Temple worship has a definite scientific reasoning behind it", the assistant professor in charge said. First it is explained how there is a proportionate configuration to the sanctum sanctorum and the idol it houses – the sanctorum is structured in such a way that the idol in it reflects any sound wave to the maximum effect.A tuning fork is vibrated in the hall with little sound reproduction, but when it is struck and placed before the entrance of a small model sanctorum, a loud hum is heard. The forks invariably produce a sound resembling the chant "OM".The lecturer explained that among the various chants, "OM" had the largest resonant effect and displaced a sizeable amount of atmosphere inside the sanctum. This is possible only when the sanctum and the idol are made of granite. Next it is explained how the presence of negative ions increases in moist condition rather in dry condition using a condenser to infer why the sanctum sanctorum is always kept moist by pouring water over the idol and washing it with water continuously. Similarly the conduction of the stone idol also increases when it is moist – this is demonstrated by comparing the conductivity of dry granite and that of a wet idol. The materials used for the abhisheka of the idol increases the conductivity of the stone through their own pH values. pH value of a substance is the negative concentration of the ion it possesses. Most of the materials used for abhisheka– milk, curd, sandalpaste, turmeric powder, vermilion powder, vibuthi have high pH values, a simple chemical experiment shows. And when they are poured over the idol they increase the conductivity of the idol, also ionizing it. A resistance reading on the ohmmeter of the idol after these elements have been poured shows the increased conductivity of the idol. The chanting of the mantras and the more frequent "OM" sets the air column inside vibrating and the highly sensitized idol conducts the ions of the abhisheka substance to the moist atmosphere.The lighting of camphor during the deeparadhna displaces the air, which is partially charged with ions, and the devotees inside the sanctum inhale theseions. These negative ions have the physiological function of fixing oxygen with hemoglobin in the blood, the lecturer explained. They are concentrated on beach shores and mountain tops in the early morning, which explains doctor’s advice to heart patients for early morning beach walks. In the final inference, it is explained, a devotee’s presence in the sanctum during abhisheka helps his system induct more negative ions than he usually inhales. A visit to the temple is a good substitute for morning walk, the lecturer explained, and a tonic for good health.But with temples becoming overcrowded, it would not be a wonder if these negative ions are submerged by the excessive carbon dioxide exhaled in the packed sanctum which is meant to house only ten people at a time. Similarly the chanting of "OM" has also been reduced to a mere inaudible mumble, affecting its highly resonant quality."(end of the news report) Further details of what happens inside the temple and during aradhana from meta physical point of view also are plenty which I am not discussing here.

-------------------------- The quicker hindus see this and try to understand hinduism in terms of its inherent truth within the stories rather than worshiping myth as literal reality from a time gone by and ritualistic worshiping of idols above genuine expanding of one's charachter and personality, the better it is for hinduism, for india and for the world. ------------------ ritualistic worshiping of idols??? Here again lot of science is involved + individual’s rise in spiritual ladder. None of the practices of Hinduism which have been handed down to us by sages (for temple construction and Murthy worship (not idol –this is not the exact word for vigraha) worship, rules have been laid down by sages –there even is in practice the agama handed down by none other than Bhagavan Sri Krishna himself) are without meaning or relevance. To not to know them does not mean that these have to be given a go-by.

--------------------------- To me, Rama was a man just like you and me. He was a great king and presided over a prosperous peaceful kingdom. He went looking for his wife, which happened to be on an island in the south (or north it seems??). By the time he got there, whether he prayed for it or not, some natural event (possibly a tsunami as proposed by aqua) cased receded waters, which made it easier to get across. This even would only serve to reinforce popular belief that rama was truly god incarnate. The basis of kingship and monarchy in every civilization everwhere was originally based on some form of divine right from God. If he ruled a prosperous kingdom, this would only reinforce the people's beliefs that he was a great king and had great connections with God and his ability to beat a powerful south indian king and even cross to lanka may have solidified his posittion as truly a god-king. Now im not saying this takes away from him being av avatar. In this sense, we are all god, or a portion of him and have yet to realize the full implications of this due to our karma. One's position from being fully realized to fully ignorant can only be determined on a social level by other people in the society in which you live. Therefore, in the society in which Rama lived, his position was so high and he did many great things that time after time reinforced the people's belief in his divinty, that he got a title of avatar. Im sure people are going to attack my statements, so let me make it clear that I AM hindu and i DO worship and respect sri rama but above everything else is satyam for saytam is brahman and i will not think twice about the destruction of the entire religion and culture for satyam. If it truly is satyam. If our religion is satyam, then it has nothing to worry about, for it will not disappear. I dont think the world in which Sri Rama lived is much different from ours nature wise. THe same laws of nature applied then that apply now. The only thing changed is the people's perceptions of what exactly is going on. So when i try to rationalize the mythologies of hinduism, its not because i want to rbign it down or demoralize it, its because i want to understand it for truth in a way that most modern people would be able to relate to. I want to read of rama throwing an arrow and samudra deva helpeing him and understand that it may have been an earthquake and tsunami, not that some blue man shot a real arrow about a foot or so long out of a bow into a vast ocean causeing it to dramatically change the ocean's appearance, just beacuse this blue man was divine. To me, that second understanding is childlike and lacks the truly genuine search for truth and enlightenment that drove all the sages of the past. They didnt search for stories to celebrate, they searched for truth and understanding of god and life. -------------------------- I don’t want to make any comment on the above, but restrict myself to say (1)Avatars happen with an aura of symbolism around them particularly ramavatara and krishnavatara. Nowhere in Ramavatara, did Rama contend that he is God. Its only others who kept saying so to Him. After agnipraveahsa, Brahma deva, Rudra and others reach Him and ask Him why he is behaving as though he is an ordinary man. Rama asks as though He does not understand what they say and requests them to tell Him who He is. Similarly in Utthara khanda, when the end comes, messengers from other world come to remind Him that t the time has come for him to depart. In contrast, in Krishnavatara, Krishna keeps telling or reminding others that He is the god. But not many hardly paid attention to it!! That is the way yuga progresses and messages for humanity abound in these avatars. (2)The symbolism, message and the so-called controversial passages of Ramavatara have been meticulously gone into by persons such as this writer which have been archived in different groups on the net. (3)For further details on how this avatar as such is a reality and how we have to date them on cosmic scale, not on archeology have been written already and archived. If interested, please give your mail ID, I will send them to you. A combined understanding of the above three will put in perspective how Ramavatara must be understood.

-------------------------- As for all the talk of why rama needed to presuade samudra deva because of their familiar reliations is unncesessary. Bringing up different god's relations to each other is not needed because all these gods are one. there is only one god, in different aspects. to assume that one god (rama) didnt know everything that samudra deva knew is to say god doesnt know what He himself knows. It is obviously not literal. It is meant to distribute this knowledge to those of lower understanding. Therefore, differnt personalities are used to interpret relations and interactions between nature, humans, and god. Over time, this method of religious understanding became widespread and more common, probably due to the intense persecution of hinduism and public hindu knowledge and debate during the Muslim occupation. ----------------------------- There is a lot of meaning attached to this episode of Rama asking Samdra rajan. In fact on his return journey, Rama tells Sita ‘it is here that I did sharanagathi to samudra rajan’. Rama had no qualms in telling that he did surrender to samudra rajan, but we are a troubled lot to view it like this!!. The entire episode belongs to a different domain in terms of surrender and the philosophy and meta physics behind it. Acharyas of yore have explained this in many ways. But the main idea as per my present level of understanding and acceptance as such is that (1) even if He is God, He does not violate the protocol nor the eternal laws of nature. (2) The principle of surrender is such that , the authority, gains eminence –like how the guru gains eminence –in MB, Krishna does Vishwa rupa to convince his disciple and in Ramayana, Hanuman does vishwa rupa to Sita to convince her. –Guru is one who removes darkness and in the two cases quoted the one in guru-sthan does vishwa rupa to drive home a message ( pertaining to their power). Similarly the one receiving sharanagthi, by virtue of his / her authority in a given situation, takes the situation under control. And sharanagathi is the highest virtue and the one who receives must do everything possible to protect the one who has surrendered. That is why Rama forgives kaakaasura, not Ravana. (though both offended Him and Sita) Narayana Himself abided by the curse of a sage whose wife was killed by Narayana’s chakraayudha, when she refused to let the evil doer, who had taken refuge in her, to be slain by the chakra. The rishi, stricken with the pain of having lost his wife, curses Narayana to undergo the pain of separation from his wife. This, Narayana accepts, not as a karmic bhandhan but as a ‘hetu’ in his Ramavatar to suffer the loss of his wife. The explanation goes on like this..

------------------------ what island is there around rameswaram, but sri lanka, and thats to the south. also, are we really 100 % sure that it was sri lanka? lanka means island, it couldve been any island. it could be entirely in north india. ------------------- Dweepa means island. For Lanka, we must look at dictionary or ask people well -versed in this. This is in the South. As per Ramayana, or any work of yore, the description is always like this :- 'South of Vindhyas' - BUt i think it makes more sense being in the south. ive always believed that hanuman and the monkey kingdom referred to an underexposed northern perspective of perhaps hairy southern indian kingdom that helped this wandering north indian king. Please dont try to turn this into a north/south arguement however, i dont think it was meant out of disrespect as much as it was a way for a group of people to express their understand of what they perceived in an environment that they may not have been exposed to. This may have been at a time so far back that most north indians tended to stay north and most southerners tended to stay south. therefore, this rare exposure may have made one believe that these so called hairy "monkeys" helped them. that doesnt mean its derogatory. It may never have been meant that way. We may be putting that interpretation in there because of our modern derogatory assocations with calling someone a monkey. But anyway, i digress....... --------------------- This is a very long topic and let me refrain from going into how it is dravida or what is this migration that we often hear people saying about, who are these monkeys etc. Suffice it to say, that from Thretha yuga onwards, the sages and others who have wanted to lead a austere life in seclusion and penance, had migrated to the south of vindhyas and set up their parNa shalas. You will find that all the sages whom RAma meets in his van-vaas, were in the south of vindhyas. That is how the north - south division is spoken in the epic. While the North was brimming with city states, the south of Vindhyas was a haven for peaceful saintly life. This has extended upto KAnchi and Rameshwaram.

---------- What is the new land that was formed that became ground for cattle? is this ground that was exposed when the water receded? if it grew grass and became food for cattle, that must have taken a relatively long time. Was this whole process over a longer period of time? or did this land not go back into the ocean and is still above water? Why do they say an island to the North? ------------------------------ Yes, the names of these lands are mentioned. But it must be interpreted that these newly formed lands became fertile for cattle grazing in due course. It is not that they instantly became so. The place that samudra deva asked Rama to shoot his astra was 'Thrumakulyam' in uttara (north) part of the ocean. The Thrumakulyam was peopled with evil people who were working against the nature and giving hardships to the samudra deva. This place was completely destroyed along with its people. The place where the astra landed came to be known as "marughAndAram" which was the land that came into existence - good for grazing. A few verses are on this place and its greatness. This place appeared in the 'madhya' part (middle) part of the ocean. The place where the astra penetrated the ocean bed making a deep dent, from where waves gushed high into the sky came to be called as "vraNA koobham" These are the information as per VAlmiki RAmayana.

--------------- Does anyone know what a bhramastra weapon is? any descriptions of its effects? i would love to know what is really is exactly. ------------------------ There existed many books on astras or weapons. Even now we have some parts of Dhanur veda which is about the different types of bows and arrows (some on internet), how they are made and what their powers are. If you know the description of Kodanda held by Rama, you would know that such a bow made of 9 joints must have been quite big, that it is not possible for any highly able-bodied human living now can lift it, if not carry it on his shoulder all the time. Rama was described to be 8 feet tall (Sundhara khanda)and it is possible that a person of this height with corresponding body-built might have done feats of sorts (even assuming him to be only human) which no archer of the current era can dream of. There are others called sastras, which sage vishwamithra gives to RAma when he takes him along his brother to the forests to protect the yajnas. The details of these are found in Valmiki RAmayana. The sastras are also weapons, but which are powered by intonations and mantras. They are very powerful and are always guarded well. By this knowledge, Rama converted a blade of grass into Brahmastra, to kill Kaakaasura. The Brahmastras mentioned at various places in the two epics are sastras, not mere astras, in their being powered or made to be potent with some 'programme' - to understand this in the modern parlance. The astra that RAma aimed at Samudra deva was not Brahmastra, but Brahma dandam,(Narada samhita speaks of this as having three colours and calable of destroying all living things)which Rama powers with Brahmasthra mantra, says Valmiki RAmayana. Where can you get more information about them? The knoweledge had existed. Dhanur vedas might have contained more about this. As some one brought out Bharadwaja's Aero nautics which I read in this forum, some might happen to chance upon the old scripts or something like that and may reveal it to the world. Or we may not get to know them at all. But my personal opinion is that this knowledge had transferred from Brahma rishis to others - not for common people or for common consumption. Since the use of Brahmastra is prohibited unless otherwise called for, as it stands for total annihilation, this must be somewhat akin to nuclear weapons.

Starting from the second line in your post (on science and religion)to the penultimate line (on 'ritualistic worshipping of idols'), I need to post minimum 40 posts to cover the various issues raised in your post, Ratheesh ji Let me therefore brief some aspects alone and leave the rest to your search. --------------- ....it incorporates science with religion, which i think is important, considering religion was the explanation of the world used in the past and science is the explanation of the world used today. ------------------------ 'Vid' (to know)is the root word for Veda and 'mun' (to think) is the root word for manush (man). Our entire vedic tattwas are about knowledge and the goal of man is to attain this knowledge and become knowledge (gyanam) Itself which he does by means of striving through his thinking capability. (pl read my other posts on gyana and vi-gyana in the something -nothing thread in this forum). And as such the whole body of sruti, Ithihasas etc are to be understood and interpreted through gyana-vigyana and the purport or symbolism so understood is also about gyana or knowledge. Religion is the word we have coined. If you want to describe the core principle of Sanathana dharma in a single sentence, it will be like this:- It is the methodology by which the individual soul strives for and attains Self-Realisation, by crossing the cycle of births. The role for God at the early stages (of a person’s mental awareness) is as disciplinarian and benefactor to help the individual soul to adhere to set rules of morality, at the middle stage as a guiding lamp to reach the winning post and finally at the state of Liberation, He is just like how the Upanishads say, the bird with shining feathers, sitting on the pippala tree along with the now realized soul. The Upanishads which speak of Realisation do not speak about any God. They speak about how the realized soul realizes itself as God. This journey for the soul is a way to make him a gyanai and this sanatana dharma is nothing but about a highly perfected science, both in the sense we know, and in the sense that Upanishads speak of. To show just one facet of it as science as we know today, let me say this on Vedic mantras. Contrary to popular belief, the mantras are not about the meanings they contain. In other words, the words recited are not about the meanings of them but some other mystic or otherwise of it or call whatever - for I don’t know the exact way to say it in words. This was brought out in a research on a homa called agni hothra. German scientists descended on Bhopal in 1982 after the gas tragedy, to find out why 2 families which did agni hotra at that time survived. As a result, they found out the anti poisonous properties created in the air by the smoke of agni hotra. One unresolved finding was about the mantras used. Though traditionally the mantras are recited for 10 minutes, the particular mantras, namely Om suryaya swaha, suryaya idam na mama/ PrajapathayE swaha, prajapathayE idam na mama// recited exactly at sunrise, and Om agnayE swaha, agnayE idam na mama/ PrajapathayE swaha, prajapathayE idam na mama// recited exactly at sunset created more than 100 kinds of oxides hitherto unknown, in the air. When the scientists tried the translation of these mantras in other languages of the world, - old, new, antiquated and extinct, - the results did not materialise. So they came to the conclusion that it is not to do with the meaning of the mantras, but with the sound effect and something else perhaps which we cant / dont know. This aspect of the sanskrit and mantras in sanskrit has been analysed by acharyas of yore in their works. The vedas are eternal and immortal due to some indestructability in them. That is why it had been possible to retrieve them from time to time after kalpas and manvanthras. That is also the reason, I presume why the acharyas, be it Shankara or Ramanuja or Madhwa quoted very less from vedas but abundantly from upanishads. They never translated the Vedas nor gave commentaries on vedic passages. Vedas are meant for reciting and by reciting they produce some results. Like how Amrutha varshini raga is played to get rains!! Recitation brings out all the desired effects which are all unknown to science. Just imagine how good it will be for the world, if only everyone everywhere does agni hotra regularly at sunrise and sun set. There will be a continuous progression of de-poisoning of the atmosphere. This is not said so in the Vedas. But upanishads do speak of all that is spoken in Vedas. For instance, the Taittriyam ordains the student never to forget the agni hotra and asks him to do it everyday till his death. Even if his father is alive and is doing at his place, the son has to do it at his place. There is no bar on varna. Everyone must do it. In his advice to Rama, sage Agasthya, tells how the sun adds potency to agni hotra, in the Adithya Hrudhay sthothra. But until scientists tell us about this, w e have not known about this. We disregard the messages from our rich past. Whose mistake is it if it is thought that Hinduism is about mysticism and the practices are not scientific? Like how Karl Sagan said, if only the scientists are Vedantists and use their tools of science in the way directed by Vedantic knowledge, they would be going in the right direction and not re-doubting their own theories, such as Big bang or Darwinism. Let me also add that while science is indicated in mundane affairs, a high level of perfectionism is ingrained simultaneously in what we do. For instance in the mantra for agni hotra, the ‘na mama’ (not mine) is the root of Nama: Every mantra has this nama: shabdam. At every stage , the jiva is reminding itself that whatever it does, does not belong to it (na mama) When we genuinely think na mama, na mama, we wont be harming anything or anyone (from environment to people) –this is the Ultimate dharma of sanatana dharma (Ahimsa paramO dharma: ) and also will be removing the shackles of karmic cycle which is the core of Gitacharyan’s teaching _sarva dharman paridyajya… This is how ours is a way of life.. How religion and science are just two sides of the same coin called sanatana dharma.

There is no question of what is the right pronunciation 'according' to me. What I have given given is as per sanskrit. Any discourse or write-up done in sanskrit will follow these rules. Similar attempts done in other languages will follow the primary rules of those languages. Like how we have differences in English spoken by people of diifernt languages, since it is spoken as the primary / mother tongue of the speaker. That is why we have many regional variations in English spoken within India itself. But people having some awareness or knowledge about how the sanskrit words are spoken or spelt, will have trouble in writing them in English. For instance in one of my posts (mother barren) I was struggling how to write satputhras, since this word is not in English, that too in its plural form. I thought it best to write it as satputhrA: as it is pronounced in sanskrit. Sanskrit is such a unique language that not many of its words can be translated, exactly implying their 4-fold meaning, nor can they be adopted exactly in other languages. That is why it is insisted that we go to the root / core texts when we want to get a better understanding of what is being said. As for your question on RAm or Krishna, as per basic grammar, proper nouns can be pronounced in any way

The exact spelling is very important in sanskrit, which means that the exact pronunciation is a must. If some minor differences are there, then the number (singular, plural or pair (dwi vachan)) itself will be different. For instance in Sundhara khanda in VAlmiki RAmayana, while talking to Hanuman about Lakshmana, Sita says something like, 'he who has left his riches and loving wives'. The number used in the sanskrit sloka is bahu vachan, plural. But nowhere we read in Ramayana that Lakshmana had more than one wife. Then this becomes a point of debate and research for scholars, who would first ascertain whether this bahu vachan sychronises with the meter of the verse or is out of place in this verse. If found to be out of place then it is deduced that this would have happened due to incorrect prounuciation while reciting, since this has come down to us mostly by recitation. And proper correction will be made. But if the word goes intact in the verse, then it really means that Lakshmana had more the two wives. Then the problem of how to justify or to look for clues arises. Until about a 1000 years ago, matters such as these were of academic interest and hotly debated. That was the time when knoweldge of sanskrit was profound and people were keen on getting the facts right. But now what matters most is that whatever we have bequeathed must reach the people at least in bits and pieces. That is why no one worries whether we write as RAma, or Ramaa or Ram etc., or pronounce the names correctly.

The pronunciation is not exactly as it is in Sanskrit. That is what is made out in my post. In reciting slokas in sanskrit we follow the exact pronunciation. Strictly speaking we must follow the exact pronunciation as it is in sanskrit only. But in regional languages, the pronunciation takes up the regional slang. For instance it is RAman in Tamil, RAm for the Hindi speaking people.

Your version is correct and is as per Valmiki Ramayana, which is the authentic text on any issue related to Ramayana, in its being a contemporary one, listened to, by Rama Himself. Other versions and interpretations have come down the ages mainly for taking the message of Bhakti, ethics and morals of such authentic texts to the masses in the way they understand and follow. The kind of misconceptions about Hinduism that is evident to day is due to failure to understand the many salient features of sanatana dharma in the light of such original texts.

The origin of all this is in sanskrit language. RAma, Shiva and Krishna are all wriiten as RAma:, Shiva: and Krishna: (pronounced as RAmaha, Shivaha and Krishnaha) in their being masculine genders. They belong to the category of singular, masculine words ending with a or a-kaaraanatha pullingam. This is in the first case (prathama vibhakthi). In the 8th case, which is for addressing a person, the names undergo this change. Rama: is addressed as 'hE RAma' Shiva: as 'hE Shiva' Krishna: as 'hE Krishna' Nowhere the singular masuline words ending with 'a' are pronounced as 'aa'. In plural form (bahu vachanam), they are 'RamA: (for many persons having the name Rama) ShivA: and KrsihnA: and while addressing in plural form they are hE RAmA:, hE ShivA: and hE KrishnA: Only in 'pithru' shabdam and 'RAjan' shabdam, the singular masculine in the first case end with 'A', like pitA and RAjA. In the 8th case, they are 'hE pita:' and 'hE rAjan'. In the first chapter in Gita, there are a plenty of places (like acharya, pithrah puthrAha)where you can apply these rules and know for yourself what those nouns stand for - singular or plural etc.

That is not a bridge supposed to have been formed 17 lakh years ago. NASA has disowned this notion which is doing rounds. It is now being claimed that this picture itself is a hoax. Without going into claims and counter-claims like this, if we look into the matter, we get different inputs. This part of the sea is such that, two seas intercept from different directions depositing underwater silt continuously. Though the Sethu samudram project has been given a green signal, the expert opinion is that there will be continuous deposition of silt in this region and as such deepening of this stretch is a futile exercise. After the recent tsunami in this region, it was found that this area is in tsunami-shadow region. While in the adjacent areas, coast-line had advanced towards the land and the depth near the coast has increased, this stretch looks piled-up, more distinct from the adjacent deep seas. In Valmiki Ramayana too, the description of how the bridge was built looks similar to the handi-work of a tsunami or some disturbance in the sea. The God of oceans, clearly states that he can not make the waves give way, as it is against the nature with which he (ocean) is made. But Rama has drawn his bow and his asthra, which is described as of Brahmasthra type, can not be wasted. So the ocean god asks Him to shoot his arrow at a far-off place in an island in the north where the people are evil and are proving to be a threat to himself (the ocean). As a consequence Rama shoots His arrow there, making a big dent on the sea floor, which results in continuous out-pour of waves from the sea bed towards the sky. This is how the description goes in Valimiki Ramayana. The other chain reactions are also explained. As a result of this asthra, many parts of the island and sea became dry. The illegal mining of sea water done by those evil people was destroyed making sea water rush to the pits where water was stored. A new land also was formed in that region, which later became a grazing ground with flush growth of grass and fodder for cattle. When this was happening the ocean god was able to maintain the Sethu region raised and he requested Raman to summon Nala, the son of Vishwa karma to build a bridge there. He assured that he will make sure that the region is without sea animals for sometime so that they can build the bridge without any disturbance from them. The bridge was built in 5 days using the trees and rocks and boulders. The service of no particular vanara has been mentioned here, nor about the squirrels. It is only said that with the guidance of Nala, the vanaras kept raising the sea bed in this stretch and moved along with the bridge as they made it and reached the other end. Rama-Lakshmana were carried by Hanuman who crossed this stretch by jumping, not by walking on it. There are some clues to what happened to this bridge in the chapter describing Rama’s return with Sita. On the return journey no one takes the route on the bridge. All of them, including all vanaras and rakshasas of Vibheeshana, mount the Pushpak vimana, which (it is specifically mentioned) is a wonder air-ship capable of carrying any number of people and seat them comfortably without congestion. On their return Rama shows Sita the sethu, which he says is impossible to make. Then he shows the Mynaka parvad which is a part of the bridge, where vanaras had taken a break while crossing (then). Then he shows the coast at Sethu which is described as being visible. This part of Valmiki Ramayana is being interpreted by scholars and commentators as giving clue to what happened to the bridge afterwards. One interpretation is that sometime after Rama crossed the bridge, ocean gradually rose to reach its old level - after the sea calmed down in the aftermath of the disturbance caused by the asthra. What Rama showed to sita was the bridge that could be seen just under the surface of water. Because He specifically makes an observation that this area is covered with sea with no islands and shows only Mynaka mountain projecting out and the shore where the bridge begins. If the bridge had existed above the waters, there is no need for Him to say that it is here where the bridge started. He specifically points out this Sethu shore as sethu Bhandanam and goes on to tell about the good things that will arise if people do puja here. The implication of all this thus: The sea water had been churned due to a big disturbance in another part of the sea, the result of which was rising of some lands, submerging of some other while some places were dried. Since the ocean god says until he is keeping this sethu raised, he can quickly build the bridge and cross the ocean, it is inferred that this raised land went down the waters, when the ocean regained its level. Since this region continues to be an area of continuous deposition, it is inferred that Rama made use of this feature by inducing a quake at another part in the ocean resulting in receding of water here for some time. This possibility is comparable to what happened to Thiruchendur during the recent tsunami. While the waves lashed the coast elsewhere, water receded far into the sea at Thiruchendur and did not return to lash as tsunami waves usually do. This happened due to its locational advantage with reference to tsunami. But a similar advantage was not there when Madura of Pandyas ( of early sanga fame accounted in literary works in Tamil) was wiped out in a single day. Probably a tsunami had caused the havoc. The point I am making out here is that this eastern coast had been prone to tsunami havoc in the past too, though very rarely. What happened when Rama built the bride was a similar happening due to disturbance in the sea which He used to His advantage. The photo available on net (if it is not a hoax as it is now declared to be) remains a testimony to a natural phenomenon whereby this area always remains raised than the adjacent ocean floor. This is a serious issue as far as the Sethu samudram project is concerned. For, instead of making use of a natural phenomena we are working against it, which will prove to be a perennial fight against nature. Remember even the Great poet, Bharathiar envisioned bridging this area, not deepening it.

Let Him Shower His Grace on you at the earliest, Subhamji. "Nimittha maathram bhava" (11-33) Just instruments in His scheme of things!! Glory unto Him! Om shanthi shanthi shanthi: