Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

narayanadasa

Members
  • Content Count

    149
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by narayanadasa

  1. Jai Sriman Narayana: Thanks! But the question in the other thread was about souls? Are they infinite? I am trying to research but it will help if you already know the answer.
  2. Jai Sriman Narayana: Is there an infinite number of souls waiting to take a body? But an infinite number does not make sense. Why do you say infinite number of souls does not make sense? If finite then only Narayana knows the real count!. It is said that the cycle of births and yugas will be there until all souls reach Vaikunta after which we dont know what will happen. Please note that this may not be only world or even the only universe. So, souls could go to other worlds, planets, universes before reaching Vaikunta. Good question though, let me start looking for answers myself.
  3. Jai Sriman Narayana: I know that i really shouldn't be on a forum about hindus, but i am looking for some information on India. I am trying to write a historical fiction about several cultures in the era of around 1500 BC. That's all i can really say about it, because i get paranoid about being ripped off and everything. But if anyone here would like to help, i would be overjoyed! There are so many sites out there that India is confusing. I can research the Shang and Egypt...but i'm stuck with India. So here are a few of my questions: 1) What is this "aryan invasion" theory? Why is it discredited? How did it come about? This is a theory cooked up by the invaders (British using German scholars like Max Mueller?). The theory says that India was not very much civilized unless Aryans came down and started the civilization. Also, it says that the Vedas were written by the Aryans etc. BUT, ALL THIS THEORY IS FALSE. Please remember to discard any material if this is what it explains. 2) The Indus Valley civilization is part of Pakistan, but is it still considered part of Indian history? How is it related to India's history? And, most of all, what was it like? India and Pakistan were one until around 1940. The British when the left India did the splitting with help from people like Jinnah (father of Pakistan). So, when we say Indian history it relates to BHARAT. The India was not originally even there.. the invaders who could'nt pronounce Sindh started calling it Hind and then eventually the British started to call it India. 3) Besides the Indus Valley civilization, what other cultures were there in India? Was hinduism even a religion back then? What kinds of worship did hindus do, and were there any other religions besides hinduism? Hinduism was a name coined by the invaders. Originally it was called "Sanatana Dharma" meaning "Eternal Way of life/rules of life/duties of life". Anyway, hindus did worship as specified in the Vedas which was the religious book since the beginning of life. Buddhism was indeed there ever since Buddha came. Anyways, those are just a few of my questions, but I think they're the easiest. If anyone replies, they don't have to make a long novel out of it, since that would be a bit to read, but if anyone replies that could give me some kind of starting point to continue my own research. I have only answered the basic questions. I am not sure which book to suggest but try this one.. ISBN : 8122405061 Title: God, Rebirth and the Vedas This gives very basic information but with real good scientific proof of what is says. Once you read this, it will become to see what is true and what is not when you come across other materials.
  4. Jai Sriman Narayana: An Italian court going to decide whether Jesus existed or not. http://headlines.sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14114365
  5. Jai Sriman Narayan: Title: God, Rebirth and the Vedas ISBN: 8122405061. This is not for Aryan Invasion in general but a lot more about basics of Sanatana Dharma from a scientific point of view in a way that common western men will understand
  6. Jai Sriman Narayana: If you read Walmiki Ramayan[not Tulsi or any of the others] it is astounding.When Sita was released from Asokwana & brought to Ram ,Ram's Speech is typical of attitude towards women in those times. Lord Ram says to Sita 'I have fought this war to remove the blemish on my Ishwaqu Wansh that my wife was stolen by Ravana.This war was not fought for you.You who has stayed with Ravana for more than six months how can I trust that you are pure.In fact there is no way that Ravana would have left you unmolested.I do not wish to co-habit with you .Please leave my house .You are free to marry or stay otherwise with Laxaman,BHarat,Sugriva or Bibhishan.I really do not care one way or other.' Ram also revealed the secret (to Laxmana) that the Sita who was with Ravan was not original but a duplicate and this was indeed a play staged to kill Ravan. Secondly, when Rama made those statements he was not alone. Even if he is convinced as a king he has the responsibility to convince others too. In that sense he made the statement for all to see and understand the qualities of a king. I have also read that when Sita did Agni pravesh, the duplicate went in and original cam out (not sure if this is in Valmiki Ramayan though!). In this context if you are a king or atleast a person ruling a small village or even with a couple of subordinates then, please suggest what action would you take? Resign from the post? or leave your wife and marry again and continue as king? or leave everything else and go on piligrimage? On hearing these harsh words Sita cried,there and then she asked Laxmana to prepare for her agnidiwya[test by fire].This was done because of Ram's horrible beheviour. I really wonder who was the gentleman,Ravan who did not touch her or Ram who behaved in this fashion.A woman who is raped also due to circumstances beyond her control is pure this is what we should be teaching our furure generations. Ram continued the same after going to Ayodhya.He discarded a pregnant woman because the Dhobi said something.The argument given is that King has to have pure image,but then he could have handed over the kingdom to Laxman or Bharat who were equally good and should have gone to the forest with Sita. Dont know for sure what happened between Smt. Sita and Ravana but Ramayana does not tell that Smt. Sita was raped/molested. So, why assume that she was not pure? Thats why we need an Aacharya to explain things. Originally all this was only learnt verbally so that you dont need to interpret but had the freedom to question and understand correctly. Today we have too many translations to cause as much confusion as possible. This is a pity. The major reason is the belief our society had at that time that a woman gets twin children if she has slept with two men [ Refer Charak samhita & nakul and Sahdeva in Mahabharat who were twins due Madri sleeping with Ashwinikumars who were two.] Sita was in advanced stage of pregancy where it was clear she was carrying twins.Thefore Dhobi and Ram had every doubt bout her fidelity. Could be provided Valmiki Rayamana says that the Sita who Ravan carried was not the original Sita. The society was like that at that time so I do not blame Ram or Dhobi for what they did, but people justifying this without reading Walmiki Ramayana are to be blamed. Yes, agreed. Even otherwise, Ram had to follow 2 Dharmas - one as husband and the other as a king (protect his kingdom, maintain trust with the people etc). He needs to sometimes sacrifice something for the other. Normally, the smaller Dharma is sacrifised for a bigger dharma. I certainly would'nt assume/speculate everything as wrong as possible when something is unclear. Remember, one Dhobi made some comments, there might have been many more people, no doubt. But majority of the remaining people wanted Sri. Rama as king as he had built the trust. Laxman was good too but was he as good as Ram to rule the kingdom? Sri. Ram had to consider a lot of options before giving away the kingdom. May be those options as a king (bigger Dharma) out-weighed the other of sending Smt. Sita away (smaller Dharma). Again we will not get perfect answers to these questions unless we ask someone who really knows. I have just given this interpretation based on what I heard/read.
  7. Jai Sriman Narayan: Yes, it is good that ISCKON is doing good work preaching in the west and elsewhere by a simple method - hari nama sankirtana. May be for a start this is really very very good. I also found very very useful information in Srila Prahbhpada's books especially since the purport takes the latest worldly situation since it was written very recently compared to other books.... so easier for a layman to understand. Being a non ISCKONite (since they are non-hindus as they sometimes say, may be not wrong if I say this) I certainly dont like some ideas of (1)changing stances on whether they are hindus or non-hindus as applicable (2)saying that vedas are not for this age.. why not? there are many even today them who learn, and can recite correctly, why not encourage them? (3)making very strong comments about Sri.Sankaracharya, Advaita - they have the right/freedom to disagree but not the right to make strong negative comments which they can make more polishly (4) Still going by the christian/islam way stating that "ISKCON is the only way (same like what is said in Christianity about Jesus and Islam about Prophet Mohammad)".
  8. Jai Sriman Narayan: I was told that future = past karma + current actions. Past actions are with us (the soul?) and can be read whereas current actions are not fully known till they happen. So, Future predictions can never be 100% accurate.
  9. Jai Sriman Narayan: I also read somewhere (dont remember) that Christianity and Islam will die very soon with whatever traces left of these will be in India only (in whatever corrupt form). I dont know if the source of this information is authentic but neverthless so just thought I will post it. This may seem real because christianity is almost dying in America with people going towards Islam and Buddhism too. Hindus need to eventually work harder to save Hinduism by learning, following and preaching at whatever opportunity available to make the above come true.
  10. Jai Sriman Narayana: Sanatana Dharma is from time immemorial. As Kaliyuga aproached people started committing sins and hence it started deteriorating. Whatever invasions/onslaughts happened can be taken as God's punishment for our sins. Even during those time there were a lot of them who did follow Sanatana Dharma well enough. They provided guidance to the others because of whom it survived. For example; Chanakya once refused to teach a larger portion of the vedas to his students, quoting the reason that "there are adharmis causing disturances to society at the moment, it is more important to learn how to fight, I will teach you warfare so that you can effectively fight them out(somewhat contrary to Mahatma Gandhi's method!)". Islam only managed to convert the very weak. Infact some of them even today keep the Gita hidden within the Quran. We need more Chanakya's today to remove even the traces of Islam atleast from the current India. People need to more worry about God than about Nehru, Gandhi etc.
  11. Jai Sriman Narayana: Good comments. I was out of town the last 3 days, so still reading and thinking...
  12. Jai Sriman Narayana: Ok, you are talking from an Advaitic point of view.. I do not have much knowledge on the Advaitic concept. But, let me ask you this question: When you say God manifisted himself as Prakriti, Brahman, Atmam why did he manifest? Was'nt he happy without that?
  13. Jai Sriman Narayana: I think you need to read my posts fully. I did'nt ever say God created the souls.... I have always said in my posts that God created the body and the material world. I also always said "Souls are beginningless". Just like God was not created, souls were not created too. The last few posts were about how souls got their first Karma. If you read the posts fully you will see my answers for that too. Material body and Souls are different thats why AAcharyas always say "You are not the body".
  14. "God has already determined all the actions and their respective reactions" But Gita says, I don't determine their actions, their contact with Gunas and not even their fruits, it is nature alone that functions. This again means that God doesnt determine what each action everyone chooses. But, he does indeed know the list of every action and every reaction. If we say nature of soul is Karma then again the point is where it started. It either started (1) because the soul that was originally free wanted to enjoy material world or (2) because the soul was originally there with some built-in nature. (1) or (2) I am not sure as I said before but in both cases God had to take some action to satisy the soul (not himself!) The basic point here is "HE" and "WE"is that distinction well-defined, anambiguous? even if you say yes, still one question remains what is the NEED for HIM to create US? Yes, HE is the super soul (Paramatma) and WE are the different souls (atma). HE created so that souls can experience their Karma. To do Karma both the body and the rest of the world is necessary..right? Thats the need for him to create. I dont think God created the souls and gave them one life-time with imperfect senses, imperfect knowledge and then based on their actions he takes them to heaven or pushes them to hell for eternity - just like the christian / islamic faiths. Now, it would seem really foolish of God to simply create souls (for his glory?) and get souls to enjoy/suffer for eternity (unless he is bored!). This definitely cant be true!. Please go ahead with your comments.. we seem to be discussing more finer topics in simple terms.
  15. Jai Sriman Narayana: if I do action X I will get reaction Y and if I do action A I get reaction P. Can you please say who determines this? God has already determined all the actions and their respective reactions. He has given us the knowledge, guidelines etc to decide what actions to choose. Now, if God wants to choose for us he can do so if he wills, no doubt and no one can stop him. But, there is no reason why he would interfere with our freewill which is again based on our previous Karma. Now coming to beginning of Karma, some philosophies say "Souls were beginning-less and Karma was part and parcel of the soul" while others say "Souls were beginning-less and were originally without Karma and by their desire they accumulated the 1st Karma and then the cycle countinued". Honestly, I am trying to find out which one of the above is more logical although as of now both are acceptable to my very basic intelligence, knowledge. One important point to remember here is, that God is always Satya (Unchanging, truth doesnt change), Gnana (Knowledge, all knowing), Anantha (All-prevading, exists everywhere) and Ananda (Bliss, Happiness) Swaroopa. This means he doesnt get bored, he is not unhappy as he is, he doesnt desire anything for himself, he doesnt need the material world to enjoy. So, he doesnt need to create the bodies for the souls, nor the material world. According to other faiths like Christianity and Islam where it is said that God creates for his own glory... which tends to say that he lacks something, so he desires to perform some action. This contradicts the above fact. If he has created all this, the only logical answer would be that he did so for our sake. It is we who need him to go out of the miserable material condition (not the other way round). Ofcourse, he is very compassionate towards us when we show the desire to go back to him and behave according he does reciprocate. We dont realize this and so end up not getting Bhakti for him. Although, there may be some very basic events that may not change (like we being born in the age of Kali, we being put into so many difficult situations etc)... there certainly are a lot of actions that although we know is bad we end up doing. This is wrong and God is not responsible for that. Hence it would be wrong to say that "God made me do this and that and so he is responsible and I am not".
  16. Jai Sriman Narayana: When He says I know everything about future, He refers to the future of Arjuna not himself. In my opinion he knows when everyone is going to die and he also knows that if I do action X I will get reaction Y and if I do action A I get reaction P. There may be 10000000+ actions and 1000000+ reactions, he know all of them and which maps to what and various combinations of that. So, I am not telling he doesnt know. I am telling that he can know if wants to know (he knows how to know!) So, the interpretation should be "God knows everything so whatever I do is because God ALLOWS me to do". What I do is based on my knowledge, intelligence, surroundings, environment etc I am placed in and this is based on my past Karma. Knowing events may not be the same as knowing the actions that each soul is going to perform. He know Kaliyuga would start at this time, end at this time etc. But, he *need not* know about what each soul is going to do to make this event happen.
  17. Jai Sriman Narayana: The misconception here is about the interpretation of "God knows everything so whatever I do is because he wants me to do" This is not the correct interpretation. God knows the LIST of all actions and all reactions but he necessarily doesnt want to choose the list of actions that you need to perform... you have freedom and intelligence to choose that yourself. God doesnt interfere and make you do Bad things and Good things.. however, based on your desire he allows you to do both. He has given you all guidelines (with Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas and Gita etc) and even incarnates when necessary to teach you. But, the reaction is awarded to you whether it be good or bad - this you have no control. Souls desired to be enjoy material world and so God created the body and the rest of the world. In the process the souls accumulated many 'actions' (Karma) and the result (destiny) was awarded.. thats why we are always here cycling through actions and reactions. The Karma that you acquired by yourself, you need to get rid of it yourself i.e you are responsible for this and GOD can help you for sure. The prescribled methods are Devotional Service, perform prescribled duties and responsibilities sincerely, love all (if loveable, some are not!), atleast TRY NOT to hate anyone (if they cant be loved!).
  18. Jai Sriman Narayana: We can only discuss rationally provided we accept some common scripture or a common Aacharya. You seem to be rejecting the books that we consider holy. So, please provide one that you realized and wrote yourself which you consider as better than the Gita, Manu Smritis etc and then we will compare and discuss rationally. Otherwise, we may end up quoting verses from the Gita, Puranas etc and you would only be rejecting those based on your mental speculation and so-called logical thinking.
  19. Jai Sriman Narayana: Traditional reasoning: A women undergoes periods during which time she is changing both chemically and physically. This is indeed painful. She undergoes the prenatal periods, childbirth and then the postnatal periods. Now, all this itself is too much strain on women coming in the way of concentration and dedication to NITYA KARMA - i.e. to do without fail without missing even for a day (or rather Kaala -time). So, isnt asking her to do whatever man is already doing not cruel on her? Sastras taking all this into consideration has correctly prescribed what women should do and what they need not (not just what they should not). Shastras have not said that Women cannot get Moksha because they dont do what all men do. In fact they play a much larger role by their faithful activities to their men-folk, by maitaining the house etc and this itself is a good accumulation of sufficient Punya... none extra is necessary. This way man takes care of external activities and women take care of internal activities and everything worked fine. Modern day: Ofcourse now a days women want to do whatever men do (thanks to western culture!) and in the process there is too much competition and both men and women suffer at the end of the day. Both men and women are making their own rules based on their limited intelligence and they always think "Oh!I am making something better that what is stated in Bhagavad Gita, Vedas etc". This is ignorance and they are not aware that they are ignorant, this is a pity. I would however wait to hear from someone who knows about the reasoning for the present age.
  20. Jai Sriman Narayana: But it seems that only after someone appears we look in Puranas if their arrival was predicted. Any predictions of any future Aacharya's for the next 427000 years apart from appearance of Lord Kalki (who is God not an Aacharya)? Basically, after Chaitanya who will appear? Is any information about this available in our scriptures?
  21. Jai Sriman Narayana: It is definitely not right to steal and use someone's philosophy, misinterpret it and then preach. But... just something occured to me... There have been so many spiritual proponents in Bharath about Sanatana Dharma and we should be proud about that. But at the same time, these philosophical differences which seems to cause INTELLECTUAL arguments which if done correctly is healthy. But, it appears that sometimes common people tend to abuse each others lineage in a public forum. I think this is serving no purpose and should be avoided, especially in a public forum. This doesnt however stop us from intellectual arguments about the different philosophies which is necessary to learn more. Major philosophies: - Adi Shankaracharya - Advaitha (non-duality) - Some Aacharya's (even outside Advaithins) differentiate between non-duality and monism i.e they dont agree that Shankaracharya was a monist. - Ramanujacharya - Vishishtadvaitha (qualified non-duality) - Madhwacharya - Dvaitha (duality) ... ... - Chaitanya - Achinthya Bhedha Abedha (simultaneous duality and non-duality) Each of them indeed said that whatever they did was applicable to Kali yuga and their philosophy was the ultimate the latest such claim being Lord Chaitanya's philosophy. Note that all of them indeed deserve to be respected. Each of them are Avataras and indeed did what they came to do because one of the properties of the Avataras is to finish the job they came for unlike common human beings where there usually is non-completion. It is only 5000 years of Kali yuga still so not sure how many more such philosophies will come in future quoting the same Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas, Itihasas etc. May be we keep committing old sins in addition to inventing new ones that God needs to send new messages in the form of new Aacharya's and new philosophies because man by nature seems to be rejecting old ones as outdated (out of ignorance may be!). For the common man, does the philosophy really matter? If so how? and are philosophies just different interpretations of the same words of God? Any thoughts?
  22. Jai Sriman Narayana: I picked this one up from http://science.krishna.org/Articles/2005/02/Reincarnation.html. Case of Nagina: Nagina was born in October 1990 in a town in District Farrukhabad, U.P. Her father, Amaruddin, was a Tonga driver. The family belonged to the sect of Sunni Moslems who did not believe in reincarnation. They were the members of the middle lower socioeconomic class. When Nagina was a little over one year old and before she had acquired speech, she used to try to convey something through gestures. She would make a gesture of striking a match and pointing it to her head. This behaviour started when one of Amaruddin's aunts, who was visiting them, asked for some oil to massage her head. Nagina brought a bottle with kerosene in it. The aunt said with surprise that she had asked for mustard oil and asked what she would do with kerosene. Nagina then showed her, through the gesture, how she (in the previous life) had poured kerosene on her head and set herself on fire by lighting a match. About the age of three, when Nagina could spoke clearly, she gave more details about a previous life. She said that she was Oma, a teacher, and that she had two dauthers and two sons. Her statements also included the details of how she had a quarrel with her husband and set herself on fire after dowsing herself in kerosene. A women called Oma devi lived a few yards away from the house of Amaruddin. She was married and had four children: two dauthers and two sons. She was a teacher in a school in District Etah, and her husband sold books and stationary in Mohammadabad. The couple did not get along well. On May 19, 1987 they had a serious quarrel; Oma Devi dowsed herself with kerosene and immolated herself. Her body was charred completely; she was 47 at the time. On hearing about Nagina's claims Oma Devi's sons called her to their home. Oma Devi's younger son expressed reservations about the case but did not deny it completely. Her older son was convinced that Nagina was his mother reborn. His conviction derived from Nagina's behaviour and her knowledge of certain events in Oma Devi's life that he believed were not known to outsiders. Nagina's Unusual Behaviour: Nagina showed behaviour, which refelected her preoccupation with the mode of death in her claimed previous life. She also showed appropriate behaviour towards Oma Devi's sons and gave information that was not in the public domain. When Oma Devi's husband died in April 1996, Nagina became very upset (she was about 5 1/2 years old at that time.) Nagina's Birthmarks: Nagina's parents, and also some other informants, noticed marks suggestive of burns on her body when she was born. On examination in December 1995, two marks were clearly seen on her body. These were hypopigmented areas under Nagina's chin and on her lower abdomen. Birth marks are on the body which is material but what reincarnated is the soul. The logical explanation is that the soul gets the type of body that it was destined to get based on its past action even to the minutest detail (burn injuries of past life - now thats cool /images/graemlins/cool.gif) Any thoughts?
  23. Jai Sriman Narayana: God has given us conscience, mind, intelligence to differentiate good from evil. I don't believe praying god alone will give you good thought, what about islamic militants and terrorists? they worship god atleast 5 times a day, did god give them good thought? I said worship God, I did not say do only that and nothing else. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif. I certainly dont know why Muslims worship 5 times a day but it looks like they worship because they are forced to otherwise they are rejected out of the community. They dont know about self-realization nor the full-science of the soul. They dont believe in rebirth. They do what the Man-Modified Kuran says without questioning - they are forbidden to do that. Now you need to ask them to know "Why they worship?". It appears that they worship to go to paradise by hook-or-crook. What about the people who killed and tormented lot of innocent people in the name of religious conversion? What about? What are you trying to convey here? Who did this? Definitely not people who follow Sanatana Dharma. We were never greedy, never invaded anybody. So, I dont know what you are trying to convey here? Are you telling that "If you worship God and get good thoughts as I said, you will end up killing innocents in the name of religious conversion" What about the people who destroyed babri masjid and burnt alive the Christian pastor in Orissa? They are also worshippers of god, did god give them any good thoughts? What about the original demolition of Rama temple and building of Masjid? What about the massacre of so many people in India by the Muslims, British etc? I am not justifying demolition of Babri Masjid but again I dont know what you are trying to convey here. Please read my next comment. God has left us to chose between heaven and hell.Mere worship alone will not give us clean chit. No, Heaven and Hell is not ultimate. For example 100% good go to heaven, 100% bad go to hell. What about the majority of them 50% good and 50 % bad or any such combination. The concept of heaven / hell being ultimate is a christian concept not a concept of Sanatana Dharma. The Christian concept is something like "anyone who is a Christian and goes to Church will automatically go to heaven" and others go the hell" Why? Because Christ died for the sins of Christians - past, present and future sins. So, a person who has done 70% bad and 30% good will be pardoned if he becomes a Christian and go to church. Just to be clear I dont hate christians or muslims. To me everyone is a spirit soul and I dont expect anyone to suffer. But, I do pity those who believe in the concept of heaven / hell being ultimate. I have'nt read the bible fully nor the Kuran (AND I DONT NEED TO READ THAT), so I would'nt want to comment too much on this. Great logic by Christians / Muslims : God creates man (by a big bang)- for reasons unknown (although christians say it is for his own glory). God gives man one lifetime to do good or bad. Based on Man's acts in one lifetime he is given paradise/heaven or put into hell / fire to suffer for eternity. So, God enjoys cruelty to his own creation by putting sinned-Man in hell for eternity. Now, according to this theory, I certainly dont know why they worship. The question was "Why worship God?" and I answered just that - I have experienced results of my worship. Now you are telling worship alone doesnt get you to heaven or hell and you talked about innocents being killed. I did'nt say that. I have't however seen your answer of "Why worship God?" /images/graemlins/confused.gif although you are free to comment to my comments.
  24. Jai Sriman Narayana: You worship God to get good thoughts so that you may perform Good Karma and reach God. God is Satya (Unchanging), Gnana (Knowledge), Anantha (Unlimited) and Aananda (Bliss) Swaroopa so he doesnt need anything. He created your body and the rest of the world so that you (your soul) could experience your Karma and finally reach God. The soul by itself based on its Karma may not have perfect thoughts by itself to understand what is Good Karma or Bad Karma. Thats why you need to learn this from God or from his bonafide representative.
×
×
  • Create New...