ajit12

This is typical of hinduism rather all sects in India.Some wise seer be it Budhdha ,Mahavir,Sahjananda,Rajneesh the list is endless;comes and tries to reintroduce people to the correct path and lo!! what happens?His followers make god out of him.Same thing happened to Ram & Krisna. God can set things right by sitting in his heaven.He does not have to take human form,do work of a human and be limited by human frailities.We have to understand that AHAM BRAMHASMI i.e. I am him .Then the concept of any human being being special god loses it's charm.If you go through Vachnaamrita you find things like eat veg. food etc. this is what god is supposed to do?So much emphasis is given to Shri Sahajanand's meeting with British governer.It does not sound like God. My objection is not to Swami Narayan sect,but to our stupid habit of making God out of any great human beings,Be it Sahajanand or Saibaba.

This confusion started with puranic verses glorifying the cow.The cow is supposed to contain 33 deities [not 33 million] in her stomach.The were 8 vasus,8 dishadevs etc.Unfortunately I do not have the references handy as I am travelling.These 33 deities together as a class are known as "koti" which in Marathi[indian regional language] also means crores [one crore is 10 million.] Hence someone translating the puranic verses translated 33 "koti" as 33 crores i.e.330 million sometime in 1904 or there abouts.This myth came from Marathi to English and other languages and has persisted ever since.I will post the relevent refernces when I am back from my travels

Every human soul the moment it is born is asking the question "KOHUM,KOHUM???" this means "who am I? During intensive meditation & sadhana he discovers the answer which then is recited with his every breath.The answer is "SOHUM,SOHUM" or"AHAM BRAMHASMI" which means "I am him" or "I am bramha" If you discover & understand this your sadhana & the cycle of births & deaths is over .This is mukti,Moksha.Rather than asking the meaning of self try and discover the same by asking the above question.The discovery is sheer, total & perpetual bliss.

Where do you get such farfetched idea that 96 % of vedas are lost ?Vedas are essentially sruties i.e. recited .If 96% of vedas is lost then we are not following vedic religion .What religion do we belong to? Vedas are not meant for elevation of heavenly planets nor there is any science in vedas.No society can escape the bonds of time in which it lives.To put a PC on your table 400 years of scientific advancement is necessary.A few slokas about Viman or arrows carrying warheads does not mean science. Within the confines of time we were great in atronomy,Mathematics[although not trignometry,our fourfathers did not know the value of 'pi'],Bharat's Natyashastra,Ayurveda[again it did not know about germs & bacteria.],Kaamsutra,Metalworking,Different schools of philosophy,building of forts & temples,meditation,cloth making & dyeing etc. We were much ahead of other societies. This list is very long but all this was suitable for the time during which this society existed.They did not cross the boundaries of time and invent nuclear bomb.

Jay 74, Get your facts right.Shiva as such, or as Mahadeva, is not alluded to in proper Vedas. The Rigveda, however, frequently mentions a brown complexioned sun-like brilliant and gold-like glowing animal-skin-wearing entity by the name of Rudra, or Ishan, who, as per the Rigvedic description, is synonymous of a violent non-Aryan jungle or tribal god capable of subduing, by his mighty arrows, even the most wild of animals. He did not hesitate even to kill human beings and sought delight in such destruction. Hence, the Rigveda is somewhat critical of his wildness and invokes him for not destroying his devotees, their ancestors, offspring, relatives and horses. It is only gradually and somewhat in simultaneity that the Rigveda softens and sophisticates him into a civil god of Aryan kind and includes him into the Vedic .. The later Vedic literature identifies in Rudra the proto form of the subsequent Shiva. When Puranas perceived the formless God manifest in His triple function, which He performed as the Creator, Sustainer and Destroyer, both initially and finally, as well as always, they chose Shiva to represent one of these functional aspects of Him and elevated him to the status of the Great Trinity.

Celibecy was never a part of Vedic religion.In fact Vedas,Mahabharat & puranas are very explicit & matter of fact about sex matters.Sex worship was an essential part of Tantric cult.Ours is the only society which produced Khajuraho,Konark & Vatsyana's Kaamsutra. Sex is also cosidered to be one of the four Purusharth,they are Dharm[Religion & worship through rituals],Arth[earning ,multiplying & enjoying money],Kaam[enjoyment of sex & procreation] & moksha[release of atma or salvation]A householder is required to make his wife a 50% partner in the first three. Celibacy and all sorts of stupid rules associated with it are a part borrowed from Budhism & Jainism.These frowned upon sex or even seeing the opposite sex by the Shraman or Sanyasi Bhikkus.This somehow made it's way in a distorted form in hinduism. Tantric rituals & sex worship had reached extreme proportions in using sex for worship.It was just horrifying and was spreading despite efforts to control it.Celibacy became the other extreme cosidering sex to be something horrible.Excesses on both sides are to be avoided.

1]'You must realize that Ram and Sita are both god, if Ram doubted Sita's safety, he would not have sent her, but she is god, nobody is going to be able to do anything' Ravan did kidnap Sita despite your argument & the whole trouble started from there.Why did our God allow this?If he did allow this to kill Ravana then why should Sita suffer for lofty aims of God Ram. 2]'Ram was not forsaking his wife, the people of the kingdom were doubting her, Ram fully trusted Sita.' To my simple mind dumping one's wife through a third person i.e. Laxman in a forest constitutes forsaking her. If you have any other definition I am at a loss to understand it.Ram never even informed Sita that he was going to dump her,like he left the unpleasant job to Laxman who revered Sita like a mother.People of kingdom were doubting her so he dumped her.My god ,don't you realise what an example this is going to give to the future generations. 3] If people of his kingdom so idolised Ram they would accepted that Sita is pure.One Dhobi or rather maybe a small group of people were gossiping unnecessarily and doubting Ram & Sita ,the purest souls or Bhagwan .What did Ram do? He succumbed to such malicious people. 4] A society which does not value a woman's sacrifice and dignity needs to be changed by the God that Ram was.Can you please enlighten me about the deeper lesson being taught.I am not doubting Ram,We should analyse their conduct say if something was wrong with their conduct.Gods can also be wrong.[Example Indra's seduction of Ahilya]

There was no idol worship in vedic religion & hinduism survived.The basis of idol worship is twofold 1] It is an idea borrowed from mahayana school of Budhism which laid emphasis on worship of Budha statues,stupas containing relics etc.These practices are apperent in Budhist temples all over the world. 2]Another reason was Hinduism adopted & took over places of worship of nonaryans ,shaktas etc.Deities such as Shiv,Shakti,Ganesh were added to hindu list of Gods.We also took over the centers of worship of these gods which were essentially temples & idols.over years this evolved into deep & elaborate rituals with beutiful temples. There is nothing wrong with idol worship .It has always been way of worship in all multigod religions such as ancient Egypt,Babylon,Rome & greeks.We do not have justify this by giving convoluted arguments of deep thinking of our forefathers.Why not just say this was one of the several ways in which Hinduism evolved & these ways were all welcome in our religion.

The basic point which everyone here is ignoring is as follows. 1] If any woman gets kidnapped due to no fault of her's and has to spend some time in captivity till such time she is rescued,the society as a whole should accept her into it's fold. 2]As bhagwan & a very popular king it is the duty of Ram to lay correct principles for the society,that is do not forsake your wife or any other lady if she is kidnapped like this.On the contrary he ended up telling the society you are right to doubt my wife so I am abondoning her,Agnidiwya or no agnidiwya.Generations to come please follow my example. 3] What about his duty towards a wife who followed him to Vanwasa ,went through kidnapping & captivity ,performed Agnidiwya for his sake?it would have been his moral & spiritual duty[One's duty during Grihastaashram] to abondon kingdom,make Bharat[who had already ruled very well for 14 years] or Laxman the king & for once show better values by following Sita into their second Vanwasa. Gods are supposed to make better human beings of us by setting more humane and kind examples.

The very first sloka of Mahabharata starts thus'This is Itihaas called JAY'.Kautilya writing in Arthashastra in 3rd century BC. writes' Bharata which is an extended version of an Itihaas called JAY.'Thre are a few more proofs which will be taken up later.

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.' 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. 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. 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.

Dear Guest, what exactly in my post you found to be anti dharma.Iam giving the background to the glorious struggle of more than a thousand years put up by the Hindus.it is also necessary to ensure that we look at our mistakes critically and in an objective way,so that we do not become slaves again through the same mistakes. I am the only one who has pointed out that despite a number of defeats it is we hindus who were victorius and not defeated.What is important is that we do not lose our victory Your irrational anger is more Tamoguni than my post.Despite Gita saying 'Krodhat bahvti snmoha etc.'

I have never come across a more inhuman argument than this.With this kind of view, people will continue to convert to other religions & we will just talk about hinduism.These are views of a man who has not experienced hunger, not understood that religion & god mean compassion and love for others who are in trouble. All vedic & hindu scriptures talk continously about Annadaan[donating food],Vastradaan [donating clothes].There are several rejoinders to a householder not to eat if any one is hungry.In anushasan parva of Mahabharta it is enjoined to the king that if people are hungry then he and everyone else in his kingdom will go to hell. Even the karma theory talks only about good deeds in this life giving you salvation.Good deeds again are looking after the sick,feeding the poor etc. People like you do not deserve salvation & will never be pardoned by krishna. Bhakti philosophy even talks about not letting even a dog go hungry. May lord Shrikrishna give you better Budhi to realise that seva is godliness.

Guest 2, I am not antiShankara ,in fact I am always amazed by his towering intellect.When I am reading his Shakarbhashya I am just overwhelmed by his arguments.His mastery over the rhetoric is astounding.Also when I read Pantanjali yogsutra with commentery by Vedvysa and critic by Shankara I understood the sutras for the first time as sutras by themselves are very cryptic. However I do not look at history as for anyone or anti any one .I try to study history in an impartial way.Even greats made mistakes at times or we may not understand the resoning behind their actions.Regarding supports for my arguments I will post list of references soon.

There is no problem to speak of demons or evil beings who perhaps operate just under the surface of our world.The problem is when you call them Asuras.The vedic or puranic term for such beings is Rakshash or Pishach and not Asuras.I was pointing out this inaccuracy.

I have visited four of these Nadi experts.Following are my comments. Your past is very accurate as the information is extracted telepathically from your own mind.The future is a guesswork and is sometimes true but most of the time false.The shock to the person trying to get his Jyotish is due to uncanny reading of your own mind due to which you become a believer.[All swamis and godmen use the same method.] I had taken one old Sanskrit and a clasical Tamil expert , they could not make head or tail of the script .The concerned people will always have not more than a few hundred strips with them. The problem is with us who are stupid instead of fighting a problem try for a quick fix in a temple ,with a guru or swami, or we go to an astrologer. The entire society has this sickness of giving up when faced with a problem. God will always listen to you ,you do not need a middleman.

India is the only country which has resisted & defeated the muslims after a struggle lasting more than a thousand years. Contrary to the popular misconception India did not have Muslim rule for thusand years. Some parts of India had msuslim rule for 100/200 years some for 800 years & some for nil. Contrary to the popular opinion hindus fought every inch of the way. The real story, however, begins with Hajjaj Bin Yusuf who was Governor of Iraq. The story of Arab merchants returning from Ceylon to Basra having been looted by Sindhi pirates is well-known. It is related that some of the women who were being carried away by the pirates implored Hajjaj to rescue them. Hajjaj took serious notice of the incident and wrote to Dahir, the ruler of Sind, for the release of captives as well as the goods which were being sent to the caliphate as presents by the ruler of Ceylon. Not receiving a favourable reply, Hajjaj, with the permission of Caliph Walid, sent a force to Debal under the command of Abdulla bin Nabhan. This force was annihilated by Dahir's army and its commander killed in battle. Again, Hajjaj sent a bigger expedition to Debal, to oppose which Dahir sent his son Jaisia with a fairly large contingent. For the second time Arabs were defeated and their commander Badil bin Tuhfa killed in action at Debal. Before Mohammad Bin Qasim's arrival here, Rajputs were the ruling race in Sind and in the rest of northern India. The last Rajput ruler of Sind was Raja Sahasi II whose dominions extended up to Kashmir. He was a contemporary of Prophet Mohammad and professed Buddhism as did his father Siharus. The rule of Raja Sahasi II ended in 632 A.D. the year Prophet Mohammad died. He was succeeded by his Brahmin chamberlain, Chach, who had become a favourite of Sahasi's wife. Chach ruled over Sind for about 68 years from 632-700 A.D. His son Dahir was the ruler when Mohammad Bin Qasim arrived here in 711 A.D. The line of rulership before Islam runs thus: Siharus, Sahasi II, Chach, Dahir. The first two were Buddhist Rajputs and the last two Hindu Brahmins. The new Brahmin rulers were extremely hostile towards the Buddhists who were in substantial numbers in Sind at that time and they had ruthlessly suppressed the Jats and Meds who formed the bulk of the peasantry. Humiliating conditions were imposed on the Jats depriving them of many civil rightsIt was because of this background that Mohammad Bin Qasim received cooperation from the Buddhists as well as the Jats and Meds during his campaign in Sind. Among others who did not oppose Mohammad Bin Qasim's advance and made peace with him was the Bhutto tribe. In fact he was hailed as deliverer by several sections of local population. The humble position of the Buddhists in Sind seeking support from outside can be read in the Chach Nama. In Sind the recall of Mohammad Bin Qasim was followed by a Hindu reaction and rebellion which almost wiped out the results of the first victories. When Hakam bin Awanah was appointed Governor of Sind, he found that the natives had rebelled and apostasized.The Muslim reule in India was thus at astandstill for the next 200 years After conquering Turkey and Kabul the Arabs fixed their gaze on Kashmir in the middle of the 8th century. During the middle of this era the Arab Chieftains attempted, many times, to trample Kashmir but they licked dust because of the powerful Kashmiri emperors and chivalrous soldiers. Kashmiris not only put up fierce resistance but defeated the invaders.Everytime they returned without any success. In 713 Emperor of Kashmir, Chandrapeed, defeated Mohd. Bin Qasim. Second time Emperor Lalitaditya defeated the Arab Chietain, Hisham, in 724 and finally in 754 one Arab Chieftain, Kalif Mansoor, set his foot on Kashmir but had to return aftering tasting defeat. The same way Mohd. Gaznavi witnessed defeat twice at the hands of Kashmiris and fled to Gazni and never came to Kashmir, thereafter. The Hindushahi dynasty in Kabul,Peshawar[Purush war] held further muslim encroachments at bay for more than 200 years. This contribution of the hindushahi dynasty is not acknowledged.The Hindushahi Raja Jaipal was successful in building up a vast empire extending from Sirhind to Lamghan with Bhatinda its capital. After establishing its firm sway over Afghanistan, the new Turkish regime entered into armed clashes with Hindushahi Jaipal of the Punjab. The struggle between the two powers lasted several decades. In or about A.D. 991, Jaipal organised a confederacy of Hindu Kings, to ward off the growing Muslim menace, but failed in his endeavour. However, Trilochan Pal of this dynasty who ruled from A.D. 1012 to 1021 restored some of the prestige of the dynasty. He shifted his capital from Bhatinda to Sirhind. Thus Sirhind acquired the honour of being the capital and first city of the Hindushahis. But the Hindushahi rulers could not stand against the incessant invasions of Mahmud Ghazanvi who made as many as seventeen attacks on India. Ghaznavi's path lay through Punjab and this part of our country was laid waste by the hordes of plunderers. The Hindu Kingdom of Shahiya which ruled Punjab at that time was completely extinguished. From such conditions of chaos created by the continuous onslaughts of the Mohammadan invaders and especially those of Mahmud of Ghazanavi, the Rajputs rose to power after the fall of the Hindushahis in the Punjab. The Chauhans first ruled in Ajmer but it appeared that by A.D. 1164 they had occupied Delhi as well as the entire tract of territory lying between it and the Satluj. Sirhind and Bathinda constituted the two most important military stations on the north western frontier of the Rajput Kingdom. Shihabuddin Muhammad Ghori (A.D. 1186-1206) brother of the sultan of Ghor, he was made governor of Ghazni in 1173 and from there launched a series of invasions of India. By 1186 he had conquered the Muslim principalities in the Punjab. He was severely defeated by the Rajputs under Prithvi Raj in 1191, However he defeated and killed Prithviraj Chauhan, the last illustrious king of this dynasty the next year i.e.1192. As a result of this, not only Sirhind but also the entire territory up to Delhi passed under control of the Turks. With the defeat of Prithvi Raj Chauhan at the hands of Muhammad Ghori in A.D. 1192 at Tarain, Punjab entered a new chapter of History, during which the Hindus had to face subjugation, intimidation, humiliation and hardship. At times the persecution led to total destruction of villages. The Delhi sultans tried to convert Hindus & put the people through untold amount of hardship. However Hindus kept fighting & resisting .Orissa,and parts of Bihar and Assam did not pass under Muslim rule for a considerable period of time. Rajputs & Parmars then retreated to Rajputana & were never ever subjugated by Muslims, only when Akbar the great used guile and made them join forces with him were Rajputs under a Muslim king.Even then the Rajput Kingdoms were more or less independent. Muslim sultans were never safe. They faced continued opposition from the Hindu majority who rebelled against their conquerors. Malik Kafur reached and captured Warangal, later on reaching the Malabar kingdoms. Mubarak of Delhi reached Warangal again in 1323. Between 1334 and 1336, Muhammad Tughlaq of Delhi again overran the region, capturing AnegondiIn about 1510, Both Harihar and Bukka founders of Vijaynagara kingdom were captured, converted to Islam And taken to Delhi as children. However they escaped, came back to the south .Swami Vidyaranya converted them back to Hinduism and inspired them to found Hindu kingdom of Vijaynagar.This was again a glorious chapter . The Vijaynagar empire is generally considered to have reached its peak during the rule of Krishna Deva Raya. Krishna conquered or subjugated territories on the east of the Deccan that belonged previously to Orissa. Many of the great monuments of the empire date from his time. He was followed by Achyuta Raya in 1530. In 1542, Achyuta was succeeded by Rama (of the third dynasty), who seems to have made a point of defying & provoking the Deccan sultanates, so that eventually they allied against him. In 1565, at the battle of Talikota, the army of Vijayanagara was routed by an alliance of the Deccan sultanates. The Muslim armies proceeded to raze the capital virtually to the ground. The Raya fled south to Penukonda. Within 50 years of the end of Vijaynagar you have Shivaji & Marathas rebelling & establishing hindu kingdom. Marathas in fact defeated Mughals during Aurangjeb’s lifetime.Aurangjeb admitted this during his last days. The Sikhs ,rajputs ,jats etc. immediately rushed in and overthrew muslim rule within 80 years from the death of Aurangjeb.When the British firmed their rule the majority of the Rajahs were hindus. This is a continued history of dogged resistance & victory culimanating in 1971 Bangladesh war which no other country can claim against the muslims .Through out the muslim rule there were hundreds of smaller states which were with the Hindus.Hindus took a savage battering over the centuries but rose again & again.

How come every one is so quiet,I expected a lot of reactions.Guest2,barney,Maadhav,Sephiroth,Jay74, where are you all?

The roots of Yoga are buried deep in the Samkhya (pronounced song-khya) tradition, and the roots of the Samkhya tradition is buried deep in the Shasti-Tantra, an ancient tantrik text long since lost to antiquity. At that time the word ‘yoga’ was not associated with the physical exercises we normally think of when we hear the word today, but the word ‘yoga’ instead referred to a specific meditation method based on sensory isolation. Yoga in Samkhya terms means the temporary suspension or arrest of all sensory activity done knowingly and willingly, and at this point we have the formal basis of the Samkhya Yoga tradition and what will in time become the cornerstone of the Raja Yoga tradition some two millennia later. From a Samkhya-Shastra (Science of Discrimination) viewpoint, people have both a physical body and a soul. First the physical body is born, and the soul is left to experience life vicariously via the proxy of the physical. After practicing the daily-prescribed method of meditation, the soul is then granted its own Life and Life Experiences to augment the physical life experiences. The metamorphosis of the human soul from that of being dependent on the physical body for its existence to being solely dependent on the Cosmic Core of Life is Yoga. This newly found independent existence for the soul constitutes a second-birth {Samadhi]to complement the physical birth, a birth into spirit per se, and once the second birth occurs it continues with or without the continued practice of the meditation that produced it. Thus the second birth establishes a permanent state of Emancipation or Kaivalya for said persona. Moreover, if the soul undergoes the second birth of Kaivalya, and is thus no longer dependent solely upon physicality, when the physical body does eventually succumb to its inevitable end then the soul lives on via its spiritual body. Early man recognised that a woman and man need to unite in order to produce that is why copulation in a freshly ploughed field was considered to be good for a bountiful harvest.They also knew that a man is needed for production of progeny but apart from copulation they could not see any role for a man .Hence the concept of 'PURUSH-PRAKRITI' . The Samkhya-Karika describes the spiritual body of the persona or purusha, a In essence the purusha-persona is a mere witness to creation, a creation whose sole purpose for existence is to serve said persona.The purush is nirguna & passive,Prakriti carries out all the activity.This shows Tantric origin of Samkhya philisophy.In vedantic terms Adi shakaracharya converted the same concept to elusive ,female MAYA and Male, eternal,passive BRAMHA. The second manuscript is the Yoga Sutras, which is a detailed instruction manual for the unique meditation method utilized by Samkhya Yoga and is generously interlaced with legalese from the Manu-Smriti (Laws of Manu). The Yoga Sutras even go so far as to state that it is a ‘deed and legal document’ which today’s culture would recognize as a patent. Although the term ‘legal document’ was undoubtedly meant to be taken figuratively, the instructions are so specific and the concepts so conclusive For almost thousand years Samkhya reigned unimpeded before they encountered their first disaster, so to speak. Adi Shankara accused Samkhya of abandoning its religious roots because the Samkhya-Karika is also an abridgement of the more expansive fore mentioned Shasti-Tantra, it is also plausible that Shankaracharya suspected Samkya to be Tantric,which he was trying to stamp out with it's sex worship.He therefore tried to stamp out Samkhya Yoga as well. Others of that period stated that the Shasti-Tantra was in fact a treatise on yoga, but the word ‘yoga’ was nowhere to be found . These possible explanations are made more plausible given that Shankara will go on to found a separate tradition and school of thought called ‘Advaita-Vedanta’, whose philosophy is in fact Samkhya philosophy with some of the legalese replaced with vocabulary from Upanishadic sources, waters from which the Samkhya Yoga tradition had originally emerged and may have even actually helped author. Many of the Samkhya tradition appear to have converted to Shankara’s Advaita-Vedanta viewpoint, perhaps because it was little more than an updated Samkhya Yoga philosophy that had restated its Upanishadic roots. That at least some advocates of Samkhya took his criticisms to heart is evidenced some time later, when the abridged text of Samkya -karika that caused the controversy was reformatted and expanded to include the yoga part A few centuries later came the second disaster. From about the 12th century C.E. onwards Islam was making military and political inroads into the Indian subcontinent. The conquering Muslims were more than adamant about their religious doctrines centered on Allah, the Supreme Creator. Neither Samkhya nor Buddhism accepted the doctrine of a Supreme Creator, and go to great lengths to discredit such beliefs. What the Muslims considered the sacred and unquestionable revelation in the form of the Koran, both Samkhya and Buddhism would regard as philosophy and fair game in public debate. Moreover, both Buddhism and Samkhya were major cohesive forces in the political-military landscape, and more so than any religious reasons, it was probably this that led to their ultimate demise. Over the next three hundred years almost everything associated with either Samkhya or Buddhism will have disappeared from India’s soil, beginning in 1199 C.E. with the destruction of a major Buddhist University. The only traditions that survived to practice their traditions openly also remade themselves into an image that was politically correct for the new regime, in that the surviving philosophies were reformatted to support a belief in either monotheism or qualified polytheism rooted in monotheism. Non-theist systems such as the Samkhya-Shastra or even Advaita-Vedanta that existed prior to the 15th century C.E. were reinterpreted by the surviving traditions, and non-theist doctrines that were too explicit to be reinterpreted were censured as errors. Some followers of the reformed Vedanta will go so far as to denounce even Shankara and his teachings as Samkhya in disguise, and to make these denunciations even though Shankara was in fact Vedanta’s founder . Buddhism was a missionary movement with established centers in Thailand, Tibet and even China; hence their traditions and lineages continued to survive. Regrettably Samkhya was never a missionary movement, and the only surviving remnants we have are those preserved ironically by it's opponents . Much as the newly created Raja Yoga tradition is based on the same text as its Samkhya predecessor however, the version of the Yoga Sutras that was utilized in its nurturing was edited to be in accordance with established beliefs of nineteenth century mainstream religious traditions.

'6000 years gone,4000years left.' This reminds me of joke, One scientist was discusing about Sun and eventual death of our Sun.He said "do you know that our Sun will be gone in 3billion years and so will be earth."Suddenly there was a worried shout from the back."How many years?Three bilion"said the scientist. The questioner said in a very,very relieved tone "Thank god , I sincerely thought 3 million.I am OK now." The moral of the joke is my dear guest, there are thousands of destitute people who do not have enough to eat fot the next day,stop worrying about what will happen after 4000 years & save these people from hunger,illness ,poverty. If you do that I can tell you as a direct message from your Bhagwan that your soul will OK after 4000 years.Got it? /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/laugh.gif /images/graemlins/tongue.gif <font color="blue"> </font color>

The asuras are usually called demons, but this is not a terribly good translation, for it denotes a sinister quality which is not always in the character of these beings. Strictly speaking, the asuras are the powerful beings who are opposed to the devas. In Hindu mythology, the Asura are a group of power-seeking deities, sometimes misleadingly referred to as demons. They were opposed to the devas. Both groups are children of Kashyapa. The name is cognate to Aesir,Ahura which implies a common Proto-Indo-European origin for the Asura and the Aesir. The negative character of the asura in Hinduism seems to have evolved over time. In general, the earliest texts have the asuras presiding over moral and social phenomena (e.g. Varuna, the guardian of rta, or Bhaga, the patron of marriages) and the devas presiding over natural phenomena (e.g. Ushas, whose name means "dawn", or Indra, a weather god). Mitra, Varuna and Vritra are the most well known Asuras. Asura was also another nonvedic school of philosophy which used to believe in 'DEHA-ATMAN WAAD' i.e. you body and soul are one and in order to look after the soul one must look after one's body.They also believed transmigration of Jiva.Asur yagnya used to differ from vedic yagnya in the fact that AAHUTI i.e. sacrificial offering instead of giving it to AGNI i.e. fire it was directly placed in to one'mouth under the chanting of mantras.'MAHAPRASADAM' i.e. placing food infront of a deity and then eating of the same by all present is a curious relic of Asur yagnya.

In Sanskrit 'agama' means acquisition of knowledge. In terms of religious sources, the Agamas are as important as the Vedas. They are also not derived from the Vedas. The Agamas are manuals of divine worship. They deal with such topics as the codes of temple building, image making, and the modes of worship. Saivism, Vaishnavism and Shaktism have their own respective Agamas.A majority of Agamas deal with Tantric worship. Saivism recognizes 28 principal Agamas and 150 sub agamas. Some of them date back to 2nd Century AD. Various schools of Saivism such as the the Saiva Siddhantha school, Tamil Saivism, Kashmiri Saivism and Vira Saivism follow these texts and base their religious activity upon them. The most prominent agama text in Saivism is the Kamika. These texts consider Siva as the Supreme Ruler of the Universe, the Highest Self, the Conscious Principle while Shakti is regarded as the unconscious or the natural principle who is the cause of bondage. The union of Shakti with Siva at the highest level leads to the freedom of the soul (pasu) from the Pasa or the attachment.This is about sexual union The Followers of Shaktism follow 27 Agamas also called Tantras. Shaktism considers the Mother Goddess as the Supreme Self and relegates Iswara, the Divine Father, to a secondary position. In Shaktism the Divine Mother is both the cause of delusion (maya) and the source of liberation. Shaktism gave birth to the practice of Tantric forms of worship which were not generally acceptable to the followers of Vedic methods of worship. The Agamas of Shaktism deal with magical and occult knowledge, besides mechanical, ritualistic, devotional and spiritual aspects of Tantric forms of worship The Vaishnava Agamas are grouped into four categories namely the Vaikhanasa, Pancharatra, Pratishthasara and Vijnanalalita. Of these, the Vaishanavites consider the Pancharatra Agama as the most important (Swami Sivananda). These Agamas are believed to have been revealed by Narayana Himself. The Pancharatra Agama is again subdivided into seven sub agamas namely, the Brahma, Saiva, Kaumara, Vasishtha, Kapila, Gautamiya and the Naradiya. The Pancharatra Agamas consider Vishnu as the Supreme Lord of the Universe and devotion to Vishnu as the sure path to liberation. According to another opinion, the Vaikhanasagama is the most ancient and most important Agama and all the Agamas practically and literally copied all their information from this sacred Agama. It is believed that the Vaikhanasa Agama was originally compiled under the guidance of sage Vaikhanasa during the early Vedic period. Sri Madhavacharya held Pancharatra texts in high esteem and equated them with the Vedas and the epics, while Sri Shankaracharya had a different opinion. Shakracharya always tried to stamp out Tantric riuals & sex worship. According to Tantric classification the Agamas are five types namely:Sakta Agamas, Soura Agamas, Ganapatya Agamas, Saiva Agamas and Vaikhanasa Agamas.These are agama which deal with Tantric riuals & sex worship.

Tantric widhi essentially believed that that you could achieve moksha by prolonging the sexual union and orgasm.It had TANTRA i.e. the way or method of it, MANTRA i.e. the holy incantations and YANTRA i.e. using things arranged in a particular way ,for example mantra inscribed on a copper plate and positioned east -west.Present shreeyantra is a relic of that. The basis for tantra is that Bramha is Shaswat Aanand i.e. eternal joy,the same joy is there in a sexual union but it is elusive as it goes away after orgasm or climax.Therefore if one can prolong the union one can achieve moksha. Tantra has it's origin in both Budghism [surprised?] & hinduism.Tantric budhism is known as Vajryan,Mahaayn,Sahajyaan,Kaalcharkayaan.These budhists found Budha in eternal sexual union with Tara. according to the tantric budhism we must forget the world while in the sexual union and make oneself Bodhichitta[budha mind].This sex is anandroop [joy] as well as shantiroop[peace].Even today Tibetian budhism has leftover of this worship. In some of the bhudhist places of learning there were Basements & rooms reserved for studying this. Hindus had several panth or sects doing sex worship such as Kaalmukh,Paashupat,Kaapalic,lakulish,Gaanpatya,shakta, Bhairwanath etc.These are mainly shaivic sects.Khajraho and Konark belong to this part of tantric scluptures. The major textbook on tanric rites is 'TANTRALOK' of Abhinavgupta [10th century A.D.]According to AbhinavguptA a man or woman who in sex forgets self & ego, achieves a sexual union which leads to mokhsa,he or she is the true BRAMHACHARI,[surprise,surprise]All manners of unions between men and women ,multiple sex, sex with relatives etc.is recommended. Tantric pooja is based on five 'M's Madya[liquor],Maans[Meat], Matsya[fish],Maithun[sexual union], Mudra [poses] In tanric pooja Parigraha meaning sexual orgies of every description are described in detail.No union is prohibited.Yoni pooja was common. The whole tanric upasana is horrifying therefore several rulers and kings along with several religious heads tried to stamp it out over hundreds of years,still thwe relics like Shree-yantra[not tantric anymore] survive.The entire hindu society has struggled against this horror for hundreds of years.The experinces during meditation are different from tantric experiences. My request to everyone is stay away from tantric cults .It can lead to destruction of the entire society.I have written all this in such detail so people know the true nature of tantricism.

Why are we so bent on proving that hinduism is the mother of all the religions & everyone has copied from it?This shows inferiority complex.If we are convinced that hinduism is either greatest and/or oldest we can just live with it.A religion can be oldest,but that does not mean anything.Why this futile exercise of catching on to some vague similarity somewhere and then say that such and such has copied from us.All religions all over thw world have copied from each other.Islam has concepts from Judaism & orthodox coptic church.Christanity is based on Judaism.They have not tried to hide it, why should they try to hide hindu roots if any.Hinduism has borrowed the concept on heaven & hell[swarg & narak] from either/or christanity or Islam.We have even borrowed astrology from greeks.There is nothing wrong in such borrowing .It leads to flowering of a religion. Which hinduism is the oldest? Hinduism has been continously changing over it's known history.The way of worship,procedure,leading deitys,philosohpies all have changed/come and gone.Still the religion is hinduism. Gentlemen there are a lot of things we as hindus should be proud of such as metaphysicaldebating,budhism,jainism,Panini's grammer,Aryabhatta's maths,Vatsyayan's kaamsutra,ayurveda.sankhya philosophy etc.We are great on our own not by the virtue of the fact that Christ was krisna. Why are we bending backword to prove bible or Qoran has borrowed from us? The proof is simply not there.What christanity has borrowed from us is the concept of celibate sanyasi & sanyasins[Priests & nuns],importance of clergy etc.When religons borrow from each other they generally [there are exceptions] borrow concepts or practices rather than individual books.Let people come to hinduism because it is a better religion or rather a way of living,not because it is oldest or others have copied from it. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

A very good and balanced reply,Guest 2. Keep it up, -----ajit12