animesh

Puru Das wrote: If someone tries to describe Him as being of blackish complexion, the next adjective, "tvisakrsnam" immediately restricts him. His complexion is certainly not blackish.Indeed, His not being blackish indicates that his complexion is golden. I disagree with you. The word "tvisakrsnam" says that lustre is not black. It does not saay that colour is not black. Colour and lustre are two different things. So, there is no contradiction if we say that "krsnavrnam" means "of blackish complexion".

Shvu, Chandragupt Maurya is mentioned in Bhagwatam.

Very often we talk about respecting one's religion. What do we mean by that? As I have found, people think that if they call their religion as the only correct religion and criticize all other religions, then they have great respect for their religion. Please tell me. How many of these people really follow the teachings of their religion. A large no. of them are content with just following some of the rituals. In Bhagwad Gita (and other Hindu scriptures also), there are many verses which tell us how one should behave. How many of the Hindus who claim to be proud of being Hindu really do what these verses tell them to do? This question can be asked not only to Hindus but to people of other religions as well. The phrase "respect for one's religion" is very often used as an euphemism.

Rakesh, I am not saying that it is OK if someone tries to hurt the sentiments of Hindus. It is bad if someone hurts the sentiments of Hindus. Also, it is bad if Hindus hurt the sentiments of others. I remember that in one thread jndas ji posted an email sent to him by a Christian priest who believed that non-Christians were deluded. My replies in that thread showed that I took exception to his calling Hindus as deluded. Now, please tell me:- If somebody writes anything against Hinduism then I take umbrage. But, if Hindus write anything against others, then I do not consider it bad. Do you think it will be fair if I do this? I do not agree that freedom of expression should be taken to such an extreme that we start hurting sentiments of others. I agree with you that very often the word "secularism" is used in a biased sense. But the reason is completely political, or to be more specific, to gain more votes.

Rakesh, The contents of both the sites (the one whose link is provided by Rakesh and the one whose link is provided by you) are extremely bad. Just because we are Hindus, it will not be fair if we think that non-Hindus have no right to write anything against Hinduism but Hindus have evry right to write whatever they feel like against other religions.

Jagat ji, Let me make one confession. When I found that you had sent Atma ji's story to VNN, then I thought that inspite of being so old (much elder than I am), you are so naughty. I was also thinking that if I was not younger than you, then I would find you out and twist your ears for this. Anyway, now I know why you wanted that story to appear in VNN. Sorry.

Rahim wrote, "Rahiman nijman ki bithaa mana hi raahko goye Suni adhilaihein log sab, baant na laihein koye" i.e. "Keep your problems within your heart. People will just laugh on listening to these. Nobody will share." There are different kind of people. Some really feel like helping others on knowing their problem and some are so stone-hearted that they make fun. So, it is true that it is dangerous for one to tell one's problems to public at large. But that does not mean that one should never tell one's problems to anyone. Many times it happens that we are very sad at heart for some reason. We just want to tell our problems to someone. It is not that we want others to help us. We just want them to listen. Even if they just listen to us without offering any help, we feel relieved. When people tell their problems to me, then I do not take this as an opportunity to make fun of them. It hurts me a lot when I come to know that my statements have hurt someone, even if unknowingly. When people share their problems with me, then I feel very close to them. I feel that they consider me as their well-wisher and not some stranger and that's why they are sharing their problems with me. I have met many kinds of people in this world. I understand that there are many instances which show that women are really treated very badly. But, it sometimes happens that even if somebody is genuinely concerned about some woman, she does not trust him. But it can not continue for ever. One day she has to trust someone. Then, she starts trusting those who take advantage of her. I know one such lady myself. Since she kept on listening to those who did not care for her and did not listen to the person who was genuinely concerned, her future was really going to be completely spoiled, but she was saved for two reasons: 1. The person who cared about her became very tough with those who were misleading her, even though it was dangerous for him. 2. Once that lady was in trouble. Then, all those who were pretending to be her well-wisher left her. Only the person who was really concerned helped her. Of course, he was very much angry with her but at the same time he did not want any harm for her. Now, she is completely changed.

Maitreya ji, You are right. The word "twisakrsnam" means "not black in lustre". But it does not mean "not black in colour". Read the very first word of the verse. The verse is "krsnavarnam" which means "of black colour". So, the verse says "of black colour but not black in lustre" or in other words "of dark complexion and bright lustre".

"Pardon my ignorance, but what language did Krishna speak in the historical Vindiraban?" May be He spoke C#?

"Pardon my ignorance, but what language did Krishna speak in the historical Vindiraban?" May be He spoke C#?

Puru Das Adhikari wrote: "In the age of Kali, intelligent persons perform congregational chanting to worship the incarnation of Godhead who constantly sings the name of Krsna. Although His complexion is not blackish, He is Krsna himself. He accompanied by His associates, servants, weapons and confidential companions." Does the verse really say "Although His complexion is not blackish?" or does it say "Whose complexion is blackish?" Where is the Sanskrit equivalent of "not" in the verse?

In the last few days I have read many posts in this thread which talk of helping others. This started me wondering as to how many people help others just because somebody is in need. A large no. of times, help is provided to gain publicity or because we expect something in return from those whom we help or because somebody forces us to do so. I have seen many instances in which a person was in need. Some of those close to him knew about his problem but acted as if they did not know. When the bad days of that person were over or when it was too late to do anything, then the same people started telling him, "Why didn't you ask us for help? We always care for you. You should have told us." If we are really concerned about somebody, should not we be helping them even if they do not ask us for help? If we are waiting for him to request us to provide help, then it shows our ego and not our helping attitude. I have also witnessed cases in which one person (say A) took some help from somebody known to him (some relative, say B). Of course, the help was provided. But, now B started thinking that A was inferior to him. He as well as others in his family tried to insult A in front of others whenever they could. They even thought that just because they helped somebody, the latter had to lead his life as they wanted him to do. Just because we help somebody, does it mean that he does not have any right to decide for himself what he should be doing? When somebody is in need, then people in his relation start thinking, "If I do not help him, what will the society say?" And if they find that, according to society, they had no obligation to help that person, then they pretend not to know that person's problems. Even if somebody in their family decide to help, then they say, "Don't be a saint. Who is he to you?" Is it necessary that we help somebody only because we are afraid of society? It also happens that, in the past, if somebody helped another person, then he will keep on reminding the latter about the help. Not only that, it also happens that if one person helped another sometime in past, then the children of the former will always remind about this incident to the children of the latter. Isn't it extreme form of ego? This post may not be directly related to theism but I am just thinking out loud.

In Puranas, the same word is used as both common noun as well as proper noun. This is something like using the word Sankaracarya. When we use this word, then we usually mean Adi Sankaracarya. But, we also use this word to refer to present Sankaracaryas. In that sense Sankaracarya is both a person as well as a post.

Shvu wrote: My previous post on this thread, vanished after some time. Cheers Now, do you believe in miracles?

Shvu wrote: My previous post on this thread, vanished after some time. Cheers Now, do you believe in miracles?

WOW! This thread has reached its third page

WOW! This thread has reached its third page

Whenever I make a long post or I use HTML/UBB code, then I first click on Preview to make sure that everything is proper. I do whatever editing I need. Then only I click on Submit Reply button.

Many years back, some physicists including Prof. Sudarshan (yes, name is same ) gave the theory of tachyons which can move faster than light in vacuum but at the same time, they do not violate the theory of relativity. Such particles have still not been confirmed. Also, the word "lepton" is not new in Physics. Leptons are a class of particles the most well known of which is electron. Muons also belong to this group. And NO, they do not travel faster than light can travel in vacuum.

A very interesting exercise: Try imagining the time when nothing was there. Not even space. I tried but did not succeed.

Are you trying to say that nothing is impossible? I read somewhere, "Don't ever say that 'nothing' is impossible. I have been doing nothing all my life."

It is turmeric.

What if you don't have a beloved?

Yes, I came to know this a few years back. A few years back, I went to NGRI (National Geophysical Research Institute, Hyderabad) to attend a seminar. People from various parts of world had come there. I met one geologist from Fiji. He told me about the pronunciation that you have mentioned. PS: Animesh is NOT pronouned as Drummeraga.

May be because Satyaraja thinks that you are always singing? Talasinga is made up of taal and sing. Taal is used in dancing. One who sings as well as dances beautifully (i.e. with proper taal) is talasinga.