REASWARAN

I am sorry if this came out as an indictment of Westerners- I did not mean it to be so- I have spent time in the west too. No what I was trying to say is that in the ultimate sense, the vedanta does not encompass any personal gods. God in the vedanta tradition is an non active state- the state of equilibruim. In such a state since there are no desires, there is no force of Rajas and hence no sorrow. This is a concept you will find not only in Hinduism but also in Buddhist philosopy. The references to Gods and heavens in the scriptures should be taken to mean only as illustrative of the way to nirvana and is given only to indicate a measure of the happiness found in the state of nirvana. It would be as much true I suppose of the heaven and hell of christianity - the visualisations are only for explaining concepts and are not the concept themselves.

If we see the universe as we know it, we can see that there are millions of planets hurtling around thousands of Suns and moreover have been doing so for thousands of year. The laws on the planet that we live on are laid down with such perfect accuracy that it is a very credulous person who will lay it down to chance. If we are willing to ascribe intelligence to the maker of the watch, why are we so unwilling to ascribe a maker to the maker of the watch and this world ? I am always amazed when friends talk of this world coming into being my chance when they would not for a moment think that a motor car can come into being by chance.

Thanks old boy. Useful site.

The body is the instrument you need to transcend the mind just as the car is the instrument you need to get to office or elsewhere. You keep your car in good shape so why should you not extend the same courtesy to your body ? If it is of any comfort to you - Patanjali who is considered the father of yoga has included Asanas as his third part of his eight part approach to realisation.

There's an ad doing the rounds these days which sums up things fairly neatly- it shows a chap eating Chocolates and drinking coke- when asked why he says the coke will kill the worms !

You do not see at all, my friend. You see in my sentence re Arjuna and Krishna due to a typo I had omitted "no" the sentence should have been "no more real than Krishna". You did not catch the innate contradiction- So perhaps we should terminate this discussion- it is a pointless one

No, I am not associated with the kriya lineage. However, I have studied yoga under more than one school. Kriya has different meanings in different schools- for example in the Hatha Yoga tradition (Svatmaram) there is a reference to Shatkarma which literally means six actions- These are the six body cleansing kriyas (actions) prescribed. Take the Bihar School of Yoga- there kriya yoga is a detailed process of asanas, pranayam, mantras etc. In an unsupervised practice of any of these kriyas - there is danger of severe and sometimes irreparable damage to the human body or mind. I can give a first hand exmple of this- one of my Uncles picked up a book on Pranayam and started practising - after some time it became impossible for him to eat- literally nothing would go down his throat. Luckily in this case , after being taken to a yoga teacher, he was able to recover- he never practised any yoga after that !

I am afraid you do not follow. You see Arjuna is more real than Krishna - They are all manifestations of the same truth -it is this truth that you are searching for- for in the stage of the truth -there are no aspirations - which may sound strange to you- but compare it with a stage of contentment when you have fulfilled some desire and you will know what I mean. The individual is all important in the west , but the eastern mind understands the insignificance of the individual

Not to my knowledge. But there are references to non vegetarian sacrificial food in the scriptures. On the whole however, since the taking of life would cause an unwholesome karmic reaction, perhaps it is best to avoid as far as possible. However to take that argument to its logical conclusion, we should even avoid plant life-so perhaps because of our human birth, a line need to be drawn somewhere.

Good question !. The answer is pretty simple actually but also terribly complex- before I end up sounding like a riddle let me explain:- The principle of the Upanishads -which are generally called the Vedanta- literally end of the Veda...Ved being knowledge- is represented by the vedic imperative "TAT TVAM ASI" meaning "YOU ARE THAT" The THAT stands for the power which created and maintains the universe- which we call God ..Jesus...Krishna ..Allah etc. However, the Upanishads just refer to it as Brahman- this incidentally is not the same as Brahma who is a God. Brahman represents the cosmic power which has created and is maintaining this universe. So what the Upanishads tell you is that in the ultimate analysis you are no different from Brahman. The fact that you are not your body or your brain or even your mind can be easily tested- When you say "I" just think over what you are referring to ? Is it the body or the intellect or the mind ? Or is it not something else which uses these faculties ? This something else is the power that drives the body .. the TAT of the quote. The aim of all scriptures is to help you realise this- realise God, be one with God etc are the words used. There are various ways, karma yoga, Bhakti yog, Jnana yog etc but the easiest is a combination of all these migrating towards renunciation as you grow older. If you need anything more please email me at reas@vsnl.com- will be more than glad to help.

Eating habits are largely dictated by social circumstances. In the vedic times, for example ,it was usual to serve sacrificial meat. The change towards vegtarianism has its origins in teachers like Buddha ,Mahavira etc. If one can avoid meat without any undue craving it is well and good, otherwise perhaps one should accept it as part of your life or relocate to a vegetarian society.

The vedantic quote is only illustrative of the divine nature of all humans (even if we dont demonstrate it most of the times). Those of you who are familiar with the Geeta will remember that the final aim of all yogic practices is union with God- the word used is Self- being the real nature of all humans. Hence the statement matro devo bhava, pitra devo bhava, athithi devo bhava - The mother is God, the father is God, the guest is God etc. It is in the nature of illustration of the divine principle. however, I dont think it extends to tolerating an insulting behaviour towards your wife- you could always push him out and make it clear that he is unwelcome. Athithi also implies that the Athithi will conduct himself as a guest. If he does not he no longer remains an Athithi and you are entitled to deal with him as you would deal with an enemy. The Gita does not expect you to be a weakling but a strong person compassionate to the weak and capable of defending those in his care. Trust this helps.

Interesting discussion. I know a guy who goes to the temple regularly every single day - and promptly afterwards goes around to his shop where he sells bad quality goods for inflated prices- he has a glib tongue -this guy. Another aquaintaince makes an effort to help whosoever he can in whatsoever way he can with his limited means - but he helps. Unfortunately he visits the temples only rarely. Who would u rate higher ?

To be able to practice Ky with any benefit, one needs to learn from a proper teacher. Parmahansa's techniques are taught at several centres- if you tell us where u are, perhaps we can locate a center close to you. I certainly would not advise you to learn from any book- if available. The autobiography you will notice does not give specifics of the technique and this omission I believe is intentional to prevent the uninitiated from harm.

I believe the source is the Tattriya Upanishads

A neat bit of semantics. But it begs the question - can the creator be defined by a neat bit of jugglery with words or an equation ? I think not. Let us consider what we mean by the term God. If we grant that it is taken to represent some universal force which is responsible for creation, maintenance and destruciton of the universe- call it what u will - God, Brahman, Jesus, these are only labels, then comes a basic question - it it possible for us to understand a power which is responsible for our existence ? Let us seek refuge in the scriptures- what do the Kena Upansishads say ?- Understand it (God) to be that(power/cause) which makes the eyes to see, the ears to hear, the mind to think .... Understand that to be Brahman and not what u worship. Poignant words indeed ! It recognises that we worship what we understand and it does not tell us not to do so but definitely indicates to us the futility of such worship. What further lessons are there ? It tells us that it is not possible for us to understand the creator by using the organs of perception which requires his power to work. The way is beyond -it is said - on another plane - u can reach the plane using any of the paths preached by our scriptures- all have one common thread- to reach inside oneself using a process of introspection called meditation. This knowledge of God is only to be expereinced and cannot be described in words. The knowledge is obtained only when the mind is quietened - which brings us back to the beginning of this post- proof is required of that which cannot be expereinced- All the explanations in the world will not really tell what an electric shock feels like- But put your finger in a socket and I'll wager you'll never ask for proof of the existence of electricity. I know it is not a very good analogy - but it illustrates why discourses on existence or non existence of God are exercises in futility.