Meaning of Happiness

[Guest guest]

Namaste Chittaranjanji.

 

Your post 21293.

 

Well, please contrast Buddha's pain with GitA verse 2.11, which says:

 

"You are grieved about those about whom you need not grieve and talk

like the wise. Those who discern do not worry about those who have

departed and those who still remain".

 

I know how painful it is to lose dear and near ones. I prefer the

GiTA in this context to the pain-ridden samsArA of Buddha.

 

I remember I laid stress in my previous post that pain exists only as

long as we identify with our body, mind, intellect and roles. Having

declared all of them impermanent (anicca), I am a little baffled why

Buddhism worries about what results from them, i.e. pain (dukkha), so

much. May be because it sees that dukkha can catalyze the urge for

liberation. In that case, isn't it better to be an advaitin like me

with an ishtadEvata representing Consciousness who can be endlessly

called for help when dukkha manifests?

 

Due to my other commitments, I am not able to keep pace with you all

in the discussions. Thanks to Sunderji for quoting several sources

to underscore the right understanding of pain in vEdAnta.

 

I hope what I have written answers Benji's post to me too.

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

______________________

 

 

advaitin, "Chittaranjan Naik"

<chittaranjan_naik> wrote:

..........

I would like to ask what happens to people when they

> are blinded to Her presence in this world? Doesn't it then become

sad

> and painful? I think it is this truth that the Budhha was speaking

> about when he said that this world is painful.

>

> You ask to be told where that unhappiness is and where is the pain

> that Buddha found. I will do that, for I am presently given over to

a

> mood of sadness, to a deep quality of sadness that pervades this

> entire world of samsara. ..............

[Guest guest]

Namaste Chittranjanji.

 

Further to my post 21310.

 

Here is a consoling thought in the context of our losing dear and

near ones.

 

The time around 1989. There was this colleague of mine who had an

epileptic daughter – an angelic being mentally retarded due to the

disease and severe medication. The father was very fond of her.

 

For some reason, when she had grown up to nine years of age, the

doctors had to withdraw the medications for a short while. The fits

then aggravated and the girl died due to cardiac arrest.

 

I had expected her passing away to be a relief for the much harrowed

father. But, to my consternation, I found him completely lost,

desperate and abysmally anguished. No words could console him – the

child was so dear to him despite its much inconveniencing illness.

 

That set me thinking and I knew that that child would have died even

otherwise as we have all `died' our childhood, teenage and youth.

What was the man then trying to cling to? Even if she hadn't passed

away, she would nevertheless have `died' every moment to perhaps grow

up to be a full-blown nasty female to cause him much pain in so

many different ways in his last days of physical and mental

infirmity.

 

And, where did that child come from? She wasn't there in 1979. The

father wasn't unhappy then. An everchanging and,therefore, an *ever-

dying* thing just popped up some time in 1980. A relationship

flowered. It was just a role and that created all the misery when it

ended, as all roles should naturally end, in 1989. The world,

indeed, is Buddha's anicca (impermanence) in full swing!

 

The father's kArmic background had warranted the birth of the girl

and the generation of the new role. He was thus creating the whole

scenario himself. The child rose from him and subsided in him at the

end like a wave on ocean surface. He didn't lose her. She went

back to his bosom wherefrom she had originated. She is in him, as

him, ever inseparate.

 

All our dear ones are therefore in us. They don't go anywhere. They

seem to depart simply because they seem to pop up. The stronger this

conviction, the lesser the pain. We can then heave in oceanic

fullness. GItA verse 2.11 acquires added significance if viewed at

from this angle.

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Nairji,

 

<<I had expected her passing away to be a relief for the much harrowed father.

But, to my consternation, I found him completely lost, desperate and abysmally

anguished. No words could console him – the child was so dear to him despite

its much inconveniencing illness.>>

 

Tht is why Bhagvan Sri Krishna says:

 

“Asakthi: anabhishwanga: puthra dara gruhadishu”

 

VIII-10, as part of Knowledge knowing which one attains “amrutatwam”

immortality.

 

However, I have read somewhere:

 

“Paropadeshavelayam, sarva: vyasa parashara:”

 

i.e. when it comes to advising others all are Vysasas and Parasharas,

 

and maybe that is why “self-knowledge” is like walking on a very sharp edged

sword.

 

Warm Regards and Hari Om

 

Mani

 

 

 

 

Madathil Rajendran Nair <madathilnair wrote:Namaste Chittranjanji.

 

Sponsor

Click Here

 

advaitin/

 

advaitin

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Search - Find what you’re looking for faster.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste Nairji,

 

As usual your message is full of wisdom. I particularly like the

fullness part - that the Self is essentially full and not seeing this

is the rise of ephemerality and the cause of all sorrow.

 

Pranams,

Chittaranjan

 

 

advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair"

<madathilnair> wrote:

> Namaste Chittranjanji.

>

> Further to my post 21310.

>

> Here is a consoling thought in the context of our losing dear and

> near ones.

>

> The time around 1989. There was this colleague of mine who had an

> epileptic daughter – an angelic being mentally retarded due to the

> disease and severe medication. The father was very fond of her.

>

> For some reason, when she had grown up to nine years of age, the

> doctors had to withdraw the medications for a short while. The

fits

> then aggravated and the girl died due to cardiac arrest.

>

> I had expected her passing away to be a relief for the much

harrowed

> father. But, to my consternation, I found him completely lost,

> desperate and abysmally anguished. No words could console him –

the

> child was so dear to him despite its much inconveniencing illness.

>

> That set me thinking and I knew that that child would have died

even

> otherwise as we have all `died' our childhood, teenage and youth.

> What was the man then trying to cling to? Even if she hadn't

passed

> away, she would nevertheless have `died' every moment to perhaps

grow

> up to be a full-blown nasty female to cause him much pain in so

> many different ways in his last days of physical and mental

> infirmity.

>

> And, where did that child come from? She wasn't there in 1979. The

> father wasn't unhappy then. An everchanging and,therefore, an

*ever-

> dying* thing just popped up some time in 1980. A relationship

> flowered. It was just a role and that created all the misery when

it

> ended, as all roles should naturally end, in 1989. The world,

> indeed, is Buddha's anicca (impermanence) in full swing!

>

> The father's kArmic background had warranted the birth of the girl

> and the generation of the new role. He was thus creating the whole

> scenario himself. The child rose from him and subsided in him at

the

> end like a wave on ocean surface. He didn't lose her. She went

> back to his bosom wherefrom she had originated. She is in him, as

> him, ever inseparate.

>

> All our dear ones are therefore in us. They don't go anywhere.

They

> seem to depart simply because they seem to pop up. The stronger

this

> conviction, the lesser the pain. We can then heave in oceanic

> fullness. GItA verse 2.11 acquires added significance if viewed at

> from this angle.

>

> PraNAms.

>

> Madathil Nair

[Guest guest]

-

Frederico Sigaud Gonzales

advaitin

Saturday, March 06, 2004 6:24 PM

Re: Re: Meaning of Happiness

 

 

Hello Benjamin,

 

I think your post shows that you have become truly spiritualized.

Christianity is depressing and opressing -- I have myself lived the darkness of

the Christian approach to life in my family, because they are all Catholic

Christians. There is no greater evil and ignorance than an oppressing, fearful

Christianity. I say that with my heart in blood because it takes me much

strength to see how my parents and grandparents suffer because of their

erroneous notions about life, death, sex, entertainment, guilt, rage, etc.

Christianity certainly plants evil seeds in the minds of people. It is a very

sad religion and you have acquired much merit by getting out of it. People who

embrace the choking philosophy of Christianity and especially Catholicism, are

created very bad karma for themselves in the future.

I have myself embraced Buddhism and your outlook of Buddhism seems correct

and beautiful to me. Certainly the Buddha taught that ego is Suffering, but he

also deemed important that people should understand that "Suffering" = Ego , and

because all our lives and actions are based on Ego, therefore everything is

ultimately Suffering until we become Enlightened or, as the Advaitin says,

Self-Realized.

I see the path of the Buddha as a non-devotional path to the destruction

of the false ego, and the Vedantic path a more devotional way to do the same

thing. But I sincerely think that the end of both is the same. In fact,

obviously, Buddhism sprang from Hinduism and Yogic schools in particular, so it

is not surprising that both are very similar philosophies with a happy path

until Enlightenment.

-

Benjamin

advaitin

Saturday, March 06, 2004 2:08 PM

Re: Meaning of Happiness

 

 

 

Namaste Chittaranjanji,

>And there is no better expression of this pain and sorrow

>that lies at the bottom of samsara than what you find in

>the words of the Buddha, no, not even in Vedanta.

 

 

Your entire message was quite eloquent. My condolences on the

departure of your loved one.

 

If I may be allowed to speak in rough general terms, I think that the

Buddha's vision was that of the 'sensitive' soul and the Vedantic

vision is that of the 'cosmic' soul. The first is sensitive to the

pain of the ephemeral, and the second thrilled by the bliss of the

eternal.

 

When stated in these terms, I find the second quite preferable. And

this choice has a lot of personal meaning for me. For many years, I

was prone to sadness, melancholy, depression, and so forth. And I

know how futile and insensitive it is to tell someone in such a state

to simply cheer up since it is 'all in the mind'. His reply would be

that suffering is painful, regardless of where it is.

 

Yet I now realize that happiness and sadness are primarily and merely

modifications of the mind. We need to observe them with detachment,

like the witness, in order to understand their true nature and become

free of them. I now wish to have peace of mind above all else. So I

discard any sad thought when it arises, if I can, for I know that

once it 'takes hold' I may spiral down into depression, through

psychological cause and effect. I simply brush it aside in my mind

while it is still a faint impression, if I can.

 

You may say that this is impossible in extreme cases, such as the

death of a family member. For so many years I was so sad because I

had no one to cling to (i.e. a wife). This may sound like an

embarrassing personal confession to most readers, but I assure you

that an important part of spiritual development is to analyze all

attachment, to both objects and people, from the standpoint of the

detached witness. We need to understand this blind urge, this dark

and tamasic impulse, to cling to someone for comfort and security. I

am not saying it is 'wrong' in itself; I am saying that it makes us

vulnerable to misery if we do not have it. This urge is also

craving, and it can enslave our minds.

 

Frankly, I am glad that I spent a life alone, for I have finally

learned how to be at peace with myself. I may get sad sometimes, but

if I just meditate for long enough, the sadness dissolves into a

luminous tranquility. It is all in the mind, no matter how

oppressive and real it may seem when we are under its influence.

 

An important step towards spirituality is to *want* to have a

peaceful and luminous consciousness under all circumstances. I do

not say I am there yet, but I have made considerable progress, and it

was slow and painful. And I know how dark clinging can take hold of

our mind, so that we end up clinging to the sadness itself. In

other words, we are not just sad because of what we don't have, but

we become addicted to the sadness itself. This may sound unlikely

but believe me it is true. Most people in this condition simply

don't realize it, because they are so self-absorbed (i.e.

ego-absorbed) and their mind is thus filled with darkness.

 

One reason I have left Christianity is because of what I consider an

unhealthy emphasis on suffering. I don't think that Christ nailed on

a cross is a good image to have permeating our subconsciousness.

Yes, I know it is all about self-sacrifice, but I still consider it a

depressing and unhealthy influence. It leads to that dark and

tamasic state of melancholy I was just discussing. Look at the

Indian Gods, both Hindu and Buddhist. Krishna is charming,

optimistic and happy. Buddha is serene and peaceful. The big

picture of Shiva and Parvati where I go to satsangh has them both

with smiling faces and outstretched palm in a gesture of

friendliness. This is the correct and positive image to plant on our

consciousness (or subconsciousness as the case may be).

 

By the way, as I said yesterday, the melancholy Buddha is the Buddha

of Early Buddhism. The later Mahayana became much more positive and

'cosmic' in its outlook, and Buddha became a Hindu God for all

practical purposes. As I have said so many times, the 'emptiness' of

Mahayana is nothing but the peace and bliss of Pure Consciousness.

How is that different from Vedanta?

 

If we surrender to the infinite consciousness, whatever we call it,

we can reach peace and communion with the infinite. Then all is a

dream, and death is no different than an actor leaving the stage. We

should simply love whichever manifestations we are with and see no

difference between them, since them are all reflections of the Self.

It is all a game, a drama, a colorful dream, the play of

consciousness. Not always easy to do in practice, but at least it is

possible. We should think this way at all times, even if we still

have moments of weakness.

 

Hari Om!

Benjamin

 

 

Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of

Atman and Brahman.

Advaitin List Archives available at:

http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/

To Post a message send an email to : advaitin

Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages

 

 

 

 

 

----------

Links

 

advaitin/

 

b..

advaitin

 

c..

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

>

> Hello Benjamin,

>

> I think your post shows that you have become truly

spiritualized. Christianity is depressing and opressing -- I have

myself lived the darkness of the Christian approach to life in my

family, because they are all Catholic Christians. There is no greater

evil and ignorance than an oppressing, fearful Christianity. I say

that with my heart in blood because it takes me much strength to see

how my parents and grandparents suffer because of their erroneous

notions about life, death, sex, entertainment, guilt, rage, etc.

 

Namste Fred

My apologies for intruding - i hope not inappropriately.

Ramakrishna Paramahamsa one of the greatest saints had made an effort

and succeded in living like a muslim, like a christian etc as the

purest of them would. He has said that when he was relating to Allah

like a muslim, he could not think of other gods and lived like a

devout muslim. Similarly his experience with Christianity. At the end

of these experiences he states that he finds a wonderful unity

between all religions though the paths are very different.

As such, when Swami Vivekananda was questioned about the need for

others to 'convert' to hindusim, he explained that sanatana Dharma is

based on the principles of swadharma ( that because of which a thing

is that thing). It is better to fare poorly following ones swadharma

than do better following another's dharma ( thus it is better for

some one with a warrior temparament to engage in kshatriya dharama

though he be a mediocre fighter than it is for him to say, become a

great Trader or scholar). Proceeding further he would say that

following sanatana dharma means for a hindu to be a good hindu, a

christian to be a good christian, a muslim to be a good muslim and so

on.

finally i come to the point.

A lot of what you had written about your experience with christianity

may be to do with wrong teachings imparted by not so

knowlegeable 'gurus'. I have some very noble and largehearted friends

who engage in selfless service and they would attribute their

attitude to the christian values taught to them. Because their value

systems encourage them to love all, they would also go to great

lengths to understand the cultural and religious beliefs of their

friends from other walks of life and allow themselves to be

influenced positively.

 

If you were to do what we call 'swadhyaya'- some self reading of

Bible and pray to God to show you the right way, I am sure the

answers will be forthcoming whichever religion you belong to or

change to.

 

I am ofcourse guilty of presenting the ideas of great masters without

referencing accurately. I hope if that be necessary, learned members

of the group will help.

Many endless thousands of namaskarams to all advaitins

 

Sridhar

---------

Wise men speak from experience, wiser men from experience do not

speak.

--------

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "asridhar19" <asridhar19> wrote:

>

> > of presenting the ideas of great masters without

> referencing accurately.

 

Namaste,

 

Whenever Sri Ramakrishna heard anyone finding fault with other

faiths, he called it the "Only my watch shows the correct time"

attitude, and said it was a great hindrance in spiritual practice.

 

 

This List, therefore, has adopted this policy in the same spirit:

 

"...The moderators request members to avoid personal attacks and

remarks demeaning religions, religious leaders, individuals or

groups......."

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

A quotation for Nairji and Chittaranji: "All happiness comes from awareness.

The more we are conscious, the deeper the joy. Acceptance of pain,

non-resistance, courage and endurance - these open deep and perennial

sources of real happiness, true bliss." (Nisargadatta Maharaj)

 

The last digest was a little on the depressing side with our attention being

drawn to the darker side of life. But it is very reasonable that this should

be done. Most of the material on this list is about truth, happiness,

enlightenment and reality and rightly so since this is where we are aiming.

Unfortunately, most of us find ourselves, for much of the time, mired in the

mists of delusion, suffering in one form or another. Ignorance it may be but

seeming none the less real for all of that.

 

The problem, of course, is the mind. As gauDapAda says in v. 5 of his

advaita prakaraNa in the karikA to the mANDUkya u.:

"As any portion of AkAsha enclosed in a pot being soiled by dust, smoke,

etc., all such other portions of AkAsha enclosed in other pots are not

soiled, so is happiness etc. of the jIvas, i.e. the happiness, misery, etc.

of one jIva do not affect other jIvas."

 

Though the nature of Atman IS Ananda (and we are That), this does not mean

that we always feel happy. Only upon enlightenment, when we truly know

ourselves to be That, will that be the case. Until then, we are forever at

the mercy of attachment to thoughts and emotions, temporarily believing

ourselves to be those instead. Nevertheless, despite the dust and smoke of

these identifications, the space within the pot is itself always pure and

unadulterated. The background of happiness is forever ours and available as

soon as we forego the dominion of the mind.

 

Osho said:

"Your misery is your invention: your bliss is your nature. Misery needs much

effort, it has to be planned, it has to be earned. It is going against

nature, hence it is very arduous. It is going upstream. It is a continuous

conflict with nature.

 

Nature knows no future, nature is always here. Nature is always THIS moment

and nothing else. The trees are growing this moment and the rivers are

flowing this moment. Everything is happening this moment, except your mind.

 

UNDERSTAND WELL: you are the cause of your suffering, nobody else."

 

This last statement is, of course, paralleled in the gItA (6.5): uddhared

AtmanA... ripur AtmanaH - Let a man raise himself by himself; let him not

lower himself. For he alone is the friend of himself, he alone is the enemy

of himself.

 

Best wishes,

 

Dennis

[Guest guest]

Hello Sridhar,

 

I agree with every thing you wrote. Every religion can be beneficial,

yes, but Christianity does not have one thing: the search for Enlightenment,

Liberation. A higher state of Consciousness is not pondered about. In this

sense, Christianity has not got something which is central to the religious

experience. This point is in my opinion very important and because of this

basic fact I embraced Buddhism because Buddhism provides ways through

meditation techniques and insight, to develop changes in one´s

consciousness. So while I think Christians can be very good people -- no

doubt about this -- I also think that the Christian religion lacks the path

to Enlightenment, and so becomes for many people a simple ritual, a duty,

rather than a thing that one really likes. But many people may find God and

Unity with Him through Christianity even. I think you spoke correctly.

Many pranams to you.

Fred

-

"asridhar19" <asridhar19

<advaitin>

Sunday, March 07, 2004 9:23 AM

Re: Meaning of Happiness

 

>

> >

> > Hello Benjamin,

> >

> > I think your post shows that you have become truly

> spiritualized. Christianity is depressing and opressing -- I have

> myself lived the darkness of the Christian approach to life in my

> family, because they are all Catholic Christians. There is no greater

> evil and ignorance than an oppressing, fearful Christianity. I say

> that with my heart in blood because it takes me much strength to see

> how my parents and grandparents suffer because of their erroneous

> notions about life, death, sex, entertainment, guilt, rage, etc.

>

> Namste Fred

> My apologies for intruding - i hope not inappropriately.

> Ramakrishna Paramahamsa one of the greatest saints had made an effort

> and succeded in living like a muslim, like a christian etc as the

> purest of them would. He has said that when he was relating to Allah

> like a muslim, he could not think of other gods and lived like a

> devout muslim. Similarly his experience with Christianity. At the end

> of these experiences he states that he finds a wonderful unity

> between all religions though the paths are very different.

> As such, when Swami Vivekananda was questioned about the need for

> others to 'convert' to hindusim, he explained that sanatana Dharma is

> based on the principles of swadharma ( that because of which a thing

> is that thing). It is better to fare poorly following ones swadharma

> than do better following another's dharma ( thus it is better for

> some one with a warrior temparament to engage in kshatriya dharama

> though he be a mediocre fighter than it is for him to say, become a

> great Trader or scholar). Proceeding further he would say that

> following sanatana dharma means for a hindu to be a good hindu, a

> christian to be a good christian, a muslim to be a good muslim and so

> on.

> finally i come to the point.

> A lot of what you had written about your experience with christianity

> may be to do with wrong teachings imparted by not so

> knowlegeable 'gurus'. I have some very noble and largehearted friends

> who engage in selfless service and they would attribute their

> attitude to the christian values taught to them. Because their value

> systems encourage them to love all, they would also go to great

> lengths to understand the cultural and religious beliefs of their

> friends from other walks of life and allow themselves to be

> influenced positively.

>

> If you were to do what we call 'swadhyaya'- some self reading of

> Bible and pray to God to show you the right way, I am sure the

> answers will be forthcoming whichever religion you belong to or

> change to.

>

> I am ofcourse guilty of presenting the ideas of great masters without

> referencing accurately. I hope if that be necessary, learned members

> of the group will help.

> Many endless thousands of namaskarams to all advaitins

>

> Sridhar

> ---------

> Wise men speak from experience, wiser men from experience do not

> speak.

> --------

>

>

>

> Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of

Atman and Brahman.

> Advaitin List Archives available at:

http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/

> To Post a message send an email to : advaitin

> Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages

>

>

> Links

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Nairji, Chittranjanji, and others

>Here is a consoling thought in the context of

>our losing dear and near ones.

 

Thanks to the efforts of you two and others, I think the quality of

this list is constantly improving. Very thoughtful and eloquent. If

you know of another spiritual list that comes close in quality, I'd

like to know about it too. I'm talking about actual life and

practice and spiritual experience, not mere scholarship.

 

Chittranjanji, I hope I didn't seem a bit insensitive yesterday,

giving you the 'grieve not for the dead' sermon. Really, only Lord

Krishna has that prerogative! However, having spent much of my life

in negative thoughts, which may be classified broadly under either

'anger' or 'sadness', I can tell you that they must not be allowed to

take root in the subconsciousness.

 

Subconsciousness is the Western word for 'vasanas', and when these

negative vasanas grow deep enough, they take on a life of their own,

so that we nurse the vasanas themselves, even if we have forgotten

about the objects that caused them initially. Of course, I am

speaking in general terms, and a period of grief for your particular

family circumstances is entirely appropriate.

 

Really, I was responding to your discussion of Buddha's sensitivity

to pain. Such sensitivity may be beneficial to start the spiritual

quest, but it is most harmful if allowed to persist. I certainly

reject any such dreary view of Buddhism. I take it as a fundamental

tenet of Hinduism or Buddhism that happiness can be achieved,

regardless of circumstances, through detachment from the objective

world and through knowledge of our true inner essence. In one case,

it is called 'nirvana' and in the other 'moksha'. If this is all a

figment of our imaginations, then we might as well become fatalistic

hedonists.

 

Hari Om!

Benjamin

[Guest guest]

Namaste Fred,

>I think your post shows that you have become

>truly spiritualized. Christianity is depressing

>and oppressing ...

 

My, my, my! The quantity of good messages lately is becoming

prolific indeed! The list is starting to overheat, so I think I will

try to be quiet for a while. However, I must answer you on this, in

order to clarify my views and to avoid offending any Christians

reading this list.

 

In brief, what you say has been true all too often, and I often

wonder why different regions of the world have their characteristic

approach to spirituality, which may be either sunny and optimistic or

dark and depressing. I can't help but feel that collective karma has

something to do with it.

 

However, I have also learned the importance of being aware of the

great diversity in any religion, regardless of the main trends.

Christianity can be luminous, mystical, open-minded, and so forth ...

but this seems to happen in isolated pockets, unfortunately.

 

I had a similar experience when learning about Islam. It is quite

clear to me that it has much intolerance and violence in its history,

like Christianity, and we must not ignore this as some naive but

well-meaning people are doing. But the fact remains that many decent

Muslims and Christians exist, who would be thoroughly likable if we

met them in person. Of course, you know this, and I do not wish to

lecture you like a child. Yet, I will confess that I can forget this

when getting absorbed in the 'drug addiction' of reading the latest

disturbing international news! :-)

 

Note: Regarding Christianity, the 'optimistic' Christians place more

emphasis on the resurrection than the crucifixion. And the

resurrection is given a cosmic dimension, where we discover a 'Christ

within' not unlike the Atman. Christ becomes a cosmic principle,

rather than a historical person, just as Buddha did in the Mahayana.

I have heard that the latest blockbuster movie on Christ by Mel

Gibson emphasizes the bloody ordeal of the crucifixion in all its

gory detail. I think I will skip it! :-)

 

Hari Om!

Benjamin

[Guest guest]

Namaste Benjaminji,

 

advaitin, Benjamin <orion777ben> wrote:

>

> Namaste Nairji, Chittranjanji, and others

>

> Chittranjanji, I hope I didn't seem a bit insensitive yesterday,

> giving you the 'grieve not for the dead' sermon. Really, only Lord

> Krishna has that prerogative!

 

 

No Benjaminji, you were not insensitive. On the contrary you are

touchingly sensitive.

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan