Guest guest Posted June 18, 2005 Report Share Posted June 18, 2005 Dear Bro's & Sisters Thanks to Bro Neil and Sis Simone for explaining. Thanks to Bro's Amit Padhye and Vengadesan Neiker for their consent on religion. Bro's Amit and Vengadesan. Pse explain who come first religion or Hinduism? What is Religion? Who founded Hinduism? Pictures posted here (various ganesh statue's )are from various countries. Standing union ganesh from Japan (Kangi-ten) Standing female ganesh from Tamil Nadu (Tanjore) Sitting female ganesh from Tribal group(North India) Sitting union ganesh from Nepal(Vajrayana, Kathmandu) Bro Neil mentioned in earlier msg sage sit's in temple feet resting upon shiv lingam. He's Guru Nanak. God is in you and me. Open up and have a birds eye view. We are just a grain of sand washed to the shore by the waves. There are alot in the ocean that we do not know. Yours George Pillai Om Gung Ganapatheye namah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2005 Report Share Posted June 18, 2005 Dear All, It was nice to hear all of your views regarding the consent i expressed about the statues... I believe that we all r free to preach what ever we feel is our own religion cauz religion actually means the lifestyle and culture you want to follow... On this topic of relating sex as Shakti with Lord Ganesha.. i have expressed my consent about why i feel such postures of Lord Ganesha statues are not what Hindu religion is or might be... Today i would just ask some questions which you just answer in simple Yes or No without any comments pls .. Based on your answer you yourself shall get answer to my consent about the not displaying Lord Ganesha in such postures.... 1) Do you feel Gods/Goddesses should be shown in sexual postures.. ? 2) Arent your parents more supreme than God ? 3) If yes then would you agree on keeping their sexual postures in form pictures or statues at your home ? 4) Would you mind doing sex with your partner in front of public the way dogs do it... 5) Can you call a Porno movie a sacred film .. ? 6) Are you hurt with these questions ? If your answer to my last question is YES, it means you didnt like me asking such questions about your personal life which includes your family members.. If you didnt like then please let me know why you didnt like it ? so that i can further comment... If your answer to most of the question above was YES... then am sorry ... you are definately not from culture of India ... and rather preaching such stuffs as Hinduism... please term it a new religion with any good name you like.. But please spare Hindu religion... Regards, Amit --- pillai_george <pillai_george wrote: > > Dear Bro's & Sisters > > Thanks to Bro Neil and Sis Simone for explaining. > Thanks to Bro's Amit Padhye and Vengadesan Neiker > for their consent > on religion. > > Bro's Amit and Vengadesan. Pse explain who come > first religion or > Hinduism? > > What is Religion? > Who founded Hinduism? > > Pictures posted here (various ganesh statue's )are > from various > countries. > > Standing union ganesh from Japan (Kangi-ten) > Standing female ganesh from Tamil Nadu (Tanjore) > Sitting female ganesh from Tribal group(North India) > Sitting union ganesh from Nepal(Vajrayana, > Kathmandu) > > Bro Neil mentioned in earlier msg sage sit's in > temple feet resting > upon shiv lingam. He's Guru Nanak. > > God is in you and me. Open up and have a birds eye > view. We are just > a grain of sand washed to the shore by the waves. > There are alot in > the ocean that we do not know. > > Yours > George Pillai > Om Gung Ganapatheye namah > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Read only the mail you want - Mail SpamGuard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2005 Report Share Posted June 18, 2005 There is a form of Ganesha called "Ucchista Ganapati." ("Ucchista" means "leftover" or "polluted.") This rare form of Ganesh has a dark blue complexion, and a third eye in his forehead. If he has 4 arms, they hold a sprig of rice paddy, a blue-black lotus flower, a veena (stringed musical instrument), and a rudraksha mala; in his trunk is a pomegranate. If he has 6 arms, the lowest right arm holds the pomegranate, and the lowest left arm supports a shapely goddess who is seated on Ganesha's thigh. This is a tantric image, and the goddess is shown fondling Ucchista Ganapati's naughty bits; with his trunk, he is returning the favor! Ucchista G. is worshipped by devotees who are in a state of ritual impurity, i.e., they have not ritually bathed, they should have leftover food still in their mouths, and it is acceptable if the altar is a bit dusty or disheveled. Ucchista Ganapati has a mantra of seed syllables which is very similar to Mother Kali's -- it goes: OM KRING KRING HRING HRING HUM! GHE-GHE PHUT SWAHA! -- Len/ Kalipadma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2005 Report Share Posted June 23, 2005 May I please be allowed to add my views, which is: In the olden days cosmic forces to be expressed and to create Forms of Gods was created and worshipped. In tune with this line of Discipline to emphasize the fact and to stress that the following exist : 1.Yin and yang forces 2. Positive and Negative forces 3. Right and Wrong forces Men of those days had to communicate these elements to the people. In the olden days what exist Blind Faith on God. Since this faith was structured in this manner MAn had to create Male and Female forms to express and communicate this truth of Two sides.That is to say without the other no existence. One fact the ancestors were trying to communicate was that a creation needs fusion of both energies.To emphasise this fact,Lord Ganesha was very welly worshipped in the olden days, and what would be the best tool to educate the masses was to use his faith to pass on the dynamics of energies down. Today, We are all full awareness that is why we do not understand the reason for such creations.I was sad to read some brothers not welly receiving this message as in those days when Man understood,you need these both as the chinese term it Yin and Yang , SIva and Shakti for existence. Lets see the meaning behind those creations and not comment on the face value. I am sure most us will agree there must be fusion for creation and to destroy. if this message is understood positively or in the right pespective we create otherwise leads to destruction. Lord Ganesha till today is a symbol or lord who removes obstacles. What is this Obstacles ? pls it is not anything physical but it is the unpleasant or unwelcomed aspects/elements to be overcome by his faith and getting our thoughts in tune with his positive or right vibrations to be aligned to our existence. To express this message this postures and visible creations was needed for Mankind to understand. This is my views, pls excuse me if anyone found these hurting.Hope I have cleared and not confuse my family members Aum ... kumarNeil <Trikashaivism (AT) onetel (DOT) com> wrote: Namaste Amit,Thank you for your response.>We Hindus> How can you say we Hindus? You are making a very large generalisationhere which contradicts the point I made earlier. Within the folds ofHinduism are many, many different perceptions and understandings, whichis part of its wonderful glory, but I don't think generalisations canspeak for all schools on this topic. Hence my earlier point aboutTantric traditions. >dont require any form of Lord Ganesha todepict what he is ..we know what he is and that he isthe One who creates n who destroys... so every form ofShakti is not required to be shown is such forms... >If you have no need for such murtis then why begrudge somebody else whoneeds them to raise their understanding and degree of experience? >Tommorrow someone might create a murti of LordGanesha in form of Laden or Saddam or similar facetsof human who are so called destroyers of today.. Forsuch Murti u wud again say that its a depiction ofdestoying power which Lord Ganesha has... Please stopall this...>Please, you are verging on the ridiculous here.>We love seeing our supreme Lord in his original formwhom we worship daily in our Mandirs...>Very good! : ) You are extremely fortunate to be able to have such adaily experience whenever you wish it. Many people are not as blessed asyou are. I for one have not such luxury, but I intend/wish to build avery small public Ganesh shrine/temple in several years time. When yousay original form, what exactly is meant by this and how can you qualifysuch a statement?>I understand people from West are very muchattracted towards studying Hinduism... but ratherlearning the culture of original Hinduism.. they tryto press upon their own logic and thinking aboutHindus...>Again, big generalisations about what constitutes being a Hindu. I'malso not sure what you mean by original Hinduism, so I cannot respond tothis. A rhetorical question for your sir, am I not Hindu because I havetook birth in the west? Being Hindu, Christian, Muslim, whatever faith,is not really about embracing the religious culture, but rather seekingto experience the heart of the religious teaching - which is beyond allforms, names, etc. Within Hinduism probably more than any other religion(IMHO) this point is explained and elucidation upon. The "real" Hindu Iwould say is the one who has the esoteric experience, the inner life, nothe exoteric experience and the outer life. The difference is likediving to the depths of the ocean, instead of splashing on the surface.>Somedays back there was a news that an Americancompany had put a picture of Lord Ganesha on slipperswhich they were selling... This is is untolerable...>I would say it is and it isn't, it depends on the perspective andintent. Speaking generally It is a sign of either great disrespect orignorance to place your feet on the Lord, the majority of people wouldnot disagree with this. However, I recall reading a tale (I'm afraid Ican't recall where, wish I did I would like to read it again) about asage who was sitting in a temple with his feet resting upon the ShivLingam. When somebody came in and found him sitting there they wereappalled and demanded that they remove their feet. To which the sageresponded "where can I put my feet that they will not rest upon Shiva?"(or words to that effect) The point being to see past the dualistic offorms and notions of right and wrong, this is a higher worship.>I request you to please stop such things...>Your request is genuinely noted.>Lord Ganesha is the supremo.. and he just needs tobe worshipped through your heart and from your mind...>I agree that Bhagavan Ganesh just has to be worshipped through heart andmind, and I would add to this that this includes casting out simplisticdualistic notions about sex and the symbolism surrounding it, and thereactions this causes within oneself. To me the worst thing within thisthread is not an image showing Ganesh in union with Shakti, but thereaction (not a response) to it. Although we do not see eye to eye on this matter Amit, I honestly haveappreciated your mails and the questions/matters/issues that have arosein them. So I hope that none of the above is perceived/read to behostile, for none of it is intended to be this way. I just wished tomake this clear because to often in these groups tempers rage and egorampage, and I for one have no interest in heated debate and arguments,but intelligent and friendly discussion is more than welcome. Adding tothis it would be good to hear others thoughts on this matter.Wishing you well,Om ShantiNeil--- Neil <Trikashaivism (AT) onetel (DOT) com> wrote:> Namaste Amit & all,> > Please do not take offence to such images, there is> no insult meant in> such images. Ganesh is very much a Tantric deity and traditional > Tantra takes many roads and can embrace acts and symbolism> that should not be> taken on a literal or superficial level. Sex is used> in many ways within> the wide variety of Hindu traditions, and here is it> presented as a> symbolic metaphor to show that Lord Ganesh is One> with Shakti, for he is> the Lord of the shaktis. The statue actually looks> very similar to the> common Yab Yum statue, especially since the statue> has a Tibetan flavour> to it> > As it states on the Om Ganesh front page all forms> of Ganesh are welcome> here, and this includes forms that fall outwith the> narrower perception> of common understanding and Smarta interpretation.> > > Om Shanti> Neil> > > > > [] On> Behalf Of amit padhye> 16 June 2005 08:10> > Subject: RE: Various Rare Ganesh Statue's> > > Hello Pillai,> > Even though you all are admiring the rare statues> of Lord Ganesha, I would insist u to please remove> the photographs from> the album as I being a hindu feel an insult to see> my God in such> posture...> > Where did you get those images from and where are> such statues available.. I dont think any Hindu> sculpture wud create such kind of statue... If u> want> to show your art of sex.. so in some other forms not> using images of our Gods... I dont think any of our> ancient sculptures who have created Ajanta Ellora> ever> used Gods having sex ....> > Regards,> Amit> > --- Neil <Trikashaivism (AT) onetel (DOT) com> wrote:> > > Namaste George,> > > > Many thanks for uploading these. Interesting> indeed!> > I haven't seen much> > like these before. Where did you find these?> > > > Here is a quick link for anyone interested -> >>lst?.dir=/George+Pillai&.s> >>rc=gr&.order=&.view=t&.done=http%3a//briefcase./> > > > Cheers George!> > > > > > Om Shanti> > Neil> > > > > > www.shivabeads.co.uk> > > > > > > > > [] On> > Behalf Of pillai_george> > 16 June 2005 05:32> > > > Various Rare Ganesh Statue's> > > > Dear Bro's and Sisters> > > > > > Pse check out the photo section under george> pillai> > view the various> > ganesh statue's.> > > > Many may have not seen.> > > > Yours> > George pillai> > Om Gang ganapatheye namah> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/>'>http://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/> > Links> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Discover > Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news and> more. Check it out! > http://discover./mobile.html> > > http://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/>'>http://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/> Links> > > > > > > > __ Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports.http://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/ Linkshttp://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/ New and Improved Mail - 1GB free storage! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2005 Report Share Posted June 23, 2005 What is real? Ganesha is just as real as you are. part of the path to enlightenment is realizing there is no you. We are all one. Yin and Yang are just the fabric of the grand illusion we call reality. So before you go calling my sweet Ganesha a concept or a way of explaining things to the ignorant remember that in 5 million years there will be nothing left of you including memories to prove that you where ever real or "Exhisted". For all you know there is some planet 10 billion light years away where Ganesha is just as real and alive as you. I cant prove it just as you cant disprove it. Im not chastising you .im just trying to make you think a little outside the box. Namaste, Jimjikhumaroan murugaian <roankz .sg> wrote: Dear Brothers n Sisiters, May I please be allowed to add my views, which is: In the olden days cosmic forces to be expressed and to create Forms of Gods was created and worshipped. In tune with this line of Discipline to emphasize the fact and to stress that the following exist : 1.Yin and yang forces 2. Positive and Negative forces 3. Right and Wrong forces Men of those days had to communicate these elements to the people. In the olden days what exist Blind Faith on God. Since this faith was structured in this manner MAn had to create Male and Female forms to express and communicate this truth of Two sides.That is to say without the other no existence. One fact the ancestors were trying to communicate was that a creation needs fusion of both energies.To emphasise this fact,Lord Ganesha was very welly worshipped in the olden days, and what would be the best tool to educate the masses was to use his faith to pass on the dynamics of energies down. Today, We are all full awareness that is why we do not understand the reason for such creations.I was sad to read some brothers not welly receiving this message as in those days when Man understood,you need these both as the chinese term it Yin and Yang , SIva and Shakti for existence. Lets see the meaning behind those creations and not comment on the face value. I am sure most us will agree there must be fusion for creation and to destroy. if this message is understood positively or in the right pespective we create otherwise leads to destruction. Lord Ganesha till today is a symbol or lord who removes obstacles. What is this Obstacles ? pls it is not anything physical but it is the unpleasant or unwelcomed aspects/elements to be overcome by his faith and getting our thoughts in tune with his positive or right vibrations to be aligned to our existence. To express this message this postures and visible creations was needed for Mankind to understand. This is my views, pls excuse me if anyone found these hurting.Hope I have cleared and not confuse my family members Aum ... kumarNeil <Trikashaivism (AT) onetel (DOT) com> wrote: Namaste Amit,Thank you for your response.>We Hindus> How can you say we Hindus? You are making a very large generalisationhere which contradicts the point I made earlier. Within the folds ofHinduism are many, many different perceptions and understandings, whichis part of its wonderful glory, but I don't think generalisations canspeak for all schools on this topic. Hence my earlier point aboutTantric traditions. >dont require any form of Lord Ganesha todepict what he is ..we know what he is and that he isthe One who creates n who destroys... so every form ofShakti is not required to be shown is such forms... >If you have no need for such murtis then why begrudge somebody else whoneeds them to raise their understanding and degree of experience? >Tommorrow someone might create a murti of LordGanesha in form of Laden or Saddam or similar facetsof human who are so called destroyers of today.. Forsuch Murti u wud again say that its a depiction ofdestoying power which Lord Ganesha has... Please stopall this...>Please, you are verging on the ridiculous here.>We love seeing our supreme Lord in his original formwhom we worship daily in our Mandirs...>Very good! : ) You are extremely fortunate to be able to have such adaily experience whenever you wish it. Many people are not as blessed asyou are. I for one have not such luxury, but I intend/wish to build avery small public Ganesh shrine/temple in several years time. When yousay original form, what exactly is meant by this and how can you qualifysuch a statement?>I understand people from West are very muchattracted towards studying Hinduism... but ratherlearning the culture of original Hinduism.. they tryto press upon their own logic and thinking aboutHindus...>Again, big generalisations about what constitutes being a Hindu. I'malso not sure what you mean by original Hinduism, so I cannot respond tothis. A rhetorical question for your sir, am I not Hindu because I havetook birth in the west? Being Hindu, Christian, Muslim, whatever faith,is not really about embracing the religious culture, but rather seekingto experience the heart of the religious teaching - which is beyond allforms, names, etc. Within Hinduism probably more than any other religion(IMHO) this point is explained and elucidation upon. The "real" Hindu Iwould say is the one who has the esoteric experience, the inner life, nothe exoteric experience and the outer life. The difference is likediving to the depths of the ocean, instead of splashing on the surface.>Somedays back there was a news that an Americancompany had put a picture of Lord Ganesha on slipperswhich they were selling... This is is untolerable...>I would say it is and it isn't, it depends on the perspective andintent. Speaking generally It is a sign of either great disrespect orignorance to place your feet on the Lord, the majority of people wouldnot disagree with this. However, I recall reading a tale (I'm afraid Ican't recall where, wish I did I would like to read it again) about asage who was sitting in a temple with his feet resting upon the ShivLingam. When somebody came in and found him sitting there they wereappalled and demanded that they remove their feet. To which the sageresponded "where can I put my feet that they will not rest upon Shiva?"(or words to that effect) The point being to see past the dualistic offorms and notions of right and wrong, this is a higher worship.>I request you to please stop such things...>Your request is genuinely noted.>Lord Ganesha is the supremo.. and he just needs tobe worshipped through your heart and from your mind...>I agree that Bhagavan Ganesh just has to be worshipped through heart andmind, and I would add to this that this includes casting out simplisticdualistic notions about sex and the symbolism surrounding it, and thereactions this causes within oneself. To me the worst thing within thisthread is not an image showing Ganesh in union with Shakti, but thereaction (not a response) to it. Although we do not see eye to eye on this matter Amit, I honestly haveappreciated your mails and the questions/matters/issues that have arosein them. So I hope that none of the above is perceived/read to behostile, for none of it is intended to be this way. I just wished tomake this clear because to often in these groups tempers rage and egorampage, and I for one have no interest in heated debate and arguments,but intelligent and friendly discussion is more than welcome. Adding tothis it would be good to hear others thoughts on this matter.Wishing you well,Om ShantiNeil--- Neil <Trikashaivism (AT) onetel (DOT) com> wrote:> Namaste Amit & all,> > Please do not take offence to such images, there is> no insult meant in> such images. Ganesh is very much a Tantric deity and traditional > Tantra takes many roads and can embrace acts and symbolism> that should not be> taken on a literal or superficial level. Sex is used> in many ways within> the wide variety of Hindu traditions, and here is it> presented as a> symbolic metaphor to show that Lord Ganesh is One> with Shakti, for he is> the Lord of the shaktis. The statue actually looks> very similar to the> common Yab Yum statue, especially since the statue> has a Tibetan flavour> to it> > As it states on the Om Ganesh front page all forms> of Ganesh are welcome> here, and this includes forms that fall outwith the> narrower perception> of common understanding and Smarta interpretation.> > > Om Shanti> Neil> > > > > [] On> Behalf Of amit padhye> 16 June 2005 08:10> > Subject: RE: Various Rare Ganesh Statue's> > > Hello Pillai,> > Even though you all are admiring the rare statues> of Lord Ganesha, I would insist u to please remove> the photographs from> the album as I being a hindu feel an insult to see> my God in such> posture...> > Where did you get those images from and where are> such statues available.. I dont think any Hindu> sculpture wud create such kind of statue... If u> want> to show your art of sex.. so in some other forms not> using images of our Gods... I dont think any of our> ancient sculptures who have created Ajanta Ellora> ever> used Gods having sex ....> > Regards,> Amit> > --- Neil <Trikashaivism (AT) onetel (DOT) com> wrote:> > > Namaste George,> > > > Many thanks for uploading these. Interesting> indeed!> > I haven't seen much> > like these before. Where did you find these?> > > > Here is a quick link for anyone interested -> >>lst?.dir=/George+Pillai&.s> >>rc=gr&.order=&.view=t&.done=http%3a//briefcase./> > > > Cheers George!> > > > > > Om Shanti> > Neil> > > > > > www.shivabeads.co.uk> > > > > > > > > [] On> > Behalf Of pillai_george> > 16 June 2005 05:32> > > > Various Rare Ganesh Statue's> > > > Dear Bro's and Sisters> > > > > > Pse check out the photo section under george> pillai> > view the various> > ganesh statue's.> > > > Many may have not seen.> > > > Yours> > George pillai> > Om Gang ganapatheye namah> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/>'>http://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/> > Links> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Discover > Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news and> more. Check it out! > http://discover./mobile.html> > > http://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/>'>http://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/> Links> > > > > > > > __ Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports.http://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/ Linkshttp://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/ New and Improved Mail - 1GB free storage! http://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/ Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam protection around Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 28, 2005 Report Share Posted June 28, 2005 i think one of the majpr handicap of an intellectual is to discredit what the majority do just to demonstrate their superiority.. as it is mentioned in the Bhagavad Gita and in many other upanishads, that the way to realise God can be either through nirguna or saguna ,, which means envisioning God with and without a form ... recently, some hindus have been taking the idea of making Hinduism more "modern" or more "christian-like" by slamming idol worship and the concept of one God but uncountable forms to be superstitious and outdated, without realising the inherent contradiction that they are doing. Lord Ganesha is as real as the saliva wetting your tongue and he can also be elusive as your eyelashes (always there but never saw them).. and for those who think of him as a concept, then he would just be a concept to you. Just as before the discovery of sound waves, radios are wild fantasy, a singing box is a concept and people believing in it to be crazy..,. Tang , james richard <nhraddude71> wrote: > Interesting kumar, I was not insulted by your words but you have to ask yourself one question. > What is real? Ganesha is just as real as you are. part of the path to enlightenment is realizing there is no you. We are all one. Yin and Yang are just the fabric of the grand illusion we call reality. So before you go calling my sweet Ganesha a concept or a way of explaining things to the ignorant remember that in 5 million years there will be nothing left of you including memories to prove that you where ever real or "Exhisted". For all you know there is some planet 10 billion light years away where Ganesha is just as real and alive as you. I cant prove it just as you cant disprove it. Im not chastising you .im just trying to make you think a little outside the box. > Namaste, Jimji > > khumaroan murugaian <roankz> wrote: > Dear Brothers n Sisiters, > > May I please be allowed to add my views, which is: > > In the olden days cosmic forces to be expressed and to create Forms of Gods was created and worshipped. In tune with this line of Discipline to emphasize the fact and to stress that the following exist : > > 1.Yin and yang forces > > 2. Positive and Negative forces > > 3. Right and Wrong forces > > Men of those days had to communicate these elements to the people. In the olden days what exist Blind Faith on God. Since this faith was structured in this manner MAn had to create Male and Female forms to express and communicate this truth of Two sides.That is to say without the other no existence. One fact the ancestors were trying to communicate was that a creation needs fusion of both energies.To emphasise this fact,Lord Ganesha > was very welly worshipped in the olden days, and what would be the best tool to educate the masses was to use his faith to pass on the dynamics of energies down. > > Today, We are all full awareness that is why we do not understand the reason for such creations.I was sad to read some brothers not welly receiving this message as in those days when Man understood,you need these both as the chinese term it Yin and Yang , SIva and Shakti for existence. > > Lets see the meaning behind those creations and not comment on the face value. > > I am sure most us will agree there must be fusion for creation and to destroy. > if this message is understood positively or in the right pespective we create otherwise leads to destruction. Lord Ganesha till today is a symbol or lord who removes obstacles. What is this Obstacles ? pls it is not anything physical but it is the unpleasant or unwelcomed aspects/elements to be overcome by his faith and getting our thoughts in tune with his positive or right vibrations to be aligned to our existence. To express this message this postures and visible creations was needed for Mankind to understand. > > This is my views, pls excuse me if anyone found these hurting.Hope I have cleared and not confuse my family members > > Aum ... > > kumar > > Neil <Trikashaivism@o...> wrote: > Namaste Amit, > > Thank you for your response. > > >We Hindus> > > How can you say we Hindus? You are making a very large generalisation > here which contradicts the point I made earlier. Within the folds of > Hinduism are many, many different perceptions and understandings, which > is part of its wonderful glory, but I don't think generalisations can > speak for all schools on this topic. Hence my earlier point about > Tantric traditions. > > >dont require any form of Lord Ganesha to > depict what he is ..we know what he is and that he is > the One who creates n who destroys... so every form of > Shakti is not required to be shown is such forms... > > > If you have no need for such murtis then why begrudge somebody else who > needs them to raise their understanding and degree of experience? > > >Tommorrow someone might create a murti of Lord > Ganesha in form of Laden or Saddam or similar facets > of human who are so called destroyers of today.. For > such Murti u wud again say that its a depiction of > destoying power which Lord Ganesha has... Please stop > all this...> > > Please, you are verging on the ridiculous here. > > >We love seeing our supreme Lord in his original form > whom we worship daily in our Mandirs...> > > Very good! : ) You are extremely fortunate to be able to have such a > daily experience whenever you wish it. Many people are not as blessed as > you are. I for one have not such luxury, but I intend/wish to build a > very small public Ganesh shrine/temple in several years time. When you > say original form, what exactly is meant by this and how can you qualify > such a statement? > > >I understand people from West are very much > attracted towards studying Hinduism... but rather > learning the culture of original Hinduism.. they try > to press upon their own logic and thinking about > Hindus...> > > Again, big generalisations about what constitutes being a Hindu. I'm > also not sure what you mean by original Hinduism, so I cannot respond to > this. A rhetorical question for your sir, am I not Hindu because I have > took birth in the west? Being Hindu, Christian, Muslim, whatever faith, > is not really about embracing the religious culture, but rather seeking > to experience the heart of the religious teaching - which is beyond all > forms, names, etc. Within Hinduism probably more than any other religion > (IMHO) this point is explained and elucidation upon. The "real" Hindu I > would say is the one who has the esoteric experience, the inner life, no > the exoteric experience and the outer life. The difference is like > diving to the depths of the ocean, instead of splashing on the surface. > > >Somedays back there was a news that an American > company had put a picture of Lord Ganesha on slippers > which they were selling... This is is untolerable...> > > I would say it is and it isn't, it depends on the perspective and > intent. Speaking generally It is a sign of either great disrespect or > ignorance to place your feet on the Lord, the majority of people would > not disagree with this. However, I recall reading a tale (I'm afraid I > can't recall where, wish I did I would like to read it again) about a > sage who was sitting in a temple with his feet resting upon the Shiv > Lingam. When somebody came in and found him sitting there they were > appalled and demanded that they remove their feet. To which the sage > responded "where can I put my feet that they will not rest upon Shiva?" > (or words to that effect) The point being to see past the dualistic of > forms and notions of right and wrong, this is a higher worship. > > >I request you to please stop such things...> > > Your request is genuinely noted. > > >Lord Ganesha is the supremo.. and he just needs to > be worshipped through your heart and from your mind...> > > I agree that Bhagavan Ganesh just has to be worshipped through heart and > mind, and I would add to this that this includes casting out simplistic > dualistic notions about sex and the symbolism surrounding it, and the > reactions this causes within oneself. To me the worst thing within this > thread is not an image showing Ganesh in union with Shakti, but the > reaction (not a response) to it. > > Although we do not see eye to eye on this matter Amit, I honestly have > appreciated your mails and the questions/matters/issues that have arose > in them. So I hope that none of the above is perceived/read to be > hostile, for none of it is intended to be this way. I just wished to > make this clear because to often in these groups tempers rage and ego > rampage, and I for one have no interest in heated debate and arguments, > but intelligent and friendly discussion is more than welcome. Adding to > this it would be good to hear others thoughts on this matter. > > Wishing you well, > > > Om Shanti > Neil > > > --- Neil <Trikashaivism@o...> wrote: > > > Namaste Amit & all, > > > > Please do not take offence to such images, there is > > no insult meant in > > such images. Ganesh is very much a Tantric deity and traditional > > Tantra takes many roads and can embrace acts and symbolism > > that should not be > > taken on a literal or superficial level. Sex is used > > in many ways within > > the wide variety of Hindu traditions, and here is it > > presented as a > > symbolic metaphor to show that Lord Ganesh is One > > with Shakti, for he is > > the Lord of the shaktis. The statue actually looks > > very similar to the > > common Yab Yum statue, especially since the statue > > has a Tibetan flavour > > to it > > > > As it states on the Om Ganesh front page all forms > > of Ganesh are welcome > > here, and this includes forms that fall outwith the > > narrower perception > > of common understanding and Smarta interpretation. > > > > > > Om Shanti > > Neil > > > > > > > > > > [] On > > Behalf Of amit padhye > > 16 June 2005 08:10 > > > > RE: Various Rare Ganesh Statue's > > > > > > Hello Pillai, > > > > Even though you all are admiring the rare statues > > of Lord Ganesha, I would insist u to please remove > > the photographs from > > the album as I being a hindu feel an insult to see > > my God in such > > posture... > > > > Where did you get those images from and where are > > such statues available.. I dont think any Hindu > > sculpture wud create such kind of statue... If u > > want > > to show your art of sex.. so in some other forms not > > using images of our Gods... I dont think any of our > > ancient sculptures who have created Ajanta Ellora > > ever > > used Gods having sex .... > > > > Regards, > > Amit > > > > --- Neil <Trikashaivism@o...> wrote: > > > > > Namaste George, > > > > > > Many thanks for uploading these. Interesting > > indeed! > > > I haven't seen much > > > like these before. Where did you find these? > > > > > > Here is a quick link for anyone interested - > > > > > > lst?.dir=/George+Pillai &.s > > > > > > rc=gr&.order=&.view=t&.done=http%3a//briefcase./ > > > > > > Cheers George! > > > > > > > > > Om Shanti > > > Neil > > > > > > > > > www.shivabeads.co.uk > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [] On > > > Behalf Of pillai_george > > > 16 June 2005 05:32 > > > > > > Various Rare Ganesh Statue's > > > > > > Dear Bro's and Sisters > > > > > > > > > Pse check out the photo section under george > > pillai > > > view the various > > > ganesh statue's. > > > > > > Many may have not seen. > > > > > > Yours > > > George pillai > > > Om Gang ganapatheye namah > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/ > > > Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Discover > > Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news and > > more. Check it out! > > http://discover./mobile.html > > > > > > http://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/ > > Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > Sports > Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football > http://football.fantasysports. > > > http://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/ > Links > > > > http://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/ > > > > > > New and Improved Mail - 1GB free storage! > > http://www.geocities.com/aumganesh/ > > > > > Links > > > / > > > > > Terms of Service. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 2005 Report Share Posted July 1, 2005 Hi Neil, I never received any further reponse to the reply i sent to your response to my reactions to ur mail about The Ganesh Statues.. I expected you answer the questions i asked you ... Well if its a discussion then rather only i responding to your logis.. why dont you too.. ? This is related to other members also who havent yet expressed their views in regards to the discussion I and Neil had .... REgards, Amit --- tangchikhay <tangchikhay wrote: > i think one of the majpr handicap of an intellectual > is to discredit > what the majority do just to demonstrate their > superiority.. as it > is mentioned in the Bhagavad Gita and in many other > upanishads, that > the way to realise God can be either through nirguna > or saguna ,, > which means envisioning God with and without a form > ... > > > recently, some hindus have been taking the idea of > making Hinduism > more "modern" or more "christian-like" by slamming > idol worship and > the concept of one God but uncountable forms to be > superstitious and > outdated, without realising the inherent > contradiction that they are > doing. > > Lord Ganesha is as real as the saliva wetting your > tongue and he can > also be elusive as your eyelashes (always there but > never saw > them).. and for those who think of him as a concept, > then he would > just be a concept to you. Just as before the > discovery of sound > waves, radios are wild fantasy, a singing box is a > concept and > people believing in it to be crazy..,. > > Tang > > > > > , james richard > <nhraddude71> > wrote: > > Interesting kumar, I was not insulted by your > words but you have > to ask yourself one question. > > What is real? Ganesha is just as real as you are. > part of the path > to enlightenment is realizing there is no you. We > are all one. Yin > and Yang are just the fabric of the grand illusion > we call reality. > So before you go calling my sweet Ganesha a concept > or a way of > explaining things to the ignorant remember that in 5 > million years > there will be nothing left of you including memories > to prove that > you where ever real or "Exhisted". For all you know > there is some > planet 10 billion light years away where Ganesha is > just as real and > alive as you. I cant prove it just as you cant > disprove it. Im not > chastising you .im just trying to make you think a > little outside > the box. > > > > Namaste, Jimji > > > > khumaroan murugaian <roankz> wrote: > > Dear Brothers n Sisiters, > > > > May I please be allowed to add my views, which is: > > > > In the olden days cosmic forces to be expressed > and to create > Forms of Gods was created and worshipped. In tune > with this line of > Discipline to emphasize the fact and to stress that > the following > exist : > > > > 1.Yin and yang forces > > > > 2. Positive and Negative forces > > > > 3. Right and Wrong forces > > > > Men of those days had to communicate these > elements to the people. > In the olden days what exist Blind Faith on God. > Since this faith > was structured in this manner MAn had to create Male > and Female > forms to express and communicate this truth of Two > sides.That is to > say without the other no existence. One fact the > ancestors were > trying to communicate was that a creation needs > fusion of both > energies.To emphasise this fact,Lord Ganesha > > was very welly worshipped in the olden days, and > what would be the > best tool to educate the masses was to use his faith > to pass on the > dynamics of energies down. > > > > Today, We are all full awareness that is why we do > not understand > the reason for such creations.I was sad to read some > brothers not > welly receiving this message as in those days when > Man > understood,you need these both as the chinese term > it Yin and Yang , > SIva and Shakti for existence. > > > > Lets see the meaning behind those creations and > not comment on the > face value. > > > > I am sure most us will agree there must be fusion > for creation and > to destroy. > > if this message is understood positively or in the > right > pespective we create otherwise leads to destruction. > Lord Ganesha > till today is a symbol or lord who removes > obstacles. What is this > Obstacles ? pls it is not anything physical but it > is the unpleasant > or unwelcomed aspects/elements to be overcome by his > faith and > getting our thoughts in tune with his positive or > right vibrations > to be aligned to our existence. To express this > message this > postures and visible creations was needed for > Mankind to understand. > > > > This is my views, pls excuse me if anyone found > these hurting.Hope > I have cleared and not confuse my family members > > > > Aum ... > > > > kumar > > > > Neil <Trikashaivism@o...> wrote: > > Namaste Amit, > > > > Thank you for your response. > > > > >We Hindus> > > > > How can you say we Hindus? You are making a very > large > generalisation > > here which contradicts the point I made earlier. > Within the folds > of > > Hinduism are many, many different perceptions and > understandings, > which > > is part of its wonderful glory, but I don't think > generalisations > can > > speak for all schools on this topic. Hence my > earlier point about > > Tantric traditions. > > > > >dont require any form of Lord Ganesha to > > depict what he is ..we know what he is and that he > is > > the One who creates n who destroys... so every > form of > > Shakti is not required to be shown is such > forms... > > > > > If you have no need for such murtis then why > begrudge somebody > else who > > needs them to raise their understanding and degree > of experience? > > > > >Tommorrow someone might create a murti of Lord > > Ganesha in form of Laden or Saddam or similar > facets > > of human who are so called destroyers of today.. > For > > such Murti u wud again say that its a depiction of > > destoying power which Lord Ganesha has... Please > stop > > all this...> > > > > Please, you are verging on the ridiculous here. > > > > >We love seeing our supreme Lord in his original > form > === message truncated === Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 2005 Report Share Posted July 1, 2005 Namaste Amit, Sorry, I missed your last mail, wasn't purposely ignoring you. I have been busy to an extreme and also without a phone line for a bit. I'll paste your mail and respond to it below: >On this topic of relating sex as Shakti with Lord Ganesha.. i have expressed my consent about why i feel such postures of Lord Ganesha statues are not what Hindu religion is or might be...> Yes, I agree and feel I have done the same, and so don't see the need to perpetuate this any further. >Today i would just ask some questions which you just answer in simple Yes or No without any comments pls ..> Sorry, you want answers, and you want them super simplified? How can you ask this? As the old saying goes "you can't have your cake and eat it". This is the problem - you are trying to condense a hundred varied traditions into simple, one size fits all, answers. It simply doesn't work like that. Your answering criteria doesn't fit the questions! >Based on your answer you yourself shall get answer to my consent about the not displaying Lord Ganesha in such postures.... 1) Do you feel Gods/Goddesses should be shown in sexual postures.. ?> It depends on the context. It is entirely appropriate within some traditions because it is understood in the correct context. An understanding which even though has been patiently explained here you either have failed to grasp or have just ignored. 2) Arent your parents more supreme than God ? I wouldn't say so. 3) If yes then would you agree on keeping their sexual postures in form pictures or statues at your home ? Amit friend, questions like this and the ones below are only illustrating how much you are not grasping the context and symbolism of sex within traditions, particularly Tantrism. IMHO images of devas and devis in intercourse are not to be taken on a simplistic, literal level. If they are the meaning is lost and we head down the road to a dogmatic fundamentalist perspective. 4) Would you mind doing sex with your partner in front of public the way dogs do it... I'm not even going to dignify such a dumb question with an answer. Your questions are bringing down the tone of the group far, far more than any image ever has. 5) Can you call a Porno movie a sacred film .. ? Again, you are miles off from understanding what is trying to be said by myself and others. 6) Are you hurt with these questions ? No, not even an iota. If anything I think they are crude and rather unintelligent. >If your answer to my last question is YES, it means you didnt like me asking such questions about your personal life which includes your family members.. If you didnt like then please let me know why you didnt like it ? so that i can further comment... Not hurt in the slightest by these questions. If they were to hurt you then it tells you were need to work on yourself. They are only questions, the play of words need not affect one. You can ask these questions or even make statements a hundred times more crude and offensive, but internally its no big deal, it is not going to disturb my state of mind. Sticks and stones....and the play of the Matrika. I understand what you are saying Amit and what you are trying to illustrate, but in my eyes these questions only reveal your perspective and interpretation. I, and probably everybody else who has read these posts, get your perspective. We simply don't agree with it and won't abide by it. So let us let sleeping dogs lie. >If your answer to most of the question above was YES... then am sorry ... you are definately not from culture of India ... and rather preaching such stuffs as Hinduism... please term it a new religion with any good name you like.. But please spare Hindu religion...> Amit, your perspective is chopping off a fair bit of Hinduism. Hinduism is broader than your personal beliefs. It would serve all better to expand understanding rather than continue conversations like this. I think everybody gets the points that yourself and I have made, lets not bore them! I have no interest in continuing this thread because I feel what is necessary to be said has been said. You have your perspective and I have mine, which is fine, as I have no wish to actively change your mind. Om Shanti Neil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 2005 Report Share Posted July 1, 2005 Thank you, Neil-ji! Poor Amit has obviously grown up in India without any real exposure to the Tantric traditions. What he describes as "Hinduism" is actually a small percentage of the whole spectrum of the faith. After hundreds of years of forced conversion, and spiritual influence by Moslems and Christians in India, it is perhaps not surprizing that many of their more repressive attitudes towards sexuality have percolated into the general Hindu population. [Amit writes:] > >If your answer to most of the question above was > YES... then am sorry ... you are definately not from > culture of India ... and rather preaching such > stuffs > as Hinduism... please term it a new religion with > any > good name you like.. But please spare Hindu > religion...> "Hindu religion" is not a monolith. There is a very wide variety of spiritual experiences that inform "Hinduism" -- Vaishnava, Shaiva, Shakta, Ganapatya, Vedic, and Tantric. Also many others. On the outside wall of the Hindu Temple in Flushing, there is a sculpted wheel presenting several symbols of world religions -- the Jewish star of David, the Christian cross, the Moslem moon cresecent and star, the Buddhist Dharma wheel, the Hindu Aum, and others. Elsewhere, it says in English: God is One; Paths to Him are many. [Neil writes:] > Amit, your perspective is chopping off a fair bit of > Hinduism. Hinduism > is broader than your personal beliefs. It would > serve all better to > expand understanding rather than continue > conversations like this. I > think everybody gets the points that yourself and I > have made, lets not > bore them! I have no interest in continuing this > thread because I feel > what is necessary to be said has been said. You have > your perspective > and I have mine, which is fine, as I have no wish to > actively change your mind. Many people on this List are devotees who perceive themselves as Tantric Hindus. Tantra has a long history of symbolizing the Divine with sexual imagery. Perhaps, to accomodate those whose attitudes are offended by sexual imagery, there should be a warning on some posts, stating: "The following contains sexual imagery." That way, those who might be offended can "Delete" such posts if such is their choice. -- Len/ Kalipadma __ Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.