Why is // Jupiter capable of destroying the house it and Saturn Protects//

[Guest guest]

Chandrashekhar ji Namaste

 

I am not getting the point. I may have habit of finding another

meaning but so far as it is not wrong I suppose it should be

allowed. Moreover, dont you agree "Every God is Guru but every Guru

is not God". There are many verses in Dharmashstras where Guru is

given the task of upholding the Dharma. Why to get H.H and try to

wind up the discussions? Can we not restrict to our opinions on a

point rather than quoting point of view of persons like H.H on your

view point. In that case what happens is that disscussions becomes

awkward as, if one says something on a point, you are free to

criticise that I have criticise H.H. which may not be the actual

intentions.

 

If you feel that we have enough of Guru/GOd why not to get back to

Sthana Brahsta karoti priciple vis-avis Guru?

 

Thanks a lot for your Time and Space.

 

AmolMAndar

 

vedic astrology, "Chandrashekhar Sharma"

<boxdel> wrote:

> Dear Amolmandar,

> As I already said, you are free to impute any meaning to what His

Holiness

> has said as I am defficient in English.

> However, this is what His Holiness says further"There is no one

greater than

> the preceptor. We should have full faith in him. It should be

genuine faith.

> if we have faith that God himself has appeared in the preceptor's

form, then

> even God is not necessary. This faith and the devotion that we

nourish

> towards Him, will of themselves redeem us.There is no one greater

than the

> preceptor. We should have full faith in him. It should be genuine

faith. if

> we have faith that God himself has appeared in the preceptor's

form, then

> even God is not necessary. This faith and the devotion that we

nourish

> towards Him, will of themselves redeem us."

>

> And he further says "

> The Preceptor can intercede on behalf of the disciple and

recommend to God

> to pardon the sinner. God will never disregard this

recommendation. If, on

> the contrary, the preceptor is sinned against there could be none

to protect

> the sinner. There is a verse which tells us this.

>

> "Gurur-pitaa, gurur-maataa, guru-daivam, guru-gatih,

> Sive-rysgte gurustraataa, gurur rushte na kascana. "

>

> This I am only enclosing for your information, note the His

Holiness says

> theat Perceptor"CAN" and not "Has to". But perhaps you will again

find a

> different meaning from His Holiness's statement.I can not help

that.

>

> Chandrashekhar.

>

>

> amolmandar [amolmandar]

> Sunday, September 07, 2003 9:20 PM

> vedic astrology

> [vedic astrology] Re: Why is // Jupiter capable of

destroying the

> house it and Saturn Protects//

>

>

> Chandrashekhar ji Namaste

>

> I think there is yet another deviation.

>

> H.H has said "God performs the works like creating and protecting

> the world. But the preceptor does not have these

responsibilities.

> God has an 'office' while the Preceptor does not have one."

>

> On this you commented as

>

> "This makes it clear that Guru is not supposed to protect but

only

> instruct about Dharma."

>

> I think it is not so. I may be wrong in analysing H.H statement

but

> I feel that When shankaracharya differentiated between God and

Guru

> it was to indicate that God has much greater role to play in the

> world than Guru. May be he wanted to convey that Guru is God

> personified but not exactly God. So naturally the responsibility

of

> God is much more than that of GUru. The comment of H.H does not

say

> anything Dharma vis-avis Guru,rather it hightlights the

greatness of

> nature of God and the way HE performs. HE has to take care of

entire

> WORLD. Guru naturally is not supose to create or destroy world

and

> hence has some less work to do. The creation,maintenance,and

> destruction is what GOD is suppose to do but Guru naturally does

not

> have this burden. It was to make clear the position of Guru vis-

avis

> God. To my mind H.H has not said that God is not Guru. Every God

is

> Guru but Evry Guru may not be God. If Guru is not burdened for

world

> affairs as regards to its creation and destruction then why do we

> compare Guru with God? It is because Guru is burdened to uphold

the

> Dharma(maintenance part of GOD). Protect the Dharma. Dharma is

> essence of life. If Dhrama is not there then there is

Brahsthachar.

> This leads to chaos. So Guru must first estabilish Dharma and

ensure

> that it is always honored. If this is not done, Guru is no Guru.

>

> So point is that H.H possibly warned us to blindly consider Guru

as

> God and made it clear how two differ. But I suppose no one can

deny

> that every God is Guru. That is why krishna being God, is Guru of

> all mankind. If one does not belive this and stands against

HIM,its

> not HIS fault and problem.

>

>

> As far as 'Sher' is concerned, I made it clear that I was

refering

> to custom. You naturally dont want to accept this and its your

way

> of looking at things. I can not interfere in this.

>

> Thanks a lot for your Time and Space.

>

> AMolMAndar

>

>

> vedic astrology, "Chandrashekhar Sharma"

> <boxdel> wrote:

> > Dear Amolmandar,

> > You are missing the point again. The article by Shankaracharya

was

> given to

> > make you understand what the Shankaracharya says about Guru

being

> different

> > grom God and this is why I wanted to convey that perhaps my

> understanding of

> > the English language is different than you. To reiterate the

point

> I paste

> > the relavant portion again, below.

> > "God performs the works like creating and protecting the world.

> But the

> > preceptor does not have these responsibilities. God has

> an 'office' while

> > the Preceptor does not have one."

> > This makes it clear that Guru is not supposed to protect but

only

> instruct

> > about Dharma. I had , as a matter of fact posted this in bold

as

> many have ,

> > in the past taken this line of Guru Protecting Dharma. Guru

will

> only

> > protect Shishya(by giving him true knowledge) when he is

satisfied

> about

> > shishya's following the Path of Dharma. He does so by bestowing

> his grace

> > and not by mere presence.I had given only part of the article

to

> avoid

> > misinterpretation. What His Holiness says in the same article

> would put the

> > Guru God dilemma in proper perspective and as such I am giving

a

> small

> > relevant portion below.

> > "In the Chandogya Upanishad itself it is declared that only by

the

> grace of

> > the Guru true knowledge is possible. It says "aacaaryavaan

purusho

> veda"

> > (only one who has a Preceptor, gains true knowledge). "

> > Whereas you found His Holiness to mean that Guru is God by

> referring to the

> > first words with out what has been said in its entirety. As a

> matter of fact

> > ,immediately after the shloka His Holiness gives its meaning.

This

> makes it

> > clear that it is salutation to the Perceptor(Guru). When one

> says"Twameva

> > Mata Pita Twameva...." it does not mean that the Bhakta is

> referring to

> > biological Mother and Father.Now this how we were taught to

> understand any

> > prayer to the Almighty or Guru or even odes eulogising kings ,

be

> it in any

> > language. Since your interpretations give a totally different

> meaning, the

> > only explaination is that my perception of concepts of

euoligies

> prayers

> > etc. are defficient.So no sarcasm was intended.

> >

> > About the "Sher" thing, this is what you said about your own

> knowledge and I

> > have made my opinion about such a comment amply clear.

> >

> > Hope this helps.

> > Chandrashekhar.

> >

> >

> > amolmandar [amolmandar]

> > Saturday, September 06, 2003 1:56 PM

> > vedic astrology

> > [vedic astrology] Re: Why is // Jupiter capable of

> destroying the

> > house it and Saturn Protects//

> >

> >

> > Chandrashekhar ji NAmaste

> >

> > Thanks for the information. H.H Shankaracharya says

> >

> > "Gurur - Brahma

> > Gurur - Vishnuh

> > Guru -devo Maheswarah

> > Gurur - sakshat Param Brahma

> > Tasmai Sri Gurave namah "

> >

> > but you will defend Sthanabrahasta karoti principle of Guru

very

> > amezing!

> >

> > >>>I might be defficient in that language as you are not,

> > being "Sher"

> >

> > Here you are sounding sarcastic and tendency of pushing the

> things.

> > Now I realized your obsessions with 'Sthana Brahstha karoti'

> > principle.

> >

> > I am extermly sorry that I put myself against your principle

> stand.

> > But I assure you that I will never cross my boundaries again

and

> > please accept my pranams.

> >

> > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space.

> >

> > AmolMAndar

> >

> >

> > vedic astrology, "Chandrashekhar

Sharma"

> > <boxdel> wrote:

> > > Dear Amolmandar,

> > > Incontinuation to my mail giving the opinion of H.H.

> > Shankaracharya of

> > > Kanchi Kamakoti Peetham, I forgot to reply to your

> statement "This

> > way you

> > > tried to show that it is not Guru who fails but his shisyas

> make

> > him

> > > to fail."

> > > First, I never said that shishyas made the Guru to fail.

What I

> > said was

> > > that it is shishyas that might fail and not the Guru, and

in

> that

> > reference

> > > I demonstrated how Arjuna failed to implement the

teachings of

> > Krishna.

> > > Second,it appears that my usage of english is not

understood

> as I

> > might be

> > > defficient in that language as you are not, being "Sher"

> > > Chandrashekhar.

> > >

> > > amolmandar [amolmandar]

> > > Friday, September 05, 2003 2:27 PM

> > > vedic astrology

> > > [vedic astrology] Re: Why is // Jupiter capable

of

> > destroying the

> > > house it and Saturn Protects//

> > >

> > >

> > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste

> > >

> > >

> > > Again, the mails you put for me is not proving any point

to

> me. I

> > > said Guru is DHarma and Guru fails trying to uphold the

> Dharma

> > but

> > > Dharma never fails so how come Guru fails in a position.

I as

> > well

> > > said that Dharma is not religion. And I never said

anything

> about

> > > Religion or Dharma as to who brought it in the thread.

> Sthana

> > > Brahstha means not following Dharma. But if it happens

in the

> > > presence of Guru who is suppose to uphold it then it is

> faliure

> > of

> > > Guru. This happens only if Guru has BIG EGO or he does

not

> have

> > > enough courge to protect Dharma. That is why he fails and

> hence

> > > Sthana Brahstha principle is applicable. To suport this

> > arguments I

> > > quoted Mahabharat. Because in my opinion, Mahabharat has

many

> > such

> > > incidances where all 'Gurus' have failed because of

these two

> > > qualities. But in entire Mahabahrata Krishna never

failed in

> > > upholding the Dharma and hence I said except Krishna

every

> one

> > > failed. That is why I said, If you have real Guru like

> Krishna

> > then

> > > you are bound to succeed. You picked up the argument on

> Krishna

> > not

> > > failing by drifting the thread to Gita and quoting that

> Krishna

> > told

> > > Arjuna in Gita not to Grief but later Arjuna grieved.

This

> way

> > you

> > > tried to show that it is not Guru who fails but his

shisyas

> make

> > him

> > > to fail.

> > >

> > >

> > > Sher

> > >

> > > It seems that I am not able to express myself properly.

In

> the

> > days

> > > of Mirza Galib, conducting the mushayara was a usual

> practice in

> > > India. The participents used to say their Sher( 4 lines

or 2

> > lines

> > > of Urdu/Farsi) only if remaining participents respect the

> > feeling of

> > > the one who is saying it, by reciting the same lines

after

> him.

> > This

> > > act of others who repeat the lines of sher is known

as 'Sher

> ko

> > > Uthana'. This was to show the appriciation of the

Shayaer.If

> for

> > > your Sher there no one to Uthao your Sher, it means

> Mushayara is

> > not

> > > ready to accept you as shayer either it is not worthy or

> > Mushayara

> > > is not capable of understanding the sher.

> > > That is why it is said "Sher ko tab hi bolo jab koi

Uthane

> Wala

> > ho".

> > > Mirza in his initial days as shayar,had left the

Mushayara

> many

> > > times because of this reason.

> > >

> > > I never ever claimed any authority over any of the

subjects

> > related

> > > to Jyotish or scriptures. I thought that you might be

aware

> of

> > this

> > > custom that is why I said that. I was not refering to

Jungle

> > sher.

> > > Nor do I reffered myself as Sher or for that matter

anyone as

> > Sher.

> > > I was refering to a custom. As you seemed to be rejecting

> what I

> > > have explained about Gita without giving a thought,

possibly

> > > thinking that it just a jugglery of Sanskrit. Or there

might

> be

> > some

> > > another reason but I remember in a thread you once said

that

> you

> > > were exasperated or irritated because of some thing. This

> happens

> > > only if one consideres the other person is not worth and

> hence

> > his

> > > opinion or one is not sure about his own stand on the

topic

> of

> > > discussions. Here you quote Great Parashar as who gives

> > weightage to

> > > other's opinion but seem to forget it peacefully. The

irony

> is

> > that

> > > you blemed all these things on me. At least I never

cross my

> > limits

> > > and do not hesitate to apologize if found guilty.

> > >

> > > >>Arjuna is reffered to as Parantap, Gudakesha, Kaunteya,

> > > Kurunandana, Partha, Bharata,

> > >

> > > >>Kiriti,Dhananjaya,Mahabaho,Kurushreshtha, Savyasachi,

> > >

> > > {{Let me make it very clear,You asked me this and hence

I am

> > > writting about it. I am not starting this from myside. I

am

> > doing it

> > > to the best of my capacity and if you find something

wanting

> then

> > > correct me but dont accuse me.}}

> > >

> > > Now I will try to highlight the fact that VedVyasa have

used

> > names

> > > of Krishna-Arjuna with a purpose in Gita. Take the case

of

> > > Dhananjaya. The word Dhananjaya means

contoller/conqueror of

> > pinda.

> > > That is why in the Yogshastra, there exists a yognadi

termed

> as

> > > Dhananjaya. That contol the pinda and hence universe. The

> yogi

> > > strives to become Dhananjaya to gain the control over

pinda

> and

> > > hence try to become master of universe. One of the place

> where

> > it is

> > > used is 1st Adhaya and 15th shloka. Please excuse me

but I

> must

> > > write the shloka to express myself fully.

> > >

> > > "PAnchaJanya rishikesho devadatta Dhananjaya:|

> > > Paundram dadhamaou mahashankham bhimakarma

vukrodara||15||

> > >

> > > The name of Krishna here is given as rishikesha and his

> conch as

> > > PAnchaJanya. The name of Arjuna is given here as

DHananjaya

> and

> > his

> > > conch as devadatta.'Rishik' means sense organs and 'Kesh'

> means

> > > controller of the same. The word Shankha here means human

> body.

> > They

> > > are not normal conches found in sea. If you are aware

there

> is

> > > custom of 'Shanka-Prashalan' in yog shastra. In this,

body is

> > > completly cleaned i.e. Prashalan. by repetedly drinking

> water.

> > The

> > > Shankah is Human body. The rishikesh means perfect yogi

will

> have

> > > perfect body(Shankha) that would be derived or given

birth

> from

> > five

> > > elements (PanchaJanya). These five elements as

> > Akash,Vayu,Tejas,Aap

> > > and Prithvi. The whole creation vibrates through the five

> > principle

> > > elements and the embodiment or incarnation of the same

is the

> > human

> > > body of 'Pinda' as it is called. The Arjuna is Dhananjaya

> menas

> > > contoller of 'Pinda' and the one who is contoller

of 'Pinda'

> > must be

> > > devine that is why his humanbody is caleed as Devadatta.

i.e.

> > > given/alloted by Devas or devine entities.

> > > This sholka comes in the very begining of Gita because

> MAhabharat

> > > war is a war of tendencies fought between Kauravas and

> pandavas.

> > > Similarly the second line of the shloka can be

interpreted

> but I

> > > will desist myself for the obvious special reasons.

> > > So the point is one can see the purpose in use of a word

for

> > Krish-

> > > Arjuna in Gita. I can try on other names as well but that

> will

> > > take 'space' and you wont like it. But I am sure about

what I

> > said.

> > > Every synonm for Krishna-Arjuna in Gita is used with a

> purpose.

> > >

> > >

> > > Brhasth Karoti

> > >

> > > What about Brhasta karoti principle.? What is wholistic

use

> of

> > this

> > > principle? Does that mean a way to use this principle on

> > hindsight?

> > >

> > > Thanks a lot for your time and Space.

> > >

> > > AmolMandar

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > vedic astrology, "Chandrashekhar

> Sharma"

> > > <boxdel> wrote:

> > > > Dear Amol mandar,

> > > > If you want to stick to "sthana brashta karoti.." I am

> > > glad.However as you

> > > > seem to suggest that I started deviating from the

> astrological

> > > principle of

> > > > "Sthana Bhrashta Karoti, I would like to refresh your

> memory by

> > > giving your

> > > > mail of August 26th below.You brought in religion in

to the

> > > discussion by

> > > > saying, please do not point to the (not religion) in

the

> mail

> > > because the

> > > > subsequent sentence" Dharma never fails" makes the

meaning

> > amply

> > > clear.

> > > > " Chandrashekharji Namste

> > > > As usual you explained the things very lucidly but just

> slight

> > > doubt.

> > > > It is said many times that Guru is Dharma(not religion)

and

> it

> > is as

> > > > well said that Guru tries to uphold Dharma but usually

> fails.

> > Hence

> > > > Dharma fails. But many say Dharma never fails. So Guru

> should

> > also

> > > never

> > > > fail. Then why it fails with respect to house?

> > > > Does MAYA play any role in this?

> > > >

> > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space.

> > > > AmolMAndar."

> > > >

> > > > This was your response to my mail as under:

> > > > "Dear Amolmandar,

> > > > I will give you an example outside

> > > > astrology and religion.Guru represents Minister or the

> > teacher .

> > > Now teacher

> > > > tells that which is right.Students many a times feel

> > unconfortable

> > > in the

> > > > presence of the Teacher as he monitors their behaviour,

> > specially

> > > if in

> > > > their youth they want to do that he might not

> approve.Similar

> > is

> > > the case

> > > > with the king whose ministers forbids him from doing

> something

> > that

> > > > is against RajDharma.Now imagine House where Jupiter is

> posited

> > > being the

> > > > student/King and Jupiter being the Teacher. The results

> for the

> > > house would

> > > > be clear.Of course , as I said earlier this is only my

way

> at

> > > looking at it

> > > > in order to understand why this happens, and the Sages'

> > principles

> > > are given

> > > > to us as such without the reasons behind them. We have

to

> apply

> > > our Viveka

> > > > to fathom the logic behind it.Other worthies might hold

> > different

> > > views.

> > > > Hope this helps understand the concept.

> > > > Chandrashekhar."

> > > >

> > > > Could you show me where in my mail have I brought in

> religion?

> > I

> > > could give

> > > > you lots of examples but as you have made up your mind

> that you

> > > were not the

> > > > one who brought religion in to the discussions and that

> > > Mahabharata does not

> > > > include Bhagvadgita, despite your mails below your own

mail

> > > message, it is

> > > > futile to argue. Specially implying that what Krishna

> > > > said"Mayaaprasannen...tvadanyen na drustapurvam"

> Adhyaaya11 Sh

> > 47

> > > is false

> > > > by pitting Vedavyasa's authority against the Lord

makes the

> > intent

> > > of

> > > > needless argument very clear.

> > > >

> > > > About your "Sher ko tabhi bolo",let me state that this

> comment

> > is

> > > not only

> > > > unwarranted but unworthy of one who claims to have

mastered

> > > Scriptures, as

> > > > you imply.Even the Great Parashara gives weightage to

> other's

> > > opinion and

> > > > does not call himself "Sher".

> > > > If your contention changes to the statement being

related

> > > to "Sher" of

> > > > Jungle, alas the Sher part cannot, now, be tested

against

> real

> > > Sher of

> > > > Jungle as Hunting of wild beasts is prohibited, unlike

in

> my

> > youth

> > > when we

> > > > tested ourselves against "Sher" of the live variety.

> > > >

> > > > Trying to call Guru upholder of Dharma in one mail,

> proposing

> > that

> > > all Gurus

> > > > failed other than Krishna in Mahabharata in another and

> then

> > again

> > > stating

> > > > that Guru is Parmatma and therefore Parmatma is Guru,

is

> some

> > > logic of a

> > > > great brain that mere mortals like me do neither

> understand nor

> > > accept as

> > > > part of a serious discussion. I would have enjoyed your

> > > explainations of why

> > > > in different shlokas Arjuna is reffered to as Parantap,

> > Gudakesha,

> > > Kaunteya,

> > > > Kurunandana, Partha, Bharata,

> > > Kiriti,Dhananjaya,Mahabaho,Kurushreshtha,

> > > > Savyasachi,

> > > >

> > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > ---

> > > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

> > > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system

(http://www.grisoft.com).

> > > > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date:

> 8/19/03

> > >

> > >

> > > Sponsor

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Group info: vedic-

> > astrology/info.html

> > >

> > > To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-

> >

> > >

> > > ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us .......

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Terms

of

> > Service.

> > >

> > > ---

> > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

> > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

> > > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date:

8/19/03

> >

> >

> > Sponsor

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Group info: vedic-

> astrology/info.html

> >

> > To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-

>

> >

> > ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us .......

> >

> >

> >

> > Terms of

> Service.

> >

> > ---

> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

> > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release 8/19/03

>

>

> Sponsor

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Group info: vedic-

astrology/info.html

>

> To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-

 

>

> ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us .......

>

>

>

> Terms of

Service.

[Guest guest]

Dear Amolmandar,

 

You may like to interprete the following well known shloka. Perhaps this will

make you understand that in different contexts different aspects of Guru are

described.

 

""Gurur-pitaa, gurur-maataa, guru-daivam, guru-gatih, Sive-rysgte gurustraataa,

gurur rushte na kascana."

 

About Guru and God , His holiness has already explained that the two operate at

different levels. Since you want to link Astrological principles to Puranas and

Dharmashashtras, interprete the story of Guru, Chandra and Budha. Perhaps

Guru's inability to provide protection to his place would become self evident.

You will also, perhaps, accept that in this story if your interpretation of

Guru failing is to be applied; it would be possible only by highest possible

streching of interpretation of shashtras. Such an interpreattion, no sane

person will accept.

 

I could have avoided the lengthy discussions by citing this earlier. However as

I believe that "Vada Vada ni jayate tatwabodhaha", I gave you other examples. I

am glad that you are not questioning the authority of His Holiness in

interpreting the Shashtras.I had not quoted him for long till the discussions

went haywire.

 

Hope this clears any doubts about the original statement of the results

Guru(Jupiter) gives when posited in a house vis-a0vis that house.

 

Chandrashekhar.

amolmandar [amolmandar ]Sent:

Monday, September 08, 2003 4:16 PMvedic astrologySubject:

[vedic astrology] Re: Why is // Jupiter capable of destroying the house it and

Saturn Protects//Chandrashekhar ji NamasteI am not getting the point. I may

have habit of finding another meaning but so far as it is not wrong I suppose

it should be allowed. Moreover, dont you agree "Every God is Guru but every

Guru is not God". There are many verses in Dharmashstras where Guru is given

the task of upholding the Dharma. Why to get H.H and try to wind up the

discussions? Can we not restrict to our opinions on a point rather than quoting

point of view of persons like H.H on your view point. In that case what happens

is that disscussions becomes awkward as, if one says something on a point, you

are free to criticise that I have criticise H.H. which may not be the actual

intentions.If you feel that we have enough of Guru/GOd why not to get back to

Sthana Brahsta karoti priciple vis-avis Guru? Thanks a lot for your Time and

Space.AmolMAndarvedic astrology, "Chandrashekhar Sharma"

<boxdel> wrote:> Dear Amolmandar,> As I already said, you are free to

impute any meaning to what His Holiness> has said as I am defficient in

English.> However, this is what His Holiness says further"There is no one

greater than> the preceptor. We should have full faith in him. It should be

genuine faith.> if we have faith that God himself has appeared in the

preceptor's form, then> even God is not necessary. This faith and the devotion

that we nourish> towards Him, will of themselves redeem us.There is no one

greater than the> preceptor. We should have full faith in him. It should be

genuine faith. if> we have faith that God himself has appeared in the

preceptor's form, then> even God is not necessary. This faith and the devotion

that we nourish> towards Him, will of themselves redeem us."> > And he further

says "> The Preceptor can intercede on behalf of the disciple and recommend to

God> to pardon the sinner. God will never disregard this recommendation. If,

on> the contrary, the preceptor is sinned against there could be none to

protect> the sinner. There is a verse which tells us this.> > "Gurur-pitaa,

gurur-maataa, guru-daivam, guru-gatih,> Sive-rysgte gurustraataa, gurur rushte

na kascana. "> > This I am only enclosing for your information, note the His

Holiness says> theat Perceptor"CAN" and not "Has to". But perhaps you will

again find a> different meaning from His Holiness's statement.I can not help

that.> > Chandrashekhar.> > > amolmandar

[amolmandar]> Sunday, September 07, 2003 9:20 PM> To:

vedic astrology> [vedic astrology] Re: Why is //

Jupiter capable of destroying the> house it and Saturn Protects//> > >

Chandrashekhar ji Namaste> > I think there is yet another deviation.> > H.H

has said "God performs the works like creating and protecting> the world. But

the preceptor does not have these responsibilities.> God has an 'office'

while the Preceptor does not have one."> > On this you commented as> >

"This makes it clear that Guru is not supposed to protect but only> instruct

about Dharma."> > I think it is not so. I may be wrong in analysing H.H

statement but> I feel that When shankaracharya differentiated between God and

Guru> it was to indicate that God has much greater role to play in the>

world than Guru. May be he wanted to convey that Guru is God> personified but

not exactly God. So naturally the responsibility of> God is much more than

that of GUru. The comment of H.H does not say> anything Dharma vis-avis

Guru,rather it hightlights the greatness of> nature of God and the way HE

performs. HE has to take care of entire> WORLD. Guru naturally is not supose

to create or destroy world and> hence has some less work to do. The

creation,maintenance,and> destruction is what GOD is suppose to do but Guru

naturally does not> have this burden. It was to make clear the position of

Guru vis-avis> God. To my mind H.H has not said that God is not Guru. Every

God is> Guru but Evry Guru may not be God. If Guru is not burdened for world>

affairs as regards to its creation and destruction then why do we> compare

Guru with God? It is because Guru is burdened to uphold the>

Dharma(maintenance part of GOD). Protect the Dharma. Dharma is> essence of

life. If Dhrama is not there then there is Brahsthachar.> This leads to

chaos. So Guru must first estabilish Dharma and ensure> that it is always

honored. If this is not done, Guru is no Guru.> > So point is that H.H

possibly warned us to blindly consider Guru as> God and made it clear how two

differ. But I suppose no one can deny> that every God is Guru. That is why

krishna being God, is Guru of> all mankind. If one does not belive this and

stands against HIM,its> not HIS fault and problem.> > > As far as 'Sher' is

concerned, I made it clear that I was refering> to custom. You naturally dont

want to accept this and its your way> of looking at things. I can not

interfere in this.> > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space.> > AMolMAndar>

> > vedic astrology, "Chandrashekhar Sharma">

<boxdel> wrote:> > Dear Amolmandar,> > You are missing the point

again. The article by Shankaracharya was> given to> > make you understand

what the Shankaracharya says about Guru being> different> > grom God and

this is why I wanted to convey that perhaps my> understanding of> > the

English language is different than you. To reiterate the point> I paste> >

the relavant portion again, below.> > "God performs the works like creating

and protecting the world.> But the> > preceptor does not have these

responsibilities. God has> an 'office' while> > the Preceptor does not have

one."> > This makes it clear that Guru is not supposed to protect but only>

instruct> > about Dharma. I had , as a matter of fact posted this in bold as>

many have ,> > in the past taken this line of Guru Protecting Dharma. Guru

will> only> > protect Shishya(by giving him true knowledge) when he is

satisfied> about> > shishya's following the Path of Dharma. He does so by

bestowing> his grace> > and not by mere presence.I had given only part of

the article to> avoid> > misinterpretation. What His Holiness says in the

same article> would put the> > Guru God dilemma in proper perspective and

as such I am giving a> small> > relevant portion below.> > "In the

Chandogya Upanishad itself it is declared that only by the> grace of> > the

Guru true knowledge is possible. It says "aacaaryavaan purusho> veda"> >

(only one who has a Preceptor, gains true knowledge). "> > Whereas you found

His Holiness to mean that Guru is God by> referring to the> > first words

with out what has been said in its entirety. As a> matter of fact> >

,immediately after the shloka His Holiness gives its meaning. This> makes it>

> clear that it is salutation to the Perceptor(Guru). When one>

says"Twameva> > Mata Pita Twameva...." it does not mean that the Bhakta is>

referring to> > biological Mother and Father.Now this how we were taught to>

understand any> > prayer to the Almighty or Guru or even odes eulogising kings

, be> it in any> > language. Since your interpretations give a totally

different> meaning, the> > only explaination is that my perception of

concepts of euoligies> prayers> > etc. are defficient.So no sarcasm was

intended.> >> > About the "Sher" thing, this is what you said about your

own> knowledge and I> > have made my opinion about such a comment amply

clear.> >> > Hope this helps.> > Chandrashekhar.> >> >

> > amolmandar [amolmandar]>

> Saturday, September 06, 2003 1:56 PM> > To:

vedic astrology> > [vedic astrology] Re: Why is //

Jupiter capable of> destroying the> > house it and Saturn Protects//> >>

>> > Chandrashekhar ji NAmaste> >> > Thanks for the information. H.H

Shankaracharya says> >> > "Gurur - Brahma> > Gurur - Vishnuh> >

Guru -devo Maheswarah> > Gurur - sakshat Param Brahma> > Tasmai Sri

Gurave namah "> >> > but you will defend Sthanabrahasta karoti principle

of Guru very> > amezing!> >> > >>>I might be defficient in that

language as you are not,> > being "Sher"> >> > Here you are sounding

sarcastic and tendency of pushing the> things.> > Now I realized your

obsessions with 'Sthana Brahstha karoti'> > principle.> >> > I am

extermly sorry that I put myself against your principle> stand.> > But I

assure you that I will never cross my boundaries again and> > please accept

my pranams.> >> > Thanks a lot for your Time and Space.> >> >

AmolMAndar> >> >> > vedic astrology,

"Chandrashekhar Sharma"> > <boxdel> wrote:> > > Dear Amolmandar,>

> > Incontinuation to my mail giving the opinion of H.H.> >

Shankaracharya of> > > Kanchi Kamakoti Peetham, I forgot to reply to your>

statement "This> > way you> > > tried to show that it is not Guru who

fails but his shisyas> make> > him> > > to fail."> > > First, I

never said that shishyas made the Guru to fail. What I> > said was> > >

that it is shishyas that might fail and not the Guru, and in> that> >

reference> > > I demonstrated how Arjuna failed to implement the teachings

of> > Krishna.> > > Second,it appears that my usage of english is not

understood> as I> > might be> > > defficient in that language as you

are not, being "Sher"> > > Chandrashekhar.> > > -----Original

Message-----> > > amolmandar [amolmandar]> > >

Friday, September 05, 2003 2:27 PM> > > To:

vedic astrology> > > [vedic astrology] Re: Why

is // Jupiter capable of> > destroying the> > > house it and Saturn

Protects//> > >> > >> > > Chandrashekhar ji Namaste> > >> >

>> > > Again, the mails you put for me is not proving any point to>

me. I> > > said Guru is DHarma and Guru fails trying to uphold the>

Dharma> > but> > > Dharma never fails so how come Guru fails in a

position. I as> > well> > > said that Dharma is not religion. And I

never said anything> about> > > Religion or Dharma as to who brought it

in the thread.> Sthana> > > Brahstha means not following Dharma. But if

it happens in the> > > presence of Guru who is suppose to uphold it then

it is> faliure> > of> > > Guru. This happens only if Guru has BIG

EGO or he does not> have> > > enough courge to protect Dharma. That is

why he fails and> hence> > > Sthana Brahstha principle is applicable.

To suport this> > arguments I> > > quoted Mahabharat. Because in my

opinion, Mahabharat has many> > such> > > incidances where all

'Gurus' have failed because of these two> > > qualities. But in entire

Mahabahrata Krishna never failed in> > > upholding the Dharma and hence I

said except Krishna every> one> > > failed. That is why I said, If you

have real Guru like> Krishna> > then> > > you are bound to succeed.

You picked up the argument on> Krishna> > not> > > failing by

drifting the thread to Gita and quoting that> Krishna> > told> > >

Arjuna in Gita not to Grief but later Arjuna grieved. This> way> > you>

> > tried to show that it is not Guru who fails but his shisyas> make> >

him> > > to fail.> > >> > >> > > Sher> > >> > >

It seems that I am not able to express myself properly. In> the> > days>

> > of Mirza Galib, conducting the mushayara was a usual> practice in>

> > India. The participents used to say their Sher( 4 lines or 2> >

lines> > > of Urdu/Farsi) only if remaining participents respect the> >

feeling of> > > the one who is saying it, by reciting the same lines

after> him.> > This> > > act of others who repeat the lines of sher

is known as 'Sher> ko> > > Uthana'. This was to show the appriciation of

the Shayaer.If> for> > > your Sher there no one to Uthao your Sher, it

means> Mushayara is> > not> > > ready to accept you as shayer

either it is not worthy or> > Mushayara> > > is not capable of

understanding the sher.> > > That is why it is said "Sher ko tab hi bolo

jab koi Uthane> Wala> > ho".> > > Mirza in his initial days as

shayar,had left the Mushayara> many> > > times because of this reason.>

> >> > > I never ever claimed any authority over any of the subjects>

> related> > > to Jyotish or scriptures. I thought that you might be

aware> of> > this> > > custom that is why I said that. I was not

refering to Jungle> > sher.> > > Nor do I reffered myself as Sher or

for that matter anyone as> > Sher.> > > I was refering to a custom.

As you seemed to be rejecting> what I> > > have explained about Gita

without giving a thought, possibly> > > thinking that it just a jugglery

of Sanskrit. Or there might> be> > some> > > another reason but I

remember in a thread you once said that> you> > > were exasperated or

irritated because of some thing. This> happens> > > only if one

consideres the other person is not worth and> hence> > his> > >

opinion or one is not sure about his own stand on the topic> of> > >

discussions. Here you quote Great Parashar as who gives> > weightage to>

> > other's opinion but seem to forget it peacefully. The irony> is> >

that> > > you blemed all these things on me. At least I never cross my>

> limits> > > and do not hesitate to apologize if found guilty.> >

>> > > >>Arjuna is reffered to as Parantap, Gudakesha, Kaunteya,> > >

Kurunandana, Partha, Bharata,> > >> > >

>>Kiriti,Dhananjaya,Mahabaho,Kurushreshtha, Savyasachi,> > >> > >

{{Let me make it very clear,You asked me this and hence I am> > >

writting about it. I am not starting this from myside. I am> > doing it>

> > to the best of my capacity and if you find something wanting> then>

> > correct me but dont accuse me.}}> > >> > > Now I will try to

highlight the fact that VedVyasa have used> > names> > > of

Krishna-Arjuna with a purpose in Gita. Take the case of> > > Dhananjaya.

The word Dhananjaya means contoller/conqueror of> > pinda.> > > That

is why in the Yogshastra, there exists a yognadi termed> as> > >

Dhananjaya. That contol the pinda and hence universe. The> yogi> > >

strives to become Dhananjaya to gain the control over pinda> and> > >

hence try to become master of universe. One of the place> where> > it is>

> > used is 1st Adhaya and 15th shloka. Please excuse me but I> must>

> > write the shloka to express myself fully.> > >> > >

"PAnchaJanya rishikesho devadatta Dhananjaya:|> > > Paundram dadhamaou

mahashankham bhimakarma vukrodara||15||> > >> > > The name of Krishna

here is given as rishikesha and his> conch as> > > PAnchaJanya. The name

of Arjuna is given here as DHananjaya> and> > his> > > conch as

devadatta.'Rishik' means sense organs and 'Kesh'> means> > > controller

of the same. The word Shankha here means human> body.> > They> > >

are not normal conches found in sea. If you are aware there> is> > >

custom of 'Shanka-Prashalan' in yog shastra. In this, body is> > >

completly cleaned i.e. Prashalan. by repetedly drinking> water.> > The>

> > Shankah is Human body. The rishikesh means perfect yogi will> have>

> > perfect body(Shankha) that would be derived or given birth> from> >

five> > > elements (PanchaJanya). These five elements as> >

Akash,Vayu,Tejas,Aap> > > and Prithvi. The whole creation vibrates

through the five> > principle> > > elements and the embodiment or

incarnation of the same is the> > human> > > body of 'Pinda' as it is

called. The Arjuna is Dhananjaya> menas> > > contoller of 'Pinda' and

the one who is contoller of 'Pinda'> > must be> > > devine that is

why his humanbody is caleed as Devadatta. i.e.> > > given/alloted by

Devas or devine entities.> > > This sholka comes in the very begining of

Gita because> MAhabharat> > > war is a war of tendencies fought between

Kauravas and> pandavas.> > > Similarly the second line of the shloka can

be interpreted> but I> > > will desist myself for the obvious special

reasons.> > > So the point is one can see the purpose in use of a word

for> > Krish-> > > Arjuna in Gita. I can try on other names as well

but that> will> > > take 'space' and you wont like it. But I am sure

about what I> > said.> > > Every synonm for Krishna-Arjuna in Gita is

used with a> purpose.> > >> > >> > > Brhasth Karoti> > >>

> > What about Brhasta karoti principle.? What is wholistic use> of> >

this> > > principle? Does that mean a way to use this principle on> >

hindsight?> > >> > > Thanks a lot for your time and Space.> > >>

> > AmolMandar> > >> > >> > >> > > --- In

vedic astrology, "Chandrashekhar> Sharma"> > >

<boxdel> wrote:> > > > Dear Amol mandar,> > > > If you want to

stick to "sthana brashta karoti.." I am> > > glad.However as you> > >

> seem to suggest that I started deviating from the> astrological> > >

principle of> > > > "Sthana Bhrashta Karoti, I would like to refresh

your> memory by> > > giving your> > > > mail of August 26th

below.You brought in religion in to the> > > discussion by> > > >

saying, please do not point to the (not religion) in the> mail> > >

because the> > > > subsequent sentence" Dharma never fails" makes the

meaning> > amply> > > clear.> > > > " Chandrashekharji Namste>

> > > As usual you explained the things very lucidly but just> slight>

> > doubt.> > > > It is said many times that Guru is Dharma(not

religion)and> it> > is as> > > > well said that Guru tries to

uphold Dharma but usually> fails.> > Hence> > > > Dharma fails. But

many say Dharma never fails. So Guru> should> > also> > > never> >

> > fail. Then why it fails with respect to house?> > > > Does MAYA

play any role in this?> > > >> > > > Thanks a lot for your Time and

Space.> > > > AmolMAndar."> > > >> > > > This was your

response to my mail as under:> > > > "Dear Amolmandar,> > > > I

will give you an example outside> > > > astrology and religion.Guru

represents Minister or the> > teacher .> > > Now teacher> > > >

tells that which is right.Students many a times feel> > unconfortable> >

> in the> > > > presence of the Teacher as he monitors their behaviour,>

> specially> > > if in> > > > their youth they want to do that

he might not> approve.Similar> > is> > > the case> > > > with

the king whose ministers forbids him from doing> something> > that> >

> > is against RajDharma.Now imagine House where Jupiter is> posited> >

> being the> > > > student/King and Jupiter being the Teacher. The

results> for the> > > house would> > > > be clear.Of course , as

I said earlier this is only my way> at> > > looking at it> > > >

in order to understand why this happens, and the Sages'> > principles> >

> are given> > > > to us as such without the reasons behind them. We

have to> apply> > > our Viveka> > > > to fathom the logic behind

it.Other worthies might hold> > different> > > views.> > > >

Hope this helps understand the concept.> > > > Chandrashekhar."> > >

>> > > > Could you show me where in my mail have I brought in>

religion?> > I> > > could give> > > > you lots of examples but

as you have made up your mind> that you> > > were not the> > > >

one who brought religion in to the discussions and that> > > Mahabharata

does not> > > > include Bhagvadgita, despite your mails below your own

mail> > > message, it is> > > > futile to argue. Specially implying

that what Krishna> > > > said"Mayaaprasannen...tvadanyen na drustapurvam">

Adhyaaya11 Sh> > 47> > > is false> > > > by pitting

Vedavyasa's authority against the Lord makes the> > intent> > > of>

> > > needless argument very clear.> > > >> > > > About your

"Sher ko tabhi bolo",let me state that this> comment> > is> > > not

only> > > > unwarranted but unworthy of one who claims to have mastered>

> > Scriptures, as> > > > you imply.Even the Great Parashara gives

weightage to> other's> > > opinion and> > > > does not call

himself "Sher".> > > > If your contention changes to the statement being

related> > > to "Sher" of> > > > Jungle, alas the Sher part cannot,

now, be tested against> real> > > Sher of> > > > Jungle as Hunting

of wild beasts is prohibited, unlike in> my> > youth> > > when we>

> > > tested ourselves against "Sher" of the live variety.> > > >> >

> > Trying to call Guru upholder of Dharma in one mail,> proposing> >

that> > > all Gurus> > > > failed other than Krishna in Mahabharata

in another and> then> > again> > > stating> > > > that Guru is

Parmatma and therefore Parmatma is Guru, is> some> > > logic of a> >

> > great brain that mere mortals like me do neither> understand nor> >

> accept as> > > > part of a serious discussion. I would have enjoyed

your> > > explainations of why> > > > in different shlokas Arjuna

is reffered to as Parantap,> > Gudakesha,> > > Kaunteya,> > > >

Kurunandana, Partha, Bharata,> > >

Kiriti,Dhananjaya,Mahabaho,Kurushreshtha,> > > > Savyasachi,> > >

>> > > > Chandrashekhar.> > > >> > > >> > > > ---> >

> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.> > > > Checked by AVG

anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).> > > > Version: 6.0.512 /

Virus Database: 309 - Release Date:> 8/19/03> > >> > >> > >

Sponsor> > > > > >> > >>

> >> > >> > > Archives:

vedic astrology> > >> > > Group info:

vedic-> > astrology/info.html> > >> >

> To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-> >

> > >> > > ....... May Jupiter's light shine

on us .......> > >> > > || Om Tat Sat || Sarvam Sri

Krishnaarpanamastu ||> > >> > > Your use of is

subject to the Terms of> > Service.> > >> > > ---> > >

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.> > > Checked by AVG anti-virus

system (http://www.grisoft.com).> > > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database:

309 - Release 8/19/03> >> >> > Sponsor> >>

>> >> > Archives: vedic astrology> >> >

Group info: vedic-> astrology/info.html> >>

> To UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank mail to vedic astrology-> >

>> > ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us .......> >> > || Om

Tat Sat || Sarvam Sri Krishnaarpanamastu ||> >> > Your use of

is subject to the Terms of> Service.> >> > ---> >

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system

(http://www.grisoft.com).> > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release

8/19/03> > > Sponsor> > >

> > > Archives: vedic astrology> > Group info:

vedic astrology/info.html> > To UNSUBSCRIBE:

Blank mail to vedic astrology-> > ....... May

Jupiter's light shine on us .......> > || Om Tat Sat || Sarvam Sri

Krishnaarpanamastu ||> >

Terms of Service.Archives: vedic astrologyGroup

info: vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE:

Blank mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's

light shine on us .......|| Om Tat Sat || Sarvam Sri Krishnaarpanamastu

||