Guest guest Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 Dear Utpal, Some points came to my mind. Thought of mailing them to you. Jumping on conclusion without properly studying/thinking about Thakur's life, just on literal meaning of those 2 words would be a sure blasphemy. You are right. But since this is a debate and just a debate, let me put forth some logical points. 1) Two wrongs never make a right. This is one mistake we Indians do when we try to debate over something. When we are discussing Tulasidasji, it does not matter whether Ramakrishna - who lived in a different century - was right or now. That would be a different debate. 2) Ramakrishna did not write anything -. He only woke up people to what ever degree was necessary and gave general talks on spirituality. So, one can always contend that a mistake maybe the biographers mistake. M or Saradananda could very well have been mistaken in what he quoted. Giving a freewheeling talk is different from creating a composition. When one writes, one has more time and energy to indulge in thinking, and checking up possibilities of different shades of meanings for the simple reason that the audience is large, unknown and spread out over huge spans of time. When one talks, and that too talking to friends, or close people, one does not need to be careful of every word or sentence one speaks. To understand this better, we have to think - scientifically speaking - how communication happens in three levels. Around 33 percent of the communication is through the words, 64 percent through body language and a solid 3 percent is 'unknown' or sub conscious communication. This last three percent is the most powerful. When a person can use this 3 percent of sub conscious communication - he can move masses of people. All great leaders do so. All rock stars also do so (IMO). If you listen to the lyrics of an average rock music, you may find it uninspiring. But if you were to be present in a live rock concert, you will definitely feel an energy and get swayed. Then comes body language which is so important. For example, if you enter a Govt office in India, you may find that the babus there will be sitting relaxed in their chair with their spine reclining. Whatever you say will hardly make any impact on them. That is why the files in Govt. of India offices move at a snail's pace. If you find that someone whom you are talking to is sitting cross legged on a chair, with left leg crossing the right, even if the person may hang on eagerly to every word you speak, know it for the sure that there is a strong change he is listening through one ear and throwing out the words through the other. In short, pretending to listen. In effect, once you leave his presence he probably won't bother about what you said. And last is spoken word. When two people speak with each other, both words and body language come into picture. Sometimes sub conscious communication too can happen. Therefore there is a LOT of the energy exchanged/communication not through words but through other means. When you write down something, body languages gets negated. Therefore, one needs to be extra cautious while writing something in order to convey the correct sense. That is why there are so many more rules to be followed for writing anything. So therefore, if Ramakrishna is "talking" to someone he is probably communicating using all means possible. But if he were to write a book and mention "Kamini and Kanchan" without further explanation of what he intends to mean, then he too can be called to question. But he never wrote any books, and the authors who did, made sure they explained the sense. Contrast this to that line from Ramacharit Manas, without any qualifications, that implies "women", "sudra", "pashu" are worthy of "tadan". If I were a woman, I would take offense to that line. 3) Whenever I am doing a critic of a religious literature, I keep the Koran as a standard. By this I mean, whenever I am judging a book of religious nature, I follow the same parameters of judgement that I use when I judge the Koran as a book. The Koran contains a verse, translated correctly in the M.A. Shakir and Dawood translations, which recommend husbands to beat their wives if the wives are disobedient. "Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in their sleeping places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great. (Shakir's version of the Koran, Quran, 4:34) A lot of muslims I have talked to, defend the above giving various reasons one of which is 'misunderstanding context'. I find it inexcusable. Same way a line in a religious book bracketing "nari", "pashu", "sudra" together, I find to be equally inexcusable. That is the sense that comes out from a normal reading of that line. I am not commenting on the whole of Ramcharit Manas, but that one vital line. [Prem, Ahinsa], Satya Vachan aur Par-stri Matusamaan| Inase agar prabhu na mile to Tulasi Juth Jabaan || (I have given this doha out of memory and its quite possible that first two wrods are wrong in the doha ) Interesting doha. Maybe you are right, maybe you are not. But that line (pashu/naari etc) definitely conveys a simple meaning. If Tulasidasji ment what you are saying, he should have used some appropiate punctuation marks. Since he did not, I have to reject your explanation. Or I can say, Tulasidasji respects women a lot, but that line is simply a bad composition. One way or the other, I cannot absolve the composer of that specific line. BTW, were you refering to the Gita verse 1.41 where Arjuna talks about women of the family getting corrupted? You and I've notably common Astrological factors in our chart. Astrologer in me found out just few days back but I'll not give it hear for the obvious reason lest our own Mr. Narasimha should get mad at me. I am sure we will make very good friends:). I normally become strong friends with people with whom I "discuss" things. Once, long back when I was furiously debating over something, my vastly more patient and experienced opponent gave me some invaluable advices which I stick by even today. Thought of sharing it in here. He said: " I find it is always best to debate online if one is keen on finding the correct resolution. Face to face debates are nothing but personality clashes. Slow the pace of a debate as required, which means, do not answer the moment you read . Take a break, take your mind off, see a movie if you have to, come back, re read and then answer. Thus what seemed revolting at first may not seem so bad later on. Never be in a hurry. This is not a wresting match. " -Regards Rajarshi PS: Please take the debate in the right vein of a debate. There is nothing personal here. The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra--- On Wed, 16/12/09, vedic_pathak <vedic_pathak wrote: vedic_pathak <vedic_pathak Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (Rama & Tulasi Das) Date: Wednesday, 16 December, 2009, 5:19 PM Dear(est) Rajarshi, back engineering job to bail out Vow! Refreshing phrase. Too good. It seems a season of debating. Branches of threads are coming out. 'Kamini and `Kanchan' was the exact words which Ramakrishna used freely during his life time. Now Kamini means a woman and its possible that several sections would have taken reservation at this. That seems very obvious otherwise why Swami Sardananda required to defend Thakur in his book called Ramakrishna Lilaprasanga. It seemed to me that Paramahansa Yogananda also have referred to this issue without mentioning Thakur's name directly (I may be wrong but i strongly felt like that when i read the 'Autobiography of a yogi' some 4/5 years back). Sardanada in a sense did 'Back engineering job to bail out ' . If we go by 'Kamini' word literaly, then Thakur could be portrayed as Women basher. but we all know that Thakur refffered to Lust and Desire of worldly objects whenever he spoke those two words. Jumping on conclusion without properly studying/thinking about Thakur's life, just on literal meaning of those 2 words would be a sure blasphemy. Same way, I also thought about Sant Tulasi das ji. I was telling myself that can a saint of his devotion and poetic skills and add to that steadfastly devoted to Lord Rama (Who never shown slightest dis-resepct to women) , utter such words and saggrigate 'Nari' for nothing. I was not convinced. One of the 'Dohas' of Tulasi Das goes like this - [Prem, Ahinsa], Satya Vachan aur Par-stri Matusamaan| Inase agar prabhu na mile to Tulasi Juth Jabaan || (I have given this doha out of memory and its quite possible that first two wrods are wrong in the doha ) If a poet is asking to look at a woman as a Mother, how could he mean 'Nari' to be 'Tadan Adhikari'? As you pointed out, on a look at surface (at the levelof text), it means which many belives but you and me need to look at little deeper. A person who did the world of Good to Indias ordinary masses by rewriting the whole Ramayana in a language which people (from north) could easily understand, The man who gave immortal 'Hanumaan Chalisa' can not be lebeled so casually as 'Nari basher' or 'Shudra Hater' (As Mayaavati brand poticians would capitalise). Regarding your questions of why Pashu are only Nari and not Nara .... I think he was reffering to Men with the words Ganvaar and Shudra and Pashu Nari must be a joint statement. Again as you already know, Shudra was not B.C., OBC, KBC, HSBC etc.. :-). but a fallen man, a mean thinking man. I have to agree if you say that Ganvaar and Shudra can also be said about Woaman however looking at the Doha and general prevailing conditions of society, it seems that he used those words for Men. Grammar...Hmmmm. i don't know if he has really used proper grammer in such Dohas. There are verse in Bhagvad Gita which can be criticised by people from other faiths if they are taken literaly and without understanding personality of Krishna . *** Regarding Ramachandra, Thank you for making clear, your notable friend's view and your detailed explanation by giving examples. But again i don't think that to consider Rama as God will actually be blockage in leading life like him and that too when almost everybody in Sanatan Dharma knows him as God. Tthat is not reversible in any case. And above all, Incarnation of Lord Vishnu - He is a GOD *** You and I've notably common Astrological factors in our chart. Astrologer in me found out just few days back but I'll not give it hear for the obvious reason lest our own Mr. Narasimha should get mad at me. Warm Regards, Utpal PS: I am writing every reference from my memory so please correct me when I am wrong in giving any reference , rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14@. ..> wrote:>> Dear Utpal,>  > I do not think that Saint like 'Tulasi Das' would ever be so hard on women. > The actual poem is like this:> || Dhol Ganwaar Shudra Pashu Naari, Yah sab Taadan ke adhikari ||> Some years back, i read an explanation that Tulasi Das ji meant "Pashu Naari" and NOT pashu and Naari. It means He feels appropriate to punish a Naari who is like pashu in her characteristics. That really makes good sense atleast to me.>  > I am no one to comment on an accepted saint like Sri Tulasidasji' s spiritual level, but that sentence definitely looks like he clubbed "pashu" and "naari" in same category, not pashu-nari. The highlighting is done by you, not in the actual text. If he ment pashu-nari he should have used some basic grammer to remove confusion. He did not. At the level of text, it is indefensible. Also, if I go by your explanation, why only Naari who are pashu, why not Naras who are like pashus? There are more Naaras of Pashu nature than Naaris in the world. This explanation that you found looks more like a back engineering job to bail out.>  >  > Regarding Rama self realization, I think I was unable to express the ideas of my friend clearly. Let me try again. He is not really saying that Sri Rama was not a self realized man. Infact he quite agrees that Sri Rama was an Avatar of God. What he says is that, (his opinion) God did not descend as Sri Rama in order to be worshipped. He descended in order to lead by example. That is why the text is called Rama+ayana. A path that an ordinary man can and should follow. One of principles. Compare this to the name of the other great epic, Mahabharata, which was not named "Krishna+ayana" . One cannot follow Krishna's path. >  > Whenever, according to him, we attribute Godhood to Sri Rama, our subcsious mind will create a blockage, a divide between the worshipper and the worshipped and thus make it impossible to lead a life like Rama did. BUt if we try to look at it like the story of a great king, a nobel man, a devoted husband etc, we have a better chance of following such a life.> An ordinary man cannot lead the life of a God but he can follow the life of a great man.>  > Similarly, even today lot of people advise that one should try to become like Vivekananda, or that this country needs its youth to be like Vivekanadas in teh future. It does not mean Vivekanada was not a self realized saint of highest calibre, but his life's image is like one who lived like a lion among sheep of ordinary men, fearless and uncompromising and principled. If every person would constantly think that Vivekanada was a saint who worked by the pwoer of a deity or due to his extreme spirituality or the blessing of a great guru, no one will ever make an attempt to be inspired by him or emulate his way of living.Vivekanada was a spiritual giant, but the image he projected was one of a tireless, fearless KarmaYogi. THAT can inspire people. >  >  On the other hand you will never hear anyone advising that one should try to lead a life like Ramarkishna.  That is impossible. He was God incarnate leading a charmed life. >  > Similar is the case with the Avatar called Sri Ramachandra incomparison to Sri Krishna. One can become Rama in actions but one can never become Krishna. Therefore, my friend believes, one should not consider Rama as a God to be worshipped, but as a model to be followed. Like Vivekanada.>  > Hope I have put forth his idea clear.>  > -Regards>  Rajarshi>  >  >  >  >  >  >  > > >  > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra> > --- On Tue, 15/12/09, vedic_pathak vedic_pathak@ ... wrote:> > > vedic_pathak vedic_pathak@ ...> Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (About my friend)> > Tuesday, 15 December, 2009, 8:29 PM> > >  > > > > > Dear Rajarshi,> I some how did not read your point no.2.> >Also, there is a line in there which equates women with animals or >something similar. He believes that was introduces in the text >because Tulasidas had a problem controlling his own lust.> I do not think that Saint like 'Tulasi Das' would ever be so hard on women. > The actual poem is like this:> || Dhol Ganwaar Shudra Pashu Naari, Yah sab Taadan ke adhikari ||> Some years back, i read an explanation that Tulasi Das ji meant "Pashu Naari" and NOT pashu and Naari. It means He feels appropriate to punish a Naari who is like pashu in her characteristics. That really makes good sense atleast to me.> About Lust in Tulasi das: It is well known that Tulasi Das was extremely attached to his wife so much that he won't allow her to go even at her parental home for a day. However he left the sansaara in a Flash. in a moment for ever. That is a great vairaagya. almost like Sri Ramakrishna used to give the example of a village Man to define the true vairaagya.> my 2 quick cent!> Best Regards,> Utpal> > , rajarshi nandy rajarshi14@ ..> wrote:> >> > Dear Kishore and Utpal,> >  > > I am troubled by one thing just like you are. It is understandable if he says Rama is an ideal man but hard to believe that such a great person claims Rama is not God. Tempted to ask him what really is the definition of God which differentiates Rama from Krishna?> > > > Some months back I had a very lengthy, verbose and charged/heated debate with him on whether Sri Rama is God or not. Mind you, these are all theoritical/ theological debates - nothing to do with actual spirituality. Finally he stopped the debate because I was getting agitated and it would have affected our friendship. > >  > > Whenever his opinion is asked on anything, he will only mention that what he can support using logic. Therefore he never generally discusses spirituality with anyone per se. He will discuss and debate scriptures using exact quotations etc, (theology) but not about mysticism or sadhana or anything which needs a belief system. That is why most people know him only as a very rational, massively knowledgeable and uncorruptable human being.  They have no clue about his meditations or anything. He never projects himself as spiritual and generally would not discuss God in public.> >  > > Therefore our discussion was also on those aspects which can be proved or disproved theologically - 1) Is Rama a God as per Valmiki Ramayana 2) Is it wrong if people consider him as God .. 3) The merits of the Ramcharit Manas of Tulasidasji.> >  > > 1) To the first question, he believes the answer is "no". > >  > > 2) To the second question he says it cannot be debated from a spiritual point if it is right or wrong - but his personal opinion is that one should try to follow the way of life shown by Sri Rama rather than worshipping him. He said, Sri Rama had mastery of all divine weapons. He could have destroyed Ravana and his whole army in a blink of an eye, right from the place where he was located when he first heard the news of Sita's abduction, but Rama did not do so and instead chose the hard way of destroying Ravana - the human way. So as per my friend, it is more important to emulate Rama's ideas than to worship Rama.> >  > > 3) He considers the Ramcharit Manas, from a literary angle, a hodgepodge of langauges and styles ranging from Awadhi to BrajBhasa. An author's paradise (since many rules of composition has been flouted) but a critics nightmare. Also, there is a line in there which equates women with animals or something similar. He believes that was introduces in the text because Tulasidas had a problem controlling his own lust. Therefore, he ended up composing a sentence derogatory to women. Further, he argues that if Sri Rama is worshipped as God, then the purpose of his Avatarhood goes waste. Sri Rama was there to explain idea way of life. Krishna was there to be worshipped because Krishna was maximum ability of God on this plane. Nothing can be more God than Krishna was on this plane, so he thinks.> >  > > The above are merely his opinions, feel free to disagree. > >  > >  > > Dear Utpal,> >  > > One request, if you can speak to him about his thought on Food habits, it'll be great.> >  > > I have been out of touch with him since August, been busy myself. But will ask him. However I don't know whether he will respond. Because as I explained above, he rarely discusses/debates anything from a purely spiritual angle. > >  > > It was only by chance that I found out one day about his meditations etc and then he confirmed them when asked.> >  > > I have seen him debating with Vegans - purely from a scientific point of view - about why there is no harm in having regulated amounts of meat (not red meat). > >  > > But I say, as Narasimha said, this person should not be taken as an ideal regarding food habits. Sachin can bat and score century even with a sore back, we will not be able to do it. His strength is his control of mind and his dedication to truth. > >  > > -Regards> >  Rajarshi> >  > >  > >  > >  > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra> > > > --- On Tue, 15/12/09, Kishore Chitrapu chitrapu@ wrote:> > > > > > Kishore Chitrapu chitrapu@> > Re: Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (About my friend)> > > > Tuesday, 15 December, 2009, 3:54 AM> > > > > >  > > > > > > > > Namaste Rajarshi,> > > > Thanks for painting such an portrait of this great person with your words.> > > > Spending 72 hours in meditation is act of no ordinary person. His other characteristics and experiences assert that he is a great person. I am troubled by one thing just like you are. It is understandable if he says Rama is an ideal man but hard to believe that such a great person claims Rama is not God. Tempted to ask him what really is the definition of God which differentiates Rama from Krishna?> > > > -Kishore> > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 4:02 PM, rajarshi nandy rajarshi14 (AT) (DOT) co.in> wrote:> > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Laxmi Narayan,> >  > >  I was intrigued by above line in your mail and want to know more about this devotee. Do you know him as a friend and is he a Indian? What sort of path/sadhana is he following?? Is he a sannyasin or a householder ?Did specific changes happened in his life after he had these samadhi and visions.Any other special things about him.> >  > >  > > Yes he is a friend of mine. I can only tell you very little about his spiritual life, because he hardly ever shares it with anyone. He is married, lives in Delhi and has a son as well.> >  > > Before I tell you anything more about his spiritual life that I know, let me say line or two about the nature of this friend of mine. I met him about two years back. What first attracted me to towards him was his impeccable honestly. I mean, he is a maniac when it comes to honestly. If someone were to put a gun to his head and ask him to just say a simple, harmless lie, like sun rises in the west, he would not say it. Therefore he never jokes with anyone too! He has actually never ever spoken even a single lie in his whole life, big or small. When he was in his school, once his teacher told him that Indian languages are richer than English, he believed his teacher. Later someone else told him English is more comprehensive language and the world cannot do with it. He got confused. Since that day, he bought himself two thick fat dictionaries, one English, one Hindi and for ten years every day he spend one hour reading the> English dictionary and> > one hour reading the Hindi dictionary apart from reading up volumes of Hindi and English literature. When I asked him why, he just said it is because he wanted to be equally adept at both the languages so that one day he can take a really detached view to judge the truth about which is more comprehensive language! As I said, he has an uncompromising attitude when it comes to finding out the truth about anything. By education, he is a Phd is mathematics. He has worked in different fields, from banking to education to journalism. He did not last for long in most places. He speaks and writes fluently, English, Bengali, Hindi, Urdu, Sanskrit, Arabic, Persian, French. Now he is learning Tamil. He composes poetry in all the above languages. When he was in college, he considered himself an atheist. While applying for a job he had kept the place makered for religion as blank. When the clerk who was supposed to take the forms saw that blank space,> he asked> > my friend's name. Hearing a Hindu name, the clerk wrote "Hindu". Seeing this, my friend snatched the form from the clerk and tore it up right there. Because, he considered himself an atheist and writing Hindu in the form would have been a lie. > >  > > So this gives a basic idea of the man I am speaking of. All his friends, whoever knows him, calls him Rama of Kaliyuga.> >  > > One day, long back, he was going to office for some urgent meeting. His way to office passed by a Krishna temple. As he was passing by in his scooter, suddenly he felt a strange urge to go into the temple. He says he still does not know why he went inside the temple, but he did. That was at 9 o clock in the morning. Next when he sees his watch it is 4:30 in the evening! And he has no knowledge of how the time went. When he asked the priest, the priest said that he went into the temple sat down and just stayed as he was for the whole time without any movement. The priest somehow felt scared to disturb him. But my friend had no idea why this happened. He remembered nothing, as if he was in deep sleep.> >  > > Then he started meditating at home, and it was there that he got visions etc of Krishna. He does not say much about these, infact most people who know him also do not know these things. But once he was in samadhi for 72 hours, not moving from his meditation seat, in the exact same place and same position for 3 days continuously. Only his wife and close relatives know about this incident. I believe nowadays when ever he sits for meditation he often enters the state of Samadhi. When someone asked him how he felt during samadhi, he just said it feels as if the whole universe orginates from me. I am the sun, the moon, the stars, the planets, the animals, men, women, children, the wind, the water, the space, smaller than the atom and bigger than everything. It cannot be accurately desribed. He considers Sri Krishna to be God and Lord Rama to be the ideal man.That is why he does not like the Ramacharit Manas because he thinks it elevated> Sri Rama to the> > level of a God whereas the aim of the orginal Valmiki Ramayana was to show Sri Rama as an ideal man, not a God.The difference he says is that, an ideal man is someone who can be emulated, an ordinary man can and should aim to become like the ideal. But a God cannot be emulated by ordinary men. One cannot become Krishna, but one can try to lead his life like Rama. I have argued with him over this, but I am merely stating his idea. Also he does not have a Guru - a human guru at least, and advises people to not trust most Gurus these days. Needless to say, he is not an atheist any more.> >  > > Later he had once mentioned he knew the relation he had with all the people around him in his past lives. His mother he says, was his daughter in his past life etc. Nowadays he spends a lot of time on different internet forums interacting with people, specially with those in the age group of 18 to 30, discussing anything and everything with them, from Indian politics to Indian history, religion, etc etc. His idea is to impart right knowledge to young people who will be the future of this country.> >  > > He is am omnivorous person. Like any other Bengali, eats fish, meat etc.> >  > > I shall refrain from mentioning his name because I had not asked his permission before mentioning him.> >  > > -Regards> >  Rajarshi> > > > > > PS: I would not like this mail to be considered as a part of the debate. This mail is just because Laxmi Narayan asked for information.> > > > > >  > > > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra> > > > --- On Mon, 14/12/09, Laxmi Narayan <shrijishrihari@ .co. uk> wrote:> > > > > > Laxmi Narayan <shrijishrihari@ .co. uk>> > Re: Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (From a vegetarian's point of view)> > > > Monday, 14 December, 2009, 10:34 PM> > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > > I know a devotee of Krishna - not just a devotee but one who sees> > Krishna during his meditations and have experienced samadhi many times> > over, who is omnivorous.> > > > Hello Rajarshi,> >                      I was intrigued by above line in your mail and want to know more about this devotee. Do you know him as a friend and is he a Indian? What sort of path/sadhana is he following?? Is he a sannyasin or a householder ?Did specific changes happened in his life after he had these samadhi and visions.Any other special things about him.> > > > In the Gita Lord is saying whatever you do/eat offer it to me first. So he is offering all these non-veg to Lord with devotion, Right?? Then prasdam all around??> > > > My curious questions are not against your acceptance of his exexperienceut to learn more.After all he is part of hidden violence. Somebody is inflicting gruesome pain and misery on animals and birds on his behalf and he is consuming them and yet he is experiencing all these exotic visions, But no feeling of kindness towards birds and animals.> > > > Where did I go wrong? Simple dal/roti and do not even touch onion/garlic/ pepper but no such samadhi? > > > > When we get burnt, we need to be careful.Many years ago I saw in a book/article about Dayamata who succeded Paramhansa Yoganand. Once she went to India and told a Spiritual Master that her progress has stopped. Master said, you are eating eggs which she admitted that she was doing secretly.> > > > This is very complex world. No outright solutions for so many difficult questions. Followers of 3 faiths which all originated in middle east are fighting each other all the time. Sometimes I think, from which part of Spiritual Sky these energies are coming,Are they also enemies there?? Their Gods said in their holy books that animals are their food. So they cannot even think about souls in animals or their pain and emotions.> > > > Then I have read stories about several people, who follow these faiths and are non-veg and how they exexperience spiritual highs and other such phenomena. It is so difficult to comprehend. Would they remain in the cycle of b/d till they learn about kindness???> > > > Kind Regards> > LaxmiNarayan> > > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 12/12/09, rajarshi nandy rajarshi14 (AT) (DOT) co.in> wrote:> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. http://in.. com/> >> > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. http://in.. com/> The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 Namaste, Further to my mail below: The line in Ramcharit Manas goes : || Dhol Ganwaar Shudra Pashu Naari, Yah sab Taadan ke adhikari || Dhol = Drum Ganwaar = Illiterate Shudra = Shudra Pashu = Animal Naari = Women Taadan = Beating Therefore exact translation would be: Drum illiterate shudra animal women, are fit to be beaten. One line of thinking, as suggested by Utpal, is that it should be read "pashu-nari" (animalistic women) and not just "animal, women". That is, pashu is an adjective for the noun naari. I don't agree. Nothing in the text suggests so. Secondly, we have not yet come to discussing the wisdom of advising a "tadan" for these above diverse group which includes a "gawaar" as well! Then by that logic, more than half of India should get a "taadan" because more than half of India is illiterate. -Regards Rajarshi The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra--- On Thu, 17/12/09, rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14 wrote: rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14Re: Tulasi Das/Ramakrishna - communication. Date: Thursday, 17 December, 2009, 4:03 PM Dear Utpal, Some points came to my mind. Thought of mailing them to you. Jumping on conclusion without properly studying/thinking about Thakur's life, just on literal meaning of those 2 words would be a sure blasphemy. You are right. But since this is a debate and just a debate, let me put forth some logical points. 1) Two wrongs never make a right. This is one mistake we Indians do when we try to debate over something. When we are discussing Tulasidasji, it does not matter whether Ramakrishna - who lived in a different century - was right or now. That would be a different debate. 2) Ramakrishna did not write anything -. He only woke up people to what ever degree was necessary and gave general talks on spirituality. So, one can always contend that a mistake maybe the biographers mistake. M or Saradananda could very well have been mistaken in what he quoted. Giving a freewheeling talk is different from creating a composition. When one writes, one has more time and energy to indulge in thinking, and checking up possibilities of different shades of meanings for the simple reason that the audience is large, unknown and spread out over huge spans of time. When one talks, and that too talking to friends, or close people, one does not need to be careful of every word or sentence one speaks. To understand this better, we have to think - scientifically speaking - how communication happens in three levels. Around 33 percent of the communication is through the words, 64 percent through body language and a solid 3 percent is 'unknown' or sub conscious communication. This last three percent is the most powerful. When a person can use this 3 percent of sub conscious communication - he can move masses of people. All great leaders do so. All rock stars also do so (IMO). If you listen to the lyrics of an average rock music, you may find it uninspiring. But if you were to be present in a live rock concert, you will definitely feel an energy and get swayed. Then comes body language which is so important. For example, if you enter a Govt office in India, you may find that the babus there will be sitting relaxed in their chair with their spine reclining. Whatever you say will hardly make any impact on them. That is why the files in Govt. of India offices move at a snail's pace. If you find that someone whom you are talking to is sitting cross legged on a chair, with left leg crossing the right, even if the person may hang on eagerly to every word you speak, know it for the sure that there is a strong change he is listening through one ear and throwing out the words through the other. In short, pretending to listen. In effect, once you leave his presence he probably won't bother about what you said. And last is spoken word. When two people speak with each other, both words and body language come into picture. Sometimes sub conscious communication too can happen. Therefore there is a LOT of the energy exchanged/communica tion not through words but through other means. When you write down something, body languages gets negated. Therefore, one needs to be extra cautious while writing something in order to convey the correct sense. That is why there are so many more rules to be followed for writing anything. So therefore, if Ramakrishna is "talking" to someone he is probably communicating using all means possible. But if he were to write a book and mention "Kamini and Kanchan" without further explanation of what he intends to mean, then he too can be called to question. But he never wrote any books, and the authors who did, made sure they explained the sense. Contrast this to that line from Ramacharit Manas, without any qualifications, that implies "women", "sudra", "pashu" are worthy of "tadan". If I were a woman, I would take offense to that line. 3) Whenever I am doing a critic of a religious literature, I keep the Koran as a standard. By this I mean, whenever I am judging a book of religious nature, I follow the same parameters of judgement that I use when I judge the Koran as a book. The Koran contains a verse, translated correctly in the M.A. Shakir and Dawood translations, which recommend husbands to beat their wives if the wives are disobedient. "Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in their sleeping places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great. (Shakir's version of the Koran, Quran, 4:34) A lot of muslims I have talked to, defend the above giving various reasons one of which is 'misunderstanding context'. I find it inexcusable. Same way a line in a religious book bracketing "nari", "pashu", "sudra" together, I find to be equally inexcusable. That is the sense that comes out from a normal reading of that line. I am not commenting on the whole of Ramcharit Manas, but that one vital line. [Prem, Ahinsa], Satya Vachan aur Par-stri Matusamaan| Inase agar prabhu na mile to Tulasi Juth Jabaan || (I have given this doha out of memory and its quite possible that first two wrods are wrong in the doha ) Interesting doha. Maybe you are right, maybe you are not. But that line (pashu/naari etc) definitely conveys a simple meaning. If Tulasidasji ment what you are saying, he should have used some appropiate punctuation marks. Since he did not, I have to reject your explanation. Or I can say, Tulasidasji respects women a lot, but that line is simply a bad composition. One way or the other, I cannot absolve the composer of that specific line. BTW, were you refering to the Gita verse 1.41 where Arjuna talks about women of the family getting corrupted? You and I've notably common Astrological factors in our chart. Astrologer in me found out just few days back but I'll not give it hear for the obvious reason lest our own Mr. Narasimha should get mad at me. I am sure we will make very good friends:). I normally become strong friends with people with whom I "discuss" things. Once, long back when I was furiously debating over something, my vastly more patient and experienced opponent gave me some invaluable advices which I stick by even today. Thought of sharing it in here. He said: " I find it is always best to debate online if one is keen on finding the correct resolution. Face to face debates are nothing but personality clashes. Slow the pace of a debate as required, which means, do not answer the moment you read . Take a break, take your mind off, see a movie if you have to, come back, re read and then answer. Thus what seemed revolting at first may not seem so bad later on. Never be in a hurry. This is not a wresting match. " -Regards Rajarshi PS: Please take the debate in the right vein of a debate. There is nothing personal here. The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra--- On Wed, 16/12/09, vedic_pathak <vedic_pathak@ > wrote: vedic_pathak <vedic_pathak@ > Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (Rama & Tulasi Das)Wednesday, 16 December, 2009, 5:19 PM Dear(est) Rajarshi, back engineering job to bail out Vow! Refreshing phrase. Too good. It seems a season of debating. Branches of threads are coming out. 'Kamini and `Kanchan' was the exact words which Ramakrishna used freely during his life time. Now Kamini means a woman and its possible that several sections would have taken reservation at this. That seems very obvious otherwise why Swami Sardananda required to defend Thakur in his book called Ramakrishna Lilaprasanga. It seemed to me that Paramahansa Yogananda also have referred to this issue without mentioning Thakur's name directly (I may be wrong but i strongly felt like that when i read the 'Autobiography of a yogi' some 4/5 years back). Sardanada in a sense did 'Back engineering job to bail out ' . If we go by 'Kamini' word literaly, then Thakur could be portrayed as Women basher. but we all know that Thakur refffered to Lust and Desire of worldly objects whenever he spoke those two words. Jumping on conclusion without properly studying/thinking about Thakur's life, just on literal meaning of those 2 words would be a sure blasphemy. Same way, I also thought about Sant Tulasi das ji. I was telling myself that can a saint of his devotion and poetic skills and add to that steadfastly devoted to Lord Rama (Who never shown slightest dis-resepct to women) , utter such words and saggrigate 'Nari' for nothing. I was not convinced. One of the 'Dohas' of Tulasi Das goes like this - [Prem, Ahinsa], Satya Vachan aur Par-stri Matusamaan| Inase agar prabhu na mile to Tulasi Juth Jabaan || (I have given this doha out of memory and its quite possible that first two wrods are wrong in the doha ) If a poet is asking to look at a woman as a Mother, how could he mean 'Nari' to be 'Tadan Adhikari'? As you pointed out, on a look at surface (at the levelof text), it means which many belives but you and me need to look at little deeper. A person who did the world of Good to Indias ordinary masses by rewriting the whole Ramayana in a language which people (from north) could easily understand, The man who gave immortal 'Hanumaan Chalisa' can not be lebeled so casually as 'Nari basher' or 'Shudra Hater' (As Mayaavati brand poticians would capitalise). Regarding your questions of why Pashu are only Nari and not Nara .... I think he was reffering to Men with the words Ganvaar and Shudra and Pashu Nari must be a joint statement. Again as you already know, Shudra was not B.C., OBC, KBC, HSBC etc.. :-). but a fallen man, a mean thinking man. I have to agree if you say that Ganvaar and Shudra can also be said about Woaman however looking at the Doha and general prevailing conditions of society, it seems that he used those words for Men. Grammar...Hmmmm. i don't know if he has really used proper grammer in such Dohas. There are verse in Bhagvad Gita which can be criticised by people from other faiths if they are taken literaly and without understanding personality of Krishna . *** Regarding Ramachandra, Thank you for making clear, your notable friend's view and your detailed explanation by giving examples. But again i don't think that to consider Rama as God will actually be blockage in leading life like him and that too when almost everybody in Sanatan Dharma knows him as God. Tthat is not reversible in any case. And above all, Incarnation of Lord Vishnu - He is a GOD *** You and I've notably common Astrological factors in our chart. Astrologer in me found out just few days back but I'll not give it hear for the obvious reason lest our own Mr. Narasimha should get mad at me. Warm Regards, Utpal PS: I am writing every reference from my memory so please correct me when I am wrong in giving any reference , rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14@. ..> wrote:>> Dear Utpal,>  > I do not think that Saint like 'Tulasi Das' would ever be so hard on women. > The actual poem is like this:> || Dhol Ganwaar Shudra Pashu Naari, Yah sab Taadan ke adhikari ||> Some years back, i read an explanation that Tulasi Das ji meant "Pashu Naari" and NOT pashu and Naari. It means He feels appropriate to punish a Naari who is like pashu in her characteristics. That really makes good sense atleast to me.>  > I am no one to comment on an accepted saint like Sri Tulasidasji' s spiritual level, but that sentence definitely looks like he clubbed "pashu" and "naari" in same category, not pashu-nari. The highlighting is done by you, not in the actual text. If he ment pashu-nari he should have used some basic grammer to remove confusion. He did not. At the level of text, it is indefensible. Also, if I go by your explanation, why only Naari who are pashu, why not Naras who are like pashus? There are more Naaras of Pashu nature than Naaris in the world. This explanation that you found looks more like a back engineering job to bail out.>  >  > Regarding Rama self realization, I think I was unable to express the ideas of my friend clearly. Let me try again. He is not really saying that Sri Rama was not a self realized man. Infact he quite agrees that Sri Rama was an Avatar of God. What he says is that, (his opinion) God did not descend as Sri Rama in order to be worshipped. He descended in order to lead by example. That is why the text is called Rama+ayana. A path that an ordinary man can and should follow. One of principles. Compare this to the name of the other great epic, Mahabharata, which was not named "Krishna+ayana" . One cannot follow Krishna's path. >  > Whenever, according to him, we attribute Godhood to Sri Rama, our subcsious mind will create a blockage, a divide between the worshipper and the worshipped and thus make it impossible to lead a life like Rama did. BUt if we try to look at it like the story of a great king, a nobel man, a devoted husband etc, we have a better chance of following such a life.> An ordinary man cannot lead the life of a God but he can follow the life of a great man.>  > Similarly, even today lot of people advise that one should try to become like Vivekananda, or that this country needs its youth to be like Vivekanadas in teh future. It does not mean Vivekanada was not a self realized saint of highest calibre, but his life's image is like one who lived like a lion among sheep of ordinary men, fearless and uncompromising and principled. If every person would constantly think that Vivekanada was a saint who worked by the pwoer of a deity or due to his extreme spirituality or the blessing of a great guru, no one will ever make an attempt to be inspired by him or emulate his way of living.Vivekanada was a spiritual giant, but the image he projected was one of a tireless, fearless KarmaYogi. THAT can inspire people. >  >  On the other hand you will never hear anyone advising that one should try to lead a life like Ramarkishna.  That is impossible. He was God incarnate leading a charmed life. >  > Similar is the case with the Avatar called Sri Ramachandra incomparison to Sri Krishna. One can become Rama in actions but one can never become Krishna. Therefore, my friend believes, one should not consider Rama as a God to be worshipped, but as a model to be followed. Like Vivekanada.>  > Hope I have put forth his idea clear.>  > -Regards>  Rajarshi>  >  >  >  >  >  >  > > >  > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra> > --- On Tue, 15/12/09, vedic_pathak vedic_pathak@ ... wrote:> > > vedic_pathak vedic_pathak@ ...> Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (About my friend)> > Tuesday, 15 December, 2009, 8:29 PM> > >  > > > > > Dear Rajarshi,> I some how did not read your point no.2.> >Also, there is a line in there which equates women with animals or >something similar. He believes that was introduces in the text >because Tulasidas had a problem controlling his own lust.> I do not think that Saint like 'Tulasi Das' would ever be so hard on women. > The actual poem is like this:> || Dhol Ganwaar Shudra Pashu Naari, Yah sab Taadan ke adhikari ||> Some years back, i read an explanation that Tulasi Das ji meant "Pashu Naari" and NOT pashu and Naari. It means He feels appropriate to punish a Naari who is like pashu in her characteristics. That really makes good sense atleast to me.> About Lust in Tulasi das: It is well known that Tulasi Das was extremely attached to his wife so much that he won't allow her to go even at her parental home for a day. However he left the sansaara in a Flash. in a moment for ever. That is a great vairaagya. almost like Sri Ramakrishna used to give the example of a village Man to define the true vairaagya.> my 2 quick cent!> Best Regards,> Utpal> > , rajarshi nandy rajarshi14@ ..> wrote:> >> > Dear Kishore and Utpal,> >  > > I am troubled by one thing just like you are. It is understandable if he says Rama is an ideal man but hard to believe that such a great person claims Rama is not God. Tempted to ask him what really is the definition of God which differentiates Rama from Krishna?> > > > Some months back I had a very lengthy, verbose and charged/heated debate with him on whether Sri Rama is God or not. Mind you, these are all theoritical/ theological debates - nothing to do with actual spirituality. Finally he stopped the debate because I was getting agitated and it would have affected our friendship. > >  > > Whenever his opinion is asked on anything, he will only mention that what he can support using logic. Therefore he never generally discusses spirituality with anyone per se. He will discuss and debate scriptures using exact quotations etc, (theology) but not about mysticism or sadhana or anything which needs a belief system. That is why most people know him only as a very rational, massively knowledgeable and uncorruptable human being.  They have no clue about his meditations or anything. He never projects himself as spiritual and generally would not discuss God in public.> >  > > Therefore our discussion was also on those aspects which can be proved or disproved theologically - 1) Is Rama a God as per Valmiki Ramayana 2) Is it wrong if people consider him as God .. 3) The merits of the Ramcharit Manas of Tulasidasji.> >  > > 1) To the first question, he believes the answer is "no". > >  > > 2) To the second question he says it cannot be debated from a spiritual point if it is right or wrong - but his personal opinion is that one should try to follow the way of life shown by Sri Rama rather than worshipping him. He said, Sri Rama had mastery of all divine weapons. He could have destroyed Ravana and his whole army in a blink of an eye, right from the place where he was located when he first heard the news of Sita's abduction, but Rama did not do so and instead chose the hard way of destroying Ravana - the human way. So as per my friend, it is more important to emulate Rama's ideas than to worship Rama.> >  > > 3) He considers the Ramcharit Manas, from a literary angle, a hodgepodge of langauges and styles ranging from Awadhi to BrajBhasa. An author's paradise (since many rules of composition has been flouted) but a critics nightmare. Also, there is a line in there which equates women with animals or something similar. He believes that was introduces in the text because Tulasidas had a problem controlling his own lust. Therefore, he ended up composing a sentence derogatory to women. Further, he argues that if Sri Rama is worshipped as God, then the purpose of his Avatarhood goes waste. Sri Rama was there to explain idea way of life. Krishna was there to be worshipped because Krishna was maximum ability of God on this plane. Nothing can be more God than Krishna was on this plane, so he thinks.> >  > > The above are merely his opinions, feel free to disagree. > >  > >  > > Dear Utpal,> >  > > One request, if you can speak to him about his thought on Food habits, it'll be great.> >  > > I have been out of touch with him since August, been busy myself. But will ask him. However I don't know whether he will respond. Because as I explained above, he rarely discusses/debates anything from a purely spiritual angle. > >  > > It was only by chance that I found out one day about his meditations etc and then he confirmed them when asked.> >  > > I have seen him debating with Vegans - purely from a scientific point of view - about why there is no harm in having regulated amounts of meat (not red meat). > >  > > But I say, as Narasimha said, this person should not be taken as an ideal regarding food habits. Sachin can bat and score century even with a sore back, we will not be able to do it. His strength is his control of mind and his dedication to truth. > >  > > -Regards> >  Rajarshi> >  > >  > >  > >  > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra> > > > --- On Tue, 15/12/09, Kishore Chitrapu chitrapu@ wrote:> > > > > > Kishore Chitrapu chitrapu@> > Re: Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (About my friend)> > > > Tuesday, 15 December, 2009, 3:54 AM> > > > > >  > > > > > > > > Namaste Rajarshi,> > > > Thanks for painting such an portrait of this great person with your words.> > > > Spending 72 hours in meditation is act of no ordinary person. His other characteristics and experiences assert that he is a great person. I am troubled by one thing just like you are. It is understandable if he says Rama is an ideal man but hard to believe that such a great person claims Rama is not God. Tempted to ask him what really is the definition of God which differentiates Rama from Krishna?> > > > -Kishore> > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 4:02 PM, rajarshi nandy rajarshi14 (AT) (DOT) co.in> wrote:> > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Laxmi Narayan,> >  > >  I was intrigued by above line in your mail and want to know more about this devotee. Do you know him as a friend and is he a Indian? What sort of path/sadhana is he following?? Is he a sannyasin or a householder ?Did specific changes happened in his life after he had these samadhi and visions.Any other special things about him.> >  > >  > > Yes he is a friend of mine. I can only tell you very little about his spiritual life, because he hardly ever shares it with anyone. He is married, lives in Delhi and has a son as well.> >  > > Before I tell you anything more about his spiritual life that I know, let me say line or two about the nature of this friend of mine. I met him about two years back. What first attracted me to towards him was his impeccable honestly. I mean, he is a maniac when it comes to honestly. If someone were to put a gun to his head and ask him to just say a simple, harmless lie, like sun rises in the west, he would not say it. Therefore he never jokes with anyone too! He has actually never ever spoken even a single lie in his whole life, big or small. When he was in his school, once his teacher told him that Indian languages are richer than English, he believed his teacher. Later someone else told him English is more comprehensive language and the world cannot do with it. He got confused. Since that day, he bought himself two thick fat dictionaries, one English, one Hindi and for ten years every day he spend one hour reading the> English dictionary and> > one hour reading the Hindi dictionary apart from reading up volumes of Hindi and English literature. When I asked him why, he just said it is because he wanted to be equally adept at both the languages so that one day he can take a really detached view to judge the truth about which is more comprehensive language! As I said, he has an uncompromising attitude when it comes to finding out the truth about anything. By education, he is a Phd is mathematics. He has worked in different fields, from banking to education to journalism. He did not last for long in most places. He speaks and writes fluently, English, Bengali, Hindi, Urdu, Sanskrit, Arabic, Persian, French. Now he is learning Tamil. He composes poetry in all the above languages. When he was in college, he considered himself an atheist. While applying for a job he had kept the place makered for religion as blank. When the clerk who was supposed to take the forms saw that blank space,> he asked> > my friend's name. Hearing a Hindu name, the clerk wrote "Hindu". Seeing this, my friend snatched the form from the clerk and tore it up right there. Because, he considered himself an atheist and writing Hindu in the form would have been a lie. > >  > > So this gives a basic idea of the man I am speaking of. All his friends, whoever knows him, calls him Rama of Kaliyuga.> >  > > One day, long back, he was going to office for some urgent meeting. His way to office passed by a Krishna temple. As he was passing by in his scooter, suddenly he felt a strange urge to go into the temple. He says he still does not know why he went inside the temple, but he did. That was at 9 o clock in the morning. Next when he sees his watch it is 4:30 in the evening! And he has no knowledge of how the time went. When he asked the priest, the priest said that he went into the temple sat down and just stayed as he was for the whole time without any movement. The priest somehow felt scared to disturb him. But my friend had no idea why this happened. He remembered nothing, as if he was in deep sleep.> >  > > Then he started meditating at home, and it was there that he got visions etc of Krishna. He does not say much about these, infact most people who know him also do not know these things. But once he was in samadhi for 72 hours, not moving from his meditation seat, in the exact same place and same position for 3 days continuously. Only his wife and close relatives know about this incident. I believe nowadays when ever he sits for meditation he often enters the state of Samadhi. When someone asked him how he felt during samadhi, he just said it feels as if the whole universe orginates from me. I am the sun, the moon, the stars, the planets, the animals, men, women, children, the wind, the water, the space, smaller than the atom and bigger than everything. It cannot be accurately desribed. He considers Sri Krishna to be God and Lord Rama to be the ideal man.That is why he does not like the Ramacharit Manas because he thinks it elevated> Sri Rama to the> > level of a God whereas the aim of the orginal Valmiki Ramayana was to show Sri Rama as an ideal man, not a God.The difference he says is that, an ideal man is someone who can be emulated, an ordinary man can and should aim to become like the ideal. But a God cannot be emulated by ordinary men. One cannot become Krishna, but one can try to lead his life like Rama. I have argued with him over this, but I am merely stating his idea. Also he does not have a Guru - a human guru at least, and advises people to not trust most Gurus these days. Needless to say, he is not an atheist any more.> >  > > Later he had once mentioned he knew the relation he had with all the people around him in his past lives. His mother he says, was his daughter in his past life etc. Nowadays he spends a lot of time on different internet forums interacting with people, specially with those in the age group of 18 to 30, discussing anything and everything with them, from Indian politics to Indian history, religion, etc etc. His idea is to impart right knowledge to young people who will be the future of this country.> >  > > He is am omnivorous person. Like any other Bengali, eats fish, meat etc.> >  > > I shall refrain from mentioning his name because I had not asked his permission before mentioning him.> >  > > -Regards> >  Rajarshi> > > > > > PS: I would not like this mail to be considered as a part of the debate. This mail is just because Laxmi Narayan asked for information.> > > > > >  > > > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra> > > > --- On Mon, 14/12/09, Laxmi Narayan <shrijishrihari@ .co. uk> wrote:> > > > > > Laxmi Narayan <shrijishrihari@ .co. uk>> > Re: Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (From a vegetarian's point of view)> > > > Monday, 14 December, 2009, 10:34 PM> > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > > I know a devotee of Krishna - not just a devotee but one who sees> > Krishna during his meditations and have experienced samadhi many times> > over, who is omnivorous.> > > > Hello Rajarshi,> >                      I was intrigued by above line in your mail and want to know more about this devotee. Do you know him as a friend and is he a Indian? What sort of path/sadhana is he following?? Is he a sannyasin or a householder ?Did specific changes happened in his life after he had these samadhi and visions.Any other special things about him.> > > > In the Gita Lord is saying whatever you do/eat offer it to me first. So he is offering all these non-veg to Lord with devotion, Right?? Then prasdam all around??> > > > My curious questions are not against your acceptance of his exexperienceut to learn more.After all he is part of hidden violence. Somebody is inflicting gruesome pain and misery on animals and birds on his behalf and he is consuming them and yet he is experiencing all these exotic visions, But no feeling of kindness towards birds and animals.> > > > Where did I go wrong? Simple dal/roti and do not even touch onion/garlic/ pepper but no such samadhi? > > > > When we get burnt, we need to be careful.Many years ago I saw in a book/article about Dayamata who succeded Paramhansa Yoganand. Once she went to India and told a Spiritual Master that her progress has stopped. Master said, you are eating eggs which she admitted that she was doing secretly.> > > > This is very complex world. No outright solutions for so many difficult questions. Followers of 3 faiths which all originated in middle east are fighting each other all the time. Sometimes I think, from which part of Spiritual Sky these energies are coming,Are they also enemies there?? Their Gods said in their holy books that animals are their food. So they cannot even think about souls in animals or their pain and emotions.> > > > Then I have read stories about several people, who follow these faiths and are non-veg and how they exexperience spiritual highs and other such phenomena. It is so difficult to comprehend. Would they remain in the cycle of b/d till they learn about kindness???> > > > Kind Regards> > LaxmiNarayan> > > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 12/12/09, rajarshi nandy rajarshi14 (AT) (DOT) co.in> wrote:> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. http://in.. com/> >> > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. http://in.. com/> The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 Dear Rajarshi, I appreciated your previous message but i am a bit taken a back by this message. Ramakrishna was not Ganwar Dhirubhai Ambani was not ganwar though he didn't go to even secondary school education. Did you not get ENGLISH Translation for 'Shudra' from your source? Shudra = Shudra in English? did you mean SHUDRA JATI because you haven't given any equivalent meaning in english. I'll not write anything now as i am saddened by your message. I doubt your intention and it is not good to write further at this moment. Best Regards, Utpal , rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14 wrote: > > Namaste, >  > Further to my mail below: >  > The line in Ramcharit Manas goes : >  > || Dhol Ganwaar Shudra Pashu Naari, Yah sab Taadan ke adhikari || >  > Dhol = Drum >  > Ganwaar = Illiterate >  > Shudra = Shudra >  > Pashu = Animal >  > Naari = Women >  > Taadan = Beating >  > Therefore exact translation would be: >  > Drum illiterate shudra animal women, are fit to be beaten. >  > One line of thinking, as suggested by Utpal, is that it should be read " pashu-nari " (animalistic women) and not just " animal, women " . That is, pashu is an adjective for the noun naari. >  > I don't agree. Nothing in the text suggests so. >  > Secondly, we have not yet come to discussing the wisdom of advising a " tadan " for these above diverse group which includes a " gawaar " as well! Then by that logic, more than half of India should get a " taadan " because more than half of India is illiterate. >  > -Regards >  Rajarshi >  >  > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra > > --- On Thu, 17/12/09, rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14 wrote: > > > rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14 > Re: Tulasi Das/Ramakrishna - communication. > > Thursday, 17 December, 2009, 4:03 PM > > >  > > Dear Utpal, >  > Some points came to my mind. Thought of mailing them to you. >  >  Jumping on conclusion without properly studying/thinking about Thakur's life, just on literal meaning of those 2 words would be a sure blasphemy. >  > You are right. But since this is a debate and just a debate,  let me put forth some logical points. >  > 1) Two wrongs never make a right. This is one mistake we Indians do when we try to debate over something. When we are discussing Tulasidasji, it does not matter whether Ramakrishna - who lived in a different century - was right or now. That would be a different debate. >  > 2) Ramakrishna did not write anything -. He only woke up people to what ever degree was necessary and gave general talks on spirituality. So, one can always contend that a mistake maybe the biographers mistake. M or Saradananda could very well have been mistaken in what he quoted. Giving a freewheeling talk is different from creating a composition. When one writes, one has more time and energy to indulge in thinking, and checking up possibilities of different shades of meanings for the simple reason that the audience is large, unknown and spread out over huge spans of time. When one talks, and that too talking to friends, or close people, one does not need to be careful of every word or sentence one speaks. >  > To understand this better,  we have to think - scientifically speaking - how communication happens in three levels. Around 33 percent of the communication is through the words, 64 percent through body language and a solid 3 percent is 'unknown' or sub conscious communication. This last three percent is the most powerful. When a person can use this 3 percent of sub conscious communication - he can move masses of people. All great leaders do so. All rock stars also do so (IMO). If you listen to the lyrics of an average rock music, you may find it uninspiring. But if you were to be present in a live rock concert, you will definitely feel an energy and get swayed. >  > Then comes body language which is so important. For example, if you enter a Govt office in India, you may find that the babus there will be sitting relaxed in their chair with their spine reclining. Whatever you say will hardly make any impact on them. That is why the files in Govt. of India offices move at a snail's pace. If you find that someone whom you are talking to is sitting cross legged on a chair, with left leg crossing the right, even if the person may hang on eagerly to every word you speak, know it for the sure that there is a strong change he is listening through one ear and throwing out the words through the other. In short, pretending to listen. In effect, once you leave his presence he probably won't bother about what you said. >  > And last is spoken word. When two people speak with each other, both words and body language come into picture. Sometimes sub conscious communication too can happen. Therefore there is a LOT of the energy exchanged/communica tion not through words but through other means. >  > When you write down something, body languages gets negated. Therefore, one needs to be extra cautious while writing something in order to convey the correct sense. That is why there are so many more rules to be followed for writing anything. >  > So therefore, if Ramakrishna is " talking " to someone he is probably communicating using all means possible. But if he were to write a book and mention " Kamini and Kanchan " without further explanation of what he intends to mean, then he too can be called to question. But he never wrote any books, and the authors who did, made sure they explained the sense. >  > Contrast this to that line from Ramacharit Manas, without any qualifications, that implies " women " , " sudra " , " pashu " are worthy of " tadan " . If I were a woman, I would take offense to that line. >  > 3) Whenever I am doing a critic of a religious literature, I keep the Koran as a standard. By this I mean, whenever I am judging a book of religious nature, I follow the same parameters of judgement that I use when I judge the Koran as a book. >  > The Koran contains a verse, translated correctly in the M.A. Shakir and Dawood translations, which recommend husbands to beat their wives if the wives are disobedient. >  > > " Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in their sleeping places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great. (Shakir's version of the Koran, Quran, 4:34) >  > A lot of muslims I have talked to, defend the above giving various reasons one of which is 'misunderstanding context'. I find it inexcusable. Same way a line in a religious book bracketing " nari " , " pashu " , " sudra " together, I find to be equally inexcusable. That is the sense that comes out from a normal reading of that line. I am not commenting on the whole of Ramcharit Manas, but that one vital line. >  > [Prem, Ahinsa], Satya Vachan aur Par-stri Matusamaan| > Inase agar prabhu na mile to Tulasi Juth Jabaan || > (I have given this doha  out of memory and its quite possible that first two wrods are wrong in the doha ) >  > Interesting doha. Maybe you are right, maybe you are not. But that line (pashu/naari etc) definitely conveys a simple meaning. If Tulasidasji ment what you are saying, he should have used some appropiate punctuation marks. Since he did not, I have to reject your explanation. Or I can say, Tulasidasji respects women a lot, but that line is simply a bad composition. One way or the other, I cannot absolve the composer of that specific line. >  > BTW, were you refering to the Gita verse 1.41 where Arjuna talks about women of the family getting corrupted? >  > You and I've notably common Astrological factors in our chart. Astrologer in me found out just few days back but I'll not give it hear for the obvious reason lest our own Mr. Narasimha should get mad at me. >  > I am sure we will make very good friends:). I normally become strong friends with people with whom I " discuss " things. >  > Once, long back when I was furiously debating over something, my vastly more patient and experienced opponent gave me some invaluable advices which I stick by even today. Thought of sharing it in here. He said: >  > "  I find it is always best to debate online if one is keen on finding the correct resolution. Face to face debates are nothing but personality clashes. Slow the pace of a debate as required, which means, do not answer the moment you read . Take a break, take your mind off, see a movie if you have to, come back, re read and then answer. Thus what seemed revolting at first may not seem so bad later on. Never be in a hurry. This is not a wresting match. " >  > -Regards >  Rajarshi >  > PS: Please take the debate in the right vein of a debate. There is nothing personal here. >  > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra > > --- On Wed, 16/12/09, vedic_pathak <vedic_pathak@ > wrote: > > > vedic_pathak <vedic_pathak@ > > Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (Rama & Tulasi Das) > > Wednesday, 16 December, 2009, 5:19 PM > > >  > > > Dear(est) Rajarshi, > back engineering job to bail out > Vow! Refreshing phrase. Too good. It seems a season of debating. Branches of threads are coming out. > 'Kamini and `Kanchan' was the exact words which Ramakrishna used freely during his life time. Now Kamini means a woman and its possible that several sections would have taken reservation at this. That seems very obvious otherwise why Swami Sardananda required to defend Thakur in his book called Ramakrishna Lilaprasanga. It seemed to me that Paramahansa Yogananda also have referred to this issue without mentioning Thakur's name directly (I may be wrong but i strongly felt like that when i read the 'Autobiography of a yogi' some 4/5 years back). Sardanada in a sense did 'Back engineering job to bail out ' . If we go by 'Kamini' word literaly, then Thakur could be portrayed as Women basher. but we all know that Thakur refffered to Lust and Desire of worldly objects whenever he spoke those two words. Jumping on conclusion without properly studying/thinking about Thakur's life, just on literal meaning of those 2 words would be a sure blasphemy. > Same way, I also thought about Sant Tulasi das ji. I was telling myself that can a saint of his devotion and poetic skills and add to that steadfastly devoted to Lord Rama (Who never shown slightest dis-resepct to  women) , utter such words and saggrigate 'Nari' for nothing. I was not convinced. One of the 'Dohas' of Tulasi Das goes like this - > [Prem, Ahinsa], Satya Vachan aur Par-stri Matusamaan| > Inase agar prabhu na mile to Tulasi Juth Jabaan || > (I have given this doha  out of memory and its quite possible that first two wrods are wrong in the doha ) > If a poet is asking to look at a woman as a Mother, how could he mean 'Nari' to be 'Tadan Adhikari'? As you pointed out, on a look at surface (at the levelof text), it means which many belives but you and me need to look at little deeper. A person who did the world of Good to Indias ordinary masses by rewriting the whole Ramayana in a language which people (from north) could easily understand, The man who gave immortal 'Hanumaan Chalisa' can not be lebeled so casually as 'Nari basher' or 'Shudra Hater' (As Mayaavati brand poticians would capitalise). > Regarding your questions of why Pashu are only Nari and not Nara .... > I think he was reffering to Men with the words Ganvaar and Shudra and Pashu Nari must be a joint statement. Again as you already know, Shudra was not B.C., OBC, KBC, HSBC etc.. :-). but a fallen man, a mean thinking man. I have to agree if you say that Ganvaar and Shudra can also be said about Woaman however looking at the Doha and general prevailing conditions of society, it seems that he used those words for Men. > Grammar...Hmmmm. i don't know if he has really used proper grammer in such Dohas. > There are verse in Bhagvad Gita which can be criticised by people from other faiths if they are taken literaly and without understanding personality of Krishna . > *** > Regarding Ramachandra, Thank you for making clear, your notable friend's view and your detailed explanation by giving examples.  But again i don't think that to consider Rama as God will actually be blockage in leading life like him and that too when almost everybody in Sanatan Dharma knows him as God. Tthat is not reversible in any case. And above all, Incarnation of Lord Vishnu - He is a GOD > *** >  > You and I've notably common Astrological factors in our chart. Astrologer in me found out just few days back but I'll not give it hear for the obvious reason lest our own Mr. Narasimha should get mad at me. > Warm Regards, > Utpal > PS: I am writing every reference from my memory so please correct me when I am wrong in giving any reference >  >  >  > > , rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14@ ..> wrote: > > > > Dear Utpal, > >  > > I do not think that Saint like 'Tulasi Das' would ever be so hard on women. > > The actual poem is like this: > > || Dhol Ganwaar Shudra Pashu Naari, Yah sab Taadan ke adhikari || > > Some years back, i read an explanation that Tulasi Das ji meant " Pashu Naari " and NOT pashu and Naari. It means He feels appropriate to punish a Naari who is like pashu in her characteristics. That really makes good sense atleast to me. > >  > > I am no one to comment on an accepted saint like Sri Tulasidasji' s spiritual level, but that sentence definitely looks like he clubbed " pashu " and " naari " in same category, not pashu-nari. The highlighting is done by you, not in the actual text. If he ment pashu-nari he should have used some basic grammer to remove confusion. He did not. At the level of text, it is indefensible. Also, if I go by your explanation, why only Naari who are pashu, why not Naras who are like pashus? There are more Naaras of Pashu nature than Naaris in the world. This explanation that you found looks more like a back engineering job to bail out. > >  > >  > > Regarding Rama self realization, I think I was unable to express the ideas of my friend clearly. Let me try again. He is not really saying that Sri Rama was not a self realized man. Infact he quite agrees that Sri Rama was an Avatar of God. What he says is that, (his opinion) God did not descend as Sri Rama in order to be worshipped. He descended in order to lead by example. That is why the text is called Rama+ayana. A path that an ordinary man can and should follow. One of principles. Compare this to the name of the other great epic, Mahabharata, which was not named " Krishna+ayana " . One cannot follow Krishna's path. > >  > > Whenever, according to him, we attribute Godhood to Sri Rama, our subcsious mind will create a blockage, a divide between the worshipper and the worshipped and thus make it impossible to lead a life like Rama did. BUt if we try to look at it like the story of a great king, a nobel man, a devoted husband etc, we have a better chance of following such a life. > > An ordinary man cannot lead the life of a God but he can follow the life of a great man. > >  > > Similarly, even today lot of people advise that one should try to become like Vivekananda, or that this country needs its youth to be like Vivekanadas in teh future. It does not mean Vivekanada was not a self realized saint of highest calibre, but his life's image is like one who lived like a lion among sheep of ordinary men, fearless and uncompromising and principled. If every person would constantly think that Vivekanada was a saint who worked by the pwoer of a deity or due to his extreme spirituality or the blessing of a great guru, no one will ever make an attempt to be inspired by him or emulate his way of living.Vivekanada was a spiritual giant, but the image he projected was one of a tireless, fearless KarmaYogi. THAT can inspire people. > >  > >  On the other hand you will never hear anyone advising that one should try to lead a life like Ramarkishna.  That is impossible. He was God incarnate leading a charmed life. > >  > > Similar is the case with the Avatar called Sri Ramachandra incomparison to Sri Krishna. One can become Rama in actions but one can never become Krishna. Therefore, my friend believes, one should not consider Rama as a God to be worshipped, but as a model to be followed. Like Vivekanada. > >  > > Hope I have put forth his idea clear. > >  > > -Regards > >  Rajarshi > >  > >  > >  > >  > >  > >  > >  > > > > > >  > > > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra > > > > --- On Tue, 15/12/09, vedic_pathak vedic_pathak@ ... wrote: > > > > > > vedic_pathak vedic_pathak@ ... > > Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (About my friend) > > > > Tuesday, 15 December, 2009, 8:29 PM > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > Dear Rajarshi, > > I some how did not read your point no.2. > > >Also, there is a line in there which equates women with animals or >something similar. He believes that was introduces in the text >because Tulasidas had a problem controlling his own lust. > > I do not think that Saint like 'Tulasi Das' would ever be so hard on women. > > The actual poem is like this: > > || Dhol Ganwaar Shudra Pashu Naari, Yah sab Taadan ke adhikari || > > Some years back, i read an explanation that Tulasi Das ji meant " Pashu Naari " and NOT pashu and Naari. It means He feels appropriate to punish a Naari who is like pashu in her characteristics. That really makes good sense atleast to me. > > About Lust in Tulasi das: It is well known that Tulasi Das was extremely attached to his wife so much that he won't allow her to go even at her parental home for a day. However he left the sansaara in a Flash. in a moment for ever. That is a great vairaagya. almost like Sri Ramakrishna used to give the example of a village Man to define the true vairaagya. > > my 2 quick cent! > > Best Regards, > > Utpal > > > > , rajarshi nandy rajarshi14@ ..> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Kishore and Utpal, > > >  > > > I am troubled by one thing just like you are. It is understandable if he says Rama is an ideal man but hard to believe that such a great person claims Rama is not God. Tempted to ask him what really is the definition of God which differentiates Rama from Krishna? > > > > > > Some months back I had a very lengthy, verbose and charged/heated debate with him on whether Sri Rama is God or not. Mind you, these are all theoritical/ theological debates - nothing to do with actual spirituality. Finally he stopped the debate because I was getting agitated and it would have affected our friendship. > > >  > > > Whenever his opinion is asked on anything, he will only mention that what he can support using logic. Therefore he never generally discusses spirituality with anyone per se. He will discuss and debate scriptures using exact quotations etc, (theology) but not about mysticism or sadhana or anything which needs a belief system. That is why most people know him only as a very rational, massively knowledgeable and uncorruptable human being.  They have no clue about his meditations or anything. He never projects himself as spiritual and generally would not discuss God in public. > > >  > > > Therefore our discussion was also on those aspects which can be proved or disproved theologically - 1) Is Rama a God as per Valmiki Ramayana 2) Is it wrong if people consider him as God .. 3) The merits of the Ramcharit Manas of Tulasidasji. > > >  > > > 1) To the first question, he believes the answer is " no " . > > >  > > > 2) To the second question he says it cannot be debated from a spiritual point if it is right or wrong - but his personal opinion is that one should try to follow the way of life shown by Sri Rama rather than worshipping him. He said, Sri Rama had mastery of all divine weapons. He could have destroyed Ravana and his whole army in a blink of an eye, right from the place where he was located when he first heard the news of Sita's abduction, but Rama did not do so and instead chose the hard way of destroying Ravana - the human way. So as per my friend, it is more important to emulate Rama's ideas than to worship Rama. > > >  > > > 3) He considers the Ramcharit Manas, from a literary angle, a hodgepodge of langauges and styles ranging from Awadhi to BrajBhasa. An author's paradise (since many rules of composition has been flouted) but a critics nightmare. Also, there is a line in there which equates women with animals or something similar. He believes that was introduces in the text because Tulasidas had a problem controlling his own lust. Therefore, he ended up composing a sentence derogatory to women. Further, he argues that if Sri Rama is worshipped as God, then the purpose of his Avatarhood goes waste. Sri Rama was there to explain idea way of life. Krishna was there to be worshipped because Krishna was maximum ability of God on this plane. Nothing can be more God than Krishna was on this plane, so he thinks. > > >  > > > The above are merely his opinions, feel free to disagree. > > >  > > >  > > > Dear Utpal, > > >  > > > One request, if you can speak to him about his thought on Food habits, it'll be great. > > >  > > > I have been out of touch with him since August, been busy myself. But will ask him. However I don't know whether he will respond. Because as I explained above, he rarely discusses/debates anything from a purely spiritual angle. > > >  > > > It was only by chance that I found out one day about his meditations etc and then he confirmed them when asked. > > >  > > > I have seen him debating with Vegans - purely from a scientific point of view - about why there is no harm in having regulated amounts of meat (not red meat). > > >  > > > But I say, as Narasimha said, this person should not be taken as an ideal regarding food habits. Sachin can bat and score century even with a sore back, we will not be able to do it. His strength is his control of mind and his dedication to truth. > > >  > > > -Regards > > >  Rajarshi > > >  > > >  > > >  > > >  > > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra > > > > > > --- On Tue, 15/12/09, Kishore Chitrapu chitrapu@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > Kishore Chitrapu chitrapu@ > > > Re: Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (About my friend) > > > > > > Tuesday, 15 December, 2009, 3:54 AM > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Rajarshi, > > > > > > Thanks for painting such an portrait of this great person with your words. > > > > > > Spending 72 hours in meditation is act of no ordinary person. His other characteristics and experiences assert that he is a great person. I am troubled by one thing just like you are. It is understandable if he says Rama is an ideal man but hard to believe that such a great person claims Rama is not God. Tempted to ask him what really is the definition of God which differentiates Rama from Krishna? > > > > > > -Kishore > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 4:02 PM, rajarshi nandy rajarshi14 (AT) (DOT) co.in> wrote: > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Laxmi Narayan, > > >  > > >  I was intrigued by above line in your mail and want to know more about this devotee. Do you know him as a friend and is he a Indian? What sort of path/sadhana is he following?? Is he a sannyasin or a householder ?Did specific changes happened in his life after he had these samadhi and visions.Any other special things about him. > > >  > > >  > > > Yes he is a friend of mine. I can only tell you very little about his spiritual life, because he hardly ever shares it with anyone. He is married, lives in Delhi and has a son as well. > > >  > > > Before I tell you anything more about his spiritual life that I know, let me say line or two about the nature of this friend of mine. I met him about two years back. What first attracted me to towards him was his impeccable honestly. I mean, he is a maniac when it comes to honestly. If someone were to put a gun to his head and ask him to just say a simple, harmless lie, like sun rises in the west, he would not say it. Therefore he never jokes with anyone too! He has actually never ever spoken even a single lie in his whole life, big or small. When he was in his school, once his teacher told him that Indian languages are richer than English, he believed his teacher. Later someone else told him English is more comprehensive language and the world cannot do with it. He got confused. Since that day, he bought himself two thick fat dictionaries, one English, one Hindi and for ten > years every day he spend one hour reading the > > English dictionary and > > > one hour reading the Hindi dictionary apart from reading up volumes of Hindi and English literature. When I asked him why, he just said it is because he wanted to be equally adept at both the languages so that one day he can take a really detached view to judge the truth about which is more comprehensive language! As I said, he has an uncompromising attitude when it comes to finding out the truth about anything. By education, he is a Phd is mathematics. He has worked in different fields, from banking to education to journalism. He did not last for long in most places. He speaks and writes fluently, English, Bengali, Hindi, Urdu, Sanskrit, Arabic, Persian, French. Now he is learning Tamil. He composes poetry in all the above languages. When he was in college, he considered himself an atheist. While applying for a job he had kept the place makered for religion as blank. When the clerk who was supposed to take the forms > saw that blank space, > > he asked > > > my friend's name. Hearing a Hindu name, the clerk wrote " Hindu " . Seeing this, my friend snatched the form from the clerk and tore it up right there. Because, he considered himself an atheist and writing Hindu in the form would have been a lie. > > >  > > > So this gives a basic idea of the man I am speaking of. All his friends, whoever knows him, calls him Rama of Kaliyuga. > > >  > > > One day, long back, he was going to office for some urgent meeting. His way to office passed by a Krishna temple. As he was passing by in his scooter, suddenly he felt a strange urge to go into the temple. He says he still does not know why he went inside the temple, but he did. That was at 9 o clock in the morning. Next when he sees his watch it is 4:30 in the evening! And he has no knowledge of how the time went. When he asked the priest, the priest said that he went into the temple sat down and just stayed as he was for the whole time without any movement. The priest somehow felt scared to disturb him. But my friend had no idea why this happened. He remembered nothing, as if he was in deep sleep. > > >  > > > Then he started meditating at home, and it was there that he got visions etc of Krishna. He does not say much about these, infact most people who know him also do not know these things. But once he was in samadhi for 72 hours, not moving from his meditation seat, in the exact same place and same position for 3 days continuously. Only his wife and close relatives know about this incident. I believe nowadays when ever he sits for meditation he often enters the state of Samadhi. When someone asked him how he felt during samadhi, he just said it feels as if the whole universe orginates from me. I am the sun, the moon, the stars, the planets, the animals, men, women, children, the wind, the water, the space, smaller than the atom and bigger than everything. It cannot be accurately desribed. He considers Sri Krishna to be God and Lord Rama to be the ideal man.That is why he does not like the Ramacharit Manas because he > thinks it elevated > > Sri Rama to the > > > level of a God whereas the aim of the orginal Valmiki Ramayana was to show Sri Rama as an ideal man, not a God.The difference he says is that, an ideal man is someone who can be emulated, an ordinary man can and should aim to become like the ideal. But a God cannot be emulated by ordinary men. One cannot become Krishna, but one can try to lead his life like Rama. I have argued with him over this, but I am merely stating his idea. Also he does not have a Guru - a human guru at least, and advises people to not trust most Gurus these days. Needless to say, he is not an atheist any more. > > >  > > > Later he had once mentioned he knew the relation he had with all the people around him in his past lives. His mother he says, was his daughter in his past life etc. Nowadays he spends a lot of time on different internet forums interacting with people, specially with those in the age group of 18 to 30, discussing anything and everything with them, from Indian politics to Indian history, religion, etc etc. His idea is to impart right knowledge to young people who will be the future of this country. > > >  > > > He is am omnivorous person. Like any other Bengali, eats fish, meat etc. > > >  > > > I shall refrain from mentioning his name because I had not asked his permission before mentioning him. > > >  > > > -Regards > > >  Rajarshi > > > > > > > > > PS: I would not like this mail to be considered as a part of the debate. This mail is just because Laxmi Narayan asked for information. > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra > > > > > > --- On Mon, 14/12/09, Laxmi Narayan <shrijishrihari@ .co. uk> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Laxmi Narayan <shrijishrihari@ .co. uk> > > > Re: Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (From a vegetarian's point of view) > > > > > > Monday, 14 December, 2009, 10:34 PM > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know a devotee of Krishna - not just a devotee but one who sees > > > Krishna during his meditations and have experienced samadhi many times > > > over, who is omnivorous. > > > > > > Hello Rajarshi, > > >         ÂÂÂ\         ÂÂ\  Ã‚ Â Â I was intrigued by above line in your mail and want to know more about this devotee. Do you know him as a friend and is he a Indian? What sort of path/sadhana is he following?? Is he a sannyasin or a householder ?Did specific changes happened in his life after he had these samadhi and visions.Any other special things about him. > > > > > > In the Gita Lord is saying whatever you do/eat offer it to me first. So he is offering all these non-veg to Lord with devotion, Right?? Then prasdam all around?? > > > > > > My curious questions are not against your acceptance of his exexperienceut to learn more.After all he is part of hidden violence. Somebody is inflicting gruesome pain and misery on animals and birds on his behalf and he is consuming them and yet he is experiencing all these exotic visions, But no feeling of kindness towards birds and animals. > > > > > > Where did I go wrong? Simple dal/roti and do not even touch onion/garlic/ pepper but no such samadhi? > > > > > > When we get burnt, we need to be careful.Many years ago I saw in a book/article about Dayamata who succeded Paramhansa Yoganand. Once she went to India and told a Spiritual Master that her progress has stopped. Master said, you are eating eggs which she admitted that she was doing secretly. > > > > > > This is very complex world. No outright solutions for so many difficult questions. Followers of 3 faiths which all originated in middle east are fighting each other all the time. Sometimes I think, from which part of Spiritual Sky these energies are coming,Are they also enemies there?? Their Gods said in their holy books that animals are their food. So they cannot even think about souls in animals or their pain and emotions. > > > > > > Then I have read stories about several people, who follow these faiths and are non-veg and how they exexperience spiritual highs and other such phenomena. It is so difficult to comprehend. Would they remain in the cycle of b/d till they learn about kindness??? > > > > > > Kind Regards > > > LaxmiNarayan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 12/12/09, rajarshi nandy rajarshi14 (AT) (DOT) co.in> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. http://in.. com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. http://in.. com/ > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. http://in./ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 Dear Utpal, I sincerly apologize if my mail offended you. However, to the best of my knowledge "Gawaar" means an illiterate person. It is a common word used even to this day. If I am mistaken, please correct me. Shudra, as far as I knew is one of the four varnas, I don't know if the word has any other possible meanings. I shall only request you to think about this verse in cool, calm manner, and not emotionally. Leave it for now. Again, sorry if the previous mail was precieved as offensive. -Regards Rajarshi The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra--- On Thu, 17/12/09, vedic_pathak <vedic_pathak wrote: vedic_pathak <vedic_pathak Re: Tulasi Das/Ramakrishna - communication. Date: Thursday, 17 December, 2009, 10:44 PM Dear Rajarshi,I appreciated your previous message but i am a bit taken a back by this message.Ramakrishna was not GanwarDhirubhai Ambani was not ganwar though he didn't go to even secondary school education.Did you not get ENGLISH Translation for 'Shudra' from your source? Shudra = Shudra in English? did you mean SHUDRA JATI because you haven't given any equivalent meaning in english.I'll not write anything now as i am saddened by your message. I doubt your intention and it is not good to write further at this moment.Best Regards,Utpal, rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14@ ...> wrote:>> Namaste,>  > Further to my mail below:>  > The line in Ramcharit Manas goes :>  > || Dhol Ganwaar Shudra Pashu Naari, Yah sab Taadan ke adhikari ||>  > Dhol = Drum>  > Ganwaar = Illiterate>  > Shudra = Shudra>  > Pashu = Animal>  > Naari = Women>  > Taadan = Beating>  > Therefore exact translation would be:>  > Drum illiterate shudra animal women, are fit to be beaten.>  > One line of thinking, as suggested by Utpal, is that it should be read "pashu-nari" (animalistic women) and not just "animal, women". That is, pashu is an adjective for the noun naari. >  > I don't agree. Nothing in the text suggests so.>  > Secondly, we have not yet come to discussing the wisdom of advising a "tadan" for these above diverse group which includes a "gawaar" as well! Then by that logic, more than half of India should get a "taadan" because more than half of India is illiterate.>  > -Regards>  Rajarshi>  >  > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra> > --- On Thu, 17/12/09, rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14@ ...> wrote:> > > rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14@ ...>> Re: Tulasi Das/Ramakrishna - communication.> > Thursday, 17 December, 2009, 4:03 PM> > >  > > > > > > > > > Dear Utpal,>  > Some points came to my mind. Thought of mailing them to you. >  >  Jumping on conclusion without properly studying/thinking about Thakur's life, just on literal meaning of those 2 words would be a sure blasphemy.>  > You are right. But since this is a debate and just a debate,  let me put forth some logical points. >  > 1) Two wrongs never make a right. This is one mistake we Indians do when we try to debate over something. When we are discussing Tulasidasji, it does not matter whether Ramakrishna - who lived in a different century - was right or now. That would be a different debate. >  > 2) Ramakrishna did not write anything -. He only woke up people to what ever degree was necessary and gave general talks on spirituality. So, one can always contend that a mistake maybe the biographers mistake. M or Saradananda could very well have been mistaken in what he quoted. Giving a freewheeling talk is different from creating a composition. When one writes, one has more time and energy to indulge in thinking, and checking up possibilities of different shades of meanings for the simple reason that the audience is large, unknown and spread out over huge spans of time. When one talks, and that too talking to friends, or close people, one does not need to be careful of every word or sentence one speaks. >  > To understand this better,  we have to think - scientifically speaking - how communication happens in three levels. Around 33 percent of the communication is through the words, 64 percent through body language and a solid 3 percent is 'unknown' or sub conscious communication. This last three percent is the most powerful. When a person can use this 3 percent of sub conscious communication - he can move masses of people. All great leaders do so. All rock stars also do so (IMO). If you listen to the lyrics of an average rock music, you may find it uninspiring. But if you were to be present in a live rock concert, you will definitely feel an energy and get swayed. >  > Then comes body language which is so important. For example, if you enter a Govt office in India, you may find that the babus there will be sitting relaxed in their chair with their spine reclining. Whatever you say will hardly make any impact on them. That is why the files in Govt. of India offices move at a snail's pace. If you find that someone whom you are talking to is sitting cross legged on a chair, with left leg crossing the right, even if the person may hang on eagerly to every word you speak, know it for the sure that there is a strong change he is listening through one ear and throwing out the words through the other. In short, pretending to listen. In effect, once you leave his presence he probably won' t bother about what you said.>  > And last is spoken word. When two people speak with each other, both words and body language come into picture. Sometimes sub conscious communication too can happen. Therefore there is a LOT of the energy exchanged/communica tion not through words but through other means. >  > When you write down something, body languages gets negated. Therefore, one needs to be extra cautious while writing something in order to convey the correct sense. That is why there are so many more rules to be followed for writing anything.>  > So therefore, if Ramakrishna is "talking" to someone he is probably communicating using all means possible. But if he were to write a book and mention "Kamini and Kanchan" without further explanation of what he intends to mean, then he too can be called to question. But he never wrote any books, and the authors who did, made sure they explained the sense. >  > Contrast this to that line from Ramacharit Manas, without any qualifications, that implies "women", "sudra", "pashu" are worthy of "tadan". If I were a woman, I would take offense to that line. >  > 3) Whenever I am doing a critic of a religious literature, I keep the Koran as a standard. By this I mean, whenever I am judging a book of religious nature, I follow the same parameters of judgement that I use when I judge the Koran as a book.>  > The Koran contains a verse, translated correctly in the M.A. Shakir and Dawood translations, which recommend husbands to beat their wives if the wives are disobedient. >  > > "Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in their sleeping places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great. (Shakir's version of the Koran, Quran, 4:34) >  > A lot of muslims I have talked to, defend the above giving various reasons one of which is 'misunderstanding context'. I find it inexcusable. Same way a line in a religious book bracketing "nari", "pashu", "sudra" together, I find to be equally inexcusable. That is the sense that comes out from a normal reading of that line. I am not commenting on the whole of Ramcharit Manas, but that one vital line.>  > [Prem, Ahinsa], Satya Vachan aur Par-stri Matusamaan|> Inase agar prabhu na mile to Tulasi Juth Jabaan ||> (I have given this doha  out of memory and its quite possible that first two wrods are wrong in the doha ) >  > Interesting doha. Maybe you are right, maybe you are not. But that line (pashu/naari etc) definitely conveys a simple meaning. If Tulasidasji ment what you are saying, he should have used some appropiate punctuation marks. Since he did not, I have to reject your explanation. Or I can say, Tulasidasji respects women a lot, but that line is simply a bad composition. One way or the other, I cannot absolve the composer of that specific line.>  > BTW, were you refering to the Gita verse 1.41 where Arjuna talks about women of the family getting corrupted?>  > You and I've notably common Astrological factors in our chart. Astrologer in me found out just few days back but I'll not give it hear for the obvious reason lest our own Mr. Narasimha should get mad at me.>  > I am sure we will make very good friends:). I normally become strong friends with people with whom I "discuss" things. >  > Once, long back when I was furiously debating over something, my vastly more patient and experienced opponent gave me some invaluable advices which I stick by even today. Thought of sharing it in here. He said:>  > " I find it is always best to debate online if one is keen on finding the correct resolution. Face to face debates are nothing but personality clashes. Slow the pace of a debate as required, which means, do not answer the moment you read . Take a break, take your mind off, see a movie if you have to, come back, re read and then answer. Thus what seemed revolting at first may not seem so bad later on. Never be in a hurry. This is not a wresting match. ">  > -Regards>  Rajarshi>  > PS: Please take the debate in the right vein of a debate. There is nothing personal here.>  > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra> > --- On Wed, 16/12/09, vedic_pathak <vedic_pathak@ > wrote:> > > vedic_pathak <vedic_pathak@ >> Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (Rama & Tulasi Das)> > Wednesday, 16 December, 2009, 5:19 PM> > >  > > > Dear(est) Rajarshi,> back engineering job to bail out> Vow! Refreshing phrase. Too good. It seems a season of debating. Branches of threads are coming out.> 'Kamini and `Kanchan' was the exact words which Ramakrishna used freely during his life time. Now Kamini means a woman and its possible that several sections would have taken reservation at this. That seems very obvious otherwise why Swami Sardananda required to defend Thakur in his book called Ramakrishna Lilaprasanga. It seemed to me that Paramahansa Yogananda also have referred to this issue without mentioning Thakur's name directly (I may be wrong but i strongly felt like that when i read the 'Autobiography of a yogi' some 4/5 years back). Sardanada in a sense did 'Back engineering job to bail out ' . If we go by 'Kamini' word literaly, then Thakur could be portrayed as Women basher. but we all know that Thakur refffered to Lust and Desire of worldly objects whenever he spoke those two words. Jumping on conclusion without properly studying/thinking about Thakur's life, just on literal meaning of those 2 words would be a sure blasphemy.> Same way, I also thought about Sant Tulasi das ji. I was telling myself that can a saint of his devotion and poetic skills and add to that steadfastly devoted to Lord Rama (Who never shown slightest dis-resepct to  women) , utter such words and saggrigate 'Nari' for nothing. I was not convinced. One of the 'Dohas' of Tulasi Das goes like this -> [Prem, Ahinsa], Satya Vachan aur Par-stri Matusamaan|> Inase agar prabhu na mile to Tulasi Juth Jabaan ||> (I have given this doha  out of memory and its quite possible that first two wrods are wrong in the doha ) > If a poet is asking to look at a woman as a Mother, how could he mean 'Nari' to be 'Tadan Adhikari'? As you pointed out, on a look at surface (at the levelof text), it means which many belives but you and me need to look at little deeper. A person who did the world of Good to Indias ordinary masses by rewriting the whole Ramayana in a language which people (from north) could easily understand, The man who gave immortal 'Hanumaan Chalisa' can not be lebeled so casually as 'Nari basher' or 'Shudra Hater' (As Mayaavati brand poticians would capitalise).> Regarding your questions of why Pashu are only Nari and not Nara ....> I think he was reffering to Men with the words Ganvaar and Shudra and Pashu Nari must be a joint statement. Again as you already know, Shudra was not B.C., OBC, KBC, HSBC etc.. :-). but a fallen man, a mean thinking man. I have to agree if you say that Ganvaar and Shudra can also be said about Woaman however looking at the Doha and general prevailing conditions of society, it seems that he used those words for Men. > Grammar...Hmmmm. i don't know if he has really used proper grammer in such Dohas.> There are verse in Bhagvad Gita which can be criticised by people from other faiths if they are taken literaly and without understanding personality of Krishna .> ***> Regarding Ramachandra, Thank you for making clear, your notable friend's view and your detailed explanation by giving examples.  But again i don't think that to consider Rama as God will actually be blockage in leading life like him and that too when almost everybody in Sanatan Dharma knows him as God. Tthat is not reversible in any case. And above all, Incarnation of Lord Vishnu - He is a GOD> ***>  > You and I've notably common Astrological factors in our chart. Astrologer in me found out just few days back but I'll not give it hear for the obvious reason lest our own Mr. Narasimha should get mad at me.> Warm Regards,> Utpal> PS: I am writing every reference from my memory so please correct me when I am wrong in giving any reference>  >  >  > > , rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14@ ..> wrote:> >> > Dear Utpal,> >  > > I do not think that Saint like 'Tulasi Das' would ever be so hard on women. > > The actual poem is like this:> > || Dhol Ganwaar Shudra Pashu Naari, Yah sab Taadan ke adhikari ||> > Some years back, i read an explanation that Tulasi Das ji meant "Pashu Naari" and NOT pashu and Naari. It means He feels appropriate to punish a Naari who is like pashu in her characteristics. That really makes good sense atleast to me.> >  > > I am no one to comment on an accepted saint like Sri Tulasidasji' s spiritual level, but that sentence definitely looks like he clubbed "pashu" and "naari" in same category, not pashu-nari. The highlighting is done by you, not in the actual text. If he ment pashu-nari he should have used some basic grammer to remove confusion. He did not. At the level of text, it is indefensible. Also, if I go by your explanation, why only Naari who are pashu, why not Naras who are like pashus? There are more Naaras of Pashu nature than Naaris in the world. This explanation that you found looks more like a back engineering job to bail out.> >  > >  > > Regarding Rama self realization, I think I was unable to express the ideas of my friend clearly. Let me try again. He is not really saying that Sri Rama was not a self realized man. Infact he quite agrees that Sri Rama was an Avatar of God. What he says is that, (his opinion) God did not descend as Sri Rama in order to be worshipped. He descended in order to lead by example. That is why the text is called Rama+ayana. A path that an ordinary man can and should follow. One of principles. Compare this to the name of the other great epic, Mahabharata, which was not named "Krishna+ayana" . One cannot follow Krishna's path. > >  > > Whenever, according to him, we attribute Godhood to Sri Rama, our subcsious mind will create a blockage, a divide between the worshipper and the worshipped and thus make it impossible to lead a life like Rama did. BUt if we try to look at it like the story of a great king, a nobel man, a devoted husband etc, we have a better chance of following such a life.> > An ordinary man cannot lead the life of a God but he can follow the life of a great man.> >  > > Similarly, even today lot of people advise that one should try to become like Vivekananda, or that this country needs its youth to be like Vivekanadas in teh future. It does not mean Vivekanada was not a self realized saint of highest calibre, but his life's image is like one who lived like a lion among sheep of ordinary men, fearless and uncompromising and principled. If every person would constantly think that Vivekanada was a saint who worked by the pwoer of a deity or due to his extreme spirituality or the blessing of a great guru, no one will ever make an attempt to be inspired by him or emulate his way of living.Vivekanada was a spiritual giant, but the image he projected was one of a tireless, fearless KarmaYogi. THAT can inspire people. > >  > >  On the other hand you will never hear anyone advising that one should try to lead a life like Ramarkishna.  That is impossible. He was God incarnate leading a charmed life. > >  > > Similar is the case with the Avatar called Sri Ramachandra incomparison to Sri Krishna. One can become Rama in actions but one can never become Krishna. Therefore, my friend believes, one should not consider Rama as a God to be worshipped, but as a model to be followed. Like Vivekanada.> >  > > Hope I have put forth his idea clear.> >  > > -Regards> >  Rajarshi> >  > >  > >  > >  > >  > >  > >  > > > > > >  > > > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra> > > > --- On Tue, 15/12/09, vedic_pathak vedic_pathak@ ... wrote:> > > > > > vedic_pathak vedic_pathak@ ...> > Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (About my friend)> > > > Tuesday, 15 December, 2009, 8:29 PM> > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > Dear Rajarshi,> > I some how did not read your point no.2.> > >Also, there is a line in there which equates women with animals or >something similar. He believes that was introduces in the text >because Tulasidas had a problem controlling his own lust.> > I do not think that Saint like 'Tulasi Das' would ever be so hard on women. > > The actual poem is like this:> > || Dhol Ganwaar Shudra Pashu Naari, Yah sab Taadan ke adhikari ||> > Some years back, i read an explanation that Tulasi Das ji meant "Pashu Naari" and NOT pashu and Naari. It means He feels appropriate to punish a Naari who is like pashu in her characteristics. That really makes good sense atleast to me.> > About Lust in Tulasi das: It is well known that Tulasi Das was extremely attached to his wife so much that he won't allow her to go even at her parental home for a day. However he left the sansaara in a Flash. in a moment for ever. That is a great vairaagya. almost like Sri Ramakrishna used to give the example of a village Man to define the true vairaagya.> > my 2 quick cent!> > Best Regards,> > Utpal> > > > , rajarshi nandy rajarshi14@ ..> wrote:> > >> > > Dear Kishore and Utpal,> > >  > > > I am troubled by one thing just like you are. It is understandable if he says Rama is an ideal man but hard to believe that such a great person claims Rama is not God. Tempted to ask him what really is the definition of God which differentiates Rama from Krishna?> > > > > > Some months back I had a very lengthy, verbose and charged/heated debate with him on whether Sri Rama is God or not. Mind you, these are all theoritical/ theological debates - nothing to do with actual spirituality. Finally he stopped the debate because I was getting agitated and it would have affected our friendship. > > >  > > > Whenever his opinion is asked on anything, he will only mention that what he can support using logic. Therefore he never generally discusses spirituality with anyone per se. He will discuss and debate scriptures using exact quotations etc, (theology) but not about mysticism or sadhana or anything which needs a belief system. That is why most people know him only as a very rational, massively knowledgeable and uncorruptable human being.  They have no clue about his meditations or anything. He never projects himself as spiritual and generally would not discuss God in public.> > >  > > > Therefore our discussion was also on those aspects which can be proved or disproved theologically - 1) Is Rama a God as per Valmiki Ramayana 2) Is it wrong if people consider him as God .. 3) The merits of the Ramcharit Manas of Tulasidasji.> > >  > > > 1) To the first question, he believes the answer is "no". > > >  > > > 2) To the second question he says it cannot be debated from a spiritual point if it is right or wrong - but his personal opinion is that one should try to follow the way of life shown by Sri Rama rather than worshipping him. He said, Sri Rama had mastery of all divine weapons. He could have destroyed Ravana and his whole army in a blink of an eye, right from the place where he was located when he first heard the news of Sita's abduction, but Rama did not do so and instead chose the hard way of destroying Ravana - the human way. So as per my friend, it is more important to emulate Rama's ideas than to worship Rama.> > >  > > > 3) He considers the Ramcharit Manas, from a literary angle, a hodgepodge of langauges and styles ranging from Awadhi to BrajBhasa. An author's paradise (since many rules of composition has been flouted) but a critics nightmare. Also, there is a line in there which equates women with animals or something similar. He believes that was introduces in the text because Tulasidas had a problem controlling his own lust. Therefore, he ended up composing a sentence derogatory to women. Further, he argues that if Sri Rama is worshipped as God, then the purpose of his Avatarhood goes waste. Sri Rama was there to explain idea way of life. Krishna was there to be worshipped because Krishna was maximum ability of God on this plane. Nothing can be more God than Krishna was on this plane, so he thinks.> > >  > > > The above are merely his opinions, feel free to disagree. > > >  > > >  > > > Dear Utpal,> > >  > > > One request, if you can speak to him about his thought on Food habits, it'll be great.> > >  > > > I have been out of touch with him since August, been busy myself. But will ask him. However I don't know whether he will respond. Because as I explained above, he rarely discusses/debates anything from a purely spiritual angle. > > >  > > > It was only by chance that I found out one day about his meditations etc and then he confirmed them when asked.> > >  > > > I have seen him debating with Vegans - purely from a scientific point of view - about why there is no harm in having regulated amounts of meat (not red meat). > > >  > > > But I say, as Narasimha said, this person should not be taken as an ideal regarding food habits. Sachin can bat and score century even with a sore back, we will not be able to do it. His strength is his control of mind and his dedication to truth. > > >  > > > -Regards> > >  Rajarshi> > >  > > >  > > >  > > >  > > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra> > > > > > --- On Tue, 15/12/09, Kishore Chitrapu chitrapu@ wrote:> > > > > > > > > Kishore Chitrapu chitrapu@> > > Re: Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (About my friend)> > > > > > Tuesday, 15 December, 2009, 3:54 AM> > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Rajarshi,> > > > > > Thanks for painting such an portrait of this great person with your words.> > > > > > Spending 72 hours in meditation is act of no ordinary person. His other characteristics and experiences assert that he is a great person. I am troubled by one thing just like you are. It is understandable if he says Rama is an ideal man but hard to believe that such a great person claims Rama is not God. Tempted to ask him what really is the definition of God which differentiates Rama from Krishna?> > > > > > -Kishore> > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 4:02 PM, rajarshi nandy rajarshi14 (AT) (DOT) co.in> wrote:> > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Laxmi Narayan,> > >  > > >  I was intrigued by above line in your mail and want to know more about this devotee. Do you know him as a friend and is he a Indian? What sort of path/sadhana is he following?? Is he a sannyasin or a householder ?Did specific changes happened in his life after he had these samadhi and visions.Any other special things about him.> > >  > > >  > > > Yes he is a friend of mine. I can only tell you very little about his spiritual life, because he hardly ever shares it with anyone. He is married, lives in Delhi and has a son as well.> > >  > > > Before I tell you anything more about his spiritual life that I know, let me say line or two about the nature of this friend of mine. I met him about two years back. What first attracted me to towards him was his impeccable honestly. I mean, he is a maniac when it comes to honestly. If someone were to put a gun to his head and ask him to just say a simple, harmless lie, like sun rises in the west, he would not say it. Therefore he never jokes with anyone too! He has actually never ever spoken even a single lie in his whole life, big or small. When he was in his school, once his teacher told him that Indian languages are richer than English, he believed his teacher. Later someone else told him English is more comprehensive language and the world cannot do with it. He got confused. Since that day, he bought himself two thick fat dictionaries, one English, one Hindi and for ten> years every day he spend one hour reading the> > English dictionary and> > > one hour reading the Hindi dictionary apart from reading up volumes of Hindi and English literature. When I asked him why, he just said it is because he wanted to be equally adept at both the languages so that one day he can take a really detached view to judge the truth about which is more comprehensive language! As I said, he has an uncompromising attitude when it comes to finding out the truth about anything. By education, he is a Phd is mathematics. He has worked in different fields, from banking to education to journalism. He did not last for long in most places. He speaks and writes fluently, English, Bengali, Hindi, Urdu, Sanskrit, Arabic, Persian, French. Now he is learning Tamil. He composes poetry in all the above languages. When he was in college, he considered himself an atheist. While applying for a job he had kept the place makered for religion as blank. When the clerk who was supposed to take the forms> saw that blank space,> > he asked> > > my friend's name. Hearing a Hindu name, the clerk wrote "Hindu". Seeing this, my friend snatched the form from the clerk and tore it up right there. Because, he considered himself an atheist and writing Hindu in the form would have been a lie. > > >  > > > So this gives a basic idea of the man I am speaking of. All his friends, whoever knows him, calls him Rama of Kaliyuga.> > >  > > > One day, long back, he was going to office for some urgent meeting. His way to office passed by a Krishna temple. As he was passing by in his scooter, suddenly he felt a strange urge to go into the temple. He says he still does not know why he went inside the temple, but he did. That was at 9 o clock in the morning. Next when he sees his watch it is 4:30 in the evening! And he has no knowledge of how the time went. When he asked the priest, the priest said that he went into the temple sat down and just stayed as he was for the whole time without any movement. The priest somehow felt scared to disturb him. But my friend had no idea why this happened. He remembered nothing, as if he was in deep sleep.> > >  > > > Then he started meditating at home, and it was there that he got visions etc of Krishna. He does not say much about these, infact most people who know him also do not know these things. But once he was in samadhi for 72 hours, not moving from his meditation seat, in the exact same place and same position for 3 days continuously. Only his wife and close relatives know about this incident. I believe nowadays when ever he sits for meditation he often enters the state of Samadhi. When someone asked him how he felt during samadhi, he just said it feels as if the whole universe orginates from me. I am the sun, the moon, the stars, the planets, the animals, men, women, children, the wind, the water, the space, smaller than the atom and bigger than everything. It cannot be accurately desribed. He considers Sri Krishna to be God and Lord Rama to be the ideal man.That is why he does not like the Ramacharit Manas because he> thinks it elevated> > Sri Rama to the> > > level of a God whereas the aim of the orginal Valmiki Ramayana was to show Sri Rama as an ideal man, not a God.The difference he says is that, an ideal man is someone who can be emulated, an ordinary man can and should aim to become like the ideal. But a God cannot be emulated by ordinary men. One cannot become Krishna, but one can try to lead his life like Rama. I have argued with him over this, but I am merely stating his idea. Also he does not have a Guru - a human guru at least, and advises people to not trust most Gurus these days. Needless to say, he is not an atheist any more.> > >  > > > Later he had once mentioned he knew the relation he had with all the people around him in his past lives. His mother he says, was his daughter in his past life etc. Nowadays he spends a lot of time on different internet forums interacting with people, specially with those in the age group of 18 to 30, discussing anything and everything with them, from Indian politics to Indian history, religion, etc etc. His idea is to impart right knowledge to young people who will be the future of this country.> > >  > > > He is am omnivorous person. Like any other Bengali, eats fish, meat etc.> > >  > > > I shall refrain from mentioning his name because I had not asked his permission before mentioning him.> > >  > > > -Regards> > >  Rajarshi> > > > > > > > > PS: I would not like this mail to be considered as a part of the debate. This mail is just because Laxmi Narayan asked for information.> > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra> > > > > > --- On Mon, 14/12/09, Laxmi Narayan <shrijishrihari@ .co. uk> wrote:> > > > > > > > > Laxmi Narayan <shrijishrihari@ .co. uk>> > > Re: Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (From a vegetarian's point of view)> > > > > > Monday, 14 December, 2009, 10:34 PM> > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know a devotee of Krishna - not just a devotee but one who sees> > > Krishna during his meditations and have experienced samadhi many times> > > over, who is omnivorous.> > > > > > Hello Rajarshi,> > >                      I was intrigued by above line in your mail and want to know more about this devotee. Do you know him as a friend and is he a Indian? What sort of path/sadhana is he following?? Is he a sannyasin or a householder ?Did specific changes happened in his life after he had these samadhi and visions.Any other special things about him.> > > > > > In the Gita Lord is saying whatever you do/eat offer it to me first. So he is offering all these non-veg to Lord with devotion, Right?? Then prasdam all around??> > > > > > My curious questions are not against your acceptance of his exexperienceut to learn more.After all he is part of hidden violence. Somebody is inflicting gruesome pain and misery on animals and birds on his behalf and he is consuming them and yet he is experiencing all these exotic visions, But no feeling of kindness towards birds and animals.> > > > > > Where did I go wrong? Simple dal/roti and do not even touch onion/garlic/ pepper but no such samadhi? > > > > > > When we get burnt, we need to be careful.Many years ago I saw in a book/article about Dayamata who succeded Paramhansa Yoganand. Once she went to India and told a Spiritual Master that her progress has stopped. Master said, you are eating eggs which she admitted that she was doing secretly.> > > > > > This is very complex world. No outright solutions for so many difficult questions. Followers of 3 faiths which all originated in middle east are fighting each other all the time. Sometimes I think, from which part of Spiritual Sky these energies are coming,Are they also enemies there?? Their Gods said in their holy books that animals are their food. So they cannot even think about souls in animals or their pain and emotions.> > > > > > Then I have read stories about several people, who follow these faiths and are non-veg and how they exexperience spiritual highs and other such phenomena. It is so difficult to comprehend. Would they remain in the cycle of b/d till they learn about kindness???> > > > > > Kind Regards> > > LaxmiNarayan> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 12/12/09, rajarshi nandy rajarshi14 (AT) (DOT) co.in> wrote:> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. http://in.. com/> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. http://in.. com/> >> > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage.> > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. http://in.. com/> The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Dear Rajarshi, I was sad not due to any personal reason. you haven't said anything to offend me on personal level but i expected you to take this is issue more seriously and not with a attitude of dry critics like today's TV/Print media reporters & critics. Its very easy if you see with common *worldly wisdom* to declare that Tulasi Das asked to Punish/Beat Woman, Shudra and Ganwar. But You have given me feeling that you are a voracious reader. A spiritual young man (which is so rare) and capable of debating such issues. I have read somewhere that you have organised some debates also. There may be thousands who have criticied Tulasi Das for this verse. abused him but i dont jump guns at him. I also provide you enough reasons to atleast consider. 'Par Stri Matu Saman' was enough to rethink but you Ignored that just by saying that Its intresting. I again gave you something to think and that is Ramakrishna and Dhirubahi Ambani can never be cosidered Ganwar. I tell you something more - The closest english words which can describe Ganwar are Fool, Idiot, Ruffian ! I shoudl also give you another poit to think - If Tulasi das says- Shudra (Popularly and falsely taken as B.C. ETC...), Woman and Ganwar (Falsely and populerly considered as Unlettered) and Animals are worthy of punishment then who else is balanced on earth. If Really Tulasidas had such things in his mind while writing then Lord Rama can not even appear in his dream and Lord Hanumaan will be keeping away from him at Infinite distance. I'll write a followup message today or tomorrow. I do not consider your apology becuase i am not offended though my message was sharp but that is how i am. Let us debate this important issue once and for all for the sake of Tulasi das. Warm Regards, Your brother in Spiritual Journey. Utpal , rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14 wrote: > > > Dear Utpal, >  > I sincerly apologize if my mail offended you. >  > However, to the best of my knowledge " Gawaar " means an illiterate person. It is a common word used even to this day. If I am mistaken, please correct me. Shudra, as far as I knew is one of the four varnas, I don't know if the word has any other possible meanings. >  >  > I shall only request you to think about this verse in cool, calm manner, and not emotionally. Leave it for now. >  > Again, sorry if the previous mail was precieved as offensive. >  > -Regards >  Rajarshi >  >  >  >  > >  > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra > > --- On Thu, 17/12/09, vedic_pathak <vedic_pathak wrote: > > > vedic_pathak <vedic_pathak > Re: Tulasi Das/Ramakrishna - communication. > > Thursday, 17 December, 2009, 10:44 PM > > >  > > > > Dear Rajarshi, > > I appreciated your previous message but i am a bit taken a back by this message. > > Ramakrishna was not Ganwar > Dhirubhai Ambani was not ganwar though he didn't go to even secondary school education. > > Did you not get ENGLISH Translation for 'Shudra' from your source? Shudra = Shudra in English? did you mean SHUDRA JATI because you haven't given any equivalent meaning in english. > > I'll not write anything now as i am saddened by your message. I doubt your intention and it is not good to write further at this moment. > > Best Regards, > > Utpal > > , rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14@ ...> wrote: > > > > Namaste, > >  > > Further to my mail below: > >  > > The line in Ramcharit Manas goes : > >  > > || Dhol Ganwaar Shudra Pashu Naari, Yah sab Taadan ke adhikari || > >  > > Dhol = Drum > >  > > Ganwaar = Illiterate > >  > > Shudra = Shudra > >  > > Pashu = Animal > >  > > Naari = Women > >  > > Taadan = Beating > >  > > Therefore exact translation would be: > >  > > Drum illiterate shudra animal women, are fit to be beaten. > >  > > One line of thinking, as suggested by Utpal, is that it should be read " pashu-nari " (animalistic women) and not just " animal, women " . That is, pashu is an adjective for the noun naari. > >  > > I don't agree. Nothing in the text suggests so. > >  > > Secondly, we have not yet come to discussing the wisdom of advising a " tadan " for these above diverse group which includes a " gawaar " as well! Then by that logic, more than half of India should get a " taadan " because more than half of India is illiterate. > >  > > -Regards > >  Rajarshi > >  > >  > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra > > > > --- On Thu, 17/12/09, rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14@ ...> > > Re: Tulasi Das/Ramakrishna - communication. > > > > Thursday, 17 December, 2009, 4:03 PM > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Utpal, > >  > > Some points came to my mind. Thought of mailing them to you. > >  > >  Jumping on conclusion without properly studying/thinking about Thakur's life, just on literal meaning of those 2 words would be a sure blasphemy. > >  > > You are right. But since this is a debate and just a debate,  let me put forth some logical points. > >  > > 1) Two wrongs never make a right. This is one mistake we Indians do when we try to debate over something. When we are discussing Tulasidasji, it does not matter whether Ramakrishna - who lived in a different century - was right or now. That would be a different debate. > >  > > 2) Ramakrishna did not write anything -. He only woke up people to what ever degree was necessary and gave general talks on spirituality. So, one can always contend that a mistake maybe the biographers mistake. M or Saradananda could very well have been mistaken in what he quoted. Giving a freewheeling talk is different from creating a composition. When one writes, one has more time and energy to indulge in thinking, and checking up possibilities of different shades of meanings for the simple reason that the audience is large, unknown and spread out over huge spans of time. When one talks, and that too talking to friends, or close people, one does not need to be careful of every word or sentence one speaks. > >  > > To understand this better,  we have to think - scientifically speaking - how communication happens in three levels. Around 33 percent of the communication is through the words, 64 percent through body language and a solid 3 percent is 'unknown' or sub conscious communication. This last three percent is the most powerful. When a person can use this 3 percent of sub conscious communication - he can move masses of people. All great leaders do so. All rock stars also do so (IMO). If you listen to the lyrics of an average rock music, you may find it uninspiring. But if you were to be present in a live rock concert, you will definitely feel an energy and get swayed. > >  > > Then comes body language which is so important. For example, if you enter a Govt office in India, you may find that the babus there will be sitting relaxed in their chair with their spine reclining. Whatever you say will hardly make any impact on them. That is why the files in Govt. of India offices move at a snail's pace. If you find that someone whom you are talking to is sitting cross legged on a chair, with left leg crossing the right, even if the person may hang on eagerly to every word you speak, know it for the sure that there is a strong change he is listening through one ear and throwing out the words through the other. In short, pretending to listen. In effect, once you leave his presence he probably won' t bother about what you said. > >  > > And last is spoken word. When two people speak with each other, both words and body language come into picture. Sometimes sub conscious communication too can happen. Therefore there is a LOT of the energy exchanged/communica tion not through words but through other means. > >  > > When you write down something, body languages gets negated. Therefore, one needs to be extra cautious while writing something in order to convey the correct sense. That is why there are so many more rules to be followed for writing anything. > >  > > So therefore, if Ramakrishna is " talking " to someone he is probably communicating using all means possible. But if he were to write a book and mention " Kamini and Kanchan " without further explanation of what he intends to mean, then he too can be called to question. But he never wrote any books, and the authors who did, made sure they explained the sense. > >  > > Contrast this to that line from Ramacharit Manas, without any qualifications, that implies " women " , " sudra " , " pashu " are worthy of " tadan " . If I were a woman, I would take offense to that line. > >  > > 3) Whenever I am doing a critic of a religious literature, I keep the Koran as a standard. By this I mean, whenever I am judging a book of religious nature, I follow the same parameters of judgement that I use when I judge the Koran as a book. > >  > > The Koran contains a verse, translated correctly in the M.A. Shakir and Dawood translations, which recommend husbands to beat their wives if the wives are disobedient. > >  > > > > " Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in their sleeping places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great. (Shakir's version of the Koran, Quran, 4:34) > >  > > A lot of muslims I have talked to, defend the above giving various reasons one of which is 'misunderstanding context'. I find it inexcusable. Same way a line in a religious book bracketing " nari " , " pashu " , " sudra " together, I find to be equally inexcusable. That is the sense that comes out from a normal reading of that line. I am not commenting on the whole of Ramcharit Manas, but that one vital line. > >  > > [Prem, Ahinsa], Satya Vachan aur Par-stri Matusamaan| > > Inase agar prabhu na mile to Tulasi Juth Jabaan || > > (I have given this doha  out of memory and its quite possible that first two wrods are wrong in the doha ) > >  > > Interesting doha. Maybe you are right, maybe you are not. But that line (pashu/naari etc) definitely conveys a simple meaning. If Tulasidasji ment what you are saying, he should have used some appropiate punctuation marks. Since he did not, I have to reject your explanation. Or I can say, Tulasidasji respects women a lot, but that line is simply a bad composition. One way or the other, I cannot absolve the composer of that specific line. > >  > > BTW, were you refering to the Gita verse 1.41 where Arjuna talks about women of the family getting corrupted? > >  > > You and I've notably common Astrological factors in our chart. Astrologer in me found out just few days back but I'll not give it hear for the obvious reason lest our own Mr. Narasimha should get mad at me. > >  > > I am sure we will make very good friends:). I normally become strong friends with people with whom I " discuss " things. > >  > > Once, long back when I was furiously debating over something, my vastly more patient and experienced opponent gave me some invaluable advices which I stick by even today. Thought of sharing it in here. He said: > >  > > "  I find it is always best to debate online if one is keen on finding the correct resolution. Face to face debates are nothing but personality clashes. Slow the pace of a debate as required, which means, do not answer the moment you read . Take a break, take your mind off, see a movie if you have to, come back, re read and then answer. Thus what seemed revolting at first may not seem so bad later on. Never be in a hurry. This is not a wresting match. " > >  > > -Regards > >  Rajarshi > >  > > PS: Please take the debate in the right vein of a debate. There is nothing personal here. > >  > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra > > > > --- On Wed, 16/12/09, vedic_pathak <vedic_pathak@ > wrote: > > > > > > vedic_pathak <vedic_pathak@ > > > Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (Rama & Tulasi Das) > > > > Wednesday, 16 December, 2009, 5:19 PM > > > > > >  > > > > > > Dear(est) Rajarshi, > > back engineering job to bail out > > Vow! Refreshing phrase. Too good. It seems a season of debating. Branches of threads are coming out. > > 'Kamini and `Kanchan' was the exact words which Ramakrishna used freely during his life time. Now Kamini means a woman and its possible that several sections would have taken reservation at this. That seems very obvious otherwise why Swami Sardananda required to defend Thakur in his book called Ramakrishna Lilaprasanga. It seemed to me that Paramahansa Yogananda also have referred to this issue without mentioning Thakur's name directly (I may be wrong but i strongly felt like that when i read the 'Autobiography of a yogi' some 4/5 years back). Sardanada in a sense did 'Back engineering job to bail out ' . If we go by 'Kamini' word literaly, then Thakur could be portrayed as Women basher. but we all know that Thakur refffered to Lust and Desire of worldly objects whenever he spoke those two words. Jumping on conclusion without properly studying/thinking about Thakur's life, just on literal meaning of those 2 words would be a sure > blasphemy. > > Same way, I also thought about Sant Tulasi das ji. I was telling myself that can a saint of his devotion and poetic skills and add to that steadfastly devoted to Lord Rama (Who never shown slightest dis-resepct to  women) , utter such words and saggrigate 'Nari' for nothing. I was not convinced. One of the 'Dohas' of Tulasi Das goes like this - > > [Prem, Ahinsa], Satya Vachan aur Par-stri Matusamaan| > > Inase agar prabhu na mile to Tulasi Juth Jabaan || > > (I have given this doha  out of memory and its quite possible that first two wrods are wrong in the doha ) > > If a poet is asking to look at a woman as a Mother, how could he mean 'Nari' to be 'Tadan Adhikari'? As you pointed out, on a look at surface (at the levelof text), it means which many belives but you and me need to look at little deeper. A person who did the world of Good to Indias ordinary masses by rewriting the whole Ramayana in a language which people (from north) could easily understand, The man who gave immortal 'Hanumaan Chalisa' can not be lebeled so casually as 'Nari basher' or 'Shudra Hater' (As Mayaavati brand poticians would capitalise). > > Regarding your questions of why Pashu are only Nari and not Nara .... > > I think he was reffering to Men with the words Ganvaar and Shudra and Pashu Nari must be a joint statement. Again as you already know, Shudra was not B.C., OBC, KBC, HSBC etc.. :-). but a fallen man, a mean thinking man. I have to agree if you say that Ganvaar and Shudra can also be said about Woaman however looking at the Doha and general prevailing conditions of society, it seems that he used those words for Men. > > Grammar...Hmmmm. i don't know if he has really used proper grammer in such Dohas. > > There are verse in Bhagvad Gita which can be criticised by people from other faiths if they are taken literaly and without understanding personality of Krishna . > > *** > > Regarding Ramachandra, Thank you for making clear, your notable friend's view and your detailed explanation by giving examples.  But again i don't think that to consider Rama as God will actually be blockage in leading life like him and that too when almost everybody in Sanatan Dharma knows him as God. Tthat is not reversible in any case. And above all, Incarnation of Lord Vishnu - He is a GOD > > *** > >  > > You and I've notably common Astrological factors in our chart. Astrologer in me found out just few days back but I'll not give it hear for the obvious reason lest our own Mr. Narasimha should get mad at me. > > Warm Regards, > > Utpal > > PS: I am writing every reference from my memory so please correct me when I am wrong in giving any reference > >  > >  > >  > > > > , rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14@ ..> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Utpal, > > >  > > > I do not think that Saint like 'Tulasi Das' would ever be so hard on women. > > > The actual poem is like this: > > > || Dhol Ganwaar Shudra Pashu Naari, Yah sab Taadan ke adhikari || > > > Some years back, i read an explanation that Tulasi Das ji meant " Pashu Naari " and NOT pashu and Naari. It means He feels appropriate to punish a Naari who is like pashu in her characteristics. That really makes good sense atleast to me. > > >  > > > I am no one to comment on an accepted saint like Sri Tulasidasji' s spiritual level, but that sentence definitely looks like he clubbed " pashu " and " naari " in same category, not pashu-nari. The highlighting is done by you, not in the actual text. If he ment pashu-nari he should have used some basic grammer to remove confusion. He did not. At the level of text, it is indefensible. Also, if I go by your explanation, why only Naari who are pashu, why not Naras who are like pashus? There are more Naaras of Pashu nature than Naaris in the world. This explanation that you found looks more like a back engineering job to bail out. > > >  > > >  > > > Regarding Rama self realization, I think I was unable to express the ideas of my friend clearly. Let me try again. He is not really saying that Sri Rama was not a self realized man. Infact he quite agrees that Sri Rama was an Avatar of God. What he says is that, (his opinion) God did not descend as Sri Rama in order to be worshipped. He descended in order to lead by example. That is why the text is called Rama+ayana. A path that an ordinary man can and should follow. One of principles. Compare this to the name of the other great epic, Mahabharata, which was not named " Krishna+ayana " . One cannot follow Krishna's path. > > >  > > > Whenever, according to him, we attribute Godhood to Sri Rama, our subcsious mind will create a blockage, a divide between the worshipper and the worshipped and thus make it impossible to lead a life like Rama did. BUt if we try to look at it like the story of a great king, a nobel man, a devoted husband etc, we have a better chance of following such a life. > > > An ordinary man cannot lead the life of a God but he can follow the life of a great man. > > >  > > > Similarly, even today lot of people advise that one should try to become like Vivekananda, or that this country needs its youth to be like Vivekanadas in teh future. It does not mean Vivekanada was not a self realized saint of highest calibre, but his life's image is like one who lived like a lion among sheep of ordinary men, fearless and uncompromising and principled. If every person would constantly think that Vivekanada was a saint who worked by the pwoer of a deity or due to his extreme spirituality or the blessing of a great guru, no one will ever make an attempt to be inspired by him or emulate his way of living.Vivekanada was a spiritual giant, but the image he projected was one of a tireless, fearless KarmaYogi. THAT can inspire people. > > >  > > >  On the other hand you will never hear anyone advising that one should try to lead a life like Ramarkishna.  That is impossible. He was God incarnate leading a charmed life. > > >  > > > Similar is the case with the Avatar called Sri Ramachandra incomparison to Sri Krishna. One can become Rama in actions but one can never become Krishna. Therefore, my friend believes, one should not consider Rama as a God to be worshipped, but as a model to be followed. Like Vivekanada. > > >  > > > Hope I have put forth his idea clear. > > >  > > > -Regards > > >  Rajarshi > > >  > > >  > > >  > > >  > > >  > > >  > > >  > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra > > > > > > --- On Tue, 15/12/09, vedic_pathak vedic_pathak@ ... wrote: > > > > > > > > > vedic_pathak vedic_pathak@ ... > > > Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (About my friend) > > > > > > Tuesday, 15 December, 2009, 8:29 PM > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Rajarshi, > > > I some how did not read your point no.2. > > > >Also, there is a line in there which equates women with animals or >something similar. He believes that was introduces in the text >because Tulasidas had a problem controlling his own lust. > > > I do not think that Saint like 'Tulasi Das' would ever be so hard on women. > > > The actual poem is like this: > > > || Dhol Ganwaar Shudra Pashu Naari, Yah sab Taadan ke adhikari || > > > Some years back, i read an explanation that Tulasi Das ji meant " Pashu Naari " and NOT pashu and Naari. It means He feels appropriate to punish a Naari who is like pashu in her characteristics. That really makes good sense atleast to me. > > > About Lust in Tulasi das: It is well known that Tulasi Das was extremely attached to his wife so much that he won't allow her to go even at her parental home for a day. However he left the sansaara in a Flash. in a moment for ever. That is a great vairaagya. almost like Sri Ramakrishna used to give the example of a village Man to define the true vairaagya. > > > my 2 quick cent! > > > Best Regards, > > > Utpal > > > > > > , rajarshi nandy rajarshi14@ ..> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Kishore and Utpal, > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > I am troubled by one thing just like you are. It is understandable if he says Rama is an ideal man but hard to believe that such a great person claims Rama is not God. Tempted to ask him what really is the definition of God which differentiates Rama from Krishna? > > > > > > > > Some months back I had a very lengthy, verbose and charged/heated debate with him on whether Sri Rama is God or not. Mind you, these are all theoritical/ theological debates - nothing to do with actual spirituality. Finally he stopped the debate because I was getting agitated and it would have affected our friendship. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > Whenever his opinion is asked on anything, he will only mention that what he can support using logic. Therefore he never generally discusses spirituality with anyone per se. He will discuss and debate scriptures using exact quotations etc, (theology)ÃÆ'‚ but not about mysticism or sadhana or anything whichÃÆ'‚ needs a belief system. That is why most people know him only as a very rational, massively knowledgeable and uncorruptableÃÆ'‚ human being.ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'‚ They have no clue about his meditations or anything. He never projects himself as spiritual and generally would not discuss God in public. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > Therefore our discussion was also on those aspects which can be proved or disproved theologicallyÃÆ'‚ - 1) Is Rama a God as per Valmiki RamayanaÃÆ'‚ 2) Is it wrong if people consider him as GodÃÆ'‚ .. 3) The merits of the Ramcharit Manas of Tulasidasji. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > 1) To the first question, he believes the answer is " no " . > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > 2) To the second question he says it cannot be debated from a spiritual point if it is right or wrongÃÆ'‚ - but his personal opinion is that one should try to follow the way of life shown by Sri Rama rather than worshipping him. He said, Sri Rama had mastery of all divine weapons. He could have destroyed Ravana and his whole army in a blink of an eye, right from the place where he wasÃÆ'‚ located when he first heard the news of Sita's abduction, but Rama did not do so and instead chose the hard way of destroying Ravana - the human way. So as per my friend, it is more important to emulate Rama's ideas than to worship Rama. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > 3) He considers the Ramcharit Manas, from a literary angle, a hodgepodge of langauges and styles ranging from Awadhi to BrajBhasa. An author's paradise (since many rules of composition has been flouted) but a critics nightmare. Also, there is a line in there which equates women with animals or something similar. He believes that was introduces in the text because Tulasidas had a problem controlling his own lust. Therefore, he ended up composing a sentence derogatory to women. Further, he argues that if Sri Rama is worshipped as God, then the purpose of his Avatarhood goes waste. Sri Rama was there to explain idea way of life. Krishna was there to be worshipped because Krishna was maximum ability of God on this plane. Nothing can be more God than Krishna was on this plane, so he thinks. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > The above are merely his opinions, feel free to disagree. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > Dear Utpal, > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > One request, if you can speak to him about his thought on Food habits, it'll be great. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > I have been out of touch with him since August, been busy myself. But will ask him. However I don't know whether he will respond. Because as I explained above, he rarely discusses/debates anything from a purely spiritual angle. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > It was only by chance that I found out one day about his meditations etc and then he confirmed them when asked. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > I have seen him debating with Vegans - purely from a scientific point of view - about why there is no harm in having regulated amounts of meat (not red meat). > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > But I say, as Narasimha said, this person should not be taken as an ideal regarding foodÃÆ'‚ habits. Sachin can bat and score century even with a sore back, we will not be able to do it. His strength is his control of mind and his dedication to truth. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > -Regards > > > > ÃÆ'‚ Rajarshi > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra > > > > > > > > --- On Tue, 15/12/09, Kishore Chitrapu chitrapu@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Kishore Chitrapu chitrapu@ > > > > Re: Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (About my friend) > > > > > > > > Tuesday, 15 December, 2009, 3:54 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Rajarshi, > > > > > > > > Thanks for painting such an portrait of this great person with your words. > > > > > > > > Spending 72 hours in meditation is act of no ordinary person. His other characteristics and experiences assert that he is a great person. I am troubled by one thing just like you are. It is understandable if he says Rama is an ideal man but hard to believe that such a great person claims Rama is not God. Tempted to ask him what really is the definition of God which differentiates Rama from Krishna? > > > > > > > > -Kishore > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 4:02 PM, rajarshi nandy rajarshi14 (AT) (DOT) co.in> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Laxmi Narayan, > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > ÃÆ'‚ I was intrigued by above line in your mail and want to know more about this devotee. Do you know him as a friend and is he a Indian? What sort of path/sadhana is he following?? Is he a sannyasin or a householder ?Did specific changes happened in his life afterÃÆ'‚ he had these samadhi and visions.Any other special things about him. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > Yes he is a friend of mine.ÃÆ'‚ I can only tell you very little about his spiritual life, because he hardly ever shares it with anyone. He is married, lives in Delhi and has a son as well. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > Before I tell you anything moreÃÆ'‚ about his spiritual lifeÃÆ'‚ that I know, let me sayÃÆ'‚ line or two about the nature of this friend of mine. I met him about two years back. What first attracted me toÃÆ'‚ towards him was his impeccable honestly. I mean, he is a maniacÃÆ'‚ when it comes toÃÆ'‚ honestly.ÃÆ'‚ If someone were to put a gun to his head and ask him to just say a simple, harmlessÃÆ'‚ lie, like sun rises in the west, he would not say it. Therefore he never jokes with anyone too! He has actually never everÃÆ'‚ spoken even a single lie in his whole life, big or small. When he was in his school, once his teacher told him that Indian languages are richer than English, he believed his teacher. Later someone else told him English is more comprehensive language and the world cannot do with it. He got confused. > Since that day, he bought himself two thick fat dictionaries, one English, one Hindi and for ten > > years every day he spend one hour reading the > > > English dictionary and > > > > one hour reading the Hindi dictionary apart from readingÃÆ'‚ up volumes of Hindi and English literature.ÃÆ'‚ When I asked him why, he just said it is because he wanted to beÃÆ'‚ equally adept at both the languages so that one day he can take a really detached view to judge the truth aboutÃÆ'‚ which is more comprehensive language! As I said, he has an uncompromising attitude when it comes to finding out the truth about anything. By education, he is a Phd is mathematics. He has worked in different fields, from banking to education to journalism. He did not last for long in most places. He speaks and writes fluently, English, Bengali, Hindi, Urdu, Sanskrit, Arabic, Persian, French. Now he is learning Tamil. He composes poetry in all the above languages. When he was in college, he considered himself an atheist. While applying for a job he had kept the place makered for religion as blank. When > the clerk who was supposed to take the forms > > saw that blank space, > > > he asked > > > > my friend's name. Hearing a Hindu name, the clerk wrote " Hindu " . Seeing this, my friend snatched the form from the clerk and tore it up right there. Because, he considered himself an atheist and writing Hindu in the form would have been a lie. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > So this gives a basic idea of the man I am speaking of. All his friends, whoever knows him, calls him Rama of Kaliyuga. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > One day, long back, he was going to office for some urgent meeting. His way to office passed by a Krishna temple. As he was passing by inÃÆ'‚ his scooter, suddenly he felt a strange urge to go into the temple. He says he still does not know why he went inside the temple, but he did. That was at 9 o clock in the morning. Next when he sees his watch it is 4:30 in the evening! And he has no knowledge of how the time went. When he asked the priest, the priest said that he went into the temple sat down and just stayed as he was for the whole time without any movement. The priest somehow felt scared to disturb him. But my friend had no idea why this happened. He remembered nothing, as if he was in deep sleep. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > Then he started meditating at home, and it was thereÃÆ'‚ that he got visions etc of Krishna. He does not say much about these, infact most people who know him also do not know these things. But once he was in samadhi for 72 hours, not moving from his meditation seat, in the exact same place and same position for 3 days continuously.ÃÆ'‚ Only his wife and close relatives know about this incident. I believe nowadays when ever he sits for meditation he often enters the state of Samadhi. When someone asked him how he felt during samadhi, he just said it feels as if the whole universe orginates from me. I am the sun, the moon, the stars, the planets, the animals, men, women, children, the wind, the water, the space, smaller than the atom and bigger than everything. It cannot be accurately desribed.ÃÆ'‚ He considers Sri Krishna to be God andÃÆ'‚ Lord Rama to be the ideal man.That is why he does > not like the Ramacharit Manas because he > > thinks it elevated > > > SriÃÆ'‚ Rama to the > > > > level of a God whereas the aim of the orginal Valmiki Ramayana was to show Sri Rama as an ideal man,ÃÆ'‚ not a God.The difference he says is that, an ideal man is someone who can be emulated, an ordinary man can and should aim to become like the ideal. But a God cannot be emulated by ordinary men. One cannot become Krishna, but oneÃÆ'‚ can try to lead his life like Rama. I have argued with him over this, but I am merely stating his idea. Also he does not have a Guru - a human guru at least, and advises people to not trust most Gurus these days. Needless to say, he is not an atheist any more. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > Later he had onceÃÆ'‚ mentioned he knew the relation he had with all the people around him in his past lives. His mother he says, was his daughter in his past life etc. Nowadays he spends a lot of time on different internet forums interacting with people, speciallyÃÆ'‚ with those inÃÆ'‚ the age group of 18 to 30, discussing anything and everything with them, from Indian politics to Indian history, religion, etc etc. His idea is to impart right knowledge to young people who will be the future of this country. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > He is am omnivorous person. Like any other Bengali, eats fish, meat etc. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > I shall refrain from mentioning his name because I had not asked his permission before mentioning him. > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > -Regards > > > > ÃÆ'‚ Rajarshi > > > > > > > > > > > > PS: I would not like this mail to be considered as a part of the debate. This mail is just because Laxmi Narayan asked for information. > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > > > > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra > > > > > > > > --- On Mon, 14/12/09, Laxmi Narayan <shrijishrihari@ .co. uk> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Laxmi Narayan <shrijishrihari@ .co. uk> > > > > Re: Re: Veg Vs. Non-Veg (From a vegetarian's point of view) > > > > > > > > Monday, 14 December, 2009, 10:34 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'‚ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know a devotee of Krishna - not just a devotee but one who sees > > > > KrishnaÃÆ'‚ during hisÃÆ'‚ meditations and have experienced samadhi many times > > > > over, who isÃÆ'‚ omnivorous. > > > > > > > > Hello Rajarshi, > > > > ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'‚ \ ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'‚ \ ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'‚ \ ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'‚ \ ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'‚ ÃÆ'‚ \ ÃÆ'‚ I was intrigued by above line in your mail and want to know more about this devotee. Do you know him as a friend and is he a Indian? What sort of path/sadhana is he following?? Is he a sannyasin or a householder ?Did specific changes happened in his life afterÃÆ'‚ he had these samadhi and visions.Any other special things about him. > > > > > > > > In the Gita Lord is saying whatever you do/eat offer it to me first. So he is offering all these non-veg to Lord with devotion, Right?? Then prasdam all around?? > > > > > > > > My curious questions are not against your acceptance of his exexperienceut to learn more.After all he is part of hidden violence. Somebody is inflicting gruesomeÃÆ'‚ pain and misery on animals and birds on his behalf and he is consuming them and yet he is experiencing all these exoticÃÆ'‚ visions, But no feeling of kindness towards birds and animals. > > > > > > > > Where did I go wrong? Simple dal/roti and do not even touch onion/garlic/ pepper but no such samadhi? > > > > > > > > When we get burnt, we need to be careful.Many years ago I saw in a book/articleÃÆ'‚ about Dayamata who succededÃÆ'‚ Paramhansa Yoganand. Once she went to India and told a Spiritual Master that her progress has stopped. Master said, you are eating eggs which she admitted that she was doingÃÆ'‚ secretly. > > > > > > > > This is very complex world. No outright solutions for so many difficult questions. Followers of 3 faiths which all originated in middle east are fighting each other all the time. Sometimes I think, from which part of Spiritual Sky these energies are coming,Are they also enemies there?? Their Gods said in their holy books that animals are their food. So they cannot even think about souls in animals or their pain and emotions. > > > > > > > > Then I have read stories about several people, who follow these faiths and are non-veg and how they exexperienceÃÆ'‚ spiritual highs and other such phenomena. It is so difficult to comprehend.ÃÆ'‚ Would they remain in the cycle of b/dÃÆ'‚ till they learn about kindness??? > > > > > > > > Kind Regards > > > > LaxmiNarayan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 12/12/09, rajarshi nandy rajarshi14 (AT) (DOT) co.in> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. http://in.. com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. http://in.. com/ > > > > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. http://in.. com/ > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Homepage. http://in./ > 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.