Osho's words

October 6, 2009

Dear Pranadas ji,

// I have not perused Tulisidas' works in great detail. But, in all

honesty, if this couplet exists, then the meaning of it is clear - we

may attempt to hide it and try and make it sound estoteric and great -

but the fact is in plain sight, Tulsidas-goswamiji erred on this one//

People after receiving enlightenment and especially Tulsidasji, do not

err. It is we who do so in understanding the context under what the

statement was said and what was the actual meaning as Utkalji just

wrote. The English language does not have many proper substitutes for

Hindi words, and " sakal tadna " cannot be intercepted as " beating " .

" Admonishing " is more nearer to " tadna " as utkalji mentioned. It would

be most foolish on anyones part to say that Tulsidasji said women should

be beaten. In fact he respected women. After he left his wife, and later

on (After many years )realised through a villager in time to come that

his wife is no more, at the end of the Tulsidasji episode on earth, he

was allowed a meeting with his wife in her astral form where some

matters on Spirituality were discussed between him and her which again

relates his respect for women, but I do not have the exact conversations

with me at present. Anyway i wish to mention that there are many matters

we do not know fully about with our limited faculties and should not

jump to make hasty judgements about venerated Sages of the past.

best wishes,

Bhaskar.

, s s <freemorons

wrote:

>

> Dear members,

> I have not perused Tulisidas' works in great detail. But, in all

honesty, if

> this couplet exists, then the meaning of it is clear - we may attempt

to

> hide it and try and make it sound estoteric and great - but the fact

is in

> plain sight, Tulsidas-goswamiji erred on this one. This statement is a

> reflection of societal conditions and that time and it was perhaps

> " justifiable " in the eyes of the common public to allow violence

against

> women..

>

> Remember, Tulsidas-ji is not God, so he is not perfect. Why, even

arjuna

> himself - the very incarnation of Indra - speaks arrogantly in front

of

> bhagawan Krishna so many many times - he gets agnyana 100s of times

!!! For

> example, when the war is about to begin, what does this hero say?

" ratham

> sthApaya _*me*_ achyuta " ('stop " *MY* " charriot, Krishna') what

arrogance!!!

> he is talking as if the charriot is his and krishna is some menial

> driver...ha ha. You see, agnyaya is very very strong, and so we should

> always try to be aware of it, but it can defeat us even if bhagawan is

> standing directly in front of us.

>

> Yes, I am claiming here that Tuslidasji and his writings are not

perfect -

> but I do not mean that we are better than him in any sense. An

elephant may

> sometimes sneeze, but that doesn't mean that the termites can laugh at

> it...we are all insignificant before the greatness of Tulsidasji's

bhakti.

>

> So, it is not necessary to rationalize and idolize a mere human when

we have

> the perfect paramAtma to concentrate on...why waste time on discussing

the

> small stone when we can be savoring the delicious taste of kheer that

is

> tulsi-ramayan? take the stone out and throw it, do not paint it white

and

> try chewing it just because you love the cook.

>

> hari smaraNs,

> prANadAsa.

>

> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Akhil Mishra astro6301 wrote:

>

> >

> > Dear Bohra ji

> >

> > Basically I belong to same place chitrakut UP and is only 5 km

> > distance from Goswami Tulsidas birth place.

> >

> > Becuase this doha in awadhi and have sense of Bundelkhani, so if a

> > person know hindi , he cant interpretate reall sense of the word.

> >

> > Hindi language is established when local language given some

> > contribution.

> >

> > Lot of peoples talk againt same doha but they dont under stand

> > spirit of the word.

> >

> > Bhaskar ji used lot of efforts to justify what is meaning of the

> > Doha , i am very grweatful to him.

> > Thanks Bhaskar Ji to interpretate the doha.

> >

> > Regards

> >

> > Dr Mishra

> >

>

October 6, 2009

Dedar Srinadh Ji,

There is no doubt that Osho has great sudy of philosphy, he was a

professor of philosphy in university of Jabalpur, but that doesnt mean

other professors didnt have that much knowledge of philosphy, mere

criticizing established beliefs doesn't vindicate the critic is greater

then the founder of a belief. We are appreciative of his study as we

look at his positive side, but there is a negative side also.

Any body who wants to make a carreer in the field of spirituality or any

body who wants to be known as a spiritual master, w'd always study Geet,

Tantra Upnishads etc, coz he has a set goal. But, we all are aware that

he has no accomplishments in any of these area, he has never taken

initiative any initiative to rsolve either publich issues or problems of

individuals. I have read his opinion about women's cloth and dress

material, you also w'd have read that, can you please post that to

group.

At least SundarKanda pacifies Shani, no articles written by Osho has

such qualities.

Still, we have respect for him coz he stood to face the world with his

beliefs, A Guru's success is counted if he is able to convert his

Shishya as a Siddha or a Guru, in Kali Yuga, we see, hardly any well

known Guru was able to make Shishyas as Siddha, we have only handful

examples like Guru Nanak, RamKrishna Paramhansha, Ramanuja Charya,

Shankaracharya... etc, agreed that over the period declination came in

their path also but at least 4-5 generations their impact was realized,

Osho's mission lost it's impact in his life time only.

Lastly, I w'd request that we have joined this group for astrology, pls

allow us doing that. I m sorry, even I respect Osho, I dont ignore what

he lacks.

Utkal.

, " sreesog " <sreesog

wrote:

>

> Dear Utkal ji,

>

> //A critic is never equal to an author, when a critic badly projects a

> dialogue as wisdom of the epic, his integrity is doubtful. //

>

> Such statements are never always true. The beings like Osho are proof

> of the same to us. Osho is NOT criticizing Tulisidas or anyone one

else

> for that matter - but for him they were all mere tools to express his

> own expression of truth that comes from within him. To know this,

> please try answering these questions sincerely (if you have read Osho)

-

>

> * Osho criticized politicians, priests, autocrats - Does it mean that

> any of these politicians, priests deserve better value than Osho?

Can't

> you see that Osho stood for truth, but they haven't?

>

> * Osho spoke about Jibran and many other literary scholars - but can't

> you see that the original literary contribution of osho and its

quality

> is better than any author in the world?

>

> * Osho spoke about psychology and its masters - but can't you see that

> Psychology as a subject is never the same before and after Osho - even

> for the psychologists?

>

> * Osho spoke about great spiritual masters - but can't you see that

> approach spirituality for the sincere seeker is never the same before

> and after Osho?

>

> * Can't you see that our knowledge of Tantra, Geeta, Psychology,

> Spiritual masters etc are never the same after Osho? Can't you see

that

> his works an epic in themselves (due to its volume and quality) and a

> record that none will break in near future (till a better master

> incarnates)?

>

> There were many drops, but Osho is rain! There were many books, but

> Osho is the greatest Library! There were many a piece of sand, but

Osho

> is the seashore!

>

> Osho is not a critic, there is no need to be; All people he refers to

> become mere touchstones to contrast and compare against and thus help

us

> to show the truth - yes, the truth and master in Osho. I value pure

gold

> than the touchstones he used. But ofcourse the touchstones has their

own

> value. []

>

> Love and regards,

>

> Sreenadh

>

> , " utkal.panigrahi "

> utkal.panigrahi@ wrote:

> >

> > Dear Bohra Ji,

> >

> > Key of controversy is, why a person whether rajneesh or any body

takes

> > up only a heated dialogue between two chacracters to ridicule the

> authur

> > and epic both, what was his intention, let's check, in or daily

life,

> > how many times we use the words like " idiot, you need a slap " , so,

> when

> > an auhor draws up such a scenario in a book, he will use similar

> > expression, quite normal and obvious.

> >

> > What was said by Samudra, realizing his arrogance, in a tune of

sorry,

> > is projected by Osho as wisdom of Ram Charit manas.

> >

> > A critic is never equal to an author, when a critic badly projects a

> > dialogue as wisdom of the epic, his integrity is doubtful. I said,

> Osho

> > or any critic as they are not from an institutional background, they

> > don't acknowledge their responsibility towards readers or towards

> > society, such critic connects the convenient dots to draw a shape

> that

> > they want to project, so that, they can get a ground, mostly, this

> sort

> > of controversy is created in the time when such critics are in their

> > struggle period, this is an effort to draw attention, let's be

> cautious.

> > there is no spirituality about it.

> >

> > A reader needs to move on ...... critics w'd come and die.

> >

> > Fellow astrologers should understand, why SundarKand works as a

remedy

> > to Shani Dosha, had there been any thing wrong, destiny and divinity

> w'd

> > have not accepted as a medium to overcome Sani Dosha, that's itself

is

> > an evidence for validity of sundar kanda.

> >

> > Utkal.

>

October 6, 2009

Dear All,Tum ho TAARAN TARAN, le lo apni sharan, Meto meto jee sankat humaara.This is a beautiful line from a lovely Jain bhajan. I have always loved these lines, kind of essence for which we call HIM, PUKAR is the right word though.

For the lines from Sundarkand, personally, I’ve always thought it meant TARAN. May it be so!Sundarkand is all about liberation or moksha and it depicts the process of liberation. Which is TARAN. Hanuman as an aspirant of self-realisation crosses the ocean to reach Lanka to find Sita. The ocean of Samsara and discovery of Sita by Hanuman is a symbol of discovery of divinity which completes the process of liberation. An aspirant struggles to attain self-realisation. Hanuman represents the purusharth and thus efforts in negotiating obstacles en route to Lanka and unite with Sita, the inner core, to unite with the Supreme Spirit represented by Rama (TAARAN).

We are saying why a WOMAN should be treated thus. The other day I read a report where similarly one DALIT neta Suraj Bhan was demanding that this particular verse of the epic be changed as it demoralized dalits. “Fresh edited versions of these scriptures should be brought out” he said.

There is no problem with Tulsidasji or with Ramayana. The problem is with our interpretation and narrow thinking. Instead of understanding it in reference to social norms and conditions of those times, we are judging it by today’s standards. And over and above all, the beauty is that it fits in today’s standards too!

A shudra of those days is not at all a Dalit of today. Shudra was only a man of lesser or no learning who would earn his living by doing service to others. He could be a Brahmin b birth. It was varna and not caste. Later on the society distorted the varna system and introduced casteism and untouchables and Dalits came into existence. How justified is Suraj Bhan’s demand to change the epic in this context, any intelligent person can see!

The verse is very meaningful as it only shows who are the ‘people’ to be helped in their journey of samsaara towards liberation. This includes men and women both. Men of certain types.Dhol is a person who has a double character and is also vain. Ganwaar is agyani, shudra is without learning and meek (not the difference between agyani and shudra!), pashu is one who acts like animals and does not have a refined intellect to understand things, and Nari is a woman as in those days we know that a woman’s role was only that of a mother and nurturer by instinct and she was devoid of actual learning process. She must be helped and supported to attain liberation is what Tulsidas ji meant.

We are told that in Sundarkand, the entire show is being watched by Lord Shiva and Bhavani. Their dialogues are the core of this episode’s teachings. Remember Shiva states that God’s grace is essential for completing difficult tasks. But to obtain God’s grace one has to constantly do good, and those who take Rama’s name in speech, thought and action will be trouble-free.

Justifiably, the word should be TARAN. ‘Bhav Sagar’, the ocean, would only talk about TAARAN and TARAN. Ocean cannot talk about TADAN. Why would he, it is so illogical!Coming to OSHO: I have greatest respect for his works. He has given us splendid commentaries on almost every work of value. When you read Osho, a feeling of calm and serenity dwells on you. His works are thought-provoking, but never seditious and rabble-raising. How can it be when he always projected detachment? Remember he said, “Look where I am pointing, don’t bite my finger”.

What Sreenadh jee has posted IS NOT and CANNOT BE Osho’s words. I am very sure. I do not relate to it, the way I do it to his other writings. I think Sreenadh je has not read the text fully. The message is so inflammatory and Anti Hindu. It is some manipulative work of an antisocial element. We can find such things on the internet which are not authentic. One must apply own mind on how-to or how-not-to react to such issues. E.g., It is ridiculous that OSHO would comment on Swami Agnivesh. Who is Swami Agnivesh, except another modern religious broker! I do not think he even mattered when OSHO was around.

//Harijans should declare themselves independent from Hindus. They are such a big force that they will change the whole character of Indian politics.//

Does anyone truly feel OSHO would say this?Think!!

RegardsNeelam

October 6, 2009

Dear Neelam ji, //What Sreenadh jee has posted IS NOT and CANNOT BE Oshoï¿½s words. I am very sure. // We cannot EXPECT people to fullfill OUR expectations. What they said is what they said - whether it be Osho or Tulsidas. What they are is what they are, and what we are is what we are. Love and regards,Sreenadh , neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote:>> Dear All,> > *Tum ho TAARAN TARAN, le lo apni sharan, Meto meto jee sankat humaara.*> This is a beautiful line from a lovely Jain bhajan. I have always loved> these lines, kind of essence for which we call HIM, PUKAR is the right word> though.> > *For the lines from Sundarkand, personally, Iï¿½ve always thought it meant> TARAN. May it be so!*> > Sundarkand is all about liberation or moksha and it depicts the process of> liberation. Which is TARAN. Hanuman as an aspirant of self-realisation> crosses the ocean to reach Lanka to find Sita. The ocean of Samsara and> discovery of Sita by Hanuman is a symbol of discovery of divinity which> completes the process of liberation. An aspirant struggles to attain> self-realisation. Hanuman represents the purusharth and thus efforts in> negotiating obstacles en route to Lanka and unite with Sita, the inner core,> to unite with the Supreme Spirit represented by Rama (TAARAN).> > *We are saying why a WOMAN should be treated thus. The other day I read a> report where similarly one DALIT neta Suraj Bhan was demanding that this> particular verse of the epic be changed as it demoralized dalits. ï¿½Fresh> edited versions of these scriptures should be brought outï¿½ he said.*> > There is no problem with Tulsidasji or with Ramayana. The problem is with> our interpretation and narrow thinking. Instead of understanding it in> reference to social norms and conditions of those times, we are judging it> by todayï¿½s standards. And over and above all, the beauty is that it fits in> todayï¿½s standards too!> > A shudra of those days is not at all a Dalit of today. Shudra was only a man> of lesser or no learning who would earn his living by doing service to> others. He could be a Brahmin b birth. It was varna and not caste. Later on> the society distorted the varna system and introduced casteism and> untouchables and Dalits came into existence. How justified is Suraj Bhanï¿½s> demand to change the epic in this context, any intelligent person can see!> > *The verse is very meaningful as it only shows who are the ï¿½peopleï¿½ to be> helped in their journey of samsaara towards liberation. This includes men> and women both. Men of certain types.*> > Dhol is a person who has a double character and is also vain. Ganwaar is> agyani, shudra is without learning and meek (not the difference between> agyani and shudra!), pashu is one who acts like animals and does not have a> refined intellect to understand things, and Nari is a woman as in those days> we know that a womanï¿½s role was only that of a mother and nurturer by> instinct and she was devoid of actual learning process. She must be helped> and supported to attain liberation is what Tulsidas ji meant.> > We are told that in Sundarkand, the entire show is being watched by Lord> Shiva and Bhavani. Their dialogues are the core of this episodeï¿½s teachings.> Remember Shiva states that Godï¿½s grace is essential for completing difficult> tasks. But to obtain Godï¿½s grace one has to constantly do good, and those> who take Ramaï¿½s name in speech, thought and action will be trouble-free.> > *Justifiably, the word should be TARAN. ï¿½Bhav Sagarï¿½, the ocean, would only> talk about TAARAN and TARAN. Ocean cannot talk about TADAN. Why would he, it> is so illogical!*> > *Coming to OSHO:* I have greatest respect for his works. He has given us> splendid commentaries on almost every work of value. When you read Osho, a> feeling of calm and serenity dwells on you. His works are thought-provoking,> but never seditious and rabble-raising. How can it be when he always> projected detachment? Remember he said, ï¿½Look where I am pointing, donï¿½t> bite my fingerï¿½.> > What Sreenadh jee has posted IS NOT and CANNOT BE Oshoï¿½s words. I am very> sure. I do not relate to it, the way I do it to his other writings. I think> Sreenadh je has not read the text fully. The message is so inflammatory and> Anti Hindu. It is some manipulative work of an antisocial element. We can> find such things on the internet which are not authentic. One must apply own> mind on how-to or how-not-to react to such issues. E.g., It is ridiculous> that OSHO would comment on Swami Agnivesh. Who is Swami Agnivesh, except> another modern religious broker! I do not think he even mattered when OSHO> was around.> > //Harijans should declare themselves independent from Hindus. They are such> a big force that they will change the whole character of Indian politics.//> Does anyone truly feel OSHO would say this?> > Think!!> > Regards> Neelam>

October 6, 2009

Dear Sreenadh ji, //We cannot EXPECT people to fullfill OUR expectations. What they said is what they said - whether it be Osho or Tulsidas. What they are is what they are, and what we are is what we are. //

I think you got me wrong! It is not a matter of fulfilling our expectations. It is just trying to see what is true and what may be false.We have that right by virtue of our senses and learning and that is what decides for us, what we to TAKE or LEAVE!

Of course, I accept that it is only my judgment of those words posted by you, because I have read OSHO to think that they are not his words! You have a right to yours. RegardsNeelam

2009/10/6 sreesog <sreesog

Dear Neelam ji, //What Sreenadh jee has posted IS NOT and CANNOT BE Oshoï¿½s words. I am very sure. // We cannot EXPECT people to fullfill OUR expectations. What they said is what they said - whether it be Osho or Tulsidas. What they are is what they are, and what we are is what we are.

Love and regards,Sreenadh , neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote:

>> Dear All,> > *Tum ho TAARAN TARAN, le lo apni sharan, Meto meto jee sankat humaara.*> This is a beautiful line from a lovely Jain bhajan. I have always loved> these lines, kind of essence for which we call HIM, PUKAR is the right word

> though.> > *For the lines from Sundarkand, personally, Iï¿½ve always thought it meant> TARAN. May it be so!*> > Sundarkand is all about liberation or moksha and it depicts the process of

> liberation. Which is TARAN. Hanuman as an aspirant of self-realisation> crosses the ocean to reach Lanka to find Sita. The ocean of Samsara and> discovery of Sita by Hanuman is a symbol of discovery of divinity which

> completes the process of liberation. An aspirant struggles to attain> self-realisation. Hanuman represents the purusharth and thus efforts in> negotiating obstacles en route to Lanka and unite with Sita, the inner core,

> to unite with the Supreme Spirit represented by Rama (TAARAN).> > *We are saying why a WOMAN should be treated thus. The other day I read a> report where similarly one DALIT neta Suraj Bhan was demanding that this

> particular verse of the epic be changed as it demoralized dalits. ï¿½Fresh> edited versions of these scriptures should be brought outï¿½ he said.*> > There is no problem with Tulsidasji or with Ramayana. The problem is with

> our interpretation and narrow thinking. Instead of understanding it in> reference to social norms and conditions of those times, we are judging it> by todayï¿½s standards. And over and above all, the beauty is that it fits in

> todayï¿½s standards too!> > A shudra of those days is not at all a Dalit of today. Shudra was only a man> of lesser or no learning who would earn his living by doing service to

> others. He could be a Brahmin b birth. It was varna and not caste. Later on> the society distorted the varna system and introduced casteism and> untouchables and Dalits came into existence. How justified is Suraj Bhanï¿½s

> demand to change the epic in this context, any intelligent person can see!> > *The verse is very meaningful as it only shows who are the ï¿½peopleï¿½ to be> helped in their journey of samsaara towards liberation. This includes men

> and women both. Men of certain types.*> > Dhol is a person who has a double character and is also vain. Ganwaar is> agyani, shudra is without learning and meek (not the difference between> agyani and shudra!), pashu is one who acts like animals and does not have a

> refined intellect to understand things, and Nari is a woman as in those days> we know that a womanï¿½s role was only that of a mother and nurturer by> instinct and she was devoid of actual learning process. She must be helped

> and supported to attain liberation is what Tulsidas ji meant.> > We are told that in Sundarkand, the entire show is being watched by Lord> Shiva and Bhavani. Their dialogues are the core of this episodeï¿½s teachings.

> Remember Shiva states that Godï¿½s grace is essential for completing difficult> tasks. But to obtain Godï¿½s grace one has to constantly do good, and those> who take Ramaï¿½s name in speech, thought and action will be trouble-free.

> > *Justifiably, the word should be TARAN. ï¿½Bhav Sagarï¿½, the ocean, would only> talk about TAARAN and TARAN. Ocean cannot talk about TADAN. Why would he, it> is so illogical!*

> > *Coming to OSHO:* I have greatest respect for his works. He has given us> splendid commentaries on almost every work of value. When you read Osho, a> feeling of calm and serenity dwells on you. His works are thought-provoking,

> but never seditious and rabble-raising. How can it be when he always> projected detachment? Remember he said, ï¿½Look where I am pointing, donï¿½t> bite my fingerï¿½.> > What Sreenadh jee has posted IS NOT and CANNOT BE Oshoï¿½s words. I am very

> sure. I do not relate to it, the way I do it to his other writings. I think> Sreenadh je has not read the text fully. The message is so inflammatory and> Anti Hindu. It is some manipulative work of an antisocial element. We can

> find such things on the internet which are not authentic. One must apply own> mind on how-to or how-not-to react to such issues. E.g., It is ridiculous> that OSHO would comment on Swami Agnivesh. Who is Swami Agnivesh, except

> another modern religious broker! I do not think he even mattered when OSHO> was around.> > //Harijans should declare themselves independent from Hindus. They are such> a big force that they will change the whole character of Indian politics.//

> Does anyone truly feel OSHO would say this?> > Think!!> > Regards> Neelam>

October 6, 2009

Dear Utkal, //Lastly, I w'd request that we have joined this group for astrology, pls allow us doing that. I m sorry, even I respect Osho, I dont ignore what he lacks.// Ha...Ha... It is not me who started discussing Tulsidas and Osho. If you want to discuss astrology then start doing it, why wait?! Or if you want I will guide you. It is just fine. Love and regards,Sreenadh , "utkal.panigrahi" <utkal.panigrahi wrote:>> > Dedar Srinadh Ji,> > There is no doubt that Osho has great sudy of philosphy, he was a> professor of philosphy in university of Jabalpur, but that doesnt mean> other professors didnt have that much knowledge of philosphy, mere> criticizing established beliefs doesn't vindicate the critic is greater> then the founder of a belief. We are appreciative of his study as we> look at his positive side, but there is a negative side also.> > > Any body who wants to make a carreer in the field of spirituality or any> body who wants to be known as a spiritual master, w'd always study Geet,> Tantra Upnishads etc, coz he has a set goal. But, we all are aware that> he has no accomplishments in any of these area, he has never taken> initiative any initiative to rsolve either publich issues or problems of> individuals. I have read his opinion about women's cloth and dress> material, you also w'd have read that, can you please post that to> group.> > At least SundarKanda pacifies Shani, no articles written by Osho has> such qualities.> > Still, we have respect for him coz he stood to face the world with his> beliefs, A Guru's success is counted if he is able to convert his> Shishya as a Siddha or a Guru, in Kali Yuga, we see, hardly any well> known Guru was able to make Shishyas as Siddha, we have only handful> examples like Guru Nanak, RamKrishna Paramhansha, Ramanuja Charya,> Shankaracharya... etc, agreed that over the period declination came in> their path also but at least 4-5 generations their impact was realized,> Osho's mission lost it's impact in his life time only.> > Lastly, I w'd request that we have joined this group for astrology, pls> allow us doing that. I m sorry, even I respect Osho, I dont ignore what> he lacks.> > Utkal.

October 6, 2009

Dear Neelam ji,

Tadna does not only mean " admonishing " . It has got other meaning too.

" Thaa paana " that is to get to know the depth. Ravana tells his

courtiers for example in the last chapters he has realised Ramas buddhi

" thaa paai " in a show of sarcasm and mockery, that he is building a

stone bridge to cross the seas with Vanaras.

Tadna thus also means that kisika dheya(Motive) tadna.

And also means " to keep under constant check " . Which is exactly meant

in the Sundarkand. The drum has a leather sheet on the top, which a

drummer hits upon , to create a sound. It has to be checked continously

by the drummer and tightened (Notice that there are screws at the top

side of the drum always)because if this sheet is loose than a " fati hui "

sound will come. This is what Tulsidasji has mentioned in order to keep

the Dhola, Shudra, Ganwar, Pashu and Naari, to keep them under constant

check, so that they do not falter.

This is just like Birbal saying to Akbar about something - do you

remember what ?.... pherna chahiye, for three objects ..... The literal

meaning no one would understand unless he excersises his brains.

The Varna system is necessary and not an evil as is made out to be, by

people who wish to appear as secular and borad in their outlooks, just

to look good. But I do not wish to open up a hornests nest by writing

more on this.

regards/Bhaskar.

n_astrology , neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote:

>

> Dear All,

>

> *Tum ho TAARAN TARAN, le lo apni sharan, Meto meto jee sankat

humaara.*

> This is a beautiful line from a lovely Jain bhajan. I have always

loved

> these lines, kind of essence for which we call HIM, PUKAR is the right

word

> though.

>

> *For the lines from Sundarkand, personally, I've always thought it

meant

> TARAN. May it be so!*

>

> Sundarkand is all about liberation or moksha and it depicts the

process of

> liberation. Which is TARAN. Hanuman as an aspirant of self-realisation

> crosses the ocean to reach Lanka to find Sita. The ocean of Samsara

and

> discovery of Sita by Hanuman is a symbol of discovery of divinity

which

> completes the process of liberation. An aspirant struggles to attain

> self-realisation. Hanuman represents the purusharth and thus efforts

in

> negotiating obstacles en route to Lanka and unite with Sita, the inner

core,

> to unite with the Supreme Spirit represented by Rama (TAARAN).

>

> *We are saying why a WOMAN should be treated thus. The other day I

read a

> report where similarly one DALIT neta Suraj Bhan was demanding that

this

> particular verse of the epic be changed as it demoralized dalits.

" Fresh

> edited versions of these scriptures should be brought out " he

said.*

>

> There is no problem with Tulsidasji or with Ramayana. The problem is

with

> our interpretation and narrow thinking. Instead of understanding it in

> reference to social norms and conditions of those times, we are

judging it

> by today's standards. And over and above all, the beauty is that

it fits in

> today's standards too!

>

> A shudra of those days is not at all a Dalit of today. Shudra was only

a man

> of lesser or no learning who would earn his living by doing service to

> others. He could be a Brahmin b birth. It was varna and not caste.

Later on

> the society distorted the varna system and introduced casteism and

> untouchables and Dalits came into existence. How justified is Suraj

Bhan's

> demand to change the epic in this context, any intelligent person can

see!

>

> *The verse is very meaningful as it only shows who are the

`people' to be

> helped in their journey of samsaara towards liberation. This includes

men

> and women both. Men of certain types.*

>

> Dhol is a person who has a double character and is also vain. Ganwaar

is

> agyani, shudra is without learning and meek (not the difference

between

> agyani and shudra!), pashu is one who acts like animals and does not

have a

> refined intellect to understand things, and Nari is a woman as in

those days

> we know that a woman's role was only that of a mother and nurturer

by

> instinct and she was devoid of actual learning process. She must be

helped

> and supported to attain liberation is what Tulsidas ji meant.

>

> We are told that in Sundarkand, the entire show is being watched by

Lord

> Shiva and Bhavani. Their dialogues are the core of this episode's

teachings.

> Remember Shiva states that God's grace is essential for completing

difficult

> tasks. But to obtain God's grace one has to constantly do good,

and those

> who take Rama's name in speech, thought and action will be

trouble-free.

>

> *Justifiably, the word should be TARAN. `Bhav Sagar', the

ocean, would only

> talk about TAARAN and TARAN. Ocean cannot talk about TADAN. Why would

he, it

> is so illogical!*

>

> *Coming to OSHO:* I have greatest respect for his works. He has given

us

> splendid commentaries on almost every work of value. When you read

Osho, a

> feeling of calm and serenity dwells on you. His works are

thought-provoking,

> but never seditious and rabble-raising. How can it be when he always

> projected detachment? Remember he said, " Look where I am pointing,

don't

> bite my finger " .

>

> What Sreenadh jee has posted IS NOT and CANNOT BE Osho's words. I

am very

> sure. I do not relate to it, the way I do it to his other writings. I

think

> Sreenadh je has not read the text fully. The message is so

inflammatory and

> Anti Hindu. It is some manipulative work of an antisocial element. We

can

> find such things on the internet which are not authentic. One must

apply own

> mind on how-to or how-not-to react to such issues. E.g., It is

ridiculous

> that OSHO would comment on Swami Agnivesh. Who is Swami Agnivesh,

except

> another modern religious broker! I do not think he even mattered when

OSHO

> was around.

>

> //Harijans should declare themselves independent from Hindus. They are

such

> a big force that they will change the whole character of Indian

politics.//

> Does anyone truly feel OSHO would say this?

>

> Think!!

>

> Regards

> Neelam

>

October 6, 2009

Dear Utkalji,

In this controversy what we can say at the end except " Jaha ki rahi bhavna

jesi,prabhu murat dekhi tin jesi " .

We can't shut the mouth of every one,every one have their own view but we can

interpret the real meaning if some body taken them wrong way.If any body have

the pre-opinion on some matter than he/she will not try to understand other view

of point.

I like very much OSHO's wisdom and all most all interpretation on every religion

of world.But we can say he is also not as perfect as we can take their word as

final word on any subject.

We are not in capacity to judge or pass comments on Tulshidasji's divine work.We

can take it as divine words only and have to understand it in only positive

meanings.

Thanks & regard,

M.S.Bohra

October 6, 2009

Dear Bohra ji,

Wonderful observations.

thanks and regards,

Bhaskar.

, " Sudan " <msbohra62

wrote:

>

> Dear Utkalji,

>

> In this controversy what we can say at the end except " Jaha ki rahi

bhavna jesi,prabhu murat dekhi tin jesi " .

>

> We can't shut the mouth of every one,every one have their own view but

we can interpret the real meaning if some body taken them wrong way.If

any body have the pre-opinion on some matter than he/she will not try to

understand other view of point.

>

> I like very much OSHO's wisdom and all most all interpretation on

every religion of world.But we can say he is also not as perfect as we

can take their word as final word on any subject.

>

> We are not in capacity to judge or pass comments on Tulshidasji's

divine work.We can take it as divine words only and have to understand

it in only positive meanings.

>

> Thanks & regard,

>

> M.S.Bohra

>

October 6, 2009

Dear Neelamji,

Again you have proved your wisdom and interpretation power well.

It is wast differences between " Taran " and Taaran " ,a word have immense power.We

have to take the real meaning very consciously.

A joke is very famous on this chopai,a husband said this chopai to his wife to

demoralise her but wife answered that " I am is only one place but rest of four

places in this chopai,you are.

Sunderkand is self realization of our power which are hidden by our ignorance as

like Hanumanji have forgotten his power.If we realize our power than we can do

unbelievable work.Once i said in the forum that every thing is in our mind,we

have to realize it.

" Obtain God's grace one has to constantly do good " ,it is real essence.

To days politicians wants to change every thing which gives them any mileage in

politics.There is no moral and ethics values in them.

Thanks for a good post.

M.S.Bohra

October 6, 2009

Dear Sreenadji , Neelamji and all ,

You should read about OSHO's take on " our " quest for freedom. Be it for the lower classes, women et all.

He admonishes the women's lib movement and advises them to also help start mens liberation.....

He also says that you do not want to be free, but just to be bound to a higher or costlier post or in a 5 star prison. Ha , Ha.

You should read it ..... it is very liberating indeed.

Thanks & Regards

Chiranjiv Mehta--- On Tue, 6/10/09, sreesog <sreesog wrote:

sreesog <sreesog Re: Osho's words Date: Tuesday, 6 October, 2009, 11:46 AM

Dear Neelam ji, //What Sreenadh jee has posted IS NOT and CANNOT BE Oshoï¿½s words. I am very sure. // We cannot EXPECT people to fullfill OUR expectations. What they said is what they said - whether it be Osho or Tulsidas. What they are is what they are, and what we are is what we are. Love and regards,Sreenadhancient_indian_ astrology,

neelam gupta <neelamgupta07@ ...> wrote:>> Dear All,> > *Tum ho TAARAN TARAN, le lo apni sharan, Meto meto jee sankat humaara.*> This is a beautiful line from a lovely Jain bhajan. I have always loved> these lines, kind of essence for which we call HIM, PUKAR is the right word> though.> > *For the lines from Sundarkand, personally, Iï¿½ve always thought it meant> TARAN. May it be so!*> > Sundarkand is all about liberation or moksha and it depicts the process of> liberation. Which is TARAN. Hanuman as an aspirant of self-realisation> crosses the ocean to reach Lanka to find Sita. The ocean of Samsara and> discovery of Sita by Hanuman is a symbol of discovery of divinity which> completes the process of liberation. An aspirant struggles to attain> self-realisation. Hanuman represents the purusharth and thus efforts in>

negotiating obstacles en route to Lanka and unite with Sita, the inner core,> to unite with the Supreme Spirit represented by Rama (TAARAN).> > *We are saying why a WOMAN should be treated thus. The other day I read a> report where similarly one DALIT neta Suraj Bhan was demanding that this> particular verse of the epic be changed as it demoralized dalits. ï¿½Fresh> edited versions of these scriptures should be brought outï¿½ he said.*> > There is no problem with Tulsidasji or with Ramayana. The problem is with> our interpretation and narrow thinking. Instead of understanding it in> reference to social norms and conditions of those times, we are judging it> by todayï¿½s standards. And over and above all, the beauty is that it fits in> todayï¿½s standards too!> > A shudra of those days is not at all a Dalit of today. Shudra was only a man>

of lesser or no learning who would earn his living by doing service to> others. He could be a Brahmin b birth. It was varna and not caste. Later on> the society distorted the varna system and introduced casteism and> untouchables and Dalits came into existence. How justified is Suraj Bhanï¿½s> demand to change the epic in this context, any intelligent person can see!> > *The verse is very meaningful as it only shows who are the ï¿½peopleï¿½ to be> helped in their journey of samsaara towards liberation. This includes men> and women both. Men of certain types.*> > Dhol is a person who has a double character and is also vain. Ganwaar is> agyani, shudra is without learning and meek (not the difference between> agyani and shudra!), pashu is one who acts like animals and does not have a> refined intellect to understand things, and Nari is a woman as in those

days> we know that a womanï¿½s role was only that of a mother and nurturer by> instinct and she was devoid of actual learning process. She must be helped> and supported to attain liberation is what Tulsidas ji meant.> > We are told that in Sundarkand, the entire show is being watched by Lord> Shiva and Bhavani. Their dialogues are the core of this episodeï¿½s teachings.> Remember Shiva states that Godï¿½s grace is essential for completing difficult> tasks. But to obtain Godï¿½s grace one has to constantly do good, and those> who take Ramaï¿½s name in speech, thought and action will be trouble-free.> > *Justifiably, the word should be TARAN. ï¿½Bhav Sagarï¿½, the ocean, would only> talk about TAARAN and TARAN. Ocean cannot talk about TADAN. Why would he, it> is so illogical!*> > *Coming to OSHO:* I have greatest respect for his

works. He has given us> splendid commentaries on almost every work of value. When you read Osho, a> feeling of calm and serenity dwells on you. His works are thought-provoking,> but never seditious and rabble-raising. How can it be when he always> projected detachment? Remember he said, ï¿½Look where I am pointing, donï¿½t> bite my fingerï¿½.> > What Sreenadh jee has posted IS NOT and CANNOT BE Oshoï¿½s words. I am very> sure. I do not relate to it, the way I do it to his other writings. I think> Sreenadh je has not read the text fully. The message is so inflammatory and> Anti Hindu. It is some manipulative work of an antisocial element. We can> find such things on the internet which are not authentic. One must apply own> mind on how-to or how-not-to react to such issues. E.g., It is ridiculous> that OSHO would comment on Swami Agnivesh. Who is Swami

Agnivesh, except> another modern religious broker! I do not think he even mattered when OSHO> was around.> > //Harijans should declare themselves independent from Hindus. They are such> a big force that they will change the whole character of Indian politics.//> Does anyone truly feel OSHO would say this?> > Think!!> > Regards> Neelam>

From cricket scores to your friends. Try the India Homepage!

October 6, 2009

" taarna' is another word. It is used like this - Is akele suputra ne

apne poore khandaan ko apne satkarmon se taar diya aur unka jeevan aur

parlok dhanya kar diya.

regards/Bhaskar.

, " Sudan " <msbohra62

wrote:

>

> Dear Neelamji,

>

> Again you have proved your wisdom and interpretation power well.

>

> It is wast differences between " Taran " and Taaran " ,a word have immense

power.We have to take the real meaning very consciously.

>

> A joke is very famous on this chopai,a husband said this chopai to his

wife to demoralise her but wife answered that " I am is only one place

but rest of four places in this chopai,you are.

>

> Sunderkand is self realization of our power which are hidden by our

ignorance as like Hanumanji have forgotten his power.If we realize our

power than we can do unbelievable work.Once i said in the forum that

every thing is in our mind,we have to realize it.

>

> " Obtain God's grace one has to constantly do good " ,it is real essence.

>

> To days politicians wants to change every thing which gives them any

mileage in politics.There is no moral and ethics values in them.

>

> Thanks for a good post.

>

> M.S.Bohra

>

October 6, 2009

Namaste to All

3 other meanings of tadna with Punjabi flavour..

1 opportunistic - like mauka tadke kisak jana

2 vigilantly- keeping a constant look out - like 'tadah rahiyo'

3 with discrimination.. Unki baaton se unko tadah liya ( like the word

parakna)..

Sorry if it looks like 'chota mu badi baat'... I love Tulsidas ramayan too.. and

it hurts to see it riddicled thro ignorance.

warmest regards

Sheevani

October 6, 2009

Dear Bhaskarji,

As like " Tu hi taaran har hai " on other word " Mukati " or " Par lagana " .

Thanks & regards,

M.S.Bohra

, " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish

wrote:

>

> " taarna' is another word. It is used like this - Is akele suputra ne

> apne poore khandaan ko apne satkarmon se taar diya aur unka jeevan aur

> parlok dhanya kar diya.

>

> regards/Bhaskar.

>

> , " Sudan " <msbohra62@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Neelamji,

> >

> > Again you have proved your wisdom and interpretation power well.

> >

> > It is wast differences between " Taran " and Taaran " ,a word have immense

> power.We have to take the real meaning very consciously.

> >

> > A joke is very famous on this chopai,a husband said this chopai to his

> wife to demoralise her but wife answered that " I am is only one place

> but rest of four places in this chopai,you are.

> >

> > Sunderkand is self realization of our power which are hidden by our

> ignorance as like Hanumanji have forgotten his power.If we realize our

> power than we can do unbelievable work.Once i said in the forum that

> every thing is in our mind,we have to realize it.

> >

> > " Obtain God's grace one has to constantly do good " ,it is real essence.

> >

> > To days politicians wants to change every thing which gives them any

> mileage in politics.There is no moral and ethics values in them.

> >

> > Thanks for a good post.

> >

> > M.S.Bohra

> >

>

October 6, 2009

Dear Bohra ji,

Yes . absolutely.

I am happy that most of us, or in fact 99.999% of us members are right

in our convictions of how we are supposed to be, as resultant from this

great discussion related to spirituality. Its nice to have members like

you nearby, with whom we can enjoy such discussions. I feel strengthened

today,with this awareness to have you and others like you with us and

around..and it gives me great happiness to know that you all value our

great culture and the great men they have produced in our heritage.

best wishes,

Bhaskar.

, " Sudan " <msbohra62

wrote:

>

> Dear Bhaskarji,

>

> As like " Tu hi taaran har hai " on other word " Mukati " or " Par lagana " .

>

> Thanks & regards,

>

> M.S.Bohra

>

> , " Bhaskar "

bhaskar_jyotish@ wrote:

> >

> > " taarna' is another word. It is used like this - Is akele suputra ne

> > apne poore khandaan ko apne satkarmon se taar diya aur unka jeevan

aur

> > parlok dhanya kar diya.

> >

> > regards/Bhaskar.

> >

> > , " Sudan "

<msbohra62@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Neelamji,

> > >

> > > Again you have proved your wisdom and interpretation power well.

> > >

> > > It is wast differences between " Taran " and Taaran " ,a word have

immense

> > power.We have to take the real meaning very consciously.

> > >

> > > A joke is very famous on this chopai,a husband said this chopai to

his

> > wife to demoralise her but wife answered that " I am is only one

place

> > but rest of four places in this chopai,you are.

> > >

> > > Sunderkand is self realization of our power which are hidden by

our

> > ignorance as like Hanumanji have forgotten his power.If we realize

our

> > power than we can do unbelievable work.Once i said in the forum that

> > every thing is in our mind,we have to realize it.

> > >

> > > " Obtain God's grace one has to constantly do good " ,it is real

essence.

> > >

> > > To days politicians wants to change every thing which gives them

any

> > mileage in politics.There is no moral and ethics values in them.

> > >

> > > Thanks for a good post.

> > >

> > > M.S.Bohra

> > >

> >

>

October 6, 2009

Dear Bhaskarji,

Thanks for such good words and feelings.

M.S.Bohra

, " Bhaskar " <bhaskar_jyotish

wrote:

>

> Dear Bohra ji,

>

> Yes . absolutely.

>

> I am happy that most of us, or in fact 99.999% of us members are right

> in our convictions of how we are supposed to be, as resultant from this

> great discussion related to spirituality. Its nice to have members like

> you nearby, with whom we can enjoy such discussions. I feel strengthened

> today,with this awareness to have you and others like you with us and

> around..and it gives me great happiness to know that you all value our

> great culture and the great men they have produced in our heritage.

>

> best wishes,

>

> Bhaskar.

>

> , " Sudan " <msbohra62@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Bhaskarji,

> >

> > As like " Tu hi taaran har hai " on other word " Mukati " or " Par lagana " .

> >

> > Thanks & regards,

> >

> > M.S.Bohra

> >

> > , " Bhaskar "

> bhaskar_jyotish@ wrote:

> > >

> > > " taarna' is another word. It is used like this - Is akele suputra ne

> > > apne poore khandaan ko apne satkarmon se taar diya aur unka jeevan

> aur

> > > parlok dhanya kar diya.

> > >

> > > regards/Bhaskar.

> > >

> > > , " Sudan "

> <msbohra62@>

> > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Neelamji,

> > > >

> > > > Again you have proved your wisdom and interpretation power well.

> > > >

> > > > It is wast differences between " Taran " and Taaran " ,a word have

> immense

> > > power.We have to take the real meaning very consciously.

> > > >

> > > > A joke is very famous on this chopai,a husband said this chopai to

> his

> > > wife to demoralise her but wife answered that " I am is only one

> place

> > > but rest of four places in this chopai,you are.

> > > >

> > > > Sunderkand is self realization of our power which are hidden by

> our

> > > ignorance as like Hanumanji have forgotten his power.If we realize

> our

> > > power than we can do unbelievable work.Once i said in the forum that

> > > every thing is in our mind,we have to realize it.

> > > >

> > > > " Obtain God's grace one has to constantly do good " ,it is real

> essence.

> > > >

> > > > To days politicians wants to change every thing which gives them

> any

> > > mileage in politics.There is no moral and ethics values in them.

> > > >

> > > > Thanks for a good post.

> > > >

> > > > M.S.Bohra

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

October 6, 2009

Dear Dr. Mishraji,If you just re-align the sentence with proper punctuation mark, we can have better meaning, without going into much detail.It should be read as:Dhol gawar, Shudra pasu nari, Yeha sab taran ke adhikari.Now it means that , males who are unintelligent, illerate and live like animals, females who are unintelligent, illerate and have animal instinct, they should be kept under control with strict force of fear, just as we control other animals.You cannot teach people who are in deep Tamasic attitude like animals.Secondly it also means that even these type of people also have the strong rights under God for proper guidance to get Mokhas (taran).Thankyou,Regards,Vijay Goel,Jaipur. , Akhil Mishra <astro6301 wrote:>> Dear Goel ji> Â > MahatamaÂ Goswami TulsiÂ dasÂ ji> Â > Stated> Â > Â > Dhole , Gawar , shudra ,pashuÂ ,nari, yes sab tadan ke adhikar> Â > It meaning isÂ thatÂ idÂ anyÂ womanÂ behaveÂ likeÂ animal, shudraÂ , and sheÂ Â haveÂ noÂ human charecter sheÂ haveÂ to punished, soÂ this case comesÂ forÂ everyÂ humanÂ being, ifÂ a male alsoÂ haveÂ notÂ such charecterÂ he have also punished.> Â > So GoswamiÂ ji wasÂ real thinker andÂ trikal darshi> Â > Reagrds> Dr Mishra>

October 7, 2009

Dear members, I have not read any book of Osho. But the writing attributed to Osho below by Srinadh ji makes immense sense to me. Religion has been the single major cause of all bloodsheds and wars in the world. People with vested interests have invented God , religion, rituals, religious practices etc and used the gullible people.. People mistake spirituality to region. One need not belong to any religion and can be spiritual.

I thank all those who contributed to this thread.regards,UdupaOn Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 4:04 PM, sreesog <sreesog wrote:

Dear All, Just pasting some words of Osho below.Regards,Sreenadh===================================To me, just because something is written in a book does not mean that

it has to be right. The criterion for its being right has to be

humanitarian. The Hindu scriptures say that the women have to be

categorized just like animals. The great Hindu saint Tulsidas says that

every woman has to be beaten at least once a week. Just because it is

written by Tulsidas, it does not become a truth. It simply shows the

stupidity of the man, the inhumanity of the man, and his book should be

burned. At least all the women around the country, wherever they find

Tulsidasâ€™ book, should immediately burn it. It is male chauvinistic.

To me, who is not part of any religion, there is no prejudice.

Everything has to be clear-cut and straightforward, no politics in it.

Thatâ€™s what the Shankaracharya is doing. And opposing him, another

Hindu sannyasin, Swami Agnivesh, is doing the same. Politics is such a

game. It makes people like footballs. Their interests are different;

Agnivesh is against the Shankaracharya. I am against both, because they

are two polarities of the same politics. The Shankaracharya does not

want Hindu harijans to enter into Nath Dwara, a temple in Rajasthan.

And Agnivesh is determined to take a big crowd of harijans and enter

forcibly into the temple, where never in the whole of history has any

harijan been allowed. It is not because of great compassion that

Agnivesh is trying to bring harijans. And the Shankaracharya is

determined that they cannot enter, and he will do everything to prevent

the entry because that will spoil the purity of the temple. The

harijans should see a simple point, that for centuries Hindus have been

entering that temple â€ " what have they gained except poverty, slavery,

starvation? What are harijans going to gain by entering in Nath Dwara

uninvited, rejected? If they listen to an unprejudiced approach, they

should spit on this temple which has never in centuries allowed their

ancestors to enter. They should refuse. Even if the Shankaracharya

touches their feet and asks them to come into Nath Dwara, they should

not enter such ugly places, so inhuman, so violent â€¦ But the poor

harijans will not understand a simple fact: you have been tortured for

ten thousand years and still you go on thinking of yourselves as Hindu.

You are not! Hindus themselves have rejected you; you are not allowed

to enter their temples, you are not allowed to read their scriptures.

On what grounds do they say you are Hindus? They burn your villages,

hundreds of people burned alive â€ " strangely, young children, old men.

They just save young girls, to rape, and this has been going on and on

for centuries. It is for the harijans to reject Agnivesh and tell him,

â€œGo and jump into the ocean. Donâ€™t bother us, we are not Hindus.â€ And

tell the Shankaracharya, â€œWhy are you unnecessarily making a fuss? Who

wants to enter your temple? Keep your temple!â€ Harijans should declare

themselves independent from Hindus. They are such a big force that they

will change the whole character of Indian politics. They are one fourth

of all Hindus; one fourth of the power should go to them. Even Mahatma

Gandhi deceived. Before Indiaâ€™s independence, he was saying that the

first president should be a harijan girl. He was proposing two things:

raising the respect towards women and the respect towards the harijan.

And when the country became independent, he forgot it completely. Again

the brahmins, the Nehrus â€¦ and they have made themselves a dynasty.

They call it democracy. As an individual, I donâ€™t belong to any party

or to any religion. I am not a politician and I am not a religious man

in the ordinary sense because I am not Hindu nor Mohammedan nor

Christian. I donâ€™t feel that I have to belong to any organization; I am

enough unto myself. And that is my whole teaching, that you should not

belong to any organization; you are enough. Your splendor has to be

independent. The women also have to come to a conclusive decision that

they will not vote for men. Half of the country belongs to women â€ " half

of the parliament should also belong to them. They should ask for a

separate vote; no woman is going to vote for any man of any party. It

is not a question of party, it is a question of a long slavery that man

has imposed on women. All women should fight against this slavery. In

India, the harijans and the women are the two most oppressed, insulted,

humiliated beings. If they get together, this country will belong to

them. Let these Shankaracharyas and these Nehrus be forgotten. It is a

simple fact that freedom has not come to the country. Britain has gone

but slavery is still here. What kind of spirituality is it, that does

not allow human beings to enter temples? (Source: http://sureslive.wordpress.com/2008/03/01/zen-the-solitary-bird-cuckoo-of-the-forest/ )

===================================

-- Please visit my website http://www.astrocare.in

October 7, 2009

No, The mistake is not confusion between religion and spirituality. It is confusion between religion and political ideology. People who do not know the difference between imperialism and preaching, are the cause for such bloodshed. Not people who think their mundane practices are spiritually guided. Shankar

October 7, 2009

Dear Udupa ji,thanks for a nice and brave post.I agree with you entirely.Love and regards,gopi. , Guru <ahudupa wrote:>> Dear members, I have not read any book of Osho. But the writing> attributed to Osho below by Srinadh ji makes immense sense to me.> Religion has been the single major cause of all bloodsheds and wars in the> world. People with vested interests have invented God , religion, rituals,> religious practices etc and used the gullible people.. People mistake> spirituality to region. One need not belong to any religion and can be> spiritual.> I thank all those who contributed to this thread.> regards,> Udupa

October 7, 2009

pls. correct urself, had the people followed osho's mistake on chaupai, and

burnt ramcharitmanas then there wd have been terrible violence. Bt, we indians

are able to validate the credibility of such critics, pls, do some

introspection.

Spirituality takes us beyond our vested interests, because, in spirituality we

learn to read our thoughts, we understand futility of excessive greed. Recall

that brahmvain sanyasi who made Alexendar understand futility of his lustful

vision of world victory, it was he who made him leave the idea of ruling the

world.

Pls dont say that people with vested interests invented god.

Spirituality comes with power of judgement and strength to safeguard and stand

for truth as sadhaka has to wade through the illusions and temptations of maya,

let's develop our power of judgement. Sometimes politeness or humility or

knowledge of a subject is misunderstood as symbol of spirituality, people can

talk of mantra and sadhana etc, bt, when time comes to display spiritual

qualities, they are first to be invisible in hide outs, pls, check lord shiva or

vishnu had fought with asuras.

Goswami Tulasidas has written that in kaliyuga, people wd like to talk about

brahma and advaita, bt, if a question of benefit comes, they will not hesitate

in killing another man, similarly, there wd be people wth greediness for their

golden image in public, so many temptations.

Pls. remember, upnishad says - Me, Atma is not available to those who dont have

courage or strength. Check, ketu, jup, sun in a chart wth respect to rahu, sat

and venus, then check how moon and mars are inclined, one must have his guru,

guide or jyotishi's horoscope.

First check, if a person is able to judge things, then check if he has no

excessive greed, then check degree of strength and check how fair he is in his

doings.

Pls apply above on everybody, every author, preacher, scholar, saint, siddha and

critic.

Utkal.

, Guru <ahudupa wrote:

>

> Dear members, I have not read any book of Osho. But the writing

> attributed to Osho below by Srinadh ji makes immense sense to me.

> Religion has been the single major cause of all bloodsheds and wars in the

> world. People with vested interests have invented God , religion, rituals,

> religious practices etc and used the gullible people.. People mistake

> spirituality to region. One need not belong to any religion and can be

> spiritual.

> I thank all those who contributed to this thread.

> regards,

> Udupa

October 7, 2009

Ha Ha. Great words You write.

// People with vested interests have invented God , religion, rituals,> religious practices etc and used the gullible people.. //

Then why are you using the name Guru ??? is a Guru not a smaller extension of God in human form ???

Preaching and practise is different. These Yadavas becoming CM's and talking of Quotas instead of Merit, will never board a aircraft driven by a Pilot who has become one on basis of Quotas.

In same way when you married did you tell the Pundit to get out and just exchanged Flower garlands ??? No you surely must not have done so.

So dont talk like an atheist who has no place in an astrology Group which rests on beliefs and inputs given by Ancient Rishi Munis who created the shlokas with conversations with the Gods in Sat Yuga and Dwapar.

Bhaskar.

, Guru <ahudupa wrote:>> Dear members, I have not read any book of Osho. But the writing> attributed to Osho below by Srinadh ji makes immense sense to me.> Religion has been the single major cause of all bloodsheds and wars in the> world. People with vested interests have invented God , religion, rituals,> religious practices etc and used the gullible people.. People mistake> spirituality to region. One need not belong to any religion and can be> spiritual.> I thank all those who contributed to this thread.> regards,> Udupa> > > On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 4:04 PM, sreesog sreesog wrote:> > >> >> > Dear All,> > Just pasting some words of Osho below.> > Regards,> > Sreenadh> > ===================================> > To me, just because something is written in a book does not mean that it> > has to be right. The criterion for its being right has to be humanitarian.> > The Hindu scriptures say that the women have to be categorized just like> > animals. The great Hindu saint Tulsidas says that every woman has to be> > beaten at least once a week. Just because it is written by Tulsidas, it does> > not become a truth. It simply shows the stupidity of the man, the inhumanity> > of the man, and his book should be burned. At least all the women around the> > country, wherever they find Tulsidasâ€™ book, should immediately burn it. It> > is male chauvinistic. To me, who is not part of any religion, there is no> > prejudice. Everything has to be clear-cut and straightforward, no politics> > in it. Thatâ€™s what the Shankaracharya is doing. And opposing him, another> > Hindu sannyasin, Swami Agnivesh, is doing the same. Politics is such a game.> > It makes people like footballs. Their interests are different; Agnivesh is> > against the Shankaracharya. I am against both, because they are two> > polarities of the same politics. The Shankaracharya does not want Hindu> > harijans to enter into Nath Dwara, a temple in Rajasthan. And Agnivesh is> > determined to take a big crowd of harijans and enter forcibly into the> > temple, where never in the whole of history has any harijan been allowed. It> > is not because of great compassion that Agnivesh is trying to bring> > harijans. And the Shankaracharya is determined that they cannot enter, and> > he will do everything to prevent the entry because that will spoil the> > purity of the temple. The harijans should see a simple point, that for> > centuries Hindus have been entering that temple â€" what have they gained> > except poverty, slavery, starvation? What are harijans going to gain by> > entering in Nath Dwara uninvited, rejected? If they listen to an> > unprejudiced approach, they should spit on this temple which has never in> > centuries allowed their ancestors to enter. They should refuse. Even if the> > Shankaracharya touches their feet and asks them to come into Nath Dwara,> > they should not enter such ugly places, so inhuman, so violent â€¦ But the> > poor harijans will not understand a simple fact: you have been tortured for> > ten thousand years and still you go on thinking of yourselves as Hindu. You> > are not! Hindus themselves have rejected you; you are not allowed to enter> > their temples, you are not allowed to read their scriptures. On what grounds> > do they say you are Hindus? They burn your villages, hundreds of people> > burned alive â€" strangely, young children, old men. They just save young> > girls, to rape, and this has been going on and on for centuries. It is for> > the harijans to reject Agnivesh and tell him, â€œGo and jump into the ocean.> > Donâ€™t bother us, we are not Hindus.â€ And tell the Shankaracharya, â€œWhy> > are you unnecessarily making a fuss? Who wants to enter your temple? Keep> > your temple!â€ Harijans should declare themselves independent from Hindus.> > They are such a big force that they will change the whole character of> > Indian politics. They are one fourth of all Hindus; one fourth of the power> > should go to them. Even Mahatma Gandhi deceived. Before Indiaâ€™s> > independence, he was saying that the first president should be a harijan> > girl. He was proposing two things: raising the respect towards women and the> > respect towards the harijan. And when the country became independent, he> > forgot it completely. Again the brahmins, the Nehrus â€¦ and they have made> > themselves a dynasty. They call it democracy. As an individual, I donâ€™t> > belong to any party or to any religion. I am not a politician and I am not a> > religious man in the ordinary sense because I am not Hindu nor Mohammedan> > nor Christian. I donâ€™t feel that I have to belong to any organization; I> > am enough unto myself. And that is my whole teaching, that you should not> > belong to any organization; you are enough. Your splendor has to be> > independent. The women also have to come to a conclusive decision that they> > will not vote for men. Half of the country belongs to women â€" half of the> > parliament should also belong to them. They should ask for a separate vote;> > no woman is going to vote for any man of any party. It is not a question of> > party, it is a question of a long slavery that man has imposed on women. All> > women should fight against this slavery. In India, the harijans and the> > women are the two most oppressed, insulted, humiliated beings. If they get> > together, this country will belong to them. Let these Shankaracharyas and> > these Nehrus be forgotten. It is a simple fact that freedom has not come to> > the country. Britain has gone but slavery is still here. What kind of> > spirituality is it, that does not allow human beings to enter temples?> > (Source:> > http://sureslive.wordpress.com/2008/03/01/zen-the-solitary-bird-cuckoo-of-the-forest/<http://../../../../../../../../../../../../Oi/8vc3V/y/ZXNsaXZlLndv/cmRwcmVzcy5jb20v/MjAwOC8wMy8wMS/96/ZW4tdGhlL/XNvb/Gl/0YXJ5LWJpc/mQtY3Vja29vLW9mLXRoZS1/mb3J/lc3Qv/b0/>)> > ===================================> > > >> > > > -- > > Please visit my website http://www.astrocare.in>

October 7, 2009

Dear Utkal-ji,

Following lines caught my attention

"Check, ketu, jup, sun in a chart wth respect to rahu, sat and venus,

then check how moon and mars are inclined, one must have his guru,

guide or jyotishi's horoscope"

I understand that the lines refer to inherent qualities of a person i.e., his

spiritual inclination.

If it is not too taxing to you...could you please illustrate the same with

a chart of your choice ? Because that will be a great learning for me

and some other forum members .

regards

Chakraborty

utkal.panigrahi [utkal.panigrahi] Wednesday, October 07, 2009 5:58 PM Subject: Re: Osho's words

pls. correct urself, had the people followed osho's mistake on chaupai, and burnt ramcharitmanas then there wd have been terrible violence. Bt, we indians are able to validate the credibility of such critics, pls, do some introspection.Spirituality takes us beyond our vested interests, because, in spirituality we learn to read our thoughts, we understand futility of excessive greed. Recall that brahmvain sanyasi who made Alexendar understand futility of his lustful vision of world victory, it was he who made him leave the idea of ruling the world. Pls dont say that people with vested interests invented god.Spirituality comes with power of judgement and strength to safeguard and stand for truth as sadhaka has to wade through the illusions and temptations of maya, let's develop our power of judgement. Sometimes politeness or humility or knowledge of a subject is misunderstood as symbol of spirituality, people can talk of mantra and sadhana etc, bt, when time comes to display spiritual qualities, they are first to be invisible in hide outs, pls, check lord shiva or vishnu had fought with asuras. Goswami Tulasidas has written that in kaliyuga, people wd like to talk about brahma and advaita, bt, if a question of benefit comes, they will not hesitate in killing another man, similarly, there wd be people wth greediness for their golden image in public, so many temptations. Pls. remember, upnishad says - Me, Atma is not available to those who dont have courage or strength. Check, ketu, jup, sun in a chart wth respect to rahu, sat and venus, then check how moon and mars are inclined, one must have his guru, guide or jyotishi's horoscope.First check, if a person is able to judge things, then check if he has no excessive greed, then check degree of strength and check how fair he is in his doings.Pls apply above on everybody, every author, preacher, scholar, saint, siddha and critic. Utkal. , Guru <ahudupa wrote:>> Dear members, I have not read any book of Osho. But the writing> attributed to Osho below by Srinadh ji makes immense sense to me.> Religion has been the single major cause of all bloodsheds and wars in the> world. People with vested interests have invented God , religion, rituals,> religious practices etc and used the gullible people.. People mistake> spirituality to region. One need not belong to any religion and can be> spiritual.> I thank all those who contributed to this thread.> regards,> UdupaThis Message was sent from Indian Oil Messaging Gateway, New Delhi, India. The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.

Sign In

Osho's words

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest