Guidelines for selecting a truly holy scripture

[Guest guest]

Great men by adopting righteous practices in life and through tough penance have realized god and they summarize it in the form of scriptures.

 

However, with passage of time, scriptures like vedas and BG are greately tampered with by pseudo-scholarly men with their own hidden agenda to the extent that we do not know now which part is original and which part has been added.

 

In such a situation, there are only two approaches to realize god and to attain salvation.

 

1.Realize god ourselves by severy penance like how great rishis who gave us holy scriptures did.

 

Or

 

2.Follow authentic scriptures.

 

first method is the best method, however for common creatures like ourselves, it is extremely difficult option.

 

Coming to second option, how do we identify authentic scripture.

 

1.An authentic scripture will give less or no room for misinterpretation.

2.Authentic scriptures will be straight forward and will stand the test of time. Anyone who undertakes responsibility of writing holy book has a great responsibility. He/She must ensure none of the thoughts expressed will never cause misery and sufferings in future, so controversial or possibly controversial topics must definitely be avoided.

3.Ultimately love is god, so any form of violance must strictly be discouraged. This will insure that the future generation will never be able to justify any form of killing by using scriptural references.

 

In my opinion, only Thirukkural satisfies all the above criteria.

 

About Thiruvalluvar:

 

The utter simplicity of his language, his crystal clear utterances, precise and forceful, his brevity, his choice diction, no less his inwardness, his learning, culture and wisdom, his catholicity and eclecticism, his gentle humour and wholesome counsel have made him an object of veneration for all time and his book is considered the Veda of the Tamils.

[Guest guest]

as to it being a secular book, it cannot be considered a "holy scripture". It is your choice to admire it, do not try to twist it into being something more than it is. A good guide for you.

 

A holy scripture is more than just a guide to people on how to live, it is about delivering the message of GOD, about defining why we are here, how this universe works, and GOD's principles of which we need to strive for.

 

And the idea that we are "common creatures" and thus cannot realize GOD is utter nonsense.

 

Even rishis before they realized GOD could be considered as "common creatures". Nevertheless, we are anything but common according to the Vedas and many other holy books. We are children of GOD, and thus it is our birthright to know GOD.

[Guest guest]

definitions of what an authentic scripture should be... and none of them are as reasonable as you may think.

 

You are the definition of a pseudo-scholarly man for doing this, since you have no basis to speak from. You are not enlightened, yet you advocate following one book over any other.

 

Authentic scriptures are open to misinterpretation just like any other book. As long as it is the written word, it shall always be open to interpretation. And if you claim that the Thiruvallavar is not open to interpretation, then you have an exceedingly narrow mind and thus cannot see the possibilities opened up by sentences written in Thiruvallavar. Either that, or it is not a book worth reading as it merely states mundane facts that are glaringly obvious and lack any sophistication in development.

 

Even the spoken word is subject to this, that's why I do not listen to just anyone, nor follow just whatever's written. It is best to search the truth for yourself and to critically examine what you hear or read to see if you agree with it. That is all that's important: your own opinion on the subject and nothing more, because that becomes your Truth, your principles, your belief system.

[Guest guest]

Dear friend,

 

I accept that great scholarly men will always find the interpretation they want from a given sentence and will give brilliant justification for their theory. But the point is, no matter how much one can twist a tale, they should never be able to produce an interpretation that is totally antethesis to what a religion must be.

 

For example, Vedas and BGs are full of glorification of warfare and killing and common people have ample oppurtunity to derive negative interpretation similar to Jehad.

 

Leave out Thirukkural out of this discussion, I apologize for that message with subject "Definition of authentic..". I realized my mistake.

But I still don't accept that fact that all scriptures are good.

 

You may have the broad mind to reject bad points and concentrate only on good points, this is what hindus have been doing for so many centuries, but recently the trend is to follow scriptures "as it is" , and this has caused unnecessary bloodshed and violance.

 

What I'm doing is a sincere attempt to show our misguided friends. Just a humble and very minor contribution to God who is nothing but Love.

[Guest guest]

he who says God is love is not far from Moksha. In the end, everything unites under love.

As for Thirikullar, it is a way of life and addresses morality in an excellant manner. Perhaps the spirtual aspect was deliberately excluded so that students could follow their own. But it certainly set the standard in moral behaviour which is the pillar of spirituality as the scriptures attest to. For Raja yoga, proper ritual cleanliness is a must, both mental and physical.

 

Thirikullar has certainly addresses that aspect.

[Sephiroth 0]

1.An authentic scripture will give less or no room for misinterpretation.

 

In another words, someone you do not know will do the thinking for you and you have to follow it like a cow.

 

2.Authentic scriptures will be straight forward and will stand the test of time. Anyone who undertakes responsibility of writing holy book has a great responsibility. He/She must ensure none of the thoughts expressed will never cause misery and sufferings in future, so controversial or possibly controversial topics must definitely be avoided.

 

Nonsense ... /images/graemlins/wink.gif

There have been no such book saved for ONE - the Gita.

 

3.Ultimately love is god, so any form of violance must strictly be discouraged. This will insure that the future generation will never be able to justify any form of killing by using scriptural references.

 

Wrong again ... anyone can misinterprete love as something else. Using love as god is incorrect.

 

God seeks us to be responsible in our actions, NOT to say "we love each other" and continue to live irresponsibly.

 

In name of Love, youngsters have premarital sex and comes out with all sort of problems - abortion, children given up and even troubled families.

 

In name of Love (as God), Christians invade India, making excuse like they love India and therefore, trying to save her by making her into a US clone.

 

In name of Love, all sort of irresponsiblities and evilness occurs in the world. Therefore, Responsibility and Living your Life properly IS the Way to God, NOT blind Love.

 

In my opinion, only Thirukkural satisfies all the above criteria.

 

In my opinion, it is the Gita which fits all this criteria - not Koran, Bible of Thirukkural.

[maadhav 0]

<< 1.An authentic scripture will give less or no room for misinterpretation. >>

 

It - Gita - does, but sometimes some people still do not understand it, due to their limit of knowledge or physical/mental /intellectual condition. Hence guru is needed.

 

<< 2.Authentic scriptures will be straight forward and will stand the test of time. >>

 

It- Gita - is, and has stood.

 

<< Anyone who undertakes responsibility of writing holy book has a great responsibility. >>

 

We hindu do not accept man-made scripture.

Vyasa wrote what was heard from God. He did not manufcture scripptures, just put on paper that was known from god.

Sure, he knows his responsibilty. he worried about allthe peole who will be born in kali yuga. So, he chose ganesh to write with a condition that Ganesh wil not write if he doesnot understand or is not true.

 

 

<< He/She must ensure none of the thoughts expressed will never cause misery and sufferings in future, so controversial or possibly controversial topics must definitely be avoided. >>

 

There are many vedic paths to realize god.

Instead picking one path and folloing it seriously, some cause controversy like siva vs. vishnu, etc.

The fault is with the people. Islam and Xianity want Hindusm totally vanish from this globe. So, we need to follow gita and check that religions in Bharat.

 

<< 3.Ultimately love is god, >>

 

No. Love is one's feeling for another living being and for God or some thing, or it is God's feeling about his creation and jivas. Love vanishes (has no meaning) when you think there is none other than your self, because there is none to love. a stone does not love a stone. you can loe a stone; a stone cannot love you (nor can a true Muslim like ladin).

 

<< so any form of violance must strictly be discouraged. >>

 

so, Krishna was a fool in your view when he said arjun to kill? He did everything to avoid a war, but then found that it was necessary.

 

<< This will insure that the future generation will never be able to justify any form of killing by using scriptural references. >>

 

if you are not a body,

then what you seeming see as violence is not violence.

read gita what krishna says in Ch. 2.

 

this however, does not meant that you embrace a muslim and encourage him to kill you.

 

suppose a muslim says:

"you are a hindu, and so a kafir. i must convert you to islam. if you refuse, i will kill you, per koran's (allah's message."

 

then only a fool hindu could say:

"oh my dear muslim come and kill me if you wish.

love is god. i as a soul am immortal, i am not this body, and body has no value. so, come and kill me. take my wife, daughters, property and nation when all the hindus are killed like you kill me."

 

such a thinking will cause adharma to its pinnacle.

 

krishna says in gita what is the right response to the anti-vedics.

 

[Guest guest]

<< so any form of violance must strictly be discouraged. >>

 

<so, Krishna was a fool in your view when he said arjun to kill? He did everything to avoid a war, but then found that it was necessary.>

 

It certainly reminds me of another person who tried every means to convince his opponents before resorting to Jehad.

 

But I'm not bothered about them, I'm asking my friends to consider following the principles of Buddha and Jesus.

If you have trouble accepting "other" philosophies, there are numerous other philosophies within our home turf preaching non-violance and love for humanity.

 

[Guest guest]

 

It certainly reminds me of another person who tried every means to convince his opponents before resorting to Jehad.

 

But I'm not bothered about them, I'm asking my friends to consider following the principles of Buddha and Jesus.

If you have trouble accepting "other" philosophies, there are numerous other philosophies within our home turf preaching non-violance and love for humanity.

 

 

You are an ignorant man.

 

Let me ask you, when some animal(say a mad dog) viciously tries to attack your child, what woould you do ?

 

What if some molester tries to rape your wife or child ?

 

What if some other murderer wants to kill your wife or child because they were witness to one of his murder ?

 

Violence in all these situations is necessary and vital in order to accomplish your duty to save innocent from harm.

 

Quoting teachings of Buddha and Jesus here is foolishness without knowing the context of these teachings.

 

All scriptural teachings have to be understood in context, not as blind rules.

[Guest guest]

>>he who says God is love is not far from Moksha. In the end, everything unites under love.

 

How come god is love?

love is a feeling of mind...

just like hatred...