qpid
stringclasses 1
value | q_body
stringlengths 46
17.9k
| AcceptedAnswerId
stringlengths 2
5
| aa_pid
stringlengths 1
5
| q_score
stringclasses 52
values | PostTypeId
stringclasses 1
value | Id
stringlengths 1
5
| aa_score
stringclasses 54
values | Title
stringlengths 15
150
| AnswerCount
stringclasses 11
values | aa_id
stringlengths 2
5
| aa_body
stringlengths 208
31.9k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
<p>Is the goddess of devi suktam Durga? is she same as adi shakti, or is adi shakti the goddess of devi suktam different from Durga.</p>
| 28015 | 28010 | 10 | 2 | 28010 | 10 | Who is devi in devi suktam? | 4 | 28015 | <p>Vaak Suktam Or Devi Suktam is in <strong>Rig- Veda - Mandala 10 as sukta 125.</strong> </p>
<p>The Rishika of this sukam is Vagambharni i.e. this sukta has been heard by a female sage by name Vaak , who is the daughter of Rishi Ambhrina and so the sukta is also called as the VakAmbharni Sukta.</p>
<p>The explanation given in various sources say that this suktam came out from deep of her heart when she was in communication with Brahman in her worship in exalted state. Here the Rishika is identifying herself with Devi and hence the Devata of this sukta is also VakAmbharni .She has eulogized herself in this sukta as Brahman , here resemblance to Advaita Philosophy. </p>
<p>According to some scholors this sukta is for power of speech and is not related with goddess . But from another point of view this sukta is gateway to Saptasati Chandi.
<hr>
<strong>But</strong> we can see the pointing in some mantras towards Devi Laxmi - I am the bestowe of wealth and I grant the wealth and I reside in the oceans. etc. - Mantra 2 & 7</p>
<blockquote>
<p>अहं सोममाहनसं बिभर्म्यहं त्वष्टारमुत पूषणं भगम | <br>
<strong>अहं दधामि द्रविणं</strong> हविष्मते सुप्राव्ये यजमानाय सुन्वते || 2 ||<br></p>
<p>ahaṃ somamāhanasaṃ bibharmyahaṃ tvaṣṭāramutapūṣaṇaṃ bhagham | <br>
<strong>ahaṃ dadhāmi draviṇaṃ</strong> haviṣmatesuprāvye yajamānāya sunvate || </p>
<p>अहं सुवे पितरमस्य मूर्धन मम योनिरप्स्वन्तः <strong>समुद्रे</strong> | <br> ततो वि
तिष्ठे भुवनानु विश्वोतामूं दयांवर्ष्मणोप सप्र्शामि || 7||</p>
<p>ahaṃ suve pitaramasya mūrdhan mama yonirapsvantaḥ <strong>samudre</strong> | <br>
tato vi tiṣṭhe bhuvanānu viśvotāmūṃ dyāṃvarṣmaṇopa spṛśāmi ||</p>
</blockquote>
<p>As Laxami is often described as emerging from depth of ocean during churning and is the goddess of wealth , prosparity in later Vedic scriptures like puranas. </p>
<p>At the same time we can also observe the presence of of Goddess Saraswati in some - mantras as - I bless the humans to become Poet , scholor , intelligent i.e. fluent or persuasive in speaking or writing. -Mantra 5 </p>
<blockquote>
<p>अहमेव स्वयमिदं वदामि जुष्टं देवेभिरुत मानुषेभिः | <br> यं कामये तं-तमुग्रं
<strong>कृणोमि तं ब्रह्माणं तमृषिं तं सुमेधाम</strong> || 5 ||<br></p>
<p>ahameva svayamidaṃ vadāmi juṣṭaṃ devebhirutamānuṣebhiḥ | <br> yaṃ kāmaye
taṃ-tamughraṃ <strong>kṛṇomi tambrahmāṇaṃ taṃ ṛṣiṃ taṃ sumedhām</strong> ||</p>
</blockquote>
<p><hr>
And in some she is said to be fighting for humans i.e. as the Devi Durga told in puranas. - Mantra 6. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>अहं रुद्राय धनुरा तनोमि ब्रह्मद्विषे शरवे हन्तवा उ | <br>
<strong>अहं जनाय समदं कृणोम्यहं</strong> द्यावापृथिवी आ विवेश || 6 ||<br></p>
<p>ahaṃ rudrāya dhanurā tanomi brahmadviṣe śarave hantavāu | <br>
<strong>ahaṃ janāya samadaṃ kṛṇomyahaṃ</strong> dyāvāpṛthivī āviveśa ||</p>
</blockquote>
<p><hr>
So it's clear that this Sukta is definitely related to Goddess. As we can see from above. </p>
<p>Here Devi is proclaming herself as source of all the creation , source of all creative power , conciousness i.e. Brahman herself. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Conclusion - So the devotees can say that the Goddess mentioned in
this suktam is Adi-Parashakti with all her aspects and forms like
Durga , Laxmi , Saraswati etc. As Adi Parashakti is the supreme
Brahman in Shakta tradition. And as she is described as Brahman in the
sukta , She is Adi-Parashakti. This sukta is chanted during the
worship of the Universal Goddess in any form.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Here is complete <a href="https://pparihar.com/2014/11/30/vaak-suktam-rig-ved/" rel="noreferrer"><strong>Devi Suktam</strong></a> with translation and some good explanation. </p>
|
|
<p>If I survive after the destruction of my body then is it not true that me and my body are separate? If yes, then where do I live without the body? (Please answer according to the philosophical school you believe to be true.)</p>
| 28276 | 28271 | 7 | 2 | 28271 | 7 | Is me and my body separate? | 3 | 28276 | <p>The "I" is the soul. And it is distinct from the body. The body is declared to be dead when the soul leaves the body.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Asya visramsamAnasya sharirasthasya dehinah |<br> DehAdvimuchyamanasya
kimatra parishishyate | Etadvai tath || </p>
<p>When, one, who is established in the body as it's lord, gets detached
from the body, what remains in the body then? That is That (or the
AtmA).</p>
<p><strong>Kathopanishad 2.2.4</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>When the soul leaves the body, depending on it's accumulated Karmas, it goes to various Lokas, where it either enjoys the fruits of Karmas or gets punishments for the same.</p>
<p>But immediately after leaving the body it does not live in a gross body (Sthula Sarira). It has then only a subtle kind of body called the Linga Deha. Some call it Sukshma Sarira too. This body remains attached to the soul as long as it is not liberated.</p>
<blockquote>
<ol start="21">
<li>The Karma, auspicious and inauspicious, done in many previous lives and preserved in seed forms, remains always inherent in a human
soul. Urged on by this Karma, the Jîvas quitting their previous
bodies, enjoy Heaven or Hell as effects of these, their own acts.
22-23. According to their good or bad works, the Jîvas acquire the
higher happy body and enjoy various pleasures in the Heavens, or they
take up very painful vicious bodies and suffer various pains in hell.
24-25. At the expiry of the above period in Heaven or Hell, when there
comes the time of his assuming another body, the Jîva becomes
conscious of the subtle body (Linga Deha) and takes his birth again.
When the Linga Deha comes into existence, the part of the Karma done
in various previous births that are ripe and ready to yield their
fruits, gets attached to the Jîva by God (or Destiny).</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>From Devi BhAgavatam 7.30</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>The ChAndogya Upanishad 5.10.6 describes how the soul (after leaving the human body) lives in the Chandraloka, till the fruits of Karmas are not exhausted. Thereafter, it gradually becomes air to finally becoming rain bearing clouds. Then the soul gets born as cereals and grains (which are cultivated aided by rainfall). Next, whoever (capable of producing children) eat those grains, the soul is born as their offspring.</p>
<p>So, the answer to your question is that the soul always lives within a subtle kind of body (the Linga Deha), that lasts till the soul gets liberation.</p>
|
|
<p>Here's a verse from Chandogya Upanishad , chapter six.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>"It (Being or Brahman) thought: ‘May I be many; may I grow forth."</p>
</blockquote>
<p>My question is, when Brahman, the supreme cosmic spirit , wished to multiply and develop into many names and forms , did the supreme cosmic spirit <strong>split</strong> into multiple souls ... and created separate individual identities in the process, when it split or broke away from the whole? </p>
<p>As per the dualists there are multiple souls or jeevatmas.</p>
<p>The advaitists on the other hand say, there is no duality and that our original selves (jeevatmas) are the same as the spirit whole aka Brahman.</p>
<p>Yes it may be true, that the basic substance or essence of the jeevatmas, is actually Brahman. Just like the basic substance of a clay pot is actually clay. So when we speak of Jivatma A , Jivatma B and Jivatma C , i guess the basic substance/essence is the same in all these three individuals (they are fragments of the cosmic spirit Brahman). But IMO, when the spirit whole, divided or became many, it's fragments became separate souls (jivatmas) each having their own individuality. Like if Jivatma A gets injured, only A will feel pain thru the indriyas and not B or C ... If C commits a heinous crime , then C will go to hell along with it's subtle body to suffer and not A or B. So it seems that we (trillions of souls) are not one big soul, that has entered or penetrated various flesh bodies, just like air enters an empty house ... In other words, we are not connected to each other. If our flesh bodies were connected by one big soul Brahman , then we would all suffer, enjoy, laugh, cry, feel etc. at the same time. Isn't it so? Correct me if i'm wrong.</p>
| 28445 | 28410 | 9 | 2 | 28410 | 5 | Did Brahman split into multiple souls? | 3 | 28445 | <p>The exact verse you are referring to is Chandogya VI.2.3. The division is only apparently so, and is only seen from the aspect of maya. Krishna says in Gita Chapter 13 verse 16 (Swami Nikhilananda translator):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It is indivisible, and yet It is, as it were, divided among beings. That Knowable Brahman is the Sustainer of all beings, and also their Devourer and Generator.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is the crux of the Advaita of Sankaracharya. The division is only apparently so. To understand this better, read the section called 'Adhyasa or Superimposition' immediately after the Introduction here - <a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/brahma-sutras" rel="noreferrer">https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/brahma-sutras</a></p>
|
|
<p>What are the "three worlds" being referred to in this shloka of the Bhagavad Gita?</p>
<blockquote>
<p>न मे पार्थास्ति कर्तव्यं त्रिषु लोकेषु किञ्चन |</p>
<p>नानवाप्तमवाप्तव्यं वर्त एव च कर्मणि || 3.22||</p>
<p>na me pārthāsti kartavyaṁ triṣhu lokeṣhu kiñchana</p>
<p>nānavāptam avāptavyaṁ varta eva cha karmaṇi</p>
<p>"There is no duty for me to do in all the three worlds, O Parth, nor do I have anything to gain or attain. Yet, I am engaged in prescribed duties."</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I have searched to find some commentaries on this shloka but there aren't any that I can find that directly address the part of the shloka referring to the "3 worlds".</p>
<p>Are they the Underworld, Earth and Heavens? If so, can this be verified in any way? Is this referred to in another part of the Mahabharata outside of the Gita? This is giving me quite the headache.</p>
| 28490 | 28486 | 11 | 2 | 28486 | 6 | What are the "Three Worlds" referred to in the Bhagavad Gita 3.22? | 3 | 28490 | <p>The <em>Brhadaranyaka Upanishad</em> V.xiv.1 (Swami Madhavananda translator) says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>'Bhumi' (the earth), 'Antariksa' (sky) and 'Dyaus' (heaven) make eight syllables, and the first foot of the Gayatri has eight syllables. So the above three worlds constitute the first foot of the Gayatri. He who knows the first foot of the Gayatri to be such wins as much as there is in those worlds.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>There are other references throughout the Upanishads. Search for Gayatri on this website for more references. The three worlds are sometimes referred to as the three cities also. There was a prior question on the three cities. </p>
|
|
<p>Each and every god/deities having corresponding mantras itself. However Lord Paramesvara said in Vishnu Saharanamam the most valuable and powerful mantra to be chanted is:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>ईश्वर उवाच<br>
श्रीराम राम रामेती रमे रामे मनोरमे ।<br>
सहस्रनाम तत्तुल्यं रामनाम वरानने ॥27 ॥</p>
<p>ishwara uvAcha:<br>
sri rAma rAma rAmethi rame rAme manorame |<br>
sahasranAma thatthulyam rAma nAma varAnane |</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But my question is, what is the mantra (only one mantra) if I going to chant and get blessing from all deities (<em>in three worlds swargaloka, bhooloka, pathalaloka</em>) and satisfy them.</p>
| 28499 | 28498 | 7 | 2 | 28498 | 9 | One mantra for praising all deities of three Lokas | 4 | 28499 | <p>There technically is "no only one mantra" if you're planning to please all the deities in the Triloka. But there are alternatives. If you wish to get the mantra which all the gods adhere to and pay allegiance, but non-Vedantic - then try the Gayatri Mantra. It is present in many sources, however I am taking it from the Surya Upanishad.</p>
<p><strong>Surya Upanishad</strong> Verse 3</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Aum bhūr-bhuva̱ḥ-suva̍ḥ |<br> tat sa̍vi̱tur vare̎ṇya̱m bhargo de'vasya
dh'īmahi |<br> dhiyo̱ yo na̍ḥ praco̱dayā̎t ||<br></strong></p>
<p>Om, Earth, middle region and sky; we meditate on the adorable splendor
of Savitar (Sun) who may inspire our thoughts.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Vishnu and Shiva mantras are generally favoured if you want direct blessings from every god out there.</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya.</strong></p>
<p><strong>Om Namo Bhagavate Rudraya.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>These mantras are invoked at the beginning of many Puranas and stotras.</p>
<p>If you want an all encompassing Gayatri for deities combined in a single flow you can refer to Mahanarayana Upanishad and keep on chanting all the Gayatris.</p>
<p>Mahanarayana Upanishad </p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>purushasya vidmahe sahasrakshasya mahadevasya dhimahi | tannorudrah
pracodayat || 22||<br><br>tatpurushaya vidmahe mahadevaya dhimahi | tanno
rudrah pracodayat || 23||<br><br>tatpurushaya vidmahe vakratundaya dhimahi
| tanno dantih pracodayat || 24||<br><br>tatpurushaya vidmahe cakratundaya
dhimahi | tanno nandih pracodayat || 25||<br><br>tatpurushaya vidmahe
mahasenaya dhimahi | tannah shanmukhah pracodayat ||
26||<br><br>tatpurushaya vidmahe suvarnapakshaya dhimahi | tanno garudah
pracodayat || 27||<br><br>vedatmanaya vidmahe hiranyagarbhaya dhimahi |
tanno brahma pracodayat || 28||<br><br>narayanaya vidmahe vasudevaya
dhimahi | tanno vishnuh pracodayat || 29||<br><br>vajranakhaya vidmahe
tikshnadam shtraya dhimahi | tannonarasim hah pracodayat || 30||<br><br>
bhaskaraya vidmahe mahaddyutikaraya dhimahi | tanno adityyah
pracodayat || 31||<br><br>vaishvanaraya vidmahe lalilaya dhimahi | tanno
agnih pracodayat || 32||<br><br>katyayanaya vidmahe kanyakumari dhimahi |
tanno durgih pracodayat || 33||<br><br>pathabhedahcaturmukhaya vidmahe
kamandaludharaya dhimahi | tanno brahma pracodayat ||<br><br>adityaya
vidmahe sahasrakiranaya dhimahi | tanno bhanuh pracodayat
||<br><br>pavakaya vidmahe saptajihvaya dhimahi | tanno vaishvanarah
pracodayat ||<br><br>mahashulinyai vidmahe mahadurgayai dhimahi | tanno
bhagavati pracodayat ||<br><br>subhagayai vidmahe kamalamalinyai dhimahi |
tanno gauri pracodayat ||<br><br>navakulaya vidmahe vishadantaya dhimahi |
tannah sarpah pracodayat ||<br><br></strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>If you're looking for a deity-less all encompassing mantra, there is only ONE and ONE only:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>AUM - ॐ</strong></p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>In Gita ch.13 v23 , the Lord says that the Supreme Purusha in this body is the upadrista (observer) , the anumanta (permitter) , bharta (supporter) and bhokta (the experiencer / the one who experiences).</p>
<blockquote>
<p>upadrashtaanumantaa cha bhartaa bhoktaa maheshvaraha |</p>
<p>paramaatmeti chaapyukto dehesmin purushaha paraha ||</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Swami Chidbhananda, in his Gita commentary, explained the bhokta part by saying that the jivatman which is the reflection of the Supreme Lord, 'experiences' the insentient Prakriti. (In his Gita, it's ch.13 v22)</p>
<p>So does this mean the soul actually experiences, pleasure & pain?
Like when we feel sad, besides observing all the drama, does the soul also experience or feel sadness ... or ... experience/feel emotional & physical pain?</p>
| 28579 | 28566 | 5 | 2 | 28566 | 1 | Does the individual soul actually feel pleasure or pain? | 4 | 28579 | <p>Yes, the jiva feels the pleasure and pain as long as he does not identify with the Atman.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Upon the same tree there are two birds, one on the top, the other
below. The one on the top is calm, silent, and majestic, immersed in
his own glory; <strong>the one on the lower branches, eating sweet and bitter
fruits by turns, hopping from branch to branch, is becoming happy and
miserable by turns.</strong> After a time the lower bird eats an exceptionally
bitter fruit and gets disgustful and looks up and sees the other bird,
that wondrous one of golden plumage, who eats neither sweet nor bitter
fruit, who is neither happy nor miserable, but calm, Self-centred, and
sees nothing beyond his Self. The lower bird longs for this condition
but soon forgets it, and again begins to eat the fruits. In a little
while, he eats another exceptionally bitter fruit, which makes him
feel miserable, and he again looks up, and tries to get nearer to the
upper bird. Once more he forgets and after a time he looks up, and so
on he goes again and again, until he comes very near to the beautiful
bird and sees the reflection of light from his plumage playing around
his own body, and he feels a change and seems to melt away; still
nearer he comes, and everything about him melts away, and at last he
understands this wonderful change. The lower bird was, as it were,
only the substantial-looking shadow, the reflection of the higher; he
himself was in essence the upper bird all the time. This eating of
fruits, sweet and bitter, this lower, little bird, weeping and happy
by turns, was a vain chimera, a dream: all along, the real bird was
there above, calm and silent, glorious and majestic, beyond grief,
beyond sorrow. The upper bird is God, the Lord of this universe; and
the lower bird is the human soul, eating the sweet and bitter fruits
of this world. Now and then comes a heavy blow to the soul. For a
time, he stops the eating and goes towards the unknown God, and a
flood of light comes. He thinks that this world is a vain show. Yet
again the senses drag hint down, and he begins as before to eat the
sweet and bitter fruits of the world. Again an exceptionally hard blow
comes. His heart becomes open again to divine light; thus gradually he
approaches God, and as he gets nearer and nearer, he finds his old
self melting away. When he has come near enough, he sees that he is no
other than God, and he exclaims, "He whom I have described to you as
the Life of this universe, as present in the atom, and in suns and
moons — He is the basis of our own life, the Soul of our soul. Nay,
thou art That." This is what this Jnana-Yoga teaches. It tells man
that he is essentially divine. It shows to mankind the real unity of
being, and that each one of us is the Lord God Himself, manifested on
earth. All of us, from the lowest worm that crawls under our feet to
the highest beings to whom we look up with wonder and awe — all are
manifestations of the same Lord.</p>
<p>Lastly, it is imperative that all these various Yogas should be
carried out in, practice; mere theories about them will not do any
good. First we have to hear about them, then we have to think about
them. We have to reason the thoughts out, impress them on our minds,
and we have to meditate on them, realise them, until at last they
become our whole life. No longer will religion remain a bundle of
ideas or theories, nor an intellectual assent; it will enter into our
very self. By means of intellectual assent we may today subscribe to
many foolish things, and change our minds altogether tomorrow. But
true religion never changes. Religion is realisation; not talk, nor
doctrine, nor theories, however beautiful they may be. It is being and
becoming, not hearing or acknowledging; it is the whole soul becoming
changed into what it believes. That is religion.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Volume 2, Practical Vedanta and Other Lectures, The Ideal of a Universal Religion</p>
|
|
<p>We know Lord Vishnu's avatars and we mostly have knowledge of different forms of deities and their leela. But does our scriptures have any accounts of avatars of Parabrahma?</p>
| 28617 | 28602 | 3 | 2 | 28602 | 2 | Did our scriptures mention any avatar that Parabrahma has taken? | 3 | 28617 | <p><strong>Yes</strong>, certainly. But NOT in the same sense as of those of say, Lord Vishnu or Lord Shiva.
The reason for this is that the nature of the Parambramhm (Parbramha) is fundamentally different from that of both - ordinary souls like us, who are linked to casual ( and ultimately to gross ) bodies, as well as the divine souls residing in the higher realms.</p>
<p>In particular,</p>
<ul>
<li><p>The gross forms which we refer to as incarnations, exist as material personifications of the divine beings ( read Gods ), who in spite of there divinity, are incomplete aspects of the Supreme Brahma, just like us ( except when they are in yoga with the Consciousness , of course ) .</p></li>
<li><p>There incarnations are therefore aspects of and by extension casual incarnations of Parbramha.</p></li>
<li><p>Being the 'casual actor' responsible for the the apparent existence of the worlds and beings, it is clearly absurd to speak of there being a personification of the Brahma in one gross body more than in any other, with the possible exception of the divine beings and their incarnations.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>All the above points have been sufficiently reconfirmed by both sages and scriptures, for there to be any need for a citation.</p>
<p><strong>TL;DR</strong></p>
<p>Clearly, it is impossible to find a scriptural reference to an avatar of the kind you enquired about ( not TOO sure about this ) . However, it is true that these exist and that we are among them.</p>
|
|
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/NFZTb.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/NFZTb.jpg" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>
<p>What is the story of Bharat Mata?<br>
What's her connection with the Indian national flag?</p>
| 28679 | 28670 | 9 | 2 | 28670 | 4 | Who is the goddess depicted as "Bharat Mata" & why is she having Indian tricolor flag? | 5 | 28679 | <h3>Goddess</h3>
<p><strong>The Bharat mata is [primarily] goddess <em>Durga</em></strong>. However in general she is an amalgamation of various goddesses.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Bharat Matā (Hindi, from Sanskrit Bhāratāmbā भारताम्बा; अम्बा ambā means 'mother') is the national personification of India as a mother goddess. She is an amalgam of <strong>all the goddesses</strong> of Indian culture and more <strong>significantly of goddess Durga</strong>. She is usually depicted as a woman clad in a saffron sari holding the Indian national flag, and sometimes accompanied by a lion... The <strong>Tiranga flag</strong> was also started being included during this period. In 1930s, the <strong>image entered in religious practice</strong>. The Bharat Mata <strong>temple was built in Benaras</strong> in 1936 by Shiv Prashad Gupt and was inaugurated by Mahatma Gandhi. ... The motto <em>Bharat Mata ki Jai</em> ("Victory for Mother India") is used by the Indian Army. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharat_Mata" rel="nofollow noreferrer">[Wikipedia]</a></p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is a rare combination of religion and nationalism (<a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/q/15020/1049">a part of Dharma</a>).</p>
<hr />
<h3>Etymology</h3>
<p>It was actually a painting work, which was named as "Bharat Mata". Eventually it got transformed into a worshippable figure for indpendence movement of India. The very early history of Bharat mata dates back to 1905 from a painting of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharat_Mata_(Abanindranath)" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Abanindranath Tagore</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Bharat Mata depicts a saffron clad woman, holding a book, sheaves of paddy, a piece of white cloth and a garland in her four hands. The painting holds historical significance as it is one of the <strong>earliest visualizations of Bharat Mata</strong>, or "Mother India." ... The "work" was painted during the time of the swadeshi movmement. The movement began as a response to the Partition of Bengal (1905) <a href="https://scroll.in/article/805990/far-from-being-eternal-bharat-mata-is-only-a-little-more-than-100-years-old" rel="nofollow noreferrer">[source]</a></p>
</blockquote>
<p>She is not a traditional <em>Pauranic</em> goddess.</p>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/qBcEDm.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/qBcEDm.jpg" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>
<p>So in the oldest of paintings, there was neither tricolor flag with her, nor was there any lion. The flag started to appear around 1930's when the independence movement was at its peak as described in the above Wiki article.</p>
<hr />
<h3>Trivia</h3>
<p>Here is what Sister Nivedita, a famous student of Vivekananda has to say:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>From beginning to end, the picture is an appeal, in the Indian language, to the Indian heart. It is the first great masterpiece in a new style. I would reprint- it, if I could, by tens of thousands, and scatter it broadcast over the land, till there was not a peasant's cottage, or a craftman's hut, between Kedar Nath and Cape Comorin, that had not this presentment of Bharat-Mata somewhere on its walls. Over and over again, as one looks into its qualities, one is struck by the purity and delicacy of the personality portrayed. <a href="https://books.google.co.in/books?id=jYhfDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">[Complete works of Sister Nivedita]</a></p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>Where is Sumeru? I have been reading about Hindu Cosmology of seven continents and in that I came across Mount Sumeru. Where is it? Is it the birth place of Hanuman?</p>
| 28714 | 28700 | 12 | 2 | 28700 | 3 | Was Lord Hanuman born in Sumeru? Where is that place? Is it renamed recently? | 3 | 28714 | <p><strong>Was Lord Hanuman born in Sumeru? Is it the birth place of Hanuman?</strong></p>
<p>Yes, as per <a href="http://ancientvoice.wikidot.com/src-vrm:ram7-40" rel="nofollow noreferrer">UTTARA KANDA of Valmiki Ramayan</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>[The ascetic Agastya said to Lord Shri Rama:] I am not capable of describing to thee the wondrous childish feat which Hanuman did perform in his boyhood. But if thou art, O Raghava, greatly anxious to hear it, I shall relate do thou hear with a quiescent mind. </p>
<p><strong>Hanuman's father Kesari reigned in the mountain Sumeru which resembles gold by the inluence of the sun</strong>. Kesari had a well known wife by the name of Anjana to whom he was greatly attached. The deity Wind begot on Anjana an excellent son. Repairing to a dense forest for collecting fruits, the excellent damsel gave birth to Hanuman.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="http://ancientvoice.wikidot.com/src-vrm:ram7-41" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Earlier</a>, Riksharaja too used to live on mountain Meru and gave birth to Vali and Sigriva. <a href="http://ancientvoice.wikidot.com/src-vrm:ram7-42" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Later</a>,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Beholding his son Riksharaja with his sons(Vali and Sigriva), Brahma, the grand father of the Devas, consoled him in diverse ways. Then he ordered the celestial messenger saying "At my behest, O emissary, do thou proceed to the highly picturesque city of <strong>Kishkindha</strong>. That golden, big and charming city is worthy of Riksharaja. Do thou place there Riksharaja, the foremost of Vanaras, with his sons; and having invited the leading Vanaras and others and received them courteously do thou install him on the throne. On beholding this Vanara chief, gifted with intelligence they shall be all subject to him." </p>
<p>Brahma, having said this, the celestial emissary, with Riksharaja before him, proceeded to the highly picturesque city of Kishkindha. And having entered there with the velocity of the wind, he, at the com mand of the Patriarch, crowned the leading Vanara Riksharaja as king. All the Vanara, residing on earth consisting of seven insular continentsand bounded by ocean, came under his subjection.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, Hanuman, Sugriv and Vali were born on mountain Sumeru but later migrated to Kishkindha.</p>
<hr>
<p><strong>Where is Sumeru?</strong></p>
<p>As per <a href="https://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/5/16" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (Bhāgavata Purāṇa) 5.26</a>,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The planetary system known as Bhū-maṇḍala resembles a lotus flower, and its seven islands resemble the whorl of that flower. The length and breadth of the island known as Jambūdvīpa, which is situated in the middle of the whorl. In Jambūdvīpa there are nine divisions of land. Amidst these divisions, or varṣas, is the varṣa named Ilāvṛta, which is situated in the middle of the whorl of the lotus. Within Ilāvṛta-varṣa is Sumeru Mountain.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>More details can be found in <a href="https://www.bhagavadgitausa.com/HINDU%20VIEW%20OF%20THE%20PHYSICAL%20WORLD.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this article</a> and in <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/28701/12304">this answer</a>.</p>
|
|
<p>When we see all the practices from vedas, puranas, Yoga, and all scriptures, ithihasa, the theme has been to purify the mind and detach it from world. They never talked about on how to grow your Atman for liberation etc.. </p>
<p>All instructions, the methods of practice, seems everything related to mind. Thus, my question is - Is liberation for mind? If so, then is Atman already free? If that's the case, then I think mind is sole reason for our existence in this world.</p>
| 28713 | 28712 | 12 | 2 | 28712 | 6 | Is liberation for mind or Atman? | 3 | 28713 | <p>What we perceive as consciousness through our mind is contained in Atman only. Atman is pure consciousness. It is the cause of consciousness which is played by the "mind" in the human body.</p>
<p><strong>Kena Upanishad Chapter One:</strong> </p>
<blockquote>
<p>IV <br> That which speech does not illumine, but which illumines
speech: know that alone to be the Brahman (the Supreme Being), not
this which people worship here.</p>
<p>V<br> That which cannot be thought by mind, but by which, they say,
mind is able to think: know that alone to be the Brahman, not this
which people worship here.</p>
<p>VI<br> That which is not seen by the eye, but by which the eye is able
to see: know that alone to be the Brahman, not this which people
worship here.</p>
<p>VII<br> That which cannot be heard by the ear, but by which the ear is
able to hear: know that alone to be Brahman, not this which people
worship here.</p>
<p>VIII<br> That which none breathes with the breath, but by which breath
is in–breathed: know that alone to be the Brahman, not this which
people worship here. Ordinarily we know three states of consciousness
only – waking, dreaming and sleeping. There is, however, a fourth
state, the superconscious, which transcends these. In the first three
states the mind is not clear enough to save us from error; but in the
fourth state it gains such purity of vision that it can perceive the
Divine. If God could be known by the limited mind and senses, then
God–knowledge would be like any other knowledge and spiritual science
like any physical science. He can be known, however, by the purified
mind only. Therefore to know God, man must purify himself. The mind
described in the Upanishads is the superconscious mind. According to
the Vedic Sages the mind in its ordinary state is only another sense
organ. This mind is limited, but when it becomes illumined by the
light of the Cosmic Intelligence, or the “mind of the mind,” then it
is able to apprehend the First Cause or That which stands behind all
external activities.</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>In scriptures, it is stated that Vishnu took Matsya avatar again during end of previous Manu, and there was a pralaya on Earth. If that's the case, from which place did Saptarishis in boat travel? Finally, where did Matsya - fish drop the Saptarishis? Was it from different dimension of existence?</p>
<p>Excerpt of <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/21714/5212">@YDS's answer</a> to <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/q/21692/5212">What is chronological timeline (in Manvantara and Mahayuga) of Lord Vishnu incarnations?</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>In the beginning (1st Sata yuga) of 7th Manvantar (Vaivaswata or present Manvantar) of the Svet-Vrah or present kalp. This incarnation of Vishnu saved Vaivaswata from the deluge (Pralaya), who later became 7th Manu and the current Manvantar is named after his name</p>
</blockquote>
| 28723 | 28717 | 4 | 2 | 28717 | 3 | From which dimension of existence did Matsya take the Sapatarishis? And to where? | 3 | 28723 | <p><strong>From which place did Saptarishis in boat travel?</strong></p>
<p>As per <a href="https://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/8/24" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (Bhāgavata Purāṇa) 8.24</a>,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>One day while Satyavrata, the King of <strong>Draviḍadeśa</strong>, performing austerities by offering water on the bank of the <strong>river Kṛtamālā</strong>, a small fish appeared in the water in his palms.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Later the fish became bigger and bigger and Satyavrata came to know that the fish is not the ordinary one. Then, Lord said to him,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>When all the three worlds merge into the water, a large boat sent by Me will appear before you. Pulling the boat, with you and all the ṛṣis in it, O King, I shall travel in the water of devastation until the night of Lord Brahmā’s slumber is over.</p>
<p>Purport: This particular devastation actually took place not during the night of Lord Brahmā but during his day, for it was during the time of Cākṣuṣa Manu. Brahmā’s night takes place when Brahmā goes to sleep, but in the daytime there are fourteen Manus, one of whom is Cākṣuṣa Manu. Therefore, Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura comments that although it was daytime for Lord Brahmā, Brahmā felt sleepy for a short time by the supreme will of the Lord. This short period is regarded as Lord Brahmā’s night.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Later, on the day of Pralay:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>As Satyavrata remembered the order of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he saw a boat coming near him. Thus he collected herbs and creepers, and, accompanied by saintly brāhmaṇas, he got aboard the boat.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="http://www.gloriousindia.com/scriptures/puranas/agni_purana/the_fish.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The Fish chapter of Agni Purana</a> also mention about Kritamala river. Presently the Kritamala River is known as the river Bhagai or Vaigai and Dravida desha as South India. So answer is South India.</p>
<hr />
<p><strong>Where did Matsya - fish drop the Saptarishis?</strong></p>
<p>As per <a href="http://www.gloriousindia.com/scriptures/puranas/agni_purana/the_fish.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The Fish chapter of Agni Purana</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>Everything happened as the fish had promised it would. The ocean became turbulent and Manu climbed into the boat. He tied the boat to the huge horn that the fish had. He prayed to the fish and the fish related the Matsya Purana to him. <strong>Eventually, when the water receded, the boat was anchored to the topmost peak of the Himalayas</strong>. And living beings were created once again.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The wiki on <a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matsya" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Matsya</a> also says the same,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The fish carries the boat with Manu to the high grounds of the northern mountains (interpreted as Himalayas).</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>We know Shiva is the Lord. But it is not clear what is meant by Shivaaya ?</p>
<p>My question is : What is the meaning of Shivaaya ?</p>
| 28754 | 28745 | 2 | 2 | 28745 | 6 | What is the meaning of Shivaaya? | 3 | 28754 | <p>शिवाय (Śivāya) is <strong>4th Vibhakti</strong> of शिव (Shiva). 4th Vibhakti means <strong>to/for whom</strong>.</p>
<p>So the meaning of Śivāya would be <strong>to/for Shiva</strong>.</p>
<p>Example: ॐ नमः शिवाय (Om Namah Shivaya): Om salutations to Lord Shiva!</p>
<hr>
<p>Below are the basic details on 8 Vibhaktis:</p>
<ol>
<li>1st: Subject</li>
<li>2nd: Object</li>
<li>3rd: by/with/through whom</li>
<li>4th: to/for whom</li>
<li>5th: from whom</li>
<li>6th: shows possession (E.g. Ram's or of Ram)</li>
<li>7th: in/on whom</li>
<li>8th: when addressing</li>
</ol>
<p>The below lines of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ram_Raksha_Stotra" rel="noreferrer">Ram Raksha Stotra</a> have all the Vibhaktis in order:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>रामो</strong> राजमणिः सदा विजयते <strong>रामं</strong> रमेशं भजे।</p>
<p><strong>रामेण</strong> अभिहता निशाचरचमू <strong>रामाय</strong> तस्मै नमः।</p>
<p><strong>रामात्</strong> नास्ति परायणं परतरं <strong>रामस्य</strong> दासोस्म्यहम्।</p>
<p><strong>रामे</strong> चित्तलयः सदा भवतु मे <strong>भो राम!</strong> मामुद्धर।।३७॥</p>
<p>I worship <strong>Rama</strong> whose jewel (among kings) who always wins and <strong>who is
lord of Lakshmi</strong> (goddess of wealth)। <strong>Through whom</strong> the hordes of demons
who move at night have been destroyed, I salut that Rama [my salutations <strong>to</strong> that <strong>Rama</strong>]।</p>
<p>There is no place of surrender <strong>greater than Rama</strong>, (and thus) I am
servant <strong>of Rama</strong>।</p>
<p>My mind is totally absorbed <strong>in Rama</strong>. <strong>O Rama</strong>, please lift me up (from
lower to higher self)॥37॥</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>Is there any reason for release of Gayatri mantra to non brahmins and even to women? I think such practice is irregular. Who is responsible for deviation from very ancient practice and making it possible for others to follow this irreligious idea of devotion?</p>
| 28999 | 28966 | 12 | 2 | 28966 | 17 | Why Gayatri mantra is widely recited by non-bramhins nowadays which was once the stronghold of only the brahmins? | 6 | 28999 | <p>gAyatri mantra HAS TO BE recited by non brahmins also, Kshatriyas and vysyas too have right for vedic initiation/upanayana.
Secondly women too have right to study and chant vedas and conduct vedic rites. So it is good that non brahmins too are taking interest in this else the divine knowledge of vedas would keep on reducing among the masses.</p>
<p><strong>Non-brahmins and Vedas :</strong></p>
<p>Today the Indian society is mainly divided on the lines of Brahmins and Non Brahmins. It is not very difficult to understand that such a division of the society is not provided for either in the dharma shAstra-s or the vedas. This man-made division is the height of absurdity considering the fact that vedas do not sanction such a division as the kShatriya-s & vaishya-s are considered to be equal to the Brahmins insofar as the study of veda-s and vedic practices are concerned. Just like brAhman the kShatriya & vaishya are also entitled to upanayana samskAra and gAyatri as is evident from different gRhyasUtra-s for eg, Apastamba says :</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“ <strong>गर्भाष्टमेषु ब्राह्मणं, गर्भैकादशेषु राजन्यं, गर्भाद्वादशेषु वैश्यम्।। (आपस्तम्बः</strong>)”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>in the eighth year from conception i.e. the 7th year from birth, the brAhman should be intitiated into gAyatri. Similarly, in the 10th year from birth for kShatriya and 11th year for vaishya</p>
<blockquote>
<p>brAhmaNaH kShatriyo vaishyaH trayo varNAH dvijAdayaH
saMskRtAshcAnyathA shUdrAH evaM vedavido viduH
tasmAdayaM suto me.adyaH shUdravat vartate shishuH
upanItaH kriyArhaH syAt iti vedeShu nirNayaH
rAjJAmekAdashe varShe sadopanayanaM smRtaM
aShTame brAhmaNAnAM ca vaishyAnAM dvAdashe kila (devI bhAgavata 7-7)</p>
<p>“<strong>The three varNa-s of brAhmaNa, kShatriya and vaishya are dvija (twice born) only if they undergo the upanayana saMskAra otherwise they are indeed considered to be shUdra in the absence of saMskAra</strong>” </p>
</blockquote>
<p>How then did the kShatriya-s & vaishya-s came to be grouped as “non-brahmins” ? Grouping of certain varNa-s as non-brahmins is therefore unwarranted and uncalled for. It must also be understood that the words ‘varNa’ & ‘jAti’ stand for entirely different concepts and the word varNa cannot by any stretch of imagination be used to mean a particular caste or jAti. It is therefore worthwhile to understand the true concept of varNa.</p>
<p>Further, a prayer to agni in the beginning of yAga goes thus :</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“रुचं नो धेहि ब्राह्मणेषु रुचं राजसु नस्कृधि | रुचं विश्येषु शूद्रेषु मयि धेहि रुचा रुचं |” </p>
<p>“rucaM no dhehi brAhmaNeShu rucaM rAjasu naskRdhi | rucaM vishyeShu shUdreShu mayi dhehi rucA rucaM |”
(YV. Mula samhita K.5. P.7 A.6. - 3 and 4)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>which is a prayer to the agni to “bestow upon us the radiance of the brAhmaNa-s, kShatriya-s, vaishya-s & shUdra-s”. Had the kShatriya or vaishya or shUdra been inferior to the brAhmaNa-s, would anyone pray for the energies of these varNa-s?</p>
<p>It must be understood that the varNa classification exists among the devas, the gems, the nine planets, in the animals and even in the letters of sanskrit. “vaiDUrya” (cat’s eye) a particular gem is classified as brAhmaNa, kshatriya, vaishya & shUdra based on its variation in color. Among the nine planets, the sun is kShatriya, but shani, the son of sun is a shUdra. Similarly, budha is classified as a vaishya. But budha is stated to be the son born to chandra & tArA. guru & shukra are stated to be brAhmaNa-s. Now which of the nine planets is superior or inferior ? The soil of the earth is also subject to these varNa classification. By mixing different varNa-s of soil, fertility that is lost can be restored. The soil that has lost its fertility, though called by its original name, can never have the original characteristics unless mixed with fresh fertile soil. In the creation of humans also, the varnas are subject to changes arising out of various reasons. Manu smRti says a brAhmaNa can become a vaishya in three days if he resorts to selling milk. By indulging in trade, a brAhmaNa will become a vaishya. Similarly a shUdra can become a brAhmaNa by reciting gAyatri. There are umpteen instances of the so called shUdra-s attaining brAhman-hood. Hence, the varNa-s were never created or conceived as water tight compartments. The difference in the varNa-s was actually meant for evolution of mankind by improving the divine powers of “brahma” “kShatra” & “viT” energies through penance and religious practices as enjoined in the veda-s and definitely not for creating inequality or complexes and animosity in the minds of people. By the increase of divine power, the self and the society as a whole and the nation can attain comfort and happiness.</p>
<p><strong>Women and Vedas :</strong></p>
<p>Vedas don't differentiate among boys and girls in the samskaras or shodasa samskara. Upanayanam ( Yajnopavita ) is one of the major samskara in which the child gets officially initiated into Brahma Gayatri and it is mainly focused on Brahmopadesham which enables him to become eligible to learn vedas and other shastras. After this ceremony he attains the "Dwija" hood or Twice born. Sutras prescribe various age groups for different Varna's for initiation. For example about Brahmin varna, अष्टम्वर्षे ब्राह्मणमुपनयेत् ( Ashvalayana Grhya Sutra 1:19:1 ) , गर्भाष्टमे ब्राह्मणमुपनयेत् ( Varaha. Grhya. Sut.) Similar rules are prescribed for Kshatriyas and Vaisyas too only the age limit is extended for them.</p>
<p>Here Sutra kaara's by brahmana , kshatriya etc mean that both boys and girls of this varna's are to be initiated. The gender is not designated to be masculine alone. Since most of the rituals are meant for boys and girls both hence they have commonly addressed as masculine words which are generally used in any stories or instructions etc.</p>
<p>For example a rule like " ब्राह्मणो न हन्तव्यः" ( the brahmana should not be murdered) it is meant that the ब्राह्मणी also should not be murdered. Similarly "मरणधर्मा मानवः" means man is mortal we mean that women is also mortal. Hence gender is specifically mentioned only where it is required.</p>
<p>As per Haarita dharma sutra, those women who are Brahma Vaadini have right for initiation, Vedic studies , Fire establishment and bhiksha etc. द्विऽविधाः स्त्रियो ब्रह्मवादिन्यः सदीवध्वश्च । तत्र ब्रह्मवादिनीनामुपनयनम्योन्धनं वेदाध्ययनं स्वगृहे भिक्शाचर्या चेति ( 21:23)</p>
<p>As per Yama Smriti, </p>
<blockquote>
<p>पुरा कल्पे कुमारिणां मोञ्जोबन्धन मिष्यते । अध्यापनन्श्च वेदानां सावित्रीवाचनन्तथा ॥ पिता पितृव्यो भ्राता वा नैनामध्यापयेत् परः |</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In olden times tying of girdle was prescribed for girls. So also study of vedas and uttering of Gayatri ( Savitur) preferably from father , brother or uncle. She is allowed for begging alms within her house limits. Yama refers to existence not only in olden days but during his times as well by his sentence पुराकल्पे ( यथैष्यत) तथा (अधुनाऽपि) इष्यते. The word तथा is specially put by Yama by way of comparison between old time and his own time so he says that during his time girls should learn from father, brother etc and she dont need to wear deer skin, bark etc. If Yama had intended to say that girls should not be initiated in his time unlike olden times he would say something like इह कल्पे तासामेवं न कुर्यान्मतिमान् क्कचित् ॥ As he uses verbs in present tense so we can make out that he prescribed rules for his own days and was the case in olden days too.</p>
<p>Gobhila says that Bride should wear the sacred thread when the bridegroom leads her to the altar. "प्रावृतां यज्ञोपवीतिनीमम्युदानयन् जपेत् सीमोऽदाद् गन्धर्वायेति " ( Gobhila Grhya sutra 2:1:19) यज्ञोपवीतिनाऽचान्तोदकेन कृत्यम् ( Gobhila Grhya sutra 1:1:2)</p>
<p>Like the women are eligible for vedas, they are eligible for brahmavidya too.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(यथाधिकरः श्रोतेषु योषितां कर्म सुश्रुतःएवमेवानुमन्यम्ब ब्रह्माणि ब्रह्मवादिताम् Yama Smriti )</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Brahamchari is one who is engaged in the study of vedas. ब्रह्मचर्येण ब्रह्म वेदः तदध्ययनार्थमाचर्यम् Atharva veda sAyana bhashyam</p>
<p>By the tapas of brahmacharya a maiden finds a youthful husband; by brahmacharya the bull and the horse seek their fodder. ----------- (Atharva Veda 11.5.18)</p>
<p>A brahmacharin should be married to a brahmacharini. ब्रह्मचरिणां च ब्रहचारिणीभिः सह विवाह् प्रशस्यो भवति - Pranavavada of maharshi Garga</p>
<p>Without initiated by proper samskara, no one is eligible to utter holy vedic mantras. But women are found to utter them in many of Shrauta and Grhya sacrifices (yajnas).</p>
<p>In the sAkamedha the third of chaturmasa (four monthly) sacrifice the girl uses the Tryambaka's mantra (त्र्यम्बकं यजामहे सुगन्धिं पतिवेदनम्। उर्वारुकमिव बन्धनादितो मुक्षीय माऽमुतः, Shukla Yajurveda Samhita III :60 )</p>
<p>As per Shatapatha Brahmana, The priest and Sacrificer go round the altar thrice from right to left, but maidens go from left to right. While doing so the maidens utter the Tryambaka mantra. ( II : 6 : 2 : 13 ) Yajnikadeva in the "paddhati" says वचनात् कुमार्या अपि मन्त्रपाठः meaning that maidens should too utter the sacred formulas as prescribed.</p>
<p>In Madana pArijAta the author quotes KAtyayana (KAtyayana samhita p.330) to show that if any samskara before the initiation ceremony is left unobserved, it should be performed with offering of oblation.</p>
<p>There was no gender based differentiation in the education in the gurukul as well. AtreyI was a class mate of Lava and Kusha, kAmandakI and SaudAminI were class mates of BhUrivAsu and devarAta in the university. (Uttara Rama Charita) Girls too resided for equal duration like boys in the gurukul for education. Amba stayed at the gurukul of Shaikhavatyas.</p>
<p>Taken from several articles my blog <a href="http://yamalesha.blogspot.com/2014/01/the-concept-of-varna-system.html?m=1" rel="noreferrer">Yamalesha.blogspot.com</a>.</p>
|
|
<p>Here's an youtube video on the analogy of Two Birds, by Swami Sarvapriyananda (an advaitin monk).</p>
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89OsBaixqnM" rel="noreferrer">Two birds by Swami Sarvapriyananda</a></p>
<p>Here, he compares the tree with our physical body, and the two birds as our atmans. He says that there's actually one bird/atman within us and not two as the dualists claim.</p>
<p>By using the two bird analogy + the pratibimba theory, he explains our true nature in this video.</p>
<p>He says that -</p>
<p>• The higher bird, is our original 'bimba' consciousness.</p>
<p>• The lower bird on the other hand, includes all of these 3 things -</p>
<p>a) the reflected 'pratibimba' consciousness.</p>
<p>b) the causal body.</p>
<p>c) the subtle body.</p>
<p>Both the original and the reflected dwells in the physical body called tree, says the swami. </p>
<p>Question -- Which is the jiva aka jivatman here?
The original one or the reflected one?</p>
<p>The Avaccheda vada theory is not that hard to understand, since it clearly speaks of a portion of space inside the pot, which is our jivatman or individuated self. But the reflection theory is a bit confusing. If i take the jiva/jivatman to be the reflected consciousness ((i.e. if the space inside the pot/gross body of avaccheda theory ----->> equates to reflected consciousness of pratibimba theory)) ... then the original consciousness must be dwelling outside the gross body, like the space that remains outside the pot. But here the swami says both dwells in the body called tree. Can anyone here clear things up for me. Thnx.</p>
| 29025 | 28993 | 7 | 2 | 28993 | 3 | In Pratibimba Vada, which is the jivatman? The original or the reflected? | 3 | 29025 | <p>Jivatman is the reflected consciousness.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Consciousness as one with dual aspect is Transcendent and Immanent.
The Transcendental Consciousness is called the Paramatma. The
Consciousness which is embedded in Mind and Matter is the Jivatma. In the first case Consciousness is formless and in the second it is with form.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Serpent Power <em>the secrets of tantric and shaktic yoga</em> by Sir John Woodroffe</p>
<p>Sir John gives an excellent summary of Sankhya and Vedantic view on Jivatma in this book between pages 49 to 82.</p>
<p>The Transcendent Consciousness is the majestic bird that only watches. Advaitists say that the consciousness rays of the Transcendent Consciousness enliven the mind and the matter of the jiva. It is the consciousness of the mind and matter of the Jiva that is called reflected consciousness. In reality it is the same as the Transcendent consciousness.</p>
<p>An analogy that is useful to understand this is the moonlight that is seen by all of us for 15 nights. The moonlight is known to be reflected sunlight. The point is that the light emanating from the Moon is not intrinsic to the Moon. Similarly the consciousness associated with forms like Jiva is not intrinsic to the Jiva but merely reflected consciousness.</p>
|
|
<p>What does the term "Svadharma" mean? What do the scriptures say about the term? Is Varna exclusive of "Svadharma"?</p>
| 29072 | 29060 | 9 | 2 | 29060 | 6 | What is the meaning of the term "Svadharma"? | 3 | 29072 | <p>Swadharma in scriptures means the duties (Dharma) prescribed for someone (Swa) based on his Varna. </p>
<p>It is one set of duties for a BrAhmin, another set for a Kshatriya and so on.</p>
<p>Here is a verse from Manu Smriti that is quite clear in explaining the concept:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Varam <strong>swadharmo</strong> viguno na pArakyah swanushthitah |<br> <strong>Paradharmena</strong>
jivan hi sadhyah patati jAtitah ||</p>
<p>10.97. It is better (to discharge) <strong>one’s own (appointed) duty</strong> incompletely than to perform completely that of another; for he who
lives according to the law of another (caste) is instantly excluded
from his own</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Opposite of Swadharma is Paradharma (someone else's duty).</p>
<p>So, according to the above verse, one should be following those duties that are prescribed for one's own Varna and not those that are prescribed for others.
If someone, by discarding one's own Varna Dharmas, follows those of others, then that results in loss of caste.</p>
|
|
<p>Lord Krishna is self-reliant and believed to depend on no one. </p>
<p>I came across the following statements:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Krishna controls the whole universe and Radha controls Krishna with
love.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I heard from preachings that Krishna cried for Radha also. My doubt is that can anyone control Krishna? Are there any explicit slokas stating that Radha can control Krishna?</p>
| 29070 | 29068 | 15 | 2 | 29068 | 21 | Can anyone control Krishna? | 6 | 29070 | <p>Such Shlokas can be found in scriptures. For example, <a href="https://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/9/4" rel="noreferrer">Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (Bhāgavata Purāṇa) 9.4</a> has such shlokas (not explicitly for Radha but for all devotees in general):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>श्रीभगवानुवाच</p>
<p><strong>अहं भक्तपराधीनो</strong> ह्यस्वतन्त्र इव द्विज</p>
<p>साधुभिर्ग्रस्तहृदयो भक्तैर्भक्तजनप्रियः ||<a href="https://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_purana/bhagpur.html?lang=sa" rel="noreferrer">०९०४०६३</a>||</p>
<p>The Supreme Personality of Godhead (Lord Nārāyaṇa) said to the brāhmaṇa (Durvāsā Muni): <strong>I am completely under the control of My devotees. Indeed, I am not at all independent.</strong> Because My devotees are completely devoid of material desires, I sit only within the cores of their hearts. What to speak of My devotee, even those who are devotees of My devotee are very dear to Me.</p>
<p>मयि निर्बद्धहृदयाः साधवः समदर्शनाः</p>
<p><strong>वशे कुर्वन्ति मां भक्त्या</strong> सत्स्त्रियः सत्पतिं यथा ||<a href="https://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_purana/bhagpur.html?lang=sa" rel="noreferrer">०९०४०६६</a>||</p>
<p>As chaste women bring their gentle husbands under control by service, the pure devotees, who are equal to everyone and completely attached to Me in the core of the heart, <strong>bring Me under their full control</strong>.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>To understand such shlokas in more details, you can read commentaries on them. When you open these shloka link from <a href="https://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/9/4" rel="noreferrer">here</a>, commentaries can be found or you can read commentaries from some other sources.</p>
|
|
<p>Rahu and Ketu are part of a demon who fraudulently became immortal. But why respect them and do their pradikshna in temple? I am looking for an answer which says more then “to avoid negative influence from Rahu and Ketu they should be worshipped”? </p>
| 29109 | 29101 | 13 | 2 | 29101 | 7 | Why worship, respect and do pradikshna for Rahu and Ketu? | 3 | 29109 | <p>Because the scriptures ask us to worship them. That's why they are worthy of worship.</p>
<p>There is a detailed chapter (called Graha Shanti) in Yajnavalkya Smriti dedicated to Navagraha worship.</p>
<p>Verses from that chapter are given below:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>CCXCV.—A person desirous of Sri or good fortune, or desirous of S^anti
or propitiation should perform Graha Yajna (sacrifice to the planets).
So also a person desirous of rain, long life and health. Similarly if
he desires to perform sorcery also.—295. (Chapter 12)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, the above are some reasons why one should worship Rahu, Ketu and the other Grahas.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Surya (The sun), Soma (the moon), Mahiputra (the son of the earth,
Mars), Somaputra (the son of the moon. Mercury), Brihaspati (Jupiter),
Sukra (Venus), Sanaichara (Saturn), Rahu (the ascending node) and Ketu
(the descending node), these are remembered as Grahas.—296</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Next the text gives the details of performing the Yajna/Puja. Like how to invoke them, what Samidhs, Mantras are to be used for each of them etc.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The fire-stick for the sun should be of Arka, for the moon Palasa, for
the Mars Khadira, for the Mercury Apamarga, for the Jupiter Peepal,
for the Venus Udumbara, for the Saturn S^ami, <strong>for the Rahu Durva, for
the Ketu Kusa. These should respectively be the Samidhs for the
respective planets.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Also, the primary reason we worship the Grahas, whether it is Rahu/Ketu or any other, is getting rid of their malefic effects. Because Navagrahas can not be Ishta Devatas.</p>
<p>Moreover, according to a boon given by Lord Brahma, the Navagrahas must worship those who worship them.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Whenever a planet has a bad aspect (in the horoscope of a person),
that person should worship with great care specially that particular
good planet. For Brahma has given this boon to them *' Being honoured
you will honour him/'—307.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And, especially the kings of the states are particularly advised to appease the Navagrahas because they responsible for both the origin and destruction of the world. Because they control our destiny/fate.</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>By lords of men should be worshipped with greatest care the planets
because the rise and fall of monarchs is dependent upon the planets,
so also the origin and destruction of the worlds.—308.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Similarly, <a href="http://www.kamakoti.org/kamakoti/matsya/bookview.php?chapnum=12" rel="noreferrer">the Matsya Purana</a> also details of how Navagraha Shanti is performed:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Karaala vadanah Khadgacharma Shuli Varapradah,<br> Neela
simhaasanascha Rahuratra Prashasyatey/ </p>
<p>( Rahu Deva is fierce looking, carries sword, skin sheath, Shula and
Vara Prada by his four hands and is seated on a blue throne). </p>
<p>Dhumraa Dwibaahavah Sarvey Gadino vikrutaananah,<br> Grudhraasana
gataa nithyam Ketavah Syurvara pradaah/ </p>
<p>(Ketu Deva is of grey colour and of fierce Rupa with two hands showing
gadaa and varada mudra seated always on a vulture) </p>
<p>Sarvey kireetinah kaaryaa Grahaa Lokahitaavahaah, <br>
Hyaanguleynocchritaah Sarvey shatamashtottaram sadaa/ </p>
<p>(These are all beneficient Grahas worthy of ornamentation with
Kiritas/head gears and be of hundred eight inches of Pratimas /
Idols).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, the scriptures themselves mention them as worthy of worship. And, in matters like religion, scriptures are our primary guide without which we can not do much on our own.</p>
<p>Also, note that prior to the Mohini episode, when Rahu and Ketu were not separated (by Lord Vishnu), the Asura was not worship-worthy. It's only after the head and the body of the Asura were separated they were included into the Navagraha group and regarded as worthy of worship.</p>
|
|
<p>This world is divided on dharma and all are involved in fighting for their respective dharmas. In this fight of dharmas, many people lose their lives, families and sometimes get punished in this world. How does dharma protect these people as per the sloka dharmo rakshati rakshitaha? I understand what shloka means but what is its relevance in this kaliyuga, how is this justified in this yuga. </p>
| 29115 | 29112 | 12 | 2 | 29112 | 11 | What is the relevance of "Dharmo Rakshati Rakshitah" in Kaliyuga? How is it justified now? | 3 | 29115 | <p>The verse of which " Dharmo rakshita rakshitah" is a part is found in Manu Smriti.</p>
<p>We need to understand the context in which it was said.</p>
<p>The following is the translation of the full verse.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Manu Smriti 8.15. ’Justice, being violated, destroys; <strong>justice, being
preserved, preserves:</strong> therefore justice must not be violated, lest
violated justice destroy us.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This verse and the adjoining verses are discussing how the king's judgement should be impeccable in the court of justice.
So, it's basically about courts, witnesses, judges, justice and the king.</p>
<p>The following verses should give you an idea about the context:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>8.12. But where justice, wounded by injustice, approaches and the judges do not extract the dart, there (they also) are wounded (by that
dart of injustice).</p>
<p>8.13. Either the court must not be entered, or the truth must be spoken; a man who either says nothing or speaks falsely, becomes
sinful.</p>
<p>8.14. Where justice is destroyed by injustice, or truth by falsehood, while the judges look on, there they shall also be destroyed.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, it is so easy to misinterpret the verse without knowing in which context it was said.</p>
<p>Coming to fights and deaths that result from inter-religion clashes, then those in no way prove this verse to be false.</p>
<p>Those people might be fighting for their own Dharma but what's the guaranty that such a Dharma is the one which is defined in Manu Smriti as Dharma? It is not actually.</p>
|
|
<p>What is the origin of Naam Traya Mantra? Or in which scripture this mantra is mentioned? The mantra is Om Achutaya namaha Anantaya namaha Govindaya Namaha. I don't know the correct form but these 3 names of God Vishnu are there in Naam Traya Mantra. I also got the Rishi and Chanda from internet but don't know in which scripture this information is found?</p>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/YjKUA.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/YjKUA.jpg" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.homam.org/mantradocs/pages/Namatraya%20mantra.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Image link</a></p>
| 49946 | 29182 | 7 | 2 | 29182 | 2 | Origin of Naam Traya Mantra | 4 | 49946 | <p>In the <strong>19th patala</strong> of <strong>Aanadikalpa-Tantra</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>ऋषय उचुः-</strong>
नामत्रयस्य माहात्म्यं श्रोतुकामा वयं प्रभो।
भगवन् श्रोतुमिच्छामो वक्तुमर्हस्यशेषत:।</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Rishis said: O Prabho, We wish to here about the Nama-Traya Mahatmya! Please enlighten us with it.</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>ब्रह्मोवाच</strong>
अतिगुह्यतरं मन्त्र वर्षकोटिशतैरपि।
नशक्यं विस्तराद वक्तुं संक्षेपाच्छूणुत द्विजा:॥ १ ॥</p>
<blockquote>
<p>What you wish to here is highly secret. Even if I speak for a hundred crore years, I would be unable to describe it completely. I shall speak briefly,</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>अथ अच्युतादों पूजादिः</strong>
अच्युतानन्तगोविन्दैश्चतुर्थयन्तैस्त्रिभि: पदेः ।
नमोऽन्तैर्जपकाले तु मूलमन्त्र इतीरितः।
अथवापि समस्तैस्तु चतुर्थ्यन्तैकमन्त्रता ।</p>
<blockquote>
<p>know the three mantras, Achutaya Namaha, Anantaya Namaha and Govindaya Namaha to be three distinct Mool-Mantras (अच्युताय नमः, अनन्ताय नमः, गोविन्दाय नमः). One must however use Achuta-Nanta-Govindaya Namaha (अच्युतानन्तगोविन्दाय नमः ) in japa and puja.</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>तदृषि: <strong>शौनको</strong> ज्ञेयः पृथक् पक्षे <strong>पराशर:</strong>।
<strong>व्यासश्च नारदश्चैव</strong> विराट्छन्द उदीरितः।
परं ब्रह्म तथा प्रोक्तं <strong>हरिर्वा</strong> देवतेत्यपि ।</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The seer of Achuta-Nanta-Govindaya Namaha is Shaunaka, and that of the Mool-mantras is Parashara, Vyasa and Narada respectively. All the four mantras are in Virat Chandas (विराट्). The devta is Hari.</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<p>So going by the above, the Seers match with the one in the question. The Dhyanam given in Aanadikalpa is same as in the question.</p>
|
|
<p>I have read much about Kundalini in yoga. There are few yoga postures for awakening the kundalini. Without these yoga postures and without a guru, is it possible to get the experience of awakening of the kundalini?</p>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/nmsti.jpg" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/nmsti.jpg" alt="Kundalini"></a></p>
| 29206 | 29199 | 12 | 2 | 29199 | 8 | Awakening of Kundalini is possible without mentor/guru? | 7 | 29206 | <p>Yes, Kundalini can be aroused without the help of Guru also.</p>
<p>Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda / Volume 1 / Raja Yoga / Chapter IV / <a href="https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Complete_Works_of_Swami_Vivekananda/Volume_1/Raja-Yoga/The_Psychic_Prana" rel="noreferrer">The Psychic Prana</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The rousing of the Kundalini is the one and only way to attaining Divine
Wisdom, superconscious perception, realisation of the spirit. <strong>The rousing may
come in various ways, through love for God, through the mercy of perfected
sages, or through the power of the analytic will of the philosopher.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Swami Vivekananda has covered the topic of Kundalini in great detail which you can find in the above link.</p>
|
|
<p>The story of Mother Sita's banishment by Sri Rama present in the Uttara Khanda of the Valmiki Ramayana, is perhaps the most controversial part of Sri Rama's story. Many Hindu acharyas such as Swami Ramabhadracharya and scholars have argued that the story of Maa Sita's banishment is an interpolation, added centuries later.
There are some scriptural arguements that can be made for both sides of course but that's not the subject of my question. I want to know whether any texts other than Valmiki's Ramayana mentions Mother Sita's second exile? I know neither the Ramcharitmanas nor the Mahabharata mentions this story but what about the Puranas? Do they mention Mother Sita's second exile? </p>
| 29376 | 29374 | 18 | 2 | 29374 | 19 | Is the story of Sita's banishment present in any scriptures other than Valmiki Ramayana? | 3 | 29376 | <h1>Do any puranas mention about Sita's second excile?</h1>
<p>Yes , as you have enquired ,Puranas do talk about mother Sita's second excile. Although not in detail as Valmiki Ramayana because it is Itihasa (true history) and Primarily a story of Lord Rama and mother Sita alone. Puranas are mythology (true tails) and talk about various other topics also ,rather than a tail of single god they contain a whole lot of topics related to all the gods and goddesses other narrations and discuss other philosophies of Hinduidm. </p>
<p>For instance take a look at below verse no. 10 of - Skandha 9- Chaptet 11 from <a href="http://gitabase.com/eng/SB/9/11/10" rel="noreferrer">
<strong>Shrimad Bhagvat Purana</strong> </a>.Shree Vyasa deva is mentioning a brief account of Shree Rama's life in two chapters 10-11.</p>
<p>He is mentioning in the verse that mother Sita was abandoned (banished) due to fear of people by Shree Ramachandra.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>इति लोकाद् बहुमुखाद् दुराराध्यादसंविदः ।<br> पत्या भीतेन सा त्यक्ता
प्राप्ता प्राचेतसाश्रमम् ॥10॥</p>
<p>iti lokād bahu-mukhād durārādhyād asaḿvidaḥ patyā bhītena sā tyaktā
prāptā prācetasāśramam <br></p>
<p>Sukadeva Gosvami said: Men with a poor fund of knowledge and a heinous
character speak nonsensically. Fearing such rascals, Lord Ramacandra
abandoned His wife, Sitadevi, although she was pregnant. Thus Sitadevi
went to the asrama of Valmiki Muni. <hr> अन्तर्वत्न्यागते काले यमौ सा
सुषुवे सुतौ । <br> कुशो लव इति ख्यातौ तयोश्चक्रे क्रिया मुनिः ॥11॥ </p>
<p>antarvatny āgate kāle yamau sā suṣuve sutau <br> kuśo lava iti
khyātau tayoś cakre kriyā muniḥ <br></p>
<p>When the time came, the pregnant mother Sitadevi gave birth to twin
sons, later celebrated as Lava and Kusa. The ritualistic ceremonies
for their birth were performed by Valmiki Muni.
<Hr></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Apart from that <a href="https://archive.org/details/PadmaPurana.Vol.5/page/n325" rel="noreferrer"><strong>Padma Purana</strong> </a>-<strong>Volume 5- PATALAKHANDA - Chapter No. 56 - Rama seeks Bharata's advice.</strong> is also mentioning discussion between Shree Rama and Bharata , where Rama orders Bharata to abandon sita in the forest.</p>
<p>From which we came to know about mother sita's second excile.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>61-64 O brother , whatever you say is all just. But by my order ,carry
out the words which i utter.I know she is purified in fire , is chaste
and is honored by the world.(But) I am afraid by public
scandal.(Therefor) <strong>I (shall) abandon my (wife) Janaki .So taking in
your hand sharp and very fiearce sword ,(either) cut off (my) head or
abandon (my) wife Janaki in the forest.</strong> Hearing these words of Rama
,Bharata with tremor in his body and tears (in his eyes) fell
unconcious on the ground.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>In the next chapter i.e.57 of Padma Purana Vol.5 we can also find the true reason behind why Rama and Sita were seprated in Sita's second excile</p>
|
|
<p>Are there any references to microbes, such as bacteria or viruses, in any Hindu scripture?</p>
| 29392 | 29388 | 11 | 2 | 29388 | 13 | Mentions of bacteria, viruses, or microbes in Hindu scripture? | 5 | 29392 | <blockquote>
<p>Microbes in Hindu scriptures.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yes , there is mentioning of microbes in Hinduism Scripture. Take a look at below verse from Shanti-Parva of <a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m12/m12a015.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer"> <strong>Mahabharata</strong> </a> -Section XV.</p>
<p>The word krimi (कृमि) is generally used in for such microscopic creatures like bacteria ,virus or other tiny worms almost invisible to human eye. Here in below verse the word Sukshma Yoni(सूक्ष्म-योनि) is used to mention microscopic organisms.</p>
<p>Here in this chapter Arjuna is talking about the concept of "Survival of the fittest" , which modern science stated thousands of year later on.</p>
<Hr>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>सूक्ष्मयॊनीनि</strong> भूतानि तर्क गम्यानि कानि चित |<br> पक्ष्मणॊ ऽपि निपातेन येषां सयात सकन्धपर्ययः||<br></p>
<p>P.26 There are many creatures that are so minute that their existence
can only be inferred. With the failing of the eyelids alone, they are
destroyed.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Although there is just mentioning of these microbes in Mahabharata and no other details are given ,but because it's not the main topic and even not in the scope of religious Scripture. But it's sure that the verse is talking about these microscopic organisms which gets destroyed or die within time required to close-open eyelid.i.e. very short lifespan.</p>
|
|
<p>How is Shakti/the consort of Shiva (including her various forms such as Kali, Durga, Parvati, Tara, etc.) seen in the various Vaishnava sampradayas?</p>
<p>I have read that, since she is the chaste stri of Lord Shiva, who himself is considered a great Vaishnava, she commands great reverence. I have also read that saints such as Sri Ramakrishna used to worship both Vishnu-tattva forms, such as Lord Rama and Lord Krishna, along with the Divine Mother Kali -- seeing them as one and the same at core.
My question stems ultimately from a curiosity regarding the root of the historical tension between Shaktas and Vaishnavas in Bengal.</p>
<p>Continuing from the same question, are the various devatas manifestations of aspects of the Supreme God or are they subservient to the Supreme God, as is the view in orthodox Gaudiya Vaishnavism? (ISKCON even calls the devatas "demigods", which I never really understood, seeing that "demigod" is a term used to refer to mythological characters that are part god and part human such as Hercules from Greek mythology.) What is the view of the various Vaishnava sampradayas on this matter? What do Shaivites and Shaktas say?</p>
| 33283 | 29433 | 9 | 2 | 29433 | 7 | How are gods and goddesses such as Shiva and Shakti seen in the Vaishnava sampradayas? | 4 | 33283 | <p>You have asked :1. <strong>Are the various devatas manifestations of aspects of the Supreme God or are they subservient to the Supreme God, as is the view in orthodox Gaudiya Vaishnavism?</strong></p>
<p>2..<strong>How is Shakti/the consort of Shiva (including her various forms such as Kali, Durga, Parvati, Tara, etc.) seen in the various Vaishnava sampradayas?</strong></p>
<p>Let me answer your question from the Gaudiya-Vaishnava perspective, as you failed to understand the use of the word 'demi-gods' by some followers of the Gaudiya Vaishnavas.</p>
<p><strong>The Gaudiya Vaishnava sect originate from Mahaprabhu</strong> Sri Krishnachaitanya Who is regarded by many (including myself) as an incarnation of God. So we must focus on His and His direct disciples' views on this topic. In the Sri Sri Chaitanya-Charitamrita, we find Sri Chaitanya saying :</p>
<blockquote>
<p>isvaratve bhed maanile hay aparadh/ ek i iswar bhakter dhyan-anurup(2/9/139-42)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>which means : <strong>Its a sin to differentiate between various forms of God. God is one Who takes many forms as per the inclination of the devotees.</strong></p>
<p>The above quotation shows how broad-minded Mahaprabhu was, as is expected from an incarnation like Him. So He would never accept a word like 'Demi-God'. Let us now come to Shiva and Shakti.</p>
<p><strong>Gaudiya Vaishnavism on Shiva:</strong></p>
<p>In Navadvip, Mahaprabhu has assumed different forms of God. In Murari Gupta's karcha(2/11), SriChaitanya-Bhagavata(Madhya, chapter 8) and Sri Chaitanya-Charitamrita (1/17), we have the description of <strong>Mahaprabhu taking the form of Shiva.</strong> '<strong>He says :'I am Shiva'</strong> His devotee Mukunda Dutta chanted the Shiva-Mahimna-Stotra (Murari Gupter Karcha, 2/11/17).Mukunda Dutta was an ardent devotee of Mahaprabhu. The Shiva-Mahimna-Stotra that he chanted is a famous hymn composed by Pushpadanta.In this hymn, Lord Shiva is described as the Supreme Godhead:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>traiyi saamkhyam yogah pasupatimatam vaishnavam iti
prabhinne prasthaane paramidam adah pathyamiti cha
ruchinaam vaichitryaad riju-kutila-naanaapthajushaam
nrinaam eko gantavyas twamasi payasaam arnava iva (7)</p>
<p>meaning : <strong>Oh Shiva, as all rivers merge at the end with the sea, you are the goal of all human beings</strong>. They accept different straight and complicated paths like that of the Vedas, the saankhyas, the yogis, the paasupatas, the vaaishnavas merely because of difference in their mental inclinations.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This makes the concept of the Gaudiya Vaishnavas on Shiva vary very clear.We read in Sri Chaitanya-Bhagavata (Antya khanda):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>siver gaurab bujhaaen gaurchandra/ eteke sankar-priya sarva-bhakta-vrinda// naa maane chaitanya-path bolay vaishnav/shivere amanya kare byartha taar sab//..pujaye govinda jena naa maane shankar/ ei paape aneke jaibe yamaghar</p>
</blockquote>
<p>meaning: <strong>Sri Gaurchandra(Sri Chaitanyadev) makes all understand Lord Shiva's glory. So all His devotees worship Shiva. Someone not obeying Sri Chaitaya and calling self a vaishnava will be cursed by Lord Shiva and be ruined. Many worshipping Sri Krishna do not worship Lord Shiva. These people are sinful and will go to hell.</strong></p>
<p><strong>Gaudiya Vaishnavism and Shakti (Kali,Durga, Parvati)</strong></p>
<p>Sri Chaitanyadev was born in Navadvip which is in Bengal. Bengalis are very devoted to Devi Shakti. Sri Sri Devi-Mahatmya, a part of Markandeya-Purana is highly respected by the bengalis.Mahaprabhu Himself copied this book and gifted to one of His relatives. In Sri Sri Chandi, we get</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Devya yayaa tatam idam jagad aatma-shaktyaa
nihshesha-devagana-shakti-samuha-murtyaa/
taam amvikaam akhila-deva-maharshi-pujyaam
bhaktyaa nataah sma vidadhatu shuvani saa nah (mantra 3, chapter 5)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>meaning : <strong>We bow down with devotion to the Mother Goddes</strong>, Who has covered the entire world with Her own power and <strong>Who is worshipped by all devas and rishis</strong>.May Devi provide us with all good.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>yasyaah prabhabam atulam bhagavaan ananto
brahma harascha na hi vaktum alam valam cha
sa Chandika akhila-jagat-paripaalanaya
nahaaya cha asurabhayasya matim karotu (mantra 4)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>meaning: <strong>Even Lord Vishnu, Brahma and Shiva are unable to describe Her unparallel effect and energy</strong>. May that Devi Chandika wish for preserving the world and destroying the fear from demons in us.</p>
<p><strong>Someone accepting Sri Sri Chandi is therefore bound to accept the Mother Goddess as the Supreme Godhead.</strong></p>
<p>Sri Chaitanya-Bhagavata (along with other biographies mentioned above) describes how <strong>Sri Chaitanya Himself assumed the form of Devi Chandi</strong> and the devotees started uttering hymn</p>
<blockquote>
<p>jaya jaya jagata-janani mahamaya/ dukkhita jibere deho charaner chhaya// brahma-vishnu-mahesware tomar mahima/ balite na paare anye ke dibek sima//..tumi adya avikara parama-prakriti/jagat-janani tumi dvitiya-rahita//</p>
</blockquote>
<p>meaning : <strong>Glory to thee O Mahamaya,the Mother of the world! Please give the suffering people resort to your feet. Even Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva can not describe your glory, then what will the others tell about you? You are the Primal Origin devoid of any change. O Mother of the world, You are One without a second.</strong></p>
<p>If She is One without a second, can Sri Krishna be different from Her? Absolutely never.Sripada Jiva Goswami therefore quotes a sloka from Gautamiya-Kalpa:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>yaa durga saiva krishnah syaad yah krishnah durga eva sa/anayor antaradarshi sansaraad na vimuchyate//</p>
</blockquote>
<p>meaning: <strong>Durga is one with Krishna and Krishna is one with Durga.Whoever sees them as two can never be liberated from worldliness.</strong></p>
<p>Mahaprabhu Himself used to go to temples of Shiva, Rama, Nrisimha, Durga,Bhairavi and worshipped all. Yes, He preached the worship of Lord Krishna, but has instructed His devotees:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Anya deva anya sastra ninda naa karibe. meaning <strong>never criticise other forms of God.</strong>
By the way, Sri Nityananda Mahaprbhu, who is also worshipped by the followers of Sri Chaitanyadeva worshipped Lord Shiva and Devi Shakti regularly.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Hope the above throws some light on the topic you questioned about.</p>
<p>Referencees: 1.Chandi-Chinta by Dr.Mahanambrata Brahmachari,Mahanaam Angan, 2.Gaudiya Vaishnava Darshan by Radhagovinda Nath, Sadhana Prakashani, 3.Mahaprabhu Sri Gauranga by Radhagovinda Nath,mSadhana Praakashani,4.Sri Sri Chaitanyadeva by Swami Saradeshananda,Udbodhan.</p>
<p><strong>Update</strong></p>
<p>Srila Sripada Radharaman Charan Das Babaji was a renowned Gaudiya Vaishnava saint contemporary of Sri Ramakrishna.Its He who established temples at all the places Mahaprabhu visited. According to Him:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Who attract the soul of the devotees is Hari.The Shaivas should relate this word to Surya, the Shaktas to the Mother Goddess, the Shaivas to Lord Shiva and the Vaishnavas to Lord Vishnu. No pesonal or secterian system or behaviour can be universal.(His biography by Ava Sarkar,Pustak Vipani, page 16).There is no difference between Kali,Durga,Shiva, Vishnu, Nitai,Gaur etc because God is Purna Purnatama(Ibid page 17).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This also is in perfect confirmity with what has been mentioned in the answer.</p>
|
|
<p>Does any shloka of Gita say anything about what a person should eat. I am mainly concerned with whether it say anything about Vegetarian or Non Vegetarian diet.</p>
| 29481 | 29476 | 15 | 2 | 29476 | 8 | Does Bhagavad Gita say anything about whether a person should eat Vegetarian or Non Vegetarian food? | 4 | 29481 | <p>Here's the most specific dietary "guidelines" I could find in Śrīmad Bhagavad Gītā,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>BG 17.8: Those foods which promote longevity, strength, health, happiness, and satisfaction;<br />
Which are juicy, oleaginous, nourishing, and pleasing to the stomach, are dear to those flourishing in <em>sāttva</em> (bright righteousness).<br />
BG 17.9 Those foods which are bitter, sour, salty, very hot, pungent, dry, and overly-piquant;<br />
Which produce pain, grief, and sickness, are dear to those caught in <em>rajas</em> (passion).<br />
BG 17.10 Those foods which are stale, bland, putrid, and toxic;<br />
Which is ort or unfit for sacrifice, are dear do those drowning in <em>tamas</em> (dark destruction).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, we can dissect this to get a little more clarity on specific foods.</p>
<ul>
<li><em>tamas</em> foods: Foods unfit for sacrifice include donkeys and camels as well as anything which is expiring. Ort are the scraps left over from preparing the meal: the chopped-off ends of vegetables, certain peels & skins, etc. Toxic foods are anything that harm the body. As for stale and bland foods, I believe this includes many meats because we don't like to eat them without first spicing them up.</li>
<li><em>rajas</em> foods: I think these are pretty clear. You can tell if something is too bitter, too sour, too salty, too hot in temperature, too pungent, dry-tasting, or too piquant ("spicy" like chilies). If you end up on the toilet after a meal, something was <em>rajas</em>. Personally, I consider pork to be <em>rajas</em> because, if I eat it after a prolonged absence from eating it, I feel very nauseated.</li>
<li><em>sāttva</em> foods: Juicy foods include most fresh fruits and many fresh vegetables. Oleaginous foods are often pressed for their oils. This includes most nuts & seeds as well as some other things like olives.</li>
</ul>
<p>Of course this is no definitive list, but it's hard to be very precise without delving into interpretation. Other than the above, the only other mention of foods in the Bhagavad Gītā is in reference to ceremonial sacrifice or the below quotes.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>BG 6.16: Yoga is not eating too much, nor is it not eating at all;<br />
neither is it sleeping too much, nor not sleeping enough, Arjuna.</p>
<p>BG 3.13: The saintly, who eat what remains of the sacrifice, are released from erring;<br />
but the erring, who cook only for their own sake, consume their own impurity.</p>
<p>BG 9.27: Whatever you do, whatever you eat, whatever you sacrifice, whatever you gift to others;<br />
and whatever austerities you undertake, Son of Kunti, all that you offer to Me.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr />
<p>So, keeping in mind BG 17.8~10, I think you can discover for yourself which things are fit for eating, and which aren't. Just don't forget BG 9.27 & 3.13; when you eat, remind yourself that it is a sacrifice to God within you. And also per BG 6.16, eat in moderation.</p>
|
|
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Note:</strong> I have limited knowledge in these matters. But I am a curious person and go with reasoning.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>I want to know that in which all Hindu's divine/sacred scriptures lord Śiva has claimed or explicitly asserted that he is a God and he should be worshipped.</p>
<p><em>For e.g.</em></p>
<p><strong>In Christianity:</strong> It is nowhere mentioned that Jesus himself claimed to be a God and asked to worship him.</p>
<p><strong>In Sikhism:</strong> In their sacred scripture Guru Granth Sahib, possibly nowhere Guru Nanak claimed himself to be a God and asked to worship him.</p>
<p><strong>In Islam:</strong> Somewhere (<em>possibly few places</em>) Allah has claimed to be a God and asked to worship him.</p>
<p><strong>Note:</strong> <em><code>If there are too many lists to mention, then mention at least a few authentic references with exact verses / lines.</code></em></p>
<hr>
<p><strong>Reason for my curiosity:</strong>
Suppose I am an alien who has come to earth and started speaking understanding the language here. After spending some time with poor (<em>having no special powers</em>) mortal humans, I come to know that they do a lot of things for their living like the business, jobs, singing, etc. which completely makes sense.</p>
<p>However, they also follow some spiritual rules/teachings which is absolutely not necessary for the living. When asked for the reason, they all said they follow it to be a good human being, to be good for the society and overall peaceful coexistence on the earth.
But they all varied in one thing i.e believing in different Gods (the creator of all the universe) and they all claimed to be true.</p>
<p>So instead of believing on individual person I took all the religious books and went to search on my own who is the actual God...</p>
| 29600 | 29558 | 8 | 2 | 29558 | 6 | As per Hindu scriptures does lord Śiva explicitly claim himself to be a deity that has to be worshiped? | 5 | 29600 | <p>Yes, for example, in <a href="https://www.kamakoti.org/kamakoti/kurmapurana/bookview.php?chapnum=18" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Kurma Purana</a> he does so. in this Purana, we have the Iswara Gita where he identifies himself as the Parambrahma.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Parama Shiva says:</p>
<p>Veeta raaga bhaya krodhaa manmayaa maamupaashritaah,<br></p>
<p>Bahavenena yogena putaa madbhaavamaagataah/<br></p>
<p>Ye yathaa maam praadyantey taamstayaiva bhajaamyahjam,<br></p>
<p>Jnaana yogena maam tasmaad yajeta Parameshwaram/<br></p>
<p>Athavaa Bjhakti yogena Vairaagyena parena tu,<br></p>
<p>Chetasaa bodha yuktena pujayenmaamsadaa shuchih/<br></p>
<p>Those who shun desire, fear and anger do approach me by performing the
Pashupati Vrata and had all been blessed; they could adopt the medium
of Jnaana Yoga or Bhakti Yoga but I relieve them of Samsara Bandhanas
for good.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>He further says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Those Bhaktaas who treat every Being without malice, hatred, and
self-pride; but with friendliness, kindness and affection are dear to
me; those who are contented, self-controlled, strong willed,
ever-engaged in Yoga and totally dedicated to me are dear to me; those
who neither get excited nor prone to exciting others, but are
fearless, placid and composed are dear to me; those who never crave
for worldly desires, but are ready to sacrifice, are impartial, are
ready to face challenges of the right kind and are not non-starters
due to hesitation are indeed near and dear to me.) Having given his
preferences, Maha Deva underscores that his bhaktas should perform
Shiva-Linga Puja always and any where that is clean and pro-active,
but with extreme devotion and dedication- be it in water, inside Agni,
addressed to Surya or Sky and even in one’s own heart! What is of
significance is that any Puja to Shiva performed in faith,
concentration and total bhakti and that shall be rewarded without
doubt.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Also, <a href="https://www.kamakoti.org/kamakoti/kurmapurana/bookview.php?chapnum=16" rel="nofollow noreferrer">in this chapter</a> of the same Purana, Lord Shiva says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Parama Shiva asserted:</p>
<p>Naaham Tapobhirvividhairna Daanena na cheyjyayaa |<br> Shakyo hi
Purushair jaaturmutey Bhaktiamanuttamaam ||</p>
<p>I am always realisable by Bhakti or Pure Devotion and not necessarily
by Tapasya, Daana or Charity and Yagnaas!.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And, he further clarifies, what is required of his devotees: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Na madbhaktaa vinashyanti madbhaktaa veeta kalmashaah |<br>
Aadaavetat pratigjaanam na mey bhaktah pranashyati ||<br> Patram
Pushpam Phalam toyam madaaraadhana kaaranaat |<br> Yo mey dadaati
niyatah sa meyBhaktah Priyomatah ||<br></p>
<p>My Bhaktaas would never be destroyed nor harmed but would be washed
off their sins as I took a vow that my Bhaktas are protected.
<strong>Bhaktas are merely required to perform my Puja with utmost sincerity and offer leaves, flowers, fruits and even water as I would be
pleased.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>And, in general, in Hinduism, there are five deities, called Pancha Devatas, who are highly worthy of worship.</p>
<p>The following verse from the Matsya Purana, is quoted in the book Nitya Karma Puja Prakash (by Gita Press):</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/uE3iU.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/uE3iU.jpg" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>
<p>Adityam gananAtham cha devim rudram cha keshavam |<br>
PanchaDaivatyamityuktam sarva karmasu pujAyeth ||</p>
<p>The Pancha Devatas are - Surya, Ganesha, Devi, Shiva and Vishnu.In all
auspicious ceremonies they should be worshiped.</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>From the <a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01190.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">following</a> excerpt of the <a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/maha/index.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Mahabharata</a>, it is clear that <strong>Draupadi rejected Karna based on his tribe</strong>.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>"And (some amongst) those kings in exerting with swelling lips each
according to his strength, education, skill, and energy,--to string
that bow, were tossed on the ground and lay perfectly motionless for
some time. Their strength spent and their crowns and garlands loosened
from their persons, they began to pant for breath and their ambition
of winning that fair maiden was cooled. Tossed by that tough bow, and
their garlands and bracelets and other ornaments disordered, they
began to utter exclamations of woe. And that assemblage of monarchs,
their hope of obtaining Krishna gone, looked sad and woeful. And
beholding the plight of those monarchs, Karna that foremost of all
wielders of the bow went to where the bow was, and quickly raising it
strung it and placed the arrows on the string. <strong>And beholding the son
of Surya--Karna of the Suta tribe--like unto fire, or Soma, or Surya
himself, resolved to shoot the mark, those foremost of bowmen--the
sons of Pandu--regarded the mark as already shot and brought down upon
the ground. But seeing Karna, Draupadi loudly said, 'I will not select
a Suta for my lord.' Then Karna, laughing in vexation and casting
glance at the Sun, threw aside the bow already drawn to a circle.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>It is the wish of Draupadi not to select anyone she doesn't want to marry. But I doubt that <em>why she rejected Karna based on his tribe? Are there any <em><strong>supporting slokas from scriptures</strong></em> supporting Draupadi's decision of denying Karna based on his tribe</em>?</p>
| 29599 | 29588 | 9 | 2 | 29588 | 11 | Scriptural basis for Draupadi's decision of denying Karna | 3 | 29599 | <p>According to the scriptures, the Pratiloma marriage, where the Varna of the wife is higher than that of the husband, is not considered as good.</p>
<p>See the following passage from <a href="http://www.astrojyoti.com/agnipurana-6.htm" rel="noreferrer">Agni Purana</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>An anuloma marriage is a marriage where the husband is from a higher
class than the wife. The offspring of such a marriage belong to the
mother’s class. <strong>A pratiloma marriage is a marriage where the wife is
from a higher class than the husband. Chandalas were born this way
from brahmana women, Sutas from kshatriya women,</strong> Devalas from vaishya
women, Pukkashas from kshatriya women and Magadhas from vaishya women.
<strong>Chandalas are executioners, Sutas charioteers, Devalas guards,
Pukkashas hunters and Magadhas bards. Chandalas should live outside
the villages and should not touch those belonging to any other class.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, a Suta, who is born of such a proscribed marriage, is basically considered as out of the 4-caste system.</p>
<p>Similar verses from Manu Smriti:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>10.11. <strong>From a Kshatriya by the daughter of a Brahmana is born (a son called) according to his caste (gati) a Suta</strong>; from a Vaisya by females
of the royal and the Brahmana (castes) spring a Magadha and a Vaideha.</p>
<p>10.26. <strong>The Suta</strong>, the Vaidehaka, the Kandala, that lowest of mortals, the Magadha, he of the Kshattri caste (gati), and the Ayogava,</p>
<p>10.27. These six (Pratilomas) beget similar races (varna) on women of their own (caste), they (also) produce (the like) with females of
their mother’s caste (gati), and with females (of) higher ones.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, basically a Suta, a Chandala etc are not considered as persons of pure origin according to the scriptures. </p>
<p>As you can see that the Purana even states to consider the Suta as an outcaste and that he should live outside the village.</p>
<p>So, in a society, where people were strictly following such rules of Varnas, we can not blame a Kshatriya woman for not accepting a Suta man as her husband. It is quite natural and in accordance with scriptural rules as well.</p>
<p>Also note that Draupadi was not aware of the true story of Karna's birth and she knew him to be a Suta Putra only.</p>
|
|
<p>As stated in one of the answer <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/418/what-is-the-significance-of-the-janeva-sacred-thread?rq=1">here</a>: There is a variation in the thread count of <em>yajñopavītam</em>. Bachelors wear a single thread, married men wear 2, and married men with children wear 3. Each thread contains 3 strands as well.</p>
<p>The three strands signify three debts:</p>
<ol>
<li>Debt to one's teacher(s).</li>
<li>Debt to one's parents and ancestors.</li>
<li>Debts to sages and Rishis.</li>
</ol>
<p>My question is: how to clear off these debts? Is there any other debt not stated here?</p>
<p>Most answers below state that: <strong><em>One can be freed from debt of Pitris by providing a son. What if a person has no son but daughter then he is not freed from this debt or is there an alternative for that? We can take an example of Raja Janak father of Sita, I think he had no son so wasn't he mukt of this debt?</em></strong></p>
<p>Please cite references from some authentic resources.</p>
| 29619 | 29612 | 18 | 2 | 29612 | 14 | How do we clear our debts? | 3 | 29619 | <p>There are three types of debts as of Pitris, Devas and Rishis. One can be freed from debt of Pitris by providing a son, from debt of Devas by doing sacrifices and from debt of Rishis by pupil-ship.</p>
<p>It is stated in <a href="http://sacred-texts.com/hin/sbr/sbe12/sbe1231.htm" rel="noreferrer">Satapatha Brahma 1.7.2</a>.</p>
<blockquote>
<ol>
<li><p>Verily, whoever exists, he, in being born, is born as (owing) a debt to the gods, to the Rishis, to the fathers, and to men.</p>
</li>
<li><p>For, inasmuch as he is bound to sacrifice, for that reason he is born as (owing) a debt to the gods: hence when he sacrifices to them, when he makes offerings to them, he does this (in discharge of his debt) to them.</p>
</li>
<li><p>And further, inasmuch as he is bound to study (the Veda), for that reason he is born as (owing) a debt to the Rishis: hence it is to them that he does this; for one who has studied (the Veda) they call 'the Rishis' treasure-warden.'</p>
</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<p>Same thing has been said in <a href="http://sacred-texts.com/hin/yv/yv06.htm" rel="noreferrer">Yajur Veda, Kanda 6, Prapathaka 1</a>.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A Brahman on birth is born with a threefold debt, of pupil-ship to the Rishis, of sacrifice to the gods, of offspring to the Pitrs. He is freed from his debt who has a son, is a sacrificer, and who has lived as a pupil: this (debt) he performs (ávadayate) by these cuttings off', and that is why the cuttings-off (avadána) have their name.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And for those who have no son but only daughter(s), there is a concept of <code>appointed daughter</code> in which son of a daughter is also considered a son. Apart from the Manusmriti 9.127, there are other scriptures too which say the same.</p>
<blockquote>
<ol start="37">
<li>Both a son's son and the son of an appointed daughter cause a man to attain heaven. Both are pronounced to be equal as regards their right of inheritance and the duty of offering funeral balls of meal (Pindas). <a href="http://sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe33/sbe3383.htm" rel="noreferrer">Brihaspati, 25.37</a></li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>For spiritual progress I want to know the role of food intake. Which type of food is suggested in scriptures for one who want to approach the path of Yoga? In other words, do Shastras recommend or instruct particular foods (to be taken) which helps one's spiritual journey be smooth?</p>
<p>Looking for answers from scriptures or from speech/sayings of personalities like Swami Vivekananda who believed to be perfect Yogi.</p>
| 29704 | 29703 | 14 | 2 | 29703 | 16 | What food is suggested for Yogi? | 5 | 29704 | <p><a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/hyp/hyp03.htm" rel="noreferrer">Hatha Yoga Pradipika</a> (1.61 to 1.70) gives the list of foods that are fit for the Yogi as well as those foods which a Yogi must avoid.</p>
<p>Recommended foods are rice, wheat, milk etc.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Varjayeddurjanaprāntam vahnistrīpathisevanam<br> Prātahsnānopavāsādi
kāyakleśavidhim tathā ||</p>
<p>Wheat, rice, barley, shâstik (a kind of rice), good corns, milk, ghee,
sugar, butter, sugarcandy, honey, dried ginger, Parwal (a vegetable)
the five vegetables, moong, pure water; these are very beneficial to
those who practise Yoga.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><br></p>
<blockquote>
<p>Ghodhūmaśāliyavashāshtikaśobhanānnam<br> Kshīrājyakhandanavanītasi
hāmadhūni<br> Śunthīpatolakaphalādikapañchaśākam<br>
Mudghādidivyamudakam cha yamīndrapathyam ||</p>
<p>A Yogî should eat tonics (things giving strength), well sweetened,
greasy (made with ghee), milk, butter, etc., which may increase humors
of the body, according to his desire</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Now, the list of food which a Yogi must avoid while practising Yoga. This list includes foods like meat, liqour, sour, bitter foods etc.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Katvāmlatīkshnalavanoshnaharītaśāka<br>
Sauvīratailatilasarshapamadyamatsyān<br>
Ājādimāmsadadhitakrakulatthakola<br>
Pinyākahingghulaśunādyamapathyamāhuh||</p>
<p>Bitter, sour, saltish, hot, green vegetables, fermented, oily, mixed
with til seed, rape seed, intoxicating liquors, fish, meat, curds,
chhaasa pulses, plums, oilcake, asafœtida (hînga), garlic, onion,
etc., should not be eaten.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>A Yogi must also always eat food which is first offered to Lord Shiva.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Susnighdhamadhurāhāraśchaturthāmśavivarjitah<br> Bhujyate
śivasamprītyai mitāhārah sa uchyate||</p>
<p>Abstemious feeding is that in which ¾ of hunger is satisfied with
food, well cooked with ghee and sweets, and eaten with the offering of
it to Śiva.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, these are some rules about eating to be followed by a Yogi from Hatha Yoga Pradipika.</p>
|
|
<p>In his column <a href="https://www.dailyo.in/lifestyle/hindus-manu-dharmashastra-manusmriti-vedas-devdutt-pattanaik-mythology/story/1/15412.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>What exactly is the Manusmriti?</em></a>, Devdutt Pattanaik makes the following claim.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Of the nearly 2,500 verses, more than a thousand are for brahmins, more than a thousand for kings, statecraft and governance, <strong>only eight for vaishyas and two for shudras</strong>. Clearly, the focus is not the entire society, but the brahmins, and their relationship with the kings.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>What are those 10 verses which are meant for vaiśyas and śūdras?</p>
| 29876 | 29845 | 3 | 2 | 29845 | 3 | Which Manusmṛti verses were written exclusively for vaiśyas and śūdras? | 3 | 29876 | <p>Pattanaik appears to be quoting from Patrick Olivelle's <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=VmfXnfB-474C&lpg=PP1&pg=PR35#v=twopage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">translation of Manusmṛti</a> but does not quote him fully.</p>
<p>Olivelle first presents an <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=VmfXnfB-474C&lpg=PP1&pg=PR28#v=twopage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">overall schematic</a> of the Manu in the introduction to his translation, then goes on to argue that in the <em>Rules of Action in Normal Times</em>, only 10 verses are allocated exclusively to vaiśyas and śūdras.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We can then view the overall structure of the <em>MDh</em> schematically:</p>
<ol>
<li>Origin of the World: 1.1–119 </li>
<li>Sources of the Law: 2.1–24 </li>
<li>Dharma of the Four Social Classes: 2.25–11.266 <br><br>
3.1. Rules Relating to Law: 2.25–10.131 <br><br>
3.1.1. Rules of Action in Normal Times: 2.26–9-336 <br><br>
3.1.1.1. Fourfold Dharma of a Brahmin: 2.26–6.97 <br>
<sub><em>I have explained to you above the fourfold Law of Brahmins, a Law that is holy and brings imperishable rewards after death. Listen now to the Law of kings. (6.97)</em></sub><br><br>
3.1.1.2. Rules of Action for a King: 7.1–9-325 <br>
<sub><em>I have described above in its entirety the eternal rules of action for the king. What follows, one should understand, are the rules of action for the Vaiśya and the Śūdra in their proper order. (9.325)</em></sub><br><br>
3.1.1.3. <strong>Rules of Action for Vaiśyas & Śūdras</strong>: 9-325–36 <br>
<sub><em>I have described above the splendid rules of action for the social classes outside times of adversity. Listen now to the rules for them in the proper order for times of adversity. (9.336)</em></sub><br><br>
3.1.2. Rules of Action in Times of Adversity: 10.1–129 <br><br>
3.2. Rules Relating to Penance: 11.1–265 <br></li>
<li>Determination Regarding Engagement in Action (<em>karmayoga</em>): 12.3–116 <br><br>
4.1. Fruits of Action: 12.3–81 <br><br>
4.2. Rules of Action for Supreme Good: 12.83–115</li>
</ol>
<p>...</p>
<p><strong>The Rules for Vaiśyas and Śūdras</strong> </p>
<p>Manu's discussion of Vaiśyas and Śūdras, the last two of the social
classes, is extraordinarily brief. <strong>Eight verses are devoted to the Vaiśya
and just two to the Śūdra.</strong> Even granting that, according to the ritual
principle of parsimony discussed earlier, much of the material for
these two classes was included in the discussion of the Brahmin, one
would have expected something more than just ten verses. </p>
<p>The reason for this brevity is unclear, but I think it must be
understood within the context of the socio-political motives behind
Manu's composition. Simply put, Manu's interest lay not in the
lower classes of society, which he considered to be an ever-present
threat to the dominance of the upper classes, but in the interaction
between the political power and Brahmanical priestly interests,
interests that were under constant threat ranging from the Asokan
imperial polity to the foreign invasions around the turn of the
millennium. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Anyway, here are those 10 verses (9.326-9.335) that he's referring to:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201718.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>Section XLIII - Duties of the Vaiśya and the Śūdra</strong></a></p>
<p>After having his sacraments performed, the Vaiśya
shall take a wife and apply himself entirely to agriculture and the
tending of cattle.–(326)</p>
<p>Prajāpati, having created cattle, made them over to
the Vaiśya; while to the Brāhmaṇā and the Kṣatriya he made over all
creatures.–(327)</p>
<p>The Vaiśya shall never conceive the wish–‘I will not
tend cattle;’ and so long as the Vaiśya is willing, they should not be
tended by any one else.–(328)</p>
<p>He shall find out the relative value of gems, pearls,
corals, metals, woven cloths, perfumes and condiments.–(329)</p>
<p>He should be acquainted with the manner of sowing
seeds, with the good and bad qualities of the soil; he should know all
kinds of weights and measures.–(330)</p>
<p>Also the excellences and defects of commodities, the
advantages and disadvantages relating to countries, the profit and
loss on merchandise and also cattle-breeding.–(331)</p>
<p>He shall know also the wages of servants, the several
languages of men, the manner of keeping goods, and also their purchase
and sale.–(332)</p>
<p>He shall put forth his best efforts towards increasing
his property in a righteous manner; and he shall zealously give food
to all beings.–(333)</p>
<hr>
<p>For the Śūdra the highest duty conducive to his best
welfare is to attend upon such Brāhmaṇa house-holders as are learned
in the Vedas and famous.–(334)</p>
<p>If he is pure, attendant upon his superiors, of gentle
speech, free from pride, and always dependent upon the Brāhmaṇa,–he
attains a higher caste.–(335)</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>Omniscience means He should know everything including all our actions and whatever we talk. Is this correct?</p>
<p><sub>Link to the recently <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/q/30059/1049">deleted question</a>.</sub></p>
| 30061 | 30060 | -1 | 2 | 30060 | 6 | Does God know about all our actions and also whatever we talk? | 3 | 30061 | <p>Yes God knows even what you talk secretly. See the following Atharva Veda (AV) Mantra: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Dvau samnishadya yat mantrayete rAja tat veda varunah tritiyah ||</p>
<p>When you talk in secret, there is always the third observer, divine
observer Varuna.</p>
<p><strong>AV 4.16.2</strong> </p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, God is monitoring all our actions, even though we might think that we are doing those actions secretly.</p>
<p>The following three Manu Smriti verses make things even more clear.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>8.84. ’The Soul itself is the witness of the Soul, and the Soul is the refuge of the Soul; despise not thy own Soul, the supreme witness of
men.</p>
<p>8.85. ’<strong>The wicked, indeed, say in their hearts, "Nobody sees us;" but the gods distinctly see them and the male within their own breasts.</strong></p>
<p>8.86. <strong>’The sky, the earth, the waters, (the male in) the heart, the moon, the sun, the fire, Yama and the wind, the night, the two
twilights, and justice know the conduct of all corporeal beings.’</strong> </p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, yes Gods very well know what we are doing or talking although we might be thinking that we have done those actions "secretly".</p>
|
|
<p>Srimad Bhagavatam is considered natural commentary of Vedanta Sutras by Gaudiya Vaishnavas.</p>
<p>That is the reason Gaudiya school didn't explicitly subscribe to Vedanta school till 17th century. Then for some secondary reasons, Baladeva Vidyabhusana commented on prasthana trayi(Vedanta Sutras, Bhagavad Gita & principal upanishads).</p>
<p><a href="https://nitaaiveda.com/All_Scriptures_By_Acharyas/Baladeva_Vidyabhushana/Vedanta_Sutra.htm" rel="noreferrer">Govinda Bhasya</a> is the commentary of Baladeva Vidyabhusana on Vedanta Sutras. This commentary is also in the similar style as previous acharyas of other schools. </p>
<p>Is there any work which shows corresponding Bhagavatam verses to each Vedanta Sutra?</p>
<p>Eg: VS 1.1.1 -> <a href="https://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/1/2/10" rel="noreferrer">SB 1.2.8-11</a>
VS 1.1.2 -> <a href="https://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/1/1/1" rel="noreferrer">SB 1.1.1</a>
VS 1.1.3 -> <a href="https://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/10/16/44" rel="noreferrer">SB 10.16.44</a>
VS 4.4.22 -> <a href="https://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/10/88/25-26" rel="noreferrer">SB 10.88.26</a>, <a href="https://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/2/8/6" rel="noreferrer">SB 2.8.6</a></p>
| 31513 | 30065 | 7 | 2 | 30065 | 4 | Where can I find side by side compilation of Vedanta Sutras and the corresponding verses from Srimad Bhagavatam? | 3 | 31513 | <p>As far as I know, there is no ancient work that has corresponding verses of Bhagavatam mapped to each Vedanta Sutra. Jiva Goswami did that to an extent in his sandarbhas but that is only in spirit not verse by verse. He explained first 5 Vedanta Sutras using first verse of bhagavatam, but others are scattered.</p>
<p>There are two modern works(20th century) however by Haridasa Shastri and Ramapada Chattopadhyaya.</p>
<p>This is Govinda Bhasya commentary by Baladeva Vidyabhusana in Sanskrit and at the end of each Vedanta Sutra, Bhagavatam verse numbers are added based on works of Haridasa Shastri and Ramapada Chattapadhyaya.</p>
<p><a href="https://grantha.jiva.org/index.php?show=entry&e_no=669" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Govinda Bhasya Adhyaya 1</a></p>
<p><a href="https://grantha.jiva.org/index.php?show=entry&e_no=670" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Govinda Bhasya Adhyaya 2</a></p>
<p><a href="https://grantha.jiva.org/index.php?show=entry&e_no=671" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Govinda Bhasya Adhyaya 3</a></p>
<p><a href="https://grantha.jiva.org/index.php?show=entry&e_no=672" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Govinda Bhasya Adhyaya 4</a></p>
|
|
<p>I am interested in old texts which uses rationale and logical arguments only to reach to conclusion or prove some axiom. Are there such text which can be rightfully called logical treatises, scientific papers.
Does ancient Hindu literature contain such body of texts? </p>
| 30096 | 30093 | 8 | 2 | 30093 | 8 | What are some of the most logical and rational Hindu text? | 3 | 30096 | <p>In any logical/mathematical sysem, we have certain Axioms, whose validity are taken for granted within that system.</p>
<p>For example, a mathematical system that tries to introduce the concept of real/complex numbers, the three Axioms - field, order and completeness Axioms - are taken for granted. That is they are not required to be proved (within that particular system). All the remaining propositions/theorems of that system are then proved using those Axioms.</p>
<p>The only Hindu scriptures which share this pattern to an extent are the Darshana Shastras (the 6 Philosophical scriptures - Samkhya, Nyaya etc). </p>
<p>In the Darshanas, we have the proofs/standards (known as <em>Pramana</em>) which serve the same purpose as does an Axiom in a mathematical system.</p>
<p>For example, for the Samkhya Philosophy, we have: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Drishtamanumanamaptavachanancha sarvapramanasiddhatvat |<br>
<strong>Trividham pramanamishtam prameyasiddhih</strong> pramanAddhi ||</p>
<p>Pratyaksha (direct perception), anumAna (inferrence) and Apta Vakya
(i.e words of the Rishis or scriptures) - <strong>these three standards are
accepted in Samkhya.</strong> All other standards are accomplished/established
by these three only. <strong>By using these three pramanas the propositions
are established.</strong></p>
<p><em>Samkhya Karika 4</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, just like all the theorems/propositions in a logical system, are established using the validity of the Axioms which are accepted in that system, in this Samkhya doctrine, all the propositions are similarly established using the three Pramanas which are accepted as valid in the doctrine.</p>
|
|
<p>People of Advaita sect believe that Atman never remains locked or trapped IN the body. The same thing has been said by many hindoos in quora as well. (They are followers of advaita).</p>
<p>If what the advaitins believe is true, then what exactly is dehi? In the Bhagavad-gita it has been said that dehi dwells within the body and keeps changing bodies like old clothes.
If dehi is not Atman, then what is it?
Need an answer from both dualistic (vaishnava) and monistic (advaita) point of view. </p>
| 30130 | 30111 | 2 | 2 | 30111 | 1 | What exactly is dehi according to advaita and vaishnava school? | 4 | 30130 | <p>Bhagavad Gita is regarded high from Advaita &/or Vaishnava school of thoughts. This answer is from that perspective.</p>
<p>According to it, <em>Dehi</em> (embodied one) transgresses from one body to another, upon death:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>वासांसि जीर्णानि यथा विहाय, नवानि गृह्णाति नरोऽपराणि। तथा शरीराणि विहाय जीर्णा, न्यन्यानि संयाति नवानि <strong>देही</strong>।।<br>
BG 2.22 - As after rejecting worn out clothes a man takes up other new ones, likewise after rejecting worn out bodies the '<strong>embodied one</strong>' unites with other new ones.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>Almost same description is given for <em>Ishvara</em> as well:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>शरीरं यदवाप्नोति यच्चाप्युत्क्राम<strong>तीश्वरः</strong>। गृहीत्वैतानि संयाति वायुर्गन्धानिवाशयात्।।<br>
BG 15.8 -- When the Body is received and also when given up, the "<strong>Master</strong>" (<em>ishvara</em>) carries all these [6 senses]; Same as wind transporting smell.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>From these 2 verse, we can infer that the <strong><em>Dehi</em> is the consciousness/intellect(<em>Buddhi</em>) or <em>Purusha</em></strong>, which controls the senses + mind like a master.<br>
It's higher in order than the mind, but lower than the <em>Atman</em> (or <em>ParamAtma</em>):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>इन्द्रियाणि पराण्याहुरिन्द्रियेभ्यः परं मनः। मनसस्तु परा बुद्धिर्यो बुद्धेः परतस्तु सः ।।<br>
BG 3.42 — Senses are said to be beyond [physical body]; mind (<em>mann</em>) is beyond senses; intellect (<em>buddhi</em>) is even beyond Mind; "That" (<em>Atma</em>) is even beyond intellect.</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>Is it possible for taking birth even the Jeeva is eligible for Moksha?</p>
<p>I'm asking this question for normal human beings, not for the avatar as Krishna, Rama etc., </p>
<p>If possible, then show an example of such human being, if exists. </p>
| 30132 | 30128 | 5 | 2 | 30128 | 3 | Do people get birth even they are (almost) eligible for Moksha | 4 | 30132 | <p>As already suggested in 1 comment, if a person is "almost" eligible for <em>Moksha</em>, then they have to born again.<br />
The birth cycle ends only after the liberation is attained.</p>
<p>This is analogous to the fallen Yogi terminology from Bhagavad Gita.<br />
A fallen Yogi is a person, who fell more or less short of attaining the final destination. Hence gets reborn and starts perseverance from where it was left.</p>
<p>Similar Q&A during Gita:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>BG 6.37 - Arjuna asked, those who possess faith, but wavers mind away from Yoga (state of attaining liberation); <strong>After failing to be perfect in Yoga, what state do they attain?</strong></p>
<p>BG 6.40 - Blessed lord said, O Partha, neither here nor hereafter, their destruction happens; O dear, <strong>none</strong> of those engaged in such auspicious activity, <strong>goes to downfall</strong>.<br />
BG 6.43 - There [in the new body] they a<strong>quire the recollection of intellect of the previous body; And thereafter they persevere (put strong efforts) more for perfection</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>The examples are trivial. Those who attained Moksha during their birth, were almost perfecting in Yoga till their previous birth:</p>
<ul>
<li>Shri RAma</li>
<li>Shri Krishna</li>
<li>Drona</li>
<li>ShishupAla</li>
<li>Ravana</li>
<li>Even there is story about Ramakrishna Parmahamsa & Vivekananda taking 1 more birth</li>
</ul>
<p>All of above, apparently got liberated during their last birth. So they would have fallen short of the perfection till their 2nd last birth.</p>
<hr />
<p>Refer this matching answer:<br />
<a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/23770/1049">What will happen to a youth who wants to enjoy life as well as continuing spiritual efforts?</a></p>
|
|
<p>There are puranas like Brahma purana, Skanda purana, Shiva Purana, Garuda purana. On what basis are these names given to the puranas? Is it that the puranas talk about some god or is that some god spoke particular purana or any other?</p>
<p>How exactly were puranas named?</p>
| 30158 | 30145 | 14 | 2 | 30145 | 12 | On what basis are puranas named? | 3 | 30158 | <p>The Puranas are named according to following points (these are my observations):</p>
<ol>
<li>On the basis of which deity is glorified.</li>
<li>On the basis of which Kalpa events are mentioned.</li>
<li>On the basis of who is narrator of events.</li>
<li>On the basis of to whom the events are being narrated.</li>
</ol>
<p>The complete list of Puranas and why they are named so is given in <a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/shiva-purana-english/d/doc226604.html" rel="noreferrer">Shiva Purana, Uma Sanhita, Chapter 44</a>.</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Nandikeśvara said</strong>:—</p>
<ol start="125">
<li><p>O Taṇḍi, Brahma the four-faced deity is the main speaker. Hence, O sage, the first Purāṇa is called Brāhma.</p>
</li>
<li><p>The second Purāṇa is called Padma. It is so called because it mentions the greatness of the Padmakalpa.</p>
</li>
<li><p>Another Purāṇa composed by Parāśara and enlightening the details of Viṣṇu is called Vaiṣṇava Purāṇa. It is said to be composed by Vyāsa since there is no difference between father and son.</p>
</li>
<li><p>Those who know the Purāṇas speak that purāṇa as Śiva Purāṇa wherein there are many stories of Śiva in its earlier and later forms.</p>
</li>
<li><p>Where the stories of the goddess Durgā are mentioned, it is said to be Bhāgavata Purāṇa as well as Devīpurāṇa.</p>
</li>
</ol>
<p>130-131. The Purāṇa narrated by Nārada is called Nāradīya. The seventh Purāṇa is called, O Taṇḍi, Mārkaṇḍeya because the great sage Mārkaṇḍeya is the speaker therein. Since it is related to the fire-god, the Purāṇa is called Āgneya. Since it recounts future events the Purāṇa is called the Bhaviṣya Purāṇa.</p>
<ol start="132">
<li>Since the transformation of Brahman is narrated the Purāṇa is called Brahmavaivarta. Since the story of Liṅga is mentioned it is called Liṅga Purāṇa.</li>
</ol>
<p>133-135. O sage, the twelfth Purāṇa Varāha is so called because it contains the story of Varāha, the great Boar. In the Skanda Purāṇa the speaker is lord Śiva himself and the listener is Skanda. In the Vāmana Puraṇa the story of Vāmana (the Dwarf-god) is mentioned. The Kūrma Purāṇa contains the story of Kūrma (the tortoise-god). The Matsya Purāṇa is so called because it is expounded by Matsya. The Garuḍa Purāṇa is so called because the speaker is Garuḍa himself. Since the story of the entire cosmic egg is mentioned, the last Purāṇa is called Brahmāṇḍa Purāṇa.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But please note that there is some contradiction on Bhagavata Purana, as you can see Shiva Purana said it is Devi Bhagavata but in <a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/vp/vp009.htm" rel="noreferrer">Vishnu Purana preface, section 5</a>, it is said to be Shrimad Bhagavata Purana.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It is named Bhágavata from its being dedicated to the glorification of Bhagavat or Vishńu.</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>Is Kalki an avatar (incarnation) of Vishnu or Siva? Is he a purn-avatar (full incarnation) or ansa-avatar (partial incarnation)? </p>
<p>I'm in doubt because persons in Mahabharata like Ashwathama, Samba etc., are ansa-avatars of Siva and are responsible for the destruction. Since Kalki is responsible for the destruction in Kaliyuga, I am suspecting that he is an avatar of Siva.</p>
| 30188 | 30185 | 5 | 2 | 30185 | 12 | Is Kalki an avatar of Vishnu? | 4 | 30188 | <p>Kalki avatar is an avatar of Lord Vishnu only. There is no doubt in this. </p>
<p>It has been prophesied in many puranas that Lord Vishnu will incarnate to remove evil from Kaliyuga therefore restoring dharma again. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>In this Kali Yuga itself, when the junction period is yet to lapse, the lord will be born under the name of Kalki and Viṣṇu Yaśā. He will be born in the family of Parashara and have great exploits. [Brahmanda Purana Upodhgata Parva Chapter 73 verse 104]. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Above verse is talking about Lord Vishnu and his avataras in different manvantaras.</p>
<p>From Bhagavata Purana: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>carācara-guror viṣṇor<br>
īśvarasyākhilātmanaḥ<br>
dharma-trāṇāya sādhūnāṁ<br>
janma karmāpanuttaye</p>
<p>Lord Viṣṇu — the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the spiritual master of all moving and nonmoving living beings, and the Supreme Soul of all — takes birth to protect the principles of religion and to relieve His saintly devotees from the reactions of material work. [<a href="https://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/12/2/17" rel="noreferrer">SB 12.2.17</a>]</p>
<p>Lord Kalki will appear in the home of the most eminent brāhmaṇa of Śambhala village, the great soul Viṣṇuyaśā.[<a href="https://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/12/2/18" rel="noreferrer">SB 12.2.18</a>]</p>
</blockquote>
<p>There are many other references in puranas and in the Mahabharata it is said that Lord Vishnu incarnates in the sandhi period of Kaliyuga and establishes the conditions of Kruta Yuga. There are stotras found in the puranas which include Kalki in Dashavatara (tem important incarnations) list.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Ashwathama, Samba etc., are ansa-avatars of Siva and are responsible for the destruction.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Arjuna caused more destruction than both these. On 14th day of Kurukshetra alone, Arjuna killed an akshauhini while searching for Jayadhratha. Bhishma killed many soldiers in the Pandava side that Yudhishtira was scared and thought they would lose the war if Bhishma continued to fight till the last day. So, these were also responsible for destruction. But these are not avatars of Lord Shiva. If we look into Mahabharata in critical way, many characters like Karna, Drona can be made the responsibility for the great Kurukshetra war. These are not avatars of Lord Shiva. So, the logic saying Kalki being avatar of Shiva because he will kill evil people doesn;t work.</p>
<p>Lord Vishnu takes birth out of his own will to bring back dharma and remove adharma time to time. From <a href="https://www.bhagavad-gita.us/bhagavad-gita-4-7/" rel="noreferrer">Bhagavad Gita 4.7</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>yadā yadā hi dharmasya glānir bhavati bhārata<br>
abhyutthānam adharmasya tadātmānaḿ sṛjāmy aham</p>
<p>paritrāṇāya sādhūnāḿ vināśāya ca duṣkṛtām<br>
dharma-saḿsthāpanārthāya sambhavāmi yuge yuge </p>
<p>Whenever and wherever there is a decline in religious practice, O descendant of Bharata, and a predominant rise of irreligion—at that time I descend Myself. </p>
<p>To deliver the pious and to annihilate the miscreants, as well as to reestablish the principles of religion, I Myself appear, millennium after millennium.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>[The translator used religious but the word is Dharma and it is untranslatable] </p>
<p>Hence, there is no doubt that Kalki is Lord Vishnu's avatar.</p>
|
|
<p>It is a well accepted view that Vishnu is source of all avatars including Krishna. This is what we all heard from childhood. I also came across the opposite opinion that Krishna is source of Vishnu. </p>
<p>I have seen other possible duplicates, it seems there are few verses to support each sect's views. Why does one focus only on them and not on others? On what basis others are rejected? What is the reasoning behind this?</p>
<p>Which all schools accept this idea?</p>
| 30223 | 30209 | 7 | 2 | 30209 | 9 | On what basis is Krishna claimed to be source of Vishnu? | 4 | 30223 | <p><strong>Why is Krishna considered as source of Vishnu?</strong></p>
<p>The answer is based on analysis by Jiva Goswami in his Sandarbhas. </p>
<p>This belief is based on Srimad Bhagavatam & other Vedic literatures.</p>
<p>Few reasons Srimad Bhagavatam is considered as sarva-pramananam cakravarti - emperor of all evidences:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>After composing all the Vedas, puranas and mahabharat, Vyasa was still dissatisfied and then finally wrote Bhagavatam and got satisfied.</p></li>
<li><p>Many other puranas glorify Bhagavatam as the best.</p></li>
<li><p>Garuda purana declared this to be natural commentary on Vedanta Sutra and most complete of all.(see <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/30065/where-can-i-find-side-by-side-compilation-of-vedanta-sutras-and-the-correspondin">here</a>)</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Some more reasons will be given later, for now we will leave it here.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Verse 1.3.28</p>
<p>ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam indrāri-vyākulaṁ
lokaṁ mṛḍayanti yuge yuge</p>
<p>All these incarnations are either plenary portions or parts of the
plenary portions of the puruṣa-avatāra. But Kṛṣṇa is the Bhagavan Himself. In
every age He protects the world
through His different features when the world is disturbed by the
enemies of Indra.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is the emperor of all verses in the Bhagavatam, for it is the most conclusive, unambiguous, declarative, absolute and categorical in establishing the Supremacy of Lord Krishna.</p>
<p>This is discussed in Krishna Sandarbha in great detail.</p>
<p>Jiva Goswami calls this paribhasa-sutra of Srimad Bhagavatam. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Paribhasa-sutra of any book, is stated only once, generally in the
beginning, provides the key for proper understanding of the entire
work and governs even a great literature that contains millions of
statements.</p>
<p>Srimad Bhagavatam describes the ultimate phase of the Absolute truth
and the supreme goal of life. It is not a random collection of
stories. Hence, the seriousness of the subject matter of Bhagavatam
demands it to be prefaced by a Paribhasa-sutra.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Lord Sri Krishna is repeatedly described in the verses of Srimad Bhagavatam. The verses of the Bhagavatam may be compared to an army and this verse may be considered commander of that army.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Bhagavatam describes activities of various incarnations of Lord
Krishna which are mysterious(SB 1.3.29) as seen from the declaration <a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/12/13/11-12" rel="nofollow noreferrer">12.13.11</a>. Since, the third chapter of 1st Canto
summarises the incarnations and their activities, and verse 1.3.28
connects all the incarnations, it is indeed paribhasa-sutra of
Bhagavatam.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Another example of this is the paribhasha-sutra “vipratishedhe param karyam,"(When two grammatical rules are contradictory, second should be done) which governs the entire text of Panini's Ashöadhyayi.</p>
<p>Meaning of the Emperor Verse:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>ete</strong> - "All these" refers to incarnations(previous described in <a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/1/3/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SB 1.3</a>)</p>
<p><strong>ca</strong> - and (all the incarnations that are not mentioned in this list)</p>
<p><strong>amsa-kalah</strong> -> are plenary portions or parts of the plenary portions and kalās, or in other words, vibhūtis (displays of lesser power).</p>
<p><strong>pumsah</strong> -> of the purusa incarnations who expanded from Bhagavan</p>
<p><strong>krsnas</strong>-> Lord Krishna who is counted as 20th incarnation in this list</p>
<p><strong>tu</strong> -> but</p>
<ol>
<li>It distinguishes Lord Krishna from "amsa-kalah"</li>
<li>Also means certainly or indeed or used for emphasis; thus the word "tu" emphasized that only Krishna is the original form of Bhagavan and Narayana or any of the other secondary
expansions of the Lord, are not the original forms.</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>bhagavan svayam</strong> -> is that very Bhagavan who is original source even of the Purusa.</p>
<p>He is the source of all the incarnations(in fact, ultimate source of
the sources of incarnations) and not simply an expansion of Vishnu.
This is emphasized by the use of the word "svayam"(in person).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Let's go into details :</p>
<blockquote>
<p>In the above verse, by the principle “the predicate should not be
stated without specifying the subject,” the characteristic of being
Bhagavān (bhagavattva) [i.e., the predicate] is established as
belonging specifically to Kṛṣṇa [the subject], and not the reverse,
that the characteristic of being Kṛṣṇa (kṛṣṇatva) is established of
Bhagavān. Consequently, because Śrī Kṛṣṇa alone has been determined as
being the repository (dharmī) of the characteristics of being Bhagavān
(bhagavattva), it is thereby proven that He is the original source
(avatārī) of all avatāras and not [merely] a manifestation of the
Puruṣa. Sūta expresses this very fact by the word svayam (“Himself ”),
which is to say that He is Bhagavān in and of Himself, not because He
has appeared from Bhagavān, nor because of the superimposition
(adhyāsa) of “Godhood” (bhagavattā) upon Him(as Advaitins think).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>When it is said, “Kṛṣṇa is Svayaṁ Bhagavān,” the known subject
is Kṛṣṇa, because He was already mentioned as the twentieth
avatāra. His being Svayaṁ Bhagavān, however, was not known.
This additional information is now being provided in the present
verse. If the sentence is interpreted in reverse order, i.e., “Svayaṁ
Bhagavān is(has taken form of) Kṛṣṇa,” then we have a case where the subject is
unknown, because no earlier reference was made to any Svayaṁ
Bhagavān. If such is the case, Suta would have said something like 'narayanas tu bhagavan svayam krishna narayana eva'. Svayam means “by His very own Self ” and not because of any other medium or upādhi. The quality of being Bhagavān is intrinsic to His nature and not a superimposition.</p>
<p>Further Analysis:</p>
<p><strong>1)Consistency: Opening and concluding statements of a composition match with each other.</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>In the opening verse of this chapter of the Bhāgavata (<a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/1/3/1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">sb 1.3.1</a>),
Sūta Gosvāmī used the two words pauruṣam and bhagavān, while in the
concluding verse of the section (sb 1.3.28), he uses the two words
puṁsaḥ and bhagavān. Because the word puṁsaḥ is a synonym [for puruṣa]
and because the word bhagavān is identical, Śrī Sūta here reminds us
that these are the very same two words employed earlier. To dispel all
obstacles to clear understanding, the learned use the same or
equivalent words in their opening (uddeśa) and concluding statements
(pratinirdeśa). For example, in the section that deals with the topic
of Jyotiṣṭoma, in the injunction “In each spring worship by jyotiṣ,”
the word jyotiṣ refers to the Jyotiṣṭoma sacrifice.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>If a speaker were to introduce
one subject in the beginning and a different one in the conclusion,
it would be difficult to understand his or her intention. This
repetition of the same words in the opening and closing statements
also shows not only that Bhagavān is distinct from and is the source
of the Puruṣa, but that Kṛṣṇa is Bhagavān Himself.</p>
<p><strong>2A)Reconciliation: More significant facts are placed at the end of the composition.</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>One should not doubt this conclusion on the plea that Kṛṣṇa is also
listed among the avatāras. [Such an allegation is dispelled] by the
hermeneutical principle: “Among prior and succeeding [injunctions],
the former is weaker, like prakṛti [the fundamental part of a yajña,
or ritual, which is overridden by the atonement process (vikṛti)]”
(Jaimini-sūtra 6.5.54)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Though <a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/1/3/23" rel="nofollow noreferrer">1.3.23</a> mentioned Krishna in the list of incarnations, 1.3.28 dispels the doubt that he is just one of the incarnations. 1.3.28 being stated at the end has more weightage than 1.3.23.</p>
<p><strong>2B)A Direct Statement Overrides the Context</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>Alternatively, the statement “Kṛṣṇa, however, is Bhagavān Himself ”
(sb 1.3.28), is validated by the hermeneutical principle that a direct
statement (śruti) overrides the context (prakaraṇa) [which in this
case is concerned with the avatāras]. An example of the application of
this principle is found in the commentary of Śaṅkarācārya on
Vedānta-sūtra, “Because a direct statement (śruti) carries greater
authority [than the context (prakaraṇa)], there is no contravention
[of the fact that these fires (manaścit and so on) are independent of
ritual action (kriyā), being associated with knowledge (vidyā)
instead]” (vs 3.3.50).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Although Kṛṣṇa is listed as the twentieth
avatāra and is thus included within the context of the avatāras,
His characteristic of being an avatāra is overridden by the direct
statement (śruti), “Kṛṣṇa (alone) is Bhagavān Himself.”</p>
<p>Consequently, here also, in the context of the discussion of the
avatāras, Sūta Gosvāmī did not use the word bhagavān for any other avatāra but did so only in reference to Kṛṣṇa: “Bhagavān
removed the burden [of the earth]” [sb 1.3.23].</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Hence, His inclusion in the list of avatāras is because of the fact
that although He is Bhagavān Himself and is ever situated in His own
intrinsic nature, He sometimes becomes visible to the world at large,
nourishing a special sweetness through His divine play (līlā), such as
taking birth, in order to bestow uniquely astonishing bliss upon His
personal associates.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>3A)Distinction: Importance of the word "tu"</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>According to Amara-kośa, a noun followed by tu has no relation to
anything that precedes it.(tv-antāthādi na pūrva-bhāk).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>"tu" here divides the sentence, since tu is used to indicate that the subject matter following is different from previous ones, it distinguished Lord Krishna from amsa kalah. Thus tu conclusively declares that Krishna is the original Supreme Personality of Godhead</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Alternatively, the word tu implies restriction, in the sense of “only”
or “exclusively.”(syur evaṁ tu punar vai vety avadhāraṇa-vācakāḥ)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Then, the śruti, or express statement, is understood as definitive (sāvadhāraṇā).
Thus, by the principle, “The definitive śruti is stronger [than
other statements]” (sāvadhāraṇā śrutir balavatī), even if Mahā-
Nārāyaṇa, Rama or others are referred to as Svayaṁ Bhagavān in certain
statements of the Śruti itself, this is to be understood in a
secondary sense by virtue of the above direct statement. (This is to say that Nārāyaṇa can be indirectly considered as Svayaṁ
Bhagavān only in relation to all the avatāras that expand from Him,
but not in relation to His own source, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. This is to be
concluded because there cannot be two forms of Svayaṁ Bhagavān)</p>
<p><strong>3B) The Distinction between the Whole and Its Parts</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>In this regard, the following is to be said: The aṁśa’s identity of
prowess, nature, and so on with that of the aṁśī is to be understood
as due specifically to their oneness [of categorical being (
jātīyatva)]. This situation is comparable to that of rivulets flowing
from an inexhaustible lake, where the inexhaustibility of the rivulets
is due to the inexhaustibility of their source<a href="https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/1/3/26/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">[SB 1.3.26]</a>;
otherwise, it would be impossible to distinguish between the part
(aṁśa) and its all-encompassing whole (aṁśī).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Consequently, a hierarchy (tāratamya) certainly
exists between the avatārī and His avatāras.</p>
<p>Thus, in the eighth chapter of the Third Canto, Vāsudeva is
described as superior even to Saṅkarṣaṇa:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The four topmost celibate sages (the Kumāras), desiring to know the
truth regarding He who is superior even to Bhagavān Saṅ- karṣaṇa,
approached and inquired from Him [Saṅkarṣaṇa], the original Deva,
whose consciousness [sattva, i.e., jñāna] is unobstructed and who was
situated in the Pātāla region. At that time, He was worshiping
[through complete meditative absorption] His own source, [whom the
Vedas] proclaim as Vāsudeva.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>(sb 3.8.3–4)</p>
<p>Otherwise, the phrase
kṛṣṇas tu would become redundant, because its purpose would
be served merely by the phrase, bhagavān svayam.</p>
<p>Therefore, since a distinction exists between the part (aṁśa)
and the whole (aṁśī), the
meaning of the statement, “Kṛṣṇa, however, is Bhagavān
Himself” (kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam) is appropriately explained.</p>
<p>The second half of the verse is not connected syntactically with
the first half, because the word tu indicates a break in sentence
structure. Consequently, the statement, “Kṛṣṇa, however, is
Bhagavān Himself,” is complete in itself.</p>
<p>The second half of verse indicates the purpose of Lord's or his incarnations' advent in each yuga.</p>
<p><strong>4)Philosophy: Philosophical statement is more authoritative than that which is historical.</strong></p>
<p>The Paribhasa sutra of a book is like a ruling king, whom all others(statements) have to obey. So, if a statement doesn't obey Paribhasa
sutra, the reader may reject it, or interpret that statement to make it agree with the Paribhasa-sutra.</p>
<p><strong>5)Contradictions: Apparent contradictions to Paribhasa-sutra are refuted and correct meanings are given (to align with Paribhasa-sutra)</strong> </p>
<p>For ex, the pastime of Krishna and Arjuna meeting Maha-Vishnu mentioned in SB 10.89 is explained in detail in this perspective.(see <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/9473/why-did-vishnu-want-to-see-krsna-and-arjuna/31491#31491">here</a>) The word
amsena in 10.43.23 doesn't mean an expansion of Lord Narayana, but rather means accompanied by all His plenary portions. </p>
<p>The statement "kalabhyam nitaram hareh" (SB 10.20.48) may also be presented as a statement contradicting our paribhasha-sutra, and someone may claim that these words mean "Hari appeared in the forms of His two expansions, Krishna and Balarama." Actually, however, this is not the proper interpretation of these words. "Kalabhyam" (by the two plenary portions) is not actually one word, but the two words "kala" and "abhyam",
joined by sandhi. The phrase "hareh kala" means the earth planet, which is one of Lord Hari's many potencies, and “abhyam" means "by Krishna and Balarama". The actual meaning of this statement is: "The earth planet, which is Lord 's potency appeared very beautiful because of the presence of Krishna and Balarama."</p>
<p>Similarly other examples are found in 10.2.41,10.2.18,4.1.59 etc are also clarified.</p>
<p>The false claim that Balarama and Krishna appeared from the hair of Vishnu based on some verses of Vishnu purana and Mahabharata is thoroughly refuted.</p>
<p>Sridhara Swami, the oldest commentator also resolves some contradictions this way.</p>
<p>For eg: In <a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/2/7/26" rel="nofollow noreferrer">2.7.26</a>:
Motilal edition translates it as:
"In order to remove the distress of earth which was pounded of Daityas, he, of white and black hair(Balarama & Krishna), will be born by his own amsa."</p>
<p>Sridhar swami doesn't agree with such translation since white hair can't be seen on Lord's head since he doesn't become old.(<a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/29888/when-does-gods-like-shani-stop-aging">I discussed here</a> how even normal devatas don't get old). Also it contradicts clear statement krsnastu bhagavan svayam. He comments:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>mat-kesav evaitat kartum saktav iti dyotanartham |
rama-krishnayor varna-sucanartham ca kesoddharanam iti gamyate |
anyatha tatraiva purva-para-virodhapatteh, <strong>krishnas tu bhagavan svayam
iti etad-virodhac ca</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Also, in the story of Candra-kalankapatti-karana in the Prabhasa-khanda of the Skanda Purana, in the description of Lord Krishna's appearance, Krishna is described as Lord Vishnu Himself. By using the words "svayam vishnuh (Vishnu Himself)", the concocted idea that Krishna is an incarnation of Lord Vishnu's hair is refuted by Vyasadeva.</p>
<p>At various instances, Jiva Goswami uses Sridhara Swami's explanations.</p>
<p>After quoting several verses that apparently contradict paribhasa sutra and resolving them with correct meanings, Jiva Goswami declares</p>
<blockquote>
<p>"Our paribhasa-sutra (krsna tu bhagavan svayam) now appears as a great
heroic king who has just defeated hundreds of enemies in the form of
opposing arguments and completely brought them under his submission to
the great delight of all onlookers. I shall now bring into view the
multitude of arguments that forms the footsoldiers, cavalry, chariot
warriors and elephant-riding warriors of his army."</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>6)Complements: Verses supporting Paribhasa-sutra</strong></p>
<p>Many other verses from Bhagavatam prove that Krishna is the source of all incarnations like lila-avataras and guna avataras. Some examples are
<a href="https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/10/2/40/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">10.2.40</a>,<a href="https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/10/14/20/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">10.14.20</a>,<a href="https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/10/8/15/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">10.8.15</a>,<a href="https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/10/10/34-35/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">10.10.34</a>,<a href="https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/10/58/37/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">10.58.37</a>,<a href="https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/10/87/46/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">10.87.46</a> etc..</p>
<p>SB 9.24.55:</p>
<p>shöamas tu tayor asit <strong>svayam eva harih kila</strong> it
"The eighth son of Vasudeva and Devaki was the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself-Krishna."
The use of the word "kila (certainly)" to emphasize the statement of this verse perfectly corroborates the statement of our paribhasha-sutra.</p>
<p>vasudeva-grihe <strong>sakshad bhagavan</strong> purusha eva (SB 10.1.23)</p>
<p>SB 10.14.32:</p>
<p>nanda-gopa-vrajaukasam yan-mitram paramanandam <strong>purnam brahma sanatanam</strong></p>
<p>"How greatly fortunate are Nanda Maharaja, the cowherd men and all the inhabitants of Vrajabhumi! There is no limit to their fortune because the Absolute Truth, the source of transcendental bliss, the eternal Supreme Brahman, has become their friend."</p>
<p>That Shri Krishna is the Original Personality of Godhead is especially confirmed by the phrase "purnam brahma sanatanam"</p>
<p><strong>7)Principal subject: Krishna's glories are described throughout SB.</strong></p>
<p>The Tenth and the Eleventh cantos that constitute almost half of Srimad Bhagavatam, describe Lord Krishna's pastimes exclusively.
Further First Canto describes about Krishna in detail.
The first Nine Cantos summarily describe Lord's other forms. Further, each of the twelve cantos describe Krishna as the Supreme Personality of
Godhead in various instances.</p>
<p>In the Second Canto, Lord Krishna is described as the Supreme Personality of Godhead in the account of the conversation between Brahma and Narada(10 verses dedicated toward Krishna in <a href="https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/2/7/26/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SB 2.7</a>). </p>
<p>In the Third Canto, Lord Krishna is also described in the account of the conversation between Vidura and Uddhava. </p>
<p>In the Fourth Canto, Lord Krishna is described, and the following verses: "That Nara-Narayana Rishi, who is a partial expansion of Krishna, has now appeared in the dynasties of Yadu and Kuru in the forms of Krishna and Arjuna respectively, in order to mitigate the burden of the world." (SB 4.1.59), and "Prithu Maharaja was a powerful incarnation of Lord Krishna's potencies; consequently any narration concerning His activities is surely very pleasing to hear, and it produces all good fortune".* (SB 4.17.6) may be presented as evidence to show that Shri Krishna is the actual subject described in the verses of the Bhagavatam etc....</p>
<p>Hence, the description of Lord Krishna is the principal subject matter of the Bhagavatam.</p>
<p><strong>8)Common Interest: All the various speakers and all the audiences of Srimad-Bhagavatam want to hear and glorify Krishna.</strong></p>
<p>Example of Speakers: Suta Goswami(<a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/1/2/5" rel="nofollow noreferrer">1.2.5</a>), Sukadeva Goswami(<a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/2/4/20" rel="nofollow noreferrer">2.4.20</a>), Maitreya Rsi(<a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/4/17/8" rel="nofollow noreferrer">4.17.8</a>)
Example of Hearers: Saunka Rsi(<a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/1/1/12" rel="nofollow noreferrer">1.1.12-14</a>), Maharaja Pariksit(<a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/1/19/5" rel="nofollow noreferrer">1.19.5</a> , <a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/10/1/10" rel="nofollow noreferrer">10.1.1-13</a>), Vidura(<a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/4/17/6-7" rel="nofollow noreferrer">4.17.6-7</a>)</p>
<p>In accordance in Narada Muni's instruction "<strong>And thus you can think of the pastimes of the Lord</strong> in trance for the liberation of the people in
general from all material bondage."(SB <a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/1/5/13" rel="nofollow noreferrer">1.5.13</a>).</p>
<p>Vyasadeva's meditation or trance in (<a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/1/7/7" rel="nofollow noreferrer">1.7.6-7</a>), reveals that Krishna is the primary subject of Bhagavatam.</p>
<p>yasyāṁ vai śrūyamāṇāyāṁ
<strong>kṛṣṇe parama-pūruṣe</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>SB 1.7.7 — Simply by giving aural
reception to this Vedic literature, the feeling for loving devotional
service to Lord Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, sprouts up
at once to extinguish the fire of lamentation, illusion and
fearfulness.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>9)Substitute: Bhagavatam is itself considered one of the forms of Sri Krishna.</strong></p>
<p>Though the sun of Krishna has set, the sun of Bhagavata Purana has risen <a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/1/3/43" rel="nofollow noreferrer">1.3.43</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>This Bhāgavata Purāṇa is as brilliant as the sun, and it has arisen
just after the departure of Lord Kṛṣṇa to His own abode, accompanied
by religion, knowledge, etc. Persons who have lost their vision due to
the dense darkness of ignorance in the Age of Kali shall get light
from this Purāṇa</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>10)Name: No other holy name of Lord is equal to Krishna.</strong></p>
<p>sahasra-namnam punyanam, trir-avrttya tu yat phalam;
ekavrttya tu krsnasya, namaikam tat prayacchati</p>
<p>Once chanting the holy name of Krishna is equivalent to the purifying effect of chanting the other names of Lord three thousand times(Vishnu sahasra nama thrice) </p>
<p>(Brahmanada Purana 2.36.19). See <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/31573/where-is-it-mentioned-that-chanting-krishna-is-more-powerful-than-chanting-rama/31608#31608">here</a></p>
<p><strong>11)Reconfirmation: Other literature also refer to Krishna as the Original Personality of Godhead</strong>.</p>
<p>Jiva Goswami quotes from Mahabharata, Brahma Samhita and Brahma Vaivarta purana, Padma purana, Bhagavad Gita.</p>
<p><strong>12)Supreme Form: The eternality and supremacy of the form of Sri Krishna is confirmed within the Bhagavatam and other literatures as well.</strong></p>
<p>eg: 3.2.12 yam martya lilaupayikam.,
11.6.5 tasyam vibhrajamanayam.., 10.14.1 naumidya te bhra vapuse.., 10.14.14 narayanas tvam na hi.
Bhagavad Gita(11.51-54)</p>
<p><strong>What about evidences contradicting this view?</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>Someone may object: by speaking few arguments, you have attempted
to refute the great mass of evidence against your theory. I can't
believe you. </p>
<p>Reply: In the Vedanta-sutra and other
Vedic literatures many lengthy arguments are refuted in a few words.
The length of an argument is not the criterion of whether it is true
or not. Even in the material world we may see an example of this, for
sometimes a single strong fighter may defeat a thousand soldiers in
the battle. In the same way a single strong argument may defeat
thousands of illogical words.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In truth, apparent contradictions in other puranas also can be resolved.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Hari-vamsha describes Lord Krishna as an incarnation of Lord Upendra
(Vamana). This false conception is refuted by the following words
spoken by Lord Krishna in the Bhagavatam, which describe Lord
Krishna's return to His own eternal abode in the spiritual world
(11.6.31). That Lord Krishna, after leaving the earth planet, returned
to His own abode in the spiritual world is also confirmed in the
following statement of Brahma (Bhagavatam 11.6.27)</p>
<p>In some places in the scriptures it may say that Lord Vaikunöha, the
son of Vikunöha-devi, appeared as Lord Krishna; in other places it may
say that Kshirodakashayi Vishnu appeared as Lord Krishna; in other
places in the scriptures it may say that the purusha-incarnations
appeared as Lord Krishna; in other places in the scriptures it may say
that Narayana Rishi appeared as Lord Krishna; in the
Brihat-sahasra-nama Prayers in the description of the identity of Lord
Balarama and Lord Lakshmana, it may say that Lord Ramacandra appeared
as Lord Krishna; in other places in the scriptures it may say that a
hair of Lord Narayana appeared as Lord Krishna; and in other places in
the scriptures there may also be other descriptions of how other forms
of Godhead have incarnated as Lord Krishna. How are these
contradictory statements to be resolved? Actually all these statements
are true, for all forms of the Personality of Godhead are
simultaneously present in the form of the Personality of Godhead, Shri
Krishna, and when Shri Krishna descends to this material world, all
other forms of Godhead also descend with Him(for He is source of all and for detailed explanation, refer Krishna Sandarbha)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>That all forms Godhead are manifested from the body of Lord Krishna is confirmed by the following statement of Uddhava (Shrimad-Bhagavatam 11.11.28):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>My dear Lord, as the Absolute Truth You are transcendental to material
nature, and like the sky You are never entangled in any way. Still,
being controlled by Your devotees’ love, You accept many different
forms, incarnating according to Your devotees’ desires</p>
</blockquote>
<p>That Bhagavatam is the best of all Vedic literatures is confirmed in the
following verse (SB <a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/9/22/21-24" rel="nofollow noreferrer">9.22.22-23</a>):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>"From Vyasadeva, I [Sukadeva Gosvami] was born, and from him I studied
this great work of literature, Srimad-Bhagavatam. The incarnation of
Godhead Vedavyasa, rejecting his disciples, headed by Paila,
instructed Srimad-Bhagavatam to me because I was free from all
material desires."</p>
<p>Vyasadeva had instructed the Four Vedas and the Puranas to His
disciples, but He did not teach them the Bhagavatam. Only Sukadeva was
qualified to study the Bhagavatam, because he was free from all
material desires. This shows the superiority of the Bhagavatam to all
Vedic literatures.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Because Bhagavatam is the best of all Vedic literatures, the statement of
the Bhagavatam, that Sri Krsna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, should be
accepted as the actual truth. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>In this context the example of the village-chief and the king may be
given. In the village chief's assembly hall a certain thing may be
praised as the best of all, and in the king s assembly hall a
different thing may be praised as the best of all. The standards of
the village chief and the king are not on the same level. What is
considered best by the king may be accepted as superior to what is
praised by the village chief. In the same way, the Bhagavatam
is the best of all scriptures, and because in the verses of the
Bhagavatam Sri Krsna is glorified as the Original Personality of
Godhead, this must be accepted as truth, even if someone may be able
to find some evidence to contradict it in some other Vedic
literatures. Any scriptural statement contradicting the Bhagavatam's
affirmation "Krsnas tu bhagavan svayam" (Sri Krsna is the Original
Personality of Godhead) should therefore be rejected, and there is no
impropriety in this</p>
</blockquote>
<p>We see in Bhagavatam <a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/10/77/30" rel="nofollow noreferrer">10.77.30</a>:</p>
<p>"Such is the account given by some sages, O wise King, but those who speak in this illogical way are contradicting themselves, having forgotten
their own previous statements."</p>
<p>This verse clearly describes how untrue statements may sometimes be found in
the Vedic literatures. The careful reader must be prepared, therefore, to sometimes reject scriptural quotations. The guideline for accepting and rejecting such statements should be the authority of Bhagavatam.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>When Bhagavatam was spoken by Sukadeva Goswmai, even great sages like
Narada and Vyasa were present to hear. Although these two sages were
Sri Suka's guru and grand-guru, respectively, when they heard Srimad
Bhagavatam issuing from his lips, they felt as if they had never heard
it before. For this reason it is said here that he taught this most
significant wisdom even to them. As mentioned in suka mukhad amrta
drava samyutam: "The Bhagavatam is enriched with nectarean juice from
the mouth of Suka" [Bhag
<a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/1/1/3" rel="nofollow noreferrer">1.1.3</a>]. Thus in this sense also Bhagavatam is more glorious than any other scripture. Statements about the superiority of other
Puranas, such as the Matsya Purana, are only relatively true.</p>
<p>So even if, as some people think, other Puranas are subordinate to the
authority of the Vedas, Bhagavatam directly denies this idea in
regards to itself. In other words, the Bhagavatam claims its own
authority independently. Thus its position is that of the highest
sruti authority, as is stated, "How did it so happen that King
Pariksit met this great sage, making it possible for this sruti text
for the pure Vaishnavas to be manifest?" [Bhag <a href="http://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/1/4/7" rel="nofollow noreferrer">1.4.7</a>]"</p>
</blockquote>
<p>It's not that Sruti(Vedas, especially Upanishads) teach something different, but they speak in indirect way.</p>
<p>Krishna says in 11.21.35</p>
<blockquote>
<p>parokṣa-vādā ṛṣayaḥ parokṣaṁ mama ca priyam</p>
<p>"The Vedic seers and mantras, deal in esoteric/indirect
terms, and I am pleased by such indirect descriptions"</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Bhagavatam's declaration being greatest purana is absolute and thus Bhagavatam's conclusions are highest.</p>
<p><strong>Which other sampradayas accept this idea?</strong></p>
<p>There are other sampradayas like Rudra Sampradaya(Pustimarg) & Nimbarka Sampradaya who accept that Krishna is the source of all.</p>
|
|
<p>On one hand we have the cows considered as the most sacred in the scriptures. All deities, pilgrimages, Rishis are said to be found in it's body.</p>
<p>Giving it pain is considered as an offence. Killing it even a bigger offence. The five products (Panchagavyas) obtained from the cow are considered as most sacred and used in almost all Hindu rituals. Consumption of those products also considered in the scriptures to be the destroyer of various kinds of sins.</p>
<p>And, on the other hand, the soul must have done something sinful in the previous birth to get born as a cow. If the Karmas are higher on the merit side then the soul must have obtained a human body and not an animal body.</p>
<p>For example, a chapter of Vishnu Smriti says: </p>
<blockquote>
<ol start="6">
<li>Those who have committed a crime effecting loss of caste, enter the bodies of amphibious animals.</li>
<li>Those who have committed a crime degrading to a mixed caste, enter the bodies of deer.</li>
<li><strong>Those who have committed a crime rendering them unworthy to receive alms, enter the bodies of cattle.</strong></li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<p>This leads us to an apparent contradiction. My question is how to reconcile?</p>
| 30372 | 30270 | 10 | 2 | 30270 | 0 | "Cows are sacred" & at the same time "It's only a sinful soul which gets born as an animal" - How to deal with this apparent contradiction? | 4 | 30372 | <p>Cow is not animal its more than animal its demi god.. Then there is no contradiction.. similarly idol worship you have to see antaryami in idol as idol itself is not god.. idol in temple is higher because it conscreted with mantra.. similarly saligrama you have sanithana or presence of lord that you can only experience, hindusim is more experience rather than outside physical worship..when worship Cow what effect it creates on you that is experience, based experience of rishi Cow you should worship like mother because you drink milk and nourish from thy blood.</p>
|
|
<p>I recently came across a claim that it is not Krishna who spoke Bhagavad Gita, but he was connected to Brahman while speaking Gita. Is there any reference for this?</p>
| 30302 | 30278 | 7 | 2 | 30278 | 5 | Is there any reference that Krishna was connected to Brahman while speaking Gita? | 7 | 30302 | <p>Apparently this comes from a statement from Anugita, as another member Lakhi has posted. Here's the <a href="https://narayanastra.blogspot.com/p/sridhara-anu-gita-and-miscellaneous.html" rel="noreferrer">explanation</a> given by the authors of the Narayanastra blog.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>para.n hi brahma kathitaM yogayuktena tanmayA |itihAsa.n tu vakShyAmi tasminnarthe purAtanam || 12||</p>
</blockquote>
<p>They explain Yoga as "Dhyana" as in thought/will instead of being in meditation or connection with brahman.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>yogaH sannahana upAya dhyAna san’gati yuktishu (amara kosha 3.3.22)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In this context, the meaning for this anugita reference is as below.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Indeed, the highest knowledge (paraM) of the vedas (brahma) was
described by me (on the battlefield), by making use of my will which
is unfettered (yoga yuktEna), ie, it was not because you performed any
sAdhana to earn it. But now (on account of your rejection of my
grace), I shall relate to you an ancient history based on that
subject.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Wherein yogayuktena is explained as "by using my unimpeded divine will or sankalpa", not that he was in yogic connection to another entity.</p>
|
|
<p>The very first line of Atharva Veda says , "ye trisaptaah pariyanti ...". The meaning of Trisapta here seems somewhat confusing. In the Acharya Vedanta Tirth translation it is called to be the three gunas (satta, rajas, tamas) and seven padarthas (prithvi, jal, tej, vaayu, aakaash, tanmaatraa, ahamkaara). However, the Sankhya philosophy says that the five tanmaatraas are distinct. Moreover, the other translations do not favor this one, they talk about a much vaster meaning - all the possible permutations of 7 and 3. Can anyone please clear me the real meaning? Moreover, is it somehow related to the corresponding devata Vachaspati? Any help is greatly appreciated.</p>
| 31540 | 30291 | 8 | 2 | 30291 | 3 | What is the meaning of Tri-sapta in Atharva-veda? | 3 | 31540 | <p>The first Sukta of Atharva-Veda is Medha Janan Sukta , Rishi of which is Atharva and Devata is Vachaspati. This is a prayer to Vāchaspati for divine illumination and help.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>ये <strong>त्रिषप्ता :</strong> परियन्ति विश्वा रूपाणि बिभ्रता : |<br> <strong>वाचस्पतिर्बला</strong>
तेषां तन्वो अद्य दधातु मे ||1||<br></p>
<p>The thrice-seven that go about , bearing all forms - Let the Lord of
speech assign to me today their powers [their] selves (tanu).</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>Your main question is about the meaning of the word Tri-Sapta and details about devata vachaspati.</p>
<p><a href="https://archive.org/details/atharvavedasamhi01whituoft/page/n169" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>William Dwight Whitney</strong></a> who translated Atharva-Veda samhita with a critical and exegetical commentary . Revised and brought nearer to completion and edited by Charles Rockwell Lanman says that.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Tri-Saptas is plainly used as designation of an indefinite number ,=
'dozens' or 'scores' supposing shruti to signify one's acquired
sacred knowledge , portion of shruti. </p>
<p>First he conjectures that it may mean ' three or seven ' ; as the
three worlds , the three gunas three highest gods ; or sevan seers ,
the seven planets , the seven troops od Maruts , the seven worlds ,
the seven meters or the like. Secondarily , it may mean ' three sevens
' as seven suns (for which is quoted TA. i.7.1) and seven priests and
seven Adityas (TA. i.13.3 ; RV. ix.114.3) , or seven rivers , sevan
worlds and seven quarters (TB. ii.8.3.) or seven planets ,seven seers
and seven marut troops . Thirdly it may signify simply thrice seven
or twenty-one as twelve months +five seasons +three worlds +one sun
(TS.vii.3.105) or five Mahabhutas +five breaths + five jnanendriyas
+five karmendriyas + one antahkarana . At any rate they are the gods ,who are to render aid.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p><a href="https://archive.org/details/AtharvavedaSubodhBhashya/page/n47" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>Shripad Damodar Satwalekar</strong></a> in his commentary " Atharvaveda Subodh Bhashya " is mentioning that </p>
<blockquote>
<p>The original seven elements in their three forms are everywhere and
their flow and transformation is giving shape to this universe.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So these are original twenty one elements which are also inside our body , our goal is to maintain harmony of these twenty one elements which are inside to twenty one elements outside to live a healthy life with sound mind power and this is the core topic of Atharva-Veda.<br>
<hr>
Author <a href="http://literature.awgp.org/book/atharveda/v1.17" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>Shree Ram Sharma Acharya</strong></a> is also saying similarly like William Dwight , he says.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The majority of commentators has concluded the meaning of Tri-Sapta as
3*7 =21 . But the view of the seer is much more wider than that.<br>
Tri-Sapta can be explained according to permutations maths as 3+7
=10 , 3*7=21 , seven raise to three 343 ,three raise to 729 etc. The seer has written the word Tri-Sapta as one so the meaning of it is all
the possible combinations i.e.(Tri-Sapta). On this basis the covers
three worlds ,three gunas , three dimensions , three devas etc. In
this way there can be infinite permutations and combination are
possible and only Vachaspati knows them all.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<h1>Vachaspati.</h1>
<p>The devata of this sukta is Vachaspati various acharyas as well as authors have presented their views about possible meaning of Vachaspati</p>
<p><a href="http://literature.awgp.org/book/atharveda/v1.17" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>Shree Ram Sharma Acharya</strong> </a>in his commentary on first sukta of Atharva-Veda is explaining the meaning of the term in following way.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>According to him Parabrahman covers all this universe all the time in
his unmanifested form (Avyakta अव्यक्त). But when he expresses
himself from unmanifested to manifested , then its appropriate to call
him "Vachaspati".</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p><a href="https://archive.org/details/AtharvavedaSubodhBhashya/page/n47" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>Shripad Damodar Satwalekar</strong></a> in his commentary " Atharvaveda Subodh Bhashya " is also explaining this devta he is stating that .</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Who is Vachaspati? Vak , Vani , Vaktrutva ,upadesh , Vyakhyan are
related words. The person who is a excellent in speech i.e. a very
good Guru (teacher) who is good counsellor is Vachaspati</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So from the above two passages the Devata Vachaspati is a good Guru or Supreme Brahman in his manifested form. </p>
|
|
<p>There is a general belief that Adi Shankara was initiated into Kriya Yoga by Mahavatar babaji who is said to be living in the Himalayas. But do we have any authentic reference from our ancient texts for it? Does Adi Shankara himself talk about Kriya Yoga for realizing Brahman?</p>
| 32792 | 30387 | 6 | 2 | 30387 | 3 | Was Adi-Shankara initiated into Kriya Yoga? | 3 | 32792 | <p>The reference of Babaji giving initiation to Adi Shankara is found in Autobiography of a Yogi. As per Paramahansa Yogananda, Mahavatar Babaji himself stated that he gave initiation to Adi Shankara.</p>
<p>Autobiography of a Yogi / Chapter 33 - <a href="https://www.ananda.org/autobiography/#chap33" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Babaji, the Yogi-Christ of Modern India</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Babaji’s mission in India has been to assist prophets in carrying out their special dispensations. He thus qualifies for the scriptural classification of Mahavatar (Great Avatar). <strong>He has stated that he gave yoga initiation to Shankara, ancient founder of the Swami Order.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Though the initiation was not of Kriya Yoga as mentioned by Paramahansa Yogananda.</p>
<p>Autobiography of a Yogi / Chapter 26 - <a href="https://www.ananda.org/autobiography/#chap26" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The Science of Kriya Yoga</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Kriya is an ancient science. Lahiri Mahasaya received it from his guru, Babaji, who rediscovered and clarified the technique after it had been lost in the Dark Ages. <strong>"The Kriya Yoga which I am giving to the world through you in this nineteenth century"</strong>, Babaji told Lahiri Mahasaya, <strong>"is a revival of the same science which Krishna gave, millenniums ago, to Arjuna."</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>From the above, it is clear that Babaji indeed initiated Adi Shankara but not in Kriya Yoga as the knowledge of Kriya Yoga was first given by Babaji to Lahiri Mahasaya and not Adi Shankara.</p>
|
|
<p>Jaidev goswami in Gita Govinda mentions about Radha , are there any prior references to her? I am not asking about puranic references, but works of any acharya. Who is the first well known saint to have mentioned Radha in his works? </p>
| 30408 | 30404 | 8 | 2 | 30404 | 5 | Who is the first well known saint to mention Radha in his works? | 4 | 30408 | <p>As far as I know, Adi Shankaracharya mentions Sri Radha's name in his
<a href="http://www.stutimandal.com/poemgen.php?id=53" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Yamunashtakam stotra</a> Slokas 6 & 7. Sankskrit-Tamil translation available in <a href="http://www.kamakoti.org/kamakoti/newTamil/stotras/index.php?imgdir=Yamuna%20Ashtakam" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this kamakoti website</a>. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>जलान्तकेलिकारिचारु <strong>राधिका</strong> ङ्गरागिणी
स्वभर्तुरन्यदुर्लभाङ्गसङ्गतांशभागिनी
स्वदत्तसुप्तसप्तसिन्धुभेदनातिकोविदा । धुनोतु मे मनोमलं कलिन्दनन्दिनी
सदा ॥६॥</p>
<p>Jala-Anta-Keli-Kaari-Caaru-<strong>Raadhika</strong>-Angga-Raaginnii
Sva-Bhartur-Anya-Durlabha-Angga-Sangga-Taamsha-Bhaaginii
Sva-Datta-Supta-Sapta-Sindhu-Bhedana-Ati-Kovidaa | Dhunotu Me
Mano-Malam Kalinda-Nandinii Sadaa ||6||</p>
<p>May Yamunā — Whose water is mixed with the cosmetics of sporting
<strong>Rādhikā</strong>, Who enjoys the continuous touch of Her consort (Kṛṣṇa) which is a luxury for others, Who is mighty enough to penetrate the
serene seven oceans, and Who is the daughter of Kalinda — washes the
malice of my mind.[6]</p>
<p>जलच्युताच्युताङ्गरागलम्पटालिशालिनी विलोल <strong>राधिका</strong>
कचान्तचम्पकालिमालिनी । सदावगाहनावतीर्णभर्तृभृत्यनारदा धुनोतु मे मनोमलं
कलिन्दनन्दिनी सदा ॥७॥</p>
<p>Jala-Cyuta-Acyuta-Angga-Raaga-Lampatta-Ali-Shaalinii
Vilola-<strong>Raadhikaa</strong>-Kaca-Anta-Campaka-Ali-Maalinii |
Sada-Avagaahana-Avatiirnna-Bhartr-Bhrtya-Naaradaa Dhunotu Me
Mano-Malam Kalinda-Nandinii Sadaa ||7||</p>
<p>May Yamunā — Who is full of damsels using fallen cosmetics of Acyuta
(Kṛṣṇa) in Her water, Who has flowers from the braids of vibrant
<strong>Rādhikā</strong> in Her water, Who is always taken as support by Nārada and other devotees of Her consort (Kṛṣṇa), and Who is the daughter of
Kalinda — washes the malice of my mind.[7]</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The celebrated Sri Vaishnava Acharya Vedanta Desikan(1268 A.D -1369 A.D)[Jayadeva Goswami's period is 1170 A.D-1245 A.D] mentions Radha's name in the <a href="https://archive.org/stream/TFIC_ASI_Books/YadavabhyudayaVol.3#page/n150/mode/1up" rel="nofollow noreferrer">10th Canto of his Yadavabhyudayam</a>, a poem on the life of Lord Krishna</p>
<blockquote>
<p>dEvakee dhanujasThooNA dhivuyam DHAma vrajAngaNam ramA
<strong>rADHAdhayScha</strong> ithi rASibhEdhairna bhidhyasE</p>
<p>There is no difference in the (states of) the Lord associated with
Lakshmi (Ramaa), <strong>Radha</strong> or other consorts, or as being born as the
Son of Devaki or being born from the Pillar as Narasimha, or living in
Vaikunta or Vrindavan</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>"Mahadeva", by definition means "The Supreme/Great God". In traditional Hindu mythology, Lord Vishnu and Lord Shiva have an equal standing as Preserver and Destroyer respectively which maintain the cosmic balance. Judging by their roles and standing, I would have assumed that both of them would hold the title and yet when the title is used, it is invariably for Lord Shiva. Is there a reason for why only Lord Shiva is called the Mahadeva and not Lord Vishnu ?</p>
| 31446 | 31445 | 8 | 2 | 31445 | 11 | Why is Lord Shiva identified as Mahadeva? | 3 | 31446 | <p>Such a thing is clarified in Karna Parva, in a conversation between Duryodhana and Shalya about the latter being the charioteer of Karna, in the process Duryodhana narrates the destruction of Tripura:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Duryodhana said, 'O supreme among kings! The gods accepted what the lord of the gods had said. 324 All of them gave him half of their energy and he became superior. The god became the strongest among all the strong ones. From that time, Shankara came to be known as Mahadeva.</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>If possible please provide quotations.</p>
| 31575 | 31571 | 12 | 2 | 31571 | 9 | What are the benefits of chanting the names of Lord Vishnu? | 3 | 31575 | <p>Here are some quotes from Bhagavatam. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>SB 12.3.51: My dear King, although Kali-yuga is an ocean of faults,
there is still one good quality about this age: Simply by chanting the
names of Kṛṣṇa, <strong>one can become free from material bondage</strong> and be
promoted to the transcendental kingdom.</p>
<p>SB 11.5.36: Those who are actually advanced in knowledge are able to
appreciate the essential value of this Age of Kali. Such enlightened
persons worship Kali-yuga because in this fallen age all <strong>perfection of
life can easily be achieved</strong> by the performance of saṅkīrtana.</p>
<p>SB 11.5.37: Indeed, there is no higher possible gain for embodied
souls forced to wander throughout the material world than the Supreme
Lord’s saṅkīrtana movement, by which <strong>one can attain the supreme peace
and free oneself from the cycle of repeated birth and death</strong>.</p>
<p>SB 2.1.11: O King, constant chanting of the holy name of the Lord
after the ways of the great authorities is the <strong>doubtless and fearless
way of success for all, including those who are free from all material
desires, those who are desirous of all material enjoyment, and also
those who are self-satisfied</strong> by dint of transcendental knowledge.</p>
<p>SB 8.23.16: There may be discrepancies in pronouncing the mantras and
observing the regulative principles, and, moreover, there may be
discrepancies in regard to time, place, person and paraphernalia. <strong>But
when Your Lordship’s holy name is chanted, everything becomes
faultless</strong>.</p>
<p>SB 1.1.14: Living beings who are entangled in the <strong>complicated meshes
of birth and death can be freed</strong> immediately by even unconsciously
chanting the holy name of Kṛṣṇa, which is feared by fear personified.</p>
<p>SB 12.12.47: If when falling, slipping, feeling pain or sneezing one
involuntarily cries out in a loud voice, “Obeisances to Lord Hari!”
one <strong>will be automatically freed from all his sinful reactions</strong>.</p>
<p>SB 12.3.44: Terrified, about to die, a man collapses on his bed.
Although his voice is faltering and he is hardly conscious of what he
is saying, if he utters the holy name of the Supreme Lord <strong>he can be
freed from the reaction of his fruitive work and achieve the supreme
destination</strong>. But still people in the Age of Kali will not worship the
Supreme Lord.</p>
<p>SB 11.2.40: By chanting the holy name of the Supreme Lord, one comes
to the stage of love of Godhead. Then the devotee is fixed in his vow
as an eternal servant of the Lord, and he gradually becomes very much
attached to a particular name and form of the Supreme Personality of
Godhead. <strong>As his heart melts with ecstatic love, he laughs very loudly
or cries or shouts. Sometimes he sings and dances like a madman, for
he is indifferent to public opinion</strong>.</p>
<p>SB 12.13.23: I offer my respectful obeisances unto the Supreme Lord,
Hari, <strong>the congregational chanting of whose holy names destroys all
sinful reactions</strong>, and the offering of obeisances unto whom relieves
all material suffering.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>You can also refer this section of Bhagavatam, it has many such verses.
<strong><a href="https://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/6/2" rel="noreferrer">SB 6.2: Ajāmila Delivered by the Viṣṇudūtas</a></strong></p>
|
|
<p>I came across a <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/13537/where-is-the-mention-of-chanting-rama-three-times-is-equal-to-chanting-1000-nam?rq=1">topic</a> in which it is explained that 1000 times chanting Vishnu equals chanting rama's name 3 times and I have a subsequent question.</p>
<p>I have heard in the temple that chanting Krishna's name is more powerful than chanting Rama's name x number of times (I think x was 1000 but I am not sure). Where is this mentioned in the scriptures?</p>
| 31574 | 31573 | 6 | 2 | 31573 | 14 | Where is it mentioned that chanting Krishna is more powerful than chanting Rama's name? | 4 | 31574 | <p>This comparison is actually unfair and made famous from some particular sects only. This is same how they started saying "<strong>Hare Krishna</strong> Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare Hare Rama Hare Rama, Rama Rama Hare Hare" instead of <a href="http://www.advaita.it/library/kaliasant.htm" rel="noreferrer">Kali-Santarana Upanishad version</a> "<strong>Hare Rama</strong> Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare" i.e. reciting Hare Krishna before Hare Rama in the mantra.</p>
<p>There is not a direct comparison. This is indirectly mentioned in two sources:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Lord Shiva said in <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/19815/why-are-the-names-of-lord-krishna-and-lord-rama-superior-to-the-name-of-lord-vis?noredirect=1&lq=1">Padma Purana</a>,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The holy name of Rama is equal to one thousand holy names.</p>
</blockquote>
</li>
<li><p>Sesha said in <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/19806/where-is-the-verse-sahasra-namnam-punyanam-prayacchati-found/19808#19808">Brahmanda Purana</a>,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>By a simple repetition, a single name of Krsna yields that fruit which is yielded by repeating three times the thousand holy names.</p>
</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>
<p>Both sources are different and the personalities who said are different. Further, neither of the verses mention Vishnu-Sahasranama, it simply says thousand holy names. So 1000 holy names of first source might be different from 1000 holy names of second source, hence, no fair comparison.</p>
<p>Though first source says in some other place that "Lord Rama's Name alone is more superior than a thousand Names of Lord Vishnu." but thousand Names of Lord Vishnu also not unique across scriptures, they differ from scripture to scripture.</p>
<p>Now, first of all there is no direct comparison between these two names. Also, <strong>रामः (raamah) and कृष्णः (krishnah) indeed part of few versions of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishnu_Sahasranama" rel="noreferrer">Vishnu Sahasranama</a></strong>.</p>
<p>So, such lines are just eulogy to the God and should not be used for direct comparisons.</p>
|
|
<p>Explain briefly about Chandas and Abhimanya Devthas.</p>
<p>Like for Gaythri mantra its Gaythri Chands, Savitha Devaatha Rshi is Vishwa Mitra</p>
<p>One Chandas how many letters one should refer or add for missing letters in Chandas while doing Yagnya</p>
| 37884 | 31667 | 9 | 2 | 31667 | 7 | How many different Chandas are there in the Vedas? | 3 | 37884 | <p>A question <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/q/37750/277">What are the 21 meters known to Rig Vedic seers?</a> (actually a Rigveda mantra quoted) triggered me to search for the list of 21 Chhandas. So, I have searched for Chhandasutras of Pingalacharya which is the oldest scripture on Chhanda, one of the six Vedangas. Original Sanskrit text is easily available on <a href="https://vedicreserve.miu.edu/chhandas/chhandas.pdf" rel="noreferrer">Vedic reserve of Maharshi University site</a>, I searched for the translation but couldn't find any handy English or Hindi translation. I found one Hindi translation on <a href="https://archive.org/details/PingalaChhandaSutras" rel="noreferrer">Internet Archive</a>, I've read it but its quality is low and some information is missing, however I got some interesting things from it. Still a thorough study was needed to summarize things.</p>
<p>Meanwhile I found a very useful research article on Chhanda (meter) of Rigveda from <em>Shodhganga</em>, a reservoir of Indian theses. <a href="https://sg.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/92918/12/13_chapter%205.pdf" rel="noreferrer"><strong>Chapter 5</strong></a> of <a href="https://sg.inflibnet.ac.in/handle/10603/92918" rel="noreferrer"><em>thesis</em></a> contains very useful information on Chhandas and I have prepared my this answer from it.</p>
<p>The referenced article is written based on <strong>1. Chhanda Sutra of Pingalacharya</strong> and <strong>2. Rigveda Pratisakya.</strong> Most of the things are cited from this two scriptures on every step. You can read <a href="https://sg.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/92918/12/13_chapter%205.pdf" rel="noreferrer">Chapter 5 pdf</a> if you want to study and learn; I'm writing an answer to the question:</p>
<p>The most popular 7 Chhandas, also mentioned in Shulka Yajurveda 23.33 are:</p>
<ol>
<li><strong>Gayatri</strong> 6 + 6 + 6 + 6 = <strong>24</strong> syllables</li>
<li><strong>Usnik</strong>   8 + 8 + 12 = <strong>28</strong> syllables</li>
<li><strong>Anustubh</strong> 8 + 8 + 8 + 8 = <strong>32</strong> syllables</li>
<li><strong>Brhati</strong>   8 + 8 + 12 + 8 = <strong>36</strong> syllables</li>
<li><strong>Pankti</strong>  8 + 8 + 8 + 8 + 8 = <strong>40</strong> syllables</li>
<li><strong>Tristubh</strong> 11 + 11 + 11 + 11= <strong>44</strong> syllables </li>
<li><strong>Jagati</strong> 12 + 12 + 12 + 12 = <strong>48</strong> syllables </li>
</ol>
<p>There are five categories of these meter of 1. Prajapati, 2. Devas, 3. Asuras, 4. Rishis and 5. Brahmanas and syllables for them are as follows:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/pemQD.png" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/pemQD.png" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>These seven Chhandas have their sub-varieties owing to the differences in the quantity of syllables which are as follows:</p>
<h2>Gayatri varieties</h2>
<ul>
<li>Padapankti Gayatri. 5 + 5 + 5 + 5 + 5 = 25</li>
<li>Bhurik Padapankti Gayatri 5 + 5 + 5 + 5 + 6 = 26</li>
<li>Virat / Padanicrt Gayatri. 7 + 7 + 7 = 21</li>
<li>Atinicrt Gdyatri. 7 + 7 + 6 = 20</li>
<li>Vardhamdna Gayatri. 6 + 7 + 8 = 21</li>
<li>Yavamadhya Gayatri 7 + 10 + 7 = 25</li>
<li>Dvipada Gayatri. 12 + 12 = 24</li>
<li>Ushiggarbha Gdyatri. 6 + 7 + 10 = 23</li>
</ul>
<h2>Usnik varieties</h2>
<ul>
<li>Pura Usnik 12+ 8 + 8</li>
<li>Kakubh Usnik. 8 + 12 + 8</li>
<li>Kakumnyarikusiranicrt Usnik 11 + 12 + 4 = 27</li>
<li>Pipilikanadhya Usnik. 11 + 6 + 11 = 27</li>
<li>Janusira Usnik.11 + 11 + 6 = 28</li>
<li>Anustubhgarbha Usnik. = 5 + 8 + 8 + 8 = 29</li>
</ul>
<h2>Anustubh varieties</h2>
<ul>
<li>Krti Anustubh. 12 + 12 + 8 = 32</li>
<li>Pipilikamadhyama – Anustubh. 12 + 8 + 12 = 32</li>
<li>Kavirat -Anustubh. 9 + 12 + 9 = 30</li>
<li>Nastarupa – Anustubh. = 9 + 10 + 13 = 32</li>
<li>Virat – Anustubh. 10 + 10 + 10 = 30 ( e.g. Rig 7.22.4) or 11 + 11 + 11 = 33 (e.g. Rig 3.25.4)</li>
<li>Mahapadaparikti – Anustubh. 5 + 5 + 5 + 5 + 5 + 6 = 31</li>
</ul>
<h2>Brhati varieties</h2>
<ul>
<li>Purastad Brhati = 12 + 8 + 8 + 8 =36 syllables,</li>
<li>Uparistat Brhati = 8 + 8 + 8 + 12 = 36 syllables,</li>
<li>Nyankusarini = 8 + 12 + 8 + 8 = 36 syllables,</li>
<li>Brhati urddhabrhati = 12 + 12 + 12 = 36 syllables,</li>
<li>Bistarabrhati = 8 + 10 + 10 + 8 = 36 syllables,</li>
<li>Pipilikamadhyamabrhati = 13 + 8 + 13 =34 syllables.</li>
<li>Bisamapadabrhati = 9 + 8 + 11 + 8 = 36 syllables.</li>
</ul>
<h2>Pankti varieties</h2>
<ul>
<li>Virat Pankti =10 + 10 + 10 + 10 = 40 syllables.</li>
<li>Satobrhati Pankti= 12 + 8 + 1 2 + 8 = 40 syllables.</li>
<li>Viparita Pankti = 8 + 12 + 8+ 12 = 40 syllables.</li>
<li>Astara pankti = 8 + 8+ 12+12 = 40 syllables.</li>
<li>Prastara Pankti = 12 + 12 + 8 + 8 = 40 syllables.</li>
<li>Sanslara Pankti = 12 + 8 + 8 + 12 = 40 syllables.</li>
</ul>
<p>Apart from these i) Aksara Pankti. ii) Alpasah Pankti. iii) Pada Pankti. iv) Jagati Pankti. v) Panchapada Pankti etc. vi) Pathya Pankti are also mentioned in Chhandasutras.</p>
<h2>Tristubh varieties</h2>
<ul>
<li>Abhisarini Trisubh = 10 + 10 + 12 + 12 = 44 syllables </li>
<li>Viratsthana Tristubh
(three conditions)
<ol>
<li>9 + 10 + 10 + 11 = 40 syllables,</li>
<li>9 + 9 + 10 + 11 = 39 syllables,</li>
<li>9 + 10 + 11 + 11 = 41 syllables.</li>
</ol></li>
<li>Viratpurana Tristubh = 10+10+8+8+8 = 44 syllables.</li>
<li>Viratrupa Tristubh =11 + 11 + 1 1 + 8 = 41 syllables.</li>
<li>Jyotismati Tristubh = 12 + 12 + 12 + 8 = 44 syllables.</li>
<li>Mahabrhati Tristubh = 12 + 8 +8 + 8 + 8 = 44 syllables.</li>
<li>Yavamadhya Trisubh = 8 + 8 + 12 + 8 + 8 = 44 syllables.</li>
</ul>
<h2>Jagati varieties</h2>
<ul>
<li>Mahapankti Jagati= 8 + 8+ 8 + 8 + 8 + 8 = 48 syllables. </li>
<li>Mahasatobrhati Jagati = 8 + 8 + 7 + 6 + 10 + 9 = 48 syllables.</li>
</ul>
<hr>
<p>Vedic meters are divided into three class. Above discussed seven Chhandas are of 1st class. Chhandas of other two class are called Aatichhandas (long meters) wich are as follows:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The 2nd class contains seven metres:</p>
<ol start="8">
<li><strong>Atijagati</strong> - (52 Syllables)</li>
<li><strong>Sakvari</strong> - (52 syllables)</li>
<li><strong>Atisakvari</strong>-{6 syllables)</li>
<li><strong>Asti</strong> - (64 syllables)</li>
<li><strong>Atyasti</strong> - (68 syllables)</li>
<li><strong>Dhrti</strong> - (72 syllables)</li>
<li><strong>Adhrti</strong> - (76 syllables)</li>
</ol>
<p>The 3rd class also consists of seven metres:</p>
<ol start="15">
<li><strong>Krti</strong> - (80 syllables) </li>
<li><strong>Prakrti</strong> - (84 syllables)</li>
<li><strong>Akrti</strong> - (88 syllables)</li>
<li><strong>Vikrti</strong> - (92 syllables)</li>
<li><strong>Samkrti</strong> - (96 syllables)</li>
<li><strong>Adhikrti</strong> - (100 syllables)</li>
<li><strong>Vtkrti</strong>- (104 syllables)</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Q.</strong> about abhimany devthas like for gaythri mantra its gaythri chands, savitha devaatha rshi is vishwa mitra</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yes, reading 3rd chapter of Pingalacharya's Chhandasutras, I've prepared one table to relate Chhandas with their Devatas, Varna, Gautra and Svaras. Hope this would be useful.</p>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/YC74X.jpg" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/YC74X.jpg" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>
|
|
<p>I want to know if Adi Shankaracharya said that the five Panchatayana deities (Shiva, Surya, Vishnu, Durga, Ganesh) are Saguna Brahman from his works. </p>
<p>Did he differentiate between them or said all are equal? </p>
<p>I don't want any references from stotras (my college teacher who is an advaitin told many could be later works attributed to Shankara).</p>
<p><a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/29914/did-shankaracharya-establish-the-shanmatha-and-the-panchayatana-puja-systems/31724#31724">This answer</a> analyses various aspects and at first look it looks like Adi Shankaracharya would not have established both the systems of pancayatana and sanmathas.</p>
<p>Is it ok for an Advaitin who is follower of Shankara to declare his own Ishta devata as superior to others?</p>
| 31847 | 31837 | 11 | 2 | 31837 | 9 | Did Adi Shankaracharya accept equality of 5 major gods in his works? | 6 | 31847 | <p>Since you believe the Stotrams attributed to Adi Shankara are later works, I guess then it will be difficult to prove that he believed all the Panchatayana deities as Saguna Brahman. This is because his major works only refer to Sriman Narayana as supreme alone.</p>
<p>For example, his Bhagavad Gita commentary states that nobody is equal to Sriman Narayana:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Asi, You are; pita, the Father, the Progenitor;
lokasya, off all beings; cara-acarasya, moving and
nonmoving. Not only are Yur are Father of this world, You are also pujyah, worthy of worship;
since You are the guruh, Teacher; [He is the
Teacher since He introduce the line of teachers of
what is virtue and vice, and of the knowledge of
the Self. And He is greater than a teacher because
He is the teacher even of Hiranyagarbha and
others.] gariyan, greater (than a teacher). How are
You greater? In answer he says: <strong>Asti, there is; na,
none other; tvat-samah, equal to You; for there is
no possibility of two Gods. Because all dealings
will come to naught if there be many Gods! When
there is no possibility of another being equal
toYou, kutah eva, how at all; can there be anyah,
anyone; abhyadhikah, greater; api, even; loka-
traye, in all the three worlds; apratima-prabhavah,
O you of unrivalled power?</strong> That by which
something is measured is pratima. You who have
no measure for Your power (prabhava) are a
pratima-prabhavah. Apratima-prabhava means 'O
You of limitless power!' Since this is so, (<strong>Adi Shankara's commentary on Bhagavad Gita 11.43</strong>)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In Bhagavad Gita 9.25, he explicity states that worshipping other deities is not the same as worshipping Vishnu:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Deva-vratah, votaries of the gods, those whose
religious observances [Making offerings and
presents, circumambulation, bowing down, etc.]
and devotion are directed to the gods; yanti, reach,
go to; devan, the gods. Pitr-vratah, the votaries of
the manes, those who are occupied with such rites
as obsequies etc., who are devoted to the manes; go
pitrn, to the manes such as Agnisvatta and others.
Bhutejyah, the Beings such as Vinayaka, the group
of Sixteen (divine) Mothers, the Four Sisters, and
others. And madyajinah, those who worship Me,
those who are given to worshipping Me, the
devotees of Visnu; reach mam, Me alone. Although
the effort (involved) is the same, <strong>still owing to ingorance they do not worship Me exclusively.
Thereby they attain lesser results.</strong> This is the
meaning. 'Not only do My devotees get the
everlasting result in the form of non-return (to this
world), but My worship also is easy.' How? (<strong>Adi Shankara's commentary on Bhagavad Gita 9.25</strong>)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Again, in Bhagavad Gita 6.47, he clearly differentiates meditation on Rudra (Shiva) and Aditya (Surya) from meditation on Vasudeva (Vishnu) and even terms the latter superior:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Api, even; sarvesam yoginam, among all the
yogis, among those who are immersed in
meditation on Rudra, Aditya, and others; yah, he
who; bhajate, adores; mam, Me; antaratmana,with
his mind; madgatena, fixed on Me, concentrated on
Me who am Vasudeva; and sraddhavan, with faith,
becoming filled with faith; sah, he; is matah,
considered; me, by Me; to be yukta-tamah, the best
of the yogis</strong>, engaged in Yoga most intensely. [It
has been shown thus far that Karma-yoga has
monasticism as its ultimate culmination. And in
the course of expounding Dhyana-yoga together with its ausxiliaries, and instructing about the
means to control the mind, the Lord rules out the
possibility of absolute ruin for a person fallen from
Yoga. He has also stated that steadfastness in
Knowledge is for a man who knows the meaning
of the word tvam (thou) (in 'Thou are That'). All
these instructions amount to declaring that
Liberation comes from the knowledge of the great
Upanisadic saying, 'Thou art That.']</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In Bhagavad Gita 7.20, he says people who worship deities other than Vasudeva lack wisdom:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>People, hrta-jnanah, deprived of their wisdom,
deprived of their discriminating knowledge; taih
taih kamaih, by desires for various objects, such as
progeny, cattle, heaven, etc.; and niyatah, guided,
compelled; svaya prakrtya, by their own nature, by
particular tendencies gathered in the past lives;
prapadyante, resort; anya-devatah, to other deities,
who are different from Vasudeva, the Self</strong>; asthaya,
following taking the help of; tam tam niyamam,the
relevant methods-those processes that are well
known for the adoration of the concerned deities.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In his commentary on Brahma Sutras 1.2.17, he once again explicitly states that Surya cannot be regarded as supreme:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Selfhood cannot be ascribed to the sun, on account of his externality (parâgrûpatva). Immortality,&c. also cannot be predicated of him, as Scripture speaks of his origin and his dissolution. For the (so-called) deathlessness of the gods only means their (comparatively) long existence. And their lordly power also is based on the highest Lord and does not naturally belong to them; as the mantra declares, 'From terror of it (Brahman) the wind blows, from terror the sun rises; from terror of it Agni and Indra, yea, Death runs as the fifth.'--Hence the person in the eye must be viewed as the highest Lord only.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>Is caste based on birth? Is it inherited? Do any scriptures support birth based caste system? </p>
| 31916 | 31915 | 5 | 2 | 31915 | 3 | Are children of Brahmin parents also Brahmin by caste? | 3 | 31916 | <p><strong>Yes, caste is based on birth.</strong> There is scriptural support for it. </p>
<p>Scriptural support:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Manusmriti (10.5).- In all castes (varna) those (children) only which
are begotten in the direct order on wedded wives, equal (in caste and
married as) virgins, are to be considered as belonging to the same
caste (as their fathers)</p>
<p>Āpastamba (2.13.1).—‘Sons begotten by a man who approaches in the
proper season a woman of equal caste, who has not belonged to another
man, and who has been married legally, have a right to follow the
occupations of their castes.’</p>
<p>Viṣṇu (16.1).—‘On women equal in caste to their husbands, sons are
begotten who are equal in caste to their fathers.’</p>
<p>Yājñavalkya (1.90).—‘From women of the same caste as their husbands
are born sons of the same caste.’</p>
<p>Baudhāyana (1.17.2).—‘Sons of equal caste spring from women of equal
caste.’</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The genetic makeup of the 4 castes are different. Brahmanas have Nadis in their body situated in such a way as to receive the vision of the Lord. Kshatriyas are genetically strong and physically fit. Vaishyas have a mind and body conducive for conducting business. Shudras are naturally pessimistic, lazy, simple-minded, and materialistic. <em>That's how their bodies were constructed.</em></p>
<p><a href="https://youtu.be/dFEnxVfwqLE?t=2340" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Source</a> for Nadis in a Brahmana's body situated in a particular way. At 39:00 minutes in the video.</p>
|
|
<p>Who was the author of the Manusmriti?</p>
<p>Now many of you might say "Manu", but it's actually not quite clear from the text itself.</p>
<p>First of all, the word "Manusmriti" means "recollection of Manu", where "smriti" means "recollection." </p>
<p>And second, the first line of Medhatithi's Manuscript of the Manusmriti says this:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The Great Sages, having approached <strong>Manu</strong>, paid their respect to <strong>him</strong> in
due form, and finding him seated with mind calm and collected,
addressed him these words—(1).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And the last verse:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The twice-born man who reads <strong>these Ordinances of Manu</strong>, shall be ever
equipped with virtue and shall attain whatever state he may
desire.—(126)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>It's referring to Manu in the 3rd person, which means that Manu did not write the verses of the Manusmriti. </p>
<p>If you continue reading, you'll notice that the Manusmriti reads like a story with a certain narrator. </p>
<p>So who was this narrator who wrote the Manusmriti?</p>
<p>From scripture, we know that Valmiki wrote the Ramayana and Vyasa narrated the Mahabharata, which was penned by Ganesha.</p>
<p>But who wrote or penned the Manusmriti?</p>
<p>According to Medhatithi on <a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc145579.html" rel="noreferrer">this</a> Manusmriti verse which talks about the nature of the Dharma Shastras, he says the words of Manu were recorded in an "unbroken lineage." </p>
<p>Which basically means this, according to Indologists:</p>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/pzd1Q.png" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/pzd1Q.png" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>
| 32130 | 31996 | 10 | 2 | 31996 | 5 | Who was the author of the Manusmriti? | 4 | 32130 | <blockquote>
<p>So who was this narrator who wrote the Manusmriti?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>It depends on whether you are looking for the traditional answer or an academic (non-faith) scholarly opinion. Based on your citing the example of Vyasa/Ganesha for the Mahabharata, it appears you are looking for the former.</p>
<p>In that case, the narrator of the Manu-Smriti is Bhrigu Maharshi. </p>
<p>The last verse of the text reads:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>इत्येतन् मानवं शास्त्रं <strong>भृगुप्रोक्तं</strong> पठन् द्विजः ।<br>
भवत्याचारवान्नित्यं यथेष्टां प्राप्नुयाद् गतिम् ॥ १२-१२६ ॥ ityetan
mānavaṃ śāstraṃ <strong>bhṛguproktaṃ</strong> paṭhan dvijaḥ |<br>
bhavatyācāravānnityaṃ yatheṣṭāṃ prāpnuyād gatim || 12-126 ||</p>
</blockquote>
<p><em>Bhṛguproktaṃ</em> means 'spoken by Bhṛgu'</p>
<p>Additionally, if you look at the ending colophon of every chapter in the Manu-Smriti, it says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>iti mānave dharmaśāstre bhṛgu-proktāyāṃ saṃhitāyām</p>
</blockquote>
<p>meaning that the Mānava dharmaśāstra is from the <em>Saṃhitā spoken by Bhṛgu</em>.</p>
<p>Here's an example from the end of the first chapter (version edited by Mahamahopadhyaya Ganganatha Jha)</p>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/thHhj.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/thHhj.png" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>
<p>To be clear, the Manu Smriti is a smaller portion of the Bhrigu Samhita that is authored by Bhrigu. It is not clear if Bhrigu quotes Manu verbatim or whether he is paraphrasing / summarizing / rewording the content of what Manu spoke. This is not very different from the Bhagavad Gita (words of Krishna) appearing in the Mahabharata (written by Vyasa).</p>
|
|
<p>Sannyasa is BELIEVED to be the so called "fourth stage" of life, i.e after brahmacharya, grihastha, and vAnaprastha. However, when one has ALREADY moved to the forest in seclusion after retiring from household duties with wife. What is there to be renounced and for what? </p>
<p>Sannyasa (most popular is dashanaami tradition of sankara), for many of those who do not know, involves renunciation of or giving up </p>
<ul>
<li><p><strong>sacred fire worship (agnihotra, yajnas and any fire rituals)</strong></p></li>
<li><p><strong>wife or patni</strong></p></li>
<li><p><strong>children and family</strong> </p></li>
<li><p><strong>yajnopavita or sacred thread</strong> </p></li>
<li><p><strong>shikhaa or tuft of hair on head</strong> </p></li>
<li><p><strong>burying the dead body and not cremating</strong></p></li>
</ul>
<p>some other sanyasa sects have a little different requirements from above but many of the core processes are same.</p>
<p>kAlidAsa when talking abt various stages in life of the raghu clan says,</p>
<p><strong>शैशवेभ्यस्त विद्यानां यौवने विषयैषिणां
वार्धके मुनिवृत्तीनां योगेनान्ते तनुं त्यजाम्</strong></p>
<p>Learn all vidyAs in childhood, indulge in youthful pleasures in youth "involve in <strong>munivRtti</strong>" in old age & at last quit the mortal coil by way of yoga. This is what ordained for everyone</p>
<p>munivRtti is asceticism & involves talking less and doing tapas. That's why in oldage people went to <strong>vAnaprastha</strong>.</p>
<p>‘In the world, one should desire to live a hundred years, but <strong>only by performing</strong> <strong>karma</strong>. Thus, and in no other way, can man be free from the taint of karma.’ (<strong>Isha upanisad 2</strong>)</p>
<p>The <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/29471/which-verse-of-taittiriya-brahmana-talks-of-extinguishing-agnihotra-fire-as-sinf">Taittiriya Brahmana</a> has it that to extinguish the agnihotra fire is to earn the <strong>demerit of killing a hero</strong>. </p>
<p>While vedas preach self realization in tune with the nature and prescribe brahmacaryaM, grihastham, shikhaa, sacred thread, progeny, etc , if a an individual or a system , renounces all these , do we call it vedic or avedic, so is the answer..</p>
<p>Vedas start with "<strong>Agni meele purohitham</strong>" and glorifies Agni and </p>
<p>Sannyasins after death are <em>buried</em> under the ground rather than offering the body to the agni. </p>
<p>"<strong>UTTISHTATA MAA SVAPTA, AGNIMICHCHADVAM BHAARATAA:</strong>” Yajurveda</p>
<p>Meaning: “O people of Bharat! awake, don’t be asleep, yearn for Agni”.</p>
<p>1) <strong>can the same vedas suggest a life that sheds this very agni?</strong></p>
<p>All the RShi-s including the saptaRShi-s were establishers of their respective gotra-s which means they led a family life. If indeed there existed something called renunciation of shikhA, kaccha, yajJopavIta, agnyupAsanA and one's own wife, </p>
<p>2) <strong>someone kindly provide proof that these great mahariShi-s did that?</strong> </p>
<p>When asked about reference of sannyasa or renunciation from the vedas, the vedantins usually cite the verse from <strong>munDaka upanishad</strong> to support their claim,</p>
<p><strong>vedāntavijñānasuniścitārthāḥ saṁnyāsayogādyatayaḥ śuddhasattvāḥ |</strong>
<strong>te brahmalokeṣu parāntakāle parāmṛtāḥ parimucyanti sarve || 3.2.6 ||</strong> </p>
<p>However, if we see the meaning of above verse, it says that the fruits of vedAnta and sannyasa is attainment of <strong>brahmaloka</strong> after death on this planet. But we know that so called vedanta and sannyasa is not for attainment of <strong>brahmaloka</strong> but <strong>moksha</strong>. </p>
<p>Then a question arises so as to what is the exact meaning of sannyasa? From Vedic point of view, </p>
<p>"<strong>nyAsa iti brahma" nyAsa ityAhur manIShiNo brahmANaM</strong>".. so say the shrutis.. </p>
<p><strong>nyAsa is brahmaa</strong> (hiraNyagarbha). </p>
<p>3) Then how can <strong>saMnyAsa</strong> be derived as "<strong>renunciation</strong>" ? </p>
<p>it can <strong>only mean the upAsanA of hiraNyagarbha</strong></p>
<p>Then there is also a conception that "<strong>yati</strong>" also necessarily means sannyasin or renunciates. However, </p>
<p>A sanyAsi can be a yati but a yati need not be a sanyAsi. People believe that yati = sanyaasi. yati is one who has restrained his mind and body. Even a gRhastha for that matter is restrained in his mind and body if he sticks to his dharma. Moreover, the word yati is actually derived as "<strong>yatate iti yatiH". i.e. one who puts effort</strong>. in that case, the word yati would aptly fit only a <strong>karmayogi</strong> and <strong>not</strong> a sanyAsi who says he has renounced karma.</p>
<p>Another such word is <strong>parivraja</strong> which is usually considered synonymous with sannyasa. However it only means a wanderer and not someone who has renounced everything.
A wanderer may or may not be a sanyasin.</p>
<p>I am also aware that there are texts which are called sannyasa upanishads which are followed by them for their sannyasa and code of conduct. However, they are not authentic in the sense that they are not the part of vedas. I have also posted a question about these <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/17797/why-do-sanyasa-scriptures-degrade-women"><strong>here</strong></a>. This includes like of jabaala upanishad, kaivalyopanishad and so on. </p>
<p>If someone likes to provide any authentic reference then I would like to ask, </p>
<p>4) <strong>Is there any reference of sannyasa ashrama as a life style in vedas?</strong> (the word sannyasa in mundaka upanishad does not speak about ashrama but sanyasa as an upasana of lord brahmaa to attain brahmaloka)</p>
<p><strong>Note:</strong> By Vedas I am expecting direct reference from vedas i.e samhitas. And also from aranyaka, brahmana, and ten authentic upanishads. Also grhya and shrauta sutras. </p>
<p><strong>P.S:</strong> Please provide the references in moola shlokas with translation and not commentaries by mutt people like gambhirananda, nikhilananda etc. </p>
| 37446 | 32052 | 12 | 2 | 32052 | 6 | Is sannyasa a Vedic way of life? Is it recommended by the Vedas, the ten authentic Upanishads or Grhyasutras? | 4 | 37446 | <p>I am referring to Rig Vedic mantras alone, which are the oldest and considered to be <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/36278/3869">apaurushEya</a>.</p>
<p>The definition of Sannyasa was already elaborated by the OP. Hence, I am not reproducing similar content here.</p>
<hr>
<p>The Rig Vedic mantras were composed by the Sages. They prayed, apart from wealth, for <strong><em>children</em></strong> also. </p>
<p>Let us examine a few of them.</p>
<hr>
<p>Rig Veda <a href="https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rvsan/rv02002.htm" rel="noreferrer">II.2.12</a> - Rishi - <strong>Gristamada</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>उभयासो जातवेदः सयाम ते सतोतारो अग्ने सूरयश्च शर्मणि | वस्वो रायः
पुरुश्चन्द्रस्य भूयसः परजावतः सवपत्यस्य शग्धि नः ||</p>
<p>Knower of all that lives, O Agni may we both, singers of praise and
chiefs, be in thy keeping still. Help us to wealth exceeding good and
glorious, abundant, rich in <strong><em>children and their progeny</em></strong>.</p>
</blockquote>
<ol start="2">
<li>Rig Veda <a href="https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv03008.htm" rel="noreferrer">III.8.6</a> - Rishi - <strong>Viswamitra</strong> , says</li>
</ol>
<blockquote>
<p>Ye whom religious men have firmly planted; thou Forest Sovran whom the
axe hath fashioned,— Let those the Stakes divine which here are
standing be fain to <strong><em>grant us wealth with store of children</em></strong></p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>So the sages of Rig Vedic period did not think that for attaining <strong><em>SPIRITUALITY</em></strong>, marriage and children are hindrance. </p>
<p>Sanyasa might be later day development.</p>
|
|
<p>I came to know that a human breathes 21,600 times per day according to Yoga sastra.</p>
<p>Which shloka explicitly states it?</p>
| 32067 | 32065 | 14 | 2 | 32065 | 16 | Do humans breathe 21600 times in a day according to Yoga sastra? | 3 | 32067 | <p><a href="https://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_upanishhat/hansa.html?lang=sa" rel="noreferrer">Hamsa Upanishad</a>, Yoga Upanishad which belongs to Shukla Yajurveda, mentions that.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>अथ हंस ऋषिः । <br> अव्यक्ता गायत्री छन्दः । <br> परमहंसो देवता । <br> अहमिति बीजम् ।<br>
स इति शक्तिः । सोऽहमिति कीलकम् । <br> षट् सङ्ख्यया
<strong>अहोरात्रयोरेकविंशतिसहस्राणि षट् शतान्यधिकानि भवन्ति</strong> ।</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/tmu/tmu27.htm" rel="noreferrer">English Translation</a> by K. Narayanasvami Aiyar:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(Here the performance of Ajapā Gāyaṭrī is given).</p>
<p>"Now Hamsa is the ṛshi; the metre is Avyakṭā Gāyaṭrī; Paramahamsa is
the ḍevaṭā (or presiding deity) 'Ham' is the bīja; 'Sa' is the śakṭī;
So’ham is the kīlaka. Thus there are six. <strong>There are 21, 600 Hamsas
(or breaths) in a day and night</strong>.</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>Sri Sringeri Sharadha Peetham has a free ebook to download here. In that book, the following statement is made by the then Shakaracharya, H.H Abhinava Vidyatheertha Mahaswami. In the page 556 of the <a href="http://svfonline.net/TheMultifacetedJivanmukta.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">book</a> (page 557 of the file), the section named "The Hypocrisy of pseudo-advaitins". </p>
<p>In summary to that section, this is found:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>One should be true to one’s conscience. One may deceive others by
high-sounding talk on Advaita but it will not be of any use if one
does not mend one’s ways. It is said, “He who is attached to worldly
comforts but still says that everything is Brahman is actually one who
has fallen from Karma and also from Brahman. Such a person must be
discarded like a lowly one.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Given that he made the statement, Who are the pseudo-advaitins the acharya is talking about? What are the characteristics that of a real advaitin according to Adi Shankaracharya?</p>
| 32486 | 32090 | 3 | 2 | 32090 | 10 | Who are the pseudo-advaitins referred to by Shringeri Acharya? Does Adi Shankara state characteristics of true advaitins? | 5 | 32486 | <p>Thanks to Rickross and Partha for their answers. You are not wrong. But this question is significant even in Advaita circles and deserves a level of detail which neither have covered.</p>
<p>Advaita, during the course of time, has been morphed in to a confused, hodge podge of philosophical diversions. </p>
<p>In the <a href="http://svfonline.net/TheMultifacetedJivanmukta.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">same book quoted in the question</a>, on page 604, the acharya says: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>They will do well to bear in mind the declaration of the
Kaṭha-upaniṣad, “One who has not desisted from bad conduct, whose
senses are not under control, whose mind is not concentrated and whose
mind is not free from hankering for the result of concentration cannot
attain the Ātman through knowledge.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This statement basically buries all the new age movements who claim to show oneness through myriad of meditations or the ones which claim to give diksha through sexual experiences or the ones that say “oh you don’t have to follow any rules”, “you are God, you just don’t know it”. None of them are grounded in siddhanta but only in money and toxic fame. </p>
<p>In <a href="http://elmisattva-nonduality.blogspot.com/2016/02/pseudo-advaitins-nondualists-and.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this</a> page, Swami Sivananda is quoted:</p>
<p>“The superstructure of Vedanta can only be built when the foundation has been laid strongly by the practice of Yama-Niyama, when the heart has been purified thoroughly through untiring selfless service and Upasana or <strong>worship of Saguna Brahman</strong>.”</p>
<p>So, one who does not practice yama-niyamas and shirks worship of Saguna Brahman, as identified by Shankaracharya, is certainly a pseudo-advaitin.</p>
<p>I came across a rather curious site <a href="https://www.enlightened-spirituality.org/neo-advaita.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>. Though I am not entirely comfortable with the whole site, it does a pretty good job of explaining what is pseudo-advaita. I will summarize it.</p>
<ol>
<li>Engaging in <strong>sophistry</strong>, in trying to glean meanings from scriptures
on their own or from questionable sources. </li>
<li>Trying to always show oneself as rooted in non-dualism out of plain
ego. This is highlighted by the constipated compulsion to always talk about
<strong>paramarthika level for everything</strong> when entirely in this reality</li>
<li>Mechanically acting out detachment, while hooked to firmly in this
material world</li>
<li>Applying dual-nondual definitions <strong>indiscriminately</strong> to everything
except what it is truly meant to denote</li>
<li><strong>Preaching to others about duality and nonduality</strong> when it is very
clear that they themselves haven’t renounced anything in this world.</li>
<li><strong>Condemning devotional service</strong> as maya or selectively showing
devotion while claiming nonduality</li>
</ol>
<p>There are a few things to be elaborated from the above. Generally, advaitins nowadays have strong personal preferences on ishta devata. Technically, it should be fine, seeing how they should see everything as (theoretically) just the same. But without actually realizing oneness, denigrating another’s preference of ishta devata, <strong>even when that choice is soundly grounded in vedantic conclusions</strong>, as sectarian and intolerant is a sure sign of a pseudo-advaitin. </p>
<p>Then comes the confused, unconscious hypocrisy of vociferously stating all devas are equal, and in the same breath claiming superiority for a particular devata. That all devatas are equal itself is not a position held by Adi-Shankara as seen in his Gita Bhasya (Ref <a href="https://archive.org/details/Bhagavad-Gita.with.the.Commentary.of.Sri.Shankaracharya/page/n231" rel="nofollow noreferrer">1</a>, <a href="https://archive.org/details/Bhagavad-Gita.with.the.Commentary.of.Sri.Shankaracharya/page/n267" rel="nofollow noreferrer">2</a>) and other works of his.</p>
<p>Another common symptom of pseudo-advaitin is when someone says “Seeing Shiva and Vishnu as different itself is dualism since they both are parabrahman”. It only betrays the <strong>immaturity</strong> of such a speaker because advaita and other siddhantas do not even deal with that type of comparison. The siddhantas are only concerned about nature of brahman. (Of course there is another huge debate raging on who Adi-Shankara considered as saguna brahman, though several of his own sampradayic disciples as well as acharyas from other traditions have clarified on that point ad infinitum, but on internet forums it is just an inconvenient truth.)</p>
<p>In <a href="http://www.chopra.com/sites/default/files/PSMOE-S2L4-MisconceptionsAboutAdvaita.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this</a> paper on “Misconceptions about Advaita”, David Frawley (A) Pandit Vamadeva Shastri makes a very important statement:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“However, if we read traditional Advaitic texts, we get quite a
different impression. The question of the aptitude or adhikara of the
student is an important topic dealt with at the beginning of the
teaching. The requirements can be quite stringent and daunting, if not
downright discouraging. <strong>One should first renounce the world</strong>, practice
brahmacharya, and gain proficiency in other yogas like karma yoga,
bhakti yoga, raja yoga, and so on (the sadhana-chatushtya). One can
examine texts like the Vedanta Sara I.6-26 for a detailed description.
While probably no one ever met all of these requirements before
starting the practice of self-inquiry, they do at least encourage
humility, not only on the part of the student, but also on the part of
the teacher who may also not have met all these requirements!”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, this basically reiterates what several scholars, that I have heard, hold as a deviation in practice, albeit one that is unavoidable in this age: if one wants to practice advaita truly, the process begins with, not ends with, renouncing this world. A pseudo-advaitin neither renounces the world <strong>nor embodies the humility needed to accept their inability to do so</strong>. There are some examples for people taking sanyaasa though they were not direct disciples of a Shankaracharya. <a href="https://mahaperiyavaa.blog/2013/05/01/sri-angarai-periyava/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Here</a> is an example where a staunch follower took up sanyaasa, though not directly from another yati. There are other examples where people take up sanyaasa shortly before passing away, but evidence is mostly anecdotal.</p>
<p>A few final observations:</p>
<p>It has become a new fad these days to believe that with mere mastery of a few languages esp. Sanskrit, and a few sciences, they can hold themselves to the level of the great acharyas. One shameful example of this phenomenon was the declaration on twitter by one such ‘Arya Acharya' that Lord Rama was not biological son of King Dasaratha. Other instances are happening today with so called followers of advaita going overboard due to influence from other traditions and come up with completely unacceptable and shameful works like the one shown here. </p>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/d72We.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/d72We.jpg" alt="pseudoadvaitin crazy"></a></p>
<p>On top of this, when faced with facts from Adi-shankara’s own words and works, they resort of word play and grammar to twist the acharya’s words to their convenience. In instances, they even insult Shankaracharya’s teaching, and by extension the acharya himself, while claiming to follow his siddhanta. Unfortunately, a pseudo-advaitin won’t hesitate to brand others as abrahamic, sectarian, hatemonger and what not (that other can even be a fellow advaitin) simply because others disagree with their own concocted views.</p>
|
|
<blockquote>
<p>हरेर्नाम हरेर्नाम हरेर्नामैव केवलम्।<br>
कलौ नास्त्येव नास्त्येव नास्त्येव गतिरन्यथा॥</p>
<p>meaning Harinama, Harinama, only Harinama ....there is no other way, no other way in the kaliyuga [for illumination].</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The above sloka was mentioned by Lord Chaitanyadeva Himself. Does this sloka make sandhyavandana and all other pujas redundant and futile in this kali yuga? I am asking because its a quote from Vrihan-Naradiya-Purana and the words of Smriti are above the Puranas as per our sanatana dharma norms.</p>
| 32110 | 32102 | 3 | 2 | 32102 | 4 | What exactly is meant by Harernamaiva Kevalam | 3 | 32110 | <p>Narada Muni was repeating to many other similar verses found in other Mahapuranas i.e., Vishnu Purana and Bhagavatam in different matters. </p>
<p>The mode of worship change from time to time and yuga to yuga due to change in conditions and the ability of the worshippers. The spiritual levels of people has also fallen. We do not have much time to perform penances or do meditation. We even have problems in understanding the esoteric meaning of the Vedas and other holy scriptures. If much time is put in that, when do we apply those teachings and strive for moksha? Hence, the provision was made. This is the easiest way.</p>
<p>Vyasa says the following in Amsha 6 adhyaya 2 of Vishnu Purana </p>
<blockquote>
<p>The fruit of penance, of continence, of silent prayer, and the like, practised in the Krita age for ten years, in the Treta for one year, in the Dwápara for a month, is obtained in the Kali age in a day and night: therefore did I exclaim "Excellent, excellent, is the Kali age!" <strong>That reward which a man obtains in the Krita by abstract meditation, in the Treta by sacrifice, in the Dwápara by adoration, he receives in the Kali by merely reciting the name of Keshava</strong>.</p>
<p>kaliṁ sabhājayanty āryā guṇa jñāḥ sāra-bhāginaḥ<br>
yatra saṅkīrtanenaiva sarva-svārtho ’bhilabhyate (Srimad Bhagavatam Skandha 11 chapter 5 shloka 36)</p>
<p>Those who are actually advanced in knowledge are able to appreciate the essential value of this Age of Kali. Such enlightened persons worship Kali-yuga because in this fallen age all perfection of life can easily be achieved by the performance of saṅkīrtana. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>There is also a statement in the Uttara Khanda of Ramayana where the advisors of Sri Rama says the characteristics of Yuga change and the worshipping methods also change. Hence the spiritual level of all the Varnas will be the same i.e., a Brahmana will be the same as Shudra (I have to find exact verse though).</p>
<p>More instances were added in an answer written by Keshav Srinivasan <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/2150/5212">Do methods of worship change according to yugas?</a></p>
<p>Chaitanya Mahaprabhu emphasized on Sankirtana out of nava vidha bhaktis. Hence he said that Hari Nama sankirtana is enough for getting liberation. </p>
<p>Adi Shankaracharya also says in his Bhaja Govindam stotra : </p>
<blockquote>
<p>bhajagovindaM bhajagovindaM<br>
govindaM bhajamuuDhamate .<br>
saMpraapte sannihite kaale<br>
nahi nahi rakshati DukRiJNkaraNe </p>
<p><strong>Worship Govinda, Worship Govinda, Worship Govinda. Oh fool! Rules of Grammar will not save you at the time of your death</strong>.</p>
<p>bhagavad.h giitaa kiJNchidadhiitaa<br>
gaNgaa jalalava kaNikaapiitaa .<br>
sakRidapi yena muraari samarchaa<br>
kriyate tasya yamena na charchaa </p>
<p>Let a man read but a little from Gitaa, drink just a drop of water from the ganges, <strong>worship murari (govinda) just once</strong>. He then will have no altercation with Yama. Stanza attributed to dR^iDhabhakta. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>In the above verse, Adi Shankaracharya recommends worship of Krishna just even once and says the person will have no altercation with Yama which means he will not have to visit Naraka (meaning Lord will take care and give better lokas).</p>
<p>So, the verse strongly suggests the nama sankirtana of Lord Vishnu. That doesn't mean we should leave our duties of performing Sandhyavandanam and deeds like visiting temples. Lord Krishna states one should do his own duty. The verse is suggesting that Lord Vishnu's name is enough for liberation.</p>
|
|
<p>Some people nowadays say <em>only</em> the Shruti (Vedas) is the sole authority in regard to Dharma, and what is not Shruti, like the Smriti, Dharma Shastras, Puranas, etc. is man-made and can be rejected. </p>
<p>Is this position logical according to the Rishis and ancient Acharyas?</p>
| 32214 | 32213 | 8 | 2 | 32213 | 7 | What do ancient Hindu acharyas say about accepting the authority of Shruti but denying the authority of Smriti? | 3 | 32214 | <p><strong>Ancient Acharyas say that it is only logical to accept the validity of Smriti, because the expounders of Shruti also expound the Smriti. Hence, the Smriti is based on Shruti.</strong></p>
<p>Firstly, we accept the Vedas as eternal and divine because Vedic scholars say so. In other words, we have trust in Vedic scholars and the Vedic Sampradayas that produce very learned, trustworthy, and religious Vedic scholars. So when those Vedic scholars say, "The Vedas are divine and eternal," we believe them. </p>
<p><strong>The expounders of the Vedas are the basis for the trustworthiness of the Vedas.</strong> This is the basis for the trustworthiness of the Vedas.</p>
<p>Now there might be some sectarian differences, like Nyayas believe the Vedas were divinely composed by Ishvara. Some others say the Vedic swaras are eternal, but the Rishis composed the words of the Vedas.</p>
<p>Either way, what almost all ancient Vedic sampradayas believe is that the Vedas are eternal and the primary authority for spiritual matters.</p>
<p>Having established that the Vedas are the foremost authority because they are eternal, what about Smritis which are authored? Do Smritis have any authority?</p>
<p>This question is answered in the ancient, very important work called the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purva_Mimamsa_Sutras" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Purva Mimamsa Sutras</em></a>, which were authored by Jaimini Rishi, who was a sishya of Vedavyasa.</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://archive.org/stream/ShabaraBhasyaTrByGanganathJha/Shabara%20Bhasya%20tr%20by%20Ganganath%20Jha%20Vol%201#page/n100/mode/1up" rel="nofollow noreferrer">1.3.1</a> - [Purvapaksha] In as much as Dharma is based upon the
Veda, what is not Veda should be disregarded.</p>
<p>1.3.2 - [Siddhanta] But Smriti is trustworthy, as there would be inference (assumption, of the basis in the Veda) <strong>from the fact of
the agent being the same.</strong></p>
<p>1.3.3 - When there is conflict between Shruti and Smriti, the Smriti should be disregarded; because it is only when there is no such
conflict that there is an inference of Vedic text in support of
Smriti.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Sutra 1 is the opponent's viewpoint. The opponent is saying that everything that is not a Vedic text should be disregarded because <em>only</em> the Veda is the source of Dharma.</p>
<p>Sutra 2 is challenging that and saying that the memory of the expounders of the Vedas is also a Pramana. <strong>This is the position of Jaimini himself. He wrote this Sutra.</strong> There were thousands of Vedic shakhas in existence in ancient times, and only a handful have survived today. The Dharma Shastras are a summary of the topics of particular Vedic Shakhas, and the Smriti is the recollection of the expounders of that Shakha. </p>
<p>In other words, at one point, there may have been a Vedic shakha that enjoined certain things not existing in any extant shakha, but the Vedic text that enjoined that practice was lost, and the only thing that is left is the "memory" of the expounders of the Vedas. This is what is meant by Smriti. </p>
<p>Basically, Sutra 2 is saying just as the Parampara expounds the Vedas, they also expound the recollections that were presumably once based on the Vedas.</p>
<p>So, it is illogical to believe Vedic scholars when they say "This is a Vedic text," and not believe them when they say "This is a Vedic injunction, but I have lost the text." </p>
<p>And it is especially illogical to accuse them of fabricating verses, because then you can just as well accuse them of tampering with the Vedic texts. </p>
<p>And finally, Sutra 3 just says that when there is a conflict between Shruti and Smriti, discard Smriti and go with Shruti, because the inference of a lost Vedic text to corroborate a Smriti verse is only valid when there is no conflict between Shruti and Smriti. In other words, since Smriti presupposes Shruti, if an extant Shruti text refutes a Smriti text, then the Shruti text is more authoritative since it is <em>direct perception</em> of a Vedic passage, and <em>direct perception</em> is always stronger than <em>inference.</em></p>
<hr>
<p>Manu also lists the 4 sources of Dharma: </p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc145579.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">2.6</a> - The entire Veda is the root-source of Dharma; also the
Conscientious Recollection of righteous persons versed in the Veda,
the Practice of Good (and learned) Men, and their self-satisfaction.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>"The entire Veda" is Shruti.</p>
<p>"Recollection of righteous persons" is Smriti.</p>
<p>"Practice of Good and learned Men" is Achara.</p>
<p>"Their self-satisfaction" is Atmanastushti.</p>
<hr>
<p>Also, the Vedas themselves say that Smriti is valid.</p>
<p>The Chhandogya Upanishad itself <a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe01/sbe01135.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">says</a> that the Puranas and Itihasas are the 5th Veda:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>7.1.2 - Nârada said: 'I know the Rig-veda, Sir, the Yagur-veda, the Sâma-veda, as the fourth the Âtharvana, <strong>as the fifth the
Itihâsa-purâna</strong> (itihāsapurāṇaṃ pañcamaṃ vedānāṃ)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Same with the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, which <a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe15/sbe15061.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">says</a> that even the Smriti was inspired by Brahman:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>2.4.10 - 'As clouds of smoke proceed by themselves out of a lighted fire
kindled with damp fuel, thus, verily, O Maitreyî, <strong>has been breathed
forth from this great Being</strong> what we have as Rig-veda, Yagur-veda,
Sama-veda, Atharvâṅgirasas, Itihâsa (legends), Purâna (cosmogonies),
Vidyâ (knowledge), the Upanishads, Slokas (verses), Sûtras (prose
rules), Anuvyâkhyânas (glosses), Vyâkhyânas (commentaries) 1. From him
alone all these were breathed forth.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The <em>Taittiriya Samhita</em> of the <em>Krishna Yajur Veda</em> <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/31999/11726">says</a> that the Manusmriti is authoritative:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Whatever Manu has said is beneficial.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>And finally, quotes from various <em>Dharma Shastras</em>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Baudhāyana, Dharmasūtra, 1.1.6.—‘Dharma has been enjoined in each
Veda.’ ‘The second source of knowledge consists of the Smṛtis.’ ‘The
third is what proceeds from the cultured, i. e., those persons who are
free from jealousy and selfishness, fairly well off, free from
avarice, haughtiness, greed, delusion, and anger.’ ‘Those persons are
cultured who have studied the Vedas along with their supplements and
who are versed in the art of making deductions from them; those are
the persons from whom the direct knowledge of Śruti can be derived.’</p>
<p>Gautama, Dharmasūtra, 1.1-2.—‘Veda is the source of Dharma’: ‘the
Smṛti and Śīla of persons learned in the Veda.’</p>
<p>Āpastamba, Dharmasūtra, 1.2-3.—‘The convention of persons knowing
Dharma is authoritative’: ‘and also the Vedas.’</p>
<p>Vaśiṣṭha, Smrti, 1.4-6.—‘In the absence of Śruti and Smṛti, the custom
of the cultured is authoritative’: ‘those persons are cultured whose
mind is free from selfish desires’: ‘that is to be regarded as Dharma
which is not prompted by a selfish motive.’</p>
<p>Yajñavalkya, Smṛti, 1-7.—‘Śruti, Smṛti, the practice of good men,
self-satisfaction determination based upon right volition,—these four
are the source of Dharma.’</p>
<p>Āpastamba, Dharmasūtra, 1.4.7.—‘The Śruti is more authoritative than
custom which derives its authority only from assumption (of
corroboration of Śruti).’</p>
<p>Ibid, 30.9.—‘In cases of conflict, what is stated in the Śruti is more
authoritative.’</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p><strong>Therefore, it stands that all ancient Acharyas accept the authority of Smriti, and that there is a logical foundation for accepting both Smriti and Shruti.</strong></p>
|
|
<p>He does say that he is sufficient: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Sarva-dharman parityajya mam ekam saranam vraja: "Give up all other duties and surrender unto Me."</p>
</blockquote>
<p>If he says anywhere that he is necessary - that would make Bhagavad Gita a sectarian document. </p>
| 32235 | 32233 | 0 | 2 | 32233 | 0 | Does Krishna say in the Bhagavad Gita that he alone can grant liberation? | 5 | 32235 | <p>This actually depends on the commentator or the one who is reading it. This <a href="https://www.gitasupersite.iitk.ac.in/srimad?language=dv&field_chapter_value=18&field_nsutra_value=66&htrskd=1&scms=1&scsri=1&scneel=1&setgb=1&etassa=1&etradi=1&choose=1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">link</a> shows that Sri Adi Shankaracharya means the Real Self by 'Me' here, whereas some others mean Narayana. And this link shows it means Lord Krishna: <a href="https://asitis.com/18/66.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://asitis.com/18/66.html</a></p>
<p>It is very cllear that Vishnu, Shiva, Shakti and Surya are just the altrnative forms of the Supreme Godhead according to Mahabharat and Gita , because:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>In Gita, Arjuna refers to Sri Krishna as Vishnu so many times and so equality of Vishnu and Krishna is well established.</p></li>
<li><p>We get Adityas in plural number while Surya is used always in the ekavachana meaning He is One. In the Vishnusahasranama, which is a part of the Mahabharata as is the Gita, the name ‘Surya’ has been mentioned. This means the equlity of Surya and Krishna is established in the Mahabharata.</p></li>
<li><p>Different names of Shiva like Swambhu, Sambhu and also also Shiva are mentioned in the Vishnusahasranama. This establishes the equality of Vishnu and Shiva. By the way, the name “Rudra” is not mentioned even in the Shivasahasranama in Mahabharata, meaning that the eleven Rudra were considered a devata and not God.</p></li>
<li><p>Sri Krishna asks Arjuna to pray to Mother Durga before the Kurukshetra war starts (Bhishmaparva, 23/2). In Arjuna’s parayer, Durga has been mentioned as “Janani” (Universal Mother) and “Swadha”(a sacred mantra). In Gita, Sri Krishna says that He Himself is the Universal Mother and Swadha. So the unity of Durga and Krishna is established in Mahabharata and so Gita.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>At the same time, the Gita accepts the four words of the Absolute forms : Brahman(chapter 8, sloka 13), Atma(chapter 10, sloka 20), Ishwar(chaper 18, sloka 61), and Bhagavan(He is always referred to as Sri Bhagavan in Gita).
So Gita is a Scripture of Synthesis: (i) Of the forms of Yogas (Karmayoga(chapter 3,sloka 19) jnanayoga (chapter12,sloka 3&4) Rajayoga (chapter 5, sloka 27 & 28) and Bhaktiyoga(chapter 11,sloka 54), and (ii) Of all the names of the Absolute forms and (iii) Of all the names of the Hindu Godheads.</p>
<p>Quite naturally, it has been the treasure of all the sects belonging to the Sanatana Dharma.</p>
<p>Sri Ramakrishna has explained the equality of God the Self beautifully. He says one's Ishtadevata is His or Her real Self.(Ref: Sriramkrishnake jerup dekhiyachhi, udbodhan karyalaya).According to Sri Sitaramdas Omkarnath,a great saint of the modern time, who actually belonged to the Ramanuja-Ramanandi sect, says that all mantras ultimately merges in OM and its the Para Pranava Who is the Real Self.(Reference: Sudhar Dhara,Sri Sri Sitaramdas Omkarnath).He has written the Pranava Prema Pijusha Vashya of Gita which has been published by the Mahamilan Math.</p>
<p>To conclude, this "Me" of Gita is the God or the Ultimate for any spiritual seeker.</p>
|
|
<p>The Hare Krishna mahamantra which I have heard from my family and saints is the following:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hare_Krishna_(mantra)#History" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Wikipedia</a> mentions the same mantra and so does <a href="http://www.advaita.it/library/kaliasant.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this source</a></p>
<p>While the one which I have heard from ISKCON is little bit different:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare Hare</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Although it doesn't make much a difference but still I want to know which is the correct one? </p>
<p>Some people say the latter one is interpolated. Since Krishna was more revered in the heart of some devotees, they interpolated it. Is that true? </p>
<p>Please note that the question is not whether interpolating this mantra slightly makes a difference or not but only that whether it has been done or not.</p>
| 32298 | 32290 | 2 | 2 | 32290 | 3 | What is the original Hare Krishna mahamantra | 3 | 32298 | <p>The original mantra is indeed "Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare".</p>
<p>The scriptural basis of this mantra comes from the Kali-Saṇṭāraṇa Upanishad where Brahma reveals this mantra to Narada in response to the latter's question of how Jivas can resist the effects of Kali in Kali-Yuga:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>At the end of Dvāpara yuga, Nārada went to Brahma and addressed him thus: "O Lord, how shall I, roaming over the earth, be able to cross Kali?" To which Brahma thus replied: "Well asked. Hearken to that which all Śrutis (the Vedas) keep secret and hidden, through which one may cross the saṃsāra (mundane existence) of Kali. He shakes off (the evil effects of) Kali through the mere uttering of the name of the Lord Nārāyaṇa, who is the primeval Puruṣa." Again Nārada asked Brahma: "What is the name?" To which Hiraṇyagarbha (Brahma) replied thus: (the words are:) <strong>"Hare Rāma Hare, Rāma, Rāma, Rāma, Hare, Hare; Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare, Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Hare, Hare."</strong> These sixteen names (words) are destructive of the evil effects of Kali. No better means than this is to be seen in all the Vedas. These (sixteen names) destroy the āvaraṇa (or the centripetal force which produces the sense of individuality) of jīva surrounded by the sixteen kalās (rays). Then like the sphere of the sun which shines fully after the clouds (screening it) disperse, Parabrahman (alone) shines.". (<strong>Kali-Saṇṭāraṇa Upanishad</strong>)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So yes, your family and the saints you met are right about the original mantra beginning from "Hare Rama". It was only modified by Gaudiya Vaishnavas because of their preference/importance to Krishna.</p>
<p>As a sidenote, I would like to add that in the mantra, "Rama" refers to the Maryada Purushottam Rama but according to the Gaudiya Vaishnava interpretation, "Rama" refers to Balarama, the elder brother of Krishna.</p>
|
|
<p>Critics say the Manusmriti is pro-Brahmin, and written by casteist Brahmins by favoring a particular section of society and thereby oppressing Shudras, women, and other lower castes.</p>
<p>Edit Note: While Varṇa and class are often associated in general use, from within the religion Varṇa is objective, and isn't dependent on how humans organize themselves. As can clearly be seen in the number of times people get it wrong.</p>
<p>Is this argument valid?</p>
| 32484 | 32483 | 10 | 2 | 32483 | 12 | Is the Manusmriti written to favor a particular Varṇa? | 4 | 32484 | <h1><strong>NOTE</strong>: Manusmriti critics have <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking" rel="noreferrer">cherry-picked</a> certain verses from the Manusmriti to show that Manu was unfair towards Shudras and partial towards Brahmins. The purpose of this answer is to provide the rest of the other verses that censure bad Brahmins and praise good Shudras, to show that the critics cherry-picked those verses unfairly, and that Manu is actually fair towards all castes.</h1>
<h1>In reality, the Manusmriti censures bad Brahmins and bad Shudras, and praises good Brahmins and good Shudras.</h1>
<hr />
<blockquote>
<p>Is the Manusmriti pro-Brahmin and written by casteist Brahmins to oppress Shudras?</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>No, because upon a closer look at the Manusmriti, its intention is to secure the welfare of all living beings.</strong></p>
<p>If the Manusmriti is pro-Brahmin, then how could it have verses like this?</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201008.html" rel="noreferrer">8.102</a></strong> - ‘<strong>He shall treat like Śūdras the Brāhmaṇas</strong> who tend cattle, who engage in trade, and who are craftsmen, actors, menial servants or money-lenders.’</p>
<p>(Brâhmanas) who neither study nor teach the Veda nor keep sacred fires become equal to Sûdras;</p>
<p>And they quote a verse of Manu on this (subject), 'A twice-born man, who not having studied the Veda applies himself to other (worldly studies), soon falls, even while living, to the condition of a Sûdra, and his descendants after him.'</p>
<p>'(A twice-born man) who does not know the Veda (can)not be (called) a Brâhmana, nor he who lives by trade, nor he who (lives as) an actor, nor he who obeys a Sûdra's commands, nor (he who like) a thief (takes the property of others), <strong>nor he who makes his living by the practice of medicine.'</strong></p>
<p><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc199563.html" rel="noreferrer"><strong>2.103</strong></a> - But he [the Dvija] who does not stand during the morning-twilight, and who does not sit through the evening-twilight, <strong>should be excluded, like the Sūdra, from all that is due to twice-born persons.</strong></p>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201969.html" rel="noreferrer">11.90</a></strong> - A twice-born person, having, through folly, drunk wine, shall drink wine red-hot; he becomes freed from his guilt, when his body has been completely burnt by it.</p>
<p>Gautama (23.1).—<strong>‘They shall pour hot wine into the mouth of a Brāhmaṇa who has drunk wine; he will be purified by death.’</strong></p>
<p>Baudhāyana (2.1.18, 19, 21).—‘If he [a Brahmana] has drunk Surā he shall scald himself to death with hot wine.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc199913.html" rel="noreferrer"><strong>3.133</strong></a> - As many mouthfuls as the person [Brahmana] ignorant of the Veda swallows out of the offerings to gods and Pitṛs [at a Sraddha], <strong>so many flaming spikes, spears and iron-balls does the man [Brahmana] swallow after death.</strong></p>
<p>Hārīta (Do.).—‘Even those born of noble families and endowed with learning,—if they be of base conduct and addicted to wicked deeds,—they are even regarded as demons. Those addicted to the killing of birds, fish and deer, serpents and tortoise and other animals are <strong>all Bad Brāhmaṇas</strong>. Who serves a Śūdra, who is supported by the King, the village-sacrificer, those living by killing and capturing—these six are <strong>Low Brāhmaṇas.</strong>’</p>
<p><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc200394.html" rel="noreferrer"><strong>5.19</strong></a> - The mushroom, the village-pig, garlic, the village-cock, onions and leeks,—<strong>the twice-born man eating these intentionally would become an outcast.</strong></p>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc200410.html" rel="noreferrer">5.53</a></strong> - In normal times the twice-born man conversant with the law shall not eat meat unlawfully; <strong>having eaten it unlawfully, he shall, after death, be devoured by them helplessly.</strong></p>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc200412.html" rel="noreferrer">5.35</a></strong> - But when invited according to law, <strong>if a man [Brahmana] does not eat meat, he becomes, after death, a beast, during twenty-one births.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>And many more verses. Of course, there are many verses praising Brahmanas, but as shown above, there are many verses deprecating bad Brahmanas. <strong>So, how can anti-Hindus <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking" rel="noreferrer">cherry pick</a> certain verses and portray the Manusmriti as pro-Brahmin? That is unfair, biased, and illogical.</strong></p>
<hr />
<p>Now let's address another related criticism.</p>
<hr />
<h2>Is the Manusmriti anti-low caste?</h2>
<p>No it is not. Dharma is conducive to one's welfare. According to Jaimini's <em>Purva Mimamsa</em> Sutra 1.1.2:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Dharma is that which is indicated by the Veda as <strong>conducive to the highest good.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Therefore, how can anyone say that Dharma is wrong or evil?</p>
<p>Here is the Dharma of Shudras:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201727.html" rel="noreferrer">9.334</a></strong> - For the Śūdra the highest duty conducive to his best welfare is to attend upon such Brāhmaṇa house-holders as are learned
in the Vedas and famous.</p>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201728.html" rel="noreferrer">9.335</a></strong> - If he is pure, attendant upon his superiors, of gentle speech, free from pride, and always dependent upon the
Brāhmaṇa,—<strong>he attains a higher caste.</strong></p>
<p>Viṣṇupurāṇa (Parāśaramādhava-Ācāra, p. 419).—‘It is only through attending upon the twice-born that the Śūdra becomes entitled to perform the Pākayajñas; <strong>and thereby becoming blessed, he wins the worlds [earth and heaven].</strong>—The Śūdra also shall make gifts, and perform the Pākayajña-sacrifices, as also the rites in honour of Pitṛs.’</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Why should Shudras serve Brahmanas aside from it being their primary duty? Because according to the Mahabharata:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Mahābhārata—Anuśāsana (Do.).—‘Finding the Śūdra oppressed with bad
traits due to the quality of Tamas, Pitāmaha ordained attendance upon
the twice-born as his duty. Through his devotion to the twice-born,
the Śūdra drops off all those traits due to the quality of Tamas; and
by attending upon the twice-born, the Śūdra attains the highest
good.—Harmless, devoted to good deeds, worshipful towards gods and the
twice-born, the Śūdra becomes endowed with all the rewards of Dharma.’</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Shudras are in fact, <em>oppressed by the quality of Tamas</em>, and <strong>not</strong> by serving Brahmanas! It is by serving Brahmanas that Shudras become Sattvic, and then are no longer oppressed!</p>
<p>Also, some rights given to Shudras that higher castes don't have:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc145599.html" rel="noreferrer">2.23</a></strong> - But the region where the spotted deer roams by nature is to be known as the ‘land fit for sacrificial acts’; beyond that is the ‘land of the Mlecchas.</p>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc145600.html" rel="noreferrer">2.24</a></strong> - The twice-born people should seek to resort to these countries [where the spotted deer roams by nature]; <strong>the Śūdra may however, when distressed for a living, reside in any land.</strong></p>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201864.html" rel="noreferrer">10.122</a></strong> - He shall serve Brāhmaṇas either for the sake of heaven, or for the sake of both; when he has attained the title of the ‘Brāhmaṇa,’ this implies the accomplishment of all his purposes.</p>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201866.html" rel="noreferrer">10.124</a></strong> - They [the Dvijas who are served by a Shudra] should provide out of their family, a suitable maintenance for him [the Shudra servant], after considering his own capacity, and the man’s skill and the burden of persons to be supported by him.</p>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201867.html" rel="noreferrer">10.125</a></strong> - Remnants of food and worn-out clothes shall be given to him; as also the grain-refuse and old furniture.</p>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201868.html" rel="noreferrer">10.126</a></strong> - <strong>For the Śūdra there is no sin</strong>; nor is he worthy of any sacraments; he is not entitled to any sacred rites; but there is no prohibition against sacred rites.</p>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201869.html" rel="noreferrer">10.127</a></strong> - If those [Shudras] who, knowing their duty, and wishing to acquire merit, imitate the practices of righteous men, with the exception of reciting the sacred texts, they incur no guilt; <strong>they obtain praise.</strong></p>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201972.html" rel="noreferrer">11.93</a></strong> - Wine [Sura] indeed is the dirty refuse of grains, and sin also is called ‘dirt’; for this reason the <strong>Brāhmaṇa, the Kṣatriya and the Vaiśya shall not drink wine [but the Shudra can].</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe02/sbe0274.htm#fr_1128" rel="noreferrer"><strong>Gautama 10.67</strong></a> - If Âryans and non-Âryans interchange their occupations and conduct (the one taking that of the other, there is) equality (between them).</p>
<p>'There is equality between them, i.e. the one need not serve the other. A Sûdra need not serve even a Brâhmana, (much less) any other (twice-born man) who lives the life of a non-Âryan (Sûdra). A Sûdra, even, who conducts himself like an 'Âryan must not be despised by men of other castes, who follow the occupations of non-Âryans, on account of his inferior birth.'--Haradatta.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>On the other hand, there are verses that <em>seem</em> to be anti-caste, such as these:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201203.html" rel="noreferrer">8.270</a></strong> - If a once-born person insults a twice-born one with gross abuse, he should suffer the cutting off of his tongue; as he is of low origin.</p>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201204.html" rel="noreferrer">8.271</a></strong> - If he mentions the name and caste of these men with scorn, a burning iron nail ten inches long shall be thrust into his mouth.</p>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201205.html" rel="noreferrer">8.272</a></strong> - If through arrogance, he teaches brāhmaṇas their duty, the king shall pour heated oil into his mouth and ears.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>However, these verses stand on the same footing as verses like these:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Gautama (23.1).—‘They shall pour hot wine into the mouth of a Brāhmaṇa who has drunk wine; he will be purified by death.’</p>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201984.html" rel="noreferrer">11.103</a></strong> - He who has violated his Preceptor’s bed shall confess his crime and lie down upon a heated iron-bed; or embrace a blazing image. By death he becomes purified.</p>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201985.html" rel="noreferrer">11.104</a></strong> - Or, having cut off his penis and testicles, he shall take them in his joined hands and walk straight on towards the ‘region of evil spirits,’ until he falls down [dead].</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Therefore, it is not right to select some verses and say "the Manusmriti is anti-Shudra."</p>
<p>Therefore, the Manusmriti was not written by casteist Brahmins who wanted to oppress Shudras.</p>
|
|
<p>We treat the Vedas including the Upanishads as representations of our highest Truth. We have Itihaasas like Ramayana and Mahabharata that provides the Bhagavad-Gita, which contains the essence of the Sanatana Dharma. We also have the different Smritis as the rule books. What exact role do the Puranas play in the Sanatana Dharma?</p>
| 32631 | 32611 | 16 | 2 | 32611 | 7 | What exactly is the role of the Puranas in the Sanatana Dharma? | 3 | 32631 | <p>According to the Devi Bhagavatam, for the benefit of the Sudras, lower Dvijas and women Puranas are composed. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>18-24. At every Manvantara, in each Dvâpara Yuga, Veda Vyâsa expounds
the Purânas duly to preserve the religion. Veda Vyâsa is no other
person than Visnu Himself; He, in the form of Veda Vyâsa, divides the
(one) Veda into four parts, in every Dvâpara Yuga, for the good of the
world. The Brahmânas of the Kali age are shortlived and their
intellect (Buddhi) is not sharp; they cannot realise the meaning after
studying the Vedas; knowing this in every Dvâpara Yuga Bhagavân
expounds the holy Purâna Samhitas. The more so because women, S’udras,
and the lower Dvijas are not entitled to hear the Vedas; for their
good, the Purânas have been composed. Tne present auspicious
Manvantara is Vaivasvata; it is the seventh in due order; and the son
of Satyavati, the best of the knowers of Dharma, is the Veda Vyâsa of
the 28th Dvâpara Yuga of this seventh Manvantara. He is my Guru; in
the next Dvâpara, Yuga Asvatthama, the son of Drona will be the Veda
Vyâsa. Twenty-seven Veda Vyâsas had expired and they duly compiled
each their own Purâna Samhitas in their own Dvâpara Yugas.</p>
<p><strong>Chapter 3, First Book</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>But have a look at the following verse where Lord Shiva is defining why Purana is so named. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Punya PApAdi KathanaAd RAkshashA DinibAranAt|<br> NavabhaktyAdi
JananAt PurAn Iti Kathyate|| </p>
<p>Because it tells of merit and demerit, Punyapapa, because it dispels
evil beings like Raksasas, and because it generates ninefold devotion,
Navabhakti, and the like, it is called Purana.</p>
<p><em>KulArnava TantrA 17.39</em> </p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, this verse gives three purposes of a Purana: </p>
<ol>
<li><p>Tell what is PApa and what is Punya.</p></li>
<li><p>To dispel evil beings.</p></li>
<li><p>To generate devotion among the masses.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>And, if you see, then it is only the Puranas which talk about Bhakti a whole lot more than any scriptures like Vedas, Smritis, Tantras.</p>
|
|
<p>From the <em><a href="https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/1/2/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Srimad Bhagavatam</a></em>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Text 2: Śrīla Sūta Gosvāmī said: Let me offer my respectful obeisances
unto that great sage [Śukadeva Gosvāmī] who can enter the hearts of
all. When he went away to take up the renounced order of life
[sannyāsa], <strong>leaving home without undergoing reformation by the
sacred thread or the ceremonies observed by the higher castes</strong>, his
father, Vyāsadeva, fearing separation from him, cried out, “O my son!”
Indeed, only the trees, which were absorbed in the same feelings of
separation, echoed in response to the begrieved father.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Also, did he become a Shudra by doing this?</p>
| 32668 | 32613 | 6 | 2 | 32613 | 6 | How come Shukadeva did not undergo Upanayanam? | 3 | 32668 | <p>First of all, the Madhwa commentator Viijayadhvaja Tirtha and the Pushtimarga Acharya Vallabhacharya both say that the word "pravrajantam" in this verse does not mean taking up Sanyasa, and that Shuka did not take Sanyasa without doing Upanayana; see page 15 of <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=J04IAQAAIAAJ&q=%22as+his+thread+ceremony+had+not+taken+place%22&dq=%22as+his+thread+ceremony+had+not+taken+place%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiwuvDC5qXgAhUIMt8KHevYBI8Q6AEIKjAA" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this book</a>. Second of all, the Sri Vaishnava Acharya Vedanta Desikan actually discusses Shuka in <a href="http://gdurl.com/G9Gg" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this excerpt</a> from the Alepakamatabhangavada, a chapter of his Satadhusani devoted to refuting the Advaita view that those who have attained Brahmajnana do not have to follow the rules of Varnashrama Dharma.</p>
<p>The Advaita opponent cites Shuka as an example of someone who didn't follow Varnashrama Dharma because he had Brahmajnana. Here is how Vedanta Desikan responds:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>[Opponent:] "Since the authoritative texts disclose that Ribhu, Shuka, Samvarta and the like practised nudity and other similar vows, we believe that they were outside all the ashramas." [Response:] That is not true, because even nudity is a special kind of vow that aims at enduring rain, wind, heat, and the like; a vow that is associated with the special practice of eating each mouthful completely (as soon as it is received). It is a vow that only certain unique men of ancient times were qualified to perform. If he were outside the ashramas, how could the king have chosen Samvarta, who was subsisting on air alone, as the priest for his sacrifice? Nudity, therefore, is just a special vow common to all varnas and ashramas, for only householders can perform priestly functions and the like. In the olden days even a widower, after fulfilling certain conditions such as taking a (new) wife, was considered fit to function as a priest.</p>
<p>[Opponent:] "'Over five hundred royal courtesans flocked to him.... After he had eaten, my dear, each of them in turn showed him the beautiful park of the female quarters in the palace.' [Mahabharata 12.312.37,39] Surely, these texts show that the great seer, Shuka, a knower of Brahman, also ate in the company of courtesans." [Response:] Wrong, because that statement is also made with reference to a situation in which these women were employed as servants <strong>to feed Brahmins and others who had completed their Vedic initiation</strong>, and, after the meal, to perform such services as fanning. It is quite clear that the intent here, indeed, was only to test Shuka's chastity and other such virtues. The text does not indicate that he ate forbidden food....</p>
<p>In the following passage of the Bhagavata Purana describing the appearance of the Paramahamsa Shuka, moreover, <strong>the phrase "he had no visible emblem" is used to indicate the concealment of the emblem</strong>, because such concealment is associated with the vow of nudity: [...] "He had the appearance of an Avadhuta, he had no visible emblem, and he was surrounded by children." [Srimad Bhagavatam 1.19.25]</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>Many Indians today think that fair/white skin is beautiful while dark/black skin is ugly.</p>
<p>Is dark skin considered beautiful in Hindu scriptures, and by extension, in ancient India before European colonization?</p>
| 32679 | 32670 | 8 | 2 | 32670 | 10 | Is dark skin considered beautiful in Hindu scriptures? | 4 | 32679 | <p>Yes, dark complexion is considered beautiful in Hindu scriptures. Like, Draupadi is one of the most beautiful woman and she is of dark complexion. It is mentioned in <a href="https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01170.htm" rel="noreferrer">Mahabharata, Book 1: Adi Parva: Chaitraratha Parva: SECTION CLXIX</a>.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>And there arose, after this from the centre of the sacrificial platform, a daughter also, called Panchali, who, blest with great good fortune, was exceedingly handsome. Her eyes were black, and large as lotus-petals, <strong>her complexion was dark</strong>, and her locks were blue and curly. Her nails were beautifully convex, and bright as burnished copper; her eye-brows were fair, and bosom was deep. Indeed, she resembled the veritable daughter of a celestial born among men.</p>
<p>Her body gave out fragrance like that of a blue lotus, perceivable from a distance of full two miles. <strong>Her beauty was such that she had no equal on earth</strong>. Like a celestial herself, she could be desired (in marriage) by a celestial, a Danava, or a: Yaksha. When this girl of fair hips was born an incorporeal voice said, 'This dark-complexioned girl will be the first of all women, and she will be the cause of the destruction of many Kshatriyas. This slender-waisted one will, in time, accomplish the purpose of the gods, and along with her many a danger will overtake the Kauravas.'</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Also Lord Krishna is of dark complexion and considered handsome as mentioned at many places as in <a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03261.htm" rel="noreferrer">Mahabharata, Book 3: Vana Parva: Draupadi-harana Parva: SECTION CCLXI</a>.</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>O thou with a complexion dark as the leaves of the blue lotus</strong>, and with eyes red as the corolla of the lily, and attired in yellow robes with, besides, the bright Kaustubha gem in thy bosom, thou art the beginning and the end of creation, and the great refuge of all.</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>Generally, Hindus are vegetarian. They avoid mamsah i.e flesh of animals like meat, fish - because it means their suffering and death. Some avoid eggs also. Atleast it is very limited, and they don't eat it daily like western countries, and avoid it during religious functions.</p>
<p>What is the reason behind this ? Is compassion/ahimsa the only reason ? Is it voluntary or compulsory ?</p>
<p>Is there any punishment for eating meat ? Is there any reward for avoiding meat ?
What is the real meaning of the word 'mamsah' (मांसः)? Does it have anything to do with why they are vegetarian ?</p>
| 32681 | 32675 | 15 | 2 | 32675 | 9 | Why are Hindus vegetarian? What is the real meaning of the word 'mamsah' (मांसः) or meat? | 5 | 32681 | <p><a href="https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m13/m13b081.htm" rel="noreferrer"><strong>Mahabharata</strong></a> - Anushasana Parva -Dana Dharma Parva - Chapters 114-116 are discussing this issue in very detail. This is discussion between Bhishma , Yudhisthira and Rishi Vaishampayana. These chapters is highlighting the topic of Ahimsa (non killing). </p>
<h1>what is the real meaning of the-word-mamsah-मांसः?</h1>
<p>The etymology of word mamsah <strong>:</strong>
The essence of word Mansa is told by Bhishma in Chapter 116 - Verse 25.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>मां स भक्षयते यस्माद भक्षयिय्षे तपप्यहम |<br> एतन्मासस्य
मांसत्वनुबुद्ध्यस्व भारत ||25||<br></p>
<p>P 243 - Since he hath eaten me, I shall eat him in return,--even this,
O Bharata, constitutes the character as Mansa of Mansa. So the real
meaning of mansa is he creature who is going to eaten says that , i
also in future will eat the eater in same manner. And this is the
real meaning of Ma मां Sa सा.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m13/m13b081.htm#fr_261" rel="noreferrer"><strong>Footnote</strong></a> - Mansa is flesh. This verse explains the <strong>etymology</strong> of the word, Mam (me) sa; Me he eateth, therefore, I shall eat him. The words following Me he should be supplied in order to get at the meaning.</p>
<p>According to Mahabhrata the meaning of Mansa is the flesh of those who are born in womb or from the womb. And there is no difference between flesh of persons own son and flesh of other creatures. </p>
<p><hr></p>
<h1>What is the reason behind this?</h1>
<p>According to Bhishma there are four ways to follow Ahimsa Dharma. By Mana (mind) , by Speech , by Karma and not eating flesh . So all these are <strong>part of Ahimsa Dharma</strong> and not eating flesh is one of them. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>चतुर्विधेयं निर्द्रिष्टा ह्यहिन्सा ब्रह्मवादिभि : |<br> एकैकतोSपि
विभ्रष्टा न भवत्यरिसूदन ||4||<br></p>
<p>"Bhishma said, 'Utterers of Brahma have said that there are four kinds
of compassion or abstention from injury.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>i.e. even by mentally mentally committing an act of slaughter, one becomes guilty of it. So those who are wise avoid it because to follow Ahimsa Dharma. </p>
<hr>
<h1>Is there any <a href="https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m13/m13b081.htm" rel="noreferrer"><strong>rewar</strong>d</a> for avoiding meat?</h1>
<p>Yes there is certainly a reward for avoiding meat. It is said in mahabharata that a person should avoid meat for his entire life and by doing so he will get the highest place in swarga i.e. heaven.
But apart from that it is also meritorious to leave the flesh in Shukla paksha -Sharad Ritu and that will become dharma. Not eating meat for 4 months brings fame , long life and strength. And for one month healthy life and freedom from all sorrows. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>सर्वमांसानि यो राजन् यावज्जिवं न भक्षयेत |<br> स्वर्गे स विपुलं स्थानं
प्राप्नुयान्नात्र संशय : ||24 ||<br></p>
<p>P 243 Hence, a person of cleansed soul should be compassionate to all
living creatures. That man, O king, who abstains from every kind of
meat from his birth, without doubt, <strong>acquires a large space in Heaven</strong>,
They who eat the flesh of animals who are desirous of life, are
themselves eaten by the animals they eat, without doubt</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And as it is part of Ahimsa Dharma which is itself is part of Dharma of man , so Hindus avoid eating flesh of animals. </p>
|
|
<ol>
<li><p>Many on one - Abhimanyu was a Maharathi or something - I believe they can be attacked by many at the same time.</p></li>
<li><p>He fought till the end and never surrendered.</p></li>
<li><p><strong>The Kauravas didn't come looking for him - he went looking for them.</strong> When he penetrated their Vyuha, were they supposed to go into meditation like Drona at the time he was killed?</p></li>
<li><p>Arjuna exacted revenge for this only from Jayadratha who only blocked the escape route and not from any of the warriors who actually killed him - it was plain vengeance and not reprisal for Adharma. <strong>Abhimanyu took youthful risk and paid for it - that's all there was to it.</strong></p></li>
</ol>
<p>Nothing seems Adharmic about his killing to me.</p>
<p>Did Bhishma on the arrow-bed chide Drona for this?</p>
<p>Why is the killing of Abhimanyu included in the litany of Adharmic acts of the Kauravas?</p>
| 32805 | 32791 | 5 | 2 | 32791 | 0 | How exactly did the killing of Abhimanyu violate the agreed-upon rules of war? | 3 | 32805 | <p>Abhimanyu's killing was totally dharmic.</p>
<p>Indian TV depicts his killing in a grossly untruthful manner But the truth from KMG's translation shows a largely Dharmic way Abhimanyu was made to pay for his youthful hubris:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07046.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m07/m07046.htm</a></p>
<p>We can discuss the many-on-one early phases of the combat - including cutting away the chariot wheel - but </p>
<p><strong>the final combat is a fair one-one-one combat with equal weapons</strong></p>
<p>It is possible that Abhimanyu was more fatigued than Dusshasana's son - but AFAIK there is no warrior code that you have to let your opponent rest between rounds. If he doesn't surrender and has weapon in hand or is reaching for one , he is fair game. </p>
<p><strong>He went in of his own choice, could have surrendered any time (IIRC, one Kaurava warrior does say "let us take him prisoner") - and the Kauravas killed him fairly, for their self-preservation, given how devastating he had been.</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>With the end of his locks waving in the air, with that supreme weapon upraised in his hands, his body became incapable of being looked at by the very gods. The kings beholding it and the wheel in his hands, became filled with anxiety, and cut that off in a hundred fragments. Then that great car-warrior, the son of Arjuna, took up a mighty mace. Deprived by them of his bow and car and sword, and divested also of his wheel by his foes, the mighty-armed Abhimanyu (mace in hand) rushed against Aswatthaman. Beholding that mace upraised, which looked like the blazing thunderbolt, Aswatthaman, that tiger among men, rapidly alighted from his car and took three (long) leaps (for avoiding Abhimanyu).</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>He makes Ashwatthama run away</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>Slaying Aswatthaman's steeds and two Parshni charioteers with that mace of his, Subhadra's son, pierced all over with arrows, looked like a porcupine. Then that hero pressed Suvala's son, Kalikeya, down into the earth, and stew seven and seventy Gandhara followers of the latter. Next, he slew ten car-warriors of the Brahma-Vasatiya race, and then ten huge elephants. Proceeding next towards the car of Duhsasana's son, he crushed the latter's car and steeds, pressing them down into the earth.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>He Is still powerful and dangerous.</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>The invincible son of Duhsasan, then, O sire, taking up his mace, rushed at Abhimanyu. saying, 'Wait, Wait!' Then those cousins, those two heroes, with upraised maces, began to strike each other, desirous of achieving each other's death, like three-eyed (Mahadeva) and (the Asura) Andhaka in the days of old. I ach of those chastisers of foes, struck with the other's mace-ends fell down on the earth, like two uprooted standards erected to the honour of Indra. Then Duhsasana's son, that enhancer of the fame of the Kurus, rising up first, struck Abhimanyu with the mace on the crown of his head, as the latter, was on the point of rising. Stupefied with the violence of that stroke as also with the fatigue he had undergone, that slayer of hostile hosts, viz., the son of Subhadra, fell on the earth, deprived of his senses. Thus, O king, was one slain by many in battle,--one who had ground the whole army, like an elephant grinding lotus-stalks in a lake. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>The text doesn’t say if Abhimanyu had his weapon or not when he was killed. Duhsasana’s son was faster to rise and in the heat of the moment, he might have committed a minor infraction, in case Abhimanyu had not yet picked up his weapon. <strong>Nothing in the text suggests he bludgeoned a supine, weaponless semi-conscious opponent to death, or that Abhimanyu was not in the process of resuming the combat after picking up his weapon.</strong> And as far as I know, the endless repetition of the "adharmic killing of Abhimanyu" doesn't mention that Dusshasana's son didn't wait for Abhimanyu to pick up his weapon before hitting him.</p>
<p>Sanjaya shows whose side he was on but also says</p>
<p><strong>one who had ground the whole army, like an elephant grinding lotus-stalks in a lake.</strong></p>
<p>As Shakespeare would say - the Abhimanyu partisan doth protest too much, methinks. </p>
|
|
<p>What are some good books to study Ramakrishna as I am a beginner and don't know much about him?</p>
| 32833 | 32830 | 5 | 2 | 32830 | 3 | What are some good books to read for understanding philosophy and life of Ramakrishna? | 3 | 32833 | <p>His simple stories encapsulate his teachings in an accessible way:</p>
<p><a href="http://yousigma.com/biographies/Tales%20and%20Parables%20of%20Sri%20Ramakrishna%20(English).pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://yousigma.com/biographies/Tales%20and%20Parables%20of%20Sri%20Ramakrishna%20(English).pdf</a></p>
|
|
<p>Ancient Vedic rishis (seers, sages) seem to be married householders e.g. Agastya was married to Lopamudra, Atri was married to Anasuya, Vasishtha was married to Arundhati, Jamadagni was married to Renuka. Children of rishis became rishis too e.g. Durvasa was son of Atri, Vyasa was son of Parashara.</p>
<p>Was sanyasa (renunciation of worldly life, monasticism) then a concept invented by the shramana movement including Buddhists and Jains, and later imported into Hinduism?</p>
| 32885 | 32858 | 6 | 2 | 32858 | 6 | Ancient rishis were married, was sanyasa invented by Buddhists and Jains? | 4 | 32885 | <blockquote>
<p>Was sanyasa (renunciation of worldly life, monasticism) then a concept invented by the shramana movement including Buddhists and Jains, and later imported into Hinduism?</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>No, it has its origins in the Upanishads.</strong></p>
<p>The view that Sannyasa and other celibate orders are non-Vedic has been held by ancient followers of the Vedas.</p>
<p>Maharishi Gautama says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Gautama (3.35)—‘There is only one life-stage, say the revered Teachers; since the householder’s life is the only one that is directly enjoined [in the Vedas].’</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Patrick Olivelle, an Indologist, says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Since the celibate orders of life contradicts the Vedic injunction to marry and to procreate, Gautama and Bodhayana argue that scriptural passages authorizing such states are without authority.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This viewpoint is mentioned by the ancient Sri Vaishnava Acharya Yadava Prakasha, in his work called <em>Yatidharma Samuccaya</em>, or "Collection of the rules for Sannyasis," in which he says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Some [the opponent of celibate orders] claim that there is indeed no such rule [of celibacy], because one is not found in the Veda, and because scriptures that contradict the Veda are without authority. That is the view of Gautama.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The opponents of the orders of celibacy say that the injunctions in the Vedas about meditation, knowledge, taking up the vow of asceticism, etc do not constitute a separate ashrama (order), but are done within the householder order itself. This is because they think that the Vedas only establish a single order, the householder, and any Smriti injunction that establishes celibate orders is non-Vedic. So, if there are Vedic injunctions that seem to suggest sannyasa, those injunctions are to be done within the householder order.</p>
<p>Yadava Prakasha then answers this objection:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>To all this we reply. There is an exclusive observance known as the yoga of knowledge. The following Vedic text, accordingly, notes at the outset the rites beginning with "truth" and ending with "mental," (Mahanarayana Upanishad) goes on to prescribe renunciation: "They say that renunciation, therefore, surpasses these austerities," (Mahanarayana Upanishad) and finally enjoins the yoga of knowledge as what is expressed by the term renunciation: "One should attach oneself to the self." Now, the yoga of knowledge consists in the sole pursuit of knowledge. <strong>Such a pursuit, evidently, is not possible for householders, because they are required to perform in addition rites such as the daily fire sacrifice.</strong> Only the yoga of rites, consequently, is applicable to them. Now, the yoga of rites consists in the simultaneous pursuit of both knowledge and rites, from which pursuit its practitioners obtain liberation. Wandering ascetics, on the other hand, attain liberation solely through the yoga of knowledge. Because they do not perform rites, therefore, the same text in a subsequent passage shows how they accomplish the ritual and prescribes that a wandering ascetic should carry it out every day without fail: "In the case of a man who knows the sacrifice in this manner, [his self is the sacrificer, faith is his wife, his body is the fire wood...]." (Mahanarayana Upanishad) This is not merely a laudatory statement but a true injunction, because it has no precedent.</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>It is thus established that the yoga of knowledge pertains to wandering ascetics, while the yoga of rites pertains to householders. The Veda accordingly declares that a person can attain immortality only by abandoning rites: "Not by rites, not by offspring, and not by wealth - but by renunciation did some people attain immortality." (Mahanarayana Upanishad).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So no, sannyasa was not invented by the Buddhists and Jains.</p>
|
|
<p>Where does this name come from? Is the name being used in an endearing or otherwise positive manner?</p>
| 32932 | 32926 | 3 | 2 | 32926 | 5 | Is "Tamasi" a name of Durga? | 3 | 32932 | <p>yes, in Devi-Maahatmya (Chapter 11, mantra 23), we get:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Medhe Saraswati Vare Bhuti Babravi <strong>Tamasi</strong>" meaning , O Devi,you are Medha, Saraswati, Varaniyaa, Parama-Aiswaryarupa, and Taamasi.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Is is a part of the famous hymn (Devyah stutih) sung by the devataas to praise Devi after Shumbha-badha.</p>
<p>Devi is Trigunatmika. In Sattwaguna, She becomes Sattwiki which is meant by the term Parama Aishwarya(Maha-Lakshmi),, In Rajoguna She becomes (Maha)Saraswati and in Tamo-Guna,She becomes Taamasi(Maha-Kali). She is called Turiya or Trigunaatita too in that book.</p>
<p>So "Taamasi' is used as a praise.</p>
|
|
<p><strong>Sri Vasudev Sarvabhouma, Kavi Karnapur, Sri Rupa, Sri Sanatana, Sri Srijiva Goswami, Sri Baladev Vidyabhushana --none of them accepted any link between Madhva sect and the Gaudiya Vaishnava sect</strong>.(Reference: Mahaprabhu Sri Chaitanya, Radhagovinda Nath, Sadhana Prakashani, Page 753.</p>
<p>Why were they of this opinion?</p>
<p>It is interesting because some prefer to call them as the Madhva-Gaudiya sect in these days.</p>
| 33189 | 33148 | 2 | 2 | 33148 | -1 | Why did the direct disciples of Mahaprabhu not accept any relation with the Madhva Sect? | 4 | 33189 | <p><strong>There is clear evidence in Sri Chaitanya Charitamrita that Mahaprabhu did not consider Himself a follower of the Madhva sect.</strong></p>
<p>Its true that Sri Chaitanyadeva was a disciple of Sripad Iswarpuri, Who was from Madhva lineage. Sri Chaitanya was God Himself Who incarnated to the earth 'to take the taste of the Radha-bhava and preach the Mahamantra-sankirtana, which is the yuga-dharma'.</p>
<p>So He Himself remeined in Radha-bhava which was not emphasised on in the Madhva lineage. Sri Chaitanya defines Sri Krishna as 'Rasaraja' and 'Kishora'. From Sri Ray Ramananda, Mahaprabhu got the support of Radha-Bhava. He later therefore mentioned both merits and demerits of the Madhva sect.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Mahaprabhu asked the Tattva-vadi Acharya of the Madhva sect about the goal and ways (Sadhya-Sadhanaa of their sect. The Acharya said : Surrendering the Varnashrama Dharma to Sri Krishna and going to Vaikuntha getting one of the five forms of Mukti. Mahaprabhu said : The scriptures stress on Sravana and Kirtana. These lead to Krishna-Prema which is the highest purusartha. The real devotees reject the five forms of Mukti as of no value. They reject both karma and mukti...Karmi,and Jnani are both devoid of Bhakti. I see that these two (karma and Jnana) are very much present in your sect. Only one quality of your sect is that you regard Sri Krishna as God (Sri Chaitanya Charitamrita 2/9/238-251).</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>If Mahaprabhu accepted that He was of the Madhva sect, He could never mention the Madhva sect as 'Your sect' to the Acharya of the Madhva sect.</strong> <strong>He never mentioned it as 'Our' sect. So it is very clear that He did not consider Himself as a member of the Madhva sect.</strong></p>
<p>Gaudiya Vaishnavas are followers of Mahaprabhu who worship Him as God.So chanting of the Mahamantra,treating Gopibhava and its culmination Radhabhava as the highest bhava and worshipping Sri Chaitanya as God make them different from the Madhva followers.</p>
<p>As Sri Radhagovinda Nath points out in the vol 1 of his 'Gaudiya Vaishnava Darshana, (page 165-171)</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(a) According to Maadhvas, Iswara is Sevya and Jiva is His sevaka.But the same holds for the other Vaishnava sects also.</p>
<p>(b) The Upasya of Maadhvas is Vaikuntheswara Narayana. The Upaasya of Gaudiyas is Nandanandana Sri Krishna.</p>
<p>(c) The Upaasana of Madhvas is ten types of bhajana: satya, hita, priya kathana, sasraanusilana, daya, spriha, sraddha, daana,paritrana, parirakshana. According to Gaudiyas, shravana and kirtana are main elements of Upaasanaa.</p>
<p>(d) As mentioned by Mahaprabhu, the Maadhva's goal is five types of Mukti and going to Vaikuntha. Gaudiyas never want Mukti and want to serve Sri Krishna alone.</p>
<p>(e) According to Madhvacharya, gopis are 'Apsara-strees'(wordly wives having heavenly bodies).This statement is against the scriptures according to the Gaudiyas, who think Radha and Krishna are One. Further, according to Madhva, Brajagopies< Asta-mahishis< Jasoda< Devaki< Vasudev < Arjun< Balaraama< Brahmaa. So Brahmaaa is the best devotee. Gaudiyas treat this as against the scriptures. They quote from Vamana-Purana to show that Sri Krishna was eager to take the dust of feet of the gopis.</p>
<p>(f) To establish the superiority of Brahma among the devotees, Madhva did not write the commentary of chapters 12,13 and 14 of the 10th Canto of Bhagavatam. This is highly objectionable to the Gaudiyas.</p>
<p>In Vrihad-Vaishnava-Toshini commentary of Bhadgavata by Sripada Sanatana Goswami, a protest agaist the Maadhva sect is recorded.</p>
<p>Sripada Srijiva Goswami in Laghu-Vaishnava-Toshini has strongly protested against the Maadhva views of the Brahma-mohana-leela.</p>
<p>So there is little similarity of the Maadhva and Gaudiya sects. In fact the opinion of Maadhvas is AGAINST the opinion of the Gaudiya sect.</p>
<p>Kavi Karnapur also mentions in Chaitanya-Chandrodaya(8/1) that Mahaprabhu did not accept the opinion of the Madhvas.</p>
<p>Sripad Srijiva Goswami has mentioned the Madhva sect as 'the Other Sect' in his Sarva-Samvaadini. He always refers to Madhva as Tattvavada-Guru, but NEVER as 'Guru of Our Sect'.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>By the way a similar happening is there is Kavirji's life.He was a disciple of Sri Ramananda, Who was a worshipper of Sri Rama with Form. But Kavir after illumination rejected the worship of God with form and in temples. His followers are known as Kavir-panthis who no longer worship Rama with form and accept Kavirji as an Incarnation of the Supreme Godhead. So Kavir-panthis inspite of having the Ramananda lineage are not followers of that sect.Theirs is a new sect.</p>
<p>Since about hundred years we are hearing the term 'Madhva-Gaudiya' sect coming into prominance (primarily from some individuals who took sannyasa after the Madhva lineage.If we regard Sri Chaitanyadeva and His followers' teachings to be the essence of the Gaudiya Vaishnavism, this term seems unacceptable. These are probably coming from the ones who never read the original books and are not dependent on any authentic sources.<strong>Radhagovinda Nath also established that none of the direct disciples of Sri Chaitanya did accept wearing of coloured clothes or taking external sannyas as their focus is on Seva.What the current Acharyas say about this has nothing to do with my question</strong>. <strong>So the view of Radhagovinda Nath seem absolutely valid.</strong></p>
<p>One of Radhagovinda Nath's books on Sri Chaitanya is available online here: <a href="https://archive.org/details/GauraTattva/page/n1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://archive.org/details/GauraTattva/page/n1</a></p>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/VxH0E.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/VxH0E.jpg" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>
<p><strong>Addition</strong></p>
<p>One respected Acharya of the Shri-Vaishnava sect is of the same opinion:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>I also have a strong objection to gaudiyA's position as followers of madhva sAmpradAya as there is no real disciplic line. (disciplic line just doesnot mean guru's sishya is next guru, but the guru's teachings are unchanged by sishya when he becomes guru.) If there were a disciplic line, then gaudiyAs cannot deviate from sri Ananda teertha's pancha-bhEda and formulate their own achintya bhEda-abhEda. It would have been proper to call themselves chaitanya sampradAya, rather than 'madhva-gaudiya' sampradAya if they want to have a different interpretation of vedanta. If a disciplic line is genuine, then they will not deviate from the original teacher's readings (in this case sri madhva's). Hence, I do not see any genuinity of Gaudiyas as a bonafide vaishnava disciplic line, even in the case of Sri madhva being a bonafide AchArya. Hence their teaching that there are 4 bonafide disciplic lines is of little value. I do not mean to offend the devotion of gaudiya vaishNavAs or madhvas, but exposing the truth behind the genuinity of their disciplic lines</strong>. (Reference: <a href="http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia/ramanuja/archives/apr05/msg00016.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia/ramanuja/archives/apr05/msg00016.html</a>)</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>UPDATE</strong></p>
<p><em>According to Radhagovinda Nath, <strong>Sripad Ishvar Puri was not a disciple of Madhva sect at all.</strong> The title of the Madhva sect monks is Tirtha, and never Puri.Radhagovinda has also shown with logic that Baladeva Vidyabhushana was earlier a disciple of the Madhva sect and later joined the Gaudiya sect and the Guru-parampara sloka is written by the commentator of Baladeva (who was a Madhva) and not by Baladeva Vidyabhushana.(Reference: Gaudiya Vaishnava Darshan, Page 171-175).</em></p>
<p><strong>So the Guru-parampara shown is other answers is questionable.</strong></p>
|
|
<p>When we say that a person is in deep meditation then what exactly do we mean:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Is the person still aware of what is going around him, like he can hear the various sounds be it anything?</p></li>
<li><p>He is not aware of anything apart from his breath?</p></li>
<li><p>He is not aware of anything at all?</p></li>
<li><p>None of the above, it is something else?</p></li>
</ol>
| 33194 | 33178 | 7 | 2 | 33178 | 7 | What exactly do we mean by the term 'deep meditation'? | 3 | 33194 | <p>DhyAna Lakshana (sign of meditation) is mentioned very briefly in the following verse by Lord Shiva: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>yathA nimilane kAle prapancha naiva pasyati |<br> Tathaiva
unmilanehapi <strong>syAdetad dhyAnasya lakshanam</strong> ||</p>
<p>Just like the person, who has his eyes closed, can not see the
outer world, in a similar manner, a person who is engrossed in meditation,
can't see the same with even his eyes open - <strong>and this is the sign of DhyAnam</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>KulArnavara Tantram 9.19</strong> </p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, if a meditating person has kept his eyes open, but still he can not see anything around, then it is to be understood that he is properly meditating. So, a properly meditating person is not aware of the existence of the world around him.</p>
<p>And, when meditation reaches it's highest stage, that is called the SamAdhi stage and the signs of SamAdhi are slightly different from what is mentioned above. </p>
<p>Lord Shiva mentions the following signs: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Na shrinoti na chAghrAti na sprishati na pasyati |<br> Na jAnAti
sukham dukkham na cha samlipyate manah ||<br> Na chApi kinchit jAnAti
na cha vrudhyAti kAshthavat |<br> Evam shive vilinAtmA <strong>samAdistha
ihochyate</strong> || </p>
<p>One who does not hear, does not [perceive] smell, does not touch, does not
see, does not feel either pain or pleasure, whose mind is not attached [to
anything], who is just like a piece of wood, who does not understand or
know anything --- completely merged in Shiva know such a person to be
in SamAdhi.</p>
<p><strong>19.13,14</strong></p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>Where I can get the complete biography/hagiography of Ramanujacharya, which contains all the details of his life and deeds, right from his birth, till his passing away? Fantastic accounts are also fine.</p>
| 33250 | 33201 | 2 | 2 | 33201 | 6 | Complete biography/hagiography of Ramanujacharya | 3 | 33250 | <p>There isn't a single comprehensive work outlining the complete biography of Sri Ramanuja. These are some of the more well known somewhat older works that describe his life:</p>
<ol>
<li><strong>Yatiraja Vaibhavam of Vaduga Nambi</strong>, a student of Sri Ramanuja is a biographical poem in 114 Sanskrit verses. You can read an English translation <a href="https://archive.org/details/YatirajaVaibhavamOfAndhrapurnaMRangacharya1978_201803" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>. This is the oldest known biography.</li>
<li>The <strong>6000-padi Guruparampara Prabhavam of Pinbazagiya Perumal Jiyar</strong> is a Manipravala Biography of the Srivaishnava Guru Parampara. The Tengalai tradition subscribes to this version of events. It is supposed to be written in the 14th century but there is a doubt as to the period of the author as some portions of later texts appear verbatim in it. It is the earliest extant (in print) elaborate discussion of Ramanuja's life. You can can read it here: <a href="https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.384478/page/n3" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Tamil script</a></li>
<li>The <strong>3000-padi Guruparampara Prabhavam of the 3rd Brahmatantra Svatantra Svami</strong> is a Manipravala Biography of the Srivaishnava Guru Parampara. The Vadagalai tradition subscribes to this version of events. It was written in the late 15th/ early 16th centuries. The author says that the first Brahmatantra Svatantra Svami wrote a biography in 12000 verses that was abridged by the second Svami in 6000 verses that was further abridged to the present form. You can read it here: <a href="https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.384479/page/n3" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Tamil script</a>, <a href="https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.383162/page/n3" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Telugu script</a></li>
<li><strong>Prapannamritam of Anantacharya.</strong> Sanskrit version <a href="https://archive.org/details/prapannamrta/page/n367" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>. It has been observed to be almost a literal translation of the 6000-padi GPP. It is considered to be written in the second half of the 17th century.</li>
<li><strong>Divyasuri Caritam of Garudavahana Pandita</strong>. This is a Sanskrit poem biography of the Sri Vaishnava Guru Parampara from the Azvars through Ramanuja. It is unclear if the author is the same Garudavahana Pandita who was a contemporary of Ramanuja or not. There is a verse in it that suggests that it was written when Ramanuja was still alive but modern historians opine that it is written in the 15th or 16th centuries. You can read the Sanskrit text and Hindi translation <a href="https://archive.org/details/Divyasuri-Charitam-Garudavahana-Pandita/page/n3" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Koil Olugu</strong> - A Tamil chronicle of the Srirangam Temple shines some light on Ramnuja's influence. It was fully translated to <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/K%C5%8Dil_Ol%CC%A4ugu.html?id=YT5MAAAAIAAJ" rel="nofollow noreferrer">English</a>. You can read an abridged English translation <a href="https://archive.org/details/Koil-Olugu-English-1954" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>.</li>
<li><strong>Yatiraja Saptati of Vedanta Desika</strong> is a poem praising Ramanuja in Sanskrit. It shines some light on certain aspects of Ramanuja's life. You can read and English translation <a href="https://www.sadagopan.org/pdfuploads/Yathiraja%20Saptati.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a> - </li>
<li><strong>Periya Tirumudi Adaivu</strong> - supposed to be written by Kandadai Nayan of the 15th century is clearly a later work as it details the life of people known to have lived a century after the author died.</li>
<li><strong>Ramanujarya Divya Charithai</strong> - Don't know much about it</li>
</ol>
<p>Besides these, there are several English biographies of Ramanuja that sample bits and pieces from these above texts.</p>
|
|
<p>According to this ISKCON article: <a href="https://krishna.org/the-flat-earth" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://krishna.org/the-flat-earth</a></p>
<p>The Srimad Bhagavata Purana's cosmology of the universe involves a flat Earth.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>So there is no ball earth floating in space in the Bhagavatam.</p>
<p>So it appears the flat earth people are heading in the right direction but they are really not much better than the scientists. In scientific terms they are worse than the globe earth people because the globe earth people have a working model [which is wrong of course…] but they do have a practical working model which does predict most of what we observe happening around us. The globe earth model is a wonderful and ingenious model built by some of the most intelligent scientific brains. Unfortunatly it is wrong…</p>
</blockquote>
| 34081 | 33363 | 1 | 2 | 33363 | 3 | Does the Srimad Bhagavatam say the Earth is flat? | 3 | 34081 | <p>No, Srimad Bhagavatam doesn't say.</p>
<p>The reason I think the author suggests a flat earth is because of his background either from Christianity/Islam.</p>
<p>Trying to understand puranic consmology especially from Modern cosmology perspective is really challenging and not easy. The reason is the way puranas describe things is quite different.</p>
<p>Even Ayurveda, a medical branch deals in terms of jataragni, 3 doshas to analyse body etc.. Modern Medicine deals with body in different way. Trying to make sense of one from other view is not easy.</p>
<p>Modern science divides constituents of air in terms of argon, oxygen, nitrogen etc..Ancient methods divide air in terms of functions like apana, samana, prana, etc..</p>
<p>Actually both approaches are quite different and making sense of one from another is sometimes not possible.</p>
<p>I personally think it is better not to mix up both.</p>
<p>But, we can say that puranic cosmology had complex cosmological view not like just earth being flat etc.. as in bible or quran.</p>
<p>For eg: universes are described egg like in Brahma Samhita:</p>
<p><a href="https://www.vedabase.com/en/bs/5/14" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.vedabase.com/en/bs/5/14</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>praty-<strong>aṇḍam</strong> evam ekāṁśād ekāṁśād viśati svayam sahasra-mūrdhā
viśvātmā mahā-viṣṇuḥ sanātanaḥ</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="https://www.vedabase.com/en/bs/5/35" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.vedabase.com/en/bs/5/35</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>eko 'py asau racayituṁ <strong>jagad-aṇḍa-koṭiṁ</strong> yac-chaktir asti
jagad-aṇḍa-cayā yad-antaḥ aṇḍāntara-stha-paramāṇu-cayāntara-stham-
govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Bhagavatam says:</p>
<p><a href="https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/5/21/8-9/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/5/21/8-9/</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>The living entities residing on Sumeru Mountain are always very warm,
as at midday, because for them the sun is always overhead. Although
the sun moves counterclockwise, facing the constellations, with Sumeru
Mountain on its left, it also moves clockwise and appears to have the
mountain on its right because it is influenced by the dakṣiṇāvarta
wind. <strong>People living in countries at points diametrically opposite to
where the sun is first seen rising will see the sun setting, and if a
straight line were drawn from a point where the sun is at midday, the
people in countries at the opposite end of the line would be
experiencing midnight</strong>. Similarly, if people residing where the sun
is setting were to go to countries diametrically opposite, they would
not see the sun in the same condition.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This should give us idea how it was a complex model.</p>
<p>We don't have any ancient supplementary works explaining Puranic cosmology surviving and that makes it even more difficult to understand it.</p>
<p>The purpose of puranic cosmology is to understand the greatness of supreme lord.</p>
<p>Similarly there is Virat Rupa description in 2nd Canto, though Virat rupa is just a concept and thus imaginary form, it is described so that even a materialist can understand the greatness of supreme lord. Especially it was suggested that that form be meditated those who can't understand spiritual form of the Lord.</p>
<p>SB 2.5.42:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>bhūrlokaḥ <strong>kalpitaḥ</strong> padbhyāṁ bhuvarloko ’sya nābhitaḥ svarlokaḥ kalpito
mūrdhnā iti vā loka-kalpanā</p>
<p>Others may divide the whole planetary system into three divisions,
namely the lower planetary systems on the legs [up to the earth], the
middle planetary systems on the navel, and the upper planetary systems
[Svarloka] from the chest to the head of the Supreme Personality.</p>
<p>SB 2.2.14: Unless the gross materialist develops a sense of loving
service unto the Supreme Lord, the seer of both the transcendental and
material worlds, he should remember or meditate upon the universal
form of the Lord at the end of his prescribed duties.</p>
<p>SB 2.7.53: The Lord’s activities in association with His different
energies should be described, appreciated and heard in accordance with
the teachings of the Supreme Lord. If this is done regularly with
devotion and respect, one is sure to get out of the illusory energy of
the Lord.</p>
<p>SB 5.16.3: When the mind is fixed upon the Supreme Personality of
Godhead in His external feature made of the material modes of nature —
the gross universal form — it is brought to the platform of pure
goodness. In that transcendental position, one can understand the
Supreme Personality of Godhead, Vāsudeva, who in His subtler form is
self-effulgent and beyond the modes of nature. O my lord, please
describe vividly how that form, which covers the entire universe, is
perceived.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Bhagavatam says these are 10 topics in it and just to described 10th item(Asraya Tattva, Sri Krishna), other items are described directly or indirectly in different ways.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>SB 2.10.1: Śrī Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam there are
ten divisions of statements regarding the following: the creation of
the universe, subcreation, planetary systems, protection by the Lord,
the creative impetus, the change of Manus, the science of God,
returning home, back to Godhead, liberation, and the summum bonum.</p>
<p>SB 2.10.2: To isolate the transcendence of the summum bonum, the symptoms
of the rest are described sometimes by Vedic inference, sometimes by
direct explanation, and sometimes by summary explanations given by the
great sages.</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>I read somewhere that Lord Shiva is regarded as a devotee of Sri Krishna as per Srimad-Bhagavatam. The name of Shiva or Rudra is mentioned as the name of the Para-Brahman in many parts of the Vedas.</p>
<p><strong>What is the position of Lord Shiva as per Srimad-Bhagavatam--is He just a Jiva or Deva or another form of Bhagavan? Please cite proper references.</strong></p>
| 33405 | 33400 | 8 | 2 | 33400 | 10 | What is the position of Lord Shiva as per Srimad-Bhagavatam | 3 | 33405 | <p><strong>Yes, Lord Shiva is a form of the Para-Brahman or the Supreme Godhead as per Srimad-Bhagavatam</strong>. This becomes clear from the 12th chapter of the 11th Canto, where Markandeya gets darshan of Shiva and Parvati:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Once travelling in tge sky with Rudrani and the ganas on His bull, <strong>Bhagavan Shiva</strong> saw Markandeya practising austerity (Sloka 3).</p>
<p><strong>Sri Bhagavan [Shiva]</strong> said: Markandeya has attained supreme devotion to Bhagavan, Who is Changeless, and so this Brahmarshi does not want any other boon. (sloka 6)</p>
<p>Saying this, Sri Bhagavan [Shiva] who is the destination of all honest ones and Ishwara of every Vidya and of everybody entered into Markeendyea's hriday-aakaasha with the help of yogamaya (sloka 8-9).</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>So its clear that Lord Shiva has been demonstrated as Sri Bhagavan Who uses His Yogamaya</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>Bhagavan can never be two.This is also clear from the same Canto:</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>Bhagavan is He Who has All the six qualities (Bhaga etc) as the leelakamala of His hand, and Dharma as his fan (chamara) and yasha as its breeze(chapter 11,sloka 18).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The definition of 'Vaishnava' is also provided beautifully in the same canto:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>That parama pada is Vaishnava, which has to be obtained by the yogis by 'neti neti'vichara in one's own cave in the heart</strong> (chapter 6, sloka 32).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So its clear that Srimad-Bhagavatam accepts Lord Shiva as one form of the Supreme Godhead and also accepts the (neti neti) vichara-marga as one way of attaining Him.</p>
<p><strong>So besides projecting Sri Bhagavan as Sri Vishnu (and Sri Krishna) and glorifying the path of bhakti or devotion in the most beautiful way, this great scripture accepts Shiva as just another form of Supreme God and also accepts jnanamarga wholeheartedly.</strong></p>
|
|
<p>Is conversion to other religions allowed in Hinduism? Are there any references in Vedic texts on this regard? Is it considered a sin? If so what happens to one who converts after death? </p>
| 33613 | 33589 | 3 | 2 | 33589 | 2 | Conversion from Hinduism to other religions | 3 | 33613 | <p>I am sure you know the following two famous slokas of Gita:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>श्रेयान्स्वधर्मो विगुणः परधर्मात्स्वनुष्ठितात्।</p>
<p>स्वधर्मे निधनं श्रेयः परधर्मो भयावहः।।3.35।।</p>
<p>One's own 'Dharma' [Customary or scripturally ordained observances of different castes and sects.-Tr.], though defective, is superior to another's 'Dharma' well-performed. Death is better while engaged in one's own 'Dharma'; another's 'Dharma' is fraught with fear.</p>
<p>श्रेयान्स्वधर्मो विगुणः परधर्मात्स्वनुष्ठितात्।</p>
<p>स्वभावनियतं कर्म कुर्वन्नाप्नोति किल्बिषम्।।18.47।।</p>
<p>18.47 One's own 'Dharma', (though) defective, is superior to another's 'Dharma' well performed. By performing a 'Dharma' as dictated by one's own nature, one does not incur sin.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>These two slokas can be broadly interpreted to understand Sri Krishna's view on conversion from any religion to other religion.</p>
|
|
<p>How many prominent and most accepted commentaries on the Srimad Bhagavad-Gita are there? Which sects or schools of thought are those?
Please mention the Vedantic and non-Vedantic schools of thought as well. </p>
| 33627 | 33621 | 7 | 2 | 33621 | 11 | How many prominent and most accepted commentaries are there on the Bhagavad-Gita? | 5 | 33627 | <p>Well, I'm aware of thirty-three commentaries on the Bhagavad-Gita:</p>
<hr />
<h2>Achintya-Bheda-Abheda Vedanta</h2>
<p>• Sarartha Varsini Tika, Vishvanatha Chakrabarti Thakura's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://archive.org/download/BhagavadGitaSararthaVarsiniTikaByVishvanathaCakravartiThakura/Bhagavad-Gita%20Sarartha-Varsini-Tika%20by%20Vishvanatha%20Cakravarti%20Thakura.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Gita Bhusana, Baladeva Vidyabhusana's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://archive.org/download/BhagavadGitaGitaBhushanaByBaladevaVidyabhushana/Bhagavad-Gita%20Gita-Bhushana%20by%20Baladeva%20Vidyabhushana.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Satyanarayan Das Babaji's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can buy it in English <a href="https://www.jiva.org/store/Bhagavad-Gita-p76426641" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Bhagavad-Gita As It Is, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.bhagavatgita.ru/files/Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwik3YH_rPTgAhUFpI8KHYvEC18QFjAAegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw0H4mVDY6VpnlWL-55SKRdq" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• B.R. Sridhara Maharaj's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="http://www.bvml.org/SBRSM/books/GITA.PDF" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Bhaktivinoda Thakura's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://kupdf.net/download/bhaktivinoda-thakura-rasika-ranjana-bhagavad-gita-commentary_5903541ddc0d60561e959ed9_pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<hr />
<h2>Advaita Vedanta</h2>
<p>• Adi-Shankaracharya's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://michaelsudduth.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Srimad-Bhagavad-Gita-Shankara-Bhashya-English.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjc3oThp_TgAhUIM48KHX3QAdQQFjAEegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw29rc4dkB7ciBd0f5XA0Rk_" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Bhavartha Dipika, Dhyaneshwar's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://estudantedavedanta.net/Sri-Jnandevas-Bhvartha-Dipika-Jnaneswari_smaller.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjty-62qfTgAhWKuo8KHQpsBYMQFjAAegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw0G-2ioNbJUAP_OBuYVKEcz" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Gutharta Dipika, Madhusudana Saraswati's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can buy it in English <a href="https://www.exoticindiaart.com/m/book/details/bhagavad-gita-with-commentary-of-madhusudan-saraswati-2-volumes-set-HAA761/" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• The Holy Geeta, Swami Chinmayananda's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://factmuseum.com/pdf/upaveda/Holy-Geeta-by-Swami-Chinmayananda.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjR0MakqvTgAhUfTo8KHaz-A2EQFjAAegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw2EB3qGMuf-ws_OyXn1m0WJ" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Geeta Rahashya, Bal Gangadhara Tilak's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://archive.org/compress/SrimadBhagavadGitaRahasya-BgTilak-Volumes1And2/formats=IMAGE%20CONTAINER%20PDF&file=/SrimadBhagavadGitaRahasya-BgTilak-Volumes1And2.zip" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Swami Sivananda's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.dlshq.org/download/bgita.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwic1f_Kr_TgAhVKo48KHa88Cw4QFjABegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw1hSapYkkhhiX1phf9atlLM&cshid=1552110938347" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Swami Chidbhavananda's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://www.amazon.in/Bhagavad-Gita-Swami-Chidbhavananda-ebook/dp/B078R61SD9" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://www.amazon.in/Bhagavad-Gita-Swami-Chidbhavananda-ebook/dp/B078R61SD9" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Discourses on the Gita, Mohandas Gandhi's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.gandhiashramsevagram.org/pdf-books/discourses-on-gita.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiF0MejzvTgAhUIqY8KHSWtCCAQFjAAegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw1yyehu4Bo3Pg6gJP1NZHby" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Talks on the Bhagavad-Gita, Vinod Bhave's can on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://www.mkgandhi.org/vinoba/gita.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<hr />
<h2>Shuddhadvaita Vedanta</h2>
<p>• Sridhara Swami's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can buy it in English <a href="https://www.exoticindiaart.com/m/book/details/srimad-bhagavad-gita-with-commentary-by-sridhara-swami-IDK748/" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<hr />
<h2>Dvaita Vedanta</h2>
<p>• Madhvacharya's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://nageshsonde.com/bhagavad_gita.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwj2oJSeqPTgAhWbknAKHXdYAYAQFjAAegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw05yOukq67ZCmVuHSeyXqQ1" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Jayatirtha's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can buy it in Sanskrit <a href="https://www.exoticindiaart.com/m/book/details/gita-bhashyam-with-commentary-of-sri-jayatirtha-and-sri-raghavendratirtha-NZG165/" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Raghavendratirtha's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can buy it in Sanskrit <a href="https://www.exoticindiaart.com/m/book/details/gita-bhashyam-with-commentary-of-sri-jayatirtha-and-sri-raghavendratirtha-NZG165/" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<hr />
<h2>Integral Yoga</h2>
<p>• Essays on the Gita, Sri Aurobindo's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/Sri-Aurobindo-VOL-19-Essays-On-The-Gita.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjEu__PzfTgAhVck3AKHbLQCC8QFjABegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw3yicGzaFwEQ2xDkic0pwzJ" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<hr />
<h2>Kashmiri Shaivism</h2>
<p>• Gitartha Sangraha, Acharya Abhinavagupta's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://ayco.it/files/963/Yoga/0BwEwR7MZZMxITjhvU2JoS1hNeVk/ABHINAVAGUPTA%2520-Bhagavad-Gita-Commentary-by-AbhinavaGupta.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwju7NG1yPTgAhUZbysKHWukBPAQFjAAegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw280KhI_9OYg23HSuVrYVpC" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<hr />
<h2>Kriya Yoga</h2>
<p>• God Talks with Arjuna: The Bhagavad-Gita, Paramahamsa Yogananda's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can buy it in English <a href="https://www.amazon.in/God-Talks-Arjuna-Bhagavad-Gita/dp/0876120311" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<hr />
<h2>Shivadvaita Vedanta</h2>
<p>• Srikantha Sivacharya's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita.</p>
<hr />
<h2>Svabhavika-Bheda-Abheda Vedanta</h2>
<p>• Yadava Prakasha's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita.</p>
<hr />
<h2>Vishishtadvaita Vedanta</h2>
<p>• Swami Ramabhadracharya's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it both in Sanskrit and Hindi in a set of two volumes <a href="https://archive.org/download/JR1998GitabhasyamI/JR1998GitabhasyamI.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a> and <a href="https://archive.org/details/JR1998GitabhasyamII" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Ramanujacharya's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.srimatham.com/uploads/5/5/4/9/5549439/ramanuja_gita_bhashya.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi5ubbLp_TgAhXLv48KHeiTB5YQFjAAegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw25ubVyL86q5XOMSj7lwp75&cshid=1552108745776" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Muktananda Swami's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita.</p>
<p>• Gopalananda Swami's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can read it in English <a href="https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3ykXFHcsqiObHRhb3pZVDNzVlk" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<hr />
<p><strong>Miscellaneous:</strong></p>
<p>• My Gita, Devdutt Pattnaik's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can buy it in English <a href="https://www.amazon.in/My-Gita-Devdutt-Pattanaik/dp/8129137704" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Bhagavad-Gita: A Text & Commentary for Students, Jeanne Fowler's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can buy it in English <a href="https://www.amazon.in/Bhagavad-Gita-Commentary-Religious-Practices/dp/1845193466" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• Exploring the Bhagavad-Gita: Philosophy, Structure and Meaning, Ithamar Theodore's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can buy it in English <a href="https://www.amazon.in/Exploring-Bhagavad-Gita-Philosophy-Structure-ebook/dp/B00D3JBI88" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<p>• F. Edgerton's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita. You can buy it in English <a href="https://www.amazon.in/Bhagavad-Gita-Vols-Harvard-Oriental/dp/8120811496/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1552137904&sr=1-2&refinements=p_27%3AF.%20Edgerton&pi=AC_SX118_SY170_FMwebp_QL65" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>here</strong></a>.</p>
<hr />
|
|
<p>How did the knowledge of great weapons like Bramhastra got lost in Hinduism tradition? As can be seen in Ramayan and Mahabharat, Gurus used to give knowledge of weapons to their shishya which were then used to protect Dharma. But eventually this knowledge was lost and Bharat couldn't fight invaders. How did this happen? Why weren't Devas invoked through yajnas when Sanatan Dharma followers were ethnically cleansed at the rate of millions by foreign invaders? At time of Mahabharat Indra himself helped Arjuna by granting him weapons. What happened now? </p>
| 40543 | 33657 | 14 | 2 | 33657 | 14 | How knowledge of weapons (shastra) शस्त्र got lost? | 3 | 40543 | <p><strong>Q:</strong> How did the knowledge of great weapons like Bramhastra got lost in Hinduism tradition? </p>
<p><strong>Knowledge of great weapons like Brahmastra didn't get lost, they are still existing.</strong></p>
<p>Simple proof is that Parashurama has the knowledge of Brahmasatra and he is a chiranjeevi<a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/2034/who-are-the-seven-immortals-chiranjeevi">[1]</a>,<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiranjivi" rel="noreferrer">[2]</a> i.e, he is alive now.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Narada said, 'That tiger of Bhrigu's race (viz., Rama), was
well-pleased with the might of Karna's arms, his affection (for him),
his self-restraint, and the services he did unto his preceptor.
Observant of ascetic penances, <strong>Rama cheerfully communicated, with due
forms, unto his penance-observing disciple, everything about the
Brahma weapon with the mantras for withdrawing it</strong>. Having acquired a
knowledge of that weapon, Karna began to pass his days happily in
Bhrigu's retreat, and endued with wonderful prowess, he devoted
himself with great ardour to the science of weapons. One day Rama of
great intelligence, while roving with Karna in the vicinity or his
retreat, felt very weak in consequence of the fasts he had undergone.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m12/m12a003.htm" rel="noreferrer">[Section 3, Rajadharmanusasana Parva, Santi Parva, The Mahabharata]</a></p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p><strong>Q:</strong> As can be seen in Ramayan and Mahabharat, Gurus used to give knowledge of weapons to their shishya which were then used to protect Dharma. But eventually this knowledge was lost and Bharat couldn't fight invaders. How did this happen? </p>
<p>In Ramayan and Mahabharat, Gurus didn't give the knowledge of every weapon to every sishya. Inorder to give the knowledge of great weapons, <em>honest guru atleast verify the eligibility of the sishya and sometimes the purpose also</em>. If the sishya is either ineligible or asking weapon for bad purposes then the guru may not give the knowledge of weapon or may revoke it, if given earlier. </p>
<p>In Mahabharata, Drona did not give the knowledge of Brahmastra to Karna</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Beholding that Dhananjaya was superior to every one in the science of
weapons, Karna. one day approached Drona in private and said these
words unto him, 'I desire to be acquainted with the Brahma weapon,
with all its mantras and the power of withdrawing it, for I desire to
fight Arjuna. Without doubt, the affection thou bearest to every one
of thy pupils is equal to what thou bearest to thy own son. I pray
that all the masters of the science of weapons may, through thy grace,
regard me as one accomplished in weapons!' Thus addressed by him,
Drona, from partiality for Phalguna, <strong>as also from his knowledge of the
wickedness of Karna, said, 'None but a Brahmana, who has duly observed
all vows, should be acquainted with the Brahma weapon, or a Kshatriya
that has practised austere penances, and no other.'</strong> When Drona had
answered thus, Karna, having worshipped him, obtained his leave, and
proceeded without delay to Rama then residing on the Mahendra
mountains.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m12/m12a002.htm" rel="noreferrer">[Section 2, Rajadharmanusasana Parva, Santi Parva, The Mahabharata]</a></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Parasurama revokes the remembrance of Karna's Brahmasatras knowledge at crucial time</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Unto the cheerless and trembling Karna, prostrated with joined hands
upon earth, that foremost one of Bhrigu's race, smiling though filled
with wrath, answered, '<strong>Since thou hast, from avarice of weapons,
behaved here with falsehood, therefore, O wretch, this Brahma weapon
shalt not dwell in thy remembrance. Since thou art not a Brahmana,
truly this Brahma weapon shall not, up to the time of thy death, dwell
in thee when thou shalt be engaged with a warrior equal to thyself!
Go hence, this is no place for a person of such false behaviour as
thou! On earth, no Kshatriya will be thy equal in battle.</strong>' Thus
addressed by Rama, Karna came away, having duty taken his leave.
Arriving then before Duryodhana, he informed him, saying, 'I have
mastered all weapons!'</p>
<p><a href="https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m12/m12a003.htm" rel="noreferrer">[Section 3, Rajadharmanusasana Parva, Santi Parva, The Mahabharata]</a></p>
</blockquote>
<p>As I told early, the purpose is also very important. <em>Even the knowledge of weapons won't work if there is no purpose</em>. The presence or absence of weapons solely depends on the purpose only. If there is no purpose then the weapons will be absent i.e., they won't work. </p>
<p>Arjuna's weapons are absent while he was trying to safeguard many people from attacking enemies</p>
<blockquote>
<p>"Arjuna said, ‘....... Another incident has happened that is more
painful than this, O thou that art possessed of wealth of penances.
Repeatedly thinking of it, my heart is breaking. In my very sight, O
Brahmana, thousands of Vrishni ladies were carried away by the Abhiras
of the country of the five waters, who assailed us. <strong>Taking up my bow
I found myself unequal to even string it. The might that had existed
in my arms seemed to have disappeared on that occasion. O great
ascetic, my weapons of diverse kinds failed to make their appearance.
Soon, again, my shafts became exhausted.</strong> That person of immeasurable
soul, of four arms, wielding the conch, the discus, and the mace, clad
in yellow robes, dark of complexion, and possessing eyes resembling
lotus-petals, is no longer seen by me. .........’</p>
<p>"Vyasa said, ‘......... All this has Time for its root. Time is,
indeed, the seed of the universe, O Dhananjaya. It is Time, again,
that withdraws everything at its pleasure. One becomes mighty, and,
again, losing that might, becomes weak. One becomes a master and rules
others, and, again, losing that position, becomes a servant for
obeying the behests of others. <strong>Thy weapons, having achieved success,
have gone away to the place they came from. They will, again, come
into thy hands when the Time for their coming approaches.</strong> The time
has come, O Bharata, for you all to attain to the highest goal. Even
this is what I regard to be highly beneficial for you all, O chief of
Bharata’s race."</p>
<p><a href="https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m16/index.htm" rel="noreferrer">[Section 8, Mausala Parva, The Mahabharata]</a></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Thus possessing of weapons are useful only if time allows it. Else they are useless. So, one need to understand that <strong>weapons make their appearances for establishing dharma at <em>proper times</em> by deserved person only</strong>. </p>
<hr>
<p><strong>Q:</strong> Why weren't Devas invoked through yajnas when Sanatan Dharma followers were ethnically cleansed at the rate of millions by foreign invaders? At time of Mahabharat Indra himself helped Arjuna by granting him weapons. What happened now? </p>
<p>As you can see in Arjuna-Vyasa conversation that knowledge of weapons will not be present if some event is <em>destined</em> to happen. Although Arjuna possess knowledge of weapons, weapons did not make their appearance when thousands of Vrishni ladies were carried away by the Abhiras. This is because of the reason that the event need to be happened because of <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/8879/is-it-true-that-thieves-kidnapped-some-of-krishnas-wives">curse</a>. The weapons made their appearances during Kurukshetra war, but not during the above mentioned attack.</p>
|
|
<p>In the Mahabharata, when Yudhisthira enters Swarga-loka, he finds Bhishma there: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"Behold Dhritarashtra, the king of the Gandharvas, possessed of great wisdom. Know that this one was the eldest brother of thy sire. This one is thy eldest brother, the son of Kunti, endued with effulgence of fire. The son of Surya, thy eldest brother, the foremost of men, even this one was known as the son of Radha. He moves in the company of Surya. Behold this foremost of Beings. Among the tribes of the Saddhyas, the gods, the Viswedevas, and the Maruts, behold, O king of kings, the mighty car-warriors of the Vrishnis and the Andhakas, viz., those heroes having Satyaki for their first, and those mighty ones among the Bhojas. Behold the son of Subhadra, invincible in battle, now staying with Soma. Even he is the mighty bowman Abhimanyu, now endued with the gentle effulgence of the great luminary of the night. Here is the mighty bowman Pandu, now united with Kunti and Madri. Thy sire frequently comes to me on his excellent car. <strong>Behold the royal Bhishma, the son of Santanu, now in the midst of the Vasus</strong>. Know that this one by the side of Brihaspati is thy preceptor Drona. These and other kings, O son of Pandu, who had warred on thy side now walk with the Gandharvas or Yakshas or other sacred beings. Some have attained to the status of Guhyakas, O king. Having cast off their bodies, they have conquered Heaven by the merit they had acquired through word, thought and deed.’ (<strong>Mahabharata, Svargarohanika Parva, Section IV</strong>)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>However, in the Srimad Bhagavatam, we see Bhishma merging into Sri Hari at once after leaving behind his material body:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Sūta went on: <strong>Having thus merged his soul with all the activities of his mind, speech and the visual sense in Sri Krishna, the universal Soul, Bhishma expired</strong>, his breath being dissolved into atmospheric air. Perceiving that <strong>Bhishma had entered into the one indivisible Brahma</strong>, all those present there became silent even as birds do at the close of the day. (<strong>Srimad Bhagavatam, Canto I, Chapter IX, Verses 43-44</strong>)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So wouldn't that logically mean that Bhishma attained Vaikuntha? But then, how does Yudhisthira find Bhishma seated in Swarga?</p>
| 33776 | 33773 | 9 | 2 | 33773 | 10 | Did Bhishma attain Swarga or Vaikuntha? | 4 | 33776 | <p>Your enquiry is about whether Bhishma attained Swarga-Loka or Vaikuntha. And as mentioned in Srimad Bhagavata Purana he became one with Shree Hari and Mahabharata's Svargarohanika Parva he was present in Swarga. </p>
<p>There is description of Bhishma asking the leave of Shree Krishna to leave his body in Mahabhrata - Anushasana Parva - <a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m13/m13b132.htm" rel="noreferrer"><strong>Bhishma-Swargarohana Parva</strong></a> , when he was laying in his death bed and when the right time to depart came Bhishma talked to Shree Krishna and said to him that with his grace he will attain a supreme abode. P. 395</p>
<blockquote>
<p>स मां त्ववनुजानीहि कृष्ण मोक्षे कलेवरं |<br> त्वयाहं समनुज्ञातो
गच्छेयं परमां गतिम् || 45 ||<br></p>
<p>Do thou, O Krishna, grant me leave, I shall cast off my body.
Permitted by thee, I shall attain to the highest end!'</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Upon that Shree Krishna granted him the leave and said to him that he will attain to the status of the Vasus. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>अनुजानामि भीष्म त्वां वसून प्राप्नुहि पार्थिव |<br> न तेsस्ति वृजिनं
किञ्चिदिह्लोके महाद्युते ||46 ||<br></p>
<p>"Vasudeva said, 'I give thee leave, O Bhishma! Do thou, O king, attain
to the status of the Vasus, O thou of great splendour, thou hast not
been guilty of a single transgression in this world.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>Now coming to main part of answer. </p>
<p>Further ,there is a story in the next chapter i.e. <a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m13/m13b133.htm" rel="noreferrer"><strong>Chapter No. 168 Of Anushasana Parva-Bhishma-Swargarohana Parva</strong> </a> of goddess Ganga the great river indulging in lamentations about her son Bhishma's death from the hands of Shikhandi . Shree Krishna then assured her that her son fought a great battle and there was nobody like him and no one could have defeated him in the battle and he was killed by Arjuna and not by Shikhandi. And then <strong>Shree Krishna himself told to goddess Ganga that Bhishma has gone to swarga or heaven</strong> as mentioned in below shlokas two times. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>भिष्मं हि कुरुशार्दुल्मुद्यतेषुं महारणे ||33 ||<br> न शक्त: संयुगे
हन्तु साक्षादपि शतक्रतु: |<br> स्वछ्न्दतस्तव सुतो गतः <strong>स्वर्गं</strong>
शुभानने ||34 ||<br></p>
<p>P. 397 Do not yield to grief, O thou of beautiful features! Without
doubt, thy son has gone to the highest region of felicity! He was one
of the Vasus of great energy. Through a curse, O thou of beautiful
features, he had to take birth among men. It behoveth thee not to
grieve for him. Agreeably to Kshatriya duties, he was slain by
Dhananjaya on the field of battle while engaged in battle. He has not
been slain, O goddess, by Sikhandin. The very chief of the celestials
himself could not slay Bhishma in battle when he stood with stretched
bow in hand. <strong>O thou of beautiful face, thy son has, in felicity,
gone to heaven.</strong> All the gods assembled together could not slay him
in battle. Do not, therefore, O goddess Ganga, grieve for that son of
Kuru's race. He was one of the Vasus, O goddess! <strong>Thy son has gone to
heaven.</strong> Let the fever of thy heart be dispelled.'</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>Further if we look - Bhishma was a Kshatriya and he fought the battle according to Kshatriya dharma and died in the battlefield of Kurukshetra , by the law " those Kshatriyas who died at the battlefield according to prescribed law attained Swarga" , like all those he also gone to swarga. </p>
<hr>
<p>Now coming to your Srimad Bhagavatam quote where it is said that Bhishma became merged with Shree Hari. That means he concentrated on Krishna as supreme Brahman , he went into Nirvikalpa Samadhi or highest stage of meditation where all his activities were focused upon Supreme Brahman. The verses has to be interpreted in this way as mentioned in purport by Swami Prabhupada. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>कृष्ण एवं भगवति मनोवाग्दृष्टिवृत्तिभिः<br> आत्मन्यात्मानमावेश्य
सोऽन्तःश्वास उपारमत् ॥ <a href="https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/1/9/43/" rel="noreferrer"><strong>SB .1.9.43</strong></a> ॥<br></p>
<p>kṛṣṇa evaṁ bhagavati mano-vāg-dṛṣṭi-vṛttibhiḥ<br> ātmany ātmānam
āveśya so ’ntaḥśvāsa upāramat<br></p>
<p>Sūta Gosvāmī said: Thus Bhīṣmadeva merged himself in the Supersoul,
Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, with his mind,
speech, sight and actions, and thus he became silent, and his
breathing stopped.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Purport</strong> -The stage attained by Bhīṣmadeva while quitting his material body is called <strong>nirvikalpa-samādhi because he merged his self into thinking of the Lord</strong> and his mind into remembering His different activities. He chanted the glories of the Lord, and by his sight he began to see the Lord personally present before him, and thus all his activities became concentrated upon the Lord without deviation.</p>
<p>In the chapter of <a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m13/m13b133.htm" rel="noreferrer"><strong>Bhishma-Swargarohana</strong></a> Parva the way with which Bhishma became dead is also mentioned. It is said that his pranas went up through piercing his Brahmarandhra (crown of the head) and went up towards heaven .</p>
<blockquote>
<p>P. 396 The life-breaths, restrained and unable to escape through any
of the outlets, at last pierced through the crown of the head and
proceeded upwards to heaven. The celestial kettle-drums began to play
and floral showers were rained down. The Siddhas and regenerate
Rishis, filled with delight, exclaimed, 'Excellent, Excellent!' 'The
life-breaths of Bhishma, piercing through the crown of his head, shot
up through the welkin like a large meteor and soon became invisible</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So according to Mahabharata Bhishma did not became one with Krishna but his soul went up to Swarga. </p>
<hr>
<p>In conclusion:-
Bhishma did not attain Vasu-Loka but he became one of the Vasus as he was originally was and took birth on earth by curse of Sage Vashistha. So he merged with Vasus and attain swarga. So Mahabharata, Svargarohanika Parva is correct. </p>
<p>Bhishma merged with Vasus , his original form and attain Swarga as mentioned by Shree Krishna himself in Mahabharata. And the Bhagavatam narration is equally correct but has to be understood by a different way. </p>
|
|
<p>Should Stotras, such as Ganpati Stotra, Durga Stotra, etc., and Mantras be recited aloud or can they be recited just in mind? Also, does the absolute correct pronunciation of words in Stotras matter? </p>
| 33848 | 33841 | 4 | 2 | 33841 | 6 | Should Stotras and Mantras be recited aloud? | 3 | 33848 | <h2>Stotras</h2>
<p>Stotras should never be recited in mind. In Stotras' case there should be loud recital.</p>
<p>In Mantra Japa, the best form is Manasa Japa (the silent chant). Loud Mantra Japa is considered as the inferior kind of Japa. </p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Manasaa yah smaret stotram</strong> vachashaa vaa manum japet |<br> <strong>Ubhayam nishphalam devi</strong> bhinna-bhaandokadam yathaa ||</p>
<p>O Devi! The act of reciting Stotras in mind and the act of repeating Mantras loudly are both fruitless just as is the act of storing water in a pot which has a hole in it. </p>
<p><strong>Kularanava Tantram 15.57</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Mantras</h2>
<p>For Mantras, the rule is exactly the opposite as already shown <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/22637/4732">in this answer</a>.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Ucchair japohadhamah prokta upaanshur madhyamah smritah |<br> Uttamo
mAnaso devi trividhah kathitah japah ||</p>
<p>O Goddess, the loud japa is considered as the worst kind, the
whispering japa (upanshu) is the middling kind and the japa that is
done completely in the mind (maanasa), is the best form of japa. These
three are said to be the kinds of japa.</p>
<p><strong>Kularnava Tantram 15.55</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>That's why Stotra recital must always be done loudly.</p>
<p>The rules for reciting Mantras are many many and all of them can not be covered in one answer. In comparison, rules of Stotra recital are only a few and simple to follow.</p>
<p>The following verses are from the Varaahi Tantram, quoted in both Tantrasaarah and Ahnik Krityam:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Pranavanchaadime datvaa stotram vaa samhitaam pathet |<br> ante cha
pranavam pranavm dadyaadi-tyuvaachaadi-purushah ||<br> Stotre cha
samhitaayaancha shlokamantyam dviruccharet |<br> <strong>Manasaa na smaret
pathedakaagramaanasah ||</strong></p>
<p><br></p>
<p>One should chant OM before and after reciting a Stotra or a Samhitaa.
And, <strong>one should never recite Stotra in mind; one should recite it
loudly with a concentrated mind.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>Some schools accept the concept of self-realization or jivanmukta. Advaita, for example, is one such school. Not all schools accept this concept, so this question is limited in scope to only those schools that accept the concept of jivanmukta.</p>
<p>Now, the question is - is it possible for us to recognize whether a person is a jivanmukta or not? <strong>Do scriptures tell us any way to distinguish the true jivanmukta from the fraud?</strong> Or is it purely subjective? If it is purely subjective, then the great personalities recognised by many saints will have to be placed at the same level as people like Nityananda, Vishwananda etc. Objectively speaking, both sets of people have their own followers who believe that their masters are self-realized. So how to resolve this issue of who is truly realized and who is fraud? Are there any scriptural statements that can help us in <strong>objectively</strong> knowing who is a true jivanmukta? Now, a particular scripture may say that a jivanmukta is equally disposed to praise and abuse, but strictly speaking, this cannot be objectively verified, because no one knows what is going on in the mind of the person. </p>
| 34113 | 34110 | 12 | 2 | 34110 | 10 | Do scriptures give a method to recognize a truly self-realized person/jivanmukta? | 3 | 34113 | <p>Dattatreya, among others, is an ideal example of a Jivanmukta. He was always associated with wine etc and a filthy lifestyle.</p>
<p>Why is that?</p>
<p><strong>Because Jivanmuktas don't want the masses to come to them. As simple as that.</strong> Because their touch is enough to liberate others, but not everyone is ready for liberation yet.</p>
<h2>Symptoms from Upanishads:</h2>
<blockquote>
<p>Like Svetaketu, Rbhu, Nidagha, Vrsabha, Durvasas, Samvartaka,
Dattatreya, and Raivataka, he has no visible emblem; <strong>he keeps his
conduct concealed; he acts as if he were a fool, a lunatic, or a
goblin; and, although he is sane, he behaves like a madman.</strong></p>
<p><strong>Narada Parivrajaka Upanishad, Chapter3</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>In these Upanishads, they are known as Paramhamsas. They always will hide their true identities. And, they will do everything so that people feel disgusted towards them.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>His emblem and aim concealed, he should present himself to the people
as a madman or a simpleton even though he is a sage, and as a fool
even though he is wise. "Let him not do anything, say anything, or
think of anything whether it is good or bad. In this manner a sage
shall roam like a fool, finding his delight in himself.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><br></p>
<blockquote>
<p>Although he is sane, he behaves like a madman. He has no visible
emblem. He keeps his conduct concealed. </p>
<p><strong>Paramhamsa Parivrajaka Upanishad, Chapter 5</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, we can not recognize such a person neither from his conduct, nor from what he is wearing.</p>
<h2>Symptoms from VedAntic texts:</h2>
<p>I'm using YogaVAshita here.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Dure munchati vandhumandhamiva yah sangAdbhujangAdiva |<br> TrAsam yo
vidadhAti vetti sadrisham bhogam cha rogam cha yah ||<br> ... SwAntam
yasya samam sa mangalamihAmutrApi martyohashnute ||</p>
<p><strong>He who forsakes all associations with friends</strong> like a blind, <strong>who is
afraid of associations with the masses</strong> like a snake, who sees the
pleasure (bhoga) and ailment (roga) as the same .. that wise man is
known to be liberated always.</p>
<p><strong>YogaVAshishtaSAra, Tattva GyAna Prakarana, Verse 18</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, another pointed highlighted here is that he will avoid all associations with masses.</p>
<p>The commentator (on YogavAshishtaSArah) SwAmi DhireshAnanada comments on the nature and some features of the Jivanmuktah:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Andhavat:</strong></p>
<p>Because he sees the world as not true he is like the blind (andha).</p>
<p><strong>Jadavat:</strong></p>
<p>Because he knows the inert nature of all the non-self entities like
bodies etc, he is Jadavat (inert).</p>
<p><strong>Mukavat:</strong></p>
<p>Since he resides in a state which is inexplicable (anirvachya pAda),
he is mukavat (dumb).</p>
<p><strong>Unmattavat:</strong></p>
<p>Since he wants to avoid association of all sorts, he behaves like a
mad man and hence is Unmattavat.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><br></p>
<blockquote>
<p>RAgadveshabhayAdinAmanurupam charannapi |<br> Yohantar-vyom-datyacchah
sa jivanmukta ucyate ||</p>
<p>Who, although is clear like the Akasha from the inside, shows from
outside, attraction towards food etc, anger towards the wicked, and
fear (towards snakes, tigers etc) is known to be a Jivanmukta.</p>
<p><strong>Laghu YogavAshita 5.93</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Symptoms from the Tantras:</h2>
<p>I'm using KulArnava Tantram. In chapter 9 of this scripture, Lord Shiva describes the features of the Yogis who have attained self-realization. They are known as the Kula-Yogis in the text.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Yogino vividhairveshairnarAnAm hitakArinah |<br> Bhramanti
prithivimetAmavigyAta-swarupinah ||</p>
<p>Acting in a way that is beneficial to the human beings, <strong>these Yogis move about in different
forms, always concealing their true nature</strong>. 66</p>
<p>Sakrinnai-vAtma-vijyAnam kshapayanti kuleswari |<br>
Unmatta-muka-jada-vannivasellokamadhyatah ||</p>
<p>O Goddess of the Kulas, they are never detached from the Knowledge of
the Self <strong>but amongst the masses, they behave like a mad, a dumb or an
inert person. (67)</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p><br></p>
<blockquote>
<p>AlakshyA hi yathA loke vyomni chandrArkayorgatihi |<br> NakshtrAnAm
grahAnAncha tathaiva kulayoginAm ||</p>
<p>In this world, the movement of the Kula Yogis are unnoticed (that is their real movement is hidden from us) just as
the movements of the sun, the moon and the stars in sky are unnoticed.
(68)</p>
<p>Asanta iva bhAshante charantyagyA iva priye |<br> PAmarA iva
drishyante kulayoga-vishAradAh ||</p>
<p>O Beloved -- <strong>The Kula Yogis speak like the bad people, roam like the
idiots (ignorant) and appear as cheats (to others). (70)</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p><br></p>
<blockquote>
<p>Muktohapi vAlavat kriret kulesho jada-vaccharet |<br>
Vadenn-unmatta-vavidvAna kuloyogi ||</p>
<p>O Great Goddess --- although the Kulayogi is liberated, <strong>he plays like
a child, behaves like an inert and talks like a mad man.</strong> (72)</p>
<p>YathA hasati lokahayam jugupsati cha kutsati |<br> Vilokya durato yAti
tathA yogi pravartate ||</p>
<p><strong>The Yogis must behave in a manner so that people laugh at them, despise them, censure them and stay away from them. (73)</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, in short, it is NOT POSSIBLE to recognize a true Jivanmukta. Because, they will always hide their true nature for sure. Moreover, their movements are also concealed from us. </p>
|
|
<p>In Gita, Sri Krishna says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>4.6 Though <strong>I am birthless, undecaying by nature</strong>, and the Lord of beings, (still) by subjugating My Prakriti, I take birth by means of My own Maya.</p>
<p>4.9 He who thus knows truly <strong>the divine birth and actions of Mine</strong> does not get birth after casting off the body. He attains Me, O Arjuna.</p>
<p>7.24 <strong>The unintelligent, unaware of My supreme state which is immutable and unsurpassable, think of Me as the unmanifest that has become manifest.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>We have also to remember that </p>
<blockquote>
<p>2.28 O descendant of Bharata, all beings remain unmanifest in the beginning;; they become manifest in the middle. After death they certainly become unmanifest. What lamentation can there be with regard to them?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So Sri Krishna makes it clear that He is different from 'Unmanisfest' becoming 'Manifest' as are ALL the persons.</p>
<p>Given the above, does any of our scriptures allow to brand Sri Krishna as a 'Person' ('Vyakti') with 'Personality'?</p>
<p><strong>The meanings of the word 'Person' according to the the Oxford Dictionary are :</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>1A human being regarded as an individual.</p>
<p>•‘the porter was the last person to see her prior to her disappearance’
‘she is a person of astonishing energy’
More example sentencesSynonyms
1.1 (in legal or formal contexts) an unspecified individual.
‘each of the persons using unlawful violence is guilty of riot’
‘the entrance fee is £2.00 per person’
More example sentences
1.2with modifier An individual characterized by a preference or liking for a specified thing.
‘she's not a cat person’
More example sentencesSynonyms
1.3 A character in a play or story.
‘his previous roles in the person of a fallible cop’
Synonyms
1.4 An individual's body.
¤‘I would have publicity photographs on my person at all times’
More example sentencesSynonyms</p>
<p>2Grammar
《A category used in the classification of pronouns, possessive determiners, and verb forms, according to whether they indicate the speaker (first person), the addressee (second person), or a third party (third person).</p>
<p>《Example sentences
《3Christian Theology
《Each of the three modes of being of God, namely the Father, the Son, or the Holy Ghost, who together constitute the Trinity.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Christan Theology meaning of course in not applicable in this case.</p>
<p>Are there any Non ISKCON translations which translate Krishna as "person"?</p>
| 34139 | 34132 | 7 | 2 | 34132 | 1 | Can Sri Krishna be called 'a person'? | 3 | 34139 | <p><strong>This is how Krishnaprem</strong>, (<a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krishna_Prem" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krishna_Prem</a>), <strong>the renowned siddha Gaudiya Vaishnava saint sees the topic</strong>.He clearly answers in the negative and writes</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Nor Krishna is man at all, but a great Power which, by its presence, though unknown, unseen, lightens the bitter sorrows of the world.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>The sanskritdictionary.com gives the relevant meanings of 'Purusha' as</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>The soul; द्वाविमौ पुरुषौ लोके क्षरश्चाक्षर एव च Bg.15.16 &c. -7 The Supreme Being, God (soul of the universe); पुरातनं त्वां पुरुषं पुराविदः (विदुः) Śi.1.33; R.13.6.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>It is obvious that here 'Purusha' can NOT mean person ('Vyakti') -- because three types of 'Purusha' are mentioned in the chapter 15 of the Gita: kshara, Akshara and Purusha-Uttama. If all three are translated as persons, that would be the most misleading!</strong></p>
<p>in His 'The Yoga of the Bhagavad-Gita'. First Sri Krishnaprem clarifies:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>To anyone who has eyes to see, Gita is based on direct knowledge of Reality, and the Path that leads to that Reality..Those eternal realities are the same now as they were thousand of years ago, and the text of Gita should be interpreted in words that refer to these realities here and now.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>He explains the verse that contains the word 'Purusha' in chapter 15, sloka 4 of the Gita as</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Detaching himself from the union with the objects of both outer and inner senses, detaching himself in fact from all from whatsoever, the disciple must soar upon the trackless path of light towards <strong>the Primal Consciousness from which ages past the Cosmic Energied steamed forth. (verse 4)</strong>.That Consciousness however being Absolute, is far beyond all that we know as such.Knower and Known exist in one as it is, in another way, they are not one in absolute matter.It is in fact no consciousness for us, being beyond the Fire of manifested life, the Moon of Mula-prakriti, the Sun of the unmanifested Atman.It is the Void; It is also the Full.Having gone thither, none can return again.That, Krishna says, is His Supreme Abode.That is the Goal; That is final bliss.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Krushnaprem is a foremost intellectual, a greatest Siddha Vaishnava and a top-class writer. So I lay most importance to His translation and interpretation.Those who know a minimum of both Sanskrit and English will understand that the word 'Purusha' can never be satisfactorily translated as 'Person', because The one Who lying in the 'Pura' is 'Purusha'.
<strong>Sri Krishnprem translates 'Purusha' as 'The Spirit or Consciousness</strong>'.
The entire book is available for download online in pdf format. <a href="https://www.auro-ebooks.com/the-yoga-of-the-bhagavat-gita/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.auro-ebooks.com/the-yoga-of-the-bhagavat-gita/</a></p>
<p><strong>The translations like 'Person' or 'The Supreme Personality of Godhead' are very very close to the Christan Theological meaning and the farthest from what the Gita and the Acharyas try to imply.</strong></p>
<p><strong>UPDATE</strong></p>
<p>There are different meanings of the word 'Purusha' in the dictionary.One crude meaning is a 'Male Person'.But in the Vedanta Literature, that is NOT acceptable. The Upanishad says : 'Purusha' of a size of a thumb always resides in the heart of every human being. The Gita says: There are two types of 'Purusha' --khsara and akshara,metc etc. There is the famous 'Purusha-Sukta' in the Vedas also.So it becomes clear that in the Vedanta Literature that includes the Gita, the translation of 'Purusha' can never be 'Person'.</p>
<p>Also, Srimad-Bhagavatam mentions that Mother Yashoda wrongly took her lad as a person and did bind with rope and Sri Sri Chaitanya Charitamrita quotes this sloka(Madhya, chapter 19):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>tam matvA Atmajam avyaktam martyalingam adokhsajam/gopika udukhale dAmna vavandha prAkritam yathA// (9/12/30)</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>The English translation of a hymn by Prahlada in Srimad -Bhagavatam (7/9/40) reads as</p>
<blockquote>
<p>My dear Lord, O infallible one, my position is like that of a person who has many wives, all trying to attract him in their own way. For example, the tongue is attracted to palatable dishes, the genitals to sex with an attractive woman, and the sense of touch to contact with soft things. The belly, although filled, still wants to eat more, and <strong>the ear, not attempting to hear about You, is generally attracted to cinema songs</strong>. The sense of smell is attracted to yet another side, the restless eyes are attracted to scenes of sense gratification, and the active senses are attracted elsewhere. In this way I am certainly embarrassed.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Did cinema-songs exist at the time of Hiranykasipu and Prahlada? Any evidence other parts of Bhagavatam or any scripture? </p>
<p>Reference : <a href="https://prabhupadabooks.com/sb/7/9?d=1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://prabhupadabooks.com/sb/7/9?d=1</a></p>
| 34164 | 34153 | 8 | 2 | 34153 | 3 | Did 'Cinema Songs' exist during Hiranyakshipu's time? | 5 | 34164 | <p>NO.</p>
<p>The 'Cinema-Song' is just an unwanted addition by the translator.</p>
<p>The original sloka is:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>jihvaikato ’cyuta vikarṣati māvitṛptā
śiśno ’nyatas tvag-udaraṁ śravaṇaṁ kutaścit
ghrāṇo ’nyataś capala-dṛk kva ca karma-śaktir
bahvyaḥ sapatnya iva geha-patiṁ lunanti</p>
<p>SYNONYMS</p>
<p>jihvā—the tongue; ekataḥ—to one side; acyuta—O my infallible Lord; vikarṣati—attracts; mā—me; avitṛptā—not being satisfied; śiśnaḥ—the genitals; anyataḥ—to another side; tvak—the skin; udaram—the belly ; <strong>śravaṇam—the ears</strong>; kutaścit—anywhere; ghrāṇaḥ—the nose; anyataḥ—to still another side; capala-dṛk—the restless eyesight; kva ca—somewhere; karma-śaktiḥ—the active senses; bahvyaḥ—many; sa-patnyaḥ—co-wives; iva—like; geha-patim—a householder; lunanti—annihilate.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>So here only ears are referred to [which are attracted to sensual music]. Cinema-Song is just unimaginable as there was no cinema at that time when our scriptures were compiled.</strong></p>
|
|
<p>In His hymn to Sri Nrisimhadeva, Prahlada says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>O best of the great personalities, I am not at all afraid of material existence, for wherever I stay I am fully absorbed in thoughts of Your glories and activities. <strong>My concern is only for the fools and rascals</strong> who are making elaborate plans for material happiness and maintaining their families, societies and countries. I am simply concerned with love for them. (7/9/43)</p>
<p>My dear Lord Nṛsiṁhadeva, I see that there are many saintly persons indeed, but they are interested only in their own deliverance. Not caring for the big cities and towns, they go to the Himalayas or the forest to meditate with vows of silence [mauna-vrata]. They are not interested in delivering others. As for me, however, I do not wish to be liberated alone, leaving aside all these poor <strong>fools and rascals.</strong> I know that without Kṛṣṇa consciousness, without taking shelter of Your lotus feet, one cannot be happy. Therefore I wish to bring them back to shelter at Your lotus feet.(7/9/44).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Did Prahlada really think that the wordly people were 'fools and rascals' as referred to in the translations above? Such a mind-set contradicts the features of a true devotee as mentioned in the Gita :</p>
<blockquote>
<p>12.13 <strong>He who is not hateful towards any creature, who is friendly and compassionate, who has no idea of 'mine' and the idea of egoism, who is the same under sorrow and happiness, who is forgiving;</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Any reference in Bhagavatam or any other scriptures?</p>
<p>Reference : <a href="https://prabhupadabooks.com/sb/7/9?d=1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://prabhupadabooks.com/sb/7/9?d=1</a></p>
| 34163 | 34154 | 6 | 2 | 34154 | 3 | Did Prahlada think that the worldly people are 'fools and rascals'? | 3 | 34163 | <p>No,. Not at all.</p>
<p>The original sloka is</p>
<blockquote>
<p>naivodvije para duratyaya-vaitaraṇyās
tvad-vīrya-gāyana-mahāmṛta-magna-cittaḥ
śoce tato vimukha-cetasa indriyārtha-
māyā-sukhāya bharam udvahato vimūḍhān</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>The lines made bold of the following quotation are all wrong translations. Let us see why</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>SYNONYMS
na—not; eva—certainly; udvije—I am disturbed or afraid; para—O Supreme; duratyaya—insurmountable or very difficult to cross; vaitaraṇyāḥ—of the Vaitaraṇī, the river of the material world; tvat-vīrya—of Your Lordship’s glories and activities; gāyana—from chanting or distributing; mahā-amṛta—in the great ocean of nectarean spiritual bliss; magna-cittaḥ—whose consciousness is absorbed; śoce—I am simply lamenting; tataḥ—from that; vimukha-cetasaḥ—<strong>the fools and rascals who are bereft of</strong> <strong>Kṛṣṇa consciousness</strong>; indriya-artha—in sense gratification; māyā-sukhāya—for temporary, illusory happiness; bharam—<strong>the false burden or responsibility (of maintaining one’s family, society and nation and elaborate arrangements for that purpose</strong>); udvahataḥ—who are lifting (by making grand plans for this arrangement); vimūḍhān—<strong>although all of them are nothing but fools and rascals</strong> (I am thinking of them also).</p>
</blockquote>
<ol>
<li>Prahlada was a devotee of Sri Vishnu and so he never could talk of the 'Krishna-Consciousness.</li>
</ol>
<p>2.'Vimukha-ChetA' means the ones whose mind are roaming away from God.</p>
<ol start="3">
<li><p>'Bhrama' means confusion.</p></li>
<li><p>Vimudha means the tempted/ beguiled/ignorant.</p></li>
</ol>
<p><strong>So there is no trace of any words like 'fools and rascals' in the original sloka.
It is conveying something very unwanted and undesirable</strong>.</p>
<p>Reference: sanskritdictionary.com</p>
|
|
<p>So far as I know, brahmacharya is essential for spiritual advancement.</p>
<p>I often hear though that our great rishis were married.</p>
<p>Is there any proof in the scriptures that show that none of the rishis were unmarried or left their families for realisation?</p>
<p>Please note that the question is about the 'Rishi-s' and not about the common folk of the vedic age.</p>
| 34238 | 34199 | 3 | 2 | 34199 | 6 | Is there any proof that none of our ancient rishis were unmarried or left their families? | 3 | 34238 | <p>Yes, we have a proof that <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yajnavalkya" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><strong>Yajnavalkya</strong></a> was married and taken Sanyasa:</p>
<p>Quoting from <a href="http://www.shastras.com/upanishads-shukla-yajur-veda/brihadaranyaka-upanishad/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Brihadaranyaka Upanishad</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>IV-v-1: Now <strong>Yajnavalkya had two wives</strong>, Maitreyi and Katyayani. Of these Maitreyi used to discuss Brahman, (while) Katyayani had then only an essentially feminine outlook. One day Yajnavalkya, with a view to embracing life -</p>
<p>IV-v-2: 'O Maitreyi, my dear', said Yajnavalkya, '<strong>I am going to renounce this life</strong> for monasticism. Allow me to finish between you and Katyayani'.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Then Maitreyi asked several questions regarding how can one approach ultimate immortality and Yajnavalkya preached her very descriptively. You can read full discussion in next verse or can refer 4th Brahmana of 2nd Adhyaya of same Upanishad where elaborative discussion is found.</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/f7xN4.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/f7xN4.jpg" alt="enter image description here" /></a><br />
<sup>image source: <a href="http://kids.baps.org/storytime/maitreyi.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">baps kids story</a></sup></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Quoting couple of verses comprising interesting preaching:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>IV-v-6: He said: 'It is not for the sake of the husband, my dear, that he is loved, but for one's own sake that he is loved. It is not for the sake of the wife, my dear, that she is loved, but for one's own sake that she is loved. It is not for the sake of the sons, my dear, that they are loved, but for one's own sake that they are loved. It is not for the sake of wealth, my dear, that it is loved, but for one's own sake that it is loved. It is not for the sake of the Brahmana, my dear, that he is loved, but for one's own sake that he is loved. It is not for the sake of the Kshatriya, my dear, that he is loved, but for one's own sake that he is loved. It is not for the sake of worlds, my dear, that they are loved, but for one's own sake that they are loved. It is not for the sake of the gods, my dear, that they are loved, but for one's own sake that they are loved. It is not for the sake of beings, my dear, that they are loved, but for one's own sake that they are loved. It is not for the sake of all, my dear, that all is loved, but for one's own sake that it is loved. <strong>The Self, my dear Maitreyi, should be realised - should be heard of, reflected on and meditated upon. When the Self, my dear, is realised by being heard of, reflected on and meditated upon, all this is known</strong></p>
<p>IV-v-15: Because when there is duality, as it were, then one sees something, one smells something, one tastes something, one speaks something, one hears something, one thinks something, one touches something, one knows something. (But) when to the knower of Brahman everything has become the Self, then what should one see and through what, what should one smell and through what, what should one taste and through what, what should one speak and through what, what should one hear and through what, what should one think and through what, what should one touch and through what, what should one know and through what? Through what should one know that owing to which all this is known? This self is That which has been described as 'Not this, Not this'. It is imperceptible, for It is never perceived; undecaying, for It never decays; unattached, for It is never attached; unfettered - it never feels pain, and never suffers injury. Through what, O Maitreyi, should one know the Knower? So you have got the instruction, Maitreyi. This much indeed is (the means of) immortality, my dear. Saying this <strong>Yajnavalkya left.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>And finally after preaching Maitreyi, Yajnavalkya took Sannyasa.</p>
|
|
<p>What is the position of Durga in Gaudiya Vaishnavism? Is there need to worship her? Can she be worshiped?</p>
| 34313 | 34312 | 8 | 2 | 34312 | 3 | What is the position of Durga in Gaudiya Vaishnavism? | 3 | 34313 | <p>Chaitanya Bhagavata is not a philosophical book, and it doesn't cover full life of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. It covers till Chaitanya Mahaprabhu takes sanyas and a bit after that. One things we learn from Chaitanya Bhagavata is that Bengali Vaishnavas were quite liberal and culturally sensitive and didn't have any fights/debates with other groups about supremacy. </p>
<p>However, Chaitanya Charitamrita covers later details and it is a book mixed with hagiograpy and philosophical teachings.</p>
<p>So, trying to get philosphical teachings from Chaitanya Bhagavata without understanding Gaudiya Vaishnava theology is misleading.</p>
<p>Some such statements are explained in this <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/33326/17931">answer</a> and I picked some portion of my answer from there.</p>
<p>Statements like "Chaitanya Mahaprabhu offered respects to Durga" doesn't prove anything that
Durga and Krishna are same. If we use wrong logic, we can say, Chaitanya mahaprabhu offered respect to his mother Saci and thus his mother is same as Krishna.</p>
<p>It is like saying, Jiva is amsa. Avatars like matsya are amsa. So, Matsya is jiva.</p>
<p>And respecting someone has nothing to do with calling some one as minor deity, one respects Narada, Prahlada though they are jivas. It is again false logic to say that respect and calling someone as minor deity are mutually exclusive.</p>
<p>Chaitanya Charitamrita also says that in Navadvipa Chaitanya Mahaprabhu didn't manifest his potency as he did in his South Indian tour where he converted many into Vaishnavism.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>CC Madhya lila :(109)</p>
<p>navadvipe yei sakti na kaila prakase se sakti prakasi’ nistarila
dakshina-dese</p>
<p>Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu did not manifest His spiritual potencies at
Navadvipa, but He did
manifest them in South India and liberated all the people there.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Thus Chaitanya Bhagavata which covers most of the earlier events doesn't have so much philosophy or not written in that style.</p>
<p>The reason why Chaitanya Mahaprabhu visited temples of Shiva and Durga in his pilgrimage is described in Sri Krsna Chaitanya Charita Mahakavya: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>vainava sreth-a buddhya ye l phj ayanti mahesvaram tair ddatta ghnate
so 'pi l tad anna pavana mahat</p>
<p>When bhaktas worship Mahadeva thinking of him as the best among
vaisnavas, Mahesvara accepts that offering from them, and that food
should be considered great and pure prasada . srI kna kn-a bh-akta-na
l bheda buddhy-a patanty adhah durvvairan sikayas tas ca / bhakta
rupah s-vaya harih</p>
<p>Those who in a sectarian spirit differentiate between Sri Krsna and
his bhaktas indeed fall down. Sri Hari personally advented in the form
of a bhakta as Caitanya Mahaprabhu in order to instruct such inimical
persons.</p>
<p>acaryyaty api deveso l hita k-t sarvva dehinam nirmmalyam adarenaiva l
ghItva j agad I-svarah </p>
<p>The Lord of all gods, who is the supreme controller of the cosmic
manifestation, certainly seeks to benefit all embodied beings. Thus,
by His reverential acceptance of Sri Siva's food-remnants, He teaches
them by His example.</p>
<p>vainavaih phjito yatra l sn siva-h paramadarat anadi linga-m asadya l
sn kna p-nti -hetav-e 20 tatraiva sasayo nasti l nirmmalya grah-ane
kvacit bhaktir eva sada vipra l subha da sa-rvva dehin-am </p>
<p>Wherever the beginningless lingam of Sri Siva is worshipped with great
respect by vaisnavas in order to develop love for Sri Krsna, there
will be no doubt about accepting the remnants of Sri Siva's food. O
vipra, such devotional service is verily auspicious for all embodied
beings.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Some believe that Chaitanya mahaprabhu was born in Shakta family and thus he visited Shiva and Durga temples, however I didn't find any support for that claim. I asked a question <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/q/34322/17931">here</a> regarding that.</p>
<p>Chaitanya Mahaprabhu specifically instructed Rupa and Sanatan Goswamis(seen in 19th and 23rd chapters of Madhya lila, CC) and other goswamis to go to Vrindavan and help Rupa and Sanatana to write books and excavate holy places in Vrindavan.</p>
<p>Therefore the works of Rupa, Sanatana and Jiva Goswamis are the authoritative opinions of Gaudiya Theology. No where they have accepted anyone other than Krishna/Vishnu as supreme. Of course in most of their works, they have dealt only with Krishna. Only very less portion is dedicated for other things.</p>
<p>The idea that all deities are equal is not found any where. </p>
<p>Brhad Gautamiya Tantra says :</p>
<blockquote>
<p>radha durga siva durga lakshmi durga prakirtita gopala visnu pujayam
ady anta na tu madhyama </p>
<p>Durga is name of Radha, Parvati and Lakshmi. In the worship of Gopala
and Vishnu, only first (Radha) and last(Lakshmi) are employed, not
the middle.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Gautamiya Kalpa says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>yah krsnah saiva durga syad ya durga krsna eva sah anayor antardarsi
samsaran no vimucyate</p>
<p>Krishna is non different from Durga. Durga is non different from
Krishna. He who sees the difference between them can't become
liberated from this world.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Thus Krishna is the Lord and Durga is his svarupa sakti, not the Durga associated with material world. </p>
<p>The derivation of durga is: with great difficulty(dur) in worship, she is understood(ga).</p>
<p>In Narada-pañcaratra, in a conversation between Sruti
and Vidya, it is described:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>janaty eka para kante saiva durga tadatmika | ya para parama saktir
maha-vi??u-svarupi?i || yasya vijñana-matre?a para?a? paramatmana? |
muhurtad eva devasya praptir bhavati nanyatha || ekeya?
prema-sarvasva-svabhava gokulesvari | anaya sulabho jñeya adi-devo
’khilesvara? || asya avarika saktir maha-mayakhilesvari | yaya mugdha?
jagat sarva? sarve dehabhimanina? ||</p>
<p>“O beloved, the topmost transcendental potency, imbued with the nature
of Maha-Vi??u, is fully aware. It is of one kind; it is the same as
the spiritual Durga, being one in essence. Merely by cognizing that
potency, and not otherwise, in a moment the transcendentalists can
attain the Lord, Paramatma. This unique potency rules Gokula, and its
nature consists entirely of pure love. The primeval God, the
controller of everything, is understood and easily obtained through
her. Maha-maya, the covering power that controls everything and by
whom the whole world and all those who identify themselves with their
material bodies are bewildered, is her potency.” (Narada-pañcaratra)
(quoted by Jiva Gosvami in his commentary on Brahma-samhita 5.3)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>From Anuccheda 285 of Bhakti Sandarbha,</p>
<p><strong>The devatās such as Durgā and Ganeśa in the worship of the āvaraṇa during
worship are seen as the Lord’s eternal servitors in Vaikuṇṭha such as Viṣvaksena.
They are not the Ganeśa and Durgā composed of māyā-śakti.</strong> Since maya has no jurisdiction in Vaikuntha.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>pravartate yatra rajas tamas tayoḥ sattvaṁ ca miśraṁ na ca
kāla-vikramaḥ | na yatra māyā kim utāpare harer anuvratā yatra
surāsurārcitāḥ ||</p>
<p>In Vaikuṇṭha there are no rajas or tamas, and no sattva mixed with
rajas and tamas. There is no influence of time. There is no influence
of māyā at all, what to speak of its products such as material
elements. In Vaikuṇṭha the inhabitants are fully dedicated to the Lord
and are worshipable by the devas, asuras and devotees. SB 2.9.10</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Rather these people are filled with the Lord’s svarūpa-śakti. The controlling
position of the special function of the śakti emanating from Kṛṣṇa’s svarūpa is
described in the śruti and tantras.</p>
<p>In the discussion of Śruti-vidyā it is said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>bhaktir bhajana-sampattir bhajate prakṛtiḥ priyam |
jñāyate’tyanta-duḥkhena seyaṁ prakṛtir ātmanaḥ || durgeti gīyate
sadbhir akhaṇḍa-rasa-vallabhā |.</p>
<p>Bhakti, who is known as prakṛti, endowed with a wealth of worship,
worships her dear Lord. She, the prakṛti of the Lord, is known with
great difficulty. Thus the devotees glorify her, dear to the Lord of
rasa, as Durgā (difficult to approach).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Her non-difference from the Lord is stated in Gautamīya-kalpa.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>yaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ saiva durgā syād yā durgā kṛṣṇa eva saḥ </p>
<p>He who is Kṛṣṇa is
Durgā. She who is Durgā is Kṛṣṇa.</p>
<p>tvam eva parameśāni asyādhiṣṭhātṛ-devatā</p>
<p>You are the supreme goddess, the controlling deity.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This hints at worshipping the Lord and Durgā as non-different, just as worship of
the universal form and Mahāviṣṇu are treated as non-different.**</p>
<p>Durgā of material realm is a portion of māyā, engaged to serve by protecting the mantra in this
world, which is dependent on the Lord. She is the servant of the spiritual
Durgā and is not the controller of bhaktiservice. </p>
<p>Padma Purāṇa described the
āvaraṇa devatās beyond māyā in Vaikuṇṭha:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>satyācyutānanta-durgā-viṣvaksena-gajānanāḥ | śaṅkha-padma-nidhī lokāś
caturthāvaraṇaṁ śubham || aindra-pāvaka-yāmyāni nairṛtaṁ vāruṇaṁ tathā
| vāyavyaṁ saumyam aiśānaṁ saptamaṁ munibhiḥ smṛtam || sādhyā
marud-gaṇāś caiva viśvedevās tathaiva ca | nityāḥ sarve pare dhāmni ye
cānye ca divaukasaḥ || te vai prākṛta-loke’sminn anityās tridaśeśvarāḥ
| te ha nākaṁ mahimānaḥ sacanta iti vai śrutiḥ |.</p>
<p>Durgā, Viṣvaksena and Ganeśa made of eternity, knowledge and bliss, Śaṅkha-nidhi and Padma-nidhi are in the fourth glorious circle. Indra,
Agni, Yama, Nairṛta, Varuṇa, Vāyu, Saumya and Śiva are in the seventh
circle. The Sādhyas, Maruts, and Viśvadevas are also there. All the
others in the spiritual world are also eternal. Those in the material
heavenly planets are temporary devatās.</p>
<p>Śruti says “The devatās associate with the Lord in the spiritual
world.” Padma Purāṇa 6.228.60, 64-66</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The ananya-bhaktas should not worry that the spiritual devatās share the same
name with their material counterparts. Viṣvaksena and others should be honored
since they are engaged in eternal service to the Lord in Vaikuṇṭha. Nor
worshipping them is considered a fault. It is said “He who never identifies
himself with, feels kinship with, worships or even visits those who are wise in
spiritual truth (devotees)—such a person is no better than a cow or an ass.” (SB
10.84.13)</p>
<blockquote>
<p>arcayitvā tu govindaṁ tadīyān nārcayet tu yaḥ na sa bhāgavato jñeyaḥ
kevalam dāmbhikaḥ smṛtaḥ</p>
<p>He who after worshipping Govinda does not worship his followers is not
known as devotee. He is simply a pretender. Padma Purāṇa 6.253.177</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Thus it is said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>durgāṁ vināyakaṁ vyāsaṁ viṣvakṣenaṁ gurūn surān sve sve sthāne tv
abhimukhān pūjayet prokṣaṇādibhiḥ</p>
<p>With prokṣaṇa and other items, one should worship Durgā, Ganeśa,
Vyāsa, Viṣvaksena, the gurus and the various devatās. All these
personalities should be in their proper places facing the deity of the
Lord. SB 11.27.29</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Thus Durga and other devas like Ganesa mentioned are eternal associates of Lord in the Vaikuntha, not the devatas of material realm.</p>
<p>Now, devas of material realm are described in Brahma Samhita:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Bs 5.43 — Lowest of all is located Devī-dhāma [mundane world], next
above it is Maheśa-dhāma [abode of Maheśa]; above Maheśa-dhāma is
placed Hari-dhāma [abode of Hari] and above them all is located
Kṛṣṇa’s own realm named Goloka. I adore the primeval Purusha Govinda,
who has allotted their respective authorities to the rulers of those
graded realms.</p>
<p>Bs 5.44 — The external potency Māyā who is of the nature of the shadow
of the cit potency, is worshiped by all people as Durgā, the creating,
preserving and destroying agency of this mundane world. I adore the
primeval Pursha, Govinda in accordance with whose will Durgā conducts
herself.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In commentary Jiva Goswami says,</p>
<p>The abodes of Devi, Mahesha, and Lord Hari were described in the previous verse. Now, in the next five verses, it will be shown that Lord Krishna is the shelter of all of these abodes.</p>
<p>Thus, Durga is external energy or Bahiranga Shakti of Krishna.</p>
<p>Jiva goswami says the same in Tattva Sandarbha, text 33</p>
<p>The Lord does not interfere with the skillful actions of māyā, the controller of the material world, who has been his devotee without beginning. Desiring that the jīvas become favorable to him out of fear of māyā, the Lord teaches:</p>
<p>My māyā, made of the guṇas, fit for the jīva’s pleasure, is hard to surpass, but those who surrender to me alone can cross over this māyā. BG 7.14</p>
<p>The Lord, as ācārya, later teaches this particularly through his form of Vyāsa, a līlāvatāra. Vyāsa saw bhakti which destroys māyā (anarthas anarthopaśamaṁ). Thus there are coordinated functions of the māyā and the Lord concerning bewilderment of the jīva and desiring to make the jīva favorable.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“Māyā is a śakti and a śakti has ability to act. Śakti is merely a
quality. Why then does māyā have the particular quality of being
ashamed (if she is just an insentient śakti)?” Scriptures describe
that there are controlling deities of these śaktis. One should see the
discussion between Indra and Māyā (who is personified as a
person)[Uma] in Kena Upaniṣad. Now let us return to the topic.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In commentary to 46th verse,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>In this example Lord Shiva, because he is the controller of the mode
of ignorance, is compared to the soot that is the by-product of these
candles. Therefore He is not equal to the Supreme Personality of
Godhead, as are the forms of Lord Vishnu. In the following verses the
various expansions of Lord Vishnu will be described.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In commentary to 49th verse, Jiva Goswami says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Although Goddess Maya, who is also known as Durga, is a servant of
Lord Karanarnavashayi Vishnu and dutifully carries out His commands,
and although Brahma, Vishnu, and others are avataras of Lord
Garbhodakashayi Vishnu, nevertheless Lord Govinda is the final shelter
of all, and all others take shelter of Him. This will be further
explained later in this book.</p>
<p>SB 10.87.28: You are the self-effulgent causeless one [free from the senses] who maintains the power of the sensory functions of all
[creatures]. The devatas together with the material nature herself[Durga] take part
in paying You tribute and partake of the offerings carried, just as
the local rulers in a kingdom together with the sovereign who rules
the entire country are of respect [for You] and enjoy their share.
That is how they who are the appointed leaders perform their duties in
fear of You.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>That other devatas are automatically satisfied on worship of Hari is seen in </p>
<blockquote>
<p>SB 4.31.14: The way one with watering the root of a tree satisfies the
trunk, branches, and twigs and one likewise by offering food sustains
the life of the [entire] sensory apparatus, so too each and everyone
is honored when one is of
worship for the Infallible One.</p>
<p>SB 11.5.41: Oh King when someone forsakes his material duties and
takes to the shelter of Mukunda, the One Affording Shelter, he is
neither the servant nor the debtor of the gods, the sages, ordinary
living beings, friends and relatives, society or of the forefathers</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In the 3rd chapter of 2nd canto, worshipping of various devas for fulfilling different desires is given first. Then it concludes with:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(10) Whether one is free from desire, is full of it or else desires
liberation, someone of a serious consideration with all his heart in
devotional service [bhakti-yoga] will honor the Original Supreme
Personality. </p>
<p>(11) All these types of worshipers for sure develop, in
their worship of the highest benediction in this life, unflinching,
spontaneous attraction to the Supreme Lord through association with
His pure devotees.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Now, can other devas be worshiped and if yes how?</p>
<p>Jiva Goswami says in Bhakti Sandarbha with respect to Shiva and Brahma and can be applied to other gods.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Brahmā, the original devatā, the instructor of bhakti for the world,
situated on his lotus, considered how to carry out creation. He could
not attain the knowledge by which the universe could be created. SB
2.9.5</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Thus Mārkaṇḍeya speaks to Śiva:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>varam ekaṁ vṛṇe 'thāpi pūrṇāt kāmābhivarṣaṇāt bhagavaty acyutāṁ
bhaktiṁ tat-pareṣu tathā tvayi</p>
<p>I request one benediction from you, who are full of all perfection and
able to shower down the fulfillment of all desires. I ask to have
unfailing devotion for the Supreme Lord and for his devotees,
especially you. SB 12.10.34</p>
</blockquote>
<p>If one thinks that Śiva, the devotee, is equal to Viṣṇu, one does not attain bhakti. In Vaiṣṇava-tantra it is said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Fools who concentrate their minds and see Viṣṇu on the same level as
other persons do not attain pure bhakti to the Lord. He who sees Viṣṇu
to be equal to Brahmā and Śiva is certainly a pāśāṇḍi.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The statements of non-difference with Viṣṇu are for śānta-bhakti-jñānīs. And also,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>śuddha-bhaktāḥ śrī-guro śrī śivasya ca bhagavatā saha
abheda-dṛṣtiṃ-tat-priyatamatvenaiva manyante</p>
<p>Whenever the scriptures describe the spiritual master and Lord Śiva as
nondifferent from Kṛṣṇa, pure devotees understand this is because of
their being the most beloved of Śrī Kṛṣṇa. (Bhakti-Sandarbha,
Annucheda 216)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Jīva Gosvāmī clearly defined that a pure devotee's observation of the spiritual master and Lord Śiva as one with the Personality of Godhead exists in their being very dear to the Lord, not identical with Him in all respects.</p>
<p><strong>Śiva should be worshipped as a Vaiṣṇava. If one has to worship Śiva in some circumstance, some Vaiṣṇavas say that one should worship the Lord within Śiva’s form.</strong></p>
<p>There is a story in Viṣṇu-dharmottara. A great devotee brāhmaṇa named Viśvaksena wandered about the earth. One day he entered the edge of a forest. The son of the village leader came and said to him, “Who are you?” When the brāhmaṇa identified himself, the son said, “Today my head hurts. I cannot worship Śiva, my worshipable deity. You do the worship in my place..</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The brāhmaṇa answered. I am a brāhmaṇa dedicated to Viṣṇu. I should
worship only Viṣṇu. I worship no one else. Therefore go away quickly.
Viṣṇu-dharma 3.354.12-13</p>
</blockquote>
<p>When he said this, the son raised his sword to cut off his head. The brāhmaṇa, considered it not desirable to die by his hand said, “I will go there.” Going there, he thought in his mind, “Because he increases ignorance, for this reason, Śiva is in tamoguṇa. Nṛsiṁha should appear here to stop the worship of Śiva since ignorance can be broken with eradication of Śiva’s associates, just as the sun rises and with its rays destroys ignorance. I will worship Nṛsiṁha in the Śiva deity since Śiva’s worshippers have worshipped him in this form.” Taking a handful of flowers he said “I offer respects to Nṛsiṁha.” The son of the village leader raised his sword in anger. Suddenly the liṅga split and Nṛsiṁha appeared and killed the son with his followers. There is a Nṛsiṁha deity in the south named Liṅga-sphoṭa.</p>
<p><strong>Thus the devotees worship Śiva as a Vaiṣṇava and some worship Viṣṇu in the Śiva deity.</strong></p>
<p>Attaining the Lord by independent worship of devatās is denied in Gītā:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Those who are devoted to other gods and with faith worship them,
worship me by the wrong method, O son of Kuntī. I am the enjoyer and
master of all sacrifices. Those who do not know me as such continue to
take birth. The worshippers of the devatās go to the devatās, and the
worshippers of the Pitṛs go to the Pitṛs. The worshippers of ghosts go
to the ghosts, and worshippers of me come to me. BG 9.23-25</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Some good qualities arise by worshipping the followers of the Lord (devatās). It is also an offense to disrespect them.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>11.3.26: With faith in the scriptures about the Supreme Lord and not >blaspheming other scriptures, one should with respect for the truth
and with one's mind, speech and activities strictly controlled, be
innerly peaceful and master one's senses</p>
<p>May Hayagrīva protect me from disrespecting the devatās when going on
a path. SB 6.8.17</p>
</blockquote>
<p>According to Murari Gupa in Karcha</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The Lord [Chaitanya] Who is the ocean of grace went to see the
lotus-face of Devi VirajA, seeing Whom all sins of the past millions
of births are destroyed. Seeing Her, He prostrated to Her and asked to
giver Her love and devotion.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This doesn't prove anything that Durga is equal to Krishna, even for Vaishnavas, it is said that seeing them one attains perfections. Here the worship is done as Vaishnavi.</p>
<p>Whatever I have stated above is the Gaudiya Vaishnava opinion picked up from the root sources whom all Gaudiya Vaishnava sects accept as authority.</p>
<hr>
<p>Here are Hindi translations of Jiva Goswami works by Gadadhar subsect(who have nothing to do with Kedarnath Datta followers) of Gaudiya Vaishnavism:</p>
<p><a href="https://archive.org/details/bhakti_sandarbha/page/n687" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Bhakti Sandarbha(Anuccheda 285)</a></p>
<p><a href="https://archive.org/details/brahma_samhita_hindi/page/n91" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Brahma Samhita</a></p>
<p><a href="https://archive.org/details/bhakti_sandarbha/page/n269" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Bhakti sandarbha(Anuccheda 106)</a></p>
<p><a href="https://archive.org/details/tattva_sandarbha/page/n109" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Tattva Sandarbha(Anuccheda 33)</a></p>
|
|
<p>I have seen majority of people having Ramcharitmanas and even temples keep many copies of Ramcharitmanas rather than Valmiki Ramayana for <em>Akhand Ramayan Paath.</em> Why has Ramcharitmanas of Tulsidas, which is a retelling of Ramayana, gained more popularity than Valmiki Ramayana? Tulsidas was criticized by the Sanskrit scholars of the 15th century ; is there any story why Tulsidas chose to write the Ramayan in Awadhi language. What were the events that led to the acceptance of his version more than Valmiki's?</p>
| 45950 | 34380 | 11 | 2 | 34380 | 8 | Why Ramcharitmanas received more popularity than Valmiki Ramayana? | 3 | 45950 | <p><strong>Summary:</strong> Tulsidasji chose to write the story in Awadhi on being ordered to do so by Lord Shiva who appeared before him. The incident is a very interesting one read the detailed part to find out. Further the popularity of the Manas is only restricted to the Hindi belt of Northern India and the part the of the answer describing the factors responsible, is obviously based on my opinion.</p>
<hr />
<p><strong>Detailed</strong></p>
<h3>1. Reason for Tulsidasji writing the Sri Ramcharitmanas in Awadhi</h3>
<p>On the command of Hanumanji, Tulsidasji went to Kashi and stayed at a Brahmin’s house. There, at Prahladghat, he began writing the Ramayana in Sanskrit. Thereafter the story goes as follows:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>In the daytime how much ever he would write, would get erased at night. This incident happened everyday and he didn’t understand what to do. Then finally on the 8th day Lord Shiva came in his dream telling him to write the story in his own language. Tulsidasji at once got up with the words of the dream echoing in his heart. At that moment Lord Shiva and Devi Parvati appeared and Tulsidasji bowed down to them with his eight limbs. <strong>Lord Shiva said, “Write this poem in your own language and don’t go behind the language of the gods (Sanskrit)</strong>. Do what will be beneficial to others and leave the old tradition. Go to Awadh and write your story there. With my blessings your poem will be as fruitful as the Sama and Richa (Rigvedic verse).” Saying this Lord Shiva disappeared and Tulsidasji headed for Awadh.<br>- <em>Mūla Gosāīm̐ Carita, Chaupais of Doha 37</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Since Tulsidasji was a Sarayūpārīṇa Brahmin, who are found in the Awadh region, <em>‘his language’ was Awadhi.</em> Oh well then <strong>following the orders of Lord Shiva, Tulsidasji writes his story in his ‘own language’, Awadhi</strong> and alludes to this in the Balakand of the Ramcharitmanas:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Despite a black cow being so, her milk is still is very beneficial and thinking this people drink it. In the same way despite <em>being in the rural language</em>, smart people still sing and hear this story of Sri Sitaramji-<br><em>Doha 10</em></p>
</blockquote>
<hr />
<h3>2. Popularity of the Sri Ramcharitmanas</h3>
<p><sup> (This part of the question being opinion based is most likely to result in the answer being based on my opinion yet I’ll try to stick to the story as much as possible.) </sup></p>
<p><strong>Gaining Acceptance</strong> <br><br>
There were many incidents occurring in Tulsidasji’s life that lead to the traditional Brahmins accepting his work. They are:</p>
<ul>
<li>Lord Shiva’s signature - After completing his work he made Lord Shiva and Devi Parvati hear it and kept it in the Kashi Vishvanatha temple. In the morning when the doors were opened, the book was signed by Lord Shiva himself bearing the words ‘Satyam Shivam Sundaram’ - <em>Mūla Gosāīm̐ Carita, Doha 47</em></li>
<li>Lord Rama protecting the book from thieves - when the Pandits of Kashi sent thieves to rob the book, they saw two men of dark and fair complexion each, protecting the book with bows and arrows. - <em>Mūla Gosāīm̐ Carita, Doha 48</em></li>
<li>The Ramcharitmanas automatically reached atop the Puranas, Shastras and even the Vedas when kept below them, in the morning when the doors of the Kashi Vishvanatha temple were opened. - <em>Mūla Gosāīm̐ Carita, Doha 50</em></li>
</ul>
<p>These 3 incidents contributed to the acceptance of the Manas as an important book.</p>
<p><strong>Gaining Popularity</strong><br><br>
<em>In my opinion</em>, the popularity of the Manas over the Valmiki Ramayana in Northern India can be attributed to:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Gita Press Gorakhpur’s efforts</strong> - Due to the absence of the printing press, many scriptures such as the Manas were not available to the public at large in the sense that each could not own his personal copy. Even after the advent of the press, these were costly. Gita Press was the first to publish a relatively authentic version of the Manas which was available at cheap rates for the general public to be able to afford a personal copy. Gita Press further advertised this book to a great extent, much more than the Valmiki Ramayana. (Refer: the entire story of <a href="https://www.panchjanya.com/Encyc/2021/1/20/Research-story-of-Shri-Ramcharitmanas-and-Bhagiratha-effort-of-Geeta-Press.html" rel="noreferrer">Gita Press’ publishing of the Manas</a> for more details.)</li>
<li><strong>The Ramayana television series of Ramanand Sagar</strong>. It is said that though the Ramayana was immensely revered, people re-gained awareness of the story due to the television series of the Ramayan which primarily bases its story on the Manas (as per the introduction). This too ignited reverence for the Manas in the minds of people.</li>
<li>The most important reason being that the Manas is in one of the languages of Northern India and hence easier to understand than Sanskrit (before the translations of the Valmiki Ramayana emerged). Further as started by Tulsidasji, there used to be the Rama Leela during the 9 days of Navaratri in Nothern India, based on the Manas (instead of the Valmiki Ramayana)</li>
</ul>
<p>Thus in my opinion, the above 3 are the primary factors causing the Manas to gain popularity over the Valmiki Ramayana in Northern India.</p>
<hr />
<p>Note: The Mūla Gosāīm̐ Carita is the most widely referred biography of Tulsidasji, written by a disciple called Venimadhav. Also besides the biography, I have also relied upon Gita Press’ version of Tulsidasji’s life which too is primarily based on the Mūla Gosāīm̐ Carita.</p>
|
|
<p>A lot of people are talking about following their passion and living the life they dream of. Living the life of freedom.
That makes complete sense to me as one should live life rather than making it count. Just want to know if it is accepted in Hinduism.</p>
| 34463 | 34445 | 1 | 2 | 34445 | 3 | Following Your Passion/ Dreams against Hinduism? | 5 | 34463 | <p><strong>It depends on what my passions/dreams are.</strong> </p>
<p><strong>The Sanatana Dharma speaks of four 'Purushartha'-s as the four types of fulfillment of life. They are : Dharma (Rightousness),Artha(Wealth), Kama (Desires) and Moksha (Liberation). For most people, the first three constitute the goals and hence the term 'Trivarga' is also used.</strong></p>
<p>If Artha and Kama that we have passion for or dream of does not contradict Dharma, they are never condemned,In fact they are encouraged. All are not to lead a purely Spiritual Life. One can worship God for the fulfillment of the desires also, who is termed as 'Artharthi' in the Gita.</p>
<p>Please see the following verse of the Gita:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>7.16 O Arjuna, foremost of the Bharata dynasty, four classes of people of <strong>virtuous</strong> deeds adore Me: the afflicted, the seeker of Knowledge, the <strong>seeker of wealth</strong> and the man of Knowledge.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>A seeker of Wealth is 'Virtuouss' according to Sri Krishna, if he/she adores God even for acquiring wealth.</p>
<p>The following sloka of the Gita is also relevant here:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>10.36 Of the fraudulent I am the gambling; I am the irresistible and of the mighty. <strong>I am excellene, I am effort</strong>, I am the sattva quality of those possessed of sattva.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So efforts and excellences are also expressions of the Lord. Also, He says in the Gita (7.11)</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Among creatures I am desire which is not contrary to righteousness</strong>, O scion of the Bharata dyansty.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>We get all the above from the lips of the Lord Himself.</p>
<p>To conclude:</p>
<p><strong>Just our passions or dreams must not be against 'Dharma' ---that's all.</strong></p>
|
|
<p>What is the language in which the <em>Vedas</em> are written? Currently, they are written in the Sanskrit language but what was their first language. Devnagri is developed by humans and Vedas are the language of gods so what is their initial writing language? Were they in any other language? Specifically, what was their lipi or script i.e. written form called?</p>
| 34545 | 34538 | 5 | 2 | 34538 | 7 | What is the language(lipi) in which the Vedas are written? | 3 | 34545 | <p>संस्कृतम् (Sanskritam)</p>
<p>Any language can have 2 components - sound and sight - the words we hear and the script we write.</p>
<p>The sounds of Vedas are eternal (literally exist infinite time before and infinite time after). They are not made by man, rather they just exist in nature as the breath of Brahmam, and are perceived by rishis during deep state of tapas. The language that the sounds of Vedas exist in is called Sanskrit and were formalized in grammar sutras by Panini, and then by Patanjali.</p>
<p>Until ~5000 years ago, when Kali Yuga started in 3102 B.C, Vedas and other Sanskrit literature were mostly recited and memorized by generation-to-generation. Rishis foresaw that human intellect would decrease as Kali progressed, hence they wrote down the sounds of Vedas in a representative script. This script, of course, is man-made, hence why it keeps changing over time.</p>
<p>The history of script changes is detailed/complex. Most Indian languages fall under <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmic_scripts" rel="noreferrer">Brahmic script</a>. Devanagari is currently the script used to represent Sanskrit (and Hindi) sounds.</p>
|
|
<p>Which Form of God is referred to as 'Hari' in our scriptures? Does 'Hari' mean the Formless Brahman also?</p>
| 34718 | 34577 | 7 | 2 | 34577 | 3 | Which form of God is referred to as 'Hari'? | 4 | 34718 | <p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/CmTSp.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/CmTSp.jpg" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>
<p><strong>The form of God referred to as 'Hari' is Sri Vishnu, Sri Krishna or His different incarnations.</strong></p>
<p><strong>Lord Shiva is also referred to as 'Hari' in the Shiva-Shasranama, but our scriptures do not use the word 'Hari' to imply Lord Shiva. Otherwise, we would not have a separate dhyana-sloka for 'Hari-Hara'.</strong> An image of Hari-Hara is enclosed. The dhyana-sloka of Hari-Hara is</p>
<blockquote>
<p>shulam chakram pAnchajanyam abi_iti dadhatam karaih/sva-sva-bhushat sva-lilArdha-deham <strong>hariharam</strong> bhaje//</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In the svarupa, both are the same and some names commonly known as of Lord Shiva like 'Swayambhu', 'Sambhu' etc are included in the Vishnu-sahasranama also.</p>
<p>But all our scriptures unianimously mean Lord Vishnu or Lord Krushna by Hari.</p>
<p>So there is no room of confusion here.</p>
<p>Srimad-Bhagavatam however repeatedly speaks of both the aspects of Sri Hari ---with form and without form. For example, Sri Hari Himself describes His formless svarupa as</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The Supreme Brahman, who is extremely subtle, being of the nature of pure Existence-Consciousness-Bliss, unlimited and impossible to be conceived with an impure heart (10.88.10).</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>So yes, 'Hari' means the formless Brahman also.</strong></p>
|
|
<p>In the 11th chapter of Gita; it is said that this vishwaroopam was never seen or heard by anyone before and arjuna needed special divya drsti to witness it. Which i believe is correct.</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://www.holy-bhagavad-gita.org/chapter/11/verse/6" rel="nofollow noreferrer">BG </a>11.6: Behold in me, O scion of the Bharatas, the (twelve) sons of
Aditi, the (eight) Vasus, the (eleven) Rudras, the (twin) Ashwini
Kumars, as well as the (forty-nine) Maruts and many more marvels never
revealed before.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>But</strong> some of the <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/29615/7853">answers</a> and questions here claim that vishwaroopam was already shown in the court of Kurus.</p>
<p>Is this true? (what about the <strong>contradiction</strong>) </p>
<p>Because the <strong>claim made in geeta</strong> is that its never heard or seen before. </p>
<p>Secondly, no one in the court was given divya drsti to witness it .</p>
<p><strong>It can be possible that the one in court was a divine form but not necessarily the vishwaroopam itself.</strong> </p>
| 34635 | 34628 | 5 | 2 | 34628 | 6 | Was Sri Krishna's vishwaroopam seen by anyone before the Gita Upadesha? | 3 | 34635 | <p>It was <i><strong>Viraatroop</strong></i> not <i><strong>Vishwaroop</strong></i> which was observed before giving the <i><strong>Gita Upadesh</strong></i></p>
<p><strong><a href="http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m05/m05131.htm" rel="noreferrer">SECTION CXXXI of the Udyoga Parva</a> describes Lord's Viraatroop</strong></p>
<blockquote>
<p>Saying this Kesava, that slayer of hostile heroes burst out into a
loud laughter. And as the high-souled Sauri laughed, from his body,
that resembled a blazing fire, issued myriads of gods, each of
lightning effulgence, and not bigger than the thumb.</p>
<p>And on his forehead appeared Brahman, and on his breast Rudra. And on
his arms appeared the regents of the world, and from his mouth issued
Agni, the Adityas, the Sadhyas, the Vasus, the Aswins, the Marutas,
with Indra, and the Viswedevas. And myriads of Yakshas, and the
Gandharvas, and Rakshasas also, of the same measure and form, issued
thence. And from his two arms issued Sankarshana and Dhananjaya.</p>
<p>And Arjuna stood on his right, bow in hand, and Rama stood on his
left, armed with the plough. And behind him stood Bhima, and
Yudhishthira, and the two sons of Madri, and before him were all the
Andhakas and the Vrishnis with Pradyumna and other chiefs bearing
mighty weapons upraised. And on his diverse arms were seen the conch,
the discus, the mace, the bow called Saranga, the plough, the javelin,
the Nandaka, and every other weapon, all shining with effulgence, and
upraised for striking.</p>
<p>And from his eyes and nose and ears and every part of his body, issued
fierce sparks of fire mixed with smoke. And from the pores of his body
issued sparks of fire like unto the rays of the sun.</p>
<p>And beholding that awful form of the high-souled Kesava, all the kings
closed their eyes with affrighted hearts, except Drona, and Bhishma,
and Vidura, endued with great intelligence, greatly blessed Sanjaya,
and the Rishis, possessed of wealth of asceticism, for the divine
Janardana gave unto them this divine sight on the occasion.</p>
<p>And beholding in the (Kuru) court that highly wonderful sight,
celestial drums beat (in the sky) and a floral shower fell (upon him).
And the whole Earth trembled (at the time) and the oceans were
agitated. And, O bull of the Bharata's race, all the denizens of the
earth were filled with great wonder.</p>
<p>Then that tiger among men, that chastiser of foes, withdrew that
divine and highly wonderful, and extremely varied and auspicious form.
And arm-in-arm with Satyaki on one side and Hridika's son
(Kritavarman) on the other, and obtaining permission of the Rishis,
the slayer of Madhu went out.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Conclusion: Vishvaroop was only observed by Arjun during the narration of Gita. Viraatroop is subtly different from the former</strong></p>
|
|
<p>We find these verses in 16th chapter of Gita.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>tān ahaṁ dviṣataḥ krūrān saṁsāreṣu narādhamān kṣipāmy <strong>ajasram</strong>
aśubhān āsurīṣv eva yoniṣu</p>
<p>āsurīṁ yonim āpannā mūḍhā janmani janmani mām <strong>aprāpyaiva kaunteya
tato yānty adhamāṁ gatim</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>English translation by Swami Prabhupada:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>BG 16.19: Those who are envious and mischievous, who are the lowest
among men,<strong>I perpetually</strong> cast into the ocean of material existence,
into various demoniac species of life.
BG 16.20: Attaining repeated birth amongst the species of demoniac
life, O son of Kuntī, <strong>such persons can never approach Me</strong>. Gradually
<strong>they sink down to the most abominable type of</strong> existence.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>English Translation By Swami Gambirananda</p>
<blockquote>
<p>16.19 <strong>I cast for ever</strong> those hateful, cruel, evil-doers in the worlds, the vilest of human beings, verily into the demoniacla classes.
16.20 Being born among the demoniacal species in births after births, the foods, <strong>without ever reaching Me, O son of Kunti, attain
conditions lower than that</strong>.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>English Translation By By Dr. S. Sankaranarayan</p>
<blockquote>
<p>16.19. These hateful, cruel, basest men, <strong>I hurl incessantly</strong> into the inauspicious demoniac wombs alone in the cycle of birth-and-death.
16.20. Having come to the demoniac womb, birth after birth, <strong>and not attaining Me at all, these deluded persons, therefore, pass to the
lowest state, O son of Kunti</strong> !</p>
</blockquote>
<p>English Translation By Swami Sivananda</p>
<blockquote>
<p>16.19 Those cruel haters, worst among men in the world, <strong>I hurl those evil-doers</strong> into the wombs of demons only.
16.20 Entering into demoniacal wombs and deluded, birth after birth, <strong>not attaining Me, they thus fall, O Arjuna, into a condition still lower than that.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>English Translation by Shri Purohit Swami</p>
<blockquote>
<p>16.19 Those who thus hate Me, who are cruel, the dregs of mankind, <strong>I condemn them to a continuous</strong>, miserable and godless rebirth.
16.20 So reborn, they spend life after life, enveloped in delusion. <strong>And they never reach Me, O Prince, but degenerate into still lower forms of life.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Krishna seems to suggest eternal samsara and all translated those verses that way. </p>
<p>Do these verses of Gita support eternal cycle of birth and death for some living beings and they have no way out? </p>
| 34681 | 34680 | 6 | 2 | 34680 | 11 | Does Gita support doctrine of eternal samsara? | 3 | 34681 | <p>Samsara = bhumi + svarga + naraka</p>
<p>Samsara is eternal. Creation and Destruction have always happened and will always happen. <strong>'yatha purvam akalpayat' - RigVeda 10.190.3</strong></p>
<p>Krishna says :</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I forever punish evil men</p>
</blockquote>
<p><em>You interpreted :</em></p>
<blockquote>
<p><em>I punish evil men forever</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Krishna says :</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Evil men</strong> never reach me</p>
</blockquote>
<p><em>You interpreted :</em></p>
<blockquote>
<p><em>Evil men <strong>never</strong> reach me</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Good or Evil are characteristics of an action, not of a person.</p>
<p>If a person does a good action, we 'temporarily' label him as good person.<br>
If a person does a evil action, we 'temporarily' label him as evil person.</p>
<p>You're wrongly assuming that once a person is labeled Good or Evil, they remain that way forever. That's not necessarily true.
Because after they finish facing consequences of action, the person goes back to blank slate (kind of, cos vasanas of action still exist, and these powerful vasanas propel you to do same acts as before). </p>
<p>Bhagavan does not damn sinners to hell forever.<br>
Bhagavan does not deign saints to heaven forever. </p>
<p>Both are temporary. After exhaustion of the rewards or punishments, the Jiva has to return to earth. <strong>'kshine punye martya lokam vishanti' - Bhagavad Gita 9.21</strong> </p>
<p>Since Samsara is eternal, there will always be saints, sinners and normal people.<br>
<strong>As long as sinners exists, Krishna will do his duty of punishing them. Duration of punishment depends on type of sin.</strong> </p>
<p>The Jiva, out of his own free-will, can choose to stay in samsara, or get out. But only the will is free, the consequences are not. That is in Bhagavan's hands.<br>
Where he stays within samsara, what happens to him during his stay, and how long he stays, is a combination of his free-will to act, and Bhagavan's free-will to react.</p>
<p>The whole point of Bhagavan using such harsh words in Gita is to drive home this point :</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A person, <strong>as long as he does evil acts</strong>, cannot reach Me.</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>We generally associate a day for the worship of different gods, like Monday for Lord Shiva, Tuesday for Lord Hanuman. What is the reason that we worship Lord Hanuman on Tuesdays and Saturdays? What is the belief and benefits of worshipping him on the given days of the week?</p>
| 34825 | 34745 | 4 | 2 | 34745 | 1 | Why do we worship Lord Hanuman on these weekdays? | 3 | 34825 | <p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/wgXDb.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/wgXDb.jpg" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>
<p><strong>Partial Answer</strong></p>
<ol>
<li>Kastabhanjan Hanuman Mandir ( <a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanuman_temple,_Salangpur" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanuman_temple,_Salangpur</a>) is an old temple at Salangpur. According to this video: <a href="https://youtu.be/lK3nFGMQNnw" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://youtu.be/lK3nFGMQNnw</a> when Hanumanji saved His devotees from the horrible effects of Sanidev who took the form of a woman to save himself from the anger of Bala-brahmachari Hanumanji. Hanumanji's idol worshipped there shows Sanidev as a female at His feet.An image is enclosed.</li>
</ol>
<p>So Hanumanji saves His Devotees from Sanidev's rage seems an ancient idea.</p>
<ol start="2">
<li>Tulsidasji, a great preacher of Sri Hanuman Worship, describes Him as 'Mangala-Murati' in the Hanuman-Chalisa. This could be the basis of His being worshipped on Tuesdays(Mangala-vara).</li>
</ol>
<p>According to the Kurma-Puran though, the day for Hanumanji's worship is Arka-vara ie Sunday. (Reference: Hanumat-Kavacham,Purohit-Darpan).</p>
|
|
<p>How can a person not interested in marriage (because they think it's a waste of time and money, also causes one to lose their peace of mind) repay their debt to parents and ancestors?</p>
<p>Does adopting a son for this purpose mean the same thing as getting married and procreating (male offspring)?</p>
<p>EDIT: This is not a duplicate of "How to clear our debts?" as there was no mention of how to clear the debt without marrying someone.</p>
| 34794 | 34771 | 6 | 2 | 34771 | 5 | How can an unmarried person repay their debt to parents and ancestors? | 3 | 34794 | <p>First of all <strong>it is recommended in the scriptures that one marries and begets son</strong>.</p>
<p>The following Aitreya Brahmana 7.13 verses quoted in the Vashishta Dharma Sutras make that explicit:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>‘A debt he pays in him and immortality he gains, the father who sees
the face of his son born and alive’ (AB 7.13).</p>
<p>2 ‘Eternal are the worlds of those men who have sons. <strong>A sonless man
has no world’––so states a vedic text</strong> (cf. AB 7.13).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>A man is born with three debts of which the particular debt that he has to his ancestors is cleared only when he procreates a son.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Manu Smriti 6.35. When he has paid the three debts, let him apply his
mind to (the attainment of) final liberation; <strong>he who seeks it
without having paid (his debts) sinks downwards.</strong></p>
<p>6.36. Having studied the Vedas in accordance with the rule, having begat sons according to the sacred law, and having offered sacrifices
according to his ability, he may direct his mind to (the attainment
of) final liberation.</p>
<p>6.37. <strong>A twice-born man who seeks final liberation</strong>, without having studied the Vedas, <strong>without having begotten sons</strong>, and without
having offered sacrifices, <strong>sinks downwards</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>In case when one has married but does not have a son, he has the option of making his daughter a Putrika - the appointed daughter in the following manner.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>9.127. He who has no son may make his daughter in the following manner an appointed daughter (putrika, saying to her husband), ’The (male)
child, born of her, shall perform my funeral rites.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Prajapati Daksha, who had only daughters, employed this technique.</p>
<p>Therefore, marriage is always recommended and if one does not have a progeny then he can adopt son who is equal to a real son in many regards.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A natural son, a son begotten on the wife, a son given in adoption, a
contrived son, a son born in secret, and a son adopted after being
abandoned by his birth parents––these share in the inheritance. </p>
<p><em>Gautama Smriti 28.33</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>For persons who do not intend to marry the options seem to be to become a Sannyasi or follow the life of a Naishthika Brahmachari ( a perpetual student). </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Manu Smriti 2.247. (A perpetual student) must, if his teacher dies,
serve his son (provided he be) endowed with good qualities, or his
widow, or his Sapinda, in the same manner as the teacher.</p>
<p>2.248. Should none of these be alive, he must serve the sacred fire, standing (by day) and sitting (during the night), and thus finish his
life.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>A perpetual student is the one who lives till he dies in the Brahmacharya Asrama. He is not required to marry.</p>
|
|
<p>Was He not satisfied with His Transcendental worlds?
Why He manifested (tranformed into gross and subtle components) His illusionary material potency "maya", somewhat a punishment based system of birth and death, heaven and hell, for jivatma (Souls; part and parcel of His conscious marginal potency) when He is known to be an ocean of mercy?</p>
<p>The question has been asked many a times, but no satisfactory answers have been found.</p>
<p>Some say it is His sport for time pass, for change, because He was getting bored. Doesn't make sense because He is the Supreme Bliss, and He has His Kingdom of timeless eternity. And also, no reason for mercy on souls, like that of Mahavishnu's case, which comes into picture after the very first creation. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>And second part of it, why is the human birth in this material domain considered so important by the scriptures?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>N.B. The question is not about cyclic creation/manifestation of material universes by Mahavishnu after "mahapralayas", when the jivas (souls, with causal body) were resting (semi-liberated) in the "mahodar" of Mahavishnu.</p>
| 34838 | 34781 | 10 | 2 | 34781 | -1 | Why has God created material system/universe? | 5 | 34838 | <p>Every action (present) has a reaction (future) and had a cause (past). There is no action (work) without a cause. Every cause has its cause(s) material or eternal. God (as the Supreme Person) is the cause of all causes, however, He Himself has no cause. He is the "sarv kaaran-kaaranam", He is the cause of His "Brahman" and "Parmatama" revelation (Supreme Personality) too.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, the different religious thoughts differently explain "how?" the material existence comes into being but answering the "why?" is difficult..... always.... in this case too!!</p>
<p>The Bhagvatam mahapuran, although has the answer in third to fifth volumes (scand). We all have unique eternal identities as unconditioned souls (as the salokya-mukta jivas, who resided in the same domain of Parmatama, but we have never ever participated/entered the Bhagvat-dham, higher "vaikuntha", the realm with His eternal pastimes, due to lack of higher eternal knowledge, desire, love and servitude). We have our eternal roots in the God's Kingdom or lower "vaikuntha", which is without the eternal pastimes (eternal domain without Sakhayam, Vatsalya and Madhurya Rasa). Somehow, when there near the "vaikuntha", beside/on shores of the "virja-river" (a.k.a causal ocean, which divides the spritual worlds from material worlds) we had acquired a hidden desire to be the absolute enjoyers like God or Bhagwan. Knowing this desire He, the All-indwelling, manifested His external energy, i.e. material potency into its eight components (the three for subtle and the five for the gross existence), the illusionary energy for the fulfillment of jiva-atamas' (or "tatashatha", marginal potencies') desire to become enjoyer or "bhokta brahman", somewhat similar to the Almighty, "Brahman-tatva", which controls both "jiva-tatva" and "maya-tatva". These three are eternal elements, neither created nor destroyed. The permanent eternal identity of the soul is as a servant of God. However, we are in illusion to temporarily enjoy in ignorance under the influence of His illusionary potency, i.e. maya, which is also eternal servant of God. In B.Gita too He has hinted about it in verse #7.27 as:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>इच्छाद्वेषसमुत्थेन द्वन्द्वमोहेन भारत|सर्वभूतानि सम्मोहं सर्गे यान्ति परन्तप||</p>
<p><strong>ichchhā-dveṣha-samutthena dvandva-mohena bhārata
sarva-bhūtāni sammohaṁ sarge yānti parantapa.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>By word "sarge" meaning at the onset of material universe creation, Krishna is indicating that at the very start of incarnate existence, all creatures are inveigled into the loops of various dualities such as good and better, higher bliss and highest bliss, honour and dishonour, controller and controlled, true-ego and false-ego, which are generated by the desire for what is agreeable and the aversion to what is disagreeable. The word "sarge" meaning at the very beginning of material creation/transformation. Or more precisely, transmigration of jiva-atma in the transformed maya. Thus, our atma or eternal soul, blissful eternal identity without any causal body, became an embodied being, with having a causal, a subtle and a gross body.</p>
<p>The mooting point here is, <strong>why</strong>, what for He did this (material transformation) pastime, <strong>for His own enjoyment?? or for our (the jivas') desire to enjoy like Him!!!</strong> Yes. He is the supreme enjoyer, He is always the Supreme Bliss, this truth is eternal in all the worlds, if transcendental or mundane. It can be further revealed by B.Gita verse# 27 of chapter# 7. He did this "Purishavatar-Lila" (pastime of eternal personality expansion in material domain) to fulfill our "ichchha" (desire) to enjoy like Him.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>And answer to the second part; the human life is considered to be the most important within the material system because of our freedom to choose (the basis of karma based existence, not to be confused and compared with any constitutional right and/or its recent amendments) which is not granted even to the demigods. Truely said, "karma pradhan vishwa kari/rachi rakha". Arjuna invested his karma/time in developing friendship with Krishna and in return Krishna removed all the hurdles from his life and made him victorious. Similarly we should invest our time in developing friendship with Krishna. It’s very easy to do. We just need to dovetail our activities (karma) as per Krishna’s advice. And Krishna assures us, “In this endeavour there is no loss or diminution, and a little progress on this path can protect one from the most dangerous type of fear.” (B.Gita# 2.40)</p>
<p>A related upnishada story; reminding the demigods who had once forgotten their limits, the Brahaman (personified) tought the lesson to agni, demigod of the fire energy; the vayu, the demigod of wind energy, and many more. The demigods have no choice to perform beyond their assigned limited duties. They seem to be at higher levels of material enjoyment but they don't have the freedom of surrendering karma onto God like the humans. It has been explained in the Upnishada, "sur-patim brahmam padam yaachate". Lord of the material heaven, Indra, wants the post of Lord Brahma, the ultimate ascending material designation. The tourism of higher material domains here, however, is for material sense enjoyment which is not a journey for the true destination, back to the permanent eternal bliss.</p>
<p>And not the least, during His eternal Pastimes in the mundane worlds, "Avatar-Lila" (not revealed in Brahman and in Parmatama manifestation) He Himself honours the human life form unavailable to even the big demigods, the mahadevas, when He comes between us to remind us of our eternal roots and protect us from all the material bliss in the illusion. He wants to remind us our chance to enter into the eternal pastimes with Him in the higher "vaikunthas" and the highest realm, "goloka".</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>The guru at the time of initiation takes on himself the sins of the disciple and suffers so much from physical maladies.</p>
<p>My question:</p>
<ol>
<li>Is this true? Is this why many gurus suffer from various diseases?</li>
<li>Are there any reliable sources from our scriptures that can support this statement, if true?</li>
</ol>
| 34803 | 34801 | 8 | 2 | 34801 | 10 | Side effects of Initiation by a Guru? | 3 | 34803 | <p>Quoting the verse from <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/27656/4732">this answer</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Mantridoshascha rAjAnam jAyAdoshah patim yathA |<br />
TathA prApnotyasandeham <strong>shishyapApam gurum priye</strong> ||</p>
<p>Just like a king gets affected by the sins committed by his ministers,
a husband gets affected by the sins committed by his wife, likewise,
without any doubt, O Beloved, <strong>a disciple's sins affect the Teacher
(Guru).</strong></p>
<p><em>KulArnava Tantram 11.110</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>This means that if after initiation, the disciple commits a sin, the Guru will also have to share that guilt. That is why the Guru is to accept a disciple only after checking whether the disciple is qualified for the initiation and of a good conduct or not.</p>
<p>Also, the Guru burns the sins of the disciple by Shaktipata etc during initiation but he does not accept the disciple's sins.</p>
|
|
<p><strong>TL;DR WHAT TO DO WHEN SCRIPTURES GO AGAINST CONSCIENCE?</strong> </p>
<p>What to do when Parshara Smriti go against my conscience? How can I treat a chandala (I do not even know what that means, except that it is a low caste) differently from a Vaishya? How are they different? Even if they did bad karma, does not mean I will not even look at them. And there are verses that say menstruating women are impure. I can understand that. But, one verse was especially immoral, from chapter 7-</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The mother, and the father, and likewise the eldest brother, all these
three relatives will go to hell, if before menstruation they neglect
to marry the girl</p>
</blockquote>
<p>What kind of Dharma has been prescribed in Parashara Smriti? Marrying a girl so young? I have come to believe Parashara smriti is highly interpolated.</p>
<p>In any case, the question stands. If a scripture goes against my conscience, will I attain bad karma if I do not follow it. This is a general question and does not pertain to Parashara Smriti.</p>
| 34834 | 34832 | 22 | 2 | 34832 | 14 | What to do when scriptures go against conscience? | 5 | 34834 | <p>Sri Krishnaprem, the great Gaudiya Vaishnava saint ( <a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krishna_Prem" rel="noreferrer">https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krishna_Prem</a>) writes in His 'Cruelty and Religion'</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>However divine the ShAstras may have been in its origin, it has been transmitted to us through the memories and writings of purely human beings who like all human beings are subject to error...There are many other practices which..are..intolerable cruelties...If we once admit the principle that Bhagavan would never sanction,let alone command cruelty, we must then fearlessly erase from our religions teachings of all such acts however well-established they may be</strong>.(The Search For Truth, page 115-6).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Krishnaprem further writes</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Does the Lord of all sanction the cruelty or not?.. The Upanishads, the Gita, the Bhagawata, the Mahabharata are filled throughout with teachings setting forth in unmistakable terms the duty of love and compassion to all beings and thses lofty teachings, the crest jewel of the Sanatana Dharma, should be allowed to overrule by divine right all lesser or narrower teachings.Do not fear that the whole structure of Hindu religion will be weakened by such criticism. The Sanatana Dharma is no decayed house that will crumble to pieces at a touch. It is built of the rock of Eternal Truth and its sublime beauty will only shine out more replendently than ever if the mud plaster with which selfish men have covered it up be removed...MA hinsyAt sarvabhutAni--"Do injury to no living being!" This is subtle teaching of the Veda.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>MahAjano yena gatah sa panthAh--I think He answered your question.</p>
<p><strong>UPDATE</strong></p>
<p>Please see how contradictory the sayings of our Smriti-s are regarding the age of marriage of a girl with the evidence avalable in our epics and puranas.The Baudhayana, Gautama, Vasistha or Parashara Smriti-s all recommend marriage before her reaching puberty! And what do we see in our Ramayana, Mahabhara and the Puranas? Was Sita or Parvati or Draupadi or Damayanti or any such female character got married 'while running nacked' as advised by the Smriti-s? No. They were matured enough and chose or being chosen by their husbands themselves. The Swayamvara obviously was never held for a girl who does not understand the meaning of marriage! I think it makes it clear that no such injunction existed originally, which leads to a conclusion that all these slokas of the Smriti-s recommending child marriage are interpolations of some later time when this was somehow needed by the society.</p>
<p><a href="https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.128125" rel="noreferrer">https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.128125</a></p>
|
|
<p>Ending of Mundaka Upanishad talks about śirovrata (शिरोव्रत):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>तदेतदृचाऽभ्युक्तम् ।
क्रियावन्तः श्रोत्रिया ब्रह्मनिष्ठाः
स्वयं जुह्वत एकर्षिं श्रद्धयन्तः ।<br>
तेषामेवैतां ब्रह्मविद्यां वदेत
<strong>शिरोव्रतं</strong> विधिवद् यैस्तु चीर्णम् ॥ <a href="https://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_upanishhat/mundaka.html?lang=sa" rel="nofollow noreferrer">मुण्डकोपनिषत्</a> ३-२-१०॥</p>
<p><a href="http://www.shastras.com/upanishads-atharva-veda/mundaka-upanishad/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">III-ii-10</a>: This (rule) has been revealed by the mantra (which runs thus): 'To them alone should one expound this knowledge of Brahman who are engaged in the practice of disciplines, versed in the Vedas, and indeed devoted to Brahman, <strong>who personally sacrifice to the fire called Ekarsi with faith, and by whom has been duly accomplished the vow of holding fire on the head.'</strong></p>
<p>तदेतत् सत्यमृषिरङ्गिराः
पुरोवाच नैतदचीर्णव्रतोऽधीते ।<br>
नमः परमऋषिभ्यो नमः परमऋषिभ्यः ॥ ११॥</p>
<p>III-ii-11: The seer Angiras spoke of this Truth in the days of yore. One that has not fulfilled <strong>the vow</strong> does not read this. Salutation to the great seers. Salutation to the great seers.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>From the translation, it seems that it's "a vow of holding fire named Ekarshi on head" or a fire ritual.</p>
<p>I want to know what is the ritual of holding a fire named "Ekarshi" on head, called "Shirovrata"? Do we have any details/description available on how this ritual is performed?</p>
| 39900 | 34958 | 4 | 2 | 34958 | 3 | What is ShiroVrata (a vow of holding fire on head)? | 3 | 39900 | <p>The <a href="https://sacred-texts.com/hin/db/bk11ch09.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Devī Bhāgavata Purāṇa</a> has the description of a vrata by the same name.</p>
<blockquote>
<h3>Chapter IX</h3>
<h3>On the rules of Śirovrata</h3>
<p>1-43. Śrī Nārāyana said :-- The Brāhmanas that will perform duly the Śirovrata, to be described in the following, are the only ones who will attain very easily the highest knowledge, destroying all Avidyā or Ignorance. So much so that the rules of right living and right conduct as ordained in the Śrutis and Smritis are not necessary to be observed by those who duly and devotedly perform the <strong>Śirovrata</strong> (i.e., <strong>vow of the head</strong>; i.e., <strong>vow to apply ashes on the forehead</strong>). O Learned One! It is through this Śirovrata that Brahmā and the other Devas have been able to get their Brahmāhood and the Devahood. The ancient sages glorified highly this Śirovrata. Brahmā, Visnu, Rudra and the other Devas all performed this Śirovrata. O Wise One! Those that performed duly this Śirovrata, all became sinless though they were sinful in every way. Its name is Śirovrata, inasmuch as it is mentioned in the first part of the Atharva Veda. Only this vrata (vow) is called Śirovrata; no other thing is denominated by this name. By no other merit can this be acquired. O Muni! Different names are assigned to this vrata in different Śākhās; in fact, they are all one and the same.</p>
<p>N. B. -- Pāsupata vrata, Śivavrata, etc., are the different names assigned to it. In all the Śākhās, the One Substance, Intelligence solidified named Śiva and the knowledge thereof is mentioned. This is "Śirovrata." He who does not perform this Śirovrata, is irreligious and he is banished from all religious acts, though he is well-qualified in all branches of learning. There is no manner of doubt in this. This Śirovrata is like the blazing fire in destroying wholly the forest of sins. All knowledge fleshes before him who performs this Śirovrata. <strong>The Atharva Śruti expounds the subtle and particularly incomprehensible things; this Śruti declares the above Śirovrata as daily to be done; so it is one of the daily observances. "Fire is ashes," "water is ashes," "earth is ashes," "air is ashes," "ether or Ākāśa is ashes," "all this manifest Universe is ashes." These six mantras stated in the Atharva Veda are to be recited; after this, ashes are to be besmeared all over the body. This is named the Śirovrata. The devotee is to put on these ashes named Śirovrata during his Sandhyopāsanā (practising Sandhyā thrice a day); so long as the Brahmā Vidyā (the knowledge of Brahmā) does not arise in him. One is to make a Sankalpa (resolve) of twelve years before one starts with this Vrata. In cases of incapability, a period of one year or six months, or three months or at least twelve days are to be adopted.</strong> That Guru is considered very cruel and his knowledge will come to an end who hesitates and does not impart the knowledge of the Vedas and other things to him who is purified by observing this Śirovrata. Know him certainly as a very merciful Guru who illumines the heart by Brahmā Vidyā just as God is very merciful and compassionate to all the living beings. One who performs one's own Dharmas for many births, acquires particular faith in this Śirovrata; others can have no faith in this. Rather he gets animosity for this vrata, because of the abundance of ignorance in him. So one ought never to advise on spiritual knowledge to an enemy who has no faith, rather who has hatred for any such thing. <strong>Those only that are purified by the observance of Śirovrata are entitled to Brahmā Vidyā; and none others. So the Vedas command :-- Those are to be advised on Brahmā Vidyā who have performed Śirovrata.</strong> Even the animal becomes freed of his animalism, as a result of this vrata; no sin occurs in killing that animal; this is the decision of the Vedānta. It has been repeatedly uttered by Jāvāla Risi that the Dharma of the Brāhmanas is to put on the Tripundra (three curved lines of ashes on the forehead). The householders are instructed to put on this Tripundra by repeating the mantra "triyamvaka"' with Om prefixed. Those that are in the stage of the Bhiksus (Sannyāsis, etc.,) are to put on this Tripundra uttering thrice the mantra "Om Hasah." Such is regularly stated in Jāvāla Śruti. The house holders and the Vānaprasthis (foresters) are to put on this Tripundra, uttering Triyamvaka mantra purified with "Haum" the pranava of Śiva prefixed.</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>Here ends the Ninth chapter of the Eleventh Book on the rules of Śirovrata in the Mahāpurānam Śrī Mad Devī Bhāgavatam of 18,000 verses by Mahārsi Veda Vyāsa.</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>BG 18.62 reads as</p>
<blockquote>
<p>tam eva <strong>śaraṇaṁ</strong> gaccha sarva-bhāvena bhārata </p>
<p>O scion of Bharata, <strong>surrender</strong> unto Him utterly.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Bg 18.63</p>
<blockquote>
<p>iti te jñānam ākhyātaṁ guhyād <strong>guhyataraṁ</strong> mayā </p>
<p>Thus I have explained to you knowledge still <strong>more confidential</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>18.64</p>
<blockquote>
<p>sarva-<strong>guhyatamaṁ</strong> bhūyaḥ śṛṇu me paramaṁ vacaḥ iṣṭo 'si me dṛḍham iti
tato vakṣyāmi te hitam</p>
<p>Because you are My very dear friend, I am speaking to you My supreme
instruction, <strong>the most confidential knowledge</strong> of all. Hear this from Me,
for it is for your benefit.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>18.66</p>
<blockquote>
<p>sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ <strong>śaraṇaṁ</strong> vraja ahaṁ tvāṁ
sarva-pāpebhyo mokṣayiṣyāmi mā śucaḥ</p>
<p>Abandon all varieties of religion and just <strong>surrender</strong> unto Me. I shall
deliver you from all sinful reactions. Do not fear.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Krishna suggests to surrender in 18.62, and then calls it more confidential knowledge in 18.63. In 18.64,Krishna says he is going to teach most confidential knowledge and says in 18.66 to surrender. </p>
<p>In 18.61-62 & 18.65-66, the process suggested is the same 'bhakti' /'surrender' . Then what is the most confidential thing that Krishna says in 18.64?</p>
| 35660 | 35054 | 5 | 2 | 35054 | 0 | What is the most confidential knowledge in Bhagavad-Gita spoken in BG 18.64? | 5 | 35660 | <p>Firstly, although Krsna (beginning with Chapter 2, verse 11: "While speaking
learned words you are mourning for what is not worthy of grief. Those who are
wise lament neither for the living nor the dead"<em>) appears to be speaking the
Bhagavad-gita in order to incite Arjuna to fight, this is not Krsna s actual purpose.
Krsna does not need to convince Arjuna to fight, for Arjuna will fight anyway
(Chapter 18, verse 60: "Under illusion you are now declining to act according to
My direction. But, compelled by Your own nature, you will act all the same, 0 son
of Kunti."</em> ). Krsna's actual intention in speaking the Gita was to teach the
ultimate goal of life.</p>
<p>Bhagavata Gita verses <a href="https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/18/advanced-view/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">18.61-66</a> are as follows:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>TEXT 61</strong></p>
<p>īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe ’rjuna tiṣṭhati bhrāmayan
sarva-bhūtāni yantrārūḍhāni māyayā</p>
<p>The Supreme Lord is situated in everyone’s heart, O
Arjuna, and is directing the wanderings of all living entities, who
are seated as on a machine, made of the material energy.</p>
<p><strong>TEXT 62</strong> </p>
<p>tam eva śaraṇaṁ gaccha sarva-bhāvena bhārata tat-prasādāt
parāṁ śāntiṁ sthānaṁ prāpsyasi śāśvatam </p>
<p>O scion of
Bharata, surrender unto Him utterly. By His grace you will attain
transcendental peace and the supreme and eternal abode.</p>
<p><strong>TEXT 63</strong> </p>
<p>iti te jñānam ākhyātaṁ guhyād guhya-taraṁ mayā vimṛśyaitad
aśeṣeṇa yathecchasi tathā kuru </p>
<p>Thus I have explained to
you knowledge still more confidential. Deliberate on this fully, and
then do what you wish to do.</p>
<p><strong>TEXT 64</strong> </p>
<p>sarva-guhyatamaṁ bhūyaḥ śṛṇu me paramaṁ vacaḥ iṣṭo ’si me
dṛḍham iti tato vakṣyāmi te hitam </p>
<p>Because you are My very
dear friend, I am speaking to you My supreme instruction, the most
confidential knowledge of all. Hear this from Me, for it is for your
benefit.</p>
<p><strong>TEXT 65</strong> </p>
<p>man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru mām evaiṣyasi
satyaṁ te pratijāne priyo ’si me </p>
<p>Always think of Me,
become My devotee, worship Me and offer your homage unto Me. Thus you
will come to Me without fail. I promise you this because you are My
very dear friend.</p>
<p><strong>TEXT 66</strong> </p>
<p>sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja ahaṁ tvāṁ
sarva-pāpebhyo mokṣayiṣyāmi mā śucaḥ </p>
<p>Abandon all varieties
of religion and just surrender unto Me. I shall deliver you from all
sinful reactions. Do not fear.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The ultimate goal of life, which is the actual message of Bhagavad-gita, is
described as a great secret. Lord Krsna says in 18.64.</p>
<p>The word "guhyat" (in verse 63) refers to knowledge of impersonal
Brahman, and the word "guhyataram" refers to the more confidential knowledge of
the all-pervading Supersoul.</p>
<p>In these six verses from Bhagavad-gita, Lord Krsna explains the worship
performed by one situated in a little transcendental knowledge (in verse 18.61,
beginning with the words "isvarah sarva-bhutanam"), and he openly states the
supreme secret of pure devotional service (in verse 18.65, beginning with the
words "man-mana bhava"). In the first quote the reference to Lord Krsna is
remote, but in the second quote the reference to Him is obvious.</p>
<p>This same description of pure devotional service was also given previously in
almost the same words in the following verse (Bhagavad-gita 9.34):
"Engage your mind always in thinking of Me, offer obeisances and worship Me.
Being completely absorbed in Me, surely you will come to Me."*
Krishna uses 'bhuyah' in 18.64 to indicate this.</p>
<p>Someone may question: </p>
<p>Lord Krsna explains (18.63-64) that the last verses of
Bhagavad-gita are the most confidential part of knowledge. This last part of
Bhagavad-gita, however simply restates what has already been stated in a general
way in the previous verses of the Gita(18.61-62). Why does Lord Krsna say that this last part is more confidential?</p>
<p>The answer is: <strong>It is not that in the later part of Bhagavad-gita Lord Krsna explains a
higher method of worship, but rather, in the last part of the Gita He explains a
higher object of worship.</strong> Earlier in the Gita, the Lord describes the all-pervading
Supersoul, the neutral observer of all living entities (8.4) ("tat =Him), and later the
Lord describes Himself as the Original Supreme Person ("mat =Me). In this way
Lord Krsna is described as the ultimate object of worship, just as in the Vedanta sutra
(3.2.39), the Personality of Godhead (and not the demigods) is described as
the ultimate bestower of the results of sacrifice.</p>
<p>That pure devotional service was described by the Lord before 18.63 is
confirmed by verse 18.62 ("0 scion of Bharata, surrender to Him utterly. By His
grace you will attain transcendental peace, and the supreme and eternal abode"<em>).
In this verse the word "eva (certainly)" emphasizes the meaning, and the phrase
"sarva-bhavena" should be interpreted according to the primary meaning of the
words ("in all respects"). The secondary meaning of the words ("by accepting the
process of meditation") should not be accepted here. We may also note that the
Lord's own planet in the spiritual world is also described in the words "You will
attain the supreme and eternal abode."</em> In this way it should be understood that
the great secret revealed after verse 18.64 is not the process of pure devotional
service, but rather, the ultimate object of that service: Sri Krsna.</p>
<p>It is not, therefore, that in the earlier portions of Bhagavad-gita, the Lord
describes an inferior process of worship, and neither does He describe the object of
worship in a more indirect way in that portion of the Gita. In the beginning
portion of the Gita, therefore, the Lord describes the all-pervading Supersoul, and
afterwards He describes Himself as the Original Personality of Godhead, above the
Supersoul.</p>
<p>That the form of Sri Krsna is more important than the form of the Supersoul is
confirmed in the following verse of Bhagavad-gita (7.30), where Lord Krsna says:
"The Supersoul form of Mine is the governing principle of the material
manifestation, the one underlying all the demigods, and the one sustaining all
sacrifices. The devotees know that I am the Original Supreme Lord, and that My
form as Sri Krsna is more important than My form as the Supersoul."
We may note the use of the word "sa" (with) in the words
"sadhibhutadhidaivam" and "sadhiyajam" in this verse. The word "sa" in these
compound words indicates that the word understood to be in the instrumental
case in these compounds is considered secondary, and the word expressed by the
whole compound is considered primary. This is confirmed in the following sutra
of Panini (Astadhyayi 2.3.19): "saha-yukte 'pradhane". From this we may
understand that the form of Sri Krsna is most important, and the form of the
Supersoul is only secondary.</p>
<p>But one may doubt the above explanation because Krsna described Himself as the Supersoul present in the hearts of all living entities.
This is described in the following words spoken by Lord Krsna Himself (Bhagavadgita
8.4):
"I am the Supreme Lord, represented as the Supersoul, dwelling in the heart of
every embodied being."</p>
<p>This should be understood to mean that Lord Krsna expands Himself to appear
as the all-pervading Supersoul. This does not mean that the original form of Sri
Krsna is present as the all-pervading Supersoul. This is something like the
following explanation of Dronacarya found in the Srimad-Bhagavatam (1.7.45):
"He (Dronacarya) is certainly still existing, being represented by his son."</p>
<p>In verses 18.63-18.64: Krishna says: I have taught you this knowledge which is more secret (guhyataram) than
knowledge of Brahman which is also secret (guhyat). The suffix tara indicates
superiority</p>
<p>Thinking that this is not sufficient for his great, exclusive devotee, Kṛṣṇa then
boldly teaches the highest knowledge of all, surpassing the hierarchy of worship
with gradations of superiority among Pradyumna, Saṅkarṣaṇa, Vāsudeva and the
Lord of Vaikuṇṭha. <strong>Please listen to the the highest teaching, the greatest secret
(sarva-guhyatamam). Though what is most secret (guhyatamam) means that it is greater than the secret
and more secret, use of the word sarva with guhyatamam indicates that it
surpasses what is taught in other scriptures about worship of the Lord of
Vaikuṇṭha because of the meaning of guhyatamam by itself simply means most
secret. The suffix tama means excellent among all or supreme</strong>.</p>
<p>Thus in Summary:</p>
<p><strong>1. The knowledge of Brahman is confidential.(guhya)</strong>[BG 14.27 - Verily, I am the foundation of Brahman]</p>
<p><strong>2. The knowledge of Paramatma(Supersoul) is very confidential.(guhya tara)</strong>[BG 18.61-62]</p>
<p><strong>3. The knowledge of Bhagavan is most confidential.(guhyatama)</strong></p>
<p><strong>4. The knowledge of Sri Krishna, among all the forms of Bhagavan is the most confidential teaching of Bhagavad Gita. This Krishna indicates by using sarva. (sarva guhyatama)</strong></p>
<p>Reference: <a href="https://ebooks.iskcondesiretree.com/pdf/Gaudiya_Books%20/Jiva_Goswami/Jiva_Goswami_Sri_Krishna_Sandarbha.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Krishna Sandarbha</a> of Jiva Goswami, Anuccheda 82</p>
<p>Just adding additional notes on the terms Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagavan for more clarity.</p>
<p>SB 1.2.11:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>vadanti tat tattva-vidas tattvam yaj jñAnam advayam brahmeti
paramAtmeti bhagavan iti sabdyate</p>
<p>Knowers of reality declare that reality to be nondual consciousness,
called “Brahman,” “Paramatma,” and “Bhagavan.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Jiva Goswami recognizes the fact that the three designations are often used interchangeably in texts; the BhAgavata mentions them here in order to indicate their primary significance. The selection of names is not arbitrary; the verse does not, for example, give “living entity” (jiva) as a name of the nondual reality. Nor is the order in which the names appear random. The BhAgavata PurAna is indicating a hierarchy of forms from Brahman to Bhagavan, based on the degree of revelation.</p>
<p><strong>Bhagavan:</strong></p>
<p>Bhagavan is the complete manifestation of the nondual reality and, indeed, identifiable with it. In him, all the inherent energies (saktis) of the Supreme are clearly visible—beauty, power, wisdom, majesty, abode, and associates.</p>
<p>Then, depending on the degree to which the fullness of the Lord’s glory is hidden, he is known as either Brahman or Paramatma.</p>
<p><strong>Paramatma:</strong></p>
<p>When Bhagavan’s energies are manifest in a partial way, mainly in regard to directing material nature (prakrti) and the living entities ( jivas), he is known as Paramatma—the inner controller, inspirer, and support of the cosmos.</p>
<p><strong>Brahman:</strong></p>
<p>"When his attributes are totally unmanifest, he is known as Brahman—the undifferentiated, unqualified, and impersonal Absolute."</p>
<p>Or</p>
<p>“That which is not qualified, and which shines because it is pure consciousness,know it to be Brahman.”</p>
<p>In his instructions to Sanatana Gosvami at Kasi, Caitanya explains the implications of the “vadanti” verse:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The word “Brahman” refers to Svayam Bhagavan, who is one consciousness
without a second, and without whom there is nothing else. “Knowers of
reality declare that reality to be nondual consciousness, called
‘Brahman,’ ‘Paramatma,’ and ‘Bhagavan.’” That nondual reality is
Krsna, Bhagavan himself. He exists in all three phases of time (past,
present, and future). This is evident from the scriptures. . . . The
word “AtmA” refers to Krsna. His nature is greatness [brhattva]. He is
all pervading, the witness of everything, and the supreme form . . .
Although the words “Brahman” and “AtmA” refer to Krsna, by
conventional usage they refer to the Undifferentiated [nirviSesa] and
the Inner Controller [antaryAmI], respectively.</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>What are these three gunas that are discussed in advaita? How are these stopping us from realizing god? How does a person attain these gunas? If the gunas are not good, does that mean we all are not good as nobody can exist without gunas? How do I know what gunas I have? Does eating veg or non-veg food decide our guna?</p>
<p>What decides the gunas that a newborn baby would have?</p>
| 35195 | 35186 | 5 | 2 | 35186 | 0 | What are sattva, rajas and tamas? | 3 | 35195 | <p>The entire creation/Prakriti/Maya is running on 3 gunas, but Purusha/Brahman is Nirguna and devoid of Gunas.</p>
<p>Here, Krishna in <a href="https://www.holy-bhagavad-gita.org/chapter/14/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Geeta</a> and in Samadhi with formless <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahman" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Brahman</a> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purusha" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Purusha</a> is explaining, how manifested unconscious material Prakriti, becomes movable with consciousness of Purusha.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Bhagavad Gita 14.3 – 14.4 <strong>The total material substance, prakṛiti, is
the womb. I impregnate it with the individual souls, and thus all living beings
are born.</strong> O son of Kunti, for all species of life that are produced,
the material nature is the womb, and I am the seed-giving Father.</p>
<p>Bhagavad Gita 14.5 O mighty-armed Arjun, the material energy consists
of three guṇas (modes)—sattva (goodness), rajas (passion), and tamas
(ignorance). These modes bind the eternal soul to the perishable body.</p>
<p>Bhagavad Gita 14.6 Amongst these, sattva guṇa, the mode of goodness,
being purer than the others, is illuminating and full of well-being. O
sinless one, it binds the soul by creating attachment for a sense of
happiness and knowledge.</p>
<p>Bhagavad Gita 14.7 O Arjun, rajo guṇa is of the nature of passion. It
arises from worldly desires and affections, and binds the soul through
attachment to fruitive actions.</p>
<p>Bhagavad Gita 14.8 O Arjun, tamo guṇa, which is born of ignorance, is
the cause of illusion for the embodied souls. It deludes all living
beings through negligence, laziness, and sleep.</p>
<p>Bhagavad Gita 14.9 Sattva binds one to material happiness; rajas
conditions the soul toward actions; and tamas clouds wisdom and binds
one to delusion.</p>
<p>Bhagavad Gita 14.10 Sometimes goodness (sattva) prevails over passion
(rajas) and ignorance (tamas), O scion of Bharat. Sometimes passion
(rajas) dominates goodness (sattva) and ignorance (tamas), and at
other times ignorance (tamas) overcomes goodness (sattva) and passion
(rajas).</p>
<p>Bhagavad Gita 14.19 When wise persons see that in all works there are
no agents of action other than the three guṇas, and they know me to be
transcendental to these guṇas, they attain my divine nature.</p>
<p>Bhagavad Gita 14.20 <strong>By transcending the three modes of material nature
associated with the body, one becomes free from birth, death, disease,
old age, and misery, and attains immortality.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Nirguna Atma lies beyond Satva guna</p>
<p><a href="http://www.ramakrishnamath.in/gospel/archives/10" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Ramkrishna Paramhans</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>“This world itself is the forest. The three robbers prowling here are
sattva, rajas, and tamas. It is they that rob a man of the Knowledge
of Truth. Tamas wants to destroy him. Rajas binds him to the world.
But sattva rescues him from the clutches of rajas and tamas. Under the
protection of sattva, man is rescued from anger, passion, and the
other evil effects of tamas. Further, sattva loosens the bonds of the
world. But sattva also is a robber. It cannot give him the ultimate
Knowledge of Truth, though it shows him the road leading to the
Supreme Abode of God. <strong>Setting him on the path, sattva tells him: ‘Look
yonder. There is your home.’ Even sattva is far away from the
Knowledge of Brahman.</strong></p>
<p>"The three gunas — sattva, rajas, and tamas — have men under their
control. They are like three brothers. As long as sattva exists, it
calls on rajas for help; and rajas can get help from tamas. The three
gunas are so many robbers. Tamas kills and rajas hinds. Sattva no
doubt releases man from his bondage, but it cannot take him to God."</p>
<p>VIJAY (smiling): "It is because sattva, too, is a robber."</p>
<p>MASTER (smiling): <strong>"True. Sattva cannot take man to God, but it shows him the
way."</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Tamas Kaali, Rajas Laxmi and Satva Saraswati is the 3 guna Maya Prakriti and is also three phases of everyone's life. In childhood, Tamas dominates a person and he spends most of time in sleeping and playing around and thats why on Durga Puja, people worship a Kumari who represents Kaali. In adulthood, Rajas dominates a person and he spends most of time in earning wealth and sensual pleasure in women and gold, thats why a Married women is always compared as Laxmi entering home. In oldage, Satva dominates and a person is taught Dharma and to accept Sanyass and study Vedas or do Bhakti, thats why an old woman is always compared to wise Saraswati.</p>
<p>Since, every dynamic ego/mind/moon of every soul is considered feminine in nature separated from the consciousness/intellect/sun, so the Nirguna Purusha Brahman Shiva/Vishnu is the seer of all these 3 phases of life and is the Soul/Aatma of everyone.</p>
<p><a href="https://greenmesg.org/stotras/shiva/dakshinamurthy_stotram.php" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Dakshinamurti Strotram</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>बाल्यादिष्वपि जाग्रदादिषु तथा सर्वास्ववस्थास्वपि</p>
<p>व्यावृत्तास्वनुवर्तमानमहमित्यन्तः स्फुरन्तं सदा ।</p>
<p>स्वात्मानं प्रकटीकरोति भजतां यो मुद्रयाभद्रया</p>
<p>Salutations to Sri Dakshinamurthy Who Awakens the Glory of the Atman
within us through His Profound Silence)</p>
<p>7.1: During all the stages of life (youth, adult and old age), during
waking and other states (Dreaming, Deep Sleep, Turiya etc.,) and
similarly in all conditions, <strong>the Atman always shines as the "I"
within, free from all conditions but at the same time present in all
conditions,</strong></p>
<p>7.3: The Inner Guru awakens this Knowledge of one's own Atman to those who surrender to Him; this knowledge which is represented by auspicious Cin-Mudra,</p>
<p>7.4: Salutations to Him, the personification of our inner guru who awakens this
knowledge through His profound silence; salutation to Sri
Dakshinamurthy.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>These 3 gunas also manifest as white Day, black Night and red dusk/dawn and also the three major religions of today's earth, who fight each other for the superiority.</p>
<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations" rel="nofollow noreferrer">List of religious populations</a></p>
<p>Hinduism = 22%(including Buddhism)</p>
<p>Christianity = 33%</p>
<p>Islam = 24%</p>
<p>These 3 are nothing but the 3 gunas of Prakriti i.e. Satva, Rajas and Tamas. Hindus(sons of Aditi) are dominated by Satva i.e. simplicity and balance and spiritual knowledge, hence most of the spiritual Gurus of world are from India. Christians(sons of Danu) are dominated by Rajas, hence most of the material knowledge and Scienctific innovations for body luxuries and sensual pleasures come from Christian nations, Muslims/Islam(sons of Diti), are dominated by Tamas(hence they reject both Moksha/Salvation(of Satvik Hindus) and Kamna/Desires(of Rajsik Christians)) and are blamed for terrorism, anger and forceful conversions to Islam(like in Mughal's period)</p>
<p>Omnipresent, Omnipotent, Omniscient God is beyond these 3 Gunas and is Nirguna, Nirakaar, but can be understood only by developing Satva(simplicity, purity) first. Hence, its <strong>Vedas alone of Hindus that declare Shivoham(I am Shiva)/Aham Brahmsmi(I am God) and talk of eternal nature of soul, because in reality an individual soul is same as God/Supersoul</strong>, but cant be understood as long a man is a slave of his senses and Rajas, Tamas Gunas. Hence Saffron, the color of renunciation is revered in Hinduism. Vedas-Puranas were revealed by God to ancient Satvik sages of Hindus. On the other hand, it is sinful to call oneself Allah or Jesus in Abrahamic religions and they reject the existence of soul, therefore considering body to be the soul and preserving it in graves for the day of resurrection/judgement day.</p>
<p>Highest Tamas is present in animals, hence animals dont worship God nor undergo self-realization, their activities are controlled by Prakriti's senses and mind. <strong>God created man in his image and gave him intellect, which separates him from the animals and allows him to control his senses and realize his true self Atma(which means without Tamas, enlightened). Hence, both man and God are called Purusha in Vedas.</strong></p>
|
|
<p>According to the Varnashrama of Shreemad Bhagwat Purana, we all know that this is Kaliyug, so what can we do so that all of us can increase own spiritual progress and remove bad obstacles of past births and present birth?</p>
<p>We want all ways and ideas that will help everyone to prosper.</p>
| 35647 | 35621 | 8 | 2 | 35621 | 2 | What can we do so that all of us can increase own spiritual progress? | 3 | 35647 | <p>Only by <strong>removal of ego/Ahamkaar i.e. "I am this or that"</strong> one can become spiritual and for it there are only 2 main paths for spiritual progress, either Bhakti Marg of Prakriti(from Puranas), you call yourself to be servant of God and than live in world like Tulsidas, Kabirdas, Ramanujacharya etc., did or Gyana Marg of Purush(from Vedas), accept Sanyas/monkhood and in which you identify self to be infinite Brahman and do sense-restraint and call this world and your body to be a temporary dream and live for selfless work for the welfare of society like Swami Vivekananda, Ramana Maharshi, Shankaracharya etc., did.</p>
<p><a href="http://bhagavata.org/canto12/chapter3.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The Remedy of Kaliyuga</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>(16) The honorable king [Parîkchit] said: 'By what means my Lord, do
the people living in Kali-yuga eradicate the faults accumulating
because of that age? Please explain to me how it is. (17) How about
the yugas, the duties prescribed for them, the time they last and when
they end, as also the Time itself that represents the movement of the
Controller, of Lord Vishnu the Supreme Soul [see also time quotes
page].'</p>
<p>(30) Sri Suka said: 'Kali-yuga is known as the age of ignorance, where
there is deceit, false testimony, sloth and lethargy, violence,
depression, lamentation, delusion, fear and poverty. (31) As a
consequence the mortals will be shortsighted, unfortunate, eating too
much, lusty and poverty-stricken while the women will act of their own
accord and be unchaste. (32) In the populated areas uncivilized people
will take high positions [and act like thieves], the Vedic scriptures
will be slighted by false doctrines [heretics], the political leaders
will devour the people and the twice-born souls will be dedicated to
their bellies and genitals. (33) The youngsters [the students] will be
averse to vows and impure in their engagements, the householders will
be beggars [with what they claim], the withdrawn souls [the
middle-aged, with no nature left to retreat into] will be
city-dwellers and the renounced order will greedily endeavor for
wealth [be engaged in 'reli-business']. (34) Smaller in size,
voracious and having many children, [the women will have] lost their
timidity and constantly speak harshly and with great audacity be as
deceitful as thieves. (35) The merchants will indulge in cheating so
that their business dealings will be wicked while the people
unnecessarily will consider any contemptible occupation [in the sex
industry or gambling business] a good job. (36) Servants will abandon
a master who lost his wealth - even if he is the best one around,
masters will abandon a handicapped servant - even when he belonged to
the family for generations, and cows will be abandoned [and killed] as
soon as they stopped giving milk. (37) Under the control of women, men
in Kali-yuga will be wretched and forsake their fathers, brothers,
friends and relatives, while regularly associating with their brothers
and sisters-in-law in a conception of friendship based upon sexual
enjoyment. (38) Laborers being dressed up as mendicants of austerity,
will accept religious charity to earn their living and mount a high
seat to speak about religious matters without any knowledge of dharmic
principles. (39-40) With their minds constantly full of stress,
emaciated by famine and taxes in times of scarcity with droughts on
the surface of the earth, oh King, the people of Kali-yuga will be
troubled by countless worries and live in fear. Lacking in clothing,
food, drink, rest, sexual love [vyavâya, also called 'change'],
bathing and personal ornaments they will appear like ghostly
creatures. (41) In the age of Kali one will even over a single coin
develop enmity [5.14 and 5.14: 26], reject friendly relations, kill
oneself [be suicidal] and even kill one's relatives [domestic
violence]. <strong>(42) Only interested in the petty service of the stomach
and the genitals one, even being born in a respectable family, will
not protect the elderly parents, the wife and the children. (43) Oh
King, with their minds diverted by atheism the mortals in Kali-yuga in
general will not worship the Infallible One, the Personality of
Godhead who is the Supreme Spiritual Master of the three worlds at
whose feet the various masters bow down.</strong> (44) In Kali-yuga the people
do not worship Him, even though He is the One by whom a person, who
dying in distress collapsing with a faltering voice helplessly chants
His name, is freed from the chains of karma and achieves the topmost
destination [see also B.G. 8: 10 and 6.2]. (45) The objects [and
food], places and the individual nature of man are as a result of
Kali-yuga all polluted [diseased, full of faults], but when one
installs Bhagavân, the Supreme Personality in one's heart, He takes
all this contamination away.</p>
<p>(46) Of those human beings who but even heard, glorified, meditated,
worshiped or venerated the Supreme Lord, the inauspiciousness is
cleansed away that from a thousand births accumulated in their hearts.
(47) Just as the discoloration one finds in gold because of other
metals is removed by fire, the impurities of the mind of yoga
practitioners are removed when Lord Vishnu has entered their heart.
(48) Education, penance, breath control, friendship, bathing in holy
waters, vows, charity and praying with prayer beads do not realize as
full the purification of the mind as the presence of Him, the
Unlimited Personality of Godhead, in the heart. (49) Therefore oh
King, do your utmost best to establish Lord Kes'ava in your heart; the
moment you die [here after this week] you will with your attention
focussed on Him attain the highest destination. (50) The Supreme Lord
meditated upon by those who are dying is the Supreme Controller, the
Soul and Shelter of All, who leads them to their true identity my
dearest. (51) In the ocean of faults of Kali-yuga, oh King, there is
luckily one great good quality: just by singing about [and meditating
on] Krishna['s name, see bhajans] one can be liberated from material
bondage and achieve beatitude [see also bhâgavata dharma and kîrtana].
(52) The same result one achieves in Satya-yuga by meditating on
Vishnu, one achieves in Tretâ-yuga by worshiping with sacrifices and
one achieves in Dvâpara-yuga by serving the lotus feet [of Him in the
form of a king], is in Kali-yuga achieved by singing about [and
meditating on the names of] the Lord [see also 11.5: 38-40].'</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Every man has an subtle memory of animal nature inherited from his past births that drags him back to sense gratification and slavery of matter, goal of spiritual person is to win over that nature. Once succeeded permanently, one has realized himself. Self is master of matter, not its slave.</p>
<p><a href="https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Swami_Vivekananda" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Swami Vivekananda</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>That man has reached immortality who is disturbed by nothing material
You have to grow from the inside out. <strong>None can teach you, none can
make you spiritual. There is no other teacher but your own soul.</strong></p>
<p>The goal of mankind is knowledge. . . . Now this knowledge is inherent
in man. No knowledge comes from outside: it is all inside. What we say
a man "knows," should, in strict psychological language, be what he
"discovers" or "unveils"; what man "learns" is really what he
discovers by taking the cover off his own soul, which is a mine of
infinite knowledge.</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>Many of the avatars of Vishnu that has happened, who were supposed to kill someone or destroy something has some kind of primary weapons.</p>
<p>Though they all can use various kinds of weapons, but had one primary weapon as their symbolic one, for instance:</p>
<ol>
<li>Narasimha avatar had his nails</li>
<li>Parshurama had an axe</li>
<li>Rama had a bow and arrow</li>
<li>Krishna had Sudarshan Charkra</li>
</ol>
<p>Similarly,<br>
<strong>Are there any descriptions telling us about the primary weapon that will be used by Kalki?</strong></p>
| 35729 | 35722 | 5 | 2 | 35722 | 6 | Primary weapon of kalki | 3 | 35729 | <p>As per <a href="https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/12/2/19-20/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (Bhāgavata Purāṇa): Skandha 12: Adhyay 2</a>, the primary weapon of Lord Kalki would be a <strong>sword</strong> (<strong>असि</strong>) and his vahana wold be a horse named Devadatta:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>अश्वमाशुगमारुह्य देवदत्तं जगत्पति: ।</p>
<p>असिनासाधुदमनमष्टैश्वर्यगुणान्वित: ॥ १९ ॥</p>
<p>Lord Kalki, the Lord of the universe, will mount His swift horse Devadatta and, <strong>sword</strong> in hand, travel over the earth exhibiting His eight mystic opulences and eight special qualities of Godhead.</p>
</blockquote>
|
|
<p>Yudhisthira was known for his dharma but he seemed to have had addiction to dice game and his wife Draupadi was also staked for it. And none of Pandavas opposed it! Did Shri Krishna ever pointed out this wrong doing of Yudhisthira to Pandavas and said they should have opposed Yudhisthira? Do we have reference for it in Mahabharata?</p>
| 35784 | 35776 | 8 | 2 | 35776 | 1 | Did Shri Krishna point out wrong actions of Yudhisthira to Pandavas at any point of time in Mahabharata? | 3 | 35784 | <p>Kṛṣṇa doesn't hold the Pāṇḍavas directly responsible for some of their actions like agreeing to the gambling match in the first place, betting their wife, etc. Instead he blames it all on the ill-effects of gambling and the Pāṇḍavas' misfortune.</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Āraṇyaka Parva</strong> / <strong>Kairāta Parva</strong></p>
<p>311 (Chapter 14)</p>
<p>Vasudeva said, "O lord of the earth! O king! Had I been present in Dvaraka earlier, this misfortune would not have befallen you. O invincible one! Even if I had not been invited to the gambling match by the Kouravas, by Ambika's son and by King Duryodhana, I would have gone and prevented the gambling by pointing out the many evils that result. I would have brought in Bhishma, Drona, Kripa and Bahlika.</p>
<p>For your sake, I would have told the king who is Vichitravirya's son, 'O Kourava! O Indra among kings! O lord! Make your sons desist from this gambling.' I would have pointed out the evils through which you have been removed from your seat and through which, in earlier times, Virasena's son was deprived of his kingdom. O lord of the earth! Whatever has not been eaten up is destroyed through gambling. I would have described how the addiction to gambling lasts continuously. <strong>Women, gambling, hunting and drinking are four things that arise out of desire. O king! It has been said that these lead to loss of prosperity.</strong> Those who are learned in the sacred texts hold that while this is true of all of them, it can be especially seen in the case of gambling. On a single day, one may lose all one's property. Misery is certain. Wealth that has not been enjoyed is lost. Only harsh words are left.</p>
<p>O Kouravya! I would have recounted these and other bitter topics. O mighty-armed one! I would have spoken to Ambika's son about these effects of gambling. O descendant of the Kuru lineage! If my words had been accepted by him, the dharma of the Kurus would have remained undisturbed. O Indra among kings! O best of the Bharata lineage! If he had not accepted my soft words, which are like medicine, I would have restrained him through force. In similar fashion, I would have destroyed all the courtiers and gamblers, ill-wishers masquerading as well-wishers. <strong>O Kouravya! It was my absence from Anarta that led to all your misfortunes from gambling.</strong> O Pandu's son! O best of the Kurus! When I reached Dvaraka, I learnt everything about your misfortunes from Yuyudhana. O Indra among kings! As soon as I heard this, my mind was filled with great anxiety. O lord of the earth! I have swiftly come here, in a desire to see you. O bull among the Bharata lineage! All of us are beset with great difficulties, since we find you and your brothers immersed in this misfortune."</p>
<p>[<a href="https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/B06XYN5YDK" rel="nofollow noreferrer" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Debroy, Bibek. The Mahabharata: Volume 2 (pp. 315-316)</a>]</p>
</blockquote>
<p>(In K M Ganguli's translation this is <a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03013.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Ch. 13</a> of the Vana Parva)</p>
|
|
<p>Did the Pandavas really complete the terms of their <em>ajnatavasa</em> (living in concealment)? Or were their hidden identities revealed before its completion and hence it was adharma to fight against the Kauravas?</p>
| 35796 | 35792 | 10 | 2 | 35792 | 8 | Did Pandavas really complete their ajnatavasa? | 3 | 35796 | <p>At first, as per <strong>Duryodhana</strong>, they didn't complete:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Vaisampayana said, 'King Duryodhana then, on the field of battle said unto Bhishma, and unto Drona--that tiger among warriors, and unto Kripa--that mighty car-warrior, these words, 'Both myself and Kama had said this unto the preceptors 1 I refer to the subject again, for I am not satisfied with having said it once. Even this was the pledge of the sons of Pandu that if defeated (at dice) they would reside to our knowledge in countries and woods for twelve years, and one more year unknown to us. <strong>That thirteenth year, instead of being over, is yet running</strong>. Vibhatsu, therefore, who is still to live undiscovered hath appeared before us. And if Vibhatsu hath come before the term of exile is at end, the Pandavas shall have to pass another twelve years in the woods. ~ <a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04047.htm" rel="noreferrer">Mahabharata: Virata Parva: Go-harana Parva: Section XLVII</a></p>
</blockquote>
<p>But, later <strong>Bhishma</strong> explained and as per this explanation, they completed:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Bhishma said, 'The wheel of time revolves with its divisions, viz., with Kalas and Kasthas and Muhurtas and days and fortnights and months and constellations and planets and seasons and years. In consequence of their fractional excesses and the deviations of also of the heavenly bodies, there is an increase of two months in every five years. It seems to me that calculating this wise, there would be an excess of five months and twelve nights in thirteen years. <strong>Everything, therefore, that the sons of Pandu had promised, hath been exactly fulfilled by them</strong>. Knowing this to be certain, Vibhatsu hath made his appearance. ~ <a href="http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m04/m04052.htm" rel="noreferrer">Mahabharata: Virata Parva: Go-harana Parva: Section LII</a></p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>This is explained in <a href="https://archive.org/stream/Mahabharata04SanskritHindiPanditRamnarayanGitaPress/Mahabharata%2002_%20Sanskrit-Hindi_Pandit%20Ramnarayan_Gita%20Press#page/n1141/mode/1up" rel="noreferrer">Mahabharata - SanskritHindi version from GitaPress by Pandit Ramnarayan</a> commentary in more detail:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/P34yb.png" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/P34yb.png" alt="Mahabharata - SanskritHindi version from GitaPress by Pandit Ramnarayan - commentary1"></a>
<a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/9vmZq.png" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/9vmZq.png" alt="Mahabharata - SanskritHindi version from GitaPress by Pandit Ramnarayan - commentary2"></a></p>
</blockquote>
<p>The English translation (as per my understanding) of above screenshot would be as below:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Lunar year</strong>: 354 days + few hrs</li>
<li><strong>Solar year</strong>: 365 days + few hrs</li>
</ul>
<p>13 Solar years = (365 * 13) = 4745 days + few days</p>
<p>13 Lunar years = (354 * 13) = 4602 days + few days</p>
<p>So there is a difference of around 5 months in both the calculation. As per Pandit Ramnarayan's commentary, Pandavas considered Solar calculation, so as per them, they just completed 13 years. But, Bhisma considered Lunar calculation along with Adhika masa, so as per him Pandavas exceeded 5 months and 12 days after completing 13 years. </p>
<p>By this explanation, Pandavas completed agreed 13 years as per both Solar and Lunar (including & excluding Adhika masa) calculations. </p>
<p>As mentioned in below answer, one who believe in Lunar calculation mentioned that Pandvas completed 13 years term even before [5 months] Arjuna reveals his identity. But Pandavas themselves were believing Solar calculation so they appeared when they completed 13 years in every calculation.</p>
<hr>
<p>As you can see, difference is due to <strong>Adhik Masa</strong>, <strong>Lunar</strong> calculation and <strong>Solar</strong> calculation. After, Bhisma's explanation Duryodhana somehow seems to be convinced and instead of sending them again in woods for 12 years, he prepared to fight:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>"Duryodhana said, 'I will not, O grandsire, give back the Pandavas their kingdom. Let every preparation, therefore, for battle be made without delay.'</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p><strong>UPDATE</strong></p>
<p>Also, as discussed in <a href="https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/28078/did-prince-yudhishthira-obtain-boons-from-yama-for-successful-completion-of-agya/28080#28080">Did prince Yudhishthira obtain boons from Yama for successful completion of Agyatvaas?</a> post, Yudhishthira obtained a boon form Yama for 'completion of thirteenth year, secretly and unrecognized':</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Vaisampayana continued,-'Thereat that worshipful one replied,--'I give this boon unto thee!' And then reassuring Kunti's son having truth for prowess, he also said, 'Even if, O Bharata, ye range this (entire) earth in your proper forms none in the three worlds shall recognise you. Ye perpetuators of the Kuru race, through my grace, ye will spend this thirteenth year, secretly and unrecognised, in Virata's kingdom! </p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, as per the Yama's boon also, they must have completed the 13th year unrecognized.</p>
|
|
<p>Yes, you got it right, in Star Plus Mahabharata, it's said by Duryodhana, that since Draupadi is now his <a href="https://www.sanskritdictionary.com/d%C4%81s%C4%AB/100781/1" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>daasi</em></a> ('female servant or slave') she has to accept his orders and he can strip her since he's her swami. Was he right? Or is it adharma?</p>
| 35853 | 35823 | 1 | 2 | 35823 | 0 | Is it adharma for a daasi to be stripped by her swami? | 3 | 35853 | <p>In the current context, the word <a href="https://www.sanskritdictionary.com/d%C4%81s%C4%AB/100781/1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">dāsī</a> means <em>female slave</em> not <em>maid servant</em> (<a href="https://www.sanskritdictionary.com/?iencoding=hk&q=paricArikA&lang=sans&action=Search" rel="nofollow noreferrer">paricārikā</a>).</p>
<p>After losing all his brothers Yudhiṣṭhira bets himself and says, should he lose, he'll do anything the Kauravas ask him to:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Sabhā Parva / Dyūta Parva - Chapter 58</p>
<p>Shakuni said, "O Kounteya! You have lost a great deal of riches. You
have lost your brothers, your horses and your elephants. Tell us if
there are any riches that you have not yet lost."</p>
<p>Yudhishthira replied, "I myself am left, especially loved by all my
brothers. <strong>If won over, until the time of destruction, I will do
whatever deed I am asked to do.</strong>"</p>
<p>At these words, Shakuni resorted to deceit and told Yudhishthira, "I
have won."</p>
<p><a href="https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/B06XYN5YDK" rel="nofollow noreferrer" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Debroy, Bibek. The Mahabharata: Volume 2 (pp. 222-225)</em></a></p>
</blockquote>
<p>And later when they were asked by Karṇa to strip, the Pāṇḍavas do not hesitate:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Sabhā Parva / Dyūta Parva - Chapter 61</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>When the noise died down, <strong>Radheya</strong>, who was almost senseless with
anger, gripped his lustrous arms and <strong>uttered these words</strong>...</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It has been ordained by the gods that a woman should only have one husband. However, she submits to many and it is therefore certain that
she is a courtesan. It is my view that there is nothing surprising in
her being brought into the sabha in a single garment, or even if she
is naked. In accordance with dharma, Soubala has won all the riches
the Pandavas possessed, including her and themselves. O Duhshasana!
This Vikarna is only a child, though he speaks words of wisdom. <strong>Strip
away the garments from the Pandavas and Droupadi.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>On hearing these words, the Pandavas took off their upper garments and
sat down in the sabha.</strong></p>
<p><em><a href="https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/B06XYN5YDK" rel="nofollow noreferrer" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Debroy, Bibek. The Mahabharata: Volume 2 (pp. 233-235)</a></em></p>
</blockquote>
<p><br>So, why did Draupadī disobey the order? What are the rights of a wife and that of a dāsī (female slave)? Aren't wives the property of their husbands? If husband is a slave, doesn't wife automatically become a slave? Bhīṣma seems to agree:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Sabhā Parva / Dyūta Parva - Chapter 60</p>
<p>Bhishma said, "O fortunate one! Since the ways of dharma are subtle, I
cannot properly resolve the question you have posed. One without
property cannot stake the property of others. <strong>But women are always the
property of their husbands.</strong> Yudhishthira will abandon the entire earth
with its riches before he gives up truth. <strong>The Pandava has himself said
he has been won.</strong> Therefore, I cannot resolve this issue. Shakuni has
no equal in dice. Kunti's son has voluntarily played with him. The
great-souled one does not think he has resorted to deceit. Therefore,
I cannot answer the question."</p>
<p><em><a href="https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/B06XYN5YDK" rel="nofollow noreferrer" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Debroy, Bibek. The Mahabharata: Volume 2 (p. 228-232)</a></em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>If Draupadī is the property of Yudhiṣṭhira and his brothers, Yudhiṣṭhira staking her after losing himself is an illegal bet and shouldn't have been allowed in the first place. So the question whether Yudhiṣṭhira bet Draupadī <em>before</em> or <em>after</em> he lost himself is moot.</p>
<hr>
<p>On the question of <em>dharma</em>-<em>adharma</em> in Draupadī's disrobing, against her will, it all comes down to this:</p>
<h3>What are the rights of a slave?</h3>
<p>Going by Yudhiṣṭhira's words, a slave has absolutely no rights:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>If won over, until the time of destruction, I will do whatever deed I am asked to do.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p><br>If on the other hand, you agree with these conclusions from G. H. Bhatt's paper, <a href="https://archive.org/stream/in.ernet.dli.2015.76405#page/n17/mode/2up" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The Draupadīvastraharaṇa Episode: An Interpolation in the Mahābhārata</a>, your whole question is based on an event that did not take place:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>...</p>
<ol start="7">
<li><p>There is another evidence in the Udyoga Parvan of the Mbh. (Critical ed.) showing that the Draupadīvastraharaṇa (Dv) episode is a late interpolation.
At the instance of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, Sañjaya approaches the Pāṇḍavas and
dissuades them from fighting, on philosophical grounds. <strong>Kṛṣṇa is
annoyed at the sermon of Sañjaya</strong> and <strong>draws his attention to the
atrocities committed by the Kauravas</strong>. There is a bare reference to
Duḥśāsana bringing Draupadī to the hall but <strong>there is no mention of Dv.</strong>
and <strong>catching hold of her hair in Kṛṣṇa's retort to Sañjaya</strong>. Later on,
Yudhiṣṭhira, also, rebukes Sañjaya and enumerates all heinous offences
perpetrated by the Kauravas. Here also, as before, there is no
reference to Dv., but there is an allusion to Duḥśāsana's seizing
Draupadī's hair only. These are the two occasions where Kṛṣṇa and
Yudhiṣṭhira are expected to make a reference to the Dv., if it were a
fact at all. The omission of the Dv. event is most significant, and is
quite sufficient to prove that the Dv. episode was not part of the
original Mbh.</p></li>
<li><p>Further, the Karṇa Parvan of the Mbh. (Citraśālā Press ed.) furnishes us with additional evidence. During fighting, the wheel of
Karṇa's chariot sinks in the mud, and Karṇa requests Arjuna not to
commence fight, on the ground of military code (Ch. 90). At that time
<strong>Kṛṣṇa criticises Karṇa</strong> (Ch. 91) for his hypocrisy, and reminding him
of his immoral conduct in the past refers to Duḥśāsana's bringing
Draupadī to the assembly-hall, <strong>but does not mention the removal of
Draupadī's garment</strong>, and <strong>even the seizure of her hair</strong>. Had the Dv. been
a fact, a reference to it on such an occasion was necessary, nay,
inevitable. Kṛṣṇa's silence on this point is, by itself, an adequate
piece of evidence in support of the interpolated nature of the Dv.
episode.</p></li>
<li><p>The same Parvan, again, furnishes another evidence also. In the Ch. 83, there is a dialogue between Bhīma and Duḥśāsana, before Bhīma
fulfills his vow of drinking the blood of Duḥśāsana. In two places,
Bhīma refers to Duḥśāsana dragging the hair of Draupadī, but is
wonderfully silent on the removal of her garment. Duḥśāsana in reply
to Bhīma refers in a boasting manner to his act of dragging Draupadī's
hair, but not to that of stripping her of her clothes. <strong>If Draupadī's
garment was actually removed by Duḥśāsana, it is most unnatural for
both Bhīma and Duḥśāsana not to refer to it in the circumstances.</strong> The
silence on the part of excited Bhīma and arrogant Duḥśāsana, regarding
the Dv. episode, naturally leads one to believe that there was nothing
of the type in the original Mbh. The episode of Bhīma drinking the
blood of Duḥśāsana is, as shown before, a later development; and even
this later interpolation does not refer to the Dv.—a feature which
naturally raises suspicion about the authenticity of the Dv. episode.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>...</p>
<ol start="12">
<li>Besides the internal evidence, there is also some external evidence in support of our theory. <strong>The Bhāgavata Purāṇa</strong> (Bh) is
clearly a work glorifying Kṛṣṇa as the highest divinity, the lord of
Vraja and dear to Gopīs. There are in the Bh. altogether four
references to the actions of Duḥśāsana which mention only the seizure
of Draupadī's hair and are <strong>wonderfully silent on the Dv.</strong> It has been
shown that the Dv. episode was developed with Draupadī's fervent
appeal to Kṛṣṇa, the lord of Vraja and dear to Gopīs, with the purpose
of magnifying the personality of Kṛṣṇa. One would naturally expect the
Bh., a work purely Kṛṣṇaite in nature, to refer to the Dv. episode
with an appeal to Kṛṣṇa. But the omission from the Bh. is most
significant, and shows that the Dv. episode did not appear in the
original Mbh.</li>
</ol>
<p>...</p>
<ol start="17">
<li><p>The last point for consideration is the society in the times of the Pāṇḍavas and the Kauravas. The only evidence that is available is
literary, and that too is scanty. In the Rāmāyaṇa, Rāvaṇa kidnapped
Sītā but did not make any attempt to outrage her modesty during her
stay in Laṅkā and this shows some culture even on the part of
Rāvaṇa, the villain of the sister epic. The literature ranging from
the Brāhmans to the Śūdras does not show the moral deterioration
which could have made the conduct such as that of Duḥśāsana quite
normal. It appears that the society of the Pāṇḍava-Kaurava period was
not so depraved as to make Duḥśāsana's action possible. At any rate
the moral standard of the Kṣatriyas at the time of the Bhārata battle
was far from being low. And this would not leave any scope for the
most abominable action of removing the garment of Draupadī by
Duḥśāsana in the original epic, which was in all probability a work of
pure history.</p></li>
<li><p><strong>The examination of the whole evidence available in connection with the Dv. episode, thus, leads us to the irresistible conclusion that
the Dv. episode did not form part of the original epic and that it was
introduced later on by the redactors of the epic</strong>, with motives too
well-known. A careful study of the critical edition of the Mbh. and
the most valuable foot-notes and the appendices therein, make it
possible to find out the several stages in the development of the Dv.
episode.</p></li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
|
Subsets and Splits