Bhakthi yoga
-
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 04:25
Jayaram, one question which can be easily answered. Answer is you don't have and you will not. Atleast that is what the SaraNagati SaStram of svAmi nammAzhvAr states. "maraNamAnAl vaikundam koDukkum pirAn".jayaram wrote:C) Finally, if God wanted us to attain moksha, why even go thru this cycle of birth/death in the first place? I.e. Why leave the dissolved state at all?
Last edited by ksrimech on 02 Jun 2007, 01:55, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 11498
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36
vasya
The dhatu ji jayE abhibhavE ca' is always parasmai pada unless used with the upasarga vi and parA. But govt of India took the quotation from MuNDakOpaniShad (3.1.6) where the implication is satyam (divinity = self) wins Self. It perhaps was ubhayapada during vedic times but lost it in classical sanskrit and hence is grammatically wrong!
The dhatu ji jayE abhibhavE ca' is always parasmai pada unless used with the upasarga vi and parA. But govt of India took the quotation from MuNDakOpaniShad (3.1.6) where the implication is satyam (divinity = self) wins Self. It perhaps was ubhayapada during vedic times but lost it in classical sanskrit and hence is grammatically wrong!
-
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51
jayaram,It all seems to come down to a leap of faith
You have raised relevant questions. I am giving hereunder a quote from the book 'Pantanjali Yoga Sutras' as translated by Swami Prabhavananda and Christopher Isherwood. Other points you have raised can wait.
(pp26,27)"'Faith' is often used by agnostics as a term of abuse. That is to say, it is taken to refer to the blind credulity which accepts all kinds of dogmas and creeds without question, repeating parrot-like which has been taught, and closing its ears to doubt and reason. Such 'faith' should certainly be attacked. It is compounded of laziness, obstinacy, ignorance and fear. Because it is rigid and unyielding it can quite easily be shaken and altogether destroyed.
But this is not the true faith - the faith which is recommended by Patanjali. True faith is provisional, flexible, undogmatic, open to doubt and reason. True faith is not like a picture frame, a permanently limited area of acceptance. It is like a plant which keeps on throwing forth shoots and growing. All we require, at the beginning, is a seed. And the seed need be nothing more than a feeling of interest in the possibilities of spiritual life. Perhaps we meet someone who seems to have reached some degree of wisdom and tranquility through the practice of meditation and spiritual disciplines. We become interested and intrigued. May be this is a solution for our own problems, maybe it isn't. We can't be sure - we ought not, at this stage, be sure - but we decide to give it a try."
-
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51
'satyam' in satyamEva jayatE refers not to the dvandva - the dualistic - truth and false - it is pure 'existence' which is derived from the mahAvAkya 'sat-cit-Ananda' or 'Om tat sat' etc. Though we normally refer to this as 'Truth ultimately wins', this is only partially correct. There is a mirzA ghAlib's poem -
He was, when it was aught
He would still be, even if it might have been naught
न था कुछ तो ख़ुदा था
कुछ न होता तो ख़ुदा होता
na kuch tO khudA thA
kuch na hOtA tO khudA hOtA
This ever-existent, immutable state is what is meant by 'satyam'; all else is false - not that they do not exist but their existence is not based on a totally objective defintion, and the mutations are only transient in nature, ultimately to be dissolved, leaving behind the state beyond mutations - therefore 'winner'.
He was, when it was aught
He would still be, even if it might have been naught
न था कुछ तो ख़ुदा था
कुछ न होता तो ख़ुदा होता
na kuch tO khudA thA
kuch na hOtA tO khudA hOtA
This ever-existent, immutable state is what is meant by 'satyam'; all else is false - not that they do not exist but their existence is not based on a totally objective defintion, and the mutations are only transient in nature, ultimately to be dissolved, leaving behind the state beyond mutations - therefore 'winner'.
Last edited by vgvindan on 02 Jun 2007, 11:06, edited 1 time in total.
Finding Faith
Malcolm Kluggeridge
Malcolm Kluggeridge
I recognize , of course , that any statement of belief from me is partly governed by the fact that I am old and in a decade or so, will be dead. In earlier years I should have expressed things differently. Now the prospect of death overshadows it all.
I am like a man on a sea voyage nearing his destination. When I embarked , I worried about having a cabin with a porthole, whether I should be asked to sit at the Captains table, who were the more attractive and important passengers...
All such considerations become pointless ,now that I shall soon disembark.
Since I do not believe that earthly life can bring lasting satisfaction, the prospect of death holds no terrors. But the world that I shall leave seems more beautiful than ever. Especially in its remoter parts ;grass and trees ,little streams and sloping hills ,;where the image of eternity is more clearly stamped than among streets and houses.
Those that I Love ,I can love ever more, Since I have nothing to ask of them but their Love. The passion to accumulate possessions or to be noticed and be important ,is now too evidently absurd to be entertained.
A sense of how extraordinarily happy I have been , and of enormous gratitude to my creator overwhelms me. I believe with a passionate unshakable conviction that life is a blessed gift; That the spirit which animates it ,is one of Love , not hate ; of Light ,not darkness.
Since I also believe that Life is benevolently , not malevolently conceived ,then I know that when these eyes see no more and this mind thinks no more ,and this hand now writing is inert , I shall find what lies beyond similarly benevolent.
IF THAT IS NOTHING ,THEN FOR THE NOTHINGNESS I OFFER THANKS .
IF THAT IS ANOTHER MODE OF EXISTENCE ,THEN FOR THAT LIKEWISE , I OFFER THANKS.
Last edited by coolkarni on 02 Jun 2007, 11:17, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: 30 Jun 2006, 03:08
The responses by Govindan and Coolkarni above seem to reflect the famous Pascal's wager. See details at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager
And also see the responses. In summary: just in case God cannot stand supplicants who worship him (or even believe in him!) perhaps we are better off not believing in/worshipping him. In which case those who exhibit bhakti etc. are actually doing themselves a disservice! And those who don't believe in god may actually be the ones chosen to go to heaven / attain moksha / etc.
Just give it a moment's thought.
Govindan, since you chose not to address my other questions, let me raise them again:
And also see the responses. In summary: just in case God cannot stand supplicants who worship him (or even believe in him!) perhaps we are better off not believing in/worshipping him. In which case those who exhibit bhakti etc. are actually doing themselves a disservice! And those who don't believe in god may actually be the ones chosen to go to heaven / attain moksha / etc.
Just give it a moment's thought.
Govindan, since you chose not to address my other questions, let me raise them again:
Mukthi/moksha is supposedly a state where we are dissolved in God.
So far so good. Now comes the tricky part. What happens next?
A) Does this mukthi state go on into eternity? If so, what exactly is the point? Please, I am not ridiculing anyone's belief here, this is a genuine question.
[Also, this point of view seems to imply that life in this world is really bad compared to the 'dissolved' state. But this would in turn imply that God's creation (i.e. this world, our lives, etc.) is bad in some sense. Aren't we thus showing disrespect to the creator by condemning His creation? In other words, isn't shunning of samsara being irreligious?]
B) I have read some theories that also state that after a long while in the dissolved state, we come back to this earth to resume the cycle of birth and death again. If this is the case, why attain moksha in the first place?
C) Finally, if God wanted us to attain moksha, why even go thru this cycle of birth/death in the first place? I.e. Why leave the dissolved state at all?
-
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: 30 Jun 2006, 03:08
ksrimech stated:
Can you please elaborate what this means? In case this is given to everyone, why have any belief at all? Or is it reserved only for those satisfy certain criteria?
The Swami's statement translates as: "If you die, vaikuntham (heaven?) is given to you."Jayaram, one question which can be easily answered. Answer is you don't have and you will not. Atleast that is what the SaraNagati SaStram of svAmi nammAzhvAr states. "maraNamAnAl vaikundam koDukkum pirAn".
Can you please elaborate what this means? In case this is given to everyone, why have any belief at all? Or is it reserved only for those satisfy certain criteria?
-
- Posts: 10956
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01
-
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51
jayaram,
To answer your question, here is another quote from the ibid book.
To answer your question, here is another quote from the ibid book.
"'Realisation', said Swami Vivekananda, 'is the real religion, all the rest is only preparation - hearing lectures, or reading books, or reasoning, is merely preparing the ground; it is not religion. Intellectual assent and intellectual dissent are not religion."
"Religion is, in fact, a severely practical and empirical kind of research. You take nothing on trust. You accept nothing but your own experience. You go forward alone, step by step, like an explorer in a virgin jungle, to see what you will find. All that Patanjali, or anybody else, can do for you is to urge you to attempt the exploration and to offer certain general hints and warnings which may be of help to you on your way."
Last edited by vgvindan on 02 Jun 2007, 19:52, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 11498
- Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36
STOP quoting and start explaining
Every philosopher (non-philosopher too) has his own experience and views but if you accept his credentials; you accept his explanations. But the 'scientific' (materialistic?) approach demands almost a 'mathematical/logical' proof. Suppose Ramkrishna/Thyagaraja claimed that he saw and conversed with God some (?) will accept. But if Einstein 'proves' E = mc**2 'ALL' will accept! That is what we all (am I right Jayaram?) want. There is none sadly!
The spiritual and material planes are disjoint. The 'intellect' sees the material plane and seeks material explanations. The spiritual explanations are beyond the pale and 'cannot' be explained except using some analogy. The impossibility of 'proof' follows from Godel since you have to axiomatize (accept the 'Apta vacana' (what He (?) says) leading to a tautology.
Since God belongs to the spiritual plane he can neither be proved or disproved using 'material' arguments. In fact God is 'irrelevant' in the material plane. But then only we humans (not discounting ET) are the only one who live in both material and spiritual planes. The 'dual' existence will be consistent as long as you do not mix and match!
Otherwise all discussions will be simply circular !
Every philosopher (non-philosopher too) has his own experience and views but if you accept his credentials; you accept his explanations. But the 'scientific' (materialistic?) approach demands almost a 'mathematical/logical' proof. Suppose Ramkrishna/Thyagaraja claimed that he saw and conversed with God some (?) will accept. But if Einstein 'proves' E = mc**2 'ALL' will accept! That is what we all (am I right Jayaram?) want. There is none sadly!
The spiritual and material planes are disjoint. The 'intellect' sees the material plane and seeks material explanations. The spiritual explanations are beyond the pale and 'cannot' be explained except using some analogy. The impossibility of 'proof' follows from Godel since you have to axiomatize (accept the 'Apta vacana' (what He (?) says) leading to a tautology.
Since God belongs to the spiritual plane he can neither be proved or disproved using 'material' arguments. In fact God is 'irrelevant' in the material plane. But then only we humans (not discounting ET) are the only one who live in both material and spiritual planes. The 'dual' existence will be consistent as long as you do not mix and match!
Otherwise all discussions will be simply circular !
-
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51
cml,
Thanks for interceding in the endless goose-chase with your explanation of inexplicability of it all.
I may add that even Einstein had to go through a struggle before others accepted the truth of what he found - and to cap it - E=mc**2 - is considered an inspiration. And our own Ramanujam attributed every mathematical theorem to his family deity - I do not remember the name. And Vivekananda would call all inspirations as 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration.
Thanks for interceding in the endless goose-chase with your explanation of inexplicability of it all.
I may add that even Einstein had to go through a struggle before others accepted the truth of what he found - and to cap it - E=mc**2 - is considered an inspiration. And our own Ramanujam attributed every mathematical theorem to his family deity - I do not remember the name. And Vivekananda would call all inspirations as 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration.
-
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: 30 Jun 2006, 03:08
Now that we are all in the quote/anecdote mood, allow me to quote the bard himself:
1. from As You Like It
All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts,
...
Last scene of all,
That ends this strange eventful history,
Is second childishness and mere oblivion,
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.
2. from Macbeth
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
1. from As You Like It
All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts,
...
Last scene of all,
That ends this strange eventful history,
Is second childishness and mere oblivion,
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.
2. from Macbeth
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
-
- Posts: 16786
- Joined: 22 Jun 2006, 09:30
Jayaram,
Many greats have played the parts (I mean, the roles) you mention. Each in his own grand manner. Funnily enough, not Olivier's or Gilgeud's--but Ian Macellan's Hamlet and his last line from Macbeth: signifying nothing--was something else...
Many greats have played the parts (I mean, the roles) you mention. Each in his own grand manner. Funnily enough, not Olivier's or Gilgeud's--but Ian Macellan's Hamlet and his last line from Macbeth: signifying nothing--was something else...
Last edited by arasi on 03 Jun 2007, 07:59, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: 30 Jun 2006, 03:08
At the risk of continuing this 'goose chase', that is NOT what I want.That is what we all (am I right Jayaram?) want.
I am not questioning the existence or non-existence of god at all.
All I am challenging is the anthropomorphising of this entity - and eveything else that follows from that step. To me, this is showing utter disrespect to God.
-
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51
The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna, pp 80.Master : "Well, do you believe in God with form or without form?"
M: (After deliberation within himself) ... "Sir, I like to think of God as formless."
Master : "Very Good. It is enough to have faith in either aspect. You believe in God without form; that is quite all right. But never for a moment think that this alone is true and all else is false. Remember that God with form is just as true as God without form. But hold fast to your own conviction."
....
M: "Sir, suppose one believes in God with form. Certainly He is not the clay image!"
Master (interrupting): "But why clay? It is an image of Spirit."
M: ... "But, sir", he said to the Master "one should explain to those who worship the clay image that it is not God, and that, while worshipping it, they should have God in view and not the clay image. One should not worship clay."
Master (sharply) : "That's the one hobby of you Calcutta people - giving lectures and bringing others to the light! Nobdoy ever stops to consider how to get the light himself. Who are you to teach others?
"He who is the Lord of the Universe will teach everyone. He alone teaches us, who has created this universe; who has made the sun and moon, men and beasts, and all other beings; who has provided means for their sustenance; who has given children parents and endowed them with love to bring them up. The Lord has done so many things - will He not show people the way to worship Him? If they need teaching, then He will be the Teacher. He is our Inner Guide.
"Suppose there is an error in worshipping the clay image; doesn't God know that through it He alone is being invoked? He will be pleased with that very worship. Why should you get a headache over it? You had better try for knowledge and devotion yourself."
-
- Posts: 101
- Joined: 26 Mar 2005, 22:32
-
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: 30 Jun 2006, 03:08
From 'rakthi ragas' thread:
Heaven must be a strange place, with so many singers in one place! Who will do the dishes?
(I didn't want to impose these thoughts on the rakthi ragas thread readers, hence responded here.
Govindan, as much as I adore and respect Tyagaraja, the above statement by him is a bit unidimensional and unfair. It is God who creates us all, and if some of us don't have musical vasanas, why should they be treated below par by the same God? Different people exhibit their creative talents in different ways, e.g. painting, writing, poetry - even cooking, farming, etc.Those (so called) great devotees, who do not have knowledge of music (rAga and tALa), loving devotion, practice of true knowledge, and Supreme Love towards the Lord, are indeed subject to rebirth.
Heaven must be a strange place, with so many singers in one place! Who will do the dishes?
(I didn't want to impose these thoughts on the rakthi ragas thread readers, hence responded here.
Last edited by jayaram on 03 Jun 2007, 20:11, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51
I am not questioning the existence or non-existence of god at all.
jayaram,To me, this is showing utter disrespect to God
On the one hand you say, you are not questioning the existence or non-existence of God. On the other hand, you say anthropomorphising God is showing utter disrepect. Accordingly, I tend to assume that you believe in existence of God, and therefore, you feel that, by giving a form to God, we are disrespecting Him. Conversely, you respect God but you are against His worship.
According to Dictionary, 'worship' means 'worthiness', 'respect'. Therefore, as you respect God, you are indeed 'worshipping' Him. May be, you are against the rituals connected with worship of God like 'pooja' etc.
Therefore, your challenging 'worshipping' boils down to 'rituals' only and not worship per-se.
I think we, the worshippers of God, are much better off than those 'worthies' who fall on the feet of 'ammas' and 'appas' at the drop of hat.
Last edited by vgvindan on 03 Jun 2007, 20:48, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: 30 Jun 2006, 03:08
I get this uneasy feeling that the goose chase has gone on long enough, and that fellow forumites must be getting tired (and rightfully so!) of this back-and-forth. I do have lots more to say on this topic, but won't (at least for now .
I plan to be in Madras this December. Govindan sir, what do you say we two (and any others interested) go for a nice cup of tea/coffee and talk thru all this. Shouldn't take more than a few minutes. Unless we get into a 'guppa maro' mood and try and solve all the world's problems (reminds me of college days spent at the cafeteria discussing the meaning of life!).
And then maybe we can go to Kapaleeswarar temple and get a good darshan!
I plan to be in Madras this December. Govindan sir, what do you say we two (and any others interested) go for a nice cup of tea/coffee and talk thru all this. Shouldn't take more than a few minutes. Unless we get into a 'guppa maro' mood and try and solve all the world's problems (reminds me of college days spent at the cafeteria discussing the meaning of life!).
And then maybe we can go to Kapaleeswarar temple and get a good darshan!
-
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 04:25
kapAli karuNai nilavu pozhi vadana madaiyanoru kapAli............cmlover wrote:Excellent Jayaram!
Invite 'kapAli' to join you at the temple in the discussions.
If you dont want to worship dont na. You dont have to believe in any vaikunTa or svarga or naraka or kailAsA. Its just your sowkaryam. You can join the DK party. LOL just kiddin.jayaram wrote:Question: Why should we worship God?
I get the mental peace when I imagine that I'm under the influence of somebody and I get badly tortured the other way round. I get the feeling when listening to tyAgarAjasvAmi with the idea that he is indeed singing about SrIrAma is totally different.
Me too. If fellow rasikas don't mind, I would also like to meet them and have this general chat which jayaram mentions. CML, VGV, SRKRis will you be there? Of course, we should be having the mArgazhi meet of rasikas.org/rasikapriyajayaram wrote:I plan to be in Madras this December.
-
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51
In devotional literature, 'rAga', 'rakti' and 'sakti' convey lower level of - Worldly -attachment; 'anurAga', 'anurakti' and 'Asakti' denote supreme love - towards God.as much as I adore and respect Tyagaraja, the above statement by him is a bit unidimensional and unfair.
IMHO 'rakti rAgas' are those which have been specially tailored to convey 'rakti' bhAva - in this case 'rakti' denotes 'anurakti' because CM is essentially devotion - oriented. That is the thrust of the words of UttukkADu venkaTa kavi also whose kRti I have quoted.
Last edited by vgvindan on 03 Jun 2007, 23:15, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 10956
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01
Why do I think I would even know? I don't want to argue now if labels are useful or not, that is a different topic. I get a fairly good idea of someone's belief based on the points they put forth and the point they dispute. In your case some of your views pertain to Atheism and others to Agnosticism. If those two don't fit, see if you can fit your beliefs to known labels. If not, invent onejayaram wrote:I find it interesting that people want to label everything.Jayaram, which position you are arguing for: Atheistic or Agnostic ?
What position do you think I am arguing for?
-
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: 30 Jun 2006, 03:08
Well worth a read... http://www.odemagazine.com/article.php?aID=4391
Excerpts:
"Kabir wrote that he had read all the scriptures, bathed in all the sacred pools, visited all the holy shrines, and found God in none of them."
"In Vedanta, the purest spiritual doctrine of Hindu India, God doesn’t want anything of us. He doesn’t want to be found; he has no laws that we should obey; he never judges, punishes or puts forth expectations."
And my favorite:
“The search for God consists of arriving at a place and discovering that God has just left.â€
Excerpts:
"Kabir wrote that he had read all the scriptures, bathed in all the sacred pools, visited all the holy shrines, and found God in none of them."
"In Vedanta, the purest spiritual doctrine of Hindu India, God doesn’t want anything of us. He doesn’t want to be found; he has no laws that we should obey; he never judges, punishes or puts forth expectations."
And my favorite:
“The search for God consists of arriving at a place and discovering that God has just left.â€
-
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51
jayaram,
Regarding kabir - Kindly do not quote him out of context. Please read below -
I. 13. mo ko kahân dhûnro bande
O SERVANT, where dost thou seek Me?
Lo! I am beside thee.
I am neither in temple nor in mosque: I am neither in Kaaba nor in Kailash:
Neither am I in rites and ceremonies, nor in Yoga and renunciation.
If thou art a true seeker, thou shalt at once see Me: thou shalt meet Me in a moment of time.
Kabîr says, "O Sadhu! God is the breath of all breath."
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sok/index.htm
SONGS OF KABÃŽR
Translated by Rabindranath Tagore
Regarding kabir - Kindly do not quote him out of context. Please read below -
I. 13. mo ko kahân dhûnro bande
O SERVANT, where dost thou seek Me?
Lo! I am beside thee.
I am neither in temple nor in mosque: I am neither in Kaaba nor in Kailash:
Neither am I in rites and ceremonies, nor in Yoga and renunciation.
If thou art a true seeker, thou shalt at once see Me: thou shalt meet Me in a moment of time.
Kabîr says, "O Sadhu! God is the breath of all breath."
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sok/index.htm
SONGS OF KABÃŽR
Translated by Rabindranath Tagore
I totally endorse these views provided these are from the mouth of a person who, like the birds and animals, does not know and care where the next meal is going to come from."God doesn’t want anything of us. He doesn’t want to be found; he has no laws that we should obey; he never judges, punishes or puts forth expectations."
-
- Posts: 3424
- Joined: 07 Feb 2010, 21:41
I may be mistaken, but IMO these could imply that the few who get there eventually find that the "God" they found is quite different from the "God" they sought - the populist (if I can use that word) notion of "God". Also that finding God is not at all easy/naiive as the populist notion implies.
But if one were to say
Well I reached the final destination. I found something completely different from what I sought. This is not what I was looking for. I still maintain that what I sought is the (true) God, this what I found isnt God. Hence there is no (true) God. All of this is a big waste, a big hoax
Then there could be problem. Others would say then you never reached the desination, in fact you werent even travelling on the right path . Who is really right vs wrong? I guess, to be absolutely truthful, we wont know for sure until we experience it ourself. To say otherwise till then - only reflects how strong your beliefs are. That belief will make you jump on one side of the fence (theist), or other (atheist) or neither (agnostic).
Arun
But if one were to say
Well I reached the final destination. I found something completely different from what I sought. This is not what I was looking for. I still maintain that what I sought is the (true) God, this what I found isnt God. Hence there is no (true) God. All of this is a big waste, a big hoax
Then there could be problem. Others would say then you never reached the desination, in fact you werent even travelling on the right path . Who is really right vs wrong? I guess, to be absolutely truthful, we wont know for sure until we experience it ourself. To say otherwise till then - only reflects how strong your beliefs are. That belief will make you jump on one side of the fence (theist), or other (atheist) or neither (agnostic).
Arun
-
- Posts: 16786
- Joined: 22 Jun 2006, 09:30
The past week, a lot of activity around my house. I observe the hedge sparrow nest through the window. All that furious activity--fetching and feeding the fledglings, flying a thousand times back to their nest, oblivious to the fact they have lost an egg, baby too, who knows? Instructing them about the predators in stern chirps. When the rain fell all day a few days ago like a heavy curtain, sitting over them with wings spread out, biding time (they have not read about karma yOgA).
The little ones are venturing into branches inside the canopy of the rhododendron this morning. In a week, they will all fly away on their own. No angst about separation, no mental or emotional conflict. No personal joy, gloating or griping.
bhArathi: viTTu viDudalaiyAgi niRpAi-inda chiTTuk kuruviyaip pOlE (attain the state of the little sparrow and feel free)...
The little ones are venturing into branches inside the canopy of the rhododendron this morning. In a week, they will all fly away on their own. No angst about separation, no mental or emotional conflict. No personal joy, gloating or griping.
bhArathi: viTTu viDudalaiyAgi niRpAi-inda chiTTuk kuruviyaip pOlE (attain the state of the little sparrow and feel free)...
-
- Posts: 3424
- Joined: 07 Feb 2010, 21:41
But arasi - Would they do the same (protect, care) for other beings as they do for their fledglings? They seemingly don't seem to have the negative baggage we carry - but is that fully true? They may see another bird with a broken wing - but may not care to even take a second look. Most of us have some inborn compassion which makes it hard(er) and is one of the catalysts to make us grow spiritually. Although I must note that almost always our compassion seems to come out only as a consequence of pity. So if the situation doesn't tug one's heart enough - no compassion, no care.
Birds and animals etc. will hoard what is necessary to survive which is of course a natural instinct, and hence not unlike most of us. But here they are still better than the (ordinary) human, as our idea what is needed to survive grows pretty much uncontrolled and unbound, since we tie it to "what i need to be comfortable well for the rest of my life and my children's lives". For birds, animals at most it is "what do i need to get past this winter".
In any case, we supposedly have to give up all this need to hoard to attain the biggest reward - so they say. This ability/potential to get better, much much better (as you know) is the most powerful trump card (over all other beings) - so they say.
In one way, it does seem great to be "free as a bird". Many of us have had that thought pass through our minds at least once. But are we really, subconsciously wishing to be "carefree as a bird" and so want to be bothered about caring for any one else, and thus avoid turbulance of mind? Wouldnt that be pretty high on the "selfish" scale/metre ?
Arun
Birds and animals etc. will hoard what is necessary to survive which is of course a natural instinct, and hence not unlike most of us. But here they are still better than the (ordinary) human, as our idea what is needed to survive grows pretty much uncontrolled and unbound, since we tie it to "what i need to be comfortable well for the rest of my life and my children's lives". For birds, animals at most it is "what do i need to get past this winter".
In any case, we supposedly have to give up all this need to hoard to attain the biggest reward - so they say. This ability/potential to get better, much much better (as you know) is the most powerful trump card (over all other beings) - so they say.
In one way, it does seem great to be "free as a bird". Many of us have had that thought pass through our minds at least once. But are we really, subconsciously wishing to be "carefree as a bird" and so want to be bothered about caring for any one else, and thus avoid turbulance of mind? Wouldnt that be pretty high on the "selfish" scale/metre ?
Arun
Last edited by arunk on 08 Jun 2007, 20:43, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 16786
- Joined: 22 Jun 2006, 09:30
Arun,
bhArathi means, 'to be free in our spirit' like a bird. It does not mean, go kill smaller birds, because it is good to emulate birds! Bharathi was not a 'birds only' philosopher!
I appreciate your constant concern for fellow beings (which comes out clearly in your posts).
bhArathi: thani oruvanukkuNavilai enil jagaththinai azhiththiDuvOm (We would destroy the world if a single human being starves) was not born out of his experience of penury. If anything, it was empathizing with the have nots.
There is so much to learn from Nature too, if only we pay attention...
bhArathi means, 'to be free in our spirit' like a bird. It does not mean, go kill smaller birds, because it is good to emulate birds! Bharathi was not a 'birds only' philosopher!
I appreciate your constant concern for fellow beings (which comes out clearly in your posts).
bhArathi: thani oruvanukkuNavilai enil jagaththinai azhiththiDuvOm (We would destroy the world if a single human being starves) was not born out of his experience of penury. If anything, it was empathizing with the have nots.
There is so much to learn from Nature too, if only we pay attention...
-
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: 30 Jun 2006, 03:08
Ascribing human qualities to non-humans can be tricky. Is nature unsympathetic because it causes storms, droughts, earthquakes, tsunamis and the like? It simply is. Just as a detached yogi or zen or sufi master simply is. Asking such a person about existence or non-existence of god is simply pointless. (Buddha is supposed to have carried with him a list of questions not to be asked of him. This list included God, Soul, etc.)
Under which category would you put a bird or a flower? Theist, atheist or agnostic?
Under which category would you put a bird or a flower? Theist, atheist or agnostic?
-
- Posts: 3424
- Joined: 07 Feb 2010, 21:41
By saying a "detached" yogi (human) is like a "detached" nature, arent you falling into the same trap of assigning human qualities to non-humans (and vice versa)?
Besides the word "detached" here is very misleading (and highly overloaded). It means different things when applied to a yogi vs applied to nature. Atleast that is one interpretation.
Arun
Besides the word "detached" here is very misleading (and highly overloaded). It means different things when applied to a yogi vs applied to nature. Atleast that is one interpretation.
Arun
-
- Posts: 3424
- Joined: 07 Feb 2010, 21:41
Per my above post it would depend of what the bird and flower believes and it expresses it in a way for you and I to perceive ;).jayaram wrote:Under which category would you put a bird or a flower? Theist, atheist or agnostic?
Besides I dont fully understand why you are getting so worked up about these terms. Sure the terms dont matter as much to the points being made, but IMO neither do the objections.
Arun
-
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51
http://bahai-library.org/personal/jw/my ... stcsm.html"I had been enamored of her, but when I renounced my desire, she desired me for herself and loved me. And I became a beloved, nay, one loving himself. Through her I went forth from myself to her and came not back to myself. In the sobriety after self-effacement I was none other than she, and when she unveiled herself my attributes became hers and we are one."
-
- Posts: 1317
- Joined: 30 Jun 2006, 03:08
Well, to me this is all friendly banter. Hope it's the same for you.why you are getting so worked up
Couple of points:
1. Detachment was meant in the sense of 'detached involvement', e.g. like an actor in a drama who plays the role with full involvement, at the same time knowing it's only a play hence is detached (ie. centered). Govindan has mentioned the same thing in this thread.
2. Your mention of flowers and birds expressing themselves is interesting. Wise people have pointed to the existence of life and sacredness in everything around us, including even so-called inanimate things. This leads to a feeling of reverence to this world, and how we interact with it. Can this be Bhakthi itself? i.e. reverence to god's creation?
Some people have pointed out that our current ecological problem is the external manifestation of our spiritual problem, i.e. constant need to fill our inner vacuum leading to constant consumption of the world around us.
To take an example, our desire for 'what glitters', e.g. gold, leads us to pollute our lands and rivers with deadly toxins like cyanide which is used in the gold extraction process. Would a true bhaktha wish this to happen to god's own creation?
Listen to GKB. "kaNDArum kiDaiyAdu viNDArum sonnadillai" (Nobody has seen Him; if anyone has analyzed at all they have not come forward to explain)arunk wrote:I may be mistaken, but IMO these could imply that the few who get there eventually find that the "God" they found is quite different from the "God" they sought - the populist (if I can use that word) notion of "God". Also that finding God is not at all easy/naiive as the populist notion implies.
Arun
Last edited by mahakavi on 10 Jun 2007, 01:46, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 16786
- Joined: 22 Jun 2006, 09:30
Arun,
Nature still astounds, Nature is still a mystery. Nature is powerful. It definitely is an imposing phenomenon. Sages and poets sang about it. We see beauty in it. Its cruelty puts us in our place when we think no end of ourselves. We feel powerless when it brings upon us hurricanes and earthquakes.
Yet, like music, it moves us, enriches us. All that you need is a pair of eyes to savor it, just as we only need ears to hear good music.
'pArkkum marangaLellAm nanda lAlA, ninRan pachchai niRam thOnRudaiyyE, nandalAlA!' goes bhArathi's 'kAkkai SiraginilE' (I see your black complexion in the feathers of the crow, your green hue in all trees. 'kETkum oliyil ellAm nanda lAlA, ninRan gItham iSaikkudaDA nanda lAlA!' In every sound I hear, I hear your song, nanda lAlA!
Add to it the human kind too--the way we are wrought and the beauty inside us, if only that is possible for us to nurture...
VK, Call me pagan if you wish. I don't mind...
Nature still astounds, Nature is still a mystery. Nature is powerful. It definitely is an imposing phenomenon. Sages and poets sang about it. We see beauty in it. Its cruelty puts us in our place when we think no end of ourselves. We feel powerless when it brings upon us hurricanes and earthquakes.
Yet, like music, it moves us, enriches us. All that you need is a pair of eyes to savor it, just as we only need ears to hear good music.
'pArkkum marangaLellAm nanda lAlA, ninRan pachchai niRam thOnRudaiyyE, nandalAlA!' goes bhArathi's 'kAkkai SiraginilE' (I see your black complexion in the feathers of the crow, your green hue in all trees. 'kETkum oliyil ellAm nanda lAlA, ninRan gItham iSaikkudaDA nanda lAlA!' In every sound I hear, I hear your song, nanda lAlA!
Add to it the human kind too--the way we are wrought and the beauty inside us, if only that is possible for us to nurture...
VK, Call me pagan if you wish. I don't mind...
I was listening to a wonderful discourse on Manku Thimmana Kagga (by DV Gundappa in kannada) and one of the verses relates to man's predicament on a fearful dark night.Even though he knows that the far away stars have more power and light , he desperately seeks for a humble house nearby with a light, to seek shelter.Bhakti and community service: Before we ask how bhakti helps community, we should ask what is community service? is it 'upliftment' of whole community, part of it, or just one or two people? Swami Vivekananda said 'If I could transform just one person completely, I would be satisfied'.
And so it should be with us in our daily conduct and our primary relationship.
Our relationships with our fellow human beings will be ultimately a reflection of our relationship with GOD.
Last edited by coolkarni on 14 Jun 2007, 08:51, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 01 Aug 2007, 13:36
My Dear Friend,
frankly saying...
ur question is NONSENSE....
u have to start doing meditation rather than analyzing or discussing it hours together by using big big words..
close your eyes, clasp your hands, cross your legs, stop your thoughts, observe your easy,soft natural breath...hours together.
then you will experience...what vedas talking about, yogis talking about.
experience it...
Trying to discuss it...and using big big words..all symbols all over body...etc... it is all our ego trip.
start meditation and become a BUDDHA.. immediately...
AND IF YOU WANT TO SEE ANY ATTAINED PERSON(BUDDHA) then come to THIRUVANNAMALAI this AUGUST 15TH 2007.
8AM -12AM.
visit- PSS.ORG
frankly saying...
ur question is NONSENSE....
u have to start doing meditation rather than analyzing or discussing it hours together by using big big words..
close your eyes, clasp your hands, cross your legs, stop your thoughts, observe your easy,soft natural breath...hours together.
then you will experience...what vedas talking about, yogis talking about.
experience it...
Trying to discuss it...and using big big words..all symbols all over body...etc... it is all our ego trip.
start meditation and become a BUDDHA.. immediately...
AND IF YOU WANT TO SEE ANY ATTAINED PERSON(BUDDHA) then come to THIRUVANNAMALAI this AUGUST 15TH 2007.
8AM -12AM.
visit- PSS.ORG