[quote="rajitha"]My SIL and my wife are a big enigma to me. It is very obvious that God meant something bad to my wife. Both of them born in the same house - one very beautiful, fortunate, wealthy, lucky, etc. She has Jupiter in her 2nd house(Sagittarius) and is running Jupiter dasha !!!!!
As expected, she is minting money. Whatever she touches becomes gold.
But, she is always scheming and trying to bring down my wife in every possible way, etc. Even her parents favour her more compared to my wife.
My wife is exactly opposite. She has to fight and struggle for every simple thing but she is very kind and innocent and never even dreams of anything wrong to anyone. She has KSD in her horoscope.
So, assuming my SIL had good karma from last life and my wife had bad karma, it is tough to believe this since I presume that the basic character of a person carries over from one life to another.
Another example is my mother who struggled all her life for everything and believe me and I am not biased, she has not done anything wrong but helped everyone in her life.
And, where does the present karma take over?
Kindly clear my confusion on this.[/quote]
Rajitha,
I think I have an answer to your confusion. Just by seeing the character traits of your wife and your SIL it can be said who is a more advanced soul, i.e., who has more good karmas to her credit. Someone with a good nature, like your wife's, must be a more advanced soul than someone with a nature like your SIL's. Now, the point is, why is your wife suffering more than your SIL? Well, the reason is, your wife has chosen to suffer more in this life so as to wipe out her negative karmas faster, i.e., suffer more than is due to her, as her goal is attaining moksha. Your SIL on the other hand being a less advanced soul has no hurry in wiping out more bad karmas than what is due to her in this life as her goal is enjoying the luxuries that her good karmas of her previous life has to offer and not attaining moksha. It's not my own theory, but something I have read in a book that sometimes advanced souls bring more suffering on themselves than it's due, just to speed up their cycle of birth and rebirth, in order to get moksha early. The same applies to your mother's case: she is more interested in speeding up the cycle of her birth and rebirth and attaining moksha than enjoying this present life.
The link between karma and the planets
Forum rules
READ Forum-Wide Rules and Guidelines NOTICE: OFFENSIVE POSTS WILL BE DELETED, AND OFFENDERS WILL HAVE ALL POSTS MODERATED.
READ Forum-Wide Rules and Guidelines NOTICE: OFFENSIVE POSTS WILL BE DELETED, AND OFFENDERS WILL HAVE ALL POSTS MODERATED.
-
Basab
Kabira,
"Thanx for visiting my blog. If my writing is good enough may be you will visit again and then comment on it as well."
I will definitely visit your blog again and will also give my comment.
"I dont know abt a career in writing cause writing a blog and writing a novel could be different ball game all together plus i dont think i write positive. I have no contacts in any literary world and i dont think this industry works without getting published using some sort of a platform."
Why don't you write for a newspaper or a magazine or even for a website. You can also try for a copywriting job in an ad agency. As you are good in writing articles, journalism will, I feel, suit you very well.
"And please dont think that ur writing is small or insignificant cause its not. Your genre is short story writing and its great. Focus on developing short stories.Its not an easy thing to do. I can even write a story and you have written many. I am sure you have talent in short story writing as well."
I am really happy to know that you feel my writings are of some standard.
I have always wanted to write stories, and happy that I am doing it, though when I read the blogs of good writers, I feel I am wasting my time in writing. 
I feel, you will surely be able to write stories if you want to, it's just that you have not tried yet.
"Thanx for visiting my blog. If my writing is good enough may be you will visit again and then comment on it as well."
I will definitely visit your blog again and will also give my comment.
"I dont know abt a career in writing cause writing a blog and writing a novel could be different ball game all together plus i dont think i write positive. I have no contacts in any literary world and i dont think this industry works without getting published using some sort of a platform."
Why don't you write for a newspaper or a magazine or even for a website. You can also try for a copywriting job in an ad agency. As you are good in writing articles, journalism will, I feel, suit you very well.
"And please dont think that ur writing is small or insignificant cause its not. Your genre is short story writing and its great. Focus on developing short stories.Its not an easy thing to do. I can even write a story and you have written many. I am sure you have talent in short story writing as well."
I am really happy to know that you feel my writings are of some standard.
I have always wanted to write stories, and happy that I am doing it, though when I read the blogs of good writers, I feel I am wasting my time in writing. I feel, you will surely be able to write stories if you want to, it's just that you have not tried yet.Last edited by Basab on 09 Jul 2009, edited 1 time in total.
-
Basab
-
Basab
Rajitha,
Yes, the soul sometimes chooses to take more suffering before taking birth. About why the individual can't accept the difficulties with a smile, well, how can he? He has chosen to suffer, so he has to suffer, right?
About your SIL, how was her Rahu period? Did she suffer depression in that period, or is she suffering it now?
Yes, the soul sometimes chooses to take more suffering before taking birth. About why the individual can't accept the difficulties with a smile, well, how can he? He has chosen to suffer, so he has to suffer, right?
About your SIL, how was her Rahu period? Did she suffer depression in that period, or is she suffering it now?
Actually, this story has always bothered me and logically sounds quite contrary to the karma theory. Will be glad if someone clarifies.
The very choice (7 lives of piety and bhakti or 3 lives of adharma and disrespect to lord Vishnu) offered by Lord Vishnu is confusing. The first choice should have reduced their karmic balance faster leading to early deliverance rather than the second. On the contrary having chosen the 2nd they were rewarded by faster deliverance and that too death in the hands of Lord Vishnu.
CRS
The very choice (7 lives of piety and bhakti or 3 lives of adharma and disrespect to lord Vishnu) offered by Lord Vishnu is confusing. The first choice should have reduced their karmic balance faster leading to early deliverance rather than the second. On the contrary having chosen the 2nd they were rewarded by faster deliverance and that too death in the hands of Lord Vishnu.
CRS
[quote="lovacrs"]Actually, this story has always bothered me and logically sounds quite contrary to the karma theory. Will be glad if someone clarifies.
The very choice (7 lives of piety and bhakti or 3 lives of adharma and disrespect to lord Vishnu) offered by Lord Vishnu is confusing. The first choice should have reduced their karmic balance faster leading to early deliverance rather than the second. On the contrary having chosen the 2nd they were rewarded by faster deliverance and that too death in the hands of Lord Vishnu.
CRS[/quote]
The demigods, and other non-earthly denizens don't wish to spend more time on "Mrityuloka" than would be necessary; that's why Jaya and Vijaya chose 3 lives and death at the hands of Narayana (could you get any better shortcut to mukti!).
The underlying funda here is that of "atma gati". Earthly trials and tribulations force the soul to think of the Almighty and seek His/Her Grace. The gati (speed) increases when you decrease your karmic load, just as a truck travels faster after unloading goods.
Karma doesn't make any sense when you look at a snapshot (single life).
The very choice (7 lives of piety and bhakti or 3 lives of adharma and disrespect to lord Vishnu) offered by Lord Vishnu is confusing. The first choice should have reduced their karmic balance faster leading to early deliverance rather than the second. On the contrary having chosen the 2nd they were rewarded by faster deliverance and that too death in the hands of Lord Vishnu.
CRS[/quote]
The demigods, and other non-earthly denizens don't wish to spend more time on "Mrityuloka" than would be necessary; that's why Jaya and Vijaya chose 3 lives and death at the hands of Narayana (could you get any better shortcut to mukti!).
The underlying funda here is that of "atma gati". Earthly trials and tribulations force the soul to think of the Almighty and seek His/Her Grace. The gati (speed) increases when you decrease your karmic load, just as a truck travels faster after unloading goods.
Karma doesn't make any sense when you look at a snapshot (single life).
Thanks Maitreya ji,
[quote]that's why Jaya and Vijaya chose 3 lives [/quote]
I have no doubts about why they chose 3 lives. But dont you think the choices offered should have been 3 lives for piety or 7 lives for non-piety from a karmic perspective? non-piety increases karmic debts and consequently requires more lives to clear. Why was it made to work the other way for Jaya Vijaya (nepotism by Narayana?
)
CRS
[quote]that's why Jaya and Vijaya chose 3 lives [/quote]
I have no doubts about why they chose 3 lives. But dont you think the choices offered should have been 3 lives for piety or 7 lives for non-piety from a karmic perspective? non-piety increases karmic debts and consequently requires more lives to clear. Why was it made to work the other way for Jaya Vijaya (nepotism by Narayana?
)CRS
Thanks Anupamji
Dear BVRshishya ji
[quote]As far as nepotism by narayana, one should realize decision to salvate a soul is for the pleasure of narayana alone not the other way around.[/quote]
Pls dont take offence at my using the word nepotism. It was in alighter vein. Nevertheless Sriman Narayana has always proclaimed to be a "Bhakta vatsala". His incarnation of Krishna atleast has treated some as favourites (e.g, Arjuna) in comparison to others without the epics giving any reasons for doing so. We may certainly argue that it was their karma phala.
Somehow I am not inclined to agree that Narayana does anything for his pleasure at all. I will rather say he is beyond his own pleasure.
At the end of it all my question remains unanswered. We all believe that a life of piety and devoutness burns karma and gives us deliverance faster from the birth-death-rebirth cycle.Narayan's offer was exactly the reverse. For leading a life great demons causing hardships to innumerable people, violence and mayhem they were to be rewarded with a shorter cycle that too with an assurance upfront. Some of our current day politicians will be very happy to have such offers.
Our scriptures are full of symbolism and hidden messages. I am just trying to get some insight on what may be behind this apparent contradiction.
CRS
Dear BVRshishya ji
[quote]As far as nepotism by narayana, one should realize decision to salvate a soul is for the pleasure of narayana alone not the other way around.[/quote]
Pls dont take offence at my using the word nepotism. It was in alighter vein. Nevertheless Sriman Narayana has always proclaimed to be a "Bhakta vatsala". His incarnation of Krishna atleast has treated some as favourites (e.g, Arjuna) in comparison to others without the epics giving any reasons for doing so. We may certainly argue that it was their karma phala.
Somehow I am not inclined to agree that Narayana does anything for his pleasure at all. I will rather say he is beyond his own pleasure.
At the end of it all my question remains unanswered. We all believe that a life of piety and devoutness burns karma and gives us deliverance faster from the birth-death-rebirth cycle.Narayan's offer was exactly the reverse. For leading a life great demons causing hardships to innumerable people, violence and mayhem they were to be rewarded with a shorter cycle that too with an assurance upfront. Some of our current day politicians will be very happy to have such offers.
Our scriptures are full of symbolism and hidden messages. I am just trying to get some insight on what may be behind this apparent contradiction.
CRS
bvrshishyaji,
The way I understand it is GOD is sachetana. Because he has chetana he cant help but do so many things which includes creation. While doing so he neither attains a state of pleasure nor the absence of it (displeasure or sorrow...). These are attributes of Mrityuloka.
As regards questioning HIS choice, as I said earlier, in HIS scheme of things there is no arbitrariness. My purpose of pointing out the contradictions in his scheme of things for us (as we understand) and that for Jaya/Vijaya. I have asked this question with the confidence that HE is right and there is no arbitrariness in his decision. I just want to understand how this contradiction is not arbitrary.
CRS
The way I understand it is GOD is sachetana. Because he has chetana he cant help but do so many things which includes creation. While doing so he neither attains a state of pleasure nor the absence of it (displeasure or sorrow...). These are attributes of Mrityuloka.
As regards questioning HIS choice, as I said earlier, in HIS scheme of things there is no arbitrariness. My purpose of pointing out the contradictions in his scheme of things for us (as we understand) and that for Jaya/Vijaya. I have asked this question with the confidence that HE is right and there is no arbitrariness in his decision. I just want to understand how this contradiction is not arbitrary.
CRS
Thanks bvrshishyaji,
[quote]In my view (our religious philosopical view), Sriman Narayana is both above ...[/quote]
I will try and read about this. Thanks for elucidating this view.
[quote]....But their moksha is a result of the totality of their karma, purity in the thought of their selection of karma in the past not just for deeds in their lifetime as asuras. [/quote]
I am not contesting that Sriman Narayana played out this with some specific purpose. But my central question is why Jaya/Vijaya's past karma before their choice plus the karma in 3 lives of non-piety gives [i]them[/i] better results than their past karmas plus 7 lives of piety.
I perfectly understand that if 3 of us are riding our two wheelers without helmets where helmet is mandatory, I get fined and the other two dont, and I still cant question the officer. But this case is prima facie is comparable to I being fined and the other two being rewarded with riches for not wearing the helmet. I also understand that if Naryana does it he must have had a purpose. I want to understand that purpose.
CRS
[quote]In my view (our religious philosopical view), Sriman Narayana is both above ...[/quote]
I will try and read about this. Thanks for elucidating this view.
[quote]....But their moksha is a result of the totality of their karma, purity in the thought of their selection of karma in the past not just for deeds in their lifetime as asuras. [/quote]
I am not contesting that Sriman Narayana played out this with some specific purpose. But my central question is why Jaya/Vijaya's past karma before their choice plus the karma in 3 lives of non-piety gives [i]them[/i] better results than their past karmas plus 7 lives of piety.
I perfectly understand that if 3 of us are riding our two wheelers without helmets where helmet is mandatory, I get fined and the other two dont, and I still cant question the officer. But this case is prima facie is comparable to I being fined and the other two being rewarded with riches for not wearing the helmet. I also understand that if Naryana does it he must have had a purpose. I want to understand that purpose.
CRS
Dear bvrshishyaji,
Thanks indeed for trying to clarify my doubts.
But I stil find that the explanaitons still do not meet the test of logic. As you and Anupamji have already pointed out not everything can not be tested with logic. Unfortunately limitations of human mind does not allow me to understand and appreciate something does not fulfill this test. In other words if pleasure of Narayana is indeed arbitrary, then I have no target to work towards.
For e.g, I get additional questions on the explanation:
1. If everything was to be at the pleasure of Narayana why did he offer a choice at all? Does it mean that he meant to give them a free will (with emphasis on "free") in which case the exercise of their free-will is not controlled by Narayana?
2. You have mentioned that based on the actions of free-will Narayan will dscern our true intent. In case of Jaya/Vijaya their either choice would have deserved good karma phala because both the choice had a built-in proclamation that they would continue to be HIS bhaktas (after 3 lives in the first choice and all through in the 2nd choice). If Narayana were to ignore the impact of these choices on others (for e.g, trouble caused to other bhaktas in the first choice) then what is there to discern between the two?
And finally, I am reminded of a joke that actually explains the choices offerred logically. The joke goes that when a priest and a taxi driver dies, the former was assigned to hell and the latter to heaven. This was because when the priest delivered the sermons the lsiteners slept whereas when the taxi driver drove, the passengers prayed to God for their lives. Probably Jaya/Vijaya in their asura births created such havoc that even people who had forgotten Narayana had to start praying.
CRS
PS: Apologies if I sound argumentative. But I suppose it is the effect of Ge Asc. The intent of-course is to get a resounding reply
Thanks indeed for trying to clarify my doubts.
But I stil find that the explanaitons still do not meet the test of logic. As you and Anupamji have already pointed out not everything can not be tested with logic. Unfortunately limitations of human mind does not allow me to understand and appreciate something does not fulfill this test. In other words if pleasure of Narayana is indeed arbitrary, then I have no target to work towards.
For e.g, I get additional questions on the explanation:
1. If everything was to be at the pleasure of Narayana why did he offer a choice at all? Does it mean that he meant to give them a free will (with emphasis on "free") in which case the exercise of their free-will is not controlled by Narayana?
2. You have mentioned that based on the actions of free-will Narayan will dscern our true intent. In case of Jaya/Vijaya their either choice would have deserved good karma phala because both the choice had a built-in proclamation that they would continue to be HIS bhaktas (after 3 lives in the first choice and all through in the 2nd choice). If Narayana were to ignore the impact of these choices on others (for e.g, trouble caused to other bhaktas in the first choice) then what is there to discern between the two?
And finally, I am reminded of a joke that actually explains the choices offerred logically. The joke goes that when a priest and a taxi driver dies, the former was assigned to hell and the latter to heaven. This was because when the priest delivered the sermons the lsiteners slept whereas when the taxi driver drove, the passengers prayed to God for their lives. Probably Jaya/Vijaya in their asura births created such havoc that even people who had forgotten Narayana had to start praying.
CRS
PS: Apologies if I sound argumentative. But I suppose it is the effect of Ge Asc. The intent of-course is to get a resounding reply
Thanks bvrshishyaji and Anupamji for the patience
I certainly appreciate the thoughts and various approaches to the question that I raised. It has given me enough material to brood over.
[quote]...Bvr ji discussing is nothing but the path of surrender and bhakti in which everything is done for pleasing God and gradually it takes us to him.[/quote]
The way bvrshishyaji has put it, the Bhakta has to do everything with intent to please Narayana but Narayana will decide whether he is pleased by it or not.
CRS
I certainly appreciate the thoughts and various approaches to the question that I raised. It has given me enough material to brood over.
[quote]...Bvr ji discussing is nothing but the path of surrender and bhakti in which everything is done for pleasing God and gradually it takes us to him.[/quote]
The way bvrshishyaji has put it, the Bhakta has to do everything with intent to please Narayana but Narayana will decide whether he is pleased by it or not.
CRS
-
sachinwadhwa
- Contributor
- Posts:51
- Joined:10 Feb 2009
Dear Anupamji,
When god is only one, single source of energy then why do we have so many names, types of god in hinduism. I understand that in different languages, we refer to god by different names, which may be due to the script / language but why do we do it in hinduism.
End of the day, we believe it is only one God and only one form of power.
Please feel free to correct my understanding.
Regards
When god is only one, single source of energy then why do we have so many names, types of god in hinduism. I understand that in different languages, we refer to god by different names, which may be due to the script / language but why do we do it in hinduism.
End of the day, we believe it is only one God and only one form of power.
Please feel free to correct my understanding.
Regards
-
sachinwadhwa
- Contributor
- Posts:51
- Joined:10 Feb 2009
[/quote]Shiva, rudra, rudrani, Kartikeya, kubera, mahalaxmi etc. etc. all are non vedic gods but still we regard them as our gods due to the cultural amalgamation which took place thousands of years back. [/quote]
Dear Anupam ji,
This is amazing. I am hearing about Vedic gods and Non Vedic gods for the first time in my life. Thank you for sharing. Request you to please elaborate on it further and share their origin.
Also, regarding innumerable invasions on our land, request you to share the invasions pre mughal era / pre alexander era.
Regards
Dear Anupam ji,
This is amazing. I am hearing about Vedic gods and Non Vedic gods for the first time in my life. Thank you for sharing. Request you to please elaborate on it further and share their origin.
Also, regarding innumerable invasions on our land, request you to share the invasions pre mughal era / pre alexander era.
Regards
Dhanyawad
Dear Anupamji,
I have been reading your articles for the past 2/3 months. Your insights into the Vedic culture is great.
Your articles do cleanse my soul. May be some similarities in our mentality. I am born non-vegetarian. But I had Chicken only once or twice in my childhood around age 9-10. Then in my adulthood, had once with friends force and had vomited due to psychological perception. I also had 5-10 times liquor and vomited always and the smell itself gives me vomit sensation.
I started doing Pooja with out any one telling me when my Guru Mahadasa started (I did not know any thing about Astrology then). Now I came to these forums when my Ashtama Sani started. I also have Mercury in 8th house like you. Is it due to this we have similarities in at least few things?
Please keep opening our souls. May God bless you.
Srini
11-11-1964 17.20 Hrs, Guntur, AP
I have been reading your articles for the past 2/3 months. Your insights into the Vedic culture is great.
Your articles do cleanse my soul. May be some similarities in our mentality. I am born non-vegetarian. But I had Chicken only once or twice in my childhood around age 9-10. Then in my adulthood, had once with friends force and had vomited due to psychological perception. I also had 5-10 times liquor and vomited always and the smell itself gives me vomit sensation.
I started doing Pooja with out any one telling me when my Guru Mahadasa started (I did not know any thing about Astrology then). Now I came to these forums when my Ashtama Sani started. I also have Mercury in 8th house like you. Is it due to this we have similarities in at least few things?
Please keep opening our souls. May God bless you.
Srini
11-11-1964 17.20 Hrs, Guntur, AP
-
Basab
Quoting from my post to Rajitha:
"Well, the reason is, your wife has chosen to suffer more in this life so as to wipe out her negative karmas faster, i.e., suffer more than is due to her, as her goal is attaining moksha."
Quoting from Anupamji's post:
"[quote]About why the individual can't accept the difficulties with a smile, well, how can he? He has chosen to suffer, so he has to suffer, right?[/quote]
'I may differ slightly on this aspect. This is not a matter of choice but instead is matter of what has ripen and what is not.'"
Dear Anupamji,
I read about what I said in 2-3 books one of which was "ASTROLOGY OF THE SEERS" by David Frawley from Page 78 of which I would like to quote here:
"Saturn gives bad luck, misfortune, difficult karma, or an unfortunate destiny. Yet these afflictions do not necessarily come upon a soul because it has been evil or slow to evolve in past lives. Some souls, particularly those more advanced, may seek such things as a means of quicker spiritual growth."
"Well, the reason is, your wife has chosen to suffer more in this life so as to wipe out her negative karmas faster, i.e., suffer more than is due to her, as her goal is attaining moksha."
Quoting from Anupamji's post:
"[quote]About why the individual can't accept the difficulties with a smile, well, how can he? He has chosen to suffer, so he has to suffer, right?[/quote]
'I may differ slightly on this aspect. This is not a matter of choice but instead is matter of what has ripen and what is not.'"
Dear Anupamji,
I read about what I said in 2-3 books one of which was "ASTROLOGY OF THE SEERS" by David Frawley from Page 78 of which I would like to quote here:
"Saturn gives bad luck, misfortune, difficult karma, or an unfortunate destiny. Yet these afflictions do not necessarily come upon a soul because it has been evil or slow to evolve in past lives. Some souls, particularly those more advanced, may seek such things as a means of quicker spiritual growth."
-
sachinwadhwa
- Contributor
- Posts:51
- Joined:10 Feb 2009
-
Basab
[quote="anupam1968"]So, I think this statement can be related with advanced souls instead of every soul whoever taking rebirth on this earth.[/quote]
Dear Anupamji,
You are right in your understanding as that's exactly what David Frawley has mentioned in his book, "ASTROLOGY OF THE SEERS": "Some souls, particularly those more advanced, may seek such things as a means of quicker spiritual growth."
Dear Anupamji,
You are right in your understanding as that's exactly what David Frawley has mentioned in his book, "ASTROLOGY OF THE SEERS": "Some souls, particularly those more advanced, may seek such things as a means of quicker spiritual growth."
-
sachinwadhwa
- Contributor
- Posts:51
- Joined:10 Feb 2009
[quote="anupam1968"]
Guru Nanak was Vidur, the adviser of Dhritrashtra and Sai of Shirdi was Kuntibhoj, the father of Kunti. I would say my mars major period and the Mahabharta war have a kind of very strong relation as far as my karmas are concerned.[/quote]
Respected Anupam ji,
I have 3 topics where I request your comments for clearing the ambiguity.
1.
I remember you said in one of your posts that Hitler went to heaven, and spiritually evolved souls continue to take rebirths. This concept is still not sinking in.
It could be a case that many people might have collectively killed Hitler, so Hitler might be zeroing out his karmas by killing them. But if Hitler would have practised forgiveness, he would have been on a better spiritual plane than killing so many people and still going to heaven.
2.
Now regarding spiritually realized souls:
(a) Not completely realized - When Vidhur and Kuntibhoj met Lord Krishna, ideally they should have received Moksha in the same birth, due to the divine energy coming out of god. What can make them or infact you survive for around 3,00,000 years, take rebirths and then finally get salvation? What is the relation between Mahabharata and this yug change?
(b) Completely Realized - As we know that God takes birth again and again in form of Lord Ram, Lord Krishna, New name expected in 2012-2014, so I believe people who have spiritually realised god completely and have become part of god may also take rebirth. But they are aware of the cosmic truth, so they don't take rebirths again and again. So like God, they also come to this planet with a motto, do their task and go back to him.
This could be a dumb analysis, so wanted to know your thoughts.
3.
Also, I have a question on religion. Why did a new religion started after Gurunanak ji while Sai didn't have one? When both of them knew who they were in their previous births, why will a follower of god allow his own puja or temple, when he is aware of the cosmic truth?
Please parden my ignorance, if I have offended anyone.
Regards
Guru Nanak was Vidur, the adviser of Dhritrashtra and Sai of Shirdi was Kuntibhoj, the father of Kunti. I would say my mars major period and the Mahabharta war have a kind of very strong relation as far as my karmas are concerned.[/quote]
Respected Anupam ji,
I have 3 topics where I request your comments for clearing the ambiguity.
1.
I remember you said in one of your posts that Hitler went to heaven, and spiritually evolved souls continue to take rebirths. This concept is still not sinking in.
It could be a case that many people might have collectively killed Hitler, so Hitler might be zeroing out his karmas by killing them. But if Hitler would have practised forgiveness, he would have been on a better spiritual plane than killing so many people and still going to heaven.
2.
Now regarding spiritually realized souls:
(a) Not completely realized - When Vidhur and Kuntibhoj met Lord Krishna, ideally they should have received Moksha in the same birth, due to the divine energy coming out of god. What can make them or infact you survive for around 3,00,000 years, take rebirths and then finally get salvation? What is the relation between Mahabharata and this yug change?
(b) Completely Realized - As we know that God takes birth again and again in form of Lord Ram, Lord Krishna, New name expected in 2012-2014, so I believe people who have spiritually realised god completely and have become part of god may also take rebirth. But they are aware of the cosmic truth, so they don't take rebirths again and again. So like God, they also come to this planet with a motto, do their task and go back to him.
This could be a dumb analysis, so wanted to know your thoughts.
3.
Also, I have a question on religion. Why did a new religion started after Gurunanak ji while Sai didn't have one? When both of them knew who they were in their previous births, why will a follower of god allow his own puja or temple, when he is aware of the cosmic truth?
Please parden my ignorance, if I have offended anyone.
Regards
Anupamji,
You have made some interesting observations. There have been quite a few versions of Mahbharath itself in recent times that throw up alternative and equally compelling views.
As for Bhishma's ego, I feel there were many other egos that could well account for the war.
In fact unlike other epics, in Mahabharath, there is no description anywhere of Kauravaas hurting the common man or the society (e.g, preventing ishta devata pooja, encouraging "Raakshasi Pravritti") in anyway. Can this be called a dharma yuddha just because within a family the two groups could not settle their disputes amicably? If it warrants to be called a dharma yuddha for this reason, were there not other unsettled disputes amongst other royal families? Why did Krishna not interfere in these and ensured that Dharma prevailed? Or were there other Krishnas who have not been chronicled in epics?
If Bhishma's ego was the culprit what about ego of Dharmaraya who could not refuse to accept an invite to gamble. After all Bhishma's vow was about himself and his conduct unrelated to others (Ambika in this case, though by a convoluted argument she may have argued that it did) while the act of gambling was known to affect the entire family.
Coming to Bhishma's inaction on Draupadi's plight in the sabha, I recollect another perspcective. The way you mentioned that Kshatriyas could not refuse an invite to gamble, this version says that the humiliation meted out to Drapudi was in fact the normal treatment to a "Daasi" which Draupadi was after she was lost in the gamble as a bet. Those days royal family could use a "Daasi" in anyway (remember Vidura was a daasiputra). The disrobing (according to this version) was to enforce the accepted dress code for Daasis which Drapudis refused to abide by. (I of-course find these practices repulsive to say the least).
As regards salvation of Bhishma - He was the cursed 8th vasu who had to take birth in Mrityuloka to redeem himself of the curse. Hence unless we disbelive this entire story it will be difficult to accept that his soul would have taken birth again.
You have also brought up a very interesting question. Why should anyone want salvation as against perpetual presence in swarga? I am assuming here that for a person who has not attained salvation Swarga vaasa is a sojourn and he has to return to earth for his next life after enjoying swarga as long as his karma phal would enable him.
CRS
PS: I hope I have not offended you by countering some of your views.
You have made some interesting observations. There have been quite a few versions of Mahbharath itself in recent times that throw up alternative and equally compelling views.
As for Bhishma's ego, I feel there were many other egos that could well account for the war.
In fact unlike other epics, in Mahabharath, there is no description anywhere of Kauravaas hurting the common man or the society (e.g, preventing ishta devata pooja, encouraging "Raakshasi Pravritti") in anyway. Can this be called a dharma yuddha just because within a family the two groups could not settle their disputes amicably? If it warrants to be called a dharma yuddha for this reason, were there not other unsettled disputes amongst other royal families? Why did Krishna not interfere in these and ensured that Dharma prevailed? Or were there other Krishnas who have not been chronicled in epics?
If Bhishma's ego was the culprit what about ego of Dharmaraya who could not refuse to accept an invite to gamble. After all Bhishma's vow was about himself and his conduct unrelated to others (Ambika in this case, though by a convoluted argument she may have argued that it did) while the act of gambling was known to affect the entire family.
Coming to Bhishma's inaction on Draupadi's plight in the sabha, I recollect another perspcective. The way you mentioned that Kshatriyas could not refuse an invite to gamble, this version says that the humiliation meted out to Drapudi was in fact the normal treatment to a "Daasi" which Draupadi was after she was lost in the gamble as a bet. Those days royal family could use a "Daasi" in anyway (remember Vidura was a daasiputra). The disrobing (according to this version) was to enforce the accepted dress code for Daasis which Drapudis refused to abide by. (I of-course find these practices repulsive to say the least).
As regards salvation of Bhishma - He was the cursed 8th vasu who had to take birth in Mrityuloka to redeem himself of the curse. Hence unless we disbelive this entire story it will be difficult to accept that his soul would have taken birth again.
You have also brought up a very interesting question. Why should anyone want salvation as against perpetual presence in swarga? I am assuming here that for a person who has not attained salvation Swarga vaasa is a sojourn and he has to return to earth for his next life after enjoying swarga as long as his karma phal would enable him.
CRS
PS: I hope I have not offended you by countering some of your views.
-
sachinwadhwa
- Contributor
- Posts:51
- Joined:10 Feb 2009
Respected Anupam ji,
Excellent conversation - I will share my thoughts further:
1.
“But other men of Mahabharta presents the picture of traditional rajputs dying for their aan, baan and shan. Never stepping back what they have uttered no matter it may cost them horribly in the coming future. They do not care.â€
What is the difference between Lord Rama and other Kyshatriyas..He also sent Sita to forest due to what society said…then you may conclude that Lord Rama was not god. I beg to differ. Many times God takes path which are conventional or unconventional depending upon the need of hour. He may choose to be Maryada purshotam Rama, or angry Parshuram, cunning Lord Krishna, Narsimha….or any form… which is required in the relevant yuga / time….It is the need of the hour which matters…and it is god’s will in which form he wants to manifest. This response of mine echos your thought “But saints still erect institutions or sect in spite of knowing everything because that is the need of an hour.â€
2.
"If Bhisma would have thought spiritually in more grander aspect the mahabharta had not taken place.â€
Anupam ji, do you think that Mahabharata took place due to Bhsima – I would beg to differ again. It was destined to happen and Bhishma was playing his role in ensuring that lot of souls reach to their destination. If Bhishma pitamaha won’t have been there, then it would have been someone else…They were an medium….It was Lord Krishna’s decision….It is HIS MAJESTY’s (God’s) decision – For me it is a Master and a Slave relationship….
Did Sri Aurobindo received Salvation – only curious?
3.
“Even these incarnations have different levels of strength instead of regarding them as equal because our journey never stops even after getting salvation. You can go higher and higher.â€
“You can go higher and higher†- is new to me. Like you wonderfully explained that souls are like salt in the ocean, once the salt is mixed with salty water of the ocean…what is next? If I have become part of god…eventually god…and God is everything…then what else could be left..except…to support god in running this world drama of yugas….This leads to your point of “Okay I have freed but what about others who are crying and wailing in their sheer ignorance. So, at a point of time even desire for Moksha seems to be nothing but complete selfishness on one's part. That is what dawns upon them.â€
Regarding your point that, incarnations have different levels of strength – I echo your thoughts. Only energy required to do a particular task is released. Excessive energy will destroy this whole world….this world can’t take it all by itself…
4.
“It is said that some are conscious from their very birth about their final reality but I am still to digest this statement.â€
Anupam ji, the very moment I am born, I owe a karmic debt to my mother for having me in her womb for 9 months. So the very moment I enter into the world of karmic debts. Then starts the journey of Karmic debits and credits….which will continue till the right time is arrived to fulfill my cosmic objective…at what age I will realize depends upon when the right time is…. Lord Hanuman got everything in is childhood…he was God…..but it was a human birth…so he did what his age asked him to do…he was a child and little naughty….so certain events took place and he forgot his powers….but he realized everything back in a second at the right time to deliver what he was supposed to …to fulfill objective of his birth…..
The point I want to make is that if God takes birth and forgets his powers because the right time has not come…all of us are slaves of god….there is no question of realizing when we want…you got realization in your Mars MD..because that was the time destined for you…similarly, whether souls will realize at age of 1 yr or 5 yr or 50 yrs…it is the will of the Master… HIS MAJESTY’s will…
5.
“Pandvas lost every child except Parikshit who also died in such an immature age due to a snake.â€
That is result of karmas….There can be 2-3 situations…(a) The person who kills other is not god….he will pay for his bad karmas and so did Pandavas…It is the law of nature (b) The person who kills is God…remember he is the master…whether he will be killed (Lord Krishna)….or drown (Lord Rama) or continue to exist on this planet (Lord Hanuman – Lord Shiva) is his choice….I remember you have said in one of your posts that God has told you that he will be changing the rules to end this yuga…he will change the time frame…crush many things….I agree with you completely...he can do it because he is the master….He is Omnipresent….It is him everywhere and in everything…
6.
“Like Shankaracharya was responsible for burning many Scholors of his era. During that age two people would debate and the one who got defeat had to go to burn himself in the fire. On the contrary we are told Shankaracharya was an incarnation of Shiva if it is truth then why he did not stop all this.â€
I am thinking loud on this one…The ego of the scholars would have been extremely high…they could have been thinking of everyone as low caste in front of them..Lord Shiva could have taken birth to tell them that there is someone superior to them….Lord may not have burnt all scholars but only those whose ego would have become bigger than HIS MAJESTY (God). If there is anyone who knows everything then that is only him…we come to know only what he communicates to us in our individual conversations… which like you have rightly said “That is why divine communication differs individual to individual.â€
7.
“Why Rama took Agni Pariksha of Sita inspite of knowing everything?â€
According to me there were 2 reasons to it: (a) To get the divine Sita back from her shadow who had went along ravana…This takes me back to the point that there are radiant rays which come out of gods when they take human birth or even from spiritually realized people..they constantly emit positive energy and vibes…Ravana could not have survived touching sita….(b) This was supposed to be the route to the end of yuga…Lord Rama left his body after Sita left her body….Sita left her body because Luv Kush were questioned about their identity…Luv Kush were questioned because sita was not in Lord Rama’s palace when they were born…so on and so forth…it relates back to Agni pariksha…
Now there is twist, why didn’t Sita left her human body at the very first instance…why did she went to forest…she could have left the human body at the first go itself….that didn’t happen…. Because it is Master’s wish the way he wants the yug to end…Similarly I don’t blame bhishma or anyone whatsoever….
Talking of the current yug….the day HIS MAJESTY wants to end the yuga, he can do it at a blink of an eye…but what when where how…are all in his hands…the way he wants to run this show…..we will do what he wants us to do…
I bow my head in front of the omnipresent.
I have a question for you - What is the relation between Mahabharata and this yug change?
Excellent conversation - I will share my thoughts further:
1.
“But other men of Mahabharta presents the picture of traditional rajputs dying for their aan, baan and shan. Never stepping back what they have uttered no matter it may cost them horribly in the coming future. They do not care.â€
What is the difference between Lord Rama and other Kyshatriyas..He also sent Sita to forest due to what society said…then you may conclude that Lord Rama was not god. I beg to differ. Many times God takes path which are conventional or unconventional depending upon the need of hour. He may choose to be Maryada purshotam Rama, or angry Parshuram, cunning Lord Krishna, Narsimha….or any form… which is required in the relevant yuga / time….It is the need of the hour which matters…and it is god’s will in which form he wants to manifest. This response of mine echos your thought “But saints still erect institutions or sect in spite of knowing everything because that is the need of an hour.â€
2.
"If Bhisma would have thought spiritually in more grander aspect the mahabharta had not taken place.â€
Anupam ji, do you think that Mahabharata took place due to Bhsima – I would beg to differ again. It was destined to happen and Bhishma was playing his role in ensuring that lot of souls reach to their destination. If Bhishma pitamaha won’t have been there, then it would have been someone else…They were an medium….It was Lord Krishna’s decision….It is HIS MAJESTY’s (God’s) decision – For me it is a Master and a Slave relationship….
Did Sri Aurobindo received Salvation – only curious?
3.
“Even these incarnations have different levels of strength instead of regarding them as equal because our journey never stops even after getting salvation. You can go higher and higher.â€
“You can go higher and higher†- is new to me. Like you wonderfully explained that souls are like salt in the ocean, once the salt is mixed with salty water of the ocean…what is next? If I have become part of god…eventually god…and God is everything…then what else could be left..except…to support god in running this world drama of yugas….This leads to your point of “Okay I have freed but what about others who are crying and wailing in their sheer ignorance. So, at a point of time even desire for Moksha seems to be nothing but complete selfishness on one's part. That is what dawns upon them.â€
Regarding your point that, incarnations have different levels of strength – I echo your thoughts. Only energy required to do a particular task is released. Excessive energy will destroy this whole world….this world can’t take it all by itself…
4.
“It is said that some are conscious from their very birth about their final reality but I am still to digest this statement.â€
Anupam ji, the very moment I am born, I owe a karmic debt to my mother for having me in her womb for 9 months. So the very moment I enter into the world of karmic debts. Then starts the journey of Karmic debits and credits….which will continue till the right time is arrived to fulfill my cosmic objective…at what age I will realize depends upon when the right time is…. Lord Hanuman got everything in is childhood…he was God…..but it was a human birth…so he did what his age asked him to do…he was a child and little naughty….so certain events took place and he forgot his powers….but he realized everything back in a second at the right time to deliver what he was supposed to …to fulfill objective of his birth…..
The point I want to make is that if God takes birth and forgets his powers because the right time has not come…all of us are slaves of god….there is no question of realizing when we want…you got realization in your Mars MD..because that was the time destined for you…similarly, whether souls will realize at age of 1 yr or 5 yr or 50 yrs…it is the will of the Master… HIS MAJESTY’s will…
5.
“Pandvas lost every child except Parikshit who also died in such an immature age due to a snake.â€
That is result of karmas….There can be 2-3 situations…(a) The person who kills other is not god….he will pay for his bad karmas and so did Pandavas…It is the law of nature (b) The person who kills is God…remember he is the master…whether he will be killed (Lord Krishna)….or drown (Lord Rama) or continue to exist on this planet (Lord Hanuman – Lord Shiva) is his choice….I remember you have said in one of your posts that God has told you that he will be changing the rules to end this yuga…he will change the time frame…crush many things….I agree with you completely...he can do it because he is the master….He is Omnipresent….It is him everywhere and in everything…
6.
“Like Shankaracharya was responsible for burning many Scholors of his era. During that age two people would debate and the one who got defeat had to go to burn himself in the fire. On the contrary we are told Shankaracharya was an incarnation of Shiva if it is truth then why he did not stop all this.â€
I am thinking loud on this one…The ego of the scholars would have been extremely high…they could have been thinking of everyone as low caste in front of them..Lord Shiva could have taken birth to tell them that there is someone superior to them….Lord may not have burnt all scholars but only those whose ego would have become bigger than HIS MAJESTY (God). If there is anyone who knows everything then that is only him…we come to know only what he communicates to us in our individual conversations… which like you have rightly said “That is why divine communication differs individual to individual.â€
7.
“Why Rama took Agni Pariksha of Sita inspite of knowing everything?â€
According to me there were 2 reasons to it: (a) To get the divine Sita back from her shadow who had went along ravana…This takes me back to the point that there are radiant rays which come out of gods when they take human birth or even from spiritually realized people..they constantly emit positive energy and vibes…Ravana could not have survived touching sita….(b) This was supposed to be the route to the end of yuga…Lord Rama left his body after Sita left her body….Sita left her body because Luv Kush were questioned about their identity…Luv Kush were questioned because sita was not in Lord Rama’s palace when they were born…so on and so forth…it relates back to Agni pariksha…
Now there is twist, why didn’t Sita left her human body at the very first instance…why did she went to forest…she could have left the human body at the first go itself….that didn’t happen…. Because it is Master’s wish the way he wants the yug to end…Similarly I don’t blame bhishma or anyone whatsoever….
Talking of the current yug….the day HIS MAJESTY wants to end the yuga, he can do it at a blink of an eye…but what when where how…are all in his hands…the way he wants to run this show…..we will do what he wants us to do…
I bow my head in front of the omnipresent.
I have a question for you - What is the relation between Mahabharata and this yug change?
Last edited by sachinwadhwa on 31 Jul 2009, edited 2 times in total.