Author Topic: please explain to me on sri Guru charitra....  (Read 15397 times)

ananthbabladi_old

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 146
    • View Profile
Re: please explain to me on sri Guru charitra....
« Reply #30 on: April 18, 2007, 04:50:22 PM »
Jai Sai Master!

Ravi garu, please don't embarass me by saying sorry. This thread has been of the best so far. Very enlightening. But at the same time, reading your last two posts, and Babu garu's counter points, I have been thinking very hard. Am I talking with bookish knowledge? I answered myself, "yes, I am". Everything that I know of is bookish knowledge with only a fraction of those being my experiences. I Am not saying Bookish knowledge is waste, but I would also like to quote that mere bookish knowledge is not enough, especially when it comes to deciding something so vast and so old.

Babu garu, my humble apologies, if this sounds otherwise, but I would like to say something that I observed. The thread started with Caste System where there were lots of different points being present by you & me to Ravi and vice versa. But as it went along, it spread out to other things too. At that point, my views were stopped. I am not angry or something like that. I got scared. I got scared because am I arguing? Because that is what Baba warned us mortals against. It got scared also because Baba said "mere bookish knowledge is not enough". These mixed feelings rode me over because as I was participating in this thread, I also saw your other thread, where you were asking about the 5 going into the jungle. Then I thought more and then it occured to me, read Sai Leelamrutam more and Sri Guru Charitra more. And the thoughts on this thread stopped.

Ravi garu, the above is the primary reason, but nothing like being angry or something like that.

I can tell you one more example of why this thread is becoming a catch 22 situation.

Quote:

The logic lies in who is next to whom and who is farther from whom.The brahmins were always next to ksatriyas.So they had the power to tell us what they thought of this verse of Sri Krishna.

The poor sudras were those who are the farthest from the ksatriya clan so they couldnt fight or take power.This is purely logical.

(How do you know this? How do you know that Sudra Maharshies were made into Brahmins? Any Rishi, by definition is a Brahmin )

My Question to you is that what makes you think that by definition a sudra maharshi is a brahmin.Who told you that.

Now is the conflict.

What if I say that by definition all the maharshis of brahmin,ksatriya and vyasyas class are sudras by definition(The highest ones according to the above classification).

This is what i meant by brahminising the whole thing.YOUR QUESTION ITSELF HAS THE ANSWER.
 


You yourself have agreed that this is a conflict. You said, by definition all the maharshis of brahmin,ksatriya and vyasyas class are sudras by definition. Please pay attention to what I highlighted. That point is a catch 22 situation and we will never come out of it. That's al.

So, let me reemphasize it again Ravi garu. You did not hurt me, nor a I feeling sorry. Just like you, I am thankful for such vast information. Now, I know what to do. Keep reading more, and surrender my knowledge to Mahatmas. They will take care of me.

Babu garu, this also does not mean that I will stop participating. But since my ideas, stopped, I would be passive just for this thread. Please forgive me Babu garu, if I said anything wrong.

Jai Sai MAster!
Ananth

ananthbabladi
-----------------------
Jai Sai Ram
Jai Sai Master
Jai Sai Swamy

Dwarakanath

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2462
    • View Profile
Re: please explain to me on sri Guru charitra....
« Reply #31 on: April 18, 2007, 04:50:58 PM »
Jai Sai Master!

Dear Ravigaru,
I read your reply and I will write in detail later.. But I need a favour from you.

Who is Sivananda? I dont consider him an authority since i havent read about him and also that Master never wrote anywhere about him. Lets stick to Buddha, Bhagavatgita, Ramayana and Master shall we?

Have you any quotations from any of these that contradict the usage of intellect?

Conscience - etymologically is "conscience, from Latin conscientia "knowledge within oneself, a moral sense". Knowledge in turn, etymologically derives from "Gno.." (close to Gnana). How can one get Gnana? By understanding or direct experience.

Also, I would like to point out that asking Guru Questions for testing purposes is not wrong. Infact Master Himself said that one should question a Guru until satisfied before accepting to do seva. The same can be seen in Yogavasishtya. Also Jnana Sankalini Tantra, one of the prime books of Tantra says this, but since we havent taken it as authority, you can ignore it.

Please read Purusha Sukta Rahasyam by Master before saying that classes were not prescribed by Rishis in Vedas. Also, please read "Sai Master Pravachanalu" and Edinijam for usage of Viveka and usage of questioning and observation required for it. I still cant understand how one can have Viveka without questioning.

And last thing I would quickly mention is

You said :
To see rightly and think rightly we have to start with the opinon that all men are sudras and in the realms of spirituality all are equal.

I disagree.. To see rightly and think rightly, you shouldnot start with any opinion. Read Buddha Dhyana Hridayam first few pages for this clarification.

I will reply to your other points later on.

Jai Sai Master!


Dwarakanath

ravifrom_old

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 47
    • View Profile
Re: please explain to me on sri Guru charitra....
« Reply #32 on: April 18, 2007, 04:51:21 PM »
Jai Sai Master...

Babu Garu,

The example of shivananda i gave only to make myself clear the intellect from the point of view I used it.

By intellect you mean viveka and I mean something else that i explained before.

I have given my examples of why it will mislead us.

I have not got any examples from you of how we can use worldy intellect (that causes dillusion and makes us fall behind sensual objects) to question and realise God.

I fear we mean two different things when we use that word.
How can we ask god for intellect because its naturally present in us right?.
vairagya and viveka(if its intellect)are asked by people and saints.

I dont remember Master garu telling that asking questions for testing purpose is right.Could you please tell me where I can read it.

I remember that Master garu in Sai Leelamrutam has said that 'moksham kosam prasna adagatame nijamaina pariprasna.
I have not read the purushasuktam and I dont really know what mastar garu has said in it.

But what I said was that the ancient rushis did not give the caste system as we know today.Any one could enter the area of a rushi from any of the profession.Right from the profession of the priest to the profession of a chandala any one could become realised.Was not valmiki a chandala before he became realised?.
So the question of swadarma does not arise here.I have every right on god just as anyone else.NO differences here please.


The point of our arguments are that you say intellect is viveka.I say intellect is not viveka.I say viveka is consciousness as i have said in my previous post with a definition attached to it.

so I dont or dint say that one will get viveka without quesitoning.I said intellect will misguide you.The difference between you and me is that we are argueing about different things.

I cannot quote only from a few set of books that you have prescribed or those that i only agree.
That would mean that there is no truth anywhere else.

I dont agree with the mahabarata personally but WHEN you asked I asked you to quote freely from it.Because for me this is a learning expirience and i could have missed something in it.

So lets not limit our discussion to a few books only because that way we cant learn more.

Also I would like to tell you that i really did not know who you were until I went back and read the website about master garus history.This I had to do because people were referring to you as babu garu.

So please take my apoligies as i thought I was arguing with some member who is an administrator of this forum.

Jai Sai Master

with regards and love

Kiran.

ravifrom

ananthbabladi_old

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 146
    • View Profile
Re: please explain to me on sri Guru charitra....
« Reply #33 on: April 18, 2007, 04:51:52 PM »
Jai Sai Master!!

I feel that Consciousness and Viveka are not the same. Consciousness is a step down to Intellect. Consciousness has more branches, while Intellect is more stricter and has less branches. By Branches, I mean the following.

1) Consciousness exists among all living beings. I am conscious that I am Ananth, I am born to such a family, my physical and mental characteristics. It exists in Animals, atleast some animals, which they use. There are exceptions and other scenarios being in this case, but I am sure this will lead to another discussion, which we should not allow to. So for arguments sake from my side, Consciousness exists among animals.

2) Consciousness also misleads us, often, compared to Intellect, which misleads us not often.

So, to recap, for me, Consciouness is a level (probably more than one level) down compared to Intellect.

More...
A)

--> Consciousness, is a mental faculty, is being aware of one?s environment, one?s own existence, sensations and thoughts, to be mentally perceptive or alert, awake, and capable of thought, will or perception.
--> Intellect is the ability to learn and reason, the capacity for knowledge and understanding, the ability to think abstractly or profoundly. Intellectual intelligence has forty-four faculties under, which you never discard. The five most essential mental faculties (Logic, Reason, Discrimination, Discretion and Discernment) lead to spiritualized intelligence and understanding. Each grade of intellect will interpret according to its kind. Living in the intellect brings the consciousness down and holds one at the horizontal level. When you worship intellect, you are worshiping your own mental faculties. Pride of intellect must not be confused with Wisdom.
--> my interpretation: The above statement says that Intellect by itself will not yield and you will get stuck in your powers of those intellect. But through the help of the medium, you will gain wisdom.

B) --> (n)intellect (knowledge and intellectual ability) "he reads to improve his mind"; "he has a keen intellect" reason, understanding, intellect (the capacity for rational thought or inference or discrimination) "we are told that man is endowed with reason and capable of distinguishing good from evil" S: (n) intellectual, intellect (a person who uses the mind creatively)

--> S: (n) consciousness (an alert cognitive state in which you are aware of yourself and your situation) "he lost consciousness"
--> S: (n) awareness, consciousness, cognizance, cognisance, knowingness (having knowledge of) "he had no awareness of his mistakes"; "his sudden consciousness of the problem he faced"; "their intelligence and general knowingness was impressive"

C) --> Being / Intellect: Being is ?ambiguous? because it is at the same time absolute and relative, or because it is absolute while being situated in relativity, or again, to express ourselves more boldly though perhaps all the more suggestive, because it is the ?relative Absolute?. In an analogous way, the Intellect is ?ambiguous? because it is at the same time divine and human, uncreated and created, principial and manifested, which can never be said of Being; Intellect is ?manifested Principle?, while Being is ?Principle determined? or ?made relative?, but always non-manifested.

--> pure Intellect, which transcends the human plane and opens out onto the divine, or of pre-human and posthuman cycles, or of Beyond-Being which is beyond all relativity and thus also beyond all distinctions.

--> Five Divine Presences: In Sufi terminology they are: the ?human realm? (nasut), that is, the domain of the corporeal, since man is created out of ?earth?; then the ?realm of royalty? (malakut), so called because it immediately dominates the corporeal world; next comes the ?realm of power? (jabarut), which, macrocosmically, is Heaven and, microcosmically, the created or human intellect, that ?supernaturally natural? Paradise which we carry within us. The fourth degree is the ?Realm of the Divine? (Lahut), which is Being and which coincides with the uncreated Intellect, the Logos; the final degree ? if provisional use can be made of such a term ? is none other than ?Quiddity? or ?Aseity? or ?Ipseity? (Hahut, from Huwa, ?He?), in other words, the Infinite Self. [FSR, The Five Divine Presences]

--> At this point, before I forget, I would pent this down too before I forget.....at some point, a person in a coma is not conscious (consciouness does not exist) but still he fights for his life through his Intellect.

--> Intellect (created / uncreated): The Intellect, in a certain sense, is ?divine? for the mind and ?created? or ?manifested? for God: it is none the less necessary to distinguish between a ?created Intellect? and an ?uncreated Intellect?, the latter being the divine Light and the former the reflection of this Light at the center of Existence;

--> Intellect / Revelation: The intellect knows through its very substance all that is capable of being known and, like the blood flowing through even the tiniest arteries of the body, it traverses all the egos of which the universe is woven and opens out ?vertically? on the Infinite. In other words: the intellective center of man, which is in practice subconscious,
has knowledge, not only of God, but also of man?s nature and his destiny; and this enables us to present Revelation as a ?supernaturally natural? manifestation of that which the human species knows, in its virtual and submerged omniscience, both about itself and about God. Pure Intellection is a subjective and immanent Revelation just as Revelation properly so called is an objective and transcendent Intellection.

--> Intellectualism: Intellectualism cannot fail to engender errors. It confers selfcomplacency and abolishes fear of God. It introduces a sort of worldliness into the intellectual domain. Its good side is that it may speak of truth; its bad side is the manner in which it speaks of it. It replaces the virtues it lacks by sophistries. It lays claim to everything but is in fact inoperative. In intellectualism a capacity to understand the most difficult things readily goes hand in hand with an inability to understand the simplest things.

--> Intelligence: One of the keys to the understanding of our true nature and of our ultimate destiny is the fact that the things of this world never measure up to the real range of our intelligence. Our intelligence is made for the Absolute, or it is nothing. Among all the intelligences of this world the human spirit alone is capable of objectivity, and this 70 implies ? or proves ? that what confers on our intelligence the power to accomplish to the full what it can accomplish, and what makes it wholly what it is, is the Absolute alone.*
One more point from me, maybe we should say (or should I say, I should say....) Pure Consciousness is on an upper level compared to Intellect, and again, we achieve pure Consciousness through Intellect.

-- > consciousness: Perception, awareness, apprehension. There are many layers or levels of consciousness ranging from the ordinary, every-day consciousness of our body and mind to omniscient states of superconsciousness. Consciousness aware only of itself is Pure Consciousness.

--> Consciousness Our own awareness of ourselves and the world; the mental processes that we can perceive; our thoughts and feelings.

--> CONSCIOUSNESS: The awareness of the waking state or the complete activated state of the mind and senses; basic dimension of existence whereby all physical and mental activity is projected.

--> Ultimately, Consciousness is All. Practically, it plays out in the human being through various states or levels of Mind: Sub-sub conscious, sub-conscious, conscious, sub super-conscious, and super-conscious
--------------------> this is one more of the important points, various levels of consciousness, and this is my opinion!!!! that among these consciousness, atleast at the basic levels, Intellect guides us through!!

More to follow.
All the above are definitions!! They are not false, but they are not authoritative too. They are simple and I could associate with those definitions.

Regards,
Jai Sai Master!!

Ananth


ananthbabladi
-----------------------
Jai Sai Ram
Jai Sai Master
Jai Sai Swamy

Dwarakanath

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2462
    • View Profile
Re: please explain to me on sri Guru charitra....
« Reply #34 on: April 18, 2007, 04:53:47 PM »
Jai Sai Master!

True, avatars are bound by Karma from our point of view. From the point of view of Krishna, He is eternal bliss and so, He is unbounded by Karma. He is Karma. It has been explained that they wantingly take on Karma for others' sake and Loka Kalyana's sake just like Vishnu took on Durvasa's curse to become Dattatreya. Thats why He(Krishna) is called Guru of Gurus and Paramatma and so on. He himself said that. Many other saints said that. Master said that. If you dont agree with them, there is no point in discussing. . Thats why they live the lives they do.

Rama killing Vali is not wrong. Not wrong at all. Vali was causing a lot of Adharma. Thats why he was killed. But that is another discussion. True it is Karma. True that Vali is the hunter in Krishna's lifetime. But THATS NOT WHY RAMA WAS BORN AS KRISHNA. Krishna was born to take care of Jaya and Vijaya in the form of Rakshasas.

You are unnecessarily equating Caste system with Unequal castes of middle ages. No one is saying that middle ages were correct. They were wrong. Such unequal caste system is wrong. There were ammendments made into some scriptures by bad people. But these bad people are not rishis. Anything original that these guys didnt pollute is not wrong. Bhagavatgita is not polluted at all according to Master. Master said that Bhagavatgita is the best teaching ever, it is so great that any one can follow it to attain liberation. So is Srimad Bhagavata. No one talked about Uttara Ramayana. No need to talk of that, since we already agree that people ammended some scriptures and that middle age caste system was wrong. No need to prove it again.

Viswamitra WAS A MURDERER, BUT HE DID IMMENSE SADHANA FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS AND PURIFIED HIMSELF OF THAT KARMA AND ONLY AFTER THAT HE WAS A BRAHMARSHI. Your question that how can a murderer be bramharshi is baseless.

Why are you reversing the caste system? what is the need? No one said Brahmin is greater than Sudra. Why do you want to write that Sudra is better? Neighter the sudra is better nor the brahmana. They are just classifications given by laws of Nature governed by God and thats why Sri Krishna said "Chaturvarnyam Maya Sristyam.."

As per the question why Brahmin came from the head, its simple.. Brahmin are like the intellectuals. People who think. Any one, irrespective of their birth, if they are intellectuals, they belong to brahmin class. Thats why it is said that classes are based on Gunas (Traits) and Karmas.

You said :
What if I say that all rishis are sudras by definition?

What definition?
The definition of Brahmin is "One who is realized in Brahma, one who is doing Brahmakarma ( process of knowing brahma ) or one who's goal of life is Brahma. According to this definition all Rishis are brahmins.

Give me one definition of the word "Sudra" that explains Rishis.

I am not against Sudras at all. I respect them. I consider myself a sudra. I consider all of us(I dont include you) egotistic fellows who dont have Viveka as sudras.

If you can give me one definition of sudra that includes the traits of Maharshis, I will agree that all maharshis are sudras too.

Please understand that I am not brahminizing. I am just stating correct definitions for classifications. If you adamantly hold a grudge towards brahmins and dont like the word brahmins, you can simply say and we can close this discussion on the note that you simply cant accept the definitions given by Sanskrit for sanskrit words. Wake up.

According to the above definition of brahmins, many of us are not brahmins. Most of us are sudras. Only people of the caliber of rishis or sadhakas are brahmins. Whether they do yagna or not, whether they wear the sacred thread or not, any ardent spiritual seeker, any Spiritual Master or any one who do Brahmayagna are Brahmins irrespective of their births. Any one who doesnt have the above qualities and also dont have the qualities of vaishya or kshatriya are sudras(includes many of the worlds people). If you want, I can give you definitions of kshatriyas and Vaisyas. I can give the definition of Sudra, but since you seem too keen, I will ask you to do that. GIVE ME THE DEFINITION OF SUDRA WITH AUTHENTIC SANSKRIT BASE SINCE THE WORD IS A SANSKRIT WORD, as you said, MAN TO MAN.

As to your question of Man to Man, I have already answered that above. Yes He was reinstated. HE WAS REINSTATED BECAUSE HE PURIFIED HIMSELF AND BECAME QUALIFIED TO BE CALLED AS BRAHMARSHI. HE REALIZED BRAHMA AND ONLY AFTER THAT HE WAS CALLED BRAHMARSHI. NOT BEFORE. HE WAS REINSTATED AND THATS WHY REINSTATION IS CORRECT BASED ON QUALIFICATIONS BUT NOT BASED ON BIRTH. there you go.. MAN TO MAN.

Many people BRAHMIN BY BIRTH DID A LOT OF MISTAKES. I TOTALLY AGREE BUT NO ONE IS BRAHMIN BY BIRTH. GET YOUR DEFINITIONS RIGHT. EVERY ONE IS SUDRA BY BIRTH. ONLY WHEN THEY START BRAHMAYAGNA OR ONLY WHEN THEY BECOME ARDENT SEEKERS CAN THEY BE CALLED AS BRAHMIN. READ THE SCRIPTURES. BRAHMINS BY BIRTH CAN ONLY BE BRAHMAJNANIS BY BIRTH.

So, your contention that RISHIS DIDNT CREATE THE CASTE SYSTEM IS WRONG! READ THE ABOVE LINKS TO PURUSHA SUKTA RAHASYAM.. GOD CREATED CASTE SYSTEM. RISHIS "SAW" IT AND EXPOUNDED IT IN VEDAS. (REMEMBER THAT I NEVER SAID THAT CASTE SYSTEM WAS "CREATED" BY RISHIS. I ONLY SAID THAT VEDAS ARE GIVEN TO MAN BY RISHIS AND VEDAS CLASSIFY THE VARNAS.)

Sir, read Scriptures correctly. THEY SAY THAT IT IS PART OF A BRAHMIN'S OR A VAISYAS OR ANY CITIZEN OF A COUNTRY'S SWADHARMA TO TAKE UP ARMS WHEN MOTHER LAND OR SPIRITUALITY IS AT STAKE. They didnt go out of SWADHARMA TO DO THAT. THEY WERE FOLLOWING SWADHARMA. THATS WHY PARASHURAMA WAS CORRECT.

THERE IS NOTHING LIKE HINDU DHARMA IN SCRIPTURES. THERE IS ONLY THE WORD "DHARMA". HINDU IS AN ARABIC/PERSIAN WORD SPOKEN WRONGLY.

Dharma is universal. Whether Buddha taught it or some one else. Hindu Dharma is a bad usage of words to explain Hindu religion. Religion and Dharma are slightly different, although religion is part of Dharma.

The Dharma of Buddha is for every one. True. So is the Sanatana Dharma.
Just like the Dharma of Buddha, Sanatana Dharma can be followed by anyone without discrimination between men and women and their profession or birth. IT ONLY CLASSIFIES BASED ON ELIGIBLITY. AGAIN READ PURUSHASUKTA RAHASHYAM BY MASTER. Any one Capable and willing to follow a Brahmin's way of life is welcomed to do so. Any one capable and willing to follow a Sudra's way of life is also equally welcomed in Sanatana Dharma. Sanatana Dharma Doesnt say that Brahmin is better than Sudra. It is a bad thing to think that Brahmin is better than Sudra.

Hindu religion does specify what a sudra must do, what a vysya must do and what a woman must do. That is why it is comprehensive. That is why it is correct. Only problem is that many corrupt people put their own theories into hindu belief and thats why the problem. The problem is of the corrupt people, not of the Dharma itself. Also, Hindu Dharma (if you prefer to call Sanatana Dharma like that), specifies that every one should follow a Brahmajnani. If a Brahmajnani is not available, they should follow the scriptures. The problem is that some people thought they were intelligent and stopped following Brahmajnanis. That is the problem of all misconceptions and bad things. But Hindu Dharma is so comprehensive that it allows corrections by later Mahatmas like Sripada Srivallabha and Sai Baba. Sanatana Dharma says to follow Guru's statements. Thus, Sanatana Dharma is always right. If you are following Buddha's doctrine, you are following Sanatana Dharma or Hindu Dharma. Buddha is a Brahmajnani and so following Him is prescribed in Sanatana Dharma.

So, Congratulations for following Sanatana Dharma by following Buddha!

If killing woman wrongly is Dharma, then I am against it too! Such a dharma is called Rakshasa Dharma. Not Sanatana Dharma.

Shirdi Sai Baba did respect Muslims and Hindus differently. He didnt allow anyone to stop any one else's methods. Thus Baba accepts Classification too. Baba encouraged it, not just tolerated. He encouraged Hindus to read their scriptures. Encouraged Muslims to pray their own way. HE ENCOURAGED SANATANA DHARMA. HE TOLD CLEARLY "SASTRAS ARE NEVER WRONG". HE TOLD PEOPLE TO FOLLOW BOOKS AND HE SOLVED THEIR DOUBTS. IT IS NOT GREATER THAN DHARMA. IT IS DHARMA.

You said :
I came to this conclusion looking at almost all the saints of all the religions who left their swadharma and became what they became.
I never had any proof of a samsari who does his swadharma and has got liberation.So i am in my rights to have such a preposterous opinion.

I am sorry. I dont think you read ALMOST ALLSAINTS OF ALL RELIGIONS. HAVE YOU HEARD OF BAHA'ULLAH? READ ABOUT SAINT AUGUSTINE? SAINT GEROME? SAINT BENEDICT? If so, forgive me. I have only read a few. NOT ALMOST ALL SAINTS OF ALL RELIGIONS. Just a few.

If you have not heard of a Samsari who does his swadharma and attained liberation? Then you have not even read half of the lifes of all saints. Read Sainatha Prabothamritam. MASTER SAYS THAT THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF SAINTS IN ALL RELIGIONS. ONE WHO FOLLOW SWADHARMA BASED ON RELIGION AND OTHERS THOSE WHO DONT.

After Ramakrishna said that liberation can be attained by being a samsari, then IT MEANS THAT SWADHARMA IS NOT A HINDERANCE TO LIBERATION.

You said :
You say swadharma is a must.I say its a must because a sansari has no other way.That is the only way he can take a step forward.

I TOTALLY AGREE.

You said :
I believe in mysticism more then the shastras .These are merely books.
I believe in the lives of saints and they are bounded by devine dharma and their dharma seems to transcend over all the others.I believe them more then books.

Me too! Thats why I believe in Shastras. Baba said that Sastras are Never wrong. So, I believe in Shastras. Infact, according to Shastras, saints are greater than Shastras. So, even though you dont believe, you are following Sastras!

As per the Jewels from Dharma Smritis, I will answer those once we go some more into Definitions of Sudras and Brahmanas. Without understanding those, you cand Understand smritis. Master Himself said that some smritis contain such verses, but those are not accepted by other Saints. Mostly, they are wrong and they are written by ugly people to condemn sudras. You said "Written by Brahmin".. but any one who writes such foul words is not a brahmin. I call such people wrong people. Calling them brahmin is as bad as calling a cow a pig.

You said :
I dont believe in following Dharma laid down by others.

So you mean, you dont believe in Dharma laid down by Buddha?

You asked:
Like Jesus said two knives cannot be put into one sheath.(well it was about money and god).So how will a merchant who will be so immersed in his daily thoughts of money and a ksatriya who is always thinking of his enimies and a sudhra who lives on leftover foods and thinks of food always achive liberation? please answer...

Simple, The merchant by thinking that money is God, Kshatriy thinking that His country is God and Sudra by thinking that left over food is Prasadam of God. Thats how they always achieve liberation. If they dont do the above, they dont attain liberation. By thinking money is God and using it for good purposes and always thinking about God (money) a merchant can certainly attain liberation. when any of them do the above and purify themselves, then they are automatically classified as Brahmins irrespective of their professions or births because the meaning and definition of Brahmin is one who is trying to reach Brahma.

Baba's entire life is a teaching for the above. He was everything. He was the money, He was the photo, He was the dog, He was every where. Master writes that any one doing any job correctly by doing it as Sai Seva will attain liberation. Master cant be wrong now, can He?

You said :
swadharmacharana is very good concept for the brahmins that is why most fo them talk of it.THEY HAVE NOTHING TO LOOSE.A brahmin by his pooja and his religious duties will for ever be before a deity.He will be in the presence of GOD always so for him his swadarmacharana is his moksha.For other it could be a bandana.Please think about what i said.

Swadharmacharana is a means to regulate one's mind and burn one's karma. Any one doing so will be liberated, not Bound. So its not a bandhana for anyone. Brahmins (Sadhaka by definition and meaning of the word "brahmin) have prayer and contemplation as their Swadharma. What do you propose. Sadhakas should have alcoholism as Swadharma? Praying should be their swadharma.Whats wrong in that? For someone who doesnt want to do Sadhana, prayer and work are swadharma to regulate and purify their mind and burn Karma. Whats wrong in that? Once they are purified and understand that they should do Sadhana, then they can adopt the Swadharma of a Sadhaka (Brahmin). I never said that Swadharmam is based on birth. I said Swadharmam is One's Dharmam in a given situation. Thats what the word "SWA DHARMAM" means. Read my posts carefully. I mentioned this before.

Prayer has been given to all classes. Only some sadhanas that give powers are restricted to pure people (not based on birth but based on gunas) and not allowed for impure( by mind, not just by bodily uncleanness) people (again not by birth). Whats wrong in that? I dont want the power of Aswamedha to be in the hands of a wrong polititain. It has been told in the scriptures that even someone ruling the country a King, if he has wrong intentions, no one should do yagnas for him and he is not allowed to participate in certain yagnas. So, it is not based on profession of a person or birth, it is based on Gunas and their actions).

I agree with you that Swadharma doesnt come by birth. I never said that Swadharma comes by birth alone. Certain parts of swadharma come by birth (like dharma of a son or a husband) and some others come by class(based on gunas and karmas).

Buddha's system is Sarvajanikam (Universal). I accept. But he too created classification among His disciples for administrative reasons. He would test the monks and see who is advanced and makes them leaders of other monks. In this way, he created two classes. For example, He selected SariPutra to lead VenuVana. Examples of this are endless.

In Buddhism, ever monk had One rule just like in Hinduism, every Sanyasi has one rule.

You said :
Atleast Bhuddist scriptures tell a different story than what you have said.AT the worldly level all are different but only in appearances..religions..beliefs etc.
Which are irrelevant for realisation purpose and infact are shackles and hurdles one should pass to realise the almighty.

and you also said :
ALL THE MONKS OF Bhuddist time were told to have compassion.

You are contradicting yourself. If all is one, then why and towards whome is compassion? Buddha prescribed compassion towards all beings.. not towards ONE. He recognizes that having compassion towards ALL BINGS is necessary which means, He recognizes that there are ALL beings(Not one) at the first level. By Compassion only, such appearances of ALL can be made none. Thats why, Even Buddha accepts AT ONE LEVEL ALL ARE DIFFERENT AND SO COMPASSION IS NECESSARY, AND AT ANOTHER LEVEL ALL IS ONE WHICH IS NIRVANA, THE GOAL. You are mistaking the attitude of GOAL to the attitude of Sadhana. SO, AT ONE LEVEL ALL ARE DIFFERENT AND AT OTHER LEVEL ALL ARE SAME IS THE BASIS OF BUDDHISM TOO.

Master clearly said that "THINKING THAT ALL THIS DOESNT EXIST IS WRONG". (Edinijam and Dhyana Yoga Sarvaswam).


You said :
The code of conduct when it differs from person to person based on his birth it becomes evil.

TOTALLY AGREE. Only that some code of conduct must be based on birth. Like conduct towards father and mother and brother and sister. Such relations are based on birth and the right conduct towards them is based on birth. Only by such right conduct can we burn the Rinanubandha with them (Sanyasa is also part of that conduct).

You said :
ALL THE CLASSES AND ALL THE MEN ARE SAME AND EQUAL BEFORE GOD AND SPIRITUAL THINGS.

I say ALL CLASSES AND ALL MEN ARE EQUAL BEFORE GOD AND SPIRITUAL THINGS. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME. If they are the same, God should appear to both prahallada and me. Towards devotees, God acts one way and towards the Rakshasa, God acts as the other. If you say that God is same Eternal bliss, then God is only there. No one else like classes exist at all. Only when God is seen as Saguna, we can talk of classes and equality.


You said :

If you are comparing intellect to viveka you are wrong in this matter.I WILL QUOTE THE WORD OF SWAMI SIVANANDA.

Firstly, I didnt compare intellect to Viveka. I said that Viveka comes when intellect works correctly. Only through understanding and discerning can we get Viveka. I never said that Viveka is intellect.
Secondly, I dont know Sivananda. Master never mentioned him. So I dont take him as authority.

However, I agree with what He wrote. When studying Mythology, we must cultivate imagery. He is talking about Symbolism (MY GRANDFATHER AND MASTER E.K. ARE EXPERTS AT THIS). To understand Symbolism of scriptures, one must "See" it. In Telugu and Sanskrit "DARSHANAM". It is very clearly mentioned in our scriptures( I didnt read this directly but mentioned in one of my Grandfather's books ) that some parts are to be understood through symbolism and Darshanam and some others to be UNDERSTOOD by logic. Sivananda is talking about the former. I am talking about the Dharma Part which doesnt contain symbolism. Oh by the way, LOGIC (meemamsa (tarkam is a part and side study of meemamsa)) is needed to understand scriptures, which needs the use of intellect. This has been approved by Master too in "matam enduku" when he says that religion is not about believing, but understanding and logic are needed to do it correctly. So, I am not wrong.


Now I understand that you used intellect from that view point. So, lets drop the intellect talk and talk of Viveka talk. How can one get Viveka? Because without Viveka and Bhakti, one cant attain liberation. Similarly Ramanamaharshi and Master (In Edinijam, Matam Endukuku, Sai Master Pravachanalu and almost every other book Master wrote).

Here one word that Master uses "AVAGAHANA". What is that? I take it as understanding when used as a verb and noun. sometimes it can be said "knowledge" but only when used as noun. Which ever word we use,
please explain what Avagahana and how to get it. Master clearly wrote that without AVAGAHANA liberation is impossible. I take Avagahana as understanding which needs intellect. Master says that with AVAGAHANA we get VIVEKA and VIVEKA GIVES BHAKTI AND BHAKTI GIVES VAIRAGYA. So, Avagahana is a must.

What is avagahana and how can we get it?
Example. "Karma Siddhantamu pi avagahana" means Understanding completely Karma siddhantam. Right or wrong? Which english word should I use for "Avagahana"?

Do you agree that Avagahana is necessary? If you dont, you are wrong. Because Master said it is necessary. And avagahana needs thinking and understanding, which needs intellect (to understand or discern). What do you say?


Continued in the next Message.....................

Dwarakanath....


Dwarakanath

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2462
    • View Profile
Re: please explain to me on sri Guru charitra....
« Reply #35 on: April 18, 2007, 04:54:18 PM »
Continuation of previous message..........


Finally, I agree with you that to reach the highest level, you need to leave swadharma and have sama bhava. But it is at a higher level. To reach that higher level, you need to follow swadharma. At that level, "Sarvadharman Parityajja" comes into picture. But that is for one who can "Mamekam Saranam Vraja" which means do complete Saranagati to Guru. That is a highest level. At that level, it doesnt matter about caste system at all. At that level, one should leave even the thought that caste system is wrong, and also the thought that caste system is right. Its immaterial at that stage. But until that stage, one has to follow swadharma.

You said :
To reach this heightest level one has to leave the samsara.For the other Gods normal poojas and bhakti ,tapassu and gnanam will do.

I dont agree. Bhakti is necessary to get Jnanam. Gnanam and Bhakti are not for other gods. Its for THAT ONE PARAMATMA IN EVERY THING. Gnanam is realization. Gnanam is Knowledge based on realization. It is the result.

You said :
For a person who is to reach that ultimate reality he or she has to leave the swadharma.This i say because swadharma makes you to do karma and binds you to this world.for example a khsatriya will be in the process of enimity with some one or the other and its impossible for him to move ahead (as told in the Sri Guru Charitra ) to a higher level of that of a brahmana.

Wrong. Swadharma makes one do Nishkaama Karma which is necessary for realization. Not all Karma is binding. Only normal Sakaama Karma is binding. Nishkaama Karma is liberating. Swadharma, when done correctly, is Nishkaama Karma.

You said :
The swadarma with a god in our midst to some extent burns this bad karma but it will take you to the realms of the trimurthis only.

Wrong! You are mistaking devatarchana and anushthana with swadharma. They are just parts of swadharma. Not all of it. Swadharma is total Sadhana. devatarchana helps sadhana (Leelamritam, saraina devatarchana Guruvunu choopistundi).

You said :
The areas of the trimurthis are brahma lokam,vaikuntam and kailash which are occupied by the three GODS who we know so well.

True, but read the definitions and meanings of the words "Brahma", "Vishnu" and "Siva". Edinijam Last chapter. Read it!
Lokam means "perspective or view point". Brahma lokam means seeing this world from the perspective of Brahma. Which means, seeing the world as One. Brahma lokam is also called "Satya Lokam". That means seeing the Spiritual Truths and not seeing appearances of Maya.
"Vaikuntha" means the place from which one doesnt fall back into Maya. That means, the stage where, in Sadhana, one cant fall any more because he crossed Maya. This is Nirvana of Buddhism. "Siva" means Blemishless. (parisuddha, lopamu leni). "Kailasa" means "Blissful" in sanskrit. Samadhi Sthithi, Turiya, unmani and Satori are the states that come under "Kailasa". The state above this, the state of Parabrahma or Guru is called "Pari Nirvana". There is no name for this in Sanatana Dharma. This is the highest state. Here one not only sees the creation(like in the three lokams) but also sees it as "Saakshi" and also is one with the other part of God which didnt form into Creation.

You said :
Brahma dev is like the work of a sculptur.HE makes the bodies of men just like a kummari(a potter) makes the the pots and keeps aside.
The work of vishnu is to see that dharma is established and that the world is ever growing and protected.The work of shiva is to destroy this world in pralayas.Just like this world is destroyed in pralayas those lokas will also be destroyed by maha pralayas.

I TOTALLY AGREE. I agree that in Mahapralaya, even these Lokams are dissolved (destroyed is the wrong word to use here). But that doesnt mean that they are bad. They are just stepping stones in Sadhana just like other states. Only thing is that once you reach this stage, you cant fall easily. And unless you reach these states, you cant reach the one above. You have to get Nirvana before you get Parinirvana.

You said :
Those who pray to the trimurthis with stead fast devotion will enter those worlds and stay their till their punya is over and come back to this world in the end.That we can see in the sai leelamrutam too.This aspect is not known to most people.

I totally agree. But those people who prays to Paramatma or Guru with steadfast devotion will also get these three, but also cross them. It doesnt mean that they are wrong or bad places. They are like steps to Parinirvana.


You said :
The three gods with gunas are like you and me.They have wives and children and finally they also have egos.They fight and argue among themselves because they have gunas.
The gods are bound by the karmic ties just like you and me.There is a story of Shiva running away from shani maha dev to escape his bad period.

This is where you have completely used your intellect in the wrong place. This is where what Sivananda said comes into play. When reading mythology dont think logically or use intellect. Use imagery. Have Darshan. Use symbolism. Wives and Kids of the Holy Trinity are symbolic. Not literal like humans. Each of those there are each of the Gunas. Unlike us humans, they dont have all three in them. They have one each. They all are aspects of GOD WHO HAS THE THERE GUNAS (SINCE GOD IS CREATION ALSO).

Story of Shiva running away is symbolic. Its like Baba saying "God is afraid of Bad and Bad is afraid of God". It doesnt mean God is literally afraid and shaking. It has deeper meaning as Master explains in Prabothamritam. Similarly, Shiva running away is symbolic. Here, imagery is needed as Sivananda says.

You said :
It really does not mean that we should not pray to these gods because real liberation can be got with them too like Sri Ramakrishna paramahamsa did.But it is very very difficult.
That is where a Real Sad Guru comes into picture.He is above all the Gods because he has seen the parabrahma in himself.There is no turning back for him.And he is qualified to take us out of this world but we should have faith and the intrest to do it.It requires a lot of patience and intrest to leave this world which people because of their agnana will not have.

I totally agree! Praying to Guru is part of Sanatana Dharma and Swadharma. Irrespective of class or creed, any one can follow a Sadguru in Sanathana Dharma. That way, Swadharma and Sanatana Dharma are always correct!!

You said :
They will try to find ways to enter heaven or those places of istadaiva but if we are pure in our heart the istadaiva will actually show us our Poorna Guru.

Totally Tottally agree! Even Ramakrishna was shown Totapuri.


You said :
The question of swadharma is there only till the question of caste is there.Once we renounce our caste all the dharmas are ours only.

Wrong! Swadharma means Ones Dharma. Irrespective or caste or religion. A muslim should follow the right path. That is muslim's swadharma. One's swadharma depends on situations and certain parts of it depend on birth. Renouncing world and becoming a monk means taking the swadharma of a Monk.

You said :
Because for all humans the ultimate point of contact are the feet of the GOD.This vese was used to discriminate and to establish the four classes based on birth in the middle ages.They wrote books and altered the existing ones because the education was with the priviledged class and the others were powerless to question.

I totally agree. The people who misused that verse are horrible. They are totally wrong. But the verse is not wrong tho. Only it was misused. When taken in correct sense, it is correct.

You said :
Sri Krishna says that he created the classes but does not as far as i know differentiate.So the sudhras being his feet could mean that they are actually more important to him than the brahmanas whom he compares to his head.

Wrong! No caste is more important than the other. All castes are different but equal to Krishna. By saying that one is more important, you are behaving exactly like the people that misused it. Dont make that mistake.

You said :
Any one who has valour is a khstriya.But if he sticks to it and does his work with nishkama he will reach one of the trilokas or the swarga but I dont think he will ever be free.That is why they used the sanyasa ashrama in the end to know the truth.He has to leave his swadharma.

Wrong! Nishkaama karma is needed to attain liberation. Master said it. Krishna said it. You cant deny it as Ramanamaharshi also said it. Buddha also said that right action is necessary in his 8 fold path. Please dont say that right action doesnt lead to liberation. Then you are negating Master, Baba, Buddha, Krishna and Ramana Maharshi which means you are wrong.
Sannyasa is not NECESSARY FOR LIBERATION. It is a classification of situations. Sannyasa is part of Swadharma. You see? It is just like Varna. "Varna Ashrama Dharma" is the term used. But the same scriptures that prescribed Sannyasa say that you can attain liberation in any Ashrama. Also, they say that if you dont do any Ashrama correctly, you will not recieve liberation. Only exception is that you can directly jump from brahmacharya to sannyasa if you are exceptional, just like brilliant students skip standards and go to higher standards directly. But it also shows that All ashramas, when done correctly in that order, help us in getting Liberation. They are all PART OF SADHANA. They are Swadharma. So, Swadharma is part of Sadhana.

You said :
A brahmin is not a Guru as far as I can think.He is just like one of the four castes.He has his duties WHICH again are not based on his birth.

Partially correct. Not every Brahmin is a Guru. But a Guru is certainly a Brahmin (Bramhajnya and Srotriya says Gurugeeta..) Whether He is born to a Sudra or not, a Sadguru is a brahmana. Whether some one is born to a Brahmin or not, if he is not doing sadhana, he is not a brahmin.

You said:
NO caste is based on birth.and in my personal opinion no caste is based on gunas either because all the gunas are there in all the people all through the ages..and also in all the gods .

I TOTALLY AGREE!

You said:
It is based on profession which people choose for themselves.

Some what based on profession, some what on intention and some other on Gunas.

You said :
Dharma as such is not a means of liberation.It ensures the smooth flowing of the society.Dharma actually changes from yuga to yuga.

Wrong. Dharma is a means of Liberation. Krishna said so, Master said so, even Baba said so (by saying so many suktis.. read Prabothamritam from 22 to 29 page as given above). Dharma changes from time to time and situation to situation. Dharma ensures smooth flowing of the society. But Dharma also ensures liberation by cleaning ones Karma and minds and thus enabling Vairagya, Bhakti and Liberation.

You said :
The verse eppudaite dharmamu tappi adarmamu perugutundo in bhagawata geeta should not be confused with here.
The dharma in this verse above taken from Geeta is the Dharma of Vishnu and it is about people restricting others from not worshipping their god of choice.Or say where people are so much in maya that no one prays to god at all and become very cruel.
that type of dharma is timeless.

I agree! But, not just Dharma of Vishnu, but all forms of Dharma. If any Dharma is crossed, then it is Dharmaglani. That causes social, personal and universal troubles.


You said :
The other type of swadharma is not timeless it keeps changing from time to time.
.One has to grow above that kind of dharma(like a kshatriya leaves for forest leaving his enimity and his kingdom.)

I agree! But Kshatriya leaving for Vanaprastha and Sannyasa is part of Kshatriya's swadharma. So, He is only leaving a post of a king, by following swadharma and going to the forest. he is not crossing swadharma.


You said :
So when a sudra for example did a yagna they somehow felt that Gods rule has been voilated and wrote stories about Sri Rama killing sudra for doing a YAGNA.
This story is not true and has been inserted by vested intrests.

I agree. Such type of thinking and writing false stories about Rama is terribly wrong and it has been done through the middle ages.


You said :
There are many contradictions in scriptures because of the insertion new verses by selfish people.

True. Scriptures say that this will happen.


You said :
That differentiation can be done by a poorna Guru only.But then even the scriptures are just like words which we use here and are useless when compared with the ultimate reality.

Very True. Scriptures say this too.


You said :
But scriptures are read and Gurus tell us to read because to a large extent it helps our ever wandering mind to think about this reality.If we merely recite scriptures with out showing intrest it will be of no use.

Very True. We should recite scriptures with understanding and discerning and with symbolism. If we do it sincerely, Guru will help us in understanding it (either by physically being there or in the form of our inner self as Ramana Maharshi says..).

I think I have answered to all your questions. If I missed any please remind me.

Ravigaru,
Please dont apologize. I am thankful for this thread.

You said :
I dont remember Master garu telling that asking questions for testing purpose is right.Could you please tell me where I can read it.

Sai Baba, his life and his teachings.. I dont remember the page number (as its been three years since Ive read it) but Master mentions a conversation with a saint which lineates this point. Also, Master used to say it to devotees. "Mahatmulanu entaina parikshinchavachhu. Kaani vallu geliste Vallanu anusarinchataaniki siddhamga vundali. Nanavalli Babanu parikshinchadu, kaani aa taruvata ayanapai ento bhaktini pondadu".
He also writes this in His letters in "Lekhavali". Also, Jnana Sankalini tantra mentions this.

You said :
But what I said was that the ancient rushis did not give the caste system as we know today.Any one could enter the area of a rushi from any of the profession.Right from the profession of the priest to the profession of a chandala any one could become realised.Was not valmiki a chandala before he became realised?.
So the question of swadarma does not arise here.I have every right on god just as anyone else.NO differences here please.

I agree totally. Any one can reach God. The original caste system is just a classification given in Vedas. It has nothing about reaching God. Only that any one who reaches God is considered a brahmin AFTER he reaches God (brahmamu nandu charinchu vadu).


You said :
I cannot quote only from a few set of books that you have prescribed or those that i only agree.
That would mean that there is no truth anywhere else.
I dont agree with the mahabarata personally but WHEN you asked I asked you to quote freely from it.Because for me this is a learning expirience and i could have missed something in it.
So lets not limit our discussion to a few books only because that way we cant learn more.

The reason for selecting only a few books or Saints is so that we dont quote from books that have malicious interpretations inserted by fools who called themselves brahmins. Bhagavatgita and Bhagavatam are pure according to Master. Thats why I wanted the discussion to revolve around those books only.

You said :
Also I would like to tell you that i really did not know who you were until I went back and read the website about master garus history.This I had to do because people were referring to you as babu garu.
So please take my apoligies as i thought I was arguing with some member who is an administrator of this forum.

Please dont apologize. I like being another devotee of Master rather than JUST being His son. After all, the relationship between Guru and Sishya is 100 times more sweeter than that of a father and a son. So, please consider me a brother disciple and argue freely so that all can benifit with better understanding.

Also, I never said intellect is Viveka. Only that Viveka comes through avagahana and avagahana comes through intellect.

Jai Sai Master!


Dwarakanath

Dwarakanath

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2462
    • View Profile
Re: please explain to me on sri Guru charitra....
« Reply #36 on: April 18, 2007, 04:54:38 PM »
Jai Sai Master!

Hahaha.. thats the longest post I ever wrote on this forum!
thanks for your patience if you read all of it.. If I am boring any one of you, please excuse me. I am learning a lot from this.


Jai Sai Master!

Dwarakanath

ravifrom_old

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 47
    • View Profile
Re: please explain to me on sri Guru charitra....
« Reply #37 on: April 18, 2007, 04:54:55 PM »

Jai Sai Master,

Babu Garu ....Namaskaram,

You have answered all my questions.If you have the time I have just these last ones.

I have read a story which If I remember is from the mahabharata.In it after the great war Sri Krishna shows a small insect to Arjuna and says do you know that in one of its previous lives this insect was a brahma of this loka.

This example was used by the person who wrote the article to tell that the lokas are not permanant and the gods are actually positions held by souls that have done a lot of good karma.

So for example the position of brahma which is now with someone carries some work with it as we discussed above.But after this yuga hanuman will take over as the next brahma.Similarly Bali chakravarthy will be in the position of indra and so also will be the case with vishnu and shiva which will go to some other persons who have done great karma

Is that true?.

It is from this aspect I wrote some of the passages in this forum.

The question of Vishwamitra....Sai baba has said that those who kill and dont give debt and those who have enimity will have to pay for their deeds if not in this life in another.

Because murder is unpardanable.How could he purify himself.
What about vishwamitra will he also come under such a rule.

I think reinstatement is just to satisfy the ego of vishwamitra and nothing else ...i dont believe its necessary but i also dont want to discuss it further as we have raked our heads over that concept.

I dint know that all the classes were to defend the country but thank you for this information.But the article actually says that all the classes went to war for ardha.That is why I asked the question but I must say i have no doubts in this matter now.You have cleared it. thank you.

About the saints of chatolic churches I would beg to differ.It is a very controversial issue even in the west.But i heard of bahaullah.

(MASTER SAYS THAT THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF SAINTS IN ALL RELIGIONS. ONE WHO FOLLOW SWADHARMA BASED ON RELIGION AND OTHERS THOSE WHO DONT.)

I wish sometimes I were born twenty years before so I could have met Master garu.I only know him for writings and also from people who were with him.

I did not mean the dharma laid down by Bhudda but those rules prescribed by such bad intention people as you have said.

(The merchant by thinking that money is God, Kshatriy thinking that His country is God and Sudra by thinking that left over food is Prasadam of God. Thats how they always achieve liberation)

I could not understand this statement of yours.I am not sure how it will work.please explain when you are free to this.
Ramakrishnaparamahamsa used to shiver at the touch of money.So its impossible for a vyasya to liberate unless he leaves all that according to my opinion.

Killing of anyone for any reason has been opposed by Bhudda so that should not work either for a ksatriya.

(A shudra and his left over food is again controversial.But i dont want to discuss that matter you can omit it.)

Baba on the other hand also never strived for money.He asked for it based on somebodys owes and things like that.And by the end of evening he gave off all the money he had.

(What do you propose. Sadhakas should have alcoholism as Swadharma?)

When I said swadharma of the classes and especially the Swadharma of a brahmin I was referrinng to it from the class point of view not as you say from the guna and karma point of view.That is why that view point came.

( Bhudda accepts AT ONE LEVEL ALL ARE DIFFERENT AND SO COMPASSION IS NECESSARY, AND AT ANOTHER LEVEL ALL IS ONE WHICH IS NIRVANA, THE GOAL.)

I agree to the difference mentioned in the statement above.

I thought in your earlier posts you were actually saying that the difference is there.In your earlier sections when you said that at one level the difference exists i thought that you were saying that not every one can realise god and that only some classes born by birth are previledge sections to realise god etc.
It was a complete misunderstanding.
Which again is not what you had in mind.So we were actually arguing over something we agree.

I think his compassion(bhuddas) is for those who cannot become monks and are in the process of the cycle of births and deaths.and other creatures of course. That is why the dharma of bhudda is a little universal than that of sanathana dharma.But you have explained it better and more convincingly.


(I say ALL CLASSES AND ALL MEN ARE EQUAL BEFORE GOD AND SPIRITUAL THINGS. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME.)

You used this statement above in your earlier posts.When I saw that i thought you were implying that only some previledge sections are closer to god etc.which again is not true and i agree with you now completely.I think it was simply because I have a bad habit sometimes of translating in my mind english sentences to telugu internally.

He is talking about Symbolism (MY GRANDFATHER AND MASTER E.K. ARE EXPERTS AT THIS).

I would like to thank you for this above information of symbolism which we have to use the mythological stories.It was intresting and enlighting to me.

About Avagahana...I dont know much about it.It could mean having a comprehensive view.



thank you for your valuable time babu garu.

with love and regards

kiran


ravifrom

ananthbabladi_old

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 146
    • View Profile
Re: please explain to me on sri Guru charitra....
« Reply #38 on: April 18, 2007, 04:55:17 PM »
Jai Sai Master!!

Babu garu, Ravi garu!! Very very enlightening. Really, I am saying this from the bottom of my heart. As of today, my Parayana of Leelamrutam and Guru Charitra will take a different and higher dimension.

Regards & Respects to you both,
Jai Sai Master!
Ananth

ananthbabladi
-----------------------
Jai Sai Ram
Jai Sai Master
Jai Sai Swamy

Dwarakanath

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2462
    • View Profile
Re: please explain to me on sri Guru charitra....
« Reply #39 on: April 18, 2007, 04:55:36 PM »
Jai Sai Master!

Awagaahana (Avagahana) in telugu is given meaning as thus in the dictionary of telugu to English.

verb : "to understand, perceive."
noun : "understanding, wholistic understanding, wholistic perspective, wholistic comprehension"


Root word : "Avagati" awagati meaning knowledge, perception, comprehension.

awagaahana also means mastering, learning, comprehension, understanding, view, outlook, bathing, immersion depending on situation.

We can clearly see the need of intellect (to understand, discern) to get avagaahana. Similarly, "chintana" as in Tattwa Chintana means thinking, thought, reflection.

So, when Master said, tattwa chintana leads to avagaahana leads to viveka. We can see the utility of "intellect" here.

Vivekamu is given as :
Discrimination, judgment, the faculty of distinguishing, prudence, discretion.


Answers to your final questions are coming Ravigaru.

Jai Sai Master!


Dwarakanath

ravifrom_old

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 47
    • View Profile
Re: please explain to me on sri Guru charitra....
« Reply #40 on: April 18, 2007, 04:55:52 PM »
Babu Garu Namaskaram,

I would like to paste some more verses about the intellect that i used in my post before.

"When the intellect develops a little people enter into aruguments and unnecessary discussions.Intellect is a hinderance on the spiritual path.They who have not developed the heart and have a developed intellect begin to doubt and question.They are led astray.They want a why and how for everything with out realising that God is beyong proofs and presumptions."

This above quote is from Sivananda swamy.But he clearly says that the heart(ramanamaharshi's hrudaya) should develop too.If not intellect of mind will lead one astray.Viveka as we have discussed is conscious questioning which leads one to the right path.This is what i formed as an opinion after this reading.

The next quote is pasted below.

"Intellect is a hinderance to a vast majority of intellectual persons.They will say that the existance of ultimate brahman is a guess-work.The superconscious state is a bluff and self realisation is a imagination of vedantis.Deluded souls!."
--shivananda

It actually brings the worldy things and puts them before the purusha tempting him toward them.It argues ,and questions and tries to understand all the mystical expiriences with the help of worldly aspects which cannot explain spirituall expirience.

About the question of God that i asked before.

That they are positions to be occupied and the holders of the positions keep changing from yuga to yuga.

There is a story of YAMA DHARMARAJA.He in one of the yuga feels very frustrated that not one sinner is comming to him.To his narakaloka.He has no importance which the other astadikpalaka are having before the people of the earth.
He becomes frustrated and goes to brahma and cries with tears in his eyes saying I have got a very bad protfolio.No one on earth is afraid or showing reverence to me and I am now with out any work because there are no sinners in the world.
It is then that brahma sends a veil of maya or i think it is vishnu i dont remember and makes people commit sins.That is selfishness.That is why I feel that the parabrahma or the God with our form and without gunas is the highest and pure and all the others who keep changing from time to time are infirior etc.

How can gods who themselves are in maya liberate a soul?.

There are innumerable stories of Gods themselves being in Maya.

How do we explain them with symbolism.

In Mastergari Sai Leelamrutam master says" manushyulu agnanam valana okkade ayina paramatma ku enno roopalu kalpistuntaru".

It means that God is one but with ignorance we try to classify them into various Gods.

I remember in Ramakrishna paramahamsa book he explains that when he was meditating on the kali he himself became her and at one point he found that there was a higher level over his present level and wanted to reach that highest level.But the image of the kali came in between his path and stopped him.He said that he had to cut that image of kali and destroy it with his dhyana sakti to reach the highest goal.

That is why I asked you those questions so please if you dont mind address these questions also in your next post.

Jai Sai Master

with regards

Kiran.

ravifrom

WhoAmI_old

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile
Re: please explain to me on sri Guru charitra....
« Reply #41 on: April 18, 2007, 04:56:14 PM »
ravifrom wrote:

The superconscious state is a bluff and self realisation is a imagination of vedantis.Deluded souls!."
--shivananda
 


I belive the above quote is not the view of Shivananda....
I think Shivananda is referring to the so called intellectuals view......

Is that right?

Ravi garu, please clarify....

Thank you,
-

Who Am I
_________________
Have you seen yourself???

ravifrom_old

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 47
    • View Profile
Re: please explain to me on sri Guru charitra....
« Reply #42 on: April 18, 2007, 04:56:33 PM »
Jai Sai Master,

Dear whoami,

Yes! It is the so called intellectuals view that swamy shivananda is talking about and its not his personal view.He in fact is callling the sceptics of supersonscious state deluded souls.

with regards

kiran

ravifrom

Dwarakanath

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2462
    • View Profile
Re: please explain to me on sri Guru charitra....
« Reply #43 on: April 18, 2007, 04:57:03 PM »
Jai Sai Master!

Happy pongal to all!

I seek apologies for not posting in the past couple of days. I was very busy and didnt even get to sleep much too. Will post my answers soon.

Ravigaru,
Please do read this thread :
http://p4.forumforfree.com/2-vt98-saimaster.html?start=15

Its a discussion on usage of intellect between me and Sudhakargaru and I learnt a lot from it. In the end, we too found out that we meant different things by meaning "intellect" differently. But given above meaning for intellect (to understand, discriminate), do read the whole discussion and my points on why intellect is necessary. It would solve a lot of questions we have here about intellect. (It has references to Master's words "Yochana", "Sattyanveshana", "tattwachintana" and the need of intellect).
I cant thank Sudhakargaru enough for that discussion.

Also, please do read "edinijam" introduction and first and fourth chapters and Chapter four of Sai Master Pravachanaau in the meanwhile if you find time.


Jai Sai Master!

Dwarakanath

ravifrom_old

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 47
    • View Profile
Re: please explain to me on sri Guru charitra....
« Reply #44 on: April 18, 2007, 04:57:21 PM »
Dear Babu Garu...

HAPPY SANKRANTI TO YOU AND TO ALL SAI BANDUS!

I have read the thread and i found that it contains of what we discussed so intently  .

I have not read the books of Master garu but I would like to quote the verses of Ramana Maharshi here.

It appears that even the intellect that you mentioned helps till a certain level only.

That is the opinion i formed after reading maharshis answers which i am pasting below.

----The Englishman casually said that in prehistoric ages there was spirituality but not high intellect, whereas intellect has now developed.

Sri Bhagavan pointed out that "intellect" raises the question "whose intellect?" The answer is, "the Self." So intellect is a tool of the Self.

The Self uses intellect for measuring variety. Intellect is not the Self nor apart from the Self. The Self alone is eternal. Intellect is only a phenomenon.

People speak of the development of variety as being the development of intellect. Intellect was always there. Dhata yatha parvam akalpayat (The Creator created just as before). Consider your own state, day by day.

There is no intellect in dreamless deep sleep.

But it is there now. There is no intellect in a child. (as i had written in my post that scriptures should be understood from a childs heart from this view point only)

It develops with age. How could there be manifestation of intellect without its seed in the sleep state and in the child? Why go to history to teach this fundamental fact?

The level of truth of history is only the level of truth of the individual.


Questioner. Beyond the intellect and before wisdom dawns there will be pictures of the world passing before one's consciousness. Is it so?

Sri Bhagavan pointed out the parallel passage in Dakshinamurti Stotram, to signify that the pictures are like reflections in a mirror; again from the Upanishad ? as in the mirror, so in the world of manes, as in the water, so in the world of Gandharvas; as shadow and sunlight in Brahma Loka

Gul and Shirin Byramjee, two Parsi ladies of Ahmedabad, arrived this day. They spoke at night to Maharshi: "Bhagavan! We have been spiritually inclined from our childhood. We have read several books on philosophy and are attracted by Vedanta. So we read the Upanishads, Yoga Vasishta, Bhagavad Gita etc. We try to meditate, but there is no progress in our meditation. We do not understand how to realise. Can you kindly help us towards realisation?''

M.: How do you meditate?

D.: I begin to ask myself "Who am I?'', eliminate body as not 'I', the breath as not 'I', the mind as not 'I' and I am not able to proceed further.

M.: Well, that is so far as the intellect goes. Your process is only intellectual. Indeed, all the scriptures mention the process only to guide the seeker to know the Truth. The Truth cannot be directly pointed out. Hence this intellectual process. You see, the one who eliminates all the not I cannot eliminate the 'I'. To say 'I am not this' or 'I am that' there must be the 'I'. This 'I' is only the ego or the 'I'-thought. After the rising up of this 'I'-thought all other thoughts arise. The 'I'-thought is therefore the root-thought. If the root is pulled out all others are at the same time uprooted. Therefore seek the root 'I', question yourself "Who am I?''; find out its source. Then all these will vanish and the pure Self will remain ever.

Thank you.

with regards and love
Kiran.

ravifrom