The Greatest Indian Epic - Mahabharath [Archive] - Page 2

View Full Version : The Greatest Indian Epic - Mahabharath

Pages : 1 [2] 3 4 5

Raghu

16th May 2005, 03:07 PM

I heard the story differently.

Arjuna was a famous fighter, and he attained fame by fighting many great demigods, including even Lord Siva. After fighting and defeating Lord Siva in the dress of a hunter, Arjuna pleased the lord and received as a reward a weapon called pashupata-astra.

Nitai

Dear Nitai,

This is very hilarious, no offence meant, but how can Paramatama Maha Iswar, he is Combination of lord Vishnu and Lord bramha, this is CLEARLY shown in ShivaLingam, Shivratri is a symbol of this!

This act was planned by Lord Krishna to get rid of Arjuna's ego, if Arjuna does win the battle , logicaly speaking his ego would reach
unlimited level, wouldn't you agree?, so what's the moral value behind this?

Please Do tell me where you heard this story, because it is pathetic, Pasupathasthra was attained by Lord Krishna and Arjuna, when they went to Kailash to do a pooja towards Maha Iswar.

Please note my post was never INTENDED to offend you, it's just people just make up their own interpretation of the story, who ever told you this must have misunderstood this.

Sudhaama

16th May 2005, 06:12 PM

SUPERIORITY.. amongst Gods.. especially SIVA and VISHNU?

Dear Mr. badri99,

Please Narrate in detail about this Episode of Siva-Arjuna quarrel over a Boar... and further Arjuna's fetching Pasupathasthra from Lord Siva..

Dear Mr. Raghu,

In Mahabharatha... there is not much room of Superiority amongst various Vedic- Gods.

In fact... it alleviates all the doubts about such probable Confusions and clarifies on the possible misconceptions as also drives off all the Surmises.

Almost all the Gods denoted by Vedas .. take part in Mahabharatha... in a Dramatic-Story Form... to establish the Sense of Vedas ... by action depicting the Vedic- Gospels as also through words uttered by its various Characters .

And further too... the most intricacies are explained in Bhagawad- Geetha... a Scientific- Gospel ... applicable for any Global Human irrespective of Religion.

We can say a lot lot more... on Mahabharatha which STRESSES and establishes..

.. the. IMPORTANCE AND NECESSITIES of BROAD-MINDENESS in Life

... especially being a Rich Subject relevant with Morality coupled with Wisdom.

Vedic-Religion... describes every God.... HIGHLY ... even Indra and Vayu...

... then should we discriminate Maha-Deva and Maha-Vishnu?

Rudram ... a part of Veda... intended to exclusively praise the Glory of Siva ... praises Vishnu also in between...

... while Purusha-Sooktha.. another part of Veda... relevant to exclusively to praise Vishnu... praises Lord Siva too. ..

... even amongst such Vishnu-praising terminologies... it says...

SA BRAHMA... SA SIVA... SA INDRA... SA-AKSHARA... PARAMA- SWARAAT.

... which means.... "the same Vishnu... is also Siva or Brahma or Indra... or an Invisible Abstract-power eternal... Supreme... (according to individuals outlook and FREE- OPTION)

So we should not indulge in such discriminatory approach at all.

... but the Great Sense-Values and Rich- beauty in every bit of its FERTILE content of Mahabharatha the Eternal Human- Gospel.

You are perhaps... the best example for such Broad-mindedness..

... By name Raghu... You are Ramadas.

... By Awatar... You are Krishna-das.

.. By Faith... SIVADAS...

Well.... .THREE IN ONE... Nice and Happy to know.... Keep it up..

I will speak more on Siva - Vishnu relations...as also on the great moral- lessons behind this episode...

... after hearing from Mr. Badri 99.

Raghu

16th May 2005, 06:46 PM

... which means.... "the same Vishnu... is also Siva or Brahma or Indra... or an Invisible Abstract-power eternal... Supreme... (according to individuals outlook and FREE- OPTION)

Dear Sudhama Sir

Yes I agree with you completely, you can virtually call the Paramathama (Ultimate Truth) by various names, and forms! here our friend said that Arjuna won the battle over the Paramathama, which can never be true!, if an Atma can win over the Paramatha, what is the point of this Paramatha the abstract class?, besides Arjuna's ego (thinking that he is the best archer in universe) was the subject when Arjuna Confronts Maha Deva, so if Arjuna defeats Maha Deva, would his ego, get any lesser?,

So we should not indulge in such discriminatory approach at all.

Not at all, sir, if we indulge in such act, which means we still have not understood the Paramatma

thank you

Om NamaShivaya

Nitai

16th May 2005, 10:54 PM

Quotes:

At the birth of Arjuna Kunti heard a heavenly voice declare as follows : "Oh ! Kunti ! your son will be equal to Siva in prowess and unconquerable just as Indra is. After defeating all the Kings he will perform the A'svamedha thrice. He will please Siva and get the great weapon called Pasupata from him.
I think this is from Mahabharata

MUKA - An asura. This demon once went to Arjuna who was engaged in penance in the forests. He had assumed the form of a boar 'and Arjuna killed him. At once Siva appeared there in the guise of a forester and contended that the boar was killed by him. A quarrel ensued which ended in a fight between them. In the end Siva appeared before Arjuna in his real form and granted him the missile Pasupata.

PASUPATA. II. The missile of Siva. Arjuna during his exile in the forests performed penance to propitiate Siva and got this missile from him.

All these quotes are from the Puranic Encyclopedia. Sometimes it is unclear from where they are, which sastra.
Regarding Arjuna's ego. Well, Krishna was always guiding Arjuna even the Bhagavad-gita was spoken to him so seemingly to us Arjuna in his action has an ahankar but actually because he is surrendered to Krishna he is situated in his real ego as an eternal servant of Krishna. This can be confirmed to you by any member of 4 bona fide Vaishnava sampradayas.

Krishna might also fought with Siva and he got the pasupata astra but it seems that this happened in some other Dvapara yuga.

Sri Krishna Svayam Bhagavan ki Jay.

Nitai

16th May 2005, 11:10 PM

In the Rg veda it is clearly said that of all Gods Vishnu is the highest and Agni is the lowest. Therefore, there is hierarchy of different Gods some are like ministers and there is one president - Vishnu. E.g. when there are problems with demons - just remember - the demigods always go to the shore of the milk-ocean to seek the help of Lord Vishnu.

But, superior than Vishnu is Krishna. Here are some sastric quotes if you are followers of satra think about them.

iisvarah paramah krsnah
sac-cid-aananda-vigrahah
anaadir aadir govindah
sarva-kaarana-kaaranam

"The Supreme Personality of Godhead is Krsna, who has a body of
eternity, knowledge, and bliss. He has not beginning, for He is the
beginning of everything. He is the cause of all causes."
(Brahma-samhitaa 5.1)

yasyaika-nisvasita-kaalam athaavalambya
jiivanti loma-vila-jaa jagad-anda-naathaah
visnur mahaan sa iha yasya kalaa-viseso
govindam aadi-purusam tam aham bhajaami

"The Mahaa-Visnu, into whom all the innumerable universes enter
and from whome they come forth again simply by His breathing
process, is a plenary expansion of Krsna. Therefore I worship
Govinda, Krsna, the cause of all causes." (Brahma-samhitaa 5.48)

So, what do you need to understand Krishna's position?

"The form you are seeing with your transcendental eyes cannot be
understood simply by studying the Vedas, nor by undergoing serious penances, nor by charity, nor by worship. It is not by these means that one can see Me AS I AM."

"My dear Arjuna, only by undivided devotional service can I be
understood as I am, standing before you, and can thus be seen
directly. Only in this way can you enter into the mysteries of My
understanding." (Bhagavad-gita 11.53-54)

CONCLUSION:
Bhagavad-gita 7.7 Knowledge of the Absolute

mattah parataram nanyat
kincid asti dhananjaya
mayi sarvam idam protam
sutre mani-gana iva

O conqueror of wealth [Arjuna], there is no Truth superior to Me [KRISHNA]. Everything rests upon Me [KRISHNA], as pearls are strung on a thread.

Nitai

16th May 2005, 11:35 PM

The Mahabharata had described the meeting between Hanuman and Bhima. Once, while Arjuna was seeking celestial weapons, the remaining Pandavas wandered to Badarikasrama high in the Himalayas. Suddenly, the Alakananda River carried to Draupadi a beautiful and fragrant thousand-petaled lotus flower. Draupadi was captivated by its beauty and scent. "Bhima, this lotus flower is so beautiful. I should offer it to Yudhisthira Maharaja. Could you get me a few more? We could take some back to our hermitage in Kamyaka."
Bhima grabbed his club and charged up the hill where no mortals were permitted. As he ran, he bellowed, frightening elephants and lions, and he uprooted trees as he pushed them aside. Caring not for the ferocious beasts of the jungle, he climbed a steep mountain until his progress was blocked by a huge monkey who was lying across the path, "Why are you making so much noise and scaring all the animals. Just sit down and eat some fruit." "Move aside," ordered Bhima, for etiquette forbade him to step over the monkey. The monkey's reply? "I am too old to move. Jump over me." Bhima, becoming angry, repeated his order. But the monkey, again pleading the weakness of old age, requested Bhima to simply move his tail aside. Unlimitedly powerful Bhima grabbed the tail and tried but failed. Amazed, he respectfully inquired as to the monkey's identity and was overjoyed to learn that he had met his brother Hanuman, for both Bhima and Hanuman were sons of Vayu. Hanuman first embraced Bhima and showed him the huge form by which he leaped to Lanka. He then offered Bhima the following blessings. "I shall also remain present on the flag of your brother Arjuna. When you roar like a lion on the battlefield, my voice will join with yours to strike terror in the hearts of your enemies. You will be victorious and will regain your kingdom."

Nitai

16th May 2005, 11:49 PM

Sudhaama

17th May 2005, 04:14 AM

Dear Mr. Nitai,

You are going far-away from the Topic Mahabharatha... There is no Question here... Which God is Superior...

When such a Question indirectly raised its hood.. I had already silenced it ...

.. ..by means of the Broad-sense of TRUE-VEDIC-SPIRIT...

//In the Rg veda it is clearly said that of all Gods Vishnu is the highest and Agni is the lowest. Therefore, there is hierarchy of different Gods some are like ministers and there is one president - Vishnu. E.g. when there are problems with demons - just remember - the demigods always go to the shore of the milk-ocean to seek the help of Lord Vishnu//.

It is Not correct to say that any Vedic-Scripture indicates "Agni" as the LOWEST GOD.... No... Not at all.

But Contrarily all the Scriptures UNANIMOUSLY declare that the PUREST GOD-FORM prevalent in all the seven Worlds... including Earth... is AGNI...

Basic authority for all the Scriptures... is Vedas... within which the Most important section is... Purusha-sooktham... which asserts... that all the HIGHEST MIGHTS AND GODS... emanated from the Holy-Face of the... Sarva-Deva- Aikya-Swaroopa Viraat- Purusha- Vishnu...

.... which also asserts... " MUKHAADH INDHRAHSCHA... "AGNIHSCHA". ----..AJAAYATHA.

... ..which means that "Agni emanated from His Face.... the Holiest of Hollies."

But Agni is specifically mentioned in the Scriptures that ... coupled with His Wife SWAHA-DEVI..

AGNI... is the most HUMBLE-SERVICE-MAN for all the Gods as a MEDIA- Agent between the Receiver Gods and Offering Devotees. anywhere in the seven worlds including Earth.

That is why we offer all our Homa-Offerings in the Agni-Kunda...

... start Chanting... Ohm AGNAYAE SWAAHAA ANNAAYAE IDHANNA MAMA...

... meaning..." Primarily I offer you this Aahuthi My offer- Anna (Food)"... which please you receive first

...and the subsequent Aahuthis ... let reach the specific God whom I call after naming your wife SWAAHAA.- Devi

Accordingly follows....OHM KAESAVAAYAH SWAAHAA KAESAAVAAYAE IDHANNA MAMA. .. and so on.

We have to understand this sense... SIMILAR TO HANUMAN... who can fetch the Greatest Boons sought by Devotees from Gods...

... just in the capacity as MESSENGER IN BETWEEN.... the Two Remotes

... Hanuman is so powerful... and GREAT-PRIVILEGED.... even though very HUMBLE..

// But, superior than Vishnu is Krishna. Here are some sastric quotes if you are followers of satra think about them.//
None of us here ... are interested to the Ultimate-Sense of Vedic- Spirit.. the SUPREME.

... but only its BROAD-OUTLOOK. of Reality.. which alone is applicable for Common-Man's Life..

... which SENSE... is the ESSENCE OF MAHABHAARATHA...

Your ARGUMENT differentiating Krishna and Vishnu... is FUNNY... which is an unfounded PAROCHIAL OUTLOOK...

But if you feel so .. please carry on Accordingly.. APPLICABLE TO YOU ONLY...

. Please DON'T PREACH US. ... Because we follow our individual Acharyas... which are well-defined needing no more intervention nor RIDICULOUS INTERPRETATIONS of anyone's own..

Do you know that... to the Siva-Devotee Arjuna... Krishna showed HIMSELF AS SIVA... on whom Arjuna performed decorations and Arjuna... believing as Siva....

... and was AMAZED to note on the next day... the same decorations and Flowers offered as Archana on Krishna's body...... were found exactly at the same manner and locations... at the Siva-linga ... he used to worship daily. He noticed it as if he performed at the Linga Himself on the previuous day too.

Then Arjuna understood the True-Sense of Devotional-Spirit of Vedic- sense..

If you know it... please elaborate here... instead of "Out of the way Dry Arguments."

a.ratchasi

17th May 2005, 06:22 AM

So the best thing is to take to Krishna consciousness....

Hare Krishna.
Nitai

NOV, the post made by the hubber is offensive in nature.
Please kindly delete it.

Badri

17th May 2005, 06:56 AM

Sudhaama wrote

Dear Mr. badri99,

Please Narrate in detail about this Episode of Siva-Arjuna quarrel over a Boar... and further Arjuna's fetching Pasupathasthra from Lord Siva.. .. after hearing from Mr. Badri 99.

Dear Sudhaama: Why bring me into this?

In any case, the story has already been discussed! What more can I add? The episode of Arjuna-Siva fight has been immortalised in the Kirataarjuniya.

On the advice of Veda Vyasa and Indra, Arjuna undertakes penance to propitiate Lord Siva and obtain His Grace. To test Arjuna's skill and sincerity, Siva enacts a drama. Accordingly, a large wild boar comes rushing towards where Arjuna is performing his Siva Puja. Seeing the boar rush towards him, and although bound by a vow of non-violence during the period of the penance, Arjuna seizes his bow and arrows when a Bhil or a Kirata (hunter) comes into the scene. He is accompanied by his wife (which is rather surprising to Arjuna, as women rarely joined their husbands on hunts in the jungle) and followed by a retinue of fierce warriors.

The Kirata accosts Arjuna and tells him, "Hey, you, that is my boar. Beware if you do anything to it."

Arjuna, who had taken up arms in defence is now stung by the casual way in which the hunter speaks to him. Though he realized the hunter probably did not know he was the famous Arjuna, his ego was stung and he at once shot an arrow through the boar, killing it. At the exact same moment, an arrow of the Kirata too pierces the boar and there ensues an argument as to who killed the boar, and therefore who it belongs to.

This develops into a fight and Arjuna finds he is no match to the Kirata. This is when his pride is quelled. He recollects within, "Krishna, what a strange drama is this? Whos is this Kirata, a mere hunter, who can vanquish even me? Is this really you who have come in this guise? Indeed, this must be your drama."

When that humility comes into him, he turns around to see the Kirata, but sees in his place, Siva and Parvati. Siva blesses him and gives him the Paashupatastra.

A good story. But as with all good stories, what is the moral, the lesson?

Arjuna was doing one-pointed penance to Siva. If his penance were truly one-pointed, he could not have failed to recognize the very object of his devotion come in another guise. But because his ego was still blinding him, he only saw the Kirata, and not the true entity behind him, namely, Lord Siva. When the scales of ego fell from his eyes, he had the true vision of the Lord. Thus, if we too abandon our exagerrated notions of ourselves, if we develop a humility that is befitting our spiritual pursuit, we too would have the darshan (vision) of the Lord.

Again, the Lord may choose to come in any form, and not always the one we are expecting Him in. Our prejudices or narrow beliefs may call for one God as superior to another! But as long as such divisiveness exists, the Lord will most certainly not be perceived. When we commit the grave sin of dividing into many that which is indivisible and akanda, how are we to be blessed with the Vision Divine? So the wise say.

Badri

17th May 2005, 08:53 AM

So the best thing is to take to Krishna consciousness..........

Hare Krishna.
Nitai

NOV, the post made by the hubber is offensive in nature.
Please kindly delete it.

Nitai: This is a Forum where people of many religions, faiths and ideas come together. While you certainly have freedom of speech, faith and expression, sometimes, as is evident above, to force one opinion on everyone is not welcome. I am sure you'll recognize how insensitive this can be to people who do not subscribe to your views.

Therefore kindly desist from such posts in the future, considering the wide diversity of our audience.

Badri

17th May 2005, 09:00 AM

A small clarification. There is a promise of Krishna to (actually, everybody) who take His shelter. And this is the reason why Arjuna defeated Lord Siva.

In the Bhagavad-gita (Bg. 9.31) Krishna says:

Kaunteya pratijanihi na me bhaktah pranasyati:

"My devotee is never vanquished."

Hare Krishna.
Nitai

Nitai: A clarification of your clarification. The word "pranashyati" does not mean vanquished. It means destroyed. Therefore, Na me bhaktyah pranashyati means "My devotee never perishes".

a.ratchasi

17th May 2005, 09:28 AM

Thanks, Badri!

viggop

17th May 2005, 10:40 AM

Hi Friends
Let us continue discussing Mahabharatha.

Sudhaama sir and Badri can elucidate on the dharma teaching which Bhishma gave to Yudishtra on his bed of arrows.It is here that Bhishma recites the Vishnu Sahasranamam.

A good site which explains Vishnu Sahasranamam is
http://home.comcast.net/~chinnamma/
The author follows vishishta-dvaita philosophy,i guess but it is good for followers of other philosophies too.Other Tamil Vaishnavite works are also present in the website.

Badri

17th May 2005, 10:57 AM

When Bhisma is lying on the bed of arrows, the Pandavas along with Krishna go to him and on Krishna's advise seek to learn Dharma from him. This forms a part of the Shanti Parva of the Mahabharatha. To discuss this as Viggop requests would probably take a good long time, but I am put in mind of an incident.

When Bhishma begins his discourse on Dharma, Draupadi laughs out aloud. Yudhistra and the others are scandalised that she would do such a disrespectful thing in front of Venerable Bhisma. But Bhisma asks them to hold their peace and asks Draupadi" Daughter, you would not have done something like this without reason. Why did you laugh?"

Draupadi replied, "Grandfather, that my husbands are virtuous is known to the whole world. It is because of their virtue, their adherence to Dharma that we won the war. They have no need for your lecture on Dharma. I find it funny that you are lecturing to them about Dharma, yet, you kept your mouth shut when I was being disrobed in the Kaurava court. When I appealed to you, in distress, you kept quiet. That was the time and place when your lecture and admonishing were most required. The Kauravas where the one who most required your advice.
You chose to keep quiet then, now you are lecturing to people who don't need it. Tell me, isn't this funny?"

Bhisma replied, "You are right, Panchali. But at that time, I had eaten the Kaurava food. My blood was filled with their Adharma, and I could not raise my voice. Now, after your husband Arjuna has riddled my body with his arrows, all that bad blood has drained away, and now I am in a position to speak of Dharma. You are right, your five husbands need no lesson in Dharma, yet I speak so that others may learn through them."

Badri

17th May 2005, 11:22 AM

The discourse of Bhishma on Dharma is full of insight. In fact, as some learned and wise men have remarked, it shows us the change in Bhishma's own thought process and his own individual philosophy. As I said, since it would be too much of an effort to reproduce in toto Bhisma's discussions on Dharma, I will try and provide a synopsis as it were.

Among the important things Bhishma speaks is Truth. Here is an interesting thing in this. This same Bhisma vowed as a young man that he would remain celibate. It was the terrible vow that even gave him his name. When later on, his step-mother Satyavati suggests to him that he marry Vichitravirya's widows, he reiterates his vow and declares

"The earth may give up fragrance, and water its own flavor. Thus light may give up form, air may give up the quality of touch, the sun its light, and smoke-bannered fire its heat, ether may give up sound, the moon may give up the coolness of its rays, Indra, slayer of Vritra, may renounce his courage, the king of dharma may give up dharma, but I shall never resolve in any way to abandon the truth."

Wonderful and powerful sentiments, yet, a more careful analysis shows that he is more concerned about his own adherence to truth than the consequences of such an adherence. Even if the world be destroyed, I will stick to truth.

However, much later, mellowed down by years and experience, lying on the bed of arrows, a different Bhishma speaks,

"Speaking truth is righteous. Nothing is higher than truth. O Bharata, I shall speak to you that which is very hard to understand on Bhuloka. Truth is not to be spoken and falshood is to be spoken in a case where falsity becomes truth and truth becomes falsehood. An immature person is bewildered in such a case where truth is not firmly established. Determining truth and falsehood, one then knows morality."

He traces the thin line between Dharma and Adharma. As is evident in the war, the only person with competent knowledge on the distinction between the two was Krishna, and Bhishma follows Krishna's own examples in explaining this to the Pandavas.

He quotes 2 examples, of the hunter Balaka and the sage Kaushika to illustrate his point.

If anyone is interested in these 2 examples, let me know, I will post them seperately.

As it is, this post has become too long!!!

Badri

17th May 2005, 11:59 AM

Continuing Bhishma's discourse on Dharma

Bhishma finally concludes saying

"One must resolve the issue of Dharma Sankata (Dharmic conundrums) by reasoning. Morality is that which prevents injury to living beings. That is the conclusion.

Morality (dharma) comes from the act of sustaining (dharana). Thus authorities say that morality sustains living beings. So that which provides such sustenance is dharma. That is the conclusion."

Although scriptures are definitely an authority on Dharma, not all situations are envisaged by them. In all such cases, the guiding principle, as explained by Bhishma, is to apply the Golden Rule:

Is this action or speech of benefit to people, or does it harm them? If it benefits, it is Dharma, if it harms then it is Adharma.

The same sentiment is also echoed by Vyasa, who declares that

"Parapokara punyaya Paapaya Parapeedanam"

To help another is Punya; to cause harm to another is Papa"

viggop

17th May 2005, 12:17 PM

Hi Badri
Since,everything is part of Mahabharatha,I dont think it is wrong to discuss dharma fully here.It need not be done in a single post.We can take own time but let us discuss it since lot of people will benefit by it.This discussion on Bhishma's discourse will be good for this thread, i think

If anyone has objections to this and if they feel that discussing the story is better,then we can abandon the idea and continue discussing other stories in the mahabharatha.

viggop

17th May 2005, 12:17 PM

The bhAghavataM says that there are only twelve men in the whole world who know the ins and outs of dharma in all its subtlety. These twelve are: BrahmA, the Creator; Narada, the roving sage; Lord Siva; Lord SubrahmaNya; the sage Kapila; Manu the law-giver; the boy-devotee Prahlada; King Janaka; Bhishma; King Bali; the boy-sage Suka, the reciter of the bhAgavatam; and Yama, the Lord of Death and Dispenser of Justice:

viggop

17th May 2005, 12:21 PM

[tscii:739c245089]Yudhishtira asks six fundamental questions to Bhishma:

· What is the One Supreme God?

· What is the One Ultimate Resort?

· What is the One by worshipping which man can attainin everything that is good for him?

· What is the One whose praise by man will give him everything that is good for him?

· What dharma is considered to be the greatest of all dharmas?

· What is the One by the memory of which man may be released from the cycle of births and deaths
[/tscii:739c245089]

Badri

17th May 2005, 12:27 PM

viggop

Actually Yudhishtra asks several questions. The 6 you have listed form a part of the Vishnu Sahasranama.

He also asks

"How should a person, who wants to abide by dharma, behave?
I seek to understand this, O wise one, so kindly explain, O best of Bharatas.

The bits I quoted are in answer to this question of Yudhistra.

Raghu

17th May 2005, 02:51 PM

Raghu

17th May 2005, 04:37 PM

Dear Niti

I have read couple of books from ISKON (International Society For Krishna Consiousness) , by his divine grace Sripala Bhakthivedananta Swami Prapuda, he nor even in the geeta it is NEVER DECLARED as lord Krishna being GOD,lord Krishna is an avatar of Lord Vishnu, this Krishna Avatar is Lord Vishnu's 9th avatar,with Kalki avatar yet to come, in Kali yuga(present yuga).

In Gita the Ultimate truth is refered as Iswar, or Parama Iswar or Maha Iswar, in Hinduism Lord Shiva or Maha Deva is referred as the Ultimate truth, the Param atama, Do you know what Shiva Lingam Represents?

Sudhaama

17th May 2005, 05:57 PM

Dear Mr. Raghu,

I strongly OBJECT to the Trend you are carrying by this latest posting...

Is this a thread on Mahabharatha.. a Topic on Epic.. or on Religion or Philosophy....??

I am very sorry to note you are going far and far away from the Thread-Tille.. you have initiated.

When we deal with Epics... we should deal with the Characters involved . along with the events relevant... which leads us towards the inherent Morals... the Lessons for Life... applicable to any Human.

That is how Mahabharatha is one of the Epics... a part of Indian-Culture and Heritage ... irrespective of Religion or Philosophy..

Even the Christian and Muslim citizens of India.... study Mahabharatha and Ramayana,... only in such a Healthy aspect on Indian-Culture of Morality-Study....

...aptly inculcated at the Student age.... towards a purposeful Life of Humanity.

The Elementary-stage in Life is Morality... which we get highly from Epics...

Epics no doubt subtly deal with God too... even though apart from Religion...

But we don't go deep into such 2nd and higher plane.. Rather Religion deals on detailing and analysing God...What Who.. Why and How aspects... relating the Creator and the Creations.

Then the highest Stage... Philosophy (Veda-Antham) ... which deals with mutual relations amongst various Gods and God-mights... as well as the intricate relations (by Spiritualism) between the God and Man... rather Jeevaathma and Paramathma.

Now Mr. Raghu... please tell me... are you discussing Religion the second higher stage ... or the Philosophy the 3rd and highest stage.... drifting far away from the fundamental stage of Epics...

... the Life-Moral... which ONLY IS APPLICABLE HERE.

You are unnecessarily provoking a Controversy often... on the God-Supremacy even within one and the same Religion... which is out of the Topic here... being an Epic.

When you say Maheswar is supreme... it provokes another person to negate your conclusion and declare stating No No.. Maha-Vishnu is supreme... If any Bengali sees both of your Arguments ... he will say... No No.. Neither Maheswar nor Maha-Vishnu is Supreme... but only Maha-Kali. Is it what you are leading us all to?

If you want to talk on Philosophy... so called Vedantham... please start another Thread on it.. where too... without any denigration to anyboy's individual Faith and Beliefs .. I will participate deeply and highly... enlightening many of the points... as laid down by our Great Acharyas like Sarvasri Sankara, Ramanuja, Madhwa, Krishna-Chaithanya, Tukaram, Thulsidas, Ramalinga-Vallalaar and so on...some of which news or message you may not be aware of..

If you bellieve Maheswar is Supreme God .. Well You can have it so... as your personal-Faith and belief...

Please don't PREACH HERE SO.. again and again...DRUM-BEATING... Vociferously .. anymore

Because it is far and far... out of the SCOPE of this Thread ...Mahabhaaratha... an Epic.. Greatest Lesson for Humanity... irrespective of any Religion and Philosophy.. .. Internatiolly too.

So I reiterate... henceforth we should confine our discussions only to Mahabharatha... ensuring our Thoughts on its Characters, Events and the Messages behind ... USEFUL FOR OUR LIFE.

Am I wrong to say so?

Thiru

17th May 2005, 06:23 PM

Pls stick to the topic rather than digressing about religious beliefs and stuff... We will be forced to edit some of your posts if this goes on...

Sudhaama

18th May 2005, 10:06 AM

Dear Mr. badri,

Thanks for honouring my request... by posting the episode of Arjuna-Siva quarrel over a Boar.

If I remember correct... Lord Siva comes in disguise as a hunter... and aims at the same Boar which is Arrow-targeted by arjuna also at the same time.... but without the knowledge Arjuna... since the Hunter-Siva was hiding behind a bush.

When both the arrows stuck on the Boar simultaneously...there arose a dispute... as to who had the due claim preferably... Then they entered into a fight... to prove who the greater warrior

Finally...Arjuna gets defeated... and Lord Siva... gives his Devotee Arjuna ... Darsana...

Subsequently Arjuna went to Kailasa... and with the blessings of Siva... he recives the PAASUPATHAA-ASTHRAM... from Siva Himself.

... which was very useful for him to win in the Kurushethra war

Am I correct ?
.

Raghu

18th May 2005, 02:18 PM

Raghu

18th May 2005, 02:28 PM

Dear Sudhama sir & thiru,

I shall reply to your PM very shortly, I am NOt at all offended by your posts.

Another interesting incident I want to discuss is Lord Krishna's encounter with Shiva Bhaktha Banasur, If any one of you want to start that up, pls do, else I shall start it shortly

Nitai

18th May 2005, 04:07 PM

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.63 Summary

This chapter describes the battle between Lord Kṛṣṇa and Lord Śiva, as well as Śiva's glorification of Kṛṣṇa after the Lord had cut off Bāṇāsura's arms.

When Aniruddha did not return from Śoṇitapura, His family and friends passed the four months of the rainy season in extreme distress. When they finally heard from Nārada Muni how Aniruddha had been captured, a large army of the best Yādava warriors, under Kṛṣṇa's protection, set off for Bāṇāsura's capital and laid siege to it. Bāṇāsura fiercely opposed them with his own army of equal size. To help Bāṇāsura, Lord Śiva, accompanied by Kārtikeya and a horde of mystic sages, took up arms against Balarāma and Kṛṣṇa. Bāṇa began fighting against Sātyaki, and Bāṇa's son fought against Sāmba. All the demigods assembled in the sky to witness the battle. With His arrows Lord Kṛṣṇa harassed the followers of Lord Śiva, and by putting Lord Śiva into a state of confusion He was able to destroy Bāṇāsura's army. Kārtikeya was so strongly beaten by Pradyumna that he fled the battlefield, while the remnants of Bāṇāsura's army, harried by the blows of Lord Balarāma's club, scattered in all directions.

Enraged to see his army's destruction, Bāṇāsura rushed Kṛṣṇa to attack Him. But the Lord immediately killed Bāṇa's chariot driver and broke his chariot and bow, and then He sounded His Pāñcajanya conchshell. Next Bāṇāsura's mother, trying to save her son, appeared naked in front of Lord Kṛṣṇa, who averted His face to avoid looking at her. Seeing his chance, Bāṇa fled into his city.

After Lord Kṛṣṇa had thoroughly defeated the ghosts and hobgoblins fighting under Lord Śiva, the Śiva-jvara weapon — a personification of fever with three heads and three legs — approached Lord Kṛṣṇa to fight Him. Seeing the Śiva-jvara, Kṛṣṇa released His Viṣṇu-jvara. The Śiva-jvara was overwhelmed by the Viṣṇu-jvara; having nowhere else to turn for shelter, the Śiva-jvara began to address Lord Kṛṣṇa, glorifying Him and asking for mercy. Lord Kṛṣṇa was pleased with the Śiva-jvara, and after the Lord had promised him freedom from fear, the Śiva-jvara bowed down to Him and departed.

Next Bāṇāsura returned and attacked Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa again, wielding all kinds of weapons in his thousand hands. But Lord Kṛṣṇa took His Sudarśana disc and began cutting off all the demon's arms Lord Śiva approached Kṛṣṇa to pray for Bāṇāsura's life, and when the Lord agreed to spare him, He spoke as follows to Śiva: "Bāṇāsura does not deserve to die, since he was born in the family of Prahlāda Mahārāja. I have severed all but four of Bāṇa's arms just to destroy his false pride, and I have annihilated his army because they were a burden to the earth. Henceforward he will be free from old age and death, and remaining fearless in all circumstances, he will be one of your principal attendants."

Assured he had nothing to fear, Bāṇāsura then offered his obeisances to Lord Kṛṣṇa and had Ūṣā and Aniruddha seated on their wedding chariot and brought before the Lord. Kṛṣṇa then set off for Dvārakā with Aniruddha and His bride leading the procession. When the newlyweds arrived at the Lord's capital, they were honored by the citizens, the Lord's relatives and the brāhmaṇas.

viggop

18th May 2005, 04:26 PM

I'm surprised to hear the above story that Lord Krishna and Lord Shiva had a fight and Karthikeya was defeated.
Sudhaamaji, Is that the original version and interpretation?
Why should Lord SHiva fight against Lord Krishna for an asura(even though his devotee).He did not fight for Ravana who was also his greatest devotee.Infact ,Lord Rama built the temple in Rameshwaram and installed the lingam there.
I read because he killed a Shiva devotee , rama installed the lingam to propiate Shiva.

Jarasandha was also a devotee of Lord Shiva and Krishna left Mathura and founded Dwaraka because of jarasandha's continuous nuisance.Seems Krishna will challenge Jarasandha to a fight.Jarasandha will be very very enraged and he'll come to the battlefield full of anger.But,Krishna will run away from the battlefield(tactical retreat).

Krishna kept on doing this till Jarasandha became weak because of his anger.Moral of this is not to get angry at anyone or anything as anger will ultimately lead to your destruction.

Raghu

18th May 2005, 04:46 PM

Dear Vigop,
Maha Deva & Lord Krishna never engage in a fight, it is true that Banasur was real devotee of Maha Iswar, he gained lots of boons from Iswar, and was impossible to defeat, hence this made bansur's head very heavy and full of EGO, but still his devotation towards Iswar did not deteriorate at all, banusur was blessed by Maha Deva & Parvathi matha, Bansur's daughter is in love with Lord Krishna's Grandson, anirudh, so Lord Krishna tactically plans to defeat Banasur, by making Banasur his in-law, the rest of the story I will post on Monday or Sunday!

Thiru

18th May 2005, 05:13 PM

Raghu,
There are different versions for each and every story as sudhaama had earlier pointed out... No offense to Srimad Bhagavatham but who knows whether that version is the right one or not.. So, lets keep discussing about the epic and not the intricacies of interpreting the character in Mahabarath..

Sudhaama

18th May 2005, 05:31 PM

[tscii:53da7adfd2][font=Arial, sans-serif]
"viggop"

//I'm surprised to hear the above story that Lord Krishna and Lord Shiva had a fight and Karthikeya was defeated...Sudhaamaji, Is that the original version and interpretation?..//

There are several Puranas, according to the individual Devotional- groups of Vedic followers. Out of them 18 Puranas only are considered Authentic and commonly accepted by all. .... irrespective of Siva-bhakthas or Vishnu-Bhakthas.. or Muruha-Bhakthas...

Such Puranas which speak highly of Lord Siva.. by His Alahaala-Visha episode of Koorma-Awatharam,...Markandeya-story...Thiripuram burning...Dhaksha-yagjnam... Siva-Sakthi Dance-competition... Baheeratha-episode ... Arjuna-Siva Quarrel in Mahabharatha... and so on one side...

... state on Lord Siva differently too.... including Bhikshaandaar episode...

The Tamil-Literature..."Thiruvaaymozhi".. the UNDISPUTED... Tamil- Version of Authentic puranas...states...

§¿÷ ºÃ¢ó¾¡ý ¦¸¡Êì-§¸¡Æ¢ì-¦¸¡ñ¼¡ý
Naer charindhaan Kodi-k-Koazhi-k-konhdaan

§¿÷-ºÃ¢ó¾¡ý ±Ã¢Ôõ «É§Ä¡ý «ôÀý
Naer charindhaan eriyum Analoan Appan

§¿÷- ºÃ¢ó¾¡ý Óì¸ñ-ã÷ò¾¢ ¸ñË÷ «ôÀý
Naer-charindhaan Mukkanh-Moorthi kanhdeer

"§¿÷-ºÃ¢ Å¡½ý ¾¢ñ§¼¡û ¦¸¡ñ¼ «ý§È".
Naer-chari-VAANHAN THINHDOALH KONDA ANRHAE"

... so concurs with such authentic 18 Puranas.

//Why should Lord SHiva fight against Lord Krishna for an asura(even though his devotee)//

Because Bhanasura prays for Help of his God Siva.... So comes in support. But Krishna felt as His duty .. to DEFEAT the Arrogance and Over-Ego coupled with Autocracy...and so felt inevitable to defeat anybody... involved.

.//He did not fight for Ravana who was also his greatest devotee//

Ravana was so Arrogant ... that he felt he can easily defeat the... after-all the Men and the Monkeys.. So he did not seek God's Support.

//.Infact ,Lord Rama built the temple in Rameshwaram and installed the lingam there... I read because he killed a Shiva devotee , rama installed the lingam to propiate Shiva.//

This is just a Sthala-puranam of the local Temple... not forming part of any Puranas including Siva-Purana...

... and felt by many as a CONCOCTED STORY... by some Siva-devotess out of Fanaticism...

...since far-differing with Ramayana... as also contradictory to the sense of Ramayana... which speaks high of Lord Siva too..... In fact Hanuman is of Siva-Vayu Complex Amsa.

Even one section of Siva-devotees do not BELIEVE THIS STORY.

//.Moral of this is not to get angry at anyone or anything as anger will ultimately lead to your destruction//

Yes ... and also SUPERIORITY COMPLEX ... coupled with ARROGANCE and also SELFISH Ill-treatment of others as Adharma...

... are treated as the ENEMIES OF GOD... in Visual-Shape... deserving to be DESTROYED.

All these are the Dramas played together by various Gods to convey to Humanity...

... ONE GREAT MORAL- SENSE... implied behind... irrespective of Siva-bhaktha, Vishnu-bhaktha or the like.

]... COMMONLY APPLICABLE to the whole Humanity eternally..towards the Meaningful-MUNDANE-Life
/font[/tscii:53da7adfd2]

viggop

18th May 2005, 05:44 PM

Sudhaamaji
Thanks for your explanation.

Raghu
Can you please put forth your version of this Banasur story.

Raghu

18th May 2005, 08:18 PM

Such Puranas which speak highly of Lord Siva.. by His Alahaala-Visha episode of Koorma-Awatharam,...Markandeya-story...Thiripuram burning...Dhaksha-yagjnam... Siva-Sakthi Dance-competition... Baheeratha-episode ... Arjuna-Siva Quarrel in Mahabharatha... and so on one side...

Sudhama sir, pardon my ignorance are saying that Koorma Awatharam was of Lord Shiva and not of Lord Vishnu?

Raghu

18th May 2005, 08:19 PM

Raghu
Can you please put forth your version of this Banasur story.

Yes I shall certainly do that on Sunday or Monday

Nitai

18th May 2005, 09:05 PM

Summary

SB 10.63.1: Sukadeva Gosvami said: O descendant of Bharata, the relatives of Aniruddha, not seeing Him return, continued to lament as the four rainy months passed.

SB 10.63.2: After hearing from Narada the news of Aniruddha's deeds and His capture, the Vrishnis, who worshiped Lord Krishna as their personal Deity, went to Sonitapura.

SB 10.63.3-4: With Lord Balarama and Lord Krishna in the lead, the chiefs of the Satvata clan -- Pradyumna, Satyaki, Gada, Samba, Sarana, Nanda, Upananda, Bhadra and others -- converged with an army of twelve divisions and laid siege to Banasura's capital, completely surrounding the city on all sides.

SB 10.63.5: Banasura became filled with anger upon seeing them destroy his city's suburban gardens, ramparts, watchtowers and gateways, and thus he went out to confront them with an army of equal size.

SB 10.63.6: Lord Rudra, accompanied by his son Kartikeya and the Pramathas, came riding on Nandi, his bull carrier, to fight Balarama and Krishna on Bana's behalf.

PURPORT

Srila Sridhara Svami states that the word bhagavan is used here to indicate that Lord Siva is by nature all-knowing and thus well aware of Lord Krishna's greatness. Still, although Siva knew Lord Krishna would defeat him, he joined the battle against Him to demonstrate the glories of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura states that Lord Siva entered the battle for two reasons: first, to increase Lord Krishna's pleasure and enthusiasm; and second, to demonstrate that the Lord's incarnation as Krishna, although enacting humanlike pastimes, is superior to other avataras, such as Lord Ramacandra. Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti further states in this regard that Yogamaya, Lord Krishna's internal potency, bewildered Lord Siva just as she had bewildered Brahma. In support of this statement, the acarya cites the phrase brahma-rudradi-mohanam from Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu. Of course, Yogamaya's job is to make fine arrangements for the Lord's pastimes, and thus Siva became enthusiastic to battle the Supreme Lord, Krishna.

SB 10.63.7: A most astonishing, tumultuous and hair-raising battle then commenced, with Lord Krishna matched against Lord Sankara, and Pradyumna against Kartikeya.

SB 10.63.8: Lord Balarama fought with Kumbhanda and Kupakarna, Samba with Bana's son, and Satyaki with Bana.

SB 10.63.9: Brahma and the other ruling demigods, along with Siddhas, Caranas and great sages, as well as Gandharvas, Apsaras and Yakshas, all came in their celestial airplanes to watch.

SB 10.63.10-11: With sharp-pointed arrows discharged from His bow Sarnga, Lord Krishna drove away the various followers of Lord Siva -- Bhutas, Pramathas, Guhyakas, Dakinis, Yatudhanas, Vetalas, Vinayakas, Pretas, Matas, Pisacas, Kushmandas and Brahma-rakshasas.

SB 10.63.12: Lord Siva, wielder of the trident, shot various weapons at Lord Krishna, wielder of Sarnga. But Lord Krishna was not in the least perplexed: He neutralized all these weapons with appropriate counterweapons.

SB 10.63.13: Lord Krishna counteracted a brahmastra with another brahmastra, a wind weapon with a mountain weapon, a fire weapon with a rain weapon, and Lord Siva's personal pasupatastra weapon with His own personal weapon, the narayanastra.

SB 10.63.14: After bewildering Lord Siva by making him yawn with a yawning weapon, Lord Krishna proceeded to strike down Banasura's army with His sword, club and arrows.

SB 10.63.15: Lord Kartikeya was distressed by the flood of Pradyumna's arrows raining down from all sides, and thus he fled the battlefield on his peacock as blood poured from his limbs.

SB 10.63.16: Kumbhanda and Kupakarna, tormented by Lord Balarama's club, fell down dead. When the soldiers of these two demons saw that their leaders had been killed, they scattered in all directions.

SB 10.63.17: Banasura was furious to see his entire military force being torn apart. Leaving his fight with Satyaki, he charged across the battlefield on his chariot and attacked Lord Krishna.

SB 10.63.18: Excited to a frenzy by the fighting, Bana simultaneously pulled taut all the strings of his five hundred bows and fixed two arrows on each string.

SB 10.63.19: Lord Sri Hari split every one of Banasura's bows simultaneously, and also struck down his chariot driver, chariot and horses. The Lord then sounded His conchshell.

SB 10.63.20: Just then Banasura's mother, Kotara, desiring to save her son's life, appeared before Lord Krishna naked and with her hair undone.

SB 10.63.21: Lord Gadagraja turned His face away to avoid seeing the naked woman, and Banasura -- deprived of his chariot, his bow shattered -- took the opportunity to flee into his city.

SB 10.63.22: After Lord Siva's followers had been driven away, the Siva-jvara, who had three heads and three feet, pressed forward to attack Lord Krishna. As the Siva-jvara approached, he seemed to burn everything in the ten directions.

PURPORT

Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti quotes the following description of the Siva-jvara:

jvaras tri-padas tri-sirah / shad-bhujo nava-locanah
bhasma-praharano raudrah / kalantaka-yamopamah

"The terrible Siva-jvara had three legs, three heads, six arms and nine eyes. Showering ashes, he resembled Yamaraja at the time of universal annihilation."

SB 10.63.23: Seeing this personified weapon approach, Lord Narayana then released His own personified fever weapon, the Vishnu-jvara. The Siva-jvara and Vishnu-jvara thus battled each other.

SB 10.63.24: The Siva-jvara, overwhelmed by the strength of the Vishnu-jvara, cried out in pain. But finding no refuge, the frightened Siva-jvara approached Lord Krishna, the master of the senses, hoping to attain His shelter. Thus with joined palms he began to praise the Lord.

PURPORT

As pointed out by Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti, it is significant that the Siva-jvara had to leave the side of his master, Lord Siva, and directly take shelter of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Krishna.

SB 10.63.25: The Siva-jvara said: I bow down to You of unlimited potencies, the Supreme Lord, the Supersoul of all beings. You possess pure and complete consciousness and are the cause of cosmic creation, maintenance and dissolution. Perfectly peaceful, You are the Absolute Truth to whom the Vedas indirectly refer.

PURPORT

Previously the Siva-jvara felt himself to be unlimitedly powerful and thus attempted to burn Sri Krishna. But now he himself has been burned, and understanding that Sri Krishna is the Supreme Lord, he humbly approaches to bow down and offer praise to the Absolute Truth.

According to the acaryas, the word sarvatmanam indicates that Lord Sri Krishna is the Supersoul, the giver of consciousness to all living beings. Krishna confirms this in the Bhagavad-gita (15.15): matah smritir jnanam apohanam ca. "From Me come remembrance, knowledge and forgetfulness.''

In his commentary Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti emphasizes that the Siva-jvara has realized in many ways Lord Krishna's supremacy over his own master, Lord Siva. Thus the Siva-jvara addresses Krishna as ananta-sakti, "possessor of unlimited potency"; paresa, "the supreme controller"; and sarvatma, "the Supersoul of all beings '' -- even of Lord Siva.

The words kevalam jnapti-matram indicate that Lord Krishna possesses pure omniscience. According to our limited understanding, we act in this world, but Lord Krishna, with His unlimited understanding, performs infinite works of creation, maintenance and annihilation. As Srila Jiva Gosvami points out, even the functions of the gross elements, such as air, depend on Him. The Taittiriya Upanishad (2.8.1) confirms this: bhishasmad vatah-pavate. "Out of fear of Him, the wind blows." Thus Lord Sri Krishna is the ultimate object of worship for all living beings.

SB 10.63.26: Time; fate; karma; the jiva and his propensities; the subtle material elements; the material body; the life air; false ego; the various senses; and the totality of these as reflected in the living being's subtle body -- all this constitutes your material illusory energy, maya, an endless cycle like that of seed and plant. I take shelter of You, the negation of this maya.

PURPORT

The word bija-roha-pravaha is explained as follows: The conditioned soul accepts a material body, with which he attempts to enjoy the material world. That body is the seed (bija) of future material existence because when a person acts with that body he creates further reactions (karma), which grow (roha) into the obligation to accept another material body. In other words, material life is a chain of actions and reactions. The simple decision to surrender to the Supreme Lord releases the conditioned soul from this futile repetition of material growth and reaction.

According to Srila Sridhara Svami, the words tan-nishedham prapadye indicate that the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Krishna, is nishedhavadhi-bhutam, "the limit of negation." In other words, after all illusion is negated, the Absolute Truth remains.

The process of education may be succinctly described as a way of eradicating ignorance through the attainment of knowledge. Through inductive, deductive and intuitive means, we attempt to refute the specious, the illusory and the imperfect and elevate ourselves to a platform of full knowledge. Ultimately, when all illusion is negated, that which remains firmly in place is the Absolute Truth, the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

In the previous text, the Siva-jvara described the Supreme Lord as sarvatmanam kevalam jnapti-matram, "pure, concentrated spiritual consciousness." Now the Siva-jvara concludes his philosophical description of the Lord by saying in this text that the various aspects of material existence are also potencies of the Supreme Lord.

Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti mentions that the Supreme Lord's own body and senses, as implied here by the word tan-nishedham, are nondifferent from the Lord's pure spiritual existence. The Lord's body and senses are not external to Him, nor do they cover Him, but rather the Lord is identical with His spiritual form and senses. The full Absolute Truth, unlimited in fascinating diversity, is Lord Sri Krishna.

SB 10.63.27: With various intentions, You perform pastimes to maintain the demigods, the saintly persons and the codes of religion for this world. By these pastimes You also kill those who stray from the right path and live by violence. Indeed, your present incarnation is meant to relieve the earth's burden.

PURPORT

As Lord Krishna states in the Bhagavad-gita (9.29),

samo 'ham sarva-bhuteshu

na me dveshyo 'sti na priyah

ye bhajanti tu mam bhaktya

mayi te teshu capy aham

"I envy no one, nor am I partial to anyone. I am equal to all. But whoever renders service unto Me in devotion is a friend -- is in Me -- and I am also a friend to him."

The demigods and sages (devan sadhun) are dedicated to executing the will of the Supreme Lord. The demigods act as cosmic administrators, and the sages, by their teachings and their good example, illumine the path of self-realization and holiness. But those who transgress the natural law, the law of God, and live by committing violence against others are vanquished by the Supreme Lord in His various pastime incarnations. As the Lord states in the Bhagavad-gita (4.11), ye yatha mam prapadyante tams tathaiva bhajamy aham. He is impartial, but He responds appropriately to the actions of the living beings.

SB 10.63.28: I am tortured by the fierce power of Your terrible fever weapon, which is cold yet burning. All embodied souls must suffer as long as they remain bound to material ambitions and thus averse to serving Your feet.

PURPORT

In the previous verse, the Siva-jvara stated that those who live by violence will suffer similar violence at the hands of the Lord. But here he further states that those who do not surrender to the Supreme Lord are especially liable to punishment. Although the Siva-jvara himself had acted violently up till now, since he has surrendered to the Lord and rectified himself, he hopes to receive the Lord's mercy. In other words, he has now become the Lord's devotee.

SB 10.63.29: The Supreme Lord said: O three-headed one, I am pleased with you. May your fear of My fever weapon be dispelled, and may whoever remembers our conversation here have no reason to fear you.

PURPORT

Here the Lord accepts the Siva-jvara as His devotee and gives him his first order -- that he should never frighten, by hot fever, those who faithfully hear this pastime of the Lord's.

SB 10.63.30: Thus addressed, the Mahesvara-jvara bowed down to the infallible Lord and went away. But Banasura then appeared, riding forth on his chariot to fight Lord Krishna.

SB 10.63.31: Carrying numerous weapons in his thousand hands, O King, the terribly infuriated demon shot many arrows at Lord Krishna, the carrier of the disc weapon.

SB 10.63.32: As Bana continued hurling weapons at Him, the Supreme Lord began using His razor-sharp cakra to cut off Banasura's arms as if they were tree branches.

SB 10.63.33: Lord Siva felt compassion for his devotee Banasura, whose arms were being cut off, and thus he approached Lord Cakrayudha [Krishna] and spoke to Him as follows.

SB 10.63.34: Sri Rudra said: You alone are the Absolute Truth, the supreme light, the mystery hidden within the verbal manifestation of the Absolute. Those whose hearts are spotless can see You, for You are uncontaminated, like the sky.

PURPORT

The Absolute Truth is the source of all light and is therefore the supreme light, self-luminous. This Absolute Truth is explained confidentially in the Vedas and is therefore difficult for an ordinary reader to understand. The following statements quoted by Srila Jiva Gosvami from the Gopala-tapani Upanishad show how the Vedic sounds occasionally reveal the Absolute: Te hocur upasanam etasya paratmano govindasyakhiladharino bruhi (Purva-khanda 17): "They [the four Kumaras] said [to Brahma], 'Please tell us how to worship Govinda, the Supreme Soul and the foundation of all that exists.' " Cetanas cetananam (Purva-khanda 21): "He is the chief of all living beings." And tam ha devam atma-vritti-prakasam (Purva-khanda 23): "One realizes that Supreme Godhead by first realizing one's own self." The great acarya Jiva Gosvami also quotes a verse from the Srimad-Bhagavatam (7.10.48) -- gudham param brahma manushya-lingam -- which refers to "the Supreme Truth concealed in a humanlike form."

Since the Lord is pure, why do some people perceive Krishna's form and activities as impure? Acarya Jiva explains that those whose own hearts are impure cannot understand the pure Lord. Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti further quotes the Lord's own instruction to Arjuna in Sri Hari-vamsa:

tat-param paramam brahma

sarvam vibhajate jagat

mamaiva tad ghanam tejo

jnatum arhasi bharata

"Superior to that [total material nature] is the Supreme Brahman, from which this entire creation expands. O descendant of Bharata, you should know that the Supreme Brahman consists of My concentrated effulgence."

Thus, to save his devotee, Siva now glorifies the Supreme Lord, Krishna, his eternal worshipable master. The Lord's bewildering potency induced Siva to fight with Lord Krishna, but now the fight is over, and to save his devotee Lord Siva offers these beautiful prayers.

SB 10.63.35-36: The sky is Your navel, fire Your face, water Your semen, and heaven Your head. The cardinal directions are Your sense of hearing, herbal plants the hairs on Your body, and water-bearing clouds the hair on Your head. The earth is Your foot, the moon Your mind, and the sun Your vision, while I am Your ego. The ocean is Your abdomen, Indra Your arm, Lord Brahma Your intelligence, the progenitor of mankind Your genitals, and religion Your heart. You are indeed the original purusha, creator of the worlds.

PURPORT

Srila Sridhara Svami explains that just as the tiny bugs living inside a fruit cannot comprehend the fruit, so we tiny living beings cannot understand the Supreme Absolute Truth, in whom we exist. It is difficult to understand the cosmic manifestation of the Lord, what to speak of His transcendental form as Sri Krishna. Therefore we should surrender in Krishna consciousness, and the Lord Himself will help us understand.

SB 10.63.37: Your current descent into the material realm, O Lord of unrestricted power, is meant for upholding the principles of justice and benefiting the entire universe. We demigods, each depending on Your grace and authority, develop the seven planetary systems.

PURPORT

As Lord Siva glorifies Lord Krishna doubt may arise, since, apparently, Lord Krishna is standing before Lord Siva as a historical personality with a humanlike body. However, it is out of the Lord's causeless mercy that He appears to us in a form visible to our mundane eyes. If we want to understand the Absolute Truth, Sri Krishna, we must hear from recognized authorities in Krishna consciousness, such as Lord Krishna Himself in the Bhagavad-gita, or from Lord Siva, a recognized Vaishnava authority, who here glorifies the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

SB 10.63.38: You are the original person, one without a second, transcendental and self-manifesting. Uncaused, you are the cause of all, and You are the ultimate controller. You are nonetheless perceived in terms of the transformations of matter effected by Your illusory energy -- transformations You sanction so that the various material qualities can fully manifest.

PURPORT

The acaryas comment as follows on this verse: Srila Sridhara Svami explains that the term adyah purushah, "the original purusha," indicates that Lord Krishna expands Himself as Maha-Vishnu, the first of the three purushas who take charge of cosmic manifestation. The Lord is eka advitiyah, "one without a second," because there is no one equal to the Lord or different from Him. No one is completely equal to the Supreme Godhead, and yet because all the living beings are expansions of the potency of the Godhead, no one is qualitatively different from Him. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu nicely explains this inconceivable situation by stating that the Absolute Truth and the living beings are qualitatively one but quantitatively different. The Absolute possesses infinite spiritual consciousness, whereas the living beings possess infinitesimal consciousness, which is subject to being covered by illusion.

Srila Jiva Gosvami, commenting on the term adyah purushah, quotes from the Satvata-tantra: vishnos tu trini rupani. "There are three forms of Vishnu [for cosmic manifestation, etc.]." Srila Jiva Gosvami also quotes a statement of the Lord's from sruti: purvam evaham ihasam. "In the beginning I alone existed in this world." This statement describes the form of the Lord called the purusha-avatara, who exists before the cosmic manifestation. Srila Jiva Gosvami also quotes the following sruti-mantra: tat-purushasya purushatvam, which means "Such constitutes the Lord's status as purusha." Actually, Lord Krishna is the essence of the purusha incarnation because He is turiya, as described in the present verse. Jiva Gosvami explains the term turiya (literally "the fourth") by quoting Sridhara Svami's commentary to the Bhagavatam verse 11.15.16:

virat hiranyagarbhas ca

karanam cety upadhayah

isasya yat tribhir hinam

turiyam tad vidur budhah

"The Lord's universal form, His Hiranyagarbha form and the primeval causal manifestation of material nature are all relative conceptions, but because the Lord Himself is not covered by these three, intelligent authorities call Him 'the fourth.' "

According to Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti, the word turiya indicates that the Lord is the fourth member of the quadruple expansion of Godhead called the Catur-vyuha. In other words, Lord Krishna is Vasudeva.

Lord Krishna is sva-drik -- that is, He alone can perceive Himself perfectly -- because He is infinite spiritual existence, infinitely pure. He is hetu, the cause of everything, and yet He is ahetu, without cause. Therefore He is isa, the supreme controller.

The last two lines of this verse are of special philosophical significance. Why is the Lord perceived differently by different persons, although He is one? A partial explanation is given here. By the agency of Maya, the Lord's external potency, material nature is in a constant state of transformation, vikara. In one sense, then, material nature is "unreal," asat. But because God is the supreme reality, and because He is present within all things and all things are His potency, material objects and energies possess a degree of reality. Therefore some people see one aspect of material energy and think, "This is reality," while other people see a different aspect of material energy and think, "No, that is reality." Being conditioned souls, we are covered by different configurations of material nature, and thus we describe the Supreme Truth or the Supreme Lord in terms of our corrupted vision. Yet even the covering qualities of material nature, such as our conditioned intelligence, mind and senses, are real (being the potency of the Supreme Lord), and therefore through all things we can perceive, in a more or less subjective way, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. That is why the present verse states, pratiyase: "You are perceived." Furthermore, without the manifestation of material nature's covering qualities, the creation could not fulfill its purpose -- namely, to allow the conditioned souls to make their best attempt to enjoy without God so that they will finally understand the futility of such an illusory notion.

SB 10.63.39: O almighty one, just as the sun, though hidden by a cloud, illuminates the cloud and all other visible forms as well, so You, although hidden by the material qualities, remain self-luminous and thus reveal all those qualities, along with the living entities who possess them.

PURPORT

Here Lord Siva further clarifies the idea expressed in the final two lines of the previous verse. The analogy of the clouds and the sun is appropriate. With its energy the sun creates clouds, which cover our vision of the sun. Yet it is the sun that allows us to see the clouds and all other things as well. Similarly, the Lord expands His illusory potency and thus prevents us from directly seeing Him. Yet it is God alone who reveals to us His covering potency -- namely, the material world -- and thus the Lord is atma-pradipa, "self-luminous." It is the reality of His existence that makes all things visible.

SB 10.63.40: Their intelligence bewildered by Your maya, fully attached to children, wife, home and so on, persons immersed in the ocean of material misery sometimes rise to the surface and sometimes sink down.

PURPORT

Srila Sridhara Svami explains that "rising in the ocean of misery" indicates elevation to higher species, such as demigods, and that "being submerged" refers to degradation to lower species -- even to immobile forms of life such as trees. As stated in the Vayu Purana, viparyayas ca bhavati brahmatva-sthavaratvayoh: "The living being rotates between the position of Brahma and that of an unmoving creature."

Srila Jiva Gosvami points out that Siva, having glorified the Lord, now pursues his original intention of securing the Lord's grace for Banasura. Thus in this and the following four verses, Lord Siva instructs Bana on his actual position in relation to the Lord. Siva's appeal to the Lord for compassion toward Bana appears in Text 45.

SB 10.63.41: One who has attained this human form of life as a gift from God, yet who fails to control his senses and honor Your feet, is surely to be pitied, for he is only cheating himself.

PURPORT

Lord Siva here condemns those who refuse to engage in the devotional service of the Supreme Lord.

SB 10.63.42: That mortal who rejects You -- his true Self, dearmost friend, and Lord -- for the sake of sense objects, whose nature is just the opposite, refuses nectar and instead consumes poison.

PURPORT

The person described above is pitiable because he rejects that which is actually dear, the Lord, and accepts that which is not dear and is ungodly: temporary sense gratification, which leads to suffering and bewilderment.

SB 10.63.43: I, Lord Brahma, the other demigods and the pure-minded sages have all surrendered wholeheartedly unto You, our dearmost Self and Lord.

SB 10.63.44: Let us worship You, the Supreme Lord, to be freed from material life. You are the maintainer of the universe and the cause of its creation and demise. Equipoised and perfectly at peace, You are the true friend, Self and worshipable Lord. You are one without a second, the shelter of all the worlds and all souls.

PURPORT

Srila Sridhara Svami states that the Lord is a true friend because He sets one's proper intelligence into motion if one desires to know the truth about God and the soul. Srila Jiva Gosvami and Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti both emphasize that the term bhavapavargaya indicates the highest liberation of pure love of Godhead, characterized by unalloyed devotional service unto the Lord.

Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti also explains that the Supreme Lord is samam, "perfectly objective and balanced," whereas other living beings, having an incomplete grasp of reality, cannot be perfectly objective. Those who surrender unto the Lord also become fully objective by taking shelter of His supreme consciousness.

SB 10.63.45: This Banasura is my dear and faithful follower, and I have awarded him freedom from fear. Therefore, my Lord, please grant him Your mercy, just as You showed mercy to Prahlada, the lord of the demons.

PURPORT

Lord Siva feels inclined to help Banasura because the demon showed great devotion to Lord Siva when he provided musical accompaniment for Siva's tandava dance. Another reason Bana is an object of Lord Siva's favor is that he is a descendant of the great devotees Prahlada and Bali.

SB 10.63.46: The Supreme Lord said: My dear lord, for your pleasure We must certainly do what you have requested of Us. I fully agree with your conclusion.

PURPORT

We should not think it strange that the Supreme Lord, Krishna, here addresses Lord Siva as bhagavan, "lord." All living beings are part and parcel of the Lord, qualitatively one with Him, and Lord Siva is an especially powerful, pure entity who possesses many of the Supreme Lord's qualities. Just as a father is happy to share his riches with a beloved son, so the Supreme Lord happily invests pure living beings with some of His potency and opulence. And just as a father proudly and happily observes the good qualities of his children, the Lord is most happy to glorify the pure living beings who are powerful in Krishna consciousness. Thus the Supreme Lord is pleased to glorify Lord Siva by addressing him as bhagavan.

SB 10.63.47: I will not kill this demonic son of Vairocani, for I gave Prahlada Maharaja the benediction that I would not kill any of his descendants.

SB 10.63.48: It was to subdue Banasura's false pride that I severed his arms. And I slew his mighty army because it had become a burden upon the earth.

SB 10.63.49: This demon, who still has four arms, will be immune to old age and death, and he will serve as one of your principal attendants. Thus he will have nothing to fear on any account.

SB 10.63.50: Thus attaining freedom from fear, Banasura offered obeisances to Lord Krishna by touching his head to the ground. Bana then seated Aniruddha and His bride on their chariot and brought them before the Lord.

SB 10.63.51: At the front of the party Lord Krishna then placed Aniruddha and His bride, both beautifully adorned with fine clothes and ornaments, and surrounded them with a full military division. Thus Lord Krishna took His leave of Lord Siva and departed.

SB 10.63.52: The Lord then entered His capital. The city was lavishly decorated with flags and victory arches, and its avenues and crossways were all sprinkled with water. As conchshells, anakas and dundubhi drums resounded, the Lord's relatives, the brahmanas and the general populace all came forward to greet Him respectfully.

SB 10.63.53: Whoever rises early in the morning and remembers Lord Krishna's victory in His battle with Lord Siva will never experience defeat.

Thus end the purports of the humble servants of His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada to the Tenth Canto, Sixty-third Chapter, of the Srimad-Bhagavatam, entitled "Lord Krishna Fights with Banasura."

Raghu

18th May 2005, 09:47 PM

[tscii:a028c5840f][font=Arial, sans-serif]
"viggop"

//I'm surprised to hear the above story that Lord Krishna and Lord Shiva had a fight and Karthikeya was defeated...Sudhaamaji, Is that the original version and interpretation?..//

There are several Puranas, according to the individual Devotional- groups of Vedic followers. Out of them 18 Puranas only are considered Authentic and commonly accepted by all. .... irrespective of Siva-bhakthas or Vishnu-Bhakthas.. or Muruha-Bhakthas...

Such Puranas which speak highly of Lord Siva.. by His Alahaala-Visha episode of Koorma-Awatharam,...Markandeya-story...Thiripuram burning...Dhaksha-yagjnam... Siva-Sakthi Dance-competition... Baheeratha-episode ... Arjuna-Siva Quarrel in Mahabharatha... and so on one side...

... state on Lord Siva differently too.... including Bhikshaandaar episode...

The Tamil-Literature..."Thiruvaaymozhi".. the UNDISPUTED... Tamil- Version of Authentic puranas...states...

§¿÷ ºÃ¢ó¾¡ý ¦¸¡Êì-§¸¡Æ¢ì-¦¸¡ñ¼¡ý
Naer charindhaan Kodi-k-Koazhi-k-konhdaan

§¿÷-ºÃ¢ó¾¡ý ±Ã¢Ôõ «É§Ä¡ý «ôÀý
Naer charindhaan eriyum Analoan Appan

§¿÷- ºÃ¢ó¾¡ý Óì¸ñ-ã÷ò¾¢ ¸ñË÷ «ôÀý
Naer-charindhaan Mukkanh-Moorthi kanhdeer

"§¿÷-ºÃ¢ Å¡½ý ¾¢ñ§¼¡û ¦¸¡ñ¼ «ý§È".
Naer-chari-VAANHAN THINHDOALH KONDA ANRHAE"

... so concurs with such authentic 18 Puranas.

//Why should Lord SHiva fight against Lord Krishna for an asura(even though his devotee)//

Because Bhanasura prays for Help of his God Siva.... So comes in support. But Krishna felt as His duty .. to DEFEAT the Arrogance and Over-Ego coupled with Autocracy...and so felt inevitable to defeat anybody... involved.

.//He did not fight for Ravana who was also his greatest devotee//

Ravana was so Arrogant ... that he felt he can easily defeat the... after-all the Men and the Monkeys.. So he did not seek God's Support.

//.Infact ,Lord Rama built the temple in Rameshwaram and installed the lingam there... I read because he killed a Shiva devotee , rama installed the lingam to propiate Shiva.//

This is just a Sthala-puranam of the local Temple... not forming part of any Puranas including Siva-Purana...

... and felt by many as a CONCOCTED STORY... by some Siva-devotess out of Fanaticism...

...since far-differing with Ramayana... as also contradictory to the sense of Ramayana... which speaks high of Lord Siva too..... In fact Hanuman is of Siva-Vayu Complex Amsa.

Even one section of Siva-devotees do not BELIEVE THIS STORY.

//.Moral of this is not to get angry at anyone or anything as anger will ultimately lead to your destruction//

Yes ... and also SUPERIORITY COMPLEX ... coupled with ARROGANCE and also SELFISH Ill-treatment of others as Adharma...

... are treated as the ENEMIES OF GOD... in Visual-Shape... deserving to be DESTROYED.

All these are the Dramas played together by various Gods to convey to Humanity...

... ONE GREAT MORAL- SENSE... implied behind... irrespective of Siva-bhaktha, Vishnu-bhaktha or the like.

]... COMMONLY APPLICABLE to the whole Humanity eternally..towards the Meaningful-MUNDANE-Life
/font[/tscii:a028c5840f]:banghead: :banghead:
:banghead: :banghead:
:banghead: :banghead:

Nitai

18th May 2005, 10:42 PM

Did you read the purports carefully? It's all lila, a fighting pastime. As in us there is a fighting spirit so there is in the Supreme Lord as well. Because He has that desire for fight so we also have that sometime.
However, only when it is ordered by the Supreme Lord, only then our fight can be spiritual. Otherwise even the policemen or any soldier can go to the jail for transgressing the law of the country.

But anyway, the fight of higher personalities from our viewpoint looks bad but actually they have a fun. The pastimes of the great personalities are inconceivable. When they fight no one is a loser nor winner. Only to us it looks like that.

I hope this will decrease your headache.
Nitya lila ki Jay.
Nitai

Thiru

18th May 2005, 10:48 PM

Can we discuss about Nakula and his role in Mahabaratha? Was he an expert in any particular skill?? Is there any particular incident involving Nakula that's famous in mahabarath? I havent read much about him in my limited reading...

Nitai

18th May 2005, 11:17 PM

THE stipulated period of twelve years was drawing to a close.
One day, a deer was rubbing itself against a poor brahmana's fire-kindling mortar and as it turned to go, the mortar got entangled in its horns and the affrighted animal fled wildly with it into the forest.
In those days matches were unknown and fire was kindled with pieces of wood by mechanical friction.
"Alas! The deer is running away with my fire-kindler. How can I perform the fire sacrifice?" shouted the brahmana and rushed towards the Pandavas for help in his extremity.
The Pandavas pursued the animal but it was a magic deer, which sped in great leaps and bounds, decoying the Pandavas far into the forest and then disappeared. Worn out by the futile chase, the Pandavas sat in great dejection under a banyan tree.
Nakula sighed: "We cannot render even this trifling service to the brahmana. How we have degenerated!" said he sadly.
Bhima said: "Quite so. When Draupadi was dragged into the assembly, we should have killed those wretches. Is it not because we did not do so that we have had to suffer all these sorrows?" and he looked at Arjuna sadly.
Arjuna agreed. "I bore in silence the vulgar and insulting brag of that son of the charioteer, doing nothing. So we have deservedly fallen into this pitiable state."
Yudhishthira noticed with sorrow that all of them had lost their cheerfulness and courage. He thought they would be more cheerful with something to do. He was tormented with thirst and so he said to Nakula: "Brother, climb that tree and see whether there is any pool or river nearby."
Nakula climbed the tree, looked around and said: "At a little distance I see water plants and cranes. There must certainly be water there."
Yudhishthira sent him to fetch some to drink.
Nakula was glad when he got to the place and saw there was a pool. He was very thirsty himself and so thought of quenching his thirst first before taking water in his quiver for his brother. But no sooner did he dip his hand in the transparent water than he heard a voice, which said:
"Do not be rash. This pool belongs to me. O son of Madri, answer my questions and then drink the water."
Nakula was surprised, but carried away by his intense thirst and heedless of the warning, he drank the water. At once, overcome by irresistible drowsiness, he fell down, to all appearance dead.
Surprised that Nakula had not returned, Yudhishthira sent Sahadeva to see what the matter was. When Sahadeva reached the pool and saw his brother lying on the ground, he wondered whether any harm had come to him. But before looking into the matter further, rushed irresistibly to the water to quench his burning thirst.
The voice was heard again: "O Sahadeva, this is my pool. Answer my questions and then only may you quench your thirst."
Like Nakula, Sahadeva also did not heed the warning. He drank the water and at once dropped down.
Puzzled and worried that Sahadeva also did not return, Yudhishthira sent Arjuna to see whether the brothers had met with any danger. "And bring water," he added, for he was very thirsty.
Arjuna went swiftly. He saw both his brothers lying dead near the pool. He was shocked at the sight and felt that they must have been killed by some lurking foe.
Though heart-broken with grief and burning with the desire for revenge, he felt all feelings submerged in a monstrous thirst, which irresistibly impelled him to the fatal pool. Again, a voice was heard: "Answer my question before you drink the water. This pool is mine. If you disobey me, you will follow your brothers."
Arjuna's anger knew no bounds. He cried: "Who are you? Come and stand up to me, and I will kill you," and he shot keen-edged arrows in the direction of the voice. The invisible being laughed in scorn: "Your arrows do but wound the air. Answer my questions and then you can satisfy your thirst. If you drink the water without doing so, you will die."
Greatly vexed, Arjuna made up his mind to seek out and grapple with this elusive foe. But first he had to quench his terrible thirst. Yes, thirst was the enemy he must kill first. So he drank the water and also fell down dead.
After anxious waiting Yudhishthira turned to Bhima: "Dear brother, Arjuna, the great hero, has also not yet returned. Something terrible must have happened to our brothers, for our stars are bad. Please seek them out and be quick about it. Also bring water, for I die of thirst." Bhima, racked with anxiety, hurried away without a word.
His grief and rage can be imagined when he saw his three brothers lying there dead. He thought: "This is certainly the work of the Yakshas. I will hunt them down and kill them. But O! I am so thirsty, I shall first drink water the better to fight them." And then he descended into the pool.
The voice shouted: "Bhimasena, beware. You may drink only after answering my questions. You will die if you disregard my words."
"Who are you to dictate to me?" cried Bhima, and he drank the water avidly, glaring around in defiance. And as he did so, his great strength seemed to slip from him like a garment. And he also fell dead among his brothers.
Alone, Yudhishthira wailed full of anxiety and thirst. "Have they been subjected to a curse or are they wandering about in the forest in a vain search for water or have they fainted or died of thirst?"
Unable to bear these thoughts and driven desperate by an overpowering thirst, he started out to look for his brothers and the pool.
Yudhishthira proceeded in the direction his brothers had taken through tracts infested with wild boar and abounding in spotted dear and huge forest birds. Presently he came upon a beautiful green meadow, girdling a pool of pellucid water, nectar to his eyes.
But when he saw his brothers lying there like sacred flagpoles thrown pell-mell after a festival, unable to restrain his grief, he lifted his voice and wept. He stroked the faces of Bhima and Arjuna as they lay so still and silent there and mourned:
"Was this to be the end of all our vows? Just when our exile is about to end, you have been snatched away. Even the gods have forsaken me in my misfortune!"
As he looked at their mighty limbs, now so helpless, he sadly wondered who could have been powerful enough to kill them. Brokenly, he reflected: "Surely my heart must be made of steel not to break even after seeing Nakula and Sahadeva dead. For what purpose should I continue to live in this world?"
Then a sense of mystery overcame him, for this could be no ordinary occurrence. The world held no warriors who could overcome his brothers. Besides, there were no wounds on their bodies which could have let out life and their faces were faces of men who slept in peace and not of those who died in wrath.
There was also no trace of the footprints of an enemy. There was surely some magic about it. Or, could it be a trick played by Duryodhana? Might he not have poisoned the water? Then Yudhishthira also descended into the pool, in his turn drawn to the water by a consuming thirst.
At once the voice without form warned as before: "Your brothers died because they did not heed my words. Do not follow them. Answer my questions first and then quench your thirst. This pool is mine."
Yudhishthira knew that these could be none other than the words of a Yaksha and guessed what had happened to his brothers. He saw a possible way of redeeming the situation.
He said to the bodiless voice: "Please ask your questions." The voice put questions rapidly one after another.
The Yaksha asked: "What makes sun shine every day?"
Yudhishthira replied: "The power of Brahman."
The Yaksha asked: "What rescues man in danger?"
Yudhishthira replied: "Courage is man's salvation in danger."
The Yaksha asked: "By the study of which science does man become wise?"
Yudhishthira replied: "Not by studying any sastra does man become wise. It is by association with the great in wisdom that he gets wisdom."
The Yaksha asked: "What is more nobly sustaining than the earth?"
Yudhishthira replied: "The mother who brings up the children she has borne is nobler and more sustaining than the earth."
The Yaksha asked: "What is higher than the sky?"
Yudhishthira replied: "The father."
The Yaksha asked: "What is fleeter than wind?"
Yudhishthira replied: "Mind."
The Yaksha asked: "What is more blighted than withered straw?"
Yudhishthira replied: "A sorrow-stricken heart."
The Yaksha asked: "What befriends a traveller?"
Yudhishthira replied: "Learning."
The Yaksha asked: "Who is the friend of one who stays at home?"
Yudhishthira replied: "The wife."
The Yaksha asked: "Who accompanies a man in death?"
Yudhishthira replied: "Dharma. That alone accompanies the soul in its solitary journey after death."
The Yaksha asked: "Which is the biggest vessel?"
Yudhishthira replied: "The earth, which contains all within itself is the greatest vessel."
The Yaksha asked: "What is happiness?"
Yudhishthira replied: "Happiness is the result of good conduct."
The Yaksha asked: "What is that, abandoning which man becomes loved by all?"
Yudhishthira replied: "Pride, for abandoning that man will be loved by all."
The Yaksha asked: "What is the loss which yields joy and not sorrow?"
Yudhishthira replied: "Anger, giving it up, we will no longer subject to sorrow."
The Yaksha asked: "What is that, by giving up which, man becomes rich?"
Yudhishthira replied: "Desire, getting rid of it, man becomes wealthy."
The Yaksha asked: "What makes one a real brahmana? Is it birth, good conduct or learning? Answer decisively."
Yudhishthira replied: "Birth and learning do not make one a brahmana. Good conduct alone does. However learned a person may be he will not be a brahmana if he is a slave to bad habits. Even though he may be learned in the four Vedas, a man of bad conduct falls to a lower class."
The Yaksha asked: "What is the greatest wonder in the world?"
Yudhishthira replied: "Every day, men see creatures depart to Yama's abode and yet, those who remain seek to live forever. This verily is the greatest wonder."
Thus, the Yaksha posed many questions and Yudhishthira answered them all.
In the end the Yaksha asked: "O king, one of your dead brothers can now be revived. Whom do you want revived? He shall come back to life."
Yudhishthira thought for a moment and then replied: "May the cloud-complexioned, lotus-eyed, broad-chested and long-armed Nakula, lying like a fallen ebony tree, arise."
The Yaksha was pleased at this and asked Yudhishthira: "Why did you choose Nakula in preference to Bhima who has the strength of sixteen thousand elephants? I have heard that Bhima is most dear to you. And why not Arjuna, whose prowess in arms is your protection? Tell me why you chose Nakula rather than either of these two."
Yudhishthira replied: "O Yaksha, dharma is the only shield of man and not Bhima or Arjuna. If dharma is set at naught, man will be ruined. Kunti and Madri were the two wives of my father. I am surviving, a son of Kunti, and so, she is not completely bereaved. In order that the scales of justice may be even, I ask that Madri's son Nakula may revive." The Yaksha was pleased with Yudhishthira's impartiality and granted that all his brothers would come back to life.
It was Yama, the Lord of Death, who had taken the form of the deer and the Yaksha so that he might see his son Yudhishthira and test him. He embraced Yudhishthira and blessed him.
Yama said: "Only a few days remain to complete the stipulated period of your exile in the forest. The thirteenth year will also pass by. None of your enemies will be able to discover you. You will successfully fulfil your undertaking," and saying this he disappeared.

Sudhaama

19th May 2005, 01:18 AM

Mr "Thiru"

// Can we discuss about Nakula and his role in Mahabaratha? Was he an expert in any particular skill?? Is there any particular incident involving Nakula that's famous in mahabarath?//

Yes please... Similar to SATHRUGNA generally deemed as a Dummy- Chracter... in Ramayana...

... who was UNAVOIDABLY required for just.... THREE Purposes... under the Most Handicapped Situations

NAKULA too was similarly indispensable for Mahabharatha...

... just for FIVE unique-features of Nakula unlike the other four brothers ....

... which factor was inevitable to fill up the Gap of Five mights in Pancha- Pandavaas....

Why FIVE Pandavas? ... with specific name as PANCHA-PAANDAVAAS.

We dont call as... CHATHUR-DASARATHA-PUTHRAS in Ramayana!!..

Draupathi... a holy-birth .. since born from Fire... performed an arduous penance towards Brahma...

Brahma appeared before her... and asked on the Boon sought.

Draupathi replied "I being an unusual Human-Lady who have not undergone the Womb's Residence at all...

... but an offspring of the Holy- Fire. unlike any other creature on Earth ....
... I want to have my Husband to be of UNIQUE-MATCH for me."
.
"What do you mean by unique match of Husband?... Clarify."

He should be the Ideal Husband with FIVE GREAT MIGHTS ... to be Qualified as a King. as per our Sasthras.

" Can you elaborate on those Royal-mights you mean?"

My Husband must be...

(1) Well-knowledged Dharma-Sasthra expert... capable of rendering Royal- justice to the People.

(2) Must be of INVINCIBLE PHYSICAL-MIGHT to defeat any Earthly- Enemy

(3) Must be an UNCONQUERABLE WARRIOR in the Art of Bow & Arrow - Warfare and also possessing the Highest degree of Masculine Vitality

(4) With all such mights he must not DOMINATE over me,.... I being a weaker-sex as a Woman ...

.. and further he must be a SUPREME HANDSOME (of Masculine- Beauty)...

....so deeply AFFECTIONATE with me that he will sincerely SERVE for me.... on my commands.

(5)So Highly Spiritualistic that he can foresee the Future- events and possibilities in Life by means of his Divine- powers... such that he can be my Life-Guide.

Brahma said... " OK Granted... You are bestowed accordingly."

Draupathi was very happy that her Boon had been granted without any Hitch.

And she believed... she would get only such a Husband having all these in One,

... through her Fathers plan for selection of her Match

And when Arjuna won over the Competition.. She believed Arjunaa must be the EXPECTED FIVE IN ONE.... since he was Handsome with proven valour too.

But when the Trend of Marriage... developed towards Five-Husbands...

She got bewildered and prayed to Brahma with Tears...

"Oh God Brahma Should I conclude that you have cheated me?"

Brahma replied.. You have got now as you asked for... which I granted....

.. All those Five characters in the respective order.. You can find in these Pancha- Pandavas in the same oder.

" Oh God!....Is it a Mockery to have FIVE HUSBANDS for a Single Lady? I did not ask for Five... but only ONE having all the Complex- characters.

" Fist of all tell me... other than your unusual qualification by Non-birth Via Womb...are You Qualified enough to duly reciprocate as the FIT-WIFE.... matching... for at least anyone of these 5 characters?

Are you of so much Feminine- beauty like RATHI..to match Nakula...the most Handsome Manmatha on Earth.?

Are you the apt Dharma-conscious as much as Yudhishtra... or at least nearer to his?

Are you capable as a helping wife knowing Dhanur-sasthra due for Arjuna?

Are you Physically so mighty to Feminie-match the Mighty Bheema?.

Are you so spiritual enough to join with Sahadeva in his Yoga- knowledge?

Are you fit enough as the matching wife... to reciprocate a Loving- Husband volunteering to obey on your commonds as your servant

... which indirectly means that you dont find it wrong to command your husband... rather you want to COMMAND

...instead of RECIPROCATING the same to him with the TRUE WIFE'S LOVE... ..

So You do not deserve to be a matching-wife even to anyone of these ideal characters of Five Great Men. ...

However I granted your prayer... out of Kindness ...

... trusting that you will develop the due RECIPROCAL-QUALIFICATIONS. later ... by means of your subsequent efforts...

... to match YOURSELF for the UNUSUAL sort of Husband you sought for.

If you had duly developed yourselves so ... during this interim period..

... I would have CREATED such a TOP- FIVE- CHARACTERED Husband .. exclusively for you .as FIVE IN ONE.,

But I am disappointed to see... your lack of Endeavour... exhibiting your SELFISHNESS and GREED..

However these Five Husbands are destined for you... which you must not reject.... being my Graceful Sanction ...

...ever unparallel in the History..... on which you will get Fame.

Draupathi was convinced...and felt happy that she had got FIVE GREAT WARRIORS ...

...as her Care-taker- Husbands.. which concept is better than just ONLY ONE..

The Most HANDSOME NAKULA comes under Category-: 4 (Four)... hereabove.

What are those FIVE UNIQUENESS... of Nakula... different from others?

Was he an expert in any particular skill??

Is there any particular incident involving Nakula that's famous in mahabarath?

To continue...

Thiru

19th May 2005, 02:27 AM

Thanks sudhaama.....

19th May 2005, 09:16 AM

Sudhamaa,
I've been following this thread and the last one on Pancha-Pandavars and Drauphati was an eye-opener..i've always had this question in my mind..why 5 husbands for a lady?? :shock: Thanks for sharing your knowledge! :wink:

Nitai

19th May 2005, 09:43 AM

Here are some events from the life of Nakula as shortly described in the Puranic encyclopedia. Although not in chronological order still, they are interesting. Hare Krishna.

1) Birth. The fourth of the Pandavas. Madri, the 'second of the two wives of Pandu meditated on the twin gods Asvinidevas, and recited one of the Mantras given to Kunti by the hermit Durvasas and the two sons Nakula and Sahadeva were born to her from those gods. It is mentioned in Mahabharata, Adi Parva, Chapter 67, Stanza 111 that Nakula and Sahadeva were immensely handsome.

2) Story of Nakula till the Bharata battle. Naming and such other rituals after birth were performed for Nakula also as in the case of the other Pandava children, by the hermits who lived in ( ? ). The ceremony of investiture with the Brahma was conducted by Kasyapa the priest of Vasudeva. The royal hermit taught Nakula archery and swords play, in his boyhood. When Pandu died, Madri jumped into the funeral pyre and died leaving her two sons with Kunti. After this the hermits of ( ? ) took Kunti and her five sons to Bhisma at Hastinapura.

At Hastinapura, Nakula learned archery under the great teacher Drona. According to the instruction of the teacher, Arjuna had to fight with him (teacher) on the completion of the teaching and during that fight Nakula and Sahadeva were the guards of Arjuna's chariot wheels. As Nakula was such an expert in wielding t:the weapons, he got the name `Atirathi'. (M.B. Adi Parva, Chapter 138, Stanza 30). When the lac-palace was completed at Varanavata, the Pandavas shifted to that mansion by the instruction of Dhrtarastra. When the lac-palace was set fire to, the Pandavas escaped by way of an underground passage and reached the banks of the Ganga. There Nakula and Sahadeva fell down weary and exhausted. Bhima carried them on his shoulders. After Baka had been killed, they proceeded to Pancalapura; where at the Svayamvara (marriage) Pancali became the wife of the Pandavas. They returned to Hastinapura. A son named Satanika was born to Nakula by Pancali. (M.B. Adi Parva, Chapter 95, Stanza 75).

After that Nakula married Karenumati, the daughter of the King of Cedi. A son named Niramitra was born to the couple. (M.B. Adi Parva, Chapter 95, Stanza 70) .

Nakula was then sent to the kingdoms of the west for regional conquest, by Dharmaputra. The wealth of the kingdoms he had conquered, was carried on ten thousand camels to the capital Hastinapura. (M.B. Sabha Parva, Chapter 32). After the Rajasuya (imperial consecration) of Yudhisthira, Nakula went to Gandhara to escort Subala and his sons. After the defeat of Yudhisthira in the game of dice, the Pandavas went to live in the forest. At that time Nakula put soil all over his body and sat on the ground because of his profound grief. In the forest, once Jatasura carried away Nakula. (See under Jat5sura). Nakula killed Ksemaitkara, Mahamaha and Suratha in the forest At Dvaitavana (a forest) Nakula went to a lake to fetch water and was killed by Dharmadeva who appeared in the form of a crane. At the request of Dharmaputra, who came afterwards, all the Pandavas including Nakula were brought to life again, by Dharma.

During the pseudonymity of the Pandavas at the city of Virata, Nakula assumed the name Granthika. When the period of pseudonymity expired, Nakula fought with the Trigartas on behalf of the King Virata. On the return of the Pandavas after the expiry of their forest-life and pseudonymity, when Duryodhana announced that he would give not even a single dot of land to them, Nakula was very eager to decide the matter by a battle. He proposed that the King Drupada should be made the chief captain of the army.

3) Nakula in the • Bharata-battle. The following is the part played by Nakula in the battle of Kurukshetra.

(i) There was a combat between Nakula and Dushasana on the first day of the battle. (M.B. Bhisma Parva, Chapter 45, Stanza 23) .

(ii) Nakula fought with Salya and was wounded. (M.B. Bhisma Parva, Chapter 83).

(iii) He fought with Sakuni. (M.B. Bhisma Parva, Chapter 105, Stanza 1 l).

(iv) He engaged Vikarna in a combat. (M.B. Bhisma Parva, Chapter I10, Stanza I1).

(v) Nakula defeated Vikarna. (NNI.B. Drona Parva, Chapter 106, Stanza 12).

(vi) Nakula defeated ~Sakuni. (M.B. Drona Chapter 169, Stanza 16) .
(vii) He defeated Duryodhana in a fight. Drona Parva, Chapter 187, Stanza 50) .

(viii) Nakula killed the King of Anga. (M.B. Parva, Chapter 22, Stanza 13).

(ix) He retreated on being defeated by Karna. (M.B. Karna Parva, Chapter 24, Stanza 45).

(x) He fought with Drona. (M.B. Karna Parva, Chapter 48, Stanza 34).

(xi) Nakula fought with Duryodhana again and was wounded. (M.B. Karna Parva, Chapter 56, Stanza 7).

(xii) He fought with Vrsasena. (M.B. Karna Parva, Chapter 61, Stanza 36).

(xiii) Nakula killed Citrasena, Satyasena and Susena the sons of Karna. (M.B. Salya Parva, Chapter 10).

4) After the Bharata-battle.

(i) After the battle, Nakula explained to Yudhisthira, the duties of a house holder. (M.B. Santi Parva, Chapter 12).

(ii) On the instruction of Yudhisthira, Nakula became the chief captain of the army. (M.B. Santi Parva, Chapter 41, Stanza 12) .

(iii) After the battle, the palace of Durmarsana the son of Dhrtarastra was given to Nakula by Dharmaputra. (M.B. Santi Parva, Chapter 44, Stanza 10).

(iv) After the battle when Yudhisthira performed the horse sacrifice, Nakula and Bhimasena stood as protectors of the city. (M.B. Asvamedha Parva, Chapter 72, Stanza 19).

(v) Nakula went to the forest to see Kunti, who was engaged in penance during her latter days. (M.B. Asramavasi a Parva, Chapter 25, Stanza 8) .

5) The end. At the `great departure' (Mahaprasthana) of the Pandavas, Nakula died in the forest.

6) The name Nakula. It is stated in Mahabharata, Virata Parva, Chapter 5, Stanza 25 that the name `Nakula' was given to him because there were none more handsome than he in the family (Kula) of the Pandavas.

GRANTHIKA. Name assumed' by Nakula during his life incognito at the Virata. palace.. (Virata Parva, Chapter 3, Verse 4) .

AMARAPARVATA. An ancient place in Bharata. Nakula had conquered this place. (M.B., Sabha Parva, Chapter 32,Verse 11).

# In the Sabha Parva of Mahabharata we find Nakula defeating the Abhiras, a low-cast people, during his victory march after the great Mahabharata batt1e.

# AKROESA. A king of ancient Bharata. He was king over the land of Mahottha. Nakula conquered him during his victory march. (Slokas 5 and 6, Chapter 32, Sabha Parva, M.B.).

# MAHAMUKHA. A warrior of King Jayadratha. Mahabharata, Vana Parva, Chapter 221, Verse 16 mentions that he was killed by Nakula in the battle which followed the forcible abduction of
Pancali by Jayadratha.

# During the victory march of the Pandavas Bhimasena and Nakula conquered the Barbaras also a low-cast people.
(Chapter 32, Sabha Parva, M.B.).

# When Yudhistir became the King, as directed by Vyasa, Nakula and Sahadeva were put in-charge of protecting the Kingdom. (Asvamedha Yajna, Chapter 72, Verse 19).

# Nakula conquered the Hunas in the western regions. (Sabha Parva, Chapter 32). The Huna kings took part in the Rajasuya of Yudhisthira and made costly presents. (Sabha Parva, Chapter 51, Verse 24) .

# DIVYAKATAM. A city situated in Western India in ancient times. According to Mahabharata this city was conquered by Nakula.-Sabha Parva, Chapter 32.

# HARA (M) . A region of Puranic fame. Nakula subjugated the King of Hara by a simple command without any resort to arms, and the King attended Yudhisthira's Rajasuya with presents. (Sabha Parva, Chapter 51, Verse 54).

# When the Pandavas reached the Himalayas there Pancali expired. To Bhima's query as to why Pancali expired first, Yudhisthira replied that it was due to her having been more partial to Arjuna. The others continued their journey and then Sahadeva died. Yudhisthira explained that Sahadeva died second due to his arrogance and conceit. And, the others continued going forward. An emaciated dog was already with the Pandavas during their journey. Nakula was the third to die, and Yudhisthira attributed it to his (Nakula) extreme conceit about his beauty. And, Arjuna's death next, Yudhisthira said, was due to his having not kept his vow, once made, to kill the whole lot of enemies in a day. After proceeding a short distance further Bhima also fell dead, and Yudhisthira thought to himself that it was due to Bhima's voracious eating.

Hare Krishna
Sri Krishna Svayam Bhagavan Ki jay.

Badri

19th May 2005, 10:06 AM

Wow! That was pretty informative, Nitai. Thanks for the whole lot of information on Nakula.

Raghu

19th May 2005, 02:34 PM

Draupathi... a holy-birth .. since born from Fire... performed an arduous penance towards Brahma...

Brahma appeared before her... and asked on the Boon sought.

Draupathi replied "I being an unusual Human-Lady who have not undergone the Womb's Residence at all...

... but an offspring of the Holy- Fire. unlike any other creature on Earth ....
... I want to have my Husband to be of UNIQUE-MATCH for me."
.
"What do you mean by unique match of Husband?... Clarify."

He should be the Ideal Husband with FIVE GREAT MIGHTS ... to be Qualified as a King. as per our Sasthras.

" Can you elaborate on those Royal-mights you mean?"

My Husband must be...

(1) Well-knowledged Dharma-Sasthra expert... capable of rendering Royal- justice to the People.

(2) Must be of INVINCIBLE PHYSICAL-MIGHT to defeat any Earthly- Enemy

(3) Must be an UNCONQUERABLE WARRIOR in the Art of Bow & Arrow - Warfare and also possessing the Highest degree of Masculine Vitality

(4) With all such mights he must not DOMINATE over me,.... I being a weaker-sex as a Woman ...

.. and further he must be a SUPREME HANDSOME (of Masculine- Beauty)...

....so deeply AFFECTIONATE with me that he will sincerely SERVE for me.... on my commands.

(5)So Highly Spiritualistic that he can foresee the Future- events and possibilities in Life by means of his Divine- powers... such that he can be my Life-Guide.

Brahma said... " OK Granted... You are bestowed accordingly."

Draupathi was very happy that her Boon had been granted without any Hitch.

And she believed... she would get only such a Husband having all these in One,

... through her Fathers plan for selection of her Match

And when Arjuna won over the Competition.. She believed Arjunaa must be the EXPECTED FIVE IN ONE.... since he was Handsome with proven valour too.

But when the Trend of Marriage... developed towards Five-Husbands...

She got bewildered and prayed to Brahma with Tears...

"Oh God Brahma Should I conclude that you have cheated me?"

Brahma replied.. You have got now as you asked for... which I granted....

.. All those Five characters in the respective order.. You can find in these Pancha- Pandavas in the same oder.

" Oh God!....Is it a Mockery to have FIVE HUSBANDS for a Single Lady? I did not ask for Five... but only ONE having all the Complex- characters.

" Fist of all tell me... other than your unusual qualification by Non-birth Via Womb...are You Qualified enough to duly reciprocate as the FIT-WIFE.... matching... for at least anyone of these 5 characters?

Are you of so much Feminine- beauty like RATHI..to match Nakula...the most Handsome Manmatha on Earth.?

Are you the apt Dharma-conscious as much as Yudhishtra... or at least nearer to his?

Are you capable as a helping wife knowing Dhanur-sasthra due for Arjuna?

Are you Physically so mighty to Feminie-match the Mighty Bheema?.

Are you so spiritual enough to join with Sahadeva in his Yoga- knowledge?

Are you fit enough as the matching wife... to reciprocate a Loving- Husband volunteering to obey on your commonds as your servant

... which indirectly means that you dont find it wrong to command your husband... rather you want to COMMAND

...instead of RECIPROCATING the same to him with the TRUE WIFE'S LOVE... ..

So You do not deserve to be a matching-wife even to anyone of these ideal characters of Five Great Men. ...

However I granted your prayer... out of Kindness ...

... trusting that you will develop the due RECIPROCAL-QUALIFICATIONS. later ... by means of your subsequent efforts...

... to match YOURSELF for the UNUSUAL sort of Husband you sought for.

If you had duly developed yourselves so ... during this interim period..

... I would have CREATED such a TOP- FIVE- CHARACTERED Husband .. exclusively for you .as FIVE IN ONE.,

But I am disappointed to see... your lack of Endeavour... exhibiting your SELFISHNESS and GREED..

However these Five Husbands are destined for you... which you must not reject.... being my Graceful Sanction ...

...ever unparallel in the History..... on which you will get Fame.

Draupathi was convinced...and felt happy that she had got FIVE GREAT WARRIORS ...

...as her Care-taker- Husbands.. which concept is better than just ONLY ONE..

The Most HANDSOME NAKULA comes under Category-: 4 (Four)... hereabove.

What are those FIVE UNIQUENESS... of Nakula... different from others?

Was he an expert in any particular skill??

Is there any particular incident involving Nakula that's famous in mahabarath?

To continue...

Dear Sudhama sir,

so the moral behind this is that you must not be greedy about anything in life, you can not have everything you want the way you want it, and no one is ever capabale of containing all the elements to be perferct.

Am I correct Sudhamma sir?,

I shall reply to your PM

Nitai

19th May 2005, 03:20 PM

It is stated that in an earlier birth as Nalayani (also named Indrasena), she was married to Maudgalya, an irascible sage afflicted with leprosy. She was so utterly devoted to her abusive husband that when a finger of his, dropped into their meal, she took it out and calmly ate the rice without revulsion. Pleased by this, Maudgalya offered her a boon, and she asked him to make love to her in five lovely forms. As she was insatiable, Maudgalya got fed up and became an ascetic. When she remonstrated and insisted that he continue their love-life, he cursed her to be reborn and have five husbands to satisfy her lust. Thereupon she practiced severe penance and pleased Lord Shiva with her prayers. He granted a boon to her. Nalayani said that she wanted a husband and to ensure that her request was heard, she repeated it five times in all. Shiva then said that in her next life she would have five husbands. She obtained the boon of regaining virginity after being with each husband. ] Thus, by asserting her womanhood and refusing to accept a life of blind subservience to her husband, Nalayani, the sati, was transformed into Yajnaseni, the kanya. Some sources have a slightly different narration. Draupadi made her request only once but she added a long list of qualities that she wanted in her husband. Lord Shiva said that it would be impossible to find one man with all these qualities. Hence she would have five husbands in her next life. All of them together would posses the qualities she had enumerated. [ According to Brahmavaivarta Purana, she is the reincarnation of the maya Sita (shadow Sita - wife of Lord Rama, an incarnation of Lord Vishnu, and hero of Ramayana) who, in turn, was Vedavati, reborn after molestation at Ravana's hands, and would become the "Lakshmi of the Indras" ] (one of the forms of Goddess Lakshmi, eternal consort of Lord Vishnu) in heaven.

NItai

Raghu

20th May 2005, 03:29 PM

Dear Sudhama sir & others

Did Arjuna use the 'Pasupathasthra' on Karna?, or did he use it on some one else?

what asthra did Arjuna use to kill Karna, while he was trying to pick up the Chariot?

Raghu

22nd May 2005, 08:07 PM

Dear all,

As Far as I know, Bansur was not defeated by War but Politics, full story to be followed Shortly.

r_kk

24th May 2005, 02:09 PM

[tscii:14331f6516]
Can any one explain?
• Who is Ekalavya?
• Why Drona asked his right thumb as gurudakshina?
• Was Arjun felt him as thread?

[/tscii:14331f6516]

Raghu

24th May 2005, 02:32 PM

[tscii:4b3bb6e334]
Can any one explain?
• Who is Ekalavya?
• Why Drona asked his right thumb as gurudakshina?
• Was Arjun felt him as thread?

[/tscii:4b3bb6e334]

Good Question R_KK,

Ekalaivan was a disciple of Guru Dronacahariya, he excelled in archery, I have a feeling that Drona thought his shishya may excel him and be better than him, so I think out of this jealousy, he asked his right Thumb, and Eakalavya did give his right thumb as Gurudakshana

I don't think Arjuna felt any one as a threat, EXCEPT Angaraj KARNA

Pls correct me if I am wrong

viggop

24th May 2005, 02:51 PM

I think Arjuna was so arrogant that he ***ALWAYS*** thought that he was the best archer in the world.

Raghu
Awaiting your Banasura story

Raghu

24th May 2005, 03:15 PM

I think Arjuna was so arrogant that he ***ALWAYS*** thought that he was the best archer in the world.

Yes, he has done this in many occasion

Raghu
Awaiting your Banasura story

Yes, i shall do that in a while, as the right up will take lot of time

Raghu

24th May 2005, 03:28 PM

A student's distinction lies in his devout pursuit of knowledge, and not merely in his heritage. This manifests in a splendid manner in Ekalavya's life. He worshipped an idol of his 'Guru', learnt his lessons in archery in the Master's absence, and mastered the art. When his master desired the thumb of Ekalavya's right hand as a fee, which might cripple him, Ekalavya smilingly sacrificed it. A boy who had grown up in the forest thus developed into a great personality - a fine example for others to emulate.
Author - Nagamani S.Rao

Ekalavya
'Gurur-brahma gurur-vishnuh
Gurur-devo maheswarah
Guruh-sakshat parabrahma
Tasmai sri gurave namah'
In our land the teacher who imparts training is held in very high esteem. The teacher is respected like a father. As the above saying describes, the teacher is considered as the 'trimurtis'- Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva - all rolled into one.
In olden times, children who sought learning had to live with their teacher faithfully attend to the chores assigned to them and pursue their studies with concentration as he taught them. Such stay of the pupil with his teacher was known as 'Gurukulavasa' ('staying and learning at the abode of the master').
The teacher was not merely teaching his pupil some subjects in a parrotlike manner. He would actually shape the boy's character and personality too by instilling in him an awareness of the world around him, and how to lead a life useful to the society and face various problems one comes across in life. Thus the tutor, who trains young boys to face life in future with success, came to be accorded a revered place in our culture.
The Brave Jungle-boy
This is a story of a boy who demonstrated to the world what an aspirant could achieve in life if he has faith and respect in his master and pursues his efforts. There are some that boast that they belong to distinguished families that they are taught by 'so-and-so'. The hero of our story should open the eyes of such arrogant men.
This ideal disciple is Ekalavya.
Ekalavya was a jungle-boy. Belonging to the hunters' community, he was a bold child. It was a time when such communities were considered socially inferior. But Ekalavya, by his actions and behavior, showed that one's inferior or superior status lies not in, whichcommunity one belongs to but in one's vision and qualities of heart.
Ekalavya resided in a small, charming forest, with his mother. They were leading a modest, contented life. His father Hiranyadhanu who was the chieftain there strove to bring up Ekalavya as a brave boy embodying good and noble qualities. But he passed away while the son was still a young boy. An ardent follower of the king, he died in a battle. Ekalavya then became the chief of the forest.

Ekalavya had developed a strong affection towards the animals amidst which he was growing up. He wanted these simple, harmless animals to grow in a loving way under his care and ensured they came to no harm. If anyone troubled them, he would feel like killing him!
A large number of wolves live in that forest and they often hunted small tender calves of deer and other animals. The calves wailing when caught by the wolves would be heart-rending, Ekalavya would upon hearing such cries, writhe in' agony. 'Can't I save these poor animals? Can't I possess enough physical strength to wipe out this menace?' he pined,
The hunters are born archers. Ekalavya too grew up mastering the art. However, he aspired to increase his physical prowess so that he can rid his forest of the wolves' menace and make it a safe haven for deer and other animals. He therefore pursued his training in archery with total concentration.
Ekalavya's mother, noticing her son's restlessness, asked him one evening: 'Son, why are you worried so much now-a-days?'
'Nothing to worry, mother'
'No. no. There is something which is worrying you very much, Can't you say what it is even to me?'
'There is nothing, which I have to hide from you, mother I only I do not wish to unnecessarily add to your worries. Look, our dear caives, deer, etc., are becoming game to the big cruel wild animals. We can kill a wolf if we can sight it. But often it will have made its kill and run away before we could see it, mother. Shoot wolf! But how to master archery to that extent? Which Master shall I turn to? This has been my worry.'
The mother in fact felt glad when she heard these words. She was pleased to learn of her son's concern for the harmless animals in the forest. She also felt sympathetic that her son, who was without a kill the unseen father, should take upon himself such an obligation at such a young age.
She said: 'Ekalavya, heard of Dronacharya?'
'No, who is he?
'If you want to shoot at the wolves unseen, you should become his disciple to achieve the prowess you desire.'
'Where is he, mother? Tell me. I will become his disciple', Ekalavya exclaimed with pleasure and anticipation.
'He is in Hastinavati teaching archery to the princes of Bharata clan. He is the 'guru' to the Kauravas who are the sons of emperor Dhritarashtra and their relatives. You have heard of Bhishmacharya, son of Gangadevi. It is said none can match him in battle. He was the person who suggested That Dronacharya should teach archery to the Kaurava princes. Drona's fame has spread far and wide and many princes from various other states also go to him for training.'
'How did Bhishmacharya discover Dronacharya?'
'He himself came to Hastinavati. He had learnt archery from his father sage Bharadwaja, besides being a disciple of Parashurama. It is said that persons matching.
Dronacharya in the art of wielding the bow and arrow are rare in the world. It appears he was very poor; and in the course of travels he came to Hastinavati. Bhishma heard about him. There is an interesting story about this also.' And she narrated that story.
The Kaurava and pandava princes were then young boy One day, while they were playing, their ball fell into a well. However much they tried they could not recover it and were looking for help. Near-by an impressive - looking, dark complexioned brahmin was standing. The boys went to him for help. Upon listening to their request, he took out a sheaf of dry grass cuttings (used in worship), consecrated it with holy prayers and threw one piece at the ball-, following it he sent down several grass leaves all of which were now attached to the ball forming a straight line leading to the top of the well. He pulled at it and drew the ball out! The boys were surprised at this 'magic' and queried:
'0 distinguished brahmin, what is your name? Where did you come from?'
Dronacharya : 'Go and narrate what you saw to Bhishmacharya, your grandfather, and you will know everything.'
The boys ran to Bhishma and excitedly told him about the brahmin's feat. At that time, Bhishma was thinking about equipping the princes in archery with thorough training, as they had to look after the kingdom when they grew up and protect it from enemies. He was on the lookout for a suitable tutor for the boys. He had heard about Dronacharya, son of the sage Bharadwaja and disciple of Parashurama, as a master archer. The enthusiastic narrative of the princes convinced him that the brahmin they had seen must have been none other than Drona. He immediately went to Drona and offered honors requesting him to stay in the capital and be the princes' master. Drona agreed and set up his residence in Hastinavati.

Ekalavya became excited as he heard the story of Dronacharya from his mother. "0, mother! How lucky are the Kaurava and Pandava princes! Can Acharya Drona teach archery to me too?"
'Go and try, son. I wish you lucked. Do not forget ' that he is a distinguished' elderly man. Conduct yourself with dignity and respect. Never retort. Behave with humility, and accomplish your task' blessed the mother and sent the boy. Filled with enthusiasm and happiness at the prospect of meeting Dronacharya, he set Out for Hastinavati.
Even before entering the city, Ekalavya sighted -the master on the outskirts. Drona was giving early lessons in archery to the princes. Ekalavya hesitated to go to him while the class was in progress. He waited near-by and watched.
Disciples surrounded Drona. He would teach each boy in an easily comprehen- sible manner. He would show them how to stand erect, on which leg one should rest more bodyweight, how to position the hands and fingers, how to position the arrow and mount the arrow, how to concentrate upon the object, how and to what extent one should draw the thread, when to release the arrow. And he would demonstrate to them all these things vividly and in detail. He would watch a boy send forward an arrow and show him where he was right and where he went wrong. The practice would continue.
Ekalavya was all eyes and ears as he watched this class with fascination. He was gripped with a new sensation, as he learnt new things about archery. 'Oh! What a master He can turn even a novice into an expert! And how easy it is to understand his teaching!' he told himself.
He remembered the counseling of his mother. At an opportune moment he met Acharya Drona. He prostrated before him totally surrendering himself to the Master. Drona was touched by the humility of this boy from the woods, stretched his arms to raise him, and blessed him. Ekalavya introduced himself. When the Master learnt of the boy's mighty desire, a sympathetic chord struck in his heart.
But engaged as he was in teaching the princes, he had no time to accept other students. He was also worried how he could teach. a jungle-boy along with the princes.
Drona decided against keeping the boy with him there, and told him, 'Son, it will not be difficult for you to learn this art. You are a born archer. Go back to the forest and practise well and with deep interest. You too are my disciple.'
Drona's words them were a great blessing to Ekalavya. He felt confident that the Masters good wishes were with him. Again prostrating before Drona, he sought his blessings, 'Sir, I will act as you have instructed. Please bless me that my practice will bear fruit.' 'Go, son, may you master archery as you wish!' Drona said,
Satisfied at having achieved something new and significant, Ekalavya returned to his forest. There he prepared an idol of Dronacharya, installed it in a particular place, and began to worship it reverently by offering flowers, fruits, etc.
Ekalavya would get up early in themorning, bathe himself and offer 'pooja' to the master's idol. Enshrined in his mind were the words, actions and training methods of Drona he had witnessed. He faithfully followed the instructions and continued his practice; and his prowess increased as days passed.
While Arjuna had personally mastered archery from Drona, learning from him by first hand, Ekalavya achieved equally impressive skill while worshipping the Master in absentia. If he could not accomplish a pailicular technique, he would rush to Drona's image and present his problem and would wait in meditation till a solution appeared in his mind. He would then proceed further.
Ekalavya's training progressed in this manner.
The Kaurava and Pandava princes once went to the forest on a hunting expedition. Their leading dog was running forward. Ekalavya, dressed in a tiger-skin and wearing strings of conch- beads, was engaged in his practice. The dog, on approaching him, began to bark. Probably wishing to show off his workmanship, he sent down a series of arrows in the direction of the barking dog and the arrows filled its mouth. It ran back to the princes. They were astonished at this expertise in archery and wondered who the archer was.
Arjuna, seeing this, was not only surprised but felt anxious too. He wanted to be recognized as the world's foremost archer. His fame was spreading across many states.
Now witnessing an instance of this extraordinary prowess, he was concerned that there may be another strong contender for that superior position.
The princes went in pursuit of the archer who had hit their dog, and saw Ekalavya.
Ekalavya was standing there- a dark complexioned young man looking like a chiseled creation, there was the bow in his left hand and an arrow in the right.
The princes wondered: Was this youngster really the one who shot those arrows? How did he acquire his training? Who taught him to use the arrows with such precision in this forest?
Arjuna felt restless. Here was a person matching him. He felt deflated.
The princes asked Ekalavya: Are you the person who sent down those arrows into the dog's mouth?'
'Yes.'
'Who are you? What's your name?'
'I am the son of Hiranyadhanu, the king of Nishada. I am the chieftain of this forest. Ekalavya is my name.
'Your prowess in archery is tremendous. Who is your master?'
'My master is Dronacharya' rep Ekalavya humbly, Arjuna was taken aback at the mention of Drona's name. Is this true? Could his dear teacher teach so much to an aboriginal boy? If so, what about the Master's promise to him?
Drona had developed a special affection towards Arjuna. He was pleased at the extraordinary interest Arjuna evinced in his training.
There was a king named Drupada who also had learnt archery with Drona. He had learnt archery with Drona. He had promised Drona that would help him when he assumed throne. But later when the poor Dronacharya went to see, him, the king dismissed him saying 'Do you think a king can keep friendship with a wretched person like you?'
Dronacharya was enraged and retorted: 'remember this! Some day one of my disciple will bring you to me bound like a slave!' Since then, this one thought was constantly nagging in the Acharya's mind.
Drona called in his disciples and told them- "Sons, I am fulfilling the onerous responsibility of training you. I am sure all of you will meet with expected success. I have a desire to be fulfilled. You should accomplish it after your training is completed. Will you promise?'
The princes stood in silence before their tutor listening to his words. After a while, Arjuna felt that it was not proper for them not to respond to their Master. Should they remain silent at Drona's plea? Were they cowards? Rushing forward, Arjuna said: "0 Master, should you're asking us thus? Your word is law to us. Whatever may be your wish, I shall fulfil it."
Dronacharya felt happy to discover a pupil of his heart's desire. His affection flowed forth towards Arjuna, 'I will train you to be unmatched in the world', and he promised him.
Another incident. Once when Drona and the princes were having their dinner, the light was suddenly extinguished by a drought of wind. The darknessencouraged Arjuna to ponder thus: 'now, in this darkness, our eyes cannot spot our hands or mouth. And yet the hand with food is correctly moving towards the mouth. This is the result of our practice. So, if we have thorough practice, even in darkness we can hit our target.' No sooner was the meal over, than he rushed out, and startedtarget practice in the dark.
Drona was pleased with his dedication.
Arjuna grew up with the strong conviction that none in the world could match him in archery, and he was Drona's closest disciple. The sight of a jungle-boy that could challenge him set him worrying. And the boy said he was a disciple of Drona. Can a respectable person likeDronacharya fail to keep his word?
"Is it true that Dronacharya is your master? ,". Asked Arjuna of Ekalavya.
'Don't be so arrogant as to question my word. My father did not live long to teach me archery completely. But he taught me to be truthful and not to tolerate untruth. Do you doubting me? Who are you to doubt even my Master?'
At this retort from Ekalavya Arjuna replied in an equally spirited tone: 'I am the son of king Pandu. My name is Arjuna, and my Master is Dronacharya. He hails from a distinguished clan and would never teach a jungle-boy like you. All his disciples come from superior races."
Ekalavya felt like laughing at Arjuna's words but without making fun, he said: 'Arjuna, my Master does not bother about these classdistinctions. It matters to him little whether a disciple is an 'Arya' or a hunter. Why should it matter in one's learning of archery? As our Master says, the disciple should possess determination and concentration in practice to achieve excellence. The teacher should be genuinely interested in his pupil. My Master Dronacharya has heartily blessed me, and I am confident that I will become a master archer with his blessing.'
Arjuna could not accept Ekalavya's words. 'No', he protested, 'What you are saying is false. I won't believe it. Did Master Dronacharya deceive me?
Arjuna's words angered Ekalavya. He suddenly whipped out his bow and shouted at Aijuna: 'You keep your mouth shut Say one word insulting my Guru, and I shall cut off your tongue!'
Sensing that the war of words was getting out of hand, Dharmaraya, the eldest of Pandavas, pacified Arjuna saying, -0 dear Arjuna, why this unnecessary acrimony? Let us go and ask Dronacharya himself.'
No sooner did they return to Hastinavati than Arjuna rushed to Dronacharya. His face was red and his eyes showed his anxiety. He explained to the Master what transpired in the forest and lamented: "A hunter-boy has gained superiority over me. 0 Master, he boasts that you are his 'Guru'. How can this be possible? What about your promise to me?"
Dronacharya was perplexed: He remained silent for a while. He could guess what really happened. He was caught between two foremost disciples, both dear to him.
Dronacharya was actually pleased at the enterprise of this disciple who stayed in the forest and had mastered the art of archery relying only upon the name of the Guru. '0, what an adventurous boy! What determination! Anybody should appreciate his capabilities when he could wield the bow and arrow so well as to humble Arjuna', Drona thought and felt happy within himself. He was very pleased at Ekalavya's devotion to the Master and thirst for acquiring a thorough training. He decided to show Arjuna the real qualities of Ekalavya.
And Drona also came to a painful decision in relation to his obligation as the teacher to the princes. 'God, Thy will be done', he prayed and set about his task.
Accompanied by Arjuna and Ashwatthama, he proceeded to Ekalavya's forest.

Ekalavya's joy knew no bounds when he learnt that Dronacharya was visiting him. He tidied up the whole forest to welcome the Master. Thinking that Drona should not miss his path amidst darkness or shadows thrown by tall trees, he positioned his fellow tribesmen all along the route to guide his teacher to the destination without hindrance.
He decorated the idol he was worshipping with colorful wild flowers. He prayed before it again. He kept the bow and arrows properly arranged. He was full of anticipation.
Horns blew heralding the arrival of Dronacharya. Ekalavya rushed out and saw him majestically walking down. Approaching him, Ekalavya fell at his feet,- tears rolled down his cheeks in sheer excitement. His desire to welcome the Master was great; it was total surrender. Ekalavya also formally welcomed Arjuna and Ashwatthama, who had accompanied the Master.
Ekalavya treated the distinguished guests to a feast of delicious fruits, milk, etc. He later demonstrated to them his prowess in archery. Arrows flew in all directions in novel formations.
Ekalavya gratefully told Drona: 'Sir, all this is the result of your kind blessing. As long as I remember you, none of the arrows I send forth can fail to hit the target, Acharya, I have also learnt to aim at the source of any sound! I sat in prayer before your idol and during the worship, the whole knowledge came to me. How can I forget your generosity?' His eyes were closed in reverence.
Dronacharya was thrilled at the words and actions of Ekalavya. His heart melted with deep affection for this unique pupil. Seeing the devotion with which be worshipped his idol, his eyes swelled with tears of emotion. I am lucky to have such a pupil', he told himself. When he remembered the object of his visit, Drona shuddered in agony. Should this poor boy suffer because of a promise I made to a prince? Should his life's ambition collapse shatteringly? Drona felt grieved.
Arjuna and Ashwatthama sat transfixed upon witnessing Ekalavya's skills. They forgot themselves and began applauding him.
Drona awakened from his emotional state and remembering his objective instructed Ashwatthama to go out and make arrangements for their return journey. He was concerned that his son might oppose him.
After Ashwatthama went out, Drona, in a low voice, summoned Ekalavya.
'Yes, Guruji.'
'Your learning has been enormous, son. I am deeply satisfied. With utter devotion and practice, you have achievedsomething magnificent. May your achievement become an ideal for all to emulate.' Drona blessed his disciple whole-heartedly.
Ekalavya was overwhelmed. 'Thank you, 0 Gurudeva! I only wish my mother had heard your noble words. But, Sir, you blessed me with this training. You asked me in Hastinavati to pursue my training in my forest and said I too was a disciple of yours. Otherwise, I do not know whether I could have accomplished this much. May your kind blessings protect me for all time, Acharya!'
Drona said - 'If you accept me as your Master, you are obliged to pay my fee ('guru-dakshina'). Think it over.'
Ekalavya smilingly replied: 'What is there to think over, Sir? I am your disciple and you are my 'Guru'. This is as true as the existence of my mother, my forest here and my dear animal friends. Should I hesitate to pay my obeisance to you? Please say what you wish, Sir. I will fulfil it even if I have to sacrifice my life in the effort.'
Words failed Drona. He could hardly respond to the glorious devotion of the boy. He felt utterly helpless and was obliged to tell him: 'Ekalavya, your achievement is unparalleled. Any master should feel proud of such a disciple. But, son, now it has fallen to my lot to promise I made.' 'Oh, Master what are you saying? You have to break a promise? Impossible it will not happen. And that too because I got trained in this art? Bhagavan! Please tell me how I can help you solve this problem. Everything that is mine, my whole being is at your disposal.'
'Ekalavya, I have to demand a supreme sacrifice from you to fulfil my word. Pardon me, son! Can you please give me the thumb of your right hand as my fee?'
Ekalavya stared at Dronacharya for an I while. He could sense the Master's agony. He then stood up and walked. To the idol with determination, placed his thumb upon a stone and cut it off with an arrow from his left hands in an instant. Blood started gushing out.
Meanwhile, Arjuna was keenly listening to the dialogue between Drona and Ekalavya. He was worried whether he could match Ekalavya in the skills of archery, but felt confident that Drona would keep his promise. When the Master asked Ekalavya's thumb as his fee, Arjuna was shocked. By the time he collected his thoughts and turned to Ekalavya, the thumb had already rolled down to the floor.
Ekalavya then prostrated before Drona who was sitting with his eyes closed and said: '0 Master, please accept my fee.' Opening his eyes, Drona saw the thumb soaked in blood; the disciple stood before him with a smile on his face. Drona, while feeling grieved at the injury he inflicted upon Ekalavya, was at the same time deeply touched by his ardent devotion. He embraced him saying: 'Son, your devotion to the 'Guru' is unmatched. I feel a sense of fulfillment in having had a disciple like you. May God bless you.'
Arjuna was standing there dumbfounded.
Later, the threesome returned to Hastinavati.
Ekalavya scored victory in defeat! With the right thumb gone, he could no longer wield the bow effectively. But he would not give up easily. He continued his practice using his left arm and achieved distinction. His accurate marksmanship became a byword. He demonstrated that nothing could be a hindrance to a totally sincere pursuit. But he was constantly nagged by one worry. As a heroic person like his father, he had desired to assist the king of the land in times of difficulties and he could not fulfil this ambition.
It was the time when the Great War of Kurukshetra was being fought. Lord Krishna, supporting the Pandavas, was thinking about talented and heroic people who may join hands with Kauravas.
Ekalavya's father Hiranyadhanu had died in the service of Kaurava kings. Now it was possible his son might also assist Kauravas. Though he had lost his right thumb, he was still one of the world's greatest archers, as Krishna knew.
It is said in the Mahabharata that Lord Krishna, not wanting Ekalavya to assist the Kaurava army, killed him before the war erupted, ad blessed him with eternal salvation.
Ekalavya was an ideal pupil. An intense desire for learning makes one a good pupil. Totally consumed by this desire for learning, Ekalavya, though not sitting before the Master in person, mastered archery by worshiping the 'Guru' in absence. A boy from the woods, losing his father early in life, achieved such great glory in the art of archery.
When the Master desired his right thumb as his fee, he unhesitatingly cut it off and presented it to him.
Ekalavya is a name that lives in the memory of mankind eternally like a star.

viggop

24th May 2005, 05:35 PM

Lord Krishna killed Ekalavya? I thought he fought for the Kauravas and was killed in the kurukshetra war

tomato

24th May 2005, 05:57 PM

Raghu

24th May 2005, 06:20 PM

Lord Krishna killed Ekalavya? I thought he fought for the Kauravas and was killed in the kurukshetra war

I did not know as well :shock:

Tomato,

I got the above info from this site, an excellent source of info.

http://www.freeindia.org/biographies/greatpersonalities/ekalavya/index.htm

Karna & Ekalavya, are equal in Dharma, two GREAT noble atmas in deed

r_kk

25th May 2005, 06:59 AM

Badri

25th May 2005, 07:29 AM

And how would that help, r_kk?

Would you like us to condemm our Gods and call them unjust villains? And would that help eradicate the social injustice you see prevalent in every society, no matter whether they believe in a god or not?

Perhaps you are an agnostic, or even an atheist, but there is such a thing as Faith, and to many, that faith is important. It will do those people no good if that bolster is removed from them.

The people of Kerala till date believe that Mahabali was the greatest king! Legend (from which you quote the vamana avatharam) has it that Mahabali was not killed, but is still the ruler of the Netherlands, where Vamana himself has agreed to act as a door keeper for all eternity. And Mahabali is an immortal, who lives till today and visits his former kingdom on Onam day.

What has it done to people in Kerala? It has given them a day to celebrate, to get together, to mingle with friends, share love and joy. Would you like us to give that up?

Every religion has festivals that give man an opportunity to make life better. If man misinterprets religion, that is not the fault of religion, or matha, but man's mind or mathi.

It is like blaming Alfred Nobel for inventing dynamite, forgetting the service he did to humanity by instituting the Nobel Prize!

r_kk

25th May 2005, 08:03 AM

Dear Badri,
I just wanted to tell that there are incidences in Mahabharata where the human race is divided based on birth and more over what each one has to learn was determined by some upper segement of society.

The first one is Ekalayvan and the second one is Karna (when his Guru sleeps on his lap, he withstand the pain of insect penetrtaing his body. Guru finds him as sathryan and curse him). I accept that this two incidences don't spoil the greatness of an epic. I also accept there are soem great moral and old mythicated history to be learned from some of the stories, but at the same time we have to accept that there are some of the incidences which indicate a bad system followed by our ancesters and our mythical Gods also recognized such system.

I placed my posts here when I found here every one tries to give a holy cover to all the incidences even to the suffering of common man. Killing of thousnads of common man in Kurusethra war and their sacrifice (what for!) is not at all given a thought. Thousands of people died for the interests of few selected ones. Thats where I feel sad.

About mahablai, Onam, underworld kingdom etc, if we remove the mythical aspect and assume Mahabali and Indra as two kings and Vamana is the just a powerful being who act in the interest of Indra, it will be different.

If here everyone accepts Mahabaratha characters are totally mythical ones and are just part of their religious belief system, I don't have any objection on their belief system.

Badri

25th May 2005, 08:10 AM

r_kk: You seem to react to the "holy" cover!! For someone who doesn't seem to believe in the entity called God, I should think the word holy doesnt mean anything! After all, the dictionary defined holy as somethign associated with divinity. When you dont believe in divinity, then there is nothing holy at all!

When there is nothing holy, in your eyes, why would you object to someone calling something by a non-exisitent term? I find it funny and ironic that you would react to something that has no personal relavance whatsoever!

r_kk

25th May 2005, 08:19 AM

beacuse the system of dividing human by birth is still alive and it is being major disease to our country. I tried to react against this so called holy cover to the myths which indirectly supports such belief. I am not against any individual belief but against a system of society which takes its basis from such so-called mythical stories.

Badri

25th May 2005, 08:26 AM

Division based on birth!! Interesting.

Even in this time and this era, there are divisions based on a person being born a black as against a white in many countries. Oh, do they have a mahabhartha as well?

Even in this time and this era, there are divisions based on a person being born poor or rich in many countries. Surely, all of their societies too must have been based on the Mahabharatha!

Even in this time and this era, there are divisions based

on a person being born in one religion or the other!
on a person being born blind, or deaf
on a person being born a genuis or a moron
on a person being born male or female
.......

My dear r_kk - we live in a world where there are divisions. Let us face it. Communism, which tried to destroy those divisions and bring about an equal society, crumbled! It is the capitalist society where the divisions of rich and poor are so clearly demarcatd that is being embraced all over the world.

Don't blame the Mahabharatha, or any other religous text or religion itself for that. Blame man's greed for it. Which incidentally is the exact message of the Mahabharatha. The greed of the Kauravas saw to their destruction.

Moral of story: Don't be greedy!

Funny, how the very story and the very belief that seeks to cure society's illness gets branded as a virus!

Badri

25th May 2005, 08:33 AM

Besides, all of these mythical stories seem to highlight that Ekalavya or Karna or Mahabali - all those "unfortunates" that got discriminated because of their birth ultimately got salvation from the Lord Himself! A rare blessing that even the Pandavas did not get!

Now, doesn't that tell you anything? Doesn't that tell you that no matter if humans persecute you for your birth, ultimately, you are rewarded and considered great for your sacrifice, that the Lord in Heaven does not distinguish between people of births?

No one can argue that any of the characters of the Bharatha are perfect. Neither Drona, nor Bhisma nor the Pandavas. They are all human beings with their mistakes. And with all their failings, they did a lot of wrong things. People like Ekalavya were wronged in life, but the story goes on to assure, men may not understand, men may cause harm, but the Lord doesnt, thereby conveying the powerful message, "When the Lord himself does not judge anyone based on birth, why should man?"

And you would seek to criticise this, dear r_kk? Woulnd't that be like a "self-goal"? and defeat your whole argument?

r_kk

25th May 2005, 10:12 AM

[tscii]Dear Badri,
Heaven or salvation after death or good life in next birth are questionable, and it can not considered as gift to those who had suffered in the current life. It is like showing some unrealistic benefit for the people those who had/have been treated as inferior. For a non-believer like me, Salvation to Ekalayva or underworld to Mahabalai is also similar. It may mean totally opposite to the believer.

As you said, division based on birth is existing in all parts of society in one or other form (religion, color, caste, wealth etc…). It doesn’t mean that we should not argue against the root cause or fight against it. As on today religions are one of the major causes for many social problems. If you want just to put blame on the greedy people or their wrong understanding of so-called holy scripts and considering the religion as holy, then we are intentionally and cleverly avoiding the effort to understand the root cause of problems.

Don't blame the Mahabharatha, or any other religious text or religion itself for that.

Funny, how the very story and the very belief that seeks to cure society's illness gets branded as a virus!

If I quote from Bhavath Gita or other religious books to show how the religions divide the people and how ill treatment of the another human being was/is made easily digestible (you please read the pro-slavery scripts of American civil war, racial discrimination Jews in Germany before Hitler era, Periyar/Ambedkar books on religion based suppression etc etc), I am sure it is going to be major controversial discussion and may go out of this subject. If you think religious beliefs are intended to cure the illness of society and all the issues are mainly because of human’s greed, then we have strong difference of opinion in the basic itself.

In order to aviod devaition to current subject, I am not expressing my views here. We can continue in detail after opening of "religious section" in the hub.

Badri

25th May 2005, 10:33 AM

dear r_kk: I used the concepts of salvation etc because that is what the holy texts themselves have shown as a reward.

The point which I tried to highlight, and which you have missed is not what the reward itself is. It is the fact that they were rewarded. Do you understand where I am coming from, r_kk?

I still insist that is is Man's greed that led him to commit many errors. Seeing this greed, religion tried to set it right by making the oppressed Ekalavya as the real hero, without antagonizing the powerful men who were committing the errors.

When Drona and others ill-treated Ekalavya, no one could point out the injustice. Why? Because they were powerful influential people. Yet the author Vyasa has so skillfully composed the epic and written it in such a way that everyone knows what low levels Drona had sunk to in doing injustice to Ekalavya. At the same time, Vyasa also made it seem that Ekalavya was actually honored and rewarded. Although from a societal stand point, he was ill-treated, he was given a place of honor.

That is the best Vyasa could do given the politico-social scenario of those days. I think of the Ekalavya episode as a satire, a parody! Like a Bernard Shaw or a Cho drama. Maybe the episode never happened, but in writing it, Vyasa exposed the so-called upper class!

Don't you agree, r_kk? Seen this way, doesnt it seem as though the religous text called Mahabharatha is actually giving a lesson to man in good social behaviour?

r_kk

25th May 2005, 11:15 AM

Dear Badri,
I agree that Mahabaratha indicates that Ekalayva and Karana were rewarded for their goodness (if the salvation is considered as reward). Good persons got good and viseverse.

But I fear that such broad conclusion may make a misleading path, in which accepting sufferings or oppression of common human beings in the current birth, is assumed to be compensated after death. It will misguide the suppresssed people to accept their misery as fate which is attached to them in their birth based on "paava/punniyam" and be easily exploited.

I would like to quote from the words from Gita (the essence of entire epic) to make you to understand why I am writing against Mahabaharata quoting a single incident. My argument will be about the core cream and how it had/has been used by small segment of greedy people as a suppressive tool. I will come to this subject later.

Raghu

25th May 2005, 02:49 PM

Raghu,
it is sad to note that you look at the removing the finger or killing of Ekalayva in "kings" or "mythical perspective". Look from a people those who had been considered as inferior because of birth.

It is similar to Vamana avadharam where a great king who donates all his weath to his people, was killed by "vamana" on request of Indra. It is more sad that the people of his own kingdom is brainwashed to believe as greatest event.

Why can't you look from common man's perspective?

Dear R_KK

That posting was not mine,but from some acharya, in fact in Gita and other Vedic Vedas, it is stated one's cast is based on One's occupation, such as Chatriya, Bhramana,..etc. just like we have doctor, engineer,..etc

but during the process of evolution people have misunderstood this and created an EVIL cast system and DISCRIMINATION based on that

Raghu

25th May 2005, 08:17 PM

Sudhama Sir,

What are your VIEWS of Ekalvya and his Moral Values/Dharma, I feel his importance in the EPIC has been neglected and was not given due credit?

Sudhaama

26th May 2005, 02:06 AM

[tscii:bb4c653a67]
// For a non-believer... Salvation to Ekalayva or underworld to Mahabalai is also similar. It may mean totally opposite to the believer//

Not only to an Atheist. But also for others too who superficially GLANCE.. these Great-exemplary Episodes

... conveying Morals for HUMANITY IRRESPECTIVE OF RELIGION.

.. will appear as just a Senseless Farce... DUBIOUSLY... justifying the Partiality, Injustice and Superiority-complex of the so called God’s incarnations as Vamana, Rama, Krishna... and the like

.. Indeed Mahabhaaratha is an EPIC of Secular-India.. irrespective of Religious aspects.

Whether anybody considers Mahabharatha as the Fifth-Veda as per Vedic- believers..

.. or as the Common-Indian- Epic according to Secular India Govt

.. or as a part of Indian- History according to Historians

.. or as just an Interesting- Story for the Children ...

... Well.... but Nobody can deny ONE FACT... that it conveys to Humanity some immortal Lessons and Morals towards a HEALTHY SOCIAL-LIFE..

... true to the Spirit of Tamilian Gospel... “Yaadhum-Oorae Yaavarum Kaelhir”

... which indirectly means that the whole Global Humanity forms only ONE United Family of KINSMEN’

Rather all the Epics similar to Mahabharatha establishes three Great Lessons to the Mankind.

(1)The Interests and Welfare of the Society at large .. is Greater.. than the Birth-right of any Individual even be a King

(2)The Interests of Dharma (ARHAM) and Righteousness is the Greatest and the Top-most above all.

(3)Irrespective of its extent and magnitude of the adherers... be it Five or One Hundred or even it be the Supreme Monarch or his / her Subjects... it is IMMATERIAL and in such cases where and when the Righteousness or Moral- Justice is DYING ... is ONLY IMPORTANT

... then God UNDOUBTEDLY intervenes by ANY MEANS... Directly or Indirectly ... and Sets it Right for the World..

So God ANNOUNCES... "Oh! You the Man (Mankind) BEWARE.. Whether you are of the so-called high caste Brahmin-Guru, or the so-called low-caste Hunter and whether you are the King or his Servant. Don’t take it as granted to do anything as you will

... You have to adhere to the basic-Principle of Social-Justice and HUMAN-MORALITY...

To ensure compliance of such a Rudimentary Life-Code for any Creature on Earth... especially the

.. Supreme-Birth as Human has the Highest degree of bounden duty towards such a SUPREME-GOAL of Mundane Life

On which I am GOVERNING YOU. .. from behind Try to understand my Lessons by Words and Deeds.

//As on today religions are one of the major causes for many social problems.//

No. No. No.. Not at all. .. Ever and ever… as well as even Now… ALL RELIGIONS without Exception...

...EMANCIPATES the Mankind.. towards the higher Perspective of various Life-Principles and Code of Practice… for the purpose of Human- Birth… Existence of one Super-Human-Power so called God

And above all.. inculcates the Sense of Society not only towards Humanity .. but also on other God-creations as well… so to say the Hearty-sense of Universal-Love

Yes all Religions declare CLEARLY SO Mahabharath-Epic is No- Exception.

// If you want just to put blame on the greedy people or their wrong understanding of so-called holy scripts and considering the religion as holy, then we are intentionally and cleverly avoiding the effort to understand the root cause of problems.//

Yes… if we find fault with the Moon… stating that it does not exist on New-Moon-day.. the Darkest day ...then it will only mean... our lack of understanding or Knowledge. And Not in the Moon.

// If I quote from Bhavath Gita or other religious books to show how the religions divide the people and how ill treatment of the another human being was/is made easily digestible//

It is TOTALLY INCORRECT to say that either the Vedas or Mahabharatha or the Bhagawad- Geetha preaches Social- discrimination.

But no doubt they assert God’s creation of Humanity in SEGREGATED forms suited to varied sorts of Earthly DEMANDS OF ACTIVITIES, Principles, Tastes and Distastes by imparting various proportions of the Three basic Gunhas (Qualities) of Mankind

Such Segregations has nothing to do with the Caste- based HUMAN- DIVIDE.. nor Discriminations nor any Disparities on the basis of Birth alone.

But such Human-divides and Social- discriminations are all MAN- MADE… including Caste-formations ..

...as also varied Code of Justice named as Sasthras.. on the basis of Human- Birth..

on which PERVERSIONS too.. God in different Manifestations..has intervened and corrected the Humanity several times.

// (you please read the pro-slavery scripts of American civil war, racial discrimination Jews in Germany before Hitler era,//

That was an Eye-Opener towards an Enlightened Wisdom for the U.S. People to revise their outlook and encode suitably ensuring Social- Equanimity, Parity of Justice Equal- Freedom of Democracy for all.the citizens alike..

The Individual Man as well as the Mankind … retraces the Steps, Corrects, and improves through Positive Lessons by observing the Great Personages or after getting Punished or by some means of. BURNING FINGERS... if not earlier by the dint of Wisdom.

//If you think religious beliefs are intended to cure the illness of society and all the issues are mainly because of human’s greed, then we have strong difference of opinion in the basic itself.//

Yes… Please come out My Dear . r-kk I can convince you if you are open-minded.

// I still insist that is is Man's greed that led him to commit many errors. Seeing this greed, religion tried to set it right by making the oppressed Ekalavya as the real hero, without antagonizing the powerful men who were committing the errors.//

Greed is one of the SIX Bad Qualities hidden within Man… consistently trying to Dominate over His Conscience (which shows him the Righteous-path based on the degree of his Wisdom)

So behind this Episode “Greed” is one amongst them to cause a Grave-injustice to Righteous Man a pitiable Hunter a Model to Humanity... despite a minor character of this Epic.

//When Drona and others ill-treated Ekalavya, no one could point out the injustice. Why? Because they were powerful influential people. Yet the author Vyasa has so skillfully composed the epic and written it in such a way that everyone knows what low levels Drona had sunk to in doing injustice to Ekalavya. At the same time, Vyasa also made it seem that Ekalavya was actually honored and rewarded. Although from a societal stand point, he was ill-treated, he was given a place of honor//

Such Epics propagate GREAT MORALS through the Mouths and Events of several characters... Main or Minor.. we have to see only the moral-lessons behind

... without looking into... who is low or high by birth or status or any other means

... And finally what were the Codes of Righteousness on those days... as had been highlighted....

... As also on what the God-incarnation APPROVES or ASSERTS in conclusion... must only be... our Direction of interests

// Seen this way, doesnt it seem as though the religous text called Mahabharatha is actually giving a lesson to man in good social behaviour?//

Yes.. Drona was severely punished by Krishna . by his CRUEL- END despite his immortal-powers..

.. mainly because of Drona’s Grave-unfairness coupled with Moral- injustice to his Loyal- Disciple... YAEKALAIVA... the Typical Role-Model to Humanity in such a Sense..
[/tscii:bb4c653a67]

r_kk

26th May 2005, 03:24 AM

Dear Mr. Sudhaama,

I will come back one by one and try to give detail replies when I get some free time. If you think that there is nothing wrong in religion but on the people's greed, then as I said before we have strong difference of opinion in the basic understanding itself. Please note that I had spent significant portion of life in understanding major religious scripture and in search of so-called supreme truth whole heartly. At the end of the very long search I personally came to the conclusion that it is nothing but "abin" as Karl Marcs said.

I can write in detail but I am sure that it will violate the rules of this section. Anyway I will try without hurting major sentiments of people when the hub open its religious section.

Badri

26th May 2005, 05:03 AM

Before this thread gets hijacked and goes off in all directions, let us remember that we started off discussing the epic Mahabharatha and not the socio-political and religous implications of modern day society.

There is already plenty of religion vs society debate going on elsewhere, so can we please focus on the story here?

r_kk wrote

I can write in detail but I am sure that it will violate the rules of this section. Anyway I will try without hurting major sentiments of people when the hub open its religious section.

Deeply appreciate your restraint in the larger interests, r_kk! Thank you.

Raghu

26th May 2005, 03:09 PM

Dear Sbadri

The Problem with this topic is that it is virtually impossible to discuss the Epic without Religion, but if one stays within the limits, I don't see a problem in discussing, so far, except Nitai, NO ONE else have gone into the Fanatical arena. So please do not delete or edit any posts unless it is of OFFENSIVE nature.

Thank you

Dear Sudhama Sir

Ekalvya was NOT given same RESPECT that Ankaraj KARNA had in the epic, can you elaborate a bit more as to why this is so?

Sudhaama

27th May 2005, 09:36 PM

Dear Mr."sbadri99"

//Before this thread gets hijacked and goes off in all directions,...//

Yes... We are ALERT... We will not allow such a mishap to happen. I am quite cautious and ALERT on the matter and...

.. So will report to you... even I feel alittle scent of such a trend in future.

///.. let us remember that we started off discussing the epic Mahabharatha and not the socio-political and religous implications of modern day society//.

Mahabharatha is internationally acclaimed irrespective of Religion or Culture or Historical or Literature aspects.. it is More a Moral-Scripture...

... Richly carved by the Indian-ancestry towards the the COMMON WELL-BEING OF THE SOCIETY as a whole... even Globaly.

... It is a Comprehensive Indian-Epic... inherent with all such sorts of Multifaceted dimensions and perceptions hidden within....

... which ONLY WE .. THE ELDERS... ARE INTERESTED... and Not just the Story.. which almost all of us know.

// There is already plenty of religion vs society debate going on elsewhere, so can we please focus on the story here?//

We have to be cautious and alert ... unitedly.... but NOT PREVENT the due Clarifications towards HUMAN- VALUES.

Even Thirukkuralh speaks of God, Fate and the Society as well... but ultimately towards the Common-well-being of the Society without any Discrimination..

So only in such a light we are clarifying some doubts and Misconceptions... towards wihich this Thread is a Good Opportunity...

Which SHOULD NEVER BE DISCOURAGED BY ANYBODY... just fearing for Thieves.

We have to unitedly serve towards this HEALTHY PURPOSE.

Sudhaama

28th May 2005, 03:37 AM

Dear Mr."r_kk"

//Your explanations to idiappam's question is interesting//

Thanks for your feed-back encouragement.

//... Ekalyva and Karna's incidences, their Guru's punished them because they learnt something which they are not supposed to learn. Is it correct? Is it means there was a division based on birth?//

Karnha was cursed by Parasurama... because that Guru felt cheated by his Disciple telling a lie and for learning in Disguise (whatever be the point behind)

Whereas Aekalaiva.. a Hunter.. was quite Straightforward... a Model- disciple...

..but feared that he being only a Hunter... and not of ROYAL-STATUS ... cannot get taught by the Royol Guru, Super- knowledged Archer- Scholar. So he stealthily learnt by keenly observing the teaching classes of the Guru from behind...

...but not failing to gratefully acknowledge his gratitude by erecting and worshipping an idol of his Self-assumed Guru Drona.

There was nothing wrong in it as per the Law of Righteousness ... a common Yardstick for Humanity.

But Drona did not appreciate him on Five grounds...

(1) The Guru felt that his high degree of Archery- knowledge was necessary and deserving only for the Kings... who have to fight wars
and not for an after all Hunter... who can make a living by ordinary extent of archery knowledge without any super-skill in it. Here the Caste or Community of birth was not his consideration...but only the comparative needs and demands on the two parallel life-duties. So the Guru felt that this uninvited Disciple was so greedy to stealthily gain the additional Knowledge by cheating the Guru... more than what he deserves and needs as hunter. So he did not relish the hunter to pursue further.parallel to his legitimate students... especially of Royal-family.

(2)When that Hunter could prove his skill equal to his authorised disciple Arjuna... Drona feared... that this unauthorised Disciple may become one day a Competitor to his best Student Arjuna... and even become greater than the Guru Drtona himself one day in future. ..which he wanted to avert.

(3) That hunter could impart such a rare knowledge to other Hunters too and ultimately their group can capture a Nation itself... driving out even the Guru Drona.... which he wanted to avert.

(4) Drona was proud to Quote Arjuna as his best Disciple... and he did not relish to quote a Hunter at par with a Future- King.(Caste were not the Criteria.. but only the disparity of status)

(5) He being an ordinary Hunter by status, can be easily enticed by any of the Future Enemy Kings of Pandavas or Kauravas... and by means of such a rare skill his legitimate disciples Arjuna and Kauravas may get defeated... which will be a matter of shame to the Guru.

So he wanted to nip it in the Bud... but his cruel-demand (an inhuman PUNISHMENT IN DISGUISE was too much) .. in the name of Guru- dhakshina... ... from his loyal- disciple generated the wrath of Krishna...

... who REWARDED BACK at the warfiled through his same highly acclaimed best- Disciple ... Arjuna

// I get struck at this point since even Gandhi's (who fought against untouchability) explantions to Gita....//

I will answer these Social- aspect-points in any other relevant forum.. if you open anew.

//Since all the incidences related with this epic, I had raised this question. //

Yes... I hope this suffices.

Idiappam

28th May 2005, 05:00 PM

Looks like the great Mahabharatham is turning ugly!

Anyway, just one question!

Why did Karna, a great warrior, courageous, and skilled - lose the war??

Something to do with his birth?

rajasaranam

28th May 2005, 05:32 PM

Has anyone touched upon the incident of five beggars/shudras and their mother getting burnt alive in the wax palace instead of pandavas :roll:

Sudhama ji throw some light over this please

jaiganes

28th May 2005, 06:28 PM

Epic - meaning long heroic poem, novel, or similar work of art.
source - l i n k (http://www.english-test.net/gre/vocabulary/meanings/356/gre-words.php#epic).
So mahabharatha is an epic.
Sadly thats how majority of people in India are brainwashed to believe.
somebody said. it is a good story for children.!! I would never let any child read mahabharatha if I could. It contains gutwrenching deeds of horror and inhuman characters depicting a time of tremendous turbulence and chaos. Even Karna's character deserves little sympathy.
Even Krishna's character deserves lesser respect(from a story point of view).
Biggest disservice one can do to this story is calling it an epic and spreading it as the symbol of Indian civilization. If what this story portrays is what ancient India used to be, then it is better to forget that India and move on.
Mahabharatha neither teaches morals (as Badri would like to have it), nor instills heroism in minds of men and women.
If you finish reading mahabharatha then all you are left with is a bitter taste in your mind and heart(reasons are obvious). I would read "Red Dragon" once more than read this.
Immediate reactions from certain learned hubbers would be that I did not read things "in between the lines" as there are millions of hidden code in this story. Then it is not for all and hence not universal.
Instead of leaving the story as it is and characters as they come, for centuries people have created Gods out of this story (for whatever lame reasons). This only complicates their stand today as more and more people read this story from a neutral view point (free of any religious affinity and bias) and ask uncomfortable questions as to why a character did this and that in the story. I see that happening and "learned" people fumble from explanation to explanation in trying to answer the question.
I will not be surprised if someone replies like "Why don't you deep sea dive in dwaraka and find it out yourself?".:-) :wink:
Guys why dont you get it? The discrimination system existed for thousands of years in this country and these stories were used as clever tools to propagate and set it (the system) in stone. Simple.

If anyone says that the stories dont do that and put the blame on the interpretation of morons in the past, then it is a conceding statement that our "ancient" people were so dumb and less apt that they did not understand the "EPICS" they held dear to their hearts and went against them(epics) by supporting an extraordinarily cruel system of discrimination.
ps: Idiappam! thanks for highlighting the darker side of that "so called" book that quantum scientists read to get new ideas. :thumbsup:

For the rest of the learned hubbers,please dont live in denial. Move ahead instead of looking back for "golden age" to emerge from relics and epics (I know that I am nothing compared before you guys to come and advice, but still, I felt like saying it.).

r_kk

28th May 2005, 07:14 PM

Thanks lot Jaiganes, rajasaranam and Idiappam,
Your posts are real eye-openers. I doubt whether such rationalistic views will be tolerated by this hub or the people those who writes here very often.

Mahabharata is unquestionably a great epic considering its length, well developed characters and coherent story line etc etc... But if someone claims that it has greatest moral values to the entire human beings and nothing bad in it, then it is very doubtful.

I request the hubbers to think and answer about killing five persons instead of Pandavas in wax house, or even killing thousands of people in wars for the sake of few kings from common man's unbiased perspective without religious superstitions. In most of the epics/old stories, during war or when suurounded by enemies, the royal prince/princes were generally replaced with sons and daughters of servants as if servent's kid's lifes are valueless. Can you understand the pain of the servent? Are you people going to praise the greatness of prince and princes or feel the pain of innocent victims?

I expect all the major participants of this thread to write their views about the incidences/slogams mentioned by Rajasaranam/Idiappam instead making request to delete the postings.

Idiappam

28th May 2005, 08:08 PM

Here, someone is really taking things lightly:

Yes, the reference to Ekalavya. For people not au fait with Hindu mythology, Ekalavya was this dude who wanted to learn archery from Dronacharya. Dronacharya was the guy who taught the Kauravas and Pandavas their martial warfare. (The Kauravas and Pandavas were the cousins who had this big-ass 18-day battle where they annihilated each other. The Pandavas were the good guys, and survived.) Anyway, one of the Pandavas was named Arjun, and he was unstoppable with a bow and arrow. (Probably attributable to his great sex life - he had at least 10 wives, by my last count.)

But Ekalavya, an earnest villager, also wanted to learn archery. (He had a great upside.) He asked Dronacharya to teach him. Dronacharya said no. So Ekalavya made a statue of Dronacharya, and by praying to that, he became an awesome archer. He showed Dronacharya how awesome he was at some contest where Arjun was fighting. Arjun got pissed, and went crying to Dronacharya, who had promised Arjun that he would let no-one surpass him. So when it came time for Ekalavya to give Dronacharya "guru dakshina" (tuition fees, I guess), Dronacharya demanded Ekalavya's thumbs. As a result, Ekalavya couldn't shoot with a bow and arrow more, and Arjun remained the best.

In short, Ekalavya was jobbed. That shows you what happens when you learn archery from a statue. As a post-script, Arjun's older brother lied to Dronacharya about Dronacharya's son having been killed on the battlefield. (But it was only a half-lie, since they'd killed an elephant with Dronacharya's son's name. So Arjun's virtuous eldest brother only spent a half-second in hell.) As a result Dronacharya lost interest in the battle, and was killed (I think by Arjun). 2nd moral of the story: don't demand thumbs as tuition fees.

http://usenetsports.com/showthread.php?t=750183

Rohit

29th May 2005, 05:59 AM

I am genuinely intending to keep away from such topics. However, I could not resist posting something that I believe, at least in principle, must be mentioned here so as to bring things in a better perspective.

Should anyone get upset by this, I do apologise for that, but I must do and say what I morally think must be done and said, which I genuinely believe would correspond more with the actuality and thus with the truer sense of morality.

Ramayan and Mahabhrat, the two classic Indian epics, are nothing more than just the creations of human minds, possibly remotely based on the lives of ancient Indian kings, their kingdoms and the way of priestly life in those days. But undoubtedly both portray the two ever-contrasting human ideologies, rightly or wrongly suited to the demands of those times.

No doubt, they both are great narrative poems, but it will be ignorant of us to treat them as universal landmark in human conceptions, prescribing what were extravagantly believed to be defining the milestones in normative human values, human conducts and human behaviours. The zeal to idealise and define social, moral, cultural as well as political blueprints for society from such narrative stories that would not and could not keep up with the demands of changing times, would only amount to a dogmatism, leading not only to social degeneration/stagnation of society but cognitive degeneration/stagnation too.

No one would ever deny that the social, cultural and political landscape of India has undergone massive historical turmoil and along with that, began the diminishing role of those moral values that were based on the scenarios and situations encountered in those ancient days.

I would wonder how many of modern human beings would seriously subscribe to what were very subjectively and controversially described as moral in such ancient and obsolete stories, while the morality itself is an essential part of human evolutionary process, which is necessarily a learned process? A learned process that is based on the cognitive development of individuals and thus of society.

Many instances and events described in both stories, while some of them have already been discussed elsewhere and some of them are being discussed here, have turned out to be morally too controversial to be right when viewed from present perspectives. It only proves them to be “right” as long as they were viewed by some as bringing “good” outcomes irrespective of whether those “good” outcomes were at the cost of miseries of countless innocents. While in reality, the genuine concepts of right and wrong do not necessarily follow from such good and bad outcomes.

The evidential proofs of such irrational and selective choices of moral values are numerous. There are countless examples of some of the most outrageous and deplorable actions and behaviours of individuals and/or society that were/are justified as good/right when such actions and/or behaviours had their deep roots in certain aspects of conceptual, social, cultural, political and/or religious life of a people. Such being the highly subjective nature of morality, no epic or story could, can and will ever succeed in encompassing the evolving nature of morality in its entirety and in its true sense. :)

Raghu

29th May 2005, 01:07 PM

his Topic is taking a different turn, pls put a stop to it!!!

Dear Viggop,

As of now still no War between Bansur & Lord Krishna, regarding Anirudh

rajasaranam

30th May 2005, 11:40 PM

SRS

Go here to say something about geetha
http://forumhub.mayyam.com/hub/viewtopic.php?t=3563&start=0

aravindhan

31st May 2005, 04:34 AM

SRS

31st May 2005, 09:37 AM

Legend (from which you quote the vamana avatharam) has it that Mahabali was not killed, but is still the ruler of the Netherlands, where Vamana himself has agreed to act as a door keeper for all eternity.
Mahabali is the ruler of the Netherlands? :shock:

I think he means nether lands meaning below.

viggop

31st May 2005, 11:20 AM

It is not Nederlands but Pathala Lokam.

Raghu

31st May 2005, 02:28 PM

Dear Pradheep,

Gita verses with Explanations,can be posted here as Gita is the back bone of Mahabhartha

Dear Vigop

Regarding Bansur, from all the episodes I am closely following, there is not yet a war, Anirudh(lord Krishna's grand son) is in love with Banasur's daughter Usha, her friend Chitralekha tries to kidnap Anirudh to unite with Usha, while Anirudh is sleeping in his chamber, but as soon she appraoches, dwaraka, Lord Krishna's Sudharsanachakaram prevents her from entering the city, but maha rishis naryana explains to chitralekha that she must offer her prayers to Lord Krishna in order to go past it, hence she offers prayers, and the chkaram disappears, in the mean time, Banasur has sent tow spies to keep an eye on Anirudh, these two spies were distroyed by chitralekha using her maya shakthi.

Chitralekha has her own story, she was a maiden to Matha Parvathi, once Maha Iswar and matha parvathi was playing dice game, Maha iswar plays a trick (leelai) he makes Matha parvathi win and him loose the game, so after he lost he got angry and walks away from matha Parvathi, this develops into an argument and they are both angry between each others, seeing this the maiden(chitra lekha) disguises her self as matha parvathi(using her illusive power) and plays the game with Maha Iswar, seeing this Matha Parvathi got angry and cursed Chitra lekha to be born as a demon, hence she was born as Usha's maiden & friend.

Maha Iswar grants mukthi to Chitra lekha in this birth, to be continued....

Badri

1st June 2005, 05:25 AM

Dear Pradheep,

Gita verses with Explanations,can be posted here as Gita is the back bone of Mahabhartha

Kindly refrain from doing so. This thread has been redone and only story references have been retained. Kindly discuss the Mahabharatha Epic as a story.

Let us not go back to another debate on religion/caste etc. using the Mahabharatha as an excuse.

The Bhagwad Gita does form a part of the Mahabharatha, but since we cannot discuss that without discussing religion, this thread is certainly not the place to do so.

Badri

1st June 2005, 05:27 AM

a.ratchasi

1st June 2005, 06:56 AM

Mahabharata is unquestionably a great epic considering its length, well developed characters and coherent story line etc etc...But if someone claims that it has greatest moral values to the entire human beings and nothing bad in it, then it is very doubtful.

I hold the same views as yours r_kk.

What intrigued me when I first read Mahabharata was the treatment of characters.
No two characters were alike and the epic unfolded very well.
It was very much human and the complexity of each character was put forth excellently. Interactions between friends and foe was simply well outlined and the depth of the characters just prevailed in every given circumstance.

Instead of brooding over the goodness of the supposed heroes, I feel Vyasa should be acknowledged for what he has contributed.

Badri

1st June 2005, 07:24 AM

Good on you, A R for bringing in a fresh perspective to the thread. How does it fare as literature? The other 2 epics we hear of often are the Illiad and the Odessey of Homer. How does Mahabharatha fare against these? I am not starting a this vs that debate, I am just trying to pick everyone's brains on looking at the Mahabaratha as we would the Odessey (meaning, no one bothers to discuss relative morality in the Odessey, so why talk about that in Mahabharatha?)

The one thing that strikes me when I read MB is the plots and the twists the author has given. He would start off a story which seems to go nowhere, yet much later, that story would be referenced and it would make sense. The amount of involutions and story within stories in MB is simply amazing!

tomato

1st June 2005, 07:57 AM

Can someone pls tell me from where I can buy the complete (not condensed) 'Ramayana' and 'Mahabharatha' transalated in English.

Raghu

1st June 2005, 03:05 PM

Tomato

You can buy them from any ISKON (International Society for Krishna Consiousness)shops world wide, they sell several books by his Divine Grace Sripala Bhaktivedananta Swami Prapudha, excellent source of knowledge, you MUST read them.

Tell me where(Country) you reside, so that I can give the address of their Temples & Book Shops

tomato

1st June 2005, 06:30 PM

Thank you Raghu for the info. I'm currently residing in Singapore. And yes I do want to read them. Only prob is I don't know sanskrit. So I want a good transtlation in english.

Raghu

1st June 2005, 07:19 PM

Tomato,

They are in English with Sanskrit References, here are some info

http://www.iskcon.com/worldwide/centres/asia.html

Malaysia
Jalan Sungai Manik, 36000 Teluk Intan, Perak
Tel. +63 (032) 83254

ADDITIONAL RESTAURANT
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Govinda's, 16-1 Jalan Bunus Enam, Masjid India
Tel. +60 (03) 780-7355, -7360, or -7369

viggop

2nd June 2005, 10:01 AM

Hi
Again coming back to the topic which I lefy sometime ago here.

What did Bhishma tell about dharma to Yudishtra? This is said to be very valuable in Mahabharatha.If anyone knows the full conversation between Bhishma and Yudishtra,please post it here

Badri

2nd June 2005, 10:06 AM

After so much I posted on that topic, you are still asking the same thing, viggop? Not satisfied, eh? :wink:

viggop

2nd June 2005, 10:23 AM

Dear Badri
Did we really discuss all the questions and answers of Yudishtra to Bhishma? I forgot.
Let us then continue Mahabharatha with some other story. :D

Raghu

2nd June 2005, 07:39 PM

Dear Badri
Did we really discuss all the questions and answers of Yudishtra to Bhishma? I forgot.
Let us then continue Mahabharatha with some other story. :D

Yes he did Viggop, you can probably find it between pages 1 - 10.

i think we should discuss about the noble characters of Vidura, his character was highly underated in Mahabharath, in my opinion

Raghu

2nd June 2005, 08:00 PM

The Mahabharata (Devanagari: महाभारत, phonetically Mahābhārata - see note), sometimes just called Bharata, is the great religious and philosophical epic of India. It is a keystone text of Hinduism. It is the second longest literary work in the world (after the Tibetan tale of Gesar). Although it is hailed as one of the greatest literary accomplishments of humanity, it is also still in the hearts and minds of Indians today. The title may be translated as "Great India" (bhārata means the son/progeny of Bharata, the king believed to have founded the kingdom of Bhāratavarsha, in present day India; "Bharat" has equal status as the official name of India in all Indian governments today and is still commonly used). The work is part of the Hindu itihaas, literally 'that which happened,' along with the Puranas and Ramayana. The full version contains more than 100,000 verses, making it around four times longer than the Bible and seven times longer than the Iliad and Odyssey.

Raghu

4th June 2005, 02:48 PM

Banasur story continues......

Chitralekha has kidnaped and Anirudh and taken him to bansur's palace to unite with usha, mean time Banasur is in search of Anirudh to kill him, but Anirudh develops an EGO that he can defeat Bansur , but his EGO is in for a big blow, when he is about to confront Bansur

to be continued...........

Raghu

5th June 2005, 05:51 PM

Banasur story continues..

Now that Anirudh is in Banasur's palace with Usha, Bansur found out that Anirudh is in his palace and found out that Chitralekha has helped Usha in their love matters

Chitralekha refuses to tell the where abouts of Anirudh, so bansur ordered Chitralekha to be headed, seeing this Anirudh jumps into save Chitralekha...

to be continued....

Raghu

10th June 2005, 06:34 PM

Bansur story will be continued here Tomorrow...

Raghu

12th June 2005, 04:17 PM

Bansur story continues....

Lord Krishna asks permission from Maha Iswar to Slay Banasur, as Maha Iswar and Parvathi matha have adopted Bansur as their son, hence he is not defeatable, Maha Iswar grants permission to Lord Krishna to slay Bansur.

In the meantime, Bansur has captured Anirudh, Usha and Chitralekha and locke them up in the jail.

to be continue

Raghu

13th June 2005, 04:44 PM

Dear all.

It would be helpfeul, if the likes of Sudhama Sir, and Vigop actively participate in this thread, it will lighten up the thread,
so please be active in this thread.

thanks

F.S.Gandhi vandayar

21st June 2005, 02:57 PM

I have so far observed that all the discussions about 'Mahabharata' don't reveal what for Mahabharata was written ? What was the abstract message (which the all forms of hinduism contains) the mahabharata stories propogate should be analysed.

The real message for the masses (saramsam) should be discussed.

And that is the message you will give for all hindus all over India and abroad.

f.s.gandhi

Raghu

21st June 2005, 08:10 PM

Raghu

21st June 2005, 08:18 PM

There was some silly & incorrect posts by Nitai here some time about banasur story :x

bansur story's last chapter

Bansur Confronts Lord Krishna in battle as he did not release Anirudh , Usha & Chitralekh as per Lord Krishna's Request. In battle he could not confront Lord Krishna, Lord Krishna uses Sudharshanchakaram to slay banasur's head, seeing it coming towards him, banasur, prays to Maha Iswar to protect him, so Maha Iswar appears infront of bansur and defeats the SudharshanChakara and explains than Haran (Maha Iswar) and Hari(lord Krsihna) are same, so foghting Lord krishna and Fighting maha Iswar is same, hence the name 'hariharan', and banasur beggs for forgiveness from Lord Krishna and Maha Iswar and he is given mukthi by Maha Iswar, this was the end. and this was the end of RamaAnand Sagar's krsihna Series :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

Idiappam

21st June 2005, 11:44 PM

Raghu said:

scientific Philosophy of life!

Ah! What is that? Any examples?

Raghu

22nd June 2005, 12:18 AM

Raghu said:

scientific Philosophy of life!

Ah! What is that? Any examples?

Isawra kaapathapa

Surya

22nd June 2005, 01:02 AM

:lol:

F.S.Gandhi vandayar

22nd June 2005, 01:49 PM

Quote :

/// It was written to teach moral values, dharma,adharma and last but NOT least the scientific Philosophy of life! ///

You got my point. Dharma and Adharma - correct. Moral values / Philosophy go inside / within Dharma.

Eventually Dharma and Adharma can be taken.

But you left out important thing, Ayya, :o

That is KARMA (KARUMAM) -destined to this birth : which was effected by good / wrong doings of yester birth : which was the main core of any 'Inthu' epics / stories / propoganta.

Karma is the primermost in Inthu ideology. Onething here we observe is 'karma' is nothing to do with science. Your 'karma' may induce 'scientific inventions' through some persons who destined to find out science. For that they have to undergo lot of agitations(sothanaikal) :!: .

However can you explain now how these three Karma,Tharma and Atherma propogated in MAHABHARATA if not part by part, through stories ?

It will help readers.

f.s.gandhi

Raghu

22nd June 2005, 07:06 PM

pradheep

23rd June 2005, 05:04 PM

>>>>>scientific Philosophy of life!|<<<<<<<<<<

A starving person would not look for a choice in food, he will try to fullfill his basic of hunger by eating food that will satisfy his hunger (artha). If resources are plenty he will exercise choice of enjoying the food (kaama). If he is sensible then he will think about the good and bad effects of the choice on health (dharma). The first is tamasic, the kaama aspectsis rajasic and the thinking ofthe choices is satvic.

These three aspects are called gunas through which everything in life operates. But these still does not make the mind satisfied. But there is an ultimate satisfaction and that is Moksha.

Artha, kaama, dharma and finally moksha is the path through which every individual goes through. This journey is what given through mahabharat.

All characters in mahabharat fall into this three modes of tamsic, rajasic and satvic and its combination. Very few transcend these three gunas and they go into moksha.

Since these aspects are not easy to understand through the lives of mahabharata characters we can understand these aspects and makesour own choices in life.

Sage vyasa says "it is dharma (satvic mode of thinking) that always helps you and when you do not dothat yu are in trouble. So why not follow dharma?. But no one listen to me".

what is karma?. When people live their lifes without knowing to set priorities and know the "value of values", then they suffer. So through mahabharata and Gita we are made to think and reflect thatin our own lives.

It is an irony thatinstead of doing a self relfection general public is busy condemning and praising the characters of the epic.

The essence of the epic is Gita, where in all the above is discused. Conflicting thoughts inlifeis prevalent in all minds. When we are in situationslike that of Arjuna, this knowledge of Gita helps us.

Is it right to fight a war killing one's own blood relatives?. This is such an obvious question that will come to any mind. Only when we encounter in real life we can understand the depth of that situation and understand how gita can shed light on that matter.

In our modern lives we may be in the sitation of Arjuna (not in battlefield|) but will be in a court room forexample, over a dispute of land. Most common in India. Then how do we act (karma). What is right and wrong.

Time immemorial, these two epics have guided us. People have misunderstood the messageand then can wrongly interpret and make a hell out of it, which is also seen In India. All requires a satvic thinking (holistic mode of thinking). This has to lived as life rather than reading as an epic. Then we understand the "scientific philosophy of life".

viggop

23rd June 2005, 07:57 PM

Thanks Pradheep.
When I read the Gita when I was a school kid,i understood some meaning.re-reading it now gives me new meaning and I guess as one grows reading the Gita will give better and deeper insights.

pradheep

23rd June 2005, 08:10 PM

Dear viggop
you are right...we understand based on our mental maturity. The truth of Gita is understood at different depths and our outlook in life. Generally people do not think (analyze). they take it for granted. This is a tamasic quality...ignorance and dullness. One who enquires is satvic.
Arjuna transcends from the rajasic quality to satvic quality and was the basis for teaching Gita.

Dhritarastra is stubborn, ignorant because he does not think beyond his body , his mind, his comfort and his children. His son duryodhan is highly tamasic. Vidhur is satvic and a tamasic one will not listen to a satvic, unless the tamasic starts his own enquiry, within.

The attachment to our beleif's will shut down the enquiring process. This is why we have to transcend attachment..atleast till we see the reality (truth).

Raghu

23rd June 2005, 08:45 PM

Dear Pradheep

yes, you are right, as long as we indulge in 'Maya' , we will be performing Dharma & Adharma, and our karma will decide our destiny, to attain mukthi one must give up all of this mundane attachment realise the paramathma is the ultimate and surrendr unto maha Iswar, and give up our lust, greed, ignorance, ego and al possible human feelings and have only Iswar (or Isa, as it is called in the Gita) then only we can attain mukthi,

else we would be in the infinite loop of life, birth, old age, disease and death, no way out!

pradheep

24th June 2005, 04:39 PM

Karma is like getting into a quick-sand....every step will pull you deeper into it. This is why karma is futile ,but when karma performed with knolwedge will help the mind to purify and through gnana alone will one get moksha. This is the message of Gita and mahabharata.

viggop

24th June 2005, 04:51 PM

Hi Pradheep
Gnana marga is not the only way.Bhkathi marga is also useful in Kali yugam

pradheep

24th June 2005, 05:28 PM

Hi Pradheep
Gnana marga is not the only way.Bhkathi marga is also useful in Kali yugam
Dear friend
This is the confusion prevalent among many, that bakthi is different , and so is karma and gnana. If we are talking of the Gnana about the "Self", then that Gnana blossoms (?) when the actions (karma) are performed with an understanding, which also holds good for bhakthi. Bhakthi is not singing bhajans or prostrating on the ground before an idol. Without the right understanding, how can there be bhakthi?. So it gnana that comes out of karma and bhakthi. In that way even bhakthi is a karma only.

conclusion:. If karma (actions) is done with an attitude (bhakthi) then one becomes a gnani (onewith Gnana). So where is the question of different margas?

Raghu

24th June 2005, 05:48 PM

Hi Pradheep
Gnana marga is not the only way.Bhkathi marga is also useful in Kali yugam

Dear Pradheep & Viggop

I agree with Viggop, Pradheep One can realise the truth by gnana, for example, let's say we(u,me & Viggop) all realise the Paramatma, but this is NO way a gurantee for Mukthi/Moksham.
another MOST difficult thing is putting this into PRACTICE, this is when one becomes a real sanyasi, so realising the truth alone is NOT enough!

Only Bhakthi is the way to Moksha/Mukthi, this is told in the Gita by Lord Krsihna.

Raghu

24th June 2005, 05:50 PM

dear Pradheep & Viggop

Thanks a lot guys for re-directing the topic in the right direction.

:thumbsup:

viggop

24th June 2005, 06:35 PM

Let us adopt anyway possible to reach Brahman/Shivam/God.
OK? :-)

pradheep

24th June 2005, 08:04 PM

Let us adopt anyway possible to reach Brahman/Shivam/God.
Dear Viggop
Please excuse me for making a statement, that there is no "anyway" but only one way of reaching "Brahman/Shivam/God". That one way is Gnana. Krishna makes it clear in Gita, the one who reahces me is one who "knows me". The one who does not know me, does not know himself either.

Karma is performed by everyone...but it does not reach to brahman unless if one understands what the purpose of the action, it wont help him. This is the problem with mimamsa people. People who do rituals to reach God would not reach if they do not understand what it is meant for. Bhakthi people if do not know what this bhakthi is taking them to ...they will not reahc Brahman. Krishna in Gita says clearly that people who does karma or bhakthi are of four types. Some pray god only when they are in trouble or sorry. The next group does when they want material benefits. Another one asks God for understanding him. Only the wise prayer is a means to thank the same self that is one and the same.

Conclusion: Without knowing what we are seeking , we will always be lost.

http://sakthifoundation.org/purify.htm

please read the real incident in the above link.

pradheep

24th June 2005, 08:09 PM

Raghu

24th June 2005, 08:49 PM

Dear raghu and friends
sorry i had to side track to understand mahabhrata more clear. Look at vidhur, who sticks on his dharma, because of his gnanam. Vidhur is thus a perfect bhaktha too and so krishna stays with him durign the visit. Krishna teaches arjuna to do karma to get gnanam. This ultimate understanding should dawn in us and that is the very purpose of Vyasa to give us mahabhratam and also give gita. it is considered that the garland is MB and Gita is the pendant.

Ok, Let's take another example , an example which is not talked much as this from Shribhavadam or Krishna Leelai, remeber Sudhaama a pure devotee of Lord Krishna, was his child hood friend, all sudhama knew was love of Lord Krishna and nothing else, was he not given moksham due to his bhakthi?

pradheep

24th June 2005, 10:45 PM

what do you mean by moksham that kuchela got....you mean the wealth he got after meeting his friend. krishna?

Raghu

25th June 2005, 02:14 PM

what do you mean by moksham that kuchela got....you mean the wealth he got after meeting his friend. krishna?

Dear Pradheep

NO NO, Lord Krishna had child hood friend called Sudhama, perhaps some one could clarify on this?

viggop

25th June 2005, 03:02 PM

Raghu
Sudhaama is kuchelar.Kuchela in sanskrit means "one who weares tattered/torn clothes".Sudhaama got this nickname from his school(gurukulam) friends because he was wearning torn clothes as his family was poor.

pradheep

25th June 2005, 04:59 PM

Raghu

26th June 2005, 03:19 AM

Badri

27th June 2005, 07:51 AM

Note to all Participants of this thread:

This thread has been brought up again after intensive clean-up of all digressions on a trial basis. Kindly stick to the topic of discussing the story aspects of the epic. Do not unnecessarily deviate into the religous merits and demerits. No personal attacks on any hubber either. Violations will result in locking this thread.

Raghu

27th June 2005, 12:09 PM

Raghu

27th June 2005, 09:04 PM

Dear Viggop
Thanks, correct kucela and sudhama are one and the same. So we have to understand what moksha, dharma, karma to understand mahabharat (viceversa true). So raghu , let us discuss what moksha means that we can get out of the confusion about these different margas.

Dear Pradheep

In gita it is clearly(IN MY VIEWS, PLS ACCEPT MY APPLOGIES, IF I AM WRONG) that self realisation is something and moksha is another thing, but self realistaion leads one to enquire about the philosophy of life, which in turn leads one to enquire about Mukti.

In gita (i shall put the verses, tomorrow) it states that to attain mukti, one must understand he/she is not his/her body these are perishable only the atma which is parts and parcels of paramatma is eternal, this is self realisation, once this is realised, one must give his/her full attention to Paramatma known as Isa by bhakthi ONLY towards Isa(which later evolved around to be Maha Iswar/Eshwar), this is the only way atma(soul) is liberated with Isa the ultimate truth, supreme personality of God head, Maha Iswar.

what is your view, pradheep?

pradheep

27th June 2005, 10:46 PM

Dear Raghu
You are correct...but a little clarification needed when you say.......

bhakthi ONLY towards Isa(which later evolved around to be Maha Iswar/Eshwar.

what do you mean by Bhakthi, "later evolved" and Maha-Iswar (Shiva or Brahman?).

With this we will be back to MBH.

Raghu

28th June 2005, 03:08 AM

pradheep

28th June 2005, 08:33 AM

Dear Raghu
You still have not made it clear whether you mean Shiva here or Brahman by the name Maheshwar.

Raghu

28th June 2005, 11:54 AM

Dear Raghu
You still have not made it clear whether you mean Shiva here or Brahman by the name Maheshwar.

Dear Pradheep

I meant Shiva

hence the saying

'Guru Bhrama(your origin), Guru Vishnu(the period you are alive in this material world), Guru Devo Maheshwara(the end of Mundane life, Moksha is ONLY attained at this stage)

pradheep

28th June 2005, 05:16 PM

I meant Shiva

Dear Raghu
Do you mean Shiva (form) with a jada-mudi, snake on his neck or a formless Shivam?

Raghu

28th June 2005, 05:58 PM

I meant Shiva

Dear Raghu
Do you mean Shiva (form) with a jada-mudi, snake on his neck or a formless Shivam?

Dear Pradheep,

illai sir, Shivam is suppose to formless, it 's just for us mundane ppl, Shivam has been narrated like jada-mudi, snake on his neck so that we can concentrate on an entity and meditate upon that, meditating on formless shivam is virtualy impossible, would you agree:D

pradheep

28th June 2005, 09:52 PM

Raghu

28th June 2005, 10:35 PM

Dear aghu
Thanks you made it clear. Now comming back to moksha......do you agree moksha means freedom, liberation.....If then what is bound? ...also is there a physical binding?. Is ama bound?

I think these discussion will lead us to understand everything clear.

dear pradheep

Moksha alias Mukti , does mean libertaion with Paramatama or Iswar and freedom from these perishable bodies, the only bounding is that , Atma must free it self from maya(illusion), such as one must accept & understand that, the body in which the Atma resides, the cosmic world or loga it lives in and it's functions/aspects are all nothing but Maya, atma must understand it carries it's Karma(Results of it's activities) be it dharma or adharma along in the vicious cycle of birth, old age, diseases and death, but it is just changing from body to body, just like we change clothes, the body it takes depends on the atma's karma in it's previous life, and this vicious cycly continues in an infinte loop till the atma attains Mukti / Moksha, this is down by Self Realisation(one you have fully realised it, one would give up everything in this mundane life and just meditate on iswar, Rishis and Munivars are prime example of such life) and Bhakthi to Iswar

But as long as the Atma indulges it self in Tama (modes of Ignorance and passion for this cosmic world) one CAN NOT ATTAIN MUKTHI / MOKSHA

Am I right Pradheep? :D

pradheep

29th June 2005, 12:21 AM

Dear Raghu
Yes, you summarized it very well. But from what you wrote isnt it obvious that it is an understanding (Gnana) and meditation, bhakthi or yoga are all means to get that understanding. So it is understanding (Gnana) that brings forth Moksha. Am I right Raghu?

Raghu

29th June 2005, 12:32 AM

pradheep

29th June 2005, 02:18 AM

Dear Raghu
Good since we are clear about the fundamental aspect, we can get back to MBH and see how we can reflect that in our lives. In Gita third chapter, krishna says strong likes and dislikes blocks the mind set to receive Gnana. Dont we see this in MBH main character Dhristarashtra?. What are your comments?

Raghu

30th June 2005, 02:29 PM

pradheep

30th June 2005, 04:38 PM

Dear Raghu
You are very knowledgeable in MBH and so we would go with Karna for our discussions.

what do you think about Artha, kama, Dharma and Moksha of karna?. Please share with us how his life goes through these four aspects of life?.

Raghu

30th June 2005, 04:43 PM

Dear Raghu
You are very knowledgeable in MBH and so we would go with Karna for our discussions.

illa Sir katrathu kai alavu kalaathathu ulahalavu :D

what do you think about Artha, kama, Dharma and Moksha of karna?. Please share with us how his life goes through these four aspects of life?.

sorry but what is Artha :? , and did you mean karma instead of kaama, as they are two different things? :?

pradheep

30th June 2005, 05:11 PM

Dear Raghu
I hope you remember in onepostI discussed artha, kama , dharma and moksha.....all human intiailly pursue artha...the basic needs of food clothing and shelter and then they make a choicein that basedon their likes and dislikes (kama) and if hasan enquiry mind will perform actions of good, righteousness (dharma) and through that they transcend to moksha.

How do you think Karna's life goes this pattern?

Raghu

30th June 2005, 06:22 PM

Dear Pradheep

Karna's Character is the MOST complicated one MBH, I would try and get back to you tomorrow on this one, sorry very busy migrating SQL server databases to another Server, so once this cools down a bit, I will get back to you. :D

thanks

Raghu

4th July 2005, 06:31 PM

Dear Pradheep & others

in Gita it says

janma karma ca me divyam
evam yo vetti tattvatah
tyaktva deham punar janma
naiti mam eti so 'rjuna

Meaning:

One who knows the transcendental nature of Iswar's appearance does not upon leaving this body takes another birth but attains Iswar's eternal abode, o Arjuna

so does this mean Gnana alone takes one into Mukti??, but in another verse which I can recall now it says Bhakthi attained from gnana is the only way, could some one pls enlighten me thanks

Vini Vidi Vici

4th July 2005, 09:53 PM

so does this mean Gnana alone takes one into Mukti??, but in another verse which I can recall now it says Bhakthi attained from gnana is the only way, could some one pls enlighten me thanks
There are two ways to understand it.
1. If there are two ways then the whole gita is wrong.
2. If you get the gnana of contradiction then the gita is wrong.

Raghu

5th July 2005, 03:00 PM

Dear Pradheep

What are your views on the above verse from Gita?

thanks

pradheep

5th July 2005, 09:37 PM

[tscii:71008e25a2]
One who knows the transcendental nature of Iswar's appearance does not upon leaving this body takes another birth but attains Iswar's eternal abode, o Arjuna

Dear Raghu
Very good verse you brought for discussion.

Life basically for everyone is to alters between two different worlds. We wake up from sleep in the morning and we do all action with the thought of reality and then when we sleep we get into the dream world and there also we do all actions thinking it as reality. So we basically alter between these two worlds. But the reality is different (discuss later). Conclusion: we wake from one world to another and keep alternating in it- this is samsara.

What I am trying to tell you is that, the last thought when you are going to sleep basically dictates the events (mostly) in the dream while asleep. While about falling asleep you will have thought of a robber and then the dream will be of events that leads to soem robberry. When you wake up you might remember some and not all. So it is the last thought at the time of exiting from this world to the dream world that matters.

Same way Krishna says in Gita that the thought at time of death, decides how you are born next. If you have the thought of being unhealthy , then next birth you will be health conscious. If you think you are not rich enough next birth you will struggle for it. If you think you did not have enough spiritual knowledge so be the next birth. So the last thought at time of death (entering into the next world) is the most important factor for the events in the next life.

Krishna says if you have thought of “Me” , which means if you identify yourself with me, you will be me in the next life and that is eternal. if you think of me then you are me (Ishvara) then you become me (ishava). If you have a thought of being a devotee then you will be a devotee of me next birth.

In the first case, when you think of me as one and the same at death time, you will not have any more births and death and no samsara cycle, because I am the one free from birth and death. So if you become me then there is death and life for you either.

But if you think you are a devotee, you are born as a devotee and being born as a devotee you still are in samsara. So Mukthi comes only when you think of me as yourself and not different from me (Tat Tvam Asi).

[/tscii:71008e25a2]

pradheep

5th July 2005, 09:44 PM

[tscii:2e6a14b8ff]

But how to remember ishvara at time of death? This is the whole purpose of spiritual practice…. you cannot remember ishava at death because you are so attached with the thought you are this body and so you will be born again with this body. You have so many attachments (possessions) that you will think only of that and not of IShvara.

So all the spiritual practice we do is only for the moment of death to get out of the samsara cycle. Death is the cross road of either getting liberated and the back door again to this samsara. To get to that moment is the proper understanding we need practice. Like in school, the end of the school day is exam. If you fail you have to repeat the same class.

Now we friends are not ashamed to fail repeatedly and be in same class because we are amidst our same friends, who are all failed. Suppose everyone graduated and we are the only one who failed and when we sit with new members we will feel ashamed. (This is why most of the people are not interested in Moksha...they keep failing and playing around here).

Okay, so the whole schooling is meant for the last day of graduation (exam). If I am student who is so obedient and spend my school days praising my teacher without studying , will I pass?. Of course my teacher is happy with my behavior but not at my studies. But what matters is only knowledge (studies). Schooling is for creating discipline to gain knowledge. Without discipline no knowledge can be got leave alone spiritual knowledge. In spiritual class, we discipline the mind to receive the knowledge of the Self. Bhakthi is devotion and bhakthi finally culminates in knowledge – Tat Tvam Asi. A devoted student finally understand he and his teacher are one not at the body level but at knowledge level. This is bhakthi.

So Gita is clear, no different path, only one. Knowledge of the self only liberates and nothing else. Rest is all the means to get this knowledge. Bakthi and all the stuff is to discipline the mind to receive the knowledge of Self (Ishvara).

We will continue with this discussion and once we are clear, remind me of Arjuna getting pasu-pathastra-----it symbolizes the weapon to cut the attachments. Death is so connected to this symbolism.
[/tscii:2e6a14b8ff]

Surya

6th July 2005, 01:17 AM

If this vicious cycle keeps repeating itself, when will everyone attain moksha? Without everyone attaining moksha, who will the world come to an end? Kalki avathar? So the result of all the sins commited by humans, the world just comes to an end through Kalki?

Like in school, the end of the school day is exam. If you fail you have to repeat the same class

Excellent analogy!! :D

pradheep

6th July 2005, 02:52 AM

If this vicious cycle keeps repeating itself, Without everyone attaining moksha, who will the world come to an end? Kalki avathar? So the result of all the sins commited by humans, the world just comes to an end through Kalki?

when one understand the Self, this question vanishes, then there is no question of when will everyone attain moksha. Who is Kalki, the conquering mind is Kalki, the one with the arms and weapons to fight the Ego.

when will everyone attain moksha?
When everyone is drowning, first we have to save ourselves first before we save others. If not we will drown ourselves with the other one whom we want to save. When we save ourself (attain Moksha) this question will cease to exist. That is the catch-20 in this situation.

Raghu

6th July 2005, 02:56 PM

[tscii:4bcb03b857]
One who knows the transcendental nature of Iswar's appearance does not upon leaving this body takes another birth but attains Iswar's eternal abode, o Arjuna

Dear Raghu
Very good verse you brought for discussion.

Life basically for everyone is to alters between two different worlds. We wake up from sleep in the morning and we do all action with the thought of reality and then when we sleep we get into the dream world and there also we do all actions thinking it as reality. So we basically alter between these two worlds. But the reality is different (discuss later). Conclusion: we wake from one world to another and keep alternating in it- this is samsara.

What I am trying to tell you is that, the last thought when you are going to sleep basically dictates the events (mostly) in the dream while asleep. While about falling asleep you will have thought of a robber and then the dream will be of events that leads to soem robberry. When you wake up you might remember some and not all. So it is the last thought at the time of exiting from this world to the dream world that matters.

Same way Krishna says in Gita that the thought at time of death, decides how you are born next. If you have the thought of being unhealthy , then next birth you will be health conscious. If you think you are not rich enough next birth you will struggle for it. If you think you did not have enough spiritual knowledge so be the next birth. So the last thought at time of death (entering into the next world) is the most important factor for the events in the next life.

Krishna says if you have thought of “Me” , which means if you identify yourself with me, you will be me in the next life and that is eternal. if you think of me then you are me (Ishvara) then you become me (ishava). If you have a thought of being a devotee then you will be a devotee of me next birth.

In the first case, when you think of me as one and the same at death time, you will not have any more births and death and no samsara cycle, because I am the one free from birth and death. So if you become me then there is death and life for you either.

But if you think you are a devotee, you are born as a devotee and being born as a devotee you still are in samsara. So Mukthi comes only when you think of me as yourself and not different from me (Tat Tvam Asi).

[/tscii:4bcb03b857]

Dear Pradheep

Yes in Gita it is Clearly Explained, your next body & life is decided upon ur desire at the time ur atma leaves this perishable body, this makes perfect sense.

but sorry to divert the topic slightly, u mentioned about dreams, yes to a certain extent, u would dream about thinks which are in ur subconsiousness but some time u dream about things which you never ever thought about, how would you explain this?, do u think these thoughts could have been bought along with ur atma from ur previous life??

pradheep

6th July 2005, 06:10 PM

think these thoughts could have been bought along with ur atma from ur previous life??

Dear Raghu
In dream state there is no sense of the "I" (body), but the mind that is active still clings on the thoughts it has generated and weaves further thoughts - dreams. Like in awaken state how the mind can bring about thoughts totally unrelated, in the dream state also mind can generate that.

When there is only one Atma, where is the question of ur atma and my atma that brings thoughts from previous life?

Raghu

6th July 2005, 07:35 PM

When there is only one Atma, where is the question of ur atma and my atma that brings thoughts from previous life?

Dear Pradheep,

Atma transmigrate from body to body till it attains mukti. in the process of transmigrating it carries it karma with it, correct, now thoughts are part of the karma right?, so logicaly it would sense, that thoughts which comes in ur dream which are not related to the karma of your current body, are thoughts carried forward from ur last life?, correct?

Idiappam

6th July 2005, 09:16 PM

Tat Tvam Asi =??
Tat =??
Tvam =??
Asi = ??

Should it not be Tvam Tat Asi?? Just curious!

Sudhaama

7th July 2005, 09:01 AM

Dear Mr "Idiappam"

// Tat Tvam Asi =??
Tat =??
Tvam =??
Asi = ??

Should it not be Tvam Tat Asi?? Just curious! //

The Overall-meaning will not change, nor become different... even if the order of the words are changed.

EdenWoods

7th July 2005, 02:09 PM

Raghu wrote:

Atma transmigrate from body to body till it attains mukti. in the process of transmigrating it carries it karma with it, correct, now thoughts are part of the karma right?, so logicaly it would sense, that thoughts which comes in ur dream which are not related to the karma of your current body, are thoughts carried forward from ur last life?, correct?
.
This is just a belief, is it not? (I a not questioning the value of this belief). There are others who do not have this believe, or believe completely different things. Is belief equal to truth, even if a million people say so? (I am aware that this question can be asked to the adherents of other beliefs too..).
.
Merely believing that belief is truth, or the only truth, is harmless as long as we approve of the the right of the others to believe similarly. Harmony is possible withe many such abosolutist beliefs going around. Only violence through which some want to enforce his/her belief as truth will destroy the harmony. This is applicable to all believers who believe i mysticism, mystic phenomena, or versions of religious truth.

EdenWoods

7th July 2005, 02:11 PM

Raghu wrote:

Atma transmigrate from body to body till it attains mukti. in the process of transmigrating it carries it karma with it, correct, now thoughts are part of the karma right?, so logicaly it would sense, that thoughts which comes in ur dream which are not related to the karma of your current body, are thoughts carried forward from ur last life?, correct?
.
This is just a belief, is it not? (I a not questioning the value of this belief). There are others who do not have this belief, or believe completely different things. Is belief equal to truth, even if a million people say so? (I am aware that this question can be asked to the adherents of other beliefs too..).
.
Merely believing that belief is truth, or the only truth, is harmless as long as we approve of the the right of the others to believe similarly. Harmony is possible with many such absolutist beliefs going around. Only violence through which some want to enforce his/her belief as truth will destroy the harmony. This is applicable to all believers who believe in mysticism, mystic phenomena, or versions of religious truth.

Raghu

8th July 2005, 01:05 PM

When there is only one Atma, where is the question of ur atma and my atma that brings thoughts from previous life?

Dear pradheep,

No I don't believe in one Atma, there is Paramatma, which contains many billions of atma's, is this not explained in Gita???

pls enlighten me, if I am wrong, thanks

pradheep

9th July 2005, 04:39 AM

No I don't believe in one Atma, there is Paramatma, which contains many billions of atma's, is this not explained in Gita???

Dear Raghu
where in Gita is there about many atma's. There are many bodies (forms), but one Atma. Atma (consciousness) is in manifested and unmanifested state. What we see through brain is the manifested |(awareness) and there is the unmanifested aspect. Manifestation is in many forms. The illusion (maya) is that there are many atma's but there is only that one Param-atma. This is the meanignof the song in thirumandiram-marathai maraithathu maa-matha-yanai...and same is the meaning of ponnai maraithathu ponannai poodanam...

If you say Atma are many, then atma becomes an object.......Atma is not an object. Sorry your belief is questionable and we can discuss. If this maya is cleared then you get the self knowledge. But you will know only when there is an end to ego-awareness. So Raghu understand the Maya get out of it.
[/quote]

pradheep

9th July 2005, 04:43 AM

Should it not be Tvam Tat Asi?? Just curious!

Dear idiappam,
read thirumandiram 2288 - pinnai ariyum .....
which says only when the ego-awareness ends the self is known. So tat is important and not tvam. There is no maya about the Tvam |(ego|) but on Tat and asi. So Tat is given the priority. Wealready have the "I" notion. All the scriptures talk about renouncing this "I" , then when that is acheived how can again the "I| be talked first?. Can you understand this?.

Surya

9th July 2005, 06:01 AM

Pradeep,
Thanks for the responce.

About the Atma being dual etc.

Aren't there differnet beliefs about that in Hinduism itself?

Duaitham, and advaitham? :D

pradheep

9th July 2005, 09:22 AM

Duaitham, and advaitham?

Yes. There are. It is based on how the truth is explained. But even in duaitham, the truth is only advaitha.

Idiappam

10th July 2005, 05:15 AM

Duaitham, and advaitham?

Yes. There are. It is based on how the truth is explained. But even in duaitham, the truth is only advaitha.

Nonsense! HOw do you know??? Did you go there and see??

F.S.Gandhi vandayar

10th July 2005, 11:44 AM

Mr. Pradeep, :) explain this Advaitham,Duvaitham and Vishshtathvaitham through Paramathma & Geevathma cocept. Then You will come to know the difference.

f.s.gandhi

viggop

11th July 2005, 10:56 AM

Dear Pradeep
Keep this Advaitham,Dvaitham discussion to a separate thread.No need to discuss them in Mahabharatha thread.Discuss only about the epic here.Thanks for your understanding.

viggop

11th July 2005, 02:00 PM

I heard a new story from my friend about Shakuni.
Can someone confirm whether it is true.

It seems that Dhridarashtra jailed shakuni and all his brothers because he was unhappy that gandari married a blind man.All of them were given a grain of rice to live.All the brothers decided that they'll make shakuni live and sacrificed their lives by giving their grain of rice to shakuni.Shakuni was hence filled with feeling of vengefulness.He vowed that he'll destroy the kaurava race. he then made the dice from his father's bones.Then, he did everything to corrupt duryodhana's mind so that a war with pandavas became inevitable.He knew that pandavas will ultimately win the war but he wanted to destroy the kauravas as revenge for his father and brother's death.
Is this story true? It is present in the mahabharatha?

a.ratchasi

11th July 2005, 03:19 PM

It seems that Dhridarashtra jailed shakuni and all his brothers because he was unhappy that gandari married a blind man.

The 'he' here refers to Sakuni, right?

Raghu

11th July 2005, 04:11 PM

viggop

11th July 2005, 04:36 PM

A.R.
'He' refers to shakuni. any idea whether this version is authentic?

Raghu

11th July 2005, 06:50 PM

A.R.
'He' refers to shakuni. any idea whether this version is authentic?

Viggop

never heard of it!

a.ratchasi

12th July 2005, 01:18 PM

same here, viggop.

Badri

12th July 2005, 01:23 PM

Yes, I have actually heard this story a long long time ago! The story goes that he uses the dice made from the bones of his father's thigh bone, which were supposed to obey him.

A drama in Bengali was written by Monoranjan Bhattacharya called Chakravyuha, which talks about this story of Shakuni being imprisoned and seeking revenge against the Kaurava clan.

I am not sure of any supporting evidence in Mahabharatha to validate this story. It could well be a fictional offshoot of the orignal story

pradheep

12th July 2005, 08:49 PM

Dear Iddiappam, Gnadhi and viggop,

Yes, I will Keep this Advaitham,Dvaitham discussion to a separate thread. see you there in the new thread Advaitam - the final understanding

Sudhaama

12th July 2005, 09:16 PM

Dear Mr. "pradheep"

// Dear Iddiappam, Gnadhi and viggop,... Yes, I will Keep this Advaitham,Dvaitham discussion to a separate thread. see you there in the new thread Advaitam -..... "the final understanding".... //

Oh! I see... ADWAITHAM - THE FINAL-UNDERSTANDING ???

... Welcome... I, the UNINVITED GUEST will also participate there...

... so as to counter your ONE-SIDED argument .... which I am observing patiently so far.

Please ensure the active participation of more Hubbers well-knowledged ... like Mr. badri99... Mr. Thiru... Mr. Aravindhan and so on.

Their participation will NULLIFY anybody's mischievous postings ... Violating the Hub- Regulations.

Let us discuss that high aspect of Human-Emancipation... in a HEALTHY APPROACH...

... without any Ill-will or Fanaticism Nor Hatred towards any Faith or Group of People or even any Individuals,

.. true to the Spirit of such an Applied Wisdom-application..

... worthy for the Most advanced Creature on Earth.... so called HUMANITY.

pradheep

12th July 2005, 10:58 PM

Dear friends and sudhama

I was not allowed to start a new topic so I continue with an old post. Please check the thread "Significance of the Masi Maham - Siva & Sakthi Valipadu... so see you there in that thread.

so as to counter your ONE-SIDED argument .... which I am observing patiently so far.

Arguements (sam-vaada) is always healthy.

ramraghav

13th July 2005, 07:32 AM

[tscii:003edc6f57]Hi Viggop, as you requested:

The Mahabharata (m) is a wonderful work of religious literature that teaches us valuable lessons in moral justice and human duty. It is a work that shall remain timeless forever.

While there may be no debate on the nature of its contents, the Mahabharata (m) is perhaps controversial due to the nature of its origin. While some claim that it based on hard facts, some others claim that it is based purely on fiction. The fact that the Mahabharata (m) is essentially a piece of religious literate does not help either side.

This is because religion is essentially about belief – one may choose to believe or not to believe. And until the concept of God has been comprehensively studied and explained, each person will be justified in holding his/her religious beliefs.

Having said that religious literature is unhelpful to prove beyond debate the nature of its own origins, one is left with three options to analyze the said origins: geology, archaelogy and non-religious literature studies. The first two are fairly obvious and speak for themselves.

The third, non-religious literature, is acceptable as a historical account of ancient events simply because it is removed from the realm of belief and is based firmly on factual events that happened prior to or during the narrator’s lifetime. Further, such literature attributes itself to human origins driven by rational human behavior.

Personally, for sometime now, I have been interested in knowing whether the Mahabharata (m) is actually a work of fact, fantasy or a combination of both. I came across this poem in the Purananooru, a literary product of the third Tamil Sangam, in the library archives of the Tamil Virtual University (www.tamilvu.org) The Purananooru, being non-religious in nature, qualifies to be considered as an historical account. The qualifications of Tamil literature in general are strengthened by the fact that its claims have always been verified by geological, marine and archaeological studies wherever they have been conducted.

I present here the poem, along with a (attempted!) translation, and wish to draw your attention to a few references that seem interesting. Please correct me if there are mistakes in the translation.

ÒÈ¿¡ëÚ - 2

Áñ ¾¢½¢ó¾ ¿¢ÄÛõ
¿¢Äý ²ó¾¢Â Å¢ÍõÒõ
Å¢ÍõÒ ¨¾ÅÕ ÅÇ¢Ôõ
ÅÇ¢ò ¾¨ÄþÂ ¾£Ôõ
¾£ ÓÃ½¢Â ¿£Õõ ±ýÈ¡íÌ 5
³õ¦ÀÕõ â¾òÐ þÂü¨¸§À¡Ä
§À¡üÈ¡÷ô ¦À¡Úò¾Öõ Ýúîº¢ÂÐ «¸øÓõ
ÅÄ¢Ôõ ¦¾ÈÖõ «Ç¢Ôõ ¯¨¼§Â¡ö
¿¢ý ¸¼ø À¢Èó¾ »¡Â¢Ú ¦ÀÂ÷òÐõ ¿¢ý
¦Åñ ¾¨Äô Ò½Ã¢ì Ì¼ ¸¼ø ÌÇ¢ìÌõ 10
Â¡½÷ ¨ÅôÀ¢ý ¿ø ¿¡ðÎô ¦À¡Õ¿
Å¡É ÅÃõÀ¨É ¿£§Â¡ ¦ÀÕÁ
«ÄíÌ¨Çô ÒÃÅ¢ ³Å¦Ã¡Î º¢¨Éþ
¿¢Äõ ¾¨Äì¦¸¡ñ¼ ¦À¡Äõ âó Ðõ¨À
®÷ ³õÀ¾¢ýÁÕõ ¦À¡ÕÐ ¸Çò¦¾¡Æ¢Â 15
¦ÀÕï§º¡üÚ Á¢ÌÀ¾õ Å¨ÃÂ¡Ð ¦¸¡Îò§¾¡ö
À¡«ø ÒÇ¢ôÀ¢Ûõ À¸ø þÕÇ¢Ûõ
¿¡«ø §Å¾ ¦¿È¢¾¢Ã¢Â¢Ûõ
¾¢Ã¢Â¡î ÍüÈ¦Á¡Î ÓØÐ§ºñ Å¢Çí¸¢
¿Îì¸¢ýÈ¢ ¿¢Ä¢Â§Ã¡ «ò¨¾ «Îì¸òÐ 20
º¢Ú¾¨Ä ¿ùÅ¢ô ¦ÀÕí¸ñ Á¡ôÀ¢¨½
«ó¾¢ «ó¾½÷ «Õí¸¼ý þÚìÌõ
Óò ¾£ Å¢Çì¸¢ý ÐïÍõ
¦À¡ü §¸¡ðÎ þÁÂÓõ ¦À¡¾¢ÂÓõ §À¡ý§È

§ºÃÁ¡ý ¦ÀÕï§º¡üÚ ¯¾Âï§ºÃÄ¡¾¨É ÓÃïº¢ä÷ ÓÊ¿¡¸Ã¡Â÷ À¡ÊÂÐ

Purananooru - 2

Like Land, fertile in its content
Sky that lies high above the Land
Wind that brushes the Sky
Fire that is fed by the Wind
And Water that is opposite to the Fire 5
You possess the qualities of the five elements
Patience to forgive the mistakes of your foes, if they cross the line the Expanse,
Power and Fury to crush them and Benevolence to grace him if he relents
Your greatness has grown to such extent
Your noble head is held in such esteem that even the ocean will sink 10
In your land which houses so many cities, Oh ruler of this prosperous nation!
The sky is the limit of your fame
The Five men, sitting on horses with shaking heads, whose
Land was taken by those with the thumbai flower -
The Hundred men, when both were exhausted at the battlefield 15
You gave them sumptuous food without any limit!
Milk, which turned sour and day which turned night
In contrast to the principles of the four Vedas
Without change (of loyalty) with your trusted people, remain powerful all your life
May you live long, without (military) tremor, piling on your success! 20
Like wide-eyed deer, and its children,
Of the saints of past who did their duty,
Sleep in the protection of the three-headed lamp
So shall we live in the protection given by You, like the Himalayas and Podhiyam hills

Sung by Mudinagarayar of Muranjiyur, in praise of Cheran Udayan Cheraladhan who provided sumptuous food

Points of interest:
1. There was a war between a group of five people and a group of 100 people
2. This war was caused because the 100 people took away land which rightfully belonged to the five people
3. The magnitude of this war was such that it lasted several days and it flouted the principles of the four Vedas
4. Cheran Udayan Cheraladhan sumptuously fed both the warring armies
5. This war occurred sometime during the period of the third Tamil Sangam (approx 18th to 2nd centuries BCE)
6. The existence of the four Vedas was known to the Tamil people
7. The Podhiyam hills (past/present not specified) were comparable in extent and proportions to the Himalayas. [/tscii:003edc6f57]

r_kk

13th July 2005, 09:38 AM

Fantastic post Ramraghav, More realistic approach...

After reading so many mythical posts, I felt your post as really refreshing one.

Keep it up.

:clap:

Raghu

13th July 2005, 12:24 PM

Dear RamRaghav

Excellent Posts, but I was unable to read the Thamizh script, any ideas as to where I can down load thamizh fonts to read them??

thanks a lot!

ramraghav

13th July 2005, 11:36 PM

Dear Raghu, why don't you use ekalappai? It can be used for reading and writing in Tamil, and is pretty simple to use. pm me with your email id, so I can send it over.

j.chenkalvarayan

20th July 2005, 10:54 AM

mahabaratha is a mere clash between two tribes at war with each other. krishna is a mere mortal as rama.

Idiappam

20th July 2005, 12:02 PM

Yes! j.chenkalvarayan, Yes!

viggop

20th July 2005, 12:45 PM

Chenkalvarayan
Krishna is never a mortal right from his birth.He is always a mayavi and even when he was a kid he'll destroy rakshashas and rakshashis.Rama avataram was of course a mortal

Raghu

20th July 2005, 01:02 PM

Chenkalvarayan
Krishna is never a mortal right from his birth.He is always a mayavi and even when he was a kid he'll destroy rakshashas and rakshashis.Rama avataram was of course a mortal

Yes that is true, Rama avatar was totaly different to Krishna avatar

pradheep

20th July 2005, 10:59 PM

Observe our thoughts.....................

Thoughts gives rise to desires which when either can be fullfilled. If not fulfilled, then there is sorrow which leads to anger and then loss of memory, delution and destruction.

Interestingly, fullfilled desires either gives pride or jealousy. If the desire fullfilled is less than the other's fullfilled desires, it gives rise to jealousy. If the fullfilled desires are more than other's fullfilled desires, then Pride comes. With pride or jealousy, loss of memory, delution and destruction happens. The desires again feed further desires and the loop continues. This is the loop of samsara.

Gita, second chapter, 62-63 verses , krishna talks about how insatiable desire can cause destruction. This applies not only to many characters in Mahabahrata, each and every one of us living in this world.

Raghu

23rd July 2005, 02:06 AM

Dear Pradheep,

I will get back to you n your above post very soon, thanks :D

viggop

28th July 2005, 01:01 PM

Panchali Sabatham was written by Mahakavi Subramaniya Bharathi

Find a urai for that in this excellent website.
http://www.harimozhi.com/ListArticle.asp?lngArticleId=22

Also,that site contains lot of other information on Tamil literature.

lordstanher

30th July 2005, 11:21 AM

pradheep

31st July 2005, 01:47 AM

Dear lordstanher
Indeed great knowledge given by a king to another king which holds good for all humankind for all ages.

Raghu

8th August 2005, 07:38 PM

Gita, second chapter, 62-63 verses , krishna talks about how insatiable desire can cause destruction. This applies not only to many characters in Mahabahrata, each and every one of us living in this world.

correct, but many take this greatest epic as a fantasy, without realising it's full potential, this a teaching to us mundane ppl, about dharama/adharma,karma,mukthi/moksha, but are we actually applying or atleast taking these into consideration in our so called mundane materialistic maya life?? :cry: :cry:

pradheep

8th August 2005, 08:01 PM

Dear Raghu
That is the nature of the Ego mind, not to "think and analyze". The ego mind is weak that it has no support and so tend to rely "other's views" to validate. Instead if the intellect is strengthened then it will start to use it (practice) and then will determine whether it is a truth or fallacy. I find sadly that many people instead of this approach just enjoy the story, the theme, the poetry and literature beauty. Of course that is good to enjoy the poetry, but it is only outside cover.

It is like receiving a pack and instead of opening and looking at the beautiful diamond necklase, people tend to enjoy only the pack. Others who do not know the potential through the worthy diamond remarking it as a glass piece.

Raghu

8th August 2005, 08:07 PM

I find sadly that many people instead of this approach just enjoy the story, the theme, the poetry and literature beauty. Of course that is good to enjoy the poetry, but it is only outside cover.

This is so correct, dear Pradheep!,They just judge the book based on it's cover!!!

pradheep

8th August 2005, 11:22 PM

Dear Raghu
Through the story of MBH we can understand everything from creation of the ego and how it gets caught in samasara and finally how it is freed.
Look at the name of shant-anu, a part of the peace who is the descendent of Bha-rath (Bha is bright light and rath is body) whichmeans embodiment of bright light which is Brahman itself. This Shant-anu then falls in love with Ganga (bliss) and seeks it. Rest is history.

Raghu

9th August 2005, 03:40 AM

pradheep

9th August 2005, 04:03 AM

Dear Raghu
Yes about bhisma, who is the eight of vasu's representing the ego (body attachment), the 8th principle needed for birth to occur. This is why bhisma takes the oath to safe guard his kingdom (attachement to the body, body is kingdom here)

viggop

9th August 2005, 10:30 AM

Bhishma is the greatest warrior and one who always follows dharma.There was no one who could defeat him in battle(not even Arjuna).In the battle with Bhishma, arjuna lost all desiure to fight twice and got dejected.Both these times, it seems Lord Krishna ran towards bhishma with the disc in his hand saying that if arjuna refuses to fight Bhishma,he'll kill bhishma himself.both times,arjuna begged Krishna to stop and said he'll fight Bhishma.Krishna did this just to enthuse Arjuna.He could have sent the disc from the chariot and it would have killed Bhishma.There was no need for Krishna to rum towards bhishma with that disc in hand.
Finally, bhishma was defeated because he refused to fight a woman(re-incarnation of Amba).This was one of Krishna's tricks again.Arjuna hid behind Amba and sent his powerful arrows at BHishma and bhishma refused to respond as Amba was a woman.Finally,he sent so many arrows that it became a bed of arrows.

But BHishma is just a great character that he could choose the time of his death.ALso, Lord Krishna himself recommended that Yudhistra clear doubts abt dharma from Bhishma when he was lying in the bed of arrows."Vishnu Saharanamam" was told by bhishma to yudishtra in this setting and he also cleared all doubts on Dharma to Yudishtra.

Bhishma had to fight along with Duryodhana because of this "chenchotru kadan".He ate the food offered in Kaurava palace and he even said that it corrupted his mind about dharma.His character has to be analysed in detail.

Badri

16th August 2005, 01:50 PM

Pradeep, SRS, Rohit: Kindly take the discussion on Vedanta, I, and other related philosophy to the new thread

"Understanding I - Vedanta"

http://forumhub.mayyam.com/hub/viewtopic.php?t=4467

All unnecessary digressions have been removed.
Let this thread discuss Mahabharatha as an epic if hubbers still want to.

S.Balaji

17th August 2005, 03:22 PM

[tscii:3dd46258d5]What Vighop mentioned about Amba’s incarnation was SHIKANDI.. Amba actually loved another prince Salva and Amba had 2 more sisters .. Ambiga and Ambaalika… At the time of Swayamvaram, Amba will wish to marry her lover but Bhishma will propose to his brother . There will be a mini battle but ultimately Bhishma will win ( including the lover of Amba ) and will take all the 3 princess to Hastinapur. When Bhishma’s brother realizes that Amba’s heart had already gone to another person, he will gracefully accept her wishes and will let her go back to her lover. But Amba’s lover , as he was defeated by Bhishma, will not accept her and he will also tell that as he had lost in the battle , Amba is no longer his lover. This will prompt Amba to go back to Hastinapur but again will get disheartened and this time will be very furious towards Bhishma and will take the support of Parashurama.
Parasurama , originally the Guru of Bhishma … will have a big fight with Bhishma and at one stage when Bhishma will try to use PAASUPATHA ASTHIRAM… one asareeree will shout… to stop using it. At this stage , Parashurama will concede his defeat . Amba now realizing that nobody can beat Bhishma will pray to Lord Shanmuga. Finally Lord Shanmuga will appear and will give a garland and will say that … anybody who wears this garland WILL BECOME A SHATRU TO BHISHMA. The point to note that even Lord Muruga also will not bless somebody to kill Bhishma .
Amba .. being impatient will commit suicide and will take re-birth as ( Shikandi ) a son of Draupadha. ( Here I have no idea on how the garland will be in Draupadha’s palace ). When he grows up, casually he will wear the garland and immediately everybody will start screaming at him that he has become a shatru of the great Bhishma.
Krishna will finally use Shikandi on the 10th day of the battle. The previous night, after heavy pressure from Duryodhana and Shakuni, Bhishma was about to take a vow that the next day, he will destroy the entire Pandavas and this stage, Krishna will realize that its time to INTERVENE and restore balance in the war.
What happens the next day is history now.
When Bhishma sees Shikandi in front of Arjuna , he will recollect his past birth and will also remember his pledge that he will never take up arms against a woman.
Thus , through Krishna’s creative thinking , Arjuna will defeat ONE OF THE GREATEST CHARACTERS .

Please correct me wherever my references are incorrect
[/tscii:3dd46258d5]

S.Balaji

17th August 2005, 03:41 PM

Its interesting to note that Lord Muruga appeared before Amba and gave that garland. This also proves that the Avatharam of Lord Muruga had happened before Mahabaratham . And, it had happened in Tamil Nadu. Does it mean that Tamilnadu existed during Mahabharat period. Anybody can enlighten us on this . Sorry for digressing from the main topic.

S.Balaji

17th August 2005, 03:48 PM

[tscii:8939c62c27]Wish to know more about the war between the Pandavas group and The Gauravas group. What is interesting to note is that the boundaries of various kings who participated in the great war did not extend beyond Kandahar , Shakuni’s kingdom( Afghanisthan )in the West and Anga ( West Bengal or Orissa ? )
Does it mean that there was no country after Afghanistan.
In the same breadth , was there no civilization beyond Bengal in the eastern side ?

Learned seniors Mr. Sudhama and Mr. Badri can throw some light on this please ?

[/tscii:8939c62c27]

S.Balaji

17th August 2005, 04:07 PM

[tscii:ae32c33408]About Rajneedhi and Dharma being preached and followed in Mahabaratha…

I have one more query..

Dirudhirashtra was the first son , followed by Pandu and Vithura. Ideally Diru should have been the king but for his handicap of being blind.
After Pandu was made the king , he left for Forest for various reasons which is well known. After this episode, Diru will be made King again and he will rule it for sometime until the next generation grew up.
My point here is, Duryodhana also had equal right to the kingdom as he is the son of the existing king , Dirudhirashtra.
In what way , this becomes Adharma ?? Infact I feel Duryodhana , by being a natural successor to the throne had better RIGHT over the throne compared to Yudhistra.

Any counter argument on this pls ?

[/tscii:ae32c33408]

S.Balaji

17th August 2005, 04:11 PM

[tscii:d2b8001661]I have few more questions…

During the exile of Pandavas, Duryodhana ruled . Any information is available on how he ruled the kingdom. I have heard vaguely that the Duryodhana ruled well and the subjects were totally happy and satisfied with the administration.
The only negative aspect of Duryodhana was his envying the Pandavas.

Can somebody come out with the facts please.
[/tscii:d2b8001661]

Raghu

17th August 2005, 09:50 PM

Karna's and Bhishma's characters have been highly sophisticated, esp on the Dharma vs Adharma issues, what is adharma from one sides's view (Pandavas view), during the incident when Draupadai was molseted in the court, was completley oppsite to Bhishma's view, ie his dharma was to be loyal to Kauravas though his side was on the evil side,!

Similarly though Karna knew he was the eldest of Pandavas, he fought against them, and vowed to Kill Partha, he knew if partha was killed, kauravas would have won the war, so he was doing his dharma (loyality) to his beloved friend Duryodhana, but on the other hand what he was doing was adharma, from pandavas /Kunti's point of view!

So how does one chose, what is adharma and dharma, in a dharma sankata situations like these?, is it influenced by the circumstances?

Once Sudhama sir has clearly explained this, but it did not get into my thick head, can some enlighten me please?

Raghu

18th August 2005, 05:56 PM

My point here is, Duryodhana also had equal right to the kingdom as he is the son of the existing king , Dirudhirashtra.
In what way , this becomes Adharma ?? Infact I feel Duryodhana , by being a natural successor to the throne had better RIGHT over the throne compared to Yudhistra.

Any counter argument on this pls ?

correct, I have often wondered about this?, can some one pls enlighten me as to why this was regarded as Dharma, ie Duriyodhana being King??

S.Balaji

18th August 2005, 07:52 PM

[tscii:bfd88513c5]
Karna's and Bhishma's characters have been highly sophisticated, esp on the Dharma vs Adharma issues, what is adharma from one sides's view (Pandavas view), during the incident when Draupadai was molseted in the court, was completley oppsite to Bhishma's view, ie his dharma was to be loyal to Kauravas though his side was on the evil side,!

Similarly though Karna knew he was the eldest of Pandavas, he fought against them, and vowed to Kill Partha, he knew if partha was killed, kauravas would have won the war, so he was doing his dharma (loyality) to his beloved friend Duryodhana, but on the other hand what he was doing was adharma, from pandavas /Kunti's point of view!

Raghu,

My view point is :

Karna who previously was identified as a Charioteer’s son was made a king instantly by Duryodhana when he challenged Arjuna at the time when the Pandavas and Gauravas were displaying their respective skills.
So, Karna had an obligation , a sort of quid pro quo relationship with Duryodhana to fulfill and he was forced to support him for all Duryodhana’s misdeeds. This only is the main reason for Karna to be with Duryodhana to fight against Pandavas. This in no way can be defined as a Dharma… If someone can still counter on this.. probably this can be coded as MithruDharma..
There is no incident of Karna coming across Duryodhana before this episode and hence there was a need for Duryodhana to identify someone to challenge Arjuna and he found someone in the form of Karna… What happened subsequently was a friendship built over a period of time. Certain events like when Duryo’s wife and Karna were playing dice…. Etc were all melodramas.. to highlight the level of friendship .

Bhishma is a revered soul.. A great character… In his prime of youth, he sacrificed everything for the sake of his father and he will take a pledge that he will stand by the king of Hastinapur.. This was the prime reason for him to fight for Kauravas finally .
The only negative aspect was… when Draupadi was illtreated in the arena.. he should have stopped that incident … There is no justification for him to remain quiet… whatever may be his commitment to the throne..
The same will be applicable for Acharya Drona as well.

Both Bhishma and Drona had to face their end for being quiet during this Draupadhi episode . But for this incident Bhisma was the most perfect character in this Great Epic. A fitting response from SriKrishna will come in the form of Vishnu Sahasranamam being told through Bhishma after the war.. That reflected SriKrishna’s respect and regard for Bhishma.

[/tscii:bfd88513c5]

Badri

19th August 2005, 08:33 AM

Dharma can be essentially classified into individual dharma (ID) and Fundamental Dharma (FD).

Karna, Bhishma etc adhered to Indiv. dharma. Now, ID is ok as long as it does not conflict with FD. FD is the more universal dharma. For instance, during the humiliation of Draupadi, it is FD to prevent it from happening. And in the sastras proclaim that when ID conflicts with FD, it is FD that has to be followed, and not ID.

If ID is to be held supreme, then each person will start violating the social and legal norms in the excuse that it is his ID. A man might become a burglar on the pretext that it is his ID to protect and provide for his family.

I hope I have been able to bring out the difference clearly. It is the mark of the wise and the discriminating to be able to understand which Dharma is more applicable in a given scenario. That is why Vibheeshana chose the right path, while Kumbhakarna erred.

Similarly, Bhishma, Drona etc made the mistake of adhering to ID, and failed when it came to FD.

S.Balaji

19th August 2005, 11:22 AM

Mr. Badri,

Your analysis of ID and FD is nice. I think this will be applicable to even Acharya Drona as well . Drona considered his ID higher than FD and his loyalty to Dirudhirashtra and for not having reacted when Draupadhi was illtreated paved way for his end. Eventhough the means adopted to kill him were not correct, he had to die for taking ID.

Raghu

19th August 2005, 02:31 PM

Badri AnNe

So If ID and FD comes in to conflict, then chosinf FD over will be dharma, while chosing ID over FD will be adharma, this is indeed a 'Dharma Sankata' situation.

If there is such a thing as ID and FD as you have mentioned, then Karna, Bhishma, Drona and Arjuna are all adharma vaathis, right?

S.Balaji

19th August 2005, 02:49 PM

Raghu,

Karna, Bhisma and Drona.... are all cannot be classified under Adharmavadhees... Unfortunately, they had to stand by Duryodhana who was an Adharmavadhee

Why did you add Arjuna to this list ??

Raghu

19th August 2005, 04:18 PM

Raghu,

Karna, Bhisma and Drona.... are all cannot be classified under Adharmavadhees... Unfortunately, they had to stand by Duryodhana who was an Adharmavadhee

Balaji AnNe

Any one who supports adharmam are adharmavadhees in terms of Fundamental Adharmavadhees, though they may be Individual Dharmavadhees, Karna, Bhisma and Drona fall into this category!

Why did you add Arjuna to this list ??

1) Killing Karna when he is unarmed
2) Killing Karna's son from behind
3) Using Sikandi as a shield to kill Bhishma

this all shows the adharma's inflicted by Arjuna, and also shows his Cowardness, esp towards Karna!!!

Surya

20th August 2005, 03:15 AM

S.Balaji

21st August 2005, 09:04 PM

Dear Raghu,

Pointing out at Arjuna being adharmavaadhee as he killed the mighty 3 in an adharma way... there are 2 more instances where Arjuna was adopting adharma to eliminate the enemy :

1. Poorisiravas... He was fighting with Satyaki and was about to kill him ... when under the directions of Krishna, Arjuna will shoot an arrow which will cut Poorisiravas's right hand...
It was not as per Yudha Dharma as Poori was fighting with another guy and not with Arjuna. Poor Arjuna had to do it as per the wishes of Srikrishna...
2. Jayathratha
3. Bagadhathan

I will give more details on this shortly

S.Balaji

21st August 2005, 09:13 PM

Jayathratha the earlier day was instrumental in blocking the path of other 4 pandavas as Drona created Chakravyugh and only Abhimanyu knew how to pierce but was not taught on how to come out of it. WHile he went in successfully, the breach was stalled by Jayathratha and he was unbeatable that day while all the 4 pandavas tried their best to enter.
Poor ABimanyu got killed by the entire group.
Arjuna got wild and he took an oath that if he does not kill Jayathradha the next day before sunset, he will commit suicide.

The war next day went almost up to the sunset as Jayathradha was a valiant warrior.. and he was also protected by the entire Kaurava force.
At one stage Krishna will do a maya act and will hide the Sun God for few moments.... Everybody will think that the sun has set and will start celebrating the moment including Jayathratha...
Arjuna , at this moment will send an arrow which will cut Jayathradha's head and will carry all the way to his Father's lap...
( there is another big story of Jayathradha )

Ultimately, Arjuna could not have killed Jayathradha but for Krishna's guile and magic.

S.Balaji

21st August 2005, 09:27 PM

Raghu,

If you talk about adharma being adopted by Arjuna doing the war,, the list is endless :

1. Bhishma .... was defeated ( but not killed ) through the shield of Shikandi...
( I had written a posting on the background of Shikandi )
2. Drona... Was about to use Bramastra and destroy the entire pandava army when ... under Krisha's advise.... Bhima will kill an elephant by name Aswathaama and shamelessly tell Drona that he had killed Aswathama... Drona .... for him ... Aswathama was life and he will reconfirm with Yudhistira who will also shamelessly say that yes... Aswathama is killed... but in a mild tone.... an elephant... Drona will not hear the second sentence of Yudhistra and will give up arms and will lay in yoganishta when Drishtadyuma will cut his head..
3. Karna..... You know the whole story...
Karna's curse was momentary as he will forget all the skills what he had learnt from Parasurama... but Arjuna could never have killed Karna as he is equally matched in skills...
Arjuna had to kill him while Karna was trying to lift his chariot wheels.
4. Duryodhana...... The whole world knew that he cannot be beaten in mace fight..... and as per the war rules.... one should not hit before hip.....
Beema ... under the advise of Krishna will hit his thigh and he will also collapse.
5. I have mentioned already about ... Poorisiravas.
6. Bagadhathan was an old brave warrior... and known for elephant fighting and is a specialist.... Due to his ageing... he will wear a cloth to hold the extra flesh which was coming before his eyes....
At one stage. Bagadhatha will use the Ankush and chant Narayan astra... and will throw at Arjuna... but krishna will appear before him and will absorb that astra... .WHICH OTHERWISE WOULD HAVE KILLED ARJUNA INSTANTLY.
As this was Narayana Astra... Sri VIshnu's astra.... Krishna happily will absorb it and will protect Arjuna.
Arjuna will cut the cloth which was protecting the eyes of Bagadhatha...
This will make Bagadhathan virtually blind as he will not be able to see anyting.
At this time... Arjuna will send an arrow which will kill Bagadhathan....

The above are all what pandavas did....

The one adharma what Gauravas did was.... killing abimanyu as a group .... when he was without arms.....

But for this episode... the war was won by pandavas purely but wicked and adharma methods...

S.Balaji

21st August 2005, 09:32 PM

[tscii:d91ce4b924]Dear Raghu..

You have created 2 wonderful threads….. Ramayana and Mahabaratha…

I suggest onething….. Shall we take up topic by topic in both the epics… and analyse…so that it will form a sequence…. It will also be easy for others to follow..

What do you feel ??
[/tscii:d91ce4b924]

S.Balaji

21st August 2005, 09:50 PM

Raghu Ji, :D

I have a question.

Arjuna wasn't supporting adharmavadhees, he was fighting them, but used some adharma ways while doing it. "beat them with their own tool" kind of thing.

Isn't all that justified since Arjuna was fighting for Dharma even though he did some things that are considered as Adharma along the way?

Regards. 8)

Surya...

I think what Raghu is driving is ....... Arjuna is known for his mastery over warfare..... A great warrior.... He should have won over his rivals by adopting YUDHA DHARMA.... while he followed YUDHA ADHARMAAA... to kill all his rivals....
I am sure... but for that act.. he could never have killed Karna / Bhishma.....
Both were skilled archers and great warrior.s

Badri

22nd August 2005, 06:34 AM

Raghu: In the case of Arjuna, again it is the classic case of ID vs FD. What he did may look adharmic, but that is from an ID point of view. As a soldier, as a warrior, he had to follow a personal code of conduct, which is ID in this case. But as a citizen of the world, in the general interests of all, the Dharma Yuddha was being waged. It was his duty as a Dharmic person to overcome the forces of Adharma. Hence, this is Fundamental Dharma.

Besides, while all of argue or point out Krishna'a apparant "adharmic" suggestions, we must also not forget the opinions of all the people, including Drona, Bhisma, Sanjaya, Gandhari, Dritharasthra etc. that

Yathra Dharmo thatra Krishna
Yathra Krishno thatra Jaya

meaning, where there is Dharma, there is Krishna, where there is Krishna, there is victory.

That even the so-called enemies acknowledged the fact that Krishna would be dharmic gives us no real authority to question or discuss any adharma on the part of Krishna. Again, as Krishna himself declares in the Gita, he is Dharmakrit, the author of Dharma.

Also, one must understand that the influence of Kaliyuga was already being felt during the war. Every Yuga has a Yugadharma. And as the story goes, Dharma stands on all 4 legs during Kritha Yuga, 3 during Treta, 2 in Dwapara and only one leg during Kaliyuga.

So, when all these collective influences, and the entire concept of individual vs fundamental dharma is considered, only then can one truly understand the real significance of Krishna's actions during the war, his advice and suggestions to the Pandavas. In isolation, in the absence of these facts would only lead to erroneous conclusions.

viggop

22nd August 2005, 09:36 AM

The entire war started because of Adharma only.If only Duryodhana had given the rightful share of the kingdom back to Pandavas(atleast 5 villages!). but he refuses to do that.Sudhaama Sir had already explained the death of Duryodhana.It was duryodhana who was adharmic and lied to Bhima on his weak spot while Bhima told the truth.Hence,Krishna pointed it out to Bhima that the weak spot was the thighs.

As We all know, the Lord was the SuthraDhari.He moved his pawns(characters in mahabharatha) in all directions as per his wish.All the world is a stage!

Raghu

22nd August 2005, 11:38 AM

Raghu

22nd August 2005, 11:42 AM

3. Bagadhathan

BalaJi AnNe

This is the first time, I am hearing about Bagdhathan, can you pls tell me a bit more bout him?

thanks :D

Raghu

22nd August 2005, 11:45 AM

The one adharma what Gauravas did was.... killing abimanyu as a group .... when he was without arms.....

But for this episode... the war was won by pandavas purely but wicked and adharma methods...

correct, 100% correct!

Raghu

22nd August 2005, 11:47 AM

[tscii:66bbbd5ced]Dear Raghu..

You have created 2 wonderful threads….. Ramayana and Mahabaratha…

I suggest onething….. Shall we take up topic by topic in both the epics… and analyse…so that it will form a sequence…. It will also be easy for others to follow..

What do you feel ??
[/tscii:66bbbd5ced]

Yes please :) , but i don't know where to start :? , so please have the honours :)

S.Balaji

23rd August 2005, 01:42 PM

[tscii:3a0180a01e]
The entire war started because of Adharma only.If only Duryodhana had given the rightful share of the kingdom back to Pandavas(atleast 5 villages!). but he refuses to do that.Sudhaama Sir had already explained the death of Duryodhana.It was duryodhana who was adharmic and lied to Bhima on his weak spot while Bhima told the truth.Hence,Krishna pointed it out to Bhima that the weak spot was the thighs.

As We all know, the Lord was the SuthraDhari.He moved his pawns(characters in mahabharatha) in all directions as per his wish.All the world is a stage!

Dear Viggop,

I think the Duryodhana episode goes like this….

When Draupadhi was treated very badly in Rajyasabha… at One stage… when Draupadhi was pulled in by Dushashan, Duryodhana will ask her to sit on his thighs…. This will prompt Bhima to take a vow that during the war, he will break the thighs of Duryodhana and take revenge. (He will also take a vow that he will kill the entire 100 kauravas).
The same vow will be reminded very tactfully by Krishna when the fight between Bhima and Duryodhana reaches a peak stage. Duryodhana will emerge very stronger and that stage Krishna will realize that this fight should it get extended… Duryodhana will emerger victorious and will decide to apply that ploy of hitting below thigh . Duryodhana was so confident that Bhima will not stoop down to such levels that he will break the war rules of mace fighting but it will come a deadly blow to him.
Leave apart the dharma angle…. It was a shameful act by the entire Pandavas for having adopted negative approach to killing their main rivals.
My point is that Bhima and Arjuna are well known warriors and superior in their craft. They should not have ventured into timid tactics.
[/tscii:3a0180a01e]

a.ratchasi

23rd August 2005, 02:41 PM

My point is that Bhima and Arjuna are well known warriors and superior in their craft. They should not have ventured into timid tactics.

There are two ways to view it.
i)The supposedly self righteous characters had negative elements in them too. This was very much prevalent during the war. This nails the very aspect that man has equal standing of goodness and evil in him. It is the choice of which one takes the upper hand in a person's life that matters.

ii)The second aspect propogates that it is alright to get even with the opponent with unfair means just as how treacherous the opponent was before. The unreasonable manner used by the righteous group actually is the fruit of deceit done by the opponent. Therefore, it is not quite right to associate the 'righteous' men with the conduct of their actions in the war.

viggop

23rd August 2005, 02:55 PM

Balaji
You have obviously not read the explanation of the whole sequence of events. Both Bhima and Duryodhana keep on fighting and the fight is even.

Duryodhana then asks Bhima that to resolve this fight , both of them have to tell their weak spots. Bhima will tell the truth that his Head is the weakest part in his body.Duryodhana will lie that chest is his weakest part.Actually,it'll be the thigh as Gandhari's eyes were covered from seeing it.
So, Bhima will hit Duryodhana as much as possible in the chest and nothing will happen to Duryodhana but whenever Duryodhana hits Bhima on the head, Bhima will become very weak.For this reason only, Krishna will remind Bhima abt his vow.
Seems that after the fall of Duryodhana, Balarama will be very unhappy and he'll leave the place in a huff.

S.Balaji

23rd August 2005, 03:12 PM

[tscii:4730b235e1]Dear Viggop,
Actually before the war , Balarama will take a neutral stand and will tell both the parties that he will not participate in the war and will go for Theertha yathra…
About Balarama’s reaction after the fight…. He was the Guru for both Bhima and Duryodhana on mace fighting and in his opinion, Duryodhana was a better fighter in this fighting and had high regards for him.
When he sees Bhima hitting Duryodhana on his thighs , he will be furious and will rush towards Bhima .. However Krishna will pull Balarama out of the situation by explaining the whole sequence of events which lead to the war…. And will also highlight to Balarama that at the Rajyasabha, Bhima took a vow to break Duryodhana’s thighs and kill him as he wanted Draupadhi to sit on his thighs… and he will justify the act of Bhima. Still Balarama will not be convinced and will finally move out of the scene stating that Krishna could have avoided the war…
He will also comment that the cowardly act of Bhima is very disgusting and it’s a shame as this is not as per war rules and will leave the place finally.
[/tscii:4730b235e1]

S.Balaji

23rd August 2005, 03:19 PM

[tscii:45de7e11b8]
[There are two ways to view it.
i)The supposedly self righteous characters had negative elements in them too. This was very much prevalent during the war. This nails the very aspect that man has equal standing of goodness and evil in him. It is the choice of which one takes the upper hand in a person's life that matters.

ii)The second aspect propogates that it is alright to get even with the opponent with unfair means just as how treacherous the opponent was before. The unreasonable manner used by the righteous group actually is the fruit of deceit done by the opponent. Therefore, it is not quite right to associate the 'righteous' men with the conduct of their actions in the war.

A.R….

Very thoughtful posting. Nice ….
You are right as both Arjun and Bhima had to resort to a befitting reply to Duryodhana for his wicked deeds earlier.
There is no question on the virtues of both Arjuna and Bhima. Both were righteous in their acts and deeds.
My point here is that they did not act like true Kshatriyas…. The way they annihilated their rivals brings disrepute to their credibility and war skills.

[/tscii:45de7e11b8]

S.Balaji

23rd August 2005, 08:03 PM

[tscii:d84c12a38e]

3. Bagadhathan

BalaJi AnNe

This is the first time, I am hearing about Bagdhathan, can you pls tell me a bit more bout him?

thanks :D

Dear Raghu,

There were some special characters who also took part in that great war and Bagadathan was one of them. He was highly respected king and was a friend of none other than Indira . As he was a good friend of Gauravas as well , he had to be with them during the war.
He was a specialist in elephant fighting and he had a mighty elephant by name SUPRADHEEPAKAM.
The incident which I had mentioned happened during the 12th day I think when Bhima was destroying Gauravas, Bagadathan had to step in with his mighty elephant and started making deep inroads into Pandava force.
There was also a ploy by Drona to capture Yudhistra alive so that the war will come to an end.
Bhima will launch a fiery attack on Drona. Satyaki and Dhristadhyumna joined him. Watching this from the middle of the field Karna told Duryodhana that Drona needed help. Duryodhana and his brothers went to Drona’s help. Seeing Duryodhana, Bhima, fury was doubled. Before Bhima could inflict any further damage, Bagadathan came there on his magnificent elephant, Supradeepakam. The elephant was quite invincible and had been a scourge to the Pandavas army. The elephant will crush the chariot of Bhima. Bhima could barely escape being crushed under the elephant. But the trunk of the elephant caught Bhima and he could extricate himself with great difficulty. Bagadathan was throwing a lot of javelins to kill the Pandavas army.
Hearing the cries of the agonised soldiers of his side and the terrible noise made by the elephant, Now, Arjuna rushed to his army’s help. He was too shocked to see the havoc caused by the elephant of Bagadathan. Arjuna went for the both, Bagadathan as well as for his elephant. Bagadathan will try to smash Arjuna’s chariot with his elephant. But he could not succeed before Krishna’s skills. Bhagadatta tried all his astras , which were cut to pieces by Arjuna. Arjuna cut the bow of Bagadathan . At this stage, Bagadathan will chant Vaishnava Astra and use that on his Ankush and throw on Arjuna. It was no ordinary astra, he had invoked Vaishnav astra, it’s the astra of lord Vishnu. It was the most terrible astra in the whole universe. However, Krishna will appear before the astra and absorb the power as he was the original owner of it !, and it will become a garland and get wrapped around Krishna’s neck. Arjuna will ask Krishna that why did he come between the astra aimed at him? He was not to participate actively in the war. It was also not the prescribed duty of a charioteer. Krishna smiled and said, I gave this astra to the mother of Narakasura and when I killed him, he gave it to the Bagadathan. The astra is sure to kill the person at whom it is aimed. Nothing could stop him. Since I did not want to lose you, I had to come between the astra and you. And since the Vaishnava astra is back with me, Bagadathan is no longer immune from all the astras and weapons. His dreaded elephant too has become like any ordinary elephant. Now be quick . Do not lose time.
As mentioned in my earlier posting, Bagadathan , due to his old age, will be holding all his extra flesh before his eyes by way of a cloth which Arjuna will tear with his sharp arrows and this will make Bagadathan virtually blind.
Arjuna will then kill the mighty elephant. Then Arjuna’s arrows will kill Bagadathan and he will fall down from the elephant dead. Arjuna will come out of his chariot and will do a parikrama to the fallen great Bagadathan and will pay respects to a great warrior..

[/tscii:d84c12a38e]

Raghu

23rd August 2005, 09:22 PM

S.Balaji

23rd August 2005, 10:36 PM

Dear Balaji AnNe

Great write up, thanks, one more question,Barberik grandson of Bhima did not participate in the war, why?, is it because Barberik was Lord Vishnu's Bhaktha and he did not want to fight against the lord.

But he had special vision in which he could see the whole war, like this other guy(what was his name) who was narrating the war scene by scene to dhiritharatchasa.

Dear Raghu,

I will do a separate posting on the grandson part

The other guy whom you have referred to was SANJAYA ... AND HE WAS GIVEN DIVINE POWERS BY SAGE VYASAR. ( probably today's doordharshan ! )
Vyasar will appear before the war and will give that extrodinary powers to Sanjaya.. who was assistant to Dirudhirashtra.

He will give a live update to Dirudhirashtra about the war.

Raghu

24th August 2005, 06:00 PM

saradhaa_sn

24th August 2005, 07:13 PM

Everybody arguing that, Bhima took revenge that he will break the thigh of Dhuryodhana, because he asked Dhrowpathy to sit on his thigh. When the Pandavas put their wife as a bet for Gambling, that means they treated her as a 'commodity' and not their wife.

DHURYODHANAN WON THAT "COMMODITY" IN GAMBLING AND HE HAS THE RIGHT TO USE AS HE LIKES.

This Bhima's anger and revenge should make his mind working, when Yudhishtiran (Dharman) decided to put their wife as a bet in gambling.

Karnan asked in front of Krishna :"Manaiviyai panayam vaiththu soodhaadinaaney. Maanamulla manidhan seyvaana idhai..?". His arguement is 100% correct.

S.Balaji

24th August 2005, 07:24 PM

Hello Saradhaji,

You have conveyed a very strong message... a very striking one....

I also wonder on another issue.... Before betting on Draupadhi... Yudhishtra had lost himself .... which means he had no right to bet on Draupadhi....
This point will be raised by Draupadhi in the court but it will go to deaf ears......
I wish the remaining pandavas had questioned Yudishtra on his act of betting on Draupadhi... But probably they stood silent as a mark of respect for their elder brother.
By doing this... even the other 4 pandavas did adharma to Draupadhi........

viggop

24th August 2005, 07:42 PM

In Panchali sabadham, bharathi also asks the same question. After Yudishtra lost himself in the gamble, he had NO right to make independent decisions as he himself is a slave.In panchali sabatham, i think Bhima gets very angry and says he'll break the hands of Yudishtra.

Also, i'm surprised that Saradhaji says Duryodhana can treat her in anyway he likes.This means that even the Kauravas treat her like a commodity.Both Pandavas and Kauravas are wrong. Nobody has right to treat women as a commodity.Draupdai is a human being and she has her own feelings and she is not an object or thing

Also, when she was being disrobed in fromt of the whole hall by dushashana, all the elders like BHisma,Drona,Dritharastra keep their mouth shut.It was Karna who gives this 'wonderful' idea of disrobing draupadi in front of all the people. Draupadi calls to Krishna to save her but actually even Krishna does not come to her rescue immediately.I read somewhere that draupadi surrenders totally to the Lord(saranagathi) and stops protecting herself from being disrobed. Only after total surrender , the Lord helps her.Till she was associating the soul with the body, Krishna does not come to her help.

S.Balaji

24th August 2005, 07:55 PM

"viggop"]In Panchali sabadham, bharathi also asks the same question. After Yudishtra lost himself in the gamble, he had NO right to make independent decisions as he himself is a slave.In panchali sabatham, i think Bhima gets very angry and says he'll break the hands of Yudishtra.

Bhima will be passified by Arjuna later on this.

Also, i'm surprised that Saradhaji says Duryodhana can treat her in anyway he likes.This means that even the Kauravas treat her like a commodity.Both Pandavas and Kauravas are wrong. Nobody has right to treat women as a commodity.Draupdai is a human being and she has her own feelings and she is not an object or thing

One should go backwards and understand what sequence of events that made Duryodhana so wild and vent his frustration on Draupadhi.
When Duryodhana visits the palace of Pandavas , he will get deceived by various mirages. At one stage he will step into a mirage which actually will be a pond and will slip down.. At this stage, Draupadhi will pass a very crude comment ... THE SON OF A BLIND MAN IS ALSO BLIND .
This will make Duryodhana furious and will immediately walk out of that place but will not be able to forget the insult that he had got from Panchali...
Karna.... at the time of the Draupadhi's wedding, he will also try to participate but Draupadhi will again utter an outrageous comment that I WILL NOT MARRY A CHARIOTEER'S SON.
Karna also equally will get wild on Draupathi...
Both of them took revenge on Draupadhi by dragging her to the Rajya sabha and try to disrobe her......
but this act of both will no way justify what Draaupadhi did to them... but thats the way some vent their anger and frustration...

Also, when she was being disrobed in fromt of the whole hall by dushashana, all the elders like BHisma,Drona,Dritharastra keep their mouth shut.It was Karna who gives this 'wonderful' idea of disrobing draupadi in front of all the people. Draupadi calls to Krishna to save her but actually even Krishna does not come to her rescue immediately.I read somewhere that draupadi surrenders totally to the Lord(saranagathi) and stops protecting herself from being disrobed. Only after total surrender , the Lord helps her.Till she was associating the soul with the body, Krishna does not come to her help.

True.... the Lord will come to the rescue when Panchaali totally surrenders before Him.

viggop

24th August 2005, 07:56 PM

Balaji
There is another place where Lord Krishna almost decides to enter the war(other than the bagadathan story). When Arjuna vows to burn himself to death if he cannot kill jayadratha, Krishna is not happy.He then asks his charioteer to prepare his chariot for war just in case Arjuna fails in his vow.He tells that he'll wage the war for the pandavas if Arjuna does unable to fulfill the vow.But of course, using a lot of tricks , Krishna saves Arjuna's life and jayadratha is killed. Arjuna succeeds in taking his revenge for AbhimanyuI read this story in HariKrishnan sir articles in chennaionline.

viggop

24th August 2005, 08:02 PM

I agree that it was wrong for Draupdai to passed the remark when Duryodhana fell down.But, i'll support Panchali's decision to assert her right on who should marry her.The same panchali will of course not object when Kunti asks her to be the wife of all five.It means that she was a very independent woman who does not fail to do what she wants to do.Nobody can force her to accept anything.If she did not like to become wife of all 5 brothers, i'm sure she would have told that to Kunti and asserted her rights.

Even Sita was like that.When she sees Rama in the streets walking behind Vishwamitra,she falls in love with him.She vows to kill herself if somebody else had broken Shiva's bow.It means, no one can force Sita to marry someone she does not like to marry.

S.Balaji

24th August 2005, 08:08 PM

Viggop,

Even before Jayathradha episode, Krishna , twice will get upset and will forge towards Bhishma taking his Sudharshana Chakra...

When Bhishma fights with Arjuna.... Krishna will observe that Arjuna , out of his respect for his Grandfather was not tottally committed to the war with him and was fighting with less force ( despite the Geethopadhesham ! )
While Bhishma will fight with full vigour and will emerge stronger always.... This will make Krishna wonder ... if this situation continues , Pandavas will lose the war and twice he will get furious and will tell Arjuna that - You are not committed totally to the war with Bhishma... Hence Let me kill him and will forge towards Bhishma... Bhishma with tears in his eyes,, will happily salute the Lord saying that.... IF I HAVE TO DIE BY YOUR CHAKRA... IT WILL BE A GREAT BLESSING TO ME.... I WILL REACH YOUR LOTUS FEET. PL DO IT...

At this stage, Arjuna will realise his mistake and will plead to Krishna to cool down and continue his role as a Charioteer.... and will resume the war....

S.Balaji

24th August 2005, 08:15 PM

I agree that it was wrong for Draupdai to passed the remark when Duryodhana fell down.But, i'll support Panchali's decision to assert her right on who should marry her.The same panchali will of course not object when Kunti asks her to be the wife of all five.It means that she was a very independent woman who does not fail to do what she wants to do.Nobody can force her to accept anything.If she did not like to become wife of all 5 brothers, i'm sure she would have told that to Kunti and asserted her rights.

Viggop,

While I too am not denying Panchaali's individual right to decide her choice.... I question the type of comments she had passed on Karna.... CASTING ASPERSIONS ON HIS CASTE... which is sad.....

May be she is a Rajakumari... and she thought the levels will not match.... in that case, she should not have accepted Arjuna as well....
The reason is that until Arjuna reveals himself , she will not know the trueth.....that it was Arjuna....
Here I find dilution in her standards of thinking...

viggop

24th August 2005, 08:18 PM

Balaji
I have mentioned this story in either this thread or Ramayana thread. :-)

viggop

24th August 2005, 08:21 PM

S.Balaji

24th August 2005, 08:36 PM

Balaji
If Arjuna was from charioteer's caste, I think Draupadi might have accepted him.probably , she already fell in love with Arjuna and did not want to maary anyone else.How does Arjuna come into the swayamvara? Does he come disguised as someone else? I thought only kings will be allowed for the swayamvara,right? then, Arjuna had to come as a ruler of some kingdom

Dear Viggop,

In Draupadhi's wedding, it was not SWAYAMVARA. Actually Durupadha will hold a test of skills where all princes will participate ( including Karna ) while Arjuna will be in disguise ( to explain why Arjuna was in disguise , I will have to go back to the Arakku maalaigai episode when the pandavas were made to live in Wax palace which was constructed by an architect under the guidance of Sakuni .... but Vidhura will give code worded alarm to Yudhishtra to vacate and with the help of Bhima , they will build a secret escape route and will move out of the palace... while Sakuni and his men will set fire to the palace....
The whole country will believe that the Pandavas had died in the inferno... and will feel sad .... but the Pandavas,, guided by Kunti will be in disguise.... and will not expose themselves for sometime... before the Draupadhi wedding event....

Now, coming back to the wedding event, Durupadha will conduct a skill test and will announce that the guy who wins the skill will marry his daughter....
While no other prince could win that test, Durupadha will wonder how to end this .. .and will announce that anybody can come and display his skill and the guy who wins shall be the worthy person to marry my daughter....
At this stage, Arjuna, in disguise will come forward and win the test ( I think he will come in disguise as a Brahman ).
Everybody will get upset and will start fighting but at this time Bhima will stand in between and will chase them away...

Durupadha will appreciate Arjuna and will do a kanyadhan to him... and will also send his son Drusthadhymnan along with Draupadhi to the bridegroom's house to find out the trueth....
Finally Dirushtadhyumnan will realise that they were pandavas... when he sees them along with Kunti

S.Balaji

24th August 2005, 08:45 PM

[tscii:8abe21f7fd]Viggop,

You had mentioned that Draupadhi already fell in love with Arjuna and would have married him anyway…

Actually, the story goes like this :

Durupadha , to avenge his defeat against Drona , will perform a yagna on two counts :
1.To get a son who shall kill Drona
2.To get a daughter who shall marry Arjuna

The specific reason for the second count was a smart thinking by Durupadha as if Arjuna marries his daughter , he will come by his side and will not be with Drona !
Actually, when Durupadha lost earlier to Drona, it was Arjuna who won the battle against Durpadha and gave the Kingdom of Panchalam as a gift to his Guru.

In the Yagna, Dirushtadhyumnan will come out as son

and Panchali as daughter

The rest if history

[/tscii:8abe21f7fd]