Debate Mansion

   

Mythology and Scriptures Debate Thread (Page 6)

Post Reply New Post

Page 6 of 44

..RamKiJanaki..

IF-Stunnerz

..RamKiJanaki..

Joined: 20 August 2008

Posts: 44061

Posted: 25 October 2009 at 3:53pm | IP Logged
Some text from Bhagwad Gita about a person's duty:
 
 
Chapter 3. Karma-yoga

TEXT 17

yas tv atma-ratir eva syad
atma-trptas ca manavah
atmany eva ca santustas
tasya karyam na vidyate

TRANSLATION

One who is, however, taking pleasure in the self, who is illuminated in the self, who rejoices in and is satisfied with the self only, fully satiated--for him there is no duty.

PURPORT

A person who is fully Krsna conscious, and is fully satisfied by his acts in Krsna consciousness, no longer has any duty to perform. Due to his being Krsna conscious, all impiety within is instantly cleansed, an effect of many, many thousands of yajna performances. By such clearing of consciousness, one becomes fully confident of his eternal position in relationship with the Supreme. His duty thus becomes self-illuminated by the grace of the Lord, and therefore he no longer has any obligations to the Vedic injunctions. Such a Krsna conscious person is no longer interested in material activities and no longer takes pleasure in material arrangements like wine, women and similar infatuations.

TEXT 18

naiva tasya krtenartho
nakrteneha kascana
na casya sarva-bhutesu
kascid artha-vyapasrayah

TRANSLATION

A self-realized man has no purpose to fulfill in the discharge of his prescribed duties, nor has he any reason not to perform such work. Nor has he any need to depend on any other living being.

PURPORT

A self-realized man is no longer obliged to perform any prescribed duty, save and except activities in Krsna consciousness. Krsna consciousness is not inactivity either, as will be explained in the following verses. A Krsna conscious man does not take shelter of any person--man or demigod. Whatever he does in Krsna consciousness is sufficient in the discharge of his obligation.
 

TEXT 19

tasmad asaktah satatam
karyam karma samacara
asakto hy acaran karma
param apnoti purusah

TRANSLATION

Therefore, without being attached to the fruits of activities, one should act as a matter of duty; for by working without attachment, one attains the Supreme.

PURPORT

The Supreme is the Personality of Godhead for the devotees, and liberation for the impersonalist. A person, therefore, acting for Krsna, or in Krsna consciousness, under proper guidance and without attachment to the result of the work, is certainly making progress toward the supreme goal of life. Arjuna is told that he should fight in the Battle of Kuruksetra for the interest of Krsna because Krsna wanted him to fight. To be a good man or a nonviolent man is a personal attachment, but to act on behalf of the Supreme is to act without attachment for the result. That is perfect action of the highest degree, recommended by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Sri Krsna.
Vedic rituals, like prescribed sacrifices, are performed for purification of impious activities that were performed in the field of sense gratification. But action in Krsna consciousness is transcendental to the reactions of good or evil work. A Krsna conscious person has no attachment for the result but acts on behalf of Krsna alone. He engages in all kinds of activities, but is completely nonattached.
 

TEXT 20

karmanaiva hi samsiddhim
asthita janakadayah
loka-sangraham evapi
sampasyan kartum arhasi

TRANSLATION

Even kings like Janaka and others attained the perfectional stage by performance of prescribed duties. Therefore, just for the sake of educating the people in general, you should perform your work.

PURPORT

Kings like Janaka and others were all self-realized souls; consequently they had no obligation to perform the prescribed duties in the Vedas. Nonetheless they performed all prescribed activities just to set examples for the people in general. Janaka was the father of Sita, and father-in-law of Lord Sri Rama. Being a great devotee of the Lord, he was transcendentally situated, but because he was the king of Mithila (a subdivision of Bihar province in India), he had to teach his subjects how to fight righteously in battle. He and his subjects fought to teach people in general that violence is also necessary in a situation where good arguments fail. Before the Battle of Kuruksetra, every effort was made to avoid the war, even by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but the other party was determined to fight. So for such a right cause, there is a necessity for fighting. Although one who is situated in Krsna consciousness may not have any interest in the world, he still works to teach the public how to live and how to act. Experienced persons in Krsna consciousness can act in such a way that others will follow, and this is explained in the following verse.
 

TEXT 22

na me parthasti kartavyam
trisu lokesu kincana
nanavaptam avaptavyam
varta eva ca karmani

TRANSLATION

O son of Prtha, there is no work prescribed for Me within all the three planetary systems. Nor am I in want of anything, nor have I need to obtain anything--and yet I am engaged in work.

PURPORT

The Supreme Personality of Godhead is described in the Vedic literatures as follows:

tam isvaranam paramam mahesvaram
tam devatanam paramam ca daivatam
patim patinam paramam parastad
vidama devam bhuvanesam idyam

na tasya karyam karanam ca vidyate
na tat-samas cabhyadhikas ca drsyate
parasya saktir vividhaiva sruyate
svabhaviki jnana-bala-kriya ca


"The Supreme Lord is the controller of all other controllers, and He is the greatest of all the diverse planetary leaders. Everyone is under His control. All entities are delegated with particular power only by the Supreme Lord; they are not supreme themselves. He is also worshipable by all demigods and is the supreme director of all directors. Therefore, He is transcendental to all kinds of material leaders and controllers and is worshipable by all. There is no one greater than Him, and He is the supreme cause of all causes.
"He does not possess bodily form like that of an ordinary living entity. There is no difference between His body and His soul. He is absolute. All His senses are transcendental. Any one of His senses can perform the action of any other sense. Therefore, no one is greater than Him or equal to Him. His potencies are multifarious, and thus His deeds are automatically performed as a natural sequence." (Svetasvatara Upanisad 6.7-8)
Since everything is in full opulence in the Personality of Godhead and is existing in full truth, there is no duty for the Supreme Personality of Godhead to perform. One who must receive the results of work has some designated duty, but one who has nothing to achieve within the three planetary systems certainly has no duty. And yet Lord Krsna is engaged on the Battlefield of Kuruksetra as the leader of the ksatriyas because the ksatriyas are duty-bound to give protection to the distressed. Although He is above all the regulations of the revealed scriptures, He does not do anything that violates the revealed scriptures.
 
Credit:

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

DemonStar

Dear Guest, Being an unregistered member you are missing out on participating in the lively discussions happening on the topic "Mythology and Scriptures Debate Thread (Page 6)" in Debate Mansion forum. In addition you lose out on the fun interactions with fellow members and other member exclusive features that India-Forums has to offer. Join India's most popular discussion portal on Indian Entertainment. It's FREE and registration is effortless so JOIN NOW!

..RamKiJanaki..

IF-Stunnerz

..RamKiJanaki..

Joined: 20 August 2008

Posts: 44061

Posted: 25 October 2009 at 3:54pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by crazy_sunny

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

 Or if you simply "heard" this from somewhere.
as i had already mentioned in my post i simply "heard " it on the news channel -India Tv-a few days back .They didnt find the body but were talking about the claims of that tribe. BTW has ravanas cremation details been mentioned in the scriptures. Anyone here who knows, plz shareSmile[/QUOTE]
 
Yeah it has. Ramcharitmanas, as well as Valmiki Ramayan itself, describes the cremation. Will post the paragraphs from them soon.Smile

return_to_hades

IF-Veteran Member

return_to_hades

Joined: 18 January 2006

Posts: 20261

Posted: 25 October 2009 at 4:03pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

 
Have you seen BRC's Mahabharat? Yeah, I know it's old compared to the new technology of today, but it's direction I feel was perfect for the 1980s. No one can portray Lord Krishna better than Nitish Bharadwaj.


Hon, I have the entire series on DVD.

..RamKiJanaki..

IF-Stunnerz

..RamKiJanaki..

Joined: 20 August 2008

Posts: 44061

Posted: 25 October 2009 at 4:07pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by Summer3

Janaki,
I think most of us are aware that names have vibrations and both Om and Rama have the Divine vibration of 7. So Rama may be repeated as it also has the power to remove our ignorance ( same as Om). Ah understanding the qualities and the nature of Rama will melt the hardest heart it is said.
 
One of Ravana's followers advised Ravana to take the form of Rama and wins Sita's love. Ravana mentioned that all evil thoughts will go away once he takes on Rama's form, so it was not a good idea.LOL
 
Both Rama and Sita were  Divine incarnations who were fully aware of the role they had to play to teach mankind the proper path and moral codes. I find most Rama bhajans have a sad and sentimental tune.
 
Wow, agree with everything you said!Clap
 
In Valmiki Ramayan, it gives a short account of Valmiki's past....of how he had become a Ram Bhakt and how Ram Naam washed away his sins.
 
He was born to Nishada parents and was very rowdy in his childhood. In his teenage years, he became a thief and stole many things from people's houses. Later on in life, he indirectly caused the death of a pious kshatrani in order to get something his equally crooked wife wanted, thereby acuring the curse of the Rajkumari. Valmiki finally began to realize the gravity of his actions and wanted forgiveness from God, who he finally began to fear.
 
Saga Narada told him that to erase his sins and walk on the right path, he should chant the word "Mara" meaning "death" over and over and over for hundreds of years. Valmiki chanted "Mara" over and over, but the letters, when separated differently, creation the word "Rama" Rama" Rama" instead of "Mara" "Mara" "Mara". Even before Lord Rama was born, his naam was so powerful to wash away a person's sins, because ultimately, Rama is another name of Lord Vishnu.
 
Valmiki chanted Lord Rama's name for hundreds of years before he reached self actualization and became a Maharishi, abstaining the material concerns of a human life. Then the incident with the two Krauncha birds happened, and Lord Brahma gave him divya dhrishti to look into the entire life of Lord Rama and compose the history of the avatar of the Supreme Lord who had erased his sons.
 
It is written in the phalasruthi of Valmiki Ramayana that those who write, read, or listen to Ramayana with a pure clear mind and chant Lord Rama's name or the sacred symbol "Om" every day as Dhyaan will receive moksha.
 
I think Ram bhajans have a sentimental sad tune because the story of Ramayana itself is sentimental and sad. It is the story of ultimate sacrifice and devotion, each character aiming to surpass the other in their nobility and greatness.
 
I mean, who has brothers like Lakshman and Bharat today, or spouses like Ramji or Sitaji?Smile And who can surpass the devotion of Hanumanji?Embarrassed
Here is a Hanuman bhajan which has such a sad tune. It's so beautiful and makes you feel at peace after listening to it.Day Dreaming
 

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

DemonStar

..RamKiJanaki..

IF-Stunnerz

..RamKiJanaki..

Joined: 20 August 2008

Posts: 44061

Posted: 25 October 2009 at 5:17pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by DM01

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

No one "won" the way, regardless of what you think. The Kauravas did not "win" because they were on the side of Adharma (who in their right 'heroic' mind tries to disrobe a menstruating woman? And who sticks up for them?), and the Pandavas did not "win" because they lost every one of their relatives, and regardless of getting the throne, too much blood on both sides had been shed. How can that be called winning?


Just to address the balance here, who in their right minds gambles their own wife? I understand where you're coming with this, but what could the Pandavas do? They were greatly outnumbered (being in Hastinapur and in the territory of the Kauravas), no one supported them even after they lost themselves, Dhritarastra, despite being the Maharaja, did not stop his sons or Shakuni from continuing their "game" before it turned into a game of Adharma, he wanted to see how much more his sons would win. Even when Shakuni ordered Yushistira to gamble Draupadi, did he protest? No. Despite Bhishma, Dronacharya, and Kripacharya gasping at the turn of events, did one of them protest againt this? No. Except Vidura, the Pandavas had no support. Let's say they refused to gamble their wife and a battle broke out because they refused to obey the orders of the King (who had ordered them to gamble in the first place). Let's leave aside all this strength issue. 5 men against the entire Hastinapur royal family...who would have won? If the Pandavas had been killed, not only Draupadi, but their entire womenfolk would have been seized by the Kauravas. Instead of blaming the Pandavas, Shakuni should be blamed for playing unfairly in the first place. He cheated to win each and every game. , who in their right minds marries 5 guys?. Like Draupadi had any say in the matter. Leaving aside the whole "Mother's word should be obeyed", if Draupadi had refused to marry all five Pandavas, do you think her father would have listened? She was after all a woman in those times, so she had no choice but to marry all five Pandavas.
Also, if people do not look down on Kings with many wives, why is Draupadi so antagonized for marrying the five Pandavas? Why the double standards?
I know many people here do not agree with the reasoning behind Draupadi's marrying all five Pandavas, though Lord Krishna also supported it, so I won't go into it. 
 
Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

Whether the Pandavas were heroes or not, Duryodhana and Karna definitely were not. Krishna is the biggest Hero of Mahabharat, even if you leave aside the fact that he is the avatar of Lord Vishnu. As for comparing Karna and Krishna....Karna came up with the idea of Dushashana disrobing Draupadi despite knowing it was her "time of month" and Krishna provided her with the endless amount of sari and saved her honor. Who's the hero?

I am not denying that Karna was a great daanveer and an overall much better character than the Kauravas, but his telling Dushadhana to disrobe Draupadi greatly decreased his "hero-ness" in my eyes. Only a woman can understand the pain and humiliation Draupadi went through when she, being merely draped in a menstruation-caused soiled cloth, was dragged to the sabha where half the men looked at her with lusty eyes and her husbands offered no protection, as well as the weakling of a King himself. Leave aside the fact that she married five men. How anyone can call Karna a hero over Krishna after what he nearly caused to Draupadi surprises me.Confused
 
Well Karna was vilified, insulted and humiliated by Draupadi and Pandavas many times on the basis of his "low" birth, this was Karna's revenge. Just because someone calls you an insulting name, it gives you the right to disrobe them/their wife?Dead Like I said, only women can understand this. A fitting 'revenge' would have been to humiliate the Pandavas and Draupadi by calling them an equally insulting name, or beating them in a fight witnessed by spectators....not stripping their wife of her clothing. That's not revenge, that's being twisted minded. If Karna had not done that, he would have been a truly great character. I was surprised and disappointed when I first read of him telling Dushashan to disrobe Draupadi, because he did not seem like the type of character who'd take such a wrong "revenge". If he had won over the Pandavas' kingdom in an openly challenged combat, what could be a better revenge? He'd have proven to everyone that being Sutaputra or Kshatriya did not matter when it came to strength of arms, and everyone would have supported him.
So I still cannot understand how you call disrobing Draupadi a fitting revenge.

This castiest snobbery displayed by the Pandavas does not portray them in a good light.  Duryodhana, despite all of his flaws, accepted Karna regardless of his caste, and accepted him on the basis of his talent. Duryodhan accepted him for selfish reasons. He only saw Karna as someone who had the ability to possibly defeat Arjuna. If Karna was a weakling, Duryodhana too would have made fun of his caste, because he was that kind of person. Duryodhan did not do many good deeds like Karna, and he was known as a relentless King during the Pandavas' exile. Karna advised him against using cowardly means to dispose of the Pandavas, because cowardice never defines greatness, and a warrior's true greatness lies in directly challenging his enemy to battle. Like all other egoistic Kings, Duryodhan brushed off even his closest "friend's" advice and wanted to win over the Pandavas using cowardly means. There was nothing heroic about him. I'd consider Karna a hero long before I consider him one. I think Karna and Bhishma were the only noble people on the Kauravas' side.

Moreover, Pandavas pretty much broke all code of conduct during war to win.  This is what I like about the Mahabharata, no side is wholly good or bad, both sides did wrong.
 
Here is a "List of Rules" the two commanders of both sides wrote up before the war...I'll list who broke which rule...
 
Rules of engagement

The two supreme commanders met and framed "rules of ethical conduct", dharmayuddha, for the war. The rules included:

    Fighting must begin no earlier than sunrise and end exactly at sunset. Neither side broke this rule during the war, but Ashwathama did massacre the Pandavas army at midnight after the war and kill a lot of innocent people.  Multiple warriors may not attack a single warrior. Kauravas broke this rule when six Maharata ambushed Abhimanyu, a mere 14 year old, at the same time.  Two warriors may "duel", or engage in prolonged personal combat, only if they carry the same weapons and they are on the same mount (no mount, a horse, an elephant, or a chariot). Both sides broke this rule at least twice.  No warrior may kill or injure a warrior who has surrendered. Dhristadyumna broke this rule when he beheaded Dronacharya cruelly.Dead Even Krishna and Arjuna were disgusted by this act and condemned him along with the rest of the Pandavas.Thumbs Down  One who surrenders becomes a prisoner of war and will then be subject to the protections of a prisoner of war. No one broke this rule....because no one became prisoners if I'm not wrong.Confused  No warrior may kill or injure an unarmed warrior. Both sides broke this rule many times towards the end. No warrior may kill or injure an unconscious warrior. Dushashana's son broke this rule when he hit an unconscious Abhimanyu with his gada before the other could regain his senses after their fight.  No warrior may kill or injure a person or animal not taking part in the war. No one broke this rule...except Ashwathama during the ending massacre.  No warrior may kill or injure a warrior whose back is turned away. Karna broke this rule when aiming the shakti at Ghatotkacha (thereby killing him) and Arjuna broke this rule when Karna was trying to lift the wheal out of the Earth (thereby killing him). No warrior may attack a woman. Neither side broke this rule. No warrior may strike an animal not considered a direct threat. No side broke this rule...unless rakshasas count as animals.Confused  The rules specific to each weapon must be followed. For example, it is prohibited to strike below the waist in mace warfare. Kauravas broke this rule during Abhimanyu Vadh and Bhima broke this rule during Duryodhan vadh. 
  • Warriors may not engage in any "unfair" warfare. Lol, both sides broke this rule many times.

Most of these laws were broken at least once by both sides. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurukshetra_war

 
 
Yeah, both sides broke the rules many times, but if you remember correctly, the Kauravas made the first unethical move. Shri Krishna said that those who fight ethically, we should deal ethically with them. If someone fights unethically, we'll be beaten to pulp if we deal ethically with them. Many policemen deal with that problem today. Sometimes, they must use their guns when dealing with criminals because there'd be no other way to put them in their place.
 
I agree though that leaving aside Shri Krishna, every character was gray shaded.

..RamKiJanaki..

IF-Stunnerz

..RamKiJanaki..

Joined: 20 August 2008

Posts: 44061

Posted: 25 October 2009 at 5:17pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by return_to_hades

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

 
Have you seen BRC's Mahabharat? Yeah, I know it's old compared to the new technology of today, but it's direction I feel was perfect for the 1980s. No one can portray Lord Krishna better than Nitish Bharadwaj.


Hon, I have the entire series on DVD.
 
So do I.
 
Did you like it?
 
What other mythos do you have on DVD?

return_to_hades

IF-Veteran Member

return_to_hades

Joined: 18 January 2006

Posts: 20261

Posted: 25 October 2009 at 5:36pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

Originally posted by DM01

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_


  • Fighting must begin no earlier than sunrise and end exactly at sunset. Neither side broke this rule during the war, but Ashwathama did massacre the Pandavas army at midnight after the war and kill a lot of innocent people. 

 
 
 
I agree though that leaving aside Shri Krishna, every character was gray shaded.


Didn't Drona actually break the sunrise sunset rule when he started the battle at midnight. The battle where Karna killed Ghatotkacha.

Personally even Krishna had grey shades, like where he encourages Yudhishter for the one lie or asks Bheema to hit Duryodhana in the thigh during the gada yudh. Of course he had his moral rationale in doing so. But the actions were morally questionable too.

I found Vidura to be the only mostly good character in the series with least flaws.



Edited by return_to_hades - 25 October 2009 at 5:38pm

return_to_hades

IF-Veteran Member

return_to_hades

Joined: 18 January 2006

Posts: 20261

Posted: 25 October 2009 at 5:39pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_




 
So do I.
 
Did you like it?
 
What other mythos do you have on DVD?


Oh man its like old school glory. Of course I loved it. As kids we used to reenact all the battle field scenes. Those flashing arrows that glowed green and turned into snakes and ropes and stuff. Smile

I also have the Shree Krishna series (but its bootleg though)



Edited by return_to_hades - 25 October 2009 at 5:40pm

Post Reply New Post

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Topic Starter Replies Views Last Post
^DEBATE MANSION SLAM BOOK^

2 3 4 5 6

BilliCat. 46 6766 23 December 2011 at 7:23am
By .DontKnow.
The Spirit of Debate Mansion

2

return_to_hades 14 9076 01 January 2010 at 3:09pm
By Jess.
The place to debate?

2 3 4

-Sneha 28 1930 07 December 2009 at 6:44am
By -Sneha
internet debate tactics?

2 3 4

jettythegod 24 4268 27 September 2009 at 7:50pm
By return_to_hades
Anyone watched tonight's debate of Obama Perfangel5655 1 386 08 October 2008 at 10:46am
By raj5000

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category

Active Forums

Debate Mansion Topic Index

Limit search to this Forum only.

 

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.