\|/Doubts & Discussions about Lord Shiva Part-1\|/ - Page 87

I personally think this "impure" and "ayogya" concept that DKDM harps on is basically a Christian construct - the concept of "original sin" that even a newborn baby is born with and must be rid of by christening, baptism etc etc. 

Originally posted by: pnars

I personally think this "impure" and "ayogya" concept that DKDM harps on is basically a Christian construct - the concept of "original sin" that even a newborn baby is born with and must be rid of by christening, baptism etc etc. 

I don't really think this exists in Hindu philosophy..if yes, please correc t me.

In Hinduism, Impure and ayogya doesn't mean  concept of original sin which is a christian concept.

I do not know about 16 impurities but i can say that ayogya concept is related to worldly attachments
and passions which arise out of it actually these are six called arishadvargas

kama — lust, craze, desire
krodha — anger, hatred
lobha — greed, miserliness, narrow minded
moha — delusory emotional attachment
mada or ahankara — pride, stubborn mindedness
matsarya — envy, jealousy, show or vanity, and pride

as long as these exist one cannot perceive the divine nature of the soul, as these act as smoke screen and draw us further into karma cycle and increasing our involvement in the material world.
which further weans you away from supreme conciousness.

regards
Krishna

Originally posted by: pnars

I personally think this "impure" and "ayogya" concept that DKDM harps on is basically a Christian construct - the concept of "original sin" that even a newborn baby is born with and must be rid of by christening, baptism etc etc. 

I don't really think this exists in Hindu philosophy..if yes, please correc t me.

I had the same thoughts too but didn't want to compare. Since its come up, I'll just graze the subject 😉

I'm not trying to compare here but just putting down what I know.

In Hindu Scriptures, birth and life is a blessing and not considered a sin. It is considered a sin to not to have lived life fully. Our forefathers will suffer (if in heaven, they will probably sent to hell - from what I understand) if we do not produce offspring to continue the family legacy. Though it is not laid down as a rule, it is said that to take up Sanyaasa, a person should have married, had kids, enjoyed life and then feel it is all enough, give up, get ready to leave the world and spend the rest of his days chanting the name of God (using 'his' here because it is described for men. For women, it is expected that she lives under the protection of her husband till he exists and then under the care of her son - I think this came up from Manu's time, not sure though. Sometimes, it is said that a wife can leave with her husband when he takes up Sanyaasa). This way of life exists to make a person go through all what life has to give and to teach him that nothing lasts forever. A person, at one stage, should be content and be ready to give up all pleasures by himself/herself and not because of death. It was considered true strength to say enough after enjoying life and not be greedy to live the same way till the end of his days.

Is there any story about how a person becomes Indra. What's his eligibality criteria?