Hinduism - Good Karma and Bad Karma
  • On lighter note. Sharon Stone said "Bad Karma" is the reason for
    China's Earth Quake.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7423089.stm
  • very true. But after loosing the dice game the agreement is that after
    14 years the land will be returned to the pandavas. Did that happen?

    For the amount of bloodshed and the gory war - I happened to talk with
    Mr.TKS Rajan once on this. Thanks to SPS, he introduced me to Mr.Rajan
    and got a chance to meet him a couple of times, and once in SPS's
    office I had a very interesting discussion with Mr.Rajan on Krishna,
    Mahabaratha etc. Mr Rajan has done detailed research on Krishna and
    Mahabaratha and his knowledge is amazing. He is closely linked with
    Media and I think he is with Makkal tv now.

    He said - basically it can be viewed as a population control method.
    The population at that time was enormous. if we calculate the count of
    the akshouni (correcta?) sena that participated in the war, the count
    is mind boggling. The soldiers alone might outwit the current
    population of india.

    And moreover, every stalwarts, had their destructive weapons- Karna
    with Brhamasthiram, Sakthi etc. Arjuna had Pasupathasthram the most
    destructive etc. etc. Today we evens deduce that those could be nukes.
    So think of a world with everyone having their own nuke and grumbling
    for vengeance? Krishna did try hard to avoid the war but it was
    Dhuryodhana who insisted on war.
  • Hi Satish, yes the land was not returned, but again does that warranty such a bloody war? Yes the count is mind boggling but are we looking at same numbers as our present numeric system? The Ramayana for example says Dasaratha ruled 16,000 years, is it humanly possible? And there is little/no evidence that there was population explosion. In fact both Yudhistir and Duryodhana supposedly ruled over very prosperous kingdoms.
     
    There is another way of looking at this whole thing - from Duryodhana's perspective. My grandmother said there used to be several street plays and folk narratives of the Mahabharat from various perspective that disappeard over time. One of them is like this - Duryodhana was not legally obligated to share any part of his kingdom with the pandavas, since they were not his bi were partial to the pandavas since Pandu died young and the five children were very accomplished. That instigated anger in Duryodhana who in turn grew up to be a vengeful, resentful prince and refuses to see the Pandavas as his equals.
     
    As far as Krishna not wanting the war, Krishna was the chess player in the whole game who moved the dice at will, not a blind follower of what each person did ? That is exactly what Gandhari asks him before cursing him and his tribe. You could have stopped it if you willed so. Why did he not will so?  Perhaps we will never know the answers.
     
    I have attended numerous discourses and talks on the Mahabharat. The late Pulavar Keeran was just amazing. I love the story very much so, am also aware of its pitfalls, [particularly with an increasingly aware generation of youngsters. (My 11 year old niece asked me a question - if Kamsa did not want his sister to have the 8th child why did he not put her and her husband in separate jails. :)). In our time and age kids did not think that way at all.)
     
    I narrate the Mahabharat as a collection of short stories. It makes huge sense that way. Not as one long story with pandavas as heroes and kauravas as villians. It does not add up to that and it probably was a lot of differnt stories collected over time.  And the puranas have little/no connection with vedic ways of living or clear cut definitions of karma.
     
    Malathi
     
  • Sundar, why would Yudhistir be punished for killing Drona? Yudhistir was a very truthful man who refuses to lie that Ashwattama died, even at Krishna's instigation. So Bhima kills an elephant named Aswattama and asks Yudhistir to announce 'Ashwattama hatha kunjaraha' - Krishna resourcefully sounds his conch at the word 'hatha' (elephant) so poor Drona hears 'Aswattama Kunjaraha' , thinks it is his son who died and renounces his arms . It is deceit at its diplomatic best. If anyone has to be punished it is Bhima perhaps not Yudhisthir.
     
     
    Ashwattama is furious that his father was killed in this fashion and plots the tent fire. Yes it is an eye for an eye, what else does war instigate?
     
    Malathi
  • Hi Malalthi
    Yudhishtra was punished because he was knowingly part that plot.When Drona's hears about Aswathamma's death, he wanted that to confirm only with Yudishtra becuase he would not go against Dharma. Having anticipated this, Krishna plooted this way and Yudhistra when saying 'hatha' lowered his voice and the sound of the conch drowned it. Yudhishtra's chariot which always remain an inch or so above the ground, becuase of his virtues, touched the ground on that moment of deceit.
  • Sundar, I had forgotten that part about the chariot touching the ground!! Thanks really for refreshing. I don't agree with the punishment in principle, one of the other pandavas would have done it if Yudhistir refused, in general the person who instigates a crime is more at fault than one who commits it (I can understand Sri Krishna genuinely testing someone if or not he is a liar but that wasn't the case here so it does not make sense that is all).
     
    Malathi
  • Malathi
    The point is Drona didnt believe when Bhima and others celebrates the killing of 'Ashwattama' as he knows that his son is a Chiranjeevi. Drona doesnt confim this with even Krishna for whom has high regards. The confirmation has to come from a person of highest integrity and none was there except Yudhistira. Even though Krishna was the soothradhari, Yudhistra cannot escape his responsibility for being part of the plot with full conscience.
  • I agree with you, thanks.
  • Dear All,

    Before I write some thing about this episode, can I humbly request
    all of you to come out with your thoughts and expectations of how
    you visualise your God to be. I mean the character (GuNas) and not
    whether He needs to sport, Sanku, Chakram, Mazhu, vAL, Golden
    Kreetam, etc.

    After your answers I will write more.

    Caveat: I am definitely not an authority on the subject. But would
    just like to know the feelings first hand, before I write anything.
  • Dear Friends,

    we can follow some guideline. Let me attempt a suggestion ::

    Like Vaaram oru Aalayam,

    certain discussions can be serialised ..

    Thevaram :: 001, 002, 003,,,,
    Divyaprabandam .. 001, 002, 003 ...

    like wise this KARMA discussion or similar ones...

    as our members normally post nice links on these discussions, we can
    also get such links ..

    Karma + Mahabaratha + Krishna getting mixed up.

    See whether we can keep them separated..

    And in the whole excercise, we also forget the New members - who
    joined our Group thinking we are discussing ponniyinselvan ...

    Definitely atleast one thread need to be maintained on PS story
    line ..

    Whether we can put Volume I, Chapter 1 as 101, Chapter 2 as 102,
    without involving copyright issues..

    pls help.

    sps
  • Dear Sathish,

    Very valid questions. Just my two cents worth regarding the reason,
    why Mahabali, inspite of being flawlessly virtuous, was pushed
    underground by Vishnu. This is a slightly confusing concept. We need
    to see this carefully.

    Caveat: The reasoning that I am giving is based on the philosophy of
    Thenkalai Sriaishnavites. I am not imposing my answer on others.
    Just an explanation based on one of the various perspectives of the
    same happening.

    According to the Thenkalai Srivaishnavites, it is considered that
    all the actions are done by God Himself. Well, placing our beliefs
    on Karma theory, it will be difficult for many of us to accept this.
    I was thinking in the same vein, until, I found a logic in it. (In
    fact I had asked that question to all as to how do you expect your
    God to be is with this logic in mind. So details of the logic,
    later)

    Nammazhwar says,
    1. OtthAr mikkArai ilayAya mA mAyan.
    2. eedum eduppum il Isan

    and many more such verses confirming that there is none equal to or
    above Him. Now who can question someone for an action. Only if that
    person is either equal or superior to the person being questioned.
    Isnt it? In this case as it is clear that there is none above Him,
    then who can question his acts? This aspect is called
    the "Parathvam" (meaning : being Supreme to everything and everyone).
  • Hi,

    > Before I write some thing about this episode, can I humbly request
    > all of you to come out with your thoughts and expectations of how
    > you visualise your God to be. I mean the character (GuNas) and not
    > whether He needs to sport, Sanku, Chakram, Mazhu, vAL, Golden
    > Kreetam, etc.

    Once, when I was conversing with my sister regarding a topic similar
    to this, she made this statement, "Visualizing God in Human form is
    the highest form of Human arrogance". It really made sense to me.

    regrds,
    siva.

    >
    > After your answers I will write more.
    >
    > Caveat: I am definitely not an authority on the subject. But would
    > just like to know the feelings first hand, before I write anything.
    >
    > Regards,
    > Venkatesh
    >
    > --- In [email protected], Malathi Mahadevan
  • Dear Sivaraman,

    So what would that mean? I mean, what is the better way of
    visualising God according to your sister? Answer to this would make
    the discussion more interesting.
  • Dear Vijay,

    I think they are "Saptha Chiranjeevis" and not eight. In the list, I
    am not sure about Kripacharya.

    May be others can throw some light and correct me.
  • Sivaraman,

    In my view that (Visualizing GOD in the form I want to) is the greatness of
    Hindu religion. I am not against any religion but for me visualising GOD as
    FATHER / SON / HOLY GHOST is not possible. But I can see him / visualize him
    in what ever form I want. Be it Macha / Koorma / Narasimha / Vamana / Rama /
    Balarama / Kali / Durga. That kind of flexibility you don't have in any
    religion except Hindu religion.
  • , "Visualizing God in Human form is
    > the highest form of Human arrogance". It really made sense to me.
    >
    > regrds,
    > siva.
    >

    hi siva

    it would have been if she had said.....

    "Visualizing God in Human form is
    > the highest form of Human ignorance".

    see dieties, temples are all there to help the uninitiated to focus
    and concentrate their energies ....its not easy to understand omni
    present.....adhi andam concept...so its only a tool....like a nada
    vandi for a baby...helps u learn to walk....and once u do that you
    go on to realise the larger concepts...( run)...sadly we are still
    left with the crutches or as toddlers

    vj
  • Excellent, V Venkatesh, it's good to have an expert explaining the concept in such a lucid way. If only I may add a couple of points here (I know this thread has moved far away from where it started, but I couldn't resist the temptation):

    Mahabali was the grandson of the great Prahlada. In His Nrisimha Avatar, the Lord blesses not only the Emperor-among-Bhakthas, viz Prahlada, but his successors for seven generations, and promises not to kill any of them.

    In fact, there is an interesting event during the Vaamana-Trivikrama avatar: Mahabali's son Namuchi confronts the Lord, asking him how He could deceive Mahabali, taking the form of a small, short kid while seeking three steps of land, and growing to occupy the three worlds (and more) while measuring what was offered. Trivikrama simply throws Namuchi into the sky; and he is considered to be revolving around the universe even today! Periazhwar, praises the Lord thus:

    ennidhu mAyam? ennappan aRindhilan
    munnaiya vaNNamE koNDu aLavAyenna
    mannu namuchiyai vAnil suzhatRiya
    minnu mudiyanE! acchO acchO
    vEnkatavANanE! acchO acchO

    Periyazhwar's paasurams are.... words fail me - they are to be experienced, and they take you oh-so-close to Balakrishna Himself.
  • Excellent, V Venkatesh, it's good to have an expert explaining the concept in such a lucid way. If only I may add a couple of points here (I know this thread has moved far away from where it started, but I couldn't resist the temptation):

    Mahabali was the grandson of the great Prahlada. In His Nrisimha Avatar, the Lord blesses not only the Emperor-among-Bhakthas, viz Prahlada, but his successors for seven generations, and promises not to kill any of them.

    In fact, there is an interesting event during the Vaamana-Trivikrama avatar: Mahabali's son Namuchi confronts the Lord, asking him how He could deceive Mahabali, taking the form of a small, short kid while seeking three steps of land, and growing to occupy the three worlds (and more) while measuring what was offered. Trivikrama simply throws Namuchi into the sky; and he is considered to be revolving around the universe even today! Periazhwar, praises the Lord thus:

    ennidhu mAyam? ennappan aRindhilan
    munnaiya vaNNamE koNDu aLavAyenna
    mannu namuchiyai vAnil suzhatRiya
    minnu mudiyanE! acchO acchO
    vEnkatavANanE! acchO acchO

    Periyazhwar's paasurams are.... words fail me - they are to be experienced, and they take you oh-so-close to Balakrishna Himself.
  • I apologize if I had offended someone with the statement.

    My sister's point was, thinking human form as the highest form of
    evolution, when describing the supreme being, humans made god a look
    alike of human form.
  • >
    > In fact, there is an interesting event during the Vaamana-
    Trivikrama avatar: Mahabali's son Namuchi confronts the Lord, asking
    him how He could deceive Mahabali, taking the form of a small, short
    kid while seeking three steps of land, and growing to occupy the
    three worlds (and more) while measuring what was offered. Trivikrama
    simply throws Namuchi into the sky; and he is considered to be
    revolving around the universe even today!


    hi ravi

    thats a very interesting story- have u seen the trivikrama
    sculptures in mallai, badami...they show a young boy kneeling at the
    feel of the lord ( in mallai its to the lord's right feet)...i have
    been searching for who it is....there is also someone shown as
    falling from the sky ( ok, brahma is shown as worshipping the
    ulifted feet)...just below it you can see someone falling upside
    down....some say its trisangu...the lord lifting his feet to the
    heavens and trisangu is midway...you can actually see the sun and
    moon also depicted half way.....mallai tour members ensure you see
    this....

    incidentally in the mahinshasuramardhini panel - also there is
    someone shown falling half way ( just under devi's lion)

    there is also a very fit women warrior fighting along with the devi
    ( she has 8 bootha ganas apart from that assisting here)...look at
    her six pack abdomen...man what cuts...anyone can help to identify
    these players...

    hv uploaded the pics in the photos section
  • Not sure. But he could have died afterwards.

    Anyway, I just indicated it doubtfully and asked others to correct
    me. Waiting for it. I could be wrong still.
  • Well said Vijay,

    I am still waiting for Sivaraman's answer to write on this aspect,
    whatever little I know.
  • Dear Venkatesh,

    Possibly Sivaraman's sister is a true-advaitin - "Neeyum brahmam, naanum brahmam. God (that is Parabrahmam) has no form, no attributes, no shape, no colour, no traits, no qualities or qualifiables..... "

    I am reminded of Azhwarkadiyan: "brahmathai brahmam thirucchAthu sAtthappOgirathu... ennai nAnE thadi koNdu thAkkappOgirEn!"
  • Dear Vijay,

    Hadn't noticed that small boy! Could he be Namuchi? Would anyway look forward to an expert's opinion....
  • > photos are under the album mallai doubts. in the trivikrama panel u
    > can also see a boar beating the drum just to the right of brahma (
    > who is left of the raised leg)...Jambavaan??

    It must be Jambavan. After the Trivikrama avatar, Jambavan is said to have circled the world many times, singing the praise of the Lord..... Expert opinion, please....
  • Wow Ravi,

    That was a wonderful quote. Thank you.
  • I think the sloka went like this: Aswattama Bali Vyasa Hanumanasya
    Vibhishinaha; Kripa Parsasurama Satyo Chiranjivinaha. I am not sure
    'satyaha' means verily or another peron.

    Sampath
  • Dear Sivaraman,

    Please do not be apologetic. If you thought I got offended, I am
    definitely not. I respect others views very much. The reason I asked
    you the below question is different. Well, without making you wait
    let me say what I wanted to say.

    There is absolutely nothing wrong in visualising the god in any form
    that one wishes. This is clearly stated by Poigai Azhwar. Am sure
    there would be enough references with Nayanmars too.

    The pAsuram goes like this (I had already quoted this some time back)

    thamar ugandhadhu evvuruvam, avvuruvam thanE
    thamar ugandhadhu eppER maRRappEr - thamar ugandhu
    evvaNNam imayAdhu sindhitthu irupparE
    avvaNNam AzhiyAnAm.

    Needless to explain this simple Thamizh, but for those who may not
    know Thamizh, Azhwar says that, In whatever form one visualises Him,
    He presents Himself in that form. In whatever name one calls Him, He
    accepts that name. Whichever form, the devotee gets attracted into,
    He takes that form.

    So with that, there is absolutely nothing wrong in visualising Him
    as a human.

    But Vijay added wonderfully to it. Visualising as a Human is just
    one thing. Only that, in the process, do not forget that He is the
    Supreme Being and hence do not expect Him behave like some (sorry to
    say this, but) stupid human.

    NammAzhwAr says.....

    paRRudai adiyavarkku eLiyavan, piRargaLukku ariya vitthagan.

    Yes He is so simple for those who are devoted to Him. And
    this "paRRu" is not just devotion. Some thing more than that. It is
    called "maha visvAsam". Yes surrendering to Him, with maha visvAsam
    is the meaning for this "paRRu".

    So.... what I intended to say was that there is absolutely nothing
    wrong in visualising Him in any form.

    Forget human form. We do have stories of where either Thukkaram or
    Bhadrachalam Ramadass, saw Rama in the form of a Dog and ran behind
    it, because it took away the Chappathi without taking the side dish.

    Is this not the height of devotion? "uNNum sORu, thinnum veRRilai,
    parugum nEEr, ellAm kaNNan" as said by Nammazhwar. And when one says
    that the God pervades everything in the Universe is there anything
    inferior for Him. May be, being humans, we can have differences by
    way of inferior and superior. Definitely not for God, who has
    created everything. There is nothing inferior or superior for Him.
  • Vijay,

    I was just thinking of this after I read that post from Ravi. I just
    went back to the discussions that we had on this.

    Seems to me now that it could be Namuchi. Honestly I had completely
    forgotten about this character until Ravi presented.

    Thanks Ravi for throwing light on this.
  • Dear Vijay,

    If I remember right, Kripacharya is the Mama of Aswatthama. Am I
    correct?
  • Dear Sampath,

    But Markandeya is definitely considered a Chiranjeevi.

    So... looks like only my count is wrong, considering the sloka
    indicated by you. As for "sathyaha" as it could not be Markandeya,
    it should only mean "Verily".
  • Yes, that means, for once, I correct, the first time.

    appa........
  • HI

    while on the sub ject of mahabaratha

    another question from the landmark quiz on aug 15th


    krishna's preaching of the githa was heard directly by 2 others
    ( other than arjuna) who?


    venketesh
  • 1. Hanuman who is on the flag of Arjuna ...
  • A wild guess. Are they the two horses? :-) :-)
  • I think Vidhurar (dhuriyodhanan's chithappa) and the second one i dnt know.
  • > >
    > >
    > > krishna's preaching of the githa was heard directly by 2 others
    > > ( other than arjuna) who?
    > >
    > >
    > > venketesh

    hi venketesh

    good one...one is hanuman on the top flag and the second via satellite
    link...sanjaya ( every verse of the gita
    starts .....kim ...dridhrastra questioning sanjaya and sanjaya
    uvacha...sanjaya says....)
  • Dhirudhatran and Sanjayan.It was a direct telecast.If I am not wrong
  • ok ok my turn now

    how many times in the mahabaratha ...does krishna show his viswaroobam
  • Dhiruthirastha and Sanjaya
    As Sanjaya was given the sight to visualise and recount to Dhiruthirasta by Krishna
    Sri
  • 1. Hanuman who is in Arjuna's flag which flies on top of his chariot
    2. The person who sees Kurushetra for Dirudirastran (I dont know his name)

    ~ Udanx

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Top Posters