• Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Bhakti as a concept in Hinduism is foreign influence.

KRN said:


Not necessary at this point. You had stated that it is hard for you to believe that Sankara was talking in terms of individual Gods like Krishna and Siva etc, hard to believe that Sankara was talking about miracles like Vishwaroopam that nevertheless appear in the Bhagavad Gita. The surest way to confirm what Sankara wrote, is to peruse some of the books authored by him, specifically the Sankara Bhashyam to the Bhagavad Gita, either in Sanskrit or in translation. That was what I suggested. The Sankara Bhashyam is readily available for purchase. But it seems you don't want to take all that trouble until retirement, nor trust my words, and rather prefer to wait for what some 'experts' say. Fine then, if you can get them to visit this forum, let us see what your 'experts' have to say about these 'hard to believe' statements, so I will wait for that.
Click to expand...

Oh come on - you issued a debating challenge earlier. I asked you for details and specifics not just for me but for the benefit of all the readers.
The issue raised is about your interpretation and understanding. My take is that your interpretation is wrong. I do not know enough to go and debate but I will get a suitable response in all fairness to support my intuition. Many serious practitioners will never become members of any forum.

This forum has made me read up more in the last few years in these topics. I am getting convinced that lot of what is written here is mostly wrong.
I am not saying anything about your posts because I have not read them until now. So I want to know if you can support your conclusions with concrete citations and understanding.

Asking me to read a book is like saying 'you know English' - read the paper of Einstein and you will know directly for yourself. That will be absurd.
Asking genuine and serious practitioners is wise.

Please provide actual citations and your point. You asked for others wanting to debate you to provide this. Please do not cop out !

I am sincere to reach out to people I know. I wish Mr tks would get engaged and share his perspectives, I may PM him as well
 
renuka said:
Recently someone asked me how do I feel when I pray...do I feel a connectivity?

I told the person..well right now I dont pray but if I were to enter a temple or hear a bhajan now I dont feel anything.

The person asked me.." dont you feel that you are a child and God is either a mother or father?"

I said " i have parents..i dont need another set"

The person then asked again.." ok ok..do you take God as a friend at least..you mean to say you dont know Bhakti?"

Then the persons questions made me realize something...
" I said..hey guess what..I am the ultimate Bhaktiman becos your questions made me realize that I allow God to be God..I dont expect God to conform to my desires..I dont expect God to be a Father or Mother or Mama or Machans.

I just let God be God..OMG..i have more Bhakti than you"

The person was quiet!
Click to expand...

:llama:
 
KRN said:
  • Then, from where did you get your "facts" that Krishna left Gokul at age 14, and never returned there afterwards, based on which you conclude that the rasalila is a poetical imagination? Do you think that is fact, or fiction?
Click to expand...


Raslila is a beautiful metaphor, The hankering of Atma to join with Paramatma. That has been degraded to a sex dance.
I do not believe in the history of Krishna as a human being. I believe Krishna as a realized soul.
 
prasad1 said:
Your smugness is obvious.

Have you seen the definition of the word scripture?


  • Scripture : the books of either the Old Testament or the New Testament or of both : the Bible
  • scriptures : the sacred writings of a religion

    Is there any difference between scripture and Fiction?

    If scripture was what the LORD stated, then there should not be any contradictions.
    All scriptures must say the same thing.
    How come Ramayana by Tulsidas differs from Ramayana by Valmiki.

    It is because it is a story narrated by different people.
As I stated before there is no honest History in any of the "SCRIPTURES". They are parables at best.

But you have hijacked the thread from Bhakti to History.
Click to expand...


Sangom ji wrote

I recall having read somewhere that the cannibalistic, jungle tribes of New Guinea (this is from my memory only) still hold as sacred an airstrip built during the WW II by RAF in the jungles (to avoid detection by enemy planes). These primitive people thought that "gods" had come down to earth in their holy chariots and then ascended to heaven again; they are sure the "gods" will come again and so they should not do anything to tamper with that holy spot which will be used by their "gods" for the next "descent"! Our present attitude to our scriptures is very similar to this, I think.
Click to expand...

https://www.tamilbrahmins.com/showthread.php?t=4970&p=60672#post60672
 
a-TB said:
Oh come on - you issued a debating challenge earlier. I asked you for details and specifics not just for me but for the benefit of all the readers.
..................
Asking me to read a book is like saying 'you know English' - read the paper of Einstein and you will know directly for yourself. That will be absurd.
Click to expand...

What is absurd in it? You say reading a book like Gita Bhashyam is, to you, similar to reading a paper of Einstein, and then ask me to provide citations from the same book. For what purpose? If you are at a level where you won't able to make sense out of the book, then why should I bother?

My challenge is very clear. It was to anyone who can provide references from the Sankara Bhashyam, in original or translation, that will refute the statements I made. Yes, that is a debating challenge, and assumes some awareness of the Gita Bhashyam on the part of the respondent. Someone who has gone through the text, and able to make sense out of the book, ie enough sense to either accept my statements or to come forward with references, refuting them. I hoped that was very clear.

I asked you for details and specifics not just for me but for the benefit of all the readers.
Click to expand...

O come on. I too issued my challenge to 'all the readers'. I see there are a huge number of readers in this forum. Some would have gone through the Gita Bhashyam, at least once. Are you assuming that just coz the Gita Bhashyam seems like a paper of Einstein to you, it will be the same for 'all the readers'? Let each member speak for himself/herself.

The issue raised is about your interpretation and understanding. My take is that your interpretation is wrong.
.................
I am not saying anything about your posts because I have not read them until now. So I want to know if you can support your conclusions with concrete citations and understanding.
Click to expand...

Are you saying, you have not read my posts, and yet you take it that my 'interpretation' is wrong?

You said you know some experts. My respects to them. I have not made the challenge to denigrate any experts or any other member of this forum, but to correct some misconceptions.

Please do not cop out !
I am sincere to reach out to people I know. I wish Mr tks would get engaged and share his perspectives, I may PM him as well
Click to expand...

Who are you kidding? I stand on the truth and am not afraid of anyone.

Please go ahead and ask each and every 'expert' you know of. But please please, not someone, to whom the Gita Bhashyam is like a paper of Einstein, or who wants to start reading the book after retirement. Because, I don't like wasting my time. I prefer a debate with someone who knows what he is talking about.
 
Last edited:
For the benefit of readers who are students of the Gita.

Here I have uploaded the first page of the Gita Bhashyam, as published by Gita Press, Gorakhpur. On the left, you can see the Bhashyam in Sanskrit original, and on the right you can see the translation in Hindi.

Right at the very beginning, in the Upodghata bhashyam, Adi Sankara starts with a slokam in praise of lord Naarayana. This slokam is not part of the Bhagavad Gita proper, which, start with 'Dharmakshetre kurukshetre'. This slokam is a creation of Sankaracharya.
 

Attachments

  • 20180517_163233.jpg
    20180517_163233.jpg
    192.2 KB · Views: 131
Last edited:
Now let us move over to the second page, that I have uploaded here.

Here is the citation asked for. These two pages of the Upodghata-sambandha bhashyam right at the beginning of the Sankara Bhashyam to the Gita, reveal to us what Sankara thinks about that Aadikarta Naraayanakhyo Vishnu, who was born as Krishna, the son of Devaki and Vasudeva. This should be enough to shut the mouth of some ppl here.

There are many more slokas occurring throughout the Gita, that can be cited.
 

Attachments

  • 20180517_163243.jpg
    20180517_163243.jpg
    195.7 KB · Views: 131
Last edited:
a-TB said:
No issues with what you have clarified. Bhakthi of Sankaracharya is NOT the same as practiced widely in Hinduism today. I think what is practiced today is largely superstition.
Click to expand...

What do you really mean by "Bhakthi of Sankaracharya"? How is it different from the Bhakti practised in Hinduism today. Pls explain.
 
Last edited:
a-TB said:
I did not say anything about practice of Yoga or if a Yogi is capable of even stopping his heart beat for a small time or be able to hold his breath for minutes.
Click to expand...

Guess you forgot how this particular discussion point arose. I stated that Adi Sankaracharya accepted lord Krishna's Vishwaroopam darshanam, as a true incident in the battlefield, though it might appear a miracle to many. The Bhagavad Gita mentions this as a Yogic performance of the Maha Yogeshwara Krishna (slokas 11.4, 11.9). I mentioned this, and stated that yoga sastra as well as advanced Yogic practitioners claim to have the ability to perform such stuff that might appear a miracle to commoners. Then you took it off on a tangent to Sathya Sai baba. Now whether to concur with the Yogis or not, is upto you. I suggested that a comprehensive scientific study on the various aspects of Yoga sastra be conducted, and the conclusions published. I am not aware whether it has been done until now. But till then, it's best to suspend disbelief. However, to each his own belief system. So if you disbelieve the entire Yoga sampradaya, or even the Bhagavad Gita with it's Vishwaroopa Darsanam, that's upto you.
 
Last edited:
Now here's a sloka in which Sankaracharya didn't stop at commenting on the Gita sloka, but goes ahead into the Mahabharata itself, and makes some statements allowing us a peep into what Acharya thought about that story :)

Students of the Gita can check for themselves, as to which one of my statements listed for debate, is confirmed by this sloka.
 

Attachments

  • 20180517_164434.jpg
    20180517_164434.jpg
    173.3 KB · Views: 121
Last edited:
Now here's another interesting sloka in which Acharya doesn't merely stop at commenting on the sloka, but goes beyond, into the Mahabharata story, which he accepts as true, and makes an interesting speculation that has escaped a lot other commentators of the Gita :)
 

Attachments

  • 20180517_163810.jpg
    20180517_163810.jpg
    148.7 KB · Views: 121
Last edited:
Last edited:
raslila is a beautiful metaphor. The hankering of atma to join parmatma. That has been degraded to a sex dance
Click to expand...

why anything about sex is "degrading"..?
sex is beautiful. Not at all bad. Depraved makes it bad.
Just a brief digression from the main topic.
 
KRN said:
What is absurd in it? You say reading a book like Gita Bhashyam is, to you, similar to reading a paper of Einstein, and then ask me to provide citations from the same book. For what purpose? If you are at a level where you won't able to make sense out of the book, then why should I bother?

My challenge is very clear. It was to anyone who can provide references from the Sankara Bhashyam, in original or translation, that will refute the statements I made. Yes, that is a debating challenge, and assumes some awareness of the Gita Bhashyam on the part of the respondent. Someone who has gone through the text, and able to make sense out of the book, ie enough sense to either accept my statements or to come forward with references, refuting them. I hoped that was very clear.



O come on. I too issued my challenge to 'all the readers'. I see there are a huge number of readers in this forum. Some would have gone through the Gita Bhashyam, at least once. Are you assuming that just coz the Gita Bhashyam seems like a paper of Einstein to you, it will be the same for 'all the readers'? Let each member speak for himself/herself.



Are you saying, you have not read my posts, and yet you take it that my 'interpretation' is wrong?

You said you know some experts. My respects to them. I have not made the challenge to denigrate any experts or any other member of this forum, but to correct some misconceptions.



Who are you kidding? I stand on the truth and am not afraid of anyone.

Please go ahead and ask each and every 'expert' you know of. But please please, not someone, to whom the Gita Bhashyam is like a paper of Einstein, or who wants to start reading the book after retirement. Because, I don't like wasting my time. I prefer a debate with someone who knows what he is talking about.
Click to expand...

I already explained , worth repeating.

If you put forth a point then you must provide references and citations in a clearly understandable way. Then make your case. If you say there is a white elephant in another planet and humans with tails fly there, you cannot say -"OK, I have stated my views, anyone wanting to refute must provide proof. I am ready to debate " That will be absurd.

If you dont want to cite, explain and make your case, that is fine. Throwing some photos of pages and that too in Hindi is not useful for me or for many people.

I have not read your previous posts because you became active very recently. I have no opinion about you other than what I read here. I only see in this thread a lot of buzz words, internal inconsistencies in claims and refusal to present a cogent case for your thesis.

If you want to debate you should present your case as if anyone expert or otherwise can comment. I was only telling you that your time spent in making your case will not go waste because I can get independent validation of your claims. You dont have to accept this challenge
 
KRN said:
What do you really mean by "Bhakthi of Sankaracharya"? How is it different from the Bhakti practised in Hinduism today. Pls explain.
Click to expand...

Today Bhakthi means (there are exceptions I am sure)

---- There is a god out there listening to all the pleas and act on it. So I want this, I want that - so I do this puja, I do this offering from my loots and God give me what I want

-----Or Oh god I am worried, listen to my plight and do something .. I get emotional and say I surrender.. Then I get up and insult people on my way out

---- Or God is a concept in my mind I discovered one day while I was a communist. I have since then fallen in love with this idol. I love HIm and he takes care of me. While saying this I have the most prejudicial view of others feeling superior about my own birth/genes


-----Or do all kinds of superstitious things in the name of God due to fear, give money and share money earned in a corrupt manner at a temple. It is all about transactions with God

I think Shankaracharya would not subscribe to this as Bhakthi.
 
KRN said:
Guess you forgot how this particular discussion point arose. I stated that Adi Sankaracharya accepted lord Krishna's Vishwaroopam darshanam, as a true incident in the battlefield, though it might appear a miracle to many. The Bhagavad Gita mentions this as a Yogic performance of the Maha Yogeshwara Krishna (slokas 11.4, 11.9). I mentioned this, and stated that yoga sastra as well as advanced Yogic practitioners claim to have the ability to perform such stuff that might appear a miracle to commoners. Then you took it off on a tangent to Sathya Sai baba. Now whether to concur with the Yogis or not, is upto you. I suggested that a comprehensive scientific study on the various aspects of Yoga sastra be conducted, and the conclusions published. I am not aware whether it has been done until now. But till then, it's best to suspend disbelief. However, to each his own belief system. So if you disbelieve the entire Yoga sampradaya, or even the Bhagavad Gita with it's Vishwaroopa Darsanam, that's upto you.
Click to expand...

Please prove conclusively that Shankaracharya 'accepted Krishna's Vishwaroopam' as a REAL event that actually happened. Please use his commentary and your English translation and explanation to make this case. I also asked you to specifically describe what it means to go beyond limitations of body etc. Could you please read that post and respond. Thanks
 
KRN said:
Thank you Sir. I do have a copy of the Gita bhashyam, but thought I will have more fun by waiting for one more day before starting with the citations :)
Click to expand...

I hope the pictures of pages your posted are not the citations. I was hoping for actual commentary in Sanskrit, your translation and your interpretations. If that is not coming it is a let down I am afraid
 
Vaagmi said:
why anything about sex is "degrading"..?
sex is beautiful. Not at all bad. Depraved makes it bad.
Just a brief digression from the main topic.
Click to expand...

Sex of one man with many women is beautiful? Rasalila is about one Krishna and many Gopis? Not seeing this as anything degrading. I would love to be like Sri Krishna too
 
a-TB said:
I already explained , worth repeating.

If you put forth a point then you must provide references and citations in a clearly understandable way. Then make your case. If you say there is a white elephant in another planet and humans with tails fly there, you cannot say -"OK, I have stated my views, anyone wanting to refute must provide proof. I am ready to debate " That will be absurd.

If you dont want to cite, explain and make your case, that is fine. Throwing some photos of pages and that too in Hindi is not useful for me or for many people.
Click to expand...

Sir, I have not put forth any 'point' or 'case' or 'thesis' of my own. I made a few statements to counter some lies and misconceptions floating around, about Sankaracharya. As I explained earlier, I have not said anything original, and you may refer the Gita Bhashyam.

It is not my fault that Adi Sankaracharya wrote his works in Sanskrit, nor is it my fault that you seem to be ignorant of Sanskrit or Hindi. So if you want a reference, you will have to put up with that language. By the way, the text in the photos are in Sanskrit, on the left side. I thought I mentioned that earlier.

Per your own admission, this topic to you is akin to a paper from Einstein. Then perhaps you should not even be trying to debate with me on this topic!
 
Last edited:

Share this page

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest ads

Follow us on Social Media

Back
Top