Papa and Punya

[malgova.mango]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Papa and Punya[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Feeling prisoned in the chore of daily grind[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]My house-wife wanted go out and pic-nic.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]We went to Bird-park- an artfiical one[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]We paid the hefty price for the ticket[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The park was packed with holiday crowd[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Buddhist monks and tourist from far-off place[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]are all here.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]We saw , penguines, pelicans,parrots[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]flamingoes,falcons, hawks etc..[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Some birds are caged and some are in open[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]my little son asked why they didn't fly[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Their vital wings were cut [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]I replied as a matter of fact. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Spirited parrots tried to bite the nets off the cages[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]in their quest for freedom. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Others resigned to their fate looked dull without any life.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Birds in their flight symbolise freedom and peace[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]They are here doomed for life.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Their punya, gave them wings to fly [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Their papa, sent them to be caged for life.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]...............................................................[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Some one-liners...[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Our free-time costs their freedom.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Birds should not be parked – set them free.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Samsara's play – makes one to laugh and cry.[/FONT]​

 

[anjankumar]

How sad it is to look at this.

Why should one refer wife as "house-wife" even in a poem?

Does it not raise the question - "Is there a wife at the office too?"

The "so called house-wife" is as good as the bird whose wings had been cut and therefore could not fly.

Would you say that it is her papa that made her caged to her "house-wife" status?

What "punya" is earned by the husband who sent her to the cage called (house-wife) thus?

When will men start looking at women with more respect?

Sad indeed!

Wow Samsara's play -

Makes one to laugh and one to cry! True indeed (when you just insert 'one')

 

[malgova.mango]

Dear Sri Ajankumar!

Thanks for the feedback.

We need to be specific, nowadays some wives work at office and some do their duties at house.

If you talk to my sis,mother and wife - you would know how happy they are to be a house-wife. Being a house-wife is a natural joy to them. They enjoy their part in their role perfectly. Why so sad about it ?

I've written another one , (in the game of love..) do a search and read it. Then , you decide.

Thanks for calling this as poem.

Thanks for the suggestion too.

Regards

 

[fire]

Equal Rights to women??

What is it ?

Is it to say both the couples to be trustful to each other ?Or is it to say if the male is not,then the female also need not be trustful?

Is it to say both should avoid bars?Or is to say both have equal rights to go to bars?

Dont we have any basics or reasons when we impose restrictions on the females?Or is it done with good aim or with bad intensions?

Is India becoming like a western country a near possibility? Already many people say modern outlook ( Not sure what that exactly means).I am sceptical even say 5% of us lead joint family (Due to various reasons may be space one among them).Nuke families,Individual happiness concepts, stiff competition between husband and wife resulting in ego clashes are already very common in India.Now a days many Indian girls not only wear(?) dresses that is uncomfortable with others some drink,smoke etc.

 

[vijisesh]

Dear Malgova.mango,

Good one ! - Applause .... call it a poem or a fact about life !, it's a good beginning !
Papa and punya - >
It has always been one of the worthy topics for discussion and debate !
Let the discussion begin !
My views about papa - may it be chinna papa or periya papa !
Pavam or sin - can be considered to be attributed to a person or a soul only if he/she does it knowingly ! But you cannot hold the son of a thief responsible or a sinner if he robs people upto the age of his understanding , could you !
If however , he continues to relish and continue robbing people even after he reaches the age of understanding , then it would come into the books of papa ! until then it will remain in the books of God's play ! - What do you say ?

 

[malgova.mango]

Dear VS,

Yes it is definetly a papa, but the result falls on the parents. Upto certain age, for the papa's done by the child, the parents/gaurdians are hold responsible for that.

Either you commit knowingly or unknowingly if one's actions hurt anothers then one definetly commits a papa, but the result you experience may differ depend on whom you hurt (for ex- if against one's parents,teacher ..then severe result) , whether it is premeditated etc...

By repention,kindness,purity,japa,devotion to lord,scriptures, time and truthfulness one's papa could be purified.

Elders used to tell by openly telling one's papa, the effect of the papa will gone away from oneself. The same logic is extended to punya also.
(Papathai chonna papam pogum, punniyathai chonna punniyam pogum)

Some people will not do any charity in open but always in secret.

Regards

 

[malgova.mango]

Dear VS!

Thanks for the compliments!

I've written another one, "in the game of love...." I was complimented for this from my little circle of known people and some unknown rail-snekams.

I thought I would receive some compliments or crticizm from our forumites. I received none.

Would you mind chipping your comments... (it is in "Jokes" section, actually before I post , the caption of that section is different, I don't know the reason for renaming ....anyway....)

Thanks & Regards

 

[malgova.mango]

In the book of God's play .... Good Phrasing. We call that as "adrishta" - "unseen" .

It is the "unseen" force that matures or ripens to become "seen" result.

See the plight of the birds , there papa is so much that it dilutes there punya. What is the use of wings for them? It is because of the wings they get caged. What could be there papa? May be they as humans in some previous lifetimes mis-used there limbs and prisoned some good peoples? ..


Regards

 

[malgova.mango]

VS!

Why no discussion?

Regards

 

[prabhakaran123]

helo malgoa

pAPAM AND pUNYAM ARE THE TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN. jUSST AS THE UMPIRE DECIDES WHO SHOULD BAT OR BOWL FIRSTDEPENDING ON THE TOSS SO ALSO THE PAPAM AAND PUNYAM ARE DECIDED BY THE MENTAL MAKE OF THE PERSONS. wHAT S PAPAMFOR ONE GENERATION MAY NOT BE PAPM FOR THE OTHR GENERATION. sATHI WAS NOT PAPAM AS PER MANUSMRITHI. bUT SATHI IS PAPAM AS PER CIVIL LAW.

DURING THE ANCIENT PERIOD HAVING MORE THAN ONE WIFE WS NOTPAPAM. BUT UNDR HINDU CIVIL LAW HAVING TWO WIFE IS UNISHABLE OFENCE. wHT I WANT TO SAY IS THE COMMON FEELINGS OF A SOCIETY DECIDES WHAT IS PAPAM AND WHAT IS PUNYAM.

a SMAL ANECTODE. a THEIF DOES HIS DUTY TAUGHT TO HIM BY HIS FATHER, STEALING. hE DOES NOT KNOW IT IS PAPAM. bUT A PRIEST DOES WHILE PRAYING FOR OTHERS IN THE TEMPLE DOES NOT DO HIS DUTY WITH DEVOTION. TAHE THEIF PRAYS DAILY WITH DEVOTION. SO HIS ACTION OF PRAYING WILL BESTO HIM BOONS OF pUNYHAM. WHEREAS ALTHOUGH AT THE OUTSET THE PRIEST SEEM TO CHANT SLOKAS, BUT HIS MIND IS NOT DEVOTED TO GOD , THEREFORE HE WILL NOT REACH SWARGA.
WHTA I WANT TO SAY IS PAPAM AND PUNYAM ARE RELAVANT FACTORS TO THE SOCIETY AT A PARTICULAR TIME.

pRABHAKARAN.

 

[kunjuppu]

prabha123,

welcome to this forum.

i enjoyed reading your posting re papa & punya. very interesting viewpoint.

i have to think through a response, which i am sure i will have, as your post was so refreshingly different.

can i please ask you a favour. please avoid capital letters as in e-text, they imply shouting. also, if you can parse into smaller paragraphs, they make easier reading.

thank you.

 

[Saab]

Paapam and Punyam are not relative to space and time but certainly relative to your actions (karma). Let's put it this way. If you help someone you earn punya and if you harm someone you earn papa. Again this is conditional. If you help an asura you earn paapa for sure!

Being yourself earns you punya. Being someone else is transgression and it earns you paapa.

You don't earn punya or paapa by praying. You perhaps speed up the maturing of your stored up punya or paapa.

Paapa and punya belongs to realm of God. It has nothing to do with the laws of the state.

 

[malgova.mango]

Dear Sir
Sorry of the belated reply , see my replies in blue...

helo malgoa

pAPAM AND pUNYAM ARE THE TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN. jUSST AS THE UMPIRE DECIDES WHO SHOULD BAT OR BOWL FIRSTDEPENDING ON THE TOSS SO ALSO THE PAPAM AAND PUNYAM ARE DECIDED BY THE MENTAL MAKE OF THE PERSONS.

Couldn't get you, do you meant p&p is more to do with intention rather than action. Like a surgeon using knife and butcher?. if that's so that's agreeable to an extent.

wHAT S PAPAMFOR ONE GENERATION MAY NOT BE PAPM FOR THE OTHR GENERATION. sATHI WAS NOT PAPAM AS PER MANUSMRITHI. bUT SATHI IS PAPAM AS PER CIVIL LAW.

sathi is a vratam practised by elderly women, it got abused and later abandoned. if a women felt the body with life is a burden without her swami then Manu Dharma allowed and honoured her intention to give her body up.



May be you meant appropriate and inappropriate. for example, to talk while you eat is not considered appropriate in our culture but in the western societies many deals are signed in dining table. That's different.

DURING THE ANCIENT PERIOD HAVING MORE THAN ONE WIFE WS NOTPAPAM. BUT UNDR HINDU CIVIL LAW HAVING TWO WIFE IS UNISHABLE OFENCE. wHT I WANT TO SAY IS THE COMMON FEELINGS OF A SOCIETY DECIDES WHAT IS PAPAM AND WHAT IS PUNYAM.

Is it like appropriate and inappropriate?, which is subject to matter of change over time.

a SMAL ANECTODE. a THEIF DOES HIS DUTY TAUGHT TO HIM BY HIS FATHER, STEALING. hE DOES NOT KNOW IT IS PAPAM. bUT A PRIEST DOES WHILE PRAYING FOR OTHERS IN THE TEMPLE DOES NOT DO HIS DUTY WITH DEVOTION. TAHE THEIF PRAYS DAILY WITH DEVOTION. SO HIS ACTION OF PRAYING WILL BESTO HIM BOONS OF pUNYHAM. WHEREAS ALTHOUGH AT THE OUTSET THE PRIEST SEEM TO CHANT SLOKAS, BUT HIS MIND IS NOT DEVOTED TO GOD , THEREFORE HE WILL NOT REACH SWARGA.
WHTA I WANT TO SAY IS PAPAM AND PUNYAM ARE RELAVANT FACTORS TO THE SOCIETY AT A PARTICULAR TIME.

stealing is a definite papam for anybody and anytime. praying itself is a out-come of devotion, if you don't have devotion you won't pray.

But if you are saying that priest is doing in a mechanical way and not whole-heartedly then I agree with you to some extent. This mechanicalness is our in-born defect, only great tapasvins could at all time act with mental alertness- is it not? a grey area.

He may not reach swarga, but he didn't hurt anybody so he is not creating any papa - is it not?

Some major papams and punyams are not subject to time, but i agree there are some subtelities that remain mutable over time.



pRABHAKARAN.

 

[kunjuppu]

sathi is a vratam practised by elderly women, it got abused and later abandoned. if a women felt the body with life is a burden without her swami then Manu Dharma allowed and honoured her intention to give her body up....

malgova,

i do not believe, that in the 21st century, one could even quote something about the raison d'etre for sathi, without abhorring it.

it is easy for manu to say whatever he said, for he does not have to walk up the funeral pyre. we never heard of any man, grieving over his wife, climb up the funeral pyre of his wife and honour his intention to give his body up?

sir, on the other hand, the disgusting practice, on the men's side, has been and perhaps even now, that even before the wife's embers have cooled, there is this urgent need and movement to find a replacement.

i feel, sir malgova, you being, so erudite and intelligent, would atleast qualify your statement, that sathi was a crime, always, and hypocritical of manu to sanction it only for the women.

we cannot ever condone double standards, one for ourselves, and another for our mothers, wives, sisters and daughters. ever.

re ending sathi, this is what i have read. sathi was not abandoned by those who practised it. it was legally and wilfully put down by the law of the then government under lord william bentinck, the british governor general, in 1829.

the reason? the state cannot permit ritual murders. very correct.

thank you.

 

[malgova.mango]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]I made 2 mistakes,[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]1 – it should be women of yesteryears and not elderly[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]2 – I don't know whether Manu Dharma talks about Sati.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The point is if a women, so willed to join her soul-mate even at death. it was respected in the days of yore. It should be like any other vratams on a voulantary basis. They felt it is meaningless to continue life with the body dedicated to his pathi. Please read "Nala charitram" . We don't limit our life to the body, infact this view is the defect that needs to be cured. We see the body as a boat.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Why man is not honoured for the same is a pertinent question. I've no answer for this. Anyway that's not the point I want to make, or the topic is about. it is about papa punyam.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]One can't even impose to observe even “Ekadasi vratam” to others. Any vratam is strictly on a voulantary basis only. This is the fine point , I want to bring out. Elders used to say “ava avaluku varanum”.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]See one set out to conquer say Mt, Everest – you see the danger in doing this act , you got to endure snow storms, unseen cliffs and other dangers to life, But he voulantarily takes up the hardship and people do rejoice in his adventure. The same logic is applied for “vratam” also.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]You can't ask why others are not willing to take the risk and set out for the adventure, it is purely personal. [/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Regards[/FONT]

 

[malgova.mango]

Even though stealing lying ... are considered papam in general, as Sri Saab points it is still dependent on whom it is directed.

If one steals from one who hoards and distribute to the needy like Robin Hood, then though by the act of stealing he hurts one , by the act of distribution he benefits many. So he does one papa, but counteracts with many punyas.

The same is extended to lying etc... In one story a realized being hand was cut due to some false accusation of he being a stealer of jewels, resulting to suffer the punishment of severing his hand the reason given is , in the previous birth while he was meditating
someone was chasing a cow for killing, the cow ran before the meditator after a while the chaser asked the meditator whether he saw the cow and the direction it runs. In that state he raised the hand showing the true direction of the cow's path and was a cause of the cow's subsequent slaying. For that papa he has to suffer in the next birth losing the limb which showed the direction.

If one reads puranas and itihasas with shraddha and bhakthi, one can gain some insights on the workings of papa punyams.

Regards

 

[Saab]

Dear kunjuppu,

Your arguments are reasonable except that it has a basic flaw. As long as you keep talking that people conform to a common code of conduct you are certainly missing a point that the people are individuals too and as an individual he/she would like to make a personal decision of their liking and choice. You are opposed to such personal decisions because you see the legitimacy of only the law in general and not the right of the individual in particular. When it comes into conflict with individual decision that affects only that individual you are prone to deny him/her that right. This is a violation of a basic human right.

MMji is talking about a individual woman doing things such as dying with her husband as her 'vratham'. Not every woman has such vratham. You are unable to see it. Why the hestitation?

Do you know that during the Muslim invasion Hindu communities ran into the forts and fought the hoards from there. Once the Muslims breached the fort, all Hindu women jumped into the huge fire they had kept ready rather than be raped by the asuric hoards. That is their 'pathi vratham'. This happened in many many battles in the North. And the secularists have erased the atrocities of the Islamist marauders and extinguished the valorous defense of their values by the bravest Hindu women in the history books that teach our children. They wantonly deny our children knowing the history in our history books. This is secularism of the vote bank politicians who covet appeasing the minorities.

These are things that are peculiar to Hindus. The western women don't have such value as 'pathi vratham'. If you are addicted to the western values you will definitely find fault with our women and their practices.

I hope you will find courage in you to find appreciation for us Hindus for our values and the desperate ways in which we defend them. And the courage to tell the secularists not to twist the history for their own ends.

Remember again there are individual rights that have to be defended from the might of the state.

Regards,

 

[Saab]

Dear MMji,

If one steals from one who hoards and distribute to the needy like Robin Hood, then though by the act of stealing he hurts one , by the act of distribution he benefits many. So he does one papa, but counteracts with many punyas.

Sorry I do not contribute to anyone taking law into their hands to earn punya. This is a bad example.

As I said dhaarmic karma earns punya. Is it Robin Hood's individual dharma to do this act? Robbing Peter to pay Paul is never considered a Dharma.

 

[anjankumar]

Mr Saab

You say:

Sorry I do not contribute to anyone taking law into their hands to earn punya. This is a bad example.

As I said dhaarmic karma earns punya. Is it Robin Hood's individual dharma to do this act? Robbing Peter to pay Paul is never considered a Dharma.

What is your position on the following?

1. Manikkavasagar misappropriated Pandia Raja's money given for buying horses and used the same money for building temple for Siva Peruman in Thirupperunthurai. Siva Peruman did not think like you. He came to support Manikkavasagar, when the Raja wanted to punish Manikkavasagar. (Dont tell me that is why Siva Peruman is God and you are not!)

2. Thirumangai Alwar waylaid passers-by, robbed them and used that money for building temple for Perumal. Perumal did not have your views on Dharma. He blessed Thirumangai Alwar and gave him the status of Alwar. (Dont tell me that is why Perumal is God and you are not!)

Just two examples to show that your concept of Dharma differs from the concept of dharma adopted by Shiva and Vishnu. There may be many more.

Regards

 

[kunjuppu]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]I made 2 mistakes, [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]1 – it should be women of yesteryears and not elderly[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]2 – I don't know whether Manu Dharma talks about Sati. [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Regards[/FONT]

thank you malgova.

please do not be hard on yourself. for one, i do not consider these as mistakes. only clarifications, and that too, a courtesy to me, as many in these forums, do not answer queries. it was very nice of you to do it.

noting your above two points, i agree 100% with your reply posting.

thanks for the clarification.

 

[Ramaa]

Dear Saabji,

When there is conflict between the individual right and the law how is it resolved?

Regards,
Ramaa

 

[kunjuppu]

thank you saab.

malgova was very kind enough to clarify. you have added further notes.

i agree, that an individual has right to any vratham. without meaning to be frivolous, i have not heard of pathni vratham being performed by pathis, and in the process, immolating themselves on their wives' pyre. not even one incident, in the recent or distant past.

vratham appears to be the sole domain of the ladies.

 

[Saab]

Dear kunjuppu,

Your query stems from total lack of understanding of Hindu way of life and from the admiration of secular way of life.

In Hindu thinking the kartha is the man and he is 'asakthan' by himself and needs a wife to perform karma. Karmas are many which are performed by man for the benefit of Devas as in the yagnas, for the benefit of manes as in the sraaddham, ubachaaram for the Guru and so on. Begetting children is karma too. All these are part of Grihasthaasrma dharma. A man is not qualified to perform this most important Grihasthaasrama dharma without a wife. The whole universe, according to Hindu concept, is the creation of 'AmbaaL'. The universe is made up of thrigunas and She is 'thrigunaathmika'. She is the power behind every aspect of the functioning of the universe. In every woman we see this Paraasakthi. Men are mere instruments in her hands.

A widower loses his qualification to perform karma. What more deprivation one needs in life?

In secular concept you see the pindam as the ultimate value. And the respect for this pindam is extolled as humanism. We do respect pindam as kundalini sakthi and we also have value far beyond it.

By the way you might have heard of Ramakrishna Paramahamsa did daily pooja to his wife. There are many 'saakthas' who do that even today in spite of the assault of secularism on our ancient way of life. If you have so much concern for the value of women I suggest you do follow the footsteps of our revered saakthas.

Regards,

 

[Saab]

Dear Sri Ramaa,

Even the constitution of the secular states starts with the listing of the funadamental rights applicable to the individual citizens. No law enacted by the government can violate this charter of rights.

In India attempt to commit suicide is a crime. You won't find such a law in any other secular country. The Jain monks starve to death. Would that be considered a fundamental right to one's religious practice or would that be considered a violation of the law?

If a person goes about 'uNNaa vratham' for some cause the Govt. which claims to have won independence on this very same tactics of Mahathma Gandhi would arrest that person and force feed him/her. But there are thousands of others who don't have food and die of starvation. Whose fault is that?

The secularists and anti-Hindus catch hold of this rare case of 'Sathi' and either demean it or cast it as forcing a widow on to a funeral pyre just to put down Hinduism as some aboriginal religion. The dead woman cannot come back to testify that she did it of her own volition!

It is not 'sathi' that is disgusting though personally I cannot approve of it. It is those secularists and anti-Hindus who decry Hinduism in the name of 'sathi' are the most disgusting ones.

In my relatively long life I haven't come across one case of 'sathi' in South India.

 

[kunjuppu]

Your query stems from total lack of understanding of Hindu way of life and from the admiration of secular way of life.

thanks saab.

i am with you 100%. i do have a total lack of understanding. which is why i learn to query more, through my questions, and from what i believe to be my life experiences.

i am one of those hindus, who have since 14, done pithur tharpanam and i am quite sure, you have performed the same, but with more gratification through your knowledge.

i am only 58 and from your writings and quotes, i figure you are older than me. hence i am very much owed to you for your wisdom.

i would like to clarify one thing - i am neither a secularist or a pseudo secularist, as these terms are oxy morons when applied to a hindu, whatever his percentage may be.

i have eschewed caste out of my own violation, but that is due to the current practices prevailing due to the corruption of varnashrama.

the other corruptions i have seen, have tempered my faith, but i do hope to reinforce aspects of it, thanks to benefitting from your immense experience and wealth of knowledge.

thank you.