Why Would God Want Us to Praise Him?

[renuka]

Share:

Facebook Twitter WhatsApp Email Share Link

That should be the answer, or students should be expelled for trying to influence the outcome.

An honest teacher would not even consider these alternatives, hopefully, god is better than that. Moreover, god is responsible for 7+ billion humans and numerous other species on this planet and some on other planets as well.


What are bad actions? Good and bad actions are purely the relationships of the ego with actions. In Advaita there are actions, but they do not have any qualifications as good and bad. Good and bad actions are purely ascribed by society and morality. That should not play any part in Religion.

I am not asking anyone to change their belief system. My opinions are purely based on my observation.

If God (Brahman) is subtler than space, air, water and is all-pervading and all-powerful then god should be nonjudgemental. Space does not judge you, why should god judge you?
Karma theory stands on its own, it has nothing to do with god.

You are right..Karma has nothing to do with God.
If one understands this then they start to respect the idea of the Universal Consciousness/God cos It/He does NOT judge nor favors anyone nor hate nor is partial.

Again you are right..there are only actions.
I used the word bad just to make a point..that way we can also say there is no begging nor there is praise...there are ONLY actions.
So why is begging and praising a issue here if in Advaita everything is classified as actions?

Isnt it so futile to be unsettled about actions of another?
This is where I note many hardcore Advaitins have issues with the idea of God and prayer but on the contrary Adi Shankara had no issues praising God in all His stotrams.

Think about it why Adi Shankara was a paradox..Advaitin yet He praised God.
May be the answer lies in the paradox of being both yet neither.

 

[a-TB]

Karma functions differently from wordly situations.

Ok..in the case above..
The student who fails ..goes back and sings praises of the teacher.
In real life there are a few possible outcomes

1) Teacher tells the student to shut up ,study hard repeat the exam and stop trying to sing praises.
2) Teacher has a change of mind and lets re evaluates the exam paper to see if the student can pass the exam.
3) Teacher asks the student for a bribe and changes the marks and makes student pass.


Now in case of Karma.
If we are not making any changes in our behavior and still commit horrible acts..then we go sing praises of God expecting things to fall in our favor...these are the outcomes.

1)All the " bad" actions still leave karmic imprints to be experienced cos we make no effort to introspect and change.

2) The singing praises of God initially would solely be with motives but it does have conducive vibes on the mind and body.
In the course of time it could have effect on polishing the persons mind to make better choices.
Then behavior modification starts and we improve.
But do all our problems get solved?
Nope! Its just that we become better equipped to handle ups and downs of live with mindfulness and equinamity.

Bhagavad Gita clearly says

Chapter 2: Contents of the Gita Summarized​

TEXT 40
nehabhikrama-naso 'sti
pratyavayo na vidyate
sv-alpam apy asya dharmasya
trayate mahato bhayat

TRANSLATION
In this endeavor there is no loss or diminution, and a little advancement on this path can protect one from the most dangerous type of fear.



So its clear that the little advancement of singing praises of God even if with personal motives over time can transform a person.

To me it appears there is no basis to interpret anything like and call it Karma theory.

Singing praise to get out of fruits of action? That is ludicrous.

Making an effort to improve will not change the outcome of Karma Phala. Period

I looked up the verse. It is not talking about Karma but about Karma yoga which is NOT the same as Karma.

Certainly singing praise of some imagined godhead is NOT Karma yoga.

 

[a-TB]

You are right..Karma has nothing to do with God.
If one understands this then they start to respect the idea of the Universal Consciousness/God cos It/He does NOT judge nor favors anyone nor hate nor is partial.

Again you are right..there are only actions.
I used the word bad just to make a point..that way we can also say there is no begging nor there is praise...there are ONLY actions.
So why is begging and praising a issue here if in Advaita everything is classified as actions?

Isnt it so futile to be unsettled about actions of another?
This is where I note many hardcore Advaitins have issues with the idea of God and prayer but on the contrary Adi Shankara had no issues praising God in all His stotrams.

Think about it why Adi Shankara was a paradox..Advaitin yet He praised God.
May be the answer lies in the paradox of being both yet neither.

Adi Sankara's understanding of God is not the same as the dualistic ideas of God that is pervasive in all religions. Also there are many sankara acharyas and not all stotrams are composed by the original sankara.

 

[prasad1]

Adi Sankara's understanding of God is not the same as the dualistic ideas of God that is pervasive in all religions. Also there are many sankara acharyas and not all stotrams are composed by the original sankara.

We can clearly see that stotras in his name are not actually written by him. For example

The hymn devi aparadha kshamapana stotra is a famous hymn for the goddess which is attributed to sankara. But the author in this hymn says that he is already 85 years old!!

Parityaktaa Devaa Vividha-Vidha-Sevaa-Kulatayaa
Mayaa Pan.caashiiter-Adhikam-Apaniite Tu Vayasi |
Idaaniim Cenmaatas-Tava Yadi Krpaa Na-Api Bhavitaa
Niraalambo Lambodara-Janani Kam Yaami Sharannam ||5||

Meaning:
5.1: (O Mother) Letting go (i.e. Left or Never undertaking) the various Ritualistic Worship servicesof the Devas ...
5.2: ... by me, more than Eighty Five years of my life has passed,
5.3: Even at this moment (nearing death), if Your Gracedo not descend, O Mother (Who is) of the form of Bliss-Consciousness, ...
5.4: ... Where will this Niralamba (one without any support) seek Refuge, O Lambodara Janani (Mother of Lambodara or Ganesha),

There is another hymn called subramanyam bhujangam where the author prays for married life and children etc.

So from such examples it is clear that many books and hymns are under his name but not actually penned by him. Even the mutts do not endorse every text to be by him.
Assisted m Internetby Google.

 

[renuka]

Adi Sankara's understanding of God is not the same as the dualistic ideas of God that is pervasive in all religions. Also there are many sankara acharyas and not all stotrams are composed by the original sankara.

Could you kindly give evidence that Adi Shankara did not write all stotrams?
As far as I know only Bhajo Govindam was a combined effort with him and his shishyas.

Adi Shankara did install the idol at Mukambika too.
He had no issues for murti worship too.

 

[a-TB]

Could you kindly give evidence that Adi Shankara did not write all stotrams?
As far as I know only Bhajo Govindam was a combined effort with him and his shishyas.

Adi Shankara did install the idol at Mukambika too.
He had no issues for murti worship too.

Do you know when Adi Sankara lived? Scholars do not even agree on when he roamed the earth. People who have studied Bhashya have told me that based on linguistic analysis (nature of Sanskrit language) that he has not written a lot attributed to him He probably lived BCE almost 1000 years earlier than what the western scholars think

All stories about him are just mythological stories. We have a member here who argued passionately how Adi Sankara disliked certain grammarians. All these are nothing but imaginations.

The only concrete things available are the Bhashyas and some mantras (like Prarasmarana stotram) with Vedantic content, I am repeating what I have heard and do not have first hand knowledge of these. But I trust the scholarship of the sources.

Adi Shankara did not install any Murthis. Murthi worship was pervasive much later than his time in earth. Idol is not a good word to use since it means satan for Christian and Islamic faith.

I noticed that Mr Prasad has given specific examples to your question

 

[renuka]

To me it appears there is no basis to interpret anything like and call it Karma theory.

Singing praise to get out of fruits of action? That is ludicrous.

Making an effort to improve will not change the outcome of Karma Phala. Period

I looked up the verse. It is not talking about Karma but about Karma yoga which is NOT the same as Karma.

Certainly singing praise of some imagined godhead is NOT Karma yoga.

I did say in my post that making effort to improve would NOT change the Karma phala BUT it would make someone make balanced choices and handle ups and downs of live in a conducive manner.

A simple example is this.

If one has a certain karma to undergo a disease which he genetically inherited he can either succumb to it by leading a reckless life in terms of health or take preventive measures to avoid the disease from expressing itself or even if the disease expresses itself he takes appropriate measures to keep it under check.

Likewise..a person who is seeking something from God might cry and beg for help..will help come?
Yes! Its self help..the effort taken to beg..cry and sing praises has an anti depressant effect on a human when he unloads even to an imaginary God...when one unloads the emotional burden lessens...his state of mind would improve and he would eventually be able to face the problem for which he is seeking help for.

Crying and begging might seem like futile to some but honestly it instills faith in self.

I learnt this from the stray cats I feed.
Daily they ask for food at least three times a day.

When they are hungry, they beg and tap the door..they keep mewing non stop till I feed them.

They have the confidence that I will never let them down and totally depend on me for food.
They seem happy and healthy too.
Its the simple act of having faith in something outside of us that releases endorphins for general well being.

Its simple math..like going to a confession box in a Church.
Does God forgive the sins when the priest says so?

We all know that its not so but again it acts like a place to unload and one reaps the benefit to feel less stressed up and eventully one might stop commiting non conducive actions and balance themselves.

 

[renuka]

Do you know when Adi Sankara lived? Scholars do not even agree on when he roamed the earth. People who have studied Bhashya have told me that based on linguistic analysis (nature of Sanskrit language) that he has not written a lot attributed to him He probably lived BCE almost 1000 years earlier than what the western scholars think

All stories about him are just mythological stories. We have a member here who argued passionately how Adi Sankara disliked certain grammarians. All these are nothing but imaginations.

The only concrete things available are the Bhashyas and some mantras (like Prarasmarana stotram) with Vedantic content, I am repeating what I have heard and do not have first hand knowledge of these. But I trust the scholarship of the sources.

Adi Shankara did not install any Murthis. Murthi worship was pervasive much later than his time in earth. Idol is not a good word to use since it means satan for Christian and Islamic faith.

I noticed that Mr Prasad has given specific examples to your question

Idol is not satan in any religion.

In Islam, one who performs Idol worship is called a Mushreekun( one who ascribes partners to Allah)

The word for Devil is Shaitan.

The meanings are poles apart.

 

[a-TB]

Idol is not satan in any religion.

In Islam, one who performs Idol worship is called a Mushreekun( one who ascribes partners to Allah)

The word for Devil is Shaitan.

The meanings are poles apart.

Some references from Google search. But the thoughts below are widespread in my experience.

Gods - The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Sometime ago, a Russian Bishop called Krishna “Satan”. Many Christians say Hindus are devil worshipers. Many Muslims say Hindu gods are animals and worshipers are infidels. Atheists would call Indian gods primitive. In their...

udaypai.in

Idols and Icons: Why Murti Should Be Used Instead

Representational Forms in Religious Worship Most of the religions and spiritual traditions of the world - with the general exception of Protestant Christians, Muslims and Jews - use images, representational forms or statues in their worship. Roman

www.vedanet.com

A well known TV evangelist, Pat Robertson used to say 'Hindus are devil worshippers'

 

[a-TB]

I did say in my post that making effort to improve would NOT change the Karma phala BUT it would make someone make balanced choices and handle ups and downs of live in a conducive manner.

A simple example is this.

If one has a certain karma to undergo a disease which he genetically inherited he can either succumb to it by leading a reckless life in terms of health or take preventive measures to avoid the disease from expressing itself or even if the disease expresses itself he takes appropriate measures to keep it under check.

Likewise..a person who is seeking something from God might cry and beg for help..will help come?
Yes! Its self help..the effort taken to beg..cry and sing praises has an anti depressant effect on a human when he unloads even to an imaginary God...when one unloads the emotional burden lessens...his state of mind would improve and he would eventually be able to face the problem for which he is seeking help for.

Crying and begging might seem like futile to some but honestly it instills faith in self.

I learnt this from the stray cats I feed.
Daily they ask for food at least three times a day.

When they are hungry, they beg and tap the door..they keep mewing non stop till I feed them.

They have the confidence that I will never let them down and totally depend on me for food.
They seem happy and healthy too.
Its the simple act of having faith in something outside of us that releases endorphins for general well being.

Its simple math..like going to a confession box in a Church.
Does God forgive the sins when the priest says so?

We all know that its not so but again it acts like a place to unload and one reaps the benefit to feel less stressed up and eventully one might stop commiting non conducive actions and balance themselves.

Yes, I can resonate with the post.

Prayer when one is in distress is useful to gain strength to face the issues.

But people predominantly pray due to their greed and have all kinds of wants. Hence they praise. Praying genuinely when one is in distress cannot be a praise (which is the topic of this thread)

Many mantras have all kinds of praise of God because 'praising to get something' is ingrained in the society.

 

[renuka]

Some references from Google search. But the thoughts below are widespread in my experience.

Gods - The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Sometime ago, a Russian Bishop called Krishna “Satan”. Many Christians say Hindus are devil worshipers. Many Muslims say Hindu gods are animals and worshipers are infidels. Atheists would call Indian gods primitive. In their...

udaypai.in

Idols and Icons: Why Murti Should Be Used Instead

Representational Forms in Religious Worship Most of the religions and spiritual traditions of the world - with the general exception of Protestant Christians, Muslims and Jews - use images, representational forms or statues in their worship. Roman

www.vedanet.com

A well known TV evangelist, Pat Robertson used to say 'Hindus are devil worshippers'

In Islam the terminologies are very clear.

 

[renuka]

Yes, I can resonate with the post.

Prayer when one is in distress is useful to gain strength to face the issues.

But people predominantly pray due to their greed and have all kinds of wants. Hence they praise. Praying genuinely when one is in distress cannot be a praise (which is the topic of this thread)

Many mantras have all kinds of praise of God because 'praising to get something' is ingrained in the society.

Yes and No.

Not all pray for greed.
Some of us pray for a recharging feeling as to align self.

After a while the prayer becomes our nature and introspection happens.

We must not forget that it ISN'T wrong for anyone to pray for whatever reason.

When a doctors see dying patients, family members beg the doc to save them..its human nature to seek help and comfort.

Everyone seeks something, seeking is hardwired in us only then seeking answers can happen.

If going by what Prasad ji and you say..what do you expect a person in distress to do?

Do you know how much stress is in the human mind if they dont find an outlet to destress?
Praying..begging for help..crying..making transactional prayers do help calm the mind and lessen the risk of depression and suicide.

Last but not least..since you mentioned that some evangelists say Hindus prays to Devils...techincally how different is it from saying "Singing praise to get out of fruits of action? That is ludicrous?"

Both opinions just shoot down belief of others.

Advaita isnt about my way or the highway...its about a very personal journey of self exploration and not minding what others do be it begging or praising.

 

[prasad1]

Yes praising some other human being is transactional. Humans want to be praised, and corrupt the system.
One can not equate god with a human being.
If god is another human with human feelings, passions, and ego, that is not a god.

I do not know how much false hope is advantageous in mental health.
Suppose a patient is on their deathbed with few hours to live, and you assure his relatives that you can cure him because he praised you and begged you, The relative will become quiet and hopeful. But when the patient dies, that same relative will be angry at you and suit you.

Brahan is beyond such ego-centric behavior.

 

[KRS]

Srimathi Dr. Renuka Ji,

You responded to Sri prasad1 Ji:

“You are right..Karma has nothing to do with God.
If one understands this then they start to respect the idea of the Universal Consciousness/God cos It/He does NOT judge nor favors anyone nor hate nor is partial.”

Maha Periaval often said that one mistake people who misunderstand Advaitha make is to think that Maya is somehow different from Brahman. Maya is borne of Brahman at the time of creation, per Advaitha.

Karma as well as it’s phala are the results of Maya, and thus part and parcel of Brahman.

we have to remember Krishna’s Vishwaroopam. All universe is Brahman.

Please let me know if my understanding is not correct.

 

[a-TB]

Yes and No.

Not all pray for greed.
Some of us pray for a recharging feeling as to align self

+++ I said predominantly. It could be greed or for a transactional advantage

After a while the prayer becomes our nature and introspection happens.

Not for all. Introspection can happen with or without prayer. Neither prayerful person *always* does introspection not non-prayerful person always do not do introspection. There is no causal link here.

We must not forget that it ISN'T wrong for anyone to pray for whatever reason.

+++ Prayer as a praise of God to extract an advantage is a human weakness. There is nothig right or wrong. There is nothing great about such prayers or any religion that promotes it. In fact most such practices lead to hypocrisy, Genuine prayer tends to be personal

When a doctors see dying patients, family members beg the doc to save them..its human nature to seek help and comfort.

Everyone seeks something, seeking is hardwired in us only then seeking answers can happen.

If going by what Prasad ji and you say..what do you expect a person in distress to do?

Do you know how much stress is in the human mind if they dont find an outlet to destress?
Praying..begging for help..crying..making transactional prayers do help calm the mind and lessen the risk of depression and suicide.

+++ As I implied earlier, prayer during distress is not the topic here. Prayer as praise of God to exact advantage in a transaction is the issue of the thread

Last but not least..since you mentioned that some evangelists say Hindus prays to Devils...techincally how different is it from saying "Singing praise to get out of fruits of action? That is ludicrous?"

+++It is ludicrous to interpret Karma yoga as prayer (as in praising God). Karma in the model will always yield fruits and cannot be offset by any prayer. This has nothing to do with the evangelicals reacting to the usage of the word Idol. Many muslims hold similar views and so the suggestion is to use the word Murthis because that is more accurate being a Sanskrit term and cannot lead to confusion. Best not to translate that word to idol since that word idol has gotten a new meaning these days.

Both opinions just shoot down belief of others.

+++ I said a while ago in this thread that I do not respond to beliefs unless it is presented as a reason or the belief is a harmful belief to a society.

Logic and beliefs cannot mix . If a belief is passed off as a reason it is right to shoot it down.

But one believer (like evangelicals) shooting down another believer (Hindu) is just madness.

Advaita isnt about my way or the highway...its about a very personal journey of self exploration and not minding what others do be it begging or praising.

+++ I am not a scholar or claim any expertise in Advita or any other philosophy. I just find a lot of logically inconsistent statement made in this forum in name of Advita. I only point out the issues when it is stark. If it is a personal journey and exploration keep it personal and not broadcast it.

 

[a-TB]

Srimathi Dr. Renuka Ji,

You responded to Sri prasad1 Ji:

“You are right..Karma has nothing to do with God.
If one understands this then they start to respect the idea of the Universal Consciousness/God cos It/He does NOT judge nor favors anyone nor hate nor is partial.”

Maha Periaval often said that one mistake people who misunderstand Advaitha make is to think that Maya is somehow different from Brahman. Maya is borne of Brahman at the time of creation, per Advaitha.

Karma as well as it’s phala are the results of Maya, and thus part and parcel of Brahman.

we have to remember Krishna’s Vishwaroopam. All universe is Brahman.

Please let me know if my understanding is not correct.

1. "Maya is borne of Brahman at the time of creation, per Advaitha." - Responding to this line below:

I am not a scholar or anything. But my understanding is that Maya being associated with Brahman has no creation. Both Maya and Brahman cannot be described by words and cannot be mentally comprehended. One (Maya) is borne of the other (Brahman) and that too at the time of creation. Creation of what?

To say at the time of creation, time would have to be created.

So a non-entity is borne by another non-entity at the time of creation when time itself is not created. You can see how these statements come across as meaningless (at least to me). I do not know if non-entity is a correct usage for referring to Brahman.


2. How can Karma be part and parcel of Brahman when it is stated that this non-entity Brahman is supposed to be part-less?

 

[renuka]

Srimathi Dr. Renuka Ji,

You responded to Sri prasad1 Ji:

“You are right..Karma has nothing to do with God.
If one understands this then they start to respect the idea of the Universal Consciousness/God cos It/He does NOT judge nor favors anyone nor hate nor is partial.”

Maha Periaval often said that one mistake people who misunderstand Advaitha make is to think that Maya is somehow different from Brahman. Maya is borne of Brahman at the time of creation, per Advaitha.

Karma as well as it’s phala are the results of Maya, and thus part and parcel of Brahman.

we have to remember Krishna’s Vishwaroopam. All universe is Brahman.

Please let me know if my understanding is not correct.

Dear KRS ji,
At a certain point we all would understand that there isnt a rigid right or wrong understanding.
Our perceptions and data of understanding of any aspect of " Reality" are just bytes that take up the storage space of our mind.

This is where knowledge could prove a hindrance at times that it doesnt allow us to align ourselves with the Universal Consciousness/ God.

Its like this...in order for us to download and install new updates on our phone we need to have sufficient storage space.
So if our mind is filled with our personal perception data and information,how are we going to allow any update to be downloaded into our system?

Chapter 1, Sutra 43 Patanjali Yoga Sutra



Smriti-Parisuddhau-Svarupasunya-Iva-Arthamatra-Nirbhasa-Nirvitarka

When The Memory Is Purified, The Mind Appears To Be Devoid Its Own Nature (i.e. Of Reflective Consciousness ) And Only The Object ( On Which It Is Contemplating) Remains Illuminated . This Kind Of Engrossment Is Called Nirvitarka Samapatti.
Taken from The Yoga Institute Website.

In the above stanza its about clearing the memory card of our mind so that only the object that we are contemplating on is illuminated.

If this stanza is understood we would come to understand that no matter what our understanding about Brahman or Maya or God or religion ...it does not really make a difference finally..cos all we have to do is clear up the memory card a be a new card and let the download in the NOW auto update us.

 

[KRS]

1. "Maya is borne of Brahman at the time of creation, per Advaitha." - Responding to this line below:

I am not a scholar or anything. But my understanding is that Maya being associated with Brahman has no creation. Both Maya and Brahman cannot be described by words and cannot be mentally comprehended. One (Maya) is borne of the other (Brahman) and that too at the time of creation. Creation of what?

To say at the time of creation, time would have to be created.

So a non-entity is borne by another non-entity at the time of creation when time itself is not created. You can see how these statements come across as meaningless (at least to me). I do not know if non-entity is a correct usage for referring to Brahman.


2. How can Karma be part and parcel of Brahman when it is stated that this non-entity Brahman is supposed to be part-less?

Sri a-TB Sir,

Firstly, I am probably less scholarly than you. But let me try to explain.

In Advaitha, Avidhya, which is same as Maya indeed is not ‘born’ at the time of creation. That is why I intentionally used the word, ‘borne out of’, which has a whole different meaning.

One can have endless conversations of Avidhya till cows come home, as some scholarly Advaitins and Visishtadvaitins do. I am just not interested in such polemics. In the end, what matters is to throw away the books and start practicing. The travel itself is worth it for the peace and serenity, and whether one reaches the destination does not matter.

Logic can only take one so far, because the data it draws from is limited. Also, one does not need to know Newton’s laws to know that there is gravity, Experience and observation tells you that.

But, what is important to know is that the ultimate Truth is Brahman, everything else is relative truth. But what we need to keep in mind is that the relative truth is real within the existence of this Universe and that is also Brahman.

There is a beautiful explanation for the question, why God creates - in our tradition, it is the endless divine stage play, or a peek-a-boo, take your pick.

Also, by the way, one can come to realization only through one’s mind, according to Adi Shankara, and the method is Jnana Yoga.

By the way, I asked your response for my question in the other thread. If you respond, we can have a discussions about the questions you raised, including my views on Astrology. Thanks.

 

[KRS]

Dear KRS ji,
At a certain point we all would understand that there isnt a rigid right or wrong understanding.
Our perceptions and data of understanding of any aspect of " Reality" are just bytes that take up the storage space of our mind.

This is where knowledge could prove a hindrance at times that it doesnt allow us to align ourselves with the Universal Consciousness/ God.

Its like this...in order for us to download and install new updates on our phone we need to have sufficient storage space.
So if our mind is filled with our personal perception data and information,how are we going to allow any update to be downloaded into our system?

Chapter 1, Sutra 43 Patanjali Yoga Sutra



Smriti-Parisuddhau-Svarupasunya-Iva-Arthamatra-Nirbhasa-Nirvitarka

When The Memory Is Purified, The Mind Appears To Be Devoid Its Own Nature (i.e. Of Reflective Consciousness ) And Only The Object ( On Which It Is Contemplating) Remains Illuminated . This Kind Of Engrossment Is Called Nirvitarka Samapatti.
Taken from The Yoga Institute Website.

In the above stanza its about clearing the memory card of our mind so that only the object that we are contemplating on is illuminated.

If this stanza is understood we would come to understand that no matter what our understanding about Brahman or Maya or God or religion ...it does not really make a difference finally..cos all we have to do is clear up the memory card a be a new card and let the download in the NOW auto update us.

Thank you. I asked the question, only because of Sri prasad1 Ji’s statement. Please see my response above to Sri a-TB Ji’s response.

By the way, I agree with you.

 

[renuka]

Thank you. I asked the question, only because of Sri prasad1 Ji’s statement. Please see my response above to Sri a-TB Ji’s response.

By the way, I agree with you.

Dear KRS ji,

I understand that you asked the question as a response to the statement by Prasad ji but its just that I dont seem to able to get into details of Maya/Brahman etc as if my mind doesnt open the url for details which dont really matter anymore.

Evidence based is not the operating system that is conducive as previously thought but Experience based seems a lot more balancing and alignining and Jnana isnt logic or information but rather clearing our memory space to receive personalized updates.