BHAGAWATHAM is another Rich-Epic of Indian-Culture ... .
Shall we discuss.?
Printable View
BHAGAWATHAM is another Rich-Epic of Indian-Culture ... .
Shall we discuss.?
You mean the Bhagawatha Purana written by Baladeva in the 13th Century?
No. ..Authored By SUKHA-BRAHMA- RISHI..... Briefly called. SUKHA-DEVA in North IndiaQuote:
Originally Posted by Idiappam
No, I think we have enough of this 'exemplary' epic and puranic talk flooding the history section. It is time we talk some true history.
Dear Mr. Idiappam,Quote:
Originally Posted by Idiappam
If You do not relish AJANTHA... it is your Taste or Distaste...
In such a Case... you are welcome to Start any other One of your Choice and Liking... or just can keep off. the ones you do not like.
... Without hindering with others... NOR HATING OR CRITICISING OTHERS TASTES..
Hello Sudhaama Sir
Good Morning. Oh already Discussion abt BHAGAVATHAM is started, Glad.
Who is Lord Krishna's guruji? From whom he learnt 64 arts in 64 days.
Have a nice day
I don't think this is the way it should start in an History forum... It should go something like..
'Bhagavatha was written 10,000 years ago in Punjab by Mr Sukhdev Singh..."
Dates, place or origin, details of the author, extent of the book (say 20 verses) should be given.
Oher names of that work, author should be given too. Contradictions should discusses. And not brushed aside, in the name of 'Holiness' - This is not a 'religion' forum.
Niether a 'literary' forum. It is a HISTORY forum you are in, Uncle Sudhamaa.
Suka maharishi is supposed to have narated the bhagwatham to Parikshit while he was awaiting death from the curse.It seems after hearing the bhagwatham, he became detached and he did not feel any pain on his death.
Suka maharishi is also a very strange rishi.He is supposed to have a parrot like face.Also, supposed to very intelligent with an exemplerary knowledge of brahmavidya
Dear Idiappam,Quote:
Originally Posted by Idiappam
As usual, you are asking too many simple questions even though you very well know that you will not get any answers. I am surprised that you are still having lot of stamina to ask questions against “large hearted” “mankind” “humanity” “heritage” threads under the history columns. More surprising is that you are expecting historical, archeological evidences and dates too. I don’t know why you can’t understand the meaning of the term “History and culture”! Please understand that these “broad minded humanity” comes under “Culture” category. If you can’t understand this, then I have to call you idiotappam. *
( * I hope you know Vanjapukaljiyani!)
Sorry, Mr r-kk.. I did not know that beliving that one of our maharishis had a parrot face is our culture..
Sorry Viggop and Sudhaama.. carry on the tale..
"HISTORY REPEATS ITSELT" I guess.
Thanks. SAANTHEEPINI Rishi... was Krishna's Guru, during His Boyhood. Sudhaama , alias Kuchela was His Classmate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthi
Suka rishi is also the son of Veda Vyasar and an apsara .
He had a parrot like face.Even though a boy, he was supposed to be a brahma gnaani.There is even a temple for him in North India in one of Vishnu's thiruthalams.
Suka rishi learnt a lot of things from King janaka.Janaka was a king who performed all duties of king but still was a jeevan muktha.
Idiappam Sir
Hinduism has lot of instances of such things which Hindus believe.
In Dasa avatharams of Vishnu, only Rama,Kirshna and Vamana and Kalki are human beings.Hanuman(another brahma gnaani) is a monkey.
Quite a bunch we are! No wonder we are easy target for conversion.Quote:
Originally Posted by viggop
Do you believe it, Viggop? Or are you just there to point out beliefs? Or promote them?
Idiappam Sir
As a Hindu, I do believe in this.
I will have no problem if a person has an alternate view on this.I just follow mine and will not try to force anyone to follow mine.In a secular country like India,people are allowed to promote and propagate their views(as long as it does not abuse other people's views).So, in the future,i can decide to promote my view saying that Dasavatharam really happened and people like Suka maharishi existed.Another person can promote his view that it did not happen and all these things are not real concept of Hinduism.An atheist can say all religions are false.Everything is acceptable in India's constituition.
I think these images are for a person who is just starting his journey towards mukthi.We have lot of philosophies in Hindu religion.as a erudite person, u know that great saints go beyond these images.Lord SHiva is said to be formless to them.But as an ordinary man, i'll keep a form in mind as i've not reached that spiritual level.Take Adi sankara for instance.His philosophy says everything is brahmam and trinity are just a form of it.But , he went and composed slokas on every god and goddess for the common man.
ANyway,we are going beyond this topic on bhagawatham
Sudhaama Sir,Let us continue the Bhagawatham
Yes Mr. viggop... WELL-SAID....Quote:
Originally Posted by viggop
Besides, the Questions our Friends Mr. Idiappam and Mr. Rohit have raised..
...even though coupled with the underlying sense of Ridicule or Mockery....
.. I take them as the Wise-Questions.... deserving the due Replies...
Because the same Questions can be raised even by our own Children, the Students anxous to LEARN THE TRUTH...
... as well as by our Non-Hindu Friends.... CURIOUS TO KNOW THE VALUES of Indian-Heritage....
INDEED there are Answers...Logical and Sensible.. for these Valid Questions.
But has got to be elaborate... Question can be in a Few Words.... but not the Answer.
And I will duly reply.... on such wealth of Knowledge... in the relevant Forum-Dais...
... another Thread... LARGE-HEARTED INDIAN-HERITAGE... soon.
I request my Friends to continue on these points... as also raise further such Wise-Questions of Common aspects... (irrelevant and far apart this Thread Topic)
... be raised in that latter one... COMPREHENSIVE THREAD.
...allowing this Thread on Bhagawatham to continue within its bounds.
'Ridicule and mockery' - see where it is coming from.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Sudhaama
What is the purpose of this thread then? Just tell the tale of krishna? Then change the heading to just 'Bhagavatam' remove misleading words 'rich' and 'mankind' etc from it.Quote:
...allowing this Thread on Bhagawatham to continue within its bounds.
If you think there is 'richness', light-hearted or heavy-hearted matter in there - post them. How many threads of do you intend to start for these empty propaganda.
Can you please change the title of this thread to just 'Bhagavatham Story'..
hey guys please mention quotes from Bhagawatham, every piece of literature has sensible things and some nonsense. Even the sensible things are conveyed in a manner that may be ludicrous apparently, but the style was defined centuries back to be accomodative to the level of intellectual development then. So let us disregard the style, parrot head etc. Let us concentrate on the message and see how sensible it is. Unfortunatley for most of our heritage we give too much importance to the form than the content, and call the form as sacred, that is the reason our culture(like most others *) looks funny for those who question it.
* In other cultures mostly in west, their documents are often revised, look at the first few centuries after christ, the religious text went multiple iterations. Even now people try to reinterpret their text with relevance to the modern thought.
I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idiappam
Request to Sudhaama to kindly change the title to just "Srimad Bhagavatham"
No doubt you may believe the story of Bhagavatham may be the panacea for all world evils, however there is no reason why others should be coerced into such belief.
As Idiappam has said, when one comes to this thread to see what Bhagavatham has for humanity and only finds stories of Krishna (in whom he does not believe) and contrived derivations thereof that this is a lesson for humanity (which he cannot accept) as has been attempted in Mahabharatha and Ramayana threads, one feels disappointed.
True, to those who believe, the stories mean much, myself included. However, a sweeping statement such as "all humanity" is not warranted and it would do well to change the title.
Dear Mr. Badri,
I am sorry to say that I do not agree with your Justification, based on a few person's contradictory opinions. Such Objections and Arguments can be raised on any Topic. .. intentionally.
I have already replied on this point hereabove addressing Mr Idiappam.
Had you not interfered... I could have handled this matter amicably WITHOUT ANY PROBLEM TO ANYBODY... because all the Hubbers here are quite wise enough to understand the other side...
.... and INVARIABLY ONE AND ALL here, are my Friends ...
Besides, what I meant in the Title... I would have established in the long run, step by step... That is the Debative-interest amongst Friends Circle
The Title I meant... NOT ONLY MEANS MY PERSONAL BELIEF... but also is an Indication to other Hubbers to handle in such a Healthy and Unique direction.
Anyone should not be Hasty to conclude... but wait for the varied opinions. and arguments. I believe in Healthy arguments... and I do not feel hurt, simply because someone disagrees with me or vociferously counters my stand.... I believe others too duly RECIPROCATE.
.And your argument and advice to me, with a NEGATIVE APPROACH
( ! ), is UNFAIR... as well as a BAD PRECEDENCE....for our Hub.
However I do not want to displease you... but HONOUR YOUR WORDS... because of the personal high regard I have for you.
So complied with YOUR ADVICE .... But I feel Hurt.. It is a BLOW ON MY ENTHUSIASM..
Let anybody else continue this Topic further..... as I now WITHDRAW.
.. Or You can Close down... That will fetch Happiness to those few., whom you are preferentially interested in.
Affectionately,
Sudhaama.
Dear Sudhaama: While I am honestly touched by the regard you have for me, I am surprised that after all that talk of wisdom and maturity, you would want to withdraw simply based on a suggestion to change the title of the topic. Isn't that unwise and immature?
Kindly consider the following facts.
We have repeatedly seen in the Hub that sweeping statements such as the earlier title of this topic have caused acrimony and hurt sentiments. Instead of beginning a thread by already forcing down the view that the Bhagawatham is indeed THE panacea for all human ills, it would have been infinitely better to have developed the theme and then letting people decide and judge for themselves whether it is indeed for all humanity or not.
I understand your enthusiasm for the great purana. I share your enthusiasm personally. Besides, all the puranas and ithihasas are part of the rich Indian heritage and culture. Which is why none of these threads have been locked or removed, but allowed to continue discussing these stories. But we have to draw the line if these threads aim at establishing any one epic as the best, the most glorious, the absolute path for all humanity etc.
With your wealth of knowledge, it is unfair if you do not participate. I request you to kindly consider this suggestion in the best spirit, which you have demonstrated on other occasions and take up the narration of tales from Bhagawatham and clarifying hubber queries with regard to the same.
DearMr. Badri,Quote:
Originally Posted by sbadri99
My detailed posting is Self-explanatory.... containing the the Answers for each and every point you have raised. now too. ...
Further I add...
My intention was a Healthy-discussion in a SPECIFIC-ASPECT... towards which I wanted to kindle the Thoughts ... Pro or Anti... Yes I welcome... Let the various Hubbers put forth their views on this specific direction.
Those who VEHEMENTLYDISAGREE with me today... will fall in line with my stand on one day in future... I am sure... because it is the fact ...which I have to bring it to light... from IRUTTU ARAI.
I feel your posting was a CHARGE ON ME... a blow on my Enthusiasm... not because of your insistence for the change of the Title... Please understand.
But because of your blatant attack on me... as if I am unfair and one-sided FANATIC... and we are the parties under loggerheads ... which you have interfered to settle down..
Where was the misunderstanding or a ugly turn towards the wrong direction.?
Some of my friends have wisely questioned me... which I had appreciated and am replying PART BY PART... in the midst of my Tight-Schedule... After all this a Forum... I wait for others too to put forth their divergent views.
If you wanted ... you cou;d have put forth your Independant views... pro or anti to mine... I would have welcomed it.
But there is NO ROLE NOW for the Modertor to interfere unnecessarily.. which is a provocation and Bad-precedence, I consider.
In brief.... realising your delicate commitment as a Moderator... I say...
If I were you.... I would have waited for that Sudhaama's way of handling ... observe closely, Healthy or Unhealthy... in the interest of the Hub. in the long run... without unnecesarily poking my nose in between the Circle of Friends.
Please note... there are several Threads here.... where the same Frends here are vehemently countering with me, at one stage and coming round with me at a later stage.... It goes on so... Both the sides amongst us, gain Knowledge by Give and Take.
Have I done any damage to The Hub at any time in the past, by way of my wrong-handling?
... or Rubbing on the Wrong-side?.. which lesson forced you to interfere now as a preventive- measure?
.You say I am Unwise and immature.!
Please go through my Reply-postings here and then you can judge.
Sudhaama: I would like to end this unnecessary digression with this brief post.
Firstly, I had not stepped into this post in the shoes of a Moderator. If that had been the case, I would not have posted here. Instead, I would either have
a) Sent you a PM to change the title
Or
b) changed the title myself.
As a hubber, I posted my views on the topic. Hence the request to you to change the title.
Therefore your premise that I interfered to put an end to any argument is grossly mistaken.
Good one! :lol: :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by r_kk
Exactly! :D Which was y even the Bhagwad Gita was undermined (even by Indians themselves) as just a "holy book for Hindus" for a long time before its contents were expounded to most of its readers....it wasn't until I read "An Understanding of the Bhagwad Gita" by Swami Ranganathananda (who has explicitly explained the meaning of all the slokas w/ relevance to current/modern scenario & actual practical application rather than just a theoritical read & remember form in a 'sacred' script!) tat I realised how knowledgable the book's teaching cud be! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by mahadevan
Not only west, I was told by a Muslim friend tat this is the case even w/ the Quran, which is updated & reinterpreted w/ relevance to modern times/thinking.Quote:
Originally Posted by mahadevan
Sudhaama Sir
continue on the Bhagawatham please.
aiyaiyo! amaam samy pottathan polaikalaam/ Idiappam theirnjuko!Quote:
Originally Posted by lordstanher
once Veda Vyasa was meditating in his ashram.suddenly, he had an intense feeling o see his son sage Suka.Veda Vyasar came out of ashram and cried along "where is Suka?"
it seems the entire forest with trees and birds answered his question "I am here".This is because Sage Suka was so merged with the Brahmam through his brahma vignya that there was no difference between the forest trees ,birds and Suka Maharishi
One more story about the greatness of sage Suka who recited the srimad bhagwatham to King Parikshit.
Once Sage Suka and his father Veda Vyasar was crossing a river.There were lot of women bathing in the river.When sage suka crossed the river, they stood up to bow to him even though they were naked.But,when Vyasar crossed next,they covered their bodies with clothes.Sage Vyasa was surprised about this and asked the women who were bathing why they behaved differently towards his son.They answered that Sage Suka was immersed in Brahmam that he did not even notice the difference between man , woman.For him ,no difference existed between himself and the women.both were manifestations of Brahmam.But, Vyasa considered them as different from his own body and hence they covered their bodies when he passed.
Can't they (the story tellers) think of something else to prove their point - the greatness of their Sage, - something other than women baring thier bodies.
Tat makes me think- can't today's film makers think of sumthing else to prove their film's worth- the logic behind their story,- sumthing other than women baring their bodies! :wink: :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Idiappam
- Sorry 4 the digression, other guys.......but cudn't help typing this!
Why blame the movie makers, when even the god-men get carried away...
Lord, I don't now how much you get carried away, but I get carried away when it comes to this subject. AUM!
Idiappam,
you are great!
I followed your AUM and I am carried away too!
AUM..................
Those are the stories which have been repeated for centuries.Obviously, they are not considered vulgar.For e.g., we have lot of slokas in Sanskrit and Tamil praising all body parts of Gods and Godesses in Hindu Pantheon(like Soundarya lahari,abhirami andhathi etc).But, it is not edited to suit modern opinions and is still considered holy.
:-)
So,listen to the story of Bhagwatham.You'll find Lord Krishna's leelas sizzling(;-)) but just listening to it made Parikshit a jivan muktha.
he he he! Viggop. That's what Idiappam was shouting about. Treat stories like stories, giving them the 'years ago' thought.
and not - 'this holy' 'that very rich' this good for mankind' opinions. leave it to the reader to form an opionion. You just tell the story.
amd every one will be fine.
viggop wrote : So,listen to the story of Bhagwatham.You'll find Lord Krishna's leelas sizzling() but just listening to it made Parikshit a jivan muktha.
Thanks buddy, keep your posting and let me hear more of it and become a jivan muktha :-)
Uthapam and Mahadevan
I totally agree with you opinion that while some people like me consider Bhagwatham holy,it need not be the views of other people. Every one has the right to have his or her own opinion and should not be expected to jalra other people's views. :-)
I'll be copying and pasting Bhagwatham from another place like I did for Kamba Ramayana thread.
================================================== =========
janmaadi asya yata: anvayaat itarata: ca artteshu abhijna swaraat
tene brahma hRudaa ya aadikavaye muhyanti yat soorya:
tejo vaari mRudaam yathaa vinimayo yatra trisarggo mRushaa
dhaamna swena sadaa nirasta kuhakam satyam param dheemahi 1.1.1
(I meditate upon the one who is responsible for the creation, sustinance and dissolution through union and separation, who is the form of knowledge in all beings, who explained the Veda/Knowledge to Brahma in his mind, who attracts even the most learned, who makes the thriguna creation real, who is always beyond Maaya, who is eternal and Parameswara.)
yam pravrajantam anupetam apetakRUtyam
dvaipaayano virahakaatara aajuhaava
putreti tanmayatayaa taravo abhinetu:
tam sarvabhoota hRudayam munim aanatosmi 1.2.2
(Sreesuka brahmaRshi was going absolutely detached, without upanayanam, free of any actions. His father, Vyaasa bhagavaan followed him as he could not bear his son's separation addressing 'oh! Son'. Sreesuka who was enjoying the brahmam did not hear this because of his abheda state. But, as HE is the dweller of all beings, all the trees answered Vyaasa. I bow to that great Rushi who dwels in all hearts.)
vadanti tat tattvavida: tattvam yat jnaanam advayam
brahmeti paramaatmeti bhagavaan iti sabdyate 1.2.11
(People who now the reality say that the supreme is one. It is the same thing that is called as 'brahmam', 'paramaatmaa', 'bhagavaan' depending on how they refer to it.)
dharma projjita kaitavotra paramo nirmatsaraanaam sataam
vedyam vaastavamatra vastu sivadam taapatraya unmoolanam
sreemad bhaagavate mahaamunikRute kim vaa parair eeswara:
sadyo hRudi avaruddhyatetra kRutibhi susrooshubhi: tatkshaNaat 1.1.2
(Srimad bhaagavatm, done by great Vyaasa Maharshi describes the dharmaa that is followed by pure souls who are are free of competition and pretention. These dharmas are eternal absolute. It announces the supreme truth that takes care of us by burning the three taapaas. The lord shines in the heart of those (immediately) who enjoy this work of Vyaasa bhagavaan.)
vaasudevaparaa vedaa vaasudevaparaa makhaa:
vaasudevaparaa yogaa: vaasudevaparaa kriyaa: 1.2.28
vaasudevaparam jnaanam vaasudevaparam tapa:
vaasudevaparo dharmo vaasudevaparaa gati: 1.2.29
(Everything (veda, yajna, yoga, kriya, jnaanam, tapas, dharma) proclaims the supreme reality of vaasudeva and leads one to vaasudeva.)
sa evam sasarjjaagre bhagavaan aatma maayayaa
sat asat roopayaa caasou gunamayee aguna: vibhu 1.2.30
(That supreme lord, who is beyond gunaas used his own maaya with guna, cause and effect to create this universe and entered into everything.)
naaraayaNam namaskRutya naram caiva narottamam
devIm saraswatIm vyaasam tato jayam udIrayet 1.2.4
(namaskaarams to naaraayana, nara, vaagdevata, vyaasa bhagavaan and start the Bhaagavatam)
jagRuhe paurusham roopam bhagavaan mahadaadibhi:
sambhootam shodasakalam aadau loka sisRukshayaa 1.3.1
(The Lord accepted the aadipurusha form, with 16 kalaas/amsaas, first to start his creation. 16 -> 5 kaRmmendriyas, 5 Jnaanendriyaas, 5 elements, mind etc. starting with mahat tattvam. So anything in this universe is nothing but a part of the Supreme)
yasya ambhasi sayaanasya yoganidraam vitanvata:
naabhihrada ambujaad asIt brahma viswasRujaam pati: 1.3.2
(The Lord was in yoga nidra in the causal water and there appeared a lotus from his naval (seed of the universe). The creator Brahma appeared in that.)
pasyantiado roopam adabhra cakshushaa sahasra paada ooru bhuja aanana adbhutam
sahasra moordha sravaNa akshi naasikam sahasra mouli ambara kunDala ullasat
(The form of aadipurusha/aadinaaraayanaa has many legs, thighs, hands, faces, heads, ears, eyes, noses. He is in splendor with many crowns, eardrops and dresses. This divine form (viswaroopam) is seen only by tapasvIs through their divine sight. This is the base for all the avataaraas and creation.)