PDA

View Full Version : Numbers?



satay
02 August 2006, 08:01 PM
Counting Numbers

On another thread I made a usual comment of ‘Sanatana Dharma is not interested in numbers’. I have been thinking about this more and have to conclusion that although spiritually the statement is correct practically it has no value and in fact due to such statements and thinking hindus are ‘minority’ in the land known as ‘Hindustan’.

The fact is that hindus do need numbers!

For example muslim population in the world is increasing at an alarming rate especially in India where muslims are allowed to have more than one wife by law (this law is to show respect to their faith). So as a result they produce many more kids than a hindu family. The statistics show that in the very near future muslim population will become a major problem for Hinduism.

This is not to put a negative point on muslims or muslim population just stating the facts as they are in India.

I think for practical purposes we do need numbers otherwise we are going to be extinguished; when I say ‘we’ I truly mean ‘we’ hindus all across the globe we are going to be extinguished.

What do you guys think about this? I see a serious problem with numbers in the very near future.

Bhakti Yoga Seeker
03 August 2006, 01:45 AM
Namaste. I see what you are saying. I believe that quality and quantity are both important but I don't believe that the importance of quantity should outweigh quality. I have noticed in general that Muslims have a tendency to place religion at the center of their lives whereas this is not the case with Hindus in general that I have come across. In other words, Muslims will place Islam higher than anything. Islam will be more important than their country, more important than their culture, and even more important than their familial and other social circles. It seems that Hindus for the most part place the nation and culture higher than the religion. For instance, the welfare of India is considered by many more important than the welfare of Sanatana Dharma. This is certainly not true in all cases. Unfortunately, this is something I have noticed and I think this is a big reason for the problem we are seeing.

I am well familiar with two large state universities in my state, for instance. Each of these universities allows students to form extracurricular clubs. Both universities have Muslim student organizations with large numbers of people involved including non-Muslims who are interested in Islamic culture (mainly professors and those studying the Middle East). They tend to have strong presences on campus and become well involved with the campus communities. On the other hand, both universities have as many Hindus if not more than that of Muslims yet no Hindu clubs exist. At best they have "India clubs" or "Hare Krishna" groups but no actual Hindu clubs. The India clubs have little to do with religion and are exclusive and the Hare Krishna groups on both campuses tend to have an extremely small turnout.

Why I brought this up is that I believe in the business model that if you want to make money you have to invest money. Hindus that are interested in quantity as well as quality cannot just complain about it and do nothing. I actually worked with a number of Muslims (many of whom were actually from Pakistan) at a previous job I worked at. For the most part they seemed fairly unbiased and after working with them for months, I got to know them pretty well. So one day I just flat out asked two of them in particular what works so well with their Muslim group and how it attracts so many people and has such a strong presence. I asked them about their methods as well as why I don't see this with Hindus on campus. They were credible sources as they also had Hindu friends as well who were on temporary visas from India. Long story short, they basically said the same thing I'm saying. That Muslims in general place Islam as priority over all other things in their life wheras most Hindus place Hinduism lower on their list of priorities and in many cases nearly at the bottom of the list.

So to answer your question, yes we do need numbers if Hinduism is going to survive but it won't survive if Hindus are more interested in making money, Bollywood films, etc. than in Hinduism. Also, Muslims don't associate Islam with any particular race or country whereas most Hindus associate Hinduism with India and Indians. The fact is that when you limit something, you get limited results. Hindus cannot complain that Hinduism is not expanding when they are limiting it to one country and one ethnicity. On the bright side with more Westerners taking an interest, I think things are changing. Namaste. ~BYS~

atanu
07 August 2006, 11:37 AM
The fact is that when you limit something, you get limited results. Hindus cannot complain that Hinduism is not expanding when they are limiting it to one country and one ethnicity. On the bright side with more Westerners taking an interest, I think things are changing. Namaste. ~BYS~

The good, the best will always be limited.


Now coming to the original question. As Gita says that none ever dies: "You, me,these kings have existed ever", then who is born? What are these numbers really? Who is born and and who dies?


And if one dies and takes birth again, then what is the guarantee that in my next birth I will not take up a OSAMA like dress and destroy the very things that I value now?

Om Namah Shivayya


A digression:

Speaking from the so-called platform of waking state practicality (dualism in other words):

The fact is that overtly staunch God loving people make the world a difficult place to live in. Bush (and the likes of him) on one side and Osama (and the likes of him) on the other hand. Is this Dharma war or is it dirty money and control politics, hidden in the garb of religion? In this respect, isn't saying of a philosopher that religion is opium of the masses correct?

Risking a bit of generalization, I would add that Eastern spirituality is largely free of such perversion. Why? A westerner asked a sage about idol worship in India. The sage replied that in general westerners are greater idolators since they love their body more than anything. Love of God in western religions is basically love and concern for the welfare of a small self called body and its hunger. Vedanta, on the other hand, while stressing that all love is truly the love of self alone, explains further that the Self is not this small limited thing called the body.)

willie
07 August 2006, 09:14 PM
Neither the east of the west has any better ideas of philosophies than the other. Most of the east is copying the techniques of the west to gain a better life for the people alive today.

Religion has been used by both sides to bludgeon people into submission and to make for a docile , for the leader to fleece. It has started a lot of wars on its own and been drug into others.

After all the time that has passed since the last holybooks were written , where are the new books that will expand on the current crop? Where are the people in other countries that would be considered to be rishis? Having all rishis comming from india seem to be a little like a fixed deck to play with.

sarabhanga
07 August 2006, 11:21 PM
Namaste Willie,

The Aryan nobility of Ayodhya were originally attended by Vasishtha Rishi, and their ancient homeland was likely in northern Afghanistan (and beyond, to the Aral Sea).

When the Aryans first arrived on the northern plains of India, the Sindhu-Sarasvati population had already been living there for thousands of years, and their own ancient nobility were originally attended by Bhrigu Rishi.

The Aryans had been dispersing in other directions for a long time before they finally penetrated the Himalaya (c. 1500 BC), and some of the ancient sages and oracles of the Mediterranean region may well have been descended from Vasishtha.

And Cyavana Rishi, the first Bhargava who is not so ancient as to have become entirely mythical, possibly came to Gujarat originally from ancient Sumeria (c. 3100 BC).

None of this can easily be “scientifically” proven, but there is surely no reason to assume that all Rishis must be born only in India. ;)

atanu
08 August 2006, 12:15 AM
Neither the east of the west has any better ideas of philosophies than the other. Most of the east is copying the techniques of the west to gain a better life for the people alive today.

Religion has been used by both sides to bludgeon people into submission and to make for a docile , for the leader to fleece. It has started a lot of wars on its own and been drug into others.

After all the time that has passed since the last holybooks were written , where are the new books that will expand on the current crop? Where are the people in other countries that would be considered to be rishis? Having all rishis comming from india seem to be a little like a fixed deck to play with.



Namaste Willie,

One thing is eternal, all others change and come and go. Vedas can not be written and re-written. Commentaries can come and go.

My point was not a general point about western and eastern differences but a difference between Exoteric (more western at present time) and esoteric (more eastern at present) knowledge. The knowledge of Ajativada, is the pinnacle of the esoteric knowledge and, some how, at present this knowledge spreads from the east.

Exoteric faith puts control on an external god and then people kill each other in the name of that external God. On the other hand, esoteric faith leads one to take full responsibilty of oneself and the environment without involving the ego.


Om Namah Shivayya

atanu
08 August 2006, 12:23 AM
Namaste Willie,

The Aryan nobility of Ayodhya were originally attended by Vasishtha Rishi, and their ancient homeland was likely in northern Afghanistan (and beyond, to the Aral Sea).

When the Aryans first arrived on the northern plains of India, the Sindhu-Sarasvati population had already been living there for thousands of years, and their own ancient nobility were originally attended by Bhrigu Rishi.

The Aryans had been dispersing in other directions for a long time before they finally penetrated the Himalaya (c. 1500 BC), and some of the ancient sages and oracles of the Mediterranean region may well have been descended from Vasishtha.

And Cyavana Rishi, the first Bhargava who is not so ancient as to have become entirely mythical, possibly came to Gujarat originally from ancient Sumeria (c. 3100 BC).

None of this can easily be “scientifically” proven, but there is surely no reason so assume that all Rishis must be born only in India. ;)


Namaste Sarabhanga Ji,

Some questions:

In Ajativada what is time and what is Afganistan? Can Vasistha et al, be located in a narrow piece of waking world, which itself exists in consciousness of Vasistha?


Om Namah Shivayya

sarabhanga
08 August 2006, 12:52 AM
Namaste Atanu,

Ajativada is the ultimate Truth, and that is the Truth of Brahman, the perfect all encompassing perspective of God. And from that infinite point of view the truth is that NOTHING has ever or indeed can ever happen!

In order to explain some more temporary (at least, not unborn and immortal) historical truths it is necessary to venture into the realm of duality. And I have no problem with duality. Of course some recognition of duality is required for normal living (and certainly for communication), but that never denies the ultimate reality of Advaita and Ajativada.

atanu
08 August 2006, 01:15 AM
Namaste Atanu,

Ajativada is the ultimate Truth, and that is the Truth of Brahman, the perfect all encompassing perspective of God. And from that infinite point of view the truth is that NOTHING has ever or indeed can ever happen!

In order to explain some more temporary (at least, not unborn and immortal) historical truths it is necessary to venture into the realm of duality. And I have no problem with duality. Of course some recognition of duality is required for normal living (and certainly for communication), but that never denies the ultimate reality of Advaita and Ajativada.


Namaste,

I agree fully. What exists in your plane of consciousness exists since consciousness exists.

However, from the perspective of Vedas, Vashista is the Vishistha Guru --a mind born son of Brahma and surely a non-localized eternal teacher who is even now teaching us.

Om Namah Shivayya

sarabhanga
08 August 2006, 01:30 AM
Namaste Atanu,



vasiSTha refers to the best of his generation, and there have been [very] many vasiSThA; and every vasiSTha is ultimately born of the mitrAvaruNau.

atanu
08 August 2006, 10:18 AM
Namaste Atanu,

vasiSTha refers to the best of his generation, and there have been [very] many vasiSThA; and every vasiSTha is ultimately born of the mitrAvaruNau.


A digression again:

It is interesting. Bhrigu is also a son of Varuna.

Om Namah Shivayya

sarabhanga
09 August 2006, 01:04 AM
Namaste Atanu,



vasiSTha (superlative of vasu ~ “excellent, good, or beneficent”) indicates the “most excellent, best, or richest”.

RV 7:33 is addressed to the vasiSThaputra (“sons of vasiSTha”), and the title maitrAvarunI is explained:

“Verily, Vasishtha thou art son of Mitra and Varuna, Brahman, born of the will of Urvashi (‘widely extending’ ~ i.e. the dawn); and as a fallen drop, in heavenly fervor, all the Gods laid thee on a lotus-blossom.” [33.11]

The maitrAvaruNa priest is the first puruSa (assistant) of the hotR (the Rgveda priest).

And vasiSTha refers to the best of his generation ~ and there have been very many vasiSThA.


mitra is derived from mith, which means “to unite, pair, couple, meet (either as a friend or as an antagonist), alternate or engage in altercation”.

mith is related to mid, meaning both “to understand” and “to kill”, and its intensive form med ~ cf. medin, which indicates “a friend, companion, associate, partner, or ally”.

mitra is praised (alone) as “calling men to activity, sustaining the earth and the sky, and beholding all creatures with an unwinking eye”, and mitra is surely “the Sun”.

maitra (“belonging to mitra”) means “coming from or given by or belonging to a friend, friendly, amicable, benevolent, affectionate, or kind”.

And a maitra is the “friend of all creatures” ~ i.e. “a brAhmaNa who has arrived at the highest state of human perfection”.



And every vasiSTha is ultimately born of the mitrAvaruNau [i.e. brahma].


bhRgu RSi is named vAruNa (“relating or belonging or sacred to or given by varuNa”) or vAruNi (“son of varuNa”), although vasiSTha is also known as vAruNi. ;)

vAruNi (or vAruNI) indicates both soma and homa; and vAruNI is the eternal consort of varuNa, and of shiva (as umA).

And varuNa is “the All-enveloping Sky” ~ praised as the “King of the Gods”, “King of both Gods and men”, and “King of the Universe”; and described as “fashioning and upholding Heaven and Earth”, “possessing extraordinary power and wisdom”, “sending his spies or messengers throughout both worlds”, “numbering the very winkings of men’s eyes”, “hating falsehood” and “seizing transgressors with his noose”, and as “the guardian of immortality”; and often connected with “the waters”, especially of the atmosphere or firmament.

In essence, varuNa is rudra shiva, and mitra is nArAyaNa viSNu. :)

atanu
09 August 2006, 04:30 AM
Namaste Atanu,



mitra is derived from mith, which means “to unite, pair, couple, meet (either as a friend or as an antagonist), alternate or engage in altercation”.

mith is related to mid, meaning both “to understand” and “to kill”, and its intensive form med ~ cf. medin, which indicates “a friend, companion, associate, partner, or ally”.

mitra is praised (alone) as “calling men to activity, sustaining the earth and the sky, and beholding all creatures with an unwinking eye”, and mitra is surely “the Sun”.

maitra (“belonging to mitra”) means “coming from or given by or belonging to a friend, friendly, amicable, benevolent, affectionate, or kind”.

And a maitra is the “friend of all creatures” ~ i.e. “a brAhmaNa who has arrived at the highest state of human perfection”.



bhRgu RSi is named vAruNa (“relating or belonging or sacred to or given by varuNa”) or vAruNi (“son of varuNa”), although vasiSTha is also known as vAruNi. ;)

vAruNi (or vAruNI) indicates both soma and homa; and vAruNI is the eternal consort of varuNa, and of shiva (as umA).

And varuNa is “the All-enveloping Sky” ~ praised as the “King of the Gods”, “King of both Gods and men”, and “King of the Universe”; and described as “fashioning and upholding Heaven and Earth”, “possessing extraordinary power and wisdom”, “sending his spies or messengers throughout both worlds”, “numbering the very winkings of men’s eyes”, “hating falsehood” and “seizing transgressors with his noose”, and as “the guardian of immortality”; and often connected with “the waters”, especially of the atmosphere or firmament.

In essence, varuNa is rudra shiva, and mitra is nArAyaNa viSNu. :)


Namaste Sarabhanga Ji,

Your knowledge is vast and your posts always make interesting reading.


With respect to Mitra Varuna, however, there are two Rig Verses which may indicate something in addition to what you have already said.

A verse says: Vishnu you are attended by Mitra Varuna.

Another says: Rudra free us from the noose of Varuna. Rudra free us off the woes gods have sent to us.


Om Namh Shivayya

sarabhanga
09 August 2006, 05:41 AM
In essence, varuNa is [cognate with] rudra shiva, and mitra is [cognate with] nArAyaNa viSNu.




Vishnu you are attended by Mitra Varuna.

Can you please give a reference for this verse?




Rudra free us from the noose of Varuna.

mitra (as the eye of varuNa) is pashya (“beholding”); and pAshapANi (“noose holding”) varuNa is only pashupati rudra ~ and so:

“O Rudra, free us from your own noose”.

atanu
10 August 2006, 03:28 AM
Can you please give a reference for this verse?


mitra (as the eye of varuNa) is pashya (“beholding”); and pAshapANi (“noose holding”) varuNa is only pashupati rudra ~ and so:

“O Rudra, free us from your own noose”.

Namaste Sarabhanga Ji,

In the following verse is mentioned that Varuna and Asvins wait on the will of Vishnu, who is said to be the primordial seed of order.

RV Book 1 HYMN CLVI. Visnu

1. FAR-SHINING, widely famed, going thy wonted way, fed with the oil, be helpful. Mitra-like, to us.
So, Visnu, e'en the wise must swell thy song of praise, and he who hath oblations pay thee solemn rites.
2 He who brings gifts to him the Ancient and the Last, to Visnu who ordains, together with his Spouse,
Who tells the lofty birth of him the Lofty One, shall verily surpass in glory e'en his peer.
3 Him have ye satisfied, singers, as well as ye know, primeval germ of Order even from his birth.
Ye, knowing e'en his name, have told it forth: may we, Visnu, enjoy the grace of thee the Mighty One.
4 The Sovran Varuna and both the Asvins wait on this the will of him who guides the Marut host.
Visnu hath power supreme and might that finds the day, and with his Friend unbars the stable of the kine.
5 Even he the Heavenly One who came for fellowship, Visnu to Indra, godly to the godlier,
Who Maker, throned in three worlds, helps the Aryan man, and gives the worshipper his share of Holy Law.

End of citation

Vishnu is the Self born (Sumajjayana), rooted in Self.

And Pashupati is an aspect of Rudra truly. But there are other aspects because of which Upanishads and other scriptures like Yoga Vashista term Rudra Shiva as One without a second --- the primordial pure seed of concsiousness without which nothing exists. The awareness is rooted in Rudra Shiva.



Om Namah Shivayya

sarabhanga
10 August 2006, 04:22 AM
“The sovereign Varuna associates (himself) with the sacrifice of the pious worshipper, assisted by the company of the Maruts (i.e. the priests); the Ashvins (unite with it); Vishnu, with his friend (Indra), has supreme heaven-conferring power, and sends down the rains.” ~ RV. 1.156.4

In the Rigveda, neither Mitra nor Varuna is said to be the servant of Vishnu, who is himself generally known as the attendant power of Indra!

satay
10 August 2006, 09:12 AM
In the Rigveda, neither Mitra nor Varuna is said to be the servant of Vishnu, who is himself generally known as the attendant power of Indra!

namaste,

Vishun is attendant power of Indra? What does that mean?

sarabhanga
10 August 2006, 09:33 AM
Namaste Satay,

Vishnu is the attendant power (i.e. Shakti) of Indra. ;)

atanu
10 August 2006, 09:48 AM
“The sovereign Varuna associates (himself) with the sacrifice of the pious worshipper, assisted by the company of the Maruts (i.e. the priests); the Ashvins (unite with it); Vishnu, with his friend (Indra), has supreme heaven-conferring power, and sends down the rains.” ~ RV. 1.156.4

In the Rigveda, neither Mitra nor Varuna is said to be the servant of Vishnu, who is himself generally known as the attendant power of Indra!


Namaste Sarabhanga Ji,

Yes, I have seen two types of translations of the same verse in Rig and sama. Since the verse is addressed primarily to Vishnu, I thought the former translation might be more appropriate. But I am not sure.


It is difficult to assess till one is established in the following:

Yajur Veda iv. 4. 8.

(Thou I art) all overcoming through Agni; self-ruling through the sun; lord of strength through might; creator with the bull; bountiful through the sacrifice; heavenly through the sacrificial fee; slayer of enemies through rage; supporter of the body through kindliness; wealth through food; through the earth he hath won; (thou art) eater of food with verses; increased by the Vasat cry; protector of the body through the Saman; full of light with the Viraj; drinker of Soma through the holy power; with cows he supporteth the sacrifice; with lordly power men; with horse and car bearer of the bolt; lord with the seasons; enclosing with the year; unassailable through penance; the sun with bodies.




iv. 4. 9.

(Thou art) Prajapati in mind, when come to the Soma; the creator in the consecration; Savitr in the bearing; Pusan in the cow for the purchase of the Soma; Varuna when bound (in the cloth); Asura in the being bought; Mitra when purchased; Çipivista when put in place; delighter of men when being drawn forward; the overlord on arrival; Prajapati being led on; Agni at the Agnidh's altar; Brhaspati on being led from the Agnidh's altar; Indra at the oblation-holder; Aditi when put in place; Visnu when being taken down; Atharvan when made wet; Yama when pressed out; drinker of unpurified (Soma) when being cleansed; Vayu when purifying; Mitra as mixed with milk; the Manthin when mixed with groats; that of the All-gods when taken out; Rudra when offered; Vayu when covered up; the gazer on men when revealed; the food when it comes; the famed of the fathers; life when taken; the river when going to the final bath; the ocean when gone; the water when dipped; the heaven when arrived at completion.

End of citation


All gods (names and forms) are manifestations of the same consciousness that says I in me and you.


Om Namah Shivayya

atanu
11 August 2006, 03:55 AM
Yajur Veda iv. 4. 8.

(Thou I art) all overcoming through Agni; self-ruling through the sun; lord of strength through might; creator with the bull; bountiful through the sacrifice; heavenly through the sacrificial fee; slayer of enemies through rage; supporter of the body through kindliness; wealth through food; through the earth he hath won; (thou art) eater of food with verses; increased by the Vasat cry; protector of the body through the Saman; full of light with the Viraj; drinker of Soma through the holy power; with cows he supporteth the sacrifice; with lordly power men; with horse and car bearer of the bolt; lord with the seasons; enclosing with the year; unassailable through penance; the sun with bodies.




All gods (names and forms) are manifestations of the same consciousness that says I in me and you.



Om Namah Shivayya




And this unnameble which gives rise to aham is surely reflected as Shiva with his bull and consort in the minds of sages of yore and now.

And the aham that arises and fills up everything with the cry of "I am Cipivista" is surely Vishnu.


Shiva and Vishnu are two sides of the same coin.


Om Namah Shivayya

satay
11 August 2006, 03:04 PM
Shiva and Vishnu are two sides of the same coin.


Om Namah Shivayya

:)

some days he creates the universe by his will some days with his dance or perhaps he wills it while he is dancing!

on the one hand he promises to come down again and again to teach us dharma on the other he chooses to live with us in this mrityuloka as a jagad guru and teaches us dharma...

on the one hand he is the father and thus superior by nature on the other he is full of karuna and shows how to stay awake in maya and teaches how to 'be' like him.

on the one hand he acts like a silly boy running around with girls on the other he stirs up the ocean and drinks and stores the 'poison' in his throat while letting us drink ganga!

isvarah paramah krishna sac-cid-ananda vigrahah
anadir adir govindah sarva karana karanam

yes, bhai...he is the only coin.

:cool1:

atanu
13 August 2006, 05:49 AM
:)

some days he creates the universe by his will some days with his dance or perhaps he wills it while he is dancing!

on the one hand he promises to come down again and again to teach us dharma on the other he chooses to live with us in this mrityuloka as a jagad guru and teaches us dharma...

on the one hand he is the father and thus superior by nature on the other he is full of karuna and shows how to stay awake in maya and teaches how to 'be' like him.

on the one hand he acts like a silly boy running around with girls on the other he stirs up the ocean and drinks and stores the 'poison' in his throat while letting us drink ganga!

isvarah paramah krishna sac-cid-ananda vigrahah
anadir adir govindah sarva karana karanam

yes, bhai...he is the only coin.

:cool1:



Namaste Satay,

Krishnaaya Vishvaroopaaya Devakinandanaayacha
Shivabhaktaaya Mitraaya Gitaamritaduhe Namah

Om

atanu
14 August 2006, 04:50 AM
Namaste Satay,

Krishnaaya Vishvaroopaaya Devakinandanaayacha
Shivabhaktaaya Mitraaya Gitaamritaduhe Namah

Om


True Varuna and Mitra.

TruthSeeker
15 August 2006, 02:38 PM
Namaste Sarabhanga Ji,

Some questions:

In Ajativada what is time and what is Afganistan? Can Vasistha et al, be located in a narrow piece of waking world, which itself exists in consciousness of Vasistha?


Om Namah Shivayya

Atanuji, there is a saying that always talk from your level of consciousness. Else there is nothing to talk about! Dont go to the absolute please!! Atleast that wont irritate some of the Vaishnavas here, and dont become the cause of their ban.;)

TruthSeeker
15 August 2006, 04:18 PM
namaste,

Vishun is attendant power of Indra? What does that mean?

Haha, there may be many Vishnus!! There is one supreme being named Vishnu, there is an Aditya of that name, there is a gandharva of that name, and there is a neighbour of that name!

Harivamsa mentions Krishna to be a brother of Indra, of course Bhagavan was son to his father, a disciple to his guru and so on. The Vishnu styled the Atman is not related to such associations.

In the absence of qualifiers, Vishnu refers to the highest all pervading spirit Atman - our Paramaguru and Adiguru who shows the way to Shiva.