Devoting to God

[goodlife]

Hii

Just a thought across my mind while coming back to home from work.

Have noticed lately that everytime some good happens or am in a good mood or there's a sense of achievement, i always end up thanking God and expressing my gratitude.

Was thinking if that is a right thing to do in the sense that

a) where is appreciation our effort?

b) we dont particularly go after him when things are not exactly going right.

This actually reminds me of a couplet from Kabir:
" Dukh me sumiran sab karen, sukh me kare na koy,
Sukh me sumiran jo kare, to dukh kahe ko hoy"

loosely translated "Everyone remembers god in adverse times, no one remembers him in good times,
if one remembers him in good times, then there wont be any bad times"

just seeking opinion of the forum members if they have gone through similar thought process.

thanks

love, peace and a goodlife to all.

[eriko]

I do it. Sometimes. Even if I don't pray but I like thanking. Though I take a name of diety or just simply addressing God but actually I am thanking the Universe.

You should read The Secret by Rhonda Byrne. According to me the secret is just one aspect of the Law of Karma. Of course this hasn't been stated as such. But since we are Hindus and undersatnd Karma, you don't miss the connection between the content of the book and the Law itself.

[goodlife]

I do it. Sometimes. Even if I don't pray but I like thanking. Though I take a name of diety or just simply addressing God but actually I am thanking the Universe.

You should read The Secret by Rhonda Byrne. According to me the secret is just one aspect of the Law of Karma. Of course this hasn't been stated as such. But since we are Hindus and undersatnd Karma, you don't miss the connection between the content of the book and the Law itself.

Hi Eriko

Boy this Secret really works. Would you believe it that this thread owes it origin to the book itself!!!! . I follow it all the time and trust me my life has changed because of that.

Highly Recommended to all forum members.

YOu know that's what I have been thinking. When i' am thanking ( owe it to the book i confess), i do it for a specific diety though on a larger scale i understand its the universe/paramatma/god at work.

but the question still lingers on..

thanks

[Spiritualseeker]

A good film to watch is "What the Bleep do we Know" talks about intention and thoughts.

[sanjaya]

Hii

Just a thought across my mind while coming back to home from work.

Have noticed lately that everytime some good happens or am in a good mood or there's a sense of achievement, i always end up thanking God and expressing my gratitude.

Was thinking if that is a right thing to do in the sense that

a) where is appreciation our effort?

b) we dont particularly go after him when things are not exactly going right.

This actually reminds me of a couplet from Kabir:
" Dukh me sumiran sab karen, sukh me kare na koy,
Sukh me sumiran jo kare, to dukh kahe ko hoy"

loosely translated "Everyone remembers god in adverse times, no one remembers him in good times,
if one remembers him in good times, then there wont be any bad times"

just seeking opinion of the forum members if they have gone through similar thought process.

thanks

love, peace and a goodlife to all.

This is a most interesting question, one that I've thought about myself. My aunt always used to tell me to thank God every night before bed for the day that he had given...even if it was a bad day! She used to be fully devoted in her pujas and repetitions of mantras, in both good and bad circumstances.

As far as a.) goes, I remember that in the Mahabharata, Sri Krishna told Arjuna not to believe that the things he was doing were by his own hand, but that Krishna (that is, God) was really punishing the Kauravas for all of their evil deeds. So it's certainly right to say that God is responsible for everything that happens. On the other hand, Krishna also told Arjuna that it was his duty to fight the Kauravas, which I think means that he would accumulate good karma for his actions. I guess that might be where appreciation for one's own actions comes in. It would be an interesting paradox: God is responsible for our actions, but he rewards us for them when we do good.

Of course, maybe I'm way off here. Anyone feel free to correct me.

[Onkara]

It would be an interesting paradox: God is responsible for our actions, but he rewards us for them when we do good.

.

Namast� Sanjaya
You raise a good point here. I often finding myself thanking God, if only to myself.

It appears the difference is when we accept and submit to His will, allowing ourselves to be part of Him or moved by His will which is the turning point in our relationship with this interesting paradox. Before we submit to His will we are still seperated by our desires or belief in individuality it seems. So we feel rewarded or perhaps even punished by God.

When we feel seperate we are then victim to good and bad luck. We could believe that it is our individual actions which are prompting this good or bad luck. Whereas when we become His servant (or One with Him) we no longer depend on Good luck, as all that happens is His will. With a part of our submission there appears to be the acceptance of both good and bad as we recognise all as being His will and so unquestionably correct. In fact luck no longer exists and neither do good nor bad things; they are just the way it appeared when we believed we were individuals seperate from God.

I offer only a quick draft of one way to expand on your interesting idea.

I also find it interesting too that God comes to our thoughts, almost intuitively.

[sanjaya]

When we feel seperate we are then victim to good and bad luck. We could believe that it is our individual actions which are prompting this good or bad luck. Whereas when we become His servant (or One with Him) we no longer depend on Good luck, as all that happens is His will. With a part of our submission there appears to be the acceptance of both good and bad as we recognise all as being His will and so unquestionably correct. In fact luck no longer exists and neither do good nor bad things; they are just the way it appeared when we believed we were individuals seperate from God.

Wow, this is an excellent observation, one that I will have to consider much more carefully. It reminds me of what Sri Krishna said when he told Arjuna that an illumined person will not mourn for the living or the dead. Perhaps this is because such a person has surrendered himself so fully to God that he accepts all things as God's will.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté sanjaya

On the other hand, Krishna also told Arjuna that it was his duty to fight the Kauravas, which I think means that he would accumulate good karma for his actions. I guess that might be where appreciation for one's own actions comes in. It would be an interesting paradox: God is responsible for our actions, but he rewards us for them when we do good.

What is your opinion on what 'good karma' is? How would you define it? Would 'good karma' be a selection of either śreyas or preyas ?

The kaṭha upaniṣad (chapter 2, 2nd śloka) talks of śreyas (conducive to welfare i.e. of higher value) and preyas (dearer , more agreeable , more desired i.e. pleasant for here and now, amenable to worldly life and accommodations). It says the following ( Yama is talking to naciketas&#185
Both śreyas and preyas approach man. The wise fully surveying them (both) , discriminates and chooses śreyas in preference to preyas. The ignorant interested in worldly well-being chooses ( really the word is 'thus consumes' or vṛṇīte) preyas.


So does this assist us in determining what is good and what is not so good karma? Do we think good karma is then the delivery of or accumulation of benefit? And that benefit turns into a more ~leisurely ~ life? Or it is it something higher or different then this?

Any thoughts on this matter?

praṇām

words

• naciketa नचिकेत- of a man; is rooted in cit to perceive , fix the mind upon , attend to , be attentive , observe , take notice of ; 'na' is not , no , nor , neither.
  • Hence na + cit is to not take notice of, or be attentive or know.
  • keta केत desire , wish , will , intention ; is also rooted in cit ; Hence na + keta is without desire or wish

[sanjaya]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namast� sanjaya



What is your opinion on what 'good karma' is? How would you define it? Would 'good karma' be a selection of either śreyas or preyas ?

The kaṭha upaniṣad (chapter 2, 2nd śloka) talks of śreyas (conducive to welfare i.e. of higher value) and preyas (dearer , more agreeable , more desired i.e. pleasant for here and now, amenable to worldly life and accommodations). It says the following ( Yama is talking to naciketas�)
Both śreyas and preyas approach man. The wise fully surveying them (both) , discriminates and chooses śreyas in preference to preyas. The ignorant interested in worldly well-being chooses ( really the word is 'thus consumes' or vṛṇīte) preyas.


So does this assist us in determining what is good and what is not so good karma? Do we think good karma is then the delivery of or accumulation of benefit? And that benefit turns into a more ~leisurely ~ life? Or it is it something higher or different then this?

Any thoughts on this matter?

praṇām

words

• naciketa नचिकेत- of a man; is rooted in cit to perceive , fix the mind upon , attend to , be attentive , observe , take notice of ; 'na' is not , no , nor , neither.
  • Hence na + cit is to not take notice of, or be attentive or know.
  • keta केत desire , wish , will , intention ; is also rooted in cit ; Hence na + keta is without desire or wish

That's a very important question! From what I've read in Hindu Scriptures, God's blessing (or "good karma," as we sometimes call it), doesn't necessarily mean worldly wealth. Indeed, worldly comforts might even be detrimental to one's spiritual well-being. Here in America we've seen how wealthy people are paranoid about holding onto their wealth, and how they'll even do evil deeds to accumulate more of it. On the other hand, most of our saints have lived in poverty. Shirdi Sai Baba is one example I can think of. He lived in a masjid for most of his life and got his food from dakshina. Perhaps those who have done good deeds, either in their present life or in past lives, will be rewarded with a closer relationship with God.

You seem to be pretty knowledgable on this topic, so I would be most interested to know what you think.

[Eastern Mind]

That's a very important question! From what I've read in Hindu Scriptures, God's blessing (or "good karma," as we sometimes call it), doesn't necessarily mean worldly wealth. Indeed, worldly comforts might even be detrimental to one's spiritual well-being. Here in America we've seen how wealthy people are paranoid about holding onto their wealth, and how they'll even do evil deeds to accumulate more of it. On the other hand, most of our saints have lived in poverty. Shirdi Sai Baba is one example I can think of. He lived in a masjid for most of his life and got his food from dakshina. Perhaps those who have done good deeds, either in their present life or in past lives, will be rewarded with a closer relationship with God.

You seem to be pretty knowledgable on this topic, so I would be most interested to know what you think.

Sanjaya: Interesting stuff, karma. I understand that there is no good or bad, rather 'that which leads us closer', and 'that which leads us further away'. So you have your karma, as a result of past experiences, in this life, or in earlier ones. We need to accept this just as we need to accept anything that has happened in this life. The idiom, 'it's all water under the bridge' works for me.

For me, the real question is: How can I live moment to moment so that future karmas are of the 'that which leads us closer' kind. Practising common sense, moral and ethical behaviour, kindness, etc.

Those people you mentioned who accumulate wealth by unscrupulous means, or are uncharitable to the nth degree, (and there are 'Hindus' in that group) certainly have little or poor understanding of karma.

But it is complicated. We had discussions on this earlier. Perhaps Yajvan or Saidevo can remember where we put it. Regardless, if I remember correctly, we concluded that it isn't the action itself(eye for an eye) that returns, but rather an action that has similar impact. Also the piousness of bhakti can ease karma, or certainly reaction to karma.

Aum Namasivaya