Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Faith in Authority vs Logical Reasoning

Expand Messages
  • Narasimha P.V.R. Rao
    Namaste Nicholas, I am all for complete faith in authority. Those who personally know me know me as a devout Hindu, with complete faith in maharshis. If I
    Message 1 of 3 , May 7, 2005
      Namaste Nicholas,

      I am all for complete faith in authority. Those who personally know me know me as a devout Hindu, with complete faith in maharshis.

      If I question something in BPHS, it does not amount to questioning Parasara.

      Upanishats say that words are not knowledge. "The intent of the words" is knowledge and it cannot be fully captured by words.

      Word and its intent are two totally different things. Words try to capture the intent, but they cannot fully do so. Unpanishats are very very wise in acknowledging it!!

      Words and sentences can have multiple meanings at different levels. A scripture may not have intended to say something it seems to be saying. Thus, we cannot stop with words and their apparent meaning. We have to investigate and understand the correct intent. That understanding can only be experienced and felt, but not put in words. It comes only with constant pondering and meditation.

      Thus, logical argument, reasoning, pondering over something and meditating over something are a natural process of correctly and completely understanding the intent of something. There is no disrespect in it.

      At the risk of stirring a hornet's nest, I will say that this open-mindedness which is so fundamental in Hindu philosophy seems to be missing in some other cultures and traditions. Some cultures seem to take scriptural words too literally and rigidly and do not seem to strive to understand the true meaning (which cannot be put in words but can only be experienced).

      Personally, I see no clash between respect for scriptures and sages and logical reasoning/argument over their words.

      * * *

      The word "pada" means word or symbol. The word "bhava" means meaning or intent. Bhava is the real one, but it has no clear expression. It is internal and can only be felt or experienced. It has no tangible manifestation. Pada is artificial, but it is the only thing that manifests in a tangible way. Pada is the only thing using which we can attempt to communicate the bhava. Pada tries to represent bhava, but cannot do so perfectly.

      No wonder houses in astrology are called bhavas (meaning/intent) and their arudhas are called padas (words/symbols)! Houses show intangibles and padas show tangible manifestations/symbols. For example, if the 4th house shows happiness from vehicle, the pada of 4th house shows the tangible symbol of it, i.e. vehicle itself.

      May Jupiter's light shine on us,
      Narasimha
      ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net
      Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org
      SJC website: http://www.SriJagannath.org
      ----------------------------------------------------------------

      > Dear Members
      >
      > Another perculiarity is that we are supposed to develop faith in authority/scripture rather than argument/reason
      > The question then is when do we stop with one and work with the other .
      >
      > Nicholas


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Chandrashekhar
      Dear Narasimha, Very well said. Chandrashekhar. ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Message 2 of 3 , May 7, 2005
        Dear Narasimha,
        Very well said.
        Chandrashekhar.

        Narasimha P.V.R. Rao wrote:

        > Namaste Nicholas,
        >
        > I am all for complete faith in authority. Those who personally know me
        > know me as a devout Hindu, with complete faith in maharshis.
        >
        > If I question something in BPHS, it does not amount to questioning
        > Parasara.
        >
        > Upanishats say that words are not knowledge. "The intent of the words"
        > is knowledge and it cannot be fully captured by words.
        >
        > Word and its intent are two totally different things. Words try to
        > capture the intent, but they cannot fully do so. Unpanishats are very
        > very wise in acknowledging it!!
        >
        > Words and sentences can have multiple meanings at different levels. A
        > scripture may not have intended to say something it seems to be
        > saying. Thus, we cannot stop with words and their apparent meaning. We
        > have to investigate and understand the correct intent. That
        > understanding can only be experienced and felt, but not put in words.
        > It comes only with constant pondering and meditation.
        >
        > Thus, logical argument, reasoning, pondering over something and
        > meditating over something are a natural process of correctly and
        > completely understanding the intent of something. There is no
        > disrespect in it.
        >
        > At the risk of stirring a hornet's nest, I will say that this
        > open-mindedness which is so fundamental in Hindu philosophy seems to
        > be missing in some other cultures and traditions. Some cultures seem
        > to take scriptural words too literally and rigidly and do not seem to
        > strive to understand the true meaning (which cannot be put in words
        > but can only be experienced).
        >
        > Personally, I see no clash between respect for scriptures and sages
        > and logical reasoning/argument over their words.
        >
        > * * *
        >
        > The word "pada" means word or symbol. The word "bhava" means meaning
        > or intent. Bhava is the real one, but it has no clear expression. It
        > is internal and can only be felt or experienced. It has no tangible
        > manifestation. Pada is artificial, but it is the only thing that
        > manifests in a tangible way. Pada is the only thing using which we can
        > attempt to communicate the bhava. Pada tries to represent bhava, but
        > cannot do so perfectly.
        >
        > No wonder houses in astrology are called bhavas (meaning/intent) and
        > their arudhas are called padas (words/symbols)! Houses show
        > intangibles and padas show tangible manifestations/symbols. For
        > example, if the 4th house shows happiness from vehicle, the pada of
        > 4th house shows the tangible symbol of it, i.e. vehicle itself.
        >
        > May Jupiter's light shine on us,
        > Narasimha
        > ----------------------------------------------------------------
        > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net
        > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org
        > SJC website: http://www.SriJagannath.org
        > ----------------------------------------------------------------
        >
        > > Dear Members
        > >
        > > Another perculiarity is that we are supposed to develop faith in
        > authority/scripture rather than argument/reason
        > > The question then is when do we stop with one and work with the other .
        > >
        > > Nicholas
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
        >
        > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JyotishGroup/
        >
        > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > JyotishGroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > <mailto:JyotishGroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
        >
        > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
        > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
        >
        >


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • vijayadas_pradeep
        Dear Narasimha ji Well said.I have been trying to convey this to shri Ranjan in many mails.Faith is needed at some places and there is no need for open
        Message 3 of 3 , May 7, 2005
          Dear Narasimha ji

          Well said.I have been trying to convey this to shri Ranjan in many
          mails.Faith is needed at some places and there is no need for open
          mindedness everywhere.

          But our own theories cannot carry the same authenticity as we are
          mortals ,unless we can explain w.r to scriptures - in word or intent.

          Prashara did say this amsha is for this and so on.

          If 9ths Lord is in Parijathamsha, the native will visit holy places,
          if in Uttamāńśa, has been visiting holy places in the past births and
          he will do the same within this life-time, if in Gopurāńśa, will
          perform sacrificial rites, if in Simhasanāńś, will be mighty and
          truthful, conquerer of his senses and will concentrate only on the
          Brahman, giving up all religions, if in Paravatāńśa, will be the
          greatest of ascetics, if in Devalokāńśa, will be an ascetic, holding a
          cudgel (Lagudi), or he will be a religious mendicant, that has
          renounced all mundane attachments and carrying three long staves, tied
          together, in his right hand (Tridandin) and, if in Brahmalokāńśa, will
          perform Aswamedh Yagya (Horse Sacrifice) and will attain the state of
          Lord Indra, if in Iravatāńś, will be a synonym of dharma, or virtues
          just, as Lord Ram and Yudhishtira.

          Thus even past births can be seen from the ' √°mshas ' attained by our
          ninth lord( bhavas are common factors for the jataka -take any shloka
          ,it conveys).Do we need more proof.

          Thanks
          Pradeep
          --- In JyotishGroup@yahoogroups.com, Chandrashekhar
          <chandrashekhar46@y...> wrote:
          > Dear Narasimha,
          > Very well said.
          > Chandrashekhar.
          >
          > Narasimha P.V.R. Rao wrote:
          >
          > > Namaste Nicholas,
          > >
          > > I am all for complete faith in authority. Those who personally
          know me
          > > know me as a devout Hindu, with complete faith in maharshis.
          > >
          > > If I question something in BPHS, it does not amount to questioning
          > > Parasara.
          > >
          > > Upanishats say that words are not knowledge. "The intent of the
          words"
          > > is knowledge and it cannot be fully captured by words.
          > >
          > > Word and its intent are two totally different things. Words try to
          > > capture the intent, but they cannot fully do so. Unpanishats are very
          > > very wise in acknowledging it!!
          > >
          > > Words and sentences can have multiple meanings at different levels. A
          > > scripture may not have intended to say something it seems to be
          > > saying. Thus, we cannot stop with words and their apparent
          meaning. We
          > > have to investigate and understand the correct intent. That
          > > understanding can only be experienced and felt, but not put in words.
          > > It comes only with constant pondering and meditation.
          > >
          > > Thus, logical argument, reasoning, pondering over something and
          > > meditating over something are a natural process of correctly and
          > > completely understanding the intent of something. There is no
          > > disrespect in it.
          > >
          > > At the risk of stirring a hornet's nest, I will say that this
          > > open-mindedness which is so fundamental in Hindu philosophy seems to
          > > be missing in some other cultures and traditions. Some cultures seem
          > > to take scriptural words too literally and rigidly and do not seem to
          > > strive to understand the true meaning (which cannot be put in words
          > > but can only be experienced).
          > >
          > > Personally, I see no clash between respect for scriptures and sages
          > > and logical reasoning/argument over their words.
          > >
          > > * * *
          > >
          > > The word "pada" means word or symbol. The word "bhava" means meaning
          > > or intent. Bhava is the real one, but it has no clear expression. It
          > > is internal and can only be felt or experienced. It has no tangible
          > > manifestation. Pada is artificial, but it is the only thing that
          > > manifests in a tangible way. Pada is the only thing using which we
          can
          > > attempt to communicate the bhava. Pada tries to represent bhava, but
          > > cannot do so perfectly.
          > >
          > > No wonder houses in astrology are called bhavas (meaning/intent) and
          > > their arudhas are called padas (words/symbols)! Houses show
          > > intangibles and padas show tangible manifestations/symbols. For
          > > example, if the 4th house shows happiness from vehicle, the pada of
          > > 4th house shows the tangible symbol of it, i.e. vehicle itself.
          > >
          > > May Jupiter's light shine on us,
          > > Narasimha
          > > ----------------------------------------------------------------
          > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net
          > > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org
          > > SJC website: http://www.SriJagannath.org
          > > ----------------------------------------------------------------
          > >
          > > > Dear Members
          > > >
          > > > Another perculiarity is that we are supposed to develop faith in
          > > authority/scripture rather than argument/reason
          > > > The question then is when do we stop with one and work with the
          other .
          > > >
          > > > Nicholas
          > >
          > >
          > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >
          > >
          > >
          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          > > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
          > >
          > > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
          > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JyotishGroup/
          > >
          > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          > > JyotishGroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          > >
          <mailto:JyotishGroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
          > >
          > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
          > > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
          > >
          > >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.