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

One traditionalist's view of puujaa

Expand Messages
  • rajsand
    namo namaH, I have been a lurker in this list almost since its inception. As is evident it took me considerable time gather enough courage to attempt present
    Message 1 of 5 , May 6, 2010
      namo namaH,

      I have been a lurker in this list almost since its inception. As is evident it took me considerable time gather enough courage to attempt present some of my humble experiences.

      I will talk of puujaa in this post.

      puujaa IMHO is an parallel development to yaj~na practice. As Hindu/Indian subcontinent has always viewed with the pa~nca mahaa bhuutaa.

      showing gratefulness and expressing joy is as natural a feeling as hunger.

      so there are different upaasanaa vidhi.

      Each vidhi is an experiment. Just to record the outcomes . and _not_ reacting to it.

      In this context, i cannot understand worship/faith/belief etc.

      Am I ignorant?

      Regards,

      aa no bhadraaH kratavo yantu vishvataH
      (Let noble thoughts come from the universe -- veda)

      Rajagopal
    • Anand Dixit
      Hi,   I think this group is doing analysis of religion(s) of its origin and evolution. Each religous practice in itself it offering to the God. Those who
      Message 2 of 5 , May 6, 2010
        Hi,
         
        I think this group is doing analysis of religion(s) of its origin and evolution. Each religous practice in itself it offering to the God. Those who condemn this practices either don't know the real meaning ( scientific or religious ) of such practices or they are just talking about the unknown gost :).
         
        If we really observe most of the religions in this world are  originated or popularised by single man except for hinduism. Islam - Md. Piegambar. Christianity - Jesus Christ. Budhhism - Buddha etc. It is hinduism that is not just preachings of one single man, rather it is a way of life. Several rituals of the religion practiced today are several thousand year older and are unchanged. I don't think that anyone is so foolish to practice some rituals for thousands of years without any meaning.
         
        As I read some where that the religions must be revived from time to time (I don't know whether I am quoting Yadaa Yadaa hi dharmasya....)  We don't know that any awataar is born to protect the religion or we have to follow some baabba or guru.
         
        When it comes to the religious rituals of today they have their meaning and effect and some of them have lost both meaning and effect or they are being manipulated by priests and religious leader.
         
        Any ritual that makes you feel that you are near to god must be practiced. Splitting the hair over them is really not the goal of the doer. It is the job of an intellectual may be just doing it for pleasure or you are getting paid for it in your department :). I don't find any light of truth in such intellectual hair splitting discussions. 
         
        I think truth is just personally universal
         
         
        Anand Dixit 

        --- On Thu, 5/6/10, rajsand <rajsand@...> wrote:


        From: rajsand <rajsand@...>
        Subject: [TheHeathenInHisBlindness] One traditionalist's view of puujaa
        To: TheHeathenInHisBlindness@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Thursday, May 6, 2010, 11:42 AM


         



        namo namaH,

        I have been a lurker in this list almost since its inception. As is evident it took me considerable time gather enough courage to attempt present some of my humble experiences.

        I will talk of puujaa in this post.

        puujaa IMHO is an parallel development to yaj~na practice. As Hindu/Indian subcontinent has always viewed with the pa~nca mahaa bhuutaa.

        showing gratefulness and expressing joy is as natural a feeling as hunger.

        so there are different upaasanaa vidhi.

        Each vidhi is an experiment. Just to record the outcomes . and _not_ reacting to it.

        In this context, i cannot understand worship/faith/ belief etc.

        Am I ignorant?

        Regards,

        aa no bhadraaH kratavo yantu vishvataH
        (Let noble thoughts come from the universe -- veda)

        Rajagopal











        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • rajsand
        namo namaH, ... This is exactly what I dispute in the sense that when the tradition treats every perceptible component in an equitable matter per individual
        Message 3 of 5 , May 6, 2010
          namo namaH,


          --- In TheHeathenInHisBlindness@yahoogroups.com, Anand Dixit <anandgdixit@...> wrote:
          >
          > Hi,
          >  
          > I think this group is doing analysis of religion(s) of its origin
          > and evolution.

          This is exactly what I dispute in the sense that when the tradition treats every perceptible component in an equitable matter per individual equips. Now to impose the one opinion is quite simply silly at the least and intellectual genocide at the worst. </rant>

          Now imho it is impossible for the thought stream which has dichotomy int its's DNa can ever understand that it is a part of a whole. It will tend to view the whole as the other and will try to to increase its tribe to match the whole which obviously it cannot.

          Let us call this dichotomic throught streams as religion for the case of this post. And Oh! please note that these are just theoratical. They never theorised, experimented and recorded results honestly for its posterity as our R^ishhi-s have done.

          The most important thing about the R^ishhi-s was "It worked (or not) for me and the steps and results are here for your to try it out. YMMV <shrug>"


          >  
          > I think truth is just personally universal
          >  
          >  


          Now iff we take the Person in the "personally" as purushha... adn view the whole issue.

          The dichotomies make the purushha (within and outside) inaccessible and hence the innumerable branches of subjects, schools and what not... like six blind men describing elephant.

          Regards,

          Rajagopal
        • Anand Dixit
          It is general tendancy of the public that they just want to gossip around and claim their rights on the subject. It should be the responsibility of the
          Message 4 of 5 , May 7, 2010
            It is general tendancy of the public that they just want to gossip around and claim their rights on the subject. It should be the responsibility of the individual to recognize such people and refrain from them.
             
            I don't think so anyone has till today described god in any human understandable method.
             
            I am approaching this in a more scientific manner ( http:///divineseeker.blogspot.com ) 


            --- On Fri, 5/7/10, rajsand <rajsand@...> wrote:


            From: rajsand <rajsand@...>
            Subject: [TheHeathenInHisBlindness] Re: One traditionalist's view of puujaa
            To: TheHeathenInHisBlindness@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Friday, May 7, 2010, 4:32 AM


             



            namo namaH,

            --- In TheHeathenInHisBlin dness@yahoogroup s.com, Anand Dixit <anandgdixit@ ...> wrote:
            >
            > Hi,
            >  
            > I think this group is doing analysis of religion(s) of its origin
            > and evolution.

            This is exactly what I dispute in the sense that when the tradition treats every perceptible component in an equitable matter per individual equips. Now to impose the one opinion is quite simply silly at the least and intellectual genocide at the worst. </rant>

            Now imho it is impossible for the thought stream which has dichotomy int its's DNa can ever understand that it is a part of a whole. It will tend to view the whole as the other and will try to to increase its tribe to match the whole which obviously it cannot.

            Let us call this dichotomic throught streams as religion for the case of this post. And Oh! please note that these are just theoratical. They never theorised, experimented and recorded results honestly for its posterity as our R^ishhi-s have done.

            The most important thing about the R^ishhi-s was "It worked (or not) for me and the steps and results are here for your to try it out. YMMV <shrug>"

            >  
            > I think truth is just personally universal
            >  
            >  

            Now iff we take the Person in the "personally" as purushha... adn view the whole issue.

            The dichotomies make the purushha (within and outside) inaccessible and hence the innumerable branches of subjects, schools and what not... like six blind men describing elephant.

            Regards,

            Rajagopal











            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Kranthikeshvara K
             The most important thing about the R^ishhi-s was It worked (or not) for me and the steps and results are here for your to try it out.  How
            Message 5 of 5 , May 7, 2010
              <quote> The most important thing about the R^ishhi-s was "It worked (or not) for me and the steps and results are here for your to try it out. <unquote>
              How did you figure this out? 



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.