Monday, April 26, 2010

#000A REPLIES TO COMMENTS OF MR. KRISHNA

Mr. KRISHNA commented as under, at my post #014:
People are free to believe whatever they want...But trying to falsify and confuse others is not acceptable. 'Moksha' is discussed in detail through out Gita which is considered to be written around three thousand years before Budha. So why Sankara has to be bring it from Budhism ?

Same way, Mr Multisubj, you are quoting from Swamiji's letters which were intended only for a particular reader. That means his words and ideas were chosen specifically for the reader to get the message through. It will be wrong if we, after hundred years, try to interpret without knowing the head or tail of why it was written ! It is ridiculous that you question, swamiji's knowledge on Gita, while all his speeches are filled with innumerable quotes from our holy scriptures like Vedas, Gita and Upanishads.
I furnish below the item-by-item replies:

People are free to believe whatever they want...But trying to falsify and confuse others is not acceptable.

Reply: This applies not only to me, but to everyone. I invite your proof of how I am falsifying.

'Moksha' is discussed in detail through out Gita which is considered to be written around three thousand years before Budha. So why Sankara has to be bring it from Budhism ?

Reply : Proof needed for the 3,000 + 600 + 2010 years of the age of Gita is needed. The counting of kaliyuga abdams (years elapsed since the entry of the Age of Wickedness) counting in panchangams is not sufficient historical evidence, because panchangams are things of recent past. If you want to believe the stories of purana pandits, nobody will stop you. This is a free world. If X society feels that burqa for women is very friendly to women, nobody will stop them. Every religion, society, is entitled to its blind beliefs.

Same way, Mr Multisubj, you are quoting from Swamiji's letters which were intended only for a particular reader. That means his words and ideas were chosen specifically for the reader to get the message through. It will be wrong if we, after hundred years, try to interpret without knowing the head or tail of why it was written !

Reply: Monks are not private men. Vivekananda was not a private person, once he went into the domain of preaching , spreading religion and making money. How can a person who is worshipped by 1.1 billion Indians have one appearance in public and another appearance of overheated nerves in private? Besides, it is not "I" who published the letters of Vivekananda. It is his sectarians (institutions of his sect) who published them. What is the purpose of the publication, if not for discussion? There are 500,000 writers on Internet who are publishing the quotes of Vivekananda, praising whatever he said or wrote. If 500,000 writers can publish his quotes selectively, and lift him to sky, why is it that one person like me cannot interpret quotes not covered by them. Everybody is interpreting his quotes only after 150 years. What message Vivekananda was giving to Ms. Christina Greenstidal when he sent a signed document asking her to countersign? What message Vivekananda was conveying when he asks her to send photo so that he can check how much fat she has built in. What message was he communicating when he invites her for a
"... They all are expected here in November, and will have a "hot time in this old town" etc. I pray you can come, and the Mother will open the door for it. I cannot but say my prayers mostly have been heard, up to date."
.

What is the object of the publication of his letters by his sectarians, if reading them are not going to help us to know the head or tail of why they were written? What for photos are asked? What for a 'hot time in old town' is celebrated? What for signed documents are sent?


It is ridiculous that you question, swamiji's knowledge on Gita, while all his speeches are filled with innumerable quotes from our holy scriptures like Vedas, Gita and Upanishads.


First of all, it is dificult to ascertain how many speeches of Vivekananda were genuine and not made up. He was under contract with a publicity firm during his first visit, who were managing his shows and newspaper publicity. Many of the speeches might have been thoroughly revised after including the innumerable quotes.

Quoting from scriptures is different from an ability to analyse and interpret. The very context of the Gita in Mahabharata indicates that Arjuna was asked to perform his duty as imposed by his caste. A person of warrior caste was to fight and he was to fight blindly. The war of Mahabharata was not for defending India. There was no patriotism involved in it. It was just a family quarrel between brothers' children. It was a battle for succession. Actually, "Raajyam" should not have been private property and ought not to have been an object of inheritance. What duty was there for the warriors to fight? If the five Pandavas brothers and hundred Kaurava brothers wanted to fight, they should have fought among themselves without sacrificing millions of soldiers, horses, and elephants. In fact, Arjuna was right when he hesitated to kill people and eat the bloody meal. There was no ignorance in that. There was no issue of "Karma" involved in that. There was no place for Atma or Paramatma in that. Even Gita was not sincere about real Paramatma. It (the priests) wanted to present Krishna as the Paramatma. They wanted to enforce the four caste system. Had Vivekananda read Gita thoroughly, he could have easily identified the selfishness of those who inserted Gita into Mahabharata. He could have identified that the whole Gita smacks of casteism. You can see Moksha Sanyasa Yoga Chapter 18 verses 42, 43, 44 which are very clear.

These things apply even to Ramayana. You can see the context of Rama wandering in the forest searching for Sita. He finds Jatayu bird. Jatayu bird preaches him the four caste system. It tells him that Brahmanas were born from heads, Kshatriyas were born from chest, Vysyas were born from thighs and Sudras were born from feet. How does a bird know all this? Priests told it!

As far as quoting from scriptures is concerned, even Nityananda did. Kalki Bhagavan does it. Kaleswar does it. Ramavadhuta does it.

I shall amend these replies further, if you come up with additional comments. I do not wish to hurt your sentiments.

5 comments:

Krishna said...

Mr Yb, the chronology of important events in the history are known to us by the study and analysis of so many scholars. There are innumerable books available which explains the logics behind those conclusions. Now, which of these schools of thoughts are acceptable is up to the individual's conviction. You want proof for Gita's existence before Budhism. Do you have proof to prove otherwise? Without that proof when you say Moksha came from Budhism, and imply that Budhism existed before Gita and Upanishads it is falsification.

To prove the hipocracy of Swami Vivekananda you quote few lines from his letters and speeches..At the same time you yourself say that "First of all, it is difficult to ascertain how many speeches of Vivekananda were genuine and not made up". If you are not sure of the genuineness of his literature, there is no point in analyzing them. All of them could be just a heap of manipulated stuff!

I have listened many discourses by scholars and have read many books explaining the difference between 'Caste' and 'Varna'. My understanding is that Gita does'nt talk about caste, only talks about Varna. Your understanding makes u believe that Varna is caste, and the "whole Gita smacks of casteism". I see innumerable slokas in Gita highlighting the oneness of universe and the existence of God in everything in equal measure etc! "Samam Sarveshu bhuteshu...", "Iswara Sarva bhuthanam.." are examples of these.
For you, Krishna is not real Paramathma...But for me and innumerable other people he is... Since we do not have any common ground for discussions, I believe it is a waste of time arguing on these...

Anyways I wish you all luck to find the 'truth' you are seeking...

Multisubj Yb TruthSeeker said...

Mr. Krishna : 1. The historicity of Mahabharata, the Archaeological Society of India has already denied in Ramasetu case before the Supreme Court. Mahabharata and Gita have therefore only only fictional or mythological value. Not historical value.


2. Assuming that Mahabharata and Gita have happened, the next question is the period of the evolution of the books Ramayana and Mahabharata. The happening of the taking shape of the books is not myth. Many historians felt that Ramayana, Mahabharata and our other Puranas have evolved during the Gupta period i.e. 3 to 6th Century A.D. By this time, Buddhism became a reality and exchange of culture has taken place between the two philosophies. An attempt was made in the Vaishnava books to denigrate Buddhists calling them as Pashandas. The Vaishnava books undermined even Siva and Brahma. The Gujarat-Rajasthan-Punjab-MP-UP area kings of those days tried to project themselves as the incarnations of Vishnu and they engaged the puranic scholars on a propaganda that the ancestors of the kings were also Vishnu's amsas. Thus Rama and Krishna evolved as Gods equivalent to Vishnu.

For the purpose of this Vivekananda blog, whether Gita was ancient or Buddhism was ancient, is not really important. What I wanted to point out was that Sanyasa was not a part of Vedic Religion. Vedic Religion essentially consisted of pleasing Gods through sacrifices of different varieties.

contd.. in my post No. 000B .

balaji said...

Why dont u dare to talk about Quran and Bible why do u talk only about Hinduism.. why dont u speak about that If u have the real guts my friend..dont jus speak about one religion if ur idealogy is common then apply to all religions if u are speaking only about hinduism then ur idealogy is not common its only a Anti-Hindu idealogy do u understand!!!!!
What service have u done to world dont just sit and speak as if u can question anything and everything...

Vikram Adithya said...

Dear friend,
Some where you mentioned...
"spreading religion and making money?"

What did he do with that money???

How many he converted??

Do you know he was the preachers of humanity, not just hinduism..

He gave conclusion speech at chicago on conversion do you even know this??

I have a clear doubt you are writing all thin unjust conspiracies just for
"Adsense collections"...

tomfire said...

u fool! sanyasa is indeed a part of vedic religion........we have many references to it in samhitas, brahmanas and upanishats......the very fact that jatayu mentioned caste system is totally false.........jatayu explained to rama that he will surely regain sita and some details about ravana thats it........he died there after.......mentioning false facts reveal your dark side........as I have mentioned before in one of my comments........swami vivekananda condemned the priestly authorities and caste system for their disadvantages in many places............