I grew up as Secular, Scientific and very Physical Hindu for 37 years, where perception by 5 senses, its records and explanation took First place and our ancient scriptures and pronouncements took second place.
But the course of events during and after my father's passing away, has slowly changed my Opinion to that expounded by Sravana. I have never seen my father's ghost or anybody else's ghost either.
It is just I started reading a lot more of our religious scriptures and contemplate on events all around and into historical past as well. On many counts I do not see contradiction between records of Physical events and that stated in our scriptures.
Shri Raghuram,
I don't know for how long you are reading religious scriptures and also which type of our religious scriptures and the kind of books on those texts which you read. If you are reading the books which try to extoll at any cost what is written in the original, sometimes even by omitting what is inconvenient, by using convoluted derivations instead of the straightforward meanings, through the commentators' imaginative descriptions and analogies, by citing some earlier sanskrit commentator as undisputable authority, etc., etc., it is possible that despite your 37 years of secular and scientific outlook, you get hooked onto those kind of explanations and start feeling that there is a lot of mysterious, other-worldly knowledge bequeathed to posterity in those texts and you are a proud inheritor of such wisdom. Of course, those people will write that way because that is what the believers want. It is also fortunate for them that most of our scriptures are in Sanskrit and we, the lay people, have to depend upon somebody who says "this is what it says"; this is akin to the position in Christianity in which the laity is prohibited from interpreting its scripture/s and have to gulp (compulsorily) what the clergy claims it to mean.
If you acquire a working knowledge of Sanskrit, read the original texts and find out what it means, you will come to know what
exactly is there. Just today, I have responded to the thread about "proper time for Sraaddham" and you may find a sample of how our religion had been. Similarly I had occasion to write against somebody's claim that the vedas are "apourushEya" - of esoteric origin, that sound waves ever present (?) or ever traversing the ether round and round (otherwise some part will be lost - like yesterday's radio waves - from which the rishis, through their superhuman ability, filtered out certain very mystical truths and made them as vedas. I have also written as to how Rama was elevated to godhead, from a purely human king as depicted by Valmiki, by the author of the Adhyatma Ramayana, etc. There is a whole lot to discover as to how religion can blunt your intellect.
If only the mind power is so great as the starter of this thread wants us to believe, how is it that we did not have even one person, throughout the known history, who could give a satisfactory demonstration of it? Of course, we have several grand descriptions in Puranas but only if one reads the puranas at least fairly completely will one come to know what sorts of "stories" they contain.
...And on other counts I still haven't reached that stage of realization to dismiss the contradictions, it is continuous learning process.
This realization is very subtle. If an individuals expects proof in the realms of Deterministic and Finite, that individual might just as well prepare oneself to accept that they would be partial non-believers in direct proportion to such expectations.
Faith cannot have any rational proof. If one believes that he is possessed by a ghost, it is very difficult to talk him out of it but we still take him for psychiatric treatment or to a "mantravaadi" to get him cured. But if one believes in Sakunam, and delays his going out till he gets a proper Sakunam, or arranges for a good Sakunam, we just take it as a sign of piety. The grade goes on increasing - Rahu kalam, Gulika kalam, Yamagandam, dreams, etc. But so long as these are "within the norms" acceptable to the society, we don't bother to analyze and say there are subtle principles which only those who have developed special powers will know.
Below is an analogy (read up on the word "Vicarious" in Oxford Dictionary to understand the below)
We all know Personal Excellence is a given and mandatory when in a cricketer finds place in BBCI's team. (BCCI is actually a private club and not a National Public institution like say Indian Olympic Association)
We further know there is enormous politicking , backstabbing , greediness and such unworthy acts which easily outnumber the personal excellence and further goes against Patriotism as well.
In-spite of above qualities we somehow associate all our national Pride and Happiness for that day with such individuals collective accomplishments.
This is called Vicarious pleasure. It is is very different from pleasure when you accomplish something you desired.
Yet the Vicarious pleasure can never be denied as unreal.
When we say "pleasure", whether vicarious or otherwise, it is a matter within the realm of the body and the mind. I do not think the sensation of "pleasure" by itself is different when it is vicarious, only the mode of achieving that pleasure is different. Suppose you get the news that your son/daughter has secured a very good job, will you not be happy? Is it the vicarious type, personal achievement or a third category? In any case the existence of vicarious pleasure IMO does not have any connection to the superior mental abilities claimed by religionists. If after all, we are merely discussing about another world in our mental imagination, that is a very ordinary matter.
Besides there are many more analogies.
But if an individual forcefully holds certain beliefs and non-beliefs in his mind, then that individual alone can release himself and his mind. No amount of analogies and inferences would undo the force within his mind.
The purport of these sentences seem contradictory; there are many more mental analogies, analogies and inferences will not undo the force within the mind (force for what?), forcefully holding on to certain (which?) beliefs and non-beliefs alone will release a person (from the body?) and his mind (where will the mind so released go and do what?).
