Vaagmi
0
Now I know it is a 80 plus Mr./Mrs aTB who is posting. Thank u for your advice on how to win friends and influence people. I will remember when I need it. At present I don't need. I have enough friends and I am loved and respected by them.
-
This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
-
Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Human Nature...
- Thread starter auh
- Start date
- Status
Do you really think only people of your generation talk about Dale Carnegie's principles because you saw his book in your younger days?
Actually Dale Carnegie training that started in 1912 is very much alive among even millennial population.
I know many in their 20s take this 12 to 14 week training class, often sponsored by their company.
Please see this : http://www.dalecarnegie.com/about-us/
" Dale Carnegie Training is represented in all 50 of the United States and over 90 countries. More than 2700 trainers present Dale Carnegie Training programs in more than 25 languages."
I was only referring to winning friends in the forum LoL. You may be loved and respected by Renuka Madam perhaps but is that enough? Mr auh being family does not count !
Anyway back to the human nature to want to surrender - your version does not add up at all for me.
Q1) why would a creator of this whole universe, want the lowly beings created to 'come and surrender to him' ? If you do on your own, why? what are you afraid of?
Q2) What is left back when your "I" is surrendered. Do you have a replica of "I" still with you in which case what is this surrender all about
If you dont want to or dont have an answer it is OK.
Vaagmi
0
Did I ruffle a feather or two there?
So, you wanted me to know that you have read Dale Carnegie (not "seen" as you would believe me to have done. LOL). Thank you for the information. It is a good book and it is good that you read it. I guessed it right. LOL.
Renuka and auh are friends among many others. You made an awkward attempt there to gang up. But a miserable failure, that. Your attempt of late at cosying-up to some members here and this outreach to gang up are interesting to watch. LOL. I wish you success.
Q1 and Q2 are interesting and could have formed the basis for an interesting conversation. You preempted any interest in me to answer your Q1 and Q2 with your Renuka, auh comment. I prefer to converse on such heavy subjects with people who are simple. You are complex. And I do not know your language/wave length. Excuse me. No hard feelings please.
The concept of an "I" arises only if we subscribe to a belief system; there is no credible proof to the contention that there is an athma, or an "I" that could be potentially realized.
What if we were to think that there is no athma, and no "I" and no God or any conscious power to sustain us all? What would happen?
sangom
0
I do not think that the concept of "I" arises only as and when one subscribes to a belief system (by which I mean some religious kind of belief system, including agnosticism, atheism, etc.) That is because even small children who are more or less free of any such beliefs, often exhibit every sign of this "I" feeling which covers mainly their physical body and its comforts/discomforts.
I agree that there is no credible proof for an individualized aathmaa or quantified aathmaa, as our religions posit. My theory is that our ancient seers/sages were not able to think 'out-of-the-box' completely, and were pbsessed with a fixation that when there is an "I" factor at this bodily level, a similar (if not the very same) "I" factor must necessarily be there in the after-death stage also. This is what has led to the concepts such as transmigration of the soul, rebirth and, eventually, to the Karma theory as we know it now.
Advaita of Adisankara says precisely that the Parabrahmam is nirguna; it has no quality whatsoever and that will mean that the Parabrahman has no conscious power or ability. It is not necessary to believe in any God entity but I feel it is inescapable that we believe in a certain 'phenomenon' which makes an inert physical body into a living personality, makes it grow and which detaches itself from the physical body at the time of death. We need not call that phenomenon as God, but some name is definitely required to refer to that; don't you think so?
There are statements strewn throughout our scriptures which make it more than clear that our ancient people were aware of such a "phenomenon". For example, the famous lines from the Mundakopanishad:—
द्वा सुपर्णा सयुजा सखाया समानं वृक्षं परिषस्वजाते ।
तयॊरन्यः पिप्पलं स्वाद्वत्त्यश्नन्नन्यो अभिचाकशीति ॥
(Two birds, beautiful of wings, close companions, cling to one common tree: of the two one eats the sweet fruit of the tree, the other eats not but watches his fellow.) http://archives.mirroroftomorrow.org/blog/_archives/2010/9/30/4631783.html
Here you find that the one soul (quantified) proposition was found unsatisfactory by the sage and he therefore goes on to propose two similar entities, etc. In this duo, one comes very close to the "phenomenon" referred to above.
* Who is that "I" that said about ruffled feather LoL
* No - there are no feathers to ruffle!
* Wrong assumption - Never read the book and have not seen that book either.
* No need to be worried - no one can gang up on anyone here as far as I have seen. I just wanted to know who all are following the thread still.
* Will ask a clean question providing an opportunity to respond to the people following the thread . All the people here may not be complex like me!
LoL
Mr Vaagmi
Q1) why would a creator of this whole universe, want the lowly beings created to 'come and surrender to him' ? If you do on your own, why? what are you afraid of?
Q2) What is left back when your "I" is surrendered. Do you have a replica of "I" still with you in which case what is this surrender all about
The floor is yours, Mr Vaagmi - we are waiting for you to respond!
Q1) why would a creator of this whole universe, want the lowly beings created to 'come and surrender to him' ? If you do on your own, why? what are you afraid of?
Q2) What is left back when your "I" is surrendered. Do you have a replica of "I" still with you in which case what is this surrender all about
The floor is yours, Mr Vaagmi - we are waiting for you to respond!
?? Dear a-TB, I thought we all belong to the same family - me, you, shri, v...
Yes, we are all family (of TB forum) !!! Enjoy the song
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmJjD33eKDU
tks
0
Sri auh -
This thread you started is alive and well. Human nature is to know about human nature I guess
I am sure you are having fun discussion with Sri Sangom, allow me to interject to make a point or two.
Do you know you exist with 100% surety? If yes, is that due to a belief system?
There is no need to bring terms like Atma since it is not universally understood.
You cannot think (verb) of non-existence of everything since there has to be a conscious person existing to think of nonexistence as an idea!
But this non-thinking of I, God, athma, Atma, conscious power all happens universally every day. When it happened for you, it means you are in deep sleep, not even dreaming.
Let me close by a quote of a contemplative person
tks
0
Here is another perspective about the above verse , let me see how I can connect it to the topic human nature !
In nature, the great diversity of life forms that have been identified in the fossil record is evidence that there has been an accumulation of mutations producing a more or less constant supply of both small and large variations upon which natural selection has operated for billions of years. Mutation has been the essential prerequisite for the evolution of life.
Human nature also makes small distortions to ideas and language potentially giving rise to many different languages and dialects over centuries.
Here is a perspective about the above verse and the Upanishadic story cited.
Let me copy and paste
Religious and philosophical truths are often explained through parables, stories, so that ignorant people can understand them easily. Since metaphysical concepts are difficult to grasp, either they have to be told in the form of a story or they have to be given the form of a ritual, that is they must find expression as religious acts.
It is likely, though, that, with the passage of time, some stories or rites will become far removed from their inner meaning. Or, it may be, the inner meaning will be altogether forgotten. So it must be that, when new religions took shape abroad, after the lapse of thousands of years-religions not connected with the Vedic faith that is the root-the original Vedic concepts become transformed or distorted.
You must be familiar with the story of Adam and Eve which belongs to the Hebrew tradition. It occurs in the Genesis of the Old Testament and speaks of the tree of knowledge and God's commandment that its fruit shall not be eaten. Adam at first did not eat it but Eve did. After that Adam too ate the forbidden fruit.
Here an Upanisadic concept has taken the form of a biblical story. But because of the change in the time and place the original idea has become distorted-or even obliterated.
The Upanisadic story speaks of two birds perched on the branch of a pippala tree. One eats the fruit of tree while the order merely watches its companion without eating. The pippala tree stands for the body. The first bird represents a being that regards himself as the jivatman or individual self and the fruit it eats signifies sensual pleasure. In the same body (symbolized by the tree) the second bird is to be understood as the Paramatman. He is the support of all beings but he does not know sensual pleasure. Since he does not eat the fruit he naturally does not have the same experience as the jivatman (the first). The Upanisad speaks with poetic beauty of the two birds. He who eats the fruit is the individual self, jiva, and he who does not eat is the Supreme Reality, the one who knows himself to be the Atman.
It is this jiva that has come to be called Eve in the Hebrew religious tradition. "Ji" changes to "i" according to a rule of grammar and "ja" to "ya". We have the example of "Yamuna" becoming "Jamuna" or of "Yogindra" being changed to "Joginder ". In the biblical story "jiva" is "Eve" and "Atma" (or "Atman") is "Adam". "Pippala" has in the same way changed to "apple". The Tree of Knowledge is our "bodhi-vrksa" . "Bodha" means "knowledge". It is well known that the Budhha attained enlightenment under the bodhi tree. But the pipal (pippala) was known as the bodhi tree even before his time.
The Upanisadic ideas transplanted into a distant land underwent a change after the lapse of centuries. Thus we see in the biblical story that the Atman (Adam) that can never be subject to sensual pleasure also eats the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. While our bodhi tree stands for enlightenment, the enlightenment that banishes all sensual pleasure, the biblical tree affords worldly pleasure.
(From the book Hindu Dharma by the Sage of Kanchi)
Vaagmi
0
As you have already shown yourself to be highly prejudiced, I am not interested in replying to your questions. It would be a waste of time
Any way, there are other like minded people answering in detail your questions. Only you would not have heard the other side, but does that matter for you? The 'you' here is singular as well as plural. LOL.
And the attempt to make it a "we" waiting for the answer instead of "me" is amusing. LOL. Another cosying up attempt? I am waiting for the gang to reassemble. LOL.
Last edited:
sangom
0
Here is another perspective about the above verse , let me see how I can connect it to the topic human nature !
In nature, the great diversity of life forms that have been identified in the fossil record is evidence that there has been an accumulation of mutations producing a more or less constant supply of both small and large variations upon which natural selection has operated for billions of years. Mutation has been the essential prerequisite for the evolution of life.
Human nature also makes small distortions to ideas and language potentially giving rise to many different languages and dialects over centuries.
Here is a perspective about the above verse and the Upanishadic story cited.
Let me copy and paste
Religious and philosophical truths are often explained through parables, stories, so that ignorant people can understand them easily. Since metaphysical concepts are difficult to grasp, either they have to be told in the form of a story or they have to be given the form of a ritual, that is they must find expression as religious acts.
It is likely, though, that, with the passage of time, some stories or rites will become far removed from their inner meaning. Or, it may be, the inner meaning will be altogether forgotten. So it must be that, when new religions took shape abroad, after the lapse of thousands of years-religions not connected with the Vedic faith that is the root-the original Vedic concepts become transformed or distorted.
You must be familiar with the story of Adam and Eve which belongs to the Hebrew tradition. It occurs in the Genesis of the Old Testament and speaks of the tree of knowledge and God's commandment that its fruit shall not be eaten. Adam at first did not eat it but Eve did. After that Adam too ate the forbidden fruit.
Here an Upanisadic concept has taken the form of a biblical story. But because of the change in the time and place the original idea has become distorted-or even obliterated.
The Upanisadic story speaks of two birds perched on the branch of a pippala tree. One eats the fruit of tree while the order merely watches its companion without eating. The pippala tree stands for the body. The first bird represents a being that regards himself as the jivatman or individual self and the fruit it eats signifies sensual pleasure. In the same body (symbolized by the tree) the second bird is to be understood as the Paramatman. He is the support of all beings but he does not know sensual pleasure. Since he does not eat the fruit he naturally does not have the same experience as the jivatman (the first). The Upanisad speaks with poetic beauty of the two birds. He who eats the fruit is the individual self, jiva, and he who does not eat is the Supreme Reality, the one who knows himself to be the Atman.
It is this jiva that has come to be called Eve in the Hebrew religious tradition. "Ji" changes to "i" according to a rule of grammar and "ja" to "ya". We have the example of "Yamuna" becoming "Jamuna" or of "Yogindra" being changed to "Joginder ". In the biblical story "jiva" is "Eve" and "Atma" (or "Atman") is "Adam". "Pippala" has in the same way changed to "apple". The Tree of Knowledge is our "bodhi-vrksa" . "Bodha" means "knowledge". It is well known that the Budhha attained enlightenment under the bodhi tree. But the pipal (pippala) was known as the bodhi tree even before his time.
The Upanisadic ideas transplanted into a distant land underwent a change after the lapse of centuries. Thus we see in the biblical story that the Atman (Adam) that can never be subject to sensual pleasure also eats the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. While our bodhi tree stands for enlightenment, the enlightenment that banishes all sensual pleasure, the biblical tree affords worldly pleasure.
(From the book Hindu Dharma by the Sage of Kanchi)
Shri tks,
That was a very interesting and instructive piece of knowledge.
Still, Is it not apparent that only a jivatma does not probably explain all the philosophical requirements and hence the upanishad proposes a twin bird (sayujaa) depicted in some temple architectures as a bird with one body and two necks, etc?
I was referring to this aspect.
sangom
0
Excuse me for poking my nose in your conversation.
Q1) First of all, I do not believe that there is some "creator" of this whole universe who can be referred to by words such as 'him, he', etc. If we really think very deep, there is a possibility that the universe is just appearing to be there, just as you also seem to be living, etc. These are beliefs, fundamentally.
Notions such as a creator that we all should surrender ourselves completely to that creator, etc., smack of cults. Even in Christianity, I think there is no similar "surrender" clause; they only go on preaching that only the path of the divine cross will save you from hell, etc.
Q2) Surrendering is done more as a symbolic thing and not in real terms, I think.
tks
0
Dear Sri Sangom
More than a philosophy, Upanishadic teaching unfolds truths with a starting point of what the human experience is.
As our knowledge deepens the nature of truth revealed is more profound, often negating the earlier understanding (without destroying the earlier understanding).
The teaching is meant for Jivas but the teaching ends up negating Jiva while affirming Isvara.
When I type this post, I also know I am typing. So in addition to "I" being involved in worldly activities (like typing) there is an experience of witnessing the act itself.
So the starting point of enquiry is the acknowledgement of "I" the doer and "I" the witness (much like in that story) . Eventually all these are negated.
Dear Mr Sangom:
Thanks so much for sharing your knowledge and wisdom!
Humans like to create cults throughout history and even like to glorify their act. In the west, a person boasts "I am a person of faith".
Some boast they are great because they surrendered (their ability to be reasonable?) to some mythical god. Many such extremist feel they are always persecuted. Here is an article at this link below.
http://www.alternet.org/christian-rights-bizarre-delusions-persecution
I am now convinced that this persecution complex is alive and well in India too LoL
Human nature is very strange LoL Thanks again!
C
CHANDRU1849
Guest
If we have faith in God and believe God creates the world, including human beings, where is the question of surrendering?
The concept of 'surrender' might have come into existence the moment we elevate human beings to the level of God.
The concept of 'surrender' might have come into existence the moment we elevate human beings to the level of God.
prasad1
Active member
I know I borrow ideas and writings from other sources. But I generally give credit to my source.
But in religion is like bollywood movies. They liberally borrow ideas from other sources and then declare it as a revelation from God.
And except for Christianity and Islam two modern religion we have no firm dates for any of the writings. Any body could borrow one idea from others and claim originality.
The idea of surrender in Hinduism is not vedic. It is rather new to Hinduism. Scholarly consensus sees bhakti as a post-Vedic movement that developed primarily during the Epics and Puranas era of Indian history. It very well could have been borrowed in the post Christ era (it is debatable).
Of course we all are shooting in the dark, we do not really know it. Some fake it and others go along with it that is the human nature.
But in religion is like bollywood movies. They liberally borrow ideas from other sources and then declare it as a revelation from God.
And except for Christianity and Islam two modern religion we have no firm dates for any of the writings. Any body could borrow one idea from others and claim originality.
The idea of surrender in Hinduism is not vedic. It is rather new to Hinduism. Scholarly consensus sees bhakti as a post-Vedic movement that developed primarily during the Epics and Puranas era of Indian history. It very well could have been borrowed in the post Christ era (it is debatable).
Of course we all are shooting in the dark, we do not really know it. Some fake it and others go along with it that is the human nature.
C
CHANDRU1849
Guest
The word 'Surrender' is more war related term. In Religion it is, in all probability, more suitable to Vaishnavism, since it largely depends on two war related epics Ramayana and Mahabharatha.
For other divisions of Hinduism, surrender has no place.
For other divisions of Hinduism, surrender has no place.
sangom
0
Dear Shri a-TB,
This is w.r.t. the highlighted words, viz., persecution complex. Hindus have been persecuted, I believe, at various phases of history, for various reasons. But I don't think the hindus, generally speaking, do not crib about these persecutions, but have a certain everlasting memory of it, handed down through word of mouth, through the generations and it can be seen even today.
But within hinduism the smaller factions do have a lot of complaining by one group over the other and that is perhaps one basic reason for the lack of unity of hindus as one group.
C
CHANDRU1849
Guest
Religion or Politics majoritariansm is the dominating force and minority has to suffer irrespective of place.
Vaagmi
0
Please excuse me. What is left unsaid is that one cult group within Hinduism derives a sadistic pleasure by needling another smaller group and makes the smaller group complain perennially.
- Status
Share this page
Share this page
Latest ads
-
Service Home-Cooked VEG North Indian Thali (Meal Box) Delivered To You Everyday (CHENNAI)Enjoy healthy and tasty home-cooked VEG (North Indian) food for lunch & dinner (Chennai)
- rajfood (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
-
For rent [Property for Rent] 1st Floor Independent House In AdambakkamIndependent House 1st Floor
- Bav2003 (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
- Expires
-
Wanted Need of a Brahmin lady cook in AdambakkamRequire a Brahmin female cook in 40s to 60 to cook for a family of 4 adults +2 kids in...
- LakshmiRajesh (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
-
Wanted Need Brahmin cook for homeBrahmin cook needed to make breakfast and lunch at home (Mylapore) for 4 people. Please text...
- ram1618 (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
-