| Sajha.com Archives | |
| Username | Post |
| noname | Posted
on 24-Oct-03 05:41 AM
KUN MANDIR MA JANCHHAU YATRI KUN MANDIR MA JANE HO KUN SAMAGRI PUJA GARCHHAU SATH KASORI LANE HO ! (Mahakavi Laxmi Pd. Devkota, in YATRI poem) After writing poem like YATRI aestheticizing human value, Mahakavi Laxmi Prasad Devkota wrote a poem from deathbed euologizing the central theme of life as devotion to Shri Krishna. He was sure a Mahakavi, for he has very eloquently merged both theme to one, and in the course, has done justice to both. He was born on Laxmi Puja and he'll sure be remembered for his immortal works in one or another way in the coming years. My tributes to this legendary poet on his 94th b'day. 
|
| noname | Posted
on 24-Oct-03 05:45 AM
The poem was written by Devkota in Sambat 2016 (?). |
| sadabichar | Posted
on 24-Oct-03 07:15 AM
That's a sign of Repentance. Through out his life he got tangled up with world of words.. he was a deep thinker... but mostly he suffered the way he ran his thinkings in his mind... and sum resultant of his whole life appeared to him as Zero. He perhaps tried to keep his mind busy, and entertain his own mind by playing with words... but he could not get enlightenment the way Buddha did. I wonder if Buddha ever wrote POEMS after he got enlightenment... there is none such poems by Buddha. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 24-Oct-03 09:45 AM
but he could not get enlightenment the way Buddha did. I wonder if Buddha ever wrote POEMS after he got enlightenment... there is none such poems by Buddha. Sadbichar, You don't make any sense dude. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever to compare Buddha with LPD. namaste |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 04-Nov-03 01:15 PM
Dear friends, I was willing to write something in this thread, but time did not permit me, finally I made it. I have learned poetry quite a bit and it had been my subject of interest for quite a while, so I dont feel uncomfortable to share something with you in this subject. First of all I have problem of taking this poem as the poem of Devkota. This is not my mere feeling, this is my strong belief based on the evidences which can never be proven. After his death people found many handwritten poems of Devkota in his house. So critics believe, many of his poems were stolen by many who were close to him, one of them is Balakrishna Sam. Well known poem Ichhya , known as one of the gifts of Balkrishna Sam, is considered to be stolen from Devkota. Critics believe that this poem must be written by Devkota. Let me give you their arguments; for which we need little background, so have patience. CHHANDAS are formulae to write poems. CHHANDA consists of certain number of letters in a single sentence and all the sentences are being sung with similar fashion. Before Buddha and at the time of Buddha, there are two, hardly three CHHANDAS, but most popular one was one. I forget its Sanskrit name but I would love to say it, Dhamma CHHANDA. Most of the verses of Buddha are in this CHHANDA, so I feel comfortable to name it as Dhamma CHHANDA. After Buddha, mainly in the time of Kalidas (which was the peak period of development of Sanskrit literature), many new CHHANDAS were developed. In Nepal, after Bhanubhakta and before Bhupi Serchan (Bhupi developed non-Chandik tradition), most of the poets wrote poem in CHHANDAS. CHHANDA have definite pattern, a formula. Mainly there are two parts in a sentence (except some Chhandas), after singing first part there is very small brake and second part is sing. Each part has definite words and each word has either long (is called Guru, and denoted by S) or short (called Laghu, denoted by I) pronunciation. Ichha is written in Sardulbikridit Chhanda, this Chhanda contains 19 words, first part 12 and second part 7 words. The formula for this Chhanda is, Mas Jas Tat Ani Antimai Dirgha Hune, Sardulabikridita. The first and second parts are separated by a comma, half letters are not counted. As far as I know, this Chhanda was first used by Ashoghosh, in Buddha Charita, where he compared Buddha with Ram. This Chanda can not be seen before Buddha and in the time of Buddha (at least I have not seen it yet), so I can say, this must have developed in Pauranik era. Almost all Bhanubhakta Ramayan and Nepali Mahabharat are in this Chhanda. In Nepali literature, Chhanda flourished a lot after Bhanubhakta and before Bhupi Serchan. Devkota had unique style of composing poems. If I analyze him with my little understanding, he must have a flow. He used traditional Chhandas but never care about the ending of the words, he just delivered the message. Any poet who writes the poem in Chhanda should be careful about the ending of the sentence. Two consecutive pairs make a verse and the end words of the verse should sound similar. For example: Bhanubhaktiya Ramayan, Sundarkanda: (while Hanuman started to jump from Indian shore to Shirlankan shore of the sea) Tarchu Chhara Samundra Aaja sahajai, Bhanne Iradha Dhari! Shree Ram Ka Charana Binda Manale, Atenta Chintan Gari!! This is one verse and last words of both sentences ends with the words having similar sounds like here, Dhari and Gari. Unlike other contemporary poets like Lekh Nath, Sambhu Prasad, Dharani Dhar, Devkota violated this general rule. In his almost all Chhandik poems, the last words are not necessarily has similar pronunciation. See in Ichhya, Ichha Yo Chha Mahesha Antima Jasai, Tyo Mirtu Saiya Jali! Mero Rakta Sukaula Ma Marula, Behos Bhai Chhat Pati!! Jali and Pati are not matching. Contrary to this, Balkrishna Sams almost all poems have good matching of words at the end. He was good to choose the words but Devkota was not. He used to write poems but Devkota used to write speech. Those who have well grasp in the subject matter, they know the style of each poet and they can distinguish, I have no wonder for that. It is said that Sama edited the original version of Ichha to remove the smell of Devkota, he added the words like Mahesh, which Devkota could never use. Devkota was not the one who believed in God, he was realistic individual. Never ever feel that, I have prejudice against Sam, I am indifference for both. Just I have brought forth what is in the closet; this is not in public because nobody can prove this. Why am I giving the example of Ichhya poem? Because I just want to say what happened with Devkota, he is mistaken in the society because of the controversy of the poem that is posted above by my friend noname . Our society is not that educated, so nobody takes this poem seriously, otherwise Devkota would be considered a controversial personality. Contd............ |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 04-Nov-03 02:32 PM
The concerned poem does not meet Devkotas condition. I forget the name of the Chhanda, may be Mandakranta or Sragdhara, 11 words, single sentence. Unlike Devkotas poems this poem contains the words of similar sound at the termination. For example: Akhira Srikrishna Rahechha Eka! Na Bhakti Bho, Gyana, Na Bho Bibeka!! Sanskara Afnu Sabanai Gumaye! Ma Sunnya Ma Sunny Sari Bilaya!! Eka, Biveka,(Palaya, Bilaya) you will find all the ending words similar in every single verses of this poem. This is the bulk reason; the subtle reason is this poem itself. This controversy poem was published after his death. People said they found this poem in his study room. A question arises, if the poem was not composed by Devkota himself, what makes other people to write this poem for him? Those stingy people had stolen his poems, so what made them so generous to write for him? The reason lies in the aforementioned four lines, two verses. Devkota was barrister of humanity; he was open minded person and always had faith on the truth, not on any hypothetical imagination. He wrote Yatree, where we can see that, he gave importance to the humanity, not the traditional belief. Even though he was not a meditator, he had a lot many characters of a meditator. He was so generous to poor, used to donate everything whatever he had. Sometime it was found he donated his only coat too. Half of his salary he used to donate to beggars. He was not a mad; he was one of the great souls. I have seen such a big heart is rare even in developed meditators. Generosity is the first step of Dhamma, he had that. He is regretting simply because he did not believe in Shrikrishna in his whole life? He is regretting simply because he believes god is good heart and humanity? Na Bhakti Vo Gyana Na Bho Bibeka,---------would he be getting all these Bhakti, Gyana , Bibek just believing on God? How funny! Devkota was not such a fool, I dont believe. How come mere belief on unseen, unknown entity can provide wisdom? Sanskara Afnu Sabanai Gumaye! Gossssssss!! What Sanskar? What can be the great Sanskar than a good quality? He lost all his Sanskar because he did not believe in God in his whole life? And he is regretting for that at the end of the day, such a dumb can never be Laxmi Prasad. How can be such a gullible? He was wise and he knew that truth is god, humanity is god. He rather tried to teach that truth to Nepali people, but its not easy to learn because learning requires some mental exercise and we are not accustomed. We are accustomed just to follow the tradition blindly, poor us! Want to make Devkota one of us. No way! Devkota was not egoist. Once, while he was education minister, went to a party with very expensive dress up. Everybody praised him for his dress, then he painted yogurt in his beautiful coat and said, now praise. He wanted to teach people that internal beauty is more important than the external one. He was beloved Sahila Baje of Children, remember, children loves humble personality, they scare from crook, clever and proud. Most of us are familiar with Muna Madan, how beautifully he delivered his message giving importance to the humanity. Chhetri Ko Chhoro Yo Pau Chhunchha, Ghina Ley Chhudaina! Manisa Thulo Dilale Hunchha, Jatale Hudaina!! He was Yethabadi-Tathakari, what he said, that he did. Many people has not put off the ghost of cast system yet, he was saying humanity is great, not the cast, so many decades ago. All upper cast companion of Madan left him to die while he was sick, a Bhote served him selflessly and cured him. Madan wanted to touch the feet of Bhote (who is considered to be lower cast). How beautiful scene, how touching scene. In this 21st century we so called highly educated people claims that we are from superior cast, we are from superior family, we proud of having associated with certain people, still hesitate for inter cast marriage, its shameful. Devkota was forerunner, he proved, time does not matter, wise ones exist every time and we are proving fools also exist every time. He never believed in god, the idea of supernatural power prevailing in the society. He had very clear vision that the society had blind belief. For him god is the humanity, which is true for all great souls of all time. In his whole life he advocated for the humanity and condemned the blind belief. See the poem Yatree, how live-message is he delivering. There are some tenders of the god, they are like sheep and want whole society to be like sheep. They dont want people use their intellect. They have great attachment with their belief and wants many people support their belief. Our society is victim of such blind belief. Some element of that society tried to admit Devkota after his death, poor them! Could not include him while he was alive. Contd....... |
| mickthesick | Posted
on 04-Nov-03 03:40 PM
i agree with dhananjaya with one point: devkota did not write the death-bed poem. the poem clearly violates devkota's way of writing poems as suggested by dhananjaya..and i agree with that. my teacher mentioned and read the poem in our class once during the tenth grade nepali class and i readily resented the poem. i argued that the poem could not have been devkota's and should must have been Balkrishna Sama's poem...and i had my reasons to. I showed him that the so-called devkota's death-bed poem had more elements of Sama than devkota's. But he would still not agree with me and hence i was kicked out of the classroom for resenting his( my teacher's) opinion. I agree with dhananjaya on the point that the death-bed poem is not written by devkota. And i would like to add that it was Sama's creation.Also the poem "Icchya" is originally devkota's poem. I do have some valid points for that but it's in my personal diary and involves detailed study of the sardul-bikridit chanda and it's use by devkota. Any student of nepali chhanda and the poems can easily tell that Bal Krishna Sama has not made any significant contribution in the field of sardul-bikridit chhanda....therefore we cannot readily accept his only entry( icchya) in this chhanda as his own creation. The poem indeed seems to have been stolen from devkota. |
| SimpleGal | Posted
on 04-Nov-03 04:18 PM
I know little Nepali poetry, but thanks for Dhanjaya and Mick for their insight :) I have always wanted to read more than what I was able to of Nepali poetry. |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 04-Nov-03 04:23 PM
mickthethesick, my friend, I have never imagined that I will be getting someone like you who will support in this matter. It's because what we are saying can never be proved for the general people. I am really touched for your appreciation and made me gald for your understanding of Chhanda. I am writing more something about Devkota's sently behavior, Buddha and some other sently being who were renowened poets. I will post it tomorrow. Dhananjaya |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 04-Nov-03 04:25 PM
You are welcome SimpleGal Ji Dhananjaya |
| Nepe | Posted
on 04-Nov-03 04:41 PM
Akhir Shrikrishna Rahechha Eka ..is such a mediocre and inconsistent poem, I have never believed it was by Devkota or coming from his sane state of mind. I always thought either there should have been some mistakes or perhaps the unbearable pain of cancer overpowered and crippled his mind. Gokul ji in some other thread had described the last agonizing moments of Devkota. It made me wonder if my hypothesis is right. In any case, this poem does not represent Devkota. It is not more than a small footnote to the powerful and consistent atheist spirituality he lived, preached and enjoyed throughout his life. For a long time I could not understand why critics give so much coverage and importance to this poem, as if this sole poem is the upasamhar of Devkota's life. Now I think I understand why. The rest of Devkota is too tough to grasp for them, too independent to their own conservative mind, too alien and irreconcilable to the thoughtless culture they are practicing. It's easy for them to talk about an ordinary Devkota who died regretting his entire life and not giving himself to the lord ShriKrishna. They want Devkota in their own image. That is why. |
| Gokul | Posted
on 04-Nov-03 06:50 PM
1) From the perspective of Anupraas It is ludicrous to say that Devkota didn't write "Sansar roopi..." saying that Devkota never cared for rhymes (Antyanuprash) whereas Sama used them. From the vast ocean of Devkota's poems, the following are just some examples which show that Devokota did use rhymes many times. If you need more examples, you can email me. ============================= (Gareeb) Gareeba bhanchau sukha ko ma jhain dhani Mildeina Sansaara bhari katai pani Bilasa ko lalasa dasa chhaina ma Mitho chha mero rasilo parishrama (Bhikhari) Hera bhikhari adi adi aayo Karun drishti le najar uthayo ..... (Shakuntal) Bhara dila tantri, Nawalaya hantri Ayikara bina, Shatha tama hantri (Prometheus unbound) Promothean pain I bear With tear on tear ... ============================ All earlier poems of Devkota conformed to the classic rules of meter (chhanda).But when he started becoming full time poet (24 hours a day), he could not care for trivial things like anupraas. There was not enough time. So he wrote and wrote and wrote. Some of them have beautiful rhymes, some of them have none. But all of them are soaked with intense feeling of beauty and humanity. So the argument from the basis of anupraas is simply stupid. To think that Devkota, the gifted son of Saraswati, could not (or did not) align Anupraas is gibberish. |
| Gokul | Posted
on 04-Nov-03 06:52 PM
(2) From the perspective of religious beliefs Here, people seem to categorize Devkota as atheist (pure nastik). This is ABSOLUTELY wrong. Devkota was very spiritual. His source of spirituality was nature and people. He became overjoyed with nature and deeply loved humanity. But that does not necessarily mean that he was nastik. He saw god everywhere. If you have read "Laxmi Nibandha Sangraha", then that is the testament of what I am saying here. He was bought up in a religious environment. His father was a great scholar and pundit. Devkota was intensely spiritual. He never said that the goal of human life is to merely eat,drink, and die. His definiton of God was like that of Einstein's, the universality of existence, the Brahma of the Vedanta. Aayo Brahma agadi sirjana hunda Omkaar bisatarama Jhalkyo jhaljhala tarakawali bani sadkalpanabhasama Herdei ranga ledei sadhain uchhalidei bandei gayo jeevana He He Vishwabirat maha kavi chhudei, Jhankaara mero mana. (Banakusum Mahakavya) The poem "sansararupi" is outstanding because here he shows his deep repentence for his wasted life. He was very unlucky because he died at the age of fifty, did not have much time to write poems, became busy in tuition for survival. Think from his perspective: Here is a man with a talent so great that even Sankrityan (another Mahapandit) calls him more than the sum of Prasad, Panta, and Nirala and now he is dying at the untimely age of fifty. He had about 32 different plans such as (1) writing for common people (2) writing epics in Vedic language (he started Rakta and Peeta Yajurveda but did not complete) (3) displaying immense intellectuality by writing philosophical essays and poems .... From his perspective, what did he accomplish? Nothing, believe me nothing. He knew that he had a tremendous potential (read his encounter with Tagore in Calcutta) for creating world class literature like Kalidas, Goethe, Shakespeare. but see he is dying because of cancer at 50. In his later life he realized all this. and that agonized him a lot. Remember Frustration = Potential (Expectation) - achievement. In his case achievement was large but potential was very, very large thereby making frustration also large. So, this poem is the genuine expression of his repentence. (Read his letter to Hari shrestha). There he says, all he wrote is worthless, mundane. He didnot write something eternal, something like Faust of Goethe. He says if he can live five more years, then he will show what the true sahitya is. But alas, it was too late. Death is a very different experience. I believe only Devkota could write a poem filled with such intense pain. (remember his encounter with Moraes) He talks about cosmic conflagration. He compares his body with a shrivelled plant. Sukiraheko taru jhain chhu khali... |
| Gokul | Posted
on 04-Nov-03 06:54 PM
(4) Some mistakes in previous writings "Before Buddha and at the time of Buddha, there are two, hardly three CHHANDAS, but most popular one was one." Chhandas have been the hallmark of sanskrita literature. There are more than 50 chhandas. Balmiki ramayana, Geeta, Bhagawat all are written in more than ten different chhandas: Shardulabikridit, Shikharini, Anustup, Indrabajra, Upendrabajra, Malini, Shalini, Bhujangaprayat, Panchachamar, Shragdhara, Mandakranta, Prithvi to name a few. "Ichha is written in Sardulbikridit Chhanda, this Chhanda contains 19 words, first part 12 and second part 7 words. The formula for this Chhanda is, Mas Jas Tat Ani Antimai Dirgha Hune, Sardulabikridita. " Not 19 words but 19 letters (alphabets). The formula is Ma Sa Ja Sa Ta Ta Gu ( 2 Ta gan) " As far as I know, this Chhanda was first used by Ashoghosh, in Buddha Charita, where he compared Buddha with Ram" ShrimadBhagawat is before Buddha. Here is sholak in Shardulbikridita from this epic: Kasturitilakam lalaatpatale bakchyasthale kaustubham Nasagre baramauktikam karatale benu kare kankanam ... "Unlike other contemporary poets like Lekh Nath, Sambhu Prasad, Dharani Dhar, Devkota violated this general rule" Not always as I already discussed before. "Jali and Pati are not matching" They are matching. what should match is the sound and not the letters themselves. Both are "Ikaars". "It is said that Sama edited the original version of Ichha to remove the smell of Devkota, he added the words like Mahesh, which Devkota could never use." How did you know this? What do you mean that Devkota could never use "Mahesh"? "Devkota was not the one who believed in God, he was realistic individual" As I said Devkota believed in God. Read his Nibandha sangraha. So you think "realistic individual" does not believe in god. Eintein believed in God so he was not a realistic individual then eh? By the way, what do you think god is? |
| Gokul | Posted
on 04-Nov-03 06:57 PM
"He is regretting simply because he did not believe in Shrikrishna in his whole life? He is regretting simply because he believes god is good heart and humanity? " Shrikrishna is just a symbol for spirituality, something that is beyond this material existence. He could have said Budhha, Ram, Jesus. But that does not change anything. What he is saying is that human life has some inner, subtle, subjective purpose. That's all. "Na Bhakti Vo Gyana Na Bho Bibeka,---------would he be getting all these Bhakti, Gyana , Bibek just believing on God? How funny! Devkota was not such a fool, I dont believe. How come mere belief on unseen, unknown entity can provide wisdom? " The true wisdom is to learn from other's mistakes. I hope you will not utter similar words in your deathbed. Yes, belief in god gives all this bhakti, bibek, gyana. That's why there are Bhaktiyoga, Rajayoga, Gyanayoga, Karmayoga. All are different roads to god. "Akhir Shrikrishna Rahechha Eka ..is such a mediocre and inconsistent poem, I have never believed it was by Devkota or coming from his sane state of mind." Nepeji, I can't believe you are saying this. It is such a profound and consistent poem. Profound because it shows the meaninglessness and absurdity of human life. And what is more consistent than the death? Nepeji, read this poem not from the perspective of an intellectual republican but from the perspective of an oriental dying an untimely death with all potential and dreams unfulfilled. "Chhindring chhindring bajne chura hoina aashu" |
| SITARA | Posted
on 04-Nov-03 07:15 PM
Gokul ji: Enjoyed your writing tremendously. Thank you for revealing the many facets of Devkota's emotive writings. Appreciate it. |
| Gokul | Posted
on 04-Nov-03 08:40 PM
Sitaraji, Thanks. Here are some stanzas that I remeber from his poem. Hope it will give you some perspectives about him. Promethean pain I bear With tear on tear. Yet a song of joy must I raise My God to praise. He doth excruciate Because I vitiate. He gives all this pain So that I may turn to him again. |
| noname | Posted
on 04-Nov-03 09:40 PM
Wow ! Very interesting insights. Gokulji enjoyed reading your knowledgeable posting. Postings like this makes Sajha worth visiting. Although a lot has already been said, let me put few more points on Devkota's personality. I remember reading Devendra Bhattarai's column on Shyam Das Baishnav, who was close to Devkota till his last days and helped Devkota to transcribe his poems in legible form, in Kantipur Koseli sometimes back. If I remember it correctly he has mentioned in the article that against the wide spread rumor about Devkota distributing his money to poor and even lending his coat, he, Shyam Das Baishnav, never noticed such exuberant behavior from Devkota. Just last week, I read his brother, Devkota sir, mentioning about Devkota asking for Cyanide as he was approaching the end. Who knows with such a surety what he had in mind, and what he wrote when even facts about his life are inundated with rumors. |
| Gokul | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 06:20 AM
Nonameji, Now that you have mentioned ShyamDas Vaishnav, let me mention how Sulochana was written. Pushkar Samser JBR was the haakim of Nepal Bhasa Prakasini and Devkota was his employee. Oneday somebody told Pushkar that Devkota had written an epic called Shakunta in three months. Pushkar did not believe and thought it was just a joke. "How can a person who is in his office most of the time and goes home only to start giving tuition do such amount of work?" Anyway, he called Devkota and asked whether it was true. To his utter astonishment, Devkota apologised for taking such a long time and said he could write an epic in mere ten days! Now there was this real hangama, Devkota was claiming to write an epic in 10 days!! However, he had one condition. He would not scribe himself. He would just recite and other person would write for him. He chose Sahyam Das because he had very beautiful writing and could write very fast as well. It was like writing Mahabharat. Vyas reciting, Ganesh writing. The place was Saraswati sadan in Trichandra college. Ghantaghar struck ten. Sama was standing near him. Devkota asked, "Kaso sakiyela?" Sama recited a poem from Ramayan describing Hanuman when he carries the entire mountain on his shoulder. Devkota closed his eyes and started ... "Suna mishta katha Subhasini Mridu Madhurya Bilaasa Mohini Vana Sheetala Vaari bahini Shiva, Sat, Sundara Tani Naadini..." Ghantaghar struck five. Devkota stopped. For ten days, it continued. On the last day, he gave the book to Pushkar. The rest, as they say, is history. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 06:40 AM
Never been a big fan of literature, but the poem that's being discussed has been one of my favorites for a long time now. My frandfather used to recite the line "aakhir rahecha shri krishna eka, na bhakti bho, gyan bho, na bho bibeka" after his morning prayers were over. Devkota was a great poet, no questions regarding that. A great post by Gokul. Dhanyabaad. |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 07:33 AM
Gokul Ji, I enjoyed your postings, they are really good. Thanks for pointing out my mistakes, I appreciate, really appreciate. Having known your wisdom, I thought it is worthwhile to learn more from you so I am going to respond you instead of continuing my third and forth postings. <<< Devokota did use rhymes many times. If you need more examples, you can email me. <<<< I did not mean that he never used, I mean he never cared about uparaas. Read in my thread, I have mentioned, he was a flow so he just ignored the matching of last words. I have written, he was giving speech not writing poems, so how could he care about the matching of last words? The next reason is he was saying the truth and truth does not require beauty. You agreed with me, you wrote, << (24 hours a day), he could not care for trivial things like anupraas. There was not enough time. So he wrote and wrote and wrote. Some of them have beautiful rhymes, some of them have none. But all of them are soaked with intense feeling of beauty << Moreover I have never said that this is the major reason, I mentioned, _______ This is the bulk reason; the subtle reason is this poem itself. _________ I don't think that we have differences till this point, rather we are saying the same thing, though the languages are different. Anyway I am grateful for your examples, I can guess there must be many such, some are known and some unknown to me, the best example can be Munamadan where most of the verses are embaded with uparas. So we are not argueing, we are not diverging, rather converging. <<<< (2) From the perspective of religious beliefs <<<<< For me religion is not mere blind belief on unseen, unknown entity. For me sprituality has to do nothing with the traditional rites and rituals. For me sprituality is, 1.Not to harm and hurt other beings 2.Have mastry over ones own mind 3.Clean the negativities of mind, keep the mind pure. This is it, not more not less. I dont' think that we will argue in this point. If you have different thinking and beleif about the sprituality, I am sorry, I won't respond you. I will be posting about Devkota's spritual life in my third posting, you can put forth your points about god and sprituality by then. Gokul Ji, I don't know more about him in detail, poetry was my hubby once, I have mentioned in the beginning and I will mention at the end too. Your postings are helping me to understand him. I don't think that I am very rigid person who sticks on ones views. There must be truth on your views also. Your one point is highly convincing, that he was suffering from great pain of cancer and looking for cynide. This is very strong point indeed. May be that agony froced him to write such a frustrating poem. But anyway, it is differnet than what he wrote in his whole life and what he live in his whole life. How can I understand Devkota? He is differnet peson than me. The ways to know him were his poems and his life style. I have just read about him in books, neither meet someone who walked with him. Trust me, I have not read any of his Maha Kabbyas, I analyse on the base of his simple gifts like Yettri, Munamadan etc. But I don't believe that, one has to read a lot to get a message from a preson. For me, his message is; Jaau Jaau Ye Samau, Ti Arta Haru Ka Pau! Haad Haru Ka Sundara Khamba Mansha Pinda Ka Diwar! ----something(sorry forgotten)----Mandir Aafu Appar! This message touches my heart. For me this is sprituality, nothing else. Manisha Thulo Dilale Hunchha Jatale Hudaina! Touches my heart. Haata Ko Maila Sunako Thaila Ke Garnu Dhanale! Saaga ra Sisnu Khayeko Besa Anandi Manale!! These verses are touching. For me, these are the messages. I am writing in my third posting, how saintly is he and can we compare him with Buddha or any other sents or not. Was he Athabadi-Tathakari (one who does the same what he is saying) or not? Your postings make me to do a lot modification in my coming postings. DIVERGENCE: Chhandas have been the hallmark of sanskrita literature. There are more than 50 chhandas. Balmiki ramayana, Geeta, Bhagawat all are written in more than ten different chhandas: <<<< I would say the same thing if I were in your place. I have mentioned there are may chhandas, I have forgotten almost all of them because I have learned them while i was 12/13. I have mentioned, these chhandas were developed in the Pauranik era, both of us are right. I could guess, many Chhandas would be in Balmiki Ramayan and Byas's Mahabharat because I have seen them in Nepali translation of these two Mythological books. I have mentioned, ShardulBikredit Chhanda in Bhanubhaktiya Ramayan. What I have written see carefully, I have first seen Shardulbikredit in Buddha Charita, I know Buddha charita is after the Ramayan, not sure whether after Mahabharat. If you believe that Ramayan and Mahabharat were composed before Buddha, then I have to say nothing. I used to believe the same because I born and grow up in such invironment. Now my study clears the blind traditional belief and shows me the truth. I have mentioned about this matter in some of my postings. All Purans and Mahapurans were developed to response Buddhism and Jainism, if you need evidences, ask anybody who is comparitive religious study student in any US or Canadian studies. I have given lot many refrences on my that postings too. If you really want to learn indifferently, I can be your good freind, if you are firm in your belief and don't want to learn anymore, the story has end. More to come: |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 07:41 AM
If you believe that Ramayan and Mahabharat were composed before Buddha, then I have to say nothing. I used to believe the same because I born and grow up in such invironment. Now my study clears the blind traditional belief and shows me the truth. I have mentioned about this matter in some of my postings. All Purans and Mahapurans were developed to response Buddhism and Jainism, if you need evidences, ask anybody who is comparitive religious study student in any US or Canadian studies. I have given lot many refrences on my that postings too. If you really want to learn indifferently, I can be your good freind, if you are firm in your belief and don't want to learn anymore, the story has end. I agree with the first half of the paragraph. Yes, based on all historical/archaeological facts, all puranas and the epics were written not more than 1500 years ago. That's almost 1000 years after the Buddha. When you read verses like "isa putram cha mam biddhi, kumari garva sambhawam" in Bhavisya Puran, you know it can't be more than 1500 years old. However, I don't think the epics + puranas were written to counter the growth of Buddhism in India. With Indian rulers engaged in fighting and the society developing into a more warrior like society, the epics and puranas somehow helped in gearing the society towards spiritualism. This is precisely the reason we see the difference between the Gandhara Art and the other forms of Indian art/iconographic traditions. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 07:46 AM
This is precisely the reason we see the difference between the Gandhara Art and the other forms of Indian art/iconographic traditions. If the gandhara art is the rtepresentation of the more warrior -Helenic and Helenistic traditions, the Indian art forms (which we nepalis copied later) with slender hands and limbs and smiles represented the Indian quest for spirituality. Anyway, the theread's just gone way off. I hope our Gokul Sir wouldn't take it toos eriously and provide Dhanaya with his expert opinion on Sanskrit and on Devkota. |
| Gokul | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 07:59 AM
Dhananjayaji, Mahabharat is considered almost 5,000 year-old epic. The original Ramayan (Balmiki Ramayana) is also older than the times of the Budhha. However, I am not arguing about these issues. If you think you are right, that is indeed good. If you find some authentic reference, please let me know. Regarding Devkota, his poems, and beliefs, I think we can have different opinions. IFji, I am zero in art, archeology and culture. So no comment. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 08:05 AM
Gokul ji, If you allow me, let me say something: Ramayana is no older than 1500 years. The oldest surviving copy of Mahavarata was taken by the Bhandrakar Reasearch Institute, Pune from our very own Bir Pustakalaya and its also not 2500 years old. |
| Sadabichar | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 08:10 AM
No matter what and how people talk about Mahakabi Laxmi Prasad Devkota today, the truth is: His life stood out as a big failure to himself at the time he was dying. That's what he realized!!! Now we might discuss here how great he was, what a skill of poetry he had, how saintly he was or not, What are the things he accomplished or what he did not. What did he finally achieve from what he did throughout his life is what matters. It's not for us to debate what Devkota achieved... it's for him to realize whether he felt good at the time he was leaving this earth. If it's true that he asked for cynanide at his death bed, then he was suicidal or lost the balance of his mind at those days. If it's true that he was saying that had he lived few more years he would have written/done a great lot things, it means that he finally saw what is black and what is white, and he realized how to find amancipation and enlightenment. Buddha got enlightenment, and Devkota did not. This is the fact, because Devkota got himself indulged in mere entertainment of playing with words (although Devkota's messages are somewhat near to buddha teachings), Devkota led mundane life smoking his lungs and finally became suicidal. Devkota neither could lead the pure household life (he didn;t care much about his own family) nor could he jumped to the monkhood life. Buddha's the greatest teacher so far!!! |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 08:13 AM
Buddha's the greatest teacher so far!!! Buddha never said that I am the greatest teacher, nor he wanted his disciples to say that. There were many Buddhas before the Buddha, and there will be many more Buddhas after the Buddha. |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 08:15 AM
you wrote: <<< Shrikrishna is just a symbol for spirituality, something that is beyond this material existence. He could have said Budhha, Ram, Jesus. But that does not change anything. What he is saying is that human life has some inner, subtle, subjective purpose. That's all. <<< This is what I have expected, that's why I used word God in my threads instead of Shrikrishna. Please replace the word Krishna by God, that was my mistake.:)sorry! <<< The true wisdom is to learn from other's mistakes. I hope you will not utter similar words in your deathbed. Yes, belief in god gives all this bhakti, bibek, gyana. That's why there are Bhaktiyoga, Rajayoga, Gyanayoga, Karmayoga. All are different roads to god. <<< I wish I could be that type who can get wisdom from other's fault. I read a poem Ris (anger) in class 6 I guess; Risa ho sabako satru, risa le saba nashine. Risale utha Jhagada, risa le saba bhasine. Risaha ko kunai mitra rahadaina jagatbhara. Risaha sanga ko mela hunchha tyo darako ghara. This poem did not work for me. This poem did not give me the insight. I read a lot of stories of great poeple and their achievements, they don't help me to be wise. I have read a lot about Buddha and his enlightenment, that knowledge does not enlightenmen me. If mere beleif in god give wisdom please enlighten me, I will follow that way. Remember, for me wisdom means that knowledge which keeps the mind balance and unperturbed under any situation. For me wisdom means the knowledge which gives me bless, always happiness. Please, forgive me if my words hurt you, I don't mean though, you are my friend. My friend, a kid also know that, mere believing in god and reading about bhakti yoga, karma youga and gyan yoga or grasping the finding of all enlightened being can not change our conditioned mind. This is the main purpose of my posting. I want all frinds to know that, to get true wisdom, you have to follow the right path yourself, you have to strive. If I am not making mistake, Krishna who claimed that he knows three yogas, Bhakti, Gyan and Karma said; UDDARETAT MANATMANM NATMANAMA BASADAYET ATMAIBA RATMANO BANDHU RATMAIBA RIPURATMANA Meaning: be your own refuge, protect yoursef, no one will will protect you. you yoursef is your friend and you yourself is your enamy. If you come up with something contrary from Krishna, then my frist question will be who is Krishna? No my friend, even kids know, you have to work hard to get wisdom, no one else can do for you. There will be no mercy of god and you will get wisdom as a reward for your belief. I have open mind to accept the reality, hope same from you, please feel me proud of having conversation with friend like you, I will try my best on my behalf. Please give true understanding of yours so that I and other Sajahaits appreciate you, find something from you. Never feel that we are arguening, we are sharing our knowledge, hope it will help us as well as many. Argument is far from my nature. You put forth the points what I have expected, I have never expected the person like Nepe and Mickthesick. Dhananjaya |
| Sadabichar | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 08:25 AM
>>Buddha never said that I am the greatest teacher, nor he wanted his disciples to say that. There were many Buddhas before the Buddha, and there will be many more Buddhas after the Buddha. Even I didn't say that 'Buddha said that he is the greatest teacher'. There might have been be other Budhhas before Gautama Buddha who got supreme enlightenment. I didn't deny that. But Gautama Buddha at this modern age is the one who decided to dessiminate his knowledge of path to enlightment. That's why so far he is the greatest teacher. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 08:29 AM
Sadbichar, Your comments directs towards a wholwe new discussion on Therawada(hinayana) and Mahayana Buddhism. And I being zero in Buddhism and religions, I don't think I'll be able to contribute anything constructive to this thread. Namaste. |
| Gokul | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 08:39 AM
IFji, "About the age of Ramayan and MB" You may be right. since this is such a controversial and immense topic that needs a thorough research, I acknowledge the futility of discussing it as amateurs. Sadabicharji, "Buddha vs. Devkota" Devkota lived as a poet, died as a poet. Comparing him with the Buddha is really a sad bichar. Even Devkota, let alone the buddha, would not permit you making such comparisons. We are not calling Devkota the greatest teacher or a monk. Remember his title? Mahakavi nor Mahaguru. |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 09:09 AM
Dear Gokul Ji; You are real wise, I am proud of having conversation with a friend like you. Forgive me my friend, if I have become little tough. Here is the thread, where you can find refrences; http://www.gbnc.org/sajha/html/openthread.cfm?forum=2&ThreadID=12246&show=all#39378 Isolated Frick Ji, I can not say when these stories were written but they were written quite after the Buddha. Trust me or refer the refrences I have given, these all were written to response the idea developed by Buddhism and Jainism. Through this thread, I would like to send my message to respected Shiva Shiva!! Ji. As I went through the thread Religion Questioning, it seems, my response to you is not polite. I am really sorry for that. the reason is, this subject what I introduced was so delicate and new that I would not accept it in the first glance.You responded before the refrences and I thought he is sercastic. Please Shiva Ji forgive me, that response was the product of my doutful mind. I really appreciate your wisdom and became fan of your quick grasping capacity since then. Sadabichar Ji, I am with you, Buddha can never be compared. I will present Saintly life of Devkota and comparision with Saints, please give your views, they will be very precious. Dhananjaya |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 09:11 AM
Dhananjaya, Where/what are the references though? |
| SITARA | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 09:14 AM
Noname ji: Thank you for creating this thread; beautiful, in its ability to elicit Devkota's poems from his avid readers. Constructive in its ability to produce interesting critique. Thanks to all the participants for their contribution. For someone like me, who seldom had the opportunity to bathe in Nepali Literature, it surely is a treat. Gokul ji: Thank you for the verse. And how aptly Devkota describes the turmoils of living as a prodding to turn inward, for solace. Sadabichar ji: Devkota was morbid. Although, it allowed Devkota to access/express his creative mind, his morbidity, itself, translated into a failour for him. For those thinkers (like Socrates), born into harsh, conservative, rigid times/societies, freedom of expression was always at a cost. Hence, a sense of frustration. IF ji: No concrete proof has been found as to the dates of Ramayana and M B; there have been many "educated/scholarly" speculations though. |
| shukla | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 09:16 AM
I have been enjoying this very erudite discussion re Devkota. As far as who wrote the poem, I must say if he did not write it, some one must have written it very quickly. I was only 9 years or so old at that time, but I still distinctly remember that there were rumors of his poems lying around. And this particluar poem, was even recited in Radio Nepal within a week or so after his death. Of course I can not be absolutely certain of the time line, because it happened more than forty years ago, but this poem was in public very soon after Devkota's death. |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 09:18 AM
Isolated Freak Ji, Here are the refrences. Refer first refrence where you will find the Purans and concept of Barhma, Bishnu and Mahesh and concept of incarnation were developed to respond the concept developed by Buddhism and Jainism. My other threads can shine more light in this matter though. ---------------------- Posted on 09-12-03 1:00 PM Reply | Notify Admin Guys, May be some of you are feeling little odd as you read my posting. it may be against of your thinking and against of your belief. I would also have felt if i did not have studied. Every individual advocate his culture, society and family. Everybody makes colorful picture of himselves and the things associated to him. As one start to explor oneself one finds who is he, where is he, and where does he stands. If one is not self explorer, most of the things what he/she thinks about himself/herself will be virtual or fake pride. Same is true for the things associated to oneself. We are ego centered person. We first draw our own image beautiful in our mind then store the image of things associated us beautiful. Culture and Sect is another think that we always want to advocate. In reality this is true for almost all poeple of the world. The culture where we born and grow, we love it and we just accept it without using our intellect. we make a type of virtual world in our mind and think that world is true. So you guys may not believe what I said above because of this reason. I don't wonder, I was also same as you. Bheda ji, Its not a knowledge. Its a information collection, a machine also can do this job. Rael defination of knowledge is somethng different.True knowledge is that which liberate me from my mental negativities(emotions)and give me happiness. I don't think that eating this and that is sin, sin is to pollute the mind. Sin is to generate defilements in mind. Shikhar ji, This is just a history. I am interested and I studied. I am not proud of knowing these history neither this history will enlighton me. If you are interested, you need not have to see me, here are the refrences, 1.Hinduism-Religion of the world, narrated by Ben Kingsley: You can find vedio or Dvd in any library of a good school. 2. Kutadanta Sutta, Digha Nikaya- where you can see how secrifice were done those days 3.Ambastha Sutta, Digha Nikaya 4. Vedanta- where you can see direct response of Buddhism. 5.Satipattana Sutta: where you can see secrifice of cow and bull were common. 6. Garud puran: where you can see direct oppose of Buddha n his teaching then you can imagine when puranas were written. 7.I have read, some part of Rigveda(considered oldest scripture of the world, this is the main veda which represents religious theme)only, see there if you find Vishnu and Shiva and incarnation concept. 8.Read Yog Basistha and Patangali Youg...where you will find they have expressed Buddhas teachig with beautiful story and practice but message is different. same case in gita. Dude, I am reality loving person. I don't believe in any faith. I neither belongs to any sects like Hindu, baudha, jain, christian, muslim etc. I believe you guys are open minded person, you can tell me if my posting contain biasing. I would not have posted these for sectarian, communal parson who has stuck to his culture and tradition blindly. This is not my view, this is all history. You are also access to it, I have given refrence above. I don not hegitate to say what I know. I have adapted a scientific culture where one can boldly say to people what he/she know. I have not claimed something that I don't know to enflat my ego. Shiva Shiva, if you are open minded i will love to share. I love to have friendship with humble, simple and openminded person. daggg, saroj, T_H, bold, i am with you guys. I also don't believe on religion. If you guys are defining Dharma as culture, scripture, faith, tradition, rites and rituals, fasting, gogmas etc, then I am pesimistic. These are the things that are cause of regress. I reject Dharma. Let me go to hell. Real Dharma has to do nothing with these things. pure Dharma is 1.living wholesome life 2.getting mastry over the mind 3.eredicate impurity of mind this is the gift of our ansisters. This is better way of living. I love this. I love Dharma. Dhananjaya |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 09:21 AM
Sitara, I agree. But, there's this wonderful science called archaeology, which i am sure you are aware of. Archeaology, based on evidence, tries to recreate the past. There's cultural archaeology and there's paleontology. See, the things that we read in Mahavarata and Ramayana didn't even exist 5000 eyars ago. So, how can we asy that its 5000 years ago? Te advanced warfare system etc. plus in ramayana, you ahve the whole bridge making etchnology mentoned. And that was not possible 5000 years ago. But again, you are right. No one can say the exact dates, but based on the facts, some SCHOLARS believe that Ramayana and Mahabbharata are not more than 1500 years old. |
| Gokul | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 09:32 AM
Coming back to Devkota, It is possible that many of Devkota's poems are still being possessed by other people. The following narrative makes an attempt to justify why. Devkota was living in Benaras in a (sort of) political exile. Life was extrordinarily hard for him as he had no source of livelihood. Through some luck, he came to befriend a Nepali named Tika Dhital, who promised he would buy his poems at the rate of Re. 1 per stanza (or something like this). Devkota was real happy to have got some source of income. Dhitalji purchased many of his poems for a while. Later Dhitalji lowered the rate to meagre ek paisa but he feared he would soon run out of money because he realized Devkota, the eternal fountain of poetry, would never stop gushing. There was simply no end to it. Dhitalji politely apologised and annulled the deal. |
| NK | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 09:33 AM
Gokul, I don't know the insider's scoop of Devkota's brilliance nor can I tell unlike you, what else did he write besides Muna Madan and Shakuntala. But, when I read that Devkota could not have written this poem on his deathbed because he mentions Krishna I somehow felt that does not sound right. Hearing (and sometimes reading )so much about his intellecutal capability, one can infer like I did when he said Krishna was the *One* he was talking about much greater than "Krishna Bhagawan" himself. Thank you. As noname said postings like yours make it worth the visit of this site |
| SITARA | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 09:45 AM
IF ji: This "wonderful thing called science and archeology" brought into prominence "Egyptologists" and Egypt specialists who wrongly dated the pyramids of Khufu and Kafre and aligned it conveniently with the "history" of the Bible (Old Testament) until an expedition armed with geologists (to study the flooding of the earth in that region) archeologists, paleontologist made a renewed attempt at studying the pyramids and the Sphinx. The findings from that expedition caused a hullaballoo grave enough for Egypt to clamp down on further investigations. The politics of 'truth" in the earlier interpretations of veteran Egyptologists came under scrutiny; investments made into archeological expeditions were "recalled"/stopped. Reason: The Sphinx and the three Pyramids, according to the geologists, are older than they have been dated. The pattern of water erosion around those monuments record a different time period. Revising textbooks and history (earlier benchmarked by Christianity and Missionaries) can be devastating to the Western world. The first person/s who ever translated or actually made a scholarly study was a missionary ( I forget his name; when I get home from work, I can look it up); he undertook the task to understand and consequently simplify conversion in the Indian Sub-continent. |
| SITARA | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 09:47 AM
"The first person/s who ever translated or actually made a scholarly study was a missionary ( I forget his name; when I get home from work, I can look it up); he undertook the task to understand and consequently simplify conversion in the Indian Sub-continent. ".... Here I meant the Vedas. |
| mickthesick | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 09:51 AM
..beautiful discussions are going on here and i am glad to be a part of it. One of the best poems closer to my heart is devkota's "PAAGAL"...it's so easy to relate to it at times. The english translation of "PAAGAL" is below:: Crazy (Pagal) 1. Oh yes, friend! I'm crazy- that's just the way I am. 2. I see sounds, I hear sights, I taste smells, I touch not heaven but things from the underworld, things people do not believe exist, whose shapes the world does not suspect. Stones I see as flowers lying water-smoothed by the water's edge, rocks of tender forms in the moonlight when the heavenly sorceress smiles at me, putting out leaves, softening, glistening, throbbing, they rise up like mute maniacs, like flowers, a kind of moon-bird's flowers. I talk to them the way they talk to me, a language, friend, that can't be written or printed or spoken, can't be understood, can't be heard. Their language comes in ripples to the moonlit Ganges banks, ripple by ripple- oh yes, friend! I'm crazy- that's just the way I am. 3. You're clever, quick with words, your exact equations are right forever and ever. But in my arithmetic, take one from one- and there's still one left. You get along with five senses, I with a sixth. You have a brain, friend, I have a heart. A rose is just a rose to you- to me it's Helen and Padmini. You are forceful prose I liquid verse. When you freeze I melt, When you're clear I get muddled and then it works the other way around. Your world is solid, mine vapor, yours coarse, mine subtle. You think a stone reality; harsh cruelty is real for you. I try to catch a dream, the way you grasp the rounded truth of cold, sweet coin. I have the sharpness of the thorn, you of gold and diamonds. You think the hills are mute- I call them eloquent. Oh yes, friend! I'm free in my inebriation- that's just the way I am. 4. In the cold of the month of Magh I sat warming to the first white heat of the star. the world called me drifty. When they saw me staring blankly for seven days after I came back from the burning ghats they said I was a spook. When I saw the first marks of the snows of time in a beautiful woman's hair I wept for three days. When the Buddha touched my soul they said I was raving. They called me a lunatic because I danced when I heard the first spring cuckoo. One dead-quite moon night breathless I leapt to my feet, filled with the pain of destruction. On that occasion the fools put me in the stocks, One day I sang with the storm- the wise men sent me off to Ranchi. Realizing that same day I myself would die I stretched out on my bed. A friend came along and pinched me hard and said, Hey, madman, your flesh isn't dead yet! For years these things went on. I'm crazy, friend- that's just the way I am. 5. I called the Navab's wine blood, the painted whore a corpse, and the king a pauper. I attacked Alexander with insults, and denounced the so-called great souls. The lowly I have raised on the bridge of praise to the seventh heaven. Your learned pandit is my great fool, your heaven my hell, your gold my iron, friend! Your piety my sin. Where you see yourself as brilliant I find you a dolt. Your rise, friend-my decline. That's the way our values are mixed up, friend! Your whole world is a hair to me. Oh yes, friend, I'm moonstruck through and through- moonstruck! That's just the way I am. 6. I see the blind man as the people's guide, the ascetic in his cave a deserter; those who act in the theater of lies I see as dark buffoons. Those who fail I find successful, and progress only backsliding. am I squint-eyed, Or just crazy? Friend, I'm crazy. Look at the withered tongues of shameless leaders, The dance of the whores At breaking the backbone on the people's rights. When the sparrow-headed newsprint spreads its black lies In a web of falsehood To challenge Reason-the hero in myself- My cheeks turn red, friend, red as molten coal. When simple people drink dark poison with their ears Thinking it nectar- and right before my eyes, friend!- then every hair on my body stands up stiff as the Gorgon's serpent hair- every hair on me maddened! When I see the tiger daring to eat the deer, friend, or the big fish the little, then into my rotten bones there comes the terrible strength of the soul of Dadhichi and tries to speak, friend, like the stormy day crashing down from heaven with the lightning. When man regards a man as not a man, friend, then my teeth grind together, all thirty-two, top and bottom jaws, like the teeth if Bhimasena. And then red with rage my eyeballs rool round and round, with one sweep like a lashing flame taking in this inhuman human world. My organs leap out of theirs frames- uproar! Uproar! my breathing becomes a storm, my face distorted, my brain on fire, friend! with a fire like those that burn beneath the sea, like the fire that devours the forests, frenzied, friend! as one who would swallow the wide world raw. Oh yes, my friend, the beautiful chakora am I, destroyer of the ugly, both tender and cruel, the bird that steals the heaven's fire, child of the tempest, spew of the insane volcano, terror incarnate. Oh yes, friend, my brain is whirling, whirling- that's just the way I am. Published. 1953. |
| Nepe | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 09:52 AM
Gokul ji, I knew we have a lot to learn from your authoritative knowledge in this field and your usual sharp analysis which often spans multiple disciplines, may I call it a holistic analysis ? And that's why I had sorta made a call for your appearance by mentioning your name in my posting. Benefited greatly from your analysis and the information and references you gave. With my very limited knowledge in these fields, I am not in a position to say much. However, with you, I know, I do not need to fear. I can be nirbastra in front you. I used the term an atheist spirituality to Devkota's belief and I think this is similar or not much different from how you have described him. Devkota has used the word 'Ishwar' very frequently, but I think you will not disagree with me that he was not talking about the conventional notion of the God. We can roughly equate his 'Ishwar' to the Nature. Being a struggling atheist myself, the notion of God is very interesting topic to me. I have become atheist more by thinking myself than by reading the views of great thinkers. So I know I could be in a serious fault. Since I first read your postings on topics of religion and philosophy in Sajha two years ago, I have always wanted to hear more from you. It will be great if you could post more on these topics, Gokul ji. Your mentioning about Eienstein's belief has aroused my curiosity further. Regarding the poem 'Akhir rahechha Shree Krishna..', may be my atheist bias has hindered to appreciate it fully. Anyway, let's agree to disagree on this for now. I am glad to see more posters participating in the discussion. Will be reading it with avid interest. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 09:55 AM
The first person/s who ever translated or actually made a scholarly study was a missionary ( I forget his name; when I get home from work, I can look it up); he undertook the task to understand and consequently simplify conversion in the Indian Sub-continent. max muller? (does U have those german tone marks)? If you are talking about max Muller then, Some Indian Scholars have starte dto question Muller's translation. They say, he just didn't translate it properly and to enforce the myth of Aryan invasion, he just skipped some part (hid those). |
| mickthesick | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 10:01 AM
..there might be some of you who do not know devkota's life story....so here a good link for you guys incase you want to know devkota's life story....i was thinking of posting it here but again i thought it would be like a torture to those who already know it. so here's the link for those poele interested: http://www.spinybabbler.org/literature/personalities/laxmi_prasad_devkota.htm |
| Gokul | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 10:04 AM
MaxMuller? |
| SITARA | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 10:06 AM
It was a Franciscan Monk,... again, I can't remember off the top of my head. Max Muller came in much later and then another group of German scientist who went into Tibet to trace the Aryan lineage among some Tibetans. The latter group was a bunch of Nazis and German physical anthropologists studying the facial, skeletal structure. This info from the Buddhist Journa Magazine "Tricycle". |
| SITARA | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 10:07 AM
Yikes!!! Sorry for the digression! :( |
| mickthesick | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 10:13 AM
..I found the english translation of muna-madan in the internet. I am not sure whether it is a complete translation or not, but it does look like a complete translation of the book. To be true i did not like the quality of the english translation. The person who translated the book must have been a good scholar but he has not been able to do justice to devkoat's creation because his english translation lacks the edge, charisma, and essence that we can find in the original writing of devkota. My opinion regarding translation of nepalese literature into english is that "if you cannot do justice to the original literature then please don't translate it". Because what happens more than often is that when people in the west read the english translation they conclude that devkota's poems are not good. The reason: the translation is not good. But to those of you who would still like to read the english translation of muna madan: here's the link. http://literature.wnso.org/2002/munamadan.htm |
| Gokul | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 10:15 AM
Didn't realize that IF had already mentioned Maxmuller. Hermann Hesse's grandfather also came to India to proselytize the Indians. Nepeji, I think pantheism may be more appropriate than "atheist spirituality" although I understand clearly what you are saying with it. Indeed, the idea of god is interesting, vast, and deserves a separate thread for discussion. For Einstein's philosophical essays, there is a book by him called "Ideas and Opinions". Nepeji, it is impossible to be an atheist and still continue living. We are all believers. Time permitting, I would love to discuss about it. |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 10:44 AM
Gokul Ji, It's real surprise to me, did Einstien believed on God, the same god who create the universe and creature? Awesome! I did have the book Einstien-Ideas and Opnions, I am sorry I could not read it all because I found it so late by then I had given up reading. Please enlighton me, about his ideas. I know one thing, he praised Buddhan and said if I have to follow religion, I will follow Buddha or something like that. He praised Gandhi too. After second world war, he used his life to advocating for peace because he was indirectly responsible for the Herosima and Nagashaki massacare, E=mc^2. As you granted to Nepeji, please accept my request too and tell something, I am thrusty for the knowledge. I don't beleive in any god and for me god is truth. I am very very much willing to hear how everyboy believes in god? How mere beleif is that powerful? Who generate the concept of faith or belief? Lot many questions are floating in my mind. I will not blindly believe on you, make me satisfied. Appreciation in agreement. Dhananjaya |
| Sadabichar | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 11:02 AM
Faith and Belief are very strange, aren't they? The concept of GOD as most of the people on this earth see is totally strange to me. But many people are so much adherant to the concepts of FAITH and BELIEF to which they never raise any doubts, or question the rationale behind such concepts. I had read the Leo Tolstoy's Anna Karenina. The main character in that novel supposed to be Anna Karenina. But, after a little further from the middle of that novel, Anna Karenina commits suicide. It's logical that since the main character has gone out of the scene, the novel should end soon. No, the Tolstoy keeps on writing the novel, but this time about another character Levin. Tolstoy wrote almost next half that novel describing how Levin transformed from athiest to avid lover of Bible. He wrote how Levin lived his life concentrating on Bible and cherishing his belief and faith in Christianity. But actually what happened was during the writing of that novel, it was Tolstoy himself who transformed growing faith in God. Levin was Tolstoy!! |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 03:03 PM
Sadabichar Ji, Regarding faith and belief, I am waiting for Gokul Ji's reply, then I will put forth my understanding about it. I am expecting something solid from Gokul ji from his statement. I have read couple of stories from Leo Tolstoy, his style is same everywhere, some one truns to be angel or god itself, but his message is one, humanity is good. One incident of his life is very informative. He was born in royal(tsar) family and were not satisfied with his cozy life style. He wanted something more, peace of mind. He left the home and start to live in solitude. He wrote, his mother when watched sentimental dramas, cried with tear, but she was very tough with the servents at her home. What is this mean? A person cried out of compassion while watching the drama and the same person became tough to those poor who need compassion. I know the reason from my own experience. The superficial mind which can analyse what is good and bad is less powerful than the subconsious mind. When she watched the movie, her consious mind generate compassion and she cried, but in her subconsious mind there is a lot of abortion which generate anger and compssion disappears. To understand this I think, one need to have some platform, I know you, so I am sure you understand the consious and subconsious mind business. Buddha figured this out that why person can not be good, can not act good and can not behave good, though he/she knows that what is good. He discovered that it is consious mind who knows good and bad, but subconsious mind never understand the language of consious mind. Buddha named the consious mind as Paritta Chitta, small mind, really compare to subconsious mind it is small. Paritta Chitta is what we call intellect. Then he discovered the language of Subconsious mind, subconsious mind understand only the language of sensation, or feelings. Then he found the link between consious and subconsious mind, then he gave the path to train this subconsious mind with the help of consious mind generating wisdom of Anichha (impermanent), Anatma(selflessness) and Dukkha (dissatisfaction). This path is called Noble Fight Forld path of liberation which tame the subconsious mind for better. He was a human being, he simply find the way out of suffering. He never claimed that he can give liberation to any, he claimed that he is free from all Dukkha and everyone who follow the path he had shown can be free. He said, Tume Hi Kichhanga Tappam, Akhataro Tathagata! You have to walk in the path, my job is just to show the path. It makes sense, isn't it? He said he worked for his liberation and selvation and became free, each individual had to work for their liberation and selvation on thier own. This makes sense, isn't it? He opened the eyes of many poeple who had blind belief on some unseen, unknown entity, he convinced them that you have to strive dynamically for your liberation and selvation. He said, Atta hi attano natho, Ko nu natho paro siya! You are master of your own who else can be your master. How live words! How scientific words! Great is Buddha! Great is enlighten one! So convincing, so pregmatic. Indeed who else can clean our defiled mind. Let me talk about faith and belief later, I first want to see Gokul Ji's understanding. Gokul Ji, I am really waiting for your understanding about the faith and belief. Remember, we are sharing knowledge, we are not debating, I will respect your understanding whatever it is, and share with you my understanding. I gonna finish my other two postings, that I have promissed. I have never thought that my posting will shake my all schadule up, I have to make a lot many things up. May not my posting generate negativity in anybodies mind, rather be informative and helpful. Dhananjaya |
| sadabichar | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 05:15 PM
Tume Hi Kichhanga Tappam, Akhataro Tathagata! An Incident: The Buddha was dwelling at Savathi, the capital of Koshala, the most densely populated city in India of those days. Several monks and nuns as well as male and female lay people would come to his meditation center to listen to his discourses and to learn meditation. Some people came only to listen to the discourses but never put any of his teaching into practice. One such person arrived early one day and found the Buddha alone. He approached Buddha and said, "Sir, I have a question that arises repeatedly in my mind. I am hesitant to ask when others are present. I am glad that you are alone today. With your permission, I will ask my question." The Buddha replied, "There should not be any doubts on the path of Dhamma; have them clarified. What is your question?" "Sir, Ihave been coming to your meditation center for many years and I have noticed that many people come to you. Some of them, I can see, have certainly reached the final stage and have become fully liberated. I can see that others are not yet fully liberated. But, Sir, there are some people, including myself, who have not changed at all. They are just as they were earlier." "Why should this be, Sir? People come to you, a great person, so powerful and comapssionate. They take refuge in you and yet there is no change in them. Why don't you use all your power and compassion to liberate them all?" The Buddha smiled. This is what he explained every day, but if someone did not want to understand, what could be done? He tried to explain again. He had different ways of explaining. Sometimes he would explain by counter-questioning. "Where do you come from?" "Savathi, sir." "Yes, but your facial features and speech show that you are not from this part of the country. You have come from some other region and settled here." "You are right, sir. I am from the city of Rajagaha, the capital of the state of Magadha. I came and settled here in Savathi a few years ago." "Have you severed (cut-off) all connections with Rajagah?" "No, sir. I still have relatives and friends there. Ihave business there. I visit Rajagah many times every year and return to Savathi." "Having travelled the path from here to Rajagah, certainly you must know the path very well?" "Oh yes sir. I know it perfectly." "And your friends, who know you well, must know that you are from Rajagaha and have settled here? They must also know that you often visit Rajagaha and that you know the path from here to Rajagaha very well?" "Then it must happen that some of them ask you to explain the path from here to Rajagaha. Do you hide anything or do you explain the path to them clearly?" "Sir, why should I hide it? I explain to them as clearly as I can: go towards the east from here and you will reach the city of Vaanasi. Continue onward until you reach Gaya. Proceed further and you will reach Rajagaha." "And do all these poeple to whom you explain the path so clearly reach Rajagaha?" "How can that be sir? Only those who walk the entire path will reach Rajagaha." "This is what I want to explain to you. Poeple come to me knowing that this is someone who has walked the path from here to Nibbana and so knows it perfectly. They ask me about the path. Why should I hide it? I explain to them clearly: "This is the path. On the way you will come across these stations; you will pass through these experiences. Proceed further and you will reach the stage of liberation, you will experience the Ultimate Truth. "I explain the path very clearly. If someone is satisfied only with my explanation and bows down three times and says, 'Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu, you have explained very well, sir' but doesn not take a single step on the path, how will he reach the final goal? "One who starts walking on the path and takes ten steps will be ten steps closer to the final goal. One who takes a hundred steps will be hundred steps closer. And one who takes all the steps on the path will reach the final goal. You have to walk the path yourself." |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 05:37 PM
Sadabichar ji, Great Story, I love this the most. The name of the guy was Ganamogallana, he was astrologist (jyotis) in his life. How clear his message is! How sublime the Dhamma is! May many people get inspiration to work hard. Dear friends, I am done with what I want to say. I am not going to post. I have contributed so many time for the welfare of my friends, may this be helpful to many. I am tired, please correct the errors yourself, forgive me. Please don't find small mistakes, read the whole thim and if you have contradiction on the message, I will hearty welcome you, please provide me oppertuity of learning. Grateful Dhananjaya |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 06:00 PM
Regarding the comparison of Devkota with Buddha, Buddha is incomparable. Buddha himself said, all the Buddhas are Anuttara , ie incomparable. Buddha said, Sabbe Buddha Samasama , ie all the Buddhas are equal in quality. Buddha is one who had fulfilled all 10 parmis with three ways (ie 30 best qualities, Parmies), thats why they are incomparable. We can compare Devkota with a general people. Let me evaluate his 10 best qualities which are known as DASA as well as Parmi. 1. Dana (Donation): Devkota was generous; he gave extreme example of his generosity. 2. Sila (precepts): Devkota was not involved in major harming and hurting to other beings, 3. Niskarnan (renounciation): He never lived the life of monk but it seems to me he was not that attached to his family. It seems to me, he is not that involved in the race of mundane things, so I can consider virtually renounce. 4. Pragya (wisdom): He had Srutmayi (wisdom from hearing and reading) Gyan, Chintanmaye (Wisdome that comes form intellectual excersice) Gyan, and I can say about Bhawanamai (the wisdom that comes from experience) Gyan. 5 Briya (effort): He had great enthusiasm for the poem, this is not right effort, but it is effort. 6. Chhayanti (forgiveness): He must have tolerance more than general people, ie he must be humble, this might be the reason why he was loved by children. 7. Sattya (truth): I dont think that he would be lying, he must be truthful. 8. Adhisthan (determination): He must have great determination because he finished Sakuntala Mahakabya (please correct me if I am wrong) within few days. 9. Mitri (friendliness): He was beloved of many simplicity loving person, he must have friendly nature. 10. Upekshya (equanimity): Saga ra sisnu khayeko besa anandi manale, he should be equanimous in adverse situation too. A saintly being is measured form these 10 parmies. I have evaluated him with my little understanding about him. I can not claim that I am correct, please correct me. Devkota serve the humanity as his best, he advocated for humanity. His service was not for ego neither for wealth. He did selfless service. There are very few people who really recognize this personality; most of us have just heard that he is the great personality. (I salute this great soul not for his poems but for his nature. Poems are not main, the message that the poems are carrying is the main. Devkota was not a mere thinker, he delivered the message and he lived himself that way. What he was saying that he was doing, so I love him. He did not believe in God, for him humanity, love, compassion were god, he lived such life and he delivered the same message, through his poems. He might have written some poems about the nature and beauty but most of his poems are humanity related. So lets not label all the poets as a mere thinkers, there is real man inside them, who might have experienced the life.) I put this inside the bracket because I have belied that Devkota lived the life of his message, but Gokul Ji suggested something else, so I got to change the matter. He was not perfect man, he had great attachment with Nepali language. Once after democracy someone said Nepali Khaldo Ma Janchha, Hindi Le Raj Garnechha! , Devkota could not bear this and he attacked him. True, what Buddha said, attachment brings misery. He was absorbed by the passion of poems so he failed to be a good husband and a good father; this is also an example of his imperfection. Cigarette addiction and carefree life (carefree without wisdom) was another imperfection. He was born in the society of heartless and mindless person, that was his bad luck and he was so humble to use Darwinism, survival for fittest. Heartless (rulers of those time) mindless (rulers plus nobles plus society who could not recognize him as a useful being) words should not offend any body, if yes, please forgive me. I found all most all Parmis of Devkota are developed more than a general human being. What makes him to develop the parmi? The answer is his Samadhi, his concentration. Is that concentration is right concentration, Samyek Samadhi? The answer is no. His Samadhi was impure, his mind was absorbed in poems, poems were object of concentration for him. Since, the concentration has passionate reference, it subsided the mental negativities. But this absorption Samadhi helped him to develop his parmies and made him different than a general human being. Since he did not have right concentration, Bhawanamai Pragya (experiential knowledge of impermanence) can not be expected. I can guess two things from this, one the poem of concern should be written by somebody else, to include him in the group of blindly faithful on God. Next thing, he did not have experiential wisdom, thats for sure, so in his painful last days, he must have lost the equanimity and accepted the faith, easiest way for temporary satisfaction, and cheapest way to sooth restless mind for a while. For me, both are equally likely, 50-50%. Lets talk about the relation between poems and Saints: Buddha was a great Kabi, not only Kabi but Aashu Kabi, he could speak in Poems. Tipithak is full of thousands of his verses; it is found sometime he gave answer of the questions in poem. Buddha used to sing those verses to make people understand the Dhamma. Most of his verses are in Dhamma Chhanda, that what I have mentioned above, plus the end words may or may not sound similar. Why? Because he was saying the fact, he was not saying the beauty; he was expressing the fact in the form of poems because it might make easier for meditators to grasp it. In Tipathaka, we can see many examples where he asked meditators to mug up the verses. One example: He asked Chhulla Pantaka monk to learn half verse (only one line, 22 letters), but he could not learn it for years, he was so dull. Here I am giving the examples of Buddhas poem. Digham Jagarato Rattim, Digham Santassa Yojanam! Digha Balanam Sansaro Saddhammam Abhijanatam!! contd.... |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 06:02 PM
He is laughing without fear to those evil selfish rulers. Time has changed, rulers also got changed, but the mentality of the rulers is the same as the Poudel described, only their tricks got changed. Rana rulers were like wolves; our new rulers are like parasitic germs. Buddha said, it is easy to do something harmful but is tremendously difficult to do something wholesome. Thus have compassion for those who are doing wrong, poor fellows will be facing bad consequences for their wrong deeds. True, no mistake is left unpunished in the court of nature. There is no source, no force, fare judgment, those who give misery to other, will get misery themselves; this is unbreakable law of Nature. I have compassion for these souls who out of their greed and ego doing wrong. Real compassion from my heart, I never scold those poor fellows. So after more than half a century I made some modification in the poem, if you like. Ma Khaau Mai Laau, Sukha Sayela Wa Moja Magaru! Ma Baachu, Mai Nachu, Aru Saba Marun Sojha Bhai Haru!! Bhani Chorne Thagne, Fataha Haru Dekhi Daya Jagi! Ma Chintan Gardai Chhu, Kasari Sudharne Lau Yi Abhagi!! I wrote a lot, I wish to write one thing of my interest. I wrote many poems (I cant say about the quality, it should be tested by experts, my Nepali teacher always praised me for my poems and my school used to send me to Balmiki Campus for compitation in Bhanu Jayanti) while I was teen; my incomparable father published a collection of my poems, just to make me happy. To my grate surprise, in my poems, there were truth; there were Dhamma, which I have learned many years later. No poems were about beauty and nature, all were like sermons. I still can not follow what I have written more than a decade ago. I am just a poet, who can just feel the truth but can not follow the truth. I know very well my crooked mind, I asked my father to publish the collection, just to inflate my ego. Somebody write for passion, somebody writes for ego as well as passion, I am the type who wrote just for ego. I wanted praise from many people and wanted to be popular, silly mentality. I do remember, I have printed a big photo of mine at the back cover of the book, crazy me, I like to laugh at me now. As I have learned Dhamma, the practice reduces the ego, and feels ashamed of writing very big truths in my poems which I still can not realize. I have described a true path in those poems which I am unable to follow yet. So, what is the meaning of such messages though they are true? Its easy to be an instructor but extremely difficult to be a student, I have experienced this. I had just Chintanmai Pragya (wisdom from intellect) which enables me to write the truth, I dont have Bhawanamai Pragya (experiential wisdom) thats why I can not follow that truth. Buddha showed me path how to develop Bhawanmayi Gyan, I am crawling in that path, since than I gave up the idea of poetry. Experiential wisdom will give me happy and balance life; it will protect me from all pains and misery. I have heard many cases where a meditator, who is practicing experiential wisdom, and suffering from painful cancer, lived equanimously and died peacefully, without losing the balance of the mind. I have seen such similar cases too. But intellectual wisdom will not be able to protect me from pain and misery of life, as it could not protect Devkota. It will give me praise, what will I do for that? That will mere increase my ego and make me unmindful. Thats why I quit poetry I am able to write poems in any subject (please dont think I am saying this out of ego, this is truth, I know myself). I dont want to be another Devkota, who has become failure household and suffered his whole life and even could not die peacefully. I want to be like Buddha, who lived happy life and helped many people to learn the technique of getting real happiness. I will write then, my real understanding of nature, in poetic language, the Dhamma Verses. Dhananjaya |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 06:02 PM
Meaning: For one, who can not sleep, night is so long, for tired one, one mile distance is also so long, and for fool who does no know the true Dhamma, the life (actually cycle of life and death) is so long. These two lines are poems but in reality they are truths, truth expressed in terms of poems. Last words are not matching here too. Before Buddha and at the time of Buddha, some people used to sell the verses. The verses were mainly bought by wise kings and wise rich peoples. The verses were bought not for their beauty but for the reality hided inside, them. One verse used to cost Hundreds, thousands, ten thousands, and even more, there are such many examples in Tipithak. I dont know whether it is coincident, not only Buddha but most of the Saintly beings were poets. Mira, and Chaitainnya were found always singing and dancing. Saint HariDas was music guru of renowned musician Tensen. Surdas, Tulsidas are popular for their Bhakti songs. Muhammad was illiterate Arabic poet, who revealed all the Koran in poetic language. Guru Nanak and Kabir Das were other two illiterate great poets. The whole Japuji is nothing but the fact revealed in poetic language by Guru Nanak. How sweet words of Nanak, Japuji starts with the poem, Aadi Sachu, Jugadi Sachu&&&&&&&&& (Truth is from the starting point not only from starting but before the starting point) What ever he spoke were poem, were truth hided inside the poem. Similarly, Kabir Das is very famous for his Dohas. They were poems of truth. I love his Dohas, they are so sweet. Here I am giving one as example, which is well known: Kal Kare jo Aja Kar, Aja Kare so Aba! Pal Me Parlaya Hoyengi, Bahuri Karoge Kab!! He is giving importance to the present momnet, every words are facts composed in terms of poem. A poet, Haribansh Raya Bachhan (father of Amitabh Bachhan) wrote the same thing in his one of the poems, Jo BitGayi So BaatGayi , but what a difference! One is revealing the truth from his own experience and another one is expressing his feelings which seem true for him. Of course there is difference between the poems of Saints and poems of poets; if the poet lives the wholesome life that he is expressing in his poems he is a saint. The difference is, Saint has knowledge of experience and never goes wrong where as poet has knowledge of feelings may or may not be true. Great living Saint, Goyanka Ji, who got opportunity to spread pure Buddhas teaching all over the world, after 2500 years of Buddha is a great poet. He was Krishna Bhakta in his early life and composed so many Krishan Bhajan. Now he is known as universal teacher of Vipassana, writes his experience. Diwasa Bita Bilakhte Rote Biti Rain! Dhannaya Dharma Yaisa Mila, Mili Manko Chain!! First line he expressed how he lived before Dhammik life and in second line he said how is he living after Dhamma. A single line tells a lot. He is encouraging his students who meditate day and night, Sarm Kar Sarm Kar babare, Sarmikau Ka Sanskar! Bin Sarm Roti Na Mile, To Chahe Bhava Par!! Indeed, without labor one can not get a bread , how can one cross the vast ocean of life and birth, one must strive. I am sort of addicted to his poems, so one more, Tap Re Tap Re Manakha, Tapehi Nirmal Huye! Subaran Agni Me Tape, Tap Tap Kundana Huwe!! Indeed! Without Tapassaya, no one can clean mental impurities, he is my honorable Guru, who teaches pristine pure Tapassaya that Buddha used to teach his pupils 2500 years ago. Saints write reality in the poetic language, they never write the poems which generate any type of emotion, rather they write the way of cession of emotion in poetic language. Poets write from intellectual understanding but Saint write from experiential understanding. This is the difference between Saints and poets. I am leaving for you whether Devkota was more saint or more paints, I know very less about his personal life, so can not feel comfortable to analyze him. Poets write from their feelings, feelings are impermanent, they keep changing, this is called Dhammanupassana in the teaching of the Buddha. There are some poets whose touching words persist for long time, event though they comes from mere feelings. I would like to give one example in this matter. The poem is composed in my best Chhanda, Sikharini, by Kabi Siromani Lekh Nath Poudel Jyu (I guess, please correct me if I am wrong), against the Rana Rullers. I loved to sing Sikharini Chhanda the most. It has 17 letters, first half 6 and second half 11 letters. Ma Khaau Mai Laau, Sukha Sayel Wa Moja Magaru! Ma Bachu Mai Nachu, Aru Saba Marun Durbala Haru!! Bhani Dara Dhasne, Abujha Satha Dekhi Chhaka Pari! Chita Khitka Chhodi, Avaya Sita Hase Mari Mari!! contd... |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 05-Nov-03 06:12 PM
Error, Please read; << I am done with what I want to say. I am not going to post. << as, I am now going to post. thanks Dhananjaya |
| peda | Posted
on 06-Nov-03 03:40 AM
very interesting discussion. I wish I could meet you all in person and learn more- maybe some day. About the poem, I think it is a great poem. The lesson to learn is when we all are in our death bed, we would probably ask questions to ourselves- ''what have I done to make my life worthwhile?''. If we think about it today, maybe the way we live will change and the world will be a better place.I am beginning to think about it now and I am thinking, I have not done anything worthwhile so far. 'Death is inevitable' and as time flies by, it will very soon stare at us into our eyes. The question of who wrote it is not very important but I believe Devtota himself wrote it. My belief about all these religions is they are a bit like constitutions of present day countries- a system to maintain the society in order. Devised by very smart people for ordinary ones. We must say they have served their purposes but taken in extremes, they have been the cause of so many wars and death. Faith is for those who believe. It does miracles to your mind and if you pursue with purity, you could feel God. He/she is not somebody who would appear in a TV screen and say 'hi, I am God. you need to do this in order to get me'. God is above all religions and I do not believe that he discriminates with any. Pls keep posting and I would hope to learn more- maybe make myself wise someday. |
| Gokul | Posted
on 06-Nov-03 08:09 AM
Before calling it a day, I would like to make a few remarks. "Nepeji, read this poem not from the perspective of an intellectual republican but from the perspective of an oriental dying an untimely death with all potential and dreams unfulfilled." Nepeji, I apologize for using the word "reublican" here. Since it was not about politics, that term was not called for although you did not object it out of your courtesy. Let it be replaced by "analyst". It was wonderful communicating, discussing, interacting with you. Thanks are due to all. |
| Gunaraj | Posted
on 06-Nov-03 08:15 AM
I wish I could read all these postings in peace of mind, with plenty of time to enjoy each sentences. I will save it and read later.... (somewhere in another thread: tip#111- Save good postings before it is lost in the archives or accidently erased). I am spellbound with the depth of literature you show you have fathomed. |
| Nepe | Posted
on 06-Nov-03 08:29 AM
I was about to express my dissatisfaction over Dhananjaya's disastrous deconstruction of Devkota with his strange Buddhist hammer, I paused and thought, well, this is what I was waiting to see, wasn't I ? It's been quite some time I have been reading Dhananjaya ji tireless postings, to learn partly about the Buddhism itself and partly about how a person with a strong faith in a particular philosophy/person behaves. Being myself a man with a strong faith in certain things, it has been quite a learning experience for me, to say the least. Anyway, I neither have enough knowledge, nor time to explain to Dhananjaya, but sir, you're talking like a hypnotized man. You don't know what you just did to Devkota. I have an enormous respect for Buddha. In fact, I am in awe with his pursuit of truth, his discovery and the way he preached. He sure was a very intelligent man. However, it is not only ridiculous, but also very harmful to claim that he knew everything about human mind that is there to be known and other big big claims Dhananjaya ji is at ease to claim. Psychology is not my field. So I know nearly nothing to make any serious claim. I hope Sajhaites with formal training in psychology will come forward and let Dhananjaya ji know there is a lot more to know about human mind than what a few elementary things Buddha said (all right, elementary for our time, but certainly very advanced for Buddha's time). Nevertheless, let me say this much. It must be 4-5 years ago, I had read a textbook on psychology (Social psychology, David G Myers) for fun. I don't remember much, but I can say this to Dhananjaya ji, Sir, human mind is much more complex than how much Buddha knew. I recommend you to read this book. May be there are better books for you. But that's all I have read and I know. |
| Nepe | Posted
on 06-Nov-03 08:34 AM
Gokul ji, Actually I was glad. It has been some time I didn't have a chance to talk about my political views. So it was like a free advertisement for me :-) |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 06-Nov-03 06:27 PM
Nepe Dai, Hearty welcome to your dissatisfaction. Dai, do I have right to know what wrong did I do with this man who was esteemed poet of Nepali language? With all respect I urge you to point out my mistakes, I am not the one who has rigid mind. Buddha was very intelligent person, you have accepted it, don't believe me, if I said he is extraordinary human being. Who am I to count on? Don't believe if I said Buddha knew everything, I love that nature. Beleive only that what is truth for you, for that you have to investigate, you have to look for the truth. Dai, is that wisdom to react and conclude without investigating? I love valid reactions, but if the reactions does not carry solid reason, I love to ignore them. You said, you have strong faith in certain things, I have a question to you, are you hyptonized by the faith? If no, how can you say that I am hyptonized. May be I am saying truth, each and every line about Buddha, investigate it, dont' escape saying you don't have time, that's not fare. I will welcome psychologist and psychiatrist to put forth their views. For your kind information, the personal assistant of Vipassana teacher is a psychiatrist, MD. I have heard many psychiatrists are practicing Buddha's teaching, I know two of them personally, both are teacher of meditation now, they are completely devoted to meditation. I am informing this because you raised a point regarding psychology. I don't feel it is worthwhile to reply your each and every point. Come and talk to me about Buddha after learning his teaching, that will make sense. I will summarize what I did with Devkota. Devkota is a great poet, I accepted it. I compare it with general people by 10 Parmis. These 10 qualities are known as hallmarks of Saints, a saint is measured form these parmies. These Parmis are known as Dasha also. This word is still in use in our cultue but we dont' know the meaning. Eg: Mero the Dasa lagechh, Mero Dasha Kharab Chha, Mero Dasha bigreko chha. Actually this mean, those qualities were in weak state, one has become unmindful to those 10 qualities. A man is a seed of a saint, and most of the saints are poets. I try to analyze Devkota's saintly behavior, but concluded according to that fact what Gokul ji suggested. Devkota revealed very big truths in his poems, you do agree. He went against the tradition and kept saying that humanity is good, good heart is god, you agreed? Is not this a saintly behavior. What, simple person like me should understand from his Yatree and Munamadan? Don't I have to appreciate his message? What new thing a Saint teach more than Devkota's message? Mere his message would not lead me to post in this thread, I have seen dozons of poets who speak the language of saints. I know that is intellectual knowledge, that does not help. Times agin I have been saying about the three types of knowledges. 1.knowledge from books, meida etc. 2.Knowledge from thinking, this is intellectual knowledge. 3. experiential knowledge, the knowledge from one's own understanding. Type one knowledge is just for inspiration. Type two knowledge is the knowledge used by poets, and type three knowledge is the knowledge used by saints. Poets writes from intellectual feelings, Saints speak from experiential feeling, are you disagree? A poet if reveals experiential knowledge, that is no longer a peot, he is a saints. I have given so many examples of saints who are poets, do you have contradiction? What makes me think of Devkota whether he was a saint poet? Certainly 10 parmis. I have heard about him that he was very generous person, that is saintly behavior. I have heard that he was beloved of children, that is saintly behavior. I have heard that he was simple, humble person, that is saintly behavior. I have heard that he was truthful person, that is saintly behavior. I have almost not heard any negative behavior of him, except smoking. A saint is known by his behavior, if one has wholesome behavior, he is a saint. Kabir Das and Nanak are two household poets who did not learn any meditation but became saint, they showed from their behavior that they were saints. This made me to think whether Devkota was also a saint. To be saint one must have experiential knowledge. Here are the words of Nanak, Tu Kahata Kagaj Ki Lekhi! Mai Kahata AAkhaun Ki Dekhi!! Mai Kahata Suljhaun Bali! Oh, Tu Kyu Raha Uljhayi Re? See the poem, he is saying to someone learned, don't talk to me from your intellectual knowledge, I am talking what i have wetnessed, I am trying to simplify and you are making complex. I salute you Nanak. So that poet is saint who has knowledge of experience not mere intellectual knowledge. I have thought that he might be a saint and we Nepali could not understand him. But that was not true, form the infromation provided by Gokul ji and other friend, I realize, he did not have knowledge from experience. So I concluded that he did not have knowledge of experience, he died with pain being so restless. This is truth. Tell me where are you disagree? I will apologize, if I feel I made a mistake. If the mistake that you are pointing does not looks mistake for me this time, I will ignore you and if I realize it is mistake later then I will appreciate you. One shoud be very open Dai, we all are busy. I know very well one thing, the belief is very dangerous enamy. Its so sticky, its hard to get detached from it. You said, you have strong faith on something, with regard, I urge you to analyse yourself, may be that strong faith is protecting you to accept other truth. Please never take this as offensive. we all have problem because we all are analysing others but never think of ourself. We always think we are good, the proof is, it hurt us if somebody said us bad. Hope this will clearify more what I want to say. I have used a lot many technical words in my previous postings and there are a lot many subtal reality which need platform to understand. But this is very well simplified, and I am very much clear what I mean, I never write without confidence. Dai, I have great respect for you in your heart, I will keep it forever. I loved your dissatisfaction, gullible person can not learn. Hope I will get oppertunity to learn from you, please point out my mistake and suggest as you would be doing in scientific colloquiums. Thanking you Dhanjaya |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 06-Nov-03 06:40 PM
Sorry, at the last para, it should be -- great respect in my heart. Dhananjaya |
| Nepe | Posted
on 06-Nov-03 09:58 PM
Dhananjaya, What can I say to your humility ? It is disarming. You sure sound an interesting man to have a chat with. I wish I had time and patience to organize my thoughts and other convenient means to have conversations with you. In this brief reply, I just want to let you know that my dissatisfaction was not due to my faith [in any other religion/faith]. My intention was a pun, when I said I too have a strong faith. I was making fun of my political side. I don't have my religion. I am an atheist. May be pantheist is a better word (Thanks Gokul ji). I believe in Science and nothing else, not even scientists. At one point of my life, I was seriously contemplating to be a Buddhist monk. I am not joking. Even now, I find, with whatever limited knowledge I have, among all religions, Buddha's views most realistic. This is only relatively speaking, ni ! I am not saying they are absolutely realistic or totally practical. In fact, if you ask me, I will say majority of Buddha's teachings are rejectable. I can not afford time to go into major discussion at this time. May be in future. My fundamental argument is that human nature in it's natural form is a product of billions of years' nature's finest selection. This should be kept in mind when we try to manipulate it. I won't be able to elaborate more, but I will say Buddhism fails in this in a major way. Good night for now ! |
| Sadabichar | Posted
on 07-Nov-03 07:39 AM
People might have sometimes a little bit hard time what the hell Dhananjaya is talking about. I thought the following book might be of interest to people here. The day I received this book, I started reading it from the first to the last page. The write is U jyotika from Burma, after engineering degree, went to monkhood... but later left the monastary and became independent monk wandering in the jungle. His logics might be little bit different than other monks. This book helped me understand how hard it is 'doing nothing'. When we say 'doing nothing' it means doing nothing in our conscious level. As soon as we stop all the action in our conscious level, we have to encounter our sub-conscious level and as soon as we face that sub-conscious level we clearly start encountering our personalities, lova, dosa, moha and so on. And that's what we are afraid to realize, therefore in order not to have deal with our impurities, we try to engage ourselves in different activities such as reading book, watching movies, listening to music, going to bars discos and rave parties, gossiping and chatting etc. - http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/jotleeds.pdf And about Dasha, dasha comes from numerical 10 (dash) refering to 10 parmis or qualities. |
| Sadabichar | Posted
on 07-Nov-03 08:50 AM
There was a little bit discussion of whether Buddha was the greatest teacher or not in this thread. However, after reading the following details about the time when Buddha was passing away, I understood what to call the teacher. And also at the end Buddha explained the difference betweeen faith (that Ananda was talking about) and the knowledge of Tathagatha (Buddha himself). So my opinion is Buddha was the greatest teacher at those times, but as soon as Buddha passed away Buddha explained that it is the Dhamma itself. ---------------------------------------------------- Then The Blessed One addressed the venerable Ananda: "It may be, Ananda, that some of you will think, ' The word of The Teacher is a thing of the past; we have now no Teacher.' But that, Ananda, is not the correct view. The Doctrine and Discipline, Ananda, which I have taught and enjoined upon you is to be your teacher when I am gone. But whereas now, Ananda, all the monks address each other with the title of 'brother,' not so must they address each other after I am gone. A senior monk, Ananda, is to address a junior monk either by his given name, or by his family name, or by the title of 'brother;' a junior monk is to address a senior monk with the title 'reverend sir,' or 'venerable.' If the Order, Ananda, wish to do so, after I am gone they may abrogate all the lesser and minor precepts. On Channa, Ananda, after I am gone, the higher penalty is to be inflicted." "Reverend Sir, what is this higher penalty?" "Let Channa, Ananda, say what he likes, he is not to be spoken to nor admonished nor instructed by the monks." Then The Blessed One addressed the monks: "It may be, O monks, that some monk has a doubt or perplexity respecting either The Buddha or the Doctrine or the Order or the Path or the course of conduct. Ask any questions, O monks, and suffer not that afterwards you feel remorse, saying, 'Our Teacher was present with us, but we failed to ask him all our questions."' When he had so spoken, the monks remained silent. And a second time The Blessed One, and a third time The Blessed One addressed the monks:& And a third time the monks remained silent. Then The Blessed One addressed the monks: "It may be, O monks, that it is out of respect to The Teacher that you ask no questions. Then let each one speak to his friend." And when he had thus spoken, the monks remained silent. Then the venerable Ananda spoke to The Blessed One as follows: "It is wonderful, Reverend Sir! It is marvelous, Reverend Sir! Reverend Sir, I have faith to believe that in this congregation of monks not a single monk has a doubt or perplexity respecting either The Buddha or the Doctrine or the Order or the Path or the course of conduct." "With you, Ananda, it is a matter of faith, when you say that; but with the Tathagata, Ananda, it is a matter of knowledge that in this congregation of monks not a single monk has a doubt or perplexity respecting either The Buddha or the Doctrine or the Order or the Path or the course of conduct. For of all these five hundred monks, Ananda, the most backward one has become converted, and is not liable to pass into a lower state of existence, but is destined necessarily to attain supreme wisdom." Then The Blessed One addressed the monks: "And now, O monks, I take my leave of you; all composite things are transitory; strive onward diligently." And this was the last word of the Tathagata. |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 07-Nov-03 12:52 PM
Nepe Dai, I appreciate what you said. I have no doubt about the theory of evolution, but laws of nature remain the same in all the times. Anybody if discovered the laws of nature and followed it, will get fruit then and there, no matter whether it is 2500 years ago or now or 2500 years later. If we take account from the starting point of evolution(ie formation of single cellular animal ameoba), the difference of 2500 years is negligible. If you want to say each and every generation is getting more and more advance mentally, physically, then I have a question for you, why the disciple of Buddha could not experience more than what Buddha experienced? Why there could not be another influencive person like Buddha after him yet? Why almost half of the world accepted him, even after centuries, rather giving new advance concept better than him? After second world war, the world is advancing very fast regarding scientific achievements. Every new generation is being clever and clever than the pervious ones, they can play with better udgraded electronic devices and updated softwares, scientists are giving theory after the old scientits and world is being more colorful, but human being are the same. Their problems are the same, even worst. I have read one article in Time, Nov. 3, 2003, more than 15% of high school kids have mental disorder in USA. I have been with few such kids, they are suffering from ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder), they said to me they are so miserable and they want to come out of it. Mental imbalence is great problem Dai, and it is major problem in the modern world and it was problem at the time of Buddha too. Trust me, we all are miserable, you would also overwhilmed by anger sometime, isn't that misery, you would also be suffering from restlessness, isn't that misery, you would also be suffering from hatred, ill will, animosity, lust, greed, inferrior complex, superior complex, angiety, all these mental impurities, this is misery. Don't tell me that these are nature of human being. In reality, these are not nature, these can be eradicated and can be lived peaceful life. The technique was given by super scientist Buddha. Follow the technique, its like medicine, I would say more than medicine because some medicine does not work for some one and they does not work after the expiration date, but this technique is for all and for all time, provided it should be used correctly. All the psychatrist and psychologist are giving pills and asking to do whatever patient want or they ask patient to keep mind engaged. Scientists have taken better views of brain through MRI imaging, but they don't know how to regulate the mind, well I am going beyond the point I guess. But scientist or non scientis every body wants peace of mind, there were anothe article in time magazine about meditation (especially Mahesh Yogi tradition, where it was written millions people in USA are practicing meditation for their body and helath. Everydoy wants helathy body and peaceful mind. All in all what I mean is Buddha gave a technique how to come out of mental emotions, that technique works for all the time, time does not matter. Dai, I urge you to find time and take training of Buddha's teaching. I will provide you vennue. You are a wise man, then it is worthwhile to discuss about this. Otherwise, now you will say everything from your feelings and limited bookish knowledge, both are powerless. The training will be an experiment of my theory (what I say is mere thory for you now), test it. 2500 years ago also when people asked Buddha whether knew everything, he asked them to learn what he teach for 7 weeks and then ask the question after 7 week, provided do exactly the same what he asked to do. Then nobody asked that question to him after testing the technuque for 7 weeks, they got all answers themselves, all of them became his disciples. Same for you, remain strong in your belief until you perform the experiment, don't trust somebody else's papers, do experiment on your own, then accept the result. The result may come against the conventional theory (ie against your beleif) then you will be bound to accept the the paper which has already published by someone. Buddha's teaching is pure science of mind and matter, someday, may be you will find scientific explanation of it in this very sajha, it will be far better if you could have done experiment before that day, that will certainly make your points reasonable. You are a scientist, use pure scientific method of testing things and theories, don't accept them easily. Buddha was great scientist, he wanted people not to accept his teaching simply out of faith. I have posted his conversation with a person known as Kalama before, I feel reasonable to post it here too. Buddha taught Dhamma to Kalama and said him, Kalama don't accept this because I am saying to you. kalama don't accept this because you have faith on me. Kalama don't accept this because it seems reasonable to you (he discarded intellectual wisdom too). Kalama don't accept this because you like this, it favors you. Kalama don't accept this because someone close to you recommended. Kalama don't accept this becasue many people have accepted this. Kalama accept this, only if you realize this. The knowledge from your realization is only knowledge, true knowledge. He is very challenging person, go and test him, give a trial, then either you will right or I will right. Dai, I am very much impressed from your early interest of being monk. You have potential, now it need to be utilized. I am sure, one day we will having conversation soon. I never meant that you have faith on some organized religion, neither I understood it from your postings. I will be going to post about the faith soon, please never hegitate to put forth your point if you are not satisfied. I always write long postings because i write Dhamma and Dhamma should be well expalined, that is first quality of Dhamma. I repeat same thing again and again and i give illustrations so that it will be good for intellectuals like you as well as for a cooking housewife. This posting is for the welfare of all of my friends, I am just addressing Nepe Dai. Dhananjaya |
| NSS | Posted
on 07-Nov-03 01:42 PM
Dhananjya, Please be consize. Isn't Nagarjun with his "Madhyamika" considered to have better depth on Buddhist philosophy than Buddha himself? Few remarks on Devkota. 1. He was blamed for not having a consistent philosophical thought of his own. Which he accepted very many times. 2. Only two works that will last another fifty years - Munamadan and Pagal. And neither for its philosophical contents. One for the depiction of reality and harshness of that time and "jhyaure chanda" and another for being one the well written gadhya kabita. |
| south | Posted
on 07-Nov-03 02:41 PM
I have few questions coming up in my mind after reading dhananjaya ji's posting. I am a very average nepali guy and after reading your posting I can say that you have good knowledge in buddhism and other religions. I respect buddha and he was great human being who left his palace to find out about the truth of life and finally succeeded. In todays world its very unlieky that people leave all his/her family, realtives, job, and everything and go to gain some knowledge about life and even if someone does he/she is not sure if that can be achieved. Today's world is very much result oriented. well i dont think i can do like what buddha did may be i can do some medidation for sometime but can not spend my most of the life in trying to know about life. we can learn a lot with the experiences of our past generations and we should move a head after that without not making such mistakes. if we know what good and what bad from past generations people then why should i spend time in figuring out about those stuffs. move ahead. I still could not figure out whom i consider great. one who who do meditation and wants to know about the fact of life or one who does good jobs for the society. I believe you are in first category and recently i read some where that oen guy who is ex budhanilamantha sutdent ( his last name is shahi) is really doing a great job in his homeland somwwhere in karnali district. he is so popular there. he is really changing the society is a good way . I dont remember the name of the guy but with his single effort his he was successful in contributing to produce a lot more grains for the villagers where he lives. it was a great effort. i dont remember now but that was quite impressive too. And few days back when i watched dishanirdesh program which is a program on NTV. bijaya kumar took interview with one guy ( shravan Nepali)who was orphan. he came to usa after I com and did his MBA and had good paying job and good life and house and everything. but he sold his house and left the job and went back to nepal and now helping orphan by providing education and shelter. it was very remarkable job and i am really impressed with him. he was so down to earth while talking to bijaya kumar and he has no regret of leaving lavish life of usa. my hats off for him. but if someone only do meditation and try to learn about life and try to know how to become happy and how to have not tension in mind then its like selfishness for me. this person is doing nothing to society and he is doing all this for himself. I dont know, may be i am totally wrong. As I have mentioned earlier I am an average guy so my thinkings might not be so deep like you guys, but for me those people are far better and they are giving good result for the society too. we need such people like shahi, nepali, and others who are doing great job for our society. I think those people who does such jobs have very good thinking and mind and they dont need to think about how to eradicate bad thinking from our mind. just my two cents. i like to know what really is better. please help me. |
| DISCO | Posted
on 07-Nov-03 02:50 PM
I see religion as as invention to keep people in a society cohesive, its just a form of a glue, it was necessary at one piont to keep us humans together withought fighting and killing each other and some people still need it now (meak minded people as our Jessie Ventura proclaims) but for some its as vestegial as a mere appendix. What you are talking about..the nullyfying of ego, How stupid I did things because of my stupid feelings.. hello!!, withought an ego and feelings you would have died a Nnieanderthal Buddha, hey! theres an Idea, the Nieanderthal's did not just die out, they carried out a "specieal Nirvana". You need ego, feelings to survive, isnt hunger a feeling?, are you so afraid of it? dont you need ego to even write on this forum? is that so bad? of course you need to limit it!, just so that others will also have a share of whats necessary to survive, therefore there is sharing and even to the extent of being altruistic, for common good, it is all in the line of evolving....talk to you later, I'm getting hungry :) ( I LOVE FOOD!). |
| Nepe | Posted
on 07-Nov-03 09:03 PM
Dhananjaya, Right now I have a pressing commitment with something else. I hope to have a good conversation with you some time in future. But you have to promise me you won't try to make me a monk. Otherwise that will be disastrous for people who depend on my attachment :-) Enjoyed this brief conversation and will be looking forward to having more in the future. And please do call me just Nepe. I feel embarassed to be called 'Dai' during intellectual discussions. Nepe |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 07-Nov-03 09:34 PM
NSS Ji, Nagarjun is one of the pillar of Mahayana Buddhism, and Madhyamika is one of the main doctrine of it, I am pretty sure that what you are saying is not true, Buddha is suprime becasue he has fulfilled all the parmies, where as Nagarjun yet has to be Buddha. I have very vew idea about the Buddhism after its fragmentation. I have been walking in the path shown by him to tens of thousands in his life time, I am familier with it only. I only talk what I know confidently. I appreciate your question. South Ji, I am very very much impressed from your question. Why buddha left his household life? His father mother were both over 80 and he had beautiful nice wife and a lovely son. Did not he have feelings? or if the people of that time did not have attachements and feelings? No my friend, he did have all these things. More than these he had far better intellect compare to general poeple. He evaluated people and found all are miserable because of one or the other reason. Someone is miserable because of sickness, someone is miserable becasue of old age, someone is miserable bacause of lack of this and lack of that, someone is miserable becasue he did not get what he want, someone is miserable because he lost his loved one, someone is miserable because his enamy is progressing and so on. There is all around misery. He thought " I have to pass through all these dark phases of life, OK lets suppose I escape most of them, but I can not escape the old age, and the death". He started to use his intellect, " is life really fun? No because sickness, old age are hurdals and it ends with great dissatisfaction called death. What is the meaning of life, if it ends leaving except memory? How can I enjoy now, the death is waiting for me. I must look for the solution to come out of this dissatisfaction. There must be way to come out of the the dissatisfaction". He was so wise left home to to find the way out of dissatisfaction. Think this like this, if I know tomorrow i gonna dye, what will i be doing? Same for him my friend, the life time was tomorrow for him. He was so wise so he could see death that close. He said many places, death is coming, life is short, work deligently to come out of all dissatisfactions. He discovered the way where all misery ceases, then he showed the way to many people. Many people came in his contact, listened him and used their intellect. They thought what he was saying seemed resonable (intellectual wisdom), then they dicided to practice it, they practiced it as he taught them and finally found they got free from all the misery (experintial wisdom), then they become his disciples. My fried everybody is result oriented. People of those days and these does not matter, if you are not getting better thing you will not leave your origional thing. those poeples were householders, they had children, wives, parents and relatives. They had wealth, prestige, status everything, why would they leave those things if they did not get something better from practicing Buddha's teaching? It's because they were the poeple of 25 century back? No my friend, they also had same mentality as we have, even more attached to their family wealth and society than us. They get something far better from his taching so they left the home. Don't think that the people who joined Buddha were very poor people who did not have food at home, no my friend, except 2/3 almost all of them are kings, rich brahmans, richest businessmen, traders etc. They had to meditate day and night, no asleep, only once or twice meal, no meal food after noon. Very hard life, why did they agree to live such cozy life? Are they really dull? No my friend, they were human being same as us, they were result oriented same as us. As we are ready to leave our possesion if we get better thing, they also did the same. Don't think that those who followed him were easily deceivable people, no my friend, they all are highly educated Brahmans, kings and businessmen. Isn't that selfishness? It would be selfishness if they were not came back to the society. They came back to the society after achieving the happiness, after ceasing their misery. they taught to the society how to live happy and balance life. They helped their family members to live happy and balance life. Buddha himself came back to Kapilvastu and taught his father, then his whole family became monks and nuns. He discovered something which is far far far better than the life of a prosporous king, that's why they left palace and joined him. It seemed to us Buddha became selfish, he did not care about his family, that is not true, such imperfect person would not be worshipped, would not be able to influence the whole continent, and would not be living after 2500 years. You don't need to be monk, you don't need to leave the house, but you need to learn how to leave happy and harmonious life. we are householders, we need to do all our duties, but we need peace of mind too. If we just run after the work, money, success, business, this, that, oh you name it. What kind of life is that? Do you think we are happy? We are so busy that we don't have time to realize what is happiness. This type of busy life brings mental stress, this is the major problem of the western world. This is one extreme of living and another extreme is idleness. People are playing cards, just roaming around, goffing around, no money, no work, no food, no medicine, everywhere poverty and lack, that is another extreme. Dhamma teaches middle way, it teaches happiness to the people of any status. If you are rich you will be happy, if you are poor you will be happy, this does not mean that poor will satisfied with the poverty and never try to be rich. If poor poeple get Dhamma, he will be mentally as well as physically sound which certainly help him to progress but will not have all worries and tensions to be a rich. He will strive for all progresses with fresh and energatic mind, won't be dipressed form the failure and won't be excited from the progress. Dhamma teaches happiness no matter what is the status of the person. contd.... |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 07-Nov-03 09:58 PM
If you are a real Dhammik, your life will speak Dhamma. If you are living self oriented life, Dhamma is far away from you, if you are extravert, do think of others too, feels the existances of others too, you are real Dhammik. Social work is premitive stage of Dhamma. It is first one of the 10 parmis that I have mentioned. You are donating, food, money, cloath, medicine, time, labor, craft and so on. This is foundation of Dharma, one whom foundation is not strong, can not build a strog and tall house. You must have great heart to practice meditation. I felt sympathetic joy when you talk about Mr Sahi and Mr. Nepali, I salute them. I don't wonder, I am pretty sure that there will be so many good souls decending in our pious land, pretty soon, it will be filled with virtious souls, this is my strong belief. If i am just talking about meditation and simply meditating ignoring rest of the world, be sure I am not a good meditator, I am wasting my time. If I am just talking about Dhamma and not meditating myself, then I am even worst. A meditator can not step up until he has great love for the beings, he must serve the being directly or indirectly. Opposite is also true, if you clean up your mind through meditation, you will start to love beings, you will no longer be self centered. I know from my own life, a self centered, egoest person, now can not hurt an insect, rather always think how can I help this miserable being, that miserable being. So service helps meditation strengthing the parmis and meditation helps to serve cleaning the mind up. What is the difference between meditator and non meditator social workers? A non meditator social worker will help poeple by giving food, cloth, medicine, time, money, craft etc and help them to raise their social status, but he/she is unable to teach them how to live a happy life. A meditator social worker will do both the job. In Nepal, we need social workers, whether meditator or non meditator. Keep these my words, I am sure most of the social workers like Mr. Nepali and Mr Shahi will learn meditation one day, their social work help them to enhance their parmi and that will help them to learn meditation (technical language sorry), they will progress so fast in meditation, meditation is for virtious person, who else can be more virtuous than a person who donate his labor, his craft and his career? South ji, don't make me a big brain, I have been exploring myself, I know myself well and I never lie, if I were a big brain, I would not be a householder, I have seen big brains, I have talked to them, I have behaved with them, perhaps you don't know, they are like a magnet, they attract everybody towards them with their love and compassion, they made people to cry out of joy, I have cried so many times for them, I want to be like them. This is the path which will strengthan my dasha (parmis) and that make me to reach to those humble people who are real big brains. You are one of the smartest person who asked me very pregmatic question, i wish I could answer you personally. I don't know how clearly I could explain Dhamma to you, if you find something unreasonable blame me, its due to my incapability, Dhamma is great. please always correct errors in my postings yourself, i write so long that i don't have time to correct. Dhamma is not something to learn and understand but Dhamma is something to experience, to behave and to live. Dhananjaya |
| Biruwa | Posted
on 08-Nov-03 09:51 AM
Some Sajha friends have remarked that Ramayan and MahaBharat were written some 1500 years ago vis-a-vis threats from Buddhism and Jainism. What ensues is ground enough for total rebuff to their claims. 'Lord Ram was born in 5114 BC' [source: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=273107] "Ram was and is for real. He was born on January 10, 5114 BC," Saroj Bala, IRS, Commisioner of Income Tax says, calmly, with the assurance of one who has tangible facts. Taking on the contemporary historical interpretation of Ramayana as a religio-literary text, and Lord Ram as a semi-mythical figure, is this unassuming person who zealously devotes her spare time to research in history when she's not playing the tax mandarin. And she has chosen the unusual combination of astronomy, Internet and literary texts to provide us a startling picture of Shri Ram. This might change the way we look at history and religion. We might refuse to begin reading Indian history from that comma, or hyphen called 'Indus Valley.' We might have to stretch the beginnings by a few thousand years because, as Saroj Bala says - Ram was born on January 10, 5114 BC. Excerpts of an interview with the lady who has the intellectual courage to go beyond the obvious: What got it all started& As an amateur historian, I've always been interested in Indian culture and heritage. I am proud that we're Indians and the products of one of the oldest civilisations. However, British rule changed us; we developed a sense of being somehow inferior. But I could never reconcile to theories like the theory of Aryan invasion to India in 1500 BC. That would make Indian civilization only 3,500 years old. And if you choose archaeology to dig beyond 7,000 years, you'd have to dig more than 60 metres - something not being done in India as yet. So, archaeology is not the only answer. There's a lot of objective research of another kind that needs to be carried out in earnest. So, how can we say Ram was born on January 10, 5114 B.C& My colleague Pushkar Bhatnagar of Indian Revenue Service is the real originator of this theory. He acquired a software named Planetarium, used to predict planetary movements and configurations. By entering in this software, precise details of planetary positions vis-à-vis zodiac constellations described by Maharishi Valmiki in the Valmiki Ramayan, it is possible to determine important dates starting from Shri Ram's birth-date to the date of his return to Ayodhya. More than just Ram's date of birth& The results have not just thrown up Shri Ram's date of birth; it has actually traced the entire sequence of incidents throughout Ramayan. Pushkar Bhatnagar starts with tracing Ram's birth. Then he moves ahead in the narrative. Valmiki Ramayan states Ram was 25-years-old when he went to exile. When the configuration of planets described at this point is fed into the software, the date thrown up matches perfectly with Ram's age at that juncture of his life - 25 years. Again in the 13th year of Ram's exile, during a war with Khar and Dushan, Valmiki describes a solar eclipse. The software proves that on that given day there was indeed a solar eclipse (with Mars in the middle). This solar eclipse and the particular configuration of planets could be seen from Panchavati (longitude and latitude plainly shown in the software). Hanuman Saw 8 Constellations while flying to Lanka& .................... To Read the rest go to the address given above |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 08-Nov-03 10:00 AM
Biruwa, Check the thread "Archbishop Usher of India" started by me on this. There's no reason not to outright dismiss this outrageous finding. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 08-Nov-03 10:26 AM
Ok, here's why you can outright dismiss this claim: (ACCEPT MY APOLOGIES BEFOREHAND IF IT HURTS YOUR RELIGIOUS SENTIMENTS). 1. There's no hard evidence to support this claim. 2. There's no rule in archeaology that says you have to go past 60m to unearth artifacts whicg are 5000 or more years + 3.The claim is not endorsed by the Archaeological Survey of India. 4. The lady who claims to date Rama is not even an Archaeologist or a history student. 5. The verse - matsya kurma barah-scha, nrisimho bamanasta tatha rama, ramayo, ramascha, buddha kalki tathaiwacha- proves that Rama was a mythical figure (not a real figure) and was incoporated in Hiduism much later. I mean, Buddha was born 2500 years ago. So, the sloka can't be more than 1200-800 years old, and that means Ram's story came into existence somewhere 1200-1600 years ago. So, how can he be born 5000 years ago? 6. That's why I compare this finding to that of Arcbishop Usher who, based on his bible readings, actually calculated the exact hour/day/year when God created the earth. Of course, this was later rejected by others who looked beyond the Bible to udnerstand things. |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 08-Nov-03 12:57 PM
Error, Please replace live by leave in (Very hard life, why did they agree to live such cozy life?) South Ji, I am really impressed from your questions so want to go through each line. I afraid, I don't understand the meaning of this. << we can learn a lot with the experiences of our past generations and we should move a head after that without not making such mistakes. if we know what good and what bad from past generations people then why should i spend time in figuring out about those stuffs. move ahead. << I don't understand what was the mistake of our ancestors, you mean to leave the household life and devote whole life for self realization was mistake? I don't take it like this. Our ancestors were great discoverors, they were big brains and highly realistic pesons who discovered great laws of nature. They left the house for the quest of knowledge, for the search of medicine of the great illness known as misery. I have counter question for you, is it better to live a unhelthy, miserable life in society or better to leave the society for a while for treatment? If you are miserable person in the society you will share your misery to the society, how can you give happiness if you yourself is miserable. This is exact picture of the world. Almost all poeple of the world are suffering and they are sharing their disturbance to their neighbours. I don't wonder if someone say it is wrong to renounce, because now a days almost all monks and nuns are not practicing Dhamma day to eradicate their mental impurities. For them monestry is like an another house, they possess everything except family. this type of life is really worst life, we should condemn it. But if someone understood Dhamma and dicided to practice without being disturbed (house is place of disturbance for meditation, it need one pointed concentration for meditation), and left home, that is healthy tradition, we must welcome it. It is because, this person is going to develop himself and will come back to the society to serve. It seems to me, you have very less background about Dhamma so I am not gonna tell you very subtal truths, you won't be able to accept them now, your some questions need subtal answers though. If you are healthy you will be able to help sick poeple, meditation is to make the person healthy. If you see the society now, each and every person is severe sick, nobody is able to help others. This is the beginning of Dhammma, pretty soon it will spread and produce helthy norses and doctors and they will serve the sick peoples with love and compassion. If you mean somethig else please clear me. PS: Please dont' include me among big brains, it's really embarrassing. Disco Ji, I am very less intersed in different Buddhas and other history. I am intersted in Buddha's teaching which is called Dhamma. I have deep gratitute to Buddhas, especially to Gautam Buddha becasue I found this precious technique of mental purification from him. It is Dhamma which is changing my life, so I am serious about it. The closest analogy will be doctor, medicine and a patient. I am a patient who has developed desiese known as misery, Buddha is a doctor who gave medicine known as Dhamma. As a patient I have to be mindful only about medicine, how to use it, when to use it, where to keep it etc, as per the suggestion of the doctor. What can I give to doctor is gratitute. Thus, I am grateful to Buddha and paying respect to him following the path he had shown. Path is more important for me, because I am wolking in it. This is the reason I give most importance to Dhamma. Fossil appendix can never be better analogy for this purpose because nothing is evolved here. The closest analogy will be fire. Burnig is nature of the fire. 2500 years ago and some centuries after that half of the world had caught fire, burned all worries and troubles of the world, then it got extinguished leaving black coals and dirty ash. Very small live coal was being saved in Myanma (Burma) and it is again spreading throughout the world, buring all the worries and troubles of the world as it did before. Fossil of Dhamma is not like appendix but its like a seed of fire. It's ego that troubles you. If you investigate inside you will find, you are complex structure of electron proton and neutrons and you have mind which feels and these all feelings are changing. You will investigate yourself like a mechanics investigating a car: this is body, this is engine, this is staring, this is seat, this is tyre, this is tube etc. Dessamble all these, hey, where is car? Assamble all these, and you name the composed object as a car. Same for I, this is hand, this is feet, this is eye, this is ear, this is intestine, this is this part, this is that part, this is feeling part of mind, this is recognizing mind, this is reactive mind and so on so forth. Where am I? Assambel all these things i will be there. If you do this type of research, you will lose the wrong view about yourself. If you investigate yourself you will notice you are so self centered person, you want praise from many people, whoever praise you he/she is your closest, whoever go against you, they are your enamy, this is also due to ego. You want to be first in many compitations, you want to lead ahead, not lag behind, this is also because of ego. As the circle of the ego get extended, it goes to mine, my son should be great, my wife should be beautiful and smart etc etc. Ego would not be problem if it was not bringing misery. Whenever ego is striked, it hurts, you go crazy, restless. If you get defeated, your ego get striked and it hurts you, if your son is doing wrong, your ego get striked and it hurts you, if your wife is not beautiful or is she is not honest to you, your ego get striked and it hurts you. That's why you need to crush the ego, which is biggest source of enamy. Ego is not simple I, ego is negative I. To get Nibbana, I have heard, you need to crush both the Is. I don't think that I am worthy to write something about Nibbana, which is far away from me. contd.... |
| DHANANJAYA | Posted
on 08-Nov-03 12:57 PM
Sadabichar Ji, Thank you very much about the book, I have read about the monk before, I guess he was Nepali Burmise. Thank for reminding last words of Buddha, BAYE DHAMMA SANKHARA, APAMADENA SAMMATETHHA! Every worldly thing is bound to decay, don't get attached to it, be mindful. Great! Nepe Dai, You will always be respected but if you wish to be addressed simply Nepe, I will try that, remember it will be limited only in sajha forum. I was behaving as a friend with a wiseman who was senior and respectworthy, I showed my interest to address him Dai, he said, so far we respect each other words do not matter. It was touching. I am sure, you will feel more responsible after learing Buddha's teaching. Instead of leaving home, you will be a good son, good brother, good husband, good father, good scientist and a good politician. You will learn three things over there, not less, not more, 1. Live moral life 2. Get mastry over the mind 3. Eradicate the negativities of the mind. All of these three techniques will be taught mannually and scientifically. All these three techniques will help you to enhance your personality. I am sorry, but I have to renounce from Sajha for couple of weeks. If anybody has any questions or suggestings please do post on this thread, i will read and try to reply as time permits. I posted these all for the welfare of all of the friends. I am sure you would have liked it but I am also sure that you will forget almost all after some weeks. These postings will help you to understand Dhamma theoritically, you will get no benefit except inspiration, hope you will try to step up instead of taking these postings as intellectual fun. Hope you will look for the path. I saw some words of devotion, faith, belief from peda ji, I will post about this sometime later. Since the thread was started from a poem of Devkota, I am closing it for a while from a poem of of the Buddha, YABA JIBAMPICHE BALO, PANDITANG PAYI RUPASATI! NASO DHAMMAM BIJANANTI, DABBI SUPA RASANG YETHA!! Even if the fool lives his whole life with a wise person he can not understand Dhamma as the spun can not taste the taste of Soup. MUHUTTA MAPICHHE BINNYU, PANDITA PAHI RUPASATI! KHIPPAM DHAMMAM BIJANATI, JIBBA SUPA RASANG YETHA!! Even if a wise one lives few momnets with a wise person, he can comprehend Dhamma well as the tounge can taste the taste of soup. Indeed!! Dhamma is not something to learn and understand, it is something to experience, behave and live. Dhananjaya |
| buddu | Posted
on 08-Nov-03 02:32 PM
THIS IS THE WORLD TODAY... THE MORE DEGREES/KNOWLEDGE ONE ACQUIRES THE MORE DIVERSITY OF THINKING. KNOWLEDGE IS THE ROOT CAUSE OF ALL CONFLICTS BECAUSE IT PROMOTES EGO OR RESTLESSNESS RATHER THAN SILENCE, INNOCENCE AND PEACE OF MIND. EVERYONE WANT TO PROVE " I AM RIGHT, YOU ARE NOT " |
| jaytha | Posted
on 08-Nov-03 07:39 PM
Nepe ani Dhananjaya lai Jaytha ko sadhubad. Esto boudhik bicharan le Jaytha lai kehi yo gahan darshan ma chaso rakhne awasar milyo. Euta sano jigyasa ke bhane, Nepe ko anusar, "...majority of Buddha's teachings are rejectable...". Yo kasari bhayo bhanne karan ra tarka chani sunna paiyena. Lau yo mero koutuhal ra jigyasa lai alikati explai garera shanta garadina huna binamra aunurodh chha. Mero sanu bihchar ma, Dhananjaya le lekhnu bhaye jastai, "..Buddha's teaching is pure science and matter...". Malai pani testai lageko chha. Hope to hear more from you, Nepe, on this. Jaytha "...Nepali...garwa garchou afnai panma ghamandi chai hoinau hai..." |
| rbaral | Posted
on 09-Nov-03 04:13 AM
"AAKHIR SHRI KRISHNA RAHECHHA EK" is a superb poetry. Like Devkota's other creations, it is very enlightening. |
| Biruwa | Posted
on 09-Nov-03 05:28 PM
Couple Compatriots have posted in this and other thread trying to disprove the news about extrapolation by some amateurs regarding Ram's birth and various incidents in this life. I don't think I need to answer each of this points. After all, each person needs to find out the truth for himself/herself. External facts and figures goes only so far. Buddha has said that you do not go after material things in your seach for the truth. I am answering a few of their points: >>3.The claim is not endorsed by the Archaeological Survey of India. So the claim about Maharabhat and Ramayan being written 1500 years ago is endorsed by the Archaeological Survey of India? Is it? >>4. The lady who claims to date Rama is not even an Archaeologist or a history student. So Archaeologist or a history student reserve the sole rights to discover or analyze historical facets? In fact it was not even the lady but another of her amature friend who did those analysis. Please read the article more carefully. You do not have to believe every thing that every body says but that not not necessarily make it untrue. I am sure there are many amatures who seriously pursue their interest. >>The verse - matsya kurma barah-scha, nrisimho bamanasta tatha rama, ramayo, ramascha, buddha kalki tathaiwacha- proves that Rama was a mythical figure Why would you think so? Unless you are also implying that the other figures mentioned in the verse are imaginary as well. Also the verse says nothing about ram being after Buddha. To me personally it is a null point. I admire the character of Buddha as well as Ram. Hinduism (Induism - called by Chinese) is comprehensive enough that the concepts expounded by Buddha is engrained in core teachings. Within the Hindu family Shivism, Bishnavism and Buddhism and various other beliefs such as Tantrism are are held equally. In fact, meditation (Buddhist think they own it!) was practiced by Hindus before Buddha's time and is still practiced. What buddha did was renew the message so that it fits the present mindset. I also have one question. Just changing few words by removing the "r" does not make your religion different. Yes, it may satisfy the rebel in you. But if you are going to confirm to fundamental beliefs of Hinduism then why not admit it. Why have you changed the following words by taking the "r" from them? Dharma, Karma. and saying Dhamma and Kamma. I respect your search for the truth which I hope you are doing. And I have no interest in trying to change your beliefs. Each person is responsible for his/her belief. But criticising others belief does not necessarily take you closer to the truth. Be mindful about it. |
| Nepe | Posted
on 09-Nov-03 09:26 PM
Jaytha ji, Thank you for your interest in my views. My identity and profession is already no secret in Sajha. So I suppose everybody can guess my views are not of the kind nobody can guess or one that needs a special kind of belief system. How an ordinary mind of an ordinary scientist thinks is how I think. Skepticism, dispassion, open mindedness and logical thinking are my limit. I can not go beyond that to understand or accept anything. I can get into bahas only with persons who would accept this limitation. This is my condition. That said, I want to make it clear that the statement I made about Buddha's teachings and philosophy was not out of my arrogance or intention to offend the believers. That was simply the statement of my POV. That's all. I am terribly busy these days. So, I won't be able to participate in a major debate in this forum now. I hope I will find many opportunities to participate in such kind discussion in the future. On a lighter note, I was thinking whether my republican friends will approve such debate on my part. I mean why should I fight with such a harmless if not useful philosophy when we have so much to fight with really evil mind and power in the country ? **************************** Dhananjya ji, Thank you for your compassionate words and those three great enterprises. Although I do not recognize them as sole Buddhist teachings (they sound very general and universal to me) and also see a need of very liberal interpretation of them (to the extent that might contradict the conventional buddhist notion of morality, mastery and negativities !), I respect the positive message they convey. Within the limitation of my own interpretation, I would like to believe that I have been trying to practice these enterprise without having to feel a need to give credit to Buddha, Dharma or Sangha. While I am at it, let me make a small comment on the last point. Eradicating the negativities of mind. I do not accept it in a absolute term. First of all so-called negativities of mind are, as I once implied somewhere above, are actually essential components of the whole package of conciousness required to optimally respond to the environment so that we can survive optimally and leave our progeny to the future. This is the fundamental of life. Therefore, in short, the theory of eradication of negativities of mind is against the life. I would prescribe for the constructive use of the negativities of mind rather than recommending the costly complete eradication of them. Nepe pro-life, always |