06-24-2008, 04:01 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-24-2008, 04:03 AM by Bodhi.)
thanks Ashok Ji, so can we say the main difference is that the vetAla wants to come back into the human body, whereas pishAcha is kind of ok in that state and only concerned about sucking the prANa of the living (more like a leech rather than a bat) in order to sustain its state?
now as you said both are still close to annamaya. do they still retain a gender-identity (male/female)?
06-24-2008, 08:03 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-24-2008, 08:06 AM by Bodhi.)
Ashok Ji, As you would be knowing, there is a shrine around kAshI known as pishAcha-mochana (liberator of/from pishAcha-s). Here, a peculiar rite of post-piNDa-dAna is performed. In this rite, the shloka-s invoke all the pitR^i-s from both the paternal and maternal lineages who are lingering in the pishAchayoni, and the shloka-s very specifically invoke all those pishAcha-s who in their human life were related to the performer and died prematuredly like killed by wild-animals, in accident like fire, in madness, or died without progeny, or without repenting for heavy sins like bramha-ghAta etc.
What is the link between a premature death etc with the pishAcha-yoni?
also, after reading what you explained, I recall a tale about sant tulasidas, and if memory serves right a chhanda he wrote about this. He was once traveling and on the way came to spend night at some village. He came to learn that in that village no women would ever venture out alone even during the day. Upon inquiring he was told that there was some pishAcha who lived on an old tree at the gateway of the village, and if any woman passed by, it would do all sorts of dishonourable things to her. So tulasidas visited that tree and with his vision realized that it was an unsatisfied atmA of a poet who died while in middle of completing a chhanda of shR^ingAra nature. And this pishAcha for a long time still looked for completeing that chhanda and to do that found romantic stimulation in teasing those women. So tulasIdas did a piNDa-dAna for him by offering to complete that chhanda and completed it in a way that the meaning became that of devotion rather than romance. By this act the pishAcha got liberated... I am not sure which of that chhanda it is, but I suppose it would be found in kavitAvalI.
so pishAcha is basically a result of a strong unfulfilled attachment ...like you said
<!--QuoteBegin-Bodhi+Jun 24 2008, 08:03 AM-->QUOTE(Bodhi @ Jun 24 2008, 08:03 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->so can we say the main difference is that the vetAla wants to come back into the human body, whereas pishAcha is kind of ok in that state and only concerned about sucking the prANa of the living (more like a leech rather than a bat) in order to sustain its state?
now as you said both are still close to annamaya. do they still retain a gender-identity (male/female)?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Bodhiji,
Yes that can be called the main difference between vetAla and the pishAcha.
Regarding gender identity, it is supposed to be maintained. In fact unfulfilled desires of the vital beings include sexual desires, and the sexual impulse is primarily the domain of prANa anyway. So, as long as a being has the vital-sheath (prANamaya kosha), it can have sexual desires. Thats why most descriptions of heavens describe apsarA-s and hooris etc.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->As you would be knowing, there is a shrine around kAshI known as pishAcha-mochana (liberator of/from pishAcha-s). Here, a peculiar rite of post-piNDa-dAna is performed. In this rite, the shloka-s invoke all the pitR^i-s from both the paternal and maternal lineages who are lingering in the pishAchayoni, and the shloka-s very specifically invoke all those pishAcha-s who in their human life were related to the performer and died prematuredly like killed by wild-animals, in accident like fire, in madness, or died without progeny, or without repenting for heavy sins like bramha-ghAta etc.
What is the link between a premature death etc with the pishAcha-yoni?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There are several such temples. One of the most famous is the vishNupada temple in Gaya.
A life that ends prematurely, either due to accident, murder or suicide, is likely to leave a strong bondage to the physical realm. Unfulfilled tasks of a prematurely ended life bind a person to the physical realm more strongly than a life that ends normally. Even suicide. We may think that a person committing suicide should not be bound to physical realm as much. But usually the decision to commit suicide is taken only by a part of the being, either mental or vital. And the whole being may not approve of it, which makes parts of being remaining attached to the physical realm.
A person dying without progeny usually means that no proper last rites were conducted, since antyeShTi and shrAddha are supposed to be performed by a son.
A mad person was supposed to be possessed by some vital beings, who possessed the person due to their attachment to the physical realm, and they don't want to let go even after death.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->so pishAcha is basically a result of a strong unfulfilled attachment ...like you said
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is valid only for those dead spirits (preta-s) that have fallen into a pishAcha like existence due to their attachment. These can be released from their pishAcha-yoni.
But there is supposedly a whole class of pishAcha-s that properly belong to the lower vital world and are not related to spirits of dead people. They are the typal beings of lower vital world, and don't take rebirth as humans etc.
Normal people are rarely troubled by pishAcha-s unless there happens to be some unfortunate connection with a dead person. Or if a person is neurotically open to be possessed by vital beings. Sometimes people with very strong egos are happy to get associated with vital beings because it gives them a sense of extraordinary power while hollowing them from within and destroying their productive social lives.
A very large percentage of people who take up serious spiritual practices, are assaulted by vital beings in the beginning phase of their sAdhanA. In more advanced stages of their sAdhanA, the hostility of the vital beings can change to temptations. This story is almost universally told in all major spiritual traditions of the world.
Apologies for grossing out those people who came looking for spirituality in the thread on sanAtana dharma and found a discussion on pishAcha-s and vetAla-s.
But these are part of the overall fabric of the dharma, and avoiding such low existences is possible by developing detachment (vairAgya), devotion (bhakti), discrimination (viveka) etc.
The easiest is the bhakti. A person of devotion can find immense help in the transition period after death. As Bodhiji's example of Tulasidas and the pishAcha showed, even after being trapped in a pishAcha yoni, a jIva can be set free by invoking divine help.
It is much easier to develop bhakti, vairAgya and viveka while living. Conditions become much more fluid once a person leaves the secure and secluded fort of the body. Then one is often resigned to move with the flow of the forces rather than develop new capabilities of the spirit.
So before one leaves this life, it is good to develop the spiritual side a bit, practice some vairAgya, develop some viveka, find an iShTa and practice the mantra of the iShTa, and also hopefully find a good guru, get blessings of some mahAtmas, visit some tIrthas etc. Seems like a tall order. But many hindus have been doing precisely this through the millenia.
People of jnAna bend may find viveka and vairAgya as sufficient and not deal with bhakti. But even sri shankarAcharya supposedly wrote great devotional hymns in later part of his life.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->A person dying without progeny usually means that no proper last rites were conducted, since antyeShTi and shrAddha are supposed to be performed by a son.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ashokji, what is the recourse for such hapless parents?
Also, what do shastras say about marriage outside jaati and kulam? From what I have been told (anecdotally), that such people lose rights to do any shraaddha and anthyesti or ancestors' link gets cut off or something to that effect - True?
06-24-2008, 05:38 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-24-2008, 05:39 PM by Husky.)
<!--QuoteBegin-k.ram+Jun 24 2008, 05:11 PM-->QUOTE(k.ram @ Jun 24 2008, 05:11 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->A person dying without progeny usually means that no proper last rites were conducted, since antyeShTi and shrAddha are supposed to be performed by a son.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Ashokji, what is the recourse for such hapless parents?[right][snapback]83270[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->I know you asked Ashok Kumar, but I'm reminded of having asked my dad a similar question once. He told me that when a person has performed the first rites, that all subsequent times the rites go toward doing shaardham (shraaddham) for all creatures that had ever died.
They literally try to think of all ancestors (not just in India, but all over the world) and every animal/creature when performing the rites.
I will try to find an occasion to ask him again, as I was not allowed to ask these questions at the wrong time.
06-24-2008, 07:05 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-24-2008, 07:30 PM by Bodhi.)
<!--QuoteBegin-k.ram+Jun 24 2008, 05:11 PM-->QUOTE(k.ram @ Jun 24 2008, 05:11 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->A person dying without progeny usually means that no proper last rites were conducted, since antyeShTi and shrAddha are supposed to be performed by a son.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ashokji, what is the recourse for such hapless parents?
Also, what do shastras say about marriage outside jaati and kulam? From what I have been told (anecdotally), that such people lose rights to do any shraaddha and anthyesti or ancestors' link gets cut off or something to that effect - True?
[right][snapback]83270[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
While we wait for Ashok Ji to answer, here is what I had read at some place in mahAbhArata. For one who does not have sons, one of the putrikA* daughters may perform the rites, or her husband, or her son. For a wife, husband may perform it too. If parents don't have a daughter either, they may adopt a dattaka putra or putrikA. If they can not do even this, then they should perform their own shrAddha before dying. They may also instruct a trusted young brAhmaNa to do so after their death (young, so he himself does not die before their death). Other relatives, like nephew etc may do it too.
*putrikA is different from putrI the normal daughter. those who don't have sons should raise one of the daughters like sons, giving her similar education, upbringing, temerament, and marry her to a boy who lives in their own household, and before marriage, the daughter and the groom should promise to give their eldest son to the girls parents as their own spiritual son.
about marriage outside jAti and kulam.
outside jAti: is permissible, though not recommended. thumbrules are this. The girl should always be married in a varNa higher than her own. So, a Sudra girl may marry grooms from other 3, but brAhmaNa girl only a brAhmaNa. However the reverse is naturally permitted. So a kShatriya boy may marry a vaishya girl. All these permitted combinations are called anuloma-vivAha. The reverse that is pratiloma-vivAha where girl comes from the higher varNa - is not permitted, and results in a "loss of jAti" and genetic derioration.
Now, within a varNa. the girl and boy should NOT be from the same gotra. They should also NOT be related from both maternal and paternal sides going as far back as 7 generations. (This ensures a very rich diversity in gene pool!) Marrying a known blood relative (cousin of any sort) is an absolute 'NO'! They should not be from the same village, least neighbours. The last sentance is true about Arya marriage and Deva marriages only, but it might be permitted in other marriage systems. Now, widows may be married too. Especially in kShatriya's if a younger brother of the slain warrior is marriable, the widow may take him as a new husband.
Most of the above is from mahAbhArata. There are some variations in it as per different shAstra-s.
So in the case of the loss of jAti, it sounds reasonable than the lineal linkage is severed. Not sure completely what is its impact on the last rites.
<!--QuoteBegin-k.ram+Jun 24 2008, 05:11 PM-->QUOTE(k.ram @ Jun 24 2008, 05:11 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->A person dying without progeny usually means that no proper last rites were conducted, since antyeShTi and shrAddha are supposed to be performed by a son.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ashokji, what is the recourse for such hapless parents?
Also, what do shastras say about marriage outside jaati and kulam? From what I have been told (anecdotally), that such people lose rights to do any shraaddha and anthyesti or ancestors' link gets cut off or something to that effect - True?
[right][snapback]83270[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Adding to what Bodhiji wrote:
In the shAstra-s, one often finds mention of pitR^i-yANa ( the way of the forefathers) and deva-yAna (the way of the Gods). Consider all these rites of antyeShTi and shrAddha etc as part of the pitR^i-yANa. They are meant to help the jIva that goes the usual path of the soul birth after birth. These rites are important to follow in general. But devayAna is superior. It is the path of the divine, and leads to liberation or mukti. Bhakti, vairagya, viveka etc are part of the devayAna.
From munDaka-upaniShad:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->satyameva jayate na anR^itam
<i> Truth only wins, not untruth</i>
satyasya panthA vitato devayAnaH
<i> The path of the Gods (devayAna) is formed of Truth</i>
yenAkramanti R^ishayo hi Apta-kAmaH
<i>Through which the sages who have silenced their desires, reach</i>
yatra tat satyasya paramaM nidhAnam
<i> where that Truth's highest abode is</i><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1. The general principle is that the Divine is so utterly good, pure, powerful etc, that any one who is stationed in the Divine, need not worry. What a son can do for a person, a long practice of the holy name of God can do better. So childless people can hang on to the Divine. Also some one else in tha family can perform the rites, which supposedly not as powerful as rites performed by a son, are still some way out there.
2. The "vairagya" teaches the vital part of the jIva, the prANamaya-kosha to give up its attachments. The "viveka" teaches the mental part, the manomaya-kosha to develop right concepts. The "bhakti" teaches the heart to love without desire. Pure selfless love sans desires is the key to reach close to the divine. So bhakti prepares the heart, or the deep lying Anandamaya-kosha through pure love. After the death, the praNamaya and the manomaya eventually decay. But vijnAnamaya and Anandamaya don't decay. They are part of our eternal soul or jIva that transmigrates from birth to birth and undergoes development in each birth just as a child grows in the womb. At a new birth, a new manomaya, prANamaya and annamaya kosha is genereated for the jIva, based on heredditary conditions and the jIva's innate saMskAra-s.
So, a combined practice of bhakti, viveka and vairAgya saves a person from all the troubles in this life and hereafter.
3. Regarding intercaste marriage etc, again, divine help and viveka, vairagya will carry anyone through. These rules for rites are meant for common people stuck in the mire of mAyA, and vitally bound by attachments and mentally deluded by moha. But if anyone puts in the effort to rise towards the divine, one need not worry too much about all these.
Ashokji, Bodhiji, Huskyji
Thanks!
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->So in the case of the loss of jAti, it <b>sounds reasonable than the lineal linkage is severed</b>. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bodhiji, could you elaborate on this please? What is the basis for coming to the conclusion? (that it is reasonable that lineal linkage is cut)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->God is the same everywhere.
It is men who make him different.
Tat Wale Baba.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
LOL.
06-25-2008, 01:28 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-25-2008, 03:55 AM by Bodhi.)
<!--QuoteBegin-k.ram+Jun 24 2008, 11:14 PM-->QUOTE(k.ram @ Jun 24 2008, 11:14 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->So in the case of the loss of jAti, it <b>sounds reasonable than the lineal linkage is severed</b>. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bodhiji, could you elaborate on this please? What is the basis for coming to the conclusion? (that it is reasonable that lineal linkage is cut)
[right][snapback]83294[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
K. Ram Ji, Lineages could be of two types, spiritual and of bloodline. spiritual lineage, no power other than the parties involved themselves can destroy, and even they may disrupt is also doubtful. This is pAralaukik lineage, goes beyond one birth cycle, and continues irrespective of anything. (there are too many things assumed in that statement. spiritual attainment is supposed to move on to next birth only if sAdhana has penetrated at least till the vij~nAnamayakoSha - Ashok Ji may confirm this. If not, then depending upon the saMskAra-s jIva attains next birth and may or may not continue in the same spiritual lineage. Might even find a different, more suitable, lineage or system.)
Second is the ihalaukika or wordly lineages, based upon bloodline, used in pitR^i-yAna system as Ashokji explained. The scope of my understanding above was about this only. At the very core of the jAti-system and kulam is the rules of matrimony (besides other things). Its functions are various, including the usage of lineal linkage to share the prAnik/kArmik/spiritual attainments among the members going at least 3 generations earlier, present generations, and three generations forward by way of pitR^i rituals.
A son, daughter, spouse, etc. donate their own spiritual fruits to a soul that is departed and might be struggling in its onward journey. Since these relatives are still alive in their human form, karma yoni, they may still earn more spiritual wealth, but not the one who has departed. This way, those alive of a kula help the one who is dead
Now, coming back to why I said the above about the lineages being severed by pratiloma vivAha: the very foundation of the jAti system is exclusive matrimony, with some rules. If an individual (a pair) ignore this founding principle, they are absolutely free to do so, but as per my understanding they also forfeit the right to belong to that particular lineage of jAti - and in fact lay the foundation of a new jAti. And this is corraborated in itihAsas with examples of how new jAti-s and new lineages are founded - that is by these splinters.
Bodhiji, excellent. Thank you..
06-25-2008, 05:36 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-25-2008, 07:30 PM by Husky.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->pratiloma-vivAha<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Bharata's mum (Shakuntala) was a Brahmana woman and his dad a Kshatriya king. He himself is one of the great Heroes of Hindu Dharma. His situation turned out exceptionally well.
Post 252:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->LOL.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Pandyan, I don't know about Tat wale baba or many another, but speaking in general: one has to bear in mind that many Hindus do not know about other religions. They're not as knowledgeable about the dynamics in the rest of the world as our generations have the opportunity to be through books and the internet. They especially have no clue about the modern ideologies, instead knowing only about the old ways. From their view, they always see the world as a reflection of themselves. Remember a couple in love: to them the world is always beautiful because their lives feel beautiful. Like that, goodytwoshoes also think the world is benign and wonderful, because their heart is benign. Because their spirituality gives them peace, they are convinced that all religion-ideologies must be the same too and cannot imagine the existence of the very real and dreadful mental torture traps out there which prey on others.
Though such people may be wrong in a very essential sense when they make such dangerous generalisations, the sincere ones are not trying to deceive. They consider the circle of their experience and then they (inaccurately) extrapolate to the world at large when making such statements. (Ideally, they should not speak of what they don't know.)
But in such cases, I tend to think people should take what is good and what makes sense from those individuals who have something of value to say, and leave that which does not fit the facts. And to be able to do that, we have to rely on our own common-sense and our ability to discern truth from non-facts. (In fact, every human should be training themselves in being able to distinguish between the two, that is the only way we can guard ourselves against being imposed upon.)
And so ends yet another lecture from me on The stuff people already knew.
06-25-2008, 06:00 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-25-2008, 06:04 PM by Bodhi.)
<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Jun 25 2008, 05:36 PM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Jun 25 2008, 05:36 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->pratiloma-vivAha<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Bharata's mum (Shakuntala) was a Brahmana woman and his dad a Kshatriya king. He himself is one of the great Heroes of Hindu Dharma. His situation turned out exceptionally well.
[right][snapback]83322[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
biologically, shakuntalA was the daughter of great kShatriya-R^iShi vishvAmitra and celestial apsarA menakA. She was born while vishvAmitra was still in pursuit of transforming himself into a brAhmaNa-R^ishi, and in fact as a result of the efforts of Gods to lure him away from it (which means he at the time of her birth was still a kShAtriya) ... so it still might be a sajAtIya vivAha. (shakuntalA started living in the household of brAhmaNa sage kaNva though and was taken by him as daughter.)
Now, even then, I feel, this marriage was NOT an Arya marriage, since it was conducted without first seeking the blessings of neither the adopted parent not the biological.
06-25-2008, 06:46 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-25-2008, 06:46 PM by Husky.)
<!--QuoteBegin-Bodhi+Jun 25 2008, 06:00 PM-->QUOTE(Bodhi @ Jun 25 2008, 06:00 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Now, even then, I feel, this marriage was NOT an Arya marriage, since it was conducted without first seeking the blessings of neither the adopted parent not the biological.[right][snapback]83324[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I am certain that all parents of the couple couldn't be happier with their grandchild.
It may not have followed some traditional guidelines on marriage, but the outcome was wonderful. All's well as ends well. Also, the couple had the blessings of the Gods. Sure, the case involved some amnesia and bringing up baby as a temporarily single parent, but it turned out okay in the end.
I don't think life is made or can be restrained by hard and fast rules. There is fluidity and where the outcome is good - where good and caring people get married - people should be happy for it.
But Bharata's mum and dad's choice to get married does not have any bearing whatsoever on Hindu people today marrying christoislamics. Bharata's parents were both Hindus. Therefore, my approving of Shakuntala's case does not mean I approve of Hindus running off with the faithful of terrorist ideologies. (Then again, my approval is neither here nor there: people have the right to do whatever they want. I merely retain the right to make fun of them <!--emo&  --><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->)
It was not a judgement on good or bad. Just one type of marriage called gandharva marriage (as opposed to Arya marriage). gandharva is also an approved form of marriage.
And in any case, bharata was born only with the blessings of adopted father kaNva (and as a result of his great boon to shakuntalA - and of course to bhAratavarSha).
06-27-2008, 09:00 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-27-2008, 09:08 AM by Bodhi.)
more about post 256. original texts say this.
when duShmanta met shakuntalA, he was immediately stricken by her beauty. However, before he proposed for her hand in marriage, he requested her to reveal all about her and explicitly asked about her birth. She then recited the whole family history which she had heard from her foster-father kaNva.
Now, once the king knew shakuntalA to be a kShatriya-born, the daughter of great vishvAmitra, he proposed to marry her.
shakuntalA, a noble daughter, gently declined the proposal, saying although she approved of him, she would let her foster-father take the decision and that the king should await till her father returns.
Upon this, the king explained to her about the eight types of marriages as described in shAstras - bramha, deva, ArSha, prajApatya, asura, gandharva, rAkShasa and paishAcha marriages. he then stated that for them, the kShatriya-s, the gandharva-marriage (->aka love-marriage) was declared the best, wheras for brAhmaNa-s only the first four types were allowed. for kShatriya-s although first 6 are allowed, but for kings even the seventh the rAkshasa type is also ok. vaishya and sUdra-s can go upto the 7th type too, whereas conducting the last one, paishAcha, is prohibited to all the Arya-s.
He again reiterated that their marriage, considering the kula-s and absence of her fathers approval etc, was still entirely in accordance to the rules of marriages declared in shAstras, and he convinced her properly in an argument.
So, even their love-marriage, was not blind to shAstrik injunctions!
Related to 245 and 246:
I got a chance to enquire again. After a Hindu man loses a parent the first time, he will start performing Tarpanam. From then onward it is done not only for parents and ancestors and our own people, but for people all over the planet and all creatures that ever passed away.
|
