12-20-2005, 02:45 AM
Ashok Kumar ji , Rajesh ji ,gangajali ji and many others , thank you for the detailed responses .
First i do agree with ashok kumar ji's point that many stories do mislead , it is better to follow the gita , but the problem and contention as you brought out in the case of lord krishna being taken lightly by the majority as a womanizer is the point i made out in my first post.
Stories are closer to the common populace who does not take the time to read the gita , Lord Krishna to save the 16000 women taken in by naraka , weds them to grant them respectability and the sastras say in spite of marriage Krishna is a Urdhva vetas i.e a brahmachari of the highest order ,reason being in his mind he being narayana is free from the fruits of karma and the doership.
But how will a common man understand so deeply ,so what is the way to make him understand for example in the case of Shambuka incident to say that the source was tampered , When he does not beleive lord krishna's version itself how will he understand the shambuka incident , there are tons of more like karna's in the mahabharata etc .
the hold of stories and mythology is much more on the common public ,and each one of these stories acts as a bludgeon in the hands of christian pastors and muslim vultures , so why do no the hindu gurus come out in force and condemn these ambiguous stories .
Gangajaali ji interesting take on the tamasa guna aspect , have heard a similar story in the discourse of chandrasekhara saraswati (associated with the kanchi math in andhra ) ,would agree with that , but as i said above how do you make the grassroot public aware of the true stuff .
if i were a rss worker trying for unity in a lower jati area , if the question of a karna or shambuka is brought up what would i do ???
First i do agree with ashok kumar ji's point that many stories do mislead , it is better to follow the gita , but the problem and contention as you brought out in the case of lord krishna being taken lightly by the majority as a womanizer is the point i made out in my first post.
Stories are closer to the common populace who does not take the time to read the gita , Lord Krishna to save the 16000 women taken in by naraka , weds them to grant them respectability and the sastras say in spite of marriage Krishna is a Urdhva vetas i.e a brahmachari of the highest order ,reason being in his mind he being narayana is free from the fruits of karma and the doership.
But how will a common man understand so deeply ,so what is the way to make him understand for example in the case of Shambuka incident to say that the source was tampered , When he does not beleive lord krishna's version itself how will he understand the shambuka incident , there are tons of more like karna's in the mahabharata etc .
the hold of stories and mythology is much more on the common public ,and each one of these stories acts as a bludgeon in the hands of christian pastors and muslim vultures , so why do no the hindu gurus come out in force and condemn these ambiguous stories .
Gangajaali ji interesting take on the tamasa guna aspect , have heard a similar story in the discourse of chandrasekhara saraswati (associated with the kanchi math in andhra ) ,would agree with that , but as i said above how do you make the grassroot public aware of the true stuff .
if i were a rss worker trying for unity in a lower jati area , if the question of a karna or shambuka is brought up what would i do ???