The YOGA Vedic philosophy has all along been known for its complexities since ages, or say since hundreds of centuries, and is known so well for its qualitative values and result orientations with a richer orientation on fitness factor. As against different tough masculine discipline of direct physical exercises involving a more rigorous discipline of regimen, Yoga exercises are considered as simpler and easy to adopt maturing to an expertise but it is observed that many take it as a short cut to achieving a perfection which is nothing beyond what is utterly utopian. The traditional physical exercises lay more emphasis on reoriginating physical body fitness whereas Yoga aims at building up a sound spiritual fitness aimed at in a way towards divine pursuits which is far greater a goal. Yoga stresses more emphasis on energising the veins and not just the bones as against wrestlers mode of practice.
Lord Buddha, say Lord Buddha, the Enlightened, hardly ever talked of the God, the reason being, some historians say, that he himself was a God which factor several others deny but there could hardly be any doubt that He was a Divine Soul. For long 30 years he lived a royal life before he renounced all royal luxuries opting to lead the life of a recluse resorting only to beggings as his alms. His followers were known as bhikshu (beggers) to partially satiate their hunger as Bauddha Dharm didn’t permit them to take full meals. Qeen Yashodhara asked Rahul, her son the heir apparent to the royal legacy, to go and ask Lord Buddha to nominate him as his successor to run the royal state but what transpired was that he showed him his robes as a beggar meaning thereby that then onwards Rahul too had to resort to a beggarhood falling in line with his father adopting Bhikshu Dharm. Yashodhara swooned on getting the news.
Called ‘Light of Asia’ in a book in the same name. the author gave many attributes and illustration to Lord Buddha, recognised as God incarnate depicting Him as a Divine superior entity. Hailing from India he was and is worshipped more in countries like China and Japan. He himself believed in God or did not has been a matter of controversy for hundreds of centuries till now and his disciples take it like the Lord himself never talked of God. The Bhikshus (a celebrated form of his disciples) too more or less maintain the same view as I took it while talking to some of them at the B.H.U. Temple in Varanasi. You visit there and you find a small scripture in Pali language pasted there reading as: “Attahi attano naathho kohi naathho parosia” (Man is a Master for himself and there is none to guide him).God appears fully sidelined here. There is controversy on his caste also –whether he was a kshatri or some thing else? Some of the talented readers of this blog have written to me a lot quite meaningfully which is a big topic itself and I shall be taking it up later with the help of my readers who have contributed much to this blog. I am already thankful to them for providing me enough of material with a scholarly touch.
This follows it’s very predecessor post nearly in the same name as an addendum being a comment as from R.S. Pandey, a versatile writer. It’s not confined to a mere comment but has fully assumed the characteristic of a full fledged write-up dealing with the relative theme philosophically like Annie Besant did while writing on Mira Bai. It is reproduced here:
Sir, the subject of the post – Love – has been fiercely discussed and debated from the times immemorial. The worldly as well as divine references to love have been made by the people, yet even to date, it remains one of the most confusing and misunderstood(?) term. The bonding between two creatures with contrasting characters as shown in the post which may be love, probably is the feeling of absence of fear and insecurity which might have got generated by their habitation in an atmosphere where they are cared as pets sans any violence. The feeling of mercy and compassion are there in even cruel and omnivorous beings, when it comes to taking care of their kids. The love which, in general parlance, is often equated with longing of varying nature, depending upon the context and relation, is considered of a mean nature when related to worldly relations but when related to a deity or God for that matter is considered a pious one. This piousness or otherwise of love, although being a relative phenomenon, is the real cause of confusion. When a term when associated with the so called divine is good, how it becomes bad when associated with worldly relations? After all, relations are but result of the creation of the He. The desire, both for worldly as well as divine attainments (even for sake of Moksha) are desires; how they can be classified along different parameters for which essentially the concerned person may or may not be responsible (often not)?
Sir, may be I have dared to tread in an area of which I have no insight and have no qualification or ability at all. But, as it seems to me, these are very perplexing ideas and notions which are not discussed and debated in public domain. The so called gurus try to have their own view point digested with no questions from other side. Raising questions is taken as being misbeliever or the one with no respect for gurus (the preachers who claim to be able and learned ones).
If this coincidence can give some solution to my problem, I shall be greatly obliged, although already and always so. However, seeking forgiveness for misadventure. Regards.
A parrot relaxing cozily in the lap of a cat –isn’t it that it otherwise sounds unbelievable? No, this is real and those who are well nigh conversant with animal life and their behaviour could be the ones to fully endorse it. What prompts them to resort to such a tender and affectionate conduct as against their well known violent character recognised as some thing fully set in their genes. It is LOVE that plays its role transcending much beyond the violent characteristics at times. The birds like dove, parrot and sparrows seen in conjunction with mouse and lizards are most favourite a dish being an easy prey. In my childhood days I was told a story that a child was snatched away by a wolf in some village from its mother’s lap in the dark night obviously to be swallowed and gulped as a meal. But what really happened was just the reverse. The child was harmlessly tamed with care developing it as a wolf. After some time the passersby in the nearby barrens saw the child completely transformed as a wolf indulging in violent attacks to the surprise of the locals whose efforts to take back the child turned to a wolf to its parents failed as the very child itself was all out to resist the efforts to take it to its parents. It’s not yet researched as to how such a phenomenon occurs but what is established is that love is like a rain shower to target any thing including all beings on earth –both men and animals. Love pervades and is capable of striking any one any where taming and crippling even the violent most elements in this world. Love is great, Love is Divine.
When I wrote “Which caste Lord Buddha belong to” this became a matter of rage with a tremendous response as from the readers all over the world and since then there is continuous upsurge going on with most voluminous comments. Some of the comments are greatly meaningful like the one from Ravi Shakya bringing out sumptuous material to the topic. I thought this one could equally be of interest to the readers and others. With that end in view his detailed comment is reproduced here:
According to Hindus, Prince Siddhartha born in Kshatriya family but when he became Buddha after that he taught Brahmins and others so he is also a Brahmin. Then Son of Buddha(Rahula) was a Brahmin so whole Shakyas should come in Brahmins but that’s a not truth only same peoples write Brahmins.The right thing is actually nobody can tell exact caste of Lord Buddha. According to Indian mentality , i am going to tell you a truth, Shakya Caste is the only caste in this world who gave a very large religion to the world, this religion is not have in India only whole world are following, i want to tell you some truth……. Shakya people form a strong caste and community in Nepal, Sri Lanka and Myanmar and some Shakyas are also live in Japan, South Korea, China, Singapore etc.
In Japan, South Korea, China, Singapore etc they all are Buddhism Guru or Brahmins.
In Nepal, Shakya caste is mostly Buddhist. Even though they are a Kshatriya caste in Hinduism, in Buddhism they are equivalent to Brahmin caste because of their role as priests in Buddhism.
In Tibet, Shakya are Buddhist Brahmin caste or Priests.
In Myanmar, Shakyans are descentants of the legendary King Abhiraja Shakya. Abhiraja Shakya belonged to the ruling Shakya Dynasty of India/Nepal. He migrated to the present-day Burma after the annexation of the Shakya kingdom by Kosala and established the Kingdom of Taguang.
In Sri Lanka, Shakya caste is known as Sinhalese, which was the ruling dynasty of Sri Lanka. Descendant of Buddha’s cousin Pandu Shakya was King Pandukabhaya who established the Kingdom of Anuradhapura which lasted more than 600 years. Sinhalese is the national language of Sri Lanka and Sinhalese people are a majority, forming the ruling political party.
so Now, i am coming to the point so please don’t compare with caste of Lord Buddha, he was the only person who gave peace to whole world from the caste and some others things…