1. Standard memberrvsakhadeo
    rvsakhadeo
    India
    Joined
    19 Feb '09
    Moves
    36544
    24 Sep '11 17:51
    The God said that there are two types of human goals of life. One is the preferable goal and the other is the pleasurable goal. Most people select the pleasurable goal but an intelligent person selects the preferable one, like you have done. The senseless people, living in the middle of ignorance but considering themselves to be enlightened go round and round following crooked paths in life, like the blind leading the blind. The means for the attainment of the Other World does not become revealed to the non discriminating person who blunders, being befooled by wealth. The one that thinks that this is the only world and there is none hereafter remains entangled in a succession of births and deaths. But one among thousands, like you, hankers after the preferable goal and becomes the knower of the Self.
    The intelligent person gives up both happiness and sorrow, concentrating the mind on the Self i.e. God.
    This is a path that one has to walk on and it is as sharp as the razor’s edge. Meditation is to be done on that timeless God, who is inscrutable, lodged inaccessibly, located in the middle of the intellect and seated in the middle of the misery that the body and the senses are.
    God is represented by the word Om. One should meditate on this word. This Self or God does not take birth nor does it die. It did not originate from anything nor did anything originate from it. It is eternal, undecaying and is not even injured when the body is killed. If someone thinks in terms of killing it and if someone thinks of it being killed, both are wrong. It does not kill nor is it killed.
    This Self is subtler than the subtle and greater than the great. It is lodged in the heart of every creature. A desireless man sees its glory and becomes free from sorrow. Having meditated on the Self as permanent among the impermanent, bodiless among the bodies and as great and pervasive, the wise man does not grieve.
    Know the Self as the master of the chariot of Body. The intellect is the charioteer. The mind is the bridle and the sense organs are the horses.
    (Part-III after you digest this dose !!!)
  2. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    the Devil himself
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    91589
    24 Sep '11 21:21
    Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
    The God said that there are two types of human goals of life. One is the preferable goal and the other is the pleasurable goal. Most people select the pleasurable goal but an intelligent person selects the preferable one, like you have done. The senseless people, living in the middle of ignorance but considering themselves to be enlightened go round and ...[text shortened]... nd is the bridle and the sense organs are the horses.
    (Part-III after you digest this dose !!!)
    I got the hankering 😵
  3. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    86339
    25 Sep '11 08:291 edit
    Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
    The God said that there are two types of human goals of life. One is the preferable goal and the other is the pleasurable goal. Most people select the pleasurable goal but an intelligent person selects the preferable one, like you have done. The senseless people, living in the middle of ignorance but considering themselves to be enlightened go round and ...[text shortened]... nd is the bridle and the sense organs are the horses.
    (Part-III after you digest this dose !!!)
    Give it a rest mate.

    Why is it you Hindu/Buddhist types insist on taking a completely simple notion, wrap it up in an enigma and then present it back in some long-winded parabolic tale as though it's a vein of pure wisdom?

    It isn't.
  4. Standard memberrvsakhadeo
    rvsakhadeo
    India
    Joined
    19 Feb '09
    Moves
    36544
    25 Sep '11 08:43
    Originally posted by divegeester
    Give it a rest mate.

    Why is it you Hindu/Buddhist types insist on taking a completely simple notion, wrap it up in an enigma and then present it back in some long-winded parabolic tale as though it's a vein of pure wisdom?

    It isn't.
    What would you call it then?
  5. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    86339
    25 Sep '11 08:52
    Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
    What would you call it then?
    Nothing to do with "intelligence".
  6. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    86339
    25 Sep '11 08:531 edit
    It is nothing to with the mind. Edit: or philosophy, or poetry.

    It's spiritual. It's open to anyone who will receive it. It is free.
  7. Standard memberrvsakhadeo
    rvsakhadeo
    India
    Joined
    19 Feb '09
    Moves
    36544
    25 Sep '11 09:15
    Originally posted by divegeester
    [b]It is nothing to with the mind. Edit: or philosophy, or poetry.

    It's spiritual. It's open to anyone who will receive it. It is free.[/b]
    My intention was to simply put forth for all posters, what is contained in the Vedas and Upanishads.
    The story of Nachiketa is what is actually contained in Kathopanishad, one of the celebrated Upanishads.
    I have not fabricated anything here.
    I have taken help of various translations and commentaries available to me to put the tale across.
    Since it is my habit to share with my friends what I consider as excellent food for thought, I took this effort. If is a bad habit,so be it.
  8. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29835
    25 Sep '11 09:19
    Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
    My intention was to simply put forth for all posters, what is contained in the Vedas and Upanishads.
    The story of Nachiketa is what is actually contained in Kathopanishad, one of the celebrated Upanishads.
    I have not fabricated anything here.
    I have taken help of various translations and commentaries available to me to put the tale across.
    Since it is ...[text shortened]... s what I consider as excellent food for thought, I took this effort. If is a bad habit,so be it.
    Why do you seek to associate "intelligence" with agreeing with you over beliefs, and things like not being "curious" and not being "imaginative" and lacking "depth" with people who have a different belief system from you?
  9. Standard memberrvsakhadeo
    rvsakhadeo
    India
    Joined
    19 Feb '09
    Moves
    36544
    25 Sep '11 09:28
    Originally posted by FMF
    Why do you seek to associate "intelligence" with agreeing with you over beliefs, and things like not being "curious" and not being "imaginative" and lacking "depth" with people who have a different belief system from you?
    The words "intellect " or "the intelligent person " are what are actually appearing in the Kathopanishad in the Nachiketa story. They are NOT repeat NOT my observations on any of the posters here.
    I take you people as highly intelligent and cultured people although, at times, given to unnecessary ribbing at Hindu Spiritualism.
  10. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29835
    25 Sep '11 09:33
    Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
    The words "intellect " or "the intelligent person " are what are actually appearing in the Kathopanishad in the Nachiketa story. They are NOT repeat NOT my observations on any of the posters here.
    I take you people as highly intelligent and cultured people although, at times, given to unnecessary ribbing at Hindu Spiritualism.
    And yet two or three posts into a recent discussion about spirituality with me - the first one, perhaps - you Did Not Pass Go but instead went straight to stuff about my lack of "curiosity", "imagination" and "depth" for having a different belief system from you.

    So you stand by the message about "intelligence" in the OP, yes or no?
  11. Standard memberrvsakhadeo
    rvsakhadeo
    India
    Joined
    19 Feb '09
    Moves
    36544
    25 Sep '11 09:41
    Originally posted by FMF
    And yet two or three posts into a recent discussion about spirituality with me - the first one, perhaps - you Did Not Pass Go but instead went straight to stuff about my lack of "curiosity", "imagination" and "depth" for having a different belief system from you.

    So you stand by the message about "intelligence" in the OP, yes or no?
    Yes.
  12. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    the Devil himself
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    91589
    26 Sep '11 03:47
    Do we get part 3?

    Is that the conclusion or does the story go on too long, ( to long for what is appropiate for this forum)?
  13. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    86339
    26 Sep '11 03:49
    Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
    Yes.
    So you are in fact aligned with dasa, who proclaims that the unintelligent cannot access the Vedic wisdom. This is a sad and cruel philosophy; it reminds me of a Mormon person I once knew who believed that mentality handicapped people could not enter the kingdom of God because they could not understand the message.
  14. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29835
    26 Sep '11 03:59
    Originally posted by divegeester
    So you are in fact aligned with dasa, who proclaims that the unintelligent cannot access the Vedic wisdom.
    I am not so sure that what Dasa proclaims about "intelligence" is consistent or clear. As far as I can make out, Dasa has claimed that the unintelligent cannot access the Vedic wisdom, as you point out; he has also claimed that intelligence can prevent access the Vedic wisdom, at least that's what he seemed to say; that intelligence is nothing more than 'cleverness'; "intelligence" is frequently used as a term of scorn or attempted dismissal in some of his posts; and that intelligence, emotions, and spirituality render us comparable to "rats and cockroaches" if we do not submit to the particular sub-section, sub-strand, sub-group of Vedic wisdom that he has chosen to subscribe to.
  15. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    86339
    26 Sep '11 04:223 edits
    Originally posted by FMF
    I am not so sure that what Dasa proclaims about "intelligence" is consistent or clear. As far as I can make out, Dasa has claimed that the unintelligent cannot access the Vedic wisdom, as you point out; he has also claimed that intelligence can prevent access the Vedic wisdom, at least that's what he seemed to say; that intelligence is nothing more than 'clevern sub-section, sub-strand, sub-group of Vedic wisdom that he has chosen to subscribe to.
    Dasa definitely did say that on several occasions; seeing rvsakhadeo state it again here (even though he seems to adopt a less hard-line approach), does seem to reaffirm that the Vedic philosophy requires a person to have a certain level of intelligence in order to enter in. I find this revealing of the temporal origin and orientation of the dogma; more of a humanistic philosophy than a spiritual experience.
Back to Top