Moksha and who is "worthy" of it

[Vinayaka]

The thing with theory of Karma is that people might start to think they will always have another chance.Instead of thinking what I have to do right now,they start think in terms of lifetimes -where will born in the next life,what bad I have done in the past,priest told this is my last lifeD) etc.I am sure intelligent members on RF will fall not prey to such a thought.

Indeed, some people, generally well versed in procrastination already, just put karma on their existing large pile of feeble excuses not to get anything done. But there are other undercurrents at work. Our friend Kalidas doesn't strike me as striken with the malady of excusaholicism.

 

[Metempsychosis]

Indeed, some people, generally well versed in procrastination already, just put karma on their existing large pile of feeble excuses not to get anything done. But there are other undercurrents at work. Our friend Kalidas doesn't strike me as striken with the malady of excusaholicism.

Right!!

 

[Poeticus]

Viewing life as if this is the last one is Abrahamic. It can surely lead to disappointment if expectations of inner worlds are too high. If realisations are to come, so be it. If not, so be it.

I would kinda agree that thinking this life is it and final would be Abrahamic. But, it wouldn't be good to rely on future lives to make up for what is lacking in this one. Even the shAstra-s say that the current life must be taken full advantage of.

I think you may have misunderstood my point regarding Brahmacharya. I was simply reiterating traditional and shAstric point of views regarding having progeny and continuing family lineages. Progeny, it seems, made it to the Vedas - which says a lot in terms of importance. Brahmachari made it to the Smritis.

Thus, as per tradition, Brahmacharyam wouldn't be required to obtain moksha. I don't think that would be excusaholic.

In fact, there are more examples of non-Brahmacharis attaining moksha than there are examples of Brahmacharis attaining moksha.

 

[Kalidas]

Indeed, some people, generally well versed in procrastination already, just put karma on their existing large pile of feeble excuses not to get anything done. But there are other undercurrents at work. Our friend Kalidas doesn't strike me as striken with the malady of excusaholicism.

well that depends in the none religious world I procrastinate pretty bad. Always waiting till the last week to turn in large college assignments etc etc etc, but this is not the same thing as you all talk about.

If anything I worry to much about my actions and how they will effect my future and not about excepting the fact that there will be more lives to come I do not need to do everything right now. It's a balancing act, knowing what you should do in this life to progress in a positive matter but not so obsessed that you forget that what can't be done now can and will happen some day.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram prabhu ji's :namaste

there is one other way which avoids the trap of excuseaholacism (is that realy a word ?) ..and the trap of considering and trying to engineer ones karma , ....

that is to act out of duty , to do ones dharma without attatchmant to the outcome , this can be done by any of the varnashrama's with equal results .

so for kalidas ji this is the perfect answer , that he may just fullfill his duty as a husband and later on as a father , but doing so with devotion offering his actions.

not attatching (to the outcome) dosent mean becoming indifferent , it is merely seeing the bigger picture .:namaste

 

[Poeticus]

not attatching (to the outcome) dosent mean becoming indifferent , it is merely seeing the bigger picture

Thanks for offering the Buddheo-Vaishnav perspective.

 

[Kalidas]

Thanks for offering the Buddheo-Vaishnav perspective.

I like it though, and honestly it is what I try to do. Everything I do I do as an offering. Or I try to lol

 

[Vinayaka]

well that depends in the none religious world I procrastinate pretty bad.

Lots of people do. It's one of life's challenges.

 

[Metempsychosis]

Thanks for offering the Buddheo-Vaishnav perspective.

Offtopic though,Ratikalaji,What does the term Buddheo-Vaishnav mean at all?Honestly,I have not seen any Vaishnaivite having any positive opinion on Buddha's teaching except that he had come as an avatar to confuse the atheists.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram kalidas ji :namaste

well that depends in the none religious world I procrastinate pretty bad. Always waiting till the last week to turn in large college assignments etc etc etc, but this is not the same thing as you all talk about.

Ha ... we can all do that , it is part of being human .

If anything I worry to much about my actions and how they will effect my future and not about excepting the fact that there will be more lives to come I do not need to do everything right now. It's a balancing act, knowing what you should do in this life to progress in a positive matter but not so obsessed that you forget that what can't be done now can and will happen some day.

excuse me sounding like I am telling you what to do , ....but to me there is one fool proof way ,... concentrate on your dharma . it is pointless to think of the future and neglect this moment . if we concentrate on our duty we think of what is in accordance with dharma , what is rightious and what is fair on others , ....when we think only to do the needfull we are thinking to please our lord (in your case devi) ...and we are thinking to do right by others , .....in most cases this takes care of procrastination as we will allways behave more responcibly when thinking of others

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram MV ji :namaste

Thanks for offering the Buddheo-Vaishnav perspective.

you are most welcome :namaste .....but what I offered was pure sanatan dharma

nothing that you will not find in the bhagavad Gita :namaste

 

[Poeticus]

but what I offered was pure sanatan dharma

That's what I'm talking about. You can't speak for my sect, nor the scriptures I abide by. What you view as attachment is viewed differently. Let's respect these differences and not speak on behalf of each other's sects.

 

[Poeticus]

Offtopic though,Ratikalaji,What does the term Buddheo-Vaishnav mean at all?

It means taking spicy chutney and sweet chutney and putting them together and calling it pure chutney.

 

[Metempsychosis]

It means taking spicy chutney and sweet chutney and putting them together and calling it pure chutney.

LOL, On a lighter note.

 

[Metempsychosis]

That's what I'm talking about. You can't speak for my sect, nor the scriptures I abide by. What you view as attachment is viewed differently. Let's respect these differences and not speak on behalf of each other's sects.

I guess she meant she was not involving Buddhism,just Hinduism.

 

[Poeticus]

I guess she meant she was not involving Buddhism,just Hinduism.

I don't know what she meant, besides stating that what she was saying was "pure sanAtana dharma".

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram prabhu ji :namaste

Offtopic though,Ratikalaji,What does the term Buddheo-Vaishnav mean at all?

dont mind MV ji , he enjoys to tease his freinds ...

a quick explanation for your benifit , I practiced tibetan buddhism for many years so still have a deep and affectionate love for the buddhas , ....(And I fall out with buddhists all the time because they dont like the personification of the buddha's let alone loving devotion ....) .... but then by divine intervention shri ji decided he wanted me to serve him as krsna so he called me to serve at his lotus feet , and there I stayed .....

Honestly,I have not seen any Vaishnaivite having any positive opinion on Buddha's teaching except that he had come as an avatar to confuse the atheists.

I realy dont want to thow things of topic here but breifly .....the majority of vaisnava dont realy give buddha a second thought and just give an abridged version of the bhagavatam's explanation regarding gautama buddha , and realy there is no need for them to look at it too deeply as it is not relevent to their devotional path , ....but coming from tibetan buddhism where the focus is upon many aspects of bhuddi and seeks to understand the ultimate reality behind the apperance of gautama . one comes to an understanding far closer to narayana , and as the names for parameshwara differ from hindu sect to hindu sect , what difference is there in a buddhist who realises the supreme as adi buddha ? .... none :namaste

studdied carefully there is no difference in the principles it is sanatana dharma

and even the ''to confuse atheists'' story is not the only understanding , just a breif simplification ....

it is just that gautama buddha is little discussed , ....because it isnt that relevent to the devotions of most vaisnava's in much the same way that the stories of valmandev and parasurama are seldom deeply considered .

but as both traditions have been a part of my path I am endebted to both .

and I see no contradiction , it has simply served to deepen my understanding .

 

[ratikala]

Oh dear , this is going to turn into an arguement .....

It means taking spicy chutney and sweet chutney and putting them together and calling it pure chutney.

rubbish ! ....

 

[Metempsychosis]

namaskaram prabhu ji :namaste



dont mind MV ji , he enjoys to tease his freinds ...

a quick explanation for your benifit , I practiced tibetan buddhism for many years so still have a deep and affectionate love for the buddhas , ....(And I fall out with buddhists all the time because they dont like the personification of the buddha's let alone loving devotion ....) .... but then by divine intervention shri ji decided he wanted me to serve him as krsna so he called me to serve at his lotus feet , and there I stayed .....





I realy dont want to thow things of topic here but breifly .....the majority of vaisnava dont realy give buddha a second thought and just give an abridged version of the bhagavatam's explanation regarding gautama buddha , and realy there is no need for them to look at it too deeply as it is not relevent to their devotional path , ....but coming from tibetan buddhism where the focus is upon many aspects of bhuddi and seeks to understand the ultimate reality behind the apperance of gautama . one comes to an understanding far closer to narayana , and as the names for parameshwara differ from hindu sect to hindu sect , what difference is there in a buddhist who realises the supreme as adi buddha ? .... none :namaste

studdied carefully there is no difference in the principles it is sanatana dharma

and even the ''to confuse atheists'' story is not the only understanding , just a breif simplification ....

it is just that gautama buddha is little discussed , ....because it isnt that relevent to the devotions of most vaisnava's in much the same way that the stories of valmandev and parasurama are seldom deeply considered .

but as both traditions have been a part of my path I am endebted to both .

and I see no contradiction , it has simply served to deepen my understanding .

Thanks for letting me know,Ratikala.

 

[ratikala]

That's what I'm talking about. You can't speak for my sect, nor the scriptures I abide by. What you view as attachment is viewed differently. Let's respect these differences and not speak on behalf of each other's sects.

now look here my dear freind .... and I mean freind , ... I am not speaking for any sect , ...if there is one failing in hinduism it is this sect noncence , .... 'dTradition' ! ... beautifull traditions , and more than many others here I respect all traditions , because I respect all people which is why I adress every one by saying namaskaram :namaste

I think you are simply not understanding my use of language , .... never mind tomorow is another day