« first day (407 days earlier)      last day (971 days later) » 

12:11 AM
@KeshavSrinivasan haha... anyway I read it...!.. šŸ˜€šŸ˜€
12:21 AM
@LakshmiNarayanan So did you see my question above? It's basically the question that I asked to that crazy Maharishi Mahesh Yogi guy.
@Tezz Since you know Sanskrit, can you try translating Devaswami's commentary on Sutra 2.2.36 of the available Sankarsha Kanda text?
12:48 AM
@Tezz Here's the relevant portion of Devaswami's commentary:
1:21 AM
@KeshavSrinivasan one word there is not so clear... it looks like 'vanãdeugapadya pi'...
@KeshavSrinivasan and the footnote of that sutra tells 'This quote has been quoted by Sri Shankaracharya in his Brahma Sutra Bhasya in 3.3.43...
1:37 AM
@Tezz Yeah, it's quoted by Adi Shankaracharya, Ramanujacharya, and countless other Acharyas.
@Tezz But are you able to decipher the other words? Do you have a general idea of what it's saying?
@Tezz Does the stuff that comes before and after shed any light on what the Sutra could be about?
2:18 AM
@KeshavSrinivasan before that word, what I translate is as 'They are to be understood as different. The difference in position and attributes makes God (Devatas) different...'
2:52 AM
@Tezz OK, but what is the context? Who are the gods who are being described?
@Tezz What are the surrounding Sutras talking about? Are they also talking about the gods?
@KeshavSrinivasan Reading it.. Did that fellow reply to your second email?
3:33 AM
@LakshmiNarayanan No, he never did. Maybe I'll send him a reminder.
@LakshmiNarayanan Maybe he was disappointed that I wasn't a new-age weirdo like him.
@KeshavSrinivasan ROFLMAO
Morning to all!!!
Morning Buddy!
@KeshavSrinivasan I still have this question: Quote, "Then they realize that the fruit of all Yagnas are ultimately temporary, and so they acquire a desire to know the gods, in the hope that the gods may grant them eternal happiness" How is being Indra lesser than being in the grace of Indra? The sequence doesn't make sense here.
@KeshavSrinivasan @Tezz What is BHA. DI in 2.2.36? Do you have any idea?
@LakshmiNarayanan Like I said, it basically boils down to the fact that "becoming Indra" is how we would understand the fruit of a hundred Ashwamedha Yagnas, but that's not how a Mimamsaka would understand it. They don't necessarily accept that someone named Indra even exists. So someone who has just read the Purva Mimamsa Sutras may think that the status Indra has is completely different from whatever reward you get from a hundred Ashwamedha Yagnas.
3:45 AM
@KeshavSrinivasan But that is from Purva Mimamsa school, How would someone of the Devata Kanda Sutras based school understand this?
@KeshavSrinivasan Even Vedanta school's thought on this distinction would be interesting to know..
@LakshmiNarayanan Well, there never was a "Devata Mimamsa" school of philosophy as far as I know. That's one of the main reasons why the Devata Kanda Sutras was lost, because there was no philosophical school built around it.
@LakshmiNarayanan People were skipping directly from the Purva Mimamsa Sutras to the Brahma Sutras, because their attitude was "Why should I bother learning about ordinary Devas when I can learn about the supreme Brahman instead?"
@LakshmiNarayanan The Vedanta school doesn't make any such distinction. The Vedanta school is very forthright in saying that the gods exist and that you can become the next Indra by doing a hundred Ashwamedha Yagnas.
@KeshavSrinivasan What are siddhanta sutras?
@SS Where are you seeing BHA DI?
@KeshavSrinivasan So what then is the purpose of Athato Dharma Jijnasa acc. to V school?
@KeshavSrinivasan The devanagari text in the brackets in the commentary of 2.2.36 is bhA dI
3:56 AM
@LakshmiNarayanan I don't understand your question. Athato Dharma Jijnasa is the starting verse of the Purva Mimamsa Sutras. A person realizes that material means are an ineffective way of achieving happiness in this life, and they realize that the most efficient way of achieving happiness in both this life and in Swarga is through Dharma, and so they read the Purva Mimamsa Sutras to learn about Dharma.
@SS Oh ok, I have no idea what that means. I can't even read Devanagari.
Then what is the first line of Devata Kanda Sutras?
@KeshavSrinivasan "So they read the Devata Kanda Sutras and learn how to meditate upon the gods, but then they realize that even that won't lead to eternal happiness, so they acquire a desire to know Brahman". Do you mean vedic deities like Indra, Agni, Vayu etc by saying gods?
@LakshmiNarayanan Athato Daivi Jijnasa.
@KeshavSrinivasan Okay, you need to Edit your question then
@LakshmiNarayanan Oh, sorry about that, I fixed it.
4:00 AM
@KeshavSrinivasan I think they are the initials of some ancient text. Di stands for deepika. Just a guess.
@KeshavSrinivasan My question makes sense now, just replace Dharma with Daivi :D
@KeshavSrinivasan what are siddhanta sutras? Are they same as brahma sutras?
@LakshmiNarayanan @KeshavSrinivasan Just a trivia : All the Sanskrit works start with the word atha. There is another word too which I don't remember.
@Pandya Yes, the Devata Kanda Sutras were devoted to analyzing the Samhitas of the Vedas in order to understand the gods mentioned in them.
@SS Haha, at least some important Sutras texts starts with Athato.
@KeshavSrinivasan ok but as you've mentioned they are referring to Vishnu also (nit just ordinary deities).
@KeshavSrinivasan Does Purva Mimamsa give any Yagas that can make one Vishnu or Shiva?
4:04 AM
@Pandya Yes, most of the Sutras were devoted to Indra, Agni, Vayu, etc., but the final three Sutras discussed Vishnu and declared him as Brahman. This ending transitions into the Brahma Sutras.
@SS Interesting!
@LakshmiNarayanan Well, what you should be asking is do the Vedas contain any Yagnas to make someone Vishnu or Shiva, and the answer is no. Making someone Indra is the highest possible fruit granted by the Yagnas given in the Vedas.
@KeshavSrinivasan Then this explains why instructions to gain grace/knowledge of God i.e., Sankarsha Kanda comes after Jaimini Sutras!
@KeshavSrinivasan so, 3rd, 4th and 5th Sutras you've mentioned are last?
@Pandya Hi, GM!
4:08 AM
@LakshmiNarayanan Namaskaram
@LakshmiNarayanan Well, knowledge of Brahman is reserved for the Brahma Sutras, not the Devata Kanda Sutras.
@Pandya Yes, the first one is the first one, the 3rd, 4th, and 5th are the last three, and the second one is somewhere in the middle.
@KeshavSrinivasan Isn't it possible there is mention of mantras on Gods in Devata Kanda who go higher than those whose posts are achievable by doing Yagas discussed by Jaimini Sutras?
@KeshavSrinivasan oh! ok. Though Devata Kanda Sutra don't appear to have knowledge of Brahman but finally they at least recognize Vishnu.
@LakshmiNarayanan Yeah, that's possible. Like the Devata Kanda Sutras might have discussed meditation on Shiva, and meditation on Shiva might give a higher fruit than Yagnas but a lower fruit than meditation on Brahman.
@Pandya Yeah, they just get you to the point of who you should really be meditating on, and then you have to consult another text to continue on your journey.
@KeshavSrinivasan scratched that, just realised Brahma is higher than Indra
4:17 AM
@SS I've never heard of a work called "the Siddhanta Sutras". But within a Sutra text you will have some Sutras that are Purvapaksha Sutras, giving the views of a hypothetical opponent, and Siddhanta Sutras, giving the author's own views.
@LakshmiNarayanan I don't know how to become the next Brahma. But I do know how to go Brahmaloka: namely meditating on the god Brahma.
@KeshavSrinivasan This is so weird, it is also a post, why is it not discussed anywhere?
@KeshavSrinivasan The siddhanta sutra here means Devata kanda sutras as they are discussing them. In the screenshot you have added above, the sutras are having Si which stands for Siddhanta sutras and Pu which stands for Purva Mimamsa sutras beside the sutra.
@LakshmiNarayanan In fact there are two paths to get Moksha. There's the quick path, where you meditate upon the supreme Brahman or perform Sharanagati and then get Moksha when you die. Or you can pursue the slow path, where you meditate on the four-headed god Brahma, and then when you die you'll go to Brahmaloka. And then at the end of the Mahakalpa, Brahma and all the inhabitants of Brahmaloka attain Moksha. Both paths are discussed in the Brahma Sutras.
@SS No, Pu should stand for Purvapaksha, not Purva Mimamsa.
@KeshavSrinivasan Oh!
@SS When it says Pu it's discussing an opponent's view and when it says Si it's discussing the author's view.
4:24 AM
@KeshavSrinivasan Who is the purvapaksha here?
@SS The view of the Purvapakshin varies. It depends on what question or issue is being discussed in that Sutra or set of Sutras.
@SS The Purvapakshin will not have the same view throughout a given Sutra text.
@KeshavSrinivasan There is no purvapaksha view for 2.2.36.
@SS Yeah, it's not mandatory to present both a Purvapaksha view and a Siddhanta view in all cases. It's only where the reader will be tempted to have an alternate belief from the one that the author wants to demonstrate that refuting a Purvapaksha argument is a useful technique.
@LakshmiNarayanan It probably is discussed somewhere, I just don't know where. You may want to post a question on it.
Q: Moksha for the Soul of Brahma

Bhavin ChhatrolaThe life of Brahma is 100 years of Brahma. More information on Hindu Cosmology We are in 51st year of the current Brahma's Life Year. I also know that after Brahma dies, Brahma (the soul in that post) is reborn. My Question is: Is the current soul of Brahma reborn as Brahma again or some ...

@KeshavSrinivasan I can still ask about how to attain post of Brahma
@LakshmiNarayanan Madhvacharya had a theory that the current Shiva becomes the new Vayu, the current Vayu becomes the new Brahma, the current Brahma becomes the new Adiseshan, and the current Adiseshan attains Moksha. But I don't know whether it has any scriptural basis.
@LakshmiNarayanan Yeah, your question wouldn't be a duplicate of that.
4:34 AM
@KeshavSrinivasan WHAAAT Adiseshan needs Moksha acc. to madhvacharya?!
@LakshmiNarayanan Well, maybe it's Adiseshan son of Kadru rather than the Nitya Suri Adiseshan.
@KeshavSrinivasan ok AdiShesha vs AnantaShesha
@LakshmiNarayanan I've never heard a distinction made between those two names. As far as I know both names are used for both the son of Kadru and the Nitya Suri.
@KeshavSrinivasan Ananta means Endless, so it would actually make sense for the latter. Adi means first - where it only makes sense to say first, etc,. is in creation a.k.a Universe.
@LakshmiNarayanan By the way, Madhvacharya's theory was how he explained the notion that Hanuman is going to be the next Brahma. But I haven't come across any scriptures which say that Hanuman will be the next Brahma.
@LakshmiNarayanan A question was posted about it here though:
Q: Is Hanuman going to be future Brahma?

sysinitI have read in multiple forums, which talks about Hanumana being rewarded as future Brahma. Can anyone point out, where exactly it is mentioned that he is going to be future Brahma?

4:46 AM
@KeshavSrinivasan This questions is about Hanuman will be next Brahma, the way he attained to it may not be applicable to ordinary Jivatmas
@KeshavSrinivasan I could only translate only some part of the commentary under the sutra 2.2.36
Q: Attaining the Post of Brahma

Lakshmi NarayananAs we all know, the Brahmanas of the Vedas describe rituals to attain to the post of various deities through the performance of Yagas(or YajƱas) among other things. The most famous of these is the one where the fruit is the post of Indra, with the prescribed ritual being the Ashwamedha Yagna per...

@KeshavSrinivasan ^
@LakshmiNarayanan Keshav will now leave the room if I am not wrong.
@SS lol why so?
He will not. His last seen was 7 minutes then.
4:57 AM
@LakshmiNarayanan Well, if Madhvacharya is correct then it's only by becoming Vayu that you can ever hope to become Brahma.
@LakshmiNarayanan OK, it looks good.
@KeshavSrinivasan Does MadhvaTattva say that Vayu automatically becomes next Brahma or Vayu too has to perform rituals or deeds?
@LakshmiNarayanan I'm not sure about that. In any case, Vayu held a pivotal position in Madhvacharya's worldview, so he was certainly busy with a lot of activities.
@KeshavSrinivasan As Tezz said, a letter in the commentary is not clear. It is the missing piece of puzzle.
@SS Is this the thing that's unclear:
@KeshavSrinivasan yes. it is a continuation. It goes like this dEva_nAdhaugapadhyEpi
@KeshavSrinivasan I understood the remaining words
5:34 AM
Has anyone read Sanyasa Upanishad? /cc @Tezz
5:44 AM
Which Scripture talks about the different Shariras?
namely Sthula, Linga, Prana, Kama, Manas, Buddhi and Atman
@LakshmiNarayanan Taittariya Upanishad
@Pandya AFAIK Taittariya talks only about Prana, Manas, Buddhi, Atman not the other three i've also mentioned.
5:59 AM
@LakshmiNarayanan Yes, subtle (Sukshma) only.
@Pandya so Sthula, Linga and Kama are later concepts?
@LakshmiNarayanan I'm not sure. I think Samkhya & Yoga might mention them.
@Pandya Have you heard of Theosophy?
They believe in these seven shariras as well.
@LakshmiNarayanan no.
6:18 AM
@KeshavSrinivasan @Tezz I thought to ask a question on site like among other Vedic deities, how Shiva/Rundra, Vishnu and BrahmA recognised as Supreme or Trinity? How about it?
2 hours later…
8:31 AM
Q: Need to create Tags for - Satya yuga, tretha yuga, dwaparayuga

USer345738380I saw there is a tag yuga & kali-yuga, but No tags for Satya yuga, tretha yuga, dwaparayuga. can someone create these tags.....

@Pandya @KeshavSrinivasan @Tezz @SS @SwiftPushkar Do we need tag for each Yuga?
@TheDestroyer If there is adequate possibility of no. of questions dedicated to particular yuga, yes.
@SS feature request is correct tag only.
@Pandya ok.
Even i think they are helpful.
@TheDestroyer feature request is not needed. It pings CM s unnecessarily. See the comment I posted.
@TheDestroyer that's why I think we should chat in Hinduism room because we will automatically know about the questions posted on the site.
@TheDestroyer how many questions were asked about treta and dwapara yugas?
Is there a need to do?
Redirect the user to tags post.
8:48 AM
@SS User is evident of methods. As user lacks reputation, he is asking us to create on behalf of him.
@LakshmiNarayanan feature request tag for your meta questions is inappropriate.
@SS there are many question about previous Yugas. So, i think those tags are useful.
@TheDestroyer feature request is for proposing new features not tags.
I know, He has association bonus.
9:15 AM
@TheDestroyer Creating them is a good idea but we should only do when there will be a scope for them in future too.
2 hours later…
11:36 AM
@LakshmiNarayanan @KeshavSrinivasan @Pandya @SS Look at this Crap made by these Ignorants hinduism.stackexchange.com/q/18629/489 , Should we block this user hinduism.stackexchange.com/users/9392/anurag-singh for making foolish comments and supporting anti hindu elements?
11:50 AM
@TriyugiNarayanMani I apologize if you felt I passed sarcastic comments. But I did not in the least way mean any sarcasm. But still if you feel it was sarcastic then please pardon me. — Anurag Singh 57 secs ago
Is he serious or trolling ?
@Pandya @Yogi @LakshmiNarayanan @Tezz @KeshavSrinivasan @SS
@TheDestroyer :-)
12:06 PM
When I explained him about upvoting and edits that we should correct grammatical errors he said to remain in those spelling mistakes and grammatical errors. He meant in a sarcastic way. Check that room transcript. aghori anurag discussion ,@TheDestroyer
@Yogi I've cleared his comments.
@TheDestroyer I think he may apologize for his comments.
@Yogi I can't see any comments.
@Pandya oh ok
@Pandya What's going on?
12:21 PM
@Pandya Okay that's nice I think as the site gets popular we need to make sure we have anti-spam methods.
@TheDestroyer It's clear he is just a troll I think he is a muslim disguised as a hindu and spamming this site.
@TriyugiNarayanMani Nice reply !
@Yogi Thanks.
@LakshmiNarayanan This chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/37829419#37829419 is why you don't see any comments
@Yogi I realised.
12:58 PM
@Yogi No need to block him.
1:10 PM
@Yogi @Pandya @TheDestroyer @KeshavSrinivasan hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/18635/8635
@Lakshmi You can also review first posts. If it is not yet reviewed. Go ahead and review it.
@SS I have flagged it. It's not available for review.
@Lakshmi Someone might have reviewed it before you. And that someone's name is obvious.
1:27 PM
@SS wth look at his edit!
Some nature lover.:P
haha yeah
Here you go. there are some spellings in some questions. go and edit it. look out for pepoles
and capitalization too
@LakshmiNarayanan There aren't that many Shariras. Advaitins believe in 5 Koshas and 3 Shariras, and Sri Vaishnavas believe in 4 Koshas and 2 Shariras.
@LakshmiNarayanan This is an area, by the way, where Adi Shankaracharya disagrees with the Vrittikara, i.e. Upavarsha/Baudhayana, whereas Ramanujacharya agrees with the Vrittikara.
@SS I don't understand this particular answer well enough to even punctuate it!
@KeshavSrinivasan Oh ok.
1:42 PM
@LakshmiNarayanan Dramidacharya is the Bhashyakara.
@KeshavSrinivasan Yes, i realised.
@KeshavSrinivasan In order to get SV idea on this, i'm reading up. I encountered that Achetana consists of Prakriti, kAla and Shuddha Sattva. What is difference between Sattva of Triguna and Shuddha Sattva?
@LakshmiNarayanan The different on the number of Koshas and Sharira boils down to the question of Anandamaya. Everyone agrees that that Annamaya, Pranamaya, Manomaya, and Vijnanamaya are Koshas. But Ramamanujacharya and the Vrittikara believe that Anandamaya is the supreme Brahman, whereas Adi Shankaracharya believes that Anandamaya is a 5th Kosha.
@LakshmiNarayanan Oh, what are you reading?
@KeshavSrinivasan I'm reading VisistAdvaita by A Srinivasa Raghavan
@LakshmiNarayanan Ordinary matter is made up of a mixture of Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas. Whereas matter that makes up Vishnu's body and makes up the objects in Paramapadam is made up only of Sattva Guna
@LakshmiNarayanan Oh, I've never heard of it. Let me see if I can find an online version of it.
@KeshavSrinivasan what about the shariras?
@KeshavSrinivasan So qualitatively the two sattvas are same?
2:01 PM
@LakshmiNarayanan The difference in Shariras arises from the difference in Koshas. Everyone agrees that the Annamaya Kosha is the Sthula Sharira, and the Pranamaya, Manomaya, and Vijnanamaya Koshas together form the Sukshma Sharira. But Adi Shankaracharya, because he believes in a 5th Kosha called Anandamaya, thinks that it constitutes a 3rd Sharira, known as the Karana Sharira or causal body.
@LakshmiNarayanan Yeah
@LakshmiNarayanan By the way, Shuddha Sattva is not subject to decay, in contrast to ordinary matter. Rajas and Tamas are what causes matter to decay.
@LakshmiNarayanan So the body of Para Vasudeva, the bodies of Nitya Suris and Muktas, and all the buildings and objects in Paramapadam, are eternal since they're made of Shuddha Sattva.
@KeshavSrinivasan I remember Taittiriya Upanishad talks about Anandamaya in the same style as the other -mayas so isn't that hinting to Sharira interpretation?
@LakshmiNarayanan See this section and subsequent sections of Ramanujacharya's Sri Bhashya: sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe48/sbe48046.htm
@KeshavSrinivasan ok thanks
2:28 PM
@LakshmiNarayanan By the way, that book by A. Srinivasa Raghavan looks good. I like that it gives lots of quotes from Vedanta Desikan's Rahasyatraya Sara.
9 hours ago, by S S
@KeshavSrinivasan I understood the remaining words
@Keshav Incase you have missed ^^
@KeshavSrinivasan Yes, it is easy to understand as well. Don't tell me you have finished reading it :O
@LakshmiNarayanan Maybe once you finish this book, you can graduate to the Rahasyatraya Sara itself.
@LakshmiNarayanan Haha
@LakshmiNarayanan I was talking about this question. Opportunity missed.
@SS Are you able to decipher what god or gods it is talking about? The Sutras that come before and after it might provide some context.
2:30 PM
@SS yeah this particular user seems to think people is spelled pepole.
@SS And what is the general meaning that you're able to understand?
@KeshavSrinivasan It is talking about Devatas given the status for a certain period of time.
All the devatas. Not particularly about any devata
@KeshavSrinivasan Do the purva mimamsakas believe in such notion?
11 hours ago, by Keshav Srinivasan
@LakshmiNarayanan Like I said, it basically boils down to the fact that "becoming Indra" is how we would understand the fruit of a hundred Ashwamedha Yagnas, but that's not how a Mimamsaka would understand it. They don't necessarily accept that someone named Indra even exists. So someone who has just read the Purva Mimamsa Sutras may think that the status Indra has is completely different from whatever reward you get from a hundred Ashwamedha Yagnas.
@SS this might be useful
@KeshavSrinivasan Here is the commentary under 2.2.36 in IAST

pruthakvā pradānaį¹ƒ syāt | rājādigunabebhedena devatāpruthakvāt avadānādeva_nādhaugapadye'pi pradānāni midhyeranneva ||
@LakshmiNarayanan Yes. that is similar what I got
The sutra is Nana Va devatapruthaktvaat @KeshavSrinivasan. You might already know it.
@SS Purva Mimamsa is skeptical of the existence of the gods.
@SS Oh ok
@SS By the way, do you see Adhikarana numbers anywhere?
@SS Like do you see the number 16 anywhere?
@SS @LakshmiNarayanan For more information on how the Purva Mimamsa school viewed the gods, see this excellent journal paper: gdurl.com/ZA_U It discusses all the major parts of the Purva Mimamsa Sutras which discuss the subject of gods, and what various commentators have to say.
3:06 PM
pruthaktvā pradānaį¹ƒ syāt | rājādigunabebhedena devatāpruthaktvāt avadānādeva_nādhaugapadye'pi pradānāni midhyeranneva ||

Translation: Perhaps the cognizance(or the awareness) is bestowed(or offered) | Based on the qualities like the Rajas etc., they are cognized. The status of Devata was given for a short period of time given as a privative.
@KeshavSrinivasan This is what I could understand. ^^
I was more clear in the morning. I got confused somewhere now.
@SS What is privative?
@KeshavSrinivasan That is the word for translation for an. Ignore it in grammar sense.
In mideranneva
@KeshavSrinivasan adjective : (of an action or state) marked by the absence or loss of some quality or attribute that is normally present
@SS I don't think it's speaking of the Guna called Rajas, I think it's speaking of Raja or king. I think it's talking about this quote of the Taittiriya Samhita of the Yajur Veda: "For him of whom he desires, 'May he be an eater of food', let him offer this (offering) of three elements, to Indra, the king, a cake on eleven potsherds, to Indra, the overlord, to Indra, the sovereign."
@KeshavSrinivasan It said Raajaadi guna bhedena. It means based on the differences of gunas like Raja etc.,
Bheda = Differences
@SS Yeah, but I don't think it means Guna as in Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas. I think it means Indra having the quality of being the king. I think it's distinguishing between the qualities of Indra the king, Indra the overlord, and Indra the sovereign.
3:18 PM
Guna = quality, merit, feature. But the word before it is Raja, so I think the meaning quality should be taken. @KeshavSrinivasan
And why do you think it is only talking about Indra? @KeshavSrinivasan
@SS By the way, here is the relevant passage of the Taittiriya Samhita in Sanskrit:
@SS For multiple reasons. In any case, I think I've found the answer to my question now. Let me post it.
@KeshavSrinivasan That's great.
@SS By the way, do you see the number 16 anywhere?
@SS I think Sutra 2.2.36 is part of Adhikarana 16.
@KeshavSrinivasan I don't know. I've only seen the screenshot. Didn't see whole text.
@SS Yeah, but in that screenshot does the number 16 appear?
3:28 PM
In the footnotes it is said that Shankaracharya, Ramanujacharya, Sri Kanthacharya have quoted this in their Brahmasutra Bhashya.
@KeshavSrinivasan Bha Dee is Bhatta deepika
It is there in footnotes
@SS Yes, numerous Acharyas quote it.
@SS Oh ok, Bhatta Dipika is Khandadeva's commentary.
@SS So you don't see the number 16 in the screenshot?
@KeshavSrinivasan No. I see 2-1-21.
@KeshavSrinivasan Why are you interested in Adhikarana 16?
@SS Because I have a summary of Adhikaranas.
3:45 PM
@KeshavSrinivasan It is part of dvitiya pada. No adhikaranas
3:59 PM
@Tezz @Pandya @LakshmiNarayanan @SS I just posted an answer to my Devata Kanda Sutras question:
A: What is the context of an important Sutra in the Sankarsha Kanda manuscripts?

Keshav SrinivasanIt's speaking of different forms of Indra. I found the answer in S. Shastri's summary of the Adhikaranas (sub-sections) of the discovered Sankarsha Kanda text. Here are the relevant Adhikaranas in Adhyaya 2 Pada 2: In the Ishti where there are three purodasha cakes to be offered to three ...

2 days ago, by S S
Revisions to Tejaananda Krita TriVajropanishadAntargata [Moderator Tatwam](https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/35673531#35673531)

He who is Pandya he is Deep and Deep is the light which creates, so his name represents Grandsire Brahma. Also Pandya represents Pa + Anda. And 'Anda'
verily represents the Hiranyagarbha which is Brahma.

He can create sons on his will. He has created a Mind born son(Manasa Putra) after his name. The name is Pandya's bot. So he is none other than Brahma.
@SS Lol
@KeshavSrinivasan 408 answers and 401 questions. Wow!! That's brilliant.
@RakeshJoshi Same question :P
@KrishnShweta moost of them are interpolated.
@RakeshJoshi Yeah...
@SS where is commas in the actual geeta verse ? how did commas come between shudra, vysya etc?
4:16 PM
@KeshavSrinivasan Tvam Prashnakarta, Tvam Uttardevta, Tvam Keshav, Tvam Vishnu! Haha
4:26 PM
O son of Pritha, those who take shelter in Me, though they be of lower birthā€”women, vaishyas [merchants] and shudras [workers]ā€”can attain the supreme destination.
He meant, instead of using Hyphen we should use Comma. So women will not be in lower birth category. Using hyphen is interpolation @RakeshJoshi
in original verse there is neither comma or hyphen and also in sankara commentary
but ramanuja has kept 4th catagory of papayoni separately which i doubt it not correct as per actual verse
@KeshavSrinivasan You might be right. Rajadi guna Bhedena means based on the abilities like Raj(ruling abilities), the were given status.
I'm just saying what he meant. However I don't believe in that verse at all. Krishna will never say anything bad about women. @RakeshJoshi
then join my club of people who belives that geeta has interpolations :)
or actual geeta is edited multiple times
@Pandya Haha
@KrishnShweta Thanks!
4:36 PM
@RakeshJoshi Yeah. Women haters did that.
:) so that is why i do not subscribe to sanyasins and vedantins :)
@KeshavSrinivasan :)
@SS I don't think Bheda means status here, I think it just means difference here.
@RakeshJoshi Haha... Let's see... I want Krishna only.
@RakeshJoshi I liked Ramanuja's commentary because I don't think women are sinful birth. I subscribed to Ramanuja's Gita Bhashya.
4:40 PM
its not necessary to have geeta for krishna .. meera bhajans would do :) @KrishnShweta
@SS then please mention it that in ramanujas bhashya he has written so and so but in original there is no commans and words like "and" between vysya, shudra, papayoni
@RakeshJoshi I never listened to Meera bhajans till now... soon I'll download few :)
meera not mandatory many are there .. there are tukaram kritis on form of vishnu. and many other bhaktas
@RakeshJoshi Ramanuja didn't edit the verse. He gave a different interpretation.
i think he introduced the word "and" in between four words which is absent in main verse
4:51 PM
@RakeshJoshi Often in a Sanskrit verse certain words like "and" are implied.
that will be discussed in detail by comparing commentaries .
the sanskrit used there is not complex
@SS Look at what Ramanujacharya says in the Sri Bhashya: "This injunction refers to one and the same Indra, possessing the qualities of rulership and so on; but as, through connexion with those several qualities, the aspects of Indra differ, the oblation of the purodâsa has to be repeated. "
@LakshmiNarayanan Peter Freund just replied to me. I forwarded you his reply.
@SS Aa profile pic enti?
@KrishnShweta Edi?
Chat user?
@KrishnShweta Savitri teliyada?
5:05 PM
@SS Yeah
@TheDestroyer I know.
my father always watch her movies and force me to watch those black and white.
But I don't watch.
@TheDestroyer neeku edit cheyu antundu hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/18597/… :P
@KrishnShweta ohh.. i don't understand that 2.5 year thing. Maybe someone who has done Upanayana can edit it. @SS
5:20 PM
5:58 PM
@TheDestroyer You mean 2.5 steps. I've done Upanayanam, but I'm not sure what he's talking about.

« first day (407 days earlier)      last day (971 days later) »