ShrI-nR^isiMha jayantI (5/9/1998)

[Anand Hudli]

 Tomorrow (5/8/1998), VaishAkha-shukla-chaturdashI, marks the day
 when Lord ViShNu appeared as the nR^isimha (half-man half-lion)
 incarnation.

 The day when the Bhagavan nR^isimha's jayantI is to be celebrated
 is stated as follows, in the nR^isimha purANa:

  vaishAkhe shukla-paxe tu chaturdashyAM nishAmukhe |
  majjanmasaMbhavaM puNyaM vrataM pApapraNAshanaM   |
  varShe varShe tu kartavyaM mama santuShTikAraNaM  ||

  (shrI-nR^isimha said:) One should observe My appearance on the
  14th tithi (lunar day) of the bright half of the lunar month of
  vaishAkha, during the beginning of the night (evening twilight).
  This meritorious observance destroys all sin, and should be done
  every year for My pleasure.

  This year, the chaturdashI tithi extends from about 5:15 AM Eastern
  Daylight Time (EDT), Saturday the 9th to about 7:30 AM EDT, Sunday
  the 10th. Therefore, during the twilight period (technically the
  pradoSha period) of the 9th, the chaturdashI (14th tithi) prevails.
  The 9th should then be celebrated as shrI-nR^isimha jayantI in
  North America.

  One more factor this year is that the svAtI-naxatra, which was
 prevalent when nR^isimha appeared from the pillar, also prevails
 from about 6:15 PM EDT on the 9th and extends throughout the night.

 Shankara has composed a most beautiful hymn called the lakShmI-
 nR^isimha-karAvalaMbaM.

     andhasya me hR^itavivekamahaadhanasya
   choraiH prabho balibhirindriyanaamadheyaiH |
   mohaandhakuupakuhare vinipaatitasya
   lakshhmInR^isiMha mama dehi karAvalambam.h  || 11 ||

   O Lord!  My great wealth called power of discrimination (viveka)
   has been  stolen away by the powerful thieves called senses.
   I am blind (without the power of discrimination between things
   eternal and noneternal). In this condition, I have been pushed into
   the dark well called delusion. O Lakshminrsimha, provide me the
   support of Your hands.
                          (lakShmI-nR^isimha-karAvalaMbaM)

 Shankara has composed a most beautiful hymn called the lakShmI-
 nR^isimha-karAvalaMbaM.  I had translated this hymn sometime back on
 the vaishnava newsgroup. Some verses of the hymn were posted on
 this list last year. Please see:

http://listserv.tamu.edu/cgi/wa?A2=ind9705C&L=advaita-l&D=&H=&T=&O=&F=&P=2885


 Anand







______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

>From  Fri May  8 19:56:28 1998
Message-Id: <FRI.8.MAY.1998.195628.0400.>
Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 19:56:28 -0400
Reply-To: ramakris at erols.com
To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
        <ADVAITA-L at TAMU.EDU>
From: Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <ramakris at EROLS.COM>
Subject: Re: REQUEST: sanskrit text of shrI lalitAtrishatI bhAShyam
Comments: To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
        <ADVAITA-L at TAMU.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Anand Hudli wrote:

>  PS: In light of your comment that Vidya is moving/has moved, I hope
>  the advaita homepage will stay as is or will find a new home too.

I am working on that.

Rama.

>From  Fri May  8 20:31:11 1998
Message-Id: <FRI.8.MAY.1998.203111.0400.>
Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 20:31:11 -0400
Reply-To: ramakris at erols.com
To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
        <ADVAITA-L at TAMU.EDU>
From: Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <ramakris at EROLS.COM>
Subject: Re: Sadhana
Comments: To: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar at braincells.com>,
        Advaita-L <advaita-l at tamu.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:

> Hmm... for the past couple of hundred years the Vyas's have been teachers
> and petty bureaucrats.  About the most atrocious thing they ever did was
> to fail someone in algebra.  If something in _your_ past troubles your
> conscience that's your problem.  Mine's clear.

I admit I had to laugh at this one :-). However, there is quite a record
of brahmins misbehaving. I can write about this to you if you wish. I
pointed that out only to make my point that just being born a brahmin
does not mean anything.

> > Hoowever,
> > sitting as you are in NJ writing software, you are far from being a
> > brahmin. You are not even following your dharma. By the very smRiti-s
> > you quote you are not.
> >
>
> Uh I don't think so.  Care to justify those remarks.

According to smR^iti-s brahmaNa-s are not supposed to take up any
profession to earn money. The only money they can obtain is from
contributions of others. Some handwaving statements that professions can
be taken up in kali yuga are given, but seems only wishful thinking to
me. These seem to be much later ideas. I presume from your web-page
(which I saw about a year back, so sorry if I am mistaken again) that
you write software for a living. It's certainly not a profession you can
take up and claim to be following dharma.

> It means that the people who made those arguments were not "blindly
> dogmatically parroting" as the good doctor put it.  Their reasoning is a
> natural outcome of their worldview.

Someone insisting that the earth is flat because of their world view is
also OK then?

> And I think I made it clear this is _one_ of _several_ views on the
> subject that can be called "orthodox".  I didn't actually come out and say
> this is the view I prefered.  (the answer to that question can be found in
> the archives if you care to look.)  If you wish to make any progress you
> need to learn a little objectivity.

If you do not I apologize. But, I seem to remember you saying that
non-Indians cannot obtain moxa?!

> > Q: As some people are not brahmins, they do not have the opportunity to
> > attain moxa. Some raise an objection to this effect. Are they justified?
> >
> > A: Whoever said that only he with upanayana can get GYAna? Vidura was a
> > great soul. He was not a dvija. That veda should not be studied does not
>                                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> This by the way settles the adhikara question.

When did I deny that? I was _only_ referring to the moxa part.

> This is another orthodox view unrelated to any point I'm trying to make.

___ excerpt from original message
body is to be born as a male member of the priestly caste." How
un-vedantic
and tragic that the orthodox have, in a parrot-like fashion, blindly and
dogmatically declared that the mere act of a male birth in a brahmin
family
is an indispensable prerequisite for Self-realization! Commentators,
scholars, and apologists have gone to great lengths in an attempt to
justify this interpretation. To mention but a few: Women are (declared
to
be) not fit to realize the Self because of their involvement in:
domestic
duties, child-bearing, child-rearing, and/or sense-pleasures; rulers and
warriors (ksatriya), business people (vaisya), and laborers (shudra) are
unfit to realize the Self because their activities are directed
outwards;
______________

Your posting followed this and naturally I assumed that you were
contradicting this. I did not remember the verses which Ravi pointed
out. I realize now that because of this the interpretation given is more
indirect and also realize why you jumped on the vedAdhikAra issue. I
apologize for the harsh words. But, as Sadananda pointed out, these can
also be interpreted in this sense without granting vedAdhikara to
everyone.

> Or college professors or Internet posters :-)

True.

Rama.