* gandikotam <8a3a8b2d-6851-4d11-bfeb-954d9779418dn@googlegroups.com> :
Wrote on Mon, 2 Jan 2023 14:29:47 -0800 (PST):

> It is a new year indeed. But SCI has been around for more than 30
> years. I remember posting here in 1986. Arindam is a very special
> poster. He is erudite and a defender of righteousness. He never
> shirked from accepting his errors,

Not in my experience. He refused to accept his mistake on his
misinterpretation of PrajapatiRishi like a stubborn ass and did (does)
his utmost to cover his ignorance

> if any, and correcting others' errors like a gentleman. His knowledge
> of hinduism and physics is legendary. He authored a published work on
> Hindu puranas that speaks louder than words. I am very fortunate to
> have received his tutelage on SCI.
>
> As usual I have a question for him. While reading Ramana Maharshi's
> book on "Who am I?" I noticed that the maharshi claimed that Self
> (note the capitalization) originates in the heart. Some other
> spiritual leaders said Self is resident in the right side of the
> chest.
>
> Then the nadis or nerves that were counted to be more than 100 the
> prominent among them being "ida, pingala, sushumna". Are they for
> real?
>
> A third reference of physical body is the "dahar akash". It is
> supposed to be a space inside the chest where a lotus hangs upside
> down. It is a microcosm of the infinite universe.
>
> A fourth reference to the physical body is, of course, chakras
> (mooladhara, swadishttana, anahita, visudha, agna, sahararaka, etc.)
> One can't see them otherwise the MRI would have caught if they are
> centers of energy. The same is true of kundalini which is supposed to
> be at the base of the spinal cord.
>
> A fifth reference is to the senses and limbs which is
> non-controversial. Everyone accepts that senses are not reliable and
> can cause false knowledge.
>
> My question is: where from the hindu sages got these things? Are they
> in vedas? I searched the upanishads in vain. Any clarification will be
> gratefully acknowledged.

The Narayana Sukta (which may be recent but is definitely shruti) may
have veiled references to kundalini processes. It is part of the popular
pancha sukta recitation cycle (purushasukta narayanasukta srisukta etc)
of the present day.

You have to read up the history of Tantra to trace the development of
the chakras concept.

On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 9:17:05 AM UTC-8, Madhu wrote:
> * gandikotam <8a3a8b2d-6851-4d11...@googlegroups.com> :
> Wrote on Mon, 2 Jan 2023 14:29:47 -0800 (PST):
> > It is a new year indeed. But SCI has been around for more than 30
> > years. I remember posting here in 1986. Arindam is a very special
> > poster. He is erudite and a defender of righteousness. He never
> > shirked from accepting his errors,
> Not in my experience. He refused to accept his mistake on his
> misinterpretation of PrajapatiRishi like a stubborn ass and did (does)
> his utmost to cover his ignorance
> > if any, and correcting others' errors like a gentleman. His knowledge
> > of hinduism and physics is legendary. He authored a published work on
> > Hindu puranas that speaks louder than words. I am very fortunate to
> > have received his tutelage on SCI.
> >
> > As usual I have a question for him. While reading Ramana Maharshi's
> > book on "Who am I?" I noticed that the maharshi claimed that Self
> > (note the capitalization) originates in the heart. Some other
> > spiritual leaders said Self is resident in the right side of the
> > chest.
> >
> > Then the nadis or nerves that were counted to be more than 100 the
> > prominent among them being "ida, pingala, sushumna". Are they for
> > real?
> >
> > A third reference of physical body is the "dahar akash". It is
> > supposed to be a space inside the chest where a lotus hangs upside
> > down. It is a microcosm of the infinite universe.
> >
> > A fourth reference to the physical body is, of course, chakras
> > (mooladhara, swadishttana, anahita, visudha, agna, sahararaka, etc.)
> > One can't see them otherwise the MRI would have caught if they are
> > centers of energy. The same is true of kundalini which is supposed to
> > be at the base of the spinal cord.
> >
> > A fifth reference is to the senses and limbs which is
> > non-controversial. Everyone accepts that senses are not reliable and
> > can cause false knowledge.
> >
> > My question is: where from the hindu sages got these things? Are they
> > in vedas? I searched the upanishads in vain. Any clarification will be
> > gratefully acknowledged.
> The Narayana Sukta (which may be recent but is definitely shruti) may
> have veiled references to kundalini processes. It is part of the popular
> pancha sukta recitation cycle (purushasukta narayanasukta srisukta etc)
> of the present day.
>
> You have to read up the history of Tantra to trace the development of
> the chakras concept.

Thank you, Madhu sir. I am aware of purusha and sri sukta. As far as I know,
Purusha sukta is describing how the Purusha created the universe and various
varnas. I have to read up on Narayana sukta and trantra. How can we take
shruti as pramana? If something is in veda it is de facto taken as pramana.
Or the purusha/sri skuta's part of vedas? Please enlighten me.

* gandikotam <4957503f-2c18-49ab-b0cf-b79dfc6437e9n @googlegroups.com> :
Wrote on Wed, 4 Jan 2023 07:31:18 -0800 (PST):
> Thank you, Madhu sir. I am aware of purusha and sri sukta. As far as I know,
No sir for u
> Purusha sukta is describing how the Purusha created the universe and various
> varnas. I have to read up on Narayana sukta and trantra. How can we take
> shruti as pramana? If something is in veda it is de facto taken as pramana.
> Or the purusha/sri skuta's part of vedas? Please enlighten me.

For enlightenment wikipedia is a better bet. I'm sure Kundalini is
treated well, and the suktas too. Sri sukta is of course "khila", i'd
think the traditions must come from medieval brahmin settlers of the
godavari, rather than saraswati.

Narayana Sukta is controversial. I just looked it up on the web and it
is a point of sectarian conflict.

https://narayanastra.blogspot.com/p/the-absurdity-of-shakta-interpretations.html
vs.
http://www.mahapashupatastra.com/2012/02/narayana-suktam-hymn-to-tripurasundari.html

but there is no need to get into sectarian violence; the allusions to
processes you asked about are there in the text even if veiled. My post
was to show it is incorrect to say there is no knowledge of those things
in the shruti. Of course there are tantric "upanishads" with those
concepts all later the 6th 7th century but they obviously are not shruti
(though it may date the narayana sukta to that period)

That the shruti is pramana is the inviolable basis for orthodoxy - there
can be no compromise at all. (however grammatical torture of the text
to extract your preferred interpretation is allowed). It is the
identical to the concept of biblical inerrance and sola-scriptura and
the validity of the torah and is the basis siddhanta.

On Wednesday, January 4, 2023 at 9:34:53 AM UTC-8, Madhu wrote:
> * gandikotam <4957503f-2c18-49ab-b0cf-b79dfc6437e9n @googlegroups.com> :
> Wrote on Wed, 4 Jan 2023 07:31:18 -0800 (PST):
> > Thank you, Madhu sir. I am aware of purusha and sri sukta. As far as I know,
> No sir for u
> > Purusha sukta is describing how the Purusha created the universe and various
> > varnas. I have to read up on Narayana sukta and trantra. How can we take
> > shruti as pramana? If something is in veda it is de facto taken as pramana.
> > Or the purusha/sri skuta's part of vedas? Please enlighten me.
> For enlightenment wikipedia is a better bet. I'm sure Kundalini is
> treated well, and the suktas too. Sri sukta is of course "khila", i'd
> think the traditions must come from medieval brahmin settlers of the
> godavari, rather than saraswati.
>
> Narayana Sukta is controversial. I just looked it up on the web and it
> is a point of sectarian conflict.
>
> https://narayanastra.blogspot.com/p/the-absurdity-of-shakta-interpretations.html
> vs.
> http://www.mahapashupatastra.com/2012/02/narayana-suktam-hymn-to-tripurasundari.html
>
> but there is no need to get into sectarian violence; the allusions to
> processes you asked about are there in the text even if veiled. My post
> was to show it is incorrect to say there is no knowledge of those things
> in the shruti. Of course there are tantric "upanishads" with those
> concepts all later the 6th 7th century but they obviously are not shruti
> (though it may date the narayana sukta to that period)
>
> That the shruti is pramana is the inviolable basis for orthodoxy - there
> can be no compromise at all. (however grammatical torture of the text
> to extract your preferred interpretation is allowed). It is the
> identical to the concept of biblical inerrance and sola-scriptura and
> the validity of the torah and is the basis siddhanta.

I looked up and found that Purusha Sukta is a part of Rig Veda that
talks about the origin of the universe and varna. Sri Suktam was considered
as a khila in Rig Veda as you had rightly pointed out. But they don't refer to the 6 chakras,
5 kosas, kundalini, etc.

Since chakras are famous all over the world, I found the following:

"The chakra system originated in India between 1500 and 500 BC in the oldest text called the Vedas. Evidence of chakras, spelled cakra, is also found in the Shri Jabala Darshana Upanishad, the Cudamini Upanishad, the Yoga-Shikka Upanishad and the Shandilya Upanishad. According to the scholar Anodea Judith in her book the Wheels of Life, knowledge of the chakra system was passed down through an oral tradition by the Indo-Eurpoean people, also called the Aryan people. The Chakra system was traditionally an Eastern philosophy until New Age authors, like Anodea Judith, resonated with the idea and wrote about the chakras, expanding upon the older texts and making the knowledge more accesible."

Considering that upanishad's are shruti, can we say chakras have shruti pramana? I'd say the yoga-shikka
and shandilya upanishad's are not well known and perhaps passed down as "smriti" like the 100's of upanishads
for which Adi Shankara had not written a bhashyam. Do you agree?

The pancha koshas are very likely part of yoga, tantra, etc. Is there a shruti pramana for that? Likely no.

So I submit, we are dealing with things that have no pramana in vedas/shruti. People made up their
own stories about koshas, chakras, etc. As mentioned, Ramana Maharshi pointed to the right of his
chest to indicate the source of atman. There is no veda pramana and it is ok since the maharshi never
read vedas as far as we know.

Are we being fooled by the yoga peddlers into believing in chakras, koshas, etc.?

Regards

* gandikotam <4f2d80a8-0168-40ae-9902-dbeaf58872dfn @googlegroups.com> :
Wrote on Thu, 5 Jan 2023 15:30:27 -0800 (PST):
> I looked up and found that Purusha Sukta is a part of Rig Veda that
> talks about the origin of the universe and varna. Sri Suktam was
> considered as a khila in Rig Veda as you had rightly pointed out. But
> they don't refer to the 6 chakras, 5 kosas, kundalini, etc.

yes there is no mention of cakras. but kosas "envelopes" are mentioned
in the older upanishads where a system of meditation is developed based
on identities and relationships between psycho-physiogical faculties and
categories (smell taste form) and natural categories (earth water fire
etc.) is developed.

> Since chakras are famous all over the world, I found the following:
>
> "The chakra system originated in India between 1500 and 500 BC in the
> oldest text called the Vedas. Evidence of chakras, spelled cakra, is
> also found in the Shri Jabala Darshana Upanishad, the Cudamini
> Upanishad, the Yoga-Shikka Upanishad and the Shandilya
> Upanishad. According to the scholar Anodea Judith in her book the
> Wheels of Life, knowledge of the chakra system was passed down through
> an oral tradition by the Indo-Eurpoean people, also called the Aryan
> people. The Chakra system was traditionally an Eastern philosophy
> until New Age authors, like Anodea Judith, resonated with the idea and
> wrote about the chakras, expanding upon the older texts and making the
> knowledge more accesible."

> Considering that upanishad's are shruti, can we say chakras have
> shruti pramana? I'd say the yoga-shikka
> and shandilya upanishad's are not well known and perhaps passed down
> as "smriti" like the 100's of upanishads
> for which Adi Shankara had not written a bhashyam. Do you agree?

Yes these are later upanishads written after the development of the
theory I would even call them "apocrypha" (attributing authorship to
earlier sages). These upanishads and the tantric practices may have been
there at Sankara's time though, see saundarya lahari and other "tantric"
works attributed to sankara. the influence is known in the practice of
the cults if not in the orthodox texts.

> The pancha koshas are very likely part of yoga, tantra, etc. Is there
> a shruti pramana for that? Likely no.

The Panca kosas are spelt out in Taittirya upanishad and similar of
meditations (speculations) are there in earlier "genuine" upanishads.
The way I understand it the meditations on identities and relationships
(that i mentioed above, like the kosas) developed into the system of
yoga for self-realization which is outlined in the brahma sutras. This
must have happened in some "milieu" which "milieu" also produced the
development of "tantra and tantra yoga" -- the practice is medieval and
not vedic and parallels how the medieval jewish kabala is projected back
to more ancient times.

> So I submit, we are dealing with things that have no pramana in
> vedas/shruti. People made up their own stories about koshas, chakras,
> etc. As mentioned, Ramana Maharshi pointed to the right of his chest
> to indicate the source of atman. There is no veda pramana and it is ok
> since the maharshi never read vedas as far as we know.

Remember under Guruism gurus have the benefit of direct experience which
is greater than any ther pramana: guru is greater than vedas and guru is
greater than god. nvr fgt. (There is a cult of "periayava", full with
idols being funded today -- i wonder if you get the satellite "spiritual
channels" in the US)

> Are we being fooled by the yoga peddlers into believing in chakras,
> koshas, etc.?

well if the claim is made that kundalini is "vedic" it is obviously
false because it is not extant in the 4 vedas. but everyone makes the
claim and no one is fooled by *that* because "vedic" is a
propaganda-like abstraction that does not mean what we expect it to
mean. (the content-matter of the 4-vedas was irrelevant even during the
time of the mahabharata except for the ritual economy)

On Thursday, January 5, 2023 at 6:51:59 PM UTC-8, Madhu wrote:
> * gandikotam <4f2d80a8-0168-40ae-9902-dbeaf58872dfn @googlegroups.com> :
> Wrote on Thu, 5 Jan 2023 15:30:27 -0800 (PST):
> > I looked up and found that Purusha Sukta is a part of Rig Veda that
> > talks about the origin of the universe and varna. Sri Suktam was
> > considered as a khila in Rig Veda as you had rightly pointed out. But
> > they don't refer to the 6 chakras, 5 kosas, kundalini, etc.
> yes there is no mention of cakras. but kosas "envelopes" are mentioned
> in the older upanishads where a system of meditation is developed based
> on identities and relationships between psycho-physiogical faculties and
> categories (smell taste form) and natural categories (earth water fire
> etc.) is developed.
> > Since chakras are famous all over the world, I found the following:
> >
> > "The chakra system originated in India between 1500 and 500 BC in the
> > oldest text called the Vedas. Evidence of chakras, spelled cakra, is
> > also found in the Shri Jabala Darshana Upanishad, the Cudamini
> > Upanishad, the Yoga-Shikka Upanishad and the Shandilya
> > Upanishad. According to the scholar Anodea Judith in her book the
> > Wheels of Life, knowledge of the chakra system was passed down through
> > an oral tradition by the Indo-Eurpoean people, also called the Aryan
> > people. The Chakra system was traditionally an Eastern philosophy
> > until New Age authors, like Anodea Judith, resonated with the idea and
> > wrote about the chakras, expanding upon the older texts and making the
> > knowledge more accesible."
>
> > Considering that upanishad's are shruti, can we say chakras have
> > shruti pramana? I'd say the yoga-shikka
> > and shandilya upanishad's are not well known and perhaps passed down
> > as "smriti" like the 100's of upanishads
> > for which Adi Shankara had not written a bhashyam. Do you agree?
> Yes these are later upanishads written after the development of the
> theory I would even call them "apocrypha" (attributing authorship to
> earlier sages). These upanishads and the tantric practices may have been
> there at Sankara's time though, see saundarya lahari and other "tantric"
> works attributed to sankara. the influence is known in the practice of
> the cults if not in the orthodox texts.
> > The pancha koshas are very likely part of yoga, tantra, etc. Is there
> > a shruti pramana for that? Likely no.
> The Panca kosas are spelt out in Taittirya upanishad and similar of

Thank you, I have to read Taittiriya more closely. In fact I am reading
Late Prof. Eknath Easwaran's translation of upanishads into English.

> meditations (speculations) are there in earlier "genuine" upanishads.
> The way I understand it the meditations on identities and relationships
> (that i mentioed above, like the kosas) developed into the system of
> yoga for self-realization which is outlined in the brahma sutras. This
> must have happened in some "milieu" which "milieu" also produced the
> development of "tantra and tantra yoga" -- the practice is medieval and
> not vedic and parallels how the medieval jewish kabala is projected back
> to more ancient times.
> > So I submit, we are dealing with things that have no pramana in
> > vedas/shruti. People made up their own stories about koshas, chakras,
> > etc. As mentioned, Ramana Maharshi pointed to the right of his chest
> > to indicate the source of atman. There is no veda pramana and it is ok
> > since the maharshi never read vedas as far as we know.
> Remember under Guruism gurus have the benefit of direct experience which
> is greater than any ther pramana: guru is greater than vedas and guru is
> greater than god. nvr fgt. (There is a cult of "periayava", full with

> idols being funded today -- i wonder if you get the satellite "spiritual
> channels" in the US)

I only watch news on TV. Reading spiritual books is my passion.

> > Are we being fooled by the yoga peddlers into believing in chakras,
> > koshas, etc.?
> well if the claim is made that kundalini is "vedic" it is obviously
> false because it is not extant in the 4 vedas. but everyone makes the
> claim and no one is fooled by *that* because "vedic" is a
> propaganda-like abstraction that does not mean what we expect it to
> mean. (the content-matter of the 4-vedas was irrelevant even during the
> time of the mahabharata except for the ritual economy)

Thank you, Madhu sir for your kind clarifications. Switching gears, I have
visited the URL's you had kindly given. One of them ("narayanastra") has
a lengthy discussion about how the saivites hijacked vaishnavite
teachings. Here is my simplistic theory: there used to exist two entirely different
civilizations that had come into contact with each other after they
developed their own theories of the supreme divine. One of them
called the supreme divine Siva and the other Vishnu. Initially they agreed
to call the supreme divine Narayana from whom Siva and Vishnu sprang
so as to avoid contention of one civilization being superior to other. After some time
they diverged and claimed Siva and Vishnu as the supreme divine.
What do you think of this theory?

* gandikotam <a9a78b20-c9af-408f-a1e0-93c2445c4a78n @googlegroups.com> :
Wrote on Fri, 6 Jan 2023 17:22:42 -0800 (PST):
> Thank you, Madhu sir for your kind clarifications. Switching gears, I have
no sir for u

> visited the URL's you had kindly given. One of them ("narayanastra") has
> a lengthy discussion about how the saivites hijacked vaishnavite
> teachings. Here is my simplistic theory: there used to exist two entirely different

I stated upfront when posting that that there is no need to delve into
the sectarian bits...

> civilizations that had come into contact with each other after they
> developed their own theories of the supreme divine. One of them
> called the supreme divine Siva and the other Vishnu. Initially they agreed
> to call the supreme divine Narayana from whom Siva and Vishnu sprang
> so as to avoid contention of one civilization being superior to other. After some time
> they diverged and claimed Siva and Vishnu as the supreme divine.
> What do you think of this theory?

I don't think the details of the sectarian conflicts are relevant,
unless it is the investigation of the conflict. While it helps to have
an idea of the past for perspective the precise speculation is
pointless. A more interesting thing would be a meta-theory about the
sectarian conflicts and how they determine the course of development,
who they ulitmately benefit.

On Saturday, January 7, 2023 at 6:23:06 PM UTC-8, Madhu wrote:
> * gandikotam <a9a78b20-c9af-408f-a1e0-93c2445c4a78n @googlegroups.com> :
> Wrote on Fri, 6 Jan 2023 17:22:42 -0800 (PST):
> > Thank you, Madhu sir for your kind clarifications. Switching gears, I have
> no sir for u
> > visited the URL's you had kindly given. One of them ("narayanastra") has
> > a lengthy discussion about how the saivites hijacked vaishnavite
> > teachings. Here is my simplistic theory: there used to exist two entirely different
> I stated upfront when posting that that there is no need to delve into
> the sectarian bits...
> > civilizations that had come into contact with each other after they
> > developed their own theories of the supreme divine. One of them
> > called the supreme divine Siva and the other Vishnu. Initially they agreed
> > to call the supreme divine Narayana from whom Siva and Vishnu sprang
> > so as to avoid contention of one civilization being superior to other. After some time
> > they diverged and claimed Siva and Vishnu as the supreme divine.
> > What do you think of this theory?
> I don't think the details of the sectarian conflicts are relevant,
> unless it is the investigation of the conflict. While it helps to have
> an idea of the past for perspective the precise speculation is
> pointless. A more interesting thing would be a meta-theory about the
> sectarian conflicts and how they determine the course of development,
> who they ulitmately benefit.

Let me ask you this that has been nagging in the mind. Garuda puranam
talks about after life. Possibly it covers the naraka where a yaatana sareera
is given to jeevaatma to suffer under intense punishment meted out by
Yamadhrama Raj. Does law of karma apply to Yama and yama-kinkaraas?
While discharging their duty the kinkaraas' are inflicting pain and suffering.
Will that accrue paapa to Yama and his kinkaraas? I think a more
contemporaneous situation is prison guards, police, etc. inflicting pain
and suffering to people just by following the law. Will that accrue
paapa to them?

Thanks

* gandikotam <01ec91db-e33a-47e8-b185-a8401e21c7d8n @googlegroups.com> :
Wrote on Sun, 8 Jan 2023 18:01:32 -0800 (PST):

> Let me ask you this that has been nagging in the mind. Garuda puranam
> talks about after life. Possibly it covers the naraka where a yaatana
> sareera is given to jeevaatma to suffer under intense punishment meted
> out by Yamadhrama Raj. Does law of karma apply to Yama and
> yama-kinkaraas? While discharging their duty the kinkaraas' are
> inflicting pain and suffering. Will that accrue paapa to Yama and his
> kinkaraas? I think a more contemporaneous situation is prison guards,
> police, etc. inflicting pain and suffering to people just by following
> the law. Will that accrue paapa to them?

Put yourself in the position of the supreme: If you are the righteous
judge, how would you judge it? I would answer: of course.

You are asking me personally you are asking me to go on a rant, I
stopped trying to do a physics-style detailed balance of merits and
demerits for karma. There are obvious commisions and omissions in the
handing out of fruits of works. According to guruism gurus can even take
or give away your karma - it becomes entirely arbitrary and then the
theory begs the question. Besides the system of administration of the
universe including administration of karma benefits is systemically
corrupt with corrupt deities in charge at all levels. This does not
mean karma as a concept is fundamentally flawed - eventually all these
deities will get their deserts from god.

I believe garuda purana is medieval literature and is influenced by
catholic purgatory imagery, and whatever the catholic imagery is based
on, and its ok for conditioning and controlling society (like most lib
propaganda) and to provide livelihood for the pandas and keep the
varnashrama dharma system, but you cant base theology on it.

On Sunday, January 8, 2023 at 9:46:32 PM UTC-8, Madhu wrote:
> * gandikotam <01ec91db-e33a-47e8-b185-a8401e21c7d8n @googlegroups.com> :
> Wrote on Sun, 8 Jan 2023 18:01:32 -0800 (PST):
> > Let me ask you this that has been nagging in the mind. Garuda puranam
> > talks about after life. Possibly it covers the naraka where a yaatana
> > sareera is given to jeevaatma to suffer under intense punishment meted
> > out by Yamadhrama Raj. Does law of karma apply to Yama and
> > yama-kinkaraas? While discharging their duty the kinkaraas' are
> > inflicting pain and suffering. Will that accrue paapa to Yama and his
> > kinkaraas? I think a more contemporaneous situation is prison guards,
> > police, etc. inflicting pain and suffering to people just by following
> > the law. Will that accrue paapa to them?
> Put yourself in the position of the supreme: If you are the righteous
> judge, how would you judge it? I would answer: of course.
>
> You are asking me personally you are asking me to go on a rant, I
> stopped trying to do a physics-style detailed balance of merits and
> demerits for karma. There are obvious commisions and omissions in the
> handing out of fruits of works. According to guruism gurus can even take
> or give away your karma - it becomes entirely arbitrary and then the
> theory begs the question. Besides the system of administration of the
> universe including administration of karma benefits is systemically
> corrupt with corrupt deities in charge at all levels. This does not
> mean karma as a concept is fundamentally flawed - eventually all these
> deities will get their deserts from god.
>
> I believe garuda purana is medieval literature and is influenced by
> catholic purgatory imagery, and whatever the catholic imagery is based
> on, and its ok for conditioning and controlling society (like most lib
> propaganda) and to provide livelihood for the pandas and keep the
> varnashrama dharma system, but you cant base theology on it.

I don't want you to go into details but consider an existing situation.
A smart phone has multiple uses. But it also gave aloofness/loneliness,
caused accidents with selfies and use while driving, wasted trillions of
hours of productive time that could have been spent on meditation and such.
What do you think Steve Jobs, the inventor of smart phone, deserves?
A permanent place in heaven, and perhaps deva guru status next only
to Indra and Brihaspati or a sojourn in naraka? I personally think
he could have reincarnated without any privileges in heaven and working
out his karma on Earth. Any ideas?

* gandikotam <ac9093ae-6dc2-4c0e-bde9-3369e23e1dccn @googlegroups.com> :
Wrote on Mon, 9 Jan 2023 14:09:04 -0800 (PST):
> I don't want you to go into details but consider an existing
> situation. A smart phone has multiple uses. But it also gave
> aloofness/loneliness, caused accidents with selfies and use while
> driving, wasted trillions of hours of productive time that could have
> been spent on meditation and such. What do you think Steve Jobs, the
> inventor of smart phone, deserves? A permanent place in heaven, and
> perhaps deva guru status next only to Indra and Brihaspati or a
> sojourn in naraka? I personally think he could have reincarnated
> without any privileges in heaven and working out his karma on
> Earth. Any ideas?

None at all.

I have never used a smartphone or any apple product in my life and hope
to ascend without ever having used any.

On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 8:00:25 PM UTC-8, Madhu wrote:
> * gandikotam <ac9093ae-6dc2-4c0e-bde9-3369e23e1dccn @googlegroups.com> :
> Wrote on Mon, 9 Jan 2023 14:09:04 -0800 (PST):
> > I don't want you to go into details but consider an existing
> > situation. A smart phone has multiple uses. But it also gave
> > aloofness/loneliness, caused accidents with selfies and use while
> > driving, wasted trillions of hours of productive time that could have
> > been spent on meditation and such. What do you think Steve Jobs, the
> > inventor of smart phone, deserves? A permanent place in heaven, and
> > perhaps deva guru status next only to Indra and Brihaspati or a
> > sojourn in naraka? I personally think he could have reincarnated
> > without any privileges in heaven and working out his karma on
> > Earth. Any ideas?
> None at all.
>
> I have never used a smartphone or any apple product in my life and hope
> to ascend without ever having used any.

Me too. Technology, most of all, flusters the law of karma which is
amenable to reason on situations that are simple. I heard a story
about a swamiji who looks the other way when beggars approach him.
One day his disciple asks "Why are you not looking at the beggars
in the eyes?" The guru says "Because I know they did bad things
in their previous lives." Such is the attitude of hindus. In a book about
Maharshi Ramana's, the English author had quoted the Maharshi
as saying we have to lead a righteous life to help ourselves. The
author says most of the western visitors were asking how they
could help others around. As you can infer, the attitude of hindus
when it comes to helping others, except of course quoting
scripture and passing on the knowledge there of, they back foot.