Rishi for Lust, Rishi for Anger

That was an avani avittam day, when I was in Class 11.

I am done with my traditional poonal change and I am asked to meditate upon a mantra, a 1000 times. It reads as "kamokaarisheen manyurakaarisheeth namo nama:"

I was thinking that those were the names of rishis"kamoka" rishi and "manyuraka"rishi. That day I had a very deep meditation on those two rishis - prolonged thoughts about those two sages who were experts / the real seekers.

I continued doing this every year and my prayers were very staunch over that rishis over a period time.

Only, so many years later that I realised that it was not the names of two rishis. Rather the meaning of mantras is that - whatever sin that I committed in the last one year, is actually not done by me - it is done by my "kama" and "Manyu" - Kamo akaarisheeth (its only the desire which did the sin); Manyu akaarisheeth(its the anger which did the sin)

I started laughing on hearing this explanation. All along my thought that the mantra referred to rishis, infact was a "self realisation" principle or an act of repenting for the mistakes. Then on, my visualisations were very clear and I practiced my meditation process the same way, as now corrected.

Then came another jolt.

One day when I was driving, I saw a girl standing alone in the bus-stop. She was looking pretty good and attractive and at that moment it struck me that the girl is a result of her parents!! Its her parent's enjoyment for a second (or seconds, as you may correct me), which made that object, the girl, stand before me today.

From the next moment, as I am driving, for every girl or boy whom I could see, I am able to see a lust behind those objects - its the lust (kama) that created all the objects around me, including me.

Any object, human or inhuman, requires a desire / lust on the part of the creator so that the object is created. Hence if we can pray the act of "creation" as God [p.s. refer my previous article on xxx] and the "creator" himself as God, why not we pray the stimulus for creation, which is the "desire" itself!! So it makes more sense to me that "kama" is not a verb - an act - rather kama is a noun, its an object pre-requisite for creation.

So I am justified in meditating that it is the "kama" that created this [kamo akaarisheeth]  - I am not here referring to my desire. I am referring to the desire of the Supreme, which resulted in creation. As a corollary, I may conclude that if "desire" is a pre-requisite for creation, then "anger" (in abstract terms a temper) is a pre-requisite for destruction.

So I believe that when I say kamo akaarisheeth, Manyur akaarisheeth - I mean that its the divine desire and temper which results in creation and destruction.

More questions crop up in my mind now. But still my enquiry will continue.

How to Name it!!!

How to name it - One of Ilayaraja's wonderful musical treatise... But I am not describing that here..

I am narrating here my free-flow thoughts on the significance of "Name" in someone's life.
 
The recent movie by sivakarthikeyan wherein he carries the name "kunchithapaadam" and the comic attacks that he faces because of his name in the society is well scripted.

I keep thinking that, casually I am so intimate with my name that I say "I am Shriram". In extra ordinary scenarios, when I meet a stranger, whom I believe is superior to me I tend to keep even my name away from me and say "My name is shriram" - i am taking off my name from myself!!!

Name - the one that identifies me with the society; says that I am one among them; i was wondering what happened to all the tamil names which were there a 1000 yrs back - nambi, mudhaliaandaan, koora-kulothama dasan, embaar, emperumaanaars, etc.... when the society undergoes a change, their way of life, thinking, etc, it is primarily the name of people which undergoes the subtle change. Recently I find all the "shs" names - like ramesh, suresh, rajesh, etc and the names like vadivelu,govindan, murugan, etc have almost gone extinct. Name is the reflection of Society

According to me, Name is the implicit contract by a person to abide by the societal laws - and ofcourse its his choice to abide or not. However if he breaks the law, carrying the name of his society, there is every chance that he might feel guilty.

Japanese mgmt theory has it that, if at all there is one word which everyone likes - its his Name. Call someone by his name and ask him to do a job, he is more likely to do it. Perhaps its one of the most influencing factor.

I still remember one of my college professor who has the unique ability to remember every student's name (within a week of college opening) and he calls everyone of us by our name. He demanded more respect in the college [unfortunately I forgot his name now!!]

Going to vedic tradition, in "upanayanam" (the sacred thread ceremony), in every stage, at the end of every mantra the work "asow" (i.e., the name of the boy) must be repeated. When the child gets to know a mantra wherein his name is embedded, he feels more interested in the ritual, thereby creating a bondage to the tradition.

I firmly believe that the student whose name starts in "A", would have enjoyed enough tortures in schools, as he is going to be the first person to be tested. Hence this should definitely have an impact on his emotional intelligence. [though I dont know whether any proof exists for my belief]

All the epics and puranas have the characters whose names are symbol of their Personality. Believe me its not X, Y or Z in epics... Its surpanakha (one who has got a sharper nail), ravan (man of terrifying sound). Not even one character in Indian epics have a name without a reason.

In the epics, the naming ceremony is done by a spiritual guru, who correctly visualises the future personality of child and names in accordingly. But what about present days????

Is the converse of the above theorem true? Can a name shape the character of a man?

Name a person as akhilesh, sharvesh, etc you will find him more sporty; name a person srinivasan, ramanujam, etc by default he should feel a pulling force. Again its a sub-concious feeling. Exceptions are there always.

Giving the name of ancestors, saints, people of demonstrated success - might have an impact on the child's level of enthusiasm.

Say for example, when you name a child ramanujam and the child gets 100% in its third standard maths exams - any passing reference that "you are like maths genius ramanujam" will take the child to extra-ordinary heights and he will start believing that he is a maths genius [atleast a one step advantage towards the subject].

i have even seen the tradition, where spiritual leaders will name the child of followers. the parents will for sure tell the child and cherish that the child's naming ceremony is done by the guruji and so his blessings are always with the child. This by itself is a positive factor for the child's entire life that he will not be let down anytime by the grace of guruji.

it is interesting to note that parents tend to think that their twins share the same identity. so they name them similary - say ramesh and rajesh; suresh and ramesh; atleast viswanathan and ramamoorthy (finding a musical duo). this can have an impact that the twins will start believing that they are similar. i really dont know why parents name the twins that way... probably some sample research will answer this.

So many rationales I find before naming someone. My father named me, after the chit fund where he worked, when I was born!!!

So what??? As shakespeare says, A Rose by any other name would smell as sweet...

Practising and Being

Warning: This article is spiritual (as I understand)

I still remember the news that I heard sometime back where a temple priest was involved in sexual activities inside the temple itself!! MMS released, that created a stir, near the place kanchipuram.

I still see many Orthodox (so called) people, stubborn in their way of life, get skipped off in silly matters like passion, anger, etc. One of the butchery shop owner told me - " Nee yenna sami!! Andha kovil iyeru en kadaila dhaan vaangittu poraaru"..

As a Prabandham goes, the Lord Brahma who is very near to Maha Vishnu, himself has never seen Vishnu's divine feet. I could recollect my own circle of people, my elderly friends, relatives, old-age people, who seem to be excellent when it comes to practising religion, but get let down when it comes to common life. If that be so, is religion / spirituality is something that is off the normal way of life? Is practising religion / spirituality required or not? Especially when it does not have any impact on one's thought process in his routine life style....

I came across an interesting lecture which gave some good answers to me for this question. Below is the extract of it -

Knowledge, Discipline and Devotion are the path to salvation [Gnana, Vairaakyam, Bakthi]. This can be done as a practice [anushtaanam] or it can be your own character [swaroopam]. The later is superior [being it as a swaroopam].

As an example, if a person wants to quit smoking and he tries controlling himself, it takes a longer time to achieve success. Sometimes he might even fail. But however a non smoker doesn't feels difficult to stay without smoking. Both the people are trying to stay without smoking .But the latter feels easy to stay (instinctly) where the former tries his 100% always to keep himself calm.

I understand that Bakthi, as a state of mind should not be practised; rather it should be a part of one's personality. As a mother loves her child (and not practises to love everytime), so the bakthi should be, which should come instinctly from within.

What if it does not comes from within? I do not feel like loving the God.. So what can I do... simply nothing... But probably one answer which i can feel now is - better look into those people who are roaming around with bakthi... I would feel better then.

I have a client who always is punctual. Within 2 or 3 encounters with him, I started being punctual. My efforts for being punctual is very minimal. Just that the simple change that i had from within made me stay punctual (atleast with that client). Where I had lot of excuses with other people on my time management, with this guy i am the most disciplined person (with little or even no efforts).

Once this bakthi (divine love) creeps in the mind, then automatically we withdraw ourselves from all the other external pleasures (with no efforts). This is what is real vairaagyam. Then gnana is automatic.

Good day

How to say Eunuch.....in Tamil???

Language.... something which is very vital for our livelihood.... something that we use to communicate our thoughts.... (which we even use to hide our thoughts)

For me even silence is a language... which conveys many meanings.....

Some time back, I came across an interesting article about the development and origin of languages... an information about the language Tamil...

Tamil, as a lingo has got
(a) vowels -ex., a, aa, e, ee, vu, vuuu, yae, yaaeee, ai, oh, oooh , ow - (referred as 12 Uyir Letters) and
(b) consonants - ex., ik, ing, ich, iny, it, in, ith, inn, ip, im, etc (referred as 18 Mei Letters)...

these vowels and consonants form the basic letters of the language (called as UyirMei)

Stop Not!  there is a peculiar letter called as "akkkk" (that is "aaidha" letter). what is so peculiar about this "akkk"... the letter is denoted by the symbol three dots forming a triangle.... you invert the triangle, it is again a triangle... anyway it resembles one and the same... that which is out of any change...

In ancient literatures, uyir letters are called as "Male letters" and Mei letters are called as "Feminine" letters.

And the male letters are classified into two:
1. Soft Men - Kuril - a, e, vu, yae, oh (short vowels)
2. Hard Men - Nedil -aa, ee, vuu, yaaee, oooh, etc (long vowels)

Feminine letters are classified into three:
1. Vallinam - Hard Natured - ka, sa, da, tha, pa, rra (so hard to pronounce)
2. Mellinam - Soft Natured - nga, nya, na, nna, ma, naa (using nostrils to pronounce - not so rigid)
3. Idayinam - Mediocre Natured - ya, ra, la, va, zha, lla (mediocre difficulty in pronounciation)

Lets learn a little bit of Tamil grammar here:
Principle 1: when this letter "akkk" has to be used in formation of words?
Answer: When a kuril is joined with the vallinam then this "akkk" has to be introduced in-between.

ex., "a" is a kuril.... "thu" (any form of tha) is a vallinam.. when we join it we get "athu" or bingo!!! "akthu..."

Genetic Formula:
A lesson that is derived from nature here is that... when a Hard Natured woman mates with a Soft Men, then in between what you get is an Eunuch.!!!!????

If we apply this theorem and categorize men and women and try to find out whether this formula really works in practical scenarios, there seems to be a positive reply. There is a research report on that (the article that I read claimed that! but not sure of the report)

Really I wonder how people imbibed genetic theory into the Grammatical Rules of the language.... Still more research can be done of these lines, decoding the language from a genetic perspective...

Have you every worshipped xxx... welcome to my group (Adults only)

Now its approx 11.30 p.m. and I am writing this blog. I am not exactly in a sexually inclined mood now (though my topic title would resemble so).

Neither am I going to write something on Vatsyayana's works (in btw, eventhough I havent read the entire text, the first part 5 chapters are drafted well.. which talks about the generic nature of human and the purpose of life in a very simple way.. according to me, its a gateway to the past)

For a long time, what I am discussing here is guarded as an evident secret.. I mean that which is evident, but still not talked of. That which everyone sees everywhere, which forms part of life but was not spoken of. Definitely I am not talking about sex here.

Indian way of worshipping is, so far, subject to higher level of criticisms in terms of blind believes, etc. Modern thinkers feel that worshipping should be more logical (involves mental part and not too much of emotional parts). But name any temple in India, you will find only the emotional part standing up first; a story attached to that temple (say, an epic related one); some guy was in trouble for sometime and the Deity came up for the rescue. Hence the temple.

Different Gods, different names, different postures, different purpose and they are all for different devotees.. But then there was one form of God which is a tremendous perception of ancient Indians.. that of Lord Shiva.. Now I am not speaking about the one with four hands, riding on an Ox and slays the demons.

I am talking about the simple form of Linga (an Inverted "U" with a base), which has been a topic of meditation from time immemorial in India.

This Lingam has two parts - one is an inverted U (cylindrical formation) and a base (most commonly referred to as Aavudai). The prayers on Lingam has been found in both Yajur Veda (Upanishads) and also in Atharvana Veda. This is the form that is a representation of Lord Shiva, is said to be fit for meditation practice.

On a careful look, it appears to me (rather its an accepted proposition) that this inverted U would resemble the male genital and the base (Aavudai) would represent the femal organ - the combo of these two signifying creation.

I cannot just imagine a set of people who dare to think on a sexual process as a form of God and start building temples on that - as I said, something which is made public but not spoken of. I could say that this is the most abstract form of worship.. to mean that I pray the act of creation. We dont talk sex here but we talk pure logic.

Further an irony is that in sanskrit the term "Linga" could mean a mark or a cylinder or a male sex organ. I could say that there is every possibility that this shape of God could only mean a Union, nothing else. That can be male and female; or can be perceived as space and time; or whatever.

But the fact remains that we people are too good in visualising and abstractions.

Let see further.

All about kasmaalam

daye "kasmaalam".. said a rickshaw-man in Triplicane addressing a fellow guy

but what exactly "kasmaalam" means.. roughly i could recap what my paatti said when i have stomach ache.. "jeernam kashmala dhooshitham"... could that mean waste, scraps? bingo..well, it could mean that.

so a rickshawman speaking sanskrit as his slang? wow!! so what.. when a robber could write an epic (i mean wall-mickey here).. whats so aweful in rickshawman speaking sanskrit?

sanskrit has always been my subject of awe from childhood. Panini, who wrote first grammar book on Sanskrit (Vyakarana-sutra) says that Lord Shiva when struck his udukkai for 14 times came the first 14 syllables of this Language. I was told by one ayurvedic doctor that these syllables are now being used in Osmania university for treating hearing impaired, as these resemble originating syllables.

Neural pathway... that which connects different neurons in our body.. which transmits brain signals to various nervous systems and vice versa. Like my hand says "its heat", the msg carried over to the brain and the brain says "remove your hand".

from our childhood, we keep on sending and receiving signals thru this pathway and at some point of time this pathways dominate our emotions.. !!

what i mean here is, if i were to be arrogant throughout my childhood, even if i want to be soft, the pathways are not used to send these signals, which it feels abnormal. instantly those kind of softer emotions stop at the brain's end without being reacted or expressed.

probably our rishis are of the view that the neural pathway can be opened up by mantras.. making the emotional flows more flexible.

I believe this is the only language wherein you have a meaning for an alphabet (or a syllable to be more specific)... "ring" means to destroy, "vu" means "only for" and it goes on.

the pranavam and the gayathri mantra are the best examples of mantras having significant impact on brain's impulses and increasing seratonin (by the by let me introduce you to a liquid that is secreted in the brain which will reduce the stress levels - mr. seratonin)

But vedic tradition says - Mananat thrayathe ithi - Mantraha (that which saves (thrayate) by constant recollection (mananat)).. it gives best results only when thought (not said)...

but today i feel that most of the mantras have been publicized or rather made in mp4 forms.. as ringtones, calling bells, four wheeler reverse tones, etc.. ooof!! crazy people

on the contrary we have sthothras.. which can be recited. but we have that in pdf.. full stop... almost many of the sthothras are becoming extinct nowadays.

more research on language to make.. lets see

The Cultural Exchange

When I was in my Class 5, if I remember right, I learnt in my history that the Aryans were the native Middle East or Farther East ppl. They took over India. Native Indians at that time were Dravidians. The Aryans drove the Dravidians to the southern part of the Nation and they occupied the Northern Part. Full stop the story.

I was really interested in this story and thought I could learn it more... Thats the time I was introduced to Max Muller (whom I would call as Mooksha Moolachariar) and his book on "the Sacred Book of the East", where he clearly states that Aryans had the book - the Rig veda, Indra refers to the God of Destruction, whom they worshipped and they drove away the Dravidians who were living in the Northern part of India.

Good one.

But one more controversial book that I read written by Swami Vivekananda wherein he says that the Mooksha Moolachariar is neither a Historian nor an Indian. How come his theory be accepted and being taught in schools.. His theory is basically intented to divide and rule India and take away the prestige of Vedas and other Scriptures out of India, by dis-associating it from the Home Land.

Following are the facts to support this:
(a) The word "Aryan" is a term coined by Mooksha Moolar and not in Vedas. There was no race called as an aryan race as proposed in vedas. Only once in Ramayana the term has been used to denote Rama (as the word arya means one who is high born or disciplined)

(b) The Aryans called the river Saraswathi (now extinct) and Ganga as the Holiest rivers. Had they been originally from middle-east or still farther, why would their scriptures refer to a place in India as being holy.

(c) Remember Mohenjo-daro and Harappa..The earliest civilisations in India.. Indus valley civilisations. Mooksha Moolar says that it belongs to India and has been devastated by the invaded Aryans. If so, how come that the city is originally constructed according to vedic principles. If Aryans brought in Vedas to India and Harappa was there at that time, then its clearly a contradiction to say that the existing Indus valley civilisation confirms with Vedic Principles.

and on and on.. Swami Vivekananda concludes that the Vedic tradition has its roots in India.

Still I want to know further on this and am reading.

Recently I came across a great cultural exchange.. around 1200 BC a battle being fought in the city of Kadesh (in Syria) between two Egyptian kings. The battle ended with a peace treaty and that treaty has been documented in a stone tablet... in that stone it is inscribed that 100 male and female gods of Iran are the witness to the treaty along with Yama, Varuna and Aswins.

I was stumped to hear that translation as it makes me very clear that there has been a cultural exchange (could be from there to here or from here to there).

Cannot conclude anything now on this.. but i am continuing my pursuit of seeking.