sabbyji Posted June 20, 2004 Report Share Posted June 20, 2004 IT Was Thruth the facts are taken from their own books. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dynamic_Banda Posted June 21, 2004 Report Share Posted June 21, 2004 did u just copy and paste from a selection of translated verses from their books.. or have u actually looked at the original text in its original language, then looked at the context of the text and its esoteric meanings? If you did then I too would say they were facts ! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabbyji Posted June 21, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 21, 2004 Well you can check below site's all I want to say that He did it with his own Daughter. I can't Post Veda scans here to convince you. http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/brahma.htm http://www.salagram.net/gp-brahma.htm http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org/canto3/Can.../chapter12.html http://www.dalitstan.org/books/gowh/gowh7.html 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted June 21, 2004 Report Share Posted June 21, 2004 ^ so what you're trying to say is that you haven't looked at the original text 'in its original language, then looked at the context of the text and its esoteric meanings"? The same sort of debates can be made for meat --> people will quote from Guru Granth Sahib where apparently meat is said to be banned. But another person will take a look at the shabad in the context it was written and find out that it was actually talking about maya. Go to some of the Archived Discussions and read some of the long debates to get an example of what I mean. Also, on a side point. I have an issue when a person makes an unwarranted attack on another religion's faiths and beliefs. Sikhi is beautiful because it stands on its on merits. Comparing it with (perceived) fallacies of other faiths does nothing to alter that fact. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sukhi Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 ^agreed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 Only an ignorant fool and idiot would take mythography as literally as you do! For having checked the original sources in Sanskrit myself I can tell you that Brahma is punished by Shiva for just desiring his daughter Gayatri. He actually does not really do it with her. It is a common theme in the puranas: Brahma who represents rajas and creative energy just can't control himself. In the Shivapurana he has an erection whilst he celebrates the mariage of Shiva and Sati and Shiva nearly kills him. Now the myth of Gayatri and Brahma: rajas is not allowed to take over control of the intellect ( Gayatri) even though as a creator he is its origin. The intellect has to control rajas, not the other way round! Amazing the level of stupidity of people who don't master Sanskrit but pretend to be able to understand the puaranas!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sardar Moderator Singh Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 We request any further discussion on this topic to be related to the matters at hand, "Brahma" per se (Rajasic Gun if needs be). This can be an interesting and informative discussion, however if this thread falls into any form of hate-mongering hereafter, rest assured this will be duly deleted. Comments above have been permitted given the nature of the original issue and for reference purposes. Thanking you all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.