About Mahabhart Epic--Post your Queries - Page 11 | Kahaani Hamaaray Mahaabhaarat Ki

CONTEST : ICC T20 World Cup 2024 Prediction Game

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

anku-

@anku-

IF-Sizzlerz

+ 4

Posted: 15 years ago

#101

Originally posted by: akhl
I mentioned Mahabharata because it is written there that Bhisma tells Yudhisthir that Krishna got his glory because of Lord Shiva.

Brahm-Vaivart Puran 2.51.34 talks about shadow Radha.

For MahaBharat part:--
😆 You are jut saying tis written, tis written but you arent writing WHERE its written? So, that will make you a liar. Thats why if you dont want me to call you a liar, tell me the Khand etc.s like I hve told you where its written.

And for Brahm-Vaivarat Puran, I just told you to elaborate wat 2.51.34? Wat do you mean? Which Khand etc? GOD!!!
😆

Quote

anku-

@anku-

IF-Sizzlerz

+ 4

Posted: 15 years ago

#102

Originally posted by: akhl
You wrote that you spit at those who disagree with you and that they are foolish, l****s.

I said, I call those SCHOLARS foolish etcs. who ll disagree with original authors writings. You need to get your english right Mr. And didnt I just tell you its not LITREALLY? 😆 I think you hve taken it personally cause you dont hve any answers to watever I ask you.

But why do you disagree when it is there in scriptures?[/quote]
Wat am I disagreeing to/with?

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

anku-

@anku-

IF-Sizzlerz

+ 4

Posted: 15 years ago

#103

Originally posted by: prerna4rishav

Hey here I am just'to oppose this point of angelz....I know I must have missed some huge arguements it seems😕 But only this I wanna point out that -

Being a Brahmin, I myself do the second thing - eating non-veg....Still I very much believe that I am Brahmin....Just becoz, what I feel is'religion'or'cast'what'I'have'is'a'feeling in myself....I dont need some habits to prove my religion😊....Many dishonest persons follow all rituals and everything and worship God more than us, but they can't serve God ever, just becoz what they are truly....

So let me tell ya, Habits are not a proof of religion, Religions were made first, then habits....Religions are for people, people are not for religion 😊....It';s entirely upto u, ur thoughts, ur deeds, which make u a good and loyal follower of ur religion, becoz God is more important, not Rituals 😊....It's not like u have to leave drinks and non-vegs if u are a brahmin....it's u have to follow the feelings/hearts of the religion which u belong to 😊 Rituals and Customs are not SO necessary....if someone is pure by heart, does every needed deeds for his religion, w/o harming anyone, spends entire lifetime, worshipping God, and only and ONLY doesnt follow 2-3 rituals, won't he become Brahmin ?? 😊

Religions are related to heart😊 not through habits 😊

Anyways my sentiments, no hard feelings 😊

Heyy...Your totally right! I am not saying anything at all. Its just that I wrote wat was told in the scripture. I hve nothing against anyone doing wat they like. And I agree with you. I myself had non-veg. for the first 10 years of my life but then left it but that was just for many reasons one being that I love animals 😳 Even my bro eats non-veg so I dont hve any issues. And no hard feelings from my side tooo 😳😊

I liked this red bold part MOST in your answer 😳

Quote

254373

Inactive

Posted: 15 years ago

#104

OK, just wanted to add my thoughts. They are MY thoughts, not intended to cause any offence.....

As far as I am aware, no mention is made anywhere of the parents of Brahma, Vishnu or Mahesh. They came into existence at the beginning of time.

They have always existed - past, present & future - they did not take birth on this earth, nor have they ever died. The original trinity - the creator, the preserver & the destroyer, representing the cycle of life. They are known as the trimurti.

Brahma = brahman, the supreme being.

Again, I don't mean to offend anyone, this is what I believe to be the truth but accept that others will have their own opinions!

Quote

anku-

@anku-

IF-Sizzlerz

+ 4

Posted: 15 years ago

#105

@Nisha:-- Are these your own opinion and understanding or you want to say its written somewhere and this is how it is? Just wanted to know. Thanks!

Quote

anku-

@anku-

IF-Sizzlerz

+ 4

Posted: 15 years ago

#106

*doubles*
Edited by ~angelz16~ - 15 years ago

Quote

254373

Inactive

Posted: 15 years ago

#107

It's my understanding from the scriptures I have read and from my guruji - as far as I can remember, I have never heard of the parents of Brahma, Vishnu or Mahesh. I have always learnt that these three did not take manav janm...they were not born to human life. If you can tell me otherwise, I would be interested to learn more?

The part about the three being trimurti is widely known, creator (Brahma), preserver (Vishnu) and destroyer (Mahesh) - that is not just my understanding but as it is written in many places. I am not as familiar with the books as you guys, but I will try to find the sources.

Quote

Aani

@EkPahelii

IF-Stunnerz

+ 4

Posted: 15 years ago

#108

Originally posted by: drymaple

hmmm...as far as i know, Karna married Rituvati, daughter of Angasen, Princess of Kanchan kingdom.

dear but it says karna married vrushali & she is his first wife so kindly can anyone clear this confusion

was it rituvati or vrushali or both that he married if so then it explains abt rituvati but who was vrushali ?

Quote

akhl

@akhl

IF-Rockerz

Posted: 15 years ago

#109

[QUOTE=~angelz16~]Wat yes? You said it was Narakasur who captivated the princesses. 😆😆😆[/quote]

You claim that watever you are saying is as per what Ved Vyas has written. Bhagavatam is authored by Ved Vyas. But I quoted from Bhagavatam and you are laughing. There are many members in this forum, who have either not read Bhagavatam or not read it in detail. But they are interested in learning. If they read your post (together with laughing emoticons), they may feel that Narakasur did not capture the princesses. For their benefit, let me say that Bhaumasur and Narakasur are same. The 59th adhyay of the 10th skandh of Bhagavatam describes the war between Lord Krishna and Bhaumasur. The 19th shlok of that chapter clearly mentions the name Naraka thus proving that Bhauma was also known as Naraka. The shlok says: -

puramevaavishannaartaa narako yudhyayudhyata

Edited by akhl - 15 years ago

Quote

purvi

@coolpurvi

Goldie

Posted: 15 years ago

#110

@ angelz16

"Originally posted by ~angelz16

Who was Vedji? He was a rishi! You think hes dead? Aree, hes ONE among those 7 who are still alive since Satyug and will remain till Kalyug ends."

My limited knowledge says that Vedvyas in one of the 7 chiranjivis(deathless) but he was born in Dwapar Yug only not in Satyug. He was born to Matsyagandha (Satyavati's previous form) n Sage Parashara. His original name was Krishna Dwaipayan because he was dark-skinned n brought up by Matsyagandha in a Dwipa (island). He is a trikaal darshi
Not all chirajivins were born in Satyayuga

All sects believe that their sect, their view n belief is best. I m Shaakt(Shakti worshiper) by birth but to me Krishna is supreme n I'm trying to be a vegetarian.
Its extremely wrong to think that my belief is truth n others r wrong or my sect is best others r lower to my sect. That Supreme Omnipresent has himself created so many forms n manifestations of HIMSELF. This means He Himself loves to be worshiped is different forms n different ways. Without HIS will nothing is possible. If different purans n people call that Supreme by different names gave different Rup to Him this means that they r doing so by HIS wish only
Why u want everybody to call that Supreme by the name Krishna only. This world is very complex different people hav differnt opinion. Its never ever possible that all people of the world will accept n worshipp one Rup of "The Supreme".

More than Puran our own thought matters most. More than what Rishis said our own understanding matters more.
If someone believes that Shiva or Durga is that Supreme than is it correct on ur part to say that those who belive so r foolish or other _ _ _ _ words that u used for them.? How all can believe in one Rup of Almighty? Our personal veiw regarding God keeps changing. For example whe I was very toddler God was photo r idol to me, then when I learnt more He became a wish fulfilling entity for me or a very powerful entity for me. My veiw abt GOD completely changed when I read Geeta n Teachings of RamKrishna Paramahansa. I came out of my narrow veiw of GOD. N with my everyday learning my notion of GOD is expanding. I ask u a question- What God is now to u was he same when u were 3 or 5 year old.
We ourselves had different notions of God at different ages. Everyday we r learning more abt him.

Thus what a person himself has understood abt GOD is more important than what is written is Purans or Vedas or Upnishads or Samhita. If some sect belive that Shiva or Shakti or Vishnu or some other is Supreme then is it correct on ur part to call them foolish or ignorant

@akhl(avinash)
I agree wid u that Bhaumasur and Narakasur were same.Edited by coolpurvi - 15 years ago

Quote

1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 ... 20