From: Bob Brigante
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 3:17
AM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: New
Vedic Translation?
---
In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
"mark robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
_____
>
> From:
Bob Brigante [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent:
Sunday, March 13, 2005 11:46 PM
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
>
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: New Vedic Translation?
>
>
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "mark
robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> wrote:
>
> _____
> >
> >
From: Bob Brigante [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2005 6:30 PM
> >
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> >
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: New Vedic Translation?
> >
>
>
> >
> >
> >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
<SNIP>
> >
> >
> There is also a longstanding tradition that cannabis sativa
> is
> >
the
> > soma
plant. No firm
> >
> opinion here.
> >
>
> >
> L B S
> >
> >
**********
> >
> >
Deepak Chopra's first book, Return of the Rishi, convinced me
> >
that
> >
the soma plant is a very rare plant that grows only on slopes
> of
> >
the
> > Himalayas, and grows following the cycle of the moon --
it used
> > to
be
> > on
the shelf at the Fairfield Library if you're interested.
> >
> >
> >
-------------
> >
>
>
> >
> >
Bob,
> >
> > I
didn't read it (Chopra). What was his hypothesis based on?
> The
> >
Rig Veda, or other comments of commentator's commentaries? Have
> >
you tried reading the direct Soma translations yourself? If
> not,
> >
try it. What does it sound like they are describing?
> >
-Mark
>
> ******
>
> Well,
Chopra was not presenting a hypothesis, but simply
>
identifying
> the
soma plant, in a way that any botanist when asked would
>
identify
> an oak
tree -- there's no mystery about the nature and location
> of
> the
soma plant among knowledgeable Vedic priests in India. It's
> only
>
westerners who think soma is a mushroom or whatever.
>
> In any
event, the rarity of the soma plant [Chopra notes that
> Balraj
> (? -- I
have don't Chopra's book in front of me, so I don't
>
remember
> the
name of the Ayurveda expert Chopra mentioned) has only seen
> the
> plant
once in his life] means that its location as a plant has
> little
>
meaning. What is relevant is that humans produce soma when Cosmic
>
>
Consciousness is gained. Mental development is complete when CC
> is
> gained,
but there is further development possible on the level of
> the
> senses,
and that is what soma is for -- it extends the range of
> the
> senses
to celestial values, so that one can see the Self in all
> of
> Creation
(as opposed to CC, when the unlimited awareness is
>
witnessing an entirely separate material creation).
>
> When
soma has done its job, and Brahman/Unity Consciousness is
> gained,
then the body produces amrita, the nectar of immortality,
>
> which
allows one to live forever in that body if desired.
>
>
>
>
------------------
>
>
>
> Bob,
>
>
>
> It's
nice that you can have so much faith in those who claim to
> know
Soma without supplying a sound Vedic foundation. I mean the
> problem
is the contrary evidence present in Vedic literature's
> own
main book: the Rig Veda. And virtually everyone in the Vedic
> scene
ignores it with some sort of weird mass-denial. In other
> words,
just read the first Vedic texts for your self, instead of
>
trusting someone else's commentary (that's probably based on
> layers
and layers of previous commentaries).
>
>
>
> -Mark
**************
I have
confidence, based on my experience with the centerpiece of
Vedic
culture (TM), that Maharishi's revival of Vedic wisdom (the
Ayurveda and
Soma-explaining content of which he handed off to
Chopra) is
authentic -- therefore it not necessary for me to re-
invent the
wheel, but instead rely on people of higher consciousness
to package
this material for me (and, conversely, not rely on people
of unknown
consciousness to interpret the material for me).
The Vedas
are coded (Jaimini describes some of the encoding in his
analysis of
the Vedas) and hard to understand.
From
"The Concise Srimad Bhagavatam," SUNY Press, 1989, available at
http://www.21stbooks.com/ :
Lord Krishna
continued:
"The
utterances of the veda are hard to comprehend. The articulate
sound of the
mantra alone is not the truth. The real meaning of the
veda is
hidden and known only to me. Therefore, only he who is solely
devoted to
me, can grasp it." p. 360, Book Eleven, Ch. 21
------------------
Bob,
So you would rather believe the preachers
than read the bible yourself eh? Good luck with your salvation; you’ll
need it. You are a priest’s wet dream, who instructs “do not
attempt to educate yourself by trying to read that which you are incapable of
comprehending; place all your faith in my rendering of the word of god (and while
you are at it, give me your money [and I’ll give it to god] – and would
you like to kiss god?......)”.
“Pay no attention to the man behind
the curtain!”
-Mark
PS:
http://www.hindunet.org/saraswati/rigveda/rvbook9.htm
http://www.hinduwebsite.com/sacredscripts/rig_veda_book_9.htm
