Troll for a supporter desperately enough, and long enough, and on FFL you will probably find one. :-)
--- In [email protected], t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > Yes, I had seen it. > > > Did you see this brilliant analysis of the > > "King" hymn (verses 4-5 of hymn 173) of the > > 10th Mandala of the Rig Veda from Barry? > > > > "In the translation provided by cardemeister, the verse > > says, > > The translation is *provided* by cardemeister, but its of course > neither *by* him nor by MMY. Its an ancient hymn used to install kings. > > 'Firm is the sky and firm the earth, and steadfast > > also are these hills. Steadfast is all this living world, > > and steadfast is this King of men. Steadfast, may Varuna > > the King, steadfast, the God Brhaspati, Steadfast, may > > Indra, steadfast too, may Agni keep thy steadfast reign.' > > > > "I find this verse -- and the choice of it, presumably > > by Maharishi -- fascinating because as a Buddhist it > > strikes me as 100% *opposite* to the way the universe > > actually works. > > > As I said its an ancient hymn used to install Kings. MMY's choice here > was simply referring to the situation. It probably was used to install > Nader Ram. When I read the second part of the last sentence my stomach > turns 180°. To comment on a vedic verse, and the say, 'as a Buddhist > it strikes me as 100% opposite the the way the universe actually works.' > > First of all it assumes, that you can use a Buddhist axiom of > 'reality' and apply it on a different religion. The validity of the > Vedas was actually rejected by the Buddha. As a practising Buddhist, > one could know this. > > Second, it implies that as a Buddhist you know, how the universe > actually works, and that this is an *absolute* truth. ('how the > universe *actually* works) > > Third, it assumes that the translation is actually correct and > exhaustive. It is very well known that many Hindus, and that includes > MMY, but not just him, think that the Vedas are virtually not > translatable, and indeed many even think until today that they should > have never been translated. Partly the reason is in RV I. 164 > > Fourth, it interprets MMY, that nothing in the relative is unchanging > wrongly. Where the Vedas speak of the immutable, they speak of the > absolute, not the relative. The notion of an absolute, unchanging is > rejected by the Buddhists as is very well known. It strikes me > somewhat as odd, that a student of Buddhism wouldn't be aware of this > major difference between Buddhism and Vedanta, which assumes the > Brahman as an Absolute.All this is of a certain philosophic or > religious naivity, if it is not straight Hindubashing. > > Fifth, it twists the argument from a general difference between > Hinduism and Buddhism and applies it to MMY having missed the whole > point (the Buddhist point here). While this may be said about the > Rishi of the verse, or maybe the translator, Barry applies it to MMY. > > What shall I say. > > And then of course its a wrong english interpretation of steadfast. > Steadfast can be relative. It just means going to last for a long > time, not eternal. Even the Rishis knew that the king would die, but > they wanted him to live long. So the whole thing is hyperbole. Hot air. > > >'Steadfast' means firmly fixed in place, > > not subject to change. Well, as I understanding things > > (and as I remember Maharishi himself saying in the past) > > *nothing* in the relative world is steadfast. Not the > > sky, not the earth, not the 'gods,' and *certainly* not > > the kings of men. To believe -- and celebrate -- the > > notion that they *are* fixed and not subject to change > > seems to me tantamount to having Missed The Whole Point, > > big-time. It's like having one's students meditate on > > 'My name is Ozymandius, King of Kings, Look on my works, > > ye Mighty, and despair!' and ignore the fact that all > > that's left of Ozzy's Empire and the statue he built to > > mark his greatness are two trunkless legs of stone in > > the desert." > > > To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
