http://raghu-vraghava।blogspot।com/
Scientifically perceived matter fills the space and these matter are in constant activity,they change their forms and travel in the limitless expanse,at times there are vigourous activity and at all times there is a pause and action relationship....IS the pause an inaction or subtle action to sustain and grow!
Humans are a tiny part of the matter or its combination of it in the space,yet humans are worried about their creation much than the creator himself/itself.
Humans have two perceived notions that distinguish them in this universe,they think about themselves(self)and about others and that involves establishing a relationship with creation.No other living or non-living or not-so-living organism has this ability.
This makes his life pathetic as well as aweful and here is were his quests for peace.
RV
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Monday, April 27, 2009
Creation
http://raghu-vraghava.blogspot.com/
One of the intriguing question probably yet unanswered is the fact that What,why,who...of creation,coupled with when and where only of creation.
Whole lot of metaphysics dwelves into the probabilities but yet nothing concrete except ruminating on perceptions....Religious thoughts have converged into oneness,but there are thoughts relating to nothingness(shoonyathvam)and manythingness(aneka vadham).
Thus these three concepts are metaphysically agreed possibilities.
If oneness is considered all energies in this universe emanate from the one supreme,call it the space,the holes init et al ...from where did this emanate,upanishads call it self-emanating...apourushaeya...anawdhi..ananth.Thus the question at the core remained unanswered except as a conjecture that a self-emanating substance could have created this world as it were,imagine a creation without a space that is limitless,impossible...which means either the one energy we ascribe for creation either created the space first or that the space was in existence for that energy to transform and manifest.thus there could be more than one substance that pre-existed creation.Could it be then ANeka vawda...probably then we are more closer to causa-causans but how could we visualise these energies and asign equal or more-than equal status between them probably then are into a struggle of identification post-creational energies.IF that be the case where both the above proposition are not realisable concepts then is shoonyavadh the right picture..and is shoonyavadh perceived as negation,probably shoonyavadh is not negation and contextually it only reflects the limits of human imagination and that core whether unified or multiply visible is not recognisable yet through human intelligence and has the potency to evade human intelligence.
RV
One of the intriguing question probably yet unanswered is the fact that What,why,who...of creation,coupled with when and where only of creation.
Whole lot of metaphysics dwelves into the probabilities but yet nothing concrete except ruminating on perceptions....Religious thoughts have converged into oneness,but there are thoughts relating to nothingness(shoonyathvam)and manythingness(aneka vadham).
Thus these three concepts are metaphysically agreed possibilities.
If oneness is considered all energies in this universe emanate from the one supreme,call it the space,the holes init et al ...from where did this emanate,upanishads call it self-emanating...apourushaeya...anawdhi..ananth.Thus the question at the core remained unanswered except as a conjecture that a self-emanating substance could have created this world as it were,imagine a creation without a space that is limitless,impossible...which means either the one energy we ascribe for creation either created the space first or that the space was in existence for that energy to transform and manifest.thus there could be more than one substance that pre-existed creation.Could it be then ANeka vawda...probably then we are more closer to causa-causans but how could we visualise these energies and asign equal or more-than equal status between them probably then are into a struggle of identification post-creational energies.IF that be the case where both the above proposition are not realisable concepts then is shoonyavadh the right picture..and is shoonyavadh perceived as negation,probably shoonyavadh is not negation and contextually it only reflects the limits of human imagination and that core whether unified or multiply visible is not recognisable yet through human intelligence and has the potency to evade human intelligence.
RV
Sunday, April 26, 2009
மோக்ஷ मोक्ष வீடு
http://raghu-vraghava.blogspot.com/
Fundamentally the spiritual life of humans revolve round liberation....this is the resultant thought of his/her actions and inactions and following consequences(कर्म और उसकी अनुभूति का परिणामित इच्छा )the resultant desire to emancipate from this bondage.
Primarily Moksha is an extended concept of death(death without being born again).
Thinking beyond this life and making it extastic-free from bondage is what humans have been discussing for centuries.
Fundamentally the spiritual life of humans revolve round liberation....this is the resultant thought of his/her actions and inactions and following consequences(कर्म और उसकी अनुभूति का परिणामित इच्छा )the resultant desire to emancipate from this bondage.
Primarily Moksha is an extended concept of death(death without being born again).
Thinking beyond this life and making it extastic-free from bondage is what humans have been discussing for centuries.
धर्म की व्याक्या
http://raghu-vraghava।blogspot.com/
தருமம் ஏன்ற சொல்லின் தமிழ் இல்லக்கணம்---தருவன ஏன்ப ... ஏதை தருவன ஏன்றால் ...வினையின் விளைவை தருவன .
தருமத்தை ...அறம் போற்றுதல் ...ஏனலாம்.
அறிவினால் செய்யும் வினையின் விளைவு அறம் ஏனலாம் .
அறத்தை ஒரு நிலை ஏன்றும் கூறலாம் ....நிலை ...நிலை பாடு ...நிலை குலைதல்...அவ்வகை சார்ந்தனவே ..நிலை நிருத்துதல் ஏன்ற சொல்லை கோள் வகுத்தல் ஏனலாம் ...கோள் ஏன்ற சொல் ..கோல் ஏன்ற கம்பை குறிக்கும் அதனின்று.. தரு.. ஏன்ற வடசொல் ..கோல் ஏன்ற தமிழ் சொல்லிற்கு ஈடு ...
இவ்வை அனைத்தும் நோக்கும் பொழுது தருமம் ஏன்பது ஒரு நிலையின் கோட்பாடு ஏனவே கூறல் ஆகும்
தருமம் ஏன்ற சொல்லின் தமிழ் இல்லக்கணம்---தருவன ஏன்ப ... ஏதை தருவன ஏன்றால் ...வினையின் விளைவை தருவன .
தருமத்தை ...அறம் போற்றுதல் ...ஏனலாம்.
அறிவினால் செய்யும் வினையின் விளைவு அறம் ஏனலாம் .
அறத்தை ஒரு நிலை ஏன்றும் கூறலாம் ....நிலை ...நிலை பாடு ...நிலை குலைதல்...அவ்வகை சார்ந்தனவே ..நிலை நிருத்துதல் ஏன்ற சொல்லை கோள் வகுத்தல் ஏனலாம் ...கோள் ஏன்ற சொல் ..கோல் ஏன்ற கம்பை குறிக்கும் அதனின்று.. தரு.. ஏன்ற வடசொல் ..கோல் ஏன்ற தமிழ் சொல்லிற்கு ஈடு ...
இவ்வை அனைத்தும் நோக்கும் பொழுது தருமம் ஏன்பது ஒரு நிலையின் கோட்பாடு ஏனவே கூறல் ஆகும்
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Tirukkural
http://raghu-vraghava.blogspot.com/
எப்பொருள் யார்யார்வாய்க் கேட்பினும் அப்பொருள்
மெய்ப்பொருள் காண்ப தறிவு.
"The mark of wisdom is to discern the truth
From whatever source it is heard."
- (Tirukkural - 423)[5]
எப்பொருள் யார்யார்வாய்க் கேட்பினும் அப்பொருள்
மெய்ப்பொருள் காண்ப தறிவு.
"The mark of wisdom is to discern the truth
From whatever source it is heard."
- (Tirukkural - 423)[5]
लव Creates --Kuruntogai
http://raghu-vraghava.blogspot.com/
குறிஞ்சி - தலைவன் கூற்று
யாயும் ஞாயும் யாரா கியரோ
எந்தையும் நுந்தையும் எம்முறைக் கேளிர்
யானும் நீயும் எவ்வழி யறிதும்
செம்புலப் பெயனீர் போல
அன்புடை நெஞ்சம் தாங்கலந் தனவே.
-செம்புலப் பெயனீரார்.
Red earth and pouring rain[1]
What could my mother be
to yours? What kin is my father
to yours anyway? And how
Did you and I meet ever?
But in love
our hearts have mingled
as red earth and pouring rain
[Translated by AK Ramanujan (Kuruntokai - 40)
குறிஞ்சி - தலைவன் கூற்று
யாயும் ஞாயும் யாரா கியரோ
எந்தையும் நுந்தையும் எம்முறைக் கேளிர்
யானும் நீயும் எவ்வழி யறிதும்
செம்புலப் பெயனீர் போல
அன்புடை நெஞ்சம் தாங்கலந் தனவே.
-செம்புலப் பெயனீரார்.
Red earth and pouring rain[1]
What could my mother be
to yours? What kin is my father
to yours anyway? And how
Did you and I meet ever?
But in love
our hearts have mingled
as red earth and pouring rain
[Translated by AK Ramanujan (Kuruntokai - 40)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)