hi .the only discussion happening on my blog is this http://banaras-meeta.blogspot.com/2006/04/discuss-movie.html#links rest is happening on swanas blog at www.swanarose.blogspot.com see u there
are nahi paul, sorry from disuading u from writing on mr singhs blog he says we should right there. and right now ,yes im totally engrosed in banaras the reason could be that the time was just right wherein i have time to indulge in this and also the inclination. i mean other people have loved the movie n maybe they r still caught up with the nity -grity of life and im at leisure to contemplate...
hey dont call me serious, i hate to take life seriously (ofcourse im refring to all the problems life throws at u , if u dont take them seriously they will give up n leave u alone he he he) see ya
Thanks to inform me. I read your comment yesterday and today only I managed to reply. Yes, I will be visiting Mr. Singh's blog and making my comments there as well.
Anyway, thanks for introducing the blog facility to me.
I wish this to continue.
Since the philosophy section is under discussion in your blog, Swana's blog and Mr. Singh's blog, I don't find a reason for me to have the same subject again. But I wish to have discussion on some other subject. What do you prefer?
My favourite subject is success.
What about it?
Please make your comment.
But assured that I will be visiting you people's blog and making my small comments there as well.
hey paul its ur own blog so u can do whatever u want here. u can cut n paste all ur reviews here so that people may see. or u can maybe start an agony aunt coloum here n people can ask you how to solve their problems. its really your call
I really wanted to start one agoney aunt and uncle column. But I am an amateur person and what I can do is to try.
Surely, this is a door of opportunity you shown me and I am greatful to you for this.
Regarding the reviewing, I am a 2 plus month old baby in reviewing. Infact I joined it to see how my views match or dismatch with other reviewers, so that I can identify with one or 2 reviewers and based on their reviews I can go for a film or not.
However, as far as I know, only very few reviews are genuine and only very few reviewers are free. So far in MS, I believe only Prasidddha and Anusha. Nobody else. And to my surprise, I observed that one person is writing 6 more reviews on one film. Will you believe? So, my review is business will not last for more.
And I have no serious intentions to become a professional reviewer since my language is my greatest drawback. Hey, I studied in a Malayalam medium school and I have my own limitations. I know.
So, shall I start a.....
but who will visit my blog?
Let us see..
And I will try to visit your blog and Swana's and Deepthi's and Mr. Sigh's blogs for some time at least.
hey pal! u seem a net freak like me. 24x7 on the net. im not angry ,the word you are looking for is BOSSY ! lol. so beware u give me one leeway n im ready to dictate. he he he well as to who will read your blog humm. well u can go n promote ur blog on other blogs (my marketing brain kicks in here) eg the message i left on ur review is an indirect invitation to all who readn want to join u can do the same!
hi paul ,what r u sayin on swans blog .am i scaring you or am i getting scared my self. i think ur sayin im gettin scared thats true to some extent . humm my intrest is in gnostic litreature cause i find it much similar to hindu philosophy . come to think of it hindu gods nad godesses are always thought of as "forms' of the SI and were married. so considering god manifested himself in form of jesus avtaar jesus becomes son of God . so what exactly do people have against all this. pls reply here only on ur blog (if u wish to)
1. Yes, I meant you are getting scared. Not Me. You are right.
2. Will you please explain what is gnostic literature? I am sorry for my English, but is it Ghostic?
3. Did you read Bhagavatha? I believe it is the basis of Hindu philosophy. Through which only the idea of Adwaitha came up. It all describe as a preacher advise the King, prepared to an inevitable death. The preacher make the King believe that there is rebirth. Of cource there are different aspects to it. But irrespective of it is a sstory or an actual incident, the theory/Philosophy of Adwaitha is born. Hindu Philosophy is considered as the only religion (Sorry, I know Hindu is not a religion, it is a culture, but for understanding purpose just mention it as religion)which advocate Adwaitha. All other religions are Dhwaitha religions. In the light of above, we have to see that when we say there is avtar of Vishnu, it is in Adwaitha principle and Jesus born as Son of god in line with a Dhwaitha principle. So, it is not correct to say it is in the same meaning it is been used.
Again, Muslims believe Jesus was a messenger from God.
So, people sea it in different views.
And when he said He and his father is one and if you can see me, you can see my father and if you can see my father you can see me....
I think you can understand what it means.
His merrit was that he put the philosophy to its simplest form and used it to help the poor and downtrodden.
He said, when you gave something to a poor or help somebody who is in need, it is been done to me. What a great vision!!!
4. Now, about your question, I think this has reference to Da Vinchi Code and related confusions.
While you say Hindu Gods married, no problems, but why not Jesus.
One has to be clear that Jesus never said that he will not marry. He was not against marriage. He has redefined morality to keep in marriage. So, it is not the question. When he died, he was only 33. He still got time to get married. Considering he was preaching and wandering around, he might have thought that it is not correct to tie his legs first. Where he got his knowledge and self realisation and succeeded over sin, he was doing the karma for 3 years. At the end of it he was crucified.
5. Mary Magdaline was a prostitute, the Jewish people wanted to kill her bfor prostitution by stoning. But Jesus saved her and set new terms for judgement. When she repented and washed his legs with sorrow, others felt ashamed. So, the relation between Jesus and Mary was not as that of a romance, but a soulwhich was fell in sin and a preacher who saved her and later a relaxed soul to the preacher, as a thanks giving.
Assuming and creating stories of bad taste is in anybody's interest, but to create cheap money quickly.
If somebody say Mahatma Gandhi visited a prostitute in a story, what it means? It means nothing, but hurting the sentiments of Indians. Why the American withdraw the bad publicity in the name of Gandhiji? It is an insult to Indians.
Now, about the writer's right. If somebody write the writer's mother was a prostitue in a story, whether he will simply listen to it and accept that? If yes, we have to appreciate his freedom idea. If not, they should stop such nasty writings .
gr8 paul can u explain adhwita again n dawita again. if u have read da vinci code then gnostic literature is described as ...um gnostics r akin to hindu mistics who were later declared blasphemous and ultimately only 4 gospels were included in the new testemate. well dvc mentions there were 4 mary's who were combined as one . mary was later absolved from the church ..these are some facts which dvc brings to light. even i dont like anyone making fun of any religion, so i dont like at places where he says jesus was not god . but on the whole i like his book. i hope u read the texts which hav been discovered in nag hammidi library they give more dept to christanity you can do a search of 'myth of sophia' and ill be looking for ur views on that
ok paul tell me that when god has to come to earth ,does he come down diffrently ,based on man made principles of adwita n dhwita ;as a messenger, as a son?? i have not read gita or any other holy text ,but i am happy .sometimes too much knowledge also blurs your vision . for me not having rad anything its easier to accept 1. muslims are right god is formless shapeless 2. hindu philosphy says the same ,only he takes a form for our benefit and hindus tend to pray to its various forms rather than the supreem being himself 3. there is one si so jesus can either be his form (avtaar) or messenger (i dont know if thers a diffrence between the two)
so what actually divides god is our knowledge or should i say incomplete knowledge.
paul, i have read a book the secrets of dvc"by dan bursten and its got a chapter on gnostic literature and symbolism. even the symbolism of adam and eve story... just read it with an open mind... eve is nothing but conciousness seprated from its maker(si) and when she self identifies with the body ...she's)called a whore because she is forgetting her true state..... and the apple that she gives adam is and they are thrown out of heaven is actually a call to the self to rember this heaven(earth ) is not their true home is this not how kundalini is described in hindu texts. infact researchers on nag hamidi 's gnostic texts say that there are 4-5 mary's in bible which are akin to various states of awakening of conciousness. soon ill searc h post links for you because its one of my fav topics
I have to separate the questions. Though I am not an expert in Dhwaitha Adhwaitha separation, nor in Christian Theology, I have gone through some relevent readings and what I can do is I can explain things in a form what I understood and developed further on it.
I have not read Davinchi Code. Somebody in one blog were questioning the authenticity of the gospels, because it is written after Christ is dead. In fact it is written after 20 years or so after. The last one written after 40 to 50 years. I had the correct years earlier, but I didn't keep it in my mind. I think the last gospel, i.e. John written in AD 94. That is the last book in the new testement also.
When we say we cannot accept a book written after 30 or 40 years, no need to explain that we can believe a book written after 2000 years. And believe me, I don't want to dirt my mind with such negative writing. If somebody is interested,let them read and follow the principles given in the book. It is upto them.
There is a person birthed in this world as human being and lived the life to its fullness and give a principle, love your enemies. If people cannot listen to him, listen to whoever writing interesting stories.
See the fate of Amir Khan now. His Fanaa is not releasing in Gujarat, because he said the people who are out of house because of the dam should be replaced!!!
Did you read about the Khushbu controversy? Sanya Mirza, Suhasini... all ran to trouble.
What nonsense we made in our country? Our country is becoming an intolerent country. Reason? There is no moral or ethical value which hold back the people. That is suppose to be the purpose of any religion. Where the modern state close their eyes, you cannot speak much.
People's right to speak is in question under people who pretend they are the protectors of religions.
So, I think I will keep a low profile for time being. But I think some day some day some day......
As I said, I have not studied theology or philosophy. But I have read Bible several times. I used to be a champion in Bible quizes. I have conducted Bible Quizes. Eventhough it all happened some 15 to 20 years back. But, still I can answer from my memory. Since the Bible and its accessories are not freely available in this country, I have limitations in references. Also, I have studied Bible in Malayalam and several words I will find to explain. However, I will try my level best.
Regarding 4 Marys in Bible.
1. is Jesus's mother. She got pregnent before marriage, by the holy spirit. But her husband didn't abandoned her, because he got god's message. Jesus was under her protection and care till year 12. We don't know anything about Jesus's 12-30 years life. But Mother Mary was with him till his crucification, after his resurrection and absorbtion to heaven.
2. Mary Magadaline. I already mentioned about her.
3. Sister of Lazar to whom Jesus gave life after 14 days of his burial. Only two occassions this Mary come to picture where Jesus visited Lazar's house and after Lazar's death, one time. Mary got a sister called Martha. She was engaged in preparing good food for Jesus,whereas Mary was more interested in talking and taking care of him. May be this small paragraph might have made the author to think that this Mary is a lover of Jesus or something like that. However, in the absence of any believable evidence in any form, we cannot simply assume that Jesus was in love with her and all. Remember, when the disciples told him his mother and brothers are waiting, he told those who listen to my words are my mother, brothers and sisters.
4. Regarding the 4th Mary, only a mention is there in the Bible. That also under the cross. Only a mention of "...other Mary. It also could be that there is no 4th Mary, because there it says, "...the Mother Mary, Magdaline Mary and the other Mary."
Unlike many other philosophies, Jesus was a simple man and his words were accurate, short and with full of meaning. One could not trap in dialogues or questions. He answer without any loopholes for the questioners. At the same time he tell things in depth. When he preach to the people, he will tell facts with the help of stories. Simple stories which each person knows. He talked about lamp, salt, goat, fruites, rice, wages etc. So that the listeners can understand and absorb. At the same time there is philosophical meaning to that as well. That he explain to disciples after the crowd goes. Which helped the disciples to understand and later preach it in correct spirit.
And the writing style of the 4 gospels, out of 4, 3 is straight to straight. But the 4th one, written by John, who is the master of the writing style called Appocalistic, saying things with symbols. He was also the author of the last book. I don't know the English name but in Malayalam it is Velipadu. Since you are interested in Philosophy and you can understand things better, it will be interesting for you to read the Gospel of John. There you can see that Jesus as projected as the "word" of God. I think 93 times, in the Gospel it says Jesus was the word.
The Gospel also says, the first had is the word. The word was with him (God). And when he say Jesus was the word... I think the example is clear.
So, if I start explaining things again and again, it will go for long. So, you may read and you may ask what you feel and I will try to see if I can help you.
Do you think that I believe you have not read Bagavatham and Bagavath Geetha? No way.
Still, to clarify or say to justify my understanding, Adwaitha states me and you are one. Oneness. Me and my god is one. You don't have to look at anotehr person. Dhwaitha treat that Me and the God is different. It is not the so called Dhwaitha religions created this idea, but the Hindu Philosophy which formulated the Adwaitha and branded all other religions as Dhwaitha.
If you read Bible, you can find many quotations like me and my father is one, to see the god, you look at the poor, when you did something for the poor, it is for me it is done, in Jesus Christ all of you are one..... we all are the physical bodies of Jesus Christ.... You will find right left and centre. So, I do not buy the principle of Dhwaitha and Adwaitha classification. But, I have noted that our discussions were mainly going on the so called Adwaitha way, and many hard core people liked to be treated it separately. And when I said the Adwaitha, I mentioned it for the easy understanding only. But, it is often referred that if a religion is originated and oriented in one person, like Jesus, Buddha, Jaina, Mohammed etc, it is referred as Dhwaitha. But only in Indian Philosophy you can find such classification.
It is a rarity that you come to a short query. Hmmmm... Hope everything is fine with me.
But to me, the death of my friend has taken a small toll on me. I came to know that he died just 2 KM from my house, whereas his house was about 20 to 25 KM away.
About alternate gospels, I have to tell you, I am not much interested, since I know from first place that there were several notes on Jesus's life from AD 30 (Jesus died in AD29).
In fact, the first gospel of Markos, the first in Bible by Mathew and one as that of Luke are similar gospels, as these absorbed many of the commonly found relevant articles. In fact the first Gospel was a collection of various writings, than a single person's writing. So, it is obvious that there are several versions which is not taken into gospels. And, the word Gospel means "Good News". And the Gospel hided in the library was that of any good news, it would have come to light and lightened many by these time.
Whether there are 20 other writings on Jesus, what I understand can stand alone, midst of any challenges, because of the simplicity, truthfullness and clarity.
Now, this is my thought on Davinchi Code Author and Jesus.
I think if he really read and understood what Jesus try to teach the world, the Author of Davinchi Code did a crime in itself.
Because Jesus set high standards for the morality. He redefined the existing morality codes with the new standards. The speach at the hills, known as the Magna Carta of Jesus Christ - tells it all. There had 10 commandments for Jews. The community used to strictly follow it by words, avoiding its meaning. Jesus set new standards for them.
For example, there had a commandment, dont' kill. Means, if you Kill somebody, it is sin. But Jesus said, when you think of hurting a person in your mind, you have done the sin in your mind.
Dont' do adultry. Jesus said, not when one go with a woman, but when he thinks of doing adultry, (evenif he didn't do it) he is sinful.
At the same time, Jesus ended people's unusual waiting for a saviour.
To Jesus's standards the Davinchi Code Author did a sin, since he think of it!!!
paul u r soo knowledgeble about so many philosophies n history of our country i wanna know, in india budha brought vegetarianism right? and then adi shankra charya uprooted buddhism ? y ?and its thanks to budhism v hav become such a peace loving nation v close to being labeled weak
i think of dan brown as judas. u know i hav my own theory about judas. judas had to b very spl friend of christ to be given the honour to betray him. its by betraying god that he allowed god to prove his divinity and i think dan brown is modern day judas..just by betraying god he's brought millions closer to god
In fact I was little taken back as the discussions gone nowhere as people left the discussion in the wayside. I don't like the attitude and decided to keep quite. And I know you cannot keep quite for long, as you are a business service professional.
Regarding my previous post, I don't have any previous posts. I just learned how to blog from you. You are my Guru.
As you are aware, I am not that soooo knowledgeable. I am well aware of my limitations of knowledge. But I believe in my ability to logic and question things which is not logical. So, I am confident of facing any discussions. Even with the Buddism and Adi Shankaracharya business, I don't know even a single thing. But, still I can respond and make you believe that I know many a thing. Anyway, as I already told that I don't know, I don't want to or I cannot pretend. Hmmm....
Buddism is for Saadus.. It is ideal. But, it is difficult to follow, like Gandhi's peace plan. When we want to roar for the super intelligence in us, Buddism is not the way. Rejuvination of the human spirit to the Super intelligence is the ultimate goal which any human soul can expect/experience in this world.
It will be interesting and informative for me and others who visit this blog (I don't know if somebody else visit this blog for that matter).
Now my take on Judas. First of all, let me clear one thing. Judas came to Jesus from a revolutionary organisation. His motive or belive was that Jesus is going to establish a physical heaven, physical change in the world. When Jesus declared clearly that his kingdom is not in this earth, naturally Judas was taken aback. And he played into the hands of those who want to get Jesus in to their hand. Later he found what is his fault and he had to commit suicide.
I do not agree that Judas has done a good job. True, with Jesus's death and his ressurection a new light is shown in the world. But the light was lighted before Jesus's death. What happens after Jesus's death is only magnification of what he have already told. Why Judas did a bad thing you will understand, only if you know that the disciples who was moving around with Jesus were not aware of the correct meaning of what Jesus meant with small stories and illustrations. His talks were so in depth and the poor disciples could not grasp its full meaning. Judas prevented time for Jesus to explain his philosophy with the help of more stories and more examples, which common people understand most.
Even at the time of their last supper, only Simon Peter understood who Jesus is in its true sense. i.e. he has been selected as the first follower of Jesus.
There are people who sympathise with Judas. But, most often they are victims of some different psychological disorders. It is really dangerous as well, as things can easily turn around and they can be in hot seat. Like Jesus said, "if that person had not born, it was good for him."
Eventhough it is good to think both sides of the issue, it is better to be the side of the peave truth and light.
Have a nice day. Share your views as well.
Hey, why are you limiting your views short? Give words to your thoughts. Of cource, within the limitation of time.
I just had a visit in the blogs. Since I didn't know indy and just looked at his/her posting and noted that indy has addressed Suguthan as KuGuthan. I thought even if you don't agree with other person's opinion, you should not take him simply for that. I don't know who is Suguthan. But, I thought it is not correct to call a person with bad name. So, not interested in indy. I had a visit to Mr. Singh's blog and his postings. But, I thought we could not continue any fruitful discussion, since he is asking me to come by dropping my wordly knowledge, which I clearly said I will not be able to, because I beleive a truth which is to be understood by knowledge only can stand the testings of the time. If we simply assume we have relevations (our own findings) and think that it is the truth, I thought it is not correct. If we believe all the truth is found by the sanyasis or the scholars from the past, I will say it is not. Truth is yet to be found. The spirit is yet to be extracted. We have to do it with knowledge and knowledge alone. Word is God. It is not correct to keep away God from knowledge, whether wordly or heavenly.
Now on Swana, I found it very odd from her to stop responding to my postings in her blog without any known reason. I visited the blog time again, but no response whatsoever. I think she was busy in beautifying the blog, but in the meantime, what she miss is continuation of a discussion. (If we can call that name.) Remember, we had 5 or 6 postings a day in the blog and now see, how many people are responding? I think Swana don't mind me leaving her blog. If at all she wanted to know why I stopped posting, she could have visited my blog and post her opinion here, in my blog, like you did.
About Deepthi, she come a while, goes a while. Uma, once a decade phinomenon. Only you keep some follow ups, but even in your blog, my posting left unattended. And see, earlier you have posted few queries, questions, I responded, but then, you leave the subject as it is and start with another thing. Of cource this is a way/chance to express myself and I have to thank you for that.
And do you remember the Annonymous in Swana's blog? It is that person made me withdraw my comments on Mr. Singh's blog, as I thought somebody close to Mr. Sigh don't want me to move away from Mr. Singh's blog. I posted my comments in good intention only. When I suggested the story part of Banaras could have been better I really meant it and I had simply drafted a posting, where I offered even my help if he required at some stage to do so. Have written some stories, and reading thousands of books, and analysing few movies, I thought I could help him in some sort, but little taken aback when I find no response from his side and got a very negative comment in the form of Anonymous.
I thought if people have little more understanding, tolerance and quest for knowledge than impatience, anger and try to convince our opinion on others. When I debate on some subject, I have no intention of establishing my view point as final. But, when I am in an argument, I will stick to my point, until I am convinced otherwise. I will not give up easily. So, people who want to set their thoughts in my mind without my conviction, I will become unacceptable to them.
Anyway meets, nice talking to you. I really appreciate your initiatives.
yaar ppl get busy n they hav fluctuating minds who go from one topic to the other havnt u seen ppl hav not replied to my posts also ..but patience pal. i think mouthshut dsnt allow email shairing thro msg..i had d same prob when she sent me her id so pls take my id from my profile n email me if u can else ill ask u here what i wanted
I am really sorry to say this, but I think you can post it here, and later may be if it is to be deleted, we can delete it.
The reason I am not giving you the email id is simple. As you are aware, in Mouthshut, there is a person who don't like me. I don't know why, but he/she don't like me. This person got several ids and always pull my legs. I doubt the same person got a psychological problem, or he is an employee of some organisation, who is writing for promotion of some movies and may be my reviews (surely based on my own judgement and true to my believes) don't suit to his/her bill.
It all beginned with the review of Banaras. This person add me to distrust list, rate my reviews as not useful or somewhat useful with several ids and sent abusive messages to mouthshut M2M box.
The person who hate me have given names like Raju Sharma, Rakesh Sharma etc. and considering you are meeta sharma and you are interested in Banaras etc, I thought it is better you to keep aside in my trust list, as you can see in my mouthshut trust list.
If I give my email id to you and if for some odd reason somebody else sent a bad message to me, chances are that I may believe that it is you who is doing all these. I don't want to beleive so, as I like mostly to believe people.
And I am sure the same person have few great ids as well and which is giving me good remarks always. So, I don't want to put a blame on that person either.
So, I thought for good order sake and to keep our relation in tact, better not to give my mail id at this point of time. I hope you will consider it only in good spirit, as I have only good intentions in not giving my id.
You can post it here, if I can help you by somehow. I have posted my suggestion on your request to have a storing system. Hope you have received it.
And once again, let me assure you that I still trust you and no hard feelings whatsoever.
Meets, life is like that. If I didn't tell what I have in mind, I may have to wander here and there and come to same confusion.
Hey, now I just beginned writing on Swahila's blogs. Let me see how that blog respond to me, so that I can continue the discussions if possible.
Since you already commented on the blog of storing system, I believe it is taken care of. I may delete it after few days, as it is only general knowledge. We may better discuss enlightment than GK, though GK is a must at lower level.
I tried Swahila's blog and no response whatsoever, even after a week.
no paul pls dont delete....even i m thinking of writing funny things n not philosophy for a while. and if u are looking for more response..u need to try forums..like beliefnet ..or anything related to your intrest.
For some odd reason I could not have blogged into my own login. Now things are sorted out and I am back.
Yes, I have read Osho and I have to accept he is a genius when it comes to philosophy. Read him, if you have not...he tells what we have not learned so far and from people who can tell more than what we know only we can learn.
I am a creative person. I believe so. I love friedship. I like reading. I love films. I wish I could travel a lot.
Also check my profile/reviews in Mouthshut@
http://www.mouthshut.com/user/Paulsb02.html
36 comments:
hi .the only discussion happening on my blog is this
http://banaras-meeta.blogspot.com/2006/04/discuss-movie.html#links
rest is happening on swanas blog at www.swanarose.blogspot.com
see u there
Hi Meeta,
I just browsed through Swana's blog.
Since the discussion were going on for long, I could not read it fully. I just brosed it.
Looks like you people are very serious and have much much more knowledge and quest for wisdom, than me.
It is good that we become friends.
Thanks for the link to banaras, through which I came to contact with many people.
I also clicked the link for your blog, but frankly, I could not read it because I have not much time.
Hope to have good discussions in future.
Thanks and regards,
Paul
are nahi paul,
sorry from disuading u from writing on mr singhs blog he says we should right there.
and right now ,yes im totally engrosed in banaras the reason could be that the time was just right wherein i have time to indulge in this and also the inclination.
i mean other people have loved the movie n maybe they r still caught up with the nity -grity of life and im at leisure to contemplate...
hey dont call me serious, i hate to take life seriously (ofcourse im refring to all the problems life throws at u , if u dont take them seriously they will give up n leave u alone he he he)
see ya
Hi Meeta,
Thanks to inform me. I read your comment yesterday and today only I managed to reply. Yes, I will be visiting Mr. Singh's blog and making my comments there as well.
Anyway, thanks for introducing the blog facility to me.
I wish this to continue.
Since the philosophy section is under discussion in your blog, Swana's blog and Mr. Singh's blog, I don't find a reason for me to have the same subject again. But I wish to have discussion on some other subject. What do you prefer?
My favourite subject is success.
What about it?
Please make your comment.
But assured that I will be visiting you people's blog and making my small comments there as well.
Paul
hey paul its ur own blog so u can do whatever u want here. u can cut n paste all ur reviews here so that people may see. or u can maybe start an agony aunt coloum here n people can ask you how to solve their problems.
its really your call
Hey Meeta,
I think you are not angry to me. Right?
I really wanted to start one agoney aunt and uncle column. But I am an amateur person and what I can do is to try.
Surely, this is a door of opportunity you shown me and I am greatful to you for this.
Regarding the reviewing, I am a 2 plus month old baby in reviewing. Infact I joined it to see how my views match or dismatch with other reviewers, so that I can identify with one or 2 reviewers and based on their reviews I can go for a film or not.
However, as far as I know, only very few reviews are genuine and only very few reviewers are free. So far in MS, I believe only Prasidddha and Anusha. Nobody else. And to my surprise, I observed that one person is writing 6 more reviews on one film. Will you believe? So, my review is business will not last for more.
And I have no serious intentions to become a professional reviewer since my language is my greatest drawback. Hey, I studied in a Malayalam medium school and I have my own limitations. I know.
So, shall I start a.....
but who will visit my blog?
Let us see..
And I will try to visit your blog and Swana's and Deepthi's and Mr. Sigh's blogs for some time at least.
Hmmmm.....
See you later. Hey, why are you angry?
No yar. LOL.
Keep your cool.
hey pal! u seem a net freak like me. 24x7 on the net.
im not angry ,the word you are looking for is BOSSY ! lol.
so beware u give me one leeway n im ready to dictate. he he he
well as to who will read your blog humm. well u can go n promote ur blog on other blogs (my marketing brain kicks in here) eg the message i left on ur review is an indirect invitation to all who readn want to join u can do the same!
Thanks Meeta,
It is interesting.
Thanks for the marketing techniques.
Soon I will start another session of discussion. Hope you will visit the blog as well.
Hmmmm.....
I like to listen to people, than talking. So, even if you turn to be bossy, I can manage. Lol....
Hey, I am not 24x7 net saavy person.
But my work need to have access to net and I am online. So, when I get some extra time or need to relax, I simply try in net.
Now let me see what you people have added in your sites.
Hey, I have urgent works to finish. So, I will visit your sites later.
Yes, I'd like to discuss and have replied to your comment on my blog.
hi paul ,what r u sayin on swans blog .am i scaring you or am i getting scared my self. i think ur sayin im gettin scared thats true to some extent .
humm my intrest is in gnostic litreature cause i find it much similar to hindu philosophy . come to think of it hindu gods nad godesses are always thought of as "forms' of the SI and were married. so considering god manifested himself in form of jesus avtaar jesus becomes son of God . so what exactly do people have against all this. pls reply here only on ur blog (if u wish to)
Hi Darius,
I have posted one reply in your blog.
Thanks for visiting my blog.
If you wish, we can continue the discussion on my blog as well.
Hi Meeta,
1. Yes, I meant you are getting scared. Not Me. You are right.
2. Will you please explain what is gnostic literature? I am sorry for my English, but is it Ghostic?
3. Did you read Bhagavatha? I believe it is the basis of Hindu philosophy. Through which only the idea of Adwaitha came up. It all describe as a preacher advise the King, prepared to an inevitable death. The preacher make the King believe that there is rebirth. Of cource there are different aspects to it. But irrespective of it is a sstory or an actual incident, the theory/Philosophy of Adwaitha is born. Hindu Philosophy is considered as the only religion (Sorry, I know Hindu is not a religion, it is a culture, but for understanding purpose just mention it as religion)which advocate Adwaitha. All other religions are Dhwaitha religions. In the light of above, we have to see that when we say there is avtar of Vishnu, it is in Adwaitha principle and Jesus born as Son of god in line with a Dhwaitha principle. So, it is not correct to say it is in the same meaning it is been used.
Again, Muslims believe Jesus was a messenger from God.
So, people sea it in different views.
And when he said He and his father is one and if you can see me, you can see my father and if you can see my father you can see me....
I think you can understand what it means.
His merrit was that he put the philosophy to its simplest form and used it to help the poor and downtrodden.
He said, when you gave something to a poor or help somebody who is in need, it is been done to me. What a great vision!!!
4. Now, about your question, I think this has reference to Da Vinchi Code and related confusions.
While you say Hindu Gods married, no problems, but why not Jesus.
One has to be clear that Jesus never said that he will not marry. He was not against marriage. He has redefined morality to keep in marriage. So, it is not the question. When he died, he was only 33. He still got time to get married. Considering he was preaching and wandering around, he might have thought that it is not correct to tie his legs first. Where he got his knowledge and self realisation and succeeded over sin, he was doing the karma for 3 years. At the end of it he was crucified.
5. Mary Magdaline was a prostitute, the Jewish people wanted to kill her bfor prostitution by stoning. But Jesus saved her and set new terms for judgement. When she repented and washed his legs with sorrow, others felt ashamed. So, the relation between Jesus and Mary was not as that of a romance, but a soulwhich was fell in sin and a preacher who saved her and later a relaxed soul to the preacher, as a thanks giving.
Assuming and creating stories of bad taste is in anybody's interest, but to create cheap money quickly.
If somebody say Mahatma Gandhi visited a prostitute in a story, what it means? It means nothing, but hurting the sentiments of Indians. Why the American withdraw the bad publicity in the name of Gandhiji? It is an insult to Indians.
Now, about the writer's right. If somebody write the writer's mother was a prostitue in a story, whether he will simply listen to it and accept that? If yes, we have to appreciate his freedom idea. If not, they should stop such nasty writings .
Hey, I think I wrote too much.
Hmmmmm...
gr8 paul can u explain adhwita again n dawita again.
if u have read da vinci code then gnostic literature is described as ...um gnostics r akin to hindu mistics who were later declared blasphemous and ultimately only 4 gospels were included in the new testemate. well dvc mentions there were 4 mary's who were combined as one . mary was later absolved from the church ..these are some facts which dvc brings to light.
even i dont like anyone making fun of any religion, so i dont like at places where he says jesus was not god . but on the whole i like his book.
i hope u read the texts which hav been discovered in nag hammidi library they give more dept to christanity
you can do a search of 'myth of sophia' and ill be looking for ur views on that
ok paul tell me that when god has to come to earth ,does he come down diffrently ,based on man made principles of adwita n dhwita ;as a messenger, as a son??
i have not read gita or any other holy text ,but i am happy .sometimes too much knowledge also blurs your vision .
for me not having rad anything its easier to accept
1. muslims are right god is formless shapeless
2. hindu philosphy says the same ,only he takes a form for our benefit and hindus tend to pray to its various forms rather than the supreem being himself
3. there is one si so jesus can either be his form (avtaar) or messenger (i dont know if thers a diffrence between the two)
so what actually divides god is our knowledge or should i say incomplete knowledge.
paul, i have read a book the secrets of dvc"by dan bursten and its got a chapter on gnostic literature and symbolism.
even the symbolism of adam and eve story...
just read it with an open mind...
eve is nothing but conciousness seprated from its maker(si) and when she self identifies with the body ...she's)called a whore because she is forgetting her true state.....
and the apple that she gives adam is and they are thrown out of heaven is actually a call to the self to rember this heaven(earth ) is not their true home
is this not how kundalini is described in hindu texts.
infact researchers on nag hamidi 's gnostic texts say that there are 4-5 mary's in bible which are akin to various states of awakening of conciousness.
soon ill searc h post links for you because its one of my fav topics
Dear Meeta,
I have to separate the questions. Though I am not an expert in Dhwaitha Adhwaitha separation, nor in Christian Theology, I have gone through some relevent readings and what I can do is I can explain things in a form what I understood and developed further on it.
I have not read Davinchi Code. Somebody in one blog were questioning the authenticity of the gospels, because it is written after Christ is dead. In fact it is written after 20 years or so after. The last one written after 40 to 50 years. I had the correct years earlier, but I didn't keep it in my mind. I think the last gospel, i.e. John written in AD 94. That is the last book in the new testement also.
When we say we cannot accept a book written after 30 or 40 years, no need to explain that we can believe a book written after 2000 years. And believe me, I don't want to dirt my mind with such negative writing. If somebody is interested,let them read and follow the principles given in the book. It is upto them.
There is a person birthed in this world as human being and lived the life to its fullness and give a principle, love your enemies. If people cannot listen to him, listen to whoever writing interesting stories.
See the fate of Amir Khan now. His Fanaa is not releasing in Gujarat, because he said the people who are out of house because of the dam should be replaced!!!
Did you read about the Khushbu controversy? Sanya Mirza, Suhasini... all ran to trouble.
What nonsense we made in our country? Our country is becoming an intolerent country. Reason? There is no moral or ethical value which hold back the people. That is suppose to be the purpose of any religion. Where the modern state close their eyes, you cannot speak much.
People's right to speak is in question under people who pretend they are the protectors of religions.
So, I think I will keep a low profile for time being. But I think some day some day some day......
Hi Meeta,
As I said, I have not studied theology or philosophy. But I have read Bible several times. I used to be a champion in Bible quizes. I have conducted Bible Quizes. Eventhough it all happened some 15 to 20 years back. But, still I can answer from my memory. Since the Bible and its accessories are not freely available in this country, I have limitations in references. Also, I have studied Bible in Malayalam and several words I will find to explain. However, I will try my level best.
Regarding 4 Marys in Bible.
1. is Jesus's mother. She got pregnent before marriage, by the holy spirit. But her husband didn't abandoned her, because he got god's message. Jesus was under her protection and care till year 12. We don't know anything about Jesus's 12-30 years life. But Mother Mary was with him till his crucification, after his resurrection and absorbtion to heaven.
2. Mary Magadaline. I already mentioned about her.
3. Sister of Lazar to whom Jesus gave life after 14 days of his burial. Only two occassions this Mary come to picture where Jesus visited Lazar's house and after Lazar's death, one time. Mary got a sister called Martha. She was engaged in preparing good food for Jesus,whereas Mary was more interested in talking and taking care of him. May be this small paragraph might have made the author to think that this Mary is a lover of Jesus or something like that. However, in the absence of any believable evidence in any form, we cannot simply assume that Jesus was in love with her and all. Remember, when the disciples told him his mother and brothers are waiting, he told those who listen to my words are my mother, brothers and sisters.
4. Regarding the 4th Mary, only a mention is there in the Bible. That also under the cross. Only a mention of "...other Mary. It also could be that there is no 4th Mary, because there it says, "...the Mother Mary, Magdaline Mary and the other Mary."
Unlike many other philosophies, Jesus was a simple man and his words were accurate, short and with full of meaning. One could not trap in dialogues or questions. He answer without any loopholes for the questioners. At the same time he tell things in depth. When he preach to the people, he will tell facts with the help of stories. Simple stories which each person knows. He talked about lamp, salt, goat, fruites, rice, wages etc. So that the listeners can understand and absorb. At the same time there is philosophical meaning to that as well. That he explain to disciples after the crowd goes. Which helped the disciples to understand and later preach it in correct spirit.
And the writing style of the 4 gospels, out of 4, 3 is straight to straight. But the 4th one, written by John, who is the master of the writing style called Appocalistic, saying things with symbols. He was also the author of the last book. I don't know the English name but in Malayalam it is Velipadu. Since you are interested in Philosophy and you can understand things better, it will be interesting for you to read the Gospel of John. There you can see that Jesus as projected as the "word" of God. I think 93 times, in the Gospel it says Jesus was the word.
The Gospel also says, the first had is the word. The word was with him (God). And when he say Jesus was the word... I think the example is clear.
So, if I start explaining things again and again, it will go for long. So, you may read and you may ask what you feel and I will try to see if I can help you.
Hi Meeta,
Do you think that I believe you have not read Bagavatham and Bagavath Geetha? No way.
Still, to clarify or say to justify my understanding, Adwaitha states me and you are one. Oneness. Me and my god is one. You don't have to look at anotehr person. Dhwaitha treat that Me and the God is different. It is not the so called Dhwaitha religions created this idea, but the Hindu Philosophy which formulated the Adwaitha and branded all other religions as Dhwaitha.
If you read Bible, you can find many quotations like me and my father is one, to see the god, you look at the poor, when you did something for the poor, it is for me it is done, in Jesus Christ all of you are one..... we all are the physical bodies of Jesus Christ.... You will find right left and centre. So, I do not buy the principle of Dhwaitha and Adwaitha classification. But, I have noted that our discussions were mainly going on the so called Adwaitha way, and many hard core people liked to be treated it separately. And when I said the Adwaitha, I mentioned it for the easy understanding only. But, it is often referred that if a religion is originated and oriented in one person, like Jesus, Buddha, Jaina, Mohammed etc, it is referred as Dhwaitha. But only in Indian Philosophy you can find such classification.
what is your take on alternate gospels that were discovered in nag hammidi library are you intrested in those findings?
Hi Meeta,
It is a rarity that you come to a short query. Hmmmm... Hope everything is fine with me.
But to me, the death of my friend has taken a small toll on me. I came to know that he died just 2 KM from my house, whereas his house was about 20 to 25 KM away.
About alternate gospels, I have to tell you, I am not much interested, since I know from first place that there were several notes on Jesus's life from AD 30 (Jesus died in AD29).
In fact, the first gospel of Markos, the first in Bible by Mathew and one as that of Luke are similar gospels, as these absorbed many of the commonly found relevant articles. In fact the first Gospel was a collection of various writings, than a single person's writing. So, it is obvious that there are several versions which is not taken into gospels. And, the word Gospel means "Good News". And the Gospel hided in the library was that of any good news, it would have come to light and lightened many by these time.
Whether there are 20 other writings on Jesus, what I understand can stand alone, midst of any challenges, because of the simplicity, truthfullness and clarity.
Why Davinchi Code is false???
Now, this is my thought on Davinchi Code Author and Jesus.
I think if he really read and understood what Jesus try to teach the world, the Author of Davinchi Code did a crime in itself.
Because Jesus set high standards for the morality. He redefined the existing morality codes with the new standards. The speach at the hills, known as the Magna Carta of Jesus Christ - tells it all. There had 10 commandments for Jews. The community used to strictly follow it by words, avoiding its meaning. Jesus set new standards for them.
For example, there had a commandment, dont' kill. Means, if you Kill somebody, it is sin. But Jesus said, when you think of hurting a person in your mind, you have done the sin in your mind.
Dont' do adultry. Jesus said, not when one go with a woman, but when he thinks of doing adultry, (evenif he didn't do it) he is sinful.
At the same time, Jesus ended people's unusual waiting for a saviour.
To Jesus's standards the Davinchi Code Author did a sin, since he think of it!!!
hey paul where ru u wheres ur previous post?
hey pal please dont delete ur comments ..cause i really like reading ur comments ...
hope ur well
see ya
paul u r soo knowledgeble about so many philosophies n history of our country
i wanna know, in india budha brought vegetarianism right? and then adi shankra charya uprooted buddhism ? y ?and its thanks to budhism v hav become such a peace loving nation v close to being labeled weak
i think of dan brown as judas. u know i hav my own theory about judas. judas had to b very spl friend of christ to be given the honour to betray him. its by betraying god that he allowed god to prove his divinity and i think dan brown is modern day judas..just by betraying god he's brought millions closer to god
Hi Meeta,
Nice to see you again.
In fact I was little taken back as the discussions gone nowhere as people left the discussion in the wayside. I don't like the attitude and decided to keep quite. And I know you cannot keep quite for long, as you are a business service professional.
Regarding my previous post, I don't have any previous posts. I just learned how to blog from you. You are my Guru.
Keep in touch.
Paul
Hi Meeta,
As you are aware, I am not that soooo knowledgeable. I am well aware of my limitations of knowledge. But I believe in my ability to logic and question things which is not logical. So, I am confident of facing any discussions. Even with the Buddism and Adi Shankaracharya business, I don't know even a single thing. But, still I can respond and make you believe that I know many a thing. Anyway, as I already told that I don't know, I don't want to or I cannot pretend. Hmmm....
Buddism is for Saadus.. It is ideal. But, it is difficult to follow, like Gandhi's peace plan. When we want to roar for the super intelligence in us, Buddism is not the way. Rejuvination of the human spirit to the Super intelligence is the ultimate goal which any human soul can expect/experience in this world.
It will be interesting and informative for me and others who visit this blog (I don't know if somebody else visit this blog for that matter).
Have a nice go.
Paul
Hi Meets,
Back to back, me again.
Now my take on Judas. First of all, let me clear one thing. Judas came to Jesus from a revolutionary organisation. His motive or belive was that Jesus is going to establish a physical heaven, physical change in the world. When Jesus declared clearly that his kingdom is not in this earth, naturally Judas was taken aback. And he played into the hands of those who want to get Jesus in to their hand. Later he found what is his fault and he had to commit suicide.
I do not agree that Judas has done a good job. True, with Jesus's death and his ressurection a new light is shown in the world. But the light was lighted before Jesus's death. What happens after Jesus's death is only magnification of what he have already told. Why Judas did a bad thing you will understand, only if you know that the disciples who was moving around with Jesus were not aware of the correct meaning of what Jesus meant with small stories and illustrations. His talks were so in depth and the poor disciples could not grasp its full meaning. Judas prevented time for Jesus to explain his philosophy with the help of more stories and more examples, which common people understand most.
Even at the time of their last supper, only Simon Peter understood who Jesus is in its true sense. i.e. he has been selected as the first follower of Jesus.
There are people who sympathise with Judas. But, most often they are victims of some different psychological disorders. It is really dangerous as well, as things can easily turn around and they can be in hot seat. Like Jesus said, "if that person had not born, it was good for him."
Eventhough it is good to think both sides of the issue, it is better to be the side of the peave truth and light.
Have a nice day. Share your views as well.
Hey, why are you limiting your views short? Give words to your thoughts. Of cource, within the limitation of time.
Paul
u dont even realise how much u r missed on d blogs indy n mr singh r wondering about u
Hi Meeta,
I just had a visit in the blogs. Since I didn't know indy and just looked at his/her posting and noted that indy has addressed Suguthan as KuGuthan. I thought even if you don't agree with other person's opinion, you should not take him simply for that. I don't know who is Suguthan. But, I thought it is not correct to call a person with bad name. So, not interested in indy. I had a visit to Mr. Singh's blog and his postings. But, I thought we could not continue any fruitful discussion, since he is asking me to come by dropping my wordly knowledge, which I clearly said I will not be able to, because I beleive a truth which is to be understood by knowledge only can stand the testings of the time. If we simply assume we have relevations (our own findings) and think that it is the truth, I thought it is not correct.
If we believe all the truth is found by the sanyasis or the scholars from the past, I will say it is not. Truth is yet to be found. The spirit is yet to be extracted. We have to do it with knowledge and knowledge alone. Word is God. It is not correct to keep away God from knowledge, whether wordly or heavenly.
Now on Swana, I found it very odd from her to stop responding to my postings in her blog without any known reason. I visited the blog time again, but no response whatsoever. I think she was busy in beautifying the blog, but in the meantime, what she miss is continuation of a discussion. (If we can call that name.) Remember, we had 5 or 6 postings a day in the blog and now see, how many people are responding? I think Swana don't mind me leaving her blog. If at all she wanted to know why I stopped posting, she could have visited my blog and post her opinion here, in my blog, like you did.
About Deepthi, she come a while, goes a while. Uma, once a decade phinomenon. Only you keep some follow ups, but even in your blog, my posting left unattended. And see, earlier you have posted few queries, questions, I responded, but then, you leave the subject as it is and start with another thing. Of cource this is a way/chance to express myself and I have to thank you for that.
And do you remember the Annonymous in Swana's blog? It is that person made me withdraw my comments on Mr. Singh's blog, as I thought somebody close to Mr. Sigh don't want me to move away from Mr. Singh's blog. I posted my comments in good intention only. When I suggested the story part of Banaras could have been better I really meant it and I had simply drafted a posting, where I offered even my help if he required at some stage to do so. Have written some stories, and reading thousands of books, and analysing few movies, I thought I could help him in some sort, but little taken aback when I find no response from his side and got a very negative comment in the form of Anonymous.
I thought if people have little more understanding, tolerance and quest for knowledge than impatience, anger and try to convince our opinion on others. When I debate on some subject, I have no intention of establishing my view point as final. But, when I am in an argument, I will stick to my point, until I am convinced otherwise. I will not give up easily. So, people who want to set their thoughts in my mind without my conviction, I will become unacceptable to them.
Anyway meets, nice talking to you. I really appreciate your initiatives.
yaar ppl get busy n they hav fluctuating minds who go from one topic to the other havnt u seen ppl hav not replied to my posts also ..but patience pal. i think mouthshut dsnt allow email shairing thro msg..i had d same prob when she sent me her id so pls take my id from my profile n email me if u can else ill ask u here what i wanted
Hi Meeta,
I am really sorry to say this, but I think you can post it here, and later may be if it is to be deleted, we can delete it.
The reason I am not giving you the email id is simple. As you are aware, in Mouthshut, there is a person who don't like me. I don't know why, but he/she don't like me. This person got several ids and always pull my legs. I doubt the same person got a psychological problem, or he is an employee of some organisation, who is writing for promotion of some movies and may be my reviews (surely based on my own judgement and true to my believes) don't suit to his/her bill.
It all beginned with the review of Banaras. This person add me to distrust list, rate my reviews as not useful or somewhat useful with several ids and sent abusive messages to mouthshut M2M box.
The person who hate me have given names like Raju Sharma, Rakesh Sharma etc. and considering you are meeta sharma and you are interested in Banaras etc, I thought it is better you to keep aside in my trust list, as you can see in my mouthshut trust list.
If I give my email id to you and if for some odd reason somebody else sent a bad message to me, chances are that I may believe that it is you who is doing all these. I don't want to beleive so, as I like mostly to believe people.
And I am sure the same person have few great ids as well and which is giving me good remarks always. So, I don't want to put a blame on that person either.
So, I thought for good order sake and to keep our relation in tact, better not to give my mail id at this point of time. I hope you will consider it only in good spirit, as I have only good intentions in not giving my id.
You can post it here, if I can help you by somehow. I have posted my suggestion on your request to have a storing system. Hope you have received it.
And once again, let me assure you that I still trust you and no hard feelings whatsoever.
Meets, life is like that. If I didn't tell what I have in mind, I may have to wander here and there and come to same confusion.
Hey, now I just beginned writing on Swahila's blogs. Let me see how that blog respond to me, so that I can continue the discussions if possible.
You are always welcome in my blog.
Keep in touch.
Paul
no paul i dont know whr u hav written d reply for effective store system..pls tell me ok??
Meeta,
Since you already commented on the blog of storing system, I believe it is taken care of. I may delete it after few days, as it is only general knowledge. We may better discuss enlightment than GK, though GK is a must at lower level.
I tried Swahila's blog and no response whatsoever, even after a week.
Wait for my sharing of knowledge from Swami Rama.
Paul
no paul pls dont delete....even i m thinking of writing funny things n not philosophy for a while. and if u are looking for more response..u need to try forums..like beliefnet ..or anything related to your intrest.
Hmmmmm.....
Let me see.
As of now I am fully trying to understand how Swami become Swami Rama. He is generous in explaining his expereiences. So, continuing my reading.
I saw your blog as well.
Hai Jerry,
Thanks for being here.
For some odd reason I could not have blogged into my own login. Now things are sorted out and I am back.
Yes, I have read Osho and I have to accept he is a genius when it comes to philosophy. Read him, if you have not...he tells what we have not learned so far and from people who can tell more than what we know only we can learn.
kit (Keep in touch)
Paul
Post a Comment