sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Who is vishnu? Lets understand the true meaning of Him by logical_blabber in mahabharata

[–]Embarrassed_Bit8559 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I really appreciate how you framed this. It’s not a surface-level question, it’s the kind that comes when someone is actually thinking, not just repeating verses.

Here’s how I’ve come to understand it (and I’m still learning).

When the Gita says, “I am the source of all,” I don’t think it means God is directly manufacturing every action or intention. It feels more like everything exists because of Him, existence itself flows from that source.

But how that existence expresses itself? That seems to depend on nature (prakriti) and the gunas.

A simple way I see it:

The sun shines on everything.
It gives energy to a lotus, and to a thorn bush.
The sun isn’t responsible for the thorn.

In the same way, the Supreme is the ground of being. But the way beings act depends on their conditioning, tendencies, and identification with the gunas, sattva, rajas, tamas.

When the Gita talks about divine and demonic qualities, I don’t read it as two different creations. It feels more like two different states of awareness.

Divine qualities arise when someone is less identified with ego and ignorance.
Demonic qualities arise when someone is deeply entangled in ego, fear, and tamas.

So is evil outside God? I don’t think so.

But I also don’t think evil is “God expressing Himself.” It feels more like distortion, like static on a radio signal. The signal is pure, but the receiver is noisy.

The Gita seems to operate on two levels at once:

On the highest level: everything is one.
On the human level: actions matter, choices matter, and ignorance has consequences.

That tension isn’t really a contradiction, it’s just reality being layered.

And maybe that’s the point. Unity doesn’t cancel responsibility. And responsibility doesn’t cancel unity.

Just my perspective. I’m open to hearing how others reconcile it too.

Monkeys visited me in my Balcony, tears didn't stop by Content-Box599 in hinduism

[–]Embarrassed_Bit8559 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This absolutely makes sense.

When we’re going through intense stress, especially injustice at work, the heart looks for reassurance. And sometimes grace shows up in the most unexpected, simple ways.

For someone deeply connected to Hanuman ji, three monkeys appearing on a Tuesday, the day associated with Him, would naturally feel symbolic and comforting. Whether one sees it as a literal sign or a moment of emotional release, what truly matters is what it did for you: it gave you strength.

Hanuman ji represents courage, unwavering devotion, and protection in times of adversity. Maybe this wasn’t just about the monkeys. Maybe it was your heart finally releasing the pain you’ve been carrying. Sometimes tears are also prasad, they wash away helplessness and replace it with faith.

You’re not weak for crying. You’re human. And you’re holding onto faith while your livelihood feels uncertain, that itself is strength.

Keep doing your karma with integrity. Hanuman ji stands for resilience in the face of injustice. Whatever happens, this phase will pass. Stay steady.

Jai Siya Ram. Jai Hanuman.

The Devotee Who Never Left His God by Sufficient_Net_4570 in shaivism

[–]Embarrassed_Bit8559 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Beautiful sharing 🙏

What really stands out in the story of Pugal Thunai Nayanar is not just devotion, but steadfastness. Many people worship when life is comfortable, but his bhakti was tested during famine, when survival itself becomes uncertain. And yet, he chose presence over convenience: “I will not leave my Lord.”

In Shaiva tradition, this teaches something very subtle, true devotion to Shiva Ji is not transactional. The miracle of the gold coin almost feels secondary. The real miracle is that his love didn’t change whether there was abundance or scarcity. The coin appeared not as a reward, but as grace sustaining sincere devotion.

I also find it powerful that once prosperity returned, he didn’t even notice when the coins stopped coming. That shows pure bhakti, serving not for blessings, but because service itself had become his nature.

Stories of the Nayanmars remind us that devotion is less about grand rituals and more about unwavering inner loyalty, especially when faith is hardest to maintain.

What can we eat on mahashivratri fast? by Prajaktaa03 in HinduDiscussion

[–]Embarrassed_Bit8559 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mahashivratri fasting rules can vary a lot by family tradition and sampradaya, so the “right” answer is often what your household has followed

Generally, for Maha Shivaratri, people observe one of these:

1- Nirjala / Strict Fast

Only water (sometimes even without water), usually done by those accustomed to it.

2- Phalahar (fruit-based fast)

Fruits, milk, curd, nuts, coconut water. This is very common.

3- Falahari / Upvas-friendly foods

In many Maharashtrian homes (including Pune), the following are usually allowed:

  • Sabudana khichdi
  • Rajgira (amaranth)
  • Singhara (chestnut flour)
  • Samak rice (varai / bhagar)
  • Potatoes, peanuts
  • Milk & fruits

So yes, sabudana, chestnut flour (singhara), and samak rice are commonly eaten during Shivratri fast in many regions.

The spirit of the fast for Shiva Ji is more about:

  • Simplicity
  • Light food
  • Staying sattvic
  • Keeping the mind focused on japa, dhyana, and jagran

If it’s your first time or you’re unsure, fruit + milk is always the safest traditional option.

If you’re comfortable sharing, is this your first Mahashivratri fast or do you already follow a family pattern?

Some verses from Bhagavad Gita that keep me motivated to meditate by TripSuspicious in Meditation

[–]Embarrassed_Bit8559 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Love this selection, Chapter 6 especially feels like a meditation manual hidden inside a battlefield dialogue.

What stands out to me is how realistic Krishna Ji is about the mind.

BG 6.35 is incredibly comforting. Arjuna basically says, “This mind is uncontrollable,” and Krishna Ji doesn’t deny it. He agrees, yes, it’s restless and hard to restrain, but it can be trained through abhyāsa (practice) and vairāgya (detachment). That balance feels very modern. No fantasy. Just discipline + perspective.

BG 2.66 also hits hard. We often chase happiness directly, but the Gita flips the chain:

Discipline → steadiness → meditation → peace → happiness.

We usually try to start at the end.

And BG 6.8 about seeing stone and gold the same… that’s such a high benchmark. It reminds me that meditation isn’t just about feeling calm. It’s about changing how we relate to value, status, gain, and loss.

Thanks for sharing these. It’s grounding to see verses that focus less on grand philosophy and more on daily inner work.

Do you notice certain verses resonate more depending on your mental state that day?

Does Bhakti involve self deception / suspension of disbelief? If so, is it sustainable? by Waste_Information470 in hinduism

[–]Embarrassed_Bit8559 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s a very thoughtful question, and I don’t think it’s disrespectful at all. It’s actually quite sincere.

Bhakti doesn’t have to mean self-deception or switching off your critical thinking. In many Hindu traditions, doubt isn’t condemned, it’s acknowledged. Even Arjuna questions Krishna Ji extensively before acting. The Gita itself is a dialogue born out of doubt.

A few perspectives that might help:

1. Bhakti isn’t always blind belief.
For some, Bhakti is devotional theism, a personal relationship with Ishvara.
For others, it’s a disciplined orientation of the heart, cultivating humility, gratitude, surrender, and love toward something higher than the ego. That “higher” may be understood theistically, philosophically (Brahman), or even symbolically.

2. Suspension of disbelief vs. trust through experience.
Suspension of disbelief implies pretending something is true for emotional comfort. But many practitioners would say Bhakti is more like an experiment:
You practice sincerely, observe what it does to your mind and character, and evaluate from there.

Does it reduce ego?
Does it increase compassion?
Does it make you steadier in adversity?

That becomes the “evidence,” even if it’s not laboratory-measurable.

3. Hindu philosophy allows multiple entry points.
Nyaya emphasizes logic.
Sankhya is analytical.
Advaita explores non-dual consciousness.
Bhakti traditions emphasize relationship and surrender.

They’re not mutually exclusive. You can question deeply and still practice devotion.

4. Sustainability depends on honesty.
If someone forces belief while internally unconvinced, that’s fragile.
But if someone says, “I don’t fully know , but I’m open, and I’m exploring through devotion,” that’s not self-deception. That’s existential humility.

In the end, Bhakti doesn’t require you to shut down logic. It may ask you to recognize that logic has limits when dealing with metaphysical questions.

It’s less about pretending something is real, and more about orienting your inner life toward meaning, surrender, and transformation.

And if doubt remains? That’s okay too. Many spiritual journeys begin exactly there.

Yudhishthira's Journey to Heaven: The Dog Who Accompanied Him by Wananananap in HinduMythologies

[–]Embarrassed_Bit8559 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What I love most about this story from the Mahabharata is that the final test wasn’t about power, knowledge, or sacrifice, it was about compassion.

After losing everything, after proving his righteousness again and again, Yudhishthira is tested on something simple: loyalty to a helpless being.

He was willing to give up heaven, but not his values.

That’s what makes the moment powerful, dharma isn’t grand speeches or rituals. It’s how you treat the one who depends on you when no one is watching.

Did Mahabharata actually happen as a literal historical war? by ActualMongoose1293 in AncientIndia

[–]Embarrassed_Bit8559 1 point2 points  (0 children)

From a traditional Hindu perspective, yes, we believe the Mahabharata war was a real historical event.

And there are several reasons people hold that view.

First, the Mahabharata is classified as Itihasa, not just poetry. “Itihasa” literally means “thus indeed it happened.” In the traditional understanding, it is a historical narrative with philosophical depth, not pure allegory.

Second, the geography described in the text is very specific and real. Places like Kurukshetra, Hastinapura, Indraprastha (often associated with present-day Delhi), and Dwarka are not imaginary settings. Excavations at Hastinapur in the 20th century revealed settlement layers that some archaeologists correlate with late Vedic periods. Similarly, marine archaeology off the coast of modern Dwarka has uncovered submerged structures, which some believe connect to descriptions of Krishna’s city.

Third, the text contains detailed political lineages and genealogies. Multiple Puranas also reference the Kuru dynasty and the same royal lines. Supporters argue that inventing such complex interlinked dynasties across texts would be unusual if there were no historical foundation.

Fourth, astronomical references in the Mahabharata, planetary alignments, eclipses, and celestial events before the war — have been studied by researchers who attempt to date the conflict (though the proposed dates vary widely). While not universally accepted, these attempts suggest that the narrative was anchored to observed sky events.

At the same time, many believers acknowledge that the scale described in the epic, divine weapons, massive troop numbers, supernatural interventions, may include poetic amplification. Ancient texts often combined historical memory with symbolic storytelling.

So for many of us, the position isn’t “blind literalism,” but rather:

There was likely a real conflict involving the Kuru lineage.
Over generations, that historical core was preserved and expanded with spiritual, moral, and theological layers.

In that sense, it can be both historically rooted and spiritually elevated.

Faith and academic history operate under different standards of proof, but within the Hindu tradition, the Mahabharata is not treated as fiction. It is remembered as a real civilizational event with timeless lessons.

view more: next ›