Interesting Argument between a Doctor and a Lawyer (Post No.6358)

Written by London swaminathan

Date: 8 May 2019
British Summer Time uploaded in London –
9-13 am

Post No. 6358

Pictures shown here are taken from various sources including google, Wikipedia, Facebook friends and newspapers. This is a non- commercial blog. ((posted by AND


Written by London Swaminathan


Date: 30 October 2017


Time uploaded in London- 16-24



Post No. 4351

Pictures shown here are taken from various sources such as Facebook friends, Books, Google and newspapers; thanks.

Satapata Brahmana is one of the important Brahmanas, part of the Vedic literature. It says,

“Devas, men, fathers (pitrs=departed souls) and Asuras approached Prajapati. One walked after another and asked him in what manner they have to live. He ordains for each.

To ‘the men clothed and bending their bodies’ ,

‘Your eating shall be in the morning and in the evening’.

The devas were told the sacrifice was to be their food.

The fathers/Pitrs were told to eat only monthly in Moon light;

The beasts (animals) can eat whatever and whenever they liked, in season or out of season

To the Asuras he gave darkness and illusion (Tamas and Maya):-

“Neither the gods/devas nor the Pitrs , nor beasts transgress (their several ordinances); some of the men alone transgress theirs. Hence whatever man grows fat, he grows fat in unrighteousness, since he totters and unable to walk because of his having grown fat by doing  wrong. One should therefore eat in the evening and morning; whosoever knowing this eats only in the evening and in the morning, reaches full measure of life, and whatever he speaks , that  is true. Because he observes the divine truth –Sat.Br.2-4-2-6

In Tamil Poetry book Neethi Venba, there is a verse which says, “Yogis eat once a day, healthy men eat twice a day, Rogis eat thrice a day (gluttons, those who want to fall sick; rogam=sickness)  those who want to leave the earth quickly eat four times a day”.


A dispute once took place between Mind and Speech as to which was the better of the two. Both Speech and Mind said, ‘I am excellent’.

Mind said, ’surely I am better than you. For you do not speak anything that is not understood by me (mind).  And since you are only an imitator of what is done by me and a follower in my wake I am surely better than you’.


Speech said ‘surely I am better than you, for what you know, I make known. I communicate’


Both of them went to appeal to Prajapati for hi decision. He, Prajapati, decided in favour of mind, saying to Speech, ‘Mind is indeed better than you for you are an imitator of its deeds and a follower in its wake’.


Then Speech (Vach) being thus gainsaid was dismayed and miscarried. She, speech, then saidt  Prajapati,

‘May I never be your oblation bearer, I whom you have gainsaid’.


Hence whatever at the sacrifice is performed for Prajapati, that is performed in a low voice; for Speech would not act as oblation bearer for Prajapati- Sat. Bra. 1-5-1-8

(My comments: These symbolic stories show that the Vedic Hindus were very literate and they can even use speech and language for conveying some message.)


Here is an illustration of statecraft following the philosophy of Speech and Mind:

“Let him draw the cups of Soma for Indra Marutvat (accompanied by the Maruts), and not for the Maruts likewise. For were he to draw cups for the Maruts, he would make the people refractory to the nobility. He thus assigns to the Maruts a share therin after Indra, whereby he makes the people subservient and obedient to the nobility—4-3-3-10


Gods and evil spirits were originally soulless and mortal They become immortal by putting in their inmost being the immortal fire—2-2-2-8


In their originally mortal condition, they used to live on earth. But the gods grew, it is said, tired of man’s endless petitions and fled—2-3-3-4



The gods abhorred the Ribhus, on account of their human smell. The gods placed two Dhayyas between the Ribhus and themselves because of the human smell of the former- Aitareya Brahmana 3-30


The sun would not rise if the priests did not make sacrifice- Sat. Br.2-3-1-5




Be Exemplary!

The months follow one another as they do because in a certain ceremony one priest follows another:-

“Were to both walk out together, were to both enter together these months would assuredly pass separated from one another; therefore, while out walks the one, in steps the other—Sat Br.3-1-7-11


–subham, subham–

Serious Argument between Rama and Bharata on Two Words! (Post No.4332)

Written by London Swaminathan


Date: 24 October 2017


Time uploaded in London- 16-42



Post No. 4332

Pictures shown here are taken from various sources such as Facebook friends, Books, Google and newspapers; thanks.


Serious Argument between Rama and Bharata on Two Words! (Post No.4332)

All of us know the outline of Ramayana, one of the two great Hindu epics in India. Ramayana has got lot of materials on Dharma or righteousness. During the meeting of Bharata and Rama in the forest, each one tried to outsmart the other. The context is Bharata persuading Rama to return to Ayodhya and take over the reins. Most of us miss the minute points; only those who read it in full original slokas (Sanskrit couplets) will observe and digest those things. Right Honourable Silver tongue V S  Srivasa sastri gave some lectures on Ramayana in 1944 touching those minute and very useful points. Madras Sanskrit Academy arranged those talks. He gave 30 lectures on Valmiki Ramayana.


Here is an excerpt: –

In the middle of the argument Bharata says, “Have pity on me. It was when I was away that Kaikeyi behaved in this fashion, fancying that it would please me. She deserves to be severely punished but I don’t punish her because I am afraid of violating the rule of Dharma. I am also afraid of your serious displeasure. As for my father, Dasaratha, he was an old man and a dotard. He was in the hands of my mother. The old saying has it that people weaken in their old age, become somewhat senile,

‘anta kale hi bhutaani muhyantiti puraa sruthi:’

This old saying has abundantly testified to by our father. (V R 2-106-8 to 14)



Then Bharata ventures on advising his own elder brother!

You know the word APATYA means son. It is grammatically neuter in gender but it means son. It comes from a peculiar belief that the son saves father from ‘falling’ (apatya), that is, from perdition we say. That is why he is called APATYAM. He prevents father’s fall. Bharat uses the word in its literal sense and ventures his brother in the truth.

Bharata says to Rama,

“Our father thinking that he was under some obligation or perhaps in fear of the anger of the wife, whatever it was, through some mistake, passed an unjust order. The transgression of our father, you had better undo it. Put it right. Father did wrong some mistake, may be he was a fool.

He is called a son in this world who when the father has gone wrong, puts the matter right:

piturhi samatikraantam puto ya: sadhu manyate- 2-106-15

If a son doesn’t do it but obeys his father in the wrong course, then he must not be called APATYA (preventing falling). He helps his father’s fall, brings it about. You had better be an APATYA.

Maa Bhavaan duskrtam pitu:- 2-106-16

Do not carry out the wrong order passed by the father. Do not confirm him in the error of his ways and thus bring down Heaven’s punishment on him. Do the right thing and save him”

See how a clever man can twist things to his own purpose.


(After giving new interpretation to the word Apatya, Bharata shows all those assembled in support of his request that Rama should return to Ayodhya)

Right Honourable Srinivasa sastri continues……………

“Then Sri Rama Says: You think that I , being the eldest son, must obey father and that you need not. Is that your opinion? Father has laid on me one duty,  going to the forest. He has laid on you another duty, being king at Ayodhya and ruling the kingdom. You forget that is your duty. Go and get yourself crowned. Do not waste time here. Carry out your father’s wish as I  carrying out his wish.

Please your mother by carrying out your father’s wish.”

Significance of going to Gaya Kshetra

Rama continues……….

“There was once a great mannamed Gaya who in the place called Gaya performed a great Yajna and saved his Pitris (departed souls).That man having saved his Pitris has laid it down for posterity.


putraamno naarakaadhyasmaatpitaram traayate suta:

tasmaan putra iti prokta: pitruun ya paathi sarvata: (2-107-12)


Because a son saves the father from the Naraka called ‘Put’ by performing what is called Ishtaputra, be it in wealth, in temples and so on, he is called PUTRA. A son who performs these benevolent offices and dedicates them for the benefit of his father is called a PUTRA.”

Now Rama says to Bharata,

You had better be a PUTRA. You asked me to be an APATYAM, I ask you to be a PUTRA.


(Both Putra and Apatyam meant the same; but Bharata gave a new interpretation and Rama corrected him by explaining Putra)


The prescription is that the man should bear many sons. One wont do, no, not even two; for life is subject to so many mutations and vicissitudes. We want one son at least to go to Gaya and perform Sraddha.


Now, ladies and gentlemen, how famous must this Gaya must have been for it to get this sanctified flavour even in the  time of Sri Rama! What an ancient place it must have been! One must wish to get many sons of whom someone may go to and perform Sradhdha.


At the end Rama outsmarted Bharata by using the word Putra which has the same meaning of Apatyam.


Socrates – A True Citizen of Athens!


Compiled by London swaminathan

Post No.2223

Date: 7   October 2015

Time uploaded in London: 21-34

Thanks for the pictures.

Don’t use pictures. Don’t reblog for at least a week.

Greek philosopher Socrates lived in Athens. He was preaching his philosophy in Athens, which the rulers did not like. Therefore they brought up a false case against him. They accused him of poisoning the youth of Athens with his bad teachings. In the end he was imprisoned and sentenced to death.

Hearing of this, Plato, Creto and his other disciples were deeply grieved. Therefore some of them were planning to get him out of prison secretly. They even made arrangements to this effect. But they feared that Socrates would never agree to their plan. So they sent Creto to persuade him.

One early morning, Creto entered the prison. He saw that Socrates was sleeping soundly on a cot. Socrates knew that he had only forty eight hours to live. He seemed to be absolutely unconcerned about it. Creto did not want to disturb him and so he sat down in a corner.

After sometime Socrates woke a up and Creto conveyed his and other disciples’ wish. He told him that all were bent upon releasing him by breaking open the prison.


But Socrates said no and continued, “The laws of Athens and the people of Athens may have done injustice to me. But for the reason we should also commit an injustice, is not proper. To counter lie with a lie and evil with an evil is not ethically right. Thus have I always held. It is therefore unworthy of me to escape from prison stealthily. I was brought up by the state, married according to her laws; nay, I even joined the army to defend her – all these things I did as part of the duty of a citizen. If I so wished I could have migrated to another state, for nobody can compel me to stay here. But by staying here I have accepted all the rights and responsibilities of a citizen. Today I may be guilty in the eyes of the people and that too, assuming for the sake of argument, unjustly. But I have been sentenced according to the laws of the State. Now if I accept your advice and run away, don’t you think that I shall be shaking the very foundation of laws of the land? And thereby will I not be harming the state and the citizens? Creto to act like this will be to return evil for evil”.