Oh, so beautiful. Imagine growing up with these exciting stories. How grateful I am that you're telling them now, Deepak! How grateful I am that I'm alive :)

Ramana replied, “He learned that when Death comes to grab you, let him grab God instead. If God is in you, Yama’s noose will always miss. What is your soul but a speck of god inside you? That is the secret for escaping his clutches.”

profound and simple
yet we are humans are such complex people
"the secret is within"

Thanks Deepak for sharing.

love and peace
ashie

In one of Deepak Chopra's books, he tells a story about a young boy who had actually changed some of his own DNA (I believe the boy accomplished this in response to his mother's urging that he get well.)

Which book was that? I'm desperately trying to find out! Thank you!

Dear Deepak

You are a wonderful storyteller. Thanks for being like a father to all your readers, sharing your stories with us.

love, Heath

@Choprareader, comment #3-- I have not read the book, but found this link a while bank, on DNA Activation. I believe I posted it at Intentblog somewhere, when I'd found it; but, here it is again... wish I could help you with the book you seek though, but Im sure someone else will eventually...

http://www.dnaperfection.com/index.html

with loving kindness,
North

Dearest Deepak,
I have read many of your books and everyday try to be passionate yet detached... The group I work with provides education and networking to build sustainable community by focusing in areas of ecological restoration, social justice and health. Would you come and do a speaking event for us during our conference next year?

So confused, I am.

God kicked Yama who then died? But Yama's a God

if he is eternally present.

God gave Yama his life back, because people were

too used to dying. Funny!

But first God had to realise this?

I thought He/She/It was omnignostic.

Or was that omniscient with a capital O?

You mean we've had no reason to die, all this time?

And, and, and we keep coming back because we're forgetful?

Oh, yeah...about the soul "thang"...

A speck of God, small because Yama's hands are really big.

A point of Light in the state of Now-here,

shining brightly for Ever to Every-there!

Am I gettin' it or what?

Deepak: Like the others here, am very much enjoying the ongoing storytelling that has so influenced your life from your early years--like Carl Jung's directive to go back to your greatest passions of early youth to find your real purpose--you've come full circle then.

This series also reminds me of a truly beloved movie--a Westernized version of Yama being likened unto the character Brad Pitt portrays in "Meet Joe Black."

Have also recently been digesting, and re-ingesting for further digestion, much about the contexts of the lives of Galileo, Newton, Einstein, and Stephen Hawking--with the internal compass seeming to be directed straight at Hawking's "Information Paradox"--I find it fascinating how consistently each of these four, appearing so diverse in their outer lives, and yet all marked as being extremely intuitive and visual in their capacity "to see" outside of the conventional boxes of their times--all scorning conventional scientific wisdom of their times.

I am particularly enjoying the back-and-forth between Hawking and the Stanford professor who took on his great question of how the universe appears to be disappearing in bits, only to come again to the merging of what Prof. Susskind has proposed at the Event Horizon of Black Holes--and Hawking being pushed into his own black hole through pnuemonia, to come back with the alternate universes countering back--one's with no black holes and the ultimate conversation of energy and information.

I think that Stephen then, with his four-decade+ defiance of Yama, is becoming the Ram in Ramana!

I've mentioned this before, many times, but your audio books characterized by your storytelling of universal principals as illustrated by the timeless legendary "myths" are my favorite works--due to your ability to integrate them with the cutting-edge sciences, both "soft and hard"--and especially "theoretical" extracts--with the Universal Heart that is present in all the great inner-spiritual teachings within the great religions of the world.

Thank You--with Much Love, Dave

For those who did not grew up listening to stories from Indian Mythology, Ramayana, Mahabarata etc, here is the back ground story for Savitri's war of wits with Yama, The god of death( Savitri is the ideal wife devoted to her husband, which every Indian girl is supposed to emulate.)

Savitri and Satyavan:
(From Wikipedia)

The oldest known version of the story of Savitri and Satyavan is found in "The Book of the Forest" of the Mahabharata.

The myth occurs as a multiply embedded narrative in the Mahabharata told, most immediately, by Markandeya. When Yudhisthira asks Markandeya whether there has ever been a woman whose devotion matched Draupadi’s, Markandeya replies by relating this myth. The childless king of Madras, Asvapati, lives ascetically for many years and offers oblations with the savitri formula. Finally the Goddess Savitri appears to him and grants him a boon, cautioning him not to complain: he will have a daughter. She is born and named Savitri in honor of the Goddess. Savitri is born out of devotion and asceticism, traits she will herself practice. We learn that the king is joyful at the prospect of a child, but the story hides his internal thoughts from the audience, allowing them to provide their own interpretation.

When Savitri reaches the age of marriage, no man asks for her hand, so her father tells her to find a husband on her own. She sets out on a pilgrimage for this purpose and finds Satyavat, the son of a blind king named Dyumatsena, living in exile as a forest-dweller. Savitri returns to find her father speaking with Narada who announces that Savitri has made a bad choice: although perfect in every way, Satyavat is irretrievably destined to die one year from that day. In response to her father’s pleas to choose a more suitable husband, Savitri insists that she will choose her husband but once. After Narada announces his agreement with Savitri, Asvapati acquiesces. This is Savitri’s first conflict with a powerful male figure: her father the king. Savitri’s argument rests on the authority of her mind. She says, “Having made the decision with my mind, I am stating it with my speech, and shall accomplish it with my actions later. My mind is my authority.” Savitri overcomes worldly power by appealing to the spiritual authority of her family’s guru and her own interior self.

Savitri and Satyavat are married, and she goes to live in the forest. Immediately after the marriage, Savitri takes on the clothing of a hermit and lives in perfect obedience and respect to her new parents-in-law and husband. She goes beyond all expectations of proper behavior.

Three days before the foreseen death of Satyavat, Savitri takes a vow of fasting and vigil. Her father-in-law tells her she has taken on too harsh of a regime, but Savitri replies that she has taken an oath to perform these austerities, at which Dyumatsena offers his support. This is her second conflict with a powerful man, and she again appeals to a higher, spiritual commitment that he must recognize.

The morning of Satyavat’s predicted death, Savitri asks for her father-in-law’s permission to accompany her husband into the forest. Since she has never asked for anything during the entire year she has spent at the hermitage, Dyumatsena grants her wish. The story juxtaposes the devotion of Savitri to her father, parents-in-law, and husband with several critical moments where she defies their wishes. She justifies her defiance, which takes the form of devotion and asceticism, through an appeal to a higher authority. She is being even more self-sacrificing and more devoted than the people around her expect, but she simultaneously demonstrates her strength and independence.

While Satyavat is splitting wood, he suddenly becomes weak and lays his head in Savitri’s lap. Yama himself comes to claim the soul of Satyavat. Savitri follows Yama as he carries the soul away. When he tries to convince her to turn back, she offers successive formulas of wisdom. First she praises obedience to the Law, then friendship with the strict, then Yama himself for his just rule, then Yama as King of the Law, and finally noble conduct with no expectation of return. Impressed at each speech, Yama praises both the content and style of her words and offers any boon except the life of Satyavat. She first asks for eyesight and a return to the throne for her father-in-law, then sons for her father, and then sons for herself and Satyavat. Finally Yama offers any boon without exception, and Savitri chooses Satyavat’s life. This is Savitri’s final and most dramatic conflict with a powerful male figure: Yama, the god of death. Yama clearly occupies the position of strength, but Savitri manages to overcome even death. Her argument lies in appealing to the Law, above even Yama.

Savitri returns to Satyavat’s body who awakens as though he has been in a deep sleep. In order to console his parents who they fear must be worried, they set out to return that evening, Satyavat assisted by his wife. Meanwhile at their home, Dyumatsena regains his eyesight and searches with his wife for Satyavat and Savitri. As the ascetics comfort and counsel the distraught parents, Savitri and Satyavat return. Since Satyavat still does not know what happened, Savitri relays the story to her parents-in-law, husband, and the gathered ascetics. As they praise her, Dyumatsena’s ministers arrive with news of the death of his usurper. Joyfully, the king and his entourage return to his kingdom. Likewise, all the other boons happen. Markandeya assures Yudhisthira and the other exiles that Draupadi will also save them.

Source: The Mahabharata vol. 2, tr. J.A.B. van Buitenen (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975)

Harishchandra(whose name had become synonymous with Satya or Truth) is another hero, who follows the path of truth and duty and brings back his dead son back to life.

This is a story which every person who grew up in India might have heard. The first Indian Movie ever made was the movie "Raja Harishchandra" in the year 1913. It is a popular tale which preaches one to stay on the path of truth and do one's duty even on the face of extraordinary struggles.

The Legend of Harishchandra's ideal life:
(From Wikipedia)

It is said that the great sage Vishwamitra, once approached Harishchandra and informed him of a promise made by the king during the sage's dream to donate his entire kingdom. (Accounts differ on how the sage had got the promise from the king. Some other legends say, it was by way of pacification when the king had once disturbed the sage's penance to his consternation.) Harishchandra was so virtuous, that he immediately made good his word and donated his entire kingdom to the sage and walked away with his wife and son.

Since, the entire world was under the sage after he donated his kingdom, the king had to go to Varanasi, a holy town dedicated to Lord Shiva. This was now the only place outside the influence of the sage. But, the sage, proclaimed that for an act of donation to be completed, an additional amount as Dakshina (honorarium) had to be paid. Harishchandra, with no money in his hands, had to sell his wife and son to a Brahmin Grihastha to pay for the Dakshina. When the money collected still did not suffice for the purpose, he sold himself to a guard at the cremation ground, who was in charge of collecting taxes for the bodies to be cremated.

The king, his wife and son had to sustain tremendous hardships doing their respective chores. The king helped the guard cremate the dead bodies, while his wife and son were used as household helpers at the house of the Brahmin. Once, the son had been to the garden to pluck flowers for his master's prayer, when he was bitten by a snake and he died instantly. His mother, having nobody to sympathise for her, carried his body to the cremation grounds. In acute penury, she could not even pay the taxes needed to cremate him. Harishchandra hearing her wails, came to her and recognised her as his wife and was stung by pangs of agony.

But, Harishchandra, was dutybound by his job to perform the cremation only after the acceptance of the tax. So, he asked his wife, if she was willing to undergo further hardships and stand by him in this hour of calamity. The faithful wife readily gave assent. She had in her possession only a saree, a part of which was used to cover the dead body of her son. She offers half of her lone dress as the tax, which Harishchandra could accept and perform the last rites of his son. When she proceeded to remove her dress, miracles happened.

Lord Vishnu, Indra and all Devas and the sage Vishwamitra himself manifested themselves on the scene, and praised Harishchandra for his perseverance and steadfastness. They brought his son back to life. They also offered the king and his wife, instant places in heaven. The virtuous king, refused saying that he cannot leave behind his subjects, by Kshatriya Dharma. He asked for a place in heaven for all his subjects. But the gods refused, explaining that the subjects had their own Karma and they have to undergo them. The king was then ready to forego all his virtues and religiousness for his people, so that they could ascend to heaven leaving him behind. The gods, now immensely pleased with the unassailable character of the great king, offered heavenly abode to the king, the queen and all their subjects.

The sage Vishwamitra helped to populate the kingdom again and installed Harishchandra's son as the king.

This moving story affected one of the greatest men of the 19th-20th century, Mahatma Gandhi who was deeply influenced by the virtues of telling the truth when he watched the play of Harischandra in his childhood.

I apologize if this isn't really the proper place, for this, but it is the only means of contacting you I could find...ahem...

Sir, if I may approach you about this. Recently, I answered the question you asked, about the soul, on Yahoo Answers. My point in approaching you, now, is neither to make you aware of this, nor to promote the answer I provided. Nonetheless, after reading the answer you gave, to the question about the afterlife, I think you may do well to consider the response I gave your question. It is on page 585 of the answers. Because, it seems to me that you may be among those, who have allowed personal preference to interfere with objectivity in reasoning. If I may point out the flaws in the points which you claim as evidence supporting the existence of an afterlife…

1. Near death experiences, in which the person in question experiences aspect(s) of the afterlife, while in a brain dead state.

Flaw: There must be some period of time, between when a person loses consciousness, and when they enter the brain dead state. As well as a similar period, as they emerge from that brain dead state. Have you ever woken up, and remembered a dream you had, during the night? Yes? Have you ever been able to say exactly what time you had it, or how long it actually lasted? Of course not. Your assertion assumes that these people had these experiences while in a brain dead state. It seems much, much more likely to me that they had these experiences either just before, or just after “death”. Regardless, your claim does not hold, as evidence, unless you can prove that they actually did have these experiences WHILE they were brain dead.

2. Near death experiences in traditional cultures.

Flaw: As I see it, this piece of information does more to disprove the afterlife than it does to prove it. Every religion has members who have experienced that religion’s version of the afterlife. This gives us two basic possibilities. One, one’s afterlife is actually determined by what one believes. Or two, the brain creates these experiences, based on what one believes. Personally, since we have nothing to support the first notion, and we are all familiar with the power of suggestion, I’m leaning toward the second explanation.

3. Children remembering past lives, and bearing a birthmark resembling they way they died in it, are you kidding me? Look, I can’t say with any certainty that I know that isn’t the case. But I will ask you, why the hell would a new physical body bear the scars that occurred in a previous life, in a completely different body, based on the soul? Nevermind, I’m sure there are hundreds of possible answers and reasons. Just bear in mind that possible and probable are not the same thing. Regardless, this falls into the same category as the bible code, and the way you can fold a 20 dollar bill in such a way that it bears an image of the world trade center burning. If you’re looking for something, you will find it. The flaw is best put by a line from poem I wrote, called “Certainty”. “You make a mistake, in the way that you reckon. Opinion comes first, observation comes second.” The point being, truth is found by making observations and drawing unbiased conclusions, not deciding beforehand what we want to believe, and distorting our perception in such a way that everything we see seems to support it. You look at a 20 dollar bill, folded a certain way, and are asked what you see. You might say, broccoli, or two cigars, or something else. But once the image of 9-11 is in your mind, once someone tells you that that is what you’re supposed to see, that is what you will see. Likewise, you see a birthmark, or two birthmarks, as in your example. Say, on someone’s arm. You wouldn’t give it a second thought. But if the person you saw them on tells you that they believe they were shot in the arm, in a past life, suddenly you see an entry wound and an exit wound. I implore you, trust me on this. This is not “striking evidence” of reincarnation. It is one of many quirks of the human mind.

4. Well, this I can’t very well refute. But to consider an experiment as credible, I would have to witness it firsthand. I do know that any experiment conducted will be as biased as the person or people conducting it. If, however, for example, a person had no physical link whatsoever between themself and a computer, and the computer was not running on a program which caused it to produce given numbers, and the person actually caused the computer to produce a desired set of numbers, and I highly doubt that that was the case, then yes, you’ve got credible evidence. But only evidence that the mind is capable of affecting things outside the physical body. Not evidence of a soul. Not evidence of an afterlife. That is jumping the gun.

5. Possible. But again, almost pure speculation. There’s a lot of “maybe” on the path to your conclusion. When combining evidence like that, every time the word “maybe”, or an equivalent, appears between the beginning of your reasoning and your conclusion, it decreases credibility exponentially.

6. There is no evidence here, at all. Yes, the brain interprets data received via the eyes, ears, nose, mouth, and nerves. Thus, we experience the world around us. After that, for all effects and purposes, all you’re doing is fantasizing. Just asking “What if?” There is nothing there to support any of what you put forth as possibilities. This is using a common version of “evidence”, which goes, “We don’t understand this, so (insert any scenario you can come up with) is possible.” And yes, yes it is possible. But then, we haven’t seen all of space yet, either. So it is possible that every single inch of space that we haven’t seen is filled with tapioca pudding. Wouldn’t you ask me why I think it is, before you buy into the theory, though?

7. Yes, I agree. But what matters isn’t that “science isn’t the only way to learn”, but rather that in order to learn, and seek the truth effectively, one cannot decide beforehand what one wants to believe. One must do one’s best to take an objective look at things. Observe and draw conclusions, not decide on conclusions, and observe only what supports those conclusions.

I am not known well enough to reach a sufficient number of people with this message. But apparently, you are. Look around. In this world, people are killing each other, and wars are being waged, because each side “knows” that the other is evil. Religious fanatics push to have their personal views and beliefs enforced as policy, resulting in blatant discrimination, and deprivation of basic rights, because they “know” that what they believe is the truth. We, as people, are losing common sense, and the ability to reason. We’ve reached a point where anything can be “proven”, and that is a catastrophe waiting to happen. There is great harm in exaggerating certainty. Don’t misunderstand, we shouldn’t understate it, either. But we need to be cautious about what we claim to “know”. Because acting on false information rarely ends well.

Such a sweet Story Telling technique...

so much to ponder...so much to think.... such is the story.... will play with my mind's kink!
Enjoying this Blog a lot........

be well
-------
TD