melvin

When there`s an agreement it means it`s a closed deal. That both have reached a consensus and approval on a subject discussed either lengthily or briefly. That`s why there are threads losing steam earlier because all who participated in the exchange agreed with no more questions asked from the thread starter. However, there are threads that go the distance because the participants find interest in the subject being presented. When a thread appears animated members and guests are driven to visit and share their own or group views in order to agree or disagree. If the majority agrees or disagrees then there`s no point in continuing the discussion. The thread is closed UNLESS THERE`S A VALID DISSENTING OIPINON to keep it open. Why is the game of Golf only have 18 holes? It`s to make sure that players won`t find other holes to sink their balls into.

Wrong, Theist. The Absolute Truth also reveals Himself when He`s approached by one with a combative mood in the case of Nrsimha Vs Hiranyakasipu as Death persona. Patience is more correct when approaching Him in a humble state of mind if we want God to reveal His real Self to us in Lord Caitanya Vs Sarvabhauma Battacharya as The Guru.

The new Hindu is akin to a born-again Christian. That is if there`s such a word as a born-again Hindu.

Mental models aren`t perfect. To test these models in reality is surreal since what we know to be reality is an illusion. So, how`d we know these logical models arrived at are valid when the mental models to begin are speculative? The result or knowledge taken from these models are conclusions shotful of holes. They easily sink to the bottom when confronted with the reality stated in the Vedas.

I`m just redefining what Theist has already said. That knowledge of God can never be discerned by mental or mathematical theories or even transcendental logic. It`s only when logic or thinking stops that we begin to know God. He reveals Himself to us only if we believe what He says in the Vedic scriptures. Quantum physicists don`t accept the Truth found in Srimad Bhagavatam or Bhagavad-gita. They`d rather use mathematical formulas and computerized models in knowing the Truth. Such endeavor is a waste of time and money. They`d rather spend billions of dollars in sending satellite probes to outer space than using these resources to feed billions of hungry souls. Why the US government continue to fund these scientific programs to me defies logic.

Sant, I don`t know the difference from a Hindu and a Neo-Hindu. What I know is that the word neo-phyte means beginner or someone who`ve just began learning an art or vocation. Certainly, Sambya is no beginner on Hinduism. But if Neo means New, same as we label modern Nazis as Neo-Nazis, then Sambya`s views as I see them fittingly describes him to be a Neo-Hindu or Modern Hindu. And Chandu whose views are the very opposite of Sambya`s are traditionally Old-Hindu.

Where logic ends, knowledge of God begins.

In this modern times, women wants to act like men and men acting like women( a reversal of roles). If a survey were done, perhaps there are more women wearing pants than men in every part of the globe. The title of this thread should have been: The Qualities of a Good Husband not Wife.

Boy meets girl. They fell in love. Both wants to get married. They bear fruits, children. They are fed and educated until they become responsible citizens. The children leave home. Now, husband and wife are back to where they were before. This is typical of a married life. If the wife didn`t possess good qualities of being a mother, the children are left behind to fend for themselves dependent on the father who decided to work abroad. While the wife is with her lover, the husband probably is living in one roof with another wife. What really is a good wife? She serves unconditionally her husband and the children under her care. She does everyting to please them but firm and brave to discipline anyone in the family least they go astray. She`s not extravagant but thrifty. She`s a good cook. She knows how to budget the family`s expenditures. She`s the homely type and does not often go out with friends to enjoy the illusory things in life. If there`s a wife and mother who fits the above criteria, she`s no other than Mother Yasoda. I wonder how Krsna and Nanda Maharaj behaved later in life if Putana became Krsna`s step mother and Nanda Maharaj`s second wife.

Ideally, a good wife, should acquire 25 or less qualities Srimati Radharani possessed to control her husband. But if she has no will to obtain them, a good wife must learn to tolerate her husband`s indiscretion. Even if she knows her husband`s playing with fire.

I don`t know, Sant. Why dasrath did not go to Visnu-loka when he remembered Raam. Maybe there`s an unfinished business dasrath had to deal with when he took Raam`s name and died.

Of course, you never wrote that. To para phrase my previous statement: " It`s a nice piece of work, Sant, you pasted on this thread.":)

Nice work, Sant:)

If God is good then why did Bilvamangla Thakur label Krsna a naughty boy? Remember it was Cintamani who caused Bilvamangala`s conversion to accept bhakti-yoga instead of becoming one with the Supreme. That during his life, Bilvamangala contacted a naughty boy. That we know for a fact it was Krsna whom he was referring to. Did Krsna and Cintamani exchange roles when Bilvamangala Thakur visited Cintamani? That it was Krsna whom Bilvamangala met instead of Cintamani inside the prostitute`s house?

Opps, I`m sorry. I`ve missed the boat.

Bilvamangala Thakur life`s had a semblance to Ajamila considering that both fell from their respective positions due to their association with prostitutes.The former was irresistably attracted to one whose name was Cintamani. Bilvamangala even braved crossing the river`s raging waters just to get to her house on the opposite side. Instead of reaping sin for his irreverent attitude, Bilvamangala Thakur was suprisingly convinced by Cintamani a pure-devotee of Krsna to take up bhakti-yoga. If Ajamila`s downfall came from a woman of ill-refute, Cintamani a prostitute was instrumental in Bilvamangala Thakur`s conversion, who later in life, lamented;" I was situated a monist in order to become one with the Supreme, but somehow or other I contacted a naughty boy and became His eternal servitor." I don`t know, Theist, if Christ or Allah is naughty.

Mathematical equations or models in describing the Absolute Truth is still material to me, Primate. Only a transcendental mathematical equation or model can describe in full the Absolute Truth. Thus the saying, " It takes a thief to know one(a thief ).":)

I don`t know what`s the principle of namabhasa, Theist. What I know was Ajamila used to be a brahmana. But got attracted to a prostitute. Later became sinful having sex with different ones. Ajamila may have completely forgotten God. And perhaps it was his luck to have named his youngest son Narayana. When it was Ajamila`s time to be taken, grotesque-looking messengers of Yamaraja came with ropes eagerly wanting to take this sinful man to hell. Fearful upon seeing them, Ajamila, called out Narayana, his son whom he was so fond with. At that instant, the messengers of Visnu arrived and forbade the messengers of Yamaraja to take Ajamila away to hell. To resolve to whom should Ajamila`s soul go, they took him to Yamaraja, the King of Hell, himself. Yamaraja`s messengers wanted an explanation as to why Ajamila, a very sinful man, shouldn`t not languish in hell according to Visnu`s messengers. When the latter cited why, Yamaraja, immmediately broke down and cried after the name Narayana was mentioned. For how could he forget his Lord, that wonderful flute player of Vrndavan who is Narayana himself. After describing Narayana to his messengers they with finality were ordered not to approach and take a sinful man like Ajamila again or else. Just like in a dream, Ajamila got back his life after waking up from the deep slumber of maya`s illusory energy. Who says Ajamila didn`t go home back to Godhead, Theist? If Lord Caitanya didn`t advocate chanting the Hare Krsna maha-mantra then there`s no sense further of doing so if one can just easily erase his sins by chanting the names Christ or Allah. Krsna`s names ( Narayana, Govinda, etc.) are above all the other names not found in the Vedic scriptures.

Only a lover of God can be saved? If Ajamila named his son Christ instead of Narayana would that have saved him from going to hell?

Yes, Theist. It`s best to stop this exchange of views when one can`t get a clearer picture presented by the other. Then we move on to another topic. There are so many important topics we haven`t yet touched and scratching the bottom is perhaps the least of our concerns. The easiest part I guess in a conversation is talking.The hardest part is when to stop and start listening.

Did I say that, Theist? What I said is that if I offer a leaf, flower, grain or water to God and I accepted it means the offering is not for myself but to the Superself within me. This is only applicable when you`re in the desert or island and there`s no nobody around but you. Where will you offer your food and drink to when you`re alone and don`t have God`s icon or deity with you? It`s mayavadism when I offer God meat and I accept it ( if it`s the only way to survive in the desert ). Or when I offer God fish and I accept it even if there are lots of coconut trees on the island.

In the New Testament of the Bible, there`s no verse describing in full what Christ looks like. Unlike in Srimad Bhagavatam where there is a verse describing Krsna sporting a long black wavy or curly hair, eyes in the shape of a lotus petal, smiling lips with bluish black skin. In short, followers of Christ who chants his name don`t have a clear picture whether his hair is long, black or curly; whether his skin is black or white; whether his eyes are big or small. The general consensus however is that Christ has the features of a Jew. But how do we know? Mary and Joseph wasn`t the biological parents of Christ. So, that rules out Christ resembling a Jew. Maybe Christ was created in Krsna`s image. If Christ is an English word, Kristo a Greek word, and Krsna a Sanskrit word. Then chanting the names Krsna Jai instead of Christ Jesus does make sense to me if I were a Christian born in India or Kristo Jesu if I were a Christian born in Greece.

What`s the difference between Krsna and Christ? Are they both the same? Would I achieve liberation or self-realization if I chant, " Oh Lord Oh Lord Christ my Lord Alleluja Oh Lord Oh Lord Christ my Lord Alleluja Oh Lord Oh Lord Christ my Lord Alleluja " Any view from you would be most welcome.

Don`t you remember, Theist, my religion is Catholicism? That Christianity is mayavadism? Bhakti yoga is Vaishnavism when we put Krsna at the center of our hearts. But when we place Christ as the center of our worship then that`s mayavadism. But when we think that Krsna and Christ are simultaneously one and different then that is acintya-bheda-abheda if we believe Krsna is bigger than Christ.