Amlesh

High Thinking. I guess an eye for an eye makes the world blind. True indeed are your words Theist...

It's a nice beginning.

The count has already crossed 125 victims.

Don't get personal buddy, I don't have anything to do with Obama in the personal basis.. I'll gauge him as a president. I would do the same even if Mr Pingolo would have sat there. The Definition of Anarchy does not limit to the point you've evoked but also to "inefficiency of the supreme power" --- Wiki I'll point to what the Gita says "One who sees action in action and inaction in action really sees." Sometimes action is inaction and inaction is action. Let's analyse: It is said by Sri Hari Himself in the Gita, "Even though for ME there is no obligation, Still I act." There might be an aparent contradiction with the statement of ""One who sees action in action and inaction in action really sees."" But in reality it is not so. The best example is the Non-Cooperation movement of Gandhiji. They refused to cooperate with British. They did not act, but still they acted. The result was quite evident later on... THE Indian showed the whole, what is called freedom and liberty with the power of spirit as their sole weapon. Now we might have Government like those of Hitler, that acted a lot in terms of activity.. but in reality even though action but in absolute Truth was inaction.. since such endeavors are not fruitful. If Obama is really working out some plans for the Eternal benefit of our World with some meaningful Ends then it is action else even though Working, it is in fact Anarchy. There is no use in beating around the bush or flipflopping in terms of usage of our resources. Today if this world is in this chaotic situation, it is because our near ancestors started to limit their vision due to their greed and lust. What we need is a statesmanship and not expert shows of Diplomacy. Remember any action undertaken now definitely has a repercussion in the coming future. So someone working in front of me with duplicity is infact a Kaam Chor.

Because there is a difference between a diplomat and a statesman. The former pretends to act and the latter acts. The absence that Mahak is speaking is in terms of the pristine responsibility that a President should take and not mere actions which leads to fruitless results. There is a big difference in doing and doing what should be done.

With whom people will celebrate RAKHEE then?

Perfect.

Well Sambya... I'll present you my apology. I know, sometimes my posts resemble that of an uncivilised monkey.

Refresing. Jai Sita Ram. Jai Sri Hanuman

Nope... There is no last word for spirituality. You used the word belief and I said no because.. it is not a word that is compatible with spirituality. Realisation is the an on-going process of the discoveries of the facets of the Supreme. It is never a last word. To be True.. without knowing ignorance, Truth is incomplete. Well.. many feel the same when reading the Gita. My words are context wise. Judgement is based on 3 criteria: Time, Circumstance and The object of judgement itself.

Gita does not have Material knowledge. Good... Now you'll teach me Gita. You don't beleive in the Supremacy of Speaker.. but can comment on it. Well, FYI...Gita contains all the different philosophies that exist in this world. In addition, since Gita teaches detached Activity... Anyone, from Politician to Businessman to a scanvenger sees himself and his material activities. However, the mood of execution which primes and is needed to be known. Well, you are contradicting what you've said earlier. OR you have not understood RamaKrishnaji. Cause I'm perfectly aware of that. that's what I've told u above... Material Knowledge itself becomes the cause of freedom when properly executed... The gita explains that. Why did you say Gita does not contain material knowledge. Buddy, gita is complete... If material knowlege is missing then how can it be complete. Enough of me saying, now let me hear from you.. what's ur say about the Gita?

True.. but all the approaches should lead one day or the other to that singular Truth.. The question beckons: WHEN ? I prefer the word REALISATION. nope no comments hurt me... Infact, I myself commented a lot -vely on Iskcon. I know you did not mean so... You told me. I asked for confirmation also. The game was already on, I just participated. The ISKCON doctrine is not sick but the ISKCONITES are sick, but not all, but the majority yes. Well that's the last time I'm saying anything against them though. Well, if I'm bad then you are worse. Atleast me, I say She exist but Advaitins say that She is invisible. I don't derogate her .. just like Shakta people take her for Supreme and me my Ram and others Humpty Dumpty, arguments do crop up. Well, as from today, I won't put my argument that Ram is the Supreme Lord in a debate. Unless someone sincere wants to know about Him, I won't tell about his Supremacy. I guess that settles everything. many of my questions have been left unanswered. But next time, you'll come again in the back to square 1 mood. I agree to some extent... But realisation is complete by using both material and spiritual knowledge. But how? It is where the science of Gita starts. I prefer Sri Krishna of the Gita as a teacher rather than RamaKrishna [for whom I have great respect though] My Kaarya will tell that one day. Action speaks for itself.

Perfect. That proves that my Krishna is the only one who says that you are not doomed when you don't worship him... which is non-sectarian. There is nothing bad in it. Your second definition is quite loose. Since Arjuna confirms that I see you the Supreme just the same way as Devala, Asita and Narada sees you. No chance for any loopholes. Anyways, even if it still holds true, then what's the use of differentiating Himself with Devas, in the first instance. Hmmm.... really nice. You've just said literal and other meaning. Well my friend, I'm gonna reveal something really beautiful. There is a secret when to take the literal meaning and to take other possible secondary meaning... and there is only 1 text which explains that... and that is SRI BHASYA. But it is damn complicated. Don't worry it is not sectarian.... Sri Ramanuja was perfect in his explanation concerning how to decode codes without adding his personal sentiments. BTW, he is the only one who wrote on such issues. Can't be.. who asked you to change your views. Gita is spoken to only 1 person. In the battlefield Gita was spoken to only Arjuna not even to Bhisma. A Mahatma is rare in this whole and it is a settled rule. Beleif? What's Zat? Truth, I like. I accept others views as well as part of it. You like part of Truth.... I like Truth. Everything is depicted in the degree of renunciation and love of Truth... not in only in mere reasoning. Well, there is nothing wrong in playing the game. I had already decided to remain silent. but do you still remember the episode when I first encountered you when you said something about Krishna and Iskcon. Well, you can comment and not me. That's why I came back. I love to play the game.... I don't mind you don't accept Krishna as supreme but I surface when you say Krishna is not the supreme. No need to make me understand.. I already know that part. The degree of selflessness is more though in a Vaishnava...that's the difference. Svadharama is something explained only in gita. There is nothing more selfless than that. That's why I love my sweet lord. By the way I love those impersonalist equally as such. I don't get irritated by them, I told let everyone be happy in their lala land. But don't come in my path when I'm in Selfless Duty. I remember Surdas.. when he said... If a Vaishnava get outclasses by a Mayavadi or A Mayavadi get outclassed by a Vaishnava.. The Vaishnava will be in more turmoil... Since we are attached to Him as a person and the Mayavadi not as a person. We love him in a desired relationship. However, to outclass a Vaishnava, I mean a real one..... hahahahahahaha As from today, I'll be really nice. Like a good boy. Personal Views... hmmmmm Gyan is incomplete without Vigyan.. First you learn [Gyan] then you Realise what you've learnt via day to day activities [Vigyan]. Knowledge into REalised Knowledge. I can prove all my realisation via SACRED TEXT.

Had I not seen your post when I first visited this Forum, I would not have joined Audarya. Since my very first day here, I had already put you as the standard that I would like to reach someday. I've learned from you all here and ever remain indebted to you all.

WEll, true. The Gitam however is not a Purana. It is the only scripture where the Supremacy issue has been clarified without any contradiction. Had Krishna lied, Shiva would not have come at his door step waiting for 3 days when he took birth. Neither Durga Maa coming as His sister Amlesh has his own style... Humbly... I suit myself with people I'm talking to. Those who likes to quote, I answer by quoting. Those who likes personal experience, I answer likewise. But the style what I'm still searching for, till now, I've never seen. That is not to argue in favor of one's own doctrine and show supremacy but use all knowledge acquired blended with others knowledge to build up with something concrete. If I'll count who will want to do so, then I'll be the only one. I don't mind if other don't see my Ram as supreme. But what I like is Truth. Me and my relationship of Rama is something to tough to explain.. let's remain with the rudimentary principles. Everyone have the right to remain happy in their lala land but when selfless duty is concerned then I'm ruthless to the opposing elements. As Krishna said it is a secret, so let it be a secret. True. But I'll prefer what you've just said, "Puranas can't be a gauge to outline Supremacy." But I'll tell you, I know the purpose of why each Puranas glorify each Deity. As I told you earlier, my aim is not to learn abcd like a parrot, but to use them in sentences. The same way, my aim is not to tell what I learned but to use my knowledge of some good cause. That's it. In some way or the other I'm still young.. I'm still 25... Audarya is a place where I'm learning many things. When I'll be out from this school, I want to be someone who can even love the Atheist or even the worst crap in this world. God is one without a second, the rest is his energy. Me, you and even Durga Maa. Depending on our level of Consiousness, certain amount of powers are given. Einstein with his E = MC2 explains that really well. But who gives that power, very few really knows The word Demi God is a circumstance wise word. For Hari all are his subject regardless of his garb, from cat, dog , me and devas. Those who are in spirituality, does not stress too much with that. That's why Gita says.. the wise does not see any difference between the DOG and the DOG EATER. Now you are asking about Demi God. Then Sorry dear... I've a very different way of seeing things.

In someway yes. But the outward garment is circumstance wise and should be cleared from greed though. For example, MK Gandhi.. he was happy with his full clothes but prefered half naked not for show off or act of humility but because his subjects where themselves naked, no money for clothes. Had it not been the case, he would have been well clothed. Likewise concerning his refusal to drink cow milk.. he chose not to drink because at that time Cows were not treated like one's mother.. knowing that being a politician he won't be able to do much, he chose as a matter of sacrifice not to have cows milk as a diet. The outward dressing is dependent of the inward thought but the inward thought is independent of the outward dressing. It is much of a mind game and purity, viz, renunciation of the fruit of action rather than action itself.

no blame to the Founder though, since me also I'm His Student.. but really different

Not exactly the cloth but in terms of pretense.. I mean a person pretending to be an Akarmi but is in fact a Karmi. However, I'm not too much in accord with all that. The Iskcon concept of Akarma is quite incomplete and also misleading. Some of the profound concept surrounding that issue which have been explained in the Gita have been missed. If tommorrow I leave my job and starts distributing Prasadam that does not mean from a Karmi I've become an Akarmi. Whatever job I undertaking, the inward renunciation is important. While distributing books and Prasadam, if still the thought of how much I will be able to distribute is tormenting me, then it is not yet Akarma. Action should be undertaken zealously but with staunch inward detachment.

When action is undertaken with a view for a result. However, Krishna says He prefer much a Karmi than an idle person. A karmi is much better than a Vikarmi also. Krishna proclaimed in the Gita, there is no action that He is forced to fulfill in this world, even then He act. But to understand what is really beneficial for us is the action that neither yields +ve nor -ve results, viz. Akarma.

A vaishnava accepts all the different versions of maya whereas others can't simultaneously. How... let me explain.... A Shakta point of view, it means Devi personification and that great lady is in charge of this ever lasting physical mutability. Advaitins don't beleive in personication but accepts that it is that illusion which is non-eternal. Vaishnava says yes to the theory of Advaitins as its attributes and also accepts the in charge to be the Great Devi. And that Vaishnava knows perfectly for whom that great lady is the devotee of. I've seen your viewpoint on the Vaishnavas perspective... I could not hold myself laughing. Well, that is not said by Devi maata anywhere. But Krishna said explicitely, that Maya of mine is difficult to cross.. But with my grace it becomes easy. Who's Maya. Vishnu's maya. I don't think Krishna lies... hahahahahahaha...... very funny. The only 3 beings who are eternal according to Hinduism are Shiva, Vishnu and Shesha... Now, let's analyse: See Tulsidasa's Ramcharitramanas.. Uma ask Shiva.. why do you carry a skeleton garland.. In reply... Shiva says, whenever my different wife dies yuga after yuga, I recollect their skull in her memory. Uma herself is Shakti. Even Garuda was in agony and doubted the supremacy of his Sweet Rama when he say him in the battlefield where coiled at the mercy of some snakes. and snakes fear garuda . however, all that lead to the conversation between Bushundi and Garuda. And Lords how sweet it is... the conversation.. imagine the sweetness of Sri Rama now. without Rama no chance of such nectarian words... no chance for Gandhiji to read all these inspiring words and no chance of India to get inpendence and no chance to teaching self respect by nicely kicking the then arrogant british. Again beta, hail to Sri Rama. Of course she is not a demigod but hahahahah a demi goddess. Ok, I'll stop joking. Infact it is not what Ranjeet meant. Between Hari and you, there is Maya and the only one that can help you overcome that Maya is Hari Himself. Using the Vedas to understand Hari is not the thing to do.The Vedas itself fails to comprehend him. Had it been the case, the Bhagwatam would not have been the cause to exist and also why the need for Krishna to reveal the Gita which he says is an ultimate secret. Several times you funny people tried to explain HIM via Vedas...really funny.. what else.. to make sugar out of sea water.

I guess, Jahnava is right.The only thing however one need to take care of is the approach to remedy such issues. If such thing is tolerated now, then it can become a habitual issue and seeing my Guru humiliated as such, pains me. Though I myself is against punishing but I know that more diplomatic and human approach are there to stop such narrow thinking and practice. However, it does not really mean that Iskcon is all WHITE in that issue... The preoccupying stuff is respect for the great seers of God who once graced this Earth... remember, they don't come again these people for us to beg him pardon nor it is easy to go there to seek the same. Jai Sri Ram.

Sure that version is an authentic one. It is easy to recognise, if Vishnu is subjugated then it is not Authentic... The Author has respected the views [bhava] of Ramanuja for Vishnu. In terms of materials provided also, it is genuine. What I want though is a hard copy.

Perfect and really pleasing. Many people do have that grudge that why Srila uses that word demi-god. Well, I 'm sure it is not for disrespecting but to make foreigners [whose who were unaware of the Vedic knowledge] understand the very difference between Devas and Bhagwan; atleast in explaining the Gita.

Thanks bija for outlining explanations from our school of thought which is really profound. and Theist you are simply marvelous.

The best person to answer this is Dark Warrior. He knows that best.