Amlesh

No never heard of it. So if you want to try to make the point that two wrongs make a right I can only tell you that childish argument carries no weight.

 

If you want to discuss that topic start another thread and we will.

 

Like what is happening now in Mumbai. Islamic religious demons on the attack.

 

Christians also have blood on their hands, even against other Christians. They all have the same demonic mentality. Only the religious symbols they wear distinguishes them from each other.

High Thinking.

I guess an eye for an eye makes the world blind.

True indeed are your words Theist...

With the current focus on Akshaya Patra and its functioning, some news

to consider. President-elect Barack Obama's recently wrote a letter

appreciating Akshaya Patra.

It's a nice beginning.

The count has already crossed 125 victims.

It doesn't matter if he just sits and makes no change whatsoever. He is still a government official who is officially running the government.

 

Another thing, anarchy is the lack of any sort of governmental order whatsoever. Even if we go with your interpretation - that the president elect might not do anything, making it some sort of unofficial anarchy - it still isn't an anarchy. America will still have Congress under Obama. It will still have a House of Representatives and a Senate. It will still have state governments and courts.

 

So, no matter how you feel about Obama, America, I'm almost certain, will not be an anarchy within four years time. That is, unless you think that Congress will be abolished, the Senate will be abolished, the House of Representatives will be abolished, all state governments will be abolished, and all courts in the United States will be shut down.

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.

Okay? That's all nice and good and all, but I still don't see how a president could possibly make an anarchy.

 

Leaders of governments can't make an absence of government. It's a contradiction in terms.

 

I guess you really did mean to make 'no rhyme' or use 'your reasoning abilities'.

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.

y cant bro ans sis marry ????????????????

With whom people will celebrate RAKHEE then?

No !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, Not possible.Well, most of them here have read them. You are just coming to the point offlate. No puranas or Vedas encourage such incest relationship. Now coming to your point, two males never gave birth to Ayyappa. Vishnu was in the form of Mohini. A female. No gay/lesbian relationship either is allowed in Puranas/Vedas.

 

The explanation for 'Why not?' is just simple. It needs to enjoy the support of a) Nature b) The surrounding environment c) The laws of the society.

 

Eventhough you negate point b & c, you can never negate the first point. Scientifically the gene mutation and blood samples deny a happy relationship which may result in a 1) Mentally weak child 2) Physically challanged child 3) Biological changes in the Womans body.

 

These incest relationships cannot be a part of any religion as per my knowledge coz such relationship spoil the fabric of any religion which boasts to uplift the society spiritually.

 

If you think that this is narrow-minded thinking, 'Yes' it is. Any religion has a boundry. To engage in such acts just mean that you become an athiest and not affiliate to any religion rather on digging the files of puranas/vedas to find any such incident and then boast that we havent crossed the religious barriers.

 

If you are still not convinced, read all Dharma Shastras, Vedas, Puranas, Shrutis and Smritis for yourself. If you find one, I will become your disciple.

Perfect.

Well Sambya... I'll present you my apology.

I know, sometimes my posts resemble that of an uncivilised monkey.

My life is no standard believe me. My life has yet to live up to my mouth unfortunately, but at least I have found the right path...Krishna-bhakti and friends here at Audarya to share that with. Because of these blessing the future looks bright.

 

Haribol

Refresing.

Jai Sita Ram.

Jai Sri Hanuman

ya but thats the last word of spirituallity !!!!!!!!!! none of us here have it right now !!!!!!!!!

 

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.

did i say that ?!!!!!!!!!!!!!! why are you having such negative thoughts. a bhakta should be always positive.everything about him must be positive. why do you keep assuming your bad ?!!! without believing in oneself one can never believe in god . dont you know that ??

 

To be True.. without knowing ignorance, Truth is incomplete.

it is only that some of your contradictory opinions that are really bad.

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.

its rather like - when you have realisation you automatically aqquire both material and spirituall knowledge. gita does not have any material knowledge in it.its perfectly refined spirituall knowledge . but what it does have in few places is actually deep spritual paths made easy for materialy inclined persons.

 

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.

another parable of ramakrishna :

 

a common man wanted to enter into into the palace of an aristocrat person.he was curious to see the treasures it contained and the the beutiful garden inside.but unable to enter he sat at the gates speculating about its beauty etc.then another person advised him to go and meet with the aristocrat person directly,in whatever manner posssible.when he finally met the person after lots of struggle the ownr himself described to him his riches his gardens ,how much property he has etc.

 

similarly its important to see god before doing anything else.once, having met him,he himself will let you know of his opulances(material nature).

when you have vishesh gyan you automatically have gyan also.

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?

truth cannot be plural.its essentially one.but approaches and understanding of truth vary greatly,not just quantatively as vaishnavs sugest.explanation : a vaishnav says that brahman is truth but an inferior truth resulting from a lesser degree of realization.but a vaishnav's raganuga bhakti and advaitin's nirvana may be other sides of the same coin.it may be two different aspects of the same truth itself.one does not necessarily have to be inferior to the other.

 

True.. but all the approaches should lead one day or the other to that singular Truth..

The question beckons: WHEN ?

sad that you are not aware of the concept of 'belief' for thats the only stepping stone to truth. if you dont have a belief you are not even remotely spiritual.

 

I prefer the word REALISATION.

how does my comment on iskcon hurt you ? and you should have understood that i have nothing against lord krishna ( he knows it ).i accept his supremacy and that he is purnaavatar.if i have said anything apprently against him that was not to derogate him but to protest against the sick doctrines of isckon.reading the entire discussion would make it evident.

 

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.

and still you are derogating devi , with whom countless shaktas have emotional bonds(just as you have with lord ram).

 

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.

vigayn comes from the sandhi of vishesh+gyan. so vigyan is superior to gyan . ramakrishna used to compare gayn with ishwar anubhuti and vigyan with the highest realization. both have nothing to do with ordinary material knowledge.true gyan and true vigyan both relate to god.

 

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]

you say " my realization ". thats great. what level are you in currently ?? asakti , ruchi or prema ?!!!!!!!! its good to know a person of realisation preserving a taste for futile discussions in an online forum.

My Kaarya will tell that one day.

Action speaks for itself.

texts in gita where krishna says "surrender to me" or "worship me instead of devas" have two explanations.the first explanation literally believes that krishna is asking to surrender only to him leaving out everyone else.the other understands it as krishna asking people to surrender onto god(acording to one's belief and not just in the form of krishna)

 

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.

 

as i believe in harmony of religions i accept the latter.if i accept the first interpretion i cant help myself from turning fundamentalist.for in such a case i would be perfectly convinced of krishna's supremacy over the rest. and it would also turn krishna into a tyrant

 

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.

you are speaking of synthesing religions but paradoxically believing the first explanation.

 

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.

 

great realization but you dont seem to follow them.or else you wouldnt have derogated durga in your previous posts.speaking from the viewpoint of psychology derogating other automatically amounts to glorifying yourself.similarly derogating durga implies that you wish to establish ram's supremacy.yet you say that, you don't mind if others don't see your Ram as supreme.

 

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.

for vaishnavs durga is ishwar's shakti,but to a shakta, durga is ishwari himself.thats what ive been trying to make you understand.

 

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.

i'll narrate a parable of ramakrishna that might help you to a have a better understanding and broad outlook :

 

.............once when sri ramachandra was in vanavas in forest he came across some rishis meditating on the brahman.seing ram they all bowed and said , " o ram, many say that you are purna brahman and god incarnate,but since begining we are worshippers of nirgun niraakar brahman.in our eyes you shall remain nothing more than dasharath's respected son" . hearing this ramachandra smiled , blessed them and walked away............

 

does ram get irritated with them . no !!!! he knows that he is desired by those munis in his impersonal aspect.and he respects their desires. thats why he is causelessly mercifull.

 

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

surely experssing ones personal views that dont tally with your thoughts would'nt amount to opposition ????????? oposition is when someone directly charges you . advaita might not believe in ram but dosent preach against ram . why do you have to get so violent against advaita ?you are being ruthless to an individuals freedom of thought and expression.

 

think about this.

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.

Amlesh, 25 yrs you say? Wise beyond your years my friend.

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.

hello amalesh. puranas are most contradictory scriptures in hinduism.so quoting from puranas to establish supremacy of any particular diety is baseless.because someone else might as well come up with a equally potent sloka illustrating the supremacy of his diety over all others.

 

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

this is a common mistake that iskcon is so adept at and recently you have taken recourse to.

 

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.

i did quote ,not with the intention of glorifying durga but to show to you that it is not just krishna who is given the status of supreme truth in puranas.

 

each purana seeks to glorify a particular deity to the level of highest truth. in case you disbeilieve you can check out a few puranas and find it out for yourself.till then its useles to argue.

 

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.

lastly a question :

is durga demigod or not ? answer in yes or no ..

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.

All of this strikes me as being very true. It seems as if something internal should not have to be signified by something external, like clothing.

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

Yes, yes. I understand what a karmi is, I just don't understand how you dress like one.

Is it just wearing normal clothing or what is it? When I put on jeans and a t-shirt am I 'dressing like 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.

How exactly does one dress like a 'karmi'?

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.

this is what happens with a shallow knowledge of scriptures.the concepts of maya as understood by an advaitin ,a shakta and a vaishnav are not same at all.i have discussed this in another post of mine. when i quoted from markendaya purana i spoke from the highly personalised shakta veiwpoint.advaitic 'maya' has nothing to do with shakta's 'maya'

 

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.

dont keep on doing the same mistake.you are speaking from only vaishnavite view point.want to know what the shaktas say to this ?? "yes most definitely,jagadishwari mother is rajrajeshwari.obviously she cant row a jiva across the bhava sagar(ocean of material existence).so she has kept a krishna to do the job."

 

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......

after dissolution of cosmsos vishnu came under the spell of yogamaya and entered into yoganidra.when madhu and kaitav came to kill brahma brahma tried to wake vishnu up.however unable to do so he prayed to yogamaya in the famous stava--------"twam swaha twam swadha........." . it means ,'o godess you are swaha and swadha mantra,you are the omkara,you are the mother of devas.you create , sustain and destroy.you are laxmi and supreme ishwari etc.....'

 

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.

pleased by this yogamaya left vishnu's body after which he got up to fight.but even after a thousand years of battle he could not win .then yogamaya mesmerised the danavas only after which vishnu managed to decapitate them.all this was after kalpanta or pralay.durga and vishnu are sole independent entities after this dissolution.........markendaya purana.

 

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.

lovely !!! if she's not a demigod then worshipping her is surely as fruitfull as worshipping krishna.moreover if she is not a demigod then she must be god.as god cannot be two then it conclusively implies that KRISHNA AND DURGA ARE SAME.or do you want to preach two diferent gods???!!!!!!!!

 

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.

sure sure !!!!! i forgot that our rishis and sages were idiots dressed in saffron who had nothing more to do than compose shastric riddles and jigsaw puzzles .!!!!thanks for this revelation.

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.

Since you are a Gaudiya Vaishnava, you should follow Rupa Goswami's advice in Bhakti Rasamrita Sindhu regarding what to do when a Vaishnava is offended. He gives several options based on our qualifications and abilities, none of which are "tolerate the offense to a Vaishnava and consider it a lesson in humility from Lord Krishna."

 

Your memory of the story of Jagai and Madhai seems to be a little faulty. The story is specifically about an offense to a Vaishnava, and Lord Caitanya's response was not to "tolerate that offense and consider it a lesson in humilty fom Lord Krishna". Rather Lord Caitanya wanted to punish the offenders severely. Only the person who is offended has the right to forgive the offender. None of us have the right to forgive the offenders who have offended Srila Prabhupada. It is not within our rights to tolerate it, forgive them for it, or remain humble about it. Why? Because it wasnt an offense to us. We can only tolerate our own sufferings, hardships and offenses. We have no right to tolerate someone else's sufferings, hardships or offenses.

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.

Dear Amlesh, do you think this version can be judged authentic? sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe48/index.htm (add www in the address)

I guess you already saw this one. This is the only one that is available for me and I wish I knew if it was worth reading.

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.

A demigod, (I call them Gods, because who am I to "demi" anyone), accepts the personality of GODHEAD, otherwise they cannot be Gods at all, rather great demons.

 

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.