srikanthdk71

Originally Posted by Nrsinghadev

. . . your phrasing of "when you can live in your own light..." basically sums it up.

 

By saying this you are again verifying that it is okay to brush aside one's guru's teachings. . . .

 

--------------------

Ironically guru may indicate "wise old Indian" just like srikanthdk71's family elders.

And Ironically even, I now know why you do your 'Cut & Paste' so vigourously. Come on Bhaktjan, come up with some topic of your own. Just read your own posting above and tell me whether it makes any sense at all? But from what I can sum up, I will try.

Person A may have an experience differing from Person B and so on. I cannot think like you nor can you think like others. So, your thought needs no confirmation of others. But when you experience something strange that normal beings are devoid of, you go to a seer to confirm whether what you experienced matches with his. That is where a guru comes into picture. The guru can take you to the pond but not make you drink. You have to do it. But, ironically if one is devoid of a guru like many Avadhoots, we cannot brush them aside just because they are devoid of scriptural anecdotes. That is the place where we show our ignorance to believe that what I experience should be experienced by all and what I believe should be followed by all. A guru can tell you the way but you have to tread the path yourself. A guru can be ignorant also keeping the current trend we are living. The 'Gururbrahma, Guru Vishnu...' is reverence to the lotus feet of the Guru who helps you to win on the Bandhana of Samsara.

Lastly, the 'Wise old Indian' is better than the 'Arrogant','Narrow Minded', 'Electicuted' individuals. Is it not?

Namaskar Srikanth Prabhu,

Well it appears from the last postings that at least you and Shvu are bewildered by your own philosophy, resulting in the above contradictory statements. Madhvacharya's philosophy was so strong that he converted his own advaitin guru. What's better? To be worshiped by lakhs of ignorants or to have your work praised by a handful of wise men? Quantity does not equal quality.

Nrsinghdevji Maharaj, I do not have a philosophy. Only experience. Many believe in their experience than philosopy and I am one of them maybe more rational. Incidently if experience tallies with advaita or any other philosophy one may want to live with it since it advocates the same as his/her experience.

Your personal experience is based on logic and rationality, in other words using the material faculties of mind and intelligence. In contrast, our personal experience or rather, realizations, are derived completely from the mercy of Sri Guru & Vaishnavas who preach about the absolute unchanging Truth as elucidated in the Vedic literature (The same literature on which Adi Shankara has based his teachings and which is now being disparagingly presented by you as being 'colorful tales to gratify the mind and senses'. Talking about "biting the hand that feeds you"!). As presented in the Vedas, one cannot get realization of the Supreme by his own mental faculty. Rather one has to obtain mercy of the Supreme Lord(through his devotees), so how do we obtain this mercy?

Not only me use the material faculties of mind and intelligence, but all. Even Sri Vedvyasji Maharaj or any of your or my Guru. When you dissolve your mind, you can experience the truth something like saying that your body is like a house to live for your soul.

(1) By adopting a service mentality, something which is apparently completely lacking in your philosophy. While you are busying yourself 'trying to be your own light', or in the spotlight(as quoted further down in this message), we are busy trying to serve the source of the light.

 

Purnamadah Purnamidam, or 'Ajayamano Bahudaa Vijayate' confirms the 'Tat Tvam Asi'. Yes, infact it can be interpreted in many ways to suit a philosphy but ultimately it should tally with your experience. It should not be like a 'Blind leading the Blind'.

(2) By following in the footsteps of the great acharyas of our parampara. This means follow their example and instructions, because they preach Absolute Truth. It's not that we reinvent the Absolute Truth at our own convenience, because 'our personal experience tells us so'. No. By following their instructions we are sure to be following in line with what Shastra tells us to do, which is what Bhagavan implores all jivas to do. In this way we can get realizations. How can shastra become subordinate to one's mental speculation?

Why were there so many Acharyas? Why did many preach in many different ways? It is the truth that they found with their experience. Is it not? In the same way, what harm is there in finding out the truth for yourself and not rely on the past to get confused. Yes, my dear, it is more confusing to go into theories with different perspective. But if you are satisfied, so be it.

So it's safe to conclude that yes, I'd rather be a sheep in the herd of a shepherd who knows the way, than to be a blind shepherd trying to lead the way.

When you have already decided you are blind, you will be blind for ever. So, open you eyes and start leading the pack. God gave us this material body to realise the truth and intellect to live like a leader and not a follower. Again, the submissiveness to God/Truth/Absolute is excellent, not to a theory or an individual.

(1) Adi Shankara: Lord Shiva, thus not 'just a human'

(2) Madhvacharya: Hanuman and Bhima combined, therefore not 'just a human'

(3) Lord Rama: Do I even have to dignify this with an explanation? Lord Rama is Supreme Lord, Bhagavan.

1. Did Sri Adi Shankara tell it that he was an incarnation of Lord Shiva? People assumed.

2. Since he wanted somebody to listen to him, Madhva told he is the avatar of Mukhyaprana or Vayu and he is an avatar. If you know the Chiranjeevi Stotram which goes like 'Ashwattamo Balirvyaso Hanumanascha Vibhishanah' clearly says Anjaneya is a Chiranjeevi. He is infact still cited in many parts of Himalayas. In such case, he must be doing Double Acting. Yes, Madhvacharya had immense strength and appetite.

3. In the Valmiki Ramayana, Sri Ram is explained as just an other human being with rare qualities. It was only in the Tulsidas Ramayan, Rama was glorified as the Lord from his birth. Anywhere throughout Ramayan, in any of the Khandas, you will not find Rama act unlike a human being. He was a Godly Human.

For once we agree. Yes, I'm a great fool. You are calling me a fool for explaining Advaita based on what Shvu is telling me about it. It would perhaps delight you to hear that I haven't taken his word as all-in-all regarding your philosophy. On the other hand unfortunately, he and some others seem all too keen to take the final word on Gaudiya Vaishnavism based on the opinion of a few hapless visitors who frequent this messageboard.

Also, your phrasing of "when you can live in your own light..." basically sums it up. By saying this you are again verifying that it is okay to brush aside one's guru's teachings.

I also noticed you brought Srila Prabhupada in this, even though I haven't mentioned his gracefulness at all in this thread. Thank you for bringing him to my attention. All glories to him, and although I don't need his confirmation, I do need his- and the grace of other Vaishnavas to get realization.

Hare Krishna

p.s.: I would like to thank you both for allowing me to engage in discussions about the Supreme Lord, by putting forward your arguments. By doing so, we are at least not spoiling our precious time.

Anyway dude, no offence meant. I like the way you have phrased out my briefings. I believe that no organisation can give you enlightenment because once a line of thought is institutionalised, there will be no room for any other free thinking bound in words like 'Gurudroha' or offense. You have to follow a systematic way of the institution/school whether you like it or not. It may help one to gain various positions in the institution just like a Chaprasi to a CEO, bound in various internal politics which you can see in places like Mantrayala, the original essence or the way would have been lost long long back.

http://www.tamilnation.org/culture/architecture/srirangam.htm

In the link above, you have a top view of the vastness of the Srirangam Temple. It is certainly the biggest of temples in the World.

If indeed there isn't any difference between ours, God's, and a pigs or a skunk's body, there is no point in calling God, a God, for he is just like any of us i.e. highly defective.

Justinji, I think you have completely misunderstood Ravindrans point of view. It should have been understood when he quoted the 'Purnamadah Purnamidam' to state that the BODY we are talking about is not the physical but the Soul of any creature may it be a Skunk or a pig or me or that of the Omnipresent is one and the same. It is devoid of Impurity. Impurity ends with the void of attachment of the physical. The pure is eternal. If God has a physical appearance, his infinity will be in question. Where there is Duality, there is no Moksha or Mukti.

Dark Warrior, i think you are taking things too personal and banging up with offensive language. Your scholarliness will not get any recognition if you continue to do so and will injunct Hate in the minds of people reading your posts. Calm yourself down. Do not spoil the fabric of the topic. Please..

I suppose then, that the likes of Sri Sankara, Sri Ramanuja, Sri Madhva et al. too did not do any good to Vedic Wisdom. Only you and your guru have hit upon something that just about every Vedantin missed. Kudos.

 

Now, we have a moron who talks of Veda as 'words', proposes an idea that has never been thought of by the most proficient Vedic scholars, has a half baked guru that causes him to open his inner and outer eyes, and he calls me 'ignorant'.

These two paragraphs show that you are not Ignorant, you are beyond all Yogis who didnt need books to realise, greater than a Shirdi Sai, greater than Mahavtar Baba, greater than Lahiri Mahasaya, Paramahamsa Yogananda, Ramana Maharishi, Swami Vivekananda. My Pranams to you and your seers. All these were morons or rather half baked. You are a full-fledged, full-baked Vedantin. Pranaams again.

Dear Bhaktjan Jaan, this is supposed to be an Advaita Vedanta Forum, please display your irrelevent "Cut & Paste" abilities in the ISKCON or General Forums if you cannot debate on Advaita Philosophy.

Well you can always visit an ISKCON Radha Krsna Temples, they certainly do NOT close during such an event.

Well, even Churches and Mosques are not closed, Hotels and Business Establishments are also not closed.

What is the meaning and purpose of life?

Purpose is for what you did in the past and Meaning is what you experience after serving your purpose.

Why is man faced with the predicament to choose between good and evil?

It is like filling an empty glass with water. You have the choice to pour howmuch ever you want. The rest is still empty.

Why do people die?

The Karmas of their past was over. They will be born again if they have Karmas unfinished in the present.

Na Karmana, Na Prajaya, Dhanena tyagenaike Amritatvamanashuh (Kaivalya Upanishad). You cannot become one with the supreme with Karmas etc. It is only possible through Vyragya and resurruction.

What happens after death?

Born again with what you gained from your past Karmas. If you are a Karmaviheena, then you will not be born.

Dear DarkWarrior, it is true that Vaishnavas do not depend on puranas. I am talking about the "Modern Vaishnavas" and not the True Vaishnavas. Anyway, dude, you seem to have a strong knowledge of books. Can you please tell me the meaning of a line in 'Purusha Sukta'(a Vedic Hymn) which may be recited by all of us n number of times. You also said that your debate is based on the Vedas.

Ajaayamaano Bahudaa Vijaayate.

That is all the point I am trying to make in all my posts and nothing else. Yes, I am a monoist.

Originally Posted by srikanthdk71

Mahadev, I dont have to prove my provess [his prowess]. Experience needs no proof. I am asking you to just experience yourself. If you are satisfied with what you are experiencing, I have no issues. It is for the benifit of people who are craving for more. NA ALPE SUKHAMASTI.

 

.............................................................................

 

Yes. Now I have learnt everything you have taught me herein above in your statements.

 

I too am doggedly pontificating to you too!

I am gracing you with devine nectar. I deliver Krishna to you, "He is Krishna! Come now srikanthdk71, and greet him with open arms" --when I say these things to you, you have been caught. That may or may not be due to My own degree-of-prowess --all for your benefit and for Paramatma's enlivenment. You have been lured, caught, and enlisted and you may enjoy.

But, my graciousness is forsaken by you in exchange for your poetic axioms & real life distracting obligations that lure you away from what I am offering to you.

 

Take Krishna or leave it, no?

I think you are electicuted by Institutionalised thoughts who cannot think on your own. When I already have Krishna with me, I am the most satisfied. The Krishna outside you can vanish but not the Krishna within you. You are already a blessed soul which you havent realised and trying to search outside with stutis and Bhajans. That can only give your mind a temporary nectar. Not make realise your soul. There can NEVER be Moksha where Dvaita exists.

 

What's the most practical way to convert and convince a stubborn christian or muslim that God is ONE?

 

777

Convertion is done by Chapels, Gorgs and Masjids and not in Temples. First try and convince the GVs that 'God is One'. If you say that, they tell, It is monoist attitude. Try... All the best.

Dear Afun, Mandukyopanishad is the Source as rightly pointed out by Ravindranji. I dont know how the schools experience these states, but I experience it as,

Jaagrat - When I am experiencing the world with my 5 Sense Organs(Gnanendriya) and 5 Organs or work(Karmendriya)

Swapn - When I am experiencing the world in state of sleep as Dream State.

Sushupti- When I am not experiencing anything in state of Deep Sleep and yet when I am awake I know that 'I enjoyed a Good Sleep'.

Turiya - The 4th State of Conciousness where the Knower is awake and in a thoughtless state(Mind absent).

Apparently his attitude hasn't changed. The above makes perfect sense; it isn't difficult to comprehend, yet he calls it "mumbo jumbo." When one is addicted to hate, addicted to offending others, then no matter how reasoned and thoughful one deals with such a person, when filtered thru his hate-filled mind and intellect, it translates into "mumbo jumbo."

 

Thankyou Nsringhadev Prabhu for trying. Great post!

So you think Nsringhadev Prabhu mind is LOVE FILLED. Kindly tell me where can you find his love in his post.Hate breeds Hate. Love breeds Love. Simple.

Namaste,

 

And indeed Adi Shankaracharya never had a 'change of heart', since he is the incarnation of Shivaji, who in turn is Govinda's greatest devotee(S.B.12.13.16). Thus his Bhaja Govindam reveals Shankaraji's original disposition, after having succesfully deluded the unfortunate atheists with his muddled monistic teachings.

Who found it Muddle? Not even Sri Ramanuja. It was Madhvacharya who found his pleasure in killing Advaita/Visistadvaita eventhough his own teachings couldnt cross the borders of Karnataka(mostly confined to the Kanara region). He couldnt dare to establish a Mutt outside it. Such strong was his philosophy.

First off, you never saw or met Shankaracharya, yet here you are defending his work, which according to your good self (see above quote) doesn't even have much value in it. Following this contradictory line of thinking, first the Advaitins learn from works of the Vedic canon, yet at the same time when somebody quotes from them they are suddenly seen as meaningless quotes from religious texts (see quote above) and 'personal experience' (according to someone's personal experience a snake may be considered a rope) paired with intelligence (a limited material faculty), are to be considered more valuable.

I think shvu has answered the first part and if you believe that the unseen and the unexperienced stories which is colorfully presented to gratify your mind and senses has more truth than the 'Rajju, Sarpa Nyaya' which has a profound theory made simple, who can stop you from the 'Herd Mentality' of following the shepherd when you think you are the sheep and not the shephard???!!!

A nice example in tracing the origin of this rather contradictory Advaitic notion is Shankaraji's pastime of faultfinding in his own shiksa guru Gaudapada (in his book Ajnanabodhini), and his attempted faultfinding in Srila Vyasadeva, thereby making guru aparadha, which is condemned in all parts of the Vedas (yes, the same Vedas of which he stressed the importance (all the while understanding that Shankara (Shiva) knew better)).

Dear One, it was Madhvacharya who made his own guru as his disciple. Great gesture. Isnt it??!! All are prone to mistakes show that they are human. Even the great Sri Rama in case of Vali. You like it or not, if there was no Adi Shankara, then you guys would have had nothing to look upto. Hence, he is the Adi Guru and finding mistakes is what the followers of Madhva are doing (not Sri Ramanuja). Who is making Guru Aparadha??

So, first Advaita Vedanta stresses that one learn from guru and Veda, only to proceed with faultfinding and dismissal of their teachings. This is no different from admitting that you haven't learned anything, after all what is learned from a source that one doesn't even accept as truth. That means you don't know the truth to begin with. Not a very confident position to be starting from. Another commonly used practice is that any commentary based on Vedic literature against Advaita Vedanta is often conveniently dismissed as having unauthored sources or being plain lies (see first quote for proof of this), which is of course a quick and clean way of dealing with their philosophy's inconsistencies. This is also mostly the approach used when attacking their 'philosophical opponents'.

Fool, Advaita doesnt teach that. It is simple. When you can live in your own light, why are you living in the light of others? It means to say that you believe in Srila Prabhupada more than your own experience. You need his confirmation for everything you experience.

Nobody here is telling 'Bash the GVs'. If they are invited by GVs by poking like Mayavadis, Another Monoist, Shiva is Bogus, etc, they will be given due respect.

many indians live in pakistain

Many Hindus live in Pakistan. Not Indians.

Look at the names of prominent vedantins - Sankara, Ramanuja, Madhva, Vallabha, Nimbarka, Baladeva...all Vaishnavas.

Dear DarkWarrior, as Sri Shankara is considered a Vaishnava Born(not Advaitin by birth), Madhvacharya was a Shaiva Smarta Brahmin(Advaitin by birth) born. He was not a Vaishnava born. He has infact done his earlier schooling on Advaita and in the later years he was called 'Teekacharya' for his commentaries against the Advaita/Visistadvaita philosophy. There was no constructive work on the 'Siddhanta' aspect unlike his predecessors(Sri Shankara and Sri Ramanuja) but his primary duty was to destroy Advaita and Visistadvaita. Jayateertha and Vyasaraja gave their contributions too to this philosophy. This demolition was tagged as Dwaita philosophy which is successfully taught by their schools even today. This philosophy could never cross the borders of Karnataka like Advaita & Visistadvaita. But in the later years, the founder of a World Renown Organisation found Madhvacharya's way more applicable to float his own sect with certain variations in the Mudra Dharana and the use of Gopichandan. All he said was already said by Madhvacharya and there was NOTHING NEW. But the difference was the country he chose to say. Indians believe more in Americans words than their own. It was just the old wine in new bottle.

I will also try and explain the base of most Vaishnava belief (the Srimad Bhagavata Purana of today) and its authenticity. There is a feeling that if at all it will be proved that it was not written by Sri Ved Vyasji Maharaj himself, the whole Vaishnava tradition would be shaken. Yes, there is a BIG HOLE in the authenticity of Srimad Bhagavatam. But I must admit it is a GREAT GREAT WORK.

Quote:

The Supreme Godhead is the supreme...we are small/tiny sparks of that summum bonum. In a previous post you have said this above statement (that I have put in quotes)...do you really believe that? Do you really believe that you are the supreme?

.

Dear Bija, When the supreme Godhead is within and without you(here YOU has been understood by most of the people as the AhamBhaav or Ahamkaar or EGO where as it is refererred to as your pure self which is within you. Yes, I do really believe. Experiencing is believing.

Quote:

(To the original poster of this thread) - statements such as this are the potential fruit of mayavadi teaching.

Your narrow thinking and focus on books of an organisation has made you say this. Speak on your own experiences. I have tried to explain Maaya. Read is as "Bija" and not as "Bija affiliated to XYZ organisation". The more rational you are, the more you are craving for truth. If you are satisfied, so be it. Cheers.

This is correct information from shvu.

 

Please read page 9 (main section of the book) of the below book for a Gaudiya Vaisnava definition of 'mayavada'. Not the number on the page scroller on the reader, but the actual page no. 9

Dear Bija, To sell anything, you say that your product is always Superior to the rest. Same here. Or else, the organisation wouldnt have grown so big. Do you need so many books if your base is strong, so many quotations, personal attacks on the past. It all started from Madhvacharya where he found immense pleasure in the 'Khandana Vaada' that his predecessors like Sri Shankara or Sri Ramanuja who had a Siddhanta 'Mandanaa Vaada' unlike something to say 'I am the best. No one better than me' and talks of Surrender of EGO to Krishna.

He said explain in simple term, originally. Mayavadis dont belive God has form. . because they believe 'everything is one spiritually'. It's basic understanding. Even in simple terms it's hard to explain. Bhaja Gopala.

Dear Pankaja Dasa, Yes. It is simple. If God had a form it cannot be unbound and infinite. Only a finite entity can have a form. The earlier posts also said Mayavadis believe in Krishna as the Conciouness and not the Sharira. Yes, even Rama had to leave his Sharira and so had Krishna. They demonstrated to the world what is Nitya and Anitya, what is Satya and Mithya. Conciousness is pure(Nityam & Satyam), unbound and infinite (Anant-Apaar) and rest is everchanging (ie., Maaya). Is it hard to explain?

Dear Ravindran (or is it Kasevan? ),

 

This is, of course, a very difficult question. Possibly one that human consciousness cannot know the answer to. The real answer will at least be mindboggling. I can, however, use this simple chaotic system analogy of reality, to illustrate the possibility of a dualist scenario in principle:

 

A computer programmer can implement a chaotic computational system on a powerful computer. Once the program has been started (e.g., by the programmer), it may infinitely display phase-projections of its chaotic behavior on the computer screen. The programmer (and his friends) can now sit down and watch the projections evolve over time. He cannot interfere with the running system, so all is perfectly dualistic. While he watches, he may be surprised, or otherwise mentally moved, by the beautiful colors and the intricate structures that evolve on the screen, but he cannot interact with the running system.

 

He might, however, have a ‘free will knob’. When he turns this knob, the sample frequency of the phase-projection on the screen will change. As a result he may see a totally different projection on the screen, but he is still not interfering with the underlying running system. Infinitely many sample frequencies will produce infinitely many different projections of exactly the same underlying system, and many different viewers of the system may watch many different projections.

 

The computer programmer may even have a second powerful computer on which he started exactly the same program 1 year earlier. This would be the only way to know the future of the system he just started on the other computer, up to 1 year ahead.

 

Kind regards,

 

Bart

Dear Bart, I may be interfering in your discussion with Ravindranji but since it is a free forum, i thought of giving it a try too. The point Ravindran is trying to make cannot be understood with this example. It means, you are alone, you have to create a computer first. Then a program next. Then you have to create the users. Then give a direction for the users to use your program on your computer. So, everything that evolved, is from that pure conciousness. If everything is conciousness, then where is duality? Correct me Bart or Ravindran if something is missing. From Bart's point of view, the knob can be turned the frequency changes because only HE knows everything. Why? Coz its all HIS creation.

This spiritual section has became a place in which there is no real spiritual discussion takes place but a fight of egos seen everywhere,a real shameful saga indeed.What is the use of saying this god is superior and that is inferior?Is this our civilizatoin?After visiting few posts here now I can know why Hindus are devided and still process is on.

Please stop posting such messages which may end up in pure ego fights,a genuine request from my side. One may escape from moderators or admins by posting such messages but he or she will NEVER able to escape from almighty God by creating such sins so wake up.

Fanaticim and Belief are to different things. The former is the result of Indoctrination and the latter is of Experience. All are below the perspective of the Ultimate. The 'Urdhvamoolam, Adah Shaakam' tells that God is ONE. Division is below. It is high time we relate ourselves with the Moolam rather getting lost in the Shaakam.

Dear Srikanth.

 

I am ome who believes all gods are manifestaiions of bhraman nomnly and hence no inferror superior stuff.

Having said that , I would like to correct you on one technical matter. ( with out intenting to start a quaral) Lord Siva does not represent tamasic form. (As you seems to have acepted) In fact He is Satvic. Look at the colour code system of the tree gunas. Satva is white and rajas is red or golden and tamas is black or blue. Now look at Sivas colour. He is pure white. Bhrama is rajasic (Yellow) and Vishnu is tamasic (Black or blue) . Therev is even an explicit declaration of the gunas of the three gods apart from thee colour code, in Pradamika rahasya of durga saptasati. In Pradamika rahasya , the three pairs of gods and goddess are described as follows: First from the grand godess three being arose: in pure satva form white mahasaraswati pure rajasic form golden maha lakshmi and pure tamasic form black mahakali. From pure satvic maha saraswati arouse two pairs - brother and syster - Siva and Saraswati. From rajasic mahalakshmi two rajasic manifestation the couple Bhrama and Lakshmi Golden in colour arose. From pure tamasic Mahakali arose two thamasic being dark coloured Vishnu and kali arose.

Then Bhrama married saraswati, visnu married lakshmi and Sive married Kali.

 

Siva himself is pure satvic manifestation. It is kali who is tamasic, not siva. Of course siva is married to kali there by possesses tamasic shakti as his partner. That is only because only a pure sartvic guy like Siva could be entrested with such a dangerous destructive power. Only a purely satvic being can use that dangerous power with out being corrept by power and will put in to right use with out any personal motiveand desire.( rajas) or ignorance (tamas) Siva is pure satvic He is a saint perfect. See he only meditates all the time expect of course when it is time to destroy evil.

 

Lord Siva is not tamas princiople He is satva perfect and pure.

 

Regards,

K.Ravindran

If that was the point, Laya is not possible in Sattva and Rajas. It is only in the form of Tamas that Laya is possible like a Sinusoidal wave. It has a beginning (Brahma Tattva), a peak (Vishnu Tattva) and an End (Laya or the Shiva Tattva). If colors derives the principle then the basic interpretation of Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesh itself would be questionable. Will it not be?

But you have quoted Krishnamurti-like polyannastic mayavad-esque diatribes. This is old hippy-ish propaganda.

 

You need your insurance premiums paid up-to-date and security cameras and a new plastic liner sack in your rubbish bin and new Bangles for your spouse and the latest rent will be due soon ---these are all absolutely true obligations, and yet, they too are transient just like your future will be at the end of the day.

 

The past is the link in the chain that comprises the strength of your fortunate birth-rights. If you turn your back on your family tradition of Vedic Knowledge as concluded by Krishna and Vyasadeva's Bhagavatam then your heart will turn to stone and by supreme irony & Maya you will be happy and satisfied--so relish what is the mystery of nectar while you still have a human species' birth, so that you can reach Sri Mukunda, Krishna.

 

Mahadev, I dont have to prove my provess. Experience needs no proof. I am asking you to just experience yourself. If you are satisfied with what you are experiencing, I have no issues. It is for the benifit of people who are craving for more. NA ALPE SUKHAMASTI.

Just think of how advanced-in-experience you already are now, and, then when you study Bhagavatam, after having come from (in essessence this is what it amounts to) a Sunyavadi-trained philosophical background --it will be so awesome for you to apply & contrast the knowledge of the workings of the "24 elements + Jiv-atma + Time + Brahman (the void)" conbined with enlightenment of Paramatma and finally, Bhagavan Sri Krishna so that you will have 'The Whole Story', after all these years.

Dear Jaan, I do not come from or represent any school of taught like you do. I do not tag myself as a Shivaite or a Vaishnava, I do not get caught in the web of Millions of books written by people. You can infact visualise time when you are with the ultimate. You can see the past, present and future. But..alas, you are here to show your Cut & Paste abilities rather than think on your own. There will be a day, i am sure you will come back to yourself. For your info, I too was like you till I realised myself. Question yourself who knows himself better.

Not Originally Posted by srikanthdk71 — but there are Symbolic Parallels with pure sense-gradification [not that there's anything wrong with that]:

Great enjoyer-person,

the frustration never goes and the wanting is always there in married-life,

where as in the divorced or single-life,

the craving for the varieties of Women exists.

When there is search for Women, it should be Absolute Beautiful Women and not Ugly Women.

Divorced Women, handicapped Women, Fat Women, are Ugly Women.

They too are bound by high-maintenance Fees.

.

The Beautiful Women are unbound and infinite.

The choice is yours.

Yes, to surrender to Ugly Women is easy.

But what next?

A true Player will always be restless and in want of more Beautiful Women however he may pretend that he has no deviations in his own lawfully wedded wife.

But when he finds the Beautiful Women for himself, "there is no other way", is what he says.

Ultimately, YOU are the enjoyer.

Bhaktajan,

PS: No offense meant to Ugly males.

Maharaj, Good that you too have a passage to prove the direction of your intellect. The point is simple. You look outside you for answers. I look inside of me. You are confused, I am convinced. Have your own way. Sorry, i do not possess such high intellect as you and i am convinced that I am better off without it.Cheers. Keep Smiling:)