sambya

hey sonic , im rather curious to understand the meaning to your qoute -- is ramananda suggesting that krishna is an enjoyer of sense gratification ? i think there's some mistake .... he is the greatest of tyagis ....he left the rasamandal without looking back ..........!!!

to be honest there are two sets of people who worship kali . the first group consists of people like various occultist tantriks and astrologers who are anything but spiritual . the second group consists of entirely spiritual people without any material inclinations ......... kali has been the chief deity for tantrik sadhaks throughout ages ... this is merely your understanding and does not have any scriptural or historical support . you dont have the slightest knowledge about kali and have never read anything about her ...... well sonic yogi , i feel the same for the veiws of orthodox gaudiya followers like you !!! if you wish feel free to quit the forum !!!! no one apart from vaishnavas ever believes that !!!! im well situated in my belief and you need not educate me about kali or even krishna .

in gandaki river in nepal . kaali gandaki more precisely . one has to trekk down to the place (muktinath , damodar kund) for 8 days or take a helicopter over the himalayan heights . i went there last year and got a few of their lordships after a tedious search .......................

ramakrishna

ok good !!! not possible , some rarely documented cases where people did return was for preaching not krishna bhakti . and that too not in a new birth ... . theres no documented reference to such a happening except in vaishnav scriptures .can you show me some ? ( which veda ? yes , if we sincerely acknowledge our insanity and go ahead with points 2 and 3 even after knowing that the first point itself is wrong .....

krishna might be claimed to be the original if all the vedic words begining with brahman like brahmachaari , brahmin , brahmananda etc can be shown to begin as krishnachaari , krishmin etc ........... but nonetheless , i do veiw krishna as a supreme god and personally suggest that acepting krishna as brahman himself or brahman as krishna himself would solve the problem. they are like both sides of a coin . two faces or the same reality , none less than the other.

good riddance !!! honestly even i get tired of replying to your boring posts stuffed with scriptural qoutations and arrogant remarks , and i really dont want the same old topics to be discussed here again. but in case you ever find any suitable answers to my questions feel free to answer them my friend ...

no !!! these are ancient folk songs highly popular all over the bengal belt being sung for centuries.... where did you get this ? which scriptures which verse ? on the other hand radha is reffered to as 'chandi' twice in geetgovindam , which you might be knowing that this is the first recorded mention of radha anywhere in the history of existing literature . now we all know the antiquity of the name 'chandi' . so who was the original chandi and who the derivative ??!! you say 'her scriptures' which refers to tantra . what principal books of tantra have you been through ?? which historical record undeniebly prooves this ? mention the book and the author please !!! as regards to scriptural records there are plenty to show just the opposite !!! ! actually you have been educated to understand kali as a ghastly god meant of unintelligent worshippers . seeing for the first time ever such high thoughts contained in songs to kali , your inherent confusion is making you hold back to your own ishta(krishna) , and this is coming out as subconcious reinforcements of your beliefs in the form of the above sentence. just as i believe that youve been brainwashed wrong !!!!!!! the statements are paradoxical . you are confused and might require some rest ...... youve not read anything about ramakrishna and know nothing about the social heritage of bengal ( both at time of ramakrishna and chaintanyadeva) , which is why you instantly related these songs with ramakrishna . a little more detailed study in any matter before you wish to speak out would help you earn some respects !!! best of luck

this depicts either your ignorance or your idiocy !!! i'll tell you how......... when you are arguing with someone and want to ascertain your own veiws over the others you must stick to commonly acceptable theories and texts to both the parties. but here the theory that fully realised gyanis take birth for the taste of krishna bhakti is typically vaishnav in nature . no other sampradya would listen to such craps . and yet you chose this vaishnava theory to proove your point . this cannot be answered in yes or no ................

that might be true . the best person to evaluate or represent any guru is his disciples . vivekananda might have been the most knowledgeable person about his guru . just like as much i've understood of jagadguru kripalu maharaj is through you and your posts . btw , where does your veiws on ramakrishna come from ?? what do you mean by that ? how do you know whether or not there is really someone out there who actually wants to make his body light ? strange , you call it a 'serious' question !!!! ranjeet , i see the ignorance in your comments ........... what do you mean by 'great but limited people' ? great for being limited ? also , what is your method to figure out ignorance so easily ? i thought i couldnt do that sort of thing , being ignorant myself (not self realised that is) . is it some kind of secret vidya that has been passed on to you by your guru ? if thats the case i would like to learn it !!!

obviously no !! and i dont want another 'who is the supreme god' kind of discussion here once more !!!!!! its just that kali is not god as per your perception..........

" o my mother ! o dweller of the cremation grounds ! i know that cremation grounds are your abode and your chosen place . now , just to invite you , i have made my heart a crematorium also . ive destroyed all my pride and belongings , i have burnt away all my ego and desires in the pyres within my heart . now , my heart is as barren as crematorium . come o mother , step in the crematorium of my heart . i do not have any more worldly cravings . the fire of your seperation is the only thing in me now. come o mother . come o mother , with the mahakaal shiva at your feet , with the ankle bells tingling because of your divine dance , and allow me to behold your radiant face before my final journey towars the crematorium(death) . " " i wont call you mother any more . you are giving me much pain and sufferings. i have been calling you for so long , but inspite of my repeated cries you choose to remain deaf and dumb . the decision's taken . you are no longer my mother ..... i 'll go from door to door begging for a morsel of food . do you think its you alone who feeds me ? if the mother dies , cant a son live alone ? " " all faults are mine alone , o mother ! whatever sufferings i've to bear is only due to my own karma . i have no one to blame . its me alone who digs up a channel and as a result drowns in its water . i have no one to blame . i left my dharma and adharma and tried to dig the well of immortal nectar in the field of your holy name . but alas ! due to my bad samskars i got only poison from the well to quench my thirst with . the tears that were in my eyes are now dropping on my chest . i know not how to preserve my life any longer . im waiting for you , o mother , waiting for a glimpse of you alone . " " the bumble bee of my mind has found its way to the lotus of shyamaa 's (kali) feet . oh ! the lotus feet of mother shyama , the feet of mother kaali . the intoxicating pleasures of material world are now nothing to me . they have all drowned in the ocean of bhakti . in the feet of my divine mother . " " o mind! why do you think so much ? just sit down at my mothers feet . if you do lavish pujas you risk the chance of developing fine ego, that's why its best to worship her alone , away from the rest of the world . why do you always need a deity of brass , wood or stone ? make a deity within your heart , seated within the thousand petalled lotus. why do you need fruits and sweets ? just please her with the drink of your bhakti-sudha. why do you call for chandeliers and thousand lamps ? decorate your mind with the gems of different virtues and see them shining all the day and night. why do you sacrifice the goats and lambs .? put your lust , anger , greed and other vices on the sacrificial alter and chop them off from your true self. ramprasad says to his own mind , why do you need drums for a puja ? sound the vibrations of her divine name and keep yourself to her lotus feet " . o mother , my coming into this human birth has been in vain .... human birth is designated for realising you but i dont do any of that . im carried away by false material pleasures just as an illussioned bee sits on a painting of a lotus thinking it to be real. o mother , you have brought me into this earth with the promise of giving me something sweet to eat .but in the end i see that you are giving me bitter neem leaves. still ignorant as i am dont realise the truth and roam about the life with the expectations of sweet and a bitter taste in my mouth . what do you want you son to do ? mother ? im not getting any satisfaction from the kind of play you are keeping me engaged at. ramprasad says whatever was to happen in this life has happened . now the night is falling fast . lift you son fast in your arms and take me home .

deleted

ive heard many gaudiya vaishnav followers describing brahman as krishna's boddily effulgence . im rather curious to know that where in vedanta or brahman sutras it is described as such . please dont qoute puranas and similar texts which are not acceptable to most other sampradayas . qouting from upanishads ( not the 15th century ones of course ) or brahma sutras would help immensly .

not that your comments ever carry any sense , but still i thought of removing a misconception . the followers of veadanta sutras are called vedantists . and this vedanta sutras have been interpreted both by sankaracharya and by ramanujacharya. and both interpretations have equal validity in the world of philosophy . therefore there is absolutely no necessity for a 'vedantin' to believe anything else ( brahma samhita for ex ) apart from the basic vedanta sutras and their commentaries .

it is not possible to describe brahman because he is vakya-man-atita or beyond mind and speech. grossly speaking the supreme god of hinduism is this brahman . all the shrutis(vedas ,upanishads etc) have spoken of and tried to simplify the concept of brahman .but at the same time it has always been said that he cannot be understood in totality . vedic philosophy maintains that this brahman is the source of everything , including the universe , planets , matter , living beings and even gods(devas). it is from him that the cosmos is projected and in the end it resolves back to him . the supreme attainable goal of any living creature is to realise and feel this brahman's presence in every thing . there are different ways of understanding brahman . although all sects agree him as the supreme , their modes of understanding do differ . an advaitin (follower of advaita vedanta or the monistic school) percieves brahman as the perfect unity.the one without a second . all things are in reality brahman itself which we are not being able to percieve due to ignorance(maya). a dvaitin(follower of dvaita vedanta or dualistic school) would say the krishna is himself the purna-brahman or that brahman is actually the bodily effulgence of krishna . but whatever may be its understanding one thing is for certain , that brahman has been the most important topic of hindu philosophy and understanding . terms like brahmachaari , brahmin , brahmagyan all have direct links with the word brahman. modern advaita interprets the various gods and goddeses not as mere illusion but personal manifestations of the same brahman . throughout indian history this veiw was subconciously prevalent among the hindu masses in india. thats why we find the highest praises being sung in the glory of all gods without any confusion . this was possible because most people had this veiw that there is one supreme god(brahman)of whom the rest are expansions . and yes brahmaa and brahman are not same ......... brahma is the four headed god of creation . brahman is........... well , no one knows for certain !!!!

its parvati , not pravati . although regional dialects varies.............. in the original sanskrit texts its always written parvati...........

im not commenting against radha but at the same time im rather curious to know about these texts in a greater detail ..........

durga can never be said to 'reside' particularly anywhere . if we veiw durga as shakti she becomes omnipotent and omnipresent . shakti in form of parvati or uma is the consort of shiva and resides at kailash . shakti in form of lakshmi resides in vaikuntha . in the form of indrani she might reside in indraloka .so on and so forth..... generally we do not come across specific 'loka' for devi . rather she is thought to be the underlying prakriti or energy of every main god. but in the famous brahma samhita of gaudiya vaishnavas i did come across the term devi dham and mahesh dham . but this 'devi dham' is instantly reduced to the level of ordinary material world(earth) in its gaudiya interpretation.

well ! i have no intention of speaking about my lineage and stuff . i did that only because you claimed that i know nothing of indian culture and its sampradayas , when actually i belong to the very land where the sampradaya that you are possibly following originated . i didnt ask for your exact place with latitude and longitude marks. i'll correct the question and put it once more -- are you an indian or not ? it will , for sure !!! i need not understand or study the sampradaya , mere mention of the name would suffice . it would help me to check out if ive missed out on any sampradaya existing in bengal or india.

try to understand why im saying this . this is not to hurt anyone . god is ifinite and absolute and cannot be known in totallity . even sages like narada didnot know him totally . what to speak of human gurus . each saint realizes a part of the supreme . thats why all religions have flaws . which place do you belong to? im an indian and have been reared in india .moreover we are goswamis by title and know vaishnav doctrines since childhood. i was in touch with iskcon and few of its foremost disciples (not naming anyone) for more than 7 years . you lack in common understanding capabilities . im sorry but your method forced me to say this. not tolerating someone who promotes intolerance cannot be intolerance atall . just like asking something from god is not good in sadhana but asking bhakti is not bad at all . it does not amount to asking something in return ( though theoritically it is indeed about asking bhakti in return) . no one is criminal here . they might be termed as deceptors. but then again how do you determine one ? YES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it is !!!!!!!!! thats what im saying . but criticisn someone for regularly criticising others cannot be criticism proper .just as asking for bhakti from god is not like asking something in return in strict sense of term . hope you understand........... what path do you follow !????!!! im curious to know the origin of such entertaining intelligence .

but its also true that until one attains the supreme his karmic reactions whether good or bad is bound to continue . one can only transcend karma bandhan and the three gunas after god realization , not before that .

well said.................good

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> </td></tr></tbody></table> new varna ?!! which vedic text says that ? and yet gurus ......... does that suggest that krishna never understood that they are not yet qualified to become gurus or brahmana and consequently gave a wrong instruction !!!!!??? <table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> </td></tr></tbody></table> so behaving ( or pretending )as vaishnavas is the thing thats needed . wow !!! never thought realization's so easy................!!!!

decide which path is closest to your heart and approach to experience brahman .