sambya

its really good to come across a person like you in this forum having a broad outlook.that is what i've tried to explain everywhere in this forum.dont limit god.one need not worship the impersonal but dont deny its existence or importance. i coudnt get you here.does gaudiya say only nirguna ? i thought its just the opposite.they stick to saguna instead.a little explanation would help. its true that some does say that krishna is temporary mnifestation.i woundnt do that blunder.he is definitely permanent . god who is vakya man atit(beyond thought and speech) out of his causeless mercy and compassion appears to a gyanyogi as brahman realization and to a bhakti yogi as loving madhav. as i said , no two persons conception regaurding god can be absolutely same. thats true as per vaishnav doctrine.but in advaita , nirguna has a deeper and abstract meaning,not merly 'without attributes' or 'without material form' .

in hindu thought reincarnation or tansmigration of souls,karmic law,moksha,bhakti etc forms the basis of philosophy.it is not possible to get a clear idea within a small time.regular study and practice will make things easier. a soul passes on through numerous bodies before attaining a human birth,which,according to the shastras is a chance to realise god.some utilises this chance and some dont.as a soul passes through millions of bodies he gathers experience slowly bit by bit.he continues his material enjoyment or bhoga.after innumerable birth when he has finished experimenting with most material pleasures he turns to god.then begins his true spiritual quest. it might be that your quest have just begun.that is why you are in doubt and confusion.in hinduism religion has to be felt and not just believed.belief or fath is the first step in solidifying your conceptions.so i would suggest not to read any atheistic texts or suchlike philosophies for the time being,so that you dont turn confused again.ofcourse you can read those after developing a firm belief in god. and it is of utmost importance to find a proper spiritual teacher who can help you in this path.be carefull,avoid the dogmatic ones. moral lifestyle increases your punyakarma and makes your next life materially comfortable.but it contributes nothing to self reslization.but when moral lifestyle is used as an accesory to the the main ideal of god realization then it can help a lot.such spirituality induced morality creates purity in heart and helps immensely to destroy false pride and ego,both of which is very necessary for self realization. start extensive reading to get a primary idea.

thanks for making me laugh once more bhaktajan.your posts are such a funny delight between these serious discussions.

once again the problem stems from interpreting shastras literally.for example , in gita as it is , prabhupad also says there are living beings in moon. the sanskrit word chandralok is interpreted in iskcon as moon. but as chandralok is described as being much far away than moon itself , it might be a completely different universe alltogether. the latest hypothesis in astrophysics is the theory of multiverse.it believes in not just one universe but numerous universes that together build up the cosmos.this fabled chandralok might have been such an universe somewhere in the vast cosmic world. if we accept this theory then the problem is easily solved.chandralok becomes a scientific reality(although hypothetically) and animate beings becomes a possibility. but sadly iskcon always understands shastras literally and in doing so often gets caught in its own words.christianity also adopted a similar path of conflict with science in the middle ages and look at it now.its almost a dead religion.its high time for isckon to wake up and refine their thoughts to avoid landing in a same fate.

lord brahma !!! do you mean to say brahma with four heads who grew out of vishnu's navel? i didnt knew that!!!! can you elaborate ??

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' 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." 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.....' 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. 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???!!!!!!!! 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.

dear bija ,ive read through your posts and liked your humble style of apporach with a spirit of discussion. and definitely i should mention in the that we are no one to speculate about god ,having not seen him personally. my translation might have sounded a bit different because i did that myself from the original vernacular texts.i kept the meaning intact though. here i would beg to differ.as i have studied sanskrit i could clearly see the mistakes in translations. the word 'purnam' means completely perfect or absolutewhole.but in this translation it is being interpreted as completely perfect,complete unit or complete balance.'purnam' has nothing to do with 'balance' or 'unit' . the word om does not mean complete whole in this context.as this sloka is used as the mangalacharan in the begining of the book it is used as a auspicious symbol.just like most mantras start with an om. most importantly nowhere there is a mention of 'personality of godhead'. it says --- " purna adah " meaning 'that is complete whole' " purna idam " meaning 'this is complete whole" now this two words are are interpreted by most philosophies as under : THAT --- god or ultimate truth or brahman THIS --- the manifested cosmos. where does the personality of god comes in .isnt this a shocking twist to the interpretations ?as my understanding of sanskrit might not be perfect one is free to get the texts interpreted by any learned proffessor of sanskrit and he would instantly see the results. definitely i dont mean to say that god cannot be personal.he is personal , impersonal and also beyond those earthly concepts. excellent said. but that would apply to impersonal god too. concepts like impersonallity and formlessness are real and true in this world.many objects in this earth are formless. so can god be short of a characteristics that even inanimate objects created by him has? god is infinite.its wrong to limit god by drawing a line and proclaiming god can be only such and such and nothing more.he can much much beyond what we can comprehend.he is our lovable krishna,respected nrishimha and impersonal brahman all at the same time.if somebody asks 'how is all that possible at the same time?' then the answer would be--"that is why we call him god." its for us to choose what aspect in him do we like the most and to follow accordingly and it is highly unwise to assume that everyone would have the same liking. ALL GLORIES TO 'PURNAM'

ISOPANISHAD'S FIRST SLOKA : om purnamadah purnamidang purnat purnamudachyate purnasya purnamadaya purnamebabshishyate. . translation according to iskcon: supreme bhagavan is complete whole(purna) in every way.as he is complete whole whatever comes out from him , like this material world,is also complete whole in every way.whatever is generated from complete whole is also complete whole.and his wholeness(Purnata) remains unaffected inspite of the fact that, numerous completely whole entities are emering out of him. polite question to iskconites : isnt this the most authentic description of advaita? please stick to literal interpretations while you answer.

the most influential socio religious movement within hinduism in the 20th century is the ramakrishna-vivekananda movement.it virtually saved hinduism from an extinction and paved the way for the global triumph that hinduism is witnessing today. it all began with a man named gadadhar chattapadhyay(sri ramakrishna paramahamsa) who rose to the highest levels of self realisation and proclaimed the universality and authenticity of all religions.coupled with the fiery words of his favourite disciple narendranath(later swami vivekananda)ramakrishna's teachings contributed to the complete regeneration of the decaying hindu race.at a time when entire india was immersed in an ocean of ignorance and inertness ,their words of inspiration instilled in the hearts of indians a renewed hope of existence. this was later acknowledged by numerous patriots and saints of modern india. a religion that cannot adjust itself to the changing needs of time cannot survive.hinduism has been one of the most flexible religions in history and hence managed to survive for so long.swamiji understood the need to resurrect the true hinduism that was submerged under the pile of untouchability,ritualistic festivals and self deception. in order to do so he broke away with a number of rules of orthodox hinduism.he travelled across the ocean,ate with all castes,and gave mantrasdiksha(mantra initiation) with pranava(om) to mlecchas(westerners). another significant contribution of swamiji is institutionalizing hinduism.adi sankaracharya was the first to realise the importance of forming unified sangha to save hinduism from collapse from the mounting pressure of buddhism.after a millenia swamiji realised that proper institution is necessary to uphold the sanatan dharma.he founded the worldwide ramakrishna mission in 19th century,the first institution of its kind.many others have followed this concept ever since. when swamiji saw the demoralised tragic condition of his countrymen he understood that a massive awakening is needed before religion can be taught to these ignorant masses.he begun his speeches of intense nationalism that would later serve as the main driving force behind the indian freedom movement. seeing the numerous western converts like sister nivedita,aldous huxley,indians started feeling proud of their spiritual legacy for the first time. but the most important contribution of ramakrishna is the concept of 'yato mat tato pat' .it says that all the religions pursue the same ultimate truth but through many different perspective and paths.ultimately all of them do coverge to the same truth. through this noble concept ramakrishna first propagated the concept of harmony of religions. we can see the amount of intolerence,destruction and fanaticism that has been going on in name of religion in present day.realized mahatmas like ramakrishna could sense this and then according to the need of the hour preached his wonderful doctrine.this was way back in 19th century ,long before the western concepts of 'religious tolerance' surfaced.infact ramakrishna vivekananda philosophy dislikes the term "religious tolerance" tolerance means accepting with dislike.vivekananda taught not just to tolerate but to equally love all faiths. ramakrishna vivekananda movement gave rise to what was called the bengal rennaisance.it acttracted the attention of world leaders and provided inspiration to countless other religious movements and acted as a role model to numerous religious institutions that would spring up in future india. even today some movements anti to ramakrishna vivekananda thought continue to seek their expertise in managerial fields. gandhi said,"the story of ramakrishna is a story of religion in practice.............vivekananda increased my love for my country tenfold times." rabindranath tagore ,asia's first nobel laureate said"if you want to know india read vivekananda." romain rolland the illustrious french thinker commented"ramakrishna's life is the culmination of 3000 years of spiritual sadhana of india".he described ramakrishna as "the epitome of the whole" max muller revered him(ramakrishna) as an avatar. aldous huxley the noted historian and christopher isherwood started to follow his teachings. tolstoy qouted from ramakrishna's sayings and parables. netaji subhas chandra bose said"i dont find any literature in this world that is superior to ramakrishna vivekananda books for formation of character.in them there is everything positive,nothing negetive." aurobindo hailed ramakrishna as the avatar of dakshineshwar. indira gandhi.sarvapalli radhakrishnan,nehru the list is endless. ramkrishna preached self reslization as the highest object of human birth.but he condemmed narrow mindedness and derogating other faiths.its sad to see how some recent gurus with shallow intellectuallity and insufficient reading start to condem him and his words. passing the test of time is one of the greatest challenges that a philpsophy or an institution can face.ramakrishna-vivekananda movement has proven itself to be succesful in this regard. debates continue to rage over their avatarhood even to this day.but avatar or not,undoubtedly they were the finest saints that 20th century indian soil has produced.

personification of god as a female form has been one of the earliest religious concepts of the world.right since the origin of mankind humans have worshipped the supreme as their mother.but nowhere did it assume a form of a seperate religion as in indian subcontinent.shakti worship here dates back even before indus valley civilization.inhabitants of the middle east had a patriarchal form of society and hence it was very natural for them to personify god as father.but in india the society before the aryans were mainly matriarchal in nature.naturally its inhabitants also viewed god as their mother or mistress.however it was in the puranas that we find a more solidified concept of the goddess. EVOLUTION shkati wortship resulted from an amalgamation of the powerfull non-aryan cults and vedic rituals.by the time of the puranas it had aqquired a complete hindu character.but the concept of shakti differed largely in various sects. 'MAYA' AS ACCORDING TO ADVAITINS an advaitin lays stress on the concept of maya.but this maya is not the like the term mahamaya as understood by the shaktas.an advaitin believes that the maya is the primary phenomenon that prohibits us from realising the supreme unity in all things.in fact in advaita , maya does not have a seperate existence at all.after the highest realization according to advaitic standards(nirvikalpa) one can see that maya never existed.it is actually nothing but bhrama(mistake).so the advaitists understands maya to be a temporary state of mind in which one is prevented to see the reality.maya is not the supreme in this philosophy.brahman is the supreme unity here. 'MAYA' AS ACCORDING TO VAISHNAVS vaishnavs generally stick to the names vishnumaya or yogamaya.in their thought, maya occupies a more personalised position.she is the goddess and shakti of vishnu.but she is not elevated above vishnu in most cases.a vaishnav believes that maya is the other name of ignorance.mayadevi casts her illision over the mortals.thus here her importance is brought down to the level of avidyashakti.she is the one who binds ,but cannot liberate without vishnu's permission. MAYA IN A SHAKTA PERSPECTIVE. shaktas view maya as the supreme phenomenon.she is the ultimate unity and sustainer and reedemer of the world.she occupies the same position that brahman enjoys in advaita and vishnu in vaishnav doctrines.they lay stress on the word mahamaya.shakta shastra maintains that the goddess can both illusion and liberate the masses.thus here all the previous concepts are joined together to create a very broad concept of maya. thus it can be seen how the three different sects understand the term 'maya' in completely three different perspectives. SHAKTA SADHANA IN BENGAL Although shakti worship was prevalent all over the country it was in bengal that it achieved the highest perfection.right since the prehistoric times bengal had been the seat of mother worship.almost all non aryans tribes used to worship the primitive mother goddess.when aryans came their vedic deities like saraswati,ratri and sandhya got merged with these goddesses and formed the base of todays shakta dharma. with the advent of chaintanya dev in bengal there begun a socio religious renaissance that changed the bengali society for ever.it was at this time that bhakti yoga started to dominate the shakta thought.numerous sadhaks like raja ramakrishna,kamalkanta,ramprasad etc began to write songs of love adressed to kali the vaishnava padavali era originated at the time of jayadeva and ended in late muslim period.shakta padavali era started only 350 to 400 years ago and is still continuing.these numerous songs describes the toughest of philosophies in simplest of languages.in one such song ramprasad writes- " my dear mother is flying thousands and thousands of kites all over the sky of material existence.the kites(jiva) are all bound with strings of maya which are hardened using a paste of sada ripu(kama krodha........matsarya) . only once in a while some lucky kite gets torn off and fies off to the free realms.seeing this my mother becomes happy and starts clapping her hands in joy. " TOLTRANCE INSHAKTA DHARMA unlike vaishnav faith ystems most shaktas are very tolerant of other religions.many shadaks have written songs requesting devi to appear in the form of krishna.this may have been possible because of the predominant advaita thought in shakta philosophy , where all other dieties are viewed as the manifestations of a single central phenomenon(shakti in this case) after advent of ramakrishna paramahamsa the shakta veiw reached the pinnacle of its development and fame.infact the culmination of three thousand years of shakti worship was perhaps in ramakrishna.one may not feel it but the shakta faith is growing strongly in current age.numerous songs and poems are being written about this divine play between mother and child. one can safely say that shakta religion is currently in its most important stage of developement.

after advaita acharya nityananda prabhu left this world a significant part of their work in bengal was continued by their sons and grandsons.it was at the time of advaita acharya's greatgrandson mathuresh goswami that the first rasa celebration took place in shantipur.slowly it spread to other branches of the goswami clan and assumed the proportions of the main festival of shantipur. the principal diety in this area is radha raman of the baro-goswami family.this deity was first installed in orissa by the famous king indradyummna bearing the name of dol-govinda.when the king of yessore(now in bangladesh), vasanta ray attacked orrissa he carried this famous diety to his capital. many years passed by and yessore came under the rule of pratapaditya,a blood relation of vasanta ray and the last independent ruler of bengal, before being overtaken by the mughals.when raja man singh,who was the right hand man of mughal emperor akbar, attacked yessore the purohit of dolgovinda sensed the gravity of the situation and gave the diety to his own guru mathuresh goswami,who brought it to shantipur.here he installed an idol of srimati radharani and renamed it radharaman. to this day one can see the beutiful deities in shantipur. apart from radharaman there are numerous other ancient family deities each with their own unique mystical history.they are spendidly dressed up in antique gold and diamond jewellary for the festival.but rest of the year use of jewellery is kept to a bare minimum to pevent attracting robbers and theives.the first day of rasautsav begins with special archana and kirtans.on the second night the dieties are married to each other.on the third day they are seated on a lavish howdah or palanquin and carried atop shoulders acrros the city accompanied with huge dazzling processions. antique silver perfume holders,betel nut holders, water glasses are provided for them in case they require any of those in the middle of the journey. these processions usually start with playing of 108 'dhaak's, a speciall barrell drum of bengal played during major festivals and decorated with lavish heron plumes. next comes numerous men and women dressed as radha krishna etc.scottish bands , balloons and other rural entertainments also follow the parade. next in line comes the beautifull "rai raja". a young girl ,not yet reached puberty, is decorated as rai or radha rani,worshipped and revered as rai herself and then seated on a lavish throne decorated with ornate lamps and chandeliers and toured across the city. it is interesting to see how these families have kept the tradition alive even after so many years.most of these palanquins or thrones are still lit up using ornate belgium glass candel holders and chandeliers.even the temples are decorated using thousands of candles.electric light is used to a basic minimum.this gives the entire event a sense of aesthetic beauty and instantly transports you to the bygone colonial eras of maharajas and zamindars.the tall collums,lofty arches,silver thrones all shimmer in the dim candel light and creates a breathtaking beauty in a few households. over time a new feature has propped up in this festivals.many public clubs and societies have started their own puja.most of these are either kali or durga.this is indeed a miracle to see kali,who is usually worshipped on amavasya,being worshipped on a purnima.but keeping the vaishnav nature of the festival intact no animal sacrifice or such practice is perormed.shakta devis are worshipped in their satwik aspect.thus it achived a synthesis of two most apparently opposing religious forces predominant in bengal -the vaishnavas and shaktas. it is indeed curious to see the hype and celebration revolving around so many vaishnav deities in one single place,in an otherwise predominantly shakta state. this makes one remember of the ancient kingdom of malla kings vishnupur,bengal.here raja bir hambir(who got initiated from jiva goswami) constructed a large rasa mancha(a temple for rasa celebrations) with 108 carved arches on its four sides.on the rasa purnima day all the local deities(108 in number),were brought and seated on the grand platform for a week long celebrations.after its culimination after a week each deity returned to its own temple.this inspiration is drawn from the nature of rasa lila itself where krishna multiplied himself to play individually with all the gopis simultaneously.those numerous deities might have given the same feel to the onlooker.but this festival didnt survive and died out with the collapse of monarchy. sadly inspite of its lost era charm and unique style , there are no proper hotels available in shantipur,which makes this festival largely inaccesable to the outsiders,except ones having relatives in this town.the unruly crowd and other issues also add to the problem. but even to this day shantipur's rasautsav can give you a taste of ancient bengal of a bygone era.

it feels good to see you agreeing to my point.true,bhakti can never be bound by organisations. thats also correct.i have also read that one's mind also acts as his best guru,though after a certain level of advancement.and intense saranagati to lord would definately get you one realized guru.its said that untill the time is ripe,guru is not to be found.and in many cases lord willfully delays the process to increase our yearning for a guru.because when one developes this intense spiritual hunger then time becomes right for sowing the first seed of bhakti. good luck with your sadhana till i return .

hello amalesh, i admit that i was not aware of this swadharma concept as you explain it.could you elaborate it a bit further for my knowledge? and who was srimati andal.like to know more about her. actually its a wrong statement that advaitins have no understanding of real vaishnavism.some really do.but yes,one thing is for sure.its not possible for a advaitin to know each and every details of bhaktiyoga in detail,for the simple fact that they are advaitins after all.can any vaishnava know shakta or advaitic doctrine in perfect detailing?never. sad that i wont be there for next few days.i'll check the posts to my questions once i return.

i think by pure bhakti you mean raganuga bhakti or krishna prema,the highest stage.i agree that advaitins can never understand this bhakti(for arguments sake).but thats also the case with you.as a bhaktiyoga practitioner even you cant know that, at this early stage.then whats the point in talking about that.im trying to focus on the other aspects of these two paths.

thats what im trying to say all this time.iskcon should take the best of everyone and ignore the rest. not joining institution is fine but i think a guru is necessary(sadly true gurus are hard to find. thats because when i first came in here i saw it had become a place for spreading hate(mostly) towards all that dont conform to the belief of isckon.and with only a few people to refute their points it had virtually become the pramod udyan(garden of pleasure) for them. its perfectly ok that most users are iskconites or people of similar faiths.but why should this incessant abuse go on unrefuted?spiritual discussions doesnt mean iskconic discussions only.

GOD IS INFINITE oops !! sorry for typing in 'goa' instesd of god.every time i talk with some people they seems to suggest that god can only be a person, or that he is always sagun etc.its similar to the claims of muslims and christians that only allah is god or god can never be with form. we all know that god is infinite.now what do we understand by this term.for a vast majority of us that would mean someone who extends all over the universe.or it might mean infinite in the same way as used in mathematics.but surely god is not that kind of infinite.the word 'infinite' is impossible for humans to comprehend because we are limited by our senses.he has ananta rup, ananta bhav,ananta guna.when someone draws a line and say that god can be only this and not that isnt it trying to limit god within finite terms?it is a paradoxical statement.how can someone limit god.we can never comprehend what he actually is(even sukadeva and narada failed).

firstly that was not written to be taken so seriously.it was kind of a joke.secondly ill tell you a truth.since childhood i have been an ardent admirer of mayapur,with their efforts to restore the ancient temple city concept,the unusually high devotion of some western devotees,their kirtans,dedication ,in short everything.there can hardly be any parralels to its spiritual vibrations.its exhilarating to see thousands of devotes dancing away in those tedious parikrama and made me remind of those beautifull days of gauranga mahaprabhu when bengal shook with naam sankiratan.but fortunately as a child i was a book worm and my family used to travel a lot and thus developed a strong reasoning power and broadness of mind.sadly as i entered deep into the folds of iskon i realized their narrowness,orthodoxy and fundamentalist veiws which are entirelly based on selective interpretation of selected scriptures. still i tried to overlook their faults,for im an optimist by nature and it should not be the nature of spiritual seekers to find faults with others.but iskcon never stopped their way of fault finding with others.and the final nail in the coffin was struck when there was a direct insult(by only a few half educated east bengal refugee brahmacaris)to some particular religious personalities and me on account of my belief in them .thats exposed their degree of fundamentalism for the last time.not only are the iskconites unintellectual but they know nothing about that personality ,except the rubbish taught to them by their authorities.they abuse(not just criticise)everyone right from rabindranath tagore,mahatma,aurobindo,maxmuller,vivekananda,radhakrishnan, dayanand saraswti,sankaracharya,durga ........etc and claim themselves to be the only monopoly traders in god realization. my friend,you must realize im indeed speaking out of being frustated with iskconites. it was after this i turned totally anti iskcon and continue to be so.if their path is so perfect why are there so many scandals and falldowns?many other advaitist organisations do not have even a quarter as much as them. there is a saying that if you ever come across guru ninda(someone saying ill words towrds your guru)then either leave the place or rise up and protest. i chose the latter. how would it help? it might indeed help a lot.for example if i ever want to avenge me and my guru's insult by publishing all these comments about these illustrious personalities(revered as saints in india) and the scandals in a few newspapers here i dont think it can attract any more youth forum members.not that im going to do that in any case.for if i do, there would be no difference between you guys and me.i belive in validity of all paths. . now you have my point.instead of continuing posting here ,think of this story carefully and work hard to rectify your organisation,so that you dont churn out more and more anti isckonites in this world.already the world is filled with them. nonetheless, theres one comforting thought.have you ever heard of brahma samaj movement of 9th century. it rose in bengal as an attempt to reform hinduism and save it from christian missionaries.but their leaders were grossly mistaken and derided varnasharm,idol worship and many other facets of hinduism.it quickly grew to a monumental size acttracting mostly rich aristrocrats,western educated college youths and the intellegentsia of the socety.its popularity made evry contemporary person think that it would grow and eventually replace hinduism.but scandals and fight for power crept in almost along with its inception and it dissapeared without a trace by 1940's. now that sociological and historical rules dont change irrespective of whatever the circumstances may be,i can see the same symptoms within iskcon.so we can safely assume that it shall be another 50 years or so for it to end peacefully.time would be the best answer. im extremely sorry for if ive offended anyone by this post.and i want to keep some genuine devotees of iskcon out of these comments.a true bhakta is never bound by any institution ,you know.

i know that.the goal of a bhakta is always suddha nishkaam ahaituki prem.the raganuga bhakti.bhaktas dont care for liberation or astrology or materialism.thats how all ideal spiritual seekers should be. thats the only place advaitins differ in thought.yes,they both converge,true.they are not exactly divisable,but interlinked.thats also true.but advaitists dont say that one supercedes the other in the end. its perfectly true.most neo advaitists of modern age dont want to merge into brahman niether do they care for mukti.whereas vaishnavs dont believe advaitic anubhuti can ever come,advaitists think that it might come as a result of their sadhana sometime in distant future.but that doesnt make them crave to unite with god. again i agree with you.its not without reason that bhaktas are advised to stay clear of advaitists.thats because building up unflinching faith is the key to realization.faith is stepping stone of religion.but if any bhakta constantly hears to opposite theories,he might develope doubts.that would harm his bhakti which is in a developing state.that is why they are advised to stay out of advaitic discussions.no harm in that.this principle should be followed by adherents of every faith in their initial stages. why do you think advaitists dont know anything of bhakt?infact in modern age its difficult to find a pure advaitin.almost all advaitists have turned into what is called neo advaita by developing concepts traditionally ascribed to bhakti,such as,kirtan,singing,japa,observing festivals etc. ive tried to read through as many bhakti scriptures as possible,like bhagavad gita(including your as it is version),madhurya kadambini,a few cantos of bhagavatam etc.and the list would increase in future. only i dont draw a line and say that god can be only this and not anything more than that.he is infinite,ananta rup,ananta bhav ,ananta rasa.my cnception of god tells me(not made up by me,of course)that he is sakar,nirakar,saguna ,nirgauna all at the same time,he is everything and also in everything.i dont try to limit him even by a fragment.there is no cause to think that as because he is saakar he cannot be nirakaar at the same time or vice versa.if he is infinite,he can be what we can comprehend and also what we can never comprehend due to our conditioned nature and material bodies.

thats not always the case.todays advaitists agree on bhakti being a self sufficient path to realization.only they claim that at the end of both bhakti and advaita the ultimate realization remains the same. thats true , gaudiya vaishnavs would never admit that jyana and bhakti can converge.

im not digesting it.im recording it in memory to utilise as necessary

how do you know that,you have not tasted it. by this do you want to suggest just because you cant no one else can?each individuals approach and capacity to understand god is different,which is why there are so many different faiths in this world. that is according to gaudiya vaishnavism and not the ancient vaishnavisn . it also says sa vidya parama.....sa iva sarveshwareshwari" which means that this shakti is the ultimate vidya or truth and the one who gives liberation.she's also the cause of bondage and the ishwari of all other ishwar(gods) whts left to explain? shes jada according to gaudiya faith only.in every other faith and in almost all puranas she is the root conciousness.its a shame that as an indian you are unawre of the basic hindu mantras like --ya devi sarvabhutesu......chetanetyavidhiyate.....namo namah.it means that the devi is present all over the cosmos in form of conciousness. in the same markendaya purana it was only the devi who existed (apart from vishnu in yoganidra)after the end of kalpa. surely a jada vastu cant exist after pralay?!!!!!!!! infact under the spell of yogamaya vishnu was lying jada in yoganidra.start reading some sciptures right now. i'll show you your fault.----------durga =vahiranga shakti(power) radha=antaranga shakti(power) krishna=powerfull so krishna in totality constitute both vahiranga and antaranga shakti,right ?? then you call durga jada or demigod. so a part of krishna turns demigod.and so he is not absolute.can he be called god anymore??!!!!!!!! so refraining from eating fish is the first criteria for becoming a mahatma ? a realized soul eats fish and he forgets all about brahman,isit like that?did you see these people?how can you be so sure that they are not mahatmas?with full respect towards sri maharaj how are you so sure of his exalted state? ha ha !!!! this is your knowledge of hinduism!!!!!!!! whats the difference between a veda mantra and krishnas words ??????????? vedas are considered gods direct revelations in hindu fold.did'nt you ever read that?or do you want to sugest that there are 2 different gods--one who revealed the vedas and one who reaveled the gita??

bhaktajan you have a rare talent to entertain people.i find your posts so amusing and funny.you have not said whether you would like to start shalagram archan according to pancharatra.if you want i can even send you some that i personally collected in my muktinath trek. i feel so sorry that im going to mayapur day after tommorow for three days on occasion of rasayatra. i would miss all your fun here. sad,but what to do? i have to understand all of iskcon's faults,scandals(they have a full library of that right since the prabhupada poisoning case),and idiotic scriptural interpretations so that i realise whats going on in the world in name of religion and become devoted to my own faith. koti dandavat.

hi bhaktajan, would you mind me asking you ,which part of the world you belong to? i know this is personal and i do not mean to offend you in any way.this is just a curiosity on my part.ive asked this on a previous occasion also. if you are a westerner that would immediately make sense of your style of arguments which are modeled on arguments of christians and followers of other abrahamic religions.in that case i would understand that it is not your fault, but your samskars as a westerner thats working.that would strentghen my already strong belief in purva janma and samskars.

hello bhaktajan.good to see you here again.whatever you said is all true and nice,no doubts about that. bhagavad gita is indeed the best of hindu scriptures,i believe that.krishnastu bhagavan swayam, no harm in that.but what all my posts wants to convey is to realise that there can be no monopoly in understanding god or interpretating gita.one cannot draw a line and say this is the only ever true interpretation of gita.god is infinite with innumerable mellows,ananta rasa , ananta bhava.how can you put him within a finite space by saying he is this and nothing else ? nether do i wish you to change your belief.gauddiya vaishnavism is a wonderfull path,but make this small change in your attitude towards others and everything would be perfect. btw, i do the archana of twelve shalagrams everyday and take the prasadam since i got my upanayan in childhood days.thats how im blessed with such a broadness of mind.if you want i can tell you where to find shalagrams and archana paddhati according to narada pancharatra AS IT IS.

hey amalesh,i dont hate nor try to spread it.im a follower of ramakrishna vivekananda thought,which was the first to teach of respecting(not just tolerating) every religion.how can i hate.i always belive in assimilation of ideas. but what comments i make about the isckon people or some vaishnavs are a result of a lot of bad experience.i was brought up in a vaishnav goswami family with modern educated values and broad outlook.but when i turned to iskcon for spirituality i found that all of them and many other vaishnavs also, still stick to medieval theories of downplaying every other beliefs.this hurt my sentiments.but still i tried to overlook their faults by acknowledging their sucsess in preaching to the west,their devotion and dedication etc. but for how long? i noticed that they cherish this art of derogating others and twist the shastric slokas to their need.any person with minimum knowledge of sanskrit would understand that.this and innumerable other causes have made me do what i do today.