Sonic Yogi

chant Hare Krishna and be very happy......feel the bliss... taste the juice...

chant Hare Krishna and you WILL love it!!!

Can you please be a bit more specific. “There is some evolution of species”, but not “evolution as being advocated by modern science”. Perhaps it’s my ape-like ancestry, but I can’t follow you.

There are Vedic sages who also expounded the theory of evolution.

Srila Prabhupada mentioned it in his books in a couple of places.

( I will have to search for the reference later, I gotta go to work now)

He doesn't give the details of exactly what that theory of evolution involves, so I can't really elaborate.

But, there are species that appear to have evolved different features as their location, the climate and the food sources changed.

So, I believe that there is both evolution and creationism.

Some species have evolved a little.

Some species like Alligators haven't evolved in millions of years.

Fossil records prove that.

So, evolution does not cancel out God and God does not cancel out evolution.

They are both possible at the same time in my view.

If evolution was a law of nature, then Alligators should have evolved.

They haven't changed at all in millions of years going back to the Dinosaurs.

Who says God himself didn’t evolve? So we may have been created in his image after all!

When you are already perfect and supreme, there is no room for evolving.

God is absolutely perfect.

There is no where to evolve to when you are the highest form of life.

There is some evolution of species.

That is not hard to accept.

But, evolution as being advocated by modern science is just the brain fart of a bunch of guys who get together and eat lunch at McDonald's every day.

What can you expect from a bunch of burger heads who make their careers out of speculating and inventing theories.

These guys make careers out of these stupid theories and there is no actual science behind it.

I know enough about these so called scientists to know that a paycheck is behind all their theories.

These people are just parasites on society who refuse work for a living or contribute anything useful to human society.

They should all be put to work in the rice fields doing something productive.

The oldest fossil remains of upright walking hominoids are about 4 million years old (Australopithecus afarensis). The earliest remains of modern humans (homo sapiens) are 195,000 years old. Next, the entire human population appears to have been nearly wiped out about 70,000 years ago (probably as the result of a super volcanic event that triggered a volcanic winter). Judged from the extreme genetic similarity of the different human races, the number of humans may have shrunk as low as 2,000 before numbers began to increase again. It cannot be known for sure exactly where this tiny group of humans survived. Might as well be in India..

So, you are basically saying that any and all religious theories about man being created by God in the image of God is all a hoax?

In other words you are saying there is no God who created man as man.

Then, what, may I ask are you doing on a forum about spirituality and faith in God?

Do you hope to convince all us religious zealots that there is no God and that man evolved from Apes.

Maybe you evolved from an Ape.

Your level of intelligence seems to indicate that.

Myself, I was created by God in his image.

That is why I am smarter than you.

Is it possible to have an intelligent conversation with an Ape?

 

Even Duke knows that its fruitless to argue over who is saksad hari and who is isn't:

 

Only Hari is sakshad-Hari, because we already confirmed in another topic that the guru is a common jiva.

There ain't no jiva that can be "directly Hari".

Hari is Vishnu-tattva and the guru is shakti-tattva.

 

Right?

 

If we can't be Hari we can a least be Hairy.

 

The moon is further away from the earth than the sun

 

Well, since there are 166 known moons in the solar system, that means that there are probably hundreds of them that are further from the Earth than the Sun.

The entire universe contains probably thousands of moons.

So, yeah, there are thousands of moons further from Earth than the Sun.

This is going to hurt me as much as it will hurt you. Well maybe you more, depending on which side of the bed you woke up on.

 

 

Smells like roses to me.

 

More confirmation below.

 

 

Lectures : Bhagavad-gita Lectures : Bg 1: Lectures : Bhagavad-gita 1.13-14 -- London, July 14, 1973 : 730714BG.LON :

 

So jīva-bhūta, we jīvas, we are all prakṛti. Puruṣa is only Kṛṣṇa. All living entities... Viṣṇu-tattva is puruṣa-tattva, and we are śakti-tattva, śakti, energy, marginal energy of Kṛṣṇa. So energy is prakṛti.

You are missing the point in that purport.

It says that shakti-tattvas are empowered to become avatars.

When the shakti-tattva become shaktyavesha avatar he is then an incarnation of Godhead like Vyasadeva.

The shaktyavesha avatars come from the ranks of the shakti-tattva, but when they are empowered avatars they are incarnations of Godhead.

Go back and read it again without coloring it with your pink glasses.

Yes, jivas are shakti-tattva, but shaktyavesha avatars are incarnations of Godhead.

Lectures : Bhagavad-gita Lectures : Bg 1: Lectures : Bhagavad-gita 1.13-14 -- London, July 14, 1973 : 730714BG.LON :

 

So jīva-bhūta, we jīvas, we are all prakṛti. Puruṣa is only Kṛṣṇa. All living entities... Viṣṇu-tattva is puruṣa-tattva, and we are śakti-tattva, śakti, energy, marginal energy of Kṛṣṇa. So energy is prakṛti.

 

So, if being shakti-tattva means incarnation of Godhead then we are all incarnations of Godhead according to the statement above.

In your stubborn, obstinate pride, you can only give an ad-hominem attack after being proven wrong. Is it that difficult for you to just admit you were wrong?

 

You cannot reproduce any sastra to back up your original statement, that very statement which I reproduced, that very statement you changed later to match some sastra.

 

You are either too stuck up to think I may have caught your mistake and didn't even bother to check back to the original thing you said, or you are just prevaricating to save your self image, hoping no one else will check on you.

 

Admitting you are wrong is like putting a pick axe to the stone around your heart. It must be done. Otherwise you can read til the cows come home, think you know something, but the stone like lens distorts what you read for your own purposes. I like to think you are better than that and just having a bad hair day, but the jury is still out on that one.

Well, your claim that shaktyavesha avatars are "shakti-tattva" is totally bogus.

Shaktyavesha avatars are incarnations of Vishnu.

If you bothered to read the shastra I wouldn't have to be here telling you that.

Show me anywhere in shastra that Shaktyavesha avatars are shakti tattva.

You can't.

It's just something you made up to try and defend your lack of knowledge of shaktyavesha avatars.

Narayana Maharaja says some wacky things in that lecture, as he usually does,

Shiva, your arrogance and conceit are totally off the chain.

You really need to get your head out of your anal sphincter and show a little respect where respect is due.

I have resolved to rectify my offenses to Narayana Maharaja and if you were as smart as you would like to presume to be you would too.

You are an insect compared to Narayan Maharaja.

The sooner you realize that the better off you will be.

Narayana Maharaja has a right to differ from Prabhupada.

Anybody with eyes can look around ISKCON and see that it is far from perfect.

I have come to give Narayan Maharaja his due respect and afford him the right to his own opinion.

If you think you are in a position to judge Narayana Maharaja I would just say that you must have really fried your brain on LSD are are suffering permanent hallucinations.

I read your story.

I know you saw Krishna in the form of a hologram and he looked just like Michael Jackson.

So, at this point, your opinion has no value to me.

His reply was the it means that Krishna is the head god.

I knew it...... there is more than one God.

Of all the many gods Krishna is just the head of the club.

That is so wonderful.

In all of Prabhupada's books he never once referred to Krishna as "the head god'.

But, some undocumented lecture in Hawaii is what we are supposed to base our understanding on.

Wonders never cease.

 

We must bring the heart into it.

And that is indeed the most difficult thing to do without getting all sentimental in a sahajiya sort of way.

Personally, I think the best way to bring the heart in to it is by really absorbing into the books and the purports.

By reading the books hour after hour, day after day year after year we might finally start to "feel the love" shared by the spiritual master.

Of course that needs to be tempered with chanting the rounds etc.

I know for many older devotees they seem to feel as if they have already read the books for along time and then they sorta just get all off into ISKCON politics or some other social situation involving other devotees and put the books on the shelf to collect dust.

The books should always be a new, fresh experience.

If they aren't we are spiritual dead and aren't going to go anywhere in spiritual advancement.

Are the books without some flaw or error?

Probably not.

But, they are probably 99% right on the money and that is enough to get us where we want to go.

We have to make sacrifice.

That is they key.

The more we really and truly give of ourselves for the benefit of others the more the love will actually start to blossom in our hearts.

If we aren't sacrificing for the cause of love, then we will never feel the love.

Here she is folks, my pride and joy!!

Isn't she a beauty?

 

Incarnations of Visnu's power invested in a living entity means what it says. It does not mean Lord Visnu transforms a Jiva into Visnu tattva, or gives the Jiva all his potencies, which would make the Jiva equal in quantity to whatever Visnu was doing the empowering, which by the way could be KRSNA. Saktavesha avatara = Sakti Tattva = empowered Jiva. Not Visnu Tattva.

Ok, I get it.

You left your reading glasses at the office?

I dont know really. I always thought anything that eminates from the complete perfect is also complete in itself.

 

You always thought?

But, does what you always thought match what is stated in shastra?

SYNONYMS

 

antarańgā — the internal potency; cit-śakti — the spiritual potency; taṭasthā — the marginal potency; jīva-śakti — the living entities; bahirańgā — the external potency; māyā — the illusory energy; tine — all three of them; kare — do; prema-bhakti — devotional service in love.

 

TRANSLATION

 

"The spiritual potency of the Supreme Personality of Godhead also appears in three phases — internal, marginal and external. These are all engaged in His devotional service in love.

 

PURPORT

 

The spiritual potency of the Lord is manifested in three phases — the internal or spiritual potency, the marginal potency, which consists of the living entities, and the external potency, known as māyā-śakti. We must understand that in each of these three phases the original spiritual potencies of pleasure, eternity and knowledge remain intact. When the potencies of spiritual pleasure and knowledge are both bestowed upon the conditioned souls, the conditioned souls can escape the clutches of the external potency, māyā, which acts as a cover obscuring one's spiritual identity. When freed, the living entity awakens to Kṛṣṇa consciousness and engages in devotional service with love and affection.

Sounds to me like hladini and chit shakti are something that has to be bestowed upon the living entity.

Bhaktivinode covers the matter in some detail in his books.

If we were so complete from the beginning, then how the heck did we end up in maya for billions of lifetimes?

And now, when you wonder if it might be a place, I treat you like an idiot again. Sorry.

But, how is a person a home?

Back Home is a place.

Why does Prabhupada refer to Godhead as a home?

How about we change it to "Back to Him, Back to Godhead".

yeah, that works for me.......

I have never met a person yet that was a home.

Home is where you hang your hat.

the wonder of shakti hey...can transform the best of us;).

True.

The tatastha jiva is lacking in chit-shakti and hladini-shakti.

The gurus invests the disciples with both these shaktis through siksha and diksha.

A tatastha jiva is incomplete in comparison to the liberated souls.

The guru completes us and gives us the power to rise above the marginal plane of consciousness and enter the internal world of love of Krishna.

Visnu may manifest guru tattva through a jiva. But there is no thing as Visnu tattva manifested through a Jiva. Sorry.

 

Sorry, but you are wrong about that.

That is what a shaktyavesha avatar is - Vishnu manifesting through a jiva.

Do some more homework before you jump to conclusions so hastily.

Vyasadeva started out as a jiva and then he became an incarnation of Narayan.

So, as far as I am concerned that is Vishnu manifesting through a jiva.

SB 4.19.37 purport,

Sometimes Lord Viṣṇu appears in His person as Lord Kṛṣṇa or Lord Rāma. All of these appearances are mentioned in the śāstras. Sometimes He appears as a śaktyāveśa-avatāra like Lord Buddha. As explained before, these śaktyāveśa-avatāras are incarnations of Viṣṇu's power invested in a living entity. Living entities are also part and parcel of Lord Viṣṇu, but they are not as powerful; therefore when a living entity descends as an incarnation of Viṣṇu, he is especially empowered by the Lord.

.....................When King Pṛthu is described as an incarnation of Lord Viṣṇu, it should be understood that he is a śaktyāveśa-avatāra, part and parcel of Lord Viṣṇu, and is specifically empowered by Him. Any living being acting as the incarnation of Lord Viṣṇu is thus empowered by Lord Viṣṇu to preach the bhakti cult. Such a person can act like Lord Viṣṇu and defeat demons by arguments and preach the bhakti cult exactly according to the principles of śāstra.

So, the only way to become God is by being his devotee.

It's amazing what you can learn if you read the books of Srila Prabhupada.

No one can be both Vishnu and a jiva, that purport is obviously miswritten.

So, now you have to resort to claiming that purports have been miswritten by the BBT editors in order to defend your claim that Siva is just a common jiva?

Ok, Gaurahari, I understand why you want to leave the discussion and claim a false victory on the basis that the books of Srila Prabhupada are seriously flawed.

If you think Vishnu cannot become a jiva, then you surely have a very limted concept of the abilities of Lord Vishnu who is the smallest of the small.

He can become even smaller than the jiva if he so chooses.

Vishnu can even manifest Vishnu-tattva through a jiva if he so chooses.

In short, Vishnu can do anything he wants.

 

One Shiva is a jiva, the other isn't. The End.

See bro that is your problem.

You want Siva-tattva to fit nicely into the corner of the box of your mind all nice and simple like a bag of weed in your pocket.

Siva-tattva is beyond your mind, your joint and your LSD.

Here is Srila Prabhupada's version..

CC Adi 7.69 purport,

Lord Śiva is therefore simultaneously an expansion of Lord Viṣṇu and, in his capacity for annihilating the creation, one of the living entities.

So, Gaurahari my old pal, Srila Prabhupada says that Siva-tattva is simultaneously Vishnu and jiva.

But, that is not acceptable to you because you insist to reduce Siva down to a jiva like yourself rolling up joints and smoking them.

In fact, you even call yourself Shiva because you smoke weed and imitate Lord Siva in drinking poison.

Hmmm . . . I don't remember knowing anyone who thought of Godhead as a place.

 

As far as the Back To Godhead slogan is concerned, it's one of Srila Prabhupada's translations of a Chaitanya-charitamrita verse:

krsna--surya-sama; maya haya andhakara

yahan krsna, tahan nahi mayara adhikara (Adi 22.31)He translatesthis verse in Cc. as "Krsna is compared to sunshine, and maya is compared to darkness. Wherever there is sunshine, there cannot be darkness. As soon as one takes to Krsna consciousness, the darkness of illusion (the influence of the external energy) will immediately vanish." In another place he gives it as "Krsna is bright like the sun. As soon as the sun appears, there is no question of darkness or nescience."

 

When Srila Prabhupada gave a lecture at the University of Hawaii in may of 1972, a student asked him what he means when he calls Krishna the supreme personality of Godhead. His reply was the it means that Krishna is the head god.

That is odd.

A few years ago I brought up a similar discussion and I had quite a bit of disagreement and one person was actually able to produce a quote from Prabhupada to the effect that Godhead was in fact synonymous with Krsnaloka.

Most everyone treated me like an idiot the last time I proposed that Godhead was not a place.

 

 

PURPORT

 

There are eleven expansions of Rudra, or Lord Śiva. They are as follows: Ajaikapāt, Ahibradhna, Virūpākṣa, Raivata, Hara, Bahurūpa, Devaśreṣṭha Tryambaka, Sāvitra, Jayanta, Pināki and Aparājita. Besides these expansions there are eight forms of Rudra called earth, water, fire, air, sky, the sun, the moon and soma-yājī. Generally all these Rudras have five faces, three eyes and ten arms. Sometimes it is found that Rudra is compared to Brahmā and considered a living entity. But when Rudra is explained to be a partial expansion of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he is compared to Śeṣa. Lord Śiva is therefore simultaneously an expansion of Lord Viṣṇu and, in his capacity for annihilating the creation, one of the living entities. As an expansion of Lord Viṣṇu he is called Hara, and he is transcendental to the material qualities, but when he is in touch with tamo-guṇa he appears contaminated by the material modes of nature. This is explained in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and the Brahma-saṁhitā. In Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Tenth Canto, it is stated that Lord Rudra is always associated with the material nature when she is in the neutral, unmanifested stage, but when the modes of material nature are agitated he associates with material nature from a distance. In the Brahma-saṁhitā the relationship between Viṣṇu and Lord Śiva is compared to that of milk and yogurt. Milk is converted into yogurt by certain additives, but although milk and yogurt have the same ingredients, they have different functions. Similarly, Lord Śiva is an expansion of Lord Viṣṇu, yet because of his taking part in the annihilation of the cosmic manifestation, he is considered to be changed, like milk converted into yogurt. In the Purāṇas it is found that Durgā appears sometimes from the heads of Brahmā and sometimes from the heads of Viṣṇu. The annihilator, Rudra, is born from Saṅkarṣaṇa and the ultimate fire to burn the whole creation. In the Vāyu Purāṇa there is a description of Sadāśiva in one of the Vaikuṇṭha planets. That Sadāśiva is a direct expansion of Lord Kṛṣṇa's form for pastimes. It is said that Sadāśiva (Lord Śambhu) is an expansion from the Sadāśiva in the Vaikuṇṭha planets (Lord Viṣṇu) and that his consort, Mahāmāyā, is an expansion of Ramādevī, or Lakṣmī. Mahāmāyā is the origin or birthplace of material nature.

 

Class Dismissed!

Nice, but that is the purport I first quoted when this whole discussion started. post #129

Let's approach it this way. What is meant by the saying, ' religion without philosophy is just sentiment and philosophy without religion is mental speculation.'

 

What does 'religion' mean in this context?

Worship of God.

Whatever you said may be, it is certainly not evolution.

 

There is plenty of material on evolution easily available. Please take some time and read it before you will speak on the topic. I assume you are not going to learn evolution from religious sources.

 

Cheers

Maybe you should expose your mind to scientists.

http://krishnascience.comDarwin_defeated.html

<table cellspacing="3"><tbody><tr><td align="right" valign="top">1</td> <td valign="top"> taTastha</td> <td valign="top">mfn. standing on a declivity or bank Naish. iii , 55 ; = %{-sthita}</td></tr></tbody></table>

The bank of the ocean is actually most commonly referred to as the beach.

Like I have been telling you peeps, we are all originally beach dwellers, surfers of the waves of illusion, soaking in the Sun of the brahmajyoti rays.

Then, JAWS came and snatched us and took a big bite out of our consciousness.

So, the lifeguard of the spiritual master has jumper in the ocean to come and rescue us from the JAWS of illusion.

For the jiva, live is a beach!