sant

Im with you sir melvin on this.What is the need to deny the greatness of christ.

vedic religion of course !!

 

instead of asking me register yourself in some reputed library and find out what it was !!

 

 

MAdhwacharya was a vaishnav and they do vedic yajnas etc,SO do you beleive that to be vedik.

vedic religion was not vaishnavism !!

 

 

What was it?

both are directly related . theres no realisation without a raised kundalini and kundalini doesnt rise without realization

No its not like that.Just go through some peoples posts over here in this forum youll know why.Anyway dont you know that kundalini can be raised with siddha drugs also.SO it does ito necessarily mean it is same as realisation.

you're right ! perhaps i already knew a little bit about hinduism for them to pass of their restructered cult as 'authentic vedic discipline'

, unlike the many unfortunate brainwashed fellows who came in blank and went out as hare krishna fanatics cursing the same gods that they have been taught to pray to by their forefathers since childhood !!!

 

 

Hare krishna's dont teach hinduismm.Srila bhaktivedanta had explained it taht he was not preaching hinduism.Do you want me to quote him.

no i dont ! its all in shastras , why should it be untruthfull ?!

 

 

which shatra?

Laxmi sarswati is prayed to but not one place it mentions that demigods serves her feet.Except the devi bhagwat one sotry which you agreed it is false.

actually there are two methods of raising kundalini - either by yoga or by ordinary bhakti . both are correct and accepted . things become bad when any persons misutilises the paranormal powers that he gets by raising it .

 

 

You still dont get it.What will raisng kundalini help you if there is no realisation and you forcefully rise the kundalini .

Raisng kundalini doesnt mean realisation.

Ordinary bhakti raises kundalini, does it?

Bhakti is ordinary.See your physche.

This is why i said that iskcon classes went out off your ears.

That is why i said bhakti to a demigod and to krishna is different.

i didnt say its vaishnisvm . i said its corrupted version of vaishnivism just like vamarga is the corrupted version of tantricism .

 

Again.You dont want to beleive then youre wish.

I can see youre avoiding this argument as always.

What you beleive may not be right.

Vaman marg is an essential part of tantrism.

Why dont you ask the tantrics.

good .................. but how does a lay man like me determine who has experience in spirituality ?

 

 

I dont know.How did you decide then that iskcon philosophies are inferior to ramakrishna or something like that.

How did you explain all those things to me in our discussions.

How did you in your way intepret and teach me how to Accept mahaprabhus philosophy And call it situational.

admit it happened in those times and I find it abhorent. I also find animal sacrifice horrible and disgusting and I care not if it is taught in the veda's or not

HUman sacrifice happened.?.Whos the translator of the verses.

I read that madhwacharya criticised and didnt accept the ashwamedha yagya process shown in the veda.Does the ramayan mention the horrid nature of rams ashwamedha yagya.

Quote:

The Tamil Saiva saint Meykandar formulated a dualistic school of Saiva Siddhanta in approx. 900 ce. Meykandar and the dualists content that the world and soul are eternal, were never created, and are inherently flawed. These views are completely counter to the monistic school

Ok this means that soul and parmatma is considered differnt here.

As for your other wiki sources i dont think anyone mentions shaiv being dualistic.Check again.

Gorakshanath (who Osho called Gorakh) originated the search for "methods and techniques of sadhana

Do you see waht is show you here?The word sadhna as in the hindi one started with gorakhnath.

Then act like a man and whip Sambya with some tongue lashing

I dont know the meaning of lashing.

I dont get what you mean.

\

Just as I know that Krsna is just a Boy.

 

Krisna is also a man.

You are very funny, Sambya. You know Sant is just a kid.

How does mr melvin know sant is a kid.

Even sant doesnt know that.

Saivas believe in one of the three schools of Hindu philosophy, namely Advaita (monism), Vishishtadvaita (qualified monism) and Dvaita (dualism) depending on the sect.

 

OK tell one dvaita shaiva.

as has been discussed a thousand times before there are innumerable references where other gods worships devis feet . so im not going into those details .

 

what do you know about kundalini jagaran ? it is a automatic process which is activated as one progresses in bhakti . the more advanced one is in bhakti sadhana the more awakened is his kundalini . it has nothing to do with black magic or witchcraft . and as far as i can immidiately remember the process is mentioned in bhagavd gita also(including your own as it is version) .....................

 

You know how untruthful those things are.Remember i showed you some Verse and you admitted it was intepreted by the brahmins.

As for kundalini jagran im sorry i know its a big thing but what i was talking about is people trying to raise their kundalini with such and such pranayam,with medicine without having any change in consciousness.

As youve mentioned it is an automated proces(same as automatic i guess) but tantra calls for artificial methodes to raise it.

In my opinion you raise your consciosnesss and not just the snake inside you otherwise youre just looking for some tantric powers by this jagran.

Raising your consciousness happens with change of heart ,change of being otherwise as ive read posts here it is just increasing energy inside you.Artificial methods for raising kundalini or consciousness make no sense.

As for bhakti tell me one shakt kundalini practitioner who does bhakti.You know it.People are just interested for the power or whatever thing this gives you.

not exactly ........it is appears like that to people who loves watching saas bahu tv soaps depicting terrifying tantrics or potentially daisasterous black magic , not to scholarly people who actually studies about tantra than believing in popular media .

 

it cannot be the same thing . there are a lot of differences between what common men believe and what are the facts . common people think that leaving everything for god is sheer madness . but that is a wrong

So you like such serials i didnt know that.Your taste reflects in spirituality also.have you been to the tantra mantra topic.You know how many people come there greived due to tantrics.Anyway my point is that it is famous for such things.Not to hurt your feelings.You can practice whatever you want.

out of the four criteria that you have specified three of them are so easy to accomplish- reading the vedas ,

beating 100 scholars,

experience in guru-giri .

 

wow !! that instantly makes many not-so-holy individuals , most eligible gurus !! great........

 

 

Again thats my point.Ypu always start comparing with iskcon or vaishnav gurus.You stop saying sahjiya vaihnavism is vaihnavism.IF you can actually prove it is vaishnavism then ill listen to you.Iv proved that vaaman marg is a part of tantra and an integral part.You call it corrupt form of tantra.And you compare with vaihnavism. But You cant call sahjiya vaishnavism corrupted because it is not vaishnavism.That is the point.All waht i said is to prove to you the status of tantra and vaishnavism.

Now coming back.

THe conditions ive mentioned are just a few of them.What made madhwacharya a jagad guru.Why dont you Think about that.

And by expericnce i meant experience in sprituality and in realisation and in god.But you like often just Dont get what i try to tell you.

why ?? explain to me !

 

After all those iskcon classes you ask why.Dont you know the value of serving the lords feet.Whose feet devi herself worships and whos name shankara chants you still ask the value of becoming his bhakt.

You compare it with such things as kundalini jagran,mahavidya etc.

as usual you didnt get through my words . i said i dont know tantric witchcraft and black magic .

So you remember.Anyway same thing since tantra is more known for that nowadays.

how to determine who has this authority ?

 

 

Experience.Are you self realised.Have you read the vedas.Have you beaten 100s of scholars in debate.

indirect and vague method , instead of being specific and conclusive ........but anyways.............a lot of centuries have rolled by and nothing could be done about that now .

Sambyacharya i dont know what you mean by that but dont you know it takes some authority and gods grace to be able to understand waht vedas say.Everything if it was direct then what was the point of people having to do some work to intepret the vedas.You think you can understand vedas better than others.

Yogmaya is identical with Sri Hari and Even Mayadevi is identical becoz THEY BOTH ARE HIS ENERGIES..Just becoz Maya performs work of deluding the maya-baddha jivas,should it mean She is a limitedly powerful sakti of Bhagavan

Identical doesnt make it equal.Even jivatam is considered a higher energy of lord and is the same as lord in quality.But he is not equal to the lord.

like the sahajiya vaishnavas !

 

im sorry but i cannot discuss things with you because you have absolutely no knowledge of tantra , which i know from the previous discussions with you . and neither will you accept what i say nor go out and seek it yourself !

 

 

I knew youll come up with that sad word sahajiya vasihnavism.Dont you have any other argument instead of this one.

You should be ashamed of your self comparing vaishnavism to tantra.

Where tantra(Artificial vedas wannabe) and where vaishnavism.

Sambya if we remember then it was you yourself who said i dont know about tantra and now youre telling me.

deleted

as per my knowledge tantra does not depend upon the vedas at all . all it does is to accept the validity of the ancient shrutis and give them their due respect . but at the same time it loudly proclaims that rituals described in shrutis are ineffective in the age of kali and tantra is the way salvation . hence they are free to deviate from vedic principles(which they sometimes does) and show a complete independence !!

Sometimes???????????

You forgetting sex,drug,alchohol,fish

Dont say this is corrupted tantra

This internal potency of the Lord has a covering potency, known as Mahā-māyā, who rules the material world. In fact she bewilders the entire universe, and thus everyone within the universe falsely identifies himself with the material body."

 

Im talking about the durga created to destroy the villian.She's different from spiritual durga.

Katyani is one of shakti peeths a form of sattti...

Yes. But as I said earlier what he practiced was pure Bhakthi and total surrender. Saranagatha.

 

Ram Prasad Sen was a Tantrik of the highest order. But he was also a Bhaktha who believed in Saranagatha.

 

Confusing. But factually true.

 

 

For advaitists bhakti is just a stage.

Sri Ramakrishna was basically a Kali Bhaktha. And also one who was a devotee of Krishna and Chaitanya Maha Prabhu whom he considered as GOD.

 

If you are interested I can post quotes.

 

But he was also an advaitist

deleted

What was the Goal of Ramakrishna, Sant ? If it is Love of God then he is with us not against us.

 

Advaitist,bhakt

I'm not manufacturing anything.

 

 

Heard it from you dear ranjeetmore .

Katyayani.

 

 

Katayani is durga?

What it means is , if you go to Durga with material desires, she will manifest as the Durga of the material world in your heart, and it will lead to materialistic bhakti.

 

So the spiritual durga is different.