Pankaja_Dasa

I'm just making my point. I could quote Sastra. When I do and start doing it, then hold on to your Dhoti. Hear from Krishna devotee...

What a Preacher Should Know siddhanta baliya citte na kara alasa iha haite krsne lage sudrdha manasa ["A sincere student should not neglect the discussion of such conclusions, considering them controversial, for such discussions strengthen the mind. Thus one's mind becomes attached to Sri Krsna." (Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi-lila 2.117)] *[see endnote 7] "One's mind will become very firmly fixed in surrender to Sri Krsna and service to Him if one studies siddhanta. So one should not be lazy to try to understand it."

Philosophy. = Doctrine. I rather use my commen sence... then read Bhagavad-gita As It Is.

Advaita is covered ignorance. Look I don't need to go on so much since it's Kali-yuga and we are all almost like Sudras. I am repeating myself over and over again like a parrot. If a doctrine establishes God can become covered by Maya, then it is Mayavada. What exactly am I meant to be saying?

I shall go now. I said what I wanted to say. God can never be covered with Maya. === Nataraja Buddists say in their doctrine the Universe is Eternal, but they cannot reconsile why everything is dying at every moment. If they say the Universe is Temporary their whole doctrine is finished. In the same way Advaitins or Mayavadis say the Universe is Eternal, but they also cannot reconsile how they came into Maya. After all how can God be covered by Maya? Krishna says- Bg.7.14: This divine energy of Mine, consisting of the three modes of material nature, is difficult to overcome. But those who have surrendered unto Me can easily cross beyond it. ==============================================

Advaita is covered ignorance. Mode of Goodness. It's not transendental. Just like Jndas said Krishna is covered by Yoga-Maya. Maya cannot touch God.

I don't understand your question, Buddisum says The Universe is eternal. But then it says we are not. Mayavadi says the same thing. We are Eternal but also not. It's same ball park, like they say in U.S.A.

Yes. I will disbelieve entire Vedas for such a dumb philosophy. If God can come into Maya then there is No God.

God is covered by Maya?

Buddisum is classed as being in the three modes of material natures, namely ignorance. Mayavada and Shankracharya and affliliates. To say God can be covered by Ignorance comes under the catergory of modes of nature. Bas. Jaya Prabhupada!

At least we have Original BG 1972 and Bhagavatam, only a matter of time before we get CC.

Well at least I made you sigh. Q: ETERNAL Brahman how did you become a Hog? A: It is only Maya. I am ETERNAL. Q: How did Maya cover you? A: It is only Maya. Q: How did you become a Hog? A: Maya Q: Are you really Eternal then? A: What do you mean it is only Maya! Q: Eternal means temporay also? A: No Eternal means Eternal. Q: Then how can you who is Eternal? A: It is only Maya Q: BUT Your Eternal! A: It is so Q: SO YOUR ETERNAL how can Maya cover you? A: It cannot Q: But your Eternal! Maya is not really Maya, because your Eternal A: Oh yes Q: Then how did you become a Hog? A: It is only Maya Q: SO are you really really Eternal then? A: It is Maya Q: WHat is Maya? That is can cover you? A: It is ... Q: WHy would Maya cover me? A: It is a play? Q: SO even though I am GOD, Maya covers me so I become a Hog? A: Oh yes Q: Why? A: It is only Maya Q: What is Maya? A: It covers me Q: Oh so your covered by Maya? A: Yes Q: I thought Brahman was not clevabale? Cannot be cut? A: Yes it is all one. Q: THen how does Maya cover me? A: It is Maya Q: But how does it do it!? If I am one? A: Maya is very clever Q: More clever then God? A: I don't understand your question Q: Let me say it nicely how does Maya cover God? A: .................................................................... Just making a point. That this is like Buddisum. You need to ask yourself very seriously that if you God [not small God we're talking the biggie] Then Maya CANNOT cover you since your Eternal.

I read Qu'ran it says 'God recides in a places beyond 14 planertery systems. But it says about Personal form of God, which Muslims don't understand. So sorry to say but depending on your mentality and according to Gita they are karmis. They want heavenly enjoyments. Christians I have no clue as yet. Mostly they turned to Gaudiya Vaishavisum!

Oh? Brahman can take form of a Hog? I thought Brahman was eternal? Are you Eternal? Your Body? Did your Soul or Atman come to this World? ? If it did how are you Eternal? How? DO YOU GET WHAT I AM SAYING. No need to quote any scriptures since you don't have a brain to understand it. Please try to think what I'm saying, maybe you like what your doing, I dunno. But if somebody presents you with obvious things then you need to look up and smell the roses. =========================================== An Old Buddist monk says 'A Hog is a Hog but it is also not'. It sounds nice but if you study it carefully the Hog is real, it's soul is real. The Monk if also real. If the monk was not real how is he seeing the Hog? Otherwise the Hog would be saying 'The Monk is a monk but also not a monk'. ! They are all real. The soul is the conscious being. Not the body. The Hog is not the Monk and the Monk is not the Hog. I know your an atheist, but take a look at Gita: http://www.freewebtown.com/bhaktiyoga/Srimad-Bhagavad-gita.htm You might learn something.

Srila Prabhupada: The empiric philosophers speculating on an imperfect process of induction, generally indulge intellectual feats without knowing that behind the mind there is human intelligence which is able to analyse the process of psychology but is unable to find out the ultimate force or spirit behind their intelligence. Letter to: Mr. Bailey Allahabad 7 July, 1953

Indeed. Krishna is saying He is the source of Brahman. Just consider this, God is the most powerful. Only if God is a Person can we think of POWER. One Person being all-powerful. It's unimaginable.

-- God must be an idoit then? He puts Himself in Maya. And becomes a HOG. __ I hope people reading this Thread. Will know what a foolish philosophy this is. It is covered Buddisum. Best avoid it. Unless you want to become an Athiest.

Quote: <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>Originally Posted by Pankaja_Dasa If everything is eternal, how did you take form? Vaishnava says we are eternal but the Universe is also eternal though temporary manifested. If you say the Universe is eternal, then there is no meaning to merge or anything. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE> <!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --> It's Maya. Illusion always is there but it's not real. It's just you mis-perceiving Brahman. === Oh forget it. Your no more than a Buddist! I asked you straight question, Illusion is there always? How always? If your Eternal? ETERNAL. If you don't know the answer no harm I guess. I will tell you Brahman is Eternal and your a part. If you still don't understand then I will stop, I don't have all year. #1 Brahman is eternal #2 Your are Eternal = No Maya

Jai very nice thing you said. Krishna already says this- Bhagavad-gita as it is Bg.9.4 By Me, in My unmanifested form, this entire universe is pervaded. All beings are in Me, but I am not in them. Bg.9.5 And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me. Behold My mystic opulence! Although I am the maintainer of all living entities, and although I am everywhere, still My Self is the very source of creation. www.vedabase.net -- Krishna says that Brahman is seperate from His yet at the same time not. And all beings are in Him yet not in Him. It is actually the highest conception.

If everything is eternal, how did you take form? Vaishnava says we are eternal but the Universe is also eternal though temporary manifested. If you say the Universe is eternal, then there is no meaning to merge or anything.

Least we have the Originals. Besides, there is a verse to the effect that even though imperfectly composed.. etc. I cannot remember. That whatever devotee do is perfect. Current Version: still one should stick to the Society; Original Version: one can keep direct company with the spiritual master, = Guru is omniscient, I also heard Iskcon doesn't accept Guru can be omniscient.

Now I know my abc's [sort of] I am going to try for my efg's and read Bhagavatam. Between me and you, I know why it says 'bhagavatam is relisable' it is because it describes the PERSONAL aspect of God.

Reply, edit please but don't delete it! its important: Dear Pankaja Prabhu, >No Swamiji I'm talking about the other changes as well. To CC, and >Bhagavatam. It seems you're being badly misinformed. Despite what some people would like you to believe, the edition of the Bhagavatam the BBT publishes now is the same one it has published since 1977--no changes. For the changes to CC. . . There's a letter from the BBT about this on Chakra.org, I think, in response to a letter sent by Kelilalita Dasi. In summary: The new CC is closer to (not farther from) Srila Prabhupada's original. >I heard recenlty >you will make Krsna captitals 'Him' into him low letters. Please don't lose sleep over it. In all of Srila Prabhupada's books, "Krsna" will stay capitalized. >I heard >this on a forum. Please don't mind my saying so, but the less time we spend on forums and the more we spend chanting Hare Krsna and preaching Krsna's message, the more we will benefit the world. Hare Krsna. Hoping this finds you in good health,

Brahman is ETERNAL and UNCHANGEABLE. Sorry we are not that. Please use your intelligence.

Guru is representative of Krishna, plus Guru is within your heart as Paramatma. So there you go. Two Guru's but they are the same, one external Guru acting as representative of internal Guru, and internal Guru is there to see your are serving external Guru, who is Pure Vaishnava.