Ganeshprasad

Jai Ganesh gahana karmano gatih The intricacies of action are very hard to understand. The Lord neither creates the urge for action nor the feeling of doership nor the attachment to the results of action in people. All these are done by the (Gunas of) nature. (5.14) The Lord does not take the (responsibility for) good or evil deeds of anybody. The knowledge is covered by (the veil of) ignorance, thereby people are deluded. (5.15) This world is temporary and full of pain Just as sankracharya said; ye sansare khaludustare,kripuyapare pahi murare Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh May Lord Shiva take those children in his shelter and grant them peace. Why do people always blame god whenever something goes wrong? we are responsible for our own action and short cominings. when ever i visit India i find safety as last in the list of priority. Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Re (••these are features of all mankind.. so everyone's hindu..) We are part of the same creation. Re (•no.. let us read everything keeping in mind the ultimate goal of bhagavad gita. Gita is a school, a journey) Gita gives you possibility of different goals and destination; an individual may choose the destination of their choice according to their desires. Re (••a denomination is a discrimination.. if you call someone hindu you identify a hindu by some features.. if you do not know any feature you cannot give any name or denomination) Follow your own logic, since Hindu is already a name it must have many features that is common. (Sense of belonging, states, Kingdom all was already there what was pandava and kaurava fighting for if not for Kingdom? ••india??? they were emperors of the whole world) Never the less they were fighting for Hastinapur, there was still a real sense of belonging as well as lots of different Kingdoms. Re (••it comes.. not it is hinduism.. being all the world vedic in all the three previous yugas, it is natural that all kali yuga religions come , more or less corrupted, by sanatana dharma.. but we do not say that they are all the same even if the origin is the same) I have never said all the paths are the same. Re (••so every definition of god is hinduism.. ok?) No need to be sarcastic. Re (••the real belonging is if one is seriously practising....) This is required if one has to achieve any goal. Re ( and if you are uncertain about the belonging to the singular sects you try to state the belonging to the "supersect" hinduism?) to worship the lord one does not need to belong to any sect or be sectarian. Re ((in the end it is an individuals effort)) (••so why the need of a new "general" name? ) No need, since Hinduism is not sectarian it is unique. Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Consult a priest who knows vastu shastra. Try this link may give you some idea www.sereneinteriors.com/vastu-shastra.html Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Re (It's not AGAINST any philosophy, it merely presents a different perspective on things, and a different interpretation of Hinduism.) Well said Jai Sankracharya Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Re (--you can cite a bhagavad gita verse in this forum, call ten so called hindus to give an interpretation and you will get no hindu interpretation but one or two vaishnava interpretation, some opposite ones by advaitists and some one by shaivites, and any one of them, even if in full respect, consider the others adharmis. It is ideas who are important, not the fact that someone reads the same book) If you think deeply of what you write you will get some idea as to what so called Hindu is, many ideas and opinions, as each individual soul is on a journey has different level of experience and realization. As Gandhi once said let the ideas flow from all direction. Re (-- All the paths written in gita different by that, are shown by krsna to teach to arjuna that they are unreliable or false.. or krnsa were putting something different in the last chapter.) Let us just read the last chapter and forget about the rest. Re (But this is my opinion ) I respect your opinion, who am I to argue with it Re (and the opinion of a high percentage among the so called hindus,) And this so called Hindus have no problem with the name. Re (so if you disagree i am not the only one who does not belong to your hindu group or denomination, label, flag and so on.. no condemning, only discriminating) it does not matter what group you belong to, a Hindu does not discriminate like that, if he has to judge then it would be by the action of a person. Re (--simply the identity of belonging to the same state and religion was born in that moment..) Sense of belonging, states, Kingdom all was already there what was pandava and kaurava fighting for if not for Kingdom? You are running away with you imagination. Re (in vedic times sanatana dharma (not hinduism.. sanatana dharma had a meaning very different from the one given now by hindu advocates) was all over the world) sure and there were malecha and yavanas raksasas also. Re (••if krsna/vishnu says "surrender to me..." or "think of me.." if arjuna executes the instruction is not him a vishnu/krsna worshipper? a vaishnava? who surrenders to vishnu is a vaishnava.. i do not see the difficulty) If the surrender is to the lord in which ever form one chooses I have no difficulty. Re ( for example imperonal brahman is also god, but brahman has no name and no form) Yes this is one of the three class of realization Brahmeti, Parmatma and Bhagvan ( ••this is called LILA... krsna can do everything by himself but he chooses to be served by many devotees an devatas. This is ANANDA, bliss, bhakti.. Krsna is much more powerful than arjuna, actually he's the only source of arjuna's power. But he choses to let arjuna fight and he humbly drives the chariot. This does not demonstrates that arjuna is supreme to krsna) You have a knack of changing the point of discussion. Just tell me where have I said Arjun is supreme to Krishna? Re (••buddhism is not considered hinduism by any one...) Wrong, many will argue it comes from Hinduism, so it has a relation, if nothing else no one is complaining of their lifestyle. Re (but actually many schools of "hinduism" are more close to buddhism than to other "hindu" schools) well that does not surprise me. Re (even hebraism, christianism and islamism are given by god but we classificate them differently from hinduism) We don’t they do, and they have a lot to learn, if they are ready. Re (••and at the end he spoke of bhakti... "bhaja govinda.. worship govinda intellectual fools..") He spoke of many things as well the above quote, and we are grateful for that. Re (••simply because you call my school "hinduism", the fact that i have a different concept of sanatana dharma from you and other "hinduists" demonstrates that there's no common idea.) Never said all the concepts of supreme lord in Hinduism is same, it can not be, simply because one can not fully describe the lord who has no beginning or end. Re (If you want to say that we both are blonde so we belong to the blonde's cathegory, i simply show you that i am not blonde and the question is at end. So you cannot classify anyone as hindu, simply because a common hindu principle does not exist) Hinduism is not as simple as your blond theory. Re ( ••"hindu" is a concept, there's no "hindu" activity who is not made also from other people. So if there's no concept , there's also no Hinduism) Fine we will still worship the way we always have done, belonging to any group or sect does not mean we are on spiritual platform, in the end it is an individuals effort and the grace of god one will transcend the material world. jaya Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Re (••no problem for our subject.. if you cannot define sanatana dharma how you can say that hinduism is sanatana dharma?) Quite simply who so ever follow Vedic literature and the laws laid down in it is a Hindu, people of this land now called India, who I might add preserved this culture against all the odds, has followed this path since time immemorial. As to defining something that is eternal is beyond me, it would be like a frog, trying to imagine the vastness of the ocean. Re (for me sanatana dharma is BHAGAVADGITA18,66) That is nice but let us not condemn those who have other preference, as unvedic, Krishna does not deny those worship. Re (••i am speaking of the features of god and saints) And I was speaking the followers Problem is when you get burnt you avoid the fire, Re (••so do not get again burnt by using sectarian conceptions to judge god and saints) Perhaps you can remind me of which god and the saint I had audacity to judge. What, India has just appeared from no where? Re (••from muslims... they decided that the land beyond sindhu river had to be called (s)ind(h)ia) Does this change the inhabitants of this land or pratice of dharma? that is not to say worship of Vishnu or Shiva is new Re (••and what's vaishnavism if not the worship of sri vishnu? what is arjuna if not a vaishnava?) You miss my point. Any way have you ever heard Arjun calling himself Vaishnava, or Krishna saying become Vaishnava? The Saattvika persons worship Devas, the Raajasika people worship demons, and the Taamasika persons worship ghosts and spirits. (17.04) Re (••and the transcendental person ... "sarva dharma....." he surrenders to sri krsna accepting in this way the "eternal duty" or "sanatana dharma") Transcendental person surrenders to god who has many names and forms. Why would Krishna ask Arjun to worship Lord Shiva, to obtain divine weapon? Why would he ask Pandavas to worship Lord Shiva to atone for the war dead. Why would he ask Youdhistar to receive Dharma instruction from Bhisma pita? Re (my opinion of course.. but enough to sustain that there's no identity between sanatana dharma and hinduism because hinduism hosts many opposite dharmas ) I am glad it is just your opinion, since Gita speak of different Dharma, different rishis gave us their realization, Buddhism is given to us by god, Sankaracharya gave the advaita, so if these different concepts are not compatable to your view of sanatan dharma, it does not make hinduism any less sanatan dharma. I do not judge people by their belief that they hold, but by their action. What good is it to hold a concept but our actions are in opposite direction? Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Re (-- old discussion...) It is easy for you to tell, who I am, unfortunately I had no way of knowing it is the same guest I have had this discussion, any way HARIBOL. Re (sanatana dharma is one dharma, having opposite dharmas inside hinduism, hinduism cannot identified with only one dharma, sanatana or not) Nice to know you can define sanatan dharma. What is the need of volumes of literatures and all the effort by individual souls in pursuit self-realization? If only the rainbow was of only one color. Re (-- discrimination has to be made by features, not nationality) It is easy to see the difference in lifestyle between east and west. Re ( -- so live by this principle.. not that if god or his representative appear outside india we are suspicious) No Hindu will disrespect god or his representative, if we are taught from the very beginning to respect all life form such a question does not arise. Problem is when you get burnt you avoid the fire, Re (-- in vedic time there was no india...) What, India has just appeared from no where? Re (sanatana dharma was all over the world..) Yes Re (and sanatana dharma was exactly identified as theism, vaishnavism) This is your sweet opinion, you will find a lot of different worship going on in vedic time Vaishnavism, Saivism,sakta are all new formation or grouping in recent time, that is not to say the worship of Vishnu or Shiva is new Lord Krishna says in BG Brahmaa, the creator, in the beginning created human beings together with Yajna and said: By Yajna you shall prosper and Yajna shall fulfill all your desires. (3.10) Nourish the Devas with Yajna, and the Devas will nourish you. Thus nourishing one another you shall attain the Supreme goal. (3.11) (Deva means a deity, a demigod, a celestial person, the agent of God, one who fulfills desires and protects.) The Devas, nourished by Yajna, will give you the desired objects. One who enjoys the gift of the Devas without offering them (anything in return) is, indeed, a thief. (3.12) O Arjuna, the faith of each is in accordance with one's own nature or Sanskaara. A person is known by the faith. One can become whatever one wants to be (if one constantly contemplates on the object of desire with faith). (17.03) The Saattvika persons worship Devas, the Raajasika people worship demons, and the Taamasika persons worship ghosts and spirits. (17.04) Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Re (do you want to follow hinduism or sanatana dharma?) No difference actually, Hinduism is a name given to the followers of sanatan dharma. Re (if you want to follow hinduism/indianism you are right to despise everything that seems to you not Indian) It is not wrong to discriminate between right and wrong or to reject that is alien to Hindu culture. Re (if you want to follow sanatana dharma you have to be able to recognize the divine everywhere) The whole creation is divine; Hinduism is a way of life, not just theory. Re (in sanatana dharma there's nothing about india, nations, boundaries, exclusivism and so on) In Vedic time India was known by some other name there were many kingdoms and boundaries. of course for a sanyasi all this designation has no meaning. Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh you know something atanuji you are right. I need a holidy Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Re (this discussion is going in circles, i say that there's no common priciple and no compatibility among many of the groups that some one call hindu) when we go round in circle, we churn like churning the ocean,something good will come out of it. in many ways i do not disagree with you, but like in a rainbow many colour makes it beautiful. (you are criticizing me for intolerance instead of speaking of that subject) when earlier in our discussion you described the hindu unity as adharmic i criticized that as intolerance. personaly i think you are a nice person. Re (bye.. let's wait for the next nice subject ...) a hindu does not say bye, but see you again. i am looking forward to Rathyatra in london, with three cart this time, then off to rainy India next wk so i also may not have much chance for discussion. anyway new subject or not i do not think this hindu discussion will end, i hope it does Jay jagannatha Jay Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Re (••so find an agreement on who's the father than decide if all belong to the same family..) Are you doubting there is only one father? He/She goes by many names. Re ( you cannot be in search and having already decided ) all i dont do is decide for others. This is what Krishna says. Neither its (real) form nor its beginning, neither its end nor its existence is perceptible here on the earth. Having cut these firm roots of the Ashvattha tree by the mighty ax of (Jnana and) Vairaagya or detachment; (15.03) The goal (of nirvana) should be sought reaching which one does not come back; thus thinking: In that very primal spirit I take refuge from which this primal manifestation comes forth. (15.04) Those who are free from pride and delusion, who have conquered the evil of attachment, who are constantly dwelling in the Supreme Self with all Kaama completely stilled, who are free from the dualities known as pleasure and pain; such undeluded persons reach the eternal goal. (15.05) Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh All of them--as they surrender unto Me--I reward accordingly. Everyone follows My path in all respects, O son of Prtha.Bg.4-11 Re (••this verse indicates that also who follows maya is actually serving krsna, because maya is krsna's indirect energy. Anyway it seems you are saying that every religion in the world is hinduism. ) You have right to think what you like. where is Krishna saying in this verse about maya. Re (••the majority of billion people simply do not care, when someone gets serious about religion, in any path, he does no more call himself hindu but vaishnava, advaita etc..) i think you are begining to understnd, i do not go about advertising i am a Hindu, in the end the sanyasi gives up all the title. Re (••i have no problem.. i know something for krsna's mercy, not because i am intelligent.. it is only a classification problem. If there's no common feature in hinduism, there's no hinduism. We are speaking of this subject, not giving judgements on what people beliefs) So if you are not judging the Hindus and their various belief what is it? Re (••if you think that this is a useless discussion you are not forced...) are you getting bored? Re (••so.. being in hinduism many peoples and schools believing in that way, they simply cannot stay under the same "hindu" denominations together with the ones who tink the opposite) you have a right to think what you like and still be a part of the family. RE (••find first an agreement on who/what is the father) That is what most of us are surching. Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Re Re (••coming from? going to? wich road? everyone makes a journey, is everyone hindu?) From the creator, back to creator, all the paths mentioned in the scripture, yes, yes. All of them--as they surrender unto Me--I reward accordingly. Everyone follows My path in all respects, O son of Prtha.Bg.4-11 Re (•• .. a conceptual union made putting concepts aside?... and similar way of life about what? dressing? eating with the right hand and cleaning with the left? you reunite a billion people on things like that?) great insight. Fact that the billion people do not find it difficult speaks volume. Re (••krsna's... if you consider him a common human born and dead with a material body it is blasphemy) Well Krishna says people who do not know me thinks like this. Think about it Krishna said this before the onset of Kaliyoug. This is mrutiyulok what do you expect for people who do not know who Krishna is think? Nor does the Supreme Spirit assume anyone's sinful or pious activities. Embodied beings, however, are bewildered because of the ignorance which covers their real knowledge.Bg.5-15 Re (advaita you have to blame Sankracharya, or Lord Krishna ••yes they have created advaita to give some spiritual relief also to materialists.. but our subject is not about judging a faith or another, this subject is about the opportunity to unite them under one denomination, and on what's the common feature, the common root and principle who makes them really united) it is your subject unity or the lack of it, Hindu does not deny either. Re (••of course krsna is also brahman.. go to preach to the ones who do not think that krsna is param brahman but a human) problem is only if the other who think different, then for me to antagonize them. Anyone who worship god can not think he is human or mortal. Re we are talking of this tree that Shree Krishna mentions, tell me if it is dead, tell me if it is not possible for new branches. (••the tree is eternal, the growing of new branches is eternal and unlimited.. but not everyone who claim to be a branch of krsna's tree says necessarily the truth. it has to be judged from his philosophy. but again it is not our subject. There's many difference of opinion on what is the krsna's tree, if there's a tree, if this tree is krsna's, who is krsna and so on. So there's no possibility of a real union on spiritual basis) There is only one tree, one god nothing can exist outside of him. Re (••and there's people who do not belong to this tree and people who have different opinion about what's the tree and what is belonging to it.. so no common principle, no union) Weather we like it or not we belong to only one family. Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Re (so similar, we both worship the devil, as I;ve mentioned elsewhere. You call it kali, and we call it satan.) We worship maa Kali as devine mother She actualy Kills SATAN and protects her childrens. Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Re (••i have said krsna's sister, not my sister... of course for me he's mother.. why not?) i got your point the first time. Re (••be precise.. krsna's servant, not servant. Krsna is param (supreme) brahman (supreme brahman).. so everyone else is his subordinate, so his servant. Where's the problem? it is not an offence it is a worship, a praise. The ambassadsor, the minister, the messenger is received with the same honour as the king) in a family you have father, mother, brothers, sisters friends, we all know who is the boss, but do you refer to anyone as servents? have you ever address a servent as servent?they have a name also. Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Re worship maa Kali and father is pleased also (••sister... in kamsa prison durga/kali appears as krsna's sister ) Kali is maa to me, she is venerate as mother by most who worship her. but point taken she does appear as Krishna's sister. why refer to her as servent? Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Re (..is this shloka advocating spiritual realizations in negation of krsna's personality? this verse says that undertsanding krsna is a very rare thing...) what one does not know become a subject of speculation. If Lord Brahma who gave us Vedas get confused what chance us mere mortals? Re (..so where's a common principle with them to justify a union?) spritual journey Re (..so where's the common feature to call all these schools with the same name?) Study of Vedas. concepts aside, outwardly similar way of life. Re (...the problem is that who blasphemy krsna is not in the same dharma with whom is worshipping krsna) in whose eye blasphemy,Krishna or Yours? i like to know which one do not search for creator? (..advaitin and mayavadi) i do not know any group that goes by mayavadi name, it is simply name calling, does not befit a bhakta. advaita you have to blame Sankracharya, or Lord Krishna But those who worship the imperishable, the undefinable, the unmanifest, the omnipresent, the unthinkable, the unchanging, the immovable, and the eternal Brahman; (12.03) Restraining all the senses, even minded under all circumstances, engaged in the welfare of all creatures, they also attain Me. (12.04) Re (..so try to explain again the context and i will try to answer) go back to my post if you care. we are talking of this tree that Shree Krishna mentions, tell me if it is dead, tell me if it is not possible for new branches. Re (..not all the branches that you feel they belongs to krsna's tree are really belonging to it. As i have already said i cannot consider krsa a common man or a ficticious charachter and simultaneously being on branch of his tree. If one feels differently, he's another tree... nothing bad, simply the denomination is different) answer the question asked, if you please. there is only one tree Krishna talks about; The Supreme Lord said: They (or the wise) speak of the eternal Ashvattha tree having its origin above (in unmanifest Brahman) and its branches below (in the cosmos) whose leaves are the (Vedic) hymns. One who understands this is a knower of the Vedas. (15.01) The branches (of this world tree of Maya) spread below and above (or all over the cosmos). The tree is nourished by the Gunas; sense pleasures are its sprouts; and its roots (of ego and desires) stretch below in the human world causing Karmic bondage. (15.02) Re. (..my words speak loud that i have nothing against single people and i have nothing against hinduism... simply there's no logic or scriptural concept behind him, there's not a common dharma between the various schools, that every school have a different or opposite opinion on what's sanatana dharma.. that is a new concept, not eternal) if you have nothing against hinduism as you state, then stop here you can not have it both ways. Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Jai Maa Ambe Re (-in spiritual realm to be a servant is not a disgrace.. kali is very happy to be subordinated to sri vishnu/krsna) never said it was, question was, are you in a position to call maa Kali a servent? do you address mother yosoda a servent? do you call gopies servent? Re (-the difference is that one is the source of energy and the other is the energy.. so kali is the energy and vishnu/krsna the source. So she serves krsna acting to fulfill his desires) question is: energy and energetic are they separate? worship maa Kali and father is pleased also Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Re (..they are opinions and not absolutely connected with single people.. and it is clear from the beginning of our discussion) i can not read your mind, your words speks louder. he's right, what interest you have to condemn people collectively? criticize him only if he personally does something bad i belive this is your statement in another thread if not i apologize so you have different standard for us Re (..read attentively the gita... krsna does not advocate realizations where there's misconceptions about his being the supreme personality of godhead. Scarcely one out of thousands of persons strives for perfection of Self-realization. Scarcely any one of the striving, or even the perfected persons, truly understands Me. (7.03) perhapes this slok escaped you, or may be you give another meaning. Re ( it is possible to prefere vishnu, varaha, mohini and even to try to get brahman impersonal realization. But nothing has effect if it is done believing that krsna is a common human or a ficticious character or a product of brahman subjected to maja. This is the current concept in the advaitin/mayavadi schools that someone consider reunite with vaishnavism or shaivism under the name hinduism) yes Krashna actualy admit some think like this, and he calls them mudha but then not every one knows him. advaita are not vaishnava, vaishnava are not shaiva, this is well understood by us hindus. Re (so.. all realizations are valid, even if the one of nirguna brahman is temporary, but not if there's envy and blasphemy of krsna) so where is the problem. Re (..many are not searching any creator, amny make distinctions between vedic literature, many give opposite meanings... so where's common points?) i like to know which one do not search for creator? Re (Vedas are eternal you said names are not important change your mind again? (..vedas are eternal, but not all schools are aternal and the idea of reunite all schools under the same denomination is not eternal) please stick to the point made, your answer is out of context. Re (..and you are forgetting that it is not enough to see that a branch is born in india to say that's vedic... even if his followers claim to be vedic. Or we must accept that many have opposite opinions on what's vedic) we are talking of this tree that Shree Krishna mentions, tell me if it is dead, tell me if it is not possible for new branches. Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh RE (..you have understood very well what i am saying but you are attempting to discredit me sayng that i am insulting you) May be, but language like irreligious, non existing of hindu dharma does not help, I have nothing to gain by discrediting you I respect you all the same. Re Vedic (Hindu) way teaches us to be noble. (..so be truthful, do not say that i am offending) By debating you on the points you make and you feel I am offending you I apologize, I am sorry. Problems only happens when people form groups, entrenches their position and accuse others who do not conform of being irreligious. Re (..if you have a so clear idea on this subject demonstrate that my objections are false.. to say that someone can be fanatic is not a great new) what? Clear idea on my statement above or your objection on many concepts? Re (..and i have already said that none of thise paths are negating the personal aspects of sri krsna.. sowho is negating is another dharma, not bhagavad gita, and it is irreligious to put him together with the others) When Krishna speaks off many different paths he allows the negation brahman realization is realization of impersonal realization of god, how can this become irreligious when he says this himself? Re (..if you find a common tree there's no problem) There is only one tree we are talking about you know this the one I quoted from bg.15 Re (..and that's a nice thing... so it is up to you to find some very important and costitutive principle who makes hinduism something real and dharmic) If it is nice receive the point gracefully no need to play the same record it is getting warn out. RE (..many opinions and many paths... how can they belong to the same dharma?) You miss the point the lord is eternal, realization are unlimited, after all it the same creator we are searching using the medium of veda. RE (..hinduism is not eternal, it is a relatively new thing and some branches are also new... ) Vedas are eternal you said names are not important change your mind again? You also forget the tree is not dead new branches are coming. Re (..if you want to have a serious dialogue you have to be honest and speak of the subject, tolerance is not in discussion) Again I point you to the title of this thread “why do people fight here? I entered the discussion why you call hindu irreligious. If tolerance is not important what is? Re .(.because this is essentially how your messages are going on... : "whai is hinduism?".. "i don't know but there's to unite against "aggressors"") And you think I was insulting you, great have your way. protect your dharma dharma will protect you to protect dharma is never adharma. (..attempting to twist the meaning of dharma is adharma ) I agree, I try to follow you sit on the fence and judge. Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Re (..so if you do not care for classification, why the need to defend or struggle for a classification.. hinduism?) By this classification that is already there, you have accused us of being irreligious then it becomes my duty to defend. Vedic (Hindu) way teaches us to be noble. Re (..maybe there's a little presumption.. honestly i think that you are not giving any demonstration and i am not for blind beliefs) I am not presuming you have come here with preconceived idea with a mission, I want be able to sell you gold for free. Re (..your citations are very clear and well known.. they simply show an impersonalist side of the truth. And there's no problem for me. But, for bhagavad gita, an approach like that is bona fide and compatible with all authorized vedic faiths if there's no envy for the personal aspect of sri krsna bhagavan. Or, if anyone uses this quotations to demonstrate that krsna is not the supreme or that he belongs to the material world or maya, he's out in my opinion from the vedic path and he cannot be grouped for example with vaishnavas who think exactly the opposite. Friendship and tolerance are not problems.. the problem is that no grouping is possible between schools so opposite and different) Problems only happens when people form groups, entrenches their position and accuse others who do not conform of being irreligious. Lord Krishna clearly cites different paths. Hindu do not denote any single path, tree is big with many branches. Re (..there's no problem in wich name you want to use.. my opinion is that, until one does not give an explanation, hindu dharma does not exist and that many of the dharmas included in hinduism are not compatible.) the statement; “it does not exist and many dharmas included in hinduism” is in itself incompatible. Re (Another fact is that the majority of the serious followers of the single schools do not care and do not want any grouping under some denomination. They are serious and they know that the differences are to be respected to not give damage and bad propaganda to the single faiths) And we respect that, the highest amongst all is a sanyasi who do not belong to any group but we can not imitate them, try and put this sanyasi in a strange place or country and he becomes an object of ridicule while a Hindu offers his pranam. Re (..there's "hindu" schools who think that creator is a person, others say that creator is an energy and who believe in the person is in maya, there's hindu schools that are completely atheists and some others who think that not only god is an illusion, but all the existence is an illusion... some other believe that everyone is god. Who is this common creator of the hindu family? (i have no problem with different names.. but if you change names you wil discover that some hindu paths are more close to other religions than to some other "hindus") Never said all the concept of the supreme is the same. Therefore, let the scripture be your authority in determining what should be done and what should not be done. You should perform your duty following the scriptural injunction. (16.24) Re (..also in this citations there's millions of "ifs" and "buts"... the meaning of scriptures, the concept of authority, the real duty, the interpretation of the scriptural injunction are very different in some of the "hindu" religions) these are matter of opinions and path chosen. Re (..it is not a game or a war.. i am discussing ready to change my opinion if you bring something that i can judge valuable to do it) very noble. Re (..many thinks that many branches are cut and that they do not belong anymore to the tree... the differences are so huge that there's no agreement on what was that tree, this is my (and many other's) point) yes this is what some might try and do cut the branches, until non may be left. Those branches that fall, rots and diappear, the fact that it survives is in itself a testimony of its eternity. Re (..first there's the need to definite the tree, then there's to check if anyone has cut his tree and now it is fallen in the ground. You are using many nice allegories, but the fact is that you do not give a definition of what's hinduism and how can hinduism unificate many religions that have opposite fundamental and constituent ideologies) The tree I talked of is the one lord Krishna spoke off, fallen branches do not survive, nor can I or want to stick all the branches together. You can not call that a tree. Re (..ok tolerance has main importance.. subject closed.. speak of what is hinduism) stop patronizing me. Re (..so you have no idea of what hinduism is or can be... but your main interest is to create an "anti-muslim" religion to make people think that they have to fight against muslims.. ) I am ignorant and you can also call me ignorant it does not hurt. but It is ridicules to suggest my main interest is to create anti muslim religion, so I made a statement, protect your dharma dharma will protect you, and you misconstrue this as anti muslim or my main interest. Re (. To twist religion for our interest is... adharma) to protect dharma is never adharma. Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Re (..you are completely missing the point 1)a civil man have to be peaceful and tolerant.... 2)i do not recognize a hindu dharma because dharma is constitued by some common principles. And no one says to me wich are the common, identificative principles of hinduism........ 3)the discussion is on classification, i do not hate chineses, but if you tell me that i am chinese i have to say that you're wrong. And it is not intolerance) May be I am missing your point and you mine. 1) anyone who is peaceful and tolerant is a noble person I salute his dharma. I do not need to ask his classification. 2) that is your choice, everyone else have no problem, we have discussed this many times but it is not understood by you, I can not force you.3) why would I identify you as chinese, one is a person and other is a various concept of dharma coming from vedas. Chapter 15: The Supreme Lord said: They (or the wise) speak of the eternal Ashvattha tree having its origin above (in unmanifest Brahman) and its branches below (in the cosmos) whose leaves are the (Vedic) hymns. One who understands this is a knower of the Vedas. (15.01) The branches (of this world tree of Maya) spread below and above (or all over the cosmos). The tree is nourished by the Gunas; sense pleasures are its sprouts; and its roots (of ego and desires) stretch below in the human world causing Karmic bondage. (15.02) Neither its (real) form nor its beginning, neither its end nor its existence is perceptible here on the earth. Having cut these firm roots of the Ashvattha tree by the mighty ax of (Jnana and) Vairaagya or detachment; (15.03) The goal (of nirvana) should be sought reaching which one does not come back; thus thinking: In that very primal spirit I take refuge from which this primal manifestation comes forth. (15.04) Those who are free from pride and delusion, who have conquered the evil of attachment, who are constantly dwelling in the Supreme Self with all Kaama completely stilled, who are free from the dualities known as pleasure and pain; such undeluded persons reach the eternal goal. (15.05) Now you tell me where should I begin what branch should I tell you off? Re (..you are saying that all together they form hinduism..) No all this different paths are known as Hindu call it Vedic if you want, there is a subtle difference it does not form in to hindu but it is known as hindu dharma. Re (..in a family there's many common principles... the parents, the grand parents... you love that boy who lives in your house because a common principle unites both you, you are brothers because you have the same father. If you enter in a house of another family in your town and you say "i love you all, you are my family.." they ask you wich relative you have in common with them) Yes so in our vedic family we see different paths as our brothers and sisters given by our creator, and if a vedic family enters another house of worship we also say to them we are all one extended family because there is no other creator only we call them by different name. Re There is no if and buts here. (..no... there's a million of if and buts... an action is dharmic if it follows dharma's rules. Not because someone says or believes that's dharmic.) Where did i say otherwise, I said 4 basic principle Therefore, let the scripture be your authority in determining what should be done and what should not be done. You should perform your duty following the scriptural injunction. (16.24) Re (...so find a common truth if you think that there's one! i am truthful in saying that there's not) If your opinion is truth then fine live by it the lord will be please with you. Re (..tapasya means coherence in performing austerities for a lifetime. But the most important thing is to understand what is the real goal of the austerity. Otherwise it is better not to do it and it is not a value at all. There's austerities in satya, rajas and tamas.. and in transcendence. Austerity in itself is not a value ..alle these values can have infinite meanings.. a vaishnava can judge intolerant a mayavadi who cannot tolerate the supremacy of krsna/vishnu. So there's not a common concept of hindu tolerance) The worship of Devas, Braahmana, guru, and the wise; purity, honesty, celibacy, and nonviolence; these are said to be the austerity of deed. (17.14) Speech that is not offensive, truthful, pleasant, beneficial, and is used for the regular reading of scriptures is called the austerity of word. (17.15) The serenity of mind, gentleness, silence, self-restraint, and the purity of mind are called the austerity of thought. (17.16) Threefold austerity (of thought, word, and deed) practiced by yogis with supreme faith, without a desire for the fruit, is said to be Saattvika austerity. (17.17) Austerity that is done for gaining respect, honor, reverence, and for show, is said to be Raajasika, unsteady, and impermanent. (17.18) Austerity performed without proper understanding, or with self-torture, or for harming others, is declared as Taamasika austerity. (17.19) Charity that is given as a matter of duty, to a deserving candidate who does nothing in return, at the right place and time, is called a Saattvika charity. (17.20) Charity that is given unwillingly, or to get something in return, or looking for some fruit, is called Raajasika charity. (17.21) Charity that is given at a wrong place and time, to unworthy persons, without paying respect or with contempt, is said to be Taamasika charity. (17.22) "OM TAT SAT" is said to be the threefold name of Brahman. The Braahmana, the Vedas, and the Yajna were created from this in the ancient time. (17.23) Therefore, acts of sacrifice, charity, and austerity prescribed in the scriptures are always commenced by uttering "OM" by the knowers of Brahman. (17.24) Various types of sacrifice, charity, and austerity are performed by the seekers of nirvana by uttering "TAT" (or He is all) without seeking a reward. (17.25) Yes austerity by itself has no value but I never said it was. Re (what you call marginal, try put in to pratice,you might find the meaning of tapasya ..you do not know me personally... and tapasya means nothing if you do not find a right reason to do it. Everyone does some form of austerity, there's people who work hard everyday of the life to buy drugs, meat, alcohol, to go with prostitutes and so on... there's some terrorist who do the great tapasya of giving their life making themeselves explode for their cause.. which is the value of these tapasyas? less than zero?) Nor do you know me personally, and if you think, when I mention this 4 principles, to mean the above mentioned acts then you do not know me at all, even after having had hours of debate with you. RE (..an easy but useless joke... marginal in classification, not in achieving spiritual realization? are you short of arguments?) Perhaps you can tell me what is so funny? Re (..so why want to unite them under the same name if you do not find them compatible?) I have not tried to unite them, we are off the same tree with different branches. In the eyes of the lord these are all worships he accepts. ..some worshippers think that the other group of worshippers are not worshipping but blaspheming.. and the opposite. Our discussion is how can we put all of them under the same name I can not think for others, nor am I trying to put them under the same name, but we are sitting on the same tree all being on a different branch. Re (..that you are a good or bad peson is not in discussion, and that indians are also like that.. we are speaking if there's a common indian concept of dharma to decide if the so called hindu dharma exists or not) O it exists no doubt. Re (..so why you want to create other groups to belong? because you do not want to go deeper on somehing who is already existing and it is traditional? the hindu name grants to you an appartenence without really accepting no duties (=tapasyas)?) I do not want to create other group, how deep I want to go will depend on my desires, you have no idea what that is. Looks like you have very low opinion of hindus. Re (..it would be enough if there'd be an agreement on the meaning of the vedas, the scriptures and laws) Agreement on whose standard yours? Re (..it is simply a trick to divert the discussion... we are speaking from days of that other subject. Tolerance is not in discussion, we are tolerating ourselves, we are speaking not fighting with guns) Not really simply pointing out the relevance of tolerance Re (..the idea that i am passively standing it is completely yours.. if one attacks me, my relatives, my friends, you... i defend. But his has nothing to do with attacking someone because he belongs to the religion of some who invaded my country some centuries ago) I have no desire to attack anyone, but I see a wrong and that wrong will destroy us if we do not stand up and protect. Re (..and you are concocting a new hindu religion, twisting freely religious values and meanings because you are concerned with muslims? is it a good remedy?) I have no capacity to form new religion, Hindu Dharma existed well before me, rest is your vivid imagination Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh are you in a position to call maa Kali a servent? have you ever known a shodow to be different from the person? energy and energetic no difference. hey jaga janani hey jagdambe maa tu bhavani saranma layge Jai Shree Krishna

Jai Ganesh Re (Tolerance, understanding, and dispassion are not easy commodities. It requires great strength to abide by these qualities. We must continously strive.) yes it tests and moulds ones character.it seams our forefathers had these in abundance. By the way i am of gujrati origin, born in uganda currently in uk love to come to India every year whenever possible. Jai Shree Krishna