AnrBjotk

Thank you. It's awhile since I wrote this post, so I have to think back to what I meant. I think what I meant is: Is Vidya, True Knowledge, i.e the oppiste of ignorance (avidya), the true reality (non-maya") an objective reality. I.e. in this true reality - only seen by true practicioners, by enlightened people, an objective, non-disoutable firm reality? OR, is this non-maya moksha a blurry, non-different and subjective experience? I.e. In the same way the material world can be experienced as different things, positive or negative, can this moksha-realm be experienced differently, OR do all enlightened beings experience moksha the same? (Basically, is it perceived as similar for all enlightened beings?)

Greetings. This is the fifth time I read Shankara's sublime commentary on the Gita. But a few verses have confused me for some time and I was hoping someone here would help me. The question is regarding chapter 9 and I will post the full text: 9.4. This whole world is pervaded by Me in My unmanifest form. All beings exist in Me, but I am not contained in them! My question is this: Does not the majority of Hindu philosophies - and especially the Samkhya and Vedanta schools - teach that all beings have an Atman - a soul - which is Brahman? Does not these schools teach that we all have, inside of us, the light of Brahman? The Advaita concept of pratibimba-vada is surely that the jiva is a reflection of Atman, and thus connected to Brahman. Is it not? Namaste, Anr Bjotk

Namaste fellow Advaitins and Hindus. I will keep this brief, as I am unsure if these posts are even posted on this forum, and as the question is intentionally open and meant to provoke discussion. Is Advaita Vedanta, in essence, subjectivist or objectivist? I'll refrain from defining these terms, taking them as known, and using the terms in abstract terms, giving some leeway. Namaste, Anr

Dear Guest: I've always found the pratibimba theory to be more pragmatic and more easily integrated into ones spiritual paths. Do you happen to know why Shankara, and later apologists, dismissed pratibimba in favour of avaccheda? And, could you explain avaccheda in detail as I am not sure I have fully comprehended it. Namaste, Anr

I became a ISKCON devotee a month ago and truly feel I've found the truth. However, it often seems like other devotees are worshipping Prabhupada more than Krishna, talking about him like he was a God, every word he said must be true, he had no faults, etc. And so many western Hare Krishnas almost only eat Indian food. This doesnt make any sense either since the religion speak about the creation of the universe, the earth, meaning all plants and beings, not just indian food. True, the religion comes from India, but one becomes a follower of Krishna of Vishnu of Brahman, not of India...surely? Sorry of this appears rude, I'm naturally an iconoclast, disliking all authority (except Brahman), it doesnt mean I am not serious about the religion, I AM very much, but I also have a mind and body of my own, and that mind has questions... And, HI! I'm new here