theist

This is a declaration of fact. You yourself have no basis to make this statement by your own honest admission. better to remain open to the possibility that Prabhupada is right and you are wrong. Not blindly accept what Prabhupada said but remain open. Problem is since you are also brahman your position is that you existence as brahman is also independent and not based on anything or anyone. But the truth is there is a God who is the source of everything and everyone. All rest upon Him as pearls are strung on a thread. God is called the Cause of all causes. This means He has no cause.

Anyone who understands the reality of karma should think about the consequences of having, providing or encouraging others to have an abortion. Afterall who do you think is being aborted? Could it be those who have aborted others in their previous lives? Do unto others and it will be done unto you.

Last week you called yourself an agnostic and now you are declaring what is the nature of the absolute truth. What happened? Struck by lightening maybe? Anyway you are welcome to your opinion.

I am not a scholar so I don't approach God as if I were. I look for the most simple and direct why to understand something. You are also not a scholar so this method may be helpful for you. In your previous post you accepted that the sun was the basis of the sunlight. Well the sun represents Krishna and the sunlight represents the brahman effulgence. Perhaps now you can see why I refuse to go away from this example. It is the simplest and most direct.

You already assume you are right. Why should I disturb you?

If you cannot see how the Sun globe is the basis of the sunshine then there is nothing left to talk about. It is such a basic thing. What is the point of talking math to someone who won't accept that 1 is the basis of all other numbers?

Compare these pictures and tell me ET's are not trying to get our attention. Also tell me why these never make any world wide news broadcast. Why no BBC? Why the silence? July 2, 2009 - “Plains of Nazca” Bird in Milk Hill, Wiltshire, England. Left: “Nazca Bird” reported July 2, 2009, below Milk Hill near Stanton St. Bernard, Wiltshire, England. Aerial image © 2009 by D. Grove. Right: Hummingbird on Plains of Nazca (500 B. C. to 500 A. D.), 250 miles south of Lima, Peru. Aerial image © Go2Peru.com. Images and information by: Cropcircleconnector.

reread the thread

Sant, This Sonic is a rouqe so-called disciple of Srila Prabhupada. He is a snake and it is best to just avoid hearing from him.

I am not interested in word games primate. I go to Prabhupada for the truth. You still won't address the point. What is your problem.

You say you understood this all along yet you continued to nit pick over the unavoidable flaw in the example of the sun and sunshine. It is that nit picking that shows me you don't really understand this. Well until you address the point of the example of the sun and sunshine, also given by Prabhupada, I have no inclination to consider your examples. Sorry but first things first. I offered this example to show how Krishna is the basis of the Brahman. Please address this directly or please allow me to end this particular conversation. Hare krishna

That is what I have been trying to do and the explanation is right there in the form of the Sun and the sunshine. That is not my example by the way. I heard it first from Prabhupada but it goes back as far as the vedas. Drop the idea of time altogether. Speaking of time means you are still analysizing the finger.Look at the moon only. Or in this case the eternal sun, Krishna. Krishna does not come from the brahman any more than the sun globe comes from the sunshine. The brahman comes from Krishna just like the sunshine comes from Krishna. The same for each one of us individually. We come from Krishna. Krishna does not come from us. Our existence is based on Krishna. If Krishna suddenly disappeared so would we and everything else but if we disappeared Krishna would still remain complete unto Himself. There is no perfect example we can use when describing krishna because there is nothing else equal to Him or like Him. I don't expect you to just believe what I am saying I am only asking you to understand that the Vaisnava perepective is different from the mayavada interpretation which you are speaking rather you know it or not. They are very different and it is not what Prabhupada is saying. Remain objective and neutral and decide which way you want to go from that position.

The guy is toxic.

Conversation with devotees on theology april 1 1975 Mayapur: Prabhupāda: No, when we come to argument that... We are supposed to be all believers in God. We are not nonbelievers. We simply want to ascertain who is that God. We are not nonbelievers. Then some persons who believe in God come together so to ascertain who is God. So just like when we come to a meeting to elect a president, so they are not nonbelievers. They are not nonbelievers. As there are so many personalities, candidate for president, now who is the right person to become the president? That is wanted. To the nonbelievers, he has no access. About discussion in God he has no access. When we discuss about God, it is supposed they are all believers. So if you say... Just like we are holding meeting to ascertain... There are so many names of God. Now we ascertain who is real God. God means there should be no more above Him. Mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat [bg. 7.7]. That is God. Viṣṇujana: Christians have such a name. They call Him Yahweh. Acyutānanda: Yahweh. Viṣṇujana: Yahweh means "I am that I am. No one is beyond Me." Acyutānanda: Yahweh. Viṣṇujana: They will say Yahweh is God. Prabhupāda: No, Yahweh, what is...? That is the name? Viṣṇujana: Name. "I am that..." It means in English, "I am that I am." Prajāpati: Some people translate that as Jehovah. Viṣṇujana: Jehovah. Prajāpati: But it's the same word. In fact, everyone agrees they do not know what the real name is. Some say Yahweh; some say Jehovah. The Jewish tradition replaces completely and says Adonai, instead. Prabhupāda: That's all right. He may not say. But we have to take from the meaning. What is the meaning? Viṣṇujana: "No one is beyond Me." Prabhupāda: That's all right. "No one is beyond Me." Then he comes to our conclusion, all-attractive. This is... They come to our conclusion, all-attractive. Because if somebody is beyond Him, then he should be attractive. But if He's final attractive, then all-attractive, Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa means all-attractive. What do you think?

Which is worse, one who openly opposes the conclusion of krishna's devotee or the one who pretends to be a disciple of said devotee while openly and publically opposing his conclusions?

Sigh..... Forget about it.

Only a foolish person would think all that is written in the old testament are the words of God (Yahweh). The Old Testament is mostly the words of the leaders of the Jews who imposed their own racial hatred and biases onto the people by claiming the ideas to have come from God. You do know that the Bible or even the Old Testament is a collection of different books written by different authors or a wide span of time and they disagree among themselves even. I do not accept the Bible as the word of God. I do accept the word of God can be found amongst the writings however. The Lord understands the intent of person offering the prayer or chant. For instance there is no comparison between a mayavadi chanting the "holy names" and a pure Vaisnava chanting the same names. But there is no hope of my persuading you since you reject the very same conclusion of Srila Prabhupada. Even Lord Caitanya accepted the Koran was speaking about the only God there is. The Koran speaks of the same God worshipped by Abraham as do the Hebrews. Such small sectarian mindness as you display in this regard is shamefull for someone claiming to be a representative of Srila Prabhupada. At least be honest on this point that you are taking a position diametrically opposed to him ksamabuddhi.

galaxy108 I am confuseed on something. Are you the author of the above? If not why do you not give the name pf the author for proper credit? Please clear this up for me. thx

You say you agree but you don't really. You still want to analysis the pointer. You still don't get it. Notice the Hotei in the picture. He is not pointing exactly to the moon yet we know what he is pointing to. Perhaps he had a crooked cane in his hand and the end of the cane pointed downward and he used the cane to indicate what what was meant? Only a silly person would think he was pointing to the ground. You don't like the example because it is effective in showing Krishna as the basis of the Brahman as the Sun globe is the basis of the sunshine. Your nit-picking of if there is a split nano second separating the sun's emitting light and the appearance of light is the best example of this silliness I have ever seen. There will always be some defincientcy in human language and thought in describing the absolute. That is the idea behind the term transcendental.

It should be noted that the Bible when translated into English had the name Yahweh translated into Lord by the ignorance of the translators. And it is the books themselves that started this discussion not the present day practices of the mass of people that call themselves Christians. 1 Praise the LORD. [a] Psalm 150 Praise God in his sanctuary; praise him in his mighty heavens. 2 Praise him for his acts of power; praise him for his surpassing greatness. 3 Praise him with the sounding of the trumpet, praise him with the harp and lyre, 4 praise him with tambourine and dancing, praise him with the strings and flute, 5 praise him with the clash of cymbals, praise him with resounding cymbals. 6 Let everything that has breath praise the LORD. Praise the LORD. This is called kirtan or bhajana, or congregational glorification of the Lord by those who speak English.

June 21, 2009 - “Yin Yang” Formation at West Kennett Near Avebury, Wiltshire, On Summer Solstice. “Yin Yang” crop formation reported June 21, 2009, at West Kennett near ancient stone circles of Avebury, Wiltshire, on the Summer Solstice. At least 175 feet in diameter and nearly 200 feet long. Aerial image © 2009 by Lucy Pringle. Images and information by: Cropcircleconnector.

And since the vedas are written n sanskrit and the Bible in hebrew why would the names appear to be the same? What a joke. Now I remember why you were placed on my ignore list where you will remain. The thing is this Sonic yogic aka Ksama claims to be an initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada but at the same time he rejects his guru's statements on the issue.

This goes back to my previous reply. Blind faith means no knowledge as knowledge equals vision. So to make blind faith into sighted faith it takes the acquisition of transcendental knowledge.

As an aside, i must remark on your change of tone Ksamabuddhi. I greatly respect your endeavor having been on the same one myself. I have been consciously trying for several years now and am having great difficulty. You on the other hand have been setting a good example right off. Bravo bro.! Now back to topic.

Nice question. This can be approached from numerous angles. Here is one. Blind faith is blind because it has no knowledge with which to see. Pure bhakti on the other hand has transcendental knowledge as it's basic platform for action.