Just a dream

[theist 1]

TRANSLATION SB 3.27.25

In the dreaming state one's consciousness is almost covered, and one sees many inauspicious things, but when he is awakened and fully conscious, such inauspicious things cannot bewilder him.

 

PURPORT

In the condition of dreaming, when one's consciousness is almost covered, one may see many unfavorable things which cause disturbance or anxiety, but upon awakening, although he remembers what happened in the dream, he is not disturbed. Similarly the position of self-realization, or understanding of one's real relationship with the Supreme Lord, makes one completely satisfied, and the three modes of material nature, which are the cause of all disturbances, cannot affect him. In contaminated consciousness one sees everything to be for his own enjoyment, but in pure consciousness, or Krishna consciousness, he sees that everything exists for the enjoyment of the supreme enjoyer. That is the difference between the dream state and wakefulness. The state of contaminated consciousness is compared to dream consciousness, and Krishna consciousness is compared to the awakened stage of life. Actually, as stated in Bhagavad-gita, the only absolute enjoyer is Krishna. One who can understand that Krishna is the proprietor of all the three worlds and that He is the friend of everyone is peaceful and independent. As long as a conditioned soul does not have this knowledge, he wants to be the enjoyer of everything; he wants to become a humanitarian or philanthropist and open hospitals and schools for his fellow human beings. This is all illusion, for one cannot benefit anyone by such material activities. If one wishes to benefit his fellow brother, he must awaken his dormant Krishna consciousness. The Krishna conscious position is that of pratibuddha, which means "pure consciousness."

[Vigraha 0]

Seaching around and found this, SOME Krishna katha!! too many mundane topics at the moment - give us a break from the Christian and mayavardi!

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

Oh no, not with the "mayavardi" again.

 

Vigraha, your response to the verse is quite humorous. I hope you can see why.

 

Your consciousness must be almost covered if you see Christ katha as being "inauspicious".

[indulekhadasi 0]

And Vigrahaji do you really think that the fall of the jiva issue is pure Krishna katha?

 

I notice that apart from Murali Mohan prabhu, Kulapavana prabhu, and some other few devotees hardly anyone posts on my threads about Nityananda Prabhu. I once complained to my father who explained that the controversial issues will always get the most traffic coming in. It is kind of annoying when we could be having lively discussions on the pastimes and glories of Nityananda Prabhu but instead we are rehashing the same old things over and over again- the jiva issue, the vani/vapuh issue and so on.

 

JAI NITAI

indulekhadasi

[suchandra 1]

 

And Vigrahaji do you really think that the fall of the jiva issue is pure Krishna katha?

 

I notice that apart from Murali Mohan prabhu, Kulapavana prabhu, and some other few devotees hardly anyone posts on my threads about Nityananda Prabhu. I once complained to my father who explained that the controversial issues will always get the most traffic coming in. It is kind of annoying when we could be having lively discussions on the pastimes and glories of Nityananda Prabhu but instead we are rehashing the same old things over and over again- the jiva issue, the vani/vapuh issue and so on.

 

JAI NITAI

indulekhadasi

 

Good points, seems we are all dreaming now and have to wake up to the real normal state of offering flowers to the Lord - no more dreaming state of consciousness.

 

[Sarva gattah 0]

 

Oh no, not with the "mayavardi" again.

 

Vigraha, your response to the verse is quite humorous. I hope you can see why.

 

Your consciousness must be almost covered if you see Christ katha as being "inauspicious".

 

I don't think he is calling Christianity Mayavardi, what he is saying is he is sick of reading topics on Christianity and impersonalist yogis when we have so much in the beautiful Srimad Bhagavatam.

 

As far as the other comments are concerned, the material world IS the dream state of the soul

 

TRANSLATION SB 3.27.25

In the dreaming state one's consciousness is almost covered, and one sees many inauspicious things, but when he is awakened and fully conscious, such inauspicious things cannot bewilder him.

Bhaktivedanta VedaBase: Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 4.29.83

 

My dear Vidura, one who hears this narration concerning the understanding of the living entity's spiritual existence, as described by the great sage Nārada, or who relates it to others, will be liberated from the bodily conception of life.

 

 

 

PURPORT

 

 

This material creation is the spirit soul's dream. Actually all existence in the material world is a dream of Mahā-Viṣṇu, as the Brahma-saḿhitā describes:

 

 

 

yaḥ kāraṇārṇava-jalebhajatismayoga-

nidrāmananta-jagad-aṇḍa-saroma-kūpaḥ

[Bs. 5.47]

 

 

This material world is created by the dreaming of Mahā-Viṣṇu. The real, factual platform is the spiritual world, but when the spirit soul wants to imitate the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he is put into this dreamland of material creation. After being in contact with the material modes of nature, the living entity develops the subtle and gross bodies. When the living entity is fortunate enough to associate with Śrī Nārada Mahāmuni or his servants, he is liberated from this dreamland of material creation and the bodily conception of life.

<<< >>>

 

[Beggar 0]

 

Seaching around and found this, SOME Krishna katha!! too many mundane topics at the moment - give us a break from the Christian and mayavardi!

Why do you write mayavardi with an "r". All recent acaryas including Srila Prabhupada and his guru use the word, "Mayavadi". For example here is a passage from TLC Chapt. 25 (my highlights).

 

 

According to Svetasvatara Upanisad, the apani-pado javano grahita mantra confirms that although Brahman has no material hands and legs, He nonetheless walks in a very stately way and accepts everything that is offered to Him. This suggests that He has transcendental limbs and is therefore not impersonal. One who does not understand the Vedic principles simply stresses the impersonal material features of the Supreme Absolute Truth and thus incorrectly calls the Absolute Truth impersonal. The impersonalist Mayavadi philosophers want to establish the Absolute Truth as impersonal, but this is in contradiction to Vedic literature. Although Vedic literatures confirm the fact that the Supreme Absolute Truth has multiple energies, the Mayavadi impersonalists still try to establish that the Absolute Truth has no energy. The fact remains, however, that the Absolute Truth is full of energy and is a person as well. It is not possible to establish Him as impersonal.

[Sarva gattah 0]

 

Why do you write mayavardi with an "r". All recent acaryas including Srila Prabhupada and his guru use the word, "Mayavadi". For example here is a passage from TLC Chapt. 25 (my highlights).

 

I also spelt it that way. Sorry about that, you are right Beggar, the correct spelling in English words is Mayavadi