The Buddhists question

[Guest guest]

I read this question by Buddhists recently:

 

" If God created the Universe, who created God? This is impossible to

prove or explain logically, so we dont accept God " .

 

How would you answer this, if a Buddhist asked you? You cannot quote

Gita, or any other text, as Buddhists dont accept those & have their

own scriptures.

 

I would be interested to hear how you would answer this?

 

Shantnu

[Guest guest]

, shanracer <no_reply wrote:

>

> I read this question by Buddhists recently:

>

> " If God created the Universe, who created God? This is impossible

to

> prove or explain logically, so we dont accept God " .

>

> How would you answer this, if a Buddhist asked you? You cannot

quote

> Gita, or any other text, as Buddhists dont accept those & have

their

> own scriptures.

 

 

Many Atheists are asking such type of circular logic questions on

YA. Like " Can God create a rock so heavy that he can not lift ? "

now these type of questions are tailor made to prove God wrong both

ways.

 

Let us take the question posted by shantnu " If God created the

Universe, who Created God ? "

 

 

If God created universe ----- Hinduism does not believe in

creation of the universe. As per hinduism, Universe is Manifested

and the whole universe is body of the God. This fact Krishna

proved when he showed his virat swarup to arjuna.

 

We should never argue with those who wish to disprove/approve

God with Logics....hence there is actually need to prove anyone

anything.

 

God does not exist ... if some stupids prove he existed

God does not cease to exist... if another set of idiots prove

he is not

 

God Exists.. because HE IS !!!

 

God transcends logics... hence cant be proved or rejected by

logics.... It is like trying to prove a mathmatical equation with

the help of social science.

 

with love

[Guest guest]

what i think about it.................

" to prove that the God exists is beyond the scope of this world.so

it is better to uplift the level of others as a work to know the

existance of the God.it will enhance your knowledge to understand

the science of the existance of the God. "

 

jitendra

 

 

 

, beirut_ka_baba <no_reply wrote:

[Guest guest]

GOD is not a laboratory chemical. His existance is not proved by human ligic.

It`s faith in GOD that saves all of us.

God does not accept a challenge from ordinary mortals like

" make an object so heavy even YOU can`t lift it.

 

Absence of proof is not proof of absence.

ijswamy

 

beirut_ka_baba <no_reply > wrote:

, shanracer <no_reply

[Guest guest]

Om Namah Shivaya.

Dear ShantnuJI and BabaJI,

 

I would say budhists SEEM to have a different veiw altogether even

though their root is from Hinduism, but NOT .

 

They beleive if there is a creation then there should be a

destruction as well, which is logically right. If there is a

creation then it is mortal.

So if GOD was created then it is also mortal.

 

They beleive GOD is IMMORTAL, and doesnot bother of creation,

preserve, punish, reward or destroy.

 

GOD is absolutely free from any limitation or blemish of mortality,

as the unborn, the unoriginated, the uncreated, the deathless.

 

And the creation, preserve, punish, reward or destroy are taken care

of mother nature.

 

I would say they are right. We do say so and beleive so, mother

nature is the reason for all the happenings and our goal is to

please her and work to ward goal of disolving ourselves with the

supreme consiousness. ( SHIV-SAKTHI)?

 

I read a nice article and the following is peice of cut and paste

from that article which literally explains budhism and its

beleifs/teachings.

 

Shivaya Nama AUM.

Thiruchitrambalam.

Senthil.

 

 

When this is, that is;|

When this arises, that arises;

When this is not, that is not;

When this ceases, that ceases.

 

This is a very simple little formula, meaning that everything that

comes into being does so dependent on conditions. When the

conditions are there, the result is there. That result in turn

becomes a condition for other results. It is a pure relationship of

cause and effect, not linear, but multi-faceted. It is a fundamental

and all-inclusive law, a self-contained system.

 

This leads to the next question: " Who made that law? " This is where

Buddhism is radically different. What is the beginning? Who created

things? These questions are based on certain assumptions. As soon as

you say, " Who created? " something outside is implied, but in

Buddhism we say mortality is a self-contained system. No beginning

can be seen. Of course, that's not very satisfactory. If you

say, 'This part is the beginning " , you have to say what is before

that point. It is like asking, " What is the smallest number? " It

depends on which school you went to. A child in Grade One might say

number one; a PhD might say something else. Whatever you say it can

be cut back further, unless you say zero, and that's not a number.

Where is the smallest number? Nowhere. Where is the beginning?

Nowhere. The system doesn't have a beginning. It's the wrong way of

looking at it. Buddhism says there is no beginning, no creator,

because as soon as you say there is a beginning, the question

arises, who created it? Who created the creator? You just go round

in circles.

 

This is a self-contained system. Everything in this system follows

the law of nature, all results depend on conditions. Why does it

rain today? " God made it rain. " This is very simplistic. It rained

because the conditions were right for it to rain. Not many people

today say " God made it rain. " It depends on certain conditions. Is

it a reward or a punishment? It depends on how you view it. This is

a law that operates at all levels, physical, mental, emotional and

spiritual.

 

In is a more personal and spiritual sense, Buddhism talks about the

Law of //Kamma//, which is a more specific application of this

wider, all-inclusive Law of Dependent Origination. The Law

of //Kamma// states that through the doing of certain volitional

actions, certain results will come about. Good actions bring good

results, bad actions bring bad results. This is not punishment, just

natural results. The idea of God the rewarder or punisher is

replaced by the law of nature. It is impersonal, it has no bias and

makes deals with no one. There are no favorites, the Law is very

neutral and very fair. All people who develop goodness, regardless

of their religion, go to heaven through the power of that goodness.

When that power of goodness fades away they die and are reborn

somewhere else. Goodness and evil have their own rewards according

to the laws of nature. These laws are fundamental, they are the

basis of nature.

 

This is the Buddhist explanation of that which is normally

attributed to God. The role of punishing, rewarding, creating and

destroying is all taken over by the laws of nature. The idea of God

as something ultimate, which is the idea behind all religion, is now

presented in this very enlightenment, absolutely free from any

limitation or blemish of mortality, as the unborn, the unoriginated,

the uncreated, the deathless.

 

It's a wonderful way of putting it if you can open your mind to it.

Then you see how it frees you from so many illogical, unsustainable

conflicts that arise from the usual way of thinking about God.

[Guest guest]

Om Nama shivaya.

I missed to add the below in my previous post.

 

Buddha about GOD???

The Buddha made this wonderful statement:

 

" There is, monks, an unborn, uncreated, an unconditioned. Here, monks,

I say there is no coming, no going, no standing, no ceasing, no

beginning. Not fixed, not movable, it has no support. Just this is the

end of suffering. "

 

Shivaya Nama AUM.

Thiruchitrambalam.

Senthil.

[Guest guest]

Senthil, Buddhists dont believe in God. They outright reject the

Vedas, & its concept of Brahm or Ishwar. Individual Gurus & sects

might accept parts of Hinduism, but as a whole they reject God.

 

Buddhists says there is no God(the Universal soul- Brahm or Shiv),

neither is there individual soul. Its just a void, which seems to

exists, but actually doesnt.

 

Hindus have answered their criticisms very nicely; I just wanted to

see of anyone in this club had heard of the arguments.

 

As Babaji said, Tantra says the world was never created- it exists as

a part of Shiv(the Universal soul, not Rudra the God of destruction of

the Puranas). It is his creative power, Shakti, which brings world

into existence, & preserves it, finally destroys it, but Shiv always

remains untouched from this game.

 

The Buddhists say that since all we see, hear etc are just impressions

on the conciousness, they arent real, as the Conciousness goes away in

Samadhi. Tantra answered this criticism well: they say that when

Samadhi finishes, the person returns to normal world, which shows

Samadhi was only a state of being, like deep sleep, & not the final

state. The final state is where there is no return. There is no

object, just the subject. This is the state of Shiv, the Universal

soul, who always stays in Samadhi, but can still act in the world.

 

The Buddhists state of Shunya, or void where there is no God, is hence

just a temporary stage- when man destroys all his Karma, vasanas &

Sanskaars, he reaches a void where nothing exists. But this void is

not the final stage, as those who reach here cannot do anything- they

just exist in sort of samadhi stage forever.

 

Shiv exists beyond this Shunya, as he isnt a part of our Universe. One

becomes a master when one crosses this void, & merges with Shiv. In

that state one can act in the World, & still be in Samadhi.

 

This is also the asnwer to Babajis other question: we get full moksha

only once we cross the void, merge with Shiv, then return to the world

as his agents to help the world. Such a person will have all the

pwoers of Shiv. His ego will be a group ego- part of all egos who have

merged with Shiv, & obviously also part of Shiv/Shakti. Such a person

can never take a wrong decision, as his decision is that of Shiv himself.

[Guest guest]

I fully agree with Shanracer here ! Buddha, although he was an

enlightened soul, but the Truth he saw and propagated is not in

conformity with the philosophy of hinduism. It may make a part of

this philosophy (like Sankhya), but Buddha cant be called a perfect

sage. He saw one side of the story, and rejected all other sides.

 

Any philsoophy which rejects God, and Soul outrightly, can not

be depended upon.... so how can we say the Moksha (Nirvana)

explained by Budha to be True??... I can not accept a VOID to be my

final Aim !

 

Shankracharya also made this mistake in the beginning of

rejecting the world and calling everything as unreal or illusion.

But Shankracharya soon found his mistake, and accepted the concept

of Shakti, the eternal energy.

 

any sect...any philosophy talking of world as fake and unreal and

unnecessary, must need a thorough examination.... because if running

away from the Game is the final aim... the Game would not have

started !!

 

with love

[Guest guest]

Somettime ago I read a great observation by Shri Aurobindo on this

subject.

 

" The universe is not merely a mathematical formula for working out

the relation of certain mental abstractions called numbers and

principles to arrive in the end at a zero or a void universe,

 

Neither is it merely a physical operation embodying certain equations

of forces.

 

It is the delight of a self-lover, the play of a child, the endless

self-multiplication of a poet intoxicated with the rapture of his own

power of endless creation.

 

- AUROBINDO (Essays on Yoga and Philosophy)

 

baba

[Guest guest]

Om Guruvay Namah

In this regard, there is a possibility that Buddha reached beyond

the void (shunya) but he did not have a single disciple whom He

could reveal this experience and the world know about Buddha only

upto the stage where the disciples could understand and narrate to

others. Because whatever we know of Buddha's experiences/stage, it

is only from the mouth of his disciples (and it is true in all cases

as no such a higher soul would go to anybody to tell his experiences

etc.). Therefore, there are chances that what came to writings, was

according to the level of the disciples.

We know about Shri Ram Krishna Paramhans's true stage only through

Shri Vivekanand. Even other disciples could not know/understand

Shri Paramhan's hight.

 

, beirut_ka_baba <no_reply wrote:

>

>

> I fully agree with Shanracer here ! Buddha, although he was

an

> enlightened soul, but the Truth he saw and propagated is not in

> conformity with the philosophy of hinduism. It may make a part of

> this philosophy (like Sankhya), but Buddha cant be called a

perfect

> sage. He saw one side of the story, and rejected all other sides.

>

> Any philsoophy which rejects God, and Soul outrightly, can

not

> be depended upon.... so how can we say the Moksha (Nirvana)

> explained by Budha to be True??... I can not accept a VOID to be

my

> final Aim !

>

> Shankracharya also made this mistake in the beginning of

> rejecting the world and calling everything as unreal or illusion.

> But Shankracharya soon found his mistake, and accepted the concept

> of Shakti, the eternal energy.

>

> any sect...any philosophy talking of world as fake and unreal

and

> unnecessary, must need a thorough examination.... because if

running

> away from the Game is the final aim... the Game would not have

> started !!

>

> with love

>

[Guest guest]

Dear friends, A few years ago I had written to His Hliness Dalai Lama to mail me

some basics of Buddism. His secretary sent me two small books. I could not fully

comprehend the message of the books. To the extent I had followed, it means " as

per buddhism and really " GOD CAN NOT BE UNDERSTOOD BY HUMANS OF ANY INTELLECT.

 

ijswamy

 

pradeep8_56 <no_reply > wrote:

Om Guruvay Namah

[Guest guest]

, pradeep8_56 <no_reply wrote:

>

> Om Guruvay Namah

> In this regard, there is a possibility that Buddha reached beyond

> the void (shunya) but he did not have a single disciple whom He

 

 

Yes this is possible.. your point is very valid. Budha also never

said that there is No God, as per Buddhist's claim. He just kept

quiet...which was taken as his rejection of God

 

God can not be Understood, learnt, read or seen. God is the

supreme consciousness which can only Experienced....and it is

totally subjective.

 

Tantra, the perfect philosophy of hinduism, confirms that

between Turiya tattwa and Paramshiva tattawa, there is a big void.

This void has no bliss, no experience...only dead consciousness.

Tantra also says that we can only cross this void with the Kripa of

God...not by our own efforts. Perhaps Buddha reached that stage and

called the supreme state of being a Void.

 

love

[Guest guest]

Dear Babaji,Please Accept my Most Humble Obiesances!

You know ,I deaply Respect Your Posts,and also, You are of most Interest to

me,not saying that i dont like everyone in this club,I do!

AS i was taught to understand,Lord Buddha is An incarnation of Krsna!He came

because the Brahminas were doing was Sacrificing Animals on the Alter,And When

They Did Amimal Sarificing, in the Time of Krsna ,The Proof of the success of

the Sacrafice, was the Animals Came Back to Life!Now as We Entered the Age of

Kalie ,The Braminas Were Sacraficing Lots of Defenceless animals,and there was

no animals being Brought back to life,So Krsna ,incarnated ,as Budha, To Stop

all the Uselesss Killings of Animals,And To return The World to a More Mercyfull

envirment!This is Not understood By most People!I hope this meets you in Good

Health,and Perfect Krsna Consciousness,Love,Your Servant,

Jaya Kesava Dasa

Jai Radhe!

[Guest guest]

, " Jaya Kesava Dasa " <krsnajoe

wrote:

>

> Dear Babaji,Please Accept my Most Humble Obiesances!

 

Thanks dear krsnajoe,

 

I do accept Buddha was incarnation of Krishna and He came

to remove many social evils prevailing in India.

 

I am too small to criticise Buddha... my point was that

different people give different explanation for Moskha or Nirvana...

so we wish to discuss if all the explanation point to Absolute Truth

or not.

 

You may like to mention what is Moksha as per your

understanding

 

with love

 

baba

[Guest guest]

We have to remember Buddha came in the dark ages of

Hinduism.......the Mahabharat war was like todays World Wars. The

whole society was destroyed, there was chaos. To make it worse, all

the intellectuals & wise men(like the Pandav brothers) left for

Sanyaas. Many others died in the great war.

 

As such, Hinduism was in its darkest ages- people didnt know why the

rituals were being done, semi literate priests had taken over

Temples, there was wide spread superstition.

 

In such an environment Buddha came. His message was simple- dont

waste time in temples, rituals, just meditate.

 

Like Pradeepji said, we dont know what Buddha actually said, just

what his followers claim(that he was anti-God etc). While he was

alive, Buddha also said no temples should be built around him, no

books written, no priests etc. He didnt want to create another

religon, but thats exactly what his followers did!

 

So, in the environment he was born in, Buddhas anti God, anti ritual

stance made sense. But Im not sure it makes sense in all

circumstances.

 

Krishans message,the gist of the Upanishads however, is always

relevant. It wasnt for a particular person, place, country or

religon. Different interpretations of it maybe time/culture specific

(like Shankars or Ramajuns), but the acutal book is very generic,

open to new interpreations all the time(for example, just read

Aurobindos commentary on the Gita, & compare it to Shankars or

Ramajuns).

 

Shantnu

[Guest guest]

Namaste all. Thanks dear babaji, I'll be writing more about my

pilgrimage events sooner or later.

 

Here is an excerpt from my old posting. I am also providing a link to

read more on Buddha as well as Jesus.

 

Buddha and Christ - Two Gods on the Path to Humanity

Article of the Month - November 2003

 

http://www.exoticindia.com/article/buddhaandchrist

 

The Life of Buddha in Legend and Art

Article of the Month - May 2000

 

http://www.exoticindiaart.com/article/gautambuddha

 

------------

 

.... Saints often preach extraordinary philosophies, depending upon the

circumstances of time and place.

 

We find that Lord Buddha went to the EXTENT of DENYING the AUTHORITY

of the Vedas and EVEN GOD.

 

In the SAME WAY, the ADVAITA Philosophy propounded by

 

Sri Sankaracharya was MAINLY NECESSITATED by the AGE

 

in which HE LIVED.

 

He had to FIGHT a battle AGAINST BUDDHISM and RITUALISM which were

gradually PRAMOTING ATHEISM.

 

He REFUTED BOTH these BELIEFS with His GREAT intellectual SKILL, but

HIMSELF continued to compose MANY poems in PRAISE of Lord Krishna.

 

They SHOW the EXTENT to which HIS DEVOTIONAL HEART YEARNED for the

SIGHT of HIS BELOVED LORD.

 

From this you can see, how DIFFERENT His practice was from His

teaching. ....

 

Source- the book 'Prema Rasa Siddhant' by Sri Rama Kripalu Maharaj

 

------

 

More to read at this link about Jagadguru Sri Shankaraacharya

 

http://forums.delphiforums.com/jayaradhey/messages?msg=5.94

 

Jaya Sri Radhey!

 

, beirut_ka_baba <no_reply wrote:

 

> I do accept Buddha was incarnation of Krishna and He came

> to remove many social evils prevailing in India.

>

> I am too small to criticise Buddha... my point was that

> different people give different explanation for Moskha or Nirvana...

> so we wish to discuss if all the explanation point to Absolute Truth

> or not.

[Guest guest]

there are thousand of ways to reach the God.if someone has seen the

God through some way why he understands that it is everything. the

GOD is infinite .

 

 

, shanracer <no_reply wrote:

>

> We have to remember Buddha came in the dark ages of

[Guest guest]

Om Namah Shivaya,

 

Rightly said ShantnuJI,

 

> In such an environment Buddha came. His message was simple- dont

> waste time in temples, rituals, just meditate.

>

> Like Pradeepji said, we dont know what Buddha actually said, just

> what his followers claim(that he was anti-God etc). While he was

> alive, Buddha also said no temples should be built around him, no

> books written, no priests etc. He didnt want to create another

> religon, but thats exactly what his followers did!

>

 

This is what i tried to say earlier, a noble person like Budha would

never been an Anti God or a Atheist., but he tried to eradicate the

misconceptions, but his followers project it in a wrong way, as you

very said.

 

Shivaya Namah AUM.

Thiruchitrambalam.

Senthil.

[Guest guest]

Thank You,Dear Babaji,Please Accept My most humble Obiesances!All Glories

to Sri Sri Guru and Gaurunga!Servants of Krsna,are not very interested in

Moksha.I will try to repeat,or at least explain what my Guruji told me! He said

to be a lover of Krsna,or a devotee of Krsna,attomatically Brings Moksha!I

believe He said if you become mad after Krsna,Chanting His Names ,Thinking of

Him,Loving Him,Serving Him,That Moksha will be on Her Knees , With Her

Hands in Prayer,Waiting for such a soul!

I think He said that,Moksha was just a Byproduct of Devotional Service!I hope I

have Explained this OK,

Love ,Your Servant,Jaya Kesava Dasa

 

 

 

 

 

-

beirut_ka_baba

[Guest guest]

Namaste all. Here is more on Mukti - from my old posts:

 

Hanuman ji says to Lord Rama:

 

bhava bandhacchide tasyai spRhayAmi na muktaye,

bhavAn prabhur aham dAsa iti yatra vilupyate

 

O Lord Who is capable of giving Liberation

by destroying all the material bondage!

Under no circumstance I'd ever desire to be liberated,

in which state that I am your Loving Servant and

You are my Beloved Master is permanently lost !

 

- Padyavali.111

 

kA tvaM muktir upAgatAsmi bhavatI kasmAd akasmAd iha

zrI kRSNa smaraNena deva! bhavato dAsI padaM prApitA

dUre tiSTha! manAganAgasi kathaM kuryAd anAryaM mayi

tvad gandhAn nija nAma candana rasAlepasya lopo bhavet

 

- Padyavali.113

 

The devotee who is absorbed in the transcendental vibration of

Holy Names of the Lord is disturbed by a stranger.

 

He puts forth the question: " Who are you? "

Answer: " I am Mukti Devi, anxiously waiting to serve you. "

Question: " So, all of a sudden how could you come so near? "

Answer: " O master, by the virtue of your fond remembrance of

my Supreme Lord Krishna in divine love, I have been blessed

to become your servant. Please do engage me in your service.

How can I serve you, my master? "

 

The frightened devotee master loudly gives his order to the servant:

 

" Stay away, far, far from me!

Why do you spoil my innocent desire for

selflessly serving my Lord, Sri Krishna?

By coming so close you might spread the foul odor of selfishness

over me who is being anointed with the fragrant sandalwood-paste of

blissful chanting of Divine Names! "

 

The implied meaning :

 

By accepting Mukti, liberation, the devotee would lose his individuality,

name as well as form, there by permanently loosing his chance

to serve his Divine Beloved.

To be engaged in the eternal loving service of the Lord,

the devotee forsakes and even rebukes Mukti

which has been easily bestowed upon him.

 

Jaya Sri Radhey!

 

, " Jaya Kesava Dasa " <krsnajoe wrote:

>Servants of Krsna,are not very interested in

> Moksha.

[Guest guest]

Dear Pyari Prabhu,Please Accept my Huble Obiesances !

Your description of How a Devotee Feels about Mukthi,are more correct than

mine!Thank you for Describing that story! It shows me how fallen, I really Am!

Hari Hari Bol!Jai Radhe!

Love,Your servant Jaya Kesava Dasa

PS: are you Dr Jaya?????

 

 

 

 

-

pyari_h

[Guest guest]

Namaste. Yes, Dr. Jaya is my original name while Pyari_h is just my

ID.

 

I have posted many interesting messages and notes on Bhakti and Mukti

at this link:

 

http://forums.delphiforums.com/jayaradhey/messages?msg=149.1

 

Bhakti is known in two main forms -

 

(1) Sadhana Bhakti, a stage of preparatory discipline and practice

 

(2) Siddha Bhakti, a state of perfection which is beyond the words

for description but realized only through experience alone, as

revealed by Sri Narada Muni in 'Narada Bhakti Sutra',

who said it to be 'mookAsvAdana vat..'- relishing of a sweet by the

mute...

So Siddha Bhakti is realized state of Divine perfection beyond

liberation. Srimad Bhagavatam has declared this at many places.

 

Sri Krishna's Testimony

 

Bhagavata 11-12.12

 

Being identified with Me-

with their mind tied to Me as it were-

they (the Gopis) did not know anything far or near,

not even their bodies.

 

Like the sages of realization fully absorbed in the Self,

or rivers which have emptied their waters in the ocean,

losing their name-and-form individualities, they beacme

One with Me.

 

They were totally oblivious of everything else. "

 

 

More similar quotes are given in Mundaka Upanishad, Bhagavatam and Tantra:

 

--

 

yathA nadyaH syandamAnAH samudre 'staM

gacchanti nAmarUpe vihAya

tathA vidvAn nAmarUpAd vimuktaH

parAtparaM puruSam upaiti divyam

 

(Mundaka Upanishad 3.2.8)

 

'As rivers, flowing down, become indistinguishable

on reaching the sea by GIVING UP their NAMES, FORMS,

 

so also the ILLUMINED soul, having become freed

from name and form, REACHES the Self-effulgent Divine Purusha,

that is HIGHER than the higher (Maya).

 

" sa yo ha vai tat paramaM brahma veda

brahmaiva bhavati nAsyA brahma vitkule bhavati,

tarati zokaM tarati pApmAnaM

guhAgranthibhyo vimukto 'mRto bhavati "

 

(Mundaka Upanishad 3.2.9)

 

 

'Anyone who REALIZES that Supreme Brahman becomes Brahman INDEED.

 

Anyone who does NOT realize Brahman DOES NOT exist in His spiritual clan.

 

He OVERCOMES grief, and RAISES above aberrations; and becoming FREED

from the DEEP KNOTS of the HEART (created by Avidya, ignorance), he

attains IMMORTALITY.'

 

********

 

bhidyate hRdaya-granthiz

chidyante sarva-sanzayAH

kSIyante cAsya karmANi

dRSTa evAtmanIzvare

 

Bhagavatam 1.2.21

 

When the individual self realizes Me,

the Self of all, the material knot

(body, mind, intellect, ego)

of his heart breaks to pieces,

all his doubts of avidya,

ignorance are dispelled and

all accumulated karmas of the past

as well as of the future are destroyed.

 

--

 

bhidyate hRdaya granthiz

chidyante sarva sanzayAH

kSIyante cAsya karmANi

mayi dRSTe 'khilAtmani

 

(Bhagavatam 11.24.30)

 

Lord Himself says -

 

'When the devotee sees Me (realizes Me),

the Self of ALL, the material KNOT

(body, mind, intellect, ego etc.,)

of his HEART breaks to PIECES,

all his doubts of avidya,

ignorance are dispelled,

and all the accumulated karmas of

the past as well as the future

are destroyed.

 

bhidyate hRdaya granthiz

chidyante sarva saMzayAH

kSIyante cAsya karmANi

tasmin dRSTe parAvare

 

- Mundaka Upanshad 1.2.8

 

When the Self Which is BOTH High and Low,

is REALIZED, the material KNOT

(body, mind, intellect, ego etc.,)

of his HEART breaks into pieces,

all his doubts of avidya,

ignorance are solved, and

all the accumulated karmas of the past

as well as the future are dissipated.

 

------------

 

When the knot of the heart is severed,

so all doubts are cut away;

and karmas, actions, and intentions

- past, present and future,

are destroyed when one sees

the Supreme Self from within.

 

- The Kularnava Tantra

 

-----------------

 

Jaya Sri Radhey!

 

, " Jaya Kesava Dasa " <krsnajoe wrote:

 

> Your description of How a Devotee Feels about Mukthi, are more

correct than mine!

> PS: are you Dr Jaya?????