Guest guest Posted April 28, 2004 Report Share Posted April 28, 2004 Sikh gurus unfortunately use this same illusioned logic. "god under maya ...as an incarnation...does whatever a man does...eats, sleeps , and gets emotionally disturbed. he is born and he ages and he does die. there is no wonder in that...nor is there any illogic. in fact it is the most logical" SB 3.4.34: The Lord's glorious acts and His acceptance of various transcendental forms for the performance of extraordinary pastimes in the mortal world are very difficult for anyone other than His devotees to understand, and for the beasts they are simply a mental disturbance Gita 9.11: Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature and My supreme dominion over all that be "u prefer to see him in a lifeless stone rather than a suffering human...u rather give a flower to the stone than a morsel of food for the hungry...how much more blind can u get?" You might be interested to see what Shnankar says about your 'stones' in his Nrsimha Tapany Upanishad commentary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 28, 2004 Report Share Posted April 28, 2004 This was supposed to be posted in vivekanand thread !?!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 28, 2004 Report Share Posted April 28, 2004 i am not against idol worship..plz dont get me wrong...i worship god daily in the image ...my favourite diety being veer hanuman ji. i didnt mean to use the word stone in a derogatory reference to dvaitic mode. it is only when perception of the divine is limited to the image only that i pointed out the irrationality of accepting one without understanding properly the other...here service to man. these are however my views. regarding god as man...if the perception of the godhead is unseen to the common eye...his pasttimes as the prince (ram) , cowherd (krishna) , sanyasin (buddha) , messaih (christ) etc being examples...then y is it so hard to imagine for the same god to be in the form of the suffering? i fail to grasp y this is such a tough concept for most to accept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 28, 2004 Report Share Posted April 28, 2004 "then y is it so hard to imagine for the same god to be in the form of the suffering?" Gita 5.18 The humble sage, by virtue of true knowledge, sees with equal vision a learned and gentle brahmana, a cow, an elephant, a dog and a dog-eater [outcaste] Isa is in the suffernig and everyone else, everything. The suffering and everything else dual is his Mahamaya Shakti. He associates with his inferior Mahamaya shatkti as Shiva. There's more to this but i dont know it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pankaja_Dasa Posted April 28, 2004 Report Share Posted April 28, 2004 Hare Krsna, I hear that Lord Siva is the Faith and Sri Paravati is the Confidence, when Lord Siva was seperated from Sati, he was beside himself, I hope this is accurate, if it is not please forgive me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.