Is there a true religion?

[barney 0]

That does not mean if one is profound in sanskrit knows everythig. So, I know how much you know about religion and life and I have no further comment.

[Guest guest]

 

That does not mean if one is profound in sanskrit knows everythig.

 

 

No it does not. But the point remains that you are utterly ignorant of Sanskrit, and consequently you are quite ignorant of the Vedas as well. Unfortunately, you have a problem admitting when you do not know what you are talking about, which is often.

 

Raghu

 

 

[barney 0]

We are not in the Dwapara yug my friend. In today's world one need not have to learn sanskrit to understand the vedas. Vedas and Upanishads have been translated into English and other languages and to understand them is not the hardest thing in the world. Even a primary schol student would be able to understand. You think only those who can read sanskrit could understand the vedas. Well, you are wrong and so are your kind. Tell me something that I don't know yet.

[Guest guest]

today's world one need not have to learn sanskrit to understand the vedas.

 

 

Incorrect. The Vedas are nondifferent from the Sanskrit medium in which they are communicated. You cannot learn one without the other. If you had studied in a traditional sampradAya, as opposed to the politically-correct, watered-down, neo-Advaitic cult you belong to, you would have known that.

 

 

Vedas and Upanishads have been translated into English and other languages and to understand them is not the hardest thing in the world.

 

 

On the contrary, it is precisely those who choose to learn the Vedas through translations who almost invariably have the most difficulty understanding them. Though it is often the case that many, like yourself, think they know what they are talking about, in just about all cases they do not.

 

One cannot evaluate the authenticity of a translation without knowing the original language first. It is indeed the height of stupidity to arbitrarily choose any one "translation" as accurate, when one does not know the language from which it is translated.

 

But because people do that, we have indiscriminate, unthinking cult follower like you who talk all sorts of things about Vedas, Upanishads, etc but in reality have absolutely no real understanding. People like you just throw words like Brahman, mAyA, etc around, but there is a lack of connectedness in your thinking. You have some rudimentary idea of what these concepts are, but you cannot apply them. You cannot use your knowledge to define them or refute misunderstandings of them.

 

All you can do is spam-mail one posting after another, with the goal of making yourself seem more knowledgeable than you actually are to an audience of people who are just as ignorant as you.

 

History here has shown that just about every one of your "Vedic" theories has been successfully put to the sword, with your only response being a whiny complaint that anyone who disagrees with you is a fanatic or some such thing. The bottom line is that you do not know the Vedas, are completely unprepared when what they say contradicts what you believe them to say, and that your only defense is a feeble character attack against anyone who disagrees with your Afro-hair baba.

 

This again gets back to the point about Thinking. It's important.

 

Of course, one need not be a genius - the milkmaids of Vraja are examples of devotees who were not scholars, but who nevertheless attained the highest perfection.

 

However, their example is not relevant to your own. While they are not great scholars, they still accept good instruction. You are not only incapable of thinking, you simply go out of your way to postulate the most bizarre and illogical theories that defy all common sense. This is what is known as anti-thinking. It isn't lack of scholarship that disqualifies your theories, but the complete opposition to scholarship that makes them worthy of the dustbin.

 

[barney 0]

You said:

On the contrary, it is precisely those who choose to learn the Vedas through translations who almost invariably have the most difficulty understanding them. Though it is often the case that many, like yourself, think they know what they are talking about, in just about all cases they do not.

__________

 

Excuse me, all one needs in life is to know the basic of his religion in order to understand and live by it as possible. I'm not aiming for a Phd here to master the whole scripture nor am do I need to converse in sanskrit to communicate with others. So, your idea does not fit the subject.

__________

 

You said:

One cannot evaluate the authenticity of a translation without knowing the original language first. It is indeed the height of stupidity to arbitrarily choose any one "translation" as accurate, when one does not know the language from which it is translated.

__________

 

Are you trying to say that those eminent sanskrit scholars who had translated the vedas into English are stupid while you are the most scholarly person of all the others. Are you telling me that their translation is not authentic? So, only you and your guru are the genuine scholars?

__________

 

You said:

All you can do is spam-mail one posting after another, with the goal of making yourself seem more knowledgeable than you actually are to an audience of people who are just as ignorant as you.

__________

 

So, you think the rest of us here are ignorant while you are the most intelligent? If you want to blow you trumpet by all means be my guest but not in this forum. Go blow you trumpet on a no man's island. I know you do not have what it takes to be a mindful person and we excuse you for that.

__________

You said:

 

History here has shown that just about every one of your "Vedic" theories has been successfully put to the sword, with your only response being a whiny complaint that anyone who disagrees with you is a fanatic or some such thing. The bottom line is that you do not know the Vedas, are completely unprepared when what they say contradicts what you believe them to say, and that your only defense is a feeble character attack against anyone who disagrees with your Afro-hair baba.

__________

 

Here again it shows your clear prejudicial attack against someone whom you dislike. I need not have to proof my aquired knowledge in the vedas nor any other scriptures. This is a forum for Hinduism and all are free to post their comments and arguments. You said you piece and let me say mine. You are not worth 2 cent for me to proof or argue with. Your character is shown in your writing and you are nothing compared to others here. Sai Baba has millions of followers and you cannot do anything about that coz compared to him, you are just dust under his feet which only need dusting away.

 

 

[Guest guest]

 

Excuse me, all one needs in life is to know the basic of his religion

 

 

You don't even know the basics. But, aside from that, you post all sorts of high-sounding things about the Vedas and Upanishads without even knowing what they say.

 

Now that you admit to not knowing these venerable scriptures, I think we are making progress.

 

My position is that one should be honest about what he knows and represent himself appropriately. Your position is that you can pretend to know what Vedas and Upanishad say even though you have no idea what they say. So in a nutshell, my position = tell the truth while your position = lie about what you know.

 

And yes, every single one of your arguments has been defeated many times over. The only reason no one bothers to try any more is because we all know your response - just ignore everyone who uses common sense to show that your ideas are the stuff of wishy-washy sentimentalism.

 

You still have not proven to me that you are not a child abuser. So I do not know why you persist in defending your "religious knowledge."

 

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

 

 

Re

( All you can do is spam-mail one posting after another, with the goal of making yourself seem more knowledgeable than you actually are to an audience of people who are just as ignorant as you.)

 

So what are you doing in this conpany

 

At first I thought why I should respond to your remark after all I am ignorant in many departments and Sanskrit is one of that although I get great pleasure in hearing the sacred chants of the Vedas.

How come someone learned in this language can spew venom? so my dear sir educate us or else just like Sankracharya said some thing like this, at the time of death the grammar will not protect you

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

[Guest guest]

 

so my dear sir educate us or else

 

 

 

A big part of education is unlearning that which is incorrect. That which is correct cannot be taught until that which is incorrect is seen for what it is.

 

Unfortunately, Barney clings to his ignorance like a drowning man clings to an anchor. So, I suspect, do you. Thus, I can know for a fact that your request for me to "educate" you is a false pretense, especially since any attempt to do so will merely be met with a "all you do is spew venom" remark.

 

For the record, all of Barney's postings are nothing more than poison, for they delude the living entities into that which is asat, and thus detrimental to their spiritual lives. Thus, it is only proper than an honest man should expose such falsehoods for what they are.

 

Barney feels great pleasure in being a teacher of spiritual things, despite knowing absolutely nothing. This is unfortunate, because the desire for attention and prestige is not the qualification of a guru. A proper teacher must be loyal to the Vedas both in name and in fact; Barney simply takes the name of the Vedas but ignores what they actually say.

 

He is dishonest because when Vedic statements are quoted which say something different from his concocted opinions, he simply ignores them and continues preaching his false propaganda. This is the mark of a dishonest man.

 

Anyway, some people relish poison. So, feel free to spew hatred at me and convince yourselves that Barney is some kind of great guy. For the record, Barney can say whatever he wants, but he better stop misusing the name of Vedas, Upanishads, Bhagavad-gItA, dharma, etc or else I will be there to correct him.

 

I do have a problem with liars who misuse our sacred scripture. But in all fairness, the problem did not start with Barney - it started with the baba who brainwashed him.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

What follows is a quote from "Barney."

 

 

My dear friend I criticize Vaishnava for their hypocracy. They talk about loving Krishna and chanting Krishna's name but have they ever for once say love your fellow human for Krishna's is in all.

 

 

Now you see, Ganesh Prasad, I know you do not object to Barney saying this. Or, even if shamed into objecting to it, you will no doubt minimize his offense and focuse on imagined offenses committed by those who object to Barney.

 

The chief problem with Barney is that, as evidenced by the above statement and similar ones like it, he has a real ego problem and cannot resist criticizing true religion, which if left untended, would make his cult propaganda the stuff of obsolete comedy sketches.

 

It is a fact that the Vaishnava traditions are based on thousands of years of scholarship and antiquity which our purple dinosaur friend simply cannot even begin to appreciate. Unfortunately, rather than admitting his lack of culture, Barney chooses to go on the offensive, thinking that his ability to copy-cut-past the Veda translations of unqualified scholars somehow makes him qualified to speak on the basis of religion.

 

But when you point out how ignorant Barney is, he simply retreats behind his "Oh, I'm just a poor humble soul with no knowledge of Sanskrit, scripture, etc who is trying to learn the basics" spiel. Well, where was that false humility of his when he was criticizing Vaishnavas? That is my point.

 

Yes, Barney does have an ego problem, like all other Sai Babas I have met. They talk much but know little. They need their egos deflated once in a while so that they learn their place. And what is that place? Sai Baba and others like him are to Hinduism what the cheap televangelists are to Christianity. It is unfortunate that so much of India has fallen under their sway, but then, the same is true of Christians and evangelicals, Islam and the fanatic terrorists, etc.

 

Nobody said that the spiritual IQ of the average Kali Yuga resident was very high.

[Ganeshprasad 0]

 

Jai Ganesh

 

Re

(A big part of education is unlearning that which is incorrect. That which is correct cannot be taught until that which is incorrect is seen for what it is.)

 

When the sun is out the darkness disappears

Here is what Krishna says in regards to setting examples in Bg.ch 3

Bewildered by the modes of material nature, the ignorant fully engage themselves in material activities and become attached. But the wise should not unsettle them, although these duties are inferior due to the performers' lack of knowledge.

 

 

Re

(Unfortunately, Barney clings to his ignorance like a drowning man clings to an anchor. So, I suspect, do you. Thus, I can know for a fact that your request for me to "educate" you is a false pretense, especially since any attempt to do so will merely be met with a "all you do is spew venom" remark.)

 

My request for education was purely based on your blanket accusations to the audience of being ignorant here, and if that is all you do, spew venom, only thing you might achieve is further entrench of ones position.

And it is wrong for you to assume or suspect what one is clinging on, especially someone as intelligent as you should know it would be very much based on ones Karma.

 

Re

 

(For the record, all of Barney's postings are nothing more than poison, for they delude the living entities into that which is asat, and thus detrimental to their spiritual lives. Thus, it is only proper than an honest man should expose such falsehoods for what they are.

Barney feels great pleasure in being a teacher of spiritual things, despite knowing absolutely nothing. This is unfortunate, because the desire for attention and prestige is not the qualification of a guru. A proper teacher must be loyal to the Vedas both in name and in fact; Barney simply takes the name of the Vedas but ignores what they actually say.

 

He is dishonest because when Vedic statements are quoted which say something different from his concocted opinions, he simply ignores them and continues preaching his false propaganda. This is the mark of a dishonest man.)

 

 

This is between you and Barney

 

Re

(Anyway, some people relish poison. So, feel free to spew hatred at me)

 

I do not know about relishing poison perhaps if I am ever fortunate enough to ask Lord Shiva I might find out, I try not to hate anyone.

 

Re

( and convince yourselves that Barney is some kind of great guy. For the record, Barney can say whatever he wants, but he better stop misusing the name of Vedas, Upanishads, Bhagavad-gItA, dharma, etc or else I will be there to correct him.)

 

I never said Barney is a great guy or otherwise. Feel free to (educate) correct who ever you want but since you said it is not going to make blind bit of difference why bother?

 

Re

(I do have a problem with liars who misuse our sacred scripture. But in all fairness, the problem did not start with Barney - it started with the baba who brainwashed him.)

 

I have no comment other than I do not like baba pictured with divine mothers whose other half are well known.

 

 

 

 

 

Re

 

(Now you see, Ganesh Prasad, I know you do not object to Barney saying this. Or, even if shamed into objecting to it, you will no doubt minimize his offense and focuse on imagined offenses committed by those who object to Barney.)

 

Now why would I want to focuse on imagined or otherwise offenses committed against Barney?

 

We are not related in anyway nor do I know this guy, I do not always agree with what he write but this is a public forum I do not let things bother me, unless it affect me directly.

Rest of the post is about your problem with Barney so let you guys get on with it.

 

Re

(Nobody said that the spiritual IQ of the average Kali Yuga resident was very high.)

 

And my one falls below average.

Jai Shree Krishna

 

[Guest guest]

 

Here is what Krishna says in regards to setting examples in Bg.ch 3

Bewildered by the modes of material nature, the ignorant fully engage themselves in material activities and become attached. But the wise should not unsettle them, although these duties are inferior due to the performers' lack of knowledge.

 

 

Not only is this not what Krishna said, you are taking it out of context.

 

I'm not really interested in addressing the rest. On one hand, you say this is between me and Barney, yet you interject yourself anyway and try to start an argument. I can't help it if you sympathize with such dishonest individuals.

 

Good day.

 

 

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

Re

(Not only is this not what Krishna said)

 

Chapter 3. Karma-yoga

TEXT 29

prakrter guna-sammudhah

sajjante guna-karmasu

tan akrtsna-vido mandan

krtsna-vin na vicalayet

SYNONYMS

prakrteh--impelled by the material modes; guna-sammudhah--befooled by material identification; sajjante--become engaged; guna-karmasu--in material activities; tan--all those; akrtsna-vidah--persons with a poor fund of knowledge; mandan--lazy to understand self-realization; krtsna-vit--one who is in factual knowledge; na--may not; vicalayet--try to agitate.

 

Translation by Srila Prabhupad

Bewildered by the modes of material nature, the ignorant fully engage themselves in material activities and become attached. But the wise should not unsettle them, although these duties are inferior due to the performers' lack of knowledge.

 

 

Those who are deluded by the Gunas of nature get attached to the works of the Gunas. The wise should not disturb the mind of the ignorant whose knowledge is imperfect. (See also 3.26) (3.29) translator, Dr. Ramanand Prasad, of the American Gita Society. ...

 

 

Perhaps you can tell in your own words what Krishna is saying above

 

Re

(you are taking out of context.)

 

No sir you have called the lot of us ignorant and foolish in no way I find this out of context.

 

Re

(I'm not really interested in addressing the rest. On one hand, you say this is between me and Barney, yet you interject yourself anyway and try to start an argument. I can't help it if you sympathize with such dishonest individuals.)

 

It your choice to respond or not.

 

Let me remind you why I interjected; you stated this “ to an audience of people who are just as ignorant as you.”

I have a right to defend my self since I am a member on this forum which makes me an audience weather a sympathizer or not, I have no reason other then that to argue with some one who is paranoid about baba and goes and accuse everyone here as a follower or a sympathizer,

 

Instead of bringing peace and harmony all you manage to do is antagonize people here whoever they might be following, and it is foolish to assume what, that might be. Which make you a fine example, of what ever you might be following.

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

[Guest guest]

Ganesh, you are really getting too fanatical for me to make any sense of you, or to make you make sense. So... I will leave it for others.

 

As far as your quote from chapter 3, it's obvious that this refers to not disturbing those who are following karma-kANDa rituals. It says nothing about not disturbing those who are spreading false propaganda or following illegitimate faiths.

 

I don't really see the point of defending myself for saying things I never said.

 

 

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

 

 

Re

(Ganesh, you are really getting too fanatical for me to make any sense of you)

 

So this is how you operate, to win an argument you throw baseless accusation at me of being fanatical, while it is you who has been rude here, calling people names, so much so you address me in familiar term without knowing any facts about me, this is no problem to me, but it is quite obvious you lake in manners as well

 

RE

(or to make you make sense. So... I will leave it for others.)

 

O don’t bother darling I am quite happy if I cant make sense to you and thank you for your concern.

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

 

Re

(As far as your quote from chapter 3, it's obvious that this refers to not disturbing those who are following karma-kANDa rituals. It says nothing about not disturbing those who are spreading false propaganda or following illegitimate faiths.)

 

 

First you doubted Krishna said this at all, now you want me to believe your interpartation of Bhagvad Gita. Let us first see what is the title of chapter three is, THE KARMA YOGA not karma Kanda.

 

Sure Lord Krishna says perfect action would be to perform Yagna but he has said much more in relation karma in the chapter three as well as other places. And I quote a few here.translator, Dr. Ramanand Prasad, of the American Gita Society. ...

 

 

Chapter 3: Path of Karma Yoga

Arjuna said: If You consider that transcendental knowledge is better than work then why do You want me to engage in this horrible war, O Krishna? (3.01)

 

Notice here Arjun is talking about his action not karma kanda

 

Shree bhagvan said.

One does not attain freedom from the bondage of Karma by merely abstaining from work. No one attains perfection by merely giving up work. (3.04)

Because no one can remain actionless even for a moment. Everyone is driven to action, helplessly indeed, by the Gunas of nature. (3.05)

 

Remember we are impelled by our gunas

.

The one who controls the senses by the (trained and purified) mind and intellect, and engages the organs of action to Nishkaama Karma-yoga, is superior, O Arjuna. (3.07)

 

 

 

Human beings are bound by Karma (or works) other than those done as Yajna. Therefore, O Arjuna, do your duty efficiently as a service or Seva to Me, free from attachment to the fruits of work. (3.09) (Yajna means sacrifice, selfless service, unselfish work, Seva, meritorious deeds, giving away something to others, and a religious rite in which oblation is offered to gods through the mouth of fire.)

 

It is obvious you are talking about above but hey one who is thus engaged is neither ignorant nor deluded

 

 

Therefore, always perform your duty efficiently and without attachment to the results, because by doing work without attachment one attains the Supreme. (3.19)

King Janaka and others attained perfection (or Self-realization) by Karma-yoga alone. You should perform your duty (with apathetic frame of mind) with a view to guide people and for the universal welfare (of the society). (3.20)

Because, whatever noble persons do, others follow. Whatever standard they set up, the world follows. (3.21)

 

Interesting don’t you think?

 

 

As the ignorant work, O Arjuna, with attachment (to the fruits of work), so the wise should work without attachment, for the welfare of the society. (3.25)

The wise should not unsettle the mind of the ignorant who is attached to the fruits of work, but the enlightened one should inspire others by performing all works efficiently without attachment. (See also 3.29) (3.26)

 

 

Very interesting read on but I don’t think you care.

 

All works are being done by the Gunas (or the energy and power) of nature, but due to delusion of ego people assume themselves to be the doer. (See also 5.09, 13.29, and 14.19) (3.27)

The one who knows the truth, O Arjuna, about the role of Guna and action does not get attached to the work, knowing that it is the Gunas that work with their instruments, the organs. (3.28)

 

Is the lord talking about rituals?

 

Those who are deluded by the Gunas of nature get attached to the works of the Gunas. The wise should not disturb the mind of the ignorant whose knowledge is imperfect. (See also 3.26) (3.29)

 

Notice the word gunas, and do not diturb the mind hardly applies to those who are performing yagna

 

 

Dedicating all works to Me in a spiritual frame of mind, free from desire, attachment, and mental grief, do your duty. (3.30)

Those who always practice this teaching of Mine, with faith and free from cavil, are freed from the bondage of Karma. (3.31)

 

 

But, those who carp at My teaching and do not practice it, consider them as ignorant of all knowledge, senseless, and lost. (3.32)

All beings follow their nature. Even the wise act according to their own nature. What, then, is the value of sense restraint? (3.33)

 

Act according to their own nature KARMA plain and simple.

 

You come here puffed up with your knowledge of Sanskrit and all you do with it is antagonize and further alienate people even if you were correct, you bring disrepute to the beautiful language and the Vedas

 

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

 

Re

(I don't really see the point of defending myself for saying things I never said.)

 

 

 

All you can do is spam-mail one posting after another, with the goal of making yourself seem more knowledgeable than you actually are to an audience of people who are just as ignorant as you.

 

So you are denying the above statement

 

Jai Shree Krishna

[Guest guest]

[sigh] I think I'm going to bow out from this one. Like I said, your request to be educated was never sincere. Since you seem to think you have some idea of what you are talking about, I will leave you to your one-man argument. If you can calm down long enough for me to explain the meaning of chapter 3, I will be happy to explain it to you.

 

Yes, I know Sanskrit. Therefore it automatically follows that I am "puffed up." On the other hand, you are armed with your blind faith in the American Gita Society translation. Of course, you now know the Gita, even though you do not know the Sanskrit, cannot read the original language, and could never tell whether the translation is faithful or not.

 

Well.... I guess if I describe the problems with that translation it can only be because I'm "puffed up" or whatever. So, good luck

 

Have a nice day.

 

Raghu

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

Re

([sigh] I think I'm going to bow out from this one.)

 

Why sigh is the heat getting to you? Sorry I forgot the balloon needs to be puffed up.

 

You have not denied your statement how can you? Therefore you cant defend yourself, all you can do is hurl abuse what possible education can you give?

 

I had no reason other than your statement branding everyone as ignorant to get involved.

 

So I leave you to your puffed up world

 

Jai Shree Krishna