survey

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

 

Re

(••no problem for our subject.. if you cannot define sanatana dharma how you can say that hinduism is sanatana dharma?)

 

Quite simply who so ever follow Vedic literature and the laws laid down in it is a Hindu, people of this land now called India, who I might add preserved this culture against all the odds, has followed this path since time immemorial.

As to defining something that is eternal is beyond me, it would be like a frog, trying to imagine the vastness of the ocean.

 

Re

(for me sanatana dharma is BHAGAVADGITA18,66)

 

That is nice but let us not condemn those who have other preference, as unvedic, Krishna does not deny those worship.

 

Re

(••i am speaking of the features of god and saints)

 

And I was speaking the followers

 

 

Problem is when you get burnt you avoid the fire,

Re

(••so do not get again burnt by using sectarian conceptions to judge god and saints)

 

Perhaps you can remind me of which god and the saint I had audacity to judge.

 

 

 

What, India has just appeared from no where?

Re

(••from muslims... they decided that the land beyond sindhu river had to be called (s)ind(h)ia)

 

Does this change the inhabitants of this land or pratice of dharma?

 

 

that is not to say worship of Vishnu or Shiva is new

Re

(••and what's vaishnavism if not the worship of sri vishnu? what is arjuna if not a vaishnava?)

You miss my point.

 

Any way have you ever heard Arjun calling himself Vaishnava, or Krishna saying become Vaishnava?

 

 

The Saattvika persons worship Devas, the Raajasika people worship demons, and the Taamasika persons worship ghosts and spirits. (17.04)

 

Re

(••and the transcendental person ... "sarva dharma....." he surrenders to sri krsna accepting in this way the "eternal duty" or "sanatana dharma")

 

Transcendental person surrenders to god who has many names and forms.

 

Why would Krishna ask Arjun to worship Lord Shiva, to obtain divine weapon?

Why would he ask Pandavas to worship Lord Shiva to atone for the war dead.

Why would he ask Youdhistar to receive Dharma instruction from Bhisma pita?

 

Re

(my opinion of course.. but enough to sustain that there's no identity between sanatana dharma and hinduism because hinduism hosts many opposite dharmas )

 

I am glad it is just your opinion, since Gita speak of different Dharma, different rishis gave us their realization, Buddhism is given to us by god, Sankaracharya gave the advaita, so if these different concepts are not compatable to your view of sanatan dharma, it does not make hinduism any less sanatan dharma.

 

 

I do not judge people by their belief that they hold, but by their action.

What good is it to hold a concept but our actions are in opposite direction?

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

[Guest guest]

Quite simply who so ever follow Vedic literature and the laws laid down in it is a Hindu

--you can cite a bhagavad gita verse in this forum, call ten so called hindus to give an interpretation and you will get no hindu interpretation but one or two vaishnava interpretation, some opposite ones by advaitists and some one by shaivites, and any one of them, even if in full respect, consider the others adharmis. It is ideas who are important, not the fact that someone reads the same book

 

(for me sanatana dharma is BHAGAVADGITA18,66)

That is nice but let us not condemn those who have other preference, as unvedic, Krishna does not deny those worship.

--i do not condemn.. i say only what's for me sanatana dharma, what's a time limited dharma and what's adharma. All the paths written in gita different by that, are shown by krsna to teach to arjuna that they are unreliable or false.. or krnsa were putting something different in the last chapter.

But this is my opinion and the opinion of a high percentage among the so called hindus, so if you disagree i am not the only one who does not belong to your hindu group or denomination, label, flag and so on.. no condemning, only discriminating

 

(••from muslims... they decided that the land beyond sindhu river had to be called (s)ind(h)ia)

Does this change the inhabitants of this land or pratice of dharma?

--simply the identity of belonging to the same state and religion was born in that moment.. in vedic times sanatana dharma (not hinduism.. sanatana dharma had a meaning very different from the one given now by hindu advocates) was all over the world

 

(••and what's vaishnavism if not the worship of sri vishnu? what is arjuna if not a vaishnava?)

You miss my point.

Any way have you ever heard Arjun calling himself Vaishnava, or Krishna saying become Vaishnava?

••if krsna/vishnu says "surrender to me..." or "think of me.." if arjuna executes the instruction is not him a vishnu/krsna worshipper? a vaishnava? who surrenders to vishnu is a vaishnava.. i do not see the difficulty

 

(••and the transcendental person ... "sarva dharma....." he surrenders to sri krsna accepting in this way the "eternal duty" or "sanatana dharma")

Transcendental person surrenders to god who has many names and forms.

••substitute krsna/vishnu to the word "god".. this word is very generic, for example imperonal brahman is also god, but brahman has no name and no form

 

Why would Krishna ask Arjun to worship Lord Shiva, to obtain divine weapon?

Why would he ask Pandavas to worship Lord Shiva to atone for the war dead.

Why would he ask Youdhistar to receive Dharma instruction from Bhisma pita?

••this is called LILA... krsna can do everything by himself but he chooses to be served by many devotees an devatas. This is ANANDA, bliss, bhakti.. Krsna is much more powerful than arjuna, actually he's the only source of arjuna's power. But he choses to let arjuna fight and he humbly drives the chariot. This does not demonstrates that arjuna is supreme to krsna

 

Buddhism is given to us by god

••buddhism is not considered hinduism by any one... but actually many schools of "hinduism" are more close to buddhism than to other "hindu" schools (even hebraism, christianism and islamism are given by god but we classificate them differently from hinduism)

 

Sankaracharya gave the advaita

••and at the end he spoke of bhakti... "bhaja govinda.. worship govinda intellectual fools.."

 

so if these different concepts are not compatable to your view of sanatan dharma, it does not make hinduism any less sanatan dharma.

••simply because you call my school "hinduism", the fact that i have a different concept of sanatana dharma from you and other "hinduists" demonstrates that there's no common idea.

If you want to say that we both are blonde so we belong to the blonde's cathegory, i simply show you that i am not blonde and the question is at end. So you cannot classify anyone as hindu, simply because a common hindu principle does not exist

 

I do not judge people by their belief that they hold, but by their action.

What good is it to hold a concept but our actions are in opposite direction?

••"hindu" is a concept, there's no "hindu" activity who is not made also from other people. So if there's no concept , there's also no hinduism

 

jaya

 

 

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

Re

(--you can cite a bhagavad gita verse in this forum, call ten so called hindus to give an interpretation and you will get no hindu interpretation but one or two vaishnava interpretation, some opposite ones by advaitists and some one by shaivites, and any one of them, even if in full respect, consider the others adharmis. It is ideas who are important, not the fact that someone reads the same book)

If you think deeply of what you write you will get some idea as to what so called Hindu is, many ideas and opinions, as each individual soul is on a journey has different level of experience and realization. As Gandhi once said let the ideas flow from all direction.

 

Re

(-- All the paths written in gita different by that, are shown by krsna to teach to arjuna that they are unreliable or false.. or krnsa were putting something different in the last chapter.)

 

Let us just read the last chapter and forget about the rest.

Re

(But this is my opinion )

I respect your opinion, who am I to argue with it

Re

(and the opinion of a high percentage among the so called hindus,)

 

And this so called Hindus have no problem with the name.

Re

(so if you disagree i am not the only one who does not belong to your hindu group or denomination, label, flag and so on.. no condemning, only discriminating)

it does not matter what group you belong to, a Hindu does not discriminate like that, if he has to judge then it would be by the action of a person.

 

 

Re

(--simply the identity of belonging to the same state and religion was born in that moment..)

Sense of belonging, states, Kingdom all was already there what was pandava and kaurava fighting for if not for Kingdom? You are running away with you imagination.

 

Re

(in vedic times sanatana dharma (not hinduism.. sanatana dharma had a meaning very different from the one given now by hindu advocates) was all over the world)

sure and there were malecha and yavanas raksasas also.

 

Re

(••if krsna/vishnu says "surrender to me..." or "think of me.." if arjuna executes the instruction is not him a vishnu/krsna worshipper? a vaishnava? who surrenders to vishnu is a vaishnava.. i do not see the difficulty)

If the surrender is to the lord in which ever form one chooses I have no difficulty.

 

 

Re

( for example imperonal brahman is also god, but brahman has no name and no form)

Yes this is one of the three class of realization Brahmeti, Parmatma and Bhagvan

 

( ••this is called LILA... krsna can do everything by himself but he chooses to be served by many devotees an devatas. This is ANANDA, bliss, bhakti.. Krsna is much more powerful than arjuna, actually he's the only source of arjuna's power. But he choses to let arjuna fight and he humbly drives the chariot. This does not demonstrates that arjuna is supreme to krsna)

 

You have a knack of changing the point of discussion.

Just tell me where have I said Arjun is supreme to Krishna?

 

Re

(••buddhism is not considered hinduism by any one...)

 

Wrong, many will argue it comes from Hinduism, so it has a relation, if nothing else no one is complaining of their lifestyle.

 

Re

(but actually many schools of "hinduism" are more close to buddhism than to other "hindu" schools)

 

well that does not surprise me.

 

Re

(even hebraism, christianism and islamism are given by god but we classificate them differently from hinduism)

 

We don’t they do, and they have a lot to learn, if they are ready.

 

Re

(••and at the end he spoke of bhakti... "bhaja govinda.. worship govinda intellectual fools..")

 

He spoke of many things as well the above quote, and we are grateful for that.

 

 

Re

(••simply because you call my school "hinduism", the fact that i have a different concept of sanatana dharma from you and other "hinduists" demonstrates that there's no common idea.)

 

Never said all the concepts of supreme lord in Hinduism is same, it can not be, simply because one can not fully describe the lord who has no beginning or end.

 

Re

(If you want to say that we both are blonde so we belong to the blonde's cathegory, i simply show you that i am not blonde and the question is at end. So you cannot classify anyone as hindu, simply because a common hindu principle does not exist)

 

Hinduism is not as simple as your blond theory.

 

Re

( ••"hindu" is a concept, there's no "hindu" activity who is not made also from other people. So if there's no concept , there's also no Hinduism)

 

Fine we will still worship the way we always have done, belonging to any group or sect does not mean we are on spiritual platform, in the end it is an individuals effort and the grace of god one will transcend the material world.

 

jaya

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

[Guest guest]

If you think deeply of what you write you will get some idea as to what so called Hindu is, many ideas and opinions, as each individual soul is on a journey has different level of experience and realization.

••these are features of all mankind.. so everyone's hindu..

 

Let us just read the last chapter and forget about the rest.

•no.. let us read everything keeping in mind the ultimate goal of bhagavad gita. Gita is a school, a journey

 

a Hindu does not discriminate like that

••a denomination is a discrimination.. if you call someone hindu you identify a hindu by some features.. if you do not know any feature you cannot give any name or denomination

 

Sense of belonging, states, Kingdom all was already there what was pandava and kaurava fighting for if not for Kingdom?

••india??? they were emperors of the whole world

 

Wrong, many will argue it comes from Hinduism

••it comes.. not it is hinduism.. being all the world vedic in all the three previous yugas, it is natural that all kali yuga religions come , more or less corrupted, by sanatana dharma.. but we do not say that they are all the same even if the origin is the same

 

Never said all the concepts of supreme lord in Hinduism is same, it can not be, simply because one can not fully describe the lord who has no beginning or end.

••so every definition of god is hinduism.. ok?

 

Hinduism is not as simple as your blond theory.

••at least i have a theory.. you are only able to say that's not simple

 

belonging to any group or sect does not mean we are on spiritual platform

••the real belonging is if one is seriously practising.... and if you are uncertain about the belonging to the singular sects you try to state the belonging to the "supersect" hinduism?

 

in the end it is an individuals effort

••so why the need of a new "general" name?

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

 

 

Re

(••these are features of all mankind.. so everyone's hindu..)

 

We are part of the same creation.

 

Re

(•no.. let us read everything keeping in mind the ultimate goal of bhagavad gita. Gita is a school, a journey)

 

Gita gives you possibility of different goals and destination; an individual may choose the destination of their choice according to their desires.

 

Re

(••a denomination is a discrimination.. if you call someone hindu you identify a hindu by some features.. if you do not know any feature you cannot give any name or denomination)

 

Follow your own logic, since Hindu is already a name it must have many features that is common.

 

 

(Sense of belonging, states, Kingdom all was already there what was pandava and kaurava fighting for if not for Kingdom?

••india??? they were emperors of the whole world)

 

Never the less they were fighting for Hastinapur, there was still a real sense of belonging as well as lots of different Kingdoms.

 

Re

(••it comes.. not it is hinduism.. being all the world vedic in all the three previous yugas, it is natural that all kali yuga religions come , more or less corrupted, by sanatana dharma.. but we do not say that they are all the same even if the origin is the same)

 

I have never said all the paths are the same.

 

Re

(••so every definition of god is hinduism.. ok?)

 

No need to be sarcastic.

 

 

 

Re

 

(••the real belonging is if one is seriously practising....)

 

This is required if one has to achieve any goal.

 

Re

( and if you are uncertain about the belonging to the singular sects you try to state the belonging to the "supersect" hinduism?)

 

to worship the lord one does not need to belong to any sect or be sectarian.

 

Re

((in the end it is an individuals effort))

(••so why the need of a new "general" name? )

 

No need, since Hinduism is not sectarian it is unique.

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

[Guest guest]

Gita gives you possibility of different goals and destination

••many schools inside hinduism are against every path given in the gita because they do not take krsna as the supreme.. if we do not take krsna as supreme there's no possibility of speaking of gita

 

Follow your own logic, since Hindu is already a name it must have many features that is common.

••so you don't konw the features but you say that if hinduism exist some featurest must be there... very funny!

 

Never the less they were fighting for Hastinapur, there was still a real sense of belonging

••for india??

 

-

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

 

Re

(••many schools inside hinduism are against every path given in the gita because they do not take krsna as the supreme..)

 

O Yes which one?

 

Re

(if we do not take krsna as supreme there's no possibility of speaking of gita)

 

How many people new Krishna when he was around?

even Arjun asked to see his universal form to be convinced.

and Krishna declares hardly any one of those who seek me know me in truth.

these does not exclude one to learn and speak of gita.

 

Re

(••so you don't konw the features but you say that if hinduism exist some featurest must be there... very funny!)

 

I am glad it makes you lough.

 

i made that statement using your own logic.

 

Features are many and divers.

 

 

Never the less they were fighting for Hastinapur, there was still a real sense of belonging

 

Re

(••for india?? )

 

Yes for the land which is now known as India

 

Jai Shree Krishna

[Guest guest]

(••many schools inside hinduism are against every path given in the gita because they do not take krsna as the supreme..)

O Yes which one?

••impersonalists

 

even Arjun asked to see his universal form to be convinced.

••arjuna was intimate friend of krsna, who has intimacy with krsna cannot be ignorant.. he asks to see visvarupa for our benefit

 

and Krishna declares hardly any one of those who seek me know me in truth.

these does not exclude one to learn and speak of gita.

••yes.. but to declare that one's a real gita's follower we have to see if he consider the supreme personality of krsna the highest level of absolute

 

Yes for the land which is now known as India

••the land you know now as india is called in this way and defined in this way by muslim.... pandavas never said that beyond sindhu river was another nation

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

 

Re

(••impersonalists)

 

Krishna does not deny the impersonal aspect of his nature.

 

 

Re

(••arjuna was intimate friend of krsna, who has intimacy with krsna cannot be ignorant.. he asks to see visvarupa for our benefit)

 

We can not see what he saw

 

Re

(••yes.. but to declare that one's a real gita's follower we have to see if he consider the supreme personality of krsna the highest level of absolute)

 

all is revealed to one who seeks, eventualy

 

 

 

((Yes for the land which is now known as India))

Re

(••the land you know now as india is called in this way and defined in this way by muslim.... pandavas never said that beyond sindhu river was another nation)

 

Are you saying the land they were born and fought had no name? was there no identity of separate Kingdom and boundry?

 

 

Jai Shree Krishna

[Guest guest]

Krishna does not deny the impersonal aspect of his nature.

••of course.. who said it?

We can not see what he saw

••yes, we read gita

all is revealed to one who seeks, eventualy

••of course. who do not seek the lord of the gita, krsna, does not reach him

Are you saying the land they were born and fought had no name?

••the land they were born is not india.. they were from hastinapura and the emperors of the world (ultimately they were pure devotees with no attachment to the land)

was there no identity of separate Kingdom and boundry?

••yes but there was no "indian kingdom"

 

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

 

((Krishna does not deny the impersonal aspect of his nature.))

Re

(••of course.. who said it?)

 

so let those who want to realize impersonal Brahman, and stop calling their sadhana as unvedic.

 

((We can not see what he saw))

Re

(••yes, we read gita)

 

But we do not see universal form, No logic in Arjun asking to see the form for our benefit.

 

 

((Are you saying the land they were born and fought had no name?))

Re

(••the land they were born is not india.. they were from hastinapura and the emperors of the world)

Your prejudice for India is astounding, have a look at a map of India and you will find all those holy Dham listed.

 

Re

(ultimately they were pure devotees with no attachment to the land)

 

And that is why they asked for 5 villages so that they could satisfy their ksatriya quality

 

((was there no identity of separate Kingdom and boundry?))

Re

(••yes but there was no "indian kingdom")

 

So now we have a name change big deal, seams to me Whiteman superiority complex does not or can not accept the fact that a culture so advanced, which has survived 1000s years of occupation is still striving in a land called India, (which is riddled with superstition so we are constantly reminded.)

Divide and rule is a well known policy

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

[Guest guest]

so let those who want to realize impersonal Brahman, and stop calling their sadhana as unvedic.

••it is unvedic and a blasphemy the "sadhana" of who wants to negate the supremacy fo krsna... it has nothing to do with the possibility to have a preference for impersonal brahman in the way that it is stated in gita

 

No logic in Arjun asking to see the form for our benefit.

••no logic to be ignorant for someone who is cousin of krsna and his intimate friend... who has the darshan of the supreme lord cannot be less than liberated

 

Your prejudice for India is astounding

••your prejudice for me is more astounding

 

(ultimately they were pure devotees with no attachment to the land)

And that is why they asked for 5 villages so that they could satisfy their ksatriya quality

••and you are calling it attachment from persons who were emperors of the world?

 

So now we have a name change big deal, seams to me Whiteman superiority complex does not or can not accept the fact that a culture so advanced, which has survived 1000s years of occupation is still striving in a land called India, (which is riddled with superstition so we are constantly reminded.)

Divide and rule is a well known policy

••of course... nice way to going on speaking not having any argument

 

jaya sri bharatavarsa

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

Re

(••it is unvedic and a blasphemy the "sadhana" of who wants to negate the supremacy fo krsna... it has nothing to do with the possibility to have a preference for impersonal brahman in the way that it is stated in gita)

 

There is no such word a blasphemy in Hindu text. Followers of Sankracharya (advaita) do not negate the supremacy of Lord Krishna, simply different concept. To call Sankra unvedic is hilarious (blasphemy to use your word) didn’t Chatnya Mahaprabhu take sanyas from advaita Sanyasi?

 

 

Re

(••no logic to be ignorant for someone who is cousin of krsna and his intimate friend... who has the darshan of the supreme lord cannot be less than liberated)

 

I have no doubt of Arjuns divinity, the dear most friend of Krishna, but how much did he know Krishna? How much anyone knows Krishna? Question is did he ask to see Krishna for our benefit or did he want to know for his own sake?

 

Tell me who are You in such a fierce form? My salutations to You, O best of gods, be merciful! I wish to understand You, the primal Being, because I do not know Your mission. (11.31)

You are the primal God, the most ancient Person. You are the ultimate resort of all the universe. You are the knower, the object of knowledge, and the supreme abode. The entire universe is pervaded by You, O Lord of the infinite form. (11.38)

Considering You merely as a friend, not knowing Your greatness, I have inadvertently addressed You as O Krishna, O Yadava, O friend; merely out of affection or carelessness. (11.41)

In whatever way I may have insulted You in jokes; while playing, reposing in bed, sitting, or at meals; when alone, or in front of others; O Krishna, I implore You for forgiveness. (11.42)

Therefore, O adorable Lord, I seek Your grace by bowing down and prostrating my body before You. Bear with me as a father to his son, as a friend to a friend, and as a husband to his wife, O Lord. (11.44)

I am delighted by beholding that which has never been seen before, and yet my mind is tormented with fear. Show me that (four-armed) form. O God of gods, the refuge of the universe have mercy! (11.45)

 

 

((Your prejudice for India is astounding))

Re

(••your prejudice for me is more astounding)

 

I do not despise you despite your stand against Hindus.

 

((And that is why they asked for 5 villages so that they could satisfy their ksatriya quality))

Re

(••and you are calling it attachment from persons who were emperors of the world?)

Call it what you may, Dharmic that they were still they wanted to rule, all being five villages. They also new Duryodhan would not agree, the war became inevitable.

 

Re

(••of course... nice way to going on speaking not having any argument)

Nice way to avoid answering.

 

Re

(jaya sri bharatavarsa )

 

The land which is know as India. Vande Matram.

To give an example England ruled the world not so long it was a British empire. Now it is a small country.

Bharat is still the name of the country which is also known by the name ‘ India’ or ‘Hindustan’

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

[Guest guest]

There is no such word a blasphemy in Hindu text

••translate it in sanskrit and you will find it

 

To call Sankra unvedic is hilarious

••shankara is saint because he gives some relief to the materialists not satisfacted by buddhism adding the existence of spirituality... but his more effective suggestion is "bhaja govinda..."

 

didn’t Chatnya Mahaprabhu take sanyas from advaita Sanyasi?

••chaitanya mahaprabhu gives no special role or benefit to the sannyasi social class.. he takes sannyasi only to have the possibility to preach in some circles opened only to sannyasis. In this way, in his whole mission, he saves many impersonalist sannyasis

 

I have no doubt of Arjuns divinity, the dear most friend of Krishna, but how much did he know Krishna?

••fully!!! he knows fully krsna because krsna gives fully himself to his pure devotees

 

How much anyone knows Krishna?

•••we cannot know... krsna can give us his darshan and make us know with the intensity he freely desire

 

Question is did he ask to see Krishna for our benefit or did he want to know for his own sake?

•••very simple... for our benefit.. an intimate friend of krsna cannot be ignorant of the nature of krsna. When there's krsna there's no maya

 

I do not despise you despite your stand against Hindus.

••i am not against indians.. i am only against a mixing who is a problem for the good name of the serious practitioners of vedic science

 

(••of course... nice way to going on speaking not having any argument)

Nice way to avoid answering.

••i have to answer if i am attempting to divide india for ruling it??

 

(jaya sri bharatavarsa )

The land which is know as India

•••a little part of bharata varsa... not bharatavarsa

 

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

 

Re

(••translate it in sanskrit and you will find it)

 

If only i new sanskrit that well.

 

Re

(but his more effective suggestion is "bhaja govinda...")

 

But he has said much more than Bhaja Govinda which also very nice.

 

Re

(didn’t Chatnya Mahaprabhu take sanyas from advaita Sanyasi?

••chaitanya mahaprabhu gives no special role or benefit to the sannyasi social class.. he takes sannyasi only to have the possibility to preach in some circles opened only to sannyasis. In this way, in his whole mission, he saves many impersonalist sannyasis)

 

does not make advaita unvedic that was the point.

 

 

Re

(••fully!!! he knows fully krsna because krsna gives fully himself to his pure devotees)

 

no one can know god fully, that is simply you can not quantify something that has no begining or end.

Udhav thought he knew Krishna until he met gopies.

 

 

 

Re

(•••very simple... for our benefit.. an intimate friend of krsna cannot be ignorant of the nature of krsna. When there's krsna there's no maya)

 

Then those statement of Arjun sounds very hollow.

Krishna is everywhere yet we are bevildered by his maya.

Duryodhana was friends of Balaram yet he was evil.

 

Re

(••i am not against indians.. i am only against a mixing who is a problem for the good name of the serious practitioners of vedic science)

 

There is no mixing, a serious practitioners of vedic science can not be sidetracked by others concepts, by the nature of darkness one can know the value of light.

 

Re

(••i have to answer if i am attempting to divide india for ruling it??)

 

Ruling comes in various forms.

 

Re

(•••a little part of bharata varsa... not bharatavarsa)

 

sure so let us preserve it make it glorious again.

Bharatmata ki jai

 

Jai Shree Krishna

[Guest guest]

But he has said much more than Bhaja Govinda which also very nice.

••it is not a marginal instruction

 

does not make advaita unvedic that was the point.

••if god himself convince people to abandone advaitism and join vaishnavism ...... what to think?

 

Udhav thought he knew Krishna until he met gopies

••inside the full of the transcendence there's the possibilty of progress... even krsna makes progress

 

Then those statement of Arjun sounds very hollow

••so we have to study them better..

 

Krishna is everywhere yet we are bevildered by his maya.

••yes..and maya is also krsna. But krsna's direct personal associates,like arjuna, radha,the gopis, uddhava, yasodamata,nanda maharaja are close expansion of sri krsna bhagavan. They never touch material world, they never express the desire to leave krsna. So there's no need for krsna to manifestate maya to fulfill some desire of forgetting him

 

Duryodhana was friends of Balaram yet he was evil.

•••lila... all the ones who fight in kuruksetra get the liberation from the fact of having seen krsna.. (and maybe balaram)

 

There is no mixing, a serious practitioners of vedic science can not be sidetracked by others concepts

••so where's the need of this sidetracking hindu concept? be happy with the single, true,coherent, historic denomination..what's the problem?

 

(••i have to answer if i am attempting to divide india for ruling it??)

Ruling comes in various forms.

••now i am ruling india .. ok!

 

(•••a little part of bharata varsa... not bharatavarsa)

sure so let us preserve it make it glorious again.

••not surely saying that bharatavarsa was limited by sindhu river and concocting a denomination that you can discuss for years but you can't explain

 

jaya sri krsna

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

 

Re

(••it is not a marginal instruction)

 

Never said it was, those who study Sankracharya follow his instructions.

 

 

Re

(••if god himself convince people to abandone advaitism and join vaishnavism ...... what to think?)

 

What to think? advaita also have their reasons.

 

 

Re

(••inside the full of the transcendence there's the possibilty of progress... even krsna makes progress)

 

We are entering in to the realm of unknown.

 

 

((Then those statement of Arjun sounds very hollow))

Re

(••so we have to study them better..)

 

We have to learn all the time, people look at things from different angle and come up with what they see, I read Arjuns and Lord Krishnas statement on face value and that is one way of looking at it.

 

 

Re

(••yes..and maya is also krsna. But krsna's direct personal associates,like arjuna, radha,the gopis, uddhava, yasodamata,nanda maharaja are close expansion of sri krsna bhagavan.)

 

None of them considered him as god, they simply loved him.

 

Re

( So there's no need for krsna to manifestate maya to fulfill some desire of forgetting him)

 

to have relation as close as that one has to forget who he is.

 

Duryodhana was friends of Balaram yet he was evil.

(•••lila... all the ones who fight in kuruksetra get the liberation from the fact of having seen krsna.. (and maybe balaram)

 

so it all boils down to faith.

 

There is no mixing, a serious practitioners of vedic science can not be sidetracked by others concepts

Re

(••so where's the need of this sidetracking hindu concept? be happy with the single, true,coherent, historic denomination..what's the problem?)

 

No problem I am happy in mine you be in yours, let us not impose

 

Re

(••now i am ruling india .. ok!)

 

Fat chance.

 

 

((sure so let us preserve it make it glorious again.))

Re

(••not surely saying that bharatavarsa was limited by sindhu river)

 

It has to begin from some point. Youdister began from Khanavprast and became an emperor

 

Re

(and concocting a denomination that you can discuss for years but you can't explain)

 

That is the nature of the lord there is no end.

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

[Guest guest]

(••inside the full of the transcendence there's the possibilty of progress... even krsna makes progress)

We are entering in to the realm of unknown.

--but it is logic... so we give faith to the masters who said this

 

I read Arjuns and Lord Krishnas statement on face value and that is one way of looking at it.

---read also mahabharata, puranas, and you will know that if arjuna is a close relative and friend of krsna he cannot be less than pure

 

None of them considered him as god, they simply loved him.

---so they are not subjected by maya... simple

 

so it all boils down to faith.

---logic... krsna is transcendental, the contact with him brings transcendence. If one sees god he has done innumerable austerities in past lifes, he's a great transcendentalist even if he shows a role as enemy in the kaurava's army

 

 

 

 

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

 

 

((We are entering in to the realm of unknown.))

RE

(--but it is logic... so we give faith to the masters who said this)

 

Logic can not reach the unknown, faith and love has no boundaries.

As to the omniscient making progress? That’s is well beyond my imagination.

 

 

 

((None of them considered him as god, they simply loved him.))

Re

(---so they are not subjected by maya... simple)

 

No they are subjected to Krishna prem.

 

Re

(---logic... krsna is transcendental, the contact with him brings transcendence.)

 

If you can saw me one place he/she is not present.

 

Re

( If one sees god he has done innumerable austerities in past lifes, he's a great transcendentalist even if he shows a role as enemy in the kaurava's army)

 

 

 

Seems to me everything in this world is a big theatre, where everyone plays a role, hard to tell the difference between realities and play acting.

 

Jai Shree Krishna