raganuga com wins close door. :)

[kailasa 0]

If you follow YOU understanding sastra it is YOU coise(?). Sastra writes for understanding. Whit out guru nobody not understand sastra. Needs guru.

[raga 0]

Dear Kailash, I do have a guru.

[kailasa 0]

**Dear Kailash, I do have a guru.

 

OK. Am too. Paramahamsa guru, rasika too.

[raga 0]

 

In Sri Narada-pancaratra it is said:

 

"The individual soul is spiritual and conscious. It lives on the

border between the spiritual and material worlds. It can leave that border,

enter the material world, and become contaminated by the modes of nature. That

is the situation of the soul."

 

 

The original text (from Jiva's commentary on verse 21) is as follows:

 

<font color=darkred>yat-taTasthaM tu cid-rUpaM sva-saMvedyAd vinirgatam |

raJjitaM guNa-rAgeNa sa jIva iti kathyate || iti nArada-paJcarAtrAt |</font>

 

The translation you have presented is from Kusakratha's edition, and with all due respect, is not very precise. A rather literal translation would be as follows:

 

<font color=darkred>"That which emanates from the tatastha, which has a spiritual form of self-cognizance, and which is coloured by attachment to the gunas, is known as the jiva."</font>

 

Living on the border, leaving the border, and becoming something are not a part of the original verse in question.

 

The fact that the jivas have been emanating from the tatastha since beginningless time is further described in the 20th verse. The original Sanskrit (verse and commentary) runs as follows:

 

<font color=darkred>yojayitvA tu tAny eva praviveza svayaM guhAm |

guhAM praviSTe tasmiMs tu jIvAtmA pratibudhyate ||20||

 

atha tRtIyam Aha yojayitveti | yojayitvA tad yojanA-yoga-nidrayor antarAle ity arthaH | guhAH virAD-vigraham | pratibudhyate pralaya-svApAj jAgarti || 20 ||</font>

 

Jiva states that the living entities are awakened from the sleep into which they entered at the end of the previous pralaya (devastation). Thus the cycle of manifestation is eternal. Vedanta Sutra (2.1.35) further discusses the cycle of karma as follows:

<font color=darkred>

na karmAvibhAgAd iti cen nAnAditvAt

 

“If someone says that the theory of karma cannot explain the inequality seen in the world, arguing that everyone had the same karma at the beginning of creation, this is not true because karma is beginningless.”</font>

 

Baladeva VidyAbhuSaNa comments on this sUtra:

 

<font color=darkred>karmaNaH kSetrajJAnAM ca brahmavad anAditva- svIkArAt. pUrva-pUrva-karmAnusareNottarottarakarmaNi pravarttanAt na kiJcid dUSaNam smRtiz ca:

 

puNya-pApAdikaM viSNu karyet pUrvakarmaNA

anAditvAt karmaNaz ca na virodhaH kathaJcana

 

karmaNo’nAditvenAnAvasthA tu na doSaH prAmANikatvAt.

 

“VyAsa has accepted that karma and the jIvas are beginningless, just like Brahman. Thus there is no fault, because subsequent karma is inspired by the past karma. The SmRti confirms this:

 

‘Lord ViSNu makes the living entities do good or bad acts according to their past karma. There is no contradiction in this because karma has no beginning.’

 

If someone objects, that if karma is beginningless, then it has the defect of infinite regress, we say that is not so, because the scriptures say so.”</font>

 

 

If you read Sri Brahma Samhita in depth you will see Sri Jiva Goswami does quote scriptures to support his presentation that the soul has arisen from a marginal position.

 

 

There is no debate over whether the jiva originates from tatastha or not. It is well known and established that the jiva is a manifestation of tatastha-sakti. The question is whether there was ever a first time when the jiva entered this world. My answer is no, since the bond between jiva and prakriti is beginningless and the cycle of karma is beginningless as well.

[kailasa 0]

Hari bol Raga! jaya Radhe.

 

that your interpretation of the verse is wrong. /ubbthreads/images/icons/frown.gif

[kailasa 0]

"Do snakes have skin?"

"Yes, snakes do indeed have skin."

 

Jagat Prabhu.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[raga 0]

It is a translation, not an interpretation. If you want to say it is wrong, you'll have to tell us why it is so. Not just because you don't like it.

 

But please do not tell it at Raganuga. First get someone to help you spell comprehensible sentences (Jagat is helping you I see) and try to not just preach your views, rather try to find the truth.

 

And do not start threads which start with quotes from AC Bhaktivedanta beginning with the word "sahajiya". Such posts tend to disappear from our board. Thanks for considering. You can post again there when your English gets better and when you learn to not try to preach to our community there without adequate evidence.

[raga 0]

Today is Radhastami. Why don't you celebrate instead of posting this stuff you post. At least for today!

[muralidhar 0]

Wonderful celebrations of Sri Radhastami at the temple here in Sydney...

 

but anyhow...

 

Yes the souls in this world are nitya-baddha. And perhaps we can also say that the souls who are absorbed in the liberated state of brahma-nirvana are in a deplorable state because they are constantly meditating on the formless Brahma. Those souls in brahmaloka have no love for Bhagavan.

 

So I guess it may be correct to say that all these souls who have no bhakti are nitya-baddha.

 

But then again, I do have some doubts about whether we should speak of the brahma-liberated souls as being "baddha". The liberated souls are self-satisfied (atmarama) and they reside within the transcendental realm of brahma-nirvana or brahmaloka.

 

According to the Gita and Upanishads, what to speak of the commentaries of the Goswamis, the self is sat chit ananda. The soul may become bound up with karma, but in its essence the soul is an entity of transcendenal substance. Those souls in brahmaloka who are absorbed in realization of the wondeful essence of their Self are not suffering in any way. They are satisfied and filled with feelings of joy.

In Srila Sridhar Maharaj's commentary of Bhagavat gita:

<blockquote>

6.26 The naturally fickle and unsteady mind should be carefully withdrawn from whatever objects it pursues, and brought back under the control of the self.

 

6.27 Devoid of passionate agitation, peaceful-hearted, free from the blemishes of attachment, fear, and anger, and endowed with the conception of the Absolute, such a yogi is blessed with the joy of realizing the divine nature of the soul.

</blockquote>

Vaishnavism has no comparable concept to the Christian's concept of "original sin". According to the gita the individual atma is divine and the Self is "spotless and pure" (to use Srila Sridhar Maharaj's words)

<blockquote>

18.54 The spotlessly purehearted and self-satisfied soul who has attained to his conscious divine nature neither grieves nor craves for anything. Seeing all beings equally (in the conception of My supreme energy), he gradually achieves supreme devotion (prema-bhakti) unto Me.

</blockquote>

Yet the Gita also says the soul fixed in Brahma realization can fall down from the light and become embroiled in karma.

 

Even Mahadev Shiva can become implicated in the actions/reactions of this world sometimes. When Ma Kali is killing the millions of forms of the asura Raktabija, Shiva becomes horrified at the carnage and lays down at the feet of Ma Kali. He becomes disturbed and begs Kali to stop her slaughter. Because of compassion, even Mahadev can exhibit some attachment to the living beings in the world, and this attachment may lead to further attachment and eventually to bondage in mandane existence. The example of Shiva's attachment for the demon Banasura, which led to an event where Shiva and his sons and army went to fighing against Krishna, is another example of situations where the liberated soul can become involved in "bad karma". Srila Sridhar Maharaj explained this to me one morning, when he gave me a long instruction about Shiva, the Markandeya Purana, Ma Durga and Kali.

 

Srila Guru Maharaj also said:

<blockquote>

This world is sometimes pushing forth and sometimes withdrawing. In the same way that a heart expands and contracts again and again, the whole universe expands and contracts. Regrouping within the one, and again manifest as the many - the one and the many - the evolution and dissolution of the material universe takes place. As a heart expands and contracts, the whole universe is manifest and withdrawn.

 

One ancient literature of India, the Manu Samhita, begins by describing the creation. In that book, it is written how, before the creative movement began, the tatastha potency of the Lord was in eqilibrium. Tatastha means equilibrium. Everything was in darkness, fully enveloped by ignorance. There was no possiblility of estimation; no symptoms of reality existed by which any conjecture or inference about the nature of reality would have been possible. And that state of being was unknowable: science has no capacity for investigating the nature of that stage of existence. We can only say from here that it was completely immersed in deep sleep. The analogy of deep sleep may give us some conception of that period: Material existence was at that time as if in sound sleep.

 

In a primitive state when the individual egos are massed together as a common whole, that conglomerate false ego, the primitive sense of awarenes that "I am", develops from a state of equilibrium. It evolves, it differentiates into innumerable individual units of localised awareness. Just as an atom can be broken down into subatomic particles, electrons, protons, neutrons and so on, the conglomerate ego gradually breaks into its component individual egos: jiva souls. Their position is tatastha; marginal and undetectable. From that subtle, undetectable plane of marginal energy, consciousness first develops into the detectable plane as a whole, and then innnumerable individual spiritual units are manifest from that lump of ego, or mahat-tattva. Gradually, the other elements of creation develop within this negative plane of exploitation.

</blockquote>

 

-- Murali

[raga 0]

 

According to the Gita and Upanishads, what to speak of the commentaries of the Goswamis, the self is sat chit ananda.

 

 

I know there's been some controversy over this. I don't hold any position myself on account of not having studied the matter in depth.

 

Would you like to present references where the soul is said to always possess the qualities of sat-cit-ananda? Direct positive statements, not statements deducted from references which do not directly discuss the topic (ie. not "the soul is unchangeable" etc.).

 

 

 

 

Yet the Gita also says the soul fixed in Brahma realization can fall down from the light and become embroiled in karma.

 

 

I know this is in the Bhagavata, but which verse of the Gita do you mean here?

 

[muralidhar 0]

<blockquote>

<hr>

Would you like to present references where the soul is said to always possess the qualities of sat-cit-ananda? Direct positive statements, not statements deducted from references which do not directly discuss the topic (ie. not "the soul is unchangeable" etc.).

<hr>

</blockquote>

I don't really understand your point here. The Upanishads and Gita explain clearly that the Self is consciousness and bliss and eternally existing. It is also clear that the Upanishads and Gita say we are involving ourselves in "external life" and forgetting the inner self, and that all our misery comes from this, but that we are still spirit, even when are forgetful of our True Inner Nature. These are very basic point of Vedanta philosophy which you certainly must have seen many times. I don't really understand how to respond to what you wrote.

 

It is clear in the Gita that the soul situated in Brahma realization can experience death:

abrahma-bhuvanal lokah punar avartino 'rjuna

mam upetya tu kaunteya punar janma na vidyate

B.g. 8.16

 

Then there is the statement from the Chandi (Markandeya Purana):

pasa baddha bhavet jiva,

pasa mukta sada-shiva

 

That is, when the soul is covered over with a body he is an animal, a jiva; but when he is liberated he is "always Shiva" (sada-shiva).

 

Let me elaborate on this. When Shiva is detached from a connection with Maya then he is always a liberated being absorbed in universal consciousness; but when he becomes active within the yoni of Mayadevi then out of the seed of universal consciousness the animal Ganapati emerges as an ego aware being.

 

There are several verses in Sri Brahma Samhita that touch upon these issues.

 

- Murali

 

[kailasa 0]

**It is a translation, not an interpretation

 

I am give to you translation too. Knowlege sanskrit it is no knowlege spiritual life.

[kailasa 0]

raganuga com tape citation with out undrstanding. I am have 200-300 citation for you raganuga com. But what means forum? Forum it is books citation?

[raga 0]

 

Raga:

 

Would you like to present references where the soul is said to always possess the qualities of sat-cit-ananda? Direct positive statements, not statements deducted from references which do not directly discuss the topic (ie. not "the soul is unchangeable" etc.).

 

Murlidhar:

 

I don't really understand your point here. The Upanishads and Gita explain clearly that the Self is consciousness and bliss and eternally existing.

 

 

There's really no other point aside a request for you to present a list of clear references instead of saying it is stated there somewhere. Where in the Upanisads or in the Gita it is stated that the soul is always filled with sat, cit and ananda, or sandhini, samvit and hladini? Do you have any verses at hand which mention these words?

 

 

It is clear in the Gita that the soul situated in Brahma realization can experience death:

abrahma-bhuvanal lokah punar avartino 'rjuna

mam upetya tu kaunteya punar janma na vidyate

B.g. 8.16

 

 

In the opinion of Visvanatha and Bhaktivinoda (as well as Bhaktivedanta Swami I noted), a-brahma-bhuvanat means the planet of Brahmaji, or Satyaloka, which is inside the shell of the universe, instead of the impersonal brahman realization.

[raga 0]

 

I am give to you translation too. Knowlege sanskrit it is no knowlege spiritual life.

 

 

Knowing Sanskrit does not directly mean to know about spiritual life, but it is of tremendous help if you understand the original texts which discuss spiritual life.

[raga 0]

 

raganuga com tape citation with out undrstanding. I am have 200-300 citation for you raganuga com. But what means forum? Forum it is books citation?

 

 

We do understand the citations we cite, don't worry. Do you? In a discussion on scriptural conclusions, citations are absolutely required.

 

When you complete your list of citations, please send it to me by private letter to kailasa-citation@raganuga.com so I can check it out and give you some feedback before you post it in. I do not wish to make another online fiasco with off-topic citations at our discussion forum.

[raga 0]

I am also duplicating another post of Kailasa and my reply from another forum to make sure it catches his attention.

 

 

Originally posted by kailasa:

 

You have FOLIO it is Raga Prabhu? I am tape some citation, you take in Folio...and OK.

 

It is raganuga no have original sanskrit teksts? What needs tape sanskrit? It is wery well knowing werse (?). He is not understanding MEANS werse ( sloka ) what needs sanskrit? /ubbthreads/images/icons/frown.gif

 

 

My dear Kailasa, you are proposing that I look it up in the Folio after you post it in. Please do understand that it is pointless for you to send in any references for which you have not read the original Sanskrit text nor the context in which the verse appears.

 

The original Sanskrit texts are absolutely required if we are to enter into a debate on subtle points of siddhanta. In such a situation, what is the use of quoting translations which may or may not be precise?

[Guest guest]

To LIVE the words of the scriptures is to know spiritual life. Is ther need for so much bantering?

[kailasa 0]

**We do understand the citations we cite, don't worry. Do you? In a discussion on scriptural conclusions, citations are absolutely required.

 

I am take citations. Forum means discussion or not? They diktate some instructions and take off may posts. My posts connect for me citation. Take off posts it is not argument.

 

**When you complete your list of citations, please send it to me by private letter to kailasa-citation@raganuga.

 

you manager raganuga com?

 

**com so I can check it out and give you some feedback before you post it in. I do not wish to make another online fiasco with off-topic citations at our discussion forum.

 

Samvit it is off-topic citations?

 

 

[Jagat 1]

You are understanding posts through an unreliable translator. You are then posting the texts that are produced by an unreliable translator. NOTHING CAN BE GAINED EXCEPT CONFUSION.

[Guest guest]

 

I am take citations. Forum means discussion or not? They diktate some instructions and take off may posts. My posts connect for me citation. Take off posts it is not argument.

 

 

Dear Kailasa, I have removed a post on Siksastakam which began from the citation, is inexact marking people as sahadzhiias, article (product) which was sent by mail by a cross on several information boards(panels). You also pereotpravili by mail things which you already have sent by mail in debatable forums, including start of new subject matter with long passage which was already discussed. It was displaced to a forum of test posts, you can find it there. If you wish to participate in Raganuga Discussions, we simply ask you to follow rules of board here.

 

 

 

you manager raganuga com?

 

 

Yeah.

 

 

 

**com so I can check it out and give you some feedback before you post it in. I do not wish to make another online fiasco with off-topic citations at our discussion forum.

 

Samvit it is off-topic citations?

 

 

It becomes outside of subject matter and replaceable, when you send by mail the same thing many times taking an input(entrance) from others. We expect, that you arrive to discuss and open for an input(entrance), not, that you arrive to convert (to transform) us only caring, that we should speak. We are open for an input(entrance) when is accordingly submitted. Accordingly means with appropriate references (recommendations), including original texts, not only ambiguous translations or interpretations.

[raga 0]

The post above originates from my electronically conceived Russian alter ego dwelling in the wild tundras of Siberia north from Novosibirsk.

 

[kailasa 0]

I am speaks with Valaya Prabhu, Shivu, Satyaraja, others replies me.???

[kailasa 0]

**Dear Kailasa, I have removed a post on Siksastakam which began from the citation, is inexact marking people as sahadzhiias, article (product) which was sent by mail by a cross on several information boards(panels). You also pereotpravili by mail things which you already have sent by mail in debatable forums, including start of new subject matter with long passage which was already discussed. It was displaced to a forum of test posts, you can find it there. If you wish to participate in Raganuga Discussions, we simply ask you to follow rules of board here.

 

 

Ok. I am read in houme.

[raga 0]

Dear Kailasa, you must understand that I have tremendous difficulties in understanding even the simplest sentences you put together, and consequently I am unable to adequately respond.

 

<hr>

Costly Kail, thou maun appreciate such I had direful difficult at appreciation entertainment the artless finding thou adjoin, ampersand consequently I am incapable near - in fond remembrance of near adequate answer.