Kalkin714 Posted March 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 Well the moderators here again edited/deleted my posts, even the one asking for an explanation of why they were doing it! So, why don't you just step up and give an explanation? I MADE NO ATTACKS ON THE "AS IT IS" OR ANY OTHER RENDITION OF THE GITA!!! SO, What gives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airicky Posted March 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 Well the moderators here again edited/deleted my posts, even the one asking for an explanation of why they were doing it! So, why don't you just step up and give an explanation? I MADE NO ATTACKS ON THE "AS IT IS" OR ANY OTHER RENDITION OF THE GITA!!! SO, What gives? Well, in one thread you had the gull to say Lord Caitanya was wrong. Then you suggest we read Mayavadi interpretations of Bhagavad-gita. wrong forum to come in and say the Supreme Lord is wrong and to push impersonalists philosophies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalkin714 Posted March 23, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 Well, in one thread you had the gull to say Lord Caitanya was wrong. Then you suggest we read Mayavadi interpretations of Bhagavad-gita. wrong forum to come in and say the Supreme Lord is wrong and to push impersonalists philosophies. Where does it say ISKCON only? If this is I'll seriously leave. I'm not tryin' to push any veiws, just to show the WHOLE veiw. But if this seriously isn't a board for the WHOLE veiw then I'll leave, no problem. As far as I know when I'm posting thus far it's about "Spiritual Discussions". (and those things weren't deleted except for my links the first time). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalkin714 Posted March 23, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 Oh and P.S. Advaita isn't impersonalist. What could be less impersonal than being non-differnt from God? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pankaja_Dasa Posted March 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 Oh and P.S. Advaita isn't impersonalist. What could be less impersonal than being non-differnt from God? Yes and I just saw a Pig fly.! Less impersonal then being non-different from God? Are you trying to merge? Excuse me. Anyway study more. You will see the futility. Serve God! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalkin714 Posted March 23, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 Yes and I just saw a Pig fly.! Less impersonal then being non-different from God? Are you trying to merge? Excuse me. Anyway study more. You will see the futility. Serve God! There is no need to be a jack ass. And there is no need to merge. There is no bondage and there is no liberation. You need to study some!....... "...there is here nothing diverse at all! From death to death he goes, who sees here any kind of diversity. As just singular must one behold it - immeasurable and immovable. The Self (Atman) is spotless and beyond space, unborn, immense, immovable." ~-Brhadaranyaka Upanishad 4.4.19-20And I do serve God, thanks! Govinda has directly imparted the whole of the Vedas to me, and I am forever his bhakta, for once you have jnana you can never not serve Lord Shanmukha. Jaya Shiva Omkara! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pankaja_Dasa Posted March 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 What Scripture are you quoting? And are you reading it? This is describing God [brahman]. Anyway I don't want to talk with a fool. So good bye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalkin714 Posted March 23, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 What Scripture are you quoting?Brhadaranyaka Upanishad (of the Sukla Yajur-Veda) 4.4.19-20 just like it says directly beneath the quote. The oldest of all the Upanishads and thus the begining of all Vedanta. And are you reading it? This is describing God [brahman].*sigh*"If a person truly percives the Self (Atman), knowing 'I am this'; What possibly could he want, Whom possibly could he love, that he should worry about his body?... ...When a man clearly sees this Self (Atman) as God, the lord of what was and of what will be, He will not seek to hide from him." ~Brhadaranyaka Upanishad of the Sukla Yajur-Veda 4.4.12,15There you go. In verse 12 Self is identifed with a person and in verse 15 Self is identified as God. Then in 19-20 it is defined as single. No diversity HERE! Advaita. Advaita directly in the Sruti prasthAna too, not anyones comentaries on Vedanta. This came at least 1200 years before Sankarah.Anyway I don't want to talk with a fool. So good bye. Good, let's just chant then: <big>Govinda Hare, Gopala Hare He Prahbu dena dayala Hare!</big> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bond Posted March 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 Pankaja, I thought you were better than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pankaja_Dasa Posted March 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 *sigh* "If a person truly percives the Self (Atman), knowing 'I am this'; What possibly could he want, Whom possibly could he love, that he should worry about his body?... ...When a man clearly sees this Self (Atman) as God, the lord of what was and of what will be, He will not seek to hide from him." ~Brhadaranyaka Upanishad of the Sukla Yajur-Veda 4.4.12,15There you go. In verse 12 Self is identifed with a person and in verse 15 Self is identified as God. Then in 19-20 it is defined as single. No diversity HERE! Advaita. Advaita directly in the Sruti prasthAna too, not anyones comentaries on Vedanta. This came at least 1200 years before Sankarah.<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --> So your saying the self is God? This means your God? And this is stated in Sastra as you quoted. So tell me if you are Atman or God. Why are you so dumb? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pankaja_Dasa Posted March 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 Pankaja, I thought you were better than that. Better then what? Who are you comparing me to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pankaja_Dasa Posted March 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 By the way Atman God or whatever you call it can never be covered by Maya, either in this World or the other World, and since everything is meant to be Brahman. Or God. Then how can it cover anything at all? Since everything is Brahman ALREADY. This means your not God your something else. Krishna says your Jiva. This means there is two entities you AND God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahnava Nitai Das Posted March 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 (and those things weren't deleted except for my links the first time). Your post and links were never deleted, they were seperated from the previous thread and made into it's own thread. This was because the person who had started the original thread felt you were hijacking his thread. Those who have volunteered to moderate don't get paid by me and do everything as a service. They really don't have time to deal with your complaints. You don't see Panakaja complaining why his post was removed, do you? Just learn to live with it. Moderation is what keeps these forums from becoming a mess. It will always offend someone, but that's the cost of a clean and decent forum. I checked the deleted posts archive and the only message you had deleted was one where you screamed that your links to the Bhagavad Gita supersite had been deleted. The truth was it was never deleted but had been made into its own thread. But if you don't like the moderation here, feel free to go elsewhere. We can't satisfy everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gHari Posted March 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 Correction: "If a person truly perceives the Self (Atman), Who is it that "perceives"? That perceiver is the self - the perceived 'Atman' Self is actually the Param-atma (beyond the self), and He is God. This is knowledge. This is humility. Don't sell yourself short - the world, God, are much greater than you think. Meeting Him is not so easy. Meeting Paramatma will infuse you with cit/knowledge, but only Sri Krsna Himself affords true ananda. The complete sac-cid-ananda character of our selves is thus fully realized when Bhagavan Sri Krsna reveals Himself out of His own sweet kindness. As the Srimad Bhagavatam verse 1.2.11 explains, God is realized in three progressive phases: Brahman, Paramatma, and finally Bhagavan. Those stuck at one level are known by their progress which will be continued forever through rebirth until complete and perfected. Those stuck thinking that Brahman realization is the be-all and end-all are known as impersonalists or jnanis. Those attached to Paramatma realization are called yogis. And those are known as bhaktas who follow the lotus feet of Sri Bhagavan Krsna, Govinda. It is not that easy, as confirmed by Lord Krishna, Govinda, God here in person: "Out of many thousands among men, one may endeavor for perfection, and of those who have achieved perfection, hardly one knows Me in truth." ..... "After many births and deaths, he who is actually in knowledge surrenders unto Me, knowing Me to be the cause of all causes and all that is. Such a great soul is very rare". - [Bhagavad-gita 7.3 and verse 7.19] The Self, the Atman (as distinguished from the 'self', the atma) is God. He is. On His existence we piggyback, both as part of Him and inconceivably as separate unique beings. That separation alone gives meaning to words like prema, rasa and bhakti, the goals and delights of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalkin714 Posted March 24, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2006 So your saying the self is God? This means your God? And this is stated in Sastra as you quoted. So tell me if you are Atman or God. Why are you so dumb?Ohhh...nice refutation there! How bout this one: I know you are but what am I? lol. So Vedanta is dumb to you? "...there is no diversity in all this.... He is the ruler of the world. He is the sovereign of the world. He is the lord of the world. One should realize; "He is my Self"" ~Kausitaki Upanishad 3.8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalkin714 Posted March 24, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2006 ....oops....deletd... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pankaja_Dasa Posted March 24, 2006 Report Share Posted March 24, 2006 Bhagavad-gita says the soul cannot be cut. Do you agree? Kalkin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalkin714 Posted March 24, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2006 Bhagavad-gita says the soul cannot be cut. Do you agree? KalkinYes, I agree. And I suppose your point is that if it can't be cut then God can't become individualized souls, and you're right! That's why it's called Maya. It's not real, it's an illusion. Please wait, give me time to respond to other posts and I'll post more scripture supporting me. "Our separation from each other is an optical illusion of consciousness." - Albert Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pankaja_Dasa Posted March 24, 2006 Report Share Posted March 24, 2006 Yes, I agree. And I suppose your point is that if it can't be cut then God can't become individualized souls, and you're right! That's why it's called Maya. It's not real, it's an illusion. Please wait, give me time to respond to other posts and I'll post more scripture supporting me. "Our separation from each other is an optical illusion of consciousness." - Albert Einstein God is everywhere because God is everywhere this means everything is God, and there by eternal. Listen to me carefully Kalkin because EVERYTHING IS GOD. THIS means is cannot be covered by Maya without it being cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts