new---new Posted January 11, 2008 Report Share Posted January 11, 2008 If you can't summarize what you believe in a sentence or two, then you're probably hopelessly confused. I am impressed with your conclusion.........the authors of BG ,Sb vedas ,upanishads etc must be ashamed......:P:P i can explain how advaitins talk ..but its quite boring.................. if anyone's really interested then heres what happens..... if u ask a jnani how he talks and who does he talk to ... he will reply that he never talks and he is only a witness ........now this is quite frustrating for the observer(lets say observer A) because the observer thinks that either the jnani is crazy or is lying or ..but here what s goes on.......... what the observerA sees in front of him is a jnani as a man ...... while the one who speaks through the jnani is identifying himself with the bhraman.....the speaker doesnt identify himself with the body of jnani ........for the jnani he is simply observing his own body as he is observing any other body ........ for the jnani the world functions automatically according to individual karmas......(which appear individual to teh obesrver ) ) for the jnani the body of the jnani (as observed by observer A and whihch appears to be preaching to observer A functions automatically......according to its former karma............. what is happening here is that the individual who formerly acted as a normal individual on attaining self realization Undergoes an "ego switch" and now identifies himself as brahman......it is a state of experience......... Interestingly one common theme between those who reach this state through jnana marg or bhakti marg is that both of them claim that there is never a fall for the jiva........ now as perplexing as this may be for the jivas who find themselves trapped in a dual world ...........it is experentially true for the self realized ......... what ultimately happens in both cases is that there is an "ego switch" form individual person to bhraman ...however externally the bhakata carries on his activities as a bhakiti philosopher and a bhakti acharya according to his former karmas ......and the follower of the jnan marga externally appears to continue with his preaching through jnan and becomes a jnani monk ........ however in both the cases the bhakta and the jnani lose their individuality ........... loss of individuality and liberation doesnt mean end of the world or destruction of mind and body ....it simply means switch of ego from individual to that of bhraman........ as such the liberation is from ones own limited ego..... such realized souls are called jivan muktas .......... if anyone wants to understand more i will be more than happy to give a reading list.................. but as i have mentioned n number of times ...... stick to the rules and the guru and do the sadhana and the mantras ......... cheers.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted January 11, 2008 Report Share Posted January 11, 2008 what ultimately happens in both cases is that there is an "ego switch" form individual person to bhraman ...however externally the bhakata carries on his activities as a bhakiti philosopher and a bhakti acharya according to his former karmas ......and the follower of the jnan marga externally appears to continue with his preaching through jnan and becomes a jnani monk ........ however in both the cases the bhakta and the jnani lose their individuality ........... loss of individuality and liberation doesnt mean end of the world or destruction of mind and body ....it simply means switch of ego from individual to that of bhraman........ as such the liberation is from ones own limited ego..... such realized souls are called jivan muktas .......... if anyone wants to understand more i will be more than happy to give a reading list.................. but as i have mentioned n number of times ...... stick to the rules and the guru and do the sadhana and the mantras ......... No thanks on the list. You demonstrate a total misunderstanding of what bhakti is as evidenced in the bold above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new---new Posted January 11, 2008 Report Share Posted January 11, 2008 on that point i disagree........ prabhupada who was a student and considered himself be unliberated .......and prabhupada the acharya who is liberated ...are two different personalities .......that is what i am trying to explain .... though externally they appear to be the same person......... i understand that what i am proposing might be quite discomforting to vaishnavas ...as it would strike at some of their... core beliefs........... but if only u ask yourself why at one time the student of a guru considers himself to be unliberated ...ultimately takes up a position that there was no fall...........it is clear the there was no fall for the person who is now speaking ...and as far as the former unliberated speaker is concerned ....he simply ceases to be .......... an ego switch has clearly happened ..even though the body remains the same...................in cases of extream bhakti the ego switch is clearly observable..........ramakrishna sometimes used to be so filled with bhakti ..for kali that he would take a garland for her and put it around his own neck...................neem karoli baba at times used to say that he was nothing ..and at other times say "i am the guru of all".......... but this is something we can choose to disagree ................i usually avoid discussing with vaishnavas ............ its better for them to just follow the rules than ask questions ................ ... No thanks on the list. You demonstrate a total misunderstanding of what bhakti is as evidenced in the bold above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted January 11, 2008 Report Share Posted January 11, 2008 I think you underestimate the forum members here. We know the difference between ramakrishna dressing like a gopi and running around the streets of Vrndavan crying "Krishna Krishna" and the real thing. Thanks for offering to be our guru but no thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new---new Posted January 11, 2008 Report Share Posted January 11, 2008 I think you underestimate the forum members here. We know the difference between ramakrishna dressing like a gopi and running around the streets of Vrndavan crying "Krishna Krishna" and the real thing. Thanks for offering to be our guru but no thanks. Ramakrishna still comes in the dreams of one of my friends and guides him ....... i value direct experience more than theory ........ by the way the jnani part was my conclusion on discussions between ramanna maharishi and his diciples..... but i agree i underestimated the forumn members here ....... i accept defeat ........and accept you as my guru ..........i learnt something new from you.......i need to learn to keep my mouth shut...... by the way i have no desire to convert ....because i have no alternative to offer ...... just do what your guru says.................just try not so much to ridicule other beliefs ...... and other personalities......especially the likes of ramakrishna and sankaracharya...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjan Posted January 11, 2008 Report Share Posted January 11, 2008 Interestingly one common theme between those who reach this state through jnana marg or bhakti marg is that both of them claim that there is never a fall for the jiva........ now as perplexing as this may be for the jivas who find themselves trapped in a dual world ...........it is experentially true for the self realized ......... What is bhakti marg? How could you decribe it? ------------------------------- And second question: There are three stages of Absolute Truth: Brahman, Paramatma, Bhagavan. My question is- is this jnana marg=first stage (Brahman realization)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murali_Mohan_das Posted January 11, 2008 Report Share Posted January 11, 2008 I am impressed with your conclusion.........the authors of BG ,Sb vedas ,upanishads etc must be ashamed......:P:P Those works are not summaries of anybody's beliefs, they are somewhat detailed descriptions of life, the Universe, and everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted January 11, 2008 Report Share Posted January 11, 2008 Ramakrishna still comes in the dreams of one of my friends and guides him ....... i value direct experience more than theory ........ by the way the jnani part was my conclusion on discussions between ramanna maharishi and his diciples..... but i agree i underestimated the forumn members here ....... i accept defeat ........and accept you as my guru ..........i learnt something new from you.......i need to learn to keep my mouth shut...... OK As your guru I instruct you to not go near commentaries produced by anyone who sees absorbtion into the Brahman effulgence as the highest goal in life. But seriously I am no one's guru as we know. The perfected Vaisnavas have taught the difference between real Bhakti which is the post liberation activity of the soul and sadhana bhakti. Further they have taught the difference betwee true sadhana-bhakti which has as it's goal eternal devotion to the Lord and the imposter sadhana-bhakti which has as it's goal absorbtion into the Brahman with the subsequent lose of individuality and distinction between the Jiva and the Supreme Lord. This distinction in the two paths both called sadhana-bhakti by many is crucial to the real Vaisnavas and therefore it is crucial to us the objects of their mercy. by the way i have no desire to convert ....because i have no alternative to offer ...... Yes I understand. You have just presented another viewpoint for discussion which is perfectly fine seeing this is a spiritual discussion forum. No problem brothersoul. I offer an alternative explanation in the same spirit. Drawing a clear line of distinction between the two ideas is extremely important to me for in words they can sound much the same while in essence they are diametrically opposed to one another. just do what your guru says.................just try not so much to ridicule other beliefs ...... and other personalities......especially the likes of ramakrishna and sankaracharya...... We are trying to respect everysoul in every form as equal to ourselves as parts of Krsna and that certainly includes ramakrishna and sankaracarya, however the beliefs of these personalities we will always take issue with for they deny the eternal service to the Supreme Person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new---new Posted January 12, 2008 Report Share Posted January 12, 2008 What is bhakti marg?How could you decribe it? ------------------------------- And second question: There are three stages of Absolute Truth: Brahman, Paramatma, Bhagavan. My question is- is this jnana marg=first stage (Brahman realization)? marg = path bhakti marg= bhakti yoga = devotional path same with jnana ..path of inquiry.. If one has brahman realization the concepts of paramatma and bhagwan will no longer matter to him........ though externally he may continue to speak about bhagwan and paramatma ... because from where he is situated everything is done by god (krishna if the realized one was a krishan devotee).. according to him not a leaf can move without gods will.... i know this may be confusing to you please re read my post on how jnanis talk ... unless you understand that, it is difficult to understand what brahman realization is..... again paramatma realizations and bhagawan realizations are not realizations as much as they are experiences..... if one constantly meditates in the heart on one ista deva(krishna for example) one will ultimately be able to see krishna in the heart however that is not the same thing as having liberation.... if one does a lot of mantra jaap of one ista deva .. krishna for example ..and is full of bhakti one will ultimately be able to see krishna in person .... even such an experience will be temperory and is not the same as liberation..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trialingeswaranatha Posted January 12, 2008 Report Share Posted January 12, 2008 Is it true that the spirit soul, atma, is only desiring and nothing more? And that it is the mind which is perceiving (pains and pleasures) the world we live in, and not the spirit soul? If it is the mind which is conscious about the pains and pleasures, and not the soul, does it then mean that it is actually the mind which is conscious, or? But then what about the mind which is part of the 8 separate material energies? Somebody who could clear this up for me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beggar Posted January 12, 2008 Report Share Posted January 12, 2008 if one does a lot of mantra jaap of one ista deva .. krishna for example ..and is full of bhakti one will ultimately be able to see krishna in person .... even such an experience will be temperory and is not the same as liberation..... This philosophy is commonly know as Mayavada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trialingeswaranatha Posted January 12, 2008 Report Share Posted January 12, 2008 Dear Ananta. Not to worry about awareness because it exist in all movements of mind and soul and in our natural condition which is Self. Perception of pain and pleasure only live in our attention focus which is a natural state which can be observed by our own desire . There is not two things here to understand. Be at peace. understanding will come Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trialingeswaranatha Posted January 12, 2008 Report Share Posted January 12, 2008 You Speak as a true believer with no experience of bakti at all. Needs be to read the Gita. Sorry friend Dogma is great but true devotion is better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjan Posted January 14, 2008 Report Share Posted January 14, 2008 Two+one questions: If one has brahman realization the concepts of paramatma and bhagwan will no longer matter to him........ though externally he may continue to speak about bhagwan and paramatma ... because from where he is situated everything is done by god (krishna if the realized one was a krishan devotee).. according to him not a leaf can move without gods will... again paramatma realizations and bhagawan realizations are not realizations as much as they are experiences..... 1.) Can you describe, what you mean by paramatma and bhagavan realizations (experiences)?(how mayavadis describe paramatma and bhagavan) if one does a lot of mantra jaap of one ista deva .. krishna for example ..and is full of bhakti one will ultimately be able to see krishna in person .... even such an experience will be temperory and is not the same as liberation..... 2.) Is this the highest goal of mayavada- liberation, Brahman realization? yes/noIf it's not, what it is? (name) And third question is for Vaishnavas: 3.) What is the highest goal for Vaishnava? What's the name for it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murali_Mohan_das Posted January 14, 2008 Report Share Posted January 14, 2008 3.) What is the highest goal for Vaishnava?What's the name for it? Divine service/seva. It is its own reward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beggar Posted January 14, 2008 Report Share Posted January 14, 2008 Divine service/seva. It is its own reward. Divine service to who? Can it be interrupted or must it be constant? What if one engages in "seva" but harbors personal desires? What is the difference between divine service and what Srila Bhaktivedanta Prabhupada calls "pure devotional service"? How would one define pure devotional service or divine service? If one has material senses how can one engage in divine (non-material) service. How does the chanting of the holy name of Krsna, the yuga dharma of this Age of Kali relate to divine service? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murali_Mohan_das Posted January 14, 2008 Report Share Posted January 14, 2008 You've got all the answers (and a lot more free time than I have). Divine service to who? Can it be interrupted or must it be constant? What if one engages in "seva" but harbors personal desires? What is the difference between divine service and what Srila Bhaktivedanta Prabhupada calls "pure devotional service"? How would one define pure devotional service or divine service? If one has material senses how can one engage in divine (non-material) service. How does the chanting of the holy name of Krsna, the yuga dharma of this Age of Kali relate to divine service? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beggar Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 Bhakti BHAKTI YOGA By O.B.L. Kapoor Bhakti cannot be easily defined, because it is transcendental. Sandilya describes it as intense loving attachment to God (paranuraktirisvare). Rupa Goswami describes it as harmonious pursuit of Krishna, unenveloped by jnana and karma and uninterrupted by the desire for anything else. Narada describes it as indescribable love of God and the most sublime of all human experiences, on attaining which man craves for nothing else. He is maddened with joy and delights in his own self. He always swims in the ocean of nectar and is not drawn to the enjoyments, either of this world or the next, which are to him like the turbid waters of a muddy pool. BHAKTI IS THE FUNCTION OF THE HLADHINI SHAKTI These descriptions, however, give us only a general idea of the character of bhakti. They do not tell us what it exactly is. No one before Jiva Goswami told us what it was. It was he, who for the first time defined it as the function (vrrti) of the Hladini Shakti of Bhagavan, the shakti that causes bliss. Bhagavan places it in the hearts of His devotees, so that they may be entranced as well as He. How do we know that Bhakti is the shakti of Bhagavan, not jiva? Sruti says that Bhagavan is eternally unmanifest (avyakta). No one can see Him without the help of His own shakti. Only he can see or know Him, whom He Himself chooses – yamevaisa vrnute tena esa labhya (Mundaka Sruti .3.2.3.). At the same time the Sruti says that hakti alone takes the jiva to Bhagavan, bhakti alone enables him to see Him – bhaktireva enam nayati, bhaktireva enam darsayati (Mathara Sruti). This makes it clear that bhakti is the shakti of Bhagavan. BHAKTI IMPLIES SELFLESS LOVING SERVICE OF BHAGAVAN Bhakti implies service. Selfless loving service of the lord is the essence of bhakti. Though the devotee serves the lord for the pleasure of the lord, pleasure comes to him automatically. Such is the very nature of bhakti. But if the devotees attitude of bhakti is tainted in the slightest degree with concealed desire for his own pleasure, he is deprived to that extent of the supreme delight that comes from suddha of pure bhakti. He condemns even pleasure that automatically comes to the devotee from an act of service, if in any manner it causes obstruction to service.It is regrettable that the idea of service is not properly understood and appreciated by those, who find it difficult to reconcile it with their ego. They think that the path of bhakti is meant exclusively for persons, who are intellectually weak and temperamentally submissive. They cannot understand that in the spiritual world, where love reigns supreme, to serve is to love and to love is to rule. In love self-sacrifice is self-realization ands self-effacement is self-fulfilment. In love there is reciprocity. Each member of the relationship of love feels deficient without the other, each wants to draw close to the other and to win the other by love and service. The lord being the other member in the relationship of love in bhakti, He feels deficient without His devotee. He draws Himself close to him to realize Himself more fully through love and service to Him. He derives greater pleasure in being controlled by His devotee than in lording it over him. http://premaprayojana.blogspot.com/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new---new Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 Two+one questions: 1.) Can you describe, what you mean by paramatma and bhagavan realizations (experiences)? (how mayavadis describe paramatma and bhagavan) paramatma and bhagavan are mainly vaishnava terminology used to describe the two features of the ultimate reality paramatma = localized feature of god in the heart .. i presume paramatma experience would be seeing god in the heart during meditation... Bhagavan = personal form of god like ram or krishna ..and personal experience would be seeing personal form of god..... for advaitins everything and all forms originate from brahman alone ....therefore there is nothing besides the bhraman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beggar Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 "The Mayavadis say that the world created by maya is false, and that actually there is no living entity but only one spiritual effulgence. They further say that God is imaginary, that people think of God only because of ignorance, and that when the Supreme Absolute Truth is befooled by the external energy, maya, He becomes a jiva, or living entity. Upon hearing all these nonsensical ideas from the nondevotee, a devotee is greatly afflicted, as if his heart and soul were broken." Bhaktivedanta Purport Caitanya-caritamrta, Antya lila 2:99 ...Such persons do not accept the philosophies of the Vaisnava acaryas, which are known as suddhadvaita (purified monism), suddha-dvaita (purified dualism), visistadvaita (specific monism), dvaitadvaita (monism and dualism) and acintya-bhedabheda (inconceivable oneness and difference). Mayavadis do not discuss these philosophies, for they are firmly convinced of their own philosophy of kevaladvaita, exclusive monism. Accepting this system of philosophy as the pure understanding of the Vedanta-sutra, they believe that Krsna has a body made of material elements and that the activities of loving service to Krsna are sentimentality. They are known as Mayavadis because according to their opinion Krsna has a body made of maya, and the loving service of the Lord executed by devotees is also maya. They consider such devotional service to be an aspect of fruitive activities (karma-kanda). According to their view, bhakti consists of mental speculation or sometimes meditation. This is the difference between the Mayavadi and Vaisnava philosophies." Bhaktivedanta Purport Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi lila 7:101 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new---new Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 "The Mayavadis say that the world created by maya is false, and that actually there is no living entity but only one spiritual effulgence. false and true are relative terms ... a dream is real as long as we are a part of the dream and is unreal when we wake up....... to assign an absolute value of "false" to the world ...is to take things out of context ...... which is exactly what the above verse does while explaining mayavada They further say that God is imaginary, that people think of God only because of ignorance, and that when the Supreme Absolute Truth is befooled by the external energy, maya, He becomes a jiva, or living entity. Ramana maharaishi said that the gods(demigods) are as real as you and me..... Upon hearing all these nonsensical ideas from the nondevotee, a devotee is greatly afflicted, as if his heart and soul were broken." this is the reason why i dont like to discuss with vaishnavas ....they are better off doing what they are told than try and understand things...... i mean if the choice is between sweet lies (which are ultimately helpful) and a broken heart what would you choose??? Bhaktivedanta Purport Caitanya-caritamrta, Antya lila 2:99 ...Such persons do not accept the philosophies of the Vaisnava acaryas, which are known as suddhadvaita (purified monism), suddha-dvaita (purified dualism), visistadvaita (specific monism), dvaitadvaita (monism and dualism) and acintya-bhedabheda (inconceivable oneness and difference). Mayavadis do not discuss these philosophies, for they are firmly convinced of their own philosophy of kevaladvaita, exclusive monism. Accepting this system of philosophy as the pure understanding of the Vedanta-sutra, they believe that Krsna has a body made of material elements and that the activities of loving service to Krsna are sentimentality. They are known as Mayavadis because according to their opinion Krsna has a body made of maya, and the loving service of the Lord executed by devotees is also maya. They consider such devotional service to be an aspect of fruitive activities (karma-kanda). According to their view, bhakti consists of mental speculation or sometimes meditation. This is the difference between the Mayavadi and Vaisnava philosophies." Bhaktivedanta Purport Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi lila 7:101 I personally believe that dwaitaadvaita and acintya-bhedabheda are more sensible than kevaladvaita and suddha-dvaita.... however whatever i say here is quickly branded as mayavada.... time and again in my posts i have tried to explain that duality is as much of an experience as oneness and both are relatively correct...... again when vaishnavas speak of krishna having spiritual body ....i ask " can you quote any scriptures to proove it ? " what exactly is the vishnava idea of a spiritual body???? please dont give me any translations ....give me sanskrit words used to describe "spiritual body" as different from material body........ Again i dont think devotional service has absolutely anything to do with karma-kanda ........and that is the reason why i have in one of my other posts relating to "did lord vishnu recommend goddess worship?" mentioned that if a material end needs to be attained then material energy needs to be worshipped acccording to the rules..... as you can see the above two verses dont accurately describe my "beliefs" and in my opinion dont quite describe the beliefs of most people who the vaishnavas brand as "mayavadis" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new---new Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 i came here to answer the questions asked as best as i understood them.. i did not come here to discuss philosophies as i dont like to criticize others beliefs unfortunately it is inevitable in a philosophical discussion...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beggar Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 again when vaishnavas speak of krishna having spiritual body ....i ask " can you quote any scriptures to proove it ? " what exactly is the vishnava idea of a spiritual body???? please dont give me any translations ....give me sanskrit words used to describe "spiritual body" as different from material body........ Chapter 5: Hymn to the Absolute Truth Bhaktivedanta VedaBase: Śrī Brahma-saḿhitā 5.1īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ anādir ādir govindaḥ sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam SYNONYMS īśvaraḥ — the controller; paramaḥ — supreme; kṛṣṇaḥ — Lord Kṛṣṇa; sat — comprising eternal existence; cit — absolute knowledge; ānanda — and absolute bliss; vigrahaḥ — whose form; anādiḥ — without beginning; ādiḥ — the origin; govindaḥ — Lord Govinda; sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam — the cause of all causes. TRANSLATION Kṛṣṇa who is known as Govinda is the Supreme Godhead. He has an eternal blissful spiritual body. He is the origin of all. He has no other origin and He is the prime cause of all causes. PURPORT Kṛṣṇa is the exalted Supreme entity having His eternal name, eternal form, eternal attribution and eternal pastimes. The very name "Kṛṣṇa" implies His love-attracting designation, expressing by His eternal nomenclature the acme of entity. His eternal beautiful heavenly blue-tinged body glowing with the intensity of ever-existing knowledge has a flute in both His hands. As His inconceivable spiritual energy is all-extending, still He maintains His all-charming medium size by His qualifying spiritual instrumentals. His all-accommodating supreme subjectivity is nicely manifested in His eternal form. The concentrated all-time presence, uncovered knowledge and inebriating felicity have their beauty in Him. The mundane manifestive portion of His own Self is known as all-pervading Paramātmā, Īśvara (Superior Lord) or Viṣṇu (All-fostering). Hence it is evident that Kṛṣṇa is sole Supreme Godhead. His unrivaled or unique spiritual body of superexcellent charm is eternally unveiled with innumerable spiritual instrumentals (senses) and unreckonable attributes keeping their signifying location properly, adjusting at the same time by His inconceivable conciliative powers. This beautiful spiritual figure is identical with Kṛṣṇa and the spiritual entity of Kṛṣṇa is identical with His own figure. The very intensely blended entity of eternal presence of felicitous cognition is the charming targeted holding or transcendental icon. It follows that the conception of the indistinguishable formless magnitude (Brahman) which is an indolent, lax, presentment of cognitive bliss, is merely a penumbra of intensely blended glow of the three concomitants, viz., the blissful, the substantive and the cognitive. This transcendental manifestive icon Kṛṣṇa in His original face is primordial background of magnitudinal infinite Brahman and of the all-pervasive oversoul. Kṛṣṇa as truly visioned in His variegated pastimes, such as owner of transcendental cows, chief of cowherds, consort of milk-maids, ruler of the terrestrial abode Gokula and object of worship by transcendental residents of Goloka beauties, is Govinda. He is the root cause of all causes who are the predominating and predominated agents of the universe. The glance of His projected fractional portion in the sacred originating water viz., the personal oversoul or Paramātmā, gives rise to a secondary potency — nature who creates this mundane universe. This oversoul's intermediate energy brings forth the individual souls analogously to the emanated rays of the sun. This book is a treatise of Kṛṣṇa; so the preamble is enacted by chanting His name in the beginning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new---new Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 i hope mr beggar that you can see the difference between the actual sanskrit verse and the translation...... i hope you can see that there is no sanskrit equivalent of "spiritual body" the verse is saying that krishna is the supreme lord whose form (vigrahah)is sat chid ananda...... sat chit ananda is the term usually used to describe brahman.... when krishna says in the bhagvad geeta that the whole world rests on" me" as pearls on a string ...what is the "me" that krishna is reffering to ?? is he trying to say that the planets are resting on his 2 armed form???.. catch the drift..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
new---new Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 do what your guru says... discussions are useless....it prooves nothing.... peace... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.