sai baba

[Inedible]

 

I wasn't picking on him. It was word play. "Why ask why?" ..Oh well

 

I think Bhaktajan is mocking me for choosing a picture where I am at a Christmas party and am holding a glass containing mostly pear-flavored vodka. Really, it surprised me that no one has said anything sooner.

[bija]

Really, it surprised me that no one has said anything sooner. quote by inedible

sometimes we dont say what we think lol

 

hmmm....pear....delish!!!

[theist]

 

I think Bhaktajan is mocking me for choosing a picture where I am at a Christmas party and am holding a glass containing mostly pear-flavored vodka. Really, it surprised me that no one has said anything sooner.

 

That's ok. Glad you have a good excuse for the goofy pic.

[Oneuser]

Which sampradaya is Sai Baba?

 

The devotee of Krishna fullfills all obligations to society and family et al., simply by following the yogic disciplines of Bhakti-yoga. In contrast to those who propagate "avidya" in the name of enlightenment

Bhaktajan

..........................................................................................................................

Sri Isopanisad Mantra 11 Purport:

 

 

 

. . . The culture of vidyä is summarized in Çrémad-Bhägavatam (1.2.14) in the following words:

 

 

 

tasmäd ekena manasä

 

bhagavän sätvatäà patiù

çrotavyaù kértitavyaç ca

dhyeyaù püjyaç ca nityadä

“Therefore, with one-pointed attention one should constantly hear about, glorify, remember and worship the Personality of Godhead, who is the protector of the devotees.”

Unless religion, economic development and sense gratification aim toward the attainment of devotional service to the Lord, they are all simply different forms of nescience, as Çré Éçopaniñad indicates in the following mantras.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.......................................................................................................

 

 

 

I dont understand your reply.

 

Schools in Vaishnavism:

o Srivaishnavism or Sri-Vaishnava Sampradaya, adheres to teachings of Ramanuja

o Dvaita or Brahma Sampradaya, adheres to teachings of Madhva

o Ramanandi Sampraday, adheres to the teachings of Ramananda

o Shree Swaminarayan Sampraday adheres to teachings of Swaminarayan

o Pushtimarg Sampraday or Rudra Sampradaya, adheres to the teachings of Vishnuswami/Vallabhacharya

o Kumara Sampraday, adheres to teachings of Nimbarka (Nimbarkacharya)

o Gaudiya Vaishnavism (includes ISKCON, the Hare Krishna movement), adheres to the teachings of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (Gaurangacharya)

o Mahapuruxiya dharma or Asomiya Vaishnavism, adheres to the teachings of Srimanta Sankaradeva

o Krishna Pranami Sampraday, adheres to the teachings of Devachandra Maharaj

 

Schools in Shaivism:

o Saiva Siddhanta, adheres to the teachings of Tirumular/Sundaranatha (Nandinatha Sampradaya, the monistic school) or of Meykandadeva (Meykandar Sampradaya, the dualistic school)

o Adinath Sampradaya or Siddha Siddhanta, adheres to the teachings of Gorakhnath and Matsyendranath

o Siva Advaita, adheres to the teachings of Nilakantha (Srikantha) and Appayya Dikshitar

o Kashmir Shaivism, adheres to the teachings of Vasugupta and his disciplinic lineage, including Abhinavagupta

o Pasupata Saivism, adheres to the teachings of Lakulisa

o Veerashaivism or Lingayat Dharma, adheres to the teachings of Basavanna

 

Schools in Shaktism

Schools in Smartism

o Advaita Vedanta

 

Schools in Javanese Hinduism

o Agama Hindu Dharma

 

Any of these?

[bhaktajan]

 

 

Which adheres to The Bhagavatam Verse Quoted?

 

 

................................................................................................................................

 

 

 

 

 

Çrémad-Bhägavatam (1.2.14) in the following words:

 

 

 

 

 

tasmäd ekena manasä

bhagavän sätvatäà patiù

çrotavyaù kértitavyaç ca

dhyeyaù püjyaç ca nityadä

 

 

 

 

 

“Therefore, with one-pointed attention one should constantly hear about, glorify, remember and worship the Personality of Godhead, who is the protector of the devotees.”

 

 

 

 

Unless religion, economic development and sense gratification aim toward the attainment of devotional service to the Lord, they are all simply different forms of nescience, as Çré Éçopaniñad indicates in the following mantras.

 

 

.................................................................................................

 

 

 

So many schools of thought and only an eternity to learn which one rightly follows the follows Vyasadeva's purports.

...........................................................................................

PS: Thank you for that list--I will keep a copy, print it, and keep in folded in the pages of one of the volumes of my Bhagavatam.

Bhaktajan

(PPS: I can get out of this 'center-alignment format')

 

 

[Sarva gattah]

Çré Éçopaniñad

 

Çrémad-Bhägavatam

 

Sorry to butt in, but how can you get correct English spelling again?

 

I wish the BBT would fix this.

 

Anyway Srila Prabhupada once wrote a letter to Sai baba. It unfolds as follows -

 

Pradyumna prabhu had a lengthy meeting with Srila Prabhupada this afternoon to finalize his reply to the Blitz article on Sai Baba.

 

Pradyumna read from the opening paragraph of the article which was entitled “God is an Indian.” “‘His contemporary avatara rests in the Trinity of Shirdi Baba, Sai Baba, and Prem Baba to come.

 

So Satya Sai Baba, the second of the triple incarnation, asserted in the course of a marathon interview to add, ‘In my present avatara, I have come armed with the fullness of the power of the formless God to save humanity.’”

 

Srila Prabhupada dictated the outline of the letter to Pradyumna.

 

THE LETTER Srila Prabhupada sent -

 

“‘Dear Sai Baba, just recently in the Blitz paper, published on—give the date—we were surprised to find one article “God is an Indian.” And you have claimed to become an incarnation of God to save the human society. What is the ground of your claiming as incarnation?

 

And what you have done to save the human society? Will you explain for enlightenment of us, or many of us? We have got the list of incarnations recorded in the Vedic scriptures and their respective activities also.

 

So where is that record in the Vedic scripture about your appearing as incarnation? Lord Krsna’s incarnation-ness is fully described in Srimad-Bhägavatam. Similarly, Lord Ramacandra’s incarnation-ness or Lord Buddha’s incarnation-ness, Lord Catena’s incarnation-ness, we have got full information in Vedic literatures.

 

Where is your incarnation described?

 

Will you kindly give the reference? Anyone can say like you, that one is incarnation, as it has become a fashion nowadays. But is that claim the only proof of one’s becoming incarnation?

 

Some such unauthorized claim of becoming an incarnation is certainly ridiculous. Then you have claimed to take

form.’ What he has written?”

 

Pradyumna re-read Baba’s claim to being an avatara “armed with the fullness of the power of the formless God.” Prabhupada continued.

 

“‘So you have claimed to take a form of the formless God. But we see in the Bhagavad-Gita that God is never formless.’”

 

He had Pradyumna read out verse 7:24 from the Gita, and its purport. Telling Pradyumna to quote the verse in the letter, along with a quote from Yamunäcärya found in the purport, Prabhupada went on with his dictation:

 

“‘Only the rascals and less intelligent class of men think that God is formless and when He incarnates, He takes a particular form…. So in this connection, the statement of Bhagavatam is especially important. Brahmeti paramätmeti bhagavän iti sabdyate. Brahman is impersonal, Paramätmä is localized, and Bhagavän is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.’”

 

Voicing aloud Prabhupada statement as he wrote it down, Pradyumna repeated,

 

“Brahman is the impersonal…” Prabhupada immediately corrected him.

 

“‘Brahman is impersonal.’ Not the. ‘Paramätmä is localized, and Bhagavän is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.’” Citing many verses from Bhagavad-Gita, Prabhupada made the point that Krsna’s personality cannot be understood without His mercy.

 

“‘So one has to accept the statement of Krsna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, how He is originally the Purina or person,’” he said. “‘Impersonal Brahman is expansion of the rays of His personal body, exactly like the sunshine is expansion of the rays of the sun-god Vivasvän. Vivasvän is a person in the sun globe and Krsna is also a person who spoke the philosophy of Bhagavad-Gita long, long years before He spoke the same to Arjuna. Therefore, the conclusion is that originally God is always a person. Impersonal Brahman is emanation from the personal God.

 

In other words, God, personal God, is not from impersonal Brahman; but impersonal Brahman is from the personal God. That is confirmed in the Bhagavad-Gita. Impersonal Brahman is resting on the personal God, exactly which illumination of light is resting on the electric bulb, not that the bulb is resting on the illuminated light.’”

 

Again quoting from the Gita Prabhupada came to a very pointed conclusion:

 

“‘So Krsna, as a person, says to Arjuna that both of them existed in the past as person, and they’ll continue to remain person in the future. So without knowing all this knowledge, a mayavada accepts the incarnation of God as coming from impersonal.

 

Under this heading you (Sai Baba) have proved yourself to become a mayavada. And how a mayavada or an ass can become the incarnation of God?’”

 

Not content with that, Prabhupada asked Pradyumna to read the rest of the article to him.

 

Pradyumna squinted through his glasses at the paper and read out a declaration by the writer of his acceptance of what he called “the avatara concept which broadly means the descent of the divine principle into human affairs.”

 

Reminding the reader of Lord Krsna’s Descent to save humanity, the writer declared:

 

“Solution and cure to world’s ills: To Baba’s devotees, the avatara has similarly come to provide both the solution and the cure to a world living in terror of a nuclear holocaust.

 

The false dichotomies created by Western thought between God and man, purusa and deva, simply do not exist in the Indian scriptures, which prescribe the assimilation of God in man and man in God as the basis of religion.”

Prabhupada was disgusted. “This is another rascal Dom. God is always distinct from man.”

 

Pradyumna said that Sai Baba made a similar quote himself, later in the piece. He read it out: “God is man and man is God. All of us have something of God, the divine spark, within us. All men are divine, like myself, with the spirit embodied in human flesh and bone.

 

The only difference is that they are unaware of this Godhood.”Skipping to another section of the article, Pradyumna went on,

 

“Here he says, ‘The mission of the present avatara is to make everybody realize that since the same God or divinity resides in everyone, people should respect, love, and …

 

’” Prabhupada cut in. “No, no. If he resides in everyone, then why he has special claim?”

 

“Yes. Well, he says he has remembered.”

 

“He remembers?” Prabhupada asked.

 

“How God can forget?”

 

“That he says here. He says that, ‘Take paddy or rice by way of an illustration. Every grain of rice is enclosed in a husk. You have to remove the husk to get the grain of rice. Now husk and rice both come from the same seed. Rice is the equivalent of God in man.’”

 

“But still husk is not rice,” Prabhupada said. “You cannot say husk is rice.”

 

Nodding in agreement, Pradyumna read on.

 

“He says, ‘Rice is the equivalent of God in man, while the husk can be compared to desire which reduces God to man.’”

 

Prabhupada sat shaking his head. “No, no.”

 

Pradyumna finished the quote:

 

“Therefore life plus desire equals man. Life minus desire equals God.”

 

Prabhupada dictated the concluding words of his letter: -

 

“You are desiring to become God. There cannot be no desire. But you unceremoniously desire to become God. Although there is no proof in the sästras.

 

In the Bhagavad-Gita it is accepted that the living entities are sparks of, part and parcel, of God, Krsna. But part is never equal to the whole.

 

So you can claim as a spark of God, as every living entity can claim, but you cannot claim as the Supreme Person with full power. That is misleading. You can show a little magic, as other magicians also can show, but you cannot show the full magic, as Krsna displayed or Lord Rämacandra displayed.Therefore, your claim as a full power is completely false and blasphemous.”

 

Pradyumna stopped writing and looked up, raising a point of his own, “Now someone may bring up the one point, they say ‘Well, if an avatara comes if he must show all kinds of great opulence’s and powers.’ Then he says sometimes the incarnation shows this, but sometimes, like when Lord Caitanya appeared He didn’t show visvarüpa or…”

 

Prabhupada replied.

 

“But He [Lord Caitanya] never claimed that ‘I am avatara.’ But we understand from the sästric evidence. He never claimed. Rather, when He was addressed as Krsna He blocked His ears, ‘You don’t say like that.’ He never claimed. He fully displayed Himself as a devotee, not Bhagavän. Prabhupada nodded.

 

.” Leaving Prabhupada to chant quietly in the garden, Pradyumna typed the letter out and it was sent off to Satya Sai Baba

[theist]

 

Çré Éçopaniñad

 

Çrémad-Bhägavatam

 

Sorry to butt in, but how can you get correct English spelling again?

 

I wish the BBT would fix this.

 

Use the Balarama font converter. http://www.bvml.org/books/fonts/convertor.html

[bhaktajan]

Çré Éçopaniñad

Çrémad-Bhägavatam

 

Sorry to butt in, but how can you get correct English spelling again?

 

......................................................................................

Çré Éçopaniñad

Çrémad-Bhägavatam

If you paste the text first into MS Word,

 

than highlight all the text,

 

Change the font to one of the following

[you will have these allready on your own computer if you have any program that contains/uses such a font to show these words with diacritical marks--in MSWord you would apply the font your self to highlighted text]:

 

Balarama, Scagoudy, ScaTimes, ScaHelvetica, and, ScaOptima among others.

[Oneuser]

@bhaktajan:

 

You can find more information (if you need) about the list if you type in google: schools of hinduism wiki.

I still dont know what sampradaya is Sai Baba.

---------------------

 

From Sarva gattah's post:

 

Prabhupada first asks: Where is that record in the Vedic scripture about your (Sai Baba's) appearing as incarnation?

 

Here is a possible explanation/answer to a question:

-three aspects of God (Brahman, Paramatma, Bhagavan)

-Trinity of Shirdi Baba, Sai Baba, and Prem Baba to come

[Oneuser]

.

[Ashvatama]

 

Srila Prabhupada - “‘So you have claimed to take a form of the formless God. But we see in the Bhagavad-Gita that God is never formless.’”

 

Srila Prabhupada - “‘Only the rascals and less intelligent class of men think that God is formless"

 

Srila Prabhupada - In other words, God, personal God, is not from impersonal Brahman; but impersonal Brahman is from the personal God. .’”

 

Srila Prabhupada - “‘So Krsna, as a person, says to Arjuna that both of them existed in the past as person, and they’ll continue to remain person in the future. So without knowing all this knowledge, a mayavada accepts the incarnation of God as coming from impersonal.

 

Srila Prabhupada - "Under this heading you (Sai Baba) have proved yourself to become a mayavada. And how a mayavada or an ass can become the incarnation of God?’” Prabhupada was disgusted and further said. “This is another rascal Dom. God is always distinct from man.”

 

Srila Prabhupada - "In the Bhagavad-Gita it is accepted that the living entities are sparks of, part and parcel, of God, Krsna. But part is never equal to the whole".

 

Srila Prabhupada - "So you can (Sai Baba) claim as a spark of God, as every living entity can claim, but you cannot claim as the Supreme Person with full power. That is misleading. You can show a little magic, as other magicians also can show, but you cannot show the full magic, as Krsna displayed or Lord Rämacandra displayed.

 

Srila Prabhupada - "Therefore, your (Sai Baba) claim as a full power is completely false and blasphemous.”

 

Srila Prabhupada - "“Lord Caitanya never claimed that ‘I am avatara.’ But we understand from the sästric evidence. He never claimed. Rather, when He was addressed as Krsna He blocked His ears, ‘You don’t say like that.’ He never claimed. He fully displayed Himself as a devotee, not Bhagavän".

 

Only a rascal fool claims to be God

[shvu]

 

Only a rascal fool claims to be God

 

Or he may be God himself. You really have no way of knowing. Anything anyone writes here on the topic is pure speculation and has zilch value.

 

Cheers

[theist]

 

Or he may be God himself. You really have no way of knowing. Anything anyone writes here on the topic is pure speculation and has zilch value.

 

Cheers

 

That would include your statement here. So I agree your statement has zilch value but I also know you speak for yourself.

[shvu]

 

That would include your statement here. So I agree your statement has zilch value but I also know you speak for yourself.

 

Of course, that is simple and plain. Is it necessary to spell out every little thing? Apparently Yes.

 

I can say he is God, you can say he is not...both statements mean nothing as we have no way of knowing.

 

Cheers

[theist]

 

Of course, that is simple and plain. Is it necessary to spell out every little thing? Apparently Yes.

 

I can say he is God, you can say he is not...both statements mean nothing as we have no way of knowing.

 

Cheers

 

You speak for yourself. YOU have no way of knowing. Those that take knowledge from the proper source have the perfect way of knowing.

 

Now people will argue that they have the proper source and their opponents will argue that they have the proper source. No one can impose their beliefs on another. But that does not mean one of them cannot be correct.

[Oneuser]

 

Only a rascal fool claims to be God

But he also sais (if i understand him correct): You are God too.

 

Please correct me in this one:

 

You are a particle of sunshine who is claiming to be the Sun. Be happy with being a particle. A particle radiates light and warmth as does the Sun. That is glorious but a particle who claims to radiate light and warmth on par with the Sun is sadly delusioned.

What is wrong with sunshine particle-A saying to sunshine particle-B that they are Sun?

They even tell particle-C and D that they are also Sun, and all other particles...

 

If you "remove" all sunshine particles there is no Sun, is it?

[theist]

 

But he also sais (if i understand him correct): You are God too.

 

Please correct me in this one:

 

What is wrong with sunshine particle-A saying to sunshine particle-B that they are Sun?

They even tell particle-C and D that they are also Sun, and all other particles...

 

If you "remove" all sunshine particles there is no Sun, is it?

 

What you are saying is seriously flawed for the most obvious of reasons. Without the Sun globe there would be no sun particles. Why have you not mentioned the Sun globe?

 

The sun particles can tell other sun particles that they are also sun particles and have emanated from the same sun so in that way they are one but if any one particle claims to be the whole then that poor particle is quite foolish indeed.

 

Lord Caitanya taught the simulataneous oneness and differnce between the particles and the whole. Simultaneous being the operative word.

[Ashvatama]

 

What is wrong with sunshine particle-A saying to sunshine particle-B that they are Sun?

They even tell particle-C and D that they are also Sun, and all other particles...

 

If you "remove" all sunshine particles there is no Sun, is it?

 

That is not possible because the Sun and the Sunrays are inconceivable simultaneously one but also different -This is called Acinta-beda-beda-tattva propounded by Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu

 

Srila Prabhupada explains this nicely - "In the Bhagavad-Gita it is accepted that the living entities are sparks of, part and parcel, of God, Krsna. But part is never equal to the whole. So you can claim as a spark of God, as every living entity can claim, but you cannot claim as the Supreme Person with full power. That is misleading. You can show a little magic, as other magicians also can show, but you cannot show the full magic, as Krsna displayed or Lord Rämacandra displayed.Therefore, your claim as a full power is completely false and blasphemous.” from letter sent to Sai Baba - BBT letters

 

Lord Caitanya's Acinta-beda-beda-tattva -inconceivable simultaneously one and different different.

 

American version of a song using His teachings -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3BIHlrPLzk&feature=related

 

Singing about Krsna

 

On stage in Australia -

[Ashvatama]

 

 

Words of song and translation

 

Tattva, acintya bheda abheda tattva (x4)

Like the flower and the scent of summer, like the sun and the shine

Well the truth may come in strange disguises, send a message to your mind

Tattva, acintya bheda abheda tattva (x4)

At the moment that you wake from sleeping, and you know it's all a dream

Well the truth may come in strange disguises, never knowing what it means

Tattva, acintya bheda abheda tattva (x4)

For you shall be tomorrow, like you have been today

If this was never ending, what more can you say?

 

acintya-bhedabheda-tattva

 

 

 

 

"inconceivable simultaneous oneness and difference"

"In the late sixteenth century, with the advent of Krishna Caitanya, in Bengal, Ramanuja's and Madhva's philosophy of Vaisnavism (worship of Visnu, or Bhagavan (God)) reached its climax.

 

Caitanya's philosophy of acintya-bhedabheda-tattva completed the progression to devotional theism. Ramanuja had agreed with Sankara that the Absolute is one only, but had disagreed by affirming individual variety within that oneness.

 

Madhva had underscored the eternal duality of the Supreme and the jiva (the eternal, individual soul or spirit): he had maintained that the duality endures even after the liberation.

 

Caitanya, in turn, specified that the Supreme and the jivas are "inconceivably, simultaneously one and different" (acintya-bheda-abheda). In rejecting impersonalism, Caitanya said that it clouds the Vedic literature's meaning.

 

He explained the direct meaning of the sastras (revealed scriptures) as devotion (bhakti) to Bhagavan Krishna.

 

Thus, Caitanya made an unprecedented contribution. Here was the possibility of a devotional relationship between God and man."

 

(This is an exerpt from a book called "Readings in Vedic Literature" by Satsvarupa dasa Goswami published in 1977 by the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust)

 

 

 

 

[rati08]

If your aunt and family are having faith in him its good.Every human has faith in some one.We believe in god has any one seen god.

People did not belive shirdi sai baba when he was alive expect few.

[bhaktajan]

 

If your aunt and family are having faith in him its good.Every human has faith in some one.We believe in god has any one seen god.

People did not belive shirdi sai baba when he was alive expect few.

 

I have not seen my landlord but I see her nephew.

I do not want to see my landlord and also I'd like to not have to pay my landlord --but She provides the Heat and the roof and the windows and the fridge and the toilet too.

 

I believe that my landlord must be a Demi-God [but, I do have to still pay the rent for the privledge of being her tenent].

 

I still hate to have the landlord visit or even ask for the rent because it's too much money to pay--but it is worth every penny.

[Oneuser]

 

What is wrong with sunshine particle-A saying to sunshine particle-B that they are Sun?

They even tell particle-C and D that they are also Sun, and all other particles...

 

If you "remove" all sunshine particles there is no Sun, is it?

What you are saying is seriously flawed for the most obvious of reasons. Without the Sun globe there would be no sun particles. Why have you not mentioned the Sun globe?

Yes, Sun globe is not mentioned. Its a complicated analogy, i could argue that Sun globe are somekind of pre-state sunshine particles...

 

 

The sun particles can tell other sun particles that they are also sun particles and have emanated from the same sun so in that way they are one but if any one particle claims to be the whole then that poor particle is quite foolish indeed.

Question:

is there any other important point in the analogy of Sun and sunshine particles other than that of the relation between a whole and a part?

 

 

Srila Prabhupada - "In the Bhagavad-Gita it is accepted that the living entities are sparks of, part and parcel, of God, Krsna. But part is never equal to the whole".

If you "remove" all parts there is no whole, is it?

 

If you remove all bricks, can you talk about the wall?

[tackleberry]

 

 

If you "remove" all parts there is no whole, is it?

 

If you remove all bricks, can you talk about the wall?

 

Good point, this happens to be the weakness in gaudiya theology. If all parts are removed, then there is no whole, which means the part and whole are one. So according to gaudiya theology, if Krishna is the whole and jivas the parts......well, you conclude!

[theist]

 

Yes, Sun globe is not mentioned. Its a complicated analogy, i could argue that Sun globe are somekind of pre-state sunshine particles...

 

 

Nonsense. I am not into word games for word games sake.

 

"Don't mistake my finger for the Moon." -Lao Tzu

 

[theist]

 

Good point, this happens to be the weakness in gaudiya theology. If all parts are removed, then there is no whole, which means the part and whole are one. So according to gaudiya theology, if Krishna is the whole and jivas the parts......well, you conclude!

 

Another nonsense statement. You obviously know little of Gaudiya philosohy.

 

Krsna says in the gita "In one sense I am everything, yet I am independent."

 

God is more than everything.