Can anybody help me on this !!

[Guest guest]

This Hindu guy told me all this, is there anyway to rebutt him or reply to him ?

 

 

 

1.No, merging into brahman is not non existance but rather a superior state of existance. Talking to and seeing Narayana and Krishna are human emotions of a soul in bondage.

 

When wisdom dawns such emotions vanish. The schools that came after Shankara and Ramanuja have conceived of moksha as similar to earth- how silly can it get...All the high abstractions in Shankara and Ramanuja has been compromised by later schools.

 

2.Kailas and Vaikunta are not "places" where a soul "goes". Everything already exists, and going to Vaikunta means attaining a high state of cognotion where you realise God. If your source is the Vishnu Purana, then take a close look at the distance of Brahma Loka from earth - it works out to the distance traversed by light in a day.(exactly actually!!). Do you really want to believe that Brahma Loka is a planet situated at this distance? It does not stand up to scientific scrutiny at all.

 

It should be obvious these worlds are nothing like planets or anything we can conceive of. Puranic descriptions are metaphors.

 

For example, what is the cause of eclipse given in Puranas? The swallowing of the sun by Rahu? Do you want to argue that is right because it is metnioned in our scripture? And that the scientific explanation of eclipses is wrong?

Please read our puranas with a scientific bent of mind.

 

3."Brightness" is an earthly quality or rather something that pertains to the physical universe. We simply dont know or even conceive God and his abode. You should also read advaita philosophy to get more idea about abstract concept of Godhead.

 

 

4.A question for you. If Shiva has the power to send other souls to Vaikunta thru his mercy, why does he himself stay in an inferior Shiva Loka. Why does not Shiva move to Vaikunta then and enjoy the higher bliss - certainly he must have the power right?

 

 

HARE KRISHNA GUYS

 

[Guest guest]

1 complete existance means also relationship. And relationship is possible only in presence of variety. If impersonality is the only absolute, the material world is more absolute than it. Absolute means "no-limits".. if in brahman i am limited in my tendence to relationate and love, the brahman is not, if not together with paramatma and bhagavan, the absolute reality

 

2 kailas and vaikunta are consciousness, transcendence... and consciousness and transcendence are reality, and not the illusion that we live in the earth. So reality means dynamism, relationships, variety... a real world.

So vaikunta and kailas are everything, places and consciousness while the matter is only illusioned consciusness.. maya

 

Puranic descriptions are metaphors.

---so being puranas from the same source of the vedas or upanishads (where advaita comes from).. the writer vyasa.. also the conclusion of your friend's philosophy are metaphor.. false

 

Please read our puranas with a scientific bent of mind.

--scientific means practice... so you, me and your friend have to practice puranas, bhagavata purana, krsna consciousness before giving conclusive judgements

 

3 if there's brightness in material world, there's also transcendental brightness in the spiritual one. Maya does not really creates anything new, she simply takes "models" from spiritual world and adds birth, disease, getting older, death

 

4 shiva is absolutely transcendental, he's in vaikunta even if, for his service, he has to be the chief of shivaloka

[Guest guest]

This hindu says Krishna is under Maya but he doesn't even consider the material scientists to be under Maya.

 

The speed of light is determined when it travels through a complete vacuum. The scientists assume that the light is always going through a complete vacuum but they do not know this. When light travels through gases it slows down. Also look up a phenomenon called "redshift".

[Guest guest]

 

Pick up a book entitled, "Vedic Cosmography and Astronomy" by Richard L. Thompson.

[Guest guest]

I prostrate myself before Govinda, the true guru, ultimate bliss and unattainable resort of all scriptures

_______

 

"complete existance means also relationship"

 

please tell how this is so

 

" So reality means dynamism, relationships, variety... a real world"

 

SO let me get this straight. You are saying reality means real. Potato means potato, this adds nothing.

 

"so being puranas from the same source of the vedas or upanishads (where advaita comes from).. the writer vyasa.. also the conclusion of your friend's philosophy are metaphor.. false"

 

Vyasa authored the puranas but not the Vedas or Upanishads, he merely organised them. On another note, the same writer can use many literary devices, sometimes metaphors and stories sometimes hard facts and analysis.

 

"scientific means practice... so you, me and your friend have to practice puranas, bhagavata purana, krsna consciousness before giving conclusive judgements"

 

I agree 100%

 

 

 

"if there's brightness in material world, there's also transcendental brightness in the spiritual one. Maya does not really creates anything new, she simply takes "models" from spiritual world and adds birth, disease, getting older, death

"

 

So where does Maya get the models for the disease, ageing and death?

 

 

[Guest guest]

"complete existance means also relationship"

please tell how this is so

••imagine our life without any relationship, love, friendship.. father, mother, brothers...... is this life?

 

" So reality means dynamism, relationships, variety... a real world"

SO let me get this straight. You are saying reality means real

••do you know directly some reality without dynamism, relationship and so on?

Philosophy has to be based on some observation of reality, otherwise there's no point of communication

 

Vyasa authored the puranas but not the Vedas or Upanishads, he merely organised them

••i do not think so.. but there's no problem. If someone is not a pure, infallible soul connected to the absolute, when he "reorganizes" he corrupts wath he's reorganizing. So if you do not trust in vyasa there's no escape also for vedas

 

On another note, the same writer can use many literary devices, sometimes metaphors and stories sometimes hard facts and analysis.

••that's possible... Vedas are not a fideistic religion. Vedas are a school, practice. I do not find in any place of vedic scriptures written that god's lilas are metaphoric, but there's no problem, we have not to believe or not believe. We have to find a pure spiritual master, increase with his help devotion and discimination.. then we'll see.

Until then, nothing says to me that personalistic views of God, of variety and plurality in the absolute are surely allegoric..... because it is logic..

 

So where does Maya get the models for the disease, ageing and death?

••the models are BLISS (ananda) and ETERNITY (sat). If you take out these "models".. you get disease, age and death as a negative result.

Another answer is that diseases are also in the spiritual realm, but they are simply free plays of god and his associates to increase the loving exchanges..