Lord is One

[Ganeshprasad]

Jai Ganesh

Re

(Jai Shree Krishna all the verses you have brought have a personalist meaning:)

 

My Point of discussion was not based on personal or impersonal aspect of the lord

 

I am not averse to aspirants goal of life be it personal or impersonal.

 

(.. so there's no difficulty, for param atma, to manifest himself as narasimhadeva and get out from a coloumn... this does not mean that narasimha is coming from impersonal brahman)

 

 

I was talking about Prahlads faith to demonstrate the subsequent statement.

 

why is so necessary to reject or read something different, when lord Krishna says I am Shankar.

 

Re

(...it is only necessary to be precise and say that if krsna is the origin and source of shankara, not necessarily the opposite is also right)

 

Both the form, part of the same coin exists eternally where is the question of origin?

Devotee of Lord Shiva will also see in the same light as you have said.

 

 

Re

(..in indian tradition there's not a word to be translated with faith in christian sense, or faith opposed to logic and rationality.... in sanskrit we have shraddha.. shraddha is "faith+logic, sentiment+rationality"... to develope only faith is fanaticism, to develope only rationality is not sufficient because we need to love to go on)

 

Have a look at what I also mentioned Vishwas(Spelling)

 

 

Re

(..a vaishnava prays siva as a great vaishnava.. and the lord is more happy to hear that the vaishnavas are praised than that he is praised. As the opposite he forgive when he is blasphemed but not when a devotee is blasphemed. )

 

Tulsidas saw them as same, I do not have quote on hand, but he said something like neither lord is pleased if either one is offended.

I do not see, in some quarters, no worship of lord Shiva even though they pay a lip service saying he is the highest Vaishnava, In fact I have seen the opposite, on his maha sivratri, instead of glorifying him, they put on plays showing him to be running away from the demon, a fine way of glorifying him.

 

jay sri krsna bhagavan

 

[Guest guest]

Re

(Jai Shree Krishna all the verses you have brought have a personalist meaning:)

My Point of discussion was not based on personal or impersonal aspect of the lord

--so please remember me what was the point and i will answer

 

why is so necessary to reject or read something different, when lord Krishna says I am Shankar.

--because it is important to state that "krsna is everything" is very different from "everything is krsna"

 

Both the form, part of the same coin exists eternally where is the question of origin?

--origin as emanating source, i am eternal as god, but he is at the origin, he's the source of my eternity.. not the opposite

 

Devotee of Lord Shiva will also see in the same light as you have said.

--yes, this is really something that i do not feel useful to discuss, i do not agree with sivaists that siva is supreme, but i think that if one wants siva he goes to siva and it is an authentic eternal spiritual goal, so i am satisfied.. and it is different from brahman realization, from brahman we come back in the material world to suffer again

 

I do not see, in some quarters, no worship of lord Shiva even though they pay a lip service saying he is the highest Vaishnava, In fact I have seen the opposite, on his maha sivratri, instead of glorifying him, they put on plays showing him to be running away from the demon, a fine way of glorifying him.

--i am not responsable of the deviations of someone else.. even if i am sorry

[Guest guest]

"Hmmm...Prana(Lord Vayu) here refers to life force that drives everything in prakriti including great Deities like Lord Rudra."

 

From Sruti:

 

Rig Veda Mandal VII Sukta 59 and Mantra 12

 

Maha Mrituyonjaya Mantra

 

We Worship Tryambaka (Rudra), Who spreads Fragrance and Increases nourishment , May He release me, like the cucumber from its stem, from Mortal life, But not From Immortality.

 

 

Man Shiva grants immortality. Shiva granted it to Markendeya.

 

 

Now even Sruti evidences are negated? You people are biased without any hope.

 

 

[Guest guest]

 

"Rudra is the soul of the Gods.

Last time you made this claim, I showed there is no Sruti verse to support this."

 

Why ignore this?

 

Yajur Veda:

iv. 5. 9.

a ----------.

p Homage to you, sparkling hearts of the gods

 

 

"Rudra is the “Bhargo” in the Gayatri. He is Agni. He is the soul of Savitar who manifests Agni. Agni when thus brought down is Visnu.

 

Each letter in Gayatri Mantra refers to a deity at one level and to Bhagavan at another level. "

 

Read this from Upanishad as below and not from perverted interpretations.

 

Please read Maitryana-Brahmaya

 

7. (The Savitri begins:) Tat Savitur varenyam, i.e. 'this of Savitri, to be chosen.' Here the Aditya (sun) is Savitri, and the same is to be chosen by the love® of Self, thus say the Brahma-teachers.

(Then follows the next foot in the Savitri): Bhargo devasya dhimahi, i.e. 'the splendour of the god we meditate on.' Here the god is Savitri, and therefore he who is called his splendour, him I meditate on, thus say the Brahma-teachers.

(Then follows the last foot): Dhiyo yo nah prakodayat, i.e. 'who should stir up our thoughts.' Here the dhiyah are thoughts, and he should stir these up for us, thus say the Brahrna-teachers.

(He now explains the word bhargas). Now he who is called bhargas is he who is placed in yonder Aditya (sun), or he who is the pupil in the eye. And he is so called, because his going (gati) is by rays (bhabhih); or because he parches (bhargayati) and makes the world to shrivel up. Rudra is called Bhargas, thus say the Brahma-teachers. Or bha means that he lights up these worlds; ra, that he delights these beings, ga that these creatures go to him and come from him; therefore being a bha-ra-ga, he is called Bhargas.

 

 

 

"As for Lord Visnu, it is clearly stated in Vedas that HE always existed and even before Lord Rudra took birth from Lord Brahma's Head."

 

 

Yes, Rudra is Shaymbhu. He appears from head of Maha-Visnu also. That does not mean he takes birth.

 

 

[Raguraman]

Hare Krishna,

 

 

"Hmmm...Prana(Lord Vayu) here refers to life force that drives everything in prakriti including great Deities like Lord Rudra."

 

From Sruti:

 

Rig Veda Mandal VII Sukta 59 and Mantra 12

 

Maha Mrituyonjaya Mantra

 

We Worship Tryambaka (Rudra), Who spreads Fragrance and Increases nourishment , May He release me, like the cucumber from its stem, from Mortal life, But not From Immortality.

 

Man Shiva grants immortality. Shiva granted it to Markendeya.

 

Now even Sruti evidences are negated? You people are biased without any hope.

 

 

 

Trayambaka can refer to Lord Narasimha as well. Lord Narasimha has three eyes and is mentioned in Narasimha Tapaniya Upansihad. In the same Upansihad Lord Narasimha is also mentioned to be the Lord of Sankara(Rudra).

 

Now if one takes it that this word Trayambakam refers to Lord Narasimha or Lord Rudra, either way Lord Rudra cannot offer Mukti to any soul independent of Lord Visnu.

 

Why ?

 

One has to again consider Rig Veda 7:40:5 where it is clearly said that Lord Rudra gained all HIS powers by worshipping Lord Visnu. One has to also consider Devi Sukta where DEVI claims she is the strength in Lord Rudra's weapons. So it is clear that Lord Rudra offers mukti through Lord Visnu's grace and not othewise. The vedic mantra is actually to Lord Visnu in Narasimha form.

 

There is also a puranic story where Lord Shiva asks Lord Visnu for a boon that anybody who dies in Kasi may attain mukti. In the event of death, Lord Shiva HIMSELF comes to the human and preaches Brahmataraka mantra to the departing.

[Guest guest]

The mahamruntyunjaya Mantra is a part of Rudram, which is right in the center of Yajur Veda.

 

Dont run you imagination wild.

 

Infact you are talking like the nameologist of Raj TV, Vijay TV Sun TV etc.

 

Shall we say Krishna also refers to Lord Siva based on your Sardarji logic?

 

[Raguraman]

Hare Krishna,

 

 

The mahamruntyunjaya Mantra is a part of Rudram, which is right in the center of Yajur Veda.

 

Dont run you imagination wild.

 

Infact you are talking like the nameologist of Raj TV, Vijay TV Sun TV etc.

 

 

 

Perhaps, people like you, when their false beliefs are adequately exposed, they start to accuse other people of imagination.

 

This is what happens when a person not even trying to find out what mantra is part of what Sloka try to make a completely baseless point.

 

First, the sloka is added along with Rudram and is not a part of Rudram.

 

Second, this verse is found in Rig Veda Samhita and not in Yajur Veda Samhita.

 

Third, there is not a single evidence that this points to Lors Shiva only. I have proovided reference in Narasimha Tapaniya Upanishad where Lord Narasimha is said to be three eyed and master, Lord of Rudra.

 

Four, I have provided reference to Rig Veda Samhita 7:40:5 which shows that Lord Rudra gained all HIS powers from Lord Visnu. Why reject this verse. Considering this, Lord Rudra grants HIS mercy and mukti only through Lord Visnu's permission and not otherwise.

 

It seems that your stand is totally demolished. so all this useless accusations of me being imaginative when you do not know which mantra is where.

 

 

Shall we say Krishna also refers to Lord Siva based on your Sardarji logic?

 

 

 

This indeed will be a sardarji logic, for only people like you can make.

[Guest guest]

Convincing points Raghuramji.

[Raguraman]

Hare Krishna,

 

 

Why ignore this?

 

Yajur Veda:

iv. 5. 9.

a ----------.

p Homage to you, sparkling hearts of the gods

 

 

Namo vah kirikebhyo devanam hrudayebhyo

 

Salutations to those(the forms of Rudra) who shower prosperity on the devotees and to those who possess the hearts of the celestials(or to those who are very dear to the celestials).

 

I think the above translation is closer to the truth.

 

As for the Maitrayana Brahmana Upanishad, some do not accept it as authentic, some take it as authentic. So I cannot comment on that which I do not trust as authemtic.

[Ganeshprasad]

Jai Ganesh

 

 

Re

(--because it is important to state that "krsna is everything" is very different from "everything is krsna")

 

If x =y it is not unreasonable to think y=x, but I agree we are talking of these personalities who eternally exist therefore Siva is always Uma pati Ram is always Sita pati, there can not be any confusion here.

 

Re

( --origin as emanating source, i am eternal as god, but he is at the origin, he's the source of my eternity.. not the opposite)

 

We are not discussing jivas position in relation to god. In any case have a look at the word eternal, means without beginning or end. What do you mean by origin?

 

 

Re

(Devotee of Lord Shiva will also see in the same light as you have said.

--yes, this is really something that i do not feel useful to discuss, i do not agree with sivaists that siva is supreme, but i think that if one wants siva he goes to siva and it is an authentic eternal spiritual goal, so i am satisfied)

 

I think it is very important to discuss, but since you agree and I too that a devotee of lord Shiva will go to lord Shiva and it is an authentic eternal spiritual goal I am happy in that knowledge also.

 

Re

(.. and it is different from brahman realization, from brahman we come back in the material world to suffer again)

 

Of cource Brahman realization is different and I am not advocating it either, but it is there in shastra. Why would they come back from it is a big question. How is it possible to achieve this state? Having given up all the desires and exhausting all the karma. Why would they come back to suffer?

 

One who knows that the position reached by means of renunciation can also be attained by works in devotional service and who therefore sees that the path of works and the path of renunciation are one, sees things as they are.(5.05)

 

 

 

 

But those who worship the imperishable, the undefinable, the unmanifest, the omnipresent, the unthinkable, the unchanging, the immovable, and the eternal Brahman; (12.03)

Restraining all the senses, even minded under all circumstances, engaged in the welfare of all creatures, they also attain Me. (12.04)

Self-realization is more difficult for those who fix their mind on the formless Brahman, because the comprehension of the unmanifest Brahman by the average embodied human being is very difficult. (12.05)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One who finds happiness with the Self, who rejoices the Self within, and who is illuminated by the Self-knowledge; such a yogi becomes one with Brahman and attains supreme nirvana. (5.24)

The person whose mind is always free from attachment, who has subdued the mind and senses, and who is free from desires, attains the supreme perfection of freedom from (the bondage of) Karma through renunciation. (18.49)

Learn from Me briefly, O Arjuna, how one who has attained such perfection realizes Brahman, the supreme state of knowledge. (18.50)

Endowed with purified intellect, subduing the mind with resolve, turning away from sound and other objects of the senses, giving up likes and dislikes; and (18.51)

Living in solitude, eating lightly, controlling the thought, word, and deed; ever absorbed in yoga of meditation, and taking refuge in detachment; and (18.52)

Relinquishing egotism, violence, pride, lust, anger, and desire for possession; free from the notion of "my", and peaceful; one becomes fit for attaining oneness with Brahman. (18.53)

 

Re

(--i am not responsable of the deviations of someone else.. even if i am sorry)

Groups many groups, or no group, we are responsible for our on action and no one else, therefore no need to be sorry, I have no reason to blame you.

Jai Shree Krishna

 

 

[Guest guest]

(--because it is important to state that "krsna is everything" is very different from "everything is krsna")

If x =y it is not unreasonable to think y=x

––another way to xplain is to say that krsna is the source of the existence of everything and not the opposite

 

In any case have a look at the word eternal, means without beginning or end. What do you mean by origin?

––source in the sense of emanation, not temporal

 

Why would they come back from it is a big question

--because the living being is active, he wants to have relationships

 

How is it possible to achieve this state? Having given up all the desires and exhausting all the karma

-- almost impossible for us, it is almost impossible to control our mind, it is much more safe to let god control our mind and exaust our karma asking his protection... like the verse "sarva dharma..." of the gita.. "surrender .. i will protect you from karma reactions". In this way we let him do the job. But if we think that god's supremacy is illusory, that we have nothing to ask because we are god, if our effort is to to increase our forgetfullness of our original position of god's servants and lovers.... this is actually a suicide

 

One who knows that the position reached by means of renunciation can also be attained by works in devotional service and who therefore sees that the path of works and the path of renunciation are one, sees things as they are.(5.05)

--yes this is the answer, service is renunciation, to renounce to our illusion that it is our effort to bring us to liberation. Now krsna gives dignity to the devotional service, then at the end of the gita krsna states the superiority of surrender (=service =love =shelter) with the "sarva dharma ..." shloka.

And arjuna is one who have surrendered, who have accepted to serve krsna's instructions to follow his duty to fight, not a renunciated.

 

But those who worship the imperishable, the undefinable, the unmanifest, the omnipresent, the unthinkable, the unchanging, the immovable, and the eternal Brahman; (12.03)

Restraining all the senses, even minded under all circumstances, engaged in the welfare of all creatures, they also attain Me. (12.04)

Self-realization is more difficult for those who fix their mind on the formless Brahman, because the comprehension of the unmanifest Brahman by the average embodied human being is very difficult. (12.05)

--yes that's the key, krsna act as a master, he do not gives dogmas.... "there's a teorical possibility to do it... but do not do it....... surrender to me, i will be in charge of everything"

[Ganeshprasad]

Jai Ganesh

 

Re

(--because the living being is active, he wants to have relationships

 

having seen the futility of material existent why would any one want to come back?

 

 

Re

( -- almost impossible for us, it is almost impossible to control our mind)

 

The Supreme Lord said: Undoubtedly, O Arjuna, the mind is restless and difficult to restrain, but it is subdued by Abhyaasa (or constant vigorous spiritual practice with perseverance), and Vairaagya (or detachment), O Arjuna. (6.35)

 

Re

(--yes that's the key, krsna act as a master, he do not gives dogmas.... "there's a teorical possibility to do it... but do not do it....... )

 

 

But those who worship the imperishable, the undefinable, the unmanifest, the omnipresent, the unthinkable, the unchanging, the immovable, and the eternal Brahman; (12.03)

Restraining all the senses, even minded under all circumstances, engaged in the welfare of all creatures, they also attain Me. (12.04)

 

So Lord Krishna is clearly saying it is possible, my is not to argue if this is correct path to choose, nor am I here to judge people who choose this path.

Having attained this realization even in theory, why would they fall from it, one has to reach this position getting rid of desires and karma?

 

Re

( it is much more safe to let god control our mind and exaust our karma asking his protection... like the verse "sarva dharma..." of the gita.. "surrender .. i will protect you from karma reactions". In this way we let him do the job. But if we think that god's supremacy is illusory, that we have nothing to ask because we are god, if our effort is to to increase our forgetfullness of our original position of god's servants and lovers.... this is actually a suicide)

 

Suicide is heavy word to use, but yes it is more easy and desirable also for me, to take his/her shelter

 

Any path we choose is not a bed of roses I would like to think, damn this ego so hard to give up.

 

Jai Shree Krishna.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

(--because the living being is active, he wants to have relationships

having seen the futility of material existent why would any one want to come back?

--because we are persons and we originally have a life full of relationships (=rasas) in the spiritual world. When we come in this world the situation is reproduced perverted by maya. So, if we ipotetically choose a path of realization where we repress and apparently lose our personality, our capacity to act and to have relations with others, we get bored and we come back

 

( -- almost impossible for us, it is almost impossible to control our mind)

The Supreme Lord said: Undoubtedly, O Arjuna, the mind is restless and difficult to restrain, but it is subdued by Abhyaasa (or constant vigorous spiritual practice with perseverance), and Vairaagya (or detachment), O Arjuna. (6.35)

--and if you read bhagavad gita the conclusion is that vairagya is yukta vairagya.. or surrendering to krsna (sarva dharma....) offering him the fruit of our actions. So the way to control the mind is to let krsna do it for us.. surrendering to him.. of course spiritual practice falls in the surrendering

 

Restraining all the senses, even minded under all circumstances, engaged in the welfare of all creatures, they also attain Me. (12.04)

-- yes ME... krishna..

 

So Lord Krishna is clearly saying it is possible, my is not to argue if this is correct path to choose

--no problem if krsna says that it is possible.. it is possible... and it is correct.... but seeing bhagavad gita as a whole everything goes towards surrendering to krsna as a person.. so it is more easy and gives eternal and blissful results

 

Having attained this realization even in theory, why would they fall from it, one has to reach this position getting rid of desires and karma?

--because we cannot avoid to act

 

Suicide is heavy word to use,

--suicide in symbolical sense... the soul does not die, but a suicide in the sense that we, searching the oneness with the whole, we annihilate our personality

 

Any path we choose is not a bed of roses I would like to think, damn this ego so hard to give up.

--the lesson of the gita is clear.... we have not to make separated efforts to change ourselves, we have to surrender to krishna and he, who is rshikesh, the controller of our senses and mind, changes us and make us fit to rediscover our eternal loving relationship with him

 

arjuna does not changes anything of his behaviour, he do his regular job of warrior but the fact that he has surrendered turns his karma in yoga

 

jaya sri krsna... hari bol!!

[Ganeshprasad]

Jai Ganesh

 

Re

(--because we are persons and we originally have a life full of relationships (=rasas) in the spiritual world. When we come in this world the situation is reproduced perverted by maya. So, if we ipotetically choose a path of realization where we repress and apparently lose our personality, our capacity to act and to have relations with others, we get bored and we come back)

 

This still does not answer the question, First this soul is self realised, two has no karma, our search in life is always to be happy, having experinced dukh why would you choose to go back? i can only see the way forward and that would be to see the personality behind this brahman realization.

 

 

 

Re

(Restraining all the senses, even minded under all circumstances, engaged in the welfare of all creatures, they also attain Me. (12.04)

-- yes ME... krishna..)

 

Yes but this was said in relation to a person trying for brahman realization, see the sloka 12.03.

 

 

Re

(So Lord Krishna is clearly saying it is possible, my is not to argue if this is correct path to choose

--no problem if krsna says that it is possible.. it is possible... and it is correct....)

 

 

So why argue with someone who chose this path.

 

The Blessed Lord said: Son of Prtha, a transcendentalist engaged in auspicious activities does not meet with destruction either in this world or in the spiritual world; one who does good, My friend, is never overcome by evil.

 

 

Re

( but seeing bhagavad gita as a whole everything goes towards surrendering to krsna as a person.. so it is more easy and gives eternal and blissful results)

 

Yes I agree

 

 

Re

(--the lesson of the gita is clear.... we have not to make separated efforts to change ourselves, we have to surrender to krishna and he, who is rshikesh, the controller of our senses and mind, changes us and make us fit to rediscover our eternal loving relationship with him)

 

Yes we have to have faith and desire in this derection.

 

 

 

jaya sri krsna... hari bol!!

[Guest guest]

First this soul is self realised, two has no karma, our search in life is always to be happy, having experinced dukh why would you choose to go back?

--there's something who is not exact in your question... the happiness..

when you ipothetically became one with the whole you are lonely, one means lonely, there's no one to relationate, no relationship, no desire and no desire to be fulfilled. So there's no more karma, no more pain, but neither happiness. For one who has suffered a long time for a disease, to gain the health with a cure in the hospital and so on will give surely a great relief .. but this relief is momentary, not definitive, because being us active we are not satisfied simply by leaving the unhappiness, the pain, the sorrow.. we want to be happy, to enjoy, and happiness and enjoyements are given by relationships, variety, action, movement

 

so yes for "no more karma" or "no more unhappiness", but this does not coincide with happiness. It like to sleep, sleep takes away the pains, but in sleep there's no happiness... and at a certain point we awake and come back to live, to act.

 

in oneness there's not life, no action, no relationship, no happiness... so we come back

..

..

..

 

Yes but this was said in relation to a person trying for brahman realization, see the sloka 12.03.

 

ye tv aksaram anirdesyam

avyaktam paryupasate

sarvatra-gam acintyam ca

kuta-stham acalam dhruvam

 

sanniyamyendriya-gramam

sarvatra sama-buddhayah

te prapnuvanti mam eva

sarva-bhuta-hite ratah

 

But those who fully worship the unmanifested, that which lies beyond the perception of the senses, the all-pervading, inconceivable, fixed and immovable--the impersonal conception of the Absolute Truth--by controlling the various senses and being equally disposed to everyone, such persons, engaged in the welfare of all, at last achieve Me.

 

 

at last... it means that brahman is krsna, it is spiritual and real realization, but seeing bhagavad gita as the whole we understand that it is not practical, and that krsna explains it but he recommends to surrender personally..... and there's the fact that if we do not relationate, if we do not have a real life, variety, love (even if in the transcendental plane) our realization is not eternal

.

.

.

.

.

 

So why argue with someone who chose this path.

--because it is not definitive and , for this reason, ultimately a big mistake.. all this effort to go in a non eternal place when simply surrendering like arjuna did the path is complete and eternal. (of course all remains on discussion's plane.. no violence, no discrimination, no sectarism)

 

The Blessed Lord said: Son of Prtha, a transcendentalist engaged in auspicious activities does not meet with destruction either in this world or in the spiritual world; one who does good, My friend, is never overcome by evil.

--this is personal realization, surrendering to the person, there's a relationship, variety, plurality of subjects... "friendship".... and friendship is active, various, blissful.. the opposite of oneness in the advaita sense

.

.

.

 

jaya sri krsna, jaya sri siva... this exchange is soo nice... many thanks

[Guest guest]

"in oneness there's not life, no action, no relationship, no happiness... so we come back"

 

This is true of muktas who have no knowledge of Krishna and fail to engage in bhakti, see Srimad Bhagavatam 10.2.32. This does not apply to Gita 12.3-4.

 

"at last... it means that brahman is krsna,"

 

This is your misinterpretation. That brahman is Krishna but Krishna isn't saying that in the verse.

 

Where did you get these ideas from?

 

"i can only see the way forward and that would be to see the personality behind this brahman realization"

 

Thats right.

[Guest guest]

"in oneness there's not life, no action, no relationship, no happiness... so we come back"

This is true of muktas who have no knowledge of Krishna and fail to engage in bhakti

--yes.. agree.. where's the problem?

 

"at last... it means that brahman is krsna,"

This is your misinterpretation. That brahman is Krishna but Krishna isn't saying that in the verse.

Where did you get these ideas from?

--(read the purport and consider the gita as a whole)

 

(haribol)

[Guest guest]

"--yes.. agree.. where's the problem?"

 

You said we come back, that has no applicatoin to gita 12.3-4.

 

"at last... it means that brahman is krsna,"

--(read the purport and consider the gita as a whole)"

 

Your interpretation isn't inline with the purport nor gita as a whole.

[Ganeshprasad]

Jai Ganesh

 

Re

(--there's something who is not exact in your question... the happiness..)

 

Every endeavour of any soul is in persuit of happiness this is what drive us all.

 

One who neither rejoices on obtaining what is pleasant nor grieves on obtaining the unpleasant, who is undeluded, who has a steady mind, and who is a knower of Brahman; such a person abides in Brahman. (5.20)

 

 

A person whose mind is unattached to sensual pleasures, who discovers the joy of the Self, and whose mind is in union with Brahman through meditation, enjoys eternal bliss. (5.21)

 

 

Supreme bliss comes to a Self-realized yogi whose mind is tranquil, whose desires are under control, and who is free from sin (or faults). (6.27)

 

 

Such a sinless yogi, who constantly engages the mind with the Self, easily enjoys the infinite bliss of contact with Brahman. (6.28)

 

 

Re

(when you ipothetically became one with the whole you are lonely, one means lonely, there's no one to relationate, no relationship, no desire and no desire to be fulfilled. So there's no more karma, no more pain, but neither happiness.)

 

opposite of happiness is dukh, braman realization can not be this

 

 

Re

(For one who has suffered a long time for a disease, to gain the health with a cure in the hospital and so on will give surely a great relief .. but this relief is momentary, not definitive, because being us active we are not satisfied simply by leaving the unhappiness,)

 

 

Leaving the unhappiness in it self sugest one is looking for hapiness, one will not stop until that stage is reached.

 

Re

( we want to be happy, to enjoy, and happiness and enjoyements are given by relationships, variety, action, movement)

 

Yes, everyone is searching for this

 

 

Re

(in oneness there's not life, no action, no relationship, no happiness... so we come back)

 

all i know is if you stop commiting crime no one send you back to jail in this world, i would like to think the lord is always just therefor the way is forward and not back to jail.

 

 

 

jaya sri krsna, jaya sri siva... this exchange is soo nice... many thanks

 

i like it also

 

Jai Shree Krishna

[Guest guest]

Dear atanu ...i want you to be there...In "swami vivekananda" therd many people are behaving in a very bad manner...see, its bad to see people calling swami as cheaters...Please ,do join in for the swami vivekanandaji...

I badly want your support to answer those non-sense questions and false concepts from those people.

They don't know anything...with their half knowledge of dvaita they are spoiling the whole image of that thread.

 

 

[Guest guest]

(--there's something who is not exact in your question... the happiness..)

Every endeavour of any soul is in persuit of happiness this is what drive us all.

--ok. ok. maybe i was explaining myself not so well... happiness is there, necessary and constitutional for the living being.. my point was that in advaita realization there's not happines.. end of suffering but not happiness

 

(when you ipothetically became one with the whole you are lonely, one means lonely, there's no one to relationate, no relationship, no desire and no desire to be fulfilled. So there's no more karma, no more pain, but neither happiness.)

opposite of happiness is dukh, braman realization can not be this

--yes.. the brahman is no suffering.. we agree on this, but no happiness, because happiness is generated by activity, variety, plurality, relationship, desire and fulfilling of desire

 

so three states... suffering.. end of suffering (like when we sleep for example).. and happiness. In impersonal realization we have end of suffering, not bliss. The demosntration is that in buddhism we have the word nir-vana, no suffering, and that you have defined that state as "no dukh"

 

if we go to an hospital, they solve all our health problems they make us stop to suffer.. not happy

 

.

 

Leaving the unhappiness in it self sugest one is looking for hapiness, one will not stop until that stage is reached.

--yes, it is possible to exchange happines for the end of suffering.. and there's no stop in searching.. nirguna brahman realization could turn in some sort of eternal hell if it would be possible to remain there eternally. We are active, we want bliss, happiness, joy.. we are not happy simply with a painless sleeping. So we come back in the material world to search other ways

 

i would like to think the lord is always just therefor the way is forward and not back to jail

--you woud like... but imagine after a great sickness to remain in the hospitals bed even when you will be perfectly healhty. How many hours you will consider it happiness? how many days you resist to ged out even to the winter's cold, even at risk to get pneumonia? we cannot stop to be active

 

 

jaya ... haribol

[Guest guest]

I badly want your support to answer those non-sense questions and false concepts from those people.

...if you need support maybe they are not saying non senses.. a non-sense is very easy to demonstrate by people with-sense

 

They don't know anything...

..so why are you not able to answer something better that their nothing?

 

.with their half knowledge of dvaita they are spoiling the whole image of that thread.

..if people with half knowledge can ruin the image of someone and his disciples maybe he and his message have some serious problems... so actually there's no image to defend

 

if everithing is one, the same, without distinctions, why you discriminate bad image and good image? take the bad one and be happy!!

[Guest guest]

"all i know is if you stop commiting crime no one send you back to jail in this world, i would like to think the lord is always just therefor the way is forward and not back to jail"

 

 

This is correct. Examples from the sastras are the kumaras, janak and sukdev

 

 

"--you woud like... but imagine after a great sickness to remain in the hospitals bed even when you will be perfectly healhty. How many hours you will consider it happiness? how many days you resist to ged out even to the winter's cold, even at risk to get pneumonia? we cannot stop to be active"

 

 

This is partly correct, it applies to voidists and keval advaitins who dont recognize bhakti as a transcendental activity. They fall back. It has no application to any of the yogis krishna talks about in gita. He doesn't speak of any mayavadis or voidists.

 

As for mayavadis, gita 5.6 bhaktivedanta purport:

 

"...The Mayavadi sannyasis sometimes fall down from the path of self-realization and again enter into material activities of a philanthropic and altruistic nature, which are nothing but material engagements. Therefore, the conclusion is that those who are engaged in Krsna consciousness are better situated than the sannyasis engaged in simple Brahman speculation, although they too come to Krsna consciousness, after many births"

[Guest guest]

"--you woud like... but imagine after a great sickness to remain in the hospitals bed even when you will be perfectly healhty. How many hours you will consider it happiness? how many days you resist to ged out even to the winter's cold, even at risk to get pneumonia? we cannot stop to be active"

This is partly correct, it applies to voidists and keval advaitins who dont recognize bhakti as a transcendental activity. They fall back. It has no application to any of the yogis krishna talks about in gita. He doesn't speak of any mayavadis or voidists.

 

--and i completely agree, the discussion between me and ganeshprasad was if nirguna brahman can be considered an eternal goal like personal god realization

 

obviously i am not attacking the gita or part of it.. i am simply more pointing on common sense and logic

[Ganeshprasad]

Jai Ganesh

 

(--ok. ok. maybe i was explaining myself not so well... happiness is there, necessary and constitutional for the living being.. my point was that in advaita realization there's not happines.. end of suffering but not happiness)

 

And my point was because of our search for happiness if there is no bliss in advaita then the soul will progress forward and not back to temporary place of misery.

 

 

Re

(--yes.. the brahman is no suffering.. we agree on this, but no happiness, because happiness is generated by activity, variety, plurality, relationship, desire and fulfilling of desire)

 

A person whose mind is unattached to sensual pleasures, who discovers the joy of the Self, and whose mind is in union with Brahman through meditation, enjoys eternal bliss. (5.21)

 

 

 

(so three states... suffering.. end of suffering (like when we sleep for example).. and happiness. In impersonal realization we have end of suffering, not bliss. The demosntration is that in buddhism we have the word nir-vana, no suffering, and that you have defined that state as "no dukh")

 

If you are not dukhi you are sukhi, Brahman is sat chit and anand why do you say there is no bliss here?

 

 

 

Re

if we go to an hospital, they solve all our health problems they make us stop to suffer.. not happy

 

similarly if you have rejected the temporary condition of material life and achieved good health (Brahman) you now have opportunity to be happy.

 

 

Re

(--yes, it is possible to exchange happines for the end of suffering.. and there's no stop in searching.. nirguna brahman realization could turn in some sort of eternal hell if it would be possible to remain there eternally.)

 

End of suffering and eternal hell is contradictory.

 

Re

(We are active, we want bliss, happiness, joy.. we are not happy simply with a painless sleeping. So we come back in the material world to search other ways)

 

I accept the active part and all of that

But no one will put the hands in fire knowing what it does.

Your logic of coming back does not hold. Having got rid of material desires to reach the Brahman realization in search for happiness and if that does not fulfill the souls quest, it is only natural to go forward and seek beyond.

 

 

Re

(--you woud like... but imagine after a great sickness to remain in the hospitals bed even when you will be perfectly healhty. How many hours you will consider it happiness? how many days you resist to ged out even to the winter's cold, even at risk to get pneumonia? we cannot stop to be active)

 

So you make all that effort to swim the sansar sagar and reach the shore, no more temporary misery of material life (healthy), would you than jump back in the ocean, having got bored on the shore or would you go explore the dry land?

 

 

jaya ... haribol

Jai Shree Krishna Jai Shiv Shanker