Truth?????It doesnt exist anymore

[Guest guest]

PV,

 

Dude all of your questions will be answered. First tell me isn't your point about truth refuted ?

 

I used that verse from narayana sukta just to tell that brahman is para tattvam and sankrit word tattvam has a good english approximate in "truth".

 

So the expression I am in pursuit of truth is pretty meaningful because truth or tattva exists and is being actively searched out.

 

The point about Supremacy of Narayana v/s other deities can be discussed seperately on a different thread which bears appropriate title. It doesn't suits this thread.

 

Once we conclude this issue about truth and its existence we can proceed ahead to Narayana v/s other deities issue.

 

Lets be organized and approach things properly - one issue at a time.

[Guest guest]

Thatva means a philosophy.Its useless to attribute truth and falsehood to a philosophy.A philosophy need not be empirically verified.No philosopher scientifically and empirically proved his theory.

 

Narayana has said that he is everything.Pure,impure,good,bad,sathya and asthya he is everything.So to say that "he is just truth and not a lie" is a lie.(I love word juggling)

 

I will start another thread on advaitha and dwaitha or whwter you belong to.See u there.

[Guest guest]

And from where did you get that tattva means philosophy ?

Any proof except for mental speculation of your mind.

 

Darsana means philosophy. Used in phrases like Vedanta Darsana etc...

 

Do you even have rudimentary knowledge of Sanskrit ? Go check any sanskrit dictionary and it will tell you that tattva means reality, or truth and not philosophy.

 

check out here. in sanskrit field type tattva and see what you get.

 

http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/indologie/tamil/mwd_search.html

 

Now this is from one of your own Advaitic gurus

 

http://www.hinduism.co.za/philosop.htm

 

"The Shad-Darsanas or the six orthodox systems grew directly out of the Vedas. Darsana means literally sight or vision. ***Darsana means a system of philosophy.*** The Darsana literature is philosophical. Each Darsana is a way of looking into the Truth; is a standpoint in respect of the Truth."

 

Learn some basics. First tell me do you accept defeat here. Don't worry PV as many threads you open which are against genuine Vaishnava teachings, they will be refuted.

 

So have we concluded this thread or not ?

Answer this specifically.

 

[Guest guest]

Lets conclude here first. You only said on a different thread:

 

"Loser and winner are determined after the debate ends.Not before it."

 

Conclude this debate atleast before starting another. I mean this is my first debate with you, and i hope you will set up a better example than what you have done till now.

[Guest guest]

Whatever you say your name is really terrifying.

 

Please choose a benevolent name.

[Guest guest]

"Whatever you say your name is really terrifying"

 

mayavadis have to be terrified because they are blaspheming krsna

[Guest guest]

As some people have requested i change my name to:

 

Vedanta_IS_Vaishnaivism.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

after a long thought i have decided to continue my name as Mayavada Buster. Sorry guest i am sensitive to your feelings but i feel that this name suits my mission on this forum.

 

It's my primary task to bust the foundations of mayavada and the doctrine itself where ever its preached.

 

Vedanta_IS_Vaishnaivism will be my signature in all posts i make from now onwards.

 

This decision is final.

 

[krishnadasa]

Dear friend,

 

i reely don understand why u people debate on things which appear to be of no use.

 

Krsna has got two aspects of realising; as one knows it could be realised as sat chit aananda or could be sat chit aananda VIGRAHA. well it depends upon one's past life deeeds and attraction one will be carefully and suitably attratced by the grace of Lord krsna towards one of these aspects of the Same supreme.

 

So i would say if in this thread one is trying to take over other; both od them will be defeated. It would be a Lose-Lose situation.

 

Hari bol

 

viks

[Guest guest]

what to conclude in this debate?I say that narayana is truth,lie,pure,impure,good bad and everything.To say that he is just truth and nothing else is not correct.He is both truth and untruth.He himself has said this in geetha as "I live in everything".

 

So what now?what do you seek?Truth or a lie?Both is him.So seek anything.YOu will get him.

 

And ur name is too long.I will prefer MB.

[Guest guest]

You started this thread with this is mind:

 

http://www.hindu-religion.net/showflat/cat/hinduism/72413/0/collapsed/5/o/6

"I am not here in pursuit of truth.That is a goal which has been ridiculed by vedas and krishna.There is nothing called as truth in the world.We are here to compare our opinions and find out who has the better opinion,thats all.We ncan start our debate on truth itself and then move on to advaitha and dwaidha if you want.Maybe you can start by defining truth.You need not confine yourselves to vedas alone.any book,any dictionary is welcome.start by defining truth.Lets find out if any truth exists in world.

 

A debate is always a rhetoric.It isnt a pursuit of a non existent goal like truth.we advaithis dont believe in truth,since in the illusory world truth is also an illusion.we can start debate on this if you want."

 

And then in same post, later you later:

"I will be out of town from thursday 1 pm chicago time to monday 3 pm.So I will start a new thread on monday and we will start the great debate there.Or you can start a thread and i will join there on monday.Lets see if you bust mayawatha or get busted by it.If I start a thread it will be titled as "truth doesnt exist"-says krishna.Or it will have the word truth in it.

 

so lets again debate on monday.you are welcome to post your replies in this thread till then.In between if i get time i will reply to them but i will start debating from monday onwards."

 

And then you opened up this current thread that Truth doesn't exists.

 

When i busted your claim, you come and display your knowledge of Sanskrit saying tattva means philosophy and not truth. And then that was busted.

 

Now you say:

"So what now?what do you seek ? Truth or a lie?Both is him.So seek anything. You will get him."

 

So your logic is seek anything and we will get him. Good enough let me seek : Greed, anger, desire and still i should get him, because you say impure, bad etc..... are also Narayana.

 

But Krishna says something else:

 

Gita 16.21

tri-vidham narakasyedam dvaram nasanam atmanah

kamah krodhas tatha lobhas tasmad etat trayam tyajet

 

There are three gates leading to this hell--lust, anger and greed. Every sane man should give these up, for they lead to the degradation of the soul.

 

And by your logic one should get Krishna even if one seeks a demigod or anyone.

 

But Krishna says:

 

Gita 7.23

antavat tu phalam tesam tad bhavaty alpa-medhasam

devan deva-yajo yanti mad-bhakta yanti mam api

 

" Men of small intelligence worship the demigods, and their fruits are limited and temporary. Those who worship the demigods go to the planets of the demigods, but My devotees ultimately reach My supreme planet."

 

You get what you seek.

 

[Guest guest]

So yeah i think you haven't still understood what does truth stands for in the word Pursuit of Truth.

 

Truth means tattva. And in this usage it doesn't means truth like speaking truth or its opposite lie. Please understand this simple point. Re read my posts again.

 

Truth = Tattva = Reality. PLEASE UNDERSTAND THIS.

 

****Reality means an existing entity.****

 

So brahman which is Para Tattva meaning Supreme Reality is an existing entity and it needs to be seeked out and attained.

 

That is why brahma sutra begins with

BS 1.1.1

"Now therefore enquire into brahman."

 

So your expressions like what will you seek etc..... have no meaning and just shows that you are unaware of the goal of vedanta.

 

Hence anyone who reads these last two posts from me will know that your original claim has been busted/refuted.

 

Decide this debate and then we can move on to the next thread. Its only a mere matter of time before there you and your likes get refuted/busted.

[Guest guest]

Everyone please judge -

 

PV wrote:

" I am not here in pursuit of truth. That is a goal which has been ridiculed by vedas and krishna. There is nothing called as truth in the world. "

 

I have refuted this claim and shown that PV is unaware of what vedic scriptures mention. Check above two posts.

 

Truth = Tattva = Reality => Existing Entity.

 

=> means implies.

 

So Brahman is existing entity to be seeked out by seekers of moksha.

 

PV ACCEPT YOUR DEFEAT.

[Guest guest]

i will be in chicago during thanksgiving. wanna meet up ????

 

There you can see THE BUSTER, servant of servants of Lord Vishnu.

[Guest guest]

Truth = Tattva = Reality => Existing Entity

 

Tattva means sathyam,not truth.And english word truth equals sanskrit word sathyam only and not rutham.And sathyam has been defined as words that benefit all.So its you who has to accept defeat.

 

Im not in chicago,im in nashville.

[Guest guest]

your post is self contradictory. Besides that it shows you are not aware of basics of sanskrit and sastra.

 

Before i go ahead and bust it, i give you a chance to repost a revised one. Go over your post carefully and knock out all errors.

[Guest guest]

********It's my primary task to bust the foundations of mayavada and the doctrine itself where ever its preached.*******

 

 

You have such a strong sense of agency that you are bound to flounder.

 

Lord does. Small self imagines that it does.

 

[Guest guest]

********Krsna has got two aspects of realising; as one knows it could be realised as sat chit aananda or could be sat chit aananda VIGRAHA. ****************

 

 

************well it depends upon one's past life deeeds and attraction one will be carefully and suitably attratced by the grace of Lord krsna towards one of these aspects of the Same supreme.****************

 

 

 

 

**********So i would say if in this thread one is trying to take over other; both od them will be defeated. It would be a Lose-Lose situation.******************

 

 

Excellent. May such views increase manyfold. May God bless you.

 

[krishnadasa]

Hmm,

 

it seems like as the time passes u re more worried about whether u will be defeated : ur situation is like that of a wolf which thinks after getting this pray it will be satisfied an it thinks it will be able to conqur the hunger only to find in the end the hunger has actaully conqured it ; and to put in simple terms this is the truth and it wins in the end.

 

Mayavadis exist right from the beginning of the age and they will never siege to exist. But its the truth which wins in the end not the Mayavadis ; in the end one finds the cob getting stucked into its own web, which it made for others.

 

 

A healthy debate should be in such way that no one should be so eager to defeat someone, One should wait with patience to win one's stand. U look very freightened about ur defeat ha aha!

 

Sri shankarachrya propounded his philosophy of Adwaita for may be a century (long time huu) only to get defeated by the Sri Madhwa in the end by his dwaita.

 

So bear this fatc in mind , the materialistic peopl like u and P_V have no rights to discuss and touch the vedas and intepret in ur own ways!(infact u will commit sins)

 

First try to follow this as written ther.

 

U re not having the basic quality of bieng calm and cool at any sitauation. U always look very passionate in ur replies.

 

Dont show up ur sanskrit knowledge and prove some vague things - u know even Ravna and hiranyakashipuz knew very well vedas and snkrit but of no use. When his Hiranykaship's father dies he gave a big commentry on vedaas to his mother, but never cared to follow any one of them.

 

 

U reely don need to go into the vedas to see the victory , Just see around urself and u will get the answer.

 

Hope u would understand and stop quarreling like Crows.

 

 

Hari bol

 

Viks

[Guest guest]

Self contradictory?Give another chance?Are you lord ram who gave ravana one more chance?

[Guest guest]

In the starting i mean first post you say:

 

"The problem lies with our perception.we confuse vedic term sathyam with english term truth.Both are totally different.The equilant word for truth in sanskrit is rutham.Rutham means describing things as you see it honsetly.vedas say rutham isnt important.Only sathyam is important."

 

So here, you say truth = rutham.

 

And then in the same post, you restate the above,

 

"So sathyam in sanskrit is not equal to truth in english. The equilant word is rutham."

 

And here again Truth = rutham.

 

And then in your recent post:

 

"Tattva means sathyam,not truth.And english word truth equals sanskrit word sathyam only and not rutham. And sathyam has been defined as words that benefit all.So its you who has to accept defeat."

 

So here you forget something you repeated twice in thw first post and say:

 

Truth = Satyam and not rutham.

 

Please decide what is correct.

 

And another error is:

 

You say -

 

Tattva = Satyam.

Tattva not = Truth.

 

But,

Satyam = Truth.

 

How are above three equations possible ?

 

Even if you resolve this contradiction by accepting you erred while making one these posts, you are still not correct in saying:

 

Tattva not = Truth.

 

Reasons being -

 

1) I have shown you from Monier Williams English to Sanskrit dictionary that Truth, Reality are equivalents for sanskrit word Tattva. Please check the dictionary again.

 

2) Have you ever heard of an advaitic work called Tattva bodha ?

 

Tattva Bodha means 'Knowledge of the Truth' or "Awakening to Reality."

 

Its a book written by Sankara according to the tradition. Tattva is translated as Truth, reality.

 

Pick up any english dictionary and you will see Truth and Reality are synynoms.

 

Between Satyam has many meanings depending on context in which it is used. So in one context it means what you have stated in your first post but in text like

 

"Satyam Jnanam Anantam brahma" [Tait. Up. 2.1.]

 

It doesn't means that. It stands for Brahman which is Unchanging reality as contrasted with many other entities which under go changes.

 

Recall brihadaranyaka says Brahman is satysa satya.

Meaning truth of truths.

 

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

Vedanta_IS_Vaishnaivism.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Truth in english equals rutham in sanskrit.But since many of us dont know that rutham is different from sathyam and hence we use sathyam in place of rutham which results in our translators translating sathyam as truth when they intended to write rutham as truth.

 

Reality is different from truth.Reality always exists,truth doesnt exist.Truth is the accurate description reality.But hence none can accurately describe reality,truth doesnt exist.

 

Thatva means philosophy.And every philosphy mentioned in vedas is sathyam.When you translate it you translate it as truth.Thats the mistake you make.

 

When I said truth is sathyam I meant the mistakes made by our translators. we assume sathyam to be truth and hence translate sathyam as truth.But sathyam isnt truth,its rutham which is truth.

 

_________

 

Vedanta is vaishnavam but god is advaitham

[Guest guest]

Reality always exists,truth doesnt exist

 

world jugglery...

[Guest guest]

word jugglery?

 

so be it.whats wrong in word jugglery?

[Guest guest]

for me nothing, i can enjoy in seeing the foolishness of a poor attempt of cheating others with strange theories

 

but you are throwing away your intelligence.. you have only one, take care