Guest guest Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 Advaitha is the theme mentioned in our vedas.Our vedas say that all religions are just different paths to reach the same reality,which isnt different from us. If our friend mayawatha buster wants to contest this view he is welcome to do so.I propose the following debate rules. 1)Vedas,puranas and epics will be the basis of the debate. 2)I will quote from other religions too and from other disciplines like philosophy,science,sarvaka etc. To start this debate I will give this quote from mahabharatha.Iw as written by veda vyasa rishi who is called as "vyasaya,vyasa rupaya vishnave.." in vishnu sahasranamam.Vishnu is hailed as having vyasa roopa.So such a great rishi has called shiva as Parabhramman in mahabharatha. http://sanskrit.bhaarat.com/Dale/Sanskrit.html#stotras http://sanskrit.safire.com/pdf/SHIVA_TRANS.PDF Now I hope my friend mayawatha buster will refute this with solid proof. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 anyone who starts to debate with you, is debating with a loser there's an old discussion that you have abandoned when in difficulties and you were simply debating with logic try to not escape this time and be serious.. it is your spiritual life, not only a debate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 Loser and winner are determined after the debate ends.Not before it. My spiritual life is in no jeopardy whether I am right or wrong.Whichever path I tread, i reach only krishna.So whats the problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 I think you have done enough of home work on advaita. But here is a cent of advice. In tamil there is a saying " Naai Vaalai Nimirhta mudiyathu". Which means you cannot straighten a dog's tail. There is no point in argueing with MB and others. If you are convinced that Adviata rules... ( as scientifically explained even by modern Physics and great minds like Einstein... and Popular books like dancing WuLi masters or Tao of Physics.. and others) then read more about advaita and become a real Gnani. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 "Loser and winner are determined after the debate ends.Not before it." i am not speaking of the debate that's now starting "Whichever path I tread, i reach only krishna" no .. if you want krsna you have to be devoted to krsna as supreme personality of godhead and highest reality of existence. you eternal subordinate individual soul He eternal Supreme Lord krsna in gita says.. "surrender to Me... i will protect you.." not "surrender to whatewer you like.." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 Thanks for your advice.Equating philosophical debates with straightening a dogs tail seems to be a nice culture.Keep it up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 a philosophical debate in this forum invariably leads to Ramana maharishi being called Maha fool, and swami Vivekanada called rascal etc. I find it offensive. So its better not to have the debate at all. If the debate is well cultured and mannered and ideas are attacked, thats fine with me. And there is nothing wrong in comparing any unchangeable things to a dog's bent tail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 There will be elements who will call great saints by various names.Engaging in such activities show that they have nothing else to talk and have lost the debate.And since such people engage in such activities nobody will stop debating.This is a deabte forum,so debate is welcome. Comparing unchangable thing to a dogs tail can be good if its done in a freidns circle.It is frowned in a philosophical debate forum.That too when we discuss great concepts given by great acharyas like shankara,mathwa and ramanuja we should realize that we are not even equal to their sandals.what do we know to criticize such great saints?But since these great men themselves have established a philosohic tradition where even useless people like us can criticize their philosphies in a civilized way,let us do so in a civilized way without using such words. Words like dogs tail cannot be used against any people.That too people in this forum are highly devotional.Insulting a devotee is the greatest offense to god.Please let us avoid such actions in future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 Its common usage in tamil and is not uncivilised. Thats all I say. Calling fools, rascals etc is uncivilised. I am just comparing the attitudes and not the people themselves. I know well about the brainwashed elements. And I stand by my words, as I have not insulted any person, any acharya or any guru but only their attitudes and the way of dealing with people. I think let us stop with this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 Acharyas attitude pathi solla kuda andha palamoliya use pannakudathu.Athu thappu.Nama ellam avanga munnadi kaal doosi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 Mb u dint answer this.Advaitha rules Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2004 Report Share Posted November 22, 2004 Does adaitha teach that one should surrender to Krishna and become his devotee? If not then advaitha definately does not rule. Jai Sri Krishna -Amit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2004 Report Share Posted November 22, 2004 Rather than jumping to a conclusion like this, based on just one philosphy, why dont you read some books on advaita philosophy or refer to the websites in this thread, and find out for yourself? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2004 Report Share Posted November 22, 2004 "Does adaitha teach that one should surrender to Krishna and become his devotee? If not then advaitha definately does not rule" right... advaita is a great blasphemy against sri krsna bhagavan.. advaita rules in blasphemy "Rather than jumping to a conclusion like this, based on just one philosphy, why dont you read some books on advaita philosophy or refer to the websites in this thread, and find out for yourself?" done... advaita teachs that there's not to surrender to krsna but that we are krsna (a-dvaita= no discrimination between me and god) .. so it is blasphemy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2004 Report Share Posted November 22, 2004 Surely surrender to Krishna is the same logic as submit to Allah. As we are all part of Krishna that would mean Krishna would be surrendering to himself. That would be the ceasation of Krishnas will as Krishan would be in complete opposition to himself and could not freely flow. We are all part of Krishna- his children, his creation. Our will is his will and we realise it by choosing consciously and of our own free will to lead good lives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2004 Report Share Posted November 22, 2004 Why is blasphemy bad by the way?Calling a blasphemist as a blasphemist will evoke the response of "Yes I am.So what?" I dont mind advaithis being called blasphemists.My response to that is "Yes.It is.So what?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2004 Report Share Posted November 22, 2004 Blasphemy is when you think you are God, and that is exactly what advaitha sounds like to me. To all those who can read this, please understand that you are not God /images/graemlins/smile.gif To think so would be grossly egotistical and a total lie. Understand that you are only a small flame compared to the infinite blazing sun that Krishna is, surrender to him! Jai Sri Krishna! -Amit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 22, 2004 Report Share Posted November 22, 2004 you still havent explained to me why blasphemy is bad.Why is blasphemy bad?Explain. To think that you are not god is one belief.To think you are god is another belief.How do we say one belief is superior over another?Why cannot two beliefs coexist at the same time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 23, 2004 Report Share Posted November 23, 2004 Krishnas an infintie blazing sun becasue hes compsoed of lots of small flames. So indeed each small flame is lit by Krishna and through this Krishna shines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 24, 2004 Report Share Posted November 24, 2004 Whats so bad about advaitha? Are they going to hell or something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 24, 2004 Report Share Posted November 24, 2004 Nobody have seen hell.Nobody who have seen it have come and explained it to us.Nobody can give any guarantee that this sort of behavior or life or religion will take you to hell or heaven. We all need something to regulate our behavior.For that we have religion.Its foolish to argue and debate about religions and to say this is superior and this is inferior. I consider even atheism as a path to reach self-actualization.Simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 24, 2004 Report Share Posted November 24, 2004 "As we are all part of Krishna that would mean Krishna would be surrendering to himself" identity between us and god is accepted by everyone but simmultaneously we have also to accept the fact that we are different, because if we were exactly krsna, we were now conscious to be krsna so if now we are conditioned by maya, who's an energy inferior to god, we have obviously a certain difference with the supreme... so the duty to surrender to the supreme is real and absolute.... if we think that we are supreme we are simply cheating ourselves Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 24, 2004 Report Share Posted November 24, 2004 "you still havent explained to me why blasphemy is bad.Why is blasphemy bad?" because through this your consciousness is reduced and you will be forced to go back in life's species where there's no interest in spirituality what is the use to have a human body if we despise god? "To think that you are not god is one belief.To think you are god is another belief.How do we say one belief is superior over another?" demonstrating that one is reality and one is fantasy "Why cannot two beliefs coexist at the same time? " because this is your exact behaviour in your life... if you have to go to mumbay, you do not consider the same thing taking the plane for mumbay or the one for oslo so let us be realistic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 24, 2004 Report Share Posted November 24, 2004 Do you mean that atheists have no consciousness?Many atheists live a life far better than theists.And to say an atheist will have no spirituality is a joke.Yes,he wont have spirituality,thats why he's an atheist.But have you explained why having no spirituality is bad? And what did u convey by your mumbai oslo example?Both are nice cities.Let people chose where they want to go.simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 25, 2004 Report Share Posted November 25, 2004 Do you mean that atheists have no consciousness? -if i do not study medicine i am not a doctor, if i do not study and practice spiritual consciousness, i do not develope spiritual consciousness Many atheists live a life far better than theists -if you mean material life, money and so on it is obviously possible... if you mean moral and inner life it is illogic.. or the theists are not real theists but cheaters But have you explained why having no spirituality is bad? --because we are spirit.. every intelligent person cares for himself And what did u convey by your mumbai oslo example?Both are nice cities --[] my wife and your girlfriend are both nice girls... now i am attempting to kiss your girlfriend ... my wife , your girl and maybe yourself (i hope so) are not happy.. who's mad? me that i do not discriminate or you that you are discriminating? so false and true do not coexist if you want to discuss seriously... (why you come repeatedly here to appear as a fool?) 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.