|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 8, 2019 13:05:46 GMT -5
I would suggest that everything that exists, exists as a movement and interaction of the three primary forces/energies, combinations of triads of the three gunas spoken of in the Bhagavad Gita, Rajas (active-positive-yang), Tamas (passive-negative-yin) and Sattva (balancing-neutralizing-catalyzing). If one energy ceased to fulfill Its principle, everything would instantly stop. The first thing that must be abandoned if a story is to seem credible, is simplicity. Hencely, complexity is the first clue that one has been lied to. My simple mind says " Krishna is a LIAR yet he's GOD.."
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Feb 8, 2019 13:09:52 GMT -5
This is what happens when stories told to the mind are used to point to or approximate truth. Logical holes or paradoxes form that must be filled with embellishments or cake layers. Simply because what's being said is not the truth of the matter. Establishing a deity called Krishna is the first and fatal stroke of the pen. It's a bit like telling a lie. Once Mom and Dad start digging for clarity, more lies are sure to follow, and the stories can become quite contradictory and full of holes. Heh, yes, this makes sense. However, what I'm wondering is what the reason for framing it one way or another might be. If we view the scriptures as teaching tools, how does it help the seeker to see the story of an enlightened person being called back to activity because of a) the laws of the universe or b) because God wants him to or to c) prevent the destruction of the universe vs. say, d) motiveless action? Two other comparisons on this point. First, Sri Ramana Maharshi. He would ultimately hold: I am not here; I am not doing. Though at other times he would say: if I am doing (which only appears to be the case to the ignorant), it's with the same unconsciousness that a baby has when being fed while asleep... And in this scenario, why would he 'appear' to be doing? Residual karma. Second, the Buddha. Now of course in Buddhism a whole different way of thinking about it is there -- the idea of the bodhisattva. Mara (the devil) supposedly appears to Buddha after his enlightenment and tempts him with simple and immediate dissolution into bliss, but the Buddha sees suffering and wants to alleviate it. Of course from the strict non-dual perspective this makes zero sense... and yet it is held out as a Buddhist ideal.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 8, 2019 14:21:58 GMT -5
The first thing that must be abandoned if a story is to seem credible, is simplicity. Hencely, complexity is the first clue that one has been lied to. My simple mind says " Krishna is a LIAR yet he's GOD.." My simpler mind says Krishna is a story about God.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 8, 2019 14:48:27 GMT -5
This is what happens when stories told to the mind are used to point to or approximate truth. Logical holes or paradoxes form that must be filled with embellishments or cake layers. Simply because what's being said is not the truth of the matter. Establishing a deity called Krishna is the first and fatal stroke of the pen. It's a bit like telling a lie. Once Mom and Dad start digging for clarity, more lies are sure to follow, and the stories can become quite contradictory and full of holes. Heh, yes, this makes sense. However, what I'm wondering is what the reason for framing it one way or another might be.
If we view the scriptures as teaching tools, how does it help the seeker to see the story of an enlightened person being called back to activity because of a) the laws of the universe or b) because God wants him to or to c) prevent the destruction of the universe vs. say, d) motiveless action?Two other comparisons on this point. First, Sri Ramana Maharshi. He would ultimately hold: I am not here; I am not doing. Though at other times he would say: if I am doing (which only appears to be the case to the ignorant), it's with the same unconsciousness that a baby has when being fed while asleep... And in this scenario, why would he 'appear' to be doing? Residual karma. Second, the Buddha. Now of course in Buddhism a whole different way of thinking about it is there -- the idea of the bodhisattva. Mara (the devil) supposedly appears to Buddha after his enlightenment and tempts him with simple and immediate dissolution into bliss, but the Buddha sees suffering and wants to alleviate it. Of course from the strict non-dual perspective this makes zero sense... and yet it is held out as a Buddhist ideal. Again, from my perspective I don't think it serves a purpose other than to hold the story together. It would be inconsistent to say the 'enlightened person' has no interest in the world, and yet we see him expressing interest. The problem starts when an 'enlightened person' becomes part of the story. Then we need an addendum to explain his obvious interest. In Christianity, things are happening just as God would have them, but then we need to explain the world's atrocities. So we have an addendum about God testing man or teaching lessons or waiting for man to accept Him.
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Feb 8, 2019 15:15:26 GMT -5
Again, from my perspective I don't think it serves a purpose other than to hold the story together. It would be inconsistent to say the 'enlightened person' has no interest in the world, and yet we see him expressing interest. The problem starts when an 'enlightened person' becomes part of the story. Then we need an addendum to explain his obvious interest. In Christianity, things are happening just as God would have them, but then we need to explain the world's atrocities. So we have an addendum about God testing man or teaching lessons or waiting for man to accept Him. That's all true in a sense, but I don't think it means that going deeper into the beauty of the ideas is fruitless. The metaphors and ideas used have different spirits, aromas, and atmospheres. The choice of one over the other indicates something. And while that may not matter in terms of the absolute truth, I find it interesting and fun to explore these various ramifications. There is further meaning to be found, which then evokes further questions... It's all the 'philosophy of maya' and it's all play.
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 8, 2019 18:10:46 GMT -5
How the battle of Kuruksetra was won
Bhisma who was hiding under the camouflage of leaves and dirt was about to shoot his arrow and kill Arjuna who was fixing his chariot when suddenly Krishna came running towards Bhisma holding a broken wheel and was going to slam it on the shocked Bhisma.
Krishna promised he would not interfere in the battle of Kuruksetra. But this was not the case. Because Krishna vowed to protect Arjuna. Bhisma without ado lowered his bow & declared the battle for that day over.
At Duryodhana`s camp. Bhisma was melancholic at what happened. He knew he was fighting a losing battle because Krishna was on the side of Arjuna. Bhisma is also a pure devotee of Krishna & Balarama, the elder brother of Krishna on the side of Duryodhana.
The following day when the battle resumed, Bhisma had himself become the target practice of Arjuna`s shooting prowess. With Bhisma receiving numerous arrows in his body. Bhisma dying, the battle was won.
There's a lesson here. That one should surrender to Krishna and become victorious in any battle. That is God's promise to his captives. 🤣
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 9, 2019 4:39:32 GMT -5
How the battle of Kuruksetra was won Bhisma who was hiding under the camouflage of leaves and dirt was about to shoot his arrow and kill Arjuna who was fixing his chariot when suddenly Krishna came running towards Bhisma holding a broken wheel and was going to slam it on the shocked Bhisma. Krishna promised he would not interfere in the battle of Kuruksetra. But this was not the case. Because Krishna vowed to protect Arjuna. Bhisma without ado lowered his bow & declared the battle for that day over. At Duryodhana`s camp. Bhisma was melancholic at what happened. He knew he was fighting a losing battle because Krishna was on the side of Arjuna. Bhisma is also a pure devotee of Krishna & Balarama, the elder brother of Krishna on the side of Duryodhana. The following day when the battle resumed, Bhisma had himself become the target practice of Arjuna`s shooting prowess. With Bhisma receiving numerous arrows in his body. Bhisma dying, the battle was won. There's a lesson here. That one should surrender to Krishna and become victorious in any battle. That is God's promise to his captives. 🤣 The Gods of Mythology are all dead now, and yet they live on in the minds of men who bestow upon their sons, the wounds and the scars that were so lovingly bestowed upon them. " Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2019 9:11:13 GMT -5
The Gods of Mythology are all dead now, and yet they live on in the minds of men who bestow upon their sons, the wounds and the scars that were so lovingly bestowed upon them. " Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana A corollary to Santayana's statement might be "those who invent a past are condemned to misery."
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 9, 2019 10:00:29 GMT -5
" Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana A corollary to Santayana's statement might be "those who invent a past are condemned to misery." Maybe you are referring to Krishna who says in Bhagavad Gita Chapter 7 Text 26, "Oh Arjuna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, I know everything that has happened in the past, all that is happening in the present, and all things that are yet to come. I also know all living entities; but Me no one knows."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2019 11:11:17 GMT -5
A corollary to Santayana's statement might be "those who invent a past are condemned to misery." Maybe you are referring to Krishna who says in Bhagavad Gita Chapter 7 Text 26, "Oh Arjuna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, I know everything that has happened in the past, all that is happening in the present, and all things that are yet to come. I also know all living entities; but Me no one knows." When someone implored Ramana to show him God. Ramana said "i cannot show you God. He is the 'seer'. He is the subject."
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 9, 2019 12:04:30 GMT -5
Maybe you are referring to Krishna who says in Bhagavad Gita Chapter 7 Text 26, "Oh Arjuna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, I know everything that has happened in the past, all that is happening in the present, and all things that are yet to come. I also know all living entities; but Me no one knows." When someone implored Ramana to show him God. Ramana said "i cannot show you God. He is the 'seer'. He is the subject." Krishna says in the Bhagavad Gita Chapter 18 Text 61 " The Supreme Lord is situated in everyone's heart, O Arjuna, and is directing the wanderings of all living entities, who are seated as on a machine, made of the material energy. "
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 9, 2019 17:56:59 GMT -5
Maybe you are referring to Krishna who says in Bhagavad Gita Chapter 7 Text 26, "Oh Arjuna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, I know everything that has happened in the past, all that is happening in the present, and all things that are yet to come. I also know all living entities; but Me no one knows." Commentary.God is omniscient. He declares here that he is trikāl-darśhī—he has knowledge of the past, present, and future. We forget what we ourselves were thinking a few hours ago. But God remembers the thoughts, words, and deeds of each of the infinite souls in the universe, at every moment of their life, in each of their infinite lifetimes. These constitute the sañchit karmas (stockpile of karmas of endless lifetimes) for every soul. God has to maintain account of this so that he may dispense justice in the form of the law of karma. As a result, he says he knows the past, present, and future. The Muṇḍakopaniṣhad states: yaḥ sarvajñaḥ sarvavidyasya jñānamayaṁ tapaḥ (1.1.9)[v25] “God is all-knowing and omniscient. His austerity consists of knowledge.” In this verse, Shree Krishna says that although he knows everything, nobody knows him. God is infinite in splendor, glory, energies, qualities, and extent. Our intellect is finite, and hence there is no way it can comprehend the Almighty God. All the Vedic scriptures state: naiṣhā tarkeṇa matirāpaneyā (Kaṭhopaniṣhad 1.2.9)[v26] “God is beyond the scope of our intellectual logic.” yato vācho nivartante aprāpya manasā saha (Taittirīya Upaniṣhad 2.9.1)[v27] “Our mind and words cannot reach God.” rām atarkya buddhi mana bānī, mata hamāra asa sunahi sayānī (Ramayan)[v28] “God cannot be analyzed by arguments or reached by words, mind, and intellect.” There is only one personality who knows God and that is God himself. If he decides to bestow his grace upon some soul, he bestows his intellect upon that fortunate soul. Equipped with God’s power, that fortunate soul can then know God. Consequently, the concept of grace is of paramount importance in getting to know God. This point is discussed in detail later in verses 10.11 and 18.58. www.holy-bhagavad-gita.org/chapter/7/verse/26God can't be known By His Grace God is known. I know God because I love Him whom can be known only with love and devotion. He's love and the way to know it is to love those who hate you. Love one another as you love thyself is the 11th commandment says Christ Jesus and Me. Happy Valentine's Day to all!
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 10, 2019 17:22:40 GMT -5
God can't be known By His Grace God is known. I know God because I love Him whom can be known only with love and devotion. He's love and the way to know it is to love those who hate you. Love one another as you love thyself is the 11th commandment says Christ Jesus and Me. Happy Valentine's Day to all! And one of the things that you've done with this post is tick the Shrink to Fit box. Tick the Shrink Tock the Psyche into a room to know if the dress fits her ego
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 10, 2019 17:51:07 GMT -5
God can't be known By His Grace God is known. I know God because I love Him whom can be known only with love and devotion. He's love and the way to know it is to love those who hate you. Love one another as you love thyself is the 11th commandment says Christ Jesus and Me. Happy Valentine's Day to all! One of the other things that you did with this post was to say that to you God is all about your love for yourself. You then use the idea of enemies to prove to yourself that you can love yourself. No where in that commentary does it say that God is personal love. I love Dr Melvin. Personally I do. I love this guy whose name, Dr Melvin, God and my parents christened. The title Dr from God. The name Melvin from my parents.
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 10, 2019 18:12:47 GMT -5
I love Dr Melvin. Personally I do. I love this guy whose name, Dr Melvin, God and my parents christened. The title Dr from God. The name Melvin from my parents. The I that loves, how is it different from Dr Melvin? I is the self. Dr Melvin is ego. So, when I love you I am referring to Me loving the other self. When I say I love Dr Melvin, the self loves the ego Dr Melvin. I, self, is soul spirit residing within this body identified as Dr Melvin.
|
|