Vedanta and Philosophy - 2017-02-17 (page 2 of 3)

« first day (302 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (2262 days later) »

11:00 AM

@SwiftPushkar btw... wait I give you another Atharvaveda verse mentioning Itihasa and Purana:

@Tezz - ओके ,I am writing def.of puranas from vayu purana

He went away to the last region. Richas, Sāmans Yajus formulas and Devotion followed him. He who, etc., as above. He went away to the great region. Itihāsa and Purāna and Gāthās and Nārāsansis followed him.

sacred-texts.com/hin/av/av15006.htm

@SwiftPushkar it is the chapter where birth of Lord Shiva (ie. Mahadeva avatar) is described.. and context is all these scriptures are following him...

I'm typing that verse in Sanskrit:

hello

तमितिहासश्च पुराणं च गाथाश्च नारशंसिश्चानुव्य चलन् ।
इतिहासस्य च वै स पुराणस्य च गाथानां च नारशंसीनां च प्रियं धाम भवति य एवं वेद ।। (AtharvaVeda 15.6.12)

@SwiftPushkar above ^^^ is that verse....

@RakeshJoshi all fine... what about yours?..

wat up

11:10 AM

@Tezz ok😊👍

going on... the destroyer was active beofe soee time

यस्मात पूरा ह्यनितीदं पुराणं तेन तत स्मृतम।
निरुक्तमस्य यो वेद सर्वपापै: प्रमुच्यते॥1.123.183॥

Yasmaat Pura HyanitiDam Puranam Tena Tat Smrutam
NirukataMasya Yo Veda ServaPapai Pramuchyate

Everything started working from that one in the starting of the kalpa (Breathing ,food intake etc.) and that is called Purana.ie.Purana=Ishwara

@SwiftPushkar it is Vayu Purana?...

@Tezz - Yes Vayu purana 😀Indeed u r तेज़ (fast)👍👍👍

Surya, Soma , Agni the core of vedic

11:13 AM

SuryaSomãgniLochana

@SwiftPushkar which question answer you are writing?..

shweta rishabha vaahana

Hmm... nice😀😀

@Tezz - I am not writing any answer , it's just for my own study , the overall knowladge abt.some scripture like core message ,social impact ,defination etc.

Chandramã manoso jaayet chakshu Suryo prajãyete..

ohh

11:17 AM

@SwiftPushkar Oh ok... nice... 🙏🙏🙏

@Tezz I watched Doctor Strange. Hero comes to Katmandu to heals by our Yogic techinques.

@RakeshJoshi were you saying lyrics of Sivoham Song? :P

ya its good movie ...

@RakeshJoshi Yes. Very good movie.

@TheDestroyer Yes, I have also watched Doctor Strange.. they also showed Pashupatinath temple...

@TheDestroyer lyrics?..

@Tezz ok.

@Tezz Sivoham Song.

Om Shiva Hom Full Song | Naan Kadavul Movie Original Video Song

11:21 AM

@TheDestroyer which verse you are talking?..

@TheDestroyer - The smita's shivoham song is also good

@SwiftPushkar Oh I was Understanding Shivoham song by Adi Shankara...

That song says, "Soma Surya Agni Lochana, Swetha Vrishabha Vahana. Sula pani Bhujanga Bhooshana.."

Nirvana Shatkam - Featuring Smita

@Tezz - Yes nirvan shatakam 😊👍 of Shree Adi ShankaraCharya

smita yevuru ?

11:23 AM

@SwiftPushkar This is still good and pleasing.

Shivoham |► Lord Shiva Songs ◄| S.P.Balasubramanyam Live Singing || Video Song with Telugu Lyrics

Sp Bala Subramanyam's voice is sweet and melodious.

@RakeshJoshi Pop singer. Not anymore famous now.

@RakeshJoshi i don't know the surname , is she from Andhra Predesh @TheDestroyer ⬅

@TheDestroyer oh I didn't know that...

@Tezz which one?

ok

@TheDestroyer that contained the verse "Soma Suryagni Lochana"... I was writing that verse from Linga Purana ....

11:26 AM

@Tezz ohh. But continuation of verse is not Swetha Vrishabha vahana in Linga Purana.

@TheDestroyer but I've watched Naan Kadvul movie... I think it means "I am God".

@Tezz Yes. I'm God.

@TheDestroyer yes... that's why I didn't understand when you told lyrics...

@TheDestroyer - But they are not clearly pronouncing Shivoham शिवोहम , its more like Sivoham , that should be Shivoham , may be difference in uttering of word ,but शिव shiv इस correct pronunciation , emphasis on "H"

@SwiftPushkar Yes. South Indians pronounce श as toungue twisted स but there's another letter ष

We say Siva

This Guy got the same doubt

5

Q: Correct way to chant Lord Shiva's name

When people recite Lord Shiva's name, they often do it in couplets, such as 'Shiva Shiva', 'Shiva Shiva', etc. My question is: What is the correct pronunciation: "Shiva" - or - "Siva"? I know that sometimes you are to pronounce "sh" and sometimes you just say "si." So what is the correct wa...

shiva scripture sanskrit name

11:31 AM

@TheDestroyer ष is also pronounced as sha and kha... khatkon.. shadyantra... both have ष

@TheDestroyer andhra people pronounciation far better than tamil ... you are ahead in this area .

@TheDestroyer ok

@RakeshJoshi Due to heavy Sanskrit influence of Telugu.

pls check for duplicate New question , possibly already has an answer⬇duplicate

3

Q: Why was Widow re-marriage not tolerated in South India?

Widows had their head shaved and forced into seclusion in South. Why??

practice culture dharma

@Tezz sha is chanted as kha only during vedic chanting not in normal . that also this chanting is specific to a shakha

11:36 AM

@RakeshJoshi I think Kannadigas too have good pronounciation. They also perform Pujas in Pashupatinath Temple of Nepal.

ok

@SwiftPushkar Btw, i always listen Songs sung by Bala Subramanyam.

This song too

Sri Kaalabhairava Ashtakam || S.P.Balasubrahmanyam

@TheDestroyer Yes , he is very famous singer all over india and abroad, very deep and Devotional voice😊👈👍👍 Mile sur mera tumhara ⬅👌

@TheDestroyer - Yes , nice song⬆👍👍👍🍫🍬

Hey all , bye for now , will re- join u in some time⏳😉

4 hours later…

3:31 PM

any fan of sri aurobindo ?

@RakeshJoshi I have read a few paragraphs of Aurobindo book The secret of Vedas...

nice

understood any secret ?

Have you read it completely... ?..

no there are quite a some books by him.. big volumes

some are poetic

and his language is tough as well

1 hour later…

4:46 PM

@Seeker:

Sir, fresh universe expanded or continued universe? — Seeker 2 mins ago

Universe is formed by expansion... the Sanskrit word is "Brahmanda"...

Whose dhatu is same as "Brahman" from 'Brihate' which means to grow to expand... thus Universe is expanding... @Seeker

brahman expanded as universe. nice
now please do not tell this is false or mithya etc :) @Tezz

@RakeshJoshi Changing things can't be real. Real things are eternal. Only Atman and Brahman are real.

where is such rule that changing cant be real ?

@RakeshJoshi general perception. How can changing things be real?

@TheDestroyer haha..again same analogy... world also expands in your dream.. but this doesn't mean that dream is real...😀😀

4:53 PM

vedic seers were so ignorant that they composed thousands of hymms but forgot to mention that world is false or dream. nor they spoke anything about so called pratibhasika or vyavaharika .. salute to you people :)

Eternal things shouldn't change. If they change, how can you say they are eternal?

where is such definition that eternal things should not change ?

@RakeshJoshi Did Vedic seers explicitly say World is real?

Different philosophers understood Vedas differently.

i m not talking of PHILOSPHERS but composers

@RakeshJoshi Do you know their interpretation? We are only trying to understanding their hymns. So did Philosophers.

4:56 PM

@RakeshJoshi "This pot when kept in time, this is what people see it many (as it appears to be many)" AtharvaVeda

when vedas talk of world then they believe that it exists . if not why would they mention anything which is not real ? even if they mention then why wont they explain about world mithya concept ?

we find numerous statement that god is self , i m atma . prajna is atma. then where is such statements that world is not reall . this world is dream. brahman is in dream

@Tezz how does this verse prove world as unreal.

not changing and non ending are different things.

@RakeshJoshi for those who want to take world as appearance it proves... for those who do not want to take it doesn't prove...

@RakeshJoshi Who knows? Did you read in Sanskrit? Adishankara didn't say his opinions. He interpreted Vedas.

take it what ?@Tezz this verse is IRRELEVANT HERE

@RakeshJoshi Kala Suktha says "paschyate".. it appears..

@RakeshJoshi Different people interpret differently.

4:59 PM

@RakeshJoshi why not explicit refrences?.. It's secret is in BrihadAranyaka Upanishad "Gods do not want humans should attain liberation."

@TheDestroyer i am yet to see such verses from vedas which deny real existence of world. its only seen in the commentaries that too only sankara advaita. there are dozens of commentaries of upanishad no one has said world as false.

@Tezz what explicit reference? who should give and for what ?

@RakeshJoshi you are telling that you are not getting tons of hymns from Vedas which say world is unreal... and I'm saying that Vedas should be understand through Tatwa... and certain mystic things are hidden in Vedas..

so not explicit refrences...

ok and you are able to decode that mystery others are beating around the bush ..
o great seer of kathmandu . thou art great !!

@RakeshJoshi Hmm.. May be I'm also able to decode some mysteries...

@RakeshJoshi Is there a rule or statement that I can't decode... ?..

it proves that there is no direct reference of unreal world in the vedas. that is why peple have to resort to excuses like vyavaharika or pratibhasa.

but worry not i will post direct statements which will show that there is creation and it exists.

5:04 PM

@RakeshJoshi remember. Every Philospher interpreted them differently. Neither we are in state of transcendental consciousness to prove them. In Maya, such differences exist.

@RakeshJoshi well nobody denies the creation of world in phenomenal level... it's just appearance..

@RakeshJoshi Who knows? Those words may exist in lost Sakhas.

then why to discuss on the forums if we are not competent enough ? why to quote references ? @TheDestroyer

@RakeshJoshi Yes. But only at relative level. Not at absolute level.

there is only one level. it has been confused by sankara to prove his point.

5:06 PM

@RakeshJoshi Sages heard Vedas in deep tapasya. They understood them clearly. But normal people couldn't. It's fact.

please quote vedic verse which speak of absolute level and relative . or

@TheDestroyer they heard ? then why they are called seers ? :)

@RakeshJoshi Non duality in absolute level is clearly stated:

II-iv-14: Because when there is duality, as it were, then one smells
something, one sees something, one hears something, one speaks
something, one thinks something, one knows something. (But) when to
the knower of Brahman everything has become the self, then what
should one smell and through what, what should one see and through
what, what should one hear and through what, what should one speak
and through what, what should one think and through what, what
should one know and through what ? Through what should one know

@RakeshJoshi why are you bothered about words. Show explicit vedic verse which says world is real?

when vedas say there was a person called Rama .. whether we should take it as real or unreal ? where is the question arise of real or unreal ?

@RakeshJoshi By heard i meant seen/Dristi.

@RakeshJoshi Is dream real?

5:08 PM

it is technically neither seeing nor hearing . its sphurana inside them. at an elated state.

if not tell me why dream is not real?

let vedas say world is a dream. why to self assume ?

@RakeshJoshi See, i'm telling you this is how some people interpret Vedas. If you have strong references from Vedas for "World is real", show them. We will see it. Till then don't blame Shankara or anyone. Neither say we disrespect Vedas. It's interpretation. We feel this interpretation as true.

and one thing . please do not assume that seers were in a dream state while receiving vedas. they were absolutely aware and awake. then only they can make statements like Prajnanam brahma . etc . to speak such hgiest principles they should be in higest state as well.

when vedas say LORD CREATED THE UNIVERSE ... wat else you want to show world as real ?

Don't involve Seers. Neither both of us know, how they understood Vedas.

5:12 PM

then dont make self assuming statements that world is a dream without VEDIC REFERENCE

@RakeshJoshi I think you didn't understand Advaita properly.

Hey, like through prism a light seen composed of 7 different colors. Similarly, the same Brahm seen as many through Maya. We can say it is neither real nor unreal. Because whatever we are seeing is part of brahm but at the same time our perception is very limited. World is neither real nor unreal. Right sir ?

@RakeshJoshi We gave vedic verses. it's you interpreting them as real.

The 1 refutation contained in the preceding Sûtra was set forth on the condition of the practical distinction of enjoyers and objects of enjoyment being acknowledged. In reality, however, that distinction does not exist because there is understood to be non-difference (identity) of cause and effect. The effect is this manifold world consisting of ether and so on; the cause is the highest Brahman. Of the effect it is understood that in reality it is non-different from the cause, i.e. has no existence apart from the cause.--How so?--'On account of the scriptural word "origin" and others.' The…

where did you give ?

5:14 PM

@RakeshJoshi Adi Shankara gives numerous Shruti quotes to prove how world is just an appearance... see above...

@RakeshJoshi @Tezz gave Upanishad statements. See Kala Suktha of Atharva VEda.

please quote the verses i will refer and come back . please provide moola shlokas which says world is unreal.

the process of final release resulting from right knowledge may be established in connexion with the element of unity (in Brahman), while the two processes of common worldly activity and of activity according to the Veda--which depend on the karmakânda--may be established in connexion with the element of manifoldness. And with this view the parallel instances of clay &c. agree very well.

This theory, we reply, is untenable because in the instance (quoted in the Upanishad) the phrase 'as clay they are true' asserts the cause only to be true while the phrase 'having its origin in speech' dec…

@RakeshJoshi read here the full Bhasya...
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe34/sbe34153.htm

@RakeshJoshi In the last Shankara quotes:

original verses are not available ? i have to consult with some scholars here.

"Thus Scripture also says, 'Where one sees nothing else, hears nothing else, understands nothing else, that is the Infinite' (Kh. Up. VII, 24, 1); 'But when the Self only has become all this, how should he see another?' (Bri. Up. II, 4, 13.) In this manner the Vedânta-texts declare that for him who has reached the

p. 330

state of truth and reality the whole apparent world does not exist."

@RakeshJoshi the verse no . of scriptures are already given in the bracket...

5:17 PM

"But when the Self only has become all this"

what is "all this" ?

@RakeshJoshi all this means "all this world" universe...

then where is the contradiction ?

"when the Self (BRAHMAN) only has become all this (SHRISTI)"

@RakeshJoshi World is not real only in reality. But generally everyone feels world is real. I can't live without eating food even though i know world is not real. here, i just know concept. But my self is still in clutches of Maya.

@RakeshJoshi so world is appearance is not imaginary invention of Shankara... he proves it with quotations from Shruti scriptures...

the references only say that the self became the universe.

why to misquote ?

5:20 PM

@RakeshJoshi See complete Shankara works. Why only one verse?

He gives many statements in support of it.

so why are you forcing me to accept sankara. why not give original verses.

@Seeker hmm.. actually world is neither real nor unreal...

the quote said THE SELF HAS BECOME JAGAT . its crystal clear.

@RakeshJoshi Where did i try to force you?

cos i m asking vedic statements and you are providing sankaras commentary. @TheDestroyer

5:21 PM

@RakeshJoshi How can i say in one word. read his commentaries. You will understand why he said that.

@RakeshJoshi I'm not forcing you... actually I do not even want that you believe world is just apperance... I'm just countering your claim that Advaita is Shankaras imagination...

the statement of that upanishad just says X BECAME Y...

THE VERSE DOES NOT SAY X IS UNREAL OR Y IS UNREAL.
IT JUST SAYS X BECAME Y

@RakeshJoshi Sir believes the world is real, but our perception to the world is distorted hence unreal.

the verse you are quoting is actually favoring my statement only . that brahman has expanded as universe.

@RakeshJoshi Don't be stubborn. If i want to know why a philospher said world is real, i refer his commentaries and analyze all how he interpreted verses. Then i can come to a conclusion. Similarly, do the same with Shankara. See how he interpreted. If you see this as marketing Advaita, i can't do anything.

5:23 PM

That's what we mean. I think there is no conflict.

@TheDestroyer i have known the thory of sankara and i know what is he trying to show.
but i m saying that there are no direct statements in the vedas about mithya.

@RakeshJoshi See. From your statements i can say you didn't understand Advaita.

if by quoting commentaries we becomeright then 10 commentaries will say world is real vs 1 commentary of sankara then what will you do ?

@RakeshJoshi 'self has become Jagat'... but self is undifferentiable... can it really change into Jagat? ... no because it can't differentiate (see Mandukya Upanishad it is shudda non dual)... then why are we seeing duality?... it's because it is illusion... (it's not that self has really become Jagat)...

@RakeshJoshi It's not number that decides power.

Every being undestands differently.

5:25 PM

As Rainbow made is the perception of eyes when in real it is only diffraction of light through droplets. Here, Rainbow can't be said unreal as we perceived it via a legitimate phenomenon but at the same time, it can't be said real as it is just perception when in actual there is only light.

@TheDestroyer then how does commentarties to be taken as proof ? i can readily defeat advaita of sankara with 10 quotations ..

@Tezz there is no DIFFERENTIATION . only EXPANSION /.

@RakeshJoshi Give such refutations one by one.

please do not introduice self imagined worlds.

brahman means something which expands ..

for example a dot or bindu expands and becomes jagat .

this is the statement.

I'm pretty much sure you didn't understand Advaita properly.

@TheDestroyer then you would be pretty sure that all the later vedanta sect founders also didnot understand sankaras advaita properly . cos they have also made same claims that sankaras commentaries are not true

5:28 PM

@RakeshJoshi Just give your refutations.

Yes, there is only expansion according to Trika system. And Trika system is the ultimate philosophy, superset of Advait philosophy.

@RakeshJoshi here is how Shankara explains how is the seen creations like.. how they evolve and dissolve... in his Dakshinamurty stotram... (I'm not saying that you should believe in it.. I'm just showing how Advaita explains creation);...

when a seed sprouts and expands to a tree will you call a seed fake or the tree fake ? its foolish

The Entire World is Like a City Seen within a Mirror, the Seeing happening within One's Own Being,
1.2: It is a Witnessing happening within the Atman, (the Witnessing) of the Externally Projected World; Projected by the Power of Maya; As if a Dream in Sleep,
1.3: One Experiences this Directly (this Play of Maya) during Spiritual Awakening within the Non-Dual Expanse of One's Own Atman,

@Tezz i am born and raised in TN the headquarters of vedanta. i m debating on advaita from over a decade.

5:30 PM

@RakeshJoshi I said so because you said "why seers composed hymns by staying dream". This statement has two problems. Firstly, you didn't know (or us) how seers understood vedas. Second, "they are in dream only in reality nor we can describe their coorect state in Maya". My second point should clear you..

This World is Like a Sprout of a Seed Within which transforms what is Changeless state Before, appear Again ...
2.2: ... as Space and Time, and endless Varieties of Pictures over it; all due to the Creation of Maya,
2.3: This Unfolding of the World (from the Seed) which is Like a Play of a Magician, happens to one Who is Like a Mahayogi out of His Own Free Will (i.e. a Mahayogi can enter the state of Samadhi out of his own free will and witness the unfolding of the world when He comes out of Samadhi),

because you said that world is dream . but when seers say that world was created then whose dream was it ?

then you said seers are hearing sounds etc which is again incorrecxt @TheDestroyer

@RakeshJoshi This question shows you didn't understand Advaita.

this statements shows that you are not aware how vedas revelations took place.

@RakeshJoshi You must know whose dream it was, if you have read Shankara works or his interpretation.

5:33 PM

i know sankara says its brahmans/ jeevas dream . but i m not talking from sankaras point of view

@RakeshJoshi Brahman has dream and yet he doesn't have dream. This is true statement.

like how maya is Anirvachaneeya :)

when logics fail then last resort is to make it Anirvachaneeya

@RakeshJoshi That's why i'm saying you didn't understand Advaita. If you have understood it, you would understand my above statement.

@TheDestroyer haha... I'm debating with myself... isn't it?..😀😀

so what will happen if i understasnd your statement ? will it become right ?

5:37 PM

@RakeshJoshi How can Brahman has dream (in reality?)?

Brahman can't have any imperfections.

there is no such drream . there is no such word like mithya or jagat dream in vedas.

@Tezz In reality. haha.

@TheDestroyer @Tezz @RakeshJoshi - Bye ,GN ,😴🌙👍💐 TC

someone quoted some statements on creation in athread . i m not able to find it..

@SwiftPushkar GN

@SwiftPushkar haha.. your 1st message is GN... bye...

5:41 PM

@SwiftPushkar Gn.

‘That (Brahman) having created entered into that very thing. And having entered there, It became the formed and the formless, the defined and the undefined, the sustaining and the non-sustaining, the sentient and the insentient, the true and the untrue. Truth became all this that there is. They call that (Brahman) Truth.’ (Taittiriya Upanishad, 2.6.1.)

what more clear statement you want ?

@RakeshJoshi read the verse just before it...
"He (the self) wished "Let me be many."

yes so ? self becomes jagat here

how its false or unreal ?

So it clearly implies that creation talked there is appearance...otherwise how can it be many...

what apprearance ?

5:43 PM

It's just mere apperance like dream... not real... in reality self only exists...

पूर्ण कुम्भोदिः काल आहितस्तं वै पश्यामो बहुदा नु सन्तः

@RakeshJoshi

what is meaning of पश्यामो ?

i m doubtful about KATHMANDU ENGLISH

when it says LET ME """BE"" MANY
not says let me appear many.

😓😓😯😯Good night all.

@Seeker Good Night...

@Seeker Good question on Kasi. I think Nirguna Sada Shiva has form. I need scriptural evidence for it.

5:46 PM

you see a ocean and tides emerging from ocean. this is paribana , can you say that waves are different and unreal ? its just as ocean.

@RakeshJoshi hah lol... that is not my translation... I also quote that passage in my answer here:

7

A: I want scripture-based explanation for "God is Everywhere"

Vedas state "Sarvakhalvidam Brahman" which means "Everything is Brahman." So, everything is Brahman in the absolute level. Chandogya Upanishad states: सर्वं खल्विदं ब्रह्म तज्जलानिति शान्त उपासीत अथ खलु क्रतुमयः पुरुषो यथाक्रतुरस्मिल्लोके पुरुषो भवति तथेतः प्रेत्य भवति स क्रतुं कुर्वीतः । [Ch...

Yes. I too needs evidences. :) @TheDestroyer

then you are saying let me be many = let me appear many ..

what is this ?

@RakeshJoshi Do you know meaning of "man मन्"?

@RakeshJoshi 👏👏✌

5:48 PM

He (the Self) wished, “Let me be many, let me be born. He undertook a deliberation. Having deliberated, he created all this that exists. That (Brahman), having created (that), entered into that very thing. And
having entered there, It became the formed and the formless, the defined and the undefined, the sustaining and the non-sustaining, the sentient and the insentient, the true and the untrue. Truth became all this that there is. They call that Brahman Truth. Pertaining to this, there occurs this verse. In the beginning all this was but the Unmanifested (Brahman). From that emerged the ma…

what is doubt in this ?

@RakeshJoshi I'm just saying it implies "appear" as self doesn't undergo differentiation...

@RakeshJoshi Just tell me meaning of मन् ?

@Tezz Does Nirguna Sada Shiva has form as per Shiva Purana?

the verses neither speaks such things . its your own thinking . the verse did not say of any differentiation . it just says brahman wish to be many and entered the created world .

there is no question of any differentiation.

when seed becomes tree then we can say that tree is false or seed is false.

@TheDestroyer I know one instance in Shiva Purana where Sada Shiva as Shabda Brahman has form of Aksharas...

@TheDestroyer as you know in the chapter origin of Vishweshwara linga.. Nirguna Shiva also speaks...

@TheDestroyer but I'm not sure whether he has form or not..

@RakeshJoshi Man means to consider or think. Is "thought" real?

5:55 PM

@TheDestroyer I think Kashi also gets destroyed in Mahakalpa... what do you think...?

dreams could be real too. in some dimensions

@Tezz even verse says "hara".

इत्युक्त्वा च त्रिशूलात्स्वादवतार्य हर:स्वयम्।
मोचयामास भुवने मत्र्यलोके हि काशिकाम्॥ २२॥

Thus speaking lord Śiva, grounded Kāši, with the tip of his trident and established it on earth.

ब्रह्मणश्च दिने सा हि न विनश्यति निश्चितम्।
तदा शिवस्त्रिशूलेन दधाति मुनयश्च ताम्।। २३ ।।
Even after the completion of a divine day of Brahmā, the city of Kāšî does not get destroyed. O Sages, at that point of time, Siva holds it over the tip of his trident.

पुनश्च ब्रह्मणा सृष्टौ कृतायां स्थाप्यते द्विजाः ।

some times the astral body goes to another places ..

@RakeshJoshi what happens to dream after you wake up?

Remember that Lakshmana got the astra in his dream to defeat indrajeet. if dream is not real then how come astra is real ?

5:56 PM

@Tezz Yes. I think.

dream is a process of subconscious mind ..

sometimes deep rooted thughts or desires arise in dream.

@Tezz Verse clearly says only after day of Brahma. Then we can answer it as other lokas are not destroyed.

there are cases where people have received mantra and divine guidence in dreams . which has come true ,

@TheDestroyer oh so you mean... while Rudra is destroying the universe... Nirguna Shiva holds it in Trishula (or Rudra himself holds it in Trishula..)?

i dont know about vedanta but in sadhana .. generally the guru asks the sadhaka to share his dream experiences with him.

then it is interpret by guru and sishya to assess spiritual progress.

@Tezz i have replied one of your thread about how vedas is saved during destruction.

6:00 PM

@Tezz Verse only says Shiva. We don't who is that "Shiva". Haha. Even Prayaga won't be destroyed after Kalpa.

@Tezz What does Kashi Khanda says? Does it say any similar statements?

@RakeshJoshi 100% predictions from dream also doesn't make dream real.. the dream itself was false in the first point...

what is your qualification ?

@RakeshJoshi Let's define words "real" and "false" first?

@TheDestroyer which scripture mentions story of Prayaga not being destroyed?...

@TheDestroyer Kashi khanda of Skandha Purana?... I haven't read it...

@Tezz I don't remember now. But i think i gave link before or said it before.

@Tezz Yes.

ok.

6:04 PM

@RakeshJoshi oh... I just read and upvoted it...

then where is question of destruction ?

@RakeshJoshi I agree with you... but I'm asking question from Puranic perspective (which you do not agree) haha...

these perspectives create issues to a seeker.
cos such realities cannot be explained by purana

@Tezz which answer?

Where Vedas have personal forms like humans... and they can speak, walk etc...

6:05 PM

will you be satisfied with a puranic story ?

the story will say that god shiva will take the vedas and keep in a secret cave before tandava., :)

@RakeshJoshi That's only your opinion.

will it make more sense to you ?

Answer here: @TheDestroyer

11

Q: How do the Vedas survive during the dissolution of the Universe?

Lord Shiva destroys the entire Universe when the Mahakalpa ends. Brahma too attains Moksha in that pralaya. Vedas in their personal form are also present in Brahmaloka along with Brahma. For eg. Hayagriva Asura stole the Vedas from Brahmaloka and took them to Patala and thus Lord Vishnu took Ha...

scripture vedas puranas history yuga

@TheDestroyer which opinion ?

@RakeshJoshi Do Agamas make sense? Agamas are also sectarian.

@RakeshJoshi That Puranas are not helpful for a seeker.

@RakeshJoshi I think it depends on how we interpret.

6:07 PM

@RakeshJoshi yes, it makes a lot of sense with me.. as God Shiva is destroyer... so it is a valid curiosity that how do Vedas (form of Vedas) survive destruction...

@TheDestroyer so even if purana gives some story which is not happening in reality wil make sense to you?

@RakeshJoshi how can you say it doesn't happen in reality? There is city of Kasi on Earth.

What's the proof? I have Sastra Pramana with me.

@TheDestroyer even if world is unreal then also there is no question of destruction . if world is real then also it cannot be destroyed

Puranas themselves say that the concept if Manifestation is not real "Mithya nãnãtwa kalpana."

if its not real then how can you destroy somethng which doesnt exist ?

6:10 PM

@RakeshJoshi Please don't mix Vyavaharika and Paramarthika.

@RakeshJoshi World doesn't exist for you after you realize. it exists or you feel it exists because you didn't realize.

pralaya means withdrawing back the creation to a point.
the world goes back into the source and then again manifests during next creation

i m not mixing its you who is mixing vedanta , purana , etc

it is fine with me that agama does not make sense to you . as it is not close to vedanta @TheDestroyer

@RakeshJoshi first of all it is not necessary that we should subscribe to your belief that we can't mix Vedanta and Purana...

@RakeshJoshi I didn't say that. I don't blame any scripture without reading. Agamas are great scriptures as they are used in many temples. Only ignorants blame them.

veda is not a puranic concept.

as per purana it might be a book but its a revelation .

then losing vedas and regaining vedas should be understood from vedic point ov view na ?

@RakeshJoshi we believe Puranas also as authority and quote it... (it doesn't matter whether you believe it or not)... (you are free to not believe)...

6:14 PM

@TheDestroyer then what it meant when you asked "does agama make sense ?"

@RakeshJoshi yes. If you give what vedas say that is of priority than Puranic View.

@RakeshJoshi I'm asking you as they extol only Shiva, Shakti and Vishnu

@TheDestroyer but mr Tezz does not want to take it. so better i should be silent on this :)

All the commentators in Brahma Sutras Adi Shankara, Srikanthacharya, Ramanujacharya, Madhavacharya etc... have cited Puranas as authority.. so we can mix Purana and Vedanta...

have you read commentaries of these acharyas ? @Tezz

@RakeshJoshi He doesn't say that. He says Puranas are also important. he said many times that Vedas are superior over Puranas.

He means Tezz.

6:16 PM

@RakeshJoshi yes, I have read...

@TheDestroyer agama is also for ganesha , surya , many other deities.

there is tantric way of gayatri related upasana also .

@RakeshJoshi Yes. But Indra has no Agama.

@TheDestroyer heard of kavyakantha vashistha ganapati muni ?

from your place.

@TheDestroyer @Tezz i did not mean that we should quote vedas for everything and its not possible also . for lord rama we have to refer valmiki ramayana.

but i feel that vedic revelations and knowledge is not puranic subject so better to understand from vedic point of view.

anyways its up to you if you want to mix both.

@RakeshJoshi yes. Even i don't like interpretating vedic verses with help of Puranas.

and its not true that vedas only talk about spirituality or god alone

6:23 PM

@RakeshJoshi But you cant say Rudra is different from shiva.

the seers also talk of anything which is new or makes them curious or inspired.

@RakeshJoshi Thanks for your view... but I mix Vedas and Puranas only when needed...

@RakeshJoshi Vedas first rest all next.

so how it is needed in this case ?
how eternal knowledge be destroyed ?

@RakeshJoshi what is needed?

6:25 PM

@RakeshJoshi it is based on the case that everything has it's own form and consciousness in it's dimension...

i mean why is it needed to mix both this regarding survival of vedas.

7

A: Kali and Kaliyug

In Hinduism (or Sanatana Dharma), there is a beautiful concept where even the non living things and abstract ideas also exist in personified form. It is because Consciousness runs everything as Shrutis/ Vedas state: प्रज्ञानं ब्रह्म (Aitreya Upanishad 3.3) Prajnam Brahman ie. Pure Consc...

So, it's asking about how personal form of Vedas which stay in Brahma Loka are preserved...

@TheDestroyer vashistha muni was during the time of ramana maharshi

he wrote books and tried to revive vedic worship

arya samaj also has similar motive

@RakeshJoshi Arya Samaj believes Moksha is not eternal. They say even after Moksha , there is life.

that is philosophy part but they focus on vedic worship..

@Seeker welcome back dear

6:30 PM

@RakeshJoshi who is vasistha muni?

😯😯😂😂@RakeshJoshi

he wrote books and tried to revive vedic worship
arya samaj also has similar motive @TheDestroyer he was into agama and vedas both

he researced vedas and wrote indra sahasranama

and indra mantras he spoke of

telugu

@RakeshJoshi are your views close to views of Arya Samaj?

in some matters i agree that they do not have caste and gender issues which is key

they dont give importance to superstitions

but their rigid on murti pooja i dont like much . but then no one is perfect

@TheDestroyer if you are determined to worship shiva i would also say you to consider agama sect also to have a look.

for example some branches of agama are struggling to survice

Lakulisha (Sanskrit: Lakuliśa, Devnagari: लकुलिश) (Etymology: लगुड (staff) or लकुट (mace) + ईश (lord) = meaning, the lord with a staff or mace or club or stick) was a prominent Shaivite revivalist, reformist and preceptor of the doctrine of the Pashupatas, one of the oldest sects of Shaivism. According to some scholars, Lakulisha is the founder of the Pashupata sect. While, another section argues that the Pashupata doctrine was already in existence before Lakulisha, and he was only its first formal preceptor. It is believed that he was born in a Brahmin family and lived in Kayavatara or Kayavarohan...

on the other hand we have novel deities coming up like santoshi mata or satyanarayana etc @Seeker

@RakeshJoshi satyanarayana is Lord vishnu. He is mentioned in bhavishya purana.

6:41 PM

any other ? i mentioned him because he is mosre famous in andhra :)

i know it will cause some telugu eye brows to rise :)

But Santoshi mata, Sai baba is clearly sheer ignorance of Hindus. :( @RakeshJoshi

This puja is first mentioned in Skanda Purana, Reva Kanda is it possible to verify these verses @TheDestroyer
cheppu nanna

@Tezz @Seeker @TheDestroyer with no offence meant to any god or goddess. i m myself a shakta . but how easy has it become to CREATE a deity now ...

make up a story that she is the daughtet of ganesha and make a film on it .

@RakeshJoshi you cited wiki statement. But Reva kanda has no such puja

thanks then i will wait for puranic references and reference of this whole katha.. cos i heard its self made story .

2

Q: Is Lord satyanarayana avatar of Vishnu and mentioned in puranas?

People in Maharashtra and Andhra celebrate sathyanarayana puja on full moon day. Puja will be made and a story will be told for 45 minutes. Even I did twice in Shirdi Sai Sathya Vratha. Is Lord satyanarayana avatar of Vishnu and mentioned in puranas?

scripture puranas satyanarayana

@RakeshJoshi i saw that

Wiki says skanda purana reva kanda has that story

6:47 PM

I'm gonna post a question soon about Bhavishya Puran. Why BP have stories till 20th century only? When Kaliyuga is more than that.

it has stories until queen victoria .. i think that was last when it was interpolated.

else it would have mention of modi and rahul gandhi too :)

Bhavishya Puran prones to the maximum interpolations.

😂😂Yes

Yes.already asked.

Who knows at the end of the century, we update BP

Give me the link.

so i think there the story of satyanarayana does not come in any purana.

thogh there might be name .

further stories say that god became angry when lady did not take prasada/achamana .. such things are hard to believe

6:50 PM

Yes. Hard to believe @RakeshJoshi sir

in many sai temples now i see that sai ashtottara shata stotra is created, there is sai aarti .
there is sai gayatri etc etc

in next 1-2 centuries it will become integral part of hinduism

many such saints will be declared as some avatar as another

There are photos which show Sai as incarnation of Lord Shiva. 😱

@RakeshJoshi there's a famous Templo in annavaram in andhrapradesh.

Better to give name to that religion - Saism. As it is no way Hinduism.

@TheDestroyer can you please share the link on BP?

Satyanarayana is famous. I think Satyanarayana is mentioned in other puranas also.

6:53 PM

ok we will wait for your refence of satyanaraana nanna @TheDestroyer

@Seeker sai is not the only saint

@Seeker Haha. Sai Baba became business for some people.

see raghavendra swami , akkalkot swami , sreepaada srivallabha , manik prabhu and so on

Oh. 😯😓

@TheDestroyer @Seeker now in adhra and also non resident teelugu people have started keeping ttheir son names like sai ramesh , vijay sai , sai mohan etc

@RakeshJoshi raghava lawrence got healed from a disease after praying to Raghavendra swami. Lawrence believes him strongly.

6:55 PM

😓Same here. Ridiculous.

@Seeker do you want Link of Bhavishya Purana?

@TheDestroyer yes i accept that i might go mantralayam soon but with different mindset

@RakeshJoshi we can worship saints.

instead of new deities why cant old deities be revived .

indra , soma , surya , mitra , aswini

@TheDestroyer i agree but there should not be fully copying like that of gods.

on other hand agamic tradition is becoming extinct ... kashmir shaivism, pasupata, etc

Saura and Ganapatya sects are almost extinct now ... which is sad.

« first day (302 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (2262 days later) »

Transcript for

Feb '1717

Vedanta and Philosophy

Discuss various philosophies of Hinduism

hinduism philosophy vedanta

join this room
about this room

00:00

06:00

12:00

18:00

all times are UTC

site design / logo © 2024 Stack Exchange Inc; legal

mobile