Correct.Prem wrote:Assumption that Saguna and Nirguna are different is not valid.
There is onlee one Supreme Reality
And this is precisely what many people get confused about.
as opposed to immersing one's brain in alcohol and lighting a fire (cigarette)? ... I knew my technique had a serious flaw ... I am stockpiling burnt rice ...S.Valkan wrote:Without being immersed in the liquid of Bhakti, the rice won't cook with just the fire of Jnana,- you will only get half-baked, burnt rice.
excellent point ... IMO, a revival is needed rather than protection ...shiv wrote:Can you protect what has already been lost?
when I was a kid, the older generation used to lament that their children were listening to western music and doing the "twist" ... they would sing praises of Indian dance forms etc ...When it appears that so many educated forum members do not seem to have a clue about the Hindu dharma they claim to stand for, why the lament about loss.
And imagine the angst of a common idol worshipping Hindu when they are branded all of the above?shiv wrote:does this make the Idol Worshipping Hindu
a) a violent reactionary?
b) a Hindu fundamentalist?
c) a Hindu revivalist?
d) an enemy of secularism?
In the competetive enviornment of Ejs world/view , Hinduism is a soft target because it did not compete in chopping the heads of Adharmic faith drones. The trick is to change the preception.Alok_N wrote:are we saying that adharma, i.e., conscious ignorance should be dealt with extreme prejudice? ...
...The evenjihadis and islamists are merely reaping what Hindu decadence has sown.
Isn't anant the expansion of conciousness to the extremities of universe, internally perceived (that is, not via 5 senses)? And anand is self absorption.S.Valkan wrote:Actually the words Anantam and Anandam are identical,- Anantam Eva Anandam.
'Unhappiness' is caused by some limitations imposed upon you.
If only you were not limited by money and resources, you could obtain all the goodies that would make you happy.
If only you were not limited physically by space-time, you could do all the things that would make you happy anywhere anytime.
So, 'happiness' or 'bliss' is a direct corollary of freedom from limitations.
Now, Anantam is freedom from limitations ( Infinite/Limitless ).
And freedom from limitations is Happiness/Bliss aka Anandam.
So, Anantam is Anandam.
Someone mentioned someone of writing a book please do the needful.general rant:
One of the classic weapons of the EJ is the "You Farted'" theory, so aptly named by BRF's own Mr. Shiv.
When exposing the hatred of the EJ or even discussing retaliation in kind, the hindu (or the jew) may expect to be in turn accused of inciting hatred. The classic "you farted" accusation.
Let's look at this. Are there people on this thread advocating hatred for
The Buddhist Faith
The Jain Faith
The Sikh Faith
The Zoroastrian Faith
The Hebrew Faith
The Scientologists??
Heck no. Do at least some of these faith diverge in their doctrine from the hindu faith. Absolutely. You have here Zoroastrian faith, the forerunner to my own Hebrew faith. Both monotheistic. And faiths such as the Buddhist and Jain (pl correct me if i am wrong) which have been described to me as being atheistic faiths. Yet, these faiths have lived peacefully in India for a few millenia now. Perhaps, it should be the exponents of christianism and islam who should wonder about the intolerance of their own faiths, and the intolerant and biggoted acts of its own followers, before casting the proverbial first stone.
Instead, the discussion is focussed on exposing the hateful agenda of the EJs, and to the extent it pertains its inherent source in the christian bible. Same with islam.
Yet, this very expose is considered hateful. So, please dont get sucked up into being defensive about this in the face of such "you farted" accusations. Recognize them for what they are and recognize the persons hurling such "you farted" accusations for what they are.
I'm one of those people, apparently. Are not the concepts of Saguna and Nirguna Brahman mutually exclusive? If Brahman encompasses both gunas and the lack thereof, doesn't this logically mean Brahman possesses attributes?S.Valkan wrote:Correct.Prem wrote:Assumption that Saguna and Nirguna are different is not valid.
There is onlee one Supreme Reality
And this is precisely what many people get confused about.
No they are not.krangarajan wrote:Are not the concepts of Saguna and Nirguna Brahman mutually exclusive?
I suspect the concept of "lack thereof" is still not quite clear in your mind.If Brahman encompasses both gunas and the lack thereof, doesn't this logically mean Brahman possesses attributes?
This is the beauty of Hinduism,- choose whatever floats your boat!This is what I find so appealing about Ramanuja's work. He never negates Advaita, but rather takes it to (at least as I see it, in my limited knowledge) its logical conclusion.
But gold DOES have an attribute shape, doesn't it?S.Valkan wrote: I suspect the concept of "lack thereof" is still not quite clear in your mind.
A small example may help.
Gold can be moulded into rings, bangles, chains, coins, bars, biscuits and so on.
Now, does Gold have an attribute shape, or does it have a "lack thereof" ?
It can be of ANY shape.
So, does it make sense to say Gold is of a PARTICULAR shape/form ?
If not, what happens to the "attribute" shape in the case of Gold ?
It is useless, because Gold can assume ANY shape.
That is what is meant by "lack thereof".
Now, if you try to "think" of Gold, invariably you think of Gold as a ring, chain, bangle, coin, bar or some such form,- the attribute "shape" BECOMES important in your thought.
Same with Brahman, which is Nirguna.
Only when you try to objectify it in thought, it is invariably "Saguna" Brahman.
They are not mutually exclusive.
I hope it is clear now.
don't stop at that length scale ... the problems lie in finite thinking ... if you are going microscopic, try to reach zero ... if going macroscopic, try to reach infinity ... the atomic scale is a confusing pit-stop onlee ...krangarajan wrote: Sure gold can take on an infinite number of shapes, but at its core, it still has the requite relationship of electrons, neutrons, etc. that make it alone gold. It has attributes that are not applicable to anything else; even if we cannot imagine what gold is at its most essential, that does not exclude the fact that it still exists as such.
I'll give you a small hint.krangarajan wrote:When gold is broken down as far as we can take it, it does have a shape to it that is inherently its own.
An interesting anecdote on this from Srinivasa Ramanujan in terms of numbers:Alok_N wrote:it may help you to picture an infinite circle ... if you start at zero, infinity will be the end of your journey, which brings you back to zero ... more on vacuum below ...
the basic physical definition is no different ... there is an infinite vacuum and an infinite "field" ... the field is defined in terms of one operator: A ...S.Valkan wrote: "Zero represents Absolute Reality. Infinity is the myriad manifestations of that Reality.
Their mathematical product, Infinity x 0 is not one number, but all numbers each of which corresponds to individual acts of creation"
Now that KKB is no longer here with his Holy Dosa quips, I think a fair discussion on Higgs Goldstone theorem etc is in order.Alok_N wrote:however, through a series of steps too complicated to go into, but basically known as "spontaneous symmetry breaking", physical vacuum generates attributes, i.e., it gives masses to various particles ...