[Prev][Next][Index]
Re: God and Demigods-is Ganesha demigod?
-
To: alt-hindu@uunet.uu.net
-
Subject: Re: God and Demigods-is Ganesha demigod?
-
From: srinivas@Glue.umd.edu (Nagulapalli Srinivas)
-
Date: 5 Jan 1995 12:16:04 -0500
-
From srinivas@Glue.umd.edu Thu Jan 5 12: 08:53 1995
-
Newsgroups: alt.hindu
-
Organization: Project Glue, University of Maryland, College Park
In article #1805 H. Krishna Susarla (susarla@great-gray.owlnet.rice.edu) writes:
: But come on man, you got to be kidding! Do you mean to say Kailasa
: is a planet?? After all a mere planet??? A kind of planet that orbits the Sun?
>yes, yes, and yes, I suppose it does orbit its own star, or something.
Oh Yeah, who saw that planet orbiting and from which telescope??!! And who
proved it has its own star???!! Wow, this is getting interesting...
: Also, what is "higher planet" in an endless void of space and vaccuum???
>It is a place which is more conducive to spiritual advancement than the
>Earth.
Oh really??? "More conducive" is relative and how do you know it applies
to everyone???!! Hey, all the saints like Tukaram, Tyagaraja, Meera,
Ramdas all of them attained the highest spiritual advancements only on
earth itself, and so what makes you think that "Kailasa" is not a
place on earth itself, or more is not a "mental state" itself????
: Just as any planet that we know of has limits and boundaries, you think
: Kailas also has space-problems and will issue Non-resident visas for
: visitors!!! Forgive me for the parody, but I could not resist. I really
>Not at all. Your nonsense is quite amusing.
Good, how similar we are!! I feel the same about yours.
: think we are capable of better ideas and logic. If you REALLY believe in the
: Vishwa-roopa of Krishna, where Past, Present, Future, all beings and
: Universe existed, I beg you to tell me what is different from Krishna??
: How can there be a Kailas other than Him ??? We want to fight over
: my theory ALONE is right and not stop there, but bite others saying that their
: theory IS WRONG!! We never want to agree that Truth is One and what does
^^^^^^^^^^^^
: it matter what label sticker you put on it, be it Krishna or Rama or Shiva
>Oh cool!! Does this mean that anything I do is okay? So, can I make up
>my own religion and still be following the Truth? After all, Truth is One,
>so everything I do is part of the Truth!!! So, if my interpretation is
>that one can worship a demon like Ravana, is this okay? It's part of the
>One Truth, right? And what if I ate meat and smoked like your cherished
>Vivekananda? It's all part of the Truth, right??? Maybe I should just stop
>reading the Gita and start playing football, like he suggested.
Hey buddy, listen a little carefully. I know you want to kill my argument
and proclaim yourself as the hero of the Prabhupada sect. I have nothing
against anything, including you. But I humbly submit, it is impossible
to deny that "Truth is One", just because it IS Truth. There CANNOT be
two laws of gravitation, it IS a universal LAW. Why? Purely, because
the moment there is "another Truth". it ceases to be Truth!!.
By nature, Truth is something that NEVER changes, it is universal.
And "another Truth" is an oxy-moron. That has nothing to do with you
wanting to worship Ravana or eating meat or smoking. If you are
convinced that those are right, please go ahead. A robber is convinced
that he is doing good by robbing and he robs. So what?? That is his
understanding and otherwise there would be no thefts in our newspapers.
But do not forget the corollary too. The police is convinced they
are doing good by arresting him and the judge is convinced he/she is
doing good by putting him in prison. Also probably, without the robber
the police would not have jobs and the judge no position!!!
Now, also note, you will never do anything that you are NOT convinced of,
and so is everyone. But, our convictions have nothing to do with what
IS Truth. Do you think Truth suffers a little, if you deny it or some
one decries it??? Do you think Truth needs the patronage of any sect
or person??? I hope you see the difference between what Truth is and
what our convictions are.
>Alt.Hindu readers take note! We have among us a great sage who suddenly
>Understands!!! Everything is One! So don't waste your time in austerity or
>devotional service! Just go out and gratify your senses; it's all part of
>the One Truth!!!! Wow, I really like this guy. I think I will organize an
>international conference to disseminate this great Truth. Isn't great to
>finally have a religion which allows you to do anything you want? Everything
>is okay, as long as it's your interpretation you are using to justify your
>actions. That's more fun than all those other, dull religions which teach
>you to give up things, like gambling and illicit sex and meat-eating and
>so on. All we have to do is realize that everything is ONE, and then we
>can do anything we want!!!
>Finally! A religion for the modern age!
Thanks for all that and I am flattered!!! I would be grateful, if you
make the discussion focussed on the issue rather that what I am because
I dont care a damn as to what you think of me. I am more interested in
knowing what your thoughts are on the issue rather.
: or Jesus??? Who are we, who did not reach the level of ego-lessness to even
>who are YOU, who reads a few books by the pseudo-swami Vivekananda and thinks
>he can pronounce the universal, authoritative opinion on religion without
>referring to any authority?
What do you mean authority man?? Experience is your own best authority.
Do you mean to say you would believe if really God were come to us
in the form of Krishna and say "Hey dude, I am here"??? Who would
not think it is a gimmick of NTR to get another vote and ask Him
to prove Himself??? I NEVER asked you to believe Vivekananda, and
does not care a hoot if you staunchly follow Prabhupada. What does
it matter?? Also what is this childishness of yourness to keep on
harping on what I read rather than what I say. I will be grateful
to your criticism however stinging it is, as long as it is on the
issue. I think it is a weakness in argument if someone resorts to
mud-slinging than pointing fallacies or adding inputs to the issue
of the discussion. I think atleast I can learn something if you
say something that you know on the issue, rather than just griping
about me or pouring out some quotes as to what one book said.
When I ask my friend a doubt about Schrodinger equation, it is of
no use to me if he quotes "Hey, this is what the text says and
that is it!!" Isn't it???
: imagine that the Grandest Truth may not be in the realms of the limited
: intelligence and how can the brain understand the mind of its own Creator,
: decree which path is indirect and which path is direct???!!!!
>You are right about one thing; we can't use our tiny brains to understand
>God. This is why we should refrain from the sort of mundane speculation
>you just displayed here and simply accept what the Lord has told us.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sincerely, I cannot tell you how greatly I cherish and value that.
The problem is we won't and that is the ego. It is the Lord who said
"Mayaa Sarva Midam Sarvam, Jagadavyaktha moorthinaa,
Matsthaani sarva bhoothanii..." in Gita. Can we ever accept
that statement of Lord that He is "sarva bhoothaani" ??? Can
we really accept that true to our heart??? Tell me what did Lord
forgot to include in that verse, where He is not?? Tell me what or
where He is not?? You may NOT like it, and may hate that verse
but that is a different issue. But, did or didn't Lord say Himself
that, and did or did not Lord Himself show that in His mighty
Vishwaroopa??? - THAT IS the point.
: >The only people who ought to be ridiculed are those who claim to believe
: >in God, but then twist His words around to suit their own personal
: >philosophy of life.
: No one ought to be ridiculed by dear friend. We are all understanding Him
:at different levels, that is all. Lord is smarter than us and without His grace
: we would not even blink. We understand Lord's words and profundity of His
: teachings only to the extent and maturity of our own inner development. I had
>The great Bhagavan Sri Rajneesh, who advocated free sex and machine gunned
>down any follower who tried to leave his congregation, had his own
>understanding of the Truth. What level of understanding of the Truth was
>he at?
Yes, I agree, that was his conviction and the society also responded with its
own conviction. There are even more brutal and vulgar things done in the
name of religion. In fact most of the bloodiest wars ever fought in
the history of mankind is in the name of religion. Human sacrifices
were made in the name of God. People were castigated, treated inhumanly
again in the name of God. This is nothing new, and not even original.
But so what?? Do you mean to say that decreases what the Truth is??
Remember, I only said "Truth is ONE", and not our understanding is
ONE. But Truth NEVER fails. They say "Satya meva Jayate". So what?
People in the name of God do all these things, but those will not
prevail. Whatever is Truth NEVER ceases to be. How long do you
think Rajneesh succeeded in fooling everyone about his path?? Do you
think Gravitation Law changes, if many people in the name of it,
misrepresent it and even get publicity out of it??? If that is so
what to talk of the Spiritual Laws??
-Srinivas Nagulapalli
