[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: New site needs your point of view
In article <4i5c1j$iog@babbage.ece.uc.edu>, the One, Omnipresent, Omniscient
God, in the form of Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <rbalasub@ecn.purdue.edu>
wrote:
>>Suka Gosvami". You see, people, especially ones responsible for
>>imparting knowledge, rarely say what they really mean, so we have to
>>ignore what is said in some texts and figure out what is really meant,
>>even if they might be contradicted by the events described. For
>>example, some simpletons will no doubt take a literal approach to
>>interpretation when the main character of a story says "worship
>>Me". It should be clear, both from ontological and epistemological
>>standpoints, that what that person really means is "worship yourself".
>
>Yeah, similarly the same simpletons will invent complicated reasonings when
>Krishna says that he is the self of all beings. Somehow simplicity deserts
them
>then, but that's OK, because then their complicated interpretations are
>something they like. Suddenly a simple interpretation is no longer allowed
and
>Krishna is not the self, but the super-self and the yogi should not
concentrate
>on the self, but rather on the super-self. Ofcourse he also has to do
service.
Quite right. You tell that lousy ISKCONite! Every good Hindu knows that the
omnipotent, all-knowing God is the same as the self in all bodies; why else
would the self be subject to illusion, ignorance, disease, old age, and death?
Sheesh! The noive of these ISKCON folks! The next they will say is that there
is only one, Supreme God!
What is happening to Hinduism these days?
>
>>>The answer to Vivek's question should now be obvious. *Drum roll*,
>>>*** crash of cymbals ***,
>>>
>>> "HE IS a VAISHNAVA, but NOT a HINDU".
>>
>>Aha, once again, you are wrong, err, I mean, we all are right:
>
>No, as in most cases I am right and you are wrong.
>
Oh no! Namaskar Ramakrishnajee. Surely we can all work together to promote
Hindu Dharma. How can you say someone is wrong? In Hinduism, all
interpretations must be right. Thus the self-appointed guardians of Hinduism
have concluded by studying the absurdity of their own interpretations.
>Niy Nauq = Ran rauq = Rad hauq = Radha who is held in great veneration
>especially by vaishnavites. Thus Niy Nauq is actually Radha. This uses the
Wait, I have one.
My name is Krishna. Your name is Ramakrishnan, which contains the seven
letters of Krishna. And Krishna is a name for God. Ergo, we are both the same
God.
Of course, one might wonder why God would argue with Himself on
soc.religion.hindu, but such people can simply be ignored; obviously such
independent and critical thought can only be a sign of fanaticism or bigotry.
>You are wrong, as usual. She is BOTH a vaishnava and Hindu.
Oh wait, did you not previously say
begin quote-----
The answer to Vivek's question should now be obvious. *Drum roll*, *** crash
of
cymbals ***,
"HE IS a VAISHNAVA, but NOT a HINDU".
---- end quote
Silly me. How dare I question you. Of course, he is both a Hindu and not a
Hindu, and both of these descriptions are equally correct.
>Gee! I don't know why. Maybe you should ask the ISKCON dude who accosted me
in
>the airport
Usually they only do that if they sense that you are in some kind of dire
spiritual need; but you already know you are God, so what did they bother you?
Actually, that ISKCON dude was also God, so you should have listened to Him.
This brings to mind the possiblity of offending God if you don't give a
donation...
>Of course I have no clue about Sikhism and it's relationship with Hinduism.
>Frankly, I don't give a damn. I am from Madras and with a name like R* Bala*,
Wrong! I think you should take some paper and write 1000 times:
"I am not from Madras. I am from the Impersonal Brahman."
That should be adequate punishment for you.
Oh wait! I just realized, I AM you. That means I have to do it too. Oh
shuckydarns....
>there's only one party I would support. Yeah, the Congress(I). Maybe you
think
If you support the Congress (I), then that means you also support the BJP.
That's because the Congress (I) is nondifferent from the BJP. Actually,
everything is nondifferent from everything else. Aum Namah Shivaya.
>I belong to the BJP/VHP/Bajrang Dal/etc because I supported Ajay Shah in some
>issues. Well, you are wrong. If you are really keen on knowing my opinions on
>how many temples were destroyed by Muslims/Christians/etc, it's the same as
>before. Frankly, I don't give a damn.
Good. That's because it was all an illusion.
>You mean HKS? Sorry about the small mistake. Whether you agreed with the rest
of
>what I said in that post or not, I am sure you will agree that my mistake did
>not change things a whole lot (as far as the discussions were concerned ie).
Anyway, nothing was actually said. We should simply remember that this is all
just one, big illusion and not get agitated. Which reminds me, I sure could
borrow some your illusory credit cards. Why not lend them to me?
yours,
The One, Omnipresent, Omniscient God, in the form of Krishna Susarla
