• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Ask a Hindu

mangalavara

सो ऽहम्
Premium Member
It's a nice avatar tho man. I like it.

Thank you. I experimented with different avatars recently, and I found that this one is still my favorite. Plus, it seems iconic and easily stands out as 'mangalavara's avatar.' Today, I'm still trying to figure out if it's a mammal or marsupial. So far, Wikipedia has not helped me on that. No wonder people say Wikipedia is unreliable. :tongueout:

By the way, I would like @Vinayaka and others to know that I am never the least bit upset at being mistakenly called a she.
 

VoidCat

Pronouns: he/him/they/them
Thank you. I experimented with different avatars recently, and I found that this one is still my favorite. Plus, it seems iconic and easily stands out as 'mangalavara's avatar.' Today, I'm still trying to figure out if it's a mammal or marsupial. So far, Wikipedia has not helped me on that. No wonder people say Wikipedia is unreliable. :tongueout:

By the way, I would like @Vinayaka and others to know that I am never the least bit upset at being mistakenly called a she.
Im a they. Offline folk misgender me as she and online folk misgender me as he. Makes me wonder if my writing is masculine.
 

mangalavara

सो ऽहम्
Premium Member
Im a they. Offline folk misgender me as she and online folk misgender me as he. Makes me wonder if my writing is masculine.

Years ago, I was told that my writing online is feminine, but I don't see it. Well, sometimes it is indeed. So yeah, I have a thread to start...
 

mangalavara

सो ऽहम्
Premium Member
Hey! I am a convert to Hinduism (technically: you can't really convert, you just start practicing) and I'm just starting a thread for people who might have questions about Hinduism. I will do my best to answer. I am certainly not an authority on it by any means, but I can share my insight :) Just be kind, is all I ask.

Do you ever worship Sūrya?

Although you are a Śaiva and worship Mahādevī, do you ever find yourself fond of Visnu and/or Laksmī?
 

Ashoka

श्री कृष्णा शरणं मम
Do you ever worship Sūrya?

Although you are a Śaiva and worship Mahādevī, do you ever find yourself fond of Visnu and/or Laksmī?

I do Surya Namaskar in the morning, so I like to think I do.

Yes, I love the stories of Vishnu and his avataras, and Maa Lakshmi is so beautiful. <3
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The proof is in Bhagavad GeetA -- that is "proof" for me. Just like Quran is "proof" for you.
The Gita is no more than a lengthy, inspirational passage, excerpted from a larger, epic poem. It was never intended to be proof, evidence, or anything -- except a discussion of metaphysics and dharma. It's not even considered shruti.
apart from what evidence Shri VAsudev KRshNa and other forms of Brahman give me with their presence, in the Silence of formless Brahman, white flashes, the sky after 4 pm or setting sun. Now THAT is pudding.
The setting sun is readily explicable from a 3rd-state level of consciousness -- which is the level from which this illusion would be observed.

From a Vedantic perspective: we are dreaming the world, like Neo from The Matrix. All the proofs and evidences, all the things, all the actions, all the gods we perceive; exist, as perceived, only in our minds.
Real reality is 'Not this, Not that'.
 

ameyAtmA

~ ~
Premium Member
The Gita is no more than a lengthy, inspirational passage, excerpted from a larger, epic poem. It was never intended to be proof, evidence, or anything -- except a discussion of metaphysics and dharma. It's not even considered shruti.
It looks like you did not see the double quotes -- and the whole sentence.
In any case Bhagavad Geeta is proof at multiple levels - and only one of which is -- that whatever is said there does happen. The proof is ~ you ~. When it clicks, fits, your own observation about yourself, transformations. This is just one aspect of it.

The setting sun is readily explicable from a 3rd-state level of consciousness -- which is the level from which this illusion would be observed.
More than setting sun, the sun in the sky a little up above, 2 hours before sunset , and the vastness of that empty sky with the sun in it --- gives me the experience of Brahman, SuryanArAyaNa and the sky are all conscious.

From a Vedantic perspective: we are dreaming the world
All the proofs and evidences, all the things, all the actions, all the gods we perceive; exist, as perceived, only in our minds.
Real reality is 'Not this, Not that'.

Perceived in the mind. Whose mind? Anyhow, I am not interested in showing/explaining the interconnectedness. It is a two-way street.

Neti Neti , Not this and that is nice to be quiet in samAdhi, but there is no need to club everything together.
Between the 2 extreme ends of absolute and mundane is the beauty of Divine Leela.
I am the infinite transcendental Brahman - this is shown through Leela via the karaN - the instrument called mind. mAnas.
The mind is an instrument through which entities experience and learn beyond the mundane.
Sans that this world remains just mundane.
 
Last edited:

ameyAtmA

~ ~
Premium Member
The Gita is no more than a lengthy, inspirational passage, excerpted from a larger, epic poem. It was never intended to be proof, evidence, or anything -- except a discussion of metaphysics and dharma. It's not even considered shruti.

It looks like you did not see the double quotes -- and the whole sentence
Let me explain if it is not clear.

I said "The proof is in Bhagavad GeetA - it is "proof" for me just as <replace scripture/religion here> is "proof" for you."

What does this mean?

If a person says "<their scripture/religion> is proof" [to them]
Then I can say "to me Bhagavad Geeta is proof"
and you may ask "of what?"

For one, the yoga explained in the Geeta work!

Karma Bhakti sAnkhya Jnana Dhyana Raja yoga - they all work!

Where is the proof that they work?
You are the proof! The sAdhak. The yogi who sees progress in themselves is the proof to themselves.

As for not being shruti, it is the cream of all the milk obtained by milking the Upanishads that ask you to test it out and see for yourself -- and Upanishads are shruti.

sarvopanishado gAvo dogdhA gopAla nandana |
pArtho vatsa sudhirbhoktA dugdham geetAmrutam mahat ||

-- GeetA Mahatmya

Meaning: All Upanishads are cows,
and Shri KRshNa , son of the cowherd Nanda, is the milkman who milks the cows (Upanishads)
OR
The cowherd KRshNa Gopala, who is ever blissfull (nandana - AnandI), is the milkman.
Arjun is the calf, who drinks this immortal nectar of milk called the Bhagavad GeetA.
 
Last edited:

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Let me explain if it is not clear.

I said "The proof is in Bhagavad GeetA - it is "proof" for me just as <replace scripture/religion here> is "proof" for you."

What does this mean?

If a person says "<their scripture/religion> is proof" [to them]
Then I can say "to me Bhagavad Geeta is proof"
and you may ask "of what?"

For one, the yoga explained in the Geeta work!

Karma Bhakti sAnkhya Jnana Dhyana Raja yoga - they all work!

Where is the proof that they work?
You are the proof! The sAdhak. The yogi who sees progress in themselves is the proof to themselves.

As for not being shruti, it is the cream of all the milk obtained by milking the Upanishads that ask you to test it out and see for yourself -- and Upanishads are shruti.

sarvopanishado gAvo dogdhA gopAla nandana |
pArtho vatsa sudhirbhoktA dugdham geetAmrutam mahat ||

-- GeetA Mahatmya

Meaning: All Upanishads are cows,
and Shri KRshNa , son of the cowherd Nanda, is the milkman.
OR
The cowherd KRshNa Gopala, who is ever blissfull (nandana - AnandI), is the milkman.
Arjun is the calf, who drinks this immortal nectar of milk called the Bhagavad GeetA.
We're talking about different things How are you defining "proof?"
There is no proof that the Earth is round. There's no proof that germs cause disease. There;s no proof that the planets revolve around a central Sun.
Proof is not the same as evidence.
 
Top