• 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!

Demons are Sent Back Here According to the Bhagavad Gita

Status
Not open for further replies.

wizanda

One Accepts All Religious Texts
Premium Member
Namaste Aupmanyav-Ji

Thank you for the reply, very interesting....
All Gods, except Lord Vishnu, are mentioned in RigVeda as Asuras.
That is fascinating, thus only Brahman is pure then, anything manifest within this reality can become corrupted.
The one who rejects the dualities of the world.
Hadn't noticed that in clarity, thank you; yet we should also take into account that unless we're consciously connected to Brahman, the divine isn't in us.

BG 9.4 This entire cosmic manifestation is pervaded by me in my unmanifest form. All living beings dwell in me, but I do not dwell in them.

BG 9.29 I am equally disposed to all living beings; I am neither inimical nor partial to anyone. But the devotees who worship me with love reside in me and I reside in them.
Is there an up and a down in universe?
According to the text there is, and within my NDE:

BG 16.16: Possessed and led astray by such imaginings, enveloped in a mesh of delusion, and addicted to the gratification of sensuous pleasures, they descend to the murkiest hell (narake).
Brahman alone exists, there is no second.
The CPU manifest reality; there are multiple dimensions between us and it...

All of the dimensions are just code, so everything is part of Brahman...

Though for it to reside within us, we've got to be in the right state of 0neness, as we're down from its level of consciousness. :innocent:
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
That is fascinating, thus only Brahman is pure then, anything manifest within this reality can become corrupted.
Hadn't noticed that in clarity, thank you; yet we should also take into account that unless we're consciously connected to Brahman, the divine isn't in us.

BG 16.16: Possessed and led astray by such imaginings, enveloped in a mesh of delusion, and addicted to the gratification of sensuous pleasures, they descend to the murkiest hell (narake).

The CPU manifest reality; there are multiple dimensions between us and it... All of the dimensions are just code, so everything is part of Brahman...

Though for it to reside within us, we've got to be in the right state of 0neness, as we're down from its level of consciousness. :innocent:
No, friend. Who or what will corrupt Brahman, since nothing exists other than it. What we perceive is just an illusion. Every thing is Brahman irrespective of the fact whether we acknowledge it or not. As an atheist, I do not believe in heaven or hell. The dimenions between it and us are our own creation, our own misunderstanding. When we understand clearly, we do not find any duality but only oneness. :)
 

Kapalika

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
It all depends on context; if the gathering of the puppies was due to them having some illness or some other reason that meant it was beneficial, then what some perceive as evil, might not be.

The context was it was for fun. Even if it so happened something was wrong with them, I don't see anything redeeming in just being cruel for the sake of being cruel.

The only reason I challenge you on this, is most people who say they don't believe in good and evil really do, they are just more loose on the definition.
 

Satyamavejayanti

Well-Known Member
"wizanda"
,
Namaste,
Glad to see your taking interest in the Gita, What else have you learned from the Gita?

As for your interpretation below, i have some observations.

After re-reading the Gita the other day, went over chapter 16 in multiple translations, as it uses the word Asura which is a demon in Hinduism; yet it applies it to people, and says that they're sent back down here, before possibly being sent lower to Hell (Naraka).

Firstly Asura is not "demon", it is as the Gita puts it "Asura Ikcha", Adharmic desire, or Tamas and Kama driven actions, that is why it applies to peoples actions (Karma) and not some mythical creature in Hell, as Demons are in Abrahamic Myths.
Those of "Asura Ikcha" figuratively "Fall", not literally into material existence and into Bondage. Asuras have Tamo Guna while Devas have Sattva Guna prevalent, as described in the Gita.

Tamas (Darkness, Ignorance) is used as a synonym for Naraka in the Gita text, indicating a state of "ignorance", and "Darkness", not a literal place.

So just like many other theologies globally, it seems like here is the top floor of Hell according to the text;

Even if i just read this chapter, there are no mention of actual physical levels of Naraka.

Personally perceive that due to that every action causes an equal and opposite reaction, if people were told the truth, that they're a demon, they'd strive to go the other way; yet due to these concepts being diluted, people think they're enlightened down near Hell.

In the Gita, in Chapter 2 we already have the foundation set down (so to speak) about the True nature of the Jiva Atman. We are told we are eternal and unborne, even the chapter you quote Verse 18 says "The Supreme is in the Bodies of even the Asura", it is the karma of a person (as detailed in this chapter) which is classified as either based on Tamas, Rajas, or Sattva not the Nature of the Atman, that is why Hindu's don't go around calling people Demons ect.

So why has this concept been completely reversed in Hindu thinking? I've had discussions on here of people telling me people are not demons according to Hinduism, that there is no Hell in Hinduism, etc...

Maybe because Hindu understand Hinduism better then non Hindus????

If you ask a Hindu, "are there people of Asura (tamas) qualities", one would say yes, if you ask a Hindu do these Asuras after death are re-born in a state of Naraka (literally "of Man", or place of Dukha) you would get a yes, so ask the right questions.
 

wizanda

One Accepts All Religious Texts
Premium Member
The dimenions between it and us are our own creation, our own misunderstanding. When we understand clearly, we do not find any duality but only oneness.
The quantum dimensions are all constructs made manifest by the CPU, 'to go beyond all duality' is to recognize this.

Each dimension is similar to some of the levels of consciousness.... We're not in a infinite realm, we've got linear time... Brahman is in a place beyond anti-matter, and matter.... Where it is pure conscious, formless, and the root of all energy in reality.
As an atheist, I do not believe in heaven or hell.
That is fine, then lets try to be scientific...

If we imagine this is a holographic universe, and there is a CPU (Brahman) manifesting this reality; surrounding that Core/Singularity, is infinite energy, and as reality is projected from it, it forms as we get into the Matrix.

As we get further away from that CPU, things can become degraded in energy; until we get lower than here, where there is single quantum strands, that don't acknowledge the Oneness of it all.

Thus matter its self is the fabric of reality, and we can remain in that state, of none rebirth stuck in a dense material form for some time; if the CPU doesn't recalculate us into higher dimension existence.
The only reason I challenge you on this, is most people who say they don't believe in good and evil really do, they are just more loose on the definition.
My perceptions greatly changed in my NDE; God was so understanding, explaining to me what my great grandparents had done, which caused reactions, that led to conditions....

Never known anything spend so much detail to show, how and why things happen, not be illogical and make rash judgements.

Thus in what you're saying, even if you had horrifically murdered the dog, drinking, and washed in its blood like Christians do to Christ...

Are they evil, as in something so disgusting it should no longer exist or just confused somewhere along the line, and need counseling to help with their issues.

Now even if they are to be sent to the lower planes of existence, this is only a frequency thing; they can still recognize their own faulty logic, and maybe one day get out of there again.

Your question is a tricky one, as i do see the word 'evil' as the opposite to 'live', thus anything that infringes on an other's ability to live fairly can be seen as evil; yet applying the word to someone, in some godforsaken contexts, I'd not do.
there are no mention of actual physical levels of Naraka.
BG 16.16: Possessed and led astray by such imaginings, enveloped in a mesh of delusion, and addicted to the gratification of sensuous pleasures, they descend to the murkiest hell (narake).

Since they descend from this plane of existence, that could imply a level between us.

Within my NDE i didn't see levels within Hell; there maybe more below the dark realm i came to, as many religious cultures say there is a fire realm below it.
Firstly Asura is not "demon"
Since you're coming at this from an Abrahmic perspective again, referring more to a demon being as Socrates applied, it is a force that guides our ego in someway.
it is as the Gita puts it "Asura Ikcha", Adharmic desire
If you could show where that phrase is found, as find it confusing to the concepts discussed.

BG 16.19–16.20: These cruel and hateful persons, the vile and vicious of humankind, I constantly hurl into the wombs of those with similar demoniac natures in the cycle of rebirth in the material world. These ignorant souls take birth again and again in demoniac wombs. Failing to reach me, O Arjun, they gradually sink to the most abominable type of existence.

The word Asura seems to be used as a final result of someone following Adharmic behavior, it is a type of character trait, that then makes a person descend.

BG 16.6: There are two kinds of beings in this world—those endowed with a divine nature and those possessing a demoniac nature. I have described the divine qualities in detail, O Arjun. Now hear from me about the demoniac nature.

Also that translation for Asura wouldn't work in this context, as that would then be defining there are some people in this reality who are Adhamic, and some who are Dharmic; that is a horrid thing to say, like some people are just not capable of being good.
Tamas (Darkness, Ignorance) is used as a synonym for Naraka in the Gita text, indicating a state of "ignorance", and "Darkness", not a literal place.
BG 1.44: O Janardan (Krishna), I have heard from the learned that those who destroy family traditions dwell in hell for an indefinite period of time.

That seems to be stating it is a place, since people can be put there for a time.
even the chapter you quote Verse 18 says "The Supreme is in the Bodies of even the Asura"
BG 9.4 This entire cosmic manifestation is pervaded by me in my unmanifest form. All living beings dwell in me, but I do not dwell in them.

BG 9.29 I am equally disposed to all living beings; I am neither inimical nor partial to anyone. But the devotees who worship me with love reside in me and I reside in them.
not the Nature of the Atman
Atman can become corrupted by the Asura (demonic viruses), that it falls lower in planes of existence.
Maybe because Hindu understand Hinduism better then non Hindus????
We're in a world of delusion (Maya), where every so often an avatar has to come back to correct the total misunderstandings, and you're still trying to prove they were right. :oops:
If you ask a Hindu, "are there people of Asura (tamas) qualities", one would say yes
Whereas on checking the religious texts, as with most religious down here...

The Gita says certain people are Asura, as they're materialistic atheists, who haven't got the intelligence to see what is really going on; with the wise recognizing the errors, and choosing to live the righteous path...

The Gita its self, has a battle between light and dark going on, with us in the middle, similar to what we find in most inspired religions; though it might be hard to accept, personally want to question the facts, and not what religious people believe in a place near Hell.

Imagine for a second, that here is actually the top floor of Hell, and if you could see people's souls, you'd recognize loads of Asuras, that they've carried for many lifes, and not dealt with; thus they keep being sent back down here, with here slowly becoming heavier, as people don't realize here is our last chance before being kicked out to a lower plane of existence...

The text state it, yet the people are in denial, as you'd expect from demons who don't want to take responsibility for their own issues.

Still questioning the Gita statements, which seems to be saying some people are Asura because of their qualities, and some people are divine because of theirs...

Personally see these qualities, as not always being only their fault, as there are many Asuras that are within the Matrix; like viruses manipulating people to go the wrong way on purpose.

Asuras attach to the ego, and because some people are not wise enough, they don't recognize the difference between their soul, self and ego; thus they get easily led into the negative things discussed in the Gita.
it is the karma of a person (as detailed in this chapter) which is classified as either based on Tamas, Rajas, or Sattva
Our atman is a melody, as it does negative things, it encompasses these vibrations; as it does good deeds, these resonate well....

Eventually tho, that atman can either fall lower or higher in dimension by its frequency, with some becoming dark, and twisted; so the music is no loner recognizable.

The soul becomes its own actions. :innocent:
 
Last edited:

Satyamavejayanti

Well-Known Member
"wizanda"

Namaste,

BG 16.16: Possessed and led astray by such imaginings, enveloped in a mesh of delusion, and addicted to the gratification of sensuous pleasures, they descend to the murkiest hell (narake).

Since they descend from this plane of existence, that could imply a level between us.

Only if read in a literal manner, why do you read the Gita in a literal way, while excluding such literal interpretations when it comes to the concept of "demons", "Satan", ect in the Abrahamic/Christian Literature?

If you could show where that phrase is found, as find it confusing to the concepts discussed.

Well i never said that this exact word (Asura ikcha) appears in the Gita (that would be taking things too literal), sorry if ite seemed that way, as i have said in my full sentence "Adharmic desire, or Tamas and Kama driven actions, that is why it applies to peoples actions (Karma)", the Gita texts is advise on how one makes a decision based on KarmaYoga, if read in full the Gita does not put labels on People but the "actions", guided by "Asatya", "Kama", "krodha" ect this is what is implied when the description of actions based on Tamo guna are listed, these are "Ikcha", or desire from a subjective view, objectively these are "Asura".

BG 1.44: O Janardan (Krishna), I have heard from the learned that those who destroy family traditions dwell in hell for an indefinite period of time.

This is out of context, this is Arjuns reasons for not fighting, not a statement about there being any actual Hell ect.

BG 9.4 This entire cosmic manifestation is pervaded by me in my unmanifest form. All living beings dwell in me, but I do not dwell in them.

The Hindu explanation, from my Purohita is: that All existence (Sava-Bhuta) are dependent on Purusha (Krishna), and pervaded by the Avyakta (un-manifested), but the Avyakta Purusha is not dependent on this.

BG 9.29 I am equally disposed to all living beings; I am neither inimical nor partial to anyone. But the devotees who worship me with love reside in me and I reside in them.

In the Vayakta or manifest form as Krishna, Purusha becomes manifest in those who have Shruddha and Bhakti towards this manifestation, therefore the "Krishna", is realized within them self for the devotees, The manifested Krishna is realized in the Krishna Bhakta, Shiva in the Shiva Bhakta, Shakti in the Shakti Bhakta ect ect, but that does not render the Avyakta which is independent as partial as it is always everywhere, remember the virat purusha shown to Arjun is "kala", or time, which is subjective and objective, transcendent and immanent at the same time.

Atman can become corrupted by the Asura (demonic viruses), that it falls lower in planes of existence.

Read Chapter 2 again

The Gita says certain people are Asura,

Not people, but certain karma and Mattas.

Dhanyavad
 

wizanda

One Accepts All Religious Texts
Premium Member
Only if read in a literal manner, why do you read the Gita in a literal way, while excluding such literal interpretations when it comes to the concept of "demons", "Satan", ect in the Abrahamic/Christian Literature?
See projecting 'this is what i do', is where your ego lets you down....

Personally keep everything as variables, as can interpret things, in many different fashions at the same time..

Yet within dealing with computer code, Biblical prophecy, and many other items, the specifications are set by what is stated, not by what people want it to say.

Thus the variable $satan to me has multiple different definitions, depending whom you're speaking to, what information is presented in their sources, etc.

BG 16.16: Possessed and led astray by such imaginings, enveloped in a mesh of delusion, and addicted to the gratification of sensuous pleasures, they descend to the murkiest hell (narake).

There is no reason in the text alone, to assume that there isn't a physical place called Narake below this realm, and then based on nearly every ideology globally saying the same thing, not sure why anyone would want to ignore it even existing.

If you can show specification within the text, that allocates, it is a fictional metaphor that isn't given a direction, a description, and some of the things found in the environment there, then by all means interested in the evidence.
Well i never said that this exact word (Asura ikcha) appears in the Gita (that would be taking things too literal)
Firstly Asura is not "demon", it is as the Gita puts it "Asura Ikcha", Adharmic desire, or Tamas
Normally take people to meaning, something close to what they state it does...

If we saw everything people say, as some metaphor that isn't in the specifications, there would be no logic in communication.
This is out of context, this is Arjuns reasons for not fighting, not a statement about there being any actual Hell ect.
It isn't out of context in the slightest, the whole conversation is a careful reiteration of a divine conversation, and to only see it in one context, misses the point.

Again based on what is there, there is no reason to see that both Krishna and Arjuna accept this place exists, and is there as a place of punishment for the wicked; as we find in most ideologies globally.
The Hindu explanation, from my Purohita is: that All existence (Sava-Bhuta) are dependent on Purusha (Krishna), and pervaded by the Avyakta (un-manifested), but the Avyakta Purusha is not dependent on this.
To me the CPU manifests reality, and just as everything is made manifest it doesn't mean it is Godly; unless it chooses to connect with the divine consistently.

BG 9.4 This entire cosmic manifestation is pervaded by me in my unmanifest form. All living beings dwell in me, but I do not dwell in them.

To take to pieces both references:

The context isn't applied to if 'all living beings' are to be 'dependent' on anything.... Instead the end of the line simply says, not everything that lives is holy.

The idea that the unmanifest Core makes reality, and yet is unattached to it seems to be the sentence; so the meaning applied doesn't seem to fit with the context of what is being discussed.

Fair enough when taking into account other literature, and ideas, we can start to see a very metaphoric description; yet it seems unstructured when compared.
Avyakta which is independent as partial as it is always everywhere
Agree with the idea that line, states that everyone who practises devotion with true love connects to the CPU; yet it also says that it processes without biases.

Therefore between these ideas, it means that not everyone down here in the Matrix is divine; as many are sent back down here to learn, those who understand can return to a state of bliss in Nirvana.

With the ultimate fate of here being destroyed at Mahapralaya; yet those who've already attained Oneness shall remain (BG 6.40).
Not people, but certain karma and Mattas.
The Gita in chapter 16, says people... You're adding words, and concepts from a vast array of ideologies.
Read Chapter 2 again
Using one chapter to not see all the other clauses is clumsy...

Souls can be imprisoned in Naraka for a time, which it states is a murky place below us.

Plus as chapter 16 is discussing souls are given lower existences...

Think it is highly logical based on what it is saying, that there is a sifting process that makes demons fall, and angels rise. :innocent:
 
Last edited:

Satyamavejayanti

Well-Known Member
"wizanda,"

Namaste,

See projecting 'this is what i do', is where your ego lets you down....

This could be seen as a egoistic statement as well, i could say the same thing when you describe yourself as a Avatar and having a NDE, its just your Ego.

There is no reason in the text alone, to assume that there isn't a physical place called Narake below this realm, and then based on nearly every ideology globally saying the same thing, not sure why anyone would want to ignore it even existing.

I have descended into the lowest level of depression having this conversation, its all down Hill from here, I may be coming down with something, i think this is a slippery slope that falls to nowhere.

Now can you interprete my dilemma, which level of Naraka am I in according to you.

If you can show specification within the text, that allocates, it is a fictional metaphor that isn't given a direction, a description, and some of the things found in the environment there, then by all means interested in the evidence.

Who said anything about a Metaphor?

Normally take people to meaning, something close to what they state it does...

Which is the same as taking things literal.

It isn't out of context in the slightest, the whole conversation is a careful reiteration of a divine conversation, and to only see it in one context, misses the point.

This statement by you is quite telling that you don't understand the Gita at all, this is a new level of ignorance from you. lower level of ignorance, but im not sure which level?????

The context isn't applied to if 'all living beings' are to be 'dependent' on anything.... Instead the end of the line simply says, not everything that lives is holy.

You are only "seeing this in one context and missing the point".

Fair enough when taking into account other literature, and ideas, we can start to see a very metaphoric description; yet it seems unstructured when compared.

Yes, when one takes the Gita out of the Context of the Mahabharatta, and the Mahabharatta out of the context of Ithihasa, ithihasa out of context from Purana, Purana out the context of Smriti and when people put Smiriti into the context of Shruti, there seems to be these confusions portrayed by many like yourself.

The Gita in chapter 16, says people... You're adding words, and concepts from a vast array of ideologies.

Using one chapter to not see all the other clauses is clumsy...

Take your own advise Mr.

Plus as chapter 16 is discussing souls are given lower existences...

Ok, read chapter 17 then
 

wizanda

One Accepts All Religious Texts
Premium Member
Now can you interprete my dilemma, which level of Naraka am I in according to you.
We're not in Naraka, it is below us in the lowest quantum level, in the dense fabric of matter....

Having had a NDE, you can pretend the place is here; yet having been there, read many NDEs, and religious texts describing the place, personally can't pretend to ignore the facts in the information we have. :rolleyes:
This could be seen as a egoistic statement as well, i could say the same thing when you describe yourself as a Avatar and having a NDE, its just your Ego.
Some people just did in the Journal thread of mine explaining everything that has happened in my life, and it would be perfectly acceptable psychologically to expect that to begin; yet if someone spent the time analyzing all the data, it can be seen these things are possible.
Who said anything about a Metaphor?
You've just claimed in the lines above that Naraka is here, which then eliminates the text defining it as a real place below us, and reasserts it as a metaphor. :oops:
This statement by you is quite telling that you don't understand the Gita at all, this is a new level of ignorance from you. lower level of ignorance, but im not sure which level?????
Please define what you're talking about, rather than just make rude statements about me, without any logic or reasoning behind them; instead of embarrass Hinduism by just acting like a typical troll.
You are only "seeing this in one context and missing the point".
Define what you're talking about....

If you're not capable of having an intellectual conversation (Satsang) without being rude, and making sweeping statements about me; express that and will leave you in ignorance, rather than trying to articulate complex points for you. :(
Yes, when one takes the Gita out of the Context of the Mahabharatta, and the Mahabharatta out of the context of Ithihasa, ithihasa out of context from Purana, Purana out the context of Smriti and when people put Smiriti into the context of Shruti, there seems to be these confusions portrayed by many like yourself.
When we look at any collection of writings by different theologians, we need to be able to assess each individually, as well as in context of the whole...

This is why this topic is on the Gita as defined by the title....

Having spent years working out inconsistencies within the Biblical theologies, it has taken dissecting each author, and knowing that people are siding with certain writing styles...

Same is happening in the Hindu setting; the Upanishads has a totally different theological direction in lots of places compared to the Gita, and the early writings each have their own angle presented as well.

Tying them in a big knot, and saying here untie this to me, using complex words that have massive contexts spread out over many text is why many things seem confused.
Take your own advise Mr.
I do, which is why re-read the whole Gita after out conversation on the other thread...

Plus again specified what meanings were being missed by only taking chapter 2, and ignoring the other sections; show me where i've missed a context within just the Gita, and always happy to re-read, study to comprehend what i've missed....

If we're near Hell, we need all the help we can get, as we're all delusional in someway. ;)
Ok, read chapter 17 then
It doesn't define where people are sent on a translation level, seems more on what qualities send people where... As the end line defines there are places to go after.

BG 17.28 O son of Pritha, whatever acts of sacrifice or penance are done without faith, are termed as “Asat.” They are useless both in this world and the next.

Please take into account this next line, as honestly don't want to harm anyone; yet your replies will hurt your own karma. :innocent:

BG 17.15 Speech that hurts no one, that is true, is pleasant to listen to and beneficial, and the constant study of the scriptures – this is austerity in speech.
 
Last edited:

Kirran

Premium Member
@wizanda, you might be more fruitful in spreading your ideas if you didn't act in such a condescending manner towards those who challenge or question them.
 

wizanda

One Accepts All Religious Texts
Premium Member
@wizanda, you might be more fruitful in spreading your ideas if you didn't act in such a condescending manner towards those who challenge or question them.
Generally try not to use 'you' in sentences, to explain everything carefully; yet when someone is consistently projecting from their ego, to the point of being rude, then feel have to say something to try and maintain righteousness.

Apologize if unintentionally ever come across as condescending from having advanced knowledge of the divine, and acting like i know what I'm talking about...

Yet generally will always try to explain carefully, and state please ask me if you don't understand; which is the opposite of having a condescending attitude (with descending inclination).

My goal is to raise everyone up, i've been sent down near to Hell to help people, not push them down; yet if someone is unconsciously lowering them self by their actions, personally think the best way is to point out that the behavior is not befitting.

I love being challenged by someone who can match the argument intellectually, and not make personal statements; yet deal with the topic presented...

Which we can see at the start of the thread with SomeRandom recognizing they'd been wrong about this having an Abrahmic agenda, and us shaking hands as such...

Same with Aupmanyav where we've discussed many concepts, with an awareness we're coming from a totally different angle at times...

Yet some people have not allowed that I'm not Abrahamic even after repeatedly stating it, also liking posts that go against me, like it is some us vs them style debate, thus appropriately the only option is to challenge the egotistical statements that don't fit into Satsang.

Though quote me if you feel i've been condescending, and not contextually accurate to help people, and will appolgize, fix, and make every effort to be better. :innocent:
 
Last edited:

Satyamavejayanti

Well-Known Member
"wizanda,"

Namaste,

We're not in Naraka, it is below us in the lowest quantum level, in the dense fabric of matter....

Wait so we are not in a place "of Man",????

You've just claimed in the lines above that Naraka is here, which then eliminates the text defining it as a real place below us, and reasserts it as a metaphor. :oops:

when i write "I have descended into the lowest level of depression having this conversation, its all down Hill from here, I may be coming down with something, i think this is a slippery slope that falls to nowhere.",

Are you assuming that all my words and intent is Literal?, Metaphorical?, or just a figure of speech? How am i claiming that "Naraka" is here when i Asked a question??????????

Please define what you're talking about, rather than just make rude statements about me, without any logic or reasoning behind them; instead of embarrass Hinduism by just acting like a typical troll.

Sorry for acting like a troll, I assure you I am Human.

Is a question a "Statement"?

The entire Gita if one reads it, is Arjuns questions to Krishna.
You quoted about BG.1.44-
BG 1.44: O Janardan (Krishna), I have heard from the learned that those who destroy family traditions dwell in hell for an indefinite period of time.

Then made a remark-
"That seems to be stating it is a place, since people can be put there for a time."

All i am asking is how is a "Question", a "Statement",

Define what you're talking about....

What i mean is that to me you are seeing the "Gita", in the context of "Hell, "Heaven", "Demons", "end of Kali Yuga", theology ect, and picking and choosing the statements that fit into your preconceived idea about your NDE or your being a "AVATAR", then when you get advised that this is not the only perspective on the Gita ect, you claim a higher Authority and experience such as you being given this information from a Divine source, or you make such egoistic statements as.....
Having spent years working out inconsistencies within the Biblical theologies, it has taken dissecting each author, and knowing that people are siding with certain writing styles...
...Then claim the ego is ripe in others, that others are deluded, that you know it all.

Tying them in a big knot, and saying here untie this to me, using complex words that have massive contexts spread out over many text is why many things seem confused.

Who is pressuring you to "untie", the Hindu texts and ideas????

Plus again specified what meanings were being missed by only taking chapter 2, and ignoring the other sections; show me where i've missed a context within just the Gita, and always happy to re-read, study to comprehend what i've missed....

Well the Gita is a conversation, the Gita conversation is in the Context of the Mahabharatta, each chapter is traditionally a different subject mater according to Arjuns questions, the answers are sometimes Universal, sometimes Arjun specific, sometimes Mahabharatta specific, some details are relevant to some readers while some details are relevant to other readers (this is why both Advaita and Dvaita vedanta use the Gita but come up with different ideas), traditionally the Gita is not read in order to understand, but is explained by a certified Guru, who can contextualize it for each individual Bhakta.

You need a Guru to find your context, cant get it from reading books, welcome to Hindu Dharmah.

Please take into account this next line, as honestly don't want to harm anyone; yet your replies will hurt your own karma. :innocent:

Then why did you quote it? oh maybe you just want me to feel bad, is this a subtle way of telling me that I am being rude to a "Avatar"?

I am a Hindu, I am Brahman, I am Sat-Chit-Annand, and so are you, why take offence from a equal?
 

wizanda

One Accepts All Religious Texts
Premium Member
why take offence from a equal?
Equals wouldn't dream to be rude to anyone, if they can help it, as they'd know what power words have.
Then why did you quote it? oh maybe you just want me to feel bad, is this a subtle way of telling me that I am being rude to a "Avatar"?
The textual statement was to be righteous in chapter 17; if you choose not to be, it doesn't affect me, it affects you...

And if you were being rude to a beggar on the street, you'd still get the same affects to your karma in someways...

Yet to be told, and know you might be speaking to someone who could be an avatar, proves the point in Kalki Purana, that people will be rude to dignitaries, and thus showing no respect for the Dharma.
Wait so we are not in a place "of Man",????
Quote the whole line, lol... Naraka (Sanskrit: नरक) is the Sanskrit word for the underworld; literally, of man.

It is an underworld, the same as is described in all these other religions globally.

Defining here as a place of man or Naraka tho isn't correct; both are just realms of consciousness.
Are you assuming that all my words and intent is Literal?, Metaphorical?, or just a figure of speech?
Sometimes we can't find a bool (true, false, null) answer for things, we can just stay with lots of variables until it makes more sense.

Yet we can spot the fallacies in a subject, before trying to establish any form of understanding...

So within what you said the implications of Naraka being here, when i've been there myself, it sort of over turns any belief questions about its existence.
Is a question a "Statement"?
Yes, as on the specifications within the question, it shows what was believed for such a question to be asked.
you claim a higher Authority and experience
Never play the authority card to say others are wrong, said got first hand experience to say they're wrong, and have been shown what will occur.
What i mean is that to me you are seeing the "Gita", in the context of "Hell, "Heaven", "Demons", "end of Kali Yuga", theology ect, and picking and choosing the statements that fit into your preconceived idea
Have you considered, maybe these things exist in the Gita, maybe my knowledge given to me by a voice speaking through the whole of reality, is slightly more authoritative than anything others have interpreted, and thus this is what the Gita says?

Plus to imply i've got preconceived ideas, when my knowledge of what is within the religious texts keeps increasing; regularly bring up new totally alien points based on specific textual references.
Then claim the ego is ripe in others, that others are deluded, that you know it all.
Wow, you don't know the Biblical case, unaware of and unbelieving of prophecy, and you have the nerve to accuse.

Also your definition of words is totally different to mine, the ego isn't ripe in people; it is a projection from the self, to protect the soul.

Again being shown the Biblical prophecy at 5/6, 15, 22 years old, and then whilst studying; one has been guided by the divine all my life, and again you're accusing the divine as a know it all for explaining these things, have fun with what you're earning... sorry.
Who is pressuring you to "untie", the Hindu texts and ideas????
In your last quote from your Purohita were many massive Hindu concepts, which then placed along side BG 9.4 to analyze every point, and to help show how the logic was flawed in someway.

If you mean overall, i was asked at 15 to read all the religions, then build a place as a last chance for peace before the destruction, then the return of the enlightened; so even if i don't fight, everyone will be destroyed anyway, which can now confirm in many religious texts, just like Arjuna.
You need a Guru to find your context, cant get it from reading books, welcome to Hindu Dharmah.
Poor people, same in many of the religions, everyone has scholars to explain spiritual matters, and with a majority being demons, really feel for the lack of understanding in the overall direction assumed. :innocent:
 
Last edited:

Nyingjé Tso

Tänpa Yungdrung zhab pä tän gyur jig
Vanakkam,

I don't know what you are trying to achieve arguing with someone who claims to be an Avatar and who is taking such a condescending tone.

This is the kind of fruitless thread where it all goes on and on and on for pages of arguing with a deaf person who believes he is somehow a god and thinks he is right anyway.

You can say whatever you want he'll still be like "you poor lost childrens, I'll explain to your still immature minds..."

So, whatever ?

*Shrug*

Aum Namah Shivaya
 

wizanda

One Accepts All Religious Texts
Premium Member
pages of arguing with a deaf person
How is someone deaf, who is quoting the textual sources, showing the reasoning, using evidence globally saying the same thing...

Think again this side taking, leads people into not questioning the evidence, and instead making assumptions based on limited info.
This is the kind of fruitless thread
That says more about yourself, and comprehension of learning wisdom from any situation... Nothing is fruitless, unless we choose to be ignorant.
who believes he is somehow a god
Said an avatar, which to me are just representatives from Brahman (God); having had a NDE, multiple prophecy fulfillments, and advanced knowledge all my life, it isn't a belief, it is just experiences, with evidence in the texts. :innocent:
 

Nyingjé Tso

Tänpa Yungdrung zhab pä tän gyur jig
Vanakkam

We are all beings of experience.
What would make my experiences less valid than yours? Or SomeRandom experiences less valid than mine?

What makes you think you hold authority above all Avatars ?
What do you know about my experiences or SomeRandom's experiences?

Aum Namah Shivaya
 

wizanda

One Accepts All Religious Texts
Premium Member
What would make my experiences less valid than yours? Or SomeRandom experiences less valid than mine?
No one is taking from others experiences, and am quite happy to discuss the inner workings of Heaven, and Hell with people who have been to both...

Otherwise if we're talking from books, that have been misunderstood, then clearly we'd think that the first hand experiences would be taken as a more valid source.
What makes you think you hold authority above all Avatars ?
Who said anything about being above others? Personally feel the lowest....

Which is why I'm consistently checking what everyone else has had to say, to verify my own knowledge.
What do you know about my experiences or SomeRandom's experiences?
Not much on a forum, in person can tell loads from a person's soul rhythm, etc.

Which is why unlike yourself, I'm not walking into a conversation making derogatory assumptions about someone, before examining, discussing what a person understands...

Me and SomeRandom said Namaste to each other, and apologized for being harsh to begin with; as his intellectual intelligence shone through on his post, he was strong, and stood his ground without being rude, thus i saw the divine within them...

Those who are just rude according to the Gita are just demons, and i get their experience might have lead them into being a hurt person; yet if you claim to follow the Dharma, live it, if you've had rough experiences, transduce them into being a better person. :innocent:
 

Kirran

Premium Member
Yes, when one takes the Gita out of the Context of the Mahabharatta, and the Mahabharatta out of the context of Ithihasa

Have you read the entirety of the Mahabharata, Satyam? Quite the labour of love!

I haven't myself, although I'm very broadly familiar with the content.
 
Last edited:

Nyingjé Tso

Tänpa Yungdrung zhab pä tän gyur jig
Vanakkam


No one is taking from others experiences, and am quite happy to na the inner workings of Heaven, and Hell with people who have been to both...

There lies a problem: you see the world in a very abrahamic mindset, either black or white. Hinduism is a vast umbrella of beliefs, but you can't apply this mindset to it.

Otherwise if we're talking from books, that have been misunderstood, then clearly we'd think that the first hand experiences would be taken as a more valid source.

On this we agree. Although, as we all are immature souls input way, we should take those experiences to reflect upon ourselves, not taking them as a "I'm special" seal of approval and trying to change anyone or anything else than ourselves with them.


Which is why I'm consistently checking what everyone else has had to say, to verify my own knowledge.

You listen, you reflect, but do you truly understand what people are trying to explain ? You turn a deaf ear and keep talking about your view in a very condescending tone because you are an avatar who have seen and experienced all. You do not deem yourself the lowest when you assume others to have less understanding of the world or their religion because they are following it or following another teacher than your words.
Are you reflecting ? Or will you dismiss this as a proof that I am a demon ?

Which is why unlike yourself, I'm not walking into a conversation making derogatory assumptions about someone, before examining, discussing what a person understands...

I did walk into a conversation advising my brothers and sisters to not give too much care and energy into a discussion with someone who can't go out of his own views or delusions as it will be a waste. And it's not baseless nor meant to be insulting, it's a fact that is supported by quite a lot of threads that are similar in nearly every point here.
There have been hundreds of discussions and as much occasions to see what you understand.

Me and SomeRandom said Namaste to each other, and apologized for being harsh to begin with; as his intellectual intelligence shone through on his post, he was strong, and stood his ground without being rude, thus i saw the divine within them...

Those who are just rude according to the Gita are just demons, and i get their experience might have lead them into being a hurt person; yet if you claim to follow the Dharma, live it, if you've had rough experiences, transduce them into being a better person. :innocent:

Namaste, hello, vanakkam, we all say it and fortunately we all mean it.
Politeness is a virtue but it doesn't make a person more or less intelligent,interesting or better than another.

I do not claim anything, I watch. And I see that you are quick to accuse other of being rude and to sit on baseless facts about you yet you just did exactly the same. You are quick to judge a person and teach lessons yet you don't want to be judged on your acts and words and refuses to be taught anything.

You can coat any word or message in sugar to make it sweet, it will not change anything on what is behind. Of the intend.

Now, since I have no care of your judgements, I will carry on with my demonic life

Aum Namah Shivaya
 

wizanda

One Accepts All Religious Texts
Premium Member
There lies a problem: you see the world in a very abrahamic mindset, either black or white.
Assumptions are really dangerous to truly understanding; don't look at things in that context...

The quantum dimensions are divided by frequency, this is based on my NDE; the basement is dark as it is low vibration, as we ascend things become lighter.

BG 16.16: Possessed and led astray by such imaginings, enveloped in a mesh of delusion, and addicted to the gratification of sensuous pleasures, they descend to the murkiest hell (narake).

BG 8.26:The path of light of spiritual practice and Self-knowledge and the path of darkness of materialism and ignorance are thought to be the world’s two eternal paths. The former leads to salvation and the latter leads to rebirth as human beings.
Although, as we all are immature souls input way
Not sure about immature, might act infinitely youthful; yet having possibly been here since the beginning of reality, constantly looking for ways to improve still.
not taking them as a "I'm special" seal of approval and trying to change anyone or anything else than ourselves with them.
I've been asked at 5/6, 15, 22 years old, to try to share with the world before the Tribulation; thus it is just a job, personally don't feel special, feel like a freak for being sent from Heaven sometimes.
You listen, you reflect, but do you truly understand what people are trying to explain ?
Try hard to understand all opinions, we can't reply to their understanding, without comprehending where they are coming from.

Yet based on overwhelming evidence globally, personally will stick with the more scientific methodology, then some understanding that doesn't fit the text, and reality.
your view in a very condescending tone because you are an avatar
Not got a condescending tone, the word means to talk down to people... I'm trying to explain to raise them up, carefully explaining all the concepts, and details.

Plus would never talk down to anyone because of being an avatar, would do the exact opposite and be a servant, spending most of my life trying to explain to help people.
Or will you dismiss this as a proof that I am a demon ?
We've all got inner demons, as Aupmanyav pointed out, every avatar other than Vishnu is said to be Asura...

I don't dismiss anyone, that is your own logic, i've not got that mentality.
someone who can't go out of his own views or delusions as it will be a waste.
So this is a definition of condescending, which is why your ego keeps accusing me of the same...

You've dismissed what i was saying in the threads as being a waste, that somehow i must be wrong, as your religious teachers have told you that is the way to interpret the texts, even though i can show a totally different logic using the same material.

Plus since my basis for theological points down here, is to use all available resources in a scientific methodology; it isn't my views or delusions, these are things i've experienced, and can show globally.
Namaste, hello, vanakkam, we all say it and fortunately we all mean it.
After seeing these lines in the Gita, I'm no longer saying Namaste to people, unless i truly recognize the divine within you.

BG 9.4: This entire cosmic manifestation is pervaded by me in my unmanifest form. All living beings dwell in me, but I do not dwell in them.

BG 9.29: I am equally disposed to all living beings; I am neither inimical nor partial to anyone. But the devotees who worship me with love reside in me and I reside in them.
Politeness is a virtue but it doesn't make a person more or less intelligent,interesting or better than another.
Again massive assumptions; generally we find in society the more educated, and intelligent people are normally far more polite, and well mannered...

The same the Gita is presenting, those who are wise try to follow a righteous path; whilst the foolish are rude, and keep heading lower.
yet you don't want to be judged on your acts and words and refuses to be taught anything.
I'm on a religious forum to challenge my ideas, to question what i've not questioned, to examine from more perspectives....

Love constructive criticism, want people to analyze with evidence, everything that is stated.

Honestly speak for yourself, as lots of what you've said has nothing to do with me, and is a lot of projections from the way you think.
You are quick to judge a person and teach lessons
Always quick to teach lessons, it is the difference between someone in Satya yuga, and those who will be left out.

Yet quick to judge again is your mentality, I'm defending the 'you' statements coming from the ego; used to be a little more lenient; yet found if the ego steps in, which personally see as the place demons attach to, then it needs quickly stating...

The wise like SomeRandom apologized quickly and empathetically; whereas those consumed by their own ego, often just argue against the person, rather than even considering the topic presented.
You can coat any word or message in sugar to make it sweet, it will not change anything on what is behind. Of the intend.
The intended energy from me is to share love, light, and harmony, i don't know anything else; the idea you've created a monster who doesn't listen, is condescending, arrogant, unthoughtful, etc is all projection.
Now, since I have no care of your judgements, I will carry on with my demonic life
I've got no Judgement, as aware the Tribulation, and then Mahapralaya is next; just here to see if anyone wants help understanding what is required to be in our reality. :innocent:
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top