-
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!
Swaminarayan Mahamantra
- Thread starter celina
- Start date
Whats it to you? Why dont you o and medtate on yourself? As your belief is that all is Brahman anyway so what should it matter to you whether one is an avtaar or not? Isi t your job to teach? If all is Brahm there is no karm and none is to be worshipped then what does it matter if one gains pleasure in worshipping an entity? Why should it affect those that believe all as Brahaman? As nothing needs to be taught, nothing has to be realised nothing has to be worshipped!
So what intrest me is taht if one gains pleasure from the worship of somone they call Parbrahm why should it affect those that believe all as Brahaman.
truth is that in Swaminarayan Bhagwans time there were plenty with your type of thinking. They all realised themselves. Unfortunately you were not there. As then you would have realised for yourself. Whereas today you just paste your drivel upon the forum.
So what intrest me is taht if one gains pleasure from the worship of somone they call Parbrahm why should it affect those that believe all as Brahaman.
truth is that in Swaminarayan Bhagwans time there were plenty with your type of thinking. They all realised themselves. Unfortunately you were not there. As then you would have realised for yourself. Whereas today you just paste your drivel upon the forum.
Don Penguinoini
Modi.
Jiv Ishwar Maya Brahma Parabrahma. Me=jiv, god= parabrahma, abode of god=brahma. Tbe big fate gate that seperates ishwar and i is MAYA!!!!!! We cannot be the same. You aint getting moksh by worshipping yourself. One human can be greater then other, duh!
Jiva =all living entities
Ishwar= Vairat Purush, Pradhan Purush etc.
Maya= Bhagwans Shakti also known as Maha Maya, Prakruti and also incarnates as Durga etc.
Brahman= the abode of Supreme Personality of Godhead and Mukts residing here also referred to as Brahm.
Parbrahman= Supreme Personality of Godhead who has a divine form and is the creator of inumberable of universes.
Ishwar= Vairat Purush, Pradhan Purush etc.
Maya= Bhagwans Shakti also known as Maha Maya, Prakruti and also incarnates as Durga etc.
Brahman= the abode of Supreme Personality of Godhead and Mukts residing here also referred to as Brahm.
Parbrahman= Supreme Personality of Godhead who has a divine form and is the creator of inumberable of universes.
Don Penguinoini
Modi.
Copycat!
Don Penguinoini
Modi.
Made up stuff cant be passed as granth/
Yeah it can. LOL.
The quote Aupmanyav states doesnt talk about the other eternal entities. It talks about the Jagat alone as oppose to Brahman.
But he has spelt 'jagat' as 'jagan' anyway. LoL Brahman makes mistakes i guess. LOL
Why are you as Brahman then feeling pain? What morals does your barren belief system leave man?
Why are some humans born disabled, in bad health, poor according to you?
The quote Aupmanyav states doesnt talk about the other eternal entities. It talks about the Jagat alone as oppose to Brahman.
But he has spelt 'jagat' as 'jagan' anyway. LoL Brahman makes mistakes i guess. LOL
Why are you as Brahman then feeling pain? What morals does your barren belief system leave man?
Why are some humans born disabled, in bad health, poor according to you?
Don Penguinoini
Modi.
Celina started a good thread here, lets keep it like that.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Aupmanyav believes in only one entity. There is no form in reality and there can be many perceived forms. Brahman does not do anything, it just exists. All 'seen to be done' is our illusion. Brahman does not feel pain or pleasure. Does a cosmic ray feel pain or pleasure? Are you not abusing my faith by calling it barren? When you see humans born disabled, you are not seeing Brahman.
Jagat/Jagan: These are rules of 'sandhi' in Sanskrit. The word 'Jagat' changes into 'jagan' when it combines with a word starting with 'ma'; as in 'jaganmatra' and the quoted 'jaganmithya'. It could also change to 'da' as in 'jagadambike' or 'jagaddhatri'.
First of all you fail to answer my other post on the other threads.
Secondly, if the Brahman you have understood to be doesnt do anything what is its purpose? A cosmic ray is not Chaitanya just like a stone. As it has no jeev. Hence that is different from Brahm and Parbrahm both. As such items are Jada and made from the 5 mahabhoots. Your faith is infertile. You know that yourself. You stated yourself in your post above that All is Brahman and Brahman does not do anything.
You fail to answer my question about why some humans are born disabled. Why some animals are fishes, why some children die at young age, why some starve from hunger, why we have natural disasters, why is there water? Etc. I want to here the other views your faith has on it besides it is because you are not seeing Brahman. Thats a barren view. Do you even class yourselves as Hindus? And if so, your Brahman then who is Parbrahman? As Shri Krishna has come and stated Himself. Milk is milk water is water.
Thirdly, whatever sandhi Sanskrit states about jagat being jagan, that is all fine. Point being, that your quote in your earlier post is talking about the prithvi, or the world.
My point being that it doesnt states anything about the 5 eternal entities being mithya. It talks about the Jagat alone being mithya as oppose to Brahman. Which is true as the jagat is mithya as its made from the Mahatatvas. Whereas Brahman is one of the 5 eternal entities.
Jay Shri Swaminarayan
Jay Shri Krishna
Secondly, if the Brahman you have understood to be doesnt do anything what is its purpose? A cosmic ray is not Chaitanya just like a stone. As it has no jeev. Hence that is different from Brahm and Parbrahm both. As such items are Jada and made from the 5 mahabhoots. Your faith is infertile. You know that yourself. You stated yourself in your post above that All is Brahman and Brahman does not do anything.
You fail to answer my question about why some humans are born disabled. Why some animals are fishes, why some children die at young age, why some starve from hunger, why we have natural disasters, why is there water? Etc. I want to here the other views your faith has on it besides it is because you are not seeing Brahman. Thats a barren view. Do you even class yourselves as Hindus? And if so, your Brahman then who is Parbrahman? As Shri Krishna has come and stated Himself. Milk is milk water is water.
Thirdly, whatever sandhi Sanskrit states about jagat being jagan, that is all fine. Point being, that your quote in your earlier post is talking about the prithvi, or the world.
My point being that it doesnt states anything about the 5 eternal entities being mithya. It talks about the Jagat alone being mithya as oppose to Brahman. Which is true as the jagat is mithya as its made from the Mahatatvas. Whereas Brahman is one of the 5 eternal entities.
Jay Shri Swaminarayan
Jay Shri Krishna
celina
Swaminarayan is GOD!
Moses the God Archetype*
Active Member
Jai Krsna
Paraprakrti
Custom User
Well, you're coming from an advaita viewpoint. I would be more interested in seeing a discourse on the debate of the alleged Godhood of Swaminarayan from a dvaitist point of view wherein there is a quantitative distinction between jiva-tattva and Vishnu-tattva, brahman and Parabrahman, atma and Paramatma.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
The problem, Mahesh, is that you have not read science (as far as I surmise). There are laws of chance and laws of probability in science. Why a child is a male and why another is a female. It all depends on chance. Out of the 10 million sperm ejauculated at one time each one of them is capable of producing a male child or a female child. But just one does. It is a matter of chance.
Science has made their guesses about what makes it more likely, for example, if the vaginal fluid is basic, the probability of begetting a male child increase. Although they have not arrived at a conclusion about it.
Similarly the chances of abnormalities in a female ova and male sperm are always there. The chances of begetting a mongoloid child increase if the age of the mother is more. These are biological reasons, And these reasons produce a healthy or an abnormal child.
Life has evolved in many directions. So from the original cyanobacteria (organisms without a nucleus), it has evolved in the various species that we have in the world today. And these various life-forms give rise to others of their own kind, sometimes with modifications (mutation) and sometimes with improvements to suit their environment (evolution). What has Brahman to do with these. For Brahman, they are all the same, a cyanobacterium or a human.
This is 21st Century. I wish hindus would not always remain koopa-mandukas (frogs of a well) and talk in a way suitable for their yuga. Yes, you are not seeing the real cause of it, the substrate, the energy, the Brahman which constitutes all that is perceived and unpercieved in this world (Science says that 75% of the energy is not visible, they call it dark matter). It is quite understandable that you might not be able to understand the naunces of science, but I expect you to understand Brahman, which is extensively explained in Geeta and perhaps even in Swami Sahajananda's writing. If Brahman is the only entity, then the five entities or fifty are all false reading of the scriptures. The fault is in your understanding. One sentence of Chhandogya Upanishad which you quoted explains it all, 'Sarva Khalvidam Brahma'. (Sarva - all, khalu, and not khalv as you wrote - material, Idam - this, Brahma - Brahman = All this material is Brahman; the sandhi in khalu + idam gives rise to Khalvidam)
(This is an answer to the last post by Mahesh)
Science has made their guesses about what makes it more likely, for example, if the vaginal fluid is basic, the probability of begetting a male child increase. Although they have not arrived at a conclusion about it.
Similarly the chances of abnormalities in a female ova and male sperm are always there. The chances of begetting a mongoloid child increase if the age of the mother is more. These are biological reasons, And these reasons produce a healthy or an abnormal child.
Life has evolved in many directions. So from the original cyanobacteria (organisms without a nucleus), it has evolved in the various species that we have in the world today. And these various life-forms give rise to others of their own kind, sometimes with modifications (mutation) and sometimes with improvements to suit their environment (evolution). What has Brahman to do with these. For Brahman, they are all the same, a cyanobacterium or a human.
This is 21st Century. I wish hindus would not always remain koopa-mandukas (frogs of a well) and talk in a way suitable for their yuga. Yes, you are not seeing the real cause of it, the substrate, the energy, the Brahman which constitutes all that is perceived and unpercieved in this world (Science says that 75% of the energy is not visible, they call it dark matter). It is quite understandable that you might not be able to understand the naunces of science, but I expect you to understand Brahman, which is extensively explained in Geeta and perhaps even in Swami Sahajananda's writing. If Brahman is the only entity, then the five entities or fifty are all false reading of the scriptures. The fault is in your understanding. One sentence of Chhandogya Upanishad which you quoted explains it all, 'Sarva Khalvidam Brahma'. (Sarva - all, khalu, and not khalv as you wrote - material, Idam - this, Brahma - Brahman = All this material is Brahman; the sandhi in khalu + idam gives rise to Khalvidam)
(This is an answer to the last post by Mahesh)
This is a recent study of modern science!!! Please have a read.
"My name is Marco Biagini and I am a Ph. D. in Solid State Physics
Materialism and atheism are incompatible with the scientific view of the universe.Science has in fact proved that all chemical, biological and cerebral processes consist only in some successions of elementary physical processes, determined in their turn only by the laws of quantum mechanics. Such a view of biological processes does not allow to account for the existence of consciousness, which existence implies then the presence in man of an unphysical element.Such element, being unphysical, can be identified as the soul.
I would like to invite you in the site:
http://xoomer.virgilio.it/fedeescienza/englishnf.html
where I analyse in detail the incongruencies of the materialistic conception of the mind, on the basis of our present scientific knowledges about brain and matter.
In the first article entitled “Mind and brain” you can find a general discussion of the mind and brain problem from a scientific point of view.In the second article entitled “Scientific contraddictions in materialism”
you can find an explanation of the fundamental inconsistencies of the typical arguments used by materialists, such as the concept of emergent, macroscopic or holist property, complexity, information, etc.
Basically, science has proved that the so-called emergent properties are nothing but arbitrary classifications of some successions of elementary physical processes; in other words, they are only abstract concepts used to describe in an approximated way the real processes.
Since consciousness is a preliminary necessary condition for the existence of any concepts or classifications, the materialist attempts to explain consciousness as an emergent property
are absolutely inconsistent from a logical point of view.
No entities which existence presupposes the existence of consciousness can be considered as the cause of the existence of consciousness.
The problem of the existence of the soul is strictly connected to the one of God's existence, as I explain in the section called “FAQ: answers to visitors' questions”, where you can find the answer to many other typical questions, such as "Are there any scientifically proved miracles?", "Does the existence of the universe imply the existence of God?", "Can science explain God?", "Can science establish which is the true religion?", "Can science explain consciousness in the future?", and many others.
An independent argument to prove directly the existence of God is the following.
Science has proved that the state of the universe is determined by some specific mathematical principles and equations, the laws of physics. However we know that mathematics cannot exist by itself, but it exists only as a thought in a conscious and intelligent mind. In fact, a mathematical equation is only an abstract concept, which existence presupposes the existence of a person who conceives such a concept. Therefore, the existence of this mathematically structured universe does imply the existence of a personal God; this universe can exist only if there exists a conscious and intelligent God conceiving it . Some people object that the mathematical equations are not the principles ruling the universe, but they are only a representation imagined by man. This argument however does not stand, as we can easily understand with the following consideration: if the universe did not have an intrinsic mathematical structure, one couldn't explain how it is possible to described so precisely all mechanical, electrical, magnetic, chemical and biological phenomena only by the same system of mathematical equations. Since one century, we observe a systematic confirmations of the laws of physics, in our numberless studies on newer and newer systems and materials. Consider that it is possible to invent infinite different mathematical equations, which wouldn't be able to describe the processes we observe in nature. It is not possible to account for the extraordinary agreement between the experimental data and the laws of physics without admitting that the state of the universe (what the phylosopher Kant called "noumenal" or "thing-in-themselves" reality) must necessarily be determined by some specific mathematical laws. The existence of these mathematical laws implies the existence of a personal, conscious and intelligent Creator. Atheism is incompatible with the view of the universe, presented by modern science.
Marco Biagini
Ph.D in Solid State Physics
"My name is Marco Biagini and I am a Ph. D. in Solid State Physics
Materialism and atheism are incompatible with the scientific view of the universe.Science has in fact proved that all chemical, biological and cerebral processes consist only in some successions of elementary physical processes, determined in their turn only by the laws of quantum mechanics. Such a view of biological processes does not allow to account for the existence of consciousness, which existence implies then the presence in man of an unphysical element.Such element, being unphysical, can be identified as the soul.
I would like to invite you in the site:
http://xoomer.virgilio.it/fedeescienza/englishnf.html
where I analyse in detail the incongruencies of the materialistic conception of the mind, on the basis of our present scientific knowledges about brain and matter.
In the first article entitled “Mind and brain” you can find a general discussion of the mind and brain problem from a scientific point of view.In the second article entitled “Scientific contraddictions in materialism”
you can find an explanation of the fundamental inconsistencies of the typical arguments used by materialists, such as the concept of emergent, macroscopic or holist property, complexity, information, etc.
Basically, science has proved that the so-called emergent properties are nothing but arbitrary classifications of some successions of elementary physical processes; in other words, they are only abstract concepts used to describe in an approximated way the real processes.
Since consciousness is a preliminary necessary condition for the existence of any concepts or classifications, the materialist attempts to explain consciousness as an emergent property
are absolutely inconsistent from a logical point of view.
No entities which existence presupposes the existence of consciousness can be considered as the cause of the existence of consciousness.
The problem of the existence of the soul is strictly connected to the one of God's existence, as I explain in the section called “FAQ: answers to visitors' questions”, where you can find the answer to many other typical questions, such as "Are there any scientifically proved miracles?", "Does the existence of the universe imply the existence of God?", "Can science explain God?", "Can science establish which is the true religion?", "Can science explain consciousness in the future?", and many others.
An independent argument to prove directly the existence of God is the following.
Science has proved that the state of the universe is determined by some specific mathematical principles and equations, the laws of physics. However we know that mathematics cannot exist by itself, but it exists only as a thought in a conscious and intelligent mind. In fact, a mathematical equation is only an abstract concept, which existence presupposes the existence of a person who conceives such a concept. Therefore, the existence of this mathematically structured universe does imply the existence of a personal God; this universe can exist only if there exists a conscious and intelligent God conceiving it . Some people object that the mathematical equations are not the principles ruling the universe, but they are only a representation imagined by man. This argument however does not stand, as we can easily understand with the following consideration: if the universe did not have an intrinsic mathematical structure, one couldn't explain how it is possible to described so precisely all mechanical, electrical, magnetic, chemical and biological phenomena only by the same system of mathematical equations. Since one century, we observe a systematic confirmations of the laws of physics, in our numberless studies on newer and newer systems and materials. Consider that it is possible to invent infinite different mathematical equations, which wouldn't be able to describe the processes we observe in nature. It is not possible to account for the extraordinary agreement between the experimental data and the laws of physics without admitting that the state of the universe (what the phylosopher Kant called "noumenal" or "thing-in-themselves" reality) must necessarily be determined by some specific mathematical laws. The existence of these mathematical laws implies the existence of a personal, conscious and intelligent Creator. Atheism is incompatible with the view of the universe, presented by modern science.
Marco Biagini
Ph.D in Solid State Physics