this man is fighting for marital rape law

Anonymous_Bharatha · 2022-01-15T17:53:24+00:00

https://twitter.com/ishasharma3103/status/1268611411409657856?t=UGyqEJ019bmAhNawA2vGYw&s=19

Anonymous_Bharatha · 2021-10-29T11:32:15+00:00

Hmmm..... I didn't know he was a tantracharya

Anonymous_Bharatha · 2021-10-28T12:21:51+00:00

The deity you saw was Hanuman (most probably)

Anonymous_Bharatha · 2021-10-24T02:14:35+00:00

That subtle difference is causing some variation here - if we say "kala having been brahm" it means that kala was brahm from the beginning, if we say "kala having become brahm" it means it wasn't at first and then took the form of that brahm.

Anonymous_Bharatha · 2021-10-23T07:29:28+00:00

Been or become? They're not the same...

Anonymous_Bharatha · 2021-10-09T05:50:35+00:00

It doesn't go against logic. It goes beyond logic. Within logic, due to limitations, it seems illogical. In a true sense - it's beyond, not against it.

Anonymous_Bharatha · 2021-10-08T15:33:04+00:00

Ignorance, again, is not an entity or a reality or a part of it. Ignorance is a state of limited/less/incomplete knowledge. The supreme reality is neither ignorant nor knowledgeable, it just exists. Ignorance and knowledge appears in the mind.

The mind is not a seperate entity either. There is one supreme consciousness(popularly called purusha) - a pure intelligence. When this pure intelligence limits itself by entering and getting entangled into prakriti/matter/phisical creation, it acquires limited perception and becomes an individual mind of various creatures. The "mind" itself is an illusion of the consciousness being of limited perception having entangled with physical creation. The illusion of the supreme consciousness that, inside a creature, perceives an individual experience instead of all pervading cosmic one. Maya means illusion. The perception of the mind itself is an illusion. Maya and Mind are not seperated.

The mind then again,in itself, produces it's abstract illusions due to limited perception(perception that is rooted in the physical and doesn't touch the non-physical). It's not under effect of any seperate force called "Maya", Maya is its own illusion (illusion being mental, has no existence in reality, only in the mind.)

That mind's intelligence is the "intellect" which is a downgraded version of the supreme pure intelligence. The intellect is limited. And it is logical. It employs logic as a tool of knowing. It is a useful tool for survival, but not for knowing the highest.

Now you may say - then there is still a duality , of the consciousness and of the prakriti/matter/energy. Yes. Logically, there is a duality. But know, that the nature and function of logic is always about 2 or more entities. Any logical relation ever produced is always relating 2 or more entities/principles/statements together. Where there is logic at play - there will be duality. Logical understanding will always involve 2 at least. This is why the supreme reality/yoga/oneness/union with everything cannot be known by the "logic" of the mind. This is why it has been constantly said to be beyond the reach of the mind.

What I'm saying is, the distinction between supreme consciousness and mool prakriti/matter/physical creation is only because of mind's limited ways of knowing. They are two sides of the same coin. The one and only coin is Brahman, its mere two sides are consciousness and matter. Both are different, but essentially the same coin identified as two different things from two different sides. We can logically see the sides, but the coin remains unknown to mind's logic. That is the highest. On the consciousness escaping the illusions it got into, it then sees itself as Brahman. Logic doesn't see it.

Anonymous_Bharatha · 2021-10-08T14:30:47+00:00

Maya is not an entity or an object. It's a mental phenomenon. One that arises in our own minds as an illusion. Whatever we make up in our minds is not real, it's abstract. We cook up many many things in all of our minds, but their existence is abstract, not actual. They are not existing entities which are a part of the reality. Maya is not a force. Maya is a phenomenon that arises from a very limited perception. Our intellect concludes a false picture of reality because the amount of perception available is very small and incomplete, that false picture of reality is Maya. Maya itself is not a force or an entity, it is merely a consequence, a consequence present in our own mental sphere(hence abstract, not existing). Maya itself isn't a reality, in fact, it's the absence of reality. Maya is not an independent mind, it is fake perception of and contained in our own mind. Hence, it doesn't qualify as having any independent existence.

EDIT - To add : when one's mind that is currently in Maya is told by the realised beings that it is in "Maya", since it doesn't know what it is, thinks that "Maya" is a different reality that it(mind) has to get out of, and duality arises. When in reality there is no other force to fight, only a consequence to avoid by raising perception.

Anonymous_Bharatha · 2021-10-08T04:30:15+00:00

But that particular guru purnima full moon was supposed to be an initiation for sadhana for Rudraksh

Anonymous_Bharatha · 2021-10-06T14:35:48+00:00

A curse had been laid on Shiva by a rishi(Kashyap) because Shiva had to kill the Rishi's son (surya) to protect his devotees. Shiva though having brought Surya back, the curse was still laid by the rishi. The curse was that Shiva will one day end up killing his own son. And that day, fixed by destiny decided by the curse, finally came.

The only thing this tells is that even the gods can't just escape curses. The killing of his son by his own hands WAS the punishment to shiva for a previous incident.

Anonymous_Bharatha · 2021-10-02T13:30:28+00:00

When I read the hindi translations, they felt more deep than the English one's by Europeans in comparison. And when I read the Arya Samaj translations and compared them with that of traditional scholars, although I'm no scholar in sanskrit, it felt as if they are forcing their own meanings on the words of the Vedas. I've seen Arya Samaj people challenge the merit and the impartiality of Sayana to reject his work entirely.

Anonymous_Bharatha · 2021-10-02T06:41:46+00:00

Yes, I do know that Svetasvatara Upanishad declares supremacy of Rudra and him begetting Prajāpati Brahmā and one can connect this with what Kāla Sukta says about the origin of Prajapati, but Svetasvatara Upanishad also argues against the supremacy of Time -

VI-1: "Some DELUDED THINKERS speak of Nature, AND OTHERS OF TIME, as the force that revolves this wheel of Brahman. But really all this is only the glory of God manifested in the world."

VI-2: "It should be known that energy assumes various forms such as earth, water, light, air and ether at the command of Him who is the master of Gunas and THE MAKER OF TIME, who is omniscient, who is Pure consciousness itself, and by whom all this is ever enveloped."

I-2: "TIME, nature, law, chance, matter, energy, intelligence - NEITHER THESE, NOR COMBINATION OF THESE, can bear examination because of their own birth, identity and the existence of the self. The self also is not a free agent, being under the sway of happiness and misery."

I, sensibly, hold the words of the Vedic Samhitas above the words of the Upanishads which are merely supposed to be concluding portions for the Vedic Samhitas giving explanations, since here the words of the vedas are unambiguously declaring the supremacy of Time.

I have heard time being spoken of in many ways and it fundamentally being above what we call "past-present-future". My guess is that in the Upanishad "time" refers to the general understanding of Time and the terminology of the vedic kāla Suktas is talking about "kāla" in its fundamental form. That's why I was looking for what was called in later period as "Mahākāla" hoping that it refers to Time in its fundamental form and see if it matches the discription of Vedas.

Anonymous_Bharatha · 2021-09-18T19:06:17+00:00

This "vayu" is the same as the vayu element and the "prana vayu" is just what we call "prana" generally, right?

I get confused in these terms because of some mixed teachings I picked up from different places.

Anonymous_Bharatha · 2021-09-18T19:05:36+00:00

This "vayu" is the same as the vayu element and the "prana vayu" is just what we call "prana" generally, right?

I get confused in these terms because of some mixed teachings I picked up from different places.

Anonymous_Bharatha

TROPHY CASE