Thread: The cycle between Hell , Earth , Heaven and Abode of God

Desidude I have strongly debated you on Israel but I really do have to say to you I admire your bluntness. I think like most prophets he at this point in his existence needs an audience. Whether that need is driven by conceit/vanity or unconditional love I suppose is for his audience to decide.

I personally listen up to a point and then say, thank you, but I need to tend my own garden.

I think we all have a tendency to spread to much fertilizer in our gardens so I guard against it when others want to donate some. I am as the prophets say, already quite full of sheeyit. But thanks anyways.

Originally Posted by dattaswami

The impartial God comes again and again for every generation (Yada Yada hi…..Gita) but you are not having the chance to meet the human incarnation again since you have no human rebirth. One may get the human rebirth in extreme exceptional situation and you should not depend on that because it involves high risk. The human birth, the urge for salvation and coming in contact with the human incarnation are the three real fortunes and the importance increases from left to right in the order. Therefore, simply having the human birth and having the urge by taking orange robe are not sufficient.

Unless you contact the Lord in human form and get the right knowledge for correct implementation, every thing is waste (Manushyatvam Mumukshatvam, Mahapurasha Samsrayah, Durlabham—Sankara).

As I said, time and again, Shankar was a respected philosopher, not a messiah. God in human form might have also been an interpretation of living entities being small containers to his version of God, the Nirgun ball of light. Since we are all small lights - we merge with the big one after all judgment is made. That's all there is to it.

I have read what you've said. It is said that the Kalki avatar is yet to come and will do so riding a white horse, wielding a sword and will eradicate the impure and will rule for a thousand years, ushering in a new golden age. He will have other living immortals such as Hanuman and Parshuram along his side - this is what I call avatars. Even even avatars, these men have imperfections and limitations of their culture. It was apparent. Ram behaved like a Golden Age ideal person, whilst Krishna was more of ideal Kshatriya. So it depends on the form of culture they are born in. We do not have, never had, records of a standard behavioural pattern of avatars, everyone was distinct.

If there is this distinction of how they lived their lives, are suggesting that we accept new standards and gamble on the 'right' avatar due to ignorance? Let's face it, even though the personality may differ, one thing remains - complete perfection.

Any mortal, no matter in any state of material imperfection *will* recognize God. Any mortal - because he is perfect. That's my point all along. Shankar was a philosopher *not* Lord Shiva's incarnation - all I can see is him being some sort of open affair where every minor philosopher taking pot shots at him. They even comment on his relationship with his wife - seriously, when is it enough? That's blatant blasphemy. Most of it comes from Shivaites who preach Shankar and call him Adi Shankar, what is that supposed to mean? How can you put him at par with Shiva? Or even Arjun? It's clearly stated that there is a distinction between devas and mortals. For the non Hindus, devas are similar to angelic beings in control of elements and are regarded to as demi Gods since there is a hierarchy in place. Indra is similar is Zeus.

Originally Posted by roobarb

I think we all have a tendency to spread to much fertilizer in our gardens so I guard against it when others want to donate some. I am as the prophets say, already quite full of sheeyit. But thanks anyways.

Yeah but you don't know the extent of such ideas seaming in. You've got to stop it at one point. Started this with an eye to exchange information anyways - I am intrigued to know more about what goes on behind the mind of a person (or his followers) looking to become God.

Originally Posted by Desidude666

As I said, time and again, Shankar was a respected philosopher, not a messiah. God in human form might have also been an interpretation of living entities being small containers to his version of God, the Nirgun ball of light. Since we are all small lights - we merge with the big one after all judgment is made. That's all there is to it.

I have read what you've said. It is said that the Kalki avatar is yet to come and will do so riding a white horse, wielding a sword and will eradicate the impure and will rule for a thousand years, ushering in a new golden age. He will have other living immortals such as Hanuman and Parshuram along his side - this is what I call avatars. Even even avatars, these men have imperfections and limitations of their culture. It was apparent. Ram behaved like a Golden Age ideal person, whilst Krishna was more of ideal Kshatriya. So it depends on the form of culture they are born in. We do not have, never had, records of a standard behavioural pattern of avatars, everyone was distinct.

If there is this distinction of how they lived their lives, are suggesting that we accept new standards and gamble on the 'right' avatar due to ignorance? Let's face it, even though the personality may differ, one thing remains - complete perfection.

Any mortal, no matter in any state of material imperfection *will* recognize God. Any mortal - because he is perfect. That's my point all along. Shankar was a philosopher *not* Lord Shiva's incarnation - all I can see is him being some sort of open affair where every minor philosopher taking pot shots at him. They even comment on his relationship with his wife - seriously, when is it enough? That's blatant blasphemy. Most of it comes from Shivaites who preach Shankar and call him Adi Shankar, what is that supposed to mean? How can you put him at par with Shiva? Or even Arjun? It's clearly stated that there is a distinction between devas and mortals. For the non Hindus, devas are similar to angelic beings in control of elements and are regarded to as demi Gods since there is a hierarchy in place. Indra is similar is Zeus.

It seems that you have not understood the concept of Lord in Human form. In Gita Lord Krishna told that He comes to this world in human form in every human generation. God need a medium to talk to us so that we are benifited by this without tension we can touch Him talk to Him, see Him and colive with Him and clear all our doubts when there is this natural alternative God will adopt this.

Probably you may not be interested in seeing God now itself. There are sincere devotees who cry for Lord, for such devotees Lord incarnate.

I know that you are worried that the Lord perhaps gets modified into the human body and thus the unchangeable Lord undergoes a change. Do not worry about this point, because the Lord is never modified into the human body. He only enters into the human body. The word ‘Ashritam’ in the verse of the Gita “Manushim tanumashritam” means the entry of the Lord into the human body and not the modification of the Lord into a human body. This is clarified by Lord Krishna in the Gita in the verse “Avyaktam Vyaktimapannam”.

When a person says that he was sent by God as a messenger and that He has brought the message of the Lord, again the same problem appears. When God is giving the message to that person, nobody has seen it. That person is the single witness. Now the only alternative left in order to believe that the knowledge was given by the Lord Himself, is that we have to test the knowledge. Had we seen the transfer of the knowledge from God to that person with our eyes, we need not have tested that knowledge. It must definitely have been the divine knowledge. If we have to believe a statement of that person without the simultaneous universal perception, then we have to believe even a fraud person who utters the same statement.

If you give us a piece of metal and say that is gold, since it was given by God, we cannot believe it. Either we must have seen God giving it to you or we must analyse the metal. Moreover the knowledge is not like the piece of metal, which will not change by transfer. When a teacher explains a concept to somebody and asks him to deliver it to his students, it cannot be transferred as it is. The transfer of knowledge consists of not only the concept but also the explanation. The concept might have been transferred but nobody other than that original teacher can give the same way of explanation of the concept by which the concept pierces into the heart. Therefore to propagate the divine knowledge, the Lord Himself comes down in a human form. Arjuna said the same in the Gita “Tvadanyah…” which means that except the Lord, nobody can preach the divine knowledge and clarify all spiritual doubts.