Selfishness is a virtue

Spirituality
#121

Yasya deve para bhaktir
yatha-deve tatha gurau
tasyaite kathita hy arthah
prakasante mahatmanah

“Only unto those great souls who have implicit faith in both the Lord and the spiritual master are all the imports of Vedic knowledge automatically revealed.” (Svetasvatara Upanisad 6.3)

Again, more fudging of the words of the Upanishads, selective quoting and fanciful reinterpretation by theologians. The translation above is incorrect: The word para-bhakti means supreme-devotion, it does not mean faith, and you know I am right :wink: To be devoted to something does not mean one must have faith, it simply means one is completely focused and absorbed in something. Bhakti in the context of the Upanishads is nothing like the Bhakti that is later reformulated in the Bhakti movement and the Bhakti Sutras Vedantins practice Bhakti through devotion to the self, by constantly remembering the self, contemplating and meditating on it - not through idol worship or ritual as practiced in Bhakti Yoga.

The Upanishads are the last texts you should be citing to support your position because the spirit of the Upanishads is opposed to ritual and worship of external gods. The major Upanishads present the doctrine of Advaita, non-dualism, the non separation of Atman and Brahman and the identity of Atman and Brahman. The use of the word ‘lord’ in the Upanishads denotes the self, not god as understood by Vaishnavists.

If we look at the Upanishad you cited we can see the context of what lord means:

I-3: Practising the method of meditation, they realized that Being who is the God of religion, the Self of philosophy and the Energy of science; who exists as the self-luminous power in everyone; who is the source of the intellect, emotions and will; who is one without a second; who presides over all the causes enumerated above, beginning with time and ending with the individual soul; and who had been incomprehensible because of the limitations of their own intellect.

Here it is very explicitly says that the Being/lord is the self luminous self who yogis realize through meditation.

I-6: In this infinite wheel of Brahman, in which everything lives and rests, the pilgrim soul is whirled about. Knowing the individual soul, hitherto regarded as separate, to be itself the Moving Force, and blessed by Him, it attains immortality.

Here the Upanishad explicitly says the self-realized one knows that the individual soul(Atman) is identical to the supreme soul(Brahman)

I-7: This is expressly declared to be the Supreme Brahman. In that is the triad. It is the firm support, and it is the imperishable. Knowing the inner essence of this, the knowers of Veda become devoted to Brahman, merge themselves in It, and are released from birth.

Here the Upanishad directly equates the self to the Supreme Brahman and defines devotion as merging oneself completely into Brahman. In Vedanta devotion is constant remembrance and meditation on the self.

I-15-16: As oil in sesame seeds, as butter in curds, as water in underground springs, as fire in wood, even so this Self is perceived in the self. He who, by means of truthfulness, self-control and concentration, looks again and again for this Self, which is all-pervading like butter contained in milk, and which is rooted in self-knowledge and meditation – he becomes that Supreme Brahman, the destroyer of ignorance.

Here the Upanishad clearly demonstrates that the self is present as the essence of all using the analogies of oil in sesame seeds, butter in curd, fire in wood, which realized in meditation and once realized ones becomes the supreme Brahman. Again showing the identity of Atman and Brahman.

I-16: This Divinity pervades all directions in their entirety. He is the first-born (Hiranyagarbha). He has entered into the womb. He alone is born, and is to be born in future. He is inside all persons as the Indwelling Self, facing all directions.

Another clear reference saying that Brahman, variously called the great being, the divinity and the first born is identical to the self in all people.

Translated by Swami Tyagisananda – Published by Sri Ramakrishna Math, Chennai

The Upanishad uses the term Atman and Brahman synonymously throughout. Thus it stand proven that the use of the word ‘Lord’ in the verse you translated denotes the self and not an external god as understood by Vaishnavists.

The Upanishads do not support Vaishnavist theology, because they make it clear Atman = Brahman and even explicitly state “I am Brahman” This is why they had to be reinterpreted by Vaishnavist theologians like Ramunjacharya and Madvacharya, using elaborate verbal gymnastics, twisting and turning the words and fudging them until it supported the party line:

Ye are sinners, unholy and diseased, ye must redeem yourself by serving and worshiping the one true and only god and doing his will only, not thy will, else ye will be punished for thy insolence. Do not ye think that ye can know with thy puny mind his glory, only men of faith and his chosen ones can know him.

(Now ye be a good devotee and live as we tell ye and do everything we say, for we are men of god :wink: )

#122

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;76039]
Ye are sinners, unholy and diseased, ye must redeem yourself by serving and worshiping the one true and only god and doing his will only, not thy will, else ye will be punished for thy insolence. Do not ye think that ye can know with thy puny mind his glory, only men of faith and his chosen ones can know him.

(Now ye be a good devotee and live as we tell ye and do everything we say, for we are men of god :wink: )[/QUOTE]

From one perspective you are right in your words, from another you are wrong. The difference between them is your understanding.

How confusing the desert is!
Instead of finding the way out you heap on chains and packs, and have no donkey.

#123

There is no ‘self’. That is an illusion - to that end, selfishness is good because what you do for yourself you do for another, but the energy gets stuck there. If you give to ‘others,’ the energy creates a circle in which the ego is minimized and your connection to all that you ARE is more apparent in your consciousness. It is a matter of nihilism/materialism or a more consciously aware view.

#124

[QUOTE=YogiDiva;76051]There is no ‘self’. That is an illusion - to that end, selfishness is good because what you do for yourself you do for another, but the energy gets stuck there. If you give to ‘others,’ the energy creates a circle in which the ego is minimized and your connection to all that you ARE is more apparent in your consciousness. It is a matter of nihilism/materialism or a more consciously aware view.[/QUOTE]

There is no ‘self’ ? That is an illusion!

what gives? what is your definition of the self?

#125

I would answer in my own words but its late. . .here’s the next best thing. . .http://scottsampson.blogspot.com/2010/04/illusion-of-self.html

#126

Self is that which is identified with. =]

#127

I read the article Yogadiva. I agree very much with the message of the article, that there is no separate self. However, I am not saying there is a separate self either. I am saying there is only one self(Atman = Brahman) This one self pervades all of the universe, it is present in everybody, in every atom. There is one really good illustration of this by Swami Rama Tirtha, the first Vedanta guru to the West. He recounts a dialogue between a master and his student. Here I present it in a modified form:

Master: What did you do today?
Student: Nothing master
Master: No you did not do nothing, try to remember what you did today?
Student: Nothing master, I woke up, bathed, had breakfast and came here to you?
Master: You did even more than this, try to remember what you did today?
Student: I am not sure what else to say. Well, I woke up, bathed, had breakfast, walked over here to you?
Master: You did a lot more than you think, for instance when you ate, you were doing countless processes breaking down the food with your teeth, digesting the food your stomach, converting the food into energy for your body, using the energy to build new muscles. When you walked here, you coordinated every muscle in your body, millions and millions of processes you did, millions of calculations in the brain to just walk here. But there is something even more you did, do you know?
Student: What master?
Master: Not only did you coordinate every process within your body, you coordinated every process outside of your body. A constant exchange between your body and the rest of the universe was taking place. You received the light with your eyes, the air with your lungs, the sound with your ears, smell and taste with your nose and tongue. In fact for you to even move at all, you had to coordinate with the planets and their gravitation fields, for is the gravitational fields were even slightly off you would not be able to move even a finger. But there is something even more you did, do you know?
Student: No master!
Master: You also had to also coordinate the alignment and orbits of the planets by sustaining the structure of the entire universe on the macrocosm level by keeping the sun burning and keeping all the planets in orbit, on the microcosmic level by keeping all the atoms in the correct ratio, for if even if their ratio was offset by 0.00000000000001% the entire universe would collapse.

Know that the same power that is operating to disgest your food, to coordinate every cell in your body and your senses, is the same power that is burning in the sun, that is keeping the planets in their orbit, keeping the atoms in perfect ratio, that is maintaining the entire universe. This is that all pervading self, in you and me, in everything! Without that self there would be no universe. You are that.

The Self, the great being that pervades this existence is immortal and infinite. It is present at all times in every state of experience. In our waking experience, in our dreaming experience, even in our deep sleep. In deep sleep when all consciousness of the entire universe disappears, the self is still there.
Know that Self and become immortal.

#128

Implicit faith an essential part of superior devotion (para bhaktir). How can you focus on something you don’t have faith in?
Atma and brahman can be translated as self, but deve doesn’t mean self, it means God.
Bhakti in the Upanisads is the same thing as in the Bhagavad-gita or any other scripture. People with an impersonal concept of Absolute Truth don’t appreciate the presence of bhakti in the Upanisads, nor those passages that explicitly state the difference between the finite individual self and the infinite supreme self, or God.

nityo nityanam cetanas cetananam
eko bahunam yo vidadhati kaman

“The One eternal (nityo) is cognizant (cetanas) and the many eternals (nityanam) are also cognizant (cetananam). The One (eko) is supplying all the necessities of life for the many (bahunam).” (Katha Upanisad 2.2.13)

The individual selves are part of the supreme self, thus they are one with the supreme self in quality, not in quantity.
How could God, the infinite supreme self ever be covered by the illusionary energy and identify himself matter? That would mean that illusion was supreme, not God. However, God’s eternal fragmental parts can be covered by maya when they decide to turn away from God. That doesn’t mean they exist outside of God, but their knowledge of their relation with God is lost. Instead of identifying themselves as eternal parts of God, they identify with their temporary external dress and thus become conditioned by matter. Those who want to get out of this situation without reviving their relationship with God take to an impersonal concept of God, making themselves believe they are identical with him. This is just another illusion.

The question remains unanswered: If you were the Supreme Lord, how could have possibly come to the condition you are in now?

#129

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;76066]Master: What did you do today?
Student: Nothing master
Master: No you did not do nothing, try to remember what you did today?
Student: Nothing master, I woke up, bathed, had breakfast and came here to you?
Master: You did even more than this, try to remember what you did today?
Student: I am not sure what else to say. Well, I woke up, bathed, had breakfast, walked over here to you?
Master: You did a lot more than you think, for instance when you ate, you were doing countless processes breaking down the food with your teeth, digesting the food your stomach, converting the food into energy for your body, using the energy to build new muscles. When you walked here, you coordinated every muscle in your body, millions and millions of processes you did, millions of calculations in the brain to just walk here. But there is something even more you did, do you know?
Student: What master?
Master: Not only did you coordinate every process within your body, you coordinated every process outside of your body. A constant exchange between your body and the rest of the universe was taking place. You received the light with your eyes, the air with your lungs, the sound with your ears, smell and taste with your nose and tongue. In fact for you to even move at all, you had to coordinate with the planets and their gravitation fields, for is the gravitational fields were even slightly off you would not be able to move even a finger. But there is something even more you did, do you know?
Student: No master!
Master: You also had to also coordinate the alignment and orbits of the planets by sustaining the structure of the entire universe on the macrocosm level by keeping the sun burning and keeping all the planets in orbit, on the microcosmic level by keeping all the atoms in the correct ratio, for if even if their ratio was offset by 0.00000000000001% the entire universe would collapse.

Know that the same power that is operating to disgest your food, to coordinate every cell in your body and your senses, is the same power that is burning in the sun, that is keeping the planets in their orbit, keeping the atoms in perfect ratio, that is maintaining the entire universe. This is that all pervading self, in you and me, in everything! Without that self there would be no universe. You are that.[/QUOTE]

prakrteh kriyamanani
gunaih karmani sarvasah
ahankara-vimudhatma
kartaham iti manyate

?The spirit soul bewildered by the influence of false ego thinks himself the doer of activities that are in actuality carried out by the three modes of material nature.? (Bhagavad-gita 3.27)

We don’t even know how our body functions what to speak of controlling it. These are all nonsense talks. When you are ill you go to the doctor. What kind of God?

What is the use of conversations between master and student if both are the one undivided self? Impersonal philosophy always defeats itself.

#130

[QUOTE=YogiDiva;76055]I would answer in my own words but its late. . .here’s the next best thing. . .http://scottsampson.blogspot.com/2010/04/illusion-of-self.html[/QUOTE]

That doesn’t say “there is no self” that says the field is unified.

A view Which i am currently in perhaps agreement with.

[I]so what is the self? [/I]

I hope we are not back to this I am God in disguise nonsense! Right Surya? I mean we know how preposterous that idea is from a standpoint of logic. Let alone wisdom.

There is no self! More happy work of the negative power! They get a colassal grin everytime thats taken up to be true! They rub their bellies, and pat each other on the back. High Fives all around!

#131

[QUOTE=Aksara;76067]Implicit faith an essential part of superior devotion (para bhaktir). How can you focus on something you don’t have faith in?
Atma and brahman can be translated as self, but deve doesn’t mean self, it means God.
Bhakti in the Upanisads is the same thing as in the Bhagavad-gita or any other scripture. People with an impersonal concept of Absolute Truth don’t appreciate the presence of bhakti in the Upanisads, nor those passages that explicitly state the difference between the finite individual self and the infinite supreme self, or God.

nityo nityanam cetanas cetananam
eko bahunam yo vidadhati kaman

“The One eternal (nityo) is cognizant (cetanas) and the many eternals (nityanam) are also cognizant (cetananam). The One (eko) is supplying all the necessities of life for the many (bahunam).” (Katha Upanisad 2.2.13)

The individual selves are part of the supreme self, thus they are one with the supreme self in quality, not in quantity.
How could God, the infinite supreme self ever be covered by the illusionary energy and identify himself matter? That would mean that illusion was supreme, not God. However, God’s eternal fragmental parts can be covered by maya when they decide to turn away from God. That doesn’t mean they exist outside of God, but their knowledge of their relation with God is lost. Instead of identifying themselves as eternal parts of God, they identify with their temporary external dress and thus become conditioned by matter. Those who want to get out of this situation without reviving their relationship with God take to an impersonal concept of God, making themselves believe they are identical with him. This is just another illusion.

The question remains unanswered: If you were the Supreme Lord, how could have possibly come to the condition you are in now?[/QUOTE]

[B]Bravo![/B]

#132

Implicit faith an essential part of superior devotion (para bhaktir). How can you focus on something you don’t have faith in?

I do not need faith to focus on my chair. The chair is an object that is present to my senses and thus is knowledge for me. I also see do not need faith in atoms, because atoms are known directly through their effects, such as nuclear radiation and electricity. Krishna, on the other hand is not an object one can know either through perception or through inference. Krishna, whether he existed or not, his history as it is told, whether he really was the one true god or not is an article of faith.

The fact remains the translation you cited(from a pro-bhakti website) is incorrect. The word used is ‘supreme devotion’ not 'faith ’ Moreover, I am surprised at how you could continue to pretend that the Upanishad is talking about devotion to god, despite me showing you very clear references in the same Upanishad that say very explicitly the self is the lord and one must meditate on that self and become it. You really need to stop reading my posts selectively, it’s annoying :stuck_out_tongue:

Bhakti in the Upanisads is the same thing as in the Bhagavad-gita or any other scripture.

No it isn’t. In Vedanta(The Upanshadic philosophy) bhakti means devotion to the self. Constant meditation on the self. Constant contemplation on the self. In the Upanishad you cited it very clearly says meditation on the self. It does not say, and I repeat, it does NOT say, worship of the one true god Krishna.

Again I recommend you read my thread “4 Yogas” which shows clearly the difference in interpretations of bhakti and karma in the different types of Yoga.

nityo nityanam cetanas cetananam
eko bahunam yo vidadhati kaman

“The One eternal (nityo) is cognizant (cetanas) and the many eternals (nityanam) are also cognizant (cetananam). The One (eko) is supplying all the necessities of life for the many (bahunam).” (Katha Upanisad 2.2.13)

So now you are selectively quoting from the Katha Upanishad. I will show you that the Katha Upanishad also makes it very clear that the self is the lord:

1-II-7. Of the Self many are not even able to hear; Him many, though they hear, do not comprehend. Wonderful is the expounder of the Self and attainer, proficient. The knower (of the Self) taught by an able preceptor is wonderful.

1-II-12. The intelligent one, knowing through concentration of mind the Self that is hard to perceive, lodged in the innermost recess, located in intelligence, seated amidst misery, and ancient, abandons joy and grief.

1-II-18. The intelligent Self is not born, nor does It die. It did not come from anywhere, nor did anything come from It. It is unborn, eternal, everlasting and ancient, and is not slain even when the body is slain.

1-II-20. The Self that is subtler than the subtle and greater than the great is seated in the heart of every creature. One who is free from desire sees the glory of the Self through the tranquility of the mind and senses and becomes absolved from grief.

1-III-3. Know the Self to be the master of the chariot, and the body to be the chariot. Know the intellect to be the charioteer, and the mind to be the reins.

1-III-4. The senses they speak of as the horses; the objects within their view, the way. When the Self is yoked with the mind and the senses, the wise call It the enjoyer.

1-III-12. This Self hidden in all beings does not shine. But by seers of subtle and pointed intellect capable of perceiving subtle objects, It is seen.

1-III-13. Let the wise man merge speech in his mind, merge that (mind) into the intelligent self and the intelligent self into the Mahat. (Let him then) merge the Mahat into the peaceful Self.

2-I-1. The self-existent damned the out-going senses. Therefore one sees externally and not the internal Self. Someone (who is) intelligent, with his eyes turned away, desirous of immortality, sees the inner Self.

-I-3. By the self (a man knows) form, taste, odour, sound, touch, and the sexual joy. What remains here (unknowable to the Self)? This verily is that (thou seekest).

2-I-4. Knowing that great and all-pervading Self by which one sees (the objects) both in the sleep and the waking states, the intelligent man grieves no more.

2-II-6. I will describe to thee, O Gautama, this secret ancient Brahman and also what becomes of the Self after death.

2-II-7. Some jivas enter the womb for assuming bodies; others go into the unmoving, in accordance with their karma and with their knowledge.

2-II-8. This Purusha who is awake when all are asleep, creating all things cherished, is certainly pure; that is Brahman; that is called the Immortal. All worlds are strung on that; none passes beyond that. This verily is that (thou seekest).

2-II-9. Just as fire, though one, having entered the world, assumes a separate form in respect of every form, so does the in-dwelling Self of all beings, though one, assume a form in respect of every form, and is outside it.

2-II-10. Just as wind, though one, having entered the world, assumes a separate form in respect of each form, so does the in-dwelling Self of all beings, though one, assumes a form in respect of every form and is outside it.

-II-11. Just as the sun, which is the eye of the entire world, is not tainted by the external impurities seen by the eyes, so also, the in-dwelling Self of all beings, though one, is not tainted by the sorrows of the world, It being external.

2-II-12. Eternal happiness belongs to the intelligent - not to others - who realize in their hearts Him who is one, the controller and the in-dwelling Self of all beings, and who makes the one form manifold.

2-II-13. Whoso among the intelligent realize the Self in the (inner space of the) heart as the eternal among the ephemeral, the consciousness among the conscious, who, though one, dispenses the desired objects to many, to them belongs eternal peace, not to others.

http://www.celextel.org/upanishads/krishna_yajur_veda/katha.html

It is very clear the Upanishads teach the doctrine of Self. They teach the Self is the lord, the infinite and immortal being and constantly enjoin us to meditate on it and realize it. They do not say worship god. Most of the Upanishads explicitly declare that the self is identical to Brahman:

Praj?ānam brahma “Consciousness is Brahman” Aitareya Upanishad
Aham brahmāsmi “I am Brahman” Brihadaranyaka
Tat tvam asi “That Thou art” Chandogya
Ayamātmā brahmā “This Atman is Brahman” Mandukya

It is very clear as day light the doctrine of the Upanishads is the doctrine of the self and its identity with Brahman. The self is the lord. There is wide agreement that this is their central doctrine

Wiki: Upanishads

Two words that are of paramount importance in grasping the Upanishads are Brahman and Atman.[31] The Brahman is the universal spirit and the Atman is the individual Self.[32] Differing opinions exist amongst scholars regarding the etymology of these words. Brahman probably comes from the root brh, which means “The Biggest ~ The Greatest ~ The ALL”. Brahman is “the infinite Spirit Source and fabric and core and destiny of all existence, both manifested and unmanifested and the formless infinite substratum and from whom the universe has grown”. Brahman is the ultimate, both transcendent and immanent, the absolute infinite existence, the sum total of all that ever is, was, or shall be. The word Atman means the immortal perfect Spirit of any living creature, being, including trees etc. The idea put forth by the Upanishadic seers that Atman and Brahman are One and the same is one of the greatest contributions made to the thought of the world.[33][34][35][36]
The Brihadaranyaka and the Chandogya are the most important of the mukhya Upanishads. They represent two main schools of thought within the Upanishads. The Brihadaranyaka deals with acosmic or nis-prapancha, whereas the Chandogya deals with the cosmic or sa-prapancha.[1] Between the two, the Brihadaranyaka is considered more original.[37]

Simply put if you go against the the doctrine that the self is identical to Brahman or the self is the lord, then you go against the Upanishads.

The doctrine of the non identity of self and Brahman is a medieval doctrine formulated by Vaishnavist theologians in order to rationalize their faith in their one true god Krishna, it does not at all represent classical Vedanta which is thousands of years older.

#133

The question remains unanswered: If you were the Supreme Lord, how could have possibly come to the condition you are in now?

Why not? Why cannot the Supreme lord be in this condition? I exist in many conditions in fact: I exist in waking condition, dreaming condition and sleeping condition. I am existence and every possibility. I exist as everything. So why can’t I exist in this condition as well?

#134

We don’t even know how our body functions what to speak of controlling it. These are all nonsense talks. When you are ill you go to the doctor. What kind of God?

Actually we know quite a lot about how our body works in the biological and medical sciences.

Who gets ill? The body or the soul? How can the soul get ill? Illness is something which takes place directly in the body. The soul is simply the witness of the body, it is not the body.

Again doesn’t the Gita itself say the soul cannot be burned by fire, moistened by water, withered by wind. It cannot be destroyed. It never takes birth and it never dies. The soul is just the witness(sakshi)

What is the use of conversations between master and student if both are the one undivided self? Impersonal philosophy always defeats itself.

Why not? Atoms communicate with each other across the universe, and yet we know all matter is the same indivisible substance. Just because there are so many people is no problem for Advaita philosophy, because all jivas are the same indivisible atman expressing itself in many ways.

#135

“The spirit soul bewildered by the influence of false ego thinks himself the doer of activities that are in actuality carried out by the three modes of material nature.” (Bhagavad-gita 3.27)

I looked at the original Sanskrit and I can see yet again the translation is incorrect. The original Sanskrit does not contain the word ‘Spirit soul’

#136

[QUOTE=Aksara;76068]What is the use of conversations between master and student if both are the one undivided self? Impersonal philosophy always defeats itself.[/QUOTE]

[B]“What we are looking for is what is looking.” ~St. Francis of Assisi[/B]

#137

"The moon bird’s head is filled with nothing but thoughts of the moon, and when the next rain will come is all that the rain bird thinks of.

Who is it we spend our entire life loving?""

Bhakti= method of absorption. :stuck_out_tongue:

#138

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;76082]I looked at the original Sanskrit and I can see yet again the translation is incorrect. The original Sanskrit does not contain the word ‘Spirit soul’[/QUOTE]

So, I will give the complete verse in Sanskrit again:

prakrteh kriyamanani
gunaih karmani sarvasah
ahankara-vimudhatma
kartaham iti manyate

?The spirit soul bewildered by the influence of false ego thinks himself the doer of activities that are in actuality carried out by the three modes of material nature.? (Bhagavad-gita 3.27)

In the third line it says ahankara-vimudhatma, ahankara-vimudha meaning “bewildered by false ego” and atma meaning “spirit soul”. I am surprised you don’t agree with the translation of atma.

You accuse me of selective reading of your posts, but according to your own words this is exactly the method you are using yourself when studying scripture, isn’t it? You have said you only accept those statements of scripture which your own intelligence can accommodate.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;76082]I don’t care what scripture says lol I don’t deal with beliefs. I deal with evidence and reason. I have read all the scriptures you have cited so far, and I have taken what was useful and rejected what was not useful. If you have not noticed already, I quote from scriptures from all religions.[/QUOTE]

The problem with this mentality is obvious: errare humanum est, to err is human! All conditioned souls are limited by imperfect senses, they are sure to commit mistakes, they are invariably illusioned, and they have the tendency to cheat others. If you fail to recognize this simple fact, you won’t have access to the spiritual science of the soul, it will be just your own imaginations and dreams. Real knowledge is available from guru, sadhu and sastra - spiritual master, saints and scripture. In the preparatory phase of spiritual life one has to examine the truth of their words by one’s own experience and power of reasoning. Otherwise one will most probably get cheated as there is so much cheating going on in spiritual matters. But if you are really serious about spiritual life you will eventually have to surrender to the superior intelligence of guru, sadhu and sastra.

Whatever you quote from the Upanisads or any other scripture about the truth of the soul can fall into two categories: Statements that support the oneness of the individual soul with the supreme soul, and statements that support their difference. Both have to be taken as they are, don’t reject either of them. This is the philosophy of acintya bheda-and-abheda-tattva?simultaneous oneness and difference. Sometimes atma or self in the scriptures refers to the finite individual self and sometimes to the infinite supreme self. Without proper guidance you will always be confused about these statements.

yasya deve para bhaktir
yatha-deve tatha gurau
tasyaite kathita hy arthah
prakasante mahatmanah

“Only unto those great souls who have implicit faith (or devotion) in both the Lord (deve) and the spiritual master (gurau) are all the imports of Vedic knowledge automatically revealed.” (Svetasvatara Upanisad 3.8 )

It doesn’t say bhakti to the atma. Devotion the self is not wrong as the individual self is the fractional part of the supreme self, but it is insufficient for liberation. You have said that Patanjali doesn’t say that you need a teacher, but he does act as your teacher from the moment you consider following his advice. By the way, he also mentions the role of the guru in yoga sutras I.26:

purvesam api guruh kalenanavacchedat

“Isvara was also the teacher (guruh) of the ancients, because he is not limited by time.”

#139

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;76077]The question remains unanswered: If you were the Supreme Lord, how could have possibly come to the condition you are in now?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;76077]Why not? Why cannot the Supreme lord be in this condition? I exist in many conditions in fact: I exist in waking condition, dreaming condition and sleeping condition. I am existence and every possibility. I exist as everything. So why can’t I exist in this condition as well?[/QUOTE]

What a concept of God?

A sane person doesn’t degrade himself, what to speak of the Supreme Lord. God is never under the influence of illusion. It is the unwise soul that chooses to undergo the tribulations of birth, death, old age and disease.

#140

[QUOTE=Aksara;76127]So, I will give the complete verse in Sanskrit again:

prakrteh kriyamanani
gunaih karmani sarvasah
ahankara-vimudhatma
kartaham iti manyate

“The spirit soul bewildered by the influence of false ego thinks himself the doer of activities that are in actuality carried out by the three modes of material nature.” (Bhagavad-gita 3.27)

In the third line it says ahankara-vimudhatma, ahankara-vimudha meaning “bewildered by false ego” and atma meaning “spirit soul”. I am surprised you don’t agree with the translation of atma.[/quote]

I apologise, you are correct it does say soul. However, it does not say anything about the soul’s bewilderment being real, for it says only that the soul is bewildered by the false ego. In Yoga philosophy the purusha is only bewildered by the prakriti(ahamkara being one of the products of prakriti) but the purusha is never really bewildered, once it realises that it is different from prakriti(jnana) it liberares itself from bewilderment - realizing that it was never in fact really ever entangled. As the Samkhyakarika declares: In the end the knowledge is produced that the purusha was never really bewildered by prakriti, none of the products of prakriti body, mind, ego, intellect etc ever belonged to the purusha. There was no actual entanglement ever, no transmigration and no liberation. The purusha was always pure.

You accuse me of selective reading of your posts, but according to your own words this is exactly the method you are using yourself when studying scripture, isn’t it? You have said you only accept those statements of scripture which your own intelligence can accommodate.

Selective reading is when you pick out sections of a piece of text that seem to support your point of view, but ignore what does not support your point of view, therefore mispresenting the text. It is a fallacy. It is dishonest. Picking and choose from various books ideas, philosophies is not selective reading.

The problem with this mentality is obvious: errare humanum est, to err is human! All conditioned souls are limited by imperfect senses, they are sure to commit mistakes, they are invariably illusioned, and they have the tendency to cheat others. If you fail to recognize this simple fact, you won’t have access to the spiritual science of the soul, it will be just your own imaginations and dreams. Real knowledge is available from guru, sadhu and sastra - spiritual master, saints and scripture. In the preparatory phase of spiritual life one has to examine the truth of their words by one’s own experience and power of reasoning. Otherwise one will most probably get cheated as there is so much cheating going on in spiritual matters. But if you are really serious about spiritual life you will eventually have to surrender to the superior intelligence of guru, sadhu and sastra.

So basically because you can’t know something using your actual means of knowledge, rather than simply admiting you don’t know, you think faith can fill in the vacuum. We should simply accept any cock and bull story told by someone we have faith in because they claim to be enlightened/god’s chosen people. Sorry to say but this is stupidity to me. This is basically how religions have been created and used to control people, kill people and suppress people.

The problem of faith is obvious to any rational person. Faith cannot be tested. It is simply somebodies belief. The fact is people have all kinds of beliefs. The pope believes Yoga etc is satanic. The Muslims believe that Islam is the most perfect revelation by god, Allah is the one and only true god, and Mohammed is the last and most perfect prophet. Most Christians believe Jesus is the only one true way to salvation and those who do not accept him will go to hell. About 4 billion people in this world believe that we only live once, then die and either go heaven or hell, and there will be a final day of redeption. Another 2 billion people believe we will reincarnate. Another 1 billion believe we die and thats it.

Faith is also dangerous, because when we start accepting as knowledge somebodies beliefs all sorts of tragic things can happen. It was believed that some women were witches in Europe, hundreds of thousands were burned at the stake. The Nazi’s believed the jews were sub-human, millions were exterminated.

Please don’t try to rationalize faith as something virtuous to me. Faith is stupid and its for stupid people who don’t want to think for themselves.

The Risis were enlightened people, they realized that no single description of god/ultimate reality could ever describe him, something many realized yogis and mystics from all different parts of the world have said. Nirguna Brahman is not something you can know anything about it, it is something you must realize. All Saguna Brahmans are just human fantasy.I mean let us consider your Saguna Brahman: Krishna the one true supreme person, with has infinite parts callled souls. Let us consider some of the problems already

  1. God has parts? A mathematican will be able to tell you right away something infinite cannot have parts. If infinite had parts, you would be able to count all the finite parts and then put them together, making something finite, not infinite. You cannot put a finite and a finite thing together and make something infinite.

Secondly an entity which is beyond space, time and causality cannot be made of parts, otherwise it cannot by definition be outside of space, time and causality.
This is something the Samkhya-Yoga philosophers realized and this is why they came up with the concept of the gunas to clearly differentiate all matter from the consciousness. Matter is made up of parts, it is a composite thing, because it is made of parts it changes, evolves and transforms. Consciousness is not made of parts, because it is not made of parts, it is unchanging.

  1. God has a name, human like personality and intervenes in human affairs?

Something which is outside of time, space and causality would enter into time, space and causality? That’s impossible. How can something whose nature is subject to the laws of time, space and causality all of a sudden become subject to them? Krishna as god takes on a human birth, lives a human life, has to eat, drink, sleep, excrete and reproduce like any other human, steals, lies, kills and cheats and also eventually get cursed and killed. Some god lol

Also, why would god have a specific personality? Not all creatures have personalities, in fact some organisms have a group personality. They are made of up cells that divide, and each cell then becomes its own organism.

Why would god intervene in human affairs? Why not the affairs of amobeas, insects, elephants and non-living matter like tornados, volcanos. Why has god not intervened to save Mars from becoming a dead planet?

It is blantantly obvious here human that your god is nothing but a human fantasy. No such god exists except in the imagination of some humans. Such a god is equal to the fantasy creations of other humans, flying spahegette monsters, dragons, mermaids, faiiries, Santa clause. Do not even try to pretetend your Krishna is any more rational than other human fantasy creations.