The associated characteristic Vs inherent characteristic

Anything to do with gender and the status of women and men.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
dattaswami
Posts: 653
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:42 am

The associated characteristic Vs inherent characteristic

Post by dattaswami »

Shri Ganesh V asked: Padanamskaram Swamiji, Why can't be the svarūpa lakṣaṇam be the same as
taṭastha lakṣaṇam? At Your divine feet, Ganesh V


Swami replied: Sometimes, the associated characteristic (Tatastha Lakshanam) can act as inherent characteristic (Svaruupa Lakshanam), but, it can’t become exactly the inherent characteristic. An yellow thread in the neck of a married lady is associated characteristic by itself since it can be separated from her at any time. But, she will never remove that and thus, the associated characteristic (yellow thread) is acting like inherent characteristic for a married lady.

Similarly, Veda says that God is excellent spiritual knowledge and here actually, this should be taken as that God is the
embodiment of excellent spiritual knowledge. When a quality is in excess in a person, that person is told as that quality (Gunaatishaye gunini guna
vyapadeshah). The God is associated with a human medium while becoming human incarnation to preach the excellent spiritual knowledge to the
humanity. In this way also, the associated characteristic (excellent spiritual knowledge) can act as inherent characteristic since such knowledge is never

separated from God. In this way, the Vedic statement that God is excellent spiritual knowledge (Prajnaanam Brahma) can be explained in both the
ways:-

1) Treating the possessor of quality as the quality itself if the quality is in excess.

2) The associated characteristic can act as inherent characteristic when it is not separated from its possessor.
User avatar
Astro Cat
Posts: 460
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2022 11:09 pm

Re: The associated characteristic Vs inherent characteristic

Post by Astro Cat »

What does this post have to do with gender?
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22141
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The associated characteristic Vs inherent characteristic

Post by Immanuel Can »

Astro Cat wrote: Wed Dec 07, 2022 1:23 pm What does this post have to do with gender?
I think he's trying to say that gender is just a "quality," not an "identity."

But I agree, he's not clear.
promethean75
Posts: 4881
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm

Re: The associated characteristic Vs inherent characteristic

Post by promethean75 »

swanmi's spamming this site so hard he can't even keep track of which forum he's in anymore.

swamm c'mon man, nobody here wants to be a Hindu and there's no way you're gonna convert anybody. The empiricists, verificationists, positivists, atheists, materialists and nihilists here won't buy it, and anybody left ain't tryna hear nobody holla at em but Jesus.
User avatar
Astro Cat
Posts: 460
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2022 11:09 pm

Re: The associated characteristic Vs inherent characteristic

Post by Astro Cat »

Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Dec 07, 2022 1:30 pm
Astro Cat wrote: Wed Dec 07, 2022 1:23 pm What does this post have to do with gender?
I think he's trying to say that gender is just a "quality," not an "identity."

But I agree, he's not clear.
Though it is an identity, even if some suppose (incorrectly, from my POV) that it is essential to/necessarily defined by their sex.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22141
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The associated characteristic Vs inherent characteristic

Post by Immanuel Can »

Astro Cat wrote: Thu Dec 08, 2022 5:49 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Dec 07, 2022 1:30 pm
Astro Cat wrote: Wed Dec 07, 2022 1:23 pm What does this post have to do with gender?
I think he's trying to say that gender is just a "quality," not an "identity."

But I agree, he's not clear.
Though it is an identity, even if some suppose (incorrectly, from my POV) that it is essential to/necessarily defined by their sex.
I don't know if he thinks "sex" and "gender" are the same concepts. But I think he's trying to say that neither matters much. He seems to think that the "all is illusion" (maya) idea covers both...but that's just a guess, on my part; because as I say, he's far from clear. That's just the best guess I can get from what he says, coupled with what I already know about his sort of worldview.
User avatar
Astro Cat
Posts: 460
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2022 11:09 pm

Re: The associated characteristic Vs inherent characteristic

Post by Astro Cat »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Dec 08, 2022 5:59 am
Astro Cat wrote: Thu Dec 08, 2022 5:49 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Dec 07, 2022 1:30 pm
I think he's trying to say that gender is just a "quality," not an "identity."

But I agree, he's not clear.
Though it is an identity, even if some suppose (incorrectly, from my POV) that it is essential to/necessarily defined by their sex.
I don't know if he thinks "sex" and "gender" are the same concepts. But I think he's trying to say that neither matters much. He seems to think that the "all is illusion" (maya) idea covers both...but that's just a guess, on my part; because as I say, he's far from clear. That's just the best guess I can get from what he says, coupled with what I already know about his sort of worldview.
Fair 'nuff. I think there is also a certain element of shotgun strategy of peppering things in every forum regardless of adherence to their topics, too
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22141
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The associated characteristic Vs inherent characteristic

Post by Immanuel Can »

Astro Cat wrote: Thu Dec 08, 2022 6:05 am Fair 'nuff. I think there is also a certain element of shotgun strategy of peppering things in every forum regardless of adherence to their topics, too
Yes. He seems to want to have a certain kind of conversation, and not to care to much how he has to get it.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9454
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: The associated characteristic Vs inherent characteristic

Post by Harbal »

dattaswami wrote: Wed Dec 07, 2022 2:59 am Shri Ganesh V asked: Padanamskaram Swamiji, Why can't be the svarūpa lakṣaṇam be the same as
taṭastha lakṣaṇam? At Your divine feet, Ganesh V


Swami replied: They are very similar, except the taṭastha lakṣaṇam tends to be a little more spicy. They both go very well with mango cordial.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6593
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: The associated characteristic Vs inherent characteristic

Post by Iwannaplato »

dattaswami wrote:
I have the courage to ......
I have the broad mind to...
Do you have the courage to consider that the way you are approaching people here is disrespectful?
To wonder if perhaps lecturing people and starting dozens of threads, often in subforums where they do not belong, might be rude and even counterproductive for your own goals?
Do you have a broad enough mind to consider that your own psychological needs might be determining how you approach people and even seem to not really care about their reactions and interests?
Do you have the courage to focus on discussing your ideas rather than vomiting them out, especially given that this is a discussion forum and not a blog?
How did you decide you had courage?
How did you decide you have a broad mind?
Have you decided that you have courage and a broad mind and will never reevaluate?
Can you take feedback and criticism into account and perhaps adjust or even more deeply change your approach to other people?
Is it possible that you think you are sharing good and lovely truths, but actually for you psychologically it is a way for you to feel special and even dominate others?
Could both be true?
What might be a better way to interact with people, one that would show them that you consider them at least potential equals not just receipients of your knowledge?
dattaswami
Posts: 653
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:42 am

Re: The associated characteristic Vs inherent characteristic

Post by dattaswami »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Dec 08, 2022 5:59 am
I don't know if he thinks "sex" and "gender" are the same concepts. But I think he's trying to say that neither matters much. He seems to think that the "all is illusion" (maya) idea covers both...but that's just a guess, on my part; because as I say, he's far from clear. That's just the best guess I can get from what he says, coupled with what I already know about his sort of worldview.
In my post the topic of discussion was regarding the characteristics of God. Since God is unimaginable, we cannot fix any characteristics to Him. The only infromation about Him is that He exists. No other information about Him. We can say some associated characteristics of God like He possess infinite divine knowledge. Thus when God comes here in this world in Human form like Rama, Krishna, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad, Shankara, Sai Baba etc such God in human form can be identified from the associated characteristics that is, the special quality of spiritual divine knowledge preached by Them. God is said to be the knowledge.

Veda says that God is the infinite right knowledge and that God is the excellent knowledge (Satyam Jnanam…, Prajnanam….). This does not mean that God is the knowledge itself. It only means that the possessor of right and excellent knowledge is God and such knowledge is His correct identification mark since it is His inseparable characteristic. If some body wears a red shirt always, the red shirt becomes his identity mark and you can call him as the red shirt like calling “Oh! Red shirt! Come here”.

Gita gives clarification on this point, which says that the possessor of knowledge is God (Jnaanitvaatmaiava……). Since God enters the human being only, such identification is mentioned. The human being is always characterized by the knowledge. Knowledge is one sided characteristic of awareness. It means knowledge is always associated with awareness and awareness need not be associated always with knowledge.

An animal or bird has awareness but no knowledge. Therefore, you should not take awareness as the meaning of the words indicating knowledge in Veda like Jnanam and Prajnanam. This clarification is given in Gita, which says that God enters human body (Manusheem….). Hence, Gita always gives clarifications on Veda. Such correct clarification can be correctly clarified by the human incarnation only since the same God, who said Gita, can alone give the original sense of the text. The Author himself can alone give the correct sense of his own statement. Since, God is one and the same in all the human incarnations, any human incarnation can clarify the text said by any other human incarnation.
Post Reply