Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Oct 16, 2022 11:53 am
dattaswami wrote: ↑Sat Oct 15, 2022 6:00 amTherefore, even if the human body perished, since the Lord is eternal, Krishna or Jesus is also eternal. When Krishna said that He will come again and again, whenever necessary ( Yada Yada hi….Gita), it means the eternal Lord present in the human body will come again and again through different human forms. Similarly, when it is told that Jesus will come again, it means the Lord present in that human body will come again. Here the names Krishna and Jesus indicate the Lord and not the human body.
This is typical of human story telling as and through the 'thought sphere' which has no actual location in nature except as illusory concept, which is extraneous to the physical brain.
'Telling' is a fictional story. It's claim without a claimer. It's a writer without an author. It's a thought without a thinker.
Life or Nature is one single solitary unitary movement. Babies and animals cannot separate themselves from whatever is happening there inside and outside of itself. But there is no inside and outside at all. What creates the division between the inside and the outside is the movement of thought.
Thought is a self-protecting mechanism, artificially born out of the movement of thought itself; in other words, self-consciousness is an illusory imposition, because in all actuality, nothing is ever born, and nothing ever dies. What has created the space between creation and destruction, or the time between the two, is 'thought'.
In nature there is no death or destruction at all. What occurs is the reshuffling of atoms. If there is a need or necessity to maintain equilibrium and the balance of energy in this universe, death occurs.
Nature's way of creating something new is to destroy the old. Nature is a killing machine. The destructive force of nature, and the humanitarian movement are born from the same source. So for the body (nature) there is no birth or death, because nature has no way of experiencing that it is alive or that it will be dead tomorrow.
The body of nature is already at extraordinary peace.
The 'thought' that you are different from ( a tree) is a superimposed artificial sense of feeling separation, caused by 'thought'.
That feeling doesn't exist in animals and babies at all. In nature, nothing changes. It's perfectly at peace in every moment. The demand for change springs from this human artificially created self-consciousness, an illusory separation from the singleness of the whole unitary movement of nature.
Nature's interest is only to create perfect species. It does not use any model...certainly, none born of 'thought' conceptually known as (Lord or God or Krishna or Jesus ) except in this artificial conception, a realm belonging to the illusory dream state of duality...where there is NONE.
Every species is unique. That which does not fit into the scheme of things, nature discards it and starts all over again.
Buddha kept silent about God indicating that God is unimaginable. This means that the existence of God is accepted but the imaginable possibility is not accepted. But, the followers of Buddha took that the existence of God is also not accepted. The reason is that anything exists if it is imaginable only. That which is unimaginable does not exist. This is the norm of the psychology of general public. Buddha also propagated that the creation does not exist with respect to God. Therefore, the followers of Buddha have taken that neither God nor the creation exists. This resulted in Shunyavada, which means that nothing exists.
This is the result of misunderstanding of Buddha and the result is misinterpretation. When Shankara came, this was the situation and every one became an atheist of extreme nature. Generally, atheist negates the existence of God but not the existence of the creation. The followers of Buddha are extreme because not only God but also the creation is negated. The followers of Shankara accept the existence of God but negate the existence of creation. The atheists are vice-versa, who accept the existence of creation but negate the existence of God. The followers of Buddha negate the existence of both God and creation. The followers of Ramanuja and Madhva accept the existence of both God and creation. Thus, there are four categories:
1. The followers of Buddha negate both God and creation
2. The atheists negate God but accept creation
3. The followers of Shankara accept God but negate creation
4. The followers of Ramanuja and Madhva accept both God and creation
Neither Buddha nor Shankara nor Ramanuja and Madhva misunderstood truth. But, their followers and atheists have misunderstood truth and misinterpreted truth. The truth is that God exists but is unimaginable. The creation does not exist with respect to God but exists with respect to the souls. The soul can not negate the existence of the world because it is a part and parcel of the world. If the soul negates the world it negates itself, which is meaningless. Therefore, you cannot give a single statement about the existence of the world. You cannot demand us to say whether the world exists or does not exist. A single angle is impossible in the case of creation. You cannot conclude about the existence or non-existence of the world. Such a situation is represented by Mithya, which means neither it is existent nor non-existent. It is a special case. This is the concept of Shankara about the world (Sadasat Vilakshana). This is the concept of Buddha, Ramanuja and Madhva also because all these four are incarnations of the same God.
The total concept is known to all the four incarnations. But according to the then existing situation, a convenient part of the concept is stressed. This does not mean that the other part of the concept is negated. The silence about the other part of the concept is due to the requirement of the then existing situation. If the total concept is stressed, people may not digest. Therefore, based on the relevant requirement, the relevant part is only stressed. This mechanism is called as psychology, which must be followed by the teacher. This serves the purpose and the first generation of the followers were always rectified. But, the other generations of the followers of the same school always misunderstand due to the absence of the original preacher of the school. To clarify the misunderstanding, God appears again and again. This process is continuous and God also gets the opportunity of continuous engagement.
When Shankara came, the Buddhists negated both God and world. The immediate requirement was to establish the existence of God. The reason is that there is no dual possibility regarding the existence of God. God always exists. But, the world has the dual possibility. In one sense, with respect to God, world does not exist and the same world exists with respect to soul in other sense. Therefore, even if the existence of world is denied, it is correct with respect to God. But, the existence of God should not be negated in any sense. Therefore, Shankara accepted the non existence of the world and in such case it must be with respect to God. Shankara never touched the angle of souls here. If the world is unreal, there must be somebody to realize the absence of this world. That somebody must be God only because the world is unreal for God only. Therefore, the awareness of God only is referred by Shankara and not the awareness of the soul in this context.