Posts
74952
Following
405
Followers
2069
weclome to my website!!
$PAGE_VIEWS
blobcatnompeachblobcatautismblobcatgrimacing

georiga on telegram
georgia@trashserver.net on xmpp
(response times may vary)

fedoradebiankdenewxfcesailfishoslineageos2fdroidraspberrypi

अहं ब्रह्मास्मि त्वं ब्रह्म असि अयम् आत्मा ब्रह्म सर्वं खल्विदं ब्रह्म
i think the meaning of being and non-being also applies in this, too. sat and asat are both God, and while worshipping sat can be called "paradoxically" worse than worshipping asat for various reasons i wont explicate (thus you get buddhism), ultimately one crosses over death by asat (rejection of the impermanent) and experiences immortality by sat (knowing the permanent, which is pure being).
1
0
0
it probably also can refer to creation and destruction as vedantics say but im not gonna address that. okay maybe i will a little, worshipping destruction can parodoxically be called better than worshipping creation because by this you understand the impermanent nature of things besides God. this is a more half-baked idea, though.
1
0
0
again on the isha upanishad i think that "worshipping the unmanifest/unborn" as superior to but still leading to ignorance vs "worshipping the manifest/born" can have many meanings. traditionally its interpreted by sankara as unborn prakriti vs born hiranyagarbha, but i think its worshipping being vs worshipping becoming, worshipping purusha and prakriti (although samkyhans call both unborn, to me they are cause and effect) as separate, worshipping God in an abstract sense vs worshipping God as He exists in the world, or to compare with common vedic understandings of God, worshipping the pradhana vs worshipping the devas. just like rote knowledge is enhanced by its application leading to immortality, being and becoming are best understood together leading to liberation, this is monism.
1
0
0
my fiber gummies were 30 dollars dude -.-
1
0
0
one who asserts divine passability must also deny divine simplicity or he must become a consciousness monist
1
0
2
the passibility debate is very much a reflection of christian myopia towards other religions, trying to innovate a theodicy when they could just look at liberated hindus or buddhists to see that while being blissful they view the suffering of everyone as their own. God is the greatest yogi, and dwells within the hearts of all, so naturally He feels the suffering of all. His compassion for us is infinite, yet He dwells in pure bliss. just like a yogis senses are intact yet they dont experience pain because of them, God suffers while not suffering. and yet, God is averse to suffering, not because it pains Him but because He is all-good. is God averse to our evil because it makes Him evil? obviously not. being averse to something because it hurts you is a form of selfishness, and God is self-less. who is more noble, someone who heals another because they fear catching their disease, or someone who heals them from compassion? viewing God as needing to be passible to be good is a misunderstanding of human empathy as well as divine empathy.
0
0
0
I have such a tummy ache
0
0
1
@fiore germans have inertia so they need some extra help speeding themselves up
0
0
3
on "idolatry"
Show content
also, to love God is to know God not just because God is love, but because God is worthy of love, obviously.

anydangway, I'm not totally sure how I feel about guru veneration, aka veneration of the liberated (the non-liberated should not be spiritual gurus). its said that to know Brahman is to be Brahman, yes, and jivanmuktas/buddhas have all sort of adorable qualities because of their knowledge and purity (omniscience, sinlessness, and various incredible powers). I think that my argument about worship with true knowledge never being a sin applies here too. if you truly know your guru is God and she has attained God-realization, then you are not in error by worshipping her, even though the liberated dont have all of Gods qualities, being still limited in various ways (having perishable form and not possessing infinite power or freedom) until they die and merge in God. I dont believe that blind faith your guru is God is enough, because one can have complete faith anything (like an LLM) is God, and without knowledge of the truth of monism, this is delusion and sin. anyway, this kind of intense faith with right knowledge comes very late on most peoples spiritual path in the age of kali yuga. so for the neophyte, or worse, for third parties, guru worship very easily leads them further from God.

many hindus dont just show gurus reverence, but show all devotees reverence. this is very prominent among vaisnavas, who greet eachother with "dandavat" referring to bowing like a stick. I dont believe that just anyone should be bowed to in this manner, only the liberated, and only with right knowledge. right knowledge means knowledge and faith in this knowledge. knowledge without faith in it can never fructify in spiritual realization.

I should restate that we are living in kali yuga, the most depraved of eras. most gurus are not liberated, and most devotees are easily misled. in such a time idolatry aka worship of what is not God is inevitable.
0
0
0
@sun I hate to say it but you make it sound less than pleasant
1
0
0
I'm happy that I found something I really really adore at my local chinese/japanese joint but it costs 60 dollars when you buy it in the quantity I do. -.-
0
0
0
@kura @sun oh. ten percent off isnt that much. but I'll pull the trigger next month.
1
0
0
@kura @sun wait is there a yearly kagi plan that saves money which I dont know about or are you talking about your phone plan
1
0
0
@sun @kura you'd get to see all the fun stuff ive been asking about vedanta
0
0
1
@sun is she worried about nitrates or what
1
0
0
Show older