georgia
Posts
74650Following
404Followers
2064$PAGE_VIEWS
georiga on telegram
georgia@trashserver.net on xmpp
(response times may vary)
अहं ब्रह्मास्मि त्वं ब्रह्म असि अयम् आत्मा ब्रह्म सर्वं खल्विदं ब्रह्म
georgia
georgia
sorry for my correct and divinely sanctioned hinduposting! (this post is bragging and thus not divinely sanctioned, but oh well)
0
0
1
georgia
georgia
more bs, Durga is not just Adi Parashakti but the Supreme in full, Tripura Sundari. She is the Shakti but she is Shaktimam as well, and pure Purusha. and one worships the Devi to both material and spiritual aims. (it is said that one worships Mahadeva to spiritual aims primarily, but in truth, one can pray to God for anything) also, "internal potency" is a silly construction, God has no inside and outside.
0
0
1
georgia
georgia
when balarama is called a "plenary expansion" of Krishna i laugh. he's a violent drunkard. Krishnas behavior in the SB isn't totally exemplary either but i just consider the account to be adulterated.
0
0
1
georgia
georgia
i've read a lot of the srimad bhagavatam including the whole 10th canto, but this book is good review
0
0
0
georgia
georgia
you aren't ready for this but God doesn't have a permanent consort because He has no equal. He/She consorts sometimes in His/Her descents, yes. but saying God has a consort like Shiva-Shakti dualism is only useful to describe Energy-Consciousness. but there is no difference between Shakti and Shaktimam! the potency of God is inherent in God, God is One.
0
0
2
georgia
georgia
this guy is treating God like a straight man. jivanmuktas don't have "sex feelings", and have no need for sex because they have no infatuation or attachment and dwell in infinite bliss. God is the greatest yogi, so of course He/She doesn't have "sex feelings" either. when God engages in romance and sex as an avatara, it is to teach about union with God. what the fuck is this sampradaya teaching???
1
1
1
georgia
georgia
literally dogmatic nonsense. Vishnu is Krishna and Krishna is Vishnu, the chatur-vyuha is a relic, and even the dashavatara are not the sole exclusive avataras of the Lord. to me all beings are Gods amsas/kalas, especially the devas who are both manifestations of God and inferior to Him, and yet all beings are also mysteriously God in full. it pains me that people make a science of Gods very being so. there is simply no discreteness within God! all you need to know is that whenever justice declines and unrighteousness prevails, God manifests on this Earth.
1
0
0
georgia
georgia
i certainly do intend to make a kagi account considering how often i use duckduckgo to bang google which i'd really rather not do
0
0
2
georgia
georgia
kagi has a browser that supports safari, chrome, and firefox extensions? now that's just excessive, i only need firefox extensions.
0
0
0
georgia
georgia
overlooked that the author of the book is a gaudiya, because i like a lot about gaudiyas, but he's a madhva follower too?? unacceptable, sorry.
0
0
0
georgia
georgia
on the bhagas, i HATE when aishvarya is interpreted/translated as superlative wealth instead of superlative lordship/majesty. while being the possessor of all the worlds wealth is a quality of God, avataras are often poor or otherwise ascetic. God doesn't covet wealth or flaunt His wealth.
2
0
2
georgia
georgia
conspiracy theories about diaspora jews and white genocide really fall apart when you look at the assimilation and intermarriage statistics of diaspora jews
1
0
1
georgia
georgia
its definitely a sin to attribute the unique qualities of the Supreme Lord (particularly superlative wisdom, lordship, prowess, beauty, splendor, goodness, auspiciousness, pervasiveness, and freedom/detatchment) to other beings, but it's definitely not a sin to say all beings share in Gods divinity, and that God has many manifestations, and that beings worthy of reverence (but certainly not equal reverence) besides God exist. that's just a fact.
0
0
1