Shankara stressed on self analysis just to avoid grief Options

[dattaswami]

Shankara stressed on self analysis just to avoid grief

Shankara advised meditation upon self, which means the deep analysis about self. The human being is under the illusion that the human body consisting of matter and energy is self. Shankara removed the concept of matter and concluded that self is only a bit of cosmic energy in essence. In fact, since matter and space are also different forms of cosmic energy, the self becomes a part of continuous ocean of cosmic energy only. In such situation the self cannot be isolated and hence the finite itself becomes the infinite ocean of cosmic energy.

The word Brahaman used by Shankara denotes only this continuous infinite cosmic energy. This cosmic energy is the source, controller and dissolver of the entire creation consisting of various materialized forms. This picture concludes that all the materialized forms are unreal in absolute sense and removes all the worldly bonds and the subsequent grief.
www.universal-spirituality.org
Universal Spirituality for World Peace

[code buttons]

The TROLLER's back!

[dattaswami]

The TROLLER's back!

It is a discussion forum and you shall discuss on the topic matter i have posted here..

[Joesus]

The TROLLER's back!

It is a discussion forum and you shall discuss on the topic matter i have posted here..

I shall quote you.

This cosmic energy is the source, controller and dissolver of the entire creation consisting of various materialized forms.

There is nothing here but Brahman, and nothing to control....
In other words you are not in charge of others or this forum, only the choices you shall make to see brahman or something along the lines of human bodies and matter.

To cast any other illusion upon Brahman (like the attachment to how things look) will only stress you out.....or cause you grief........

Time for a little self analysis?

[dattaswami]

The TROLLER's back!

It is a discussion forum and you shall discuss on the topic matter i have posted here..

I shall quote you.

This cosmic energy is the source, controller and dissolver of the entire creation consisting of various materialized forms.

There is nothing here but Brahman, and nothing to control....
In other words you are not in charge of others or this forum, only the choices you shall make to see brahman or something along the lines of human bodies and matter.

To cast any other illusion upon Brahman (like the attachment to how things look) will only stress you out.....or cause you grief........

Time for a little self analysis?

In Gita it is said that Brahman is created by God (Brahmaakshara Samudbhavam). Here Brahman cannot mean God. It means the Veda, which is greatest among all the scriptures due to absence of additions and deletions, since Veda is protected by oral recitations from generations together. The word Brahman is used in Veda to mean other greatest items like food (Annam Brahmeti…). Therefore, the word Brahman is not restricted to the unimaginable God and hence God is confused to be any greatest worldly item in its corresponding category. For this reason only, the author would like to restrict the word Para Brahman to the unimaginable God only and avoid the confusion.

[Joesus]

In Gita it is said that Brahman is created by God (Brahmaakshara Samudbhavam). Here Brahman cannot mean God. It means the Veda, which is greatest among all the scriptures due to absence of additions and deletions, since Veda is protected by oral recitations from generations together. The word Brahman is used in Veda to mean other greatest items like food (Annam Brahmeti…). Therefore, the word Brahman is not restricted to the unimaginable God and hence God is confused to be any greatest worldly item in its corresponding category. For this reason only, the author would like to restrict the word Para Brahman to the unimaginable God only and avoid the confusion.

Ah, but in Brain Meta, according to your authoring and insistence to discuss what was written (without any additions or deletions) Brahman is noted as..

The word Brahaman used by Shankara

Which

denotes only this continuous infinite cosmic energy. This cosmic energy is the source, controller and dissolver of the entire creation consisting of various materialized forms. This picture concludes that all the materialized forms are unreal in absolute sense and removes all the worldly bonds and the subsequent grief.

So here, we shall note that, unless you wish to discuss additions and deletions, we will be discussing the relationship with this Brahman and any issues of control pertaining to discussions and expectations placed within the relative field of perceptions be they cosmic or material, and any relative delusions of suffering due to such attachments or personal needs of identification with the self as, all material forms.

[dattaswami]

In Gita it is said that Brahman is created by God (Brahmaakshara Samudbhavam). Here Brahman cannot mean God. It means the Veda, which is greatest among all the scriptures due to absence of additions and deletions, since Veda is protected by oral recitations from generations together. The word Brahman is used in Veda to mean other greatest items like food (Annam Brahmeti…). Therefore, the word Brahman is not restricted to the unimaginable God and hence God is confused to be any greatest worldly item in its corresponding category. For this reason only, the author would like to restrict the word Para Brahman to the unimaginable God only and avoid the confusion.

Ah, but in Brain Meta, according to your authoring and insistence to discuss what was written (without any additions or deletions) Brahman is noted as..

The word Brahaman used by Shankara

Which

denotes only this continuous infinite cosmic energy. This cosmic energy is the source, controller and dissolver of the entire creation consisting of various materialized forms. This picture concludes that all the materialized forms are unreal in absolute sense and removes all the worldly bonds and the subsequent grief.

So here, we shall note that, unless you wish to discuss additions and deletions, we will be discussing the relationship with this Brahman and any issues of control pertaining to discussions and expectations placed within the relative field of perceptions be they cosmic or material, and any relative delusions of suffering due to such attachments or personal needs of identification with the self as, all material forms.

If somebody asks Him how that Atman, a bit of cosmic energy, is God, who is beyond the entire cosmic energy, the answer will be that Brahman means only the entire cosmic energy and not God. The similarity is also qualitative and not quantitative. The atheists have misunderstood Brahman as God and the silence of Shankara over this is purposeful. By such misunderstanding, the atheists will think that Atman is God and therefore God exists since Atman exists.

A twist for some good purpose is appreciable and should not be considered as cheating. Now through this misunderstanding, the atheist is converted into theist. This is the first success of Shankara. The second step is that Shankara told that this world is unreal. It is unreal for God but not for the soul, since soul is also a part of the world because a bit of cosmic energy (soul) must be a part of entire cosmic energy (creation). Shankara kept silent on this point also and therefore the soul (atheist) took the world as unreal in its view. Again this twist is for good purpose only. The atheist converted theist now thinks that the world is unreal and therefore reduces his selfishness to a very large extent since he feels that his family bonds are unreal. This brings purity of mind. This is the second success of Shankara.

Now the result is that the atheist is converted in to theist with pure mind. The mind without selfishness becomes pure. Theism associated with purity of mind is perfectly eligible for devotion. Now a third twist is given by Shankara to convert the pure minded theist in to a devotee of Lord. Shankara suggested that though the Atman is God, it can practically become God through devotion to the Lord. The theoretical influence of ignorance (Ajnana avaranam) is removed by the knowledge of the unity of Atman and Brahman but the practical influence of ignorance (Ajnana vikshepa) can be removed only by the intensive worship of Lord.

This is the proposal of Shankara to introduce devotion to the new theists. Now the pure theist becomes a devotee of the Lord. In course of time the devotion to Lord and the pure mind without selfishness looses the ambition to become God. Thus, Shankara was successful to convert the extreme negative into extreme positive through His intellectual interpretations associated with purposeful twists and silence over the clarifications. There can be no practical preacher in this creation similar to Shankara, who succeeded in this unimaginable task and this is possible because Shankara is the human form of God Himself. Therefore, Shankara alone can be called as the world preacher (Jagadguru) and we must remember Him on this auspicious Gurupurnima.

[Joesus]

If somebody asks Him how that Atman, a bit of cosmic energy, is God, who is beyond the entire cosmic energy, the answer will be that Brahman means only the entire cosmic energy and not God. The similarity is also qualitative and not quantitative. The atheists have misunderstood Brahman as God and the silence of Shankara over this is purposeful. By such misunderstanding, the atheists will think that Atman is God and therefore God exists since Atman exists.

A twist for some good purpose is appreciable and should not be considered as cheating.

Conversation to expose the underlying thoughts, where the ownership of thought is revealed to be something other than ones own thoughts, always is useful. However if one takes ownership and projects expectations from ones ownership and identification with those thoughts suffering follows as disappointment and frustration.

Now through this misunderstanding, the atheist is converted into theist.

This might be an assumption where one believes it is an action that precipitates another action (An interpretation of he gunas playing upon the gunas). But there is a useful question to be pondered. "If a crow lands upon a coconut tree and at the exact moment when the crow lands upon the tree a coconut falls... did the crow dislodge the coconut or did the coconut fall of its own accord and the crow land at the exact moment the crow lighted upon the coconut tree?

This is the first success of Shankara.

If we follow the premise that Shankara is God, as you make note, we can use a common western theists example of Jesus' statement "I and my Father are One. What the Father witnesses in me so do I witness in the Father. I do nothing of myself for all that I do is done by the Father" as being the nature of the gunas playing upon the gunas. Where the witness (knower) sees what they will interpret as reality (the Known) according to the path of dharma (process of knowing) with what it draws into view thru personal evolution and karma. Shankara then simply becomes the vessel of knowledge, ( the hero in his own right having achieved liberation) but none the less fully surrendered to giving freely that which has been revealed to him in the process of Svadhyaya.

The second step is that Shankara told that this world is unreal. It is unreal for God but not for the soul, since soul is also a part of the world because a bit of cosmic energy (soul) must be a part of entire cosmic energy (creation).

This however is just semantics to lead the mind into further contemplation upon the meaning of God. Just as you make example of the word Brahman to mean both the absolute as well as the reflection of the absolute.

Shankara kept silent on this point also and therefore the soul (atheist) took the world as unreal in its view. Again this twist is for good purpose only. The atheist converted theist now thinks that the world is unreal and therefore reduces his selfishness to a very large extent since he feels that his family bonds are unreal. This brings purity of mind. This is the second success of Shankara.

Success would be of the relative. In this case you are stating that the physical man is responsible for the success of another to become pure of mind.
Another way to look at it is that the success of the atheist, is relative to having contemplated God, with that which Shankara surrendered thru selfless service. That which was revealed to him (Shankara) in his contemplation of God.
God, assisted with the creation of Shankara and the unconditional surrender of Shankara's will to the absolute or spirit of God, had placed in its entirety, the knower the known and the process of knowing within the relative field, with all personalities of intellect to see. Time being relative to the knower, it might appear that what is known, was presented at a specific time within the relative field, when in fact all that can be known is and has been available prior, during and after the appearance of one called Shankara (in other words always has been and always will be there for those with the eyes to see, the ears to hear and the voice to speak of it.

Now the result is that the atheist is converted in to theist with pure mind. The mind without selfishness becomes pure. Theism associated with purity of mind is perfectly eligible for devotion. Now a third twist is given by Shankara to convert the pure minded theist in to a devotee of Lord. Shankara suggested that though the Atman is God, it can practically become God through devotion to the Lord. The theoretical influence of ignorance (Ajnana avaranam) is removed by the knowledge of the unity of Atman and Brahman but the practical influence of ignorance (Ajnana vikshepa) can be removed only by the intensive worship of Lord.

Dissolution of ego is also said to be thru the effort of who you would be calling pure of mind, rather than because of the ever available knowledge, presented thru the surrender of any master. This idea presents a picture that might give the knower reason to apply themselves to Svadhyaya (study of the self) rather than waiting for the magic of the guru to take ones will and effort from them. Or to assume the process of osmosis exceeds the will of the soul that insists to ignore what is absolute.

This is the proposal of Shankara to introduce devotion to the new theists. Now the pure theist becomes a devotee of the Lord. In course of time the devotion to Lord and the pure mind without selfishness looses the ambition to become God. Thus, Shankara was successful to convert the extreme negative into extreme positive through His intellectual interpretations associated with purposeful twists and silence over the clarifications. There can be no practical preacher in this creation similar to Shankara, who succeeded in this unimaginable task and this is possible because Shankara is the human form of God Himself. Therefore, Shankara alone can be called as the world preacher (Jagadguru) and we must remember Him on this auspicious Gurupurnima.

It would be good to remember the entire lineage or the reflections of the Jagadguru, so as to imbue ones self with the knowledge of self effort and the reward of liberation.
Shankara (the man) does not alone represent the absolute world Preacher. We remember him for resurrecting the great knowledge of Truth and bringing it into the world and the worldly when it had been hidden from the understanding and experience of the majority for some time. But it is not he alone who would be in surrender to the absolute God or the known, as being the Universal knowledge of Brahman. There is never just one face of God.

[dattaswami]

If we follow the premise that Shankara is God, as you make note, we can use a common western theists example of Jesus' statement "I and my Father are One. What the Father witnesses in me so do I witness in the Father. I do nothing of myself for all that I do is done by the Father" as being the nature of the

To a deserving devotee, Jesus told He and His father are one and the same. When Jesus saw a devotee who was slightly affected by jealousy and egoism, Jesus came down by one step saying that He was the son of the God. The word son is indicating that He is different from the God but the same spirit is present in both like the same blood in the father and the son. This means that He is different and smaller than the God but at the same time has the same essence. It is like the relationship between the mighty ocean and the tiny water drop. The father is major and the son is minor component. They resemble qualitatively but differ quantitatively. This is the visishta advaita of Ramanuja.

When Jesus met a devotee who is fully bacterialised by jealousy and egoism He told that He was the humble messenger of God. This is the Dvaita of Madhva. Therefore the human incarnation will declare its level based on the level of the receiver. Mohammad told that He is the messenger of the Lord. Thus there is a gradual degradation of spiritual obedience and the gradual growth of jealousy and egoism. Jesus stands as a transition bridge between the Advaita of Krishna and Dvaita of Mohammad.

How to reconcile the statement of Jesus that He is Son of God & He and Father are the same

Matter is the condensed form of energy and hence, the energy can be treated as Father and matter as son. The Father of heaven is the energetic form charged by the unimaginable God. Jesus is the materialized matter-form charged by the same unimaginable God. From the point of view of medium, He told that He is the son of God and from the point of view of internal unimaginable God He told that He and His Father are one and the same.

The human incarnation (God in human form who comes to this world and present now) is a single phase of two components, which are God and soul. It is an alloy of Gold and copper. If a trace of Gold is mixed in copper, still it is alloy but it looks like copper only. Similarly, the human incarnation looks like an ordinary human being in which the invisible – unimaginable God is alloyed. This type of combination makes the medium always exhibited with its properties like birth, death, hunger etc. If the properties of the medium are suppressed and the properties of God are exhibited, people get excited and cannot clarify their doubts with the human incarnation. This is the merit of this concept but defect is that people generally neglect the human incarnation based on this very same point.

But, the merit is more important because the primary purpose of human incarnation is to clarify the doubts of the devotees. Arjuna questioned Krishna in several ways and got the points clarified freely because Krishna was in human form. If Krishna started explaining the Bhagavad Gita through energetic form (Vishwarupam), Arjuna could not have asked even one question due to extensive excitement. The God component in the human incarnation speaks that He is God. But, people see the human incarnation as human being only. Then there are two ways of the reaction of the human beings. Either they say that the human incarnation is only a human being and not God or they say that every human being is God. The first way is offensive and the second way is defensive. In the first way, people crucified Jesus. The offensive way is also mentioned in the Gita (Avajaananti maam…). Mohammad refused this concept of human incarnation since the people were continuing in the offensive nature only.

The defensive way was taken by Shankara. In His time, people were also atheists with ego and jealousy. He subsided their reaction by taking the defensive way. You can understand the human incarnation only by recognizing the two components. Whenever Jesus told that He is truth and light, it is the God component that spoke those words. Whenever Jesus told ‘Let Thy will be done.’, ‘Why did You leave Me?’ etc., it is the soul the component that spoke these words. The two components were clearly demonstrated by Krishna. Bhagavad Gita was told by God component. After the war, when Arjuna asked to repeat the same, the soul component spoke Anu Gita, which was only an exposition of a scholar. The Bhagavad Gita was told by God component and Anu Gita was told by soul component.

Whenever God speaks, the soul in the human incarnation is forced to be dumb. Sometimes, even the soul in the human incarnation may claim that it is God and in such case, it will be insulted and punished. This happened in the case of Parashurama, who thought that he killed all the kings. He was insulted and punished by Rama. When this is the case of the soul present in the human incarnation, what about the case of souls present in the human beings? Such souls will be punished in the hell for reformation. Sometimes the soul in the human incarnation may keep silent when he is praised as God by the devotees. The silence is forced on the soul by the God. If the soul reveals the truth, the devotees may be deeply hurt and pained. They prayed God to see Him and to speak with Him. Therefore, the secrecy of technique of the human incarnation should be maintained by the soul. However, such silence should not mislead the soul to think that it is really God or is transformed in to God really. In the alloy, the atoms of Gold remain as Gold and the atoms of copper remain as copper. Neither Gold became copper nor vice-versa.

You should limit the example within some boundaries and you should not analyze the example deeply. Infact, the Gold and copper are inter-convertible by artificial transmutation and this point should not be brought here to spoil the concept. If you take like that with extensive analysis, there can be no simile to God. All the items in the creation are imaginable and cannot be compared to unimaginable God. Therefore, you should not cross the limits of the simile in understanding the concept about God. The science is blessed to the human beings by God to understand the spiritual knowledge in deeper real sense. But, the human beings diverted the science to create more facilities. Infact, God has created all the facilities based on balance of nature leading to perfect health. All the inventions of science for the extra facilities proved to be harmful by the environmental science, which clearly proves that these inventions are not the intentions of God to bless the human beings with advanced scientific knowledge.

[dattaswami]

If we follow the premise that Shankara is God, as you make note, we can use a common western theists example of Jesus' statement "I and my Father are One. What the Father witnesses in me so do I witness in the Father. I do nothing of myself for all that I do is done by the Father" as being the nature of the

Meaning of one can approach Father through Me only

When you are worshipping the statue or photo of the past human incarnation, your photo or statue also indicates the eternal Lord existed in that human body. The Lord being eternal exists even today. Therefore, your photo indicates the Lord existing today. The statue or photo only indicates the existence of the Lord in a human form. It does not mean that the Lord existed only in that human body and is not present in any human body later on. If the Lord can exist in one human body, what is the objection for the Lord to exist in another human body also?

Once the concept of the existence of the Lord in human body is accepted, you must not have any objection to accept the Lord in another human body also. When you say that the current flows in this wire, you should not object the possibility of the flow of same current in another similar wire. If you object, you are a blind, rigid, ignorant lay- man and you can never be called as a scientist. Such conservative people will never change and even the liquid fire in the hell cannot change them. When Jesus told that one could approach the God through Him only it means that one can approach the unimaginable God through the medium of human form only and does not mean that one can approach the unimaginable God through that particular human body called as Jesus only.

[Joesus]

Whenever God speaks, the soul in the human incarnation is forced to be dumb. Sometimes, even the soul in the human incarnation may claim that it is God and in such case, it will be insulted and punished.

Now you are beginning to sound like the Christian Church.
The idea that God punishes the souls is a twisted understanding of Scripture and the teachings of the Jagadguru.

In truth all suffering is the result of such beliefs that one is separate from God. Fortunately beliefs change and belief can ultimately lead one to deeper contemplation, where the human nervous system can rise above the illusions of ego and its consummate identification with the relative beliefs in material boundaries. In other words one can choose to align with the divine within themselves and begin to culture a relationship with God within.

This happened in the case of Parashurama, who thought that he killed all the kings. He was insulted and punished by Rama. When this is the case of the soul present in the human incarnation, what about the case of souls present in the human beings? Such souls will be punished in the hell for reformation.

Hell is simply the illusion of ones own ideas of Self trapped within boundaries. The reflection of thoughts and desires also called Karma.

Sometimes the soul in the human incarnation may keep silent when he is praised as God by the devotees. The silence is forced on the soul by the God. If the soul reveals the truth, the devotees may be deeply hurt and pained. They prayed God to see Him and to speak with Him. Therefore, the secrecy of technique of the human incarnation should be maintained by the soul. However, such silence should not mislead the soul to think that it is really God or is transformed in to God really. In the alloy, the atoms of Gold remain as Gold and the atoms of copper remain as copper. Neither Gold became copper nor vice-versa.

Nothing is forced. When one aligns with the will of God, one surrenders ones self to being perfectly in tune with the forces of nature or the gunas.
An example I like to use is the story of Lazarus in the Bible. Lazarus was ill and dying, and his sisters pleaded with Jesus to come save him from his illness. Jesus told them to go home and all will take care of itself.
Lazarus died.
Jesus then approached Lazarus and his sisters after Lazarus had died knowing that it was now time to awaken Lazarus from his sleep. A debt of Karma had been paid by Lazarus. In other words the energy of past actions of thought and desire had come to completion where something new could be created without ensuing a mixture of convoluted thoughts and energy. Jesus then surrendered himself, or followed an intuited and obvious course of action (like drying ones self after a bath) to bring him to life again for the purpose to serve God in a greater capacity than to suffer the illusions of human death which he had done already.

You should limit the example within some boundaries and you should not analyze the example deeply. Infact, the Gold and copper are inter-convertible by artificial transmutation and this point should not be brought here to spoil the concept. If you take like that with extensive analysis, there can be no simile to God. All the items in the creation are imaginable and cannot be compared to unimaginable God. Therefore, you should not cross the limits of the simile in understanding the concept about God. The science is blessed to the human beings by God to understand the spiritual knowledge in deeper real sense. But, the human beings diverted the science to create more facilities. Infact, God has created all the facilities based on balance of nature leading to perfect health. All the inventions of science for the extra facilities proved to be harmful by the environmental science, which clearly proves that these inventions are not the intentions of God to bless the human beings with advanced scientific knowledge.

One should always express everything they can conceive of when it comes to the knowledge of God to empty the cup. Otherwise one makes a religion of God and assumes there are finite conditions placed upon the soul and its reflections. Built into the natural law of cause and effect is the simple truth that the mind that is not open to receive will not comprehend anything beyond relative truths.
Tho Jesus did not always speak of the deeper truths to the ignorant when there was no one to listen, he never held back the depths of Truth absolute from any soul, for he felt and understood the suffering of their self (ego) created hell. Always, God is, in the sense that the immutable exists in everything everywhere always for man to see if he has the eyes, and to hear if he has the ears.
Often Jesus spoke in parables for those who had sufficiently ascended the attachments of the outward driven senses, but those parables were also keys to the intellect that would seek to know the deeper meanings of truth absolute, rather than isolate themselves within truth personal and subjective.

You remind me of the typical pundit who wears the hair shirt and sits before the fire in the middle of the hot noon day sun, assuming they must pay penance to receive a blessing from God.

Quoting scripture or badly mistranslated scripture, without having experienced union with God or the union described by the master who spoke the words that became scripture, is the delusion of religion.
For example, India is so separated from its spiritual heritage the Cow has been raised to an image of God. Pundits like yourself are steeped in fear of a God that punishes humanity for its transgressions and the misunderstanding of the deeper meanings of Gods love for humanity only because fear still exists in the mind as a reality of God. God did not create fear for humans. God created humans with the capacity to know fear and humans created fear in their own lives as a part of God.

One should not speak of that which they have no experience of and expect it to cast a resonance or truth.

Also one should know that when they speak of Truth that it does not create instant results, nor does it insult the God within the individual. The Guru never identifies himself as being greater than the God in any individual and so he does not walk with the illusion of being separate from the God absolute or the God or Christed essence of the individuals around him.

One does not fear for the will of God in each individual when one experiences the perfection of nature around ones Self. Only one fears for imperfections when one lives themselves as an imperfection, separate from God.

Many speak of the knowledge of God but the words are simply memorized and absorbed into the intellect without actually raising the intellect and the nervous system to sufficiently touch the spirit within and bring it forth in all thought feeling and action.
Once one has done that, they can begin to become one with spirit where all actions are observed and experienced as the One immutable God.

Fear of damnation or the arrogance of speaking for an authority outside of ones self, only comes from an unawareness or separation from experience and knowledge of the immutable, or the ego that has assumed the position of an authority or knowledge outside of ones Self without having the direct experience of God within ones self, and within everything else one perceives.

Tho you can quote scripture like any good disciple who plays the obedient role to the master I don't hear much from what I call experience. Consciousness recognizes consciousness. One who knows the Christ can recognize it in another when it is alive and functioning at the active level of thought and speech. From you I get the impression of a man with a suitcase full of "So and So said" or "It is written here in scripture" etc. etc.

Ive heard more convincing sermons with less fear and superstition involved where one does not carry memorized speeches to assume a position or to try to convince ones self they are worthy of Gods grace.

When Jesus told that one could approach the God through Him only it means that one can approach the unimaginable God through the medium of human form only and does not mean that one can approach the unimaginable God through that particular human body called as Jesus only.

Well I see it a bit differently. Jesus spoke of the Christ within as being the Son of God. The manifestation of God on earth within the human form. That he spoke of as being within each and everyone and "THAT" being the doorway to approach God. So when he said thru me, he was reiterating his previous statement of union with God at the level of both the soul and the form as the Christed being, one with the Father, where he witnessed the Father and the Father witnessed him. The unmanifest absolute God and the manifest reflection of God united always and eternally one.
He did not say thru another human form he meant all human forms, but more specifically within each individual was the doorway to union or Yoga.

[dattaswami]

Now you are beginning to sound like the Christian Church.
The idea that God punishes the souls is a twisted understanding of Scripture and the teachings of the Jagadguru.

Punishment given for a sin is only to change the mind of the soul and purify it. There is no trace of revenge in this. The hell is an indication of the intensive love of God to the souls through which God wants to reform the souls. The hell indicates the hectic effort of God put on the soul to reform it and not to leave the soul for its fate. A father may leave his son since he is not changing inspite of all his efforts. But in the hell God puts serious effort and succeeds to change the soul.

Therefore, even thousands of fathers cannot be equal to God. God is not leaving the soul without changing it and this point is indicated by the punishment and hell. Therefore, there is no point of excusing the Prarabhdas if this true basis is understood. God will try to change the soul through preaching as far as possible. Punishment in the hell is the last resort. Once the soul is reformed all the sins are smashed since there is neither the necessity of preaching nor the necessity of punishment.

[dattaswami]

An example I like to use is the story of Lazarus in the Bible. Lazarus was ill and dying, and his sisters pleaded with Jesus to come save him from his illness. Jesus told them to go home and all will take care of itself.
Lazarus died.
Jesus then approached Lazarus and his sisters after Lazarus had died knowing that it was now time to awaken Lazarus from his sleep. A debt of Karma had been paid by Lazarus. In other words the energy of past actions of thought and desire had come to completion where something new could be created without ensuing a mixture of convoluted thoughts and energy. Jesus then surrendered himself, or followed an intuited and obvious course of action (like drying ones self after a bath) to bring him to life again for the purpose to serve God in a greater capacity than to suffer the illusions of human death which he had done already.

Poeple are suffering due to their own actions only

The reason for misery or happiness is only your action that was already done. The Gita says that the actions are very very subtle (Gahana Karmano Gatih…). I will give you a small example. While eating food, suppose a piece of chilly is left over in your plate. When it is thrown outside, it decays and lot of virus and bacteria are generated. Suppose, such virus affects the health of a good devotee who is involved in the mission of Lord; this has become the greatest sin based on the smallest piece of chilly. Your health will be affected severely. Therefore, the Veda says “Annam Na Parichakshita”, which means that even an iota (Iota is denoted by the prefix pari) of food should not be thrown out. Either you should eat the piece of chilly or use the powder of chilies in cooking the food. You can imagine the fate of the priests who throw lot of food in the death rituals stating that throwing food indicates their full satisfaction! This shows that we cannot avoid sins which are so subtle that easily escape our attention. You have to enjoy the fruits of your actions. Without knowing such subtle nature of deeds, people cry saying “What sin I have done in this birth?” They say that some deed from the previous birth was responsible for such fruit. They assume that they are very pure without doing any sin in this birth! It is not correct. All the fruits end by enjoyment or punishment either in this world or in the upper world (heaven and hell). When the soul comes down to the earth and enters a fresh body, all the fruits are over with a nil balance sheet.

But, the Samskaras (psychological tendencies for doing such deeds) exist in the soul in very much reduced state. The soul does again the same deeds guided by these samskaras, which are called as destiny (Karmasesha). Therefore, either enjoyment of the fruits or worship of God (theoretical and practical) are the two ways left over. God alone can burn your sins by His own specific technology (enjoying the fruits for your sake). The Gita says the same (Ahamtva…). You cannot escape the enjoyment of the fruits even after millions of Yugas unless these Samskaras are burnt by the divine knowledge, which leads you to God and subsequent practical devotion. People misunderstand that the divine knowledge directly burns the Samskaras.

The burning can be verified only through the practical devotion to God (Jnanaagnih… Gita). The proof for receiving the right divine knowledge is only determination and implementation in practice. The root of all these Samskaras is only attachment to the world. When this attachment is burnt, the Samskaras are burnt. But burning the attachment to the world is very difficult and cannot be achieved by the effort of even entire life time. Therefore, do not waste your life time in burning these Samskaras. You divert these Samskaras (good and bad qualities) to God and this is the easiest and fruitful solution. Suppose, you go on making efforts till the age of your retirement to get the relief order from the old institution, where is the time to join the new institution?

[dattaswami]

Quoting scripture or badly mistranslated scripture, without having experienced union with God or the union described by the master who spoke the words that became scripture, is the delusion of religion.
For example, India is so separated from its spiritual heritage the Cow has been raised to an image of God. Pundits like yourself are steeped in fear of a God that punishes humanity for its transgressions and the misunderstanding of the deeper meanings of Gods love for humanity only because fear still exists in the mind as a reality of God. God did not create fear for humans. God created humans with the capacity to know fear and humans created fear in their own lives as a part of God.

To accept any concept, there are four authorities:

1) Shruti, the scripture, which is the divine text and it is Veda for Hindus.
2) The second authority is Smruti, which is the text written by sages.
3) The third authority is logical discussion to find out the correct interpretation of the scripture.
4) The fourth authority is experience of divine scholars.

Let us examine the first authority, the Veda, which is said to be the word of God revealed to sages. In this scripture, lot of importance is given to the four great statements (Mahavaakyaas). One statement says that the special knowledge is God (Prajnanam Brahma). The special knowledge cannot mean simple awareness, which is found in animals and birds. The word ‘Jnanam’ means ‘Knowledge’ and not mere awareness. Awareness is the basic material but knowledge is the special design of it. When you are appreciating a golden jewel, the appreciation for the specialty is related to the design of the golden chain and not to the basic gold.

You are not appreciating a lump of gold. The word ‘Pra’ denotes the ‘Specialty’ and the word ‘Jnanam’ denotes the ‘Knowledge’. The word ‘Knowledge’ eliminates all the living beings other than human beings because only human beings possess and express knowledge. The word ‘Pra’ indicates a rare special human being only, who is possessor of the special knowledge. The result is that a specific human being, who is the possessor and preacher of the special knowledge alone can be God like Krishna, who preached Geeta-the special knowledge. When you say that a king is ruling the country, the word ‘king’ cannot mean every living being and you cannot say that an animal or a bird is ruling the country. The word ‘king’ also cannot mean every human being because every human being cannot have the special talent of administration to rule the entire country. Hence, the word ‘king’ indicates a specially talented human being only. This statement also indicates that the main purpose of God to come as a human being is to preach the special knowledge only.


Another statement says that an individual human being is God (Ayamaatma Brahma). The word ‘Atmaa’ means not only the awareness, but also the external human body. ‘Atmaa’ means that which pervades. The awareness pervades the body through nerves. Awareness is the neural energy flowing in the nerves. The body also pervades the space as it grows. Therefore, the word ‘Atmaa’ stands for the human being, which is the human body along with the awareness. The three statements saying that ‘I am God’, ‘You are God’ and ‘He is God’ denote only the aspiration that everybody should become God in the near future. The verbs in present tense like ‘am’, ‘are’ and ‘is’ stand for the present tense indicating the immediate future as per the grammar. These three statements also mean that the human form of God is like me, you and him for external look. Since God looks like an ordinary human being externally, these three statements indicate the aspect of similarity.

The fourth statement brings the difference, which says that God is the ‘Special Knowledge’. The possessor of knowledge can be called as the knowledge itself, when the knowledge excels in the possessor as per the grammar. Therefore knowledge means the possessor of knowledge. According to lakshana, the possessor can be called by the possessor material. A seller of apples is called as ‘apples’. All these four statements indicate the human incarnation only. The word ‘Narayana’ referred in Veda means the source of knowledge. Veda says that Narayana spreads all over the world (vyaapya Naraayanah). It means that the knowledge preached by the Lord is spreading all over the world.


Another Vedic statement saying that all this world is God (sarvam khalvidam…) also means the same. The country ruled by the king, Kalinga, is called as Kalinga only. The region spread by the rule of Kalinga is called as Kalinga. This does not mean that the entire kingdom is the king himself in person. All these statements indicate the knowledge of the human incarnation spreading all over the world and this should not be mis-understood as the human incarnation Himself becoming all the world. In Rudram, existing in Veda, it is said that God hits the people with arrows released from His bow. This also indicates the human incarnations like Rama and Krishna, who punished the evil people with the help of bow and arrows. Apart from that, the bow stands for the knowledge and the arrows stands for the points.

God in human form hits everybody with His points through knowledge to kill their ignorance. Like this, all the Vedic statements can be rightly interpreted in the sense of human incarnation preaching the special knowledge.


Veda also says that God is un-imaginable, who is beyond words, mind, intelligence and logic and hence God alone knows God (Brahmavit Brahmaiva...). You should know that God cannot be known (Yasyaamatam…). But such God enters the world through a medium (Tadevaanu Praavishat...) and God becomes that medium while keeping His separate identity of His real form (Satchatyatcha...). Therefore, the essence of the Veda is very clear that the absolute God is un-imaginable, He enters a human being as a medium for the sake of preaching knowledge and He remains in His original form and at the same time gets identified with the human form also.

The second authority is ‘Smruti’, which is, the text written by sages consisting of the three great epics dealing with the human incarnations like Rama and Krishna. The third authority is reasoning, which is already taken up from the beginning of this message. The logical analysis always helps to get the correct interpretation of both ‘Shruti’ and ‘Smruti’. The fourth authority is the experience of divine scholars. Hanuman is the greatest scholar, who learnt all the scriptures from the sun. Gopikas are also the incarnations of great sages, who are the greatest scholars of the scriptures. Both Hanuman and Gopikas worshipped the contemporary human incarnations only and not the statues of energetic forms of God or the past human incarnations. Hanuman never worshipped the statues of past human incarnations like Parashurama and Vamana or the statues of energetic forms like Shiva and Vishnu. Similarly, gopikas did not worship the statues of Rama or the statues of Vishnu and Shiva. Therefore, all the four authorities clearly indicate that human beings should worship the human form of God only for the salvation.


The energetic forms of God are meant only for the energetic forms of departed souls in the upper worlds. It is not the question of right and wrong, but it is a question of relevance and irrelevance. We do not say that the energetic form is wrong for human beings. We only say that the energetic form is irrelevant and human form of God is relevant for the human beings. When you worship the energetic forms, you have to either concentrate on the imagined form in mind, which is very difficult or you have to worship the statue of the energetic form. We cannot serve the imagined form. In the case of a statue, the service becomes waste. But, if you take the human form of God, all your service is enjoyed by God and becomes fruitful.

The only obstruction to the alive human form of God is the ego and jealousy towards a co-human form. You may accept the concept of human incarnation, but, if your ego and jealousy are not completely eradicated, you will worship only the statues of past human incarnations only and not the present alive form of God. Thus, for a human being, everything is concentrated on the contemporary human incarnation only.
www.universal-spirituality.org
Universal Spirituality for World Peace

[Joesus]

You are not appreciating a lump of gold.

The lump of Gold I can appreciate.
Your cutting and pasting of scripture and writings that are not your own, I see as a lump trying to be golden.

[dattaswami]

You are not appreciating a lump of gold.

The lump of Gold I can appreciate.
Your cutting and pasting of scripture and writings that are not your own, I see as a lump trying to be golden.

Thanks for that.
The cause is absolute plane and its effect is relative plane. Gold is the cause and chain is its effect. The lump of gold has no shape but its effect, the chain, has a specific shape. When you are talking about the beauty of the shape of the chain, the quantity or quality of gold is not touched. When you talk about the quality and quantity of gold, you should not talk about the beauty of the design of chain. The former is absolute plane and latter is relative plane. When you are in one plane, you should not bring the other plane and get confused.

[Joesus]

The cause is absolute plane and its effect is relative plane. Gold is the cause and chain is its effect. The lump of gold has no shape but its effect, the chain, has a specific shape.

No. Shapes change as the mind wanders with changing beliefs. Tho the specific shape of reality appears to be the same it only appears within memory as such.

When you are talking about the beauty of the shape of the chain, the quantity or quality of gold is not touched. When you talk about the quality and quantity of gold, you should not talk about the beauty of the design of chain. The former is absolute plane and latter is relative plane. When you are in one plane, you should not bring the other plane and get confused.

When you are in one plane the other is contrived from the knowledge and experience of that plane and you live 100% of life in what you believe is real.
When you live standing in both planes, you live 200% of life and speak from the experience and knowledge of both planes. The knower however, within the process of knowing knows only the language of the plane one is immersed within.
Hence when one hears the master being silent, and without the knowledge of the absolute assumes a rule based on what he/she does not understand or hear. The hopeful makes an assumption that one cannot bring one into the other or speak of one within the other. Without the ears to hear one assumes deafness to be normal and the rule.

You are confused because you know only one language, just as a Christian gets confused when God is presented in Eastern Terminology, you are conditioned by your limited grasp of Eastern Scripture and with both feet in one plane, imagining the absolute.

I think you believe the human nervous system is without the flexibility to stretch itself within the absolute and to live in the world but not be of it.

Arrogance is blinding as well as binding........

You remind me of one of Jesus disciples who met a man who performed miracles and spoke of God. He said to him, "what do you know of God? The master Jesus is the true master and you know him not and I do not know you" When rejoining his teacher and speaking of his encounter Jesus told him, " Anyone who knows God is your brother. My Brother. There is no limit to the experience or expression of God, and it is not my words that are law. It is the nature or law that supports my words and all words of God. Your prejudice is in the belief that only I can speak of God and only my words and the way you hear them are the spoken words of God."

Your conversations appear as reporting. Like a reporter who speaks of what he is told and given on a TV screen. There is little conversation to be had with the Television screen because the man within the screen is absorbed in his own world and does not see or hear those he speaks to. He only hears his own words and thoughts and thinks what he has been told.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4gN4m3Tqd8&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlbDJCqPH2U&feature=related

[dattaswami]

You remind me of one of Jesus disciples who met a man who performed miracles and spoke of God. He said to him, "what do you know of God? The master Jesus is the true master and you know him not and I do not know you" When rejoining his teacher and speaking of his encounter Jesus told him, " Anyone who knows God is your brother. My Brother. There is no limit to the experience or expression of God, and it is not my words that are law. It is the nature or law that supports my words and all words of God. Your prejudice is in the belief that only I can speak of God and only my words and the way you hear them are the spoken words of God."

Miracles alone is not the identity mark of God! Miracles are done even by demons and black magicians and therefore cannot be the identifying marks of God. Miracles alone are not sufficient to detect the Lord. Krishna is identified by not miracles but by excellent knowledge of Gita. Krishna lifted the mountain but Ravana also lifted the Kailasa Mountain. You should not test God by demanding miracles and this was told by Jesus to Satan, when Satan asked Him to convert the stone into bread.

A saint asks Me to kill him and give him life again as proof. In the history of human incarnations no body asked like this and no human incarnation did like this. If such challenge is thrown, a demon will certainly come forward with a miracle. Lord Krishna killed several evil people but never gave life to them. Due to His plan only, Abhimanyu was killed. When Subhadra asked to give life to him, He refused. But He gave life to Parikshit and brought back the dead son of His Guru. He did miracles in the case of exceptionally deserving devotees only, but not on any challenge.

Whenever the devotee deserves and the Lord by Himself wishes, any miracle can take place spontaneously. Sukracharaya knows to give life to a killed person but he is not God. Vatapi and Ilala were demons. Ilala kills Vatapi and serves him as food to the guest. Then Ilala calls Vatapi. Vatapi becomes alive and comes out by tearing the stomach of guest. Does this means that they are God?

The saint told that Krishna only created, maintained and dissolved the Universe, which is an exceptional miracle. But Krishna did not dissolve all this Universe and created it again keeping you separately as a spectator. He only showed the cosmic form as a vision to Arjuna. In the vision He created the Universe, maintained it and finally dissolved it. During this vision the universe is not affected. Even Durroyadhana saw it and discarded it as hypnotic illusion. Arjuna believed the vision for some time. Udanka appreciated the vision forever. Of course, this vision proves that Krishna is God. Since Veda and Brahma sutra also gives this as the super most miracle of identification which is not possible for any body except God. On one Guru Purnima day I was giving a divine discourse and suddenly I stood for five minutes silently in highly excited state. Then I sat again in the chair.

I asked two devotees in the crowd to tell what they saw simultaneously. Both of them told that they had the vision of cosmic form (Viswaroopam). Of course, God in Me gave that vision and I have nothing to do with it. If God is not in Me how that vision was given? How I identified only those two devotees? How I said that both of them had the same vision and they should explain it to other devotees? If one person gets the vision it may be illusion. How the same illusion is created to both the devotees simultaneously. The analysis made me also believe that God (Parabrahman) is present in Me. When God is given to the devotees through human body He is called as Datta. Veda also says that the special divine knowledge comes form God only (Satyam Jananam, Prajnanam..). Gita also says the same (Jnanitvatmaiva…..). I gave importance to these aspects in analyzing that God is in Me to give this special knowledge and that special vision. Of course, Duroyodhana discarded even that as hypnotiam. Brahma sutras also tell these two aspects as the identifying marks (Janmadyasya…, Sastrayonitvat).

[Joesus]

Miracles alone is not the identity mark of God! ...................

You still don't know how to listen, which is why you hear nothing. The idea I presented was not about miracles, it was about the person who does not see, hear or comprehend conversation or what is in front of him in the person to whom he speaks, but instead runs on automatic pilot following a program one has been hypnotized into following.
You only see the chain, which is understandable since you seem to chained to your beliefs and definitions.

I doubt you would be very much fun on a date, unless you found someone who could just quote scripture and carry enough written material to pull examples from every time a word caught your attention. Neither one of you would really see the other with all of the mental masturbation that took place.

You can preach, but there is no spirit behind the words, because no one is home.

IF it were just about the words, all of the great masters would have written books and never made any kind of public appearance, or they would have brought a book and read from it as you read from yours.

[dattaswami]

You can preach, but there is no spirit behind the words, because no one is home.

IF it were just about the words, all of the great masters would have written books and never made any kind of public appearance, or they would have brought a book and read from it as you read from yours.

The spiritual knowledge or philosophy (Vedanta) is generally based on logic (Tarka). God is certainly above the logic and thus logic cannot touch Him (Naisha Tarkena -Veda). Nobody can show God by the indicating finger. Veda clearly states that God is beyond words, mind, intelligence and logic and the best way of explanation is silence about God. If that is so, there is no necessity of spiritual knowledge, because God cannot be known or imagined. Then what is the use of all these scriptures? Why are there so many discussions and debates? [color=#3366FF]

Lord Yama says in Veda that angels and sages are still discussing about God and have concluded that God is unknowable. Here unknowable means unimaginable even to the logic. They have not conducted such long discussions to know simply that God is unknowable because it is not the object as my friend says! If God is said to be unimaginable, what is the subject of discussions? The answer is that the logic used in long discussions is not about God but about the Non-God entities (items of creation). Certainly, we cannot know God by logic or by any other means, but we can use the logic to reject a Non-God item projected as God. When you say that awareness is God, we will use the logic and see whether awareness is an item of creation.

If it is an item of creation, certainly it can be analyzed by logic. If logic fails to analyze it, certainly we will accept it as God. Similarly we shall apply the logic to several entities rejected as God and see whether any item is beyond logic.

The logic is the analytical faculty supported by practical examples, which stands as experimental verification. The ancient Indian logic was developed based on practical examples like mud pot etc. The advancement in logic took place from time to time and the logic was more and more sharpened. The authoritative parameters (Pramanas) have improved in number and therefore the schools of Nyaya, Vaiseshika and Vedanta differed in the subject of logic. The number of Pramanas increased from 2 to 4 and finally became 6 in Vedanta. This shows the improvement of logic in course of time. Today science is the most advanced logic since the experimental verification was improved. Therefore if I am explaining the philosophy based on science, it means that the philosophy is more and more clear due to the advanced logic. I told you already that the logic (science) is only useful to refuse any item of creation as not God.

The creator cannot be any item of the creation. If creator becomes creation, there must be some other creator for this creator to become the creation. Ad-infinitum (Anavastha) results. Science disproved some conclusions of the earlier logic and this should not be misunderstood as refusing God. God is in no way touched because the earlier logic also was dealing with only the analysis of created items. Tarka means the analysis of the items of creation, which are indicated and understood by their corresponding names or words (Tarkyante Padarthah Asminniti….). God is beyond all the words and cannot be the understood meaning of any word and therefore, logic cannot touch God.

[Joesus]

Then what is the use of all these scriptures?

Self discovery, regarding the spirit behind the words. Not to create religion or preach.

Why are there so many discussions and debates?

Mostly when it comes to scripture, discussions consist of the mental masturbation of the intellect. So to ask why, could be answered that it feels normal to think and discuss what one believes, to find validation with ones self identity and ones idea of purpose and value.
Rarely do they (discussions of scripture) approach the personal experiences of the author, or what inspired the words and why one should discuss the approach or method of approach to ones own experience of the spirit behind the words.

Discussions regarding scripture end up as discussions of religion and tend to stall in the intellect, to project meanings from the inside of the box one lives in that is lined with beliefs and past impressions.

[dattaswami]

Then what is the use of all these scriptures?

Self discovery, regarding the spirit behind the words. Not to create religion or preach.

Why are there so many discussions and debates?

Mostly when it comes to scripture, discussions consist of the mental masturbation of the intellect. So to ask why, could be answered that it feels normal to think and discuss what one believes, to find validation with ones self identity and ones idea of purpose and value.
Rarely do they (discussions of scripture) approach the personal experiences of the author, or what inspired the words and why one should discuss the approach or method of approach to ones own experience of the spirit behind the words.

Discussions regarding scripture end up as discussions of religion and tend to stall in the intellect, to project meanings from the inside of the box one lives in that is lined with beliefs and past impressions.

There is a need of direction in spirituality. It cannot comeby itself. The truth is given from the God in human form to the aspirant. Aspirant has to analyse the knoweldge and based based on the analyse he has to decide whether it is truth or not and them follow it. Therefore God who only posses the correct true divine knowledge comes in human form to preach the knowledge to us.

The direct preaching of right spiritual knowledge and direct clarification of doubts is the primary aim of human incarnation. Nothing can be achieved if the knowledge is imperfect or incomplete. While serving this primary aim, other secondary aims like desire of devotees to see, touch and live with God are also accomplished. If you go to Delhi to attend a seminar on behalf of your job, you have served the primary aim. You may purchase a sari for your wife in Delhi and this is a secondary work. There is nothing wrong with the secondary work as long as the primary work is not disturbed.

You must get the correct information to reach Delhi. The correct information will show you the right path to reach the goal. Here, the purpose of knowledge is over. From this point onwards, your effort is required. You may have the correct knowledge of the path, but unless you put the effort to walk, the goal is not reached. The true knowledge is given by the scripture. But, unfortunately wrong interpretations of the scripture exist in this world. Therefore, the correct interpretation with powerful explanation of the scripture is required. The correct interpretation is only known to the Author of the Scripture. Therefore, God, the Author of the Scripture, should come down in the human form as Preacher to give the original interpretation and clarify all your doubts to convince you with powerful and correct logic.

If God comes in any form other than human form, the preaching is not possible. Of course, God can preach you even in the form of a statue through His omnipotence. But, if that is done, you will be excited with tension and will not be able to receive the interpretation and will not be able to express your doubts in cool atmosphere. For this purpose only, God comes down in the human form as a Preacher so that you will treat Him as your co-human being and express your doubts freely to get correct clarification. Hence, [there is] the importance of contemporary human incarnation.

[dattaswami]

Then what is the use of all these scriptures?

Self discovery, regarding the spirit behind the words. Not to create religion or preach.

Why are there so many discussions and debates?

Mostly when it comes to scripture, discussions consist of the mental masturbation of the intellect. So to ask why, could be answered that it feels normal to think and discuss what one believes, to find validation with ones self identity and ones idea of purpose and value.
Rarely do they (discussions of scripture) approach the personal experiences of the author, or what inspired the words and why one should discuss the approach or method of approach to ones own experience of the spirit behind the words.

Discussions regarding scripture end up as discussions of religion and tend to stall in the intellect, to project meanings from the inside of the box one lives in that is lined with beliefs and past impressions.

You may ask then who is such God in human form from whome the divine knoweldge is listened to?



Recognition of contemporary human incarnation is the most crucial point since we can worship God directly through contemporary human incarnation only. The recognition is to be done by examining various messages of divine knowledge rendered by the spiritual preachers and through the true and excellent spiritual knowledge only, you have to recognize the contemporary human incarnation.

If you want to give gold medal to the top most meritorious student in the class, you have to examine the answer scripts written by all the students of the class and depending on the highest marks, you have to select the gold medalist. Similarly, you have to examine the messages of all the preachers and then recognize the incarnation through the merit of the message. You should not fix some student as the gold medalist in the beginning itself and then allot highest marks to his answer script. Today, people are doing exactly the same mistake. They enquire and examine the preacher through various other aspects and decide some preacher as the incarnation and then treat his knowledge as the true knowledge.

Veda says that true (Satyam Jnanam) and excellent (Prajnanam) spiritual knowledge alone is the real identification of God. Therefore, you have to examine the knowledge first and not the preacher.


While you are examining the answer scripts of the students, you are unaware of any student. You are giving highest marks simply based on the merit of the answer without knowing the student of that script. You are not aware of the personal merits and personal defects of the student while giving the highest marks to a particular script. You are not judging the student by his character and conduct. The knowledge of the student alone is relevant basis for giving the gold medal. Similarly, the true and excellent spiritual knowledge alone is the deciding factor for identifying God in human form of the present generation because you are going to get the right direction in your spiritual journey through the true knowledge only.


The examination of Gita gives the identification of God. You are concerned only about Gita since it gives the right direction for your spiritual uplift. Based on this only, you should conclude that the Author of Gita must be God. You are not concerned about the merits and defects of the Author of Gita, which are not relevant to your spiritual progress. He might have stolen butter or might have danced with girls since those factors are not going to help you in any way in your spiritual journey. The advice given by Him to you alone is relevant to you. There may be so many unknown reasons for His behavior about which, your capacity is not sufficient to analyze. Such unnecessary analysis is unnecessary for your spiritual journey. What you require is only the correct advice about the correct spiritual path.

Therefore, you have to recognize God in human form through such correct advice which is called as true spiritual knowledge. After recognition, you should not analyze the other aspects of God. After giving highest marks to the answer script, you should give the gold medal to the writer. You should not stop the gold medal since the student is smoking.



You have read the Bible and concluded that the Speaker of the Bible should be God. The Author of the Bible might have taken the wine of grapes or might have taken the non-vegetarian dish. You may search for the reasons of such specific behavior of the incarnation. But your faith on Him as God should not be disturbed if you have not got the answer in your analysis. You may find out the reason for the smoking of gold medalist. But you should not keep the gold medal in suspension till you find out the reason. Whether you find out the reason or not the gold medalist is a gold medalist. Therefore, it is the climax of the foolishness of the ignorance to decide some person as God first and then believe his knowledge as the true knowledge. You have to impartially examine the knowledge of various preachers and the best selected knowledge must lead you to its author as God.

Such God may belong to your caste or not, may belong to your religion or not, may belong to your nation or not since God is always universal and His preaching is also universal since He is the creator of the entire humanity. Gita also says that the Preacher of the true knowledge is God (Jnanitvaatmaiva….). This means that the merit of the knowledge alone should be the deciding factor in recognizing God.

[Joesus]

If you simply examine knowledge without taking the mind and awareness inward to touch God, then study only renders ideas based on external experiences and the dynamic appreciation of democratic opinion.

In the Upanishads there is a saying, "To know enlightenment, one must study scripture, surround ones self with enlightened company and..have a valid method to take the mind inward to gain the awareness in which to structure a relationship with the underlying Supreme nature of all things".

Knowledge, enlightened guidance to help the intellect refine knowledge into experience, and the tools/means to gain personal experience of the Supreme, absolute being (A way to take the mind from the surface thoughts into the underlying nature of all of reality).

Scripture without the other two is just a bunch of words to masturbate the intellect with.

Memorization of scripture and intellectual masturbation creates an enlightened ego.

Preachers speak of intellectual ideas, but cannot convey experience. Either their own to someone or to culture experience in another.

A master knows better than to spout words without the experience behind them or to waste words on those that do not hear.
Preachers know nothing of the experience with the Supreme being, for their point of surrender is self validation thru someone outside of themselves rather than the direct experience of the One within themselves.

A master knows what is in the heart of others and knows when silence serves to focus knowledge where it is most useful and can be used.

A preacher, preaches to hear ones self speak, so as to self validate. A preacher or one who self validates, holds a discussion to idolize identity based on surface appearances and the worship of surface appearances.

A master uses scripture to point the way toward personal experience of the divine when instructing one who is on the path to enlightenment and has a valid tool to take the mind inward to cultivate the relationship with the Divine Self.

Reading and discussing scripture with someone who cannot hear the words and without the guidance of one who has mastered the Self and the tools to enlightenment is like watching TV with the sound off and facing opposite of the screen. You engage yourself in a mirror exercise where you talk to yourself about your ideal image of self.
If you are lucky, you might discover that even tho you feel righteous, you are still only stirring surface appearances and begin to engage your Self in someone who can lead you to the proven and valid approach handed down from one master to the next, rather than to perpetuate religious dogma.

There is no comprehension or understanding in surmising God based on intellectual understanding when the intellect is floating on the surface of mind created illusions.

You may read and study a book on surgery and even discuss what is in the book with others, but without taking the knife and performing surgery you are not a surgeon. Furthermore you would not be the surgical patient to someone without the guidance of another who has mastered surgery, or one who has only read and discussed a book on surgery.

[dattaswami]

Then what is the use of all these scriptures?

Self discovery, regarding the spirit behind the words. Not to create religion or preach.

Why are there so many discussions and debates?

Mostly when it comes to scripture, discussions consist of the mental masturbation of the intellect. So to ask why, could be answered that it feels normal to think and discuss what one believes, to find validation with ones self identity and ones idea of purpose and value.
Rarely do they (discussions of scripture) approach the personal experiences of the author, or what inspired the words and why one should discuss the approach or method of approach to ones own experience of the spirit behind the words.

Discussions regarding scripture end up as discussions of religion and tend to stall in the intellect, to project meanings from the inside of the box one lives in that is lined with beliefs and past impressions.

You may ask then who is such God in human form from whome the divine knoweldge is listened to?



Recognition of contemporary human incarnation is the most crucial point since we can worship God directly through contemporary human incarnation only. The recognition is to be done by examining various messages of divine knowledge rendered by the spiritual preachers and through the true and excellent spiritual knowledge only, you have to recognize the contemporary human incarnation.

If you want to give gold medal to the top most meritorious student in the class, you have to examine the answer scripts written by all the students of the class and depending on the highest marks, you have to select the gold medalist. Similarly, you have to examine the messages of all the preachers and then recognize the incarnation through the merit of the message. You should not fix some student as the gold medalist in the beginning itself and then allot highest marks to his answer script. Today, people are doing exactly the same mistake. They enquire and examine the preacher through various other aspects and decide some preacher as the incarnation and then treat his knowledge as the true knowledge.

Veda says that true (Satyam Jnanam) and excellent (Prajnanam) spiritual knowledge alone is the real identification of God. Therefore, you have to examine the knowledge first and not the preacher.


While you are examining the answer scripts of the students, you are unaware of any student. You are giving highest marks simply based on the merit of the answer without knowing the student of that script. You are not aware of the personal merits and personal defects of the student while giving the highest marks to a particular script. You are not judging the student by his character and conduct. The knowledge of the student alone is relevant basis for giving the gold medal. Similarly, the true and excellent spiritual knowledge alone is the deciding factor for identifying God in human form of the present generation because you are going to get the right direction in your spiritual journey through the true knowledge only.


The examination of Gita gives the identification of God. You are concerned only about Gita since it gives the right direction for your spiritual uplift. Based on this only, you should conclude that the Author of Gita must be God. You are not concerned about the merits and defects of the Author of Gita, which are not relevant to your spiritual progress. He might have stolen butter or might have danced with girls since those factors are not going to help you in any way in your spiritual journey. The advice given by Him to you alone is relevant to you. There may be so many unknown reasons for His behavior about which, your capacity is not sufficient to analyze. Such unnecessary analysis is unnecessary for your spiritual journey. What you require is only the correct advice about the correct spiritual path.

Therefore, you have to recognize God in human form through such correct advice which is called as true spiritual knowledge. After recognition, you should not analyze the other aspects of God. After giving highest marks to the answer script, you should give the gold medal to the writer. You should not stop the gold medal since the student is smoking.



You have read the Bible and concluded that the Speaker of the Bible should be God. The Author of the Bible might have taken the wine of grapes or might have taken the non-vegetarian dish. You may search for the reasons of such specific behavior of the incarnation. But your faith on Him as God should not be disturbed if you have not got the answer in your analysis. You may find out the reason for the smoking of gold medalist. But you should not keep the gold medal in suspension till you find out the reason. Whether you find out the reason or not the gold medalist is a gold medalist. Therefore, it is the climax of the foolishness of the ignorance to decide some person as God first and then believe his knowledge as the true knowledge. You have to impartially examine the knowledge of various preachers and the best selected knowledge must lead you to its author as God.

Such God may belong to your caste or not, may belong to your religion or not, may belong to your nation or not since God is always universal and His preaching is also universal since He is the creator of the entire humanity. Gita also says that the Preacher of the true knowledge is God (Jnanitvaatmaiva….). This means that the merit of the knowledge alone should be the deciding factor in recognizing God.

There is a huge difference between a preacher and God in human form.If you want to eat an apple, you have to search for the seller of apples in order to purchase an apple from him. Then, how to identify the seller of apples? The identity mark for recognizing the seller of apples is the apple itself. Therefore, your requirement itself is the identity mark to recognize the possessor of your requirement. If you want to learn Physics, you to have select the best teacher of the physics. What is the identity mark of the best teacher of physics? The identity mark is the best teaching of the physics itself. Similarly the requirement of an aspirant of spiritual path is the correct direction in his spiritual journey. The correct direction in the spiritual journey can be given by the true spiritual knowledge. Apart from the true spiritual knowledge, there should be best way of explanation of such true spiritual knowledge. Therefore, your requirement is the true spiritual knowledge and its best explanation, so that you can get the correct direction in your spiritual effort.

Now, the identity mark to recognize the possessor of true spiritual knowledge and the best preacher of such true spiritual knowledge is the true spiritual knowledge and its best explanation only. Veda says that the true spiritual knowledge (Satyam, Jnanam…) along with its best explanation (Prajnanam Brahma) is required for the correct spiritual direction. Veda says that the true spiritual knowledge itself is God.

It means that the possessor of true spiritual knowledge is God. It should not be confused that the knowledge itself is God. The possessor of your required important item is addressed as the item itself. You are calling the possessor of apple as apples. You call him “Oh Apples! Come here”. Here, the word ‘apples’ means the possessor of apples.Gita clarified this confusion by saying that the possessor of knowledge is God (Jnanitvatmaiva…).

The special divine knowledge of the human incarnation is not the inherent characteristic of the awareness or Chit (Atman) because of its specialty indicated by the prefix ‘Pra’ in the word Prajnanam. The knowledge of the ordinary level is also not the inherent characteristic of awareness. Awareness is only the medium of expression of knowledge. The knowledge present in a scholar is from the teachers who taught him and their source was books. The chief source of all the books is the Veda. The source of the Veda is God. If this knowledge is the inherent sign of awareness (Chit), all the living beings having common chit must have knowledge to the same extent. Thus, God is the source of knowledge of all levels including the Chit. But God has not granted the same level of knowledge to all living beings. If God had granted equal knowledge to all living beings, you could have said that knowledge is the characteristic of Chit.

The different levels of knowledge differentiate the various categories of living beings. Human beings have the highest level of knowledge with respect to other living beings. But within the category of human beings, different human beings again have different levels of knowledge as sub-divisions. Such sub-divisions differentiate ignorant people from scholars. Such sub-divisions are again due to the wish of God alone. In this setup when God comes in human form, He exhibits a special divine knowledge which is not seen in any human being and this is also according to the wish of God. The source of such knowledge is also God present in the human form and not the Chit. Such special knowledge differentiates the super man from all the other human beings. In any case chit is only a medium of expression of the design and not the real designer. If chit were the designer, every living being having the same chit would have the same level of knowledge. This concept separates God as the Designer who is different from the Chit which is the material of the design.

[maximus242]

Shankara stressed on self analysis just to avoid grief

Shankara advised meditation upon self, which means the deep analysis about self. The human being is under the illusion that the human body consisting of matter and energy is self. Shankara removed the concept of matter and concluded that self is only a bit of cosmic energy in essence. In fact, since matter and space are also different forms of cosmic energy, the self becomes a part of continuous ocean of cosmic energy only. In such situation the self cannot be isolated and hence the finite itself becomes the infinite ocean of cosmic energy.

The word Brahaman used by Shankara denotes only this continuous infinite cosmic energy. This cosmic energy is the source, controller and dissolver of the entire creation consisting of various materialized forms. This picture concludes that all the materialized forms are unreal in absolute sense and removes all the worldly bonds and the subsequent grief.
www.universal-spirituality.org
Universal Spirituality for World Peace

This is fine though even if you should accept all of this as true this doesnt relate to the emotion of grief its simply a philosophical idea about nature and our relation to the world. I dont understand how you intend to use this concept as a form of relieving psychological stress or grief.

[dattaswami]

This is fine though even if you should accept all of this as true this doesnt relate to the emotion of grief its simply a philosophical idea about nature and our relation to the world. I dont understand how you intend to use this concept as a form of relieving psychological stress or grief.

The essence of the entire message of Lord Krishna, Bhagavad Gita, is to develop the highest state in which you can be in the state of continuous enjoyment and happiness through entertainment. If you can enjoy the problems also, such continuous state of happiness is possible. The human being has always the worst tendency to pick-up negative things only in the life and go on brooding over those things. Either you should avoid thinking about those negative things (dhyayato vishayaan …) or you should be able to enjoy those negative things also like the dish of chillies in meals.

Avoiding the thinking of negative things in the life is impossible since they touch and penetrate the mind in the practical life. Therefore, the only alternative way is to enjoy those things also and be happy in every minute of life. Such state is called as Brahmi sthiti (Eshaa brahmi sthitih …), which means that you should continuously enjoy your life containing both positive and negative things like God enjoying His creation containing both good and bad.

You become equal to God in this state of enjoyment (Enjoying both +ve and –ve things in life) and this is the only possible monism (advaita). You are in the state of maintained creation and you are enjoying the creation like God (if you enjoy both good and bad in the life). You are not in the state before creation, in which you cannot be equal to God since He is creating everything and you cannot create anything.

You are not in the state of final dissolution of the world in which He is destroying everything and you cannot destroy anything. You are in the best state of maintenance of creation in which you cannot be differentiated from God since you are enjoying the creation like God. There is no trace of difference as long as the aspect of enjoyment of the world-cinema containing both scenes of happiness and tragedy is concerned. Even the extreme tragedy, the death, is not an exception to such entertainment (sthitvaasyaamantakalepi …).


Krishna followed this (continuously enjoying life containing both positive and negative things) in His life and His preaching, the Gita, was perfectly implemented in His practice. He was enjoying His own death while the foot was bleeding, hit by the hunter. He consoled the hunter and removed his tension over the incident. He enjoyed the genocide of His family members as a spectator in the end.

He enjoyed the defeat in the hands of the enemies like Jarasandha, who flew away to construct a new city in the island present in the ocean. He enjoyed while Shishupala was repeatedly scolding Him and was never subjected to any tension. He enjoyed while He was called as the thief of butter in other houses. Except entertainment and enjoyment, even a trace of tension could not touch Him in His entire life.

You may say that God is enjoying the world-cinema since He is away from it. You may differentiate from God by this, stating that you are participating in the cinema. This cannot be accepted since God also entered the world-cinema as Krishna and participated in it like you. The only difference is that He is acting in the role, where as you are living in the role by completely identifying yourself with it. Such divine knowledge applies to you also and Shankara preached this.

[Joesus]

There is a huge difference between a preacher and God in human form.

That is what I said. However the point I made is that God/Consciousness recognizes God/Consciousness. The mind that is steeped in belief and illusion is not familiar with that part of itself and does not recognize God in any form but instead imagines form based on belief. IF God does not fit the imagined form it is rejected.
You are still not listening but instead reacting to the words you find do not fit the form you imagine

If you want to eat an apple, you have to search for the seller of apples in order to purchase an apple from him.

And without the knowledge of the seller or the apples, the search often becomes a fruitless endeavor

Then, how to identify the seller of apples? The identity mark for recognizing the seller of apples is the apple itself.

Exactly, and so when it comes to recognizing God, one would have to have an experience and a familiarity with God.

Therefore, your requirement itself is the identity mark to recognize the possessor of your requirement.

Now we are talking the same language.

If you want to learn Physics, you have select the best teacher of the physics. What is the identity mark of the best teacher of physics? The identity mark is the best teaching of the physics itself.

Exactly, in this case having become the master of physics one would be qualified to know the best as a master based on ones own personal experience, otherwise the identity mark will be outside of ones own experience. In other words one will definitely be subject to opinion. Often the opinion will be a majority of similar beliefs. If we use the example where the belief was that the world was flat, the majority as the authority becomes the false identifier.

Similarly the requirement of an aspirant of spiritual path is the correct direction in his spiritual journey. The correct direction in the spiritual journey can be given by the true spiritual knowledge. Apart from the true spiritual knowledge, there should be best way of explanation of such true spiritual knowledge. Therefore, your requirement is the true spiritual knowledge and its best explanation, so that you can get the correct direction in your spiritual effort.

Now, the identity mark to recognize the possessor of true spiritual knowledge and the best preacher of such true spiritual knowledge is the true spiritual knowledge and its best explanation only. Veda says that the true spiritual knowledge (Satyam, Jnanam…) along with its best explanation (Prajnanam Brahma) is required for the correct spiritual direction. Veda says that the true spiritual knowledge itself is God.

It means that the possessor of true spiritual knowledge is God. It should not be confused that the knowledge itself is God. The possessor of your required important item is addressed as the item itself. You are calling the possessor of apple as apples. You call him “Oh Apples! Come here”. Here, the word ‘apples’ means the possessor of apples.Gita clarified this confusion by saying that the possessor of knowledge is God (Jnanitvatmaiva…).

If you have never eaten an apple, the possessor of an Orange might say here is an apple and one will make a decision after some time if the apple is an orange or if the orange is an apple. Man can wander thru lifetimes in search of something he has no familiarity with or has been misled by. information by the preacher who knows nothing himself of God but stands as a disciple to the majority who claims the orange is the apple and has convince himself of this idea often draws to him, the disciple who will see the orange as an apple and the best example.

The special divine knowledge of the human incarnation is not the inherent characteristic of the awareness or Chit (Atman) because of its specialty indicated by the prefix ‘Pra’ in the word Prajnanam. The knowledge of the ordinary level is also not the inherent characteristic of awareness. Awareness is only the medium of expression of knowledge. The knowledge present in a scholar is from the teachers who taught him and their source was books. The chief source of all the books is the Veda. The source of the Veda is God. If this knowledge is the inherent sign of awareness (Chit), all the living beings having common chit must have knowledge to the same extent. Thus, God is the source of knowledge of all levels including the Chit. But God has not granted the same level of knowledge to all living beings. If God had granted equal knowledge to all living beings, you could have said that knowledge is the characteristic of Chit.

And.. Chit happens...

Unfortunately scholars who (without the knowledge and experience of Atman) having translated the Veda from their level of ignorance in God, create illusions of God within their translations and teachings from their level of illusions and lack of experience.
This is one of the reasons the Peoples of India have raised the cow to a level of worship and as an image of God.
The Orange now achieving status as an apple.
Tho they (the people) can contemplate the Vedas and study scripture, if the effect is to raise a cow to deity, it can be said study of scripture itself and its contemplation will not achieve glorious results. And brings to mind just what contemplation is. What is being contemplated and how effective is the method of contemplation?

Effective methods that achieve quick results will serve better to lessen the time spent wandering from one authority to another seeking the proof within the eating of the pudding.

The different levels of knowledge differentiate the various categories of living beings. Human beings have the highest level of knowledge with respect to other living beings. But within the category of human beings, different human beings again have different levels of knowledge as sub-divisions. Such sub-divisions differentiate ignorant people from scholars. Such sub-divisions are again due to the wish of God alone. In this setup when God comes in human form, He exhibits a special divine knowledge which is not seen in any human being and this is also according to the wish of God. The source of such knowledge is also God present in the human form and not the Chit. Such special knowledge differentiates the super man from all the other human beings. In any case chit is only a medium of expression of the design and not the real designer. If chit were the designer, every living being having the same chit would have the same level of knowledge. This concept separates God as the Designer who is different from the Chit which is the material of the design.

This is unfortunately not a guarantee that creates (As you say God created) instant recognition for the human so that God is recognized. The appearance of Deity does not inspire an ignorant man. And Deity cannot subvert the free will or Karma of an ignorant man hell bent on ignorance.
The example of the Crucifixion would be a good example of that.

The essence of the entire message of Lord Krishna, Bhagavad Gita, is to develop the highest state in which you can be in the state of continuous enjoyment and happiness through entertainment. If you can enjoy the problems also, such continuous state of happiness is possible. The human being has always the worst tendency to pick-up negative things only in the life and go on brooding over those things. Either you should avoid thinking about those negative things (dhyayato vishayaan …) or you should be able to enjoy those negative things also like the dish of chillies in meals.

Man will not abandon what he knows without replacing it with something greater. So it stands that an affective means to gain the perspective of the Good within the bad must be the course to take so that one can witness God/Good within all thought feeling and action. Happiness then is not relative happiness where there is the dual experience of opposites such as unhappiness with happiness. Entertainment then is not thru the outward driven senses but instead having mastered the sense thru the inward recognition of Consciousness having the ability to enjoy itself within the feelings no matter what they are as they are perceived thru the senses. Like watching a movie with happiness and sadness within the drama on the screen and leaving untouched by a cumulative effect.

So to get back to the simple point.

Study of scripture by itself is not the path of recognition, unless it includes the EXPERIENCE of God within scripture. Experience best comes served by having had instruction by One who knows God with an effective method that quickly raises the levels of consciousness within the aspirant. And.... There is a saying, "When the student is ready the Teacher will appear".

So in this particular case of you having flooded the internet with words of your Guru and the Vedas, the reception you get is one of the preacher who speaks to the audience thru the Television having little or no ability to recognize or communicate directly but instead to advertise like in a telethon hoping and waiting by the phone to catch someone who resonates at some level of belief to your broadcasting and to phone you in response. An advertising scheme, which is in itself not a bad thing. All religions have their advertising agents.

In conversation you listen but do not hear, but instead react to words, and so do not present yourself as one who knows God but instead has more of a familiarity with words, tho not a very effective knowledge of the English language due to you missing the subtlety of the conversations intent and meaning when engaged with someone other than the imagined person you perceive, thru the filters of your own beliefs.

In any relationship where two people are speaking and neither one has the ability to put themselves in the others place, there are 4 people present. IF we use you and the way you perceive yourself as well as the you the person you speak to sees, we have two people. Then there is the other as you perceive them to be as well as the other as he/she appears to themselves. This makes 4 people present within the conversation.

So in my experience of this conversation you see me thru your eyes in this conversation and do not hear the conversation as I present it to you. I could say this is my fault for not presenting it so that you understand it, but I have said what you say in different words but you still insist on hearing your own words as you want them to be rather than in any form that appears different.
You've been discussing the validity of words as God sourced, which I have not disagreed. But then I have been addressing recognition of you as a valid source. Your response is to defend the scripture rather than to speak of your own experience. You do not listen, or appear to know how to listen.

(You Could take some time to study western Scripture as well as Eastern so you don't appear to be so stuck to a single presentation of dialogue within defined characteristics of a single personality. Then you will not have to use some kind of example of what someone else says about western scripture. You could speak from your own experience of having studied it.)

I hear you as you want to present it and I also hear you listening without hearing. So you repeat yourself after I have heard and addressed the subject matter.
Having studied Scripture myself both (Eastern and Western) as well as having a Teacher and my own experience of God, I find your zealousness to be the hindrance to your ability to have a conversation and to hear what is being said. (Obviously the tendency here in this media is to delete your postings before many have had a chance to read them)
Zealousness in itself is not a bad thing. There is a pada in the Yoga Sutras "To the intensely vehement, Soon" Which refers to having a certain excitement and commitment to ones own liberation thru Svadhaya, but more than often Svadhaya (study of the Self) becomes the study of the limited self in personal beliefs and boundaries.

I have no complaints as to the God within Scripture, and I have said so. What I would say, is that your recognition of God is bound by limited vision and senses that are restricted to a particular school of thought that does not present itself as having direct experience with Scripture or the teachings of God, due to the way you heavily project what has been said by others. Your examples are propped up and mixed with the outside authority.

Shankara said... etc.etc.

You seem to expect someone to listen to you because of the (obvious) authority you place outside of yourself and so you present yourself as a messenger for the master rather than the master himself.
You present yourself with a lack in credibility thru your own presentation as the messenger rather than the Teacher and so you have become the preacher who speaks to the effects of the effective, without standing in the experience of having effected mastery yourself. (Especially when you insist on copying and pasting another's words as dialogue to someones response)

Why should someone take you seriously when you have discounted your own words, by not having presented yourself as one who has taken the path you describe, and having achieved what you preach?

I can understand the master having reverence for the lineage of Teachers preceding ones own experience but in my own experience, the master him/herself speaks freely without having his/her teacher present holding a hand as a backup to convince the outside world that his/her discourse is true.
Why should someone believe you or the words of your master when you broadcast words that only excite you at the level of your senses?
The best you can hope for is to find someone who is excited in the same way you are. But then you just have two excited people who worship thoughts and ideas and we still have no discussion of the valid means of gaining direct experience of God. (At least we have not heard of anything as of yet)

Does your master/Teacher surf the net and advertise himself or does he need you to do that for him?

Or shall we immediately recognize that your Teacher surfs the net thru you as the creation of God?

Shall we discuss your results?
Honestly how much success have you achieved in gaining trust and a following with similar interest, and how much reaction do you get where the response is to test you and label you as a crackpot and a spammer?

The proof is usually in the eating of the pudding. Would you, could you, be honest enough to share your experience of how the world receives the preaching of Dattaswami thru you the messenger?

Do you pretend to be the Martyr who casts himself to the wind of self sacrifice to bring the message of God to the world by mass mailings and internet advertising, or do you have a profound love of God and wish to surrender yourself to be the voice of God that is such was within the scribes of the Veda?
Do you blindly cast your words upon the airwaves, or surrender yourself to those who call to you and to listen to your message?

Who is dattaswami or Anil (Anal?) Antony?

[dattaswami]

That is what I said. However the point I made is that God/Consciousness recognizes God/Consciousness. The mind that is steeped in belief and illusion is not familiar with that part of itself and does not recognize God in any form but instead imagines form based on belief. IF God does not fit the imagined form it is rejected.
You are still not listening but instead reacting to the words you find do not fit the form you imagine

It is true that GOd is unimaginable and invisible, but He can be experienced through 'Human incarnation' who comes to us in every generation. God enters into an imaginable medium and get identified with it. God enters to a devoted soul known as Son of GOd, like current enetering a wire. By seeing the SOn of GOd you have seen the unimaginable God. God is experienced by the excellent divine knowledge spoken by the God component in the human incarnation through the mouth of the Son of God.

When the un-imaginable God enters a medium, He remains in His inherent un-imaginable form and at the same time attains the form of the medium also. But, the attainment of the form of the medium is by identifying Himself with that medium. The attainment is not real because God is not really transformed into that form of medium. When the current enters a metallic wire, the current is identified with the metallic wire because you can experience the property of the current at any part of the wire. This does not mean that the current is really modified or transformed into the metallic wire. The current is a stream of electrons and it remains in its inherent form, which is the stream of electrons. The metallic wire is a chain of crystals. The electrons are not transformed into crystals. But, the crystals are treated as electrons since the electrons are identified with the crystals.

Hence, the current has two forms: (1) its inherent form of stream of electrons and (2) its identified form of chain of metallic crystals. The current remains always in its inherent form. Since we can treat the metallic wire as current for all practical purposes, the current has apparently attained the form of metallic crystals. The identified form is only assumed reality and the inherent form is the actual reality.

Veda says that the un-imaginable God remaining in His inherent form attains the identified form of the medium also (Satcha tyatcha abhavat). The inherent form of the Absolute God is the un-imaginable nature. The identified form of the medium is the inherent form of the medium only and not the inherent form of God. Gita says that the un-imaginable God is not transformed into imaginable God at any cost (avyaktam vyaktimaapannam...).The un-imaginable God apparently attains the assumed form of the medium, which is the inherent form of the medium only. Since the medium is imaginable, the un-imaginable God becomes imaginable through the attained identified form of the imaginable medium.

All the words give the meanings of the processes taking place in the imaginable items of the imaginable creation. When we say that God entered a medium, the entry denotes the process of entry of an imaginable item into another imaginable item. Thus, when we say that the current entered the wire, it means the imaginable stream of electrons entered the visible chain of metallic crystals. The stream of electrons may be invisible to the naked eye but is visible through powerful microscope. The imaginable item may be visible or invisible. The invisible may become visible through powerful instruments or at least to the powerful analytical logic. But, the un-imaginable is always invisible even to the most powerful analytical faculty. When we give this example as simile to the entry of God into a medium, the process of entry is not exactly valid because it is the entry of un-imaginable item (God) into imaginable entity. Since there is no second un-imaginable item, we cannot give the exact simile to the entry of un-imaginable God.

Since the existence of the un-imaginable God is inferred through the un-imaginable events, we are inferring the entry of God into that medium. By the experience of the un-imaginable event, un-imaginable has not become imaginable. Only the existence of un-imaginable nature is experienced. If the existence is also not experienced, we have no authority to say that un-imaginable God exists. Therefore, Veda says that the existence of un-imaginable God is experienced, which is very essential and required as a proof for the existence of un-imaginable God (Asteetyeva…). Similarly, since we are experiencing the un-imaginable nature throughout the medium, we are assuming the probable pervasion of un-imaginable God all over the medium.

[dattaswami]

And without the knowledge of the seller or the apples, the search often becomes a fruitless endeavor

Exactly, and so when it comes to recognizing God, one would have to have an experience and a familiarity with God.

Veda says that the true spiritual knowledge itself is God. The possessor of true spiritual knowledge and the best preacher of such true spiritual knowledge is the true spiritual knowledge and its best explanation only. You need not search the possessor of knowledge by going to various places. The knowledge given by a preacher is printed in the form of books.

You can read various books, which are the messages given by various preachers. You can judge the true knowledge explained in best way. How to judge the true knowledge? It is said that your inner consciousness is the best judge (Pramanamantahkaranapravruttayah). When something is true, your inner consciousness will always prick you, saying that it is truth, even though you may not like it. Similarly your inner consciousness will say the false thing as false, even though you may like it. Actually God is giving this hint to you through your inner consciousness.

Sometimes, the knowledge may be true, but, if the explanation is not good, you will be having confusion. Even in such situation, your inner consciousness hints you that it is true. Ofcourse, if the true knowledge is explained in best way, you will not have any confusion. Therefore, not only the knowledge must be true, but also the way of explanation must be best. When both these aspects are accomplished, know that the preacher of such true knowledge explained in best way is God alone.

Such preacher is called as Satguru. Guru is the preacher and may give the true knowledge, which was already given by God through the scripture. But the best explanation of it, clarifying all your doubts is possible to God alone (chidyante sarvasamsayah).