Awareness and Soul of a human being, Excellent read.. Options

[Joesus]

So your saying Veda is only a useful iconic image for ignorant people rather than the authority or standard to set all images by for the knowledgeable.

And

Only the experience of God can validate scripture, rather than the other way around.

[dattaswami]

So your saying Veda is only a useful iconic image for ignorant people rather than the authority or standard to set all images by for the knowledgeable.

And

Only the experience of God can validate scripture, rather than the other way around.

The logic of atheists is based on perception (Pratyaksha Pramana), which was propagated by the sage Charvaka. Perception means the knowledge derived from the observation with the naked eyes. Infact in the logic (Tarka Sastra) all the means of knowledge are based on perception only. In the inference (Anumana) also, the fire on the hill is inferred by its smoke. But the relationship between the fire and smoke is perceived with the naked eyes only. Similarly other means of knowledge are also based on the perception only.

Thus Charvaka forms the basic of the entire logic and without logic there is no knowledge. The statement that the God is above logic must be proved only by perception. The divine miracles performed by the human form of Lord prove that there is a power above the logic. These miracles are seen by the naked eyes. The atheists must be allowed to prove whether the miracles are simply magic tricks. When they cannot prove, they must accept the existence of super power above the logic. If they do not accept this they are contradicting their own basis, which is the perception. The divine miracles are experienced by the devotees and the experience cannot be contradicted. If the experience is contradicted, the experience of the atheists is also contradicted. Therefore atheists must be open-minded and should not be conservative. If they are conservative they have no right to criticize the religious conservatism.

The theory of Vedas and Bhagavath Gita never contradicts the perception and therefore the logic of atheists becomes the basis of the spiritual knowledge. The Lord comes in human form and this human form is perceived by the naked eyes. Even the miracles performed by demons establish the existence of super power. Therefore to convince the atheists the miracles of the Lord are not necessary. When they are convinced about the existence of the Super power (Maya), the possessor of the Super Power, the Lord, coming in human form must be also accepted because the form is seen by the naked eyes. The salvation is breakage of the bonds in this world. Since the bonds of this world exist based on the perception, the salvation is also existing based on the perception. Since the family members and the money are perceived by the eyes, the bonds with them are also perceived. Thus the salvation (Moksha) must be accepted by the atheists. A single bond with the human form of the Lord is called ‘Saayujya’ or ‘Kaivalya’.

Since the human form is perceived, Sayujya or Kaivalya is also perceived and must be accepted by the atheists. The Bliss is derived by the devotee from the divine knowledge of the human form of the Lord. Therefore the Bliss is also true according to atheists. Thus the goal, the means to please the Lord (Sadhana) and the fruit of Sadhana (Moksha and Kaivalya) are perceived and exist in this world itself. Veda says ‘Yat Saakshat Aparokshaat’, ‘Pratyagatmana Maikshat’ which mean that the Lord in human form is perceived by the naked eyes. Veda also says ‘Ihachet Avedeet’, which means that everything is true as seen in this world itself. This is called ‘Jeevanmukthi’, which means attaining the salvation while one is alive and not after death. The salvation after the death is not true because that has no basis of perception. Thus if the atheists are little bit patient and leave their aggressive nature of criticism, they are best fitted in the true spiritual knowledge of Vedas. In fact Swami Vidyaranya included the philosophy of Charvaka in his book as one of the logical philosophies (Darsanaas).

[majentis]

You once said:

Do not get discouraged use your brain and analyse the knowledge and let us discuss!!

And yet you won't discuss the knowledge that I'm presenting to you:

...you choose to post in a way that paints a picture of you as a spammer or a troll. Wouldn't you rather engage people in a way that is conducive to both parties?

[Joesus]

The logic of atheists is based on perception (Pratyaksha Pramana), which was propagated by the sage Charvaka. Perception means the knowledge derived from the observation with the naked eyes....................................................
............... Thus if the atheists are little bit patient and leave their aggressive nature of criticism, they are best fitted in the true spiritual knowledge of Vedas. In fact Swami Vidyaranya included the philosophy of Charvaka in his book as one of the logical philosophies (Darsanaas).

So, your saying Veda is a discussion topic, (regarding the differences between a useful iconic image for ignorant people who use it as the authority or standard to set all images by), for the knowledgeable AND how the knowledgeable can speak of themselves in relationship to God and the ignorant.

And/Or

Only the experience of God can validate scripture, rather than the other way around.

[majentis]

The atheists must be allowed to prove whether the miracles are simply magic tricks. When they cannot prove, they must accept the existence of super power above the logic.

Why accept the existance of a super power above the logic? We're still an extremely young civilisation as far as our knowledge of reality is concerned. There have been some really interesting studies done where dogs were filmed with cameras while their owner was away. With regularity which exceeds statistical probability - dogs sensed their owners heading home despite the dogs not having any physical evidence to allow such sensing. Is this a miracle just because it is unexplainable within the narrow confines of accepted science? Surely not. And there are surely many such phenomena, even if we were to include turning water into wine, which would indicate not so much a higher power; but rather, that we are one with that of which we have much to learn.

[dattaswami]

The logic of atheists is based on perception (Pratyaksha Pramana), which was propagated by the sage Charvaka. Perception means the knowledge derived from the observation with the naked eyes....................................................
............... Thus if the atheists are little bit patient and leave their aggressive nature of criticism, they are best fitted in the true spiritual knowledge of Vedas. In fact Swami Vidyaranya included the philosophy of Charvaka in his book as one of the logical philosophies (Darsanaas).

So, your saying Veda is a discussion topic, (regarding the differences between a useful iconic image for ignorant people who use it as the authority or standard to set all images by), for the knowledgeable AND how the knowledgeable can speak of themselves in relationship to God and the ignorant.

And/Or

Only the experience of God can validate scripture, rather than the other way around.

The God is unimaginable, but His existence is experienced so we should say that the unimaginable God exists (Asteetyeva…Veda). Therefore, God also is called as ‘Sat’, which means that exists. God gives the experience of His existence through human incarnation to human beings. Since God can be called as ‘sat’, you can say that God alone existed in the beginning before the creation while explaining (Sadeva Somya…Veda).

God created the energy (Tat Tejo…Veda) and the energy can also be called as ‘Sat’, which means that Energy exists even if all forms of energy disappear. It is “Sat” with reference to its forms (matter and awareness). But it is non-existent with respect to God and so it is also ‘Asat’. Therefore, the Veda says ‘Sat existed in the beginning’ and also says ‘Asat existed in the beginning’. The first statement applies to God also since God is the absolute Sat. According to the context, you have to take the corresponding meaning for any word. Without analysis, confusion results finally.

The Veda says “Asanneva Sa bhavati…” etc. This hymn means “God exists while being the non-existent. Realize that God is both the existent and non-existent items. Then you will realize that God exists”. This hymn needs an elaborate analytical explanation. You can bring another Vedic statement here (Tat Srushtvaa…, Satcha Tyat Chaabhavat…). This means “God created the world and entered into it. Then He became both existent and non-existent”. Bring the Gita here (Manusheem Tanum...), which means that God enters the human body.


The non-existent items (Asat) are energy, matter and awareness, forms and feelings. Forms and feelings are non-existent with respect to matter and awareness. Both matter and awareness are non-existent with respect to energy. Energy is non-existent with respect to God. God is never non-existent. He is always existent (Sat). When God enters in the energetic form, the energetic form consists of form and energy and both these are relatively true (Asat) items.

When God enters the human body, the body consists of matter, energy, awareness, forms and feelings, which are also relatively true (Asat) items only. You have to take that form as God as you take the live wire as current. If you agree that the unimaginable God exists and enters imaginable items, which are non-existent (since they are relatively true), now you can say that God exists and is visible. Through the imaginable and relatively non-existent items (like energetic form or human body) only you can experience God.


The Veda says that God becomes both ‘Sat’ and ‘Tyat’. God exists as God and also as non-God (body and soul). In human body, He entertains Himself under the illusion of forms and feelings like an ordinary human being. If necessary, He will rise to higher level and will realize that forms and feelings are unreal. If still necessary, He will rise to still higher level, will realize both matter and awareness as unreal, and will perform miracles. Finally, He will rise to the highest level, where energy also becomes unreal and in this state, He is creator, maintainer and destroyer of the world. In this highest level only the Gita or the Bible or (divine knowledge) comes out.

[dattaswami]

Only the experience of God can validate scripture, rather than the other way around.

When you experience God in human incarnation, God still remains unimaginable. Only the existence of unimaginable God is experienced and not God (asteetyeva…Veda). You have experienced the existence of current by touching the electric wire and this does not mean that you have understood the electricity. Hence, the experience of existence of unimaginable God does not mean that God became imaginable. You can have two or more electric wires simultaneously. Due to difference in the works like a wire for fan, a wire for tube light etc.

Similarly, due to different programs, you can have many human incarnations simultaneously in the same time. If you mistake that a particular electric wire is only the current, then the problem comes. Here you have mistaken that the wire and current are one and the same. Here the knowledge of Dvaita is required. Then only you can understand that the same electricity is flowing in different wires. Some people think that a particular electric wire in the past (past human incarnation) alone is the current, even though that wire was destroyed and does not exist today. These people are many who think that a particular past human incarnation like Rama, Jesus, etc., alone is God.


What is the reason for the God to create both imaginable and unimaginable items? The imaginable is created only to give the relative individual identity of the unimaginable entity. The presence of night gives the relative identity of the day. If everything is made unimaginable, there is no identity of the very existence of unimaginable nature. By this, God wanted the human beings to recognize the existence of unimaginable nature in the creation, which indicates the unimaginable God. The analysis of creation in the deepest plane exhibits the unimaginable nature and this point is realized by all the scientists. This unimaginable nature forming the deepest plane becomes the ultimate basis or substratum of the Universe.

Therefore, the creation is said to be supported or maintained by the unimaginable God. The boundary of this creation is beyond our vision and imagination and thus becomes unimaginable. Such boundary is beyond our scope of the imaginable extent of the Universe. Such boundary can be concluded as the unimaginable boundary existing beyond Universe or Creation. Therefore, we say that the unimaginable God is beyond creation and not at all present in the imaginable extent of the creation. Hence Veda is discarding every imaginable item of the core of the creation existing in the imaginable extent not to be God (Neti Neti….). Gita also says the same (Mamebhyah Paramavyayam). This unimaginable God expressed Himself as Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva by entering the three created energetic forms. The three forms of the energy – medium are one and the same because the constituting material is energy only. There may be some difference in the forms. The inner absolute God is also one and the same.

[Joesus]

So............, your saying Veda is a discussion topic, for the knowledgeable and the ignorant, and inspires the anal to speak of themselves in relationship to God and how God can and should be discussed.

And/Or

Only the experience of God can validate scripture, rather than the other way around.