Demons are Sent Back Here According to the Bhagavad Gita

[crowfeather]

Apparently, 'Spiritual' is just another term to describe passive-aggression. While trying to disguise it.
Like all our words, deconstructed and hijacked into uselessness. Tower of Babel, and all that.

Yes, The World of Man is a sinful place, akin to hell. While The World remains the Garden of Eden.
Everything is reversed in The World of Men. Gobbledygook.
The only way to navigate it is to stop listening to the words of men.

Paradox rules.

 

[wizanda]

But i thought the Avatar would know all this?

Sort of guessed you're westernized from the none Hindu way you speak, you say 'Namaste', yet you don't bow, you've been raising yourself up continually, and feel for you, that you're so unaware of the Dharma, tho have read so much.

every word in your post is full of a self assumed superiority.

That is your own ego at being asked to question concepts, and because I'm standing on the textual authority, you can't distinguish between person and topic.

so now i guess i am a Demon, according to you

We've all got inner demons.

BG 16.4: O Parth, the qualities of those who possess a demoniac nature are hypocrisy, arrogance, conceit, anger, harshness, and ignorance.

No, i don't want to be questioned, as i consider myself not being able to give accurate answers

Wow, Satsang should not be about questioning 'you', it is about questioning 'truth'....

You've read all the Mahabharata, etc, and yet can't provide an alternative presentation to substantiate 'your own' beliefs; understand you actually think these are not your beliefs, yet Hindu beliefs, and yet you contradict the majority of Hindu websites.

how many questions did Krishna Ask Arjun in the Gita?

As many as were needed, there isn't some set amount of questions in Satsang.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

"wizanda,"

Namaste,

Sort of guessed you're westernized from the none Hindu way you speak, you say 'Namaste', yet you don't bow, you've been raising yourself up continually, and feel for you, that you're so unaware of the Dharma, tho have read so much.

So many judgement passed about my Dharmah, I thought we agreed that My Dharmah is mine and yours is yours somewhere in these interactions.

That is your own ego at being asked to question concepts, and because I'm standing on the textual authority,

Maybe, but i am also standing on Textual Authority, why is your version superior to mine?

Wow, Satsang should not be about questioning 'you', it is about questioning 'truth'....

My chain of this conversation started with your below statement:

[QUOTE]Have you considered, maybe these things exist in the Gita, maybe my knowledge given to me by a voice speaking through the whole of reality, is slightly more authoritative than anything others have interpreted, and thus this is what the Gita says?[/QUOTE]

Then i said yes i have, but once i realise this delusion i snap my self out, then i quoted the reason why i consider your above statement to be egoistic. Then you said

Right so basically, your not open to questioning, as your preconceived notions override even accepting a different understanding; will remember your a waste of time having Satsang with, as you're not seeking truth.

to which i replied: No, i don't want to be questioned, as i consider myself not being able to give accurate answers, but I am not the one claiming Avatar Hood here, how many questions did Krishna Ask Arjun in the Gita?

I replied in the context of the Gita, and in the context that you claim to know more then anyone else including my purohita, therefore i said i am not the one who is the Avatar, so the questioning is not a Satsang but when it comes to a Avatar it is Upanishad, maybe i have misunderstood you if so i Apologize.

You've read all the Mahabharata, etc, and yet can't provide an alternative presentation to substantiate 'your own' beliefs; understand you actually think these are not your beliefs, yet Hindu beliefs, and yet you contradict the majority of Hindu websites.

I can read all i want, but Dharmah is not found in Books or websites. Well I am a Hindu aren't I, why can't i say that my beliefs are Hindu, Why do i have to agree with Hindu websites to justify my Hinduness?

Anyways, Dhanyavad

 

[wizanda]

So many judgement passed about my Dharmah

Not referencing your own concepts you see as firm (Dharma); referring to the inability to understand things instructed with everyone's Dharma, in other words these texts are not yours because you claim to be a Hindu...

They have their own understanding, and the people who ascribed them thought totally differently to either of us, and we should try to respect their perspective, and what they are stating.

Maybe, but i am also standing on Textual Authority, why is your version superior to mine?

Prove it with textual references, not insults, and will recognize the divine within you.

so the questioning is not a Satsang but when it comes to a Avatar it is Upanishad

Since you don't respect me as an avatar anyway; lets just stick to textual analysis, and a civilized Satsang.

Why do i have to agree with Hindu websites to justify my Hinduness?

BG 16.24: Therefore, let the scriptures be your authority in determining what should be done and what should not be done. Understand the scriptural injunctions and teachings, and then perform your actions in this world accordingly.

There are Laws expressed in religious texts, that then can be commonly disbelieved; especially by the Asuras telling us to ignore evidence available to us.

Thus we're allowed to make believe what ever we wish; yet if the text has been stipulated as Law, that we state we follow, and then we prove we're a hypocrite from not actually accepting the rule specified, then we've prove we don't follow it...

Plus if we are teaching others falsely about what is contained in the texts due to our beliefs, then we're destined for Hell for a time according to this:

BG 1.44: O Janardan (Krishna), I have heard from the learned that those who destroy family traditions (ancestral Dharma) dwell in hell for an indefinite period of time.

Asura comes from Asu, which means 'life of the spiritual world or departed spirits'....

In other words the Asura are departed mean souls from lower levels, trying to fool us through pride, arrogance, etc not to accept what the books are actually saying, as they want to drag us all down to Hell with them.

 

[SomeRandom]

In other words the Asura are departed mean souls from lower levels, trying to fool us through pride, arrogance, etc not to accept what the books are actually saying, as they want to drag us all down to Hell with them.

Well, technically the Asura are higher beings than humans, given their status of divinity. They're not mean, just not particularly benign. Most of the time. Officially speaking (as much as one can even say that.) The etymology of the Sanskrit word "Asura" also potentially relates to meanings like "Master of the house," "Lord," "Breath" and "life-giving." I mean Danu is an Asura, if you want to get technical. And she's also a primordial goddess associated with the water of the heavens and creation. So the context of "departed souls" ehhh, departed from where, exactly? They were in existence before creation and it's not like they were cast into the depths of the underworld with no real means to escape. Well except that one guy, but to be fair, it was because he failed to deliver on a promise. And even then I did always think that Krishna pretty much rigged the system to trap him.

Vengeful spirits ie ghosts? I don't know if they really have the power to do that, unless a boon is granted to them I guess.

I dunno, why would the Asuras try to drag us down to Hell? I mean the ones who are there are probably too busy to really bother with us. The ones not doing a job there, they're not that vindictive. Honestly Indra is more vindictive in a lot of his stories.
Are they doing it to get back at the God/s for denying them the nectar of immortality? Still sore over the defeat of Vritra?
I know they compete with the Devas, and probably do use us as pawns in their immortal game of chess. But.....

The whole thing, the idea that God is looking out for us, that the Asuras are plotting our demise, it all seems a little inane to me. I get them as a metaphor but I dunno. Is this really the point? To constantly jump through hoops to prove ourselves worthy?
#existential crisis

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

"wizanda,"

referring to the inability to understand things instructed with everyone's Dharma,

Everyones Svadharmah, or JatiDharmah, or VarnaDharma?

in other words these texts are not yours because you claim to be a Hindu...

Says Who?

Prove it with textual references, not insults, and will recognize the divine within you.

Upanishad of Bhagvad Gita CH2

“You and I always existed and will exist for ever in future. So is the case with all these kings in front of us (2:12). Just as an embodied self has several stages like infancy, boyhood, youth, old age and final decay for the body, so does it have another body. The wise person does not get deluded” (2:13).“Dualities like pleasure and pain are ephemeral, caused by contact of senses with sense-objects. Endure them with equanimity” (2:14).
“For the eternal, indestructible, unknowable embodied Atman (the individual self ), these bodies come and go. Therefore, oh Bharata, you fight”.(2.18) “Just as we cast off worn out clothes and wear new clothes,
so do we cast off the worn out bodies and take over new bodies”(2:22).

Upanishad of Bhagavad Gita 13.12-17

I shall tell you of the soul. The soul is God who is immortal and infinite, who has no beginning and will have no end, and who both exists and does not exist. Those who know the soul, are immortal. The soul dwells in every living being, and in every part of every living being; it dwells in the hand and the foot, the skull and the mouth, the eye and the ear. Although it does not itself have senses, it shines through every sense. It is completely independent, yet all beings depend on it. The soul is both near every living being, and far from every being. The soul is both inside and outside every living being. The soul is the cause of movement, but does not itself move. The soul is one, yet has innumerable forms. The soul creates, preserves, and destroys. The soul is the light of every light; and its light transcends the duality of brightness and darkness. The soul is the light of knowledge; and its light is also the goal of knowledge. In the soul the subject and object of knowledge are one.

Various Upanishads also declare this.

Tat tvam asi
That is what you are.
Ayam atma brahma
Atman and brahman are the same.
Aham brahmasmi
I am brahman.
Sarvam khalvidam brahma
All of this is brahman.

Brihadaranyaka Upanishad for example

”Atman is the person in the earth and the person in the body… in fire and in speech; in wind and in breath; in the Sun and in the eye… in truth and truthfulness; in humanity and in the human; in the Self and in the self.”

”That same thing, namely, this self, is the trace of this All; for by it one knows this All. Just as ( if it were)a footprint”

” with the nature of this self, as with a lamp, a practitioner of Yoga beholds here the nature of Brahman”

‘Verily, that great unborn soul, undecaying, undying, immortal, fearless is Brahman.’

Svetasvatara Upanishad says

‘The Soul which pervades all things…this is Brahman.’

As the Gita you quoted states:

BG 16.24: Therefore, let the scriptures be your authority in determining what should be done and what should not be done. Understand the scriptural injunctions and teachings, and then perform your actions in this world accordingly.

Therefore "Shastra", are not with you.

In other words the Asura are departed mean souls from lower levels, trying to fool us through pride, arrogance, etc not to accept what the books are actually saying, as they want to drag us all down to Hell with them.

BG CH 16
dwau bhootasargau loke’smin daiva aasura eva cha
daivo vistarashah proktah aasuram paartha me shrinu // 16.6 //

There are two types of created beings in this world - the divine and the demoniac; the divine has been described at length; hear from Me, O Arjuna, of the demoniac.

Sorry Gita disagrees.

 

[wizanda]

Bhagavad Gita 13.12-17

What a terrible translation, there isn't the word atman in that sentence; it is referring to Brahman, and someone has made it personal.

Chapter 13 – Bhagavad Gita, The Song of God – Swami Mukundananda

Various Upanishads also declare this.

Mixing all sorts of different authors, then muddies the waters, as they have a different theological perspective.

Says Who?

Says logic; a text is independent of people saying they follow it.

Sorry Gita disagrees.

The Gita is saying the same thing, as souls descend in conscious state, eventually they become trapped in dense matter due to bad vibrations; thus these same souls drag others down with them.

The whole thing, the idea that God is looking out for us, that the Asuras are plotting our demise, it all seems a little inane to me. I get them as a metaphor but I dunno. Is this really the point? To constantly jump through hoops to prove ourselves worthy?

It is an interesting concept of here being like an assault course, with lots of distractions...

It seems more of a sifting process; the Gita is implying those who have demonic qualities fall lower, and those who choose divine ways, ascend higher until leaving this plain of existence.

Brahman clearly looks out for us, as if here is full of beings with demonic qualities, and yet this reality has been maintained, guided, and influenced to better understanding, it is trying to educate us.

The Asuras in some of the text might be plotting; yet the way the Gita is presenting, these are just lower conscious spirits, that mislead us on individual points; like viruses in the Matrix.

Personally see Kali yuga as a larger divide between us and Brahman for a time; so there is less light on reality, so we don't see each other as demons, and thus those who like that direction, go the way they've chosen...

Which isn't really like a hoop, it is more like a giant flaming tunnel 'with don't enter' dangerous signs put around it from every religion globally.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

"wizanda,"

Namaste,

What a terrible translation, there isn't the word atman in that sentence; it is referring to Brahman, and someone has made it personal.

Well that was from a "Hindu website", I guess some Hindu websites disagree with each other???

Mixing all sorts of different authors, then muddies the waters, as they have a different theological perspective.

No, not understanding what "Shastra" means in the Gita causes some people to think that Gita is referring to itself.

Says logic; a text is independent of people saying they follow it.

My logic is that texts are dependent on the Interpretations of the people who have shruddha for it and also those who do not have shruddha for it, and are dependent heavily on the context of the culture that they have been produced in, even the Gita itself is not independent from the Mahabharatta.
No textual work is independent from its surroundings of tradition, culture and civilization.

 

[wizanda]

Well that was from a "Hindu website", I guess some Hindu websites disagree with each other???

Of course sites disagree with each other, as do translations; therefore we have to use the more scientific methodology, and check for multiple results the same, to establish what is the most likely i.e. use a 'majority of Hindu websites'.

what "Shastra" means in the Gita causes some people to think that Gita is referring to itself.

The start is examining the Gita as scripture, and establishing what its precepts are; before moving on, and encompassing other ideologies.

Encompassing things that are saying everyone is divine, everyone is Brahman without needing to be righteous, is why the water is so filthy, anyone conscious of Brahman being selfless wouldn't even wash in it.

texts are dependent on the Interpretations of the people who have shruddha for it

Of course texts can be analyzed by people who have faith, down near Hell; yet often what we find is they've molded the text to their image, the deities in their image, and regardless of textual constraints, after millennium they've turned it into something they want to follow....

Which is why avatars are sent back down here, to help people learn the original path again.

 

[SomeRandom]

Sorry for not responding earlier. Had to go to a Wedding. Geez, just watching it was exhausting!!

It is an interesting concept of here being like an assault course, with lots of distractions...

It seems more of a sifting process; the Gita is implying those who have demonic qualities fall lower, and those who choose divine ways, ascend higher until leaving this plain of existence.

I see it more like a dog show. We're the dogs on show, being judged on our performance. Of course that could be my cynicism that tends to crop up every now and again.

This is probably why I lean more towards Shaktism, personally. A child imploring a maternal figure for forgiveness and deliverance seems more like how we are. Mere children trying to figure out the world.

Brahman clearly looks out for us, as if here is full of beings with demonic qualities, and yet this reality has been maintained, guided, and influenced to better understanding, it is trying to educate us.

Maybe. Again, I'm more inclined to the idea of someone like Kali Ma or Ma Saraswati looking out for us. But that's sect preference talking.

The Asuras in some of the text might be plotting; yet the way the Gita is presenting, these are just lower conscious spirits, that mislead us on individual points; like viruses in the Matrix.

It's more complicated than that. You keep implying that they're two sides of a coin. And while that is true, it's not that black and white. Some Asuras attain entrance into Heaven (Ravana) some become Gods (Duryodhana) Some are used to teach proper Dharma (Karna's loyalty.) Some were responsible for creation (Ma Duna) The dividing line between the Asuras and the Devas is a fuzzy one at the best of times. It's important not to think of them as two sides, rather two different attributes that we all possess. Both of them have good and evil. Both have the chance to receive Moksha. Krishna liberates several "demons" sent to kill him. (Except that giant brolga looking thing. Weird.)
Your view is quite pessimistic, honestly. Moksha is always within reach, yes, there are things that will distract you, things that will bring you down. But I don't think it's the Asuras. At least not exclusively, since a lot of them have their own thing to do and worry about. The Asuras are not like fallen angels who have an animosity towards God or carry a grudge against God, they tend to war against the Devas usually. But they do not have any real reason for dragging people down. They even have their own priests who are very well respected by the Devas. They are not always lower, they are not consigned to hell or lower levels of reality just because they are an Asura. Much like people, they cannot be labelled as one thing. They are more complicated.
Hell, sometimes going against God is not seen as adharmic even. Kumbhakarna, the younger brother of the demon king Ravana, was a pious, intelligent and highly respected warrior. (Though he ate monkeys to increase his power.) He even performed a Yajna to appease Brahman (and succeeded) and asked for a boon. But Indra was jealous of his battle prowess and Saraswati tied his tongue so he couldn't ask for a boon. Long story short, he was cursed to a powerful sleep, which Ravana undid and asked for his help to battle against Ram. Though Kumbhakarna objected and advised his brother against battling an Avatar of Lord Vishnu, his loyalty to his brother was such that he battled for him valiantly and without hesitation. He is fondly remembered for his loyalty to his brother.
Ravana's other brother Vibhishana was so against the battle Ravana had with Ram, that he helped Ram defeat him. Though he did so with great regret. He was crowned king by Ram for his efforts and is also quite well respected. But he is also considered disloyal to his family. A very grave charge.
Much like Dharma, the Asuras and the Devas are not clear cut, nor are their choices always easy. Though the Asuras are not as benevolent, I do not know of many who are downright nasty. So I have a hard time believing they are actively trying to bring us all down. Maybe vengeful spirits/ghosts are, which is also sometimes a translation of the word Asura.

Personally see Kali yuga as a larger divide between us and Brahman for a time; so there is less light on reality, so we don't see each other as demons, and thus those who like that direction, go the way they've chosen...

Which isn't really like a hoop, it is more like a giant flaming tunnel 'with don't enter' dangerous signs put around it from every religion globally.

Alright, I can see where you're coming from.

 

[sayak83]

Of course sites disagree with each other, as do translations; therefore we have to use the more scientific methodology, and check for multiple results the same, to establish what is the most likely i.e. use a 'majority of Hindu websites'.

The start is examining the Gita as scripture, and establishing what its precepts are; before moving on, and encompassing other ideologies.

Encompassing things that are saying everyone is divine, everyone is Brahman without needing to be righteous, is why the water is so filthy, anyone conscious of Brahman being selfless wouldn't even wash in it.

Of course texts can be analyzed by people who have faith, down near Hell; yet often what we find is they've molded the text to their image, the deities in their image, and regardless of textual constraints, after millennium they've turned it into something they want to follow....

Which is why avatars are sent back down here, to help people learn the original path again.

I am not at all convinced that you understand much about Gita or Hinduism. However I will hear you out. What is that you think Krishna in Gita is saying?
You should exercise caution when claiming you are an Avatar. You can be the person who is severely deluded.

There is no eternal hell in Hinduism. Arjuna is completely confused about this and many other things in his lamentations. Krishna never says any of the lower births is eternal as it goes against all Hindu Darshana.

Regarding asura-s. Some of them certainly have desires to conquer heaven or earth, for which they enter those realms. The Mahabharata story is set in the framework of one such time when a clan of Asura-s entered Earth as Kshatriyas forcing the God's to enter earth as well, thus causing the Mahabharata war. That was an extraordinary situation, that only occurs at the end of an epoch and is not generic to history. Neither are Asura-s, God's and men distinct beings. Through rebirth the positions jockey around. Asura-s are however higher than humans and are not in naraka at all.

 

[wizanda]

Namaste SomeRandom-Ji,

Sorry for not responding earlier.

Thank you for the apologies; no worries, very patient, and aware some people have a personal life outside of this forum.

Shaktism
Kali Ma or Ma Saraswati

Agreed, that the divine feminine makes a far better mother than a fatherly concept, as the Heavens are nurturing to us, and in my own understanding this is why using the terminology CPU, as it frees us of any illogical male dominated traits, which are often applied to the Highest Formless Creator of all.

The dividing line between the Asuras and the Devas is a fuzzy one at the best of times. It's important not to think of them as two sides, rather two different attributes that we all possess.

Thank you for a thoughtful reply, and agree do sometimes paint this dividing line to thick, when really see it with much more complexity....

This whole reality is made of consciousness, with many souls differing in vibration, where don't have a divide that any of it isn't the same...

In my NDE i didn't see demons down in Hell, i saw souls that had become distorted due to allowing themselves to become disharmonized (demonized).

Every soul has the potential to become an avatar, and everyone is welcome to Oneness (Heaven) if they deal with their own emotional baggage; many just don't realize they're the object of this game, nothing external to blame or excuse ourselves of our own issues.

I am not at all convinced that you understand much about Gita or Hinduism.

Firstly not proving Hinduism's beliefs, speaking on my own concepts of what is within the Gita, based on personal experience.

What is that you think Krishna in Gita is saying?

Can't answer such a complex question, be decisive, and list individual points based on specific statements.... This thread is currently on chapter 16's concepts.

You should exercise caution when claiming you are an Avatar. You can be the person who is severely deluded.

So my first recollection of being an avatar was at 4/5 years old, without any concepts of that word being explained to me from any source, also with advanced knowledge of the Heaven's, Biblical prophecy, etc....

Yet you are right, could be deluded still; which is why spent my life assessing the information presented, and having had a NDE it validated for myself what had always known.

There is no eternal hell in Hinduism.

There is no eternal Hell in the Bible either btw, Hell is destroyed in Revelation 20:14.

Krishna never says any of the lower births is eternal

BG 16.21: There are three gates leading to the hell of self-destruction for the soul—lust, anger, and greed. Therefore, all should abandon these three.

BG 16.16: Possessed and led astray by such imaginings, enveloped in a mesh of delusion, and addicted to the gratification of sensuous pleasures, they descend to the murkiest hell.

BG 1.44: O Janardan (Krishna), I have heard from the learned that those who destroy family traditions dwell in hell for an indefinite period of time.

We're not born into Hell, we can be sent there if we don't make restitution whilst here; like here is the highway to Hell, and most of us are on a downhill path, unless we strive to work the opposite way to what this realm presents.

Though as already replying above, it is a conscious thing; just because we've fallen so low, doesn't mean we can't learn from our mistakes.

Asura-s are however higher than humans and are not in naraka at all.

I don't have that divide; the Gita implies that people can become Asura, and the demonic nature (Asura) is what makes us get sent lower down to Hell.

 

[SomeRandom]

Namaste.

Agreed, that the divine feminine makes a far better mother than a fatherly concept, as the Heavens are nurturing to us, and in my own understanding this is why using the terminology CPU, as it frees us of any illogical male dominated traits, which are often applied to the Highest Formless Creator of all.

Feminine and masculine are both traits we need, but we as humans tend to separate them into two entirely different entities. Male and Female humans. We Shaktas (and probably many Shaivites) don't believe in such separation. Although the Nameless Formless One probably has neither if you think about it lol.

Thank you for a thoughtful reply, and agree do sometimes paint this dividing line to thick, when really see it with much more complexity....

This whole reality is made of consciousness, with many souls differing in vibration, where don't have a divide that any of it isn't the same...

In my NDE i didn't see demons down in Hell, i saw souls that had become distorted due to allowing themselves to become disharmonized (demonized).

Well theologically speaking, if a human were to become an Asura, they'd technically be climbing the ladder, so to speak. As we are lower beings.
But I guess a soul would be rather distorted in Hell. But that's why they come back more pure. Hell isn't a punishment, it's a place to wash away (albeit rather violently) the bad actions one may have done. But I suppose if one soul is quite determined to become disharmonized I could see them becoming rather distorted in general. I don't know if I'd call them an Asura, there's probably a name for it already. Just don't know it.

Every soul has the potential to become an avatar, and everyone is welcome to Oneness (Heaven) if they deal with their own emotional baggage; many just don't realize they're the object of this game, nothing external to blame or excuse ourselves of our own issues.

I don't know about the potential to be an avatar, although I suppose as a boon to one's piousness Brahman could grant one a particularly close connection in the next life to the Nameless Formless One. Like Vishnu rewarded a couple to be the earth parents of his next avatar Krishna in their next life (just in time too, since they were about to immolate themselves when he didn't respond to their extensive devotion and prayers.) But I guess if one achieves Moksha and asks to become an avatar, they could be granted such a request.
But I do agree that we should not blame external factors. We have free will and we all have choices. We must live with the consequences.

 

[wizanda]

Feminine and masculine are both traits we need

Love the phrase by Lao Tzu:

'Know the masculine, keep to the feminine, and be the brook of the world.'

Although the Nameless Formless One probably has neither

Personally would think all aspects of everything we see within reality are within the Source.

if a human were to become an Asura, they'd technically be climbing the ladder, so to speak. As we are lower beings.

Where does this concept exist please, that we're lower than Asura, other than them being referenced as spiritual beings?

But I guess if one achieves Moksha and asks to become an avatar, they could be granted such a request.

It is more of an achievement in my understanding, like to attain being an avatar it is a continual refining process, to be able to sit next to Brahman in a level of wisdom, and logic that most people don't come close to.

Attaining Moksha is only a start to the Heavens, as we ascend higher we can become part of everything created; so it something to strive for, that takes ultimate dedication.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

"wizanda,"

Namaste,

The start is examining the Gita as scripture, and establishing what its precepts are; before moving on, and encompassing other ideologies.

No, that is not accurate, why does one have to start at the Gita, who made this rule?, why not start at the Sankhya and Yoga Darshans, or why not start at the Upanishads or Veda's, or the Kamasutra??

Encompassing things that are saying everyone is divine, everyone is Brahman without needing to be righteous, is why the water is so filthy, anyone conscious of Brahman being selfless wouldn't even wash in it.

But this would be against the advise of the Gita, even if one starts from there.

Dhanyavad,

 

[wizanda]

why does one have to start at the Gita, who made this rule?

It is called logic...

If we're dealing with a specific text written by a specific author, regardless if it is contained in a massive collection of writings; we must be able to examine it within its own scope, before expanding to a larger perspective; else unfortunately we're not being logical, as each individual has their own slightly unique theological perspective.

But this would be against the advise of the Gita

This is your perspective, based on chapter 2 again...

Yet personally don't see that as the only perspective presented within the Gita; as only those who practise connection consistently with the divine, have the light within them.

Just because we're made manifest by the CPU, doesn't make us the CPU; we're characters inside of the game, and some of us are scummy within.

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

"wizanda,"

Namaste,

It is called logic...

If we're dealing with a specific text written by a specific author, regardless if it is contained in a massive collection of writings; we must be able to examine it within its own scope, before expanding to a larger perspective; else unfortunately we're not being logical, as each individual has their own slightly unique theological perspective.

Well my logic is, that even if we take the specifics of a text, we have to ensure that it is not interpreted out of the context of the whole, such texts as the Gita (which forms part of the Mahabharatta) are not independent of the context of Mahabharatta and the genre of "Ithihas", the Mahabharatta teaches about Dharmah and Gita is but a small part of the whole.

 

[SomeRandom]

Love the phrase by Lao Tzu:

'Know the masculine, keep to the feminine, and be the brook of the world.'

Personally would think all aspects of everything we see within reality are within the Source.

Both and neither. What we perceive is merely an illusion. Something to sate our menial little minds for the time being. I think the true Nameless one would be beyond such concepts as "masculine" and "feminine." Of course that's not to say they're separate from Brahman.

Where does this concept exist please, that we're lower than Asura, other than them being referenced as spiritual beings?

I'm not entirely sure. It seems to be one of those things people seem to know through sheer osmosis (seemingly.) Like who Luke Skywalker's father is or what happens to Bambi's mum. I'm sure you can find it in some scripture somewhere.

Though I guess it's because of their inherent divine powers, their divine status and them existing before even Homo Erectus was wandering around.

It is more of an achievement in my understanding, like to attain being an avatar it is a continual refining process, to be able to sit next to Brahman in a level of wisdom, and logic that most people don't come close to.

Attaining Moksha is only a start to the Heavens, as we ascend higher we can become part of everything created; so it something to strive for, that takes ultimate dedication.

Perhaps. It is quite the lofty goal.

 

[sayak83]

Namaste SomeRandom-Ji,

Thank you for the apologies; no worries, very patient, and aware some people have a personal life outside of this forum.

Agreed, that the divine feminine makes a far better mother than a fatherly concept, as the Heavens are nurturing to us, and in my own understanding this is why using the terminology CPU, as it frees us of any illogical male dominated traits, which are often applied to the Highest Formless Creator of all.

Thank you for a thoughtful reply, and agree do sometimes paint this dividing line to thick, when really see it with much more complexity....

This whole reality is made of consciousness, with many souls differing in vibration, where don't have a divide that any of it isn't the same...

In my NDE i didn't see demons down in Hell, i saw souls that had become distorted due to allowing themselves to become disharmonized (demonized).

Every soul has the potential to become an avatar, and everyone is welcome to Oneness (Heaven) if they deal with their own emotional baggage; many just don't realize they're the object of this game, nothing external to blame or excuse ourselves of our own issues.

Firstly not proving Hinduism's beliefs, speaking on my own concepts of what is within the Gita, based on personal experience.

Can't answer such a complex question, be decisive, and list individual points based on specific statements.... This thread is currently on chapter 16's concepts.

So my first recollection of being an avatar was at 4/5 years old, without any concepts of that word being explained to me from any source, also with advanced knowledge of the Heaven's, Biblical prophecy, etc....

Yet you are right, could be deluded still; which is why spent my life assessing the information presented, and having had a NDE it validated for myself what had always known.

There is no eternal Hell in the Bible either btw, Hell is destroyed in Revelation 20:14.

BG 16.21: There are three gates leading to the hell of self-destruction for the soul—lust, anger, and greed. Therefore, all should abandon these three.

BG 16.16: Possessed and led astray by such imaginings, enveloped in a mesh of delusion, and addicted to the gratification of sensuous pleasures, they descend to the murkiest hell.

BG 1.44: O Janardan (Krishna), I have heard from the learned that those who destroy family traditions dwell in hell for an indefinite period of time.

We're not born into Hell, we can be sent there if we don't make restitution whilst here; like here is the highway to Hell, and most of us are on a downhill path, unless we strive to work the opposite way to what this realm presents.

Though as already replying above, it is a conscious thing; just because we've fallen so low, doesn't mean we can't learn from our mistakes.

I don't have that divide; the Gita implies that people can become Asura, and the demonic nature (Asura) is what makes us get sent lower down to Hell.

I won't discuss chapter 16 before going through the first 15 chapters. They are before it for a reason.
Nothing you quoted said anything of any eternal hell. Since every being passes through every world asuras or gods going through is hardly news. But if you think people (or demons) stay in hell forever, then you are wrong. Arjuna says many wrong things in his lament. That is one of them. That is why Krishna has to instruct him.

 

[wizanda]

Well my logic is

Though i agree we all have our own form of logic; not doing both, to first check on its own account, before placing it into the larger scope is a flaw in logic.

I think the true Nameless one would be beyond such concepts as "masculine" and "feminine."

Totally agree, and why like to now use the terminology CPU, to remove all illogical anthropomorphism.

them existing before even Homo Erectus was wandering around.

This is interesting, see my comprehension before form and order came into reality, was there was just random quantum strands everywhere, these are all souls...

Yet many of us are a little twisted; so guess some were seen as Asura before given form, to help us all evolve in this holographic reality.

I won't discuss chapter 16 before going through the first 15 chapters.

Please apply a context for wanting to include 15 chapters?

Nothing you quoted said anything of any eternal hell.

There is no such thing; why are you continuing debating on something that already said doesn't even exist in a Hebraic context.

Arjuna says many wrong things in his lament.

Please list where you think Arjuna was wrong, as find that a bit slanderous?

But if you think people (or demons) stay in hell forever, then you are wrong.

Since not said that; you're arguing with your own ego's perceptions.