When Vivekananda perfomed Kumari Puja on a Muslim girl worshipping her as the Divine Mother...

[ajay0]

Why should I leave you that cheaply?

You just talked about not criticizing others , and now you state that you have no intention to leave me in this thread I created! Very well, then.

Is this person a God? Which scripture mentions him? Why should a Hindu worship him? Are you a Hindu? Heretics like you make Hinduism weaker.

Do tell me why on earth should an atheist like you be bothered about what other theistic hindus do!

Shirdi Sai himself taught about Advaita both from a Hindu and Sufi point of view, and your attacks on him is clear proof of my contention that you have no idea what Advaita is, though you keep on advertising your misunderstanding of advaita in this and other forums, inviting ridicule and criticism in the process.

It is out of sympathy that I asked you to cease this process, but you seem to have no intention to do so. As for me and others, it is but an opportunity for more laughs, comedy and humor . Lol....

 

[Aupmanyav]

Do tell me why on earth should an atheist like you be bothered about what other theistic hindus do!

Shirdi Sai himself taught about Advaita both from a Hindu and Sufi point of view, and your attacks on him is clear proof of my contention that you have no idea what Advaita is, though you keep on advertising your misunderstanding of advaita in this and other forums, inviting ridicule and criticism in the process.

It is out of sympathy that I asked you to cease this process, but you seem to have no intention to do so. As for me and others, it is but an opportunity for more laughs, comedy and humor . Lol....

It is because I am a Hindu, so all things that affect Hinduism are in my range of concern. As I have said we have so many Gods and if people give the designation to any Tom, Dick or Harry, it weakens Hinduism. If that person was an advitist then not just he but all people are Gods. What to talk of people, even the dogs and cats are Brahman. I ask you - Are they not? He alone cannot be Brahman. That is against 'Advaita'. Then, you should start worshiping me too. Have your laugh.

 

[ajay0]

It is because I am a Hindu, so all things that affect Hinduism are in my range of concern.

Your concern is not needed. It is just your ego talking. If you wish to serve the cause of Hinduism, do try to first perfect your own knowledge of Hinduism rather than advertising your misunderstanding of it and attracting ridicule and laughs.

The blind will only lead others to the ditch as well.

As I have said we have so many Gods and if people give the designation to any Tom, Dick or Harry, it weakens Hinduism. If that person was an advitist then not just he but all people are Gods. What to talk of people, even the dogs and cats are Brahman. I ask you - Are they not? He alone cannot be Brahman. That is against 'Advaita'. Then, you should start worshiping me too. Have your laugh.

All this smacks of delusion as usual. What difference does it make if Hindus worship one more god as Shirdi when they already worship 330 million gods and goddesses ! Shirdi is also Brahman.

Have your laugh.

Thank you. Do bring more such stuff. I am feeling bored.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Every Hindu should/has to care for Hinduism. If my concern is not needed, then your advice also is useless. So, only you are not blind. Anyone whose views differ from yours is blind? What ego!
If that fakir (Chand Mian) staying in a mosque is Brahman (he sure is Brahman, so are Osama Bin Laden or Saddam Hussain, advait does not allow one to see differences). Why then, are you not worshiping Osama or Saddam? What is not Brahman in the universe? The Shirdi one alone cannot be Brahman. That will be against 'Advaita'.

Keep to your parampara, keep to your scriptures. Don't accept new Gods like some women who must have a new husband every year. You are loosing your way.

"Vyavasāyātmikā buddhir, ekeha kuru-nandana;
bahu-śākhā hy anantāś ca, buddhayo 'vyavasāyinām."

 

[ajay0]

Every Hindu should/has to care for Hinduism. If my concern is not needed, then your advice also is useless. So, only you are not blind. Anyone whose views differ from yours is blind? What ego!

My posts go with what Hinduism teaches, whereas your posts go as per your pov . There is a major difference between the two, and this is why you have been subjected to criticism and scorn in this and other hindu forums.

To keep on blindly with a flawed pov is ego and obstinacy.

If that fakir (Chand Mian) staying in a mosque is Brahman (he sure is Brahman, so are Osama Bin Laden or Saddam Hussain, advait does not allow one to see differences). Why then, are you not worshiping Osama or Saddam? What is not Brahman in the universe? The Shirdi one alone cannot be Brahman. That will be against 'Advaita'.

Shirdi Sai Baba is an enlightened sage and this is why he is worshipped by millions of Hindus. Hitler, Osama, Saddam and you are not , and that is why temples for the above are not there.

What is not Brahman in the universe? The Shirdi one alone cannot be Brahman. That will be against 'Advaita'.

That you asked such a foolish question is more proof that you have no idea of Advaita. It is just a flawed pov of advaita you keep circling around.

All the other gods are also considered as manifestations of Brahman and worshipped accordingly, and not considered as per your flawed model.

Keep to your parampara, keep to your scriptures. Don't accept new Gods like the new husbands that women in some countries gather. You are loosing your way.

It would be more than enough if you stop murdering advaita and hinduism with half-baked knowledge.

However I welcome the comedy and appreciate that a lot.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Thank you Aupmanyav [nice story about the elephant; didn't know that. Good illustration too in this context].

I think we might be more on 1 line than you think. I am very much aware of these two realities. I do like to give humans a chance to prove themselves worthy to be called humans. And learned that 1 chance is enough. If they blow it, 90% sure they will not change. Evolution is just too slow for that. And those religions too rigid.

Besides giving the Muslim a chance, I also double check by creating a test if they don't use taqiyya on me [they can't blame me, because they started being taqiyya on me]. I came to this forum to find out the "true face" of Christians and Muslims. I'm a scientist, and quite smart at that, though pretending ignorant [my taqiyya]. My test for the Muslims will be ready in a few days, and then I have proof what their "true face" is. Sofar the non-Muslims were better in showing their "true face" [I do hope this changes]. But I have also seen a some nice Muslims. So I still hope and believe in the positive.

Taqiyya is an Islamophobic Internet meme. Most Muslims have probably never heard of it. It's similar to an anti-Semitic canard in that it dehumanizes Muslims by saying they can never be trusted no matter what they do. That's a horrible and stupid thing to insinuate of such a vast and varied group. The bigotry and fanaticism from some in thread is very ugly. It's also against the rules to talk like that in a DIR because obviously Muslims can't come and rebut those posters.

 

[stvdv]

Taqiyya is an Islamophobic Internet meme. Most Muslims have probably never heard of it. It's similar to an anti-Semitic canard in that it dehumanizes Muslims by saying they can never be trusted no matter what they do. That's a horrible and stupid thing to insinuate of such a vast and varied group. The bigotry and fanaticism from some in thread is very ugly. It's also against the rules to talk like that in a DIR because obviously Muslims can't come and rebut those posters.

Taqiyya is a form of religious dissimulation,[1] or a legal dispensation whereby a believing individual can deny his Islamic faith or commit otherwise illegal or blasphemous acts while they are at risk of significant persecution.[2] It is based on Qur'anic verses that instruct Muslims not to "take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers... except by way of precaution,"[3] and to not utter unbelief "except [while] under compulsion".[4]
Taqiyya - WikiIslam

Thank you. I must admit I didn't really investigate this Taqiyya [and replied without proper checking]. My mistake [So according to the definition my lines seem out of line]. Of course I read this on the internet, and I am aware that there is a lot of untruth on the internet. But if above definition is correct, Taqiyya should only be used when they are at risk of significant persecution

But even here in Holland some people use "fingers crossed" behind their backs. So I lost my confidence in honesty of people a little. I am very careful nowadays. Especially when I see that people can't admit if something is wrong in their scripture what is quite obvious to all others.

Personally I do believe that belief-systems who claim "our belief-system is the only/highest truth" are the ones responsible for creating dubious problems like above, because such a claim is arrogant and therefore a form of agression (IMHO). The moment people stop claiming "My religion is superior" many related problems in the world will solve automatically. IMHO.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Thank you. I must admit I didn't really investigate this Taqiyya [and replied without proper checking]. My mistake [you are right my lines were out of line]. I did read that there are certain circumstances when they are allowed to use it. Of course I read this on the internet, and I am aware that there is a lot of untruth on the internet. I think the info in this link should be correct. Taqiyya - WikiIslam
So I will find out more about it.

Personally I do believe that belief-systems who claim "our belief-system is the only/highest truth" are the ones responsible for creating dubious problems like above, because such a claim is arrogant and therefore a form of agression (IMHO). The moment people stop claiming "My religion is superior" many related problems in the world will solve automatically. IMHO.

WikiIslam is actually an anti-Islam site. Taqiyya was orginally an obscure concept in Shia Islam (the Twelver sect, I think) where it was possibly permissible to deny your religion in order to save your life during periods of intense persecution (martyrdom vs. the value of life). It doesn't seem to ever have been that popular, even among Shia Muslims. Apparently some people who hate Muslims came across the term, took it out of context, stretched it out of proportion and said "see, Muslims are all liars and we can never trust them when they say they're peaceful!".

"Taqiyya": How An Obscure Islamic Concept Became An Obsession Of Anti-Muslim Activists

 

[stvdv]

WikiIslam is actually an anti-Islam site. Taqiyya was orginally an obscure concept in Shia Islam (the Twelver sect, I think) where it was possibly permissible to deny your religion in order to save your life during periods of intense persecution (martyrdom vs. the value of life). It doesn't seem to ever have been that popular, even among Shia Muslims. Apparently some people who hate Muslims came across the term, took it out of context, stretched it out of proportion and said "see, Muslims are all liars and we can never trust them when they say they're peaceful!".

"Taqiyya": How An Obscure Islamic Concept Became An Obsession Of Anti-Muslim Activists

Thank you Lvcifer, glad you are here to keep me on track. I wouldn't have thought wikiislam to be an anti-Islam site. My God. Horrible this internet since "trolls" are taking over so much. Even the Koran I downloaded was an "anti-Islam" Koran @Aamer: warned me. So at least now I have a good Koran, according to him. I also will ask him about this Taqiyya thing.

You are totally right, it's very bad to spread dumm rumours. And I am glad you corrected me on this.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Thank you Lvcifer, glad you are here to keep me on track. I wouldn't have thought wikiislam to be an anti-Islam site. My God. Horrible this internet since "trolls" are taking over so much. Even the Koran I downloaded was an "anti-Islam" Koran @Aamer: warned me. So at least now I have a good Koran, according to him. I also will ask him about this Taqiyya thing.

You are totally right, it's very bad to spread dumm rumours. And I am glad you corrected me on this.

You're welcome. I do what I can. I used to hate Islam and would read WikiIslam. Those sites can be deceptive so don't feel too bad about it.

 

[Aupmanyav]

-Shirdi Sai Baba is an enlightened sage and this is why he is worshipped by millions of Hindus. Hitler, Osama, Saddam and you are not, and that is why temples for the above are not there.
- That you asked such a foolish question is more proof that you have no idea of Advaita. It is just a flawed pov of advaita you keep circling around.
- All the other gods are also considered as manifestations of Brahman and worshipped accordingly, and not considered as per your flawed model.
- It would be more than enough if you stop murdering advaita and hinduism with half-baked knowledge.

- That he is worshiped by millions is no proof of his enlightenment. People were (and many still do) worshiping Osho, Gurmeet Ram Rahim, Ramlal, Asa Ram, Virendra Dev Dixit, etc. This is not something unique to India. Dangerous cults exist in other parts of the world too. The Shirdi phenomenon was a money making device for administrators of the temple before the Government took over the control. People promote it to make money out of it. That is why there are temples and bhajan parties.
- As I said, don't just abuse me, give your reasons for what you say.
- That depends on the view of the person. For many Hindus each God or Goddess is a separate entity. Bhirava is not the same as Vishnu. You cannot apply your measure to every Hindu.
- Dazzle us with your knowledge. Other than abusing me you have not giving even one single argument against what I believe.

 

[ajay0]

- That he is worshiped by millions is no proof of his enlightenment.

With your limited understanding of Advaita and Hinduism, you certainly are not in a position to gauge whether Shirdi Sai Baba is enlightened or not.

Rama was similarly criticized by Ravana and Krishna was similarly criticized by Shishupala and Paundraka .

People were (and many still do) worshiping Osho, Gurmeet Ram Rahim, Ramlal, Asa Ram, Virendra Dev Dixit, etc.

There are no temples for the above in India.

This is not something unique to India. Dangerous cults exist in other parts of the world too. The Shirdi phenomenon was a money making device for administrators of the temple before the Government took over the control. People promote it to make money out of it. That is why there are temples and bhajan parties.

You yourself are promoting a regressive cult with your misunderstandings of advaita and hinduism.

The shirdi sai baba temple and tomb is growing in popularity amongst Hindus and non-hindus, and millions visit the place. Shirdi Sai Baba is also considered the most popular non-zoroastrian spiritual figure among zoroastrians as well. I have never heard of Shirdi sai temples associated with corruption issues whereas I have read many times of orthodox hindu temples being looted by Hindu administrators there.

All hindus, non-hindus and foreigners are welcomed in Shirdi Sai Baba temple and tomb in Shirdi and can take free prasadam and food.

That the Shirdi Sai temple kitchen has has bagged the coveted Concentrated Solar Thermal (CST) and Solar Cooker Excellence Awards- 2016 by the ministry of new and renewable energy (MNRE), shows that it is also a progressive movement as well .

The temple operates one of the world's largest Solar System Projects for community cooking installed in 2014. With 73 solar dishes each of 16 sq meter size, the total steam generation capacity of this project is 4200 kg/day. Food is cooked for more than 25000 individuals every day in the Kitchen. More than 2 tonnes of rice is cooked through this plant every day, saving cooking gas of up to Rs 20,000. Till date, the plant has saved Rs 60 lakh for the trust.

Shirdi Sai temple gets excellence award for solar kitchen - Times of India

- As I said, don't just abuse me, give your reasons for what you say.

In this and other Hindu forums, many Hindus had criticised you for your flawed understanding, and had given their reasons for it umpteen times. That you can't still figure it out, is not their headache.

Perhaps the issue is that as an old saying goes, ' You can't teach an old dog new tricks.'

- That depends on the view of the person. For many Hindus each God or Goddess is a separate entity. Bhirava is not the same as Vishnu. You cannot apply your measure to every Hindu.
-

Bhairava is not the same as Vishnu or Shirdi Sai Baba and vice versa.

Your statement 'You cannot apply your measure to every Hindu' applies to you as well.

 

[stvdv]

But one cnnot be an 'advaitist' and at the same time accept the existence of God. That will be contradiction. Kindly tell me, where do I go wrong?

Whenever words are used it's duality
Non-duality: a)don't accept God + b)don't deny God

 

[stvdv]

What to talk of people, even the dogs and cats are Brahman. I ask you - Are they not? He alone cannot be Brahman. That is against 'Advaita'. Then, you should start worshiping me too. Have your laugh.

Only God exist, all else is maya. That is the Truth the Veda's declare. Worship all, or worship none are both fine. IMHO

 

[stvdv]

The Shirdi one alone cannot be Brahman

Referring to Shirdi as this fakir having a body, cannot be Brahman. That is called maya IMHO.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Is he alone the Brahman? Everything is. For 'advitist', even a stone is Brahman and none else.

Only God exist, all else is maya. Worship all, or worship none are both fine. IMHO

Sorry, I am a strong atheist and advaitist. I do not worship any or all.

Whenever words are used it's duality. Non-duality: a) don't accept God + b) don't deny God

Use words or not, 'Advaita' denies all duality.

 

[stvdv]

Sorry, I am a strong atheist and advaitist.

No need to say sorry IF "Saying sorry, is just an excuse to do it again"
[To be a strong atheist and advaitist is oke; so sorry is bit funny, isn't it?]

 

[stvdv]

Is he alone the Brahman? Everything is. For 'advitist', even a stone is Brahman and none else.Sorry, I am a strong atheist and advaitist. I do not worship any or all.Use words or not, 'Advaita' denies all duality.

Is he alone the Brahman? Everything is.

That is exactly what I said. Only Brahman exists, all else is maya

For 'advitist', even a stone is Brahman and none else.

That is exactly what I said. Only Brahman exists, all is Brahman. You + @ajay0 + stone + statues are Brahman only

Sorry, I am a strong atheist and advaitist.

A real "sorry" means you won't do it again. But obviously here "Sorry is an excuse to do it again"
[And oke to be a strong atheist and advaitist, so no need at all to say sorry IMHO]

I am a strong atheist and advaitist.

"I" is ego
"am" is identification
"strong" is super identification
"atheist" is duality
"advaitist" implies dvaitist, so still duality
Those are all maya, illusion. Silence is the only way to convey that
[I don't claim all these things, so I can use words]

I do not worship any or all.

You are Brahman, who is there to do worship or don't worship?

Use words or not, 'Advaita' denies all duality.

Deny is duality

IMHO

 

[Aupmanyav]

No need to say sorry IF "Saying sorry, is just an excuse to do it again"
[To be a strong atheist and advaitist is ok; so sorry is bit funny, isn't it?]

Yes, I will always be an atheist and an advaitist, because my view of advaita (non-duality) does not allow me to accept the existence of God/Gods/Goddesses.

"I" is the second level of reality in 'advaita' (Vyavaharika - pragmatic). "I", i.e., Aupmanyav exists only in Vyavaharika Truth. He does not exist in Paramarthika Truth - Absolute Truth. There, it is Brahman only.

Right. There is no one else to be worshiped in 'advaita' (according to my view). Denial comes when there is an assertion, otherwise no denial is needed.

 

[ajay0]

Referring to Shirdi as this fakir having a body, cannot be Brahman. That is called maya IMHO.

This is correct. There is an excerpt in the ancient Chandogya Upanishad of the demon king Virochana and the god king Indra, coming to Prajapati to study the nature of the Self or Brahman.

Virochana deludedly comes to the conclusion that the body is the Self or Brahman, and goes and teaches other demons the same.

Indra on the other hand, due to deep thinking, contemplation and satsang with Prajapati, goes deeper into the subject and correctly comes to the conclusion that the Self or Brahman is pure consciousness.

The King of Gods, Indra, and the King of Demons, Virochana | Hridaya Yoga

This is also the reason why correct knowledge or wisdom is emphasized in Hinduism.

False knowledge or ignorance can make a demon out of a human being, while true knowledge or wisdom can make a god out of the same person by helping him uncover his intrinsic true nature.