But we see how that changed anything.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Who Would This Person Be Within Hinduism
- Thread starter wizanda
- Start date
Many religious peoples have these ideas of a personification of truth, which is silly, as truth is subjective; it is easier to establish all the fallacies in a subject first, before trying to establish the truth built upon lies.
Within each of the religious texts globally tho, the person comes to point out where people are following adharma.
Though clearly people won't like that, as we're all full of ego, and so don't like being told; therefore we will again see that the person is arrogant, from thinking they know the truth.
The New Age is strong with this one.
Why havn't the mods moved it to the debates section or something?
Hinduism's concepts of death, judgement and "final destiny" are much different than Abrahamic ones.
Your OP sounded very Abrahamic.
Or you are proving to have a poor understanding of the texts, as compared to actual Hindus.
Okay buddy, if you say so... I really don't think that is what Dharma is.
Maybe you're the one not making sense.
How about you use a ****ing dictionary and not misappropriate our words then, then maybe we can talk in the same religious context.
There isn't any heaven. Dharma wasn't ever established or created. It's eternal and unchanging. I don't know of anyone who has ever believed or supposed that Dharma was anything but.
I think you mean they call their religion Dharma as in they follow Dharma. The usage isn't actually different, it's just a different way of describing their religion for those who call it that. Such as some here have called their faith Sanatana Dharma (Hindu).
It's not a unique view, it's my view as well and the view of most Hindus.
Actually Swami Bhaskarananda explicitly said in a book of his as such agreeing with me and @Satyamavejayanti
I actually should recommend this book to you, actually:
(if the link breaks the book is called "Essentials of Hinduism")
If we are in the Matrix then who's the Architect? Who are the machines and what is Zion? Who's the One? Because it sure as hell wasn't Neo and there is a lot of evidence it was unwittingly Agent Smith.
Well the core idea of Hinduism is kind of that we are all (or at least part of) God/Brahman/whatever. So I don't see how that's silly.
Deities (avatars) are not messengers or even human. They are actual manifestations of divinity that only appear to be humanoid. That's why we call them avatars.
It's a bit' more complicated than that. It's been described as that but "ultimate foundational reality" is probably a better term.
A lot of sects and schools of thought would disagree with that, though admittedly not all.
Ya, that's Vendanta.
Who sent you?
I am pretty sure that a lot of Hindus understand/believe that all is one (nondualism) but just because there is nondualism doesn't mean that all subjective things are congruent. It only means that objective things are congruent. Temporal dualism exists even within monism and nondualism; two religions can be wildly different even if the minds that created them are inseparable and indistinguishable from the particles that make them up fading into a constant stream of interaction and energy from the earth on which they reside. There may be no real boundaries between these physical things, but the difference in abstract things like religious beliefs are defined by their nature as being incongruent with each other, even if the abstract aspect of existence itself makes them similar, they are not congruent. But a merger back into monistic essence would preclude most concepts particularly ones that are not of truth. This is why the ego vanishes in schools like Vendanta and Samkhya.
Why havn't the mods moved it to the debates section or something?
If someone asked me if I'm christian, i feels its an insult...As been debating its errors for the last 12 years.
'noun: eschatology
the part of theology concerned with death, judgement, and the final destiny of the soul and of humankind.'
Used to not like the word debate, and thought always better to relate; yet we learn the most from the hardest route.
Hinduism's concepts of death, judgement and "final destiny" are much different than Abrahamic ones.
Your OP sounded very Abrahamic.
So either way what i asked about me in the OP, can fit with Hindu text; just not your beliefs.
Or you are proving to have a poor understanding of the texts, as compared to actual Hindus.
Okay buddy, if you say so... I really don't think that is what Dharma is.
Maybe you're the one not making sense.
If you keep only applying your own contexts to words, then you're missing my point and arguing without understanding, which is where i keep trying to help you understand.
How about you use a ****ing dictionary and not misappropriate our words then, then maybe we can talk in the same religious context.
There isn't any heaven. Dharma wasn't ever established or created. It's eternal and unchanging. I don't know of anyone who has ever believed or supposed that Dharma was anything but.
Buddhist use the term Dharma to mean their belief system... 'You really should read up on all the different aspects of all the words used.'
I think you mean they call their religion Dharma as in they follow Dharma. The usage isn't actually different, it's just a different way of describing their religion for those who call it that. Such as some here have called their faith Sanatana Dharma (Hindu).
It's not a unique view, it's my view as well and the view of most Hindus.
Actually Swami Bhaskarananda explicitly said in a book of his as such agreeing with me and @Satyamavejayanti
I actually should recommend this book to you, actually:
(if the link breaks the book is called "Essentials of Hinduism")
If we are in the Matrix then who's the Architect? Who are the machines and what is Zion? Who's the One? Because it sure as hell wasn't Neo and there is a lot of evidence it was unwittingly Agent Smith.
Well the core idea of Hinduism is kind of that we are all (or at least part of) God/Brahman/whatever. So I don't see how that's silly.
Deities (avatars) are not messengers or even human. They are actual manifestations of divinity that only appear to be humanoid. That's why we call them avatars.
It's a bit' more complicated than that. It's been described as that but "ultimate foundational reality" is probably a better term.
A lot of sects and schools of thought would disagree with that, though admittedly not all.
Ya, that's Vendanta.
Who sent you?
I am pretty sure that a lot of Hindus understand/believe that all is one (nondualism) but just because there is nondualism doesn't mean that all subjective things are congruent. It only means that objective things are congruent. Temporal dualism exists even within monism and nondualism; two religions can be wildly different even if the minds that created them are inseparable and indistinguishable from the particles that make them up fading into a constant stream of interaction and energy from the earth on which they reside. There may be no real boundaries between these physical things, but the difference in abstract things like religious beliefs are defined by their nature as being incongruent with each other, even if the abstract aspect of existence itself makes them similar, they are not congruent. But a merger back into monistic essence would preclude most concepts particularly ones that are not of truth. This is why the ego vanishes in schools like Vendanta and Samkhya.
Last edited:
I guess I'll have to read a TV Guide to see what that says.Many religious peoples have these ideas of a personification of truth, which is silly, as truth is subjective; it is easier to establish all the fallacies in a subject first, before trying to establish the truth built upon lies.
Within each of the religious texts globally tho, the person comes to point out where people are following adharma.
Though clearly people won't like that, as we're all full of ego, and so don't like being told; therefore we will again see that the person is arrogant, from thinking they know the truth.
The mods first moved it to comparative religions, and then religious debate as the conversation progressed. Well done mods!
They're all saying the same more or less, and therefore trying to qualify certain criteria set by them overall.
Sorry can't reply to the rest...
...Oh it was moved? Stupid me lol. Didn't realize that.
Okay, well uh... all I can say again is that there isn't a Hindu heaven and that it's more cyclic than linear like abrahamic faiths. Also I don't think the Jews have a hell.. some Dharmic faiths have temporary hells and heavens but really most don't.
There are some similarities sure, but that doesn't mean they are revealing the same underlying truth, considering that it's not universal among all the major world religions even. It just means that they have similar ideas. "There is nothing new under the sun" as it has been said before.
Okay, well uh... all I can say again is that there isn't a Hindu heaven and that it's more cyclic than linear like abrahamic faiths. Also I don't think the Jews have a hell.. some Dharmic faiths have temporary hells and heavens but really most don't.
There are some similarities sure, but that doesn't mean they are revealing the same underlying truth, considering that it's not universal among all the major world religions even. It just means that they have similar ideas. "There is nothing new under the sun" as it has been said before.
jerry greer
Member
dark clouds in town hell ill do things in town tommorow....
Satyamavejayanti
Well-Known Member
Namaste,
The Context is Kalki Avatar of Vishnu, not your personal belief.
Well IF there is a heaven, I would agree that even there would be Dharmah. But you implied that Dharmah is the Way to heaven, Now changing your claim that there also is Dharmah in Heaven. if this is so then where is the destination of following Dharmah in Heaven considering Dharmah will be a "Way", to somewhere?
My reply was because you had equated Dharmah with Religion, You had also claimed Dharmah as a Way to heaven, You have also claimed in previous posts that Dharmah is the Core of religions, now just by claiming that religions came later does not annul the fact that you are continuously equate the idea of Dharmah with religion.
Wait, are you telling me that because a Hindus perspective on Sat-Chit-Annand does not make sense to a Non Hndu, therefore the Non-Hindu has a right to just equate it with a Christian/Abrahamic concept of being in heaven and then label the Hindu of not making sense?
Normally in a debate, we try and establish each persons understanding of a words context, so that we can understand each other....
If you keep only applying your own contexts to words, then you're missing my point and arguing without understanding, which is where i keep trying to help you understand.
This is a debate (now) on the Hindu ideas of Avatar/Atman/Brahman - the context is the Hindu perspective, as the words describe Hindu concepts - the words such as Heaven/Oneness/Way are not Hindu concepts and do not describe Hindu ideas. Nearly all Hindus have explained this in their own way in this thread.
For the Debate, I will (as I have already) establish certain non translatable
1) Atman
2) Dharmah
3) Brahman
These are not translatable not because we have not done so yet, but because these concepts and idea that the words represent textually or in Practice are not to be found in traditions other then Hinduism or close relative of the Dharmah traditions.
Again, Dharmah is Sa-NA-ANtana - Never ending therefore never having a beginning, your equation does not relate to Dharmah.
Buddhist use the term Dharma to mean their belief system... 'You really should read up on all the different aspects of all the words used.'
Because Dharmah is contextual, not to be applied willy nilly to concepts that does not relate to the core principals of Dharmah, Buddhism being from the same traditional/cultural/historical background obviously would have Dharmah. Now this is up to my Buddhist mates to enlighten us on the issue that Dharmah is a belief system in Budhism and is a "way" to "heaven", that Dharmah gets Buddhists closer or in close proximity to Brahman or is part of a religion (these are your claims about Dharmah).
This view is a view from the Gita, not unique at all. The idea of Good/Bad Karma is a western view.
Your are equating Brahman with the Abrahmic concept of GOD, which i have already said is not right. By equating Brahman with God, you are in fact threatening the Advaitin/Dvaitin/Hindu with Hell for thinking they are God (Brahman). Typical Christian
Avatar = to descend into form is not equal to messenger = which means being Gods messenger. Totally wrong equation.
Not "with", Brahman but "Become", Brahman. Again the Idea of being in the "Presence of Brahman in heaven" (Which is your proposition, which i had questioned) does not occur in Hinduism (As I have said previously).
I beg to differ, this entire post, and previously you equate Brahman with the Abrahamic concept of GOD.
Last edited:
We follow dharma as it is the right Way to be, thus to even be in Heaven you have to live it.
One aspect of dharma is righteousness, thus all religions teach righteousness in someway...
If there was no dharma, and people were all just evil, then we wouldn't need religions to tell us to be good.
I was on about me being in Heaven, me being sent from there, this whole topic was about me, and everyone turned it into fighting Christianity.
In your opinion, whereas many Hindus would say the exact opposite....There are even Hindu schools called Oneness.
You've been doing that throughout the topic, and unfortunately, i don't fit into a only one culture can only use their language.
Each word has its context within its original text background, and not some belief that people choose to illogically apply to it.....
By all means show fault in the logic used, and will accept the correction, if it is valid, else will say i don't agree and try to find a common understanding that makes sense.
Before creation there was chaos, therefore no dharma.
We're almost in hell, this is the top floor...Christians believe Hell is somewhere we go, not that we're already almost in it.
[GALLERY=media, 7191][/GALLERY]
They're totally different concepts, i used the term God, which is the common English word used for any deity.
This is what happens when people die, from my own first hand experience, not some religious belief or superstition, so regardless of what you want to defend, I'm just explaining what occurs to people.
I don't speak from the Abrahmic God, there is only one, i'm speaking from most religious texts globally, and first hand experience.
Peace
Satyamavejayanti
Well-Known Member
Namaste,
You previously said Dharmah is the Way, and specifically a Way to Heaven, therefore I asked what happens to Dharmah when we reach heaven? I did not ask what Dharmah is, but What happens to Dharmah (The right way in your interpretation) when we are in Heaven?
All Im saying is That Dharmah is Sanatana, and never ending.
But religions do tell us to be good? because the religions and their books tell us we are all Evil from within, and that is because religions do not adhere to Dharmah in the first place.
What here you are assuming is that we need religions to be Dharmic (righteousness) - And this is where the equivocation of Dharmah & Religions does not make sense, because one can be a Dharmic person without any religions or any holy books or belief in the afterlife or heaven, therefore religion does not have anything to do with Dharmah.
Atheist can be Dharmic, but can they be religious?
Mate, come on. You use Christian ideas of heaven and God, you have said that you learn about religions from their texts (this is specifically a Abrahamic concept of learning about religion from holy books of God), you continuously espouse christian metaphysical/theological ideas (In this thread at least), you claim no allegiance to Hinduism at all. You in this sentence alone are showing your Christian ideas of "Coming from Heaven", Sent from Heaven", so please recognize that the reason Christianity has been even mentioned in this thread is you, not me. And who is fighting Christianity? if i don't just plainly agree to your assumptions is this fighting?, if i don't agree to your interpretation of Hindu ideas is this Fighting?, if I say things are not the same is this fighting?
Why the victim-hood?
I am not talking about the language but the presumptions about the meaning and interpretation of these words. Christianity has its theology of Oneness of GOD, Hindus have the Advaita of Brahman. Not only is the language different but the entire metaphysics or theology or the entire Sidhanta is different. Plus coincidences do not mean the truth claims are the same.
No, this is not hat i mean, neither is this the reason i gave. What you are doing is Just replacing the words from English to Sanskrit, without realizing that they do not have the same meaning.
And yet you are doing just that. Trying to fit Hinduism by appropriating Sanskrit words into some new age Christian theology.
Where have you been during this conversation?
See right here, what your saying is not the Hindu view, you are denying Hindus the Sanatana aspect of Dharmah, Why?
So your worst then those who believe in Hell as somewhere to go, you say we (Advaitin/Dvaitin/Hindus) are almost there. I don't fear this threat of your mate, this hole thread shows that all you are looking for is Souls, not Discussion.
If they are totally different concepts, Why the would you use a word that is generic?
You are confusing, above you say that Brahman and God are different concepts, Then you say that people experiance Brahman in Heaven?????????????????, Do you see the logic????
I did not say that you speak from God, I said you equate Brahman with the Abrahamic concept of God.
Dhanyavad
Namaste Satyamavejayanti-Ji
There are aspects of the idea that everything is created by God, and if you're one with God in consciousness, then you're part of the divine, yet it doesn't make you God.
Now if you want to apply your Christian ideology or Hindu that is fine; yet isn't what I'm talking about, and thus many Hindus do accept these terms.
There are multiple religions globally with the same eschatology, not only Christian, and i was speaking from all.
Since Christians are Anti-Christ's teachings in my understanding, and considering that is often my main point online, my whole site is about ending Christianity; you've been making up a strawman to argue with.
Religions try to quantify these things into a path for everyone, which to me sometimes causes adharma.
Fair enough I've spent years trying to reach Christians, thus I might've used terminology, that isn't specifically Hindu...Yet have quickly clarified each time, the overall meaning that was originally meant.
Multiple eschatologies all have someone who is sent or comes from Heaven just before the end of the age, including Hinduism with Kalki....
It is just being pedantic to argue over the word usage, and not the concepts being discussed.
Yet it originally had nothing to do with Christianity; it was specifically about the things i was told to do by God.
Peace
Dharma stems from Heaven, and it is the way of Heaven.
Because the right way only exists as Brahman does, the reality without Brahman wouldn't have Dharma, it would just be chaos.
Maya is a realm of delusional people...It is a place between Heaven and Hell in multiple cultures globally; mortals don't get to be immortal, unless they're special.
There are aspects of the idea that everything is created by God, and if you're one with God in consciousness, then you're part of the divine, yet it doesn't make you God.
And i was saying i think the Abrahamic concept of God is nonsense in many aspects; I'm speaking from all religions globally, a NDE, fulfilling prophecy, being spoken to straight through the walls of reality, etc.
Because the term God applies to anyone's concept of God, it isn't specifically Abrahamic; if i was using that deity, I'd use its names YHVH or EL maybe.... Yet God is a universal term.
Because I'm speaking from first hand experience, in Heaven which is a place of pure consciousness (nothing to do with your Abrahamic concepts); this is just what happens from my experience.
From my own NDE Heaven was called Oneness, the essence of this is the Dharma...
Now if you want to apply your Christian ideology or Hindu that is fine; yet isn't what I'm talking about, and thus many Hindus do accept these terms.
Rather than listen to what I'm saying, you're translating my words into Abrahamic concepts, and thus misapplying them repeatedly.
There are multiple religions globally with the same eschatology, not only Christian, and i was speaking from all.
Since Christians are Anti-Christ's teachings in my understanding, and considering that is often my main point online, my whole site is about ending Christianity; you've been making up a strawman to argue with.
You're just not getting what i keep saying, dharma is the right way, the righteous way, the logical way, etc....
Religions try to quantify these things into a path for everyone, which to me sometimes causes adharma.
Since i think Christianity is evil, that shows how little you understand.
I've learned what people think from reading their religions; i personally have remembered Heaven since birth, had a NDE, so most of my knowledge comes from first hand experience....
Fair enough I've spent years trying to reach Christians, thus I might've used terminology, that isn't specifically Hindu...Yet have quickly clarified each time, the overall meaning that was originally meant.
They're terms from multiple different religions around the world, they're not specifically Christian...
Multiple eschatologies all have someone who is sent or comes from Heaven just before the end of the age, including Hinduism with Kalki....
It is just being pedantic to argue over the word usage, and not the concepts being discussed.
Because i dislike Christianity, and due to having the knowledge been correcting everyone's mistakes in the thread....
Yet it originally had nothing to do with Christianity; it was specifically about the things i was told to do by God.
Peace
Kelly of the Phoenix
Well-Known Member
I just think it's cool that you and I got similar heads' up from the divine reality.
The bible as a whole is incredibly inconsistent.
Oneness doesn't have to mean everyone's the same, though. We can all be part of a greater whole while still being, well, "parts". I think the primary problem of promoting Oneness (which is similar to what I believe) is that in practice it tends to ignore differences. Those differences need not keep us from Oneness. We could not be human if we were only made up of one type of cell. No, not even all of our cells necessary for our survival are even OURS. We live also thanks to beneficial flora like bacteria and such. If we strive too hard to remove nonhuman flora from our bodies, we can get sick and/or die. We must accept that differences are needed to promote a greater good.
No insult intended to wizanda, but he thinks he is sent from heaven as something like an avatar or whatever. I feel similarly about myself, though I am also fine with the idea that no one was "sent" so much as humanity is evolving. Every generation has its "cool people" destined for changing something for the better. After we die the next class will take over. We should never let our destinies over-inflate our sense of self.
I believe that if someone has the Truth, they don't need a marketing department.
But what they're saying is that since all is Brahma, it is impossible to SEND someone out, as all is Brahma ANYWAY. If I have a large bonfire and transfer one flame from one point to another in the bonfire, have I changed anything about the fire itself?
We are not our religions, though. We are we. I come from Christianity. There's a whole lot of sinning in the bible that the bible actually encourages, but I don't do much of that stuff because I am ME, not a character in the book. Characters in a book must do what the author(s) demand(s).
But if there is no difference between the physical and metaphysical, there is nowhere for them to go. I can go from my kitchen to the bathroom and still be in the same house. Reality is the house and cannot be left (assuming your house has nothing outside of it).
IMHO also the most irrelevant theology. Life is flux. Life goes on. Life will outlive US. Life is more like an open game instead of a linear one with a "final stage". You, and others, want to find the princess but she will always be in another castle than the one you're in.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Well as far as i know, i chose to come back, and was sent by God....: You are not God himself. Vishnu at least for Vaishnavas is the Supreme God, Brahman.
So either way what i asked about me in the OP, can fit with Hindu text; just not your beliefs.: No, it does not. Even non-Vaishnavas believe that nobody orders Vishnu.
Dharma is the essence of all righteous logic in reality; you could sort of say it is like the Dao....: Yes, it is common to all. Hindus think even non-Hindus should also follow their dharma. Apart from the common factors Dharma also depends on other things. For example, the dharma of a father will be different from the dharma of the son or daughter.
Thus on being in Heaven, you have to follow Dharma; Dharma stems from there, and without it, we just have chaos.: Not all Hindus believe in oneness. Those who believe in separateness of Humans and God are known as 'dvaitists' in contrast to 'advaitists'. Advaitists do believe in oneness to the extent that they may refuse to acknowledge existence of God.
Dharma was one from the offset of creation, the religions came ages after, thus they miss the point by being divided.: Dharma came with human society. Yes, advaitists think that dvaitists are missing the point. But this is Hinduism and there is freedom of personal belief. Dvaitists think that advaitists are missing the point.
Was explaining what sat-chit-ananda is from experience of being in Heaven, and how some of the ways you're using it don't make sense.: Perhaps it does not make sense to you, but it does to Satyam.
Normally in a debate, we try and establish each persons understanding of a words context, so that we can understand each other....: Perhaps he understands your point but does not agree.
Buddhist use the term Dharma to mean their belief system...: You are not correct here. In all Indian religions, dharma is the right action. It has nothing to do with religious beliefs.
You do realize that is a very unique view, as most people use the term bad karma.: No. Other Hindus will accept it as difference of opinion. This is because you have not understood Hinduism.
Brahman is the CPU; we're in the Matrix/Maya.: This view is not accepted by all Hindus.
The idea that some people think they're God, in a place near Hell is amusing.: Meaning not clear to me
Avatars are messengers sent by Brahman within the Matrix.: You are talking about Christianity, Islam, Mormonism, Bahai, Ahmadiyyas, - but definitely not Hinduism.
If we listen, we can all hear Brahman....: Some people hear other things. Again, please note that you are talking about Hinduism which has a thousand melodies.
We're in matter; Brahman is in pure consciousness...: I think consciousness disappears on death.
We by being pure Dharmic consciousness, can be one in consciousness; yet we can not physically come close to Brahman until we leave matter.: Completely wrong. I AM BRAHMAN (Aham Brahmasmi).
Some people believe they end the cycle of rebirth, and will become pure consciousness again with Brahman.: There is no cycle of birth. We are a one-time phenomenon.
I've got that point, yet since I'm speaking from being sent, an NDE, being asked to do what is in the OP, and first hand experience; the reason the Abrahamic beliefs even got brought up, is because of lack of understanding that all is One to begin with.: NDE is just like a dream. It is because of accumulation of Carbon-di-oxide in Brain. Hallucination.
Wizanda, unless you abandon your Christian and other prejudices, you are never going to understand Hinduism. One who says that my view is correct and the views held by other people are wrong can never understand Hinduism. Regards.
So either way what i asked about me in the OP, can fit with Hindu text; just not your beliefs.: No, it does not. Even non-Vaishnavas believe that nobody orders Vishnu.
Dharma is the essence of all righteous logic in reality; you could sort of say it is like the Dao....: Yes, it is common to all. Hindus think even non-Hindus should also follow their dharma. Apart from the common factors Dharma also depends on other things. For example, the dharma of a father will be different from the dharma of the son or daughter.
Thus on being in Heaven, you have to follow Dharma; Dharma stems from there, and without it, we just have chaos.: Not all Hindus believe in oneness. Those who believe in separateness of Humans and God are known as 'dvaitists' in contrast to 'advaitists'. Advaitists do believe in oneness to the extent that they may refuse to acknowledge existence of God.
Dharma was one from the offset of creation, the religions came ages after, thus they miss the point by being divided.: Dharma came with human society. Yes, advaitists think that dvaitists are missing the point. But this is Hinduism and there is freedom of personal belief. Dvaitists think that advaitists are missing the point.
Was explaining what sat-chit-ananda is from experience of being in Heaven, and how some of the ways you're using it don't make sense.: Perhaps it does not make sense to you, but it does to Satyam.
Normally in a debate, we try and establish each persons understanding of a words context, so that we can understand each other....: Perhaps he understands your point but does not agree.
Buddhist use the term Dharma to mean their belief system...: You are not correct here. In all Indian religions, dharma is the right action. It has nothing to do with religious beliefs.
You do realize that is a very unique view, as most people use the term bad karma.: No. Other Hindus will accept it as difference of opinion. This is because you have not understood Hinduism.
Brahman is the CPU; we're in the Matrix/Maya.: This view is not accepted by all Hindus.
The idea that some people think they're God, in a place near Hell is amusing.: Meaning not clear to me
Avatars are messengers sent by Brahman within the Matrix.: You are talking about Christianity, Islam, Mormonism, Bahai, Ahmadiyyas, - but definitely not Hinduism.
If we listen, we can all hear Brahman....: Some people hear other things. Again, please note that you are talking about Hinduism which has a thousand melodies.
We're in matter; Brahman is in pure consciousness...: I think consciousness disappears on death.
We by being pure Dharmic consciousness, can be one in consciousness; yet we can not physically come close to Brahman until we leave matter.: Completely wrong. I AM BRAHMAN (Aham Brahmasmi).
Some people believe they end the cycle of rebirth, and will become pure consciousness again with Brahman.: There is no cycle of birth. We are a one-time phenomenon.
I've got that point, yet since I'm speaking from being sent, an NDE, being asked to do what is in the OP, and first hand experience; the reason the Abrahamic beliefs even got brought up, is because of lack of understanding that all is One to begin with.: NDE is just like a dream. It is because of accumulation of Carbon-di-oxide in Brain. Hallucination.
Wizanda, unless you abandon your Christian and other prejudices, you are never going to understand Hinduism. One who says that my view is correct and the views held by other people are wrong can never understand Hinduism. Regards.
Last edited:
Namaste Aupmanyav-Ji,
Yet speaking from first hand experience of being an avatar (which is the word I'd used about myself as a 4/5 year old, with my name Zanda being sacred as well), then can only present the information as I'm aware of it.
Though if you read through, i generally don't go around saying, 'you are wrong'; instead I'm always trying to show people the reasoning, and logic behind another view (just without letting them know my credentials).
Namaste Kelly of the Phoenix-Ji,
As you will know if you search your own heart to question Yeshua Vs Paul, its clear only one is right; yet people don't, they just follow like blind sheeple.
Which is where defining Brahman as the CPU, and us in the Matrix, matches better with Hindu texts; the idea that Brahman is in pure consciousness, beyond this realm, yet also part of it by manifesting the structure we see within it.
Unless of course we choose to be separate to books, and religious ideals; which is a possibility, yet doesn't mean you're following that religion according to most.
Thank you for trying to clarify Hinduism, and admittingly I've lost track of what i originally asked, and started debating my own ideas into it.... So appreciate your diplomatic input.
It's interesting that Christians do the same thing, and make jesus into God returning; whereas personally can't accept that ideology, yet do get where it comes from in both beliefs.
Thank you, it appears i might need to define what i mean by Oneness in a thread to show people, before we start a dialogue; as that is only a very limited application applied to it within this thread, which explains where we're not seeing eye to eye.
Two of my poems questioning it - Earth’s Dynamics & Doing Time
I can understand the Hindu view, and how they've arrived at their ideas from the text, and traditions...
Yet speaking from first hand experience of being an avatar (which is the word I'd used about myself as a 4/5 year old, with my name Zanda being sacred as well), then can only present the information as I'm aware of it.
Though if you read through, i generally don't go around saying, 'you are wrong'; instead I'm always trying to show people the reasoning, and logic behind another view (just without letting them know my credentials).
Namaste Kelly of the Phoenix-Ji,
True; yet as you're aware of Pauline ideology messing everything up, that was part of what i was referring to...
As you will know if you search your own heart to question Yeshua Vs Paul, its clear only one is right; yet people don't, they just follow like blind sheeple.
What were you told, and what details, as all clarification helps; which is why made this thread to seek more understanding.
Agreed in your summary of Oneness, and you're right; yet not all differences are beneficial to the whole, and i fear that the world has been misguided purposefully, to distinguish who'd go the wrong way on purpose.
It is an interesting metaphor, and would be right in that context; yet find it slightly more complex...
Which is where defining Brahman as the CPU, and us in the Matrix, matches better with Hindu texts; the idea that Brahman is in pure consciousness, beyond this realm, yet also part of it by manifesting the structure we see within it.
If the books tell us to accept something evil as good, and good as evil, then we're what the books produce....
Unless of course we choose to be separate to books, and religious ideals; which is a possibility, yet doesn't mean you're following that religion according to most.
Now understandably not all schools of Hinduism accept a Heaven; yet clearly there are texts to substantiate the ideas that there are separate realms, it is just peoples perceptions that differ.
I believe in a circle, we're just returning to the beginning again; where some of us have stayed within Brahman's orders, and some have been misled so far, that they can no longer be in the Matrix.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Wizanda, I said 'unless you abandon the prejudices' because the Eastern religions and philosophy are completely different from the Abrahamic format. Jesus was sent by his father, was he not? The Ghost breathing in, the anointed son, .., etc. Sure, you are an avatara, since for me all things are Brahman. As I have said many times in the forum, even Hitler, Pol Pot and Caliph Ibrahim, too were/is none other. Yes, we try to make others understand our views, but some may not understand and others may differ. It is their right.I do not believe in heaven or hell. And how can Brahman have an order when it itself is all that exists? I am not a poetry person and whatever is more than ten lines generally dissuades me. But I note that other people have liked your poems. They must be good.
Last edited:
Though debating everyone over the Abrahamic format as I've spent years studying it, was studying Taoism first, then Krishna consciousness, so aware of the different ideologies.
Indeed it is their right to go which ever way they wish; just I've been sent to inform everyone we're coming to a close of that, and only those who are going the right way will remain....
Though as saying I'm getting ahead of myself, by dictating what will happen in a thread asking for clarification of other people's understanding.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Now you are sounding like an Abrahamic prophet warning of impending doom. That is alien to Hinduism. Personally, I find it very amusing. They all did it. Even Jesus does that.
Last edited:
On the one hand been asked to show how the religions interlink; yet not been asked to save anyone....
There isn't a saviour, even from a true understanding of the Bible, it is up to the individual's character, and our works for us to save ourselves.
I'm not proselyting; i was asking a question on all religious eschatology, and if it fitted within a Hindu understanding...
Which even though the text might suggest it does, the people are in disagreement, just the same as all the other religions.
We're not in a Dir anymore, this is the debate section.
True, and apologize for it; yet clearly with mankind's current rate of desecration, we've got less than 20 years left before the world's biosphere goes into turmoil.
Kalki comes at a time of great troubles, where the world is in a state of adharma, etc.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
You see, Wizanda, it is just not possible in Hinduism to have an agreement (on anything whatsoever). That, sort of, defines Hinduism. Kalki is not going to be a prophet. He will be an avatara of Lord Vishnu. But he is going to take a long long time to come - 426,000 years and not earlier than that. Till that time we have to manage on our own.