GODLIKE?

[n9newunsixx5150]

Is this mayavadi philosophy hinduism, a different religion altogether, or just a departure of traditional himduism and more related to Buddhist thought?

The word hindu is not found anywhere in the Vedic literatures, nor any of the affiliated literatures. There is a river named "Sind", but the Muslims pronounced it "Hind". So they called India, "Hindustan" and they called the Indians, "Hindus". But yeah, the mayavadi sect claimed to follow the Vedas. It is somewhat related to buddhist philosophy in that it is a form of impersonalism. But Buddhism is actually sunyavadi. Sunyavadi means that they are trying to make everything zero, or void. Whereas, in the mayavadi philosophy they are trying to make everything one. I follow the philosophy of "Acintya bheda bheda tattva", which means, "Inconceivably one and many/different". God is one and many. For example, there is a distinction between God and His energies. But at the same time, dwelling on the absolute platform, He and His energies are non-different from each other. Like fire and heat. Fire is different from heat, but there is no meaning to fire without heat and there is no meaning to heat without some source of fire. One and different.

God can judge us on earth and after the ressurection. The ressurection is just the ultimate Judgement.

I understand this. What I am proposing is that this ultimate judgement is only for those still residing on earth. I cannot accept this "sleep" after death. I say, we are judged upon death. Those who are still here at the time of this ultimate judgement are to be judged, while some others may have already been eligible to enter heaven.

We will be alive. Well some of us. There are 2 ressurections. Revelations chapter 20-22 I believe hold most of the story. Pretty short read. First Satan will be captured and Jesus will reing on earth for 1000 years. These thousand years will be prosperous and those ressurected at this time will be blessed. Then Satan will be let out and the final war will come. Men will always be on earth. That's the reason the earth was created. Men can go to heaven but it's not where were supposed to be.

"men" is just the bodies. The soul is what is of spiritual concern. A soul is a soul is a soul. There is no real difference between a "human" soul and an "angel" soul. The only real distinction that should be made is between God and all other living entities. Also, if we aren't supposed to be in heaven, then we won't go.

God destroys hell after the last battle. Those who are sent to hell will be there. How long? I'm not sure. But I'm guessing for a while. As for Non-existance you're right it's no cares, no worries, no anxieties but I'd still rather strive to go to "Heaven."

But our residing in Heaven does not last forever, according to your philosophy. Why postpone the inevitable? I think we should strive to "live" in our essence. So if it is essentially true that nonexistence is our nature, then why keep deluding ourselves with nonsense ideas of heaven? The prospect of salvation is no more noble than the prospect of sex with a hot date. It is, to some degree, a fleeting satisfaction. That is exactly what is being taught against. The Bible speaks of gaining the whole world but losing one's soul. The stress here is that all these worldly things are fleeting. Therefore, their mention of the soul is opposite in nature to the worldly things/pleasures. If it wasn't then there would be an obvious hypocrisy in the philosophy.

The fire is eternal. The fire isn't destroyed hell is. Hell is a placed of punishment but a place of punishment doesn't serve a purpose since there will be no one to punish. The fire I believe is a manifestation of God. Also The angels and the devil are not eternal, they serve(d) God, why would an eternal being have to serve any one?

Ok, does the fire reside in hell? If so, then when hell is destroyed, how is it that the fire remains? And what is the difference between hell, the place, and hell, the fire? Everything is a manifestation of God. It is just that God has two energies, His internal and His external. Both energies exist eternally with God, but the material (external) energy is cycling through being manifest and unmanifest. So, then this implies that hell (being that it is destroyed) is of the material energy.

You ask, "why would an eternal being have to serve any one?"

What if they were eternally in service to others? What if they could not give up this capacity? Being that they are eternally subordinate to God and fully dependent on Him, that would constitute their necessity for serving God.

This is what I follow: Sanatana Dharma.
That means the eternal capacity to render service. Because no matter what we are doing we are serving something external to ourselves. We may serve friends, family, strangers, pets. When we eat we are serving the sense capacity of the tongue as well as the body's necessity for nourishment. We think we are serving self, but that is an illusion. Self and the material senses are two completely different things. therefore, Sanatana Dharma is used to first understand to whom we are eternally related. And then, since we cannot cease in our service, to serve God, the one we are eternally related to.

The purpose is to get back with God. Go back home. Learn our lesson.

I completely agree.

But here you bring up a good point. You say, "to get **back** with God", "Go **back** home".
This constitutes that we were once with God. Not that we were merged with God, but that we were, in our individual capacities, with God.

 

[MEXCOM]

The word hindu is not found anywhere in the Vedic literatures, nor any of the affiliated literatures. There is a river named "Sind", but the Muslims pronounced it "Hind". So they called India, "Hindustan" and they called the Indians, "Hindus". But yeah, the mayavadi sect claimed to follow the Vedas. It is somewhat related to buddhist philosophy in that it is a form of impersonalism. But Buddhism is actually sunyavadi. Sunyavadi means that they are trying to make everything zero, or void. Whereas, in the mayavadi philosophy they are trying to make everything one. I follow the philosophy of "Acintya bheda bheda tattva", which means, "Inconceivably one and many/different". God is one and many. For example, there is a distinction between God and His energies. But at the same time, dwelling on the absolute platform, He and His energies are non-different from each other. Like fire and heat. Fire is different from heat, but there is no meaning to fire without heat and there is no meaning to heat without some source of fire. One and different.

Thanks for the info. One question I believe it's an Indian Story, not sure if you know of it, but it's about the God's fighting some type of Aliens from Space. It's supposedly some HUGE epic story would you happen to know the name as I've always wanted to read it.

I understand this. What I am proposing is that this ultimate judgement is only for those still residing on earth. I cannot accept this "sleep" after death. I say, we are judged upon death. Those who are still here at the time of this ultimate judgement are to be judged, while some others may have already been eligible to enter heaven.

So you're saying those who aren't here for the ultimate judgement have already been judged and are in heaven or it's whatever spirtitual life after death equivalent people choose to call it?

"men" is just the bodies. The soul is what is of spiritual concern. A soul is a soul is a soul. There is no real difference between a "human" soul and an "angel" soul. The only real distinction that should be made is between God and all other living entities. Also, if we aren't supposed to be in heaven, then we won't go.

The thing is I'm not sure if Angels have a soul. As they may or may not have been created differently. About not going to heaven we can if God let's us in although that's not our given home. It's not so much we can't go as it's not our home.

But our residing in Heaven does not last forever, according to your philosophy. Why postpone the inevitable? I think we should strive to "live" in our essence. So if it is essentially true that nonexistence is our nature, then why keep deluding ourselves with nonsense ideas of heaven? The prospect of salvation is no more noble than the prospect of sex with a hot date. It is, to some degree, a fleeting satisfaction. That is exactly what is being taught against. The Bible speaks of gaining the whole world but losing one's soul. The stress here is that all these worldly things are fleeting. Therefore, their mention of the soul is opposite in nature to the worldly things/pleasures. If it wasn't then there would be an obvious hypocrisy in the philosophy.

I meant paradise when I said "heaven." Sorry if there was any confusion. Where exactly did you get that our residin in Heaven doesn't last for ever? I'd like to see if I can check what ever passage that was with the original Hebrew or greek if I can. Why would Salvation not be noble? It takes a noble person to be saved. The soul is save through salvation.

Ok, does the fire reside in hell? If so, then when hell is destroyed, how is it that the fire remains? And what is the difference between hell, the place, and hell, the fire? Everything is a manifestation of God. It is just that God has two energies, His internal and His external. Both energies exist eternally with God, but the material (external) energy is cycling through being manifest and unmanifest. So, then this implies that hell (being that it is destroyed) is of the material energy.

I'm not sure where the lake of fire is although I believe it is not in Hell since one is to be destroyed and the other isn't. I cant add more speculation then that.

You ask, "why would an eternal being have to serve any one?"

What if they were eternally in service to others? What if they could not give up this capacity? Being that they are eternally subordinate to God and fully dependent on Him, that would constitute their necessity for serving God.

Well if they were Fully and eternally dependant on God I don't see how it would be possible for Lucifer to rebel.

This is what I follow: Sanatana Dharma.
That means the eternal capacity to render service. Because no matter what we are doing we are serving something external to ourselves. We may serve friends, family, strangers, pets. When we eat we are serving the sense capacity of the tongue as well as the body's necessity for nourishment. We think we are serving self, but that is an illusion. Self and the material senses are two completely different things. therefore, Sanatana Dharma is used to first understand to whom we are eternally related. And then, since we cannot cease in our service, to serve God, the one we are eternally related to.




I completely agree.

But here you bring up a good point. You say, "to get **back** with God", "Go **back** home".
This constitutes that we were once with God. Not that we were merged with God, but that we were, in our individual capacities, with God.

1) If things are an illusion why are we here? Who created this illusion and what for? How do we escape this illusion? It sounds very Buddhist to me.
2)So do you believe we were merged with God or that we were with God in our individual capacities because it sound like you agree with the latter.

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

Thanks for the info. One question I believe it's an Indian Story, not sure if you know of it, but it's about the God's fighting some type of Aliens from Space. It's supposedly some HUGE epic story would you happen to know the name as I've always wanted to read it.

I've never heard of this. But there are many many stories I have yet to get into. Also, is it "Indian" from India, or "indian" as in Native American?

So you're saying those who aren't here for the ultimate judgement have already been judged and are in heaven or it's whatever spirtitual life after death equivalent people choose to call it?

Not all who have died are in the spiritual world. But my point is that we are judged all the time. Not that judgement stops and we "sleep" for a while. This seems inconsistent to me. We may die and be judged to remain under the material energy. Others may die and actually attain the spiritual world.
By the way, in the Vedas it explains that at the end of this age the earth will be burnt up with fire. Doesn't it say that in the Bible as well?

The thing is I'm not sure if Angels have a soul. As they may or may not have been created differently. About not going to heaven we can if God let's us in although that's not our given home. It's not so much we can't go as it's not our home.

"Soul" just means "living entity".

First you say, "The purpose is to get back with God. Go back home. Learn our lesson."

Now you say, "About not going to heaven we can if God let's us in although that's not our given home. It's not so much we can't go as it's not our home."

So it it our home or not?

I meant paradise when I said "heaven." Sorry if there was any confusion. Where exactly did you get that our residin in Heaven doesn't last for ever? I'd like to see if I can check what ever passage that was with the original Hebrew or greek if I can. Why would Salvation not be noble? It takes a noble person to be saved. The soul is save through salvation.

First you say, "Men can go to heaven but it's not where were supposed to be." And also, "Heaven is the home of God and angels."
But now you are implying that we do reside in Heaven forever. To reside somewhere forever means that we are eternal. If we are not eternal then there is no chance of residing anywhere *forever*.

I said salvation would not be noble under the circumstances that it was a fleeting satisfaction similar to these material pleasures. In other words, if salvation (going to the spiritual world) was only temporary, then how is it essentially any different than living in this material world seeking material pleasure? And, why then is it stressed in both the Bible and the Vedas that we should give up material pleasures and seek our spiritual position in relation to God?

I'm not sure where the lake of fire is although I believe it is not in Hell since one is to be destroyed and the other isn't. I cant add more speculation then that.

Ok. Can you provide me passages that explain hell and the lake of fire being different from each other?

Well if they were Fully and eternally dependant on God I don't see how it would be possible for Lucifer to rebel.

So you are saying that Lucifer is not dependent on God?

Everyone is dependent on God. God is the only one who is independent. God requires nothing for His sustenance. But even Lucifer requires things to sustain himself. Ultimately, he gets these things from God. An atheist can rebel God, but they do not realize that everything they obtain to sustain their existence is given by God. Rebellious to God doesn't mean they have actually become free of God, it just means that they have chosen to ignore God.

1) If things are an illusion why are we here? Who created this illusion and what for? How do we escape this illusion? It sounds very Buddhist to me.

The material energy's forms are an illusion in comparison to the spiritual energy. We are here because we were put here. We were put here because at some point in our existence we desired to lord over the material nature. We wanted to be God. God created this material universe, but He did so by our desires. Still, our eternal position is dependent on God. We have disregarded God, thinking that we can be all-in-all ourselves. That thought is our illusion. That illusion comes under identification with the material energy. We are thinking ourselves to be both creators and enjoyers of all we survey. We "escape", or transcend this illusion by surrendering to God. This philosophy follows in the Bible, whether or not the Bible explains it to this degree. Buddhism wants to make everything void. What I am advocating is that beyond these temporal material forms there is another nature, a superior nature where the forms do not come into being, dwindle and then dissolute. But that they are eternally existing. So it is not that these forms themselves are false, but they are "mirages" of the actual forms. We must give up seeking worldly things ans start seeking God. That is the conclusion.

2)So do you believe we were merged with God or that we were with God in our individual capacities because it sound like you agree with the latter.

We are constitutionally individuals. It is the mayavadi or sunyavadi that believe this "merged" state to be liberation. That state of being merged with the absolute does have a position in actual fact, according to the Vedas. But, it is because we are constitutionally individuals that we will eventually fall back into the material world from that merged position. And our capacity to serve God constitutes us as individuals. The mayavadi would say that the act of serving God ultimately leads to merging with Him. But this is a material conception because they are thinking that the spiritual/absolute existence must be one without variegatedness. It is only from their lack of perception that they think this. The fact is that the spiritual realm is filled with variegated forms just as we have here in the material world. We are individuals, God is an individual. That is the eternal constitution. If everything was one without variegatedness, then how does one explain how the "One" divided amongst itself and fell into ignorance?? This is the biggest question that mayavadi's cannot answer. If God is the ONE and we are all one with Him indistinctly, then how was it that God divided into many parts and fell into ignorance? Or from a mathematical viewpoint, how does one divide infinity? It is impossible. So mayavadi philosophers are really only speculating.

 

[MEXCOM]

I've never heard of this. But there are many many stories I have yet to get into. Also, is it "Indian" from India, or "indian" as in Native American?

Indian as from India. It's middle eastern/west asian which ever term you prefer.

Not all who have died are in the spiritual world. But my point is that we are judged all the time. Not that judgement stops and we "sleep" for a while. This seems inconsistent to me. We may die and be judged to remain under the material energy. Others may die and actually attain the spiritual world.
By the way, in the Vedas it explains that at the end of this age the earth will be burnt up with fire. Doesn't it say that in the Bible as well?

Do you believe in Dharma and Karma? We are judged in life I agree. Sometimes we are tested or punished/rewarded that's why you hear som many people say "Thank God" or "Why do good things happen to bad people?" And yes the world will end in fire.

"Soul" just means "living entity".

First you say, "The purpose is to get back with God. Go back home. Learn our lesson."

Now you say, "About not going to heaven we can if God let's us in although that's not our given home. It's not so much we can't go as it's not our home."

So it it our home or not?

No heaven is not out home. But since Jesus is God we shall inhabit the earth with him.

First you say, "Men can go to heaven but it's not where were supposed to be." And also, "Heaven is the home of God and angels."
But now you are implying that we do reside in Heaven forever. To reside somewhere forever means that we are eternal. If we are not eternal then there is no chance of residing anywhere *forever*.

I said salvation would not be noble under the circumstances that it was a fleeting satisfaction similar to these material pleasures. In other words, if salvation (going to the spiritual world) was only temporary, then how is it essentially any different than living in this material world seeking material pleasure? And, why then is it stressed in both the Bible and the Vedas that we should give up material pleasures and seek our spiritual position in relation to God?

When humans go to heaven its usually for a purpose. It's called ascension (sp?). We go there but paradise (on earth) is our "heaven."

Salvation is forever. Not eternal since we aren't but once we're saved we'll always be saved. Also we don't go to the spiritual world. The soul and body we have are equally important since the soul is saved and the body ressurected.

Ok. Can you provide me passages that explain hell and the lake of fire being different from each other?

Rev 20:13-14

So you are saying that Lucifer is not dependent on God?

Not at all. He just isn't eternally dependent on him.

Everyone is dependent on God. God is the only one who is independent. God requires nothing for His sustenance. But even Lucifer requires things to sustain himself. Ultimately, he gets these things from God. An atheist can rebel God, but they do not realize that everything they obtain to sustain their existence is given by God. Rebellious to God doesn't mean they have actually become free of God, it just means that they have chosen to ignore God.

Agreed.

The material energy's forms are an illusion in comparison to the spiritual energy. We are here because we were put here. We were put here because at some point in our existence we desired to lord over the material nature. We wanted to be God. God created this material universe, but He did so by our desires. Still, our eternal position is dependent on God. We have disregarded God, thinking that we can be all-in-all ourselves. That thought is our illusion. That illusion comes under identification with the material energy. We are thinking ourselves to be both creators and enjoyers of all we survey. We "escape", or transcend this illusion by surrendering to God. This philosophy follows in the Bible, whether or not the Bible explains it to this degree. Buddhism wants to make everything void. What I am advocating is that beyond these temporal material forms there is another nature, a superior nature where the forms do not come into being, dwindle and then dissolute. But that they are eternally existing. So it is not that these forms themselves are false, but they are "mirages" of the actual forms. We must give up seeking worldly things ans start seeking God. That is the conclusion.

Beautifully stated.

We are constitutionally individuals. It is the mayavadi or sunyavadi that believe this "merged" state to be liberation. That state of being merged with the absolute does have a position in actual fact, according to the Vedas. But, it is because we are constitutionally individuals that we will eventually fall back into the material world from that merged position. And our capacity to serve God constitutes us as individuals. The mayavadi would say that the act of serving God ultimately leads to merging with Him. But this is a material conception because they are thinking that the spiritual/absolute existence must be one without variegatedness. It is only from their lack of perception that they think this. The fact is that the spiritual realm is filled with variegated forms just as we have here in the material world. We are individuals, God is an individual. That is the eternal constitution. If everything was one without variegatedness, then how does one explain how the "One" divided amongst itself and fell into ignorance?? This is the biggest question that mayavadi's cannot answer. If God is the ONE and we are all one with Him indistinctly, then how was it that God divided into many parts and fell into ignorance? Or from a mathematical viewpoint, how does one divide infinity? It is impossible. So mayavadi philosophers are really only speculating.

I was thinking the same thing.

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

Indian as from India. It's middle eastern/west asian which ever term you prefer.

Thanks for the clarification. Some people say "indians" but are referring to Native Americans. Stupid Columbus!

Do you believe in Dharma and Karma? We are judged in life I agree. Sometimes we are tested or punished/rewarded that's why you hear som many people say "Thank God" or "Why do good things happen to bad people?" And yes the world will end in fire.

Dharma is "that which one cannot give up". Yes, I believe we have a nature that cannot be hindered. That nature is our capacity to render service. Karma is basically just cause and effect, action and reaction. Yes, I accept those things to be true. Karma is a "we reap what we sow" concept.

No heaven is not out home. But since Jesus is God we shall inhabit the earth with him.

I see.

When humans go to heaven its usually for a purpose. It's called ascension (sp?). We go there but paradise (on earth) is our "heaven."

In the Vedas it is explained that there are four yugas (ages): Satya Yuga, Treta Yuga, Dvapara Yuga and Kali Yuga. The Satya Yuga is the most spiritually enlightened age. The people of that age are very close to God. As the ages go from Satya to Treta, to Dvapara and to Kali, people gradually become degraded due to identification with the material energy. We are currently in the age of Kali, in which at the end, God will burn the earth with fire and re-establish it. But upon re-establishing the earth, begins another Satya Yuga. Over time that Satya Yuga again degrades to Treta, Dvarpara, etc. This is the cycle that has been going on forever. It is prescribed that we surrender to God, in that way we become eligible for transcending this cycle altogether. The cycle of ages goes on until it is time for the universe to become unmanifest again. The entities that are still not liberated merge into the Lord's impersonal effulgence for a time until the cycle restarts and universes are made manifest, thus beginning another Satya Yuga. Satya Yuga lasts 1,728,000 earth years. So I would say that paradise on earth lasts for that long. But practically all the humans living in the Satya Yuga attain liberation and enter into the spiritual world to associate personally with God. So, could it be perhaps that our going to heaven before coming back to the re-established earth means that we are saved for the next cycle of yugas with another chance at liberation? And also, that other sinful entities would instead be sent to the hellish existence?
This would mean that paradise on earth is not our final resting place. But that we have been saved in order to become fully and eternally liberated. Because, like I said, practically all the inhabitants of the Satya Yuga become liberated.

Salvation is forever. Not eternal since we aren't but once we're saved we'll always be saved. Also we don't go to the spiritual world. The soul and body we have are equally important since the soul is saved and the body ressurected.

What is the difference in "forever" and "eternal"?
To get saved means that we became lost. So therefore, becoming saved just means returning to our original position. The material body is not resurrected. It may be that the spiritual body is manifest, but the material body has rotted away.

Rev 20:13-14

I will look into this...

Not at all. He just isn't eternally dependent on him.

But you were stressing that if Lucifer were dependent on God at all, then how is it that he rebelled? How would Lucifer being eternally dependent on God constitute him not being able to rebel?
Whether Lucifer exists eternally or just for a time, how does him being dependent on God contradict his ability to be rebellious?

Beautifully stated.

I am surprised you agree with this. Because what I have stated constitutes that the living entities existed prior to the creation. That it was according to the desires of these pre-existing entities that God decided to create this universe. I didn't think this was a Biblical idea. I thought the Bible explained that God created because He desired companionship.

 

[n9newunsixx5150]

Ok...

I just read through Revelations chapters 20, 21 and some of 22. Very interesting...

The way it describes that no sun nor moon is needed, but that God is the light, is also explained in the Vedas:

BHAGAVAD-GITA​

CHAPTER 15​

TEXT 6​

na tad bhasayate suryo
na sasanko na pavakah
yad gatva na nivartante
tad dhama paramam mama​

SYNONYMS​

na--not; tat--that; bhasayate--illuminates; suryah--the sun; na--nor; sasankah--the moon; na--nor; pavakah--fire, electricity; yat--where; gatva--going; na--never; nivartante--comes back; tat dhama--that abode; paramam--supreme; mama--My.

TRANSLATION​

That abode of Mine is not illumined by the sun or moon, nor by electricity. One who reaches it never returns to this material world.


It is further explained elsewhere that the Vaikuntha (spiritual) planets are self-illuminating. And that this illumination is the effulgence of the Lord. Now, under this new information I have to conclude that this re-established earth is a spiritual place.



Regarding the difference between hell and the lake of fire... I see what you are saying. I guess people go to hades until it is time for them to be judged to see whether they will go to the lake of fire or to the spiritual world. Does this sound correct?

What though, is the relationship between hades and torments?