I want to ask my Hindu friends, why do they make idols when it is condemned in their own scriptures.
Please no attacks. This is just a question from Hindu “brothers” …
Here is the supportive evidence.
**Straight from Srimand Bhagvad Gita **
Unable to understand my imperishable, exalted and supreem state of being, the spiritually deficient regard me, the unmenifest as coming into existance. Bhagavad Gita Chapter 7: Knowledge of the ultimat truth Verse 24
“The ignorant believe that un-manifest Para Brahma (One God) incarnates or takes manifestations, because they do not completely understand My highest, immutable, incomparable, and transcendental existence.”
OR
“I am not menifest to everyone, being veiled by my illusionary potency in the external energy. The ignorant in this world cannot understand me, the unborn and imperishable” Bhagavad Gita Chapter 7: Knowledge of the ultimat truth Verse 25
I have already answered your question on idol worship in the thread “What has Hinduism given this world” in post #34.
You have asked the right question giving incorrect references to verses.
The verse 24 simply means that those who are spiritually deficient(atheists), regard Para Brahma (One God) as perishable and finite, which is not true.
The 25th verse(second translation) is the famous one, in which Lord Krishna shows his complete form with all the entire universe to Arjun, who is disturbed at the prospect of going to war against his own cousins.
So Krishna at this point says that Arjun is lucky to have “seen” his form as others in the battlefield, who are ignorant, cannot understand him (Krishna’s cousins constantly tried to murder him, thinking he was human and perishable).
He said others in the battlefield cant see any of his manifestations that is veiled in the illusion of external energy (Arjun’s cousins and brothers including Yudishthir were blinded by the light that came when Krishna showed his complete form to Arjun).
I suggest that you read a simple children’s version of the Mahabharata.
Also, read verse 30. You will know the concept of “government of universe” that I was talking about.
Do not alter your reply now. I am only gonna reply to your original post. If you have to say something say it in the next post after I post my reply. I appreciate it very much......
I have already answered your question on idol worship in the thread "What has Hinduism given this world" in post #34.
You have asked the right question giving incorrect references to verses.
The verse 24 simply means that those who are spiritually deficient(atheists), regard Para Brahma (One God) as perishable and finite, which is not true.
The 25th verse(second translation) is the famous one, in which Lord Krishna shows his complete form with all the entire universe to Arjun, who is disturbed at the prospect of going to war against his own cousins.
So Krishna at this point says that Arjun is lucky to have "seen" his form as others in the battlefield, who are ignorant, cannot understand him (Krishna's cousins constantly tried to murder him, thinking he was human and perishable).
He said others in the battlefield cant see any of his manifestations that is veiled in the illusion of external energy (Arjun's cousins and brothers including Yudishthir were blinded by the light that came when Krishna showed his complete form to Arjun).
I suggest that you read a simple children's version of the Mahabharata.
I have already answered your question on idol worship in the thread "What has Hinduism given this world" in post #34.
You have asked the right question giving incorrect references to verses.
Mr.
The question is correct and the reference is correct too. The website given to you is a Hindu website and there is official translation present in many many languages……
Let me show how you have played with the words or your interpretation is flawed…..
Chapter 7: In chapter seven Lord Krishna gives concrete knowledge of the absolute reality as well as the opulence of divinity. He describes His illusory energy in the material existence called Maya and declares how extremely difficult it is to surmount it. He also describes the four types of people attracted to divinity and the four types of people who are opposed to divinty. In conclusion He reveals that one in spiritual intelligence takes exclusive refuge of the Lord without reservation in devotional service. Thus this chapter is entitled: Knowledge of the Ultimate Truth.
Lets have a look at the verse 24 as provided by the website
Read the underlined sentence and then read your interpretation as underlined by me.
Point 1: This is Lord Krishna talking to Arjun, right? Point 2: The translation says that “the spiritually deficient regard me”. This does not mean “Atheists”. Ask me why? Because “Atheists” DO NOT believe in any gOD or God. So there is not question of Lord Krishna addressing to “Atheists”. Point 3: The next part of #24 says, “the unmenifest as coming into existence”. Now, who is the unmenifest???? It is according to Hindu mythology, PARA BRAHMA, one whom has nobody ever seen. The verse clearly means that that ONE God does not come into existence. I once again urge you to read the four types of people Lord Krishna has described WHO DO UNDERSTAND THE DIVINITY. Lord Krishna has then described the fours types who are “spiritually deficient can perceive The One Exalted as coming into existence……..
Point 4: You have written in your reply “Regard Brahma Para (One God) as perishable and finite”. Nowhere the verse # 24 mentions the “Perishable or finite” it simply talks about the “coming into existence” in other words, taking incarnations……
Now lets have a look at the verse #25.
Okay lets take the first translation out as you didn’t like it. May I go to the verse 26 in the same translation? Thank you….. Verse 26 says….
Please note the underlined sentence. “NO ONE KNOWS ME” Compare it with Verse #25 and its underlined sentence.
Point 1: May I raise an objection. Lord Krisna is well known in Hindu mythology as a “Shephard”, “a cowboy” and just a character of Hindu Epics. He is said to have 16,000 Gopi girlfriends. How come he is manifest to them? He is well known for stealing the clothes of the women taking bath at the streams who then plea Krishna to return their clothes and then Krishna asks then to come out of the stream naked one by one etc etc? How come Krishna is manifest to those Gopis…….. Who is the 3rd person seeing all this incident happening?
I can clearly see there is some thing wrong here ....
Lets first decide, who ans what is Krishna before even going further into the details of verse 25……
OK. When you take a break, refer to the correct translation of verse 25 :
I never manifest to the foolish and unintelligent.For them I am covered by my internal potency, and therefore they do not know I am unborn and infallible.
Chapter one introduces the scene, the setting, the circumstances and **the characters involved **determining the reasons for the Bhagavad-Gita’s revelation. The scene is the sacred plain of Kuruksetra. The setting is a battlefield. The circumstances is war. The main characters are the Supreme Lord Krishna and Prince Arjuna,witnessed by four million soldiers led by their respective military commanders. After naming the principal warriors on both sides, Arjunas growing dejection is described due to the fear of losing friends and relatives in the course of the impending war and the subsequent sins attached to such actions. Thus this chapter is entitled: Lamenting the Consequence of War.
Point 1: This means there were 4 million soldiers witnessing Lord Krishna and Prince Arjun…I see serious problems here bud, very serious problems. Any English speaker will adamantly disagree with your claim that Lord Krishna declared Arjun LUCKY and to be the only one to have seen him.
Point 2: Moreover, if Lord Krishna was only visible to Arjun, then why does the style of writting seems to be as if a 3rd person is watching all this??? In that case, Bhagwad geeta would have been written by Arjun in this following manner, " Then Lord Krishna asked/told me" Then I saw Lord Krishna…" It should have been written in second person gramatically…
Arey merey bhai, when Krishna shows Arjun his manifested form, encompassing all the galaxies and the universe (Para Brahma), all others are blinded by it. Only Arjun was fortunate to see it. Before that, the conversation was witnessed by all others.
That was exactly what verse 25 (which you posted) was all about.
I know that Indian channels have been banned in Pakistan, but if you watched Ramanand Sagar's Mahabharat serial quite some time back, you might have known. The graphics were a little shoddy, but for explanation purposes, they were sufficient.
Point 2 : The conversation is in entire first person by Krishna. Before anyone starts speaking, there is an announcement like "Lahore981 Uvacha", meaning that following verses are being said by "Lahore981".
Read today's Dawn editorial. Does Ayaz Amir say "I think....", "I guess..." or "I did this..." in every sentence ? He just comments and gives facts.
Lahore, its good you are reading Gita, Please finish it completely ..
You will atleast understand the theory of Karma clearly. Theory of Karma is one of the cornerstone of Hindu Religion and its belief in Rebirth.......
i've seen in many indian movies and have also heard that when a married woman becomes widow , she has to be burned alive with her husband?
i dont know if hindus still do it but why they used to do this for?
It started in medieval period when peaceful marauders for arabia iran afghan came to india they used to kill people and take their wives as slave/concubine as ordained so in order to save their honour in courts they used to keep burning fire and when the news of husband's death used to come women folks used to jump into burning fire.. so u see once again reason for this custom ae peaceful brothers............
and NO it doesn't hapen thankfully peaceaful marauders are busy fighting among themselves and are too weak to wreak loot and plunder misison in india
The question is correct and the reference is correct too.
No it is not.
[quote]
Let me show how you have played with the words or your interpretation is flawed…..
[/quote]
A Pakistani's "interpretation" of the Bhagvad Gita being unflawed ? This will be interesting.
**
[quote]
Chapter 7:
[/quote]
**
[quote]
In chapter seven Lord Krishna gives concrete knowledge of the absolute reality as well as the opulence of divinity. He describes His illusory energy in the material existence called Maya and declares how extremely difficult it is to surmount it. He also describes the four types of people attracted to divinity and the four types of people who are opposed to divinty. In conclusion He reveals that one in spiritual intelligence takes exclusive refuge of the Lord without reservation in devotional service. Thus this chapter is entitled: Knowledge of the Ultimate Truth.
[/quote]
[quote] Point 1: This is Lord Krishna talking to Arjun, right?
[/quote]
Yes.
[quote] Point 2: The translation says that “the spiritually deficient regard me”. This does not mean “Atheists”. Ask me why?
[/quote]
The first 3 types of "undivine" people i.e. the depraved, the foolish and the lower levels of humanity (those who are discriminatory by desires) as mentioned in the Bhagavad Gita, do not regard Para Brahma, but instead worship demigods (verses 15 and 20). Those demigods are part of the Para Brahma himself (remember ministers of government of the universe ?) (verses 21,22,23).
Now atleast these 3 types worship demigods and are allowed to do so by ParaBrahma, but the 4th type i.e. the Spiritually deficient kind, regard Him as coming into existence (the reference here is unmistakably to the evil Kauravas i.e. the cousins of Arjun and the Pandavs. They knew of Krishna's unhuman-like feats, knew he represented a higher power, but still wanted to destroy that power. The word Duryodhan used for him was "Mayavi" or a sorcerer).
[quote] Point 3: The next part of #24 says, “the unmenifest as coming into existence”. Now, who is the unmenifest???? It is according to Hindu mythology, PARA BRAHMA, one whom has nobody ever seen. The verse clearly means that that ONE God does not come into existence.
[/quote]
The Para Brahma doesnt come into existence in a perishable format like a human-being. The man in question was Lord Krishna, one of the 10 avatars of Lord Vishnu (remember verse 6 ?). In this human-form, he showed Arjun a glimpse of himself as Para Brahma.
Lord Krishna was killed 36 years later after that battle, when a hunter mistook him for a deer. Did Para Brahma get killed with him ? No. And never will be.
[quote] Point 4: You have written in your reply “Regard Brahma Para (One God) as perishable and finite”. Nowhere the verse # 24 mentions the “Perishable or finite” it simply talks about the “coming into existence” in other words, taking incarnations……
[/quote]
"As coming into existence" means becoming one like them and hence perishable and finite. O Lahore981 the perishable, Para Brahma is the Universe itself, which is imperishable, the supreme external energy. (verses 1 to 14).
[quote] Point 1: May I raise an objection. Lord Krisna is well known in Hindu mythology as a “Shephard”, “a cowboy” and just a character of Hindu Epics. How come Krishna is manifest to those Gopis…….. Who is the 3rd person seeing all this incident happening?
[/quote]
Arey merey bhai, the person manifested as Para Brahma to Arjun on the battlefield of Kurukshetra was Para Brahma and no one else. Krishna was Arjun's humble charioteer and he being the incarnation of Lord Vishnu, shed his human-like image and showed him his supreme form (the others in the field were blinded for that time).
Get Ramanand's CD of the serial Mahabharat from the piracy market of Lahore will you ?
Lord Krishna was one of the 10 finite and perishable incarnations of Lord Vishnu himself. Gautam Buddha was the 9th one. He was born as a human, grew up, ate, slept, fought just like other Kshatriyas (Pandavs and Kauravs) did. He also performed super-human acts that his distractors did not understand (much like Jesus Christ). The 10th avatar is Kalki Avatar, who is yet to come (it was not Mohammad as Zakir Naik claims).
[quote]
Lets first decide, who ans what is Krishna before even going further into the details of verse 25……
[/quote]
It has been decided 4 millenia ago. You have to shed your Lahori Logic to understand what an incarnation is, and then what Lord Krishna was.
And about that Gopi stories you wrote.....Again some mud-slinging stuff from Pakistanidefence right ? Too much masala added to make it sound dirty and bad. Get a CD of Ramanand Sagar's Mahabharat and Krishna and see for yourself.
Lahori ko confuse mat karo yaar. He is taking his first baby steps. Let us help him.
Also Lahore981, Lord Krishna was Arjun’s charioteer. All 4 million men on that battlefied witnessed both of them, and those from the opposition tried to kill both of them.
Okay, I'll reply soon but don't try to be bull headed here. You are stuck up with the same misinterpretation what I pointed out to you. You think you can make a fool out of everyone?
Now wait till I reply to your post. Don't regard the delay as if I am stumped and don't know how to reply.
I'll let you reply after I post mine. To keep this discussion clean and organized, talk one by one. OKAY :D
Compare the quoted text with the one you wrote. Do you feel any difference??? To me there is a big big difference So you are confirming that the claim of Lord Krishna was wrong in saying that NOBODY HAS SEEN HIM.
So you are confirming that 4 million people did witness Lord Krishna and Arjun… RGHT?
Compare the colored text. Do you see any difference? I see Big Big difference
What do you mean “**that would mean **Arjuna wrote it” ?
Why don’t you say YES, For sure Arjuna wrote it?
**Who is the author of Bhagavad Gita? **Do youunderstand the **difference between “writting” something and “reveletion” ? **
Probably the one who translated this text needs to be sent to an English School. Poor Hindu translator .
You are the worst debator I have ever seen. One who digs a ditch for himself
Also, read post #10 of this thread. I've answered all your "doubts" and "misrepresentations".
Please, do not alter your posts once you post them. I really wanna have a debate. If you keep on editing your replies, its not a good sign. Let me reply and then I'll let you post your reply too.
Also, I'll reply to yours and other member's posts separately. I'll not mix them up.....
We are already in debate of this incarnation theory and I have quoted verses that clearly deny this..... this is the current topic in yours and mine discussion.
The question is not from you. I replied to his post and he is upposed to answer.
So you are confirming that the claim of Lord Krishna was wrong in saying that NOBODY HAS SEEN HIM.
Do you understand the **difference between “writting” something and “reveletion” ? **
