Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 65

Thread: Did Krishna give up his body?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    usa,iowa
    Age
    36
    Posts
    133
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Did Krishna give up his body?

    Quote Originally Posted by brahma jijnasa View Post
    Namaste

    Here I'll try to give an insight on this topic from the Vaishnava point of view.
    Special note: This is not from the Advaitic point of view, but this is from that other, non-advaitic point of view.

    Here it is said that the Lord relinquishes or abandons His body, but here this abandoning is compared with the performance or play of the magician or an actor (naṭaḥ)! Just as in the theater or in the show of a magician, the magician or an actor sometimes performs the show that seems as if he is falling dead and dies, but in reality he is not dead because it's just a show for the audience, similarly the Lord sometimes plays a role or He performs his pastimes (lilas) so that it seems as if He accepted and rejected the body.
    So, how then verse like this one may be evidence that the Lord has no eternal body? How when here it says He is like a magician!
    Does a magician really dies on the stage? Does the Lord really relinquished the body?
    How He leaves his body when He actually has an eternal body?
    Not only that but it is said in many scriptures that He has his eternal bodily form in Vaikuntha. Sometimes He descends to this material world with his eternal bodily form from Vaikuntha which is his eternal abode or the place where He dwells forever, and this descent is then called avatara.

    regards
    nAMASTE
    That applies not only to Lord but any jiva soul because the soul's real form remains the same and it changes bodies just as a magician changes his acts.
    And that is the whole point of advaita

  2. #22
    Join Date
    December 2012
    Posts
    552
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Did Krishna give up his body?

    Namaste
    Quote Originally Posted by hinduism♥krishna View Post
    That verse is a condensed form of entire meaning of the verse. Here ऽपि serves a purpose of 'Even Though'. In this way, ANY sanskrit master would translate this verse. [You may ask anyone]. Moreover; If there was just Saguna, Nirakara , 'Api' wouldn't had been used in the verse.
    You know what, this "api" word will not help you much because in the literal translation of the verse there is no "Though you're originally only formless"!

    I've looked into Gita Press' Book, All hinds consider Gita press as the most authentic non-sectarian source of translations of various Hindu scriptures. They have also translated this Verse in the same way how I've translated. And I'm very sure that those Gita Press' translations are translated by any Sanskrit Pandit, not by any newbie of Sanskrit.
    Vaishnava translators are also Sanskrit Pandits and yet they haven't translated this verse so "Though you're originally only formless".

    I don't believe that this Gita press has non sectarian translations. Actually translation of this verse shows that their translator didn't give non sectarian translation at all. It is obvious that this translation is under the influence of Advaita philosophy and so it precisely is sectarian!

    Actually there is no something that could be called non sectarian translation. Each translation is more or less sectarian. Long time ago I explained it here: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/sho...681#post105681


    regards

  3. #23
    Join Date
    June 2013
    Location
    Maharashtra
    Posts
    570
    Rep Power
    1125

    Re: Did Krishna give up his body?

    Quote Originally Posted by brahma jijnasa View Post
    Namaste


    You know what, this "api" word will not help you much because in the literal translation of the verse there is no "Though you're originally only formless"!


    Pranam Brahma Jijanasa..
    You should note that 'Api' has various moods. It's not just 'also'. Other meanings of 'Api' are 'Though', 'Even though', 'In spite of of' . By looking at the way the verse is stated, 'Api' word is used for 'Though'
    Vaishnava translators are also Sanskrit Pandits and yet they haven't translated this verse so "Though you're originally only formless".
    Yes, they may be. But they translate words very extremely. Many times I've seen that they translate Atma as Paramatma when they feel that their philosophy is getting refuted, in the same way they translate Nirakara as having no material body, which is obviously way off the actual meaning of the word. Nirakara simply means formless. Nowhere it is mentioned about Material form yet they add extra words to make it having a new meaning . Spiritual form or material form are just new concepts created just to defense. You'll say it's interpretation , then better say it's interpretation, no need to say Translation. Their translations are not AS IT IS , but AS PER . Most of the hindus of different sects know that Gita Press translates verses as it is. They've translated all Puranas in its original form. No any sectarian distortion in their translations !

    I don't believe that this Gita press has non sectarian translations. Actually translation of this verse shows that their translator didn't give non sectarian translation at all. It is obvious that this translation is under the influence of Advaita philosophy and so it precisely is sectarian!


    Not true ! In their translation of Padma Purana, they have supported Dvaitian vaishnawa's views too. I've read it. This proves that they translate the verses as it it . You may feel getting refuted but not because of they're advaitians but because of the fact that they translate the verse as it is. They don't invent new meaning to the word, unlike Dvaitians. They translate Nirakara as Nirakara only. That's why it is genuine and so their translations are praised by almost all sects.

    Actually there is no something that could be called non sectarian translation. Each translation is more or less sectarian. Long time ago I explained it here: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/sho...681#post105681
    Translating verses as it is is always non-sectarian. You'd not believe as you've trust only in the translations of Vaishnwas who are very strong adherents of Dvaita and not open-minded to think according to other side.

    Last edited by hinduism♥krishna; 12 July 2014 at 02:05 AM.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,210
    Rep Power
    1364

    Re: Did Krishna give up his body?

    Namaste,

    Just to make a note, Srila Prabhupada's meaning of 'As it is' is something different. He has himself explained this in (CC Ādi 7.108). He is stressing on taking literal meaning.

    OM
    Only God Is Truth, Everything Else Is Illusion - Ramakrishna
    Total Surrender of Ego to SELF is Real Bhakti - Ramana Maharshi

    Silence is the study of the scruptures. Meditation is the continuous thinking of Brahman which is to be meditated upon. The complete negation of both by knowledge is the vision of truth – sadAcAra-14 of Adi SankarAcArya

    namah SivAya vishnurUpAya viShNave SivarUpiNe, MBh, vanaparva, 3.39.76

    Sanskrit Dict | MW Dict | Gita Super Site | Hindu Dharma

  5. #25
    Join Date
    June 2013
    Location
    Maharashtra
    Posts
    570
    Rep Power
    1125

    Conclusion

    PranAm,

    Now I'm going to put a conclusion revealing the truths/secrets about Bhagavan Krishna from Vishnu Purana, that no one can deny. In Bhagavata Purana, we get very less info about Krishna's end of Avatara, however in Vishnu Purana we get much details about how krishna left his human-body and established himself in formless Brahman and what happened after Krishna's निर्याण - Niryana [ Death ].

    Vishnu Purana unveils some real facts about Krishna. It states that Krishna merged himself in all-pervading Brahman and thereafter bodies of Krishna and Rama[Balaram] were burnt during Aaurdhva-dehik Samskara [Final obsequial rights of death], that was done by Arjuna.

    Now we'll see what happened after leaving of Jara, whose arrow was pierced in the lotus foot of Krishna, to the heaven. Thereafter Krishna performed Yogic- Method to attain Brahman or to establish in his own self without burning his body. However Yogis normally burn the body while leaving the body.

    == How Krishna actually left his body ==

    भगवानपि गोविन्दो वासुदेवात्मकं परं |
    ब्रह्मात्मनि समारोप्य सर्वभुतेश्वधारयत |
    निष्प्रपन्चे महाभाग संयोज्यात्मान्मात्मनि |
    तुर्यवस्थं सलिलं च शेते स्म पुरुषोत्तमः || Vishnu Purana 5.37.66

    " Thus Bhagavan Krishna too, by attributing himself in ParaBrahman, put all living beings in himself. Then by merging his self in Pure Atma, he, who is best among men, established himself in Turya-State [ which is beyond waking-dreaming-dreamless sates] with ease.


    गते तस्मिन्स भगवन्सन्योज्यात्मनि |
    ब्रह्मभूत अव्ययः अचिन्त्ये वासुदेवमये अमले || 5.37.74
    अजन्मन्यमरे विष्णावप्रमेये अखिलात्मनि |
    तत्याज मानुषं देहं अतीत्य त्रिविधां गतिम् || 5.37.75

    "Then the illustrious Krishńa, having united himself with pure, spiritual, inexhaustible, inconceivable, unborn, undecaying, imperishable, and universal spirit, which is one with Vishnu, abandoned his mortal human body by crossing over the condition of the threefold qualities"

    == What happened after he merged in Brahman ==

    पराशर उवाच :

    अर्जुनोऽपि तदान्विष्य रामकृष्णकलेवरे
    संस्कारं लम्भयामास तथान्येषांनुक्रमात || Vishnu Purana 5.38.1

    "ARJUNA having found the bodies of Krishńa and of [Bala]Rama, performed for them, and the rest of the slain, the obsequial rites [Death Rights]"

    अष्टौ महिष्यः कथिता रुक्मिनिप्रमुखास्तु या: |
    उपगुह्य हरेर्देहं विविशुस्ता हुताशनम् || 5.38.2
    रेवती चापि रामस्य देहामाश्लिष्य सत्तमा |
    विवेश ज्वलितं वन्हिं तत्सन्गा अल्हादशीतलम् || 5.38.3

    "The eight queens of Krishńa, who have been named, with Rukmini at their head, embraced the body of Hari, and entered the funeral fire [Sati] . Revati also, embracing the corpse of Rama, entered the blazing pile, which was cool to her, happy in contact with her lord. Hearing these events, Ugrasena and Anakadundubhi, with Devaki and Rohini, committed themselves to the flames . The last ceremonies were performed for all these by Arjuna, who then made all the people leave the city, and took Vajra with him.


    Thus, I think, this is much more than enough to say that Krishna is beyond his Krishna-form itself and his real nature is Parabrahman which is formless, imperishable and infinite. ParaBrahman had holded a human body through his Maya, and at the end he gave up that body and merged himself in Atma/Paramatma/Brahman. This is the truth I've seen. Truth can't be hided for a long time..

    Hari Govinda Hari Hari.. Thank You
    Last edited by hinduism♥krishna; 12 July 2014 at 02:26 PM.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    usa,iowa
    Age
    36
    Posts
    133
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Conclusion

    Quote Originally Posted by hinduism♥krishna View Post
    PranAm,

    == How Krishna actually left his body ==

    भगवानपि गोविन्दो वासुदेवात्मकं परं |
    ब्रह्मात्मनि समारोप्य सर्वभुतेश्वधारयत |
    निष्प्रपन्चे महाभाग संयोज्यात्मान्मात्मनि |
    तुर्यवस्थं सलिलं च शेते स्म पुरुषोत्तमः || Vishnu Purana 5.37.66

    " Thus Bhagavan Krishna too, by attributing himself in ParaBrahman, put all living beings in himself. Then by merging his self in Pure Atma, he, who is best among men, established himself in Turya-State [ which is beyond waking-dreaming-dreamless sates] with ease.


    गते तस्मिन्स भगवन्सन्योज्यात्मनि |
    ब्रह्मभूत अव्ययः अचिन्त्ये वासुदेवमये अमले || 5.37.74
    अजन्मन्यमरे विष्णावप्रमेये अखिलात्मनि |
    तत्याज मानुषं देहं अतीत्य त्रिविधां गतिम् || 5.37.75

    "Then the illustrious Krishńa, having united himself with pure, spiritual, inexhaustible, inconceivable, unborn, undecaying, imperishable, and universal spirit, which is one with Vishnu, abandoned his mortal human body by crossing over the condition of the threefold qualities"

    == What happened after he merged in Brahman ==

    पराशर उवाच :

    अर्जुनोऽपि तदान्विष्य रामकृष्णकलेवरे
    संस्कारं लम्भयामास तथान्येषांनुक्रमात || Vishnu Purana 5.38.1

    "ARJUNA having found the bodies of Krishńa and of [Bala]Rama, performed for them, and the rest of the slain, the obsequial rites [Death Rights]"

    अष्टौ महिष्यः कथिता रुक्मिनिप्रमुखास्तु या: |
    उपगुह्य हरेर्देहं विविशुस्ता हुताशनम् || 5.38.2
    रेवती चापि रामस्य देहामाश्लिष्य सत्तमा |
    विवेश ज्वलितं वन्हिं तत्सन्गा अल्हादशीतलम् || 5.38.3

    "The eight queens of Krishńa, who have been named, with Rukmini at their head, embraced the body of Hari, and entered the funeral fire [Sati] . Revati also, embracing the corpse of Rama, entered the blazing pile, which was cool to her, happy in contact with her lord. Hearing these events, Ugrasena and Anakadundubhi, with Devaki and Rohini, committed themselves to the flames . The last ceremonies were performed for all these by Arjuna, who then made all the people leave the city, and took Vajra with him.


    Thus, I think, this is much more than enough to say that Krishna is beyond his Krishna-form itself and his real nature is Parabrahman which is formless, imperishable and infinite. ParaBrahman had holded a human body through his Maya, and at the end he gave up that body and merged himself in Atma/Paramatma/Brahman. This is the truth I've seen because truth can't be hided for a long time..

    Hari Govinda Hari Hari.. Thank You
    Namaste
    Thank you for your excellent quotes as usual. But let me tell you one thing. A person who is brainwashed will not try to learn the truth no matter how many quotes you show him. I have been before in a group of demons calling themselves devotees who used to sing dance chant the holy names yet used to talk nonsense,harbor hatred towards others,egoistic etc etc

    Il tell you one sequence from the Shri Ganesha purana. At the end of a penance to Lord Ganesha, a devotee, cursed with death, actually lives and the Yama Dutas tell him that they cannot touch him because he actually he crossed over his karma due to his devotion to Lord Ganesha. But even after escaping death, the devotee still feels bad that he didnot get the darshan of Lord Ganesha. Then Bhagavan comes in his dream and tells him not to be dejected as His grace is more important than His darshan itself. The devotee then understands that he became mrityunjaya and that itself is a testimony that Bhagavan is with him.
    This shows that grace of God is more important than the vision of God. And grace of God definitely shows if the devotee is sincere.
    Because irrespective of the fights between dvaita and advaita, the one who has the grace of God wins. And when a person has grace of God, his intelligence rises,awareness rises, eagerness to learn the truth rises.

    And going by your posts anyone can tell that you are on the path to true enlightenment and im sure the same Krishna will favour you than some fanatic who is only into singing dancing than finding the essence of the Gita. Superficial worship of forms and names is like admiring Mother Teresa
    for her clothes, instead of her character.
    And i have learnt a lot from you. And you give the best explanations.
    My only prayer to Lord is to make me meet more people like you.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,210
    Rep Power
    1364

    Re: Did Krishna give up his body?

    Namaste HLK,

    Thank you very much for quotes. I am interested to know if in a few verses before and after the quoted verses mention something like Krishna came out of body in his subtle body and ascend to vaikuntha or goloka. Do the verses mention the word 'Vaikuntha' or 'Goloka'

    OM
    Only God Is Truth, Everything Else Is Illusion - Ramakrishna
    Total Surrender of Ego to SELF is Real Bhakti - Ramana Maharshi

    Silence is the study of the scruptures. Meditation is the continuous thinking of Brahman which is to be meditated upon. The complete negation of both by knowledge is the vision of truth – sadAcAra-14 of Adi SankarAcArya

    namah SivAya vishnurUpAya viShNave SivarUpiNe, MBh, vanaparva, 3.39.76

    Sanskrit Dict | MW Dict | Gita Super Site | Hindu Dharma

  8. #28
    Join Date
    June 2013
    Location
    Maharashtra
    Posts
    570
    Rep Power
    1125

    Re: Did Krishna give up his body?

    Quote Originally Posted by Amrut View Post
    Namaste HLK,
    Thank you very much for quotes. I am interested to know if in a few verses before and after the quoted verses mention something like Krishna came out of body in his subtle body and ascend to vaikuntha or goloka. Do the verses mention the word 'Vaikuntha' or 'Goloka'
    Pranam Amrut.
    Not at all ! Vaikuntha or Gloloka is not mentioned. Bhagavan Krishna merged himself in ParaBrahman from where he came. In fact there's not a single reference of Goloka in Bhagavata and Vishnu Purana.

    Vishnu Purana 5.37.66 mentions Turiya state of Krishna and thereafter there is a incident of hitting bow in his foot. Thus Krishna was already established himself in Turiya-State before leaving the body.

    Krishna had held a form through his Maya [form] and in the end by giving up this Maya he again united with Parabrahman which is also known as 'Vishnu'. This is what Vishnu Purana states.
    Last edited by hinduism♥krishna; 13 July 2014 at 06:57 AM.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,210
    Rep Power
    1364

    Re: Did Krishna give up his body?

    Quote Originally Posted by hinduism♥krishna View Post
    Pranam Amrut.
    Not at all ! Vaikuntha or Gloloka is not mentioned. Bhagavan Krishna merged himself in ParaBrahman from where he came. In fact there's not a single reference of Goloka in Bhagavata and Vishnu Purana.

    Vishnu Purana 5.37.66 mentions Turiya state of Krishna and thereafter there is a incident of hitting bow in his foot. Thus Krishna was already established himself in Turiya-State before leaving the body.

    Krishna had held a form through his Maya [form] and in the end by giving up this Maya he again united with Parabrahman which is also known as 'Vishnu'. This is what Vishnu Purana states.
    Thank you HLK.
    Only God Is Truth, Everything Else Is Illusion - Ramakrishna
    Total Surrender of Ego to SELF is Real Bhakti - Ramana Maharshi

    Silence is the study of the scruptures. Meditation is the continuous thinking of Brahman which is to be meditated upon. The complete negation of both by knowledge is the vision of truth – sadAcAra-14 of Adi SankarAcArya

    namah SivAya vishnurUpAya viShNave SivarUpiNe, MBh, vanaparva, 3.39.76

    Sanskrit Dict | MW Dict | Gita Super Site | Hindu Dharma

  10. #30
    Join Date
    December 2012
    Posts
    552
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Did Krishna give up his body?

    Namaste all

    We have some members here in this thread whose understanding of the scriptures is superficial.
    Their attempt is to fool us by quoting some passages from the scriptures which they tried to explain without a proper understanding.
    Their first attempt was to show that the Lord gives up His body like the fish avatara (Matsya) and others. Thus our HLK quoted Bhagavatam 1.15.35 in the post #1 in this thread and he gave a translation:

    "Even as he acquires fish like forms and then gives up, he gave up that body with which he removed the burden on the earth."

    But HLK forgot to give a full translation of this verse! Here is the translation of this verse from the BBT, vedabase:

    "The Supreme Lord relinquished the body which He manifested to diminish the burden of the earth. Just like a magician, He relinquishes one body to accept different ones, like the fish incarnation and others."

    Here it is said that the Lord relinquishes or abandons His body, but here this abandoning is compared with the performance or play of the magician or an actor (naṭaḥ)! Just as in the theater or in the show of a magician, the magician or an actor sometimes performs the show that seems as if he is falling dead and dies, but in reality he is not dead because it's just a show for the audience, similarly the Lord sometimes plays a role or He performs his pastimes (lilas) so that it seems as if He accepted and rejected the body.
    So, how then verse like this one may be evidence that the Lord has no eternal body? How when here it says He is like a magician!
    Does a magician really dies on the stage? Does the Lord really relinquished the body?
    How He leaves his body when He actually has an eternal body?
    HLK simply ignored the word naṭaḥ "the magician" or "an actor" in this verse.

    Not only that but it is said in many scriptures that the Lord has his eternal bodily form in Vaikuntha. Sometimes He descends to this material world with his eternal bodily form from Vaikuntha which is his eternal abode or the place where He dwells forever, and this descent is then called avatara. Word avatara literally means "one who descends" which means that He with this eternal body descends to this material world and with this body He later returns back to his own eternal abode, Vaikuntha.

    Yes, there are some statements in the scriptures that seem to describe as if the Lord accepts and rejects the body, or as if He has no eternal bodily form. Our HLK was not lazy and found some verses in the Vishnu Purana that say Krishna fell dead after He was hit by an arrow and rejected some kind of physical body which was picked up by Arjuna who organized the obsequial rite.
    This was one lila (pastime) of the Lord which He performed here on earth.

    I do not see how this proves anything. Does this somehow refutes the fact that the Lord has his eternal bodily form in Vaikuntha? Certainly not.

    Even the word nirākāra can not refute this fact because according to understanding of HLK nirākāra means "formless". Just because Brahman is called "formless" it doesn't mean Brahman can not have a form. How so? This is so becaue both are true, ie Brahman has a form (Bhagavan) and has a formless feature called brahmajyoti "the light of Brahman". So Brahman is not formless only! Brahman is both, formless and with form.
    It would be foolish to think that Brahman can not have a form just because it is called nirākāra. Brahman is also known as the Lord or Bhagavan which appears in the form of the person, Lord Vishnu. So this word nirākāra does not refute Brahman as Bhagavan in the form of the person, Lord Vishnu!!! So to say it simple this "formless" does not refute "the form of the person" becaue both are true "formless" and "the form of the person"!

    Another attempt of HLK was with the help of Mahatmya verse 3.58 and words api and nirākāra. But this is not of much help because in the literal translation of the verse there is no "Though you're originally only formless"!

    There are statements in the scriptures that the Lord's body is eternal, identical with Brahman, etc. But HLK simply ignored all the evidence (such as word naṭaḥ, see above Bhagavatam 1.15.35) and focused on some completely absurd examples which he explained in a completely strange and tamasic fashion.

    The statements in the scriptures can be interpreted in a proper manner but also in a tamasic manner. What it means for something to be interpreted in a tamasic manner? It means to interpret statements in the scriptures in such a manner to arrive at the wrong conclusion. Anyone can arbitrarily choose any statement in the scriptures and then interpreted in a tamasic manner. Even I know how to do it, here's an example:

    Creation Hymn in the Rig Veda (Book 10, Hymn 129) says:

    "Who verily knows and who can here declare it, whence it was born and whence comes this creation?
    The Gods are later than this world's production. Who knows then whence it first came into being?
    He, the first origin of this creation, whether he formed it all or did not form it,
    Whose eye controls this world in highest heaven, he verily knows it, or perhaps he knows not."

    Here is described how God created the world and says at the end "or perhaps he knows not". Thus I can say that this is a proof that even God does not know when and how He made the world. As if God has a dementia so, miserable, He himself does not know did He made ​​the world or not. See about Dementia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dementia
    What a silly interpretation. Only someone who's a complete ignoramus can interpret the scriptures in this way. That would be an example of interpretation of scriptures in a tamasic manner.
    What is this tamas? It was explained by Lord Krishna in the Bhagavad gita 14.8 that tamas (darkness, ignorance) is a mode of material nature:

    "O son of Bharata, know that the mode of darkness, born of ignorance, is the delusion of all embodied living entities. The results of this mode are madness, indolence and sleep, which bind the conditioned soul."

    Further Lord Krishna explains this mode of nature called tamas in verse 14.17:

    "From the mode of goodness (sattva), real knowledge develops; from the mode of passion (rajas), greed develops; and from the mode of ignorance (tamas) develop foolishness, madness and illusion."

    So anyone can arbitrarily pick any statement in the scriptures and then interpreted it in a tamasic manner which is characterized as (see above verses Bg 14.8 and 14.17) ignorance, delusion, foolishness, illusion and madness. Thus one can arrive at the wrong conclusion which is foolish and delusional.
    Quite the contrary to that is the mode of sattva or "mode of goodness" because from sattva "real knowledge develops", see above Bg 14.17.

    So let them be happy living with that their "enlightening" conclusions.


    -------------------
    Words:

    naṭaḥ -- the magician or an actor
    lilas -- pastimes or play of the Lord
    avatara -- "one who descends"
    nirākāra -- "formless", or "without material form"
    brahmajyoti -- "the light of Brahman", it is formless and impersonal aspect of Brahman, ie without personal characteristics
    Bhagavan -- Brahman as Person, Supreme God Vishnu (deva), ie aspect of Brahman with personal characteristics such as bodily form
    tamas (darkness, ignorance) is the lowest mode (quality) of material nature
    sattva or "mode of goodness" is the highest mode (quality) of nature because from sattva "real knowledge develops" (see above Bhagavad gita 14.17)


    regards
    Last edited by brahma jijnasa; 19 July 2014 at 07:54 AM. Reason: post revised

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Ashtanga Yogam-2 Sandilya Upanishad
    By brahman in forum Advaita
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04 July 2009, 01:23 AM
  2. Some questions on HK
    By Yogkriya in forum Hare Krishna (ISKCON)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06 August 2007, 02:03 PM
  3. Veda
    By sarabhanga in forum Vedas & Brahmanas
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 21 January 2007, 06:42 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •