What does the Supreme really want?

[Eastern Mind]

I feel partly we humans tend to Humanize God in order to relate to Him.

Vannakkam: And that is precisely why some of us prefer less anthropomorphic forms. It keeps God beyond human.

Aum Namasivaya

[R Gitananda]

Big-time acharyas like Valmiki and Prahlada didn't have human gurus yet someone would have been privileged to be able to have either one as their guru; agreed?

Dear Gitananda

Well, both Valmiki and Prahlada had Narada Muni for guru. ...

Namaste

Dear Marga mana das

Yes I believe that on faith. However Narada Muni was not a human guru, he was a liberated spiritual being. Therefore can not any swami in Rishikesh claim to have learned from Narada Muni?

Hari Aum

[Marga mana das]

Pranam



Can you please guide me, where in shastra the Valmiki Ramayan, this Mantra 'Mara' as you mention was given to Valmiki rishi!

Jai Shree Krishna

Namaste,

It is found in uttara kanda. By the way - he is descrbed as beeing a highway robber, not a hunter.

Hare Krishna.

[Marga mana das]

Pranam



I am sorry I keep asking this, I am trying to understand what is this 'Parampara' you keep mentioning, is it dependent on institute? If so can you guide me which institute Valmiki or Prahlad or Dhruvmaharaj belonged to?

NB a purport does not form an evidence only except to a person who has faith in that particular person.

Jai Shree Krishna

Namaste Ganeshprasad,

-beautiful name, by the way.

Parampara refers to a chain of spiritual masters, and the idea is that the guru simply passes on the knowledge he has received from his guru to his own disciples - without adding or subtracting, or in other way changing the original knowledge. In this way the knowledge remains perfect and potent.
Krishna gives the example in the gita: Krishna - Vivasvan - Manu -Iksvaku.

-is it dependent on institute?

That depends on your definition of institute.

- If so can you guide me which institute Valmiki or Prahlad or Dhruvmaharaj belonged to?

As they were instructed by Narada, who was instructed by Brahma (who was instructed by Vishnu), they belong to the Brahma-sampradaya.

Jay Shree Krishna!

[Marga mana das]

Namaste

Dear Marga mana das

Yes I believe that on faith. However Narada was not a human guru, he was a liberated spiritual being. Therefore can not any swami in Rishikesh claim to have learned from Narada Muni?

Hari Aum

Dear Gitananda,

I'd be very sceptical. These things don't take place very often in Kali-yuga. Srila Prabhupada often said we live in the age of the cheater and the cheated.
He would have to be tested - are histeachings exactly the same as that of Narada Muni? - Chanses are - they are not. Is his lifestyle perfectly saintly?

These are the references: Guru-sadhu-shastra. Teachings that are in accordance with these can be accepted.

Hare Krishna.

[ameyAtmA]

Namaste

So then, what if a teacher claims to have learned directly from God? Is that disciplic succession?

Yes, Sir! It is, provided it is a genuine two-way street between the Lord as Guru and devotee as disciple. Not if someone just claims so on the basis of theory, although it is true that God IS the Jagat Guru.

Otherwise, whom is the sAdhak cheating, if not themselves, by saying "God asked me to do all the things I like doing" ?

Hari OM

Shri Hari Govinda Mukunda OM

[grames]

Valmiki, prahaladha are given the Vishnu Bhakti by the great rsi narada who is one of the pivot in all four sampradaya. Not sure the intend of this question but at least in theistic schools knowledge can only decend and the process of gaining of knowledge is descending from personality and not by mere self experiments.

[grames]

It's an interesting proposition at least to try a Supreme that is full of actions rather than assuming an everything "less" or "absent". In fact, Supreme sounds more fitting if it's attributed with most excellent rather with none and we have this term Bagavan for Him where five describe fullness and sixth describe renunciation. So assuming The Lord having desire or want is a flaw is flaw of thought process as we believe since our desire cause pain His desire also will. We have needs so He must not have needs? We act so He should be actionless.

This is not the idea of a Supreme and the positive Supreme is Bagavan and always full but unattached.

[Marga mana das]

Namaste.

Can anyone of you who claim that the Supreme has no desires explain why that Supreme Brahman - who is atma-rama, has come under the spell of Maya?

And what is that Maya anyway? An energy? Does Brahman have energies?
You may argue that Maya doesn't really exist, but then how can something that doesn't exist influence Brahman?

Why are there two states of Brahman - one where He is in bliss and one where, in Maya's grip, He is suffering like a dog? (-some people suffer so much that they kill themselves) Why would Brahman enter such a state?


Hare Krishna.

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam

Namaste,

It is found in uttara kanda. By the way - he is descrbed as beeing a highway robber, not a hunter.

Hare Krishna.

I am familiar about the story of Ratnakar, what I have not heard about is, any mantra called 'Mara'
It is true that Naradji gave Ram naam to chant, unable to chant Rama it turned in to Mara, repeat it continuation it becomes indistinguishable, that is what I have learnt from reading Ramcharitra Ramayan of Tulsidas Goswami.
That is why I ask if you can provide any evidence with actual verse it would be appreciated.

Jai Shree Krishna