Re: How do we counter this argument?
Originally Posted by
smaranam
Namaste Atanuji
--
Just one point - i know that isn't what *you* are saying, but just so other readers will not read anything less in it -
KRSNa is "all attractive" only and only to His devotees, that's correct , not to all cultures, not even to all in the native culture that was His Leela ground.
Aum Namah Shivaya
Jai Sri KRSNa
Namaste Smaranam
That is the point of Saguna and Nirguna and also about selective cognition. Shushupti is not non-attractive to anyone-- though very few of general public know it consciously and very few devotees of the form Tribhangamurari may intuit that Shushupti Sarvesvara and Tribhangamurari Sarvesvara may be the same? I am not saying that they are same. I am asking why they should not be?
To paraphrase, Sarvasvara Rudra is conceived in some part of consciousness. Sarvesvara Tribahngamurari is conceived in some other. But Consciousness is common and contstant and its full is the shushupti, which every one adores without exception.
Om Namah
Last edited by atanu; 23 March 2010 at 12:29 AM.
That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious and the non-dual. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.
Bookmarks