What's the worst thing one can do to hamper one's spiritual advancement?

Shoot

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

(nb - maybe you could help refine your response by also including a defintion of what spiritual advancement is characterized by)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Go to church.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

To answer the question, give them an education.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

certainly explains why you are atheists

actually I was thinking more in terms of specific acts rather than allusions to political/instituitional sway of establishing a status quo on one's agenda

 

Believe in the spiritual.





wu wei

 

1. Do something to further spiritual advancement.
2. Do nothing to further spiritual advancement.

 

so how does one perceive one's values under such a notion?

 

any ways to help distinguish between option 1 and 2?

 

That's not part of the original question now is it?

Regardless: to judge one's morality by perceiving their values, as you suggest, would be tantamount to being amoral. In matters of morality, it is not one's own judgment that is the measure.

 

Because we have an education and you don't?

 

nope

 

The worse thing is to stop seeking the truth....

Getting caught up anger, fear, sorrow (mode of ignorance) will also hamper spiritual advancement...as well getting caught up in any insecurity

 

hardly

 

there is the eg of hanuman who used his anger to burn lanka - in other words emmotions can be dovetailed - like one can be fearful of falling into illusion, sorrowful at the prospect of not having a bright spiritual future etc

 

So, you hardly have an education?

I suppose that's better than none at all.

 

But even Hanuman is not supremely enlightened....someone fully realized in the truth has no more of these things...no more suffering to even the smallest extent...

As Krishna says:
"The humble sages, by virtue of true knowledge, see with equal vision a learned and gentle brāhmaṇa, a cow, an elephant, a dog and a dog-eater [outcaste]" (BG 5.18)

 

VitalOne

your statement is not in line with scripture

obviously there is a distinction, as indicated by this verse, between a person entangled in the lower modes and the personalities indicated who are seen as liberating influences


This non-difference between the Lord and his pure devotee (hence transcendental nature) is given here too

Also your statement is out of line with the activities of saintly persons, since Caitanya mahaprabhu has no business paying his obeisances to an effigy of a mundane entity

what to speak of the numerous quotes and pastimes one can pull out from the Ramayana that indicate hanuman is in fact pure, bereft of any self interest, even the interest for liberation which many exalted yogis find difficult to disregard

For the purposes of theistic debate (at least according to the vedas) one's statements must line up with both sastra (scripture) and sadhu (saintly person).

How do you propose to unravel the contradiction between your BG quote and statement about hanuman and the scriptural statements plus evidence of the behaviour of saintly persons?

 

I was suggesting that your education bears no merit, since all academic pursuits begin with character (in other words the fruits of knowledge eg happiness, contentment etc will never manifest until this foundation is addressed, no matter how many little bo-peep diplomas or prescription medications a person may have access to)

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Hanuman attained the supreme abode, but while alive he wasn't in the abode....through divine assocation and devotion he attained it...

Krishna is just listing the prominent forms of himself, as he says, among the Kimpurusas (an intelligence race of monkeys), he is Hanuman.

According to Krishna only men of small intelligence worship the devas and other lesser beings...

Someone can be pure, bereft of any self-interest, and still not be liberated...they're just under material nature of the mode of goodness...

Which sastra says that Hanuman was liberated while alive? That anger he had possessed was not an attribute of a liberated person, only through association did he attain the abode as it says:

SB 11.12.7: The persons I have mentioned did not undergo serious studies of the Vedic literature, nor did they worship great saintly persons, nor did they execute severe vows or austerities. Simply by association with Me and My devotees, they achieved Me.

What contradiction?

 

I am in a bit of a rush so I will bring in sastric quotes later for the points I will make - in the meantime you might want to provide some for the following (if you can't find scriptural texts we can also work with information in purports too)

do you have a scriptural quote to explain why it is that an eternal associate of the Lord who participates in the eternal pastimes of the Lord (on this planet) is in ignorance?

”

You might notice that all the entities he mentions are pure devotees (eg uddhava)

Krishna also says better than worship of him is worship of his devotees (eg hanuman)

Do you have a scriptural quote that defines the mode of goodness as being bereft of self interest?

Hanuman is accepted as a nitya siddha (eternal associate in the Lord's pastimes or lila) - what to speak of being liberated, ignorance can not touch him.
The Ramayana is the obvious one to mention, but there are eg's as given in the SB as mentioned (of course we are in the process of sifting through the defintions you are working with, to determine whether you are offering ine contradiction to explain another contradiction)

And given that hanuman is an eternal associate of Lord ramachandra, that never left his association, its not clear how he is declared as being under the influence of the modes of service (since devotional service to the Lord is declared by Krishna to be bereft of the influence of the modes of nature). Its also not clear what was the austerity or work that hanuman had to do to get liberated (as you insist that he did)

you say hanuman is a mundane entity that attained liberation - there is evidence to the contrary - in fact I can't think of any evidence to suggest what you are proposing (no scriptural commentator has given such statements that I am aware of, what to speak of a body of scriptural quotes to directly suggest hanuman is not a transcendental personality)