Significance of the Maasi Maham-Siva & Sakthi Valipaadu

[Rohit]

Yes Pradheep, you are absolutely right about that someone, I was referring to. Please keep us posted on his conditions. Thanks!

[viggop]

Dear Pradheep and Rohit
I would request you to PM each other till you come to an agreement as your posts do not relate to this topic.

[Uthappam]

Dear Pradheep and Rohit
I would request you to PM each other till you come to an agreement as your posts do not relate to this topic.

No Viggop, let them do it here! I want to watch!

[pradheep]

Dear Aravindhan
Thanks for the link.

You are right aravindhan, the difference in understanding vedanta and buddhism comes from the usage of "Atman". Vedanta is like solving a mathematical problem using "x" for unknown and finally one get's the value of X and the problem is solved.

Buddhism tries to arrive at an answer refuting the very "X" factor and therefore the whole teaching collapases in the end. Buddhism deines atman but talks about rebirth and so unanswered question is, what is reborn?. Since gross body perishes, therefore something that is subtle should be there to be re-born. Buddhist rejects that 'something" and equally suffers in answering that which is re-born.

Vedanta on the other hand uses atman (individual atma as jiva, which in reality none) in the equation like the unknown X factor and finally when one enquires, understands there is no jiva-atma (separate) but only one, which due to an error appears as many. The X =1 and that 1 appears as many.

For sankara it was a piece of cake to defeat buddhists, but it was a challenge with mimamsa's. It is easy to teach some one who is ignorant of a subject, but is very difficult to correct someone who has understand the concept wrongly. Mimasa's were in the second state. Infact, whole life is only an error to be corrected.

[Rohit]

Buddhism denies Atman........Buddhist rejects that 'something".

At last Pradheep has finally managed to understand Buddha's original teachings in the right context, that there is absolutely no place for "Atman/Brahman/God" in Buddhism. By accepting that fact about Buddhism, Pradheep has now accepted and confirmed my mutually exclusive principle, which operates between [Atman/Brahman/God] and [Buddha's Sunyata].

[Atman/Brahman/God](XOR)[Buddha's Sunyata Nirvana = Complete negation of "Atman/Brahman/God"]

When I unequivocally proved, what Pradheep calls "X or something", was, in fact, absolutely nothing in the evolution thread, Pradheep mendaciously kept distorting the very teachings of Buddha in desperation and ended-up taking refuge in Buddhism. Undoubtedly, when my proofs rendered him completely defenceless at the end, Pradheep had no choice but to quit in utter disgrace, carrying yet another washed-up defeat.

[Rohit]

Buddhism denies atman but talks about rebirth and so unanswered question is, what is reborn?

Having said that Pradheep; for the benefit of all readers, could you please now elaborate on exactly what is reborn in "Advaita" or else, who is that, which does think that "one" will be reborn in "Advaitic worldview"?

[pradheep]

Dear Rohit
Great to know that you are an ardent fan of an insane, schizophrenic guy. Thank you.

[Rohit]

Great to know that you are an ardent fan of an insane, schizophrenic guy. Thank you.

No Pradheep, not an ardent fan, but a concerned sympathiser!

However, I do like the way you keep distorting your perceptions every now and then; and then watch you go under the deep spell.

[pradheep]

Dear Rohit
Thank you

[Rohit]

Aravindhan, thanks for posting the link to that article.