Wrongly Conclude: Difference between revisions
Visnu Murti (talk | contribs) (Created page with "Category:Wrongly Category:Conclude Category:All Categories - Vaniquotes") |
Visnu Murti (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:Wrong]] | |||
[[Category:Wrongly]] | [[Category:Wrongly]] | ||
[[Category:Conclude]] | [[Category:Conclude]] | ||
[[Category:All Categories - Vaniquotes]] | [[Category:All Categories - Vaniquotes]] | ||
Latest revision as of 10:57, 15 September 2023
Pages in category "Wrongly Conclude"
The following 12 pages are in this category, out of 12 total.
B
- Both the Lord and the living entity exist as unborn and inexhaustible personalities. Thus Hiranyakasipu's conclusion that Visnu was dead was wrong
- By putting forward mundane logic one frequently comes to the wrong conclusion regarding the Absolute Truth, and as a result of such a conclusion one may fall down to accept a body like that of a jackal
O
- One should not wrongly conclude that the Lord was formerly unmanifested and has now manifested Himself in the human form
- One thing is that all translations should be checked by you and Candrabali because those who are not our students, if they write some wrong conclusion, the whole thing will be murdered
S
- So Krsna is life. He's not dead stone. Therefore the conclusion is: from life, life has come and matter has come. Not that matter has come from life. Oh, what is that? Life has come from matter. That is not the conclusion. That is wrong conclusion
- So when it is creation by the Supreme Lord, it is not that the brahmanas are to be found only in India. That is another wrong conclusion. Because brahmanas means representation of the quality of goodness
T
- That happens, you see. Not hearing attentively, sometimes wrong conclusion is made
- They (Sankhya philosophers, metaphysicians or materialistic scientists) wrongly conclude that the reactions of the material elements are the original cause of creation. The Bhagavad-gita, however, does not accept this theory