Amlesh

If Krishna wants to clean the dust on the mirror of your mind even if you are staying in the House of Hitler; I don't know who can stop Him. There is a famous saying at my place, if a student wants to learn seriously, he can acquire knowledge even if his classroom is in a sugarcane field. The only criteria to dissipate darkness is Sincerity in your search for spiritual realisation. After knowing the unknown, you'll even find Hell and Heaven alike.

AND I don't think that Theist and CBrahma are too hot headed, they are the best I've seen so far in this Forum.

Yes, SP only said, Krishna is the father of all religions.

Accepting Krishna to be the Supreme happens only when one is cleared of all doubts. He himself said, "After knowing this, nothing is left to be known."

No, you don't need to think like that, the answer was provided by the Speaker of the Gita only not From Swami Vivekananda.

You'll need to read the Gita really well. It's a really complex issue but for sure it does have the answer. It's a very subtle issue, only a very humble and devoted soul can unlock this mystery. Words from us will not help.

I suppose that there is a liking to raise issues not to converge towards a solution but instead to oscillate.

From where did you get the idea that the status classification about a Brahmachari Vaisnava is the Best? Before enlightenment 'Chop wood and carry water' for oneselfafter enlightenment 'Chop wood and carry water' for God, the entire scenario changes. PS: My dear sir, The intensity of love for God does not depend on the external paraphernalia of the Devotee but on Love itself.

Long and winding Road....

Very intelligent question. But before that, if you'll start going deep through the different threads in this Forum, you might start getting wrong impression about vaishnavism. As far as my knowledge allows me speak, I'll try my best to help you in this issue. If i may use the mathematical jargons to clarify my points, I may say that Vaishnavism is the Universal Set and all the Religions and Doctrines are just elements of that Supreme set. Everything is derived from it. It is the only philosophy that never says no to any other philosophies, everything according to Gita has its proper place and it shows how every religion is a step towards the Infinite. In short, it is the mediator of all religions and schools of thoughts. A proper Vaishnav is never keen to get defensive about his philosophy because he knows that how these different Philosophies is part of his Philosophy. Gita teaches us to undertand the deep rooted riches of spirit and at the same time never neglecting material duties and also not to be tagged by any label concerning Religion, Culture, Ritual, Sampradaya etc, the only attachment Gita recommends is attachment to Brahman, our dear Lord.

The issue to the meaning of the Term Sanatana Dharma can come to an end if one tries to follow anyone of the 12 Mahajana. Nothing can come out in trying to figure out things by our perpetually weakening senses and intelligence. These 12 Mahajans for certain knows the secret of Duty, we have just to understand sincerely their common way of perceiving Dharma.

The point of accepting and rejecting things comes into consideration when we are still independent. When we give up our independence to God such thought does not come in our mind. The seemingly paradox and beautiful thing is that the very same dependence is our real independence.

By being ourselves fallen.

I've read the Ram Charitramanas and yes he spoke about Brahman and he equated Ram with it. Interestingly, when he described Sri Ram, it reminded me of Srimad Bhagvatam. No one in this world is wise enough to judge Tulsidasji. No one is able to realise their own self but commenting on such great soul without any deep thought is done so easily, that's the sad part.

Sorry to all of you if I've said something wrong. Anyways, my mistake, after seeing the title only I should have refrained myself in adding my views. It is my last post for this thread and I admit my frailties.

Yes it's true, but Gita does not neglect material nature also. That's why it is known to be the mediator of all existing philosophies.

1. the feelings of despise is still there 2. ask Krishna Himself 3. Not Theatrics but purely logical, read the Gita well 4. I can give u that substance but you seem to be allergical to that. It reminds me of Chanakya Pandita and Krishna about, a secret should remain a secret.

1. It's not surprising because Vedas were already defined by Krishna as Pushpitam Vaacham, but it does not mean we should despise it. 2. I do care, Krishna does care, and the dear most devotee of Krishna (Lord Shiva cares). How can you obtain the mercy of Krishna if you don't care about His devotees. 3. So easily said about the one who took the name of Ram on his lips before dying. 4. Many things, you just don't want to see.

Well said, for sure the eternal confusion created by the different issues pertaining to religion, culture, rituals can be eradicated if we can understand properly the various purpose of our Holybooks. The vedas and Upanishads are the 2 extremities and for sure there is a mediator. In simpler words I would say, the Veda is the Thesis, the upanishads becomes the Anti-thesis and it's the Gita which acts as the Synthesis bringing both ends to common grounds. When all confusions are cleared, then only one becomes the seer of God.

Sorry for the uncommon expression; my surroundings are just the opposite of yours; such trees are quite common:).

All that you've said is logical Dark Warrior. But ask yourself these questions: 1. Do you think that Vedanta Deshikar ever despised those Barbarians even though He had to hide among dead bodies... 2. Do you think Jesus Christ ever had any hatred for those who crucified Him? 3. Do you think M.K.Gandhi had any grudge against the British though they despised Him? 4. Do you think Madhavacharya felt annoyed when no one could understand His teachings? Well, we don't need to climb on coconut tree to get the answer. I do understand your points, but Vaishnavism has more inner meanings that need to be discovered.

Whatever Theist said is True and it was confirmed by Krishna himself in the Bhagvad Gita. Very very rarely, after many many births one becomes My Devotee. There is a large difference between an aspirant Vaishnava and a Vaishnava, i.e., trying to be perfect and being perfect and whatever that has come from the pen of the real Vaishnava confirms that also. It is more like to be or not to be and that's why Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu said, "a real devotee thinks that he does not possess a single drop of love for Krishna"

Certainly the way you are all using Vaishnavism as the measurement stick is not the proper way. Vaishnavism is not used to compare but to find its degree of presence with other religions. The higher the degree is, the more the religion is close to krishna. When the time comes when you become one of the seer of God, at that time you'll not tag yourself with any religion.

The basic principle of Vaishnavism is not to find the incompatibility between religions but instead to find the missing links. It's the only philosophy who has the answer for it...but you'll need the eye for it and also most importantly the Grace of Sriman Narayan.

I guess Surdas explains it best. Try to find the songs of this Great Poet, you'll definately get the answer.