Guruvani

Well, if you want to get archaeological, then why don't you seek some scientific proof that Jesus existed? They can't even find scientific proof that Jesus or King David or any of that Bible mythology ever existed and that was supposed to be 3000 years after Krishna appeared on the Earth. There is not a shred of scientific proof that Jesus ever existed and that was only 2000 years ago. Why should you demand archaeological proof of Dwaraka or Kurukshetra? Do I detect a prejudice here? I think most definitely

But, you are immune to Karma and Jesus died for your sins, so you are all good to go? hahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!!! You and Jerry Falwell oughta hook-up.

It's quite amuzing to see devotees separating what part of the Gaudiya or Vedic canon they accept as real and what part they accept as fantasy. We have no proof of any of it. It all sounds quite fantastic and mythological. It's just really funny to see devotees separating what part of the mythology they accept as real and what part they want to label as fiction. Picking and choosing what part of these scriptures we accept and what part we reject is a mind game that ends up in a lot of confusion and quarrel. Maybe we should just try to find the spiritual element in all of it instead of trying to label part of it as history and part of it as mythology. It's all got a spiritual meaning and spiritual purpose. Our problem is that we want to get all mental about it and start picking and choosing to suit our personal preferences. Where will it all end? Probably in a condition of weakened faith on the mental platfrom. It's all fantastic. Separating one part as acceptable and another as unacceptable is a losing proposition. IMHO

I predict that 2007 is going to be a very bad year for the United States, because of the havoc that our preemptive attack on Iraq has imposed upon the planet. We already see floods, fires and drought that is harassing the United States. I fear a terrible a hurricane season for the Southeast and a severe Earthquake in California. Is this psychic or just common sense to feel that the higher powers of the universe are going to punish America for starting an unnecessary war in Iraq? On top of planetary karma, we are also going so far in debt on this war that we will never see the light of day again, unless and until this country atones for this heinous act against the planet. It's quite obvious that only a dictator like Saddam Hussein can keep peace in a country like Iraq, but the United States has arranged for his removal and execution and the cure for the problem over there is proving to be worse than the problem. The United States is going to pay a high price for trying to impose democracy on Iraq. It's one of the worse foreign policy decisions that any president of the United States has even made.

Personally, I think any and all concern with Jesus is about as "peripheral" as you can get and certainly amongst the slag we need to rid ourselves of if we want to get to the core of spiritual cultivation. If you suggest that there is much in the Gaudiya shastra that we can cut loose, I would suggest that before we get to cutting away portions of the authorized scriptures we should cut away all the slag of sentimental rubbish we have picked-up from unauthorized scriptures.

You prove my point very well. You can't prove it with the books, because the books don't support your silly idea. The only proof you have is conversational statements that Srila Prabhupada made to neophytes who obviously were not reading the books. I have shown proof from the books that contradict your fall-from-goloka theory and all you have is some conversational statements of Srila Prabhupada preaching to some neophytes who were not ready for anything except pablum philosophy. Keep eating pablum if you like. I prefer to go on to the curd subji and puri diet.

I think that Muralidhar's request for archaeological evidence of the Kimpurusa race having lived in South India is totally off-the-wall. We don't even have archaeological evidence of Dwaraka or so many other things described 5000 years ago in Krishna lila, much less anything archaeological from Ramayana that supposedly happened millions of years ago. I can't comprehend how Muralidhar could propose such a bizarre request in his attempt to prove his theory about the so-called radical claims of Bhaktivinode Thakur. For Saraswati Thakur to publish Sri Krishna Samhita is not his absolute statement that everything in the book is perfectly correct, but probably more along the lines that he simply was not concerned to hide anything about the life, the study and the teachings of Bhaktivinode. Bhaktivinode prayed like a Christian at times in his life. Bhaktivinode was a follower of Brahmoism at one time is his life. Bhaktivinode was not a vegetarian at times in his life. We can't take everything in the life of Bhaktivinode as some absolute standard. If we are supposed to accept everything Bhaktivinode said and did even before he took diksha and accepted his siksha guru, then that is a statement that diksha is not necessary and everything acharyas do in their whole life is to be accepted as absolute, even if it does not jive with shastra. To get into this conception that Valmiki was some joker who wrote falsities about the characters of Ramayan who were actually just tribal people from South India, is a very dangerous course. Srila Prabhupada never proposed such a radical conception and I don't think he would approve of it either. None of the great Goswamis of the Gaudiya sampradaya have ever objected to anything in the depictions of the Ramayan of Valmiki. Broadcasting these bizarre interpretations of the teachings of Bhaktivinode is just going to make a controversial parivar (Saraswata) even more controversial. I don't see any reason or any purpose in promoting these radical claims. Srila Prabhupada certainly never presented anything like that. I think we should just keep these kinds of claims to ourselves, as the Saraswata sampradaya doesn't need any more controversy or scandal than it already has.

It is very powerful if you apply Vaishnava symbols of tilaka on your body and chant proper mantras for applying tilaka. Also you should wear Tulasi beads around your neck and apply symbols of Vishnu on your body with Tilaka. Keep the Vaishnava tilaka symbol on your forehead at all times. Here is a web site that has the proper mantras for applying Tilaka. http://www.deityworship.com/temple_worship/temple_ready.htm Always, apply this tilaka after bathing 2 times daily. The more pure and powerful is your chanting of the Tilaka mantras the more effective and potent will be the protective shield provided by the Tilaka. Then learn to chant the Narayana Kavaca mantra for protection. You can find the mantras here in Srimad Bhagavatam. http://vedabase.net/sb/6/8/en1 With keeping Tilaka and chanting the Narayana Kavaca, you should start to see the Tantric curses being neutralized.

Vigraha, You should be ashamed to keep posting that nonsense on the forum. It is riddled with errors of all kinds. You should let somebody who actually knows the philosophy deal with these issues, because you obviously don't have a good grasp of shastra. The only support you can produce are some statements Srila Prabhupada made in letters or conversations and you take those and abuse them to support your mixed up ideas that can't be supported with actual shastra. We have already shown statements in the books that defeat your silly theory. Really, you don't have the knowledge or skills to write on this subject authoritatively. You should be embarassed with how ridiclulous you look. In the books of Srila Prabhupada you cannot support your claims. In the books, the fall from Goloka theory cannot be supported. It's obvious that Srila Prabhupada spoke conversationally to neophytes on the subject in a different way to avoid confusing them. But, if you read his books, then you can't support your ridiculous theory. The books don't promote the fall from Goloka theory and that is quite obvious. You are really making an ass out of yourself. If I were you I would just go hide in a corner somewhere and hope that everybody forgets about your ridiculous rantings on the fall from Goloka.

Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu offered his respects to Hanuman deities during his lila. If Hanuman was actually a human being portrayed as a monkey, wouldn't Mahaprabhu have had some problem with that? None of the six Goswamis or any other great Gaudiya acharya ever took exception to Hanuman being portrayed as a Kimpurusa or monkey-like. Then the whole story of Hanuman burning down Lanka with the fire on his tale is all a fabrication and a myth? I guess now we are supposed to think he was just a human with a torch and that a human jumped from South India to Lanka? No human can jump from South India to Sri Lanka. I am not so sure that Bhaktivinode was actually saying what he is being accused of saying. A personal conversation between Muralidhar with Sridhar Maharaja hardly equates with shastric verses that have been accepted with full faith for thousands of years. To call the Kimpurusa race as "people" is also not anything incomprehensible. Sugriva was the monkey king of Ramayana - not Hanuman. Even the Lord says Hanuman is Kimpurusa. Myself, I am not so convinced that from one paragraph in the introduction of Sri Krishna Samhita and a private conversation between Muralidhara and Sridhara Maharaja that Bhaktivinode was going against thousands of years of traditional belief that Hanuman was a primate/human Kimpurusa. Personally, I don't buy it. I think its way too radical for me to go against thousands of years of tradition and make Bhaktivinode out to be a lunatic with all this crazy talk about Hanuman being a human from south India. I am not going for it. It's way too revolutionary for me.

Here we find the basic fundamental flaw in Pradyumna Swami's writings. He writes: Ok, so he admits that most of this nonsense is based on his PERSONAL REALIZATIONS. Sadly, what he is referring to as "personal realizations" are actually personal speculation and mental concoctions. If "personal realizations" conflict with shastra, then these "personal realizations" are just so much nonsense fabrication.

Let's look at the errors in siddhanta in just the first post of this thread by this pretend person "Vigraha". (1)where Krishna’s numerable expansions of Vishnu and Lakshmi reside (he says the expansions of Vishnu are numberable, when in reality they are innumerable). (2)nitya-siddha-svarupa-atma-sat-cit-ananda-vigraha (concocted sanskrit verse that does not exist in shastra) (3)This dark cloud is nothing other than the rebellious dreams, thoughts, desires and impersonal escape of just a few of those eternal bodily personalities (nitya-siddha-svarupa-atma-vigraha devotees). (in fact the material universes of the cosmos come out of the pores of the Maha-Vishnu and is not the product of dreaming jivas) (4) Ones secondary consciousness enters the dark cloud in the Spiritual Sky or Brahmajyoti due to their desires not to be with Krishna as their devotional form or body, such disloyal dreams, thoughts and desires are projected or transmitted as a ‘secondary consciousness’ to that dark perishable cloud or mahat-tattva temporary material manifestation where they are then given counterfeit bodily material forms (ethereal and biological vessels) by the creator of that perishable place of the dreaming, Maha-Vishnu. (this term secondary consciousness of the jiva is a false term that he has manufactured and has no basis in shastra. it's an outright concoction) These are just a few of his bogus statements and clains in just the first four paragraphs of his nonsense concocted thesis on the fall of the jiva. I am sure that the rest of the thesis is just as bogus and misguiding as the first four paragraphs. this person is totally unfit and unqualified to be writing thesis papers on Gaudiya siddhanta. There are uninitiated devotees I know that know the siddhanta better than this Swami. How he ever got to be a Swami and who awarded him sannyasa is very much in question as he persists to write and publish bogus theories on the fall of the jiva that is based on his mental speculations and fabrications.

the author of the thesis in question has also taken the liberty to say that the lotus flower of Goloka is red, when in fact I don't find anywhere that the lotus of Goloka is described as any particular color. The lotus flower that Lord Brahma appeared on is said to be of red or yellowish color, because red is the color of passion and Lord Brahma is the guna-avatar of raja-guna. I don't see anywhere that the lotus of Goloka is described as red. I think the author of the thesis in discussion has taken liberty to say it is red when in fact that is not based on shastric evidence. I can't find any refererence as to any particular color that the lotus of Goloka has been described as being of that color. Again, I could be wrong. I don't know everything. Anybody got anything on this subject? I am sure he got his idea from the portrait that he is using to demonstrate his topic. But, other than some ISKCON portrait, I can't find any shastric description of the actual color of the lotus of Goloka.

It's obvious that this Pradyumna Swami thinks that he has the right to fabricate terms, statements and concepts that are nothing more than misinterpretations of Srila Prabhupada's words that cannot be traced to a specific shastric reference. I have never seen such an audacious and preposterous attempt by any ISKCON sannyasi. He is in a class by himself when it comes to fabrication, concoction and misinterpretation. It's the most ridiculous attempt at a philosophical thesis I have ever seen. It's actually a disgrace to Srila Prabhupada and his legacy of teachings. ISKCON needs to reel this loose cannon back in and stop his nonsense pontificating of fictitious doctrines that are being presented as Gaudiya siddhanta.

The author has referred to Maya Devi as the "wife of Maha Vishnu", and such bogus terms as "Maya Devi's shakti, the wife of Maha Vishnu". This is a slightly altered version as I have seen on other websites where he simply refers to Maya Devi as the wife of Maha Vishnu". It's in post #114. Anybody who is going around saying that Maya Devi is the wife of Maha Vishnu certainly has no business writing thesis papers on the fall of the jiva. It's obvious that his knowledge of siddhanta is lacking in areas other than the fall of the jiva subject. I am sure there are dozens of bogus statements in his writings are they are about 95% his own words and about 5% shastra. (that is a generous figure) I have never seen such an flimsy thesis as this one. It's almost all speculation and fabrication based on misinterpretation of a few statements of Srila Prabhupada. These are the kinds of Swamis that are going to be leading ISKCON someday. It's really sad to think about that.

According to the author of this nonsense thesis theory, Srila Sridhar Maharaja and all the Gaudiya Math sannyasis were "infected with impersonalism", whilst this Pradyumna Swami has got the perfect personalism down to a science. This refererence came from here..... http://www.isvara.org/forumen/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=5530

As a matter of fact, I am finding it very difficult to even find such a term as "atma vigraha" except as it appears several times in the writing of this Pradyumna Swami. I certainly can't find the Sanskrit term in the Gita and I haven't found the term in other other place except in the writings of this Pradyumna Swami. I am not so sure that the term "atma vigraha" is even a valid Sanskrit term. I could be wrong. But, I haven't found it in shastra yet. If anyone can find it, I would like to know where.

I am still at a loss to find the actual statement of Bhaktivinode where is explicitly states that Hanuman was a human being of South Indian ethnicity. Can somebody please help me find the exact statement that is causing all the uproar?

If my memory serves me correctly, Srila Bhaktivinode compiled Sri Krishna Samhita before he was initiated by Vipina Goswami and long before he became siksha disciple of Jagannatha das Babaji. The biography in GM version of Jaiva Dharma describes Srila Bhaktivinode as having compiled Sri Krishna Samhita while he was in Puri, before he came to be posted in Bengal. So, that was before he took formal diksha and before he accepted Jagannatha Das Babaji as siksha guru. This is not to minimize the book or the Thakur, but just to state an historical fact.

In "The Final Proof:The Jiva did Fall From Goloka", there is not ONE shastric reference - just a lot of mental rambling, conjecture and fabrication. The final proof is not proof at all, because there is not one shastric reference in the "final proof". The "final proof" is bogus. Apparently, the author thinks himself to be an authority on the level of Vyasadeva or a Vedic rishi. His final proof is nothing more than his own mental ramblings.

i've done some searching around the web and it appears that this thesis and theory is the brainchild of one Pradyumna Swami. http://pradyumnaswami.spaces.live.com/Blog/cns!3016C3218A4C8577!107.entry but, I find it quite curious and very suspicious that Prabhudumna Swami or one of his followers would post this thesis theory on this forum and conceal the identity of the true author. If a person is not even willing to attach his name to his works, then that is very suspicious and very questionable. I think Pradyumna Swami (whoever he is, I don't know anything about him), will someday be exposed for his flawed siddhanta and will be known as a fraud philosopher. If you do a search on "atma vigraha" you will find his thesis posted on several places around the web.

Being popular has never been on my agenda. Trying to understand the truth about what Srila Prabhupada has actually taught is more important to me than being popular or well-liked. I am a loner. It's not very much fun to be a loner, but it is the fate that has befallen me. I get a little uptight when I hear people wrongly accusing Srila Prabhupada no matter how great they are or how many followers they have. The problem is not in what Srila Prabhupada has said, but in the way people interpret his teachings and the agenda they have in trying to prove him to be incorrect about the siddhanta. Did anyone fully understand Srila Prabhupada? I don't think that anyone can fully understand Srila Prabhupada. Not even the greatest among his Godbrothers. Not I nor anyone else can even begin to understand the greatness of Srila Prabhupada. His preaching was so far beyond us that we can only glimpse the deeper purpose of his teachings. Srila Prabhupada has been preaching in the material world since time eternal. He was not some rotten grhasta that was a junior disciple of Srila Saraswati Thakur. His preaching tactics were something that he had refined millions of years ago. He was not learning as he went along. He had it figured out millions of years ago. Did any Godbrother fully understand Srila Prabhupada? I don't think anyone has fully understood Srila Prabhupada. I certainly don't make such a claim. did the godbrothers of Srila Prabhupada make a complete study of the life and precepts of Srila Prabhupada? Not one of them has. Most of their opinions are drawn from hearsay and secondhand information. That is no way to understand Srila Prabhupada.

but, before anyone goes to accuse Srila Prabhupada of saying that the parshadas of Krishna fall down to material existence, I would like them to please post the quote. I don't expect a reply. Because Srila Prabhupada never said any such thing. Anyone who accuses Srila Prabhupada of saying such a thing is simply a victim of their own mind. Srila Prabhupada never once said that any associate of Krishna in his pastimes has fallen down to material existence. Please don't accuse Srila Prabhupada of saying things he did not say. Please post your quotes where Srila Prabhupada said that a pure devotee of Krishna gave up his spiritual body to be born into material existence. Such statements don't exist. Please show me. I have never seen anything that proves that Srila Prabhupada said that pure devotees have fallen down to become worms in stool or microbic life. Again, my challenge is "PUT UP OR SHUT UP" about accusing Srila Prabhupada of preaching apasiddhanta. It is just plain evil to accuse Srila Prabhupada of such transgressions of siddhanta. He was sly and he was sharp, but he was never a liar. there are those out there who would be glad to prove that Srila Prabhupada preached apasiddhanta, but they are simply very unfortunate and very confused about the teachings and the mission of Srila Prabhupada A.C. Bhaktivedanta. Put away your bias and prejudice and read Srila Prabhupada with a objective mind. Srila Prabhupada said that we were previously "with Krishna". There is a quantum leap from that to saying that the parshadas of Krishna fall down to become worms in stool. Srila Prabhupada has been preaching in the cosmos since time eternal. He is not some amateur preacher that has some personal agenda. Srila Prabhupada is amongst the most ancient of souls who have been assisting the Lord in delivering fallen souls from the material existance. He is not some sadhaka trying to attain liberation.

That's a little bit too far into Mahabhava for me. The actual lovers of Krishna can call him a liar, but if a mortal soul calls Krishna a liar, then he is doomed. Krishna lies when it gives pleasure to his devotees, not when it makes them confused. Maybe Krishna is a liar, but Srila Prabhupada was not and in his purports he said that Krishna will never let his devotees down. Krishna's lies are more truth than what we call truth in the material world. Krishna's lies are so much pleasure for the devotees that it cannot be described. The shastra does not lie. Krishna lies when he is having too much fun. So, we can trust the acharyas even if we can't trust Krishna. that is my opinion............ Radharani is not a liar. She would never let a devotee fall down. When Krishna let's us down, then Radharani is there to take up the slack. Radharani certainly never allows any of her maidservants to fall down to become a worm in stool. She controls Krishna. Thank God for that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Don't make me laugh! I have a double hernia and it hurts when I laugh. OK, I get it now. We can only falldown once and then when we get back to goloka we have learned our lesson and we never get jealous of Krishna again and want our own flock of gopis. So, we just join the gopis and become one of them because we can never be like Krishna and have our own groupies to sport in the bowers of Vrindavan with? Now, I understand. Can you please show me the "only falldown once" reference in shastra. How about the actual statements of Srila Prabhupada that having once taken birth in the spiritual world one can never falldown? The fall-from-goloka theorists are blasphemers of Krishna. That is why I hate them so much. They blaspheme Krishna and call him a liar when he says he always protects his pure devotees. The fall from Goloka theorists actually hate Krishna. They accuse him of all sorts of terrible neglect of his devotees. It's very sad that these people have such a low opinion of Lord Krishna, that he would let his pure devotees fall down to become worms in stool.