Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

shvu

Members
  • Content Count

    1,850
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by shvu

  1. If we take the avatar route, then any position other than equating Siddharta <=> Gautama Buddha <=> Vishnu avatar will raise more questions and increase complexity. Simpler to go with the option of one Buddha who was the founder of the religion and also the predicted avatar. It is possible because, 1. The followers of Krishna & Rama see them just as they are described in the Puranas. This is not the case with the Buddha as his followers follow a different set of scripture which is very unlike the Puranas. 2. Krishna and Rama are not predicted. All the sources describing them are written after their existence on earth. This is different from the case of the Buddha who is a prediction. 3. Historically, Ashoka's patronage to Buddhism resulted in major changes in the status of the Brahmana in society. Perhaps for the first time, people from lower varnas were holding more authority than Brahmanas, which was a red flag. It is natural that they would have attempted to check their growth by discrediting the Buddha's teaching as false. 4. The Buddha avatar is not found in all avatar lists. There are several instances in the Puranas and even in the Mahabharata where the Buddha avatar is not mentioned. No such problem exists in the case of Krishna and Rama. 5. Finally, it is well know that the Mahabharata and all the Puranas have been subject to interpolation from a long time. Hence, it is not necessary to accept them verbatim. The general approach is look for corroboration, preferably in the Vedas and if not, then there is always the possibility of doubt. Cheers
  2. Just out of curiosity, All the branches of Vedanta hold that Karma is beginnningless, but there is an end to this bondage in Moksha, which is irrereversible. This is also explicitly stated in the Gita where Krishna describes his abode as the "abode of no return". But apparently some Prabhupada followers say it is possible to return from this abode and it is a matter of personal choice. My question is, other than this group, do we know of any other doctrine which holds a similiar position? Like the Vallabhas, Nimbarkas, etc.,? Cheers
  3. Spend as much time here as I have and you will have no trouble believing it. We live in a world where high school dropouts have the audacity to criticize a genius like Shankara without knowing even the basics of his doctrine! Cheers
  4. Here is a short analysis related to avatarizing the Buddha. Let us assume the Bhagavatam, Vishnu Purana and the Mahabharata are 5000 years old or at least older than the Buddha, i.e., before 2600 years old and the author through magical vision predicted the arrival of a Buddha whose teachings would be atheistic. Now flash forward to the time of Sidharta who has just been enlightened and is gradually getting famous. 1. Who is the superbrain who decided this Sidharta was the predicted Buddha? There were a number of famous teachers during that time, most of them preaching atheistic philosophies. 2. Or do we assume that somehow (magically) no one in the Buddha camp read the Mahabharata or any of the Puranas; were completely unaware of the prediction and just innocently named him Buddha? 3. There were never any predictions. A bunch of unscrupulous Purana editors inserted the story of Buddha being an avatar of Vishnu who intentionally came down to preach false philosphies. #3 is the most logical choice to me. There is extensive Purana research available from Winternitz, Hazra and others to show the Buddha was not avatarized until the 5th century AD. And perhaps the most compelling reason would be that the Buddhists themselves do not see the Buddha as an avatar. Hence, such ideas of a Buddha avatara that originate externally have no value. Simpler to see the Buddha as yet another teacher like Mahavira and others whose teachings became popular due to royal patronage & missionary activities from Ashoka and other kings. Cheers
  5. A general statement can be made that people who died a painful death; their loved ones who have been left behind to feel the pain of their loss, etc., are all suffering due to Karma. But it is impossible to get specific and create a link between two actual events and say one was the outcome of the other. No one has the means to know these things. Cheers
  6. There are also some Hindus who would make such a statement, but they are mainly people who lack clarity on the topic and are usually just repeating what they heard from uninformed sources. Standard dictionaries and textbooks are clear without ambiguity that Vaishnavism is a branch of Hinduism. If people are willing to disagree with these dictionaries and textbooks based on personal preferences and/or the words of some x,y or z, then that is a different topic altogether. Cheers
  7. Imagine for a moment how different life would be if do not invent excuses for everything we do and stopped fnding complaints about everything that others do that we do not do. Cheers
  8. And pretty much true for all religions. If we can successfully accomplish everything we set out to do; if we have no reason to be unhappy and/or bored, why will anyone bother with a God? Cheers
  9. So the highest Vaishnava sees himself as the lowest. What about the second highest Vaishnava? If he sees himself as the lowest too, then we have two people of different levels competing for the same position which will result in one being incorrect. The other option is the second higest Vaishnva sees himself as the second lowest of all. Extending this logic to the third highest, fourth highest, etc., we arrive at the conclusion that the average vaishnava is the only person who sees himself at the correct level where he is. Everyone else will be off, as higher guys see themselvesd as lower and lower guys see themselves as higher. Cheers
  10. If he does not want it, it would never exist, right? So the argument is moot. The fact is, Krishna is looking on as children starve, women get raped and civilian homes are bombed in war zones. He has been looking on and has done nothing to stop it. This is true whether man has free will or not. Cheers
  11. I recall reading Prabhupada during his last years once said or wrote "demons have entered the Krishna consciousness movement". Perhaps he was helpless at that point to do something about it. But since he communicated this discovery, why did this not serve as a wakeup call for others? Cheers
  12. The answer is in your question. 1. The Gods do not care or are incapable of making things better. 2. The Gods do not exist. Cheers
  13. I like the Tattavada interpretation detailed here. http://www.dvaita.org/shaastra/gita/bg514.html Cheers
  14. No, they don't. I see you still haven't given up offering your expert opinions on Mayavada. Cheers
  15. Anyway, as long as it was fun for all the participants I have a question for you. All these days gone and I was never aware of the Gaudiya position that chanting the Hare Krishna mantra at the time of death is sufficient to end reincarnation (I am not being sarcastic). Can you point me to some material online which explains this in more detail? I am curious to see how a case is made to lead to this conclusion as I am not aware of any other Gita interpretation that makes it possible to be liberated in one lifetime. And also if we have to explore this more, I suggest another thread as this one has outlived its usefulness. Thanks
  16. If only this simple exchange had happened a month or two earlier! We could all have saved ourselves a lot of sparring. Cheers
  17. It is so easy to get, if you shed your sentiments and look at it objectively and dispassionately for just a minute. Just like Prabhupada was not qualified to assign varnas to his disciples, neither was he qualified to know who was an avatar and who was not. Btw, I doubt even theist will agree with you that christianity is a form of Vaishnavism. At least, I do not recall such explicit statement from him. We will take you as an example. In your next life you may be born somewhere where you have no relation to Jesus and would care less about his authenticity or nature. After that you will live several more lives before getting to Vrindavana and meeting Prabhupada. But Prabhupada will not be Prabhupada there! The thing is, when you get there after all these countless lives, why will you be fixated on people you knew in this life? You are not going to remember any of this. Even if you do, they are people you related to, in just one life out of billions. The mistake you are making is you are taking your physical identity from one arbitrary life out of countless lives and imagining it to be your permanent identity. By now, Prabhupada would have taken birth somewhere and will have no memory of his past life. The same will happen to everyone. Cheers
  18. Raises a curious point. Granting that the identity of Jesus as a Vaishnava was not Sidhanta and was instead a pravachana tool to lure Christians, it still remains a baseless claim which would make it false. So is it OK to utter falsities as long as it is part of Pravachana? What is the justification for this position? Cheers
  19. The same logic should be equally and fairly applied to Jesus as well – for it to have any meaning. Turning water into wine or healing the blind are not qualifications. Yes, we know better magicians than Jesus and Sai baba who - unlike them - did not introduce a religious angle into their magical tricks. But if it worked for Jesus, then it should work for Sai Baba. To state the converse, if it does not work for Sai Baba, it cannot work for Jesus as well. It is that fairness thing I was talking about earlier. Now Sai Baba has millions of devotees who are perfectly happy with his status – whatever they see it as. They have a positive relationship with their Guru and are thankful for his presence in their lives, in spite of all the damaging, unfounded material circulated about him. Now compare this reality with what our distingushed iskcon colleaues have to say on this forum; people who have no knowledge about Sai Baba beyond what they read in trashy articles and yet consider themselves qualified to sit in judgement of his credibility. And again, who was the one who said Sai Baba’s claim to a religious icon is due to his ability to perform magic? Cheers
  20. Why is it a shame to the world? Cheers
  21. But that has been the position on Smriti for a long time. It is valid only if it is in line with Shruti or else, it is invalid. Madhva back in the 13th century wrote about the problem of multiple Mahabharata recensions and the difficuly of finding authentic portions of the text. He completely discarded Valmiki Ramayana as a valid source for the story of Rama. Cheers
  22. Like I said earlier, that is not the act of a coward. It was the smart move. During Shivaji's times, the marathas were not equipped to battle the huge Mughal army. So instead of direct combat, they engaged in guerilla warfare and found a lot of success which would most certainly not have been possible if they had fought them head-on. Does that make the Marathas cowards? I believe Rama and Krishna (if they existed) lived and died like regular humans. They were born just like other humans are born, they grew up over time just like everyone else, shaved, ate, slept, etc., just like everyone else. I had posted here earlier once that they would have even had internal organs like a liver, etc., which was met with shock and dismay by the pious devotees of this forum. Somehow, for some reason, to them an avatar can only have externally visible organs. But all that aside, what kind of proof are you asking for? What kind of proof do you think is possible? Cheers
  23. That is an admission of a very rare nature from a Prabhupada disciple. It is always refreshing to see someone not take the "I know Vaishnavism better than Indians/Hindus because I have read a couple of Prabhupada books" attitude. Cheers
  24. And once again, CBrahma - the greatest dodger of the 21st century - avoided the explicit quote from Sanatana Goswami on the definition of a Vaishnava which is different from the definition that Prabhupada made up to pull in Jesus & Christians. A vaishnava is one who is initiated into the Vaishnava mantra - Sanatana Goswami Anyone is a Vaishnava as long as we say he is. Therefore Jesus and Mohammad are Vaishnavas - Prabhupada You ought to be play dodgeball man. Dodge, duck, dive, dip and dodge. Cheers
  25. Have you heard of "innocent until proven guilty?" Don't believe everything you hear about Sai Baba. All the talk you hear are from people who never met him or any of his devotees. They are just flapping their jaws based on hearsay. Cheers
×
×
  • Create New...