sambya

its true that detachment is very hard to practice and maintain . only the highest of souls can actually be detached . other aspirants try to get attached to a higher cause ( their deities , mantra etc ) . but in persons who were perfectly detached we see an outburst of positivity . they feel for their wives or children even more than any ordinary person . when you are attached materially with your family you love them for what they give to you ( physical pleasure , security etc) . but a perfectly detached person loves his family for what they are . his love is not concentrated on his own little world and hence he loves all in his 'big' world . this you can notice in many sages and mahatmas of india . in a detached person the focus of love is on jivas . but in an attached person the focus of love is on his self and no one else . thus this second form of love is more short lived and perishes as soon as this 'self' is injured . whereas the first form of love is more mature and doesnt perish even if his self recieves any harm . what can be said , however , is that this kind of perfect detachment is a rarest of rare phenomenon . only a few individuals can attain to that blessed state .................... whereas the vast majority of us are illusioned into thinking displeasure or dislike as detachment .

thats better !!

with a concept like that im sure you are , no better than an animal that is !!!!

oh come on . dont use that term ........!!!! sounds weird and embarrassing !!

you have finished through all scriptures ???

there are some rare dreams which can be truly spiritual and mystical . but most of our dreams are not worth it . moreover how do you know it was a real spiritual revelation ? that is why spiritual aspirants are always taught to ignore such dreams . if they come its good . but forget about them the next moment and move on with your sadhan .....................if you cling on to it it shall ruin your sadhana !!

now worship for material gain in itself is not wrong but definately labeled as being inferior to other forms of prayer . hindu scriptures have always spoke of sakama( with desires ) and nishkama( without desire) modes of worship . majority of indians have always followed the former and will continue to do so in future because it is in the very nature of human race . we want a return !! even while asking for moksha or even bahkti we are seeeking a favour . this is a limitation of human birth . but out of the two seeking bhakti is considered more selfless and therefore more desirable and better . but one can only ask for bahkti when he has realised that this material world is false or temporary . before that one cannot be forcefully made to do bhakti ......... it comes from within . therefore many people pray for comforts and material benefits . but one should always remember that his ultimate goal of life is the surrender to the reality or supreme . and seeking material benedictions should be kept down to a minimum . i mean if you already have three cars and are praying for one more latest model , that amounts to greed and extremely bad . but suppose you are praying because you are in a bad financial state and want a little better and easier life , then that is better . its good that you can apperiaciate the need of mukti . but so long as you want anything from god you cannot progress in the field of mukti . even little of desires are to be avoided .mukti sounds very interesting and remedial but extremely difficult !! you can definitely go on with sakama prayers but just add one more line to your demands from god-- " teach me how to be desireless , how to remain contended in little and turn me nishkama " this would do for the present ...................

oh yes !! that was a bad incident , shamefull . but i guess quite natural for christian practitioners !! heres a link to the incident--

why did you flee from the other thread when answers were needed from you , and now brewing up the same topic here ?

what is 'mess' ? what mess are you speaking of ? if you mean changes in the fold of hinduism , isnt that a common phenomeneon all through the world in respect of all religions ? is not other religions also in equal mess ? isnt gaudiya vaishnavism itself a mess in that sense ? lastly , by your theory , iskcon movement would be the greatest mess(in all sense) ever in the history of religious movements. !!! elaborate this mythical term that you have coined -- mess

this not not 'learning' indian scriptures , when saying that the self is not the body , the caste , the sex , meant to educate people about the real aim in life and about the nature of their true self . it taught the people to gradually dissociate themselves from these temporary designations and look beyond the superficial truth . it was aimed at teaching non-attachement . but what you are doing here is subtly condemning the hindu faith and passing it off as non-attachment . ill give you an example - mahaprabhu knew his eternal position with krishna and that the relationship with his mother is only for this life . he adopted sannyasa as a recognition of his spiritual position . but still he kept his respect fro his mother intact and obeyed by her commands . he dis-associated himself from her but his love for her never reduced a bit !! this is real non-attachement and this in what is necessary in spirituality for progress !! what you are doing is actually more attachment than non-attachment . previously you were attached to christianity or hinduism ...........now all of sudden you learn that vaishnavism is the way..................and focus all your attention and attachments to vaishnavsim disrespecting others .

almost about the same value as in believing yourself to be a vaishnava --- a material word formed from some material phonetic sounds which does nothing in itself to elevate you spiritually !!!

okay ronin . im cutting it short since you are a busy man spending hours over internet !! tell us , what does a parent do when his young child calls him 'pa' instead of 'papa' ? does he kick him ? i guess not !! if there is any mistake why would the parent get angry ? what do you define as hindi ? the language that gathered a distinct shape only in the last 300 years and was promoted by the newly independent government to the level of state language ? what has hindi to do with 5000 years of hindu history ?

but did you notice that vaidic homa is so tougher than tantric homa . i mean a homa for kalipuja (tantric) is so easy compared to one in durgapuja(vaidic) . did you notice that ?

i would give the status to only sanskrit . do you know sanskrit ? if not then you are worthless as a hindu ( by your logic) you have not explained the relation between being a hindu and hindi . why not any other langauge ? hindi was a forced amalgamation of ragional dialects like maithili , bhojpuri , brajbhasa etc etc . where was hindi 500 years ago ? what scriptures were writen in hindi ? this is not to say that hindi is bad , but to make you understand that it is not indespensable nor necessary ............... learning sanskrit is what is really needed !! hope you get it .

ha ha !! here comes the chief of anti neo-hindu squad !!! beware all !!

yes it a known fact that hindi is an indirect derivative of sanskrit . but so were the other northern languages like oriya or gujarati !! bengali is more sanskritised than any other language and more accomplished in terms of literary enrichment and grammer than hindi . why not bengali then ? why hindi alone ? could you also please specify what relation does hindi have with being a hindu . i mean , what is so indespensible about hindi in order to be a hindu ?

yes , caste distinction and other vices did play a role for sure . no one can deny that ! but such rules came into force since the begining of the muslim era . for in the earliest days of temple worship in india you do not find such references -- for example no one have heard that any greeks were not allowed in entering a hindu holy place . the muslim atrocities and their strange and different mannerisms( to hindu eyes) also helped a lot to promote and solidify this untouchability concept and other orthodoxy . but whatever happens is as per lords will . therefore all this untouchabilty thing also was not without purpose . it was this orthodoxy and rigidity that unknowingly preserved the solidarity and integrity of the oppressed hindu civilization .

dreams are mere manifestations of subconscious minds and apart from providing some mental strength to an aspirant it is of no use . dreams are generally not even counted as spiritual encounters !!

thats okay ! i agree to you . im only saying that it was not something that was asked by the original poster . he inquired whether what he has heard is true . what does that mean ? krishna consciousness(whatever that means) ....................or i would prefer to say vaishnavism.............. exclusive from hinduism (as it it is understood today ) ????

how do you know that he wants to be a transcendentalist or just a practising hindu ? in the original post he just asked the truth about what he heard , not the ways to be a transcendentalist !!! also , if realizing oneself as a servant(dasya)is the only supreme goal then what about man who realizes oneself in any other rasa - say madhurya or shanta ?

deleted

hindi ?????!!!!!! what for ? why not tamil which is the second classical language of india ? why not bengali , assamese , punjabi , prakrit , pali and other apabrahmsa dialects ?? why not kahsi , garo , and santhali mothertongues ? do you know that hindu was not a language in proper sense and how much effort has gone into it to give it a language status ?

there are two prespectives through which one can veiw chaitanyadeva . in the first one he is a historical devotee of the lord . in this veiw he acted a a leader among men or a guru . his behavior towards people was that of a leader . a teacher . so naturally he couldnt discard his followers or their requests. but he always practised renunciation and abhorred material things . remember when jagdananda pandit(?) brought that pithcher of sandalwood oil from bengal to puri for him , and he refused it ? in second perspective he is god incarnate . here all the followers , wealth , girls etc etc are all 'his' !! he is the lord . but if an aspirant tries to be spiritual and at the same time be in contact with material objects it is sure to ruin his spirituality . but then again there are different levels. here im talking of the sincere aspirants who want to see god . not the ones merely strying to smoothe out their troubled lives with a dash of spiritual practices !! not the ones who are merely seeking to lead an alternative lifestyle !! for example , imagine an aspirant who has intense love of god and has tivra-vairagya or intense renunciation burning within him . he cannot withstand wordly talks and feels sepration every moment . imagine this fellow doesnt have any money with him and he is lying in the dust of vrindavan just dependent on god and nothing else . he is hungry and weak , but in his mind he is witnessing god's lila . he knows that he is testing him . a secret conversation is going all along between him and god . and every moment his love and surrender towards god is increasing by leaps and bounds . he knows that there is no other way for him than complete saranagati . now a rich man comes and gives him a big bank note . what will he do ? the first temptation would be to go out and seek some food to satisfy his hunger . the purchasing power that he has aqquired would instantly tempt him to go and purchase some food . this will reduce the saranagati and promote ego -- he knows he can eat any moment , he has money . but if he didnt have any money, things would have been completely different . if this can happen to a sincere aspirant with just one banknote , imagine what is the condition of people living in samsara with savings deposits !! quite unkowingly they are trapped in a vicious circle !! every moment your money is boosting your sense of karta(master) , your ego !! this is the danger of material objects -- even little is enough to sway you . brahmacharis are not even allowed to look at a womens picture . what may be mere 'looking' may develop into addiction and ruin your devotion . mahaprabhu discarded chhota haridas just for speaking to a women . a sincere aspirant should always stay away from even a little of material things . all this a not suitable for a vast majority of people of this world , although !!

no no !!! because you your bhakti life is shattered if even a little of those find its way in your life ............ even a little fragment !!!