Haridasdasdas

What is the beginning of Hindu love and walking with the divine as friends? What about sin and being separated from friendship?

 

And what about turning back from sin, why would one, how so? What crosses to disunion? Where does the will and strength come from?

 

Can you be forgiven and have a clear conscience again, like a small child, and the hope of all good things restored? What happens and how?

 

Shalom.

Wow, I'm going to leave a better person to answer your questions, but you have an absolutely fantastic way of looking at spirituality.

Seriously, whatever you do will probably be a success.

Hare Krishna

Look, how much more simple can I make it then I already have?

 

If Hinduism equals Krishna consciousness then what do you say to those Hindus who don't accept Krishna as the Supreme personality of Godhead?

 

Krishna consciousness is the natural consciousness of the soul in liberation. Do you think every hindu is liberated?

 

Nor are all the Hare Krishna's really fully Krishna conscious. It is a rare condition to find such a rare soul in the world.

 

Krishna consciousness is not a belief system that you just identify with or are born into or enter into by the performance of certain religious rites and rituals.

 

If this isn't clear enough then I apologize.

Hinduism can be Krishna Consciousness though. Whether that it guadiya or not.

Do you deny that?

theist , i wanted to know where is it suggested that buddha was a shaktavesa avatar . i want the precise scriptures and some sound logic also . im sure you would be able to provide some , being a harekrishna (they dont move a inch without 'authentic' scriptural qotations) .

 

by what logic ( or wildest possible imagination ) can buddha and bhaktivinoda thakura(because he was a shaktavesa too) be compared ?

 

but i think i already know the answers........either you will shout and argue blindly till everyone gets a headache with an accute lack of logic or leave the thread backdoor !!

 

 

however , it will be better and more respectable for you if you simply say that you dont have the answer( none of us here know everything ) and admit that prabhupada sometimes did speak without corroboration from 'authentic' scriptures !!!!

It says it in the first canto of the Bhagavatam, but it doesn't say shaktavesa, The Bhagavatam makes Buddha sound more like a full avatar, according to the Bhagavatam, he's Visnu Tattva, so that's a long way from shaktavesa, right?

I don't know, but I don't see that he's shaktavesa either.

But Parasurama is sometimes called Shaktavesa as well and hes one of the Visnu Tattva. Confusing.

You can't see some truth in Advaita? How about this world is illusion and reality (the true self) is Brahman. We may then disagree on finer points as to the nature of illusion and self.

 

An advaitain may say "I am" God. We can agree but still the relationship to Krishna is we are the servator Godhead and He is the served Godhead.

 

Why do you think shaktya-vesa avatars like Lord Buddha & Maharaja Prithu are worshipped as incarnations of God? Because they are!

 

Certain dualists may say they are only jivas and not God but Caitanyaites say they are both. God as servantor God.

 

"Learned transcendentalists described this non-dual substance as Brahman, Paramatma and the Supreme Personality of Godhead."

 

 

 

Oh you are so generous to Prabhupada.

Perhaps you should consider the word 'acintya', which basically nullifies most debate on the matter.

This thread is ridiculos and inflammatory ONLY to the ignorant ones. Those who wished to learn and accept that they are trapped in an illusion now will learn many things.

 

Truth can be learnt ONLY by examining things which one does not like to examine, NOT by turning one's back to it. Good example here could be Gautama Buddha who discard EVERYTHING to seek the Truth.

 

Ignorant people like to turn their backs on their problems and dislike others pointing out their mistakes or advising them. For people like this, as long as no one tells them that they are ignorant, they are happy and blissful.

In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna says he is God.

I don't care how you interpret that, whether it is literal, whether he is this part of god, this avatar, what is God outside of him, but it is quite plain and simple.

What does aham mean?

10.8

aham sarvasya prabhavo

mattah sarvam pravartate

iti mattva bhajante mam

buddha bhava samanvitah

Krishna is not referring to someone else, regardless of how you interpret His identity.

4.1

Sri Bhagavan Uvaca

imam vivasvate yogam

proktavan aham avyayam

vivasvan manave praha

manur iksvakave bravit

How can you say it is someone else's Gita? It was not written by Krishna, it was spoken by Krishna, nobody is claiming that he wrote it down.

Yes, the OP is inflamatory, please read his origional post. I wasn't calling you inflammatory, but Ronin's comments that Iskcon devotees are liars or something is just ridiculous.

Theist and everyone of his peers here have proven that they have not read a single word of the Advaita doctrine. Of course, to their way of thinking, that is not a reason to stop pontificating on the topic.

 

You will find that anything he says about Advaita will be incorrect and cannot be corroborated by any work on Advaita.

 

Cheers

Caitanya says not to hear from the advaitins, so what kind of Gaudiya would he be if he were an expert in Advaita? If he knew it all, you would no doubt criticise him for not following his path properly. So what's the value of your judgement?

If you do not know basics, then you should go do your homework first. Discussion forums are not really well suited to learn fundamentals.

 

Cheers

If I thought there was a problem in Caitanya's theology I would not follow it.

I have already asked you to stop saying 'cheers', are you an alcoholic as well as a flesh eater?

This thread pretty much sums up everything that is wrong in people's attitude to religion.

What is this rubbish that this man cannot do some Ganesh ritual because his wife is Catholic? If the people saying this cannot provide scriptural basis for their wild and outlandish claims, then forget it.

If Ganesh hated non-Hindus, would He be worth worshipping? All these differences are man made. Aligning yourself with a particular group means very little.

Lotuses grow out of the mud, are they also tamasic? And, just because it is classified as a fungus, doesn't mean that it doesn't still have many beneficial properties.

A lotus is a flower, a mushroom is a fungus, which is commercially grown in the dark.

Nobody has ever said that mushrooms were bad for the gross physical body. You think things are simply good or bad. It's not that simple. Fluoride, for example, is toxic, hence it is regulated in childrens toothpaste since it can poison them. It is, however, very good for teeth.

Creative indeed, since "acintya-bheda-abheda-tattva" does NOT actually reconcile "advaita and dvaita philosophies."

Why not? Are you just going to state how you feel or are you going to use the forum?

'does not' means nothing, please explain.

i myself is born in a jain family.jains dont belive in any one behind creation.they say it happened by chance.thay dont belive in any bhagavan.thay say any mortal human can become god.they say in this yuga no one can get liberation.according to them lord Krishna is suffering in hell.reason because he dances with so many girls in rasa dance,he was responsible for the mahabharat war etc.they say Brahma,vishnu,siva,all demigods are subbordinate to their tirthankaras. lord Krishna and Rama were just ordinary people with some powers according to them.many many more thing which are totally atheistic and against the vedas.

How depressing. Jainism just sounds like one big bring-down. I like potatoes, dammit.

Where do you guys get these rules from?

 

1) What about Casper, the friendly ghost? If he cannot appear in the "area" too, then that is simply not fair. Corrupt individuals are allowed to enter the "area" and even become Gurus, but Casper cannot enter the area, simply because he is a ghost. Isn't that bad?

 

2) In a more general case, why is that shallow people, megalomaniacs, pedophiles, etc., can enter the area, but ghosts cannot? What makes the ghosts any worse than these people?

 

Cheers

Casper isn't real perhaps?

Ghosts operate on a subtle plain(sp?), and not a gross material plain. I guess that would be the answer.

What is this 'cheers'? Are you drinking?

Vegetarianism is cool. But no one should talk about it lest kaiser get upset.

Haha, I love it. That has to be one of the poorest posts on this board.

Seriously, why eat meat? He can't answer that.

I hope the administrators will delete this ridiculous and inflammatory thread.

Krishna says 'Aham sarvasya prabhavo'

'I am the source of all the worlds.' More or less.

So why did he say 'aham' if he was not referring to himself?

Clearly the OP is not very intelligent, and may not have read Bhagavad Gita.

It is not obvious to me. Based on his (theist) posts on this topic now and in the past, here is his positon as I understand it.

 

1) Hindu is a mundane concept.

2) Shaiva is a worshipper of Shiva (sectarian), Shakta is a worshipper of Shakti (sectarian) but Vaishnava is *not* a worshipper of Vishnu (not sectarian).

3) Vaishnavism is the only true religion.

4) Per this new definition of Vaishnavism, Christians and Muslims are also Vaishnavas. However, India based systems like Shaiva, etc., are demi-god worshippers and not Vaishnavas. Only foreign religions qualify.

5) Hindus should not call themselves Hindus as it is all one big mess.

6) The only recourse appears to be they should all become Hare Krishnas and call themselves Vaishnavas. Everything else is mundane.

7) Mayavada is poison.

 

Cheers

I apologise for my assumptions and I apologise for using 'obvious' twice in a sentence.

In Caitanya's time, the chancellor of Gauda(?) was a Hindu. Everyone else was a Muslim. It was a Muslim government, but they would not trust a Muslim to look after the money.

You can find this in Antya Lila volume 1, I forget where exactly though.

This is a very long thread of people who as far as I can see all agree with each other to the answer to the initial question.

Do you mean Advaita is Hinduism and Krishna consciousness is not? Or do you mean Advaita is Krishna consciousness and Hinduism is not? Or do you mean Vaishnavism, including Advaita, is Krishna consciousness, but Hinduism is not per se? What do you mean?

 

Anyway, I think Advaita is compatible with Krishna consciousness. The difference between Advaita and Dvaita or Gaudiya Vaishnavism, seems to be mainly the different readings of the fundamental relation between God (or Krishna) and individual souls (or Jivas); I.e., monism versus dualism or inconceivable oneness and difference.

 

After all, Adi Shankara apparently wrote: "Worship Govinda, Worship Govinda, Worship Govinda. Oh fool! Rules of grammar will not save you at the time of your death"..

Obviously he means that Hinduism is not confined to Gaudiya Vaisnavism. That was obvious.

What about the good Karma accrued by meat eaters for they hasten the process of the animal taking a better birth in its next life? If it were not for them, the animal would languish on planet earth for a long time. The butcher in the Mahabharata is actually shown as an intelligent guy by the author (unless it was a British conspiracy).

 

The Guru in the above post acknowledges that we plant killers/eaters are sinning too, though in "lesser amounts", but we have to commit these sins as we need to survive. Isn't there somethng fundamentally wrong here? If the only way to survive is to sin, then the model is flawed somewhere.

 

The whole meat-eating concept exists because the creator God created the concept of the food chain containing animal life. There is no avoiding this fact. And then, it becomes meaningless to say the same God will curse you for that. If he really really did not want meat-eating on the planet, then his creation would have only contained Herbivore species.

 

Being vegetarian is cool, but I dislike vegetarians sporting a holier-than-thou attitude and criticizing meat-eaters, McDonalds, etc. Really no different from Hare Krishnas criticizing Shaivas, Mayavadins, Kundalini Yoga, etc. It comes across as extremely shallow.

 

Cheers

The crack addicts who roam the streets of the various cities of the world often have no chance to become a yogi/devotee/etc, so by your logic we should kill them. Local law enforcement may take a different view of this.

You have a choice.

Either you can eat slain animals or you can eat other foods and still live a healthy life.

Lions etc do not have this choice. Humans do, provided they have sufficient agricultural capabilities.

Krishna has also allowed us to become paedophiles, mass murderes etc. How can he give us hands that can kill and condemn us for using them? This logic is flawed.

Plants have life and the taking of life results in karma, this Guru, whoever he is, is presumably taking this statement from the vedas.

You probably beleive it is worse to kill a person than it is to kill an animal. The law would agree with that, wherever you live. The same principle applies to the difference between killing a plant and an animal. Simple.

This is not a complex issue. To suggest that people stop eating animals when there is no shortage of plant based foods is not shallow.

Of course, to claim to be 'better than another' because you do so is silly, and as you said, shallow. Even a pigeon is a vegetarian, they don't think highly of themselves for it.

This is not complicated, it is really simple. Even a child can understand this, and they often do, which is why so many meat eating parents lie to their children.

No. Garlic and onion are very good anti-inflamatory herbs. The only reason people don't eat onion and garlic is because they are considered to be rajasic foods by Vaishnavas. They also think that mushrooms, which have been considered as anti-virals, are rajasic and avoid them.

Mushrooms are tamasic, not rajasic.

That is because they are a fungus grown in the dark. If I grow a fungus in the dark what guna would you suppose it to be in?

''you can't be a Hindu unless you are born into it'' i hear this from a person in a web is it true?!

 

a friend of mine help me understand a lot about Sanatana Dharma teachings and he's Hindu Shaivism from Malaysia and he told me that was not true...I don't now But is it true?? NOT that i belive him, but i still wanna be sure?!

 

and i heard and i have see Vishnu,Shiva,shakti Devotees in Europe places and America to

i just wanna now again and fell 100% sure that anyone can enter or have a slap in the faces right now.

Please ask him what his basis for saying that is.

"I've always imagined that the point of polygamy was mainly because of there being less men than women(wars etc), and the women needing protection."-Haridasdasdas

 

Reagarding Post no 6,It appears to be logical, and convincing. Thankyou Haridasdasdasji!

 

So can we still say that bigamy or polygamy is though illegal, it is not unethical and immoral?

Thank you.

I wouldnt say unethical or immoral, but simply impractical, and if it were practised widely it could threaten society, with jealous men being killed because of the shortage of wives.

I agree. In the Kaliyug its adharm to keep more than one wife.

Yes, but I wouldn't say that is always true, just true here and now.

The mantra " Om Kleem Keshavay Namah " I would like to know if this helps in attracting women . Second i want to know that where can i find the actual word Kleem written in sanscrit because i was told by a guru to pronounce it as kleen not kleem . While chanting this mantra is it required to be a vegatarian . And also should this be chanted out loud or within the mind.

Maybe you should stop eating meat and chasing women anyway? These are both poison.

Why do you need some benefit from Krishna before you leave the animals alone? Why do you think Krishna is just there to satisfy your lust?

This is materialism not religion.

Does anyone actually think this is a worthwhile discussion? If such a discussion constantly goes around in circles, does it not suggest that it is supposed to do so? I don't know, but I think so.