leyh

We can all benefit by constantly remembering Lord Caitanya's instruction to be humble: trnad api sunicena taror api sahisnuna amanina manadena kirtaniyah sada harih "One should chant the holy name of the Lord in a humble state of mind, thinking oneself lower than the straw in the street; one should be more tolerant than a tree, devoid of all sense of false prestige, and should be ready to offer all respect to others. In such a state of mind one can chant the holy name of the Lord constantly." (Siksastaka, Text 3)

There are four lines of disciplic succession: one from Lord Brahma, one from Lord Shiva, one from Laksmi, the goddess of fortune, and one from the Kumaras. The disciplic succession from Lord Brahma is called the Brahma Sampradaya, the succession from Lord Shiva (Sambhu) is called the Rudra Sampradaya, the one from the goddess of fortune, Laksmiji, is called the Sri Sampradaya, and the one from the Kumaras is called the Kumara Sampradaya. One must take shelter of one these four sampradayas in order to understand the most confidential religious system. In the Padma Purana it is said, sampradaya-vihina ye mantras te nisphala matah: "If one does not follow the four recognized disciplic successions, his mantra or initiation is useless." In the present day there are many apasampradayas, or sampradayas which are not bona fide, which have no link to authorities like Lord Brahma, Lord Shiva, the Kumaras or Laksmi. People are misguided by such sampradayas. The sastras say that being initiated in such a sampradaya is a useless waste of time, for it will never enable one to understand the real religious principles. (Srimad-Bhagavatam 6.3.21, purport by His Divine Grace A.C Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada) For those great souls from non-Vedic traditions like Jesus Christ Prophet Muhammad who are not linked to the above mentioned disciplic successions, how do we accept them as being representatives of the Lord? It seems to me that by doing so, we would be accepting there are bona-fide representatives of God outside the disciplic successions. Would that not contradict Srila Prabhupada's assertion that to be initiated in a sampradaya not connected with the authorities like Lord Brahma, Lord Shiva, the Kumaras or Laksmi will never enable one to understand the real religious principles? I am inclined to see the disciplic successions not as mere sectarian tradition but as a formal and informal network of devotees and spiritual knowledge which originated from the great authorities and ultimately the Supreme Lord.

Not just 2003, but every year will be destructive so long as humanity clings to atheism and materialism.

Dear Shvu: If you wish to take your information about Krsna from mundane academic sources like "big-big universities" or the dictionaries, etc. By all means do so. I will take my information about Krsna from His representatives.

My understanding of Hindu Dharma is that it is another name for Vedic civilization, but since "Hindu" is a term manufactured by Muslims in reference to the Sindhu river, it is an imprecise term. It is rather like describing Christians as "Jordanians" because Jesus preached in the vicinity of the River Jordan. Maybe the understanding of "Vaisnava" has sectarian overtones for some people, but certainly not for Prabhupada. Didn't he say that Jesus Christ is a Vaisnava? I don't think Jesus ever applied tilak or had a sikha. Srila Prabhupada: In our society, there are many Mexicans, Canadians, Indians, Jews, and Muslims, but they no longer consider themselves Muslims, Christians, Jews, or whatever. They are all servants of Krsna. That is Brahman realization. Mr. O'Grady: That's giving it a name also. Srila Prabhupada: Yes, a name must be there. But although, for example, your name is different from that of another Irishman, you nonetheless all feel that you are Irish. One's name may be different, but that doesn't matter. The quality should be one. That is required. When we acquire Krsna's quality, then, despite different names, there will be peace. That is called so 'ham. The names of different people in a nation may be different, but all the people feel the same nationality. ("An Awareness of What Is Best And Most Beautiful" From Chapter 7 of Science of Self Realization by His Divine Grace A.C Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada) So a name must be there, but if the name is used in a way that transcends materialistic boundaries and sectarianism, then it is all right.

Dear Shvu: Isn't it true that Krsna was worshipped before the term "Hindu" was concoted? So what would be the objective description of Krsna before that time? To understand Krsna with the aid of mundane dictionaries is like trying to understand Christianity with the help of Marxist literatures. Different platform. And where did I say there is no such thing as "Hindu Dharma"? I quoted Srila Prabhupada as saying that Krsna Conciousness is not Hindu Dharma.

Dear Guest: I don't think it's offensive to say Krsna is a Hindu god. It's simply incorrect. This is not my opinion, but the opinion of Krsna's pure devotee His Divine Grace A.C Bhaktievdanta Swami Prabhupada: They are attracted to Krsna. These people, they are... (Hindi) But you are taking Krsna as Hindu. That is your mistake. Krsna is... Hindu ne. He is God. He is God. God Hindu ne, Mussulman ne, Christian ne, Parsi ne--God is God. (Hindi) And I am also not interested to preach Hindu dharma. (Hindi) ...Krsna dharma. Krsna consciousness, that is the only dharma. (Hindi) ...Krsna literature. It is not a Hindu dharma literature. (Hindi) (Room Conversation,November 7, 1970, Bombay)

Krsna is not a Hindu god. Krsna is God.

Dear Ethos: This is my final statement to you on this matter. It is final because I believe that further dialogue with you will not be constructive, but I'm still willing to give it one last shot. Please think it over. Don't consider it an attack. I harbour no ill feelings towards you. Maybe some exasperation, but definitely no anger or hostility. I am speaking to you as a friend, as a fellow aspiring devotee of Srila Prabhupada and Krsna. Prabhu, I'm sure that in your study of Krsna Consciousness, you must have came across this concept of Vaisnava aparadaha? It is simply defined as the blasphemy of devotees and it is considered to be very serious as it can completely uproot our devotional creeper. Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu Himself humbly requested His devotees:"My Dear Devotees,I humbly Beg all of You,Please!Do Not Commit Vaishnava Aparadha." I am not a Vaisnava. I am standing outside the camp of the Vaisnavas waiting for their remenants. So I do not maintain that you have committed any offence to myself. But what about the Vaisnavas in this Forum? You have made sweeping personal attacks on "you people" or the 'clowns" in "the peanut gallery", calling everyone all kinds of names in the name of truth and being philosophical. I beg to submit that some of your words have been so recklessly acidic towards the Forum Members that Vaisnava aparadha has clearly been committed. As far as my own self is concerened, I started out by trying to point out that your approach towards Bill was unnecessarily heavy. And as our exchange developed, I thought I detected an arrogance in your posts where you presumed to judge Bill's sincerity (without the perfect knowledge of the Supersoul) and I thought you were trying to imitate Prabhupada's heavy preaching. I am sorry if I have offended you by doing so, but I have to speak the truth as I see it. Please try to understand. I carry no Ethos bashing agenda. However, I am mortified to see that many of your recent posts can only be described as venomous. I know I am unqualified to preach nor should I engage in fault finding, but I cannot sit back in silence to watch you unleash your hurtful words on others.Your words are hurtful. Can you not see that? Does that not concern you? When you type words like "clowns", "opportunists" etc. They are not just directed into an abstract cyber world. These words are read by people, many of whom are sincerely trying to know God, and some of them are even trying to love and serve God. Don't you think that it is possible that your reckless words might disturb these people? Is that your intention? I am not sure how you will respond to this post. A cynical part of me thinks that you are just going to "retaliate" (how can one retaliate against a non-existent attack?) with another acidic post about how "you people" just don't get it, that we're apathethic and we are clowns, etc. But another part of me --- the part that still believes that anyone who is interested in Krsna Consciousness (which you obviously are) will somehow listen to reason and is open to respectful dialogue, hopes that it will not be as my cynical part predicts. I humbly apologize if I have committed any offences against you. In the expression of truth, we have to take some risks and sometimes in dealings with devotees, Vaisnava aparadha may be committed especially by foolish persons like myself. But we should always be careful not to commit offences against those who are servants or trying to be servants of the Lord. The Lord is never tolerant of those who commit offences against His devotees.Hare Krsna.

"And therefore take good heed unto time, how thou spendest it; for nothing is more precious than time. In one little time, as little as it is, may heaven be won and lost." (The Cloud of Unknowing by An English mystic of the Fourteenth Century, The Fourth Chapter)

"To believe in God for me is to feel that there is a God, not a dead one, or a stuffed one, but a living one, who with irresistible force urges me towards more loving." (Vincent Van Gogh)

"Satan fears and trembles before humble souls." (Padre Pio)

If only I kept quiet about asking Ethos to go easy on Bill. Then he wouldn't have exploded and Bill would still be here.I screwed up. Note:I had wanted to make this post in reply to Mahak's but replied to Ethos instead. I deleted and re-posted, but Theist had already swiftly replied before I could re-post which explains the inverted order of his reply to this post. Thanks, Theist. But I still feel I'm at fault here.Haribol.

Dear Bill: If you are still reading this: I don't think there is a need for you to stop participating in this Forum. I'm sure none of the members here have a problem with you posting here. There was some kind of misunderstanding, but that's the way of the material world. Nothing's perfect here. Let's make the best bargain we can out of a bad deal.

catur-vidha bhajante mam janah sukrtino 'rjuna arto jijnasur artharthi jnani ca bharatarsabha "O best among the Bharatas [Arjuna], four kinds of pious men render devotional service unto Me--the distressed, the desirer of wealth, the inquisitive, and he who is searching for knowledge of the Absolute." (Bhagavad-gita 7.16)

Dear ethos: I am sorry if I have misunderstood your words. I believe I have been respectful to you in my posts and since it is quite evident that you have been unable to recipocrate, then I think our exchanges should stop here for now. Hare Krsna.

Dear Bill: I'm glad to hear from you and I hope you are well. Interfaith dialogues is one of my concerns because I have seen some really ugly sides of religious fanaticism. I used to be a Christian some years ago, but even then I could never accept the conviction amongst many Christians that Christianity was the only way to God. I remember, during my days as a Christian, a conversation with another Christian who told me in no uncertain terms that he didn't care whatever religion a person belonged to, as long as that person didn't believed in Jesus Christ, that person was going to hell. The way he said it was so arrogantly dismissive that I just got up and walked away. Since then, I have come to realize that "Christianity", "Hinduism", "Islam" etc are all man-made designations. By reading the books of His Divine Grace A.C Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, the Founder-Acarya (spiritual master) of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness, I have learnt that God is neither Christian, Hindu, Muslim or whatever man-made designation that His children have tried to attach to Him throughout the centuries. God is transcendental to all these material descriptions and a devotee of God should similarly rise above all these "I am Christian", "I am Hindu" or 'I am whatever" designations and simply come to the conclusion: "My actual position is that I am an eternal servant of God." Isn't this a beautifully universal and non-sectarian philosophy? The supreme religion is not any "ism" or doctrine. It is simply love for God. It is stated in Srimad Bhagavatam, a scripture of the Vedic canon: sa vai pumsam paro dharmo yato bhaktir adhoksaje ahaituky apratihata yayatma suprasidati "The supreme occupation (dharma) for all humanity is that by which men can attain to loving devotional service unto the transcendent Lord. Such devotional service must be unmotivated and uninterrupted to completely satisfy the self." (Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.2.6) So any process which helps us to attain this goal of unmotivated and uninterrupted love for God is to be embraced and any process which is unfavourable for our advancement towards this goal is to be rejected. So if you feel that by accepting Jesus as your spiritual master, you can know and love God, you should follow Jesus.I revere Jesus as one of my spiritual masters and still look to him for inspiration. Vaisnavism is a school of Vedantic philosophy. There are many scholarly devotees here who can give you sound information on both Vaisnavism and Vednanta. I am neither scholalry nor am I a devotee. (I am trying to be a devotee)The role of an "interested outsider" would described me perfectly. Looking forward to hearing you again.

Dear ethos: You ask: "Why waste time with people?" But isn't Krsna Consciousness about people and being personal? To paraphrase a saying of Jesus: "The philosophy is made for the man and not the man for the philosophy." If we are purely concerned with philosophy, we run the risk of becoming fanatics --- going "in your face" with the philosophy while disregarding the human touch. I'm sorry if I have irritated you and I certainly have no intention of doing so. I was just trying to be a voice of caution to balance the heaviness that I saw in your posts.I apologize if my words have disturbed you.

Dear Ethos: I am not interested in bashing you, nor anyone else for that matter.Please don't feel that way. Unlike Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, I have no beauty to produce. That should not be surprising at all as I am simply fallen. From reading your posts, I can sense your enthusiasm in preaching the philosophy of Krsna Consciousness. But we have to understand this: It is a fact that prasadam is spiritually beneficial, but if we stuff prasadam into anyone's mouth, chances are that person will vomit. It seems to me that Giveawayboy has just began to make a few posts on this Forum. I just don't think it's necessary to press ("Did you look at the critique on Christianity by Bhaktivinode Thakura? You did not reply in response to it. Why?") him to reply to your posts in a manner that might come of as being harsh and heavy. In preaching, there is a danger of coming on too strong. Have you considered the possibility that Giveawayboy needs time to reflect on the writings of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura that you have highlighted? The writings of Vaisnava acaryas may be difficult to understand for those from a Judeo-Christian tradition and/or those unfamiliar with the Vedic philosophy which is the foundation for the huge melting point of ideas known to the world as "Hinduism". I'm all for dialogue. But at a friendly and relaxed pace. IMO, dialogue between spiritual traditions should be like slow chats at a cafe between people who meet and gradually develop a relationship over a course of time rather then like exchanging rhethoric at a political debate. But that's just me. If you are the confrontational type, you may opt for the exchange-of-rhethoric approach, but please remember: if we neglect the personal aspect and just pursue the philosophy, we run the risk of becoming impersonalists and that is the pitfall that those who aspire to be Vaisnavas should avoid. I hope I have not offended you with my choice of words.

Dear ethos: Give the man a break. Discussion doesn't have to be heavy all the time. Furthermore, Bill's got the right to post as and when he sees fit (provided, of course it doesn't break any rules) and nobody should press him into replying to Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura's critique if he isn't ready to do so.

Dear Ethos Prabhu: My obeisances unto you too. I am hardly one to be righteous, but when I first read about the proposed changes to Prabhupada's books and the Maha-Mantra, I was simply flabbergasted. I don't wish to sound like a fundamentalist. I do believe in the necessity of making adjustments based on time, place and circumstances. But editing whole portions of Prabhupada's books? Changing the Maha-Mantra? sounds like a bad idea to me. Furthermore, changes can be made only by authorized personalities, namely acaryas. It's just like an army. Changes made by the higher authorities are done so with a perspective of the big picture. If the men at the bottom of the military hierachy start making changes based on their whim and fancy, the army would simply collapse. Similarly, if any man/woman on the street were to start making changes based on their opinion, the intergrity of the disciplic succession would simply fall apart.

If enthusiasm for Krsna Consciousness means whimsically changing an acarya's books to conform with social norms or changing the maha-mantra because it is sexist, then I think that it is better that one remains an atheist.

Dear Friend in Krishna: I hope you are well. You wrote:"Allah cannot descend in the human form.....why? Because His Glorious Pride prevents Him from that.." God is Absolutely Supreme. That means there is nothing He cannot do. as His Holiness Visnujana Swami, a great devotee of Lord Krsna once said during a 1975 Ratha-yatra Festival Address in San Francisco: If God wants to appear in a bush, He can. And if He wants to appear in a pillar of fire, a pillar of smoke, or sound or wood or stone or tree or your heart. He can do whatever He pleases. So don't try to limit Him saying that God can't do this and God can't do that. He can do whatever He likes. Don't try to limit God.Sounds like good advice to me.

Dear Friend in Krishna: I hope you are well. You wrote:"Allah cannot descend in the human form.....why? Because His Glorious Pride prevents Him from that.." God is Absolutely Supreme. That means there is nothing He cannot do. as His Holiness Visnujana Swami, a great devotee of Lord Krsna once said during a 1975 Ratha-yatra Festival Address in San Francisco: If God wants to appear in a bush, He can. And if He wants to appear in a pillar of fire, a pillar of smoke, or sound or wood or stone or tree or your heart. He can do whatever He pleases. So don't try to limit Him saying that God can't do this and God can't do that. He can do whatever He likes. Don't try to limit God.Sounds like good advice to me.

I am ignorant about Siva's place in Krsna lila in Goloka. Maybe some more knowledgable devotee can shed some light?