Gauracandra

There hasn't been a program in the last few weeks. This week there was one, and it was a repeat of this summary. Its funny, but today I was driving around and saw a guy walking his dog, and the dog was wearing a sweater /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Is this Karan Singh the same one who is mentioned in the quote here: http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/showflat/cat/hinduism/37698/0/collapsed/5/o/1#Post38406 The former governor of Punjab (if I'm reading the quote right, its hard to tell). If so, sounds like he is a great guy.

Cute Manipuri Gaudiya Vaishnava baby: Manipuri procession Here are some quotes from Srila Prabhupada about Manipur:

Wanted: churchgoers Sunday, March 2, 2003 Posted: 9:06 PM EST (0206 GMT) STOCKHOLM, Sweden (AP) -- Wanted: churchgoers. Place of work: Landeryd church. Salary: Good communion. That ad was put in a local paper last week by the vicar at the Lutheran church of Landeryd, a small community 160 kilometers (100 miles) southwest of the capital, Stockholm. Desperate for more attendance, the church is even offering free taxi rides for those who don't have a car. "I want more people to attend the Sunday services," the Rev. Bjoern Frennesson told The Associated Press on Sunday. There are 14,300 people in the parish, but few of them live near the church. "I want a bigger base of loyal worshippers. I want to create a spirit of community, a kind of responsibility among the churchgoers and explain that we are important, " Frennesson said. Apparently the ad had an effect. Normally there are only 20 to 40 people attending the service. This Sunday there were about 100, Frennesson said.

Its not a sin, but it might be a bit troublesome. Of course, some orthodox Hindus and orthodox Muslims will likely object. Anytime you have interreligious marriage, especially if one or both partners are serious in their religion, then you will have problems.

Thank you for the confirmation and for the link. The tribute was very nice. Also, the picture that accompanied it also confirmed something for me. For years I've had "arguments" (nothing serious) with friends when I say that is Bahudak in that picture. They say "No, thats not Bahudak", and I was always positive it was. It had to be Bahudak with the wooly hair, and physical build. Its a famous picture, and everyone has seen it. Now I have confirmation. Thanks again.

Looks like we got a big Al Qaeda fish this time. We've gotten quite a few middle level managers of Terror Inc. Now we got one of the vice-presidents. Soon, they'll have to declare bankruptcy unless they get a bail out from Saudi money.

I agree Theist. PETA does some pretty goofy stuff sometimes, but it does keep it out front. I was a little disappointed though a few months back when I went to a PETA site and a pop up ad came forward to the veggie burger at Burger King. I wasn't sure how to feel exactly, but I think it was a bit like being bought off by the devil. I suppose the money from the ad could be used to further undermine the meat industry. I don't know.

Jewish Groups Decry PETA's Holocaust Ads By MICHELLE MORGANTE, Associated Press Writer SAN DIEGO - An animal-rights campaign comparing the suffering of livestock to that of Holocaust victims is drawing sharp criticism from a leading Jewish group for "trivializing" the mass murder of Jews. "The Holocaust on Your Plate" campaign by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, debuted this week in California and will make a national tour. The display is a set of eight 6-foot-by-10-foot panels showing photographs of Holocaust victims — emaciated men, crowds of people being forced onto trains, children behind barbed wire, heaps of human bodies — set next to similar images of cattle, pigs and chickens. The Anti-Defamation League denounced the project and PETA's appeal for support from the Jewish community as "outrageous, offensive and taking chutzpah to new heights." Abraham H. Foxman, a Holocaust survivor and ADL national director, said linking the deliberate, systematic murder of millions of Jews to the issue of animal rights was "abhorrent." PETA member Matt Prescott, the creator of the campaign, said he is Jewish and his family lost several members in Nazi concentration camps. He said the campaign was funded by a Jewish philanthropist who wishes to remain anonymous. He said criticism of the project was expected. "The fact is all animals feel pain, fear and loneliness," he said Friday. "We're asking people to recognize that what Jews and others went through in the Holocaust is what animals go through every day in factory farms."

I was just informed that Bahudak Prabhu passed away last week from a heart attack. I have no independent confirmation, but if so this is very saddenning. Bahudak Prabhu was responsible for the building up of Krsna Consciousness on the West Coast of Canada, building very nice devotee communities and a farm. I always knew him as a really honorable person who really inspired the devotee community. In addition, he was simply the best kirtaneer I've ever heard. A wonderful singing voice and energetic presentation. Again, I have no independent confirmation, but thought I should pass this along. If anyone can confirm this please do.

I seem to recall that Gaudiya Vaishnavism was brought to Manipur by disciples of Narottam Das Thakur. I’m not positive on this, its just something in the back of my mind. I’ve spoken to a few devotees who have been to Manipur and they tell me the tradition is very strong. In fact, they say you will find police officers and government officials wearing Gaudiya tilak in the performance of their duties. Here is a quote I found from the following website: http://www.manipuronline.com/Profiles/January2003/iskcon20_1.htm

Mr. Rogers was quality television programming for the whole community. He created a safe and peaceful environment, so that any kid, could feel secure regardless of the real neighborhood they lived in. I always thought (in fact I’m sure), there were probably children in inner cities, where their neighborhood had graffiti, gangs, and drugs, who could go to Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood and have some peace. He never condescended to the audience, the children, but still communicated with them perfectly. I especially like how he would take tours of places that built things, like crayons, or shoes. Even as an adult you could watch that and be entertained and informed. I mean, how many people actually know how things we take for granted are actually made? Those programs were always fascinating. I never realized he was a vegetarian, but understand, I believe, he was a Presbyterian minister. He probably had more influence on children than we could understand. His program was on for like 30 years. And he seemed like he would actually be a really neat guy you could meet.

This isn’t a scientific poll, but it looks like Tamil Nadu and Gujarat are the places in India that practice the Vaisnava culture most perfectly. I can definitely see this based on my experiences with individuals from these regions. When we speak of Vaisnava culture I suppose there are a lot of things involved there. Certainly one would be hospitality, and this is where I’ve noticed that Tamils and Gujaratis certainly excel (again just my experience). Any comments on how they practice Vaisnavism? I'm rather happy that Manipur got a few votes. I've always found what little I've seen of Manipuri Vaisnavism as very beautiful.

Haribol. This is great that you are pursuing your teaching license. Here is a site by William Bennett, former Secretary of Education, that I would suggest any homeschooler to check out: http://www.k12.com/

Haribol. This is great that you are pursuing your teaching license. Here is a site by William Bennett, former Secretary of Education, that I would suggest any homeschooler to check out: http://www.k12.com/

I've seen the Manipuri dance troupe doing martial arts, drums, and kirtan. Unfortunately, I've never seen the actual Manipuri dance. I've always found the Manipuri look to be so colorful and beautiful.

Here is something from “The Life and Times of Lord Caitanya” by Steven Rosen. A sixteenth-century Oriyan manuscript called the Chaitanya Bhagavat says that Mahaprabhu met with the founder of Sikhism, Guru Nanak. The author, Ishvar Das, one of Mahaprabhu’s followers in Puri, was the only biographer to mention the event, perhaps because the meeting was brief and only the eyewitness devotees of Puri knew about it. According to Ishvar Das, “Sri Caitanya, the Lord, joined in the kirtan with Nanak, who was accompanied by his disciple Sarang. Rupa and Sanatan were also there, as were Jagai and Madhai. They all engaged in kirtan, dancing in ecstacy.” (Ishvara Das’s Chaitanya Bhagavat, Adhyaya 61). Ishvara Das continues: “In the congregational singing led by Shri Caitanya and Guru Nanak, Nagar Purushottama followed suit. Two disciples, Jangli and Nandni, also joined in. Gopal Guru, for whom Guru Nanak felt deep affection, was there as well, along with Nityananda Prabhu, who was considered an incarnation of Balarama. They all relished the kirtan at Jagannath Puri.” (Ishvara Das’s Chaitanya Bhagavat Adhyaya 64). Thus there are scholars in the Gaudiya tradition who are confident that Mahaprabhu and Guru Nanak resolved all religious differences in the holy name of Krishna. There are scholars in the Sikh tradition, too, who have documented the meeting of Lord Chaitanya and Guru Nanak. Ganda Singh, for instance, says that the meeting actually occurred in 1510, during one of Mahaprabhu’s earlier trips to Puri. And Trilochan Singh fixes the date at 1512. Still others place the meeting at a much later date, perhaps 1518. Regardless of the disagreement over when the meeting took place, all these references acknowledge the historicity of the event.

That is his point. That Christianity broke out of this mold. I don't have the quote on hand but he mentions how "the changeless east is precisely that because it has not undergone the great change." You just proved his point in pointing to this pre-Christian Nordic symbol. He would not argue at all with this. I'd recommend reading his entire work, as it is a very well organized description of Christianity, its symbolism and development.

Very likely. It is entirely possible an atheist can formulate his own notions of good and bad. We all have creativity. Though I would argue the atheist will not change much from the prevailing culture’s morality if at all (else he’d end up in the insane asylum). But we, as individuals, do not determine what is good and bad. Society determines if what we have done is good or bad (note I’m not invoking God into the equation). Virtues are learned, and each society has different notions of virtues that are learned. Lets take an example. In the past in South America there were tribes that performed human sacrifice. Within that society, it was morally acceptable to kill another human being. Some tribes even engaged in cannibalism. I’m not taking an extreme example to be controversial. Rather I believe we need to go back to the original state as much as possible. Otherwise, we end up projecting our existing moral culture, and assume we came to those conclusions on our own. Now if you were born in that culture I can almost guarantee you that 99.9999% of the time you would also agree that human sacrifice was morally acceptable. Note that nowhere did I say that theism (belief in a God) in and of itself is what makes people moral. I don’t believe that Thor was a shining example of morality that society should emulate. I don’t believe that Greek sex cults that worshipped goddesses were examples society should follow. And I don’t believe human sacrifice to appease the Gods is a practice that society should accept. I would argue that Christianity was a religion that had good values to follow and that what Western culture deems to be good has been derived from the Christian ethic. You cannot separate that from the Western views of what is good and bad behavior. I didn’t preach the Sermon on the Mount, but what was said there was weaved into the Western culture over centuries, such that you cannot separate it out. Its like trying to identify exactly where the threads in the social fabric were brought together. Certainly they were brought together. They are not just self-manifested, springing up in a morally neutral environment birth after birth. Now lets look at the moral atheist. An atheist can be moral. But what I’m looking at is the religious mechanism, which I call the organizing principle, that does not exist in atheism. Thus an atheist may very well live a life of good moral conduct but will lack the mechanism to bring about change. To remake the world according to his moral vision. This is no big deal if the world already exists in moral clarity. Then the atheist can just mirror society and claim to have come to the conclusions on his own. But this is why I stress the need to go back to the original state. Go back to a time before Christianity, before Western Civilization (I’m focusing on Western Civilization, though an analysis could be made for other cultures as well separate from the Christian God or religion). Go back to the lunatic asylum before our current notions of good and bad, before our culture. Go to a time when there were all sorts of different moralities, not what we call moral today, but what each individual cult deemed to be moral in itself. Now be an atheist within that moral morass of conflicting values, and try to bring the lunatic asylum into sanity. I would argue that you couldn’t do it. And that it wasn’t any old religion that did it, but a particular religion that did it. Thus Western culture is based on Christian morality, and not on atheistic morality. An atheist could have come up with good values but could never have (and didn’t) create a living movement to reshape the world according to those values. Christianity did, that’s why Western civilization is based on a Christian culture. We all want to believe we came to our own conclusions. But we are a product of our cultures. It is a fact that the Western culture has been shaped by a particular religion – Christianity. We may not even realize where certain ideas come from, and because we can’t trace it out, we assume they sprung up internal to our own character. There is no doubt in my mind, the Christian culture in the Western world has influenced Christian and atheist alike, in ways we can’t even trace out.

Some interesting results. Perhaps after we can discuss what makes these regions practice of Vaisnavism so nice.

Thanks Raguraman. This is very informative.

Your sand idea might have some possibilities. How about engraving people's names on grains of sand (microscopically), and then spreading it in different parts of the world. Maybe $1 per grain of sand. You can have your name on some sand on every continent of the world /images/graemlins/smile.gif

It was in Time magazine in the Letters section:

There are a couple of ways to approach this question. First let me quote a statement by Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur in his “Stages and Varieties of Faith” found here: http://www.indiadivine.com/bhaktivinoda-thakur-stages-faith1.htm One way to read this is to understand that in the ultimate sense, a civilization without God misses the point of human life. Thus morality does not lead one to God in and of itself. An atheist may be moral, but lacks love for God. As such, one misses his true calling in this human form of life. But such an argument wouldn’t be very convincing to an atheist or agnostic. But another angle to read this is to also understand that atheistic morality does not have the power to transform the world into a better place. This is a point that is made in a book I have quoted before called “The Everlasting Man” by G.K. Chesterton. In a post I made in these forums a few weeks back I pointed out that atheism is fundamentally individualistic. There is nothing that unites one atheist with another atheist. An atheist really is all alone in the world. I called this aspect of religion the “motivating principle” or “organizing principle”. From “The Everlasting Man”: One of the points he makes is that Christianity united religion with philosophy to create a living movement. The Greek philosophers could come up with all sorts of ethical codes and theoretical notions of justice and ethics. But they couldn’t put it into practice but within their own minds. This is why tens of millions of people in the United States go to church every Sunday, but you only study Plato for one quarter in college and hope just to pass with a C-. All the Greek philosophers might have had theoretical models of morality, but they couldn’t transform the world. They couldn’t make it into a living philosophy. Put yourself back 2000 years ago in Europe. At a place that G.K. Chesterton called the lunatic asylum. The whole continent was filled with all sorts of practices. Sex cults, goddess cults, Druids, worship of Hercules, worship of Thor and Odin, various speculative philosophies etc…. Now enter as an atheist with your ideas of morality. How do you transform this world of confusion into a world of moral order? Try it. You have no organizing principle. You are all alone in this world. Atheism is individualistic. It doesn’t have any transformative powers. Atheistic morality in such a situation would quickly be swallowed up by the prevailing lunatic asylum. And that assumes an atheist would come up with moral principles to follow. Many atheists would come to very different conclusions (it is individualistic) and decide on hedonism. Who says sex with one’s neighbors wife is wrong? The truth is atheistic morality in today’s culture is due to theistic morality. I as an individual did not come up with my moral values. The culture did. The culture has told me what it considers to be right and wrong. It’s the same thing for atheists. I guarantee you, most atheists (if not all) did not sit around and decide what is good and bad. They were inculcated with it from the prevailing Christian culture (speaking of the United States). Put those same atheists into the lunatic asylum of 2000 years ago, and they won’t have the same values or notions. And even if they had the same values and notions they wouldn’t be able to make a dent in the world. They are all alone in the world. When they die, their philosophy dies. Its not a living philosophy.