sumedh

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam I think this is becoming completely non-sensical; i will only address the logical points. Consider this my last post on this topic, unless you have some questions. It is in Burma where Vedic culture has much effect; they know about Lord Rama, Lord Krishna etc. and their pastimes (and Yamaraja too). Same is the case in Indonesia/Malaysia etc. where there are Hindu temples because they were under the rule of Chola and other Kings at one point of history. What you mean by "not naked"? OBE or NDE means without body outside body, then where does the question of naked or not naked arise -- there is no body where is the question of clothes. It is only the subtle body which is incidently not visible with these eyes else others would be seeing the disembodied person. Okay, i am not speaking anymore on this for it is only giving a semblence of credibility from my side. Just to confuse you, see this http://www.near-death.com/experiences/origen045.html No i don't endorse this. Then don't speak about him -- okay. Since you know nothing about Him and still have the audacity to formulate some nonsensical ideas, let me tell you that Lord Buddha maintained a "Golden Silence" on the question of Supreme Lord. When someone asked Him about the Supreme Lord He said that stay with me for (something like) three years and then you will understand the answer to this question. You did not even consider for a moment that what will remain of your situation if you are wrong, and Jesus and Buddha turn out to be intimately related and Jesus is angry for saying and thinking such things for Lord Buddha. You sure you know the meaning of ETERNAL -- yes it means ETERNAL; let us see: age of Lord Brahma which is the age of a universe in one cycle is some trillion years, and that is not even a flash in ETERNITY, in fact from the point of ETERNITY it is zero; so ETERNITY is not one trillion years, not 10^100000000000^1000000000000 years; all these are precisely zero in the context of ETERNITY. However large number you can IMAGINE (fill the whole universe with 10000...) is precisely zero when compared to ETERNITY. Good luck with your beliefs. You want to remain in your make believe world, no problems. But if you want to know the Truth then pray to Lord with devotion daily, for two hours or more. Yes and do give up meat-eating, intoxicants if you sincerely want to try this. We must become like Jesus in this lifetime; trust no after-life future however bright some may claim to be; see God in His complete splendour in this very life and learn ALL Truths from Him. You know nothing. If God orders to, then His devotees will do anything what to speak of claiming no God. See Yamadeva, for example, who despite his immense compassion puts jivas through suffering in accordance with their deeds as desired by God. You mock God's infinite nature and potencies by such statements; why on earth will He hurt Himself? Then again you contradict yourself when you said that God can forgive sins and now are saying He suffers for our sins. You read/imagine things and believe them to be true if they fit in with your feelings; indeed such kinds of self-hypnosis is very powerful as can be seen from your responses. Your thinking makes no difference to the fact that millions (if not billions) of people do not even come to know of God (either Jesus/Krishna/Allah/...) in their lifetimes because of their being born in such places (like primitive tribal areas etc.). Billions trillions have already died after been born in such areas in the past without having any idea of God nor having gotten even a slightest oportunity to know about Him, so they all went to hell in your consideration. And of course all animals/plants are going to hell anyways, or you believe they have no souls contradicting the Jewish NDE which you so love. By saying this you present Jesus in poor light and i strongly contest this. No Jesus never and can never say this. A pure devotee like Jesus knows and sees everyone and everything as part and parcel of God. You say that source of everyone and everything is not God. So now there are two Gods, one God and other a lesser God called devil/satan. There is no satan; he is only your figment of imagination -- "Satan" only means the tendency to enjoy separately from God i.e. incorrect use of our free-will. God is Omnipotent and He has no competitor even remotely, contrary to what you may want to believe. If anything by thinking of Lord Buddha as going to hell or as child of devil despite having been given full information otherwise, you are indeed letting "satan in your heart" in your own words. I can understand that you have strong beliefs and questioning them will constitute a grave crisis of faith for you, so you can go to any extent to justify them. But if you do not keep an open mind there is no possibility of getting to know the Truth from God or any other agency. Okay cross exists; happy. Now spare us with the foolishness of any more NDEs. If you want to discuss something of God's nature, of His glories or how you love Him etc. then you are welcome; but i do not think that your huge mental baggage will allow you to engage sincerely in any such exchanges. Oh talk about the glories of the Lord so that everyone will love it, but by posting such NDEs and your ideas of Buddha (and justifying them) you are only proving some of the harsh statements of other devotees to be correct.

Hare Krishna In muslim books he is called isa-maseeha (or messenger from God) and in books in India he is called isha-putra (son of God), and in later books isa-maseeha which came from muslim invaders. Isa means God in both Sanskrit and Arabic; no muslims ever considered Jesus as God in any book in that part of the world.

Dear Vishnu Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam Really even on face value we can find so many errors in this. Firstly because Bible (or any other scripture) does not mention the name of the King of Hell (please correct me if i am wrong) they pick Yama from the Vedic texts. Then Yamadeva is talking about Jesus Christ; O he has apparently left His dearmost Krishna and now is enacting new principles of belief in Jesus as the religion!! Normally no souls directly meet Yamadeva anymore than you would be greeted by President of US on taking birth here (okay this may be an exception) but even by any chance if one does he would first be lead by Yamadutas. Then he says 'I am the King of Hell, the Destroyer', from when did Yamadeva take on the job of Lord Shiva of destruction. Then he sees the monks still dressed in saffron robes -- maybe they disrobed their dead bodies and brought those alongwith!! and so on ... In Burma where there are Buddhists there will be NDEs where Lord Buddha goes to hell; in India there will be NDEs where Lord Krishna goes to hell and in competition Muslims have NDEs where Jesus Christ goes to hell. Why have you based your trust and faith in these NDEs rather than in the teachings of Jesus? Even if you cannot consider Buddha to be an incarnation of Lord then see his life. He had unbound compassion for all living entities, he was running hither-tither to save everybody from the pangs of material existence. And to even imagine that such a great soul would go to hell!! Use a little bit of logic; can the source of all love that all-compassionate Lord send such a soul to hell. Then the other foolish proposition of christians of eternal hell. From when did a portion of material world became eternal, only the spiritual world is eternal. And the Lord has become such a brute that he will let His dear children go eternally to hell; and His children who happen to be born among say tribes are all by default going to eternal hell? Ask the Lord in your heart; think from unbiased point of view. Can you not see what would have Lord Jesus Christ thought of such a soul. Now for this and the other NDE of emmanuel you posted. Dear Vishnu please don't be so naive especially with so many NDE's floating around nowadays. We live in dangerous times where frauds abound, indeed it is quite difficult to find one truly genuine person what to speak of God-realized soul. Only trust the Lord in your heart; He is our dearmost companion. We cannot understand the depth of His love, He has been chasing us as the SuperSoul since time immemorial in these material worlds not leaving us for even minutest fraction of second. He has given us the mind and intellect; use them to good effect. Do not abandon unbiased rational thought for this is His precious gift in human life. If you take my advise stop this NDE business completely and rather spend that on praying sincerely to God. And please definitely do not post such NDEs here; no one's interested and it will be only a matter of time before devotees come down hard on them -- don't test their patience. Most devotees here are experiencing the results of their bhajan for their dear Lord and would not leave Him even if actually subjected to hell or whatever you may think of what to speak of reported "NDEs", and if you wish to impress your beliefs on them the result could turn out to be opposite for your own good. If you really wish to show some kind of super-excellent position of Jesus over and above all then talk of his teachings and philosophy which incidently are already accepted by (most of) devotees. So really we have no issues in that area.

... is not a lecture but chapter 12.13 from Srimad-Bhagavatam itself. See it from here for example.

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam I would say why wait? Just start reading and do not worry if there is something you cannot understand; read it again and again. The Bhagavatam is meant to make us "deserve" Krishna; it is the Krishna Himself in literary form. We would lack qualification for it no more than we would lack qualification for Krishna. The suggested order of reading is to gradually make us attracted to Krishna but since you are already so much attracted i do not find the slightest reason to think of lack of qualification. As for Sri Ishopanishad it is not a prerequisite for Bhagavatam. Regarding Sathya Sai Baba, it is okay if you like some of his teachings but i would suggest not to get associated with him or his disciples. The reason is that many of his teachings are highly suspect and specially his (or his followers') claim of being God etc. You would be knowing what Srila Prabhupada would call such self-professed God(s). My strong suggestion would be to give up any idea of associating with him (if you have such a desire). When you are ready Krishna will send you a Guru; He knows it and trust Him.

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam ... or try to confuse others by this. Srila Prabhupada had disciples who were gay or lesbian, just follow his example -- does that sound reasonable to you or not. I have already expressed my opinion in the post before; if you cannot understand or pretend not to then nothing can be done. Yes, Srila Prabhupada extended his mercy to gays and lesbians so just follow his example. What is the need to bring this issue as if a new phenomenon when we know how Srila Prabhupada acted on this issue? Anyway, i am not arguing anymore on this issue.

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam Srila Prabhupada has already answered this as follows: Maybe you do not agree with the son part but Holy Ghost is clearly the SuperSoul or Paramatma.The Brahman, SuperSoul and Krishna (or Bhagavan) are the three features of Krishna in different levels of realization. When the Lord is realized in His all-pervading aspect then it is Brahman-realization, when in the localized aspect as the SuperSoul in the hearts of all living entities (and in paramanu meaning the smallest particle) then it is Paramatma-realization and when as the Supreme Person then it is the full God-realization. As i have said the nature of Lord is sat(Absolute existence)-cit(Absolute Knowledge)-ananda(Absolute Bliss), in the Brahman-realization the sat aspect is "visible", in the Paramatma-realization the sat and cit aspects are "visible" and all the aspects are realized as Bhagavan. Brahman which is transcendental effulgence of the Lord cannot be Holy Ghost. Also Vishnu is not son in any case; maha-vishnu and vishnu are one and the same there is not the slightest difference in the two -- different names for the same Person. When He acts in one capacity (innumerable universes emanating from His body) He is called maha-vishnu and when He acts as the maintainer of one particular universe He is called Vishnu (more specifically Kshirodakshayi Vishnu). By His inconceivable potency He acts in both capacities simultaneously -- one Person *apparent* different forms i.e. the Lord appearing in many forms. As for your concept of Jesus as the creator of Earth, it would be pertinent to ask in what way because in one way Lord Brahma and his subordinate Prajapatis do this work.

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam Please definitely go ahead without any fears. As i said before if we do not find nectar in the confidential lilas of tenth Canto then we should come back and not proceed; i mean we should know where we stand. The Bhagavatam is meant for all, it is also meant for even non-human living entities what then to speak of humans and this is its unique position.

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam The best is to hear from the agency of a pure devotee. Otherwise we can just read the Srimad-Bhagavatam (with purports by Srila Prabhupada), without any problems since you have already read the others. Don't worry about not being pure enough; the point is to become pure by reading Bhagavatam. The important point is to receive it in a humble state and not in a judgemental state of mind; if we do not understand something then as Srila Prabhupada would say just read it over and over again. The injuction is not to jump cantos but read to it in sequence; the warning is that in the tenth Canto that if the topmost lilas appear to be mundane activity to our minds then we must rewind back to Sri Ishopanishad and Bhagavad-Gita.

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam There is no need to argue about this. The unambiguous fact is that if a disciple wants to change regulations of his Spiritual Master he/she has to setup a new society; simple okay. If anyone wants to change the regulations as set by Srila Prabhupada in Iskcon let him setup his own society.

Hare Krishna and dandavats Oh why you say this, many of us have been much much worse at some point. Our friend has a problem of being a little naive sometimes, but really his sincerity is exceptional -- okay i am not a distant mind-reader but all i can tell from his posts.

Hare Krishna and dandavats You mean Rudhra as in Lord Shiva? If you like please post the conversations with Rudhra for the pleasure of the devotees.

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam Maybe i was not clear: of course, it was a transcendental event and a tremendous source of inspiration for all particularly the christians and shows the great magnanimous character of Jesus; i meant that it does not "add" to philosophy or spiritual practise. Just like Srila Haridasa Thakur's public flogging in twenty-one market places and his apparent death, then his coming back but that does not mean that only believing in Srila Haridasa Thakura as Guru yields the greatest benefit for us or viewing his apparent death is sufficient means to attain our true nature. Srila Prabhupada said that the christians should highlight his teachings more than the crucification aspect.

Dear Vishnu Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam If jesus has said that he and his Father are one, then it is a very nice exposition of the gaudiya philosophy which is acintya-bheda-abheda i.e. inconceivable simultaneous oneness and difference, and which describes the basic nature of the spiritual realm. It is inconceivable because apparent contradictory features co-exist simultaneously and eternally in the Lord. Jesus first distinguishes himself from Father, and then says they are one. A pure devotee is considered included in vishnu-tattva (or intrinsic part of the Lord) meaning all his desires and thoughts are those of the Lord and since he is has attained the internal potency of the Lord he is non-different from the Lord; the difference is from the tattva point of view in that Lord is the Whole while jiva is part of Him and the fact that a Guru is servitor while the Lord is the served one. So both aspects exist simultaneously and eternally. (i may add that in the spiritual realm there are no small parts or big parts since there is no measuring tendency, only the Whole and infinitesemal jivas and other energies). One point is that maha-vishnu and vishnu are one and the same (same person in different "roles"), and not as Father and son. They are completely identical in all respects and so are all the various forms of Lord (Rama, Nrsimha, Baladeva, Kurma, Matsya etc.) who are called vishnu-tattva Deities. In gaudiya theology, of course, Krishna is understood to be the "Original" Personality of Godhead or the original form and the source of all other forms (although all of them are eternal and are truly One and the same) and some vaishnava sampradayas consider His Narayana form to be the Original, this actually makes no difference when we are considering from the tattva point of view (i.e. their true nature).

Seriously you would not want to know. Haribol

Rajneesh (Osho) in the list only gives a good laugh.

Dear vishnu Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam You may be interested in reading this post here which tries to describe the attitude of Hindus and vaishnavas in particular, as regards Jesus.

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam Okay now i understand how you came to the conclusion as regards Brahman and Jesus, Krishna relation. Oh the unauthorized advaita interpretation consider the all-pervading feature of Brahman as the Absolute Truth (which is only partially true). So probably you read those interpretations; then in that the avataars are relegated to the position of "Brahman fusing into a body" whatever that means and consequently the current Christian theology seems closer to advaita conception. See the power and influence of Acharya Shankara, really powerful, really powerful. A part of me sees some connection between spreading of advaita philosophy and other philosophies trying to adjust to it. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

Hare Krishna Just a clarification Why this maybe? Krishna is God, the Father in the Christian theology. Brahman is the impersonal all-pervading aspect of the Lord, also described as the spiritual effulgence (brahmajyoti) from the transcendental form of Krishna which is non-different from Krishna. Krishna is never the son in any sense of the word you may think. Krishna is also called ParaBrahman i.e. Supreme Brahman or the source of Brahman just like sun is the source of sunlight. So both of His aspects are Eternal, just that His personal aspect is the source of His impersonal aspect (like sun-sunlight, none comes before the other). This situation is called acintya-bheda-abheda i.e. inconceivable simultaneous oneness and difference in the gaudiya philosophy.

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam We cannot hear or see the SuperSoul due to the material impurities of our mind, or may i call it "noise" created by our non-self viz. mind/body/intellect. Gradually when we come to the transcendental platform then we hear Him and see Him clearly.

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam God can decide to preach anything at His own will for He is Supremely Independent. But if we really understand this we shall know it was only for our benefit. Lord Buddha is mentioned as the incarnation of God in Visnu Purana, Vayu Purana, Garuda Purana, Skandha Purana, and Devi Bhagavata; and of course Srimad-Bhagavatam. And yes, all of these were written before His advent. Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.3.24 And to confuse us mere mortals another incarnation of God named Buddha is mentioned who actually appears in a Kali-yuga of a different yuga-chakra (the cycle of four yugas) Srimad-Bhagavatam 2.7.38 So kindly bring an end to your speculations in this matter of ten incarnations etc.; there are innumerable incarnations -- Bhagavatam mentions twenty-four to give a feel. No need to unneccessarily throw out an incarnation in favour of your preferred one to accomadate in the list of ten. Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.3.26 Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.3.27 Just to make sure you do not misunderstand, there is a difference in these avataars from tattva point of view i.e. Lord Matsya, Nrsimha, Rama, Krishna, Kalki are vishnu-tattva directly the Personality of Godhead (the only difference in them is with regards to what is "visible" to us in the mundane sense) while Narada, Vyasa, Buddha etc. are empowered incarnations i.e. jivas specifically empowered by the Lord.

Hare Krishna and the appearance of Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu about 500 years ago has brought religion to its ultimate climax, in its greatest splendour and pristine form. Why don't you ask the Lord (with whom you are in a direct communion) of the validity of this statement? Also i would not like to disappoint you but Sri Kalki is going to appear at the end of this age -- that would make about 427,000 years.

It is 400,000 verses in total in the Puraanas instead of 240000, i wrote.

definitely not from where you are getting your's.

As far as i know Valmiki was not a mathematician. There are some Vedic texts which have combined spiritual knowledge and mathematics in the same verses (Vedic mathematics is from them) but i doubt if Ramayana is one of them. Of course, transcendental literature has so many different levels meanings depending on our level of understanding e.g. Lord Chaitanya gave sixty one meanings of one single verse, so it is possible but i have never heard this for Ramayana.