muralidhar_das

God is everywhere, Not only in the sky, earth and sea, But even in the heart of disturbed people with serious mental illnesses who are unable to recognize the fact that they are suffering from a psychosis.

The historical Buddha who appeared on earth 2,600 years ago. This sutra is the last instruction Buddha gave before dying: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahayan...inirvana_Sutra

If you seriously search for a real Guru you will find one.

In the Earliest Buddhism as recorded in the Nirvana Sutra or Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra we find Buddha promoting Vegetarianism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahayana_Mahaparinirvana_Sutra But in different places Buddhism evolved in different ways, according to the tastes and culture of the people. The Nirvana Sutra, by the way, Buddha also says that God [buddha-nature] exists in the heart of every being. In this sutra, his last sermon before dying, Buddha states that the philosophy he has taught is not nihilism. Buddha says it is wrong to think that we have no eternal self. He says the Self is "indestructible like a diamond".

In the way of thinking that Sri Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Thakura categorized as "semitic psychology" God is thought to be an invisible being. In the New Testament we find Paul declaring that God is invisible and that this invisible God incarnated as Jesus. Paul also says this person Jesus was the "firstborn of every creature" and that Jesus created "all things". This type of Semitic psychology, with it's invisible God and its insistence that the [possibly fictional] prophet Jesus is God Himself, is a totally different psychology from the spiritual psychology taught by Sri Chaitanya. The subject of this thread is "Origin of Biblical Monotheism". The monotheism of the semites is a form of Mayavada. It is worship of an invisible God who is the source of light - like the Sun.

I respect the Dalai Lama for the fact that through his own personal display of integrity he has made the whole world aware of Tibet and its ancient Buddhist culture. Pity he is a meat eater

Theist you may call me a bigot and feel that (in your own self righteous way) But take a look at the things the Hebrews did to other races, as recorded in their own testament. They were not godly people, and out of all of them, their prophets (in the style of Bin Laden) were the worst of the bunch. Is there one crime against humanity that Bin Laden is accused of that the Hebrews did not do many, many, many, many times?

This Yahweh is a psychopath. He is always threatening to kill people. But why didn't moses die when Yahweh wanted to kill him? If Yahweh was all-powerful then Moses would just have died instantly, simply because Yahweh wanted him dead. So it is pretty obvious that Yahweh is just a symbol for some wrathful "demon" force that the Jews were frightened of. Yahweh is no god at all. But then not only is Yahweh imaginary, but Moses too!

Yahweh wanted to kill moses so Moses wife cut off the foreskin of her son to make Yahweh happy. A barbarian religion? Yes it is! *************************** Exodus 4:24 God attacked Moses and tried to kill him. Exodus 4:25 Then Zipporah, taking up a flint knife, cut off her sons's foreskin. And with the foreskin, she touched Moses's feet and said, 'You are my blood-bridegroom!'

500 years ago Krishna walked on this earth. There is no doubt whatsoever that He lived on earth. And if you believe the soul does not die then that REAL PERSON who came to earth 500 years ago is still living. On the other hand, there is no evidence at all that Moses actually existed. http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_arhs.htm Exodus 4:24 says that God tried to kill Moses? What a strange thing this bible is ... absurd and irrational. http://www.thebricktestament.com/exodus/god_attacks_moses/ex04_24b.html

Nice name. I have a son named Nitai Sharan

Totally wonderful. Totally amazing.

That was beautiful Babhru Prabhu.

Sanatana Goswami: Sarupa is Gopa Kumara's other name.

What a joke. My Guru Maharaj's divine commentary on Gayatri, a mantra that only an initiate is supposed to know, is turned into a point of discussion for ritviks and non-believers such as Kshamabuddhi. If it wasn't such a tragic abuse and offence against everything that I consider holy, it would be merely nauseating. But since this whole topic is an aparadha all I can do is go away. What will we see next? Maybe some genius will invent a robot that walks around and speaking the words in "Prabhupada's books". It's head can be a 1973 edition of Gita as it is. And this robot can give you diksa if you sit in front of it. Just offer a flower and the robot will say "om bhu bhuvah swah" etc. Everything is in Prabhupada's books, we hear them say. So if you get a robot and load all the books into a few Gb of RAM then the robot will be better than any living guru - oh I forgot, it is "bad" to suggest that a guru can be anything other than living. If you say a Guru is departed, the Book-Vani crowd will call you a fool.

Yes, without a doubt. In my experience this is exactly how people think of the Krishna-bhaktas.

I just came back from the city, I went to see the Dalai Lama speak in a park. It was raining and there were several thousand people standing in the rain listening. He was asked, "What is the meaning of life". The Dalai Lama answered, "I don't know". He went on to say that people are full of hope and desire to find things in this world but in this life you don't find real joy. Joy comes through liberation from this life of material existence. One thing I was amazed to realize today is that Buddhism is acceptable to all kinds of ordinary people in Australia. Both the Prime Minister and the leader of the opposition Labor party met with the Dalai Lama. Football stars, famous actors and musicians, the CEO of Virgin airlines in Australia, all of these met with the Dalai Lama. I guess Buddha's religion is regarded as a real spiritual tradition. I wish our faith was regarded with that kind of respect. Unfortunately, it is not.

Kshamabuddhi if you want to think what you think then go right ahead. I am not the thought police. Theist I don't think anyone has to be pure to get diksa. Getting diksa is the means by which we become a pure devotee, so by definition a person will get diksa and then get pure devotion. After diksa comes bhajana-kriya, chanting and service. All this is described in Bhaktirasamrtasindhu, or Nectar of Devotion if you prefer. You know that already. I'm not saying anything new. Hari bol

As Puri Maharaj says in the quote above, at the stage of sadhu-sanga you take shelter of the spiritual master's lotus feet. At the stage of sadhu-sangha, you take diksa and begin bhajana-kriya. Diksa happens at the beginning of your spiritual practice. Diksa is not something you achieve only when you are totally pure and liberated. Diksa is for beginners, for people infested with anarthas. Later on, after diksa, you get free from all your bad habits (anartha-nivritti).

I have the recording (mp3) of this conversation some place. I'll have to dig it out from among the 1500 lectures I have, mostly unindexed. Whether he said formal i don't remember. What he was saying is that being told "chant Hare Krishna" is not necessarily initiation. There are general instructions or statements such as saying "chant Hare Krishna" on the one hand and Diksa on the other. He was very clear in telling me that I had not received diksa, simply because Prabhupada had said to me (personally) that I should chant hare krishna, follow the regs, read his books.

I asked this question: <table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> "What is the difference between being told by a suddha-vaishnava to chant Hare Krishna and getting initiation into the Hare Krishna mantra from that Vaishnava?" </td> </tr> </tbody></table> <!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --> He told me if the Guru accepts you as a disciple you are his disciple. Simply having him telling you "chant hare krishna" is not the same as getting diksa

Acceptance by the Guru is what was important. That is what Srila Sridhar Maharaj told me. Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Ādi 1.35: mantra-guru āra yata śikṣā-guru-gaṇa tāńhāra caraṇa āge kariye vandana I first offer my respectful obeisances at the lotus feet of my initiating spiritual master and also to all my instructing spiritual masters.

Just a bit of history, here. I saw Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada during three visits to Australia in the ealy 70's. I also wrote to Prabhupada, and in a letter he told me "chant hare krishna, follow the four regs, thoroughly read and assmilate my books" and some other instructions. I still have the letter. When I went to Srila Sridhar Maharaj I asked him I was feeling that maybe I'm a disciple of Srila Prabhupada because he had, in fact, given me Hari-Nama personally, in personal instruction. And indeed I rendered personal service to him and had some one-on-one connection to him (In the video about Prabhupada in Australia you see standing beside Prabhupada and doing some various sorts of service in a section that goes on for maybe 20 minutes.) Anyhow, this is the background. Srila Sridhar Maharaj told me that diksa is when the Guru accepts you. So unless he formally accepts you as his disciple then it is not initiation. Some kind of relationship may be there. Certainly. But you cannot just say you got diksa from some Vaishnava simply because he said to you "chant Hare Krishna". That is not diksa. Diksa involves being personally accepted as a disciple by the Guru. We've all heard the story about how Narottama das Thakura was not accepted by Lokananatha Goswami in the beginning, and how Gaura Kishore das Babaji initially did not accept Saraswati Thakura. Only after repeated efforts by the prospective disciple did the Guru accept the disciple. That's the way things are.

Yes good points Vedesu A crisis of faith can be a very positive experience because a person realizes that they can no longer be guided by "blind faith" but instead that they need to get some internal inspiration and spiritual realization.

I don't think Guest123 has fallen down I think he has just started to see things properly Guest123 wants to attain real bhakti.