suchandra

<!-- vstory begin --> Persistent loss of bees having sour effect on economy Web Posted: 05/17/2008 11:47 PM CDT http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA051808.8B.BusinessBees.38986d3.html Express-News David Roy Park began finding empty hives where his bees should have been in the winter of 2006. In a matter of months, he went from 4,000 hives to 1,600. “You go to the bee yard and open the hive and there's just no bees in it,” said Park, a fourth-generation beekeeper who runs Cold River Apiaries in Moore, in Frio County. “We started losing bees left and right for no reason that we could figure out; they just disappeared.” Park's situation is not unique. Bee colonies surveyed across the country experienced an average 31 percent loss from September through March, and the total loss nationwide was 36 percent, according to a survey released this month that was commissioned by the Apiary Inspectors of America. “That's an amazingly high number,” said Dennis vanEngelsdorp, president of AIA. “If you can imagine one-third of all the cows or chickens dying, that would raise a lot of eyebrows.” South Texas has thousands of the 2.44 million colonies in the country, and the disappearance of hives has had a substantive economic impact. The AIA survey was the second one the organization commissioned to gauge bee losses. It documented a trend some call Colony Collapse Disorder that has begun to alarm scientists, beekeepers and farmers across the country in recent years. Theories abound, but van-Engelsdorp believes the bulk of the loss is the result of parasitic mites that pass viruses from colony to colony. Whatever the reason, bee population loss raises several serious concerns, he said. Bees are important to the food supply because they are primary pollinators for most agricultural crops. If it becomes too expensive to replace dead bees, van-Engelsdorp worries, too many commercial pollinators may get out of the business — and their specialized set of skills, combining beekeeping, carpentry and long-haul trucking, isn't easily replaced. Park, the Moore beekeeper, said pesticides and drought are affecting the bees. Jack Fowler of Fowler Honey Farm in La Vernia agrees that chemicals, combined with the stress of constant movement from farm to farm, are killing the bees. “It's the most devastating thing we ever went through,” said Park, whose operation produces honey but makes most of its profit as a crop pollinator, ranging from almonds in California to cantaloupes in West Texas and cucumbers in South Texas. Park charges farmers around $150 per hive for pollination services, so losing 1,000 hives is a big deal, translating to a $150,000 loss in revenue at every farm he works each year. Park's operation is back up to 3,000 since 2006 but still short of the 5,000 he considers normal. As soon as the honey season is over this summer, he'll be devoting all his resources to replace the missing bees. It's an expensive endeavor, he explained, costing about $50 per hive in labor and equipment — that includes $16 for a queen bee — not to mention lost revenue. “It's probably cost me between a quarter of a million and three-quarters of a million dollars a year the past few years,” he said. The disappearance of bees has also affected honey production, shooting prices up precisely because it's become harder to find. “At present across the U.S., there is almost no honey to be had,” said Fowler, of Fowler Honey Farm in La Vernia, which sells raw honey to South Texas retailers. Fowler makes his own, but also buys honey from producers throughout South Texas. Park said the disappearance of bees has varied geographically. His hives were hit in the winter of 2006, while his father, David Park of Devine, began to find empty hives at the end of 2007. The timing may be different, Park said, but the result is the same. “I hope the researchers get this thing figured out because we really need some help,” Park said. “Everywhere I go now people ask how the bees are doing.” News researcher Kevin Frazzini contributed to this report.

THE QUESTION OF WHETHER LORD RAMA ATE MEAT IN THE RAMAYANA Sometimes the idea comes up that the Ramayana indicates that Lord Rama ate meat, especially while He was in exile in the woods. However, there is no verse in Valmiki’s Ramayana that establishes that Lord Rama, Lakshmana or Sita ate meat while in or even out of exile. In fact, it seems to show that He very much disliked the notion of eating meat. The evidence for this is as follows: The verse that comes in question in this regard in the Valmiki Ramayana, Sundarakanda, Skanda 36, Sloka 41, says: “Na mamsam Raghava bhunkte, na chaiva madhu sevate, Vanyam suvihitam nityam bhaktamsnati panchamam.” The literal translation of this verse is: “Sri Rama does not take meat or honey. He partakes everyday of wild fruits and boiled (wild) rice fully sanctioned (for an ascetic) in the evening.” Faulty English translations have put it as something like this: Hanuman to Sita, “When you were away, Sri Rama did not even take deer meat.” This incorrectly implies that Rama normally may have ate meat but did not do so while Sita was away from Him. Now in this verse, the Sanskrit word bhunkte is a verb that means strong desire for eating. It comes from the Sanskrit bhaksha, which means voracious eating. When you say Na bhunkte, as we see in the line that says “Na mamsam Raghava bhunkte”, it gives a complete negative connotation, meaning that Lord Rama abhorred meat-eating. On the other hand, if the words were “Na mamsam Raghavo khadate”, it could then mean that Raghava may have engaged in meat eating before, but had stopped it at this point. However, this is not what is said, but is where some English translations present a similar confusion, or are simply unclear about this issue. Nonetheless, by analyzing the correct view of the proper translation, it indicates clearly that the Valmiki Ramayana shows how Lord Rama not only did not eat meat, but greatly disliked it. THE PRINCIPAL OF BEING MERCIFUL Meat-eating and animal slaughter also disrupts and disregards the doctrine of ahimsa, or non-violence. It is not possible to kill animals for the pleasure of the tongue without violence. The Padma Purana (1.31.27) simply says that, “Ahimsa is the highest duty.” Therefore, one must honestly ask themselves if they intend to truly follow the Vedic tenets or not, at least if they call themselves a Hindu, follower of Vedanta, or a Sanatana-dharmist. If they are, then they must adopt the ways of ahimsa. Ahimsa is more directly explained in Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras (2.30) wherein it is said: “Having no ill feeling for any living being, in all manners possible and for all times, is called ahimsa, and it should be the desired goal of all seekers.” It is also said in the Buddhist scripture, the Mahaparinirvana Sutra, “The eating of meat extinguishes the seed of great compassion.” One of the principles that one must follow in the endeavor to be free from acquiring bad karma and for spiritual advancement is being merciful, based on ahimsa. Mercy means more than just being nice. Mercy means being kind to all living entities, not just to humans, but also to animals, birds, insects, etc. This is because the living entity, depending on its consciousness, can take a material body in any one of the 8,400,000 species of life. Therefore, to develop and maintain the quality of mercy, one must follow the principle of no meat eating. This includes no eating of meat, fish, eggs, or insects. In this way, those who are serious about a spiritual path remain free from so many unnecessary karmic reactions. Karma means that for every action there is an opposite and equal reaction. Killing an animal to eat is certainly an act of violence that creates a negative reaction in the atmosphere which returns as more violence. This comes back to us as reversals in life which we must endure in the future. It is bluntly stated that meat eating is actually the grossest form of spiritual ignorance. To kill other living entities for the pleasure of the tongue is a cruel and selfish activity that requires one to be almost completely blind to the spiritual reality of the living being, that within the body is a soul like you, a part and parcel of the Supreme Soul. It also causes one to remain hard-hearted and less sensitive to the concern for the wellbeing and feelings of others. As previously explained, according to the law of karma, whatever pain we cause for others we will have to suffer in the future. Therefore, a wise man does not even want to harm an insect if possible, what to speak of slaughtering an animal in order to taste its flesh and blood. As explained in the Manu-samhita, the sinful reaction for animal slaughter is received by six kinds of participants, which include, (1) the killer of the animal, (2) one who advocates or advertises meat-eating, (3) one who transports the meat, (4) one who handles or packages the meat, (5) one who prepares or cooks the meat, and (6) one who eats it. The sinful reaction shared by these six participants in animal slaughter is serious. In fact, the Bible compares the killing of cows to murdering a man: “He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man.” (Isaiah 66.3) It is also explained in the Sri Caitanya-caritamrita (Adi-lila, Chapter 17, verse 166): “Cow killers are condemned to rot in hellish life for as many thousands of years as there are hairs on the body of the cow,” which is also referenced in the Manu-samhita. So an intelligent person will try to avoid this fate. Some readers may say, however, that the sacrifices in the early Vedic literature prescribed animal slaughter, so for that reason it is all right to kill animals. But such activities in this day and age are refuted by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu in the Caitanya-caritamrita (Adi-lila, Chapter 17, verses 159-165) which He explains to the Chand Kazi who was a Muslim: “The Vedas clearly enjoin that cows should not be killed. Therefore any Hindu, whoever he may be, does not indulge in cow killing. In the Vedas and Puranas there are injunctions declaring that if one can revive a living being, he can kill it for experimental purposes [in the ritual]. Therefore the great sages sometimes killed old animals, and by chanting Vedic hymns they again brought them to life for protection. The killing and rejuvenation of such old and invalid animals was not truly killing but an act of great benefit. Formerly there were great powerful brahmanas who could make such experiments using Vedic hymns, but now, because of Kali-yuga, brahmanas are not so powerful. Therefore the killing of cows and bulls for rejuvenation is forbidden. ‘In this age of Kali, five acts are forbidden: the offering of a horse in sacrifice, the offering of a cow in sacrifice, the acceptance of the [renounced] order of sannyasa, the offering of oblations of flesh to the forefathers, and a man’s begetting children in his brother's wife.’ Since you Mohammedans [and others] cannot bring killed animals back to life, you are responsible for killing them. Therefore you are going to hell; there is no way for your deliverance.” This quotation makes it perfectly clear how anyone who participates in killing other living beings is responsible for such acts which cause one to attain a hellish future, or at the least, causes stifling of their spiritual progress. We mentioned the karmic reactions for killing the cow, but there are karmic results that one acquires from killing other entities as well, which is to suffer a similar pain or die in a similar way. Whatever you do unto others will later return to you, either in this life or in a future life. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. That is the law of karma. We can now begin to understand how dark the future is for someone who owns or manages something like a hamburger or fried chicken stand. Not only is he responsible for the animals that are killed, cooked, and then sold by his business, but he is also responsible for those he hires to help with it, and those who buy and eat the dead animals. We can also begin to get an idea of the dark collective karma of the population of a country whose food habits are centered around the meat industry. The violence that is generated by such a society certainly cannot help but create adverse affects in the world. THE BENEFIT FROM COWS The cow and bull are the prime targets of the meat industry. However, cows and bulls are very important to human civilization. Until the recent invention of the tractor, the bull was used for helping to cultivate fields for producing food, and the cow has always supplied milk. A moderate supply of milk in our diet provides the proper nutrients for developing a good brain for understanding spiritual topics. Some sadhus in India do not eat, but take only milk. From milk one can make many other foods that are used in thousands of recipes that we all appreciate, such as cheese or curd, yogurt, kefir, butter, ghee, and so on. (However, this is not to approve of the cruel and questionable practices of the dairy industry as found in western countries.) This means that, according to the Vedas, the cow is one of our mothers and the bull is like a father for the benefit they have done for society. To do outright harm to such creatures is considered extremely serious. I have heard Western people criticize India for not slaughtering its cows, and talk about how there would be no more starving children if they would just eat the cows. That is not the cure. I have traveled all over India and have seen hungry people there as well as in American cities, which is more able to hide such problems. Homeless and hungry people are found in every country. For another thing, cows are one of India’s greatest resources. They produce food, fuel and power. Bullocks do as much as two-thirds of the work on the average farm. They help plow the fields, hall produce, and turn the presses. For India to convert to machinery to do these tasks, especially in villages, would cost as much as 20 to 30 billion dollars. For a country like India, that is out of the question and a waste of time and money. The cows also supply up to 800 tons of manure each year for fuel. Cow dung gives a slow even heat, good for cooking. Using coal for cooking would cost 1.5 billion dollars a year. And besides, believe it or not, cow dung kills bacteria and is antiseptic. And keeping cows is cheap since they eat things like wheat stubble, husks, and rice straw, which people cannot use. So why raise cattle for meat consumption when it takes seven times more acreage for a pound of beef than a pound of milk? Only four to sixteen pounds of flesh food is produced for every hundred pounds of food eaten by cattle. Ten to twenty tons of nutritive vegetable food can be produced from the same amount of land that can produce only one ton of beef. In one year, you can get much more protein from a cow in the form of milk, cheese, etc., than in the several years it takes for a cow to mature enough to produce meat. To produce one pound of wheat takes 25 gallons of water, whereas one pound of beef requires 2500 gallons. And water is not always a plentiful resource in countries like India. Obviously, using agricultural resources for meat production is nothing but wasteful. Furthermore, if we are so concerned about the starving people in the world and the environment we live in, then let us consider the fact that 60 million more people in the world could be fed if Americans reduced their meat consumption by only 10%. Plus, thousands of acres of rainforest are lost every day in various countries, and it is said that 50% of that is directly linked to raising cattle for meat production. And though 76% of Americans consider themselves concerned about the environment, only 2.8% are vegetarians (at the time of this writing). Many Americans may say they love animals, but they still eat them on a regular basis. Obviously, they need to raise their consciousness about this. In any case, there are many books on the market that present this type of environmental information much more thoroughly. For those of you who would like to learn more about what a vegetarian diet can do for you and how to cook vegetarian meals easily, there are plenty of books available to help you get started. Or check here on my website for additional information and resources to get started. [This article available at: http://www.stephen-knapp.com]

Thanks so much for bringing up this most important point - the vedas and animal killing sacrifices etc. Very good question, brilliant! Stephen Knapp says, "there seems to be some confusion or lack of clarity on whether the Vedic path condones or condemns the eating of meat." Vegetarianism: Recommended in Vedic Scripture By Stephen Knapp Many times there seems to be some confusion or lack of clarity on whether the Vedic path condones or condemns the eating of meat. Often times I hear Indians and followers of the Vedic path explain that meat eating is all right, that the Vedic shastras do not condemn it. Of course, in this day and age meat eating includes and supports the whole meat industry, which is the systematic slaughter of thousands of animals on a daily basis. But if we actually research the Vedic texts we will find that there are numerous references in the various portions of the Vedic literature which explain in no uncertain terms the karmic dangers of meat-eating and unnecessary animal slaughter. These indicate that meat eating should be given up for one’s spiritual and even material progress. This means that the Vedic conclusions that some people present for meat-eating are not accurate, and that they have never studied their own religious books very thoroughly. This is something that is important to understand, so let us take a look. VEDIC REFERENCES AGAINST MEAT-EATING AND ANIMAL SLAUGHTER To start with, the Manu-samhita clearly and logically recommends that, “Meat can never be obtained without injury to living creatures, and injury to sentient beings is detrimental to the attainment of heavenly bliss; let him therefore shun the use of meat. Having well considered the disgusting origin of flesh and the cruelty of fettering and slaying corporeal beings, let him entirely abstain from eating flesh.” (Manu-samhita 5.48-49) However, it is not simply the person who eats the meat that becomes implicated by eating the dead animal, but also those who assist in the process. “He who permits the slaughter of an animal, he who cuts it up, he who kills it, he who buys or sells meat, he who cooks it, he who serves it up, and he who eats it, must all be considered as the slayers of the animal. There is no greater sinner than that man who though not worshiping the gods or the ancestors, seeks to increase the bulk of his own flesh by the flesh of other beings.” (Manu-samhita 5.51-52) As we get further into the Manu-samhita, there are warnings that become increasingly more serious. For example, “If he has a strong desire (for meat) he may make an animal of clarified butter or one of flour (and eat that); but let him never seek to destroy an animal without a (lawful) reason. As many hairs as the slain beast has, so often indeed will he who killed it without a (lawful) reason suffer a violent death in future births.” (Manu-samhita 5.37-38) In this way, the only time to carry out the need to kill animals for consumption is when there is an emergency such as when there simply is nothing else to eat. Otherwise, when there are plenty of grains, vegetables, fruits, etc., to eat, it is only mankind’s lust and selfish desires that motivate one to kill other beings to satisfy one’s tongue by tasting their blood and flesh, or to fatten one’s wallet by making money from participating in the distribution or the cooking of meat. Such violent actions create opposite reactions. For this reason the warnings are given, “He who injures harmless creatures from a wish to give himself pleasure, never finds happiness in this life or the next.” (Manu-samhita 5.45) Nonetheless, there are also benefits that are mentioned that a person can attain simply by not eating the bodies of other creatures: “By subsisting on pure fruits and roots, and by eating food fit for ascetics in the forest, one does not gain so great a reward as by entirely avoiding the use of flesh. Me he [mam sah] will devour in the next world, whose flesh I eat in this life; the wise declare this to be the real meaning of the word ‘flesh’ [mam sah].” (Manu-samhita 5.54-55) “He who does not seek to cause the sufferings of bonds and death to living creatures, (but) desires the good of all (beings), obtains endless bliss. He who does not injure any (creature) attains without an effort what he thinks of, what he undertakes, and what he fixes his mind on.” (Manu-samhita 5.46-47) Also, “By not killing any living being, one becomes fit for salvation.” (Manu-samhita 6.60) The earlier texts, such as the Rig-veda (10.87.16), also proclaim the need to give up the eating of slaughtered animals. “One who partakes of human flesh, the flesh of a horse or of another animal, and deprives others of milk by slaughtering cows, O King, if such a fiend does not desist by other means, then you should not hesitate to cut off his head.” "You must not use your God-given body for killing God's creatures, whether they are human, animal or whatever." (Yajur Veda 12.32.90) There are also references in the Mahabharata that forewarn the activity of eating flesh: “He who desires to augment his own flesh by eating the flesh of other creatures, lives in misery in whatever species he may take his [next] birth.” (Mahabharata, Anu.115.47) “The purchaser of flesh performs violence by his wealth; he who eats flesh does so by enjoying its taste; the killer does violence by actually tying and killing the animal. Thus, there are three forms of killing. He who brings flesh or sends for it, he who cuts off the limbs of an animal, and he who purchases, sells, or cooks flesh and eats it--all these are to be considered meat-eaters.” (Mahabharata, Anu.115.40) All of these people will also incur the same karmic reactions for their participation in killing, distributing or eating the flesh of animals, as explained next. “The sins generated by violence curtail the life of the perpetrator. Therefore, even those who are anxious for their own welfare should abstain from meat-eating.” (Mahabharata, Anu.115.33) “Those who are ignorant of real dharma and, though wicked and haughty, account themselves virtuous, kill animals without any feeling of remorse or fear of punishment. Further, in their next lives, such sinful persons will be eaten by the same creatures they have killed in this world.” (Bhagavata Purana 11.5.14) The following verses are from the Tirukural: <!--mstheme--> How can he practice true compassion who eats the flesh of an animal to fatten his own flesh?<!--mstheme--><!--mstheme--> Riches cannot be found in the hands of the thriftless, nor can compassion be found in the hearts of those who eat meat.<!--mstheme--><!--mstheme--> He who feasts on a creature's flesh is like he who wields a weapon. Goodness is never one with the minds of these two. <!--mstheme--><!--mstheme--> If you ask, "What is kindness and what is unkindness?" It is not-killing and killing. Thus, eating flesh is never virtuous.<!--mstheme--><!--mstheme--> Life is perpetuated by not eating meat. The jaws of Hell close on those who do.<!--mstheme--><!--mstheme--> If the world did not purchase and consume meat, no one would slaughter and offer meat for sale.<!--mstheme--><!--mstheme--> When a man realizes that meat is the butchered flesh of another creature, he will abstain from eating it.<!--mstheme--><!--mstheme--> Insightful souls who have abandoned the passion to hurt others will not feed on flesh that life has abandoned.<!--mstheme--><!--mstheme--> Greater than a thousand ghee offerings consumed in sacrificial fires is to not sacrifice and consume any living creature.<!--mstheme--><!--mstheme--> All life will press palms together in prayerful adoration of those who refuse to slaughter or savor meat.<!--mstheme--> From these verses there should be no doubt that the Vedic shastra recommends that such selfish meat-eating must be given up if one has any concern for other living beings, or one’s own future existence, or for attaining any spiritual merit. In Bhagavad-gita, however, we also find similar verses on what is recommended for human consumption. Lord Krishna says, “If one offers Me with love and devotion a leaf, a flower, fruit or water, I will accept it.” (Bg.9.26) This means that not only should one be a vegetarian and eat only fruits, water, grains, vegetables, etc., but such items should be made as an offering to God with love. The reason is that, “The devotees of the Lord are released from all kinds of sins because they eat food which is offered first for sacrifice. Others, who prepare food for personal sense enjoyment, verily eat only sin.” (Bg.3.13) So what is offered are only those things that Krishna accepts. That becomes prasada, or remnants of foods offered to the Lord. As further elaborated in Bhagavad-gita by Lord Sri Krishna: “O son of Kunti, all that you do, all that you eat, all that you offer and give away, as well as all austerities that you may perform, should be done as an offering unto Me. In this way you will be freed from all reactions to good and evil deeds, and by this principle of renunciation you will be liberated and come to Me.” (Bg.9.27) Herein we can see that the process of preparing and eating food is also a part of the Vedic system for making spiritual advancement. As the Vedic literature explains, what we eat is an important factor in the process of purifying ourselves and remaining free from accumulating bad karma. It actually is not so difficult to be vegetarian, and it gives one a much higher taste in eating and in one’s spiritual realizations. The level of our consciousness is also determined not only by what we think and do, but also by the vibrational level of what we put into our bodies as food. The more natural and peaceful the food, the more healthy and peaceful will be our consciousness. If it is further blessed and offered to the Lord, then it becomes especially powerful and spiritualized. This vibration goes into our own bodies and is assimilated by our consciousness to assist us in our spiritual upliftment. However, if we eat foods that are the remnants of animals that were petrified with fear before being slaughtered, or were tortured during the slaughter process, that fear, aggression and suffering will also become a part of our own consciousness, which is reflected back on our own life and the people with whom we come in contact. And people wonder why there is not more peace in the world. to be continued............

Krsna says, "time I am, the great destroyer of the worlds.." BG 11.32 In other words, when God says that He's the destroyer of the worlds, does this mean we can play God and also start killing? Rather it says, Sri Caitanya-caritamrita (Adi-lila, Chapter 17, verse 166): “Cow killers are condemned to rot in hellish life for as many thousands of years as there are hairs on the body of the cow,” which is also referenced in the Manu-samhita. So an intelligent person will try to avoid this fate and stop accumulating sinful reactions.

Since Buddhism is by now a well established global org, probably much better than Vaishnavism, the Vaishnavas should remind the Buddhist fellow men that Lord Buddha wanted to establish ahimsa, stop to generate sinful reactions by killing - as the vedas confirm - especially the killing of cows is very sinful. Now, everywhere we find nowadays humanity thriving for peace, harmony and good living. What they don't know, while accumulating sinful reactions, peace is not possible. For example the inhibition threshold to commit violence is constanly getting lower and lower, even school children get more and more out of control. Another problem for stopping the killing of animals, the widespread "scientific knowledge" that animals have only biological life - life that is created by chemicals within the cells. Additionally, the big religions teach the same, there's no soul within animals, there's no soul even within members of other religions among human beings. What is missing, first of all, prove that the understanding of biological life is not scientific, there's no proof what so ever how by chemical interaction within the cells life is generated. It is nothing but a fiction. I recently told a lady who owns a cat, it is unfortunate that the Church teaches that animals have no soul. She looked at me with disbelieve, "Is this really true?", yes, I replied, they invented the term, "biological life". She couldn't believe it and was actually shocked. Then she said, "but I know that my cat has a soul, is an individual, how can they say that?" So, this lady is a Catholic, paid church rate for her whole live but as we see they don't even know what is being taught and what is the consequence of this killing. A lot of awareness training has to be done and present Vaishnavas, are they aware of the world they live in? Right, sometimes the refugees from the tyrant's kingdom start fighting amongst themselves. This makes no sense, the refugees need to stick together.

SHIVA TRANCE <embed src=" " type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" height="355" width="425">

Finally we get the details, God is speaking with G.W.Bush. Bush: God told me to invade Iraq <!--proximic_content_on-->President 'revealed reasons for war in private meeting'<!--proximic_content_off--> <author>By Rupert Cornwell in Washington</author> Friday, 16 May 2008 <!-- Create a list of all articles, collections and links which are "from the archives" --><!-- Create a list of all articles, collections and links which are "from the archives" --> <!-- Create a list of all articles and collections and links and test if they also appear in the "from the archives" list --> <!--proximic_content_on--> President George Bush has claimed he was told by God to invade Iraq and attack Osama bin Laden's stronghold of Afghanistan as part of a divine mission to bring peace to the Middle East, security for Israel, and a state for the Palestinians. <!--proximic_content_off--> <!--proximic_content_on--> The President made the assertion during his first meeting with Palestinian leaders in June 2003, according to a BBC series which will be broadcast this month. The revelation comes after Mr Bush launched an impassioned attack yesterday in Washington on Islamic militants, likening their ideology to that of Communism, and accusing them of seeking to "enslave whole nations" and set up a radical Islamic empire "that spans from Spain to Indonesia". In the programmeElusive Peace: Israel and the Arabs, which starts on Monday, the former Palestinian foreign minister Nabil Shaath says Mr Bush told him and Mahmoud Abbas, former prime minister and now Palestinian President: "I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, 'George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan.' And I did, and then God would tell me, 'George go and end the tyranny in Iraq,' and I did." And "now again", Mr Bush is quoted as telling the two, "I feel God's words coming to me: 'Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East.' And by God, I'm gonna do it." Mr Abbas remembers how the US President told him he had a "moral and religious obligation" to act. The White House has refused to comment on what it terms a private conversation. But the BBC account is anything but implausible, given how throughout his presidency Mr Bush, a born-again Christian, has never hidden the importance of his faith. From the outset he has couched the "global war on terror" in quasi-religious terms, as a struggle between good and evil. Al-Qa'ida terrorists are routinely described as evil-doers. For Mr Bush, the invasion of Iraq has always been part of the struggle against terrorism, and he appears to see himself as the executor of the divine will. He told Bob Woodward - whose 2004 book, Plan of Attack, is the definitive account of the administration's road to war in Iraq - that after giving the order to invade in March 2003, he walked in the White House garden, praying "that our troops be safe, be protected by the Almighty". As he went into this critical period, he told Mr Woodward, "I was praying for strength to do the Lord's will. "I'm surely not going to justify war based upon God. Understand that. Nevertheless, in my case, I pray that I will be as good a messenger of His will as possible. And then of course, I pray for forgiveness." Another telling sign of Mr Bush's religion was his answer to Mr Woodward's question on whether he had asked his father - the former president who refused to launch a full-scale invasion of Iraq after driving Saddam Hussein from Kuwait in 1991 - for advice on what to do. The current President replied that his earthly father was "the wrong father to appeal to for advice ... there is a higher father that I appeal to". The same sense of mission permeated his speech at the National Endowment of Democracy yesterday. Its main news was Mr Bush's claim that Western security services had thwarted 10 planned attacks by al-Qa'ida since 11 September 2001, three of them against mainland US. More striking though was his unrelenting portrayal of radical Islam as a global menace, which only the forces of freedom - led by the US - could repel. It was delivered at a moment when Mr Bush's domestic approval ratings are at their lowest ebb, in large part because of the war in Iraq, in which 1,950 US troops have died, with no end in sight. It came amid continuing violence on the ground, nine days before the critical referendum on the new constitution that offers perhaps the last chance of securing a unitary and democratic Iraq. "The militants believe that controlling one country will rally the Muslim masses, enabling them to overthrow all moderate governments in the region" and set up a radical empire stretching from Spain to Indonesia, he said. The insurgents' aim was to "enslave whole nations and intimidate the world". He portrayed Islamic radicals as a single global movement, from the Middle East to Chechnya and Bali and the jungles of the Philippines. He rejected claims that the US military presence in Iraq was fuelling terrorism: 11 September 2001 occurred long before American troops set foot in Iraq - and Russia's opposition to the invasion did not stop terrorists carrying out the Beslan atrocity in which 300 children died. Mr Bush also accused Syria and Iran of supporting radical groups. They "have a long history of collaboration with terrorists and they deserve no patience". The US, he warned, "makes no distinction between those who commit acts of terror and those who support and harbour them because they're equally as guilty of murder". "Wars are not won without sacrifice and this war will require more sacrifice, more time and more resolve," Mr Bush declared. But progress was being made in Iraq, and, he proclaimed: "We will keep our nerve and we will win that victory."

Well this means that thriving for big positions doesn't mean that people are getting convinced about spiritual knowledge by such big big leaders. In this case, the understanding that animals have a soul. I made the assertion that nothing really happened in this understanding that animals have a soul, people are not confident about it.

The present situation of humanity rejecting the vedic understanding that animals have a soul hasn't changed very much since Vaishnavism came to the West in 1966. The French Cardinal Danielou brought it to the point, if God created nature like this that one species of animals lives by killing another species, God could have meant only one thing - there's only biological life within animals, but no spirit soul. (" But why does God create some animals who eat other animals? There is a fault in the creation, it seems.") When Prabhupada presented the general framework he surely expected that in future the Vaishnavas would work out additional findings. Somehow this was overslept by struggle for existence to maintain the institutions. Yet another example that an efficient preaching force doesn't take shape by thriving for position. No pain, no gain. Thou Shalt Not Kill Or Thou Shalt Not Murder? <center>At a monastic retreat near Paris, in July of 1973, Srila Prabhupada talked with Cardinal Jean Danielou: "... the Bible does not simply say, 'Do not kill the human being.' It says broadly, 'Thou shalt not kill.'... why do you interpret this to suit your own convenience?" </center> Srila Prabhupada: Jesus Christ said, "Thou shalt not kill." So why is it that the Christian people are engaged in animal killing? Cardinal Danielou: Certainly in Christianity it is forbidden to kill, but we believe that there is a difference between the life of a human being and the life of the beasts. The life of a human being is sacred because man is made in the image of God; therefore, to kill a human being is forbidden. Srila Prabhupada: But the Bible does not simply say, "Do not kill the human being." It says broadly, "Thou shalt not kill." Cardinal Danielou: We believe that only human life is sacred. Srila Prabhupada: That is your interpretation. The commandment is "Thou shalt not kill." Cardinal Danielou: It is necessary for man to kill animals in order to have food to eat. Srila Prabhupada: No. Man can eat grains, vegetables, fruits, and milk. Cardinal Danielou: No flesh? Srila Prabhupada: No. Human beings are meant to eat vegetarian food. The tiger does not come to eat your fruits. His prescribed food is animal flesh. But man's food is vegetables, fruits, grains, and milk products. So how can you say that animal killing is not a sin? Cardinal Danielou: We believe it is a question of motivation. If the killing of an animal is for giving food to the hungry, then it is justified. Srila Prabhupada: But consider the cow: we drink her milk; therefore, she is our mother. Do you agree? Cardinal Danielou: Yes, surely. Srila Prabhupada: So if the cow is your mother, how can you support killing her? You take the milk from her, and when she's old and cannot give you milk, you cut her throat. Is that a very humane proposal? In India those who are meat-eaters are advised to kill some lower animals like goats, pigs, or even buffalo. But cow killing is the greatest sin. In preaching Krsna consciousness we ask people not to eat any kind of meat, and my disciples strictly follow this principle. But if, under certain circumstances, others are obliged to eat meat, then they should eat the flesh of some lower animal. Don't kill cows. It is the greatest sin. And as long as a man is sinful, he cannot understand God. The human being's main business is to understand God and to love Him. But if you remain sinful, you will never be able to understand God--what to speak of loving Him. Cardinal Danielou: I think that perhaps this is not an essential point. The important thing is to love God. The practical commandments can vary from one religion to the next. Srila Prabhupada: So, in the Bible God's practical commandment is that you cannot kill; therefore killing cows is a sin for you. Cardinal Danielou: God says to the Indians that killing is not good, and he says to the Jews that... Srila Prabhupada: No, no. Jesus Christ taught, "Thou shalt not kill." Why do you interpret this to suit your own convenience? Cardinal Danielou: But Jesus allowed the sacrifice of the Paschal Lamb. Srila Prabhupada: But he never maintained a slaughterhouse. Cardinal Danielou: [Laughs.] No, but he did eat meat. Srila Prabhupada: When there is no other food, someone may eat meat in order to keep from starving. That is another thing. But it is most sinful to regularly maintain slaughterhouses just to satisfy your tongue. Actually, you will not even have a human society until this cruel practice of maintaining slaughterhouses is stopped. And although animal killing may sometimes be necessary for survival, at least the mother animal, the cow, should not be killed. That is simply human decency. In the Krsna consciousness movement our practice is that we don't allow the killing of any animals. Krsna says, patram puspam phalam toyam yo me bhaktya prayacchati: "Vegetables, fruits, milk, and grains should be offered to Me in devotion." (Bhagavad-gita 9.26) We take only the remnants of Krsna's food (prasadam). The trees offer us many varieties of fruits, but the trees are not killed. Of course, one living entity is food for another living entity, but that does not mean you can kill your mother for food. Cows are innocent; they give us milk. You take their milk--and then kill them in the slaughterhouse. This is sinful. Student: Srila Prabhupada, Christianity's sanction of meat-eating is based on the view that lower species of life do not have a soul like the human being's. Srila Prabhupada: That is foolishness. First of all, we have to understand the evidence of the soul's presence within the body. Then we can see whether the human being has a soul and the cow does not. What are the different characteristics of the cow and the man? If we find a difference in characteristics, then we can say that in the animal there is no soul. But if we see that the animal and the human being have the same characteristics, then how can you say that the animal has no soul? The general symptoms are that the animal eats, you eat; the animal sleeps, you sleep; the animal mates, you mate; the animal defends, and you defend. Where is the difference? Cardinal Danielou: We admit that in the animal there may be the same type of biological existence as in men, but there is no soul. We believe that the soul is a human soul. Srila Prabhupada: Our Bhagavad-gita says sarva-yonisu, "In all species of life the soul exists." The body is like a suit of clothes. You have black clothes; I am dressed in saffron clothes. But within the dress you are a human being, and I am also a human being. Similarly, the bodies of the different species are just like different types of dress. There are soul, a part and parcel of God. Suppose a man has two sons, not equally meritorious. One may be a Supreme Court judge and the other may be a common laborer, but the father claims both as his sons. He does not make the distinction that the son who is a judge is very important and the worker-son is not important. And if the judge-son says, "My dear father, your other son is useless; let me cut him up and eat him," will the father allow this? Cardinal Danielou: Certainly not, but the idea that all life is part of the life of God is difficult for us to admit. There is a great difference between human life and animal life. Srila Prabhupada: That difference is due to the development of consciousness. In the human body there is developed consciousness. Even a tree has a soul, but a tree's consciousness is not very developed. If you cut a tree it does not resist. Actually, it does resist, but only to a very small degree. There is a scientist named Jagadish Chandra Bose who has made a machine which shows that trees and plants are able to feel pain when they are cut. And we can see directly that when someone comes to kill an animal, it resists, it cries, it makes a horrible sound. So it is a matter of the development of consciousness. But the soul is there within all living beings. Cardinal Danielou: But metaphysically, the life of man is sacred. Human beings think on a higher platform than the animals do. Srila Prabhupada: What is that higher platform? The animal eats to maintain his body, and you also eat in order to maintain your body. The cow eats grass in the field, and the human being eats meat from a huge slaughterhouse full of modern machines. But just because you have big machines and a ghastly scene, while the animal simply eats grass, this does not mean that you are so advanced that only within your body is there a soul and that there is not a soul within the body of the animal. That is illogical. We can see that the basic characteristics are the same in the animal and the human being. Cardinal Danielou: But only in human beings do we find a metaphysical search for the meaning of life. Srila Prabhupada: Yes. So metaphysically search out why you believe that there is no soul within the animal--that is metaphysics. If you are thinking metaphysically, that's all right. But if you are thinking like an animal, then what is the use of your metaphysical study? Metaphysical means "above the physical" or, in other words, "spiritual." In the Bhagavad-gita Krsna says, sarva-yonisu kaunteya: "In every living being there is a spirit soul." That is metaphysical understanding. Now either you accept Krsna's teachings as metaphysical, or you'll have to take a third-class fool's opinion as metaphysical. Which do you accept? Cardinal Danielou: But why does God create some animals who eat other animals? There is a fault in the creation, it seems. Srila Prabhupada: It is not a fault. God is very kind. If you want to eat animals, then He'll give you full facility. God will give you the body of a tiger in your next life so that you can eat flesh very freely. "Why are you maintaining slaughterhouses? I'll give you fangs and claws. Now eat." So the meat-eaters are awaiting such punishment. The animal-eaters become tigers, wolves, cats, and dogs in their next life--to get more facility."

Thanks Avinash, yes, civil right decisions can go on for years. "Court, everyone goes to the court to receive justice. But if the court is itself polluted, then how people will live? That has become the practice in the Kali-yuga. Anardhyena nyāya-rahitam. In Kali-yuga, if you have no money, then you will not be able to get justice. Anardhyena nyāya-rahitam. As soon as you go to the court, immediately you’ll have to appoint a pleader and pay him at least seventy-five rupees and then stamp duty, this and that, so many things—then bribe. Then bribe. You give bribe to this man, you give bribe to that man. Suppose you actually want some money from somebody. He has taken money, he is not paying, or something else. So you have to push good money after bad money. So money which is due from others—he is not paying—that has become a bad money. Good money means which is in your hand. That is good money. And if you are simply speculating that “I shall get this money from that person. I shall get this money from…,” that is bad money. So there is an English proverb, perhaps you know all, “To push good money after bad money.” So therefore sometimes intelligent persons, they do not go to the court because he knows that money which is not being paid… Before entering into agreement you should be very clever so that your money may not be bad money which you are advancing. But if somehow or other it has become bad money, don’t try to put good money. Let that bad money go to hell. So better nowadays not to go to the court as far as possible. But you should deal with people in such a way… Just like I was advising you, just find out a respectable transporter, because the time is very bad. Otherwise it will become a bad money. You go for cheap thing, that “He will carry my goods free,” but he will throw it away. Somebody will take away. Then your whole profit is gone. You should be very careful. And if you have to go to court, then it is still more bad. You see?So we have to be very careful. The age is very bad, the Kali-yuga. You are experiencing. We have to simply take shelter of Kṛṣṇa and always cry, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, he! kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, he! kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, rakṣa mām! kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇa, pāhi mām! kṛṣṇa, keśava, kṛṣṇa, keśava, kṛṣṇa, keśava, rakṣa mām! rāma rāghava, rāma rāghava, rāma rāghava, pāhi mām!" Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 6.2.1-5 by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda Calcutta, January 6, 1971

Since the vedic version of everywhere on all the planets are living entities is pretty out on a limb - at least the Church's astronomer says something similar, although they say that there is only one universe, "Just as there is a multiplicity of creatures on Earth, so there could be other beings created by God [beyond it]." Pope's astronomer insists alien life 'would be part of God's creation' <author>By Peter Popham in Rome</author> Thursday, 15 May 2008 <!-- Create a list of all articles, collections and links which are "from the archives" --> <!-- Create a list of all articles, collections and links which are "from the archives" --> <!--proximic_exclude_on--> <form method="post" action="http://www.independent.co.uk/search/index.jsp"> <fieldset class="searchBox"> <legend>Search</legend> <label for="f_searchtool">Search</label> <input name="eceExpr" id="f_searchtool" value="" class="required" type="text"> <!-- <input type="text" id="zoek" name="eceExpr" value='' class="required"/> --> <input name="eceSort" value="relevance" type="hidden"> <input name="eceMode" value="search" type="hidden"> <input name="eceForm" value="simple" type="hidden"> <button type="submit">Go</button> <input name="where" value="this" id="f_searchtarget-1" class="radio" type="radio"> <label for="f_searchtarget-1" class="static">Independent.co.uk</label> <input name="where" value="web" id="f_searchtarget-2" class="radio" type="radio"> <label for="f_searchtarget-2" class="static">Web</label> </fieldset> </form> Change font size: A | A | A <!--proximic_content_on--> The Vatican's official newspaper has endorsed the possibility that the universe could contain intelligent life beyond Earth, while insisting that aliens would be "our brothers" and "children of God" as much as human beings are. <!--proximic_content_off--> <!--proximic_content_on--> The Pope's astronomer, José Gabriel Funes, a Jesuit priest, told L'Osservatore Romano that there would be nothing surprising about the existence of intelligent extra-terrestrials. "Just as there is a multiplicity of creatures on Earth, so there could be other beings created by God [beyond it]," he said. The interview suggests that the Church's hierarchy may be paving the way to showing that Pope Benedict XVI is more open to the ideas of modern science than he has previously seemed to be. Pope Benedict has spoken in favour of "intelligent design" in the past and has damned evolutionary ideas that leave no room for God. Fr Funes, in the interview, admits that, for him, evolution is a given. He also said that he believed in the Big Bang theory as the most likely explanation for the origin of the universe, and that the Bible should not be held to account for its lack of scientific accuracy. "Fundamentally," he said, "the Bible is not a book of science... It's a love letter written by God to his people in the language of two or three thousand years ago... So one cannot ask the Bible for scientific responses." The existence of alien beings would not create a problem for believers, he insisted, "because one cannot put limits on the creative freedom of God... They would be part of creation." Pope Benedict has reminded believers that "Revelation teaches us that [man] was created in the image and likeness of God", and that "man is the only creature on Earth that God has wanted for his own sake".

Thing is (btw thanks that you liked the pic I posted Kula:rolleyes:): The sum total--more than 48,000,000 is the number of children aborted in the United States since 1973. Or the number of children aborted in the world each year. Considering the fact that so many children are killed it is quite fair that Prabhupada says, "Children—contraceptive. And dog—welcome", although they might also kill many cats and dogs. Overpopulation when it comes to varna-sankara, yes, those who create hellish condition in human society, this could be called overpopulated. Varnasrama and Varna Sankara 2,045 Views / EMail This Post / Print This Post / Home » Varnasrama and Varna Sankara <!-- end .post-top --> <!-- the main section of the post goes here --> By Praghosa Dasa We often remark that in the west death is something that is very much hidden away from day to day life. Aside from the flashing lights of passing ambulances there is little to remind us of inevitable death. Unfortunately the same cannot be said of the ever growing number of youths who menacingly roam the streets of western cities in small to medium size gangs. Maybe it is because I am getting older and am suffering from misty nostalgia, or perhaps I’m feeling a little more vulnerable to youthful strength, but no, that is not the case, this phenomena is both on the increase as far as frequency goes, as well as the degree of brutality involved. While generally the youths themselves are menacing enough, when they are accompanied by those dogs that always remind me of the hellish planets, the menace level increases significantly. With no training, no guidance, poor upbringing and no role models, the pure unadulterated desire to lord it over by brute force appears to be their life mission. And boy do they take to that mission with gusto. Beatings, stabbings and murders are now a daily occurrence in most western cities. Indeed a new phrase has arisen in the western lexicon “anti-social behaviour” I guess anti-social behaviour is more or less the job description for varna sankara offspring. Srila Prabhupada defines varna sankara in different ways but one definition he uses again and again is unwanted children. In most western countries these days there are quite a number of unwanted children that don’t generally see the light day, due to a combination of contraception and abortion. I suppose they could be categorised as the absolute unwanted, of course the ‘parents’ of the absolute unwanted are merely making their own unfortunate position in this material world even worse; In this sinful age of Kali, people have even taken to the process of killing the child in the womb. This is the most degraded practice; it can only perpetuate the miserable material conditions of those who perform it. SB 5.17.12 purport Then we have the children who are not planned but are not so unwanted that they are aborted, these children are born both inside of outside of marriage but the statistics (as well as Srila Prabhupada’s comments) suggest that those born outside of marriage are more likely to be a disturbance to society; If varna-sankara population is increased, then the whole society becomes a hell. That’s a fact. Actually, that is the position at the present moment. Therefore, according to the Vedic system, marriage is there. Without marriage, the population, increase of population, means varna-sankara. Bg 2.13 Lecture Nov 19th 1972 While the above quote is quite categoric and direct it does get worse. I don’t think there were TV shows during Srila Prabhupada’s time (at least I never heard of them) that were dedicated to people taking paternity tests so the identity of the father could be determined! Recently while visiting my brother in hospital our conversation meandered onto the subject of marriage and how it is the essential building block of a stable society, a concept he was in agreement with. He then went on to reveal how far and how quickly society is moving away from that standard. He informed me of TV shows that are dedicated to the subject of paternity testing and what’s more, there are an unlimited number of people who need such paternity tests. What this means of course is that married or not, the mother is sleeping with multiple partners, but regardless of whether there were TV shows during Prabhupada’s time on this subject, Prabhupada did cover this issue of paternity; Varna-sankara population means a population who cannot say who is his father SB Lecture 1.16.12 9th January 1974 So a quick recap: varna sankara take 1 – Children born in stable monogamous marriages but were not fully planned varna sankara take 2 – Unplanned children born outside of marriage varna sankara take 3 – Unplanned children not only born out of marriage but born to a mother who is not able to pinpoint who the father is. There is also a hybrid of 1 and 2 above wherein the child is conceived outside of marriage but the parents marry before the child is born. In the west this is known as a ’shotgun wedding’? A shotgun wedding being a wedding that takes place quickly (shotgun) due to the ‘bride’ getting pregnant by ‘mistake’. Traditionally the main reason for a shotgun wedding was to legitimise the relationship between the man and woman involved, as well as making sure the future child was not considered a second class citizen. In many Catholic countries a child born out of wedlock was denied a series of sacraments that would undermine its chances of achieving salvation according to Catholic theology. So the shotgun wedding solved this problem but regardless of such after-thoughts and arrangements, unplanned children remain varna sankara and are likely to be a disturbance to one degree or another; To check the increase of demoniac population, the Vedic civilization enacted so many rules and regulations of social life, the most important of which is the garbhadhana process for be getting good children. SB 3.17.15 Still, while such shotgun weddings may not be ideal, when compared to the need for paternity testing they take on a much more glorious status, such a reality only confirms the relentless march of kali yuga; …in this age, Kali-yuga, dam-patye ‘bhirucir hetuh: the relationship between husband and wife will be based on sexual power. Therefore householder life in this Kali-yuga is extremely dangerous unless both the wife and husband take to Krsna consciousness. SB 6.18.40 purport As devotees of Krsna and followers of Srila Prabhupada our prime duty will always be to spread the glories of the holy name as far and wide as possible and indeed that alone will have a huge impact on the unlimited negative influences of the age of kali. However it is clear that as well as engaging in sravanam and kirtanam we also have a duty to live our lives in as dharmic a way as possible. To underline this Srila Prabhupada often made the link between varna sankara and the lack of varnasrama; Formerly, the principle of dividing human society into four sections—brahmana, ksatriya, vaisya and sudra—was strictly followed, but because of gradual neglect of the varnasrama principles, varna-sankara population developed, and the entire institution has now been lost. In this age of Kali, practically everyone is a sudra (kalau sudra-sambhavah), and finding anyone who is a brahmana, ksatriya or vaisya is very difficult. Although the Krsna consciousness movement is a movement of brahmanas and Vaisnavas, it is trying to re-establish the divine varnasrama institution, for without this division of society there cannot be peace and prosperity anywhere. SB 7.11.18-20 purport Of course we cannot have varnasrama without having ’simple living and high thinking’. High thinking is something that comes naturally to devotees but simple living is more of a struggle for the vast majority of us. So perhaps an additional impetus for us to embrace simple living might be the thought that if we don’t we are likely adding to the grave problem of an increase in the varna sankara population. …as stated in Bhagavad-gita, an increase of varna-sankara population creates a hellish society. This is the society in which Americans now find themselves. SB 6.7.12 Purport

I can live at best being insulted by guru-tyagis like beggar, so go on as you like! Again, it clearly says that this kind of sikhsa-guru system you were talking about was never installed within ISKCON. It is rather something like vartmana-pradarshika-guru, giving direction - someone who also gives siksha but who is not a siksha-guru. If for example Bhakta Joe instructs a guest at the Sunday feast how to chant Hare Krishna he's giving sikhsa, but he's not a sikhsa-guru but a vartmana-pradarshika-guru, pointing in the right direction. Anyone knows this except beggar - is he a Vaishnava anyway?

Prabhupada: No husband, no children, one dog. Just see. Children—contraceptive. And dog—welcome. Woman with dog: Good morning. Prabhupāda: Good morning. Devotee: Hare Krishna. Prabhupāda: For children—kill them. This is Kali-yuga. They are killing their own children and patting a dog. Just see how much fallen they are, and they’re passing as civilized. Fourth class. Complaining of overpopulation, and the dog gives birth at a time half a dozen—there is no overpopulation, welcome; we shall maintain them. Huh? They’re giving twice in a year, or once in a, even once in a year, that is no overpopulation. A man gives one or two birth, it is overpopulation. Formerly they are begetting hundred children. At that time there was no complaint of overpopulation. At that time, the description in the history is kāmaṁ vavarṣa parjanyaḥ [SB 1.10.4] On account of good rains, the earth used to produce immense necessities of life. Just like this portion is maintained with sufficient water, there is green everywhere. So if there is sufficient rain, everywhere you can do. Where is the question of overpopulation? [break] …population you work for growing food. No. Some of them are becoming hippies, no work. And some of them are working for manufacturing tire tube, tools, that’s all. Where is food? Still there is food, but they’ll not work for this, for growing food. Madhudviṣa: They have run one survey… Prabhupāda: Hm. Madhudviṣa: …and they have found out that the people of Australia spend so much money on feeding their pets that two hundred thousand people per year could be fed with the money that is used to feed the pets. Prabhupāda: Just see. Morning Walk Conversation with His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda May 19, 1975, Melbourne 750519mw.mel

Messiah (Hebrew: מָׁשִיַח, <small>Standard</small> Mašíaḥ <small>Tiberian</small> Māšîªḥ; Aramaic: משיחא, Aramaic/Syriac: ܡܫܺܝܚܳܐ, Məšîḥā; Arabic: المسيح‎, al-Masīḥ) Literally, Messiah means "The Anointed (One)", typically someone anointed with holy anointing oil. Figuratively, anointing is done to signify being chosen for a task; so, Messiah means "The Chosen (One)", particularly someone divinely chosen. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messiah No sir, like usually, beggar has it all wrong, is halluzinating but calling others foolishly offender. First he says, no, Prabhupada's books are not Krishna's books, although we provided all proof, now he says, messiah = God. At Wikipedia it says, messiah=the chosen one, someone divinely chosen. In other words, as stated also in Srila Rupa Goswami's Bhaktirasamrita-sindhu, a genuine spiritual master is not chosen by vote, but by the Supreme Lord Himself through the bonafide parampara system. It is that simple. Please learn to read Wikipedia and then come back. "Therefore guru must be authorized person, not that bhūmi-phala- guru. No. “I am guru,” no. You cannot become guru unless you are agent to draw out the mercy water from the ocean of mercy of Krishna. That is guru. And therefore a guru is not an ordinary person. He is the representative, bona fide representative of Kṛṣṇa. Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura has sung, Krishna se tomāra, kṛṣṇa dite pāra: “Vaiṣṇava Ṭhākura, Krishna is your property. If you like, you can give.” Vedeṣu durlabhaṁ adurlabhaṁ ātma-bhaktau [Bs. 5.33]. You cannot get Krishna by studying Vedas. That is not possible. There is Krishna in the Vedas, but you cannot pick up. It is not possible. But if you go to the Krishna's favorite person… Kintu prabhor yaḥ priya eva tasya. Krishna’s very dear servant, confidential servant, is guru. Nobody can become guru unless he is in confidence of Kṛṣṇa. Na ca tasmād manuṣyeṣu kaścid me priya-kṛttamaḥ. These things are there. Not that by magic one can become guru. No. He must be… Saṁsāra dāvānala-līḍha-loka-trāṇāya kāruṇya-ghanāghanatvam, prāptasya kalyāṇa **. Everything is there in the śāstra. We have to see whether a person is actually bona fide agent of Krishna. Then we accept him as guru. Otherwise useless waste of time." Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 5.6.8 by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda Vṛndāvana, November 30, 1976 full lecture: http://causelessmercy.com/t/t/761130SB.VRN.htm

Better you present logic and reason instead of attacking members. Makes you look more respectable. "An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject."

You're again wrong, good trial though (this type of siksa-guru system what is nondifferent with "the swarupa of Krsna" and you're refering to was never installed within ISKCON). Since you made it your mission to shout down anyone who proposes the worship of Srila Prabhupada, what else can be expected. Q: What the heck do you take interest in A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami? You rejected him long ago. Stick to associate with your godbrothers and follow your guru. This should be enough work to keep yourself fully engaged.

<embed src=" " type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" height="355" width="425"> This reflects the age we're living in, the mass of people giving a wild ovation to the leader of the global atheist movement, Richard Dawkins. The crowd gives him right, but didn't the crowd always followed like Lemmings? As usual it is ISKCON who's giving the Dawkins of kali-yuga the biggest applaud, Sitapati das, moderator of planetiskcon.com: "This is Dawkins at his finest. A flawless victory without a doubt. The crowd gives him a wild ovation after a 70 second response to "the simplest question" from an audience member at Randolph Macon Women's College in Lynchburg, Virginia. Dawkins delivers his stunning oratorial tour de force by enveloping the question using a rhetorical cultural relativity argument that sweeps his opponents legs from under her. Again he wraps his opponent in a metanarrative. He doesn't address the question itself, but rather goes on the offensive, and attacks the questioner and their frame of reference. This is a prime example of Dawkins at his best - he is playing to a live audience of the public. Remember that he is the sitting chair for the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University. He is a populist orator. He knows how to play to the crowd, and this crowd of Americans cheers him on like he were Hulk Hogan and this were a Friday night Smackdown at the WWE." full article: http://www.atmayogi.com/node/772

Spot-on, this should have been understood by now. To reduce Srila Prabhupada's status from messiah (diksha) to pot washer (shiksha) is why we are obliged to counter all these arguments. May 10, 1970 Los Angeles My Dear Bali Mardan and Upendra, Please accept my blessings. I am in due receipt of your letter dated by Post 5th May, 1970. So it is very encouraging that people are coming to the extent of 40 heads, and they are trying to understand the importance of this great movement, and any sane man will be able to understand that. But I do not know why our students who are supposed to be the leaders of this movement will fight amongst themselves for supremacy. Our whole process is of surrendering. We are taught to address others as Prabhu. Prabhu means master; and the leader of the masters is called Prabhupada. So if the Prabhus have surrendered to the Prabhupada, why there shall be such mentality of occupying the superior position? This is contradictory. Kindly stop this unnecessary misunderstanding. Both Upendra and yourself are competent and experienced, so please adjust your disagreement amongst your selves. It is my request. As a matter of fact, as you are the pioneer in taking all risks to go to Australia, naturally you shall be considered as the leader, but a leader’s position is also very grave and responsible. A leader has to lead others very tactfully and intelligently. Kindly therefore do not quarrel, but go on with your duties progressively. In the meantime, things should run on as it is, and if there is any need of change, we shall consider about it when Citralekha goes there. Please try to organize the new center as nicely as possible even at personal inconvenience–that is real service. Krsna is sitting in everyone’s heart, He knows everything what to do, so depend on Him and do your duties patiently. Maya is very strong, and we are liable to fall down at any moment. We have to gather our strength by chanting the beads sixteen rounds regularly and praying to the lotus feet of Krsna for guidance. I hope both of you will kindly follow my instruction and forget if there is any accidental disagreement. Hope this will meet you in good health. Your ever well-wisher, A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami

This is good, there're now more people like Lalita Madhava devi dasi noting that there is an anti-woman and anti-children process going on. More people are arguing: This is not what our acaryas were teaching. thanks sd BRATTLEBORO, VERMONT — Dear Bhakti Vikasa Swami, please accept my obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada. As you are undoubtedly aware, your disciple Caitanya dasa has been writing a Blog entitled " Hare Krishna Diary" as a vehicle for propagating your "teachings." Throughout it, purporting to quote Srila Prabhupada, he pervasively vilifies women as "whores,prostitutes" and "animals" and consistently vilifies them in abusive language in numerous additional ways. His statements are deeply disturbing and offensive. Even more disturbing is the fact that you are at the very least allowing, if not encouraging, him to do this, which reflects very poorly on you and casts you in an extremely unfavorable light. That you would impart such a distorted and dangerous version of "Krishna consciousness" to young, impressionable devotees in your care reveals a serious deficiency in your judgment and calls into question your qualification to act as an initiating guru on behalf of ISKCON. In addition to his own distasteful statements, Caitanya dasa also quotes and provides numerous links to your texts from the infamous "GHQ" conference. This conference and the statements made by its members (only one of whom is known to have ever had the decency to apologize) were emphatically repudiated by the North American GBC 10 years ago. Therefore it is most surprising that you appear to be encouraging your disciple to actively propagate these very statements, which the GBC described as "demeaning,ill intended,ridiculing,berating" and "vilifying" and thus strongly denounced as "crossing the line of decency, morality and Vaisnava etiquette." In this way, whether you have merely tacitly allowed these things to go on (though one has to wonder how your newly-initiated disciple, a mere 2-year devotee, happened to come into possession of all of your old GHQ writings and one has to assume that he would surely not have published them without your permission) or whether you have actively encouraged them, you are fully responsible for the abhorrent, vulgar, offensive and abusive statements made by your disciple and consequently must be accountable to the Society of devotees for them. Therefore I am requesting you to please do each of the following: 1. Publicly apologize for the offensive and disturbing statements made by your disciple with your tacit or overt permission. As these statements are being publicly disseminated on the Internet, a public apology from you is similarly in order. 2. Compel your disciple Caitanya dasa to also publicly apologize for the offensive and disturbing statements he has made. 3. Compel your disciple Caitanya dasa to remove this offensive blog from the Internet. Its existence is a liability for ISKCON in every way. 4. Forbid your disciple Caitanya dasa from ever again using the sacred words "Hare Krishna" in any title or in any writing disseminated via any medium which propagates hateful, vulgar, offensive, abusive and misogynistic rhetoric. Calling that repugnant blog the "Hare Krishna Diary" is a disgrace to the Holy Name and a disgrace to Srila Prabhupada that dishonors his legacy and everything he sacrificed to make "Hare Krishna" a household word. Thank you very much. Your servant, Lalita Madhava d.d.

According vedic view free will is always there. But because we activated with our free will all kind of karmic reactions we sometimes become restricted and don't feel free to act. Just like a mountain climber who feels free by climbing up the biggest mountains and suddenly meets with an accident. The consequential damage of this accident might cause this man to consider that he has no more freedom, is bound to sit in a wheel chair and even thinks of committing suicide. In that state of feeling no more freedom he might say, "I'm no more the doer". But actually it was he himself who brought himself into this condition. And this is basically the situation with all of us being born in this age of kali, we created in our past the karma of having presently very limited material freedom. The good thing is however, we can easily get spiritual perfection by chanting the Holy Name. Devotee: Śrīla Prabhupāda? Why God gave to man free will if He knew the man would fall down in the material world?Prabhupāda: If you have no free will, then you are a stone. The stone has no free will. You want to be stone? Then you must be, must have free will. But don’t misuse your free will. But don’t try to become stone. That is not life. Bhagavad-gītā 15.15 by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda August 5, 1976, New Mayapur (French farm)

Thanks for posting this nice enlightening story! You're right - God created everything and therefore we should be humble and accept whatever we can get to worship the Lord. In post above written by Richard S. Brown, http://www.richardshawbrown.com/mysticarticles/laxmi-conch.html it says that he himself is looking for such a special conch shell and is asking to write him. So, could be that these Laxmi conch shells are so rare that one can hardly find one and all the millions of altars wouldnt be there if they couldnt use the "bogus conch". Additionally Krishna says, one should offer with love and devotion and then He will accept. No Laxmi conch mentioned. patraḿ puṣpaḿ phalaḿ toyaḿ yo me bhaktyā prayacchati tad ahaḿ bhakty-upahṛtam aśnāmi prayatātmanaḥ SYNONYMS patram — a leaf; puṣpam — a flower; phalam — a fruit; toyam — water; yaḥ — whoever; me — unto Me; bhaktyā — with devotion; prayacchati — offers; tat — that; aham — I; bhakti-upahṛtam — offered in devotion; aśnāmi — accept; prayata-ātmanaḥ — from one in pure consciousness. TRANSLATION If one offers Me with love and devotion a leaf, a flower, fruit or water, I will accept it. PURPORT For the intelligent person, it is essential to be in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, engaged in the transcendental loving service of the Lord, in order to achieve a permanent, blissful abode for eternal happiness. The process of achieving such a marvelous result is very easy and can be attempted even by the poorest of the poor, without any kind of qualification. The only qualification required in this connection is to be a pure devotee of the Lord. It does not matter what one is or where one is situated. The process is so easy that even a leaf or a little water or fruit can be offered to the Supreme Lord in genuine love and the Lord will be pleased to accept it. No one, therefore, can be barred from Kṛṣṇa consciousness, because it is so easy and universal. Who is such a fool that he does not want to be Kṛṣṇa conscious by this simple method and thus attain the highest perfectional life of eternity, bliss and knowledge? Kṛṣṇa wants only loving service and nothing more. Kṛṣṇa accepts even a little flower from His pure devotee. He does not want any kind of offering from a nondevotee. He is not in need of anything from anyone, because He is self-sufficient, and yet He accepts the offering of His devotee in an exchange of love and affection. To develop Kṛṣṇa consciousness is the highest perfection of life. Bhakti is mentioned twice in this verse in order to declare more emphatically that bhakti, or devotional service, is the only means to approach Kṛṣṇa. No other condition, such as becoming a brāhmaṇa. a learned scholar, a very rich man or a great philosopher, can induce Kṛṣṇa to accept some offering. Without the basic principle of bhakti, nothing can induce the Lord to agree to accept anything from anyone. Bhakti is never causal. The process is eternal. It is direct action in service to the absolute whole. Here Lord Kṛṣṇa, having established that He is the only enjoyer, the primeval Lord and the real object of all sacrificial offerings, reveals what types of sacrifices He desires to be offered. If one wishes to engage in devotional service to the Supreme in order to be purified and to reach the goal of life — the transcendental loving service of God — then one should find out what the Lord desires of him. One who loves Kṛṣṇa will give Him whatever He wants, and he avoids offering anything which is undesirable or unasked. Thus meat, fish and eggs should not be offered to Kṛṣṇa. If He desired such things as offerings, He would have said so. Instead He clearly requests that a leaf, fruit, flowers and water be given to Him, and He says of this offering, "I will accept it." Therefore, we should understand that He will not accept meat, fish and eggs. Vegetables, grains, fruits, milk and water are the proper foods for human beings and are prescribed by Lord Kṛṣṇa Himself. Whatever else we eat cannot be offered to Him, since He will not accept it. Thus we cannot be acting on the level of loving devotion if we offer such foods. In the Third Chapter, verse thirteen, Śrī Kṛṣṇa explains that only the remains of sacrifice are purified and fit for consumption by those who are seeking advancement in life and release from the clutches of the material entanglement. Those who do not make an offering of their food, He says in the same verse, are eating only sin. In other words, their every mouthful is simply deepening their involvement in the complexities of material nature. But preparing nice, simple vegetable dishes, offering them before the picture or Deity of Lord Kṛṣṇa and bowing down and praying for Him to accept such a humble offering enables one to advance steadily in life, to purify the body, and to create fine brain tissues which will lead to clear thinking. Above all, the offering should be made with an attitude of love. Kṛṣṇa has no need of food, since He already possesses everything that be, yet He will accept the offering of one who desires to please Him in that way. The important element, in preparation, in serving and in offering, is to act with love for Kṛṣṇa. The impersonalist philosophers, who wish to maintain that the Absolute Truth is without senses, cannot comprehend this verse of Bhagavad-gītā. To them, it is either a metaphor or proof of the mundane character of Kṛṣṇa, the speaker of the Bhagavad-gītā. But, in actuality, Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Godhead, has senses, and it is stated that His senses are interchangeable; in other words, one sense can perform the function of any other. This is what it means to say that Kṛṣṇa is absolute. Lacking senses, He could hardly be considered full in all opulences. In the Seventh Chapter, Kṛṣṇa has explained that He impregnates the living entities into material nature. This is done by His looking upon material nature. And so in this instance, Kṛṣṇa's hearing the devotee's words of love in offering foodstuffs is wholly identical with His eating and actually tasting. This point should be emphasized: because of His absolute position, His hearing is wholly identical with His eating and tasting. Only the devotee, who accepts Kṛṣṇa as He describes Himself, without interpretation, can understand that the Supreme Absolute Truth can eat food and enjoy it.

We have now all these new words like "modern warfare", "fighting terrorism" or "peace corps", but when looking back we find it must have been all the time very similar to what we have today. When the British ruled over India they considered to recruit real ksatriyas and to expand their empire. But finally without fighting for Krishna, everything seems an illusion. Prabhupāda: Sikhs are very brave. They’re martial. And another martial race, Jats. They are kṣatriyas. Oh, they can fight… When Britishers possessed India they organized this military with Sikhs especially, Jats, and Gurkhas. And they expanded their empire, Burma, Ceylon, Africa, all these British Empire possessions. And not only that, they fought two big world wars with these Sikhs soldiers. They conquered over this Mesopotamia, Middle East. Caraṇāravindam: They worked so hard. It’s a pity they weren’t doing it for Krishna. Prabhupāda: They like military. They want military jobs. Very kṣatriya spirit. Caraṇāravindam: They collected so much, but they lost it because they didn’t give it to Krishna. Prabhupāda: Ah, their bad policy that they wanted India for Britishers’ benefit. That is not duty of the government. Government should be for the welfare of the people. Then that government will continue. But they exploited the Indian people for the benefit of their own countrymen. That is the failure. That policy was not good. Therefore they finished within two hundred years. They began their ruling 1775, like that. And 1947… Not even two hundred years. Caraṇāravindam: And now nothing. Prabhupāda: Now, after losing India, they have no more British Empire. Because they cannot maintain without Indian soldiers. Therefore they voluntarily left. Garden Conversation with His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda September 3, 1976, Vṛndāvana Full conversation: http://causelessmercy.com/t/t/760903gc.vrn.htm

Looks that Jupiter is presently between Capricon and Aquarius. Since Ekadasi was mentioned by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu who asked His mother to observe it, this option you mention would also be explained. So far I heard only rules similar to this: "Ekadasi was very important to Caitanya Mahaprabhu. One day in his childhood he approached his mother and asked, "Mother, please do one thing for me?" She said, "Yes, Nimai, whatever you like." He said, "Please don't eat grains on Ekadasi." At that time in Bengal only widows were thought to have to follow Ekadasi and women who were married and had families and husbands, they didn't. Ekadasi was looked at as a punishment. If you're a bad person, then you have to fast on Ekadasi. They thought widows were unfortunate people, with bad karma, inauspicious. So if your life was inauspicious, only then did you need to follow Ekadasi. But Mahaprabhu said something quite different. So immediately, from that day on, Sacidevi began to observe Ekadasi. Later on, in Jagannatha Puri, the devotees of Mahaprabhu had a dilemma about observing Ekadasi. Because in Jagannath Puri there is so much prasad, 54 offerings daily and taking Jagannath prasad is very auspicious. So, if Ekadasi means fasting, how can we not honor the prasad of Lord Jagannatha? This question was put to Caitanya Mahaprabhu and he gave his opinion; "We shall observe Ekadasi and we shall honor Jagannath prasad. When Jagannath prasad comes, we will pay our dandavats to it. In this way, prasad will be honored and we will continue to observe the upavasa at the same time." So Mahaprabhu emphasized this point a great deal. Even raganuga bhaktas should observe Ekadasi. It is favorable, it is anukula for raganuga bhajan. We should not think that raganuga means we don't need to follow all of the regulations. Q. What is the principle behind Ekadasi? Upavasa means to fast. Vasa may mean to reside and upa means nearby. So upavasa means "to reside nearby". So the main principle of Ekadasi is to reside near the Lord. It is not about fasting but about coming closer to the Lord. This is the actual heart of the idea. In fact, every day we should come closer to the Lord but two days have been singled out to emphasize the point. So we can call it Hari's day and everyone will be told to do certain observances. But the purpose is to reside closer to the Lord, to come near to him. And when we do it we find it is nice, and then we may end up doing it every day. That is the real idea. In the Christian faith they make Sunday the Lord's Day. Every day actually is the Lord's day, but they select one day so that at least on that one day everyone will observe. So this is the principle, to come near to the Lord. Our Ekadasi observance should revolve around that. In other words, if fasting is only making me go to sleep, if fasting is only making me proud, what is the value of that? Will I be brought nearer to the Lord by that? Q. Are there ever any exceptions? On one occasion a disciple of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur had to travel for preaching on Ekadasi. It was important for the mission that he preach, and for traveling you have to eat grains - especially if you're Bengali, you have to have some rice. So they ate rice and went preaching on Ekadasi. This is mentioned in Hari Bhakti Vilasa, if sad-guru says break Ekadasi, then you can break it. In the preaching mission of Caitanya Mahaprabhu we should position ourselves as assistants to a real preacher. We should follow very carefully. But if sad guru says "take grains on Ekadasi" then for the higher purpose of preaching we can do that, as Sarasvati Thakur showed. We have to become acquainted with the principle of Ekadasi, as we must with all the devotional practices. Otherwise it is just niyamagraha. We follow the rules but don't know the meaning. That will be counterproductive and a cause of going down. We should have this kind of sensibility and understand the principle. We should be saragrahi Vaisnavas and not baragrahi Vaisnavas who simply carry around a burden of so much form that the substance is obscured. This is a gostyanandi line we are coming in, and it is all about adjusting the details for delivering the principle. We have to have some dynamic thinking if we are to preach. Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur was prepared to serve even meat if this meant Westerners would come to Mayapur to hear about Caitanya Mahaprabhu. His own disciples were shocked. He told them, "You have to have Vaikuntha vritti." This means like Vaikuntha in the mind, where anything can be adjusted from the Vaikuntha perspective, and all things are possible. He was no ordinary devotee preacher. We should aspire to come under the auspices of such a person. And we cannot imitate such a preacher of course. But we should know who it is we are connected with, and what an extraordinary devotee Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur was, and how great were his followers. We must keep this line of the Gaudiya Sarasvata sampradaya alive with real preaching through understanding the essence of the devotional principles. Q. What is the significance of the moon and Ekadasi? In the Bhagavad-gita Krsna says, "I am the light of the sun and the moon." There is another way of thinking about this, looking at it from another direction. "In this world I am the light. The light of the sun and moon cannot reveal me, but at the same time in whatever light there is, I am there." If we think of the sun and moon in this way, it will shed light on the nature of Krsna's position and take us to him. Krsna says, "I become the moon and by that I nourish the vegetables." The moon is said to have some position in influencing the juices. The tides of the ocean, for example, are determined by the phases of the moon. And our human body is constituted primarily of water. So at the time of Ekadasi, the water in the body rises up by the influence of the moon and puts pressure on the senses and increases our tendency to enjoy. From this perspective it seems to be inauspicious because we are pushed toward sense gratification which is not drawing us nearer to the Lord but away. So by fasting, the pressure on the senses goes down and we will not be pushed away from the Lord by the influence of that phase of the moon. So from the point of view of the sadhaka, it may seem that Ekadasi is inauspicious. But Prabhupada said, "Ekadasi is most auspicious," did he not? "It is not fasting, it is feasting." So for the siddha, who dwells in the aprakrta conception of the Absolute, Krsna is not God, Krsna appears to be like one of us. Mother Yasoda is not thinking, "Krsna is the Supreme Godhead." The cowherds and the gopis are not thinking like this. They are thinking along these lines, "My son, my friend, my lover." They are thinking that Krsna is human like them. So on Ekadasi they think, "Pressure is there on Krsna's senses to enjoy more. So we can offer him more on this day, more prasad we can offer. We can satisfy his senses more. Although we are already giving him everything, by the grace of this phase of the moon, we can serve even more." So these devotees see Ekadasi as increasing their service. In this way Ekadasi is most auspicious. It is feasting for the Lord and not fasting at all. So we should try to come to this aprakrta conception of Krsna. This is our ideal. First we teach Krsna is the Supreme God, but we hope in the future people will forget that. At one stage we are preaching Krsna is the Supreme, but only to get people to the stage where they will think he is their friend only, their lover. This is our ideal. So ours is a very funny religion - turning the Veda upside down. But this is Vrindavan, this is Goloka. And this is how we should try to understand Ekadasi." source: Swami B.V. Tripurari, Vrindavan