karthik_v

I think that charity is a nice thing. But I am a little skeptical about earning goodwill and publicity through such charities. Does it not reduce the religious movement to a commercial venture? When we talk of training people to manage aren't we heading this way? I can tell you what will happen next. Those who are good managers, fund-raisers etc., will receieve special treatment, as can be seen in ISKCON. Spiritualism takes back seat and it is only a matter of time before ISKCON becomes another Vatican.

I would agree with this. ISKCON teachings on these issues are so fanatical that even very religious families are upset when their kids start going to ISKCON. My neighbours in Chennai warned my parents that ISKCON brainwashes when my bachelor brother started going to ISKCON, giving the example of her 2 nephews who became brahmacharis. Also, there is so much preaching against mayavada that these new converts abuse even great saints like the Paramacarya of Kanchi Sankara mutt. All this upsets the family. Empathy is what matters here. If I were a religious Hindu parent, I will be be upset with ISKCON for making my child lose interest in sex. I will be even more upset when ISKCON has brainwashed my child into donating a high portion of his salary to the temple. Naturally I will ask: how come these sannyasis who are brainwashing young boys and girls into hating sex, so attached to globe-trotting, staying in 5 star hotels and getting cozy with rich NRI devotees.Naturally, their glaring faults become magnified. That is why I repeatedly ask: Why is that no previous acarya ever proscribed sex in marriage? How come none objected to the depictions of erotic art in temples? How come none objected to the erotic descriptions of the sexual arousal of Rama and Sita in Kamba Ramayanam? Is it because, none of them considered sex within marriage as normal? Something not to be repressed. True again. One in a million can transcend the attraction of sex. Such a person would have no attraction for 5 star hotels and politicking either. As Krishna says in BG, he would see all as equal. He won't be afraid of criticizing a rich devotee just because he helps get funds for your project. Above all, he won't be obsessed with criticizing women in tight pair of jeans Most people cannot overcome their desire for sex.That is why we have grahastha asrama.The very fact that sex is within marriage means it is regulated. There is no need to further put the brakes on.To ask someone who is yet to lose his attachment for wealth, to give up sex is terrible. Doesn't SB say that Kamini and Pratishta asha are the toughest to overcome? I have been married for 7 years. Nope renunciation doesn't creep in I guess it takes a few life times. I am not in a hurry to let that happen Yes, sadhana done in a natural way purifies our hearts. Sadhana done artificially through brainwashing corrupts us. Is it not true that the most fallen ones in ISKCON have also been SP's disciples? One thing is that we can explain away all this saying it is prarabda karma. Another explanation could be that they were not really qualified to become sannyasis/brahmacaris, but that state was thrust upon them. This is where I feel that the method followed by traditional schools like Kanchi Sankara mutt or Srirangam mutt is natural. They have just one or 2 sannyasis. Even they are handpicked from very pious families. If we accept karma, then our birth to a parent is due to our karma. Naturally, a person who is born of parents that are materially attached is less likely to become a renunciate than one born into a family that is spiritual. Picking up such a person and thrusting sannyasa doesn't work. Likewise, if you are attracted to sex, it is because of your natural state that results due to your karma. Renunciation through brain washing doesn't work.

This is by T V Kapali Shastry. Sri Aurobindo varies by only one word. He uses cavernous. The following was by Sayanacarya: "Four are the definite grades of speech; those Brahman.as who are wise know them; three, deposited in secret, indicate no meaning; men speak the fourth grade of speech."

Hari Bol J N Das Prabhuji, Thank you for the reference. In the part I have highlighted in bold, is Srila Vishvanatha Cakravarthi Thakur referring to the paramatma? Just a small correction. That translation was from Sayanacarya. One more question. Which commentary on vedas is normally accepted by GV acaryas and also other Sri Vaishnavas? I guess that they may not vibe well with Sayanacarya because he emphasised more on karma kanda. Is my guess correct?

Hare Krishna J N Das Prabhuji, Thank you for the wonderful posting and the link. I read through them and also the references you had given to BG. Still I have a question: One of the 3 levels you have mentioned is madhyama-vak, which occurs in the mind. If something occurs in the mind is it not perceptible to us? If you see the translation of Sri Aurobindo, it sas that they are not perceptible to us. I checked into the translation of Sayanacarya, which I produce below, and it seems to match Sri Aurobindo. Four are the definite grades of spech; those Brahman.as who are wise know them; three, deposited in secret, indicate no meaning; men speak the fourth grade of speech. [Four are: catva_ri va_kparimita_ pada_ni: the language of the mantras, the kalpa, the bra_hman.a and laukika, or current speech (Taittiri_ya Samhita_ 1.31.2); those bra_hman.as: bra_hman.a_ ye mani_s.in.ah: bra_hman.a_ = those acquainted with the s'abdabrahma, brahma as the word, or, the yogis, mystics; fourth grade of speech: va_k, speech, was created fourfold, three kinds of which are in the three regions, the fourth amongst the pas'us; the form on earth, associated with Agni is in the rathantara; the form in the firmament, associated with Va_yu, is in the Va_madevya mantras; that which is in heaven, with A_ditya, is Br.hati_, or in the thunder (stanayitnau); whatever else was more than this was placed amongst the pas'us, lit., animals; here the bra_hman.as are implied: atha pas'us.u tato ya_ va_g atiricyate ta_m bra_hman.es.u adaduh; thus, the bra_hman.as speak both languages, that of the gods and that of man (tasma_d bra_hman.a_ ubharyo va_cam vadanti ya_ ca deva_na_m ya_ ca manus.ya_n.a(m (Nirukta 13.9)]. Of course, at times I don't understand what Sri Aurobindo is saying Having said that I must also add that I have read even in old Tamil literature that the vedas carry no literal meaning and are metaphorical. For example a Sangam Tamil poem, Ettutokai Paripadal 19 says: You are the One who can elucidate the mystical hymns of the vedas that are hidden behind the apparent words [Note: Here the poet is praising Lord Muruga]. I have also come across in the poems of Thirumazhisai Azhwar where he refers to the vedas as: Those words that cannot be contained in letters. [Note: An obvious reference to the mystical hymns which convey the real meaning to the seers.] I would very much appreciate your comments.

Hari Bol J N Das Prabhuji, The Vedas primarily deal with mundane knowledge related to the modes of nature I am surprised that you have made this statement. True that Atharva veda deals with many mundane things, but the three primary vedas don't deal with mundane things. In fact, even literal translation of the vedas is incorrect. They are metaphorical and Rk veda itself says that: catvAri vAk parimitA padAni tAni vidurbrAhmaNA ye manISiNaH guhA trINi nihitA neN^gayanti turIyaM vAco manuSyA vadanti Translation: Speech or word was divided into four parts. Three parts, which are hidden, mortals do not activate; the fourth part they speak. So, I don't know why you say that the vedas deal with mundane things. Atleast that is not what I ahve read in the writings of great saints who wrote in Tamil in Sanskrit. In fact, all are categorical that the vedas don't deal with this world at all and their real meaning is imparted through its mystical hymns to the realized seers. Because there are countless other instructions given in the Vedas that are actually poison, and Sri Rupa Goswami has saved us from that poison by presenting us with those essential instructions meant for advancing our devotion to the Lord. I don't know which vedic injuction can be poisonous. In fact SP himself wanted to recreate vedic lifestyle. Every acarya has wanted to do that. Thanks for quoting Rupa Goswami on upastha vega. But, I am interested in knowing if that applies to grahasthas. If so, did previous acaryas like Sri Ramanujacarya and Sri Madhvacarya speak about restrictions in grahastha sex life? I agree with you that one has to transcend sex to realize Krishna, but my primary contention is that a person who gets into grahastha order is light years away from being there. So, how can he give up sex? Also, is it possible for someone attached to even gross things like money and job to give up sex? Both statements are highly speculative and incorrect according to Vedantic views. You seem to hold the opinion that material enjoyment leads one to satisfaction or happiness (in this case within marriage), but this is not a teaching of the Gita. True I am speculating, but that has atleast some basis in shastras. But I don't believe that material enjoyment leads to spiritual happiness. Sorry for not communicating that. I am only for accepting our nature as it is. I am against artificial repression through severe indoctrination. Not that I believe that my position is to be justified as ideal. It is not, but it is devoid of hypocrisy. A true happy marriage will be one where in the people are God realized. I really can't get much vaguer than that, as it is really just a fundamental principle of Vedanta, of which the Gita is the essence. Perfect agreement. Its really a matter of what is the goal of one's life. The prayojana of Gaudiya Vaishnavas is Krishna Prema, and as such they follow the bhakti-shastras such as Bhagavad Gita and Srimad Bhagavatam (as opposed to the Kama-shastra). These teachings are much more relevant and useful for the modern times, as devotion is our actual need. Unfortunately we sometimes fail to realize what is in our own self interest: na te viduh svartha gatim hi vishnum. We must learn to distinguish between preyas and shreyas, for one will lead us to bondage, and the other to liberation. I am not saying that we should replace SB or BG with Kamashastras. My point is that those shastras have never been objected to by previous acaryas (pre-GV). They are depicted in all temples. Does it not suggest that our acaryas never found anything wrong with sex in mariage? True, one will lead to bondage, whereas the other will liberate. But artificial repression doesn't help either. Also, repression due to heavy indoctrination against is dangerous. I don't believe that we can overcome bondage to sex by hating it. Saints transcend sexual urges. They are so much beyond that, that it doesn't bother them. A grahastha, by definition, is bonded to sex. So, in my opinion, he should enjoy sex with his wife and try to serve Krishna.

Shiva Prabhuji, When his movement and life was threatened by the muslim rulers,he did not physically fight them,what did he do? He enlightened them,gave them love. It seems that such enlightenment was quite short-lived, as Rupa and Sanatana Goswami had to literally flee to join Mahaprabhu

Agreed. A valid point. Any material attachment is an obstacle to realization. Be it attachment for sex, money, college degree etc..

Jijaji: I certainly think grhasta life in Gaudiya Vaishnava society needs to be stripped of the renunciate influences from the sanyass ashram. I agree 100%. That is why I always keep asking for shastric (shruti) basis for restraint from sex in grahastha order. Though you are the resident iconoclaust, I don't hink you are a rabble-rouser. I think you have valid points here. I already mentioned about highly erotic sex in our scriptures and also sculptures in our temples as well as the fact that before GV no acarya ever objected to sex within marriage. In fact, some of the vedic mantras recited during marriage are from Rk veda and those mantras require the husband to say, among many things, that he will satisfy his wife sexually and also the wife repeats the same w.r.t her husband. It is another story that these mantras aren't recited in GV/ISKCON temples during marriages Since restriction on sex within marriage first comes up with GV, one should offer scriptural evidence and also explain why GV line varies from the tradition. I believe that a lot of these restrictions are due to Islamic influence. Allah O Akbar Ram: Well, animals cannot create devotees. How about the animals that helped Rama construct the bridge? In all the traditions of vedanta, there is mantra for sex as there is tantra. We are all focussed, in the modern day, with the tantra of sex alone - candle light dinners, what not. And focussed on the enjoyment of the moment. Even in tantra, some of the great yogis say that by controlling the prana one can have sex for hours and even orgasm for hours. Of course, they always say experience of the divine is superior to these. Perhaps, your use of the word tantra is ambivalent. If you take tantric works like Tirumantiram, there is direct advice on enjoying sex, at a physical level, by controlling prana. I haven't seen in that work anything that says that sexual experience is inferior to spiritual. In fact, it says that sexual experience is one of the many experiences of the Divine. Please read the verses between 2900 and 3000 and also the complete tantra 9. Even we can experience a fraction of this by simple practices. What is more interesting is that the vedic people had a great focus on the mantra. Every vedantic tradition insists that we chant the mantras. These mantras are very powerful in producing auspicious babies if offered with faith and devotion to the Supreme. Yes, mantras were certainly there, but this over emphasis on the rituals is due to Sayanacarya. If you read other interpretations, you get a different picture. Sex like any other activity will make us happy depending on the consciousness in which we do. Higher the consciousness, higher our happiness. Provided we do it Then, GV/ISKCON teachings are often for exercising restraint. In modern day people are forced to plan their families for financial reasons because of the complexity of modern life. But in the vedic life people were never afraid of having sex and considered children as a blessing. I am not sure. Lord Rama and Sita had their children 20 years after marriage. Many rshis enjoyed sex with their wives and yet had just one or two children. Ayurveda talks of many methods of contraception. Also, don't forget that prostitution is the oldest profession in the world. If contraception didn't exist, every prostitute would have gone out of business in a month. One who goes and tells one wife that she can have as many devotee children as she wants will inspire confidence in her that he is a real man. Assuming that such a man is lucky enough to find a wife in the first place, such a marriage will end in strife. It will also make the women of the family follow religious acts with more faith. A seriously disagree. A grahastha who refrains from enjoying passionate sex with his wife will never be intimate with his wife. Period. Please read about Ahalya and Gautama. There is a lesson out there. Also, it is a myth that such refraining will make the wife more religious. Women operate within a bandwidth. They neither become over religious nor over atheistic. They have a high emotional quotient. Instead of wasting his time in making his wife refrain from sex, such a practitioner should not marry in the first place. When was it last that you ordered a hamburger at McDonald's and then took a vow that you won't eat it? I think that there is a serious problem when a grahastha becomes a renunciate or starts going that way. It invariably leads to broken families or less intimate ones. Sex is to be enjoyed to its fullest, with varieties, between a husband and his wife. Atleast, that is what our Kamashastras teach. But one who is afraid of having children and indulges in contraception - the wife will understand because the modern day life is $ centric and people have urges - but it will be not be same as having children. Everyone has n number of children but has sex many more times than that. As Jijaji correctly said, having sex for procreating is animalistic. The prime purpose of sex is enjoyment, within marriage. In fact, a marriage where the couple enjoy passionate sex, often, and have fewer children when they want to have them, will be a happy marriage. Such sexuality is not against religion and is not an obstacle in the path to KC. Also note that abominable acts like abortion are very different from contraception. It is terrible that many youngsters are given lopsided ideas about sex during their impressionable years. Many of them may never be able to relate to their spouses when it comes to normal sexuality.

Hari Bol Abhi the great! 786 written in Arabic is considered very holy by the Muslims. You can find that symbolism in many of their books, holy sites etc.. But, none of them knows what it means. The following link argues, quite convincingly in my opinion, that it is nothing but Om. Generally, I take this site with a pinch of salt, but this piece is good, more so because Muslims don't have any explanation. http://www.swordoftruth.com/swordoftruth/archives/byauthor/aditichaturvedi/vpopia2.html

Not this piece. This is good. At times, this site goes overboard.For example, they once argued that the whole world was vedic once. Nothing wrong in it, provided it is done in a sane way. But, they claimed that every word came from Sanskrit, including England. Their contrived logic was, England was originally Angulistan. Anguli = finger. They claimed that when the vedic army went to Europe, the commander stood at a vantage point and pointed his finger [Anguli] at what is England. His followers then named it Angulistan, which later became England. they never cared to say what that vantage point was!

I always wonder as to why sage Kambar wrote such erotic verses in Ramayanam while describing how Lord Rama and Sita were aroused upon seeing each other. Well, then I know the standard answer - those are not meant for common people. Then if I wonder why erotic sculptures are there in every temple if sex is not to be indulged in again the standard answer would be - acaryas can change the teaching as per time, place and circumstances, even without basis in scriptures. Then if I wonder if that freedom is available to, say, a Sai Baba too, the answer would be - hey, this is Vaisnava aparadh. So, let me just say Hari Bol

Theist: karthik, Serious, sorry to say.I had to read the caption several times.Page two of the Times is where they always plant a picture of Britney Speers or some other pop star wearing practically nothing. Do you have link or the date? Of course, I know that the online edition is not the same as regular, so we may not have one. Abhi_the_great: Is it that this hall is a open hall open to the public, which they can rent out? I n Mumbai temple also, people are free to use the special hall for conducting various public programs. This attracts a lot hi-fi crowd into the temple. Hemamalini's dance shows and marriages usually take place there. I have not heard of any fashion shows yet. I feel that even the stage programs, like dance etc., are not good to be viewed by brahmacaris. But in Juhu, I have seen men in saffron watching these shows. Terrible. The same sannyasis who watch Hema Malini dance or some skimpily clad model strut her wares in front of the deities, would not rent the hall to a Mayavadi even if he were to speak on Brahma Sutra or Srimad Bhagavatam. I feel flaunting brahmacarya is more dangerous than really leading a married KC life, with great difficulty. What can hypocrisy acheive? I believe that most Brahmacaris in ISKCON/GV were brainwashed into that state during their impressionable years by aggressively preaching sannyasis. Virtually all of them rebelled against their families [mostly religious] and joined the temple. Brahmacarya and sannyasa are not something ordinary that anyone can take to them. Only one in a million can be a renunciate. No wonder that most of the artificial sannyasis spend their time politicking or falling down. I know one GV sannyasi who cannot go through one SB class without discussing in length about women clad in tight jeans. I always got the feeling that a shapely woman clad in tight jeans caused more flutters in his heart than in mine But then who can tell the fanatics that sex was never a taboo in Sanatana dharma or that it was even considered sacred...not something to be oppressed by freak acts.

Yashoda_dd: Srila Prabhupada never wanted sannyasis to have female too close to them. That is the right approach. A sannyasi is a detached person. He doesn't differentiate between men and women and the rich and the poor. So, a sannyasi cannot display any affinity to any sex. Hence getting into bondage with anyone, especially the opposite sex, is ruled out. Also, in the vedic tradition, a sannyasi has to adhere to many rules. The only reason he hasn't withdrawn into Aranyas is to guide the grahasthas. He cannot become one himself. Protected woman means respected woman. You do not have to give her gold and shower her with sweet words. Protected woman means she is appreciated and understood as a person. If not, she will try to do any crazy thing to turn attention. Reducing a woman to the state where she craves for attention is terrible. Vedic system requires that women are respected and protected. When a married man tries to relate to another woman, he breaches the protocol. In India, it is the family that should protect women. Outsiders have no business to protect her. Yet, when many westerners joined ISKCON, they were trying to adapt to the Indian system but didn't have the family backing. That can be said to be true even for many Indians who joined ISKCON, as ISKCON is still not considered mainstream or respectable. So, that gave rise to such situations which were exploited by those who are unscruplous. It is sad. Shameless Devakinandana, rich like anything out of rich donators, did not turn the gift down from poor girl. This is another malady afflicting ISKCON. There is so much emphasis on fund raising that those who are good at it get special positions and also misuse it.

Sri Aurobindo: February 28, 1924: "... That is the history of every religion, sect or religious institution: it begins with religion and ends in commerce. Everywhere you find the same thing."

Sri Aurobindo on Islam: July 23, 1923: "You can live amicably with a religion whose principle is toleration. But how is it possible to live peacefully with a religion whose principle is “I will not tolerate you”? How are you going to have unity with these people? Certainly, Hindu-Muslim unity cannot be arrived at on the basis that the Muslims will go on converting Hindus while the Hindus shall not convert any Mahomedan. You can’t build unity on such a basis. Perhaps the only way of making the Mahomedans harmless is to make them lose their fanatic faith in their religion...." September 12, 1923: "The Mahomedan or Islamic culture hardly gave anything to the world which may be said to be of fundamental importance and typically its own; Islamic culture was mainly borrowed from others. Their mathematics and astronomy and other subjects were derived from India and Greece. It is true they gave some of these things a new turn, but they have not created much. Their philosophy and their religion are very simple and what they call Sufism is largely the result of gnostics who lived in Persia and it is the logical outcome of that school of thought largely touched by Vedanta. I have, however, mentioned [in The Foundations of Indian Culture] that Islamic culture contributed the Indo-Saracenic architecture to Indian culture. I do not think it has done anything more in India of cultural value. It gave some new forms to art and poetry. Its political institutions were always semi-barbaric."

Sri Aurobindo on Muslims: April 18, 1923: [The short-lived display of Hindu-Muslim unity that followed the launch of the Khilafat agitation in 1920 soon gave way to renewed distrust and acrimony, which seized on issues such as Hindu processions playing music before mosques, killing of cows in public during Id, etc.; early in 1923 clashes broke out in Amritsar and Multan, now in Pakistan, and were going to recur with increasing frequency till the Partition—and after.] (A disciple): Did you read [Pandit Madan Mohan] Malaviya's speech about the Multan riots and also what C. Rajagopalachari has said? (Sri Aurobindo): I am sorry they are making a fetish of this Hindu-Muslim unity. It is no use ignoring facts; some day the Hindus may have to fight the Muslims and they must prepare for it. Hindu-Muslim unity should not mean the subjection of the Hindus. Every time the mildness of the Hindu has given way. The best solution would be to allow the Hindus to organize themselves and the Hindu-Muslim unity would take care of itself, it would automatically solve the problem. Otherwise, we are lulled into a false sense of satisfaction that we have solved a difficult problem, when in fact we have only shelved it. So, this Hindu retaliation in Gujarat will bring the Muslims to sense. That is, provided, the media acts sensibly.

Dear Sushil Kanoriaji, I think you have been very harsh on Ram. Ram Prabhu was being sarcastic when he used the word "rascal" in his above post. He was actually ridiculing Mr.Shiva. If you had read the post completely, you would have understood that he is actually ridiculing Islam and those Hindus like Gandhi who always placated the Muslims. He is not supporting the Muslims. If you read his other posts, you will understand that he is a passionate and committed Hindu who does not at all believe in appeasing the Muslims. Hope that helps.

Yashoda DD: I had some problems in Iskcon Bombay (Mumbai) temple, because authorities wanted me to dress opulent saris and wear ornaments (to attract rich and western guests). Sickening. Why do you still stay in the temple? I consider those open Indian-style blouses almost unmoral. Nothing immoral about open-style blouses. If you go to rural Kerala or many parts of remote India, women just wrap a saree around them - no blouses. Sometimes, you will see a young mother breast feed her child in public glare, non-chalantly. Perhaps, sex is not the only thing on their minds. But generally I vote for modest dressing, provided it doesn't assume prudish proportions. But, in India so many men have no culture and no sense control and no respect for ladies (sometimes it is very dangerous to walk in the strees of Indian cities), so we have to cover even our nouses and eyes. True that many Indian men stare, thanks to Victorian rule that has made the society prudish. But you are lumping all the Indian men here. I have seen many American colleagues, even old married ones, that drool at a pretty colleague at work. Just that it is done a bit sophisticatedly. Theist: I read in a Times of India article of a fashion show at iskcon Delhi.I saw the photo also.A woman in a provacative pose,in seductive clothing,laying back surrounded by a pool of water with another model(male) pouring water out of a lota in imitation of an offering.It was on the second page of the paper so those familiar with the paper will understand the mood. Are you kidding or serious? I don't know why a temple should sponsor a fashion show. Perhaps, fund raising has taken all spiritualism away. Sickening. Avinash: Do women stare at men? Can any of the men in this forum say if any woman has anytime stared at him? Very much yes. If you look at old Indian literature, there are many descriptions of women staring at men. They do so from the corner of their eyes, instead of staring directly. That was even considered feminine. If you read Kamba Ramayanam (Tamil), there is a lovely description of how Lord Rama looked at Sita directly and how she averted direct glance, but as Rama moved on, cast a side glance on him, only to find him turn around and catch her glance. And they fell in love right away. Of course, such demure glances are only to be found in a society that isn't licentious. If you are in the USA, then such things can be found in literature alone.

Dear Shiva Prabhuji, I seriously meant no disrespect for Islam. Really Quran is meant as a comic relief. After a stressful day at work, I always read the Quran to relax. It can make you laugh. If you don't believe me, please get a 81B filter and read the original manuscript. It will have a . Do you know what 786 means? In the original Arabic script it meant . But Muslims never understood it and have taken it as some sacred number.You can ask any Muslim. He won't know its meaning. Actually it is a . In fact, doctors at Satanford university [spelling mistake unintentional ]are recommending a Quranic verse a day to keep heart attacks away. If you don't believe me visit http://www.satanforduniversity.edu/gradschoolofmedicine/quranicheart.htm If it says website not found, then it is a confirmation that you are a kafir

Practical Islam through Q & A: part 2 A devout Muslim asks and the divine Mullah answers: (a series of questions answered by Mullah ibn-bad-wallah) Devout Muslim: Allah O Akbar! I am married to 2 women. But of late I am getting attracted to the 2 maid servants who do house hold chores for us. I hope that my wives don't object if I wish to marry the servants. If they do, I will take a box-cutter (bAx-Qatr) and chop off their tongues. My only problem is that those maid servants are married. How do I solve this? Divine Mullah: Insha Allah, you have great intelligence. You correctly said that you will hold the bAx-Qatr in your right hand while chopping off the tongues of disobedient wives. Many Muslims are careless about this. They hold the bAx-Qatr in their left hand. It is against Quran to hold the bAx-Qatr in the left hand, while punishing disobedient wives. As far as the servants being already married, I think it is a minor technicality. I think you can declare their husbands as kafirs and take away their wives. That would be the right path as per Quran. Nevertheless, I would consult the Hadiths and give you an answer from the life of the Prophet. I am sure he must have faced something like this. After all, he married a 6 year old while he was 53, forcibly married women etc..and those circumstances were more complicated. There is no God but Allah! He has no father and no SON!

Practical Islam through Q & A: part 1 A devout Muslim asks and the divine Mullah answers: (a series of questions answered by Mullah ibn-bad-wallah) Devout Muslim: Allah O Akbar! Every time I offer namaaz from the balcony of my apartment, when I twist and crook my neck and look at a difficult angle, I can see the apartment around the block where the lady dries her inner garments outside. That causes flutters in in my heart and disturbs my namaaz. What should be done? Divine Mullah: Insha Allah, May you be a great Muslim. I totally agree with your observation. I decree that the lady wraps her inner garments in a burkha and then dries them outside, so that devout Muslim men aren't bothered. For the indiscretion on her part all along, I would recommend flogging 20 times in public.

I think there is a serious misunderstanding about Islam and Quran, not only among devotees, but even among the Muslims. Quran is not a religious book as many of you think. It was meant to provide comic relief. If you use 81B filter and read the original manuscript of Quran, you will see a But while typesetting, those were excluded and Muslims have come to take those words seriously. If you read Srimad Bhagavatam 13th canto, manuscripts of which have been lost, you will find Lord Krishna and Radha Rani having a hearty laugh listening to readings from Quran. In fact, the reader himself is Mohammad.

Dear Sri Dharma, I would also like to know if SB mentions anywhere that the Supreme Lord will work for an insurance company till the age of 42 before he "becomes" an "avatar". I would very much appreciate any reference. Since there are too many Gods all around, I have become a demanding customer. The last time I went to Madras, I met 2 "avatars", while on 29D (a bus route). One claimed that h(H?)e was a hybrid of Jesus and Mohammad and the other candidly spoke of his brief stint in central jail. I thought it must have been a symbolic stay to show the ignorant about their own incarceration in the world of maya. When I asked him for scriptural references, he wasn't aware of what scriptures I was talking about. May be that was h(H?)is way of showing me that shrutis take precedence over smritis!

Dear Sri Dharma, I would also like to know if SB mentions anywhere that the Supreme Lord will work for an insurance company till the age of 42 before he "becomes" an "avatar". I would very much appreciate any reference. Since there are too many Gods all around, I have become a demanding customer. The last time I went to Madras, I met 2 "avatars", while on 29D (a bus route). One claimed that h(H?)e was a hybrid of Jesus and Mohammad and the other candidly spoke of his brief stint in central jail. I thought it must have been a symbolic stay to show the ignorant about their own incarceration in the world of maya. When I asked him for scriptural references, he wasn't aware of what scriptures I was talking about. May be that was h(H?)is way of showing me that shrutis take precedence over smritis!