karthik_v

On 2 counts I wouldn't consider Mohammad a mukta or even a bonafide guru. First, he had a very high predisposition to mindless violence. In Bhanu Qurraiah he killed 600 Jewish men even after they surrendered. That killing was cold-blooded. He also urged in Koran to attack and the infidels and kafirs (non-muslims). He spread (imposed) his religion through the sword than debates. Second, he had a high predisposition to sex. He married 11 times and had many more concubines. He also forcibly took the daughter of the headman of Bhanu Qurraiah after murdering her father and husband in front of her eyes, against her will. She refused to marry him and spat on his face. He still kept her as his concubine. In a civilized world, this would be called rape. At 55, he married 6 year old Ayesha and consummated the marriage 2 years later. In a civilized world he would be called pedophile. He married his own daughter-in-law Zainab, after asking Zaid to divorce her. These 2 project him as an ordinary criminal who mustered support by kindling the lowest urges among his followers. That puts him in the same league as Hitler et al. Unless, the real Prophet was radically different from what is projected of him through the Koran and the Hadith. This could be a possibilty as the Koran was written 25 years after he died and the Hadiths were written 220 years after he died. But, for that assumption we need concrete proof and cannot speculate.

That is an interesting point from Satyaraja Dasa. I think this merits some discussion. Spiritual progress and revelation are beyond the scope of empirical sense perception. So, is it not possible for any lowly criminal to pursue his base agenda in the name of the Lord? For example, all Hitler should have done was pursue his efforts in the name of the Lord and he would have been called a saint. How does a seeker distinguish a saint from a bogus criminal? Likewise, if an otherwise saintly person indulges in a set of abominable acts how should the seeker view him? Should he condone them? Is BG 9:30 an exception to the rule? If so, under what circumstances? Or could it be that the Lord doesn't judge your spiritual progress on the merit of your material ethics? This also brings about another interesting question. Why would a spiritually realized person ever indulge in acts that are so repulsive to an ethical unrealized person? What motivates him?

Hare Krsna Prabhu, You can also buy Srila Prabhupad's biography and it has all the information. It makes an excellent reading.

Is that why Afghanistan is among the richest nations in the world? Is that why it has sprawling mansions, meadows, hospitals and universities? The USA pumped money into the hands of the very same Taliban and Osama and Pakistani dictators to fight the USSR. The money wasn't given to the people of Afghanistan. The US often propped up or supported dictatorship regimes in many 3rd world nations to further its interests. And this whole thing called "AID" is humbug. The US, USSR and NATO nations made billions by trading arms and fighter planes to those countries that can't afford to feed their population. And a fragment of that revenue went back as aid. A case in point is that of Ethiopia/Eritrea in 1987 when they were battling for homeland. USA and USSR sold weapons to them and took away 80% of their GDP. The artistes then formed a consortium called USA for Africa (United Support Artistes) and raised 4 million USD in aid. The media raved about this aid, but hardly anyone spoke of the billions taken away from those poor folks through arms sale. So, what is the definition of aid? The only way we can have lasting peace is when we remove inequalities in this world. That can happen only when we ultimately transcend the artificial barriers of nationality. For that to happen in the long-term, the first steps should be to put an embargo on arms trade. The second step should be to ban the secret banking industry in Switzerland...for that is the conduit for every dictator, arms dealer and mafia. Then we don't need any "AID", you see.

I agree with Gauracandra das that it is the media which influences the society. One example that comes to my mind is the Miss Universe/Miss World contests. Starting 1994 Indian women have won virtually all these awards. That makes one wonder what suddenly changed in 1994. Did the Indian women suddenly transform themselves from ugly ducklings to pretty angels? Since genome research is nascent even today, such a possibility sounds remote. And, in the eyes of the beholder, the Indian woman before and after 1994 remains the same. Yet, the media projected them as the prettiest. And the 80s belonged to South American women. It is not hard to find why. The multinationals perceived in the mid-90s that India is the biggest consumer market which hardly used cosmetics. Casting Indian women in the international mode was the easiest wasy to shape opinions, perceptions and ensure sales. I have also seen how even conservative magazines in India have, in the past 6-7 years, introduced photos of scantily clad models and sex to an increasing degree. So, it is obvious that it is the media that influences and shapes public opinion. That is not hard to understand. Even in the US, the bulk of the media such as CNN, Fox, Warner and ABC are controlled by a few individuals who are keen on furthering their own interests and have the wherewithal to pursue their agenda. Does it put a question mark on the freedom of expression itself?

Exposing the holes in the other school of thought is one thing, but to denigrate the acarya of another bonafide school is different. If there are many bonafide schools, such as Gaudiya Vaishnava, Sri Vaishnava, Advaita et al. then each preceptor should have realized the supreme in varying degrees or moods. For example, a Gaudiya vaishnava acarya might have attained personal realization of Krishna while an advaita guru might have had brahman realizaion. Now, can the followers of either school of thought denigrate the preceptor of the other? Would that not be sectarian? Would that not derail any philosophical debate and just result in clash of egos? Would it not sabotage the very spiritual advancement that we are seeking?

I never suggested that a vaishnava ruler would deploy oppressive means to spread KC. I want to make things clear if my words had not been clear earlier. I was inquiring into the role of a vaishnava ruler in the context of spreading KC, how he should deal with different philosophies including opposing ones. I was looking for answers from devotees and I was not making a statement.

Hare Krishna, While Satyaraja's intention may be to denigrate the movement of Srila Prabhupad, I think he has raised a valid point as well. To what extent can a Krishna Conscious ruler go, to spread the holy name in his kingdom? Can he indulge in violence against those who disagree with him or question the authority of Krishna? Exactly, under what circumstances is violence allowed? I know that Gaudiya Vaishnava philosophy which we follow is different from Advaita and vedanta schools. So, there will always be debates on the aspects of philosophy. But, can we attack the acharyas of other schools? Even we agree that Adi Sankaracarya was an avatar of Lord Shiva. Likewise, it is very obvious that individuals like Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswati of Kanchi Sankara Mutt and Ramana Maharishi have been great jnanis or muktas. So, can we talk about them or their philosophy in a condescending manner?

Satyaraja Dasa: Well, if you thought that Gaudiya Vaishnavas started the process of proselytization, then check back with history. Ramanujacarya did that. Prior to him Adi Sankacarya did that. Milinda did that. Gautama Buddha before him. All of them have 1 thing in common with Gaudiya Vaishnavas..they are inducing change of faith..rather they give faith and knowledge to those who seek it. Change of faith is radically different from induced conversions carried out by the missionaries. Hope you can appreciate the difference between the two.

Satyaraj: I thought your knowledge of scriptures is lopsided. Now it is apparent that even your knowledge of Indian history and culture are shallow. For facts, Hindus have not been known to issue fatwa against others nor have they launched suicide attacks. So, please rest in peace. Thou shall not fear any fidayeen attack from me. Further, unlike the semitic religions, Sanatana dharma allows for dissension. So, feel free to dissent, even sacrificing logic, should that make you feel good!!! Anyway, just be reminded that I found your idea on eating habits repugnant..not that I found the idea of eating with spoons repugnant. It is amazing that your thoughts can vacillate between topics totally unconnected. I am struggling to establish a nexus between turbans and spoons, in vain. For most people in the USA, the world begins on the east coast of the US and ends on the west coast. They are oblivious to what happens outside. That is why we have seen such a horrible foreign policy and its consequences. From your statement it looks like Brazil is same. I think the confusion is not caused by the turban..it is caused by ignorance. Even if the Sikhs take off the turban, still every Asian, Indian or Arab, could be perceived as the same by closeted minds. Well how much distinct can I look from my neighbour? After all, we both have 2 hands, 2 legs and a head (sane or insane) on our shoulders!!

Nice response SHVU. Yet it was in the year 1600 A.D. that the British representative of the Queen "submitted her humble request at the feet of the then Mughal king, seeking his permission to grant the Queen and her men the extraordinary honour of doing trade with India". In less than a few centuries down the line, in a calculated move, Macaulays and Max Muellers succeeded in denigating everything that is Indian. So subtly, that even we Indians don't realize it. Ample from the fact that we have honoured such a person with Max Mueller Bhavan all over India. What irony?

Satyaraja Dasa, you are exposing your ignorance. Last week the government of UK built open urinals in the streets of London as men are 'relieving' themselves on streets. So, it is not an Indian phenomenon. This is something that arises out of lack of even basic infrastructure. It has nothing to do with Vedic culture. Unless you have studied some 'shrutis', hitherto unknown to the world, that justifies such acts. Dr. Radhakrishnan was once asked by the British press: "Sir, while the western world eats with forks and knives why is that Indians still eat with hands? Is it not barbaric?" He replied: "Eating with forks and knives is like making love through an interpreter." As far hygiene goes, it is better to eat with hands provided you wash it before and after eating. Your hands only go into your own mouth. On the other hand, that spoon went into the mouths of so many, some stricken with TB, some AIDS, some who hadn't brushed for days, some who just vomitted (no, I am not hinting at your postings) etc... I find your standards of hygiene repugnant.

Satyaraja you are getting desperate, aren't you? Trying to ascribe words and motives that weren't mine to begin with. What I meant was pretty clear..that translation is the same no matter where it comes from. You may or may not agree with SP's purport. I do agree with them 100%. But that is beyond the point. We are debating on the core issue and we are both quoting from BG, verses and translation. From what these verses and their translations reveal, your contentions stand exposed as totally false. Again you are evading the question. Is it because you are unable to find fault with SP's translation from a linguistic, academic or grammatical perspective? I understand that and I would be quite considerate towards you for you have set yourself against an uphill task far beyond your capabilities.

Hare Krishna, "Faith sans philosophical understanding is mere sentiment. Philosophy sans faith is mere speculation". -Srila Prabhupad So, the question of following blindly doesn't arise. You haven't stated as to what you find difficult to accept. If you state that, we can address the specific issue. Often, we try to fit scriptural sayings within the ambit of empirical reasoning. If we do that we may find some anomolies. That doesn't mean the vedic philosophy is inadequate. In fact the very opposite is true. A good way to go about is to ask youself if every phenomenon can be explained by empiricism. You find that it doesn't. So, avoid trying to understand philosophy empirically. On the other hand accept the axiomatic truth of Krishna on faith (as we accept mass in physics) and then try to understand the philosophy. Then things will make sense.

Well, how can the quotes from BG be biased? That defies logic! I was not even quoting SP's purport. I was only quoting the verses and their translation. So, please point out (by resorting to references from Panini) as to why they are wrong. Till then, Satyaraja, you are on a very shaky wicket. Your contention that BG cannot be given to everyone is based on a highly twisted interpretation verse 18.67. So, I gave umpteen references disputing your twisted claim and showing why BG recommends dissemination of such knowledge to all. That sums up the discussion.

Karthik responds: I don't know what Satyaraj Prabhu is trying to accomplish by providing this reference. So, let us go to the actual verse 18.67 of BG and analze it. ************************* idam te natapaskaya nabhaktaya kadacana na casusrusave vacyam na ca mam yo 'bhyasuyati WORD FOR WORD idam -- this; te -- by you; na -- never; atapaskaya -- to one who is not austere; na -- never; abhaktaya -- to one who is not a devotee; kadacana -- at any time; na -- never; ca -- also; asusrusave -- to one who is not engaged in devotional service; vacyam -- to be spoken; na -- never; ca -- also; mam -- toward Me; yah -- anyone who; abhyasuyati -- is envious. TRANSLATION This confidential knowledge may never be explained to those who are not austere, or devoted, or engaged in devotional service, nor to one who is envious of Me. ***************************** This only means that while an acarya is merciful enough to give the transcendental knowledge, the disciple can understand that only if he is following the rules. This point is illustrated in the verse 18.66 of BG, as shown below. ***************************** TEXT 66 sarva-dharman parityajya mam ekam saranam vraja aham tvam sarva-papebhyo moksayisyami ma sucah WORD FOR WORD sarva-dharman -- all varieties of religion; parityajya -- abandoning; mam -- unto Me; ekam -- only; saranam -- for surrender; vraja -- go; aham -- I; tvam -- you; sarva -- all; papebhyah -- from sinful reactions; moksayisyami -- will deliver; ma -- do not; sucah -- worry. TRANSLATION Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me. I shall deliver you from all sinful reactions. Do not fear. ****************************** From this it is clear that if an individual is ready to surrender unto Krishna then Krishna takes upon himself the responsibility to deliver him. So, even if has defects (which any non-transcendental person will have), Krishna will still deliver him, provided he surrenders. In verse 9.22 of BG Krishna clearly states that even if we are defective, but surrender unto him, then he provides us what we lack while preserving what we have. ************************ anan yas cintayanto mam ye janah paryupasate tesam nit yabhi yuktanam yoga-ksemam vahamy aham WORD FOR WORD ananyah -- having no other object; cintayantah -- concentrating; mam -- on Me; ye -- those who; janah -- persons; paryupasate -- properly worship; tesam -- of them; nitya -- always; abhiyuktanam -- fixed in devotion; yoga -- requirements; ksemam -- protection; vahami -- carry; aham -- I. TRANSLATION But those who always worship Me with exclusive devotion, meditating on My transcendental form -- to them I carry what they lack, and I preserve what they have. *********************** This should drive home the point that surrender is the key to become a liberated soul. By the mercy of Krishna and Guru, all our defects will go away if we are surrendered. That an acarya should preach is evident from the verse 18.68 of BG as shown below. ******************************* ya idam paramam guhyam mad-bhaktesv abhidhasyati bhaktim mayi param krtva mam evaishyaty asamsayah WORD FOR WORD yah -- anyone who; idam -- this; paramam -- most; guhyam -- confidential secret; mat -- of Mine; bhaktesu -- amongst devotees; abhidhasyati -- explains; bhaktim -- devotional service; mayi -- unto Me; param -- transcendental; krtva -- doing; mam -- unto Me; eva -- certainly; esyati -- comes; asamsayah -- without doubt. TRANSLATION For one who explains this supreme secret to the devotees, pure devotional service is guaranteed, and at the end he will come back to Me. ******************************** This illustrates 2 points. First, an acarya will preach to the fallen souls out of causeless mercy. Second, one who preaches becomes dear to Krishna. When we talk of mukti what does it mean? Is not becoming dear to Krishna the highest form of Mukti? If Krishna says that such a person is the dearest to him, then we can certainly conclude that an acarya who preaches BG as it is is also the purest.

Talasiga: Beneath the veneer of words of Satyaraja Dasa exists a hidden agenda. I shall not hesitate to expose one when I encounter it...however veiled it may come. Sorry, if that upset your plans too!!!!! Hare Krishna

Oops! there is some redundancy in that sentence. Any realization, I thought, has to be real. So, where does real realizatioon come from???!!!! Anyway, "the obvious", or Krishna cannot be explained in any material sense, as all material media are limited and imperfect. But a liberated acarya would still preach to the multitude out of his causeless mercy. While, we may not understand the great pastimes of Lord Krishna, atleast we will be reminded by the acaryas that our material existence is just ephemeral and spiritual world is where we truly belong. If it were true that the "realized" don't preach, then why would Lord Krishna give BG to this world?

This is a letter from the gurukulis who are prteaching out there in Pakistan, in the midst of all the hostilities. It was quite inspiring to read this. May be this is the spirit we need to have to spread the message of Srila Prabhupad all over. ***************************************** Ananda Tirtha Fri Sep 14, 2001 8:36 pm Preaching Krishna Consciousness in Pakistan.. Letter PAMHO:4650969 (35 lines) Ananda Tirtha (das) PVS (Mayapur Gurukula, SRPV - IN) --------------------------- Camp: Larkana, Sindh, Pakistan Dear Maharajas and Prabhus, Please accept our humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada. Just want to re-invite all of you to come to Pakistan some time. Devarsi Prabhu, Gaura Bhagavan and I have been here for since the 17th of August. We have travelled to quite a few places along with Amoghalila Prabhu and Deena Bandhu Prabhus, whose association has been very enlivening. The printing of the Urdu Gita is also finally underway which should be a source of great pleasure to Srila Prabhupada and all our Acaryas. It has been quite tough on our minds and bodies, but we are hanging in there somehow. Last night we did a Harinam in the Hindu colony of Khairpur, a nearby town, and I gave a short talk in my broken Urdu/Hindi or whatever it was that came out. No translators in these small towns. The kids were as usual the most enthusiastic. Going by their stares, they may have never seen a white man before. We also went to another place for another programme in a Sindhi gentleman's house. Then they made us go around in Harinam to each house in the area. I tend to question the rationale of doing Harinams at midnight in the middle of nowhere, but everyone else seemed to think it was perfectly normal. We will spend a couple more days in this area before heading back to Lahore side and India. So our humble request to all the respected receivers of this letter is to please take some time to come here and give your association to the starving souls. It is really inspiring to meet fired-up congregational devotees in these remote towns who already have ISKCON-style altars and know the songs and philosophy. . . . Your servants from Pakistan

There are a few. But their numbers are declining. A friend of mine remarked that you can count them with the fingers of your hands..but by the time you finish counting you have to recount, as their numbers might have diminished.

While the Blacks are the largest followers of Islam in the US, there are many Whites too getting into it. I think the prime attraction Islam holds for them is a chesive family/community where disciplineand obedience are asstes. If you come from a fractured family, where you had all the freedom but no protection, and if are unhappy, probably the very opposite what have had all along may appeal to you. And that is what Islam promises.

While the Blacks are the largest followers of Islam in the US, there are many Whites too getting into it. I think the prime attraction Islam holds for them is a chesive family/community where disciplineand obedience are asstes. If you come from a fractured family, where you had all the freedom but no protection, and if are unhappy, probably the very opposite what have had all along may appeal to you. And that is what Islam promises.

Just like Gaucandra Prabhu, I too have faced awkward questions at work as I am a vegetarian. Often, I am combative when I respond. Once in chicago, a colleague sarcastically asked me why I won't eat beaf...is it because cows are sacred? I responded with a question..."Will he bar-be-cue and eat his pet dog?" He was shocked and muttered that I was being insensitive. I triumphantly declared that just as dogs are pets in many American households, so are cows in India. If he found killing and eating his pet abominable, by the same logic, we did too. He hasn't commented on my vegetarianism ever after.

A few months ago H H Bhakti Swarup Tirtha Maharaj was giving 12 days of lecture on SB in Seattle.During the course of lectures he happened to touch upon the idea of fasting. Let me try to get out the gist of what he said: "On days like Ekadasi, we should fast..but what is even more important is to have satsanga. Satsanga itself means sadhu+sanga or association with devotees of the Lord. Days like Ekadasi are oppurtunities for all, including grahasthas, to gain such association which will keep the devotional fire in us alive. Similarly, when people go on yatras to a dham, they should eat only once a day, chant atleast 6 hours and read scriptures like SB for 6 hours. And all this to be preferably done in satsanga. All these occasions like Ekadasi or yatra to a dham are occasions to remind us that eating, sleeping, mating and defending are not the purposes of our life."