Jahnava Nitai Das

Your definition of Hinduism is different than that used by Prabhupada. If our two definitions and usages are different, then the conversation will just be confusing. If you really care what Prabhupada was saying, I would suggest you study his definition of Hinduism and religion in general. Worship of the Lord is our natural constitutional function, it is not an external material designation such as Hinduism, Christianity, etc.

Satyaraj, its amazing how you can take any discussion, and inject your hatred into it in a manner to make the discussion deviate completely from the original point. If you have nothing positive to answer to Karthik's question, then don't post. I will not warn you again about this. Use your common senses. This thread was a question on the bible, and you start speaking your nonsense about Hare Krishna's. Don't come here to spoil these forums. If that is your only purpose, you won't be around much long.

No. The Satyaraja from the conversation is a disciple of A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. The Satyaraja here used to be a disciple of Narayana Maharaj, but later rejected his guru, but forgot to reject the name his guru gave him.

Madhva's don't follow Hinduism, they follow Vaishnavism.

I removed the 30 or so spam messages Melvin posted today. In case anyone missed them, the summary was that "Jndas is a capitalist pig who only supports the rich." I couldn't quite figure out the point, but anyway, 30 posts of the same thing wasn't polite to the other forum members.

Tulasidas says "There are tens of millions of incarnations of Rama's occuring in different Kalpas, thus there is no wonder why various descriptions of His lilas differ." I'm on my way out to Melkote (Sri Narasimha temple) right now, so no time to get the exact reference. If anyone wants it, I will post it when I get back.

Service to cows is a great sadhana that we should all practice. There is a nice book published by the publishers of Kalpataru magazine (are they Gita press?). The book is called "Go Purana" and is a compilation of all the scriptural references to cows as found in the Puranas. It is a full sized book around 1 or 2 inches thick.

Thank you for the summary. It sounds very similar to Hinduism in beliefs. Could you tell us how old is this belief? And also what are some of the practical rules of the religion? Are there dietary laws? Are there ways of prayer? Or is everything just left to the individuals.

tapantu tApaiH prapatantu parvatAd aTantu tIrthAni paThantu cAgamAn yajantu yAgair vivadantu vAdair hariM vinA naiva mRtiM taranti "Let them suffer austerities, throw themselves from mountain tops, travel to holy places, study the scriptures, worship with fire sacrifices and argue various philosophies, but without Lord Hari they will never cross beyond death." From Sridhar Swami's commentary on SB 10.87.27

Oh no. Now Satyaraja is going to become an authority on Vedic cosmology. Excuse me while I step out for a while. [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 10-25-2001).]

The general view of Hinduism you cited is a creation of recent times. Go deeper into the traditions and you may find something of substance. The term "Hindu" is itself foreign to our religion, and does not occur in any of our religious texts. Thus what you will generally find through research in popular books will be something foreign to the ancient religion of India, the sanatana-dharma. Most of the concepts you have listed above fall into this category. They are more or less popular modern conceptions, as opposed to the ancient tradition of the Vedas.

Sri Madhva states that the two versions of Parikshit's final days (as found in Bhagavatam and Mahabharata) are narrations from two separate divya yugas. Thus there is no discrepancy.

Because you yourself said so. Reminder:

Actually, the Vedic scriptures never say the earth is flat. For thousands of years the ancient rishis of India knew the earth was a globe. Visit any ancient bhu-varaha temple, and you will see engravings of Varaha holding a round earth on his tusks. The Vedic texts do speak of various planes of existence, with each comprising of many planets. This may be mistaken as a "flat earth" by some. As far as Sadaputa Das's (Dr. Richard Thompson's) work on evolution, he has already written a book on it, titled "Forbidden Archeology: Hidden History of the Human Race". You can read it if you are interested, but it probably won't satisfy you, as the conclusion is the opposite to what you are looking for. [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 10-24-2001).]

Our concern is that there are people distorting the teachings of the Vedic scriptures and of our Acharya, Srila Prabhupada. To say that homosexuality is not sinful, when Srila Prabhupada directly says the opposite, while claiming to follow Srila Prabhupada is certainly offensive to him. Do you seriously think you and Amara Das have understood dharma-shastras better than Srila Prabhupada? Do you think that you have uncovered some Vedic truth that Srila Prabhupada was ignorant of?

But Amara Das claims Homosexuality is not sinful, and that oral sex is not sinful, and that homosexuals are "more detached" than heterosexuals. Do you really expect us to believe you don't see a difference between these views and those of our Acharya, Sri A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada? If someone would start a "Promiscuous Heterosexual Vaishnava Association", and then claim they were following the "spirit" of Srila Prabhupada's teachings, I would criticize them for their distortions as well. Do not distort the direct teachings of the Vaishnava Acharyas. You are not a vaishnava tradition, plain and simple. It does not mean you are not a vaishnava. No traditional Vaishnava lineage in the history has ever stated that homosexuality is not sinful. In the Madhva and Ramanuja lines these points are obvious and unquestionable. Speak to Pejavara Swami, speak to Chinna Jeeyar Swami. Even try to tell this nonsense to Jayendra Saraswati of Kanchipuram Matha. They won't even waste time to reply to these absurdities. Can you cite a single traditional Vaishnava Acharya who has ever stated homosexuality is not sinful? If, as you claim, 10% of the population in ancient India was homosexual, than one of the Vaishnava Acharya's must have addressed this point. The fact is, homosexuality was rarely practiced in ancient India, it was considered sinful, and Vaishnava Acharya's wouldn't even waste time on the topic, just as they didn't waste time explaining how its sinful to sleep with one's mother. Regarding Amara Das's claims on viyoni, his understanding of the prefixes is childish. Based on context and combination, the prefixes and roots develop their meanings. To simply say, "look! vikarma means 'bad activity', so viyoni must mean 'bad womb'! Therefore it refers to 'the neighbors wife!'" is simply absurd. I would suggest he seriously study sanskrit under a proper teacher, and not make ludicrous claims without knowing the language. Napumsaka does not mean homosexual. It never has, and even today it does not. No sanskrit dictionary will define it as homosexual. A homosexual named Amara Das comes along and states 'napumsaka' means "homosexual" (in opposition to all rules of language), and we are supposed to blindly accept it? If we don't accept this absurdity, we are narrow-minded, prejudice, gay-bashers, etc.? All I can say is he should first learn the language and then try to teach it to me. [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 10-23-2001).]

I think it was more poetic than literal. By stating "I am a shudra", it didn't literally mean he was born in a shudra family, but that "I am unqualified..." Sri Chaitanya has stated: kiba vipra, kiba nyasi, sudra kene naya yei krsna-tattva-vetta, sei 'guru' haya "It does not matter whether one is a brahmana, shudra, grihastha or sannyasi. If one knows the science of Krishna, he is a guru."

Yet, the Sun is Narayana Himself (Surya Narayana); and He is pratyakasha-devata, the most visible form of the Lord. Also Sri Ramachandra took His birth in the Surya vamsha (sun dynasty). When everything is connected to the Lord it becomes difficult to choose which is more important.

According to Hinduism we have chosen to be what we are in this life by our actions in previous lives. There is no question of blaiming God for the results of our own activities. When a criminal decides to break a law, he is choosing to go to prison. It is his choice to make. We have all made our choices in previous lives which have resulted in each of our own personal prisons, known as shariras or kshetras. Your personal prison is no more (or less) binding then my personal prison. The point is to understand that we are in bondage, and to free ourselves from this bondage through sadhana, or spiritual practice - culminating in realization of the true self beyond the external coverings of matter. We should turn from matter towards spirit. In the Gita it is said that ultimately every action performed, unless done as a sacrifice to the divine, is a cause of bondage. The laws of karma are so stringent and binding that even what we consider to be "good" actions are in fact part of our entanglement. Thus Krishna advises us, "Whatever you do, whatever you eat, whatever you offer or give away, do it, O Arjuna, as an offering to Me." In this way we can link with the Supreme through our actions (karma-yoga) and become free from the entanglement of binding reactions. Anyone, from any background or situation can take to this process of purification. Our only objection to the article on "Tritiya-prakriti" is that it 1) distorts the Vedic teachings, 2) states that homosexuals are superior to others as they are "not attached to family life", 3) it says homosexuality is not sinful (whereas according to the Vedic teachings, sex for purposes other than procreation is considered sinful), 4) it tries to combine a vice with the spiritual tradition of "vaishnavism" (note the name 'Gay and Lesbian Vaishnava Association'). It is something like if I start the 'Cocaine Users Vaishnava Association', 'Cow Killers Vaishnava Association', 'Promiscuous Heteresexual Vaishnava Association', etc. The Vaishnava path is not for identifying with our material faults. It is for trying to rise above our material attachments and become attached soley to the divine, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. There isno need to advertise our material misidentifications. This body itself is a misidentification of the self, which is known as avidya, or ignorance. All the subsidiary bodily identifications (such as nationality, religion, caste, creed, sexuality, etc.) are all blocks on our path for spiritual realization. Those blocks will be there in our way, but we must step over them; not focus on them and become absorbed in them. A separate endeavour is not necessary. Krishna says in the Gita that by becoming aborbed in the higher spiritual consciousness, one will automatically become free from the lower material consciousness. Absorb yourself in the divine through sadhana, daily spiritual practice and meditation. Only by knowing the higher self can the lower self be forgotten. [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 10-23-2001).]

For the kirtans, bhajans, and other audio files, you need to install a free software called "Real Audio Player". If that is installed, then when you click on each link, it will automatically start playing. To download the Real Audio Player, http://www.real.com/R/RC.RPC1011_h1.free.txt..R/huxley.real.com/real/player/player.html?src=011011realhome_1,011011rpchoice_h1&dc=102410231022 I hope that link will work. After downloading the real player, click on "Open". It will install on your computer. Then whenever you click on the audio links they should automatically start playing.

According to Vedic philosophy everything is by choice, though due to conditioning our nature is molded in a particular way. Our attachments are due to our karma-vasanas, the residual effects of past material activity and their associations. Though these residues of attachment are very hard to become free from (and thus we strongly identify ourselves with those attachments), still we can purify ourselves of them through regulated sadhana and devotion to the Lord. Thus homosexuality, and every attachment in existence, is in fact a choice, made both in this life and the previous (by association). Though it may be difficult to change our material conditioning on our own, with the empowerment of the Lord anything can be accomplished. Regarding my article, it has nothing to do with interpretation of scripture. It is simply a direct analysis of words belonging to the sanskrit language. Words have particular definitions. The author of the article "Tritiya-prakriti: the third sex" ignored the true definitions of certain words and fabricated his own meanings. His entire article is based on these imaginary meanings (napumsaka means "homosexual", viyoni means "the womb of another man's wife", etc.) and thus his entire article is nothing but distortion. It is something similar to people claiming cow slaughter used to be very prevelant in ancient India.

You can have a look at this message: http://www.indiadivine.com/ubb/Forum11/HTML/000009.html

The server was done yesterday for a few hours. Hopefully it will not happen again.

But Srila Prabhupada, who happens to be the guru Amara Das has rejected, teaches that homosexuality is a sin. It's your freedom to choose who you wish to accept, but as a follower of Srila Prabhupada I would expect you to accept Srila Prabhupada's instruction. Desire for illicit sex is very natural in the material world; it is what causes our bondage. To give in to this lower urge is the way of further entanglement in maya. Srila Prabhupada, keeping our eternal benefit in mind, instructed us to give up sinful activities which lead to bondage. These include homosexuality and any sexual activity not for conceiving children. To follow one's animal instincts, or what comes "naturally" to the conditioned soul, is not the advice of the sages and saints. They instruct us to develop our divine nature by controlling the senses and cultivating spiritual sadhana. These are the teachings of Srila Prabhupada. Any sex that is not for procreation is sinful. Perhaps you give more importance to the kama-sutra than to the words of your spiritual master. That is a cultural defect prevelant in the west, to reject the order of the guru in favour of one's own opinions. The difference is I will admit that my vices are sinful, but some others, such as those writing for GALVA, state homosexuality is not sinful, it is the natural activity of homosexuals. I am versed in sanskrit and know the meaning of "viyoni". Contrary to your claims, it means literally "without a female sexual organ". Those who have no knowledge of sanskrit write articles claiming viyoni means "another mans wife", that "napumsaka" means "homosexual", etc. These are absurd statements which can only fool those who have no knowledge of the language, and who have a preset conclusion that homosexuality is not sinful. A similar example can be found in the common word vairagya, which means detachment or dispassion. Or one can analyse the usage of the word "viita" as found in the Gita verse 'vIta-rAga-bhaya-krodha'. 'Being free from attachment, fear and anger.' The meaning of 'viyoni' is self evident. The language itself has a direct meaning and does not require twisting and tearing to fit one's preset philosophy. The meaning is "without a female sexual organ". Regardless, the context of the verse is itself self-evident and requires no illumination. [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 10-23-2001).]

This is the latest article written by the GALVA people (Gay and Lesbian something or other). Here they very clearly state that homosexuality is not sinful. Oddly, the guru they claim to follow, Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, very clearly says that homosexuality is a sin. I wonder how they justify their deviating from their guru. To disobey the instructions of the spiritual master is a great offense, and it stops one's advancement in sadhana. And look at this one: Srila Prabhupada taught that this regulation applies for all of his disciples. The GALVA fellows want us to reject the instructions of the Acharya in favour of their own speculations. They missed this verse from Mahabharata: "Foolish and evil men engage in all forms of sexual intercourse without a female womb, forcing themselves upon other men. They are born again without their organs as neuters." (Mahabharata 13.145.52) And this is what they say about Srila Prabhupada: Thus they are stating that Srila Prabhupada's teachings, instructions, and writings (including Srimad Bhagavatam) are materially influenced and therefore imperfect. I think this throws a lot of light on the opinion and views of the GALVA people, who claim to follow Srila Prabhupada, but openly reject him and his teachings, and consider him to be materially influenced. My original response to the Tritiya Prakriti (GALVA) article is here: http://www.indiadivine.com/galva-reply.htm