Jahnava Nitai Das

Right now I am leaning toward something like Off Topic, as that would include anything that isn't fitting in another forum.

Holikotsava is also known more commonly as Holi. Unfortunately it isn't much of a religious festival anymore, though it is probably one of the biggest festivals of the year in India. Today it is mostly just people throwing color on each other with no idea of the religious significance of the day. It's more of a social festival.

Have a look here: http://www.indiadivine.org/hinduism/categories/Hindu-Festivals/ Go down to the articles on Shiva Ratri.

Anyone have suggestions for a name for the forum, and what topics it will cover?

Well, there is the hinduism today group that alligns itself with Shaiva Siddhanta. I'm not sure how strictly they follow it as I have never studied their teachings. I think their website is hindu.org.

Some people spread this idea mostly to justify their eating meat. If one studies the scriptures one will find nonviolence and vegetarianism to be fundamental practices going back to the beginnings of Hinduism. Yes, trying is certainly beneficial. When a child learns to walk he first will fall many times, but by practice eventually he will learn to walk without falling. The same is the case for all of us trying to follow the path of dharma. In the beginning it will be difficult but if we are sincere and pick ourselve up we will eventually succeed.

According to Hinduism no divine destruction is scheduled for 427,000 years, at which point the kali yuga will come to an end.

There are now RSS feeds available for each forum. Please see the photo below for the location of the link: http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=1052&stc=1&d=1143209049

Please present your evidence that it isn't sinful to kill animals and eat meat. The Gita proclaims any action not done for the purpose of sacrifice as sinful, and specifically states food that is not offered to God is eating sin: 3.13 yajna-sistasinah santo mucyante sarva-kilbisaih bhunjate te tv agham papa ye pacanty atma-karanat "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." - Bhagavad-gita 3.13 yajnarthat karmano ’nyatra loko ’yam karma-bandhanah tad-artham karma kaunteya mukta-sangah samacara "All action must be performed as a sacrifice for Vishnu, otherwise any action will cause bondage in this material world. Therefore, O son of Kunti, perform all actions for His satisfaction, and in that way you will always remain free from bondage." - Bhagavad-gita 3.9

Hinduism is based on the fundamental teaching of ahimsa, or nonviolence. Those who eat meat cause pain and suffering to animals for the satisfaction of their tongue (i.e. for a selfish reason). According to the laws of karma, the pain they inflict will eventually be returned to them in the next life, when they are forced to take birth as animals and undergo the same sufferings. Those who cannot give up eating meat, should at least try to reduce the meat they eat with the idea of eventually giving up eating meat altogether. Also, in such a situation where one cannot immediately give up the practive, one should try to avoid harming more consciously developed animals such as cows, and instead eat meat from fish or chickens. Those who are devotees of Shiva should be especially conscious of this, as vegetarianism is called "Shaivam" in Tamil, which means both auspicious and related to Shiva. God shows compassion to us according to how much compassion we have for other living entities. Lord Shiva is known by the name Pashupatinath, which means "Lord and protector of the cows". The cow is considered the mother of the devas and should never be disrepected in thought, word or deed.

These end of the world predictions have been going on for thousands of years, but the world is still here. Hinduism expects the world to continue for a few more trillion years before Maha Vishnu winds up the creation and recreates the worlds anew.

No, looks like someone has decided to speak in the third person from now on. That's usually a sure sign of improved communications in any discussion.

Not another advaita thread, please. Let each thread focus on it's own topic.

Here is an interesting letter from Prabhupada's secretary written in July of 1977. These are the letters that Prabhupada would have the secretary write and then authorize them by signing them himself. Any comments on this?

Such opinions originate from people of other religions. It helps them increase faith in their own religion by accusing other religions of being man-made. Also they feel it will convince others to convert to their religion.

But if we go by this standard then half the Bhagavad Gita should be taken as interpolated. Scholars and researches in indology do not accept any of the Vedic texts as authoritative. Everyone has their own system of belief, and they have invested a lot of their life into their own belief system. It isn't easy for someone to look beyond all their wasted learning and come to accept something that would completely alter their system of belief.

Please see the articles on the front page of www.indiadivine.org

Your post and links were never deleted, they were seperated from the previous thread and made into it's own thread. This was because the person who had started the original thread felt you were hijacking his thread. Those who have volunteered to moderate don't get paid by me and do everything as a service. They really don't have time to deal with your complaints. You don't see Panakaja complaining why his post was removed, do you? Just learn to live with it. Moderation is what keeps these forums from becoming a mess. It will always offend someone, but that's the cost of a clean and decent forum. I checked the deleted posts archive and the only message you had deleted was one where you screamed that your links to the Bhagavad Gita supersite had been deleted. The truth was it was never deleted but had been made into its own thread. But if you don't like the moderation here, feel free to go elsewhere. We can't satisfy everyone.

From wikipedia: The oldest mention of Shambuka occurs in the Ramayana of Valmiki, in the last book of the epic, Uttara-kanda.After Rama returns to Ayodhya and is crowned the king of Ayodhya, a child-death occurs in the kingdom. He is told that calamities, such as this, occur when Dharma is not followed in a kingdom. Rama tries to find out the reason and comes to know that a Shudra caste person called Shambuka is performing penance which he is not supposed to do according to the Varna sytem rules prevailing in that period. He is executed personally by Rama. This incident is quoted often as an example of caste/varna-based cruelty and to condemn Rama as a heartless, blind follower of varna-based rules. However, the implication of this incident is far from clear. To begin with, it occurs in the Uttara-Kanda, believed by many to be an interpolation and not the work of Valmiki. Even if this issue is not pertinent to understanding the tale, it is quite bizarre. After revealing to Rama the reason for the death of the Brahmana’s son, it is added that this is the result of the Shudra violating the rules of the TRETA age. This is the age in which the tale is set and the present degenerate Kali age comes only after an intermediate Dwapara one. The book says that the austerities are forbidden to the Shudra's in Treta and Dwapara. Considering the fact that all of 'historical' time is set in Kali, the incident could hardly be a template for Shudra-behaviour of any time after about 3000 B.C.! To complicate the mater further, when Rama sees Shambuka, he is hanging upside down and trying to gather enough merit to enter heaven in his won physical body! This looks like a mirror-image of the tale in Bala-Kanda of Ramayana,‘The Book of Childhood’, about Trishanku. By no stretch of imagination is he an ordinary Moksha seeking mendicant. All this becomes more puzzling when we meet a non-Brahmana/Kshatriya ascetic in 'The Book of Ayodhya' in the same epic. When Dasaratha recounts a terrible deed of his impetuous youth, he tells show he shot a young ascetic (not named by Valmiki) in the forest. The dying boy absolves the prince of the sin of 'Brahmincide' by telling him that his father is a Vaishya and the mother a Shudra. This old couple is praised in glowing terms in the passages that follow. Does this mean that there was no prohibition on austerities for Vaishyas and Shudras in Treta? Or was it a Brahmincide, quite permissible in the ancient times, desperately disguised by later pedants? An even more unambiguous story that makes a mockery of the Shambuka incident can be found in 'The Book of the Forest'. In search of Sita, Rama and his brother arrive at the hermitage of a lady hermit called Shabari. Her name indicates that she is clearly a forest tribal, outside the pale of varnas. She is again glorified in many terms and these passages are not really cast in Bhakti terms to make it a very late addition. In addition she mentions that her teachers were the disciples of sage Matanga: the name is same as that of another tribal community. Kalidasa (circa 4 A.D) mentions the incident of Shambuka in Raghuvamsa without any comment, whereas Bhavabhuti (circa 7 A.D) is clearly uncomfortable with the story in his UttaraRamaCharita.

As far as I recall it is only Jagat who promotes this theory that Bhaktivinoda Thakur was a liar and cheater. At one point Jagat had even publicly forgiven Bhaktivinoda Thakur for his human weaknesses and mistakes. Now to cite Jagat's theory as though it is an absolute fact is being a little too blind. Caitanya Upanishad does not resemble Bhaktivinoda's writting style, and it closely follows other Vedic meters. On top of it you would have to assert that Bhaktivinoda Thakur is a liar and cheater, which is not in line with his character. Are we expected to accept Jagats view of Bhaktivinoda Thakur being a liar and cheater based on Jagats personal opinion? If we analyse the two personalities we find that Bhaktivinoda Thakur's character is spotless whereas the accusers is not. No need to go into that, but it is relevant when someone is accusing an Acharya of being a liar and cheater.

That's not much of a defense of Caitanya Mahaprabhu, rather it will only bring Him insult. It would be like if a Swaminarayan follower told you that Swaminarayan is God because he actually said it himself. One's own word isn't evidence to prove one's divinity.

I would say that unless one has been given the mantra by a satguru, the effects of chanting gayatri will be minimal. Chanting of mantras shouldn't be given up all together, but in the Kali yuga it is more beneficial to chant nama mantras such as om namo narayanaya, om namo bhagavate vasudevaya, hare krishna, etc. You can take up chanting a nama mantra for 15 minutes a day, and then spend the rest of the time in meditation. Pranayama is for making the mind peaceful so that you can meditate. Don't give up meditation for pranayama, as the purpose of pranayama is to help you to meditate. And meditation should be on the divine. Fix the form or Narayana in your mind, mentally recite His mantra, and sit in meditation each day at the sandhyas.

Yes, because you are doing this for Bhagavan's seva, not for satisfying your thirst. By chanting the mantras and touching the water to the toungue you are purifying your body prior to worship. Would you avoid brushing your teeth as well?

There are 4 T's in devanagari, and the correct transliteration for all of these words uses 't', not 'th' which is a different letter. Regarding this being "Tamilized", when Tamils write in English they commonly misconvert a number of letters: "Ta" is written as "Tha" (for example sathsanga) "Ta" is also sometimes written as "Da" "Ka" is miswritten as "Ga" or "Ha" (yoha for yoga) "Fa" is miswritten as "Ba" ("bridge thanee") It's actually not just written incorrectly, it's spoken incorrectly also; and that's probably why one might insist its the correct transliteration. When I say spoken incorrectly, it is strictly in relation to sanskrit. They may be speaking fine according to their language's use of these words, but in sanskrit the pronunciations are different. And since this is a sanskrit verse, being tamilized is wrong. In sanskrit you wouldn't practice "yoha", and you wouldn't attend sathsanga. Oddly there don't seem to be rules for when to mispronounce and when not to. Take for example kaka (crow) being called kaha. Now why the first ka is left but second is changed is mysterious. The above verse has five of these mistakes: Asatho Maa Sad Gamaya. Thamaso Maa Jyothir Gamaya. Mrithyur Maa Amritham Gamaya. You can also see the first version posted which has a similar mistake: tamaso maa jodir gamaya Again it's the conversion of 't' to 'd' which is only found in South India. This verse is found in many upanishads, one of them being the Akshi Upanishad. Here is a picture of the devanagari and the correct transliteration in itrans, but then its the same problem if you aren't familiar with how itrans is written in English: AUM asato maa sadgamaya . tamaso maa jyotirgamaya . mR^ityormaa.amR^ita.n gamaya . ha.nso bhagavaa\-

I think the greater danger isn't who you worship, but why you worship. If someone is worshipping Shiva for material gain, then he is a fool. But if someone is worshipping Shiva to be purified of kama (lust), krodha (anger), and lobha (greed), then Shiva will guide him in the right direction and give him all blessings.