krishnadasa

Ao ham bhi Yidhar kuch Likna chaahut hoo!!! Ham bhi Englis lik sakhte hooo

what is this all about???I dont need to know either!!!!!

Not a ridulous request at all IMO. I don't accept every story in the Srimad Bhagavatam as literally true. One of Srila Prabhupada's disciples who was having a problem accepting that an eclipse was a demons head (Rahu) who was attacking the sun and moon and wrote a letter to Srila Prabhupada expressing his doubt.

 

Srila Prabhupada wrote back and told him that indeed it was an allegory and not to worry about such things and just "take the essence" of Srimad Bhagavatam.

 

Other devotees will tell you that you must accept all these stories literally and it never helps to argue with them. Just try to capture the essence of what is in the pages of SB praying always to the Lord in your heart to guide you.

 

Surely you have found knowledge in the SB that is astounding and beyond anything the world has to offer. That can't be rejected because you also find some things too much to accept. So take the essence and leave the rest.

 

I speak only for myself here. I in no way represent any Hare Krsna group or anything but it's a fact we must pilot our own plane at the time of death. Find what works for you.

And thats exactly what I have been trying to tell people..

Hari bol

Is your screen full of dust, smudge marks, maybe even potato chip grease? Clean it today, from inside your monitor, for free!

Start Cleaning now…

cool stuff, thanks

btw, Bangalore is in Karnataka; not Kerala

"But"!? When it comes to cow protection there is no but!

 

This last sentence "I understand the passion and the necessity for cow protection, but people should choose whatever diet benefits them" could have been written by a meat eater justifying his flesh consumption.

Even for vegies, one has to KILL plants,,, so, vedic diet is more of consciousness in the food (in terms of satvic, rajsic and tamsic) than saving something.. something that lives should die one day...

If Israelites come from israel, what comes from Paris?

you must be an English

I dont know, but it could be offensive to some Indians sometimes.. I dun undestant why westeners cant make a joke without brining some culture in between.. But I am happy that Indians don make such things agaisnt westeners, even when there are loads could be done on thier filthy culture..

PS; Mod, its not clean joke ,,,,

 

Louis Theroux's Encounter with a Guru

 

Fri, 07/03/2008 - 4:02pm — "This guy Louis Theroux from the BBC does these cheeky documentaries. In this one he goes to Mayapur and meets Jayapataka Swami. He manges to have some fun without being completely offensive":

 

(They've disabled embedding so you'll have to follow the link above.)

Matter of fact, he was offensive there

And also, its not good to derogate any of the Devas, they are highly exhalted souls and devotees of the Lord.. You should understand that Krishna is Supereme and the rest are his devotees ,,, devotees have to be served to obtain Krishna,, if you are parents worhsipping other dieties , you should not stop them, rather make them understand that the Key for the treasury is with Krishna and other Gods can get them money if and only if Visnu wills.....In that way atleast you can make them BELIEVE that Krishna or Visnu is supreme,, hari bol

practice made men perfect,,,, from mara mara it became rama rama and a thief became Valmiki and wrote ramayana

Im sure people had pets before the British came. Thats a very ignorant statement to make. And why aren't we allowed to have pets?

There is a famous story of Bharathmaharaja getting attached to Deer and becoming one his next life in Bhagavatam

The Bible is an abridged version of the Srimad Bhagavad Gita.

 

Now thats a new propostion isnt it?

I am not an expert in this but it is worth noting.

Then better not give any kinda crude conclusion....

The linguistics people are trying to establish the prevalence of the root of Hari which I think is Hru or Hri in Sanskrit. That also is the root of Hara. The presence of this root-word does not necessarily indicate Vishnu as realized by Indian sages.

So, you think one shoould start following what these neo confused lingusits say , whose theories change over night than the realised sages...

The association of Hari with the Vishnu recognized by Vaishnavas and of Hara with the Shiva of the Shaivites might have come later and might be unique to India.

Ignorance!!!!

In particular, the awareness of the word Hri may not indicate the same of Vishnu. (unless ofcourse the word Vishnu is also established being present in other parts of the world and as linked to Hri in its variant forms.)

Thats the point what some people here trying to clear.. that Visnu was not followed in the Mlecha desha...

And by the way Hari comes in the one of 24 names one chants during morning Achamana, which Brahmanas have been doing ever since ,, I MEAN EVER SINCE ....

Guess making animals as pets was brought to India by Brits.. Otherwise its not recommanded to have any animal as pet, as that will affect one's consciousness.....

Wow. How do you know Jesus never heard of Visnu?

 

Well Jesus spoke Aramaic and was likely knowledgable of Greek and Hebrew.

 

"After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers. - Luke 2:46-48

 

Greek was extensively used by Jewish scholars and scribes at the time of Christ. In fact, the Hebrew scriptures at the time of Christ were preserved (written in) greek. The Greek compilation of Hebrew scriptures is known as the Septuagint ( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint )

 

Varios aspects of Egyptian history would have also been taught to Jesus and He may have known Egyptian dialects.

 

"Now when they had gone, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, "Get up! Take the Child and His mother and flee to Egypt, and remain there until I tell you" - Matt 2:13

 

The Jewish temple in Cochin India dates to 700 BC (the time of King Solomon) and this fact is often referenced by scholars as proof that there existed a spice trade between India and the middle east.

 

-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochin_Jews

 

Therefore, the presence of the Bible and Bible philosophy in India dates back to 700BC . It would be unreasonable and ridiculous to assume that questions of faith, discussions of faith and the nature of God were not discussed among peoples interacting in trade and commerce, or as foriegn immigrants living among a new people.

 

Regarding the Cochin Jews, "They traditionally spoke Judeo-Malayalam, a form of the Malayalam tongue, native to the state of Kerala, in India. "

 

Is it an accident that among all Indian languages, Malayalam is most "infused" with sanskrit?

 

"Influence of Sanskrit is most prominent in Malayalam in almost all linguistic areas. From Sanskrit, thousands of nouns and hundreds of verbs are borrowed into Malayalam. Some items of basic vocabulary also have found their way into Malayalam from Sanskrit." - source: Language in India http://www.languageinindia.com/may2005/girishenglishmalayalam1.html

 

Now we can look at dialects for the Name of God across language families in Africa , Summeria, Persia Greek, and India and see the following:

 

The Supreme Father God

 

OLU Niger-Kordofanian Language Family

 

HERU Nilo-Saharan Language Family

 

HELI Greek

 

SOLE Roman

 

ELI West Semitic (ALI as in Allah is related)

 

URI ARI, ORI Semitic variants

 

HURRI SERRI Hurrian and Hittite variants

 

ILU Sumerian

 

ZER HVARE Persian variants

 

SURA same as HARI, compare SURIH, SUREH, HARIH, HAREH, SURYA, HARYA etc.

 

HARI HARA Vaishnava and Shaivite Sanskrit forms

 

HRIH Buddhist Sanskrit

 

 

One of the two most used names for God among Greeks and Hebrews at the time of Christ was HELI(OS) EL, ELI

 

HARI and ELI are definitely linquistically related, and hence the Holy Name of LORD Hari was known throughout the entire civilized world.

 

Is Visnu a different God than HARI?

Dont trust wikepdia anyways,, I cn put my own things in here...

I had such discussions many time before and ended up wit nothing..Westeners (not all) always have a superiorty complex over others especially, easteners.. This is got to do with the height of materilism seen in these parts of the world. It is difficult therefore to persuade them in anyways, something they have been revering for ages as false or different.......Partly, Indians themself are responsible for that,, they have lost their selfesteem and running behind money... Education starts from home and home is totally corrupted,,, its has become kind of confused junk,, on the one hand they cant stop themselves going to temples ,, on the other hand cant also stop themselves from going to discos,, kind a rowing at a time in two boats that have entirely different banks to reach,,,

How did you "discover" Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu?

I used to teach in an Institute and a devotee used to give lectures on Shrimad Bhagavadgita,, though it was little different than what I used to, like Dwaita, but still made lot of sence and fortunately, by the grace of Guru, I can very easily make a connections between dwaita and Achintya Bhedabheda..

Hari bol

I still don't see the theism. This sounds more like Sankara's Advaita then voidist Buddhism but the difference is split hair.

Guess Budhists think after many lives of Vipasana everybody becomes Budha i.e God,, its not I am God Philosophy rather, I can become God philosphy as you said split hair difference to advaita...

In the age of Kali, mostly people will be of low or no intelligence and they talk all foolish and nonsence

I read somewhere that iskcon was formed mostly by high school dropouts and former drug users or in other words people who could not be part of normal society.

 

I do not know if it is true but if yes it makes sense that it is hard for them think logically. It wil be easier for them dsicard logic in favor of sentiments.

There is a song in India which goes like this:

Poti poti pade jag muha

pandith hua na koi;

dhhai achar prem ka pade so pandith hoi.

" One doesnt become a Pandith by reading many books ; but can certainely become by knowing what is Love"

Hari bol

Why did not Jesus bring anything about Lord Visnu in Bible or any of the scriptures related to christianity. Well when I asked this with bunch of Christ followers, they said its coz Jesus did not write the Bibile.. So does not that mean he did not refer to that supreme lord Visnu to any of his followers, who eventually put Bible in a book form? he could have very easily done that as people werent biased so much about any of the indian systems at that time...On the top of that , it must have been lot more easier for the people to comprehend of God explianed in his real form as Vinsu or Krishna. And unfortunately, this is not shown in Bible or any related abrahamic scriptures, which says though the God was explained but purely in impersonal way.. This is a very simple thing, and does not need any scriptual evidence either...So , howver one tries to bring forth some kind of meaning out of nothing, no way Bible is going to lead to Vinsu in his sac. chit. anadana form.. Nevethelss if tried that may lead to some kinds Anukula shastra

Quite natural, in my house my anscestors have been worshipping saligrama shila of Gopala

same source as above:

 

The simple fact is that although seemingly firm in their convictions about Jesus, most contemporary Vaisnavas have not made a thorough study of the Bible or of Christian history. Their knowledge is mostly derived from romanticized hearsay, the propaganda of the Church or the propaganda of Church dissidents [New Age gurus in favor of Jesus being something different from the Church]. That is to say that even the 'ideal' of Jesus is something that has been exaggerated and romanticized, but has no actual basis, other than having been borrowed from pagan and other much wiser traditions than Christianity.

If one studies the Bible objectively like many intelligent people have done, then an obvious conclusion is that today's 'Fundamentalist Christians' are actually following the Bible! This means that the Bible was created with a fundamentalist mentality, whereby anyone who does not accept Jesus goes to Hell and witches and heretics should be put to death. In the past Christians performed many atrocities based on Biblical authority and the same ideal continues among the Christian right wing today. On the other hand, the liberal Christians have no authority for what they think the teachings of Jesus are, other than their speculations. They have no scripture to support their views.

 

Question: There are certain things that I have appreciation for in Christianity such as that Christians in general have a very clear understanding that they are not God. This gives them a much better position than the great amount of atheists, Buddhists and Mayavadi's out there dominating the 'spiritual' scene in the West. Devotion to a personal God remains a central theme, and I think it is for this reason our acaryas have spoken of Vaisnavism as extended Christianity. I have yet to meet the first Buddhist who changed his outlook to Vaisnavism, whereas Christians have done so in larger number. So, I do feel your statement, about it being misfortunate if one appreciates Christianity, to be rather strong.

 

Answer: I mostly disagree with your statement. In the first place Christianity is admittedly one of the main causes of atheism in the modern world. Christian dogma and Christians have done more to turn intelligent people away from God than Darwin and the host of scientists in his wake. In fact, some atheists are more God conscious with their 'humanistic views' than Christians with their Bible-banging rhetoric and lack of knowledge.

Furthermore, the Christians are Mayavadis in that they say that the guru [Jesus] is God. As for Christians like the Mormons, their belief is that they themselves will become 'gods' and rule their own universe. And as for the early Christians, they are the one's that took the divinity out of nature and declared themselves 'Lords' of the material world. Thus they are largely to blame for the environmental holocaust.

Christians may have an idea that God is a person but what type of person is their God? In their opinion, God has given them the right to exploit the material energy for their fullest enjoyment.

 

"And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." (Genesis 1:28)

 

Ultimately every Christian believes in Heaven, but it is clear in the Bible that Heaven is on this Earth after the Day of Judgment and that the saved will inherit and enjoy the Earth. The idea that Heaven is somewhere in the sky is an idea that came into Christianity much later, after the time of Jesus. Early Christians were an apocalyptic cult that was awaiting the final battle between good and evil in which evil would be destroyed and they would inherit the earth after the Day of Judgment. Christians are still waiting for the apocalypse and the Day of Judgment - one has but to read The Book of Revelations to understand this fact or just tune into any Sunday morning televangelist program.

 

It is also a fact that since the alleged time of Jesus, every Christian generation has preached that they are living in the 'End of Times', that Jesus was coming within their generation to judge the living and the dead and to bring God's kingdom to Earth. This is still the Christian worldview in 2006.

And what does Jesus say he will do on ‘Judgment Day’? Check this out:

 

"The son of man will dispatch his angels to collection from his kingdom all who draw others to apostasy [to reject Jesus], and all evildoers. The angels will hurl them into the fiery furnace where they will wail and grind their teeth." [Matthew 13-41]

 

The success in preaching Krsna consciousness in the west has not been due to people having a favorable Christian background, but rather the success has been due to certain political doctrines [constitutions] in the west granting freedom of religion. Particularly there is the constitution of the United States [where Krsna Consciousness got a foot hold in the west] that guarantees freedom of religion, but this doctrine was not the work of Christians - it was the work of Deists who made up most of the founding fathers of America. In fact, it was the fear of a Christian theocracy taking control in America that prompted the founding fathers to separate church and state.

 

You say that devotion to a personal God remains a central theme in Christianity and that because of this Christians have converted to Vaisnavism in larger numbers, but I do not find this to be entirely true. Many of the devotees who first joined Krsna consciousness in the 1960's and 1970's had practiced some sort of impersonalism, Zen, etc. Very few were practicing Christians, if any. The greater number of devotees from the west, who have converted to Krsna Consciousness did so after rejecting Christianity and the materialistic culture that Christianity fostered. They rejected Christianity because of Christianity's lack of knowledge of even the most basic spiritual points, because of Christian hypocrisy and because of Christianity lacking compassion for other living beings. The fact is that hardcore Christians rarely, if ever, convert to Vaisnavism.

 

Question: I have been personally present when my Gurudeva spoke appreciatively of Christianity, and he did not do that just to be polite or for preaching purposes.

 

Answer: Yes, that may be the fact [the romanticized ideal is laudable], but according to Sarasvati Thakura and also according to Bhaktivinoda Thakura, Christianity is not something that is desirable for a Gaudiya Vaisnava. Bhaktivinoda Thakura considers that some men of small intelligence gave birth to a very wild idea and that this is not acceptable to intelligent men.

 

"Some philosophers say that because of the first living entity's sin, all the other living entities are imprisoned in the material world. Later, punishing Himself for their sins, God delivers the living entities."

 

"Deliberating on the virtues and faults of this world, some moralistic monotheists concluded that the material world is not a place of pure happiness. Indeed, the sufferings outweigh the pleasures. They claim that the material world is a prison to punish the living entities. If there is punishment, then there must be a crime. If there were no crime, then why would there be any punishment? What crime did the living entities commit? Unable to properly answer this question, some men of small intelligence gave birth to a very wild idea. God created the first man and placed him in a pleasant garden with his wife. Then God forbade the man to taste the fruit of the tree of knowledge. Following the evil counsel of a wicked being [a snake], the first man and woman tasted the fruit of the tree of knowledge, thus disobeying God's command. In this way they fell from that garden into the material world filled with sufferings. Because of their offense, all other living entities are offenders from the moment of their birth. Not seeing any other way to remove this offense, God Himself took birth in a humanlike form, took on His own shoulders the sins of His followers, and then died [was crucified]. All who follow Him easily attain liberation, and all who do not follow Him fall into an eternal Hell. In this way God assumes a humanlike form, punishes Himself, and thus liberates the living entities. An intelligent person cannot make sense of any of this!" (Tattva-viveka)

 

One may also note that since many western devotees in contemporary times came from Christian cultures, that our acaryas sometimes were generous in their statements about Christianity. But at the same time we may also note that they were very outspoken and direct about any concoctions within their own Indian traditions. Thus, it is for those of us from Christian cultures to speak out about Christian concoction as our acaryas have done in speaking out against Hindu concoctions.

 

Question: I have some appreciation for the Christian monk Thomas Keating. For me he has many saintly qualities. I genuinely feel I am not mistaking 'being nice' for saintliness here. It is about displaying the qualities of saintliness as we know them from our Vaisnava scriptures: tolerance, humility, devotion to God. He may not have the philosophical understanding of the Vaisnava conception, but he displays certain qualities of a devotee to a much higher extent then so many followers of krsna-bhakti that I know.

 

Answer: I have never met Thomas Keating but I have met several Vaisnava paramahamsas so I also have some idea about saintly qualities. As per my understanding, one may have 'saintly qualities' to some extent but without proper knowledge one is not actually a saint. If a person has no proper knowledge of the soul or of God then such a person is a neophyte [kanistha] and it is not possible for the neophytes to have 'saintly qualities' - that would be a contradiction

 

Thomas Keating in your opinion may have saintly qualities, but in fact so do many atheists such as the Dalai Lama or even Amrta Ma for that matter. Mahatma Gandhi was also considered a saint [a saint among politicians, but a politician among saints]. These personalities that I mention may have tolerance, humility and so-called devotion to God but the question is, to which God?

 

Of course, the Dalai Lama says there is no God. Amrta Ma and others like Sai Baba say they are God, and all Christians [Thomas Keating included] say that Jesus is God or that the God of Abraham is God. The fact is that all the above are mistaken. Jesus is not God nor did he say he was and the God of the Old Testament, the God of Abraham, was a pagan God [one of many] in early Judaism - not the monotheistic God that he is made out to be today. So without knowing who God is - then all the so-called saintly qualities one may have simply fall short of the mark.

 

Even if one blindly accepts that everything that Jesus taught is true still it does not compare to even a drop of the great ocean of Krsna Consciousness. Sarasvati Thakura put it this way: "The highest morality taught by the noble Jesus does not come even near the principles of amorous love enshrined in the devotees of Krsna." (Srila Sarasvati Thakura - Interview with Prof. Suthers)

 

In addition to the above it is also a fact that India has produced thousands of sadhus over the past 2,000 years, having saintly character and many of

them as great as or greater than the alleged Jesus - particularly since the time of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. As for the Vaisnava literatures [produced by the saints of India] that deal with the Absolute Truth and the ultimate goal of love of God - the Christian world has nothing to even slightly compare.

In the opinion of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, these so-called Christian priests [monks] are comparable to the Putana demon. Christianity amounts to soul killing because it pats everyone on the back and tells everyone to just believe in Jesus, to be happy in this material world and then go to heaven to enjoy when they die - because Jesus died for their sins. There is nothing spiritual in such a conception. Christianity, when taken to task, has no spiritual knowledge or proper conception of Reality.

 

Question: I have been reading some writings of Christian mystics and some articles by Thomas Keating, and they convey a certain degree of realization that goes much beyond what most people know of Christianity. They also seem to have developed good techniques for meditation, that have helped me in my own japa. I think more devotees could benefit from a better system for nama-japa since, for the great majority of devotees, it doesn't get very far beyond the level of chanting with a totally distracted mind.

 

Answer: The Christian mystics and others that you speak of were at best trying to reach God by the ascending process whereas what Bhagavata devotee have to offer and what is given by your guru and the sadhus is coming down to us unadulterated and full of transcendental nectar - descending in parampara. Those given to the ascending process can never know Krsna nor do their processes actually enhance Krsna Consciousness. Only Krsna Consciousness can enhance Krsna Consciousness.

 

Since receiving your email I have also read some of the articles of Thomas Keating and in none of them did I find any spiritual knowledge that even remotely approaches the beginning chapters of Bhagavad-gita. Keating often refers to parables and stories from the Bible and tries to squeeze out some truth - but alas he only comes up with some sentiment and an occasional sub-religious principle. In none of his articles did I find any information about the soul or who God is. Religion without proper knowledge is sentiment and knowledge without religion is speculation.

As for the 'good techniques for meditation' developed by Christians and the writings of Christian mystics, one should question from where these techniques and writings have come? Are they 'God sent' or simply the product of mental interpretations? I am highly doubtful that such techniques have any real applicability to Krsna Consciousness. Rather, I am of the opinion that such interests develop from our own anarthas and lack of faith.

If one is interested in 'techniques' to improve one's Krsna conscious sadhana, then our recommendation is that one should study the books of the six Gosvamis and their bona-fide representatives.

 

External techniques are actually of no use in Gaudiya Vaisnavism. Gaudiya Vaisnavism is built on three spiritual principles; sraddha, saranagati and seva [faith, surrender, and service]. If one is having trouble controlling the mind while chanting or developing the qualities of a Vaisnava then one should question one's own sincerity. A wandering mind is due to anarthas and aparadhas and not because of a lack in technique.

 

A staunch disciple of Bhaktisiddhanta by the name of Sadananda Prabhu was of the opinion that, "If a religion doesn't even have a clear concept of what the individual atma is, what to speak of God, it is not worth the name 'religion' at all."

 

Sadananda Prabhu is also on record as having said to another Vaisnava that, "If he didn't like the razor-sharp distinctions in bhakti, he could return to his old mysticism.Mysticism," he said, "appears only where bhakti is not present."

 

[Note: Sadananda Prabhu was the first person from a Judeo-Christian background [Germany, 1933] to embrace Gaudiya Vaisnavism and become a disciple of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura. He was a strong preacher and as is evident from the above quotes, he gave up completely any sentimental attachments for Christianity.]

 

Question: People have an aversion to fundamentalism. Hardly anybody goes to Church here anymore, the old way just doesn't work anymore. So in order for me to effectively preach Vaisnavism, an appreciative view of the aspects of Christianity that are also present in our tradition is only helpful.

 

Answer: Yes, many people have an aversion to fundamentalism as you have mentioned but not all. There are over 50 million Christians in America who are hardcore fundamentalists [and they have the guns]! That's a lot of people. These fundamentalist Christians, given the political authority, would imprison you and every other Hare Krsna devotee in the world. In fact, wherever the fundamentalist Christians, Protestants, Catholics and Orthodox Christians have the clout they use that to interfere with the spreading of Krsna Consciousness. Russia, Serbia, Germany, USA and even India are places where this has recently occurred. Real Christianity is a religion of fundamentalism and fanaticism. It is not a religion of love or even of peace as the propaganda tells us. Throughout history whenever there has been a Christian theocracy, there has been repression, torture and death brought upon the people. Even Martin Luther, who stood up against the oppression of the Catholic Church, after coming to power himself brought about his own brand of repression and sanctioned the burning of thousands of so-called witches and heretics. In England, when the Protestants came to power, they persecuted the Catholics and when the Catholics came to power they persecuted the Protestants. Thousands of innocent people died! In Ireland this fight is still going on for the past couple of centuries.

 

Then there are the Muslim fundamentalists and they number in the many millions also. So to say that there is no market in this world for fundamentalism is not accurate. Fundamentalism may also be a good thing - it depends on what type of fundamentalism we are talking about.

 

Krsna Consciousness is purified fundamentalism. The Absolute Truth [Krsna] is the fundamental basis of Reality. To speak this conception directly [frankly and straightforward] and to point out that the cheating religions of the world are the principle cause of suffering may not be appreciated by the liberal left, but compromising the truth and becoming duplicitous is not the solution - it only serves to perpetuate the delusions of ignorance that Christianity has spread around the world for more than 2,000 years.

 

People should be informed that Christianity is a man-made religion and that because of such it has no real value for spiritual advancement. Preaching means philosophical war against ignorance. Truth will set us free!

Great post Prabhu, Thank you,,, I took my time to read the every bit of it..

Hari Bol,