tackleberry

Some people seem to have a rather strange idea that we, the vaishnavas, must stop using the word 'hindu' to describe ourselves, just because hinduism contains a wide range of schools, conflicting with each other. But that's true of Christians too, many sects are in conflict with the other. But you don't find Catholics or Lutherans or whoever wanting to separate themselves from the 'christian' label. They're practical and understand it's better NOT to separate themselves from Christianity, despite the conflict between each of their schools. Why can't Vaishnvas learn to be like that?

I really do not like that word Hinduism. Devotees of Krishna are NOT 'Hindu'

 

Historically the word Hindu comes from the invaders who invaded India, most recently the Muslims in the 7th Century. They could not pronounce the word Indus, referring to the river and it eventually became Hindus the Hindu. This word is not found in Sanskrit.

 

The religious name for the followers of Krishna consciousness is Sanatan Dharm “Sanatan” means original, universal, eternal and is used as “Sanatan Dharm”, the ancient name for those who follow the Vedas and worship Krishna and Vishnu

Maybe so, but for practical purposes, it's better to call oneself Hindu, and not quibble over its origins. Bottom line, we can use the word 'Hindu' in the same way we understand 'Sanatan Dharma', then where's the problem? So instead of doing away with it, it'd be wiser to keep the word 'Hindu', but give it the significance we assign to what we call Sanatan Dharma. That is the best approach.

If God only wanted one form of worship and did not assume different forms for people to lead their own path, wouldn't it be that way?

This is faulty logic, I am afraid. One can also argue, If God only wanted peace in this world, wouldn't it be that way? And because there's so much violence, bigotry, and terrorism, God must've wanted it that way. So let's not strive for a peaceful world, it's very scary if there is only going to be peace without any diversity like violence, terrorism, murder etc. Point being, just because these things exist, it doesn't mean it's God's will, and just because there are a zillion religions, it doesn't mean God approves all of them, or that all religions are true.

Yes, I see that very same energy propelling people to butcher countless thousands of people in the name of their religion. I see millions of these so called Christians supporting American "holy war" with these 'awful Muslim fanatics' which has led to at least half a million innocent lives lost and untold suffering.

 

Merry Christmas to you, brother, pass on the ammo...

It could be Krishna's plan, getting both sides to fight, because they have so much in common.

Funny how the law of karma works. These 'leaders' arm terrorists while in power, and when they're out of power, they're killed by the same terrorists. Some gratitude!

What is "the self" that you speak of?

 

The self refers to the living entity, the 'I' that's alive, the 'I' that's distinct from mind, body etc.

If I were to write, I'd write from the perspective of Karna, a very interesting character. Whether you love him or hate him, you can't deny he's the most confusing, inspiring, heroic, hateful, and pretty much every other contradiction rolled into one!

Regarding Yogananda's Jyotish chart, Parasara says:

 

"One will attain full enlightenment if Ketu is in the 12th [from Karakāṁśā] identical with Meṣa or Dhanuḥ and receives a Dṛṣṭi from a benefic. If Ketu is in the 12th from Karakāṁśā, receiving a Dṛṣṭi from a malefic, or is there yuti with a malefic, one will not attain full enlightenment." [bPHS 33.63-74]

 

 

Wow, David, that was interesting. Just curious...if by ketu, you mean south node, I have it in 12th from K conjunct with Jupiter, but it's in Scorpio. Does this have any value from an astro perspective?

Murali Mohan prabhu, Kabbalah refers to a set of beliefs and practices that supplement traditional Jewish interpretations of the Bible and religious observances. It is held authoritative by most Orthodox Jews, although traditionally limited to married Talmud scholars. Kabbalah is considered by many Orthodox Jews to be part of the study of Torah, specifically the study of the inner meaning of Torah.

For one who understands Judaism, the study of the inner secrets of Torah (Sod) is called Kabbalah. The idea of reincarnation, called gilgulis, is found in much Yiddish literature among Ashkenazi Jews. It is also believed that some human souls could end up being reincarnated into non-human bodies.

According to Jewish beliefs, the intimate understanding and mastery of the Kabbalah brings one spiritually closer to God and enriches one's experience of Jewish sacred texts and law however, the Kabbalah became secretive, forbidden and esoteric to Judaism for two and a half millennia and this is why many outsiders, like European Christians, never heard of the Jewish reincarnation beliefs. Even the term reincarnating is today not used by many orthodox Jews who have their own word ‘gilgulis’, which in English means reincarnation anyway. Many Rabbis today refer to people reincarnating (gilgulis) in successive lives. The belief of reincarnation is actually very common in mainstream Judaism. Most Orthodox Jews have a prayer asking for forgiveness for one's sins that one may have committed in this gilgul or a previous life.

Very informative, thanks a lot. Can you also tell me whether Jews believe that the souls always reincarnate in the same race, such as jews taking birth as jews, and so on? Do they believe jews are superior to other humans, and the chosen race? Some links and resources would help.

That does not mean he considered Vipina Vihari a sahajiya. He did not like VV ever since he placed his foot on Bhaktivinoda's head during the time of initiation.

 

Siddha pranali was a standard Gaudiya Vaishnava practice at least since the times of Krsnadasa Kaviraja Goswami - that is not a reason to call all these people sahajiyas.

Is this for real? I mean someone placing their feet on B? Can't believe it!

Right on. It is evident that a number of Sarasvata Vaishnavas label those not in the line of Prabhupada Srila Sarasvati Thakura as "sahajiyas" without beginning to understand what that loaded word really means. I find it hopelessly pathetic that people can be so ignorant of a tradition which they profess to follow. Whether ISKCON and Gaudiya Matha devotees like it or not, they belong to an unorthodox branch of the Gaudiya tree which explains why they are so markedly at variance with the older, more traditional Parivaras. A truly balanced and nuanced view of Chaitanya Vaishnavism cannot be had unless one is broad-minded enough to study all those different streams of the movement of Mahaprabhu. As for the notorious Sahajiyas, they are of another world altogether, in many respects alien to both traditionalists and Sarasvatas.

Is that your avatar?

PY's body didn't decay one week after his demise. Nobody's ever achieved that, it speaks a lot about his yogic practice.

typical oversimplification.

 

what the shastras say is: kalau sudra sambhava - in the age of Kali everyone is only a sudra by birth.

 

In other words nobody is born a brahmana, kshatriya, or vaishya - you must become qualified by proper activities and character to be considered anything more then a sudra.

Having to figure it out may be extremely time-consuming, and more often than not, the conclusion may not be accurate. You may have to spend an entire liftetime trying to find your varna, and any mistake would force you to start from scratch.

That said, wouldn't birth-based caste system end this problem? A carpenter's son would have the same genes (plus growing up in similar environment), so it's more likely that he'd become a successful carpenter, rather than a successful merchant. Birth-based caste takes genetics as well as environment into account. So wouldn't it be better?

Also, if you've seen some of my comments which were deleted by the moderators, you'd know that I *can* certainly be a lot more sanctimonious.

Who's your guru?

OMG, that's an amazing change in you, GV, unless of course, I am missing the sarcasm somewhere.

Be that as it may, what I like is the Christian methods of organization, how they've managed to survive despite the rise of other religions, atheism etc. Perhaps, Iskcon can learn a thing or two from christians on organiztation, marketing (yup, that's right!), and all the rest of it.

Except for people in Kerala, India, nobody accepts Ayapa as an authentic god, because he's not mentioned in any Vedic scripture. In India, everybody is worshipped, from movie stars to politicians to local gurus, so it's not surprising that this ayapa has been elevated to the status of a god.

Hope this helps.

Fall down from where?

 

 

 

Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada has stated:

 

 

 

 

"The conclusion is that no one falls from the spiritual world, or Vaikuntha planet, for it is the eternal abode." (S.B. purport, 3.16.26)

Why do most people have a problem accepting the "fall down" theory, when it can be explained quite easily. OTOH, the opposite cannot be explained with logic and shastra.

Every jiva is dreaming this material world, which is similar to a king dreaming he's a beggar. In reality, the king is not a beggar, but the intensity of the dream is so strong that he IS a beggar for all practical purposes. Likewise, every jiva is nitya siddha, but maya is so powerful he's also a badha jiva (even though, technically, he's not).

Obviously, this puts an end to the apparent contradiction as to how a jiva can be both, or whether there can be a fall down. Fall down IS and ISN'T, going by the dream analogy.

So simple and easy to understand. Why can't people accept this, instead of fighting over this like petty minded people?

Oh, no! dont tell me you believe in that stuff?

 

the Satan fairytale is like the fall from Goloka stuff. good for kids but really bad for adults.

But isn't it somewhat similar to Kamsa and other asuras envying Lord Krishna? One of the basic qualities of asuras is hatred/envy of Krishna, right? So maybe, the satan story was derived from this principle.

Well, I'm not Sanskrit scholar, but isn't "go" (as in "Govinda" and "Gopala") translated as *both* "Brahmana" *and* "cow"? Perhaps there are less ambiguous words for both.

"Go" in Sanskrit also means light.

Poverty is the reason why even good people go bad. Put yourself in their shoes, and you might do the exact same thing in desperation. Life is not easy. Let's try to be a little considerate.

I am a little confused after reading your post. If the battle of Kurukshetra wasn't a holy war, then why did Krishna want Arjuna to fight in it?

I think you're reacting, without even trying to understand Kula's point. The term 'holy war' in MB's or Gita's context is understood as fighting for right over wrong, done as a service to Krishna. But the same term 'holy war' was used as a justification by religious bigots to indulge in barbaric practices.

This is what Kula is trying to say, and if you can't see the difference between these two, then there's nothing more to say.

I've tried to give up 'unkrishna' conscious activities, but in vain.

Just curious...is it not true that ancient vedic people used to drink and dance, marry lots of times, and so forth. So it seems like there's nothing wrong with enjoyment per se. Even devotees used to drink often, lust after women etc. So maybe, all these are permitted. If at all there are rules, it could be because the vaishnava saints wanted moderation, and didn't want these things to go out of control.

What do people think of this? Is it possible to make progress, even though we continue to drink and do other stuff?

Compared to the 'crimes' committed by other religious organizations, isn't it true that iskcon is somewhat better? I mean, you normally hear thousands of cases of, say molestation and other serious charges, reg. catholic priests, muslim clerics etc. but not so with respect to iskcon. So in comparision, it seems ok.

Krishna is busy having fun with the gopis. He doesn't have time to listen to your sad story.