theist

Jesus also warned about false prophets melvin. Can't trust everyone. And when it comes to matters of who is God and who is guru then we should not trust anyone until God Himself confirms it in our hearts. I think it dangerous all this mixing of one guy says this and another guy says that, toss it into a pot and stir and call what ever comes out a nice offering to God.

Truthfully I do not value your instructions Kulapavanna. You have for years been offering up your version of what Srila Prabhupada was "really" thinking and doing despite what he actually did. This is just more of the same. But I do accept that I am dense in consciousness. Can anyone born into this dense corner of the material world claim otherwise?

Hahaha sambya. Think before you pick a fight. Ask yourself, "Is it really worth it?"

It was a word used to convey the same thought and not intended as a word for word quote. The original was sankrit anyway. But here you go. Bg 9.23 TEXT 23 TEXT ye 'py anya-devatā-bhaktā yajante śraddhayānvitāḥ te 'pi mām eva kaunteya yajanty avidhi-pūrvakam SYNONYMS ye—those; api—also; anya—other; devatā—demigods; bhaktāḥ—devotees; yajante—worship; śraddhaya-anvitāḥ—with faith; te—they; api—also; mām—Me; eva—even; kaunteya-O son of Kuntī; yajanti—sacrifice; avidhi-pūrvakam—in a wrong way. TRANSLATION BG 9.23 Whatever a man may sacrifice to other gods, O son of Kuntī, is really meant for Me alone, but it is offered without true understanding.

Thank you sant. You have a natural tendancy to watch out and protect others. Several times I have noticed this. Well not every statement should require such a detailed explanation. If that were the case every post here would become a small book. Krishna speaks in the gita that those who worship the demi-gods are really worshipping Him in a wrong way as ultimately He is the only grantor of boons. We all need to be educated that as parts and parcels of Krishna our birthright is that we have a direct access to the Supreme Father to ask for anything. We don't need priests to talk to God for us nor do we need demigods to provide shelter from the storms of life. Reference Krishna lifting Govardhana Hill to protect His devotees from Indra's wrath. Only Krishna is our shelter, protector and provider.

It should be noted that Bhatisiddhanta was giving the defintion of Vaisnava to a culture that had been long misusing it in hopes of rectifying the situation.

So let's stick to one defintion and that should be Bhatisiddhanta's, not yours.

. Quote: ) Theist wrote that one cannot worship other "demigods" and have Krishna too. Youve written half.Heres what thiest said and what he meant Quote: Can't worship some demi-god or the things of this world and expect to also have Krishna too. Or in Arjuna's case it would be familial ties and worldly piety Ok i got you .Thiest must have made a mistake .Im sorry. This is still being discussed? hear is the difference. A devotee may ask for help in removing his impediments for performing devotional service to krishna from Ganesh or anyone superior that can help. The objective is Krishna NOT MUNDANE BUSINESS. You cannot have a love for money and Krishna too, "The Lord is a jealous God" in some peoples parlance. An example is the gopis who worshiop Goddess Katyayani? to have a good husband but they only wanted Krishna as their husband. Some disciples in the 70's wanted to worshipnGanesh to get money "for Krishna's service" and Srila Prabhupada said only those who donated him $100,000 a month could do so. No one did.

Yes this is our duty otherwise we should just remain silent. Pure cultural exchanges are for those that want to remain in worlds such as these.

As I already addressed in this world we must use the word with an understanding of different meanings ACCORDING TO THE CONTEXT! When I encounter an Iskcon person on the street I acknowledge them by saying "Hare Krishna vaisnava." That doesn't mean I am saying they are a pure devotee or something. But when we are speaking of precise definitions as we are here or when we are searching for an exact definiton AS WE ARE HERE then the only one that fits is Bhaktisiddhanta's. I assume it all the time and then I try to correct their misunderstanding rather than remain silent. "silence means agreement" or at least it is taken that way. What is this forum for, discussing spiritual life threadbare or is it an intercultural exchange forum? JNDAS, In understand the ackwardness of your situation. If somebody refers to themselves as a hindu or most likely Christian to me I don't immediately staring raising objections to how they are using the word. However this is a philosophical forum and in particular the Spirtual Discussion thread. If not here then just where would it be appropriate to relay on the highest definition for Vaisnava?

It may be what you had in mind but it is not what you expressed! The pure devotee's devotional mood is perfectly in line with sastra, is based on the pure objective true, and is 100% factual. You statement that there is a difference between his devotional mood and sastra is tantamount to calling him a sentimentalist with no philosophical understanding. Here is your mistake in this idea. The soul is unchanging NOW. It only appears that there is a break in the loving service to Krishna when the question is viewed from within the illusion of past and future which are in themselves only wispy dreamlike states. It's not that the jiva becomes a dog and then returns to being a Vaisnava. Thisnecessary way of speaking and conceptualizing is a limitation forced on us because of our bondage to the time conception and our living (speaking and thinking) under it's influence. This is true but again only from the plane of material vision. Vaisnavism is a transcendental reality, in other words a fire that always is burning. Right.

I use Bhaktisiddhanta's definition consistently and also have. The contrast is in philosophy. We accept the self that inhabitating a Buddhist mind as in reality a jiva whose eternal function is Vaisnavic. The same for the Christians Advaitins animals plants and demi-gods. This is called seeing with equal vision which is a basic tenent of spiritual life. Just like we say we are bhakti-yoga practionser and it is also said that real bhakti begins after liberation from false designations. What's the mystery? If you break it down a little further then you see the term "materialist devotees". The jivas in the brahmajyoti have all retained their individuality. Or do you think that brahman realization really entails the end of the jivas indivduality as the impersonalists claim? They simply haven't revived the dormant krishna consciousness. As to this statement it reminded me of why I ignore your posts. This is so full of cr*p. It is highly offensive to Bhaktisiddhanta by calling him a sentimentalist, ignorant of objectivity and factual knowledge of shastra.

You don't really want to go into this territory JNdas. You know I can post so many things by Srila Prabhupada calling hinduism a hodge-podge etc.

When people ask me what religion I am I take the time to explain that the eternal religion of the soul is to be a loving servant of God. This is the Krishna conscious position.!!!! Srila Prabhupada did not come here to establish another religious designation for the people of the world to mis-identify with. For years now I have been attacked by numerous rabid "hindus" on this forum for saying this very thing. Perhaps you are unaware due to having your attention on your other manifold duties. I call religious designations such as Hindu, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist as mundane (mundane meaning having to do with the designations of the material world) and suddenly I am attacking all of India in peoples eyes. The fact of the matter is I am presenting the definition as given by Bhaktisiddhanta and not attacking the poor hindus. By the way I go on "Christian" debate forums and make exactly the same point only changing the name hindu to christian and Vaisnava to eternal servant. The poor christians also are bewildered as to what I mean and are loath to accept it because it means the Hindu and Muslim are just as much children of God as they are. The jews would also freak out if I suggested every child of God is a chosen child and special in His eyes and not just them on there websites but that is not my territory. Religion, as the term is generally used, (especially by those in the Mid-east and India where seeing in terms of religion is more prominent) is the reason the West is often described by them as "Christian". However I don't consider Europe or America as truly Christian by any stretch of the word despite all the chuches. Are the teachings of Lord Jesus Christ being followed here? Hardly. Gross materialism rules in the West. If you insist on relating to the world on the terms acceptable to the world for the sake of going along to get along then that is your business but Lord Caitanya's teaching are meant to completely shake the world out of the dominant mundane paradigm. Now this teaching not need to be offered in a rude manner but certainly can and must be offered in a staright forward manner. In this context meaning to explain the true definition of Vaisnava is as given by Bhaktisiddhanta and to not compromise on this vital point.

JNdas, Your points,( although very well written as is your style), are very disappointing, watered down and weak. Linquististics!?. Are you not in line from Bhaktisiddhanta? Do you not represent the siddhanta of the Gaudiya Vaisnava's? Which of your preceptors has defined Vaisnavism as you have? Here are Bhaktisiddhanta statements on what constitutes a real Vaisnava and a reminder we are only interested in establishing the reality and not the apparent as truth. From Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's small book Vaisnavism Real and Apparent, the section on defining what is a Vaisnava and Vaisnavism. If anyone rechecks my many posts on the subject, (deemed "bigoted" by many of the posters here) you will find I only adhere and promote this definiton of Vaisnavism.

No problem. Closed if you like. At least you are a gentleman on the issue. Thank you for that. Although you failed to answer the last questions. But perhaps you got a glimpse of my point anyway. Hopefully someone else will take it up and answer the questions I posed to Kali-Upsaka.

Well I will read your response in the morning. It is getting late in California and I must sleep. Hare Krishna

Well do you consider "being a hindu" as the eternal occupation of the soul? Meaning that to become liberate from all false designations means to realize one's eternal identity as Hindu". Lord Caitanya saw the eternal nature of the self as understanding one's self to be the eternal servant of the servant of the servant of Krishna's lotus feet. That is Vaisnavism. Will all who calll themselves hindu agree to this statement? TRANSLATION CC Madhya 13.80 Lord Caitanya speaking. " 'I am not a brāhmaṇa, I am not a kṣatriya, I am not a vaiśya or a śūdra. Nor am I a brahmacārī, a householder, a vānaprastha or a sannyāsī. I identify Myself only as the servant of the servant of the servant of the lotus feet of Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the maintainer of the gopīs. He is like an ocean of nectar, and He is the cause of universal transcendental bliss. He is always existing with brilliance.' "

What present day Iskcon is is anybodies guess. But the founder acarya was very clear on the difference between Hinduism and Vaisnavism.

What problem?

What a nasty post.

Ahh...how refreshing. A ray of light shines through all the wordy head games played out here. Thanks Melvin

There was more to that episode than that from what I heard. But it is not worth talking about. This blimp thing just shows that they will keep squeezing the populace until they have biochips implanted in everyone at birth and can monitor our every move on GPS. Just one more reason to end the cycle of birth and death.

There is no end it seems to the self proclaimed 'Bhagavans". This is the first 2012 Bhagavan I've heard although admittedly I try to avoid such people like the plague.

Melvin, when you first started this Sept. 11 stuff I laughed because I thought you were joking. Am I know to believe you actually take this seriously!!!? I read a bumper sticker recent that said,"Don't believe everything you think." This is very good advice. It's hard not to listen to the mind since we have been thinking it is ourself for so long. But that voice in your head and that never ending stream of thoughts that just keep coming are just echos of past experiences in Maya and speculations about what may be coming in the future. Don't believe everything IT says or thinks brother.