anadi

Haribol Mahak, Someone who emphasizes in every post that "disciplic succession does not always mean that one has to be initiated officially" wants most prbably to institute the exception as a rule, and by this he is trying to distroy bahkti, namely the backbone of bhakti: 1. guru padashraya 2. guru diksha shiksha adi Guru is the backbone of bhakti. First ist guru, namely service to guru and vaisnava. Guru must accept you; not like ritvik Ekalvia, who made a murti of his living guru, and worship that murti. And this ritvik are praising now the so called "christianity", this fraud propagated in the name of love and Jesus. These are the people who like to support their speculation, looking in some letters that a saintly person wrote to some of his disciples. When the bible was assembled, the paulinist, took 13 Paulus letters to make, with other of 4 gospels, that what they called "the new testament". Than they took some text of the mosaic religion, and through the method called "the pious fraud" they made "the old testament". And this was sastra? Was this sastra made by the holy ghost as they claim, and as some of us say that this is a scripture for a certain type of faith. This is not a scripture, but a fraud, as you at least aknowledged in the other thread on the amount of 90%. The same tendency I see it here. Another kind of pavelinism and researching of letters. And you spoke about love. To tolerate the evil of propagating apasiddhanta is not love.

and Ill gladly hear from devotees like theist and gHari, scholars, indeed, but most of all, devotees, who see scholarship as secondary to real love of god. What is real love of god?

This is not an advice from a bhakta, for a bhakta. this the advice of a theist person who pose as a bhakta, trying at his level best, to distroy bhakti, from within. You should pray for the mercy of guru and vaisnavas, and see them as your deva and your atma. How do you pray? By serving them, and than you can ask question...not before (tad vidhi pranipatena pariprasnena sevaya), and by their mercy you may get some realization. Krishna says: ye me bhakta janah partha / na me bhaktas ca te janah mad bhaktanam ca ye bhakta / mama bhaktastu te narah "Those who claim to be my devotees, really are not my devotees. Those who are the devotees of my devotees, are my devotees." From Adi Purana (BRS 1.2.218)

You personally have "some vague idea" but no evidence for this type of translation, I am that I am, that I have overseen. What kind of translation is this one, which contradicts the tetragammaton YHVH which should mean that this a Name, the name of the tribal-God of Israel. What kind of God is this one? this kind: "4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them " This kind of God seems to be under the influence of material modes of nature, as he would be under the spell of maya, being jelous on other "gods" or demigods?! Whereas Sri Krishna says that the one who worships the demigods, they also worship Him, although in a wrong way. Regarding the "idolatry" propagated by such a "God" or demi-god, who knows?... Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura says in Jaiva Dharma in Nitya-dharma and Idolatry: "Vaisnavas is to worship the fully conscious, eternal Deity form of Bhagavän. Therefore, idolatry (but-parast) is not part of the Vaisnava doctrine. One should clearly understand that the Vaisnavasworship of the Deity is not idolatry. One cannot prohibit Deity worship simply because some books forbid idolatry; everything depends on the quality of faith in the worshiper's heart. The more one's heart can transcend the influence of matter, the more competent one will be to worship the pure form of the Deity. The more one is absorbed in thoughts of matter, the more he will be implicated in the worship of matter. Although he may claim that the Lord is formless, his heart is still filled with thoughts of matter. It is very difficult for the general mass of people to worship the pure form of the Deity, for such worship is strictly a matter of personal qualification. In other words, only one who has been elevated beyond the influence of matter can transcend thoughts of material form. I sincerely request you to consider this subject carefully. Srimad-Bhagavatam (10.84.13) says: "One who considers this corpse-like body, comprised of the three elements vata, pita, and kapha, to be his real self; who regards his wife, children, and others as his very own; who considers mundane forms made of earth, stone, or wood to be worshipable; and who regards mere water to be a place of pilgrimage but who does not consider the bhagavadbhaktas to be more dear than his very self, to be his very own, to be worshipable, and to be places of pilgrimage; such a person, though human, is no better than an ass among animals." It is said in the Gita (9.25): Those who worship matter go to the realms of matter. Those whose spiritual qualification is extremely low cannot understand the pure, spiritual state of existence. Even when such people meditate on the Lord within their minds, the form that they imagine is material, and meditating on a material form within the mind is the same as constructing a form of physical elements, and regarding it as the Lord's form. That is why it is beneficial for a person on this level of eligibility to worship the Deity. Factually speaking, it would be most inauspicious for the general class of people if there were no worship of Deities. When ordinary jévas become inclined toward the service of the Lord, they become despondent if they cannot see the Deity form of the Lord before them. In religions where there is no worship of the Deity, members who are on a low level of spiritual qualification are highly materialistic and oblivious to Isvara, or in a state of distraction. Therefore, worship of the Deity is the foundation of religion for all humanity."

One may continue with the speculation, and say: He is living in his books. Do you know the opinion of Srila Goura Govinda Maharaja, his most dear and "special"(not like the "others") disciple, in this connection? If not, I would be glad to share it with you.

I just wonder that you understood the nature of Q-hari, big dissapointment. But his deceitfuness is herein more evident: Maybe you forgot to read the article to the end?!Because Hamsa Avatar reveals His identity: Please understand that I am the Supreme Personality of Godhead, ViSNu, and that I have appeared before you desiring to explain your actual religious duties. He doesn't say "I am that I am" although He gives a quite impersonal type of self realization in His speech on sankya and astanga yoga. Besides this I have't found your "I am that I am"in the King James Bible or in any other version or translation: King James Bible Exodus 3:1 Now Moses kept the flock of Jethro his father in law, the priest of Midian: and he led the flock to the backside of the desert, and came to the mountain of God, even to Horeb. 3:2 And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed. 3:3 And Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt. 3:4 And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I. 3:5 And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground. 3:6 Moreover he said, I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God. http://king-james-bible.classic-literature.co.uk/exodus/ebook-page-03.asp 6 Moreover he said, I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God. From CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS & RESEARCH MINISTRY http://www.carm.org/kjv/Ex/Ex_3.htm 4 When the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called to him out of the bush, "Moses, Moses!" And he said, "Here am I." "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God. http://www.world-mysteries.com/awr_1_2.htm Moses and the Burning Bush 5 "Do not come any closer," God said. "Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy ground." 6 Then he said, "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob." ." http://www.biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?passage=exodus+3 This are some modified translations nowadays. How should have been? When Yahveh appeared to Moses in the Burning Bush, and announced himself as "the God of thy fathers," he was a total stranger to Moses. How do I know? Read the account. It doesn't take a scholar to read where Moses ASKS who's talking. No, Moses wasn't merely surprised at the voice…he simply didn't know what was going on. Moses did not know this Yahveh, and had never heard of him. After some intermission, the God came directly to the point, and declared-here are the exact words-one of the most notorious falsities in the Hebrew text: "And elohim spake unto Moses, and said unto him., anoki Yahveh -- I am the Lord! "And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of el-shaddai, but by my name Yahveh (JEHOVAH) was I not known to them." (Ex. 6:2, 8.) The Hebrew God for the first time since the world began, is "revealed" to mankind by the "name" of Yahveh, here first appearing in the Bible translations, and there printed as JEHOVAH in capital letters; for more vivid and awe-inspiring impression. But this is a notorious lie-since the "churchianism" pretends that Moses did write the first five books of the Hebrew text, where in Genesis 2:4, the name YAHVEH first appears; "in the day that Yahveh-elohim made the earth and the heavens." Its first recorded use as a mystical personage, was when Eve "conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from Yahveh-the Lord." (Gen. 4:1.)

The answer in the thread "death for bhakti".

Is there any scriptural evidence for this speculation?No, never! Srila Bhaktivedanta Svami Prabhupada says himself: One should simply try to find a genuinely qualified spiritual master for actual advancement in spiritual understanding. Does he say try to find the books of a genuinely qualified spiritual master? No. He says, try to find the spiritual master.

Besides the tactic of 1. changing the subject 2. denigrating the opponent you are using also the third tactic of the demoniac teachings: 3. try to ridicule your opponent. if you don't have arguments on the subject, which in this case was the loving association that you are pretensly asking from your opponent, but in the same post you are saying "anyway I don't care about what you are saying" showing a duplicious character.

Love is not to say "my dear shambu" oh you have such nice ...and your words are so melodious...and your ideas... Love is to show what the sastra says, to open the eyes of people who are not so abstinate in their speculation, people who are very attached to these speculation. How can they love you? They will try denigrate you, as you yourself are trying here by implying: "oh you speak about asociation with devotee, but where is your love?" and you continue denigrating by saying: "Oh, you are qouting from from the translation by BV Narayana Maharaja (which explains a lot...). What kind of loving exchange can I have with such a person as you? Even I would love you, where is the exchange? The exchange is in your words: "Whatever you may think or remark, I don't care at all." I've just asked how many rounds that prabhu chants. Why? Because he himself sugested to me that I should better chant...So my question is..."but how many rounds do you chant, if you give me this advice...with the implication: do you know how many rounds do I chant daily, as part of my saddhana?

If one thinks that he is above consulting anyone else, including a spiritual master, he is at once an offender at the lotus feet of the Lord. One should simply try to find a genuinely qualified spiritual master for actual advancement in spiritual understanding. CC Adi 1.35 purport by Srila Bhaktivedanta Svami Prabhupada This has been said for all people at all times, not in a letter for Dinesh, who had his own problems...and needed a personal advice!... a certain circumstanacial context.

and this a good try to denigrate, when the evidence required is missing, and there was nothig but a speculation. To have some basic understanding in shuddha bhakti, one should learn Upadeshamrita, and a few more books, and when one makes Sri Upadeshamrita his heart, under the guidance of guru and vaishnava, he will follow them, and no such theistic speculations would come out, as the ones you spread here in this forum, even obsessivly repeated in the signature. My answer should always be there in my signature. The fourth verse is about association which nourishes bhakti: dadAti pratigRhNAti guhyam AkhyAti pRcchati bhuNkte bhojayate caiva SaD-vidhaM prIti-lakSanam Offering pure devotees items in accordance with their requirements, accepting prasAdA or remnant items given by pure devotees, revealing to devotees one's confidential realisations concerning bhajana, inquiring from them about their confidential realisations , eating with great love the prasAda remnants given by devotees and lovingly feeding them prasAda these are the six symptoms of loving association with devotees. You are opposed to bhakti, because you are opposed to guru, and you are infiltrated in bhakti, that is why you are most dangerous.

Although it would be unfair to blame Max Müller for the rise of Nazism, he, as an eminent scholar of the Vedas and Sanskrit, bears a heavy responsibility for the deliberate misuse of a term in response to the emotion of the moment. He was guilty of giving scriptural sanction to the worst prejudice of his or any age. Not everyone however was guilty of such abuse. Wilhem Schlegel, no less a German nationalist, or romantic, always used the word 'Arya' to mean honorable and never in a racial sense. Max Müller's misuse of the term may be pardonable in an ignoramus, but not in a scholar of his stature. At the same time it should be pointed out that there is nothing to indicate that Max Müller was himself a racist. He was a decent and honorable man who had many Indian friends. He simply allowed himself to be carried away by the emotion of the moment, and the heady feeling of being regarded an Aryan sage by fellow German nationalists. To be always in the public eye was a lifelong weakness with the man. With the benefit of hindsight we can say that Max Müller saw the opportunity and made a 'bargain with the devil' to gain fame and fortune. It would be a serious error however to judge the man based on this one unseemly episode in a many-sided life. His contribution as editor and publisher of ancient works is great beyond dispute. He was a great man and we must be prepared to recognize it. Much now is made of the fact that Max Müller later repudiated the racial aspects of the Aryan theory, claiming it to be a linguistic concept.

Is it your speculation, or you can bring some evidence? Or maybe is your spiritual master that told you that? Learn the fourth Sloka from Upadeshamrita by heart!

"VrajanAtha: So mAyA has nothing whatever to do with creating the svarUpa of the jivas this has to be accepted. At the same time, I have also clearly understood that the jiva is by nature subject to the influence of mAyA. Now I want to know, did the cit-Sakti create the jivas and give them their taTastha-svabhAva (marginal nature)? BAbAji : No, the cit-Sakti is paripUrNa-Sakti, the complete potency of KRSNa, and its manifestations are all eternally perfect substances. The jiva is not nitya-siddha , although when he performs sAdhana, he can become sAdhana-siddha and enjoy transcendental happiness like the nitya-siddhas, eternally perfect beings. All the four types of Srimati Radhika's sakhis are nitya-siddha, and they are direct expansions (kaya-vyUha) of the cit-Sakti, Srimati RadhikA Herself. All the jivas, on the other hand, have manifested from Sri KRSNa's jIva-Sakti . The cit-Sakti is Sri KRSNa's complete Sakti, whereas the jIva-Sakti is His incomplete sakti. Just as the complete tattvas are all transformations of the complete potency, similarly innumerable atomic, conscious jivas are transformations of the incomplete Sakti." from Jaiva Dharma Prameya Jiva Tattva Ch 15

1. Krishna is speaking to Arjuna, Krishna is not “the firing bush” of Moses. Arjuna knew Krishna, Moses didn’t know who is speaking. When Moses is supposed to have asked God who is speaking it would be most improbable, that the Lord would start with an impersonal answer like “I am that I am” taking into account that Moses is supposed to be no impersonalist philosoph, or at least philosoph . 2. Jiva has two main functions: I-ness (personality or self identification) and mamata (possessivness) . Anyone can say I am, and according to what comes after “I am”, one can see if he one is utterly governed by ahamkara or not, or has an impersonalist conception as in aham brahmasmi. Be sure I am not talking for you, you are a senior devotee, and I can not tell you something, which could be new for you. Are you on the level of chanting 64 rounds a day, or 48, or at least 32, or something in between? Just as a curiosity… or maybe 2x 64 rounds a day already? I won’t comment your answer in this connection.

You gave some links and in the first I've oppened it, is written: "According to Jewish Orthodox tradition, the Sacred Name is not to be uttered and accordingly, the form "G-d " is used in writing or printing." and than they give some reason for this prohibition (see the link). What kind of ortodoxy is that, which pretend one should not utter the name of the Lord? madhura madhuram etam mangala mangalanam sakala nigam vali sat phalam cit svarupam sakrit api parigitam shradaya helaya va briguvara nara matram tarayet krishna nama From all that is sweet, the sweetest is the holy name From all that is auspicious, the most auspicious is the holy name. the holy name is the ripened fruit of knowledge. If one utters the holy name even once (sakrit api parigitam) wiht faith (shraddha) or indiference (helaya) he will be liberated. For whatever reason this is a demoniac supposition "the Sacred Name is not to be uttered" , which is against the transcendental knowledhe, of chanting the name of the Lord all the time? The matter of fact those articles don't contradict at all The fraudulent translation of the world elohim, Yahve, and Yahve-elohim, invariably with God, creating the “Christian” myth of so called monotheistic religion, and dividing religions in mono and polytheistic. As for the King James translation... this is one of the most controversial translations. The Vedas speak indirectly about Krishna, but Krishna speaks directly about himself. Be sure, that agnostic translation "I am that I am." makes no sens. The Lord wants to introduce Himself to his devotee, and says: I am that I am? which means "now you know who am I, I am that I am. Congratulation. This is like the nature of maya: being inconlcusive. PS: Maybe you should not go on denigrating the opponent, which is a demoniac tactic, you should be factual, remaining on the subject. I never pretended I know jewish, or arameic, and if you want to know the source of my writings, you should politely ask; for example MadavAnanda Prabhu with such an occasion asked me for the source, but anyway your intention was not to know the source, because anyway you know it... the muslim fanatics?

You switched from the tactic of diverting from the subject to the denigration tactic, and your atacs are more virulent. I said one should be factual. Than you change and you want to eat your hat, not because the bible as was assembled and translated and misinterpreted, might be proven a fraudulent work, but because I, "the opponent", I don't know what are the Christian teachings. I tell you, in that way so that you don't eat your hat: If you are baptised at the end of your life, and you say that you belive in Jesus, all your sins will be forgiven, and you will go in heaven, otherwise you will go for ever in hell. Ask your local priest, if this is true of false. Evindence for this here: "The emperor Constantin was told that no pagan religion offered absolution for such crimes as his. He then turned to the Christian Church, (the sect of Paulus) and was informed that Christian baptism would expiate any crime, irrespective of its magnitude. At the same time he was advised that baptism might he deferred to the day of his death without losing any of its efficacy. Thus, Eusebius relates that, When he thought that he was near his death, he confessed his sins, desiring pardon for them from God, and was baptized. So that Constantine was the first of all the Emperors to be regenerated by the new birth of baptism, and signed with the sign of the Cross. (Vita Constantin.) From the moment that Constantine realized that his crimes could be expiated by Christian baptism, he declared himself the protector of a religion which treats criminals with such lenience. Immediately he began to show his gratitude to the Church. He donated the Lateran Palace to the Bishops of Rome. He sent his mother Helena on a journey to Jerusalem and erected several basilicas in the Holy Land. Then he turned his attention to increasing the membership of the Church. He offered freedom to all slaves who would accept the Christian faith, and to those who were not slaves he offered a white robe and twenty pieces of gold. As a result of this propaganda, twelve thousand converts were added to Christianity in the city of Rome alone. Next, he determined to increase the wealth of the Church. He gave permission to his subjects to bequeath their fortunes to the Church. Soon the rent-roll from the houses, shops and gardens attached to three basilicas brought in an annual income of $60,000. He raised the Bishops' salaries to $3,000 a year, and, in the Council of Nicea, assured the Bishops that if any of them were caught in the act of adultery the Imperial mantle would be thrown over them, so that the world at large might not learn of their offence. His next act was to issue an edict against all who refused to accept Christianity, commanding that their meeting places should be demolished or confiscated. According to his successor, the Emperor Julian, Many were imprisoned and persecuted and driven into exile. Whole troops of those who were styled "heretics" were massacred. In many provinces, entire towns and villages were laid waste and utterly destroyed. (Julian: Epistol. lii.) He then ordered the destruction of all writings adverse to the Christian faith. "For we would not suffer any of those things so much as to come to men's ears which tend to provoke God to wrath and offend the minds of the pious." And finally, in order to convince his subjects of his Christian piety, Constantine caused his image to be engraven on his golden coins in the form of prayer, with his hands joined together, and looking up towards heaven. And over divers gates of his palace he was drawn praying and lifting up his hands and eyes to heaven. (Vita Constantin.)" see THEOSOPHY, Vol. 25, No. 5, March, 1937 (I don't give the link but the one that is really curious can lool for Theosophy) This the triumphal march of "preaching of love" of the church of Paulus, as the representativ of Christianity, which went on for many centuries.

See http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/showflat/cat/hinduism/84707/0/collapsed/5/o/1

What is the meaning of bhagavat parampara? The bhagavat parampara is the line of transmiting the transcendental sound which is not different from the the transcendental object. Who can utter the transcendental name? Only a pure devotee. Is there any evidence? Yes it is:The four features of the sound. Para-vak is the transcendent sound. Para means highest or farthest, and in this connection it indicates that sound which is beyond the perception of the senses. Para-vak is also known as "rava-shabda" - an unvibratory condition of sound beyond the reach of mind and intelligence (avyakta), only to be realized by great souls, parama-jnanis. On the stage of para-vak there is no distinction between the object and the sound. The sound contains within it all the qualities of the object. In terms of the universal cosmology, vaikhari, madhyama and pashyanti correspond respectively to bhuh, bhuvah, and svah. The para-shabda ultimately corresponds to the Lord's tri-padda-vibhuti. Within the pashyanti-vak exists the nature's iccha-shakti, or the power of will. Within the madhyama-vak exists the nature's jnana-shakti , or the power of knowledge. And within the vaikhari-vak exists the nature's kriya-shakti, or power of action. The bhagavat parampara is the line transmiting the transcendental sound . Is there any evidence? Madya lila 17.48-49 keha yadi tanra mukhe sune krsna-nama tanra mukhe ana sune tanra mukhe ana sabe 'krsna' 'hari' bali' nace, kande, hase paramparaya 'vaisnava' ha-ila sarva dese When someone heard the chanting of the holy name from the mouth of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu , and someone else heard this chanting from that second person, and someone again heard this chanting from the third person, everyone in all countries became a Vaisnava through such disciplic succession. Thus everyone chanted the holy name of Krsna and Hari, and they danced, cried and smiled. What is the meaning? Shall we speculate on it? No. We should accept the authoritative purport. Purport by SB Svami Prabhupada The transcendental power or potency of the Hare Krsna maha-mantra is herein explained. First, the holy name is vibrated by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. When someone hears from Him directly, he is purified. When another person hears from that person, he also is purified. In this way the purification process is advanced among pure devotees.Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and no one can claim His potency. Nonetheless, if one is a pure devotee, hundreds and thousands of men can be purified BY HIS VIBRATION. Many heard the transcendental sound from the pure devotees of the Lord, but where is their purification? Where is the yAvatI zaktiH (imense power) of nAmnaH'sya hareh (of the holy Name of the Lord)? Destroyed by inumberable offeneses against the pure devotees. Srila Narotama dAsa ThAkura says in his Ei BAra KrunA Kara hari stAne aparAdha tAre harinAma tomA sthAne aparAdhe nahika eDAna Oh vaiSNava GosAi, offenses committed at lotus feet of Sri Hari are absolved by harinAma. But for offenses against you there is absolutely no means of deliverance! The purification process is not a passive process. Is there any garanty for the process? Yes. sAdhu saNge kRSNa bhaktye SraddhA yadi haya bhakti phala prema haya saMsAra yAya kzaya When a devotee obtains faith in the association of softhearted and pure vaiSNavas he very quickly obtains prema and the saMsAra is distroyed.

I've personlly seen emails from my Gurudeva sent to some Godbrothers, which entail many contradictory points regarding siddhanta, but in his books siddhanta is cristal clear. He is also following this principle "If your aim is to engage him in Krsna consciousness, if you do something which is not very straight, that is allowed".

but my duty is to present some arguments when some moderate "Christians" say Bible is the book of truth and the only book of truth. Now I take the side of Jiva Gosvami, who wrote the sandarbhas to protect the writings of his gurus: Sri Rupa and Sanatana. Sorry that I have to repeat it. You just try to divert the discussion. This diversion is a demoniac tactic. If you want to say that the three main points in the discussion (or any other I presented), are false please prove it. 1. The fraudulent translation of the world elohim, Yahve, and Yahve-elohim, invariably with God, creating the “Christian” myth of so called monotheistic religion, and dividing religions in mono and polytheistic. More on this fraud here: When Yahveh appeared to Moses in the Burning Bush, and announced himself as "the God of thy fathers," he was a total stranger to Moses. How do I know? Read the account. It doesn't take a scholar to read where Moses ASKS who's talking. No, Moses wasn't merely surprised at the voice…he simply didn't know what was going on. Moses did not know this Yahveh, and had never heard of him. After some intermission, the God came directly to the point, and declared-here are the exact words-one of the most notorious falsities in the Hebrew text: "And elohim spake unto Moses, and said unto him., anoki Yahveh -- I am the Lord! "And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of el-shaddai, but by my name Yahveh (JEHOVAH) was I not known to them." (Ex. 6:2, 8.) The Hebrew God for the first time since the world began, is "revealed" to mankind by the "name" of Yahveh, here first appearing in the Bible translations, and there printed as JEHOVAH in capital letters; for more vivid and awe-inspiring impression. But this is a notorious lie-since the “churchianism” pretends that Moses did write the first five books of the Hebrew text, where in Genesis 2:4, the name YAHVEH first appears; "in the day that Yahveh-elohim made the earth and the heavens." Its first recorded use as a mystical personage, was when Eve "conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from Yahveh-the Lord." (Gen. 4:1.) The personal name YAHVEH is spoken dozens of times by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as any one can read in Genesis. Every single time that the title "the Lord" and "the Lord God" appears, it is a false translation by the priests for the Hebrew personal name YAHVEH. More exactly, the Tetragrammaton (YHVH), appears in the Old Testament 6823 times as the proper name of God as the God of Israel. As such it serves to distinguish him from the gods of the other nations." Thus was the Hebrew tribal god YAHVEH distinguished from Bel, and Chemosh, and Dagon, and Shamash, and the dozens of "gods of the nations". And this the pious translators, foisting their fraud on us, sought to hide, giving names to all the "other gods," but suppressing a name for the Hebrew deity, who as "the Lord," or "the Lord God," was high and unique, "a god above all gods," -the one and only true God-through the use of a tetragrammaton. But yet a more malicious and evil-intentioned deception, is that the name of the Yahve was concealed by false translation for the deliberate purpose of forging the whole Hebrew texts, as translated, into a semblance of harmony with the false declaration of Exodus 6:3, that "by my name YAHVEH was I not know unto them." Search as one may, outside Exodus 6:3, the god-name YAHVEH (Jehovah) is never to be found in the translations, except in Psalm 78:18, and Isaiah 12:2 and 26:4. (But they are irrelevant for this discussion because those passages were written well after the original 5 books were forged.) The false translations thus "make truth to be a liar," the lie of Exodus 6:3 to seem the truth; and a tribal god among a hundred neighbor and competitive gods to be the nameless One Lord God of the Universe. “ 2. Second point I mentioned was the utter destruction of the ideea of transcendental initiation by its replacement with the ceremony of baptizing as the means to attain the heavens (by the way, no idea about the spiritual world). 3. The myth of the first man Adam, an utter lie, vigorously propagated everywhere. I don’t think that the Lord wants all this twisting of the truth. Only people driven by material interestse, are twisting the words of the Lord given through guru-parampara. If someone has something to say against the evidence I present it, please bring the evidence, but only using the tactic of diverting the discussion, followed by personal attack on the “opponent of debate” one proves that one follows a demoniac nature, more or less conscious. By the way, “ followed by personal attack on the “opponent of debate”” , thank you for the advice to better chant more or more and better… but how can you chant better if you don’t follow “siddhanta balya citte na koro alas / iha hoite krsna lage sudrida manas” This is deceitfulness, as I said it before. Remain factual. We debate principles in a forum, not persons.

Jaiva Dharma Prameya Jiva Tattva Ch 15 VrajanAtha: The spiritual rays of the transcendental KRSNa-sun and the spiritual atoms within those rays are non-different from the sun, yet at the same time they are eternally different from it. How can both these facts be true simultaneously? BAbAji: In the material world, when one object is produced from another, either the product is completely different from its source, or else it remains a part of it. This is the nature of material objects. ... However, the nature of cid-vastu is somewhat different. Whatever has manifested from the spiritual sun is simultaneously one with it, and different from it. ... VrajanAtha: If transcendental entities and material objects belong to completely different categories, how can material objects be used as appropriate examples for understanding transcendental entities? BAbAji: There are different categories of material objects, and the paNDitas of the NyAya school consider them eternal. However, there is no such categorical difference between the cit (transcendental) and jaDa (material). I have already said that cit is the only reality, and jDòa is simply its transformation (vikAra). The vikAra is different from the original source, but it is still similar to the pure, original object in many respects. For example, ice is a transformation of water, and it becomes different from water through this transformation, but the two remain similar in many of their qualities, such as coldness. Hot and cold water do not both have the quality of coldness, but their quality of fluidity is the same. Therefore, the transformed object certainly retains some similarity to the pure object. According to this principle, the transcendental (cit) world can be understood to some extent with the help of material examples. Again, by adopting the logic of arundhatI-darSana1, one can use material examples to understand something about the spiritual nature. ArundhatI is a very small star, which is situated close to the VaSiztha star in the SaptaRSi constellation .In order to view it, its location is first determined by looking at a bigger star beside it, then if one looks carefully one can see Arundhati close by.“Similarly, the madhyama-adhikari, although taking help from the senses and the language of the material world in describing the spiritual world, realizes and sees the aprakRta-tattva after having applied BAbAji: The madhyama-adhikArIs take shelter of arundhati-darzana-nyAya, and experience the transcendental pastimes, which are similar to mundane descriptions. And when the uttama-adhikArI bhaktas hear the descriptions of those pastimes, they become absorbed in the rasa of pure transcendental cid-vilAsa, which is above all mundane qualities. The Absolute Truth is aprAkRta-tattva, so how can we educate the jIvas about it without taking help of the principles that I have just described? Can the conditioned jIva understand a subject that renders the voice dumb and stops the working of the mind? There doesn’t appear to be any method of explaining these subjects other than the principle of similarity, and the logic of arundhatI-darzana.

previous post by anadi

If one reads attentively, one will see that many of these and other words of Srila Bhaktivedanta Svami, were addressed to people according their understanding and according circumstances, and entails really no siddhanta, but compromise somehow "for a a better acceptance of Krishna in an alien world, alien to the philosophical percepts (siddhanta) of devotional service (bhakti). Now I see you are using a technic which is described as taught by the demons in the case of an argumentation: You changed the topic (which pertains to the truth about the collection of texts called bible), pretending you respond to the question "pious fraud in the bible" and give a quotation which has nothing to do with the subject. Sorry, I changed radically my opinion about you. Other nice demoniac technics one can use: denigrate the opponent make fun of him bane him exile and kill. Apropo these thechnics, let's see how the paulinic churchianism under the guise of Christianity was imposed to the world, and started with the first christian emperor. "THE fourth century was the turning point in the history of the Western world, the period in which Christianity took the form of a strong political organization. Throttling the old religions, sciences and philosophies, "the Church" arose as a temporal power upon their remains. Constantine, the first Christian Emperor, was the son of the Roman Emperor Constantius and of Helena, the daughter of an inn-keeper. He was a pagan by birth, a devotee of the sun-god Apollo, whose altars Constantine covered with votive offerings, and whose image appeared on the coins of the emperor as his "companion and guardian." Constantine's conversion to Christianity, as the result of a psychic vision, is described by Eusebius, who was his close friend and companion as well as his famous biographer. On the night before his final battle with Maxentius, who had denounced him as a usurper to the throne, Constantine appealed to his own god for help. According to Eusebius, While he was praying with fervent entreaty, a most marvelous sign appeared in the heavens, the account of which, related by any other person, would be difficult of belief. But since the victorious Emperor himself declared it to the writer of this history, and confirmed his statement with an oath, who could hesitate to credit it? He said that when the sun was beginning to decline, he saw with his own eyes the trophy of a Cross of blazing light, with this inscription: "I. H. S. In this sign thou shalt conquer." (Vita Constantin.) On the following night Constantine had another psychic vision. This time the figure of Christ himself appeared, wearing the same cross that Constantine had seen the night before. Constantine declared that on this occasion Christ spoke to him, telling him to place this cross on his battle flag and to march against Maxentius with full assurance of victory. Constantine obeyed, and Maxentius was defeated. In adopting this symbol -- henceforth placed upon the Imperial banner and carried at the head of the army in its conquest for Christ and the Church -- Constantine added two more pagan symbols to Christianity. For the long lance crossed at right angles by a staff was the ancient sign of Osiris, and the letters I. H. S. one of the names of Bacchus. Constantine celebrated his victory over Maxentius by the kiling of the two sons of his adversary. This was followed in orderly succession by the kiling of five members of Constantine's own household and later by the kiling of his own wife and son. Eventually these crimes began to weigh upon his conscience. Although he had been fighting under the banner of Christ for twenty years, he turned to the pagan religions for absolution. He was told that no pagan religion offered absolution for such crimes as his. He then turned to the Christian Church, and was informed that Christian baptism would expiate any crime, irrespective of its magnitude"; (which is a misinterpretation of diksha)- 1. first function of diksha is really to distroy papa (sins) the seeds of sins, papa bija, and the tendency to commit sins, papa kutha. 2. second function of diksha is to give transcendental knowledge, divya jnana...revealed in the "heart" (citta). But Diksha is a process which start with the ceremony of taking initiation and may take uncountable life times. See the definition of Diksha as given by Srila Rupa Gosvami in his book of definitions on abhideya tattva, Sri Bhakti Rasamrita Sindhu. And in describing vaidhi sadhana bhakti Srila Rupa Gosvami says that the first anga of bhakti is guru padda-ashraya (take shelter of the lotus feet of guru) and second anga is to take diksha and shiksa from him - Sri guru diksha-shiksha-adi.