Ayodhya

Ofcourse I still do not fully understand this law of karma. Because there seems to be so much suffering in this world. Recently I saw on tv a small african child with skin and bones suffering greatly. How do we explain this? My heart felt like crying upon seeing this. Is this why?

I would go so far as to say that no theological system on the planet has a sure-fire way of justifying all the suffering in the world, especially that of innocents.

Dear Friends,

 

Kindly go through the below sites.

 

http://www.stephen-knapp.com/was_the_taj_mahal_a_vedic_temple.htm

http://www.caribbeanhindu.com/taj_mahal.htm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A5220

 

Hari Bol,

Sushil

Woh!

That's amazing! I love these forbidden archaeological finds. It's too bad the Indian government won't allow further investigation. Ultimately, it's all in the tourist money. The Taj Mahal, unfortunately for the Hindus is the symbol of India built by a Muslim Sultan.

i want to hear that from u, and 2nd its proven that the whole Universe will collaspse and also proven that the universe is EXPANDING, so tell me who the world came to be?

The idea of the Big Bang has a counterpart called the Big Crunch, in which the amount of matter/energy (Vedic scriptures say both are the same) from which the original "matter ball" (the infitessimally small point of energy) was made of, is exhausted and then buckles in upon itself. An implosion of sorts, or an explosion.

Ultimately, whatever matter was used to create the Universes will continue to exist even after an implosion or explosion, so whatever comes to exist afterwards will use that same matter/energy to begin to expand.

So, to this end, Vedic scripture supports modern science.

Are you talking about the intermediate stage before next birth?

Yes.

Thanks for the additional information, but what do you think specifically about the stages between the next birth?

On another note about Heaven and Hell:

There are a few assumptions that I think should be made clear.

To me, it seems irrational for one to believe in Heaven and not believe in Hell. A good father still loves his children but chastises them to remind them of what they've done wrong.

Even if one does not specifically believe in some physical plane of supreme happiness or celestial planets, good and bad things continue to happen. Even if one does not believe in celestial planets or a burning pit of fire, our good and bad karma creates Heaven and Hell on Earth.

Regardless, we feel the consequences (good or bad) of whatever we do here on Earth.

Seems like it's your heart that is stone.

To show contempt for a person in pain is against every spiritual teachings in every religion of every planet of the world.

Consolation is the only thing one can give.

hello everybody,

 

I am currently in a fierce debate on a Romanian forum at Softpedia.com; I would appreciate any help I can get to defend the authority of Vyasadeva and to prove that zoroastrism is earlier than the Vedas. Also, the greatest problem is that I cannot find a answer to the provoking question: "If Vishnu is so great then why are all the shruti vedas focusing on indra and the others?". For more clarity, I will translate parts of the message I am having difficulty with.

 

"Come on, be serious with this vyasa guy. isn't he the one who "wrote" mahabharata?Or, are there 5000 years-old manuscripts that have survived and I don't know about is? You should do some research on when the Veda was put in writing. You will be surprized! Guaranteed."

 

"And them , what about the internal evidence within the Veda [he is refering to the 4 vedas] What about the linguistic changes [???]? And how do you explain the parallels between the vedic texts and the persian and avestan texts(which can be very precisely dated? How do you explain the fact that if Vishnu is the greatest and the coolest he is a somewhat secondary characted in the Vedas and he barely appears, whereas later in the later vedic literature the other deites almost disappear (not to mention the treaties from Mittani where Indra, Mitra, Varuna are evoked)".

 

"How the heck do you explain that aryans have lived in the cities from the Sindh valley, but there is no urban life mentioned in the Vedas [again, he is refering to the 4 vedas?"

 

 

"On what criteria do you accept the authority of BG/SB translation of prabhupad if you do not know the language? Do you like the cover? Have you ever read a vedic text?"

 

I will not bother to try to convince anybody of anything but this discussion is public and I hate not to be able to defend Prabhupad and the Vaisnava point of view in front of people who are really interested about it[there are some symphatizers of bhakti among the users].

 

I would really be grateful if somebody who has knowledge in these issues, would help me out here

 

Thank you in advance,

 

Hare Krishna

If you still need information about this dharmapurusha, you should Google works on how the Aryan-Invasion Theory has been essentially debunked. The true migration was not from Iran to India, but instead, the other way around.

From Africa, humans moved to India and then from there, they moved in Central Asia, only to move back again. Everything is a theory, obviously, and when scientists find that Hinduism did develop in the Motherland, it will be as such.

Read this:

http://www.hindunet.org/saraswati/AMT.html

All of you sound like sympathetic Christians who are truly sorry for those souls who will not accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour (and thus, go to Hell for all Eternity).

Obviously, nothing will change your viewpoint, but there do exist people who do not believe in a personal God because He/She (take your pick) has not answered prayers, performed miracles, etc.

Because people do not believe in a personal God does not mean they do not want to believe in one. Who wouldn't want to believe in a Father who takes care of us and answers our prayers? The obvious answer is that some people cannot believe because God has not done what scripture has said he would do.

What do you tell a Jewish boy would lived through a concentration camp? That God doesn't love him, or that He has forsaken him? Why didn't He answer that boy's prayers, which clearly had more importance than someone desiring Enlightenment.

Growth was what I had in mind, bija.

I have another random question relating to life after death.

Do we go to both Hell and Heaven as a result of Karma before we are reborn, or is it just Heaven, or what (let us assume this is not an Enlightened soul)?

What do you think the purpose of NDE's is?

And why doesn't it happen to all people?

All this talk of Bhakti and Jnana is fruitless. Life isn't so black and white and people rarely act as such.

To Guruvani:

Srila Prabhupada refers to "Hindu religion" as a hodgepodge of philosophy.

Srila Prabhupada is only one of the many people in this world (past and present) who "knew" he knew "the way." To claim with so much zeal that there is only way does not make you any different than fundamentalist Christians or Muslims.

To condemn demi-god worship is to be ignorant of why people worship demi-god's. Krishna is generalizing when he says, "Those who worship demi-god's worship for material desires." Not everyone does that.

For most western religionists, the idea of Heaven is much more attractive.

I don't believe in Heaven, so yes, the Advaita way does make more sense, but I would not consider myself an Advaitin because I do believe in individuality. And also, just because something is attractive doesn't mean it's right. Not to detract from the philosophy, just putting it out there.

If you want to become a spark of light in the Brahman, then that is your choice.............. a bad choice............... but your choice.

Once again, one of the dumbest responses yet. You don't know for sure which way is right (eventhough you have fiercely made up your mind to believe as such). You just have to keep an open mind.

Only a fool believes there is only one way. With Bhakti must come Jnana, and with Jnana must come Bhakti. Where would you be without the other? By saying that my choice is a bad choice shows your contempt for one path, and thus, one idea that you will have to overcome before ever reaching your "Krishna Consciousness".

Let me say that I would very much prefer spiritual planets and spiritual whatever, but it doesn't seem to me that it exists.

All this talk means nothing for it is what we do that defines us. Chanting "Hare Krishna" means nothing if you haven't helped other people. I sincerely hope you agree with me.

To theist:

You see God never suffers an identity crisis. He never forgets who He is. If anyone has ever forgotten his true identity that is proof he is not God. God does not need to be reminded of who He is. So clearly you and I are not the One Supreme Lord, rather we are minute parts of Him.

I enjoyed the answer, but Jesus did the same. Isn't Jesus the same and equal to Krishna in that regard? Or is he still "just a part"?

Bhakti is that special pure spotless love that is in full bloom when one has gone beyond the desire for liberation which can only be realized once liberation is achieved. Bhakti refers to the eternal activity of the pure self in relationship to the Supreme Self. Not a temporary activity designed to achieve salvation then discarded as taught by the Advaitans- I prefer the Vaisnava explanation.

Realization cannot be without Bhakti and once one is realized, it cannot be discarded, or else that devotee is not realized. How can anyone go to Heaven without forsaking it?

General Conclusion:

By thinking that one way is easier than another or one is more fruitive than another is pure folly. It is only when you truly understand that every way is equal that you can even attain Self-Realization, let alone "Krishna Consciousness" (whatever that is).

Most of you obviously disregard other sages, but hear this:

"The number of paths, the number of ways."

"More are the names of God and infinite are the forms through which He may be approached. In whatever name and form you worship Him, through them you will realize Him."

- Ramakrishna

But of course, you only follow Prabhupada, sorry.

Another question to ponder: (Assume Enlightenment to be the higest state to attain, not Krishna consciousness)

If an atheist achieved Enlightenment, would they still be trapped in samsara?

I really enjoy this since I'm not part of ISKON.

Do you have any longer videos? It seems that it's part of something much larger...

From my experience...not the other way around...first enlightenment then Krsna...no....first Krsna then enlightenment.

Seems like both of us have some soul searching of our own to do...

All things are compliments to Krsna consciousness.

As Krishna Consciousness is compliment to all things. I would agree either way.

Thank you for the scripture you posted. Sri Chaitanya is somewhat of a new concept for me.

Krsna consciousness for me basically means to have Krsna (God) in my consciousness all the time. To think of God constantly. The cause of all causes, whom we are parts and parcels of...

Interesting.

Thanks for your summary. Hopefully, others will report to us what Krishna Consciousness means to them.

It seems Hinduism has more internal problems than I thought.

Yes this is the standard mimpersonalist viewpoint. I accept the Vaisnava explanation myself. When Krishna says worship Me He is saying worship Me. If He wanted to say the impersonal Brahman within He could have easily said that. No need for you to put words in His mouth. You like the Advaita view that's fine. I adhor it which is my choice. But it's nice to have it clarified. We will never agree on Gita so no use trying to discuss it.

The beauty of the Gita is that we can talk about it! Why avoid it completely instead of harboring intellectual debate?

Chapter 2, Verse 12:

Certainly, never at any time, did I not exist, nor you, nor all these kings, and certainly shall we never cease to exist in the future.

If Krishna always existed as well as Arjuna, then what is the difference between Krishna and Arjuna except that Arjuna has not realized for himself, the Imperishable Brahman?

If He wanted to say the impersonal Brahman within He could have easily said that. No need for you to put words in His mouth.

Why doesn't Krishna refer to the Brahman? He does! But he, as well as us, ARE the Brahman, so why should He make the difference?

Yes material desires are material desires. But the real idea of approaching Krishna is that you begin to form a relationship.

Also, what kind of relationship do you have with Krishna? What kind of relationship should I expect if I opted for Krishna Consciousness instead of the Advaita way?

I hope you're not assuming that there is a loss of bhakti because of a word change?

Fallen souls have been finding enlightenment eternally. Are you trying to attach the above assertion to me? That would be a strawman you built yourself.

You have attached the above assertion to yourself. I said nothing of the kind.

Why would rishi's before the time of Krishna be fallen souls (according to you)?

Were they fallen simply because they did not worship Krishna?

Please answer the question instead of avoiding it.

The problem with your viewpoint is your attachment to Krishna, which, is and of itself the wrong way of approaching God. Your retort will no doubt be, "But an attachment to Krishna is better than some other attachment." True, but it is an not an attachment to Krishna that counts, but instead, what he represents (his values, his deeds, etc.). Krishna (the body) died by the way.

But I will never accept the Advaita mis-interpretations of the Gita as being of any value.

You do realize that this is one of the least intellectual statements ever made, don't you? How can any one interpretation be Absolute? How can you, with whatever intellect you have, sit there and claim you are more right than I am?

This seems more of an "misinterpretation" than anything:

"This stage of śānta-rasa can be attained by the impersonalists only when they are in association with pure devotees. Otherwise it is not possible. After Brahman realization, when a liberated soul comes in contact with a pure devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa and submissively accepts the teachings of Lord Kṛṣṇa without misinterpretation, he becomes situated in this neutral stage of devotional service."

To think that members of other sects and other religions cannot attain realization without Krishna is silly, don't you think? Are not Krishna's teachings the same everywhere? How do Shiva's teachings differ from Krishna's?

Thanks bija!

Could you explain what Krishna Consciousness means as opposed to Enlightenment?

Thanks so much drkpp! I hate to bother you again, but could you translate this phrase (which is in Sanskrit) into Devanagari? Thanks in advance

"Satyamev Jayate"

The picture I get is that the Puranas are not consistent in their definition of the Supreme Absolute Truth, so it's pick your Purana and take your chances time.

Picking and choosing is almost as silly as deeming portions of the Bible as Apocryphal. There are hundreds of sages in India's past and present who do not think of Krishna as the ultimate. What happened to the Saptarishi's who may have worshipped Indra? Did they not achieve Enlightenment simply for this reason?

It seems to me that there are multiple ways of looking at the Gita. When Krishna says those who worship me, come to me, he is not saying, "those who worship Krishna", he is saying, those who worship Me (The Brahman). But the Brahman has no diety affiliation (Krishna, Indra, etc.)(I guess this is only the Advaita point of view, which makes oh so much more sense)

You say that those who worship Indra, go to Indra, but what if I use a statue of Indra, but worship him with the Brahman in mind?

You also say that people only worship Indra for material desires. Don't you think worshipping Krishna for material desires is the same as worshipping any other God for material desires? Material desires are the same no matter who stands before you.

Must I remind you that the Rig Veda lionizes Indra more than Krishna? Are we going to completely negate an entire set of stories from a Veda? Do you really believe people before Krishna did not attain Enlightenment? This is pure folly.

It seems to me that some of you don't truly understand the Gita.

Still, no one has answered my question about worshipping other Gods and Goddesses besides avatars of Krishna/Vishnu. If I worship Indra, do I go to Hell for a longer period of time because it generates bad karma?

They are not to be trusted. Conservatives either.

 

The liberals are the abortion on demand proponents, the homosex marriage crew, keep God out of schools and the public square facists, take all guns away from the people(San Francisco just did this).

 

The conservatives have their own evils and hypocrisy.

 

They both kill cows by the billions.

Vegetarians are mostly centered among the Democrats.

If not for the Democrats, we would be singing the Bible in school and all worshipping Jesus according to law. Keeping God out of schools means keeping the Christian God out of schools, and to keep it fair, all Gods.

You didn't reply to my question, Sridas!

You only quoted what I said!

ps As an acrophobic that picture had me clutching my chair and leaning straight back. =:-o

Me too!!!

On my trip to the Eiffel Tower I mustered the strength to actually look down from the top. Absolutely terrifying!

You'll be ostrasized from Iskcon, banned, excommunicated, exiled.

 

No I'm pretty sure Srila Prabhupad will make room for you even if you like Lord Rama.

What about all the other Gods?

What if I create my own Indra diety and worship it because I love him so much (even though I don't have the talent to make one...)?

Guest I am facing a lot of difficulties.My Past is always reminding me.I was not praying to krsna all decisions taken were wrong.My conciousness is tormenting me .I am very afraid and shameful of my previous actions.Please i want to ask Krsna Pardon.

If you are feeling guilty of previous actions, then Krishna is the person to turn to. In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna says:

"Even those who are the worst of sinners only have to meditate on Me (the Brahman) and they become saintly."

Do not be troubled by previous actions and do not live in the past, but instead, show to devotion to the Gods and the Imperishable Brahman will liberate you from all sins.