Ayodhya

Could you post a link to these material artifacts?

We do not pray to idols. Idols are statues, such as the Disc Thrower, or Doryphorus (Greek scultpure). Each statue is God himself. I say to heck with him. You cannot practice your religion without Krishna, Ganesha, Lakshmi or the other Devas in your home. Aftwards, whether or not he wants to place pictures of Jesus is up to him. Religious respect does not mean secularizing the relationship. When you have children, teach them the Hindu lifestyle (prayer in the morning, yoga, meditation) without compromising going to Church. However, this depends on how fanatical your husband is. Are you living together already? If you're not, I'm going to guess that years down the road, whatever respect he may have had, will dwindle. You don't have kids now, so there is no threat to his religion. But when you do, his true colors may come out. Obviously, you are the best judge.

I think we should try and tackle the historicity of the Mahabharata from a more secular standpoint. Dragging God into the picture (however relevent it may be) leaves room for cop-outs.

Four million isn't unreasonable if you consider that the Persian's had an army of 2.5 million when they fought the Greeks at Thermopolyae. And someone definitely edited that Wikipedia article since I last looked at it. 1.7 billion is a ridiculous number. There weren't that many people in the world at that time, let alone in India, meaning the Kshatriyas all in Kurukshetra.

Actually, according to Vyaasa himself, with complimentary calculations, the number of total men on both sides was 4 million. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kurukshetra

In America, I was reading a report on how Christion missionaries cannot/find it extremely difficult to convert Hindus. Why? On college campuses and surrounding areas, there are all sort of Indian culture programs and Hindu Student Federations. Why? Almost all of the Indians in America (my country) are highly educated. Education of the lower castes (I hate using that term)/poor people will ultimately unite Hinduism. Once people do not have to worry about food on their table, they can turn their minds to something else.

You stated that 600 million people were alive during the time of the Mahabharata. There weren't that many people in India at that time alone. Only in the early 1900's did numbers drastically take the turn that it has today.

These are just isolated statements of things with nothing to back them up. Yes, people can say things have happened or will happen, but nothing in the epic says it does. Where in the Mahabharata does it explicitly say that the fighting of Kurukshetra extended into the inhabited ares? You didn't even quote the Mahabharata, and instead, took an outside source.

The idea that Krishna's pastimes with Radha should be higher than the range of human intellect or something so subtle (that we cannot understand it) seem useless to me. Why would sages bother to write something that could not be understood by people? Are not people what make up a religion? To me, the idea that Krishna did not love Radha any differently than you and I seems ultimately more beautiful than elevating their love to something different. Yes, Krishna is the source of all godly affection, but why couldn't he love? Didn't Rama do so? By your definitions, if he is everything, than surely he is the romantic love of every giggling couple in this world. One of the many reasons people disagree with Krishna's base affections for Radha is that he wasn't married to her - and that He is God, afterall. What better way to identify with God than to realize that He too loved?

Technically, the freedom of choice is simultaneously our greatest strength and weakness. Atrocities across the globe are always committed by people who believe, through their reason, that their way is better, or that their thought is better than the one besides them. Not to mention the lack of reason in certain individuals leading them to believe in the wrong path of their leader. Animals have no such problems, as they are continually in harmony with Nature. Humans on the whole, however, do not do so and are more or less parasites, in a pessimistic light. Freedom of choice, then, could be seen as a disastrous aspect of Humanity, leading one to believe that we would be much better off as animals.

Oops, sorry... But I still think you confused him.

Guruvani, I think you confused him. Krishna is an avatar (reincarnation) of Vishnu, one of the Trinity. Vishnu is the Sustainer, Shiva is the Destroyer, and Brahma is the Creator. Vishnu took the form of Krishna on Earth, not Shiva. Yes, Krishna did exist and was real.

Dear Guest, I loved your modern-day retelling of Krishna's pastimes. To think of Radha and Krishna as typical teenagers seems rather odd and at times wrong, but at the same time, closer to me, in that I see this sort of thing all over the place. Thanks!

Thanks to all for information regarding Sri Chaitanya! I still don't understand what Krishna did to Radha. Is it just romantic teasing on both their parts?

Thanks for information about Sri Chaitanya! Actually, Krishna married 16,108 Kshatriya princesses. This could disputed, however, seeing as their is no mention of this in any of the other puranas.

Where did you find all the pictures? Did you just search for Rama, Sita, Radha, Krishna, and Shiva on Google?

Could you kindly explain to me who Sri Chaitanya is? I have never heard of him. I don't understand this. Krishna makes no mention of Vrindavana and says that if a woman leaves her husband, she will not be able to attain the heavenly planets (Swarga). I have no qualms with this, however, why should chaste men be able to marry again after leaving their bad wives, but chaste women be punished for leaving bad men? What did Krishna do to Radha besides leave her?

Sounds good, but as soon as there is trouble, watch the chastity and faithfulness of both male and females take a nosedive out the nearest window. Haven't seen it yet - just wait!

I was not advocating changing scripture, but to say that a man has every right a woman doesn't sounds like chauvinism. You have to remember the context in which this was spoken - the time period and who was speaking. In India today, this sort of attitude is what dampens the growth of the economy. China's growth can be strongly linked to its education of its women. Wouldn't you agree that a man should be faithful to his wife as well, despite her situation?

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> In this way, Krsna explained the duty of a woman. He also stressed the point of serving the husband: "Even if he is not of very good character, or even if he is not very rich or fortunate or even if he is old or invalid on account of continued diseases, whatever her husband's condition, a woman should not divorce her husband if she actually desires to be elevated to the higher planetary systems after leaving this body. Besides that, it is considered abominable in society if a woman is unfaithful and goes searching for another man. Such habits will deter a woman from being elevated to the heavenly planets, and the results of such habits are very degrading. A married woman should not search for a paramour, for this is not sanctioned by the Vedic principles of life. If you think that you are very much attached to Me and you want My association, I advise you not to personally try to enjoy Me. It is better for you to go home, simply talk about Me, think of Me, and by this process of constantly remembering Me and chanting My names, you will surely be elevated to the spiritual platform. There is no need to stand near Me. Please go back home." The instruction given herein by the Supreme Personality of Godhead to the gopis was not at all sarcastic. Such instructions should be taken very seriously by all honest women. The chastity of women is specifically stressed herein by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Therefore this principle should be followed by any serious woman who wants to be elevated to a higher status of life. Krsna is the center of all affection for all living creatures. When this affection is developed for Krsna, then one surpasses and transcends all Vedic injunctions. This was possible for the gopis because they saw Krsna face to face. This is not possible for any women in the conditioned state. </td> </tr> </tbody></table> <!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --> Take this passage and replace every instance of 'woman' with 'man' and I would find it just as suitable and in fact, necessary. Perhaps the society assumed men to be of a higher continence, but I can guarantee you that whatever differences there were between men and women have now vanished. To stay true to your spouse should be applied to both the sexes. Thankfully, this is very much in effect today.

ISKON needs to resume their teachings in India. I realize Srila Prabhuda decided to focus on the West, but if their teachings are so effective, why not return to the Motherland? Sanatana Dharma has never had a strong need for conversion because the entire country had always been Hindu, but now with this globalization, we need to be ready to defend our religion. But even that sounds fanatical, and smells somewhat like out-fanatacizing the fanatics. However, I can't imagine that Christian schools teach the Bible in school. How is that even legal?

How were innocents killed at Kurukshetra? It was a designated battlefield where all the rules of war were followed until Jayadratha killed Abhimanyu.

If Krishna is God, why couldn't He remember the Bhagavad Gita and tell Arjuna again?

There should not be a necessity to convert anyone. To me, religious conversion is an act of mental violence that creates a sense of fear in people, which decreases free thought, and creates gaps between religions. Obviously, there are exceptions where people simply feel more comfortable worshipping one way or another.

Think of Africa and its inhabitants who do not have easy access to edible vegetation. Would it be right to condemn them, who eat out of necessity? And what about Rama in the Dandaka jungle? How does a warrior stay at the peak of his physical state without eating meat?