cbrahma

Not just u buddy,no one likes suffering,atleast for themselves,what pleasure is there in GOLOKA?

 

What are Radha and Krishna doing in GOLOKA?

 

What qualities you need to go to GOLOKA?

 

Where is GOLOKA?

 

How do you know there is no suffering in GOLOKA?

Why do the adminstrators put up with this wacko?

Im crazy for believing someone might have created the world but ur not crazy for expecting to go dance in GOLOKA when u dont even know it exists,wow what a logic

 

And how did u come to the enlightment this is age of quarell mr Radhey radhey,so is this why ur quarelling with me?So u cant prove GOLOKA exists?Am i right?

 

I am here to see if there is proof,if there is then i would love to go there myself,maybe if i start posting like i saw Krishna dancing with his gopis thru a telescope from here then maybe i can become popular...then i wont be crazy,i will be a believer.

Get help. You are totally incoherent.

I believe in god because someone might have created the world so that person is GOD.But yes i havent seen him so i cant say i am going to dance with him after i die and he did this he did that to so and so.

 

Im not mocking anyone,i am here to find if there is proof so that i can believe,im searching but i havent found,if u seem to have found then u show it or else keep searching,ur story with no proof mocks itself and not me,u r doing it to urself,not me.

 

Anyone can write books and create characters,if ur going to believe in them dont u think they should show themselves at some point to u?

Whereas ur saying so based on some book written some years ago.

 

How can u go serve Radha and Krishna when u dont even know where they live?

Even if they live somewhere they dont seem to want u now,what is the guarantee they may want u in future,why do u want to serve them when ur not welcome to be there now?

 

How can u prove Krishnas existence,because seriously if there is someone like that now even i might love to know and what benefit does he give u?

IF u just want to be someones slave then there r lot of people who might use ur service...

 

Im not judging anyone,i am just asking questions,u dont have to judge me,call me aethist or anything,but the onus is on those who claim something exists to prove it does,or else they r cheating themselves and others.

 

When ur a child ur mother tells u the moon is there for ur taking if u finish ur food(u mean any kid,this is just a example)

So do u think the moonis going to come to u?

Sameway stories like Jesus healing the blind or Krishna lifting the govardan in his pinky are stories,if he shows it now then i will believe,that makes me a curious person and not a mocker?

 

I didnt insult Rama,i said based on the Epic he was a Avatar,a man who died like any man and who had flaws,again that is only if he existed,i believe in Visnu Shiva because ive been told to when i grew up,maybe they r alive or maybe not who knows,but if u say ur going to dance with him in GOLOKA then that is a bit funny dont u think.

 

Thats like believing tomorrow we will wake up,we may wake up or we may not,same way visnu maybe there or maybe not,but ur saying ur going to serve someone when u dont even know how that might feel or how that is better thanall pleasures...

 

So my belief is just a optimistic thinking,just to cling onto something,but u all seem to know for sure and its u all Rama devotees who started judging people who criticised him,so u must be ready for the facts(if he existed and if he did those cowardly acts)to be put in front of u.

 

If u want to be a yes man for Rama go ahead,but dont judge people who question him if ur not ready to give proof of his existence,people criticise thinking he was a man and they r right until u prove otherwise

You are crazy. A crazy Hindu.

Why should u have blind faith without questioning something just for the sake of Temptation and fear?

 

How do u know Rama was a avatar and not just a man like u and me?

How did he incarnate again?u mean as Krishna and die again for his killing of Vaali?

How can any do gooder or a thug type person just cause he has power and conquered be called Avatar or GOD when he suffers a death,and has no power this day,dont u think there has to be any use in praying these people in day to day life?

Do u get ur food water and shelter just by chanting their name or going to church or a mosque?If not then whats the point in the so called faith?

Are you seriously questioning the status of an avatar that is Visnu-tattva.

Are you insane?

The sense I get about Cbrahma is that he is a sincere soul and has great admiration for Srila Prabhupada but apparently he suffered first hand some of the grossness that occured in Iskcon or witnessed it firsthand and maybe that has caused some trauma or something but that is understandable in my opinion. That is merely my speculation but I have enjoyed Cbrahmas contributions to this forum but that doesn't mean I am in his "camp" just because I can see goodness in Cbrahma.

I will not get into an oblique argument with a self-professed Vaisnava who I've put on ignore. Suffice it to say politics is Beggar's life blood which is why he operates on making personal attacks. His position is indefensible since he tries to justify the GBC and the Math which are currently at war. Of course he needs to defend GBC because Sridhara was consulted by them initially during the zonal acarya fiasco. That whole debacle was exposed on one of these threads.

It's really very funny considering how rabid he gets in defense of both.

What he doesn't realize is that his behaviour discredits his spiritual claims (Vaisnavas don't get involved in politics because they are supposed to humble LOL) and his fallacies discredit his philosophical arguments.

If there is one thing I have learned about Krishna Conscious people it consists of a bunch of different groups calling each other "shams" and "bogus". That stuff sure is tossed around a lot.

I have put Beggar on ignore, but his particular way of expediting an argument by labelling somebody as belonging to a group or whatever label (Hare Christians) is a fallacy called 'ad hominem' and doesn't deserve acknowledgment.

Noticeably one has defer to these self-professed Vaisnavas who have no problem questioning or criticizing a senior Vaisnava - that is Srila Prabhupada. It is really guru politics at its worst.

To AMariner & Co.

 

 

I was meant to left this thread already. But because you mentioned "my guru" I have to clarify.

 

My Guru has nothing to do with my post. My post was practically about the realizations of my Gurubhai, which indirectly of course came from his direct association with our guru.

 

The BIG O! Aparadha! Quite expected from your group. When you reach the dead end as you can not find support from shastra and other sadhus , you invoke the aparadha defence.

 

Radhe Radhe

There is no 'dead end'. That is wishful thinking.

When you can't produce the proper evidence or do so whimsically that invocation is valid.

AMariner: Ok fine you think Prabhupada is wrong about Jesus that is your viewpoint but the body of evidence suggests that Prabhupada refered to Jesus as a Saktyavesa avatara and Srila Prabhupada has a lot of respect in Gaudiya Vaisnavism so you should at least take that into account in your objective analysis of things instead of trying to say people are merely being sentimental.

 

Gvism is about shastra, guru, sadhu. They should reconcile.

I have nothing more to say. I have to do japa. Have you done japa yet?

 

Radhe Radhe

Japa after committing Vaisnava apharada. Nice.

The problem with you, Ancient Mariner and your cohorts is that, if anyone gives an objective look (meaning cross-referencing backing from sources to prove a position) on a certain topic, you will come back with your sentimentalism attack that one is disrespecting Srila Prabhupad.

 

 

The problem is that there is always some elusive sastra that is referred to but never quoted. Once a sastra is given from say Brahma Samhita, then the entire sastra is discredited as not being accepted by 'most'. etc...

and so it goes... hopscotching and sidestepping.

Correct. But to be fair, nobody's suggesting that, except the OP.

Apparently your reading comprehension needs some work.

LOL. If you take a look at audarya forum, you'll find that most posts have little or no relevance to the threads at all. I am simply continuing the trend. Anyway, I take it you're incapable of answering, which is why you're dodging it.

It is obvious the forum is not very closely managed but off topicality has also been mentioned in several cases. New threads have been developed and other threads merged by administrators for that very reason. You can assume whatever you like. I really don't care. It seems the only thing you do well. I am tired of repeating myself. Your obtuseness is invincible.

What exactly is the point being made on this thread. That Krsna is not Bhagavan? That is absurd. One would have to toss out the Bhagavad Gita and the Bhagavatam to make that stick and even then there are sastras that would cause embarrasment.

Cbrahma, answer with a yes or no. Do you or do you not believe in Christ Loka? Don't evade this, don't change the subject.

How did this become the subject? And what is the relevance? Do you have any idea what the topic of this thread is? If you have a bone to pick about what was said on another thread then address it there, or start a new one. In other forums, more strictly managed, you would be warned and blocked for trying to continue an argument across threads. I refuse to engage in a global argument regardless of what you think that proves.

Sticking to the topic and demanding relevance as I've said before is not evasion.

And once again, CBrahma - the greatest dodger of the 21st century - avoided the explicit quote from Sanatana Goswami on the definition of a Vaishnava which is different from the definition that Prabhupada made up to pull in Jesus & Christians.

 

You ought to be play dodgeball man. Dodge, duck, dive, dip and dodge.

 

Cheers

Being logical and on topic is not a dodge.

In your little mind you have grasped at a non-existent straw and think you have somehow won some kind of victory. Dream on. It's off topic and you are arguing across threads all frustrated with the proverbial hair up your orifice. If you want to discredit Prabhupada start that thread and we'll discuss it.

I can go silent as I do not have any pending questions to answer. Not the same with you as you made some tall claims and now that you have been asked to walk your talk, you are on the run.

 

 

 

He contradicted Sanatan Goswami on the Vaishnava definition - something that you have constantly dodged. Nor can he pull things like "Christ-loka" out of his hat. Sai Baba's devotees make claims about their Guru which do not contradict scripture, but not found in scripture either (just like Prabhupada's Christ Loka). Why do you have a problem with Sai Baba then?

 

I want to say - Walk your talk, CBrahma but then we know you cannot. You have run out of substance, but apparently not out of steam yet.

 

Cheers

Constantly dodged? It has hardly been discussed. What claim are you challenging that you have deliberately misconstrued one more time?

You are just spouting assumptions and misinterpretation from another unrelated argument. It's off topic at this point. I don't need to address it in this context whatever you imagine you have proven.

I don't think that was TB's question.

 

Since you claimed that *all* of Prabhupada's statements are supported by scripture, you are being challenged on this point to present scriptural evidence of "Christ-loka". You cannot claim to not believe in Chirst-loka as Prabhupada is the one who told you folks about it. If you claim to be his follower. but refuse to believe in Christ-loka, then you are guilty of the very problem you are accusing Kulapavana of.

 

And earlier, I notice you claimed all GV acharyas say the same thing and when presented with a quote from Sanatana Goswami which clearly is different from Prabhupada's view [on who is a Vaishnava]. you have gone silent on the topic. Does that mean you accept the inconsistency? I suppose that would be too much to hope for...but you never know.

 

Cheers

I'm not about to start up every thread and discuss all your straw man misinterpretations I made in this or that context. I don't need to. The topic of this thread has to do with Vaisnava gods being targeted. Do you have anything to contribute. You have gone silent for a lot longer.

There was no question. It was all ad hominem presupposition. After all, without knowledge what other tactic is there? Nothing Prabhupada says contradicts scripture. Do you contend that he does? Nothing I believe depends on Christ loka nor am I aware of Prabuhpada making statements in that regard. I can challenge any guru in the same way, expecting his disciples to support every single statement as being found in sastra.

Neither sastra , nor guru stand alone. They are interdependant.

This is exactly how people like SaiBaba get away,by calling all the nonbelievers as fools and people in Maaya

 

Saibaba tells us he also came from above in a Transcendental form and is supreme,so are we going to accept that as well?

If Saibaba tells us he is god then he has to prove it. Can he lift Govardhana Hill with one finger? Can he exhale universes from his pores? He he subject to birth death old age and disease?

That's why sastra needs the support of guru and sadhu.

Is it not the same old arrogance again?

 

Christians missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point.

Muslims missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point.

Hindus missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point.

 

Ultimately Hare Krishnas have got everything right. These who differ have got it wrong. Plain and Simple.

 

I am not as baffled by this arrogance as I am at the nonsense value of such an attitude towards religion.

The point is that Vaisnavas are not just 'Hare Krsnas'. Siva is a Vaisnava. Is he a 'Hare Krsna'. That's really missing the point.

Why don't you just answer this question for our benefit? Do you or do you not believe in Christ loka? If you do, please provide shruti pramANa. Thank you.

It wasn't a question. It was an assumption. I don't have to 'believe' in Christ loka to know that Christianity fits under the umbrella of Vaisnavism.

The same old hypocrisy and denial.

 

Originally Posted by cbrahma

The acaryas have every support from scripture. What is your scriptural reference to prove otherwise?

 

My Response

Calling your bluff....which scripture mentions christ-loka? If you cannot produce evidence then I suggest you keep silent and stop your long drawn nonsense on this forum.

In your fevered imagination. I answered your ridiculous accusation and all you are capable of is making groundless wholesale insults. Get a life.

Calling your bluff....which scripture mentions christ-loka? If you cannot produce evidence then I suggest you keep silent and stop your long drawn nonsense on this forum.

You'd probably take the same tone with Prabhupada. I didn't mention christ-loka so stop speculating nonsense.

and Islam IS interchangeable with Vaisnavism?

 

There is FAR, FAR less difference between the cult of Lord Vishnu and the cult of Lord Shiva than between Vaishnavism and the Abrahamic religions. And that is based on opinions of most Vedic scholars, regardless of their afiliation.

What is it with you Math guys, your logical inference skills are zero.

Where did I imply interchangeability?

I don't dispute that calling a thief a thief is proper and not faultfinding in it's proper context. This means that if one discovers a thief in the act of thievery then one may alert others so that they may not themselves be victimized. But this does not mean that one has license to obsess about the faults of thieves or prostitutes as ones principle focus or occupation. Of course there is the story of the brahmana and the prostitute:

I will object as long as there will be obssessive cover up. Admit the gross fault and I am done.

I don't believe that any bonafide guru/sadhu will give anyone a license for obsessive faultfinding despite what the GBC, the KGB or the CIA has done.

 

 

 

The teachings of "the holy teachers in the strict disciplic succession" is to give up faultfinding not embrace it. Krsna Consciousness is not a brand of politics.

Gosh. That's the one trick pony that has enabled the corruption in ISKCON to go on for so long. Calling a murderer a murderer is not fault finding. Prabhupada always spoke the truth however unpalatable. The obsession is the cover up. He attacked bogus gurus and bogus teachers all the time. Do you need examples?

In your mind, theist's mind and the three gaudiya acharyas with no support from scripture. That is five people in total...five people in delusion.

 

Sri Vaishnavas, Madhva Vaishnavas and other Gauidya Vaihnavas do not think so. They follow a more sensible approach.

Who are these other Gaudiya Vaisnavas of which you speak who contradict the acaryas in disciplic succession?

The acaryas have every support from scripture. What is your scriptural reference to prove otherwise?