brajeshwara das

Dear qHari, dandavat pranam,

 

This idea has already been refuted.

The mercy of Krihsna has nothing to do with rewarding. It is always there available.

Only we are blind to see it.

So we have to cure our desease. The cure - process is called sadhana.

The doctor cures our disease. We are dependent on the mercy of the Vaisnavas. We don't cure ourselves. We allow ourselves to be cured, we have that free will to do so, but without the mercy of Sri Guru we cannot do it alone. Paramatma is sitting in our hearts, but we are not Paramatma.

Dear brajeshwara, dandavat pranam,

 

The more you qualify, the more you are feeling disqualified.

Yes anandi. But this emphasis you are putting on qualification can be dangerous for us kanishtas. We start thinking 'I need to be qualified...I am becoming qualified...I am qualified!'. And again, even though any qualification, if it is the Lord's will we are denied entrance, so be it. We can't force our way in, but are allowed. It ultimately comes from Him.

brajeshwara prabhu...good thoughts, thank you.

 

However, it is clear that this person is not here to share mercy, but to destroy and convert.

 

I stand by my previous statements.

So were Jagai and Madhai, even worse they were drunkards and barbarous, but through the great mercy of Nityananda Prabhu they received Mahaprabhu's mercy. We need to do the same if we wish to receive the mercy ourselves.

My understanding is the deep feeling of disqualification, that humility, is the qualification. So this whole debate is kind of strange, as we understand no qualification is qualification. Through our surrender and the grace of the Lord we are raised up, but not through some feeling of qualification. Feeling qualified disqualifies us. We can't make a payment to enter that domain as Theist said previously. But even so, even if we are qualified, if Krsna wants he can cast us into hell no matter what, that is His perogotive. There are no rules He must follow that say He needs to do this or that. He's an autocrat. It is ultimately through His mercy that we are allowed entrance.

Which is the way I try to conduct my dealings with others. However, this person is clearly here to proselytize and denigrate, not engage in spiritual dialogue. Therefore, firm correction is in order.

Firm correction is in order within our own hearts, see this as a test of our tolerance if you like. What is it to be tolerant if there is nothing to tolerate? And know that the intention of the original poster is to share the mercy of the Lord, even if it is not properly understood by him. That is what we all want, to enter into that service relationship and be a conduit for mercy. So the desire to post here is an honorable one, to be respected, and we should show that original poster some affection and encouragement, while letting him know there is mercy here to be had, and hopefully he will learn something from Lord Caitanya and become more tolerant, humble, and give honor to others.

I used to be a Deadhead and we used to put one finger in the air and walk around looking for our 'miricle ticket' into the show. At the time it was an extremely mystical experience for me and it is the first place I met the devotees, had prasadam, and read about Krsna. Now I still have that one finger poking out of my bead bag looking for that 'miracle' to be allowed entrance into true service life. Funny how life is, huh?

I have the ability to commit offenses without leaving home. I wouldn't want to cause offenses in the Dham with my mundane mentality. The Dham is home to the devotees, and I am only thier aspiring servant. Maybe proximity means focus on the quality of your sadhana and not just try to get physically close. Unless I have service there I'm safer here in California. I was told many times that you don't 'go' to the Dham but you are granted entrance. You may physically be in Vrindavan but your consciousness will determine where you 'really are'. You could be physically in Toledo but if you are a *real* devotee, you will always be in the Dham. Service is there wherever you are, and that is our salvation. I don't know, I'm tired. Forgive my ignorance, it's likely nonsense.

I was wondering whether Bagavad Gita AS IT IS really as it is? Cause the sloka dosen't say that women are not intelligent. But Prabhupad claims says that in his purport. And he claim As it Is!!!This is due to his wife saying she can't give up Tea. but not alll women are the same. There are some who is really spiritual. He have done that to most of his books - Giving his own opinion.

It would be helpful if you reference the purport, otherwise there isn't much to discuss.

Also Srila Prabhupada may be referencing other scripture. As I recall Srimad Bhagavatam also says some things concerning women's intelligence, so I believe there is scriptural basis for his commentary, even if it may not be in the Bhagavad Gita. (I'll have to look that up) Again, remember transmigration of souls is based on the jiva's consciousness and that would be manifest in the sort of body you receive.

...be tolerant, humble, and give honor to others... so simple but so hard to do. Dayal Nityananda, Gaura Haribol.

I found this: Chaitanya Charitamrta A.L. ch. 7, purport of verses 32 and 38. "...since both boys and girls are being trained to become preachers those girls are not ordinary girls but are as good as their brothers who are preaching Krishna Consciousness. Therefore to engage both boys and girls in fully transcendental activities is a policy intended to spread the Krishna Consciousness movement... The results of this are wonderful. Both men and women are preaching the gospel of Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and Lord Krishna with redoubled strength."

It may indeed say women are less intelligent, meaning women who haven't taken to spiritual life. I know this may be hard to accept but if you understand that we get the bodies we have depending on our conditioning and attachments, on our consciousness, you can see there will be general tendencies for each sex. Men are generally more violent, for example. Who would deny that?

That would be off the topic at hand, but I don't know As It Is so well. I have Srila Sridhar Maharaj's version.

ok ananda, you go ahead and climb that staircase, it's raining mercy over here. Sure, we need to learn to hold out our hands, make a cup and receive it as best we can, but there is no doubt it is falling on our heads. There is no arguing that we all need to become proper receivers, but mercy doesn't seek a qualification. I think it is the Bible that says the sun rises on saint and sinner alike. Jagai and Madhai received the Lords mercy not by searching for it but insulting it. Go figure, causeless mercy is causeless.

One is qualified for justice.

 

Mercy means getting that for which you are not qualified, or maybe not getting what you really deserve.

 

Otherwise, why call it mercy?

 

Ask guru.

Lord Caitanya compells us to be tolerant, humble, and give honor to others. Even though we know the intentions of the original poster, shouldn't we take the high road, showing what our faith has taught us, and try and make something that may start off as a negative thing into a positive thing? I see no harm in it. The environment is friendly.

The Catur-Sloki of Srimad Bhagavad Gita start at 10.8.

This is my 108th post, I thought it deserved it's own thread, and maybe just discuss all the times you see 108 throughout the day.

I just saw today that the new MacBooks are 1.08 inches thick. Now I want one.

The sales VP at my company's extension is 108 and I always think of Krsna every time I call his line. I probably wouldn't otherwise.

Anyway, excuse my nonsense, it's just a bit of fun.

Haribol prabhu. I totally understand your dilemma, and it is actually quite frequently discussed. The main feeling about inattentive chanting is simply that it's better than no chanting at all. It is said that "Even inattentive chanting is better than vibrating Maya’s glories, and will help lead us on to greater degrees of acceptance and pleasure in the chanting, especially if we are indeed chanting our daily 16 nicely also. Even inattentive chanting is better than a void!"

 

So although inattentive chanting is one of the ten offenses that can be made while chanting, chanting while driving is better than allowing ourselves to slip back into Maya's trap. Also, Srila Prabhupada wrote that chanting can be done anywhere, at any time, and it will be beneficial. He recommended to always have the holy name on our lips, no matter what our other activities were.

 

"Even by chanting the Holy Name, not even fully purely, one can be freed from all sinful effects."

I totally agree except that I don't think it should be done on the japa while driving. I'll listen to kirtans and lectures and chant while driving, but chanting on our malas are service to our Gurudeva, and it seems to me we should try to the best of our ability to do that service nicely. For many of us this is one of the few direct orders we have received, so it seems especially troubling to me. Anyway, not really a big deal for me, I was just wondering what the bottom line was. Hare Krishna!

Devotees, on this forum you find that just about once a month a Christian believer comes along and makes a statement to the effect that Jesus is Lord, the Bible is THE word of God, and that everybody in the world should believe in Christianity. Because if you don't then you will go to hell.

 

Some devotees here like to be involved in a discussion with the visitor Christians, and inevitably it comes to the point where the Christian visitor will start saying "if you accept the Bible, then you must accept..." -- which they follow with a few statements about professing allegiance to Jesus and so forth.

 

What amazes me is that so many devotees accept this Bible as a genuine scripture. The Bible itself is a perfect testament to the shocking things that have been done by "Gods's chosen People", who were supposedly acting according to "God's plan" when they committed dozens of acts of genocide and other acts of barbarism in the so-called Holy Land.

 

Our Guru, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur, was scathing in his criticism of the religions of the Bible and their imaginary stories of Adam and Eve and Satan, the Messiah myth, and so forth.

 

Why is it that so many devotees feel so much empathy with Christianity and the fact Testaments of the Bible which was created by servants of a Roman Emporer, three hundred years after Jesus Died. Yes he DIED. It is a a fact.

 

Why do devotees ignore the obvious fact that the Christian religion borrowed much of its' myth from the religion of Mithraism. For the Mitharaism religion also has a Hero born of a virgin, twelve apostles, death by crucifiction and a rising from the dead after three days in a cave. Obviouisly Christianity borrowed much from this older religion of Mithraism. So why do devotees give so much credence to this fake religion of Christianity?

I like the sermon on the Mount and parables of Jesus. I used to only read what apparently came from Jesus when I was a kid, which rang so true in my heart. I wouldn't touch the Old Testament or Revelations, and ignored Paul. I took it all with a grain of salt, and didn't accept the ressurection. But Jesus still had a nice message: Love God, love each other, and live in the Kingdom of God. Hare Krishna.

Tolerance is certainly to be practiced by any spiritual person, no matter their religion, but "respect" for "other" religions/traditions/spiritual philosophies, besides their own, is something that Christian (and Muslim) fundamentalists find very hard to do. The reason is: they believe only their religion can save your soul, and if you don't convert within your lifetime, you are eternally damned when you die. Therefore, a "good" Christian (or Muslim) will try to get you to convert from whatever your non-Christian (or Islamic) religion is, before it's too late, and you find your soul damned. Missionary work and trying to save people from what they deem as false religions (Hare Krishna, Buddhist, Sikh, Wicca), is something they feel compelled to do. They can't respect religions which they believe are damning millions of souls to hell.

 

There are mystics and esoterists within Christianity and Islam, that feel differently of course... and can see many paths as leading to the same destination. These people will show respect, and not try to convert others or try to scare them into their sect/belief system. These are also the types one can hold interfaith dialogues with. Generally speaking though, and certainly historically, the 2 major Abrahamic religions, have shown little "respect" for religions besides their own. Sometimes out and out destroying ancient traditions from the face of the earth. Study what happened to the pre-Christian traditions in Europe for instance.. :/

Certainly true enough, but again, I was raised Episcopalian and I never got any heavy preaching against anyone. It was really mellow, I don't know if it was my particular church but they definitely gave me a foundation to grow on, and though I rejected Christianity as my faith of choice, it wasn't because I found them particularly closed minded. So as I agree with much of what you say, I think there is much tolerance (at least there used to be) in many Christian churches. Maybe not theologically, but in common practice.

You know what I really resent is people like you and there have been hundreds before you that place my postion as being one of rejecting the association of saintly person in physical form just because my emphasis is otherwise. I am sick and tired of fools arguing with me that despite my statements otherwise I am anti-sadhu sanga etc. Piss off with that.

 

Our conversation here has ended. Feel free to have the last word.

Hey Theist,

We shouldn't be trying to place anyone else's position anywhere but see our own correctly, I'm sorry if I ever have made you feel like that, you are sincere and honorable in your postings here and I always appreciate your pespective. Please don't let the material energy that we are all swimming in around here bug you out. Right or wrong in whatever discussion, you have a lot to contribute and it is much appreciated. Jaya Gurudeva! (yours, mine, ours, etc)

For what it's worth, Srila Govinda Maharaj recommends to us that we read Srila Sridhar Maharaj's books, so the physically present acharrya says to seek His Guru's association in books as well. I don't know how this fits into the discussion here but anywhow, it is a quote on our Math's homepage that seemed relevant:

"For the spiritual growth of the sincere practitioners it will be best for them to read our Math's publications. Through his own divine perception Srila Guru Maharaj presented the nectar from the Scriptures to us in a most generous, clear and practical way so that we would be able to gain the nourishment contained in them. If we try to understand everything on our own, we will only become confused and misguided."

There are many different sects of Christianity, and some have additional texts and more depth to their teachings, than the comic book teachings we get from the fundamentalist sects (believe like us, or you will burn in hell forever ). Like the Sophian Gnostics.. the Sophian Gnostics are the closest to the dharmic religions (Hinduism/Sikhism/Jainism/Buddhism). The Sophians believe in reincarnation and that all beings can finally be liberated, if not in this lifetime, in future lifetimes. This is their site: sophian.org

 

Some other Christian sects that speak of karma, reincarnation and other topics that show they have more depth to their teachings and spiritual understanding are:

 

rosicrucian.com/

essene.org

 

and to inquirer:

 

There are some Christians that teach that all souls will be

"saved" in the fullness of times, and many verses throughout the canonized Bible that speak of this, see: tentmaker.org for more info, and their forum tentmaker.org/smf/ There are many more sites like this. Google Christian Universalism and Universal Reconciliation.

Sure, and I in no way would try and lump all Christians into one intollerant, close-minded lump. My parents are still Episcopal and are very open minded, though chaste to thier line, as I would expect them to be.

Mahatma Ghandi said "I came to the conclusion long ago … that all religions were true and also that all had some error in them, and whilst I hold by my own, I should hold others as dear as Hinduism. So we can only pray, if we are Hindus, not that a Christian should become a Hindu … But our innermost prayer should be a Hindu should be a better Hindu, a Muslim a better Muslim, a Christian a better Christian."

I don't necessarily agree people shouldn't switch to another faith if their current faith doesn't fully resonate with their heart. I would say being a better anything would be to see the Lord in the other religions as well, with whatever degree of clarity you find there. AT the very least tolerance and respect should exist.

Yes never rejected but also always accepted with the proper understanding in the first place. If one finds they made a mistake it is only natural for them to correct the situation.

Of course.

So (in an attempt to get back on topic), when is Guru to be rejected? If one comes to the realization thier diksha or siksha Guru is no longer (or never was) a conduit of truth from the Lord, then is rejecting them rejecting Guru? I don't think so, because Guru is no longer present there. Isn't Guru the like the light in the bulb, not the bulb? As long as we don't lose faith that the Lord is coming to us in the form of Guru, we are safe. So I believe Guru should never be rejected.

My Gurudeva is Guru because he is accepting the service at His Guru's request. We shouldn't consider ourselves self realized souls but eternally students, and if we are asked to take some service to the Vaisnavas, then we do that. If that it to take the position of Guru we have to accept that. But to think ourselfs qualified is a disqualification. We should try and hear from the servants of our Gurus and as long as we are hearing the same teachings and we have some faith in those devotees, then do we need a 'living' Guru? All I can say from my experience is physically manifest Acharrya helps. That should be the most desirable situation but if you don't have that available you shouldn't look for it artificially in someone who isn't really in that position but is called 'Guru' just so you have a physically present Guru. That would be like drinking whitewash and pretending it is milk, it would be better to fast in that situation IMO. Srila Prabhupada is there in His books, so no worries. It just is harder that way.