Priitaa

I am not offended anymore, nor was it so much on a personal level in the first place. Maybe somewhat because I am not perfect, or possibly because I have a right to my feelings even if they are not vox populi. However, it was more about my spiriutal master, who is perfect and therefore no one has the right to even jokingly criticize. Now with that said, I have too often run into those who think they can speak anything, and everyone 'must' respond bright eyed and bushy tailed, otherwise they are not "spiritual." This is not taking responsibility for what one puts out there. I'm not suggesting to go the other extreme, simply that you can not, or at least have not, owned your contribution in this. As far as answering your question, it has all ready been answered by Thiest. My suspicion is you reject his answer or you wouldn't be saying it had not been answered. All I can do is suggest you read Prabhupada's books for yourself and see they are indeed, pure, and that he is as well. And thanks gH, you have verbalized exactly what I was picking up on.

I am not offended anymore, nor was it so much on a personal level in the first place. Maybe somewhat because I am not perfect, or possibly because I have a right to my feelings even if they are not vox populi. However, it was more about my spiriutal master, who is perfect and therefore no one has the right to even jokingly criticize. Now with that said, I have too often run into those who think they can speak anything, and everyone 'must' respond bright eyed and bushy tailed, otherwise they are not "spiritual." This is not taking responsibility for what one puts out there. I'm not suggesting to go the other extreme, simply that you can not, or at least have not, owned your contribution in this. As far as answering your question, it has all ready been answered by Thiest. My suspicion is you reject his answer or you wouldn't be saying it had not been answered. All I can do is suggest you read Prabhupada's books for yourself and see they are indeed, pure, and that he is as well. And thanks gH, you have verbalized exactly what I was picking up on.

Do NOT make fun of Srila Prabhupada, not in any way, shape or form, or I guarantee you not only will I let into you like a ton of bricks, many on this message board will also. If you dont accept him as your guru thats your business, but he is mine and many others here, so how dare you challenge him, his knowledge, his purity, or whatever else. If you have no faith in him, then what is the purpose of your post but to put him down. If you have a sincere question, I suggest you ask it in that manner (sincerely). Yet I find it foolish for Hindu to argue with deovtees of Prabhupada's Hare Krishna movement when we have much in common, and there are so many Xtians and Muslems you all ready argue with. Please back off, and show respect, before you commit a mad elephant offense due to fault finding with a pure devotee of Krishna.

Do NOT make fun of Srila Prabhupada, not in any way, shape or form, or I guarantee you not only will I let into you like a ton of bricks, many on this message board will also. If you dont accept him as your guru thats your business, but he is mine and many others here, so how dare you challenge him, his knowledge, his purity, or whatever else. If you have no faith in him, then what is the purpose of your post but to put him down. If you have a sincere question, I suggest you ask it in that manner (sincerely). Yet I find it foolish for Hindu to argue with deovtees of Prabhupada's Hare Krishna movement when we have much in common, and there are so many Xtians and Muslems you all ready argue with. Please back off, and show respect, before you commit a mad elephant offense due to fault finding with a pure devotee of Krishna.

No, nature is not God. Nature may inspire some to realize God has created all this, and they start on their path toward God consciousness, but nature is not God. That is why it's called "material" nature, prkriti. However, the "sleep with previous rabbit-wife" comment of the later poster is crude and not the sign of a spirtually minded person.

No, nature is not God. Nature may inspire some to realize God has created all this, and they start on their path toward God consciousness, but nature is not God. That is why it's called "material" nature, prkriti. However, the "sleep with previous rabbit-wife" comment of the later poster is crude and not the sign of a spirtually minded person.

Oh, that's true.

Wtih all due respect, I did not interpret his inquirey as cruel. I thought he was just trying to figure it out. What I was told once, and correct me if I am wrong, is that they do not say the entire word "God" because they cosider Him to be so pure and so potent, that out of humility they do not feel pure enough to say "God." Of course, in Krishna consciousness we understand that the only way to get purified is by chanting Gods Names, but we can respect other paths.

So are you saying that you are not a vegetarian? Are you a Vaisnava? Could you explain to me how you can be a Vaisnava (worship Visnu) and eat meat? How do you offer your food to Him? Really, please explain this to me, as I may be not understanding you.

So are you saying that you are not a vegetarian? Are you a Vaisnava? Could you explain to me how you can be a Vaisnava (worship Visnu) and eat meat? How do you offer your food to Him? Really, please explain this to me, as I may be not understanding you.

This is to be found in Srila Prabhupada's books. He explains how Mohammed was a shaktyavesa avatara, and that he preached to stop the abominations that were going on, therefore elevating the people.

This is to be found in Srila Prabhupada's books. He explains how Mohammed was a shaktyavesa avatara, and that he preached to stop the abominations that were going on, therefore elevating the people.

Sometimes I keep a journal on Word, though other times I don't update it for quite a while. Actually, you are making me think it's time. It is always benficial when I do, and I become sorry that I let it go so long. Gradually, that will reduce and reduce, until it ends. I also have my work that sometimes gets in the way, or eats up the time I would use for journaling. Anyhow, this is an excellent way to increase realization or work out issues within ourselves.

Hi Myra, Well, thank you for the kind words, tho not sure what insights you are looking for. I am just a struggling devotee like anyone else. :-) Simply I have really good resources. ha So anything you want to ask, I can usually look up. It doesn't matter that you live outside the community, one can develop their God consciousness anywhere.

Hi Myra, Well, thank you for the kind words, tho not sure what insights you are looking for. I am just a struggling devotee like anyone else. :-) Simply I have really good resources. ha So anything you want to ask, I can usually look up. It doesn't matter that you live outside the community, one can develop their God consciousness anywhere.

"The all time stupidest thing I have heard in a while was a couple of weeks ago as my co-worker chowed down on a cow flesh sandwich - she looked at me with her mouth full and actually said,"I will not tolerate cruelty to animals!" I had to walk away. " -- Oh my. What illusion they must be under. I became a vegetarian before I became a devotee. And this was at a time (as you may remember too) where initially there was so little informaiton. That is, it was begining to come forward and increase in popularity or info, but there was so much people did not know. Relatives would insist I was not getting enough protein, etc. Ignorance was strong at that time. Whereas these days, there is plenty of knowledge on the topic. I guess I don't understand why now, they don't just give it up.

"The all time stupidest thing I have heard in a while was a couple of weeks ago as my co-worker chowed down on a cow flesh sandwich - she looked at me with her mouth full and actually said,"I will not tolerate cruelty to animals!" I had to walk away. " -- Oh my. What illusion they must be under. I became a vegetarian before I became a devotee. And this was at a time (as you may remember too) where initially there was so little informaiton. That is, it was begining to come forward and increase in popularity or info, but there was so much people did not know. Relatives would insist I was not getting enough protein, etc. Ignorance was strong at that time. Whereas these days, there is plenty of knowledge on the topic. I guess I don't understand why now, they don't just give it up.

WOW To actually think one can stick anything they want in their mouth, murder any creature God created, and it has nothing to do with whether they have had experience of God, is big illusion at best. And to pass the buck and claim that since others haven't "seen" God, it is proof enough for them that food choices do not matter. What an excuse to not control the senses, starting with the tongue. To see God one must follow "ALL" religious instructions, and not evaluate if they are right or wrong according to the advancement or lack of, by other conditioned souls who are on the path but not fully there. No. It should instead be evaluted by what the great saages of the past, or pure deovtees of this age, who HAVE seen God, tell us. Which is, not only should food be vegetarian, but to make it karma free it must be offered with love and devotion to Lord Krishna. And you can't offer meat to Krishna, He will not accept. So that also should make it clear what He wants you to be eating. Most likely, the pro-meat poster on this thread is just attached to the taste and doesn't want to admit a need to give it up in order to make spiriutal advancement. I humbly suggest to all meat eaters out there, if you want to eat meat, do it the way the Vedas instruct. First, don't go to your local supermarket and get it all ready killed, cleaned, and in sterilized plastic wrap with its price tag on it. Instead go kill your own, tear off its fur or whatever crature you pick. Pull out its veins, etc., and do whatever else is physically required to get it into a condition to eat. Oh yes, and it would be wise to follow 'all' of the Vedic injunctions on this. The Vedas instruct that right before we do take its life, we must whisper in its ear: "In this life I am killing you. In your next life, you shall kill me." And that is the real price tag. Lets get real folks. Meat eating is dangerous business.

WOW To actually think one can stick anything they want in their mouth, murder any creature God created, and it has nothing to do with whether they have had experience of God, is big illusion at best. And to pass the buck and claim that since others haven't "seen" God, it is proof enough for them that food choices do not matter. What an excuse to not control the senses, starting with the tongue. To see God one must follow "ALL" religious instructions, and not evaluate if they are right or wrong according to the advancement or lack of, by other conditioned souls who are on the path but not fully there. No. It should instead be evaluted by what the great saages of the past, or pure deovtees of this age, who HAVE seen God, tell us. Which is, not only should food be vegetarian, but to make it karma free it must be offered with love and devotion to Lord Krishna. And you can't offer meat to Krishna, He will not accept. So that also should make it clear what He wants you to be eating. Most likely, the pro-meat poster on this thread is just attached to the taste and doesn't want to admit a need to give it up in order to make spiriutal advancement. I humbly suggest to all meat eaters out there, if you want to eat meat, do it the way the Vedas instruct. First, don't go to your local supermarket and get it all ready killed, cleaned, and in sterilized plastic wrap with its price tag on it. Instead go kill your own, tear off its fur or whatever crature you pick. Pull out its veins, etc., and do whatever else is physically required to get it into a condition to eat. Oh yes, and it would be wise to follow 'all' of the Vedic injunctions on this. The Vedas instruct that right before we do take its life, we must whisper in its ear: "In this life I am killing you. In your next life, you shall kill me." And that is the real price tag. Lets get real folks. Meat eating is dangerous business.

I wasn't going to reply because it seems you have gone beyond needing help, and have crossed the line into fault finding, but I made the mistaken of clicking on this link and reading. :-) ME: "Well, now you are talking about New Vrndavana (NV), and that wasn't even an ISKCON temple, not really. For years ISKCON refused to even put the NV address in BTG, books, etc. Bhaktipada was in charge and he was/is bogus. So of course they had a bad experience! It was not really Prabhupada's temple, or teachings, anymore. I dont deny that this goes on to some degree, sometimes, in other temples, but nothing has ever been as bad as NV!" YOU: "NV was an ISKCON temple when they started going there. It was run by ISKCON devotees before it left ISKCON. The people who dragged it down were originally ISKCON devotees. " Wrong. Your are speaking to soneone who lives In NV right now, lived her for a short time in 1977, and when I lived at other temples, "everyone" knew NV was a problem! You are on the outside looking in. Even when NV was legally under ISKCON'S name, it was a constant worry, how to fix NV! Matter of fact, I did not want to return here, and only after 20 years and the promise that Bhaktipada is not even on the property anymore, did I return. The point is, NV should not be compared to other ISKCON temples, at least not its past. It was a cult. YOU: "My point is that this is a recurring theme. ISKCOn devotees don't follow standards, then they wonder why Hindus don't like coming to their temples, and conclude that the fault is entirely on the Hindoos, calling them mayavadis, karmis, fault-finders, etc. Nevermind their own weird activities." I don't know what ISKCON devotees you are associating with, but you will find what you are lookng for. No one is perfect. I am sure you have your faults as well. I do agree there are ISKCON devotees who don't follow 'our' ISKOCN standards, but I also know many who do. You simply must choose your associaiton wisely. YOU: "It's all nice and good to criticize Smaartha brahmins. But smaartha brahmins, for all their craziness, don't have a 55% divorce rate " ME: "No, they stay in abusive marriages and pass it down from generation to generation that abuse must be accpeted if it manifests, instead of divorce." YOU: "This is nothing more than a racist stereotype." I take offeense that you cal me a racist. If anyone is racist, its a Hindu who has a problem with white ISKCON devotees. And my comment is based in fact, not prejudiced. YOU: "Given the more than 700 million Hindus out there, do you even know 1% of them? " You keep making comments that I dont know this, or I dont know about that, and I'm unaware of yada yada, when in fact I know about these things. So yes, I do know at least 1 % of Hindus. Surprise. And for that mater, more. My teenagers best friend, when we lived at a different temple (as we relocated), was Hindu. But I don't judge who should be my friend by their external body, rather by how they treat me. YOU: "I think not." Exactly my point. You think I know so little. You are speculating. YOU: "ISkcon people blow so many truths out of proportion " So now I'm an ISKCON person and fit in your mold. Who is prejudiced now? YOU: "just to convince everyone that their situation is better or at least no worse. " If you have a problem with certain ISKCON deovtees, or if some have been harsh or unjust toward you, I feel you should go speak to them about it. But do not lump us all in, which it appears you are doing, and continue to do like that. And do not take it out on me. YOU: "If you say you know 100 couples who had an abusive marriage, there is no science in generalizing it to the Hindu population at large, or even the majority of Hindus." It appears you can't stand the truth to come out. Nor did I ever say 100 anything, you did. I have, however, been spoken to by Hindu ladies who confided in me they were most definitely being abused and didn't know what to do. So I am not making this up out of the air. Its hard to face such a truth, I understand. One lady, it was serious abuse. He was hitting her daily, and sometimes bad. She told me, "There is no divorce with Hindus. I dont know what to do." They had a child and it was a mess. I realize this is not always the case, but you need to reazlie it is more often the case than you know or are willing to believe. After all, women are more inclined to confide in other women. Please do not try to blame her either, or indicate it is an isolated incident. But if you want to do the 'traditional' brushing it under the carpet, that Hindus seldom have this problem -- there's nothing I can do about that. Look, all I am saying is it works both ways and you should take the humble position instead of bragging that Hindu divorce rate is so low, just look at us fallen ISKCON devotees. What did you expect? After all, you brought this topic up. YOU: "On the other hand, ISKCON householders do have a 55% divorce rate. This is according to Anuttama das, who was quoted in Hinduism today about 5 years ago, and even admitted to me in person that he did say this. And this goes on even with devotees who stay in the movement, and even though Srila Prabhupada compares divorce to prostitution in his 1st canto purports. " And again, its just cuz westerners that you so much dislike, won't stick around and get beaten or let their sons learn from their fathers they should beat when they marry, or the daughters learn they should take it from their future husbands. Numbers mean nothing, it just means its being dealt with in a different, more hidden method. It is, after all, kali yuga in India (and with Hindus) too. Please stop bragging and let us drop this topic. I probably won't to read your reply because from what I see, many have tried to help you and explain things to you, but since we won't reform to your way of doing things, you keep fault finding. But I hold no hard feelings and if anything, I wish you well. Hare Krishna.

I wasn't going to reply because it seems you have gone beyond needing help, and have crossed the line into fault finding, but I made the mistaken of clicking on this link and reading. :-) ME: "Well, now you are talking about New Vrndavana (NV), and that wasn't even an ISKCON temple, not really. For years ISKCON refused to even put the NV address in BTG, books, etc. Bhaktipada was in charge and he was/is bogus. So of course they had a bad experience! It was not really Prabhupada's temple, or teachings, anymore. I dont deny that this goes on to some degree, sometimes, in other temples, but nothing has ever been as bad as NV!" YOU: "NV was an ISKCON temple when they started going there. It was run by ISKCON devotees before it left ISKCON. The people who dragged it down were originally ISKCON devotees. " Wrong. Your are speaking to soneone who lives In NV right now, lived her for a short time in 1977, and when I lived at other temples, "everyone" knew NV was a problem! You are on the outside looking in. Even when NV was legally under ISKCON'S name, it was a constant worry, how to fix NV! Matter of fact, I did not want to return here, and only after 20 years and the promise that Bhaktipada is not even on the property anymore, did I return. The point is, NV should not be compared to other ISKCON temples, at least not its past. It was a cult. YOU: "My point is that this is a recurring theme. ISKCOn devotees don't follow standards, then they wonder why Hindus don't like coming to their temples, and conclude that the fault is entirely on the Hindoos, calling them mayavadis, karmis, fault-finders, etc. Nevermind their own weird activities." I don't know what ISKCON devotees you are associating with, but you will find what you are lookng for. No one is perfect. I am sure you have your faults as well. I do agree there are ISKCON devotees who don't follow 'our' ISKOCN standards, but I also know many who do. You simply must choose your associaiton wisely. YOU: "It's all nice and good to criticize Smaartha brahmins. But smaartha brahmins, for all their craziness, don't have a 55% divorce rate " ME: "No, they stay in abusive marriages and pass it down from generation to generation that abuse must be accpeted if it manifests, instead of divorce." YOU: "This is nothing more than a racist stereotype." I take offeense that you cal me a racist. If anyone is racist, its a Hindu who has a problem with white ISKCON devotees. And my comment is based in fact, not prejudiced. YOU: "Given the more than 700 million Hindus out there, do you even know 1% of them? " You keep making comments that I dont know this, or I dont know about that, and I'm unaware of yada yada, when in fact I know about these things. So yes, I do know at least 1 % of Hindus. Surprise. And for that mater, more. My teenagers best friend, when we lived at a different temple (as we relocated), was Hindu. But I don't judge who should be my friend by their external body, rather by how they treat me. YOU: "I think not." Exactly my point. You think I know so little. You are speculating. YOU: "ISkcon people blow so many truths out of proportion " So now I'm an ISKCON person and fit in your mold. Who is prejudiced now? YOU: "just to convince everyone that their situation is better or at least no worse. " If you have a problem with certain ISKCON deovtees, or if some have been harsh or unjust toward you, I feel you should go speak to them about it. But do not lump us all in, which it appears you are doing, and continue to do like that. And do not take it out on me. YOU: "If you say you know 100 couples who had an abusive marriage, there is no science in generalizing it to the Hindu population at large, or even the majority of Hindus." It appears you can't stand the truth to come out. Nor did I ever say 100 anything, you did. I have, however, been spoken to by Hindu ladies who confided in me they were most definitely being abused and didn't know what to do. So I am not making this up out of the air. Its hard to face such a truth, I understand. One lady, it was serious abuse. He was hitting her daily, and sometimes bad. She told me, "There is no divorce with Hindus. I dont know what to do." They had a child and it was a mess. I realize this is not always the case, but you need to reazlie it is more often the case than you know or are willing to believe. After all, women are more inclined to confide in other women. Please do not try to blame her either, or indicate it is an isolated incident. But if you want to do the 'traditional' brushing it under the carpet, that Hindus seldom have this problem -- there's nothing I can do about that. Look, all I am saying is it works both ways and you should take the humble position instead of bragging that Hindu divorce rate is so low, just look at us fallen ISKCON devotees. What did you expect? After all, you brought this topic up. YOU: "On the other hand, ISKCON householders do have a 55% divorce rate. This is according to Anuttama das, who was quoted in Hinduism today about 5 years ago, and even admitted to me in person that he did say this. And this goes on even with devotees who stay in the movement, and even though Srila Prabhupada compares divorce to prostitution in his 1st canto purports. " And again, its just cuz westerners that you so much dislike, won't stick around and get beaten or let their sons learn from their fathers they should beat when they marry, or the daughters learn they should take it from their future husbands. Numbers mean nothing, it just means its being dealt with in a different, more hidden method. It is, after all, kali yuga in India (and with Hindus) too. Please stop bragging and let us drop this topic. I probably won't to read your reply because from what I see, many have tried to help you and explain things to you, but since we won't reform to your way of doing things, you keep fault finding. But I hold no hard feelings and if anything, I wish you well. Hare Krishna.

Angekela Thank you for your kind, and sincere reply. I will try to answer your questions as well as I can. And don't worry that your faith is weak. That will change. Regardless of whether I agree or disagree with your choices, it will change merely because you are sincerely looking. The first point I should probably tell you is that I do not practice what fits in the category of "Hinduism." Some who do, also understand Krishna to be God, but others believe Shiva is God, others worship demi-gods such as Durga, and even there are other paths. Whereas what I practice is transcendental Krishna consciousness. More on this later, but thought I should clear that up. And now you have something else to add to your list. /images/graemlins/smile.gif "On the other hand, I am confused about the teachings of Krishna. There is no evident/factual basis of His appearance in this world." Actually there is much evidence (physical and historical) of Krishna's presence in this world. Just that, for whatever reason, the focus has not gone in that direction. It is why I am going to make a web page on the topic, sort of. But it will take months to do, and I also need time for research. Time I dont have. Thats why it will require months. But here is one to start you out with. In India there is physical evidence of the city of Dwarka, where Lord Krishna lived. It tells us in Srimad Bhagavatam that this city ultimately ended up under the water. And guess where they found this city in India? You guessed it. Under the water! Oh, and one that comes to mind are the NASA pictures that appear to be the bridge built by Hauman - a pastime of Lord Rama (an incarnation of Krishna)! They are on this message board, soemwhere. This is just the tip of the ice burg. There is much more! "Unlike Jesus, History of the world is parallel to his existence. In the Bible, there are numerous names of ancient Kings that were mentioned and it is exactly named if we match it is world history. " Glad you pointed this out. In my reasearch I have discovred, for example, many names of Christian or even Jewish lineages have their roots in Sanskrit names. For example, Jew and Yadu dynasty are considered by some to be connected. Purity and proper following are another topic, but the example is there. And when God told Jesus where to find the Promised Land, the names He gave are almost identical, and most are identical, with names of beautiful lands in Kashmir India. Again, this is only the tip of the iceburg and I just haven't had time to do more research. But I plan on it. "I don't have any knowledge about the proof/facts about Hinduism." Well, as touched on above, I do not practice Hinduism. Some who are Hindu know Krishna is God, but others do not. But I can answer most questions about Hindism. To start with it is more of a modern word, at least when we compare it to ancient texts. It is not to be found in any Sanskrit Vedic literatutes and most Hindus will agree here. I have put a web page together trying to explain the difference between Krishna consciousness and Hinduism, which is meant with all due repsect to those Hindus that know who God is. Simply, this questions gets asked over and over, so it's time it gets answered. Difference Between Hinduism & Krishna Consciousness http://www.geocities.com/priitaa108/difference_between_hinduism_kc.htm It should be noted that not all Hindus practice the same thing, believe the same way, even various Hindu culutres are differ from one another. I have done my best to clear it up, but if there are any 'significant' mistakes, any Hindus could politely inform me. Not referring to things they themselves differ over, where one Hindu follows it but they dont. No. Just something "no" Hindu follows. "Does really Hanuman ever lived?" Yes, and still does! /images/graemlins/smile.gif The NASA picture may help in this way too. But his race, highly intelligent moneky species, no longer exists. He is only alive due to his transcendental nature, and he's staying away from kali yuga people, living up in the Himalaya's. "There are also lots of god to be worshipped. My idea is, if we can't please, follow, love with all our hearts only one God, why have more? For God is a jealous God, He don't want His people to praise other non-existent/mind created beings...." God is not jealous, that is a human quality, or lack thereof. However you are correct that there is only One God. Prabhupada clearly explains demi-god worship is for the less intelligent and/or for the materialistic persons who want to recieve some material benefit, so this is who they approach. But God can give anything, so even then, one should approach Krishna with their desires. Better of course, to just worship and serve Him, but everyone has to act according to what they can handle. "I have found a list of characteristics of a False religion. I know this is not 100% true but just as the guide to see if you are in the group... The following statements, compiled by Dr. Michael Langone, editor of Cultic Studies Journal, often characterize manipulative groups." I have also been thinking how I should do some research on what is a cult and what is not. But as of yet, have not. (Though I do know a little.) So my answers will be based more on personal experience and scripture. (1) The group is focused on a living leader to whom members seem to display excessively zealous, unquestioning commitment. A- I agree here, though the exception is when someone as great as Christ, Prabhupada or Mohammed walks the earth, as these are all pure devotees of Krishna. They merely had different assignments or missions from God/Krishna. Although when the pure devotee tells you to do something, you just are so fortunate! But even then, Prabhupada always pointed out how this is a voluntary process, something I suspect some of his followers (not all) seem to have missed or minimize. (2) The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members. A- The word 'preoccupied' is what makes all the difference in the world. There is nothing wrong with brining in new members, and after all, how will others find out about it if on one tells them? But if they are preoccupied thats almost like obsessive addictive behavior, and therein lies the problem. Devotees of Krishna engage in a variety of activies and not just this. Though preaching is an important part of our philosophy, its not the all-in-all. Matter of fact, it is often said that we should focus on ourselves first, try to become more and more Krisna conscious ourselves. Then we can share it better anyway. We also engage in worship, serving and other activites, including serving the devotees. (3) The group is preoccupied with making money. A- I agree 100% here. As we have jokingly said/complained 'Money's the Honey.' :-) (4) Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished. A- Srila Prabhupada encrouaged us to ask, ask, ask. At the end of his classes too, he always had a period of questions or even comments. (5) Mind-numbing techniques (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, debilitating work routines) are used to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s). A- I dont know whether to laugh or cry over this one, because to put meditatoin in the same category as 'mind-numbing' is rahter cult like too. ha That is, its alsmost as if he is saying we must stop any form of connecting with God and instead surrender unto him & his understandings. Just because he cannot see or comprehend what goes on with those who are (genuinely) experiencing something spirutal, invisible and wonderful in a meditative state, he therefore tries to debunk what his material vision is blind to. ha However, when it comes to speaking in tongues or engaging in debiliting work, I will agree with him here. Now, I don't know what denunciation sessions are. Guess I never went through one. ha (6) The leadership dictates sometimes in great detail how members should think, act, and feel (for example: members must get permission from leaders to date, change jobs, get married; leaders may prescribe what types of clothes to wear, where to live, how to discipline children, and so forth). A-What even many devotees don't know is that when it comes to marriage, or who to assciate with (date) for future spouse, this is one area the guru does not have to be involved in. He can be if you want, but scriptures do not say it is a must. Regarding clothes, I almost agree. But if a spiriutal leader (qualified!) is explaining we should not be a show off with our bodies but instead to wear chaste clothes, and these days men are not left out of this category, I have no problem with such an instruction and do not see it as cult-like at all. I know many devotees who prefer devotional clothing, and others who don't. But all dress like ladies and gentlemen. Of course, when going to the temple, most of us wear traditional saree or dhoti, but again, we long ago made a personal choice and have a desire for this. No one is forcing, its what we want. I love sarees! :-) I am going to post this and edit to finish, cuz it looks like my electricity may shut down with the upcoming storm! brb. (7) The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s), and members (for example: the leader is considered the Messiah or an avatar; the group and/or the leader has a special mission to save humanity). A- I see this as mixed. What to do when one actually 'does' bump into the association of a pure devotee or an Avatar? I am not saying there are any current Avatars, just replying to the theory presented. So rather than Dr. Langone expressing it the way he did above in #7, he maybe should first be capable of pointing out "how" to recognize the difference between either an incarnation (Avatar) of God, or how to be able to know (qualities) who is a pure deovtee of God. Since he is not able to do that, I tend to question his motivation. But anyway, the bottom line would be, if someone is following a false prophet or false God, they should know how to recnogize this and from that point, renounce it. If on the other hand it is a bona fide path, I can't imagine why on earth Dr. Michael Langone would want them to cease and desist from saving others, unless he's on a missoin of his own. ha I remember the Jehovah Witnesses coming to my door regularly as a child growing up. All my parents did was shut the lights, pull down the curtains, and phone the nighbors to warn them. :-) They were annoying, but no one called them a cult. They could be, but still, their spiriutal belief should at least be respected. (8) The group has a polarized us- versus-them mentality, which causes conflict with the wider society. A- Again, I see it as mixed. If there is anything I find disrespectful, its when devotees look down their noses at the nondevotee. After all, we were all nondevotees once, unless born in Vrndavana India (Holy Land). Yet, since a person goes out of their way to give up sinful activity, it does change them and help them find their higher self. It will cause them to be different from those who are not trying. But if they loose their humility, well, they should not stop trying, but must realize this is only very first step if they must puff themselvs up in order to continue spiritually. Every soul is child of Krishna. Just that some get the realization (or mercy) sooner than others. (9) The group's leader is not accountable to any authorities as are, for example, military commanders and ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream denominations). A- With the exception of those who fit in the category of a pure deovtee, I agree here. Spiriutal people (monks, etc) are still 'people' and at risk of fall down at any point in time. Matter of fact, what helps them avoid fall down is when they DO have someone to answer up to. So this is good for them, not bad. If they avoid, then look out! But when Jesus walked the earth there was no fear he would fall down. He actually did have the connection with God that not only made him accountable, but also lead to no interest in material life anyhow. Similarly Prabhupada also behaved in the most spiriutal ways. Actually at that time, when he came to America, many gurus were also coming. And they were living in big fancy hotels or in various similar ways, reaping the material benefits of their American disciples. Prabhupada lived with his disciples, he even served them prasadam (food)! (10) The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify means that members would have considered unethical before joining the group (for example: collecting money for bogus charities). A- LOL Sorry, but that hits home. Again, Prabhupadas disciples do not always do what he says. Letter after letter, Prabhupada tells us to be honest in such matters. (11) The leadership induces guilt feelings in members in order to control them. A- I tend to think we (devotees) drag our Xtian and Jewish backgrounds with us into the movement. I have had deovtees try to guilt and shame me into doing this or that, but such methodology cannot be found anywhere in Prabhupadas books, etc. Those who were there, we all know we followed Prabhupada because he INSPIRED us. He brought to us such wonderful, transcendental feelings we never before experienced in our entire life! /images/graemlins/smile.gif (12) Members' subservience to the group causes them to cut ties with family and friends, and to give up personal goals and activities that were of interest before joining the group. A- Again, mixed. After I joined, I phoned my parents weekly, wrote them letters, and visited. Whereas all my friends wrote ME off! (And I thought they were open minded. What a surprise.) Yet even the Catholic church, the nuns for example, must completely renounce all family ties , even friends and personal goals. Of course what Dr. Michael Langone is not accepting is that joining the Catholic church as a nun or monk IS their personal goal. Therefore he is denying them too. ha It seems that anything spiriutal, he fault finds with. Tho not to misunderstand. I do feel we all must look into what is a cult and what is not, and apply it. But everyone who writes about cults (or has a 'position' in their anti-cult 'group' hehe) is not always accurate, tho often some of what they say may be correct, and some is mistaken. (13) Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group. A- Again, that brings me back to the Catholic church idea. If anyone wants to dedicate their life to any religion at all, such committment should not automatically be stuck in a category of 'cult.' That in iteself is cult mentality. But I do agree it should be a voluntary process. Also, in the Krishna consciousnness movement there are different ashramas. If one does not want to give up as much time, or cannot, they can be householders. Householders have independence. Whereas in any religion, Buddhism, any, if one makes the personal choice to fully give their all, they can become monks and do like that. They know what they are getting into. Its not like they made such a choice out of ignorance. If they did, that would be different. In which case I would tell them, "Get an education before making major, life altering choices." Its just common sense really. Tho in this age, many have lost common sense. :-) (14) Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members A- I have yet to see any religion that does not prefer association with others of their own faith. However, it is not restricted to that. Unless one is a monk or nun. Again, they have made a conscious choice to live that type of lifestyle, and I dont think it should be criticized (I know you are not doing this, just that Dr. Michael Langone is). It seems he has used different angles to ask make the same point over and over. But I hope I answered everything well enough. Feel free to ask any questions. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Angekela Thank you for your kind, and sincere reply. I will try to answer your questions as well as I can. And don't worry that your faith is weak. That will change. Regardless of whether I agree or disagree with your choices, it will change merely because you are sincerely looking. The first point I should probably tell you is that I do not practice what fits in the category of "Hinduism." Some who do, also understand Krishna to be God, but others believe Shiva is God, others worship demi-gods such as Durga, and even there are other paths. Whereas what I practice is transcendental Krishna consciousness. More on this later, but thought I should clear that up. And now you have something else to add to your list. /images/graemlins/smile.gif "On the other hand, I am confused about the teachings of Krishna. There is no evident/factual basis of His appearance in this world." Actually there is much evidence (physical and historical) of Krishna's presence in this world. Just that, for whatever reason, the focus has not gone in that direction. It is why I am going to make a web page on the topic, sort of. But it will take months to do, and I also need time for research. Time I dont have. Thats why it will require months. But here is one to start you out with. In India there is physical evidence of the city of Dwarka, where Lord Krishna lived. It tells us in Srimad Bhagavatam that this city ultimately ended up under the water. And guess where they found this city in India? You guessed it. Under the water! Oh, and one that comes to mind are the NASA pictures that appear to be the bridge built by Hauman - a pastime of Lord Rama (an incarnation of Krishna)! They are on this message board, soemwhere. This is just the tip of the ice burg. There is much more! "Unlike Jesus, History of the world is parallel to his existence. In the Bible, there are numerous names of ancient Kings that were mentioned and it is exactly named if we match it is world history. " Glad you pointed this out. In my reasearch I have discovred, for example, many names of Christian or even Jewish lineages have their roots in Sanskrit names. For example, Jew and Yadu dynasty are considered by some to be connected. Purity and proper following are another topic, but the example is there. And when God told Jesus where to find the Promised Land, the names He gave are almost identical, and most are identical, with names of beautiful lands in Kashmir India. Again, this is only the tip of the iceburg and I just haven't had time to do more research. But I plan on it. "I don't have any knowledge about the proof/facts about Hinduism." Well, as touched on above, I do not practice Hinduism. Some who are Hindu know Krishna is God, but others do not. But I can answer most questions about Hindism. To start with it is more of a modern word, at least when we compare it to ancient texts. It is not to be found in any Sanskrit Vedic literatutes and most Hindus will agree here. I have put a web page together trying to explain the difference between Krishna consciousness and Hinduism, which is meant with all due repsect to those Hindus that know who God is. Simply, this questions gets asked over and over, so it's time it gets answered. Difference Between Hinduism & Krishna Consciousness http://www.geocities.com/priitaa108/difference_between_hinduism_kc.htm It should be noted that not all Hindus practice the same thing, believe the same way, even various Hindu culutres are differ from one another. I have done my best to clear it up, but if there are any 'significant' mistakes, any Hindus could politely inform me. Not referring to things they themselves differ over, where one Hindu follows it but they dont. No. Just something "no" Hindu follows. "Does really Hanuman ever lived?" Yes, and still does! /images/graemlins/smile.gif The NASA picture may help in this way too. But his race, highly intelligent moneky species, no longer exists. He is only alive due to his transcendental nature, and he's staying away from kali yuga people, living up in the Himalaya's. "There are also lots of god to be worshipped. My idea is, if we can't please, follow, love with all our hearts only one God, why have more? For God is a jealous God, He don't want His people to praise other non-existent/mind created beings...." God is not jealous, that is a human quality, or lack thereof. However you are correct that there is only One God. Prabhupada clearly explains demi-god worship is for the less intelligent and/or for the materialistic persons who want to recieve some material benefit, so this is who they approach. But God can give anything, so even then, one should approach Krishna with their desires. Better of course, to just worship and serve Him, but everyone has to act according to what they can handle. "I have found a list of characteristics of a False religion. I know this is not 100% true but just as the guide to see if you are in the group... The following statements, compiled by Dr. Michael Langone, editor of Cultic Studies Journal, often characterize manipulative groups." I have also been thinking how I should do some research on what is a cult and what is not. But as of yet, have not. (Though I do know a little.) So my answers will be based more on personal experience and scripture. (1) The group is focused on a living leader to whom members seem to display excessively zealous, unquestioning commitment. A- I agree here, though the exception is when someone as great as Christ, Prabhupada or Mohammed walks the earth, as these are all pure devotees of Krishna. They merely had different assignments or missions from God/Krishna. Although when the pure devotee tells you to do something, you just are so fortunate! But even then, Prabhupada always pointed out how this is a voluntary process, something I suspect some of his followers (not all) seem to have missed or minimize. (2) The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members. A- The word 'preoccupied' is what makes all the difference in the world. There is nothing wrong with brining in new members, and after all, how will others find out about it if on one tells them? But if they are preoccupied thats almost like obsessive addictive behavior, and therein lies the problem. Devotees of Krishna engage in a variety of activies and not just this. Though preaching is an important part of our philosophy, its not the all-in-all. Matter of fact, it is often said that we should focus on ourselves first, try to become more and more Krisna conscious ourselves. Then we can share it better anyway. We also engage in worship, serving and other activites, including serving the devotees. (3) The group is preoccupied with making money. A- I agree 100% here. As we have jokingly said/complained 'Money's the Honey.' :-) (4) Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished. A- Srila Prabhupada encrouaged us to ask, ask, ask. At the end of his classes too, he always had a period of questions or even comments. (5) Mind-numbing techniques (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, debilitating work routines) are used to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s). A- I dont know whether to laugh or cry over this one, because to put meditatoin in the same category as 'mind-numbing' is rahter cult like too. ha That is, its alsmost as if he is saying we must stop any form of connecting with God and instead surrender unto him & his understandings. Just because he cannot see or comprehend what goes on with those who are (genuinely) experiencing something spirutal, invisible and wonderful in a meditative state, he therefore tries to debunk what his material vision is blind to. ha However, when it comes to speaking in tongues or engaging in debiliting work, I will agree with him here. Now, I don't know what denunciation sessions are. Guess I never went through one. ha (6) The leadership dictates sometimes in great detail how members should think, act, and feel (for example: members must get permission from leaders to date, change jobs, get married; leaders may prescribe what types of clothes to wear, where to live, how to discipline children, and so forth). A-What even many devotees don't know is that when it comes to marriage, or who to assciate with (date) for future spouse, this is one area the guru does not have to be involved in. He can be if you want, but scriptures do not say it is a must. Regarding clothes, I almost agree. But if a spiriutal leader (qualified!) is explaining we should not be a show off with our bodies but instead to wear chaste clothes, and these days men are not left out of this category, I have no problem with such an instruction and do not see it as cult-like at all. I know many devotees who prefer devotional clothing, and others who don't. But all dress like ladies and gentlemen. Of course, when going to the temple, most of us wear traditional saree or dhoti, but again, we long ago made a personal choice and have a desire for this. No one is forcing, its what we want. I love sarees! :-) I am going to post this and edit to finish, cuz it looks like my electricity may shut down with the upcoming storm! brb. (7) The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s), and members (for example: the leader is considered the Messiah or an avatar; the group and/or the leader has a special mission to save humanity). A- I see this as mixed. What to do when one actually 'does' bump into the association of a pure devotee or an Avatar? I am not saying there are any current Avatars, just replying to the theory presented. So rather than Dr. Langone expressing it the way he did above in #7, he maybe should first be capable of pointing out "how" to recognize the difference between either an incarnation (Avatar) of God, or how to be able to know (qualities) who is a pure deovtee of God. Since he is not able to do that, I tend to question his motivation. But anyway, the bottom line would be, if someone is following a false prophet or false God, they should know how to recnogize this and from that point, renounce it. If on the other hand it is a bona fide path, I can't imagine why on earth Dr. Michael Langone would want them to cease and desist from saving others, unless he's on a missoin of his own. ha I remember the Jehovah Witnesses coming to my door regularly as a child growing up. All my parents did was shut the lights, pull down the curtains, and phone the nighbors to warn them. :-) They were annoying, but no one called them a cult. They could be, but still, their spiriutal belief should at least be respected. (8) The group has a polarized us- versus-them mentality, which causes conflict with the wider society. A- Again, I see it as mixed. If there is anything I find disrespectful, its when devotees look down their noses at the nondevotee. After all, we were all nondevotees once, unless born in Vrndavana India (Holy Land). Yet, since a person goes out of their way to give up sinful activity, it does change them and help them find their higher self. It will cause them to be different from those who are not trying. But if they loose their humility, well, they should not stop trying, but must realize this is only very first step if they must puff themselvs up in order to continue spiritually. Every soul is child of Krishna. Just that some get the realization (or mercy) sooner than others. (9) The group's leader is not accountable to any authorities as are, for example, military commanders and ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream denominations). A- With the exception of those who fit in the category of a pure deovtee, I agree here. Spiriutal people (monks, etc) are still 'people' and at risk of fall down at any point in time. Matter of fact, what helps them avoid fall down is when they DO have someone to answer up to. So this is good for them, not bad. If they avoid, then look out! But when Jesus walked the earth there was no fear he would fall down. He actually did have the connection with God that not only made him accountable, but also lead to no interest in material life anyhow. Similarly Prabhupada also behaved in the most spiriutal ways. Actually at that time, when he came to America, many gurus were also coming. And they were living in big fancy hotels or in various similar ways, reaping the material benefits of their American disciples. Prabhupada lived with his disciples, he even served them prasadam (food)! (10) The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify means that members would have considered unethical before joining the group (for example: collecting money for bogus charities). A- LOL Sorry, but that hits home. Again, Prabhupadas disciples do not always do what he says. Letter after letter, Prabhupada tells us to be honest in such matters. (11) The leadership induces guilt feelings in members in order to control them. A- I tend to think we (devotees) drag our Xtian and Jewish backgrounds with us into the movement. I have had deovtees try to guilt and shame me into doing this or that, but such methodology cannot be found anywhere in Prabhupadas books, etc. Those who were there, we all know we followed Prabhupada because he INSPIRED us. He brought to us such wonderful, transcendental feelings we never before experienced in our entire life! /images/graemlins/smile.gif (12) Members' subservience to the group causes them to cut ties with family and friends, and to give up personal goals and activities that were of interest before joining the group. A- Again, mixed. After I joined, I phoned my parents weekly, wrote them letters, and visited. Whereas all my friends wrote ME off! (And I thought they were open minded. What a surprise.) Yet even the Catholic church, the nuns for example, must completely renounce all family ties , even friends and personal goals. Of course what Dr. Michael Langone is not accepting is that joining the Catholic church as a nun or monk IS their personal goal. Therefore he is denying them too. ha It seems that anything spiriutal, he fault finds with. Tho not to misunderstand. I do feel we all must look into what is a cult and what is not, and apply it. But everyone who writes about cults (or has a 'position' in their anti-cult 'group' hehe) is not always accurate, tho often some of what they say may be correct, and some is mistaken. (13) Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group. A- Again, that brings me back to the Catholic church idea. If anyone wants to dedicate their life to any religion at all, such committment should not automatically be stuck in a category of 'cult.' That in iteself is cult mentality. But I do agree it should be a voluntary process. Also, in the Krishna consciousnness movement there are different ashramas. If one does not want to give up as much time, or cannot, they can be householders. Householders have independence. Whereas in any religion, Buddhism, any, if one makes the personal choice to fully give their all, they can become monks and do like that. They know what they are getting into. Its not like they made such a choice out of ignorance. If they did, that would be different. In which case I would tell them, "Get an education before making major, life altering choices." Its just common sense really. Tho in this age, many have lost common sense. :-) (14) Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members A- I have yet to see any religion that does not prefer association with others of their own faith. However, it is not restricted to that. Unless one is a monk or nun. Again, they have made a conscious choice to live that type of lifestyle, and I dont think it should be criticized (I know you are not doing this, just that Dr. Michael Langone is). It seems he has used different angles to ask make the same point over and over. But I hope I answered everything well enough. Feel free to ask any questions. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

LOL ha Thanks, I am honroed. Well, I was busy with work, while simultaneously thinking today maybe I would avoid the fundamental xtians and get a breather. ha They never listen anyway. Even now, I have only skimmed this thread trying to remain somewhat detached from their nonsense. So what was the question? If Jesus is Prajapati? I think someone made that claim. Well, he certainly is not. We do not see his name in any Vedic literatures in relationship to the position of a Prajapati. However, his name as Issa (and it can be proven this is one name he used) can indeed be found in Bhavishya Purana. But not as a prajapati. haha I'm sorry, but that was such a stretch I had to laugh. Anyway, you will see "Isa-putra" or "son of God" in Bhavishya Purana. (MahaPurana's) And the other question/comment that Krisna never died for our sins on the cross like Jesus? Well, God cannot die. ha Who do Xtians think Jesus was praying to all that time? Tho most of them can't stand this, it was Krishna of course. And that is exaclty why Jesus did not tell them Who God is, he wanted to protect them from making offenses. But he did point out they were not ready, not advanced enough, and he had more to tell them. Now, since Jesus died for their sins/karma, he is their guru or spiritual teacher. Therefore, they need to stop sinning. He did not do all this in the mood of "You continue bad behavior and I will just keep right on suffering your sinful reactions." No. The idea of him accepting a position so grave is that they must reciprocrate by purifying their ways of life and their thinking too. Devotees follow 4 regulative principles that frees us from furhter sinful activities. They are basically the same in all (bona fide) religions. Christians should follow them strictly instead of wasting time fault finding with other paths. Devotees also spend time daily chanting the names of God. This too is an instruction of the Bible as well as Jesus himself. Most fundamentla Xtains I have run into are not following, they are just complaining about other religions. ha It can be a type of intoxication. There may be other questions. I am behind in my work so may or may not be able to answer tonight. But let me know and I will look into it. We all must become expert in this field of preaching too, because you see how they react. Yet there are others who are not trouble makers but are sincere, so we must be able to explain things to them, factually. Must run! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

LOL ha Thanks, I am honroed. Well, I was busy with work, while simultaneously thinking today maybe I would avoid the fundamental xtians and get a breather. ha They never listen anyway. Even now, I have only skimmed this thread trying to remain somewhat detached from their nonsense. So what was the question? If Jesus is Prajapati? I think someone made that claim. Well, he certainly is not. We do not see his name in any Vedic literatures in relationship to the position of a Prajapati. However, his name as Issa (and it can be proven this is one name he used) can indeed be found in Bhavishya Purana. But not as a prajapati. haha I'm sorry, but that was such a stretch I had to laugh. Anyway, you will see "Isa-putra" or "son of God" in Bhavishya Purana. (MahaPurana's) And the other question/comment that Krisna never died for our sins on the cross like Jesus? Well, God cannot die. ha Who do Xtians think Jesus was praying to all that time? Tho most of them can't stand this, it was Krishna of course. And that is exaclty why Jesus did not tell them Who God is, he wanted to protect them from making offenses. But he did point out they were not ready, not advanced enough, and he had more to tell them. Now, since Jesus died for their sins/karma, he is their guru or spiritual teacher. Therefore, they need to stop sinning. He did not do all this in the mood of "You continue bad behavior and I will just keep right on suffering your sinful reactions." No. The idea of him accepting a position so grave is that they must reciprocrate by purifying their ways of life and their thinking too. Devotees follow 4 regulative principles that frees us from furhter sinful activities. They are basically the same in all (bona fide) religions. Christians should follow them strictly instead of wasting time fault finding with other paths. Devotees also spend time daily chanting the names of God. This too is an instruction of the Bible as well as Jesus himself. Most fundamentla Xtains I have run into are not following, they are just complaining about other religions. ha It can be a type of intoxication. There may be other questions. I am behind in my work so may or may not be able to answer tonight. But let me know and I will look into it. We all must become expert in this field of preaching too, because you see how they react. Yet there are others who are not trouble makers but are sincere, so we must be able to explain things to them, factually. Must run! /images/graemlins/smile.gif