matarisvan

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

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.

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?

Srila Sanatan Goswami says,

"One who is initiated into the Vaishnava mantra and who is devoted to worshipping Lord Vishnu/Krishna is a Vaishnava. One who is devoid of these practices is not a Vaishnava."

What in God's name is that supposed to mean? False knowledge? Newsflash...Vaisnavism is not a religion. It is the essence of religion - sanatana dharma.

Shaktism is not a religion. It is the essence of religion - sanatana Dharma.

Shaivism is not a religion. It is the essence of religion - sanatana Dharma.

I thank Narayana with all my heart for not putting you in the positon of a Guru. Your inability to grasp basics is apalling. I cannot begin to imagine the harmful effects that would happen if someone like you was in the positon of a teacher.

Thankfully your nonsense is limited to this discussion forum where readers by now know how you seriously lack knowledge on Vaishnavism and your lack of ability to learn.

...Vaisnavism is broad enough to include all religions that meet essential criteria.

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.

Thank you. I really appreciate that.

Sometimes I think that Srila Prabhupada would not be pleased with everything I say, but that he would appreciate what I am trying to accomplish.

Theist is deceiving himself with false knowledge that he is above religion. But in reality he is more stuck up in labels than anyone else. Read his posts from April to see what I mean.

He says he he is a slow learner and I have no reason to doubt that. As we are clearing up these misconceptions now it will be a few years before he gets this. Until then be prepared to hear the same nonsense over and over again from him.

It is interesting to note that more concern is there for not offending and driving awaythe homosexuals who defy Prabhupada's teachings on the subject of homosex then on there is for those who accept Prabhupada's teachings on Lord Jesus Christ and who are harrassed and driven away on this forum and elsewhere for following Prabhupada's teaching on Christ. Most recently that nice devotee Her Servant.

 

Now how twisted is that?

Huh? The only twist is in your own mind.

No one drove anyone away. HerServant was making stupid posts like genesis is ganesha and a number of such other connections based on nothing other than his/her imagination. Why will people not question such nonsense?

Of course....by your logic, such ideas however absurd should not be questioned or challenged...because they mirror your own christian beliefs. Questioning or disagreeing your beliefs is harassment. But you are free to disagree and criticize anyone or with anything but that is not harassment.

Your continued demonstration of double standards and hypocrisy are not fooling anyone.

Not much. The Westerners, especially the Christians have been demonized as ignorant unintelligent fools and rascals.

Not all westerners. Some people like Kulapavana are intelligent and fair and clearly not rascals.

gokul,

There are atheists in India too just like anywhere else. were you expecting indian atheists to behave differently?

The recent arguments about Rama were not about the divine Rama. They were about lack of evidence for the mythological rama which upset the sentiments of some people.

Your primitive labelling doesn't even deserve a response.

But you responded anyway and avoided admitting your flaw. Double standards.

Your disagreement with Prabhupada on a single point doesn't disqualify his brahminical status.

My disagreement? The entire world knows the moon is not a star. It shows Prabhupada made mistakes and his word cannot be used as authority.

I have no problems saying Hinduism is polytheistic.

Sorry. I forgot your hostility to Prabhupada. I didn't mean to bring out your puffed up offensiveness.

Yeah....point out a flaw in your argument and that makes me a hostile person. Iskcon double standard are still in style.

Raghu, two points in response to your previous post:

 

1. Why would Mahabharata make exactly the same point as Prabhupada seemed to following with ISKCON, and Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati in his Gaudiya Math?

 

2. And there are many Brahmins by birth who have also fallen from brahminical standards. So your argument must equally discredit the validity of selection by birth.

kimfelix,

This has been addresses in detail already.

We will go by example.

1. Can you identify a Brahmin not by birth but by the iskcon meaning? What are your standards and how do you know your categorisation is correct?

2. Prabhupada thought he was capable of doing this and failed miserably. How are his followers more competent than him to be able to make such identification?

3. If the Mahabharata understanding is correct, then why was such a system not followed in India for thousands of years?

4. If varna of an individual can change from time to time then what meaning does it have?

Prabhupada, an educated bhrahmin, had no such concerns. He used the term a number of times.

You mean the educated Brahmin who called the moon a star?

OK.

Hare Krishna Everyone,

 

I just wanted to say that (starting from this Friday) although I will be still posting, it will be not so frequent. My studies are becoming harder and I will be preparing for college applications around this winter. Please bless me to continue remembering the lotus feet of Lord Nityananda even while I am doing my studies, because otherwise my life is useless.

 

 

Didn't you say you were 14 sometime back? That seems early to be preparing for college applications.

Good luck with your education and everything else.

I am more than just a bit entertained that some individuals who are now proposing that the Vedas are non-sectarian and universal were formerly the same individuals who derided those who based their religious ideas on the Vedas as narrow-minded and sectarian.

 

"If it's not in my book, therefore it cannot be." (http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/spiritual-discussions/36602-jesus-only-way-2.html#post274915)

 

This was the ridicule this individual had to offer to someone who refused to accept the supposed truth of Jesus' divinity based on the absence of supporting evidence from the Vedas.

He is now trying to provide a new definition of the term Veda. Something that is more in line with his beliefs to include Jesus.

I should have said Vaisnavism instead of Hinduism. The problem is that there are a number of professed Vaisnavas who disagree on the topic. (dwaita/adwaita)

A single iskcon temple contain idols of radha, krishna, sita, rama and gaura-nitai. It contains paintings of laxmana, hanuman and chaitanya. Another temple with idols for chaitanya, nityananda, advaita prabhu and gadadara prabhu.

With this information, try convincing a Christian (not HK Christians, but a full Christian) that iskcon is monotheistic but when hindus do the same, it should be considered polytheism. No one has provided objective evidence that monotheism is better than polytheism.

cbrahma

what were you trying to say in this thread?

It is not clear.

Of course, the charge of polytheism in the West is considered bad, more primitive, culturally backwards.

Hinduism is Polytheist. Vivekananda and other Gurus who traveled to the west tried to show Hindu as monotheist to make it easier for westerners to gain an interest in the religion.

But that will not work. To the Christian it does not make a difference if Hinduism is mono or poly. It is false and should be avoide in both cases.

Some Hindus instead of asserting polytheism get defensive and try to deny it. I consider them ignorant because they are taking the bait of western conception that polytheism is bad. If anyone can present objective evidence that polytheism is lesser than monotheism I will hear it. If it is based on nothing other than semitic/christian sentiments then it has no value.

Often Hinduism is accused of being polytheist because of its pantheon of deities.

The usage of "accused" implies polytheism is bad. Why?

Because the people who make this "accusation" come from a monotheistic religion which has a strong known history of condemning and putting down older religions which were mostly polytheistic. Their way of thinking is “because I follow a monotheistic religion polytheism must be bad”.

Hindus are not concerned about outsider views and accusations. We can accuse Christianity and other monotheistic of a number of faults. Does that make a difference to them? Their accusations are useless similarly.

I am literate. I can read. Don't be stupid.

Hasn't done you much good.

A Gaudiya Vaisnava is not a Vaisnava?

Who said that? Raises doubts aboout your ability to read or your ability to comprehend what you read.

I agree your response is dumb.

worth nothing as your response is to a statement that was never made.

Assuming accurately that your intelligence equals that of a third grader, "fruit does not mean apple" is not the same as "apple does not mean fruit".

Guru must be brahmana.

Brahmana is by birth

Therefore guru is by birth.

Not all Brahmanas are Gurus. Birth alone is not sufficient.

If one accepts varna-by-birth, then guru-by-birth is a logical corollary.

Guru are supposed to teach, and teaching by definition is a brhaminical function. Clearly, if varna is by birth, then minimally, so must guru be conditioned.

guru-by-birth does not exist.

In olden days it was common practice for the son to follow in the same line of work as his father. The goldsmith's son was a goldsmith, the king's son would be king, the potter's son was a potter. Because they would be trained in that line of work and were qualified to take up that profession.

Yes how silly , to quote an exalted Gaudiya Vaisnava , as an authority on Gaudiya Vaisnavism. Who are we supposed to accept as an authority? You? Who are you?

more dumb responses...come out of your narrow little shell and understand what is discussed here before making nonsensical posts.

vaishnava does not mean gaudiya vaishnava. gaudiya vaishnavas are a small branch of the vaishnava group. Why on earth do you think other vaishnava groups care for prabhupada's teacings? they have their own gurus and their own teachings much older than gaudiya vaishnavism.

how much more time before you can realize this is not a gauidya discussion forum?

Which means nothing to me, since I am NOT his follower. And why does that make the verse interesting?

Some hks on this forum think all Vaishnavas (not just iskcon vaishnavas) have to follow Prabhupada or accept everything he says just because he said them.

You would rather commit apharada to a disciplic succession than dispel your illusion of a varna by birth, which so far you haven't had the courage to declare.

Wake up.

Advaita follows a disciplic succession from Narayana and follows varna by birth.

SriVaishnavism follows a disciplic succession from Narayana and follows varna by birth.

Tattavada follows a disciplic succession from Vishnu and follows varna by birth.

Iskcon claims to follow a disciplic succession (indirectly through Tattvavada) from Krishna and does not follow varna by birth.

You are commiting Aparpadha to 3 disciplic successions but I am commiting aparadha to only one which I consider bogus anyway.

You are in a much worse position.

Did you read the quote from Prabhupada. He rejects varna by birth. He is in the Brahma sampradya disciplic succession. So I guess he's the one who is taking the cheap shot.

I have no problems accepting this.