Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by RadheRade1657

  1. Hmmm... I'm not really all that big on arranged marriages, myself... I don't think Radharani is either:

    "I throw ashes at all laws, made by man or god.

    I am born alone, with no companion.

    What is the worth of your vile laws that failed me in love and left me with a dumbskull?

    My wretched fate is so designed that He is absent for whom I long.

    I shall set fire to this house and go away."

    --Radharani in ShreeKrishna Kirtan


    Yes in every male dominated society everything has to be by the males, of the males & for the males. I didn’t know in Buddhism spirits have GENDER, but isn’t it a violation of the laws of ‘ANATTA'. :)


    I notice you completely ignored the whole Kumari-thing. Whatever...

    I don't know if the spirit itself is regarded as having a gender, but they say that Avalokita only incarnates in a male body. The bodhisattva Tara only incarnates in a female body. It's what they think. It's not just a 'male-only' thing.

    The Mahayana Buddhists believe in the Atman. Tibetan Buddhism is a sub-group of this school.


    CBrahma: I'm not sure where you got the idea that 'believing' in Krsna was going to send you to hell, from a Christian teaching. Jesus teaching was to worship the Father (Krsna) in Spirit and in Truth. This is a completely transcendantal understanding that endorses no specific religious sect.


    Ok, the below are for the Hare Christnas:


    From Exodus, No. 4 of the TEN Commandments of GOD

    Do not make an image or any likeness of what is in the heavens above


    In Deutoronomy: NO. 8 of the TEN Commandments of God:

    You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.


    So, puja to the Archana vigraha of the Lord will send me to hell?


    Theist and CBrahma, I assert that Christianity is not compatible with (Gaudiya) Vaishnavism. I think it was St Paul who chastised the early Christians who prayed on the streets. However, Sankirtan in every streets and villages is what the movement of Lord Chaitanya is all about.


    Also, the emphasis of Jesus' prayer as below, is not exactly how Gvism approach spirituality:


    1. Our father who art in heaven 2.

    2. hollowed be thy name thy kingdom come, thy wil be done on earth as it is in heaven.

    3 Give us this day our daily bread

    4. And forgive us our trespasses as

    5. we forgive those who trespassed against us

    6 . And lead us not into temptation and deliver us from evil



    The ones in red according to the Gita is a lower form of spirituality.


    Also, eating meat is alright in Christianity. Krishna however does not accept such kind of offering.


    What's next Theist? Jesus Christ is the illegitimate son of Radha and Krishna !


    Stop your crusade. That is why you get abused by some forummers here, for your lack of education.



    So, you're using a Middle-Eastern tribal book and the words of a man who never even knew Jesus, as well as a prayer to stop famine as a way to criticize Jesus?

    Here are the commandments Jesus said to follow to a man who questioned him:

    "You shall not kill; You shall not steal; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not bear false witness; Honor your father and mother; and, love your neighbor as yourself."

    So, I really don't see how the commandments he lists off are going against any principle of Gaudiya Vaishnavism.


    As to Paul, he never even knew Jesus. He never met him. The Acts of the Apostles says that he claimed to have seen a vision of Jesus many years after he died, but, since he would be the only witness to such a vision, we don't know if this is for certain.


    "Give us this day our daily bread..."

    I didn't realize that praying for God to save your people from famine was sinful.

    "...And forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who have trespassed against us..."

    I think it's a nice summary of Karma, myself: "I ask You to treat me as I have treated Your children."

    "...And lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil."

    (The Aramaic/Syriac reads, "And let us not enter into temptation..." but I digress.)

    I don't see how asking the Lord to keep you from bad situations is sinful, or how asking him to 'deliver you from evil' (whether that be negative influences in your life, the evil thoughts within you, etc...).


    I dont want esoteric answers, but realistic ones. In his human form, why did he choose black skin color? Was there a purpose to it, like getting rid of color prejudices?

    Because His Mommy is black (or dark... bluish... whatever).

    "Krsna's mother... is dark and her garments are like a rainbow."

    ((Sure... it's the description of His foster-mother, but maybe He chose to be that color so She wouldn't be suspicious as to why Her son was a different color than She was!))


    Jhulana Lila – Swing Pastimes

    (rAgiNI kAmoda - tAla chuTa daza kusi)


    nava ghana kAnana zohana kuJja;

    vikasita kusuma madhukara guJja

    nava nava pallave zobhita DAla;

    sAri zuka pika gAoye rasAla

    tahi boli aparUpa ratana hindola;

    tA’pora baiThalo yugala kizora

    vraja ramaNI-gaNa deota jhakora;

    gIrata jAni dhani korotahi kora

    koto koto upajala rasa parasaGga;

    govinda dAsa tahi dekhoto raGga

    “In the new deep forest is a beautiful kunja where the flowers blossom and the bees buzz. On the fresh leaves on the beautiful branches the female Sari-parrots and the male Suka parrots sing delicious songs. Here is a wonderful jewelled swing, on which the Yugala Kisora is seated. The Vraja-gopis give a push, and Radha takes shelter of Krsna’s lap, afraid that She will fall. How many rasika talks are being held? Govinda dasa blissfully beholds it.”

    Thank you so much Mataji! :) Jhulan Lila is one of my favorite pastimes. Could you tell me where to find other poems by Govinda Dasa?

  6. I really like this little quiz. It brings to the fore a lot of sectarian issues we've been having here at Audarya.

    Jai Radhey-Krishna ki Jai! Jai Nitai Gauranga! Jaya Jai Shiv-Parivar! Jaya Jai Mariam-Yeshu! Jaya Jai Buddha!

    And Victory to all the true teachers of our world! :)


    A year ago I bought rudraksa beads, but some vaishnavas says that aspiring or vaishnavas should not wear rudraksa beads. Also in audarya once I heard that Lord Caitanya wore them.


    Is there a scriptural evidence of this?


    Hare Krsna!

    I, personally, chant MahaMantra and 'Radhey Radhey' on a Rudraksha mala. I don't see anything wrong with it. Shiva and Parvati are Radha-Krishna's greatest devotees. So, I can't see a reason why Radha-Krishna would mind if we pray to them on the 'tears of Rudra', their greatest bhakta.


    Hare Krishna.

    I am the father of Indulekhadasi. That is not her actual name but we both decided to keep ourselves anonymous. Gaurhari isn't my real name, either. Indulekhadasi is a 14 year old girl. However, both of us don't understand why everyone is so amazed by her age.

    Sri Guru Vaishnava kripa prarthi,


    I wonder what Beggar's going to say to this? He's probably going to concoct some elaborate scheme, like that Indulekha Dasi kidnapped someone from Audarya and made them write this at gun-point :rolleyes:


    If she (more likely he) was really 14 then she'd be in school or being home schooled during the times that her posts take place. Moreover she (more likely he) has the understanding of a man who has studied Gaudiya Vaisnavism for at least 2 if not 3 decades. I haven't met many women with such a mentality and understanding and I'm not saying that it doesn't exist.

    But I would categorically state that such a mentality would not be found in a 14 year old girl. If it did then I would consider such a 14 year old girl to be one of my siksa gurus. Anyway I appreciate Indulekha dasi's posts but I just don't believe that she's a 14 year old girl.

    So, because she's wise, she has to be older? And, she has to be a man?! What?! Your statements are blatantly sexist. The only reason you haven't 'met many women' who are advanced in Krishna Consciousness is because you're blind to their wisdom based on your overtly sexist thoughts. I really hope you don't have a daughter... she'll think she's worthless!

    Look at the Gopikas, they were all young women, and none of us have seen such wisdom and devotion as compared to Them. Indulekha Dasi is a very wise young women. Leave her alone! What would be her reason to say that she's a fourteen year old girl (if she wasn't) on a religious forum? If she were really a forty year old man pulling this kind of trick, I'm sure she wouldn't be looking for dates on a religious web site... she'd probably just be stalking MySpaces all day :rolleyes:


    He existed, but was fictionalised. Do you not realise how close to the story of Buddha and Krishna this whole Jesus myth is? But the Krishna Story and Buddha Story themselves have no influences, so thus, they cannot be discounted.




    In the gnostic gospels, Jesus talks about how the spirit, when it loses ignorance, can become wholly divine. This is crude advaita at best. He talks of how the Kingdom of God is everywhere, which sounds similar to the 'Buddha Nature' of Buddhists.


    In the canonical gospels, he advocates worship and reverance of a God, and at times refers to himself as god, at other times, calling himself a son of god. Hence, going by the gnostic texts and the canonical gospels, his message is garbled and inconclusive.


    There is ample evidence to suggest that Vedic thought had permeated into Judea by the time of the Old Testament itself. Consider the story when Yahweh tells Moses to refer to him as 'I am'. This reminds me of the opening hymns of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad.


    The OT is a tribal text, utterly devoid of spirituality. Yet, even it has some vedic influences, as evidenced by the above fact. Hence, by the time of the New Testament, there is no doubt that philosophies like Buddhism and Advaita (which existed even prior to the time of Gautama Buddha and Sankaracharya) had reached the west.




    The original texts, given to us by Vyasa and Valmiki Bhagavan, are the Mahabharata and Ramayana. There are many, many versions of these books, but they can only be considered as genuine if they do not contradict the works of the two rishis mentioned before.


    Kanya-Kumari Lila and all that stuff is simply a later product of humans. The original story is that Lord Krishna killed Narakasura, and this is affirmed by great sages. Anything that does not confirm to the testimony of the rishis is spurious and is rejected.


    Similarly, I see a lot of unhealthy comparison going on. For instance, some christians tend to think the Vedas are talking about nonsensical stuff when they say that the world is held up by 7 elephants, etc. But these people do not understand that the Vedas have a profound inner meaning, always.


    For instance, the Vedas say the sun is a chariot drawn by 7 snakes. This is explained as follows - The 7 snakes pertain to seven colors of light. And mordern science has found that light from sun travels in a curved fashion, hence it has been referred to as 'snakes' in the Vedas.

    I guess you don't know Krishna's Lila in the slightest. His Lila has almost nothing in common with Jesus'. I guess people are just reading the websites that get their information from "The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors" for information on Lord Krishna.

    It's been shown that some Gnostic gospels came earlier than other ones. The Gospel of Thomas is one of the early ones. I was just showing that there are sources that talk about Jesus outside of the Canon.

    I agree that the OT is a bunch of BS. It makes God look like an angry tyrant (hence the reason I like the Gnostics... they rejected it).

    I agree that Vedic knowledge had reached Judea. I don't deny it. I don't see how that disproves Jesus, it just tells me that he listened to the teachers that spread the wisdom of the Vedas and Upanishads.

    I see that you completely avoid the statement of the seven elephants holding up a flat earth by talking about the Vedic statements on the sun (which is interesting). Could you please explain the Vedic statements of the seven elephants holding up a flat earth, which is covered by a firmament that holds back water from the earth (so it doesn't flood, of course!)?


    I don't see how I'm bashing Jesus? I mean, this is an open discussion. If someone proves me wrong, I'm fine with that. This is just currently how I stand, but I don't claim to have these beliefs set in stone. I find these debates to be productive and I feel I learn from them every time.


    The difference between the contradiction that you listed and contradictions in the Bible (which I agree that they both set themselves up for contradictions) is that on a general basis, people accept these contradictions and realize that they exist. In the Bible however, Christians turn a complete blind eye to it, thus creating their own version of Jesus in their minds.

    There's not a particular problem with this, however. They can do what they want, but it's hard to say "I worship Jesus" when I'm not sure what he was even about.


    I suppose this is a big deal for me as I was raised all-protestant. Christian schools and all. I lived it. The vagueness of the Bible as well as such contradictions sparked a lot of strange beliefs in American Protestantism. When I realized that these people I grew up with were merely picking and choosing what suited them from the scriptures...my beliefs were quite shaken.

    I am not blaming Jesus for this. Nor the Christians that do this. (most of them don't know any better) However, I don't believe that any form of Christianity really exists that can honestly say they understand Jesus or know why they are worshipping him.

    I'm sorry. I didn't mean to say that you were bashing Jesus (I admit the comparison did make it seem that way, though). But, you said that he didn't exist (or was fictionalized/deified to the extreme), which is also what many people of Abrahamic religions do to try to get converts.

    I don't really understand how it's hard to see what Jesus was really about. I think his words (or the words attributed to him) show what he was about. A rather early gospel (earlier than the canonical gospels) called the Gospel of Thomas is a teaching gospel. It is many of the teachings of Jesus. No life story or anything like that in it. It's just Jesus' teachings. Most of the teachings are the exact same as the ones in the canonical gospels (there are some additional teachings, such as teaching that God is both father and mother). So, it's really not hard to see what he was all about.

    I do agree that most Christians do refuse to look at the contradictions in the Bible. Especially the Old Testament. And when you try to point out contradictions between the O.T. and the N.T. they act like you're a heretic who needs to be burned at the stake.

    I was raised in a similar background (Catholic, though). Once I left Catholicism, I was a much happier individual. I think it's all the dogma modern Christianity pushes on it's followers that makes so many people turn away.


    Thank you, Radhe Radhe!

    Quite long, and chock full of mistakes, however. You see, as soon as I came back from the airport this past December, I just plopped onto the computer and wrote that whole thing in five minutes. It just flowed because all the memories of Ekachakra were clear in my mind. Now unfortunately sometimes it is fading away. I don't like that so I ask my father to put on the video he took while we were in Ekachakra. It calms me down somewhat, but still sometimes when I am feeling separation I blurt out to my mother, "Let's go back to Ekachakra". When will the day come when I can live there permanently???

    I'm glad you were able to have such a wonderful pilgrimage!

    I hope you get to go back to Ekachakra soon! I'm sorry you feel so much seperation from the Lord :( But, remember that the easiest way to get close to the Lord is through seperation from him ;)

    Jai Nitai!


    I will agree that perhaps these scriptures were based on a real person. However, we do not know if even the people writing these scriptures really knew him or not. Also, due to the many contradictions between them, we do not know which is truthful or not.

    Therefore how can we even worship him or claim to know anything about him or his true teachings?

    In order to do this would be to take all of the scriptures attributed to him at face value...even if you want to believe in a virgin birth, there are many other things to consider. Which do you take as fact or fiction? If these scriptures were not so inconsistent and contained so many contradictions (in facts) and had not so obviously been tampered with over time, perhaps there would be something left to have faith in.


    In order to do all of the above, one would have to make up their own version of Jesus in their head for the purpose of worship. Which many have done.


    As for Mark being anti-sementic, well, I will have to make a second post on that tomorrow. I think I'm too sleepy for this one tonight. :)


    No, I have not read the book you mentioned. The above post was from many things that I've read over time and have been stored as a mish-mash in my head.


    This is also not an attack on Christians (which I believe I stated above)...I respect Christians but am rather exhausted with the main idea that the Bible is without error or that Jesus is a cemented idea.

    Stories about the gods contradict each other as well. For example, in the lila of Kanya-Kumari, she is supposed to be the one that killed Narakasura. But, in the story of Krishna, he kills Narakasura. So, I guess that now both stories are invalid, and, as such, Krishna should be completely ignored and his teachings in the Gita should be thrown out as well.

    You saying it's 'not an attack on Christians' is kinda like when people of Abrahamic faiths say that Hindu gods are demons and are only trying to help their Hindu 'friends' by bashing the gods.

  14. Lol... I totally know what you mean thehat. It's like they just want to be in the "hip" crowd and call themselves 'vegetarians', and then, when you see them eating a chicken sandwhich, they go, "Oh... but I'm a pesco-poyo vegetarian... so it's okay." And then I go off on a huge rant about how ridiculous the term is, and that they shouldn't call themselves 'vegetarians' b/c they obviously aren't! I've ruined more than a few relationships over that one.


    Nityananda! Gauranga! Hare Krsna!


    Thx for the nice thread. Simple devotion wherever it is found is warming to the heart (I will bookmark your website).


    I also deeply respect Beggar's aspiration for one-pointed devotion to Vraj, and Sri Sri Radha-Krsna. This high standard of devotional aspiration is well backed in Gaudiya literature. But this one pointedness is very very rare, and one who has such devotion would be the simplest of souls.


    I was raised catholic and remember deep feelings of devotion as a child. These saintly children who received darshan of Mother Mary are true devotees. The vaikuntha realms are unlimitedly vast and from what I gather it is possible to live in one realm and be fully satisfied. Even though gradation of devotion may exist, the devotees in vaikuntha are so fully satisfied they do not see any gradation or inadequacy in their joy of service. God's love is so merciful, so unlimitedly kind, that he longs to give his devotee fullest satisfaction. That is a great mystery of vaikuntha. And the great mystery of our goal as Gaudiya devotees.


    In our Gaudiya understanding it is possible, according to Srila Bhkativinoda's Jaiva Dharma, for a devotee of Sri GaurangaKrsna to have two spiritual bodies. One in Krsna lila and one in Gauranga lila. Or, only one body in one of these lila's. So if God chooses out of his great love, why cant he grant a devotee bodies in Christ Loka and Krsna loka? Or is it not possible because of the necessary qualification of one pointedness, to go to Radha lila (consummate purity)? Ok we dont have this written in books to back up this line of thought! But any realized devotee will surely realize that love, and espicially God's love is not restricted by books, rules, or regulations? God's love is only governed by the purity of love of his devotee!


    Such as these small children in your video!


    Thank you Radhe and Rohini I really needed to hear of sweet devotion today.


    Thank you Beggar.

    I so appreciate your insight! The last paragraph was especially enlightening! Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this with all of us :)


    Well...GODSEED prabhuji has a point. But sometimes I feel uncomfortable calling the love of my heart, Nityananda prabhu- Sri Nityananda Rama Svarupa Avadhuta Prabhu. It seems there is too much aishwarya bhava if I do that. Don't get me wrong I know very well who Lord Nityananda actually is. I don't dare to try and minimize His position. It is just that if I called Him that it may interfere with our loving relationship.

    I totally agree. Lord Nityananda cares more about our love for him... I'm sure that he could care less about the formalities when compared to the love you have for him! :D Especially since you have such a close relationship with him!


    If this is the reason than don’t you think that P.P.H.H.Dalai Lama or his ancestors should have relocated themselves, to keep them from deviating from the path of Dharma ? As far as ‘public figures’ are concerned I don’t think someone like Swami Ramdev would start eating meat just cause there is dearth of vegetarian food. Also by relocating themselves, the ancestors of P.P.H.H.Dalia Lama would have saved the Chinese government a lot of trouble. ;)

    The Buddhists eat meat for the same reason Catholics & Muslims do. This is the reason why all these religions & the present day Hinduism needs something like the 'Varna Vyavastha' of the Vedic era. :rolleyes:

    The history is evident that proponents of Buddhism like Emperor Ashoka quashed Hinduism & Jainism with his might (do some research regarding this if your not aware of it)

    As for the bhikshunies, was there a female Dalai Lama ? I don’t know if there was any. Or mebbe they don’t have a female Dalai Lama for the same reasons there is no black U.S. president. ;)




    Your saying as if killing of animals for Yagna was a widespread practise & so there was a need for Buddha to teach them that Ahimsa is Paramo Dharma, don’t talk rubbish. Get your facts corrected before blindly bashing anyone. :smash:


    anyway we are not discussing Jainism here & I personally don’t require any lecture from you on what true Jainism is. :)

    There are many Hindus who don’t believe in Shri Krishna either. If one doesn’t believe in supremacy of Narayan, it doesn’t make him/her anti Vedic. There is need for ignorant fools like you to rise above such stereotyping. Narayan is just a name given to the truth. There are many ways in which this truth is outlined in the form of Shiva or Ganesha or Durga. By this our sages made an attempt to make it easier for spiritually uneducated people like us to REALISE what the truth is. Do you think it is easy to realise this truth, even Buddha failed at this. This is the reason why questions keep popping up in our head & there are forums like this in place.

    Just coz we fail to realise anything doesn’t make it void.


    God can never be explained, the truth can only be experienced - Hinduism



    Well... I really don't think it's any of my business if someone doesn't feel like making a location change. I was just saying the reason why he, personally, eats meat during some seasons of the year.

    I know about Emperor Ashoka. But, in all due fairness, many Hindus discriminated against Buddhists, Jains, etc... for many years. Some do to this day. And, I'm sure that Emperor Ashoka's actions aren't accepted by the majority of Buddhists, and I'm sure that many of them would never do such a thing.

    There's no female Dalai Lama for a simple reason: he's considered the reincarnation of a male spirit (the Bodhisattva Avalokita). There is the Kumari, though. She's considered to be an incarnation of Goddess Durga (to the Hindus) and of Vajra-Yogini (to the Buddhists).


    You have to taste both mellows. And then you chose one that you like more and immerse yourself in it. Eventually you will leave this world to be where your taste takes you. You can be one of the yoginis dancing with Lord Shiva, or one of the gopis dancing with Lord Krsna.

    Oh... so sorry. I think I completely misunderstood what you were saying. I agree. Devotees of Kali and Shiva go to Kali and Shiva. Devotees of Radha and Krishna go to Radha and Krishna.

    I thought you were saying something along the lines of, 'devotees of Kali don't reach God-consciousness.' But, that wasn't what you were saying at all. All apologies! :o

  • Create New...