lokeshvara

Hare Krishna! when i said i felt like i could relate, i did not mean that i am any where close to him in terms of his qualities, in fact, it's the opposite, my feeling is more like i can relate to his flaws, or perhaps internal struggle would be a better term. just my thoughts upon first coming across the Mahabharata

Hare Krishna! Great topic As for my favorites (beside Sri Krishna) I really like Arjuna and Draupadi. First I like Arjuna because of his flaws and doubt and his constant striving to do whats right. I feel like in some ways I can relate to his character (especially when he hesitates on Kurushetra) I like Draupadi too because to me she has such an internal strength. I find particularly touching, the moment when she is lost in the dice game and her clothes were being taken. She showed pure strong faith in Krishna. Even during exile she was strong.

Namaste, I am saddened by the behavior of some posters on this thread. If you don't know this person you should not make comments about his authenticity. On his website he doesn't claim succession from a particular guru. The person who started this thread came here with good intentions and out of devotion to her guru and instead of being welcomed as a member of the community, she has had a number of posts attacking her teacher. Not every one is cut out for iskcon and i see this as a welcome alternative. of course this is simply my opinion based on my own experience and what i have read and seen from Acharyaji. I don't presume to tell anyone else their guru is false or fallen or wrong and i would hope that others would extend that to new comers. then again this is the internet and arguing is what is done best on here. Hari Om!

Namaste Tulasi Thank you for posting the information. I've been a fan (for lack of a better word) of Sri Acharyaji's since his early youtube days. You have clarified some things for me in your posts an I am very very grateful. Although living in omaha isn't an option for me (i live on the east coast) and i have never met him, i still get a lot out of his work. As a woman i find it extremely inspiring that Acharyaji has made the brahmin thread available to us Hari Om!!

Namaste and Welcome Acharyaji Hari Om!

Namaste, my own understanding is that God has both impersonal and personal form. the impersonal is Brahman and the personal being Bhagavan. Some claim Brahman to be the supreme reality but i do not believe this to be true. Brahman is the aspect of Bhagavan that permeates the entire universe however it is not the ultimate. Our true existence is a relationship with Bhagavan. Some call him Krishna, others Vishnu, others Shiva, others still Devi. Krishna revealed in the Bhagavad Gita that he is all these things. I do not see much difference between Devi and Krishna in that it is how we relate to God. The divine mother is a manifestion of certain aspects of God that some people relate to. There may be some who disagree but while I consider Vishnu/ Krishna to be the ultimate form of God I don't like sectarianism and I have a lot of respect for Shivaji and Ganga Ma for the help they have given me in finding my way to vaishnavism. To answer your question, yes God has a body and it is the most beautiful and perfect ever to exist. It is attractive to all. Hari Om!

Namaste Bija, thank you so much for this beautiful gift! it is a real treasure and i can't wait to read it all! Jai Sri Krishna!!!

i too have had strange experiences. i grew up in a haunted house so there were many dark experiences. but, i have also had some major good ones. some people may have remembered when i first came here i was a buddhist just interested in some interfaith dialogue. in the winter of last year i was introduced to the practice of kirtan but i didn't go to a temple or anything. when the summer rolled around, i was totally confused. i didn't know what religion was right. i thought maybe it was christianity, or sanatana dharma, or buddhism. i just didn't know so i thought i wouldn't practice anything. i also decided that i would just pray to god/ the universe and ask it who was god, was there a god, what should i do. etc. i prayed like this for about three weeks. i was very honest about my confusion and i didn't even think i would get an answer. then one night i had a very strange dream. there was some long drawn out plot that i won't go into now but the last part of it was the most important. i was standing on a hill with people dressed like sadhus. i was then approached by someone who i didn't know but he seemed special some how. he told me to close my eyes and then he touched my head. when he did this i could feel an intense unbelievable love. this love was so strong it was tangible like i was swimming in it. everything else in life disappeared and i was just in this love and it was a kind of surrender too and i knew it was god and i could see in my mind's eye sri narayana. all i wanted to do was make god happy and keep feeling this forever. it was like my being was defined by this surrender. when i woke up this feeling was with me the whole day like i was completely dependent on god for everything. i also awoke with the realization that i should stop eating meat. i know this is just a dream and i know there are probably all sorts of other physical explanations for it or that it was just some karma or something. i don't presume to know for certain the cause but no matter what, i know it had an almost miraculous impact on my life. 10 years as a buddhist and i could never give up meat, but that dream did it and turned me from an atheist to a believer in a personal god and it got me to chant mahamantra. so the explanations for it aren't as important as the results to me. Jai Sri Krishna!

namaste, here is my take. firstly it is your belief that krishna, rama, et al are avatars and not the source. this is fine as it is your belief but please be respectful of those of us who disagree because of our texts ie: the gita and srimad bhagavatam. and yes many here are extremely well read and can not only quote scripture and verse but do it in sanskrit. next, why does it matter who is supreme? this argument pops up every so often and honestly to me it seems completely fruitless. the vaishnavas are never going to convince the shaivites and the other way around, and lets not forget about the shaktis. the truth is, everyone is going to think their ishta deva is #1 so why not just be content and practice your lineage. god is god and if shiva is number one is he going to care if we call him narayan and if vishnu is number one do you think he is going to care if some call him shiva? these debates very rarely lead to any good. Jai Sri Krishna!

Namaste, i'm not sure where to start with this one :/ firstly, the aryan invassion is a complete myth dreamed up by 19th. century colonizers to some how link indian culture to europe because it wasn't thinkable to them that a society could develop and flourish outside of european influence, even in ancient times. there are even academics who reject the idea that aryans come from outside of india. there is arhealogical evidence to support that not only were the aryans indians but they also had shiva, shakti, and vishnu worship. i'm curious too as to which scriptures you are using as the basis of your ascertations of shaivism as being the original? Jai Sri Krishna

Namaste, the prasadam comes from the Bhagavad Gita where the Lord explains that he will accept anything that is offered to him with the attitude of devotion. he also explains that food should be offered to him before we eat it and when this is done the food has the power to remove many sins. i believe he says something like those who don't offer their food first are eating sin. hope this helps Jai Sri Krishna!

that's a good question and something i've wondered myself. i wear the thread around the wrist but the only information i have found on it is that the thread is supposed to be symbol of God's blessings. also it is worn on the right hand for males, women of the brahmin caste, and married women, and worn on the left for unmarried non brahmin women. hopefully someone else may have more info on this. Jai Sri Krishna!

namaste as i see it, vishnu, krishna, there is no difference. Jai Sri Krishna!

indianization of catholicism was a policy approved by the pope about a year ago. the bible is just the first step. there are some churches now chanting namah jesus and the icons are coming closer to looking like traditional murtis. also many churches in kerala and other places are taking on traditional indian architecture instead of the western style most churches take on. when i was in varanasi last year i visited a church (much to my mistake, i was looking for a temple) the church was being rennovated as a part of its indianization. it's an interesting phenomenon. i would be interested to see ten years down the road if indian catholicism will resemble its western roots or if it will look more like a local faith much like catholicism in mayan and incan communities of south america.

this sounds to me to be cold war fear. it didn't happen 30 years ago and will it happen in the future? possibly. but what use is worrying about. if it truly is nature's arangement then there is nothing we can do to prevent it and if it is not then we can prevent it. so worrying does no good either way. it also sounds like the cold war has not ended but only moved. it's no longer democracy vs. communism but u.s. interests vs. the muslim world. the players may have changed but the game hasn't. there is no use in living in fear, especially one who is in a relationship with the Lord. let come what may come, do what is possible to ease global suffering, and know that this world is not what defines our existance.

ohhh lol. my bad, i saw this as a new thread and thought all the posts were from today. thanks

Vedas are anything but primative. how can a scripture that had the basis of modern algebra and architecture be primitive? how can a system that knew about atoms over 2000 years ago be primitive?? cultured? what qualifies as being cultured?? Only ignorant barbarians? that's why so many americans and erupeans are converting to sanathana dharma? oh and yea those people are so barbaric thats why i feel safer walking around the streets of Kashi than i do my own home city. yea real barbaric. obviously you do not understanding the meanings of these forms. after all what better way is there to show god's love for all creation than to make Ram's best friend a monkey? it's really quite beautiful. i'm sorry you are missing that type of beauty in your life no, what is childish is to think oneself to be equal to god, whether that is through thinking one is as powerful as god or that there is no god at all. it's like a little child thinking he is a grown up. that is childish. the true ignorance is found in believing there is nothing higher. this i know from experience after having lived in ignorance. it is far more difficult and takes far more intelligence to be able to admit something is greater and try to build a relationship with that being. accepting god's love and developing a relationship with him is by far the most difficult thing we have to do.

i think perhaps you may want to do a little more research about this topic instead of make quick judgements. the principles of shaolin kung fu were not buddhist inspired but belong to the daoist tradition. the system of kung fu is heavely based on the manipulation of qi energy which is absolutely not buddhist. however when buddhism entered china it merged with local religions (it did this throughout asia) so in china there are many daoists who include buddhist ideas and deities within their tradition. the Shaolin temple is a mixed temple. Kung fu was originally developed by the daoists as a way to protect the monastary from invading hordes. it was meant for protection not as an invading force. today the real shaolin tradition doesn't exist, the communists took care of that. what we have today is a group of circus performers under the guise of shaolin. the samurai are a political group that were absolutely never considered to be a buddhist institution. were there some budddhists who were samurai, possibly but during a great number of years that the samurai were around, buddhism in japan had been outlawed. the samurai followed the code of bushido which is the way of the warior. it was centered on ideas of honor and devotion to one's master and emperor. it was not a buddhist code. as for thai kickboxing, there are plenty of devout hindus in south india who practice their own form of martial arts. the point though is, the kick boxing is NOT buddhist but a part of thai culture. if you go to a thai temple you will not find kick boxers there or anyone giving kick boxing lessons. i think perhaps you are missing the point, that being the buddha's teachings are ahimsa. it is found over and over and over again through out the entire buddhist cannon. the very first precept lay and ordained take is to abstain from taking life and to do everything in one's power to perserve it. does every buddhist follow this? definitely not but it is the teaching regardless. i am curious too, what vested interest do you have in disputing the buddha? i have seen you do it in other threads too. obviously my interest is that i came out of the buddhist tradition so i am intimately aware of it's traditions, teachings, and daily practices. i only respond here to give that insight and let others make the call if they believe him to be or not to be an avatara. based on the teachings of the mahayana and my own experience, i believe him to be, that is one of the reasons i am moving out of the tradition in to a more complete one. whether or not anyone else thinks it, that is their choice. and i certainly don't want to try and argue for it against anyone else. i'm only trying here to present all of the information so others can make their own decisions. Jai Shree Krishna!!!

shambhala teachings in the kalacakra are quite interesting as it is one of the few escatological texts in the buddhist world. the text describes the inhabbitants being both followers of sanathana and buddha dharmas. the head general there is Sri Hanuman and if i remember correctly, it's either the first king or the last king of shambhala is Rudra. The prophecy talks a lot about the mlecchas being the enemies of dharma that will try to destroy all dharma under the banner of their 10 prophets (includes abhraham, noah, jesus, mohammad, and madhi among others) when the mlecchas over run the world shambhala will enter into this world (the portal is believed to be located where the brahmaputra and sarasvati rivers meet) or so says the tradition anyway. i'm curious though, why do you bring this topic up?

i don't know why someone would offer truffles but according to vinaya traditions the buddha and monastic order ate whatever was offered as they lived a beggers life. as for theravada being the oldest, there is archeological evidence that suggests other wise. the theravada texts were the oldest to be found in writing (in sri lanka) but that doesn't make it the oldest tradition. in fact theravada and mahayana both evolved out of much older traditions and were developing around the same time in different regions. what is you statistic for meat eating among buddhists? i myself do not know it but my point isn't who is eating meat today but to point out that in the largest buddhist tradition, it is against both lay and ordained precepts. chech out the brahmanet sutra if you don't believe me. Shambhala is not buddhist and it is not a lethel marshal art. if you are refering to the Warriors of Shambhala it is a metaphor for the internal struggle to over come the three poisons. it was developed by Chogyam Trungpa as a means of teachings spiritual values without including religion. it includes, hatha yoga, flower arranging, calligraphy, and breath meditation (not too lethal ) if you are refering to some other shambhala please post the link.

thank you for the wonderful link Sarva! Jai Shree Krishna!!!

the idea about the end of the world coming in 2012 comes from sensationalists who have no understanding of what they are talking about. it is based on the Mayan calender which ends in 2012. what isn't mentioned though is that the calender doesn't end but the current astronomical cycle ends. the Mayans only mapped out till the current cycle (archeologists haven't found another calender yet) it was actually quite advanced that five hundred years ago they were able to map out what would be happening in our current skies. this once again doesn't mean the end of the world. it only means a change in cycles. earlier mayan calender show previous cycles.

for clarification. the buddha didn't die from eating pork products. he died from poison truffles. you'll have to forgive me as i don't remember the pali or sanskrit term for it but it was rendered as not being pigs' meat as in pork but the food pigs eat:ie: truffles. this is common belief within almost all of buddhism with the acception of some theravada traditions. the quotes from the ajanh are from a theravada perspective and the majority of buddhists in the world do not belong to this tradition. as for the buddha's stance on vegatarianism, within the mahayana tripitaka it is clear that meat products are adharmic and should be avoided, dairy is ok but even that is avoided by many of the devout.

i'm unsure of whether or not this information will be helpful in this debate but here some things that are not so commonly known about the buddha's teachings. maybe it can point one way or the other (i don't know, just throwing it out there) 1) as mentioned by others within the buddhist world view, Siddhartha Gautama was not the first or only buddha. He was the fifth buddha to appear on earth. 2) the biography of the buddha found in the buddhacaritam refers to the appearance of the buddha as not a single unique event but as the continuation of the tathagata's (thus come one's) lila. 3) within theravada the veneration of brahma and vishnu often takes place at buddhist temples. in mahayana (the largest branch) the buddha of compassion- avalokiteshvara (the most venerated deity in the buddhist pantheon) is refered to as Nilakantha, Narayana, Isvara, and Yogeshvara. some of the buddhist hymns also refer to him as Lord Vishnu. he has three heads (that of a boar, and handsom man, and a lion) he has four arms and caries a chakra, a mase, a lotus, and a conch. he also wears a black snake as the his sacred thread. he is not seperate from gautama buddha but a manifestation of supreme compassion. 4) although it is often believed that all of the buddha's teachings were atheistic, this is not entirely true. devotion was taught and encouraged. primarily devotion to avalokiteshvara and buddha amitabha (spiritual father of avalokiteshvara) this devotion mainly consists of the constant repition of the sacred name. 5) in the Lankavatara Sutra, a key mahayana text, the buddha makes a statement along the lines of "some call me the thus come one, others the buddha, still other isvara, and others ram, but none know the true meanings of these names and do not understand the true reality of who i am" something close to that anyway. does this show similarities in traditions, yes. does it show siddhartha gautama as buddha avatara i don't know. take this info for what it's worth in conjunction with the sacred texts and draw your own conclusions. for me personally i believe they were one in the same but that is my opinion. Jai Sree Vishnu!!!

yes the gov. was receiving a lot of bad publicity over the panchen lama issue and now that the dalai lama is getting up there in age. the chinese gov. passed laws forbidding reincarnation unless you have government approval. there was an article about it on msnbc but it seems to be gone now. the law made reincarnation illegal lol. they did it probably to delegitimate the dalai lama's reincarnation. lol someone better tell God that China made it illegal:smash: JAI SHREE KRISHNA!!!