don't all Hindus believe in Krishna?

[Guest guest]

I was astonished to find out that the most famous and respected Hindu in the western world (Ghandi) denied there was every a historical person named Krishna. And then he went so far to say that if Krishna did exist he would not bow to him? Are there many Hindus who hold this view?

 

 

I have no knowledge that the Krishna of Mahabharata ever lived. My Krishna has nothing to do with any historical person. I would refuse to bow my head to the Krishna who would kill because his pride is hurt, or the Krishna whom non-Hindus portray as a dissolute youth. I believe in Krishna of my imagination as a perfect incarnation, spotless in every sense of the word, the inspirer of the Gita and the inspirer of the lives of millions of human beings. But if it was proved to me that the Mahabharata is history in the same sense that modern historical books are, that every word of the Mahabharata is authentic and that the Krishna of the Mahabharata actually did some of the acts attributed to him, even at the risk of being banished from the Hindu fold, I should not hesitate to reject that Krishna as God-incarnate. But, to me, the Mahabharata is a profoundly religious book, largely allegorical, in no way meant to the eternal duel going on within ourselves, given so vividly as to make us think for the time being that the deeds described therein were actually done by the human beings. Nor do I regard the Mahabharata, as we have it now, as a faultless copy of the original. On the contrary, I consider that it has undergone many amedations.

 

M.K. Gandhi, Young India : October 1, 1925.

 

I agree the Mahabharata is understood on many levels (including allegorical and esoteric).. but I also believe in a literal Krishna. Surprised to discover some Hindus do not.

[Guest guest]

 

I was astonished to find out that the most famous and respected Hindu in the western world (Ghandi) denied there was every a historical person named Krishna. And then he went so far to say that if Krishna did exist he would not bow to him? Are there many Hindus who hold this view?

 

 

 

I agree the Mahabharata is understood on many levels (including allegorical and esoteric).. but I also believe in a literal Krishna. Surprised to discover some Hindus do not.

 

 

Indeed, Gandhi himself is not truly a believer of Hinduism, nor is he as sophisticated in his ideas about dharma as one would have thought.

 

He was brought up as a Western, I believe, so he was more influenced with rationalist and empirical thought rather than the spiritual intuition that Hinduism largely emphasises. I think he truly believed in Christ, but none of the Hindu gods and goddesses. He used reference to Hindu deities as a way to unify India, he couldn't use Christ's name, and integrated what was common to both Hinduism and Christianity to further his goals.

 

In any case, his true ishtadev supposedly was Rama, I believe.

[Guest guest]

Also, I don't think most Hindus who are brought up in the West or have Western values believe in the actual existence of Krishna or any Hindu gods and goddesses.

[Guest guest]

Please don't equate Gandhi with Hinduism. Gandhi may have been born a Hindu but that doesn't make him a good Hindu. He not only believed in racial purity but he slept with little sudra girls. So Gandhi was never a true follower of Hinduism nor is he a representation of Hinduism.

[Guest guest]

 

He was brought up as a Western, I believe, so he was more influenced with rationalist and empirical thought rather than the spiritual intuition that Hinduism largely emphasises. I think he truly believed in Christ, but none of the Hindu gods and goddesses.

 

I think he was disgusted by the corruption within Indian Hinduism in his day, especially the caste oppression. This might have caused him to make some anti-orthodox Hindu statements, because orthodox Hinduism in practice (by many brahmins) had left a bad taste in his mouth.

 

Ghandi was moved by emotion and compassion for those suffering India, under caste oppression and british oprresion; and he was more concerned with helping people, than continuing orthodox Hinduism.

 

I do not believe Ghandi was a avatar, but he was a humanitarian, who tried to uplift Indians and people of all castes. He was more a true Hindu in his heart, than any Hindu who beliefs in caste oppression. This is not to say that Ghandi was a Self-Realized Master. I do not believe he was a master Yogi, nor would he probably have claimed to be.

 

Ghandi's Yoga was Karma Yoga (self-less service). This is how he served God, by helping others and encouraging others to do the same. Such humanitarians are concerned more with people, than religious form. Ghandi's sadhana was service to man.

[Guest guest]

 

. He not only believed in racial purity but he slept with little sudra girls. .

 

what do you mean by racial purity? there is nothing wrong with interracial dating. Don't be a bigot. I see indians with white women, and white men with some indian women. What is wrong with this? We are all the same race - the human race. Who cares what color body a person has? The soul is the same in everyone

 

Also, caste disctinction in relationship is wrong. People should be with who they want. Relationships are built on love. Only backward cultures practice things like dowry, or only marry people of their caste.

[Guest guest]

 

what do you mean by racial purity? there is nothing wrong with interracial dating. Don't be a bigot. I see indians with white women, and white men with some indian women. What is wrong with this? We are all the same race - the human race. Who cares what color body a person has? The soul is the same in everyone

 

Also, caste disctinction in relationship is wrong. People should be with who they want. Relationships are built on love. Only backward cultures practice things like dowry, or only marry people of their caste.

 

 

You totally misunderstood what I was saying. I said Gandhi believed in racial purity-I DON'T BELIEVE IN RACIAL PURITY. I, like you and most Hindus believe people should be free to be with any race they please. So please reread what I wrote. If you want to call anyone a bigot call Gandhi a bigot.

[Guest guest]

 

I think he was disgusted by the corruption within Indian Hinduism in his day, especially the caste oppression. This might have caused him to make some anti-orthodox Hindu statements, because orthodox Hinduism in practice (by many brahmins) had left a bad taste in his mouth.

 

Ghandi was moved by emotion and compassion for those suffering India, under caste oppression and british oprresion; and he was more concerned with helping people, than continuing orthodox Hinduism.

 

I do not believe Ghandi was a avatar, but he was a humanitarian, who tried to uplift Indians and people of all castes. He was more a true Hindu in his heart, than any Hindu who beliefs in caste oppression. This is not to say that Ghandi was a Self-Realized Master. I do not believe he was a master Yogi, nor would he probably have claimed to be.

 

Ghandi's Yoga was Karma Yoga (self-less service). This is how he served God, by helping others and encouraging others to do the same. Such humanitarians are concerned more with people, than religious form. Ghandi's sadhana was service to man.

 

Well, that wasn't my point. I never said anything about Gandhi's compassion or his choice of karma yoga. I only talked about his perception and rationale. Being raised mostly as a Westerner, he would have Western viewpoints. I think most Hindus these days are like this, really.

[Guest guest]

 

Well, that wasn't my point. I never said anything about Gandhi's compassion or his choice of karma yoga. I only talked about his perception and rationale. Being raised mostly as a Westerner, he would have Western viewpoints. I think most Hindus these days are like this, really.

 

It's funny, when westerners become Hindus, they take their spiritual practices very serious and learn as much as they can about this great religion; seeking guidance from a Guru, and trying to imitate him/her. While many big-city-indians who are born Hindu, take their religion for granted, do not care about finding a Guru, and try to imitate the worst of secular westerners.

[Guest guest]

 

I think he was disgusted by the corruption within Indian Hinduism in his day, especially the caste oppression. This might have caused him to make some anti-orthodox Hindu statements, because orthodox Hinduism in practice (by many brahmins) had left a bad taste in his mouth.

 

Ghandi was moved by emotion and compassion for those suffering India, under caste oppression and british oprresion; and he was more concerned with helping people, than continuing orthodox Hinduism.

 

I do not believe Ghandi was a avatar, but he was a humanitarian, who tried to uplift Indians and people of all castes. He was more a true Hindu in his heart, than any Hindu who beliefs in caste oppression. This is not to say that Ghandi was a Self-Realized Master. I do not believe he was a master Yogi, nor would he probably have claimed to be.

 

Ghandi's Yoga was Karma Yoga (self-less service). This is how he served God, by helping others and encouraging others to do the same. Such humanitarians are concerned more with people, than religious form. Ghandi's sadhana was service to man.

 

 

Sorry, but was Gandhi casteist or not? One poster claims he was casteist and then the above poster claims he wasn't.

[Guest guest]

To answer the original question, not all Hindus believe in Krishna, though most do. But all Vaishnavas believe in Krishna. Other Hindu denominations give more importance to Shiva or Devi, so Krishna to them is of less importance. Many impersonalists do not believe in Sri Krishna as historical but see him as a representation of God or Brahman of the Upanishads.

 

Gandhi saw the Gita as a true scripture written by a sage on how to find God, but he did not believe Krishna revealed this knowledge, but it was written by a God-realised master. He believed the information it contained (which was largely upanishadic as well as yogic) was informnation from sruti, that's what gave it authority, but that it was not the world of Sri Krishna since, some historians say the Gita was written between 600-200BC, while Krishna apparently lived either 3000BC or 1500BC.

 

Looking at Gandhi's writings he had his own ideas, which were not always 'hindu'. Gandhi was a politician after all, not a holy man. He was against caste oppression, but didn't want India to develop and become an industrial power (as Nehru did) and in a rural societies caste could had been there for so long that it was very hard to destroy, so Gandhi wanted reforms in the caste system, but didn't want to get rid of it completely.

[Guest guest]

 

Sorry, but was Gandhi casteist or not? One poster claims he was casteist and then the above poster claims he wasn't.

 

Ghandi was against untouchability (not the 4 castes), as any person with an ounce of human deceny is. The untouchablity problem has made India the laughing stock of the world. Humanitarians who are neither Hindu or indian, care more about these poor suffering people, than many indians who have become numb and coldhearted to the plight of their own. Untouchablity is the worst evil to ever plague India.

 

just so you know, has nothing to do with Sanatana Dharma. It is an evil that has crept into to a corrupt society; a society which cares more about cows than suffering people.

 

The Gods loathe the practice of caste discrimination and untouchabilyty. When Lord Shiva appeared to one of his devotees in North India, he did discouraged this bigotry greatly. That's why in Kashmir Shaivism which was founded by Lord Shiva, there is no caste, race, or gender bigotry. The teachings have been given for every soul on the planet.

[Guest guest]

 

It's funny, when westerners become Hindus, they take their spiritual practices very serious and learn as much as they can about this great religion; seeking guidance from a Guru, and trying to imitate him/her. While many big-city-indians who are born Hindu, take their religion for granted, do not care about finding a Guru, and try to imitate the worst of secular westerners.

 

 

 

this is very true. i understand what u meant by funny, but i find it horrible. many MANY young people, not jst in the West but also in India. When i went to India in Jan, i realized that so many of my cousins, majority of which are in their twenties (i being 24 myself) pray, but only in an obligatory fashion. They pray because thats what people do. They pray in a sense because they have to.

 

There is no true devotion to god or to going to temples. I however, am deeply into it. When i suggested going to Vaikom temple, my cousin was asking 'why' and tried to persuade me not to go. When i wanted to go to a krishna temple, my other cousin was surprised and said 'for what, to pray?' and said he didnt want to go.

 

The only temple i was able to go with a cousin of mine was when i went to the ISKON temple in Bangaluru, which btw was a beatiful temple - the most modern temple i have ever been to - truly amazing. Anyone thats been there can probably verify what i am saying.

 

But anyway, the reason for it i believe is western commercialism and capitalism as seen through the Indian media. The media shows a very romanticized version of America, through its only wholesome movies, which many Indians love. As economic wellbeing, especially in a place like kerala, moves towards the Christians and Muslims and away from the Hindus, it makes it more likeable to be one of those instead of Hindu. Secondly, the lack of understanding of hinduism among hindus. Many seem to verbalize the myths and stories and thats it. leave it at that. there is no further seeking. This has to be fostered by those Indians who do know.

 

On festival days, dont just repeat the same stories, but rather give a selection of stories relating to the festival. Give some meaning to these stories. Give some historical basis and background of where the ideology comes from and what time period and what was going on then.

 

Thirdly, we have such little media in terms of Hindu history or stories. Most are only the myth versions, like the Mahabharata, which largely show amazing imporbable feats with a touch of cheesy corny cinematography. Why not show modern Hindu movies, like the Mystic India movie, or the new Mahabharata movie or Buddha movie when it comes out.

 

Most importantly, its the education system. The history of India and Hinduism taught tends to be a more in depth version of the 'history of india' classes taught in Europe//America. However, i believe they should teach more than that. teach a very indepth lesson on the different sects and movements within hinduism and how they have affected the society of different indian states. Most importantly teach the negative impact that both the Muslim invasion and the Christian European oppression has done not only to the Hindu movement, but also to the Indian people politicalyly, economically, socially and psychologically.

 

 

There is a great change, a great 'Indianization' if u will, that must take place with in the education and specifically the History department in India. Knowledge of History is very important and helps shape one's understanding of where global politics stands today and how it got here. Teach it to Indians from an Indian point of view, not the same recycled, muchly biased and overwhelmingly eurocentric viewpoint that modern scholarship and academia lives by, which it gets from centuries of just assuming that the euro way was the right way.

 

 

But I am faaaar off topic. As for Gandhi, every man is different in his appraoch to Hidnusim. Gandhi seems to takes Krishna in a more romanticized scale. From things ive heard and read, i do believe that Gandhi was a strict orthodox Hindu who abbhorred caste. He became so popular and respected only because he spearheaded the movement that liberated india from Britain. He got further acclaim globally, because this indian independance movement, led by Gandhi, was the start of a global independance movement that eventually changed the face of the world. Winston churchill once said that if India got independace it would mean the death of the Empire (or something to that nature).

 

By 1950, another 48 or 49 countries got independance from Britain, all starting with Gandhi and India. Therefore, GAndhi has a higher role in global conception of INdia/Indians/Indianism. HOwever, on a religious sense, he was not as religious as many many other Hindus out there. He was in fact a religious man, but nothing of a spectacular sort that spiritually impacted many Indians. He was, like stated earlier, a karma yogi, who did such great things for many people and set the world on fire with his non-violent movement, whch eventually led to and inspired the movements of 50 other countries on their quest for freedom and inspired the entire racial movement in the west that gave equality to african-americans.

[Guest guest]

 

this is very true. i understand what u meant by funny, but i find it horrible. many MANY young people, not jst in the West but also in India. When i went to India in Jan, i realized that so many of my cousins, majority of which are in their twenties (i being 24 myself) pray, but only in an obligatory fashion. They pray because thats what people do. They pray in a sense because they have to.

 

There is no true devotion to god or to going to temples. I however, am deeply into it. When i suggested going to Vaikom temple, my cousin was asking 'why' and tried to persuade me not to go. When i wanted to go to a krishna temple, my other cousin was surprised and said 'for what, to pray?' and said he didnt want to go.

 

The only temple i was able to go with a cousin of mine was when i went to the ISKON temple in Bangaluru, which btw was a beatiful temple - the most modern temple i have ever been to - truly amazing. Anyone thats been there can probably verify what i am saying.

 

But anyway, the reason for it i believe is western commercialism and capitalism as seen through the Indian media. The media shows a very romanticized version of America, through its only wholesome movies, which many Indians love. As economic wellbeing, especially in a place like kerala, moves towards the Christians and Muslims and away from the Hindus, it makes it more likeable to be one of those instead of Hindu. Secondly, the lack of understanding of hinduism among hindus. Many seem to verbalize the myths and stories and thats it. leave it at that. there is no further seeking. This has to be fostered by those Indians who do know.

 

On festival days, dont just repeat the same stories, but rather give a selection of stories relating to the festival. Give some meaning to these stories. Give some historical basis and background of where the ideology comes from and what time period and what was going on then.

 

Thirdly, we have such little media in terms of Hindu history or stories. Most are only the myth versions, like the Mahabharata, which largely show amazing imporbable feats with a touch of cheesy corny cinematography. Why not show modern Hindu movies, like the Mystic India movie, or the new Mahabharata movie or Buddha movie when it comes out.

 

Most importantly, its the education system. The history of India and Hinduism taught tends to be a more in depth version of the 'history of india' classes taught in Europe//America. However, i believe they should teach more than that. teach a very indepth lesson on the different sects and movements within hinduism and how they have affected the society of different indian states. Most importantly teach the negative impact that both the Muslim invasion and the Christian European oppression has done not only to the Hindu movement, but also to the Indian people politicalyly, economically, socially and psychologically.

 

Namaste Ratheesh,

 

Hindus need to make Hinduism contemporary and relevant to younger Hinduism. They just can't teach them a few stories, they need to teach about the dharma teachings: about karma, reincarnation, samsara, moksha, yoga, etc... so they can understand the metaphysical implications of spirituality. Religion is not about doing a few pujas, without understanding, and then going on about your daily life with a non-spiritual outlook. Sanatana Dharma should enlighten every aspect of our life, and help us to realize ourselves as eternal souls, who need to find liberation from samsaric existence.

 

In Christianity, the youth have sunday school classes, youth groups, youth camps and retreats, etc.. so that they will be well-educated in their faith, and make it a part of their daily life and worldview. Also, in Christianity, they have made things contemporary to get the youth interested in Christian teachings. They have contemporary Christian music, like Christian rock and rap, instead of trying to get the kids to listen to old hymns that will not interest them.

 

We must attract the youth with refreshing spiritual teaching and activities, or else they are inevitably drawn away by the wrong kind of enticements of the world. Thinking religion is just rituals and stories.

 

Dharma should not be boring.. our spiritual practices should be the most exciting thing in our life. Unfortunately many indian youth may find their religion boring or stale, because it's not presented to them with real life and vigour; and the depth of Hindu metaphysical teachings and applications are not instilled in them. Rituals do not excite kids, unless they know what they mean, and how they can help them. The dharma teachings will not interest kids, unless they are presented to them with relevance to their lives and shown how they work in their soul-development.

[Guest guest]

Also, I think someone should set up a Hindu youth forum. I see Hindu kids all over the very busy Desi forums, and religion and spirituality is never discussed. Unless its about how some festival/holiday is coming up, and what a drag its going to be to have to obstain from meat during this time.

 

The Hindu kids love message boards, and post on them all day long! yet there is not one forum set up for them to discuss Hinduism on these Desi forums. They are totally secular.

 

The Christians have youth forums set up for young Christians. Hindus need to do the same, because the american/canadian Hindu youth are online! and are being distracted by everything but what's important.

 

Why not have a forum for young people to come together and discuss Sanatana Dharma and their spiritual life? It could be a place of great support and encouragement for Hindu youth.

[Guest guest]

 

Hindus need to make Hinduism contemporary and relevant to younger Hinduism. They just can't teach them a few stories, they need to teach about the dharma teachings: about karma, reincarnation, samsara, moksha, yoga, etc... so they can understand the metaphysical implications of spirituality.

 

 

Good point. People would only follow something if it makes sense to them and if they are in agreement with it. For example, westerners who have adopted Hinduism have good reasons as to why they choose to follow Hinduism, a religion with a wealth of spiritual teachings that does not actively seek converts. There are sites on the internet such as hindunet.com, where Hindus (including western converts) talk about the reason they choose to follow Hinduism.

 

 

 

Religion is not about doing a few pujas, without understanding, and then going on about your daily life with a non-spiritual outlook. Sanatana Dharma should enlighten every aspect of our life, and help us to realize ourselves as eternal souls, who need to find liberation from samsaric existence.

 

 

Hinduism should be playing a bigger part in everyday life, not just visiting the mandir. We are supposed to learn from examples from the epics, but although many Hindus are familiar with the epics, they do not take any lessons from them and some see them as mythological, therefore lacking credibility.

 

Another problem is we've had many great gurus in Hinduism. But with some of the gurus who are promoted by their followers, you would find some of their ideas to be unenlightened, such as Adi shankara on the varna/caste system. The youth see the herediatry caste system as the most disgusting thing practiced in Hinduism and rightly so. So when people talk about the greatness of Adi Shankara, they paint him as some sort of hero but then find out that he believed in hereditary caste system, which is very off-putting and disappointing. You can lose faith in these people who have been put up by Hindu society as great personalities in Hinduism. The same thing can be said about Vivekananda and his views on meat-eating. I know a Hindu youth who liked Hinduism, but due to these two personalities and their controversial views has lost interest in 'Hinduism' - especially advaita and now shows more interest in Buddhism. Differences of opinions within Hinduism can cause the followers of one sect hate those who follow other sects. We need to look at ways to recify this problem before it's gets worse.

 

 

 

In Christianity, the youth have sunday school classes, youth groups, youth camps and retreats, etc.. so that they will be well-educated in their faith, and make it a part of their daily life and worldview. Also, in Christianity, they have made things contemporary to get the youth interested in Christian teachings. They have contemporary Christian music, like Christian rock and rap, instead of trying to get the kids to listen to old hymns that will not interest them.

 

We must attract the youth with refreshing spiritual teaching and activities, or else they are inevitably drawn away by the wrong kind of enticements of the world. Thinking religion is just rituals and stories.

 

 

I think youth groups is a great idea and I believe some Hindu groups like ISKCON, with the Pandava sena and Chinmaya mission with the Yuva Kendra already do this. You will find that their youth are well clued-up about their teachings and have a dicipline that is absent from Hindu youths not brought up in this environment

 

 

Dharma should not be boring.. our spiritual practices should be the most exciting thing in our life. Unfortunately many indian youth may find their religion boring or stale, because it's not presented to them with real life and vigour; and the depth of Hindu metaphysical teachings and applications are not instilled in them. Rituals do not excite kids, unless they know what they mean, and how they can help them. The dharma teachings will not interest kids, unless they are presented to them with relevance to their lives and shown how they work in their soul-development.

 

 

To present them in a real life vigour we so tell them about the real spiritual masters who really lived, not so much stories from the puranas as I find alot of the older kids find them unrealistic and as some say 'mythological'. Rituals do not exite them because they have been brought up to question things that make little sense and don't believe that doing rituals is going to change things. Metaphysical teachings will attract those in their late teens and above. Hinduism really has to adapt to the developed world in India as it has been doing in the western world.

[Guest guest]

 

I know a Hindu youth who liked Hinduism, but due to these two personalities and their controversial views has lost interest in 'Hinduism' - especially advaita and now shows more interest in Buddhism

 

That would be a matter of personal preference. There are many who take the reverse direction.

 

Cheers