List of Gods

[mahak 0]

I was using Srila Prabhupadas definition of worship, found in the original BGAII, wherein he states that one must worship the demigods, elders, gurus, brahmanas, parents. There is another type of worship, i forget the word, that means worship reserved only for the supreme personality of godhead, that is mentioned in the same section.

 

Semantics? Of course, but it still is valid, what I say. The quote refers to materialists, not Vaisnavas. We cannot fault the gopis for praying to Katyayani for a husband. And even in our ceremonies, there is worship of Agni, Arjuna did Agnis bidding, and he certainly worshipped Indra, Vayu, Lord Siva. But a vaisnava WORSHIPS demigods knowing where they stand, not to achieve any material goal.

 

I actually was told that a neophyte devotee should worship Lord Ganesha to have help in removing impediments tyo our attempt at performing bhakti yoga.

 

Srila Prabhupada is speaking of self centered worship of the demigods. I worship Lord Yamaraja because he is always nearby, and I want him to come and help me get my mind straight in that troubling hour. Who better to worship than one of the 12 authorities on devotional service. These 12 are all demigods, grant power to materialists, but are fully worshippable by the vaisnava. Janaka, Brahma, Siva, Yama, Kumara, Bhisma, Narada, et all.

 

But the definition of worship must be understood in context.

 

Hare Krsna, yer surf ant, mahaksadasa

[bija 0]

A friend came home with gifts of garlands and tulsi/sandalwood which adorned Sri Sri Radha Krsna in the temple. I placed them upon Lord Ganesha and Lord Siva, faithful and true servants. A simple little thing. Maybe they may assist this material person to have a devotional heart. I read somewhere recently this would be the appropriate thing to do.

[theist 1]

 

The beauty of the Gita is that we can talk about it! Why avoid it completely instead of harboring intellectual debate?

The beauty of the Gita is that we can realize it As It Is just as it was intended to be. It is not a speculative work given to mankind so that we can endlessly speculate on it's meaning. It is above the mental plane. In that light we can discuss it's meaning and we need to do so but that discusion is one of the new student submitting relevant questions to his guru or superior Godsiblings in an attempt to better understand the teachings as they are.

 

The Advaita schools will never accept the conclusions of the Vaisnavas and visa versa. So why should beginners like us try to debate it? I choose to listen only to Vaisnavas when it comes to such matters of Absolute truth and you are just as free to make whatever choice you like.

 

There is no animosity here but why should we waste time by discussing that which we will never agree upon? I have too little left in this life.

 

 

Chapter 2, Verse 12:

Certainly, never at any time, did I not exist, nor you, nor all these kings, and certainly shall we never cease to exist in the future.

 

If Krishna always existed as well as Arjuna, then what is the difference between Krishna and Arjuna except that Arjuna has not realized for himself, the Imperishable Brahman?

This is a very valuable question. Srila Prabhupada explains that the difference between Krishna and Arjuna is that Krishna is the One Supreme Lord and Arjuna is a part of Krsna. As Supreme Lord Krsna never forgets his identity whereas living entities like Arjuna (you and I) are prone to.

 

You see God never suffers an identity crisis. He never forgets who He is. If anyone has ever forgotten his true identity that is proof he is not God. God does not need to be reminded of who He is. So clearly you and I are not the One Supreme Lord, rather we are minute parts of Him.

 

Best to read the purport to that verse as give by Srila Prabhupada.

http://vedabase.net/bg/2/12/en1 BG 2.12

 

 

 

 

 

Why doesn't Krishna refer to the Brahman? He does! But he, as well as us, ARE the Brahman, so why should He make the difference?

He states in the Gita that the Brahman is subordinate to Him. The Unlimited Glorious Brahman is Krsna's effulgence or aura. One must go past mere Brahman realization to see Krsna as He is.

 

 

 

Also, what kind of relationship do you have with Krishna? What kind of relationship should I expect if I opted for Krishna Consciousness instead of the Advaita way?

My present relationship is one of the prodigal son who is just realizing the hopelessness of searching for happiness outside his fathers estate and is making his first steps homeward and with a long way to go. So at present I am without consciousness of my eternal relationship with Krsna therefore I am attempting to become Krsna conscious. I am the fallen soul in need of mercy and Krsna is the Supreme merciful.

 

 

I hope you're not assuming that there is a loss of bhakti because of a word change?

Not sure what you mean here. The vaisnavas teach that pure Bhakti takes place AFTER self realization. It is not just one of many paths that lead to salvation.Like the standard pick your favorite form or image to worship and become devoted to so that you may merge into that image and realize yourself as the formless within that form.

.

Bhakti is that special pure spotless love that is in full bloom when one has gone beyond the desire for liberation which can only be realized once liberation is achieved. Bhakti refers to the eternal activity of the pure self in relationship to the Supreme Self. Not a temporary activity designed to achieve salvation then discarded as taught by the Advaitans- I prefer the Vaisnava explanation.

 

 

 

 

You have attached the above assertion to yourself. I said nothing of the kind.

 

Why would rishi's before the time of Krishna be fallen souls (according to you)?

Were they fallen simply because they did not worship Krishna?

 

Please answer the question instead of avoiding it.

I refuse to speculate on the particulars of this because I don't know anything about them. It's that simple.

 

Being fallen has nothing to do with pre-Krsna era or post-Krsna era. Fallen means being forgetful of one's relationship with God.

 

 

The problem with your viewpoint is your attachment to Krishna, which, is and of itself the wrong way of approaching God. Your retort will no doubt be, "But an attachment to Krishna is better than some other attachment." True, but it is an not an attachment to Krishna that counts, but instead, what he represents (his values, his deeds, etc.). Krishna (the body) died by the way.

Nonsense talk. Death is an illusion for everyone so why not Krsna? Krsna's existence never ceases.

 

 

 

 

You do realize that this is one of the least intellectual statements ever made, don't you? How can any one interpretation be Absolute? How can you, with whatever intellect you have, sit there and claim you are more right than I am?

 

This seems more of an "misinterpretation" than anything:

"This stage of śānta-rasa can be attained by the impersonalists only when they are in association with pure devotees. Otherwise it is not possible. After Brahman realization, when a liberated soul comes in contact with a pure devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa and submissively accepts the teachings of Lord Kṛṣṇa without misinterpretation, he becomes situated in this neutral stage of devotional service."

 

To think that members of other sects and other religions cannot attain realization without Krishna is silly, don't you think? Are not Krishna's teachings the same everywhere? How do Shiva's teachings differ from Krishna's?

Krsna has unlimited names but yet Krsna is the One Supreme Lord above all others. Call Him Rama or Vishnu you must address Him with the proper understanding.

 

If you want to understand the Vaisnava conclusions then I suggst you seek out a self realized Vaisnava.

[theist 1]

Is it just me or are there missing posts on this thread?

[bija 0]

Sri Caitanya-Bhagavata Madhya Kanda

Chapter Fourteen

Yamaraja-sankirtana

 

Yamaraja's Sankirtana

 

A Song in Hema-kiraniya-raga

 

Text 1

His body flooded with love, Lord Caitanya happily dances.

Text 2

Brahma, Siva, and all the demigods always serve Lord Caitanya.

Text 3

Without the Lord's order, no one has the power to see Him. Again and again the demigods serve the Lord.

Text 4 Every day the demigods watched the Lord's pastimes. When the Lord slept they went to their homes.

Text 5 Seeing the deliverance of the two brahmana-demons, the demigods happily said,

Text 6 "Lord Caitanya is so merciful that He delivered even these two.

Text 7 "By doing this, the Lord has placed hope in my heart. Now I hope, `Certainly I wil also be delivered'. "

Text 8 As they returned to their homes, the demigods happily spoke these words among themselves.

Text 9 Yamaraja, the king of pious deeds, regularly came to Lord Caitanya's home, and thus he saw all these activities of the Lord.

Text 10

Lord Yamaraja asked Citragupta, "What sins did these two (Jagai and Madhai) perform, sins that the Lord forgave?"

Text 11

Citragupta replied, "Please hear, O Yamaraja. Why should you struggle to attain what cannot be attained?

Text 12

"If a hundred thousand scribes write for one month, they will not soon come to the end of their sins.

Text 13

"If you wish to hear the reports of the hundred thousand scribes, then by all means hear them..

Text 14

"The messengers never stop bringing reports of these two sinners' sins. The scribes have come to thinks these reports a great annoyance.

Text 15

"At every moment reporting these two sinners' sins, the messengers are so exhausted they are on the verge of death."

Text 16

The messengers said, "These two sinners commit so many sins, that I find it a great burden to write them all. Why must I suffer in this way?

Text 17

"No proper punishment is written for the many sins I have written. The records are big like a mountain.

Text 18

"We scribes weep as record the sins of these two sinners. How will we survive the torture we feel?

Text 19

"Lord Caitanya made those sins a small as a sesame seed. And then He threw that sesame seed far away. Please give the order, and we will throw all these records into the ocean."

Text 20

Yamaraja had never seen anything as glorious as the mercy that delivered these two sinners.

Text 21

Yamaraja is by nature a great Vaishnava. He is religion personified. He knows all that is in the heart of the religion of devotional service.

Text 22

When he heard Citragupta's words, Yamaraja at once forgot his own body. He was filled the ecstasy of love for Lord Krishna.

Text 23

He fell unconscious on his chariot. There were no signs of life anywhere on his body.

Text 24

There was a great commotion. Citragupta and the others grasped Yamaraja's body and wept.

Text 25

Traveling in their chariots, the demigods sang a kirtana. But Yamaraja's chariot was filled with lamentation.

Text 26

Having see the deliverance of the two brahmana-demons, the demigods were singing the glories of the Lord as they traveled.

Text 27

The demigods headed by Siva, Brahma, and Ananta Sesha, and the sages headed by Narada all sang about the deliverance of the two sinners.

Text 28

Some demigods had never known such a blissful kirtana. Other demigods, having seen the Lord's mercy, wept.

Text 29

When they saw that Yamaraja was motionless on his chariot, all the demigods went there.

Text 30

Ananta Sesha, Brahma, Siva, and the sages headed by Narada saw that Yamaraja had fallen unconscious.

Text 31

Not knowing the reason, they were very surprised. Then Citragupta described everything.

Text 32

Aware that Yamaraja had fainted in an ecstasy of love for Lord Krishna, Brahma and Siva sang a kirtana into Yamaraja's ear.

Text 33

Hearing the kirtana, Yamaraja at once sat up. Again conscious, Yamaraja danced like a raving madman.

Text 34

A supremely blissful kirtana arose among the demigods. Filled with the ecstasy of love of Lord Krishna, Yamaraja, the son of Suryadeva, danced.

Text 35

Seeing Yamaraja danced, all the other demigods also danced. Brahma, Siva, Narada, and the others all danced.

Text 36

Please attentively hear of the demigods' dancing. For now, this account is very confidential, but some day the Vedas will openly reveal all this.

 

A Song in Sri-raga

 

Text 37

Throwing away all shyness, Yamaraja danced. Filled with the ecstasy of love for Lord Krishna, Yamaraja did not know who he was. Meditating on Lord Caitanya, Yamaraja called out, "Glorious! Glorious! The glorious savior of the fallen!"

Text 38

He roared and bellowed. The hairs of his body stood erect. Yamaraja's ecstasy had no end. Overcome, he wept. He was rapt in meditation on Lord Caitanya............(to long to post the rest...)

[Guruvani 0]

The followers of Advaita Vedanta aspire to merge their individual existence into Brahman and give up the world of forms and names for the bliss of ananda.

The Devotees aspire to attaIn to the Spiritual planets of the Vaikuntha plane and have spiritual bodies and spiritual senses.

 

It's quite simple the difference between the Vaishnava and the Brahmavadi.

 

Devotees want to live on the spiritual planets and enjoy the variegatedness of the spiritual planets with spiritual forms.

Advaitins want to merge into the Brahmajyoti and cease individual existence.

For many religionists, this idea of merging into Brahman and losing individuality to become ONE with the light is not a very attractive concept.

 

For most western religionists, the idea of Heaven is much more attractive.

The real Heaven is the spiritual world of Vaikuntha, though generally heaven usually refers to the higher planets in this material universe.

 

Devotees wil enjoy eternity, knowledge, bliss and form.

Jnanis can enjoy eternity, knowledge and bliss without form.

 

Choose your preference.

Most people prefer the idea of spiritual forms, spiritual planets and spiritual loving relationship with spiritual senses.

 

If you want to become a spark of light in the Brahman, then that is your choice.............. a bad choice............... but your choice.

 

That is the basic difference between Bhakta and Jnani.

[bija 0]

 

Devotees wil enjoy eternity, knowledge, bliss and form.

Jnanis can enjoy eternity, knowledge and bliss without form.

 

Choose your preference. quote by Guruvani

Good point here Guruvani. It is of our own choosing.

 

The souls constitutional right is bliss, it is seeking pure happiness. And because of this constitution it will never be satisfied until it finds rest in the highest station.

 

Maybe we came to this material world because we wanted to find that supreme bliss. How foolish we were to think it could be found seperate from God. (Yes Theist, I am also that lost prodigal son with head facing back home)

 

So now we begin the journey, after being away a long long time.

 

The vaisnava truths say that if we merge into oneness in the brahmajoyti we will find bliss...but after a long time we will realize we are not fully satisfied, so again we fall to this material world.

 

The vaisnava truths say the soul will only find that supreme peace in the nature of relationship. A fountain of unending, ever-new bliss. The bliss of love of God.

 

We have made our choice where to find that ultimate happiness, that ultimate peace.

 

A personal relationship, with a personal God. So satisfying that all the mystical siddhis become like playthings of a child. Playthings which soon lose their attraction.

 

But to seek that One, to think of Him in quiet time, to wonder if we will ever get to meet Him, to talk with Him, to laugh with Him, to play with Him, to cry with Him, .......

 

Maybe this is the fountain of un-ending bliss. This is the choice of the Vaisnava.

[Ayodhya 0]

To Guruvani:

 

Srila Prabhupada refers to "Hindu religion" as a hodgepodge of philosophy.

Srila Prabhupada is only one of the many people in this world (past and present) who "knew" he knew "the way." To claim with so much zeal that there is only way does not make you any different than fundamentalist Christians or Muslims.

 

To condemn demi-god worship is to be ignorant of why people worship demi-god's. Krishna is generalizing when he says, "Those who worship demi-god's worship for material desires." Not everyone does that.

 

For most western religionists, the idea of Heaven is much more attractive.

I don't believe in Heaven, so yes, the Advaita way does make more sense, but I would not consider myself an Advaitin because I do believe in individuality. And also, just because something is attractive doesn't mean it's right. Not to detract from the philosophy, just putting it out there.

 

 

If you want to become a spark of light in the Brahman, then that is your choice.............. a bad choice............... but your choice.

Once again, one of the dumbest responses yet. You don't know for sure which way is right (eventhough you have fiercely made up your mind to believe as such). You just have to keep an open mind.

 

Only a fool believes there is only one way. With Bhakti must come Jnana, and with Jnana must come Bhakti. Where would you be without the other? By saying that my choice is a bad choice shows your contempt for one path, and thus, one idea that you will have to overcome before ever reaching your "Krishna Consciousness".

 

Let me say that I would very much prefer spiritual planets and spiritual whatever, but it doesn't seem to me that it exists.

 

All this talk means nothing for it is what we do that defines us. Chanting "Hare Krishna" means nothing if you haven't helped other people. I sincerely hope you agree with me.

 

 

To theist:

 

You see God never suffers an identity crisis. He never forgets who He is. If anyone has ever forgotten his true identity that is proof he is not God. God does not need to be reminded of who He is. So clearly you and I are not the One Supreme Lord, rather we are minute parts of Him.

I enjoyed the answer, but Jesus did the same. Isn't Jesus the same and equal to Krishna in that regard? Or is he still "just a part"?

 

 

Bhakti is that special pure spotless love that is in full bloom when one has gone beyond the desire for liberation which can only be realized once liberation is achieved. Bhakti refers to the eternal activity of the pure self in relationship to the Supreme Self. Not a temporary activity designed to achieve salvation then discarded as taught by the Advaitans- I prefer the Vaisnava explanation.

Realization cannot be without Bhakti and once one is realized, it cannot be discarded, or else that devotee is not realized. How can anyone go to Heaven without forsaking it?

 

General Conclusion:

By thinking that one way is easier than another or one is more fruitive than another is pure folly. It is only when you truly understand that every way is equal that you can even attain Self-Realization, let alone "Krishna Consciousness" (whatever that is).

Most of you obviously disregard other sages, but hear this:

"The number of paths, the number of ways."

"More are the names of God and infinite are the forms through which He may be approached. In whatever name and form you worship Him, through them you will realize Him."

- Ramakrishna

But of course, you only follow Prabhupada, sorry.

 

Another question to ponder: (Assume Enlightenment to be the higest state to attain, not Krishna consciousness)

If an atheist achieved Enlightenment, would they still be trapped in samsara?

[theist 1]

 

I enjoyed the answer, but Jesus did the same. Isn't Jesus the same and equal to Krishna in that regard? Or is he still "just a part"?

 

Jesus Himself said "I and the Father are one.He also said the Father is greater than I." This is Lord Caitanya's philosophy of simultaneous oneness and difference. The key word here is simultaneous. Because Christians don't understand this they are locked in arguments of whether Christ is God or the Son of God. The fact is he is both.

 

 

But of course, you only follow Prabhupada, sorry.

Sorry for what exactly? Quote who you like.

 

I am not actually a follower of Srila Prabhupada BTW. I don't perform 5% of the sadhana that he described. I live on the mental plane and therefore the material mind is still my guru. But I am slowly improving hopefully.

 

I do however try to take transcendental knowledge from him and his followers.

[Guruvani 0]

Reply to Ayodhya,

 

Honestly, I think your actual knowledge of Advaita Vedanta and the Jnana-marga is very flimsy.

I don't believe that you have a good grasp on either Advaita Vedanta - the Vedanta Sutras, the teachings of Shankaracharya or any other Brahmavadi guru.

Especially, you have almost no understanding of the Vaishnava doctrine, the Bhagavat siddhanta or the Bhakti-yoga marga.

 

Before you come here to argue and debate your Mayavadi views against Vaishnavas, maybe you should do your homework.

 

You are ill equipped to discuss either Advaita Vedanta or Vaishnava siddhanta.

 

Don't think that being Hindu makes you more learned or more experienced in Vedic philosophy, because actually it does not.

There are many western people who know Advaita Vedanta and Vaishnava siddhanta better than many "Hindus".

 

There are many American devotees who have been studying the Vaishnava siddhanta for over 40 years, so don't think that Indians have a monopoly on Vedic knowledge, because Srila Prabhupada changed all that when he came to the USA in 1965.

 

There are American teen-agers who know Vedic philosophy better than many Hindus.

That's the result of the preaching of Srila Prabhupada.

 

Otherwise, best wishes.

As a human being I respect all.