Hindu Prayer Opens US Senate

[AncientMariner 0]

 

Yes only a vaisnava should lead prayer for any nation. Afterall a mayavadi or voidist (buddhist taoist) don't believe there is a personal God there to even hear a prayer so to whom do they pray to.

 

As far as polytheists go Krsna tells us in the Gita that their prayers and worship to the demi-gods are really meant for Him alone but are being offered in a wrong way.

 

So that leaves the monotheists as the only ones that should lead prayers for the nation.

 

I offer my respectful obeisances to Bhaktivedanta Srila Prabhupada the servant of Saraswati Prabhupada who has kindly come to this western world to deliver us from impersonalism and voidism.

 

This is not sectarian religion because without God as the center THERE IS NO RELIGION TO Begin with.

 

 

Very well said. If the polytheists are the ones leading the prayers and the celebrity culture of Hollywood or somewhere finds it cool and fashionable to try Hinduism they will misrepresent it and think demi-god worship is the ultimate goal of human life.

[Guest guest]

 

All well and good for you but Prabhupada didn't teach approaching Krsna through Ganesh. He taught approaching Krsna directly through His name as given by Caitanya Mahaprabhu.

 

Caitanya Mahaprabhu taught monotheism. Mahaprabhu is the universal guru. That's that for me. I have no need to try and convince you of anything.

 

The United States is based on the monotheistic principle that all rights are God given as is clear in the Declaration of Independence. Thus monotheism is the heritage of this country and what is done in India not necessarily need be done in the US.

 

What Prabhupada taught doesn't have to be necessarily in compliance with the Vedic culture. It is not. Praying to Lord Ganesha first is the Vedic norm. HK norms are different. Understandable. But teh authentic original Vedic norms don't have to bend backwards to accommodate Prabhupadas.

There are groups who follow his every word fanatically, no matter in what context or under what circumstances or for what class of people it was said.

I would agree with Ganeshprasad that Krsna nowhere called gods worship as 'wrong'. The translation, purport reflecting a certain attitude may be different.

[Guest guest]

 

The United States is based on the monotheistic principle that all rights are God given as is clear in the Declaration of Independence. Thus monotheism is the heritage of this country and what is done in India not necessarily need be done in the US.

 

Right. n what is done in the U.S. may not necessarily be done in India. Besides, United States may be able to dictate its military prowess over other countries (except over Russia of course), but it is certainly under no position to dictate its spiritual prowess or dictate of any kind whatsoever over India - the spiritual Vedic giant.

On the other hand, I beg to differ that United States is based on monotheistic principle really. What is quoted in the declaration of independence and what actually is followed are two different things. U.S. does except polytheism, just as it accepts the existence and freedom of many different religious streams n sects like the HK that further go on dividing into various sub sects like the ritviks, the anti n the pro n so on...

[muralidhar_das 0]

 

Therefore keeping in the spirit of this nations founding the Senate should not have any non-monotheistic prayers opening the Senate which is the lawmaking body of the United States.

OK, so according to this rule they should ban Christians from saying prayers at your Senate since Christians believe in the existence of four gods: Father, Son, Holy Ghost and Satan.

 

Satan used to be an integral part of Yahweh and Yahweh even said the Hebrews should worship the idol of a serpent called Nehustan, but after the Hebrews came in contact with Zoarastrianism they started to believe Satan is evil.

 

 

<table style="border-style: none; border-collapse: collapse; background-color: transparent;" class="cquote" align="center"> <tbody><tr><td style="padding: 10px; color: rgb(178, 183, 242); font-size: 60px; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-weight: bold; text-align: left;" valign="top" width="20">“</td> <td style="padding: 4px 10px;" valign="top"> 21.6. And the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died.

21.7. Therefore the people came to Moses, and said, We have sinned, for we have spoken against the Lord, and against thee; pray unto the Lord, that he take away the serpents from us. And Moses prayed for the people.

21.8. And the Lord said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.

21.9. And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.

</td> <td style="padding: 10px; color: rgb(178, 183, 242); font-size: 60px; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-weight: bold; text-align: right;" valign="bottom" width="20">”</td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="3" style="padding-top: 10px;">

 

<cite style="font-style: normal;">—Numbers 21:4–9</cite>

 

</td></tr></tbody> </table>

 

[AncientMariner 0]

 

Right. n what is done in the U.S. may not necessarily be done in India. Besides, United States may be able to dictate its military prowess over other countries (except over Russia of course), but it is certainly under no position to dictate its spiritual prowess or dictate of any kind whatsoever over India - the spiritual Vedic giant.

On the other hand, I beg to differ that United States is based on monotheistic principle really. What is quoted in the declaration of independence and what actually is followed are two different things. U.S. does except polytheism, just as it accepts the existence and freedom of many different religious streams n sects like the HK that further go on dividing into various sub sects like the ritviks, the anti n the pro n so on...

 

 

If I remember right when reading the Vedic literature the conclusion is that "Hinduism" so to speak is actually monotheistic and it is a misconception to view it as polytheistic. All the Gods and demigods get their power and authority solely from Krishna and they are all jiva-tattva and limited to at most 78% of the qualities of Godhead except for the expansions and aspects of Krishna. The thing to avoid in my opinion is furthering this misconception in western people's minds that "Hinduism" is polytheistic cause then the mess will never get sorted out.

[theist 1]

 

What Prabhupada taught doesn't have to be necessarily in compliance with the Vedic culture. It is not. Praying to Lord Ganesha first is the Vedic norm. HK norms are different. Understandable. But teh authentic original Vedic norms don't have to bend backwards to accommodate Prabhupadas.

There are groups who follow his every word fanatically, no matter in what context or under what circumstances or for what class of people it was said.

I would agree with Ganeshprasad that Krsna nowhere called gods worship as 'wrong'. The translation, purport reflecting a certain attitude may be different.

 

You don't accept his translation. Fine that is your right. I do. Everyone has the One God given right to His own beliefs. One God, many gods, or no God or gods at all, the jiva has enough independence of thought to approach life in own chosen way his way.

 

The topic is prayer in the US Senant and not what is considered vedic or not. No one wants to take up my point that this country was established by the blood sweat and tears as well as conceptual power of monotheists? Then I rest my case.

 

Already the practice of Senatorial prayer is being assaulted by the atheists who want every mention of God stricken from govermental affairs even though the Declaration of Independence recognizes that all human rights are God given. I guess they want to rewrite that also. Now what we don't need is the voidists and impersonalists,(which is 99% of the polytheists) watering down what monotheism remains in American life(precious little) by getting that position in the name of "diversity."

 

Now this is not directed at this particular hindu priest as I have no idea what the prayer was or what siddhanta he prescribes to, I am saying that just because he is called a hindu and wears a hindu suit doean't give him the right to lead the nations leaders in prayer.

[theist 1]

 

OK, so according to this rule they should ban Christians from saying prayers at your Senate since Christians believe in the existence of four gods: Father, Son, Holy Ghost and Satan.

 

 

This is so far below your own pay grade muralidhar. Ever hear of simultaneous oneness and difference?

 

Your bigotry makes you speak like a common troll on this issue just trying to stir up arguments and bad feelings. Are you not a leader at your local matha? Grow up.

 

As for the full time troll "analyst", AKA Plastic Scholastic, what can be said. He is obviously consumed by his hatred. I am just disappointed that he is allowed to give voice to it here.

[Guruvani 0]

Here is the prayer the Hindu priest offered to God in front of the US Senate.

He seems to be praying to ONE supreme God, so if we go by the guidelines that Srila Prabhupada has given this must be taken as Vaishnava prayer.

 

 

"Let us pray," Zed began, "We meditate on the transcendental glory of the deity supreme, who is inside the heart of the earth, inside the life of the sky and inside the soul of heaven. May he stimulate and illuminate our minds."Lead us from the unreal to real, from darkness to light, and from death to immortality. May we be protected together. May we be nourished together. May we work together with great vigor. May our study be enlightening. May no obstacle arise between us."

Seeking the blessings of god on behalf of and for the Senators, Zed declared, "May the Senators strive constantly to serve the welfare of the world, performing their duties with the welfare of others always in mind. Because by devotion to selfless work one attains the supreme goal of life. May they work carefully and wisely, guided by compassion, and without thought for themselves."

"United your resolve, united your hearts, may your spirits be at one, that you may long dwell in unity and concord!" he added, and ended with, "Peace, peace, peace be unto all."

 

[theist 1]

 

On the other hand, I beg to differ that United States is based on monotheistic principle really. What is quoted in the declaration of independence and what actually is followed are two different things.

 

<!-- END TEMPLATE: newreply_reviewbit --><!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: newreply_reviewbit -->I have already addressed this point.

 

 

[ No Buddhists, No mayavadis, No Wiccans etc. should lead govermental functions although their rights to practice and believe as they wish should always be protected.

 

You can lead polytheistic prayers in the street in fron of the White house or Senant chamber. You can stand there and pray to the tree god if you want or the fairy of raindrops even and the police are required to protect your right to do so, as it should be.

 

Again the topic is leading prayer for the leaders of the nation.

[theist 1]

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> "Let us pray," Zed began, "We meditate on the transcendental glory of the deity supreme, who is inside the heart of the earth, inside the life of the sky and inside the soul of heaven. May he stimulate and illuminate our minds."Lead us from the unreal to real, from darkness to light, and from death to immortality. May we be protected together. May we be nourished together. May we work together with great vigor. May our study be enlightening. May no obstacle arise between us."

Seeking the blessings of god on behalf of and for the Senators, Zed declared, "May the Senators strive constantly to serve the welfare of the world, performing their duties with the welfare of others always in mind. Because by devotion to selfless work one attains the supreme goal of life. May they work carefully and wisely, guided by compassion, and without thought for themselves."

"United your resolve, united your hearts, may your spirits be at one, that you may long dwell in unity and concord!" he added, and ended with, "Peace, peace, peace be unto all."

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>Perhaps but not necessarily. Remeber the mayavadis claim their own brand of "bhakti" which is to use devotion to Ganesh Siva Durga Krsna etc. as a vehicle to merge into the Brahman.

 

I am open to his being a monotheist but am not yet convinced by this prayer.

 

I should mention that there are also mayavadis dressed as christians who pray in similar ways to other christians except they hold an impersonalist view of God. I reject them also despite their Bibles and crosses around their neck.

 

I believe leading the nations leaders in prayer is a very important thing. I believe the nations leaders should be led by the dictates of the Supreme Lord (which is far from the case now) and not just a religious show to demonstrate how open minded they are.

 

I remain an unapologetic advocate for montheism. Personally I would like to see them open with a Hare Krsna kirtan as well as a prayer.

 

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

 

 

 

All well and good for you but Prabhupada didn't teach approaching Krsna through Ganesh. He taught approaching Krsna directly through His name as given by Caitanya Mahaprabhu.

 

Caitanya Mahaprabhu taught monotheism. Mahaprabhu is the universal guru. That's that for me. I have no need to try and convince you of anything.

 

I see true to your ever changing stance the debate has moved on. First the objection was about Hindus being sectarian then devas worship and now declaration on independence. it is the nature of this material world for ever changing.

 

All and good for you also may be it the will of the lord that you should approach him directly but learning that is not enough the hard part is to realize what we have learnt, and I don’t say this with any malice.

As for us who come from Vedic tradition we will continue as best possible to keep that tradition going. It would be an insult to our ancestor who despite many difficulties kept the dharma going.

 

You may not have the fortune of Ganesh worship but even Mahaprabhu to whom the Lord Jaganath was so dear, had on the occasion of snanyatra opportunity to witness the most wonderful past time of dressing of the deities as Lord Ganesh. So we can try hard as we do but the Vedic past will remind us always of it glories, the devas are integral part of this wonderful dharma.

 

Jai Shree Krishna

[Ganeshprasad 0]

Jai Ganesh

 

 

The United States is based on the monotheistic principle that all rights are God given as is clear in the Declaration of Independence. Thus monotheism is the heritage of this country and what is done in India not necessarily need be done in the US.

 

I quote this rather long passage not to gain entry in to senate I really do not care either way.

 

Hinduism is a monotheistic religion with one God (Brahman) assuming many forms and names. Brahman, as Nirguna, has no attributes (is formless and unmanifested), whereas as Saguna (or Iswara) is manifested and with attributes. People use many different names for God. Consider for example the following hymns from Rig Veda.

"They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni, and he is heavenly nobly-winged Garutman.

To what is One, sages give many a title they call it Agni, Yama, Matarisvan." RV (Book 1, Hymn 164.46)

"He in his might surveyed the floods containing productive force and generating Worship.

He is the God, and none beside him. What God shall we adore with our oblation?" RV (Book 10, Hymn 121.8)

Thus various forms (names and perceptions) symbolizing Brahman reflect different visions according to many sages and seers. Note that, like any particular prophet, each sage advances his own concept of God which seems unique (in name and form / image) and may be classed as monomorphic (one view). This concept of divine -- monotheistic and monomorphic -- is usually accepted and followed by the adherents of that particular sage. This is just like any monotheistic religion after a certain prophet. But in Hinduism, this situation is further augmented due to accumulated visions of God from many sages -- each sage's vision being separately monotheistic and monomorphic -- resulting in monotheism with a polymorphic view where one God is perceived in many different ways. Note that this is not polytheism, because God is still one, even though He is portrayed differently according to different people (sages, etc.) and situations.

Hinduism is also not henotheistic, where people believe in one god but are not concerned if he is the only god. Note that Brahman is one even though He has many names. For henotheism, there should exist a parallel (or competing) deity against Brahman but such is not the case. In addition, even the different Avtars (reincarnations) are not considered as independent of Iswara.

Hinduism is not pantheistic either, since there is no direct identification of God with universe. Note, God and universe (belonging to the Absolute or Reality -- which also consists of souls) are considered as distinct from each other in Hindu religio-philosophy.

Furthermore, polymorphically speaking, God may be worshipped, for example, by a farmer as Varuna (meaning the lord of water) and by a carpenter as Vishvakarma (meaning architect of the world). Since water -- potential boon from Varuna -- is important in agriculture for bringing good harvest etc., the farmer easily, conveniently and even inadvertently is drawn towards the deity known as Varuna. Meanwhile, the carpenter identifies himself professionally more closely with Vishvakarma (the Constructor). People thus have a tendency to assign and accept various functional or phenomenal labels for God, and perceive, worship, and meditate on Him accordingly. In spite of having different names, Brahman (God) still remains one and the Hinduism monotheistic. Note also that worshipping Varuna and Vishvakarma just amounts to worshipping God in two different aspects of water and construction, respectively. In reality, worship of either Varuna or Vishvakarma or both of them together still amounts to -- including the potential benefits -- the worship of one Brahman. The Real, possessing various attributes (i.e. God as Varuna or as Vishvakarma), should not be seen as accumulating them mathematically. Thus, one (as Varuna) + one (as Vishvakarma) is not to be construed as two, but still One (God).

Depending on the basic attributes, God (Hari or Savior) is called Om -- the creator (Omniscient, Brahma, the chaturmukh); Tat -- the preserver / master (Omnipotent, Vishnu, the chaturbhuj); and Sat -- the destroyer (Rudra or Shiva -- good and righteous; RV: Book 5, Hymn 44.2).

Furthermore, in the earthly regions, Iswara (and His power) may manifest as Agni; in the mid-air, as Indra; and in the heavens, as Savitar. Note that the personality or symbol used as a deity in meditation or worship is mainly for spiritual significance and to reflect the real power (God) behind it. Physical and material aspects of the symbol used in worship are less important.

True bhakti (devotion) and the type (method) of worship depend on a person's nature and temperament. Moreover, even if the object of adoration remains the same, there may be several ways to approach it. In addition, Brahman as Nirguna (unmanifested) is simply believed in. The direct worship of Nirguna Brahman is not possible, because it is not known (as Nirguna) and therefore can not be worshipped. The believer therefore simply recognizes the entire creation as a reflection of God and acts accordingly (Gita: Ch 12).

In the case of Saguna Brahman, there are two types of worship -- one is of a personal God as the Immanent, and the other by using symbols. In case of the Immanent, worship usually occurs in the form of pure meditation and at the spiritual level. On the other hand, when a worshipper views God as being external to him, then the worship is symbolic. Here, symbols (objects and deities etc.) used are generally prakrit (comprising of prakrti / nature and therefore involving three modes or gunas -- sattva, rajas, and tamas). Note that the worshipper in this case needs to be careful as to what exactly the object of adoration (such as the deity) and the method of worship (yajna etc.) stand for, because that will determine the outcome (fruits) of such worship.

Object of meditation (worship) should be beyond or above the Law of Karma. It should not become part of the sansara (world) -- as a soul or the constituent matter -- and be not existing at times in the mode of darkness or ignorance (Tamas). Note that only Brahman is above and beyond Karma, is changeless, and meets these conditions (Gita: Ch. 5 - V. 29). On the other hand, if the meditation (worship) is intended towards a secondary figure (such as a guru or a deity) who is subject to the Law of Karma, the results from such effort will also be secondary (Gita: Ch. 9 - V. 25). The meditation (worship) symbols and methods should be therefore carefully selected.

Note also that the religious offerings and gifts, though important, are voluntary and motivated by faith and love. Moreover, worships and rituals should not be performed miserly and with a desire for vainglory (RV: Book 7 - Hymn 32.9; Gita: Ch. 9 - V. 26, Ch. 16 - V. 17, Ch. 17 - V. 13).

Ref.: http://www.geocities.com/lamberdar/brahman.html

 

 

Jai Shree Krishna

[AncientMariner 0]

I could be wrong but what you wrote doesn't seem to jive with Prabhupada's books. In Prabhupada's books Krishna is God and Brahma is the secondary creator empowered by Krishna but Brahma only has a maximum of 78% of the qualities of Godhead so Brahma is Godly but not actually a God. The incarnations and expansions of Krishna have more than 78% of the qualities of Godhead. I think Lord Siva has like 84% of the qualities of Godhead. At least that is how I read the books.

[Guest guest]

 

Quote:

"Let us pray," Zed began, "We meditate on the transcendental glory of the deity supreme, who is inside the heart of the earth, inside the life of the sky and inside the soul of heaven. May he stimulate and illuminate our minds."Lead us from the unreal to real, from darkness to light, and from death to immortality. May we be protected together. May we be nourished together. May we work together with great vigor. May our study be enlightening. May no obstacle arise between us."

Seeking the blessings of god on behalf of and for the Senators, Zed declared, "May the Senators strive constantly to serve the welfare of the world, performing their duties with the welfare of others always in mind. Because by devotion to selfless work one attains the supreme goal of life. May they work carefully and wisely, guided by compassion, and without thought for themselves."

"United your resolve, united your hearts, may your spirits be at one, that you may long dwell in unity and concord!" he added, and ended with, "Peace, peace, peace be unto all."Perhaps but not necessarily. Remeber the mayavadis claim their own brand of "bhakti" which is to use devotion to Ganesh Siva Durga Krsna etc. as a vehicle to merge into the Brahman.

 

I am open to his being a monotheist but am not yet convinced by this prayer.

 

I should mention that there are also mayavadis dressed as christians who pray in similar ways to other christians except they hold an impersonalist view of God. I reject them also despite their Bibles and crosses around their neck.

 

I believe leading the nations leaders in prayer is a very important thing. I believe the nations leaders should be led by the dictates of the Supreme Lord (which is far from the case now) and not just a religious show to demonstrate how open minded they are.

 

I remain an unapologetic advocate for montheism. Prsionally I would like to see them open with a Hare Krsna kirtan as well as a prayer.

 

 

You are not convinced by a prayer. You have no faith in such a such prayer - because it doesn't match your personal belief set of words, thinking system, cult etc.

You failed to grasp the most important thing. If you are NOT convinced and if you do not have faith, NO damn prayer is ever going to work for you ever!!! Prayers works on faith. personal or impersonal. Still is a prayer. The Hindu priest's inclination and intentions were good and he came forward with them in front of a group of people he thought would participate and wish well for all present, un present praising the glory of the Lord (what ever belief system, form they follow). And there were and will remain people who are there to judge, dissecting every word, labeling them and putting them under different categories of personal, impersonal, this sect, that sect, this theology, that theology, 'mayavad' obsession, we pure HK obsession, Hinduism hodge-podge polytheism obsession and so on... There is no end to it.

But thus having missed the single most important ingredient from the prayer, all you are left with is this dissection, judgmental argumentation and self ego inflating talk. cuz one has failed to walk the walk, now all that has remained is the talk. Now one can continue further meditating on what was not that right as he would have done in that prayer!! Sure you would have conducted a Hare Krsna Kirtana instead! Cuz no other form of worship or prayer probably ever seems to work. Right? Christ could never learn how to pray either, cuz he didn't know sankirtana. Nor could anyone learn to pray before coming of Chaitanya! I guess I'm putting forth a point clear enough..

 

What do we have here? A prayer!

Now immediately a group is formed to dissect it n find fault with - a. the person offering the prayer, b. the manner in which it is conducted, c. if any ideology etc is presented in it that is identical to that of yours. And there is another group that is trying to defend the prayer and the one trying to offer it.

You know what i agree about sankirtana, theist? Its the spirit of participation that supports the energy. Until we participate in the prayer, we will be left standing out n then our mind's job is to find fault with it, or see immediately what is not as right as we would want it to be. In this short response, you have failed to depict a participation in this priest's prayer, having no faith in it. Why? because since he is a so called "Hindu" and not precisely conditioned under the Hare Krsna mode of Vaishnavism, he has failed to 'rock yer boat'.

Krsna says in Bhagwat Gita - that even if you offer little water with sincere devotion and love to him, he will gladly accept it. This is exactly what Lord Shiva says in Shiva Gita to Ramachandra. He is not saying if you pray to him only the way Hare Krsnas do, then he will accept your prayers. Or only through one particular line of worship.

 

I think polytheism or monotheism, the prayer was a sincere effort that a few idiots tried to ruin. Prayer needs a particular pure and harmonious and peaceful, faithful mindset to get into. The people who shouted didn't follow it and were pre-prepared with their own dogmas, and anti towards anything not sounding their way. That's it. His prayer effort didn't rock their boat ;-)

Anyways, Sorry if something i said offended anyone. I wish you well. Thanks and Regards,

 

Yogkriya.

[AncientMariner 0]

If that is all that was said in the prayer it seems like a pretty generic prayer that almost anyone of any denomination could give. I wonder what the big deal was in having a "Hindu" deliver that prayer.

[Guest guest]

 

I could be wrong but what you wrote doesn't seem to jive with Prabhupada's books. In Prabhupada's books Krishna is God and Brahma is the secondary creator empowered by Krishna but Brahma only has a maximum of 78% of the qualities of Godhead so Brahma is Godly but not actually a God. The incarnations and expansions of Krishna have more than 78% of the qualities of Godhead. I think Lord Siva has like 84% of the qualities of Godhead. At least that is how I read the books.

 

That's perfectly alright. Nobody is in compulsion to jive in with Prabhupada and his books. Nor did Prabhupada feel any need to jive in even with common most vedic norms like starting a havan or yagya with Shri Ganesh worship. There are many terms and demarcations that he brought forward that sideline the mainstream Vedic philosophy claiming everything to be secondary, and what he did was only primary. This is alright

[AncientMariner 0]

 

That's perfectly alright. Nobody is in compulsion to jive in with Prabhupada and his books. Nor did Prabhupada feel any need to jive in even with common most vedic norms like starting a havan or yagya with Shri Ganesh worship. There are many terms and demarcations that he brought forward that sideline the mainstream Vedic philosophy claiming everything to be secondary, and what he did was only primary. This is alright

 

 

I don't mean any disrepect to your particular line of worship and if I remember right Shri Ganesh was an incarnation of Krishna so I don't think you are going wrong or anything by that worship but Prabhupada is my source for Vedic knowledge so I tend to believe what he says over other interpretations. No disrespect intended and best wishes.

[Guest guest]

 

I don't mean any disrepect to your particular line of worship and if I remember right Shri Ganesh was an incarnation of Krishna so I don't think you are going wrong or anything by that worship but Prabhupada is my source for Vedic knowledge so I tend to believe what he says over other interpretations. No disrespect intended and best wishes.

Thanks for being respectful. My best wishes to you too.

But ... umm ... Ganesha - an incarnation of Krsna!!! Is that what Prabhupada said? I thought Krsna is an incarnation of Vishnu/Narayan isn't he?

hmm... Prabhupada ji is very special indeed.

[Guest guest]

 

If that is all that was said in the prayer it seems like a pretty generic prayer that almost anyone of any denomination could give. I wonder what the big deal was in having a "Hindu" deliver that prayer.

 

I agree with you. It wasn't a big deal really. The protest was just uncalled for.