A Hindu Temple?

[theist 1]

 

 

 

A Hindu Temple?

BY: MAHAVIDYA DASA (ACBSP)

 

Jan 18, UK (SUN) —

 

I'm interested to know why my local temple, Bhaktivedanta Manor,

is constantly being presented to the public as a Hindu temple.

After all,

Bhaktivedanta Manor is one of Srila Prabhupada's many ISKCON temples.

Can anyone remember when Srila Prabhupada tirelessly campaigned to promote His ISKCON as a Hindu organisation?

Having said that,

There is no doubt in my mind that Srila Prabhupada sought to engage Hindus in His ISKCON.

There is also no doubt in my mind that, more importantly, Srila Prabhupada sought to engage EVERYONE in His ISKCON.

Hindus, Christians, Muslims, Jews, even the atheists.

Srila Prabhupada did teach us about Hinduism, that's for sure, as much as he taught us about other religions, about impersonalism, about everything.

We may consider ourselves "experts" on the subject of Hinduism.

We may even consider ourselves "experts" on the subject of impersonalism.

But..

When ISKCON is constantly being presented as a Hindu society,

I consider this a gross misrepresentation of the teachings of Srila Prabhupada.

Are we to convince Muslims, Christians, Jews or atheists to become Hindus?

Certainly not.

Srila Prabhupada constantly stressed the non-sectarian nature of Krishna consciousness.

I have never read in any of Srila Prabhupada"s books or heard Him ever instruct us to become Hindus.

He taught us the science of Krishna consciousness, the science of self-realisation.

So why is ISKCON being misrepresented as a Hindu society?

Why do my local temple managers (this includes Kripamoya das) continue to promote Srila Prabhupada's temple, His institution, as Hindu?

One answer that comes to my mind is the financial benefits.

And just who profits from those?

The "leaders" who promote grossly or subtly this misrepresentation.

Let's look at who those "leaders" are.

Kripamoya das is only one example.

He is considered a senior devotee and disciple of Srila Prabhupada here in the UK.

He is involved in the congregational development.

He is considered a leader,

Yet... I have yet to hear him speak up against the present situation at Bhaktivedanta Manor. I have yet to hear him speak up against the misrepresentation of his Guru's society.

Why is that?

Well... His family are some of the principal financial beneficiaries.

Enough of Mahavidya dasa,

Let's hear what Srila Prabhupada has to say.

I am only providing a sample representation of Srila Prabhupada's teaching.

All the following quotes may be found in

Siksamrta

.

A compilation of Srila Prabhupada's letters.

 

 

• On Hinduism - Volume 2, Preaching to the Indian Community:
  "I am trying to implement the truth in this part of the world and it is the duty of the Hindus and Indians to help me in all respects."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Sri Krishnaji, March 25, 1967
  
  
  "Of course, there are many Indians who may be delighted to have a Hindu temple there, but we are especially interested in something else. Our plan is not to sponsor the Hindus or any other individual group. Our real purpose is to spread Krishna consciousness."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Yamuna, May 27, 1969
  
  
  "I am not very interested to establish a Hindu temple. Perhaps you know from the very beginning I never described my movement as Hindu religion."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Mukunda, June 10, 1969
  
  
  "We should not anymore think in terms of Hindu society. If we limit ourselves to Hindus then there will be many competitors like Christians, Mohammedans, Buddhists and so on. But if we preach the philosophy of Krishna consciousness in right earnest, it will be accepted throughout the whole world."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Sriman Bankaji, March 13, 1970
  
  
  "Regarding the Hindu centres in the foreign countries, none of them are bona fide. There is similar hodge podge center in London. Actually, Hindus and non-Hindus, everyone is at the present moment out of touch of the real science of spiritual knowledge."
  
  
  And...
  
  
  "The difficulty has become more acute on account of Rama-Krishna Mission's preaching that any opinion about religion is all right."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Jayapataka, April 17, 1970
  
  
  "We must avoid the risk of a separatist movement, unity is our purpose; just like in London where the Indians are starting their own Radha-Krishna temple. We want to avoid skin disease and the Indian people are like the tannery expert."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Sriman Hariprasad Badruka, March 5, 1973
  
  

 

Kripamoya and his wife are both receiving independent salaries. He is a manager. His good wife teaches in the school. (She has been offered a position in the new Hindu school. Ref:

Racism in ISKCON

.)

 

The Manor management refuses to disclose any information on who gets what.

 

Here is what Srila Prabhupada said on the subject of financial remuneration....

 

• "Any householder devotee who is working full time ( with his wife ) as a sankirtana book distributor, or temple managerial duties, artist, cook etc, shall be provided food shelter, and other bare minimum necessities by the temple itself. They should not cook their own meals separate from the temple meals. If they have children, then some minimal allowance may be given according to the number of children. If they want anything extra or over and above what the temple president sees as absolute necessity, then they should work outside--the temple cannot pay for anything beyond the bare necessities. And definitely, the BBT cannot pay any salary to anybody. Our philosophy is "simple living and high thinking"---not sense gratification. The temple president and leaders (elder students) must show this by example. Temple or ashrama means for renunciation and renounced persons. If one is engaged in self-realisation process, then his material necessities become almost nil. Persons who do not like this can work outside."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Kirtiraja 12 01 1975
  
  

 

And on the subject of weddings...

 

• "We should not allow anyone to hold any function in our temple, otherwise than Vaisnava principle."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Hamsaduta, October 10, 1968
  
  
  "Uninitiated couples cannot be married by us. We shall not take the responsibility of ordinary marriage maker. Our practise is to help devotees for advancing in Krishna consciousness ."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Jaya Gopal, January 11, 1970
  
  
  "Regarding using our temple for Marriage ceremonies for the Hindu community, if they contribute something to the temple they can use the temple and perform the marriage with their own priest, but we cannot take responsibility for marrying others who are not initiated by us."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Upendra, May 25, 1970
  
  
  "You can allow the sacrifice in the Manor for Mrs. Mehta, but as with the weddings they must pay for the room.( Don't have it in the temple room.) She can bring her own brahmanas.
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Patita Uddarana das, February 3, 1975
  
  
  "Concerning marriages in the Bombay center as a means of income, if it does not disturb the daily routine then it can be done. However, the marriages cannot take place before the deity in the temple."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Surabhi, May 20, 1976
  
  

 

[suchandra 1]

Things have changed at the Manor, Mahavidya prabhu, there're only Hindus visiting the Manor, no other guests attending the Sunday-feast.

Even the temple stuff are almost all Hindus. If a temple is run by Hindus and the guests are only Hindus and the school is called Hindu school, they concluded to call it a Hindu temple and ISKCON = Hindu ISKCON: http://hinduism.iskcon.com/:rolleyes:

Natural implication.

[Vigraha 0]

 

 

 

A Hindu Temple?

BY: MAHAVIDYA DASA (ACBSP)

 

Jan 18, UK (SUN) —

 

I'm interested to know why my local temple, Bhaktivedanta Manor,

is constantly being presented to the public as a Hindu temple.

After all,

Bhaktivedanta Manor is one of Srila Prabhupada's many ISKCON temples.

Can anyone remember when Srila Prabhupada tirelessly campaigned to promote His ISKCON as a Hindu organisation?

Having said that,

There is no doubt in my mind that Srila Prabhupada sought to engage Hindus in His ISKCON.

There is also no doubt in my mind that, more importantly, Srila Prabhupada sought to engage EVERYONE in His ISKCON.

Hindus, Christians, Muslims, Jews, even the atheists.

Srila Prabhupada did teach us about Hinduism, that's for sure, as much as he taught us about other religions, about impersonalism, about everything.

We may consider ourselves "experts" on the subject of Hinduism.

We may even consider ourselves "experts" on the subject of impersonalism.

But..

When ISKCON is constantly being presented as a Hindu society,

I consider this a gross misrepresentation of the teachings of Srila Prabhupada.

Are we to convince Muslims, Christians, Jews or atheists to become Hindus?

Certainly not.

Srila Prabhupada constantly stressed the non-sectarian nature of Krishna consciousness.

I have never read in any of Srila Prabhupada"s books or heard Him ever instruct us to become Hindus.

He taught us the science of Krishna consciousness, the science of self-realisation.

So why is ISKCON being misrepresented as a Hindu society?

Why do my local temple managers (this includes Kripamoya das) continue to promote Srila Prabhupada's temple, His institution, as Hindu?

One answer that comes to my mind is the financial benefits.

And just who profits from those?

The "leaders" who promote grossly or subtly this misrepresentation.

Let's look at who those "leaders" are.

Kripamoya das is only one example.

He is considered a senior devotee and disciple of Srila Prabhupada here in the UK.

He is involved in the congregational development.

He is considered a leader,

Yet... I have yet to hear him speak up against the present situation at Bhaktivedanta Manor. I have yet to hear him speak up against the misrepresentation of his Guru's society.

Why is that?

Well... His family are some of the principal financial beneficiaries.

Enough of Mahavidya dasa,

Let's hear what Srila Prabhupada has to say.

I am only providing a sample representation of Srila Prabhupada's teaching.

All the following quotes may be found in

Siksamrta

.

A compilation of Srila Prabhupada's letters.

 

 

• On Hinduism - Volume 2, Preaching to the Indian Community:
  "I am trying to implement the truth in this part of the world and it is the duty of the Hindus and Indians to help me in all respects."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Sri Krishnaji, March 25, 1967
  
  
  "Of course, there are many Indians who may be delighted to have a Hindu temple there, but we are especially interested in something else. Our plan is not to sponsor the Hindus or any other individual group. Our real purpose is to spread Krishna consciousness."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Yamuna, May 27, 1969
  
  
  "I am not very interested to establish a Hindu temple. Perhaps you know from the very beginning I never described my movement as Hindu religion."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Mukunda, June 10, 1969
  
  
  "We should not anymore think in terms of Hindu society. If we limit ourselves to Hindus then there will be many competitors like Christians, Mohammedans, Buddhists and so on. But if we preach the philosophy of Krishna consciousness in right earnest, it will be accepted throughout the whole world."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Sriman Bankaji, March 13, 1970
  
  
  "Regarding the Hindu centres in the foreign countries, none of them are bona fide. There is similar hodge podge center in London. Actually, Hindus and non-Hindus, everyone is at the present moment out of touch of the real science of spiritual knowledge."
  
  
  And...
  
  
  "The difficulty has become more acute on account of Rama-Krishna Mission's preaching that any opinion about religion is all right."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Jayapataka, April 17, 1970
  
  
  "We must avoid the risk of a separatist movement, unity is our purpose; just like in London where the Indians are starting their own Radha-Krishna temple. We want to avoid skin disease and the Indian people are like the tannery expert."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Sriman Hariprasad Badruka, March 5, 1973

Kripamoya and his wife are both receiving independent salaries. He is a manager. His good wife teaches in the school. (She has been offered a position in the new Hindu school. Ref:

Racism in ISKCON

.)

 

The Manor management refuses to disclose any information on who gets what.

 

Here is what Srila Prabhupada said on the subject of financial remuneration....

 

• "Any householder devotee who is working full time ( with his wife ) as a sankirtana book distributor, or temple managerial duties, artist, cook etc, shall be provided food shelter, and other bare minimum necessities by the temple itself. They should not cook their own meals separate from the temple meals. If they have children, then some minimal allowance may be given according to the number of children. If they want anything extra or over and above what the temple president sees as absolute necessity, then they should work outside--the temple cannot pay for anything beyond the bare necessities. And definitely, the BBT cannot pay any salary to anybody. Our philosophy is "simple living and high thinking"---not sense gratification. The temple president and leaders (elder students) must show this by example. Temple or ashrama means for renunciation and renounced persons. If one is engaged in self-realisation process, then his material necessities become almost nil. Persons who do not like this can work outside."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Kirtiraja 12 01 1975

And on the subject of weddings...

 

• "We should not allow anyone to hold any function in our temple, otherwise than Vaisnava principle."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Hamsaduta, October 10, 1968
  
  
  "Uninitiated couples cannot be married by us. We shall not take the responsibility of ordinary marriage maker. Our practise is to help devotees for advancing in Krishna consciousness ."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Jaya Gopal, January 11, 1970
  
  
  "Regarding using our temple for Marriage ceremonies for the Hindu community, if they contribute something to the temple they can use the temple and perform the marriage with their own priest, but we cannot take responsibility for marrying others who are not initiated by us."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Upendra, May 25, 1970
  
  
  "You can allow the sacrifice in the Manor for Mrs. Mehta, but as with the weddings they must pay for the room.( Don't have it in the temple room.) She can bring her own brahmanas.
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Patita Uddarana das, February 3, 1975
  
  
  "Concerning marriages in the Bombay center as a means of income, if it does not disturb the daily routine then it can be done. However, the marriages cannot take place before the deity in the temple."
  
  
  Srila Prabhupada Letter to Surabhi, May 20, 1976

 

 

 

 

interesting KRISHNA story theist, 99% of the time you talk about Krishna, Its devotees like you that keep me on this thread. I want to advance in Krishna Consciousness. If it is NOT about Krishna then the thread is not worth reading!!

[theist 1]

 

 

 

A Hindu Temple Continued

BY: MAHAVIDYA DASA (ACBSP)

 

Jan 21, UK (SUN) —

 

Further elaborating on "

A Hindu Temple?

"

It is very clear from Srila Prabhupada's own letters that He was stressing the non-sectarian nature of Krishna consciousness.

He did NOT advertise His ISKCON as Hinduism,

nor did he want ISKCON to be advertised as such by His followers.

Yes,

there is a common cultural background,

but that's it.

Srila Prabhupada is presenting a spiritual revolution to the world at large.

And…

His ISKCON is the vehicle to execute that mission.

Did Srila Prabhupada want Hindus involved in that mission?

Most certainly.

Srila Prabhupada's followers came from all walks of life,

all varieties of backgrounds.

Muslim, Jew, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, atheist, black, white, brown, you name it.

Scientist, scholar, labourer…

Not necessarily just "hippies" with nowhere to go.

My own background was that of a "Christian upbringing".

My father was a political activist with the National Socialist party of Great Britain.

By the time I was 13, I had read Marx, The emergence of Red China, Robert Tressel, etc., etc.

However…

Srila Prabhupada's teachings, contained within His books,

beat all of those books hands down.

When I met Srila Prabhupada and His disciples there was never a mention of "Hinduism".

The first time I encountered this term

was when Bhaktivedanta Manor was in danger of being closed by the local government.

Our UK management like to celebrate our wonderful achievement in keeping the Manor open to the public

but never seem to ask,

what were the dynamics that caused the locals to want us removed?

Who were the personalities involved?

What mistakes did we make?

What can we learn from that experience?

I went to South Africa in 1979, the UK yatra was a leader in book distribution.

We had just established the Soho St temple.

I returned in 1988 to find the Manor £1,000,000 in debt ( much more if you calculate it to present day figures).

The Manor was litterly rat-infested.

The Manor was a demoralised wreck.

To get out of this black hole, ISKCON UK began to promote itself as a "Hindu" organisation.

Once the local management realised the potential of political influence and hard cash,

It simply carried on.

It goes on to this day.

The latest example is "the Hindu school ", worth about £10,000,000.

And the employment contained within for various members of ISKCON.

Look and see who benefits from this arrangement.

Those who propagate the misconception that ISKCON is a Hindu society.

As we keep repeating...

There is no doubt that Srila Prabhupada wanted the participation of the Hindu community

within ISKCON.

The problem arises when we constantly advertise ISKCON as a Hindu society.

Are we to introduce ourselves to the world as "Hindus"?

It is contrary to what Srila Prabhupada wanted.

And,

this is the criteria for success.

Not what Mahavidya dasa wants,

or what Kripamoya das wants,

or what our temple management wants.

But…

What does Srila Prabhupada want?

So .....

just where does all the friction come from?

In my opinion,

When we do NOT follow Srila Prabhupada's instruction,

Personal agendas other than Srila Prabhupada's are introduced.

The reasoning that is used sounds like this:

"Srila Prabhupada would preach according to time, place, and circumstance,

therefore what he said then is NOT relevant to our present situation".

How many times have you heard that one?

Using that particular logic you can justify any nonsense.

Simply remove Srila Prabhupada from His own society and do whatever you want.

Go back to Godhead by circumventing the Parampara.

Should any thinking person challenge such nonsense,

using Srila Prabhupada's own words,

His own instructions,

you will be accused by the unscrupulous as "critics" and "fault-finders".

 

 

[Beggar 0]

In the early to mid-eighties Haripada Prabhu and his wife Phalini d.d. opened an ISKCON temple in Fullerton, California. It was one of the biggest Indian preaching projects in America up to that time. The temple flourished and was listed in BTG. There is a law in most U.S. states including Calif. that allows the member of a church to elect the board of directors. What constitues a member of the church can just me a person who attends weekly services. Eventually the Indian congregation elected the board of directors and the new board broke its ties with ISKCON and established Hindu pancapasana but allowed the Radha Krsna and Gaura Nitai dieties to remain.

[Kulapavana 0]

if you can't attract non-Hindus to participate in Iskcon, no wonder Iskcon managers go after the easy target audience - ethnic Hindus.

 

but as to Iskcon ever being a non-sectarian organization, that is extremely debatable. I doubt anybody on the outside would have ever seen our movement in that way. In theory and in abstract principle - maybe, just maybe - but in practice we were always very sectarian.

[theist 1]

 

if you can't attract non-Hindus to participate in Iskcon, no wonder Iskcon managers go after the easy target audience - ethnic Hindus.

 

but as to Iskcon ever being a non-sectarian organization, that is extremely debatable. I doubt anybody on the outside would have ever seen our movement in that way. In theory and in abstract principle - maybe, just maybe - but in practice we were always very sectarian.

 

Nope. It was very clear when Srila Prabhupada was here that the Teachings of Lord Caitanya were transcendental in nature and above such designations as Hindu Christian Islamist etc.

 

How people from the outside perceived the movement is irrelevant to the reality.

[matarisvan 0]

 

Nope. It was very clear when Srila Prabhupada was here that the Teachings of Lord Caitanya were transcendental in nature and above such designations as Hindu Christian Islamist etc.

 

Was it also above desigations such as shaivism, vaishnavism, shaktism and jainism? Is there any evidence of that?

 

And also above sri vaishnavism, shuddha vaishnavism, gaudiya vahsnavism and other forms of vaishnavism?

 

How were the differences between these groups perceived within the organization?

[Beggar 0]

 

Was it also above desigations such as shaivism, vaishnavism, shaktism and jainism? Is there any evidence of that?

 

And also above sri vaishnavism, shuddha vaishnavism, gaudiya vahsnavism and other forms of vaishnavism?

 

How were the differences between these groups perceived within the organization?

 

It's all about words and how you define them. Srila Prabhupada was giving the old wine (Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's teachings) in a new bottle (ISKCON).

Unless one is pure and inspired like Prabhupada then whether it is a new bottle or not the "wine" will have a different, and displeasing taste. So what Srila Prabhupada did was that he preached Krsna Conciousness in a unique way for the unique audience of his time while keeping it's timeless universality. It takes a special devotee to do this and the extra speciality of Srila Prabhupada is that he was able to do it in the foreign lands of the Mleechas.

[matarisvan 0]

 

It's all about words and how you define them.

 

Does not answer the questions. You and I do not define words that already exist. They have been defined and universally accepted long back. Otherwise we would not be able to communicate now.

 

 

Srila Prabhupada was giving the old wine (Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's teachings) in a new bottle (ISKCON).

Unless one is pure and inspired like Prabhupada then whether it is a new bottle or not the "wine" will have a different, and displeasing taste. So what Srila Prabhupada did was that he preached Krsna Conciousness in a unique way for the unique audience of his time while keeping it's timeless universality. It takes a special devotee to do this and the extra speciality of Srila Prabhupada is that he was able to do it in the foreign lands of the Mleechas.

 

In other words you are saying Prabhupada did whatever he had to do to preach Krishna consciousness in foreign lands. In this case it was attracting christians in America by not getting them to feel they were entering into Hinduism which was just another religion and making it easier for them by saying Jesus was a Vaishnava.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Nope. It was very clear when Srila Prabhupada was here that the Teachings of Lord Caitanya were transcendental in nature and above such designations as Hindu Christian Islamist etc.

 

How people from the outside perceived the movement is irrelevant to the reality.

 

The reality was that he would not even consider his own godbrother's Mathas as equally valid and transcendental as compared with his own movement, and that mentality still exists in Iskcon. How is that for non-sectarian? He banned the books of Bon Maharaja and other GM writers from his movement. How is that for non-sectarian? To you he was non sectarian because he said Christianity was also Vaishnavism... whatever works for you, brother.

 

We can all claim what we want, on paper and in words. Yet, it is the reality on the ground that counts. At least in the mind of rational people. Our movement is not, and was not, nonsectarian in practice.

[Beggar 0]

 

Does not answer the questions. You and I do not define words that already exist. They have been defined and universally accepted long back. Otherwise we would not be able to communicate now.

 

What I mean by define is choosing which definition to apply since many words have multiple definitions. Then there is always connotation and denotation. Srila Sridhar Maharaj was fond of saying, "as denotation increases connotation decreases and as connotation increases denotation decreases".

 

 

In other words you are saying Prabhupada did whatever he had to do to preach Krishna consciousness in foreign lands. In this case it was attracting christians in America by not getting them to feel they were entering into Hinduism which was just another religion and making it easier for them by saying Jesus was a Vaishnava.

 

That is a valid way to look at it. There may be other valid ways also.

[theist 1]

 

The reality was that he would not even consider his own godbrother's Mathas as equally valid and transcendental as compared with his own movement, and that mentality still exists in Iskcon. How is that for non-sectarian? He banned the books of Bon Maharaja and other GM writers from his movement. How is that for non-sectarian? To you he was non sectarian because he said Christianity was also Vaishnavism... whatever works for you, brother.

 

We can all claim what we want, on paper and in words. Yet, it is the reality on the ground that counts. At least in the mind of rational people. Our movement is not, and was not, nonsectarian in practice.

 

See what you like. Now you are calling Prabhupada a sectarianist and for that I am calling you a fool.

[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"> Originally Posted by matarisvan

In other words you are saying Prabhupada did whatever he had to do to preach Krishna consciousness in foreign lands. In this case it was attracting christians in America by not getting them to feel they were entering into Hinduism which was just another religion and making it easier for them by saying Jesus was a Vaishnava.

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

That is a valid way to look at it. There may be other valid ways also.

I disagree. That is not a vaid way to look at it. Those that think they are hindus may want to see it this way. He was *NOT trying to get anybody into "Hinduism." Give it up.

 

*edited for word ommission.

[Beggar 0]

 

See what you like. Now you are calling Prabhupada a sectarianist and for that I am calling you a fool.

Prabhupada wrote about "the cult of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu". When he wrote that before coming to America, he certainly thought of the word "cult" in a different way than the anti-cult movement did some 15 years later. Could the same be said for the word, "sect"? It's all about selecting an established definition and then looking at the denotation and connotation of the word. Words are just tools that we use to express thoughts. The word and the object the word describes are different. We are not talking about the Name of Krsna here.

[matarisvan 0]

 

I disagree. That is not a vaid way to look at it. Those that think they are hindus may want to see it this way. He was trying to get anybody into Hinduism. Give it up.

 

I think Prabhupada had people like you in mind when he took that approach. He knew what would work for people like you and he told you what you wanted to hear...and it worked.

 

Beggar has it in him to admit it...unklike you and GHari who are living in a state of denial. Whatever...

 

And you evaded the question of iskcon rising above sectarian differences betwen shaivas, vaishnavas and shatas. More denial and more pretenses as usual of belonging to some one-of-a-kind transcendantal organization. You cannot even rise above differences inside the Hindu religion. Why talk about rising above other religions?

 

Empty words...

[Beggar 0]

 

I disagree. That is not a vaid way to look at it. Those that think they are hindus may want to see it this way. He was trying to get anybody into Hinduism. Give it up.

You have to remember that Hinduism is thought of as a great world religion from a distance. When you get up close to it you see that it is far more diverse than say Christianity. Kali worshippers in Bengal are considered Hindu, and are very, very different than any kind of Vaisnavas. Srila Prabhupada was trying to insulate his followers and prospective followers from such a hodge podge. Yet the British still considered Gaudiya Vaisnava's as Hindus and this mentality had crept into the British educated Indian elite who the Gaudiya Math was trying to preach to. Maybe the question goes deeper like, "can something that has a form be transcendental?"

[Kulapavana 0]

 

See what you like. Now you are calling Prabhupada a sectarianist and for that I am calling you a fool.

 

You can call me what you like, but words have established meaning and if you are using them you have to follow the standard and not invent new meanings:

 

Here are 3 definitions of the word sectarian:

 

 

1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of a sect.
   
2. Adhering or confined to the dogmatic limits of a sect or denomination; partisan.
   
3. Narrow-minded; parochial.

1. Prabhupada did separate his movement from even the group he originally came from.

2. He did set up very distinct limits for his movement, a lot of which were quite arbitrary or dogmatic.

3. He was quite broad minded in sense of philosophy and reaching out to various groups of people, but the same can hardly be said about his social views. Yet even within that broad category of philosophy he placed some very stiff interpretations of his own tradition, usually insisting on very literal interpretation of the scriptures.

 

How does all that add up to being non-sectarian I do not really know. In my opinion Prabhupada was sectarian in some areas and non-sectarian in others.

<!-- __ADSHERE -->

[theist 1]

 

And you evaded the question of iskcon rising above sectarian differences betwen shaivas, vaishnavas and shatas. More denial and more pretenses as usual of belonging to some one-of-a-kind transcendantal organization. You cannot even rise above differences inside the Hindu religion. Why talk about rising above other religions?

 

No I am not evading the question I am evading you.

[theist 1]

This is how I use it.

 

 

Therefore, sanätana-dharma does not refer to any sectarian process of religion. It is the eternal function of the eternal living entities in relationship with the eternal Supreme Lord. Sanätana-dharma refers, as stated previously, to the eternal occupation of the living entity. Sripäda Rämänujäcärya has explained the word sanätana as "that which has neither beginning nor end," so when we speak of sanätana-dharma, we must take it for granted on the authority of Sripäda Rämänujäcärya that it has neither beginning nor end.- BG intro.

[matarisvan 0]

 

No I am not evading the question I am evading you.

 

Because you cannot answer the question.

 

You have ben up and around these forums for 10000 posts and you did not get there by evading people. I have been watching you and this is not the first time you have ducked questions you cannot answer.

 

 

Therefore, sanätana-dharma does not refer to any sectarian process of religion.

It is the eternal function of the eternal living entities in relationship with the eternal Supreme Lord. Sanätana-dharma refers, as stated previously, to the eternal occupation of the living entity. Sripäda Rämänujäcärya has explained the word sanätana as "that which has neither beginning nor end," so when we speak of sanätana-dharma, we must take it for granted on the authority of Sripäda Rämänujäcärya that it has neither beginning nor end.- BG intro.

 

Ramanujacharya was not talking about chaitanya's "transcendantal" teachings. He was referring to his own sri vaishnava interpretation of the bhagavad gita which is significantly different from the iskcon interpetation. He did not cover other branches of vaishnavism or hinduism or christianity or islam. it was just about sri vaishnavism and highly sectarian.

 

If this is all you have, then you have nothing.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

This is how I use it.

Quote:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>Therefore, sanätana-dharma does not refer to any sectarian process of religion. It is the eternal function of the eternal living entities in relationship with the eternal Supreme Lord. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

For the umptinth time: There is a HUGE gap between theory and practice. In theory, Iskcon as set up by Prabhupada claims to be the most perfect expression of sanatana-dharma, non-sectarian to the core, yet up close it was quite far from that ideal. How is dressing up in traditional Vaishnava robes non-sectarian? How is painting tilak non-sectarian? How is interpreting Gita along the Saraswata parivar line non sectarian? How is the Gaudiya Vaishnava temple worship non sectarian? The list goes on and on...

 

One of the reasons people dont take our movement seriously is because we are completely unable to look at ourselves in a critical way, and with intellectual honesty admit to our own limitations. We have a shocking, GRAND case of megalomania, yet we think of ourselves as the best of the best, savior of the world in all categories. That is a total fantasy and I am often embarassed when devotees think and talk in that way.

 

A little humility goes a long way.

[Beggar 0]

 

Ramanujacharya was not talking about chaitanya's "transcendantal" teachings. He was referring to his own sri vaishnava interpretation of the bhagavad gita which is significantly different from the iskcon interpetation. He did not cover other branches of vaishnavism or hinduism or christianity or islam. it was just about sri vaishnavism and highly sectarian.

 

If this is all you have, then you have nothing.

 

Mahaprabhu took two principles from each sampradaya

Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu accepted two principles from each of the 4 Acaryas.

From Ramanuja:

 

• 1) He accepted the concept of unalloyed devotion untinged by karma and jyana
  
• 2) service to the vaisnavas

From Madhavacarya:

 

• 1) He accepted the complete destruction of mayavadism
  
• 2) worship of the deity form of the Supreme Lord Krishna

From Vishnu Swami:

 

• 1) He accepted total dependence on Krishna
  
• 2) the mellow of spontaneous devotional service

From Nimbarka:

 

• 1) He accepted as the truth the exalt love of the gopis for Krishna
  
• 2) the necessity of taking exclusive shelter of them

{vaisnava Vijay, page 98, Bh. Prajana Kesava Maharaj}

[Beggar 0]

Visva dharma

The cult of Chaitanya philosophy is richer than any other and is admitted to be the living religion of the day with the potency of spreading as Visva Dharma or universal religion.

We are glad that the matter has been taken up by some enthusiastic sages like Bhaktisiddanta Sarasvati Gosvami Maharaj and his disciples. We shall eagerly wait for the happy days of Bagavat-Dharma or Prema-Dharma inaugurated by the Lord, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. {SB INTRO}

 

Please we invite you to take up the cult of Chaitanya philosophy!

[matarisvan 0]

 

Mahaprabhu took two principles from each sampradaya

Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu accepted two principles from each of the 4 Acaryas.

From Ramanuja:

 

• 1) He accepted the concept of unalloyed devotion untinged by karma and jyana
  
• 2) service to the vaisnavas

From Madhavacarya:

 

• 1) He accepted the complete destruction of mayavadism
  
• 2) worship of the deity form of the Supreme Lord Krishna

From Vishnu Swami:

 

• 1) He accepted total dependence on Krishna
  
• 2) the mellow of spontaneous devotional service

From Nimbarka:

 

• 1) He accepted as the truth the exalt love of the gopis for Krishna
  
• 2) the necessity of taking exclusive shelter of them

{vaisnava Vijay, page 98, Bh. Prajana Kesava Maharaj}

 

Some of the points described under one group like dpenedance on Krishna and worship of the diety form of Krishna can be found in other groups too.

 

But when ramanujacharya was calling his version of Dharma as eternal, he was not just referring to the parts that were later borrowed by chaitanya. He meant the whole srivaishnava package. In other words he did not endorse chaitanya's teachings as eternal....he was endorsing his own.

 

what is meant by complete defeat of mayavada? Madhva vaishnavas failed to defeat Mayavada and are a very small group today found onyl in SOuth India I think. Writing books on how their doctrine is better than others does not mean victory. Among the traditional doctrines mayavada is the most prevalent doctrine today.