Universality and transcendance

[cbrahma 0]

 

Read his introduction to Srimad Bhagavatam for clues.

Since you are making the insinuations, point to the relevant passage.

 

For the foolish person, This is Hindu religion, This is Christian religion, and This is Muhammadan religion. But religion is one. How it can be Hindu religion, Christian religion? No. Religion is one. God is one. Because religion means the law or the order given by God. That is religion. Simple definition. His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada (01-21-07)

This quote sums up all the sectarian nonsense.

[theist 1]

 

Your presumption to know Prabhupada's intention in the absence of his voicing them is considerable. What necessity would there be to 'cast off' any sentiments, as though there were a contest between Christianity and Vaisnavism.

Yes Kulapavana has along standing habit of assuming he knows what Srila Prabhupada 'really' meant or what was in his mind as motivation for doing various things.

 

Speculating in such a way as this is really extremely arrogant. I speculate also only I don't claim my speculations as anything more than my speculations. Putting speculations forward and trying to hide behind Prabhupada's dhoti while doing it is the action of a coward.

[bija 0]

I appreciate Kulapavana's point in some ways. The masters words are like a door...we can see the door and open it, walk through and begin the journey.

 

So the wordings and approach of the teacher or not the end, but a real beginning. The master will teach in such a way to inspire the student to open the door and begin walking, so the student becomes thoughtful intelligent empowered being, just like the master walks and lives. And in due course also become able to teach others the way of his own master.

 

Srila Prabhupada's desire I feel is that all his children become masters also. He has said this is in his books. Full of compassion for the conditioned souls.

 

Why limit that which is eternal, seeing Guru's words in such light is not limiting the instructions, because the instructions are living and full of life, coming directly from the heart of a realized intelligent being.

[theist 1]

 

I appreciate Kulapavana's point in some ways. The masters words are like a door...we can see the door and open it, walk through and begin the journey.

 

So the wordings and approach of the teacher or not the end, but a real beginning. The master will teach in such a way to inspire the student to open the door and begin walking, so the student becomes thoughtful intelligent empowered being, just like the master walks and lives. And in due course also become able to teach others the way of his own master.

 

Srila Prabhupada's desire I feel is that all his children become masters also. Full of compassion for the conditioned souls.

 

Well at no point will the student put words in teachers mouth and assume to have an inside track on the teachers inner motives especially from someone who came in contact with is teaching after he has left the earth. I don't even trust those that served as his personal servants and traveled the earth with Prabhupada to speak on his behalf let alone those that never had that association or came later on.

 

He said and wrote plenty. No one need to second guess anything. If something is in doubt that simply means we don't know and it should be left at that.

 

Now this is different from disagreeing with something Prabhupada said or taught. That is fair game and can be approached respectfully and honestly. I am not advocating blind acceptance just honesty.

[bija 0]

But many made it to the other side, casting away all former sentiments. kula

I disagree with Kula on this point, of casting away things. All experience for me is an integral gift of God. There is no need to cast away anything that has bought us to the point of our present realization and love. Therefore I will never disparage christianity in its essence. Neither did Srila Prabhupada disparage its essence. I presume he understood (this is an understatement) the progression the jiva takes in his journey on this earth. And the loving patience of God. No need to cast away, a balanced human will integrate.

 

Similarly, the eternal function of the eternal living entity cannot be taken from the living entity. Sanatana-dharma is eternally integral with the living entity. by Prabhupada

Therefore, sanatana-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. Sanatana-dharma refers, as stated previously, to the eternal occupation of the living entity. Sripada Ramanujacarya has explained the word sanatana as "that which has neither beginning nor end," so when we speak of sanatana-dharma, we must take it for granted on the authority of Sripada Ramanujacarya that it has neither beginning nor end.

 

The English world religion is a little different from sanatana-dharma. Religion conveys the idea of faith, and faith may change. One may have faith in a particular process, and he may change this faith and adopt another, but sanatana-dharma refers to that activity which cannot be changed. For instance, liquidity cannot be taken from water, nor can heat be taken from fire. Similarly, the eternal function of the eternal living entity cannot be taken from the living entity. Sanatana-dharma is eternally integral with the living entity. When we speak of sanatana-dharma, therefore, we must take it for granted on the authority of Sripada Ramanujacarya that it has neither beginning nor end. That which has neither end nor beginning must not be sectarian, for it cannot be limited by any boundaries. Those belonging to some sectarian faith will wrongly consider that sanatana-dharma is also sectarian, but if we go deeply into the matter and consider it in the light of modern science, it is possible for us to see that sanatana-dharma is the business of all the people of the world—nay, of all the living entities of the universe.

 

Non-sanatana religious faith may have some beginning in the annals of human history, but there is no beginning to the history of sanatana-dharma, because it remains eternally with the living entities. Insofar as the living entities are concerned, the authoritative sastras state that the living entity has neither birth nor death. In the Gita it is stated that the living entity is never born and he never dies. He is eternal and indestructible, and he continues to live after the destruction of his temporary material body. In reference to the concept of sanatana-dharma, we must try to understand the concept of religion from the Sanskrit root meaning of the word. Dharma refers to that which is constantly existing with a particular object. We conclude that there is heat and light along with the fire; without heat and light, there is no meaning to the word fire. Similarly, we must discover the essential part of the living being, that part which is his constant companion. That constant companion is his eternal quality, and that eternal quality is his eternal religion.-Bhagavad gita introduction

[tackleberry 1]

 

In order to make Vaishnavism appeal to people with strong pro-Christian sentiment in the West, Prabhupada presented Krsna Consciousness in a particular fashion. Some of his followers took this compromise teachings as the final word, and stopped making the transition towards real Vaishnavism. They froze half way across the path. That was the risk he took. But many made it to the other side, casting away all former sentiments. Thus the risk was IMO worth taking.

 

I am quite puzzled by this, to say the least. If Prabhupada had so much faith in Krishna, he could've presented Vaishnavism in its pure form with no regard for Christian sentiments, safe in the knowledge that Krishna would take care of the rest. That he chose to do otherwise raises some interesting questions on SP's convictions. Some people might wonder why a devotee would act like salesman, unless he lacked faith in the Supreme.

[cbrahma 0]

 

I appreciate Kulapavana's point in some ways. The masters words are like a door...we can see the door and open it, walk through and begin the journey.

 

So the wordings and approach of the teacher or not the end, but a real beginning. The master will teach in such a way to inspire the student to open the door and begin walking, so the student becomes thoughtful intelligent empowered being, just like the master walks and lives. And in due course also become able to teach others the way of his own master.

 

Srila Prabhupada's desire I feel is that all his children become masters also. He has said this is in his books. Full of compassion for the conditioned souls.

 

Why limit that which is eternal, seeing Guru's words in such light is not limiting the instructions, because the instructions are living and full of life, coming directly from the heart of a realized intelligent being.

 

man-mana bhava mad-bhakto

 

mad-yaji mam namaskuru

 

mam evaisyasi yuktvaivam

 

atmanam mat-parayanah

 

"Engage your mind always in thinking of Me, become My devotee, offer obeisances, and worship Me. Being completely absorbed in Me, surely you will come to Me." These very instructions were reiterated by all the acaryas, such as Ramanujacarya, Madhvacarya, and Caitanya Mahaprabhu. The six Gosvamis also transmitted the same message, and we are simply following in their footsteps. There is no difference. We do not interpret the words of Krsna by saying , "In my opinion, the Battlefield of Kuruksetra represents the human body." Such interpretations are set forth by rascals. In the world there are many rascal gurus who give their own opinion, but we can challenge any rascal. A rascal guru may say, "I am God," or, "We are all God." That is all right, but we should find out from the dictionary what the meaning of God is. Generally, a dictionary will tell us that the word God indicates the Supreme Being. Thus we may ask such a guru, "Are you the Supreme Being ?" If he cannot understand this, then we should give the meaning of supreme. Any dictionary will inform us that supreme means "the greatest authority." We may then ask, "Are you the greatest authority?" Such a rascal guru, even though proclaiming himself to be God, cannot answer such a question. God is the Supreme Being and the highest authority. No one is equal to Him or greater than Him. Yet there are many guru-gods, many rascals who claim to be the Supreme. Such rascals cannot help us escape the darkness of material existence. They cannot illumine our darkness with the torchlight of spiritual knowledge.

The bona fide guru will simply present what the supreme guru, God, says in bona fide scripture. A guru cannot change the message of the disciplic succession.

 

[Kulapavana 0]

 

If Prabhupada had so much faith in Krishna, he could've presented Vaishnavism in its pure form with no regard for Christian sentiments, safe in the knowledge that Krishna would take care of the rest. That he chose to do otherwise raises some interesting questions on SP's convictions. Some people might wonder why a devotee would act like salesman, unless he lacked faith in the Supreme.

 

I do not see it that way at all. SP was certainly making adjustments to the tradition when preaching in the West, like including women in the ashramas, giving them Gayatri, marrying his disciples, etc. ALL preaching is done in relation to time place and circumstances - even Lord Krsna does it that way. Remember the Buddha incarnation? What? Krsna did not have faith in Himself and had to compromise? Perish the thought!!!

[Kulapavana 0]

 

But many made it to the other side, casting away all former sentiments. kula

 

I disagree with Kula on this point, of casting away things. All experience for me is an integral gift of God. There is no need to cast away anything that has bought us to the point of our present realization and love.

 

"when you find what's worth keeping

with a breath of kindness

blow the rest away."

 

Golden Feather

Robbie Robertson

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Well at no point will the student put words in teachers mouth and assume to have an inside track on the teachers inner motives especially from someone who came in contact with is teaching after he has left the earth.

 

Like you are any different on this? Or anybody else for that part? What else can you do now? Hmm? We all read what he wrote and we try to understand that in the broad context of other sources and reality on the ground. Or you can simply be a parrot and blabber out quotes without even trying to understand them or see the bigger picture. Or you simply copy and paste, because you are too scared to think for yourself.

[Amlesh 1]

The point of accepting and rejecting things comes into consideration when we are still independent.

When we give up our independence to God such thought does not come in our mind.

 

The seemingly paradox and beautiful thing is that the very same dependence is our real independence.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Your presumption to know Prabhupada's intention in the absence of his voicing them is considerable. What necessity would there be to 'cast off' any sentiments, as though there were a contest between Christianity and Vaisnavism.

 

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam, Preface

We must know the present need of human society. And what is that need? Human society is no longer bounded by geographical limits to particular countries or communities. Human society is broader than in the Middle Ages, and the world tendency is toward one state or one human society. The ideals of spiritual communism, according to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, are based more or less on the oneness of the entire human society, nay, of the entire energy of living beings. The need is felt by great thinkers to make this a successful ideology. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam will fill this need in human society. It begins, therefore, with the aphorism of Vedānta philosophy janmādy asya yataḥ [SB 1.1.1] to establish the ideal of a common cause.

Human society, at the present moment, is not in the darkness of oblivion. It has made rapid progress in the field of material comforts, education and economic development throughout the entire world. But there is a pinprick somewhere in the social body at large, and therefore there are large-scale quarrels, even over less important issues. There is need of a clue as to how humanity can become one in peace, friendship and prosperity with a common cause. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam will fill this need, for it is a cultural presentation for the respiritualization of the entire human society.

------

 

Prabhupada believed that Christianity and other religions FAILED and should be replaced with the Bhagavatam religion.

[Dark Warrior 0]

In India, back when our sampradayas were being propagated, the reason why our acharyas had to refute Buddhism, Jainism, Pasupata, Shaktism, Mimamsa, Samkhya, and a zillion other faiths was simply because none of them can lead to moksha. Only Vaishnavism can.

 

In the West, such traditions of polemics and debates is not present. You cannot go to christians and say, 'your Bible is wrong, my Bhagavatam is correct' if you want to convert them. Tact was needed and Srila Prabhupada certainly had tact.

 

For instance, it is painfully clear that neither cBrahma or Theist, for instance, would have converted if Srila Prabhupada hadn't made accomodations for their Christian faith!!

 

cBrahma couldn't prove that Bible was talking about Vishnu, so he started saying its ok if Jesus was Shaiva!! But Shaiva is certainly a defeated and rejected faith, as far as Vedantins are concerned.

 

Atleast philosophies like Samkhya and Mimamsa have a vedic connection, as do religions like Shaiva and Shakta. Yet, they have been categorically refuted. It is laughable to think Abrahamic Faiths, which contradict vedic principles at the most basic level by their whole 'fall of man' concept, is compatible, or even linked to Vedanta.

 

Here is an interesting quote from Theist's thread:

 

Non-sanatana religious faith may have some beginning in the annals of human history, but there is no beginning to the history of sanatana-dharma, because it remains eternally with the living entities. ~ Srila Prabhupada.

 

From this, it is clear that the 'Non Sanatana Faith' that Srila Prabhupada is referring to includes Christianity, Islam and the degenerate brainless Hindu sects like the Ayyappa and Ganapati cults that exist today, which are all unvedic and have a beginning in time. Vaishnavism is obviously the 'Sanatana Dharma' he was talking about.

[bija 0]

"when you find what's worth keeping

with a breath of kindness

blow the rest away."

Golden Feather

Robbie Robertson quote by kula

With a breathe of kindness indeed....would you care to join me in a cup of tulasi tea kind sir. I add some herbs and spice and it is tasty, Krsna loves it too. Bienvenido!

 

And yes cbrahma all my words are an interpretation, because I have not seen the truth or claim to know...as yet;)

 

And am not qaulified or sincere enough to repeat the words of the master...word for word.

 

This will test your discernment and sharpen your sword of truth I am sure.

[theist 1]

 

Like you are any different on this? Or anybody else for that part? What else can you do now? Hmm? We all read what he wrote and we try to understand that in the broad context of other sources and reality on the ground. Or you can simply be a parrot and blabber out quotes without even trying to understand them or see the bigger picture. Or you simply copy and paste, because you are too scared to think for yourself.

 

I gave my view on these points already? Use Prabhupada's words but don't put words in his mouth!

 

 

Well at no point will the student put words in teachers mouth and assume to have an inside track on the teachers inner motives especially from someone who came in contact with is teaching after he has left the earth. I don't even trust those that served as his personal servants and traveled the earth with Prabhupada to speak on his behalf let alone those that never had that association or came later on.

 

He said and wrote plenty. No one need to second guess anything. If something is in doubt that simply means we don't know and it should be left at that.

 

Now this is different from disagreeing with something Prabhupada said or taught. That is fair game and can be approached respectfully and honestly. I am not advocating blind acceptance just honesty.

 

There is a vast difference between philosophical speculation and mental speculation.

[theist 1]

 

Prabhupada believed that Christianity and other religions FAILED and should be replaced with the Bhagavatam religion.

 

 

All religions fall short that is why Krishna tells in the Gita to abandon them, That includes Hinduism.

[tackleberry 1]

 

All religions fall short that is why Krishna tells in the Gita to abandon them, That includes Hinduism.

 

In that case, are you prepared to abandon Christ and surrender to Krishna?

[theist 1]

 

In that case, are you prepared to abandon Christ and surrender to Krishna?

I have never been a member of Christianity. As I have said 10,000 times I grew uo an atheist.

 

Christ is a person not a religion.

 

Are you prepared to renounce Hinduism?

[tackleberry 1]

 

I do not see it that way at all. SP was certainly making adjustments to the tradition when preaching in the West, like including women in the ashramas, giving them Gayatri, marrying his disciples, etc. ALL preaching is done in relation to time place and circumstances - even Lord Krsna does it that way. Remember the Buddha incarnation? What? Krsna did not have faith in Himself and had to compromise? Perish the thought!!!

 

BuddhAvatAr was for a specific purpose-to delude the asura-s. But in any case, we cannot compare normal people with Lord Krishna and his transcendental activities.

 

Bottom line, SP used to say neo-vedantins like Vivekananda and Mahesh Yogi have twisted vedanta in order to present it to a western audience. But SP himself was guilty of this, wasn't he? He too made compromises, as you've mentioned in your post. Yet, he wasted no time in blasting neo-vedantins for doing the same thing. This is what I am referring to, this appears quite peculiar to me.

[tackleberry 1]

 

I have never been a member of Christianity. As I have said 10,000 times I grew uo an atheist.

 

Christ is a person not a religion.

 

In other words, you will surrender to Krishna WITHOUT ever abandoning your attachment to Christ. But would you call this surrender?

[cbrahma 0]

 

In other words, you will surrender to Krishna WITHOUT ever abandoning your attachment to Christ. But would you call this surrender?

How is attachment to Christ an obstacle to surrender to Krsna?

[theist 1]

 

In other words, you will surrender to Krishna WITHOUT ever abandoning your attachment to Christ. But would you call this surrender?

 

Yes I call surrender to Christ surrender to Krsna. That means that Christians must renounce Christianity to properly surrender to Christ. Surrender to Christ means to surrender to his instructions like, "Love God with all your mind body and heart and love others as yourself."

 

Here is how it works. Prabhupada has said that Christ has his own planet in this universe which he called Christ-loka. Those that follow the teaching of Christ sincerely will go to this Christ-loka for further training in krsna consciousness. Jesus himself told his disciples, "I have many other things to tell you but you are not advanced enough to understand them but when the Holy Spirit (Supersoul) comes to you He shall lead you to all truth."

 

The sincere Christian will be lead to Christ-loka in his next birth and from there he can move on to Vaikuntha after he is taught the nature of the Supreme Person and his own relationship to Him. Christ's desire is to bring people to the Supreme Person.

 

It is my personal belief that Christ travels continously throughout the universe drawing souls to his Christ-loka and from there to Goloka or Vaikuntha.

 

From this we can understand that Christ's teaching as progressive. How could he explain that God is a little Boy who plays a flute to a people that were still engaged in animal sacrifice as a means clearing their own sins. Afterall when he attack the idea of animal sacrifice the priests plotted to have him crucified.

 

The teacher can not speak over the heads of the people he is trying to inspire. Jesus did not come to start a religion. Religion is what happens when people don't quite get the true meaning of the devotees words.

 

We see the same thing happening to Prabhupada's teachings. Iskcon has become and is becoming more and more another religion with their ecclesiactical gurus.

 

Now to my question to you. Are you prepared to renounce Hinduism per the instructions of Sri Krishna?

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Bottom line, SP used to say neo-vedantins like Vivekananda and Mahesh Yogi have twisted vedanta in order to present it to a western audience. But SP himself was guilty of this, wasn't he? He too made compromises, as you've mentioned in your post. Yet, he wasted no time in blasting neo-vedantins for doing the same thing. This is what I am referring to, this appears quite peculiar to me.

 

That is a fair charge. SP was very critical in general. Someone who criticizes others must be ready for a similar reaction directed towards them. The fall from Vaikuntha preaching and compromise with Christianity are examples of his personal interpretations of "preaching needs" in the West. Other vedantist teachers made changes in their presentation as well. Still, Prabhupada did it out of compassion, not a desire for cheap popularity.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

We see the same thing happening to Prabhupada's teachings. Iskcon has become and is becoming more and more another religion with their ecclesiactical gurus.

 

 

ISKCON was a religion from day one. When you specify the devotional practices, like japa, mantra, puja, etc. you have a typical religion. And there is nothing wrong with that! Pretending that you are not a religion, however, is just misleading yourself and others.

[tackleberry 1]

 

How is attachment to Christ an obstacle to surrender to Krsna?

 

How can one surrender to Reality, whilst yet attached to myths?