So who is this person

[jeffster 0]

Thanks again, theist. Yes, I am looking forward to posting some of my ideas here and hopefully cooperating with your good self and others here.

jeffster/AMdas

[theist 1]

There is good solid precedent for using topical social interests to present Krishna consciousness. Siddhasvarupananda has been doing it successfully for decades. His talks on all these various topics have been made into small booklets each covering a specific topic like racism, homosexuality etc. showing how to view each from the Krishna conscious perspective. Wonderful for widespread distribution. So the example is there for the rest of us.

[jeffster 0]

I am just now publishing my own first book: Vaishnava Viewpoint: Journey to Ecstasy, copyright 2008, by JR, with a simple self-published hard copy for now, as well as another version that I can't speak about just yet.

 

Isn't he the same Siddha Svarup who is in Hawaii ? He left Iskcon early on or something like that ? Where can his books be obtained ?

 

jeffster/AMdas

[theist 1]

 

I am just now publishing my own first book: Vaishnava Viewpoint: Journey to Ecstasy, copyright 2008, by JR, with a simple self-published hard copy for now, as well as another version that I can't speak about just yet.

 

Isn't he the same Siddha Svarup who is in Hawaii ? He left Iskcon early on or something like that ? Where can his books be obtained ?

 

jeffster/AMdas

 

That's great. There cannot be too many Vaisnava books and still there are so few.

 

Yes he is a disciple of Srila Prabhupada. I was fortunate to hear him speak a few times in Hawaii in the late 70's.

 

I am not sure this contact info. is still valid as it is many years old.

 

Transcendental Sound

PO Box 5063

El Dorado Hills, Ca 95762

 

1-916-933-9568

tsound@calweb.com

 

I would definitely recommend his book Who Are You?

[suchandra 1]

 

So, from a strictly transcendental perspective, there is not a great deal of difference between and heterosexual and homosexual. However, we shall see that in the practice of Krishna consciousness (sadhana-bhakti) there is a fundamental difference which can ultimately lead to either liberation or bondage.

The first flaw in Amara das' logic is that in his article of 17 May, '08, "Gay Vaishnavas Welcome CA Supreme Court Ruling," he waxes enthusiastic over the CA ruling legalizing same-sex marriage. He doesn't mention that this issue will be put to CA voters in the November election and likely overturned by the general populace. What is more disturbing, however, is the fact that he is enthusiastic over the decision of a secular body. My dictionary defines "secular" as "of or relating to the worldly or temporal" and also

"not bound by monastic vows or rules." In older times when there was little or no division of church and state, laws were passed which upheld religious mores. Now, in this age of separation of church and state, laws are passed that promote or at least tolerate sinful activities and sense gratification. More on "sin" later. In other words, in devotee parlance, the secular authorities are in "maya." Why should we listen to them or want to follow their illusory edicts ?

Sorry if my statement that "there is no sanction in any known religious system" wasn't accurate. But even if we accept the fact that some of the world's indigenous religions accommodated homosexuality, should we as Vaishnavas accept this ? Amara das himself said that "Vaishnavas may not agree with these beliefs." What great contributions have any of the indigeneous religions made to the world? What was their standard ? What is the Vaishnava standard ? Compare their standard to the Vaishnava standard and to our sublime goal of cent percent surrender and service to Lord Krishna, and we can see that this is not an acceptable argument for acceptance of homosexuality. If anything, all that these religions could do was sanction activities that they couldn't manage.

I also stand behind my statement that "homosexuality is perhaps a denser form of entanglement (conditioning)." In fact, I shall confidently remove the word "perhaps" altogether. Let's compare apples with apples here. I am not comparing a celibate gay man with a heterosexual rapist. But is is fair to compare a sexually active gay couple with a sexually active heterosexual couple. For the sake of our argument, let us consider that both couples are attempting to become Krishna conscious. Our Vaishnava prohibition is that there is no sex outside of marriage and sex within marriage only for the purpose of procreation. Firstly, the gay couples are prohibited from marriage altogether. Heterosexual devotees can at least legitimize their sex desire through marriage by having children whom they can raise in Krishna consciousness. Homosexuals have no way to legitimize their sexual desire, as it is for sense gratification only. Homosexuality, therefore, falls completely outside of the purview of the householder ashram. In fact, it falls within the category of sinful activity. I define sin as that which is contrary to self and God realization. But perhaps my definition is not valid or bonafide enough; my dictionary defines sin as "1.)an offense against God, 2.) transgression of the law of God, 3.) a vitiated state of human nature in which the self is estranged from God." Perhaps the fact of nature's arrangement has been lost on homosexual men... The most powerful attraction IS between man and woman and it was designed that way to perpetuate the human race. What is Amara suggesting here ? That we should become gay because it is somehow less entangling than a man/woman relationship ? This is a dangerous argument and subtly promotes values of sinfulness.

I also maintain that these so-called Christian denominations have only succeeded in watering down the principles of bonafide religion in order to increase the numbers in their congregation by allowing non-standard (homosexual) members to marry. I do not believe that Christ would have sanctioned it. Perhaps one of our readers can find a scriptural reference on what Jesus said, if anything, about homosexuality.

Again, after having said all that, I feel that homosexual devotees should certainly be accepted and encouraged as devotees, but never given sanction through marriage. Rather they should maintain a low profile and not let their "gay pride" go to their heads. In the purport to Bhagavad-gita 15.5, Prabhupad states "The surrendering process is described here very nicely. The first qualification is that one should not be deluded by pride." And I would give that same advice to myself or any other practicing Vaishnava. We are all fallen, we are all beset by sex desire and we all have a greater or lesser degree of false pride. With good faith, let us encourage each other to chant Hare Krishna and serve. There is hope for all of us."

 

After having some time to give this article more thought, I also realized that the position of the gay apologists is that they were "born" with the tendency, as if to say, "We can't help it." We all have free will, so somewhere along the journey homosexuals came up with their desire to be gay and it has now fructified so that they were born with this tendency in this life. Since it all has to do with desire, isn't it is time that they began to clean up their desires and get back on track, and not use the excuse that it is an inborn tendency in an attempt to rationalize their gaydom ?

jeffster / AMdas

 

These are good points and surely in the line what Prabhupada also said.

If Prabhupada would have preached 2008 in a situation where homosexuals are spread like an epidemic plague and millions are infected, he surely would have found a similar tool like he found for the hippies to bring leverage to bear on the poor gays and get them engaged in KC, to actually do something and not apply segregation.

However, what we see happening for example in the church, homosexuality actually did quite some tremendous damage there and so far the church is pretty much fed up and immediately kicks out priests with homosexual notion.

If the Catholic Church kicks out homosexual priests because they caused huge numbers in the church's withdrawal statistics why should the Vaishnavas show mercy?

[theist 1]

 

If Prabhupada would have preached 2008 in a situation where homosexuals are spread like an epidemic plague and millions are infected, he surely would have found a similar tool like he found for the hippies to bring leverage to bear on the poor gays and get them engaged in KC, to actually do something and not apply segregation.

Indeed many of Prabhupada's early disciples were homosexuals. Even to the position of personal servant who gave him massages. No one can claim Prabhupada treated them any differently then his heterosexual disciples. He still spoke out against homosex calling it demonic and not for any sane man and he blasted priestly sanction of gay marriage. So he has set the example and there is no need to reinvent the wheel on this one in spite of what Ramachandra Goswami suggests.

[Amlesh 1]

 

Then to take second hand opinion without reading the. words of the compassionate contribution and assimilating an opposition without observing the characteristics of the progress is rude.

 

Might be, but if there are 1001 Darwins with 1001 thesis, it will take time for me to bring forward an approval, anti-thesis or may be synthesis of all what they said. Surely, anything lacking spiritual elements, is incomplete.

 

And as dumbo lives in peace with existence; mankind is still abusive and capable of misconduct, dumbo is not. Let’s give a hand to dumbo for remaining true to existence.

Man who is abusive and who is a slave to misconduct is under the cathegory to Dumbo.

 

And Thoth suggested Light is life, well before most … does that mean GE must give up the patents.

 

You are right, but original remains the original. The original is complete in itself. Nothing to add and nothing to remove.

 

 

Perhaps Gita was describing what is true, that the progress of ‘evolution’ is true; why can’t you? Who knows maybe <st1:city><st1:place>Darwin</st1:place></st1:city> was a closet case Gita man and was picking up where the old teachers left off. Are you denying what both Gita and Darwin suggest; evolution is real and a description of a process within Vishnu; kind of Brahma ish… the process of good!

 

I'm understanding where you are coming to, but Darwin left the spiritual element concentrating only on Physical aspects. Krishna considered both.

 

 

Who was here first Vishnu or Krshna?

 

You can start a new thread for that.

 

 

As well who is more honest to represent truth, dumbo or you? Maybe dumbo should be our world hero. As it seems best to honor the integrity of life and that ability of nature to reveal pure truths rather than people who can get upset (emotional) because their faith is being revealed as ankle deep. And that comment is not about the ill regard of a teacher but of them who follow with zero intent of developing truth and summarize for the next generation to evolve a little more than the previous; a selfish arrogance based on faith.

 

I don't like the Versioning of Truth. It will make the present Truth falsified in the near future. Everything is mutable except the spiritual element. It seems you are neglecting it.

 

 

Then why speak of Prabhupada when Bhaktivinoda Thakura was his guru…? Did Srila Prabhupada exceed the works and books as well increase the attrition well beyond Bhaktivinoda Thakura? Answer simply yes or no. Now do you wish to restate your line; as it is found a fib? And what would make your mind so clouded as to fib other than an emotion of the self?

 

Truth is as old as the hills and mountains, Srila Prabhupad never invented or extended the philosophies given by Bhaktivinoda Thakura. He just taught what Bhaktivinoda Thakura taught.

 

 

The guru should never put another in a position to oppress the student of the goal of linear achievements in knowledge.

( I want my child to be better off and experience life without having to fall into the holes I did.)

The teacher fails if the student is less than……….. Do you see the error in the logic you presented? And then realize others may have seen and been damaged, all because of ‘self.’

Then why follow a master? Why read words? Why the heck are you breathing if good has no meaning? ‘good: supports life…..’ ‘bad; loss to the common’………. Follow the mind of self and which lives by your choice?

The Guru is satisfied when the Knowledge acquired by the Student is on the track followed by the ancient.

 

 

Do you wish to learn even from others words?

 

You have seen people evolve, did you see improvement or rather a degenerated society.

 

From the above the statement that the worshippers of the unmanifest also reach Him it is impossible to equate the worship of the Unmanifest with the Nirguna Brahma. How could the worshippers of Nirguna Brahma attain Sri Krishna who is Saguna Brahma? Advaita philosophy does not accept the attainment of Saguna as the consummation of the worship of Nirguna Brahma; the one who pursues the Nirguna path, attains Brahma Himself. Thus when we examine the fruit of the worship of the Unmanifest and see the superior place given to the worship of the Lord as Manifest as against the pursuit of the Unmanifest, it is clear that what is referred to in this context is not the Saguna and Nirguna aspects of the Supreme Lord but the worship of Sri Lakshmi and the Lord Himself.

 

Nirguna is the stage above satva Guna. Nothing to do with niraakaar and saakaar.

But the ultimatum is Bhakti.

 

 

Meaning each must evolve in bother mind and spirit but without combining both in knowledge; your doomed!

 

You are right, but you have missed the element of mercy from Krishna.

By honoring more than one face of Vishnu to understand and then represent the truth

Perhaps maybe return the teachings for a better understanding?

Since we know Darwin is also within the ‘source’ as you put it, then to give of self, without needs of, to contribute, without need of, to transcend beliefs and the idealism of his own peers and religious order; simply for the intent of ‘good’…..

is that ‘Godhead’ in the flesh or Brahman; yet you never even give the book and works a chance… simply because of another’s opinion that it is against your belief…..

 

I've told you earlier I don't like the word belief. I've never say no to your way of acquiring knowledge, but it's never conclusive but speculative. If i'll ask you when will your doubt be dissipated and reach a sound conclusion, I'm still wondering about your answer.

 

My way for gaining knowledge is not a predetermined way, I wait for the mercy of Krishna and the devotees like Hanuman, Sita Maa and his other dear most.

 

If you find it irrational then so be it.

 

 

never say never; especially when your integrity is on the line.

 

 

I don't mind to lose my integrity in front of anyone. I don't mind if I'm proved wrong in this forum. I don't mind if I'm called the very Dumbo.

 

I suppose I need to thank Hari to let me have this capacity or if you like, this incapacity.

 

Anyways will do.

 

 

Start with honesty and share what has been learned rather than repeat or mirror what another said without comprehending what it meant.

 

does that answer your question?

 

Once I was accused of never quoting or giving facts from Shatras, today I'm accused of being mirroring others thoughts.

 

Decide for yourself.

 

I prefer the way you don't like, it's safer and more beautiful and more conclusive and also more rational.

 

I don't trust my dirty mind to collect Gyan, I prefer the Lord to cater for that.

[jeffster 0]

Yes, if Prabhupad were here preaching today, he would find a clever way to engage homosexuals. But he is not here, he left the responsibility to us, as faulty as we (I) still are, to attempt to carry on. Prabhupad saw beyond all the designations that we are still attached to, such as homosexual and heterosexual, and he simply encouraged us to engage in service and chant, knowing that if we did so, we would eventually become purified and become free from our bodily designations. I feel that anyone who is sincere enough to want to practice KC should be encouraged, and this, from my book: "...he should also be encouraged to give up homosexual behavior altogether or, if unable to do so, remain loyal to one partner." The rest of it is similar to what I have stated above in the reply to Amara das. Homosexuals should be allowed to be congregational members, at least, but certainly never allowed into a brahmacari or brahmacarini ashram, for sure. But celibacy would still be the safest position for a person with homosexual tendencies, because that would mean that he/she is not acting on those tendencies. But, again, from a strictly transcendental viewpoint, the same could be said for heterosexuals, as well. Sexual desire, separate desire has to be given up regardless of who we are. It's difficult to walk the walk, that's for sure, but necessary.

jeffster/AMdas

[theist 1]

 

"...he should also be encouraged to give up homosexual behavior altogether or, if unable to do so, remain loyal to one partner."

My opinion is even the advice of sticking to one partner is too much. Unless one is speaking as a confidential friend our as that person's siksa guru I feel that in general as advice it is giving too much sanction. It should just be given up.

 

Everything else I am on board with.

[jeffster 0]

But some people can't give it up, any more than heterosexuals can give it up. Of course, we know that heterosexuals can legitimize it through having progeny that hopefully they raise in KC. But does that mean that you wouldn't allow a homosexual with a homosexual partner to even be a congregational member ? On the other hand, in most cases, homosexuals, because of their tendency to this type of sin, wouldn't be interested in KC anyway, but what of the few who are ?

[theist 1]

 

But some people can't give it up, any more than heterosexuals can give it up. Of course, we know that heterosexuals can legitimize it through having progeny that hopefully they raise in KC. But does that mean that you wouldn't allow a homosexual with a homosexual partner to even be a congregational member ? On the other hand, in most cases, homosexuals, because of their tendency to this type of sin, wouldn't be interested in KC anyway, but what of the few who are ?

 

Of course there should be no such restriction. Anyone can be a congregation member as in comng to the kirtana temple and festivals doing service etc. I've been a congregational memeber while stoned on ganja everyday, addicted to illicit hetero sex. I am not much into keeping track of memberships and such things anyway.

 

What I mean is when giving advice to the public I believe there is a limit on how liberal a Krishna conscious preacher need go. I don't think telling someone to just be a faithful homosexual is appropiate. Maybe that is all someone can do and that is none of my business as long as they don't flaunt it especially around the temple or at devotee gatherings. Something like someone may smoke ganja but they may not smoke at the temple or during kirtan's etc.

 

Prabhupada already set the example with his homosexual disciples. It should just be followed.

[jeffster 0]

My thinking was that monogamy is superior to promiscuity. At least there would be some standard, rather than no standard. But, I personally agree that homosexual behavior would be better if given up entirely.

[theist 1]

 

My thinking was that monogamy is superior to promiscuity. At least there would be some standard, rather than no standard. But, I personally agree that homosexual behavior would be better if given up entirely.

 

The standard is already there. It is Krishna's standard for human life and it is up to us to adjust to it. So many things have been relaxed to met the inadeqecies of earth inhabitants during this age. But there are some basic facts of nature that cannot be given up if we want to be considered human beings.

 

Homosexuality is clearly opposed to the most basic laws of nature. Abortion is another abominable activity that needs to be checked and not compromised with just to get public favor.

 

Anyway everyone can chant.

[jeffster 0]

It was my idea for a standard for the non-standard homosexuals. Sort of an interim standard, for the many of them who can't rise to the full standard that Srila Prabhupad encouraged. Just an idea...

 

My book went live yesterday on Amazon Kindle. Kindle is their fairly new book downloader and display device. In other words, the book is in electronic format only, at this time, although I will be selling hard copies at San Francisco Rathayatra for anyone who is interested. I haven't yet been able to upload my product image, which is a pic of the front cover of the book. At least now there is something on Kindle outside of the usual pap, even though, in a disclaimer, I don't claim to represent any Vaishnava ecclesiastical organization. Everything is just the "opinion of the author."

jeffster/AMdas

[theist 1]

There is a board here at Audarya Fellowship that has been kindly set up as a place for devotees to advertise their projects and items for sale called the Friendly Marketplace. You may want to consider posting an ad there.

 

Good luck on your endeavor.

 

I am hoping you will start some threads on the other subjects from your book here as well.

[jeffster 0]

Hello again, theist,

Yes, I need to be involved here, if the members will have me. I need to learn to give again, after 22 years of doing mostly business. The business was mostly taking, so it is time for me to learn to give.

I.M. Faulty/jeffster/AMdas

[theist 1]

 

Hello again, theist,

Yes, I need to be involved here, if the members will have me. I need to learn to give again, after 22 years of doing mostly business. The business was mostly taking, so it is time for me to learn to give.

I.M. Faulty/jeffster/AMdas

 

We have all been taking and exploiting others since time immemorial and it will take time to once again learn how to serve selflessly.

[Amlesh 1]

Theist, on his usual ride. Thanks dude, for knowing how to mark an end to a thread in a conclusive way, which I suppose, very few have. Lucky we are, for you to be among us.