Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org
Sign in to follow this  
boricua

Do you have to be Born Hindu to be Hindu???

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

 

Look, how much more simple can I make it then I already have?

 

If Hinduism equals Krishna consciousness then what do you say to those Hindus who don't accept Krishna as the Supreme personality of Godhead?

 

Krishna consciousness is the natural consciousness of the soul in liberation. Do you think every hindu is liberated?

 

Nor are all the Hare Krishna's really fully Krishna conscious. It is a rare condition to find such a rare soul in the world.

 

Krishna consciousness is not a belief system that you just identify with or are born into or enter into by the performance of certain religious rites and rituals.

 

If this isn't clear enough then I apologize.

 

Hinduism can be Krishna Consciousness though. Whether that it guadiya or not.

 

Do you deny that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hinduism can be Krishna Consciousness though. Whether that it guadiya or not.

 

Do you deny that?

Arrgh!!!! We need a smiley of someone pulling out his hair.

 

Only Krishna consciousness is Krishna consciousness. Someone can be God conscious from within a religious framework as well as outside of one.

 

A scientist can be Krishna conscious and his laboratory his temple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Arrgh!!!! We need a smiley of someone pulling out his hair.

 

Only Krishna consciousness is Krishna consciousness. Someone can be God conscious from with a religious framework as well as outside of one.

 

theist , im sorry to say , but you are a prime example of what happens when you give krishna conciousness to non adikaris .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

theist , im sorry to say , but you are a prime example of what happens when you give krishna conciousness to non adikaris .

 

This reminds me of a story from the Mahabharata of a young man who wanted to learn the Vedas. He performed various sacrifices in order to get the favor of Indra for becoming learned in Vedas. Indra would repeatedly tell him that he could not make the man learned in the Vedas, and that the only way one could get knowledge of the Vedas was through careful study and penance under the guidance of a guru. Still, the man persisted and his austerities became so severe that Indra reluctantly gave him the knowledge of the Vedas.

 

Armed now with knowledge of the Vedas, the man became proud of his learning. Since he was given his knowledge of Vedas as a boon, he did not go through the reformatory process of studying Vedas as a celibate brahmachari. For this reason he had not developed the good qualities that come with Vedic education, and instead had become puffed up because of his knowledge. Day by day his arrogance grew until he wanted to be worshipped by all others for his knowledge. He became lusty and deluded, and he began making unwanted sexual advances towards a brahmin girl. When the girl declined to accept his proposal, he beat her and raped her.

 

The girl's father, who was a qualified brahmin, then performed a sacrifice to invoke the presence of two black spirits whom he commanded to kill the rascal, which they did. And that was the end of him, Vedic knowledge and all.

 

This warning to self-styled "brahmanas" or "devotees" is just as relevant today, especially on Audarya. Vedic knowledge must be learned in the traditional way accompanied by sensual restraint, wisdom, and humility. There is a danger in taking short cuts and thinking one's self to be very learned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nice story !!

 

 

Vedic knowledge must be learned in the traditional way accompanied by sensual restraint, wisdom, and humility. There is a danger in taking short cuts and thinking one's self to be very learned.

 

so true.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

theist , im sorry to say , but you are a prime example of what happens when you give krishna conciousness to non adikaris .

 

Lord krishna is for everybody even the chandal can be krishna consciosness,but such a person who is krishna consciousness is truly rare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

nice story !!

 

Quote:

Vedic knowledge must be learned in the traditional way accompanied by sensual restraint, wisdom, and humility. There is a danger in taking short cuts and thinking one's self to be very learned.

 

so true.......

 

 

First of all vedic knowledge and i hope you mean the mantra chanting,no one is such an adhikari in this age leaving a few.That is why gautam buddha came on this earth ,this was also one of his reasons.Vedic mantra chanting was opposed and there is a reason why such things dont work now in that amount because the adhikaris are less and the enviroment is such.

 

As for your story,

 

 

 

Still, the man persisted and his austerities became so severe that Indra reluctantly gave him the knowledge of the Vedas

 

You yourself have said in this he performesd austerities.

So your mentioning this moral below, though true does not fit here.

 

 

 

Vedic knowledge must be learned in the traditional way accompanied by sensual restraint, wisdom, and humility. There is a danger in taking short cuts and thinking one's self to be very learned.

 

go and get some suitable stories and morals which you yourself follow.Tell me do you have vedik knowledge.are you a brahman.Certainly your two sided aims dont show youre one.In kali yuga it is said that brahmans are also like shudras.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Open to everyone without condition other then his having a desire to hear and receive the message.

Don't let the mundane religonists bluff you into thinking you are in need any other qualification like birth or joining a certain religion.

 

 

The intelligent person, with thoughtful discretion, can be assured by the great sage Vyāsadeva that he can realize the Supreme Personality directly by hearing Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Without undergoing the different stages of realization set forth in the Vedas, one can be lifted immediately to the position of paramahaṁsa simply by agreeing to receive this message.- purport to SB 1.1.2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Lord krishna is for everybody even the chandal can be krishna consciosness,but such a person who is krishna consciousness is truly rare.

im not speaking of which caste can be allowed into krishna consciousness . i know that even a chandala with suddha prema is dwijottama . but for a chandala to receieve 'krishna consciousness' he has to be adhikari first . this goes for every caste including brahmins . plants gan be grown in different variety of soils . but if there is no water in it , the entire thing turns useless . im speaking of this moisture or adhikar . and you are wrongfully uderstanding it to be the 'types of soil' !!!

 

hope things are clear to you now !!!!! :eek4:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Look, how much more simple can I make it then I already have?

 

If Hinduism equals Krishna consciousness then what do you say to those Hindus who don't accept Krishna as the Supreme personality of Godhead?

 

Krishna consciousness is the natural consciousness of the soul in liberation. Do you think every hindu is liberated?

 

Nor are all the Hare Krishna's really fully Krishna conscious. It is a rare condition to find such a rare soul in the world.

 

Krishna consciousness is not a belief system that you just identify with or are born into or enter into by the performance of certain religious rites and rituals.

 

If this isn't clear enough then I apologize.

No offence taken. :) Although I realize that God must exist, my general religious outlook is still agnostic. I prefer oneness over duality, because in terms of formal logic, oneness seems to be a much better - and a more elegant proposition.

 

A question: Gaudiya Vaishnavism (acintya-bheda-abheda) views individuality and ego as ignorance or illusion. Isn’t that ultimately Advaitic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

No offence taken. :) Although I realize that God must exist, my general religious outlook is still agnostic. I prefer oneness over duality, because in terms of formal logic, oneness seems to be a much better - and a more elegant proposition.

 

A question: Gaudiya Vaishnavism (acintya-bheda-abheda) views individuality and ego as ignorance or illusion. Isn’t that ultimately Advaitic?

 

If you enjoy being one with God then you drop by on this web sites www.yogananda.net or at www.yoganandaji.org. They would certainly love to know what you`ve got.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

No offence taken. :) Although I realize that God must exist, my general religious outlook is still agnostic. I prefer oneness over duality, because in terms of formal logic, oneness seems to be a much better - and a more elegant proposition.

 

A question: Gaudiya Vaishnavism (acintya-bheda-abheda) views individuality and ego as ignorance or illusion. Isn’t that ultimately Advaitic?

Ok, now I kinow your position more clearly. You are agnostic. I have respect for agnostics because they are honest. An atheist wrongly declares there is no God of which he has no proof only a personal prejudice. Many so-called theists claim there is a God but don't feel a need to changed their hearts and love Him.

 

Oneness seems like a more desirable position because we inmates of the material world are here because we don't want to serve God. We can't stand the idea of their being an eternal Person that we are subordinate to. But even the Advaitins admit this world of birth and death is suffering and so they try to escape this world without admiting their eternal subordinate position to God.

 

For such people Krishna kindly let's them take temporary refuge in His aura or effulgence where they forget the whole dilemna and enter a deep slepp whereby they forget their own indivuality. It is something like the deep dreamless sleep we experience at night.

 

Eventually though the desire to regain one's indiviuality emerges and not knowing any other way to express it they again come down into the material world.

 

Vaisnavas accept the existence of eternal individuality and an eternal loving relationship with the Supreme Person.The Gaudiyas have the most intimate understanding of loving relationships with God and that is why I prefer to hear from them.

 

The bliss derived from merging into God's effulegence is compared to the water that collects in the hoofprint of a cow compared to the ocean.

 

A life of lovingrelationships reigns supreme over an existence of simple static being.

 

In either case one should chant Hare Krishna.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

im not speaking of which caste can be allowed into krishna consciousness . i know that even a chandala with suddha prema is dwijottama . but for a chandala to receieve 'krishna consciousness' he has to be adhikari first . this goes for every caste including brahmins . plants gan be grown in different variety of soils . but if there is no water in it , the entire thing turns useless . im speaking of this moisture or adhikar . and you are wrongfully uderstanding it to be the 'types of soil' !!!

 

hope things are clear to you now !!!!! :eek4:

Of course sambya but this will only be clear by whaT your definiton of kc is.

You say one has to be adhikari but how does one become an adhikari,the lords grace falls upon whom only he becomes krishna consciousness.Its not a technique, or is it?Krishna prem is very rare and it is given to the rarest of rarest by the grace of god.By your way you mean to say that krishna prema is some diksha or something.A non adhikari cannot get krishna consciouness aka love yoga state with krishna.Hes only going to get when hes adhikari.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

First of all vedic knowledge and i hope you mean the mantra chanting,no one is such an adhikari in this age leaving a few.

 

Why do you say no one? Are you saying Madhva was not qualified? Are you saying Ramanuja was not qualified? Are you saying that their disciples were not qualified? Are you saying that their disciples cannot determine who is qualified?

 

This is nothing more than arrogant presumption. You may be not be qualified, but do not make assumptions about others based on your own limitations.

 

 

That is why gautam buddha came on this earth ,this was also one of his reasons.Vedic mantra chanting was opposed and there is a reason why such things dont work now in that amount because the adhikaris are less and the enviroment is such.

 

You are confused, which is not surprising. The story was about understanding the Vedas properly, not about ritual chanting. The point is that Vedic knowledge should be received with humility and should lead to true reformation of character. Whereas certain individuals on this very thread have a repeated tendency to proclaim that they know the real essence of the Vedas and yet go around using their so-called knowledge to club everyone else over the head, calling them "mundane,hodge podge," etc.

 

I realize you do not know what I am talking about. In the past, subtlety has generally been wasted on you. The people who do know what I am talking about conceal their guilt by silence, and by threatening placement in ignore lists, etc. So I will just say to them, here is what your own guru has to say on the subject (BG 17.15):

 

anudvega-karaḿvākyaḿ

satyaḿpriya-hitaḿcayat

svādhyāyābhyasanaḿ caiva

vāń-mayaḿtapaucyate

 

TRANSLATION

Austerity of speech consists in speaking words that are truthful, pleasing, beneficial, and not agitating to others, and also in regularly reciting Vedic literature.

 

PURPORT

One should not speak in such a way as to agitate the minds of others. Of course, when a teacher speaks, he can speak the truth for the instruction of his students, but such a teacher should not speak to those who are not his students if he will agitate their minds. This is penance as far as talking is concerned. Besides that, one should not talk nonsense. The process of speaking in spiritual circles is to say something upheld by the scriptures. One should at once quote from scriptural authority to back up what he is saying. At the same time, such talk should be very pleasurable to the ear. By such discussions, one may derive the highest benefit and elevate human society. There is a limitless stock of Vedic literature, and one should study this. This is called penance of speech.

 

That is good advice to take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Why do you say no one? Are you saying Madhva was not qualified? Are you saying Ramanuja was not qualified? Are you saying that their disciples were not qualified? Are you saying that their disciples cannot determine who is qualified?

 

This is nothing more than arrogant presumption. You may be not be qualified, but do not make assumptions about others based on your own limitations.

 

certainly you yourself are confused when i say vedic knowledge.

What do you mean by vedik knowledge?

What i meant was the vedik rituals,yajnas etc.Which are to be performed.Now tell me did madhwa actualy perform or promote this.And When you talk about puraans srimad bhagwatam not everybody will consider it vedik knowledge.

 

 

certain individuals on this very thread have a repeated tendency to proclaim that they know the real essence of the Vedas and yet go around using their so-called knowledge to club everyone else over the head, calling them "mundane,hodge podge," etc.

 

 

Ofcourse they do because it is mahprabhus philososphy.You speak of ramanuja and madhwa but where their philosophies same and so is it that one of them didnt know vedas.You dont know anything about your own philosophy and you talk about others.

 

 

 

I realize you do not know what I am talking about. In the past, subtlety has generally been wasted on you. The people who do know what I am talking about conceal their guilt by silence, and by threatening placement in ignore lists, etc. So I will just say to them, here is what your own guru has to say on the subject (BG 17.15):

 

 

This is the biggest joke ive heard from you.Certainly irony is your favourite emotion.Its like a thief telling teaching and ordering me not to rob others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

certainly you yourself are confused when i say vedic knowledge.

 

Sant, everyone is confused when you say anything, because you can't type in proper English and don't seem to have any idea what you are talking about.

 

 

What do you mean by vedik knowledge?

 

Knowledge of the Vedas.

 

 

What i meant was the vedik rituals,yajnas etc.Which are to be performed.

 

 

Oh I'm sorry. With Hare Krishnas many words often do not mean what they seem. Very well, let us use your dictionary.

 

 

Now tell me did madhwa actualy perform or promote this.

 

Uhh, yeah. Vedic rituals were performed under Madhva's direction and are done right down to the present day in the Madhva tradition. Have you never been to the Udipi Sri Krishna temple?

 

Vaishnavas from traditional sampradayas are quite qualified to perform Vedic rituals and yagnas and continue to do so today. You are certainly not qualified - do not extrapolate to others the weakness of your own character.

 

In response to, "certain individuals on this very thread have a repeated tendency to proclaim that they know the real essence of the Vedas and yet go around using their so-called knowledge to club everyone else over the head, calling them "mundane,hodge podge," etc." you wrote:

 

 

Ofcourse they do because it is mahprabhus philososphy.

 

So let me see if I got this straight. It is Caitanya Mahaprabhu's philosophy for people to claim they know the Vedas even though they never studied the Vedas, and then to go around clubbing other individuals with this so-called knowledge and calling their religion "mudane,hodge podge," etc?

 

 

You speak of ramanuja and madhwa but where their philosophies same and so is it that one of them didnt know vedas.

 

Sant, what are you talking about? Do you have any idea how crazy you sound? Can you not trouble yourself to learn English? No one can figure out what it is you are trying to say.

 

 

You dont know anything about your own philosophy and you talk about others.

 

Whatever you say, Sant. Am I correct in assuming that you are no older than 16 years of age?

 

In response to my quoting Sri Krishna's instructions on austerity of speech in BG 17.15 and Prabhupada's commentary to that effect, you wrote:

 

 

This is the biggest joke ive heard from you.Certainly irony is your favourite emotion.Its like a thief telling teaching and ordering me not to rob others.

 

You may not take Sri Krishna's instruction seriously, but it is there nevertheless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everybody in this world are only HINDUS.I quote this with authority as the first religion was only the vedic within which fold the entire humanity was created.While other religions may not to it,please analyse the following.

1.All religions emanate from a founder which means that religion was not there before the founder.So what religion people were following before that?When mankind was created,God also created a religion for them to attain salvation.Hence any religion which starts from a founder was not before him.

2.Hence the only religion which was there from time immemorial is Hindusim.

3.People who are attracted towards Hinduism and its philosophy,but born in other religions now can follow the samanya dharma prescribed for entire mankind.The vishesha dharma prescribed for others cannot be practised as they have been made by God to be born to non hindu parents which we should not try to alter by converting them as Hindus.It would mean going against the wishes of God

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Sant, everyone is confused when you say anything, because you can't type in proper English and don't seem to have any idea what you are talking about.

 

Certainly my english can be bad.

But im clear now.

 

 

Quote:

What do you mean by vedik knowledge?

 

Knowledge of the Vedas.

 

No again you talk nonsense.Do you think vedas are storybooks.Have you even read the vedas.

 

 

Quote:

What i meant was the vedik rituals,yajnas etc.Which are to be performed.

 

 

 

Oh I'm sorry. With Hare Krishnas many words often do not mean what they seem. Very well, let us use your dictionary.

 

 

Do you think vedas do not talk about rituals.The vedas mostly contain prayers and mantras to be performed by priests.Isnt that correct sir.

 

 

Uhh, yeah. Vedic rituals were performed under Madhva's direction and are done right down to the present day in the Madhva tradition. Have you never been to the Udipi Sri Krishna temple?

 

No ive not been.This is your finite understanding of vedas.The vedas dont even talk of temples.The yajnas done they themselves purify the enviroment.

 

Vaishnavas from traditional sampradayas are quite qualified to perform Vedic rituals and yagnas and continue to do so today. You are certainly not qualified - do not extrapolate to others the weakness of your own character.

 

Again the vedas are to be performed by brahmans and im not one.So ofcourse i wont do it.It is said that in this age the brahmins are also shudras and they do the yajnas.Surely that is being proved here.

 

 

In response to, "certain individuals on this very thread have a repeated tendency to proclaim that they know the real essence of the Vedas and yet go around using their so-called knowledge to club everyone else over the head, calling them "mundane,hodge podge," etc." you wrote:

 

Its you who does it.Besides Mahprabhus philosophy is great.If you due to youir enmity with a hare krishna will not accept it then that is your wish.youre not accepting because you have some enmity with them not because you think they are wrong.Isnt that true.

 

 

 

Quote:

You speak of ramanuja and madhwa but where their philosophies same and so is it that one of them didnt know vedas.

 

Sant, what are you talking about? Do you have any idea how crazy you sound? Can you not trouble yourself to learn English? No one can figure out what it is you are trying to say.

 

What shall i do. Whatever you dont want to accept or dont like to answer or dont have an answer for are going to make excuses.

 

 

Quote:

You dont know anything about your own philosophy and you talk about others.

 

Whatever you say, Sant. Am I correct in assuming that you are no older than 16 years of age?

 

Wrong again.

 

 

In response to my quoting Sri Krishna's instructions on austerity of speech in BG 17.15 and Prabhupada's commentary to that effect, you wrote:

 

 

Quote:

This is the biggest joke ive heard from you.Certainly irony is your favourite emotion.Its like a thief telling teaching and ordering me not to rob others.

 

You may not take Sri Krishna's instruction seriously, but it is there nevertheless.

 

 

Ofcourse if a thief comes and tells me not to rob anyone then i can laugh only.Yo yourself use bad words and try to insult people and youre telling me.

 

 

So I will just say to them, here is what your own guru has to say on the subject (BG 17.15

 

Remember this raghu.

What did you mean your own guru.Bhagwad gita is for everyone i thought but you have started this-'your guru my guru'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sant,

 

You are completely missing the point Raghu is trying to make. You are relatively new to this forum and in all probability have no idea about the offensive posts made by some of you esteemed Western Hare Krishna colleagues here in the past - the same colleagues you are trying to protect by abusing Raghu. In short, you are missing the context and are not able to understand his position.

 

Perhaps if you took some time off to read some of the older threads, that may help you gain the right perspective. You may still disagree, but you will at least stop believing some of us have some kind of hatred against the Hare Krishna system.

 

Veda does not just mean rituals. it is a lot more than that, and when you simply say veda, it is taken to cover the entire corpus. You cannot assume Veda = rituals and abuse others for not making the same mistake.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Sant,

 

You are completely missing the point Raghu is trying to make. You are relatively new to this forum and in all probability have no idea about the offensive posts made by some of you esteemed Western Hare Krishna colleagues here in the past - the same colleagues you are trying to protect by abusing Raghu. In short, you are missing the context and are not able to understand his position.

 

Perhaps if you took some time off to read some of the older threads, that may help you gain the right perspective. You may still disagree, but you will at least stop believing some of us have some kind of hatred against the Hare Krishna system.

 

Veda does not just mean rituals. it is a lot more than that, and when you simply say veda, it is taken to cover the entire corpus. You cannot assume Veda = rituals and abuse others for not making the same mistake.

 

Cheers

 

I see only raghu making such statements and you always joking about hare krishna philossophy.Show me some posts or tell me which one then i can also see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I see only raghu making such statements and you always joking about hare krishna philossophy.

You are wrong my friend.

What Kaiser always do is defend his philosophy. You are accusing him of something that he should be accusing others of doing so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can anyone help me? I have had rems of the Hindu gods. the first was lord Shiva putting his head to me like he was very disappointed in me, i think it was because i was straying away from my religion. And another was lord Hanuman in my dream there was a painting of him pointing at me, and another painting i could see his face but everything around him was bright colours of red. what does that mean? is he mad at me aswell?. in my living room we have a beautiful oil painting of lord Ganesha, and on somedays after prayers the painting will actually shine like it has minature diamonds within it. amazing. but in my dream i saw the painting but this time it was only his face and everything around the paiting was glowing bright gold and red. what does this mean? i hope hes not mad at me aswell. and can anyone tell me some lord hanuman muntras and ganesha muntras, i alreay have several lrod shivas muntras to chant. so I can please them. Thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be blunt you take your dreams and what you think you see in these paintings all too seriously.

 

One thing you can count on is the Lord in your heart whom at this time you may not be able to see but who can see you. Him you can pray to and try to please. He will guide you spiritually if you put your faith in Him. In sanskrit He is called Vishnu or Paramatma, the Lord in the heart.

 

Hare Krishnaparamatma.gif

 

paramatma.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody is born with any religion literally, but Krishna Bakthi or devotion to God is something that is being carried by the soul from birth to birth according to Sri Krishna in His Own words where He talks about it when Arjuna questions Him.

 

Vedic principles are not religion based. Anyone can follow. In fact there was no religion existing in India until Muslims invaded and when they called the people living on other side on Sindu as Hindus. Europeans branded sanathana dharma as Hinduism to differentiate it from christianity and islam and other practices..

 

Sanathana Dharma is just pure principles of life any human can follow to reach the Kingdom of God ultimately.

 

Nobody will be left out ultimately and regardless of whatever level a soul may be in evolution, everyone goes there finally with realization and thats the beauty of explanation and comfort one can get by following the foot of Krishna.

 

Shyam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My dear friend Boricua:

Dharma or religion is the matter of faith. You do not need to be born in certain region or family to follow that religion or faith. If person born in Hindu family but does not have faith in that religion, he or she is not hindu. But most important thing is that Sanatan Dharma is the original name of this faith. Sanatan means the thing which does not have regional boundaries, does not have boundaries of time (kaal) means it was in the past, it is in the present and it will be in the future. In short, it does not change per geographic area or time lines. Your heart and mind accept this faith, so you will become automatically Sanatan Dharmi or follower of Sanatan Dharm. It is upto your heart and mind has to accept the faith. Then faith is for your own good. It is not a title, you don't have to carry and show others. Saint Sri Tulsidasji says "Bhojan (Food), Bhajan (Faith/worship) and Bharya (Wife) should be the public affair, it should be confidential. So, you don't have to declare your identity as a Hindu or Sanatan Dharmi. This religion says that the Karma identifies the person's cast, state of the mind, or faith. No body has to approve or put a stamp of approval. If you have more doubts, please let me know. I will try my best to give you truth as much as I know. Be happy. Peace. OM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×