Basic Question regarding God

[venkataramana 0]

Hi,

My Name is venkataramana. I came to know about ISKCON recently. I know very little about bhgavad gita. I would liek to pose my question in detail. I am very much interested in knowing thins.

 

'Bhgavad gita and bhagavatam says Krishna is the supreme personality of god head.

 

Bible says jesus is God, in different countries there may be different gods,in which they will worship.

 

As much as i know truth can not be changes. Who is correct, is indians, where most of us believe in Krishna or some one else?

If Krishna is supreme, then why other people doesnt even know ?

I know little that, India was more advanced in terms of intellectual where people understand more advanced concepts,

Does. But why all the puranas talk about the places in india only not in any of other places in the world.

 

 

Please forgive me if there is any offensive in my statements.This question i am having for past several years.

 

Thanks for your help in getting wisdom to this igrorant

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

1. Bible is wrong. I am saying because even according to the tradition of christians bible is written by human beings.

 

2. jesus himself denies being GOD in many places in the bible.

 

3. Vedas are Apaurasheya, meaning not authored by anybody. Vedas always exist(ed) in the SABDA(Sound) form. Only Vedas teach the TRUTH.

 

4. Vedas propound Sarvottamatva of Lord Visnu, meaning that Lord Visnu(Krishna) is the GOD and LORD of every other Lord.

 

5. Lord Visnu is ASAMAURDHVA, mening HE has none equal or higher than HIM.

 

6. HE is OMNISCIENT, OMNIPRESENT and OMNIPOTENT. HE is the ANTARYAMI of all other gods(Devas), humans and rakshasas, matter, animals, birds and all that is in existence.

 

7. It is because HE is the ANTARYAMI(Indweller) of all things in existence, that all these even exist and continue to exist.

[venkataramana 0]

Dear sir,

If Krishna is supreme,why the people in the other parts of the world being denied( i mean no access, no resource at least till ISKCON created) to know Krishna. It means this world is there from several thousand years since krishna.

My strong feeling is God is same for every one. ANd every one will be allowed to know the God(krishna) and reach the god either you live in India or Some where in the world. If your soul is pure from sins and your soul's intention to reach the god, you will reach the god.

 

Is this not true that the person who is in some other part of world like 200 years before is allowed to know the God/Krishna? That time same person is not even aware of Krishna, but every individual aware of God as a whole.

 

Please forgive if my expression meant some thing wrong in any way.

 

Please help in in this regard

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

Let me bring an analogy here.

 

In this odern age, there are still many people who do not know what is the shape of the Earth. They do not understand anything about space, gravitational forces, magnetic field etc. We find Science and its influence in every sphere of life, but still there are ignorant people who do not know or have not studied science.

 

Similarly, people have different degrees of understanding about GOD, some do not have any knowledge at all, some have intimate knowledge about HIM.

 

So just like Earth is a sphere whether you or I believe it to be different, So is Lord Visnu(Krishna) GOD or LORD of al other Lords.

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

Another point is knowledge is revealed to deserving people. When people find difficulty in understanding many material things, what to speak of invisible spiritual realm and what to say about GOD who is invisible to even Devas.

 

That one may be aware of presence of GOD in everything and not know KRISHNA is impossible as per Vedas. Here KNOWING means knowledge revealed by KRISHNA(THE GOD). When this is revealed correct knowledge about KRISHNA also follows automatically. Otherwise the person does not know GOD.

 

Note:KNOWING here does not imply mere intellectual ideas. KNOWING is KNOWLEDGE revealed by KRISHNA.

[Guest guest]

hari bol,

nice questions indeed, and were the questions i had for a some time.

Bible does not say that Jesus was the Supreme Lord but that he was a son of the Lord (that he is the Lord is an incorrect intellectual interpretation of some of his words when he clearly states as being son of the God). So anyone who is worshipping God as the Supreme controller and Supreme is every sense is actually worshipping Krishna, is it not? Srila Prabhupada makes it amply clear in many places that one will obtain liberation if one seriously follows the Bible. However, he also says that currently no one is following Bible. As Srimad Bhagvatam says, that religion is first-class which teaches how to love God. However, it is true that the various relationships with the Supreme Lord that a jiva can have, are dealt with in detail only in Vedic texts; other texts are superficial at best in this.

 

But your very same argument can be applied to people in those regions (and others) before Jesus? So, the people who present Jesus as the only God are extremely ignorant and insulting Jesus himself.

 

Just having a strong desire to reach God is not enough, following an authentic method is equally important. The fact is that the basic desire of all living beings in this world is to enjoy this material world. It is not possible to find a person who without any knowledge of God and His qualities will develop pure love for Him; following a method is required.

The question is not whether or one is allowed to know Krishna. Attaining to love for God is not a simple thing -- it is the most difficult thing; just being aware of the God makes us no way eligible. The only eligility is complete desire for God and no material cravings. Also, as the Bhagavad Gita says, those who sincerely desire the Supreme Lord or even who no longer have the desire to enjoy the material world (or are tired of material world) are born in the family of righteous humans where they can fulfil their desire, whether such righteous humans be in Bharatavarsha or anywhere in the world.

 

Regarding the other question of why the Vedic texts only talk of Bharatvarsha, this is simply not true. I have read only the Srimad Bhaagvad Puraana and there are references to other places (e.g. the world is divided into nine khandas which cover the whole of the world we know; there is also reference to some sages who are not from india); i can give the exact references if you so desire. However, regarding this please note that most of the civilization/spiritual knowledge was in Bharatvarsha (do the western or other books talk about the time before Jesus/Moses) so the references are small.

[Augustine 0]

 

1. Bible is wrong. I am saying because even according to the tradition of christians bible is written by human beings.

 

 

Like Vedanta, you'll find many people saying many different things, even though they all claim to be faithful proponents of said philosophy/doctrine. However, generally only modernistic/liberal Christian groups would claim the Bible is a purely human work.

 

 

2. jesus himself denies being GOD in many places in the bible.

 

 

There are two strains of sayings by and about Christ Himself in the Bible, which are only ostensibly contradictory if one does not understand what Christians basically believe about Christ.

 

Christ is both truly God, and truly man. He is not one or the other, but both. As God He is eternal and has the attributes people of various religious traditions would associate with the Divinity.

 

What is harder for some to understand, is the teaching of "kenosis" or "self emptying." To some degree, whenever God has approached His creatures to communicate with them, He has "lowered" Himself, that is to say come with humility in a way more appropriate to our abilities to understand and our limitations. Even the awesome theophanies described in the Bible are in reality examples of God "humbling" Himself for our benefit.

 

In taking upon Himself a human nature and walking amongst men (the Incarnation), we have the ultimate example of this kenosis. Though God, in time Christ was born, felt pain, needed nourishment. Indeed, He even humbeled Himself to the point of even being able to taste death. All of this is for our sake.

 

Hence, when you read passages in the New Testament which upon a superficial reading appear to deny the Divinity of Christ, it is important to read them alongside passages which clearly underline and affirm His Divinity. The point is, that what one is reading in the so called "denial" passages are really manifestations of Christ's humility.

 

I find it particularly interesting/strange that devotees of the Krishna consciousness movement would have problems grasping this, since they themselves assert that the 16th century guru Caitanya was in fact the incarnation of Krishna (who they believe to be God) come as his own devotee.

 

[Guest guest]

"I find it particularly interesting/strange that devotees of the Krishna consciousness movement would have problems grasping this, since they themselves assert that the 16th century guru Caitanya was in fact the incarnation of Krishna (who they believe to be God) come as his own devotee"

 

a)the devotees who are denying the identity of christ as god do not know very well all aspects of krsna consciousness. (i apologize for my not so expert brothers) God is a very generic and not specialized definition... so christ is not the supreme personality of god, but he's a manifestation of god being, for example, the pure spiritual master

 

b)krsna does not need to dress a material body to interact with humans... he's eternal transcendental form, and transcendence is more real than the matter.

So he comes in this world with his transcendental body that ignorants mistake for human flesh and bones.. so krsna in vrindavan 5000years ago and mahaprabhu in mayapur 500years ago... they are the same person, no one is derivative or supreme .. but simply the same person, existence, being with different dresses

 

so chaitanya mahaprabhu has nothing to do with the christian concept of incarnation

 

i suspect that neither christ has to do with this conception and that he has transcendental body and not a human one and that's not dead