Russian Hindus?

[newhindu05 0]

http://autofeed.msn.co.in/pandoraV15/output/20B755B8-917A-41AE-9D64-A06C661384AE.asp

 

I couldn't really find anything about Russian Hindus, but I heard they do exist. Ok my question is, are the people Hindus or Hare Krishnas. I get the impression on this forum that people don't consider Hare Krishna's as Hindus. If that's true than what else would they be. Also would it be because their only religious text is Bhagavad Gita. As a Hindu you should also recognize Vedas and all Shruti and Smriti text. Since Bhagavad Gita is a Smriti text, they are basically ignoring the foremost important texts to follow. So basically if a Indian Hindu brought home a Hare Krishna follower, would they be considered the same as a proper Indian Hindu, why or why not./images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Guest guest]

Hari OM

 

"Since Bhagavad Gita is a Smriti text"

 

Bhagavad Gita is not Smriti, it is Shruti.

 

Shruti is what has directly releaved from God

 

Smriti can be considered as the work of Learned People.

 

All Achrayas Consider Veda as the tree and Gita as the fruit.

 

As we all know fruit has seed inside it which is nothing but a (blue print) of the whole tree itself.

 

Similarly Gita contains the Whole of Veda inside it (and it also sweet like nectar).

 

The Krishna consicuosness (by Chaitnya Mahaprabhu) on whose philisophy HK is based simply states that in Kaliyug things are so easy that the fruit had directly fallen on your lap, no need to climb the hard and difficult tree (vedas) to get the fruit. It no where says to ignore Vedas or anything like that.

[newhindu05 0]

http://www.sankeertanam.com/brahma_sutras.htm

 

Isn't Bhagavad Gita also called smriti prasthAna? Ok maybe I shouldn't read Hindu scripture online. Pleas give me better sources to read from so I can get things straight. /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[Guest guest]

Hari OM

 

Thanks for your mail.

 

The web site you had mentioned is one of the most absurd i had seen, this states:

 

"the Bhagavad-Gita is the smriti prasthAna, composed by sages based on their understanding of the VedAs (smriti - that which is remembered)"

 

Even people with a basic understanding of Hinduism will immediately tell this statement is rubbish.

 

This web site is written by some Thivayaru Krishan, whom i think has just created this for making some quick bucks, very few would have even heard this name.

 

There are some authorised People, called Gurus who are comptent enought to write about Hinduism , like only atomic physicts should write about atomic theories, if every body starts writing then it would lead only to confusion.

 

The most profound scholar of recent times is Adi Shankaracharya , he has written many books like commentaries on Gita, Vishnu shasranama, Bhaja Govindam, Vivekachudamani, Prachanto Rathnamalika, etc., He also established Shankar mutts in India about 2500 years ago, and this mutts are being run by Gurus who are complete celibates, and who ascend in the traditional Guru-Shisya method. These Gurus had written explanation in English and the regional languages on Adi Shankaracharyas work, as of now these are the most authorative works available, i think.

 

Other than that Books by Ramanujacharya, Srila Prabupada, Chinmayanda, Dayanda Saraswathi, Sri Aurbindo ( I don't know whether Madhavacharya had written any books, I had not come across), can be referred to.

 

Before studying the book you should know the history of the (original) author and preferably a transliteration version of the book. Whether the author had properly studied Vedas under a Guru, whether he followed the tradition and practices, was honest, was having extraordinary intelligence or super human powers, what are the reliablle sources of eye-witness to the author,etc., other wise we may end in studying some scrap.

 

Regarding Gita, it is the conclusion of all the above authors (and many more) that it is authored by sri Krishna (and not some sages). And sri Krishna is not just an avtar of Vishnu but Pruna Avatar, i.e., the Godhead himself speaking. Gita is considered as the final authority in Hinduism and any text which contradicts it should be thrown away.

[newhindu05 0]

Thanks, I'll pay more attention to what I read online and elsewhere. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Guest guest]

Hari OM

 

Thank you, i would like to share some of my thoughts on Shruti with you, sorry if i look boring or lecturing.

 

Shruthi (The Vedas) is like a travel guide. The creator created the Universe with different paths and all travellers (Jiva the individual Soul) and gave the travel guide to ALL of them (remember God can't be partial).

 

The guide tells about the places encountered in the journey, Dos and Donts, the various controllers of the Path as well as how a Traveller should behave himself and with others. Every body can "see" the Vedas when they ascend to their Jiva (i.e., the consicuoness level).

 

People travelled in groups (say societies or communities), and this travel, even though never ending, was not tiresome it had many beautiful sceneries and resting places , as well as Bandits, snakes and scoripons(Brahama's night is a period of rest for the traveler). Of course not every body in a travel group will always be carrying/looking into the Travel guide. One or few people will take that responsibility. That people were called "Brahmins", who were provided with the travel guide , however as time progressesed these people became so much egoistic and proud of possessing the travel guide they lost it and now struggling with every body else , how to travel?

 

Other than this there was Vedanata or Upanishad which stated all the above facts (this thread itself is based on MahaNaryana Upanishad), this was used by people who were thinking , what is the purpose of the travel itself , (obviously you can't find the purpose of your travel in a travel guide), that is the reason many scholars ridiculed Vedas (actually they ridiculed people looking into Vedas for the purpose of life(travel))

 

Gita contains both of the above and it states in very clear and specific terms that this travel ends only when the purpose of travel is known, not by travelling safely, happily, or not travelling at all. That is why it is considered supreme both by Bhaktas and the dry vedantic scholars (who don't acknowledge God)

 

Thanks,

 

Subham

[Guest guest]

{I get the impression on this forum that people don't consider Hare Krishna's as Hindus. If that's true than what else would they be.}

 

Hare Krishnas are a part of Hinduism, but some of them like to distinguish themselves because they don't want to be confused for any other Hindu sect or practices. They are Hindus who follow Sri Chaitanya's interpretation of the Prasthana-Traya and in addition the Srimad Bhagvatam.

 

The Gita is part of the Prashthana-traya, so ant school that follows these texts interpreted by an Acharya then they are considered Hindu. It doesn't matter about their race or nationality. Although people say you are Hindu is you acknowledge the Vedas as your authority, the Prasthana-traya is given more importance as Upanishads are Shruti.