05-23-2005, 09:06 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> also contribute dollars whenever I do go to Iskcon, but cannot bare to sit thru the lectures. Overall, nice chaps at the grassroot level.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is condescending enough!
The Skanda Purana lists six types of spiritually deadly Vaisnava Aparadhas:
hanti nindati vai dvesthi, vaisnavan nabhi-nandati
krudhayate yati no harsam, darsane patanani sat
1. One who kills a devotee
2. one who blasphemes devotees
3. one who is envious of devotees
4. one who fails to offer obeisances to Vaishnavs upon seeing them
5. one who becomes angry with a Vaishnava
6. One who does not become joyfull upon seeing a Vaisnava
"These six classes of foolish men who blaspheme Vaishnavas go to the worst kind of Hellish planet along with generations of their ancestors"
To say that a lecture is so unbearable that one cannot bear to sit through it is terrible.
I am sure any lecture of a Vaishnava has some kind of Glorification of the Lord.
If one says that this Glorification of the Lord is unbearable, it is an Offense I am afraid.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Hyagriva, I do not have a percentage statistics. But I DO know from my own friends cricle who are Madhvas, Iyengars of Vadagalai, Thengalai, and also Vaishnavas of UP, Orissa and Andhra. To save words, I will post from the DVAITHA Website about ISKCON. Position Paper on ISKCON by the Poornaprajna Vidyapeetha<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You just took advantage of the traditional Inter-Vaishnavite theological differences to make it seem as if each School totally condemns the other.. That paper merely tries to win back the Madhavites from becoming too involved with ISKCON and it does it the wrong way.
In anycase, that is not MANY, but just one Vidyapeetha or College... Not a Matha!
Since you brough it up, here is what Acharyans from Dwaita Mathas have to say about it:
The letters are here: http://gosai.com/dvaita/udupi/index.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Sri H. H. Sri Vidyadisa Tirtha Swamiji
Car Street, Udupi
Sri Prabhupada has accepted Sri Madhwacharya as his "Acarya."
He has put manure and water to the seed sowed by Sri Madhwacharya. Sri Prabhupada is responsible for the spread of the branches of the tree of "Bhakti cult" all over India. It is the duty of all Madhwas to recognize the sadhana of Vaishnavite Sri Prabhupada.
It is true that there is a difference between "Chaitanya school" and "Madhwa school." In spite of the difference between the two schools of thought, one has to look into the similar thoughts that exist between the two. Therefore, the followers of these two cults should never blame each other nor envy each other.
One should not use bad words on the other. One should respect the other and vice-versa. All Madhwas should unite themselves.
Sri H. H. Sri Vidyadisa Tirtha Swamiji
Palimar Swami
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->From:
Sri Shiroor Mutt, Udupi
Jadadguru Sri Sri Madhwacharya Peethan
Udupi, South Candra
To: Friend of our Samsthanam Poojya
Sri Narasingha Swamy Sri Narasingha Chaitanya Mutt,
Sri Rangapatna, Mysore
Ref: Re: Mispropoganda in www.Dvaita.org between "Sri Madhwacharya and Chaitanya Pantha."
Sri Chaitanya Sampradaya is a branch of Madhwa philosophy. there are historic proofs to substantiate this fact. The sadhana achieved by Sri A. C. Prabhupada, Acharya of "Chaitanya Sampradaya" is to be welcomed by all Vaishnavites. It is due to him people all over the world have learned about Lord Krishna. This work should have been accomplished by Madhwa followers. But Prabhupada has served the world in propagating this cult. Even in the western world he has attracted a large number of devotees of Lord Krishna, through his discourse on "Bhagavat Geeta." The book on "Bhagavat Geeta" of Sri Prabhupada is allowed to be sold in front of Krishna Mandira at Udupi. This fact is known to all eight mutts of Udupi. As well as all devotees of Udupi Kshetra.
Therefore, the blame cast on Sri Prabhupada is to be deemed as the blame on Sri Hari, Vayu and Guru. This type of behavior is not to be found in a brahmin. As such, it is a bad affair to note that a Vaishnava has exhibited such a behavior. Such contradictory statements do create split in the Vaishnava Society and do not promote any good on the Society.
Therefore we oppose the points relayed through the website.
Sri Laksmivara Tirtha Swami
Sriroor Swami
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
More Mathas :
http://gosai.com/dvaita/udupi/asta_matha/k...or_english.html
http://gosai.com/dvaita/udupi/asta_matha/s...ya_english.html
Also, here is what the ISKCONites have to say about the controversial 'position paper'!
http://gosai.com/chaitanya/saranagati/html...radayas_fs.html
But according to me, its correct Vaishnavite ettiquite to stay away from all controversies.
As adequetely said by Lakshmivara tirtha Swami of Sriroor Dwaita Matha:
Therefore, the blame cast on Sri Prabhupada is to be deemed as the blame on Sri Hari, Vayu and Guru. This type of behavior is not to be found in a brahmin. As such, it is a bad affair to note that a Vaishnava has exhibited such a behavior. Such contradictory statements do create split in the Vaishnava Society and do not promote any good on the Society.
Therefore we oppose the points relayed through the website.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->First off, Jesus - if he existed - was not addressing a barbarig crowd. Secondly, you quote one message from the Old testament, and forget the other one - Matthew 10:34 where Jesus is supposed to have said, " Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me."(10:34-36), I will reserve this and other thoughts on Christianity for a different thread. Suffice to say bible is not all goody-goody.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, if the Shastras are to be read superficially and literally, they will seem to be cruel and more inhuman than any other scripture on the earth, including the Quran.
According to Vaishnavism, if one is attached to his/her family, he would not be able to do Bhakthi effectively. If one loves his/her Father or Mother more than the Guru, he sure is not worthy of a true Vaishnavite Guru.. now, those words which you quote seem to make perfect sense to me if seen through true Hindu perspective. The worldly relations are like straw coming together in the waves of the ocean, only to seperate... love for wife or attachment to home and family is one type of sense enjoyment too, arising from egoistic notions of 'mine' and ownership. My Father, My Mother, My Children, etc are all nothing but bondage.
A Guru brings not peace to this material world which can never have peace. Utopia is a dream in the Material realm. A Guru brings a sword to cut Ignorance, egoism and materialism.
Jesus was grossly misunderstood by 'Christians' and by Indians too.
Its ok for Indians to misunderstand Jesus, but its a tragedy that the Christians who claim to follow Jesus totally and irrevocably forgot his teachings while they deitified Him alone minus his words.
The crowd was indeed barbarian.
According to Hinduism, just be taking birth as a Human does not automatically make one Human.
A Man (/woman) needs Samskaras to qualify him/her as a Human.
Apart from Samskaras, some basic qualities that come with conscience like mercy and ahimsa truly qualify a human.
The crowd to whom Jesus preached were clearly naastikas. Naastikas means barbarians as per Vedic outlook.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->hristos is the Greek version of the word Krishna. When an Indian person calls on Krishna, he often says, "Krista." Krista is a sanskrit word meaning attraction. So when we address God as Christ, Krista or Krishna, we indicate the same all-attractive Supreme Personality of Godhead.When Jesus said, "<b>Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name," that name of God was Krista or Krishna</b>. Actually it doesn't matter -- Krishna or Christ -- the name is the same. The main point is to follow the injunctions of the Vedic Scriptures that recommend chanting the name of God in this age.Our request is that you please chant the name of God, the Bible also demands this. Everyone should cooperate and chant. If someone has a prejudice against chanting the name Krishna, then they can chant Christos or Krista -- there is no difference<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, but where is the Historical Jesus of Nazareth made God??
Only the word Christos is identified with attraction which indeed is the name of God, All Attractive.
Prabhupada makes it still clearer when he says that Jesus Prayed to KRISTA or Krishna. Not that Jesus himself is Krista.
Kindly read without prejudice and you will understand what the author wishes to convey.. that one must Chant the holy Names of the God.. it does not matter whether one chants Christos or Krishta, which mean the same....
This is not the same as saying that Jesus is the same person as Krishna is.
My name is Jagan Mohan which also means the same as Krishna, but doesn't mean that Jagan Mohan and Krishna are one person.
The name Christ and Krishna might mean the same, but it does not mean that Jesus Christ is the same as Krishna.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->You Can Pronounce Krsna in Any Way [Prabhupada Speaks Out]
QUOTE
Srila Prabhupada: I have read one book, the Aquarian Gospel, wherein it is explained that Krist means love. Christ means love. And Krsna also means love. So from Krsna this word Krist has come. And in India sometimes people say Kristha. Instead of Krsna, they say Kristha. And in various regions has come the word Kestha. Generally, instead of pronouncing very precisely Krsna, if somebody's name is Krsnacandra, they say, "Hey, Kesthara."
Allen Ginsberg:Â Where is this?
Srila Prabhupada: In India everywhere. Kestha. So Kestha, Christ, Krist, Kristha, or Krsna--they're in the same group. Pronouncing Krsna is not difficult.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes.. true.. You can pronounce Krsna in anyway! Whats wrong with this teaching? Frankly, this is like trying to find fault where there is none.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Tempted as I am to say something, I agree with you on this one. What is in a name?? The Name-form combination gives us the freedom to assume such. The Higher entity (Narayana, Sadashiva, or Parabhattarika Lalitha Mahatripurasundari) is the Supreme, while Ishwara (Hari, Hara etc) are the Saguna/Saakara form. Hara over Hari or Hari over Hara is not the center of contention here. It is Sriman Narayana is the same as Jehovah or Allah, while Sadhashiva is the servant is what is being questioned.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sorry, but this is gross Mayavada.
Names do have significance because a seperate personality named Shiva actually exists.
But there is NO ALLAH OR JEHOVAH existing.
Therefore, we ASSUME that the names Allah and Jehovah belong to Krishna since they are supposed to be the name of ONE SUPREME CONTROLLER.
DO YOU Get the gist of what I am trying to convey??
We cannot call Krishna or Narayana with the name Shiva or Hara or anyother name that rightly belongs to Lord Shiva, but we can call Narayana with the name Allah or any other speculative name that one might invent to represent the Supreme God.
If tomorrow a new language is made and some word like 23942 is meant to be the Name for God, it will represent Narayana, but not the word Shiva or Shakti or any name of the million Demigods because these Demigods acually exist!
The Vishnu-rahasya says:
alinganam varam manye vyala-vyaghra-jaaukasam
na sangah salya-yuktanam nana-devaika-sevinam
"One should prefer to embrace a sname, a tiger or an alligator rather than associate with persons who are worshipers of various demigods and who are impelled by material desire'.
Katyayana-samhiti:
varam huta-vaha-jvala- panjarantar-vyavasthitih
na sauri-cinta-vumukha- jana-samvasa-vaisasam
"It is better to accept the miseries of being encaged and surrounded by burning flames than to associate with those bereft of Bhakti. Such association is a very great hardship''
Ramanuja Acharya warns that Vaishnavas must strictly avoid Demigod worshippers. he once said, "If you are about to die in a fire but can save yourself by taking refuge in a nearby temple where people are worshipping the Demigods, you had better die in the Fire. It would be better to die in the fire than enter that temple of demigod worshippers'.
I hope I have adequetely conveyed the gravity of how much emphasis Vaishnavism places on non-worship of Demigods.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> Where has Iskcon then failed in making Alliances with the non-practising Indians? Why is it unable to reach the Indians who have degenerated from practising their own Dharma? (This is a LEGIT question I ask in all humility, it would be a good theme to discuss how Iskcon, which has successfully spread the message amongst Christians and Muslims focus strategies on regaining Indians who are lost to Commuism. mainly the Sabrang/foil Akila Rahman types.)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You see, Indians come with a baggage of rampant Demigod worship and Neo-Advaitic contamination which is quite difficult to get rid of before one can become a Vaishnava.
Indians tend to believe that all religions are one and that the many paths are same.
ISKCON FAILS with Indians because ISKCON as any true Vaishnavite organisation demands only the best and full adherence to Vaishnavite practice including Vaishnavite dressing.
Indians are only looking for quick fix temples and hamburger/fast food ceremonies... they dont really care for Hinduism. All the mumbojumbo at a Vedic Sacrifice makes no sense to them and they simply don't connect with it.
Sabrang/Foil is a direct result of this Indian civilizational disrespect for Hinduism.
If we have adequete respect for Hinduism like the Jews have for Judaism, we would be walking in Dhotis with Tilaks on our forehead on the streets of New York.
Indians have learnt only to flaunt their intellectual capacities in the US, but don't want to follow Vedic Scientific Heritage which gave us the Zero and Aryabatta for example.
Sabrang/Foil is the child of our failure. We have only ourselves to blame.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Vaisnava Philosophy
The Vedic scriptures state that spiritual life begins when one inquires into the nature of the absolute truth, the Supreme Godhead. Gaudiya Vaisnavas are monotheists and know the personality of Godhead Krishna, the All-attractive. But it is also recognised that the Supreme has unlimited names such as Rama, Buddha, Vishnu, Jehovah, Allah, etc. The ultimate goal of Gaudiya Vaisnavism is to develop a loving relationship with the Supreme Godhead. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, quite right.
Supreme God has unlimited names.
But Shiva is NOT one of them. Shiva, Indra, Brahma, etc etc are all names of real personages. NOT some imaginery names.
On the other hand, as I have mentioned earlier, any other name not mentioned by the Scriptures as belonging to distinct Demigods, but followed by some race as the name for the Supreme God and has RESEMBLENCE to some Supreme Aspect or Attribute or GOD as given in the SHastras can be accepted as proper names of GOD.
This is the universality of Hinduism! You can call God with any of his innumerable names, but one has to make sure that it belongs to the Supreme God and not to any Devata or Demigod.
If Jehovah means Supreme God, it can only mean Narayana and not otherwise. There can be no other Supreme God. Ditto with Allah.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is condescending enough!
The Skanda Purana lists six types of spiritually deadly Vaisnava Aparadhas:
hanti nindati vai dvesthi, vaisnavan nabhi-nandati
krudhayate yati no harsam, darsane patanani sat
1. One who kills a devotee
2. one who blasphemes devotees
3. one who is envious of devotees
4. one who fails to offer obeisances to Vaishnavs upon seeing them
5. one who becomes angry with a Vaishnava
6. One who does not become joyfull upon seeing a Vaisnava
"These six classes of foolish men who blaspheme Vaishnavas go to the worst kind of Hellish planet along with generations of their ancestors"
To say that a lecture is so unbearable that one cannot bear to sit through it is terrible.
I am sure any lecture of a Vaishnava has some kind of Glorification of the Lord.
If one says that this Glorification of the Lord is unbearable, it is an Offense I am afraid.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Hyagriva, I do not have a percentage statistics. But I DO know from my own friends cricle who are Madhvas, Iyengars of Vadagalai, Thengalai, and also Vaishnavas of UP, Orissa and Andhra. To save words, I will post from the DVAITHA Website about ISKCON. Position Paper on ISKCON by the Poornaprajna Vidyapeetha<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You just took advantage of the traditional Inter-Vaishnavite theological differences to make it seem as if each School totally condemns the other.. That paper merely tries to win back the Madhavites from becoming too involved with ISKCON and it does it the wrong way.
In anycase, that is not MANY, but just one Vidyapeetha or College... Not a Matha!
Since you brough it up, here is what Acharyans from Dwaita Mathas have to say about it:
The letters are here: http://gosai.com/dvaita/udupi/index.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Sri H. H. Sri Vidyadisa Tirtha Swamiji
Car Street, Udupi
Sri Prabhupada has accepted Sri Madhwacharya as his "Acarya."
He has put manure and water to the seed sowed by Sri Madhwacharya. Sri Prabhupada is responsible for the spread of the branches of the tree of "Bhakti cult" all over India. It is the duty of all Madhwas to recognize the sadhana of Vaishnavite Sri Prabhupada.
It is true that there is a difference between "Chaitanya school" and "Madhwa school." In spite of the difference between the two schools of thought, one has to look into the similar thoughts that exist between the two. Therefore, the followers of these two cults should never blame each other nor envy each other.
One should not use bad words on the other. One should respect the other and vice-versa. All Madhwas should unite themselves.
Sri H. H. Sri Vidyadisa Tirtha Swamiji
Palimar Swami
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->From:
Sri Shiroor Mutt, Udupi
Jadadguru Sri Sri Madhwacharya Peethan
Udupi, South Candra
To: Friend of our Samsthanam Poojya
Sri Narasingha Swamy Sri Narasingha Chaitanya Mutt,
Sri Rangapatna, Mysore
Ref: Re: Mispropoganda in www.Dvaita.org between "Sri Madhwacharya and Chaitanya Pantha."
Sri Chaitanya Sampradaya is a branch of Madhwa philosophy. there are historic proofs to substantiate this fact. The sadhana achieved by Sri A. C. Prabhupada, Acharya of "Chaitanya Sampradaya" is to be welcomed by all Vaishnavites. It is due to him people all over the world have learned about Lord Krishna. This work should have been accomplished by Madhwa followers. But Prabhupada has served the world in propagating this cult. Even in the western world he has attracted a large number of devotees of Lord Krishna, through his discourse on "Bhagavat Geeta." The book on "Bhagavat Geeta" of Sri Prabhupada is allowed to be sold in front of Krishna Mandira at Udupi. This fact is known to all eight mutts of Udupi. As well as all devotees of Udupi Kshetra.
Therefore, the blame cast on Sri Prabhupada is to be deemed as the blame on Sri Hari, Vayu and Guru. This type of behavior is not to be found in a brahmin. As such, it is a bad affair to note that a Vaishnava has exhibited such a behavior. Such contradictory statements do create split in the Vaishnava Society and do not promote any good on the Society.
Therefore we oppose the points relayed through the website.
Sri Laksmivara Tirtha Swami
Sriroor Swami
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
More Mathas :
http://gosai.com/dvaita/udupi/asta_matha/k...or_english.html
http://gosai.com/dvaita/udupi/asta_matha/s...ya_english.html
Also, here is what the ISKCONites have to say about the controversial 'position paper'!
http://gosai.com/chaitanya/saranagati/html...radayas_fs.html
But according to me, its correct Vaishnavite ettiquite to stay away from all controversies.
As adequetely said by Lakshmivara tirtha Swami of Sriroor Dwaita Matha:
Therefore, the blame cast on Sri Prabhupada is to be deemed as the blame on Sri Hari, Vayu and Guru. This type of behavior is not to be found in a brahmin. As such, it is a bad affair to note that a Vaishnava has exhibited such a behavior. Such contradictory statements do create split in the Vaishnava Society and do not promote any good on the Society.
Therefore we oppose the points relayed through the website.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->First off, Jesus - if he existed - was not addressing a barbarig crowd. Secondly, you quote one message from the Old testament, and forget the other one - Matthew 10:34 where Jesus is supposed to have said, " Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me."(10:34-36), I will reserve this and other thoughts on Christianity for a different thread. Suffice to say bible is not all goody-goody.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, if the Shastras are to be read superficially and literally, they will seem to be cruel and more inhuman than any other scripture on the earth, including the Quran.
According to Vaishnavism, if one is attached to his/her family, he would not be able to do Bhakthi effectively. If one loves his/her Father or Mother more than the Guru, he sure is not worthy of a true Vaishnavite Guru.. now, those words which you quote seem to make perfect sense to me if seen through true Hindu perspective. The worldly relations are like straw coming together in the waves of the ocean, only to seperate... love for wife or attachment to home and family is one type of sense enjoyment too, arising from egoistic notions of 'mine' and ownership. My Father, My Mother, My Children, etc are all nothing but bondage.
A Guru brings not peace to this material world which can never have peace. Utopia is a dream in the Material realm. A Guru brings a sword to cut Ignorance, egoism and materialism.
Jesus was grossly misunderstood by 'Christians' and by Indians too.
Its ok for Indians to misunderstand Jesus, but its a tragedy that the Christians who claim to follow Jesus totally and irrevocably forgot his teachings while they deitified Him alone minus his words.
The crowd was indeed barbarian.
According to Hinduism, just be taking birth as a Human does not automatically make one Human.
A Man (/woman) needs Samskaras to qualify him/her as a Human.
Apart from Samskaras, some basic qualities that come with conscience like mercy and ahimsa truly qualify a human.
The crowd to whom Jesus preached were clearly naastikas. Naastikas means barbarians as per Vedic outlook.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->hristos is the Greek version of the word Krishna. When an Indian person calls on Krishna, he often says, "Krista." Krista is a sanskrit word meaning attraction. So when we address God as Christ, Krista or Krishna, we indicate the same all-attractive Supreme Personality of Godhead.When Jesus said, "<b>Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name," that name of God was Krista or Krishna</b>. Actually it doesn't matter -- Krishna or Christ -- the name is the same. The main point is to follow the injunctions of the Vedic Scriptures that recommend chanting the name of God in this age.Our request is that you please chant the name of God, the Bible also demands this. Everyone should cooperate and chant. If someone has a prejudice against chanting the name Krishna, then they can chant Christos or Krista -- there is no difference<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, but where is the Historical Jesus of Nazareth made God??
Only the word Christos is identified with attraction which indeed is the name of God, All Attractive.
Prabhupada makes it still clearer when he says that Jesus Prayed to KRISTA or Krishna. Not that Jesus himself is Krista.
Kindly read without prejudice and you will understand what the author wishes to convey.. that one must Chant the holy Names of the God.. it does not matter whether one chants Christos or Krishta, which mean the same....
This is not the same as saying that Jesus is the same person as Krishna is.
My name is Jagan Mohan which also means the same as Krishna, but doesn't mean that Jagan Mohan and Krishna are one person.
The name Christ and Krishna might mean the same, but it does not mean that Jesus Christ is the same as Krishna.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->You Can Pronounce Krsna in Any Way [Prabhupada Speaks Out]
QUOTE
Srila Prabhupada: I have read one book, the Aquarian Gospel, wherein it is explained that Krist means love. Christ means love. And Krsna also means love. So from Krsna this word Krist has come. And in India sometimes people say Kristha. Instead of Krsna, they say Kristha. And in various regions has come the word Kestha. Generally, instead of pronouncing very precisely Krsna, if somebody's name is Krsnacandra, they say, "Hey, Kesthara."
Allen Ginsberg:Â Where is this?
Srila Prabhupada: In India everywhere. Kestha. So Kestha, Christ, Krist, Kristha, or Krsna--they're in the same group. Pronouncing Krsna is not difficult.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes.. true.. You can pronounce Krsna in anyway! Whats wrong with this teaching? Frankly, this is like trying to find fault where there is none.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Tempted as I am to say something, I agree with you on this one. What is in a name?? The Name-form combination gives us the freedom to assume such. The Higher entity (Narayana, Sadashiva, or Parabhattarika Lalitha Mahatripurasundari) is the Supreme, while Ishwara (Hari, Hara etc) are the Saguna/Saakara form. Hara over Hari or Hari over Hara is not the center of contention here. It is Sriman Narayana is the same as Jehovah or Allah, while Sadhashiva is the servant is what is being questioned.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sorry, but this is gross Mayavada.
Names do have significance because a seperate personality named Shiva actually exists.
But there is NO ALLAH OR JEHOVAH existing.
Therefore, we ASSUME that the names Allah and Jehovah belong to Krishna since they are supposed to be the name of ONE SUPREME CONTROLLER.
DO YOU Get the gist of what I am trying to convey??
We cannot call Krishna or Narayana with the name Shiva or Hara or anyother name that rightly belongs to Lord Shiva, but we can call Narayana with the name Allah or any other speculative name that one might invent to represent the Supreme God.
If tomorrow a new language is made and some word like 23942 is meant to be the Name for God, it will represent Narayana, but not the word Shiva or Shakti or any name of the million Demigods because these Demigods acually exist!
The Vishnu-rahasya says:
alinganam varam manye vyala-vyaghra-jaaukasam
na sangah salya-yuktanam nana-devaika-sevinam
"One should prefer to embrace a sname, a tiger or an alligator rather than associate with persons who are worshipers of various demigods and who are impelled by material desire'.
Katyayana-samhiti:
varam huta-vaha-jvala- panjarantar-vyavasthitih
na sauri-cinta-vumukha- jana-samvasa-vaisasam
"It is better to accept the miseries of being encaged and surrounded by burning flames than to associate with those bereft of Bhakti. Such association is a very great hardship''
Ramanuja Acharya warns that Vaishnavas must strictly avoid Demigod worshippers. he once said, "If you are about to die in a fire but can save yourself by taking refuge in a nearby temple where people are worshipping the Demigods, you had better die in the Fire. It would be better to die in the fire than enter that temple of demigod worshippers'.
I hope I have adequetely conveyed the gravity of how much emphasis Vaishnavism places on non-worship of Demigods.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> Where has Iskcon then failed in making Alliances with the non-practising Indians? Why is it unable to reach the Indians who have degenerated from practising their own Dharma? (This is a LEGIT question I ask in all humility, it would be a good theme to discuss how Iskcon, which has successfully spread the message amongst Christians and Muslims focus strategies on regaining Indians who are lost to Commuism. mainly the Sabrang/foil Akila Rahman types.)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You see, Indians come with a baggage of rampant Demigod worship and Neo-Advaitic contamination which is quite difficult to get rid of before one can become a Vaishnava.
Indians tend to believe that all religions are one and that the many paths are same.
ISKCON FAILS with Indians because ISKCON as any true Vaishnavite organisation demands only the best and full adherence to Vaishnavite practice including Vaishnavite dressing.
Indians are only looking for quick fix temples and hamburger/fast food ceremonies... they dont really care for Hinduism. All the mumbojumbo at a Vedic Sacrifice makes no sense to them and they simply don't connect with it.
Sabrang/Foil is a direct result of this Indian civilizational disrespect for Hinduism.
If we have adequete respect for Hinduism like the Jews have for Judaism, we would be walking in Dhotis with Tilaks on our forehead on the streets of New York.
Indians have learnt only to flaunt their intellectual capacities in the US, but don't want to follow Vedic Scientific Heritage which gave us the Zero and Aryabatta for example.
Sabrang/Foil is the child of our failure. We have only ourselves to blame.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Vaisnava Philosophy
The Vedic scriptures state that spiritual life begins when one inquires into the nature of the absolute truth, the Supreme Godhead. Gaudiya Vaisnavas are monotheists and know the personality of Godhead Krishna, the All-attractive. But it is also recognised that the Supreme has unlimited names such as Rama, Buddha, Vishnu, Jehovah, Allah, etc. The ultimate goal of Gaudiya Vaisnavism is to develop a loving relationship with the Supreme Godhead. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, quite right.
Supreme God has unlimited names.
But Shiva is NOT one of them. Shiva, Indra, Brahma, etc etc are all names of real personages. NOT some imaginery names.
On the other hand, as I have mentioned earlier, any other name not mentioned by the Scriptures as belonging to distinct Demigods, but followed by some race as the name for the Supreme God and has RESEMBLENCE to some Supreme Aspect or Attribute or GOD as given in the SHastras can be accepted as proper names of GOD.
This is the universality of Hinduism! You can call God with any of his innumerable names, but one has to make sure that it belongs to the Supreme God and not to any Devata or Demigod.
If Jehovah means Supreme God, it can only mean Narayana and not otherwise. There can be no other Supreme God. Ditto with Allah.