12-13-2007, 04:01 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Dec 13 2007, 02:25 PM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Dec 13 2007, 02:25 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-sarangadhara+Dec 12 2007, 01:18 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(sarangadhara @ Dec 12 2007, 01:18 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->...
There is one question though that has troubled me the most ...I have seen a few explanations in other threads in the forum explaining the attitude of Indian Modern Guru's in their writings to praise the jesus...in attempting to reach out to western audiences...
but the writings of most Modern gurus do not stop short of just mentioning...but go on to raise the praise to a crescendo level...
...
Looking in Hindsight ...the damage being done by the so called baba's in justifying false christiniaty is helping the masses get converted more easily....
My two cents...
Apologize once again if any followers of babas are hurt......
[right][snapback]76039[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->And my statement might well hurt some others - but I write it from my own view and experiences.
You forgot to add in your list what I think ought to be #1: ISKCON.
I own and have read a lot of their books (mainly the ones written by Srila Prabhupada, not so much the later ones). They equate Krishna with jehovallah. AND they go one step further, saying that Krishna is not Shiva, not Devi - that the latter are merely "demi" Gods; that they can not give Moksha. That Krishna is the ONLY God. Meanwhile, allah and jeebus make the grade for "the real thing" in their view <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
(Did ISKCON's guru Srila Prabhupada ever see Krishna during his life, I wonder though - did not come across it in the books of his that I have. But the proof is in the pudding isn't it? Others - even the "minor deity" worshippers who worship Mahavishnu along with the rest - <i>have</i> seen Krishna.)
Also, Rama and Mahavishnu in ISKCON's understanding is not the same as Krishna who they claim is the full version, the only one worth pursuing.
Even pure Vaishnavas (that is, of traditional Hindu background) do not say that jehovallah is the same as Krishna, even if they regard other central Hindu Gods as minor. And Vaishnavas have recognised Krishna is wholly the same as Rama/Mahavishnu. For some Rama takes more prominence in their personal lives than Krishna (but this is considered personal choice - a common thing in Hindu Dharma).
Before someone thinks I am knocking Krishna: *no* way.
I just can't warm to ISKCON anymore, it's totally alienated me. After ~2 years of being blindly infatuated with their books (this was only in my early teens - between my 10th and 12th year and only because I had been growing up overseas then) I decided it wasn't right for me and went back to the traditional view of Hinduism.
If others find meaning in ISKCON - good for them. But I will not accept any claims they make on "Shiva and Uma and Murughan and the rest are not equal to/same as Krishna". That is an opinion, not a fact in Hindu Dharma.
And I will never accept that "Krishna is jehovallah". He is not.
[right][snapback]76100[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not far ago ,during my philosophical quest, i become friend whit Iskon members of Romania and even go and visit the temple during a holyday.
I had a 3 hours discussion whit the romanian vedic teacher(who teach Veda philosophy at the University) regarding christian-vaishnava diference and similarites in theology.
The first point was comparation betwin vaishnava statement -there are infinite persons sharing the same essence(bedha-abedha,dvaitaadvaita statement);and christian statement-one essence 3 persons.
The similarity stop here ,as in vaishnava all persons have the same essence whit God,including limited persons like humans.
The God have infinite expansions s of 2 types
1-expansions-persons unlimited in power (like Balarama )and
2-expansions-persons limited in power(like humans )
Regarding persons of the first type in "christians" terms we could talk about Holy Infinity(comparative whit Holy Trinity).The diference here stay in number.
I ask the teacher ,is not a contradiction that in the same essence to be more then one person?(as Islam teach for exemple)
Answer was that acording to vedic philosophy we talk about the logic of the finite and the logic of the infinite.Practicaly all notions of God(be them impersonal,islamic or sickh)are contradictory if we look them in detail.
What seem contradictory for the finite logic in perfect rational for logic of the infinite.
Krishna is consider Brahman and is both personal and impersonal;but personal aspect is seen more important then impersonal aspect and the goal of life is the eternal happiness living next to personal Krishna.This is Vishnu-vedanta
This teaching is diferent the Mayavada(impersonal) schools of hinduism ,which subordonate personal aspect of God the the impersonal one(person is just a temporaly ilusion),among impersonal school being shaiva and buddhism.
SHiva is consider a great devotee of Krishna and he is responsable whit management of Maya(ilusion).The porpose of ilusion is the wish of some limited personal expansions to live whitout God(and they forget their havently state and incarnate in the material world).
There is one question though that has troubled me the most ...I have seen a few explanations in other threads in the forum explaining the attitude of Indian Modern Guru's in their writings to praise the jesus...in attempting to reach out to western audiences...
but the writings of most Modern gurus do not stop short of just mentioning...but go on to raise the praise to a crescendo level...
...
Looking in Hindsight ...the damage being done by the so called baba's in justifying false christiniaty is helping the masses get converted more easily....
My two cents...
Apologize once again if any followers of babas are hurt......
[right][snapback]76039[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->And my statement might well hurt some others - but I write it from my own view and experiences.
You forgot to add in your list what I think ought to be #1: ISKCON.
I own and have read a lot of their books (mainly the ones written by Srila Prabhupada, not so much the later ones). They equate Krishna with jehovallah. AND they go one step further, saying that Krishna is not Shiva, not Devi - that the latter are merely "demi" Gods; that they can not give Moksha. That Krishna is the ONLY God. Meanwhile, allah and jeebus make the grade for "the real thing" in their view <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
(Did ISKCON's guru Srila Prabhupada ever see Krishna during his life, I wonder though - did not come across it in the books of his that I have. But the proof is in the pudding isn't it? Others - even the "minor deity" worshippers who worship Mahavishnu along with the rest - <i>have</i> seen Krishna.)
Also, Rama and Mahavishnu in ISKCON's understanding is not the same as Krishna who they claim is the full version, the only one worth pursuing.
Even pure Vaishnavas (that is, of traditional Hindu background) do not say that jehovallah is the same as Krishna, even if they regard other central Hindu Gods as minor. And Vaishnavas have recognised Krishna is wholly the same as Rama/Mahavishnu. For some Rama takes more prominence in their personal lives than Krishna (but this is considered personal choice - a common thing in Hindu Dharma).
Before someone thinks I am knocking Krishna: *no* way.
I just can't warm to ISKCON anymore, it's totally alienated me. After ~2 years of being blindly infatuated with their books (this was only in my early teens - between my 10th and 12th year and only because I had been growing up overseas then) I decided it wasn't right for me and went back to the traditional view of Hinduism.
If others find meaning in ISKCON - good for them. But I will not accept any claims they make on "Shiva and Uma and Murughan and the rest are not equal to/same as Krishna". That is an opinion, not a fact in Hindu Dharma.
And I will never accept that "Krishna is jehovallah". He is not.
[right][snapback]76100[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not far ago ,during my philosophical quest, i become friend whit Iskon members of Romania and even go and visit the temple during a holyday.
I had a 3 hours discussion whit the romanian vedic teacher(who teach Veda philosophy at the University) regarding christian-vaishnava diference and similarites in theology.
The first point was comparation betwin vaishnava statement -there are infinite persons sharing the same essence(bedha-abedha,dvaitaadvaita statement);and christian statement-one essence 3 persons.
The similarity stop here ,as in vaishnava all persons have the same essence whit God,including limited persons like humans.
The God have infinite expansions s of 2 types
1-expansions-persons unlimited in power (like Balarama )and
2-expansions-persons limited in power(like humans )
Regarding persons of the first type in "christians" terms we could talk about Holy Infinity(comparative whit Holy Trinity).The diference here stay in number.
I ask the teacher ,is not a contradiction that in the same essence to be more then one person?(as Islam teach for exemple)
Answer was that acording to vedic philosophy we talk about the logic of the finite and the logic of the infinite.Practicaly all notions of God(be them impersonal,islamic or sickh)are contradictory if we look them in detail.
What seem contradictory for the finite logic in perfect rational for logic of the infinite.
Krishna is consider Brahman and is both personal and impersonal;but personal aspect is seen more important then impersonal aspect and the goal of life is the eternal happiness living next to personal Krishna.This is Vishnu-vedanta
This teaching is diferent the Mayavada(impersonal) schools of hinduism ,which subordonate personal aspect of God the the impersonal one(person is just a temporaly ilusion),among impersonal school being shaiva and buddhism.
SHiva is consider a great devotee of Krishna and he is responsable whit management of Maya(ilusion).The porpose of ilusion is the wish of some limited personal expansions to live whitout God(and they forget their havently state and incarnate in the material world).