05-21-2005, 09:39 PM
This thead is full of misconceptions... so much that I even don't know where to start.
The first post by Sunder claims: <!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> Many traidional Vaishnavas do not feel comfortable with Iskcon Idealogy and the method in which it propogates it's idealogies. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What do you mean by 'many'?? Where did you get that statistic?
I am a traditional Sri Vaishnavite, belong to a Sri Vaishnavite Mutt of 700 year history and Parampara and have a Guru Acharyan. I follow strict Agamic and Vaishnavite lifestyle - I have read Vaishnavite as well as Shaivite Literature under Authorities. Thus I consider myself to be competent enough to talk about ISKCON.
I do not see anything wrong with ISKCON ideology as well as the method in which it propogates 'its' ideologies.
Neither does any real Vaishnavite do. To condemn even mentally those who have given up their lives unto the control of Lord Hari is so unbecoming of a Vaishnava that it is a Bhagavat Aparada, the greatest aparada, much greater than even blashphemy against the Lord.
Lord Hari will even forgive anybody who is his own enemy and grant Moksha to them out of his causeless mercy, but he does not forgive those who disrespect Vaishnavas.
Thus, a Vaishnavite is required to withhold judgements unless called for by the authority of a position he/she holds.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> While many are enchanted by the "Hare Krishna" groups spreading the message of Krishna Consciousness, there is also an undercurrent that's quite unclear <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Unclear to YOU is clear. The only way to get to know Vaishnavism is to accept a Guru. Without a Guru, nobody can claim himself to be a follower of the Vedas. Hinduism is not a relaxed 'anything goes' religion that many mistakenly think, but it is a religion of Sadhana and Ascetism.
One has to have a Guru to learn the Scriptures and undergo the Brahmacharya Ashrama. Without undergoing this first and foremost Ashrama, he is a Naastika.
Sunder: <!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> Infact the belief is that a Muslim man get's 72 beautiful houris in heaven and all the above seems to be purely materialistic rewards. Now <b>Krishna on the other hand preached Karma Yoga </b>(doing works without expecting rewards), on the ohter hand the only thing Allah seems to be saying is that he will give his followers materialistic things, so how can they be the same.
It seems that while they have no problem with ridiculing Vivekananda for his fascination with Buddhism they themselves seem to not follow what they preach. They seem to have no problem with sucking upto Muslims by preaching false truths like the above one.
Also if Allah and Krishna are the same then what is the whole point of Krishna Conciousness movement among Muslims if they already worship him under the name Allah. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Total misunderstanding!
Vaishnavism realises that from time to time as per the mental abilities of humans, certain teachers appear who tend to put forward teachings that reflect the mentality of their students.
Thus we have Rajasic and Tamasic Shastras too devoted to the worship of Kali and even Ghosts. We also have the left handed Tantrik Schools and such.
The point is that the world needs teachings of many kinds to accomodate the mentality and bhava of 400,000 types of Human beings.
The Muslim religion is a Rajasic+tamasic religion meant for the upliftment of the totally irreligious Arabs.
It is not sucking up to Muslims, but recognising their position. The Quran is right that if the muslims follow their religion of worshiping their version of Lord five times a day and inspite of eating meat and being unclean they will surely attain Swarga or Heaven of Indra where they can enjoy Wine and Apsaras. Vedic scriptures too promise Swarga with Apsaras to those who do enough piety or even less - by just a simple fire sacrifice.
But Vaishnavas do not care for Swarga which is inside the Material Universe. The lotus feet of Lord Narayana is the only refuge and goal of the Vaishnavas.
The Muslims however are most welcome to follow their own religion to attain Swarga from whence they have better chances of evolution.
Ditto for Christians. Jesus just wanted to teach them simple 'love thy neighbour as yourself' stuff to the barbarians. It is not a chance that Jesus has so many followers that we can just regard it as a accident of history. No, Jesus must have some power which in turn must come from the Lord of the Universe. Also Jesus himself mentions that whatever he teaches was just the basic. That means the Christians will have to seek beyond the teachings of their Guru for the real whole thing.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> On the one hand Christ (or Krista), and Allah are mentioned as Godhead. On the other hand, Shiva is pushed as a demi-god whose worship is shocking to Devotees of Iskcon <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here is the challenge: Where is Christ mentioned as Godhead? He might be accepted as an 'empowered Avatara', but never as God himself.
The Signs and Symptoms of Lord and his Avataras are mentioned clearly in the Scriptures.
Christ is not Lord Narayana. He does not exhibit the six qualities required of Bhagavan.
Also, ALL Vaishnavites, not just ISKCONites, do not worship Lord Shiva, but accept Shiva as the Param Vaishnava, or the Best of Vaishnavites, the First of Devotees.
It should be mentioned that Shiva is a partial avatara of Hari to lord over the mode of Ignorance.
Lord Shiva is almost equal to Narayana. Lord Shiva is a Demigod who should be shown uttermost respect, but worship is meant only for the Divine Couple, Sri Sriman Narayanan.
Ashok Kumar :<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> I wonder whether hinduism is in danger from its non-Indian protagonists. It just seems that they get it only partially, in a cosmetic sort of way. While the substructure remains of the dominant non-Indian religions of monotheistic variety <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, the non-Indians in ISKCON seem to have adopted to Vaishnavism MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH better than Indians who are lost to their lofty culture but have adopted meat-eating.
What Indians' dont' realise is that they have long lost their own religion. They think that they still define what Hinduism is from their cultural followings, but the truth is that Indians are just clinging to a figment of what is the original Vedic Civilization. 99.99999999999% is lost.
The Vaishnava dress is not cosmetic. It is a total definition of what and who you are.
The real challenge is if an Indian.. ok, lets take you for example, Ashok Kumar, can wear a traditional Indian dress to work everyday and feel comfortable it it?
To wear this Indian dress is by itself a Sadhana. Dress codes are strict in Vaishnavism. If you visit any orthodox South Indian Vaishnavite temple, you will have to forgo your shirt and trousers, but wear a Dhoti and go bare chested in front of the Lord. This is the Standard.
In the North, where orthodox traditions have worn thin, even socks and jeans are standard in temples. This is what we are at last left with.
Vaishnavism is Monotheistic. NOT MONISTIC. Ditto with Shaiva Siddhanta school of philosophy of South India (Hinduismtoday.com). Their might be various doctrinal differences between various schools of thought in Vaishnavism (Shuddha Dwaita, Vishistadwaita, Advaita dwaita, etc), but the common element which holds all the schools of Vaishnavism is the fact that Lord Narayana/Vishnu/Hari is the One and Only Supreme Lord. He is a person with innumerable auspicious qualities and attributes. His impersonal aspect as Brahman is one of those atributes, but not a supreme attribute.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> I wonder whether hinduism is in danger from its non-Indian protagonists  <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Do not worry! The Lord has promised to descend from time to time to defend his own teachings and Dharma.
Vaishnavites such as ISKCON have therefore nothing to worry from the Christians nor Muslims. ISKCONites have proved the true spirit of Vaishnavism by taking the teachings of Vedas to the heartland of Bhoga-bhummis where today MOST (not All I say!) Indians go only to enjoy materially but not to practise their own Religion.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> It is perhaps due to Buddha's rejection of a God. ISKCON appears not to tolerate divine without a personality. Buddha's formless Nirvana would be an anathema to someone who thinks God must have a personality. The same way Advaita's Nirguna Brahman would be an anathema too. There would be nothing to adore, love, worship and submit. Just a formless absolute, and not the most favored of a person with devotional attitude.
In comparision Jehova and Allah are clearly described as having a 'personality'. That perhaps makes them more acceptable to ISKCON than the truly formless versions. It is curious that even though Allah ( and in some ways Jehova, although bible says God made man in his own image, so there is perhaps a form) is supposed to have no image, but he has a personality. Philosophically speaking an 'image' is just a bundle of attributes. A personality must have attributes. So Allah with a personality but without an image or form is a philosophical black hole for me.
ISKCON Krishna has personality and form. Krishna is also special that he is the Narayana (who dwells in all people) and Antaryami (who rules from within), or soul of all souls. So he is one with all the beings and still separate from them (achintya-bheda-abheda). <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Atlast you come a bit nearer to Vaishnavite viewpoint, abeit this is a small step, you can go further!
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> I absolutely disagree with this, we have overwhelming evidence now which shows that evolution did really happen. The main diff between Eastern religions and Christian lunatics is the fact that Eastern religions always changed with times and also never opposed scientific facts. The Dalai Lama once clearly stated that if science proves a central Buddhist belief as wrong then Buddhists have to accept the new fact. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you disagree, it does not affect the traditions of Vaishnavism.
Darwin's theory is to be rejected by Vaishnavism, since it does not include the 'design by intelligence' but instead awards the reason for evolution to 'chance'.
Also, the evolution theory is not yet complete nor does it answer all of nature's mysteries. It is still a developing subject, while the Vedic verdict on the natural history is total, all encompassing, complete and irreversible. This knowledge comes down to us though an unbroken line of Parampara. This knowledge will never be modified or adapted to the whims of any number of Scientists.
The views of Dalai Lama might be acceptable for the Tibetian Buddhists, but Shruti is the corner stone of Vaishnavism and its interpretation by Acharyas is the be followed, not scientists' speculations.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> We believe that there is a planet called Vaikuntha where Krishna lives.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, this is a basic teachings in all schools of Vaishnavism. Vaikuntha is the Spiritual Dimension, if which the material world is but a speck.
Don't tell me you never knew this before!!
---------------------------------------
<!--emo&N^3--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/n3.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='n3.gif' /><!--endemo--> Sir, Salutations to you. Your posts were impeccable...... as ever.
Jagan Mohan.
The first post by Sunder claims: <!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> Many traidional Vaishnavas do not feel comfortable with Iskcon Idealogy and the method in which it propogates it's idealogies. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What do you mean by 'many'?? Where did you get that statistic?
I am a traditional Sri Vaishnavite, belong to a Sri Vaishnavite Mutt of 700 year history and Parampara and have a Guru Acharyan. I follow strict Agamic and Vaishnavite lifestyle - I have read Vaishnavite as well as Shaivite Literature under Authorities. Thus I consider myself to be competent enough to talk about ISKCON.
I do not see anything wrong with ISKCON ideology as well as the method in which it propogates 'its' ideologies.
Neither does any real Vaishnavite do. To condemn even mentally those who have given up their lives unto the control of Lord Hari is so unbecoming of a Vaishnava that it is a Bhagavat Aparada, the greatest aparada, much greater than even blashphemy against the Lord.
Lord Hari will even forgive anybody who is his own enemy and grant Moksha to them out of his causeless mercy, but he does not forgive those who disrespect Vaishnavas.
Thus, a Vaishnavite is required to withhold judgements unless called for by the authority of a position he/she holds.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> While many are enchanted by the "Hare Krishna" groups spreading the message of Krishna Consciousness, there is also an undercurrent that's quite unclear <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Unclear to YOU is clear. The only way to get to know Vaishnavism is to accept a Guru. Without a Guru, nobody can claim himself to be a follower of the Vedas. Hinduism is not a relaxed 'anything goes' religion that many mistakenly think, but it is a religion of Sadhana and Ascetism.
One has to have a Guru to learn the Scriptures and undergo the Brahmacharya Ashrama. Without undergoing this first and foremost Ashrama, he is a Naastika.
Sunder: <!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> Infact the belief is that a Muslim man get's 72 beautiful houris in heaven and all the above seems to be purely materialistic rewards. Now <b>Krishna on the other hand preached Karma Yoga </b>(doing works without expecting rewards), on the ohter hand the only thing Allah seems to be saying is that he will give his followers materialistic things, so how can they be the same.
It seems that while they have no problem with ridiculing Vivekananda for his fascination with Buddhism they themselves seem to not follow what they preach. They seem to have no problem with sucking upto Muslims by preaching false truths like the above one.
Also if Allah and Krishna are the same then what is the whole point of Krishna Conciousness movement among Muslims if they already worship him under the name Allah. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Total misunderstanding!
Vaishnavism realises that from time to time as per the mental abilities of humans, certain teachers appear who tend to put forward teachings that reflect the mentality of their students.
Thus we have Rajasic and Tamasic Shastras too devoted to the worship of Kali and even Ghosts. We also have the left handed Tantrik Schools and such.
The point is that the world needs teachings of many kinds to accomodate the mentality and bhava of 400,000 types of Human beings.
The Muslim religion is a Rajasic+tamasic religion meant for the upliftment of the totally irreligious Arabs.
It is not sucking up to Muslims, but recognising their position. The Quran is right that if the muslims follow their religion of worshiping their version of Lord five times a day and inspite of eating meat and being unclean they will surely attain Swarga or Heaven of Indra where they can enjoy Wine and Apsaras. Vedic scriptures too promise Swarga with Apsaras to those who do enough piety or even less - by just a simple fire sacrifice.
But Vaishnavas do not care for Swarga which is inside the Material Universe. The lotus feet of Lord Narayana is the only refuge and goal of the Vaishnavas.
The Muslims however are most welcome to follow their own religion to attain Swarga from whence they have better chances of evolution.
Ditto for Christians. Jesus just wanted to teach them simple 'love thy neighbour as yourself' stuff to the barbarians. It is not a chance that Jesus has so many followers that we can just regard it as a accident of history. No, Jesus must have some power which in turn must come from the Lord of the Universe. Also Jesus himself mentions that whatever he teaches was just the basic. That means the Christians will have to seek beyond the teachings of their Guru for the real whole thing.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> On the one hand Christ (or Krista), and Allah are mentioned as Godhead. On the other hand, Shiva is pushed as a demi-god whose worship is shocking to Devotees of Iskcon <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here is the challenge: Where is Christ mentioned as Godhead? He might be accepted as an 'empowered Avatara', but never as God himself.
The Signs and Symptoms of Lord and his Avataras are mentioned clearly in the Scriptures.
Christ is not Lord Narayana. He does not exhibit the six qualities required of Bhagavan.
Also, ALL Vaishnavites, not just ISKCONites, do not worship Lord Shiva, but accept Shiva as the Param Vaishnava, or the Best of Vaishnavites, the First of Devotees.
It should be mentioned that Shiva is a partial avatara of Hari to lord over the mode of Ignorance.
Lord Shiva is almost equal to Narayana. Lord Shiva is a Demigod who should be shown uttermost respect, but worship is meant only for the Divine Couple, Sri Sriman Narayanan.
Ashok Kumar :<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> I wonder whether hinduism is in danger from its non-Indian protagonists. It just seems that they get it only partially, in a cosmetic sort of way. While the substructure remains of the dominant non-Indian religions of monotheistic variety <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, the non-Indians in ISKCON seem to have adopted to Vaishnavism MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH better than Indians who are lost to their lofty culture but have adopted meat-eating.
What Indians' dont' realise is that they have long lost their own religion. They think that they still define what Hinduism is from their cultural followings, but the truth is that Indians are just clinging to a figment of what is the original Vedic Civilization. 99.99999999999% is lost.
The Vaishnava dress is not cosmetic. It is a total definition of what and who you are.
The real challenge is if an Indian.. ok, lets take you for example, Ashok Kumar, can wear a traditional Indian dress to work everyday and feel comfortable it it?
To wear this Indian dress is by itself a Sadhana. Dress codes are strict in Vaishnavism. If you visit any orthodox South Indian Vaishnavite temple, you will have to forgo your shirt and trousers, but wear a Dhoti and go bare chested in front of the Lord. This is the Standard.
In the North, where orthodox traditions have worn thin, even socks and jeans are standard in temples. This is what we are at last left with.
Vaishnavism is Monotheistic. NOT MONISTIC. Ditto with Shaiva Siddhanta school of philosophy of South India (Hinduismtoday.com). Their might be various doctrinal differences between various schools of thought in Vaishnavism (Shuddha Dwaita, Vishistadwaita, Advaita dwaita, etc), but the common element which holds all the schools of Vaishnavism is the fact that Lord Narayana/Vishnu/Hari is the One and Only Supreme Lord. He is a person with innumerable auspicious qualities and attributes. His impersonal aspect as Brahman is one of those atributes, but not a supreme attribute.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> I wonder whether hinduism is in danger from its non-Indian protagonists  <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Do not worry! The Lord has promised to descend from time to time to defend his own teachings and Dharma.
Vaishnavites such as ISKCON have therefore nothing to worry from the Christians nor Muslims. ISKCONites have proved the true spirit of Vaishnavism by taking the teachings of Vedas to the heartland of Bhoga-bhummis where today MOST (not All I say!) Indians go only to enjoy materially but not to practise their own Religion.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> It is perhaps due to Buddha's rejection of a God. ISKCON appears not to tolerate divine without a personality. Buddha's formless Nirvana would be an anathema to someone who thinks God must have a personality. The same way Advaita's Nirguna Brahman would be an anathema too. There would be nothing to adore, love, worship and submit. Just a formless absolute, and not the most favored of a person with devotional attitude.
In comparision Jehova and Allah are clearly described as having a 'personality'. That perhaps makes them more acceptable to ISKCON than the truly formless versions. It is curious that even though Allah ( and in some ways Jehova, although bible says God made man in his own image, so there is perhaps a form) is supposed to have no image, but he has a personality. Philosophically speaking an 'image' is just a bundle of attributes. A personality must have attributes. So Allah with a personality but without an image or form is a philosophical black hole for me.
ISKCON Krishna has personality and form. Krishna is also special that he is the Narayana (who dwells in all people) and Antaryami (who rules from within), or soul of all souls. So he is one with all the beings and still separate from them (achintya-bheda-abheda). <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Atlast you come a bit nearer to Vaishnavite viewpoint, abeit this is a small step, you can go further!
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> I absolutely disagree with this, we have overwhelming evidence now which shows that evolution did really happen. The main diff between Eastern religions and Christian lunatics is the fact that Eastern religions always changed with times and also never opposed scientific facts. The Dalai Lama once clearly stated that if science proves a central Buddhist belief as wrong then Buddhists have to accept the new fact. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you disagree, it does not affect the traditions of Vaishnavism.
Darwin's theory is to be rejected by Vaishnavism, since it does not include the 'design by intelligence' but instead awards the reason for evolution to 'chance'.
Also, the evolution theory is not yet complete nor does it answer all of nature's mysteries. It is still a developing subject, while the Vedic verdict on the natural history is total, all encompassing, complete and irreversible. This knowledge comes down to us though an unbroken line of Parampara. This knowledge will never be modified or adapted to the whims of any number of Scientists.
The views of Dalai Lama might be acceptable for the Tibetian Buddhists, but Shruti is the corner stone of Vaishnavism and its interpretation by Acharyas is the be followed, not scientists' speculations.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> We believe that there is a planet called Vaikuntha where Krishna lives.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, this is a basic teachings in all schools of Vaishnavism. Vaikuntha is the Spiritual Dimension, if which the material world is but a speck.
Don't tell me you never knew this before!!
---------------------------------------
<!--emo&N^3--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/n3.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='n3.gif' /><!--endemo--> Sir, Salutations to you. Your posts were impeccable...... as ever.
Jagan Mohan.