harish

Ask Krishna to solve your problems and promise him that you will tread the path of Bhakti towards Krishna. If you ask with a sincere intent, he will respond.

Kaliyuga does not provide the right facilities and environment for Krishna to manifest personally. An entire lifetime should be devoted for such an experience. Don't get deluded and depressed expecting the impossible. We must see him in everything and wish such that he makes life easier in order to relaize and server him and his devotees better. This way, he will respond definitely. Ananyaschintayanthoman yo jana paryapasathe Thesham Nityabhiyuktanam yogakshemaVahamyaham The welfare of the devotee who beleives in me alone as the supreme Godhead and trusts me alone to help him an none else, is very important for me. The above words are the absolute truth. If fear overcomes you, think of Narasimha avatara. If mortal fear overcomes, it is possible to get initiated into some special mantras, but those need a formal Guru.

My question was to devotees of non Indian origin, since you were not brought up on stores from the scriptures like Bhagavatha, what attracts you to Krishna and Sanathana Dharma? Your devotion must be purer than mine in some ways as I was already born amidst an orthodox Vaishnava upbringing due to which devotion to Krishna came naturally.

Unfortunately spiritual disucssions get into Pro and Anti India mode, which will be irrelevant for non Indians who want to disucss krishna Consciousness. India is great no doubt, it has also run into decadence. however Avatars can happen only at the place where Avatars are beleived. The key is Santana Dharma. Avatars shoudl logically happen at places where ancient civilizations happened. China-The civilization has been more secular based on principles rather than God. Greece-Pantheistic relegion with no backup philosophy to support their Gods Egypt-Great nkowledge but again beleif in a one powerful god kissing and it ran into ruin Sumeria-May be too primitive for organized relegions South America-May be too primitive for organized relegions India-Very strong philosophy connected to theism, many other positive conditions, stress on Gurus who guide to the right path, relegion tightly integrated with daily-life. Any comments?

Though initiation is ritualistic and a formality, is it not necessay to have a Guru to ensure that the understanding is right? By Guru I do not mean a particular formal Guru with whom you attend classes, but could be a guiding group of knowledgeable people. Periodic contact with a Guru who gives pointers in the right direction helps proper understanding.

The lord exists as the essence of every form (Vibhuti Rupa). In the nectar of sweet things, essence of sweet smells, whatever we enjoy is caused by his presence. Whenever we come across a good quality, thinking of the quality as among his infinite good qualities helps see him everywhere. Total acceptance of his pervasiveness in the Universe also releases daily stress.

I think what you mean is that in each cycle(Kalpa) Dvapara Yuga occurs. In each Dvapara Yuga Krishna incarnates. Yes, as I know, there will be the same cycle over and over again and same avatars will happen.

I guess brahmana means one who learns and follows the spiritual path for a living, not harming any living thing, follows austere practices and does not run after opulence.

self-proclaimed avatar who accumulated a lot of power, money and political. let us not waste time dicussing in this forum where you would want to talk of humble surrender to Krishna guided by a benevolent Guru.

----------------------- I'm not saying Buddhism or mayavada is necessarily right, but I am saying that there needs to be an actual debate about the basic tenets of these principles rather than relying on scriptures which most of us can't read, nor understand since they were written in a different time. ----------------------- My comments were based on the scriptures, which I meant Vedas,BrahmaSutras,Upanishads,Bhagavata Purana, Gita. Also I did not mean to go into personalities and just painted mayavada using some concepts in the scriptures as I was questioning it in a predominantly Vaishnava forum.(When I first heard of Isckon, Chaitanya and Prabhu-., I was under the impression that they preached Advaita) My original question was does not Mayavada militate against basic concepts like re-incarnation and Bhakti? So as Buddhism does as well. As for the question whether the scriptures(or parts of them) themselves are proof, I agree it is a valid question. I say if you have no theistic basis (pramana), you can never get anywhere unless you want to be an atheist and follow path of science alone. For Christians, words of Jesus and the Bible are the Pramana, for muslinms, it is Moahmmed and Islam. So where do we start finding the truth.

<hr> Millions of people all over the world suffer without food, water. What good would chanting do? <hr> You are free to go around and feed the millions and do nothing else, if that was the logic always, we would still be in stone-age fighting beasts in the forests. Anyway, helping others in name of Krishna is "also" a form of worship, no one says chanting will remove suffering.

the concept of three equal godheads is simplistic and based on puranic interpretations. The true understanding is that all three are done by the same God, That one God can be Vishnu or Shiva or other based on interpretation of Puranas. In the vaishnava beleifs, Vishnu as Padma-Nabha creates 4 faced Brahma who arises from the lotus from Vishnu's navel, and he creates the rest of the universe. During desctruction, the universe enters Vishnu again.

The sastras approached from different directions can be contradictory. Puranas like the Bhagavatha, talk about supremacy of Vishnu, some other about Shiva; Looking at vedas alone you would say Hinduism is a pantheon of almost equal gods. Parts of Vedanta look Atheistic. That is why Yama tells Nachiketa that understnding Vedic knowledge is as difficutl as walknig on a razor's edge. The sutras also say 'Tatthu Samanvayat', or "reconcile the pramanas" ALL the gurus, mathacharyas are greats irrespective of what way they interpreted. There must be an active exchange between shcools of thought to ensure that the knowledge of a schools is constantly polished. This thread in particular questioned how Mayavada can be close to Vedas, Bhagavatha and Geeta and is it not making some basic concepts like re-incranation look a bit hollow? Also my last comments worked up some objections to the fact that due to historic reasons, Mayavada is widely seen to be the main concept of Hinduism whereas Bhakti is relegated to a lesser place. All Vaishnava schools stress on Bhakti as equally as on Gnana. Raising this as this is a Vaishnava forum. Prabuh-. says that since Bhakti is the way, fine, go ahead and all of us need not go into depth of the Vedas.

I still say, there is no point in taking on science. Science is right in it's own honest way, we "do not have the capacity" to interpret the Vedas scientifically though truths are hidden(for example the truth of cycles of creation). The aim of the scriptures is learning about the absolute truth by knowing which all other knowledge is irrelevant. We should contemplate within which is easier with the scriptures.

Tradition says Buddhism was to mislead asuras towards atheism. Mayavada is a disguised buddhism, you just have to change terms. Mayavada is also ideal for asuras because ...... 1. There is an Ahankara that I AM GOD. Puranas are replete with asuras who wanted to replace god (hiranya kashipu) 2.UNdeserving people can be satisfied by the fact that everyone is god, even dog is god, a murderer is God. 3. No need for humble worship through Bhakti, Bhakti is delegeated to a inferior place. Devas always displayed humility to God while asuras stayed away from true Bhakti and challenged even those who granted them boons. 4. Asuras always tried to usurp through violent means, mayavada commentary stands on violent manipulation of Brahma sutras, Saatvic Puranas like Bhagavatha have been ignored. Even Sankara opposed Vyasa on Vedanta whereas Vyasa himself was the original compiler. 5. Asuras HATE Vishnu, so Mayavadins never consider Vishnu as supreme(the only asuras who loved Vishnu were Prahlada, Bali, Vibheeshana) 6. Asuras mislead by illusion, so Mayavada is full of confusing signals with conflicting statements at the same time such as Nirguna/Saguna Braman. 7. Asuras hate and are jealous of Vishnu's qualities (Gunas), so they made Brhman as Nirguna. 8. Most mayavadins depend on Tamasic puranas, Tamasic is dear to Asuras. Agunaya Gunodreka Swaroopayaadhikarine VidaaritariSanghaya vasudevaya te namaha