Krishna’s Opinion

[Guest guest]

Krishna’s Opinion<br>To label me a fanatic for

pointing these things out seems to me to be a case of the

pot calling the kettle black. What are members of the

“Sadhana” cyber community chastising me for? Posting verses

from the Bhagavaga Gita to and sharing with the other

members of this forum the Vaishnava interpretation of

these verses? MY opinion is no–doubt useless, but I

have presented Krishna’s opinion. Hopefully those who

participate in this exchange will give some serious

consideration to His words. Calling me names doesn’t help me

understand why anyone who accepts the authority of the Gita,

would pursue any of the other numerous flavors of

“Hinduism”. An advanced transcendentalist understands that

when things are considered from the viewpoint of

Brahmana realization, honoring any “Hindu” tradition IS

OK. In fact honoring ANY process of self realization

is ok in relation from that vantage point! But

Krishna certainly appears to be pushing us towards

something that lies beyond Brahman realization. In that

regard he offers many verses to help us understand that

there are many distinctions, which it would be in our

interest to make. <br>Let me conclude with this last verse

for your consideration. It is found in the concluding

verse of chapter five where Krishna declares that Full

(God) consciousness and peace is attained when one

becomes conscious of Him, and recognized that He is the

ultimate beneficiary of all sacrifices and the Lord of ALL

planets and demigods.<br>bhoktaram yajna-tapasam

sarva-loka-mahesvaram<br>suhrdam sarva-bhutanam jnatva mam santim rcchati<br> “A

person in full consciousness of Me, knowing Me to be the

ultimate beneficiary of all sacrifices and austerities,

the Supreme Lord of all planets and demigods, and the

benefactor and well-wisher of all living entities, attains

peace from the pangs of material miseries.” -Bg.

5.29<br>I respectfully submit this to the member of the

Sadana community and I await their response. I will

consciously temper my future contributions based on the

response I get from this effort. If it is obvious that the

majority of the readers of this forum prefer not to have a

“Fanatic Krishna Bhakti” interrupting your dialogue then

please say so and I will engage my efforts elsewhere.

You may also contact me directly via email if you

prefer to not broadcast your comments web-wide.

<br>Thank you.<br>Mayesvara

dasa<br><br>robertswg

[Guest guest]

Dear mayeswara,<br>thank you for the

clarifications which has helped one to see the true man behind

the posts, and one feels ashamed of his impatient

"reactions" on some issues.<br>Gita is indeed one of the most

condensed forms spiritual books, expounding profound truths

in so few words.<br>However I would like to draw

your attention to the fact that most 'Hindu'

literature has deeper levels of understanding than is

evident in the first reading, thus people seem to spend

their whole lives delving into just one book, nigh just

one sentence.<br>Am glad that you have finally

managed some time for all of us and am sure all the

remaining mambers would be one voice in welcoming you. Will

attempt to read all your future posts in the light of

your explanations.<br>As to accepting the Gita or

Krishna as "absolute authority", I'm afraid that will

take some convincing.<br>What would you say if Gita's

words are found in many other scriptures scattered

around?<br>What would you say that many people strongly believe

Krishna to be one of the ten avataras?<br>Could we start

a discussion on who you believe to be Krishna?<br>A

dark superman, an avatara, the only god(a term so

often used without sense behind it), or something

beyond all this...?<br><br>awaiting your reply (this

time, will wait patiently)<br><br>regards really

[Guest guest]

The question: What would you say that many people

strongly believe Krishna to be one of the ten

avataras?<br>Could we start a discussion on who you believe to be

Krishna?<br><br>So, who is Shree Krishna?<br><br>In Srimad Bhagwat

Purana, first section chapter 3, Vedavyasa gives us a

list of 22 Vishnu-avataras. Of this list, Balarama and

Krishna are #19 and #20. In conclusion he states, "O

brahmanas, the incarnations of the Lord are innumerable,

like rivulets flowing from inexaustible sources of

water."<br>So it appears that all avataras are accepted as holy

and accepted as God.<br>However, Vedavyasa does give

special distinction to Shree Krishna. In the 28th verse

of this same chapter it is stated, "All of the

above-mentioned incarnations are either plenary portions or

portions of the plenary portions of the Lord, but Lord

Shree Krishna is the original Bhagawan."<br><br>As

believers of Veda we should not be afriad to accept Shree

Krishna as the only God. This is not a new idea, as many

Hindus think. Rather, the idea of Hinduism lacking one

supreme authority, was imposed by outside forces (Muslim

and English) in an attempt to make Indian religion

appear primitive.<br>This does not discredit anyone's

worship of another avatara or of many avataras. If we are

thinking Rama, Narsimha, Balarama, etc. to be anyone but

Shree Krishna, then we have misunderstood.