Vedic definition of atheism

[Guest guest]

>Thank you for this conference. Is it informative, or is it meant for

>discussions?

 

Pamho Prabhu! Thank you very much! The conference is both. We can share our

arguments and strategies, we can discuss arguments for and against God, we

can ask our questions and express our doubts.

 

> I would like to hear your opinion on what the Vedic definition of atheism

> would be.

 

>Here is my opinion, for whatever it counts.

>Practice in ISKCON seems to be directed towards two goals, one is pure KC,

>the other is heavenly planets. Of course, pure KC is the only real goal,

>but

>not everybody are willing to pursue it.

 

Are there also devotees in ISKCON consciously practicing KC to go to the

heavenly planets? I hope it's few. Can we really say that that's the two

goals of ISKCON even though SOME might want to go for the heavenly planets?

I'm not sure.

 

>Therefore, besides pure KC

>practices, there is need for varnasrama society. Both practices are defined

>with their own rules - pure KC with its rules of devotional service, and

>varnasrama with its rules and regulations of 4 varnas and 4 asramas.

 

Yes, but as far as I understand the varnashrama in ISKCON is meant for going

directly back to Krishna.

 

"I propose, that everything, that is not in line with pure KC, or in line

with varnasrama rules, as defined in sastra, is athiesm."

 

Well, if one has to practice varnashrama because one is not pure yet, that

means one is still more or less influenced by an ungodly mentality

(atheism). Because one is determined to follow Krishna's instructions by for

example by following the varnashrama system, then on might not be

categorized as an antheist but as a devotee, but one is still to some degree

conditioned by ungodliness (atheism). What do you say to that?

 

>> To me it seems that you can use different definitions according

>> to the point you want to emphasize. In the gita it is said, that anyone

>> who does not follow the regulations in the Vedic scriptures is a demon -

>> an atheist. Also mayavadis, demigod worshippers etc. are atheists

>> according to Prabhupada.

>>

>> Sometimes even devotees fail to follow the scriptures, but how can they

>>be

>> atheists? I think, then, we could say that even theists can exhibit

>> atheistic behavior sometimes if they are not pure devotees.

 

Could one say, that pure devotion is higher than regulations of varnasrama?

Thus in pure KC one may disregard certain vedic injunctions.

 

This is how I understand it. All the way up through the yoga ladder one

first accepts certain rules and regulation and then gives them up for higher

rules and regulations when they are no longer needed. That goes on until one

reaches the topmost platform of spontanious devotion.

 

>If varnasrama is between pure KC and ateism, then one can fail in following

>varnasrama for two reasons. Failing varnasrama for pure KC is good, and

>failing varnasrama for atheism is bad.

 

Yes, but the word "failing" is perhaps not the best word when one gives

varnashrama up for pure devotion?

 

Ys, AKD