Religious training for Ksatriyas

[Guest guest]

>

> I was hoping others could provide me with some other Names of God which I

> could add to the list from time to time. I know of the many, many other

> Sanskrit Names for God like Krsna, etc. (which I personally prefer) but I

> would like some more Names of God like Christ and other languages, too. There

> must be many.

 

Tunkashila

Great Mystery

Wakan Tanka

[Guest guest]

On 14 Apr 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote:

 

 

>

> Tunkashila

> Great Mystery

> Wakan Tanka

>

 

Thanks Gosh, I knew I could rely upon you to be simple and responsive to the

request.

 

Hari! (Oh, there's another One.)

[Guest guest]

> Actually, the only reason I use it is because of something I read of Srila

> Prabhupada's in the SSR wherein he stated that "Christ" comes from the

> word Christos which comes from sansrit krsta (?) and that is the same as

> Krsna. Christ or Krsna - it's the same thing. Something to this effect I

> believe. Correct me if I'm wrong please.

 

I have also heard this, even if I am not sure about the source. It may of

course cause confusion to use the name Christ, since most people think about

Jesus Christ when they hear it. I have never heard of any religious society

nowadays who uses Christ as a name of God, even if it still may be used as

such by some without my knowledge.

[Guest guest]

"WWW: Janesvara (Dasa) ACBSP (Syracuse - USA)" wrote:

 

> [Text 2232172 from COM]

>

> On 13 Apr 1999, Hare Krsna dasi wrote:

>

> > Srila Prabhupada mentions about half a dozen subjects such as

> > politics, social structure, warfare, economics, science, etc., in which the

> > ksatriya should be trained.

>

> Where Oh where is that ISKCON college to train these??? It would be so

> excellent!

>

> > One subject Prabhupada mentions is that the ksatriya should be trained in

> > religion. He specifically mentions the word "religion" and not spiritual

> > science. He mentions that separately, that the ksatriya should be trained

> in

> > devotional service to the Supreme Lord.

> >

> > So, when he talks about "religion" this means something a little bit

> different.

> >

> > In the varnasrama society as presented by Srila Prabhupada everyone would

> not

> > necessarily have the same religion. Therefore the ksatriyas must be

trained

> to

> > understand the different religions and to make sure that they are training

> > their

> > citizens to actually love God.

> >

> > A ksatriya would be taught the proper fundamentals of the different

> religions

> > so

> > that he could appreciate how his citizens could best advance in their

> service

> > to

> > the Lord.

>

> I hope you don't mind if I take this opportunity to request some help along

> this subject. I have been wanting to ask this for months but couldn't find a

> good opportunity to ask.

>

> During my daily morning ablutions, one of my prayers is the second verse of

> the Sikshastakam prayers of Lord Caitanya. I chant the sanskrit then I recite

> the English translation as follows:

>

> "Oh my Lord, Your Holy Name alone can render all benediction to living beings

> and thus You have hundreds and millions of Names like Krsna, Govinda and

> Christ. In these transcendental Names You have invested all....etc."

>

> I was hoping others could provide me with some other Names of God which I

> could add to the list from time to time. I know of the many, many other

> Sanskrit Names for God like Krsna, etc. (which I personally prefer) but I

> would like some more Names of God like Christ and other languages, too. There

> must be many. I think it is important that the Names refer directly to God,

> the Supreme Being, etc. I am not certain that the Names of the Lords pure

> devotees (like Jesus, Mohammed, etc.), while certainly wonderful, are of

> similar potency or applicable?

>

> I often think about how I could interest Christians and other religions to

> chant the Holy Names of their own nomenclatures. This would certainly be

> non-sectarian and very effective, in my humble opinion.

 

*************************************

Hare Krsna dasi

 

Well, this seems like a valuable point to discuss. I don't have access to the

VedaBase from this computer, but the first quote that springs to mind goes

something like this (could someone please look it up for us?):

 

"No Christian gentleman will be willing to change his faith. Similarly no

Hindu

gentleman will be willing to change his faith. Nor any Muslim gentleman. This

changing of faith is for those who have no particular social position.

Nevertheless, every gentleman will be willing to learn how to increase his love

for God in his own faith. That is the position of the Krsna consciousness

movement. We are non-sectarian. We will help anyone increase his love for God,

in

keeping with his own tradition."

 

(I hope someone will look up the actual quote, this is a very rough

paraphrasal.)

 

So, the thing that is wanted here is not that we should attempt to artificially

create some new kind of religion which is a merge of all different kinds of

religion. That is something which Kirtanananda attempted to do in the 1980s.

A

concoction.

 

The important thing here is that the ksatriya should have a very firm

understanding of the fundamentals of the different religions of his citizens,

so

that he may know who is the legitimate religious leader, and who is actually

ignorant, and who is a cheating materialistic exploiter of his followers.

 

Just as Lord Caitanya preached to Chand Kazi on the basis of the Koran, a

leader

must be able to preach to any particular religious group competently, based on

the

scripture of that group. However, we do not see that Lord Caitanya, Himself,

began chanting "Allah" as a regular habit.

 

So, we need to make a clear distinction between having a firm understanding of

different religions and attempting to artificially create some new religion. I

don't believe the latter will be very spiritual productive.

 

And again, this is mainly a topic for ksatriyas and for the brahmanas who are

training them -- not that most sudras or vaisyas need to know the particulars

of

all religions -- they should simply be taught to appreciate and respect the

means

that others use in the expression of their love for the Lord.

 

your servant,

 

Hare Krsna dasi

[Guest guest]

On 14 Apr 1999, Hare Krsna dasi wrote:

 

 

> Well, this seems like a valuable point to discuss.

 

 

Thanks Mother, I very much appreciate level-headedness. It warms the heart!

Makes me want to keep trying to improve my fallen self.

 

 

>

> "No Christian gentleman will be willing to change his faith. Similarly no

> Hindu

> gentleman will be willing to change his faith. Nor any Muslim gentleman.

This

> changing of faith is for those who have no particular social position.

> Nevertheless, every gentleman will be willing to learn how to increase his

love

> for God in his own faith. That is the position of the Krsna consciousness

> movement. We are non-sectarian. We will help anyone increase his love for

God,

> in

> keeping with his own tradition."

 

 

 

God, I love this kind of stuff! This is precisely the attitude that attracted

me to Srila Prabhupada and his movement. I have always envisioned my role as

an aspiring Vaisnava ksatriya as a kind of religious-social referee. Whatever

religion a person is I feel comfortable talking with them and being friendly

discussing God and His Names. I personally am not really attracted to the more

Hindu-type traditions (clothes, decorations,etc.) Some I like and they are

wonderful for those who favor them. But I started my Krsna consciousness by

reading Srila Prabhupada's gita which I bought by chance at a bookstore in

Tucson, AZ. I had no idea there was a cult movement attached to it at the

time. Until I wrote a letter to the address provided in the book I just

thought it was a philosophical approach to life. I loved reading it

everywhere, especially up in the woods or streamside. It answered so many of

my questions about life. Never did a religious ceremonial or sectarian concept

enter my mind - until I visited an ISKCON temple and the members told me,

first thing, to not return home to my maya parents and friends. Surrender now!

Shave up! Wear a dhoti!

 

I returned to my home.

[Guest guest]

>God, I love this kind of stuff! This is precisely the attitude that

>attracted

>me to Srila Prabhupada and his movement. I have always envisioned my role

>as

>an aspiring Vaisnava ksatriya as a kind of religious-social referee.

>Whatever

>religion a person is I feel comfortable talking with them and being

>friendly

>discussing God and His Names. I personally am not really attracted to the

>more

>Hindu-type traditions (clothes, decorations,etc.) Some I like and they are

>wonderful for those who favor them. But I started my Krsna consciousness by

>reading Srila Prabhupada's gita which I bought by chance at a bookstore in

>Tucson, AZ. I had no idea there was a cult movement attached to it at the

>time. Until I wrote a letter to the address provided in the book I just

>thought it was a philosophical approach to life. I loved reading it

>everywhere, especially up in the woods or streamside. It answered so many

>of

>my questions about life. Never did a religious ceremonial or sectarian

>concept

>enter my mind - until I visited an ISKCON temple and the members told me,

>first thing, to not return home to my maya parents and friends. Surrender

>now!

>Shave up! Wear a dhoti!

 

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

 

This makes me remember my early days with Krishna-consciousness, the Gita

also entered my house and immediately things started to change. The first

was a certain joy in cleaning for Krishna.

We started making sunday-feasts too, out in the fields under the open sky

or in a tepe. When my daughter was born with the help of the holy name and

my husband, the first thing my husband did was offering her to Srila

Prabhupada. I still have a very clear and beautyful picture in my mind of

that event.

Then we moved into the temple, it was really hard for me adjusting to the

customs there. The simple living was not so simple compaired to what we were

used to and it seemed further away from what we had understood while reading

Srila Prabhupada's books. We were very much discouraged to keep contact with

the people we had previously known. Although the devotees were certainly

wellmeaning and did their best to make us fit in, which was quite hard,

giving us a feeling of beeing especially fallen cases, I still sometimes

wonder what would have happened if we had simply continued the way we had

started and stayed where we was with the cows, the land and the

preachingspirit in Srila Prabhupada's books.

 

Your servant Gunamani d.d.

[Guest guest]

>

> Hari! (Oh, there's another One.)

 

In the study of the roots of words, where they come from, which I believe is

called etymology, there is a thing called linguistic shift. Just like with

Orientals and the R-L shift, or even in our own tradition the B-V shift

(Vrindaban - Brindaban).

 

So one aspect of linguistic shift is that any vowel can be substituted for any

other vowel.

 

Hence, studying the derivation of the word HOLY, we can substitute an A for

the O and a I for the Y and get HARI. So every time you hear the word HOLY ,

you can understand it to be a Name of God.

 

Also, PARADISE becomes PARADESA, the Supreme Place.

 

 

Understanding Krsna and Christ

Krsna, Christos, Christ

In 1974, near ISKCON's center in Frankfurt am Main, West Germany, Srila

Prabhupada and several of his disciples took a morning walk with father

Emmanuel

Jungclaussen, a Benedictine monk from Niederalteich Monastery. Noticing that

Srila Prabhupada was carrying meditation beads similar to the rosary, Father

Emmanuel explained that he also chanted a constant prayer: "Lord Jesus Christ,

be merciful unto us." The following conversation ensued.

Srila Prabhupada: What is the meaning of the word Christ?

Father Emmanuel: Christ comes from the Greek word Christos, meaning "the

anointed one."

Srila Prabhupada: Christos is the Greek version of the word Krsna.

Father Emmanuel: This is very interesting.

Srila Prabhupada: When an Indian person calls on Krsna, he often says, "Krsta."

Krsta is a Sanskrit word meaning "attraction." So when we address God as

"Christ,Krsta," or "Krsna," we indicate the same all-attractive Supreme

Personality of Godhead. When Jesus said, "Our Father, who an in heaven,

sanctified be Thy name," that name of God was "Krsta" or "Krsna." Do you agree?

Father Emmanuel: I think Jesus, as the son of God, has revealed to us the

actual

name of God: Christ. We can call God "Father," but if we want to address Him by

His actual name, we have to say "Christ."

Srila Prabhupada: Yes. "Christ" is another way of saying Krsta, and "Krsta" is

another way of pronouncing Krsna, the name of God.

 

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Krsna, Christos, Christ

 

KRSTA K to C, add the I between the R and S, A shifts to O, all recognised

linguistic shifts, hence Krsta becomes Christos which then shifts to Christ.

Adding and dropping end letters is a shift, also aspirated Hs. Like in the

cockney, Hey , becomes 'ey.

 

ALLAH, add an H at the beggining , drop it at the end, R-L shift, second A

to

I = HARI.

 

The Star of David is also a Nrsimha dev symbol, and the Name Narahara or

something like that is in the Jewish tradition which is a simple shift from

Narahari, a name of Nrshimhadev. Suddenly the Lion of Judah makes more sense,

eh?

 

Just see the fun.

[Guest guest]

>

>

> "No Christian gentleman will be willing to change his faith. Similarly no

> Hindu

> gentleman will be willing to change his faith. Nor any Muslim gentleman. This

> changing of faith is for those who have no particular social position.

> Nevertheless, every gentleman will be willing to learn how to increase his

love

> for God in his own faith. That is the position of the Krsna consciousness

> movement. We are non-sectarian. We will help anyone increase his love for

God,

> in

> keeping with his own tradition."

>

> (I hope someone will look up the actual quote, this is a very rough

> paraphrasal.)

 

The ultimate goal of this movement is to educate people in how to love God.

Caitanya Mahaprabhu approves the conclusion that the highest perfection of

human

life is to learn how to love God. The Krsna consciousness movement has nothing

to

do with the Hindu religion or any system of religion. No Christian gentleman

will

be interested in changing his faith from Christian to Hindu. Similarly, no

Hindu

gentleman of culture will be ready to change to the Christian faith. Such

changing

is for men who have no particular social status. But everyone will be

interested in

understanding the philosophy and science of God and taking it seriously. One

should

clearly understand that the Krsna consciousness movement is not preaching the

so-called Hindu religion. We are giving a spiritual culture that can solve all

the

problems of life, and therefore it is being accepted all over the world.

 

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Krsna Consciousness: Hindu Cult or Divine Culture?

 

 

 

 

 

>

>

> So, the thing that is wanted here is not that we should attempt to

artificially

> create some new kind of religion which is a merge of all different kinds of

> religion. That is something which Kirtanananda attempted to do in the 1980s.

> A

> concoction.

 

Actually, that is a common mISKCONception. It wasn't until after he was

thrown

out of ISKCON that he started making changes, although it is commonly said he

was

thrown out BECAUSE of the changes. That was more of a possibly late 80s ,

more

of a 1990s thing. He moved the cows out of the center of the community in

about

1987 and all that other stuff happened after, in gradual steps, not fully

flowering until the 90s.

 

That detail aside, your point about artificially creating is well taken. As a

confirmed Lutheran, I was troubled by seeing Jesus sitting on a Vyasa sana on

a

lower level than Srila Prabhupada, and on his left side, while Kirtanananda

sat

on the same level as Jesus, but on the right side of Srila Prabhupada. I

think a

lot of Christians were probably offended by that.

[Guest guest]

>

>

> "No Christian gentleman will be willing to change his faith. Similarly no

> Hindu

> gentleman will be willing to change his faith. Nor any Muslim gentleman. This

> changing of faith is for those who have no particular social position.

> Nevertheless, every gentleman will be willing to learn how to increase his

love

> for God in his own faith. That is the position of the Krsna consciousness

> movement. We are non-sectarian. We will help anyone increase his love for

God,

> in

> keeping with his own tradition."

>

> (I hope someone will look up the actual quote, this is a very rough

> paraphrasal.)

 

The ultimate goal of this movement is to educate people in how to love God.

Caitanya Mahaprabhu approves the conclusion that the highest perfection of

human

life is to learn how to love God. The Krsna consciousness movement has nothing

to

do with the Hindu religion or any system of religion. No Christian gentleman

will

be interested in changing his faith from Christian to Hindu. Similarly, no

Hindu

gentleman of culture will be ready to change to the Christian faith. Such

changing

is for men who have no particular social status. But everyone will be

interested in

understanding the philosophy and science of God and taking it seriously. One

should

clearly understand that the Krsna consciousness movement is not preaching the

so-called Hindu religion. We are giving a spiritual culture that can solve all

the

problems of life, and therefore it is being accepted all over the world.

 

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Krsna Consciousness: Hindu Cult or Divine Culture?

 

 

 

 

 

>

>

> So, the thing that is wanted here is not that we should attempt to

artificially

> create some new kind of religion which is a merge of all different kinds of

> religion. That is something which Kirtanananda attempted to do in the 1980s.

> A

> concoction.

 

Actually, that is a common mISKCONception. It wasn't until after he was

thrown

out of ISKCON that he started making changes, although it is commonly said he

was

thrown out BECAUSE of the changes. That was more of a possibly late 80s ,

more

of a 1990s thing. He moved the cows out of the center of the community in

about

1987 and all that other stuff happened after, in gradual steps, not fully

flowering until the 90s.

 

That detail aside, your point about artificially creating is well taken. As a

confirmed Lutheran, I was troubled by seeing Jesus sitting on a Vyasa sana on

a

lower level than Srila Prabhupada, and on his left side, while Kirtanananda

sat

on the same level as Jesus, but on the right side of Srila Prabhupada. I

think a

lot of Christians were probably offended by that.

[Guest guest]

At 3:25 -0800 4/15/99, COM: Madhava Gosh (das) ACBSP (New Vrindavan - USA)

wrote:

>Actually, that is a common mISKCONception. It wasn't until after he was

>thrown

>out of ISKCON that he started making changes, although it is commonly said he

>was

>thrown out BECAUSE of the changes.

 

I'm confused. My ex-husband left New Vrindavan in the 80s because of these

changes. When they first started, NV was still in ISKCON, and he was

confused about who was right, but then ISKCON excommunicated NV and things

started getting really weird so he bolted.

 

Your description of the hierarchy of the altars was fascinating. Has anyone

recorded the history and documented all the changes that did happen? I know

Maitreya for one was deeply disturbed by the polyester robes. I mean if

you've grown up in the 60s and 70s with natural fibers, that's completely

unacceptable (I'm only partially kidding).....

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

[Guest guest]

"COM: Madhava Gosh (das) ACBSP (New Vrindavan - USA)" wrote:

 

> [Text 2236205 from COM]

>

> > "No Christian gentleman will be willing to change his faith. Similarly no

> > Hindu

> > gentleman will be willing to change his faith. Nor any Muslim gentleman.

This

> > changing of faith is for those who have no particular social position.

> > Nevertheless, every gentleman will be willing to learn how to increase his

> love

> > for God in his own faith. That is the position of the Krsna consciousness

> > movement. We are non-sectarian. We will help anyone increase his love for

> God, in keeping with his own tradition."

> >

> > (I hope someone will look up the actual quote, this is a very rough

> > paraphrasal.)

>

 

[srila Prabhupada's actual statement provided by Madhava Gosh:]

 

> The ultimate goal of this movement is to educate people in how to love God.

> Caitanya Mahaprabhu approves the conclusion that the highest perfection of

human

> life is to learn how to love God. The Krsna consciousness movement has

nothing to

>

> do with the Hindu religion or any system of religion. No Christian gentleman

will

> be interested in changing his faith from Christian to Hindu. Similarly, no

Hindu

> gentleman of culture will be ready to change to the Christian faith. Such

> changing

> is for men who have no particular social status. But everyone will be

interested

> in understanding the philosophy and science of God and taking it seriously.

One

> should clearly understand that the Krsna consciousness movement is not

preaching

> the so-called Hindu religion. We are giving a spiritual culture that can

solve

> all the problems of life, and therefore it is being ccepted all over the

world.

>

> >>> Ref. VedaBase => Krsna Consciousness: Hindu Cult or Divine Culture?

 

> > So, the thing that is wanted here is not that we should attempt to

> artificially

> > create some new kind of religion which is a merge of all different kinds of

> > religion. That is something which Kirtanananda attempted to do in the

1980s.

> > A concoction.

>

> Actually, that is a common mISKCONception. It wasn't until after he was

thrown

> out of ISKCON that he started making changes, although it is commonly said

he

> was thrown out BECAUSE of the changes. That was more of a possibly late 80s

,

> more of a 1990s thing. He moved the cows out of the center of the community

in

> about 1987 and all that other stuff happened after, in gradual steps, not

> fully flowering until the 90s.

>

> That detail aside, your point about artificially creating is well taken. As

a

> confirmed Lutheran, I was troubled by seeing Jesus sitting on a Vyasa sana

on a

> lower level than Srila Prabhupada, and on his left side, while Kirtanananda

sat

> on the same level as Jesus, but on the right side of Srila Prabhupada. I

think

> a lot of Christians were probably offended by that.

 

**********************

 

Thanks, Madhava Gosh prabhu. Also, for those who do not have access to the

VedaBase, I believe this quote appears in the *Science of Self Realization*.

If I

remember it is on the very last page of one of the chapters or sections.

 

your servant,

 

Hare Krsna dasi

[Guest guest]

On 15 Apr 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote:

> That detail aside, your point about artificially creating is well taken.

As a

> confirmed Lutheran, I was troubled by seeing Jesus sitting on a Vyasa sana

on

> a

> lower level than Srila Prabhupada, and on his left side, while

Kirtanananda

> sat

> on the same level as Jesus, but on the right side of Srila Prabhupada.

 

A disciple is always placed on the right side of his guru; that's

why the altar photos always have Srila Prabhupada on our left,

followed by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, Srila Gaura-Kishora, and

Srila Bhaktivinoda on our right. Actually, from their point of view,

it is Srila Bhaktivinoda, with Gaura-Kishora on his right,

Bhaktisiddhanta on his right, and Prabhupada on his right.

 

> I

> think a

> lot of Christians were probably offended by that.

 

A lot of non-Xns that went to NV during that time were

offended by seeing Jesus on a vyasasana at all in the

temple. Jesus was a preacher of mleccha-dharma, not

the Vedic teachings of Vyasa.

 

Yours,

 

Vijay

[Guest guest]

"WWW: Vijay Pai (Houston TX - USA)" wrote:

 

> [Text 2237244 from COM]

>

> On 15 Apr 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote:

>

>

> > I

> > think a

> > lot of Christians were probably offended by that.

>

> A lot of non-Xns that went to NV during that time were

> offended by seeing Jesus on a vyasasana at all in the

> temple. Jesus was a preacher of mleccha-dharma, not

> the Vedic teachings of Vyasa.

>

> Yours,

>

> Vijay

 

Srila Prabhupada told us that Jesus Christ is a saktavesa avatar of the Supreme

Lord. Let's be careful what we say, lest we cross over the boundary of good

taste and commit Vaisnava aparadha. I think we're starting to tread on thin

ice

here.

 

your servant,

 

Hare Krsna dasi

[Guest guest]

> >

> >

> > "No Christian gentleman will be willing to change his faith. Similarly no

Hindu gentleman will be willing to change his faith. Nor any Muslim gentleman.

This changing of faith is for those who have no particular social position.

> >

 

 

Which, curiously, was the situation much of the youth counter-culture found

themselves in during the 60's and early 70's. For many, becoming KC is often a

matter of finding a new religion.

 

 

> > Nevertheless, every gentleman will be willing to learn how to increase his

love for God in his own faith. That is the position of the Krsna

consciousness movement. We are non-sectarian. We will help anyone increase

his love fo God

> >

 

 

Anyone in any social position can take up the process of bhakti-yoga. Then

there is the issue of our constitutional position, which is beyond the issue

of faith.

[Guest guest]

>

> Actually, that is a common mISKCONception. It wasn't until after he was

thrown out of ISKCON that he started making changes, although it is commonly

said he was thrown out BECAUSE of the changes.

>

>

 

 

Seems to me Kirtananda had a number of 'creative' tendencies that manifest

themselves early on. Of course, when you became a self-effulgent acarya based

on the strength of you personal character you naturally get more facility to

express yourself.

[Guest guest]

>

> A lot of non-Xns that went to NV during that time were

> offended by seeing Jesus on a vyasasana at all in the

> temple. Jesus was a preacher of mleccha-dharma, not

> the Vedic teachings of Vyasa.

>

>

 

This could be a slight regarding Jesus and his preaching. I believe our main

concern is maintaining the integrity of our own disciplic succession within

our own tradition.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

..

[Guest guest]

> A lot of non-Xns that went to NV during that time were

> offended by seeing Jesus on a vyasasana at all in the

> temple. Jesus was a preacher of mleccha-dharma, not

> the Vedic teachings of Vyasa.

>

> Yours,

>

> Vijay

 

 

 

"A Vaishnava should follow the examples of such Vaishnavas as Haridas

Thakur, Nityananda Prabhu and also Lord Jesus Christ." S.B. 4.6.47.

 

 

"Mr. O'Grady: ...when you say Krsna consciousness is there any difference

between that and Christ consciousness?

Srila Prabhupada: No, there is no difference. Christ came to preach the

message of God. If you actually become Christ conscious, you become Krsna

conscious." SSR pg 262

 

"... anindaya is that we should not criticize others methods of religion.

There are different types of religious systems operating under different

qualities of material nature. When people are mostly under the modes of

passion and ignorance, then their system of religion will be of the same

quality. A devotee, instead of criticizing such systems, will encourage the

followers to stick to their principles so that gradually they can come to

the platform of religion in goodness. Simply by criticizing them, a

devotee's mind will be agitated. Thus a devotee should tolerate and learn to

stop agitation." Srimad Bhagavatam 4.22.24

 

 

SSR pg. 135, 136:

"Once in Melbourne, a group of Christian ministers came to visit me. They

asked, "What is your idea of Jesus Christ?" I told them, "He is our guru. He

is preaching God consciousness, so he is our spiritual master." The

ministers very much appreciated that.

Actually, anyone who is preaching God's glories must be accepted as a guru.

Jesus Christ is one such great personality. The scriptures say that anyone

who considers the spiritual master to be an ordinary man has a hellish

mentality. If Jesus Christ were an ordinary man, then he could not have

delivered God consciousness"

[Guest guest]

On 15 Apr 1999, Sthita-dhi-muni Dasa wrote:

> VSP wrote:

> > temple. Jesus was a preacher of mleccha-dharma, not

> > the Vedic teachings of Vyasa.

 

> This could be a slight regarding Jesus and his preaching.

 

It is not a "slight" regarding Jesus; I only spoke of his preaching.

Besides, Srila Prabhupada has already confirmed what I said (although

he used the term "yavana", not "mleccha". Perhaps I was wrong to use

mleccha):

 

 

"The shastras of the yavanas, or meat-eaters, are not eternal

scriptures. They have been fashioned recently, and sometimes they

contradict one another. The scriptures of the yavanas are three:

the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Koran. Their

compilation has a history; they are not eternal like the Vedic

knowledge. Therefore although they have their arguments and

reasonings, they are not very sound and transcendental. As such,

modern people advanced in science and philosophy deem these

scriptures unacceptable." (CC Adi 17.169 purport)

 

Yours,

 

Vijay

[Guest guest]

Might be more tactful to say something like he was preaching eternal truths

within a Yavana culture. He did say a lot of powerful stuff any devotee can

relate to. I don't think he compromised the message -- like he was instituting

some new dharma for low class people. After all, it wasn't Jesus who wrote the

New Testament.

 

 

 

> > VSP wrote:

> > > temple. Jesus was a preacher of mleccha-dharma, not

> > > the Vedic teachings of Vyasa.

>

> > This could be a slight regarding Jesus and his preaching.

>

> It is not a "slight" regarding Jesus; I only spoke of his preaching.

> Besides, Srila Prabhupada has already confirmed what I said (although

> he used the term "yavana", not "mleccha". Perhaps I was wrong to use

> mleccha):

>

>

> "The shastras of the yavanas, or meat-eaters, are not eternal

> scriptures. They have been fashioned recently, and sometimes they

> contradict one another. The scriptures of the yavanas are three:

> the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Koran. Their

> compilation has a history; they are not eternal like the Vedic

> knowledge. Therefore although they have their arguments and

> reasonings, they are not very sound and transcendental. As such,

> modern people advanced in science and philosophy deem these

> scriptures unacceptable." (CC Adi 17.169 purport)

>

> Yours,

>

> Vijay

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

..

[Guest guest]

>

>

> A disciple is always placed on the right side of his guru; that's

> why the altar photos always have Srila Prabhupada on our left,

> followed by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, Srila Gaura-Kishora, and

> Srila Bhaktivinoda on our right. Actually, from their point of view,

> it is Srila Bhaktivinoda, with Gaura-Kishora on his right,

> Bhaktisiddhanta on his right, and Prabhupada on his right.

 

In the Christian tradition, in a vision of the judgement, the saved are on

the

right hand and the fallen on the left, so Jesus on the left was wierd.

 

>

>

> > I

> > think a

> > lot of Christians were probably offended by that.

>

> A lot of non-Xns that went to NV during that time were

> offended by seeing Jesus on a vyasasana at all in the

> temple. Jesus was a preacher of mleccha-dharma, not

> the Vedic teachings of Vyasa.

>

> Yours,

>

> Vijay

 

That is a matter of opinion. Certainly the institutionized Christianity that

has

prospered politically can be characterized that way, but that is not what

Jesus

preached. But I am not going to defend that point.

[Guest guest]

"WWW: Sthita-dhi-muni (Dasa) SDG (Alachua FL - USA)" wrote:

 

> [Text 2237944 from COM]

>

> >

> > Actually, that is a common mISKCONception. It wasn't until after he was

> thrown out of ISKCON that he started making changes, although it is commonly

> said he was thrown out BECAUSE of the changes.

> >

> >

>

> Seems to me Kirtananda had a number of 'creative' tendencies that manifest

> themselves early on. Of course, when you became a self-effulgent acarya based

> on the strength of you personal character you naturally get more facility to

> express yourself.

 

After the attack on him in late 1985 that put him in a coma for several weeks,

his disciples still wanted to believe that he was still only a conduit for

instructions directly from Krsna. So even though he was suffering from severe

brain damage, he was still given full credibility like nothing had happened.

Because of the continuing threats on his life (Sulocana said he was going to

come kill Kirtanananda, and was apprehended leaving a local motel after

midnight

with a loaded pistol), and because of Kirtanananda's fierce independence that

made it impossible to keep a devotee by him constantly, the devotees got him

a

trained guard dog so he would have protection 24/7 from an attack like he had

already been the victim of - a quick, close in attack by a looney toon

devotee.

 

He started taking the dog into the temple. That was the only deviation in

ritual

that was cited in the GBC resolution , which was passed in the Mayapur at the

1987 meeting(just confirmed that with a devotee who traveled to Inida with

him).. All the other stuff happened after he was expelled, and it took

several

years for it to all unfold.

 

Yet I hear history rewritten constantly saying that BECAUSE of the changes, he

was expelled. Just ain't true, and nobody will learn from needed lessons from

history if it isn't accurate.

[Guest guest]

"WWW: Vijay Pai (Houston TX - USA)" wrote:

 

> [Text 2239796 from COM]

>

> On 15 Apr 1999, Sthita-dhi-muni Dasa wrote:

> > VSP wrote:

> > > temple. Jesus was a preacher of mleccha-dharma, not

> > > the Vedic teachings of Vyasa.

>

> > This could be a slight regarding Jesus and his preaching.

>

> It is not a "slight" regarding Jesus; I only spoke of his preaching.

> Besides, Srila Prabhupada has already confirmed what I said (although

> he used the term "yavana", not "mleccha". Perhaps I was wrong to use

> mleccha):

>

> "The shastras of the yavanas, or meat-eaters, are not eternal

> scriptures. They have been fashioned recently, and sometimes they

> contradict one another. The scriptures of the yavanas are three:

> the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Koran. Their

> compilation has a history; they are not eternal like the Vedic

> knowledge. Therefore although they have their arguments and

> reasonings, they are not very sound and transcendental. As such,

> modern people advanced in science and philosophy deem these

> scriptures unacceptable." (CC Adi 17.169 purport)

>

> Yours,

>

> Vijay

 

*****************************

 

There is a saying: The definition of a gentleman is he is a person who

never offends someone else -- unintentionally.

 

This saying reminds me of Srila Prabhupada, the foremost perfect

gentleman that we know of. There is a story in the Lilamrta about a big

pandal program that was arranged somewhere in India. During the course

of the program devotees were up on stage chanting in kitan -- both men

and women. There was a man in the audience who was sitting near where

the women were singing and he took the opportunity to reach up and grab

at the sari of one of the women. Satsvarupa Maharaja describes that

Srila Prabhupada came at the man very fiercely, just like a lion,

clanging his kartalas in the man's face to make him stop the nonsense.

No doubt that man was offended by Srila Prabhupada. But still Srila

Prabhupada remained the perfect gentleman because he had indeed intended

to offend the man -- and make him stop his so called "all-in-good-fun"

activity.

 

On the other hand, we can read many conversations in which Srila

Prabhupada talks about spiritual matters with various

Christian leaders. Sometimes he offends them also -- by pointing out

that because they kill cows, they are not following the instructions of

Jesus Christ. But he never offends them without specifically intending

to do so. He never tells them that Jesus Christ was teaching an inferior

type of religion.

 

Instead, in such discussions, we always hear him praising Jesus Christ

and pushing them to follow him more closely. He will not hurt someone by

attacking or even appearing to attack Jesus Christ. Srila Prabhupada

realizes that for them, Jesus Christ is their connection to Krsna. And

he had enough imagination and enough vision to see how they could make

spiritual advancement by more carefully following the path they were on.

He did not suggest that they needed to change their religion because it

was inferior. No, he encouraged them to use their religion to gain

spiritual strength.

 

So, this is the type of brahminical guidance that a ksatriya needs to

guide his people properly.

 

Someone made the comment that a ksatriya does not need to understand how

his people feel. I am not sure where that idea came from. When someone

who is in the position of a ksatriya leader says things which undermine

the spiritual life and spiritual conviction of his people, he sets the

stage for civil strife -- which is a complete distraction from

constructive spiritual advancement.

 

Far from not needing to understand the feelings of his people -- it is

*essential* that he understand the feelings of his people. To me, that

is an important distinguishing characteristic of the varnasrama system as

presented by Srila Prabhupada contrasted with modern government. In

describing the activities of King Prthu in the 4th Canto, and in other

places, Srila Prabhupada points out that it is important that the

ksatriya must hear from the ordinary citizens and learn what different

concerns are on their minds. Then he can take appropriate steps to

relieve their suffering. If he does not hear from them and find out how

they feel about their situation, how can he help them out? And

certainly, there is ample historical record of leaders who simply had no

idea of how their citizens were feeling -- the example of Catherine the

Great's tour of Russia in which she had no idea her subjects were all

starving to death comes to mind, for instance.

 

So, it is important that the ksatriya understand the feelings of his

people, and it is important that he be trained by a "perfect gentleman"

brahmana so that he does not unintentially discourage his citizens in

their spiritual life.

 

your servant,

 

Hare Krsna dasi

[Guest guest]

> > > temple. Jesus was a preacher of mleccha-dharma, not

> > > the Vedic teachings of Vyasa.

>

> > This could be a slight regarding Jesus and his preaching.

>

> It is not a "slight" regarding Jesus; I only spoke of his preaching.

> Besides, Srila Prabhupada has already confirmed what I said (although he

> used the term "yavana", not "mleccha". Perhaps I was wrong to use

> mleccha):

>

>

> "The shastras of the yavanas, or meat-eaters, are not eternal

> scriptures. They have been fashioned recently, and sometimes they

> contradict one another. The scriptures of the yavanas are three: the Old

> Testament, the New Testament and the Koran. Their compilation has a

> history; they are not eternal like the Vedic

> knowledge. Therefore although they have their arguments and

> reasonings, they are not very sound and transcendental. As such, modern

> people advanced in science and philosophy deem these scriptures

> unacceptable." (CC Adi 17.169 purport)

>

 

 

Actually, the possibility of your being wrong would not be due

to usage of "mleccha" instead of "yavana". You know that, don't

you?

 

 

Where you might be wrong is your interpolation of the name of

Jesus Christ, as well as his activities, into Srila Prabhupada's

words. Srila Prabhupada says here just nothing of a kind that you

did say (about Jesus and his preaching), but you are nevertheless

claiming "Srila Prabhupada confirmed what I said."

 

There is a golf of difference in between Srila Prabhupada's

perception of Jesus Christ's preaching, and that one of yours.

Srila Prabhupada always referred to Jesus as the pure devotee

of the Lord, one who preached the *love of Godhead* (you can

check the Folio), and not as a "preacher of mleccha-dharma."

It is simply that Jesus gave so much of knowledge so much

the mlecchas of that time and place could possibly take.

But his *preaching* was, essentially, "Love God, love

God's parts and parcels." And that is the actual dharma, not

"mleccha-dharma"??

 

Notice also that Prabhupada did not even use the expression

"mleccha-dharma" in this quote. What to speak about "Jesus

preaching mleccha-dharma"! It's all your own idea, but

you are selling it as "Prabhupada confirmed it".

 

 

 

ys mnd

[Guest guest]

>

> Yet I hear history rewritten constantly saying that BECAUSE of the changes,

he was expelled. Just ain't true, and nobody will learn from needed lessons

fro history if it isn't accurate.

>

>

 

 

I am not at all up on this stuff, but Kirtananda did have a bit of a

reputation for being a loose cannon quite a while before this period. He

certainly did among many of the senior devotees in Phili, where I was seving

at that time. From a legal standpoint, I wonder if it was in ISKCON's interest

to acknowlege Kirtananda's crimes committed while he was acting as an official

ISKCON representative.

[Guest guest]

>

>

> I am not at all up on this stuff, but Kirtananda did have a bit of a

> reputation for being a loose cannon quite a while before this period.

> He

> certainly did among many of the senior devotees in Phili, where I was

> seving

> at that time. From a legal standpoint, I wonder if it was in ISKCON's

> interest

> to acknowlege Kirtananda's crimes committed while he was acting as an

> official

> ISKCON representative.

 

Again, so noone misunderstands my position, Kirtananada is in prison

and needs to be there(as do a few others, incidentally).

 

Given the current widespread dissatisfaction with the GBC, a case could

be made that Kirtananda was a man ahead of his time in regards to his

dealings with the "senior" men of that time who were all GBC lackeys,

but I won't go there.

 

Yes, there were strong legal advantages for ISKCON to give up

Kirtanananda to the feds - it gave them immunity for their own crimes.

But let's not go there either.

 

Whatever the externals, Kirtanananda was a miscogynist, who created a

climate where woman and children were vulnerable to abuse. For that,

he deserves prison. For others who espouse the same philosophies, I

can only feel guilty I am unable to help them change their minds, as

they face the same fate, and by my lack of articulation I am unable to

save them from it.