Moscow May Allocate New Plot for Krishna Temple

[Guest guest]

by PTI (Press Trust of India)

 

Posted June 10, 2006

 

Moscow may allocate a new plot for the construction of a Krishna temple despite opposition from the powerful Christian Orthodox Church and Muslim clergy.

 

The earlier allotment of plot to the Moscow chapter of ISKCON for building the Krishna temple was revoked by the prosecutor's office due to alleged "irregularities".

 

The Christian Orthodox Church and Muslim clergy were also opposed to the allotment of plot for the purpose.

 

The issue came up during the talks visiting Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit had with the Russian capital's Mayor Yuri Luzhkov on Wednesday.

 

"At the insistence of the local authorities the clause about allocation of land for the Hindu temple has been included in the joint statement of the governments of Delhi and Moscow signed at the end of our visit," Dikshit told reporters on Thursday.

 

Dikshit was leading a large delegation of government officials and artists for the three-day cultural festival -- Days of Delhi in Moscow.

 

"Days of Delhi in Moscow was a roaring success," Dikshit said adding, she and the Moscow mayor have agreed to continue the process of cultural exchanges along the lines of sister cities and that Days of Moscow will be held in Delhi in 2007.

[theist]

Good news indeed. If and when this comes about we must remember to send thank you note to Cheif Minister Dikshit and the Moscow Mayor Luzhkov.

[Yogkriya]

Good News indeed!!

But it is not a "Hindu Temple". It is an "Iskcon" temple.

 

 

 

by PTI (Press Trust of India)

 

Posted June 10, 2006

 

"At the insistence of the local authorities the clause about allocation of land for the Hindu temple has been included in the joint statement of the governments of Delhi and Moscow signed at the end of our visit," Dikshit told reporters on Thursday.

 

[theist]

Yes, but appreciate the viewpoint of those involved. Neither the mayor of Moscow or Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit may consider themselves members of Iskcon. Many people are helping because they see a Hindu connection. Their help should be appreciated and respected. Many others who have some philosphical diverences with Iskcon want to see it happen because the maha-mantra will be spread and people will gain valuable sukriti if nothing else.

 

The sign may say ISKCON but the efforts involved are not limited to ISKCON members alone.

[Guest guest]

 

Good News indeed!!

But it is not a "Hindu Temple". It is an "Iskcon" temple.

 

ISCKON is a new religious movement, but it is part of the Gaudiya movement, which is part of the ancient Vaishnava tradition, which fulls under the definition of a vedic religion. And vedic traditions are classified as Hindu traditions, despite any objections by ISKCON zealots. It's all a matter of classifications. Krishna is a Hindu god, not a Muslim or Christian god.

[Guest guest]

 

ISCKON is a new religious movement, but it is part of the Gaudiya movement, which is part of the ancient Vaishnava tradition, which fulls under the definition of a vedic religion. And vedic traditions are classified as Hindu traditions, despite any objections by ISKCON zealots. It's all a matter of classifications. Krishna is a Hindu god, not a Muslim or Christian god.

 

what I mean is Krishna is only mentioned in Hindu scriptures. The names Vishnu, Krishna, Radha, Vaikuntha, etc. only are in Indian scriptures. Therefore, this is why russians are identifying ISKCON as a HINDU religion, as opposed to a Christian or Muslim religion.

[theist]

Thank you for the important clarification.

[Yogkriya]

Yes. Therefore Russians are identifying it as Hindu. That is why Iskcon leadership projected the temple as Hindu to the Delhi mayor, moscow mayor and everybody else.

But when a HIndu goes to the temple, he is told that "we are not some Hindu" He is told that Hinduism is nothing but a dried out branch of religion that is not worth anymore. It is hodge podge confused and mixed up. This was the position of Prabhupad, the founder of Iskcon and is backed by all Iskcon leaders today. But to gain support, they portray themselves as "Hindu" to the foreign people, societies, governments. Ask what an Iskcon leader whether he would want to help build a Shiva temple or a Durga temple. Vishnu, Shiva and Brahma is the Hindu trinity. But in Iskcon language Shiva is a mere Demi-God. Though they call themselves as "Vedic" another clich word, they have serious contradictions with teh original Vedic culture.

 

 

 

what I mean is Krishna is only mentioned in Hindu scriptures. The names Vishnu, Krishna, Radha, Vaikuntha, etc. only are in Indian scriptures. Therefore, this is why russians are identifying ISKCON as a HINDU religion, as opposed to a Christian or Muslim religion.

[Yogkriya]

Yes I definitely appreciate if the temple is indeed okayed.

But other's don't have philosophical differences with Iskcon. Iskcon has differences with others. This spreading of the Mahamantra should be encouraged. But if the people from isckon spread that "ours is the only bonafide way and all other ways are inferior" then it is not correct.

 

 

 

Yes, but appreciate the viewpoint of those involved. Neither the mayor of Moscow or Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit may consider themselves members of Iskcon. Many people are helping because they see a Hindu connection. Their help should be appreciated and respected. Many others who have some philosphical diverences with Iskcon want to see it happen because the maha-mantra will be spread and people will gain valuable sukriti if nothing else.

 

The sign may say ISKCON but the efforts involved are not limited to ISKCON members alone.

[Guest guest]

Yogkriya, I agree that ISCKON members distancing themselves and blasting other Hindu sects is a problem. Sadly, I have witnessed some gross offensives against Saivites and Shaktas from Hare Krishnas, yet I have never seen Saivites or Shaktas, trying to call Vaishnavas a false path, etc. They accept the other sects, as valid paths to Moksha. This idea that only one sect can lead to Moksha is not vedic. There are many Yoga paths, including many Bhakti traditions. It's not just ISCKON devotees who can be liberated, as if all other Hindus are some misguided fools. Calling Shiva a demigod is offensive, just as calling Krishna a demigod is offensive.

[theist]

Well this is all besides the point at hand really. If this Iskcon temple can maintain a Moscow presence then Hindus can use that to their advantage too if they should want to build a Shaivite temple or something.

[Yogkriya]

Yes this is so true.

 

 

Yogkriya, I agree that ISCKON members distancing themselves and blasting other Hindu sects is a problem. Sadly, I have witnessed some gross offensives against Saivites and Shaktas from Hare Krishnas, yet I have never seen Saivites or Shaktas, trying to call Vaishnavas a false path, etc. They accept the other sects, as valid paths to Moksha. This idea that only one sect can lead to Moksha is not vedic. There are many Yoga paths, including many Bhakti traditions. It's not just ISCKON devotees who can be liberated, as if all other Hindus are some misguided fools. Calling Shiva a demigod is offensive, just as calling Krishna a demigod is offensive.

[Yogkriya]

Dear theist,

 

Well, Isckon has always taken advantage of the Hindus and not otherwise. This wouldn't have been a problem and Hindus could gladly support them, becauase after all Lord Krishna is teh Hindu God. Krishna worship has always been there in Hinduism. Bhakti yoga has always been an essential part of Vedic culture. There is nothing new in it. The prolem comes when they want to exploit Hindus but do not accept Hinduism. It is recognized all over the world. Hindus are always very free and they don't really have a problem if you worship Lord Shiva or Vishnu or Rama or Gayatri or Shri Durga... Nobody would come to you and say that "why are you worshipping shiva? You know Shiva depends on Krishna and is subservient to him and can't liberate you, all he does is sit in kailash and chant hare krishna mantra, so if you worship Shiva as indipendent it is offensive, that's why you can ask Shiva to help you meet Krishna". This is the Iskcon theory! Hindus are very liberal and not stuck up.

 

And if the Hindus have to make a Shiva temple there, Iskcon won't ever be helping in that. I had a talk with one of the Iskcon Gurus. I won't quote his name here, but he is a very good person. I said if you think that this is going to be a "Vedic" temple, then Shiva worship is a major part of Vedic culture. The temple was first marketed as Vedic temple and cultural center, beacuse the Vedic has more authority and value and the society would have accepted that more than say Hare Krishna temple. Krishna and Rama worshipped Shiva, Krishna's aunt Queen Kunti was a staunch Shiva devotee, So were the Gurus of Lord Rama - Vashishtha and Vishwamitra. The greatest vaishnava Rama learned from Shiva Gurus. Why don't you allocate a room for Lord Shiva in this temple? Krishna will be pleased! Even if you consider Shiva as the number one Vaishnava, Won't Krishna be pleased to have his number one devotee next to him?? And the Hindu community that gives donations and supported the cause on political fronts could also go to Lord Shiva! But the answer was a big NO!!

When the previous Indian Prime minister AB Vajpayee went to Moscow, the temple cause was trumpeted to him as a Hindu temple project and saying that the Hindu community needs their temple there. So ABV put in efforts to get them the land allocated. But Hindus worship Shiva and Durga too! And this is also VEDIC!! This is 'sahstra sammat' to worship them. Krishna instructs Arjuna to worship Shiva and Durga too. There are enough documented evidence of it. If you read compelte Mahabharata (not Iskcon version), you will find it. You will see a big difference in Lord Krishna's opinion on Lord Shiva and Iskcon's opinion on Lord Shiva!!

 

Anyways, it will be very good if the Moscow Krishna devotees can have the temple finally!!

Only, Iskcon masquerading as Hindus when they require funds and political support or facing social confrontation in a country, is not appreciable. Especially beacuse they do not consider Hinduism as a bonafide religion and criticize it. If the iskcon philosophy is powerful, it should learn to survive without resorting to cheap marketing tactics using clitch words as Hindu and Yoga!! If Prabhupada dejected Hinduism, he never claimed to be Hindu or having a Hindu temple. His approach was very straight. You like it or not.

 

Jai Gurudev!

 

 

Well this is all besides the point at hand really. If this Iskcon temple can maintain a Moscow presence then Hindus can use that to their advantage too if they should want to build a Shaivite temple or something.

[theist]

Well Yogapriya, I certainly do believe in the honesty of presentation. Srila Prabhupada presented Krsna conscious as being transcendental to all religious designations and also as the ultimate goal of all of them. Iskcon should not feign Hinduism to get $ from Hindu's under false pretense. I understand why the Hare Krsna movement is confused with Hinduism. "Hinduism" is the context through which Krsna consciousness is being revealed. But just as the a cup is not the same as the water it holds hinduism is not Krsna Consciousness. We may not agree on this but that is alright.

 

I accept the definition of Vaisnavism as straight up mono-theism. It is not an insult to call a servant a servant. I accept One Served and all others servant. That is my attraction to Krsna consciousness movement. No other philosophy in the world can equal the mono-theism of Caitanya Mahaprabhu that includes all other monothestic religions.

 

To a pure loving servant of Krsna one could not give higher respects than to recognize his servant staus.

 

But aside from this another reason I support the temple being rebuilt in Moscow is that I believe in the free expression of religion in whatever form people choose to practice it.

[Yogkriya]

I understand the 'bhaava' behind the philosophy. The mood of achintya bheda-bhed philosophy. This is no problem at all. You can believe Lord Shiva to be Krishna's servant and even a demi-God. You have the right to express your religious/spiritual sentiments and hold your beliefs. This is normal. What is abnormal though is that There are other sections of Vedic culture who have different beliefs. There are people who believe Lord Sadashiva to be their Supreme Lord. And they also have a freedom to their practices and beliefs. And when you go to them and tell them that it is not correct to pray to Shiva indipendently, then this is not correct. This is disrespectful to others. Attitude that we are right and you are wrong is disrespectful. The problem is Iskcon using Hindu tag when necessary and condemning it when not required. Internal policy rejects Hinduism. External marketing policies align with Hinduism if required at a particular step not for spiritual purposes, but for political and financial reasons. This is sad.

Many Hindus who gladly visit Iskcon temples in foreign lands hardly know of this. Its when after spending a few years and reading the philosophy, they come to know about this and become surprised.

 

 

Well Yogakriya, I certainly do believe in the honesty of presentation. Srila Prabhupada presented Krsna conscious as being transcendental to all religious designations and also as the ultimate goal of all of them. Iskcon should not feign Hinduism to get $ from Hindu's under false pretense. I understand why the Hare Krsna movement is confused with Hinduism. "Hinduism" is the context through which Krsna consciousness is being revealed. But just as the a cup is not the same as the water it holds hinduism is not Krsna Consciousness. We may not agree on this but that is alright.

 

I accept the definition of Vaisnavism as straight up mono-theism. It is not an insult to call a servant a servant. I accept One Served and all others servant. That is my attraction to Krsna consciousness movement. No other philosophy in the world can equal the mono-theism of Caitanya Mahaprabhu that includes all other monothestic religions.

 

To a pure loving servant of Krsna one could not give higher respects than to recognize his servant staus.

 

But aside from this another reason I support the temple being rebuilt in Moscow is that I believe in the free expression of religion in whatever form people choose to practice it.

[vijay]

 

What is abnormal though is that There are other sections of Vedic culture who have different beliefs. There are people who believe Lord Sadashiva to be their Supreme Lord. And they also have a freedom to their practices and beliefs. And when you go to them and tell them that it is not correct to pray to Shiva indipendently, then this is not correct. This is disrespectful to others. Attitude that we are right and you are wrong is disrespectful.

 

 

The attitude of discussing what is right and wrong is not disrespectful, agreed if its done in a condecending way then any statement is offensive. In india there has always been debate between various sects, Ramunajacarya debated Sankaracaryites, Madhvas debated both the sects, the pusti marg another. Its only a recent phenomenon where this so called hindu philosophy of 'dont debate' 'everyone is right' philosophy has come in to play. Debates previously where conducted using the scripture, there are various rules of debate and we have the Nya sastra's. However although one sect will think the other is wrong they will debate it but it was never fanitical like in some other religions where it turned into violence, that respect for ideas was always maintained, that is the greatness of vedic culture, that is why we india is a hub of sprituality as thought were refined through intelligent debate and reasoning.

 

Even Krsna in the gita makes distinctions, your interpretation of these may be different but the distinction of higher and lower is clear throughout the scriptures.

 

"Those whose intelligence has been stolen by material desires surrender

unto demigods and follow the particular rules and regulations of worship

according to their own nature."

(BG 7.20)

 

"Men of small intelligence worship the demigods, and their fruits are

limited and temporary. Those who worship the demigods go to the planets

of the demigods, but My devotees ultimately reach My supreme planet."

(BG 7.23)

 

"Those who are devotees of other gods and who worship them with faith

actually worship only Me, O son of Kunti, but they do so in a wrong

way."

(BG 9.23)

 

You will find similar translations from most authors.

 

 

This is disrespectful to others. Attitude that we are right and you are wrong is disrespectful. The problem is Iskcon using Hindu tag when necessary and condemning it when not required. Internal policy rejects Hinduism. External marketing policies align with Hinduism if required at a particular step not for spiritual purposes, but for political and financial reasons. This is sad.

 

Like theist Prabhu said ISKCON can be classified as a subset of hinduism, and therefore the tag can be used as its a branch of vaishnnavism, however in terms of the philosophy when preaching the tag cannot be used. Your version of hinduism is "Attitude that we are right and you are wrong is disrespectful", we may not agree with that and think you should tell someone they are wrong when we believe they are (sidepoint. if you think people should not be told they are wrong in what they believe then why are you telling us that we are wrong for saying what we believe in), some others think to be a hindu you have to be born a hindu, or to be a brahman you have to be born a brahmin like the smarta brahmins, others believe that all gods are one, others think anything goes, obviously we dont agree with that and so dont class ourselves as hindus when it comes to philosophy as every tom has his own conception.

 

Krsna isnt a hindu nor is shiva, nor arjuna, hindu is an umbrella term that has its uses, its not a religion, but more describes a whole array of contridictory and similar things. There was no real hindu identity until around the the monghul rule when all sects were refered to as hindus, before that sects would refer to themselves as either vaishnava, shakta etc. The rishis didnt regard themselves as hindus but seekers of truth following the vedas. In most writngs of acaryas before the 12th century you will never see that they refered to themsleves as hindu instead they used the name of their linage. This defining of what a hindu is and encouragment to use that label as some sort of religion is a modern thing, neo-hinduism which gained momentum during the freedom struggle from british rule. Just like im classified as a indian or american, as a man, or human for practical reasons like passport conversation etc, i may be classified as hindu in some respects to whatever hindu means, however on the philosophical level im none of these things, my real identity is a spirit soul servent of Krsna. In gods world, you dont have badges of who is a hindu and who is a muslim etc. SO philosophically according to scripture we are not hindu not human, animal etc, however as a means of classification to the general world depending on who you are talking to you classify your self in different ways. If your talking to a fellow indian and asked where are you from ? you will reply gujerat or punjab, but if your talking to someone from america you may say india. These are all relative things that have a practical purpose.

 

I do agree that there are people with condescending attitudes, but that isnt restricted to any sect its human nature.

[Guest guest]

 

The attitude of discussing what is right and wrong is not disrespectful, agreed if its done in a condecending way then any statement is offensive. In india there has always been debate between various sects, Ramunajacarya debated Sankaracaryites, Madhvas debated both the sects, the pusti marg another. Its only a recent phenomenon where this so called hindu philosophy of 'dont debate' 'everyone is right' philosophy has come in to play. Debates previously where conducted using the scripture, there are various rules of debate and we have the Nya sastra's. However although one sect will think the other is wrong they will debate it but it was never fanitical like in some other religions where it turned into violence, that respect for ideas was always maintained, that is the greatness of vedic culture, that is why we india is a hub of sprituality as thought were refined through intelligent debate and reasoning.

 

Even Krsna in the gita makes distinctions, your interpretation of these may be different but the distinction of higher an lower is clear throughout the scriptures.

 

"Those whose intelligence has been stolen by material desires surrender

unto demigods and follow the particular rules and regulations of worship

according to their own nature."

(BG 7.20)

 

"Men of small intelligence worship the demigods, and their fruits are

limited and temporary. Those who worship the demigods go to the planets

of the demigods, but My devotees ultimately reach My supreme planet."

(BG 7.23)

 

"Those who are devotees of other gods and who worship them with faith

actually worship only Me, O son of Kunti, but they do so in a wrong

way."

(BG 9.23)

 

You will find similar translations from most authors.

 

 

 

Like theist Prabhu said ISKCON can be classified as a subset of hinduism, and therefore the tag can be used as its a branch of vaishnnavism, however in terms of the philosophy when preaching the tag cannot be used. Your version of hinduism is "Attitude that we are right and you are wrong is disrespectful", we may not agree that you shouldnt tell someone they are wrong when we believe they are, some others think to be a hindu you have to be born a hindu, or to be a brahman you have to be born a brahmin like the smarta brahmins, others believe that all gods are one, others think anything goes, obviously we dont agree with that and so dont class are selves as hindus when it comes to philosophy as every tom has his own conception.

 

Krsna isnt a hindu nor is shiva, nor arjuna, hindu is an umbrella term that has its uses, its not a religion, but more describes a whole array of contridictory and similar things. There was no real hindu identity until around the the monghul rule when all sects were refered to as hindus, before that sects would refer to themselves as either vaishnava, shakta etc. The rishis didnt regard them selves as hindus but seekers of truth following the vedas. In most writngs of acaryas before the 12th century you will never see that they refered to themsleves as hindu instead they used the name of their linage. This defining of what a hindu is and encouragment to use that lable as some sort of religion is a modern thing, neo-hinduism which gained momentum during the freedom struggle from british rule. Just like im classified as a indian or american, as a man, or human, i may be classified as hindu in some respects to whatever hindu means, however on the philosophical level im none of these things, my real identity is a spirit soul servent of Krsna. In gods worlds, you dont have badges of who is a hindu and who is a muslim etc. SO philosophically according to scripture we are not hindu not human, animal etc, however as a means of classification to the general world depending on who you are talking to you classify your self in different ways. If your talking to a fellow indian and asked where are you from ? you will reply gujerat or punjab, but if your talkingto someone from america you may say india. These are all relative things.

 

I do agree that there are people with condescending attitudes, but that isnt restricted to any sect its human nature.

 

Debates among leaders are fine, but some Iskconites actually prostelytize other unsuspecting Hindus, and this is considered wrong. When you go up to a Saivite and say he is worshipping a demigod, and try to destroy his/her faith in Shiva, you have committed an offense.

[vijay]

 

Debates among leaders are fine, but some Iskconites actually prostelytize other unsuspecting Hindus, and this is considered wrong. When you go up to a Saivite and say he is worshipping a demigod, and try to destroy his/her faith in Shiva, you have committed an offense.

 

This is sentimental. "prostelytize other unsuspecting Hindus, and this is considered wrong" Considered wrong by you, this is your opinion and your entitled to it. Have a look at indias History, who did sankarcharya convert?, who did Ramunajacarya convert? who did Madhva convert? Who did Mahaprabhu convert who did swaminarayan convert? Who did guru Nanak convert? In our tradition the ideas that make the most sense people adopt, the sentimental ritualistic ideas are not strong and die. This form of debate keeps everyone clued up, if you discourage it and let people do things out of blind faith then they will naturally be converted eventually to other vedic or even non-vedic paths, as their faith is so weak no one wants to be a blind follower. Im glad vedic sects prostelytize at least there is some logic and reason involved, children know why they are doing stuff, i have seen most converts study much more as they actually thought about what they are doing. Vedic knowledge has always been about letting the best ideas win. There has always been debates on vedanta, not about keeping what grandma told me alive.

[Guest guest]

 

This is sentimental. "prostelytize other unsuspecting Hindus, and this is considered wrong" Considered wrong by you, this is your opinion and your entitled to it. Have a look at indias History, who did sankarcharya convert?, who did Ramunajacarya convert? who did Madhva convert? Who did Mahaprabhu convert who did swaminarayan convert? Who did guru Nanak convert? In our tradition the ideas that make the most sense people adopt, the sentimental ritualistic ideas are not strong and die. This form of debate keeps everyone clued up, if you discourage it and let people do things out of blind faith then they will naturally be converted eventually to other vedic or even non-vedic paths, as their faith is so weak no one wants to be a blind follower. Im glad vedic sects prostelytize at least there is some logic and reason involved, children know why they are doing stuff, i have seen most converts study much more as they actually thought about what they are doing. Vedic knowledge has always been about letting the best ideas win. There has always been debates on vedanta, not about keeping what grandma told me alive.

 

Go to the next Kumbh Mela and start telling those of the various sects assembled that that only ISKCON is the true path. See how well you fair.

 

Other Hindu sects may claim to have the highest revelation, but they do not claim other paths are also not beneficial to their devotees. This is the difference! ISKCON is making itself the Jehovah's Witnesses of Hinduism, when they claim all other forms of Hinduism are false, and they alone are the True Path.

 

Read the Gita. Krsna says in whatever form devotees approach me, I strengthen their faith in THAT form.

 

Hinduism has always had Saivites, and some of the greatest saints of Sanatana Dharma have been devotees of Shiva. Even by non-Hindus, Shiva is considered by historians to be the oldest God worshipped in the world! To call the Saivite path a false religion, is very insulting. Saivites respect Vaishnavism as a path to Moksha, and other Vaishnavas (non-Iskcon) accept Shaivism as a path to Moksha. So where is this extreme intolerance coming from Iskcon devotees?

[vijay]

 

Go to the next Kumbh Mela and start telling those of the various sects assembled that that only ISKCON is the true path. See how well you fair.

 

 

My point wasnt to go to kumbha mela or anywhere else and start randomly telling people that they are wrong, my point is that there is nothing wrong with discussing something and giving your view on that matter. You want everyone not to give their opinion? I agree there are over zelous people but that occurs everywhere. Your original point was that we shouldnt say people are wrong.

 

 

Other Hindu sects may claim to have the highest revelation, but they do not claim other paths are also not beneficial to their devotees. This is the difference! ISKCON is making itself the Jehovah's Witnesses of Hinduism, when they claim all other forms of Hinduism are false, and they alone are the True Path.

 

This is misinformation, whether you are exagerating or taking someone's over zelous's opinion I dont know, you may be better off researching your self in to what ISKCON says. Krishna conciousness claims to be the highest relisation of god head, and it recognises that different modes of worship are recomended for different levels of people, as it is stated in the gita and other scriptures.

 

 

Hinduism has always had Saivites, and some of the greatest saints of Sanatana Dharma have been devotees of Shiva. Even by non-Hindus, Shiva is considered by historians to be the oldest God worshipped in the world! To call the Saivite path a false religion, is very insulting. Saivites respect Vaishnavism as a path to Moksha, and other Vaishnavas (non-Iskcon) accept Shaivism as a path to Moksha. So where is this extreme intolerance coming from Iskcon devotees?

 

Hinduism has always had shaivites, but hinduism has always had debates between shaivites and vaishnvas. This is nothing new. Shiva is respected among the vaishnvas, however there is always disagreement on the position of shiva. Just as shaktas will see Krishna under Maa, or Shivaites who talk about the impersonal Shiva who actaully spoke the Gita through Krishna. Opinions are always varied. Vaishnavas have a certain viewpoint which can be discussed with other sects with logic and reason based on sastra. Ultimately its up to the indvidual to decide what makes sense. Their is no Gun against anyones head, just use your head and decide. Respect doesnt mean acceptance. I may respect Islamics, christians, shaivites, saibaba's, other vaishnavas etc, but may not accept their philosophy to some degree, we may discuss this and point out what I think. I've spoken to christians and said I dont think Jesus is god, most will try and give me an explanation, a few small minded or weak faithed will get uncomfortable. People have said to me Krsna was just a self relized person which is a common belief in many mayavadi sects, I will use whatever knowledge I have to find out wheteher mine or their understanding is incorrect, not get offended just because someone else thinks something else

[theist]

 

The attitude of discussing what is right and wrong is not disrespectful, agreed if its done in a condecending way then any statement is offensive. In india there has always been debate between various sects, Ramunajacarya debated Sankaracaryites, Madhvas debated both the sects, the pusti marg another. Its only a recent phenomenon where this so called hindu philosophy of 'dont debate' 'everyone is right' philosophy has come in to play. Debates previously where conducted using the scripture, there are various rules of debate and we have the Nya sastra's. However although one sect will think the other is wrong they will debate it but it was never fanitical like in some other religions where it turned into violence, that respect for ideas was always maintained, that is the greatness of vedic culture, that is why we india is a hub of sprituality as thought were refined through intelligent debate and reasoning.

 

Even Krsna in the gita makes distinctions, your interpretation of these may be different but the distinction of higher and lower is clear throughout the scriptures.

 

"Those whose intelligence has been stolen by material desires surrender

unto demigods and follow the particular rules and regulations of worship

according to their own nature."

(BG 7.20)

 

"Men of small intelligence worship the demigods, and their fruits are

limited and temporary. Those who worship the demigods go to the planets

of the demigods, but My devotees ultimately reach My supreme planet."

(BG 7.23)

 

"Those who are devotees of other gods and who worship them with faith

actually worship only Me, O son of Kunti, but they do so in a wrong

way."

(BG 9.23)

 

You will find similar translations from most authors.

 

 

 

Like theist Prabhu said ISKCON can be classified as a subset of hinduism, and therefore the tag can be used as its a branch of vaishnnavism, however in terms of the philosophy when preaching the tag cannot be used. Your version of hinduism is "Attitude that we are right and you are wrong is disrespectful", we may not agree with that and think you should tell someone they are wrong when we believe they are (sidepoint. if you think people should not be told they are wrong in what they believe then why are you telling us that we are wrong for saying what we believe in), some others think to be a hindu you have to be born a hindu, or to be a brahman you have to be born a brahmin like the smarta brahmins, others believe that all gods are one, others think anything goes, obviously we dont agree with that and so dont class ourselves as hindus when it comes to philosophy as every tom has his own conception.

 

Krsna isnt a hindu nor is shiva, nor arjuna, hindu is an umbrella term that has its uses, its not a religion, but more describes a whole array of contridictory and similar things. There was no real hindu identity until around the the monghul rule when all sects were refered to as hindus, before that sects would refer to themselves as either vaishnava, shakta etc. The rishis didnt regard themselves as hindus but seekers of truth following the vedas. In most writngs of acaryas before the 12th century you will never see that they refered to themsleves as hindu instead they used the name of their linage. This defining of what a hindu is and encouragment to use that label as some sort of religion is a modern thing, neo-hinduism which gained momentum during the freedom struggle from british rule. Just like im classified as a indian or american, as a man, or human for practical reasons like passport conversation etc, i may be classified as hindu in some respects to whatever hindu means, however on the philosophical level im none of these things, my real identity is a spirit soul servent of Krsna. In gods world, you dont have badges of who is a hindu and who is a muslim etc. SO philosophically according to scripture we are not hindu not human, animal etc, however as a means of classification to the general world depending on who you are talking to you classify your self in different ways. If your talking to a fellow indian and asked where are you from ? you will reply gujerat or punjab, but if your talking to someone from america you may say india. These are all relative things that have a practical purpose.

 

I do agree that there are people with condescending attitudes, but that isnt restricted to any sect its human nature.

 

I agree and defer to Vijay. There is one possible exception. Referring Prabhupada's vision for ISKCON, I do not believe that can be called a subset of hinduism. Although it may turn into something like hinduism that was not the intent, time will tell. Rather what I meant to say was that Vaisnavism, which is the eternal function of the soul, the only activity of the liberated soul ( as sayuja mukti has no activity) has appeared in a "hindu" context with Indian cultural looks and traits etc. But is in itself transcendental to those cultural looks and traits. Indian culture was the only one on the earth with sufficient sattva to receive this message in the degree that has been revealed.

 

A vaisnava appearing to me in a business suit and tie or a scientists mock is no less than one appearing in a dhoti and shaved head.

 

Vaisnavism as appeared in the mid-east in the person of Lord Jesus Christ was more limited in revelation of philosophy. His context was the Hebrew religion, while mono-theist at that time, was heavy into mode of ignorance activities such as animal sacrifice for sins with it's animal blood offerings to God, not understanding the basic equality of all beings the way they treated other cultures and peoples under the pretext of doing God's will etc. did not make them a fertile ground for receiving the higher more refined teachings of that transcendental soul (love, mercy, forgivness, personal sacrifice for the clearing of sins and such). So He was able to only give them so much as he said so Himself when speaking to his disciples. He said, "There are many other things I have to tell you but you cannot bear them now.."

 

So very much more was given to the people of India because their capacity to receive was so much greater than the Hebrews at that time. So Vaisnavism became more intertwined with basic Indian/vedic culture. Nonetheless it has and always will be transcendental to it.

 

I see every urge towards God as budding Vaisnavism in some degree and so consider everything else as a subset or incomplete move towards Vaisnavism.

 

Vaisnavism is not there as a path to mukta once attained only to be discarded. So how can we accept when others tell us it is one of the many paths to absorpsion in the Brahman?

 

As beginners I know that most of us come off as being arrogant and intolerant when speaking to others and push points that should not be pushed. I do that right on this board. This causes unnecessary emnity and for that I apologize.

 

There are enough very good solid reasons for everyone to support this Moscow temple. Rather from a Hindu perspective or a freedom of religion perspective it is vitally important. I think the best reason is that Srila Prabhupada desired it.

 

There is no reason to pretend we don't have differences of opinion when we do. What is needed is tolerance for differing opinions while maintaining a cooperative spirit for a greater good.

 

How many "hindu" temples have easily opened in America due in part to the hard ground breaking work done by ISKCON to soften this hardened soil? Those that consider themselves hindus can support this Iskcon temple in a similar way. Dealing with the frozen soil of Russia will take much support from all sides.

[vijay]

 

But is in itself transcendental to those cultural looks and traits

thanks for that.

[Guest guest]

 

So where is this extreme intolerance coming from Iskcon devotees?

 

 

Do you think Sri Krishna is also being intolerant when he explains these verses in the Bhagavad Gita :

 

 

Chapter 4. Transcendental Knowledge

TEXT 12

 

kanksantah karmanam siddhim

yajanta iha devatah

ksipram hi manuse loke

siddhir bhavati karma-ja

 

SYNONYMS

 

kanksantah--desiring; karmanam--of fruitive activities; siddhim--perfection; yajante--worship by sacrifices; iha--in the material world; devatah--the demigods; ksipram--very quickly; hi--certainly; manuse--in human society; loke--within this world; siddhih bhavati--becomes successful; karma-ja--the fruitive worker.

TRANSLATION

 

 

Men in this world desire success in fruitive activities, and therefore they worship the demigods. Quickly, of course, men get results from fruitive work in this world.

 

Chapter 7. Knowledge of the Absolute

TEXT 23

 

antavat tu phalam tesam

tad bhavaty alpa-medhasam

devan deva-yajo yanti

mad-bhakta yanti mam api

 

SYNONYMS

 

anta-vat tu--limited and temporary; phalam--fruits; tesam--their; tat--that; bhavati--becomes; alpa-medhasam--of those of small intelligence; devan--demigods' planets; deva-yajah--worshipers of demigods; yanti--achieve; mat--My; bhaktah--devotees; yanti--attain; mam--to Me; api--surely.

TRANSLATION

 

 

Men of small intelligence worship the demigods, and their fruits are limited and temporary. Those who worship the demigods go to the planets of the demigods, but My devotees ultimately reach My supreme planet.

 

Chapter 18. Conclusion--The Perfection of Renunciation

TEXT 65

 

man-mana bhava mad-bhakto

mad-yaji mam namaskuru

mam evaisyasi satyam te

pratijane priyo 'si me

 

SYNONYMS

 

mat-manah--thinking of Me; bhava--just become; mat-bhaktah--My devotee; mat-yaji--My worshiper; mam--unto Me; namaskuru--offer your obeisances; mam--unto Me; eva--certainly; esyasi--come; satyam--truly; te--to you; pratijane--I promise; priyah--dear; asi--you are; me--Mine.

TRANSLATION

 

 

Always think of Me and become My devotee. Worship Me and offer your homage unto Me. Thus you will come to Me without fail. I promise you this because you are My very dear friend.

 

Chapter 18. Conclusion--The Perfection of Renunciation

TEXT 66

 

sarva-dharman parityajya

mam ekam saranam vraja

aham tvam sarva-papebhyo

moksayisyami ma sucah

 

SYNONYMS

 

sarva-dharman--all varieties of religion; parityajya--abandoning; mam--unto Me; ekam--only; saranam--surrender; vraja--go; aham--I; tvam--you; sarva--all; papebhyah--from sinful reactions; moksayisyami--deliver; ma--not; sucah--worry.

TRANSLATION

 

 

Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me. I shall deliver you from all sinful reaction. Do not fear.