Jesus is the reason for the season

[Guruvani]

The Christian conception of Christ, God and the power of faith is indeed a very beautiful religious conception.

The Christian theology represents centuries of human religious thought and refinement.

Though, I find it to be very beautiful and inspiring, I do not accept the historical Jesus of Christianity.

 

But, in the ultimate issue does it really matter if Jesus was a real person or not?

Doesn't Paramatma understand that this beautiful religious conception is really aimed at him and thereby accepts this religious sentiment as sincere devotion to God?

[tackleberry]

OMG, that's an amazing change in you, GV, unless of course, I am missing the sarcasm somewhere.

 

Be that as it may, what I like is the Christian methods of organization, how they've managed to survive despite the rise of other religions, atheism etc. Perhaps, Iskcon can learn a thing or two from christians on organiztation, marketing (yup, that's right!), and all the rest of it.

[Erik]

 

But, in the ultimate issue does it really matter if Jesus was a real person or not?

 

 

www.tombofjesus.com

 

www.salagram.net/JesusLivedInIndia.html

 

[cbrahma]

 

OMG, that's an amazing change in you, GV, unless of course, I am missing the sarcasm somewhere.

 

Be that as it may, what I like is the Christian methods of organization, how they've managed to survive despite the rise of other religions, atheism etc. Perhaps, Iskcon can learn a thing or two from christians on organiztation, marketing (yup, that's right!), and all the rest of it.

I always go back to my Christian roots. What they understand at least in principle is welcoming not only the stranger , but the sinner. Would that ISKCON members could embrace that.

[Erik]

 

I always go back to my Christian roots. What they understand at least in principle is welcoming not only the stranger , but the sinner. Would that ISKCON members could embrace that.

 

Prabupada clearly states in the Nectar of Instruction that devotees should try to make friends with devotees.

 

 

Everybody is welcome to become Krishna Consciouss, and he even stated that in The Golden Age every faith and religion is free to excercise his or her religion, lovingly and attentively.

[cbrahma]

 

Prabupada clearly states in the Nectar of Instruction that devotees should try to make friends with devotees.

 

 

Everybody is welcome to become Krishna Consciouss, and he even stated that in The Golden Age every faith and religion is free to excercise his or her religion, lovingly and attentively.

But if they're big book distributors , they're already preachers, why do they have to lower themselves to ugh...talking to people without getting money ...

[Erik]

 

But if they're big book distributors , they're already preachers, why do they have to lower themselves to ugh...talking to people without getting money ...

 

From my point of view that is the greatest thing to do, talking to people, preaching without getting money, it's true that without money no institution will last, so there has to be money, but in my experience when I was in Radhadesh, doing the guided tours, I had fun preaching our philosophy for sometimes two to three hours without even people buying books, I just liked the discussions and my efforts to persuede them in the knowledge that we are not the body nor the mind and so on, although the people paid for the guided tours. But main point for me is that this philosophy is free, it is spiritual, but money has to be there offcourse.

 

Anyway, it's better to get money for book distribution for the goals we have, but for me, only for me, it is not neccesary, I like to preach, even when it costs me money, call me stupid, I know.

 

:crazy2: :crazy2: :crazy2: :crazy2: :crazy2: :crazy2: :crazy2: :crazy2: :crazy2: :crazy2: :crazy2: :crazy2:

[Erik]

About this being stupid........

 

I also have no desire to go back eternally to where I came from, 'cause if you try to preach there about the unlimited Pastimes of Krishna or Atma Yoga philosophy (www.yogamandir.com) , the Souls there would pet my back and say in a fatherly way : "We know, my child, we know...", so what to do there....??

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't wanna be here eternally and I am not addicted to Maya too much, but to be there eternally....???

 

I must be the most fallen.......

[mahak]

He welcomes the religious impulse in humankind, as does Srila AC Bhaktivedanta Swami. The key ingredient in this non-sectarian movement is that the sentiments of all religious faith is not crushed by dogma difference, rather enhanced by the addition of scientific sadhana bhakti processes.

 

Thus, althpugh we may argue a bit about dogma, we can also see the significance and benefits of sentimental devotion as a spiritual attribute, to be recognized, encouraged, and welcome by the sane struggling through this rubble of armageddonist march into history.

 

Even in our own corner of shared consciousness, we can apply the good will that is mentioned in relationship with the season of Lord Jesus to our own. We can certainly have fun with our differences, but we share the good will with the vaiosnava community.

 

Hare Crishna, ys, mahaksadasa

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

I always go back to my Christian roots. What they understand at least in principle is welcoming not only the stranger , but the sinner. Would that ISKCON members could embrace that.

 

I appreciate your candor.

 

We all have our "roots" or conditioning. Many aspiring devotees try to ignore their roots with the idea that they can become pukka Brahmins just like those who grew up in Vedic culture. So often this leads to imposition of Victorian morals on Krishna Consciousness, to use one example, and other deviations.

 

When we are impure, it's inevitable that we will deviate from the standard. To pretend that we are something which we are not (like the fallen gurus seem to have done) is not very useful, and sets us up for eventual disappointment.

 

As Srila Sridhar Maharaja observes, if we do not deceive ourselves, no one else can deceive us.

 

To the extent that you are forthright about all of your doubts, misgivings, etc., cbrahma, and do not make any pretense of piety (though you are certainly pious), I admire you.

[cbrahma]

 

I appreciate your candor.

 

We all have our "roots" or conditioning. Many aspiring devotees try to ignore their roots with the idea that they can become pukka Brahmins just like those who grew up in Vedic culture. So often this leads to imposition of Victorian morals on Krishna Consciousness, to use one example, and other deviations.

 

When we are impure, it's inevitable that we will deviate from the standard. To pretend that we are something which we are not (like the fallen gurus seem to have done) is not very useful, and sets us up for eventual disappointment.

 

As Srila Sridhar Maharaja observes, if we do not deceive ourselves, no one else can deceive us.

 

To the extent that you are forthright about all of your doubts, misgivings, etc., cbrahma, and do not make any pretense of piety (though you are certainly pious), I admire you.

You have a loyalty to your guru. I have to mine. Jesus has never steered me wrong and many of his disciples have the same core realization of Vaisnava siddhanta - that we are all children of God.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

You have a loyalty to your guru. I have to mine. Jesus has never steered me wrong and many of his disciples have the same core realization of Vaisnava siddhanta - that we are all children of God.

My comment was meant as a compliment, not an insult. I'm sorry if you're offended.

 

I find no fault in your returning to your Christian roots. My roots happen to be Gaudiya Vaishnava. That was my good fortune.

 

I also had the good fortune to attend a Catholic High school and sing in the choir there. I attended every Mass at which the choir sang. I was moved by the devotion of the Marist Brothers who taught me.

 

Though I was never baptized, I consider myself a Christian (or, rather, an aspiring Christian, just as I consider myself an aspiring Vaishnava).

 

Merry Christmas!

[cbrahma]

 

My comment was meant as a compliment, not an insult. I'm sorry if you're offended.

 

I find no fault in your returning to your Christian roots. My roots happen to be Gaudiya Vaishnava. That was my good fortune.

 

I also had the good fortune to attend a Catholic High school and sing in the choir there. I attended every Mass at which the choir sang. I was moved by the devotion of the Marist Brothers who taught me.

 

Though I was never baptized, I consider myself a Christian (or, rather, an aspiring Christian, just as I consider myself an aspiring Vaishnava).

 

Merry Christmas!

I'm not insulted, but I detect your usual patronizing tone - because you got the guru and a monopoly on truth. The typical attitude.

I thought Christians had the attitude - dogmatic - aggressively proselytizing- until I met those who call themselves devotees.

[theist]

 

The Christian conception of Christ, God and the power of faith is indeed a very beautiful religious conception.

The Christian theology represents centuries of human religious thought and refinement.

Though, I find it to be very beautiful and inspiring, I do not accept the historical Jesus of Christianity.

 

But, in the ultimate issue does it really matter if Jesus was a real person or not?

Doesn't Paramatma understand that this beautiful religious conception is really aimed at him and thereby accepts this religious sentiment as sincere devotion to God?

 

Guruvani raises a very deep question here and I don't want it to get lost in the conversation.

 

I accept the historical Jesus per my own experience. It has been proven to me in a personal way. But I can't insist on that from anyone else.

 

When one gets past the petty arguments over sectarian religon then it becomes easy to see the nature of the pure Vaisnava. I have often said I have learned more about the nature of Christ from reading about the nature of the pure devotees and avatars in the Bhagavatam than the Bible.

 

One can see the same story in the experience of Christ in Arjuna of the Gita. Arjuna had to enter a war he didn't want to fight to fulfill the will of Krsna and Jesus had to go to the cross on the will of Krsna. Of course both of these dramas are staged for the intructional benefit of the fallen souls.

 

And this raises the question of if it is absolutely necessary to accept Arjuna as a historical personality as well.

What do you think and why?

[mahak]

There is no fault in one who has come to know reality from nonsense. That one objects to one who is content with the food that is on the table is noteworthy in that there seems to be envy and even anger displayed.

 

No apologies will come from one who has guru. There is also no condescending attitude, either, especially from those whose liberal minded gurus accept the notion of other practices that have actual spiritual benefit.

 

This is actually covered in Srila Prabhupadas teachings. He speaks of those who say "neti, neti", meaning those whose whole goal in life is to find the flaw in everyone elses religious leanings. This is actually the mentality of extreme immaturity. It reads, loud and clear, "I dont know the TRUE from the glitter, and because I dont know, neither can anyone else. I have no faith, therefore faith is imp[ossible." This is ultimate display of false identification of the self with the supreme god, because if such a fool makes determination that something is not the TRUE because one cannot fathom such, then ultimately, the supreme authority on such matters is the fool himself.

 

The anger is so clear that there seems to be attack against one who is merely expressing serenity and contentment with the fact of very self realization. What some fools may see as patronizing is just blatant animosity against the devotees, who, whethger christian, vaisnava, muslim, etc, all have realization to some degree of the TRUE. What, should we patronize you and say, "Yes sir, you are right. There is no way out. My guru has fooled me and has offended you by not revealing himself to you."

 

pelau, to luv jah mean to fea no mon. mahaksadasa

[suchandra]

 

I'm not insulted, but I detect your usual patronizing tone - because you got the guru and a monopoly on truth. The typical attitude.

I thought Christians had the attitude - dogmatic - aggressively proselytizing- until I met those who call themselves devotees.

Yes, this is spot on, hierarchy - seems like in Western Vaishnavism this is the balance point - where is your position in our hierarchy? The answer to this kind of seemingly unteachable behaviour is surely like in Christianity the breakup of institutionized religion, admitting the failure of institutionized Vaishnavism. Throughout history Vaishnavism was never an institution, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja made for the first time an attempt to organize Vaishnavas and to set up an institution. The situation we have today clearly says, this attempt failed.

 

 

As Srila Sridhar Maharaja observes, if we do not deceive ourselves, no one else can deceive us.

 

This is a typical phrase also being used by modern psychology. Don't look for faults anywhere but within yourself. However, when reading Bhagavad-gita, battlefied of Kuruksetra, did Krishna say, wait Arjuna, just don't deceive yourself, then Duryodhana&co won't try to deceive you anymore? Rather Krishna says, although you don't deceive yourself, still, our enemies deceive us, therefore, get up and fight.

 

O son of Kuntī, either you will be killed on the battlefield and attain the heavenly planets, or you will conquer and enjoy the earthly kingdom. Therefore, get up with determination and fight. 2.37

PURPORT

Even though there was no certainty of victory for Arjuna's side, he still had to fight; for, even being killed there, he could be elevated into the heavenly planets.

[cbrahma]

 

The anger is so clear that there seems to be attack against one who is merely expressing serenity and contentment with the fact of very self realization. What some fools may see as patronizing is just blatant animosity against the devotees, who, whethger christian, vaisnava, muslim, etc, all have realization to some degree of the TRUE. What, should we patronize you and say, "Yes sir, you are right. There is no way out. My guru has fooled me and has offended you by not revealing himself to you."

mahaksadasa

Well that pretty much exhonerates all the religionist hubris in dealing with those they consider fools for not being 'in the know', not in their fold.

That exclusivity is just ego on a collectivist scale.

I consider Jesus to be my guru, as much as Prabhupada, but that doesn't mean I accept everything self-proclaimed disciples do or say. That would really make me a fool.

[mahak]

haribol. If it is innocent, then you are innocent. My basic point is that srila prabhupada initia;lly initiated us all by saying "Chant hare krsna and your life will be siblime." Perhaps when I read from those who dont seem to have basic joy in the process, well, maybe they did not take the gift.

 

I, too, have no need for fanaticism, if this is what you are speaking of. Fanaticism is evident when folks spout off stuuff that they have yet to realize, then it comes off very weird, very shallow, and in this, Im totally in agreement with you. I did not get that vibe from our friend you were responding to, so this is where my post may read strange to some. Sorry if my post offended, as said, if innocent, innocent it is. Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[Murali_Mohan_das]

You see that for which you seek.

 

When have I ever called myself a devotee? Or were you referring to someone else?

 

 

I'm not insulted, but I detect your usual patronizing tone - because you got the guru and a monopoly on truth. The typical attitude.

I thought Christians had the attitude - dogmatic - aggressively proselytizing- until I met those who call themselves devotees.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

Thank you, Mahaksa Prabhu, for seeing (and thereby strengthening) the small speck of good in me and not dwelling on my numerous and glaring flaws.

 

You are truly a swan among geese.

 

 

haribol. If it is innocent, then you are innocent. My basic point is that srila prabhupada initia;lly initiated us all by saying "Chant hare krsna and your life will be siblime." Perhaps when I read from those who dont seem to have basic joy in the process, well, maybe they did not take the gift.

 

I, too, have no need for fanaticism, if this is what you are speaking of. Fanaticism is evident when folks spout off stuuff that they have yet to realize, then it comes off very weird, very shallow, and in this, Im totally in agreement with you. I did not get that vibe from our friend you were responding to, so this is where my post may read strange to some. Sorry if my post offended, as said, if innocent, innocent it is. Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[cbrahma]

 

You see that for which you seek.

 

When have I ever called myself a devotee? Or were you referring to someone else?

You are quite correct you don't call yourself a devotee. You have only aggressively proselytized for your guru , imposing him as the repository of all truth over which of course you now have a monopoly.

Without that absolute endorsement others are less advanced , less knowledgeable, less qualified...etc.

[mahak]

I sing the glories of all my gurus, they ARE the repository of all truth. What I say is perfect if I speak on their behalf, errors are my own.

 

The humble endorsement of prospective disciples glorifying their gurus is the basis of this movement. It is the humble words of DISCIPLES that constitute the Parampara, called by my spiritual master a DISCIPLIC succession.

 

Had I not had the benefit of such endorsement by disciples toward their masters, be it Lord Jesus, Prabhupada, et al, I would surely remain less advanced, less knowledgable, less qualified, etc.

 

We spend our lives seeking out the association of masters, yet the vaisnava always advizes that we seek out the servants. Masters have no access to God, but servants live with him in intimate relationship always.

 

nuff said. hare krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

Without that absolute endorsement others are less advanced , less knowledgeable, less qualified...etc.

 

Can you point out where I said that? One thing which I do not appreciate having words put into my mouth.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

I see you as a humble and sincere disciple of Srila Prabhupada, Mahaksa-ji, whatever the "official" roster might or might not say.

 

Not that my "endorsement" is worth anything. Not that my vision is perfect. Rather, I feel fortunate to have your virtual association.

 

 

I sing the glories of all my gurus, they ARE the repository of all truth. What I say is perfect if I speak on their behalf, errors are my own.

 

The humble endorsement of prospective disciples glorifying their gurus is the basis of this movement. It is the humble words of DISCIPLES that constitute the Parampara, called by my spiritual master a DISCIPLIC succession.

 

Had I not had the benefit of such endorsement by disciples toward their masters, be it Lord Jesus, Prabhupada, et al, I would surely remain less advanced, less knowledgable, less qualified, etc.

 

We spend our lives seeking out the association of masters, yet the vaisnava always advizes that we seek out the servants. Masters have no access to God, but servants live with him in intimate relationship always.

 

nuff said. hare krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[mahak]

Srila Prabhupadas vani includes specific promise to guide his follower from within. This is the criteria for which we analyze all teachings from disciples of this Parampara. So we can take a bit of instruction from even Malcolm X, who always stated "The truth I speak comes from Allah, all the errors are mine alone."

 

A vaisnava will gladly hear from all vaisnavas who speak the truth, and we have the mechanism to glean errors out of the equasion. This is the meaning of paramahamsa, that, like a swan, we can drink a mixture of water and milk, injesting either water or milk, rejecting the other substance. When we hear from a disciple of an acarya, the acarya is speaking thru him, but we also must discern the truth from such source. Guru-shastra-sadhu is the filtering mechanism. Vaisnavas are very keen to the old adage of "A wise man can learn from a fool, but a fool cannot learn from anyone." Shastra gives us instruction (guru-vani, because srimad bhagavatam is both shastra and guru, who represents perfectly Vyasadeva) that those literatures (or posts, discussions, internet ramblings) that describe the glories, pastimes, PARAPHENALIA (meaning the devotee associates of the Supreme Lord), lila, guna, rupa, nama, all are appreciated by those who are thoroughly honest, EVEN THO SUCH LITERATURE MAY BE IMPERFECTLY COMPOSED. If I cannot HEAR Srila Prabhupada through the medium of his glorious disciples and followers, disciples of his disciples, disciples of his contemporaries, etc, then I must concede that he has not reached any of them, that he is an utter failure. I do accept the teachings of those whom he planted the seed of bhakti because I accept his disciplic succession, fully functional although it may seem quite concealed.

 

It is not the nectar I seek, these descriptions of faults of others, of problematic dogma, of true crime stories that become novels fit for a supermarket check out stand.

 

I actually gladly hear from an old classmate who has contacted me for our fortieth high school reunion. She tells me she is into meditation and jesus christ, and has chanted with another classmate who also became a devotee-disciple of Srila Prabhupada and his Parampara. Using filtering mechanism, I tell myself, I can hear from such a person, because meditation is quite a grand thing for one who simultaneously accepts the bhakti yoga of Lord Jesus Christ. A meditator will not fall into a bad trap of imagined divinity with Lord Jesus Protecting them from such tomfoolery. The vedavadis may protest and call me apostate, but frankly, my deah, I dont give a damn.

 

If we have no guru, then we cannot hear from one. It is as simple as that. Our friend alex has, for years, given examples of true initiation into this process of bhakti yoga. We are ultinmately responsibel for actually becoming paramahamsa, swanlike. If not, all we get is watered down milk or water polluted with the bodily fluids of a cow. No discernment of the truth means acceptance of lies.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

 

BTW Are we still on topic, or should we discuss that ugly phrase, "Discernment of the TRUE"?