bible schmible

[mahak]

Haribol. I dont mean disrespect with my title, just making a point for all those who insist vaisnavism is somehow made impure by the injection of teachings from Lord Jesus Christ. The vaisnava will gladly hear from a vansnava, regardless of how such nectar is framed.

 

We have complete authority in our insistance that Srila Prabhupada is quite proper by accepting Lord Jesus as vaisnava. The vaisnava himself establishes the criteria for recognizing vaisnavas by their characteristics.

 

Our example is that Lord Chaitanya used the Holy Qoran to convince the Kazi thaT THE samkirtana movement is authorized by Mohammed Himself. This is not to say that the vaisnava advertizes the bible or the qoran as authority, but the Vaisnava Himself IS IN FACT, the authority.

 

The vaisnava can use even time magazine, even the lyrics of a contemporary song (see PS to gHari), to make other vaisnavas. So, I am guilty of supporting Lord Jesus, but one will always note that my approval is completely linked to the commentary of the Vaisnava. We do not hear theism unless it is spoken by a lover of God. This also includes the bhagavad gita, which is useless in the hands and on the lips of those envious of the Supreme Lord. So all criticism against the bible is ill-founded if the commentary is by a vaisnava, and all support of the bhagavad gita is also useless if the commentary is by a serpant.

 

I close by posting a song with lyrics. This modern song can be commented upon by a vaisnava and be a wonderful teaching tool, which the vaisnava will do whenever he pleases, and because he is pleasing to Krsna, all vedic authority is put into such contemporary literature and art. Not otherwise.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVPYzhghPRA&feature=related

 

Whatcha think of these lyrics, gHari. I think they are quite awesome, and Im going to just breathe, exhaling Harinama.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[mahak]

lyrics are one thing, a live performance is quite another.

 

[AncientMariner]

 

Haribol. I dont mean disrespect with my title, just making a point for all those who insist vaisnavism is somehow made impure by the injection of teachings from Lord Jesus Christ. The vaisnava will gladly hear from a vansnava, regardless of how such nectar is framed.

 

We have complete authority in our insistance that Srila Prabhupada is quite proper by accepting Lord Jesus as vaisnava. The vaisnava himself establishes the criteria for recognizing vaisnavas by their characteristics.

 

Our example is that Lord Chaitanya used the Holy Qoran to convince the Kazi thaT THE samkirtana movement is authorized by Mohammed Himself. This is not to say that the vaisnava advertizes the bible or the qoran as authority, but the Vaisnava Himself IS IN FACT, the authority.

 

The vaisnava can use even time magazine, even the lyrics of a contemporary song (see PS to gHari), to make other vaisnavas. So, I am guilty of supporting Lord Jesus, but one will always note that my approval is completely linked to the commentary of the Vaisnava. We do not hear theism unless it is spoken by a lover of God. This also includes the bhagavad gita, which is useless in the hands and on the lips of those envious of the Supreme Lord. So all criticism against the bible is ill-founded if the commentary is by a vaisnava, and all support of the bhagavad gita is also useless if the commentary is by a serpant.

 

I close by posting a song with lyrics. This modern song can be commented upon by a vaisnava and be a wonderful teaching tool, which the vaisnava will do whenever he pleases, and because he is pleasing to Krsna, all vedic authority is put into such contemporary literature and art. Not otherwise.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVPYzhghPRA&feature=related

 

Whatcha think of these lyrics, gHari. I think they are quite awesome, and Im going to just breathe, exhaling Harinama.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

 

 

By including Jesus as a Vaisnava and even comparing him to Prahlada Maharaja and Haridasa Thakura, Prabhupada was just using a preaching tactic to play to the irrational sentiments of the idiot westerners and now he has gone and created a dangerous pseudo-cult of people that refuse to abandon their love for Jesus but at the same time have appreciation for Krishna Consciousness. It is has the whole Vaisnava Tradition in an absolute uproar.

[mahak]

but we had no use for jesus. Jesus freaks did not get near devotees. The folks im thinking of were atheists and hedonists, and prabhupada had no need for such tactics. This so called uproar is not by vaisnavas, but rather vaisnava cultists who have adopted a wierd religion that is no different than any other fools religion, the stuff that krsna has required we abandon all forms of. Srila Prabhupada insisted upon establishment of his movement in the west that were are non-sectarian, "welcoming all religious sentiments ofr mankind". This religious sentiment is the quest for absolute truth, that which sparks aw3akening of guru tattwa. In fact, Srila Prabhupada never required us to abandon our love for devotees of the Supreme Lord, rather understand exactly what they are teaching. What we need to do here is abandon the vaisnava religion in favor of the actual teachings of the vaisnava acarya. The acarya does not use tactics, because such a thing is duplicitous, and this is against the vaisnava character of straightforwardness.

 

 

 

Srila Prabhupada is not about vaisnava tradition. He is about yuga dharma, chanting Gods many names, and those who do, follow the vaisnava even if they dont give a hoot about traditionalists who just march off into their party spirit history. Without giving up such sectarianism, there is no hope of becoming Krsna Conscious. Krsna is not a tribal god, he is the Lord of all, Lord Jagannatha, who is specially relating to all who choose to hear him, who chant his name, fame, glories, and have deep respect for all the great lovers of God regardless of their traditions.

 

Uproar is for fools who are threatened by the competition. Lord Jesus' followers were in such an uproar, and complained about the other devotee who at the time was speaking similarly to Lord Jesus. Lord Jesus was not disturbed, and told his disciples in their sectarian uproar that "those who are not against us are with us." He called a roman centurian a better devotee with more faith that all the faith in Judea.

 

Disturbance and uproars just let us know that those so situated are neophytes, unle to have very strong faith, and thus they have unrealistic concerns for what they feel is competitive. But Srila Prabhupada relieves the neophyte consciousness by letting us know there is no competition, the absolute truth is there within the self, and can be revealed by any method so chosen by Lord Nityananda. Religion wars deny this, and their uproar is the destruction of all that is required for advancement in actual krsna consciousness. Vaisnavas who feel threatened by Lord Jesus Christ are kanistha adhikaris, very doubtful of their own proclaimed religious principle. An advanced devotee feels no such threat, thus he can actually get value from all sources, and give value from such sources, as Lord Chaitanya did in his successful preaching of Qoran to the Kazi.

 

My advice to the uproaring vaisnava, just breathe. You are watching the hourglass that is glued to the table. No one here is demanding that you give up krsna and be a jesus freak. In fact, the devotees here who speak fondly about Lord Jesus are most critical of the religion that is known as christianity.. And if someone does demand that a vaisnava study jesus, such a person should be severely challenged. The vaisnava will always tell another that one needs a guru to teach shastra and the glories of past devotees of Krsna. Guru-shastra-sadhu. Bibles are nothing without the commentary of the devotee, just as bhagavad gita did not make alister crowley or aldous huxley a devotee of Krsna.

 

.........

 

haribol, ys, mahaksadasa

[gHari]

Just breathe. I enjoyed it the other day from the tubes favorites thread, and even more twice today, putting a face to the song. Elegant, classy, smart, beautiful, poised - what's not to like? I hope she becomes popular. She has a lot to offer the world - certainly more than Britney and her stripper pole. But I guess we all have a part to play. Even Britney received Lord Caitanya's darshan at the LA temple a while back. But I'm still an Avril guy; I've got high hopes for that little pure-hearted munchkin.

[ThomasLB]

Below is an excerpt from The Science of Self-Realization by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada:

 

 

Of course, the message that Christ preached was just according to his particular time, place, and country, and just suited for a particular group of people. But certainly he is the representative of God. Therefore we adore Lord Jesus Christ and offer our obeisances to him.

 

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. We should not think of him as an ordinary human being. 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.

 

[raghu]

 

Haribol. I dont mean disrespect with my title, just making a point for all those who insist vaisnavism is somehow made impure by the injection of teachings from Lord Jesus Christ.

 

I really do not know how to explain this to you without coming across as a "sectarian Hindu," but I will try nevertheless.

 

Most of the great Vaishnava acharyas did not think of their teachings as an original product based on their fertile imaginations, but rather as the reinstatement of an eternal tradition based on flawless shabda-pramana.

 

For this reason real Vaishnavas will not bother to mix in ideas borrowed from philosophers or "prophets" speaking on the basis of paurusheya-granthas invented during specific times and places.

 

 

The vaisnava will gladly hear from a vansnava, regardless of how such nectar is framed.

 

In the shrutis and smritis quoted by Vaishnavas for centuries prior to the imperialist age, there is mention of many great bhagavatas that are accepted as such by members of various different sampradayas. Strangely, Jesus does not figure into any of those lists.

 

The inclusion of Jesus as a Vaishnava by some groups corresponds exactly with the attempts of those groups to reach out to an English-speaking audience in the 20th century.

 

You put 2 and 2 together and figure out what that means.

[raghu]

 

Srila Prabhupada is not about vaisnava tradition. He is about yuga dharma, chanting Gods many names, and those who do, follow the vaisnava even if they dont give a hoot about traditionalists who just march off into their party spirit history.

Ok, so you are not Vaishnavas then?

[madanbhakta]

But how can we go about such without thinking of how Lord Chaitanya Himself used the Qur'an to argue that Vaishnava morals and the personality of God was found in the Qur'an itself? Surely, perhaps the Qur'an may be a crude Vaishnavite literature, or perhaps not. However, Lord Chaitanya used it as an argumentative tactic and eventually won the hearts of the Muslims.

 

Srila Prabhupada was spreading Vaishnavism as the path of Krishna-bhakti. There is definitely no doubt about that.

 

My learning comes from Srila Prabhupada and Srila Sridhar Maharaj. I am a Gaudiya Vaishnava. It wasn't the terms that Srila Prabhupada argued, since he said that a Christian, Muslim, Hindu, etc. can practice bhakti through chanting Hare Krishna. But it is the attachment to those names, and not the Holy Name, that make the illusion.

[new---new]

A small note....

 

Jesus was a nice bloke ....many people who dislike him or even hate him do so because they misunderstand biblical teachings as his teachings........

 

the closest to what Jesus actually preaches is found in the 4 versions of the gospel

found in the present day bible .....and if you notice .....despite all attempts to interpolate jesus's teachings with the earlier teachings ....one still cannot find the word IDOL OR IDOLATORY in any of the 4 versions of the gospel today.........Jesus never said a word against Idolatory..... .....He came to preach against the practices of the people in his time........

 

Jesus was a nice guy but his teachings were hijacked and today all kind of #### is being sold in his name......

Jesus was a nice bloke ...it doesnt matter if he was a vaishnava or not ...

I wish i could have met him atleast once in person....

[AncientMariner]

 

but we had no use for jesus. Jesus freaks did not get near devotees. The folks im thinking of were atheists and hedonists, and prabhupada had no need for such tactics. This so called uproar is not by vaisnavas, but rather vaisnava cultists who have adopted a wierd religion that is no different than any other fools religion, the stuff that krsna has required we abandon all forms of. Srila Prabhupada insisted upon establishment of his movement in the west that were are non-sectarian, "welcoming all religious sentiments ofr mankind". This religious sentiment is the quest for absolute truth, that which sparks aw3akening of guru tattwa. In fact, Srila Prabhupada never required us to abandon our love for devotees of the Supreme Lord, rather understand exactly what they are teaching. What we need to do here is abandon the vaisnava religion in favor of the actual teachings of the vaisnava acarya. The acarya does not use tactics, because such a thing is duplicitous, and this is against the vaisnava character of straightforwardness.

 

 

 

Srila Prabhupada is not about vaisnava tradition. He is about yuga dharma, chanting Gods many names, and those who do, follow the vaisnava even if they dont give a hoot about traditionalists who just march off into their party spirit history. Without giving up such sectarianism, there is no hope of becoming Krsna Conscious. Krsna is not a tribal god, he is the Lord of all, Lord Jagannatha, who is specially relating to all who choose to hear him, who chant his name, fame, glories, and have deep respect for all the great lovers of God regardless of their traditions.

 

Uproar is for fools who are threatened by the competition. Lord Jesus' followers were in such an uproar, and complained about the other devotee who at the time was speaking similarly to Lord Jesus. Lord Jesus was not disturbed, and told his disciples in their sectarian uproar that "those who are not against us are with us." He called a roman centurian a better devotee with more faith that all the faith in Judea.

 

Disturbance and uproars just let us know that those so situated are neophytes, unle to have very strong faith, and thus they have unrealistic concerns for what they feel is competitive. But Srila Prabhupada relieves the neophyte consciousness by letting us know there is no competition, the absolute truth is there within the self, and can be revealed by any method so chosen by Lord Nityananda. Religion wars deny this, and their uproar is the destruction of all that is required for advancement in actual krsna consciousness. Vaisnavas who feel threatened by Lord Jesus Christ are kanistha adhikaris, very doubtful of their own proclaimed religious principle. An advanced devotee feels no such threat, thus he can actually get value from all sources, and give value from such sources, as Lord Chaitanya did in his successful preaching of Qoran to the Kazi.

 

My advice to the uproaring vaisnava, just breathe. You are watching the hourglass that is glued to the table. No one here is demanding that you give up krsna and be a jesus freak. In fact, the devotees here who speak fondly about Lord Jesus are most critical of the religion that is known as christianity.. And if someone does demand that a vaisnava study jesus, such a person should be severely challenged. The vaisnava will always tell another that one needs a guru to teach shastra and the glories of past devotees of Krsna. Guru-shastra-sadhu. Bibles are nothing without the commentary of the devotee, just as bhagavad gita did not make alister crowley or aldous huxley a devotee of Krsna.

 

.........

 

haribol, ys, mahaksadasa

 

 

Very well said as usual. Your writing is truly nectarian and I hold you in very high respect.

 

I was just kidding around with my post and kind of playing devils advocate and preempting what the Vaisnava traditionalists (not that there is anything necessarily wrong with tradition) would start throwing at you. Kind of rotten on my part but sometimes just cant help myself.

[AncientMariner]

 

I really do not know how to explain this to you without coming across as a "sectarian Hindu," but I will try nevertheless.

 

Most of the great Vaishnava acharyas did not think of their teachings as an original product based on their fertile imaginations, but rather as the reinstatement of an eternal tradition based on flawless shabda-pramana.

 

For this reason real Vaishnavas will not bother to mix in ideas borrowed from philosophers or "prophets" speaking on the basis of paurusheya-granthas invented during specific times and places.

 

 

 

In the shrutis and smritis quoted by Vaishnavas for centuries prior to the imperialist age, there is mention of many great bhagavatas that are accepted as such by members of various different sampradayas. Strangely, Jesus does not figure into any of those lists.

 

The inclusion of Jesus as a Vaishnava by some groups corresponds exactly with the attempts of those groups to reach out to an English-speaking audience in the 20th century.

 

You put 2 and 2 together and figure out what that means.

 

 

All in all that seems a fair point to me but at least what I have read in Prabhupada's books there really is no limit to how many avatars Krishna can send if necessary even if they are not specifically mentioned in the Srimad Bhagavatam so when Prabhupada says Jesus was a saktyavesa avatar and comparable to Prahlada Maharaja and Haridasa Thakura I take that at face value and don't feel the need to try and read Prabhupada's mind. And based on that fact when I hear bigwig vaisnavas engaged in defamation of Jesus I always find that puzzling to say the least. I have been patronized and sanctimoniously looked down upon by the Vaisnava traditionalists (not that there is anything necessarily wrong with tradition) for having this view ever since I have posted here so all in all it is nothing new and I view it as being par for the course.

[AncientMariner]

 

Just breathe. I enjoyed it the other day from the tubes favorites thread, and even more twice today, putting a face to the song. Elegant, classy, smart, beautiful, poised - what's not to like? I hope she becomes popular. She has a lot to offer the world - certainly more than Britney and her stripper pole. But I guess we all have a part to play. Even Britney received Lord Caitanya's darshan at the LA temple a while back. But I'm still an Avril guy; I've got high hopes for that little pure-hearted munchkin.

 

I like that song by Nelly Furtado In Gods Hands or something like that. I have always liked Avril Lavigne as well she has a certain purity about her or seems to anyway, I agree with you on that. The most misunderstood guy was Eminem though, he was absolutely brilliant in his prime and I guess he even eventually proclaimed an allegiance to Jesus so that is at very least a step in the right direction in my opinion.

[raghu]

 

All in all that seems a fair point to me but at least what I have read in Prabhupada's books there really is no limit to how many avatars Krishna can send if necessary even if they are not specifically mentioned in the Srimad Bhagavatam

 

No one contests the fact that there is no limit to the number of avataras Sri Hari can have. What is questionable is the fuzzy logic to the effect that because Lord has unlimited avataras, one must therefore accept Jesus as a shakti-avesha avatara because someone said so.

 

 

so when Prabhupada says Jesus was a saktyavesa avatar

 

... it is an unfounded statement, with no historical, scriptural, or traditional backing.

 

 

And based on that fact when I hear bigwig vaisnavas engaged in defamation of Jesus

 

When iskcon devotees claim that Jesus is something that he is not, it is not defamation to refute such claims. If the iskcon people could demonstrate some semblance of intellectual honesty, they would accept the weaknesses inherent in their claims instead of flinging accusations of "defamation" and so on when people scrutinize them.

[AncientMariner]

 

No one contests the fact that there is no limit to the number of avataras Sri Hari can have. What is questionable is the fuzzy logic to the effect that because Lord has unlimited avataras, one must therefore accept Jesus as a shakti-avesha avatara because someone said so.

 

 

 

... it is an unfounded statement, with no historical, scriptural, or traditional backing.

 

 

 

When iskcon devotees claim that Jesus is something that he is not, it is not defamation to refute such claims. If the iskcon people could demonstrate some semblance of intellectual honesty, they would accept the weaknesses inherent in their claims instead of flinging accusations of "defamation" and so on when people scrutinize them.

 

There are numerous quotes from both Prabhupada and Narayana Maharaja where they refer to Jesus as saktavesa avatar even the hardcore admit this but they go on to say they can read Prabhupada and Narayana Maharajas minds and they were just using a preaching tactic.

[raghu]

 

There are numerous quotes from both Prabhupada and Narayana Maharaja where they refer to Jesus as saktavesa avatar even the hardcore admit this but they go on to say they can read Prabhupada and Narayana Maharajas minds and they were just using a preaching tactic.

 

I don't claim to read their minds. Whether it was a "preaching tactic" or not is besides the point.

 

The bottom line is that such claims are totally unfounded. There is no historical or scriptural evidence to support it. There is no precedent for such ideas prior to Bhaktivedanta or Bhaktisiddhanta.

[AncientMariner]

 

I don't claim to read their minds. Whether it was a "preaching tactic" or not is besides the point.

 

The bottom line is that such claims are totally unfounded. There is no historical or scriptural evidence to support it. There is no precedent for such ideas prior to Bhaktivedanta or Bhaktisiddhanta.

 

Okay then you don't accept Prabhupada and Narayana Maharaja as pure devotees. Whatever floats your boat but they have proven themselves to me.

[HerServant]

 

When iskcon devotees claim that Jesus is something that he is not, it is not defamation to refute such claims. If the iskcon people could demonstrate some semblance of intellectual honesty, they would accept the weaknesses inherent in their claims instead of flinging accusations of "defamation" and so on when people scrutinize them.

 

Proclaiming Jesus as avatar is not limited to Vaisnavism or ISKCON.

 

"One of his young charges had a bible and used to read to Sri Ramakrishna stories from the bible. He became enamored of the wonderful stories of the life of Christ and of the beautiful picture of the Madonna with the Divine Child and fully immersed his mind in the Christian images for three days. On the fourth day as he was walking he saw an extraordinary looking person of serene aspect approaching him with his gaze intently fixed on him. Presently the figure drew near and from the inmost recesses of Sri Ramakrishna's heart there came the realization: "There is the Christ who poured out his heart's blood for the redemption of mankind and suffered agonies for its sake. It is none else but the Master-Yogin Jesus, the embodiment of Love!" In his divine vision the Son of Man embraced Sri Ramakrishna and became merged in him. The Master lost outward consciousness in Samadhi, realizing his union with Brahman with attributes. Thus was he convinced that Jesus Christ was an Incarnation of the Lord." -- http://www.geocities.com/neovedanta/srk.html

 

Accepting all religions as valid paths to God, we also accept their Avatars as incarnations of God. Where Vedanta differs from some other faiths is that we believe God has incarnated many times: as Jesus, as Buddha, as Sri Ramakrishna, and many others. Vedanta embraces them all! -- http://203.199.162.246:8080/soft/vedanta/vedUserFaqs.jsp#Jesus%20and%20Buddha

 

God has come doon tae earth in human form. thes is fur real. his original name is "shri. lahari krishna" ( commonly called as shreeman narayana (or) allah (or) christ-jesus ) -- http://www.narayanaconsciousness.net/Site_publish/Scot/Prayer.htm

 

and the list goes on

[raghu]

 

Okay then you don't accept Prabhupada and Narayana Maharaja as pure devotees. Whatever floats your boat but they have proven themselves to me.

 

Vaishnava conclusions do not rest on claims of spiritual superiority but rather on the authority of shruti and to a lesser extent smriti. No one is an independent authority. Even Sri Krishna Himself speaks on the basis of what is known from the Vedas and dharma-shastras.

 

The idea that one has to follow a person and believe whatever he says because he is arbitrarily designated as "pure devotee" is cultish and regressive. Perhaps if more iskcon people knew that from the beginning, there would not be such a huge population of disgruntled ex-devotees who were misled by "pure devotees" who later fell down and became quite degraded in their bhakti.

[raghu]

 

Proclaiming Jesus as avatar is not limited to Vaisnavism or ISKCON.

 

I agree. Other bogus Hindu missionaries did it too. Vivekananda did it. Sai Baba did it. Rajneesh did it etc etc.

 

Are you really planning on quoting every two-bit charlatan to bolster your claims? I must say that I am really amazed at your cluelessness.

[AncientMariner]

 

Vaishnava conclusions do not rest on claims of spiritual superiority but rather on the authority of shruti and to a lesser extent smriti. No one is an independent authority. Even Sri Krishna Himself speaks on the basis of what is known from the Vedas and dharma-shastras.

 

The idea that one has to follow a person and believe whatever he says because he is arbitrarily designated as "pure devotee" is cultish and regressive. Perhaps if more iskcon people knew that from the beginning, there would not be such a huge population of disgruntled ex-devotees who were misled by "pure devotees" who later fell down and became quite degraded in their bhakti.

 

 

I wasn't aware that Prabhupada became degraded in his bhakti. He said his big fault was that he accepted too many disciples if I remember right.

[raghu]

 

I wasn't aware that Prabhupada became degraded in his bhakti. He said his big fault was that he accepted too many disciples if I remember right.

 

How many of his "pure devotee" disciple gurus fell down? How many of them demanded and received unquestioning obedience on the basis of their perceived spiritual position, rather than on objective examination of their views and behavior based on shastra? How many disgruntled ex-iskcond devotees have been left behind, bitter due to being misled?

 

Are you always this obtuse?

[AncientMariner]

 

How many of his "pure devotee" disciple gurus fell down? How many of them demanded and received unquestioning obedience on the basis of their perceived spiritual position, rather than on objective examination of their views and behavior based on shastra? How many disgruntled ex-iskcond devotees have been left behind, bitter due to being misled?

 

Are you always this obtuse?

 

 

You must have missed out on the whole ritvik vs. appointed guru arguments. Consider yourself fortunate.

[AncientMariner]

 

but we had no use for jesus. Jesus freaks did not get near devotees. The folks im thinking of were atheists and hedonists, and prabhupada had no need for such tactics. This so called uproar is not by vaisnavas, but rather vaisnava cultists who have adopted a wierd religion that is no different than any other fools religion, the stuff that krsna has required we abandon all forms of. Srila Prabhupada insisted upon establishment of his movement in the west that were are non-sectarian, "welcoming all religious sentiments ofr mankind". This religious sentiment is the quest for absolute truth, that which sparks aw3akening of guru tattwa. In fact, Srila Prabhupada never required us to abandon our love for devotees of the Supreme Lord, rather understand exactly what they are teaching. What we need to do here is abandon the vaisnava religion in favor of the actual teachings of the vaisnava acarya. The acarya does not use tactics, because such a thing is duplicitous, and this is against the vaisnava character of straightforwardness.

 

 

 

Srila Prabhupada is not about vaisnava tradition. He is about yuga dharma, chanting Gods many names, and those who do, follow the vaisnava even if they dont give a hoot about traditionalists who just march off into their party spirit history. Without giving up such sectarianism, there is no hope of becoming Krsna Conscious. Krsna is not a tribal god, he is the Lord of all, Lord Jagannatha, who is specially relating to all who choose to hear him, who chant his name, fame, glories, and have deep respect for all the great lovers of God regardless of their traditions.

 

Uproar is for fools who are threatened by the competition. Lord Jesus' followers were in such an uproar, and complained about the other devotee who at the time was speaking similarly to Lord Jesus. Lord Jesus was not disturbed, and told his disciples in their sectarian uproar that "those who are not against us are with us." He called a roman centurian a better devotee with more faith that all the faith in Judea.

 

Disturbance and uproars just let us know that those so situated are neophytes, unle to have very strong faith, and thus they have unrealistic concerns for what they feel is competitive. But Srila Prabhupada relieves the neophyte consciousness by letting us know there is no competition, the absolute truth is there within the self, and can be revealed by any method so chosen by Lord Nityananda. Religion wars deny this, and their uproar is the destruction of all that is required for advancement in actual krsna consciousness. Vaisnavas who feel threatened by Lord Jesus Christ are kanistha adhikaris, very doubtful of their own proclaimed religious principle. An advanced devotee feels no such threat, thus he can actually get value from all sources, and give value from such sources, as Lord Chaitanya did in his successful preaching of Qoran to the Kazi.

 

My advice to the uproaring vaisnava, just breathe. You are watching the hourglass that is glued to the table. No one here is demanding that you give up krsna and be a jesus freak. In fact, the devotees here who speak fondly about Lord Jesus are most critical of the religion that is known as christianity.. And if someone does demand that a vaisnava study jesus, such a person should be severely challenged. The vaisnava will always tell another that one needs a guru to teach shastra and the glories of past devotees of Krsna. Guru-shastra-sadhu. Bibles are nothing without the commentary of the devotee, just as bhagavad gita did not make alister crowley or aldous huxley a devotee of Krsna.

 

.........

 

haribol, ys, mahaksadasa

 

 

I enjoy reading this post several times. Really good stuff.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

Vaishnava conclusions do not rest on claims of spiritual superiority but rather on the authority of shruti and to a lesser extent smriti. No one is an independent authority. Even Sri Krishna Himself speaks on the basis of what is known from the Vedas and dharma-shastras.

 

The idea that one has to follow a person and believe whatever he says because he is arbitrarily designated as "pure devotee" is cultish and regressive. Perhaps if more iskcon people knew that from the beginning, there would not be such a huge population of disgruntled ex-devotees who were misled by "pure devotees" who later fell down and became quite degraded in their bhakti.

Sigh!!

 

The utterances of the pure devotee *are* scripture, more pure than any mis-copied, mis-translated, and mis-interpreted words on paper.

 

Your assumption that a person is "arbitrarily designated as a 'pure devotee'" is disingenuous.